Oh, I should add that I'm talking about variations to the underlying hardware.
If you're talking about changes to aesthetics and form-factor, then there's no problem there. But really, those are things that Nokia should be able to get mostly right with usability testing and design heuristics, well before the manufacturing process.
Nokia, who's a phone maker, is pretty much used to releasing new models almost every year for their cell phone line. Why change this strategy for a video game console?
... because of compatibility and support issues.
For a basic cellphone (I'm excluding smartphones), users really don't install new software. A typical user just uses the phone out of the box. In this scenario, more models means more choices for the consumer, and the support costs should scale about linearly to the number of models available.
The N-Gage is not targeted for this kind of market. The N-Gage requires games--third-party software titles--that users are responsible for purchasing and installing. Now you have to worry about compatibility:
Backward compatibility. Are future models of the N-Gage compatible with games made for older models?
Forward compatibility. Do games made for future models work on older models? Are they totally incompatible or is there a well-designed, easy-to-use infrastructure to degrade gracefully?
User confusion. If games are not fully compatible in both directions, is it easy for consumers to determine what's compatible with what? Can they easily decide which model to buy? If the consumer is too confused, they might pass on the product entirely.
Developer confusion. If games are not fully compatible in both directions, is it easy for developers to determine what's compatible with what? Can they easily decide which models to target? If the developers are too confused, they won't write software for the product.
Support. What kind of commitment is there to providing patches and support to old hardware?
If decide that you do want backwards and forwards compatibility, the testing and support costs can increase geometrically as the number of models increases.
There are some good reasons for consoles to have somewhat long lives: they provide a stable market for consumers and a stable target for developers. Unless they plan things out very carefully (and given some of the design flaws of the first N-Gage, I wouldn't count on Nokia to do that), saturating the market with too many hardware variations could have too many potential pitfalls.
If Microsoft actually released an approved Xbox emulator, it could have a win-win situation...
If Microsoft released an approved X-Box emulator, they'd have to support it. Support costs aren't cheap.
Supporting games on a closed, fixed hardware platform is much easier and cheaper than supporting games on top of an emulator on top of an open, highly-variable hardware platform.
Or how about a two-handed keyboard that lets you mouse?
I bought an IBM TrackPoint keyboard, and I love it. Sure, the TrackPoint is more cumbersome than a regular mouse, but since most OSs these days support multiple pointing devices, you can use it in addition to a regular mouse. If I need to do a lot of keyboarding but only a little mousing, I can use the TrackPoint; if I need to do a lot of mousing but only a bit of keyboarding, I use the mouse.
If you really want a one-handed keyboard, as others have pointed out, there's Matias' Half-Keyboard. It's pricy though. If you use Windows, you also can check out OkayKeybees; it's a free keyboard remapper that lets you define chords. (For example, you could create chords to mimic the half-keyboard's, if you so wanted.)
First, I'm going to have to agree with a lot of the other posters and say that this is a poor question for Ask Slashdot; it shouldn't have been hard to research on your own.
With most DV camcorders, you should be able to feed a composite or s-video source into the camcorder, and then you can use whatever DV software you normally use. I've heard that there are a handful of DV camcorder models that require you to record to tape first, but I don't think they're Sony's. Unfortunately, there will be significant latency.
As for some of the other Slashdot responses so far: No, you don't need a Mac, and no, you don't need Premiere. If you're using Windows and want a lightweight DV capturing app, try Scenalyzer Live! (~$40) or WinDV (free).
Heck, on Windows, a DV camcorder should show up as a DirectShow capture device. If you don't care about recompressing the video stream (e.g. for machine vision), then you can use any DirectShow-based TV/capture app. There are a number of open-source ones out there (e.g. Virtual VCR).
For example, everyone is expecting Anakin to become Vader. What if he's not? Perhaps Vader is a clone of Anakin. This could explain a few things:
The stupid midochlorian plot element of Episode I. It could have been written in as a (lame) way to get a blood sample from Anakin sent off to Coruscant.
How Vader was unaware that he had children. Perhaps they weren't his but instead were the original Anakin's.
Obi-Wan's lies and half-truths from different points of views. Maybe Vader really did kill Luke's father.
Or it could be the other way around, and a clone of Anakin sires Luke and Leia.
I doubt that any of this is the case. I bet Episode III is going to be a boring piece of trash with nothing substantial to add. I can dream, though...
Plus, I think I was speculation on theforce.net a few years ago that maybe Senator/Chancellor Palpatine and Darth Sidious are not the same person but rather are clones of each other.
Actually, I'm thinking (and hoping, but probably in vain) that maybe we don't know what we think we know.
For example, everyone is expecting Anakin to become Vader. What if he's not? Perhaps Vader is a clone of Anakin. This could explain a few things:
The stupid midochlorian plot element of Episode I. It could have been written in as a (lame) way to get a blood sample from Anakin sent off to Coruscant.
How Vader was unaware that he had children. Perhaps they weren't his but instead were the original Anakin's.
Obi-Wan's lies and half-truths from different points of views. Maybe Vader really did kill Luke's father.
Or it could be the other way around, and a clone of Anakin sires Luke and Leia.
I doubt that any of this is the case. I bet Episode III is going to be a boring piece of trash with nothing substantial to add. I can dream, though...
Endurapro 104: a buckling-spring (aka Model-M) keyboard with Windows keys and integrated TrackPoint.
Buckling-spring. There are already numerous other comments on the greatness of Model-M keyboards.
Windows keys. Okay, some of you hate them with a passion. If they bother you that much, pckeyboards sell versions without 'em. Me, I think they're useful. Use an application such as WinKey to assign keyboard shortcuts to Windows-key combinations. (Examples: Win+i to start a web browser, Win+v to open the volume control, Win+c to open the control panel, Win+down to minimize the current window,...)
Integrated TrackPoint. Some of you hate these things too. "A normal mouse is so much better," you say. The beauty, though, is that you can use it with a normal mouse. I have both a TrackPoint keyboard and a normal mouse hooked up. If I need to do a lot of mousing, I'll use the mouse. If I want to do just a little bit, though, I can use the TrackPoint to move the mouse cursor and never have to take my hands off the keyboard. It's excellent for coding. All keyboards should be like this.
Tablet PC -- A fantastic step backwards in design. If you're already lugging two pounds and something the size of a notebook around, why not just use a notebook PC? It does everything a tablet PC does and more, and has a much easier input interface.
Huh? How does a notebook do more than a Tablet PC? A Tablet PC does everything a notebook does but adds a touchscreen.
A Tablet PC can do more, not less. There are models with keyboards, you know.
I'd like to see you draw on a normal notebook computer. Oh, you don't draw? Okay, how about taking notes or writing out mathematical formulas? Oh, you don't do that either? So Tablet PCs must be stupid because you're not in their market segment?
For occasional use to calculate sales tax or tips, a PDA is fine. For any extensive calculations, though, such as for math/science/engineering work, a physical calculator is far superior for the following reasons:
Physical buttons. Never underestimate the importance of tactile feedback. When I push a button on my calculator, I want to be sure that:
I pushed the right button; on a PDA, it's easy to tap the wrong virtual button, especially if you're using your fingers
the button I pushed registered
Without good feedback, you waste time looking at what you're pressing and looking at the display area to double-check yourself. With proper feedback, you can use a calculator without looking at it at all. Why do people prefer bulky physical keyboards to those flat, touchpad-like ones?
Ease of use. With a PDA, you either need to take out the stylus or to dirty the screen with your finger. Plus, if you're writing out your calculations on paper, switching between a pencil/pen and the stylus can be tedious.
Battery life. My physical calculator lasts for years before I need to even think about replacing the batteries. With a PDA, you need to keep it charged constantly.
Durability. PDAs are fragile. Physical calculators are rugged. A physical calculator can be thrown into a knapsack and jostled around without any worries. Even if you do break something, the physical calculator is much cheaper to replace.
Dependability. I have more trust in the results from TI and HP than in those from the various PDA software packages of less mature vendors.
I personally would be in favor of a modified BSD license that would add only one stipulation: that the code can never be placed under another more restrictive license, preventing the modified-BSD-licensed code from being relicensed (and thus effectively "stolen" from the community) under the GPL or similar viral licenses.
How would this be different from the GPL? Isn't this precisely why the GPL is commercially-hostile?
Is not the reason that the BSD license is commercially friendly because it allows code to be used under restrictive licenses, such as in closed-source, commercial works?
Someone's already mentioned VirtualDub, but I'd like to point out AviSynth too. Although VirtualDub provides a simple GUI and can be good for video filtering and for re-encoding, its capabilities are limited to linear editing.
AviSynth, on the other hand, is very powerful script-based non-linear editing system. AviSynth operates as a frame-server--other applications (such as VirtualDub) load AviSynth scripts, and when they request frame N, AviSynth generates that frame and feeds it to the calling application. Most applications don't even need to support AviSynth explicitly; as long as they use Windows' native AVI handlers, AviSynth should work with them just fine.
It doesn't provide a GUI, although there are a number of third-party graphical front-ends to ease the script-writing process. It's harder to learn for non-programmers, but as a script-based system, in many ways it's more powerful, flexible, and precise than traditional methods.
An AviSynth script often looks something like this:
# load foo.avi, and refer to it through the # variable clip1 clip1 = AVISource("foo.avi") clip2 = AVISource("bar.avi")
# output a new clip that has frames [0, 1000] # of clip1, frames [500, 1500] of clip2, and then # frames [2000, 3000] of clip1 # # (the ++ operator concatenates, and the Trim function cuts) editedClip = clip1.Trim(0, 1000) ++ clip2.Trim(500, 1500) ++ clip1.Trim(2000, 3000)
# AviSynth provides filtering support too editedClip = editedClip.TemporalSoften(4, 4, 8, 15, 2) editedClip = editedClip.Levels(0, 1.1, 255, 0, 255)
return editedClip
There are quite a number of third-party plug-ins. So far, though, AviSynth has been used primarily as a tool for processing TV captures and DVD rips, and the vast majority of its filters are different types of denoisers. There are few "effects"-based filters, but hopefully this will change as more and more people use it as an editing system. However, there is support for basic fades, pans, and wipes.
More information can be found at the avisynth.org site and on the doom9 AviSynth forums.
Hopefully these systems will come back to bite their game publishers in the ass.
Anyone who encounters such clandestine anti-piracy systems probably will consider the game to be buggy or slow and will blame the developers for being inept and selling a POS.
I hardly see how such a system would encourage that person to purchase the game (assuming he is even a pirate at all), and if anything works as negative advertising, since that person has the potential to badmouth the game to his friends.
That's nonsense. FAT32 most certainly does not have a 32 GB limit.
Windows 2000 and XP refuse to create FAT32 partitions larger than 32 GB, but that's because Microsoft is trying to encourage people to use NTFS. IIRC FAT32 supports partition sizes up to 2 TB.
Windows 98 can create FAT32 partitions larger than 32 GB without any problems.
It's not so simple.
My experience with Firebird 0.6 and earlier has been that merely unzipping it over an existing installation breaks all the old plugin settings.
Well, I imagine that 1280x1024 can be problematic due to having more than one aspect ratio in common use.
On CRTs, which are typically 4:3, most people will stretch 1280x1024 to fit the entire viewable area. Since 1280:1024 is not equal to 4:3, when so stretched, that resolution uses non-square pixels, and anything that assumes square pixels will appear slightly distorted.
On LCDs that have a native resolution of 1280x1024, typically square pixels are used, and hence the screen has an aspect ratio of 5:4.
So what do you do? The game can't determine on its own if the display uses square or non-square pixels, so it'll need to ask the user or go through some calibration step. It also could choose to support only one aspect ratio (I imagine non-square pixels are a pain to support anyway) and hope that the distortion isn't too noticeable if it's wrong choice.
Of course, not supporting 1280x1024 at all isn't the Right Thing to do either...
I saw a brief interview with Engelbart on TechTV a couple years ago in response to tactile mice (like Logitech's iFeel mouse), and he had some interesting things to say about mouse evolution.
One of the things he mentioned was that instead of a mouseball, his original mouse used two orthogonal wheels arranged in an L-shape. If you tilted the mouse, it would rest on only one of the wheels. Depending on which wheel it was resting, you then could move the mouse perfectly horizontally or vertically.
This would be kind of useful in CAD work. Modern mice don't do this, although I guess nowadays it's easier and more accurate to restrict movement via software.
So you think they aren't going to store this info ina database if you don't have an account? Of course they are, since they need the info in case you need to return something, for tax records, inventory purposes, rebate verification, and a host of other reasons.
I'd expect them to keep it around for a certain period of time for those purposes, yes. However, I'd prefer if they purged it after the return period elapses. They certainly don't need to store my credit card number or password on file.
I buy hundreds of dollars of equiptment a month from the 'net, much for resale, so this is usually a plus for me because I don't have to reenter info. But they would have my info anyway, and I would have to reenter it without an account.
As I said, accounts should be provided as a convenience, not a requirement. I'm not advocating getting rid of accounts entirely.
I admit that I know nothing about business, but it seems clear to me one of
the primary goals should be to to make it as easy as possible to
separate willing customers from their money. If people want to give
you money, don't make them jump through hoops.
For example, an alarming number of sites I've visited require me to
create an account to buy something. This is a turn-off.
For a first-time shopper who may never visit your site again, it's
an extra, unnecessary step.
An account implies that my name, address, telephone number, email
address, and credit card number are stored on file. No thanks.
Creating an account means I have to supply a password. This means
that I either make up a new password (which I will need to remember
but won't should I ever return), or I re-use a password I've used
elsewhere. In other words, that's either one more password I need
to remember or one more place where someone can steal it.
I have no evidence of this, but I suspect at least 90% of people
re-use passwords. As a consequence, I must ask myself: do I trust
your site with my password? (It suddenly strikes me as odd that I
would trust a site with my credit card number but not my password,
but I do.) Even if the answer is yes, that's one more decision the
customer who has already decided to buy something from you
has to make; that's one more point where the customer can change
his/her mind.
Please, don't require accounts. Provide them as a convenience to
repeat customers, but don't make them a barrier to first-timers. Make the
first- timers happy, build up trust, and they'll be more likely to come
back.
(If you do use accounts, it would be reassuring to know if your site
hashes or encrypts passwords before storing them.)
As users of the software, these contributors have certain common interests in making the software stable and usable.
How often do OSS contributors show real interest in software usability? It seems more like a common disinterest to me. OSS contributors are primarily coders; sometimes this can be a hindrance. Do you choose the user-friendly behavior that's many times harder to code, or do you choose the less-friendly behavior that's easier to code? Everybody hates writing GUI code, so few people are willing to write good GUIs.
Furthermore, many developers don't know how to make good user interfaces in the first place. Do most OSS contributors design software with usability as a focus or as an afterthought? Do they design the code around the interface or the interface around the code? Do they design UI mockups and prototypes? conduct usability tests? get heuristic feedback from usability experts? take feedback well from users?
Much of the attitude I've seen is user-neglect. If a user doesn't like the way something behaves, the response is an elitist "use the source, Luke." If you don't like it, change it yourself; if you can't change it yourself, too bad, because no one's interested in improving usability. It's a lot of work with little instant gratification, even though it pays off in the long run.
Or maybe they throw in skinnability--a poor substitute for a proper UI design--and say, "Hey, it's skinnable. If you don't like the interface, you can change it." (... often ignoring that interface usability involves much more than aesthetics.) Or maybe they're just ignored completely.
I do not support this ruling, because I do not support patents in any way shape or form.
Patents or just software patents?
Software patents are bad because their lifetime is an eternity in the software world, giving them undue monopolistic power. This is exacerbated by the fact that most of the patent examiners don't seem to have the direct knowledge or the familiarity with computing history to differentiate between trivial ideas and really unique, innovative stuff.
(And then there's also the problem of idiots flooding the patent office with ridiculous patents.)
However, the patent system as originally envisioned by the U.S. forefathers was a pretty good idea. It gives inventors an incentive to fully disclose the workings of their inventions to the public in exchange for a limited-time monopoly.
Although Megaman wasn't featured in the article, it was mentioned in passing twice. They hadn't forgotten. Or maybe they tried to but weren't as successful at repressing it as they hoped.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, I should add that I'm talking about variations to the underlying hardware.
If you're talking about changes to aesthetics and form-factor, then there's no problem there. But really, those are things that Nokia should be able to get mostly right with usability testing and design heuristics, well before the manufacturing process.
For a basic cellphone (I'm excluding smartphones), users really don't install new software. A typical user just uses the phone out of the box. In this scenario, more models means more choices for the consumer, and the support costs should scale about linearly to the number of models available.
The N-Gage is not targeted for this kind of market. The N-Gage requires games--third-party software titles--that users are responsible for purchasing and installing. Now you have to worry about compatibility:
If decide that you do want backwards and forwards compatibility, the testing and support costs can increase geometrically as the number of models increases.
There are some good reasons for consoles to have somewhat long lives: they provide a stable market for consumers and a stable target for developers. Unless they plan things out very carefully (and given some of the design flaws of the first N-Gage, I wouldn't count on Nokia to do that), saturating the market with too many hardware variations could have too many potential pitfalls.
If Microsoft released an approved X-Box emulator, they'd have to support it. Support costs aren't cheap.
Supporting games on a closed, fixed hardware platform is much easier and cheaper than supporting games on top of an emulator on top of an open, highly-variable hardware platform.
Or how about a two-handed keyboard that lets you mouse?
I bought an IBM TrackPoint keyboard, and I love it. Sure, the TrackPoint is more cumbersome than a regular mouse, but since most OSs these days support multiple pointing devices, you can use it in addition to a regular mouse. If I need to do a lot of keyboarding but only a little mousing, I can use the TrackPoint; if I need to do a lot of mousing but only a bit of keyboarding, I use the mouse.
If you really want a one-handed keyboard, as others have pointed out, there's Matias' Half-Keyboard. It's pricy though. If you use Windows, you also can check out OkayKeybees; it's a free keyboard remapper that lets you define chords. (For example, you could create chords to mimic the half-keyboard's, if you so wanted.)
First, I'm going to have to agree with a lot of the other posters and say that this is a poor question for Ask Slashdot; it shouldn't have been hard to research on your own.
Second, Slashdot is not the best place to ask. The quality of your responses would be much better from forums that focus on video capture, such as Ars Technica's Audio/Visual forum and doom9.org's DV forum.
Now, back to your question:
With most DV camcorders, you should be able to feed a composite or s-video source into the camcorder, and then you can use whatever DV software you normally use. I've heard that there are a handful of DV camcorder models that require you to record to tape first, but I don't think they're Sony's. Unfortunately, there will be significant latency.
As for some of the other Slashdot responses so far: No, you don't need a Mac, and no, you don't need Premiere. If you're using Windows and want a lightweight DV capturing app, try Scenalyzer Live! (~$40) or WinDV (free).
Heck, on Windows, a DV camcorder should show up as a DirectShow capture device. If you don't care about recompressing the video stream (e.g. for machine vision), then you can use any DirectShow-based TV/capture app. There are a number of open-source ones out there (e.g. Virtual VCR).
That's what I'm thinking too. I posted some thoughts about it before:
Plus, I think I was speculation on theforce.net a few years ago that maybe Senator/Chancellor Palpatine and Darth Sidious are not the same person but rather are clones of each other.
Actually, I'm thinking (and hoping, but probably in vain) that maybe we don't know what we think we know.
For example, everyone is expecting Anakin to become Vader. What if he's not? Perhaps Vader is a clone of Anakin. This could explain a few things:
Or it could be the other way around, and a clone of Anakin sires Luke and Leia.
I doubt that any of this is the case. I bet Episode III is going to be a boring piece of trash with nothing substantial to add. I can dream, though...
Sharpies use alcohol-based inks.
The CD-R FAQ indicates that Sharpies should be okay.
Endurapro 104: a buckling-spring (aka Model-M) keyboard with Windows keys and integrated TrackPoint.
Buckling-spring. There are already numerous other comments on the greatness of Model-M keyboards.
Windows keys. Okay, some of you hate them with a passion. If they bother you that much, pckeyboards sell versions without 'em. Me, I think they're useful. Use an application such as WinKey to assign keyboard shortcuts to Windows-key combinations. (Examples: Win+i to start a web browser, Win+v to open the volume control, Win+c to open the control panel, Win+down to minimize the current window, ...)
Integrated TrackPoint. Some of you hate these things too. "A normal mouse is so much better," you say. The beauty, though, is that you can use it with a normal mouse. I have both a TrackPoint keyboard and a normal mouse hooked up. If I need to do a lot of mousing, I'll use the mouse. If I want to do just a little bit, though, I can use the TrackPoint to move the mouse cursor and never have to take my hands off the keyboard. It's excellent for coding. All keyboards should be like this.
Huh? How does a notebook do more than a Tablet PC? A Tablet PC does everything a notebook does but adds a touchscreen.
A Tablet PC can do more, not less. There are models with keyboards, you know.
I'd like to see you draw on a normal notebook computer. Oh, you don't draw? Okay, how about taking notes or writing out mathematical formulas? Oh, you don't do that either? So Tablet PCs must be stupid because you're not in their market segment?
How about feeding them to wolves?
For occasional use to calculate sales tax or tips, a PDA is fine. For any extensive calculations, though, such as for math/science/engineering work, a physical calculator is far superior for the following reasons:
- I pushed the right button; on a PDA, it's easy to tap the wrong virtual button, especially if you're using your fingers
- the button I pushed registered
Without good feedback, you waste time looking at what you're pressing and looking at the display area to double-check yourself. With proper feedback, you can use a calculator without looking at it at all. Why do people prefer bulky physical keyboards to those flat, touchpad-like ones?How would this be different from the GPL? Isn't this precisely why the GPL is commercially-hostile?
Is not the reason that the BSD license is commercially friendly because it allows code to be used under restrictive licenses, such as in closed-source, commercial works?
Someone's already mentioned VirtualDub, but I'd like to point out AviSynth too. Although VirtualDub provides a simple GUI and can be good for video filtering and for re-encoding, its capabilities are limited to linear editing.
AviSynth, on the other hand, is very powerful script-based non-linear editing system. AviSynth operates as a frame-server--other applications (such as VirtualDub) load AviSynth scripts, and when they request frame N, AviSynth generates that frame and feeds it to the calling application. Most applications don't even need to support AviSynth explicitly; as long as they use Windows' native AVI handlers, AviSynth should work with them just fine.
It doesn't provide a GUI, although there are a number of third-party graphical front-ends to ease the script-writing process. It's harder to learn for non-programmers, but as a script-based system, in many ways it's more powerful, flexible, and precise than traditional methods.
An AviSynth script often looks something like this:
There are quite a number of third-party plug-ins. So far, though, AviSynth has been used primarily as a tool for processing TV captures and DVD rips, and the vast majority of its filters are different types of denoisers. There are few "effects"-based filters, but hopefully this will change as more and more people use it as an editing system. However, there is support for basic fades, pans, and wipes.
More information can be found at the avisynth.org site and on the doom9 AviSynth forums.
Hopefully these systems will come back to bite their game publishers in the ass.
Anyone who encounters such clandestine anti-piracy systems probably will consider the game to be buggy or slow and will blame the developers for being inept and selling a POS.
I hardly see how such a system would encourage that person to purchase the game (assuming he is even a pirate at all), and if anything works as negative advertising, since that person has the potential to badmouth the game to his friends.
Brilliant.
That's nonsense. FAT32 most certainly does not have a 32 GB limit.
Windows 2000 and XP refuse to create FAT32 partitions larger than 32 GB, but that's because Microsoft is trying to encourage people to use NTFS. IIRC FAT32 supports partition sizes up to 2 TB.
Windows 98 can create FAT32 partitions larger than 32 GB without any problems.
Okay, but that doesn't solve the real problem, which is that you need to reinstall all the old extensions after upgrading.
It's not so simple. My experience with Firebird 0.6 and earlier has been that merely unzipping it over an existing installation breaks all the old plugin settings.
Well, I imagine that 1280x1024 can be problematic due to having more than one aspect ratio in common use.
On CRTs, which are typically 4:3, most people will stretch 1280x1024 to fit the entire viewable area. Since 1280:1024 is not equal to 4:3, when so stretched, that resolution uses non-square pixels, and anything that assumes square pixels will appear slightly distorted.
On LCDs that have a native resolution of 1280x1024, typically square pixels are used, and hence the screen has an aspect ratio of 5:4.
So what do you do? The game can't determine on its own if the display uses square or non-square pixels, so it'll need to ask the user or go through some calibration step. It also could choose to support only one aspect ratio (I imagine non-square pixels are a pain to support anyway) and hope that the distortion isn't too noticeable if it's wrong choice.
Of course, not supporting 1280x1024 at all isn't the Right Thing to do either...
I saw a brief interview with Engelbart on TechTV a couple years ago in response to tactile mice (like Logitech's iFeel mouse), and he had some interesting things to say about mouse evolution.
One of the things he mentioned was that instead of a mouseball, his original mouse used two orthogonal wheels arranged in an L-shape. If you tilted the mouse, it would rest on only one of the wheels. Depending on which wheel it was resting, you then could move the mouse perfectly horizontally or vertically.
This would be kind of useful in CAD work. Modern mice don't do this, although I guess nowadays it's easier and more accurate to restrict movement via software.
I'd expect them to keep it around for a certain period of time for those purposes, yes. However, I'd prefer if they purged it after the return period elapses. They certainly don't need to store my credit card number or password on file.
As I said, accounts should be provided as a convenience, not a requirement. I'm not advocating getting rid of accounts entirely.
I admit that I know nothing about business, but it seems clear to me one of the primary goals should be to to make it as easy as possible to separate willing customers from their money. If people want to give you money, don't make them jump through hoops.
For example, an alarming number of sites I've visited require me to create an account to buy something. This is a turn-off.
For a first-time shopper who may never visit your site again, it's an extra, unnecessary step.
An account implies that my name, address, telephone number, email address, and credit card number are stored on file. No thanks.
Creating an account means I have to supply a password. This means that I either make up a new password (which I will need to remember but won't should I ever return), or I re-use a password I've used elsewhere. In other words, that's either one more password I need to remember or one more place where someone can steal it.
I have no evidence of this, but I suspect at least 90% of people re-use passwords. As a consequence, I must ask myself: do I trust your site with my password? (It suddenly strikes me as odd that I would trust a site with my credit card number but not my password, but I do.) Even if the answer is yes, that's one more decision the customer who has already decided to buy something from you has to make; that's one more point where the customer can change his/her mind.
Please, don't require accounts. Provide them as a convenience to repeat customers, but don't make them a barrier to first-timers. Make the first- timers happy, build up trust, and they'll be more likely to come back.
(If you do use accounts, it would be reassuring to know if your site hashes or encrypts passwords before storing them.)
How often do OSS contributors show real interest in software usability? It seems more like a common disinterest to me. OSS contributors are primarily coders; sometimes this can be a hindrance. Do you choose the user-friendly behavior that's many times harder to code, or do you choose the less-friendly behavior that's easier to code? Everybody hates writing GUI code, so few people are willing to write good GUIs.
Furthermore, many developers don't know how to make good user interfaces in the first place. Do most OSS contributors design software with usability as a focus or as an afterthought? Do they design the code around the interface or the interface around the code? Do they design UI mockups and prototypes? conduct usability tests? get heuristic feedback from usability experts? take feedback well from users?
Much of the attitude I've seen is user-neglect. If a user doesn't like the way something behaves, the response is an elitist "use the source, Luke." If you don't like it, change it yourself; if you can't change it yourself, too bad, because no one's interested in improving usability. It's a lot of work with little instant gratification, even though it pays off in the long run.
Or maybe they throw in skinnability--a poor substitute for a proper UI design--and say, "Hey, it's skinnable. If you don't like the interface, you can change it." (... often ignoring that interface usability involves much more than aesthetics.) Or maybe they're just ignored completely.
Patents or just software patents?
Software patents are bad because their lifetime is an eternity in the software world, giving them undue monopolistic power. This is exacerbated by the fact that most of the patent examiners don't seem to have the direct knowledge or the familiarity with computing history to differentiate between trivial ideas and really unique, innovative stuff.
(And then there's also the problem of idiots flooding the patent office with ridiculous patents.)
However, the patent system as originally envisioned by the U.S. forefathers was a pretty good idea. It gives inventors an incentive to fully disclose the workings of their inventions to the public in exchange for a limited-time monopoly.
Although Megaman wasn't featured in the article, it was mentioned in passing twice. They hadn't forgotten. Or maybe they tried to but weren't as successful at repressing it as they hoped.