The real world cultural differences between the Arab and western worlds are clear. What majors differences would you note between the two cultures online?
At eight years old Song is already talking about building flying cars and defying Newton's law of gravity while others his age are attending the first grade.
i was dreaming up flying cars and defying gravity in first grade. and riding dinosaurs... oh ya.
Until recently, the market for electronic games was mainly young, male, and diehard.
i call B.S. young, male, and diehard is where the big name publishers have been getting most of their profits, and therefore have been afraid to vary from the formula for so long. but i recall a WEALTH of great, accessible games to people of all ages and genders back in the 386 days and shortly thereafter.
remember Myst? that game you never played because it didn't have action? the one that made more money and garnered more positive attention to the PC game market than anything else? everyone played it. throw in D, King's Quest, Sim City, really ANY sim or adventure title!
and the big names raking in the big money these days, like the Sims, are those games that appeal to EVERYONE.
this "new revolution" in games marketable to just about anyone is that universal market big publishers THREW ONTO THE CURB a few years back.
such things have been reported of coffee since Asia Minor first learned of it how many centuries ago. can't be believed, i suppose, until people in white lab-coats tell you it's true. it's important to be reminded, though. (forgive the cynicism.)
Leaning away from desktop computing, I even find a laptop to be "too much" for true mobility... gotta pack a bag with powersupply to do any real computing, unless i want to work short-term. Ideally what I want is a mobile, wireless terminal to a server at home running ssh and X - could this be my solution? PDAs are too small and expensive, and standard laptops too bulky. This looks and sounds like a "just right" alternative, that isn't trying to be a "PC for your backpack". And they've already done the hard part of putting Linux on there for me, so it's just a matter of changing the startup scripts and using it as a convenient device from virtually anywhere. So... where the heck do I buy?? Why do companies like this never include sales information?? Anyone know?
i'm reading a lot of backlash against standards, and i suspect that most people responding don't understand the first thing about them. the LSB does not a vanilla linux installation make. it's a standard by which, hopefully, one can download a binary and it will "just work", whether you're on a "by hackers for hackers" distro or one that holds your hand. and complying to the standard doesn't necessarily inhibit creativity or progress, as the end-user/sysadmin is the ultimate authority.
example: Slackware, a distribution wholly unlike any of the big names on everyone's lips, chooses a BSD-like init design and manages packages with a relatively simple set of shell scripts. BUT, for the sake of maintaining standards (particularly the Linux File System standard), Slackware has symlinks compatible with a SysV install and includes rpm! was that really so hard? did that inhibit the "simplicity and stability" mantra, or stop Slackware fans from creating avariety of interesting projects? no.
the freedom to experiment exists and is encouraged and adopted within Slackware, while it still maintains standards compliancy.
i'm sure the designers of cell phones were just trying to emulate Star Trek. silly nerds creating an absolutely useless invention... OR you're just being a *little* short-sighted. technology has followed science fiction pretty much since technology began catching up with science fiction, so we have Gundam to _thank_, actually.
I am of the unpopular and absolutely elitist opinion that these people don't belong online. And yes, I know I'm talking about 90% of the internet populace. I don't necessarily believe everyone should be a programmer or technician to so much as receive email and look at boobies, but if you don't know how to *operate* a blasted computer, you shouldn't be using one. And the internet is like playing in the street - fairly safe if you know what you're doing but entirely stupid if you don't. So the question isn't whether or not we should dumb things down, but recognize that the internet and general purpose computing is "not ready for the desktop", and is beyond the grasp of the everyday person. Like automobiles, it will eventually become so commonplace, tweaked from experience, and "tamed" that just about anyone can use it, but it's not there yet.
if they are Gnome developers, than their program descriptions should declare just that. i don't like Gnome, don't use Gnome, and when searching for software ungrudgingly pass by programs "written for Gnome". but when i read "Gtk", i assume that it uses Gtk, and not Gnome, able to run very happily on my computer -- if GNOME developers would be more conscientious, i wouldn't have my complaint.
yes, i understand this. and if the "cute little program" (i do regret using that phrase) were part of the GNOME suite, or KDE as the case may be, i'd completely understand. but as it is, i'll do a sf.net search for, say, a network monitor, find an app that sounds appealling, look at its description listing only "GTK". try to compile, or worse yet, install the binary package, and they neglected to inform you its dependant on a Bonobo, Pango, whatever else GNOME uses.
i understand that GNOME is the framework to build very useful and productive programs, but it renders a very good application absolutely useless to anyone (usually myself) who has decided on another DE. most alternative windowmanagers have configure options to run with GNOME support, KDE support, or neither. these "cute little programs" should too.
and i'll acknowledge that there are a good many developers who faithfully include "written for GNOME" in their program descriptions. i read that and know immediately that i can't use it, while other developers say only "written in Gtk", leaving me only to realize the sad truth. (thank you those who distinguish clearly!)
and *that* is my complaint.
i'm glad to see it go. it's always been a big waste of burned disk space when all i want to do is upgrade the latest core packages and recompile everything else that linuxpackages.net doesn't have a binary for. and while we're on the topic of cutting out unnecessary GNOME fat... GTK developers: please stop depending on GNOME-specific packages!! when i want a cute little program for a slim little purpose to run on my less mainstream enlightenment setup, i *don't* want to install an entire DE that i never use!! please write programs independant of GNOME *and* KDE. both Qt and Gtk are perfectly fine libraries by themselves, without the additional bloat!
gosh, Davy... computer science is hard!
better leave it to the smart people at Intel, because that sort of thing is clearly too much freedom for dumb-dumbs like us.
the BSDs aren't as popular with heavy hitters because if they contribute code, there is absolutely NO promise of return with that code. the GPL puts everyone on equal footing - IBM contributes code, and I can contribute code, and both parties may take advantage of it.
in BSD, IBM contributes code, and I can improve upon that code and close off my source. IBM gains nothing.
I wrote my congressman once, in regards to the DMCA. Score one point for democracy, right?
My congressman wrote me back (or rather, sent back a copy of a previously prepared letter) saying that he'd seriously considered my point of view, and decided that I was an immoral pirate with no idea what's good for America.
I'll refrain from expressing my disappointment in our government system, but the idea that holding a re-election over someone's head truly makes a difference is bollocks, unless you've got the money to lobby heavily - oh, like Corporate America does:D
it looks like a nice feature, which will be good, for both gtk and qt. looking at the Cairo site, it looks to serve a purpose similar to SVG, which used to be the big buzzword. can anyone tell us, is Cairo in direct competition with SVG applications? i notice cairo advertises "high quality...printing outputs" - is that its focus while SVG deals more with graphic displays and the web?
i think that's very cool. i love to see new efforts being drawn on retro hardware.
but i do wonder why one would bother building a parallel port unit to play the music when there are software emulators doing that work for us already? if it were truly *standalone*, then it would be a fun, useful way to incorporate it into music projects or just have fun - but as it's tied to the computer already, why not just use the software?
looking at the list briefly, it's good to catch 2 or 3 hackers on it! (if you count the SoBig author) at least 2 or three names i recognize.
it's interesting also, with the arguably condescending remarks on the Open Source movement, that while the president of China is listed the 4th most influential man in technology they fail to mention China's official RED FLAG LINUX. interesting, eh?
goodness. every now and then we acquire a technology so advanced that one may first wonder "how the hell can we implement that usefully?" and then i think Star Trek a second... imagine miniaturized lasers like these in a handheld device that performs automatically according to a doctor's settings. hehe.
i first read this article last night on Newsforge and did some cursory searches for the project. i couldn't find anything. has anyone else had any luck?
the only things i've yet found are blog entries. he seems to be a reliable hacker but of what news is this until there's downloadable source-code? i'm planning on working on a new MUD; i'll be sure to submit that to/. right away!!
so if you have a link for us, please pass this along. also, like so many others have asked, how closely will this be tied to GNOME? even my desktop system uses WindowMaker ; why should a foundational mother-program rope me into a DE i don't like? or be reliant on the GUI in the first place?!
as the author had stated, the average linux user *does* believe in free software. and i, for one, couldn't give two shakes about conforming such a powerful oppurtunity as linux to the low standard Microsoft has set for users to expect. (having been a professional and freelance tech for a few years, i feel justified in saying exactly that.)
the average user is not comfortable with the Microsoft desktop. the average user does not know how to install programs, despite the "universal style". the average user is a myth - the elusive "unified desktop" is a myth. Gnome is *not* incapatible with KDE: it's just a matter of having the right libraries installed! when one Windows program uses OpenGL and the other DirectX, one doesn't claim they are incompatible - you install the freaking library!! and the only incompatibility between distributions is that of filesystem when installing from pre-compiled binaries. maybe what the community needs is a universal gateway for these rpms (debs and slack-tarballs are pretty much distro-specific) which is a bit more user-friendly than rpmfind.net - or even a small business DEVOTED to exactly that!! or a prepackaged format that dynamically installs according to the nuances of the file-system, instead of effectively "untarring" into a static filesystem.
it's my personal belief that Linux diversity is its strength - the fact that RedHat can design Bluecurve, unifying Gnome and KDE; the fact that Xandros can mimic Microsoft's (ugly) interface; the fact that i can tailor-customize a WindowMaker desktop specifically for the needs of my family -- standardization is a crock. businesses standardize, and if i were to start my own distribution, i'd make the desktop and packaging standard, and even try to incorporate community development sites for the benefit of the user. the linux community is a technically savvy community - it's up to distribution businesses to decide these matters, install both gtk and qt libraries by default and run a customized GUI. the author is barking up the wrong tree.
"...show the filesystem layout to your mother and ask her where an application might be located."
i love my best friend dearly, but she (an intelligent young woman in her twenties) didn't know what an APPLICATION was, let alone where she might find one. this is Stephenson's "Metaphor Shear", methinks. we're too presumptuous about what a user wants, what a user needs, and (most importantly) what will SATISFY a user.
i, personally, think the only real computer interface that will be a success (apart from complete market saturation and the billions of dollars needed to enforce such a monopoly) is limitted, proprietary interfaces like you'd find at an ATM, or on a very basic cell-phone.
Adobe shouldn't be selling software for hundreds of dollars - they should be selling customized workstations for the same money! computers will only be the huge success this author and many like him describe when it is as intuitive as gaming consoles, regardless the OS/vendor/business. as a technician and "yes, i'll fix your computer" geek, i know that NO user likes Microsoft's product, on the whole. and when given the choice of Linux, the reason for staying with Microsoft has nothing to do with useability, it's just that they can go to Best Buy for software or repair.
when computers are *not* customizable, are intuitive, and never crash, the users will be happy. general computing is for hackers. focused computing is necessary for everyone else.
as an avid patron to arcades still today, i'll throw in my two credits. (don't mod me down for puns!)
this new strategy of Microsoft's is not going to work, and not because "the arcade is dead", but because they're going about it all wrong.
most successful arcade machines, today, are successful for one of two reasons: 1) it has an innovative playing style, 2) it has a classic, time-proven appeal. (one could argue, i'm sure, that this statements cover all possibilities, but that's not the case) a necessary foundation underlying both these requirements is that the game is FUN.
typically, the second category (classic gaming) is in a classic console, not a rehash. classic fighters like Marvel vs. Capcom, Street Fighter, MK, etc., etc. - racers - shooters. copy-cats are rarely as successful as the originals.
now - what's making the big money? fun innovation. and that's Konami, right now. consider the Cult of DDR - where i've witnessed at least $30 fly into the machine in the course of 2 hours. the game is fun, it's unconventional, it's SOCIAL, and a buck to dance to 3 or 4 songs (potentially 5 or more minutes of play) is fair - and the experience usually cathartic. Konami's also got the rest of the music game series, which is fairly successful. another of their big hits is Silent Scope - a simple shooter, yes, but unconventional and interesting gameplay. another big success (in my observational experience) is Golden Tee - which looks, to me, to be the most boring arcade game of all time! but it's intended as a machine for a sports bar - where people enjoy golf. and this game, too, has an unconventional interface. the player spins a ball (think oldschool Centipede) to make the shot - thus putting physical skill (less than reaction-time) into the mix.
now - what does *not* make any of these said games successful? the underlying hardware! while, yes, the hardware makes everything run and look pretty - it's not the selling point. none of the games i'd mentioned above have ridiculously impressive graphics - it's the gameplay that matters. i play DDR because it's fun - i play pinball because it's fun - i play TMNT because it's fun;p i might risk a dollar or fifty cents on a game with amazing UT2k-comparable graphics, but i won't play it unless it's fun! and i certainly don't play the game because i know it's got a certified IBM custom-built Gecko CPU! (Nintendo reference) and would not be drawn to a machine because i know Xbox's PC hardware drives the thing.
so, Microsoft can only really be doing this to try to get new developers, because only developers really pay attention to the underlying hardware. but really, then, developers already making arcade games already have their hardware and i doubt they'd switch to a glorified PC (Xbox) - Microsoft must be looking for new developers, who are only familiar with Wintel and therefore more likely to use that hardware. unless they're stupid or self-aggrandizing enough to throw a big Xbox insignia on the title panel!
and even this is questionable... there aren't many up-and-coming game developers (though i'd like someday to be one myself) - and the arcade market is not what it used to be. if Microsoft *really* were looking to make money and compete with other coin-op companies, they'd start making gambling hardware. that's where the money is. even Konami, who is probably the most successful arcade manufacturer right now, makes Casino machines!
i really don't think Microsoft knows what it's doing with this. maybe Tux poked the octopus in the eye, and now it's just flailing about wildly?
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe MS is trying to goad people (like IT professionals) into upgrading to Vista...
TRUST NO ONE
The real world cultural differences between the Arab and western worlds are clear. What majors differences would you note between the two cultures online?
Carmack doesn't work on games - Carmack is strictly technology... he pays other people to design gameplay
just fyi
it seems that Korea is having a lot of issues with human eggs. they constitute a black market in Asia:
the crackdown might be why the scientist had to seek an egg donation. bioethical questions aside, this all seems very odd.
At eight years old Song is already talking about building flying cars and defying Newton's law of gravity while others his age are attending the first grade.
i was dreaming up flying cars and defying gravity in first grade. and riding dinosaurs... oh ya.
Until recently, the market for electronic games was mainly young, male, and diehard.
i call B.S. young, male, and diehard is where the big name publishers have been getting most of their profits, and therefore have been afraid to vary from the formula for so long. but i recall a WEALTH of great, accessible games to people of all ages and genders back in the 386 days and shortly thereafter.
remember Myst? that game you never played because it didn't have action? the one that made more money and garnered more positive attention to the PC game market than anything else? everyone played it. throw in D, King's Quest, Sim City, really ANY sim or adventure title!
and the big names raking in the big money these days, like the Sims, are those games that appeal to EVERYONE.
this "new revolution" in games marketable to just about anyone is that universal market big publishers THREW ONTO THE CURB a few years back.
such things have been reported of coffee since Asia Minor first learned of it how many centuries ago. can't be believed, i suppose, until people in white lab-coats tell you it's true. it's important to be reminded, though. (forgive the cynicism.)
Leaning away from desktop computing, I even find a laptop to be "too much" for true mobility... gotta pack a bag with powersupply to do any real computing, unless i want to work short-term. Ideally what I want is a mobile, wireless terminal to a server at home running ssh and X - could this be my solution? PDAs are too small and expensive, and standard laptops too bulky. This looks and sounds like a "just right" alternative, that isn't trying to be a "PC for your backpack". And they've already done the hard part of putting Linux on there for me, so it's just a matter of changing the startup scripts and using it as a convenient device from virtually anywhere.
So... where the heck do I buy?? Why do companies like this never include sales information?? Anyone know?
i'm reading a lot of backlash against standards, and i suspect that most people responding don't understand the first thing about them. the LSB does not a vanilla linux installation make. it's a standard by which, hopefully, one can download a binary and it will "just work", whether you're on a "by hackers for hackers" distro or one that holds your hand. and complying to the standard doesn't necessarily inhibit creativity or progress, as the end-user/sysadmin is the ultimate authority.
example: Slackware, a distribution wholly unlike any of the big names on everyone's lips, chooses a BSD-like init design and manages packages with a relatively simple set of shell scripts. BUT, for the sake of maintaining standards (particularly the Linux File System standard), Slackware has symlinks compatible with a SysV install and includes rpm! was that really so hard? did that inhibit the "simplicity and stability" mantra, or stop Slackware fans from creating a variety of interesting projects? no.
the freedom to experiment exists and is encouraged and adopted within Slackware, while it still maintains standards compliancy.
i'm sure the designers of cell phones were just trying to emulate Star Trek. silly nerds creating an absolutely useless invention... OR you're just being a *little* short-sighted. technology has followed science fiction pretty much since technology began catching up with science fiction, so we have Gundam to _thank_, actually.
I am of the unpopular and absolutely elitist opinion that these people don't belong online. And yes, I know I'm talking about 90% of the internet populace. I don't necessarily believe everyone should be a programmer or technician to so much as receive email and look at boobies, but if you don't know how to *operate* a blasted computer, you shouldn't be using one. And the internet is like playing in the street - fairly safe if you know what you're doing but entirely stupid if you don't.
So the question isn't whether or not we should dumb things down, but recognize that the internet and general purpose computing is "not ready for the desktop", and is beyond the grasp of the everyday person. Like automobiles, it will eventually become so commonplace, tweaked from experience, and "tamed" that just about anyone can use it, but it's not there yet.
if they are Gnome developers, than their program descriptions should declare just that. i don't like Gnome, don't use Gnome, and when searching for software ungrudgingly pass by programs "written for Gnome". but when i read "Gtk", i assume that it uses Gtk, and not Gnome, able to run very happily on my computer -- if GNOME developers would be more conscientious, i wouldn't have my complaint.
yes, i understand this. and if the "cute little program" (i do regret using that phrase) were part of the GNOME suite, or KDE as the case may be, i'd completely understand. but as it is, i'll do a sf.net search for, say, a network monitor, find an app that sounds appealling, look at its description listing only "GTK". try to compile, or worse yet, install the binary package, and they neglected to inform you its dependant on a Bonobo, Pango, whatever else GNOME uses. i understand that GNOME is the framework to build very useful and productive programs, but it renders a very good application absolutely useless to anyone (usually myself) who has decided on another DE. most alternative windowmanagers have configure options to run with GNOME support, KDE support, or neither. these "cute little programs" should too. and i'll acknowledge that there are a good many developers who faithfully include "written for GNOME" in their program descriptions. i read that and know immediately that i can't use it, while other developers say only "written in Gtk", leaving me only to realize the sad truth. (thank you those who distinguish clearly!) and *that* is my complaint.
i'm glad to see it go. it's always been a big waste of burned disk space when all i want to do is upgrade the latest core packages and recompile everything else that linuxpackages.net doesn't have a binary for.
and while we're on the topic of cutting out unnecessary GNOME fat... GTK developers: please stop depending on GNOME-specific packages!! when i want a cute little program for a slim little purpose to run on my less mainstream enlightenment setup, i *don't* want to install an entire DE that i never use!! please write programs independant of GNOME *and* KDE. both Qt and Gtk are perfectly fine libraries by themselves, without the additional bloat!
gosh, Davy... computer science is hard! better leave it to the smart people at Intel, because that sort of thing is clearly too much freedom for dumb-dumbs like us.
the BSDs aren't as popular with heavy hitters because if they contribute code, there is absolutely NO promise of return with that code. the GPL puts everyone on equal footing - IBM contributes code, and I can contribute code, and both parties may take advantage of it.
in BSD, IBM contributes code, and I can improve upon that code and close off my source. IBM gains nothing.
I wrote my congressman once, in regards to the DMCA. Score one point for democracy, right?
:D
My congressman wrote me back (or rather, sent back a copy of a previously prepared letter) saying that he'd seriously considered my point of view, and decided that I was an immoral pirate with no idea what's good for America.
I'll refrain from expressing my disappointment in our government system, but the idea that holding a re-election over someone's head truly makes a difference is bollocks, unless you've got the money to lobby heavily - oh, like Corporate America does
it looks like a nice feature, which will be good, for both gtk and qt. looking at the Cairo site, it looks to serve a purpose similar to SVG, which used to be the big buzzword.
can anyone tell us, is Cairo in direct competition with SVG applications? i notice cairo advertises "high quality...printing outputs" - is that its focus while SVG deals more with graphic displays and the web?
i think that's very cool. i love to see new efforts being drawn on retro hardware.
but i do wonder why one would bother building a parallel port unit to play the music when there are software emulators doing that work for us already?
if it were truly *standalone*, then it would be a fun, useful way to incorporate it into music projects or just have fun - but as it's tied to the computer already, why not just use the software?
looking at the list briefly, it's good to catch 2 or 3 hackers on it! (if you count the SoBig author) at least 2 or three names i recognize.
it's interesting also, with the arguably condescending remarks on the Open Source movement, that while the president of China is listed the 4th most influential man in technology they fail to mention China's official RED FLAG LINUX.
interesting, eh?
goodness. every now and then we acquire a technology so advanced that one may first wonder "how the hell can we implement that usefully?"
and then i think Star Trek a second... imagine miniaturized lasers like these in a handheld device that performs automatically according to a doctor's settings.
hehe.
i first read this article last night on Newsforge and did some cursory searches for the project. i couldn't find anything. has anyone else had any luck?
/. right away!!
the only things i've yet found are blog entries. he seems to be a reliable hacker but of what news is this until there's downloadable source-code? i'm planning on working on a new MUD; i'll be sure to submit that to
so if you have a link for us, please pass this along. also, like so many others have asked, how closely will this be tied to GNOME? even my desktop system uses WindowMaker ; why should a foundational mother-program rope me into a DE i don't like? or be reliant on the GUI in the first place?!
as the author had stated, the average linux user *does* believe in free software. and i, for one, couldn't give two shakes about conforming such a powerful oppurtunity as linux to the low standard Microsoft has set for users to expect. (having been a professional and freelance tech for a few years, i feel justified in saying exactly that.)
the average user is not comfortable with the Microsoft desktop. the average user does not know how to install programs, despite the "universal style". the average user is a myth - the elusive "unified desktop" is a myth.
Gnome is *not* incapatible with KDE: it's just a matter of having the right libraries installed! when one Windows program uses OpenGL and the other DirectX, one doesn't claim they are incompatible - you install the freaking library!!
and the only incompatibility between distributions is that of filesystem when installing from pre-compiled binaries. maybe what the community needs is a universal gateway for these rpms (debs and slack-tarballs are pretty much distro-specific) which is a bit more user-friendly than rpmfind.net - or even a small business DEVOTED to exactly that!! or a prepackaged format that dynamically installs according to the nuances of the file-system, instead of effectively "untarring" into a static filesystem.
it's my personal belief that Linux diversity is its strength - the fact that RedHat can design Bluecurve, unifying Gnome and KDE; the fact that Xandros can mimic Microsoft's (ugly) interface; the fact that i can tailor-customize a WindowMaker desktop specifically for the needs of my family -- standardization is a crock. businesses standardize, and if i were to start my own distribution, i'd make the desktop and packaging standard, and even try to incorporate community development sites for the benefit of the user.
the linux community is a technically savvy community - it's up to distribution businesses to decide these matters, install both gtk and qt libraries by default and run a customized GUI. the author is barking up the wrong tree.
"...show the filesystem layout to your mother and ask her where an application might be located."
i love my best friend dearly, but she (an intelligent young woman in her twenties) didn't know what an APPLICATION was, let alone where she might find one.
this is Stephenson's "Metaphor Shear", methinks. we're too presumptuous about what a user wants, what a user needs, and (most importantly) what will SATISFY a user.
i, personally, think the only real computer interface that will be a success (apart from complete market saturation and the billions of dollars needed to enforce such a monopoly) is limitted, proprietary interfaces like you'd find at an ATM, or on a very basic cell-phone.
Adobe shouldn't be selling software for hundreds of dollars - they should be selling customized workstations for the same money! computers will only be the huge success this author and many like him describe when it is as intuitive as gaming consoles, regardless the OS/vendor/business. as a technician and "yes, i'll fix your computer" geek, i know that NO user likes Microsoft's product, on the whole. and when given the choice of Linux, the reason for staying with Microsoft has nothing to do with useability, it's just that they can go to Best Buy for software or repair.
when computers are *not* customizable, are intuitive, and never crash, the users will be happy. general computing is for hackers. focused computing is necessary for everyone else.
as an avid patron to arcades still today, i'll throw in my two credits. (don't mod me down for puns!)
;p i might risk a dollar or fifty cents on a game with amazing UT2k-comparable graphics, but i won't play it unless it's fun! and i certainly don't play the game because i know it's got a certified IBM custom-built Gecko CPU! (Nintendo reference) and would not be drawn to a machine because i know Xbox's PC hardware drives the thing.
this new strategy of Microsoft's is not going to work, and not because "the arcade is dead", but because they're going about it all wrong.
most successful arcade machines, today, are successful for one of two reasons: 1) it has an innovative playing style, 2) it has a classic, time-proven appeal. (one could argue, i'm sure, that this statements cover all possibilities, but that's not the case) a necessary foundation underlying both these requirements is that the game is FUN.
typically, the second category (classic gaming) is in a classic console, not a rehash. classic fighters like Marvel vs. Capcom, Street Fighter, MK, etc., etc. - racers - shooters. copy-cats are rarely as successful as the originals.
now - what's making the big money? fun innovation. and that's Konami, right now. consider the Cult of DDR - where i've witnessed at least $30 fly into the machine in the course of 2 hours. the game is fun, it's unconventional, it's SOCIAL, and a buck to dance to 3 or 4 songs (potentially 5 or more minutes of play) is fair - and the experience usually cathartic. Konami's also got the rest of the music game series, which is fairly successful. another of their big hits is Silent Scope - a simple shooter, yes, but unconventional and interesting gameplay.
another big success (in my observational experience) is Golden Tee - which looks, to me, to be the most boring arcade game of all time! but it's intended as a machine for a sports bar - where people enjoy golf. and this game, too, has an unconventional interface. the player spins a ball (think oldschool Centipede) to make the shot - thus putting physical skill (less than reaction-time) into the mix.
now - what does *not* make any of these said games successful? the underlying hardware! while, yes, the hardware makes everything run and look pretty - it's not the selling point. none of the games i'd mentioned above have ridiculously impressive graphics - it's the gameplay that matters. i play DDR because it's fun - i play pinball because it's fun - i play TMNT because it's fun
so, Microsoft can only really be doing this to try to get new developers, because only developers really pay attention to the underlying hardware. but really, then, developers already making arcade games already have their hardware and i doubt they'd switch to a glorified PC (Xbox) - Microsoft must be looking for new developers, who are only familiar with Wintel and therefore more likely to use that hardware.
unless they're stupid or self-aggrandizing enough to throw a big Xbox insignia on the title panel!
and even this is questionable... there aren't many up-and-coming game developers (though i'd like someday to be one myself) - and the arcade market is not what it used to be. if Microsoft *really* were looking to make money and compete with other coin-op companies, they'd start making gambling hardware. that's where the money is. even Konami, who is probably the most successful arcade manufacturer right now, makes Casino machines!
i really don't think Microsoft knows what it's doing with this. maybe Tux poked the octopus in the eye, and now it's just flailing about wildly?