So what's the problem? The general concepts explored in Stickybear Math or Reader Rabbit haven't really changed much since the 1980s, and in fact many Apple II educational programs are better designed than "modern" ones that run off of CD and tend to feature more movies than learning.
Moreover, to address the comment that people think they learn about computers when they learn about the Apple II, but they later realize they don't, I have only one word in response: BULLSHIT
If you learn assembly on the Apple II, or any 8-bit micro, you will find understanding and programming C or any other language a billion times easier, and have a far better grasp of computer science than someone who hasn't learned assembly, or a cool simple architecture.
Here's the brutal irony about the Apple IIe, C64, and TRS-80: Those old DD (double density, not high density) 5.25 inch floppy disks were so over engineered that as long as the data is refreshed once in a while, the media can last more than 90 years based on tests, versus a usual life of like 10 years for a CD and even less for a CD-R. I recently booted up some Apple II floppies that hadn't been accessed since 1985 with no problem.
To get back on topic, converting the videos to digital is the best bet. Then write some DVDs, keep them on your HD (moving and converting them as needed when you switch machines), put some on backup tape, etc. The real secret is redundancy.
My girlfriend's mom wrote some of the first conversions of actuarial tables to mainframe, from books, in the 1950s and 1960s (all done w/ punch cards and machine language, of course) at a life insurance company in Mass. The company was still running a lot of her orgininal code when she retired a couple of years ago.
Hey slashdot community, what's the oldest program you've seen running at the office or home, not counting classic games? Personally I've been using Bank Street Filer on Apple//c (c. 1983) to catalog my game collection, just for kicks. Most of my collection is classic games, so it seems appropriate...
Touch tone phones offered a lot of advantages over rotary dial, most notably speed of dialing. That made learning a new system worth it.
This phone offers no advantages in its stupid layout -- it's not faster or demonstrably better in any way (except maybe aesthetically, if you're a Finn, I guess), it's just different (and thus slower) than standard phone dial pad arrangements just for the sake of it.
how irritatating it would be to try and dial that thing, with the buttons not layed out in the traditional, muscle memory configuration. Oh sure, you can use voice recognition, or look up numbers on a list, but even with all that enabled, I still end up *dialing* my phone about 50 - 60% of the time, and trying to deal with that keypad combination would suck, especially with numbers where you can only remember it by dialing it.
What was the mood or zeitgeist like in the early days of the Phreaker/Hacker world? I mean, how did it feel to go from nothing to suddenly learning how to control the phone system? The feeling of excitement, exploration, and power must have been really intense, and I'd love to hear more about that. Excellent site by the way!
Your metabolism can only slow so far. The whole "if you just diet, your metabolism will slow and you won't lose any weight" argument doesn't really take into account that most people's metabolism is genetically set, and isn't going to change more than a few percent regardless of what you eat.
Granted, as you lose weight your body needs less calories to maintain its basal metabolism, so it does get harder to lose weight, but these things aren't dramatically scalable: if you eat like a pig, you don't just develop a super-fast metabolism, you gain weight. If you starve yourself, you don't just slow your metabolism, you lose weight too.
I've done some research into this (using the Hacker's Diet as a jumping off point), and have lost 17 pounds (9% of my total starting weight) since Jan 8th -- a pretty sustainable (hopefully permanent) weight loss on a new eating regimen that doesn't feel like a diet or leave me feeling deprived -- I just don't feel like a glutton any more.
The key is to go slowly. And I'm not saying that excersize isn't important, just that you can't ignore diet as well.
The only way to get rid of fat is to burn more calories than you injest. It can be from increasing your excerise, but it can also come from (drumroll) eating less food. Or, more correctly, eating less calories. If you average 3500 less calories taken in over a week than you expend, you will loose about a pound of fat.
Quickest? Quickest? Are you high? I am using, right now, a 1ghz Athlon from early 2001, and Windows 98. I don't maintain or clean my system regularly -- I think my 30GB drive has like 2GB free, and there are files scattered everywhere. I've never de-fragmented the drive. (yeah, yeah, I know, I'm sloppy.)
Yet, when I click on My Documents folder, with 1200+ items in it, it opens instantly. There is no perceived pause at all. When I click on the Word icon, Word opens in well under 2 seconds.
In short, the "Finder" on my PC is hella fast. On the fastest, most expensive and memory laden Mac they have at the Apple store, which features pretty stipped down content, folders take forever to open in my perception. Way longer then with OS9 on my G3 at home, and way longer than my PC at work. Applications (well, Word and Photoshop, which I tested opening) load faster than on the G3, but still way, way, slower than on my PC.
I really, really wanted to buy a new Mac, but given the amount of file and application switching I do on a daily basis, the thing is just way to gd slow to justify a purchase. Maybe if I ran difficulty Photoshop filters all day it would be ok, but I don't. And what is slowing things down? Stupid animations you can't turn off? The animating dock? Poorly executed programs? I have no clue, but there's no way I'm dropping $2000+ on a computer that goes (in my perception) slower than a two year old PC.
Note: I have to say the people at the Apple store in Emeryville, CA, were super friendly, super well informed about their product, and really took some time with me to help optimize the OS 10.2 finder for speed (turning off doc animations, using the least annoying folder animation, letting the folders cache, etc.). I really appreciated that level of customer service; but until I don't consciously perceive the Macintosh as "going slow" in the Finder, I won't be buying one.
It's hard for me to believe the same person did both sets of icons. The Mac icons look so elegant and timeless, and the Windows icons just look cheap and lame. I guess it's tough to follow yourself...
Testing is a shitty job, but it's also got THE lowest threshold of entry in the game biz. Do well as a tester (hint: know how to communicate well, be enthusiastic, and be willing to work hard) and you'll be promoted to Test Lead, then eventually you can make the jump from testing to development as an assistant or associate producer.
The sad reality is that a lot of game testers are really lacking in the professional skills they need to leave Test; if you have previous experience as a tester, you should be able to excel really quickly at the job.
Don't bother with a recruiter, just contact publishers directly (particularly in the run-up to Xmas releases -- the hiring then is frantic for temp. testers, and the best people get job offers after the Xmas games ship).
Long answer: The best systems I've seen organize things like this:
"RF" systems (such as the 2600, Intellivision, etc) go in line, with the most frequently used closest to the TV (to avoid the inevitable signal degredation). (And yes, this can mess up cable reception.)
Systems which can use S-Video or standard composite cables go into a switchbox, such as this one . It's powered, but I've used it unpowered with good results. Depending on the number of systems you have, you may need to daisy chain a couple of these together.
Finally, I just plug one system in via component, because component switch boxes can be pricey. For me, it's the Xbox, because it's DVD capabilities are way better than the PS2's.
Storage-wise, most game systems aren't that deep, so I've found cheap shelves from anyway cna hold most of the systems. The real hassle is controllers, which get in the way, always look messy, and are tough to keep attached. A friend has all his hanging from hooks in his game room, I prefer to keep them all in a drawer (well, actually it's a little cabinet with a door, but the end result is the same -- it's pretty neat on the outside, no one sees how messy it is on the inside).
I keep the games in CD-holder type shelves, well away from the TV. There are ususally one or two games on the TV, but the TV space doesn't look cluttered.
I daisy chain three power strips for my consoles. The first has only the TV, VCR and Xbox on it, and I usually leave it on. The other two are for the other consoles.
Bottom line: shelves you like, a place to hide the controllers, and a way to keep the games from stacking up will usually result in a pretty nice set-up, even with six or seven consoles hooked up to your TV.
Although I think they are out of business now, NEW DEAL INC made something called NEW DEAL OFFICE which was a GEOS-like office suite for old DOS machines. It was really good. You can find it on eBay for ~$20 and it is definitely worth checking out. Lots of old GEOS guys worked on it.
-Chris
Baseball doesn't "black out" games when they aren't sold out -- that's football. Few baseball games sell out, and it's common practice to broadcast a local game locally, when you could easily go to the game yourself and get a ticket.
It's football that blacks out the games locally if the game isn't sold out, because each game represents a wayy bigger % of revenue and they really, really want to get people to games.
What Baseball "blacks out" is competing broadcasts. So, say Channel 36 has the rights to broadcast A's games. If the same game were going to be on ESPN that night, ESPN would have to black it out in Channel 36's broadcast area, because the local broadcaster has precedence.
That's how the webcast blackout will work (or try to work). If the game is on the web, but also Channel 36 (aka Action Cable 6), you theoretically won't be able to watch it from your PacBell account in Oakland...
This is what I don't get -- you can't live in anything but an adobe hut, or a canvas tent, but until you save up the dough to do that, you need to stay in your *car*, which is somehow not toxic?
New Car Smell is certainly more pungent and chemically than New House Smell...
Why not move into an old house, built pre-plywood? Although I suspect my house has formaldahyde insulation, it was built in 1915, so any smells have had a long while to leech out. Located ~2 miles from the Hayward fault, there are also no true lines in the house, ensuring a constant breeze through the inefficient windows to keep fresh air in the place, and keep radon or other fumes from building up. I have not yet suffered any ill-effects of the house, other than needing a lot of blankets to sleep...
But small teams make movies fairly frequently that either break out and are hits (Blair Witch, Resevoir Dogs) or at least do well enough for the prinicples to get noticed and get big jobs. I would argue that the same is true in games. Do a few great licensed games, and you will get your shot at the big time, even today.
I work at a small videogame company. The business climate out there is really, really tough. But at the same time, I don't think it's impossible to succeed. The problem is just that the market is really unforgiving. Making any kind of common rookie business mistake -- from bad management, to stupid financial decisions, to slipping your game, whatever -- will kill your company. But there aren't that many companies that do everything right, and fail anyway.
Luckily, the capital it takes to start a game company and do a demo is relatively minor, even today, which is why you see so many new companies and dev. shops set up, even as others are closing down. It's brutal, but I don't think government subsidies will do anything but prolong the inevitable.
To run a successful videogame company, you have to know how to successfully run a company -- that's actually more important than anything else today. I know for a fact my company would not be around today, ten years after it started, if we didn't have a president who was a hardcore business guy (who luckily trusts the rest of us to know what we're doing on the game side).
Testing games is one of the least fun, least rewarding, and most shit upon jobs in the game industry (only thing lower == customer service). But it's also totally crucial to the success of a game.
It's also a way talented people without art or programming skills can get into games. The common path is tester -> test lead -> assistant producer -> associate producer -> producer -> executive producer -> game god. Of course, this takes years, and you need to sell your soul around AP to succeed...
I don't think the reason you prefer 2D games is not that developers concentrate more on the gameplay in a 2D game, but rather that it's easier to have total situational awareness in a 2D game. We're doing a 3D game right now, and I know people are concentrating as much on the gameplay as they did when doing 2D games. There are definitely more distracting technical problems with 3D games than 2D games, but I don't think that affects the gameplay signifcantly, since 3D games also tend to have more people on them, and have longer schedules.
Slashdot Mirror
So what's the problem? The general concepts explored in Stickybear Math or Reader Rabbit haven't really changed much since the 1980s, and in fact many Apple II educational programs are better designed than "modern" ones that run off of CD and tend to feature more movies than learning.
Moreover, to address the comment that people think they learn about computers when they learn about the Apple II, but they later realize they don't, I have only one word in response: BULLSHIT
If you learn assembly on the Apple II, or any 8-bit micro, you will find understanding and programming C or any other language a billion times easier, and have a far better grasp of computer science than someone who hasn't learned assembly, or a cool simple architecture.
As for SUVs, they suck, I agree!
To get back on topic, converting the videos to digital is the best bet. Then write some DVDs, keep them on your HD (moving and converting them as needed when you switch machines), put some on backup tape, etc. The real secret is redundancy.
Actually the first one was set in the late 1930s, before the US was at war with Germany. The second one was set in the mid-1930s (before Raiders).
My girlfriend's mom wrote some of the first conversions of actuarial tables to mainframe, from books, in the 1950s and 1960s (all done w/ punch cards and machine language, of course) at a life insurance company in Mass. The company was still running a lot of her orgininal code when she retired a couple of years ago.
Hey slashdot community, what's the oldest program you've seen running at the office or home, not counting classic games? Personally I've been using Bank Street Filer on Apple //c (c. 1983) to catalog my game collection, just for kicks. Most of my collection is classic games, so it seems appropriate...
The reality is that geeks don't get beat up, they mainly just get ignored.
This phone offers no advantages in its stupid layout -- it's not faster or demonstrably better in any way (except maybe aesthetically, if you're a Finn, I guess), it's just different (and thus slower) than standard phone dial pad arrangements just for the sake of it.
how irritatating it would be to try and dial that thing, with the buttons not layed out in the traditional, muscle memory configuration. Oh sure, you can use voice recognition, or look up numbers on a list, but even with all that enabled, I still end up *dialing* my phone about 50 - 60% of the time, and trying to deal with that keypad combination would suck, especially with numbers where you can only remember it by dialing it.
What was the mood or zeitgeist like in the early days of the Phreaker/Hacker world? I mean, how did it feel to go from nothing to suddenly learning how to control the phone system? The feeling of excitement, exploration, and power must have been really intense, and I'd love to hear more about that. Excellent site by the way!
Granted, as you lose weight your body needs less calories to maintain its basal metabolism, so it does get harder to lose weight, but these things aren't dramatically scalable: if you eat like a pig, you don't just develop a super-fast metabolism, you gain weight. If you starve yourself, you don't just slow your metabolism, you lose weight too.
I've done some research into this (using the Hacker's Diet as a jumping off point), and have lost 17 pounds (9% of my total starting weight) since Jan 8th -- a pretty sustainable (hopefully permanent) weight loss on a new eating regimen that doesn't feel like a diet or leave me feeling deprived -- I just don't feel like a glutton any more.
The key is to go slowly. And I'm not saying that excersize isn't important, just that you can't ignore diet as well.
Actually I am using a PC as I write this. I'm no glassy eyed fanatic, and I may not know icons, but I know what I like!
Yet, when I click on My Documents folder, with 1200+ items in it, it opens instantly. There is no perceived pause at all. When I click on the Word icon, Word opens in well under 2 seconds.
In short, the "Finder" on my PC is hella fast. On the fastest, most expensive and memory laden Mac they have at the Apple store, which features pretty stipped down content, folders take forever to open in my perception. Way longer then with OS9 on my G3 at home, and way longer than my PC at work. Applications (well, Word and Photoshop, which I tested opening) load faster than on the G3, but still way, way, slower than on my PC.
I really, really wanted to buy a new Mac, but given the amount of file and application switching I do on a daily basis, the thing is just way to gd slow to justify a purchase. Maybe if I ran difficulty Photoshop filters all day it would be ok, but I don't. And what is slowing things down? Stupid animations you can't turn off? The animating dock? Poorly executed programs? I have no clue, but there's no way I'm dropping $2000+ on a computer that goes (in my perception) slower than a two year old PC.
Note: I have to say the people at the Apple store in Emeryville, CA, were super friendly, super well informed about their product, and really took some time with me to help optimize the OS 10.2 finder for speed (turning off doc animations, using the least annoying folder animation, letting the folders cache, etc.). I really appreciated that level of customer service; but until I don't consciously perceive the Macintosh as "going slow" in the Finder, I won't be buying one.
The sad reality is that a lot of game testers are really lacking in the professional skills they need to leave Test; if you have previous experience as a tester, you should be able to excel really quickly at the job.
Don't bother with a recruiter, just contact publishers directly (particularly in the run-up to Xmas releases -- the hiring then is frantic for temp. testers, and the best people get job offers after the Xmas games ship).
Long answer: The best systems I've seen organize things like this:
"RF" systems (such as the 2600, Intellivision, etc) go in line, with the most frequently used closest to the TV (to avoid the inevitable signal degredation). (And yes, this can mess up cable reception.)
Systems which can use S-Video or standard composite cables go into a switchbox, such as this one . It's powered, but I've used it unpowered with good results. Depending on the number of systems you have, you may need to daisy chain a couple of these together.
Finally, I just plug one system in via component, because component switch boxes can be pricey. For me, it's the Xbox, because it's DVD capabilities are way better than the PS2's.
Storage-wise, most game systems aren't that deep, so I've found cheap shelves from anyway cna hold most of the systems. The real hassle is controllers, which get in the way, always look messy, and are tough to keep attached. A friend has all his hanging from hooks in his game room, I prefer to keep them all in a drawer (well, actually it's a little cabinet with a door, but the end result is the same -- it's pretty neat on the outside, no one sees how messy it is on the inside).
I keep the games in CD-holder type shelves, well away from the TV. There are ususally one or two games on the TV, but the TV space doesn't look cluttered.
I daisy chain three power strips for my consoles. The first has only the TV, VCR and Xbox on it, and I usually leave it on. The other two are for the other consoles.
Bottom line: shelves you like, a place to hide the controllers, and a way to keep the games from stacking up will usually result in a pretty nice set-up, even with six or seven consoles hooked up to your TV.
Here's a good link that explains New Deal. Apparently it *was* GEOS.... http://dougspc.uts.ohio-state.edu/t100xndo.htm -Chris
Although I think they are out of business now, NEW DEAL INC made something called NEW DEAL OFFICE which was a GEOS-like office suite for old DOS machines. It was really good. You can find it on eBay for ~$20 and it is definitely worth checking out. Lots of old GEOS guys worked on it. -Chris
It's football that blacks out the games locally if the game isn't sold out, because each game represents a wayy bigger % of revenue and they really, really want to get people to games.
What Baseball "blacks out" is competing broadcasts. So, say Channel 36 has the rights to broadcast A's games. If the same game were going to be on ESPN that night, ESPN would have to black it out in Channel 36's broadcast area, because the local broadcaster has precedence.
That's how the webcast blackout will work (or try to work). If the game is on the web, but also Channel 36 (aka Action Cable 6), you theoretically won't be able to watch it from your PacBell account in Oakland...
New Car Smell is certainly more pungent and chemically than New House Smell...
Why not move into an old house, built pre-plywood? Although I suspect my house has formaldahyde insulation, it was built in 1915, so any smells have had a long while to leech out. Located ~2 miles from the Hayward fault, there are also no true lines in the house, ensuring a constant breeze through the inefficient windows to keep fresh air in the place, and keep radon or other fumes from building up. I have not yet suffered any ill-effects of the house, other than needing a lot of blankets to sleep...
But small teams make movies fairly frequently that either break out and are hits (Blair Witch, Resevoir Dogs) or at least do well enough for the prinicples to get noticed and get big jobs. I would argue that the same is true in games. Do a few great licensed games, and you will get your shot at the big time, even today.
Luckily, the capital it takes to start a game company and do a demo is relatively minor, even today, which is why you see so many new companies and dev. shops set up, even as others are closing down. It's brutal, but I don't think government subsidies will do anything but prolong the inevitable.
To run a successful videogame company, you have to know how to successfully run a company -- that's actually more important than anything else today. I know for a fact my company would not be around today, ten years after it started, if we didn't have a president who was a hardcore business guy (who luckily trusts the rest of us to know what we're doing on the game side).
It's also a way talented people without art or programming skills can get into games. The common path is tester -> test lead -> assistant producer -> associate producer -> producer -> executive producer -> game god. Of course, this takes years, and you need to sell your soul around AP to succeed...