...some people will pay admission, drop a vat of popcorn over the keyboard, idly look at the screen, speak loudly to their neighbor during the whole game, and then leave saying the movie sucked on their cellphones... ^^
Since many components of modern GUIs are images and sounds, there would be the issue of who owns the copyrights. Can image and sound files be licensed under the GPL?
If so, it would provide a framework for "GUI experts" to create their own themes. Also a standard for GUI themes would be most welcome (there are many, but AFAIK none is standard as in "XML standard").
It may be nice to have a box and software that *potentially* can work like a Tivo... for the Linux gods. But I have to ask in the name of all the rest of the mortals, where's the GUI? Can we just set this up ONCE and then avoid any kind of hacking? Or is this flawed with the problem of many OSS packages, lack of usability for those who doesn't want/are not able to bother?
IMHO this is the main reason why OSS has not skyrocketed yet, because many people would prefer to pay an extra $100 than having to write batches every time you want to record a TV show or any other kind of menial task.
I know instances of OSS with good interfaces exist. But GUI usually seems to have a very low priority, unfortunately.
I must be a freak since I use the internet more than I watch TV. Well, I actually don't watch TV at all. Public broadcasts are only re-runs and I don't want to pay for cable (I pay for broadband instead). So for me the only way to see a series is either if it is released in DVD format (that I can rent/buy and watch a piacere)) or, as some series in Asia, in stream format over the Internet.
It wouldn't cost them much to put the content online, at a smaller quality, and charging a minium fee (like $1 per hour) for viewing. But we can't ask these kind of things as long as they are busy putting online services that have more DRM than music variety.:-(
It's indeed a good idea - the original hardware can still be kept as a museum piece (the two "indestructible discs", for example), but everybody would be able to access the content via emulation.
I hope that they also make the content available online and that they donate the source and content to the different websites that would be interested (e.g. Project Gutenberg for the text, and emulator websites for the program).
a) web designing takes time, and you design with a specific target in mind. If you have to redo everything with a new target, you can expect to have to spend an equal amount of time since many things will have to be reworked. Unless, of course, that you consider that "accessible" websites should have an inferior design.
b) I'm talking mostly about websites. Since games are based on the mix of several media, you can't realistically expect games to be "accessible". For a website, however, I expect most useful content to be text.
I am not talking about using a single solution, but there's only a certain amount of time that you can spend in developing alternatives to your main website. So you have to choose the solutions carefully. A "text-only" approach not only would work for blind people, but with those sick of IE's fancy features as well.:-)
If it is possible to develop websites/games based only on sound (like the sound-only Quake), then can we justify the dramatic increase in development time to reach a minority that would be better served by text-only content?
(the same could be asked about any kind of alternative content that needs extra development).
The Macintosh do seem more attractive to users (used?) that are not tech-savvy, and not just because it looks nice. The GUI has a certain flexibility and learning it is very straightforward. However, everyone learns it in their own way, and Mac users have all different habits.
So that explains Mac zealotry, since once you get used to using a Mac, going to Windows can be hard since it doesn't have the same usability features.
However, the same can be said about Windows - although it seems that it imposes its own way of doing things, it becomes natural once you are used to it. And when you try a mac, you complain that everything is missing. ^^
Mac OS X should be attractive to Windows users that wish to use some flavor of Unix but who doesn't want to give up a nice interface. But Apple loses in this crowd with the propietary hardware. I would have loved to build a machine with OS X, but I find the idea of buying overpriced hardware ridiculous (for the same price I can buy technically superior and esthetically equivalent components).
Of course for Linux enthusiasts, Apple is just another Microsoft. Don't forget that Steve Jobs once said "Microsoft succeeded in what we have tried to accomplish" (he also said that comparing Mac to PCs was ridiculous since PCs have already won - both quotes from the book "Apple Confidential").
Macromedia Flash has integrated many accessibility features in an effort to promote development of content for special needs. However, can we realistically try to turn any mutlimedia feature into its accessible equivalent? Is it even feasible other than providing a text-only equivalent?
If this is like every other "high speed" trains, then it can only keep its maximum speed for short periods of time.
I believe it's more related with the environment (i.e. "let's not hit a cow") than anything else. So I wonder if they developed a system to allow a constant high speed (other than "we don't care about cows")?
Chances are that most trigger-happy fps players will hate Metroid Prime. It's not hyped because it's a standard FPS, but because it's a new game of the Metroid series (and actually succeeds in conveying a similar gameplay to the older 2D version).
Also to pretend that GC games are only appropiate to kids is a major fallacy. A game does not need a rating of Mature to be enjoyable.
Besides, if what most people call "adult games" are in fact new instances of "Quake3 nth-clone" or "Famous Name's Hyped Sport", then I'm very happy playing kiddie games, thank you.
the metaphor falls short with the fact that you cannot send people to harvest the Moon, even if there was an easy way to transport them....unless you terraform the Moon and then build a spaceship out of wood pulled by flying animals. Then you'd have to watch out for titatium-alloy-arrow-throwing Aliun'.
Slashdot Mirror
...some people will pay admission, drop a vat of popcorn over the keyboard, idly look at the screen, speak loudly to their neighbor during the whole game, and then leave saying the movie sucked on their cellphones... ^^
Since many components of modern GUIs are images and sounds, there would be the issue of who owns the copyrights. Can image and sound files be licensed under the GPL?
If so, it would provide a framework for "GUI experts" to create their own themes. Also a standard for GUI themes would be most welcome (there are many, but AFAIK none is standard as in "XML standard").
Maybe the price will go down once the technology is mainstream and the cells are mass-produced.
Of course this means that they have to come with some sort of standard... let's hope they don't hand the task to the DVD guys...
Earlier today I bought a 80gb usb2 drive. :-)
I knew computers are obsolete as soon as you leave the store, but this is ridiculous.
It may be nice to have a box and software that *potentially* can work like a Tivo... for the Linux gods. But I have to ask in the name of all the rest of the mortals, where's the GUI? Can we just set this up ONCE and then avoid any kind of hacking? Or is this flawed with the problem of many OSS packages, lack of usability for those who doesn't want/are not able to bother?
IMHO this is the main reason why OSS has not skyrocketed yet, because many people would prefer to pay an extra $100 than having to write batches every time you want to record a TV show or any other kind of menial task.
I know instances of OSS with good interfaces exist. But GUI usually seems to have a very low priority, unfortunately.
...if we force the trend-setters to stop wearing makeup, so "fashionable" people stop buying it, we could afford a second space station.
:-)
Looks like the old Geek vs. Jock perceptual rifts in high school values...
Whatever the cost, they would be building a ship destined to Alpha Centauri. :-)
I must be a freak since I use the internet more than I watch TV. Well, I actually don't watch TV at all. Public broadcasts are only re-runs and I don't want to pay for cable (I pay for broadband instead). So for me the only way to see a series is either if it is released in DVD format (that I can rent/buy and watch a piacere)) or, as some series in Asia, in stream format over the Internet.
:-(
It wouldn't cost them much to put the content online, at a smaller quality, and charging a minium fee (like $1 per hour) for viewing. But we can't ask these kind of things as long as they are busy putting online services that have more DRM than music variety.
It's indeed a good idea - the original hardware can still be kept as a museum piece (the two "indestructible discs", for example), but everybody would be able to access the content via emulation.
I hope that they also make the content available online and that they donate the source and content to the different websites that would be interested (e.g. Project Gutenberg for the text, and emulator websites for the program).
If you try a mac I bet you wont go back.
:-)
I use Mac OS X on a regular basis, and owned (in parallel with a PC) a Mac LC (and System 7) for several years. I still prefer PCs.
a) web designing takes time, and you design with a specific target in mind. If you have to redo everything with a new target, you can expect to have to spend an equal amount of time since many things will have to be reworked. Unless, of course, that you consider that "accessible" websites should have an inferior design.
:-)
b) I'm talking mostly about websites. Since games are based on the mix of several media, you can't realistically expect games to be "accessible". For a website, however, I expect most useful content to be text.
I am not talking about using a single solution, but there's only a certain amount of time that you can spend in developing alternatives to your main website. So you have to choose the solutions carefully. A "text-only" approach not only would work for blind people, but with those sick of IE's fancy features as well.
If it is possible to develop websites/games based only on sound (like the sound-only Quake), then can we justify the dramatic increase in development time to reach a minority that would be better served by text-only content?
(the same could be asked about any kind of alternative content that needs extra development).
...because they brought a world of uncertainty ("error -1") to a logical world of command line.
So I became loyal to PCs instead. Little did I know that some years later we would face the same uncertainty in the form of a blue-colored display. ^^
The Macintosh do seem more attractive to users (used?) that are not tech-savvy, and not just because it looks nice. The GUI has a certain flexibility and learning it is very straightforward. However, everyone learns it in their own way, and Mac users have all different habits.
So that explains Mac zealotry, since once you get used to using a Mac, going to Windows can be hard since it doesn't have the same usability features.
However, the same can be said about Windows - although it seems that it imposes its own way of doing things, it becomes natural once you are used to it. And when you try a mac, you complain that everything is missing. ^^
Mac OS X should be attractive to Windows users that wish to use some flavor of Unix but who doesn't want to give up a nice interface. But Apple loses in this crowd with the propietary hardware. I would have loved to build a machine with OS X, but I find the idea of buying overpriced hardware ridiculous (for the same price I can buy technically superior and esthetically equivalent components).
Of course for Linux enthusiasts, Apple is just another Microsoft. Don't forget that Steve Jobs once said "Microsoft succeeded in what we have tried to accomplish" (he also said that comparing Mac to PCs was ridiculous since PCs have already won - both quotes from the book "Apple Confidential").
Please check the timestamp before modding to redundant. Losing mod points because people surf in "Newest Post Mode" is not very nice.
:-)
Anyway, a redudant comment is still on topic, given the title of the news.
Macromedia Flash has integrated many accessibility features in an effort to promote development of content for special needs.
However, can we realistically try to turn any mutlimedia feature into its accessible equivalent? Is it even feasible other than providing a text-only equivalent?
They should call it crack!
You can't, because it doesn't go, like, "Beep! Beep! Beep!".
Linux users hate Bill Gates.
Elllen Feiss switched to pot.
Slashdot slashdots sites.
If this is like every other "high speed" trains, then it can only keep its maximum speed for short periods of time.
I believe it's more related with the environment (i.e. "let's not hit a cow") than anything else. So I wonder if they developed a system to allow a constant high speed (other than "we don't care about cows")?
It would be nice to have these models as Leocad files so that we can make our own modifications and contributions. :-)
To be scored redundant when the similar posts are made after mine... well that's life. No worries. Nothing to see here. :-)
Right now it's Serverdeath...
Chances are that most trigger-happy fps players will hate Metroid Prime. It's not hyped because it's a standard FPS, but because it's a new game of the Metroid series (and actually succeeds in conveying a similar gameplay to the older 2D version).
Also to pretend that GC games are only appropiate to kids is a major fallacy. A game does not need a rating of Mature to be enjoyable.
Besides, if what most people call "adult games" are in fact new instances of "Quake3 nth-clone" or "Famous Name's Hyped Sport", then I'm very happy playing kiddie games, thank you.
The writer confused making his point and giving an accurate historical perspective.
the metaphor falls short with the fact that you cannot send people to harvest the Moon, even if there was an easy way to transport them. ...unless you terraform the Moon and then build a spaceship out of wood pulled by flying animals.
Then you'd have to watch out for titatium-alloy-arrow-throwing Aliun'.