who's not calm? i don't recall swearing a blue streak, claiming conspiracies etc - this is the state of the industry - and it is a ridiculous state to be in.
instead of flaming me, how about answering the claims with reasons why a virtual machine is such a good idea?
i'm a 'bitter asshole' because i've had to work in an industry that continues to perpetuate the same issues onto it's customers again and again - and these same issues affect my business as a software developer. and since things aren't looking like they are intending to change any time in the future, it will only continue to get worse and worse.
Yes for your information, I do refuse to install Java as well for the same reasons.
I don't need a 20 megabyte process running in the background 'just in case' i might decide to run a Java application at some point. This whole 'need a runtime' technique of programming is complete garbage as far as i'm concerned.
My point about the 'technical support nightmare' is that alot of programs that require the.Net framework do not indicate that they do, and if they do, provide a link to the ms download site, but don't indicate which version they require - I ran into this the other day - decided to actually bother to download the.net runtime to try out a program that I thought useful. There was a link from the application developers site to the MS download site to grab the.net installer.
So I go there, download the.net runtime that they linked to, and try to install the application again. But NOOO, I installed the 2.0.Net runtime, this application needed the 1.1 runtime...bah.
At this point I've wasted 20 minutes trying to install a demo of a program that I now will never use or even attempt to purchase - lost sale.
This is not zealotry, this is common sense analysis of how your non-technical users view your programs. If you want to support the MAJORITY of computer users, you simply cannot assume that they even KNOW that they can go to windows update to install the runtime that they need. Nor should they be required to, in my opinion.
It's like visiting a webpage for the first time. You go to view something that potentially might interest you - but NOO this website is using 'internet 3.0' or whatever, and you need to update your browser, get some plugin, whatever - doesn't matter if it's the most common plugin (ie flash for example), you have immediately written off a percentage of your user base by forcing them to do this.
This is the same reason that we use OpenGL for our game engine - features & functionality JUST WORKS - games don't require some ultra-new version of DirectX, ultra-new 'just released beta' drivers for our users video cards etc like most game engines require.
Shit should JUST WORK - it shouldn't force your users to jump through hoops.
Software developers are the worst at this. The whole paradigm of forcing your users to be ultra-tech savvy needs to change in order for the so-called 'mass market' to care about our products.
Do you need to install some custom runtime, drivers, update your whole operating system (ie halo 2 pc) or other ridiculously stupid shit just to read a book or watch a movie?
All of this is a self-perpetuating scam inflicted on the world by hardware vendors & operating system vendors & software developers. The cycle needs to break./end rant
I agree completely. I've run into, i think maybe 2 programs that actually require the.net runtime (i refuse to install it), and even so there are multiple versions of the runtime, it's not clear which is which or which you need to run said program, etc...
run a program without the.net runtime and it just crashes saying 'missing dll' - if this is so crucial to the microsoft 'platform', you'd think that they'd at least KNOW which dll's are those that require dot net and give you an appropriate message etc...
in my opinion, if you are writing an application that depends on an external library to be REQUIRED, which may or may not be installed on the users' machine, then you are going to run into problems.
Since it sounds like this is a product that will be used outside of a controlled environment (ie withing a specific company, you know what you are running the app on), then you are asking for a technical support nightmare.
the only remotely successful installation of a vb-based application was for an ntranet applicatoin for a software company i used to work for, but even this was the result of 'gee, we need a quick app, lets use VB because it will let us develop it super quick' and ended up being used for like 10 years, as the company expanded 1000% times the size, and kept trying to keep the program running & working etc...
anyways, that's a whole other story - this was back in vb 5 (or prior) days when you couldn't even make a 'real' vb application mind you...but then again, anything that requires a 'runtime' to me isn't a real application. java, yes i'm looking at you.
>> Last time I ran into this it happened in series... first an update of the steam service >> itself for 20 minutes or so, and then another half hour of HL2. By the time it was done, >> I didn't feel like playing anymore anyway.
i completely agree with this.
i have so little time to play games, when i DO have the chance, i will go for the ones that are an easy, quick pickup & play version, instead of launching steam, waiting for it to decide that it's ready to let me play, etc.
steam as a whole is a great idea - the implementation is terrible.
I'm amazed at how many students in my game design teaching experience that are 'whiz kids' at basic windows stuff, installing games, screwing around, but have absolutely zero experience with the fundamental stuff that I would consider essential.
Things like 'ctrl-c' is copy and 'ctrl-v' is paste. Seriously simple stuff, but it works in (almost) every situation, and particularly with students that have used computers for their whole lives (and windows being the bulk of that experience), NOT learning basic things like this is bizarre to me.
I feel that the ability to write up a doc, create a powerpoint (style) presentation, actually do formatting on it - instead of relying on word's horrid default fonts & formatting. Being able to insert a table of contents, that type of thing. These are all things that I feel that at a college level I should NOT have to teach students, and yet every semester and even ever course, I find myself teaching the most ridiculously basic things to students that are supposedly 'computer literate'.
Not to mention using a spellchecker. Do they not teach spelling or grammar in school anymore?
not only this, but how is 'releasing it free' on google video useful at all? we'll release it for free, but only under a custom, who-knows-what format that no one can really do anything with anyways...
pure publicity stunt.
release the video in mpeg or an actual 'editable' format and THEN it's useful or at least MIGHT be useful to the community.
what trent reznor did was useful - releasing raw audio tracks for users to play with - this is just publicity stunt...
Sony is notorious for this - you think the fact that the ps3 has a bazillion seperate processors and whatnot is there to make developers lives EASIER? not likely. It's to make sure that your code runs on the ps3 and ONLY the ps3.
Gamecube developers already have existing technology that will run on the Wii (for the most part), this eleviates alot of the difficulty of getting started with the Wii - the fun part will be testing & figuring out cool ways to use the new controller.
Games are NOT the hardware that they run on - the fanboys can claim all they want, but this simply is not the case.
If anything, this means that what we are seeing is effectively a second generation of gamecube development teams that already know what makes the hardware 'do its thing' - just like late-stage ps2 and xbox1 games were miles better than the original ones, you will likely see a similar progression from gamecube to wii.
Judging from the post-E3 buzz that's around, i'm fairly sure developers & publishers 'get' the Wii...just compare the 3 conferences from the event and you can see where things stand - Nintendo was SLICK, sony was boring and microsoft was, well, trying to be all hardcore when they really just look silly.
They need to realize that Bill Gates is NOT cool, no matter how much he really really wants to be;]
[quote] Based on the short story 'Johnny Mnemonic' from the 'Burning Chrome' short story collection, Gibson wrote the screenplay for the movie. It is directed by Robert Longo and starring Keanu Reeves and Dolph Lundgren.
Robert Longo said they intended to make a 'dirty, edgy black-and-white science fiction film' but shifted to big movie because nobody was interested in funding what would have been 'a giant student film'. Gibson himself says Hollywood forces changed the movie from his and Longo's vision, and that the Japanese cut of the movie (in English with Japanese subtitles) is closer to their intent. [/quote]
dunno, but the first two links are broken in firefox anyways - the text scrolls off past the bottom of the page and you can't scroll down to view them...stupid web designers...
except the movie that he wanted to make was NOT the movie that actually got released. the original screenplay was VERY different than the final edit that the studio spit out.
They finished the movie how they wanted to, but the studio didn't like it so they literally re-edited it into a story that they liked better...which resulted in the final movie as it was released.
Hence why william gibson is unlikely to release any other of his books to licensee's...
GameTrailers is the only place worth going for game videos. no 320x240 crappy encoding, they have all of the good videos, and if they don't have a specific video, they have a large community that can post any videos into their 'gametrailers tv' area...
People DID say this with the first generation of dedicated 3d hardware chips, which is effectively why 3dfx went out of business. There wasn't enough installed base to make the developer cost worthwhile balanced with the benefit of reaching such a small installed base.
There are several things wrong with the Ageia business model:
1) they mandate that you use THEIR physics engine in order to access the physics hardware - there is no low-level hardware API that any engine can access - so by supporting their hardware, you are excluding using well-known and stable physics engines such as Havok, ODE (for the open-source crowd) etc for your games. This is a major issue from a development standpoint.
2) the cost issue (which others have brought up). The added cost vs the benefit of actually having these chips installed is simply too much for hardware vendors to actually see this as being a worthwhile thing to add to machines. Currently Ageia is relying on the hardcore gamer crowd seeing this as something that MUST be supported by games, which is a bad way to go about things. Until they sign on a vendor like Dell or HP to actually build machines with these chips, then it's a no-go for developers.
---------
Re: 1) I've heard that Havok & Nvidia are partnering together to create a bundled video card with an extra dedicated CPU for physics in a single card - so instead of having the single GPU, you will be able to have a GPU, PPU all on a single card in your machine. This will bring the cost down significantly and actually be worth supporting (both for the hardware vendors looking to build machines for the lowest cost) as well as developers - Nvidia's marketing muscle and existing OEM chain will guarantee that vendors will actually build machines using their cards.
As well, from their experience in the video world, i'm guessing that Nvidia's version will provide a low-level API for accessing the hardware, which any physics vendor can then support, instead of forcing developers to use THEIR physics engine (whether it's havok or otherwise).
Until this happens, the concept of a dedicated processor for physics is inevitably going to go the way of 3dfx. Perhaps Ageia will be bought by ATI looking to create their own dedicated GPU / PPU combination, but otherwise I don't see it catching on.
With dedicated 3d graphics, at least there are OTHER applications / reasons that a general mass-market consumer might want such a card - ie the aero-style 3dish interfaces, etc. With a physics processor, unless you are playing games that require it, it's an unnecessary add-on.
Depends on what kind of game you're trying to make really.
Projects like Reality Factory (www.realityfactory.ca) are very useful for developers looking to script a bit, but not dive into the low-level C++ coding, which is what it sounds like you are looking for.
the unreal engine has always been powerful - if you can figure out how to use it.
it has a LONG way to go before being a truly 'must have' for development though.
it's a strange dynamic - having a company large enough to support the on-going engineering effort that developing game engines requires and having a company (and code base) small enough to be flexible and innovative.
i fear that epic has moved from the second category into the first...it's the same syndrome that affects any company that becomes this large...
seriously - who would EVER want to see 'another' daikatana? did anyone actually play the original? the only thing 'interesting' about this game was watching the self-destruction of john romero's company in prime time...
sorta like watching a car crash in slow motion...as far as the game goes - there wasn't anything interesting about it that i could see, yet another generic first person shooter developed with a licensed engine (ie a mod basically)...
another of these the world doesn't need...
fallout and xcom on the other hand, are two that definitely needs to be redone in some shape or form...
guess we'll have to wait and see how bestheda does with their 'version' of fallout...
>> Learn to use your current phone. It makes no sense to visit one website to find another, if theres no link there.
thanx, but i DO know how to use my phone. it's not rocket science.
There are no options to set a home page, no options to customize the startup behavior.
I go to the 'web browser' on my phone, it doesn't give me any options but their default list of urls that I can choose - it doesn't give me an 'http://' prompt, it immediately thinks that I want one of their default pages...
Yes this is the providers page - they don't say that it is, but it's quite obviously their 'default start page'.
It says 'rogers 'navigate' on the page and the links are all obviously html links (wap versions)
my options are:
- hot picks (for what?) - get music & tones - get games - get graphics - get email / chat - get tv / video (yeah right) - my subscriptions - get info - search - graphical view (as if the text version wasn't slow enough)
i have to click 'search', which takes me (eventually) to another page that gives me a search box, or i tab down to the next link which has
- go to http:/// - go to https:/// - Yellow Pages - canada411.com - takeataxi.com - city info - ibm (why would i want to go to IBM's site?) - time zone - mygasprices - dictionary.com
so in order for me to get an 'http://' prompt, i have to:
- launch browser - takes approx 15 seconds to get to the first page - navigate the crap-ass menus - navigation on the phone is SOO laggy it's ridiculous. each link you click takes about 10 seconds to load.
so after I spend approx 2 minutes of link navigation, i finally have an http:/// prompt to actually type in the website.
Note that I'm getting billed for EVERY one of these pages that I have to navigate through prior to actually get said http:/// prompt, which is something that they do NOT mention to you when you sign up - you think you're actually only paying for the 'real' internet pages that you visit, but NOOOO.
celphone providers need to realize that their crap-ass service is hindering more than helping the adoption of these devices as the 'end all be all' that they think they are.
With that said, I'm actually going to try out this opera mobile that some people have mentioned - i've heard good things about it, perhaps it will actually let me set how I want to surf the net instead of being told how I am by my provider.
ok, i just signed up for the 'web access' on my new v3 razr phone through my local provider a few weeks ago.
this so called 'internet on phones' is even more ridiculous than the concept of playing games on celphones.
1) the web-browser is SOO slow - takes a LONG time to initialize... 2) they make you navigate through 3 or 4 screens before you can even type in an 'http://' address, each of which is hideously slow and probably costing me money because it's actually navigating some website on my providers network 3) viewing an image heavy site like flikr on a phone? you've GOT to be kidding me - let alone the fact that most celphone users are paying by the kb...
all adds up to 'yet more hype around celphones' that basically is a waste of time and money for the consumer.
Agreed, Sony has always been notoriously deficient in their Devkits - this isn't any surprise. Whereas Nintendo provides alot of support libraries and tools, the Playstation has always been a pain to develop with. For the most part, Sony sends out the hardware and says 'have fun'...
Slashdot Mirror
>>fear some leaders might not have sound judgment when considering what will necessitate a war.
gee, you think? insightful - mod this up...lol
who's not calm? i don't recall swearing a blue streak, claiming conspiracies etc - this is the state of the industry - and it is a ridiculous state to be in.
instead of flaming me, how about answering the claims with reasons why a virtual machine is such a good idea?
i'm a 'bitter asshole' because i've had to work in an industry that continues to perpetuate the same issues onto it's customers again and again - and these same issues affect my business as a software developer. and since things aren't looking like they are intending to change any time in the future, it will only continue to get worse and worse.
Yes for your information, I do refuse to install Java as well for the same reasons.
.Net framework do not indicate that they do, and if they do, provide a link to the ms download site, but don't indicate which version they require - I ran into this the other day - decided to actually bother to download the .net runtime to try out a program that I thought useful. There was a link from the application developers site to the MS download site to grab the .net installer.
.net runtime that they linked to, and try to install the application again. But NOOO, I installed the 2.0 .Net runtime, this application needed the 1.1 runtime...bah.
/end rant
I don't need a 20 megabyte process running in the background 'just in case' i might decide to run a Java application at some point. This whole 'need a runtime' technique of programming is complete garbage as far as i'm concerned.
My point about the 'technical support nightmare' is that alot of programs that require the
So I go there, download the
At this point I've wasted 20 minutes trying to install a demo of a program that I now will never use or even attempt to purchase - lost sale.
This is not zealotry, this is common sense analysis of how your non-technical users view your programs. If you want to support the MAJORITY of computer users, you simply cannot assume that they even KNOW that they can go to windows update to install the runtime that they need. Nor should they be required to, in my opinion.
It's like visiting a webpage for the first time. You go to view something that potentially might interest you - but NOO this website is using 'internet 3.0' or whatever, and you need to update your browser, get some plugin, whatever - doesn't matter if it's the most common plugin (ie flash for example), you have immediately written off a percentage of your user base by forcing them to do this.
This is the same reason that we use OpenGL for our game engine - features & functionality JUST WORKS - games don't require some ultra-new version of DirectX, ultra-new 'just released beta' drivers for our users video cards etc like most game engines require.
Shit should JUST WORK - it shouldn't force your users to jump through hoops.
Software developers are the worst at this. The whole paradigm of forcing your users to be ultra-tech savvy needs to change in order for the so-called 'mass market' to care about our products.
Do you need to install some custom runtime, drivers, update your whole operating system (ie halo 2 pc) or other ridiculously stupid shit just to read a book or watch a movie?
All of this is a self-perpetuating scam inflicted on the world by hardware vendors & operating system vendors & software developers. The cycle needs to break.
I agree completely. I've run into, i think maybe 2 programs that actually require the .net runtime (i refuse to install it), and even so there are multiple versions of the runtime, it's not clear which is which or which you need to run said program, etc...
.net runtime and it just crashes saying 'missing dll' - if this is so crucial to the microsoft 'platform', you'd think that they'd at least KNOW which dll's are those that require dot net and give you an appropriate message etc...
run a program without the
in my opinion, if you are writing an application that depends on an external library to be REQUIRED, which may or may not be installed on the users' machine, then you are going to run into problems.
Since it sounds like this is a product that will be used outside of a controlled environment (ie withing a specific company, you know what you are running the app on), then you are asking for a technical support nightmare.
the only remotely successful installation of a vb-based application was for an ntranet applicatoin for a software company i used to work for, but even this was the result of 'gee, we need a quick app, lets use VB because it will let us develop it super quick' and ended up being used for like 10 years, as the company expanded 1000% times the size, and kept trying to keep the program running & working etc...
anyways, that's a whole other story - this was back in vb 5 (or prior) days when you couldn't even make a 'real' vb application mind you...but then again, anything that requires a 'runtime' to me isn't a real application. java, yes i'm looking at you.
ah. didn't realize that - have been looking for a description of what these stupid videos are (didn't spend a whole lot of time mind you).
;P
should have figured it would be a simple playlist file...
danka - either way, it's still a publicity stunt
>> Last time I ran into this it happened in series... first an update of the steam service
>> itself for 20 minutes or so, and then another half hour of HL2. By the time it was done,
>> I didn't feel like playing anymore anyway.
i completely agree with this.
i have so little time to play games, when i DO have the chance, i will go for the ones that are an easy, quick pickup & play version, instead of launching steam, waiting for it to decide that it's ready to let me play, etc.
steam as a whole is a great idea - the implementation is terrible.
I would agree completely.
I'm amazed at how many students in my game design teaching experience that are 'whiz kids' at basic windows stuff, installing games, screwing around, but have absolutely zero experience with the fundamental stuff that I would consider essential.
Things like 'ctrl-c' is copy and 'ctrl-v' is paste. Seriously simple stuff, but it works in (almost) every situation, and particularly with students that have used computers for their whole lives (and windows being the bulk of that experience), NOT learning basic things like this is bizarre to me.
I feel that the ability to write up a doc, create a powerpoint (style) presentation, actually do formatting on it - instead of relying on word's horrid default fonts & formatting. Being able to insert a table of contents, that type of thing. These are all things that I feel that at a college level I should NOT have to teach students, and yet every semester and even ever course, I find myself teaching the most ridiculously basic things to students that are supposedly 'computer literate'.
Not to mention using a spellchecker. Do they not teach spelling or grammar in school anymore?
not only this, but how is 'releasing it free' on google video useful at all? we'll release it for free, but only under a custom, who-knows-what format that no one can really do anything with anyways...
pure publicity stunt.
release the video in mpeg or an actual 'editable' format and THEN it's useful or at least MIGHT be useful to the community.
what trent reznor did was useful - releasing raw audio tracks for users to play with - this is just publicity stunt...
The hardware companies do this on purpose.
;]
Sony is notorious for this - you think the fact that the ps3 has a bazillion seperate processors and whatnot is there to make developers lives EASIER? not likely. It's to make sure that your code runs on the ps3 and ONLY the ps3.
Gamecube developers already have existing technology that will run on the Wii (for the most part), this eleviates alot of the difficulty of getting started with the Wii - the fun part will be testing & figuring out cool ways to use the new controller.
Games are NOT the hardware that they run on - the fanboys can claim all they want, but this simply is not the case.
If anything, this means that what we are seeing is effectively a second generation of gamecube development teams that already know what makes the hardware 'do its thing' - just like late-stage ps2 and xbox1 games were miles better than the original ones, you will likely see a similar progression from gamecube to wii.
Judging from the post-E3 buzz that's around, i'm fairly sure developers & publishers 'get' the Wii...just compare the 3 conferences from the event and you can see where things stand - Nintendo was SLICK, sony was boring and microsoft was, well, trying to be all hardcore when they really just look silly.
They need to realize that Bill Gates is NOT cool, no matter how much he really really wants to be
http://www.antonraubenweiss.com/gibson/gibson0.htm l
[quote]
Based on the short story 'Johnny Mnemonic' from the 'Burning Chrome' short story collection, Gibson wrote the screenplay for the movie. It is directed by Robert Longo and starring Keanu Reeves and Dolph Lundgren.
Robert Longo said they intended to make a 'dirty, edgy black-and-white science fiction film' but shifted to big movie because nobody was interested in funding what would have been 'a giant student film'. Gibson himself says Hollywood forces changed the movie from his and Longo's vision, and that the Japanese cut of the movie (in English with Japanese subtitles) is closer to their intent.
[/quote]
here here...
dunno, but the first two links are broken in firefox anyways - the text scrolls off past the bottom of the page and you can't scroll down to view them...stupid web designers...
except the movie that he wanted to make was NOT the movie that actually got released. the original screenplay was VERY different than the final edit that the studio spit out.
They finished the movie how they wanted to, but the studio didn't like it so they literally re-edited it into a story that they liked better...which resulted in the final movie as it was released.
Hence why william gibson is unlikely to release any other of his books to licensee's...
GameTrailers is the only place worth going for game videos. no 320x240 crappy encoding, they have all of the good videos, and if they don't have a specific video, they have a large community that can post any videos into their 'gametrailers tv' area...
I'm with you - the only reason i see anyone seems to use mac's is because they DON'T have a clue about troubleshooting or anything else 'tech-related'
it's not misleading - massive is the name of the company they acquired, it's just a 'different' massive ;}
no idea...so...next topic
People DID say this with the first generation of dedicated 3d hardware chips, which is effectively why 3dfx went out of business. There wasn't enough installed base to make the developer cost worthwhile balanced with the benefit of reaching such a small installed base.
There are several things wrong with the Ageia business model:
1) they mandate that you use THEIR physics engine in order to access the physics hardware - there is no low-level hardware API that any engine can access - so by supporting their hardware, you are excluding using well-known and stable physics engines such as Havok, ODE (for the open-source crowd) etc for your games. This is a major issue from a development standpoint.
2) the cost issue (which others have brought up). The added cost vs the benefit of actually having these chips installed is simply too much for hardware vendors to actually see this as being a worthwhile thing to add to machines. Currently Ageia is relying on the hardcore gamer crowd seeing this as something that MUST be supported by games, which is a bad way to go about things. Until they sign on a vendor like Dell or HP to actually build machines with these chips, then it's a no-go for developers.
---------
Re: 1) I've heard that Havok & Nvidia are partnering together to create a bundled video card with an extra dedicated CPU for physics in a single card - so instead of having the single GPU, you will be able to have a GPU, PPU all on a single card in your machine. This will bring the cost down significantly and actually be worth supporting (both for the hardware vendors looking to build machines for the lowest cost) as well as developers - Nvidia's marketing muscle and existing OEM chain will guarantee that vendors will actually build machines using their cards.
As well, from their experience in the video world, i'm guessing that Nvidia's version will provide a low-level API for accessing the hardware, which any physics vendor can then support, instead of forcing developers to use THEIR physics engine (whether it's havok or otherwise).
Until this happens, the concept of a dedicated processor for physics is inevitably going to go the way of 3dfx. Perhaps Ageia will be bought by ATI looking to create their own dedicated GPU / PPU combination, but otherwise I don't see it catching on.
With dedicated 3d graphics, at least there are OTHER applications / reasons that a general mass-market consumer might want such a card - ie the aero-style 3dish interfaces, etc. With a physics processor, unless you are playing games that require it, it's an unnecessary add-on.
Depends on what kind of game you're trying to make really.
Projects like Reality Factory (www.realityfactory.ca) are very useful for developers looking to script a bit, but not dive into the low-level C++ coding, which is what it sounds like you are looking for.
All Hail his Noodly Appendage!
the unreal engine has always been powerful - if you can figure out how to use it.
it has a LONG way to go before being a truly 'must have' for development though.
it's a strange dynamic - having a company large enough to support the on-going engineering effort that developing game engines requires and having a company (and code base) small enough to be flexible and innovative.
i fear that epic has moved from the second category into the first...it's the same syndrome that affects any company that becomes this large...
seriously - who would EVER want to see 'another' daikatana? did anyone actually play the original? the only thing 'interesting' about this game was watching the self-destruction of john romero's company in prime time...
sorta like watching a car crash in slow motion...as far as the game goes - there wasn't anything interesting about it that i could see, yet another generic first person shooter developed with a licensed engine (ie a mod basically)...
another of these the world doesn't need...
fallout and xcom on the other hand, are two that definitely needs to be redone in some shape or form...
guess we'll have to wait and see how bestheda does with their 'version' of fallout...
>> Learn to use your current phone. It makes no sense to visit one website to find another, if theres no link there.
thanx, but i DO know how to use my phone. it's not rocket science.
There are no options to set a home page, no options to customize the startup behavior.
I go to the 'web browser' on my phone, it doesn't give me any options but their default list of urls that I can choose - it doesn't give me an 'http://' prompt, it immediately thinks that I want one of their default pages...
Yes this is the providers page - they don't say that it is, but it's quite obviously their 'default start page'.
It says 'rogers 'navigate' on the page and the links are all obviously html links (wap versions)
my options are:
- hot picks (for what?)
- get music & tones
- get games
- get graphics
- get email / chat
- get tv / video (yeah right)
- my subscriptions
- get info
- search
- graphical view (as if the text version wasn't slow enough)
i have to click 'search', which takes me (eventually) to another page that gives me a search box, or i tab down to the next link which has
- go to http:///
- go to https:///
- Yellow Pages
- canada411.com
- takeataxi.com
- city info
- ibm (why would i want to go to IBM's site?)
- time zone
- mygasprices
- dictionary.com
so in order for me to get an 'http://' prompt, i have to:
- launch browser - takes approx 15 seconds to get to the first page
- navigate the crap-ass menus - navigation on the phone is SOO laggy it's ridiculous. each link you click takes about 10 seconds to load.
so after I spend approx 2 minutes of link navigation, i finally have an http:/// prompt to actually type in the website.
Note that I'm getting billed for EVERY one of these pages that I have to navigate through prior to actually get said http:/// prompt, which is something that they do NOT mention to you when you sign up - you think you're actually only paying for the 'real' internet pages that you visit, but NOOOO.
celphone providers need to realize that their crap-ass service is hindering more than helping the adoption of these devices as the 'end all be all' that they think they are.
With that said, I'm actually going to try out this opera mobile that some people have mentioned - i've heard good things about it, perhaps it will actually let me set how I want to surf the net instead of being told how I am by my provider.
ok, i just signed up for the 'web access' on my new v3 razr phone through my local provider a few weeks ago.
this so called 'internet on phones' is even more ridiculous than the concept of playing games on celphones.
1) the web-browser is SOO slow - takes a LONG time to initialize...
2) they make you navigate through 3 or 4 screens before you can even type in an 'http://' address, each of which is hideously slow and probably costing me money because it's actually navigating some website on my providers network
3) viewing an image heavy site like flikr on a phone? you've GOT to be kidding me - let alone the fact that most celphone users are paying by the kb...
all adds up to 'yet more hype around celphones' that basically is a waste of time and money for the consumer.
no thanx
Agreed, Sony has always been notoriously deficient in their Devkits - this isn't any surprise. Whereas Nintendo provides alot of support libraries and tools, the Playstation has always been a pain to develop with. For the most part, Sony sends out the hardware and says 'have fun'...