If you do it intuitively (forward=accelerate, backward=brake)
I don't find that intuitive. I don't think that accelerate and brake are intuitive either. They are based on the era of fully mechanical control where two different systems meant two different input devices. But both control one aspect: speed.
So perhaps forward should be "faster" and backward should be "slower" and center would be "maintain speed"
That is not my experience. From what I know, the only way to have the wheels spin when the transmission is in park is if your transmission breaks. I've driven cars with broken hand brakes where I was forced to use "park" as a brake. It works fine.
Although we are off-topic at this point: running out of gas does not park the transmission.
Robotron does have a story - and it was clearly displayed when the game started. I find it telling that it was used as an example of a game with no story. Perhaps this is more of a commentary on the players at the time, rather than the games.
Doom's lack of story was especially notable, even in an era were many games did not have stories. 1) In the pre-release interviews, they did have a story. They even talked about how you were going to start in a room with a bunch of soldiers playing cards and a demon comes in and kills them all and then it starts. The idea of using the game engine to start the story like that would have been groundbreaking. People were disappointed when it didn't happen. 2) The game was really immersive and realistic. So people expected to see a story - much more so than something more arcade-like or 2 dimensional. You felt like you were there, so you wanted to know why and what you were doing.
I think he didn't list his FOSS experience very well. It says:
Sole engineer for the GoTD program (http://sourceforge.net/projects/mgatdirector), an open source program for directing Go tournaments. GoTD integrates registration, player pairing, handicapping, conict resolution, and results reporting into one easy-to-use interface. GoTD is the rst and only open source program available for managing Go tournaments.
It sounds like he is selling the project, not himself. In my experience, you don't say what the project did, you say the technologies it uses and what YOU did. I might write:
Sole engineer for the GoTD program (http://sourceforge.net/projects/mgatdirector), an open source program for directing Go tournaments written in C++/Qt. Ran on Linux, Windows, and Commodore 64. Maintained project in source control via sourceforge. Prioritized bug reports, applied fixes, and determined new features. A forum was established to solicit feedback from customers.
Users can download content from Amazon and some other Kindle content providers in the proprietary Kindle format (AZW), or load content in various formats from a computer. Kindle Terms of Use forbid transferring Amazon e-books to another user or a different type of device.
Imagine a law stating that every grocery store must allow other grocery stores to have stalls within their own store. That would present a bizarre conflict of interest because they must help their competitors... and on their own property.
This is what the current "open access" laws do. A telco who owns wires must allow another telco, who has no wires, to provide a competing service over their own wires. That's just plain silly. We need to go the next step, and establish telephone/ISP service providers, and providers of wires. The provider of wires cannot provide service. And a provider of service cannot provide wires. Conflict vanishes.
I haven't read the PDF, but I think that is what it is talking about. It fixes the reason why "open access" doesn't work.
Let me remind everyone of how things were back in the golden age of the internet.
You had dozens of ISPs to choose from. In a major city, perhaps hundreds. You could instruct your computer to connect to any one of those ISPs, regardless of who was your local telephone company. If you didn't like your ISP, then you could switch to another one that same day. No installers, no custom modems rented from the phone company or ISP. Just a standard device.
Back then, we never worried about network neutrality, or traffic filtering, or censorship. There were no sites like ESPN that could only be accessed by certain ISPs. Internet was really really really cheap ($9.99) and "unlimited" really was unlimited.
The reason things changed is because when we used dial-up over telephones, phone companies were legally required to be neutral carriers. When we switched to broadband that was no longer the case. Basically, the phone companies found a legal loophole that killed competition. It has taken congress and the FCC 10 years to understand this. Hopefully they won't get lobbied by the new oligarchy and kill this proposal to fix things.
If you didn't like the GPL3, why wouldn't you go with GPL2? BSD has entirely different intentions. When deciding on a license, those two aren't in the same boat.
Who are these people who watch theater video camera recordings of movies? That's really sad. At leaste be a self-respecting pirate and get a decent copy.
I had an IP lawyer tell me that the provisional patent is completely pointless. You don't have to file a provisional patent to get this protection. You can publish, then patent up to a year later and your idea is still protected.
Agreed. I came back to read the comments because I had this same though. The article says they could replace the huge parabolic mirrors used in solar collection. So they want to replace a large mirror, with a large fuunnel made of obscure expensive materials? How does that help?
who are you to declare that handheld systems only interest 8th graders?
I never said that. I'm 33, and I have a DS, my immediate circle of friends all have the Nintendo DS + a mod chip.
Go read an NPD sales chart and try to claim that the DS has seen any loss of market share to the iPhone.
True, but look at the DSi charts. Also, look at the game sales. Those people who bought a DS 3 years ago aren't buying a DSi. That group I referenced earlier? They haven't touched those DS's in years. They moved on to iPhones and Android phones. The DS is too limiting.
Next, look at the developer community. Some of those homebrew DS developers became iPhone developers, and will probably become Android developers. Especially the good ones. A few of them just gave up on the DS and stopped releasing updates because it was such a hassle.
I've heard that in Japan they do sell software to do this. Outside of Japan it is all homebrew. But while Nintendo has one hand creating very limited PDA software exclusive to Japan, their other hand is preventing such software from being released outside of Japan. I find that strange.
Now that I reflect, this same thing happened with the original NES. They started to turn it into a computer, but only in Japan, and only at the end of the product's life cycle.
The problem is that the device must pass FCC testing and then get picked up by a carrier.
The FCC process won't stop companies like Nintendo: they have to do that anyway. The chip manufacturers have the hard work. Also, cell phones do not need to be "picked-up" by a carrier.
I just don't know if a $200 Nintendo cell phone would sell when you can get an iPhone for $99.
Why not? It does today, even without the cell phone feature.
I don't want my game system to also be a cell phone.
Fair enough. But if it had one optionally - what harm would it do?
. I don't want to have to upgrade my game system in order to upgrade my cell phone,
Why would you have to do so?
or buy multiple cell phones because I want both a DS and a PSP.
How would that be a problem? If they both had cell phones, then you would activate one of them as a cell phone but not the other. Then you would carry around two devices. If they were not cell phones, then you would carry around 3 devices: the DS, the PSP, and the cell phone. And odds are, the cell phone probably also has games on it too. That sounds like a pain in the butt to me. Literally, since that would require some big pants.:-)
I think I am starting to understand the responses I'm getting. People seem to assume that if you put a cell phone in something, that you must activate it! Rethink that assumption.
The only real disadvantage to this would be price. And I'm betting that since they already have wireless networking, camera, touch screens, 3D graphics, and removable storage - that a cellular chip won't overtly increase the cost.
Yeah, price is probably the biggest reason that what I'm describing may not happen for another generation or so. But I suspect that if Nintendo decided, tomorrow, to make the DSi a cell phone, that it would not severely impact the price. It already has wireless capabilities, a touch screen, a camera, and a decent enough processor to decrypt WPA.
I'd love to know: Would it add $10? $50? $100? That still wouldn't double the price of the item - but for many people, it would more than double the usefulness.
My guess is that at some point in the future, adding cellular support will be akin to adding USB support. It will be a little chip that somebody buys and can put into a device. And when THAT day comes, you'll find cell phones in things you never imagined. And those devices will suddenly become a lot smarter, and we will wonder what we ever did without it.
Slashdot Mirror
If you do it intuitively (forward=accelerate, backward=brake)
I don't find that intuitive. I don't think that accelerate and brake are intuitive either. They are based on the era of fully mechanical control where two different systems meant two different input devices. But both control one aspect: speed.
So perhaps forward should be "faster" and backward should be "slower" and center would be "maintain speed"
That is not my experience. From what I know, the only way to have the wheels spin when the transmission is in park is if your transmission breaks. I've driven cars with broken hand brakes where I was forced to use "park" as a brake. It works fine.
Although we are off-topic at this point: running out of gas does not park the transmission.
Those systems stop working when your RPMs drop below idle RPM.
I'm not a mechanic, but how exactly does one run out of gas and still maintain engine RPMs?
Robotron does have a story - and it was clearly displayed when the game started. I find it telling that it was used as an example of a game with no story. Perhaps this is more of a commentary on the players at the time, rather than the games.
Doom's lack of story was especially notable, even in an era were many games did not have stories.
1) In the pre-release interviews, they did have a story. They even talked about how you were going to start in a room with a bunch of soldiers playing cards and a demon comes in and kills them all and then it starts. The idea of using the game engine to start the story like that would have been groundbreaking. People were disappointed when it didn't happen.
2) The game was really immersive and realistic. So people expected to see a story - much more so than something more arcade-like or 2 dimensional. You felt like you were there, so you wanted to know why and what you were doing.
What about GPS?
I think he didn't list his FOSS experience very well. It says:
Sole engineer for the GoTD program (http://sourceforge.net/projects/mgatdirector), an open source program for directing Go tournaments. GoTD integrates registration, player pairing, handicapping,
conict resolution, and results reporting into one easy-to-use interface. GoTD is the rst and only open source program available for managing Go tournaments.
It sounds like he is selling the project, not himself. In my experience, you don't say what the project did, you say the technologies it uses and what YOU did. I might write:
Sole engineer for the GoTD program (http://sourceforge.net/projects/mgatdirector), an open source program for directing Go tournaments written in C++/Qt. Ran on Linux, Windows, and Commodore 64. Maintained project in source control via sourceforge. Prioritized bug reports, applied fixes, and determined new features. A forum was established to solicit feedback from customers.
ROFL. I'll just quote Wikipedia.
Users can download content from Amazon and some other Kindle content providers in the proprietary Kindle format (AZW), or load content in various formats from a computer. Kindle Terms of Use forbid transferring Amazon e-books to another user or a different type of device.
Yes! That's the concept I was going for.
Yeah, the analogy assumes the grocery stores are some sort of monopoly.
That's find until you have to replace your kindle one day, and you have to buy your books again.
Imagine a law stating that every grocery store must allow other grocery stores to have stalls within their own store. That would present a bizarre conflict of interest because they must help their competitors... and on their own property.
This is what the current "open access" laws do. A telco who owns wires must allow another telco, who has no wires, to provide a competing service over their own wires. That's just plain silly. We need to go the next step, and establish telephone/ISP service providers, and providers of wires. The provider of wires cannot provide service. And a provider of service cannot provide wires. Conflict vanishes.
I haven't read the PDF, but I think that is what it is talking about. It fixes the reason why "open access" doesn't work.
This is a great case for a good directional antenna to setup a point-to-point link.
Perhaps. Although many consider the golden age to be prior to the eternal september :-)
Let me remind everyone of how things were back in the golden age of the internet.
You had dozens of ISPs to choose from. In a major city, perhaps hundreds. You could instruct your computer to connect to any one of those ISPs, regardless of who was your local telephone company. If you didn't like your ISP, then you could switch to another one that same day. No installers, no custom modems rented from the phone company or ISP. Just a standard device.
Back then, we never worried about network neutrality, or traffic filtering, or censorship. There were no sites like ESPN that could only be accessed by certain ISPs. Internet was really really really cheap ($9.99) and "unlimited" really was unlimited.
The reason things changed is because when we used dial-up over telephones, phone companies were legally required to be neutral carriers. When we switched to broadband that was no longer the case. Basically, the phone companies found a legal loophole that killed competition. It has taken congress and the FCC 10 years to understand this. Hopefully they won't get lobbied by the new oligarchy and kill this proposal to fix things.
If it crashes your phone, there's something wrong with your phone, not the site.
If you didn't like the GPL3, why wouldn't you go with GPL2? BSD has entirely different intentions. When deciding on a license, those two aren't in the same boat.
Who are these people who watch theater video camera recordings of movies? That's really sad. At leaste be a self-respecting pirate and get a decent copy.
I had an IP lawyer tell me that the provisional patent is completely pointless. You don't have to file a provisional patent to get this protection. You can publish, then patent up to a year later and your idea is still protected.
Agreed. I came back to read the comments because I had this same though. The article says they could replace the huge parabolic mirrors used in solar collection. So they want to replace a large mirror, with a large fuunnel made of obscure expensive materials? How does that help?
With out subsidy I think it would be closer to $300 or $400
Whoaaa!!! I think that's a bit steep. There are cell phones out that that are $20 with no contract. $40 gets you a camera and Bluetooth.
If Nintendo wants to target a $200 price point, and they decide to add a cell phone option to it -- the maximum cost is $220.
who are you to declare that handheld systems only interest 8th graders?
I never said that. I'm 33, and I have a DS, my immediate circle of friends all have the Nintendo DS + a mod chip.
Go read an NPD sales chart and try to claim that the DS has seen any loss of market share to the iPhone.
True, but look at the DSi charts. Also, look at the game sales. Those people who bought a DS 3 years ago aren't buying a DSi. That group I referenced earlier? They haven't touched those DS's in years. They moved on to iPhones and Android phones. The DS is too limiting.
Next, look at the developer community. Some of those homebrew DS developers became iPhone developers, and will probably become Android developers. Especially the good ones. A few of them just gave up on the DS and stopped releasing updates because it was such a hassle.
I've heard that in Japan they do sell software to do this. Outside of Japan it is all homebrew. But while Nintendo has one hand creating very limited PDA software exclusive to Japan, their other hand is preventing such software from being released outside of Japan. I find that strange.
Now that I reflect, this same thing happened with the original NES. They started to turn it into a computer, but only in Japan, and only at the end of the product's life cycle.
Some clarifications here:
The problem is that the device must pass FCC testing and then get picked up by a carrier.
The FCC process won't stop companies like Nintendo: they have to do that anyway. The chip manufacturers have the hard work. Also, cell phones do not need to be "picked-up" by a carrier.
I just don't know if a $200 Nintendo cell phone would sell when you can get an iPhone for $99.
Why not? It does today, even without the cell phone feature.
I don't want my game system to also be a cell phone.
Fair enough. But if it had one optionally - what harm would it do?
. I don't want to have to upgrade my game system in order to upgrade my cell phone,
Why would you have to do so?
or buy multiple cell phones because I want both a DS and a PSP.
How would that be a problem? If they both had cell phones, then you would activate one of them as a cell phone but not the other. Then you would carry around two devices. If they were not cell phones, then you would carry around 3 devices: the DS, the PSP, and the cell phone. And odds are, the cell phone probably also has games on it too. That sounds like a pain in the butt to me. Literally, since that would require some big pants. :-)
I think I am starting to understand the responses I'm getting. People seem to assume that if you put a cell phone in something, that you must activate it! Rethink that assumption.
The only real disadvantage to this would be price. And I'm betting that since they already have wireless networking, camera, touch screens, 3D graphics, and removable storage - that a cellular chip won't overtly increase the cost.
Yeah, price is probably the biggest reason that what I'm describing may not happen for another generation or so. But I suspect that if Nintendo decided, tomorrow, to make the DSi a cell phone, that it would not severely impact the price. It already has wireless capabilities, a touch screen, a camera, and a decent enough processor to decrypt WPA.
I'd love to know: Would it add $10? $50? $100? That still wouldn't double the price of the item - but for many people, it would more than double the usefulness.
My guess is that at some point in the future, adding cellular support will be akin to adding USB support. It will be a little chip that somebody buys and can put into a device. And when THAT day comes, you'll find cell phones in things you never imagined. And those devices will suddenly become a lot smarter, and we will wonder what we ever did without it.