It's not that he knew what type of conference it was. It's that he seemed surprised Apple was showing off something that would primarily appeal to developers, and not necessarily consumers.
Relax. Take a deep breath....And another one. There. Do you feel better now?
I was just pointing out that Paul seems to think any time Jobs speaks, the only people listening have to be consumers. He seemed utterly confused as to why Apple would show technologies/features that primarily affect developers.
Of course, if Jobs gave speeches like the other Steve at that other company, Paul would've known it was a developers conference... "DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS!!!!!!!one!!!eleventy!"
Destined for the same thrash heap as Automator and Sherlock on most user's Macs, Dashcode lets developers build Dashboard widgets with templates, debugging tools, a visual editor for CSS, and other tools.
I'm surprised he also didn't comment on how useless Xcode 3.0 would be to end users as well. Afterall, what would someone do with a coding environment?
The end result is that Core Animation will not directly effect end users in Leopard until developers take advantage of it. Clearly, it was thrown out as a bone to the developer-heavy crowd.
Funny how the World Wide Developers Conference was developer-heavy, huh?
Most of how you see the AOL chat protocol (OSCAR) implimented today was reverse engineered. However, AOL signed a contract with Apple in 2002 allowing them to use and impliment the OSCAR protocol as will as AOL's libraries.
I don't think youtube will turn and directly sell videos, either singularly or as a collection for the reasons you mention. And especially because many of the people in these videos are minors. However, while I didn't go over every square inch of the TOS (or even one square inch actually... I'm just that lazy and it's time for bed), there may be implied or explicit language that states the uploader of the video has obtained proper documentation for the subjects in said video. This way, if any discrepencies come up, they can redirect the inquiries to the uploader and relieve themselves of that burden.
What I find interesting about this whole uproar is people saying "They can't take our videos and do what they like. How dare they say they have a license to the content we created." Let's look at it from this perspective: You put a lot of work into a decent video, take it to festivals, perhaps even sell a few copies. Now someone who bought it says "hey this is neat!" and makes some copies for friends, who in turn make copies for their friends. Suddenly, your work is floating out there and you had no idea. While you may be flattered that so many people like it, you realize that they were never granted a license to redistribute your work and you've lost control of the distribution of your hard work. Sound familiar? It's the mantra of the *AA. I just find it interesting that as a collective, the internet community seems to have a completely different attitude concerning the distribution/rights of their own work than the work of "the faceless studios/labels."
Now, I realize I'm am generalizing. I'm also not entirely sure I believe the scenario I just described. I'm just putting it out there as food for thought. I think if someone realized that their short little videos they put on-line can turn a profit for themselves, they'd fight tooth and nail for control over that video and try to make every penny off it they can. This doesn't excuse the recent "war on piracy," but rather puts it into a little different perspective.
But as I said before, it's late and I should be sleeping. So season this post with salt to taste.
I still maintain that movies based off anything need to make changes from the original source material, especially when adapted from a video game. Films, books, video games and TV shows are all different mediums and should be treated as such.
A video game is an interactive experience. The audience (player) is involved in what direction and pace the story goes. That doesn't translate well into a passive experience like a movie. Just take the nuts and bolts of the game (characters & scenerios) and place them into a storyline related to, but not a carbon copy of the video game.
Though Halo (and the earlier Marathon series for Mac) does have a pretty good basis for a movie, I don't want to sit down and basically watch filmmakers play the game in real life.
While I appreciate you correcting the GP's math, there still is an issue with the GGP's understanding of frequency as well.
When the GGP said 22.05kHz, I'm assuming he meant the equivalent of a CDs sample rate. That analogy doesn't hold. you need at least 44.1 kHz sample rate to reproduce a 22.05kHz sound wave (one each for the crest and trough) in digital, but analog doean't really use samples. Now, if he did indeed mean sound frequency, his argument still wouldn't hold because barely anyone can actually hear frequencies in that range (I think most anything above 16kHz is pushing it for the adult ear).
That's it. It's late. This might not make sense to me in the morning.... or right now.
This is also the case than with the PowerBook G4 (non titanium) when compared to the iBooks. iBooks always got better reception.
Many people seem to forget that the MacBook (and also the PowerBooks) are aluminum cases. the iBook is plastic. Here's a fun experiment. Take your cell phone (or notebook) and wrap it in aluminum. Those little gray plastic strips on either side of the display are for the antenna.
See my post above. If people know what they are doing, great! We need more tallent out there. The issue comes in when people think that a tool makes the artist; when people think "hey, I can get Shake now. That's all I need!" and never follow up with either getting training, or getting beyond the basics and labeling themselves as composite artists/designers/editors.
Let's move the example a little closer to home. Take web design. It is very cheap to design and host web sites now. How many times have you seen sites and thought "who the hell designed/coded this?" Chances are, it's someone who has got the tools, never learned to use them, never read a book on design or coding, labeled themselves as a web developer/designer, and charged far less than any professional or even semi-professional designer/coder would have. Hey, I like to tinker with web design/programming too. I just don't announce myself to the world as a web developer/designer.
It's not a 1337 thing, it's a business thing. When powerful software gets into the hands of the untrained, the trend seems to be that it lowers the value of the services of people who do know what they are doing.
Don't get me wrong, I think it's great that people will get a chance to use Shake (and software like it). But look at the trend in the design world. As the barrier to entry is lowered, so is the quality of work as well as the value of that work (over the entire industry).
I can't tell you how many times I've heard agencies say "We don't need to use a post house, we have Final Cut Pro now." Only they can't attract the tallent or experience that a post house has. Taken one step further, there was a client of an agency we work with who decided to get FCP and some cameras and drop the agency all together. Only now their commercials are stuck with a 4-year-old campaign (that's starting to look dated), their tallent looks like he's aged about 15 years because of poor lighting, and the editing and graphics are lacking.
I'm not saying the price drop in Shake is entirely bad, just that it will bring in more people who think they know what they're doing, when really they have no idea. And suddenly the professionals who have been using it for quite some time look like they're gouging their clients because some kid in his mom's basement can get the same tools.
Oh, and to anyone who says "Hey, your business model should be changing to fit the market." That's not the issue, it's that the market thinks our services should be cheaper because Timmy, the VP's nephew can do the same thing because he has a computer with FCP/Shake/Photoshop/whatever. They for some reason don't realize that experience and training go a long way.
Well, since their entire line of computers is moving to the Intel chips, it would only make sense to develop your software for the chips that will be in your computers. I didn't think it was that difficult to understand.
Great. First we had people who thought they could edit (FCP/iMovie), then people who thought they could design motion graphics (Motion), now we'll have people who think they know how to composite.
I'm not sure about the other models, but the palmrest on my 12" PowerBook is plastic, not aluminum. How do I know? Well, for one, it sounds completely different than the rest of the cast when you tap it. Second, the paint is chipped away a little bit and I can see the plastic. Third, I've taken this thing apart twice... it's plastic.
I think the lack of discoloration is because of the type paint itself.
Wasn't this the same issue with the DS when it first launched?
If I recall (I'm too lazy to look anything up and I'm about to leave work), the DS had limited (if any) 3rd party support at launch. Everyone claimed the device was gimicky and no one would use it. It took a while before we saw games that took real advantage of the hardware.
I believe this is the case with the Wii as well. The first year of the device will see a lot of 1st party support with interesting games, but the 3rd party developers will use that time to figure out what the hell to do with it. Don't get me wrong, I fully intend on picking one up on or near launch (which I've never done for anything). However, I fully expect to only have a few titles that really make use of the new control scheme.
You mean the $500 PS3? Unless you found some store selling it at a discount. In which case, where? I'd grab up a couple and sell them at $450. People get a deal, I get compensation for my trouble!
Xbox 360 is also $600: $400 for the console, $100 for the Wi-Fi adapter, and $100 for the HD-DVD drive.
I hear this comparison a lot, and I have to draw this comparison: the Mac Mini*. People were all up in arms because of the $100 increase in price when they switched to the Intel Minis. Some people pointed out that the new Intel Minis had 802.11G and Bluetooth built-in, an upgrade that would've cost you (I believe) $120 before. It doesn't matter. It's all about perception, and when a demographic is used to a $200-$300 launch price (many complained about the $399 price point of the 360), a $499 base price is a problem. Especially when you consider the fully functional system is $599 (I say fully functional because of the lack of Wi-Fi or HDMI in the $499 system).
It seems as if it never occured to Sony (or Microsoft, for that matter) that maybe people just want a game system.
I, actually, really want to hear from people who are still planning on buying the system and what their justification is for the their decision. Is it brand loyalty? Blu-Ray? Exclusive titles? What? I'm not trying to start a flame war, I'm just really curious to hear reasons to buy the system at that price.
* I am a certified Mac fan-boy, and even I was disappointed by the $100 price hike. Also, I am not interested in the PS3, nor the 360. I will be getting a Wii, but I made that decision a long, long time ago before I even knew concrete details about any of these systems. So the news this week was just further justification for me.
Activision - Tony Hawk's Downhill Jam, Marvel: Ulatimate Alliance, Call of Duty 3
AQ Interactive - Boxing Action
Atari - Dragon Ball Z Budokai: Tenkaichi 2
Atlus - Trauma Center: Second Opinion
Buena Vista Games - Disney's Chicken Little: Ace in Action Disney's Meet the Robinsons
Capcom - Resident Evil series
D3Publisher - SIMPLE series
Electronic Arts - Madden NFL '07, Medal of Honor Airborne
Hudson - Bomberman
Koei - Sengoku Action
Konami - Elebits, Soccer game
Majesco - Bust-a-Move Revolution
Marvelous Interactive / Natsume - Harvest Moon Heroes, Legend of the River King
Mastiff - Mr. D Goes to Town
Midway Games - The Ant Bully, Happy Feet
MTO - SAN-X All-star Revolution
Namco Bandai - Final Furlong, Mobile Suite Gundam, Digimon, One Piece Ulimited Adventure, Tamagotchi
SEGA - Super Monkey Ball Banana Blitz, Sonic Wild Fire
SNK - Metal Slug Anthology
Spike - Necro-Nesia, Jawa
Square Enix - Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: Crystal Bearers, Dragon Quest Swords: The Masked Queen and the Tower of Mirrors
Taito - Turn it around!, Let's go by train!, Cooking Mama -Cooking with International Friends
Tecmo - Super Swing Golf Pangya
THQ - Avatar: The Last Airbender, SpongeBob SquarePants: Creature from the Krusty Krab, Disney/Pixar Cars
TOMY - Battle Action
Ubisoft - Open Season, Rayman Raving Rabbids, Red Steel
Yeah, I sure with they had at least some third-party support. While I'm not necessarily defending the quality of some of these games (I'm not necessarily a Spongebob fan), the point it that third-party support exists.
...fraction of Nintendo's sales
5/7 would still be the correct fraction seeing as how we're comparing Genesis sales to SNES sales, not overall system sales.
If you're simple putting the Mac OS into hibernate mode, it would make it that much easier to switch back into the Mac OS once you're done with Windows.
Think about it this way: There's something you want to do that you think you need to do in Windows. You hibernate your Mac OS, and wait to boot up Windows. When you're done, you switch back to the Mac side, only waiting for Windows to shut down (not for the Mac to start up). Eventually, people may tire of waiting to Windows to boot (not that it takes all that long, but it's still a waiting game), so they might find solutions on the Mac side and stay there. If it takes longer to switch from Mac to Windows than from Windows to Mac, I think that's a good thing for Apple.
That does make sense (I'm always one to eat my humble pie when proven wrong). But you mention something else of interest: the antenna. What effect would the shape and direction of the antenna have on the supposed risk? For example, many phones have a small nub of an antenna sticking vertically off ther phone. My candybar phone has a small internal antenna that is perpendicular to the phone and points out the back. Does that mean most of the RF is directed away from me when compared to the vertical antenna?
Just curious really.
Here's my issue with this. If the phone is strong enough to transmit to towers miles away, what good will it do to move the phone about two-three feet from your head down to your pocket/waist/whatever? I suppose the signal isn't as concentrated, but you'd think there'd still be risk (if there is indeed any risk).
Slashdot Mirror
It's not that he knew what type of conference it was. It's that he seemed surprised Apple was showing off something that would primarily appeal to developers, and not necessarily consumers.
Relax. Take a deep breath. ...And another one. There. Do you feel better now?
I was just pointing out that Paul seems to think any time Jobs speaks, the only people listening have to be consumers. He seemed utterly confused as to why Apple would show technologies/features that primarily affect developers.
Of course, if Jobs gave speeches like the other Steve at that other company, Paul would've known it was a developers conference... "DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS!!!!!!!one!!!eleventy!"
I'm surprised he also didn't comment on how useless Xcode 3.0 would be to end users as well. Afterall, what would someone do with a coding environment?
Funny how the World Wide Developers Conference was developer-heavy, huh?
I'll save him the trouble:
VirtueDesktops (free, built off Desktop Manager below)
CodeTek Virtual Desktop Pro ($40)
Desktop Manager (free, no longer in development?)
Though the virtual Desktops in Leopard look to be far more elegant.
Most of how you see the AOL chat protocol (OSCAR) implimented today was reverse engineered. However, AOL signed a contract with Apple in 2002 allowing them to use and impliment the OSCAR protocol as will as AOL's libraries.
Were you aware that you could simply collapse the sidebar and never have to look at it again? You just grag the divider and drag it over to the left.
I don't think youtube will turn and directly sell videos, either singularly or as a collection for the reasons you mention. And especially because many of the people in these videos are minors. However, while I didn't go over every square inch of the TOS (or even one square inch actually... I'm just that lazy and it's time for bed), there may be implied or explicit language that states the uploader of the video has obtained proper documentation for the subjects in said video. This way, if any discrepencies come up, they can redirect the inquiries to the uploader and relieve themselves of that burden.
What I find interesting about this whole uproar is people saying "They can't take our videos and do what they like. How dare they say they have a license to the content we created." Let's look at it from this perspective: You put a lot of work into a decent video, take it to festivals, perhaps even sell a few copies. Now someone who bought it says "hey this is neat!" and makes some copies for friends, who in turn make copies for their friends. Suddenly, your work is floating out there and you had no idea. While you may be flattered that so many people like it, you realize that they were never granted a license to redistribute your work and you've lost control of the distribution of your hard work. Sound familiar? It's the mantra of the *AA. I just find it interesting that as a collective, the internet community seems to have a completely different attitude concerning the distribution/rights of their own work than the work of "the faceless studios/labels."
Now, I realize I'm am generalizing. I'm also not entirely sure I believe the scenario I just described. I'm just putting it out there as food for thought. I think if someone realized that their short little videos they put on-line can turn a profit for themselves, they'd fight tooth and nail for control over that video and try to make every penny off it they can. This doesn't excuse the recent "war on piracy," but rather puts it into a little different perspective.
But as I said before, it's late and I should be sleeping. So season this post with salt to taste.
I still maintain that movies based off anything need to make changes from the original source material, especially when adapted from a video game. Films, books, video games and TV shows are all different mediums and should be treated as such.
A video game is an interactive experience. The audience (player) is involved in what direction and pace the story goes. That doesn't translate well into a passive experience like a movie. Just take the nuts and bolts of the game (characters & scenerios) and place them into a storyline related to, but not a carbon copy of the video game.
Though Halo (and the earlier Marathon series for Mac) does have a pretty good basis for a movie, I don't want to sit down and basically watch filmmakers play the game in real life.
While I appreciate you correcting the GP's math, there still is an issue with the GGP's understanding of frequency as well.
When the GGP said 22.05kHz, I'm assuming he meant the equivalent of a CDs sample rate. That analogy doesn't hold. you need at least 44.1 kHz sample rate to reproduce a 22.05kHz sound wave (one each for the crest and trough) in digital, but analog doean't really use samples. Now, if he did indeed mean sound frequency, his argument still wouldn't hold because barely anyone can actually hear frequencies in that range (I think most anything above 16kHz is pushing it for the adult ear).
That's it. It's late. This might not make sense to me in the morning.... or right now.
I need sleep.
This is also the case than with the PowerBook G4 (non titanium) when compared to the iBooks. iBooks always got better reception.
Many people seem to forget that the MacBook (and also the PowerBooks) are aluminum cases. the iBook is plastic. Here's a fun experiment. Take your cell phone (or notebook) and wrap it in aluminum. Those little gray plastic strips on either side of the display are for the antenna.
...and to think, you were marked as "friend."
See my post above. If people know what they are doing, great! We need more tallent out there. The issue comes in when people think that a tool makes the artist; when people think "hey, I can get Shake now. That's all I need!" and never follow up with either getting training, or getting beyond the basics and labeling themselves as composite artists/designers/editors.
Let's move the example a little closer to home. Take web design. It is very cheap to design and host web sites now. How many times have you seen sites and thought "who the hell designed/coded this?" Chances are, it's someone who has got the tools, never learned to use them, never read a book on design or coding, labeled themselves as a web developer/designer, and charged far less than any professional or even semi-professional designer/coder would have. Hey, I like to tinker with web design/programming too. I just don't announce myself to the world as a web developer/designer.
It's not a 1337 thing, it's a business thing. When powerful software gets into the hands of the untrained, the trend seems to be that it lowers the value of the services of people who do know what they are doing.
Don't get me wrong, I think it's great that people will get a chance to use Shake (and software like it). But look at the trend in the design world. As the barrier to entry is lowered, so is the quality of work as well as the value of that work (over the entire industry).
I can't tell you how many times I've heard agencies say "We don't need to use a post house, we have Final Cut Pro now." Only they can't attract the tallent or experience that a post house has. Taken one step further, there was a client of an agency we work with who decided to get FCP and some cameras and drop the agency all together. Only now their commercials are stuck with a 4-year-old campaign (that's starting to look dated), their tallent looks like he's aged about 15 years because of poor lighting, and the editing and graphics are lacking.
I'm not saying the price drop in Shake is entirely bad, just that it will bring in more people who think they know what they're doing, when really they have no idea. And suddenly the professionals who have been using it for quite some time look like they're gouging their clients because some kid in his mom's basement can get the same tools.
Oh, and to anyone who says "Hey, your business model should be changing to fit the market." That's not the issue, it's that the market thinks our services should be cheaper because Timmy, the VP's nephew can do the same thing because he has a computer with FCP/Shake/Photoshop/whatever. They for some reason don't realize that experience and training go a long way.
Well, since their entire line of computers is moving to the Intel chips, it would only make sense to develop your software for the chips that will be in your computers. I didn't think it was that difficult to understand.
Great. First we had people who thought they could edit (FCP/iMovie), then people who thought they could design motion graphics (Motion), now we'll have people who think they know how to composite.
Am I the only one that thinks this is a bad idea?
I'm not sure about the other models, but the palmrest on my 12" PowerBook is plastic, not aluminum. How do I know? Well, for one, it sounds completely different than the rest of the cast when you tap it. Second, the paint is chipped away a little bit and I can see the plastic. Third, I've taken this thing apart twice... it's plastic.
I think the lack of discoloration is because of the type paint itself.
Wasn't this the same issue with the DS when it first launched?
If I recall (I'm too lazy to look anything up and I'm about to leave work), the DS had limited (if any) 3rd party support at launch. Everyone claimed the device was gimicky and no one would use it. It took a while before we saw games that took real advantage of the hardware.
I believe this is the case with the Wii as well. The first year of the device will see a lot of 1st party support with interesting games, but the 3rd party developers will use that time to figure out what the hell to do with it. Don't get me wrong, I fully intend on picking one up on or near launch (which I've never done for anything). However, I fully expect to only have a few titles that really make use of the new control scheme.
You mean the $500 PS3? Unless you found some store selling it at a discount. In which case, where? I'd grab up a couple and sell them at $450. People get a deal, I get compensation for my trouble!
I hear this comparison a lot, and I have to draw this comparison: the Mac Mini*. People were all up in arms because of the $100 increase in price when they switched to the Intel Minis. Some people pointed out that the new Intel Minis had 802.11G and Bluetooth built-in, an upgrade that would've cost you (I believe) $120 before. It doesn't matter. It's all about perception, and when a demographic is used to a $200-$300 launch price (many complained about the $399 price point of the 360), a $499 base price is a problem. Especially when you consider the fully functional system is $599 (I say fully functional because of the lack of Wi-Fi or HDMI in the $499 system).
It seems as if it never occured to Sony (or Microsoft, for that matter) that maybe people just want a game system.
I, actually, really want to hear from people who are still planning on buying the system and what their justification is for the their decision. Is it brand loyalty? Blu-Ray? Exclusive titles? What? I'm not trying to start a flame war, I'm just really curious to hear reasons to buy the system at that price.
* I am a certified Mac fan-boy, and even I was disappointed by the $100 price hike. Also, I am not interested in the PS3, nor the 360. I will be getting a Wii, but I made that decision a long, long time ago before I even knew concrete details about any of these systems. So the news this week was just further justification for me.
You mean like these:
Activision - Tony Hawk's Downhill Jam, Marvel: Ulatimate Alliance, Call of Duty 3
AQ Interactive - Boxing Action
Atari - Dragon Ball Z Budokai: Tenkaichi 2
Atlus - Trauma Center: Second Opinion
Buena Vista Games - Disney's Chicken Little: Ace in Action Disney's Meet the Robinsons
Capcom - Resident Evil series
D3Publisher - SIMPLE series
Electronic Arts - Madden NFL '07, Medal of Honor Airborne
Hudson - Bomberman
Koei - Sengoku Action
Konami - Elebits, Soccer game
Majesco - Bust-a-Move Revolution
Marvelous Interactive / Natsume - Harvest Moon Heroes, Legend of the River King
Mastiff - Mr. D Goes to Town
Midway Games - The Ant Bully, Happy Feet
MTO - SAN-X All-star Revolution
Namco Bandai - Final Furlong, Mobile Suite Gundam, Digimon, One Piece Ulimited Adventure, Tamagotchi
SEGA - Super Monkey Ball Banana Blitz, Sonic Wild Fire
SNK - Metal Slug Anthology
Spike - Necro-Nesia, Jawa
Square Enix - Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: Crystal Bearers, Dragon Quest Swords: The Masked Queen and the Tower of Mirrors
Taito - Turn it around!, Let's go by train!, Cooking Mama -Cooking with International Friends
Tecmo - Super Swing Golf Pangya
THQ - Avatar: The Last Airbender, SpongeBob SquarePants: Creature from the Krusty Krab, Disney/Pixar Cars
TOMY - Battle Action
Ubisoft - Open Season, Rayman Raving Rabbids, Red Steel
Yeah, I sure with they had at least some third-party support. While I'm not necessarily defending the quality of some of these games (I'm not necessarily a Spongebob fan), the point it that third-party support exists.
5/7 would still be the correct fraction seeing as how we're comparing Genesis sales to SNES sales, not overall system sales.
Pshhhhhh... Get it right. It's b-e-s-u-r-e-t-o-d-r-i-n-k-y-o-u-r-o-v-a-l-t-i-n-e.
...amateurs. I'm off to get some Ovaltine.
If you're simple putting the Mac OS into hibernate mode, it would make it that much easier to switch back into the Mac OS once you're done with Windows.
Think about it this way: There's something you want to do that you think you need to do in Windows. You hibernate your Mac OS, and wait to boot up Windows. When you're done, you switch back to the Mac side, only waiting for Windows to shut down (not for the Mac to start up). Eventually, people may tire of waiting to Windows to boot (not that it takes all that long, but it's still a waiting game), so they might find solutions on the Mac side and stay there. If it takes longer to switch from Mac to Windows than from Windows to Mac, I think that's a good thing for Apple.
That does make sense (I'm always one to eat my humble pie when proven wrong). But you mention something else of interest: the antenna. What effect would the shape and direction of the antenna have on the supposed risk? For example, many phones have a small nub of an antenna sticking vertically off ther phone. My candybar phone has a small internal antenna that is perpendicular to the phone and points out the back. Does that mean most of the RF is directed away from me when compared to the vertical antenna?
Just curious really.
Here's my issue with this. If the phone is strong enough to transmit to towers miles away, what good will it do to move the phone about two-three feet from your head down to your pocket/waist/whatever? I suppose the signal isn't as concentrated, but you'd think there'd still be risk (if there is indeed any risk).