I've sort of noticed this. At Wal-Mart, I see a big PS3 display in front, a normal 360 displaly in their case, and the Wii was just a disaster.
I have to agree. It doesn't help that the Wii identity is particular weak so that it fades in the background in the midst of all the chaos and color in stores. I think wherever designed the identity, Nintendo includes, were going for the Apple look. However, they failed to realize that the Wii is competing in a different space than Apple and as such needs to stand out a bit more. I'm not saying they should do anything X-TREME, but at least introduce a bit of color. Maybe the Wii mark a nice vibrant color instead of the faded grey it is now.
Not that my own observations count for much but I've actually noticed a number of people inquiring about or purchasing the Xbox360 in various stores. A few stores have had very prominent displays for the Xbox with the Wii and PS3 off to the side somewhere. Of course it doesn't help that neither of those consoles is currently available.
I did see one woman asking about the Wii and she didn't seem to be pleased at all over the prospect of having to wait in line to get one and this was for a December 6th shipment. She was even willing to pay extra to secure a unit. I think she was determined to get one not because it was the Wii but because she wasn't looking forward to the prospect of having whining kids at Christmas. If it were me I'd just get them socks and use this as a life lesson, "we dont always get what we want".
Anyway, I suspect anyone who might have wanted a PS3 will end up getting the Xbox360. And everyone else will likely get a Wii.
Actually I think TV these days in terms of quality is probably on the whole better than it's ever been before. Yes, reality shows suck, but when you take away those there are still a lot of really first-rate things on the air.
I might agree that production values are better than they've ever been before. But that doesn't change the fact that practically everything on television is garbage. And if that weren't bad enough we have to wade through all that relentless advertising.
About the only channel I have the patience to watch for any period of time is The History Channel. The Discovery Channel is putting too much emphasis on entertainment over education. Everything has to be extreme.
Which leads me to this Pro Gaming thing. I don't have high hopes for it at all. I except it to be exceedingly obnoxious in a WWE or MTV Music Awards sort of way. I also predict it will be nothing but incessant advertising for hardware and software companies.
I'm sure that's the primary drive behind Pro Gaming. The organizers have noticed all the money being made in both the gaming and sports industries. It's only logical that someone would try to marry the two. Rest assured this wasn't done in some attempt to legitimize gaming. If anything, this runs the risk of alienating the average non-gamer with all the extremeness.
Well, that's my cynical observation for the day...
Why does M$ think they can mess with everything? Or do they just want are money?
What? You mean unlike every other major corporation on Earth?
Companies want to do whatever they like unimpeded and what they like to do is earn as much of our money as possible and control as much of their respective markets as they can. But to disparage Microsoft like this is somehow unique to them is a bit foolish. Right now Microsoft draws all the ire. Someday it will be someone like Google or Apple.
I'm not necessarily defending Microsoft. I'm just trying to point out what I feel are childish perceptions some people have of companies. How people can go to absurd lengths to put one company on a pedestal, Apple is one of the first examples to come to mind, and then go to the most absurd lengths to bash a company Microsoft. Look at Sony. Imagine what people would think about Apple if they had 80% or 90% marketshare. Would Apple also be sued by various nations for including Quicktime, Mail and Safari with OS X? And lets see how people feel about Google in 10 years.
Why in the hell does the tax system need to be complicated further? People are already taxed for all income. If a player sells a character for $500, they're supposed to report that as income tax. So what else is there to tax? If a tax in placed on these transactions wont these people essentially be taxed twice?
It looks to me like the government just can't help but getting its grubby hands on yet another source of revenue. How about they learn how to properly spend the money they've already got? I think there should be a moratorium put on all tax increases until the government can get itself spending in order. The amount of waste rampant in government is shocking, and I'm not referring to the more sensational stories like $50 hammers or pork projects.
I don't quite see where this is an issue as related to privacy, but it certainly is very cool. And it does work for me, in Firefox, on a Mac. It doesn't, however, work in Safari.
I can't help but wonder why stores in the US can't be more organized and responsible like they are in Japan. I really feel like people in the US lack any sort of pride in what they do, and it's especially bad in the retail space.
The Wii launch was more civilized than the PS3 only because there were more units to be had; otherwise we would almost certainly have seen the same sort of nonsense.
I can't say I'm sorry to see these magazines go. These rags are nothing but cover-to-cover advertisements. They consist mostly of previews, some feature article with no substance whatsoever and excessively positive reviews. Either that or it's some guy trying to wax philosophical about something pointless.
It's either that or the writers gloat about how they're in the industry and get their hands on everything before the average consumer does. They barely put any effort into print quality so that I can clearly see what they're trying to present in screenshots.
It isn't like the good old days with the nice crisp screenshots and detailed game information. The best thing was the pages and pages of detailed game maps. Who the hell puts effort into anything like that anymore?
It's not like the internet has helped. It's more of the same and in some ways, worse.
Is it my imagination or is this sort of packaging used primarily in the US? I can't really recall seeing this sort of packaging anywhere outside of the US, and when I've seen plastic shells they've been quite easy to open. I've cut myself more than once trying to tear at that stuff. There are organizations that freak out over harmless little points on toys but appear unconcerned about the packaging.
I can only imagine that the main reason for this packaging to to deter shoplifters because it seems to be consistently used for small items. It's kind of pathetic and depresses me a bit that shoplifting is such an issue in the US that retailers resort to such cumbersome, unattractive, wasteful packaging.
It's not like this is any surprise. The more integrated and sophisticated our devices are the easier it becomes to track and observe everything we do. It's not like there's some kind of ulterior motive to all this. It's just the consequence of all this connectivity.
If you're that paranoid and don't want to risk being tracked it's simple. Don't buy electronic devices, particularly those that transmit any kind of signal. Even then there are ways to observe people, but at least it's significantly more difficult.
The problem becomes when people are forced to carry devices that report some organization, be it the government or some corporation. We aren't there yet, but I wont be surprised if when it comes people either don't notice it happening or they openly embrace it.
If things continue to go badly for Sony I think it's entirely possible the PS3 will be the last console they produce. Maybe they'd then focus strictly on games, perhaps putting the emphasis on PC gaming. Maybe... Just speculating.
I'm getting tired of people complaining about "special" pieces. Whine, whine, whine. No one is forcing you to use them. Just because your building from 1979 was a piece of multi-colored garbage doesn't mean that's how it should be today.
The problem isn't simply the use of special pieces. Some of those are welcome and allow for creations that haven't been possible in the past. The problem is when they use these custom pieces instead of actually building out the section with smaller components. I can only assume this is done to cut corners. And the problem is when you end up with an overly polished looking set that barely looks like it was made from legos and you can't really do anything else with the overly custom parts.
This is interesting timing considering I bought my first lego set in years just a couple of weeks ago.
I have to say building blocks, and legos in particular, are some of the best toys out there. These toys require decent visual-spacial abilities to assemble and very basic understanding of structures and engineering concepts, at least if you don't want something to collapse on your. And probably more importantly they inspire the imagination. There's not much out there that is quite this good, not even most so-called learning toys. Even computers I don't think necessarily provide as much value, at least not when kids do nothing but chat, visit mySpace and play games.
I do have to add that I don't quite like what I've seen from Lego in recent years with all the overly custom parts. I don't really like the who Bionicle line either, but I do understand Lego's need to stay relevant. And they seem to have addressed some of the issues with the custom pieces more recently.
Money is more important than quality.
on
Why Do Gadgets Break?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I think build quality has declined with the ever increasing desire to keep costs down. I see several problems. First, companies seem to be so eager to do business in China that they're willing to tolerate anything. When it's a company's primary goal to cut costs, why would they want to spend any more money than necessary to ensure a higher standard of quality? The consumer is clearly content with the current standard of quality at low prices so why bother with anything more? So they dump manufacturing in Chinese hands and let them deal with everything. In the end, all many companies are doing is slapping their own logo on the product.
Which leads me to the second problem. Too many American companies seem to have given up on producing quality products and instead have focused on being cheap. This means that they are no only outsourcing manufacturing, but design as well. So instead of having products that are thoughtfully designed and aestetically pleasing we're getting an overwrought messes that aren't particularly easy to use. How many American companies are left that are actually involved in every step of the design and manufacturing process for consumer products. One of the few is Apple and they do an amazing job. But look at Dell, or HP who are essentially sticking their logo on someone else's product.
These companies are going with Chinese suppliers because they adhere to the same principles of cheap manufacturing. The end result, of course, is something that doesn't look very good and isn't particularly reliable. The Chinese don't yet have the product design experience that the Americans should have, and the Japanese and many Europeans definitely do have.
The problem ultimately is that American companies seem to have gotten obsessed with making money first and foremos. Pride in quality products has taken a back seat. There are American companies out there that used to produce respected products that now only offer crap products. They want to do things that require a minimum of effort but produce a maximum of income, hence the apparently popularity of web-based businesses. The Koreans, by contrast, have done quite well because they have a lot of nationalistic pride. They want to outdo the Japanese in every way they can. The Chinese are also quite ambitious so although they're still well behind most of the world they're making a lot of headway.
The Taiwanese also produce excellent products, but there in a similar situation as the US. They lack a lot of the pride other asians have and they continue to try to stick to the easy way of doing things. The problem is that the Chinese can do what they do more cheaply. So their chance for success is to move upmarket much in the way Japan did in the 70s and the Koreans more recently, pushing their own brands and improving quality.
That's an important point... It's why the Japanese and some Europeans to a lesser extent thrive. They're not competing for the bottom of the barrel. They're producing higher quality products which offer both technological innovation and design sophistication. They care about making quality products. To many American companies seem to be stuck producing the same old crap and constantly reminiscing on the supposed glory days of the 50s and 60s.
Here's a example I face on occassion. I walk into a Staples looking for office supplies. Because I'm in design I care about having a space that actually looks appealing. But all I see at office supply stores in the US is garbage. Complete and utter garbage. Completely uninspired and bereft of any design sensibility. It's all industrial-looking transparent crap. Why? Couldn't they hire some damn designers and an engineer or two to put a little effort into something that feels durable and looks good? Contrast that with when I was living in Taiwan and I could walk into any of a number of Taiwanese or Japanese supply stores and find some neat looking stuff that actually worked well. Some of these products even had ingenious little features.
I find it funny that someone who disagrees with what seems to be the majority of people here is automatically considered a troll... So much for open debate.
The article says that this could 'prevent Microsoft from selling Microsoft Office in South Korea'... that's how you stop a monopoly: block it from selling a monopoly product.
Monopoly? You can't be serious. Off the top of my head I can think of at least two competitors to Microsoft office: Lotus Smartsuite and OpenOffice. One is a commercial direct competitor to Office and the other a free, open-source alternative which I myself use. One of the companies where I used to work used Lotus Smartsuite exclusively and abandoned it for Office because they had such a miserable experience with it. I myself used it years ago. It was even more complicated, at the time, than Office. So is it Microsoft's fault that Lotus couldn't produce a sufficiently competitive product?
The last time I checked no version of Windows prevents me from installing any competitor's software nor does Office come installed with Windows.
Just because they have the majority of the market share and because you personally don't like the company doesn't make Microsoft a monopoly.
This situation in Korea to me stinks of the government hindering the competitiveness of a foreign market-leader in order to give domestic companies an unfair advantage.
I read that interview and honestly, I thought those analysts made some compelling points. Just because a certain segment has a particular passion for an eccentric game doesn't mean that such games are the most profitable out there. And there's always that one odd game that happens to be a hit, but this isn't something that can be predicted.
It sounds nice to have a developer constantly put out unusual games, but they do have bills to pay. They can't count on every one of those games being a success, regardless of how many people claim they want innovative games. Blizzard has become a success not through innovative gameplay, but by taking some established genre and refining it so that the most entertaining aspects of the genre are enhanced.
Inevitably the Wii will be called upon as a mark of innovative gaming. But I don't think Nintendo is nearly as innovative as people like to claim. It's essentially a different intepretation of existing input devices and more importantly, the games themselves thus far certainly haven't broken the mold. And when it comes down to it, I can't help but wonder if the Wii would have gotten anywhere near this kind of attention if it hadn't been Nintendo developing it.
The Xavix, http://www.xavix.com/ has been around for a few years now and over the past year, with all the discussion of the Wii, I have yet to see a single person mention the system. The system works quite well, and doesn't require the calibration the Wii does.
When it comes down to it, Nintendo is a safe bet, much like EA. Because they're established and in the greater scheme of things they're taking a relatively safe path to success. If anything, Sony has taken the most risk, but then they probably have deeper pockets that help absorb some of this risk. Although, if it doesn't pay off it will be a massive hit for the company.
This is not to say I believe what analysts claim, because they often seem to be wrong. Too many of these analysts really don't seem to have much knowledge of the industry they're talking about. But then, that's why it's recommended that if you invest you do so in an industry you're intimately familiar with and that you keep yourself informed.
And ultimately, it's too early to tell how these new consoles will turn out... In a year we'll what the market looks like.
Most PC case designs look atrocious. Current PC design apparently is dictated by how many LEDs, windows and vents can be forced onto a case.
I miss the days of clean, beige cases simply because most of what's available is over-designed and gaudy. There are the rare exceptions, and companies like Dell, Sony and others are designing some decent looking machines. The problem is that companies like Dell aren't involved in the entire manufacturing process. They're normally designing an existing shell, so they're always going to be constrained in how creative they can get. It doesn't help that they're normally trying cut corners to reduce costs.
That's the huge advantage Apple has. They're involved in the design and engineering process at every step. So they can get creative not only with design, but the use of materials and construction. It's also why the software integrates so well with the system. That's not really possible in the PC world, unless Microsoft began designing and manufacturing PCs. Although, somehow I doubt most people here would welcome that.
I think in general many electronic devices have gotten uglier. Where devices used to have nice clean lines and designed in more thoughtful colors too many products today are bloated, overly organic, covered in contrasting textures and almost always come in frosted silver or black. It's like manufacturing has gotten easier, allowing for more unusual shapes and designers have gotten carried away. Another part of the problem is that because of cost cutting measures companies are putting less effort into design, having the Chinese manufacturers handle design. It's either that, or they're just trying to rip off Apple's design. Although, as nice as current Apple designs are, the previous generations, starting with the first iMacs, were horrendous. They look even worse today, and they unfortunately spawned an entire generation of ugly electronics.
I don't know what it is about the American electronics market, actually, because in Asia, well, Taiwan, Korea, in Japan there are plenty of cool-looking products to be hand. Phones out there are light years beyond anything available in the US, not only in terms of technology, but design. And this applies to all electronics, PCs included.
A mark of good design is how it ages. If something was well-designed it should look good 10, 20 or 50 years later. Its style might look out-of-date, but it should still be appreciated for it's good design. The vast majority of current PC cases don't look good today, let alone how they will look 5 years ago.
The wet dream of these companies is to be able to set up the same sort of pricing system mobile phone carriers now enjoy. Charge for different types of usage. Charge a given fee for basic browsing and email. Want to download movies? Pay extra. Want to play online games? Pay even more. Go over your allotted bandwidth? You're going to be charged 50 cents for every Mb over your limit.
Companies are desperately seeking new ways to nickle and dime customers to the most ridiculous degree. So many companies today are so ravenous for money that they're actually hindering progress.
I'm all for the free market, but this isn't free market in action. This is companies trying to get legislation enacted which give some companies and unfair competitive advantage. Citizens are too uninformed and in this case would lack insufficient power to be able to effectively fight this.
I think it's far more important to design something that's aesthetically pleasing, intuitive and simple. There is really no practical reason to allow the end user to customize something to the nth degree. Applications with customizable interfaces inevitably are cluttered and difficult to navigate. And those that allow for changing skins are even worse. If it wasn't created by the original developer it almost always looks unfinished and amateurish.
I don't think many people have a grasp of what constitutes good interface design. They get too wrapped up in overloading the application with features and don't really consider how someone will use that applications. Customizable interfaces to me are a convenient way of dodging the issue. They're basically dumping the interface in the end user's lap and having them deal with it.
I think Apple has the right approach. Compare iTunes to Windows Media Player or Winamp.
iTunes is simple, basically all you can do with it is play music, rip music off CDs, burn CDs and buy music online. That's pretty much it and when it comes down to it that's pretty much all most will ever need. A few minor things can be customized here and there. Because the core of the application is so simple the interface is straightforward and easy to use.
Look at Windows Media Player; it's a bloated, convoluted mess. Options are scattered all over the place, I have to hunt to find controls for basic functions. The skins are inconsistent in layout and nearly all are terrible. It gives me more functionality than iTunes, but what's the point if the experience is so bad? Winamp isn't much better. In general it's better designed, but it goes too far, in my opinion with all the customization.
A good interface shouldn't require much customization.
People like to go on about the US turning into some sort of police state despite the fact that there haven't really been open moves in that direction. What's the worst Americans have seen? More thorough searches at airports? There are too many who vehemently and vocally oppose that sort of thing for it to gain real traction. Interestingly, it seems to be Europe where we're seeing burgeoning police states. Case in point: the United Kingdom.
I think part of the problem is that the socialist governments of Europe tend to think it's their responsibility to watch over the citizens. Individual freedoms are irrelevant when it's for the greater good. I've seen public safety materials which essentially depict the citizens as children who the parent, government, needs to watch over.
If the US starts heading in that same direction it's because the citizens demand it. They want to be absolved of personal responsibility and instead demand the government watch over them. Either that, or they'll be too obsessed with self-indulgence to bother with being responsible for anything. I'm sure there are many in government who look forward to this. The US is already almost at that point, but I think it's harder to stop something when it's the government forcing it on the people.
I find it funny that in an era of supposed equality of the sexes that women are being more objectified than ever. Scandalous, stupid women are glorified.
These people come up with a lame list of "geek" women and can't put the effort into filling it with women who have actually contributed something to society. Instead they deem a cartoon character and a dirty tramp, who may as well be a cartoon, significant.
We're supposed to respect women, and rightly so, but all this crap seems to be encouraging people to do the opposite.
Don't people start experiencing LSD-like hallucinations after going for several days without sleep? Drugs may be able to keep a person awake but I don't see how they be a substitute for REM sleep.
While Ogre3D looks fairly good it's very possible it doesn't have the power and flexibility of the Unreal Engine. And more importantly, the licensing of that engine is certainly going to include extensive support. Imagine some NASA developer being forced to browse Ogre3D forums and being called a noob for asking questions.
NASA wants the engine to enabler, not to become an obstacle they themselves have to fix every time they encounter a shortcoming. This is not to put down engines like Ogre3D at all. But if they have the money to spend, why not spend it on a system that is robust and is well-supported.
Slashdot Mirror
I have to agree. It doesn't help that the Wii identity is particular weak so that it fades in the background in the midst of all the chaos and color in stores. I think wherever designed the identity, Nintendo includes, were going for the Apple look. However, they failed to realize that the Wii is competing in a different space than Apple and as such needs to stand out a bit more. I'm not saying they should do anything X-TREME, but at least introduce a bit of color. Maybe the Wii mark a nice vibrant color instead of the faded grey it is now.
Not that my own observations count for much but I've actually noticed a number of people inquiring about or purchasing the Xbox360 in various stores. A few stores have had very prominent displays for the Xbox with the Wii and PS3 off to the side somewhere. Of course it doesn't help that neither of those consoles is currently available.
I did see one woman asking about the Wii and she didn't seem to be pleased at all over the prospect of having to wait in line to get one and this was for a December 6th shipment. She was even willing to pay extra to secure a unit. I think she was determined to get one not because it was the Wii but because she wasn't looking forward to the prospect of having whining kids at Christmas. If it were me I'd just get them socks and use this as a life lesson, "we dont always get what we want".
Anyway, I suspect anyone who might have wanted a PS3 will end up getting the Xbox360. And everyone else will likely get a Wii.
I see this as a prelude to EA stating they're going to raise prices on their games to cover the "crazy" cost of development.
Actually I think TV these days in terms of quality is probably on the whole better than it's ever been before. Yes, reality shows suck, but when you take away those there are still a lot of really first-rate things on the air.
I might agree that production values are better than they've ever been before. But that doesn't change the fact that practically everything on television is garbage. And if that weren't bad enough we have to wade through all that relentless advertising.
About the only channel I have the patience to watch for any period of time is The History Channel. The Discovery Channel is putting too much emphasis on entertainment over education. Everything has to be extreme.
Which leads me to this Pro Gaming thing. I don't have high hopes for it at all. I except it to be exceedingly obnoxious in a WWE or MTV Music Awards sort of way. I also predict it will be nothing but incessant advertising for hardware and software companies.
I'm sure that's the primary drive behind Pro Gaming. The organizers have noticed all the money being made in both the gaming and sports industries. It's only logical that someone would try to marry the two. Rest assured this wasn't done in some attempt to legitimize gaming. If anything, this runs the risk of alienating the average non-gamer with all the extremeness.
Well, that's my cynical observation for the day...
Why does M$ think they can mess with everything? Or do they just want are money?
What? You mean unlike every other major corporation on Earth?
Companies want to do whatever they like unimpeded and what they like to do is earn as much of our money as possible and control as much of their respective markets as they can. But to disparage Microsoft like this is somehow unique to them is a bit foolish. Right now Microsoft draws all the ire. Someday it will be someone like Google or Apple.
I'm not necessarily defending Microsoft. I'm just trying to point out what I feel are childish perceptions some people have of companies. How people can go to absurd lengths to put one company on a pedestal, Apple is one of the first examples to come to mind, and then go to the most absurd lengths to bash a company Microsoft. Look at Sony. Imagine what people would think about Apple if they had 80% or 90% marketshare. Would Apple also be sued by various nations for including Quicktime, Mail and Safari with OS X? And lets see how people feel about Google in 10 years.
Why in the hell does the tax system need to be complicated further? People are already taxed for all income. If a player sells a character for $500, they're supposed to report that as income tax. So what else is there to tax? If a tax in placed on these transactions wont these people essentially be taxed twice?
It looks to me like the government just can't help but getting its grubby hands on yet another source of revenue. How about they learn how to properly spend the money they've already got? I think there should be a moratorium put on all tax increases until the government can get itself spending in order. The amount of waste rampant in government is shocking, and I'm not referring to the more sensational stories like $50 hammers or pork projects.
I don't quite see where this is an issue as related to privacy, but it certainly is very cool. And it does work for me, in Firefox, on a Mac. It doesn't, however, work in Safari.
I can't help but wonder why stores in the US can't be more organized and responsible like they are in Japan. I really feel like people in the US lack any sort of pride in what they do, and it's especially bad in the retail space.
The Wii launch was more civilized than the PS3 only because there were more units to be had; otherwise we would almost certainly have seen the same sort of nonsense.
I can't say I'm sorry to see these magazines go. These rags are nothing but cover-to-cover advertisements. They consist mostly of previews, some feature article with no substance whatsoever and excessively positive reviews. Either that or it's some guy trying to wax philosophical about something pointless.
It's either that or the writers gloat about how they're in the industry and get their hands on everything before the average consumer does. They barely put any effort into print quality so that I can clearly see what they're trying to present in screenshots.
It isn't like the good old days with the nice crisp screenshots and detailed game information. The best thing was the pages and pages of detailed game maps. Who the hell puts effort into anything like that anymore?
It's not like the internet has helped. It's more of the same and in some ways, worse.
Is it my imagination or is this sort of packaging used primarily in the US? I can't really recall seeing this sort of packaging anywhere outside of the US, and when I've seen plastic shells they've been quite easy to open. I've cut myself more than once trying to tear at that stuff. There are organizations that freak out over harmless little points on toys but appear unconcerned about the packaging.
I can only imagine that the main reason for this packaging to to deter shoplifters because it seems to be consistently used for small items. It's kind of pathetic and depresses me a bit that shoplifting is such an issue in the US that retailers resort to such cumbersome, unattractive, wasteful packaging.
It's not like this is any surprise. The more integrated and sophisticated our devices are the easier it becomes to track and observe everything we do. It's not like there's some kind of ulterior motive to all this. It's just the consequence of all this connectivity.
If you're that paranoid and don't want to risk being tracked it's simple. Don't buy electronic devices, particularly those that transmit any kind of signal. Even then there are ways to observe people, but at least it's significantly more difficult.
The problem becomes when people are forced to carry devices that report some organization, be it the government or some corporation. We aren't there yet, but I wont be surprised if when it comes people either don't notice it happening or they openly embrace it.
If things continue to go badly for Sony I think it's entirely possible the PS3 will be the last console they produce. Maybe they'd then focus strictly on games, perhaps putting the emphasis on PC gaming. Maybe... Just speculating.
I'm getting tired of people complaining about "special" pieces. Whine, whine, whine. No one is forcing you to use them. Just because your building from 1979 was a piece of multi-colored garbage doesn't mean that's how it should be today.
The problem isn't simply the use of special pieces. Some of those are welcome and allow for creations that haven't been possible in the past. The problem is when they use these custom pieces instead of actually building out the section with smaller components. I can only assume this is done to cut corners. And the problem is when you end up with an overly polished looking set that barely looks like it was made from legos and you can't really do anything else with the overly custom parts.
This is interesting timing considering I bought my first lego set in years just a couple of weeks ago.
I have to say building blocks, and legos in particular, are some of the best toys out there. These toys require decent visual-spacial abilities to assemble and very basic understanding of structures and engineering concepts, at least if you don't want something to collapse on your. And probably more importantly they inspire the imagination. There's not much out there that is quite this good, not even most so-called learning toys. Even computers I don't think necessarily provide as much value, at least not when kids do nothing but chat, visit mySpace and play games.
I do have to add that I don't quite like what I've seen from Lego in recent years with all the overly custom parts. I don't really like the who Bionicle line either, but I do understand Lego's need to stay relevant. And they seem to have addressed some of the issues with the custom pieces more recently.
I think build quality has declined with the ever increasing desire to keep costs down. I see several problems. First, companies seem to be so eager to do business in China that they're willing to tolerate anything. When it's a company's primary goal to cut costs, why would they want to spend any more money than necessary to ensure a higher standard of quality? The consumer is clearly content with the current standard of quality at low prices so why bother with anything more? So they dump manufacturing in Chinese hands and let them deal with everything. In the end, all many companies are doing is slapping their own logo on the product.
Which leads me to the second problem. Too many American companies seem to have given up on producing quality products and instead have focused on being cheap. This means that they are no only outsourcing manufacturing, but design as well. So instead of having products that are thoughtfully designed and aestetically pleasing we're getting an overwrought messes that aren't particularly easy to use. How many American companies are left that are actually involved in every step of the design and manufacturing process for consumer products. One of the few is Apple and they do an amazing job. But look at Dell, or HP who are essentially sticking their logo on someone else's product.
These companies are going with Chinese suppliers because they adhere to the same principles of cheap manufacturing. The end result, of course, is something that doesn't look very good and isn't particularly reliable. The Chinese don't yet have the product design experience that the Americans should have, and the Japanese and many Europeans definitely do have.
The problem ultimately is that American companies seem to have gotten obsessed with making money first and foremos. Pride in quality products has taken a back seat. There are American companies out there that used to produce respected products that now only offer crap products. They want to do things that require a minimum of effort but produce a maximum of income, hence the apparently popularity of web-based businesses. The Koreans, by contrast, have done quite well because they have a lot of nationalistic pride. They want to outdo the Japanese in every way they can. The Chinese are also quite ambitious so although they're still well behind most of the world they're making a lot of headway.
The Taiwanese also produce excellent products, but there in a similar situation as the US. They lack a lot of the pride other asians have and they continue to try to stick to the easy way of doing things. The problem is that the Chinese can do what they do more cheaply. So their chance for success is to move upmarket much in the way Japan did in the 70s and the Koreans more recently, pushing their own brands and improving quality.
That's an important point... It's why the Japanese and some Europeans to a lesser extent thrive. They're not competing for the bottom of the barrel. They're producing higher quality products which offer both technological innovation and design sophistication. They care about making quality products. To many American companies seem to be stuck producing the same old crap and constantly reminiscing on the supposed glory days of the 50s and 60s.
Here's a example I face on occassion. I walk into a Staples looking for office supplies. Because I'm in design I care about having a space that actually looks appealing. But all I see at office supply stores in the US is garbage. Complete and utter garbage. Completely uninspired and bereft of any design sensibility. It's all industrial-looking transparent crap. Why? Couldn't they hire some damn designers and an engineer or two to put a little effort into something that feels durable and looks good? Contrast that with when I was living in Taiwan and I could walk into any of a number of Taiwanese or Japanese supply stores and find some neat looking stuff that actually worked well. Some of these products even had ingenious little features.
I guarantee you, however, t
I find it funny that someone who disagrees with what seems to be the majority of people here is automatically considered a troll... So much for open debate.
The article says that this could 'prevent Microsoft from selling Microsoft Office in South Korea'... that's how you stop a monopoly: block it from selling a monopoly product.
Monopoly? You can't be serious. Off the top of my head I can think of at least two competitors to Microsoft office: Lotus Smartsuite and OpenOffice. One is a commercial direct competitor to Office and the other a free, open-source alternative which I myself use. One of the companies where I used to work used Lotus Smartsuite exclusively and abandoned it for Office because they had such a miserable experience with it. I myself used it years ago. It was even more complicated, at the time, than Office. So is it Microsoft's fault that Lotus couldn't produce a sufficiently competitive product?
The last time I checked no version of Windows prevents me from installing any competitor's software nor does Office come installed with Windows.
Just because they have the majority of the market share and because you personally don't like the company doesn't make Microsoft a monopoly.
This situation in Korea to me stinks of the government hindering the competitiveness of a foreign market-leader in order to give domestic companies an unfair advantage.
I read that interview and honestly, I thought those analysts made some compelling points. Just because a certain segment has a particular passion for an eccentric game doesn't mean that such games are the most profitable out there. And there's always that one odd game that happens to be a hit, but this isn't something that can be predicted.
It sounds nice to have a developer constantly put out unusual games, but they do have bills to pay. They can't count on every one of those games being a success, regardless of how many people claim they want innovative games. Blizzard has become a success not through innovative gameplay, but by taking some established genre and refining it so that the most entertaining aspects of the genre are enhanced.
Inevitably the Wii will be called upon as a mark of innovative gaming. But I don't think Nintendo is nearly as innovative as people like to claim. It's essentially a different intepretation of existing input devices and more importantly, the games themselves thus far certainly haven't broken the mold. And when it comes down to it, I can't help but wonder if the Wii would have gotten anywhere near this kind of attention if it hadn't been Nintendo developing it.
The Xavix, http://www.xavix.com/ has been around for a few years now and over the past year, with all the discussion of the Wii, I have yet to see a single person mention the system. The system works quite well, and doesn't require the calibration the Wii does.
When it comes down to it, Nintendo is a safe bet, much like EA. Because they're established and in the greater scheme of things they're taking a relatively safe path to success. If anything, Sony has taken the most risk, but then they probably have deeper pockets that help absorb some of this risk. Although, if it doesn't pay off it will be a massive hit for the company.
This is not to say I believe what analysts claim, because they often seem to be wrong. Too many of these analysts really don't seem to have much knowledge of the industry they're talking about. But then, that's why it's recommended that if you invest you do so in an industry you're intimately familiar with and that you keep yourself informed.
And ultimately, it's too early to tell how these new consoles will turn out... In a year we'll what the market looks like.
Most PC case designs look atrocious. Current PC design apparently is dictated by how many LEDs, windows and vents can be forced onto a case.
I miss the days of clean, beige cases simply because most of what's available is over-designed and gaudy. There are the rare exceptions, and companies like Dell, Sony and others are designing some decent looking machines. The problem is that companies like Dell aren't involved in the entire manufacturing process. They're normally designing an existing shell, so they're always going to be constrained in how creative they can get. It doesn't help that they're normally trying cut corners to reduce costs.
That's the huge advantage Apple has. They're involved in the design and engineering process at every step. So they can get creative not only with design, but the use of materials and construction. It's also why the software integrates so well with the system. That's not really possible in the PC world, unless Microsoft began designing and manufacturing PCs. Although, somehow I doubt most people here would welcome that.
I think in general many electronic devices have gotten uglier. Where devices used to have nice clean lines and designed in more thoughtful colors too many products today are bloated, overly organic, covered in contrasting textures and almost always come in frosted silver or black. It's like manufacturing has gotten easier, allowing for more unusual shapes and designers have gotten carried away. Another part of the problem is that because of cost cutting measures companies are putting less effort into design, having the Chinese manufacturers handle design. It's either that, or they're just trying to rip off Apple's design. Although, as nice as current Apple designs are, the previous generations, starting with the first iMacs, were horrendous. They look even worse today, and they unfortunately spawned an entire generation of ugly electronics.
I don't know what it is about the American electronics market, actually, because in Asia, well, Taiwan, Korea, in Japan there are plenty of cool-looking products to be hand. Phones out there are light years beyond anything available in the US, not only in terms of technology, but design. And this applies to all electronics, PCs included.
A mark of good design is how it ages. If something was well-designed it should look good 10, 20 or 50 years later. Its style might look out-of-date, but it should still be appreciated for it's good design. The vast majority of current PC cases don't look good today, let alone how they will look 5 years ago.
The wet dream of these companies is to be able to set up the same sort of pricing system mobile phone carriers now enjoy. Charge for different types of usage. Charge a given fee for basic browsing and email. Want to download movies? Pay extra. Want to play online games? Pay even more. Go over your allotted bandwidth? You're going to be charged 50 cents for every Mb over your limit.
Companies are desperately seeking new ways to nickle and dime customers to the most ridiculous degree. So many companies today are so ravenous for money that they're actually hindering progress.
I'm all for the free market, but this isn't free market in action. This is companies trying to get legislation enacted which give some companies and unfair competitive advantage. Citizens are too uninformed and in this case would lack insufficient power to be able to effectively fight this.
I think it's far more important to design something that's aesthetically pleasing, intuitive and simple. There is really no practical reason to allow the end user to customize something to the nth degree. Applications with customizable interfaces inevitably are cluttered and difficult to navigate. And those that allow for changing skins are even worse. If it wasn't created by the original developer it almost always looks unfinished and amateurish.
I don't think many people have a grasp of what constitutes good interface design. They get too wrapped up in overloading the application with features and don't really consider how someone will use that applications. Customizable interfaces to me are a convenient way of dodging the issue. They're basically dumping the interface in the end user's lap and having them deal with it.
I think Apple has the right approach. Compare iTunes to Windows Media Player or Winamp.
iTunes is simple, basically all you can do with it is play music, rip music off CDs, burn CDs and buy music online. That's pretty much it and when it comes down to it that's pretty much all most will ever need. A few minor things can be customized here and there. Because the core of the application is so simple the interface is straightforward and easy to use.
Look at Windows Media Player; it's a bloated, convoluted mess. Options are scattered all over the place, I have to hunt to find controls for basic functions. The skins are inconsistent in layout and nearly all are terrible. It gives me more functionality than iTunes, but what's the point if the experience is so bad? Winamp isn't much better. In general it's better designed, but it goes too far, in my opinion with all the customization.
A good interface shouldn't require much customization.
People like to go on about the US turning into some sort of police state despite the fact that there haven't really been open moves in that direction. What's the worst Americans have seen? More thorough searches at airports? There are too many who vehemently and vocally oppose that sort of thing for it to gain real traction. Interestingly, it seems to be Europe where we're seeing burgeoning police states. Case in point: the United Kingdom.
I think part of the problem is that the socialist governments of Europe tend to think it's their responsibility to watch over the citizens. Individual freedoms are irrelevant when it's for the greater good. I've seen public safety materials which essentially depict the citizens as children who the parent, government, needs to watch over.
If the US starts heading in that same direction it's because the citizens demand it. They want to be absolved of personal responsibility and instead demand the government watch over them. Either that, or they'll be too obsessed with self-indulgence to bother with being responsible for anything. I'm sure there are many in government who look forward to this. The US is already almost at that point, but I think it's harder to stop something when it's the government forcing it on the people.
I find it funny that in an era of supposed equality of the sexes that women are being more objectified than ever. Scandalous, stupid women are glorified.
These people come up with a lame list of "geek" women and can't put the effort into filling it with women who have actually contributed something to society. Instead they deem a cartoon character and a dirty tramp, who may as well be a cartoon, significant.
We're supposed to respect women, and rightly so, but all this crap seems to be encouraging people to do the opposite.
Don't people start experiencing LSD-like hallucinations after going for several days without sleep? Drugs may be able to keep a person awake but I don't see how they be a substitute for REM sleep.
While Ogre3D looks fairly good it's very possible it doesn't have the power and flexibility of the Unreal Engine. And more importantly, the licensing of that engine is certainly going to include extensive support. Imagine some NASA developer being forced to browse Ogre3D forums and being called a noob for asking questions.
NASA wants the engine to enabler, not to become an obstacle they themselves have to fix every time they encounter a shortcoming. This is not to put down engines like Ogre3D at all. But if they have the money to spend, why not spend it on a system that is robust and is well-supported.