I do agree input is something that could greatly be improved, but obviously there are lots of popular games that lack gamepad/joystick support, so that's not really a barrier.
I actually think games like Civilization are especially well suited to run in a browser.
And obviously, you're underestimating Angry Birds a lot and overestimating the importance of "serious gaming". Farmville is already probably the most-played game ever and there's no reason why gaming in the browser wouldn't become more popular than it already is.
Either way, I do lots of stuff on my computer outside of the browser. But I do agree with the article: gaming in the browser will definitely be huge in the future.
Just because they've started to release updates lately now that actual competition is starting to emerge, doesn't mean I can't fault them for creating the current mess to begin with. I don't know if you have ever used the Flash plugin on Linux or Mac OS X, but the performance is terrible compared to Windows, not to mention the stability and security problems.
If you watch the video, you'll see they had 4 products in mind right from the start. True, it was only in '99 the iBook actually launched, but the iMac wasn't launched until later in '98 as well.
But as more content will be provided in SVG, the support for it in browsers will also improve. It's a chicken/egg situation, I know, but I see absolutely no reason why Adobe would be the sole provider of fast rendering vector graphics on the web.
Why wouldn't browsers be capable of the same level of performance in rendering vector graphics as Flash? Especially since hardware acceleration is already implemented by most browsers on most platforms and Javascript engines are already highly optimized, creating smoother canvas / SVG animations could well be the next big thing browser developers will aim for.
Since there is competition however in the browser market, much will be done to improve rendering speed of complex and heavy HTML5 applications. This is in sharp contrast with Adobe, who as sole provider of the Flash plugin has no incentive at all to improve things.
iTunes is barely breaking even. It might be a reason for people to buy an iOS device in the first place, but the App Store itself isn't making Apple any money at all.
You are completely right. The product line strategy Apple employs from 1997 until today is directly the result of Steve Jobs returning as CEO. It is one of the main reasons he is valued so highly. Tech companies tend to produce a gazillion totally different models in an attempt to suit every niche one can think of. In 1997, Apple was no exception. But when Steve Jobs took over, he not only fired almost the entire board, but also killed the entire product line and replaced it with 4 single models of computers, all of which are still sold today. The current Apple product line is much more like the product line of car manufactures than other tech companies: a few very different models, each with a clear name and a clear market focus. I really believe this is not only a lot friendlier towards the consumer, but also increases the quality of the products themselves. I don't really understand why Apple still seems to be one of the few (the only?) tech company to employ this strategy.
For those interested, a video of Jobs scrapping every single Apple product and introducing the new product line is on YouTube.
Wow, that was fast
on
Nokia Sells Qt
·
· Score: 5, Funny
I have nothing against using a Dvorak keyboard and the reason I'm not using one right now has more to do with a lack of time and devotion than not believing it's worth using.
When cars were only around for 25 years, the interface changed all the time. The current model (steering wheel, two or three pedals) was first used in the 1916 Cadillac type 53, but it was not until the '40ies or '50ies that all cars were built like this.
And why is constant change better *inherently* than stable interfaces?
I'm not saying it is better, I'm saying it is going to be this way, whether you like it or not. At least for a while. It took the car industry many decades to get to the standardized interface we currently use.
Slashdot Mirror
I do agree input is something that could greatly be improved, but obviously there are lots of popular games that lack gamepad/joystick support, so that's not really a barrier.
What's abysmal about the graphics in the game you link to?
I actually think games like Civilization are especially well suited to run in a browser.
And obviously, you're underestimating Angry Birds a lot and overestimating the importance of "serious gaming". Farmville is already probably the most-played game ever and there's no reason why gaming in the browser wouldn't become more popular than it already is.
Isn't that exactly what ChromeOS is all about?
Either way, I do lots of stuff on my computer outside of the browser. But I do agree with the article: gaming in the browser will definitely be huge in the future.
Headaches for developers just create better professionals. Headaches for users are inexcusable.
Just because they've started to release updates lately now that actual competition is starting to emerge, doesn't mean I can't fault them for creating the current mess to begin with. I don't know if you have ever used the Flash plugin on Linux or Mac OS X, but the performance is terrible compared to Windows, not to mention the stability and security problems.
If you watch the video, you'll see they had 4 products in mind right from the start. True, it was only in '99 the iBook actually launched, but the iMac wasn't launched until later in '98 as well.
But as more content will be provided in SVG, the support for it in browsers will also improve. It's a chicken/egg situation, I know, but I see absolutely no reason why Adobe would be the sole provider of fast rendering vector graphics on the web.
The catch is you'll still have to use Flash to create the animations to begin with.
There's nothing Actionscript can do which Javascript can't.
Why wouldn't browsers be capable of the same level of performance in rendering vector graphics as Flash? Especially since hardware acceleration is already implemented by most browsers on most platforms and Javascript engines are already highly optimized, creating smoother canvas / SVG animations could well be the next big thing browser developers will aim for.
Since there is competition however in the browser market, much will be done to improve rendering speed of complex and heavy HTML5 applications. This is in sharp contrast with Adobe, who as sole provider of the Flash plugin has no incentive at all to improve things.
iTunes is barely breaking even. It might be a reason for people to buy an iOS device in the first place, but the App Store itself isn't making Apple any money at all.
You are completely right. The product line strategy Apple employs from 1997 until today is directly the result of Steve Jobs returning as CEO. It is one of the main reasons he is valued so highly. Tech companies tend to produce a gazillion totally different models in an attempt to suit every niche one can think of. In 1997, Apple was no exception. But when Steve Jobs took over, he not only fired almost the entire board, but also killed the entire product line and replaced it with 4 single models of computers, all of which are still sold today. The current Apple product line is much more like the product line of car manufactures than other tech companies: a few very different models, each with a clear name and a clear market focus. I really believe this is not only a lot friendlier towards the consumer, but also increases the quality of the products themselves. I don't really understand why Apple still seems to be one of the few (the only?) tech company to employ this strategy.
For those interested, a video of Jobs scrapping every single Apple product and introducing the new product line is on YouTube.
So I guess when Nokia stated on their official blog that Qt would remain to play an important role in Nokia they actually forgot to add "...for about three weeks".
Thinking different is becoming less and less different I guess...
I have nothing against using a Dvorak keyboard and the reason I'm not using one right now has more to do with a lack of time and devotion than not believing it's worth using.
and now just like MS Windows you can resize the windows from any side of the border
Seriously? Is that new in Lion or something? Because on Snow Leopard it's still right bottom corner only.
Is that really so? I was looking at some screenshots from System 1 and couldn't find minimze/maximze buttons.
When cars were only around for 25 years, the interface changed all the time. The current model (steering wheel, two or three pedals) was first used in the 1916 Cadillac type 53, but it was not until the '40ies or '50ies that all cars were built like this.
And why is constant change better *inherently* than stable interfaces?
I'm not saying it is better, I'm saying it is going to be this way, whether you like it or not. At least for a while. It took the car industry many decades to get to the standardized interface we currently use.
Indeed you deserve what you're signing up for: a familiar and usable UI
Because obviously, only that what is familiar is worth using.
i have to open many windows with different apps
So... what's wrong with your tab button?
Well, I guess there are 2 types of GUI's: ones everyone complain about and ones nobody uses.
25 years of minimize/maximize buttons in the title bar of a window? What GUI from 1986 are you talking about?