If a true roleplay environment (like some of the many MUDs out there that focus on it), you simply need to draw a thick line between IC channels and OOC channels, and make it clear to users which is which.
For instance, if you have a channel that broadcasts to anybody in the game, or the area, it better be labeled OOC. Either that, or every character in the game has a 500-decibel voice and perfect hearing. The rules in WOW RP servers actually *oppose this directly* by saying that the "area" channels are IC channels. Tell is the same way, unless you want a game where each character can telepathically communicate with every other.
What really bothers me is that WOW could be made into an *actual* RP environment very easily with only a few changes, but Blizzard will never bother because: 1) It takes more admins to run the world. (Heck, I'm on an RP server in WOW, and I see names like "Cellphoneia" at *level 50!* even though it's a blatantly wrong name for an RP server.) 2) It doesn't appeal to the vast majority of players.
I do programming at Eternal Struggle MUD http://esmud.com/... stop by if you want to see how an actual RP environment works.
Considering you can't even spell roleplay, I'm guessing you're not really as into it as your post would suggest. But no MMORPG has roleplay, and none ever will... I can guarantee it. If you want roleplay, you have to find a good MUD to provide it for you. I believe http://www.rpimuds.com/ has a decent list of RP-enforced and RP-focused MUDs to choose from.
You're taking too much offense, and I don't even know what you're taking offense at. The point he was trying to make is that the Twin Towers *were* designed to take an impact from an airplane, and at the time it was designed, the 707 was the largest airliner in service. He's not saying it was a "bug" that the towers collapsed when struck by much larger airliners... the designers of the building couldn't have possibly have anticipated that! And additionally, they were being pro-active by designing against an airplane strike. From what I understand, most buildings don't take that into consideration at all.
Some band in the mid-to-late-90s had a music video that was basically a nostalgic view of the sitcom Happy Days. I found it interesting, because it was basically 90s nostalgia towards a 70s show that was nostalgia towards the 50s. In short: It's been done.
I'm guessing a Xbox development kit costs at least three grand. It's not like giving away copies of VB Express, there's a lot of hardware involved at all. In short: Don't hold your breath.
That said, any well-behaved DirectX game can be ported to Xbox or Xbox Live Arcade with minimal effort. There's an article on that somewhere from the developers of Marble Blast for 360...
Fortunately, the demo on the Xbox Magazine disk had the same bug, so I avoided buying it altogether.:) Shame, though, because it looked like a really fun game.
That said, the Xbox version has a bug where not only does it not use 480p resolution, but it'll actually send 480i to the TV even if your Xbox is set not to use 480i for anything. For the majority of TVs, this isn't an issue; they can accept 480i no problem through the same input they accept 480p. For my Zenith, however, it makes the game unplayable... my Zenith *only* accepts HDTV resolutions in the HDTV input and 480i appears as gibberish.
DOS uses \ for backwards-compatibility with older CPM programs that used / to specify parameters. They aren't compatible with Unix path separators for the same reason (say) Apple Classic OS used : as a separator: It was arbitrary, and the concept of cross-compatibility didn't exist until much later. (When did Apple decide they should open DOS/Windows files? 1990?)
The reason Unix stuff is "standard" now is because the Internet happened to be implemented with Unix servers. If the Internet had happened to be implemented with Macintosh servers, we'd all be typing in http/::slashdot.org:happy. It's all arbitrary, and compatibility didn't matter.
Excuse my Java ignorance, but I thought that Swing was made by Sun and Apple's involvement was only creating the Virtual Machine that Swing and the Java apps ran in?
If Swing is, indeed, developed by Apple, and if Swing has hooks into Java apps for them to take advantage of features like drag&drop, the spellchecker, etc, then yeah, I agree that it's Apple's fault.
However, whether it's Apple's fault or Sun's fault, the fact is that Java GUI apps look and run like ass on OS X and I avoid them whenever possible because of that.
Yeah, but putting a password on my Microsoft Word file is *also* DRM, and I use that every single day. I think the real problem is that it's not DRM that's bad, but certain uses of it... and if this movement is going to succeed, it'll need to define the terms better. After all, you're not going to convince me that the password protection in MS Word is some horrible corporate conspiracy that'll remove my rights... mainly because it's not. Yet, it is DRM all the same.
It's the same problem with the people protesting RFID tags without realizing that it's not the *tags* that are the problem (they're just modernized barcodes) it's the tracking of the tags that's the problem. *warning: Godwin ahead*: The Nazis tracked people just fine using nothing but serial numbers. RFID tags aren't required.
Yes, but we're back to "in my opinion..." Your opinion in usability doesn't matter. (And I'm not insulting you personally, nobody's opinion matters.) Usability is notoriously counter-intuitive, and the only thing that really matters when coming up with a great user interface is *real* studies with *real* users.
Microsoft's done that; check out Jensen Harris' blog on the subject. You haven't. Therefore, when Microsoft says it's better, I'm going to trust that more than "in my opinion..." and so should everybody reading this article.
Try it on OS X, then come back. It's tolerable on Windows, but it's not even remotely close on OS X. Drag&drop doesn't work; the integrated spell-checker doesn't work; the Services menu doesn't work; it's ugly as hell and generally un-Mac-like (i.e. the editFields are wrong, the Preferences aren't in the Application menu, etc.)
You know that Microsoft does usability tests, right? They don't just randomly place things (well, they did in Office for a long time, which is why they're fixing that now), and they don't just rip-off other programs like open source projects to. You can bet your ass that if Microsoft is making a change for usability reasons, they have documented, repeatable, scientific evidence that the new version is better.
What you're griping is basically, "but I don't like to learn new things!," which is the opposite of how most Slashdotters seem to be... for instance, a lot of Slashdotters recommend starting with Gentoo when switching to Linux you can see how Linux works, or learning the CLI even if you're already experienced at a GUI interface.
Of course, with Microsoft involved, you know that 80% of these comments are saying it'll be a crappy product without even having tried it.
Removing limitations in software is always good, regardless of how the anti-Microsoft crowd likes to spin it. If this was Firefox increasing the maximum number of bookmarks from 255 to 65k, this same community would be cheering it on.
Wow, you're the most negative person in computing. Not a single, "maybe once we use it, we'll see it works better than this summary makes it seem..." No, every single feature is crap! Even a feature which indisputably makes the product better (more rows in Excel) is crap because in your little world, nobody should be using more than 65k rows. (BTW, Excel is the classic example of the application that few people use for what it was original designed to be... it's used more for list-making now than anything else.)
Anyway, how about a little bit of balance in your outlook?
Microsoft *does* make that clear, by setting a good example, by documenting it, by creating a logo certification program that requires it.
Microsoft can't force developers to fix their software no matter how much they publish/document/encourage! That's my exact point.
Lotus Notes has tens of millions of installs, and it wouldn't even come remotely close to passing Microsoft's logo certification, and Lotus has done nothing in the last 3 major versions about it. If Microsoft can't get Lotus, with tens of millions of installs, to fix their product, what could they possibly do about the 10,000 other smaller developers with the same problem?
Well, here's a potential solution: Windows could not run software that hasn't been through Microsoft's logo program. Imagine the uproar that would cause!
Look, Microsoft's doing the best they can. Any program that doesn't run correctly is the fault of the programmers who wrote it, period. There's nothing more Microsoft can do. And who suffers? Us poor administrators who are stuck figuring out which permissions each application *really* requires. (Which, of course, is NEVER documented.)
(Similar argument I used in a posting a few stories down)
Yeah, and their apps work just fine without supporting screen-readers, which only a small fraction of their users use. However, it's not acceptable to produce an app that doesn't support screen-readers just as it's not acceptable to produce an app that requires admin permissions.
It's all lack of training of the programmers, and testers who don't test for the right things. There's nothing Microsoft can do to help; their logo certification program already requires apps to run as non-admin, but most developers don't bother.
How often is she planning to move? If you're switching computers around often enough that this comes up more than once a year, I'd think you'd quickly figure out how to de-authorize each computer individually before you stop using it. Criminy, think before posting here, guys. Come on.
Office doesn't require admin for anything I can figure out except installing Service Packs. (Which you'd expect, because those have to change program files.) Do you have a source saying that Office doesn't work for non-admins?
The default install doesn't have a screen-reader, either... does that mean it's acceptable for an application developer to release an application that doesn't work with screen-readers? Your disabled users will say "hell no."
I'm sorry, ALL this blame goes on the application developer. Lotus Notes has been shipped for every version of the NT kernel since 4.x (and probably before), and didn't support multi-user correctly until Windows XP. And it *still* doesn't support roaming profiles. Go ahead; figure out a way to blame that one on Microsoft. No, the blame lies squarely on Lotus.
WTF? I hit reply on the post below the grandparent and somehow my reply ended up on the wrong post. Slashdot has issues with Safari. It also sometimes does a "preview" when I click "submit."
Slashdot Mirror
If a true roleplay environment (like some of the many MUDs out there that focus on it), you simply need to draw a thick line between IC channels and OOC channels, and make it clear to users which is which.
... stop by if you want to see how an actual RP environment works.
For instance, if you have a channel that broadcasts to anybody in the game, or the area, it better be labeled OOC. Either that, or every character in the game has a 500-decibel voice and perfect hearing. The rules in WOW RP servers actually *oppose this directly* by saying that the "area" channels are IC channels. Tell is the same way, unless you want a game where each character can telepathically communicate with every other.
What really bothers me is that WOW could be made into an *actual* RP environment very easily with only a few changes, but Blizzard will never bother because:
1) It takes more admins to run the world. (Heck, I'm on an RP server in WOW, and I see names like "Cellphoneia" at *level 50!* even though it's a blatantly wrong name for an RP server.)
2) It doesn't appeal to the vast majority of players.
I do programming at Eternal Struggle MUD http://esmud.com/
Considering you can't even spell roleplay, I'm guessing you're not really as into it as your post would suggest. But no MMORPG has roleplay, and none ever will... I can guarantee it. If you want roleplay, you have to find a good MUD to provide it for you. I believe http://www.rpimuds.com/ has a decent list of RP-enforced and RP-focused MUDs to choose from.
You're taking too much offense, and I don't even know what you're taking offense at. The point he was trying to make is that the Twin Towers *were* designed to take an impact from an airplane, and at the time it was designed, the 707 was the largest airliner in service. He's not saying it was a "bug" that the towers collapsed when struck by much larger airliners... the designers of the building couldn't have possibly have anticipated that! And additionally, they were being pro-active by designing against an airplane strike. From what I understand, most buildings don't take that into consideration at all.
I really don't get what you're offended about.
Flash: Slashdot Games poster a fan of Nintendo! News at 11:00!
Do you have a job? Or a hobby? Or family? Hell, even watching TV would probably have been a better use of your time than this.
Some band in the mid-to-late-90s had a music video that was basically a nostalgic view of the sitcom Happy Days. I found it interesting, because it was basically 90s nostalgia towards a 70s show that was nostalgia towards the 50s. In short: It's been done.
Arms Akimbo = best Freakazoid villain!
I'm guessing a Xbox development kit costs at least three grand. It's not like giving away copies of VB Express, there's a lot of hardware involved at all. In short: Don't hold your breath.
That said, any well-behaved DirectX game can be ported to Xbox or Xbox Live Arcade with minimal effort. There's an article on that somewhere from the developers of Marble Blast for 360...
Fortunately, the demo on the Xbox Magazine disk had the same bug, so I avoided buying it altogether. :) Shame, though, because it looked like a really fun game.
Like the Xbox maybe?
That said, the Xbox version has a bug where not only does it not use 480p resolution, but it'll actually send 480i to the TV even if your Xbox is set not to use 480i for anything. For the majority of TVs, this isn't an issue; they can accept 480i no problem through the same input they accept 480p. For my Zenith, however, it makes the game unplayable... my Zenith *only* accepts HDTV resolutions in the HDTV input and 480i appears as gibberish.
DOS uses \ for backwards-compatibility with older CPM programs that used / to specify parameters. They aren't compatible with Unix path separators for the same reason (say) Apple Classic OS used : as a separator: It was arbitrary, and the concept of cross-compatibility didn't exist until much later. (When did Apple decide they should open DOS/Windows files? 1990?)
The reason Unix stuff is "standard" now is because the Internet happened to be implemented with Unix servers. If the Internet had happened to be implemented with Macintosh servers, we'd all be typing in http/::slashdot.org:happy. It's all arbitrary, and compatibility didn't matter.
Excuse my Java ignorance, but I thought that Swing was made by Sun and Apple's involvement was only creating the Virtual Machine that Swing and the Java apps ran in?
If Swing is, indeed, developed by Apple, and if Swing has hooks into Java apps for them to take advantage of features like drag&drop, the spellchecker, etc, then yeah, I agree that it's Apple's fault.
However, whether it's Apple's fault or Sun's fault, the fact is that Java GUI apps look and run like ass on OS X and I avoid them whenever possible because of that.
Yeah, but putting a password on my Microsoft Word file is *also* DRM, and I use that every single day. I think the real problem is that it's not DRM that's bad, but certain uses of it... and if this movement is going to succeed, it'll need to define the terms better. After all, you're not going to convince me that the password protection in MS Word is some horrible corporate conspiracy that'll remove my rights... mainly because it's not. Yet, it is DRM all the same.
It's the same problem with the people protesting RFID tags without realizing that it's not the *tags* that are the problem (they're just modernized barcodes) it's the tracking of the tags that's the problem. *warning: Godwin ahead*: The Nazis tracked people just fine using nothing but serial numbers. RFID tags aren't required.
Yes, but we're back to "in my opinion..." Your opinion in usability doesn't matter. (And I'm not insulting you personally, nobody's opinion matters.) Usability is notoriously counter-intuitive, and the only thing that really matters when coming up with a great user interface is *real* studies with *real* users.
Microsoft's done that; check out Jensen Harris' blog on the subject. You haven't. Therefore, when Microsoft says it's better, I'm going to trust that more than "in my opinion..." and so should everybody reading this article.
Try it on OS X, then come back. It's tolerable on Windows, but it's not even remotely close on OS X. Drag&drop doesn't work; the integrated spell-checker doesn't work; the Services menu doesn't work; it's ugly as hell and generally un-Mac-like (i.e. the editFields are wrong, the Preferences aren't in the Application menu, etc.)
What collaboration features does OpenOffice offer? Last I checked it, 1.1.2 I think, it was far behind Microsoft Office in change tracking.
You know that Microsoft does usability tests, right? They don't just randomly place things (well, they did in Office for a long time, which is why they're fixing that now), and they don't just rip-off other programs like open source projects to. You can bet your ass that if Microsoft is making a change for usability reasons, they have documented, repeatable, scientific evidence that the new version is better.
What you're griping is basically, "but I don't like to learn new things!," which is the opposite of how most Slashdotters seem to be... for instance, a lot of Slashdotters recommend starting with Gentoo when switching to Linux you can see how Linux works, or learning the CLI even if you're already experienced at a GUI interface.
Of course, with Microsoft involved, you know that 80% of these comments are saying it'll be a crappy product without even having tried it.
Removing limitations in software is always good, regardless of how the anti-Microsoft crowd likes to spin it. If this was Firefox increasing the maximum number of bookmarks from 255 to 65k, this same community would be cheering it on.
Wow, you're the most negative person in computing. Not a single, "maybe once we use it, we'll see it works better than this summary makes it seem..." No, every single feature is crap! Even a feature which indisputably makes the product better (more rows in Excel) is crap because in your little world, nobody should be using more than 65k rows. (BTW, Excel is the classic example of the application that few people use for what it was original designed to be... it's used more for list-making now than anything else.)
Anyway, how about a little bit of balance in your outlook?
Microsoft *does* make that clear, by setting a good example, by documenting it, by creating a logo certification program that requires it.
Microsoft can't force developers to fix their software no matter how much they publish/document/encourage! That's my exact point.
Lotus Notes has tens of millions of installs, and it wouldn't even come remotely close to passing Microsoft's logo certification, and Lotus has done nothing in the last 3 major versions about it. If Microsoft can't get Lotus, with tens of millions of installs, to fix their product, what could they possibly do about the 10,000 other smaller developers with the same problem?
Well, here's a potential solution: Windows could not run software that hasn't been through Microsoft's logo program. Imagine the uproar that would cause!
Look, Microsoft's doing the best they can. Any program that doesn't run correctly is the fault of the programmers who wrote it, period. There's nothing more Microsoft can do. And who suffers? Us poor administrators who are stuck figuring out which permissions each application *really* requires. (Which, of course, is NEVER documented.)
(Similar argument I used in a posting a few stories down)
Yeah, and their apps work just fine without supporting screen-readers, which only a small fraction of their users use. However, it's not acceptable to produce an app that doesn't support screen-readers just as it's not acceptable to produce an app that requires admin permissions.
It's all lack of training of the programmers, and testers who don't test for the right things. There's nothing Microsoft can do to help; their logo certification program already requires apps to run as non-admin, but most developers don't bother.
How often is she planning to move? If you're switching computers around often enough that this comes up more than once a year, I'd think you'd quickly figure out how to de-authorize each computer individually before you stop using it. Criminy, think before posting here, guys. Come on.
Office doesn't require admin for anything I can figure out except installing Service Packs. (Which you'd expect, because those have to change program files.) Do you have a source saying that Office doesn't work for non-admins?
The default install doesn't have a screen-reader, either... does that mean it's acceptable for an application developer to release an application that doesn't work with screen-readers? Your disabled users will say "hell no."
I'm sorry, ALL this blame goes on the application developer. Lotus Notes has been shipped for every version of the NT kernel since 4.x (and probably before), and didn't support multi-user correctly until Windows XP. And it *still* doesn't support roaming profiles. Go ahead; figure out a way to blame that one on Microsoft. No, the blame lies squarely on Lotus.
WTF? I hit reply on the post below the grandparent and somehow my reply ended up on the wrong post. Slashdot has issues with Safari. It also sometimes does a "preview" when I click "submit."