Monty Mole said:Please tell me you didn't just write all that shit yourself.
The front door.
hall_front_door.jpg
Use it.

Monty Mole said:Please tell me you didn't just write all that shit yourself.
The front door.
hall_front_door.jpg
Use it.
Flachmatuch said:That's *exactly* what I called utterly pathetic. MS Research should be a new PARC, a new Bell Labs. Sorry but most of these things look like snake oil to me.
And yeah, they invented a few superficial features, but the concept behind their GUI has changed basically nothing. Seriously, can you list anything in interfaces that's as important as, to stick to an easy goal, what Apple did? Anything even remotely comparable to even the trashcan or menubars (drop down menus)?
They've been "business leader" in GUIs for decades and they're still sticking to the desktop metaphor that the Alto already had?
Well speech/gesture recognition is not the biggest issue behind this. What's missing is exactly the stuff faked by Milo![]()
But...why? What are some of the practical uses for Natal (except for cool looking but pretty tiresome looking navigation interfaces)? I mean, yeah, the technology *is* very cool, but why do people always talk in generalities? It's always about "possibilities" and "a step in the right direction", but, apart from a handful of ideas (commando gestures, grenade throwing, head tracking), I've not seen an actual game idea that really goes beyond Eyetoy stuff. I mean, if it's so awesome, if it opens so many possibilities then why don't people keep coming up with new game ideas?
Monty Mole said:Please tell me you didn't just write all that shit yourself.
The front door.
Use it.
Monty Mole said:Please tell me you didn't just write all that shit yourself.
The front door.
Use it.
JaggedSac said:No, I did not just write them just now.
Rainier said:Didn't get the anger in your post till I noticed it's from here.
You're right, you're going to get rabid fanboys on pretty much every gaming site, but at least here there are enough knowledgeable people to call out bullshit and keep people (somewhat) honest. I've yet to find a better gaming forum on the net.JaggedSac said:I figured I would try out neoGaf to see if some actual gaming discussions might take place, but it appears it suffers from the same communities all gaming sites have.
REMEMBER CITADEL said:The times have changed, there will never be another PARC. As far as your comment about Microsoft's research projects goes, well, that's you, I obviously disagree.
Off the top of my head, task-switching.
Hey, they did try something a little different very early on.![]()
Really, not a single big company (or even the open source community) has tried to completely abandon the ancient desktop metaphor in any meaningful fashion. Why? I think that's a discussion for a whole new thread.
If by "faked" you mean he's not actually thinking, well duh. I don't see how that would be required for a simple user interface, though.
If by "faked" you mean all that talk about men in black - sorry, men with laptops - controlling Milo from the shadows, let's wait until the actual game comes out. Then we'll talk about what it can and cannot do.
So you're talking about games now? Because up to this point we were talking about interfaces in general, but fine.
Again, let's wait until we see the actual games before we start talking about whether they're introducing some fresh ideas or not. If you can't see the potential uses... I really can't help you. Actually, I could, but I'm tired of repeating the same things over and over.
Rainier said:You're right, you're going to get rabid fanboys on pretty much every gaming site, but at least here there are enough knowledgeable people to call out bullshit and keep people (somewhat) honest. I've yet to find a better gaming forum on the net.
Linkified said:Flachmatuch, everytime someone posts something to disprove a point of yours. You keep up this pretense that MS are an evil corporation so why post in a Natal thread?
Really? The only thing you have done is spin the discussion in your direction and completly change the subject when the argument is relevant.Flachmatuch said:Show me a single argument that I ignored, didn't answer or misunderstood before you say anything like this. I mean, I have my preferences and I admit to them, but that doesn't mean at all that I ignore or falsify arguments. As I said before, it's a serious claim, and you shouldn't use it unless you can prove it.
You know, it might actually be the case that MS *is* indeed a large corporation, whose influence is not perfectly good, and may even be a problem in this market. I don't see how it's that obviously stupid to say that having one of the world largest and richest corporations enter a new market with huge financial muscle might distort it and be a bad influence in the long run.
Flachmatuch said:Although tbh even if MS Research did come up with a completely new super innovative GUI model, we might not know about until it's in a product.
Flachmatuch said:Task switching?Do you mean alt-tab? I'm pretty sure "task switching" itself came way before MS hehe
Anyway, isn't that kind of, you know, scraping the barrel?
Cool feature though.
But whatever, I'm ready to admit that based on the "alt tab" combination, MS is as innovative in terms of GUIs as Apple :-D
My problem is that even within that, they haven't innovated one bit. Although tbh even if MS Research did come up with a completely new super innovative GUI model, we might not know about until it's in a product.
It's the first. I really think a good user interface would need a lot of intelligence though, but yeah, this is a different topic.
But you said on the last page that you hate them... and that you could explain why. Surely that in itself is an indication of bias?Flachmatuch said:Point out my concrete bias or the fault in my argument and don't just post general bullshit please. It's not like I couldn't answer back with similar accusations, but what's the point?
lol no anger at all.Rainier said:Didn't get the anger in your post till I noticed it's from here.
Psychotext said:But you said on the last page that you hate them... and that you could explain why. Surely that in itself is an indication of bias?
REMEMBER CITADEL said:Look, the bases of today's prevalent desktop paradigm have been established by Xerox and Apple ages ago. Everything since then, by any company, has been just slight refinement (even though cumulative effects of all those improvements are enormous). Like you said, we're still stuck with the same old desktop metaphor and you can only do so much within that space.
Again, I wouldn't agree that they haven't innovated one bit. They did contribute to modern desktop interfaces either by innovating (the already mentioned alt-tab task-switching or newer ribbon toolbars, for instance) or by popularizing GUI elements pioneered by someone else (context-sensitive menus come to mind). I don't think we'll reach an agreement over this so we better drop it.
It wouldn't hurt, but I don't think it needs the same kind of faked intelligence exhibited by Milo. I mean, it should be intelligent enough in handling, organizing and presenting the data, but it doesn't need to convince us it's anything but a machine (in Milo's case, a human being). It's imperative, however, that we're able to communicate with it rather naturally - it just doesn't need to talk back (although I guess it wouldn't hurt if it did).
I don't think Natal will give us HAL 9000, but it might very well give us Blade Runner's Esper.
It's really more than people are going to find it difficult to believe that you're looking at this stuff objectively when you've clearly indicated your feelings toward the company.Flachmatuch said:It's just an indication of preferences. I thought "bias" when you actually let those preferences influence your thoughts. Should I be pretending I am neutral towards them, even when I'm not? Or should I stop thinking about everything I'm not completely neutral towards?
Flachmatuch said:It's just an indication of preferences. I thought "bias" when you actually let those preferences influence your thoughts. Should I be pretending I am neutral towards them, even when I'm not? Or should I stop thinking about everything I'm not completely neutral towards?
Psychotext said:It's really more than people are going to find it difficult to believe that you're looking at this stuff objectively when you've clearly indicated your feelings toward the company.
Hell, I can't stand many companies and I'm not entirely sure it doesn't affect my reasoning towards them... if not just on a subconscious level.
Flachmatuch said:No matter which way I look at it, I think it's better if I state my preferences that might distort my judgment, and not leave them to guesswork. I think people are mistaken about my reasons though, I have loads of idiotic prejudices, but preferring one mnc to another, identifying with it and wanting it to "win" is not really one of those.
Eh, those resources would likely have gone unused (meaning no extra hiring or team-building for this or anything else) or put to more of the same...which would likely net a disappointed remark or two on the internet complaining about more of the same stuff being produced. You want to give people who create new things to build off of. Motion control foundations for design are more interesting than what we've gotten mostly this gen so far in more refined, but samey stuff. In all cases, I'd prefer to see the foundation and base of the pyramid of possibilities widened rather than narrowed.professor_t said:I certainly hope Natal will change things, but I worry that resources are being invested in the wrong things (in short, trying to lure non-gamers to the fold).
MightyHedgehog said:Eh, those resources would likely have gone unused (meaning no extra hiring or team-building for this or anything else) or put to more of the same...which would likely net a disappointed remark or two on the internet complaining about more of the same stuff being produced. You want to give people who create new things to build off of. Motion control foundations for design are more interesting than what we've gotten mostly this gen so far in more refined, but samey stuff. In all cases, I'd prefer to see the foundation and base of the pyramid of possibilities widened rather than narrowed.
judging from the move thread and it's title there's alot of "Nintendo clone" being mentioned so I have to agree.Monty Mole said:From a platform POV, Sony has been the company doing the "copying" this generation. Sixaxis was a blatant late add-in to combat the Wii. PSN, DLC, downloadable low-budget games, trophies, etc, all ideas seen earlier on 360.
The PS-wand is probably more reminiscent of the Wii than Natal is of the Eye-Toy. Natal's biggest difference over Eye-Toy is probably not even the IR, but its software SDK - allowing all games to take advantage of the Natal hardware in the same way all games take advantage of Live.
Flachmatuch said:You expect development in human computer interfaces from Microsoft? I'd be surprised, looking at their track record.
Equipment. The study was run on high-end Pentium ma-
chines (P6-266 or P6-300), with at least 128 MB of mem-
ory, and a 17-inch display. The machines had either an
Intergraph Intense 3D Pro 1000 or 2200 graphics accel-
erator card and ran Windows NT4.
sinnergy said:MS is pretty advanced in Interaction Design, can be applied to anything hardware software UI etc..
The even have their own ID labs. They know what they are doing..
Iknos said:http://www.microsoft.com/usability/UEPostings/p153-robertson.pdf
This was back in 97.
There are good reasons why concept cars do not become reality the next day. Some features fail to become reality.
People don't like change. Companies don't like taking risks.
Lots of reasons why you don't see too much innovation in products from these large companies even though they invest a lot into R&D.
![]()
Honda FC Sport
Not going to see a car like that on the road in the next 5 years. Does this mean Honda fails at innovation? Are current Honda vehicles "pathetic" because that is all you as a customer know about them?
travisbickle said:Concept cars are just a cheap way for the car company to get attention. There is no way they are intended to become a reality just a marketing tool to get people talking.