— aka.spvn

Archive
Random Musings

Coverflow in Safari 4 Beta

Let’s face it, Apple has always been obsessed with being as sleek as possible when it comes to their hardware and providing as much eyecandy as possible when it comes to their software. They have a knack for introducing products that will Wow the public while making Mac lovers drool over the most recently overpriced product they released.

Thus, it was hardly surprising when Apple purchased Coverflow from an independent artist back in 2006. Coverflow was originally an additional plugin to iTunes, which did exactly the same thing it does today: showcase your album art in a very stylish and sleek form, precisely what Apple loves. When Apple first bought it, all they initially did was make it a default feature in iTunes, but as time went by, they tried to introduce Coverflow to anything and everything.

Everytime I watched Steve Jobs introduce a new product or iPod at keynotes in recent years, he’d always reach the part where he shows off Coverflow for the umpteenth time. Everytime he tries to wow everyone with it, I’m busy cringing in front of my computer screen going, “Not this stupid thing again…”

The truth of the matter is that Coverflow is nothing more than a gimmick. I use it for like 5 seconds now and then just to scroll through all my album art really really fast, because it really does seem cool! For literally 5 seconds that is, after which I imeediately switch back to the much more functional list view.

And now, with the latest beta version of Safari, Apple’s default web browser for the Mac, they’ve done the unthinkable: shoehorning Coverflow into a web browser.

This really is the last straw.

Does Apple REALLY expect people to use it to browse through the history of the sites they’ve browsed? Personally, I almost never look at my history, except when I need to go back to a site whose URL I forgot on the rare occasion, I’ll do a quick search and be done with it.

What does Apple expect us to do? Get bored with web surfing and so we turn to surfing through our history for the fun of it?

Get real. Practically no one uses Coverflow on their iPods or iTunes, where we actually get to see some pretty cool album art fly by. But honestly? Watching snapshots of websites fly by? Nu-uh, not for me.

Post to Twitter

Read More

facebook-logoA few weeks or so ago, Facebook suddenly decided to update, or rather revise, their Terms of Service. I won’t bother to copy what they added here, since it’s written in lengthy, complicated, and downright anal terms-of-use-language (ie. they use 3 sentences to reiterate the same thing and 10 different “synonyms” of sorts to make sure they cover every single aspect they want to). Basically, they added a few paragraphs which explicitly stated that Facebook owned whatever content you uploaded (pictures, videos, etc.) and could do whatever they wanted to do with it (which was where they had to use 10+ words to describe what they could do with it), even if you deleted your account!!!

*Panic and chaos ensues*

Seriously people, since when has social networking sites like Facebook/Friendster NOT owned your photos. You upload them to their server so that your friends can view them, hasn’t it ever occured to you that you’re granting them the license to display these images to the public in the first place? Even if they decided to sell your media to other companies or whatsoever, do you really think you would have heard about it? Besides, a majority of the media uploaded on Facebook is usually personal pictures and videos of friends and family, who would gain much from your 10th grade picture of you crying or whatever?

Nevertheless, there was a huge outcry all over the internet. Fueled by the annoymity of internet usernames, people with nicknames along the lines of DeathSlayer28 and PwettyGurl82 were busy growing balls of steel and telling Facebook to go “burn and die”. Everyone started thinking Facebook would really want to steal their unglam pictures and videos to sell to marketting companies or something. It seems like everyone never realised that things have been like that all along, since by uploading the pictures to Facebook and letting all your friends view them you’re basically granting them the license to do a hell lot with your media anyway.

Despite the founder of Facebook himself (Mark SZuckerberg) clarifying things in this blog post dated Febrary 17th, stating about how Facebook requires such a license to be allowed to publicise your media, Facebook has ultimately decided to revert to it’s old ToS for now… which doesn’t really make much of a difference really. According to this other blog post that Zuckerberg posted roughly 24 hours before the previous one, he stated that Facebook is reverting back to the original ToS while they craft out a new one that will explain more clearly what they meant by having control over people’s media. They only updated the ToS in the first place to make it clearer as to what control they had over the media.

The thing is, all Facebook users (like myself) can do is to trust them. I mean we’re giving away all our personal information to a completely foreign website, there’s really no guarentee that they’re not selling off our information under the table without anyone knowing. When it comes to the internet, one really has no choice but to trust whatever site you’re giving away your information to. All in all, there’s really no point in whining about it.

At least Facebook is willing to do something about it and are listening to what its users have to say.

Post to Twitter

Read More

Windows Live Hotmail LogoBack in the day even before Gmail came along, (then) Hotmail was probably the most popular email solution for home users and basically anyone who wanted a free email account. Then Gmail came along and messed everything up for them. Thus, since 2005, Microsoft has been busy trying to revamp Hotmail, for example through things like more disk space. It’s hard to imagine that there was a time when Hotmail users had 25mb while Gmail users had 1GB, but that was the case when Gmail was first introduced.

Sure Hotmail managed to revamp it’s interface recently, but honestly, it’s nowhere near what Gmail has. The top quarter of the screen is filled up with huge banner advertisements and links no one cares about to other areas of Windows Live. Even the interface itself just doesn’t feel as snappy or as clean as Gmail’s interface. No doubt though, it was a step in the right direction.

Still, for some strange reason, Hotmail never provided free POP3 access. For the uninitiated, it means that Hotmail users couldn’t view their email through external 3rd-party email clients like Thunderbird or Outlook or whatnot. The ONLY way to view your email was to navigate through the site’s horrible online interface. In comparison, Gmail provided such access from the get go in 2004.

However, only this year, in 2009, is Microsoft finally playing the catch-up game. They just announced POP3 access for Brazil and US users, along with access for Europe and UK users which they’ve been working on since January. Honestly, Microsoft needed 5 years (after Gmail was introduced) to introduce such a fundamental feature? Sure it was present in the past, but one had to pay just to be able to read his/her email wherever they wanted to. Even after Gmail came along in 2004 and made free POP3 access an “industry standard” so to speak, Microsoft never took the hint to introduce that same feature, hence they’ve watched their users steadily switch over to Gmail one by one.

It seems like I’ll be sticking with Gmail as well, seeing as how they haven’t even provided POP3 access for Asian users. In fact, this lack of POP3 access is one of the biggest reasons why I don’t use Hotmail anymore. At the time of this writing, I have exactly 146 unread email messages in my inbox. Though I’ve got to check it from time to time because some people still email me at my Hotmail account, it goes to show how little I bother about it anymore.

Not to mention Microsoft might be doing too little, too late. If they took 5 years to introduce POP3 access, one can only wonder when they’ll finally be able to introduce an interface I’d actually bother to use, because half the time it doesn’t even work properly with Mozilla Firefox, which is my (as well as many other people’s) primary browser.

In my opinion, we could probably see Microsoft closing down Hotmail eventually.

Post to Twitter

Read More

Eat LeadWe’ve always had parodies for all forms of media, for example the Scary Movie series for horror movies, the terribly awful Meet the Spartans is another example for movies, plus the thousands and thousands of videos on YouTube that parody everything from movie scenes, to music videos to commercials. Yet while people have been doing parodies of movies and music for ages, for some strange reason no one ever thought of parodying games. With the long list of interesting, quirky and downright stupid facts that have been rapidly growing ever since the age of Pong and Pac man, it would almost seem like a no brainer to create a game which parodies other games.

The closest a game ever came close to this was the Simpsons game that was released in recent years. However, that was more of a parody of the TV series rather than any game, but it was still great fun. However, it seems like someone has finally bothered to come up with a game that parodies the entire gaming industry.

Vicious Cycle Software is currently developing Eat Lead, a game which is slated for release this year (if I’m not wrong). This development studio hasn’t really been known for triple-A titles, but rather for games that receive a lot of hype and recognition due to its branding, but never games that will last the test of time. For example the soon to be released Ben 10: Alien Force was developed by them, as was some Dora the Explorer game, Dead Head Fred, Marvel Trading Card Game, etc. The one exception to this trend was Puzzle Quest (yeah they developed that game) which received critical acclaim acroos the board as well as a huge following.

Now, it seems like they’re continue their trend of so called “second-tier” games, ie. games that are fun for the moment but quickly fade into history. Let’s face it, the actual gameplay of Eat Lead probably isn’t going to be that awesome, after all, that’s not exactly the focus of the game. However, to me it’ll still be worth playing just for the experience of enjoying it as nothing else but a parody of old games. I can just imagine when this game comes out, everyone is going to start discussing where a specific gun/enemy came from and the significance of certain aspects of the game. Meanwhile, deep within the halls of the Vicious Cycle office will be the master list of random fun facts and trivia that they somehow squeezed into the game and fans will be desperately trying to match that list point for point.

Unfortunately it seems like this game is only slated to be released on the two major gaming consoles, and us PC gamers will be left out once again like we always are. One can only hope that they decide to port it to the PC eventually, because I’m absolutely dying to play this game and talk about it online. For someone like me who never got to experience the rise of the gaming industry, this is probably going to be a treat.

Post to Twitter

Read More

Citizendium 1Since it was first created in 2001, Wikipedia has become one of the Internet’s most popular website, receiving over 750 million views a month. Wikipedia has quickly become one of the most popular destinations for people to go to in all the research for information about practically any subject in the world. It’s easily the world’s most popular encyclopaedia, and with good reason: any single person in the world can edit any single article or entry within Wikipedia. What results is what is probably the world’s most up-to-date encyclopaedia.

Yet, along with this feature comes Wikipeida’s biggest and most obvious flaw: it’s, sometimes blatant, inaccuracy. Just imagine, a 10 year old kid could easily edit the entry on, say quantum physics, anyway he wants and no one could stop him. Of course, someone will eventually spot the mistake, though the keyword here being “eventually”.

This is especially so when you consider how false information in the Wikipedia entry on US political figure and journalist, John Seigenthaler, was left undetected for four months. In that time, anyone who read that Wikipedia article probably thought he was a suspect in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and his brother.

Hence, in an attempt to create a more accurate version of Wikipedia, Wikipedia cofounder Larry Sanger spearheaded a new project: Citizendium. It was only recently that I stumbled upon this site, and I have to say, the idea of it is pretty exciting. First introduced in 2003, Citizendium is pretty similar to Wikipedia in many ways, in that a large number of people contribute to the encyclopaedia instead of there being a single publisher. The difference between them, is in who gets to edit the articles. Readers who wish to edit articles and Citizendium must first sign up to be a member. Not only that, members are required to sign up with their real names and e-mail addresses, and moderators even require a bachelors degree to be eligible. Furthermore, before articles are published, they are subject to verification by the site’s moderators.

On the whole, Citizendium places a very heavy emphasis on “experts”, as they are the ones who effectively manage the site and ensure that only quality, and more importantly accurate, information gets posted on the website for the world to see. However in the FAQ page of Citizendium, they clearly state their need for the constant support of their “non-expert” editors and contributors. However, the emphasis on experts might not be a bad thing after all, as that might help deter the same anonymous pranksters who are intent on ruining Wikipedia’s articles.

However, Citizendium is still in its infancy stages, having roughly 9000 articles at the time of this writing according to their website. In terms of quantity, it’s still a far cry from what Wikipedia now is. With a much smaller pool of editors as well, the rate at which the quantity of its articles increases is also going to be relatively slow as compared to Wikipedia, since practically anyone can edit any article in Wikipedia. Citizendium is surely giving up a lot in order to strive to become a very accurate source of information.

How useful and accurate and Citizendium going to be? Only time will tell. Personally though, I’ll stick with Wikipedia for now, even with its inaccurate articles. When Citizendium matures though, perhaps that will be the time to switch.

Here’s hoping that Citizendium eventually achieves its goal, for the good of everyone.

Post to Twitter

Read More

WikipediaAs the season to be giving approaches and as everyone rushes to stores to buy presents for loved ones, we tend to forget that there are others that deserve our gifts as much as everyone else. Especially if it’s someone who you probably go to time and time again for help, whom millions of other people turn to, and yet he never asks for anything in return.

No, not Santa Claus, he has more than enough elves to help him. Rather, it’s a site that practically everyone takes for granted: Wikipedia. Unless you’ve been living under a rock, Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia which practically anyone at all can edit and add information to. This practically makes it the fastest growing and most rapidly updated encyclopedia in the world with millions and millions of “editors”. Just look at how quickly the entry on the Virginia Tech massacre grew in just 12 hours from absolutely nothing, into a pretty informative article.

That said, one really has to take everything posted on Wikipedia with a pinch of salt. While it is known for being one of the most convenient sites on the net to turn to for in-depth information about a certain topic, it also has the reputation for being really inaccurate at times. That’s hard to avoid, considering how even the average Joe who has access the the internet can pretty much mess around with any entry on Wikipedia any way he likes.

Despite that fact, many have undoubtedly wiled away countless hours among the pages of Wikipedia, clicking one article after another just for the sake of reading up about random facts and information. I’m sure I’m not the only one who does this, considering how 275 million people visit the site every month. Most people don’t realise the significance of numbers this big, but if you break it down:

  • 275,000,000 a month
  • 9,150,000 a day
  • 382,000 every hour
  • 6000 every minute
  • 100 every second

That’s right, on average, a hundred people visit Wikipedia every second, 24/7. While you were reading this very post, Wikipedia probably just received a few thousand hits. Despite being widely known as a pretty inaccurate source of news, it still remains one of the world’s most popular general reference work on the Internet.

Now, while Wikipedia has always been asking for donations through a “banner” of sorts at the top of every single page (which it never used to do in the past), a new banner has popped up in recent days in huge words which read “Please read: A Personal Appeal From Wikipedia Founder Jimmy Wales”. Upon clicking it, the user is directed to this article.

Wikipedia is different. It’s the largest encyclopedia in history, written by volunteers. Like a national park or a school, we don’t believe advertising should have a place in Wikipedia. We want to keep it free and strong, but we need the support of thousands of people like you.

I invite you to join us: Your donation will help keep Wikipedia free for the whole world.

This is the first time this has occured, which means Wikipedia really is suffering from the recent economic meltdown, a fact which really isn’t that impossible. Wikimedia, the organisation behind Wikipedia, is a non-profit organisation with only a handful of employees. However, their server costs must be astronomically high, considering how it has an Alexa traffic rank of 8. While that doesn’t directly translate into the site being the 8th most popular site, it sure comes close to that number.

With such high traffic and with every single user seeing Wikipedia’s plea at the top of every page, they have still been unable to reach their target of 6 million dollars in donations, falling roughly 1.7 million dollars short at the time of this writing. Just imagine, if every person who visits Wikipedia every month donates one cent, Wikipedia could easily reach its goal, with a million more dollars to spare.

I have no idea what better way to get word out about how important it is to contribute to this cause. Imagine if Wikipedia stops being free, or completely shuts down due to a lack of funds. Sure, it’s pretty inaccurate at times, but would anyone really want to see Wikipedia disappear forever?

Wikipedia is there when you need it – now it needs you.

Post to Twitter

Read More

Rubik's cubeEver since the Rubik’s cube was invented and first sold decades ago, it has spread worldwide like wildfire, till the stage where it’s now even considered an icon of pop culture. No matter if you know how to solve it or not, every single person instantly recognises this unassuming little cube.

Upon seeing it, some are continually dumbfounded by it, not knowing how others are able to solve it with such ease. Truth of the matter is, the rest of us who do know how to solve it are continually dumbfounded by why others don’t know how to solve it. The purpose of this blog post is really to let anyone reading this who doesn’t know how to solve a cube know, it is really easy to learn how to solve it.

I’m pretty sick of trying to convince everyone about how easy it really is. There are so many sites out there nowadays that provide instructions as to how to solve the cube, and a plethora of YouTube videos that try to do that as well. If you don’t know how to solve it but have always wished you knew how to, there really is no reason for not being able to do so. “Not having enough time” is a ridiculous excuse as well, as all it takes is a few hours to learn, then many, many more hours to perfect, because all you really need to do to perfect it is one thing: practice.

The Rubik’s cube has also been associated with “geek” culture, and with good reason as well. It’d be hard not to associate anyone who keeps walking around with a cube as not being a geek. What most people don’t realize is how addictive such an unassuming cube can be. Long after one learns how to solve it, the cube will keep him entertained for a really long time to come. Don’t believe me? Just consider how there were even classes in the past designed to help people get rid of their addiction to the cube.

Most people really don’t realize how significant the Rubik’s cube is, it’s much more that just a children’s toy or a simple puzzle. The simple fact that it has survived decades and still remains extremely popular despite the drastic changes in other areas of our culture speaks volumes by itself. Not many other objects or trends from that era can lay claim to a similar achievement in the 21st century, where computers and the media have taken over.There’s something about the cube that makes it seemingly irresistible to other trends in society and is really one of the few icons of pop culture that transcends all race, religion, language, etc.

Really, people do not realise the significance of this unassuming little cube.

Post to Twitter

Read More

For those who don’t know, I’m at avid user of digg.com (it’s not without its flaws though, but that’s a story for another time), and a few days ago I stumbled across an article on digg titled “Top 10 reasons I don’t care about today’s gaming“. Disregarding the grammatically incorrect title, it seemed like an interesting article.

Among the first few paragraphs (right before the list actually starts), the author wrote:

And just to clarify, this is all my opinion, so don’t get worked up about it (glares at the users of Digg.com… ‘OMG U SUK UR LIST SUX UR ON CRACK!’)

Knowing how immature some digg users could be, I sympathised with him… but then I read the article.

After which, I posted the following comment on digg, which I’ll use here (slightly edited) because it’s really all I want to say:

Initially when he started complaining about how Digg users were irritating for calling him an idiot, I was thinking I’d agree with him by the end of the article because I’ve seen how bad some comments on digg are.

After going through the entire article, the first comment (That guy is an idiot, why was this article even submitted?) needs to be dugg up A LOT more. And so that he doesn’t post an update to the post going “AHA DIGG USERS ARE STILL FLAMING ME, THE STUPID IDIOTS WHO COMPLAIN FOR NOTHING”, I’m gonna try and prove why SOME (note, not ALL, I do agree with some parts of what he said) were utter crap:

(Please keep in mind this was a one-off comment, hence the sloppy writing and pretty biased tone)
——-Start of comment——–
10) Too many good old games
Ok, he has a point there I guess. Personally, I’ve never played old games (I’m only 17), but I don’t doubt some of them are good, looking at how much love some are given. However, is this REALLY a credible reason for not caring about new games? Does the fact that old games are good = new games suck? He stated Halo 2 as one of the “old franchises”, did he ever bother to try Halo 3? Or any other good game out nowadays actually.

Fact is technology has reached a point where there’s just more stuff in games nowadays, eg. Open world games. Sure you could consider GTA 3 an “old game”, but face it, GTA 4 kicks ass.

9) Way too complex

This entire point only focuses on the PS3 (at least that’s what I think, I personally don’t own any current gen consoles, and not because I don’t want to), if I’m wrong someone please correct me. But from what I’ve heard, only the PS3 really requires you to install games.

And even if it wasn’t the case, if the game is good enough, I’m sure most people would be willing to wait for awhile longer to start playing it. So you’re telling me that because you need to wait to install games, you’ll gladly pass on games that might go on to become classics in the future? And only when they become classics will you check them out?

8) Memory cards

I actually agree with this part, the ability to bring my latest save file of Final Fantasy or whatever game to my friend’s house who has a PS2 as well as the game itself to show off to him how cool my characters are is great fun. My only gripe with Mem cards are the small storage space. IMHO, mem cards would probably have been a good idea to add to the current gen consoles. Portability rules.

As for the author, you seriously think you’re going to run out of space because of game save files on a HD?

7) WiiMusic

Do I really need to explain how stupid this point is? How does the release of a (supposedly) crappy game, which you yourself admit was released at the wrong time, contribute to you not wanting to check out newer games? How does that even make sense?!

“Stupid game got released at the wrong time, everyone hates it…. I SHOULD STOP CARING ABOUT NEW GAMES.”

6) ‘Hardcore’ and ‘Casual’

He’s actually stereotyping the 2 categories himself. Only other idiots think that Casual games don’t belong to a “hardcore gamer” library, no one’s even saying that’s the case. Every single gamer (hardcore or not) has definitely spent some time with an online flash game or something like that.

Besides, the logic here doesn’t make sense again.

“People stereotype hardcore and casual gamers…. GAMES NOWADAYS SUCK.”

5) Online

Some games were MEANT to be played online. So you’re not happy that a game doesn’t have enough single player content and you usually only play single player stuff? THEN DON’T BUY THAT PARTICULAR GAME! DUH!

oh and I quote

“Either give me a good game with no online capabilities, or a good game with online capabilities. I don’t really care which.”

If you “don’t care which”, then why is this even an issue?!

4) Casual gaming

Have you even TRIED casual games? World of Goo anyone? And what’s the problem with casual games? There are more than enough “hardcore” games out there for YOU, so now what,

“There are so many casual games out there and I don’t like them… I SHOULD STOP CARING ABOUT ALL GAMES”.

3) Cost

Ok here, I completely agree, game prices are definitely going up, but if the game is quality enough, I’d still be willing to buy it. But for this point I can see his reasons for not liking newer games. But seriously, not caring about games just because of their cost? Good luck catching up in the future when all these games become classics and their prices drop low enough for your budget.

2) Console problems

True, the RROD epidemic is unprecedented, so I can see why you are irritated with the new consoles. But may I please inform you of this “console” that has been around for ages called the PC? Sure not all games run on it, but it’s still a worthwhile platform to play some of the latest, good games that come out on the PC as well. But besides that, surely you can still learn to at least appreciate the new games without actually playing them? Flat out ignoring what are going to become classics in the future is plain dumb.

1) Lack of games!

Someone PLEASE help me on this one, I am soooo lazy to list all the good games that have come out in the last 5 years. THERE ARE SO MANY. He’s obviously not looking hard enough for good games… or he’s just been hiding under a rock. Just a few games I can think of off the top of my head:

  1. GTA IV
  2. Halo 3
  3. Left 4 Dead
  4. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
  5. Fallout 3
  6. Bioshock
  7. Gears of War
  8. Metal Gear Solid 4
  9. Team Fortress 2
  10. Portal

and many, many, many more.

——-End of comment——–

All in all, there’s really no reason to at least completely give up on keeping up with the latest games, you might not like all of them, but the technology itself is something to marvel at. Sure we had Super Mario, Zelda, etc in the past, but even if you disregard the improvement in graphics, developers have learned how to develop better gameplay, provide a more engaging story than saving a princess from Bowser, and have created open worlds previous thought impossible.

Games of the past will always remain classics, but games of today are going to become classics of the future.

Post to Twitter

Read More