Yeah, I'm familiar with ESP. I wouldn't waste my time chasing that train.
That's too funny. Try watching a video on Microsoft's website without
having to get Silverlight shoved down your throat. Gotta love Microsoft.
;-)
Nah, I'll pass. I'll wait till Microsoft starts using YouTube (oh yeah,
that's right, YouTube is owned by GOOGLE).
Nah, I'll pass on the Microsoft proprietary technologies. Nothing new,
nothing amazing. Just more proprietary slop being handed out, and passed
around by Microsoft. As a Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer, maybe I'll
get some more BIG SLOP shoved down my throat again next year. I guess
"patching systems" keeps us employed, and Microsoft would really hate to
build something or design something stable, that they didn't need constant
fixing. Building something stable and designing something correctly the
first time might actually ruin their business model.
With Microsoft the more unstable systems are, the more Microsoft makes it's
money. It seems that the systems get worse and worse after every service
pack. They release one "hot fix" and it breaks 5 more things (for every 1
thing it fixes). It seems to be Microsoft's MO, and business model. Soon,
after 8 years of "Beta testing" their latest operating system, they tell
everyong that it's "end of life' and time for a new one. Dig down deep into
your pockets and upgrade again.
Who can even keep up with all the garbage that Microsoft spews out? It's
hard enough trying to keep up with all the service packs, security patches,
and latest security updates. You want some buggy software, that will crash
half way through the simulation (with a nice "blue screen of death") then
just keep drinking the Microsoft Cool Aid.
I'll stick with something cleaner, more stable, more lean, and something
that uses resources much more efficiently. Something I don't have to
reboot. Why waste half of my system resources on sloppy code, or a sloppy
and fat operating system?
If engineers built cars the way Microsoft designs operating systems, your
car would crash into a tree at least once a week (all by itself). You'd
have to stagger out of your car, get a few stiches, and then walk yourself
down to the local "Microsoft Dealership" and buy a new one. Thank goodness
Microsoft isn't building cars. ;-)
It's only a matter of time before the old dinosaur takes a fall. Don't get
me wrong, I love my XBOX 360 (as long as that red light doesn't start
flashing, and I get the nice "ring of death" and green screen and need to
send it back to Microsoft and pay another $150 for yet another repair on a
poorly engineered piece of proprietary hardware), and I've learned to live
with Vista and Server 2008, but I am by no means a big huge fan of
Microsoft's proprietary technologies.
I prefer Open Source technologies. I believe in what realXtend is doing, or
I wouldn't be here right now. ;-)
If I wanted to chase Microsoft and be a Microsoft "fanboy" then I'd be
hanging out in their forums, sipping on their latest Cool Aid right now.
I'd probably even crack open a book, and start learning Silverlight. At
this point, I'm just not going to waste my time on anymore Microsoft
"hoopla". They discontinue their technologies just as fast as they release
them. So what is here today, will surely be gone tomorrow.
I personally don't like the idea of any one single company (Microsoft)
deciding the fate of a technology, or deciding what/where the world will
head. Microsoft kills off ALL the competition, and then pushes out their
garbage. You either learn to eat Microsoft, or you learn to starve. Those
are your two options.
The licensing costs alone will choke off the majority of the people. There
will always be a constant battle between Open Source and closed proprietary
technologies such as Microsoft.
Go ahead, pick a side, and dig in. I'm betting on Open Source & cross
platform technologies. It's only a matter of time before the old Dinosaur
gets kicked in the pants by Google. ;-)
If Apple wasn't so stubborn they would just sell OS X Leopard to the masses,
and kill off Vista. It sure would be nice to run OS X on a $399 Dell. I
guess Apple sees that as defeating the purpose of owning a Mac (and against
their business model of selling very high end expensive hardware), but it
still would be nice having a $399 Dell with OS X. (Yes, I'm aware of the
OSx86 project). Just let that one go, before Apple gets greedy and stomps
out the fires.
I do prefer my Apple updates, and I enjoy my nice shiny Mac Pro with 12
monitors, 8 wonderful cores, 6TB of hard drive space, my quad 1.5GB NVIDIA
graphics cards, and 32GB of ram. Now just make that hardware more
affordable so that the masses could have a similar system for just under
$1,000 (instead of $35,000). That's all I ask.
As for Microsoft, I just hope that Google finally gives them the "nail in
the coffin" that they really need. Maybe they could revert back to focusing
all their energy on proprietary gaming platforms, but it's only a matter of
time before an Open Source & cross platform system (like realXtend) comes
along, and eventually knocks some of these legacy proprietary Microsoft
technologies off their pedestals.
I'm sticking with OpenSource and Open-ended systems. Microsoft is doing a
fine job of working extremely hard in recent years at killing themselves
off, just let them continue. They will eventually choke themselves off.
Just give them enough time, and enough rope.
I'll use Vista just long enough till OS X takes root (which may never happen
because Apple refuses to sell their operating system to the masses), or I
will wait till Google comes out with their own operating system that they
will give away for free (that will hopefully be Unix/BSD based) and
hopefully they will kill off Microsoft once and for all. At least stop the
stupidity, and end the silly nonsense.
ESP is just another proprietary "dead end" cartoon-like technology. It's
dead-end technology. ESP, as far as VR is concerned, is nothing but
hoopla. It's garbage, it would be like running out and buying Windows 3.1
right now. I just really wouldn't waste my time or energy chasing another
"Microsoft comet". ;-)
Mark
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 8:31 AM, Peter Quirk <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> Check out the machinima from Microsoft about their Generation 4 data
> centers. It seems to have been made on the ESP platform (http://
> www.microsoft.com/esp).
> Does anyone know if the Caligari tools were used in this video (http://
>
> www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2008/12/02/video-microsofts-generation-4-data-centers/
> )?
> -- Peter
>
>
> On Dec 13, 11:40 pm, Mark Malewski <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I completely agree with Antti.
> >
> > We may need different tailored clients (browsers/viewers). For the
> > extremely high end gaming, and then a basic standard browser for
> > normal everyday interactions (social network). Also collaboration
> > with existing technologies (VoIP/Skype, e-mail, SMS, whiteboard, Video
> > playback and Video streaming, etc.) will increase the value of 3D
> > Internet technologies.
> >
> > Just as Dan Miller stated:
> >
> > "Just like the web, it is imperative not to assume that one set of
> > client capabilities fits all use cases. While a big honking PC
> > running the latest NVidia drivers and the latest Windows may work
> > nicely, you should also be able to log on and interact over an iPhone,
> > or even a less capable device. Meaning, a stock Ubuntu install on an
> > old machine should work as well, with visualization somewhere between
> > the honking gamer's box and the mobile phone with the 3" screen."
> >
> > I completely agree. Keep the system open and cross-platform. It
> > should run on Unix/Linux, Windows, OS X, 3G iPhone, G-1 (Android) and
> > possibly even the Blackberry Storm.
> >
> > We don't want to "cripple" ourselves by migrating towards any one
> > platform (such as a Microsoft based system). Try to keep it as "cross
> > platform" as possible.
> >
> > TrueSpace has been around since the beginning of time (I remember
> > using TrueSpace back in 1994). I'd been using various Caligari
> > software since 1986, and it's hard to believe that Microsoft gobbled
> > them up.
> >
> > I guess that's good for Microsoft, but bad for the rest of us. ;-)
> >
> > Just as Microsoft killed off Netscape, I'm sure they'll just use this
> > technology as a way to push their Virtual Earth service, and begin
> > shoving their standards down other people's throats.
> >
> > I personally wouldn't take the bait, and I believe in staying the
> > course. Continue developing open source standards, and just stay away
> > from any proprietary technologies that Microsoft will attempt to shove
> > down our throats.
> >
> > I don't think one browser will be a "fit for all" solution. We will
> > have to develop open-source browsers for a wide variety of hardware
> > platforms and various operating systems (to include Linux, and OS X)
> > as well as mobile phone devices (like iPhone, Android/G-1, and
> > possibly even Blackberry Storm).
> >
> > I'm not sure that Microsoft made an "excellent acquisition" by
> > purchasing Caligari, but it's something that Microsoft needed to try
> > and "keep up" with Google. I still think Microsoft is way behind in
> > the game, and I seriously doubt even the purchase of Caligari will
> > help them keep up.
> >
> > I really think true open source development and open source software
> > will continue to kick the pants off of Microsoft. They are an "aging
> > dinosaur" and it's only a matter of time before the Open Source
> > community does them in. Look at how "rock solid" many open source
> > platforms have become (think LAMP). You look at Linux/Apache/MySQL/
> > PhP/Python systems, and these are developer workhorses. Very thin,
> > light machines, that don't hog up all your resources like the
> > Microsoft machines.
> >
> > Keep the code thin, light, and clean. It's sad to see Caligari get
> > swallowed up by Microsoft, but it just shows how desparate Microsoft
> > is getting. They know they're falling behind in the game. I still
> > seriously doubt even with the Caligari acquisition that it will help
> > Microsoft catch up to Google Earth/Google Maps. The one thing that
> > Google is very good at is working with the Open Source community. I
> > can't say the same for Microsoft (and their crazy SDK's & licensing
> > agreements). Case in point, has anyone tried developing for the XBOX
> > 360 without paying CRAZY licensing fees, and getting kicked in the
> > pants by Microsoft?
> >
> > "This weekend there were two pieces of news which may have a profound
> > impact on virtual worlds and which may force designers to choose
> > between Windows and non-Windows platforms."
> >
> > Nope, nothing "profound" by the acquisition. Sure, it's good for
> > Microsoft, and bad for the rest of the world, but it really won't have
> > that much affect on the open source community. Microsoft will attempt
> > to shove some standards down people's throats (just like their
> > "Silverlight" technology). But until it's a "cross platform" and open
> > source technology (that isn't controlled by Microsoft) then the
> > technology will just die.
> >
> > Look at what a terrible browser Internet Explorer is. It doesn't even
> > follow or abide by basic standards. You need to use something like
> > Mozilla, or Opera, just so you have a decent "cross platform" web
> > browser that works correctly (and works across multiple platforms and
> > displays pages correctly). Microsoft is non-compliant, and they "do
> > not play well" with others.
> >
> > I personally won't "drink the cool aid" and go chase any Microsoft
> > technologies when I see better techologies floating around in the Open
> > Source arena. I'm sure that many in the science/academic/research
> > community will agree.
> >
> > We do need to stay Open-sourced, cross-platform, and have custom
> > tailored browsers (for various platforms, devices, and also specific
> > applications such as high-end gaming, or social networking, or even
> > teaching).
> >
> > Kirstenlee did a great job with the R15, and hopefully she'll continue
> > to contribute and help the open-source community with her great work!
> >
> > > In any case, tailored viewers for different scenarios would be great.
> > > For example simple web-based viewers, mobile phones, lightweight 3d
> > > and why not console based as well, maybe simply a way to use the text
> > > chat through IRC or something, all these things would expand the
> > > functionality and usefulness of our application.
> >
> > I completely agree!
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > On Aug 1, 2:47 am, "Antti Ilomäki" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > You're absolutely correct. What we're going to need is different ways
> > > of interacting with the virtual worlds and managing the social
> > > contacts. Starting a full-blown whiz-bang 3D-viewer isn't the optimal
> > > solution in many cases. Having tailored clients for simpler
> > > interactions will increase the value of the "3D Internet" immensely.
> > > It's important to tie in existing communications forms such as email,
> > > but we're also going to need new tools for managing communications
> > > between realXtend users. This is actually something that's very
> > > interesting to us (and especially me) and we're hopefully going to
> > > start working on something in the near future.
> >
> > > In any case, tailored viewers for different scenarios would be great.
> > > For example simple web-based viewers, mobile phones, lightweight 3d
> > > and why not console based as well, maybe simply a way to use the text
> > > chat through IRC or something, all these things would expand the
> > > functionality and usefulness of our application.
> >
> > > 2008/7/28 dan miller <[email protected]>:
> >
> > > > I think it's critical to keep in mind the distinction between the
> capabilities of the client/viewer software, and the meaning of the protocol
> itself (ie, what information the client and server share).
> >
> > > > Just like the web, it is imperative not to assume that one set of
> client capabilities fits all use cases. While a big honking PC running the
> latest NVidia drivers and the latest Windows may work nicely, you should
> also be able to log on and interact over an iPhone, or even a less capable
> device. Meaning, a stock Ubuntu install on an old machine should work as
> well, with visualization somewhere between the honking gamer's box and the
> mobile phone with the 3" screen.
> >
> > > > So to bring up a concrete example: I have been running the SL viewer
> on my Ubuntu machine. Of course I don't get silverlight; but frankly I
> don't care. I'm logging on for social interaction reasons, and whether or
> not the clouds are hyper-realistic just isn't that important to me. The
> problem is, my Unix build is unstable; it crashes frequently. When I
> complain about this on irc, I get the RIDICULOUS comment that it's crashing
> because my machine is underpowered. To quote the Sex Pistols, Bollocks.
> There is no conceivable reason that the viewer should be any less stable
> because it has downgraded graphics capabilities. This is simply a matter of
> sloppy programming and lack of testing, not some intrinsic requirement that
> the client be uber-graphically aware.
> >
> > > > To sort of push this point to the max, I have been tempted to write a
> console-based SL viewer, using full-screen text rendering to show a top-down
> view of the space. Each avatar would be represented by a different
> character, and an irc-style chat area would run on the lower part of the
> screen. That might be all I need for about 90% of my SL/opensim visits.
> YMMV
> >
> > > > -danx0r- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
this list: http://groups.google.com/group/realxtend
realXtend home page: http://www.realxtend.org/
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
