Re: @fibbles
However you can do this, which is almost the same:
edit: this is in production, having brought in 7X the amount they wanted HomePage
6848 publicly visible posts • joined 28 May 2010
However you can do this, which is almost the same:
edit: this is in production, having brought in 7X the amount they wanted HomePage
No, not FB. All the "non conformists" who despite being unique have posted almost carbon copies of the same template "I don't confirm, I never use FB, it will fail". Ironic really.
I bet you all have blogs where you complain about the narcissism of posting on Twitter and FB too.
Paying for beta access isn't that new, and I don't mind the idea. But you should be paying a fraction of the full price and £20-26 is quite expensive even for a finished indie game. You're supposed to be incentivised to play pre-release by getting it cheap, or getting free life-access to pay-subscription features.
OXML was at least a step towards open standards from MS - you can now actually create and edit DOCX files using standard libraries for instance - and of late they have been supporting more FOSS projects (where it suits them obviously).
I wonder if longer term MS might actually move to supporting some standard life ODF by default?
If you die so much that you have to do it that many times then you are obviously not meant for that game, choose an easier one
If the game mechanic has a health meter of some sort, then being able to respawn mid-level can be seen as making it overly easy. But if it's an instant-death mechanic, you're wrong. The fact I got to point X means I already proved I can do everything before X. If X is hard and I have to try it 10 times, why do I need to prove over and over I can do the bit which didn't cause problems?
And for that reason, I'm out. This is one way modern games HAVE moved on. Make me keep re-doing the bit that killed me, but not the whole bloody level.
Also, did he really say you lose ALL progress if you quit the game?
AAAAAAAAAAaaaarghhh.
I doubt it was really cheaper. More than likely, they designed their new site without proper thought and then realised "oh shit, it doesn't work on IE7 and all our customers use it". And now it's cheaper to do this than rework it all.
They probably let some bright-eyed graduates on the job, who were determined to do the whole thing in the newest web technologies just because they're new and cool.
It's a recruitment site. It doesn't need loads of HTML5 and a super-efficient JS compiler. It shouldn't anyway.
Firstly, wonderful project and well done on all the hard work.
But it seems like KS is obligatory now, and innovative companies have been growing all over the place for decades... did you already approach the more traditional channels?
I'd have thought this would also be a perfect thing to apply for Dragons' Den btw, if you're of that bent.
...I work under the assumption anything I do online could probably be linked back to me by governments if they could be bothered. The fact this is proving to be true doesn't really surprise me, it just shows all those silly computer films from the 90s were actually bang on accurate ;)
I do however find it fascinating from a techy point of view.
Cryptocurrency is currency, and to be taken seriously - bitcoin is working hard to been seen as legitimate and secure. So why make some joke currency that is likely to disappear? OK, that might be fun, but why would anyone actually buy any of such a currency when it might not be here next week (like the Kanye one)?
Exactly - selling entire applications for £0.50 - £2.50 in most cases. You see reviews stating that "even at the high cost of £5 it's worth it" for software which is often a full-blown application that wouldn't be out of place on a PC.
>>Oh like run most of the web servers on the internet, as is currently the case?
Well done for agreeing with me without realising it. The fact that FOSS exists for web servers stacks is one of the contributing factors to this notion that buying software is wrong, somehow. As someone who makes software for a living, the idea that people will look shocked at the idea they have to pay for my work is not great.
Can you point me to benchmarks showing the mini-retina is equivalent to the Air?
Also - are you sure the non-retina mini is packing the same punch as an iPad3? I was convinced the original mini was just an iPad2 in a smaller box with a different connector.
These figures show a confusing picture, that the iPAd3 and iPad2 are equally powerful: http://browser.primatelabs.com/ios-benchmarks
The 2 is still a great device though. Underpowered for fancy games but otherwise very capable with great battery life. And of course the design is just as nice, if you want that kind of look - and/or you have an iPhone and want to stay in the same ecosystem - iPad2 is still a decent budget choice.
Sadly it's competition is also the PS3 and XBox360 and they smack it out of the park. The Wii beats it because of the motion controllers and they beat it on power and back-catalog. And of course you can get Kinect for the 360 too.
If people developed some awesome accessories for it I'd be interested, is that likely?
I just checked, and you can get a 12Gb PS3 for £150 on Amazon or £120 (new) on eBay. With the immense back-catalog of games - most of them very cheap other than new releases, the better spec and the built-in blu-ray player, as well as a big indie gaming store, saving £20 for an unknown device doesn't seem wise to me.
If I missed something big, happy to be corrected.
4D is a typical term used in the medical imaging world, I think they do even talk of 5D at times. The extra dimension(s) can be time - a 4D heart scan could be a video of a single heart-beat where each frame is a 3D image - but could be other stuff too like ultrasound strength or x-ray frequency, etc.
To understand the true 3D structure from ultrasound, a 4D (3D video) scan might be needed, to help differentiate the tissue as it moves around.