I spent a decent chunk of time last year building up a somewhat large Cocoa application (a telling synecdoche of how ambitious the app is: it integrates libevent with the Cocoa loop and involved writing a whole new evented Redis-backed HTTPS cache in ObjC).
But unfortunately, I got to the UI part of this project ("UI part", heh) thinking "this is going to be so much easier than webdev, look at all these tools!, and that was a crushing disappointment; getting anything reasonable on the screen has been intensely painful, and is if anything much harder than CSS3+JQ is on modern web apps.
I'm thrilled to hear that at least to some extent, it isn't just me, and making a good-looking Cocoa app (especially your first) is just very hard.
This sounds like a wrong design decision. I wish nobody could log into my github account using anything but my SSH keys.
This is also true of my AWS account: my ec2 instances are protected by SSH keypairs, but if anyone gets my AWS password, he has full control over everything.
I'm not a security expert, but SSH keys feel way safer than passwords, especially with all those recents article showing how easy it can be to bruteforce passwords.
Cocoa is probably the framework best suited for incorporating web views, and tons of apps do this: Mail.app, iTunes, Aperture, Colloquy, etc. etc. Use the right tool for the right job, if you have something that is going to have a lot of flow-based layout, then by all means use WebView.
It's kind of like refusing to use an NSTextView, then complaining about having to lay out text yourself.
What about conflict resolution? That's one of the hairiest, least-user-friendly scenarios in my experience.
> Unfortunately for everyone involved, every OS X application that's showed up over the years gave up and tried to turn CLI commands into buttons.
It's my understanding that for a really long time there was no linkable library for interacting with Git. So unless these devs wanted to first write said library they were pretty much left with putting buttons on the CLI.
You might say "Well they should have written one, then!" but that is quite a risky capital expense on a piece of software that could easily flop. GitHub did it (with Summer of Code's help), but they have umpteen uses of such a library even if nobody uses GitHub for Mac.
> It blows my mind that no one tried to do anything special. Git (and its DVCS cousins like Mercurial & Bazaar) provide an amazing platform to build next generation clients â€" and it's like the entire OS X ecosystem left their imagination at home.
I dunno, I think GitX (especially its forks) does some pretty special things, including making it dead simple to stage/unstage/discard single lines of files.
I hope that means they plan to build a git GUI client for Windows, the poor bastard child of git support.
This is getting a lot better in Lion. If you browse the WWDC 2011 videos, look for Session 103 "Cocoa Autolayout".
Though, I think the difficulty of making a complex GUI in Cocoa shines in the OS X world. It's a lot harder to make a working UI, so you want to get the design right the first time, so you don't have to go back and re-do.
Circles? Actually I think that many people like the idea of their posts are being read by as many people as possible and not just the ones with similar interests. Although it looks like a big discussion group, the news feed is really a giant personality-defining display for vain people. I saw a programmer friend post annoyance over some Android API today and I suspect that this was more than just a spontaneous exclamation -- he was communicating that he is smart (to non-techies) and that he is "cutting edge" (to fellow programmers).
Privacy? I have the feeling that most really don't care very much. But ironically, I think the privacy-thing could actually work in facebook's favor. Here is why: I use fb a lot even though I don't like their privacy policies. I trust google more than facebook. Still, it bothers me when it says "logged in" in the google bar at the top because google watches my searches. When I am on facebook I behave like I am in public. I don't hope for the best and write secret stuff anywhere. But with all the google searches I make through a day, I am giving google a lot of very personal information that I would not like anyone to see. I would hate to see something that I was searching for somehow show up in a stream for my friends to see because I accidentally clicked a +1 button or similar.
Finally, there is the fact that even if I can export my graph from fb to g+, it's worthless until my friends do the same. And I just don't see that happening before they come up with some truly ground breaking feature that will allow me to get laid with any friend I choose by clicking on their picture :-)
> Google+ is in limited Field TrialRight now, we're testing with a small number of people, but it won't be long before the Google+ project is ready for everyone. Leave us your email address and we'll make sure you're the first to know when we're ready to invite more people.
WHY?! WHY are they doing this again? They did this with Wave. Google, you cannot launch a social network while explicitly disallowing social networking! This is so frustrating.
I'm very excited to try this out. Context (AKA "Circles") is the biggest feature Facebook still hasn't gotten right. By mirroring the way we think about our social graph in real life, Google is making a huge step toward converging Online and Offline identity. It will be very interesting to see how Facebook responds to this... they might finally have a competitor.
Grr. Google /really/ need to fix their authentication scheme.
1) Extremely slick interface. Facebook beat MySpace in part because it was relatively clean; Google+ wins here by a mile. That reason alone makes me root for it.
2) It's Google's umpteenth foray into the social arena, so naturally most people are comparing it to Facebook. But its use cases strike me as being more comparable to Twitter than FB.
3) People can be categorized into contexts and multiple contexts. This is the killer feature. I find myself wanting to just eliminate the "Friends" circle wholesale and just have a different circle for each cluster in my social network.
4) I might be misunderstanding how sharing/the feed works. But, if someone is in any circle and you are viewing that circle's stream, I think you see whatever they share. I'd like something finer-grained than that. I have one friend who I both bike with and play board games with. If we get into a conversation about a ride on a weekend, doesn't the model inherently mean what I see in the board game stream gets polluted with the bike conversation?
I really would love to know what the FB stands for.
Now with features like Circles I can put my REAL friends in one circle, family in another, and all the noise and acquaintances(networking etc.) in a spam filter circle.
This is going to be awesome.
That "HTML5" there is simply for buzz effect. Seriously, come on already...
"With Hangouts, the unplanned meet-up comes to the web for the first time. Let specific buddies (or entire circles) know you're hanging out and then see who drops by for a face-to-face-to-face chat. Until teleportation arrives, it's the next best thing."
imagine a jerk that noone loves intruding all the hangouts. but everybody too polite/dependant to unfriend
It will be interested to see if this impacts the IPO plans of Facebook. This does seem to be a direct assault on their home turf.
However, this poll would suggest people think otherwise:http://www.wepolls.com/p/884244/Will-Googles-new-social-vent...
Supposedly they already did that, and yes I did the "merge the accounts dance", and still, no Profiles for me, and therefore, no +1 and no Google+.
Google, I'm paying for my google apps. I don't want to have another free account just to play with your new features (and I really hope this is not going Buzz way... which I also never saw in my gmail...)
I immediately searched for a way to turn it off.
Instead Google makes another Facebook with a different UI. It looks like a cleaner Myspace that will be embraced by a small set of techy users. No way will this ever be cool.
You can install the app without an invite, but cannot use it.
EDIT: The "Learn More" button in the app cycles you back to the "You need an invitation" message box. So the app itself is completely pointless if you haven't received an invitation.
BTW, thanks for giving up on Google Health. This is way better.
Where do I sign up???
Well, okay. I'll live without you, Google+.(Running Seamonkey 2.0.14, which advertises Gecko/20110430. Out of date since.. 3 weeks.)
Picasa Web albums and photosYour Google profileGoogle BuzzGoogle ContactsStream
That alone would make me switch to circles.
That would be interesting.
Edit: If you can't stand the black bar either, just switch to the secure version of Google: https://encrypted.google.com/ They haven't changed it yet and it usually lags behind on updates.
I preferred the lighter theme personallyâ€¦
The first strikes me as a bug that will eventually be fixed, but the second seems to be a design choice - Google can save money on bandwidth if they downsize your photos, and if you know that what you get when you export is downsized you're less likely to do it. I feel sorry, though, for people whose only copy of some photos is in Picasa.
Edit: Tried a second time and it works now.
But as it was said, the most important thing I miss is a way to extract the mails (in the way they are stored in GMail with all tags and other meta information).
Its clear they've tried not just to 'clone' Facebook, which I appreciate.
So it's like a reverse twitter, where you choose who can follow you?
I love the circles philosophy and UX.
One problem is the restriction on invites. Google+ is valuable to me if I can share things with others, just like I do it in FB right now. They have to enable invites soon or the early adopters will get bored and leave forever.
Overall this seems to be very well thought through with some fresh ideas.
Another annoying case of "do no evil" not implying anything about actually pushing the state forward or helping. I'm not altogether that interested in the greater of the two silos, although I am excited by a state of play other than facebook moseying down the field palming the ball in one hand.
search > social
With Facebook, I felt as if I was on this huge football field with all of my 'friends.' I could lean in to whisper with a friend here and there, or even put on some face paint and huddle together with like-faced friends to form a group. But everyone could still see me, and I could see them â€" I just had to peer down the field. I can't really say things to my group that I'd normally say in private because with all these people on the field with me, someone would certainly overhear us!
With Google+ the structure is different. Rather than a field, it's more like a big building with many rooms. Each room can be decorated and tailored to a specific group of friends who hang out there. Best part is once I'm in the room, I can close the door and be myself! I can go up two levels, change hats, and walk into a different room.
tl;dr Google+ lets me fully engage my various social sides, whereas Facebook never really let you as you were always in the eye of the public.
Edit: One thing I did notice that I wish they would change is that it seems as if a friend can only be placed into one circle. Often times there's a lot of overlap among my social circles and friends may be part of at least two different groups.
1. It looks CLEAN While in my opinion one major reason Facebook ended up beating out Myspace was its wonderful interface, I feel like recent renditions have just lost that simplicity. I want connecting with my friends to be simple, not a bombardment of Farmville updates and a poorly designed messaging system.
2. Sparks Hopefully Google will succeed where Facebook has failed in actually making keeping track of your interests, well...interesting.
3. Circles Friend management in Facebook has always been one of my biggest complaints, Circles seems to be a legitimate approach to making organizing your friends a little bit more intuitive.
I am very excited to see Google+ roll out to the masses, and I do hope it is successful. Not because I want it to take Facebook down, but I think it wouldn't hurt to make them break a little sweat and think about their users a bit more.
> 404. That's an error.
> The requested URL /intl/en-GB/+/learnmore/notifyme.html was not found on this server. That's all we know.
I am obviously ignorant in my belief:
privacy != Google obtaining and storing increasingly intimate personal data
Yes, it is correct that google harvests your information to feed you more targeted ads. But it doesn't mean that if a startup, started initially as a "do no evil" company becomes as big as google or facebook won't do the same(targeted ads).
Since all these services are free to use, easiest or maybe only possible way to make profit off them is by advertising. Since nothing comes for free, you will pay for the service by sharing your personal information. Which in turn means onus lies on you to see what is it that you want to share.
Connect with The New York Times on Facebook.
If you're a start-up and you're directing people to your blog, please, please, please make an obvious and easy link from the blog to your startup's homepage. Don't hide it in the sidebar, don't make the 'home' link on the blog go to the blog's homepage, don't waste the damn traffic.
Make it brainless for me to get from your blog to your startup's homepage.
If my laptop/iPad dies, knowing the internet is available goes from awesome to super painful.
Hipmunk is great and all, but I fail to see how a travel site adding an icon is relevant to the HN frontpage.
I'd love to quickly be able to compare the costs of checking luggage, cancellation insurance costs, etc.
1) Age-wise, what ratio of accepted YC applicants are over 35? 40?
2) What ratio of them fall into the "married with kids" category?
My impression of YC is that you strongly (exclusively?) prefer under 30 people who are unattached or, at least, are married with no other obligations.
Can you dispel that impression or is it close to the truth?
(I hope this doesn't come across as trolling or as an accusation. If you think it is, I welcome suggestion on how to word it better)
This application will be able to:
Read Tweets from your timeline. See who you follow, and follow new people. Update your profile. Post Tweets for you. Access your direct messages until June 30th, 2011.
Also, how does anyasq beat reddit ama?
2. What 3 early-stage startups excite you most that haven't been funded by YC?
3. Do you personally invest in startups?
4. What do you like most about your job?
5. Do you have some cool YC-related stories you could share?
6. What's a typical day like for you? (If "typical" doesn't apply, what'd you do today?)
The biggest question I had for a while about YC has already been answered. That is, how much does the educational background of an applicant impact the analysis of an application.
I know a few former and current YC founders and they all seem to have the same thing in common: CS degrees from elite universities.
Harjeet put my concerns to rest with his answer that it is only relevant if it directly relates to the problem being solved.
I'm sure a PhD in Machine Learning from Stanford doesn't go unnoticed even if the problem being solved is technically somewhat simple. However, it is nice to see that everyone is treated equally at least on paper.
2- What is one of the assumption you had about the entire process that ended up not being true?
3- Who is one entrepreneur (or team) whom you really thought had it wrong, but invested in anyways because they had that je-ne-sais-quoi?
Wish you huge luck! Would love to sit down and debrief a part of this you might attack later, namely live events and conferences. I've got some good ideas of how to integrate this to those in a visually appealing manner, and would love to chat.
I wouldn't completely rule out us ever doing something in NY, if we *had* to open another YC branch it would almost certainly be in NY.
The "movement" is about polyglot persistence and not leaving RDBMS completely. Pull pain points out into something that's a better fit. Rinse and repeat.
Its better to use it as the write-cache for complex datasets with the database being the backup.
We just added it to our stack for caching and storing sessions.
It's blazing fast !
We're now trying to use it for different other purposes; autocompletion, counting and ab testing.
Resque is for background jobs (with many add-ons for locking, scheduling, retries, etc.), and redis-store is a drop-in store for Rack::Session, Rack::Cache and Rails.cache. Easy and super fast.
I have a console app that's backed by Redis (in much the same manner as described in this post), but I save my sessions to h5 when I switch between datasets. That means I need to combine the Redis data with my app data and export -- I do this using two separate h5 files, with with the appropriate links.
It would be nice (for me anyway) if I could do a Redis-native save, and move the resulting file. That would also improve my startup times when I reverse the process.
But, while h5 is nice for My data, I can't say it would be any good for generic Redis data...
I'm not sure of the typical game server stack though.
Really great tool for the belt.
Yes, you've replaced a "select * from comments order by created_at limit 10" with a "select * from comments where id in (list_of_ids_from_redis)".
Wouldn't you cache the comment models in a top-10 list?
Oh yea, and the front page of HN this time around.
It sounded like you got your hands wet in a lot of different things. That doesn't necessarily mean you are going to retire on this game, but think how many people are aware of you now and when you do Bullet Factory X (where you skeet-shoot puppies and elderly people) you'll have that much more information on how to promote the game or where to spend your time. It also sounds like you had a successful working relationship with your sister (as an artist) which is half the battle for any game title. So that's a big win right there for your next game too.
I'm not that surprised as the lack of feedback from bloggers though. I think I get 10 emails a day following the format:
OMG, Super Games Factory, LLC has just released the most amazing game on the planet: Dish Washer! Wash dishes in amazing stick-figure 3D! Contact us for a free evaluation code!
Bullet Factory is a fun/simple concept, but it seems better as an ad-supported title (it's too simple) than a 99 cents title when you compare it along side other 99 cent titles I've seen in the app store. The bar is getting higher and higher and unless I see something amazing in screenshots or a trailer, it's not even worth the purchase barrier to entry for me to try it. Unrealized value (purchasing a game for 99 cents only to realize I hate the gameplay mechanics) is so frustrating to me, I'd rather just not buy something I'm on the fence about.
I would take the low-sales-since-december-even-though-you-are-marketing as an indicator that it isn't a high-demand game. Release a free ad-supported version of it "Bullet Factory FREE" and move on to your next title. Keep track of the download differences to learn a bit more about what worked, what didn't and where the bar is.
That's not to say your next game or the game after that won't hit -- keep pushing, you'll have a success and it will catch you by surprise.
They always do.
1) Reviews are the most important things when you sell an app. I made the app free for the first week or so until I had about 10 5 star reviews. DO NOT use scammy tactics for fake reviews. Make sure your app is well polished for what it does. If it's not, don't put it in the App Store.
2) Review reminders. Basically the user uses the app a few times and they get a notice asking if they would like to review it. Include something like the appirater class. Google that.
3) Built-in sharing options for Facebook and Twitter. These should link back to the iTunes page for the app or to a custom site.
4) Setup bitly links for each sharing option. This helps in keeping stats about where your app is being talked about.
In the first week or so I was getting 3000 downloads a day. When I hit my 10 review goal, I switched to $.99. It's disheartening to see that 3k number drop to 20 the next day, but that's money in your pocket now. For the rest of the month, I averaged 20-30 paid downloads a day.
Things not to do:There are lots of stupid people out there. They will leave 1 star reviews because they hear no sound. Their mute is on. Don't get upset about these people.
Twitter is great for campaigning. Don't write bots that listen to the stream for people talking about the movie that then follows them and does @Soandso check out my Hangover2 app! Surprisingly, it actually works very well. It ran for about 45 minutes and followed 400+ people. About 50 of them clicked through (bitly again) and I think a few people bought it. However, Twitter banned the account after 45 minutes. So, don't do what I did.
Don't write well polished apps that use sound clips from a big upcoming movie. You might argue that it's fair use, but that doesn't mean crap when WB decides to stomp on you.
Is there some back-story to this game that is interesting? Are these spheres of mutant gel being produced by the evil Dr. Klaus Scheitzenburger to turn children into mindless drones so that he can take over the planet and only I can stop it using my Mutant-b-Gone sphere blaster?
Oh, none of that? It's just a sphere popping game? There's no marketing that can save that.
Now a killer back-story isn't a requirement, but it would help if it were "juicy fun". There's some great advice here: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/2438/how_to_prototype_...
Your game screenshots scream "tech demo", which is no way to sell a game.
I took a look at your app in the App Store.
Here's your problem: your icon.
The icon is the most prominent thing the user sees when first looking at your app in the App Store.
Change your icon, and you'll get more downloads. Trust me :-)
Feel free to contact me if you'd like to discuss good icon design, or other under-appreciated aspects of selling an app.
First time I loaded it the menu seemed sluggish. When I pressed buttons, the button gave no feedback and I wasn't sure if the click had registered. I understand there's loading time involved, but some feedback would be nice.
During game play when I "Shoot" there is nothing that displays a shooting event. Balls just explode if my cross-hares are on it. That seems odd. Again, a feedback issue.
Also the menu buttons seem smaller than needed and there are too many options. If you could make it simpler that might be better.
Overall the game play is smooth and the gyro controls are cool. I think this would make a really engaging first person shooter. Maybe shooting something other than balls for points would be more fun.
The problem with the screenshots, of course, is that the in game content looks to dull. I can't really say how you can improve it, but have a look at top selling games.
Be way more explicit with your branding and marketing about exactly what the game is, right down to the name, if you're willing to change it. Looking at the top charts right now, there are games that show you exactly how to play just with the title and the icon: Fruit Ninja, Cut the Rope, Flick Golf, Feed Me Oil. You want to be the gyro shooting gallery app. So, something like Gyro Shot or Gyro Shooting. It's sounds lame but it seems to work. It may also give Apple a reason to feature you, since you are demoing a hardware feature.
I think you also need a more fun look. The game looks really drab right now. A grey factory is not a terribly exciting backdrop and the balls are pointy. Choose a look that you can execute at grade A level. This is where the "glowing neon" look came from -- programmers who can't do art. Use shaders to make the balls perfectly round and give them some sort of cool effect. The screenshots should be attractive on their own.
Your Ask HN not making it to the front page? Probably just bad luck (there are lots of good stories that don't make it to the front page). Game blogs not writing about it? Probably just bad luck that they heard about other games at the same time that they wanted to write about more.
I think there's a common feeling that there's just that one magic bullet that's going to make you a success (that TechCrunch article, or that Touch Arcade article, or if you can JUST get into YC or get that first investor). I think all that stuff definitely helps, but from what I've seen the best way to do it is to get a good amount of sleep, hustle your ass off 5-6 days a week, and have a partner in crime (even if it's just a drinking buddy who works on their own, separate projects).
I think you just have to pick up and start on the next project. The App Store is extremely competitive, but if you just keep making better and better games every time, something will stick. Just be sure to do some client work or keep your day job in the meantime to stay financially solvent. :)
A couple of details - icon (as someone else mentioned). Another thing is - you're a textbook example of promoting "features", and not "benefits". Instead of writing "Using Oscilloscope", which nobody cares about, you should've written "The smoothest shooting experience there is (thanks to oscilloscope)".
Also: get a graphic designer. Your graphics are not that bad, but a good painter could really make this app work much better. People buy good looking games.
As for your trailers - they aren't that bad. As a tech person I'll say: wow. It really looks smooth, I'm impressed. BUT most people aren't technical - aside from the screen they should see a happy person playing, and they should see someone really TILTING the device - now it's barely visible (perhaps even exaggerate the moves so they can be seen on the camera). Look at one of the Kinect trailers. You can't do as good, but you can get close. Oh - and remember that there should be a link close to the end of the movie, directing to the app store.
Anyway - these are just a couple of things for a good product / landing page. Doing this alone won't increase sales though...
the testimonial paragraph is awkwardly worded ("... a portal into a virtual shooting gallery overflowing with beach ball-shaped targets just waiting to be popped") and i can't tell how to play (or what makes it fun) from the screenshots. it's gyroscope controlled, but what the hell does that mean?
i'm going to give the lite version a try, but the app store page totally didn't grab me.
i thought "the heist" had a pretty good write-up and screenshot section, for what it's worth. i usually just read the first paragraph and scroll to the screenshots.
EDIT: i tried it, it's like an FPS where you shoot beach balls and twist the phone around to aim. looks pretty well done, but not my bag (i hate aiming anything by moving the phone)
Have you considered updating the app icon? It looks quite dark and flat rather than fun and cartoony like many game icons.
I was a little surprised to see how non-spherical the balls look in your screenshots. If it can still perform well with a more detailed ball model, I would think that would help the look of the screenshots.
Regardless, I stopped promoting my best selling apps and they sell exactly as many copies.
I think sometimes we just fail to see that our games are really crap. I totally fell in love with the idea of a real-time multiplayer quiz for the iPhone. But nobody else did.
[EDIT]I am not saying your game is no good. I haven't really played it. More of a general comment on how we may not fairly judge our own work[/EDIT]
What we did was this:- picked a somewhat hight price point ($2) This seemed to use like the sweetspot, with what we could live and what we would expect an honest buyer to pay. (who knows?!)
- we wrote to the canonical forum, where we expected most of the potential users. That resulted in an initial rush (two days after writing to the forum), but it wasn't much at all.
- the domain iebtapp.com was registered prior to publishing, but contained nothing more then a simple "Something's coming this december" string. Watching the server logs, there seemed to be some who were trying to figure out where the link from the app pointed.
- after some time, we wrote the current, very limited text on iebtapp.com. Not even with images. That seems to have resulted in a minor increase in sales.
- with some text on the website, we thought it was time to do some advertisement, and went with Google Ads. This too seems to have resulted in a minor increase in sales.
And here's what we plan to do:- add Appirater to the App. We have only a very few reviews, and they are not enough to get any star rating on the AppStore. Maybe this helps, who knows. I will closely watch this.
Personal conclusion:iOS development is really /a lot/ of fun. But I think we need to change two things:- More marketing. But not all at once; results should be measurable.- Niche markets, that are this tiny, can be a very high risk game. (Especially if someone else, writes to the forum that he's going to release another iPhone app and lets people sign up for the beta :-))
--: see iebtapp.com
Also, I would recommend finding a good graphic designer to help you out. The icon for Bullseye Factory doesn't promise $1.99 worth of fun. Plus, I'm sure you can think of something more creative than stripped balls in a perfectly preserved yet empty factory. How about going along with the Jester theme and making it some sort of a factory taken over by zombie clowns?
Your game is technically very impressive, but needs a good theme to sell it. Looks at Nuts for instance. It's probably slightly less complicated technically, but it has a funny, slightly juvenile name, cute squirrels, and various alternative objectives.
Word of mouth was there: and it was 'don't bother'. If it's an app or game that people have to have, most of these techniques would have yielded different results.
Except for a few: like submitting to websites for review... most of them are looking for cash for reviews, so you get what you pay for.
I haven't seen any games that topped the list that were not worthy of chart-toppers... If games or apps like this were chart-toppers, then the chart wouldn't be worth much.
Stoic Jester indeed!
Nice overview of app marketing wasteland. I went thru much the same and the needle never moved, or not very much at least. My new approach is to give away a free version that is slightly hobbled but still useful and use that base of users to launch other ventures.
I guess what I am saying is that you have to keep going, market, iterate, try things and as said not give up. At some point hopefully your product will begin to sell itself enough for you to improve or version 2 it.
As you alluded to, releasing pre-Christmas and pitching bloggers with free promo codes is so common as to render it useless unless you're remarkable about it.
1. Buy ads. It costs about $0.00001 to show an ad banner on mobile. $0.01 to buy on a click basis. $10k to get into the app store top 25. Do the math. Minimums apply.
2. PR: meet/call or otherwise contact the people who can get your message out and convince them how cool your game is. Or pay someone who can do this for you.
Marketing is hard work, get busy!
These are years out of date. It would be a lot more interesting if it could support modern versions (ActionScript 3 / FlashPlayer 9/10/10.1/10.2).
How feasible would it be for a Chrome extension where Flash elements in wegpages are seamlessly converted and displayed as HTML5 objects?
It would be a good thing for Google to have users frustrated with Flash websites that don't work in iOS. Now they are helping Apple giving users a great experience on iOS?
I'm not anti-exercise and I've worked out a lot in the past, but I've found that being skinnier makes being active easier and more fun. Moving sucks if you're carrying an extra 50-100 lbs. around. Most skinny people don't really get this.
So, I've focused on nailing the diet and that works for me. I basically didn't exercise more than once a week so far this year, but now that I'm down quite a bit, I am naturally finding myself to be more active.
In the long run both exercise and eating right are incredibly important, so if you're overweight and want to be more active, get rid of the extra weight and you might find yourself exercising more by default.
For example, a circuit training-like WOD might be to do the following in the shortest time you can:
21 pullups 21 burpees 800m run 15 pullups 15 burpees 400m run 9 pullups 9 burpees 200m run
Or you might do the following as many times as possible in 15 minutes (in Crossfit lingo, AMRAC -- As Many Rounds As you Can):
10 deadlifts 20 wall balls (throwing a medicine ball against a 10' target on a wall) 400m run
You can do this on your own, like I said, but for some people the pressure of performing in front of other people helps a lot. It's certainly true for me, even though I'm completely the opposite when it comes to mental work. Having instructors is good, too. They'll push you to pile on the weight or ease back on the weight as appropriate. If joining CrossFit is impractical or unaffordable, and you can't talk your friends into working out with you, competitive sports can serve the same purpose of providing motivation and measuring improvement.
They offer all sorts of sports like basketball, swimming, weight lifting, martial arts, dance, etc.
For me personally, scooby1962's videos on Youtube were really helpful. Great advice on building muscle without doing crazy stuff, not requiring a gym and almost no equipment.
I just started P90X, I'm on day 5 and everything cost me $90 and I own the equipment, rather than paying a high monthly gym cost. I probably get better results and spend less time traveling to/from the gym because I can do them from my apartment and they're demonstrated on video. I managed to find the following off Amazon, all for under $90: pull up bar, push up holders, 5lbs whey protein, 300g creatine, iPhone arm band, yoga mat, resistance bands.
1. Figuring out what to do.2. Actually doing it, consistently, over the long haul.
Crossfit will teach you how to do the old-school, badass basics of fitness--stuff that will get you in great shape and is actually fun to do. No gimmicks, no miracles, just stuff that will kick your ass.
Doing Crossfit also makes you a member of an incredibly friendly, supportive community. This makes it so much easier to stick with it--every class, you'll see people in your community, friends, going hard and making progress. You support them and they support you. You'll work out with beginners, who you can help, and with badasses, who can help you.
A well-run Crossfit gym is a magical place.
If I want some casual health tips I wouldn't go to HN.
This way you get Flask simplicity and elegance, but also you get Rails-like separation of configuration test/development/production environments.
Another misconception people seem to have is that Flask means Jinja2. Fortunately that's not the case, swapping Jinja with Mako is also extremely easy.
Finally, Flask can run on top of any WSGI server, not just a built-in one: at http://mailgun.net we have Flask services running on Tornado and on Paster servers - the thing is rock solid.
Can someone help me understand where Flask fits into things? It would essentially be a replacement for Tornado? What's the advantage of this over Tornado? Ease of use?
I can understand the simplicity argument; I chose to avoid Django because it was too heavy, so I'd love to hear more about how Flask compares.
On a slightly related note - although jinja2 is already quite compact, I'm a fan of haml and I'm always surprised by the lack of support for it in Python. Is there something I'm missing? Uncanny valley for Pythonistas?
It's good timing; I was just getting to the stage in my app where I was noticing the need for some view refactoring.
First off, what is a game? Let's consider two broad types of games: competitive games and puzzle games. Competitive games (like chess) feature more than one player and the outcome of the game is unknown (both in terms of the winner and the final game state). Puzzle games (generally speaking) don't have a strong competitive element and the final outcome is known (i.e., a lone player solves the puzzle).
I contend that first-person shooters (in single player mode) are nothing more than big puzzle games. This isn't bad per se, but the problem lies in how these games have evolved.
Rather than make the "puzzles" in FPS games more challenging and innovative (i.e., focus on gameplay), the major game studios have instead focused on increasing the audio-visuals and cinematic attributes of their products. As a result, gameplay has consistently been minimized in favor of eye candy.
No better example comes to mind than the recent smash hit, L.A. Noire. The extent to which the producers of this game clearly wish they were making movies comes off as obsequious. The tiny sliver of game mechanics they did include is mind-numbingly repetitive and utterly without challenge.
These things are no longer "games", they're shitty movies.
>LOOK You are in a brand new air conditioned Palo Alto office. Empty packets of ramen litter the floor. There are two desks, each with brand new macbooks on them. >SIT DOWN There are no chairs. What are you, some kind of loser? >PIVOT You are bought by a google.
I credit adventure games with teaching me to touch type. To this day I can still type "inventory" far faster than any other nine-letter word.
I'm all for fond remembrance. But the problems of text-based games weren't limited to comparing poorly to graphics. Some of them were inherent; implicit companions of the desirable parts of such "written" games.
although that version seems to have some simple graphics, which is just wrong.
There's more information on the Scott Adams games herehttp://www.lysator.liu.se/adventure/Adventure_International/...
It is all about MMOs, RTS, role playing, shooters and sports games nowadays.
There's still a vibrant interactive fiction gaming scene. It has thrived despite Infocom's demise.
Many interactive fiction games continue to be developed, played, entered in competitions, and reviewed.
Here are some links to get you started:
Ultima 7 was a graphical game that had a similar effect on me. The graphics were somewhat abstract and generic and left a lot for the imagination to fill in. The writing was wonderful and put flesh on the world. Playing the game was like reading a novel.
It seems like game makers need to focus less on graphics and more on music and writing.
I think the game that had the biggest impact on me, though, was a game for the Apple ][ called "Odyssey"... I remember many hours lost to that game:
SWEET JESUS GET IT OFF ME
That's not a reason, that's just an assertion backed up with an assertion.
> I don't feel quite compelled to switch from Facebook or Twitter to Google
Well, neither do I, but I'm sure as shit going to try it, and make my friends try it too - and then I'll make an informed decision. And anyway, there's not necessarily any reason I'll need to stop using FB or Twitter - maybe I'll use all three, which would still be a win for Google.
That's not much of a reason.
I'll submit an email.
If we got rid of indentation, I'd like to think it was replaced by something that took less space, not more.
BeFS rocketh, check out the book:
It felt faster booted from a ZIP Drive on a 160MHz PPC with 192MB of RAM than my machine feels today, and this is not an overstatement. There wasn't a single click that didn't instantly produce a response.
Everybody points to iOS's design, but to me, one of the reasons for its success is that a system that fits in your pocket feels faster than the one at your desk.
If more people had been exposed to it back then, maybe we wouldn't put up with today's software as it is.
If you're running BeOS/Haiku, you already know about People and Mail. I also recommend you check out Caya and HaikuTwitter.
:-) great article though about an OS I missed the boat on.
If compatibility weren't an issue, we might have been very advanced right now. Seems like compatibility is what stopping everything from properly advancing, except hardware maybe?
Percentage comparisons (hired/applied):6% JoS fans4.3% of Columbia job fair2% Princeton job fair1.7% of web searchand 0% of everything else
I love these stats though... Would make great presentation material on the importance of being active in a job search. Especially the part about what times to apply... if it's a rolling recruiting basis (which I'm assuming almost every company does), those would probably be advantageous times.
Nah. That's too obvious.
Arab spring and Twitter connection aside, are they going to measure success in rainbows, or cash like the rest of the world?