All Activity
This stream auto-updates
- Today
-
I'll contact the sub editor and get back -
I'm getting errors at subtitle entries 266, 267, 300, 302, 303, 304, 309, and 312. I think it's caused by stuff like this: 312 00:14:40,000 --> 00:14:42,213 Y el argumento de proveer soporte para siempre... ("El soporte del los juegos no puede durar para siempre.") I think the parentheticals have to be removed. YouTube won't accept them from me. - Yesterday
-
My guess is it's a blind fan of the idiot game "dev" that was spreading misinformation about the initiative. (I refuse to say his name, that gives him more respect than is due) Really, a nothingburger of a complaint. What you need to watch out for is when the entrenched powers of the gaming publishers start coming after you. That is likely to happen sometime after the initiative succeeds. They have actual power, and million dollar lawyers with which to try to bleed you dry using frivolous lawsuits. These are the real threat. -
You know what, I haven’t mentioned this on the forum before because I felt it wouldn’t be appropriate, but this video really hits home for me. Between all the truthful things Ross said about volunteering that really sting, the accusation that nobody would work this much for free, and recently watching Louis Rossmann words on the topic, I’ll cut the humble act and put it out there: I accept donations.
-
On behalf of translator Reonu. Title: La industria ha presentado cargos falsos contra la iniciativa "Alto a la destrucción de los videojuegos" Description: ¡Han llegado denuncias de que tanto la iniciativa Stop Killing Games como yo mismo estamos violando las normas de la UE! Estas denuncias serían serias, de no ser porque son falsas, y utilizan pruebas inventadas. Copia de los cargos presentados contra la iniciativa: https://mega.nz/file/W3YTHCqQ#i-D2f_fgILqBILJiavLwX-eh3pUPGnYeaQfdadiFH20 Enlace a la iniciativa ciudadana europea: https://eci.ec.europa.eu/045/public/#/screen/home?lg=es Enlace para contactar con miembros del Comité de Mercado Interno y Protección al Consumidor del Parlamento Europeo: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/es/imco/home/members 0:00 Intro 1:00 Cargos contra la iniciativa 8:22 Especulación acerca de qué significa esto 13:59 Ubisoft responde a SKG 15:26 Especulando acerca del futuro 17:35 Novedades respecto a miembros del Parlamento Europeo que apoyan la iniciativa #StopKillingGames https://stopkillinggames.com 1 00:00:00,293 --> 00:00:01,200 ¡Hey! 2 00:00:01,200 --> 00:00:02,054 ¿Sabéis el dicho que dice: 3 00:00:02,054 --> 00:00:06,166 "no es paranoia si de verdad te persiguen"? 4 00:00:06,166 --> 00:00:08,967 Bueno, pues este es otro vídeo que no quería hacer, 5 00:00:08,967 --> 00:00:11,097 pero creo que debo hacerlo. 6 00:00:11,097 --> 00:00:15,120 Y es una novedad importante, sobre todo para mí. 7 00:00:15,120 --> 00:00:19,233 Tengo novedades de lo que está pasando tras las cámaras en Stop Killing Games 8 00:00:19,233 --> 00:00:22,800 Vale, repaso rápido, porque sé que esto es confuso: 9 00:00:22,800 --> 00:00:25,040 Yo fundé el movimiento "Stop Killing Games" 10 00:00:25,040 --> 00:00:29,313 para desafiar la legalidad de los editores destruyendo juegos por los que has pagado. 11 00:00:29,313 --> 00:00:32,800 Esto ha involucrado muchas cosas que he enseñado en diapositivas antes, 12 00:00:32,800 --> 00:00:36,800 e incluye asistir con la iniciativa ciudadana europea, 13 00:00:36,800 --> 00:00:39,547 que es la parte más importante del movimiento ahora mismo. 14 00:00:39,547 --> 00:00:43,966 Pero yo no soy el fundador de la iniciativa ciudadana europea. 15 00:00:43,966 --> 00:00:47,520 Son un grupo de voluntarios con los que estoy en contacto. 16 00:00:47,520 --> 00:00:50,214 No tengo derecho para tener un rol oficial en la iniciativa. 17 00:00:50,214 --> 00:00:52,488 Simplemente la promuevo mucho. 18 00:00:52,488 --> 00:00:54,400 Siempre han sido cosas separadas. 19 00:00:54,400 --> 00:00:58,054 Eso es parte del motivo por el que se llama "Stop Destroying Videogames" 20 00:00:58,054 --> 00:01:00,800 en lugar de "Stop Killing Games", como el movimiento. 21 00:01:00,800 --> 00:01:02,108 Así que con esto en mente, 22 00:01:02,108 --> 00:01:03,609 hace poco me comunicaron que 23 00:01:03,609 --> 00:01:06,653 alguien ha hecho una acusación muy 24 00:01:06,653 --> 00:01:11,473 seria dirigida a la iniciativa "Stop Destroying Videogames". 25 00:01:11,473 --> 00:01:13,967 La Comisión Europea nos ha reenviado una queja citando 26 00:01:13,967 --> 00:01:16,330 que ha roto dos normas. 27 00:01:16,330 --> 00:01:17,600 ¡Hostias! 28 00:01:17,600 --> 00:01:20,247 Una declaración falsa de que no tiene financiación, 29 00:01:20,247 --> 00:01:24,314 y "ocultación sistemática de contribuciones notables". 30 00:01:24,314 --> 00:01:27,280 "Esta declaración parece ser fundamentalmente errónea 31 00:01:27,280 --> 00:01:29,360 basándonos en pruebas disponibles públicamente 32 00:01:29,360 --> 00:01:33,666 de contribuciones profesionales notables para la campaña" 33 00:01:33,666 --> 00:01:36,374 Bueno, pues me acabo de enterar 34 00:01:36,374 --> 00:01:39,680 pero bueno, no es como si supiera todo lo que ocurre en la iniciativa. 35 00:01:39,680 --> 00:01:41,066 ¿De qué va esto? 36 00:01:41,066 --> 00:01:43,120 ¡Ah, que esto va de mí! 37 00:01:43,120 --> 00:01:44,920 ¡YO soy la prueba, gente! 38 00:01:46,600 --> 00:01:48,800 ¿Qué tenemos aquí? 39 00:01:48,800 --> 00:01:50,960 Una cita, "Han habido varias semanas en la campaña en 40 00:01:50,960 --> 00:01:53,233 las que he trabajado de 12 a 14 horas a la semana 41 00:01:53,233 --> 00:01:55,600 para mantener el ritmo y conseguir firmas" 42 00:01:55,600 --> 00:01:57,001 Joder, ¡y tanto que sí! 43 00:01:57,001 --> 00:01:58,374 Eso es verdad. 44 00:01:58,374 --> 00:02:02,233 "He estado tirando de un carro llevando a la gente al destino." 45 00:02:02,233 --> 00:02:04,348 Eh... sí. 46 00:02:04,348 --> 00:02:06,880 Es verdad que dije esas palabras. 47 00:02:06,880 --> 00:02:08,580 No me queda claro si la persona acusadora 48 00:02:08,580 --> 00:02:12,400 piensa que he estado ofreciendo un servicio en el que literalmente tiro de un carro. 49 00:02:12,400 --> 00:02:13,360 ¿Y sabéis qué? 50 00:02:13,360 --> 00:02:14,880 No se lo voy a decir. 51 00:02:14,880 --> 00:02:17,040 Esta persona puede adivinarlo por su cuenta. 52 00:02:17,040 --> 00:02:18,961 Y bueno, adivinar es algo que ha hecho mucho. 53 00:02:18,961 --> 00:02:20,000 Ya veréis. 54 00:02:20,000 --> 00:02:22,654 "Entrevistas con los medios describiéndome como la persona que 55 00:02:22,654 --> 00:02:26,480 "lleva el día a día la campaña Stop Killing Games" 56 00:02:26,480 --> 00:02:29,440 y que me "describen como la persona principal que toma decisiones 57 00:02:29,440 --> 00:02:32,197 y actúa de representante para la campaña."" 58 00:02:32,197 --> 00:02:34,398 Vale, esto es rebuscado. 59 00:02:34,398 --> 00:02:37,680 Ya que al parecer tengo que decirlo explícitamente, 60 00:02:37,680 --> 00:02:41,934 cuando digo que la iniciativa "va a hacer esto" o "va a hacer aquello", 61 00:02:41,934 --> 00:02:46,160 eso soy yo dando por hecho que los miembros de la iniciativa están de acuerdo conmigo 62 00:02:46,160 --> 00:02:48,560 y haciendo lo que puedo para predecir lo que va a pasar. 63 00:02:48,560 --> 00:02:50,800 Incluso he dicho antes en mis vídeos 64 00:02:50,800 --> 00:02:53,840 que los miembros de la iniciativa no son una mente colmena. 65 00:02:53,840 --> 00:02:57,033 Pueden no estar de acuerdo entre ellos, o conmigo. 66 00:02:57,033 --> 00:03:00,000 Claro que escuchan mi opinión, 67 00:03:00,000 --> 00:03:05,280 pero ellos toman literalmente todas las decisiones relacionadas con la iniciativa. 68 00:03:05,280 --> 00:03:10,080 Si a mí no me gusta algo, pero a ellos sí, no me queda otra que aguantarme. 69 00:03:10,080 --> 00:03:12,757 No tengo autoridad. 70 00:03:12,757 --> 00:03:16,320 No puedo darle órdenes a nadie en la iniciativa. 71 00:03:16,320 --> 00:03:19,071 Pero preparaos, porque ahora se viene el contable payaso. 72 00:03:19,071 --> 00:03:23,120 "Entre quince y veinte semanas trabajando de 12 a 14 horas al día." 73 00:03:23,120 --> 00:03:26,570 Es curioso que definan esto como "tirando por lo bajo", porque 74 00:03:26,570 --> 00:03:28,724 se están inventando estos números. 75 00:03:28,724 --> 00:03:31,324 Esto es básicamente lo mismo que leer hojas de té. 76 00:03:31,324 --> 00:03:35,697 Es cierto que creo que he trabajado esa cantidad de horas... 77 00:03:35,697 --> 00:03:37,840 ...ALGUNAS semanas. 78 00:03:37,840 --> 00:03:39,920 ¿Pero de 15 a 20? 79 00:03:39,920 --> 00:03:41,633 ¡Me moriría! 80 00:03:41,633 --> 00:03:43,264 Algunas semanas sí, 81 00:03:43,264 --> 00:03:46,880 pero otras semanas era algo como de 0 a 4 horas. 82 00:03:46,880 --> 00:03:48,101 No sé. 83 00:03:48,101 --> 00:03:49,920 ¿Sabéis por qué no lo sé? 84 00:03:49,920 --> 00:03:51,600 ¡Porque no cuento mis horas! 85 00:03:51,600 --> 00:03:52,960 ¿Por qué iba a hacerlo? 86 00:03:52,960 --> 00:03:55,040 Nadie me ha contratado para esto. 87 00:03:55,040 --> 00:03:57,120 Esto es todo voluntariado. 88 00:03:57,120 --> 00:04:01,520 Si digo que he trabajado "de 12 a 14 horas" es porque han habido días 89 00:04:01,520 --> 00:04:05,704 en los que me despertaba, trabajaba el día entero, y me iba a dormir, 90 00:04:05,704 --> 00:04:09,040 quitando comer, hacer ejercicio, y tareas vitales. 91 00:04:09,040 --> 00:04:10,658 Y esos días me volvían loco. 92 00:04:10,658 --> 00:04:12,966 Odio trabajar tanto. 93 00:04:12,966 --> 00:04:17,233 Pero me impresiona que se piensen que saben las horas que trabajo mejor que yo. 94 00:04:17,233 --> 00:04:19,114 Ah, pero esta es la mejor parte: 95 00:04:19,114 --> 00:04:23,704 "Tarifa profesional: De 50 a 75 euros la hora" 96 00:04:23,704 --> 00:04:25,280 Ya, tal vez eso significaría algo si 97 00:04:25,280 --> 00:04:28,687 fuera un profesional con una tarifa para algo. 98 00:04:28,687 --> 00:04:34,988 "Valor mínimo estimado: de 63.000 a 147.000 euros." 99 00:04:34,988 --> 00:04:36,633 ¡Sí, claro! 100 00:04:36,633 --> 00:04:39,214 Vale, esto me molesta un poco, porque 101 00:04:39,214 --> 00:04:43,374 su estimación mínima es 63.000€, 102 00:04:43,374 --> 00:04:48,480 y eso es más dinero que lo que he ganado en un año en toda mi vida. 103 00:04:48,480 --> 00:04:49,277 Pero, oye, 104 00:04:49,277 --> 00:04:51,760 seguro que hay mucha gente que tiene mucho más dinero 105 00:04:51,760 --> 00:04:55,120 si empiezan a inventarse cuánto deberían cobrar basándose en 106 00:04:55,120 --> 00:04:57,266 fuentes imaginarias. 107 00:04:57,266 --> 00:05:00,167 Pero dicen que eso es lo que vale mi trabajo de voluntariado, por lo que 108 00:05:00,167 --> 00:05:04,720 al no reportarlo están violando el artículo 17, blabla. 109 00:05:04,720 --> 00:05:08,560 La prueba que presentan son los medios tratándome como si fuera el líder, 110 00:05:08,560 --> 00:05:10,987 y yo diciendo que he trabajado un montón en esto. 111 00:05:10,987 --> 00:05:13,760 Bueno, es verdad que he trabajado muchísimo en esto. 112 00:05:13,760 --> 00:05:15,120 Pero debo haber dicho que no tengo 113 00:05:15,120 --> 00:05:18,974 derecho a unirme a la iniciativa al menos 50 veces. 114 00:05:18,974 --> 00:05:21,281 Y tal vez esto le sorprenda a la persona de la queja, 115 00:05:21,281 --> 00:05:26,182 pero a veces los periodistas se equivocan y dicen cosas que no son. 116 00:05:26,182 --> 00:05:29,280 "Un compromiso de 12 a 14 horas durante "muchas semanas" 117 00:05:29,280 --> 00:05:32,729 supera de lejos cualquier rango razonable de voluntariado" 118 00:05:32,729 --> 00:05:34,240 ¡Sí, es verdad! 119 00:05:34,240 --> 00:05:35,520 Tienen razón en eso. 120 00:05:35,520 --> 00:05:37,187 No es razonable para nada. 121 00:05:37,187 --> 00:05:41,520 He odiado hacer todo esto y no puedo esperar a trabajar menos en la campaña. 122 00:05:41,520 --> 00:05:44,334 Si me he esforzado tantísimo es porque creo que esta es mi única 123 00:05:44,334 --> 00:05:47,600 oportunidad de solucionar el problema de que se destruyan los videojuegos. 124 00:05:47,600 --> 00:05:49,595 Pero, gente, estoy en mi límite. 125 00:05:49,595 --> 00:05:51,001 "La inversión de tiempo profesional 126 00:05:51,001 --> 00:05:53,756 equivale a una contribución cuantificable 127 00:05:53,756 --> 00:05:56,066 bajo las leyes de transparencia" 128 00:05:56,066 --> 00:05:58,666 Bueno, ¡pues menos mal que no soy un profesional entonces! 129 00:05:58,666 --> 00:06:02,320 Pues bueno, esto parece una acusación muy seria, 130 00:06:02,320 --> 00:06:04,387 y suena a que debería haber contado mis horas 131 00:06:04,387 --> 00:06:07,566 y haberme inventado tarifas horarias como hizo la persona que me acusa, ¿no? 132 00:06:07,566 --> 00:06:10,000 Pero, espera, tengo una idea: 133 00:06:10,000 --> 00:06:14,636 ¿Por qué no miramos qué dicen realmente las normas de la Unión Europea? 134 00:06:14,636 --> 00:06:17,087 ¿Quién se considera como un patrocinador? 135 00:06:17,087 --> 00:06:19,334 "Los patrocinadores son personas u organizaciones que 136 00:06:19,334 --> 00:06:22,641 proveen apoyo financiero por encima de 500 euros." 137 00:06:22,641 --> 00:06:25,719 Vale, pues bueno, yo he gastado cero euros en la iniciativa, 138 00:06:25,719 --> 00:06:28,785 solo he gastado una burrada de tiempo, así que eso no me representa. 139 00:06:28,785 --> 00:06:30,953 "Las personas legales u organizaciones que proporcionen 140 00:06:30,953 --> 00:06:34,960 otras donaciones o equivalentes cuantificables o 141 00:06:34,960 --> 00:06:38,320 apoyo no cuantificable económicamente a una iniciativa 142 00:06:38,320 --> 00:06:40,597 también se consideran patrocionadores." 143 00:06:40,597 --> 00:06:43,671 Bueno, me han dicho que no soy una "persona legal". 144 00:06:43,671 --> 00:06:45,451 Soy una "persona natural". 145 00:06:45,451 --> 00:06:47,232 Eso me cuadra. 146 00:06:47,232 --> 00:06:51,120 Y desde luego que no estoy representando a una organización oficial. 147 00:06:51,120 --> 00:06:55,040 O sea, ni siquiera he rellenado un solo formulario que diga "Stop Killing Games", 148 00:06:55,040 --> 00:06:57,197 ni que sea para la iniciativa. 149 00:06:57,197 --> 00:07:01,533 "Los individuos que proporcionen apoyo no monetario, como los voluntarios 150 00:07:01,533 --> 00:07:05,440 no se consideran patrocionadores bajo las regulaciones de las ICE, 151 00:07:05,440 --> 00:07:08,500 por lo que no hace falta comunicarlo." 152 00:07:08,500 --> 00:07:10,640 Anda, ¿y esto? 153 00:07:10,640 --> 00:07:14,133 ¿Esta descripción, que encaja a la perfección con lo que he estado haciendo? 154 00:07:14,133 --> 00:07:19,233 ¿O sea que la UE dice que la iniciativa ha seguido las normas en tood momento? 155 00:07:19,233 --> 00:07:23,533 ¿Pero y qué pasa con este acusador anónimo que dice que la UE no se sabe sus normas? 156 00:07:23,533 --> 00:07:26,080 ¿Hay una cláusula oculta aquí? 157 00:07:26,080 --> 00:07:27,474 En plan, ¿no eres un patrocinador 158 00:07:27,474 --> 00:07:29,440 a no ser que te esfuerces mucho? 159 00:07:29,440 --> 00:07:31,000 Bueno, repasemos: 160 00:07:31,000 --> 00:07:35,994 Tenemos una queja anónima diciendo que la iniciativa está violando la ley europea. 161 00:07:35,994 --> 00:07:38,335 Aparentemente estoy a cargo de la iniciativa, 162 00:07:38,335 --> 00:07:41,233 a pesar de que ni siquiera tengo derecho a participar, 163 00:07:41,233 --> 00:07:44,000 motivo por el cual mi nombre no está en la misma. 164 00:07:44,000 --> 00:07:47,280 El acusador se ha inventado cuántas horas he trabajado en ella, 165 00:07:47,280 --> 00:07:49,534 y se está inventando cuánto dinero 166 00:07:49,534 --> 00:07:52,080 supuestamente he donado en especie 167 00:07:52,080 --> 00:07:55,966 y sus alegaciones contradicen directamente las normas de la UE al respecto. 168 00:07:55,966 --> 00:07:57,966 Y hey, giro de guión: 169 00:07:57,966 --> 00:08:00,240 Hay una cosa que no os he contado. 170 00:08:00,240 --> 00:08:04,400 Los organizadores de la iniciativa literalmente le preguntaron a representantes 171 00:08:04,400 --> 00:08:07,854 de la UE si no pasaba nada porque yo ayudase de esta manera 172 00:08:07,854 --> 00:08:10,687 en primavera de 2024, 173 00:08:10,687 --> 00:08:13,267 solo para asegurarnos de que todo estaba bien 174 00:08:13,267 --> 00:08:16,800 por si había un problema o teníamos que informar de algo. 175 00:08:16,800 --> 00:08:19,600 Dijeron que lo que he estado haciendo está bien. 176 00:08:19,600 --> 00:08:22,100 Hemos estado haciendo todo siguiendo la ley al pie de la letra. 177 00:08:22,100 --> 00:08:24,500 Entonces, ¿de dónde sale esta queja? 178 00:08:24,500 --> 00:08:27,200 Bueno, nunca lo sabremos, es anónima. 179 00:08:27,200 --> 00:08:28,487 Pero déjame preguntaros algo: 180 00:08:28,487 --> 00:08:31,667 ¿de verdad alguien cree que esto es un ciudadano preocupado 181 00:08:31,667 --> 00:08:33,840 actuando de manera independiente? 182 00:08:33,840 --> 00:08:36,880 O sea, vamos a fingir por un momento que todas estas acusaciones son ciertas 183 00:08:36,880 --> 00:08:39,114 ¿Sería el fin de la iniciativa? 184 00:08:39,114 --> 00:08:39,881 Tal vez. 185 00:08:39,881 --> 00:08:41,307 No lo sé. 186 00:08:41,307 --> 00:08:45,233 Alguien nos tiene en el punto de mira, esto es un disparo de advertencia. 187 00:08:45,233 --> 00:08:46,134 De nuevo, 188 00:08:46,134 --> 00:08:50,240 esta queja es anónima, así que no estoy acusando a nadie. 189 00:08:50,240 --> 00:08:52,000 No sé quién lo escribió, pero 190 00:08:52,000 --> 00:08:54,160 he de decir que es una gran coincidencia 191 00:08:54,160 --> 00:08:57,840 que esto ocurra justo después de que un grupo de lobbying europeo 192 00:08:57,840 --> 00:09:01,120 haya hecho unas declaraciones muy malas respecto al movimiento. 193 00:09:01,120 --> 00:09:04,866 En algunos casos, hasta mintiendo sobre ella, en mi opinión. 194 00:09:04,866 --> 00:09:07,066 Pero no sé si fueron ellos. 195 00:09:07,066 --> 00:09:09,420 Igual era un grupo de lobbying distinto, 196 00:09:09,420 --> 00:09:13,780 o igual es un verdugo político contratado por la industria. 197 00:09:13,780 --> 00:09:16,921 Pero alguien estaba intentando cargarse la iniciativa. 198 00:09:16,921 --> 00:09:19,522 Enviar documentación a la Unión Europea 199 00:09:19,522 --> 00:09:23,543 acusando a la iniciativa y a mí de violar las normas, 200 00:09:23,543 --> 00:09:26,957 tal vez incluso de cometer un crimen, no estoy seguro; 201 00:09:26,957 --> 00:09:29,040 no es ninguna tontería. 202 00:09:29,040 --> 00:09:31,840 Esto es la industria jugando sucio. 203 00:09:31,840 --> 00:09:33,866 Me recuerda al juego "Hundir la flota". 204 00:09:33,866 --> 00:09:35,461 Pegaron un tiro, 205 00:09:35,461 --> 00:09:37,600 con la esperanza de que mi buque estuviera aquí, 206 00:09:37,600 --> 00:09:39,627 pero en realidad estaba aquí. 207 00:09:39,627 --> 00:09:43,266 Así que fallaron, pero desde luego que sentí el impacto. 208 00:09:43,266 --> 00:09:45,720 ¿Y por qué os estoy contando esto? 209 00:09:45,720 --> 00:09:48,320 Bueno, esto me tiene preocupado. 210 00:09:48,320 --> 00:09:50,400 O sea, esta queja no me asusta. 211 00:09:50,400 --> 00:09:52,960 Hemos seguido las normas, y se han inventado los cargos. 212 00:09:52,960 --> 00:09:57,200 De hecho, si no hubieran puesto "aparentemente fundamentalmente incorrecto" 213 00:09:57,200 --> 00:09:59,800 podría llegar a ser defamación contra mí. 214 00:09:59,800 --> 00:10:03,574 Pero el hecho de que primero tengamos a la industria haciendo lobbying contra 215 00:10:03,574 --> 00:10:07,488 nosotros y luego intenten cargarse la iniciativa a puerta cerrada 216 00:10:07,488 --> 00:10:10,466 hace que me preocupe qué será lo siguiente. 217 00:10:10,466 --> 00:10:13,280 O sea, no he hecho nada raro que yo sepa, 218 00:10:13,280 --> 00:10:15,360 pero tal vez eso da igual. 219 00:10:15,360 --> 00:10:19,694 Si no pueden encontrar nada que echarnos a la cara, tal vez seguirán inventando. 220 00:10:19,694 --> 00:10:21,840 Tal vez se inventarán cosas serias. 221 00:10:21,840 --> 00:10:25,600 A este ritmo, me espero que la siguiente novedad sea un 222 00:10:25,600 --> 00:10:28,320 photoshop de mí en un garaje haciendo 223 00:10:28,320 --> 00:10:30,900 un intercambio con un maletín lleno de dinero. 224 00:10:30,900 --> 00:10:35,040 Lo que he escuchado es que si no pueden cargarse la iniciativa, 225 00:10:35,040 --> 00:10:38,087 el siguiente paso es tirarnos tantas acusaciones que los 226 00:10:38,087 --> 00:10:41,534 miembros del Parlamento tengan miedo de apoyarnos. 227 00:10:41,534 --> 00:10:44,800 Así que puede que este sea solo el segundo disparo, pero 228 00:10:44,800 --> 00:10:47,933 eso no quita que vengan otros 20 disparos detrás. 229 00:10:47,933 --> 00:10:51,840 Y no puedo evitar pensar en lo estúpido que es esto 230 00:10:51,840 --> 00:10:56,480 cuando tienes en cuenta, en comparación, lo barato que sería un plan de fin de soporte. 231 00:10:56,480 --> 00:10:59,760 Estoy seguro de que lo que están gastando las empresas en este lobbying 232 00:10:59,760 --> 00:11:03,537 es más de lo que costaría implementar un plan de fin de soporte en los juegos, 233 00:11:03,537 --> 00:11:05,971 especialmente en el futuro. 234 00:11:05,971 --> 00:11:08,400 De hecho, creo que dichos planes de fin de vida 235 00:11:08,400 --> 00:11:12,300 costarían menos que esos euros imaginarios que nadie me está pagando. 236 00:11:12,300 --> 00:11:14,194 Pero no sé qué va a venir después de esto, 237 00:11:14,194 --> 00:11:16,220 y podría volverse mucho más feo. 238 00:11:16,220 --> 00:11:17,600 ¿Quién sabe? 239 00:11:17,600 --> 00:11:20,720 Estoy completamente fuera de mi terreno. 240 00:11:20,720 --> 00:11:24,080 Nunca había sido un objetivo político antes, 241 00:11:24,080 --> 00:11:27,200 así que todo esto es terreno desconocido para mí. 242 00:11:27,200 --> 00:11:30,000 ¿Alguna vez has jugado a un juego que se va volviendo más difícil, 243 00:11:30,000 --> 00:11:32,640 y todavía eres capaz de seguir el ritmo de momento, 244 00:11:32,640 --> 00:11:35,120 pero empiezas a pensar que si sigue así 245 00:11:35,120 --> 00:11:38,320 no estás seguro de si podrás seguir el ritmo en un nivel o dos? 246 00:11:38,320 --> 00:11:41,200 Esa es la sensación que tengo ahora mismo. 247 00:11:41,200 --> 00:11:43,680 Y para los que penséis que esto siendo paranóico, 248 00:11:43,680 --> 00:11:46,000 ¿habéis oído hablar de ese youtuber de videojuegos retro 249 00:11:46,000 --> 00:11:49,544 a quien arrestaron por hacer reseñas de consolas portátiles retro? 250 00:11:49,544 --> 00:11:53,600 Ah, sí, ¡para nada se siente similar! 251 00:11:53,600 --> 00:11:56,985 O sea, no tengo ninguna consola portátil, así que supongo que estoy a salvo. 252 00:11:56,985 --> 00:11:58,900 ¿Pero y qué pasa con el abandonanware? 253 00:11:58,900 --> 00:12:02,400 Si juego a un juego de Commodore 64 con un emulador, 254 00:12:02,400 --> 00:12:06,474 ¿el quinto paso va a ser enviar a la policía a mi casa? 255 00:12:06,474 --> 00:12:08,764 ¡Hay que querer a la industria del videojuego! 256 00:12:08,764 --> 00:12:12,521 Ahora mismo, todavía me siento libre de expresar lo que siento, 257 00:12:12,521 --> 00:12:15,280 así que más me vale aprovechar. 258 00:12:15,280 --> 00:12:16,480 Pero el rollo es: 259 00:12:16,480 --> 00:12:19,222 La industria de los videojuegos vale miles de millones. 260 00:12:19,222 --> 00:12:22,289 Si de verdad quieren mancillar mi nombre o el de la iniciativa, 261 00:12:22,289 --> 00:12:24,276 van a encontrar la manera de hacerlo. 262 00:12:24,276 --> 00:12:27,933 Tenemos suerte de que sus intentos hasta ahora hayan sido tan incompetentes. 263 00:12:27,933 --> 00:12:31,360 O sea, os acabo de enseñar que sus declaraciones son falsas, 264 00:12:31,360 --> 00:12:34,366 ya que están mintiendo acerca de cómo la ley define mis acciones. 265 00:12:34,366 --> 00:12:37,920 Video Games Europe casi seguro estaba mintiendo respecto a esta afirmación, 266 00:12:37,920 --> 00:12:39,760 y además era irrelevante. ("Cuando cerramos el soporte a un videojuego, la industria se asegura de que los jugadores se enteren con el tiempo de antelación requerido por las leyes locales de protección al consumidor") 267 00:12:39,760 --> 00:12:43,040 Casi seguro mintieron acerca de que tendrían responsabilidad aquí. ("Las empresas serían responsables del contenido en servidores de la comunidad") 268 00:12:43,040 --> 00:12:46,859 O son tan obtusos que son incapaces de entender lo que estamos pidiendo, 269 00:12:46,859 --> 00:12:48,700 incluso cuando se les explica detenidamente, 270 00:12:48,700 --> 00:12:51,127 o mienten al decir que no lo entiende. 271 00:12:51,127 --> 00:12:52,400 Elegid. 272 00:12:52,400 --> 00:12:53,834 Ah, y esta afirmación. ("Estas propuestas reducirían la libertad del desarrollador al hacer que los videojuegos sean prohibitivamente caros de desarrollar") 273 00:12:53,834 --> 00:12:57,200 Esta tiene su truco, porque no se puede desmentir. 274 00:12:57,200 --> 00:12:58,987 Podrías decir esto acerca de cualquier cosa. 275 00:12:58,987 --> 00:12:59,746 En plan, podría decir: 276 00:12:59,746 --> 00:13:03,360 "Es prohibitivamente caro para mí hacer un avíón de papel" 277 00:13:03,360 --> 00:13:04,080 Y podrás decir, 278 00:13:04,080 --> 00:13:08,080 "¿De qué estás hablando? Un folio vale, qué, ¿dos céntimos?" 279 00:13:08,080 --> 00:13:08,800 Y yo podría decirte, 280 00:13:08,800 --> 00:13:12,034 "Sí, pero estarías limitando mis libertades, porque 281 00:13:12,034 --> 00:13:14,320 yo quiero hacer mis aviones de papel utilizando 282 00:13:14,320 --> 00:13:17,541 la Carta Magna, y eso tiene un valor incalculable. 283 00:13:17,541 --> 00:13:22,127 Por tanto, es prohibitivamente caro para mí hacer un avión de papel." 284 00:13:22,127 --> 00:13:25,120 Os garantizo que esa es la clase de lógica que están usando aquí 285 00:13:25,120 --> 00:13:27,600 si nos pusiéramos a analizar los detalles. 286 00:13:27,600 --> 00:13:29,200 Oh, y hagamos que todo el mundo sepa que 287 00:13:29,200 --> 00:13:32,890 este grupo de lobbying ni siquiera está respresentando a sus miembros muy bien. 288 00:13:32,890 --> 00:13:37,040 BeamNG dice que Video Games Europe no les consultó, 289 00:13:37,040 --> 00:13:39,820 y que no están de acuerdo con sus declaraciones ni comportamiento. 290 00:13:39,820 --> 00:13:42,000 Incluso Epic Games, 291 00:13:42,000 --> 00:13:45,367 sí, esa pequeña compañía, probablemente nunca hayáis escuchado hablar de ellos, 292 00:13:45,367 --> 00:13:48,960 ha salido a decir que ahora mismo no tiene opinión en el tema. 293 00:13:48,960 --> 00:13:53,266 ¡Así que Video Games Europe tampoco les representaba a ellos! 294 00:13:53,266 --> 00:13:56,320 Así que si ni siquiera están consultando a sus miembros, 295 00:13:56,320 --> 00:13:58,866 ¿a quién demonios están representando exactamente? 296 00:13:58,866 --> 00:14:01,714 Vale, tengo una novedad que he visto mientras estaba editando: 297 00:14:01,714 --> 00:14:04,862 Ubisoft ha respondido a Stop Killing Games. 298 00:14:04,862 --> 00:14:06,890 Esa no me la esperaba. 299 00:14:06,890 --> 00:14:10,518 Están intentando confundir a la gente. Voy a hacer esto rápido. 300 00:14:10,518 --> 00:14:12,339 Vale, esto es irrelevante. ("Respecto a la petición, operamos en un mercado. Y cuando sacamos un juego, proveemos un montón de soporte para dicho juego. También proveemos un montón de servicios para asegurarnos de que el juego es accessible y se puede jugar 24/7.") 301 00:14:12,339 --> 00:14:14,126 Somos conscientes de vuestros términos, 302 00:14:14,126 --> 00:14:16,673 todavía no se sabe si son legales. ("Guillemot dice que la compañía provee "información respecto al juego y durante cuánto tiempo puede jugarse".") 303 00:14:16,673 --> 00:14:18,640 Esto también es irrelevante. ("Proponemos a los compradores del juego una cuota de un euro para comprar la siguiente versión del juego. No es mucho dinero para seguir jugando al juego.") 304 00:14:18,640 --> 00:14:19,914 Esta parte es verdad. ("Este tipo de problema no es exclusivo de Ubisoft") 305 00:14:19,914 --> 00:14:22,560 Esto es un problema extendido en la industria. 306 00:14:22,560 --> 00:14:24,080 Lo único especial de Ubisoft es que 307 00:14:24,080 --> 00:14:27,327 pretenden hacer esto y salirse con la suya siendo una empresa francesa. 308 00:14:27,327 --> 00:14:29,948 Vale, ni siquiera la comisión europea quería comprometerse a decir 309 00:14:29,948 --> 00:14:33,440 si este tipo de juegos son servicios o no cuando preguntamos. ("Provees un servicio, pero nada está escrito en piedra y puede que en algún momento el servicio termine.") 310 00:14:33,440 --> 00:14:37,433 Así que es libre de afirmar que estos juegos son servicios, pero igual no lo son. 311 00:14:37,433 --> 00:14:40,000 Los servicios te dicen cuándo acaban. 312 00:14:40,000 --> 00:14:42,213 Y el argumento de proveer soporte para siempre... ("El soporte del los juegos no puede durar para siempre.") 313 00:14:42,213 --> 00:14:43,760 Vale, no me decido. 314 00:14:43,760 --> 00:14:46,267 Si un desarrollador con experiencia dijera esto, 315 00:14:46,267 --> 00:14:48,787 estaría 100% seguro de que están intentando engañar a la gente. 316 00:14:48,787 --> 00:14:49,634 O sea, hey, 317 00:14:49,634 --> 00:14:51,794 se parece muchísimo a ese comentario 318 00:14:51,794 --> 00:14:54,560 de Video Games Europe acerca del soporte eterno. 319 00:14:54,560 --> 00:14:56,720 Puede que esta sea la nueva estrategia de la industria. 320 00:14:56,720 --> 00:15:01,461 Si pueden seguir fingiendo eternamente que no entienden lo que pedimos, 321 00:15:01,461 --> 00:15:03,833 igual esperan que así puedan cambiar la narrativa. 322 00:15:03,833 --> 00:15:07,440 Pero quien lo dice es un CEO, 323 00:15:07,440 --> 00:15:10,844 así que a lo mejor de verdad no sabe cómo funcionan sus juegos. 324 00:15:10,844 --> 00:15:12,201 Oye, si es así 325 00:15:12,201 --> 00:15:13,840 no sería el primer CEO 326 00:15:13,840 --> 00:15:16,560 que no entiende cómo funcionan sus productos. 327 00:15:16,560 --> 00:15:19,360 Así que no me queda claro si quiere hacerle luz de gas a todo el mundo, 328 00:15:19,360 --> 00:15:21,920 o si simplemente no sabe cómo se hacen estos juegos, 329 00:15:21,920 --> 00:15:24,266 así que piensa que necesitarían soporte eterno. 330 00:15:24,266 --> 00:15:26,733 Casi que espero que de verdad no sepa de qué habla. 331 00:15:26,733 --> 00:15:28,433 Pero bueno, la cuestión es que 332 00:15:28,433 --> 00:15:31,900 la industria de los videojuegos está mintiendo un montón y jugando sucio 333 00:15:31,900 --> 00:15:33,760 en contra de Stop Killing Games. 334 00:15:33,760 --> 00:15:36,400 Y supongo que en contra de mí también. 335 00:15:36,400 --> 00:15:40,067 Así que si la industria sigue con estos intentos de tumbar la iniciativa, 336 00:15:40,067 --> 00:15:41,920 tal vez da por hecho que la industria, 337 00:15:41,920 --> 00:15:44,350 que sabemos que no para de mentir, 338 00:15:44,350 --> 00:15:46,320 está mintiendo otra vez. 339 00:15:46,320 --> 00:15:50,560 Y la razón de sus acusaciones es que quieren hacerte olvidar el problema real, 340 00:15:50,560 --> 00:15:53,600 es decir, la industria robándole a los consumidores. 341 00:15:53,600 --> 00:15:56,400 Hay matices, pero básicamente el mensaje 342 00:15:56,400 --> 00:15:58,907 es que si compras una copia de un juego, 343 00:15:58,907 --> 00:16:00,720 deberías poder quedártela, 344 00:16:00,720 --> 00:16:05,497 y los distribuidores no deberían poder destruir algo por lo que has pagado. 345 00:16:05,497 --> 00:16:07,736 Este concepto es tan básico, 346 00:16:07,760 --> 00:16:11,520 que es gracioso que tengamos siquiera que luchar por ello. 347 00:16:11,520 --> 00:16:14,560 Así que no dejes que la industria te distraiga, 348 00:16:14,560 --> 00:16:16,230 especialmente en el futuro. 349 00:16:16,230 --> 00:16:20,233 Si algo huele mal, discútelo, plántale cara. 350 00:16:20,233 --> 00:16:23,280 Lo digo porque es posible que la cosa se ponga tan fea 351 00:16:23,280 --> 00:16:24,527 que tal vez en el futuro 352 00:16:24,527 --> 00:16:29,440 no tenga la libertad de comentar o de defenderme como hago ahora. 353 00:16:29,440 --> 00:16:32,320 He podido ponerme en contacto con gente que tiene contactos en política, 354 00:16:32,320 --> 00:16:35,520 quienes saben más acerca de estos ataques que yo. 355 00:16:35,520 --> 00:16:38,233 Pienso seguir sus consejos. 356 00:16:38,233 --> 00:16:41,360 Ahora mismo mis planes no han cambiado nada. 357 00:16:41,360 --> 00:16:44,880 Pero si en el futuro de repente no hablo de ciertos temas, 358 00:16:44,880 --> 00:16:47,200 os estoy explicando el porqué ahora mismo. 359 00:16:47,200 --> 00:16:50,000 Será porque estoy recibiendo ataques tan serios 360 00:16:50,000 --> 00:16:53,760 que el hecho de que yo diga algo podría suponer una carga. 361 00:16:53,760 --> 00:16:54,733 O sea, recordad: 362 00:16:54,733 --> 00:16:57,120 Esto fue en privado. 363 00:16:57,120 --> 00:16:59,600 La industria no ha publicado esto. 364 00:16:59,600 --> 00:17:02,400 Así que quién sabe qué es lo siguiente que planean. 365 00:17:02,400 --> 00:17:04,859 Y a ver, con suerte estoy sobrereaccionando 366 00:17:04,859 --> 00:17:07,520 y la industria no siga escalando. 367 00:17:07,520 --> 00:17:10,240 Esto ha sido ellos lanzando un par de dardos al voleo, 368 00:17:10,240 --> 00:17:13,120 pero estoy intentando prepararme para muchas posibilidades. 369 00:17:13,120 --> 00:17:16,000 O sea, yo ya sabía que era posilbe que pasara algo así 370 00:17:16,000 --> 00:17:18,640 cuando empecé la campaña el año pasado. 371 00:17:18,640 --> 00:17:23,027 Es uno de los muchos motivos por los que no quería hacer esto. 372 00:17:23,027 --> 00:17:26,704 Al menos lo único que estoy haciendo es implementar un mínimo de sentido común 373 00:17:26,704 --> 00:17:29,760 en la regulación de la industria de los videojuegos, 374 00:17:29,760 --> 00:17:33,711 y no algo como denunciar a la industria de defensa. 375 00:17:33,711 --> 00:17:35,833 Eso sí que sería malo. 376 00:17:35,833 --> 00:17:38,440 Vale, para terminar con algo más positivo, 377 00:17:38,440 --> 00:17:40,080 a pesar de todo este desastre, 378 00:17:40,080 --> 00:17:44,366 estamos teniendo cada vez más apoyo por parte de miembros del Parlamento Europeo. 379 00:17:44,366 --> 00:17:46,560 Aquí van algunos de los que me han informado, 380 00:17:46,560 --> 00:17:49,200 aunque de algunos me he enterado bastante tarde. 381 00:17:49,200 --> 00:17:52,233 De hecho, Markéta Gregorová es del año pasado 382 00:17:52,233 --> 00:17:54,666 y tenía un arte promocional muy chulo y todo. 383 00:17:54,666 --> 00:17:56,880 Eso es... qué, ¿color de 4 bits? 384 00:17:56,880 --> 00:17:59,734 Pero el grande es Nicolae Ștefănuță, 385 00:17:59,734 --> 00:18:02,800 un vicepresidente del Parlamento Europeo, 386 00:18:02,800 --> 00:18:07,130 poniendo su peso tras la iniciativa y firmándola él mismo. 387 00:18:07,130 --> 00:18:11,040 Vale, soy la persona equivocada para juzgar la eficacia de las redes sociales, 388 00:18:11,040 --> 00:18:14,480 pero 85 mil "me gusta" en Twitter me me sonaría bastante bien 389 00:18:14,480 --> 00:18:16,080 si fuera un político. 390 00:18:16,080 --> 00:18:19,766 Gente, a esto me refiero con las "victorias fáciles" para los políticos. 391 00:18:19,766 --> 00:18:21,034 Pero en serio, 392 00:18:21,034 --> 00:18:24,720 A la mayoría de la gente los videojuegos ni les van ni les vienen, 393 00:18:24,720 --> 00:18:27,520 así que esto tiene bastante poco riesgo político. 394 00:18:27,520 --> 00:18:29,184 Pero para la gente a la que sí le importan, 395 00:18:29,184 --> 00:18:33,280 Stop Killing Games está luchando por una posición bastante popular 396 00:18:33,280 --> 00:18:36,320 que se ajusta a leyes de protección al consumidor existentes, 397 00:18:36,320 --> 00:18:38,480 y se centra en una sola cuestión, 398 00:18:38,480 --> 00:18:41,300 así que no es que vaya a hacer daño a la industria de los videojuegos. 399 00:18:41,300 --> 00:18:42,880 La industria está luchando contra esto 400 00:18:42,880 --> 00:18:46,494 porque lucharían contra cualquier cosa que les obligue a hacer algo. 401 00:18:46,494 --> 00:18:51,760 Stop Killing Games es de las cosas menos arriesgadas y más populares en política. 402 00:18:51,760 --> 00:18:52,880 Y como extra, 403 00:18:52,880 --> 00:18:56,960 es algo que atrae a la gente que normalmente no se mete en política. 404 00:18:56,960 --> 00:18:59,033 Es difícil llegar a esa población. 405 00:18:59,033 --> 00:19:00,800 Y ahora es buen momento para volver a mencionar 406 00:19:00,800 --> 00:19:03,360 que contactar con miembros del Parlamento Europeo 407 00:19:03,360 --> 00:19:06,160 en el comité de Mercado Interno y Protección al Consumidor 408 00:19:06,160 --> 00:19:09,120 es probablemente lo mejor que podemos hacer para luchar. 409 00:19:09,120 --> 00:19:12,560 Aunque he recibido información contradictoria de a qué partidos contactar 410 00:19:12,560 --> 00:19:14,880 y qué asuntos usar en los correos. 411 00:19:14,880 --> 00:19:16,000 Si quieres ayudar, 412 00:19:16,000 --> 00:19:20,000 haz lo que puedas y contacta con un representante de tu país. 413 00:19:20,000 --> 00:19:22,866 Preferiblemente alguien a quien le importen los derechos del consumidor. 414 00:19:22,866 --> 00:19:24,841 Vale, ¡eso es todo! 415 00:19:24,841 --> 00:19:28,160 No tengo ni idea de qué va a pasar a partir de ahora, 416 00:19:28,160 --> 00:19:29,360 pero toda esta resistencia 417 00:19:29,360 --> 00:19:32,627 significa que estamos demostrando tener poder para cambiar las cosas. 418 00:19:32,627 --> 00:19:34,033 Así que, ¡sigamos! 419 00:19:34,033 --> 00:19:35,069 [Subtítulos por Reonu]
-
Yeah, they are only going to up the attack, I think. Luckily, I think you could go over every fan stream with Ross and the only political opinions you would find is slightly left-of-center pragmatism mixed with cynicism about the US government at least. This attack was made through the legal channels of the EU, but I don’t think they will only take that approach. The petition will only put the movement before the legislative body, meaning it needs MPs willing to support it; the industry will probably try to sap the political will that will pressure them to actually do something. And careless retweets of toxic supporters will make that more difficult. So I hope that even if Ross has no control over that account, he might consider giving the account runner a little friendly advice about exercising caution if he is on good terms with them. -
Oh, the irony of being a volunteer subtitle writer. Am I also entitled to €63,000? I don't think I've attracted enough heat from the industry to go after me. Yet. Enjoy Ross's Rickshaw Rides. High-tech VTT subtitles featuring markup for positioning to get out of the way when needed! Just copy and paste the text in a txt and upload verbatim like usual. WEBVTT 00:00:00.293 --> 00:00:01.200 Hey! 00:00:01.200 --> 00:00:02.054 You know that saying, 00:00:02.054 --> 00:00:06.166 "It's not paranoia if they really are out to get you"? 00:00:06.166 --> 00:00:08.967 Well, I have another video I do not want to make, 00:00:08.967 --> 00:00:11.097 but I probably should. 00:00:11.097 --> 00:00:15.120 And this one is newsworthy, especially for me. 00:00:15.120 --> 00:00:19.233 I have behind-the-scenes news on the Stop Killing Games campaign. 00:00:19.233 --> 00:00:22.800 Okay, a quick refresher, because I know this gets confusing: 00:00:22.800 --> 00:00:25.040 I founded the Stop Killing Games <i>movement</i> 00:00:25.040 --> 00:00:29.313 to challenge the legality of publishers destroying games which you've paid for. 00:00:29.313 --> 00:00:32.800 This has involved a lot of things which I've shown in slides before, 00:00:32.800 --> 00:00:36.800 line:75% and that <i>includes</i> assisting with the European Citizens' Initiative, 00:00:36.800 --> 00:00:39.547 which is the biggest thing going on with it right now. 00:00:39.547 --> 00:00:43.966 However, I am actually <i>not</i> the founder of the European Citizens' Initiative. 00:00:43.966 --> 00:00:47.520 position:100% line-right align:right size:50% line:50% That would be a group of volunteers whom I'm in touch with. 00:00:47.520 --> 00:00:50.214 position:100% line-right align:right size:50% line:50% I'm ineligible to have an official role in the initiative. 00:00:50.214 --> 00:00:52.488 position:100% line-right align:right size:50% line:50% I'm just a major promoter of it. 00:00:52.488 --> 00:00:54.400 It's always been something separate. 00:00:54.400 --> 00:00:58.054 That's part of why it's called the "Stop Destroying Videogames" initiative 00:00:58.054 --> 00:01:00.800 instead of the "Stop Killing Games" movement. 00:01:00.800 --> 00:01:02.108 So, with that in mind, 00:01:02.108 --> 00:01:03.609 it was recently shared with me 00:01:03.609 --> 00:01:06.653 that the Stop Destroying Videogames initiative 00:01:06.653 --> 00:01:11.473 has received a serious accusation from an anonymous source. 00:01:11.473 --> 00:01:13.967 The EU Commission relayed a complaint of it 00:01:13.967 --> 00:01:16.330 committing two violations. 00:01:16.330 --> 00:01:17.600 Yikes! 00:01:17.600 --> 00:01:20.247 A "false 'no funding' declaration", 00:01:20.247 --> 00:01:24.314 and "systematic concealment of major contributions". 00:01:24.314 --> 00:01:27.280 "This declaration appears fundamentally incorrect 00:01:27.280 --> 00:01:29.360 based on publicly documented evidence 00:01:29.360 --> 00:01:33.666 of substantial undisclosed professional contributions to the campaign." 00:01:33.666 --> 00:01:36.374 Well, this is all news to me, 00:01:36.374 --> 00:01:39.680 but I don't know everything that's going on with the initiative. 00:01:39.680 --> 00:01:41.066 What's this about? 00:01:41.066 --> 00:01:43.120 Oh, it's about me! 00:01:43.120 --> 00:01:44.920 I'm the evidence, everyone! 00:01:46.600 --> 00:01:48.800 What do we have here? 00:01:48.800 --> 00:01:50.960 A quote, "There have been many weeks on the campaign 00:01:50.960 --> 00:01:53.233 where I've been working 12 to 14 hours a day 00:01:53.233 --> 00:01:55.600 to keep things moving to get signatures." 00:01:55.600 --> 00:01:57.001 Damn straight I have! 00:01:57.001 --> 00:01:58.374 That is true. 00:01:58.374 --> 00:02:02.233 "I've been running a rickshaw carrying people to the destination." 00:02:02.233 --> 00:02:04.348 Um… yes. 00:02:04.348 --> 00:02:06.880 I did say those words. 00:02:06.880 --> 00:02:08.580 It's unclear to me if the accuser 00:02:08.580 --> 00:02:12.400 thinks I've literally been running a rickshaw service or not. 00:02:12.400 --> 00:02:13.360 And you know what? 00:02:13.360 --> 00:02:14.880 I'm not gonna tell them. 00:02:14.880 --> 00:02:17.040 They can guess that for themselves. 00:02:17.040 --> 00:02:18.961 They're doing a lot of guessing in this. 00:02:18.961 --> 00:02:20.000 You'll see. 00:02:20.000 --> 00:02:22.654 Media interviews identifying me as handling 00:02:22.654 --> 00:02:26.480 "the standard day-to-day work of running the Stop Killing Games initiative" 00:02:26.480 --> 00:02:29.440 and "described as the primary strategic decision-maker 00:02:29.440 --> 00:02:32.197 and public spokesperson throughout the campaign." 00:02:32.197 --> 00:02:34.398 Okay, this is reaching. 00:02:34.398 --> 00:02:37.680 Since I apparently need to spell it out, 00:02:37.680 --> 00:02:41.934 when I say the initiative "will do this" or "will do that," 00:02:41.934 --> 00:02:46.160 that's me assuming the initiative members are on board with what I'm saying, 00:02:46.160 --> 00:02:48.560 and me taking my best guess. 00:02:48.560 --> 00:02:50.800 I've even said before on video, 00:02:50.800 --> 00:02:53.840 the initiative members are not a hive mind. 00:02:53.840 --> 00:02:57.033 They can disagree with each other, including me. 00:02:57.033 --> 00:03:00.000 They certainly <i>listen</i> to my input, 00:03:00.000 --> 00:03:05.280 but the decision on literally everything about the initiative is theirs. 00:03:05.280 --> 00:03:10.080 If I don't like something, but they do, then I just have to deal with it. 00:03:10.080 --> 00:03:12.757 I have no actual authority. 00:03:12.757 --> 00:03:16.320 Nobody in the initiative takes orders from me. 00:03:16.320 --> 00:03:19.071 But get ready, because here comes the clown accounting. 00:03:19.071 --> 00:03:23.120 "Fifteen to twenty weeks of twelve to fourteen hour days." 00:03:23.120 --> 00:03:26.570 That's interesting that they call this a <i>conservative</i> estimate, 00:03:26.570 --> 00:03:28.724 because they're making these numbers up. 00:03:28.724 --> 00:03:31.324 They may as well be reading tea leaves. 00:03:31.324 --> 00:03:35.697 It's true I think I've spent that many hours a day working on this campaign 00:03:35.697 --> 00:03:37.840 for <i>some</i> weeks. 00:03:37.840 --> 00:03:39.920 But 15 to 20? 00:03:39.920 --> 00:03:41.633 That would have killed me! 00:03:41.633 --> 00:03:43.264 Some weeks were this high, 00:03:43.264 --> 00:03:46.880 others it was anywhere from zero to four hours a day. 00:03:46.880 --> 00:03:48.101 I don't know. 00:03:48.101 --> 00:03:49.920 You know why I don't know? 00:03:49.920 --> 00:03:51.600 Because I never track my hours! 00:03:51.600 --> 00:03:52.960 Why would I? 00:03:52.960 --> 00:03:55.040 Nobody was hiring me for this. 00:03:55.040 --> 00:03:57.120 It's all volunteer time. 00:03:57.120 --> 00:04:01.520 The only reason I said "12 to 14" is because there were plenty of days 00:04:01.520 --> 00:04:05.704 where I would wake up, work the whole time, then go to bed, 00:04:05.704 --> 00:04:09.040 minus eating, exercise, and essential chores. 00:04:09.040 --> 00:04:10.658 And those days make me batty. 00:04:10.658 --> 00:04:12.966 I hate working that much. 00:04:12.966 --> 00:04:17.233 But I am impressed that they think they know my hours better than I do. 00:04:17.233 --> 00:04:19.114 Oh, but here's the good part: 00:04:19.114 --> 00:04:23.704 "Professional rate: 50 to 75 euros an hour." 00:04:23.704 --> 00:04:25.280 Yeah, maybe that would mean something 00:04:25.280 --> 00:04:28.687 if I was a professional who had a rate for <i>anything</i>. 00:04:28.687 --> 00:04:34.988 "Minimum estimated value: 63 to 147,000 euros." 00:04:34.988 --> 00:04:36.633 Oh, yeah(!) 00:04:36.633 --> 00:04:39.214 Okay, this one annoys me a bit 00:04:39.214 --> 00:04:43.374 because their low end, €63,000, 00:04:43.374 --> 00:04:48.480 is more money I've made in any year in my entire life. 00:04:48.480 --> 00:04:49.277 Though, hey, 00:04:49.277 --> 00:04:51.760 I'm sure all kinds of people are worth more 00:04:51.760 --> 00:04:55.120 if they make up numbers about how much they should be getting paid 00:04:55.120 --> 00:04:57.266 from imaginary sources. 00:04:57.266 --> 00:05:00.167 But they're saying my volunteer work is worth that much, 00:05:00.167 --> 00:05:04.720 so, by not reporting it, it's violating Article 17, yada yada. 00:05:04.720 --> 00:05:08.560 Their supporting evidence is media treating me as though I'm the leader, 00:05:08.560 --> 00:05:10.987 and me saying I've worked a lot on this. 00:05:10.987 --> 00:05:13.760 Well, it's true I have worked a lot on this. 00:05:13.760 --> 00:05:15.120 But I must have said publicly 00:05:15.120 --> 00:05:18.974 that I'm ineligible to join the initiative at least 50 times. 00:05:18.974 --> 00:05:21.281 And this may surprise the accuser, 00:05:21.281 --> 00:05:26.182 but sometimes game journalists get details wrong when reporting on something. 00:05:26.182 --> 00:05:29.280 "Twelve to fourteen hour day commitment during 'many weeks' 00:05:29.280 --> 00:05:32.729 far exceeds any reasonable volunteer threshold." 00:05:32.729 --> 00:05:34.240 Yes, true! 00:05:34.240 --> 00:05:35.520 They're right about that. 00:05:35.520 --> 00:05:37.187 That isn't reasonable at all. 00:05:37.187 --> 00:05:41.520 I've hated this crap and I can't wait to work less on the campaign! 00:05:41.520 --> 00:05:44.334 It's only my perception that this is my one chance 00:05:44.334 --> 00:05:47.600 to fix the problem of destroying games that's pushed me this hard. 00:05:47.600 --> 00:05:49.595 But I have my limits, guys. 00:05:49.595 --> 00:05:51.001 "Professional time investment 00:05:51.001 --> 00:05:53.756 constitutes quantifiable in-kind contribution 00:05:53.756 --> 00:05:56.066 under transparency regulations." 00:05:56.066 --> 00:05:58.666 I guess good thing I'm not a professional then! 00:05:58.666 --> 00:06:02.320 Well, this is a very serious accusation, 00:06:02.320 --> 00:06:04.387 and it sounds like I should have logged my hours 00:06:04.387 --> 00:06:07.566 and made up hourly rates like my accuser did, huh? 00:06:07.566 --> 00:06:10.000 But wait, here's a thought: 00:06:10.000 --> 00:06:14.636 Why don't we check what the European Union's rules actually are? 00:06:14.636 --> 00:06:17.087 "Who is considered a sponsor?" 00:06:17.087 --> 00:06:19.334 "Sponsors are people or organisations 00:06:19.334 --> 00:06:22.641 providing financial support over 500 euros." 00:06:22.641 --> 00:06:25.719 Okay, well, I've spent zero euros on the initiative, 00:06:25.719 --> 00:06:28.785 just a crapload of time, so, that's not me. 00:06:28.785 --> 00:06:30.953 "Legal persons or organisations 00:06:30.953 --> 00:06:34.960 providing other economically quantifiable (in-kind donations) 00:06:34.960 --> 00:06:38.320 or non-economically quantifiable support to an initiative 00:06:38.320 --> 00:06:40.597 are also considered sponsors." 00:06:40.597 --> 00:06:43.671 Well, I've been advised I'm not a "legal person," 00:06:43.671 --> 00:06:45.451 I'm a "natural person." 00:06:45.451 --> 00:06:47.232 That sounds right. 00:06:47.232 --> 00:06:51.120 And I certainly wasn't representing an official organization. 00:06:51.120 --> 00:06:55.040 I mean, I haven't signed one form with "Stop Killing Games" on it, 00:06:55.040 --> 00:06:57.197 or for the initiative, for that matter. 00:06:57.197 --> 00:07:01.533 "Individuals providing non-financial support, such as volunteering, 00:07:01.533 --> 00:07:05.440 are not considered sponsors under the ECI Regulation 00:07:05.440 --> 00:07:08.500 and do not need to be reported." 00:07:08.500 --> 00:07:10.640 Oh, what's that? 00:07:10.640 --> 00:07:14.133 That description, which is exactly what I've been doing? 00:07:14.133 --> 00:07:19.233 So the EU says the initiative has been following the rules this entire time? 00:07:19.233 --> 00:07:23.533 But what about this anonymous accuser saying the EU doesn't know its own rules? 00:07:23.533 --> 00:07:26.080 Is there a hidden clause here? 00:07:26.080 --> 00:07:27.474 Like, you're not a sponsor 00:07:27.474 --> 00:07:29.440 unless you work really hard? 00:07:29.440 --> 00:07:31.000 So, let's get this straight: 00:07:31.000 --> 00:07:35.994 We've got an anonymous complaint saying the initiative is violating EU law, 00:07:35.994 --> 00:07:38.335 I'm apparently in charge of the initiative, 00:07:38.335 --> 00:07:41.233 despite being ineligible to even join it, 00:07:41.233 --> 00:07:44.000 hence why my name is not on here. 00:07:44.000 --> 00:07:47.280 The accuser is making up how many hours I've worked on this 00:07:47.280 --> 00:07:49.534 and are making up imaginary money amounts 00:07:49.534 --> 00:07:52.080 I've supposedly donated in kind, 00:07:52.080 --> 00:07:55.966 and their claims directly contradict the EU's own laws on this. 00:07:55.966 --> 00:07:57.966 And hey, plot twist: 00:07:57.966 --> 00:08:00.240 There's something I didn't tell you. 00:08:00.240 --> 00:08:04.400 The official organizers literally asked EU representatives 00:08:04.400 --> 00:08:07.854 if it was okay for me to assist them in the capacity I have been 00:08:07.854 --> 00:08:10.687 back in spring of 2024, 00:08:10.687 --> 00:08:13.267 just to make sure everything was above board, 00:08:13.267 --> 00:08:16.800 in case there was a problem, or we needed to report anything. 00:08:16.800 --> 00:08:19.600 They said what I've been doing is <i>fine</i>. 00:08:19.600 --> 00:08:22.100 We've been doing this by the book, guys. 00:08:22.100 --> 00:08:24.500 So where did this complaint come from? 00:08:24.500 --> 00:08:27.200 Well, we'll never know, it's anonymous. 00:08:27.200 --> 00:08:28.487 But let me ask you, 00:08:28.487 --> 00:08:31.667 does anyone think this is just some <i>concerned citizen</i> 00:08:31.667 --> 00:08:33.840 acting independently here? 00:08:33.840 --> 00:08:36.880 I mean, pretend all of these accusations were true. 00:08:36.880 --> 00:08:39.114 Would that end the initiative? 00:08:39.114 --> 00:08:39.881 Maybe. 00:08:39.881 --> 00:08:41.307 I don't know. 00:08:41.307 --> 00:08:45.233 Someone was gunning for us, this is a shot across the bow. 00:08:45.233 --> 00:08:46.134 Now, again, 00:08:46.134 --> 00:08:50.240 this complaint is anonymous, so I'm not accusing anyone. 00:08:50.240 --> 00:08:52.000 I don't know who wrote it. 00:08:52.000 --> 00:08:54.160 But I'll just say the timing of this 00:08:54.160 --> 00:08:57.840 is awfully hot on the heels of an industry lobby group 00:08:57.840 --> 00:09:01.120 giving some very bad statements about the movement. 00:09:01.120 --> 00:09:04.866 In some cases, I think outright lying about it. 00:09:04.866 --> 00:09:07.066 But I don't know if it was them. 00:09:07.066 --> 00:09:09.420 Maybe it was a different lobbying group, 00:09:09.420 --> 00:09:13.780 or maybe it was just some political hatchet man hired by the industry. 00:09:13.780 --> 00:09:16.921 But someone was trying to kill the initiative. 00:09:16.921 --> 00:09:19.522 Filing paperwork to the European Union, 00:09:19.522 --> 00:09:23.543 accusing the initiative and myself of violating the rules, 00:09:23.543 --> 00:09:26.957 maybe even committing a crime, I'm not sure; 00:09:26.957 --> 00:09:29.040 that's no small thing. 00:09:29.040 --> 00:09:31.840 This is the industry playing dirty now. 00:09:31.840 --> 00:09:33.866 It reminds me of <i>Battleship</i>. 00:09:33.866 --> 00:09:35.461 They took a shot, 00:09:35.461 --> 00:09:37.600 hoping my battleship was here, 00:09:37.600 --> 00:09:39.627 when it was actually here. 00:09:39.627 --> 00:09:43.266 So, they missed, but I sure felt the splash. 00:09:43.266 --> 00:09:45.720 So why am I telling you all this? 00:09:45.720 --> 00:09:48.320 Well, this has me a little worried. 00:09:48.320 --> 00:09:50.400 I mean, this complaint doesn't scare me. 00:09:50.400 --> 00:09:52.960 We followed the rules and they made up the charges. 00:09:52.960 --> 00:09:57.200 I mean, hell, if they hadn't put "<i>appears</i> fundamentally incorrect," 00:09:57.200 --> 00:09:59.800 this might have been borderline libel against me. 00:09:59.800 --> 00:10:03.574 But the fact that first we have the industry lobbying against us, 00:10:03.574 --> 00:10:07.488 then we're getting this attempted shot at us behind closed doors 00:10:07.488 --> 00:10:10.466 makes me concerned about what's coming next. 00:10:10.466 --> 00:10:13.280 I mean, I haven't done anything shady that I'm aware of, 00:10:13.280 --> 00:10:15.360 but maybe that doesn't matter. 00:10:15.360 --> 00:10:19.694 If they can't find a real angle on us, maybe they'll make more things up. 00:10:19.694 --> 00:10:21.840 Maybe serious things. 00:10:21.840 --> 00:10:25.600 At the rate we're going, I'm expecting the next news 00:10:25.600 --> 00:10:28.320 to be a Photoshop of me in a parking garage 00:10:28.320 --> 00:10:30.900 doing a handoff with a briefcase full of money. 00:10:30.900 --> 00:10:35.040 Now, what I've been told is if the industry can't kill the initiative, 00:10:35.040 --> 00:10:38.087 the next step is to throw so much dirt on us, 00:10:38.087 --> 00:10:41.534 members of parliament start getting scared to support it. 00:10:41.534 --> 00:10:44.800 So just because this is only the second shot at us, 00:10:44.800 --> 00:10:47.933 that doesn't mean there aren't 20 more shots coming behind it. 00:10:47.933 --> 00:10:51.840 And I'm again reminded of how stupid this whole thing is 00:10:51.840 --> 00:10:56.480 when you consider what a comparatively low cost an end-of-life plan is. 00:10:56.480 --> 00:10:59.760 I bet whatever companies are spending on lobbying against us 00:10:59.760 --> 00:11:03.537 is more than it would cost them to have end-of-life plans for their games, 00:11:03.537 --> 00:11:05.971 especially in the future. 00:11:05.971 --> 00:11:08.400 Hell, I think a lot of end-of-life plans for games 00:11:08.400 --> 00:11:12.300 would be less than those imaginary euros I'm not being paid. 00:11:12.300 --> 00:11:14.194 But I don't know what's coming next, 00:11:14.194 --> 00:11:16.220 and it could get a lot worse than this. 00:11:16.220 --> 00:11:17.600 Who knows? 00:11:17.600 --> 00:11:20.720 I am so out of my league on this. 00:11:20.720 --> 00:11:24.080 I have never been a political target before, 00:11:24.080 --> 00:11:27.200 so this is all uncharted territory for me. 00:11:27.200 --> 00:11:30.000 Have you ever played a game that's getting harder and harder, 00:11:30.000 --> 00:11:32.640 and you can still keep up with it in the moment, 00:11:32.640 --> 00:11:35.120 but you're starting to think at the rate it's going, 00:11:35.120 --> 00:11:38.320 you're not sure if you can handle it in a level or two? 00:11:38.320 --> 00:11:41.200 That's kind of the vibe I have right now. 00:11:41.200 --> 00:11:43.680 And for those of you who think I'm being paranoid, 00:11:43.680 --> 00:11:46.000 did you hear about that retro gaming YouTuber 00:11:46.000 --> 00:11:49.544 who was arrested for reviewing modded handheld consoles? 00:11:49.544 --> 00:11:53.600 Oh, yeah, that doesn't hit close to home for me at all(!) 00:11:53.600 --> 00:11:56.985 I mean, I don't have any handhelds, so I guess I'm safe there. 00:11:56.985 --> 00:11:58.900 But what about abandonware? 00:11:58.900 --> 00:12:02.400 If I play an emulated Commodore 64 game, 00:12:02.400 --> 00:12:06.474 are they going to send the cops to my place as step five? 00:12:06.474 --> 00:12:08.764 Gotta love the games industry! 00:12:08.764 --> 00:12:12.521 But as of this moment, I still feel free to speak my mind, 00:12:12.521 --> 00:12:15.280 so, I better make use of it. 00:12:15.280 --> 00:12:16.480 Here's the thing: 00:12:16.480 --> 00:12:19.222 The video games industry is worth billions. 00:12:19.222 --> 00:12:22.289 If they really want to smear me or the initiative, 00:12:22.289 --> 00:12:24.276 they'll find a way to do it. 00:12:24.276 --> 00:12:27.933 We're lucky their attempts have been so bumbling so far. 00:12:27.933 --> 00:12:31.360 I mean, I just showed you how these claims are false, 00:12:31.360 --> 00:12:34.366 because they're lying about how the law defines my actions. 00:12:34.366 --> 00:12:37.920 Video Games Europe was almost certainly lying about this claim, 00:12:37.920 --> 00:12:39.760 and it was irrelevant. 00:12:39.760 --> 00:12:43.040 Almost certainly lying about their liability here. 00:12:43.040 --> 00:12:46.859 They were either so obtuse they couldn't understand what we're asking for 00:12:46.859 --> 00:12:48.700 when it's spelled out for them, 00:12:48.700 --> 00:12:51.127 or they're lying about not understanding it. 00:12:51.127 --> 00:12:52.400 Take your pick. 00:12:52.400 --> 00:12:53.834 Oh, and this claim. 00:12:53.834 --> 00:12:57.200 This one is a bit clever because it can't be disproven. 00:12:57.200 --> 00:12:58.987 You could say this about anything. 00:12:58.987 --> 00:12:59.746 Like I could say, 00:12:59.746 --> 00:13:03.360 "It's prohibitively expensive for me to make a paper airplane." 00:13:03.360 --> 00:13:04.080 And you might say, 00:13:04.080 --> 00:13:08.080 "What are you talking about? A piece of paper costs what, 2 cents?" 00:13:08.080 --> 00:13:08.800 And I could say, 00:13:08.800 --> 00:13:12.034 "Yeah, but that would curtail my choice, 00:13:12.034 --> 00:13:14.320 because I want to make my paper airplane 00:13:14.320 --> 00:13:17.541 out of the Magna Carta, and that's priceless. 00:13:17.541 --> 00:13:22.127 Thus, it's prohibitively expensive for me to make a paper airplane." 00:13:22.127 --> 00:13:25.120 I guarantee you that's the kind of logic they're using here 00:13:25.120 --> 00:13:27.600 if you were to really dig into the details. 00:13:27.600 --> 00:13:29.200 Oh, and let's let everyone know, 00:13:29.200 --> 00:13:32.890 this lobby group isn't even representing its members that well. 00:13:32.890 --> 00:13:37.040 <i>BeamNG</i> says they weren't consulted by Video Games Europe, 00:13:37.040 --> 00:13:39.820 and disagree with their statement and behavior. 00:13:39.820 --> 00:13:42.000 Even Epic Games, 00:13:42.000 --> 00:13:45.367 yeah, that small company, you probably haven't heard of them, 00:13:45.367 --> 00:13:48.960 has come out saying that they're currently non-committal on this. 00:13:48.960 --> 00:13:53.266 So, Video Games Europe wasn't representing <i>them</i> in their statement either! 00:13:53.266 --> 00:13:56.320 So, if they're not even consulting their members, 00:13:56.320 --> 00:13:58.866 who the hell are they representing, exactly? 00:13:58.866 --> 00:14:01.714 Okay, some news as I'm editing: 00:14:01.714 --> 00:14:04.862 Ubisoft has responded to Stop Killing Games. 00:14:04.862 --> 00:14:06.890 I was not expecting that. 00:14:06.890 --> 00:14:10.518 It's a lot of misdirection, I'll try and speedrun this. 00:14:10.518 --> 00:14:12.339 Okay, this is irrelevant. 00:14:12.339 --> 00:14:14.126 We're aware of your terms, 00:14:14.126 --> 00:14:16.673 it's not yet determined if they're legal or not. 00:14:16.673 --> 00:14:18.640 line:50% This is also irrelevant. 00:14:18.640 --> 00:14:19.914 This part is true, 00:14:19.914 --> 00:14:22.560 this is a widespread problem in the industry. 00:14:22.560 --> 00:14:24.080 The only thing unique to Ubisoft 00:14:24.080 --> 00:14:27.327 is they're trying to get away with this crap as a French company. 00:14:27.327 --> 00:14:29.948 Okay, even the EU Commission wouldn't commit 00:14:29.948 --> 00:14:33.440 as to whether these types of games are services or not when asked. 00:14:33.440 --> 00:14:37.433 So, he can call these games services, but legally, they might not be. 00:14:37.433 --> 00:14:40.000 Services tell you when they end. 00:14:40.000 --> 00:14:42.213 And the endless support argument. 00:14:42.213 --> 00:14:43.760 Okay, I'm undecided. 00:14:43.760 --> 00:14:46.267 If this was a senior developer saying this, 00:14:46.267 --> 00:14:48.787 I would 100% call this misdirection. 00:14:48.787 --> 00:14:49.634 I mean, hey, 00:14:49.634 --> 00:14:51.794 this looks awfully similar to that comment 00:14:51.794 --> 00:14:54.560 from Video Games Europe about endless support. 00:14:54.560 --> 00:14:56.720 This could be the industry's new playbook. 00:14:56.720 --> 00:15:01.461 If they can pretend to not understand what we're asking for over and over again, 00:15:01.461 --> 00:15:03.833 maybe they're hoping that will change the narrative. 00:15:03.833 --> 00:15:07.440 However, this is a CEO saying this, 00:15:07.440 --> 00:15:10.844 so maybe he really doesn't know how these games work. 00:15:10.844 --> 00:15:12.201 Hey, if so, 00:15:12.201 --> 00:15:13.840 he wouldn't be the first CEO 00:15:13.840 --> 00:15:16.560 line:50% to not understand how his company's products work. 00:15:16.560 --> 00:15:19.360 line:50% So, I can't tell if he's just trying to gaslight everyone, 00:15:19.360 --> 00:15:21.920 line:50% or if he just doesn't know how these games are made, 00:15:21.920 --> 00:15:24.266 line:50% so he thinks they would need endless support. 00:15:24.266 --> 00:15:26.733 line:50% I kind of hope he actually doesn't know. 00:15:26.733 --> 00:15:28.433 Anyway, the point here is 00:15:28.433 --> 00:15:31.900 there's a lot of lying and shady stuff going on from the games industry 00:15:31.900 --> 00:15:33.760 against Stop Killing Games. 00:15:33.760 --> 00:15:36.400 And I guess now, me too. 00:15:36.400 --> 00:15:40.067 So, if these attempts to shoot down the initiative keep happening, 00:15:40.067 --> 00:15:41.920 maybe assume the industry, 00:15:41.920 --> 00:15:44.350 which has been shown to be lying repeatedly, 00:15:44.350 --> 00:15:46.320 is lying again. 00:15:46.320 --> 00:15:50.560 And the whole point of their accusations is to make you forget the real issue, 00:15:50.560 --> 00:15:53.600 which is consumers are getting robbed by the industry. 00:15:53.600 --> 00:15:56.400 There are nuances to it, but the basic message 00:15:56.400 --> 00:15:58.907 is when you buy a copy of a game, 00:15:58.907 --> 00:16:00.720 you should get to keep it, 00:16:00.720 --> 00:16:05.497 and publishers shouldn't be able to destroy what you already paid for. 00:16:05.497 --> 00:16:07.760 This concept is so basic, 00:16:07.760 --> 00:16:11.520 it's still a joke we even have to fight for this. 00:16:11.520 --> 00:16:14.560 So don't let the industry throw you off the scent, 00:16:14.560 --> 00:16:16.230 especially in the future. 00:16:16.230 --> 00:16:20.233 If something doesn't pass the smell test, push back. 00:16:20.233 --> 00:16:23.280 I say this because things could heat up so much 00:16:23.280 --> 00:16:24.527 that maybe in the future, 00:16:24.527 --> 00:16:29.440 I'm <i>not</i> at liberty to give commentary or defend myself like this. 00:16:29.440 --> 00:16:32.320 I've managed to get in touch with a few political insiders 00:16:32.320 --> 00:16:35.520 that know more about how these attacks work than I do. 00:16:35.520 --> 00:16:38.233 I intend to follow their advice. 00:16:38.233 --> 00:16:41.360 Right now, my plans haven't changed at all. 00:16:41.360 --> 00:16:44.880 But if I just go really quiet on some topics in the future, 00:16:44.880 --> 00:16:47.200 then I'm telling you why right now. 00:16:47.200 --> 00:16:50.000 It will be because the attacks are getting so serious 00:16:50.000 --> 00:16:53.760 that me saying anything might be a liability somehow. 00:16:53.760 --> 00:16:54.733 I mean, remember: 00:16:54.733 --> 00:16:57.120 This was behind the scenes. 00:16:57.120 --> 00:16:59.600 The industry didn't make this one public. 00:16:59.600 --> 00:17:02.400 So, who knows what the next thing they're planning is. 00:17:02.400 --> 00:17:04.859 Now, hopefully I'm overreacting, 00:17:04.859 --> 00:17:07.520 and the industry won't keep escalating this. 00:17:07.520 --> 00:17:10.240 This was just them taking a couple pot shots at us, 00:17:10.240 --> 00:17:13.120 but I'm trying to prepare for a lot of scenarios. 00:17:13.120 --> 00:17:16.000 I mean, I knew there was a chance of something like this happening 00:17:16.000 --> 00:17:18.640 back when I launched the campaign last year. 00:17:18.640 --> 00:17:23.027 That's one of the many reasons I never wanted to do this. 00:17:23.027 --> 00:17:26.704 At least this is just me trying to get the most bare minimum 00:17:26.704 --> 00:17:29.760 common sense regulation in the games industry, 00:17:29.760 --> 00:17:33.711 and not trying to be a whistleblower on the defense industry. 00:17:33.711 --> 00:17:35.833 That would be bad. 00:17:35.833 --> 00:17:38.440 Okay, to end this on a lighter note, 00:17:38.440 --> 00:17:40.080 despite all this mess, 00:17:40.080 --> 00:17:44.366 we've been getting more and more support from European members of Parliament. 00:17:44.366 --> 00:17:46.560 Here are some I've been informed of, 00:17:46.560 --> 00:17:49.200 though some of these I'm pretty late finding out. 00:17:49.200 --> 00:17:52.233 Markéta Gregorová's was from last year, actually, 00:17:52.233 --> 00:17:54.666 and had cool promotional art and everything. 00:17:54.666 --> 00:17:56.880 That's what, 4-bit color? 00:17:56.880 --> 00:17:59.734 But the big one is Nicolae Ștefănuță, 00:17:59.734 --> 00:18:02.800 a Vice President of European Parliament, 00:18:02.800 --> 00:18:07.130 throwing his weight behind the initiative and saying he signed it himself. 00:18:07.130 --> 00:18:11.040 Okay, I'm the wrong person to judge social media effectiveness, 00:18:11.040 --> 00:18:14.480 line:60% but 85,000 likes on Twitter would sound like a good day to me 00:18:14.480 --> 00:18:16.080 line:60% if I was a politician. 00:18:16.080 --> 00:18:19.766 line:60% This is what I mean about easy wins for politicians, guys. 00:18:19.766 --> 00:18:21.034 Keeping it real, 00:18:21.034 --> 00:18:24.720 most people don't care about video games either way, 00:18:24.720 --> 00:18:27.520 so this is pretty safe politically. 00:18:27.520 --> 00:18:29.184 But for the people who do, 00:18:29.184 --> 00:18:33.280 Stop Killing Games is advocating for a very popular position 00:18:33.280 --> 00:18:36.320 that's in line with existing consumer protection laws, 00:18:36.320 --> 00:18:38.480 and is narrowly focused, 00:18:38.480 --> 00:18:41.300 so this isn't going to cripple the industry either. 00:18:41.300 --> 00:18:42.880 The industry is fighting this 00:18:42.880 --> 00:18:46.494 because they'll fight <i>anything</i> that requires them to do something. 00:18:46.494 --> 00:18:51.760 Stop Killing Games is about as safe and popular as it gets in politics. 00:18:51.760 --> 00:18:52.880 And as a bonus, 00:18:52.880 --> 00:18:56.960 it's appealing to people who might not normally be involved in politics. 00:18:56.960 --> 00:18:59.033 That's an elusive demographic. 00:18:59.033 --> 00:19:00.800 And now's a good time to mention again 00:19:00.800 --> 00:19:03.360 that contacting members of European Parliament 00:19:03.360 --> 00:19:06.160 on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee 00:19:06.160 --> 00:19:09.120 is probably the best thing we can do to push back. 00:19:09.120 --> 00:19:12.560 line:0 Though, I've received conflicting information on which parties to contact 00:19:12.560 --> 00:19:14.880 line:0 and what subject lines to use. 00:19:14.880 --> 00:19:16.000 line:0 If you want to help, 00:19:16.000 --> 00:19:20.000 line:0 just try your best with contacting a representative of your country. 00:19:20.000 --> 00:19:22.866 line:0 Preferably someone who cares about consumer rights. 00:19:22.866 --> 00:19:24.841 Okay, that's it! 00:19:24.841 --> 00:19:28.160 I have no idea what's coming down the pipeline now, 00:19:28.160 --> 00:19:29.360 but all this resistance 00:19:29.360 --> 00:19:32.627 means we are throwing around some real power to fix things. 00:19:32.627 --> 00:19:34.033 So, let's keep at it! 00:19:34.033 --> 00:19:35.069 [Subtitles by Erasmus Magnus]
- Last week
-
Okay, @daisekihan, granted: I didn't expect yesterday when I said Ross need not worry about his image that we were going to see serious false allegations the very next day. I'm still not convinced that interviews and the occasional retweet from people with shithead beliefs will be the main problem, but damn, this is sobering. Stay safe Ross, get 2FA going on your accounts (your wife's too). I don't know what to expect now. -
The "Stop Destroying Videogames" initiative has received official accusations of it (and myself) of violating EU rules! These would be serious charges, except that they're false, using made up evidence. This industry is playing hardball now! This is a blog post. To read the original post, please click here » -
The "Stop Destroying Videogames" initiative has received official accusations of it (and myself) of violating EU rules! These would be serious charges, except that they're false, using made up evidence. This industry is playing hardball now!
-
The industry is lobbying against Stop Killing Games!
daisekihan replied to Ross Scott's topic in General News
I haven’t looked that closely into the history of Gamergate, and that may be true. Still, even if the impetus came from chuds, there were some people at the beginning who thought there was some merit to it at first. I think the guy who who first made the KotakuinAction subreddit tried to shut it down because he saw it was nothing but bigots. Anyway, I think you may have an overly optimistic view of this process. This isn’t something people who support SKG can just turn over to EU legislators and hope for the best. The industry certainly isn’t going to approach it that way—their resistance is only going to get stronger the closer change gets to happening. Grassroots pressure if anything needs to get bigger to match that. I can absolutely imagine the industry using this as a point of attack, especially in the EU, which is more progressive in general. So any official SKG outlet like a Twitter account needs to be very careful about keeping its nose clean; or at least Ross and the other leaders should do a cost-benefit analysis to inform how they should respond to unsavory supporters. -
I think this is a dead game. Shut down 14 February 2020 and this was the second time it shutdown too apparently. AI Overview "Guardians of Ember shut down due to the expiration of the publishing contract between Runewaker, the developer, and Gameforge, the publisher, without plans for renewal. The contract's end led to the closure of all official Gameforge servers and the deactivation of the payment service, preventing further purchase of in-game currency. There were no plans for character transfers or alternative official servers."
-
The industry is lobbying against Stop Killing Games!
Deep Dive Devin replied to Ross Scott's topic in General News
The original idea of Gamergate was a lie that an abuser made up on 4chan to direct harassment toward his ex. It wasn't a well-meaning movement subverted by reactionary conservatives, it was their movement, and "ethics in games journalism" was the mask. I am concerned about a lot of the treatment of Pirate Software, it verged into bullying for things that don't matter. Like, he was a furry? Who cares? Furries are probably more reliable for movements like this. But it's important to remember SKG is for consumer groups and governments with a set goal, where harassment campaigns are meant to make their targets miserable forever. Even if a community had its well poisoned with Grummz shit or whatever, it wouldn't last because there's not much drama to farm. That's probably why Thor was targeted, there's nobody else to make an enemy of but corpos with no faces to offend. Ross considers SKG a populist, single-issue movement (his words not mine). He's done interviews with people that have awful politics, but secured broad support from left figures anyway. Now, I don't love that, I didn't like it years ago when he was doing a live interview with racist crackhead child abuser Nick Rekieta (<-- not an exaggeration, I believe he's currently serving time for the latter two) but at a certain point you have to accept that Ross is taking what he can get. And not for nothing, while we characterize shithead gamers as "conservative", those beliefs don't necessarily flow into the logical extension of economic conservatism, because they're not thinking with 100% logic. So a lot of them would be more willing to support government regulation than something they think is "woke", even when the industry pushes for diversity are capitalist in motive. With the UK petition filled and and the ECI past 140%, it seems Ross threaded that line well-enough, and what's left is in the hands of the professionals, who won't be bothering with random racists on twitter. For the rest, I'd say the community moderation we have had did an okay job keeping a reactionary base from sprouting up. Basic Discord and Reddit rules filter a lot of the worst shit. Twitter sucks and isn't getting better, but I have not seen people being particularly shitty to each other in spaces that aren't deliberately catered to the far-right to begin with. And all that being said, I don't expect the industry to frame us as racist or whatever to dismiss us, because they already don't do a good job getting rid of actual racists, misogynists and queerphobes. -
The industry is lobbying against Stop Killing Games!
daisekihan replied to Ross Scott's topic in General News
Hey Ross, I didn’t think this rose to the level of of an email, but I’ve noticed a trend that you might want to get ahead of. Recently at a Ubisoft shareholder meeting, the CEO was first asked about “woke” games and then the SKG campaign by the same person. I’m not going to get into the content of the answer, but I have seen a lot of people supporting SKG who could broadly be thought of as representing the alt-right/Manosphere kind of gamer. Another example I saw was the SKG Twitter retweeting a message of support From Bounding into Comics, which was strongly connected to an alt-right harassment campaign against comic creators and is very right leaning according to every bias checker. I am not trying to make a political argument here but I this sort of association could be problematic for the campaign. Obviously it is important to have as broad a base of support for SKG as possible and I don’t think the campaign should try to push away people who I find unsavory, but it would be very easy for the industry to try to frame SKG as another Gamergate if they can make these links. They haven’t done so yet but I can imagine them taking any step they can think of to discredit SKG the closer it gets to achieving its goals. The original idea of Gamergate wasn’t even bad—gaming journalists are too close to their sources—but the possibility of pushing back against those bad practices was lost when the goals got mixed up with politics. Obviously, you can control something like the shareholder meeting, but it might at least be a good idea if the person running the SKG Twitter tried to be a bit more careful with retweets. -
The GUI should be better. A lot better.
danielsangeo replied to Erasmus Roterodamnsus's topic in English
I think this is done. -
Bunny Lab changed their profile photo
-
The GUI should be better. A lot better.
Erasmus Roterodamnsus replied to Erasmus Roterodamnsus's topic in English
Here is the corrected version. In the future, please contact me if you wish to correct a specialty formatted subtitle. You can read more about this in the readme.txt of the original .zip file: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><timedtext format="3"><head><wp id="0" ap="7" ah="0" av="0" /><wp id="1" ap="7" ah="50" av="100" /><wp id="2" ap="7" ah="50" av="92" /><wp id="3" ap="7" ah="50" av="95" /><wp id="4" ap="7" ah="50" av="96" /><wp id="5" ap="7" ah="50" av="94" /><wp id="6" ap="7" ah="53" av="93" /><wp id="7" ap="7" ah="50" av="97" /><wp id="8" ap="6" ah="50" av="94" /><wp id="9" ap="7" ah="50" av="89" /><wp id="10" ap="7" ah="50" av="81" /><wp id="11" ap="7" ah="50" av="76" /><wp id="12" ap="7" ah="50" av="82" /><wp id="13" ap="7" ah="50" av="86" /><wp id="14" ap="6" ah="39" av="93" /><wp id="15" ap="6" ah="48" av="93" /><wp id="16" ap="7" ah="50" av="84" /><wp id="17" ap="8" ah="80" av="86" /><wp id="18" ap="1" ah="50" av="0" /><wp id="19" ap="1" ah="50" av="13" /><wp id="20" ap="7" ah="50" av="24" /><wp id="21" ap="8" ah="47" av="85" /><wp id="22" ap="8" ah="48" av="97" /><wp id="23" ap="8" ah="48" av="98" /><wp id="24" ap="6" ah="0" av="65" /><wp id="25" ap="6" ah="0" av="36" /><wp id="26" ap="6" ah="0" av="70" /><wp id="27" ap="6" ah="0" av="100" /><wp id="28" ap="6" ah="43" av="99" /><wp id="29" ap="6" ah="43" av="93" /><wp id="30" ap="7" ah="50" av="91" /><wp id="31" ap="7" ah="50" av="79" /><wp id="32" ap="7" ah="50" av="67" /><wp id="33" ap="7" ah="50" av="59" /><wp id="34" ap="7" ah="50" av="88" /><wp id="35" ap="7" ah="50" av="75" /><wp id="36" ap="1" ah="50" av="14" /><wp id="37" ap="1" ah="50" av="5" /><wp id="38" ap="7" ah="50" av="83" /><wp id="39" ap="8" ah="82" av="99" /><wp id="40" ap="7" ah="50" av="93" /><wp id="41" ap="8" ah="0" av="0" /><ws id="0" ju="2" pd="0" sd="0" /><ws id="1" ju="2" pd="0" sd="0" /><ws id="2" ju="0" pd="0" sd="0" /><ws id="3" ju="1" pd="0" sd="0" /><pen id="0" fc="#000000" fo="0" bo="0" /><pen id="1" sz="0" fc="#A0AAB4" fo="0" bo="0" /><pen id="2" fc="#FEFEFE" fo="254" /><pen id="3" i="1" fc="#FEFEFE" fo="254" /><pen id="4" fc="#FFFF00" fo="254" /><pen id="5" fc="#00FF00" fo="254" /><pen id="6" fc="#00FFFF" fo="254" /><pen id="7" fc="#000000" fo="0" bo="0" /><pen id="8" i="1" fc="#FEFEFE" fo="1" bo="0" /></head><body><p t="651" d="1168" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Hi. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1819" d="3270" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> One of the things I like about </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the internet is the long tail, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="5089" d="2269" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> which means everybody </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> has specific interests </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="7358" d="1801" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> that won't appeal to most people, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="9159" d="3904" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but for the people who </s><s p="3">are </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> interested, it really delivers. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="13063" d="3637" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So on that note, this was </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> originally going to be a quick video </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="16700" d="2336" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> showing my desktop at this point in time, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="19036" d="3470" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> since it’s a little exotic and not </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> what most people are used to. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="22506" d="2069" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But this started rapidly escalating, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="24575" d="3904" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and is now a minor </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> existential crisis for me instead. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="28479" d="4170" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So, now I’m upset, and maybe </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I can make you upset too. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="32649" d="3371" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I think this video’s going </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to be for two basic camps: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="36020" d="2936" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> First, if you have any interest in the GUI, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="38956" d="2702" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> you know, the graphic user interface, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="41658" d="1535" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> stick around. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="43193" d="4171" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I have loads for you in this video, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and I’ll be impressed if anyone out there </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="47364" d="2403" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> is familiar with everything </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I’m gonna show you. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="49767" d="5238" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> In fact, I’d say there’s a possibility </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> this will lead us to GUI enlightenment. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="55005" d="4304" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Probably not though, I’m only giving that </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> about a 5% chance of happening, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="59309" d="2336" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but that's good enough </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> for me to make the video. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="61645" d="2169" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And the other camp is just stalkers, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="63814" d="3770" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because I’m gonna show a bunch </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> of my desktop, my files, and so on. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="67584" d="2069" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You’ll see what a mess everything is. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="69653" d="2936" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> In fact, this video is probably </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> gonna be a mess too. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="72589" d="3237" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I have a dozen thoughts </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> coming at me all at once on this, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="75826" d="2336" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so I may jump around all over the place, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="78162" d="3069" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I think it'll all </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> make sense by the end. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="81231" d="1669" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And just to make things worse, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="82900" d="3803" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I am not an expert on pretty </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> much anything in this video. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="86703" d="1802" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But that's exactly the issue! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="88505" d="1936" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> As a non-expert, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="90441" d="5271" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm seeing way, </s><s p="3">way</s><s p="2"> too many problems that </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I wouldn't be if everything was going well. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="95712" d="4338" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> Now, I'm no botanist, but I do know that </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="4"> if you put water on plants, they grow. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="100050" d="2669" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, that's about where </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I'm coming from here. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="102719" d="1502" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So let's kick this thing off. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="104221" d="2169" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Here is my desktop: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="106390" d="1234" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Ta-da! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="107624" d="2470" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, I'm on Windows 7 right now. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="110094" d="1401" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Isn't it obvious? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="111495" d="3670" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> See, I have my taskbar, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> system tray hidden here, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="115165" d="5873" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> my sort of Start menu, a Run bar, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> some shortcuts to programs I use a lot… </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="121038" d="2736" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, I said I'm not an </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> expert, and I mean it. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="123774" d="4204" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This is not the perfect desktop </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that I've polished up for the video. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="127978" d="2369" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> No, I'm just showing this as is, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="130347" d="4037" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and it's more like Frankenstein's monster </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that's been beaten repeatedly. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="134384" d="5773" wp="3" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I've been using a custom GUI like this </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> since maybe 2002, sometime around then? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="140157" d="4438" wp="3" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, thanks to dumb luck, I took </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> screenshots at various points in time, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="144595" d="3203" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so you can see what my desktop </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> used to look like in the past. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="147798" d="1768" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This first batch is the only time </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="149566" d="3637" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I attempted to go all out to make </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> some sort of coherent theme. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="153203" d="2870" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So I was actually trying </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to showcase this one. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="156073" d="3236" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, for this part, I can hit a hotkey </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and make all open windows </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="159309" d="2570" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> line up vertically or horizontally. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="161879" d="1334" wp="3" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I can still do that now. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="163213" d="701" wp="3" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> [pop] </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="163914" d="2102" wp="3" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And this was in 2002! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="166016" d="1468" wp="3" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Oh, and before I get too far, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="167484" d="4038" wp="3" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> what you're seeing right now </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> isn't actually how my desktop looks. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="171522" d="1701" wp="3" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm recording this at 1080, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="173223" d="3837" wp="3" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I'm normally running it at </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> 1440 resolution these days, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="177060" d="3537" wp="3" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so if everything looks </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> a little oversized, that's why. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="180597" d="4738" wp="4" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="3"> This</s><s p="2"> is what it looks like proportionally, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> even though this isn't great. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="185335" d="6207" wp="4" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> See, on Windows 7, if you scale the images </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> much past 125%, they'll start blurring. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="191542" d="5572" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> My current GUI was </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> originally </s><s p="3">designed</s><s p="2"> for 1152×864. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="197114" d="3136" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, been a while since </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I ran at that resolution. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="200250" d="4805" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And what's happened is I've just slowly </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> modified it since, and have gotten lazier. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="205055" d="1435" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But back to the past. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="206490" d="3570" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> In the past, I just wanted my </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> desktop to look as cool as possible </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="210060" d="1435" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and still be functional. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="211495" d="1468" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, you can see for a while </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="212963" d="3604" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I was just copying </s><s p="3">System Shock 2</s><s p="2">'s </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> interface to an extent. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="216567" d="3503" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> After that, my taste shifted and I just </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> wanted something a little more toned-down </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="220070" d="3237" wp="3" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> that I wouldn't mind </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> staring at, day in, day out. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="223307" d="2535" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Even then, none of these </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> themes were my true vision, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="225842" d="2303" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> since the software would often fight me. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="228145" d="3203" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, see, look at that. </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> You can see it in the screenshot. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="231348" d="4338" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Plus, with the GUI, I've never </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> known 100% what I've wanted. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="235686" d="1635" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> In fact, I still don't. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="237321" d="4004" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> What I'll hope you'll see here is that I </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> was </s><s p="3">trying</s><s p="2"> to make something better. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="241325" d="3737" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm still not an expert, but out of </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> years of meddling with things, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="245062" d="3436" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I think I've at least </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> discovered some GUI truths. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="248498" d="1268" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So here's the first one: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="249766" d="3871" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Your GUI should look nice enough </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> so that you never really get sick of it. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="253637" d="2402" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> A lot of you have seen </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="3"> Groundhog Day</s><s p="2">, right? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="256039" d="2937" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Where the protagonist </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> relives the same day forever? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="258976" d="4371" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> When we think of the GUI, we should be </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> thinking of what Phil is gonna use here. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="263347" d="4304" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Whatever we pick, he is stuck with, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> so it better be good. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="267651" d="2869" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, that said, that's going to be </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> different for every person, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="270520" d="1869" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> which brings me to another truth: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="272389" d="2703" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> There's no perfect GUI for everyone. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="275092" d="2269" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Everyone has different </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> tastes and requirements </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="277361" d="1835" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> for what they use a computer for. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="279196" d="3570" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> However, there </s><s p="3">are</s><s p="2"> lots of things </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> you can do with the GUI </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="282766" d="3804" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> that are </s><s p="3">ideal</s><s p="2"> for the majority of people. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="286570" d="2269" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> There are many things </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> you can experiment with </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="288839" d="3870" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and measure statistically from </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> users when it comes to the GUI. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="292709" d="1302" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> More on that later. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="294011" d="3403" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But yeah, if you're someone who </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> works on the computer for your job, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="297414" d="2903" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> or just simply spends </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> a lot of time on one, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="300317" d="5105" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> the GUI is what you're going to be </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> staring at for a large portion of your life, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="305422" d="3203" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so shouldn't that be the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> nicest experience possible? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="308625" d="2636" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Smooth and just easy on the eyes, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="311261" d="2970" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> to make your time just </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that much more pleasant? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="314231" d="934" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> No. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="315165" d="2302" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> No, no, no, no, no. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="317467" d="1669" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Not if you're on Windows! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="319136" d="2969" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You can roll around in the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> trash like everybody else! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="322105" d="5339" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Compared to what we could be doing, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> Windows is such garbage! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="327444" d="2836" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And yes, I'm mostly going </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to focus on Windows here, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="330280" d="3337" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because it has the lion's share </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> of the desktop market. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="333617" d="4504" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But if you're on another OS, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> don't worry, I'm coming for you too! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="338121" d="2937" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> The entire industry is guilty! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="341058" d="2602" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="3"> None are without sin! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="343660" d="1969" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But yeah, Windows. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="345629" d="1568" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Let's get straight to it. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="347197" d="1335" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Windows is ugly. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="348532" d="2335" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Pick any version of it, I don't care. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="350867" d="3370" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, to be fair, it's not </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> god-awful hideous, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="354237" d="3037" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but that's not the same </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> thing as "good," is it? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="357274" d="5172" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I think Windows is in solid </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> four out of ten territory for its GUIs. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="362446" d="4638" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> They get the job done, but they're </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> not pleasant to use or look at. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="367084" d="4604" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now this part is subjective—in other </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> words, I personally think it's ugly, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="371688" d="4304" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but maybe you're a freak and think </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the Windows OS is a work of beauty. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="375992" d="2036" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Not a problem! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="378028" d="3136" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It still sucks, and I'll </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> prove it in other ways. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="381164" d="2169" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But Windows, let's have a quick tour: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="383333" d="2870" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Everything before Windows 95 </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I'm skipping over, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="386203" d="3003" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because that's not really </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the model being used now. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="389206" d="1735" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But Windows 95: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="390941" d="4504" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Okay, not beautiful, but it was the '90s, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I guess this worked for the time. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="395445" d="3337" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Windows 98: mostly more of the same. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="398782" d="2336" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Windows ME and 2000: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="401118" d="3803" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Those two are very different </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> under the hood, but visually, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="404921" d="4672" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I kind of want to say these are the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> best GUIs Microsoft has come up with. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="409593" d="2502" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Again, I'm not calling them good, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="412095" d="3671" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I don't find myself </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> immediately hating how they look. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="415766" d="1468" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That takes longer. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="417234" d="4704" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Windows XP: also known </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> as the Fisher-Price interface. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="421938" d="2536" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This is just ugly in my eyes. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="424474" d="2970" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yes, you can tweak it to look </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> more like Classic Windows, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="427444" d="2736" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but this was the default </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> theme everybody saw. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="430180" d="5706" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Microsoft was worth around 250 billion </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> in 2001 and this is what they came up with. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="435886" d="2068" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Fine, let's keep going. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="437954" d="1168" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Vista: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="439122" d="3837" wp="4" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Eh, this glass and transparency </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> stuff isn't my thing. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="442959" d="4305" wp="4" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I think it's visually distracting, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and the red button clashes visually. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="447264" d="4204" wp="6" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It's not as loud as XP, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> but I still think it's ugly. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="451468" d="1601" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Windows 7: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="453069" d="4872" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Well, everything I just said </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> about Vista still applies, so... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="457941" d="1401" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Windows 8: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="459342" d="1102" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Uh... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="460444" d="3403" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Okay, we're thinking outside the box now. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="463847" d="2269" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But assuming you turn that crap off, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="466116" d="4104" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> eh, better I guess, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> still not impressing me. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="470220" d="2069" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And Windows 10: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="472289" d="1701" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> still not digging it. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="473990" d="3771" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Too much white, and still feels </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> like an identity crisis to me. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="477761" d="3637" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And if we turn on the dark theme, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> then too much black. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="481398" d="4171" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> All right, and now Microsoft </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> is worth one </s><s p="3">trillion</s><s p="2"> dollars. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="485569" d="1167" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Jesus. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="486736" d="4839" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And this is their best of the best </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> GUI on their flagship product, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="491575" d="4004" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> with 25 years of experience </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> since Windows 95. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="495579" d="1268" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Okay... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="496847" d="3069" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And that's my review </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> of the Windows GUI. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="499916" d="2069" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Just a giant blah. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="501985" d="1201" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> Blah! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="503186" d="3871" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now of course, you don't have to </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> stick with the default Windows look. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="507057" d="4304" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It also allows the bare </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> minimum of visual customization. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="511361" d="1235" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="3"> Wow. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="512596" d="1234" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> [claps] </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="513830" d="2336" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> We can change the colors, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="516166" d="3470" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> put the taskbar on </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> different sides of the screen, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="519636" d="2502" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> maybe a few other things? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="522138" d="1502" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It's </s><s p="3">pathetic</s><s p="2">. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="523640" d="3871" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> The level of customization </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> on Windows is </s><s p="3">pathetic</s><s p="2">. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="527511" d="1735" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now that's not the end of the story, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="529246" d="4137" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because there are a lot of third-party </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> programs to work with, but ah... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="533383" d="1268" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'll get to the those. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="534651" d="2369" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, this is probably </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> going to be a long video. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="537020" d="2336" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> A long video for the long tail. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="539356" d="3870" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Okay, let's go back to my custom GUI, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I'll give you a quick tour here. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="543226" d="2336" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I guess, first, let's talk </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> about the desktop. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="545562" d="2736" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, notice how </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> there are no icons on it? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="548298" d="1835" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, that's because that's ugly. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="550133" d="1902" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I mean, if you have a great wallpaper, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="552035" d="2469" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> why would you want to </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> clutter it up with shortcuts </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="554504" d="3637" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> you're not using 99% of the time? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="558141" d="4171" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I mean, you run them, then you're done. </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> They don't need to stay there. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="562312" d="4371" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This wasn't a big deal in 95, because </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> everything was clunky back then. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="566683" d="2703" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, in 2020? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="569386" d="4337" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This is an eyesore and an </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> embarrassment this still exists! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="573723" d="2903" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> There are dozens </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> of better ways to do this. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="576626" d="2569" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> In fact, that brings up another truth: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="579195" d="4071" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> The GUI should get out of the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> way when you don't need it. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="583266" d="5205" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You want your attention focused on what's </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> important, which is usually your programs. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="588471" d="5005" wp="7" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I mean, that's the point of an </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> operating system: to run your programs. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="593476" d="3304" wp="7" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It should be like a butler </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that's ready at a moment's notice, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="596780" d="2536" wp="7" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and disappears when you </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> don't need them anymore. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="601451" d="1768" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, like that. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="603219" d="1202" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Perfect. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="604421" d="2269" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But I do need desktop shortcuts, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="606690" d="3169" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because I probably have a couple </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> hundred programs total. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="609859" d="2970" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So here's how I handle it, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> which may not be the best way, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="612829" d="2169" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but it's better than the default. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="614998" d="4738" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I right click anywhere on the desktop, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> boom, boom, boom, anywhere, and bam: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="619736" d="2202" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> There are all the desktop shortcuts. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="621938" d="3671" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Again, I want to emphasize I'm </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> not putting really well organized. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="625609" d="3570" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This is just random junk I have </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> installed on here at the moment. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="629179" d="2736" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That's really a trend </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> for me on my computer. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="631915" d="3170" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It feels like I'm constantly </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> battling the forces of chaos, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="635085" d="3537" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and I don't think I'm </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> winning, but I'm trying. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="638622" d="2435" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That might be why I can </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> relate to </s><s p="3">Warhammer</s><s p="2">. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="641057" d="1502" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="5"> Waugh! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="642559" d="3336" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Anyway, this is also my </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> equivalent of the Start menu. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="645895" d="1936" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I can throw whatever I want here. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="647831" d="3670" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Besides the desktop, I also have </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> folders "Surface" and "Core," </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="651501" d="2836" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> since I was imagining my </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> computer like a planet. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="654337" d="2836" wp="8" ws="2"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> "Surface" is where any </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> new programs are installed, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="657173" d="3337" wp="8" ws="2"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but "Core" is a bunch of programs </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I knew I wanted installed </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="660510" d="4738" wp="8" ws="2"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> at the time I set this up, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> which was a few years ago. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="665248" d="2569" wp="8" ws="2"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Some still hold up, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> some are outdated, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="667817" d="3404" wp="8" ws="2"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but this just helps me from </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> being even more overwhelmed. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="671221" d="3437" wp="8" ws="2"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Otherwise, the crap I'd have to </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> sift through would be twice as big. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="674658" d="3370" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now I know some of you are going to </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> tell me to use something like Launchy </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="678028" d="3136" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> or Cortana, and just type </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the name of my program. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="681164" d="1101" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Much faster! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="682265" d="1835" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Well, I'll expand on that later, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="684100" d="3404" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but what if I don't know the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> name of the program I want? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="687504" d="2302" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I do a lot of different </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> things with my computer. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="689806" d="3136" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Sometimes I have a specific function </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I'm looking for software to, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="692942" d="3671" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and I have to test multiple shareware </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> programs until I find what I need. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="696613" d="1802" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Or maybe it's just something I want, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="698415" d="3236" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I haven't used in a long time </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and I forgot the name of it. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="701651" d="3203" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I've forgotten the name of </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> MotionPerfect multiple times before, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="704854" d="2002" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> even though that's becoming obsolete, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="706856" d="3170" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and I should probably switch </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> over to Butterflow instead, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="710026" d="2336" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> even though I started </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> having errors with that, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="712362" d="3170" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> even though I didn't used to, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> but that's probably on my end. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="715532" d="2135" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Forces of chaos, guys. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="717667" d="2703" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Or "PrimeSense," what the hell is that? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="720370" d="3870" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Oh, that's related to capture </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> drivers for the Kinect. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="724240" d="4205" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> See, I don't keep all this stuff in </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> my head, I need it listed like this. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="728445" d="1401" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Okay, before I move on, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="729846" d="3904" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I guess I should explain how I was able </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to just tear out the Start menu, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="733750" d="3603" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> the system tray, the taskbar, and so on. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="737353" d="2970" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I mean, okay, I have the system tray </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> in about the same place, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="740323" d="1735" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I could put it anywhere! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="742058" d="1168" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Anywhere! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="743226" d="1201" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Plus, it's hidden. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="744427" d="3003" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It never comes up </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> unless I click on this spot. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="747430" d="2636" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Well, it's multiple </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> programs doing all this </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="750066" d="3604" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but the glue holding it together </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> is a program called LiteStep. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="753670" d="2769" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This is a shell replacement for Windows. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="756439" d="4338" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> What that means is all the inner workings </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> of the operating system are still the same— </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="760777" d="1768" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> it's all Windows code; </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="762545" d="5206" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> the shell is a program on top of that </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that displays </s><s p="3">part</s><s p="2"> of your GUI. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="767751" d="1868" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Normally, that's Explorer. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="769619" d="4037" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, you know, the Windows </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> File Explorer you use to browse files? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="773656" d="2336" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, that's your shell also. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="775992" d="4705" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So LiteStep was created as a </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> replacement to Explorer for the GUI. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="780697" d="4137" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It was inspired by AfterStep, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> which was inspired by NextStep, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="784834" d="2636" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> which was inspired by step steps. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="787470" d="4538" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, LiteStep does not replace the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> way regular Windows look or function, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="792008" d="4805" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but it does replace the taskbar, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> system tray, Start menu, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="796813" d="2069" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and other miscellaneous things. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="798882" d="4437" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It's also crazy customizable </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and supports hundreds of modules </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="803319" d="3804" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> that can handle different aspects </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> of the desktop in different ways. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="807123" d="3504" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It's also had hundreds, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> if not thousands of themes for it </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="810627" d="2169" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> that can get really imaginative. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="812796" d="2802" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And it's also really user-hostile, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="815598" d="4972" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and uses giant configuration files whose </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> complexity borders on programming. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="820570" d="4504" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Also, things go wrong, and sometimes </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> there's nothing you can do about it. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="825074" d="4205" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Changing from XP to Windows 7 </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> was a minor nightmare for me, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="829279" d="2369" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and honestly, I've never fully recovered. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="831648" d="2335" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That's because that </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> broke so many plugins, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="833983" d="3304" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and there wasn't always </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> a fix or alternatives. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="837287" d="2502" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I don't know what to say about LiteStep. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="839789" d="3303" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It lets you do so much more </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> than default Windows, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="843092" d="3571" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but at the same time, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> it's really abusive to the user! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="846663" d="2302" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Though, that's kind of not its fault, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="848965" d="3303" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> since Windows is the one </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> actually breaking things. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="852268" d="801" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Ahhh—! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="853069" d="1535" wp="10" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> The taskbar! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="854604" d="3737" wp="10" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Okay, here's an example of an </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> objective shortcoming of Windows. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="858341" d="4471" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm using the program Nexus Dock here, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> though ObjectDock behaves similarly. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="862812" d="4338" wp="11" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Although with Nexus, I can close programs </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> by middle-clicking; that's handy. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="867150" d="2836" wp="11" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> In both, you can customize the icons. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="869986" d="4071" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, I have the web browser set up </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to look like Netscape, because why not? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="874057" d="2602" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I kind of miss that starfield animation. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="876659" d="1202" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That was good. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="877861" d="4604" wp="12" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Also, I'm using what I think is the GNOME </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> icon to represent the File Explorer. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="882465" d="4171" wp="12" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I just got sick of the same icons, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and a giant foot seemed appropriate. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="886636" d="2703" wp="12" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Anyway, onto objective shortcomings. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="889339" d="3537" wp="12" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Say you have a bunch of programs open </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and you want to pick one out immediately, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="892876" d="2068" wp="12" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but you're not sure which is which. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="894944" d="4104" wp="12" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Well, on the Classic taskbar, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that looks ugly, and it's a problem. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="899048" d="3938" wp="12" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And here's something Windows can't do, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and even LiteStep can't do. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="902986" d="2002" wp="12" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> If you hover over the task, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="904988" d="4404" wp="12" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="3"> eventually</s><s p="2"> the text comes up that </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> identifies which program is which, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="909392" d="1835" wp="12" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> then you can scroll the rest. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="911227" d="3737" wp="12" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Well, that is </s><s p="3">too damn slow</s><s p="2"> for me! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="914964" d="2202" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But on the Dock program, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="917166" d="3437" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> boom, boom, boom, boom, boom; </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> rapid-fire identification. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="920603" d="2303" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Say I have five text files open. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="922906" d="2902" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I can identify which </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> is which immediately, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="925808" d="2970" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and the rest of the time </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I have nice looking icons instead, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="928778" d="2769" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and I don't have to see the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> text cluttering up everything. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="931547" d="2470" wp="12" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I hate the default grouping </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> Windows does now, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="934017" d="4537" wp="12" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so I have to click an additional menu </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> before I can select my program. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="938554" d="1635" wp="12" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That's another slowdown! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="940189" d="3838" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This is faster than normal Windows, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and makes me more efficient. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="944027" d="3003" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That's half the damn point of a GUI! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="947030" d="1635" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Boom, another truth: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="948665" d="4471" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> The GUI should be as efficient as </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> possible if you know what you're doing. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="953136" d="4504" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> If you know exactly what you want to do, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> but the GUI is making you wait, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="957640" d="4071" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> or jump through a series of hoops, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> then that's a bad design. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="961711" d="2603" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Although, even Nexus Dock isn't great. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="964314" d="3336" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, you want a taste of </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> GUI hell? Here you go. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="967650" d="2136" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Ideally, I wouldn't have any icons at all, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="969786" d="3570" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and it would just be fullscreen </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> browsing to maximize my space. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="973356" d="3270" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, it does support auto-hiding, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> but that's another problem. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="976626" d="3670" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Let's say I'm browsing fullscreen, but </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> now I want to switch to another window. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="980296" d="1769" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Okay, bring up the dock. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="982065" d="700" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Uh... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="982765" d="2203" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Bring up the dock! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="984968" d="1301" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Bring it up! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="986269" d="2102" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It won't work, I can't do it. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="988371" d="2869" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But what if I was in a </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> fullscreen game or a video? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="991240" d="3604" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Or I'm just scrolling towards the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> bottom of the screen for something else? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="994844" d="2903" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Well then, I wouldn't </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> want the dock to show up. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="997747" d="1168" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I can't win. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="998915" d="1768" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So that brings up another truth: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1000683" d="5306" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> The GUI should activate when you want it, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and </s><s p="3">not</s><s p="2"> activate when you don't. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1005989" d="5338" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, that's a lot easier said than done, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> but that's what the perfect GUI would do. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1011327" d="4171" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now the way I solve this problem </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> is I told the dock to always show up, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1015498" d="3103" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I used a script in AutoHotkey </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to map a toggle function </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1018601" d="1869" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> to one of my mouse buttons. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1020470" d="2135" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So I can turn it on and off at will. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1022605" d="3604" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, I hate to burn a whole </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> mouse button on </s><s p="3">just</s><s p="2"> this, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1026209" d="2102" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I couldn't find any other way. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1028311" d="3370" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This is all super hacky </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and I'm not proud of it, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1031681" d="4237" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but that's the price I pay for being </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> able to read my titles immediately. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1035918" d="2336" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Fighting Windows is hell. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1038254" d="3570" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> All right, I should start wrapping up </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the tour, but a few more things quick. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1041824" d="3404" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Besides all this, I've replaced </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> Windows Explorer too. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1045228" d="4404" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> The default with Windows is okay, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> but it could be a lot better. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1049632" d="2503" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm using a years old version </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> of Directory Opus, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1052135" d="2769" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because I'm too cheap </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to buy an updated copy. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1054904" d="2402" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It has a </s><s p="3">lot</s><s p="2"> of options. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1057306" d="4238" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> My theme here used to look better, but the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> forces of chaos had another victory here. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1061544" d="1368" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> See, I used to have buttons </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1062912" d="3103" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> to switch back and forth </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> between details and thumbnail view, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1066015" d="1769" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> since that's all I ever use, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1067784" d="2802" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but now I have to click </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> an extra button first. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1070586" d="3804" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> See, that's another example </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> of an inefficiency I should fix! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1074390" d="2403" wp="14" ws="2"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I </s><s p="3">used</s><s p="2"> to have that fix, but... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1076793" d="934" wp="15" ws="2"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Gah! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1077727" d="2803" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Anyway, I'm sure this could be </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> even better with the right theme, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1080530" d="3637" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I don't know what I'm doing, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and this still beats Explorer. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1084167" d="3803" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Like, hey, I can have queued </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> file transfers, that's handy. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1087970" d="2269" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> There's a lot of file explorers out there. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1090239" d="1468" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I don't know what's best, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1091707" d="3003" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but they're pretty much </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> all better than Explorer. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1094710" d="1369" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Uh, what else? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1096079" d="2235" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You may have noticed </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the number indicators. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1098314" d="3203" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This shows how much free space </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I have on each of my drives. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1101517" d="2269" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I </s><s p="3">do</s><s p="2"> want that on the desktop, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1103786" d="4638" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> since discovering you've gone to zero </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> while you're working is not fun. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1108424" d="3303" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Uh, I have a wallpaper changer </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I can change to a random one </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1111727" d="2770" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> by pressing Control and </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> clicking on the desktop. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1114497" d="2269" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I like being able to </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> do that on command. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1116766" d="3470" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Oh, and while I'm on wallpapers, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I want to veer off course a second. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1120236" d="2636" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm a fan of the art from </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="3"> Magic: The Gathering</s><s p="2">. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1122872" d="3437" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> They have lots of gorgeous art, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> especially the lands. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1126309" d="3036" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I was thinking these would </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> be perfect as wallpapers. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1129345" d="4037" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, sometimes the artists make </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the high-resolution copies available, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1133382" d="2036" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but a lot of times, they don't. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1135418" d="3403" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Since we don't have access </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to what I imagine is a giant vault </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1138821" d="4204" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> with super high-res copies of all </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> their artwork at Wizards of the Coast, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1143025" d="2837" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I had the idea of maybe </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> using some of this AI learning </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1145862" d="3336" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> to scale these card </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> scans to wallpaper size, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1149198" d="2236" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and still have them look pretty good. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1151434" d="3570" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I mean, I've seen miracles performed </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> on that with old game textures, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1155004" d="2436" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> this seems like more of the same thing. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1157440" d="3804" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> If anything, this might be easier, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> it just has to look like an oil painting. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1161244" d="2903" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Plus, you could probably </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> train the AI really well </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1164147" d="3269" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> by using high-resolution </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> originals that we do have, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1167416" d="3471" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> against the cards scans </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> themselves for it to learn from. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1170887" d="2736" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> We could have thousands </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> of potential wallpapers. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1173623" d="2936" wp="16" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, if the artist has the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> high-res stuff for sale, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1176559" d="1902" wp="16" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> yeah, we don't want to rip them off, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1178461" d="3537" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but a lot of this art has no other </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> version available to the public </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1181998" d="2102" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> other than these tiny cards. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1184100" d="1968" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm kind of an art raider. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1186068" d="3137" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Anyway, I totally don't have </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> time to be spending on that, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1189205" d="3770" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I wanted to encourage someone </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> who does to take a crack at it. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1192975" d="2203" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'll have contact info at the end. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1195178" d="2902" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> All right, so that's the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> quick tour of my desktop. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1198080" d="2169" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But I said there's a crisis emerging. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1200249" d="1502" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> What's that all about? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1201751" d="4538" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Well, I'm on Windows 7, and I'm not </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> going to be able to stay on it forever. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1206289" d="2702" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, I know a few of </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> you out there might try, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1208991" d="1769" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I want to be able to do VR </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1210760" d="3804" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and have better DPI scaling </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> than that blurriness on 7, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1214564" d="1768" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so that limits things for me. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1216332" d="1468" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So what's the big deal? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1217800" d="3036" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Well, when it comes to GUI customization, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1220836" d="3504" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Windows 10 is like the end times. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1224340" d="4771" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I barely got LiteStep working </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> with the functionality I needed on 7, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1229111" d="3170" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and even now it acts like </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> it's been shot in the leg. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1232281" d="2903" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm thinking there's </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> no hope at all for 10. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1235184" d="4238" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> The state of GUI customization </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> was pretty healthy back in XP times. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1239422" d="1434" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> There were lots of options. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1240856" d="1936" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> See, look at all those green boxes. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1242792" d="1635" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> These weren't all of them either. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1244427" d="3904" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I remember GeoShell, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> Aston Desktop, SharpE... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1248331" d="1568" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm sure there were more. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1249899" d="1568" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now look at things. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1251467" d="4671" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It's been a trail of bodies when </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> it comes to GUI customization. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1256138" d="3204" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> People either gave up, or </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> Windows suffocated them. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1259342" d="2035" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, the software </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> dying was bad enough, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1261377" d="3303" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but Windows has been </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> moving in for the kill, too. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1264680" d="3804" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Okay, first, Windows doesn't </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> like you're doing </s><s p="3">any</s><s p="2"> of this. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1268484" d="4638" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It tends to treat any sort of replacement </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to the desktop shell like it's a virus. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1273122" d="2903" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It'll even set off some </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> virus or malware scanners, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1276025" d="3237" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and I have to use a special </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> utility to set it back again. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1279262" d="4070" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And hey, Windows 10 </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> likes to update, right? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1283332" d="5005" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Assuming my LiteStep theme will work </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> properly, which it won't, there's no way, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1288337" d="4505" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Windows 10 is going to scrub it </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> pretty much any time it feels like it. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1292842" d="5338" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Customizing the GUI is outside </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the range of acceptable thought. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1298948" d="1034" wp="17" ws="3"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> No, sick! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1299982" d="1535" wp="17" ws="3"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> Sick and wrong! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1301517" d="2503" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, I get the message loud and clear. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1304020" d="2135" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I should use Windows </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the way it's intended, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1306155" d="4471" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and I'm a degenerate for </s><s p="3">actually </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> trying to customize my desktop. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1310626" d="4271" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Oh, and speaking of updates, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> let's head back to Windows 7 a second. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1314897" d="5406" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I've had to skip </s><s p="3">multiple</s><s p="2"> security updates, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> because they screw up LiteStep! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1320303" d="1501" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> No joke, look at this: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1321804" d="2102" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'll install one temporarily. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1323906" d="4772" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> See, look: now the Z-order on my </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> windows is screwed; my theme's broken. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1328678" d="2402" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I literally cannot fix this. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1331080" d="4671" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> My computer's half-unusable </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> unless I do things the Windows way. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1335751" d="3337" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now on 7, I can choose </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to </s><s p="3">skip</s><s p="2"> those updates, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1339088" d="3870" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> which I guess makes my system </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> less secure; that's nice, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1342958" d="3304" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but on 10, they got </s><s p="3">rid</s><s p="2"> of that option! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1346262" d="2469" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You either update, or you go to hell! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1348731" d="4104" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> There's no "skipping" </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> problematic ones they never fix! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1352835" d="3604" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Plus, what a wonderful </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> choice I'm being given! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1356439" d="3003" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Choosing between </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> a more secure system, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1359442" d="3436" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="3"> or</s><s p="2"> being able to use </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> my GUI the way I want to! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1362878" d="1001" wp="17" ws="3"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> No, sick! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1363879" d="1502" wp="17" ws="3"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> Sick and wrong! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1365381" d="1001" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, I get it! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1366382" d="3103" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm a freak, and I'm the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> only person who's doing this, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1369485" d="1335" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but riddle me this: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1370820" d="5906" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Why do </s><s p="3">security</s><s p="2"> updates need to </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> screw with the </s><s p="3">graphics</s><s p="2"> like this? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1376726" d="4037" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> A friend of mine has a theory that </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> they're doing this to push notices on you, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1380763" d="1868" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and he could be right. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1382631" d="1068" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'll say this: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1383699" d="3070" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I received updates for </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="3"> years</s><s p="2"> without incident, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1386769" d="1935" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and this all started right around the time </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1388704" d="3604" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Microsoft was aggressively telling </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> people to move to Windows 10. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1392308" d="1368" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> They're assholes! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1393676" d="5605" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And why the hell does the GUI have to be </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> so damn deep in the code to begin with?! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1399281" d="2403" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm not trying to hack my damn system, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1401684" d="4471" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I </s><s p="3">just</s><s p="2"> want to change the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> graphics and the interface! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1406155" d="2569" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You'd think I'm trying </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to delete the kernel! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1408724" d="4304" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> The Windows way of doing things </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> is so damn hostile to this! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1413028" d="2169" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Hey, do you know where </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the icons are located </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1415197" d="3437" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> for things like folders, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> message prompts, and so on? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1418634" d="3871" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Well, most of them are </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> buried inside shell32.dll, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1422505" d="2102" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> which is a protected system file </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1424607" d="3170" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> that you have to jump through </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> all kinds of hoops to modify, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1427777" d="4037" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and again, Windows will never </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> let it go that it's been modified! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1431814" d="2970" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And what's worse is </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that sort of makes sense, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1434784" d="3837" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because why the hell should I </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> have to modify a system DLL file </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1438621" d="2569" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> just to change the damn icons?! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1441190" d="2936" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Because I'm a dirty </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> virus creator, apparently! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1444126" d="701" wp="17" ws="3"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> Sick! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1444827" d="1368" wp="17" ws="3"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> Sick and wrong! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1446195" d="4738" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, remember kids: </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> Non-Windows graphics equals virus! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1450933" d="1935" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That's the Microsoft way! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1452868" d="3804" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, there </s><s p="3">are</s><s p="2"> workarounds, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> but everything's a compromise. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1456672" d="3003" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Take the program IconPackager by Stardock: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1459675" d="4872" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It advertises itself as being able to change </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the Windows icons to whatever you want! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1464547" d="1368" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Great, right? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1465915" d="700" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> No! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1466615" d="1268" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Not great! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1467883" d="4638" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> If you're using a custom </s><s p="3">shell</s><s p="2">, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> like say, a LiteStep user, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1472521" d="2336" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> then it </s><s p="3">doesn't work! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1474857" d="4738" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It only works if you're using </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="3"> Explorer</s><s p="2"> as your shell, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1479595" d="3103" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> as God—I mean, Microsoft intended! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1482698" d="2402" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So even trying to break free, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1485100" d="4472" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> you're being funneled back into the way </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> Windows wants you to do things again! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1489572" d="1635" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I hate this crap! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1491207" d="3236" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Windows 10 is bringing me to an impasse. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1494443" d="3103" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I feel like I'm being </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> dragged back to the past, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1497546" d="4305" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and having what limited progress </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I've made over the past decades erased! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1501851" d="1501" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> For me, this is the equivalent </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1503352" d="4304" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> of the industry discovering I'm </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> writing papers using a word processor, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1507656" d="3404" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so they want to come smash it up </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> so they can sell me a typewriter. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1511060" d="4037" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> They're trying to make me go back, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and I don't want to go back to that! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1515097" d="1268" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> See, that's just it: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1516365" d="3604" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm faster on my flawed, limping interface </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1519969" d="3904" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> in almost any situation </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> than I am on Windows default. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1523873" d="3069" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> The thought of going </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> back to </s><s p="3">regular</s><s p="2"> Windows </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1526942" d="3070" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> is going to be such a </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> slap in the face for me! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1530012" d="2736" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Okay, here I'm really gonna </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> start sounding like a heretic, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1532748" d="4071" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but if you're still here watching this, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> maybe you can handle a little heresy. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1536819" d="2469" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This entire experience </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> has gotten me to realize </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1539288" d="4605" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> just how woefully underdeveloped </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the GUI as a whole is. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1543893" d="2969" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yes, there have been minor </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> improvements over time, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1546862" d="5406" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but the GUI on Windows isn't </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="3"> that</s><s p="2"> different than it was 25 years ago. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1552268" d="4838" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So, what, we got it almost perfect </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> back then, only small things to improve? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1557106" d="767" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> No! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1557873" d="1235" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> God, no! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1559108" d="5505" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Okay, for starters, much of the GUI </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> depends on precise movements and actions. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1564613" d="4038" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> If I want to open up a shortcut, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I have to click on this area. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1568651" d="3536" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> If I want to resize the window, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I have to click here. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1572187" d="4171" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> The sloppier you are, the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> longer everything takes you. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1576358" d="3637" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And while I'm on it, I kind of </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> don't like double-clicking? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1579995" d="3504" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This is a minor thing, but I've </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> never really liked how it feels. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1583499" d="2569" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I like things to happen when I click once. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1586068" d="1735" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Plus, it's a little awkward. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1587803" d="2903" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Sometimes I open a folder </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> or launch a program, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1590706" d="3136" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but sometimes I accidentally </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> tell it to rename the file. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1593842" d="2002" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Or sometimes nothing </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> seems to happen. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1595844" d="2136" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Then there's this pause </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> when you're not sure </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1597980" d="3337" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> if the computer is just taking </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> its time to start the program, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1601317" d="3203" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> or if it just didn't register your </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> double-click for some reason, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1604520" d="1701" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and you're waiting on nothing. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1606221" d="3771" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> If I only have to click </s><s p="3">once</s><s p="2">, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I know I pressed the button. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1609992" d="4438" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> The GUI as it is right now </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> wants me to be precise. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1614430" d="2469" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Humans are not precise. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1616899" d="2669" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, they can be relatively precise, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1619568" d="4705" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but that takes additional concentration </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and energy, and usually time. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1624273" d="3470" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> In fact, there's a famous story </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> about how Pope Benedict XI </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1627743" d="2769" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> sent a letter to Giotto di Bondone </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1630512" d="4338" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> asking him to prove his skill as an artist </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> before he offered a commission. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1634850" d="5339" wp="18" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So he drew a perfect circle freestyle </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> without any assistance on the spot. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1640189" d="4404" wp="18" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That blew the pope away, and </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that story has survived even now. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1644593" d="2836" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That's how big a deal </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> human precision is. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1647429" d="1068" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Nyah! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1648497" d="4371" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Well, the GUI gives you </s><s p="3">some </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> wiggle room, but not a lot. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1652868" d="3937" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> The less precise you need to be, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the faster you are. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1656805" d="2503" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm surprised this analogy works, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1659308" d="3737" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but everybody knows why airports </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> take up so much space, right? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1663045" d="2936" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Because planes can't just land on a dime. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1665981" d="4038" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> They have a lot of momentum </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and need lots of room to do it right. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1670019" d="5271" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Whereas helicopters can land in </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> pretty tight areas, but they're slower. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1675290" d="6207" wp="18" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> The fastest helicopter in the world isn't </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> as fast as an ordinary passenger plane. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1681497" d="2035" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That's also why that scene in </s><s p="3">Deus Ex </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1683532" d="4505" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> where you fly from New York to </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> Hong Kong by helicopter is a little silly, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1688037" d="2369" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I guess that's a future helicopter. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1690406" d="4938" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I think the GUI needs a lot </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> more planes and less helicopters. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1695344" d="2169" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Here, let me show you </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> what I'm talking about: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1697513" d="4237" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Windows 7 added a Show Desktop </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> button in the corner of the screen. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1701750" d="3304" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I thought this was such a good </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> idea to come from Microsoft, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1705054" d="1935" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> that maybe they stole it from elsewhere. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1706989" d="867" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I don't know. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1707856" d="1135" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But that's great. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1708991" d="3303" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> If everything's cluttered and you </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> just need to get a bearing on things, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1712294" d="1668" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> bam, there you go. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1713962" d="3471" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Well, I liked that so much I copied it </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> for my own desktop in LiteStep, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1717433" d="1801" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so I can do the same thing. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1719234" d="2102" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But I thought, "Why stop there?" </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1721336" d="2703" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Two programs I run </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> all the time on my computer </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1724039" d="2636" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> are a web browser and a file manager, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1726675" d="3303" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so I made the left mouse button </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> in this area show the desktop, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1729978" d="4772" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but the right one or middle one </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> launch a web browser or Directory Opus. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1734750" d="2769" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I mean, I use those a lot </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> of the time I use a computer, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1737519" d="2503" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so why not make that stupid easy? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1740022" d="1368" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But let me prove this: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1741390" d="3904" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm going to clock myself launching </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> a web browser as fast as I can, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1745294" d="4204" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> using the default Windows methods </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> of using a shortcut on the desktop, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1749498" d="1835" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> using the Quick Launch bar, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1751333" d="2669" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and then using my way on LiteStep. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1754002" d="2336" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> We're not gonna wait </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> on my computer to load it, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1756338" d="2703" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> timing ends as soon as </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I complete the action. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1759041" d="4938" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Okay, I looked over the footage and took </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the average times on multiple attempts. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1763979" d="2136" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, I wasn't Bruce Lee speed, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1766115" d="4771" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but it looks like my way is about half a </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> second faster than using the Quick Bar. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1770886" d="2236" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, sure, that doesn't sound like much, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1773122" d="3970" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but how many times do you use a </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> web browser or need to move files around? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1777092" d="1635" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That crap adds up. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1778727" d="2736" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Plus, my method is more reliable. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1781463" d="3737" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> If you asked me to launch stuff from </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the Quick Launch bar as fast as I can </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1785200" d="1302" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> over and over, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1786502" d="2969" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm probably going to </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> screw up at some point. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1789471" d="2703" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> "Oh, no, I hit the wrong button!" </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1792174" d="3370" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Whereas I'll get it </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> every time using my way. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1795544" d="2703" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I could literally do this blindfolded. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1798247" d="3003" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So it's faster, </s><s p="3">and</s><s p="2"> more reliable. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1801250" d="2402" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And that's an </s><s p="3">objective</s><s p="2"> difference. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1803652" d="6006" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> We can measure it, repeat it in trials, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> get hard data, and quantify the bastard. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1809658" d="4171" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It </s><s p="3">is</s><s p="2"> possible to figure out </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> what is best for the GUI </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1813829" d="2235" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> based on what you're trying to do. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1816064" d="2636" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And I feel like this example </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> is just a microcosm </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1818700" d="3070" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> of what we </s><s p="3">could</s><s p="2"> be doing with the GUI. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1821770" d="4972" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> All right, now listen up, because I'm going </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to say something positive about Steve Jobs. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1826742" d="2069" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You're not going to hear me do that often. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1828811" d="2102" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> In fact, I might be </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> playing with fire here, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1830913" d="2535" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> since there's some </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> Steve Jobs worship out there, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1833448" d="1402" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but from what I know of him, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1834850" d="3570" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I think he was a predatory asshole </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> who was good at marketing, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1838420" d="2336" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and had a cult leader personality type. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1840756" d="1535" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Sure, he did stuff, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1842291" d="3036" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but a lot of it probably still would've </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> happened one way or another, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1845327" d="1335" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> even without him. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1846662" d="1434" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You know how multiple people </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1848096" d="3938" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> invented the telephone </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> independently around the same time? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1852034" d="2803" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> A lot of stuff in computers </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I think was like that, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1854837" d="2369" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> especially when you </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> don't have a monopoly. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1857206" d="4004" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I have ten times more </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> respect for Steve Wozniak, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1861210" d="4504" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> also known as the guy who actually </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> invented the Apple Computer? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1865714" d="2569" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> He didn't let success go to his head, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1868283" d="2469" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> has kept dabbling in </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> engineering projects, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1870752" d="3304" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and just has a better </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> attitude about life in general. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1875090" d="1368" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Where am I? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1876458" d="934" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Oh, that's right... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1877392" d="3471" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> One thing Steve Jobs said </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that I agree with 100% </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1880863" d="2135" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> is when he was working on the Macintosh, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1882998" d="3136" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> he was hellbent on </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> getting it to boot faster, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1886134" d="2903" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because if millions of people </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> were going to be using it, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1889037" d="4171" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> that collectively adds up </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to people's lives being saved. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1893208" d="3570" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Okay, now obviously the math </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> doesn't work out that cleanly, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1896778" d="3737" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and to be honest, boot time </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> isn't the end of the world. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1900515" d="3137" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You can do other things </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> while you wait for it to boot up. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1903652" d="1835" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But the GUI? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1905487" d="4805" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> A bad one is </s><s p="3">constantly</s><s p="2"> going to weigh </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> you down the more you're on a computer. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1910292" d="2869" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Shaving seconds down anywhere you can </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1913161" d="4305" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> is </s><s p="3">exactly</s><s p="2"> the attitude major </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> companies should take towards it. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1917466" d="4571" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now if you're making a game or a program </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that makes dog noises or something, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1922037" d="1768" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> you can forget all this crap. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1923805" d="5072" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But a major operating system </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that's going to be used by millions? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1928877" d="3971" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Oh no, excuse me, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> a </s><s p="3">billion</s><s p="2"> people, I guess? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1932848" d="3236" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That has such far reaching consequences </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1936084" d="5272" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> that </s><s p="3">any</s><s p="2"> inefficiencies mean </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> you are wasting people's lives! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1941356" d="3671" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That's practically holding </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> human progress back a bit, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1945027" d="2369" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Because instead of </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> getting more things done, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1947396" d="2002" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> we're wasting bits of time everywhere </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1949398" d="3737" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> on navigating Windows </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> in a semi-irritating way! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1953135" d="4337" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I mean, I realize Microsoft doesn't </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> seem to understand the human race. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1957472" d="1735" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> If you have any doubts about that, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1959207" d="3904" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I encourage you to watch their </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> Windows 7 launch party video. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1963111" d="4138" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It feels like a documentary </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> about humans made by aliens. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1967249" d="4771" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But Jesus, the level of stagnation </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> on the GUI just drives me crazy, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1972020" d="3070" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because I have to deal </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> with it almost every day! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1975090" d="4905" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Again, if you work on the computer, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the GUI is most of what you're seeing. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1979995" d="2569" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Computers have changed the world, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1982564" d="3937" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so why are we still in four </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> out of ten territory on this? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1986501" d="2036" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Well, I know part of the answer. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1988537" d="2436" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Again, I'm mostly </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> singling out Microsoft here, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1990973" d="1968" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but that's because they're a monopoly. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1992941" d="3704" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Oh, sure, somebody's going to say, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="3"> "No they're not, there are other options!" </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1996645" d="2669" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yes, technically, that's correct. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="1999314" d="2369" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So they're a de facto monopoly. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2001683" d="3337" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I mean, actually, they are down </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> globally for desktop share. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2005020" d="3036" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="3"> Only</s><s p="2"> 77% of the market. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2008056" d="1969" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That's lower than I thought. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2010025" d="3036" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Down from 91% a few years ago. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2013061" d="734" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Huh. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2013795" d="2069" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Well, what if you're a PC gamer? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2015864" d="2102" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> What percent of the market are they then? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2017966" d="4304" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Okay, on Steam, they're </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> only 96.8% of the market. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2022270" d="2903" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Oh yeah, that's not a monopoly at all. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2025173" d="3204" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And yes, competition technically exists. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2028377" d="4404" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And people were making fun of that concept </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> over a hundred years ago, by the way. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2032781" d="1301" wp="18" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I mean, in 2001, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2034082" d="3804" wp="18" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Microsoft was so big they attracted </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> attention from the Justice Department </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2037886" d="2402" wp="18" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> for violating antitrust laws. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2040288" d="1335" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Microsoft won, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2041623" d="4671" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> though I can't help but think if computing </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> would be better off now if they hadn't. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2046294" d="4371" wp="11" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I mean, their net worth now is </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> four times bigger than it was back then. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2050665" d="4839" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Anyway, the point to all this is in many </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> areas, Microsoft doesn't need to compete, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2055504" d="1201" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so they don't. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2056705" d="3937" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> See, here's what I would do if I was </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> running the GUI department at Microsoft, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2060642" d="1602" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> assuming they have one. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2062244" d="4471" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> First, I'd hire some people that just </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> invent GUI methods and test them out. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2066715" d="2903" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That'd be their whole job: </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> just to brainstorm all day. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2069618" d="2969" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Then, they can implement ideas </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> in test builds or programs </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2072587" d="2069" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> that the public could try alphas of. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2074656" d="3504" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You know how Microsoft has </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the Insider builds of Windows? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2078160" d="3703" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'd have that as a perpetual </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> program for the GUI also. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2081863" d="2903" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> There would be a new one for </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> people to test out all the time. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2084766" d="3103" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Then, collect data on everyone </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> who does opt into that. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2087869" d="3237" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> See which designs the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> public navigates the fastest. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2091106" d="6039" wp="18" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Over time, I could accumulate lots of data </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> on maybe not the perfect GUI, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2097145" d="2169" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but something pretty close, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2099314" d="2603" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because you would have </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the numbers to back it up. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2101917" d="1668" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And I'm getting ahead of myself here, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2103585" d="4571" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I would also detach the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> GUI from core system files, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2108156" d="4271" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and make a developer kit, so artists and </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> designers could do whatever they wanted. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2112427" d="3203" wp="19" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So they would </s><s p="3">ship</s><s p="2"> Windows </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> with the Microsoft standard, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2115630" d="2870" wp="20" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> which would be brilliant </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> instead of what we have now, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2118500" d="3236" wp="20" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because it would be derived from </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> constant research and development, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2121736" d="2336" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but if people didn't like it, fine! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2124072" d="2636" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> They could make their computer </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> look like whatever they wanted, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2126708" d="2569" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because they'd have the tools to do so! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2129277" d="3370" wp="21" ws="3"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So it could look like a giant </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> extension of </s><s p="3">World of Warcraft</s><s p="2">, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2132647" d="2870" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> those panels from </s><s p="3">Star Trek</s><s p="2">, whatever! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2135517" d="3837" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Some people will spend hundreds </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> if not thousands of hours </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2139354" d="5072" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> working on mods for </s><s p="3">Skyrim</s><s p="2">, with others </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> picking out exactly what they want. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2144426" d="2602" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Can you imagine what </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the computer would look like </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2147028" d="3404" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> if even a fraction of </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that talent was unlocked, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2150432" d="4738" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and given full access to </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the GUI itself in an easy way? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2155170" d="2703" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Right now, it's hurdle after hurdle. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2157873" d="1401" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I mean, when most people talk about </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2159274" d="3270" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> how they prefer an </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> operating system over another, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2162544" d="5472" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> half the time, they're not really talking </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> about the underlying code, but the GUI, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2168016" d="1602" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because that's all they see. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2169618" d="2536" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So by opening that up, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> Windows could be the king </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2172154" d="4471" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because people genuinely prefer </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="3"> using</s><s p="2"> it over alternatives, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2176625" d="2869" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and not just because of </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> business strong-arming tactics. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2179494" d="2336" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You know, when I first </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> heard about how Microsoft </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2181830" d="2936" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> was going to be changing </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the GUI for Windows 8, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2184766" d="1235" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I got excited. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2186001" d="1468" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I thought, "This is it! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2187469" d="3403" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This is their chance to just </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> scrap all the outdated holdovers, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2190872" d="2269" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and come up with something really good! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2193141" d="2403" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Sure, people will have </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to learn something new, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2195544" d="2302" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but then they'll be able </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to use Windows faster, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2197846" d="2602" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and hate the thought of </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> going back to the old way!" </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2200448" d="2603" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Well, that didn't happen. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2203051" d="2970" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Instead, it was a half-baked </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> touchscreen interface </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2206021" d="2269" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> that not only wasn't thought through, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2208290" d="3370" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but it couldn't even perform </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> all Windows functions, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2211660" d="3770" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so it truly was "one size fits no one." </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2215430" d="4505" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Or hey, remember how I said </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the look of a GUI is subjective? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2219935" d="2302" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Turns out that's not entirely true. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2222237" d="1335" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I saw an article recently </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2223572" d="4104" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> about how apparently flat-looking </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> themes lower productivity. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2227676" d="2369" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> They did exactly what </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I was talking about: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2230045" d="1868" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Gave users tasks to perform, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2231913" d="2736" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and clocked time spent </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> lingering on the UI, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2234649" d="1936" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and tracked their eye movements. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2236585" d="4771" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So objectively, Microsoft's </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> flat theme is slower. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2241356" d="4271" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, if we want to be super generous, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> which I don't think we should be, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2245627" d="5238" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> we could speculate that maybe it's </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> slower initially, but then faster later. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2250865" d="3504" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> For example, I've heard that </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> typing on a Dvorak keyboard </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2254369" d="2135" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> is faster than a regular one. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2256504" d="2870" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But if you clock somebody </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> one week into learning it, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2259374" d="2002" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> yeah, they're going to be slower. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2261376" d="3770" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But six months later, no, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> they'll probably be faster. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2265146" d="2136" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And if you're wondering </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> why I don't use one, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2267282" d="4438" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> it's because I may be a lost cause, since </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I don't type the right way to begin with. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2271720" d="2168" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I don't have a home row. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2273888" d="1969" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm keyboard homeless. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2275857" d="4171" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Anyway, Windows 8 exists, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> so I think it's safe to assume </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2280028" d="4471" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> GUI efficiency wasn't part </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> of Microsoft's master plan. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2284499" d="4304" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And here's data stating what </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> they're doing is objectively worse. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2288803" d="2803" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So to me, this says one of two things: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2291606" d="4371" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Either Microsoft is barely doing </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> any research at all on the GUI, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2295977" d="4104" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and their design process is like </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> somebody taking a test who hasn't studied, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2300081" d="3304" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> or Microsoft </s><s p="3">did</s><s p="2"> do the research, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2303385" d="3069" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but some higher-ups at the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> company completely ignored it, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2306454" d="3871" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and it's the ego of someone who's </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> not a designer steering the ship. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2310325" d="3637" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Either way, it's incompetence, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and they're rewarded for it, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2313962" d="2102" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because they're a monopoly. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2316064" d="2769" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm not a fan of Microsoft, by the way. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2318833" d="2870" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Okay, now if you're still here, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> because let's face it, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2321703" d="2035" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> most normal people left by now, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2323738" d="2403" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm sure some of you are </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> jumping out of your seat </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2326141" d="5305" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> to tell me about hotkeys and shortcuts, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and all the innovations on that front. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2331446" d="3136" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now on Windows 10, you can </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> hold down the Windows key, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2334582" d="1736" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and make a window dock, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2336318" d="3169" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> or access a specific </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> program on the taskbar, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2339487" d="2069" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> or minimize, maximize... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2341556" d="2569" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> There's a keyboard </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> shortcut for everything! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2344125" d="3637" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Or hey, use the program </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> AutoHotkey to create your own, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2347762" d="3070" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> which I do actually, but uh... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2350832" d="1502" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Okay, I'll start off easy. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2352334" d="3370" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> First, yes, these are improvements. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2355704" d="934" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2356638" d="1034" wp="22" ws="3"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> [sighs] </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2357672" d="2503" wp="23" ws="3"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> it's like we're getting </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> there, and we're not. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2360175" d="1501" wp="24" ws="2"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Okay, to kick things off, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2361676" d="4271" wp="24" ws="2"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> all the Windows key shortcuts are </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> almost useless if you're a gamer. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2365947" d="4638" wp="24" ws="2"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Anybody who's gamed on the PC </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> long enough has hit that key by accident, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2370585" d="2169" wp="25" ws="2"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and that can sometimes </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> end your game, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2372754" d="2836" wp="25" ws="2"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because it tells Windows </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to pull up the Start menu, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2375590" d="2970" wp="26" ws="2"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> which a lot of games </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> are not cool with. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2378560" d="3670" wp="27" ws="2"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Hey, I made a video on the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> game </s><s p="3">Messiah</s><s p="2"> not long ago. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2382230" d="3937" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Let's see what happens when I </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> press the Windows key while in that. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2386167" d="2369" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Uh-oh, didn't want that! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2388536" d="2536" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But that's okay, I'll just </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> switch back to the game. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2391072" d="3804" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, impressively, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the game did not crash, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2394876" d="3403" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but it's just not quite the same anymore. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2398279" d="3237" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> There's a </s><s p="3">lot</s><s p="2"> of games this happens with. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2401516" d="4037" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It's such a liability, I had the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> key disabled on my system, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2405553" d="3137" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so I'm missing out on </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> all these hotkeys anyway. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2408690" d="3670" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And wouldn't you know it, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that brings me to another GUI truth: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2412360" d="5672" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It shouldn't be really easy to do </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> something you don't want to by accident. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2418032" d="3838" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now that truth is in a constant </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> tug of war with the efficiency one, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2421870" d="4538" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because often the fastest path </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> is also easy to trigger accidentally. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2426408" d="2202" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But there are ways around that. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2428610" d="4004" wp="28" ws="2"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Bottom line is if pressing </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> one button wrecks everything, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2432614" d="3670" wp="28" ws="2"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and it's right next to other </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> buttons you press frequently, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2436284" d="2136" wp="29" ws="2"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> that's not a good design. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2438420" d="1935" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But let's say I wasn't a gamer, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2440355" d="4104" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and I never had to worry about </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> getting ripped out of a fullscreen game. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2444459" d="2235" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This still isn't efficient. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2446694" d="2369" wp="7" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> First, let's look at the ergonomics. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2449063" d="3704" wp="7" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Let's say I wanted to bring up </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the fifth program using that hotkey. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2452767" d="2436" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Well, that's Windows key and 5. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2457038" d="1001" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Eh... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2458973" d="1502" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Ergh... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2460475" d="1435" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, that sucks. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2461910" d="3603" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It's a solution the keyboard was </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> never designed for to begin with. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2465513" d="3804" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But surely it's a lot easier </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to just do this, right? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2469317" d="1268" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But uh-oh, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2470585" d="2703" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> now my hand's off the mouse. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2473288" d="4271" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So I had to bring my hand all the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> way from over here to press this key. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2477559" d="2802" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Modern computing is full of this crap. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2480361" d="1769" wp="7" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> If you use hot keys, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2482130" d="4171" wp="23" ws="3"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> unless they're really well </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> thought-out, which most aren't, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2486301" d="2536" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> you're constantly going back and forth. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2488837" d="2135" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This is crap design. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2490972" d="3537" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You have to stop whatever you were </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> doing with this hand on the mouse, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2494509" d="3537" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> bring it all the way over here, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that takes time, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2498046" d="2169" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and now because your </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> hand was on the mouse, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2500215" d="1868" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and you don't have a frame of reference, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2502083" d="4004" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> you may not be able to locate </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the exact key you want by touch, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2506087" d="2703" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so you have to take your </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> eyes away from the screen, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2508790" d="2602" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> look down to find the key you wanted, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2511392" d="4605" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because no one ever gets "N" and "M" </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> mixed up when they don't look down, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2515997" d="1435" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> then press it, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2517432" d="5505" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="3"> then</s><s p="2"> move your hand back to the mouse, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and resume looking at the screen. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2522937" d="1602" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This is garbage! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2524539" d="4438" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now most of us probably don't think of </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> it that way, because we're so used to it, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2528977" d="3003" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I told you I was going </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to sound like a heretic! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2531980" d="2435" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I feel like Michael Palin in </s><s p="3">Jabberwocky</s><s p="2">. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2540188" d="3136" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> I couldn't help noticing that </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="4"> you could increase your efficiency </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2543324" d="1569" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> if you moved your box to here. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2545894" d="1968" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="6"> [screams] </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2550565" d="1001" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="5"> Oof! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2551566" d="6173" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="5"> [all scream] </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2557739" d="2669" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, that's what I should expect, huh? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2560408" d="2736" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Unless you're actually typing a sentence, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2563144" d="4271" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because I don't see a way around that, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> with the mouse and keyboard anyway, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2567415" d="3504" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> ideally your hands should </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> never come off the mouse. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2570919" d="4204" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You should be able to do as </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> much as possible with just one hand, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2575123" d="3837" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and then really bring out the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> higher functions if you use two, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2578960" d="4371" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> not essentially require </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> three hands the way it is now. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2583331" d="3704" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="3"> This</s><s p="2"> is why even if you know </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the name of your programs, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2587035" d="4738" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> using something like Launchy </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="3"> still</s><s p="2"> isn't an optimal solution, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2591773" d="2569" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because it involves leaving the mouse. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2594342" d="2703" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> In fact, I feel another truth coming on: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2597045" d="2269" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> If you're not actually typing, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2599314" d="4504" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> the number of times you have to switch </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> your hand between the mouse and keyboard </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2603818" d="2436" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> should be kept to an absolute minimum. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2606254" d="2703" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> The computer could </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> almost be like a throne, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2608957" d="3136" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> where your hands are on </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> each side doing everything. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2612093" d="1435" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Look at the Riddler there. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2613528" d="1902" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> He doesn't have to lift his hands! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2615430" d="3303" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Look at how much </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> information he's processing! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2618733" d="3871" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Really, I almost see Windows </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> pushing Cortana as the go-to standard </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2622604" d="3103" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> for launching programs </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> as an admission of defeat. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2625707" d="1201" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It's like they're saying </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2626908" d="3804" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> they can't come up with a graceful way </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to navigate your computer visually, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2630712" d="2903" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so here, just type in what </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> you want and leave us alone. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2633615" d="3636" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That will free up more of the Start menu </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> for us to add </s><s p="3">Candy Crush</s><s p="2"> to it. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2637251" d="2336" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, not all hotkeys are bad. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2639587" d="3470" wp="30" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I use Control-C a lot, since </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that's a common function, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2643057" d="3470" wp="30" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and that sort of passes </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the ergonomics test. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2646527" d="3370" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Too bad it only works when it wants to! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2649897" d="4605" wp="31" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Okay, I'm off course again, but there have </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> been times I've highlighted a bit of text, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2654502" d="3470" wp="31" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> pressed Control-C </s><s p="3">three</s><s p="2"> times, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2657972" d="3904" wp="31" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> then went over here and pressed </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> Control-V, and then, nothing. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2661876" d="2903" wp="31" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It's like it never happened. </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> Erased from history. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2664779" d="3170" wp="31" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> However, this is not the hotkey's fault, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2667949" d="1868" wp="32" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because I've seen it happen before, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2669817" d="5039" wp="33" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> right-clicking, pressing copy, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and then still, nothing. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2674856" d="4137" wp="34" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now this only happens </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> maybe 5–10% of the time, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2678993" d="2302" wp="34" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but that's still way too high. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2681295" d="3170" wp="34" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I have zero idea what's causing this, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2684465" d="4705" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and if we're to rely on my blurry </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> memory, which maybe we shouldn't, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2689170" d="6373" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I want to say it didn't used to be </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> this bad on XP and Windows 98. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2695543" d="5172" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I seem to remember copy and paste </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> not being a game of chance. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2700715" d="4004" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Anyway, hotkeys could be better </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> if you had a dedicated keypad, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2704719" d="3503" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and </s><s p="3">all</s><s p="2"> the functions </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> were optimized for that. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2708222" d="2670" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But right now, they're </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> just all over the place. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2710892" d="1668" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Plus, there's a lot of them. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2712560" d="4872" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Do you really want to memorize all these </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> hotkeys for different Windows functions? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2717432" d="2836" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Pop quiz: What's the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> hotkey for Device Manager? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2720268" d="1401" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> For System Restore? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2721669" d="1368" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> The Display panel? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2723037" d="1435" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Learn those hotkeys! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2724472" d="1535" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Hup hup hup hup hup hup hup! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2726007" d="4638" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I want to be as lazy </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> as possible when using the GUI. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2730645" d="1802" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I get more done that way. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2732447" d="4037" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I should get the maximum </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> amount done for the minimum effort. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2736484" d="4104" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And I'm sure some of you are making fun of </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> me for complaining about the "extra effort" </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2740588" d="4605" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> it takes to click on tiny icons, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> move my hand off the mouse, and so on. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2745193" d="3169" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Well, go ahead, but it's not </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> like you're building character </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2748362" d="2169" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> by putting up with inefficiencies. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2750531" d="1735" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You're just getting aggravated. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2752266" d="3704" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Everyone should want to </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> be lazier using the computer. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2755970" d="3137" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You should save the effort </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> for your actual work, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2759107" d="3637" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> or just whatever you were using </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the computer for in the first place, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2762744" d="1868" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> not the GUI. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2764612" d="2536" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> If you don't want your arms to be lazy, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2767148" d="2936" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> then get off the computer </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and go lift some weights! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2770084" d="3504" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> What, are you getting </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> pumped from using the mouse? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2773588" d="3270" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> The GUI is full of </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> inefficiencies like this. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2776858" d="2836" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Why do we have to switch </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> off the mouse so often? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2779694" d="3870" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Why go down to the bottom corner when </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> you could just launch the menu anywhere? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2783564" d="3804" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, I bet people using </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> super-wide monitors love that one. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2787368" d="2803" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Why do we have tiny icons </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and buttons to click on </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2790171" d="2970" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> instead of just hiding big ones </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> until we need them? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2793141" d="1701" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Why do we double-click? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2794842" d="3003" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Why does middle-clicking often do nothing? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2797845" d="2569" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And this is just the stuff I'm noticing. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2800414" d="3003" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I don't even know half </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> of the problems we have. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2803417" d="2169" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But every time I use a computer, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2805586" d="4104" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> my intuition is screaming </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> at me that it could be better. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2809690" d="2236" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Okay, I'm going to go full heretic: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2811926" d="4471" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm not even convinced one of the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> most sacred aspects of GUI design, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2816397" d="5806" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> having tiny buttons in the corner </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to close, maximize, and resize your window </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2822203" d="2235" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> is a good way of doing things. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2824438" d="3137" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I mean, if you look at </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> Windows, Mac, Linux... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2827575" d="2002" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> They all follow that formula. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2829577" d="2369" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> These are tiny targets. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2831946" d="2669" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It takes concentration to hit them. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2834615" d="2670" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It's easy to hit the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> wrong one by accident. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2837285" d="3870" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> They take up space that can </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> be devoted to the program itself. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2841155" d="3937" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, this wasn't a bad </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> system 35 years ago, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2845092" d="3270" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but it's barely evolved since then! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2848362" d="2536" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Hey here's a thought experiment for you: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2850898" d="2536" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Pretend you got rid of </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> all modern eye candy, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2853434" d="4471" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and judge the Windows GUI </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> solely by how functional it is. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2857905" d="2569" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Does this look like decades </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> worth of advancement </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2860474" d="2937" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> in a cutting edge technology field? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2863411" d="4171" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> If this was yours, would you be </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> proud to show this off to the world </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2867582" d="4804" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> if this was all the progress </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> you've made since 95? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2872386" d="1335" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I wouldn't! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2873721" d="2703" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> When you type a sentence, it has flow. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2876424" d="1234" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You roll along with the keys, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2877658" d="3437" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and things feel like they're moving </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> about as fast as they could be. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2881095" d="1969" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It generally feels good. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2883064" d="2636" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> The Windows GUI has no flow. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2885700" d="3770" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It's all a bunch of starting and </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> stopping and precision clicking. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2889470" d="5038" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It feels more like driving downtown in </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> a city with constant stops and checks. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2894508" d="4004" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> In fact, when I think of what the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> optimal Windows user would look like, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2898512" d="4238" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I keep thinking back to a </s><s p="3">Star Trek</s><s p="2"> episode </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> where the engines have been sabotaged, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2902750" d="3971" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> they need to get them working again </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> in time before the ship is destroyed, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2906721" d="2035" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> except the only way to start the engines </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2908756" d="4838" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> is by inserting these cards into </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the computer in the exact right way, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2913594" d="3504" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and no one can humanly do it </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> fast enough to save them in time, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2917098" d="1735" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> except Data. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2918833" d="4037" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="3"> This</s><s p="2"> is what the ideal </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> GUI user looks like. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2922870" d="4004" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> We've created an interface </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> for androids, not humans! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2926874" d="4304" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now I have some ideas on how </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to fix this, because I've seen better. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2931178" d="5005" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This may sound stupid, but plenty of movies </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> have shown slick-looking interfaces. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2936183" d="1669" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Zip, zip, zip. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2937852" d="2669" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="3"> That</s><s p="2"> is what I'm talking about. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2940521" d="4838" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now don't worry, I'm not saying we have to </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> use motion controls and augmented reality, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2945359" d="3904" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> at least, not for most people, uh... yet. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2949263" d="2703" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But I can't help but think </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> there's potential here. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2951966" d="3770" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I mean, motion controls are less </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> lazy than the mouse and keyboard, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2955736" d="4371" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but this looks so much more efficient, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> which is what I actually want. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2960107" d="4004" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> All right, forget the layered </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> transparency crap, I don't like that, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2964111" d="2803" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but do you know how much </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> faster I could edit this video </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2966914" d="4304" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> if I could use my hands like this, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> instead of the mouse and keyboard? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2971218" d="2570" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And these all look like they have flow. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2973788" d="1168" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Look at that. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2974956" d="4204" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I have no idea what he's </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> doing, but it looks efficient. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2979160" d="3837" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Oh, and hey, this one takes place in 2021! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2982997" d="2769" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> There's still time for this, guys! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2985766" d="4572" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, back in the 2D mouse and </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> keyboard world, we still have options. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2990338" d="5739" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I think the future of GUI efficiency </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> lies at least partially in mouse gestures. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2996077" d="1501" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Here, take a look: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="2997578" d="3170" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> So I was sitting here doing nothing, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="4"> just playing my music, and I thought, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3000748" d="4204" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> you know, I'd better stop and mute this, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="4"> and go ahead and upload a video to YouTube, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3004952" d="2803" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> and I thought, "What can I talk about? </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="4"> Maybe I could talk about the mouse," </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3007755" d="1668" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> you know, scrolling </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="4"> in the background, maybe. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3009423" d="3671" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> This is something Windows doesn't </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="4"> do by default, it's pretty cool to have. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3013094" d="2402" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> And I thought, you know, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="4"> "Nah, people don't want to watch that." </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3015496" d="868" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> But then maybe they do. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3016364" d="3870" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> Some people go on YouTube just to find </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="4"> new content. They want to see anything. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3020234" d="3804" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> They're happy to refresh the page </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="4"> just to find new videos to watch. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3024038" d="2336" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> So I could do that, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="4"> or I could search on Google. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3026374" d="4871" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> I mean, at the end of the day, there's </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="4"> always something to be found on Google. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3031245" d="701" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> Then again, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3031946" d="3737" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> I don't really want to be that person </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="4"> that just takes content and copies it, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3035683" d="3203" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> and then you end up seeing </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="4"> exactly the same thing again later on. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3038886" d="2703" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> That's not what I'm about, you know. </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="4"> My channel isn't going backwards, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3041589" d="2202" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> it's going forwards, so, I don't know. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3043791" d="2269" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> Maybe I should go on Twitter </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="4"> to find new content, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3046060" d="3203" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> or maybe I should just, uh, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="4"> think about something closer to home. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3049263" d="1568" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> Ooh, my mind went blank. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3050831" d="2603" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> Tell you what, let's talk </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="4"> about mouse gestures. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3053434" d="5772" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, see, now </s><s p="3">that</s><s p="2"> looks like an </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> actual advancement to the GUI. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3059206" d="2203" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Instead of aiming for precise targets, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3061409" d="3503" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> we just wave the mouse around </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> like a wand and things happen. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3064912" d="2836" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Tell me that doesn't look </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> faster and more intuitive </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3067748" d="2970" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> than almost every </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> GUI computers use today! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3070718" d="1301" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I dare you! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3072019" d="5873" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Why the hell is this an obscure third-party </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> program instead of an industry standard? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3077892" d="4304" wp="35" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Maybe because Microsoft wasn't </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> broken up and maintained their monopoly, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3082196" d="2502" wp="35" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so it calcified </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> every designer's thinking </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3084698" d="2470" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> into doing things the way </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> they've always been done! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3087168" d="2469" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It stunted people's brains! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3089637" d="3670" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Hell, now I'm mad at myself </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that I haven't been using this. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3093307" d="2503" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm not saying this is </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the answer to everything, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3095810" d="3103" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but in the same way my intuition </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> has been screaming at me </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3098913" d="2002" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> that the GUI could be better, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3100915" d="3870" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> this is screaming to me </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that it has massive potential. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3104785" d="3337" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But I do think there are a few </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> principles you would want here. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3108122" d="3537" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> First, you would want very </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> quick and simple gestures. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3111659" d="2202" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm thinking three strokes maximum. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3113861" d="3036" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Second, you don't want to </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> trigger these by accident. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3116897" d="4471" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Okay, I'm not super knowledgeable </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> on </s><s p="3">Star Wars</s><s p="2">, but from what I can tell, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3121368" d="2470" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> there's some sort of </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> mechanism in the lightsabers, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3123838" d="2669" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> where they turn off </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> if you're not gripping them. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3126507" d="2402" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> At least, that's what it </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> looks like in the movies. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3128909" d="2803" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> For example, we know </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> this video isn't canon, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3131712" d="3370" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because when they knock the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> lightsaber out of the farmer's hand, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3135082" d="2736" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> it should turn off, but it doesn't. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3137818" d="2770" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So you would want </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> something similar with gestures. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3140588" d="3937" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Maybe assign a button from your mouse </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to hold it down when you make a gesture, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3144525" d="1835" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> then let it go the rest of the time? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3146360" d="1902" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Actually, there are so many functions, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3148262" d="3837" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> you might need a few buttons, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> or need a mouse that looks like this. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3152099" d="3270" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Oh, and that's not an endorsement </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> of Razer, by the way. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3155369" d="2069" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> In fact, I've been trying to boycott them </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3157438" d="3103" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> ever since they started </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> adding DRM to their mice. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3160541" d="3503" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But maybe this many buttons isn't needed, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and right-click and thumb-click </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3164044" d="2269" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> could take care of everything </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> they traditionally did, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3166313" d="2336" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> except now with gestures too. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3168649" d="1101" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I don't know. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3169750" d="2403" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You'd probably need </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> more than one button though, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3172153" d="3169" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so a swipe left would mean </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> one thing with button one, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3175322" d="2002" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and another with button two. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3177324" d="2870" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You could unlock dozens </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> of functions that way. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3180194" d="2436" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> In fact, I think that's another truth: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3182630" d="3904" wp="36" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You need multiple mouse </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> buttons for maximum efficiency. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3186534" d="3103" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> See, I told you I wasn't </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> a fan of Steve Jobs! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3189637" d="2769" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, another problem is </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> like the Windows key, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3192406" d="3670" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> you don't want gestures </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> triggering by accident in a game. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3196076" d="2369" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, maybe there's </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> third-party software like this </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3198445" d="2603" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> already on Windows </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that I don't know about, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3201048" d="3036" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I've actually seen a </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> possible solution to that. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3204084" d="2303" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> When I had a SteelSeries mouse, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3206387" d="2636" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I could assign different </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> functions to the mouse key </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3209023" d="2602" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> depending on what program was active. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3211625" d="4872" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So if I was inside a video editor, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> my buttons would trigger editing functions, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3216497" d="4838" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but if I switched over to a web browser, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> they would seamlessly do something else. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3221335" d="3270" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Oh, and that's not an endorsement </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> of SteelSeries mice either. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3224605" d="2970" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> My scroll wheel button </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> broke on my last one. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3227575" d="4070" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> The scroll wheel button broke on </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> my SteelSeries mouse before that, too. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3231645" d="3304" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Actually, my scroll wheel button </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> is broken on my current mouse, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3234949" d="4404" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I was able to remap it to the DPI </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> button, so it's still hanging in there. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3239353" d="3403" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But that's my problem; </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I'm a mutant when it comes to mice. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3242756" d="3370" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You can watch my birthday video </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> if you want to know more about that. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3246126" d="3971" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> The point to all this is we really </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> need software like that standardized, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3250097" d="3737" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so that mouse buttons can do a lot </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> more depending on what you're running. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3253834" d="4738" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm not sure if all this is </s><s p="3">the</s><s p="2"> answer, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> but it seems like it could be. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3258572" d="3504" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Mouse gestures combined </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> with smart application detection </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3262076" d="2402" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> could get things done very quickly. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3264478" d="3737" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I mean, maybe there's a good reason </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the industry isn't really using them, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3268215" d="1001" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I don't know. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3269216" d="2503" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Gestures have been around a long time. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3271719" d="3103" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I remember the Opera browser </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> had them from way back, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3274822" d="4137" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> although I don't use Opera anymore because </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> they switched to a Chromium foundation, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3278959" d="1802" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> which is a problem for me. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3280761" d="5172" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I currently use Firefox, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> because once again of the GUI. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3285933" d="2769" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> See, Firefox is one of </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the last browsers standing </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3288702" d="2903" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> to let me disable the tab close button. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3291605" d="2836" wp="2" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I haven't used those in maybe decades. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3294441" d="4905" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> See, they're not on those early </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> screenshots from 2002 or whenever that was. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3299346" d="3804" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Say I want to open up a bunch </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> of tabs, like some screenshots. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3303150" d="1602" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Fine, I middle-click. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3304752" d="1401" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Open, open, open. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3306153" d="2636" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now I want to browse some, and—oh, darn! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3308789" d="3270" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I closed one by accident </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> because I hit that stupid button, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3312059" d="2636" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because I'm an imprecise human being! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3314695" d="3370" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Gee, if only I didn't need </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that damn button at all, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3318065" d="2803" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because I can just </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> middle-click to close the tab, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3320868" d="2169" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and left-click to select it, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3323037" d="3136" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> thus ensuring I never </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> close one by accident, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3326173" d="3103" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="3"> and</s><s p="2"> freeing up more </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> space to read the titles! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3329276" d="4371" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Plus, the space to click on a tab </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> instead of a close button is wider, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3333647" d="1935" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so there's more margin for error. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3335582" d="2770" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This is just a more efficient system. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3338352" d="2970" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm not the only person </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> who thinks this, either. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3341322" d="4237" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I've seen threads asking Chrome </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to add this, to which they've replied, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3345559" d="3070" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> "This is a will-not-fix kind of issue." </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3348629" d="2269" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And now Opera is doing this too! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3350898" d="1802" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now this is much more minor, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3352700" d="5305" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but again, it feels like the industry </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> is trying to drag me backwards to the past </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3358005" d="1935" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> when it comes to the GUI! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3359940" d="3203" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Thank god Firefox </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> hasn't done this to me! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3363143" d="935" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> ...yet! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3364078" d="2068" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Though, it's given me other problems. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3366146" d="3837" wp="30" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> One of the updates completely </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> broke file associations for me. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3369983" d="4205" wp="30" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Then they updated again, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and made it less broken, but not fixed. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3374188" d="2536" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It remained busted </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> from its original state. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3376724" d="2802" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Then, update after update, no fix. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3379526" d="5372" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, to be fair, it did get fixed </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> just recently, which honestly shocked me, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3384898" d="2837" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but it was still bugged </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> for about six months. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3387735" d="3470" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Stuff like that makes me </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> afraid to click on updates. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3391205" d="4104" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Though problems like this are </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> hardly unique to Firefox. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3395309" d="3537" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Hey, did you know that now Microsoft </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> has stopped supporting Windows 7? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3398846" d="3003" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> They released one </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> final patch of fixes for it? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3401849" d="4571" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Except that fix added a new bug </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> which turned people's wallpapers black. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3406420" d="2970" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So they released a </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> fix for their final fix. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3409390" d="3103" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Except that fix added another new bug, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3412493" d="2502" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so people couldn't shut </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> down Windows anymore. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3414995" d="1001" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I haven't kept up </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3415996" d="3971" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> to see whether they've released </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> a fix for the fix for the final fix. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3419967" d="1334" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> With Windows 10, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3421301" d="4905" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Microsoft has made perpetual betas </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the new standard for computing. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3426206" d="2736" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> There are no stable versions </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> for the user now. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3428942" d="2703" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It's always a fix for the fix for the fix. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3431645" d="4104" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That might have something to do with them </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> firing their quality assurance department, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3435749" d="2336" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and replacing them with AI testing. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3438085" d="5205" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It blows my mind the industry </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and just users in general tolerate this, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3443290" d="2636" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but all right, I'm getting </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> way off track now. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3445926" d="1568" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Actually, wait, no. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3447494" d="1168" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> As I'm editing this, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3448662" d="5172" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> there's news that Microsoft is replacing </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> its news contractors at MSN with AI also. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3453834" d="1101" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Oh boy(!) </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3454935" d="2135" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It's a brave new world, guys. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3457070" d="1836" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Back to the GUI! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3458906" d="1034" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Uh... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3459940" d="2603" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> All right, I'm winding this up, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> but before I do that, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3462543" d="3336" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I've been focusing so much </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> on how the GUI functions. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3465879" d="2002" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> What about how it looks? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3467881" d="2336" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Again, Windows is pathetic! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3470217" d="2369" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> We have different colors, and... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3472586" d="3170" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> yeah, that's pretty much </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> all you get out of default Windows. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3475756" d="3503" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now in the past, there have </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> been programs like StyleXP, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3479259" d="1902" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I think that's dead now... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3481161" d="4004" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I use this BricoPack thing I've found </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to make the buttons less ugly, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3485165" d="2803" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and that probably won't </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> work on Windows 10, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3487968" d="4771" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but one of the holdouts that </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> still works, I think, is WindowBlinds. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3492739" d="1669" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, in the past, at least, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3494408" d="3970" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> WindowBlinds and a lot of </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> Stardock programs could change a lot, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3498378" d="2536" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and I have found some promising themes, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3500914" d="3904" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I don't know how many of </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> those got updated for Windows 10. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3504818" d="3637" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Plus, there's so much </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> mediocrity out there. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3508455" d="701" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Eh... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3509423" d="767" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Eh... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3510491" d="1067" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Eh... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3511558" d="2369" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Like vanilla Windows itself, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3513927" d="4972" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so much that's out there looks like </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> four or five out of ten material to me. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3518899" d="2636" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I mean, yeah, these took time to make, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3521535" d="3804" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but can you honestly say </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> these themes look almost perfect, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3525339" d="4638" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and what you would want your computer </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to look like for the next ten years? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3529977" d="3336" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Look at this contrast; </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that's not easy on the eyes! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3533313" d="2670" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And why do so many </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> themes have low contrast </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3535983" d="2402" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> between the text and the background? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3538385" d="1835" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That's how you get eye strain! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3540220" d="1935" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Hey, Bach was a great composer, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3542155" d="4038" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but he went blind because he </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> used crappy WindowsBlinds themes. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3546193" d="3070" wp="37" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Here, I'm adding those to the truth list. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3549263" d="2902" wp="18" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, again, I don't know </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> exactly what I want, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3552165" d="3404" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I have seen some themes in </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the past I like more than these, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3555569" d="3470" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so the potential is there with </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> WindowsBlinds to make something nicer, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3559039" d="2703" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but good luck finding the right themes. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3561742" d="3003" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> All right, let's talk about </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> other OSs for a minute. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3564745" d="2068" wp="38" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, I'm not much of a Mac user. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3566813" d="3237" wp="38" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> They've always cost more, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> have locked-down hardware, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3570050" d="1835" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and don't have as many games, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3571885" d="4838" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but if they had a look I really liked, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I'd say that's worth copying. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3576723" d="1936" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Well, it's not terrible. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3578659" d="3803" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'd say the default look is definitely </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> more cohesive than Windows. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3582462" d="3871" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I like some of the icons, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> like that two-faced smiley guy, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3586333" d="4605" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I can't say I like it so much </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I want to model the GUI after this. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3590938" d="4170" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Though obviously I like the look of the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> dock better than the Windows taskbar. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3595108" d="4738" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now I haven't used a Mac in a few years, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> so my knowledge may be a little outdated— </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3599846" d="2103" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Macs have a different way of doing things, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3601949" d="4871" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I'd say they have a lot of the same </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> pitfalls as Windows regarding the GUI. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3606820" d="2836" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> They weren't thinking </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that outside the box. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3609656" d="2870" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> However, I have heard of the Magic Mouse, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3612526" d="3637" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> which seems to be embracing </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> gesture-based navigation. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3616163" d="2302" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I don't know how successful that's been. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3618465" d="3403" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I would think that if they </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> did a really good job on that, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3621868" d="2603" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> the tech media would </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> be talking about it more, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3624471" d="2336" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I'm operating from ignorance here. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3626807" d="3904" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> If any Mac users want to </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> weigh in on how nice or not nice </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3630711" d="3637" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> the current state of the GUI </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> is on the Mac, let us know. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3634348" d="4738" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I still can't see myself switching </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> for all the same reasons I've had for... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3639086" d="1801" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> my whole life pretty much, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3640887" d="2937" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but that doesn't mean they </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> couldn't be doing some things right, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3643824" d="2636" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and are worth copying if they are. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3646460" d="1701" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now what about Linux? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3648161" d="3671" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Okay, I had to rewrite everything </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I was going to say about Linux. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3651832" d="3003" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> First off, there's no one Linux look. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3654835" d="3103" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> There are lots of different </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> flavors and distributions. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3657938" d="3270" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> In the </s><s p="3">past</s><s p="2">, I felt like some </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> of these default themes </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3661208" d="2068" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> were some of the nicest around; </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3663276" d="2937" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> better than what Windows </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> or Mac was coming up with. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3666213" d="2269" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> There was definitely </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> room for improvement, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3668482" d="2435" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I liked a lot of what I was seeing. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3670917" d="2770" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, I don't know </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> what the hell is going on. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3673687" d="3570" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I was hoping to show just </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> how great Linux can look, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3677257" d="2236" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but everything I've found </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> had a problem with it. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3679493" d="3136" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> For starters, I'm not a </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> fan of super dark themes, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3682629" d="2403" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because if you're browsing </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the internet or something, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3685032" d="2636" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> you'll inevitably come </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> across something bright, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3687668" d="3003" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> which can hurt your non-adjusted eyes. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3690671" d="2869" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Well, there's a lot of super dark themes. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3693540" d="3504" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> There's also that flat-looking </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> "too much white" stuff. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3697044" d="2636" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Are we copying Windows 10 here? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3699680" d="4037" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But most of all, a million themes </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> today seem to have this ugly contrast, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3703717" d="2202" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> where we have a decent theme going on, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3705919" d="3470" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but then they slap these </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> black bars on the top or bottom, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3709389" d="2970" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> which increases eye strain </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and hurts readability. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3712359" d="1868" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Why are they doing this? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3714227" d="4305" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And of course, there's also some </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> of the super low contrast stuff. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3718532" d="1001" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Eugh. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3719533" d="1535" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Look, I tried. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3721068" d="4437" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Odds are, there </s><s p="3">are</s><s p="2"> really nice </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> looking Linux themes out there, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3725505" d="1135" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but they're in hiding, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3726640" d="2969" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and the mainstream stuff </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> doesn't seem to know what it's doing. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3729609" d="3137" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> See, that's one thing that </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="3"> is</s><s p="2"> great about Linux: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3732746" d="4771" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> These are all desktop environments </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that sit on top of the OS itself. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3737517" d="2203" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So if you want to </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> change all the graphics, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3739720" d="3703" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> that's totally cool and it isn't </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> treated like a virus attack. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3743423" d="5773" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So if you wanted to create the perfect GUI, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> Linux might be the place to do it. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3749196" d="1601" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And to add some more positive, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3750797" d="4104" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> for basic things like web </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> browsing or light multimedia, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3754901" d="5406" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Linux is actually super easy to use now, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> even easier than Windows. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3760307" d="4871" wp="18" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Oh yeah, some people might expect me </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to add "easy to understand" to the truths? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3765178" d="2069" wp="18" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> No, that's not one of my truths. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3767247" d="400" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> [pop] </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3767647" d="1669" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I don't care at all about that. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3769316" d="2669" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I want whatever makes me a GUI wizard. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3771985" d="1935" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Though, old people might want that one. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3773920" d="701" wp="39" ws="3"><s p="1"></s><s p="6"> Uh! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3774621" d="4872" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Regardless, for basic things, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> Linux has that going for it: it's easy. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3779493" d="5205" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But once you get into intermediate stuff, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> or specialty functions and programs, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3784698" d="2335" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I want to say it's </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> inevitable at some point </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3787033" d="3804" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> that you're going to </s><s p="3">have </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to use the command-line interface. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3790837" d="3704" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This isn't really the case </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> for Windows or Mac. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3794541" d="3804" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I've heard some people say the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> command-line is faster than the GUI. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3798345" d="2169" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I don't really think that's true. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3800514" d="2469" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I used the command-line </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> back in the DOS days. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3802983" d="1701" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I don't miss it at all. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3804684" d="5339" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I still play DOS games, but man, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I use a front end for that crap now. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3810023" d="2870" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Say I want to change a </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> profile for a game I'm running, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3812893" d="3603" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> then change my CPU speed, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> maybe try a different scaler, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3816496" d="3270" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> turn fullscreen on or off, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> change the directory... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3819766" d="1702" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Boom, boom, boom, I'm done. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3821468" d="1635" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It's just faster. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3823103" d="3170" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Or say I want to select </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> some specific files from a list, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3826273" d="2202" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> then move them to a different directory. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3828475" d="3203" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I can't see a command-line </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> being faster for that. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3831678" d="1935" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> There are tons of things like this. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3833613" d="2603" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now there might be some </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> scenarios I'm not thinking of </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3836216" d="2536" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> where a command-line could beat the GUI, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3838752" d="5138" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> though I'm not sure what that would be </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> if you had a properly optimized front end. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3843890" d="2569" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And hey, don't forget the travel time! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3846459" d="4138" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But, assuming the command </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> line is faster at some things, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3850597" d="2903" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I still don't think that means </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the command-line is better. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3853500" d="3503" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It means the current GUI is </s><s p="3">worse</s><s p="2">. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3857003" d="4772" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It's inefficient and unoptimized, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> which is the whole point of this video! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3861775" d="2002" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It needs to be better! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3863777" d="2869" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> All right, I may upset </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> some people, but whatever. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3866646" d="2736" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I don't want to </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> stereotype all Linux users, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3869382" d="5039" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I think people will agree there's a </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> significant portion of the Linux community </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3874421" d="2369" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> that see the GUI as the enemy, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3876790" d="3770" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and the command-line as </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the end-all answer to </s><s p="3">everything</s><s p="2">. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3880560" d="3971" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You can pry the command-line </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> away from their cold dead hands, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3884531" d="3437" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and Linux development </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> can reflect that sometimes. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3887968" d="2736" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> In fact, while making this video, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3890704" d="3370" wp="27" ws="2"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I ran into this comic </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> completely by coincidence, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3894074" d="3370" wp="27" ws="2"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and it kind of sums up </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> what I'm talking about. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3897444" d="3603" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So with this obsession </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> by </s><s p="3">some</s><s p="2"> Linux users, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3901047" d="4305" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm not sure we're going to see </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the perfect GUI emerge on Linux. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3905352" d="1334" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Though, we could. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3906686" d="1535" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> No matter how you slice it, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3908221" d="4304" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Linux is </s><s p="3">not</s><s p="2"> stopping the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> march of progress of the GUI, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3912525" d="2103" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and Microsoft </s><s p="3">is</s><s p="2">, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3914628" d="1901" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so the potential's there. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3916529" d="3237" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But just to illustrate what I'm </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> talking about, let me give an example: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3919766" d="3937" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Normally, the GUI requires you </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to go through all these sub-menus, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3923703" d="5372" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> press the right tab, double-click, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> press checkboxes in the right locations... </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3929075" d="2403" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> For sure, all that can bog you down. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3931478" d="1401" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It can get so bad, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3932879" d="3237" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I completely understand why </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> some people say, "hell with it," </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3936116" d="1935" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and just type out what they want. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3938051" d="2836" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Well, what if instead of </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> all that, I just hit a button, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3940887" d="2669" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> then options came up </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> where my mouse cursor was, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3943556" d="2670" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and one of them was a </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> broader category I wanted. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3946226" d="4504" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Then, as soon as I move to that direction, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I can move to another sub-menu wheel, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3950730" d="1769" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> until I got to where I wanted. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3952499" d="3336" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> If I needed more options, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I can maybe have multiple layers. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3955835" d="3537" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Or maybe different buttons </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> would bring up different wheel options. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3959372" d="2836" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That could give us hundreds </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> of options right there. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3962208" d="2403" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Then, if I knew what I was doing, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3964611" d="3236" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I could just bring up the menu </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> then go zoop, zoop, zoop, done. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3967847" d="3437" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I could be as fast as Zorro carving a "Z". </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3971284" d="2836" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That's how you become </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> faster than the command-line: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3974120" d="3771" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> by being able to launch hundreds of </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> different options in under a second. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3977891" d="5038" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> We don't really have this or something </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> even better in standard GUIs today. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3982929" d="1969" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> At least, not how I'm envisioning it. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3984898" d="2903" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And remember, I am not an expert— </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3987801" d="5238" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> this is just an idea I had off the cuff </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that I could imagine flowing very rapidly. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3993039" d="2870" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> There's probably even </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> better ideas out there! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3995909" d="2536" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I think people who swear </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> by the command-line </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="3998445" d="4905" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> may have trouble imagining an interface </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="3"> much</s><s p="2"> better than what we have now. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4003350" d="2602" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Okay, I spoke too soon. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4005952" d="2036" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I found this out at the last minute. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4007988" d="1968" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Apparently, MakuluLinux has something </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4009956" d="2870" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> extremely similar to </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> what I was thinking of, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4012826" d="3837" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but it looks like it wasn't </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> optimized for speed and functionality. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4016663" d="3003" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> See, look, that's </s><s p="3">way</s><s p="2"> too </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> many options per wheel. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4019666" d="3470" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> When there's that many, you can't just </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> flick your mouse in the general direction </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4023136" d="1635" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> you want to make things happen. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4024771" d="3604" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You have to slow down and </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> carefully select what you want. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4028375" d="3903" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That means we're back to </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> helicopters and not planes again, guys. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4032278" d="2570" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You lose all your speed when that happens. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4034848" d="3770" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This wobble effect makes it even </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> harder to click on your target, too. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4038618" d="1068" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That's no good. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4039686" d="4004" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Plus, look at how huge a gap there is </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> between the menu in the icons. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4043690" d="2202" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That travel time is too high. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4045892" d="1235" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This needs work. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4047127" d="4104" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> However, I feel like I'm unfairly </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> trashing a prototype here. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4051231" d="4571" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Big props to MakuluLinux for at </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> least attempting something better. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4055802" d="4204" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> We need a </s><s p="3">lot</s><s p="2"> more experimentation </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> like this to get something good. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4060006" d="1001" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I feel dumb. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4061007" d="3237" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I had no idea this </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> even existed until now. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4064244" d="4504" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> See, this is what happens when a </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> non-expert realizes there's a problem, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4068748" d="2770" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and most of the industry </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> is asleep at the wheel. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4071518" d="1835" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> All right, time to wrap things up. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4073353" d="4938" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, believe it or not, I did not </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> make this video to trash Microsoft. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4078291" d="1702" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That's just unavoidable. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4079993" d="2669" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> No, I made this as a cry for help. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4082662" d="5539" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Windows 10 is looming on the horizon, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and it's coming to chop my hands off. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4088201" d="4071" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It wants to undo all the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> progress I've had with the GUI, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4092272" d="2035" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and I don't know what I'm gonna do. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4094307" d="1602" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="4"> What am I gonna do?! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4095909" d="1468" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, I don't know! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4097377" d="2269" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm really not taking this well. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4099646" d="4037" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But I can't be the first person </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to be thinking like this. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4103683" d="3804" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> There has to be some </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> unsung GUI genius out there </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4107487" d="4438" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> who's even more frustrated than I am, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and has more of the answers. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4111925" d="3503" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You know how in role-playing games </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> where you customize your character? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4115428" d="3837" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Some people are </s><s p="3">really </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> good at optimizing them? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4119265" d="1902" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> They'll figure out some bizarre combo </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4121167" d="3437" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> that amounts to five times the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> damage you would normally get? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4124604" d="3604" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I feel like GUI design </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> is a lot of the same thing. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4128208" d="2669" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Instead of balancing </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> your offense and defense, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4130877" d="3937" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> you're balancing efficiency and </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> not triggering things by accident. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4134814" d="3537" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So this video is a search </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> for the GUI masters. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4138351" d="2703" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now that you've watched it, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> you know where I'm coming from. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4141054" d="1501" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I could have made it shorter, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4142555" d="2102" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but if I had done that, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> then people would have said, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4144657" d="3471" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> "Oh, just use Classic shell. </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> Problem solved!" </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4148128" d="1701" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and not seen the bigger picture. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4149829" d="1835" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That would be depressing. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4151664" d="4171" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Out of the spectrum of magnificent </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> possibilities for the GUI, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4155835" d="5639" wp="18" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Microsoft has shifted the range of </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> acceptable thought to this tiny sliver. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4161474" d="2770" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It's like watching a dream die. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4164244" d="4537" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So, I'm seeking out the GUI masters, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> because I think they're out there, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4168781" d="2737" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and maybe their knowledge </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> can benefit us all. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4171518" d="2202" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm looking for three things: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4173720" d="3870" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> First, show me your </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> vision of the perfect GUI. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4177590" d="3537" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Pretend Windows doesn't exist, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and you can do anything. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4181127" d="4838" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I at least want to know what GUI utopia </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> looks like, and what to aim for. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4185965" d="3170" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This could be a mock-up, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> some sketches, anything. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4189135" d="2669" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> How are we launching </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> programs, hiding them, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4191804" d="3971" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> resizing, closing, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> organizing files, whatever. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4195775" d="1168" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Let's see it. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4196943" d="4638" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Show us your brilliance, and how </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the industry, especially Microsoft, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4201581" d="4438" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> should be ashamed of itself </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that it's so far behind! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4206019" d="1568" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Shame! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4207587" d="5038" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Second, what's the closest </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> we can get to an ideal GUI today? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4212625" d="3871" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Windows is not going to let us </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> achieve the GUI dream. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4216496" d="1568" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That much is clear. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4218064" d="3670" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But we can chip away at it </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> and get a little closer, at least. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4221734" d="3637" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, I do know about some </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> programs as a starting point here. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4225371" d="4538" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> First off, Stardock has partially </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> cornered the market on this sort of thing. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4229909" d="2069" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I mentioned some of their stuff already, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4231978" d="4137" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but they also have Fences, which, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I don't know if that's going to be ideal, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4236115" d="2736" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I'm going to want </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> those icons off the desktop, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4238851" d="2536" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so this may be my only route for that. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4241387" d="4505" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I've heard of Rainmeter, which I never </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> bothered learning since I had LiteStep, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4245892" d="3603" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but it should be good for adding </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> my little drive space labels back. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4249495" d="1502" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Circle Dock: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4250997" d="3036" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm almost certainly </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> going to start using this, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4254033" d="2369" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> even though I don't know how, yet. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4256402" d="5139" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I feel like this one in particular is </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> getting us closer to GUI evolution. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4261541" d="1435" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> You just press a button, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4262976" d="3903" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and shortcuts come up wherever </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> you are to whatever you want, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4266879" d="2870" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and they're relatively </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> big and easy to click. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4269749" d="2836" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> This could maybe replace </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> my primary shortcuts, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4272585" d="1902" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> though it would be more chaotic. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4274487" d="3270" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'd like multiple wheels like </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> this for different categories. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4277757" d="2870" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> See, even Circle Dock </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> may not be enough for me! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4280627" d="2202" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I need Circle Dock steroids! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4282829" d="2469" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Also, I'm not sure </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> how to get this working, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4285298" d="2869" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="3"> and</s><s p="2"> turn it off when I'm running games. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4288167" d="3504" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Again, we're going to need some </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> equivalent of that SteelSeries software, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4291671" d="2703" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> where if program "X" is the active window, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4294374" d="3236" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> then disable "Y" function, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that sort of thing. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4297610" d="901" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But yeah, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4298511" d="5405" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> my stumbling intuition tells me more </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> software like StrokesPlus and Circle Dock </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4303916" d="2136" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> is the path to the future. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4306052" d="3070" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> We have the potential to be so slick! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4309122" d="1935" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I know it's out there! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4311057" d="2336" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now there are a lot of </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> Start menu replacements, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4313393" d="3136" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I'm not sure any of them let you </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> bring up the menu anywhere, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4316529" d="1769" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> like LiteStep does now. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4318298" d="2035" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So I may just have to deal with it. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4320333" d="1501" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So thanks, Windows. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4321834" d="1035" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Thanks. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4322869" d="3270" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, knowing what software </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to use is only half the battle. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4326139" d="5071" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> What the best themes or configurations for </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> them are can take forever to figure out. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4331210" d="1535" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I don't want just options, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4332745" d="3704" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I want to know what are some of the </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> best methods for navigating the computer. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4336449" d="1969" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Hey, I mentioned mouse gestures. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4338418" d="1968" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> What are the best combos for that? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4340386" d="4104" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> See, that's tricky, because anybody </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> can come up with </s><s p="3">a</s><s p="2"> system, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4344490" d="2369" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but a well thought-out </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> one that's efficient, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4346859" d="3471" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> where the most common functions </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> are the easiest and feel natural, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4350330" d="2302" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and you're less inclined </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to trigger the wrong ones? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4352632" d="1735" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Ugh, that's hard. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4354367" d="1935" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I don't even want to think about that. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4356302" d="2536" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It's almost like we're </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> literally having to come up </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4358838" d="2803" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> with a martial art style for the computer. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4361641" d="1668" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'll do it if I have to, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4363309" d="4004" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I'd really prefer not to have to </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> figure out my own half-assed style, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4367313" d="4271" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and instead just learn karate </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> from some GUI Mr. Miyagi out there, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4371584" d="5973" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but that would require GUI karate </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to exist, which it may or may not. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4377557" d="1434" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It's the wrong year! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4378991" d="1435" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> We're too early! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4380426" d="3404" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, there are programs </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> like Winstep and Cairo Shell, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4383830" d="2636" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but they don't strike me </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> as GUI masterpieces, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4386466" d="1935" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so I'll probably pass on those. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4388401" d="2936" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm sure there's more stuff </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> out there I'm not familiar with. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4391337" d="3437" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> It's a long, dark road </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> trying to figure all this out. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4394774" d="6139" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And hey, I'm focused on Windows, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> because, surprise, I'm part of that 96.8%, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4400913" d="2770" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but if you're on Linux and </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> think you have all the answers, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4403683" d="2869" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and they're not the command-line, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> then let's hear them! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4406552" d="1869" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Yeah, there's a challenge for you! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4408421" d="3103" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Make Windows look bad, literally. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4411524" d="2603" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So that's what I want </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> from the GUI masters. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4414127" d="1968" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But there's one last thing I want to see </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4416095" d="3270" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> that you don't need to be a </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> master to help out with. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4419365" d="3137" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Maybe you don't know where </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to start when designing a GUI, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4422502" d="3303" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but you do know what </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> you think looks good. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4425805" d="1335" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So let's see it! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4427140" d="4170" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Let's see screenshots of your </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> favorite GUIs, they can be from anywhere. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4431310" d="3137" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Stuff that has nice color usage, patterns… </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4434447" d="4304" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I mean, what a concept: </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> an interface that's pleasant to look at! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4438751" d="3103" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Or hey, what are the nicest </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> looking icons out there? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4441854" d="2069" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> What fonts look the best? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4443923" d="4671" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> That stuff has a surprisingly </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> large impact and how a GUI feels. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4448594" d="2436" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Just what should we be imitating? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4451030" d="1668" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now this is highly subjective, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4452698" d="2703" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> because different people are </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> going to like different things, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4455401" d="1668" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but whatever people come up with </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4457069" d="4038" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm betting will far and away </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> look better than default Windows, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4461107" d="2035" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> so you almost can't lose. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4463142" d="2469" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So, where do you submit this stuff? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4465611" d="3204" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Well, you can always email </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> me about anything in this video, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4468815" d="2602" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but I'm not looking to </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> hoard the knowledge here, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4471417" d="3270" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and I think a lot of people might </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> benefit from this being public. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4474687" d="3303" wp="40" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So I've set up a thread in my forums </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> where you can post information, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4477990" d="3904" wp="40" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and it can serve as a resource for </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> anyone else frustrated with the GUI. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4481894" d="4204" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I can't be the only person who's </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> sick of Windows, that's impossible! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4486098" d="3037" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Now, I don't care if you </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> sign up for my forums or not, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4489135" d="3603" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> it's just that then I can guarantee </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> the information will stay up there. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4492738" d="3804" wp="13" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> But if you don't want to do that, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> there's also an Accursed Farms Reddit, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4496542" d="2403" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> though I'm not actually in charge of that. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4498945" d="3870" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I mean, you </s><s p="3">can</s><s p="2"> try to post something </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> important in the YouTube comments </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4502815" d="1235" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> if you really want to, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4504050" d="2903" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but that's a little like </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> putting a note in a bottle at sea, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4506953" d="2435" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> and hoping it reaches the right person. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4509388" d="3204" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Oh, and before I finish, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I mentioned my email address— </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4512592" d="3003" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> what's the nicest looking email interface? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4515595" d="3303" wp="9" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> See, I can't stop, the GUI </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> pervades everything! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4518898" d="2970" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I use Gmail, which allows </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> some minimal customization </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4521868" d="2302" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> if you're not using the official themes. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4524170" d="2135" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> They have this pretty nice pixel art theme </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4526305" d="3604" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> that makes me think of a bright, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> sunny day in some 8-bit racer, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4529909" d="1668" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but then it would switch to night on me </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4531577" d="2703" wp="5" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> when I didn't want it to, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> so I stopped using it. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4534280" d="3937" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I love the idea of a GUI making me </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> think I'm in a nice-looking game. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4538217" d="2670" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Stuff like that can make </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> you more productive. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4540887" d="4604" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Is there a third-party email client </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that has really nice themes like that? </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4545491" d="3604" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> A lot of people use email, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> I'm sure plenty of them would be happy </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4549095" d="3403" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> to feel like they're in their </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> favorite game when they go through it. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4552498" d="2770" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> We need a good GUI for everything! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4555268" d="1668" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Everything! </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4556936" d="1201" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And that's it. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4558137" d="2069" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I hope we find answers. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4560206" d="734" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> To be honest, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4560940" d="3537" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I'm not sure we're ever gonna make it </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> to the promised land with the GUI </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4564477" d="5005" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> as long as Microsoft and Google exist, </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> but we can still try. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4569482" d="1868" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> And to end things, while making this, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4571350" d="3037" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I stumbled onto a quote </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> that's just too perfect: </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4574387" d="4237" p="7" wp="1" ws="1">"Man must shape his tools lest they shape him."</p><p t="4578624" d="2670" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Wow, if that isn't what this is all about. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4581294" d="2702" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> We've all been shaped a little too much. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4583996" d="1969" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> I felt kind of crazy making this, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4585965" d="4271" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> since I went on a long time about </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> something almost nobody talks about, </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4590236" d="4037" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> but there's just too many observations </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> for me to be completely crazy. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4594273" d="4038" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> So I'm only half-crazy </s><s p="1"> </s><s p="2"> at worst on this, guys. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4598311" d="1401" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> Half. </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4599712" d="1735" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> [Subtitles by Erasmus Magnus] </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4601447" d="21588" wp="1" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> ♪♪ </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4624036" d="13614" wp="18" ws="1"><s p="1"></s><s p="2"> [ominous music] </s><s p="1"></s></p><p t="4989" d="100" p="8" wp="41" ws="3"></p></body></timedtext> -
It's a surprisingly ambitious game with it being a space action sim and an FPS, being able to land on "planets" and having various interiors for the different ship types. But after 13 hours I stopped simply because it became repetitive quite quickly. The planets and combat are very basic and everything else as well, as far as I remember. But space could be quite pretty at times.
-
Tried it, but between Starforce actually being dangerous to your system in this case, various sound problems and massive graphics glitches, I'm just going to hope that gog re-releases it one day with the issues fixed. Theoretically all issues can be fixed, but risking it with this kind of broken DRM doesn't feel like the best idea.
-
I have to say I'm surprised about how that turned out. I'm always sceptical when it comes to these kinds of reboots, especially when a completely different developer handles it, but how much they messed it up is still surprising. Personally I ended up playing Deserts of Kharak much later. I wanted to give the old Homeworlds a try as well, but didn't get along with the first game at all. Something about the controls and the random behaviour of the AI. I'm not sure how much of this is down to the Remasters though. In any case I enjoyed DoK. I didn't finish the campaign as per usual with most RTS', but instead ended up putting a good amount of time into skirmish mode. I did appreciate the story presentation, but I often don't get along well with the design of RTS-campaigns. The AI is good. It may rely on certain tricks that can be figured out, but even then it still felt quite solid. It's aesthetically quite impressive and has pretty good atmosphere for an RTS. The comms chatter helped with that as well and the wreckage left behind after battle and the physics involved were a nice touch. Nights were especially nice with the headlights on. Different strategies and unit compositions worked well in both 1v1 and 2v2. One of the few games where I actually just went back and watched some of my replays.
-
Sadly, I have to agree. When I first tried this on my old Notebook with a GT 820 M I couldn't run it properly, not even on low settings. Personally I tend to think the lighting is pretty good, but overall it still doesn't look good enough to be able to justify these kinds of requirements.
-
I have to say I was disappointed. Lack of weapon variety and enemy variety, though it does all work well enough/feel well enough. The story was fine, though I enjoyed the surreal library sections the most. It didn't help that the hardware requirements are too high though. The game looks nice enough, but it's just another case of inefficient use of graphics tech that is basically standard nowadays.
-
Agreed, it's probably better in Multiplayer. Playing solo I could still appreciate what is on offer, but it doesn't provide much for a proper "playthrough" so to speak. I didn't play it long.
-
It's good as most seem to agree. Very much a Half-like if you will. Good atmosphere and environments and satisfying gunplay, though some issues with how ironsights/recoil work. Relatively high challenge and the game isn't afraid to throw hordes of enemies at the player. Weak bosses and basic story, but overall definitely recommended.
-
The GUI should be better. A lot better.
mrglanet replied to Erasmus Roterodamnsus's topic in English
I gave corrections to @danielsangeosome months ago Here they are: 0:26 - Ross is saying `is` rather than "it's" (or, I thought so, but daniel disagreed) 0:52 - Lead us to GUI enlightenment... 0:56 - The 2nd that is not being said Sorry about that! -
The GUI should be better. A lot better.
Erasmus Roterodamnsus replied to Erasmus Roterodamnsus's topic in English
I believe somebody tried to modifying the subtitles, either through YouTube Studio or a text editor, because the positioning and color are broken now. Because of the subtitle's formatting, you cannot externally fix them without the specialized software—they're not like an SRT. If there's an error someone would like to be corrected, tell me, and I will do it manually on my end. Otherwise, re-uploading verbatim and hitting publish without touching them on YouTube Studio will fix the problem.