1  2  3  4  5  |   Order by index

Dec 12, 2002, 7:32pm

Me too. I looked all over their site for it and couldn't find even a vague indicator.

TechnoZeus

[View Quote]

Dec 12, 2002, 7:52pm

true enough.....sorry Optiman, for jumping on your case....
BB takes deep breath and heads downstairs to the gym to burn some stress..;)


[View Quote]

Dec 12, 2002, 11:58pm

Well, that's not much of a difference from my point of view. There are many cities here that don't have a McDonald's rettaurant, and many that have more than one. It's only one restaurant chain. I haven't went to a cinema in quite a while, and I have no desire to acquire pirated anything, so... I probably wouldn't notice the difference... except that I'm not on AOL, and I would probably miss my cable modem. :)

TechnoZeus

[View Quote]

Dec 13, 2002, 12:59am

Quote:
___________________________________________________________________________
Bad only if AW targets the gaming communities and not the chat
and modeling folks.

All screenshots of NWN I have seen so far showed fighting scenes,
I don't feel like fighting monsters while I chat so it isn't an
option for me.
____________________________________________________________________________

Ok, yea we all love AW, no doubt here. Bots, Modeling, Building, SDK, etc
etc (drool). It's in it's niche already. But, look at these other games a
second hun, you're wrong about NWN and games like EQ as people most
certainly can and do chat without fighting monsters. 50k - 80k people
online in EQ every day (all freakin day except patch days lol), some are
just chatting and some are playing the game. Those games have their appeal
of being huge seemingly endless games with a massive chat program inside,
while the monthly cost is relatively low (EQ $12.95/mo vs AW $6.95/mo....
duh is it still $6.95? *checks*) Shoot, the chat options in EQ are awesome,
serverwide, channels, zone, group, guild... they even released a free
service called EQIM where you don't even need to be inside the game to chat
with your friends, have someone ingame create a channel...poof you got all
the chat you want.

(suddenly has image of Officers in Fortune 500 Co in High Elf av's holding
conference) Yes i see your point there ;o) but again, they have
inter-corporation email, real time chat, video, phones, etc.. why would they
add AW to the mix where their employees potentially could go for a half hour
romp through AW on company time? lol... it's hard enough for them to keep up
with monitoring employee email.

But, i too feel as if AW is lacking something. i'm not a programmer, i
don't make alot objects, i have practically built my brains out, played with
bots to the extent of my aptitude (limits of my flusteration). What is left
to do but chat? AW is a niche for those people that love to do these things.
There won't ever be thousands and thousands of people in AW at a given time
because there just arent that many people interested in spending their
recreation time programming or modeling and building....unless they expand
the niche to include the gamers somehow too.

Guess it's AW's future vision that determines whether or not the community
grows from the releases of "new" technology. Seems to me they already have
their core subscribers now, "the programmers and modeling folks".

Dec 13, 2002, 1:07am

Well, that's just it. Active Worlds is where it started. It may grow in many directions from there, but as long as Active Worlds continues to be the best "Active Worlds" it doesn't have to be what any of the others are... the root feeds the branches, and the branches feed the root.

TechnoZeus

[View Quote]

Dec 13, 2002, 1:07am

Sorry, I was trying to be cute and I made a bad joke. Kind of like Trent
Lott. But I'll shut up now. :)

Chris

[View Quote]

Dec 13, 2002, 1:09am

If Second Life is like AW, and it improves in one single thing, like
graphics, then it's better. But we don't have a feature list yet, so it's
all conjecture at this point.

Chris

[View Quote]

Dec 13, 2002, 1:13am

http://www.gamespy.com/previews/december02/secondlifepc/

Theres tons of features they've told us about at this point. Not that it names every single feature.

--
Zeo

[View Quote]

Dec 13, 2002, 1:28am

I've stewed, now the pot is boiling. :)

Possible reinventions
1. Cease development of the Active Worlds software and concentrate on a new
client, built from the ground up that will implement new technology and
features that have surfaced since AW was introduced. New code designed from
the ground up may make it easier to compete with Second Life without having
to program around the legacy code of the AW clients and servers. Continue
operation of Active Worlds, but at a lower price. Charge the current prices
or slightly higher for the new software. Allow legacy propdumping in the
new client.

2. Concentrate on Business to Business applications, selling the software
and servers to corporate clients like Volkswagon. Run a limited ad campaign
in several B2B magazines to gauge the affectiveness of advertising. Hire a
media planner!

3. Create a brand image that makes Active Worlds stand out from Second Life
and the Sims Online. Abandon the "3D chat and design tool" image. Use
buzzwords. :) Make sure people know you're the first one out there and
still the best.

4. Market aggressively to people bored with life (office workers,
secretaries, teenage internet surfers, stay-at-home moms, anybody who surfs
the net when they are bored, babysitters). If you have any friends in
Hollywood, see if you can get a product placement on any TV series or film.
Ham up the community. Update your primary build world to the latest
features available in AW, including 3rd party features like Demeter. ;)
Reward those who respond well to your advertising.

Unfortunately it all costs money, and you have probably already considered
these options. As far as advertising, radio and the internet are your best
bets for a product like AW. Television is much too competitive.

Chris

j
[View Quote]

Dec 13, 2002, 1:36am

True, but they are all measurements of time. You don't need to divide
months into two because the world chose to divide it into days. Therefore
it is logical to divide the day into two sets of twelve, roughly indicating
the part of the day where there is human activity, and the part of the day
where everyone is sleeping. But it is also logical by that reasoning to use
a twenty-four hour schedule. Or to divide the day into twelve periods.

Neither is better than the other, so you elitists on both sides stop.
Really. It's dumb to argue about something you can't change.

Chris

[View Quote]

Dec 13, 2002, 1:40am

For the entertainment or what? The guy was making no sense, an issue out of
nothing.

Chris

[View Quote]

Dec 13, 2002, 1:45am

If AW markets its product like what you've just described, then that would
help tremendously. :)

Chris

[View Quote]

Dec 13, 2002, 3:06am

Hehe. Maybe I should be on their marketing team. :)

Just kidding.... I'm happy just being me.

TechnoZeus

[View Quote]

Dec 13, 2002, 3:08am

yep... that's it... out of nothing... and lots of people seem to think that's entertaining. Next? :)

TechnoZeus

[View Quote]

Dec 13, 2002, 3:14am

That's why I don't argue about things. I change them. On my own, I can't change the fact that the system of time measurement currently in use doesn't make any more sense than one the average room full of young children could make up, but I can point out that it could be improved and get a few people to think about how... and maybe some day they'll get a room full of young children together to help them think up something better. :)

TechnoZeus

[View Quote]

Dec 13, 2002, 12:48pm

[View Quote]
Very true :)

F.

Dec 13, 2002, 2:12pm

LOL have you ever read our press releases ;)

E



3. Create a brand image that makes Active Worlds stand out from Second Life
and the Sims Online. Abandon the "3D chat and design tool" image. Use
buzzwords. :) Make sure people know you're the first one out there and
still the best.
[View Quote]

Dec 13, 2002, 6:13pm

Why would I? ;P I knew when I posted this you had probably already gone
through these options.

Chris

[View Quote]

Dec 13, 2002, 11:36pm

What's the address to find them at... in case someone wants to send one of them to the press? :)

TZ

[View Quote]

Dec 14, 2002, 3:02am

Yes I could say the 253nd day of the year, but since even a figure big as 24
seems to cause problems I doubt numbers going up to 365 would never work.
I am not saying that one system is the right one. Of course if both persons
are at the same place they probably know if it is day or night, but in an
international enviroment like AW where ppl come from various timezones a 24h
system is much more logic. A few times I have said when asked the time for
example it is 11. The time in US is about 1-3 am then. It is not at all
clear if my time is am or pm ( well it is for me but not the person who
ask).

Drac
zeo toxion <brandon at metrocast.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3df7f9b2 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> I don't think it makes much of a difference. They're both logic. The day
is split into day and night and the
> months are split into weeks and days. That just goes to show that you
can't force everyone to go one way or the
> other it's a preference.
>
> And um...why would you divide months anyway. Days and months are two
seperate things you can't compare them.
> Why don't I say it's 252nd day of the year.
>
> --
> Zeo
>
[View Quote]

Dec 14, 2002, 3:08am

I know, and there was not even a year zero. I guess I was just trying to say
that using a 24h system in an enviroment with people from various timezones
is more logical, when again when talking locally the 12h sytem makes more
sense. When I talk with my granny I usully use the 12 h system, but when
having a person from OZ , Europe and Hawaii in the same chatroom 11 o´clock
is not so obvious anymore.

Drac
technozeus <TechnoZeus at techie.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3df80d82 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Well, they may not have slpit months, but most areas have split years into
either 2, 3, or 4 seasons and each of them seems to think for the most part
that their way is the best way. Also, you may have noticed that the numbers
used to represent the years split between 1 B.C., and 1 A.D., although
alternative initials are used in some places, but I personally think the
whole system has always been a mess and still is a mess. The number of days
in a month isn't something that's always been agreed on, and in fact after
many changes along the way we seem to have ended up with a system that only
vaguely resembles any sort of pattern. 24 hours in a day? Okay, so it's
nice that you can evenly divide that by 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 12, so when it
was put into effect I'm sure it made a lot of sense to the people who were
around at the time. The number of seconds in a minute, or minutes in an
hour can be evenly divided by 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 15, 20, and 30, so
that's even more versatile... but who these days takes advantage of that?
The number systems based on 12 and 60 that were responsable for those
divisions are no longer in common usage, and the idea that we can split the
month up into 30 days was given up a long time ago because the moon simply
wouldn't cooperate. Want a system of time that makes sense? Get a bunch of
countries together and have them come up with one that makes sense to at
least most of them. How about something based on the Metric system?
There's something International for you. The 24 hour clock is arguably more
"international" than the 12 hour clock, but the fact that it can be so
readily argued either way proves that neither one really deserves the title.
Now, you may wonder if I'm nieve enough to think that a universal Metric
time system will be accepted world wide within my lifetime... I'm not, but
it's a nice thought.
>
> By the way, that would make me about 337.6 kh old, I think.
>
> TechnoZeus
>
[View Quote]

Dec 14, 2002, 3:10am

See above + It has nothing to do with elitistic, but with practicality.

Drac

>

Dec 14, 2002, 3:26am

But that's not a fault in the system. That's just sloppy use of it. You can do that with any system, but yes the 12 hour half day system does make that particular situation a little more likely to happen. Even if you had said specifically that it was 11pm, that still doesn't tell whether it's early in the week or late in the week, because again information has been left out... and if you said it was 23 O'clock on a Friday, that would still not tell whether it's planting season, rainy season, or a snowy night with a full moon out so there's plenty of light to see your way around outside without having to bring a flashlight. Of course, if you throw the numbers out of it completely and just give answers like "it's morning" or "it's evening" then such ambiguities are much less likely than with either system, but then you're not narrowing it down much and of course a shared language becomes necessary. As an example of what I meant about numbers causing ambiguity, in the summer time 6pm isn't evening here in Wisconsin, U.S.A., but in the winter it is. Okay, so maybe 6pm isn't a good example. Since both the 12 hour and 24 hour system fail to make much sense to me I'm not much good at either. To me the idea that changing where you're talking about necessarily changes "when" you are talking about feels about the same as I am guessing it would feel to most people if I tried to tell them that changing "when" you are talking about necessarily changes "where" you are talking about. When you ask someone how far away someplace is and they tell you it's about 2 hours from where you are, do you sit back and expect to be there in 2 hours? I don't mind the discussion about what time systems are better for what reasons, but I really think in the case of the 12 and 24 hour systems it's more a case of what's more familliar than what's actually "better" and that, unfortunately, will vary from person to person.

TechnoZeus

[View Quote]

Dec 14, 2002, 5:08am

http://www.activeworlds.com/info/press.asp

Under the "Company" link near the top.


"technozeus" wrote...
>What's the address to find them at... in case someone wants to send one of
them to the press? :)


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 12/06/2002

Dec 14, 2002, 6:22am

Thanks. Hmmm... 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, nothing for 2001, and nothing yet for 2002. Maybe something should get added before this year is over, just to keep press people who look there from thinking the company died. Hehe.

TechnoZeus

[View Quote]

Dec 15, 2002, 10:09am

True, telling the time what the clock show, be it 12 or 24 hour system, is
not very informatic. Actually I seldom look at the clock, I go to bed when I
am tired, I eat when I am hungry etc. For some people it seems to make a
difference what the local time is tho, and in a international chat-room I
think it make slightly more sense to use a 24h system; it will exclude the
morning/evening question, but not the day .
I think human beeings of today way too much look at the clock and the time;
should rather concentrate on what they are doing.
Paying attention to non-essential things can actually be dangerous. Like
when you are driving the car, if you stare at the tachometer all the time,
much that happenes on the road will be missed.

Another thing I find weird to ask in a chat room is age and sex. What
difference does it actually make? Well, the age maybe because all
conversations are probably not suited to all ageses, but sex, I really do
not see what difference it makes virtually.

Drac

technozeus <TechnoZeus at techie.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3dfac105$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> But that's not a fault in the system. That's just sloppy use of it. You
can do that with any system, but yes the 12 hour half day system does make
that particular situation a little more likely to happen. Even if you had
said specifically that it was 11pm, that still doesn't tell whether it's
early in the week or late in the week, because again information has been
left out... and if you said it was 23 O'clock on a Friday, that would still
not tell whether it's planting season, rainy season, or a snowy night with a
full moon out so there's plenty of light to see your way around outside
without having to bring a flashlight. Of course, if you throw the numbers
out of it completely and just give answers like "it's morning" or "it's
evening" then such ambiguities are much less likely than with either system,
but then you're not narrowing it down much and of course a shared language
becomes necessary. As an example of what I meant about numbers causing
ambiguity, in the summer time 6pm isn't evening here in Wisconsin, U.S.A.,
but in the winter it is. Okay, so maybe 6pm isn't a good example. Since
both the 12 hour and 24 hour system fail to make much sense to me I'm not
much good at either. To me the idea that changing where you're talking
about necessarily changes "when" you are talking about feels about the same
as I am guessing it would feel to most people if I tried to tell them that
changing "when" you are talking about necessarily changes "where" you are
talking about. When you ask someone how far away someplace is and they tell
you it's about 2 hours from where you are, do you sit back and expect to be
there in 2 hours? I don't mind the discussion about what time systems are
better for what reasons, but I really think in the case of the 12 and 24
hour systems it's more a case of what's more familliar than what's actually
"better" and that, unfortunately, will vary from person to person.
>
> TechnoZeus
>
[View Quote]

Dec 15, 2002, 11:47pm

I agree. People do spend too much time in their schedules. And a lot of
the time their jobs hold them to it.

Chris

[View Quote]

Dec 16, 2002, 1:57am

If evenyone could use both systems fluently, then I would agree with you 100% that using the 24 hour clock system would make more sense in an international setting, but oddly enough many people have trouble converting from 12 to 24 hour or from 24 to 12 hour time, and this may come as a surprise to a lot of people but I have found that it is move common for people who are used to the 12 hour system to have trouble with the 24 hour system than for people used to the 24 hour system to have trouble with the 12 hour system... so with that in mind one could easily argue that the 12 hour system makes more sense in international settings because people using the 24 hour system tend to adapt to the 12 hour system with less trouble. Really though, what makes sense to me is to realize that different people have different prefferences and that human communication is not designed for precision, and to give what information you think the person you are talking with will be most comfortable with. If they ask you to clarify, be prepared to give them more information. If you can convert the time to their time zone, and a system that you know they like, great. If not, make do with what you can. :) As for how a program should represent time, I think it's not something we could ever get everyone to agree on, so it's probably best to make it something you can choose for yourself... besides, that solves half of the problem for people who have trouble converting between systems. :)

As for the issue of why people ask age and gender, I have thought about that myself and here's my take on it... Different people ask for different reasons, but I think probably the most common reason is that they have never learned how to begin conversations with strangers. Asking age and gender is an awkward ice-breaker, but it's better than none at all. The answers to those questions give enough information to help a person feel a little more like they know something about the people around them and a little less like they're surrounded by strangers. You may have noticed also that when a baby is born the first question most people ask is weather it's a boy or a girl. This step is almost necessary in some cultures, to avoid getting a lot of dirty looks when you go to say something about the baby and need to choose a pronoun. For example, you may make some men angry if you look at their young son and say "she's pretty" or comment about their new daughter that "he looks like he's going to grow up big and strong" even though you may be correct, except for the use of the wrong pronoun. I'm hoping that some day we'll evolve beyond that point, but for now it's often necessary to ask such things. Personally, I don't generally say things to people that would not be alright to say around a child, so that eliminates the need for me to ask age... and since I don't usually send cyber-hugs to people that I don't know very well, it's pretty rare that I get a comment to the effect of "um, you just hugged a guy" or something like that... and some guys are okay with it anyway, because they see casual cyber-hugs as the friendly gesture they were intended to be and don't worry about the connotations behind their physical counterpart.

Some people try to start conversations by asking something more general like "does anyone want to talk" but it strikes me as sortof funny that I usually see that question being asked in an area where a lot of people are already talking. If you walk up to a family you don't know in a fancy restaurant and try to join the conversation they're having, you may get a few funny looks, or you may get welcomed in as if you belonged there... or you may be told to go away and mind your own business. Trying to talk with strangers involves an unknown risk, and not knowing how to deal with such situations often leads to people becomming angry and treating other people badly who would not have otherwise, and since things work differently in Active Worlds than in chat rooms, many people who are used to chat rooms make some pretty big mistakes before they figure it out. That's why when I see someone start out with somehing like "asl" as their first line of text, I generally take that as a sign of a need to learn some new habits quickly, and mention to them that if they want to talk to someone, it helps to call the person by name... and that if the person doesn't respond they shouldn't take it personally.

TechnoZeus

[View Quote]

Dec 16, 2002, 7:42am

Here (germany) we actually use both. In normal speech, when you
meet a person face to face, and it's clear that it can only be
in the morning or evening, everyone uses the 12 hours system.
Even without those modifiers "in the morning" or "evening".

If it's in a letter or email, where the other person cannot ask
at once, if something is not clear, we always use 24 hours, as
misunderstandings are impossible then.

In all 12-hour countries they use the 24 hours system too, for
all kinds of official or technical time measurements.

The only problem I have with converting to the British 12 hours
system occurs at midnight and at noon. In our everyday language,
12°° at noon is not before or after something, it's just noon.
That's why I'm often not sure, if the 12 am/pm means noon or
midnight. Of course, the "a" in "am" is a little problem too, as
_a_nte" does not mean _a_fter ;)

These errors or misunderstandings are not possible in 24 hours.
Plus it's easier to remember - you remember one number, instead
of one number plus a modifier behind it.

Those problems are a clear point for the 24 hours system in an
international environment, in the exchange of time schedules.

In chat I can ask if it isn't clear, so it's works if everyone uses
his local system. In publishing a schedule, it's always better to
use the official 24 hours system, as it allows no misunderstandings.


[View Quote]

Dec 17, 2002, 2:09am

Sounds like you use it the same way as what has always felt most natural to me.

Noon is 12pm, by the way, and Midnight is 12am, where-as on 24 hour clocks noon is just 12, and midnight can be either 0 or 24 depending on "which" 24 hour system, but is always (unless there is an exception I'm not aware of) considered the beginning of a calandar date, not the end of one.

TechnoZeus

[View Quote]

1  2  3  4  5  |   Order by index