I am vexed that no one has made an editor with a feature set comparable to Brief while at the same time not being so overbloated with useless crap that it's practically unusable.
Here is the list of things editors seem to consistently fail on now. These aren't hard.
Most of the other things: syntax highlighting, regex searches, etc are pretty well covered by most editors. There are other things I like but aren't absolutely required (setting where the cursor goes with \c when you do a regex search, keyboard macros, tab to spaces to tabs, etc).
It's the usability side of the things above that get me every time I try to hop editors. I've pretty much defaulted to Visual Studio's editor (since it has a great debugger and all that for C). I'd estimate I'm only 80% efficient when coding because of the stuff above. I still use an ancient copy of Codewright for plain text editing because it has these features, but it's getting long in the tooth: the file dialog boxes malfunction sometimes.
Google should make a full reversal on pseudonyms. It's one of those situations where the developer can get it totally wrong at first and still come out on top. (MMO devs run into this situation more often than they might prefer.) The debate itself shows a demand for innovation. This is a huge opportunity to provide a more robust identity paradigm and set the standard for the future. There are many well-written articles that outline some good approaches. Few of them appear particularly difficult technically (or socially).
Sticking to their guns on this would show an sad lack of vision, I think. They should grab the chance and make it a product-defining characteristic of G+.
As a follow-on to the Steve Perlman talk, I checked out OnLive. OnLive lets you play games on your computer even if your computer is too weak to support the game. It basically runs the game on a server out in a server farm somewhere, and sends you the video. There's no need for you to install the game or anything. It also has a variety of community features, like being able to watch other people play the game, give them cheers, friend them and so on.
I had first heard of them maybe five years ago, and my thought was that it would never work. More specifically, the round-trip time between the computer and the server would be high enough that everything would be a bit laggy. Most (good) games already do a lot of work to decrease the time between input and output, adding 100-350ms of latency is an eternity. I flipped the bozo bit on the idea and moved on.
Five years later, I see a video of someone using it, and it looks pretty slick. I'm intrigued, so I decided to check it out. Basically, it has all the problems I expected that it would. That said, it seems to work nearly as well as physics allows it to, which is pretty impressive.Latency
None of these these things are really their "fault". In fact, it works a ton better than I ever thought it would. It shows, however, an inherent weakness to the Cloud Everything approach.
Recently, Steve Perlman gave a talk at Columbia on what his company, Rearden, has been up to the past few years. Perlman thinks that not enough true invention is being done any more. Venture capital expects payoffs in the one to three year timeframe. Innovation and invention can take a lot longer than that. SO he created Rearden Labs to do this kind of invention. Several are discussed in the talk, but the one that really caught my eye was DIDO radio.
Not much was said in the presentation except that it was world-changing, and awesome, and that the "big guys" didn't want to use it even though it's better in every way. There was some potential for hyperbole. That said, I was intrigued because the basic approach sounded clever. It also has the potential to solve the "last-mile" problem in rural areas (where it's really a "last-twenty-miles" problem).
The presentation didn't go into hardly any detail and I know almost nothing about radio so this isn't too surprising. I did some research on it today to see just how awesome it is. I read a whitepaper Rearden posted DIDO radio. It didn't give quite enough for me to know what was real and what was hyperbole, however. However, they've been working on this for a long time and the whole thing is laid out in their patents.
The executive summary is that it’s still pretty cool, but not ultra-mind-blowing-cool as far as I can tell. There’s an enormous amount of prior art that this is founded on. WiMax and LTE do stuff like it (but not exactly it). The DIDO patents actually cover the difference between MIMO and the new stuff explicitly. (Imagine! They actually teach as they are supposed to!)My Summary
The advantages of this approach are that the client radios can be smaller (apparently, the current art requires multiple antennas for reasons I am not clear on) and much simpler since there’s no big calculating that needs to be done.
The number of simultaneous streams of data that can be sent is limited by the number of spatially distinct antennas at the base. (They are preferably at least 1/2 a wavelength apart according to the patents.) If you have more clients than antennas, you time-multiplex them.
I don’t understand how upstream data is sent in this system, or how the training information is determined. Apparently, this is meant to be obvious to one "skilled in the art" as they are just jargon in the patent.
So, probably a great improvement over the state of the art, but probably not entirely earth-shattering to those in the industry.
Fairmont Hotel Tonga Room, San Francisco
Looks like the thatch roofs weren't installed at this time.
He played the ocarina before it was cool.