They come off a bit biased towards the design fetish, and how the engineer had to deal with the knowingly uncompromising dream designer.
Scott’s mission was to reinvent the look, feel, and even
personality of a computer, without limits. He worked to
capture an idea and a feeling without worrying initially
about the execution of that idea.
The Engineering Challenge: Realize the Design
For George, he sees his role as one to challenge
assumptions and do his utmost to realize Scott’s design.
“My role as the Engineer is to take what the Industrial
Designer says is the Bible and try and put that into
production, more than coming back with “we have to change
this and that,” George says. “Because wherever possible,
we don’t want to compromise on our vision. We’ve made
every step necessary to manifest the industrial design
and try to reflect the creativity and personality of the
product.”
Design is great, but this just reminds me of design by Homer [1]
It does, except that this technique can, in theory create a holodeck like experience for a group not wearing headsets. That would be better for training and simulation.
For a while I was looking at building a basement with a "picture window" which was really just a view from the floor above ground. "Normal" displays don't simulate a good window experience, a curved display can give a decent simulation if you don't move (and that is what they do in flight sims as you are constrained to your seat), but a light field simulation would really give you the feeling you were looking out of the window directly, even when moving around your point of view.
Even for a single user you need to add head tracking to get a perspective that shifts as you move your head (though that's pretty doable with consumer stuff these days). For a multi-user system I think you need something more like this.
It could be interesting to do multi-user individual-perspective shutter-based 3D, but you'd need to run at a really high framerate and you'd probably have brightness issues as each eye would only be receiving light for some smaller fraction of time.
I really recommend anyone who drinks black coffee try brewing their own loose leaf tea - greens, blacks, oolong, yerba matte.
Start with distilled water and add honey to taste, maybe even hemp milk (very creamy, nutty flavor, and omegas!)
The Third Los Angeles is really about how the internet has allowed awareness of otherwise buried treasures of LA to be lost in the noise. The greater Los Angeles area is becoming somewhat what it was intended to be, with the hundreds of surrounding cities converging upon LA as a magnet. Whenever I've attended interesting events in LA, it's never just people from LA proper it's people who've hopped in a car and drove 40 miles to converge with a bunch of other people who've done the same.
This article seems to spin green development, but it's mostly just normal development and the rapid gentrification and rezoning of the old industrial & wholesale districts.
San Fransisco has a more more diverse set of options for nightlife and culture compared to downtown Santa Monica.
If you bicycle around Santa Monica/Venice there's not much going on compared to SF. Sure you could hop in your car and drive to Hollywood, DTLA, or other parts of the city but that's not really the same as the work/live urban core ideal.
The attraction of suburban life vs dense urban downtown would be mostly the same if public transit routes were just as available. (Although I would imagine the availability of easier transportation would certainly increase restaurant & entertainment offerings from outside commuters who don't normally have car access)
Some people prefer their peaceful cookie cut house and desire nothing much to do with the big cities. More often then not it's zoning, job availability, and affordability.
I'd wager what people actually prefer would be wide open fields where everything you see in front of you is yours but they can't afford that, hence they settle on a suburban lawn. Economics drive suburbanization, not any sort of actual human desire. If the economics skew away from the heavy subsidies for suburbs, people stop expanding them.
That's not really true, at least with many people that desire suburbia that I talk to. They want a house in a nice neighborhood with decent restaurants and shopping within a reasonable driving distance.
It's not that common to want wide open fields in front of you. On top of that, it's not that expensive to get a big chunk of land in the middle of nowhere.
Something that really opened my eyes to thinking about the design of everyday things was "Objectified" (2009), a documentary on industrial/product design.
Could you expand on why this film came to your mind in this context. I also saw objectified but felt it was, to put lightly, a fluff self-glorification by designers.
We are immersed in the various mediums present in our daily life and being aware of the medium itself and what limitations or potentialities are available from that medium will demystify these otherwise mundane ubiquitous things we encounter everywhere.
In the context of "The Medium is the Massage", I brought up (industrial) design because physical products are a major part of our daily lives and I never really gave much thought as to how a tooth brush or a Macbook was developed and built. Yeah Objectified had a fair amount of self-glorification of the designer egos, but before I saw the film I had no real concept of who was behind all the stuff that I use in my daily life.
http://11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111...