When the Contribution Model Fails

I'm a big advocate of Open Source software. I feel that there really is no reason to close software source for the most part, and in general, closed libraries are very frustrating for me as a developer. However Open Source has it's flaws. The contribution model may be one of it's greatest strengths, but is also a big weakness.

What leads me to this "revelation" is an issue which i've been considering getting involved in and fixing. It's a Gimp enhancement request, which is probably the thing that annoys me most about Gimp at this moment. The "bug" is the lack of grouped layers in Gimp. Obviously, not having groups for layers can make a large document really convoluted, but more than that, i often find myself wanting to make modifications to multiple layers at once, such as opacity or translations. So what's the problem? Surely if they know about it and it's in their list, i should either do it myself or just be patient?

It's a 7 year old feature request.

I do understand that "implementing this feature is not trivial", but 7 years is not even close to acceptable. I realise they are suggesting it might make it to version 2.10, possibly in 2011 or 2012? Before the end of the world i'd hope. But seriously, in the commercial world, people lose their jobs for taking over a month to implement features like this. This is not easy to do, but in that time the KDE guys have written Krita from scratch, which may end up soon overtaking Gimp in features, and already has grouped layers. To me it almost seems like no one wants to take on the task.

What happened to open source being the cradle of innovation, instead of lagging behind commercial competitors? In Gimp, you have the Open Source stereotype. It's not as good as commercial counterparts, and lags several years behind in features. Some Open Source projects really seem to suffer from this. I'd suggest that X.org is another that just can't keep up with feature requests. Is it because of a poor codebase that people struggle to build on? Is it because of lack of interest in the project from outside devs? I'm not sure, but it really does bring down the quality of some big Open Source projects. 

On the other hand you have the entire KDE team as an example of real innovation. The KDE desktop is years ahead of any competitor, the codebase is beautifully clean, and they are churning out major features in just a few weeks. My example of Krita is a very pertinent one. It may turn out to be a big threat to Gimp in the long run, especially because it is now cross platform. The pace of development is clearly much faster, and it seems that it already has some of the modern features Gimp lacks.

In the end this does highlight some of the problems with the contribution model of Open Source software. Some projects fall behind, potentially become aged, while others forge ahead. How do you prevent a split like this? Should similar projects collaborate? Does that then remove an element of choice? The way i see it is that if it is needed enough, someone will do it. Maybe thats why Krita is moving so quickly, compensating for Gimp's inadequacies? It's probably also why Google are going to replace X.org in Chrome OS. After all sometimes its good to do some spring cleaning.

Opera does something right, again!

In KDE, i disabled the window border, and in Opera moved the tabs to the right... this is a browser experience i can certainly get used to!

Adding some shine to your Pepper

So, with my new domain, having my own wiki, part of the intention is to start a series of tutorials. The immediate focus is some simple tricks in Gimp for programmers, since programmer art generally has the rep for looking tacky and cheap. I don't claim to be an expert designer, but i do try and keep my art standard above a certain level. The first tutorial is a simple button with a bit of shine and can be found here:

http://davidgoemans.com/wiki/index.php5?title=Simple_Button_Shine

But... i've embedded it below anyway :)

Creating a simple button with a bit of shine

• Open Gimp and Create a new image with canvas size 128x128
• Right click the Background layer, and click Add alpha channel
• In the Select Menu -> All
• Select -> Rounded Rectangle ( Set Radius = 50 )
• Select -> Invert
• Edit -> Clear ( or just press delete )

• Select -> Invert
• Use the Bucket Tool to Fill with color #3d3d85
• Create a new layer above the background
• Use the Ellipse Select Tool with Ctrl + Alt depressed. Using Ctrl + Alt creates an intersection with the existing selection created an intersection.
• Select an ellipse like this:

• Use the Gradient Tool with the Tool Options setup with a gradient from White to Alpha
• On the new layer: Start far below the image ( 50 - 100px below ) and drag to a few pixels before the top of the icon, creating the gradient

• Create a new layer between the background and the highlight layer ( Naming layers is good practice! )
• Select Forground Color: #2a2a5a
• Use the Gradient Tool with the Tool Options setup with a gradient from #2a2a5a to Alpha
• On the new layer: Start just above image ( 10px ) and drag to just over half way down the selection

• On the background layer in the toolbox, right click and select Alpha to Selection, thus selecting the nice rounded rectangle.
• Create a new layer directly above background again
• Setup a gradient from White to Alpha
• Set the Gradient Shape to Radial
• On new layer: Start just below top left rounded corner, and drag to just off ( 10px ) the bottom right corner.
• Set layer opacity to roughly 50%

• Create a new layer directly above the background again
• Select the Paintbrush tool
• Change the current brush tool option to Pepper ( yes the green pepper ) and set the scale to 1.70
• Draw the pepper in the center of the new layer

A domain with a wiki

Apologies for the very extended AFK, work has been keeping me busy. However, to compensate, i have many fun things in store. Firstly, i have finally bought my own domain, and have some basic stuff set up, including a wiki. So without further ado,

www.davidgoemans.com

"Microsoft Hatred is a Disease"

Thanks to @mjhutchinson on twitter for the screen shot.

Btw, sorry for all the AFK, will return shortly. ish. sometime. i hope. soon.

Game Review: Swords and Soldiers

Since the Wii has hit the market i've been saying that it is the console that will allow for decent strategy play. And so far there have been very few attempts to make it work. That said my understanding of Wii sales is that the console, Nintendo, Sega games and Guitar Hero have made up most of the sales, and everything else has been gimmicky nonsense. Wiiware is really populated with a lot of mini-games, and this may or may not reflect exactly on the demographic that own Nintendo Wiis. But then there is Swords and Soldiers. As a strategy fan, it had to be bought.

The thing that interested and worried me the most about this game was the fact that it is side scrolling strategy. I'd never heard of that concept before this, so i was very wary of the 1000 Wii points i spent. At first the game strikes you with the great visual style. Cartoony interface and fun sounds and music make a good first impression, however you instantly know this isn't going to be a hardcore 100+ unit strat game. I wasn't expecting depth at first glance, but it is true that a good strat game doesn't need complexity. And the gameplay really illustrates that.

The single player storyline is ridiculous, but tongue in cheek from the start. You're a Viking, preparing a BBQ and your butcher is attacked. You then need to send troops to save him. Hilariously thought at, and at no point meant to be serious. The feel of the game fits in perfectly with the story and makes for an enjoyable laugh.

But this still doesn't tell you how a side scrolling strategy holds up. Gameplay is vital in a strat game, which is why most strat gamers are still playing Starcraft and not any of the newer games. So here's the deal: Its good. At first it's odd with minimal micro management, but you grow used to the fact that you don't control individual units. To upgrade your tech tree ( which has about 10 options depending on race ), you spend gold. This normally unlocks new units and abilities. To build a unit you just click on the icon, and instantly the unit heads off to fight or mine. There is no micro of units. the maps are normally linear, so the fighting units just walk continuously in the direction of the enemy. Abilities are cast from a global mana pool ( which auto regen's and some abilities add to it ), and these give you some micro control over the battles. Dropping Aztec cages on enemies, casting Viking lighting or sending a massive Chinese Dragon across the entire battlefield are just some options you have, and they really add depth to the game. The game is well balanced with costs and cooldown times, for example, the Chinese have very slow mana regen ( unless you build a really expensive tech 3 tower ), and the Dragon costs a lot of mana, but does an immense amount of damage.

All 3 races seem to have been thought through carefully and have enough variation to feel different. Each have their own abilities, variations in tech trees and order of unlocking items that you find yourself preferring one due to personality and feel of play rather than how strong they are, which is the sign of a well balanced game.

The multiplayer is enjoyable, and although my wife is beating me on average ( this reminds me of our early Starcraft games ), i'm still excited to try and challenge her, and feel like every game has been close. The average game lasts between 3 and 10 minutes, which although short, is just long enough to not get bored with the limited choices.

Overall, a top game production, making it the most fun i've had with Wii Ware. It's not as hardcore strategy as i might like, but it is really fun and has some longevity in gameplay.

Pros:

• Really good humour
• Well balanced gameplay
• Multiplayer is enjoyable
• New concept in side scrolling strategy, done very well

Cons:

• Limited number of maps
• Not for very serious strategy

Opera's Brick Walls

Today Opera announced something amazing. Unite. The basis is a webserver in a browser. It allows you to share your music, images, files, and host chatrooms with anyone you choose, whether or not they use Opera. Futhermore, the APIs for writing your own services are available now. And the press has jumped onto this. Even Slashdot incorrectly reported it as the 10.0 release. However, will this actually get them users? In truth i doubt it.

Here's my theory, most Firefox users are using Firefox either because they have it installed on their machine by a sys admin or family member, or because they are religiously bound to Firefox ( oddly, in my opinion, this is very much like Ubuntu users ). Most internet explorer users just use it out of convenience or because they don't know of an alternative. This leaves very little space for other browsers.

But what about Chrome? Chrome has not done that well, even though it has the might of Google behind it. Less than 2% market share in over a year with the search giant punting it instead of Firefox at every turn, that doesn't impress me. And i like Chrome, its way ahead of Firefox on my browser preference list. But the world doesn't really care. They have IE8 with tabs by big evil Microsoft* ( which honestly, is a whole pile better than IE7 ), or they have Firefox which is open source and completely pluggable. I don't talk about Mac users.

So what am i trying to say? The average non technical user doesn't know anything beyond their desktop. And until such a time as the average user becomes technical enough, the only reason people will change their browsers, is if sites stop supporting them. If everyone stopped supporting IE 6 years ago, Microsoft would be out of the browser market. This is the same argument that can be applied to Flash, that it is no where near superior technology, but everyone supports it, so it gets used.

Opera won't get picked up in the main stream, until there is a killer app or function which makes it a necessity. And they are close. Opera Link is really an amazing service, i can't live without it. Turbo is incredible for anyone who uses internet via Wifi or mobile connections on a regular basis. And now, Unite, which has more innovation in 1 service than i've seen from Firefox since its launch. But still this isn't enough. And if this isn't, then honestly, will anything ever be?

* i don't think they're evil, but a know lots of Firefox users who do