10.27.2003

Matrix Confusion

Okay, I geeked out all weekend watching Matrix Reloaded a few times; it was a happy birthday present from my lovely wife, who really didn't see much of me after giving it (ah, the irony). Now the first thing I was surprised by was how much I enjoyed it a second time - once I was done trying to compare it to the first film I was ready to be entertained. The second thought in my paranoid brain was how not only can we trust what our favorite hackers see IN the Matrix, but we can also not trust what we see going on in Zion, the "real" world, etc.

Now many Matrix-ites have written that perhaps Zion is just another Matrix, a simulation on top of a simulation. This doesn't hold water for me - though I have no arguments to rennounce the idea, it just doesn't "feel" right given the constant dialogue of man and machine living together versus living in opposition; I mean, if it was just another simulation than all the tension of the series is just so much hype, and I can't see the brothers pulling that on their public. However, one of the messages of the second movie is that Zion, like the Matrix itself, is another control system meant to reign in and manipulate the silly humans. I mean, it turns out that Zion is set up by the machines and is routinely destroyed and rebuilt. So what I wonder is this: wouldn't it be foolish for the machines to have built a controlling system in which they're not involved?

So here's what I'm thinking - what if the machines have agents interspersed within the human population of Zion? Agent Smith's possession of Bane early in the second movie demonstrates that artificial intelligence can "hop" the gap into human bodies; indeed, I'm still not entirely sure that Neo isn't really (or at least partly) a complex program from the machine world. So why can't the machines simply insert some "programs" into human bodies that subsequently are "freed" and brought to Zion. Can you think of a better way to monitor and manipulate the inhabitants? This came to me as I watched Council Member Haman (sp?) speaking with Neo in the bowels of Zion. He certainly seems to imply a need for man/machine cooperation - the same implications the Oracle gives Neo later in the story. So is this just parrallel thinking, or are there machine intelligences manipulating Neo from Zion as well as from the Matrix?

Now, there's no way to test this idea until the third movie comes out. I mean, Smith's ability to come into the real world may be the same quirk that allows Neo to sense the machines in the real world. Perhaps it's an unintended side-effect that the machines in general aren't aware of. But if I were a machine, it seems silly (or at least arrogant) to set up a cell of rebellous, angry humans and then not put any failsafes into the system.

10.22.2003

Okay, What's Adobe's Deal?

As I occasionally have to admit, I'm a Mac Addict. It's not that I am a zealous Jobs-Head; I use a PC at work, I teach use of the PC at Ohio State, and I recognize that there are many advantages to using a Windows system. It's just that my Mac use is pushing ten years now. I'm more comfortable there. It's home. I'll probably always use a Mac to do my work when I can: web design, digital imaging, you name it.

So it is with dismay that I've watched several recent Adobe product announcements, all without Mac suport. First, they updated their video and DVD authoring programs, Adobe Premier Pro and Adobe Encore DVD. At the time there was much brouh-hah-hah (sp?) about how Apple was writing competing software (Final Cut Pro and DVD Studio Pro), and that because Apple throws around such weight with Apple Users it becomes uncompetitive for Adobe to make competing software. Fine. That makes business sense. So while I'm saddened that these great Adobe tools won't continue to be available to Macintosh users, I'll learn to live with it.

But then today, Adobe announced a new product - Adobe Atmosphere. Basically, it's a third-party plug-in that allows you to interact in a 3-D environment (that's Adobe Atmosphere Player) and an authoring environment for 3-D settings (Adobe Atmosphere proper). The problem - both the player and the authoring tool exist only for Windows machines using Internet Explorer. To quote from a recent C|Net Article:

The initial version of Atmosphere works only with Microsoft's Windows operating system and Internet Explorer browser. Bahman Dara, senior product manager for Adobe, said the company is considering support for Apple Computer's Mac operating system in future versions of Atmosphere Player, but "it doesn't look like the audience is big enough for version 1."

So not only can I not develop these new, 3-D environs on my trusty Mac, I can't even view them. In fact, I can't view them on my Window's machine easily because I long abandoned IE as my browser of choice (a whole 'nother rant there, let me tell you). So while Adobe claims their aim is to "make this (3-D interfaces) reall accessible," they've made a program that forces the user to use a specific program on a specific platform only. This seems to be a choice the trades accessibility for profitability.

So this trend disturbs me deeply - both personally as a Mac user and generally as a supporter of computing accessibility and choice. In the past I've praised Adobe - they represent, to me, one of the first companies that consciously attempted to standardize their programs and user experiences across multiple platforms. Yet now they seem to be only concerned with those who use the lowest common denominator - if you chose to show initative and use your machine in a different way, you're out of luck. How ironic that this comes days after Apple released their vaunted iTunes program and iTunes Music Store for Windows users; now I can enjoy virtually the same music-listening experience no matter where I might be situtated. I just wish Adobe would show me the same courtesy.

10.08.2003

Multimedia is Saved?

A while ago, I published a summary and critique of the recent Microsoft vs. Eolas ruling, which endangered the basic technology which drives the delivery of Flash, Quicktime, Shockwave, and other multimedia content. Well, much news has occurred over the last 24 hours. After weeks of silence, companies like Microsoft, Macromedia, and Apple have come out with work-arounds which they believe will enable websites to continue functioning after Microsoft has rebuilt their browser. I just used the Macromedia work-around and it seems to work great. Now a word of caution - reports don't have the new IE browser coming out until later this year, so don't there's not a lot of pressure to change anything till 2004. But I thought it would be useful to have some resources ready for any, in case they need to make changes.

Who should be thinking about this? Well, anyone who does web development. Basically, any HTML and XHTML code that uses the OBJECT or EMBED tags. And those are popular tags...

UPDATE

I literally went to post this entry and then check the news, and there's more developments. News.com just announced that Eolas has just filed a motion to stop the distribution of Internet Explorer until Microsoft begins licensing the plug-in process from Eolas. Things just keep getting better and better - stay tuned!

UPDATE UPDATE

Macromedia just posted a nice presentation that shows the changes in the next Internet Explorer and what they and Microsoft are doing to address them. Also, it shows the use of their Breeze presentation software, very slick. Anyways, take a look...

Active Content Resources

Microsoft MSDN Developers' Page
Details Microsoft's upcoming changes to Internet Explorer and links to other providers
Macromedia's Active Content Center
Currently contains a concise description of the problem, as well as a set of JavaScript work-arounds for Macromedia content
Apple Computers
Instructions for including Quicktime Content
RealNetworks
Information for working with Real Media Files
News.com
An overview of Microsoft's announcement and related issues from C|Net News
Coverage by Web Blogger Jeffrey Zeldman
Coverage by Sidesh0w.com