Stritar's chronolog

Tablets were invented for recycling old PC games

Tue, 01 Apr 2014 21:15:33 GMT

Remember when we were playing really great games on our first home computers in the 80s and 90s? Good times. My gaming journey started with the Spectrum 48K (snowman FTW!), and slowly progressed to where we are now. Today's games truly are a piece of art, I have to give full credit to ventures such as Angry Birds and GTAs, but back then, everything was so much simpler, as if different rules applied. Games were there purely for the gameplay, and were awesome even if they came in 4-bit colors.

Luckily, these classic MS-DOS games received the opportunity to be revived. A few months ago, I played The Secret of Monkey Island on the iPad and it was fucking brilliant. Such a perfectly integrated experience, as if the game was originally designed for the tablet. Loved the humor, loved the clever tricks, loved the simplicity. It brought back so many memories... I want to play more games like that! More Lucas Arts and Sierra titles! Street Rod and Duke Nukem 2D! Dune, Syndicate and UFO! Railroad Tycoon!! Starcraft!!!

(Besides The Secret of Monkey Island, I noticed Civilization. Simcity and Prince of Persia are also available in the App Store, while The Incredible Machine seems to have been removed. Don't like the generic modern graphics though.)

These old games were great because they offered so little, but due to today's information pollution, insufficiency is bliss. Imagine a game where you don't need to be impressed with its amazing graphics or clever physics. Yes, we used to enjoy things like that, things that were pure and simple. Things like The Monkey Island, which managed to make me calm and relaxed with its plain ingenuity, besides reminding me of my childhood.

I'm not sure about the legal issues that come with it, but I am certain there's a huge opportunity in republishing classic games and abandonware on tablets and smartphones. The concepts and scenarios are there, they just need to be modified and rewritten for another device. So, if you have the opportunity to do so, please recycle one of those old PC titles, I would love to enjoy every bit of its vintageness on my mobile device before I go to bed. Because people are sentimental, and old times will always mean good times. And there are many of us who are prepared to pay money for that.

Is Dexter and its social game Slice of Life the future of TV shows (but no one noticed)?

Sun, 06 Nov 2011 15:46:35 GMT

I don't know if you've noticed, but a few months ago the hit television show Dexter got it's own social game you can play on Facebook, named Slice of Life. Similar kinds of branded social games have been done before, but it's something else that's interesting this time. This game changes according to the plot of the television series each week. That's right, the show and the game are coexisting and evolving together to bring users a totally new type of experience. And while most technology blogs, obsessed with social, said Slice of Life is a revolutionary new type of a social game, I asked myself: is it rather a new revolutionary type of consuming television?

Television is static - not interactive the way the Web is. You can't do much. More or less, liking and commenting shows, besides tele voting, are the most interactive things you can do. But Slice of Life changes everything. A television show that you can watch, consume and play on multiple mediums, multiple channels, multiple platforms, online and offline. You're actually playing a game inside the show. Or watching a show inside the game. Pretty awesome stuff that didn't get as nearly much attention as it should, attention for bringing a new type of interactivity to television shows.

If the future of television as a medium will be defined by new types of business models (Netflix), physical architecture (Google?) and user experience (Apple?), the future of television content will definitely be defined by the level of interactivity it offers, imitating the Web. And until now, interactivity hasn't been solved in such a smart way than our favorite serial killer's social game. You must watch, you must play, you must do everything to be the biggest of the 10 million+ fans Dexter has on Facebook.

It looks like television is becoming more than just a medium. It's rather evolving into a cross-platform interactive content serving entertainment system. Some have already managed to successfully understand that fact, more will follow soon. I don't know about you, but I can't wait to see more.

Twitfluence received some media attention. And almost went to Seedcamp.

Thu, 06 Oct 2011 09:05:04 GMT

Lately, a lot has been happening with Twitfluence. We've finally decided it's time to go out of prototype mode and make Twitfluence a fully working solution, a joint venture between Neolab and IlovarStritar. A fine combination of great technical expertise and amazing visual experience. We've even applied for Seedcamp Ljubljana, but only made it as runners-up (which is actually not that bad for the first try). But that won't stop us – we are more certain than ever to make Twitfluence a complete product, and we'll try even harder the next time.

There are quite a few challenges on our way, the biggest one being the technical difficulties the calculation is having when analyzing large accounts. We had to rewrite it pretty much from scratch. Besides other small upgrades and patches, we will also be doing another major thing: rebranding it. Twitfluence sounds too generic, and most service built on top of Twitter are Twit-something. You will see what we have in mind, and we're sure you'll like it.

This will probably be the last post about Twitfluence on stritar.net, since we'll be moving to the official blog. It was fun while it lasted, but Twitfluence will be retired soon, to make way for something even greater. Hopefully you will be able to see the results in about a month.

What made us pursue the idea further, to think beyond the current ugly mode? A lot has had to do with bloggers that were covering us, which gave us amazing moral support (and a kick in the ass). This coverage went way beyond Slovenia and we are proud to have made it so far. It has also shown us we are on the right track – if we were able to get noticed with the current version, the broad potential of such a service must be great. See for yourselves, here are a few great articles that we've seen floating on the internets:

My Community Manager: Different authority measurement applications review (in French)
had blog: Twitfluence review (in Slovene), by @had
SocialEast: About Slovene Twitter tracking software solutions
Toronto Star Blog: Politicians on Twitter, and how to determine their influence and social capital

Thank you for your support and patience, we'll be seeing you around. Bigger, better, prettier and of course, more playable. Stay tuned.

Trends of 2010, according to Facebook, Google and Twitter

Tue, 21 Dec 2010 07:42:29 GMT

The year is coming to an end, and our favorite big brothers all published reports about trends inside their ecosystems (Facebook, Google, Twitter). Even though the services are not perfectly comparable (information gets pulled and pushed: while you search, you pull data; on social networks the data gets pushed to you), I think they can provide a clear picture about the general state of the Web in 2010. Three obvious winners emerged, coming strong in all the charts. Apple made the iPad the most wanted gadget around, FIFA World Cup mania took over the whole planet, and Justin Bieber topped the celebrity world. I was curious about the comparison, so I've joined all three lists, gave all topics a score, and put the results into pictures. Sadly, I'm not a designer to make a really cool infographic about it, so this will have to do.

#	Google (points)	Facebook (points)	Twitter (points)	Total (points)
1	HMU (10)	Chatroulette (10)	Gulf Oil Spill (10)	iPad (21)
2	World Cup (9)	iPad (9)	FIFA World Cup (9)	World Cup (18)
3	Movies (8)	Justin Bieber (8)	Inception (8)	Justin Bieber (16)
4	iPad and iPhone 4 (7)	Nicki Minaj (7)	Haiti Earthquake (7)	Haiti (13)
5	Haiti (6)	Friv (6)	Vuvuzela (6)	Oil Spill (10)
6	Justin Bieber (5)	Myxer (5)	Apple iPad (5)	Chatroulette (10)
7	Games on Facebook (4)	Katy Perry (4)	Google Android (4)	Inception (8)
8	Mineros / Miners (3)	Twitter (3)	Justin Bieber (3)	Nicki Minaj (7)
9	Airplanes (2)	GameZer (2)	Harry Potter (2)	Friv (6)
10	2011 (1)	Facebook (1)	Pulpo Paul (1)	Vuvuzela (6)

I've only left out "HMU" (Hit me up) and "Movies", because the first is an expression, and the second is a generic term. Hope you like it, see you around in 2011.

Web 2.5: Looking for the missing link between Web 2.0 and Web 3.0

Wed, 10 Nov 2010 17:39:56 GMT

The great revolution of Web 2.0 is still here and well – it looks like it's not going anywhere. Actually, its name did change, making "social media" more widely used today, but I'm still sticking to the original Tim O'Reilly's term. It's been more than five years since that happened, and a few years ago Web 3.0 was also starting to get mentioned. Web 3.0 mainly stands for the semantic web, using mathematical algorithms and meta data for trying to understand the meaning of content. But the whole thing is getting kinda old, because we still didn't see any real great results or services online – or perhaps they just did not make it to the mainstream. So while we wait for that to unveil, we could discuss something in between.

Client: Smartphone

In my opinion, there are a few quite significant changes in the Web we're used to using today, compared to the widely spread classic social Web 2.0 that already became fully mainstream. And the thing that's mostly responsible for this transition, surely has to be the smartphone. The wide spread of smartphones brought us new kinds of services, solutions, interactions and user experience, all powered by a powerful hand-held device supporting web connectivity. And as I will try to explain below, these services go way beyond Web 2.0, which is traditionally still powered by a personal computer. If you ask me, the mobile web is not just a new way to access the World Wide Web, it might as well be the new generation of it.

New capabilities

Modern smartphones come equipped with a wide arrange of additional hardware capabilities, such as high-resolution cameras, various sensors, compasses, gyroscopes and probably the most important – GPS. This fact created an array of new online services, where the ones worth mentioning would definitely be location (geo) based networking and augmented reality. Most of us can probably still remember when first phones with their 300x200 pixel cameras came out, and look at what happened now. Not to mention the giant tablet army that's heading our way.

Real-time web

Real-time web is the driving force behind Twitter, a thing so cool Google adopted it too, while Facebook is having problems to get its information out of privacy. It represents giving information when it happens, not hours (days) later, like the traditional (online) media does. While real-time web might be one of the biggest favorites for the next generation of Web beyond Web 2.0, it's still pretty useless if real time is only on the publisher's side. Mobile devices bring real-time to consumer's side too, enabling real time interactions between millions of users, which creates even more publishers and information – more than a group of professional journalists is ever capable of creating, making this world truly global.

Location-based networking

Location-based networking enables socializing based on where you and your friends physically are. Original players, such as Gowalla and Foursquare (who aleady has more than 3 million users) are already being copied by the mainstream, such as Facebook, Twitter and Google (all three naming them Places). While these services are rapidly spreading, they also introduced another interesting thing into networking, the gaming component, which uses badges and achievements to create real-life role playing games.

Augmented reality

Combining a compass and a GPS allowed another new type of software, called augmented reality, mostly in the form of solutions that use the camera image and draw things on top of it. There are already a few interesting applications of it available, and the marketing potential of this concept is probably huge. Augmented reality also managed to turn the smartphone into a deadly gadget, and where governments probably spent billions researching similar weapons, a soldier equipped with a €500 smartphone and a proper piece of software could lead a team of warriors who can see each other through walls.

Mobile apps

The previous shift in IT was for corporate software solutions to go from desktop to the web (and beyond to the cloud). Funny the trend, as today software is going back from web to mobile "desktop" applications, called apps. This happened because mobile apps enable a much better user experience (they can access the above mentioned capabilities) and at the same time provide less data consumption (making them cheaper and faster). Besides being a billion dollar industry, apps might also create the next step in the evolution of (business oriented) software and IT.

Is the mobile web actually Web 2.5?

These are a few examples of features we haven't seen before, and I think they should be considered when thinking about significant generations of the World Wide Web. The transition from Web 1.0 to Web 2.0 was from static to dynamic, from publishing to sharing and interaction, and the next big step worth mentioning could really be the one presented.

I admit the title of this post is a bit misleading, since this new concept has almost nothing to do with semantic Web 3.0. But I hope my thoughts are not that way off, since I haven't noticed any real authority write about the mobile web as a next big step in the Web's evolution. Right or wrong, from my point of view as a software architect and developer, the mobile era brought us much more than just online access everywhere, it brought a new generation of software and the Web. Besides, we have to be aware that this trend of mobile domination will surely evolve even further and continue to grow in the future. And since the name Web 3.0 is already taken, it might as well be called Web 2.5. What do you think?

Google 2.0, take infinity: Google Me

Mon, 06 Sep 2010 18:17:35 GMT

The past few months have been loaded with expectations and speculations about the new social service from Google that will be introduced soon: Google Me. Facebook is currently dominating the social market, with 500 million registered users and an expected 2 billion dollars of revenue in 2010. It's satellites, mostly in the form of social gaming providers, are also gaining momentum, e.g. Zynga, the most successful of the pack, could generate $500 million in revenue this year. Even though Google's revenue is still much much greater, more than $20 billion a year to be exact, this does not change the fact the future of the World Wide Web lies in social – and Google obviously wants to be a part of that.

SEO is out

We can see for ourselves that the Web has been shifting to a new shape, where you don't look for information anymore, information finds you (push vs. pull). Another interesting fact - The Search Engine Strategies (SES) conference was not about Search Engine Optimization (SEO) this year, it was about possibilities of new social strategies. Modern viral campaigns that use social media, such as the one for Old Spice, make traditional web strategies seem plain, ineffective and a thing of the past. And Google, once the ultimate company and employer, the coolest place to work in, is facing a leakage of its employees towards Facebook, currently valued at 33+ billion. Middle aged Google, slowly loosing its coolness against the new kid on the block.

Facebook is in

A few days ago, Facebook was granted with a patent concerning social search, an algorithm build on the number of clicks made by your social vicinity. A really interesting idea, and potentially a great threat to probably the world's greatest (most valuable) mathematical algorithm – Google PageRank. This is not some service of a new type anymore, this one competes directly with Google's core business and the thing that made the corporation what it is today. And Google desperately needs to strike back.

Google's past attempts with Web 2.0 weren't that successful. From the decline of Orkut, to canceled Wave and useless Buzz, these services didn't quite make it to wider use, leaving aside YouTube. The following infographic beautifully shows all Google's (mostly failed) attempts at social, but they will still give it another go - this time in the form of Google Me.

Google wants in

Aimed to be a Facebook clone, some people say it has great potential, some are reserved, while others think it will be a failure. Besides, an open alternative called Diaspora is set to launch September 15th with huge social buzz, so this game might turn out really interesting. But Google, once the web's innovation leader, is slowly turning into an old school player, finding it hard to cope with new concepts. Something similar is happening to Nokia, who has problems with fully penetrating the smart phone market, and is loosing ground towards new players, such as Apple and the whole Android movement.

But a few strategic takeovers (check out the complete history) and strong partnerships and acquisitions of social gaming providers may just enable Google the brain power it needs to provide a successful Facebook alternative. Facebook is currently loosing some hype and if Google is able to provide a fresh service for what the core functionality of Facebook is – connecting with people you know – this just might work. But this time, it will have to be something smart and creative (but not too creative like Wave), similar, but different (not a total clone like Twitter's clone Buzz), and Google could get a chance to get on top of things again. The only question is if Google still has enough out of the box thinking left to pull it off and finally become a real Web 2.0 player.

I'm really eager to see what they'll do and like many curious people, I will surely give it a try. The only question is if it will be just a try, or will it be interesting enough (for others) to persuade me to stay. For Google's sake, I hope it will, otherwise they may face an even bigger problem on a strategic scale: the lost domination of the World Wide Web.

What's hot on the web - Part 3: A peek into obscurity

Mon, 05 Oct 2009 19:39:25 GMT

You know the drill. The world wide web is a beautiful thing filled with cool and funny stuff. A lot of that stuff gets unnoticed by most of the people, so consolidations are needed. I like weird and unexplainably attractive things, things that are differently funny and geeky. Because we've already went through the classic ones, this part of the series is a bit more obscure. Presenting What's hot on the web, part 3.

The Techno Viking

The Techno Viking is supposedly the only guy who could kill Chuck Norris. The story is happening on an open air party where this guy tries to pickpocket a visitor. Little does he know that around the block the Techno Viking is lurking. Once he get into his element, the dominance doesn't end until the end of the movie.

All your base are belong to us

This one is based on a lousy translation of a video game. The cyber community and gamers found this so hillarious that somebody actually made a song out of it, video included. All your base are belong to us!

local: reporter Andrej Stare drunk

The legend has it that all Slovenian TV reporters are a bit drunkards, because their job demands spending a lot of free time while on the set. One the funniest is a sports reporter Andrej Stare, who magnificently commented on a hockey match between Slovenia and Croatia. Totally drunk, of course.

Hope you had a good laugh. But beware, you don't want to piss off the Techno Viking.

Check out the complete What's hot on the web series.

I want it all - the curious case of Microsoft

Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:18:12 GMT

There's Microsoft, probably the biggest software company in the world. And there are others. In the past years Microsoft has been trying to expand it's business to pretty much all the markets, faintly connected with it's core business - developing software. Marketing experts could say this is not a good strategy, because it is better for companies to retain their focus and stay specialized in things they do best. But if Samsung can build bridges in South Korea and at the same time make smart phones, why shouldn't Microsoft make iPods?

There are a few interesting new markets Microsoft entered into. But are they profitable enough to let the Windows family suffer because of this expansion? Here are the most significant:

Gaming consoles market: the Xbox 360 is supposed to be one of the best gaming consoles according to independent tests, because of it's high performance and good online support. They even offer some exclusive Grand theft auto content, which was probably the most anticipated game of this year.
Portable media devices: we are supposed to see the new Zune HD in autumn, designed to kill the iPod dominance of portable mp3 and video devices. But is it cool enough to be able to take this burden upon itself?
Search: a few years ago Microsoft introduced Live search, which was the successor of MSN search. A few months ago Bing was launched, and it is actually successfully taking search engine usage and share from Google and Yahoo, at least for now. But is it just curiosity, or is it actually good enough to replace The mighty one?

In the mean time, Windows Vista was quite a debacle and left most of the users longing and keeping Windows XP. We will see how Windows 7 does, but they surely lost a good position against Mac and Linux in the past years. I still think that Microsoft's business suite is the best there is (Office, asp.net, SQL server), but negative attitude can easily travel from operating systems towards enterprise environment and fun gadgets. People want the iPod and the iPhone because it is easy and fun to use, will they think the same about Zune after using Windows Vista?

It is always fun and interesting to check what the stock market says. The following diagram compares Microsoft (MSFT) to it's competitors from different markets mentioned above, Apple (AAPL), Google (GOOG) and Nintendo (NTDOY), from the beginning of 2005 until now.

It doesn't look that good, does it (even though the dates and players in the diagram were carefully chosen to support the hypothesis)?