Check out this awesome Flash demo using the Papervision components for Flash CS3.

Its a 3d rotating image gallery!

http://www.airtightinteractive.com/projects/tiltviewer/app/

Richard

A new web based technology that uses a program to stop spam is now saving our classic books.

This recent article on the BBC news site got me thinking; What will technology, that we take for granted today, be used for in the future? How can we use current technology in new ways that they were never intended for?

Will the telephone somehow solve poverty? Will chewing gum be used to clean the streets? Any thoughts welcome!

Alastair

It seems social networking online is becoming more and more like the real world.

I found this article about IBM employees planning a virtual protest:

Check it out here

Is this the future? Is this Web 3.0?

Alastair

There are days it all goes wrong: PC's have a habbit of knowing when you're on a deadline and suddenly start running slow, every queue at the supermarket is 40 miles long, the sandwhich shop have run out of sandwhiches... you know those kind of days.

But, thanks to the internet, it's possible to find people out there who deal with real problems, day in day out, as part of their work. Next time you have a bad day, think of these guys...

http://randomreality.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2004/5/1/45188.html

http://maypeacebewithyou.blogspot.com/2007/07/perspectives.html

Alastair

Watch any Hollywood thriller and technology is nearly always portrayed as the tool of Big Brother.

Whether it's films like The Bourne Ultimatum, Enemy of the State, or the recent Die Hard 4, network technologies are largely used as a means to repress and control the general public.

In real life then it's refreshing to find social networking site Facebook being used as a tool for democratic protest.

As the BBC reported today an online protest by students on Facebook has forced HSBC bank into a u-turn over its plans to scrap interest-free overdrafts for students.

Faced with an organised online boycott by thousands of students the bank withdrew the measure, with NUS president Wes Streeting acknowledging the impact of the Facebook protest on the decision.

Detractors of Facebook have long been scaremongering over privacy concerns about sharing your thoughts and information online with large numbers of people. What's far more interesting though is the very potential to do just this on more important issues, helping people collaborate in a way that would not otherwise be possible.

With traditional media channels increasingly homogenised, and modern politics less-and-less a viable means of representation for some of us, its great to see the web still affords a democratic outlet as a way to get your voice heard.

Nick Welch

It seems Adobe is jumping on the High-Definition bandwagon with their announcement of support for High Definition video via Flash over the Internet.

The new update to Flash Player 9 provides support for the H.264 codec for high-definition video content, as well as improved audio support.

So what does this mean for video over the web? The logical answer here is full-screen streaming video content of unprecedented quality, high-quality movie trailers and rich-media interactive experiences combined with IPTV. As developers this means we’ll have more powerful tools for reaching new markets and wider audiences.

Sadly for many of us in the UK I feel this won’t be the case just yet, whether you're a developer or a consumer. I’m a bit of an AV-obsessive so hate to be cynical, but I can’t see any of the above happening unless UK ISPs change their position on bandwidth and how heavily their customers use the internet.

The internet holds great promise as a delivery platform for television content. Satellite giant Sky have been making inroads towards video-on-demand services over broadband, and the BBC, Tiscali and BT have launched their own IPTV services in the form of BBC iPlayer, Tiscali TV and BT-Vision. With increasing convergence between the web and traditional broadcasting new opportunities exist for interactivity such as that offered by the Flash platform. The success of sites such as YouTube shows that the problem isn't one of demand.

Unfortunately, the majority of ISPs still seem hopelessly unrealistic about how much bandwidth their customers need. Speed-throttling and usage limits abound with most ISPs under the PR-friendly guise of ‘Traffic-Shaping’ or ‘Fair-Use’ policies. Limits notwithstanding, non-cable customers using ADSL are at the mercy of aging infrastructure that reduces potential speeds. 

Technology blog Gizmodo has been one of many to chronicle the huge disparity between the speeds ISPs advertise as possible and those their customers can actually get, following a report by Which? Online.

Clearly, as with most good things in life, bandwidth is not infinite. The logistical and financial burden falls on the ISPs to administrate the network and ensure everyone gets their share. However this flipside of the coin is notoriously absent in the advertising of so-called ‘unlimited’ and ‘high-speed’ broadband services.

The BBC’s launch of its iPlayer IPTV offering, recently fell foul of ISPs due to customers using increasing amounts of bandwidth to use the service. Hardly suprisingly news given that many ISPs are positioning themselves as providers of IPTV themselves.

Sadly then, without higher prices for customers and ISPs investing more heavily in their infrastructure we’re unlikely to see the kind of broadband speeds enjoyed by America, Korea and Japan; though more realistic advertising from ISPs would be a nice start.

So where does this leave our streaming, high-def, all-singing all-dancing web video experience in the UK? Sadly, as with many quintessentially British experiences, most likely at the back of the queue waiting in line for its turn.

Nick Welch

Imagine not having any software actually installed on your PC, imagine all your applications running online directly from the software vendors. This is the direction that many software developers are heading and it's said that in 10 years time this will be the norm.

Adobe, Microsoft, Google and many other big names are all developing online versions of software applications, some free, some Beta trials and some just for fun. Imaging software and business apps seem to be the popular favourite at the moment but i'm sure this will extend into 3d and video before too long.

I can see a number of positives and negatives, though the more I think about it the more it seems to make sense for everyone.

The Pro's (as I see them)
- Your software is usable from any computer around the world.
- Your software is updated by the software vendor so is always up-to-date.
- No software installations to fill up your hard disk.
- The software vendors see what you are doing and how you use the software, so can improve the software and remove unused features.
- If your system dies you don't lose your software installations.
- Reduces software piracy as software can't be copied.

The Con's (as I see them)
- Your work files are vulnerable to an online attack ?
- The software vendors see what you are doing and how you use the software.
- If you lose internet access or can't get internet access you can't work!
- If your software account gets hacked/stolen by another user they get your software.
- Imagine renewing countless software subscriptions each year.

For me it's already happening, albeit in the PC Gaming context, my treasured Half Life CD is now an online licence enabling me to play my registered games from any PC around the world via a Steam account, I think that's a big leap forward.

Richard

Recently at Signals we’ve been taking a look at using avatar technology to support a whole range of digital applications.

 

With their roots in computer games, avatars serve as a graphical representation of the user in a virtual environment. As such they’re a great tool in terms of helping people interact with content, and have a history of use within eLearning.

 

So it was interesting to see electronics giant Sony announce a new 3D avatar environment as an interface for its PS3 games console.

 

Jamie’s post noted the impact of Web 2.0 and user generated content. It’s in this light that Sony is setting up its virtual shop with a user experience that embraces avatars wholeheartedly. Under the title of ‘Home’, PS3 gamers are able to customise a character and use it to meet other players, chat, and hang out in their own virtual apartment. In a departure from the similar Second Life, Home isn’t being touted as just a ‘game’ but will actually be part of the interface and user experience.

 

Home is being touted as a 3D social networking environment where gamers can create and unlock new content, and compete in games with people they meet online. Home will also serve commercial interests, with games and film companies showcasing trailers for up and coming releases in virtual cinemas.

 

With Sony’s Phil Harrison defining Home as “Game 3.0” it’s easy to be cynical. Dig beneath the hyperbole though, and the free download promises to further change the way people consume digital media and interact online.

 

Microsoft’s XBOX Live and Nintendo’s Wii both use player avatars, so its not that ‘Home’ is groundbreaking or particularly new. The key thing to me is that it’s indicative of a shift towards a web interface that is a simulation of the real world. As Alastair’s post noted, people are increasingly asking more from human computer interaction.

 

With increasing media saturation, the challenge of capturing and holding attention spans is a big challenge. Avatars offer a compelling alternative to simple, click-driven content by putting a human face on information, and offering something more engaging and personal. Crucially, avatars create online presence and context for the user in what would otherwise be an intangible environment.

 

My last post talked about transforming eLearning with computer game mechanics. Avatars are a big part of this, and there are some good examples of the technology being used for eLearning, such as those in Second Life, or the  CodeBaby avatar technology.

 

As broadband speeds rise, and richer media experiences are possible, it'll be interesting to see how far avatars impact on other web-based applications and services.

 

Nick Welch

Fun - it’s a simple word to describe something we’ve all been doing since we were born. So why do we get so worked up when we talk about fun in the same breath as learning.

 

Looking at this in the context of eLearning it’s easy to see how things have become confused. In the last three decades technology has transformed every area of business. Unfortunately, as James' post mentioned, the perception persists that simply digitising content to make it ‘eLearning’ makes it more effective or engaging. Early eLearning content was limited by technology and bandwidth, but that’s not the case with powerful tools like Flash and increasing online bandwidth. So why is so much eLearning material dry, uninspiring, and creating user fatigue as the mouse-button is clicked over and over to escape the tedium? The problem isn’t the tools, and it’s not necessarily the content; it’s the lack of fun.

 

There’s that word again. If you think back to your early childhood fun was a key ingredient in learning. You only have to look at the success of firms such as the ELC producing toys that are fun and educational. Fun is a key driver in human behaviour, directly impacting on our attention span, and how well we retain information. Unfortunately it’s something that’s all too easily dismissed within the eLearning development process.

 

So why is the ‘fun’ factor lacking in so much eLearning. Well, there are the obvious issues of time and cost. Many eLearning developments are time-critical for a product or campaign launch. Budgets restrictions may also be a consideration. Both of these, however, are surmountable by a capable eLearning vendor. For myself, and I’m sure for many of our clients, ‘fun’ is difficult as it’s a problematic fit with corporate identity, branding, and messaging. Too much fun and you risk trivialising your content and brand. Too little and you create a ‘page-turner’ without capitalising on the benefits of a digital platform.

 

Having discussed these issues with a client on a recent development, it was refreshing to find common ground, and a willingness to explore and experiment with how we present information. An increasingly popular approach is the use of game-based learning, as James’ post described. Sometimes referred to as ‘serious games’ or ‘hard-fun’, they are a key tool for eLearning developers. Check out seriousgames.org for some examples.

 

At their simplest they use scaled-down computer game mechanics to engage the learner with interactivity, but at their most complex they can be full Immersive Learning Simulations (ILS). Coined by the eLearning Guild, and subject of its recent research study; the term ILS describes eLearning that is richly interactive and uses game-methodology and simulation. An ILS can simulate a learner’s working environment and present information in a context that is relevant and highly engaging with multiple outcomes, and scenarios.

 

By applying gaming to learning we create an experience that is far more memorable and compelling, but don’t just take my word for it. According to recent figures from ELSPA the UK computer and video game market is worth £2 billion, and the global market worth $21 billion, having tripled in the last decade. With these figures isn’t it about time eLearning took ‘fun’ seriously?

Nick Welch

Please check out the video here.

It is a very interesting and informative way of putting the real meaning back into the phrase "Web 2.0".

It is also rather thought provoking about how we might consider using the internet with this powerful technology.

I really just felt that as many people should get to see it as possible but you never know, maybe it will start a little discussion.

Personally I feel that the explanation is spot on and very clear, but I don't really agree on what it is trying to say. At the end it suggests that we should maybe think about changing ourselves. I wouldn't really want to see that, I think that our web should change for us. Maybe all that is needed is a perspective change instead...what do you think?

Hope you enjoyed the video at least,

Jamie