Author Archives: Cavorter

New (to me) Sodas

I was doing some shopping today and ran across three new lines of soda that I had not previously seen. Haven’t tasted them all yet, but figured I’d at least mention them here before I forgot.

First up, while I was looking for the new Dry Soda flavors at Kowalski’s (which they did NOT have) I found OogavĂ© in Root Beer, Cola, Ginger Ale, and Watermelon Cream. I gave the Ginger Ale a miss this trip but if the other three are decent I’ll probably give that one a try as well. It was nice that the Cola was non-caffeinated and it’s great to see a different flavor like Watermelon Cream put out by anyone.

On the other side of the aisle in the drink mixers was Fever-Tree Ginger Beer. It’s diminutive size (200ml/6.8 fl oz) is what really marks it as a drink mixer instead of intended as a typical premium CSD and seems similar in approach to Fentimans line of smaller bottles for mixing. I do think it’s interesting on their website though that they appear to have both Ginger Bear and Ginger Ale flavors.

Later at Rainbow I saw they were carrying Big Bay Brewing Company Pierjumper Twisted Citrus and Oh Bouy! Cherry Cola. Unfortunately I skipped the Oh Bouy on the grounds that it might have actual cherry in it which wouldn’t do so well for me. (Oh, do I miss cherries…)

Hoping to take a couple of each to a party tomorrow night, so if you see me and want to try one just let me know!

No tag for this post.

New Marvel Trades on Nook (12/26/2011)

New Marvel Comics Available on Nook 12/26/2011

I find that it is often nice to be wrong, and yesterday’s bumper crop of releases is very welcome. I wasn’t expecting to see any more titles for at least a week and honestly only checked very late last night on a whim. Obviously I need to be more diligent about that daily checking.

Six of the sixteen new collections are from regular titles and the others are limited run titles of one sort or another including the “X-Necrosha” event collection which spans multiple titles (I’ll have to ask Sigrid Ellis if that one is worth buying or not). It is good to finally see a Fantastic Four collection though I’m not familiar with this particular writer or his storyline. Ghost Rider has never been a character I really understood but it is good to see an increase in the diversity of characters from the Marvel U. IIRC Spider-Man: Blue was pretty well received though I couldn’t tell you why and it might be awhile before I get around to finding out for myself.

However it’s not all good news. Remember last week when I said they were doing the Ultimate books right? Well this week sees the release of Ultimate Spider-Man volumes 5 and 6. Last week had the release of volume 3. Where is volume 4? Maybe stuck in someone’s email inbox somewhere…

No tag for this post.

New Marvel Trades on Nook (12/23/2011)

New Marvel Comics Available on Nook 12/23/2011

It’s been 11 days since the last batch of new comics got released which seems like an odd number but at a guess it is because Sunday is Christmas in the US and Monday seems to be the day many businesses are giving as a holiday. Could it be that instead of the world of physical comics, where a holiday means delayed shipments, that in the world of electronic comics we’ll have early shipments? It would be nice but it seems more likely that Marvel wanted more titles in the catalog for all the people who are about to receive a shiny new device in the next two days. In any case we’ll know if the two week release window is the general plan on or around Jan 9, 2012.

This release is fairly Spider-Man heavy gives us a little mix of vintages starting with a classic Avengers storyline in “Avengers Under Siege”. (Personal anecdote: That is the story that ran immediately before I started following the Avengers.) In a similarly dark tone we have the first collection from the recent “Dark Avengers”. Both of which I’m looking forward to reading through, Under Siege for the umpteenth time and Dark Avengers for the first.

The spate of Spider-Man titles that arrives this week continues the odd release pattern we’ve got going for most titles. Doing it right is the Ultimate line with the consecutive release of Volume 3 and continuing to make a mess of things is the release of the Civil War story (Pre-Brand New Day), the second volume immediately following Brand New Day, and a volume long AFTER Brand New Day (though previous to “Big Time” released last week), but still no Brand New Day. So for those of you keeping track that gives us the following contemporary issues of Amazing Spider-Man: #532-536, #546-558, #574-577, #648-651.

To balance the complaints about the order of release I do want to point out that at least there are digital releases and I personally find the reading experience to be quite good.

Hope everyone is enjoying the holiday season!

Tags: ,

New Marvel Trades on Nook (12/12/2011)

New Marvel Comics Available on Nook 12/12/2011

The list for this week includes a couple of firsts for the the Nook releases. First and foremost it’s the first 616 Spider-Man trades released (Ultimate Spider-Man vol 1 & 2 were much earlier) though it does show part of the problems in the release schedule by putting out books on either side of the One More Day special event without also publishing THAT story. Previous weeks have shown similar issues with the Civil War and Captain America assasination timeline and I expect that it will continue in that vein until someone can talk some sense to whatever poor intern got the job of getting this schedule together.

The second first is the inclusion of the Masterwork trades. Already owning them in physical form I am still debating if I’m going to pick them up or not though I would imagine they look as good as the modern stuff. It does at least point to some intention to publish some of the classics from the vault.

Tags:

Marvel Comics on the Nook

I’ve been a Nook user since I got a free Color last Christmas and liked it enough to upgrade to the Tablet on day one (which honestly is a somewhat marginal upgrade) and also a long time Marvel Comics reader though a few years ago I had to decide financially between LEGO and Comics and then once my finances had stabilized I still wasn’t able to return to the comics because I just don’t have any space for them. So when the Nook Tablet announcement included news that Marvel would be publishing exclusively on the Nook platform I was incredibly excited.

Sadly that announcement said essentially nothing about what they would be publishing and several weeks in, some of the shine has worn off the thrill of finally being able to buy Marvel comics digitally however I can say that it has not been a total disappointment. Currently Marvel is only publishing trade collections for Nook and the selection is still somewhat small. Today there are a total of 48 items available in the special Marvel Comics section, and that includes the five new items that were the first new items in two weeks.

The pricing for the trades is decent, though probably nothing to look forward to if you have already bought any of these in print, generally maxing out at $16.74 (currently only for Planet Hulk) and as low as $5.59 for several good items. Most items are within a dollar of $10.

Users of the Nook software on other platforms should beware: These purchases are ONLY viewable on a Nook Tablet or Nook Color with the latest firmware. I’m hoping they open that up a bit some day and since I’m a Tablet owner I’m don’t have too much of a problem with it, but it really feels like a purely artificial imposition for no good reason.

The reading experience is pretty good if not perfect. The default display is a full page taking up the entire screen and the text is quite readable and the graphics come through well. If you want to see detail a quick tap zooms in for a closer look. Tilting the device into landscape mode will resize to display two pages which is handy for big spreads, though makes the text unreadable at that size. Additionally the TOC navigation is visual rather then by page number so it makes it really easy to move around.

The actual problem from my point of view is the what they are publishing and when they are publishing them. Early in the release cycle they published books on either side of the story where Captain America was assassinated without publishing the story where the assassination happened. They seem to be keeping with that kind of idiocy with this week’s publishing of Spider-Man trades on either side of the One More Day storyline, though hopefully they’ll follow up next week with that story as well. The assassination story I wasn’t as bothered by since I had already read that one in print. I have not read the Spider-Man story and so it feels a bit spoilerish to be reading what happens afterwards and I might wait till they correct that oversight before I actually crack that one open.

The initial point of this post however was to make a note of the items that are available when they are released since I can not seem to find anywhere else on the net that talks about it and figured it might be useful for someone else. I’ve been checking the store daily for awhile so hopefully will keep this up for at least awhile in some format.

No tag for this post.

Environment and Path Variables in InstallShield

For whatever reason I have either never had a reason to use an Environment Variable for a Path Variable in InstallShield before now, or it’s been long enough that I forgot how to do it so this morning when I went in to try and set one up I was a bit surprised to find it to not be quite as straightforward as I thought it might be.

I had originally just gone straight to the Path Variables section of the IDE [EDIT: after creating the environment variable before starting InstallShield] and created a new Path Variable entry and changed the type to “Environment” however no matter what I did I could not get it to resolve to the value of the Environment Variable that I had already created. The help files were no help and I didn’t see anything in a quick search on the InstallShield Community Forums (which are normally a great resource for exactly this sort of problem). I had been using InstallShield 2009 Professional and verified that it worked the same ways in 2010 and 2011. Eventually I stumbled on to this method:

  1. Create the environment variable on the system first through the usual methods.
  2. Open the InstallShield project that you want to use the variable in. (If you have the project open when you create the variable it does not always propagate until you’ve restarted InstallShield. It’s a fairly consistent problem with Windows environment variables.)
  3. In Tools | Options on the Path Variables tab, make sure you have either “Always recommend…” or “Always display…” selected. If you want to use an environment variable that an existing path variable points to you will want to either modify/delete the existing path variable or have the option set to “Always display…”.
  4. Add or modify the location of a file in some part of the IDE and use the environment variable in the “Browse for File dialog”. This could be in a component or in something like the signing certificate file location in the Release settings.
  5. When the “Path Variable Recommendation” dialog appears make sure to select “Create a new path…” and enter a name that is identical to the environment variable you want to use.
  6. Go to the Path Variables section of the IDE and change the Type for the new variable to “Environment”.

If you did everything properly the “Current Value” field should immediately change to “” where “VARIABLENAME” is the name of the environment variable that you are referencing.

If someone knows of an easier way of doing this I’d love to hear about it!

Tags: , , , , ,

Part Commonality: 2×1 Invert 45 Slope vs 1×2 Technic Brick

In the conversation on the TwinLUG list about the recent proposal for a change to the Micropolis module bases, there was an assertion that the use of 2×1 Inverted Slope 45 bricks would be a problem because they weren’t as common as Technic bricks.

I didn’t quite disagree, however it seemed like a strong assertion to make without actually researching the available data. So I did.

The result is the following graph which plots the number of sets that each part appears in from 1977 through 2011, the avg number of sets per year, as well as the trendline for the appearance of the part. Absurd overkill for the conversation? Absolutely, but it was fun to put together.

No tag for this post.

Thoughts on a new module base

Ri Co Le Go on Flickr has proposed a new module base for Micropolis. (Composite example and Building Instructions)

I started working on a comment on the image with my reactions and analysis and it got really big very quickly, so I decided to move it here instead. Please be sure to look at those links and the associated comments first for better context.

First off, I think it’s a really interesting idea and certainly deserves discussion.

I like that it remains compatible with the existing standard and doesn’t compromise the depth of the module. Additionally it seems like there would be a lot more possibility of being able to overcome table height differences with only some small modifications.

To elaborate on Dave DuJour’s observation about pin usage in TwinLUG, we’ve pretty much given up on pins in the big layouts for a few different reasons:

  1. Laziness. :-)
  2. The size of even our medium layouts means that we almost always run into weight limitations that result in cracked or sheared pins across table edges.
  3. These days we have quite a few modules that are larger then 1 block which makes managing the connections much more complicated.
  4. Probably most importantly, we find being able to make quick changes by simply lifting a module out to be incredibly useful, especially in convention layouts where people are dropping off new modules at random times and we want to make sure we get good placement for all modules so that you can still see everything.

The proposed change resolves being able to maintain a nice and even layout while still maintaining the ability to make easy changes. The implementation seems fairly straightforward as well since it can use pretty common parts.

However I think my biggest concern is about part count for the base modules. These days my quarter block bases use exactly 14 parts at an average cost of $2.72 per base. (LDD File for reference)

Minimal Quarter Block Base Cost Breakdown
qty Part $per cost
4 8×8 Plate $0.20 $0.80
2 1×16 Technic Brick $0.57 $1.14
2 1×14 Technic Brick $0.22 $0.44
4 2×2 Corner Plate $0.03 $0.12
1 2×16 Plate $0.19 $0.19
1 2×2 Brick $0.03 $0.03
Total $2.72

I went ahead and threw together a really quick minimal implementation of the proposed module base and came up with 28 parts at an average cost of $2.28 per base. (LDD File for reference)

Minimal Proposed Quarter Block Base Cost Breakdown
qty Part $per cost
4 8×8 Plate $0.20 $0.80
8 1×4 Brick $0.04 $0.32
4 1×6 Brick $0.05 $0.20
8 2×1 Inverted Slope 45 $0.04 $0.32
4 6×6 Plate $0.16 $0.64
Total $2.28

That did NOT include the cost of each of the H connectors which I came up with several different permutations for. The most sturdy using two 1×4 Technic Bricks ($0.04) and a 2×2 Modified Brick with 2 pins ($0.03), most common parts using two 1×4 Bricks ($0.04) and one 2×2 Brick ($0.03), and your proposal with four 2×2 Corner Bricks ($0.06). If we used 1×4 Tile ($0.07) on all three of those permutations the average cost comes out to $0.31 per connector. Supplying enough connectors for a large layout could become quite expensive and even for a medium layout could be slightly prohibitive. (LDD File for reference)

Still, if you figure an average of 2 H Connectors per module that does make the price difference $0.18, which isn’t huge for the possible increase in functionality.

However I think the best place that this will be useful, and the best reason for adoption, will be with Bluff modules. There is currently a big issue with assembling Bluff modules and keeping them together plus the common need for support structures underneath standard modules arranged behind Bluff modules. If we included the H Connector (or maybe “Rico Connector”?) in the Bluff standard on the high sides of the module that would go a long way towards resolving a lot of the problems I’ve had there though not entirely obviating the need for under structure. However since I am in the minority of people working with Bluff modules I doubt that will have much sway with the rest of the community.

As for concerns about this change causing difficulty for using the depth of the module, I do not find that to be a compelling argument. Most modules that make use of the depth of the module do so towards the middle of the module and not towards the edges. The exception I can think of would be Thomas Anderson’s Construction Site, but even in that case there is an intact road on one side. So if the implementation of this change involved requiring at least one (or possibly two) connection points I think that would probably be enough.

Tags: ,

Installations in Windows 8

If you follow my Twitter stream you’ll have noticed that I’ve been playing with the Developer Preview of Windows 8 this morning. I’ve gotten a couple of funny looks from the family but to me a new operating system to play with and especially one with as many interesting changes as Windows 8 is pretty exciting.

As an installation developer though I figured I’d take a quick peek at things and see what was going on at this stage. The short version is: Quite a lot and very little.

The big news for setup developers is the introduction of an entirely new distribution model for the Metro Style applications using an AppX package which according to the documentation is “An app package is a container based on the Open Packing Conventions (OPC) standard.”. So pretty much it’s a zip file with some structured content. There is API access to the installation system but for the most part as far as installation development goes for Metro Style apps: A person with my specialized skills is not needed. Honestly, that’s pretty much a good thing.

Of course this being a Microsoft product it does provide backward compatibility for older technologies and so I was unsurprised to see only a minor increment to the version of Windows Installer in this build to 5.0.8102.0 and continued to be unsurprised by the log output from a test installer I threw together to check for any non-obvious operational changes.

For your perusal:

The few little differences:

  • The USERNAME property in Windows 8 gets set to a generic “Windows User” instead of the username.
  • Even though the authored MSI does not have a LaunchConditions action in either the UI or Execute sequences it appears that Windows Installer on Windows 8 is attempting to run it anyway and gets an error.
  • A few small errors that appear to occur while attempting to update the progress dialog during execution.

At a guess the last two can probably be put down to defects of some sort, but the first one could be interesting if it is not another defect. The installer was executed under an account that was generated using my Windows Live ID so I generated a local user (Which can only be done through a currently non-obvious method) and verified that it shows up the same there. Though the USERNAME environment variable is populated properly so maybe this is just another defect. I know I have used that property for installations a couple of times and it would be problematic if it was no longer populated.

For completeness sake I also ran a couple of classic InstallScript installers and everything ran fine there as well and the log output from those didn’t have any surprises.

No tag for this post.

Thoughts on Driver: San Francisco

I used a cache of rewards points this week to pick up a copy of Driver: San Francisco. I haven’t quite finished absolutely everything in the game, but since I’ve finished the story and have played a bit of multiplayer I figured I’d put down some thoughts while they were still fresh.

For all that the game narrative is absolutely ridiculous on it’s face, it was a lot of fun to play through it. The story is that you’re a rogue cop who manages to get put into a coma while trying to take down your nemesis who just escaped from jail and then find that you can “shift” into people while they are driving and essentially run them like a puppet. See? Ridiculous! Also, entertaining.

The mechanic of being able to pop out of your own body and jump into others makes for some really interesting possibilities and the designers took pretty good advantage of them to put together a series of missions that were diverse, interesting, and mostly fun. The best part being that if you didn’t like the current mission you could always go off into the city and find another or just goof off as much as you wanted.

Granted this is still a racing game so all of those diverse missions still involve being behind the wheel of a car but at least you aren’t always racing. In fact one of my favorite mission types is the Takedown. Normally I find these a bit hard to do since my physical coordination, while better then my friends who do NOT play racing games, is just not fantastic. Getting enough speed in a vehicle, weaving through traffic behind the target, and then managing to actually hit them with my car? It happens sometimes, but not often enough. However with the Shifting mechanic in this game I can always catch up with the target by shifting to a new car or even get ahead of them and take them out head-on. It is wonderfully satisfying to jack knife a truck and trailer across a freeway and watch a whole gang of street racers impact a few seconds later then jump into a pickup coming up behind them and put in the finishing touches.

Sound violent? It is, but at the same time it’s somewhat cartoony violence. There’s no blood, no guts, and pedestrians always seem to dive out of the way just in time. Destroy your car ramming into a wall on a bad corner? Shift into something else and keep going or just wait to get respawned. It all certainly takes away from any “realism” but that’s basically not the point of the game despite the incredibly well rendered city that you’re driving in.

Speaking of that city, they take advantage of that back drop for more then just the hills and streets to be racing on. The buildings are very well rendered though unlike one of my favorite racing games set in the city, Midtown Madness 2, none of them are interactive and all of the facades are just there to keep you from making that next turn properly. That said, the changes in elevation are well done and make for some really challenging routes and stunts.

My biggest complaint is about the cars. There are 140 real cars modeled and while Ubisoft gets full marks for arcade-realistic and varied handling I found their zeal for American Muscle cars and other serious drift cars to be kind of annoying. Give me a grippy car any day and I can do reasonably well in a race but especially as you get to the top end of the vehicles it gets harder and harder to manage to sometimes even go in a straight line without your back end coming around.

There’s lots of multi-player options including fun local split screen co-op and versus modes plus a large selection of online content and plenty of people to play against this soon after launch.

Worth $60? Maybe. If you like or are even mildly interested in racing games the single player story is well written while being self-aware and has an interesting payoff. The cut scenes are pretty well acted and really give a good sense of pacing and direction to the plot. If you’re a Forza or Gran Tourismo lover or otherwise appreciate a realistic approach to driving you’ll probably want to give it a pass.

No tag for this post.