3D Mailbox: How About This - SL-esque?

It's kind of sad when an e-mail proggie has better 3D than a 3D virtual world. Shadows and seemingly better animations (the running fingers through hair anim) stood out for me, although we could probably do without the wobbly 'flexi' belly on the spam avies .

Well, SL does alot more than this program. For one thing, everything is stored server side. Not to mention the ten million more things one can do in SL. Also, graphics are manchine/video card dependent. Most advertisments show the highest possible graphics on a superfast machine, with several thousand dollar video card(s). This paticular program, like WOW and other virtual worlds have all the graphics stored locally. Which allows for better graphics. This isn't possible with SL since you have to be able to see what I've made. Remember, the graphics you see are dependent on your card, so your comparison isnt totally valid

The issue here is that everything is starting to go 3D.. in a few years, the 2D web and current HTTP protocol's we use now will join older protocols like WAIS and Archie (Have you ever heard of those??? )

It's sad when an e-mail program has silly, useless 3D. Shouldn't they be working on making a toaster with a built-in DVR instead?

What is wrong with something looking nice? Eye-candy is often useless, but therefor not unimportant....

Morwen.

Some people have been saying this about MS Office for years .. why do we need Dual Core Pentiums to send a letter?


I wanna be an email!! Can I .. can I .. huh? .. can I? I wanna play on the beach with the others!!!

Because Dual Core Pentiums are sexuyyyyyy

Morwen.

Eye candy is something which although not being particularly functional doesn't get in the way. So some of the new 3D effects in the Vista and OS-X UI's are eye candy. A window frame with a button is really not much different from Win 3.1 - whilst the 3D shading, maximise/minimise animations, roll over button effects etc. may cause a few oohs initially most people forget they are there, and they are unobstrusive enough that most people won't bother about them.

Then there are things which do add functionality, such as some of the newer UI controls e.g. the font dropdown list which displays font names in the actual fonts (which admittedly doesn't work too well for all fonts notably symbol fonts), the breadcrumb was of displaying paths in the Vista explorer bar etc. Of course, inevitably some welcome these whilst others despair!

And then there are novelties - and I'm afraid this mail client comes into that category. It can be quite fun at first, and may be a talking point around the office. However, I suspect that after a few days, most will find the graphics an annoying distration whilst trying to get through the days inbox, and go back to a normal e-mail client!

There may be scope for 3D mail clients but ones where the 3D is more functional. Instead of an avatar representing the e-mail message, how about an avatar representing an e-mail sender perhaps with a mailsack which grows in size depending on the amount of unread e-mail from them? The distance from you could represent the time of the last e-mail. If one starts jumping up and down waving hands it means they have an urgent e-mail for you. Their arrangement may represent conversation threads within the e-mails etc.

Matthew

That they said also about IncrediMail... Gues what I have registered and what I am using for at least 2 years?

Morwen.

I didn't say it looks better . But it does have shadows which SL lacks (despite being listed as a feature on LL's site) and it looks like it has better joints for animations. And 'flexi' bellies probably means 'flexi' breasts which some people seem to want as well .

It just seemed bizarre to have things that SL lacks, present in a simple mail proggie, especially since all three are strictly client-side.

SL is about communication, the web is about information, the two don't overlap for there to be anything like a "3D web".

"Second Life is the future of the 3D Web" (http://www.secondlifeinsider.com/2007/07/14/second-life-is-the-future-of-the-3d-web/) is one of the best articles I've come across on that topic .

The reason I posted this was that I felt it was an interesting indication
of where things are going. Second Life is perhaps at the very crest of
this wave which is going to propel immersive, 3D, internet communication.

I remember reading Neuromancer back in the 80s...about "jacking in",
about going into cyberspace as an avatar...and now it's happening.

This 3D Mailbox is just an example of this...and other than the basic
look of the simulated environment and characters (which is essentially
the same with lots of "games" such as SimLife et al)...there's no
comparison with the wild west of exploration in Second Life's model. =)

- Infrared

Whats wrong with it is when the eye candy hurts functionality.

Look at how much screen real estate is being taken up by nonsense.

But, no, it really isnt. Theres no "3D Internet" here. It's just a regular, boring e-mail program that has a crappy, slow 3D interface.

Its why, despite how cool it looks, interfaces like you see in the movie Jurassic Park have never caught on.

Ermmm..... wasn't that what I said more or less?????

Often I find eye candy just as important as functionalty..... at times even more important.

Morwen.

No, it wasn't. Actually, it's pretty much the opposite of what you said. Eye candy IS useless if it comes at the expense of functionality.

It's two competing schools of thought. Eye candy > Functionality, or Design > Functionality.

Whats the point of something that looks pretty if it doesn't do what its supposed to do half as well as something that doesn't look as pretty?

Buy a painting, hang it on your wall, and get good software.

Thats what i said!

Looking nice is important. But this has nothing to do with looking nice. In fact, it looks pretty crappy. The base note commented on shadows and animations. These are technologies that can be used to make something look nice, but when they're cited by themselves, it's the technology and not the aesthetics driving the comment. It's like saying a lousy movie is good because it's on blu-ray.

Unfortunately, many of the people involved in content creation are technophiles who easily get distracted by such items. Then other people fall into the trap of thinking they're experts, and start evaluating content based on technical details, leading to lots of really bad stuff being sold. But people don't realize it's bad until the technology becomes commonplace, the excitement wears off, and they look again and see nothing worthwhile.

This product is really about experimenting with technology combinations, in the hope of finding something that will be the next breakthrough. And the subset of early adopters who get turned on by any new application of any new technology, regardless of quality, will take the bait. But this product fails to deliver anything of value.

By the way, IncrediMail is even worse. Not because the images aren't good, but because of marketing blurbs like "Email Backgrounds ... Everyone receiving your email will be amazed!" Do we really want people thinking they can amaze others by writing garbage on top of a pretty background?