New Media Reflections

Well, it seems the battle over Windows Vista is never-ending. I saw an article in CNET recently that outlined a little “trick” Microsoft played on some testers. Apparently they gathered up some Vista-haters sat them in a room and presented them with a “new” operating system named Mojave. Apparently 90 percent of the viewers were impressed with the “new” product. As it turns out, this was simply Vista that they were presented with. Now Microsoft plans to use this in their marketing.

Now, I have a problem with this. I have been using Vista, unwillingly (It came loaded on my new laptop) for about a year now. I hate it now as I did then. I very much value my other machine that still has the outstanding XP operating system. The thing is, Vista is a very good show. I’m not surprised that Microsoft’s test subjects liked what they saw. It’s nice to look at and does some neat tricks. But if you have less than 2gigs of RAM, Vista is the new Windows Me. I remember trying to move an icon from one side of the screen to the other. Well, you can go get coffee while you wait for the process to complete. It could take several minutes. First Vista has to ask you if you want to do this, you have to give permission, then it has to think about moving it, then it moves it, then it lets you know you moved it. Gee, I don’t know, I kinda liked XP where the icon just moved to the other side instantly. I did eventually upgrade my RAM just so I could use my machine. I don’t use most of the flashy features built in to Vista. I had seen suggestions by critics that Vista should have been offered as a security package, maybe service pack 3, to Windows XP. I fully agree with that.

I understand Microsoft is working on the next operating system, which is somewhat indicative that they know they have a real problem here. But I wish they would just admit it, pull Vista, stick with XP until they have a useful solid product that doesn’t require us all to purchase high-end machines to use. XP was great Microsoft, why mess with it?

Tags: Uncategorized by markcotrupe
No Comments »

Where the Hell is Matt? (2008)

I read an article in the New York Times online about this guy Matt who was becoming famous on the internet for his video that showed him dancing in various places around the world. Once I viewed it, I found myself very moved by it. I loved it. So I’m sharing it here. Yes, at first it seems a little ridiculous. But as I watched people from many countries and cultures dancing with Matt, I saw this more as a venue that highlighted the notion that even though we are dispersed throughout the world, we truly are all just a part of humanity. Matt becomes the icon of our connectedness. It also exemplifies the global village concept, reminding us of our brethren who have similar wants and desires as us. It’s more about how we are alike than how we differ.
Modern media as a social connection tool becomes so clear from this video.
A big thank-you to Matt!

Tags: Uncategorized by markcotrupe
No Comments »

I was recently a graduate intern for the Network Culture Project at USC’s Annenberg School for Communication. The part of the project I was involved with was studying Advocacy in Virtual Worlds. Each intern followed and documented a group that had submitted a proposal to create an advocacy project and through votes from in-world residents, obtain funding and space in Second Life to build-out their project.

I have been using Second Life for almost two years now. I have found that while it is similar, and yes, there is a person behind every avatar, things that work for marketing in real life don’t necessarily work in SL. In fact, most large corporations who have gone in-world to advertise their projects, find that they end up with empty property that people don’t visit. Universities who have gone in to conduct classes have had difficulty making it work, and many have already withdrawn from SL. The one thing these groups seem to have missed is that anything in SL really needs to be interactive to engage people. The most popular draws in-world are music events and offering free items. But these bring traffic, not necessarily engagement. There are a couple of shining examples of interactive and engaging places in SL. They are the Particle Laboratory and the Ivory Tower of Prim. Both instruct people how to build and use things in Second Life. While they are attracting an interested audience to begin with, it’s the manner in which they present things that makes them work so well. They both include visually interesting presentation designs. The avatar basically works its way through stations. They first read about skill, and then try it out in a demo, then move on to the next one, sometimes having to move to a different part of the building. What they are doing then is reading, practicing and moving through space. This is engaging in a virtual world, and an example of how things should be presented.

There are many advocacy groups functioning in SL, some very large and pervasive, and some quite small and personal. Now, similar to the building tutorial sites, most of these groups are attracting a concerned, like-minded audience, which guarantees a certain visibility and attendance. Most of them have visuals, reading material, and move you through the space as in an exhibit. Some hold concerts and other entertainment events. Some hold Challenges and team competitions. These all tend to engage people.

Something that is inherent in virtual worlds is that when groups are assembled, they tend to consist of a dispersed membership. This makes it more difficult to meet, plan and conduct business. While the idea of a dispersed membership is one of the beautiful things in a virtual world, where people from all over the world can come together, this also creates great difficulty when trying to arrange synchronous events and meetings. Sometimes the time zone difference is too great for this to be done effectively. This would be similar to real life advocacy groups having national or global chapters, but no local membership. That probably wouldn’t work. Surprisingly, other than the synchronicity issue, this tends to work quite well in-world. Since it is a persistent environment, if a group is say, building a headquarters, people from all over the world can do their part when it is a good time for them. All of the workers don’t need to meet simultaneously to construct this. So with most of the advocacy efforts, personal location doesn’t much matter. People can become involved in some way with their advocacy group of choice.

Another possibility with in-world groups is to have real world communication. Not only does SL Instant Messaging have the ability to go to real-life email, but people can actually email, or use other communication routes such as Skype, for voice contact.

Otherwise, I think whether a group in-world is effective or not is just a function of how people work together in any world.

Tags: Uncategorized by markcotrupe
No Comments »