3 ms·

As long as they can mine Bitcoin there's no need for micro transactions. Just make sure that there is no save button and warn the user that closing the mail wil

As long as they can mine Bitcoin there's no need for micro transactions. Just make sure that there is no save button and warn the user that closing the mail will lose their game state. A more serious use case might be the architect sending models of the new building or the doctor sending MRIs. While those cases have practical issues like the recepient not being able to respond to it easily (move that wall!) and privacy, they also have interesting benefits like no need to login to some cloud and retention period controlled by the recepient. Sending as attachment of course works, but needs container formats to collect assets together and sandboxing in browsers for local files. As well as this being a media break, where I have to switch to a different tool to look at it then where the context is.

yyyk 7y ago
Your suggestion is pure genius. We'll just call it a roguelike and that would explain the 'no save button'. I'll be sure to recommend you at the next 'dark pattern' meeting! /j As for the latter, if we're going in that direction, we might as well go all the way and implement some COM-like thingy for the web, so users can attach multiple whatevers and work on them in the email. This seems more efficient than turning each email to a unique embedded app which can embed only one type + maybe attachments. Despite all this being possible in Outlook-land, everyone I'm familiar with prefers opening the attachment and working in a separate window, but I guess some people would rather work inline?
- johannes1234321 7y ago
  Maybe they like it since there is no alternative!? If there were a working way things might be different.
  - yyyk 7y ago
    I meant that in Windows there is an alternative to attachments to an extent. COM allows an application to embed in another application. i.e. I can paste some Excel into Outlook and it will keep the table formatting and I can manipulate it in Outlook as if it were Excel. It's not the best implementation though (pretty bad on the other side), and there probably is a much nicer way to do it. You could be right, with a better implementation there would be more that choose to work that way. I still think the risk outweighs the possible limited benefit though.

yyyk 7y ago

Your suggestion is pure genius. We'll just call it a roguelike and that would explain the 'no save button'. I'll be sure to recommend you at the next 'dark pattern' meeting! /j As for the latter, if we're going in that direction, we might as well go all the way and implement some COM-like thingy for the web, so users can attach multiple whatevers and work on them in the email. This seems more efficient than turning each email to a unique embedded app which can embed only one type + maybe attachments. Despite all this being possible in Outlook-land, everyone I'm familiar with prefers opening the attachment and working in a separate window, but I guess some people would rather work inline?

johannes1234321 7y ago
Maybe they like it since there is no alternative!? If there were a working way things might be different.
- yyyk 7y ago
  I meant that in Windows there is an alternative to attachments to an extent. COM allows an application to embed in another application. i.e. I can paste some Excel into Outlook and it will keep the table formatting and I can manipulate it in Outlook as if it were Excel. It's not the best implementation though (pretty bad on the other side), and there probably is a much nicer way to do it. You could be right, with a better implementation there would be more that choose to work that way. I still think the risk outweighs the possible limited benefit though.