Hello, I am Jesse Thompson, proud to join your prestigious group :) I haven't solved the cube yet but I'm working on it.
I promised myself I wouldn't post anything until I had something to contribute, but then I realized I had this small thing I could offer: I made a spiffy rgb file *yay* ;)
0 0 1
1 0 0
0 .8 1
1 1 1
1 1 0
1 0 1
.9 .6 0
0 .8 0
.3 .3 .3
It should provide a little better contrast than the stock rgb file, and with one exception (purple-cyan) it is a plus-yellow tesseract, like the origional european rubick's cubes. :)
Not to impune the makers of the origional rgb file, but I just couldn't deal with 3 shades or purple and no red anywhere in sight ;)
Wish me luck on the solving goodness! :)
- - Jesse
welcome jeff!
it was by intent that the default colors are very unlike the original 3D
puzzle. that's because we once got a cease-and-desist letter from the IP
lawyers of the patent owner demanding that we take down the site. i
managed to talk them into leaving us alone by changing the name, text,
and other stuff. in their documentation they'd sent me, several pages
related to the particular colors they'd used, so i immediately changed
the colors to be as clearly different from their puzzle as possible but
still creating enough contrast to still be useful. you can very likely
come up with a better set of colors with these restrictions than i did,
and if so, i'll happily use them. note that an "optimal" scheme would
also take into account differences in monitors as well as the more
common forms of color blindness and also work to avoid problems for that
segment of potential users.
another thing that suddenly occurred to me is that it'd be great if you
upload your color file to the "files" area of the group which may make
it easier for members to use.
thanks jeff,
-melinda
ibutton77 wrote:
> Hello, I am Jesse Thompson, proud to join your prestigious group :) I
> haven't solved the cube yet but I'm working on it.
> I promised myself I wouldn't post anything until I had something to
> contribute, but then I realized I had this small thing I could offer:
> I made a spiffy rgb file *yay* ;)
> 0 0 1
> 1 0 0
> 0 .8 1
> 1 1 1
> 1 1 0
> 1 0 1
> .9 .6 0
> 0 .8 0
>
> .3 .3 .3
>
> It should provide a little better contrast than the stock rgb file,
> and with one exception (purple-cyan) it is a plus-yellow tesseract,
> like the origional european rubick's cubes. :)
> Not to impune the makers of the origional rgb file, but I just
> couldn't deal with 3 shades or purple and no red anywhere in sight ;)
>
> Wish me luck on the solving goodness! :)
>
> - - Jesse
Okie I've thrown it in the files section, along with a short disclaimer :)
What type of criteria did the patent folks lay down, if any? I'll take
another poke at the thing and see what happy mediums can be found. :)
- - Jesse
--- In 4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com, Melinda Green
> welcome jeff!
>
> it was by intent that the default colors are very unlike the
original 3D
> puzzle. that's because we once got a cease-and-desist letter from
the IP
> lawyers of the patent owner demanding that we take down the site. i
> managed to talk them into leaving us alone by changing the name, text,
> and other stuff. in their documentation they'd sent me, several pages
> related to the particular colors they'd used, so i immediately changed
> the colors to be as clearly different from their puzzle as possible but
> still creating enough contrast to still be useful. you can very likely
> come up with a better set of colors with these restrictions than i did,
> and if so, i'll happily use them. note that an "optimal" scheme would
> also take into account differences in monitors as well as the more
> common forms of color blindness and also work to avoid problems for
that
> segment of potential users.
>
> another thing that suddenly occurred to me is that it'd be great if you
> upload your color file to the "files" area of the group which may make
> it easier for members to use.
>
> thanks jeff,
> -melinda
>
> ibutton77 wrote:
>
> > Hello, I am Jesse Thompson, proud to join your prestigious group
:) I
> > haven't solved the cube yet but I'm working on it.
> > I promised myself I wouldn't post anything until I had something to
> > contribute, but then I realized I had this small thing I could offer:
> > I made a spiffy rgb file *yay* ;)
> > 0 0 1
> > 1 0 0
> > 0 .8 1
> > 1 1 1
> > 1 1 0
> > 1 0 1
> > .9 .6 0
> > 0 .8 0
> >
> > .3 .3 .3
> >
> > It should provide a little better contrast than the stock rgb file,
> > and with one exception (purple-cyan) it is a plus-yellow tesseract,
> > like the origional european rubick's cubes. :)
> > Not to impune the makers of the origional rgb file, but I just
> > couldn't deal with 3 shades or purple and no red anywhere in sight ;)
> >
> > Wish me luck on the solving goodness! :)
> >
> > - - Jesse
in their letter they said they didn't like:
- our use of the name "rubik" in our puzzle name,
- our text saying "use it for anything you like", "send to friends",
"post to the net", etc.
- our colors.
i'd said i had no intention of removing the software from publication
but i'd happily change the name and colors, and i'd asked them if they
felt better with "MagicCube4D". they replied that that was much better,
and that was the last we heard from them.
note that they weren't just being petty but simply defending their
patent. if you don't send out such letters you can be seen as not
defending your patent and thereby abandoning it. i'd have done the same
in their position.
-melinda
ibutton77 wrote:
> Okie I've thrown it in the files section, along with a short disclaimer :)
>
> What type of criteria did the patent folks lay down, if any? I'll take
> another poke at the thing and see what happy mediums can be found. :)
On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 05:48:26PM -0800, Melinda Green wrote:
> in their letter they said they didn't like:
> - our use of the name "rubik" in our puzzle name,
> - our text saying "use it for anything you like", "send to friends",
> "post to the net", etc.
> - our colors.
> i'd said i had no intention of removing the software from publication
> but i'd happily change the name and colors, and i'd asked them if they
> felt better with "MagicCube4D". they replied that that was much better,
> and that was the last we heard from them.
>
> note that they weren't just being petty but simply defending their
> patent. if you don't send out such letters you can be seen as not
> defending your patent and thereby abandoning it. i'd have done the same
> in their position.
No way, you would have offered to team up and market Rubik4D.
Don
>
> -melinda
>
> ibutton77 wrote:
>
> > Okie I've thrown it in the files section, along with a short disclaimer :)
> >
> > What type of criteria did the patent folks lay down, if any? I'll take
> > another poke at the thing and see what happy mediums can be found. :)
>
--
Don Hatch
hatch@plunk.org
http://www.plunk.org/~hatch/
Don Hatch wrote:
> [...]
> > note that they weren't just being petty but simply defending their
> > patent. if you don't send out such letters you can be seen as not
> > defending your patent and thereby abandoning it. i'd have done the same
> > in their position.
>
> No way, you would have offered to team up and market Rubik4D.
Good point though in reality i would have done both. in fact i did offer
to team up with them and make MC4D available for free from the official
rubik site. in the letter where they ok'ed the new name they also said
they would forward my suggestion but that was the last i'd heard from them.
-melinda