Goldfish is superior to MA!

wimplefish · 04-30-2004, 11:20 PM

I prefer GA. Why does it feel like everyone thinks that MA is superior to GA?

feldon34 · 04-30-2004, 11:49 PM

Because it is?

Stating opinion as fact doesn't get either of us anywhere.

Falz · 05-02-2004, 07:48 PM

Respect to Jim really, who started it all. Unfortunately, the MA hasn't come very far despite the fact it's been around for years. It just feels kinda dated now. It's still a great piece of work but just the lack of progress despite the new fish and the goldfish have held it back.

For me the Goldfish aquarium is superior in many ways:

Better fish models.
Much better swimming behaviour (back, forth, in, out, behind and in front of plants).
More interesting tank (more than just a static bitmap and static bubble column!)
But the thing that makes it more realistic to me is that the fish are much closer to normal size on a monitor. With the MA, it's spoiled by the fact those fish which are normally huge are tiny on your monitor. Therefore you know they are not real before you've even looked at it.

Of coure GA uses much more CPU and requires a more powerful video card to get a full framerate with all fish and features enabled, so there's a cost to all that eye candy. But if you have the system it's lovely :-)

wimplefish · 05-02-2004, 10:26 PM

I do have the system, and it cost me a lot, but it's definitely worth it, seeing those beautiful fish in the fps they deserve!

Falz, I agree with you. I hate bitmaps. The thing that annoys me most in MA is the static tank background and bubbles. Re-sizing of the fish is very annoying too.

Marsh Marigold · 05-03-2004, 07:14 AM

Hey - I like GA too - a LOT - but superior to MA? Not.

Different. Great fish. Great movement. Cool swaying water plants. BUT - the graphic quality of MA is superior to GA IMHO.

They are both outstanding programs and I eagerly await the future enhancements - to each - that are sure to come!

Jav400 · 05-03-2004, 07:22 AM

Well said MM.

cjmaddy · 05-03-2004, 10:52 AM

..... Unfortunately, the MA hasn't come very far despite the fact it's been around for years. It just feels kinda dated now.

WOW!!!!! ..... Where does one start to challenge a statement like that!
If Jim has a fault, - then it's his perfectionism, and therefore the time he takes to achieve his goal. - When I first got his aquarium, back in the autumn of 2001, it was already near perfection. - So how do you improve on that?

I think we will find that the answer to that one will be the scrolling 3D background. - But that won't 'update' it, because it isn't 'dated'. - (Unless you call the Mona Lisa, 'dated'! ) - It will be the next stage in it's development.

The Goldfish aquarium was introduced to most of us at a much earlier stage in it's development, and that has contributed to it's problems, - IMHO!

Don't get me wrong, the fish in the Goldfish aquarium are great! - and the gravel is fine. - But those fuzzy faded plants??? (Some look virtually dead to me!) - And that 'rock' !

To compare those plants and that lump of fibre glass,

- with Jim's coral, - is just not on! - IMO!

I too look forward to the time when the MA fish will move around the tank more. - But I find the way the Goldfish currently hog the sides of the tank to be very irritating.

As MM says, they are 'different', ..... but the Goldfish aquarium needs much more work on it. - IMO! ..... Rant over!

edaniels · 05-03-2004, 11:34 AM

MM took the words right out of my mouth: "...The graphic quality of MA is superior to GA." It's true, dang it. Every time I look at that thing it makes me crazy; I see yet another thing that mine is missing (artistically, not botanically).

I learn more about what I'm doing wrong by looking at what he did right than I do by looking at what I did wrong. If that makes any sense.

CJM, that "rock" (at first) was an attempt to celebrate the "cheesy" decorations we've all had in our fish tanks... it wasn't meant to look real. But the more I looked at the tank, the more I wanted to fix things about it. So now it's kind of a hybrid of ideas, none of them good. So I agree. It's got to go.

Oh, and I agree also about Ginger's tail. I was trying for something there that I didn't quite succeed at. I'll have to make another pass at her in a future version.

I expect to be sort of playing a game of technical (and animational) leapfrog with Jim for a while... but I don't ever expect to be able to leap over him artistically.

Thanks again for all your comments.... I really do appreciate even the critiques.

--Eric

Jim Sachs · 05-04-2004, 12:36 AM

My pal Eric is being too modest. He's done a fantastic job on the Goldfish tank, with incredible animation of the fish. Someday maybe he'll tell you a little about his background, when he leaves the witness protection program

Marsh Marigold · 05-04-2004, 06:05 AM

Yeah! Eric, your goldfish have PERSONALITY. Even the way they hang around the edges of the tank - so very much like real ones do.

signed,

A BIG FAN

JimO'Connor · 05-04-2004, 06:49 PM

I think that MA, though more limited in its scope than GA, has a finer finish in its execution. In my opinion MA holds up very well despite several years on the market, and I daresay I've spent as many hours looking at it as anybody except Mr. Sachs himself.

GA has a more difficult problem to solve by being more general and do a lot more. However, I think Eric will get there, and where it is now is pretty impressive.

05-04-2004, 07:04 PM

Personally, I think comparing MA to GA is like comparing apples to oranges. Hmm, they are both fruit, they are both spherical, they both grow on trees, they can be made into juice...lots of things in common but they have very different appeal (or they have a very different peel

).
I love MA, and it was that affection that compelled my to purchase GA (which I now also love). I look forward to Jim and Eric as they continue to perfect these two outstanding screensavers (there are no others that even come close, IMO).

Falz · 05-05-2004, 01:50 AM

When I say it's dated I mean that it looks now almost exactly the same as when I bought it in 2000. Sure there are some new fish and they have been fine tuned, but you can't expect that "wow" or "oooh, ahhh" factor to last 4 years, especially when games and everything else has made huge advances.

The 3D background, better fish behaviour (rather than just swimming left, turning, swimming right, turning) and hopefully the ability to make the fish larger (by "zooming" in one area of the tank) would all rejuvenate the project in my opinion.

Digital Lungfish · 05-14-2004, 04:59 PM

Each product has it's own strengths and weaknesses and since both are still evolving they'll continue to change and improve. IMO, I don't consider GA and MA to be competing products. Sure, both are aquarium screensavers, but one is freshwater, the other is marine. If I'm going to make direct comparisons with MA and other products, then Sim-Aquarium and AquaReal would be first on the list.

But even so, to me each product has it's own appeal so I appreciate each one for it's differences. I've been with MA since the beginning and it's still my number 1 marine aquarium screensaver, but I also really enjoy GA for what it has to offer me.

Tiny Turtle · 05-15-2004, 05:25 AM

Um, they're both screensavers so I would say they are competing products. One on the screen at the time, eh?

I'm in favour of MA though

/Tiny Tang

patscarr · 05-15-2004, 06:19 AM

MA gets my vote too!

edaniels · 05-15-2004, 10:12 AM

Mine too!

Tiny Turtle · 05-15-2004, 11:35 AM

Oh, that one was cold, Eric!

Digital Lungfish · 05-15-2004, 02:01 PM

Oh sure, gang up on me now why don't ya?

05-15-2004, 10:52 PM

I wasn't quite sure where to post this, except that this thread seems to be watched regularly. I had the strangest thing happen to GA today. I had it on while reading a book, and looked up to see that the monitor screen was black. I first thought that I had turned off the monitor, but noticed the green "on" light was steady. I wiggled the mouse and the screen went back to my desktop pic. So, I clicked on the GA icon on my desktop...and got the black screen again. I went into Start>Programs>LifeGlobe>Goldfish Aquarium and clicked on that. Again, black screen. I right clicked on my desktop and clicked the screensaver tab and did a preview of GA. Again, blank screen. Same outcome from right clicking on the desktop icon, finding target, and clicking on the icon there. Then I had the bright idea of hitting the space bar while the screen was black. Voila, the GA setting screen came up. Somehow, foreground and background lights were both all the way off. I know I didn't do this, so does anyone have any idea how this would have happened when less than an hour earlier GA was running fine with the settings I'd chosen for it?

04-30-2004, 11:20 PM	#1
wimplefish Registered Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 20	Goldfish is superior to MA! I prefer GA. Why does it feel like everyone thinks that MA is superior to GA? "Who hears the fish when they cry?" FISHBOWLS ARE EVIL!

04-30-2004, 11:49 PM	#2
feldon34 Forum Administrator Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Rock Hill, SC Posts: 10,939	Because it is? Stating opinion as fact doesn't get either of us anywhere. "Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations." - George Orwell "If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal." - Emma Goldman

05-02-2004, 10:26 PM	#4
wimplefish Registered Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 20	I do have the system, and it cost me a lot, but it's definitely worth it, seeing those beautiful fish in the fps they deserve! Falz, I agree with you. I hate bitmaps. The thing that annoys me most in MA is the static tank background and bubbles. Re-sizing of the fish is very annoying too. "Who hears the fish when they cry?" FISHBOWLS ARE EVIL!

05-03-2004, 07:14 AM	#5
Marsh Marigold Still Folding Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Plymouth, Michigan Posts: 190	Hey - I like GA too - a LOT - but superior to MA? Not. Different. Great fish. Great movement. Cool swaying water plants. BUT - the graphic quality of MA is superior to GA IMHO. They are both outstanding programs and I eagerly await the future enhancements - to each - that are sure to come! * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

05-03-2004, 07:22 AM	#6
Jav400 Administrator Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Tennessee Posts: 9,725	Well said MM. Michael Administrator of Inside:SereneScreen Aquarium Forum, Chatroom, Fan Site & *Gallery* DVD Collection

05-02-2004, 07:48 PM	#3
Falz Registered Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 118	Respect to Jim really, who started it all. Unfortunately, the MA hasn't come very far despite the fact it's been around for years. It just feels kinda dated now. It's still a great piece of work but just the lack of progress despite the new fish and the goldfish have held it back. For me the Goldfish aquarium is superior in many ways: Better fish models. Much better swimming behaviour (back, forth, in, out, behind and in front of plants). More interesting tank (more than just a static bitmap and static bubble column!) But the thing that makes it more realistic to me is that the fish are much closer to normal size on a monitor. With the MA, it's spoiled by the fact those fish which are normally huge are tiny on your monitor. Therefore you know they are not real before you've even looked at it. Of coure GA uses much more CPU and requires a more powerful video card to get a full framerate with all fish and features enabled, so there's a cost to all that eye candy. But if you have the system it's lovely :-)

05-03-2004, 10:52 AM	#7
cjmaddy Registered Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Lancashire, UK Posts: 7,854	..... Unfortunately, the MA hasn't come very far despite the fact it's been around for years. It just feels kinda dated now. WOW!!!!! ..... Where does one start to challenge a statement like that! If Jim has a fault, - then it's his perfectionism, and therefore the time he takes to achieve his goal. - When I first got his aquarium, back in the autumn of 2001, it was already near perfection. - So how do you improve on that? I think we will find that the answer to that one will be the scrolling 3D background. - But that won't 'update' it, because it isn't 'dated'. - (Unless you call the Mona Lisa, 'dated'! ) - It will be the next stage in it's development. The Goldfish aquarium was introduced to most of us at a much earlier stage in it's development, and that has contributed to it's problems, - IMHO! Don't get me wrong, the fish in the Goldfish aquarium are great! - and the gravel is fine. - But those fuzzy faded plants??? (Some look virtually dead to me!) - And that 'rock' ! To compare those plants and that lump of fibre glass, - with Jim's coral, - is just not on! - IMO! I too look forward to the time when the MA fish will move around the tank more. - But I find the way the Goldfish currently hog the sides of the tank to be very irritating. As MM says, they are 'different', ..... but the Goldfish aquarium needs *much* more work on it. - IMO! ..... Rant over!

05-03-2004, 11:34 AM	#8
edaniels Goldfish Aquarium Developer Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Glendale, California Posts: 82	MM took the words right out of my mouth: "...The graphic quality of MA is superior to GA." It's true, dang it. Every time I look at that thing it makes me crazy; I see yet another thing that mine is missing (artistically, not botanically). I learn more about what I'm doing wrong by looking at what he did right than I do by looking at what I did wrong. If that makes any sense. CJM, that "rock" (at first) was an attempt to celebrate the "cheesy" decorations we've all had in our fish tanks... it wasn't meant to look real. But the more I looked at the tank, the more I wanted to fix things about it. So now it's kind of a hybrid of ideas, none of them good. So I agree. It's got to go. Oh, and I agree also about Ginger's tail. I was trying for something there that I didn't quite succeed at. I'll have to make another pass at her in a future version. I expect to be sort of playing a game of technical (and animational) leapfrog with Jim for a while... but I don't ever expect to be able to leap over him artistically. Thanks again for all your comments.... I really do appreciate even the critiques. --Eric ---------------------------------- E R I C D A N I E L S, a n i m a t o r Goldfish Aquarium Screensaver ----------------------------------

05-04-2004, 12:36 AM	#9
Jim Sachs Developer Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Southern Oregon Posts: 9,791	My pal Eric is being too modest. He's done a fantastic job on the Goldfish tank, with incredible animation of the fish. Someday maybe he'll tell you a little about his background, when he leaves the witness protection program Jim Sachs Creator of SereneScreen Aquarium

05-04-2004, 06:05 AM	#10
Marsh Marigold Still Folding Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Plymouth, Michigan Posts: 190	Yeah! Eric, your goldfish have PERSONALITY. Even the way they hang around the edges of the tank - so very much like real ones do. signed, A BIG FAN * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

05-04-2004, 06:49 PM	#11
JimO'Connor Mac Development Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Kenai, Alaska Posts: 678	I think that MA, though more limited in its scope than GA, has a finer finish in its execution. In my opinion MA holds up very well despite several years on the market, and I daresay I've spent as many hours looking at it as anybody except Mr. Sachs himself. GA has a more difficult problem to solve by being more general and do a lot more. However, I think Eric will get there, and where it is now is pretty impressive. Jim O'Connor Order N Development Last edited by JimO'Connor; 05-04-2004 at 09:07 PM.

05-04-2004, 07:04 PM	#12
klyntun Guest Posts: n/a	Personally, I think comparing MA to GA is like comparing apples to oranges. Hmm, they are both fruit, they are both spherical, they both grow on trees, they can be made into juice...lots of things in common but they have very different appeal (or they have a very different peel ). I love MA, and it was that affection that compelled my to purchase GA (which I now also love). I look forward to Jim and Eric as they continue to perfect these two outstanding screensavers (there are no others that even come close, IMO).

05-05-2004, 01:50 AM	#13
Falz Registered Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 118	When I say it's dated I mean that it looks now almost exactly the same as when I bought it in 2000. Sure there are some new fish and they have been fine tuned, but you can't expect that "wow" or "oooh, ahhh" factor to last 4 years, especially when games and everything else has made huge advances. The 3D background, better fish behaviour (rather than just swimming left, turning, swimming right, turning) and hopefully the ability to make the fish larger (by "zooming" in one area of the tank) would all rejuvenate the project in my opinion.

05-14-2004, 04:59 PM	#14
Digital Lungfish Obey the toad! Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Diego, California Posts: 2,557	Each product has it's own strengths and weaknesses and since both are still evolving they'll continue to change and improve. IMO, I don't consider GA and MA to be competing products. Sure, both are aquarium screensavers, but one is freshwater, the other is marine. If I'm going to make direct comparisons with MA and other products, then Sim-Aquarium and AquaReal would be first on the list. But even so, to me each product has it's own appeal so I appreciate each one for it's differences. I've been with MA since the beginning and it's still my number 1 marine aquarium screensaver, but I also really enjoy GA for what it has to offer me. Steve www.tron-sector.com - www.badcartridge.com - www.classicgaming.com - www.dinofish.com Today is the tomorrow you were worried about yesterday...

05-15-2004, 05:25 AM	#15
Tiny Turtle is pleased Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Posts: 7,365	Um, they're both screensavers so I would say they are competing products. One on the screen at the time, eh? I'm in favour of MA though /Tiny Tang Thanks to Morgan, Tiny Snapshots is up and running again with "Tiny Järvafält" as the latest addition – Go have a look and tell me what you think. "We knew the world would not be the same. A few people laughed, a few people cried, most people were silent. I remembered the line from the Hindu scripture, the Bhagavad-Gita. Vishnu is trying to persuade the Prince that he should do his duty and to impress him takes on his multi-armed form and says, 'Now, I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.' I suppose we all thought that, one way or another." /Robert Oppenheimer on witnessing the first thermonuclear detonation in history.

05-15-2004, 06:19 AM	#16
patscarr Pet Shark Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Back in Buffalo Posts: 5,455	MA gets my vote too! Patrick

05-15-2004, 10:12 AM	#17
edaniels Goldfish Aquarium Developer Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Glendale, California Posts: 82	Mine too! ---------------------------------- E R I C D A N I E L S, a n i m a t o r Goldfish Aquarium Screensaver ----------------------------------

05-15-2004, 11:35 AM	#18
Tiny Turtle is pleased Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Posts: 7,365	Oh, that one was cold, Eric! Thanks to Morgan, Tiny Snapshots is up and running again with "Tiny Järvafält" as the latest addition – Go have a look and tell me what you think. "We knew the world would not be the same. A few people laughed, a few people cried, most people were silent. I remembered the line from the Hindu scripture, the Bhagavad-Gita. Vishnu is trying to persuade the Prince that he should do his duty and to impress him takes on his multi-armed form and says, 'Now, I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.' I suppose we all thought that, one way or another." /Robert Oppenheimer on witnessing the first thermonuclear detonation in history.

05-15-2004, 02:01 PM	#19
Digital Lungfish Obey the toad! Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Diego, California Posts: 2,557	Oh sure, gang up on me now why don't ya? Steve www.tron-sector.com - www.badcartridge.com - www.classicgaming.com - www.dinofish.com Today is the tomorrow you were worried about yesterday...

05-15-2004, 10:52 PM	#20
klyntun Guest Posts: n/a	I wasn't quite sure where to post this, except that this thread seems to be watched regularly. I had the strangest thing happen to GA today. I had it on while reading a book, and looked up to see that the monitor screen was black. I first thought that I had turned off the monitor, but noticed the green "on" light was steady. I wiggled the mouse and the screen went back to my desktop pic. So, I clicked on the GA icon on my desktop...and got the black screen again. I went into Start>Programs>LifeGlobe>Goldfish Aquarium and clicked on that. Again, black screen. I right clicked on my desktop and clicked the screensaver tab and did a preview of GA. Again, blank screen. Same outcome from right clicking on the desktop icon, finding target, and clicking on the icon there. Then I had the bright idea of hitting the space bar while the screen was black. Voila, the GA setting screen came up. Somehow, foreground and background lights were both all the way off. I know I didn't do this, so does anyone have any idea how this would have happened when less than an hour earlier GA was running fine with the settings I'd chosen for it?