Just some screenshots of Sins of a Solar Empire.

For years, PC makers have competed with one another largely on price. PCs, it was said, were nothing more than a commodity. But over the past couple of years, consumers have begun to take the overall experience a lot more seriously.

Last year's successful launch of the Apple iPhone made clear to cell phone makers that yes, the experience a "commodity" provides for the customer matters.  PC makers have begun to take note and leading the way is Dell who began pre-loading the new Dell Dock on consumer PCs yesterday.

The new dock, represents a significant improvement for Windows Vista users over the default experience by seamlessly integrating programs and data into the desktop experience. It's a first step to be sure but it's a pretty bold move for one of the world's leading PC producers to take. 

While at a glance, one might try to argue that the dock looks like the MacOS X dock. But that would be akin to people saying that the dock in MacOS X is like the LaunchPad that came with IBM OS/2. What makes the Dell dock special is its ease of customization, low memory foot print, and raw performance. In addition, as pretty as the Dell Dock is, its focus is on usability rather than flash. Short-cuts get separated from folders, the category view is designed for ease of access, and dozens of small touches make it feel as if it were a natural part of Windows.

Developed by Stardock's ObjectDock team, the Dell Dock is not based on the ObjectDock code but rather a brand-new Stardock technology platform designed to deliver exquisite performance while being incredibly efficient with system resources.

"We've spent years learning how to integrate new technology into Microsoft Windows to improve the user experience," said Kirk Windisch, Director of Stardock Software. "Now the focus is how to deliver this improved experience to consumers with enterprise-level robustness with a minimum use of system resources."

The Dell Dock is expected to be launched on over 11 million PCs this year. For PC users, it is a first step to a brave new world where the PC makers themselves are taking the Windows experience more and more seriously. Dell has clearly made giving their consumer customers a better experience a priority.

Digital distribution - the ability to download intellectual property on-line is growing by leaps and bounds. Whether you're an iTunes user, Xbox Live, a user of Steam, Stardock Central, or some other mechanism, these programs or platforms are revolutionizing the way we "get our stuff".

I've been meaning to write a primer for digital distribution as it has certainly become pretty mainstream at this point. But I also want to make sure I have the facts absolutely correct.

So here is my rough draft, please comment with errors of omission and more details.

Note that I'm not including websites. This may be personal prejudice but as a user (whether it be games or software) I don't like having to mess with websites to manage my programs. But feel free to correct me on this if you disagree with this view.

I think the most successful platforms have been the ones that are actual programs. Apple delivers iTunes as a program for instance. I think this has had a significant impact on its success.

Generation 1: Clients for downloading and updating content one has already purchased

• Component Manager (Stardock, December 1999)
• Others?

Generation 2: Clients for purchasing, downloading, and updating digital content. Also adds support for content created by third-parties.

• Stardock Central (Stardock, February 2003)
• iTunes (Apple, April 2003)
• Steam (Valve, September 2003)
• Others?

Generation 2.5: Clients for purchasing, downloading, updating, and supporting virtual communities, cross-developer API

• Steam (Steamworks) (Valve, May 2008)
• Others?

Generation 3: Clients for purchase, downloading, updating digital content and provide an integrated persistent community, multi-source distribution, cross-developer API

• Impulse (Stardock, June 2008)
• Others?

Now, obviously there is no set definition of what constitutes gen 1, gen 2, gen 3, etc. 

In my opinion, Steam is the #1 digital platform today both in terms of the tech and userbase. It is the only Gen 2.5 client I know of.

So what would constitute a Gen 3 client? I am thinking of Impulse as a Gen 3 platform but it doesn't exist in Gen 3 form today.  The BETA of Impulse is Gen 2 - it's not even Gen 2.5.  By June 17th (the official Impulse launch date) it'll have to get a lot of new features to justify being called Gen 3 and realistically, that's only a distinction that can be made by others. I'm only attempting to try to start discussion that might lead to a consensus in this emerging market.

So what do you think?

This week we should be relatively feature complete for The Political Machine 2008. We're pretty happy with how it's turning out.  The first edition we did was a pretty good game, but it wasn't really well polished and its replayability was limited (it was hard coded to 1 map with one set of data).  The 2008 edition is just so much better in every way.  I'll be glad to take Memorial Day off and so will the team. It's been a pretty rough month for all of us.  I'll also be happy to get to spend some time on GalCiv.  There's a number of tweaks and changes I want to put in there such as the research cost algorithms and I still want to release the expanded new manual.

About once a month someone, somewhere, will comment on something I've written saying how "A CEO shouldn't act so unprofessionally in public". Over the years, I've gotten that message hundreds of times along with predictions of demise for my company due to my "public" behavior.

Now, I think the case could be made that we live in a different time. The new age of companies have executives who hang out on forums and mix it up with people. But I'm not going to make that argument because, ultimately, it doesn't matter. I would still do what I do no matter what.

My personal and professional objectives have always been the same: I want to do what I want to do.

That is my top priority. Freedom.

Freedom has consequences. I am certain, beyond a doubt, that my public postings on various topics over the years has alienated some percentage of users who have encountered what I written to the point that they have decided to not purchase products and services from my company. I'm okay with it. It's a price I'm willing to pay to be able to do what I want.

Stardock isn't a public company. It's not investor run. It doesn't even have investors. It's my company. It's a company with around 60 people these days that I can proudly say has not had any voluntary turn over in over 2 years. How many other software or game companies of that size can make that claim? And the reason for that is that my public attitude is my private attitude too -- we're going to do what we want to do. Not just me but the people there too.

Sure, there's a cost to doing what you want to do. I have gotten plenty of ribbing that we're working on a TURN-BASED fantasy strategy game instead of making it an RTS. But I want to make a turn-based fantasy strategy game. It won't sell as well as an RTS would but so what? What good is more money if you can't do what you want to do?

Every day at Stardock is FUN. Even during crunch-time it's FUN. And why is it fun? Because every day we do what we want to do.

But at the end of the day, it doesn't matter whether I'm justified or not because I'm going to do what I want to do. And so far, it's worked out pretty well for both me, my family, my coworkers, and our customers.

About once a month someone, somewhere, will comment on something I've written saying how "A CEO shouldn't act unprofessionally in public".  Over the years, I've gotten that message hundreds of times along with predictions of demise for my company due to my "public" behavior.

A long time ago I took a calculated risk:  Most people would prefer a CEO that is transparent, open and tells the truth even if those truths are sometimes not what they want to hear versus the traditional CEO that seems more like a politician.

Obviously, the company's continued survival tends to imply that the fact that I look at customer / developer relationships as a partnership of equals rather than one of master / slave as some "customers" online seem to think is not too damaging.

And even if it were damaging,  I would still do what I do no matter what. That is my primary motivation for having a company: To do what I want.  I want to make stuff for other people. Those people are my partners. It's a coequal relationship.

My personal and professional objectives have always been the same: I want to do what I want to do.

Freedom has consequences.  I am certain, beyond a doubt, that my public postings on various topics over the years has alienated some percentage of users who have encountered what I written to the point that they have decided to not purchase products and services from my company.  I'm okay with it.  It's a price I'm willing to pay to be able to do what I want.

I don't subscribe to the belief that because someone buys a product that they get a license to behave terribly.  A person exchanges their money for a product or service and that does not imply giving them the right to heap abuse on us or others.

Stardock isn't a public company. It's not investor run. It doesn't even have investors. It's my company. This makes it a bit unusual in the investor-driven technology industry. In the case of Stardock, it means that the company reflects my values. In particular, transparency and collaboration with others. That means I'll discuss things like legal cases or matters that people will predict will be our ruin.

Transparency is a double-edged sword. We won't tell people what they want to hear. We simply tell them what we believe is the truth -- even if that is not necessarily good news for us. Moreover, it also means we work on the things we want to do rather than what is arguably the most profitable.

Sure, there's a cost to doing what you want to do. I have gotten plenty of ribbing that we tend to prefer to make TURN-BASED fantasy strategy games instead of making action games.  But I want to make a turn-based fantasy strategy game. It won't sell as well as an FPS would but so what? What good is more money if you can't do what you want to do?

I'm 36. I'm a pretty happy guy.  I enjoy what I do. I enjoy hanging out with people online (most of the time).  And I get to work every day with people who I really like. Not just professionally but on a personal level.  So I tend to think I'm probably doing something right. But more to the point, I'm way past the point where I have to do anything I don't want to do. So I'm not inclined to put up with crap.

There is always some guy on the net who insists that THIS time, something i've said or done is going to be the end. Not a week goes by that someone doesn't insist that we're doomed because of something I've posted somewhere. 

But you know what?

Every day at Stardock is FUN.  Even during crunch-time it's FUN.  And why is it fun? Because every day we do what we want to do. It's why we are able to attract the best and brightest. Because the best and brightest are often motivated to have the freedom to work on the things they want to do work. To do the things they want to do.

And part of doing what you want to do is being able to show some obnoxious customer the door or making clear that we don't want or need jerks using our stuff.

But at the end of the day, it doesn't matter whether I'm justified or not because I'm going to do what I want to do. And so far, it's worked out pretty well for both me, my family, my coworkers, and our customers. 

It would seem that TGT Soft has quietly died.

See http://www.withinwindows.com/2008/05/13/hellloooo-tgtsoft-anyone-home/ for more details.

  Rafael from WithinWindows visited us this past week and took some great pictures. I'm stealing this from his site.. Rafael is best known as the world's leading expert on uxtheme patching (XP and Vista).  But he's not just a great developer, he's a great guy too.

The wetlands on the Stardock property.

Bee hives

inside the hives

Outside the Stardock building

Rafael inside

Inside my messy office (panoramic view)

The first review of Galactic Civilizations II: Twilight of the Arnor has arrived and it's from GameSpy.  Mega reviewer Allen Rausch has taken an extremely in-depth look at the game and put together a very detailed review.

Here's a quote:

The technology trees alone make it impossible for someone who's sampled Twilight of the Arnor to ever go back to just playing Dark Avatar. Add to that impressive customization tools, new gameplay dynamics, better AI, graphic upgrades, new ship-builder components and completely re-done flavor text and hundreds and hundreds of smaller tweaks, fixes and changes and what you have is an absolute triumph and a new standard for turn-based-strategy games. Bravo, Stardock. This is how expansion packs should be done.

Please check out the review for yourself!