The post Nvidia توقف تحديثات تعريفات GeForce GTX 10 وتعلن نهاية دعم ويندوز 10 appeared first on عرب هاردوير.

This is the most Nintendo thing ever.

Virtuos, the support team behind big games like The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion Remastered and the upcoming Metal Gear Solid Delta: Snake Eater remake, is the latest in a sad line of developers releasing a successful project and being rewarded with la

Homebrew bills itself as the package manager MacOS never had (conveniently ignoring MacPorts) but they leave the PPC crowd criminally under-served, to say nothing of the 68k gang. Enter [that-ben] …read more

Developer Iron Galaxy is “investigating” an Easter egg fans spotted involving a trash can and a Guitar Hero clone in the recently released Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater 3+4.Read more...

There’s been an undercurrent of opinion, ever since Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 took audiences by surprise earlier this year, that the approach taken by the turn-based fantasy RPG is the cure for everything that ails Final Fantasy. It delivers an old

Imaginez-vous dans une vaste plaine médiévale, casque VR vissé sur la tête, en train de […] Cet article Zoom sur Besiege VR, l’ingénierie en réalité virtuelle a été publié sur REALITE-VIRTUELLE.COM.

## The 2025 Anniversary of UGREEN: Fueling Your Journey with Every Percentage! It's 2025, and while the world moves at lightning speed, UGREEN has been steadfastly chugging along, shoving mediocre competitors aside and positioning itself as a titan in the tech accessory field. A company that dares to claim, "We charge your journey with every percentage!"—and frankly, it had better deliver on...

Cool Finds Archaeologists Stumble Onto Sprawling Ancient Roman Villa During Construction of a Road in France Located near Auxerre, the grand estate once possessed an exorbitant level of wealth, with thermal baths and heated floors Aerial view of the villa, with thermal baths at the bottom right, the garden and fountain in the center, and the agricultural fields expanding to the left Ch. Fouquin / INRAP In ancient times, all roads led to Rome—or so the saying goes. Nowadays, new roads can lead to Roman ruins. During construction on an alternative route to D606, a regional road just under two miles outside of Auxerre, in central France, salvage archaeologists unearthed a sprawling Roman villa complete with a stately garden, a fountain and an elaborate system of underfloor heating known as a hypocaust, according to a statement from the French National Institute for Preventive Archaeological Research (INRAP). While researchers have been aware of the ruins on the outskirts of the Gallo-Roman settlement of Autissiodorum (as Auxerre was once known) since the 19th century, previous excavations have been limited. The most recent dig, in 1966, found a 7,500-square-foot building with ten rooms and amenities that suggested its residents enjoyed great wealth and regional power. The site of Sainte-Nitasse, adjacent to a regional highway Ch. Fouquin / INRAP But until now, the true scale of the villa known as Sainte-Nitasse and its surrounding agricultural estates along the River Yonne was unclear. Archaeologists at INRAP have since discovered a 43,000-square-foot building thought to date to between the first and third centuries C.E. It suggests a previously unimagined level of grandeur. INRAP identifies the site as one of the “grand villas of Roman Gaul,” according to the statement. Grand villas are typified by their vast dimensions and sophisticated architectural style. They typically encompass both agricultural and residential portions, known in Latin as pars rustica and pars urbana, respectively. In the pars urbana, grand villas tend to feature stately construction materials like marble; extensive mosaics and frescoes; and amenities like private baths, fountains and gardens. So far, the excavations at Sainte-Nitasse have revealed all these features and more. The villa’s development is extensive. A 4,800-square-foot garden is enclosed by a fountain to the south and a water basin, or an ornamental pond, to the north. The hypocaust, an ancient system of central heating that circulated hot air beneath the floors of the house, signals a level of luxury atypical for rural estates in Roman Gaul. A section of the villa's hypocaust heating system, which circulated hot air beneath the floor Ch. Fouquin / INRAP “We can imagine it as an ‘aristocratic’ villa, belonging to someone with riches, responsibilities—perhaps municipal, given the proximity to Auxerre—a landowner who had staff on site,” Alexandre Burgevin, the archaeologist in charge of the excavations with INRAP, tells France Info’s Lisa Guyenne. Near the banks of the Yonne, a thermal bath site contains several pools where the landowner and his family bathed. On the other side of the garden, workers toiled in the fields of a massive agricultural estate. Aside from its size and amenities, the villa’s level of preservation also astounded archaeologists. “For a rural site, it’s quite exceptional,” Burgevin tells L’Yonne Républicaine’s Titouan Stücker. “You can walk on floors from the time period, circulate between rooms like the Gallo-Romans did.”Over time, Autissiodorum grew to become a major city along the Via Agrippa, eventually earning the honor of serving as a provincial Roman capital by the fourth century C.E. As Gaul began slipping away from the Roman Empire around the same time, the prominence of the city fluctuated. INRAP archaeologists speculate that the site was repurposed during medieval times, around the 13th century. Burgevin offers several explanations for why the site remained so well preserved in subsequent centuries. The humid conditions along the banks of the river might have prevented excess decay. Since this portion of the River Yonne wasn’t canalized until the 19th century, engineers may have already been aware of the presence of ruins. Or, perhaps the rubble of the villa created “bumpy,” intractable soil that was “not easy to pass over with a tractor,” he tells France Info. While the site will briefly open to the public on June 15 for European Archaeology Days, an annual event held at sites across the continent, excavations will continue until September, at which time construction on the road will resume. Much work is to be done, including filling in large gaps of the site’s chronology between the Roman and medieval eras. “We have well-built walls but few objects,” says Burgevin, per L’Yonne Républicaine. “It will be necessary to continue digging to understand better.” Get the latest stories in your inbox every weekday.

You’ve drawn fifty versions of the same screen — and you still hate every one of them. Begrudgingly, you pick three, show them to your product manager, and hear: “Looks cool, but the idea doesn’t work.” Sound familiar? In this article, I’ll unpack why designers fall into detail work at the wrong moment, examining both process pitfalls and the underlying psychological reasons, as understanding these traps is the first step to overcoming them. I’ll also share tactics I use to climb out of that trap. Reason #1 You’re Afraid To Show Rough Work We designers worship detail. We’re taught that true craft equals razor‑sharp typography, perfect grids, and pixel precision. So the minute a task arrives, we pop open Figma and start polishing long before polish is needed. I’ve skipped the sketch phase more times than I care to admit. I told myself it would be faster, yet I always ended up spending hours producing a tidy mock‑up when a scribbled thumbnail would have sparked a five‑minute chat with my product manager. Rough sketches felt “unprofessional,” so I hid them. The cost? Lost time, wasted energy — and, by the third redo, teammates were quietly wondering if I even understood the brief. The real problem here is the habit: we open Figma and start perfecting the UI before we’ve even solved the problem. So why do we hide these rough sketches? It’s not just a bad habit or plain silly. There are solid psychological reasons behind it. We often just call it perfectionism, but it’s deeper than wanting things neat. Digging into the psychology (like the research by Hewitt and Flett) shows there are a couple of flavors driving this: Socially prescribed perfectionismIt’s that nagging feeling that everyone else expects perfect work from you, which makes showing anything rough feel like walking into the lion’s den. Self-oriented perfectionismWhere you’re the one setting impossibly high standards for yourself, leading to brutal self-criticism if anything looks slightly off. Either way, the result’s the same: showing unfinished work feels wrong, and you miss out on that vital early feedback. Back to the design side, remember that clients rarely see architects’ first pencil sketches, but these sketches still exist; they guide structural choices before the 3D render. Treat your thumbnails the same way — artifacts meant to collapse uncertainty, not portfolio pieces. Once stakeholders see the upside, roughness becomes a badge of speed, not sloppiness. So, the key is to consciously make that shift: Treat early sketches as disposable tools for thinking and actively share them to get feedback faster. Reason #2: You Fix The Symptom, Not The Cause Before tackling any task, we need to understand what business outcome we’re aiming for. Product managers might come to us asking to enlarge the payment button in the shopping cart because users aren’t noticing it. The suggested solution itself isn’t necessarily bad, but before redesigning the button, we should ask, “What data suggests they aren’t noticing it?” Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying you shouldn’t trust your product manager. On the contrary, these questions help ensure you’re on the same page and working with the same data. From my experience, here are several reasons why users might not be clicking that coveted button: Users don’t understand that this step is for payment. They understand it’s about payment but expect order confirmation first. Due to incorrect translation, users don’t understand what the button means. Lack of trust signals (no security icons, unclear seller information). Unexpected additional costs (hidden fees, shipping) that appear at this stage. Technical issues (inactive button, page freezing). Now, imagine you simply did what the manager suggested. Would you have solved the problem? Hardly. Moreover, the responsibility for the unresolved issue would fall on you, as the interface solution lies within the design domain. The product manager actually did their job correctly by identifying a problem: suspiciously, few users are clicking the button. Psychologically, taking on this bigger role isn’t easy. It means overcoming the fear of making mistakes and the discomfort of exploring unclear problems rather than just doing tasks. This shift means seeing ourselves as partners who create value — even if it means fighting a hesitation to question product managers (which might come from a fear of speaking up or a desire to avoid challenging authority) — and understanding that using our product logic expertise proactively is crucial for modern designers. There’s another critical reason why we, designers, need to be a bit like product managers: the rise of AI. I deliberately used a simple example about enlarging a button, but I’m confident that in the near future, AI will easily handle routine design tasks. This worries me, but at the same time, I’m already gladly stepping into the product manager’s territory: understanding product and business metrics, formulating hypotheses, conducting research, and so on. It might sound like I’m taking work away from PMs, but believe me, they undoubtedly have enough on their plates and are usually more than happy to delegate some responsibilities to designers. Reason #3: You’re Solving The Wrong Problem Before solving anything, ask whether the problem even deserves your attention. During a major home‑screen redesign, our goal was to drive more users into paid services. The initial hypothesis — making service buttons bigger and brighter might help returning users — seemed reasonable enough to test. However, even when A/B tests (a method of comparing two versions of a design to determine which performs better) showed minimal impact, we continued to tweak those buttons. Only later did it click: the home screen isn’t the place to sell; visitors open the app to start, not to buy. We removed that promo block, and nothing broke. Contextual entry points deeper into the journey performed brilliantly. Lesson learned: Without the right context, any visual tweak is lipstick on a pig. Why did we get stuck polishing buttons instead of stopping sooner? It’s easy to get tunnel vision. Psychologically, it’s likely the good old sunk cost fallacy kicking in: we’d already invested time in the buttons, so stopping felt like wasting that effort, even though the data wasn’t promising. It’s just easier to keep fiddling with something familiar than to admit we need a new plan. Perhaps the simple question I should have asked myself when results stalled was: “Are we optimizing the right thing or just polishing something that fundamentally doesn’t fit the user’s primary goal here?” That alone might have saved hours. Reason #4: You’re Drowning In Unactionable Feedback We all discuss our work with colleagues. But here’s a crucial point: what kind of question do you pose to kick off that discussion? If your go-to is “What do you think?” well, that question might lead you down a rabbit hole of personal opinions rather than actionable insights. While experienced colleagues will cut through the noise, others, unsure what to evaluate, might comment on anything and everything — fonts, button colors, even when you desperately need to discuss a user flow. What matters here are two things: The question you ask, The context you give. That means clearly stating the problem, what you’ve learned, and how your idea aims to fix it. For instance: “The problem is our payment conversion rate has dropped by X%. I’ve interviewed users and found they abandon payment because they don’t understand how the total amount is calculated. My solution is to show a detailed cost breakdown. Do you think this actually solves the problem for them?” Here, you’ve stated the problem (conversion drop), shared your insight (user confusion), explained your solution (cost breakdown), and asked a direct question. It’s even better if you prepare a list of specific sub-questions. For instance: “Are all items in the cost breakdown clear?” or “Does the placement of this breakdown feel intuitive within the payment flow?” Another good habit is to keep your rough sketches and previous iterations handy. Some of your colleagues’ suggestions might be things you’ve already tried. It’s great if you can discuss them immediately to either revisit those ideas or definitively set them aside. I’m not a psychologist, but experience tells me that, psychologically, the reluctance to be this specific often stems from a fear of our solution being rejected. We tend to internalize feedback: a seemingly innocent comment like, “Have you considered other ways to organize this section?” or “Perhaps explore a different structure for this part?” can instantly morph in our minds into “You completely messed up the structure. You’re a bad designer.” Imposter syndrome, in all its glory. So, to wrap up this point, here are two recommendations: Prepare for every design discussion.A couple of focused questions will yield far more valuable input than a vague “So, what do you think?”. Actively work on separating feedback on your design from your self-worth.If a mistake is pointed out, acknowledge it, learn from it, and you’ll be less likely to repeat it. This is often easier said than done. For me, it took years of working with a psychotherapist. If you struggle with this, I sincerely wish you strength in overcoming it. Reason #5 You’re Just Tired Sometimes, the issue isn’t strategic at all — it’s fatigue. Fussing over icon corners can feel like a cozy bunker when your brain is fried. There’s a name for this: decision fatigue. Basically, your brain’s battery for hard thinking is low, so it hides out in the easy, comfy zone of pixel-pushing. A striking example comes from a New York Times article titled “Do You Suffer From Decision Fatigue?.” It described how judges deciding on release requests were far more likely to grant release early in the day (about 70% of cases) compared to late in the day (less than 10%) simply because their decision-making energy was depleted. Luckily, designers rarely hold someone’s freedom in their hands, but the example dramatically shows how fatigue can impact our judgment and productivity. What helps here: Swap tasks.Trade tickets with another designer; novelty resets your focus. Talk to another designer.If NDA permits, ask peers outside the team for a sanity check. Step away.Even a ten‑minute walk can do more than a double‑shot espresso. By the way, I came up with these ideas while walking around my office. I was lucky to work near a river, and those short walks quickly turned into a helpful habit. And one more trick that helps me snap out of detail mode early: if I catch myself making around 20 little tweaks — changing font weight, color, border radius — I just stop. Over time, it turned into a habit. I have a similar one with Instagram: by the third reel, my brain quietly asks, “Wait, weren’t we working?” Funny how that kind of nudge saves a ton of time. Four Steps I Use to Avoid Drowning In Detail Knowing these potential traps, here’s the practical process I use to stay on track: 1. Define the Core Problem & Business Goal Before anything, dig deep: what’s the actual problem we’re solving, not just the requested task or a surface-level symptom? Ask ‘why’ repeatedly. What user pain or business need are we addressing? Then, state the clear business goal: “What metric am I moving, and do we have data to prove this is the right lever?” If retention is the goal, decide whether push reminders, gamification, or personalised content is the best route. The wrong lever, or tackling a symptom instead of the cause, dooms everything downstream. 2. Choose the Mechanic (Solution Principle) Once the core problem and goal are clear, lock the solution principle or ‘mechanic’ first. Going with a game layer? Decide if it’s leaderboards, streaks, or badges. Write it down. Then move on. No UI yet. This keeps the focus high-level before diving into pixels. 3. Wireframe the Flow & Get Focused Feedback Now open Figma. Map screens, layout, and transitions. Boxes and arrows are enough. Keep the fidelity low so the discussion stays on the flow, not colour. Crucially, when you share these early wires, ask specific questions and provide clear context (as discussed in ‘Reason #4’) to get actionable feedback, not just vague opinions. 4. Polish the Visuals (Mindfully) I only let myself tweak grids, type scales, and shadows after the flow is validated. If progress stalls, or before a major polish effort, I surface the work in a design critique — again using targeted questions and clear context — instead of hiding in version 47. This ensures detailing serves the now-validated solution. Even for something as small as a single button, running these four checkpoints takes about ten minutes and saves hours of decorative dithering. Wrapping Up Next time you feel the pull to vanish into mock‑ups before the problem is nailed down, pause and ask what you might be avoiding. Yes, that can expose an uncomfortable truth. But pausing to ask what you might be avoiding — maybe the fuzzy core problem, or just asking for tough feedback — gives you the power to face the real issue head-on. It keeps the project focused on solving the right problem, not just perfecting a flawed solution. Attention to detail is a superpower when used at the right moment. Obsessing over pixels too soon, though, is a bad habit and a warning light telling us the process needs a rethink.