Have you even tried a LED matte screen? I get vivid colors and I don't have to feel like my eyes are going to bug out of my head from a horrible reflection.
An image is not accurate no matter how much you shake your stick when you have reflections super imposed on top of the image. It is a bit like you added a completely unrelated 20% visible layer on top of an image in Photoshop. It's the exact opposite of accuracy.
Now, I recently switched to a Matte screen from Glossy. I see no saturation difference with my present LED screen verses the old glossy. Marketing crap is marketing crap and it has to stop.
I think people are generally thinking the wrong way. They need to make in unprofitable for specific kinds of adverts to be shown. Not block all adverts. This would mean turning off all gif animations and also using Flash block. When the only way that advertisers will be able to show you something is when they don't molest your eyes, things will change.
I can now scroll web pages semi-smoothly on my Atom notebook. Flash movies will usually actually play without the extra cpu load. I also don't have to worry about viruses from rogue Flash objects.
I will still see non-animating advertisements as well as adverts shown inside of flash movies. Seems like a good compromise to me. Avoiding specific websites tells the advertisers *nothing*.
Can someone tell me how many dead kittens that equals? I cannot imagine numbers that big.
On a side note, by any other developer having a game in development for 7 years with no screen shots or anything would be a bad omen. It's usually a sign that things had to be scrapped and started over again with and with that period of time they must have had to redo the artwork/animation 2-3 times to keep up with modern expectations.
But I could be wrong.
Re:Replacement to DOSBox?
on
Wine 1.2 Released
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Honestly, what the hell is the point of Xubuntu?
The words of a man who walks in with a predetermined opinion and never tries the actual product. Speed is a bullet point, but not a reason in itself to switch. Yes, there are a *number* of reasons to at least try out XFCE.
I just switched to XFCE recently on my netbook after being a Gnome user for 3-4 years. There are definitely reasons enough for it to exist and those reasons will amplify when Gnome 3.0 hits.
It is amazing how many gconf options for gnome are broken nowadays. Can't turn off the desktop because nautilus will be forever restarted to the detriment of your CPU. You set sloppy focus and to only raise the windows when you click, then windows will never come forward even when you click them in the gnome panel. You remove the notification area, and that bug means that you have no access at all to some windows when they are minimized. It's a buggy mess.
Then there are the large number of forced dependencies. You use a vanilla install of gnome, and you have Epiphany/Evolution forced on you. Evolution being the more annoying one. You can't remove them either because they are part of the Gnome base dependencies.
There are enough differences to make the existance of XFCE worth it. That is probably why it still has developers.
In my original post I meant installing the MS.Net framework separately. I am pretty sure they are easy to get. I know Wine doesn't have.Net stuff built in yet, but some people seem to like restating the obvious. MS.Net supports many more application than Mono ever would. Wine indirectly gives you all of.net at your fingertips. Not a subset.
Firefox is falling behind on version numbers and it is 100% it's own fault. If this continues, it is not going to be able to compete with Chrome 5.0, Safari 5, Internet Explorer 9, or Opera 10.
Maybe Firefox should name their next version Firefox 1080?
People tend to only use the word censorship on the Internet when they are pissed off at a moderator. I sometimes feel sorry for them when they have to do the work that everybody hates.
This thread is closed as it was turning into a flamewar.. Censorship.
This post was deleted for inappropriate language. Censorship.
This post is off topic and has been moved to a board that is not searchable. Censorship.
People break the forum EULA not to talk about copying DVDs, ROM hacking, and other illegals. Censorship.
Slashdot has -1 disagree that people use to hide comments that they can't rate as wrong,flamebait, troll or be bothered to reply to. Censorship.
I could very well see people writing unhelpful complaints about the iPhone who are not actually seeking help at all.
I could see people trolling because they are so happy with their Blackberry that lets them to X, Y and Z while the iPhone locks them into the evil Apple empire where everybody are only drones. They don't want an over priced bumper or any of the other hippy shit. It's more fun just talking shit and getting the fanboiz riled.
Honestly, I could see that as being the case for a number of the posts. As in real life, you can complain about things (and you have the right to), but at a certain point a store will kick you out for disturbing everybody else. Censorship.
Wii Motion Plus supports this time please. I know no one thinks I have any balls for using a Wii as my main gaming platform, but it is still better than my Linux netbook.:-p
Speaking of which, it would be just lovely if you could import SVGs into Flash. You would think it would be something obvious for the developers to add. Maybe they really aren't the same thing? *Cue Twighlight Zone music*
The broader issue is, as pointed out, how do you engage with the broader public?
Seriously? Did you seriously ask this? The place where Pepsi would get their message out the easiest and to the most people who count would be through television commercials. Maybe at the end of the commercial tell people to check out the "facts" at pepsi-health.com.
This is straight forward. People know what it is. It also doesn't feel as sneaky as some other methods where they try to pass off the tests as having been done by someone else. I'm sure you remember the commercials talking about eggs having less cholesterol than they had thought? Or the ones talking about some food products being high in fiber or low in fat?
Commercials are the domain for companies to get their message out. This hasn't changed for a long time. Why is everyone so confused about their existence now?
Of course you can't avoid hardware becoming obsolete. What you can avoid, however, are companies that actively make your old hardware obsolete.
Speaking of which, can someone tell me if the newest games for the iPhone run on the old iPhones? Or if some of the App store programs generally have higher hardware requirements?
I also wonder if 2G phones even run in the US anymore. It pissed me off when that became unusable the last time in Japan which I usually use as my life line. Cell phones are useless for what most people use as an excuse to get them for.
I agree that we don't need another "best viewed in" web built up, but you're comparing apples to oranges.
It all comes down to MS having their history which makes people more afraid of them. Not to mention that their rendering engine is closed sourced and not cross-platform. I can't think of a worse place for new technologies to appear from. If IE starts having extensions, people can't even see the source code to see how they did it. They haven't even been working with the W3C on standards since around IE5 from what I can tell.
Awesome! I would compare, but I can't ever find the layer resize button in Photoshop. I really do hate it's layout. Whenever I do use it I have to ask where everything is D:. Yes. I am 100% serious.
Believe what you want. Safari and Firefox have been pulling which direction the CSS level 3 standard was going by creating live examples. Given the background of Webkit on supporting W3C code, the size of webkit share market share as compared to Firefox and Explorer, and the fervor that extensions have been happening, things call for cautious optimism. Not tin foil hats.
Do you remember the opacity css attribute? All modern browsers support -opacity now. Safari went from -khtml-opacity to -webkit-opacity to -opacity. You're playing with fire as long as you do not use the W3C official equivalent. Speaking of which, have you seen all the depricated mozilla css styles lately?
Just like the mozilla equivalents, the Safari equivalents were mostly created for internal usage. Why the hell do people think Apple was seriously pushing html as an alternative to native application development for the iphone? Does no one remember that Mac OS X dashboard widgets are written in html too? Selective memories I guess... Not really any different than the usage of the Mozilla extensions.
I'll say it again, but cautious optimism is called for. You act like a tin foil hat and people will ignore you.
You are linking about future CSS3 tech. Read http://www.jungus.com/b/2010/01/03/what-you-need-to-know-about-behavioral-css. The big issue is if Safari and co don't deprecate their extensions when an official W3C version become available. HTML5 is where we will see this. You do remember that Safari brought us the W3C canvas tag, right?
These Apple css extensions were originally for the iPhone apps that were only supposed to be written in html if I remember. My how things change.
The Webkit guys have not shown me anything that overly makes me thing they are trying to speed us toward a proprietary web yet. They have done mostly the opposite. Fixing their acid test scores and sharing new technologies with the W3C so they can be standardized.
I'm not seeing the problem here when using Firefox on that link.
Extensions like -moz were made for testing and use in addons. The addons are hard wired against specific Firefox version numbers giving the devs flexibility in their implementation of their test css extensions between versions. You use them in webpages without fallbacks, you're just asking to shoot yourself in the foot. These things are likely to change or disappear in the future.
MS never removes their extensions for backward compatibility. If they added a -ms-css extension and some big webpages started to use it, they wouldn't remove it for at least 10 years.
I'm talking about web pages generally degrading gracefully. You don't need to ban people using edge cases. For example, people who set their browser to force larger fonts expect some things to appear differently. What you are basically pushing for is a Javascript to test the font size of the browser and ban those people from the webpage all in the name of "presentation". Might as well ban the Lynx users too. Or people who have images turned off for that matter. Also cell phones. We also can't allow users who don't use stylesheets to view anything either. All these horrible people will not see the web page how it was meant to be seen.
That is what you are advocating whether you realize it or not.
If businesses understood technology, they would be asking for designers to support specific rendering engines. Not browsers which is edging on silly.
The asshats also wouldn't lock out other browsers because there is a chance the untested w3c html may render slighly differently but still be totally useable. Different doesn't mean wrong businessmen. While presentation is important, content is king.
Interestingly enough, the GameCube seems to handle the bounce from walking just fine when tethered to a waist belt. I somehow think the Wii would also handle being toppled better than both the PS3 and the XBox360 thanks to the style drive it uses. I may be wrong though.
Slashdot Mirror
Have you even tried a LED matte screen? I get vivid colors and I don't have to feel like my eyes are going to bug out of my head from a horrible reflection.
An image is not accurate no matter how much you shake your stick when you have reflections super imposed on top of the image. It is a bit like you added a completely unrelated 20% visible layer on top of an image in Photoshop. It's the exact opposite of accuracy.
Now, I recently switched to a Matte screen from Glossy. I see no saturation difference with my present LED screen verses the old glossy. Marketing crap is marketing crap and it has to stop.
I think people are generally thinking the wrong way. They need to make in unprofitable for specific kinds of adverts to be shown. Not block all adverts. This would mean turning off all gif animations and also using Flash block. When the only way that advertisers will be able to show you something is when they don't molest your eyes, things will change.
I can now scroll web pages semi-smoothly on my Atom notebook. Flash movies will usually actually play without the extra cpu load. I also don't have to worry about viruses from rogue Flash objects.
I will still see non-animating advertisements as well as adverts shown inside of flash movies. Seems like a good compromise to me. Avoiding specific websites tells the advertisers *nothing*.
Can someone tell me how many dead kittens that equals? I cannot imagine numbers that big.
On a side note, by any other developer having a game in development for 7 years with no screen shots or anything would be a bad omen. It's usually a sign that things had to be scrapped and started over again with and with that period of time they must have had to redo the artwork/animation 2-3 times to keep up with modern expectations.
But I could be wrong.
Honestly, what the hell is the point of Xubuntu?
The words of a man who walks in with a predetermined opinion and never tries the actual product. Speed is a bullet point, but not a reason in itself to switch. Yes, there are a *number* of reasons to at least try out XFCE.
I just switched to XFCE recently on my netbook after being a Gnome user for 3-4 years. There are definitely reasons enough for it to exist and those reasons will amplify when Gnome 3.0 hits.
It is amazing how many gconf options for gnome are broken nowadays. Can't turn off the desktop because nautilus will be forever restarted to the detriment of your CPU. You set sloppy focus and to only raise the windows when you click, then windows will never come forward even when you click them in the gnome panel. You remove the notification area, and that bug means that you have no access at all to some windows when they are minimized. It's a buggy mess.
Then there are the large number of forced dependencies. You use a vanilla install of gnome, and you have Epiphany/Evolution forced on you. Evolution being the more annoying one. You can't remove them either because they are part of the Gnome base dependencies.
There are enough differences to make the existance of XFCE worth it. That is probably why it still has developers.
In my original post I meant installing the MS .Net framework separately. I am pretty sure they are easy to get. I know Wine doesn't have .Net stuff built in yet, but some people seem to like restating the obvious. MS .Net supports many more application than Mono ever would. Wine indirectly gives you all of .net at your fingertips. Not a subset.
Does Wine have higher compatibility with "mono" apps than mono? By "mono" I mean C#/.net application developed on Windows.
Firefox is falling behind on version numbers and it is 100% it's own fault. If this continues, it is not going to be able to compete with Chrome 5.0, Safari 5, Internet Explorer 9, or Opera 10.
Maybe Firefox should name their next version Firefox 1080?
Argh! Must not cope with the sad article through medication! Must tough it out!
People tend to only use the word censorship on the Internet when they are pissed off at a moderator. I sometimes feel sorry for them when they have to do the work that everybody hates.
This thread is closed as it was turning into a flamewar.. Censorship.
This post was deleted for inappropriate language. Censorship.
This post is off topic and has been moved to a board that is not searchable. Censorship.
People break the forum EULA not to talk about copying DVDs, ROM hacking, and other illegals. Censorship.
Slashdot has -1 disagree that people use to hide comments that they can't rate as wrong,flamebait, troll or be bothered to reply to. Censorship.
I could very well see people writing unhelpful complaints about the iPhone who are not actually seeking help at all.
I could see people trolling because they are so happy with their Blackberry that lets them to X, Y and Z while the iPhone locks them into the evil Apple empire where everybody are only drones. They don't want an over priced bumper or any of the other hippy shit. It's more fun just talking shit and getting the fanboiz riled.
Honestly, I could see that as being the case for a number of the posts. As in real life, you can complain about things (and you have the right to), but at a certain point a store will kick you out for disturbing everybody else. Censorship.
Wii Motion Plus supports this time please. I know no one thinks I have any balls for using a Wii as my main gaming platform, but it is still better than my Linux netbook. :-p
It is quite simple and always error free! Ideal for blogs and flash pages where content is not paramount.
/>
<!doctype html>
<html
Speaking of which, it would be just lovely if you could import SVGs into Flash. You would think it would be something obvious for the developers to add. Maybe they really aren't the same thing? *Cue Twighlight Zone music*
The broader issue is, as pointed out, how do you engage with the broader public?
Seriously? Did you seriously ask this? The place where Pepsi would get their message out the easiest and to the most people who count would be through television commercials. Maybe at the end of the commercial tell people to check out the "facts" at pepsi-health.com.
This is straight forward. People know what it is. It also doesn't feel as sneaky as some other methods where they try to pass off the tests as having been done by someone else. I'm sure you remember the commercials talking about eggs having less cholesterol than they had thought? Or the ones talking about some food products being high in fiber or low in fat?
Commercials are the domain for companies to get their message out. This hasn't changed for a long time. Why is everyone so confused about their existence now?
Or the fact if they were standardized they would be much much cheaper.
Of course you can't avoid hardware becoming obsolete. What you can avoid, however, are companies that actively make your old hardware obsolete.
Speaking of which, can someone tell me if the newest games for the iPhone run on the old iPhones? Or if some of the App store programs generally have higher hardware requirements?
I also wonder if 2G phones even run in the US anymore. It pissed me off when that became unusable the last time in Japan which I usually use as my life line. Cell phones are useless for what most people use as an excuse to get them for.
I agree that we don't need another "best viewed in" web built up, but you're comparing apples to oranges.
It all comes down to MS having their history which makes people more afraid of them. Not to mention that their rendering engine is closed sourced and not cross-platform. I can't think of a worse place for new technologies to appear from. If IE starts having extensions, people can't even see the source code to see how they did it. They haven't even been working with the W3C on standards since around IE5 from what I can tell.
MS doesn't even try to fake being a team player.
Awesome! I would compare, but I can't ever find the layer resize button in Photoshop. I really do hate it's layout. Whenever I do use it I have to ask where everything is D:. Yes. I am 100% serious.
Believe what you want. Safari and Firefox have been pulling which direction the CSS level 3 standard was going by creating live examples. Given the background of Webkit on supporting W3C code, the size of webkit share market share as compared to Firefox and Explorer, and the fervor that extensions have been happening, things call for cautious optimism. Not tin foil hats.
Do you remember the opacity css attribute? All modern browsers support -opacity now. Safari went from -khtml-opacity to -webkit-opacity to -opacity. You're playing with fire as long as you do not use the W3C official equivalent. Speaking of which, have you seen all the depricated mozilla css styles lately?
Just like the mozilla equivalents, the Safari equivalents were mostly created for internal usage. Why the hell do people think Apple was seriously pushing html as an alternative to native application development for the iphone? Does no one remember that Mac OS X dashboard widgets are written in html too? Selective memories I guess... Not really any different than the usage of the Mozilla extensions.
I'll say it again, but cautious optimism is called for. You act like a tin foil hat and people will ignore you.
You are linking about future CSS3 tech. Read http://www.jungus.com/b/2010/01/03/what-you-need-to-know-about-behavioral-css. The big issue is if Safari and co don't deprecate their extensions when an official W3C version become available. HTML5 is where we will see this. You do remember that Safari brought us the W3C canvas tag, right?
These Apple css extensions were originally for the iPhone apps that were only supposed to be written in html if I remember. My how things change.
The Webkit guys have not shown me anything that overly makes me thing they are trying to speed us toward a proprietary web yet. They have done mostly the opposite. Fixing their acid test scores and sharing new technologies with the W3C so they can be standardized.
I'm not seeing the problem here when using Firefox on that link.
Extensions like -moz were made for testing and use in addons. The addons are hard wired against specific Firefox version numbers giving the devs flexibility in their implementation of their test css extensions between versions. You use them in webpages without fallbacks, you're just asking to shoot yourself in the foot. These things are likely to change or disappear in the future.
MS never removes their extensions for backward compatibility. If they added a -ms-css extension and some big webpages started to use it, they wouldn't remove it for at least 10 years.
Oh, you mean the css properties that are made for developers and may change at any time screwing over your site if you foolishly use them? No thanks.
You're fooling yourself.
I'm talking about web pages generally degrading gracefully. You don't need to ban people using edge cases. For example, people who set their browser to force larger fonts expect some things to appear differently. What you are basically pushing for is a Javascript to test the font size of the browser and ban those people from the webpage all in the name of "presentation". Might as well ban the Lynx users too. Or people who have images turned off for that matter. Also cell phones. We also can't allow users who don't use stylesheets to view anything either. All these horrible people will not see the web page how it was meant to be seen.
That is what you are advocating whether you realize it or not.
If businesses understood technology, they would be asking for designers to support specific rendering engines. Not browsers which is edging on silly.
The asshats also wouldn't lock out other browsers because there is a chance the untested w3c html may render slighly differently but still be totally useable. Different doesn't mean wrong businessmen. While presentation is important, content is king.
Interestingly enough, the GameCube seems to handle the bounce from walking just fine when tethered to a waist belt. I somehow think the Wii would also handle being toppled better than both the PS3 and the XBox360 thanks to the style drive it uses. I may be wrong though.