There's a short story I'm currently writing in a similar way. Basically, I put "Funeralopolis" from Electric Wizard on repeat, put on my headphones, turn it up REAL loud, close my eyes, and type what I see.
Basically, I've been writing a massive battle filled with strange creatures that can't even be described as eldritch. It's been a super interesting experiment, one that I might continue once I finish the story.
And then you have music like like mine (free to listen to/download, btw), which is designed to evoke imagery in people's minds. I created what I "heard" when I "saw" things, either in dreams or when using my imagination, but obviously that may differ from what other people see.
It's really interesting, seeing how radically different two different people's reaction can be to the same sound.
I'd say that should be included in Biological Bias. Rampant ignorance (and the constant rejection that such ignorance is as prevalent as it is) seems to be a fairly regular thing amongst many humans. We know a lot, but I think most people think we know far more than we actually do (or, in other cases, far less than we actually do. In either case, ignorance is front and center.)
So...our "loving" Creator/Father/God put us in a hostile environment where we are considered abominations and have no reason to exist other than because he went on a bender and thought it was a good idea?
As one of our fellow apartment-dwellers likes to point out, our scientific view of the universe is directly influenced by:
1. Our own biological bias (meaning the way we, as humans, perceive things) 2. The fundamental elements that make up life in this galaxy 3. The math we use
Were any of these three things different, our scientific view of reality could be completely changed.
Perhaps the "movie science/actual science" effect is going on here...example: people see "Hackers", and think that's what "hacking" is. People then see either a script kiddy in their mom's basement or a government techie with sky-high stacks of paper on his desk (or working at a scarily-clean desk), and realize the actual act is pretty damn boring.
PlayerPro, my music player, for instance, has an on-screen back button (same place as on iOS usually), and the hardware back button takes you out of the app instead of just to the last view/activity/whatever. That reminds me, I have to go file a bug report/complaint about that:p
Drop that crap. The Winamp Android app is pure genious. Supports Last.FM Scrobbling, Shoutcast streaming, library streaming from any computer with Winamp installed, wireless synch, iTunes playlist support, and more.
If you have an Android device, and you use it for music, you're wasting your time using anything else. Best of all? It's free:)
You see, when the iPad came out it had MORE power than the iPhone.
It had more power than a one-year old device, which is not what my original post is about.
Then, a new iPhone came out
Yeah, a couple of months later...meaning the internal architecture had long since been decided upon before the iPad was released.
You expect a phone to not advance technologically because a tablet exists? Perhaps you're aware that over the last almost one year period Apple's been developing the next iPad, which will surely feature improved specs versus the old one. At the same time, they continue to work on newer iPhones, no doubt guaranteeing the same thing on that side.
No, I expect a tablet to be more powerful than a phone released within the same time frame and as part of the same product line. I'm not talking about cross-generation comparisons, I'm talking about same-generation comparisons. This is the key thing that people seem to be missing.
I'm not comparing cross-generation products, I'm not comparing products from different companies, I'm not comparing mobile vs desktop components. I'm comparing a PHONE and a TABLET, and the fact that the tablet has no performance advantage over the same-generation phone from the same company in the same product line. What was so hard for people to understand about this?
I'm sorry if I seem rude, I just didn't think I'd have to spell things out like this on a tech-oriented website. That's a bit ridiculous.
Seriously? Are you just trolling, or are you really this ignorant?
I'm comparing two products from the same company that run the same operating system and are, for all intents and purposes, a part of the same product line. I'm NOT saying this comparison extends to all aspects of the computing world, nor did I imply it.
No, but again...compare a 10" netbook to a 16" laptop (the difference in screen size between an iPad and an iPhone is slightly over 6 inches.) Would you expect a 16" laptop to have the same power as a 10" netbook?
I mean really what does the ipad need more CPU power for than the iPhone? The resolution is the same so the graphics performance requirements are the same. I guess if you want to put more demanding apps on the ipad than the iphone maybe it would useful but on the whole I do not see a big drive need for more CPU power in the iPad over the iPhone.
So...the people calling the iPad just a big iPod Touch are right, then?
You might expect that - I certainly don't. The devices with the most computing power tend to have no screens at all.
OK, but we're talking about all-inclusive devices that function completely on their own...not desktop parts.
Do automatically think a laptop with a smaller screen has less computing power than one with a larger screen? Really?
If the difference is as drastic as 6+ inches (the difference between an iPad and iPhone...6.2, if you want to be exact), then yes: I generally expect a 16 inch laptop to have more power than a 10 inch netbook.
I've got a 20 inch monitor at home does that make my several year old iMac totally bad ass from a computing power stand point?
I'm not talking about desktop components, I'm talking about portable components. Apples to oranges, bud.
I still have yet to understand what's so amazing about iOS, from a GUI point of view. It's incredibly sparse and lacking in workflow functionality. The steps you have to take when you get an email or a text message, for example, are far more convoluted than on Android (in which you pull down the notification bar (regardless of what you're doing), tap the email/text, read it, then just hit the back arrow twice to immediately go back to what you were doing.
This is just one such example. iOS seems like it functions off a central core with a bunch of solitary roads going outward. Android, however, seems like it has the same layout, but each of the "roads" are interconnected.
Sure, you'll get where you want to go with iOS, but you have to get there in a specific way, whereas with Android you have much more navigational freedom. iOs is Good Enough®, but I still don't see how people applaud it so loudly when it isn't conducive to non-centralized navigation. Let's face it, the homescreen looks like an Android app drawer...
Here's to hoping that Apple puts a more powerful processor in the second iPad than they do in the 5th iPhone. I realize they likely had the same processor in the iPad/iPhone 4 just to keep things simple, but it seemed really strange to me that a device with a bigger screen (and marginally larger resolution) had the same CPU in it as the tiny version.
Slashdot Mirror
There's a short story I'm currently writing in a similar way. Basically, I put "Funeralopolis" from Electric Wizard on repeat, put on my headphones, turn it up REAL loud, close my eyes, and type what I see.
Basically, I've been writing a massive battle filled with strange creatures that can't even be described as eldritch. It's been a super interesting experiment, one that I might continue once I finish the story.
And then you have music like like mine (free to listen to/download, btw), which is designed to evoke imagery in people's minds. I created what I "heard" when I "saw" things, either in dreams or when using my imagination, but obviously that may differ from what other people see.
It's really interesting, seeing how radically different two different people's reaction can be to the same sound.
I'd say that should be included in Biological Bias. Rampant ignorance (and the constant rejection that such ignorance is as prevalent as it is) seems to be a fairly regular thing amongst many humans. We know a lot, but I think most people think we know far more than we actually do (or, in other cases, far less than we actually do. In either case, ignorance is front and center.)
Actually, she loved me very much (and still does!) I was just responding to the poster, that's all
Right...they were carrying malaria. ::V-8 headslap::
Yup...I'll laugh all the way to the grave when god gets bored with humans and decides to give sharks legs and functioning lungs ;)
So...our "loving" Creator/Father/God put us in a hostile environment where we are considered abominations and have no reason to exist other than because he went on a bender and thought it was a good idea?
Man...god can be such an asshole sometimes.
As one of our fellow apartment-dwellers likes to point out, our scientific view of the universe is directly influenced by:
1. Our own biological bias (meaning the way we, as humans, perceive things)
2. The fundamental elements that make up life in this galaxy
3. The math we use
Were any of these three things different, our scientific view of reality could be completely changed.
GRAUGH.
My point was a larger display (especially a 6.2" larger display) means two things:
It's used for different, generally more intensive purposes
and
It's a larger form factor.
More intensive purposes + larger form factor (i.e. more physical space for components) SHOULD = more powerful hardware.
Not on a regular basis, but at least a few times a month. Currently running a Droid Eris with Nonsensikal 15.2
Weird...I haven't really had any of those problems...what phone are you using it on?
Perhaps the "movie science/actual science" effect is going on here...example: people see "Hackers", and think that's what "hacking" is. People then see either a script kiddy in their mom's basement or a government techie with sky-high stacks of paper on his desk (or working at a scarily-clean desk), and realize the actual act is pretty damn boring.
offtopic, but:
PlayerPro, my music player, for instance, has an on-screen back button (same place as on iOS usually), and the hardware back button takes you out of the app instead of just to the last view/activity/whatever. That reminds me, I have to go file a bug report/complaint about that :p
Drop that crap. The Winamp Android app is pure genious. Supports Last.FM Scrobbling, Shoutcast streaming, library streaming from any computer with Winamp installed, wireless synch, iTunes playlist support, and more.
If you have an Android device, and you use it for music, you're wasting your time using anything else. Best of all? It's free :)
Perhaps your expectations are off.
This seems to be the most likely explanation.
You don't have to understand it. It's not like there's a problem with people who aren't you liking things you don't like, is there?
I never said there was. I was talking about iOS, not the people that use it.
And it's not like you're the genius to end all geniuses. I don't need to ask there, I've read enough of your posts.
That being said, I couldn't help but notice you insulted me rather than answering my question. Good form, old chap!
Jesus fucking christ.
You see, when the iPad came out it had MORE power than the iPhone.
It had more power than a one-year old device, which is not what my original post is about.
Then, a new iPhone came out
Yeah, a couple of months later...meaning the internal architecture had long since been decided upon before the iPad was released.
You expect a phone to not advance technologically because a tablet exists? Perhaps you're aware that over the last almost one year period Apple's been developing the next iPad, which will surely feature improved specs versus the old one. At the same time, they continue to work on newer iPhones, no doubt guaranteeing the same thing on that side.
No, I expect a tablet to be more powerful than a phone released within the same time frame and as part of the same product line. I'm not talking about cross-generation comparisons, I'm talking about same-generation comparisons. This is the key thing that people seem to be missing.
I'm not comparing cross-generation products, I'm not comparing products from different companies, I'm not comparing mobile vs desktop components. I'm comparing a PHONE and a TABLET, and the fact that the tablet has no performance advantage over the same-generation phone from the same company in the same product line. What was so hard for people to understand about this?
I'm sorry if I seem rude, I just didn't think I'd have to spell things out like this on a tech-oriented website. That's a bit ridiculous.
No I do not think that it is wise to equate physical size with power.
As I explained in another post, the iPhone is a phone. The iPad is a tablet. Would you expect a phone to have the same power as a tablet?
I think it's pretty clear I have no idea what your argument is anymore.
The iPhone is a PHONE. The iPad is a TABLET. You expect a phone and a tablet to have the same computing power?
That's my point.
Seriously? Are you just trolling, or are you really this ignorant?
I'm comparing two products from the same company that run the same operating system and are, for all intents and purposes, a part of the same product line. I'm NOT saying this comparison extends to all aspects of the computing world, nor did I imply it.
Besides, I think you're forgetting that when the iPad came out, it DID have a faster processor than the iPhone.
True, but then you're comparing a brand-new product to what was at the time almost a year old....
but does it need it?
No, but again...compare a 10" netbook to a 16" laptop (the difference in screen size between an iPad and an iPhone is slightly over 6 inches.) Would you expect a 16" laptop to have the same power as a 10" netbook?
I mean really what does the ipad need more CPU power for than the iPhone? The resolution is the same so the graphics performance requirements are the same. I guess if you want to put more demanding apps on the ipad than the iphone maybe it would useful but on the whole I do not see a big drive need for more CPU power in the iPad over the iPhone.
So...the people calling the iPad just a big iPod Touch are right, then?
You might expect that - I certainly don't. The devices with the most computing power tend to have no screens at all.
OK, but we're talking about all-inclusive devices that function completely on their own...not desktop parts.
Do automatically think a laptop with a smaller screen has less computing power than one with a larger screen? Really?
If the difference is as drastic as 6+ inches (the difference between an iPad and iPhone...6.2, if you want to be exact), then yes: I generally expect a 16 inch laptop to have more power than a 10 inch netbook.
I've got a 20 inch monitor at home does that make my several year old iMac totally bad ass from a computing power stand point?
I'm not talking about desktop components, I'm talking about portable components. Apples to oranges, bud.
I still have yet to understand what's so amazing about iOS, from a GUI point of view. It's incredibly sparse and lacking in workflow functionality. The steps you have to take when you get an email or a text message, for example, are far more convoluted than on Android (in which you pull down the notification bar (regardless of what you're doing), tap the email/text, read it, then just hit the back arrow twice to immediately go back to what you were doing.
This is just one such example. iOS seems like it functions off a central core with a bunch of solitary roads going outward. Android, however, seems like it has the same layout, but each of the "roads" are interconnected.
Sure, you'll get where you want to go with iOS, but you have to get there in a specific way, whereas with Android you have much more navigational freedom. iOs is Good Enough®, but I still don't see how people applaud it so loudly when it isn't conducive to non-centralized navigation. Let's face it, the homescreen looks like an Android app drawer...
No. I was referring to the fact that, generally, you expect a 10" device to have more computing power than a 3.5" device.
Did I really have to explain that?
Here's to hoping that Apple puts a more powerful processor in the second iPad than they do in the 5th iPhone. I realize they likely had the same processor in the iPad/iPhone 4 just to keep things simple, but it seemed really strange to me that a device with a bigger screen (and marginally larger resolution) had the same CPU in it as the tiny version.