I am in sales but don't sell electronics, I'll leave you to your assumptions on that one.
So why would you lead us to believe otherwise:
So you basically have a complete lack of understanding of the sales process is what you're saying. It's ok, I hear this propagandist nonsense from customers of mine even as I'm trying to point them towards the product that fits their needs and budget rather than the more expensive product that makes no sense for their personal situation.
The reason I separated individual points of your posting was to point out how each of your assumptions was flawed.
It's easy to find flaws when you only post half of the thought. Though, you probably should have googled my points before assuming they were.
Each of your responses are also baseless, unsubstantiated nonsense. Where is your cite for your magical 40-50% acceptance rate for HD capable tuners, and even if the rate is 50% how does that become classified as "early adopter phase"?
You're right. I really wish I researched that number a little better. I forget where I heard/read it, but I was so wrong. Hopefully this month, with sales from the holidays, they'll break 20%. I don't know how they keep the shelves stocked.
The "down scaling" from 1080i to 720p was your reference, not mine, I was telling you it's not done and you responded that it's not done. What are you arguing? My television is 1080i as are virtually all HD units available at all major electronic retailers today and they do, in fact, display 1080i picture. You claimed these sets somehow "down scale" the image to 720p. I'm still waiting for clarification on that.
And it is a perfectly legitimate reference, though, may to not confuse you, I should have said down scalling 1920x1080 to 1366x768(I know, it's a hair better then 720p). 1080i draws a screen that is 1920x1080, albiet in 2 passes, but still requires 1920x1080 pixels to display all data. Call me crazy, but I'm not sure how we're going to jam those pixels into a fixed pixel 1366x768 device that is 1080i capable.
Google native resolution. Here is the second link from a wonderful FUDsite, since many have issues with the accuracy of the first link at Wikipedia.
Fixed-pixel displays follow a few basic rules:
No matter the resolution of the source material, whether VHS, DVD, or HDTV, a fixed-pixel display will always convert, or scale, it to fit its native resolution.
If the incoming source has more pixels than the display's native resolution, you will lose some visible detail and sharpness, though often what you're left with still looks great.
If the incoming source has fewer pixels than the native resolution, you're not getting any extra sharpness from the television's pixels.
While you could have a CRT that is 1800x1600, overdrive it and display the details, albiet it will have the details but may not be as sharp as a 1920x1080 native device. No matter how hard you try, you can't overdrive an LCD or Plasma. There are 1080i TVs capable of displaying a 1920x1080 picture, but considering the circuitry required to improve the bandwidth isn't nearly as pricey as the pixels, chances are, if it is an LCD or plasma that is 1080i capable, it will have a native resolution of 1366x768. The extra pixels above 720p are for overscan.
So if you loose detail, and when a DVD is upscaled, is the difference going to be that noticable? I have a co-worker who can see it, but says, for the price, it isn't worth it. I can see a huge difference, but I am sitting 8ft away from a 110" 1080p screen and have better then 20/20 vision, so I'm not a good candidate for an
I enjoyed how you cut small segments of my comments and poked at them. Normally I wouldn't waste my time responding, but considering you seem to sell these devices and don't understand them, I'll respond to relevant segments that haven't bastardized.
And FWIW, people in middle to high class income brackets do regularly browse the Brick, Best Buy, and Future Shop ads that come with their weekly newspapers and decide to upgrade the technology around their house. In point of fact, nearly every one of my friends, family and colleagues have high definition televisions right now; some of them have more than one in their home. I never said they didn't. I said they don't read them and think wow I need one. Big difference. I have a good number of friends who have them, but you must have higher classed friends and family, as the numbers for my friends and family is around 40, maybe 50%, which is on par with the acceptance rate.
You're also presuming that people really need 1080p. Most HD sources today are 1080i and 720p, as are virtually all available HD television sets. By the way, most 1080i sets do not "down scale" from progessive to interlaced. Scaling has nothing to do with i and p. I and P have the same resolution, and display the same picture. I is interlaced meaning it takes 2 passes. P is progressive and does it in one pass, creating smoother transitions, which cuts out motion artifact created in 1080i(supposedly the average person can only tell the difference 3% of the time.
With that said, can you explain to me how you will get 1080i on a fixed pixel 1366x768 Plasma and or LCD without down scaling it? 1080i capable does not mean it displays 1080i on the screen. As far as what is broadcast, I'll agree that a lot are broadcasting 720p. At high resolutions, you run into bandwidth issues, and since the picture is the same, only drawn in 2 passes, unless it is sports(broadcast in 720p for people like me with a 1080i TV not capable of deinterlacing), would it ever make sense to broadcast in P? Most TVs worth anything will deinterlace an Intelaced picture into a Progressive one. There are a lot of the cheaper 1080p LCDs only accept 1080i and deinterlace the picture. Some do a better job then others, but considering how often most can see the difference, any will do a fine job.
Actually there are perfectly clear displays at most all retail electronics outlets as well as a plethora of literature everywhere explaining the differences to customers even in places like those very print ads you yourself referred to. Also, how many "mindless sheep" know what an upscaling DVD player is in the first place? Well, I'd suggest reading a few, and read up on the technologies you sell, as a lot of sales brochures just try and get you in the door, and don't give you the full picture, no pun intended.
So I'm at a loss here as to what exactly it is you're trying to prove. That nobody has HD, nobody wants HD, nobody understands HD, and that it's a technology available only to geeks? Re-read my posts. I never said anything like that. My point was, now that BR has no competition to drive the price down, it will stagnate, as most don't see the point. Based on this response, you've done nothing but reinforce my opinion.
Early adopter phase? It's getting more and more difficult to buy a NON HD TV nowadays! When you can get decent sized HD TVs for sub-$400 it's hard to argue against it. Tubes are practically obsolete, flat panels are all the rage, and there aren't many flat panels out there that aren't HD capable. The numbers say it. We aren't even at 50% of the house holds owning them. Heck, more people have wireless access points, and that is finally starting to become mainstream(do some war driving and count the houses w/ vs w/o). Just because it is getting more difficult/impossible to buy a SD TV doesn't mean people are lining up to buy them. Yes, take a way choice, it will help adoption, but people don't look through the best buy ad they get with their paper(yes, people still get papers) and think, "Wow, I oughta get a new TV since they no longer offer old ones." The average TV should get you at least 7 years use. Lack of choice will simply slowly phase things out. It does not force adoption.
Insignia 32" LCD HDTV currently on sale for $499CDN. I could buy that with the leavings from my next paycheque. If you'd prefer something smaller you can get a 26" for $399. If you'd rather a name brand you can get a Toshiba 26" for $499. A few years ago I paid $899 for a 32" Sony Vega CRT that's not HD and now I can buy a slim form factor television for half that that's both widescreen and HD capable. Samsung Blu-ray Player (BD-P1400) on sale for $399. So I can meander into Future Shop and pick up a full HD TV visual experience for $901.74 including all of our Ontario and Canadian sales taxes. HD capable also proves my point. HD Capable, 1080i, etc. does not mean you are getting 1920x1080 pixes. When you consider they are fixed pixel devices that down scale a picture to 720p, you aren't getting the full detal that a 1080p tv offers. Considering 720p is a little over double the detail of 480p, and 1080p is over 5 times the detail of 480p, no one is getting excited over it, and for goood reason. I have a CRT TV that can render 1920x1080, even if only 1080i, as well as a Marquee CRT projector which makes the best Best Buy projector look like crap. On both, I see the significant difference and find it is worth it. Most I have talked to say that there isn't enough improvement for them to buy in.
The cheap TVs are few and far between, most of which lack HD tuners which every sales rep will bash in hopes of the larger sale. You're $399 for a for a player proves my point. Most of the mindless sheep think a $70 upscaler is as good as a BR player. Which do you think the average clueless user is going to buy. AV consumers include a lot of people who aren't technophile. The average user is clueless, and intimidated by the selection.
Funny, I've thought the same thing about the HD TVs, which is another reason Players are selling.
That whole price comment is what will screw BR. BR won the war between HD-DVD, but they still haven't won the acceptance war. In all this Toshiba Post-mortum, there has been no news of BR players flying off the shelves, and there has only been a 20% increase prior to the Warner move. It just caused people to sit back on the fence, especially considering HDTVs are still in the early adopter phase, so you have to be an early early adopter to have an HD format.
HD-DVD needs to stay alive for any physical format to be accepted. Otherwise, player prices don't drop, media stays the same, and no momentum is built up to require the increased production needed to bring the price down. In the end, Warner screwed everyone.
Think about it, the average house hold income is under 60k? Throw some taxes into it, and your basically expecting the average american to drop 1/20th to 1/30th of their salary on a TV and HD player. And throw in the fact that most thought Wimbeldon was in HD because it was broadcast in 16x9, and these same people think that an upscaled DVD is almost as good as an BR/HDDVD, we're working towards another laser disc.
One thing I will say, Toshiba made some clutch decisions to give them the Sony ID-10-T Format Award. Congrats to Sony to finally "winning" one.
There is also no security in socketpipes, so it isn't much different from using FTP from a security standpoint.
I think the point of this article is to improve a "secure" method of data transfer by making the way it deals with encryption better. Even using weaker encryption methods, you still have this problem.
I think the idea makes perfect sense and probably could improve file transfer dramatically. Realistically, it is just a software encryption accelerator. If they could implement it in the NIC card, that would be a better solution, but probably a headache from a OS programming/encryption update standpoint.
If I replace my locks with a deadbolt, it is more secure, yes?
Now, I am more vulnerable to being locked out if my wife leaves the house and I forgot my keys, or if the lock breaks. So just because the slogan, "American express, I can't get into my home without it" is no longer true, should I not use it?
Security is an art. No one way is right, nor perfect. It is all acceptable risk. Personally, I have a feeling all IDS systems will migrate to host based systems because the majority of the traffic will be encrypted.
Consider yourself lucky. I had a future employer send me a security clearance form to update via email, that I had already filled out, physically handed it to them, and made sure it was not faxed anywhere, leaving evidence of it on any storage media in the fax machine. Why? It had my social security number all over it.
And they wonder why I decided not to work for them. In this day and age, it doesn't pay to be paranoid, but it can save you time and money.
Shame DC comics didn't surpress this. That little sample I saw looks like one more inaccurrate stereo type to keep computer geeks from getting tail......
I'm not a forensic expert, and don't even play one on TV, practically impossible isn't how I would describe the likely hood of retrieving data.
When write heads write, the are kind of like an analog device, they don't stop on the drop of a dime, so when writing to a sector, it may be a hair off and you can make out what was there before. With the help of checksums, you can sometimes fill in the blanks if one of the bits is unreadable. The biggest problem you have is finding a write that was before the deleted file.
There's a reason the DoD had/has a policy of writing 5 passes to a disk. Something like 1 pass Zeroing, another Oning, and the rest random. As I said before, I'm no expert, so I don't know how likely they'll find it, but, the more you write and defrag, the less likely.
Is it? Go to Best Buy and poll the average consumer to see if they know the difference between BR, HD-DVD, and an upscaled DVD player. Ask them what the difference between 1080i and 1080p? Ask them if the fixed pixel 1080i device they end up buying, which is only capable of showing 1366x768 pixels, shows all of the detail that 1080i has. I think you'd be surprised at how few people actually have a clue.
I never said an upscale DVD player is as good, I said, most are under the impression it is. Big difference. I've seen it, and I think it is night an day, but most don't. A month ago I was in a best buy magnolia center displaying a horrendous santana DVD on a 1080p projector. How iss the average consumer going to get excited about 1080p by looking at a pixelated version of Carlos Santana? They don't know the difference and whatever they go home with will look better then what they had before.
As for the 0%, it's a point. Read between the lines. You're 1% comment just proved my point. Grant I know that the Sales figures don't include all merchants, but when you see that BR sold 21,770 players in that scale, if you were to say every one of them was bought in NY city, less then.3% own a player. You can't even round that up to 1%. Adoption is not happening. If prices come down, it will.
The war is far from over. You need people to adopt in order to win. Toshiba's sales dropped, but BR's did not increase by much, if at all, so it sounds like warner's decision just put a lot of people back on the fence.
Prices on the media and players are high because the demand is not there, and the average AV consumer has no clue what the difference is between true HD and upscaled HD. Look at the numbers and compare it to how many upscaling DVD players were sold. Last I checked, 0 *.93 is still zero, and when ALL hd players sales are compared to DVD upscalers, that's what the number looks like.
If toshiba up and dies, prices stay the same, demand slightly increases, and prices don't drop enough for the average user to care about the difference between 480p and 1080p. Toshiba has to drop the price on both the media and players to stay in the game, but also for either format to be adopted. If that happens, Sony will have to follow to maintain the lead. If sony doesn't, and ends up "beating" toshiba, they will still lose to themselves.
Because the numbers you hear are always in favor of one side. What you say is exactly right. However, Toshiba was touting the attach rate because it clearly showed they had higher numbers. Sony counted the PS3 which helped player numbers, but killed the attached rate.
While the numbers both sides spout are true, there are a lot of things that are omitted.
Experts? Who is actually an expert. By most parents, it would be someone who finds a scape goat for why their child is in a gang, going to prison, or prostituting themselves to pay for their drug habbit. Now a days when kids are given everything because parents feel guilty for being divorced, working, etc., video games are probably one of the few things that teach kids to problem solve and give them drive to achieve. Little League that allows everyone to play certainly doesn't.
First let me prefix this: OS structure and design are NOT implied in any of this. That is something I'd be more then happy to take sides on, and Bill wouldn't be too happy.
Security professionals who pay attention to trends and understand more than simply reading bugtraq know that more users equals more vulnerabilities. Most malicious code is written for financial gain. Would you target the slew of illegal XP SP1 machines that never get security updates and had their free 30 day Norton trial run out will be, or would you target a linux based system which has a smaller and more competant user base.
The perfect example is Firefox. It had minimal vulnerabilities, and as the users rose, the vulnerabilities did. While Firefox still has less vulnerabilities(and a smaller user base) there's a reason I use Opera, and it isn't because of usability or the talent of their programmers. It's due to paranioa instilled by statistics.
Most coders regardless of platform are ignorant to secure practices and think if they validate input is the right size when read in, they are secure. Yeah, about as secure as an escaped mental patient. Most also don't understand simple networking/security concepts and being in a hurry to get things done make easy to miss mistakes that shouldn't be missed, both in code and design concepts.
How many coders know what a string format error is? Did you think it was a string too long or had a special character like those used in SQL injection or System\Exec calls to execute binaries not intended? Or did you know it is a problem with the printf family of functions that allows you to pass a string formatted to printf to modify arbitrary variables, and or print various segments of memory? If you picked the latter and can show me an example, send me your resume.
If I get to interview a subset of system programmers from different sides and see a pattern, I'll buy one side is better. There are so many other variables involved in researching vulnerabilities, that it is really not rellevant, especially if you want to make a name for yourself. You target something claiming to be Fort Knox or something that will have a huge impact. I guarantee if you discover the next exploit for a big worm before it is released, you won't ever need to look for a job. They'll find you.
Running on the same hardware? Or are you saying that a Core 2 Duo with Vista isn't any slower than a P3 with XP? If it's the latter, It's not a compliment.
Same hardware. My point is, XP was written for machines with not as much horse power, so I feel like I should notice a big difference when moving from XP to Vista on the same hardware. I saw little, if any degredation
If it takes 2Gb of RAM to notice the difference, I'd argue that the memory management isn't much better no matter how you look at it. In XP, more memory ment longer time between reboots.
Keep in mind, I said in comparison to XP and your point about longer time between reboots shows my point. My machine never touches the swap space when I've check. It is definitely utilizing the memory to some degree to improve performance, rather then leaving it unused. That is better resource management, no matter how you look at it.
I saw big improvent from 1 gig to 2 gig, but I was using 1 stick, rather then 2, which isn't optimal for DDR2 ram, so I'm not going to say you have to have 2 gig, but I will say, it couldn't hurt. I did still notice a slight improvement when I had 4 gig, which is why I mention it. I may make a recommendation if I try 2 512mb sticks.
On another note, I don't think I rebooted nearly as often due to the memory leak issues associated with leaving it running. I have become numb to the windows reboot, so take that with a grain of salt. I will start paying attention now. I did have some odd freezes, but that I think was a crappy power supply. I now have an Antec, and no problems.
I'm give a lot of details of what I'm running because I don't want someone running a K62 thinking Vista will be great. Maybe it will, but I won't stand behind it until I try it and see it does. I wouldn't hold your breath for me doing that.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure I would agree with that, but I would......
They have some of the best prices on Rustolium green paint I've ever seen.
I am in sales but don't sell electronics, I'll leave you to your assumptions on that one.
So why would you lead us to believe otherwise:
So you basically have a complete lack of understanding of the sales process is what you're saying. It's ok, I hear this propagandist nonsense from customers of mine even as I'm trying to point them towards the product that fits their needs and budget rather than the more expensive product that makes no sense for their personal situation.
The reason I separated individual points of your posting was to point out how each of your assumptions was flawed.
It's easy to find flaws when you only post half of the thought. Though, you probably should have googled my points before assuming they were.
Each of your responses are also baseless, unsubstantiated nonsense. Where is your cite for your magical 40-50% acceptance rate for HD capable tuners, and even if the rate is 50% how does that become classified as "early adopter phase"?
You're right. I really wish I researched that number a little better. I forget where I heard/read it, but I was so wrong. Hopefully this month, with sales from the holidays, they'll break 20%. I don't know how they keep the shelves stocked.
The "down scaling" from 1080i to 720p was your reference, not mine, I was telling you it's not done and you responded that it's not done. What are you arguing? My television is 1080i as are virtually all HD units available at all major electronic retailers today and they do, in fact, display 1080i picture. You claimed these sets somehow "down scale" the image to 720p. I'm still waiting for clarification on that.
And it is a perfectly legitimate reference, though, may to not confuse you, I should have said down scalling 1920x1080 to 1366x768(I know, it's a hair better then 720p). 1080i draws a screen that is 1920x1080, albiet in 2 passes, but still requires 1920x1080 pixels to display all data. Call me crazy, but I'm not sure how we're going to jam those pixels into a fixed pixel 1366x768 device that is 1080i capable.
Google native resolution. Here is the second link from a wonderful FUDsite, since many have issues with the accuracy of the first link at Wikipedia.
Fixed-pixel displays follow a few basic rules:
No matter the resolution of the source material, whether VHS, DVD, or HDTV, a fixed-pixel display will always convert, or scale, it to fit its native resolution.
If the incoming source has more pixels than the display's native resolution, you will lose some visible detail and sharpness, though often what you're left with still looks great.
If the incoming source has fewer pixels than the native resolution, you're not getting any extra sharpness from the television's pixels.
While you could have a CRT that is 1800x1600, overdrive it and display the details, albiet it will have the details but may not be as sharp as a 1920x1080 native device. No matter how hard you try, you can't overdrive an LCD or Plasma. There are 1080i TVs capable of displaying a 1920x1080 picture, but considering the circuitry required to improve the bandwidth isn't nearly as pricey as the pixels, chances are, if it is an LCD or plasma that is 1080i capable, it will have a native resolution of 1366x768. The extra pixels above 720p are for overscan.
So if you loose detail, and when a DVD is upscaled, is the difference going to be that noticable? I have a co-worker who can see it, but says, for the price, it isn't worth it. I can see a huge difference, but I am sitting 8ft away from a 110" 1080p screen and have better then 20/20 vision, so I'm not a good candidate for an
With that said, can you explain to me how you will get 1080i on a fixed pixel 1366x768 Plasma and or LCD without down scaling it? 1080i capable does not mean it displays 1080i on the screen. As far as what is broadcast, I'll agree that a lot are broadcasting 720p. At high resolutions, you run into bandwidth issues, and since the picture is the same, only drawn in 2 passes, unless it is sports(broadcast in 720p for people like me with a 1080i TV not capable of deinterlacing), would it ever make sense to broadcast in P? Most TVs worth anything will deinterlace an Intelaced picture into a Progressive one. There are a lot of the cheaper 1080p LCDs only accept 1080i and deinterlace the picture. Some do a better job then others, but considering how often most can see the difference, any will do a fine job. Actually there are perfectly clear displays at most all retail electronics outlets as well as a plethora of literature everywhere explaining the differences to customers even in places like those very print ads you yourself referred to. Also, how many "mindless sheep" know what an upscaling DVD player is in the first place? Well, I'd suggest reading a few, and read up on the technologies you sell, as a lot of sales brochures just try and get you in the door, and don't give you the full picture, no pun intended. So I'm at a loss here as to what exactly it is you're trying to prove. That nobody has HD, nobody wants HD, nobody understands HD, and that it's a technology available only to geeks? Re-read my posts. I never said anything like that. My point was, now that BR has no competition to drive the price down, it will stagnate, as most don't see the point. Based on this response, you've done nothing but reinforce my opinion.
The cheap TVs are few and far between, most of which lack HD tuners which every sales rep will bash in hopes of the larger sale. You're $399 for a for a player proves my point. Most of the mindless sheep think a $70 upscaler is as good as a BR player. Which do you think the average clueless user is going to buy. AV consumers include a lot of people who aren't technophile. The average user is clueless, and intimidated by the selection.
Funny, I've thought the same thing about the HD TVs, which is another reason Players are selling.
That whole price comment is what will screw BR. BR won the war between HD-DVD, but they still haven't won the acceptance war. In all this Toshiba Post-mortum, there has been no news of BR players flying off the shelves, and there has only been a 20% increase prior to the Warner move. It just caused people to sit back on the fence, especially considering HDTVs are still in the early adopter phase, so you have to be an early early adopter to have an HD format.
HD-DVD needs to stay alive for any physical format to be accepted. Otherwise, player prices don't drop, media stays the same, and no momentum is built up to require the increased production needed to bring the price down. In the end, Warner screwed everyone.
Think about it, the average house hold income is under 60k? Throw some taxes into it, and your basically expecting the average american to drop 1/20th to 1/30th of their salary on a TV and HD player. And throw in the fact that most thought Wimbeldon was in HD because it was broadcast in 16x9, and these same people think that an upscaled DVD is almost as good as an BR/HDDVD, we're working towards another laser disc.
One thing I will say, Toshiba made some clutch decisions to give them the Sony ID-10-T Format Award. Congrats to Sony to finally "winning" one.
A contest based on cables and speed would have to be held in the Valley.
There is also no security in socketpipes, so it isn't much different from using FTP from a security standpoint.
I think the point of this article is to improve a "secure" method of data transfer by making the way it deals with encryption better. Even using weaker encryption methods, you still have this problem.
I think the idea makes perfect sense and probably could improve file transfer dramatically. Realistically, it is just a software encryption accelerator. If they could implement it in the NIC card, that would be a better solution, but probably a headache from a OS programming/encryption update standpoint.
Had to learn? If people had to learn it, 90% of my arguments over the last decade would not have happened.
I can see it now, 30+ sessions to cure whatever the call this internet addiction.
I'd like to suggest Adclickophilia and Obsesive Compulsive Clickorder.
Now that Moe Green is out of the Tropicana, what else would we expect them to do?
If I replace my locks with a deadbolt, it is more secure, yes?
Now, I am more vulnerable to being locked out if my wife leaves the house and I forgot my keys, or if the lock breaks. So just because the slogan, "American express, I can't get into my home without it" is no longer true, should I not use it?
Security is an art. No one way is right, nor perfect. It is all acceptable risk. Personally, I have a feeling all IDS systems will migrate to host based systems because the majority of the traffic will be encrypted.
Consider yourself lucky. I had a future employer send me a security clearance form to update via email, that I had already filled out, physically handed it to them, and made sure it was not faxed anywhere, leaving evidence of it on any storage media in the fax machine. Why? It had my social security number all over it.
And they wonder why I decided not to work for them. In this day and age, it doesn't pay to be paranoid, but it can save you time and money.
Shame DC comics didn't surpress this. That little sample I saw looks like one more inaccurrate stereo type to keep computer geeks from getting tail......
Don't forget about vi, the greatest HTML editor ever.
I'm not a forensic expert, and don't even play one on TV, practically impossible isn't how I would describe the likely hood of retrieving data.
When write heads write, the are kind of like an analog device, they don't stop on the drop of a dime, so when writing to a sector, it may be a hair off and you can make out what was there before. With the help of checksums, you can sometimes fill in the blanks if one of the bits is unreadable. The biggest problem you have is finding a write that was before the deleted file.
There's a reason the DoD had/has a policy of writing 5 passes to a disk. Something like 1 pass Zeroing, another Oning, and the rest random. As I said before, I'm no expert, so I don't know how likely they'll find it, but, the more you write and defrag, the less likely.
Is it? Go to Best Buy and poll the average consumer to see if they know the difference between BR, HD-DVD, and an upscaled DVD player. Ask them what the difference between 1080i and 1080p? Ask them if the fixed pixel 1080i device they end up buying, which is only capable of showing 1366x768 pixels, shows all of the detail that 1080i has. I think you'd be surprised at how few people actually have a clue.
.3% own a player. You can't even round that up to 1%. Adoption is not happening. If prices come down, it will.
I never said an upscale DVD player is as good, I said, most are under the impression it is. Big difference. I've seen it, and I think it is night an day, but most don't. A month ago I was in a best buy magnolia center displaying a horrendous santana DVD on a 1080p projector. How iss the average consumer going to get excited about 1080p by looking at a pixelated version of Carlos Santana? They don't know the difference and whatever they go home with will look better then what they had before.
As for the 0%, it's a point. Read between the lines. You're 1% comment just proved my point. Grant I know that the Sales figures don't include all merchants, but when you see that BR sold 21,770 players in that scale, if you were to say every one of them was bought in NY city, less then
The war is far from over. You need people to adopt in order to win. Toshiba's sales dropped, but BR's did not increase by much, if at all, so it sounds like warner's decision just put a lot of people back on the fence.
Prices on the media and players are high because the demand is not there, and the average AV consumer has no clue what the difference is between true HD and upscaled HD. Look at the numbers and compare it to how many upscaling DVD players were sold. Last I checked, 0 *.93 is still zero, and when ALL hd players sales are compared to DVD upscalers, that's what the number looks like.
If toshiba up and dies, prices stay the same, demand slightly increases, and prices don't drop enough for the average user to care about the difference between 480p and 1080p. Toshiba has to drop the price on both the media and players to stay in the game, but also for either format to be adopted. If that happens, Sony will have to follow to maintain the lead. If sony doesn't, and ends up "beating" toshiba, they will still lose to themselves.
Because the numbers you hear are always in favor of one side. What you say is exactly right. However, Toshiba was touting the attach rate because it clearly showed they had higher numbers. Sony counted the PS3 which helped player numbers, but killed the attached rate.
While the numbers both sides spout are true, there are a lot of things that are omitted.
Experts? Who is actually an expert. By most parents, it would be someone who finds a scape goat for why their child is in a gang, going to prison, or prostituting themselves to pay for their drug habbit. Now a days when kids are given everything because parents feel guilty for being divorced, working, etc., video games are probably one of the few things that teach kids to problem solve and give them drive to achieve. Little League that allows everyone to play certainly doesn't.
Bozo the Clown serious?
So if I have to wait in line for my ration of bread, will Vista still cost me $150?
First let me prefix this: OS structure and design are NOT implied in any of this. That is something I'd be more then happy to take sides on, and Bill wouldn't be too happy.
Security professionals who pay attention to trends and understand more than simply reading bugtraq know that more users equals more vulnerabilities. Most malicious code is written for financial gain. Would you target the slew of illegal XP SP1 machines that never get security updates and had their free 30 day Norton trial run out will be, or would you target a linux based system which has a smaller and more competant user base.
The perfect example is Firefox. It had minimal vulnerabilities, and as the users rose, the vulnerabilities did. While Firefox still has less vulnerabilities(and a smaller user base) there's a reason I use Opera, and it isn't because of usability or the talent of their programmers. It's due to paranioa instilled by statistics.
Most coders regardless of platform are ignorant to secure practices and think if they validate input is the right size when read in, they are secure. Yeah, about as secure as an escaped mental patient. Most also don't understand simple networking/security concepts and being in a hurry to get things done make easy to miss mistakes that shouldn't be missed, both in code and design concepts.
How many coders know what a string format error is? Did you think it was a string too long or had a special character like those used in SQL injection or System\Exec calls to execute binaries not intended? Or did you know it is a problem with the printf family of functions that allows you to pass a string formatted to printf to modify arbitrary variables, and or print various segments of memory? If you picked the latter and can show me an example, send me your resume.
If I get to interview a subset of system programmers from different sides and see a pattern, I'll buy one side is better. There are so many other variables involved in researching vulnerabilities, that it is really not rellevant, especially if you want to make a name for yourself. You target something claiming to be Fort Knox or something that will have a huge impact. I guarantee if you discover the next exploit for a big worm before it is released, you won't ever need to look for a job. They'll find you.
Running on the same hardware? Or are you saying that a Core 2 Duo with Vista isn't any slower than a P3 with XP? If it's the latter, It's not a compliment.
Same hardware. My point is, XP was written for machines with not as much horse power, so I feel like I should notice a big difference when moving from XP to Vista on the same hardware. I saw little, if any degredation
If it takes 2Gb of RAM to notice the difference, I'd argue that the memory management isn't much better no matter how you look at it. In XP, more memory ment longer time between reboots.
Keep in mind, I said in comparison to XP and your point about longer time between reboots shows my point. My machine never touches the swap space when I've check. It is definitely utilizing the memory to some degree to improve performance, rather then leaving it unused. That is better resource management, no matter how you look at it.
I saw big improvent from 1 gig to 2 gig, but I was using 1 stick, rather then 2, which isn't optimal for DDR2 ram, so I'm not going to say you have to have 2 gig, but I will say, it couldn't hurt. I did still notice a slight improvement when I had 4 gig, which is why I mention it. I may make a recommendation if I try 2 512mb sticks.
On another note, I don't think I rebooted nearly as often due to the memory leak issues associated with leaving it running. I have become numb to the windows reboot, so take that with a grain of salt. I will start paying attention now. I did have some odd freezes, but that I think was a crappy power supply. I now have an Antec, and no problems.
I'm give a lot of details of what I'm running because I don't want someone running a K62 thinking Vista will be great. Maybe it will, but I won't stand behind it until I try it and see it does. I wouldn't hold your breath for me doing that.
Don't forget to learn phrases like "I'm also gonna need you to go ahead and come in on Sunday, too..."