Since when? Oh wait, you're intentionally misrepresenting the fact that they are discontinuing IronRuby with deprecating the entire platform. Nice FUD attempt, though, bro.
I mean surely after 10 or 20 reincarnations of the same useless fart app gets released, it will be obvious that Apple's marketplace is too bloated to be useful...
Yeah, instead they'll just make their fart apps from Android.
droidFart is THE premiere fart application for the Android operating system.
Or if you are more into the Bieber craze you can get the Bieber Fart App.
You don't need ports of the tools. That's the point of SFU. It's a POSIX compatibility layer and includes a whole host of GNU and various other Unix tools.
Lukas had every right to change his creation but to assume fans of the original would be pleased was a little foolish.
Of course he does. It's just amusing that a person who once went in front of Congress to protest against the colorization of The Three Stooges is one of the biggest film revisionists of all time at this point. Hell, he's supposedly supposed to be making even more revisions for the BD release.
You are getting a bigger picture, but you do lose parts of the scene;
How can it be a "bigger" picture with part of the picture matted out?
because the movie was shot intended for 2.35:1 usage, cropping to 2.35:1 during the transfer (as was done for theatrical release outside of IMAX theaters) gives you a better image quality (BluRay uses a lossy format) and you see exactly what the directory intended.
No it doesn't. You get less picture and do to the black bars that have to be added to pad the image to 16:9 you get less resolution as well.
I'm sure there are people out there who would rather not lose the cropped parts of the scene, I personally would rather have a larger 2.35:1 image with no loss in sharpness due to zoom.
Except you do get a loss of sharpness due to the fact that you've lost about 30% of the horizontal resolution due to the way the 2.35:1 picture is stored in a 16:9 frame.
The deaths of nine or more plastics workers in Apple's iPhone supplier
Who is also the same supplier of Dell, Microsoft, Logitech, HP, Intel, etc on and on. Why do you only single out Apple out of all of Foxconn's customers?
Because a bigger image on the screen is a more enjoyable experience to me. Zooming a 16:9 isn't the same thing. It was framed for 2.35:1 - it was intended, when shot, to be shown in 2.35:1. Like I stated, it may seem snobby, but it isn't, if I can get a bigger image I would prefer that. I have the 16:9 version and I enjoy it, and it looks great, but it feels much more (to me) like you've got a real theater when the aspect is 2.35:1 or 2.4:1.
But you're not getting a bigger picture. All you would get is less picture and less resolution due to the matting.
Why? Since it wasn't shot at 2.35:1 to one, all you would get is a matted version of the 16:9. What exactly do you gain by that other than less picture and lower resolution?
Slashdot Mirror
Since when? Oh wait, you're intentionally misrepresenting the fact that they are discontinuing IronRuby with deprecating the entire platform. Nice FUD attempt, though, bro.
Except this isn't about the Federal government. It's about local municipalities. Last time I checked, those were distinct governmental bodies.
I mean surely after 10 or 20 reincarnations of the same useless fart app gets released, it will be obvious that Apple's marketplace is too bloated to be useful...
Yeah, instead they'll just make their fart apps from Android.
droidFart is THE premiere fart application for the Android operating system.
Or if you are more into the Bieber craze you can get the Bieber Fart App.
Besides, PowerShell commands are too wordy.
Then use the abbreviated aliases. Wow, that was hard.
You don't need ports of the tools. That's the point of SFU. It's a POSIX compatibility layer and includes a whole host of GNU and various other Unix tools.
But if I put on a kid's TV show, and there's nudity or violence on the commercials between the show, how I am supposed to block that?
Because this is such a regular and routine happening, right? Oh wait...
The point is why not just have your desktop look the way it shipped
Because not everyone likes the default way the desktop looks? Opinions, lol.
Then use Services for Unix or PowerShell. Problem solved 11 years and 6 years ago respectively.
Then get a stylus for your capacitive touchscreen.
Yep, keep telling yourself that.
Yes. Such a thing is old news at this point.
Yeah, sure, bro.
Gee, no shit? You mean like how it already says that in both the article and the summary?
and to boot was seen as a knock-off of the seminal 'Praxis effect' in Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991).
I didn't realize that Amazon was selling Chinatown bootlegs.
Magic carpets and wizard spells don't fall into the realm of science fiction. That would be fantasy.
Lukas had every right to change his creation but to assume fans of the original would be pleased was a little foolish.
Of course he does. It's just amusing that a person who once went in front of Congress to protest against the colorization of The Three Stooges is one of the biggest film revisionists of all time at this point. Hell, he's supposedly supposed to be making even more revisions for the BD release.
None of it. Just like it wasn't news that the Air Force is using trained falcons to scare off other birds.
You are getting a bigger picture, but you do lose parts of the scene;
How can it be a "bigger" picture with part of the picture matted out?
because the movie was shot intended for 2.35:1 usage, cropping to 2.35:1 during the transfer (as was done for theatrical release outside of IMAX theaters) gives you a better image quality (BluRay uses a lossy format) and you see exactly what the directory intended.
No it doesn't. You get less picture and do to the black bars that have to be added to pad the image to 16:9 you get less resolution as well.
I'm sure there are people out there who would rather not lose the cropped parts of the scene, I personally would rather have a larger 2.35:1 image with no loss in sharpness due to zoom.
Except you do get a loss of sharpness due to the fact that you've lost about 30% of the horizontal resolution due to the way the 2.35:1 picture is stored in a 16:9 frame.
The deaths of nine or more plastics workers in Apple's iPhone supplier
Who is also the same supplier of Dell, Microsoft, Logitech, HP, Intel, etc on and on. Why do you only single out Apple out of all of Foxconn's customers?
Then after realizing it was all coming from Taiwan and China
How long did this take you? Apple has been outsourcing to China and Taiwan for more than a decade. Are you really that ignorant?
Because a bigger image on the screen is a more enjoyable experience to me. Zooming a 16:9 isn't the same thing. It was framed for 2.35:1 - it was intended, when shot, to be shown in 2.35:1. Like I stated, it may seem snobby, but it isn't, if I can get a bigger image I would prefer that. I have the 16:9 version and I enjoy it, and it looks great, but it feels much more (to me) like you've got a real theater when the aspect is 2.35:1 or 2.4:1.
But you're not getting a bigger picture. All you would get is less picture and less resolution due to the matting.
Don't worry. CmdrTaco has his ear to Steve Jobs' anus just in case he lets loose a fart.
LEAVE XZIBIT ALONE!!!
Why? Since it wasn't shot at 2.35:1 to one, all you would get is a matted version of the 16:9. What exactly do you gain by that other than less picture and lower resolution?
At least it wasn't yet-another re-make of a '70s or '80s TV show or movie, or the 6th sequel to a series that should have died after the 2nd.
Correct. It pulled all of it's themes from 90s movies to rehash with "oooh shiny" SFX.