Set up XBMC as your dash. You'll never look back: its "dashboard" functionality is just as good as all the other dashboards. It seems to boot just as fast too.
Good god. What possible excuse could they have for making it so huge? This isn't like a VCR where they haven't had a chance to engineer the most compact layout of some complex machinery. It's a plain old disk transport and a bit of decoding electronics -- just like every DVD player already on the shelves.
They could even have dropped all the DAC hardware, if HDMI is the only output format.
Re:What if there's nothing to see here?
on
Requiem for Usenet
·
· Score: 1
No, it was a true vector game, fitted with a color XY monitor. Video hardware of that day was nowhere near fast enough to rasterize a 3D scene at that resolution and framerate, even in wireframe.
The old vector graphics Return of the Jedi game was one of the best arcade games from it's era, and still a blast to play.
There was no vector Return of the Jedi game. You're probably thinking of simply "Star Wars", based on the first movie. It let you fight TIEs in open space, attack towers and bunkers on the Death Star surface, and ended a round with the final trench run.
There was a vector Empire Strikes back sequel (actually a ROM upgrade to the original), which is pretty rare. Using the same controls and visuals, it had you hunting probe droids and attacking AT-ATs in a snowspeeder, and in open space fighting TIE and dodging asteroids.
The Return of the Jedi arcade game was a 3/4 perspective shooter, a la Zaxxon, in conventional raster graphics. It sucked.
Indeed. It's telling that in order for a GUI Java app to be regarded as useful, it has to be as insanely great as those two are. Anything less, and you haven't made the painful tradeoff of going to the platform worthwhile.
Is it "jumping to a conclusion with no evidence" when you are told about the flying spaghetti monster and don't immediately set about trying to prove or disprove its existence? If so, isn't this an entirely reasonable thing to do? I'm simply going with the assumption that the laws of physics are today pretty much as we understood them yesterday. THEY are the ones that would have us turn over some pretty well established theory. For this reason, they have to prove themselves.
And some canned, black-box mystery machine in the owner's basement doesn't prove a damn thing.
You're in distinguished company. That is the precise argument that proponents of Intelligent Design use. "Prove us wrong!".
It is not our obligation to disprove the findings of crackpots. It is their obligation to prove them. They cannot, which is why they have a press release instead of scientific paper.
A lot of work goes into making light sources produce even, smooth lighting that won't generate harsh shadows- point sources make this job a real bitch.
Wrapping the point source in a simple translucent bulb qualifies as a "real bitch"? The engineering field isn't as far along as I thought it was.
I was doing this for a commodity exchange application in around 2001 (MS released MSXML 4 midway through our development.)
It was an app that would bootstrap itself from an HTML page and a boatload of javascript, and communicated with the server solely via XML HTTP requests therafter. It rendered its UI using client-side XSLT transformations.
I thought it was cool, but felt at the time that the issues with caching, performance, and MSXML library version incompatibilities made it too hard to maintain.
You're that guy from the TV commercials, aren't you? You know, the guy for whom straining spaghetti or wiping off a table or opening a jar are so incredibly difficult and frustrating that you have to swipe all your existing products off a tabletop with both hands and buy some special device to do it for you.
The triangulation here is based on relative signal strength, not on time differences like GPS.
There's no way you could do this with the time difference. Even with GPS, where the transmitters are tens of thousands of kilometers away, you need nanosecond-accurate clocks to be able to make sense of the differences in timing. With the transmitters only a block or two away, you haven't got enough difference to work with.
Your geeklessness is showing. Foo and Bar are the de facto standard metasyntactic variable names used when showing examples. They effectively lost their connection to the FUBAR acronym a long time ago.
If this were Microsoft, the entire slashdot army would be marching on Redmond with pitchforks and torches right now. But since it's Apple, you're apologizing for their behaviour.
The face on the 1984 commercial video screen is starting to look a whole lot like Steve Jobs.
Before you know it, this could result in an increasing cost of outsourced workers.
Don't hold your breath. There's a whole second-order wave of tech outsourcing just now staring -- this time in China. And it will be many years before all the wages there rise high enough to be prohibitive.
Using four motors to overcome the same inertia/friction wouldn't take much more power than using one motor to do it.
It would probably take less power, because with a motor driving the wheel directly, you no longer have the (very significant) power loss from the drivetrain.
Slashdot Mirror
Set up XBMC as your dash. You'll never look back: its "dashboard" functionality is just as good as all the other dashboards. It seems to boot just as fast too.
Not much use other than data storage -- a 10,000L 1 meter deep pool would be about 10 feet square.
It looks like it's actually a single chip solution. Any other ideas?
They could even have dropped all the DAC hardware, if HDMI is the only output format.
Imminent death of Usenet predicted. Film at 11.
No, it was a true vector game, fitted with a color XY monitor. Video hardware of that day was nowhere near fast enough to rasterize a 3D scene at that resolution and framerate, even in wireframe.
There was no vector Return of the Jedi game. You're probably thinking of simply "Star Wars", based on the first movie. It let you fight TIEs in open space, attack towers and bunkers on the Death Star surface, and ended a round with the final trench run.
There was a vector Empire Strikes back sequel (actually a ROM upgrade to the original), which is pretty rare. Using the same controls and visuals, it had you hunting probe droids and attacking AT-ATs in a snowspeeder, and in open space fighting TIE and dodging asteroids.
The Return of the Jedi arcade game was a 3/4 perspective shooter, a la Zaxxon, in conventional raster graphics. It sucked.
Indeed. It's telling that in order for a GUI Java app to be regarded as useful, it has to be as insanely great as those two are. Anything less, and you haven't made the painful tradeoff of going to the platform worthwhile.
You can't be serious. The very worst thing about the AJAX phenomenon is that is has lended credibility to that godawful language.
And some canned, black-box mystery machine in the owner's basement doesn't prove a damn thing.
It is not our obligation to disprove the findings of crackpots. It is their obligation to prove them. They cannot, which is why they have a press release instead of scientific paper.
Wrapping the point source in a simple translucent bulb qualifies as a "real bitch"? The engineering field isn't as far along as I thought it was.
It was an app that would bootstrap itself from an HTML page and a boatload of javascript, and communicated with the server solely via XML HTTP requests therafter. It rendered its UI using client-side XSLT transformations.
I thought it was cool, but felt at the time that the issues with caching, performance, and MSXML library version incompatibilities made it too hard to maintain.
You're that guy from the TV commercials, aren't you? You know, the guy for whom straining spaghetti or wiping off a table or opening a jar are so incredibly difficult and frustrating that you have to swipe all your existing products off a tabletop with both hands and buy some special device to do it for you.
There's no way you could do this with the time difference. Even with GPS, where the transmitters are tens of thousands of kilometers away, you need nanosecond-accurate clocks to be able to make sense of the differences in timing. With the transmitters only a block or two away, you haven't got enough difference to work with.
Officials are also considering dismantling the city's controversial Escalator to Nowhere.
It's good to know that its nuclear power plant can survive an earthquake.
Your geeklessness is showing. Foo and Bar are the de facto standard metasyntactic variable names used when showing examples. They effectively lost their connection to the FUBAR acronym a long time ago.
If a stick had a sharpened edge along its length, with a blunt end, it would be "sharp" without being "pointy".
Doh! If it did work it would do the opposite of what we want.
Not that anyone ever saw real examples of it.
If this were Microsoft, the entire slashdot army would be marching on Redmond with pitchforks and torches right now. But since it's Apple, you're apologizing for their behaviour.
The face on the 1984 commercial video screen is starting to look a whole lot like Steve Jobs.
Don't hold your breath. There's a whole second-order wave of tech outsourcing just now staring -- this time in China. And it will be many years before all the wages there rise high enough to be prohibitive.
And then there's still Africa, after that...
It would probably take less power, because with a motor driving the wheel directly, you no longer have the (very significant) power loss from the drivetrain.