Why should they be lifelike?
on
Reviews:Shrek
·
· Score: 2
Why do we expect CG characters to look lifelike? We don't expect cartoon characters to look exactly like normal people? Because they're cartoons, so why do we expect CG characters to look 'real'? Why can't we just say 'okay, it's a CG character, it's not going to look real' and accept the fact that it never will? The movement in cartoons isn't quite right either, but we want CG to be right. Why do we have such high expectations for CG, but not for cartoons? The two are basically the same media, they're attempting to draw (or model/render) a complex physical object, and unless they are going to spends tons of time to paint a portrait of their character, it's not going to look exactly right. It would take even more time to make them move right, so why do we expect them to?
I must disagree based on the following price sheet:
Extra 500MHz on same processor: $ 100
Brand new processor: $ 200
Air cooling system: $ 100
MHz gained from air cooling system: 500
Ultra water cooled system: $ 200
MHz gained from water cooling 1000
300 fps Quake 3 priceless
I think it seems to be missing some sort of indicator to my computer so that my computer knows what the flow rate it and can shut itself off (or adjust the clock speed) after it's gone for a certain amount of time at dangerously low flows. Otherwise it's just a visual indicator to me, but if I'm not by my computer it doesn't do me much good.
2) Standards: Promote collaboration and interoperability while supporting innovation and healthy competition.
I'd like to know what standards Microsoft has been using to promote interoperability and support healthy competition. It seems like they just try to take something good and make it propriatary so it doesn't interoperate with anyone else. From my list I see BOOTP-DHCP, NFS-SMB, Kerbos(sp?), undisclosed file formats, and I'm sure the list goes on. Unless they mean that by supporting the TCP and IP connection protocols they are supporting standards and healthy competition, but I don't buy it.
I know this is the standard 'Embrace and Extinguish' rant, but the fact that they are trying to claim that they don't follow these incompatibility practices and that shared source won't either is just wrong.
I also wonder what they consider 'healthy competition' to be. They obviously consider Linux to be some sort of competition, and they are trying to squash it even though it has such a small market share on the desktop. I suppose their definition of 'healthy competition' and most business defintitions are a little different. Macs are probably considered competition, and I believe Microsoft ported it's office suite to Mac, but not Linux, why? That probably supported healthy competition, but maybe Linux is considered a threat and Macs aren't, hmmmm, makes you wonder...
Personally, I think Yve and Jimmy were great additions to the cast. They needed a non-tech savvy person so they could explain some things to the layman. Yve was just around for the 'hot chick' factor I thought. But she was pretty shallow, always in it for the money and very predictable, but was a good addition nonetheless I thought.
I'd have to agree that a lot of what he says has came to pass. But I think the washable house interior that I just spray down with a hose was a bit far off. And he was right with several ideas, but just a little off on the implementation. Such as I'm sure most of us don't use our tv to do shopping, but we can still shop from our home with our computer (and with our tv if we have webtv).
I wonder what/. thinks the average house will be like in 2050. I'm guessing wireless networked appliances, quantum computers and fiberoptic connection to the internet, but that's probably just my dream, not what will become reality. So what do you think it will be like?
The Java date subsystem was apparently designed by a short sighted individual. Who would use a signed number to represent the date? They could go twice as far into the future if they used it as an unsigned number. After all, time didn't exist before 1970 so it's perfectly okay to just represent it as an unsigned number.
Sorry, but seeing bad programming practices like this just make be a little upset especially for a supposedly robust system such as Java.
Perhaps they should just train a neural net for the filtering instead of just using a word search. I'll bet that given enough time, a well-trained neural net would make a good filter.
This is off topic and I'm probably feeding a troll, but no I don't think Gladiator deserved Best Pictures. I was hoping Crouching Tiger would win, but I knew it wouldn't. Out of the nominated movies, I think Crouching Tiger was the best and deserved to win.
Since the Linux community suffers from poor to no marketing, what advice would you give to the Linux community to improve their marketing? Keep in mind that the Linux community does not have unlimitied marketing funds what would be the most effect ways to market Linux to the public?
What kind of anti-competitive marketing strategies does Microsoft employ to stifle competition and perpetuate the dominance of Microsoft in the market?
When I had to use an SH4, I just created by own real time os for it, it just had to talk to a GPS, Radio Modem and a display (and of course keyboard/mouse), but nothing fancy, but it was a fun project:). It has a very nice and fairly simple architecture and I just had to compile a GCC that for it and it was all over. But it's a fun processor, and I'm wondering how hackable these things will be:).
Antitrust law says that for a company to behave illegally, it must establish a monopoly (not in itself illegal), engage in anti-competitive practices, and perhaps most importantly, harm consumers. Were consumers demonstrably harmed by Microsoft? If so, how?
Consumers are harmed by being forced to use software that does not allow them to achieve their full level of productivity. At work I have to use Win2k, VC6, and Office2k. Win2k must be rebooted at least three times a week to keep it from grinding to a halt because it can't seem to free up memory properly. VC6 crashes at least twice a week for no apparant reason and is often not repeatable. I don't even want to get started on Office2k, but it is some of the most unusable software in my opinion. But I have no choice, since Microsoft _is_ a monopoly I am forced to use their software if I expect other developers to be able to read my documentation and if I want to read their documentation in the format that it was intended. This is harmful to consumers by not giving them the freedom to choose their software and by Microsoft not providing open formats and not supporting a wide variety of third party formats (Lotus and Wordperfect are supported, but that's the only non-ms formats that I can see). This kind of leads me into my next argument:
Did government antitrust prosecutors actually prove that Microsoft prevented Netscape, or any other rival, from bringing new products to the marketplace?
This isn't really a matter of Microsoft preventing Netscape to bring other products to market, but the fact is that the majority of Joe Average Users will just use whatever comes with their system and not bother (or not know how) to go out and get anything else. I'll bet 90% of the Windows users use notepad or wordpad to edit simple text documents, why don't they go out and get Vim or Emacs or any of hundreds of different text editors which have many more features that notepad or wordpad? Because they're already on the system when they install it. Most people if they already have a web browser on their system are not going to rush out and start browsing the web for another browser if they already have one on their system. And when Microsoft has an OS with the huge market share that it does and then starts including an web browser with it in the web-enabled world we have today, that browser will become one of the most widely used browers just because it's already there. With Win3.1 the browser was not included, the users had the choice of which web browser to get and had to make a concious decision 'okay, i'm going to use netscape' or 'i think i'll use explorer', but after the web browser came with the operating system, Microsoft had chosen for them, and why bother going out and getting another one? Technically the users were free to choose Netscape but of them would not simply because they already had one on their system and saw no reason to get another one. Unless of course they were loyal Netscape users already and wanted to support their favorite browser, but this was not the case in the majority of people.
Did Microsoft make it too difficult or in some cases, impossible, for consumers to remove IE from their desktops?
Since most people will only look to their Add/Remove programs list to see if something can be removed and in most cases IE doesn't show up in the Windows Programs list, then I would say yes they made it too difficult for consumers to remove IE from their desktops. Of course, some of the more advanced users could find a document online that described how it could be manually removed by copying over files, etc, but since this information was not easy to come by for the average user I would say they made it too difficult, but not impossible to remove IE from their system.
In this time period, as the Web was exploding, why wasn't Microsoft justified in integrating Windows with its much-hyped OS? Wouldn't doing otherwise prove corporate suicide? Was Microsoft really supposed to sit back and allow competitors to dominate this critical market, surely threatening Windows in the process?
Microsoft was _not_ justified in integrating IE into Windows. It should be just a program like Solitare or Hyperteminal that can be removed at will. Microsoft could have also included other browers (like Netscape) and put both icons on the desktop and allowed the user to choose which one they will use. This might sound silly, but really, what does Microsoft really have to lose? My linux installation came with three different browers (lynx, netscape, and konquerer) and I have the freedom to choose which one I will use. Including another brower would not have been corperate suicide, not including one may have been, but it did not need to be integrated.
Microsoft engages in other forms of anti-competitive behavior in other areas. One that I noticed is it's Hotmail service. Hotmail does not allow me to forward incoming mail to another address or even allow me to check it with a pop3 client. However, it will allow me to check _other_ pop3 mail from Hotmail. Basically once I get mail into Hotmail, I _must_ use the Hotmail webpage to get it. Contrast this with the yahoo service, I can setup my yahoo account to forward mail to other accounts and just give people my yahoo address and it will go whereever I happen to want it. I can also check my yahoo mail from a pop3 client. Yahoo gives me the freedom to do everything with my mail that I want to, but Hotmail forces me to use their system. This is just one example of the anti-competitive nature of Microsoft.
But I believe my rant is done for now, thank you for listening.
Similarly, Serena and Venus Williams could clobber Kevin and George Repper in a doubles match on a tennis court. The Reppers, though, could force a rematch in federal court if the swinging sisters dared to appropriate their patented tennis stroke. As described in the abstract of patent No. 5,993,336 (Nov. 30, 1999), this technique consists of wearing kneepads and swatting the ball "either while the covered knee is on the tennis court surface or just prior to the knee contacting the tennis court surface." This innovation "enables a player to successfully return balls that otherwise are out of effective stroking reach," the patent claim concludes.
I suppose this means I should submit my patent on using multiple digits (fingers or toes) to enter data which will allow users to successfully reach data entry modules (keys, mouse buttons, etc) that are otherwise out of effective striking distance with only one digit.
For 'prior art', everyone I know only uses one finger per hand to type and click mouse buttons so this new method will revolutionize their typing and allow them to type more effectively and quickly.
Perhaps I should clarify the difference between being more difficult and not being able to do the work. When I say that it was more difficult for me and lowered my GPA, it was the difference between my mid-90's grades for CS and high-80's for CE classes (I'm not sure what that translates to in letter grades, but I'm guessing A's for CS classes and B to B+'s for CE classes), that just means that I had a bit more difficulty for them, but it was not impossible.
For instance, with the capstone project I mentioned, there were four groups. Our group was the only one that had a person with a CS background (me), and our group was the only one that actually had something working to show at the end of the semester. The other groups had little things that almost worked and there was one group that had absolutly nothing to show at the end of the term.
That is the difference between something being more difficult and just not being able to do the work. But I know that's just an antecedial story and there were probably other factors involved, but still I'm sure I could have put any CS student on the other teams and they would have come along a lot farther.
I still maintain that any CS could do the work of a CE with minimal training. However, I also believe that any person can do anything they apply themselves at, I just think CS's have a better foundation. I'm sure that CE's could do the same work as a CS, but I think it would take more effort and more time than a CS doing the work of a CE.
When I started college five years ago, I had the same question and my solution was: why not do both? (perhaps that means I'm better suited for management ). I recently graduation with a BS in CS and a BS in CE and looking back I almost regret getting the CE major. Perhaps that's just because I was a programmer at heart before I started and I found all the CE-core classes painful and almost to the point where I considered dropping the CE major my junior year, but at that point I figured I had gone this far, might as well finish. In the end, all it (the CE major) did was lower my GPA.
I believe that any CS student could do the work of a Computer Engineer with maybe minor training in the specific industry. In fact, my CE capstone project was really just an applied CS project but using a different processor (whop-de-doo).
Things I learned from my CE cirriculum:
- Circuit Analysis and Design (boring and trivial, IMHO)
- Computer Architecture (common sense)
- Embedded Systems (applied CS)
- Digital Logic (repeat from the CS course Discrete Math)
Things I learned from my CS cirriculum:
- Algorithms and Data structures (useful when doing any sort of programming)
- Algorithm Analysis
- Advanced Problem Solving (useful for anything)
- System Level programming and OS Design
In my opinion, a CS background will give you more fundamental skills and knowledge that can take you farther than a CE background and can be used in more places than just programming or theoretical studies.
But like everyone else has said, if you like doing the list of thing listed under the CE stuff, then go CE, if you like the CS stuff, go CS, and if you're not sure, stay undeclared until you take a course or two in both of them to see what you like more and if you like both, do a dual major. If you do a dual major it's possible that you can get a job doing both CS work and CE work. Right now I'm programming for a company that writes software that computer engineers use to design systems so it helps that I know what a transistor and a FETT and digital modulation sources and stuff like that are.
Good luck to you, I hope this helps you figure out what you want:).
If you give other users the power to add files to your MP3 directory, what's to prevent them from renaming or deleting your files? or to just cause general havok with your MP3 directory?
Just a thought. But for me and my computer, we don't share our files, except maybe via ftp or http.
1) Because you want to
2) Because you need to
3) Because you think it's funny
4) Because we think it's funny
5) Because it's different and people get tried of the same old, same old
6) Because you are very insecure about yourself and need to feel loved so you put yourself as an option so people will vote for you to boost your low self-esteem and validate your pathetic existence
7) Mr. Sketch
8) CmdrTaco
9) Signal11
10) CowboyNeal [had to incase of #6]
11) Other, please elaborate.
Don't complain about lack of options- You've got to pick a few when you do multiple choice. Those are the breaks.
Feel free to suggest poll ideas if you're feeling creative. I'd strongly suggest reading the past polls first.
This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important- you're insane
Mine's pretty boring, but I'll post it anyways. Basically around 9 years ago I got a modem (2400!) and I logged onto a BBS that required the use of a nick name. So, I sat and looked around to see if anything around me would spark a nickname. Then I saw a pack of Mr. Sketch markers (you know, the scented ones:) ), and I've been using it ever since. In college, my friends shorted it to just 'Sketch' and called me by that instead of my real name, in fact I think one of my friends hasn't call me by my real name in well over two years. But on informal boards and online, I still like to go by Mr. Sketch.
So that's the history behind my name, if anyone cares. One of the drawbacks of it is that people assume that I can draw which is sooooo far from the truth: I can't even draw a stick figure well.
Slashdot Mirror
Why do we expect CG characters to look lifelike? We don't expect cartoon characters to look exactly like normal people? Because they're cartoons, so why do we expect CG characters to look 'real'? Why can't we just say 'okay, it's a CG character, it's not going to look real' and accept the fact that it never will? The movement in cartoons isn't quite right either, but we want CG to be right. Why do we have such high expectations for CG, but not for cartoons? The two are basically the same media, they're attempting to draw (or model/render) a complex physical object, and unless they are going to spends tons of time to paint a portrait of their character, it's not going to look exactly right. It would take even more time to make them move right, so why do we expect them to?
I must disagree based on the following price sheet:
Extra 500MHz on same processor: $ 100
Brand new processor: $ 200
Air cooling system: $ 100
MHz gained from air cooling system: 500
Ultra water cooled system: $ 200
MHz gained from water cooling 1000
300 fps Quake 3 priceless
I think it seems to be missing some sort of indicator to my computer so that my computer knows what the flow rate it and can shut itself off (or adjust the clock speed) after it's gone for a certain amount of time at dangerously low flows. Otherwise it's just a visual indicator to me, but if I'm not by my computer it doesn't do me much good.
2) Standards: Promote collaboration and interoperability while supporting innovation and healthy competition.
I'd like to know what standards Microsoft has been using to promote interoperability and support healthy competition. It seems like they just try to take something good and make it propriatary so it doesn't interoperate with anyone else. From my list I see BOOTP-DHCP, NFS-SMB, Kerbos(sp?), undisclosed file formats, and I'm sure the list goes on. Unless they mean that by supporting the TCP and IP connection protocols they are supporting standards and healthy competition, but I don't buy it.
I know this is the standard 'Embrace and Extinguish' rant, but the fact that they are trying to claim that they don't follow these incompatibility practices and that shared source won't either is just wrong.
I also wonder what they consider 'healthy competition' to be. They obviously consider Linux to be some sort of competition, and they are trying to squash it even though it has such a small market share on the desktop. I suppose their definition of 'healthy competition' and most business defintitions are a little different. Macs are probably considered competition, and I believe Microsoft ported it's office suite to Mac, but not Linux, why? That probably supported healthy competition, but maybe Linux is considered a threat and Macs aren't, hmmmm, makes you wonder...
Personally, I think Yve and Jimmy were great additions to the cast. They needed a non-tech savvy person so they could explain some things to the layman. Yve was just around for the 'hot chick' factor I thought. But she was pretty shallow, always in it for the money and very predictable, but was a good addition nonetheless I thought.
I'd have to agree that a lot of what he says has came to pass. But I think the washable house interior that I just spray down with a hose was a bit far off. And he was right with several ideas, but just a little off on the implementation. Such as I'm sure most of us don't use our tv to do shopping, but we can still shop from our home with our computer (and with our tv if we have webtv).
/. thinks the average house will be like in 2050. I'm guessing wireless networked appliances, quantum computers and fiberoptic connection to the internet, but that's probably just my dream, not what will become reality. So what do you think it will be like?
I wonder what
The Java date subsystem was apparently designed by a short sighted individual. Who would use a signed number to represent the date? They could go twice as far into the future if they used it as an unsigned number. After all, time didn't exist before 1970 so it's perfectly okay to just represent it as an unsigned number.
Sorry, but seeing bad programming practices like this just make be a little upset especially for a supposedly robust system such as Java.
It says so on his webpage that:
* Released bonobo-1.0.1 if only POTFILES.in was checked by make distcheck.
I'm not really sure either, but it sounds like some sort of development IDE for Gnome, but I could be wrong.
here.
Because Star Wars: Episode II will be out as well as the Lord of the Rings Trilogy. So far 2001 has sucked as far as movies go, IMHO of course.
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Perhaps they should just train a neural net for the filtering instead of just using a word search. I'll bet that given enough time, a well-trained neural net would make a good filter.
This is off topic and I'm probably feeding a troll, but no I don't think Gladiator deserved Best Pictures. I was hoping Crouching Tiger would win, but I knew it wouldn't. Out of the nominated movies, I think Crouching Tiger was the best and deserved to win.
Since the Linux community suffers from poor to no marketing, what advice would you give to the Linux community to improve their marketing? Keep in mind that the Linux community does not have unlimitied marketing funds what would be the most effect ways to market Linux to the public?
Hypothetically, if Microsoft was working on it's own version of Linux, how would Microsoft market it to the public?
Would they emphasize compatibility with Windows or would they try to make it stand on it's own merits or what other strategies would be used?
I know every soul has a price and going from unix to working with Microsoft, what was the price of your soul?
What kind of anti-competitive marketing strategies does Microsoft employ to stifle competition and perpetuate the dominance of Microsoft in the market?
When I had to use an SH4, I just created by own real time os for it, it just had to talk to a GPS, Radio Modem and a display (and of course keyboard/mouse), but nothing fancy, but it was a fun project :). It has a very nice and fairly simple architecture and I just had to compile a GCC that for it and it was all over. But it's a fun processor, and I'm wondering how hackable these things will be :).
Antitrust law says that for a company to behave illegally, it must establish a monopoly (not in itself illegal), engage in anti-competitive practices, and perhaps most importantly, harm consumers. Were consumers demonstrably harmed by Microsoft? If so, how?
Consumers are harmed by being forced to use software that does not allow them to achieve their full level of productivity. At work I have to use Win2k, VC6, and Office2k. Win2k must be rebooted at least three times a week to keep it from grinding to a halt because it can't seem to free up memory properly. VC6 crashes at least twice a week for no apparant reason and is often not repeatable. I don't even want to get started on Office2k, but it is some of the most unusable software in my opinion. But I have no choice, since Microsoft _is_ a monopoly I am forced to use their software if I expect other developers to be able to read my documentation and if I want to read their documentation in the format that it was intended. This is harmful to consumers by not giving them the freedom to choose their software and by Microsoft not providing open formats and not supporting a wide variety of third party formats (Lotus and Wordperfect are supported, but that's the only non-ms formats that I can see). This kind of leads me into my next argument:
Did government antitrust prosecutors actually prove that Microsoft prevented Netscape, or any other rival, from bringing new products to the marketplace?
This isn't really a matter of Microsoft preventing Netscape to bring other products to market, but the fact is that the majority of Joe Average Users will just use whatever comes with their system and not bother (or not know how) to go out and get anything else. I'll bet 90% of the Windows users use notepad or wordpad to edit simple text documents, why don't they go out and get Vim or Emacs or any of hundreds of different text editors which have many more features that notepad or wordpad? Because they're already on the system when they install it. Most people if they already have a web browser on their system are not going to rush out and start browsing the web for another browser if they already have one on their system. And when Microsoft has an OS with the huge market share that it does and then starts including an web browser with it in the web-enabled world we have today, that browser will become one of the most widely used browers just because it's already there. With Win3.1 the browser was not included, the users had the choice of which web browser to get and had to make a concious decision 'okay, i'm going to use netscape' or 'i think i'll use explorer', but after the web browser came with the operating system, Microsoft had chosen for them, and why bother going out and getting another one? Technically the users were free to choose Netscape but of them would not simply because they already had one on their system and saw no reason to get another one. Unless of course they were loyal Netscape users already and wanted to support their favorite browser, but this was not the case in the majority of people.
Did Microsoft make it too difficult or in some cases, impossible, for consumers to remove IE from their desktops?
Since most people will only look to their Add/Remove programs list to see if something can be removed and in most cases IE doesn't show up in the Windows Programs list, then I would say yes they made it too difficult for consumers to remove IE from their desktops. Of course, some of the more advanced users could find a document online that described how it could be manually removed by copying over files, etc, but since this information was not easy to come by for the average user I would say they made it too difficult, but not impossible to remove IE from their system.
In this time period, as the Web was exploding, why wasn't Microsoft justified in integrating Windows with its much-hyped OS? Wouldn't doing otherwise prove corporate suicide? Was Microsoft really supposed to sit back and allow competitors to dominate this critical market, surely threatening Windows in the process?
Microsoft was _not_ justified in integrating IE into Windows. It should be just a program like Solitare or Hyperteminal that can be removed at will. Microsoft could have also included other browers (like Netscape) and put both icons on the desktop and allowed the user to choose which one they will use. This might sound silly, but really, what does Microsoft really have to lose? My linux installation came with three different browers (lynx, netscape, and konquerer) and I have the freedom to choose which one I will use. Including another brower would not have been corperate suicide, not including one may have been, but it did not need to be integrated.
Microsoft engages in other forms of anti-competitive behavior in other areas. One that I noticed is it's Hotmail service. Hotmail does not allow me to forward incoming mail to another address or even allow me to check it with a pop3 client. However, it will allow me to check _other_ pop3 mail from Hotmail. Basically once I get mail into Hotmail, I _must_ use the Hotmail webpage to get it. Contrast this with the yahoo service, I can setup my yahoo account to forward mail to other accounts and just give people my yahoo address and it will go whereever I happen to want it. I can also check my yahoo mail from a pop3 client. Yahoo gives me the freedom to do everything with my mail that I want to, but Hotmail forces me to use their system. This is just one example of the anti-competitive nature of Microsoft.
But I believe my rant is done for now, thank you for listening.
By a similar note:
Similarly, Serena and Venus Williams could clobber Kevin and George Repper in a doubles match on a tennis court. The Reppers, though, could force a rematch in federal court if the swinging sisters dared to appropriate their patented tennis stroke. As described in the abstract of patent No. 5,993,336 (Nov. 30, 1999), this technique consists of wearing kneepads and swatting the ball "either while the covered knee is on the tennis court surface or just prior to the knee contacting the tennis court surface." This innovation "enables a player to successfully return balls that otherwise are out of effective stroking reach," the patent claim concludes.
I suppose this means I should submit my patent on using multiple digits (fingers or toes) to enter data which will allow users to successfully reach data entry modules (keys, mouse buttons, etc) that are otherwise out of effective striking distance with only one digit.
For 'prior art', everyone I know only uses one finger per hand to type and click mouse buttons so this new method will revolutionize their typing and allow them to type more effectively and quickly.
Perhaps I should clarify the difference between being more difficult and not being able to do the work. When I say that it was more difficult for me and lowered my GPA, it was the difference between my mid-90's grades for CS and high-80's for CE classes (I'm not sure what that translates to in letter grades, but I'm guessing A's for CS classes and B to B+'s for CE classes), that just means that I had a bit more difficulty for them, but it was not impossible.
For instance, with the capstone project I mentioned, there were four groups. Our group was the only one that had a person with a CS background (me), and our group was the only one that actually had something working to show at the end of the semester. The other groups had little things that almost worked and there was one group that had absolutly nothing to show at the end of the term.
That is the difference between something being more difficult and just not being able to do the work. But I know that's just an antecedial story and there were probably other factors involved, but still I'm sure I could have put any CS student on the other teams and they would have come along a lot farther.
I still maintain that any CS could do the work of a CE with minimal training. However, I also believe that any person can do anything they apply themselves at, I just think CS's have a better foundation. I'm sure that CE's could do the same work as a CS, but I think it would take more effort and more time than a CS doing the work of a CE.
When I started college five years ago, I had the same question and my solution was: why not do both? (perhaps that means I'm better suited for management ). I recently graduation with a BS in CS and a BS in CE and looking back I almost regret getting the CE major. Perhaps that's just because I was a programmer at heart before I started and I found all the CE-core classes painful and almost to the point where I considered dropping the CE major my junior year, but at that point I figured I had gone this far, might as well finish. In the end, all it (the CE major) did was lower my GPA.
:).
I believe that any CS student could do the work of a Computer Engineer with maybe minor training in the specific industry. In fact, my CE capstone project was really just an applied CS project but using a different processor (whop-de-doo).
Things I learned from my CE cirriculum:
- Circuit Analysis and Design (boring and trivial, IMHO)
- Computer Architecture (common sense)
- Embedded Systems (applied CS)
- Digital Logic (repeat from the CS course Discrete Math)
Things I learned from my CS cirriculum:
- Algorithms and Data structures (useful when doing any sort of programming)
- Algorithm Analysis
- Advanced Problem Solving (useful for anything)
- System Level programming and OS Design
In my opinion, a CS background will give you more fundamental skills and knowledge that can take you farther than a CE background and can be used in more places than just programming or theoretical studies.
But like everyone else has said, if you like doing the list of thing listed under the CE stuff, then go CE, if you like the CS stuff, go CS, and if you're not sure, stay undeclared until you take a course or two in both of them to see what you like more and if you like both, do a dual major. If you do a dual major it's possible that you can get a job doing both CS work and CE work. Right now I'm programming for a company that writes software that computer engineers use to design systems so it helps that I know what a transistor and a FETT and digital modulation sources and stuff like that are.
Good luck to you, I hope this helps you figure out what you want
If you give other users the power to add files to your MP3 directory, what's to prevent them from renaming or deleting your files? or to just cause general havok with your MP3 directory?
Just a thought. But for me and my computer, we don't share our files, except maybe via ftp or http.
1) Because you want to
2) Because you need to
3) Because you think it's funny
4) Because we think it's funny
5) Because it's different and people get tried of the same old, same old
6) Because you are very insecure about yourself and need to feel loved so you put yourself as an option so people will vote for you to boost your low self-esteem and validate your pathetic existence
7) Mr. Sketch
8) CmdrTaco
9) Signal11
10) CowboyNeal [had to incase of #6]
11) Other, please elaborate.
Don't complain about lack of options- You've got to pick a few when you do multiple choice. Those are the breaks.
Feel free to suggest poll ideas if you're feeling creative. I'd strongly suggest reading the past polls first.
This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important- you're insane
Mine's pretty boring, but I'll post it anyways. Basically around 9 years ago I got a modem (2400!) and I logged onto a BBS that required the use of a nick name. So, I sat and looked around to see if anything around me would spark a nickname. Then I saw a pack of Mr. Sketch markers (you know, the scented ones :) ), and I've been using it ever since. In college, my friends shorted it to just 'Sketch' and called me by that instead of my real name, in fact I think one of my friends hasn't call me by my real name in well over two years. But on informal boards and online, I still like to go by Mr. Sketch.
So that's the history behind my name, if anyone cares. One of the drawbacks of it is that people assume that I can draw which is sooooo far from the truth: I can't even draw a stick figure well.