Hearing the difference now isn’t the reason to encode to FLAC. FLAC uses lossless compression, while MP3 is ‘lossy’. What this means is that for each year the MP3 sits on your hard drive, it will lose roughly 12kbps, assuming you have SATA – it’s about 15kbps on IDE, but only 7kbps on SCSI, due to rotational velocidensity. You don’t want to know how much worse it is on CD-ROM or other optical media.
I started collecting MP3s in about 2001, and if I try to play any of the tracks I downloaded back then, even the stuff I grabbed at 320kbps, they just sound like crap. The bass is terrible, the midrangewell don’t get me started. Some of those albums have degraded down to 32 or even 16kbps. FLAC rips from the same period still sound great, even if they weren’t stored correctly, in a cool, dry place. Seriously, stick to FLAC, you may not be able to hear the difference now, but in a year or two, you’ll be glad you did.
This is what you get with proprietary software. Under that kind of software, you don't get the tools and legal permissions to do that kind of stuff. You got exactly what you bought, nobody promised you would get any sort of benefit once they stop providing updates for that product.
I mean, this situation does suck, but that's just the nature of closed-source software. This complaint is out of scope of the realities for this OS.
Is Debian 2.2 still receiving updates? (It's not) Then why are you expecting Microsoft to still provide updates to XP? I mean, I really dislike MS as a company, but this kind of complaint is just plain and utterly retarded.
Dude, 512 GB flash drives have been announced by Kingston already. Sure, they're expensive, but we'll have them this year. Double that is 2 or 3 years ahead at most.
My logic is that only things that are actually interesting should be reported on.
Both you and I know this is extremely subjective.
It's a major release and as such it should be reported. Firefox also has a similar release schedule and it gets reported as much on Slashdot. I do find this new kind of release schedule (both on Chrome and Firefox) completely idiotic, but that's a whole different issue.
Your cell phone has a battery, which keeps it running even if it's not plugged in... Just write down your 3 most important phone numbers before you run out of power.
It's a Wii with a better CPU & GPU and a tablet controller.
Even though I somewhat agree with you, bear in mind that a better CPU/GPU allows for new kinds of games. I, for instance, love my Nintendo DS but it's painfully obvious when I play a GameBoy Advance game. It's not only better graphics: GBA's gameplay is much worse than that of the DS.
Sure, it won't be a jump as remarkable as that of the SNES vs. Nintendo 64, but better hardware allows for improved gameplay.
If you already own a tablet that can stream to your TV
You can't compare. I mean, I'm sure a lot of casuals won't care (And that's why Nintendo will have it much harder this generation), but playing without dedicated buttons and analog controllers is bullshit. Only a limited set of genres can successfully be played with only a touchscreen.
The big problem that AMD has right now is old debt and an inability to produce enough chips to satisfy demand.
So why did they delay Trinity on the desktop? They did it because they needed to get rid of old Llano stock. That's not exactly a "satisfied demand." Moreover, Bulldozer was a disappointment and I'd rather buy a Sandy/Ivy Bridge i5.
I'm sorry. I love AMD but they're rapidly going down the gutter. Trinity is mildly interesting, but not really that much. The future also doesn't look great for them, other than the GPU division.
Intel is a whole litho process node ahead of AMD. That translates into better battery life to your laptop. Only if you're a gamer on a budget should you consider going with Llano/Trinity and most people are not gamers (Flash games are not what I mean)
Bulldozer is almost useless unless you can fully take advantage of all of its "cores"
Slashdot Mirror
Could you expand on your view? I'm not sure I really get it.
As an Argentinian, I believe invading the Falklands/Malvinas was one of the stupidest things we've ever done, and we've done plenty of stupid shit.
Hearing the difference now isn’t the reason to encode to FLAC. FLAC uses lossless compression, while MP3 is ‘lossy’. What this means is that for each year the MP3 sits on your hard drive, it will lose roughly 12kbps, assuming you have SATA – it’s about 15kbps on IDE, but only 7kbps on SCSI, due to rotational velocidensity. You don’t want to know how much worse it is on CD-ROM or other optical media.
I started collecting MP3s in about 2001, and if I try to play any of the tracks I downloaded back then, even the stuff I grabbed at 320kbps, they just sound like crap. The bass is terrible, the midrangewell don’t get me started. Some of those albums have degraded down to 32 or even 16kbps. FLAC rips from the same period still sound great, even if they weren’t stored correctly, in a cool, dry place. Seriously, stick to FLAC, you may not be able to hear the difference now, but in a year or two, you’ll be glad you did.
Uhm... What happened in the last quarter of 2008?
This is what you get with proprietary software. Under that kind of software, you don't get the tools and legal permissions to do that kind of stuff. You got exactly what you bought, nobody promised you would get any sort of benefit once they stop providing updates for that product.
I mean, this situation does suck, but that's just the nature of closed-source software. This complaint is out of scope of the realities for this OS.
Is Debian 2.2 still receiving updates? (It's not) Then why are you expecting Microsoft to still provide updates to XP? I mean, I really dislike MS as a company, but this kind of complaint is just plain and utterly retarded.
Dude, 512 GB flash drives have been announced by Kingston already. Sure, they're expensive, but we'll have them this year. Double that is 2 or 3 years ahead at most.
You dropped $30.000* - $80.000* on a house, but only put 2 ($4200) CPUs in the machine? Cheapskate. * House 1 = $30.000 * House 2 = $80.000
My logic is that only things that are actually interesting should be reported on.
Both you and I know this is extremely subjective.
It's a major release and as such it should be reported. Firefox also has a similar release schedule and it gets reported as much on Slashdot. I do find this new kind of release schedule (both on Chrome and Firefox) completely idiotic, but that's a whole different issue.
By your logic, Chrome should've been mentioned by Slashdot only once, during it's initial release, since it includes a silent updater from day 1.
Only Slashdot's virgin clueless fags can mod this comment to +5 insightful,
They use a different kind of technology to transfer video, it's not done over Bluetooth. I don't know exactly what technology, though.
Thank you for putting some humor in this thread. This topic terrifies me.
Your cell phone has a battery, which keeps it running even if it's not plugged in... Just write down your 3 most important phone numbers before you run out of power.
Wii U will be the same deal.
There will be a Pro controller for the Wii U (which looks quite like the XBox 360 controller)
Yeah, probably. I mean, I never had a GBA, so playing those games on the DS feels as a "downgrade" for me.
It's a Wii with a better CPU & GPU and a tablet controller.
Even though I somewhat agree with you, bear in mind that a better CPU/GPU allows for new kinds of games. I, for instance, love my Nintendo DS but it's painfully obvious when I play a GameBoy Advance game. It's not only better graphics: GBA's gameplay is much worse than that of the DS.
Sure, it won't be a jump as remarkable as that of the SNES vs. Nintendo 64, but better hardware allows for improved gameplay.
Yeah! Enough of rehashes! Now let's all play another round of Call of Halo 9.
If you already own a tablet that can stream to your TV
You can't compare. I mean, I'm sure a lot of casuals won't care (And that's why Nintendo will have it much harder this generation), but playing without dedicated buttons and analog controllers is bullshit. Only a limited set of genres can successfully be played with only a touchscreen.
Intel will be relevant for 8 years more at least, very likely much more.
Perhaps you mean death of Intel-as-a-monopoly?
Don't tell me, ask games developers: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/5
No, that depends on the game. AI processing isn't done on a GPU. Of course, it's almost always better to improve your GPU instead of your CPU.
The Sandy Bridge architecture was developed in Israel.
The big problem that AMD has right now is old debt and an inability to produce enough chips to satisfy demand.
So why did they delay Trinity on the desktop? They did it because they needed to get rid of old Llano stock. That's not exactly a "satisfied demand." Moreover, Bulldozer was a disappointment and I'd rather buy a Sandy/Ivy Bridge i5.
I'm sorry. I love AMD but they're rapidly going down the gutter. Trinity is mildly interesting, but not really that much. The future also doesn't look great for them, other than the GPU division.
Intel is a whole litho process node ahead of AMD. That translates into better battery life to your laptop. Only if you're a gamer on a budget should you consider going with Llano/Trinity and most people are not gamers (Flash games are not what I mean)
Bulldozer is almost useless unless you can fully take advantage of all of its "cores"
You are right: only 90% of the market is interested in single threaded performance.