Run a test pattern through your Blu-Ray player if you don't believe me. I had to work really hard to find a modeline that got rid of overscan on my HTPC and 1080p TV (more to blame for my TV having bad EDID data).
If you have a 720p TV, the problem is even worse, because although it will take a 1280x780 input signal, it's usually displaying it on a 1366x768 panel and it won't usually take a 1366x768 signal at all.
So their test actually puts more load on the computer (or they adjust by loading less often). It didn't account for the battery life difference and the patch seems to have solved that problem.
Not really an issue for video unless it's showing pixel-accurate things like text (lower thirds, screencasts, etc). Otherwise, you get pretty much the same clarity on the resized video - none of it is ultra-sharp to begin with. Just like most TVs have 1920x1080 panels but still overscan the incoming signal and most people don't complain that it's not being displayed 1:1 unless they're plugging a PC into it.
If you work in a pro photo editing tool, the cropping feature already has lots of preset ratios. They are in easy to read formats like "5x7" or "8x10". No need to do your own math.
I said Unix - OS X is based on a different Unix OS and I'm not comparing it to Linux.
A lot of things you take for granted on the CLI are based on bash scripts using all sorts of tiny scripts (sed, awk, grep). Even major packages work this way.
Either way, Apple is well-known for enforcing their preferred way of using a device (you're holding it wrong). If you are wanting to do something different, there's a long-established history of being forced to go the third-party route. If you're already using a Mac, you probably already know this.
The ratios are a little off to make the macro blocks evenly divisible by 16 pixels. This also makes the GPU happy. You probably lose a lot more pixels in the overscan on a TV anyway. The picture is still more or less true to the theatrical original.
Give it a while, someone will create a utility to do the one-by-one adding for you. Maybe you could do that yourself and release it to the world. Either way, it will probably not be a problem long-term.
That is, the test was made by lazy people that don't ACTUALLY want to simulate what a real day is like
If you have real people clicking buttons all day, that's likely to give false readings, too. If you have enough web site samples to be representative of average web sites, then you don't actually need all 600 sites visited over 8-10 hours to be different as long as caching is disabled.
Their testing protocol would have been fine if it weren't for the Safari bug.
Moreover, they should've tested with another browser to see if the results were replicable there
I don't 100% disagree, but they're giving a single battery rating. Not one for every possible use case. Adding 3rd-party software is not completely fair to Apple, because it's not a test of what they've themselves have made and they don't need to accept the blame for other browsers killing the battery.
Apple can walk away saying their hardware was perfectly good all along, and CR is going to have to issue a retraction and update to the test.
CR didn't test the hardware. They tested the hardware/software in combination. The update would not be a retraction, it would be a tangible change to the product.
If the movie is filmed in it, the Blu-Ray discs almost always preserve it. DVD does too more often than not, but there aren't a lot of pixels for good image quality. Most movies are still done in 16:9, but a lot of directors are still enamored with the size. I own quite a few movies in that format - you see it more for action/sci-fi and almost never for romantic comedy.
Just hold down the Fn key. I think that was the default on previous Macs anyway, since the brightness and volume settings were performed by pressing the top row without holding down Fn.
If you leave caching on, you'd can't test by loading a handful of sites over and over. They would have to have a script of non-repeating real-world web sites that would handle 8-10 hours of battery life.
By limiting to a handful of sites and disabling a cache, you can make a more consistent and repeatable test. While you're testing real-world (and real web sites), you still want to test in a repeatable and somewhat verifiable way.
The only reason these songs were mastered in such a high sample rate / bit depth is to reduce artifacts when blending multitrack audio into a single output. There is no reason not to downsample that to 48KHz/44.1KHz, because human hearing is incapable of hearing the difference.
I'm not sure what the benefit of a higher bit depth is when you're already listening to music with the dynamic range crushed out of it. 16-bit is a pretty wide range of volume already, thought I could see 24-bit being reasonably worthwhile.
Despite how ridiculous the radio repeats are, few people want a month of no-repeats. Either way, $2,000 worth of music lasts far more than the 17 years it would take to match that expense through Spotify. I have plenty of music from CDs older than 17 years that I still listen to. Stored properly, you can get 50 years out of it, and a few might be valuable to a future heir.
A huge number of my CDs were bought used and under the $5 range - they make flawless rips just fine. I don't think your dollar comparisons hold up to the average use case.
If CD sales are going down, nobody's buying CDs to rip. Yeah, a lot of people have pre-existing libraries and just don't want newer music - but that is only a certain age range that would have bought CDs in the past.
I understand that if a furnace stops working I need to call someone to repair it and find a warm place to stay if my house gets too cold.
But if it's an unoccupied rental, the pipes will freeze and burst and you may not know for a long time. What's useful to one person may not be useful to everyone, but it's not stupid all around.
Data mining isn't all bad. If it's only minimal telemetry, anyway. Imagine they are getting a number of warranty claims, but have no idea how they're getting so much premature wear. Aggregating basic usage statistics will help them to build more durable appliances but only increasing the budget on the parts that actually get more abuse.
4. Don't fill anything with a weak contrast (white on white, black on black, or light gray on white. Subtracting foreground color from background is easy)
Sometimes when styling custom form elements, the border goes on a container rather than the element itself.
The rational for disabling automatic defragging is that it interferes with other stuff going during the maintenance window or programs being run overnight
While that's true, you can set scheduled tasks to run with a timer - if it takes longer than its allotted time it can be stopped to make way for the next item. If it's running weekly on schedule, it shouldn't take long to run anyway.
This might be a non-issue now that newer PCs have SSDs instead of HDDs
Complete non-issue. In fact, it's recommended to not even bother defragging, because that will just increase the write cycles.
Slashdot Mirror
ATSC called, it has the same problem.
Run a test pattern through your Blu-Ray player if you don't believe me. I had to work really hard to find a modeline that got rid of overscan on my HTPC and 1080p TV (more to blame for my TV having bad EDID data).
If you have a 720p TV, the problem is even worse, because although it will take a 1280x780 input signal, it's usually displaying it on a 1366x768 panel and it won't usually take a 1366x768 signal at all.
So their test actually puts more load on the computer (or they adjust by loading less often). It didn't account for the battery life difference and the patch seems to have solved that problem.
Not really an issue for video unless it's showing pixel-accurate things like text (lower thirds, screencasts, etc). Otherwise, you get pretty much the same clarity on the resized video - none of it is ultra-sharp to begin with. Just like most TVs have 1920x1080 panels but still overscan the incoming signal and most people don't complain that it's not being displayed 1:1 unless they're plugging a PC into it.
If you work in a pro photo editing tool, the cropping feature already has lots of preset ratios. They are in easy to read formats like "5x7" or "8x10". No need to do your own math.
I said Unix - OS X is based on a different Unix OS and I'm not comparing it to Linux.
A lot of things you take for granted on the CLI are based on bash scripts using all sorts of tiny scripts (sed, awk, grep). Even major packages work this way.
Either way, Apple is well-known for enforcing their preferred way of using a device (you're holding it wrong). If you are wanting to do something different, there's a long-established history of being forced to go the third-party route. If you're already using a Mac, you probably already know this.
installing many little third party toolets to make an expensive machine do what you want
That's the Unix way.
The ratios are a little off to make the macro blocks evenly divisible by 16 pixels. This also makes the GPU happy. You probably lose a lot more pixels in the overscan on a TV anyway. The picture is still more or less true to the theatrical original.
Give it a while, someone will create a utility to do the one-by-one adding for you. Maybe you could do that yourself and release it to the world. Either way, it will probably not be a problem long-term.
That is, the test was made by lazy people that don't ACTUALLY want to simulate what a real day is like
If you have real people clicking buttons all day, that's likely to give false readings, too. If you have enough web site samples to be representative of average web sites, then you don't actually need all 600 sites visited over 8-10 hours to be different as long as caching is disabled.
Their testing protocol would have been fine if it weren't for the Safari bug.
Moreover, they should've tested with another browser to see if the results were replicable there
I don't 100% disagree, but they're giving a single battery rating. Not one for every possible use case. Adding 3rd-party software is not completely fair to Apple, because it's not a test of what they've themselves have made and they don't need to accept the blame for other browsers killing the battery.
Apple can walk away saying their hardware was perfectly good all along, and CR is going to have to issue a retraction and update to the test.
CR didn't test the hardware. They tested the hardware/software in combination. The update would not be a retraction, it would be a tangible change to the product.
If the movie is filmed in it, the Blu-Ray discs almost always preserve it. DVD does too more often than not, but there aren't a lot of pixels for good image quality. Most movies are still done in 16:9, but a lot of directors are still enamored with the size. I own quite a few movies in that format - you see it more for action/sci-fi and almost never for romantic comedy.
Sounds like marketing is doing what marketing does and making it understandable to the everyday person.
For easier comprehension and comparison by consumers to 16:9.
On properly formatted movies, cinemascope films (2.35:1) would show smaller black bars than on a 16:9 display.
Just hold down the Fn key. I think that was the default on previous Macs anyway, since the brightness and volume settings were performed by pressing the top row without holding down Fn.
If you leave caching on, you'd can't test by loading a handful of sites over and over. They would have to have a script of non-repeating real-world web sites that would handle 8-10 hours of battery life.
By limiting to a handful of sites and disabling a cache, you can make a more consistent and repeatable test. While you're testing real-world (and real web sites), you still want to test in a repeatable and somewhat verifiable way.
Someone mod this up, seriously. What's the point of a high-quality stream if it's going to be degraded like this.
The only reason these songs were mastered in such a high sample rate / bit depth is to reduce artifacts when blending multitrack audio into a single output. There is no reason not to downsample that to 48KHz/44.1KHz, because human hearing is incapable of hearing the difference.
I'm not sure what the benefit of a higher bit depth is when you're already listening to music with the dynamic range crushed out of it. 16-bit is a pretty wide range of volume already, thought I could see 24-bit being reasonably worthwhile.
No, they charge you the same amount regardless of your age typically.
Assuming an average pf 21 work days per week
I think you need to find a new line of work.
Despite how ridiculous the radio repeats are, few people want a month of no-repeats. Either way, $2,000 worth of music lasts far more than the 17 years it would take to match that expense through Spotify. I have plenty of music from CDs older than 17 years that I still listen to. Stored properly, you can get 50 years out of it, and a few might be valuable to a future heir.
A huge number of my CDs were bought used and under the $5 range - they make flawless rips just fine. I don't think your dollar comparisons hold up to the average use case.
What copyright nonsense? You're legally allowed to rip your CDs for personal use. ITs called Fair Use.
I assume this refers to the copy made inadvertently when the computer is backed up to a corporate backup system.
If CD sales are going down, nobody's buying CDs to rip. Yeah, a lot of people have pre-existing libraries and just don't want newer music - but that is only a certain age range that would have bought CDs in the past.
I understand that if a furnace stops working I need to call someone to repair it and find a warm place to stay if my house gets too cold.
But if it's an unoccupied rental, the pipes will freeze and burst and you may not know for a long time. What's useful to one person may not be useful to everyone, but it's not stupid all around.
Data mining isn't all bad. If it's only minimal telemetry, anyway. Imagine they are getting a number of warranty claims, but have no idea how they're getting so much premature wear. Aggregating basic usage statistics will help them to build more durable appliances but only increasing the budget on the parts that actually get more abuse.
Windows 10 is NOT a good example of this.
4. Don't fill anything with a weak contrast (white on white, black on black, or light gray on white. Subtracting foreground color from background is easy)
Sometimes when styling custom form elements, the border goes on a container rather than the element itself.
The rational for disabling automatic defragging is that it interferes with other stuff going during the maintenance window or programs being run overnight
While that's true, you can set scheduled tasks to run with a timer - if it takes longer than its allotted time it can be stopped to make way for the next item. If it's running weekly on schedule, it shouldn't take long to run anyway.
This might be a non-issue now that newer PCs have SSDs instead of HDDs
Complete non-issue. In fact, it's recommended to not even bother defragging, because that will just increase the write cycles.