It's not even fake AI. All they were saying was that a less resource intensive OS leaves more compute cycles open for harder things. I'll at least admit it is buzzword-compliant. And maybe a little better marketing than "creators update," but that's not saying much.
Sure. And Apple wants to be the one to tell you who to trust. Just like the others, somehow only the OEM is trustworthy and everyone else is not.
The current push against right-to-repair by companies is mostly focused around the idea that everyone but the OEM is out to get you and that you shouldn't be legally allowed to trust anyone else. This is mostly because they have no remaining legs to stand on, and this one is flimsy. I'm sure car dealers would say only the dealership is safe for an oil change. Only genuine Canon inks are safe and won't void your warranty. But the OEM is always trustworthy somehow.
We import petroleum for a good reason. If we used all of our own, we would run out faster and lose our control on global oil prices. Having a stockpile is a price control measure.
I know. There are people lying in the gutters in Belgium. Completely destitute because they spent their last dollar on one more loot box. It is indeed the biggest problem in Belgium.
Nearly every theater screen in the US is digital projection now, capable of 24 FPS, 48 FPS, 60 FPS or more. 30 FPS looks fine.
Digital projection is not all it takes. A compatible delivery format that was designed into the firmware is what it takes. Few of them had the capability. 30 fps is drastically different and if you can't see the difference then you simply don't know what you're talking about.
Major theaters didn't show the Hobbit in 24 FPS. They showed it at 48 FPS.
I had to drive to one of only a couple theaters in a metro area to try it out.
Oh, I had no interest in the movies themselves. Just the new format.
You run the film at double the speed, doubling your cost. Or you run the video at twice the frame rate, doubling your VFX render cost and not much else. Your nonsense about rolling shutters is absurd. You're still doing the VFX afterward and you're still working with the same fucking issues matching the digital effects to the motion blur, color, noise, etc. of the film. If it looks like ass at 48 FPS it'll look like ass at 24 FPS.
These were shot with RED cameras (not film). And doubling the render cost is nothing compared to the cost of creating the VFX. Matching the motion characteristics is more complex than just matching frame rate (especially if you have two targets). You don't even know what rolling shutter means, so stop talking absurd. But the 24fps (most of the trailers I saw) were actually more convincing in the VFX because it's known territory and could be handled relatively well.
Either that, or they have huge quality control problems and the refurbs really are refurbs.
Ding! Ding! Ding!
I doubt they could stay in business if their quality was that bad.
Sure they can. They double-dip on sales by re-selling it refurbished. And the first customer paid extra for the warranty to allow it to fail. And the refurb-buyers are convinced to just buy another one when it fails rather than consider another option because they're still convinced that Dyson is the best.
DLP is projection-based (if I remember right). So there's both the lower contrast from that and the horrible flickering from the mirror array. I can't stand the flicker.
If you get lucky and buy the right model and/or live in an area with few power fluctuations, this can happen. When buying my refrigerator, most of the reviews for almost every model and every brand were showing failures at the 2-3 year mark. I've hit 3.5 years so far, but there is truly a lot of junk out there and worse - most of it is highly susceptible to voltage variation or tiny power spikes.
48fps is so that you can drop it down to 24fps for theater presentation and have it film-like. 30fps does not look like a movie. Most people's minds are heavily tuned toward the 24fps frame rate and anything else looks like TV or soap.
The problem with the Hobbit movies is that the special effects shots did not use similar (virtual) rolling shutter techniques to match the motion blur of the digital footage. The result is that any special effects were overly sharp and had less motion blur than anything else on-screen. And a large percentage of what was on-screen was effects shots to some extent. The whole reason for The Hobbit to be HFR was all the sweeping panoramic flyover shots - which were full of judder in all the LOTR movies. They didn't look good if you notice that sort of thing.
Whether you like the script or not, the technical merits of 48fps have a lot of potential, but it will require a decade or more of experience for Hollywood to actually be proficient at all.
144 isn't divisible by 60, so it's not going to be useful for most interlaced content. Without variable refresh, 240Hz would be the best compromise, though a true 120Hz would be good enough for anything but 48fps (Hobbit, next Avatar) content.
This is nothing to do with competition. This is to do with mature manufacturing techniques with low defect rates and existing manufacturing facilities. That same pixel density when scaled to larger panels makes higher resolution screens. The prices are already down, but this is another way to monetize existing manufacturing facilities. The incremental cost to manufacture these as a new product line is very low compared to creating something new.
They're already small enough. But to do that, you need higher pixel density than you need in a 50" 4K screen. That's enough pixel density to make a 10" 8K screen. a 1080p smartphone screen is enough pixel density for a large 8K TV.
You can perceive sharpness and detail without seeing a pixel. I couldn't see pixels on my 1080p monitor, but I can still fit a lot more text on my 4K screen without it becoming hard to read. It's true that these will be a lot more useful for information display and non-cinematic content.
The HDMI 2.1 spec offers 48Gbps of bandwidth and really, the increase is more about EMI suppression than it is about conductivity. Maximum cable length will take a hit, but otherwise it's nothing crazy.
I'm not lined up with it you illiterate. My interpretation of this new EPA rule matches perfectly, though. Why would they go and try to embrace valid scientific research that would disagree with their conclusions?
That 300Mbps would be roughly at the same quality as 4K Blu-Ray but with the 4-fold resolution and bandwidth increase.
Streaming 4K content isn't nearly as pristine and runs between 15-25Mbps. Quadrupling that would be around the 100Mbps mark. But really, HEVC is more efficient as resolution increases, so it might actually look better than current 4K at 4 times the size. On the other hand, if 8K ever makes it to cable/satellite TV expect it to still look worse than Blu-Ray quality (most HD content is worse than DVD quality as it is) and be allocated maybe 20Mbps of bandwidth per channel.
In short, if you've ever compared Blu-Ray to an HD Netflix stream, you can tell which one is better, but both are far better than SD. The main difference between Blu-Ray and HD streams are motion blocking artifacts. You get most of the high resolution improvements in relatively static scenes.
Also a nice side effect of putting on 8K displays, is it drives the cots of 4k displays even cheaper in the meantime.
And more specifically, it's the same manufacturing needed to make smaller 4K displays. This is just trying to monetize the fact that smaller 4K panels are being manufactured with fewer flaws.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not even fake AI. All they were saying was that a less resource intensive OS leaves more compute cycles open for harder things. I'll at least admit it is buzzword-compliant. And maybe a little better marketing than "creators update," but that's not saying much.
Nobody's claiming it's an Apple-made screen.
It had always been Digital Rights Management. Not sure where you got the other backronym.
Sure. And Apple wants to be the one to tell you who to trust. Just like the others, somehow only the OEM is trustworthy and everyone else is not.
The current push against right-to-repair by companies is mostly focused around the idea that everyone but the OEM is out to get you and that you shouldn't be legally allowed to trust anyone else. This is mostly because they have no remaining legs to stand on, and this one is flimsy. I'm sure car dealers would say only the dealership is safe for an oil change. Only genuine Canon inks are safe and won't void your warranty. But the OEM is always trustworthy somehow.
everything here is a voluntary interaction and anybody who doesn't like it can stop playing.
If that were true, we wouldn't need to regulate gambling at all.
It read more like an Onion article.
We import petroleum for a good reason. If we used all of our own, we would run out faster and lose our control on global oil prices. Having a stockpile is a price control measure.
I know. There are people lying in the gutters in Belgium. Completely destitute because they spent their last dollar on one more loot box. It is indeed the biggest problem in Belgium.
Such weasel words: "Non-genuine display." It is a genuine display, it's just not made by or for Apple.
Nearly every theater screen in the US is digital projection now, capable of 24 FPS, 48 FPS, 60 FPS or more.
30 FPS looks fine.
Digital projection is not all it takes. A compatible delivery format that was designed into the firmware is what it takes. Few of them had the capability. 30 fps is drastically different and if you can't see the difference then you simply don't know what you're talking about.
Major theaters didn't show the Hobbit in 24 FPS. They showed it at 48 FPS.
I had to drive to one of only a couple theaters in a metro area to try it out.
Oh, I had no interest in the movies themselves. Just the new format.
You run the film at double the speed, doubling your cost. Or you run the video at twice the frame rate, doubling your VFX render cost and not much else. Your nonsense about rolling shutters is absurd. You're still doing the VFX afterward and you're still working with the same fucking issues matching the digital effects to the motion blur, color, noise, etc. of the film. If it looks like ass at 48 FPS it'll look like ass at 24 FPS.
These were shot with RED cameras (not film). And doubling the render cost is nothing compared to the cost of creating the VFX. Matching the motion characteristics is more complex than just matching frame rate (especially if you have two targets). You don't even know what rolling shutter means, so stop talking absurd. But the 24fps (most of the trailers I saw) were actually more convincing in the VFX because it's known territory and could be handled relatively well.
Either that, or they have huge quality control problems and the refurbs really are refurbs.
Ding! Ding! Ding!
I doubt they could stay in business if their quality was that bad.
Sure they can. They double-dip on sales by re-selling it refurbished. And the first customer paid extra for the warranty to allow it to fail. And the refurb-buyers are convinced to just buy another one when it fails rather than consider another option because they're still convinced that Dyson is the best.
DLP is projection-based (if I remember right). So there's both the lower contrast from that and the horrible flickering from the mirror array. I can't stand the flicker.
If you get lucky and buy the right model and/or live in an area with few power fluctuations, this can happen. When buying my refrigerator, most of the reviews for almost every model and every brand were showing failures at the 2-3 year mark. I've hit 3.5 years so far, but there is truly a lot of junk out there and worse - most of it is highly susceptible to voltage variation or tiny power spikes.
They manage "rights" digitally, just not your rights.
48fps is so that you can drop it down to 24fps for theater presentation and have it film-like. 30fps does not look like a movie. Most people's minds are heavily tuned toward the 24fps frame rate and anything else looks like TV or soap.
The problem with the Hobbit movies is that the special effects shots did not use similar (virtual) rolling shutter techniques to match the motion blur of the digital footage. The result is that any special effects were overly sharp and had less motion blur than anything else on-screen. And a large percentage of what was on-screen was effects shots to some extent. The whole reason for The Hobbit to be HFR was all the sweeping panoramic flyover shots - which were full of judder in all the LOTR movies. They didn't look good if you notice that sort of thing.
Whether you like the script or not, the technical merits of 48fps have a lot of potential, but it will require a decade or more of experience for Hollywood to actually be proficient at all.
144 isn't divisible by 60, so it's not going to be useful for most interlaced content. Without variable refresh, 240Hz would be the best compromise, though a true 120Hz would be good enough for anything but 48fps (Hobbit, next Avatar) content.
This is nothing to do with competition. This is to do with mature manufacturing techniques with low defect rates and existing manufacturing facilities. That same pixel density when scaled to larger panels makes higher resolution screens. The prices are already down, but this is another way to monetize existing manufacturing facilities. The incremental cost to manufacture these as a new product line is very low compared to creating something new.
They're already small enough. But to do that, you need higher pixel density than you need in a 50" 4K screen. That's enough pixel density to make a 10" 8K screen. a 1080p smartphone screen is enough pixel density for a large 8K TV.
You can perceive sharpness and detail without seeing a pixel. I couldn't see pixels on my 1080p monitor, but I can still fit a lot more text on my 4K screen without it becoming hard to read. It's true that these will be a lot more useful for information display and non-cinematic content.
The HDMI 2.1 spec offers 48Gbps of bandwidth and really, the increase is more about EMI suppression than it is about conductivity. Maximum cable length will take a hit, but otherwise it's nothing crazy.
You're lined up with pretty blatant bullshit.
I'm not lined up with it you illiterate. My interpretation of this new EPA rule matches perfectly, though. Why would they go and try to embrace valid scientific research that would disagree with their conclusions?
That 300Mbps would be roughly at the same quality as 4K Blu-Ray but with the 4-fold resolution and bandwidth increase.
Streaming 4K content isn't nearly as pristine and runs between 15-25Mbps. Quadrupling that would be around the 100Mbps mark. But really, HEVC is more efficient as resolution increases, so it might actually look better than current 4K at 4 times the size. On the other hand, if 8K ever makes it to cable/satellite TV expect it to still look worse than Blu-Ray quality (most HD content is worse than DVD quality as it is) and be allocated maybe 20Mbps of bandwidth per channel.
In short, if you've ever compared Blu-Ray to an HD Netflix stream, you can tell which one is better, but both are far better than SD. The main difference between Blu-Ray and HD streams are motion blocking artifacts. You get most of the high resolution improvements in relatively static scenes.
Also a nice side effect of putting on 8K displays, is it drives the cots of 4k displays even cheaper in the meantime.
And more specifically, it's the same manufacturing needed to make smaller 4K displays. This is just trying to monetize the fact that smaller 4K panels are being manufactured with fewer flaws.
Probably not a US ruling/case. Way too many Mickey Mouse laws and way too many films that are unavailable. Go find me a copy of Song of the South.
And they would promptly lose compatibility with the majority of software. Which is fine, but then why not just go with an RT version?