that ntsc res your giving us is interlaced my friend. I'm not sure if both the horizontal and vertical pixel/lines are but at least one is. So it's more like half that res.
It's only interlaced in the horizontal. There's a whole of misinformation on this thread so here's the factual rundown.
NTSC offers 525 scanlines per frame and it is horizontally interlaced into two fields. There are 20 overscan lines per field so there are only 485 visible lines per frame. The horizontal resolution for NTSC is 720. Digital formats store 720x480 pixels per frame and the player produces interlaced fields for your TV.
However it is still a resolution of 720x480, despite being interlaced. Your comment that it is "only half" that resolution is not correct. The interlacing affects the framerate, not the resolution.
What resolution your TV actually displays is an entirely different matter. I have read that some (cheaper) TVs only show ~320 distinct scanlines. It's a similar problem to dot pitch on monitors.
Would it be possible to have multiple lasers all burning at once to increase speed? Like dual lasers working on opposite sides of the disk.
CD and DVD store the data as a continuous spiral on the disc, so while it is easy to have multiple read heads I think it would be very difficult to have multiple write heads.
This is why I hate government interference in the economy. I once worked for a company and developed their product for free, in exchange for future consideration. This was probably illegal in California, but OH MY GOD I did it anyway. It eventually turned into a full-time employment and a really sweet royalty agreement.
Ok, sure, this worked for you. But for every single example where this works there would be (and I'm just guessing) hundreds of people who got screwed by the employer and didn't see a red nickel.
The government is in possession of the actual numbers so they know how many people get screwed. They do their best to stop this practise because they know that the few people who benefit are outnumbered by the many people who get screwed.
Don't assume that the legal-type-person is stupid. They just might have more facts than you do.
First, I'm guessing you didn't read my whole post before you started typing your reply.
Blah blah blah. That's the fifth time you've done that. I would say something witty about glass houses but I simply couldn't be bothered. You want this way more than I do. Congratulations, you win by attrition. But just before I sign off...
This is a cultural thing, but it does come into the picture. Trends (Economics, political or cultural) in a certain region don't always translate themselves to other regions, irrespective of or unmodified by local ethos. I think that's the mistake you're making...
That's why (LOL) about a half dozen people born and living in India have responded to this thread and said you were wrong. You have the most selective reading skills I have ever seen!
Enjoy your "economic gain" while it lasts. Windows is dead, it just doesn't know it yet, and your head is so deeply buried in the sand that you won't even hear the Linux steamroller before it flattens you.
Before I respond to you in specifics, YOU still haven't provided any counterargument other than simply asserting that mine is incorrect.
Sure I have. I gave Borland and Oracle as two counterexamples when you claimed that developing for Linux means "software is free (beer) and support (LOL) is the source of revenue". I gave Anjuta when you claimed "To expect a group of Indian coders to sit and down and code say, an IDE, give it away for free is fantasy". I pointed out your mistake when you then claimed that Naba must have been paid by Manipur to write Anjuta (Manipur has no claim on Anjuta). I caught you when you changed your argument from "software is free (beer) and support (LOL) is the source of revenue" to the rather lame argument that you steal Windows so it's effectively free... a completely new argument that you threw in to obscure your original argument because it had no merit. I showed you the BMW/Ford analogy when you claimed "the Indian developer won't develop non-free Indian-specific software for Linux since there aren't any decent number of potential buyers" to demonstrate that a small market share is not the same thing as no market share.
But there are a decent number of potential _buyers_ for BMWs. But like you said, a lot more GMs.Ford..etc So, the ratio of spare parts for GMs..etc to that for BMWs will be more or less commensurate. They don't manufacture 10 million spare parts for 5000 BMWs, do they ? It's based on the market.
And there a decent number of buyers for Linux software too. Otherwise there wouldn't be a Linux market in the first place. Sure it might be a small market, but by the same token you don't have to compete on the scale of McDonalds to run a successful restaurant.
His paid team is not going to write GPLed code or non-free Linux stuff until there's a market for it in India (assuming that's his primary market).
And I refuted this tired chestnut the first time. You don't have to write GPL code. Oracle and Borland were the two counter-examples I gave. It's not that there aren't any counter-arguments here... you are purposefully ignoring them.
You're being foolish, in addition to being a jerk; let
me paraphrase in (virtually) words of one syllable:
Well this "foolish" "jerk" couldn't read the rest of your well-delivered insult because, unfortunately, you used several words with more than one syllable.
Fortunately I hailed a passing person with strong skills in English and they translated your poly-syllabic post into grunt words that I can understand. Basically you're repeating Gyan's lame argument because you seem to think I can't read 100 words without losing my train of thought. Here's a clue: I didn't argue against his lame argument then, and I'm not going to argue against it now. There's no need to repeat the argument to me if I'm not arguing against it, twerp.
Now, the Indian developer won't develop non-free Indian-specific software for Linux since there aren't any decent number of potential buyers.
By the same bogus argument nobody would build spare parts for BMWs because "there aren't any decent number of potential buyers" what with 90% of the population driving Ford, Toyota or GMH. I'll be very blunt: you still don't have a convincing argument.
The main groups who will participate in such ventures are those affliated (studying, teaching or research) with institutions. Naba fits that category.
This is a different claim than you made before. Earlier you said that nobody would write free software unless they were being paid a "stipend" by a research institution to do so. Naba wrote Anjuta on his own time and for his own reasons. It's an insult to Naba for you to claim that his donation was anything other than his to give.
If you want to argue that academics are more interested in free-software than other IT people then I won't disagree. But this is a new claim you are making and it has no bearing on your earlier incorrect claim.
Blah blah blah. You're back pedalling so quickly you could set an olympic record for the 1km sprint. Your original argument was "(LOL) how can I make money giving away my products for free!". Now your argument is "Windows is just as free as Linux because I steal it anyway". I'm unimpressed by your insincerity.
Did you eve read the Authors section of Anjuta.
Of course I did. You said that nobody from India would write an IDE and give it away for free. You were wrong. Your footnote didn't apply because Naba wasn't paid by Manipur Tech to write Anjuta. In fact, it's totally disgusting of you to cast mud upon Naba's generous donation by even implying such things.
Most savvy users in India will only pick up a tool if it can be an instrument for economic gain. This is why ofcourse, computer programming and learning it is a big thing in India. Because that's what the 20-something thinks. Learn coding and the world is open to you. The Indian mindset is not exactly open to adopting a culture where the software is free (beer) and support (LOL) is the source of revenue.
And (LOL) how much money do you make by purchasing Microsoft Windows?
Answer: none. Your argument is bogus. You don't make any money by using Windows. You only make money by selling services and products for Windows. You could make similar money by selling services and products for Linux.
To expect a group of Indian coders to sit and down and code say, an IDE, give it away for free is fantasy
Using Linux doesn't force you into a pact where all your own software has to be free as well. Oracle and Borland are two largish companies with closed-source non-free products for Linux . You could join that market as well.
But in any event, the free IDE from India has already been done. Check out Anjuta.
Any lawyer that gives legal advice over ask slashdot is a lawyer with a short career.
Why? What gave you this idea? Where is it written that "lawyers shall not talk about legal things unless there is money involved"? Do you have this strange idea that the bailiff will hunt them down and serve out a writ for "MrByte, Slashdot UID 198374" for giving free advice on an Internet message board? Perhaps you think they will be disbarred because they spoke before receiving a big fat cheque?
What next? DVD manufacturers have to bundle competing (free) DVD player software with their drives?
If you're going to use an analogy then at least get it right.
Imagine that 99% of the population owned Sony DVD players. Sony purposefully cripples their player to only play DVD titles from Sony Columbia Tristar but for some reason 99% of the population doesn't mind. The subversive company Philips writes a free firmware upgrade for Sony players that plays DVDs from all vendors PLUS adds VCD and MP3 support. Philips and Sony negotiate a contract to ship the new firmware in all Sony players. However Sony pulls a swifty and ships a buggy Sony firmware with Philips branding all over it. Philips is understandably pissed but tries to resolve the problem with Sony. However in an unbelievable piece of spin doctoring Sony manages to convice 99% of the population that the Philips firmware was crap in the first place. Philips sues Sony and the judge agrees that Sony has to ship the Philips firmware like the contract said they would.
See, it doesn't seem so silly when you make the analogy work properly.
I'll have to assume you really are being serious...
Yes, I really am being serious. And no, it's not just kneejerk.
Linux is not a free pool of developers, willing and ready to do the whim of the users. Linux is the pooled work of developers doing whatever they feel like. The pooled work is what the developers wanted. If this by chance happens to overlap with the desires of the non-developing users then that's great. If not, then tough luck.
I believe the people with the knee-jerk "shut up and fix it yourself" attitudes are standing in the way of a lot of linux's problems being addressed.
If they were truly problems - I don't believe they are - then some developers would take an interest in solving them. The previous poster wanted to drum up support for his personal pet peeve. He blamed the lack of enthusiasm on "inertia" but I think it's far more likely that he's simply wrong. Most developers don't find the situation all that bad, because if they did then they would fix it.
Thus my comment: if he has a problem then he should fix it himself or pay somebody else to fix it for him. Asking strangers to fix his problem - for free - is never going to work.
I've tried to stir up discussion about that a couple time, but most of the Linux community seems to have an inertia you wouldn't believe. The answers were basically, "Shut up and use apt-get", "Shut up and use RPM", or "shut up and use configure; make; make install".
Freedom without innovation doesn't do users any good.
Sure it does. Freedom itself is a huge benefit. It is such a huge benefit that users will willingly sacrifice time and money in order to achieve freedom, even if that freedom comes at the expense of not having the latest widget or whatzit.
I use whatever software I like, whether is is free or commercial. There's no reason why I should limit myself.
I'm not telling you to limit your choices. You can choose to use whatever software you want. This is a furphy you've thrown into the argument. Shame on you.
My interest is in using better software; the free software movement gives me free knock-offs of software I can easily afford to buy.
Then buy them. Use them. Feel free to do so. Nobody is telling you to do otherwise. But you should understand that the FREE software developers believe that freedom is more valuable than the immediate gratification of using the latest whizbang doohickey.
If you don't grok this then feel free to not comment on it. You want the FREE software people to stop making FREE software and instead make innovative software. Well too bad for you. This isn't what the FREE software developers are trying to achieve. So stop yapping on about innovation because innovation is not the goal of the FREE software developers.
I don't care. What I want is better, more innovative software.
Then you're using the wrong software. The people writing FREE software want FREE software. They don't even mind if it's not innovative. The key goal is FREE. If you don't understand why FREE is more important than innovative then you're not the best person to comment on the politics.
The GPL places severe restirictions on what I can and cannot do with my software by requiring me to provide source.
That is a complete lie. The GPL places NO restrictions on what you can and cannot do with your software. You can choose whatever damn license you like for your software.
If you mean to say "The GPL places severe restirictions on what I can and cannot do with somebody else's software" then you are also wrong. The GPL gives you additional and less restrictive distribution opportunities than standard copyright permits.
Now you could sensibly argue that some other licenses give you additional and less restrictive distribution opportunities than the GPL. I wouldn't disagree. I only disagree with your claim that the GPL imposes restrictions (you used the word "places" but in context it meant the same thing as "imposes"). The GPL does no such thing. You always have the option to ignore the GPL, in which case you are restricted by the default copyright laws.
The real mistake the theater made was printing an ambiguous time on their ticket. They need to use 12 Noon and 12 Midnight. For midnight, they need to print two dates.
Trig at age 12? Man, we didn't do that until we were 15 or 16 (gcses). I dunno how Brit schooling compares to American, but you're experience seems to have been a lot better than normal.
I went to an Australian public school and we did trigonometry when I was 12 (year 8). We had covered the basics of matrices and calculus before I finished high school. All students were expected to achieve this level. Admittedly this was more than a decade ago. I have heard the standards have slipped since then.
Note to new slashdot readers: This is typical thinking on slashdot. I want EVERYTHING for free. If it's not free, it's wrong.
This is NOT "slashdot think". The reality is that there are 100s of 1000s of slashdot readers and they all have their own opinions. This isn't the borg and there isn't a consensus across all slashdot readers. I'd bet a huge percentage of the slashdot readers don't agree that all code should be open but you won't ever find out because you're too busy telling slashdot readers how stupid they are rather than listening to the diversity of their opinions.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks for the corrections. These standards are always more complicated than they should be!
It's only interlaced in the horizontal. There's a whole of misinformation on this thread so here's the factual rundown.
NTSC offers 525 scanlines per frame and it is horizontally interlaced into two fields. There are 20 overscan lines per field so there are only 485 visible lines per frame. The horizontal resolution for NTSC is 720. Digital formats store 720x480 pixels per frame and the player produces interlaced fields for your TV.
However it is still a resolution of 720x480, despite being interlaced. Your comment that it is "only half" that resolution is not correct. The interlacing affects the framerate, not the resolution.
What resolution your TV actually displays is an entirely different matter. I have read that some (cheaper) TVs only show ~320 distinct scanlines. It's a similar problem to dot pitch on monitors.
CD and DVD store the data as a continuous spiral on the disc, so while it is easy to have multiple read heads I think it would be very difficult to have multiple write heads.
Ok, sure, this worked for you. But for every single example where this works there would be (and I'm just guessing) hundreds of people who got screwed by the employer and didn't see a red nickel.
The government is in possession of the actual numbers so they know how many people get screwed. They do their best to stop this practise because they know that the few people who benefit are outnumbered by the many people who get screwed.
Don't assume that the legal-type-person is stupid. They just might have more facts than you do.
Blah blah blah. That's the fifth time you've done that. I would say something witty about glass houses but I simply couldn't be bothered. You want this way more than I do. Congratulations, you win by attrition. But just before I sign off...
That's why (LOL) about a half dozen people born and living in India have responded to this thread and said you were wrong. You have the most selective reading skills I have ever seen!
Enjoy your "economic gain" while it lasts. Windows is dead, it just doesn't know it yet, and your head is so deeply buried in the sand that you won't even hear the Linux steamroller before it flattens you.
Sure I have. I gave Borland and Oracle as two counterexamples when you claimed that developing for Linux means "software is free (beer) and support (LOL) is the source of revenue". I gave Anjuta when you claimed "To expect a group of Indian coders to sit and down and code say, an IDE, give it away for free is fantasy". I pointed out your mistake when you then claimed that Naba must have been paid by Manipur to write Anjuta (Manipur has no claim on Anjuta). I caught you when you changed your argument from "software is free (beer) and support (LOL) is the source of revenue" to the rather lame argument that you steal Windows so it's effectively free... a completely new argument that you threw in to obscure your original argument because it had no merit. I showed you the BMW/Ford analogy when you claimed "the Indian developer won't develop non-free Indian-specific software for Linux since there aren't any decent number of potential buyers" to demonstrate that a small market share is not the same thing as no market share.
And there a decent number of buyers for Linux software too. Otherwise there wouldn't be a Linux market in the first place. Sure it might be a small market, but by the same token you don't have to compete on the scale of McDonalds to run a successful restaurant.
And I refuted this tired chestnut the first time. You don't have to write GPL code. Oracle and Borland were the two counter-examples I gave. It's not that there aren't any counter-arguments here... you are purposefully ignoring them.
Well this "foolish" "jerk" couldn't read the rest of your well-delivered insult because, unfortunately, you used several words with more than one syllable.
Fortunately I hailed a passing person with strong skills in English and they translated your poly-syllabic post into grunt words that I can understand. Basically you're repeating Gyan's lame argument because you seem to think I can't read 100 words without losing my train of thought. Here's a clue: I didn't argue against his lame argument then, and I'm not going to argue against it now. There's no need to repeat the argument to me if I'm not arguing against it, twerp.
By the same bogus argument nobody would build spare parts for BMWs because "there aren't any decent number of potential buyers" what with 90% of the population driving Ford, Toyota or GMH. I'll be very blunt: you still don't have a convincing argument.
This is a different claim than you made before. Earlier you said that nobody would write free software unless they were being paid a "stipend" by a research institution to do so. Naba wrote Anjuta on his own time and for his own reasons. It's an insult to Naba for you to claim that his donation was anything other than his to give.
If you want to argue that academics are more interested in free-software than other IT people then I won't disagree. But this is a new claim you are making and it has no bearing on your earlier incorrect claim.
Blah blah blah. You're back pedalling so quickly you could set an olympic record for the 1km sprint. Your original argument was "(LOL) how can I make money giving away my products for free!". Now your argument is "Windows is just as free as Linux because I steal it anyway". I'm unimpressed by your insincerity.
Of course I did. You said that nobody from India would write an IDE and give it away for free. You were wrong. Your footnote didn't apply because Naba wasn't paid by Manipur Tech to write Anjuta. In fact, it's totally disgusting of you to cast mud upon Naba's generous donation by even implying such things.
And (LOL) how much money do you make by purchasing Microsoft Windows?
Answer: none. Your argument is bogus. You don't make any money by using Windows. You only make money by selling services and products for Windows. You could make similar money by selling services and products for Linux.
Using Linux doesn't force you into a pact where all your own software has to be free as well. Oracle and Borland are two largish companies with closed-source non-free products for Linux . You could join that market as well.
But in any event, the free IDE from India has already been done. Check out Anjuta.
Why? What gave you this idea? Where is it written that "lawyers shall not talk about legal things unless there is money involved"? Do you have this strange idea that the bailiff will hunt them down and serve out a writ for "MrByte, Slashdot UID 198374" for giving free advice on an Internet message board? Perhaps you think they will be disbarred because they spoke before receiving a big fat cheque?
Slashdot isn't just read by unemployed webpage writers and Linux users. The occasional solicitor can be found amongst the hordes.
The real trick is for the ignorant non-solicitors to shutup. Unfortunately this doesn't happen even when technical questions are asked.
If you're going to use an analogy then at least get it right.
Imagine that 99% of the population owned Sony DVD players. Sony purposefully cripples their player to only play DVD titles from Sony Columbia Tristar but for some reason 99% of the population doesn't mind. The subversive company Philips writes a free firmware upgrade for Sony players that plays DVDs from all vendors PLUS adds VCD and MP3 support. Philips and Sony negotiate a contract to ship the new firmware in all Sony players. However Sony pulls a swifty and ships a buggy Sony firmware with Philips branding all over it. Philips is understandably pissed but tries to resolve the problem with Sony. However in an unbelievable piece of spin doctoring Sony manages to convice 99% of the population that the Philips firmware was crap in the first place. Philips sues Sony and the judge agrees that Sony has to ship the Philips firmware like the contract said they would.
See, it doesn't seem so silly when you make the analogy work properly.
Yes, I really am being serious. And no, it's not just kneejerk.
Linux is not a free pool of developers, willing and ready to do the whim of the users. Linux is the pooled work of developers doing whatever they feel like. The pooled work is what the developers wanted. If this by chance happens to overlap with the desires of the non-developing users then that's great. If not, then tough luck.
If they were truly problems - I don't believe they are - then some developers would take an interest in solving them. The previous poster wanted to drum up support for his personal pet peeve. He blamed the lack of enthusiasm on "inertia" but I think it's far more likely that he's simply wrong. Most developers don't find the situation all that bad, because if they did then they would fix it.
Thus my comment: if he has a problem then he should fix it himself or pay somebody else to fix it for him. Asking strangers to fix his problem - for free - is never going to work.
This is the stupidest thing I have ever heard.
Shut up and write the solution yourself.
I'm being serious.
Starcraft 100% classic, great multiplayer, everybody enjoys it.
Quake N for positive integer values of N less than 3. Literally 1000s of mods.
Subspace This is the greatest game to hit multiplayer since multiplayer was invented.
Counterstrike The perfect complement to Quake. Must-have for any LAN party.
Sure it does. Freedom itself is a huge benefit. It is such a huge benefit that users will willingly sacrifice time and money in order to achieve freedom, even if that freedom comes at the expense of not having the latest widget or whatzit.
I'm not telling you to limit your choices. You can choose to use whatever software you want. This is a furphy you've thrown into the argument. Shame on you.
Then buy them. Use them. Feel free to do so. Nobody is telling you to do otherwise. But you should understand that the FREE software developers believe that freedom is more valuable than the immediate gratification of using the latest whizbang doohickey.
If you don't grok this then feel free to not comment on it. You want the FREE software people to stop making FREE software and instead make innovative software. Well too bad for you. This isn't what the FREE software developers are trying to achieve. So stop yapping on about innovation because innovation is not the goal of the FREE software developers.
Then you're using the wrong software. The people writing FREE software want FREE software. They don't even mind if it's not innovative. The key goal is FREE. If you don't understand why FREE is more important than innovative then you're not the best person to comment on the politics.
That is a complete lie. The GPL places NO restrictions on what you can and cannot do with your software. You can choose whatever damn license you like for your software.
If you mean to say "The GPL places severe restirictions on what I can and cannot do with somebody else's software" then you are also wrong. The GPL gives you additional and less restrictive distribution opportunities than standard copyright permits.
Now you could sensibly argue that some other licenses give you additional and less restrictive distribution opportunities than the GPL. I wouldn't disagree. I only disagree with your claim that the GPL imposes restrictions (you used the word "places" but in context it meant the same thing as "imposes"). The GPL does no such thing. You always have the option to ignore the GPL, in which case you are restricted by the default copyright laws.
12 AM is ALWAYS midnight.
It is only ambiguous to the uneducated.
I went to an Australian public school and we did trigonometry when I was 12 (year 8). We had covered the basics of matrices and calculus before I finished high school. All students were expected to achieve this level. Admittedly this was more than a decade ago. I have heard the standards have slipped since then.
If every human act is selfish then your definition of the word "selfish" is meaningless.
To state it another way, there must exist some human acts that are altruistic in order to give meaning to those human acts that are selfish.
Seeing as time-travel hadn't been perfected in the 1940s, I'm fairly confident that he was being sarcastic.
This is NOT "slashdot think". The reality is that there are 100s of 1000s of slashdot readers and they all have their own opinions. This isn't the borg and there isn't a consensus across all slashdot readers. I'd bet a huge percentage of the slashdot readers don't agree that all code should be open but you won't ever find out because you're too busy telling slashdot readers how stupid they are rather than listening to the diversity of their opinions.