Can't say I agree with this. Display pixel density is far too low for that... I'll agree with you when I'm using a 1080p 10" netbook at the same physical font sizes as now.
But for now, no way I'm turning off anti-aliasing (or cleartype or whatever) on regular 120-150dpi pixel densities...
"They make small integrated chips but they are not very powerful and don't stack up well with the low power nVidia/ATi stuff."
Beg to differ. My last experience with nVidia vs. Intel graphics proved otherwise. In two laptops with otherwise more or less the same hardware (Core 2 Duo P-Series processors, 4+ gigs of RAM, same chipset), the one with Intel graphics provides a much smoother video (HD and so on) experience (things like YoutubeHD or FullHD H264 in MKV), only marginally worse performance in 3D games, and MUCH MUCH MUCH better thermal performance - at full load, the nVidia GPU ran at about 103C (!!!), despite the much larger HSF-assembly on the machine. The Intel graphics in comparison, rarely hit 60C, and the power consumption of the entire system is lower by about half (idle, that is - more like 20% of the nVidia system's wattage under full load).
It's different when you have no power or heat issues, but in laptops (which seems to be where the money is), the integrated chips were starting to offer similarly fast options with far lower power consumption and less heat... no contest for non-gamers, and very debateable for casual gaming. The move to on-die GPUs in Core iX has reduced the heat advantage (now the CPUs get *really* hot - i.e. 95C on many Core i5/i7 Sandy Bridge) when both CPU and GPU loads are high), but they're still much more power efficient. Performance is much higher than last-gen low-end dedicated graphics though...
This was the Intel 4500MHD vs. an nVidia 9300M GS, so same generation and all. A bit outdated now, but I'm sure the situation will return to this as soon as Intel sorts out their heat issues (I'm guessing that'll take another generation or two post Sandy Bridge)...
"I've worked with plenty of scientists in national labs that turn out production grade, maintainable code; and programmers who didn't."
Do you know scientists who turn out production grade, maintainable code, even if they weren't specifically asked to? If you're writing a program to solve a specific part of the problem you're working on, and are only going to use it that one time (happens often in scientific fields and engineering), why would you bother to make it neat and maintainable, or even understandable to the outside world?
I CAN produce clean, modular code that is maintainable and can be extended easily - but that doesn't mean I should have to for every little problem that comes my way. I'm sure most engineers and scientists think that way... why spend two hours on my little script when I could be done in 10 minutes?
Not to mention that engineers/scientists writing their own little programs in math languages (Matlab is used a lot around here) or even straight higher level languages are usually very problem-oriented - a few lines of code for each single problem, without much re-use going on unless the problem to be solved is always the same one...
I actually quite like this approach in the simplified, FORTRAN based Matlab - writing a new script is incredibly fast, because everything's kept so simple - but it's just too much work in the more universal higher level languages... if I had to do all my problem solving with C I'd probably go insane because of all the background work for setting up a few simple calculations. Then again, I'm no C programmer, so maybe for those well versed in that, Matlab would be horribly slow and inefficient;)
You'd be surprised at the difference compared to when your device was new. CCFL backlights don't age nicely, which is why many older laptops have yellowish screens.
Depends a lot on the usage, of course... my backlights all look more or less like new, but I'm not one of those people who runs 'em on 100% brightness all the time (33% right now in a moving car).
I agree with the no, but not for the same reason. Rather: It doesn't seem very logical. Mechanically, having three screens would make more sense: One main screen in the middle, and two half-size slide-out panels on the sides - 1080p in the middle and 960x1080 on either side, for instance.
And there's no reason to make the damned thing so heavy either - Don't add the extra screens to a mobile workstation with a quadcore and workstation graphics, just add it to a regular laptop. That way you'll end up with something that you can carry without a forklift...
"Windows 7 is supposed to have some feature that manages this in an intelligent way - so you can speed up your machine for a year or so by adding a $10-20 memory stick. (I'm not running Win7, so I haven't tried it - but my laptop has an SD card slot, which would let me leave a card in there full time, without it sticking out like a USB stick.)"
I've tried it on multiple systems, with fast USB sticks - Superfetch is much faster and more efficient. Only problem there: Many of the current generation (Sandy Bridge) laptop chips only seem to support 8GB of RAM, with the top end models (mostly quad cores) maxing out at 16GB.
I wish that were the case here in Germany as well. Unfortunately the laws around here say you're responsible for your own unsecured WiFi - if the neighbors download illegal stuff, you're to blame for not securing it.
Hence, nearly everything around here is encrypted... even cafes and other places of business are switching to ticketed systems that allow them to track, pinpoint and restrict user activity. This isn't a problem for most patrons per se, but the prohibitive cost and added complication of such systems (compared to a few WiFi access points) is making a lot of places drop WiFi altogether of start charging for it.
There was a video of Windows 8 a while back... it switched seamlessly back and forth between running tablet-style (Metro) apps and traditional apps. When switching to a traditional app, a regular old Windows desktop with a Start button and a taskbar came into view...
Might be confusing or not ideal, but it would get the job done, and is something I'd be prepared to live with.
Think I'll stick with Win7 for the next few years though...
An Ideapad with a trackpoint (i.e. Thinkpad EDGE, X100/X120 and so on) is, unfortunately, not a Thinkpad... at least not in my eyes. They have their merits and their niche (and even do some things a lot better than actual Thinkpads, like decently bright screens), but they're sure as hell not on the same playing field as real Thinkpads... I'd trust my X41 or X200 to accompany me to hell and back - an EDGE or X120e? No way I'm leaving home with one of those without a backup machine.
The HDMI port should be a clue as to the device's target audience;)
Now that's interesting, I must be getting too used to my Thinkpads - only the consumer lines (think SL/EDGE) have HDMI there.
In the environment I'm working & studying in, nearly everyone has a personal laptop from one of the main business manufacturers: Lenovo Thinkpads, Dell Latitude/Precision, HP Elitebooks... and all I keep seeing are Displayports. All anecdotal, of course, but your info is surprising nonetheless:)... is this a new trend at Dell?
Consumer-grade as in home theater... I've been seeing DisplayPort more and more in work environments in general. HDMI? When was the last time a business PC or laptop was sold with that?
I don't doubt DVI is still huge in the pro video segment... hell, both my desktop monitors are still DVI, but then again, that's more because of their age than anything else;)
But the cables don't fall within the spec (which is why they're a problem in the first place) - so what's the problem? Does the connector itself need to be licensed?
Luckily I don't have any more HDMI devices - consumer-grade clusterfuck... Displayport Baby!
No dice on FF5... add-on installs and then sits in the background uselessly doing nothing. Trying to connect to Facebook in the "Connected Accounts" section of the Google+ still gives me an error message...
Smartphones are great, but there's no way I'm pulling out mine every time I want to know what time it is.
I wish Bluetooth watches with decent battery life would take off - something like an iPod Nano, but with OpenWatch compatibility and less clunky... put a decent analog watch skin on that and have it tie directly into Android and/or iOS for notifications, muisc control and so on. That's pretty much the one thing that would get me to switch away from analog watches...
Until then, I'm going to keep saving for that Rolex Submariner... might take me a few years, but hey, the knockoffs are cheap enough to hold me over until I get there;)
It's a holdover from the days before Gmail - back when Webmail interfaces sucked donkey balls. GMail was the first one to actually be usable, and it's still got some quirks that're annoying and non-customizable.
With a desktop client, you've got much more choice, and with Thunderbird's plugin infrastructure, more ways to customize and change things you don't like.
That said, this day and age... there's no point in using a dedicated desktop client unless you're just really used to it or an absolutely hardcore e-mail user. The GMail web interface fulfills all my needs perfectly...
Slashdot Mirror
If you're an experienced C++ programmer, sure. Matlab seems much easier to pick up for non-programmers :)
This, but the other way around as well, and with iOS apps as well. Gah, cross-platform app compatibility would be absolutely great...
Can't say I agree with this. Display pixel density is far too low for that... I'll agree with you when I'm using a 1080p 10" netbook at the same physical font sizes as now.
But for now, no way I'm turning off anti-aliasing (or cleartype or whatever) on regular 120-150dpi pixel densities...
"They make small integrated chips but they are not very powerful and don't stack up well with the low power nVidia/ATi stuff."
Beg to differ. My last experience with nVidia vs. Intel graphics proved otherwise. In two laptops with otherwise more or less the same hardware (Core 2 Duo P-Series processors, 4+ gigs of RAM, same chipset), the one with Intel graphics provides a much smoother video (HD and so on) experience (things like YoutubeHD or FullHD H264 in MKV), only marginally worse performance in 3D games, and MUCH MUCH MUCH better thermal performance - at full load, the nVidia GPU ran at about 103C (!!!), despite the much larger HSF-assembly on the machine. The Intel graphics in comparison, rarely hit 60C, and the power consumption of the entire system is lower by about half (idle, that is - more like 20% of the nVidia system's wattage under full load).
It's different when you have no power or heat issues, but in laptops (which seems to be where the money is), the integrated chips were starting to offer similarly fast options with far lower power consumption and less heat... no contest for non-gamers, and very debateable for casual gaming. The move to on-die GPUs in Core iX has reduced the heat advantage (now the CPUs get *really* hot - i.e. 95C on many Core i5/i7 Sandy Bridge) when both CPU and GPU loads are high), but they're still much more power efficient. Performance is much higher than last-gen low-end dedicated graphics though...
This was the Intel 4500MHD vs. an nVidia 9300M GS, so same generation and all. A bit outdated now, but I'm sure the situation will return to this as soon as Intel sorts out their heat issues (I'm guessing that'll take another generation or two post Sandy Bridge)...
"I've worked with plenty of scientists in national labs that turn out production grade, maintainable code; and programmers who didn't."
Do you know scientists who turn out production grade, maintainable code, even if they weren't specifically asked to? If you're writing a program to solve a specific part of the problem you're working on, and are only going to use it that one time (happens often in scientific fields and engineering), why would you bother to make it neat and maintainable, or even understandable to the outside world?
I CAN produce clean, modular code that is maintainable and can be extended easily - but that doesn't mean I should have to for every little problem that comes my way. I'm sure most engineers and scientists think that way... why spend two hours on my little script when I could be done in 10 minutes?
Not to mention that engineers/scientists writing their own little programs in math languages (Matlab is used a lot around here) or even straight higher level languages are usually very problem-oriented - a few lines of code for each single problem, without much re-use going on unless the problem to be solved is always the same one...
I actually quite like this approach in the simplified, FORTRAN based Matlab - writing a new script is incredibly fast, because everything's kept so simple - but it's just too much work in the more universal higher level languages... if I had to do all my problem solving with C I'd probably go insane because of all the background work for setting up a few simple calculations. Then again, I'm no C programmer, so maybe for those well versed in that, Matlab would be horribly slow and inefficient ;)
You'd be surprised at the difference compared to when your device was new. CCFL backlights don't age nicely, which is why many older laptops have yellowish screens.
Depends a lot on the usage, of course... my backlights all look more or less like new, but I'm not one of those people who runs 'em on 100% brightness all the time (33% right now in a moving car).
I agree with the no, but not for the same reason. Rather: It doesn't seem very logical. Mechanically, having three screens would make more sense: One main screen in the middle, and two half-size slide-out panels on the sides - 1080p in the middle and 960x1080 on either side, for instance.
And there's no reason to make the damned thing so heavy either - Don't add the extra screens to a mobile workstation with a quadcore and workstation graphics, just add it to a regular laptop. That way you'll end up with something that you can carry without a forklift...
"Windows 7 is supposed to have some feature that manages this in an intelligent way - so you can speed up your machine for a year or so by adding a $10-20 memory stick. (I'm not running Win7, so I haven't tried it - but my laptop has an SD card slot, which would let me leave a card in there full time, without it sticking out like a USB stick.)"
I've tried it on multiple systems, with fast USB sticks - Superfetch is much faster and more efficient. Only problem there: Many of the current generation (Sandy Bridge) laptop chips only seem to support 8GB of RAM, with the top end models (mostly quad cores) maxing out at 16GB.
The real question is whether or not it's increased sales... I know it has on my part.
I wish that were the case here in Germany as well. Unfortunately the laws around here say you're responsible for your own unsecured WiFi - if the neighbors download illegal stuff, you're to blame for not securing it.
Hence, nearly everything around here is encrypted... even cafes and other places of business are switching to ticketed systems that allow them to track, pinpoint and restrict user activity. This isn't a problem for most patrons per se, but the prohibitive cost and added complication of such systems (compared to a few WiFi access points) is making a lot of places drop WiFi altogether of start charging for it.
Very unfortunate :(
Except that Sony, HTC and Moto are finally opening up bootloaders, and the rest have been open all along.
Apple seems to be the last holdout in relevant circles...
There was a video of Windows 8 a while back... it switched seamlessly back and forth between running tablet-style (Metro) apps and traditional apps. When switching to a traditional app, a regular old Windows desktop with a Start button and a taskbar came into view...
Might be confusing or not ideal, but it would get the job done, and is something I'd be prepared to live with.
Think I'll stick with Win7 for the next few years though...
Intel seem to be just as capable of screwing up: http://www.zdnet.co.uk/blogs/mapping-babel-10017967/intel-we-are-aware-of-320-ssd-bug-10023343/
An Ideapad with a trackpoint (i.e. Thinkpad EDGE, X100/X120 and so on) is, unfortunately, not a Thinkpad... at least not in my eyes. They have their merits and their niche (and even do some things a lot better than actual Thinkpads, like decently bright screens), but they're sure as hell not on the same playing field as real Thinkpads... I'd trust my X41 or X200 to accompany me to hell and back - an EDGE or X120e? No way I'm leaving home with one of those without a backup machine.
The HDMI port should be a clue as to the device's target audience ;)
That's what I thought...
Now that's interesting, I must be getting too used to my Thinkpads - only the consumer lines (think SL/EDGE) have HDMI there.
In the environment I'm working & studying in, nearly everyone has a personal laptop from one of the main business manufacturers: Lenovo Thinkpads, Dell Latitude/Precision, HP Elitebooks... and all I keep seeing are Displayports. All anecdotal, of course, but your info is surprising nonetheless :)... is this a new trend at Dell?
Consumer-grade as in home theater... I've been seeing DisplayPort more and more in work environments in general. HDMI? When was the last time a business PC or laptop was sold with that?
I don't doubt DVI is still huge in the pro video segment... hell, both my desktop monitors are still DVI, but then again, that's more because of their age than anything else ;)
But the cables don't fall within the spec (which is why they're a problem in the first place) - so what's the problem? Does the connector itself need to be licensed?
Luckily I don't have any more HDMI devices - consumer-grade clusterfuck... Displayport Baby!
What's the connect to Facebook/Twitter/other function there for then? G+ Settings => Connected Accounts ...?
No dice on FF5... add-on installs and then sits in the background uselessly doing nothing. Trying to connect to Facebook in the "Connected Accounts" section of the Google+ still gives me an error message...
How? When I try to connect my Facebook account in the G+ account settings, all I get is an error message :(
May be electronic, but sure as hell not digital. :)
Smartphones are great, but there's no way I'm pulling out mine every time I want to know what time it is.
I wish Bluetooth watches with decent battery life would take off - something like an iPod Nano, but with OpenWatch compatibility and less clunky... put a decent analog watch skin on that and have it tie directly into Android and/or iOS for notifications, muisc control and so on. That's pretty much the one thing that would get me to switch away from analog watches...
Until then, I'm going to keep saving for that Rolex Submariner... might take me a few years, but hey, the knockoffs are cheap enough to hold me over until I get there ;)
It's a holdover from the days before Gmail - back when Webmail interfaces sucked donkey balls. GMail was the first one to actually be usable, and it's still got some quirks that're annoying and non-customizable.
With a desktop client, you've got much more choice, and with Thunderbird's plugin infrastructure, more ways to customize and change things you don't like.
That said, this day and age... there's no point in using a dedicated desktop client unless you're just really used to it or an absolutely hardcore e-mail user. The GMail web interface fulfills all my needs perfectly...