The LCD screen of my W520 moves around loosely in the screen bezel. Also, there was a leftover plastic bit between the screen and the bezel, resulting in a huge gap. The plastics feel like cheap noname Chinese brands rather than the matte velvety surface of the Thinkpad 600 series or the Newton Messagepad. There is creaking etc. when the machine is held. It dies often under Windows (what it came with). The official Lenovo Ultrabay hard drive caddy is thinner than the bay, resulting in a huge gap, letting dust in the machine. I don't care about the dead pixel in comparison. The LCD (good color gamut but TN) has 1080 rows on a 15.6" screen vs. 1050 rows on my very old 12.1" X60 tablet (IPS), wow. The keyboard is still best of class, but they placed silly "paging" keys directly among the previously well-separated arrow island. The ThinkLight sucks, partly because the keys became shiny after little use and glare (screams 'used old clunker' in daylight). They put a huge and hideous shiny plastic-chrome "lenovo" logo on the lid, and it is the polar opposite design language of the still-retained, understated "ThinkPad" logo, which is spun matte metal and a decent font. It's still a good machine, much better than the X1 et al with low memory, glare, screen-heavy design and poor screen resolution.
Read some Robert Pirsig and Christopher Alexander, they open you up to the objective nature and depth of things like quality. With consumer products, there are exceptions, but some very mainstream manufacturers (er.. gadget brand owners) sell only cheap, plasticky products, not to mention knockoff makers. No one said it is impossible to build great products from plastic, or that such products don't exist, but the generalization about inferiority was fairly valid. If a reviewer says it feels cheap, flimsy and plasticky, at least I know what to expect (I'd rather spend 20% more for something that feels better to use). However don'd build up a childish strawman argument, they don't write it simply based on the construction material which is but one element of the overall feel. For example, the Nexus 7 or the HTC One X are praised instead. Determining instrument-measurable criteria for determining quality would be an interesting research project. In the meantime I don't need to think a product is cheap, I just need to feel it and move on to alternatives.
Even now, there may be an identical twin zygote in a freezer from a former in vitro fertilization that can be thawed. So while the accessibility of this option can be increased by cloning, it wouldn't be a new sort of ethical problem, it would perhaps be a new societal issue.
> It's close enough to 16:9 that watching movies isn't problematic. Particularly since most are made by taking a 16:9 resolution and adding some height.
I don't understand. On a 16:9 monitor, there is usually quite large bands on top and bottom. So 16:9 does not seem to be a movie format, isn't 21:9 better in that regard? I'm just asking about the film aspect, not the productivity etc. aspect.
> Even better IMO. A move in the right, rather than wrong, direction.
It's not a move in any direction. 1280x1024 displays have been around since the Cretaceous.My problem is that while they are good for single-window operations, I prefer working with two windows side by side, and for that 16:10 is best and 16:9 is acceptable. Splitting a 5:4 screen will result in too narrow windows, or a gargantuan LCD panel height, even if we forget about the fact that 1280x1024 is a decent resolution only on a mobile phone and lower-end tablets.
Riiight. Police can work with one set of evidence and confirm it with a DNA match, but not the other way around. Sounds logical. Probably the Dutch police / justice system does not employ even one person who is a statistician. They should come straight to Slashdot if they want to have a clue and just release the raper already.
Riight, it'll be so straightforward for you to verify that rock-solid assurance, I see how you'll become convinced. All these police investigations are so transparent anyway, and of course there is no value at all in retaining your and thousands of others' DNA for future investigations of murder.
Someone in the middle ages conceptualized the modern car. Others thought it can't possibly work because it would destroy the gate when the driver arrives home. They didn't think it would be possible to park _near_ the house and walk a bit of distance, rather than crashing into the gate. It'a just as inconceivable that an Alcubierre spaceship aimed at slightly off of the destination, and after deceleration, slowly and carefully arrived at the spaceport from an angle.
Why should it be called *anything*? Branding is cool and all, but it's not like there is a law that your product be named. Apple does not "make" phones other than the iPhone so there should be no confusion.
- Sir, would you check our selection of Android phones? - No, I'd like to buy an Apple phone / I'm interested in iOS devices / I want *one of these* here. - Which one? - 4S please / the shorter / less expensive / less magnificent one. - Here you are,... pesos please. - Good bye.
Then leave it to the population how they call it:-)
So 720p is 768 rows, 1080p is 1080 rows and 4k is 2160 rows, and not even 4k columns? Who named it so? In Best Buy: "See how much better this 4k screen is, compared to that 1080"
> you're looking at 27.6 MILLION PARTS per panel, right now that means a lot of defects
At a sufficiently high pixel density (maybe a couple of thousand DPI), having a large number of bad pixels is OK as long as they are spread around evenly.
> The ones who don't get run over by buses are more likely to be the ones who pay attention to what's around them or the ones who never leave the house.
You guys are awfully serious about this. The judge has a strong yet sophisticated sense of humor, and the ruling can be interpreted in multiple ways. I think a judgement that rules your product "cool" in writing is preferable over actually winning a petty case like this. Does anyone think the judge was unaware of the consequences of his wording, and how Apple can use it to its own benefit? And let's face it, Samsung et al do copy the success that they saw with Apple products like there's no tomorrow. If anything, the Apple posting is just and hilarious in many ways.
Slashdot Mirror
The LCD screen of my W520 moves around loosely in the screen bezel. Also, there was a leftover plastic bit between the screen and the bezel, resulting in a huge gap. The plastics feel like cheap noname Chinese brands rather than the matte velvety surface of the Thinkpad 600 series or the Newton Messagepad. There is creaking etc. when the machine is held. It dies often under Windows (what it came with). The official Lenovo Ultrabay hard drive caddy is thinner than the bay, resulting in a huge gap, letting dust in the machine. I don't care about the dead pixel in comparison. The LCD (good color gamut but TN) has 1080 rows on a 15.6" screen vs. 1050 rows on my very old 12.1" X60 tablet (IPS), wow. The keyboard is still best of class, but they placed silly "paging" keys directly among the previously well-separated arrow island. The ThinkLight sucks, partly because the keys became shiny after little use and glare (screams 'used old clunker' in daylight). They put a huge and hideous shiny plastic-chrome "lenovo" logo on the lid, and it is the polar opposite design language of the still-retained, understated "ThinkPad" logo, which is spun matte metal and a decent font. It's still a good machine, much better than the X1 et al with low memory, glare, screen-heavy design and poor screen resolution.
Read some Robert Pirsig and Christopher Alexander, they open you up to the objective nature and depth of things like quality. With consumer products, there are exceptions, but some very mainstream manufacturers (er.. gadget brand owners) sell only cheap, plasticky products, not to mention knockoff makers. No one said it is impossible to build great products from plastic, or that such products don't exist, but the generalization about inferiority was fairly valid. If a reviewer says it feels cheap, flimsy and plasticky, at least I know what to expect (I'd rather spend 20% more for something that feels better to use). However don'd build up a childish strawman argument, they don't write it simply based on the construction material which is but one element of the overall feel. For example, the Nexus 7 or the HTC One X are praised instead. Determining instrument-measurable criteria for determining quality would be an interesting research project. In the meantime I don't need to think a product is cheap, I just need to feel it and move on to alternatives.
Even now, there may be an identical twin zygote in a freezer from a former in vitro fertilization that can be thawed. So while the accessibility of this option can be increased by cloning, it wouldn't be a new sort of ethical problem, it would perhaps be a new societal issue.
Use one half of an iPad!
> It's close enough to 16:9 that watching movies isn't problematic. Particularly since most are made by taking a 16:9 resolution and adding some height.
It's the glueing that is the hard part.
> Square monitors are best in a sense
Shame that none of the 1:1 monitors I found was rotatable. Bummer!
I don't understand. On a 16:9 monitor, there is usually quite large bands on top and bottom. So 16:9 does not seem to be a movie format, isn't 21:9 better in that regard? I'm just asking about the film aspect, not the productivity etc. aspect.
> Even better IMO. A move in the right, rather than wrong, direction.
It's not a move in any direction. 1280x1024 displays have been around since the Cretaceous.My problem is that while they are good for single-window operations, I prefer working with two windows side by side, and for that 16:10 is best and 16:9 is acceptable. Splitting a 5:4 screen will result in too narrow windows, or a gargantuan LCD panel height, even if we forget about the fact that 1280x1024 is a decent resolution only on a mobile phone and lower-end tablets.
Mod parent up, finally someone who can step away from the shallow dismissive "thinking" that characterizes 90% of posters here.
Riiight. Police can work with one set of evidence and confirm it with a DNA match, but not the other way around. Sounds logical. Probably the Dutch police / justice system does not employ even one person who is a statistician. They should come straight to Slashdot if they want to have a clue and just release the raper already.
> It's strange that he volunteered a DNA sample. Hopefully that's just because most criminals are dumb, and not because he's being wrongly accused.
How is it not already a dumb move, to say the least, to kill someone?
Riight, it'll be so straightforward for you to verify that rock-solid assurance, I see how you'll become convinced. All these police investigations are so transparent anyway, and of course there is no value at all in retaining your and thousands of others' DNA for future investigations of murder.
Yes, like posting on facebook and kindly ask the murdeder to come forth? Get real, man.
Someone in the middle ages conceptualized the modern car. Others thought it can't possibly work because it would destroy the gate when the driver arrives home. They didn't think it would be possible to park _near_ the house and walk a bit of distance, rather than crashing into the gate. It'a just as inconceivable that an Alcubierre spaceship aimed at slightly off of the destination, and after deceleration, slowly and carefully arrived at the spaceport from an angle.
a dead salmon.
Yes, they have said as much in their press release: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/everspin-debuts-first-spin-torque-140000887.html
> I seem to recall the major feature of any electronic calculator was the ability to write 80085 and make your classmates giggle.
Isn't it 8085?
> If programming was easy women and children would be doing it ;-)
It may not be easy, and women and children are doing it.
Why should it be called *anything*? Branding is cool and all, but it's not like there is a law that your product be named. Apple does not "make" phones other than the iPhone so there should be no confusion.
- Sir, would you check our selection of Android phones? ... pesos please.
- No, I'd like to buy an Apple phone / I'm interested in iOS devices / I want *one of these* here.
- Which one?
- 4S please / the shorter / less expensive / less magnificent one.
- Here you are,
- Good bye.
Then leave it to the population how they call it :-)
So 720p is 768 rows, 1080p is 1080 rows and 4k is 2160 rows, and not even 4k columns? Who named it so? In Best Buy: "See how much better this 4k screen is, compared to that 1080"
> you're looking at 27.6 MILLION PARTS per panel, right now that means a lot of defects
At a sufficiently high pixel density (maybe a couple of thousand DPI), having a large number of bad pixels is OK as long as they are spread around evenly.
> The ones who don't get run over by buses are more likely to be the ones who pay attention to what's around them or the ones who never leave the house.
Or the bus.
You guys are awfully serious about this. The judge has a strong yet sophisticated sense of humor, and the ruling can be interpreted in multiple ways. I think a judgement that rules your product "cool" in writing is preferable over actually winning a petty case like this. Does anyone think the judge was unaware of the consequences of his wording, and how Apple can use it to its own benefit? And let's face it, Samsung et al do copy the success that they saw with Apple products like there's no tomorrow. If anything, the Apple posting is just and hilarious in many ways.
That's what you get if you deliver to the One Infinite Loop address.
You get my vote.