I've just wasted 2 days with windows 8. The only positive thing I can say of the experience is that MS were happy to refund my money. Horrible UI, but worse still, it refuses to let you use your (valid!) license. Complete and utter crap.
Did it say which ethnic minority the asteroid belongs to? Or when its daughter will be turning 16? I might have to see what fred basset has to say about all this...
But i thought that the entire point of the second ammendment was to allow organised militias to point guns at people representing a tyrannical government?
I must admit, the first time I saw raw 48fps footage, it looked super odd. After a while of staring at the same sequence, I realised it's because there was no motion blur on the frames, only that which you see with your own eyes. The lack of motion blur made the sequences look more like a computer game than a film. As someone who moved from the games industry to VFX, it was kinda nice to know that the games I worked on in the past, actually looked a lot more realistic than I'd given them credit at the time. I find it slightly ironic that the games industry has been chasing the 'photoreal' quality of film (by added motion blur etc), and yet a simple technology change in the VFX world has shown that computer games had actually more photorealistic all along....
That's not really how it works. Every dev I've ever worked with in the games industry, all aim for 60fps. Given enough time and resources, that's what they'd all end up delivering. Since they are never given enough time or resources, by either management or their publishers, there will be a time when the only option is to drop to 30fps. It has nothing to do with laziness, and everything to do with money.
I think you've completely missed the point. If you are setting up a large procedural animation, the second you 'apply' modifiers, you've lost the procedural control. Usually we want to keep that history around (just incase the director changes his/her mind)
Re:3D Comp[uter Graphics Software
on
Blender 2.65 Released
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Or more accurately, Blender is to 3DS Max what GIMP is to Photoshop.
Blender is based around the modifier-stack philosophy present in 3DS Max, which is probably my biggest complaint about it tbh. Max is, and always has been, very inflexible compared to Maya. It's great for getting some stuff done quickly, but if you're not careful, you can easily run up against the boundaries of what's possible with the software. Maya is a very different beast in this regard (along with XSI & Houdini). It's organised around a node/attr dependency graph which can easily be reconfigured to solve whatever problem needs solving. If you hit a problem in Maya, there is always a way around it (which may be horribly hacky, but at least there is a workaround). That's the main reason Maya/Houdini/XSI are used extensivley within the VFX world, and why you'll never find anyone using Blender or Max.
That's not to say Blender isn't good at what it does, but it's not something that can really compete with Maya. It's great in the games arena (especially indy games), but it's core level architecture is not an approach that would work nicely in VFX world sadly....
Because for years we've been trying to remove the influence of the church from parliament, like you know, those 18 unelected male bishops that sit in the house of lords. Putting Jedi down in the census before last was all well and funny, but this time around people were asked to put 'atheist'. The idea being that if the majority of the country were atheist, politicians would have a hard time defending the churches unelected role in our country. So yes, putting 'Jedi' was funny ten years ago, but this time around those people are just being dicks.
Rubbish. If cost reduction was the aim, then it would be cheaper to keep the current 2.4L engines rather than invest millions developing new 1.6L turbos for the 2014 season. They are developing the 1.6L engines soley to try to temp the car manufacturers back (VW, Audi, and Honda specifically).
The engine power output is part of the formula, and so efficiency is not something the teams can use to get an upper hand. The engine formula is decided by whether the sponsors want to attach their names (and money!) to the cars. Since most car manufacturers are attempting to sell small economical cars (e.g. renault!), it makes sense to be involved in a high profile sport where the car engines have some parity to their road cars (although an 1.6L F1 engine will still produce 700+HP, it at least sounds closer to their road car offerings).
Racing at the very top is supposed to be about the most uncompromising cars possible.
Maybe in the 80's. These days F1 technology is very much driven by road vehicle manufacturers & environmental concerns. For example, the current 2.4L engines (which year on year have been limited to lower and lower revs) are being replaced by 1.6L turbos in 2014, mainly as a result of pressure from manufactures such a merc & renault (and audi / VW, although they eventally decided against joining). If the majority of newly built road cars become diesel powered, F1 engines will switch to diesel. Similarly, if the majority of new road cars are electric, F1 will switch. F1 will do whatever the sponsors ask, and if that includes radically changing the formula, then so be it....
There are different motherboards? Well, I'm sure there are different models, but different enough to matter?
Yes. I built a PC for a friend earlier this year, paid above the odds for a motherboard with USB3 / SATA3 Raid / 1800Mhz DDR3, and matched it with a cheap CPU. The cheap to midrange mobos at the time were all USB2 / SATA2. Choice is a *good* thing. It allows you to choose which features you include in your build, at a pricepoint that suits you. If Sata3 is important, pay for it. If a 6 core CPU isn't, then don't. If at the time the CPU had been soldered on the mobo, I'm fairly certain the cost of the build would have risen quite noticeably.
Of course, all of this discussion might be a load of old guff. Intel already produce a number of ATOM chips soldered onto the motherboards. If the submitter is comparing an arm with an Atom, then that may make perfect sense.
Slashdot Mirror
I've just wasted 2 days with windows 8. The only positive thing I can say of the experience is that MS were happy to refund my money. Horrible UI, but worse still, it refuses to let you use your (valid!) license. Complete and utter crap.
Did it say which ethnic minority the asteroid belongs to? Or when its daughter will be turning 16? I might have to see what fred basset has to say about all this...
I'm just here for the ladies.
"you don't point a gun at people EVER"
But i thought that the entire point of the second ammendment was to allow organised militias to point guns at people representing a tyrannical government?
It's a tabloid? There was me thinking it was some sort of hilarous paradoy of 'to death do us part'.
The UK smoking age has been 18 for some time....
I must admit, the first time I saw raw 48fps footage, it looked super odd. After a while of staring at the same sequence, I realised it's because there was no motion blur on the frames, only that which you see with your own eyes. The lack of motion blur made the sequences look more like a computer game than a film. As someone who moved from the games industry to VFX, it was kinda nice to know that the games I worked on in the past, actually looked a lot more realistic than I'd given them credit at the time. I find it slightly ironic that the games industry has been chasing the 'photoreal' quality of film (by added motion blur etc), and yet a simple technology change in the VFX world has shown that computer games had actually more photorealistic all along....
That's not really how it works. Every dev I've ever worked with in the games industry, all aim for 60fps. Given enough time and resources, that's what they'd all end up delivering. Since they are never given enough time or resources, by either management or their publishers, there will be a time when the only option is to drop to 30fps. It has nothing to do with laziness, and everything to do with money.
That's because the question is not "should it go to Japan?", but "will the equipment be safe if it's built in Japan?".
I don't think Blender is much like any of the Adobe products. The entire orientation of the development effort is different.
Adobe doesn't make any 3D modelling or animation packages, although Autodesk do....
I think you've completely missed the point. If you are setting up a large procedural animation, the second you 'apply' modifiers, you've lost the procedural control. Usually we want to keep that history around (just incase the director changes his/her mind)
Or more accurately, Blender is to 3DS Max what GIMP is to Photoshop.
Blender is based around the modifier-stack philosophy present in 3DS Max, which is probably my biggest complaint about it tbh. Max is, and always has been, very inflexible compared to Maya. It's great for getting some stuff done quickly, but if you're not careful, you can easily run up against the boundaries of what's possible with the software. Maya is a very different beast in this regard (along with XSI & Houdini). It's organised around a node/attr dependency graph which can easily be reconfigured to solve whatever problem needs solving. If you hit a problem in Maya, there is always a way around it (which may be horribly hacky, but at least there is a workaround). That's the main reason Maya/Houdini/XSI are used extensivley within the VFX world, and why you'll never find anyone using Blender or Max.
That's not to say Blender isn't good at what it does, but it's not something that can really compete with Maya. It's great in the games arena (especially indy games), but it's core level architecture is not an approach that would work nicely in VFX world sadly....
The quadro FX5800 in my work PC has 4GB, the matrox has 32MB. I'd say 30-40 is a bit of a low ball (which is why the parent is marked funny.....)
Digby says he'll bite your head off unless you start you start worshipping your new oversized disney dog overlords!
Because for years we've been trying to remove the influence of the church from parliament, like you know, those 18 unelected male bishops that sit in the house of lords. Putting Jedi down in the census before last was all well and funny, but this time around people were asked to put 'atheist'. The idea being that if the majority of the country were atheist, politicians would have a hard time defending the churches unelected role in our country. So yes, putting 'Jedi' was funny ten years ago, but this time around those people are just being dicks.
What could possible happen if a fire occurred?
Have you ever tried to light diesel? It's much harder than you seem to think......
And just how big is RT's market share supposed to be?
Somewhere between 0 and FLT_MIN.
It's a bigger potential market, but it's not grossing as high as the console market (yet!).
The GP isn't wrong.....
I think the innovation is still there..... it's just a lot more crafty these days ;) F-Duct, Double DRS, Exhaust blown diffuser, L shaped pods
Rubbish. If cost reduction was the aim, then it would be cheaper to keep the current 2.4L engines rather than invest millions developing new 1.6L turbos for the 2014 season. They are developing the 1.6L engines soley to try to temp the car manufacturers back (VW, Audi, and Honda specifically).
The engine power output is part of the formula, and so efficiency is not something the teams can use to get an upper hand. The engine formula is decided by whether the sponsors want to attach their names (and money!) to the cars. Since most car manufacturers are attempting to sell small economical cars (e.g. renault!), it makes sense to be involved in a high profile sport where the car engines have some parity to their road cars (although an 1.6L F1 engine will still produce 700+HP, it at least sounds closer to their road car offerings).
Racing at the very top is supposed to be about the most uncompromising cars possible.
Maybe in the 80's. These days F1 technology is very much driven by road vehicle manufacturers & environmental concerns. For example, the current 2.4L engines (which year on year have been limited to lower and lower revs) are being replaced by 1.6L turbos in 2014, mainly as a result of pressure from manufactures such a merc & renault (and audi / VW, although they eventally decided against joining). If the majority of newly built road cars become diesel powered, F1 engines will switch to diesel. Similarly, if the majority of new road cars are electric, F1 will switch. F1 will do whatever the sponsors ask, and if that includes radically changing the formula, then so be it....
There are different motherboards? Well, I'm sure there are different models, but different enough to matter?
Yes. I built a PC for a friend earlier this year, paid above the odds for a motherboard with USB3 / SATA3 Raid / 1800Mhz DDR3, and matched it with a cheap CPU. The cheap to midrange mobos at the time were all USB2 / SATA2. Choice is a *good* thing. It allows you to choose which features you include in your build, at a pricepoint that suits you. If Sata3 is important, pay for it. If a 6 core CPU isn't, then don't. If at the time the CPU had been soldered on the mobo, I'm fairly certain the cost of the build would have risen quite noticeably.
Of course, all of this discussion might be a load of old guff. Intel already produce a number of ATOM chips soldered onto the motherboards. If the submitter is comparing an arm with an Atom, then that may make perfect sense.
Uhm, there are closed source apps on Linux and Mac you know.