Interpolation aren't just best guesses. They are numerical analysis curve fitting algorithms to best represent non-linearity in discrete linear slopes that become increasingly correct as the differential [distance between two points on the curve] decreases. The trade off reaches a point of diminishing returns [depending on your curve fit method of choice] and wasted clock cycles as you can do it infinitely and get no perceptual improvement to the human eye.
You're absolutely right. I'm Irish and to me, the Democrats are, at best, moderate and at worst, on the hard right compared to my left wing politics. In fact, the former American Ambassador to Ireland, Tom Foley, once called me "an out and out Marxist". Now I'm no Marxist, hell, I'm not even communist, but considering his politics and the huge swing to the right that Americans have had since Reagan, I took it as being that I was simply one of the few true left wingers that he had encountered in those early days of his tenure in Ireland!
That would be Thomas C. Foley, not to be confused with Tom Foley [Thomas S. Foley], retired Democrat and former Speaker of the House from Spokane, WA.
Ride a Train: No, Yet more lines are moving to Bio-Electric and are beginning to test Algae
Use Plastics: Unfortunately thanks to the glass industry yet to implement it's latest material science advances I'm stuck with Milk not in glass, cottage cheese not in glass, dips, salsas [I can make my own dip and salsa and will again this summer], etc.
My petroleum footprint is a lot lower than most. I'm glad Wine and other liquors are still in glass. I'm glad pickles, olive oil, mixed vegetables and more are available still in glass. Hopefully, glass makes a comeback.
That is if I want to easily port my app to different platforms I will have to abstract the platform dependant portions so that I can re-use the rest of the code directly, and have separate bits of code for the various APIs and such.
They just disallowed doing exactly this, and required that you only use their API directly, without your custom wrapper library.
Factually incorrect. Your low level code that are doing your platform independent routines must be written in C, C++, ObjC or ObjC++ and even Javascript. The hooks to the OS must use the iPhone OS APIs. That's it.
This of course has nothing to do with Mac OS X proper.
XNA is just an API and runtime. Yes, it happens to exist only Microsoft OSes. But Microsoft doesn't require that ALL games that run on its operating systems are written with XNA, which is effectively what Apple is doing.
Mac OS X doesn't either. We're talking about the embedded iPhone OS platform, and XNA and the 360 platform requires XNA only the XBox 360.
I hadn't thought of this, and this is exactly right. I don't even think they need to find an email: this seems (perhaps illegally) anti-competitive on its face.
You're clearly never been a developer for an OEM or an OS corporation. They have legal contracts disclosing directions long in advance of their marketing campaigns.
Actually, it is plainly obvious from Mr. Jobs' comments that the point of the restriction is to prevent cross-platform applications. Apple wants iPhone apps to be designed for the iPhone, not ported from another platform.
-dZ.
Try this one on for size: You write MS Office on Windows using their GUI interfaces. Apple wants MS Office written on OS X to use their GUI interfaces and other communication APIs that are unique to their platform. The same for Windows. It would be incumbent upon the developer to make their architecture modular and reuse as much of their low level C/C++ code available to both platforms and just fork their code base in the areas of Platform dependent APIs.
Apple does not require developers to use Apple tools, only the approved languages, which were not invented and neither are owned by Apple: Objective C, C, and C++. XCode is the IDE provided by Apple, and it uses GCC to compile the code.
You are free to use whatever you want, as long as the code is originally written in one of those languages and not ported from a different platform.
-dZ.
Apple owns Objective-C. They have licensed portions back to GCC w/o the Apple runtime.
HTML5 and WHATWG were a workaround to the W3C standards process because certain powerful interests didn't want to support the strictness of XHTML2.
Now that WHATWG's efforts have been accepted by W3C and the superior standard of XHTML2 has been shelved, what can we do to try and make the web work properly?
Sorry, but having floundered through a DECADE of XML and it's Bazillion offspring HTML5 was crying to be made.
"Hasn't been sued yet" is different from "patent-free".
Sure, because those are totally orthogonal dimensions. You can get sued for using any codec (and you might even be a juicier target with something like h.264). When you buy an h.264 license, you're only indemnified against the patents the consortium holds, and you're explicitly not covered against anything else that was infringed along the way.
I see you ignored the parent posters factual response that HTML 5 is not VIDEO 5 as you seem to fixate on.
HTML5 is shaping up to be one of the biggest screw jobs we've seen yet when it comes to web standards.
At least previous standards were written with the browser users and web developers in mind. However, that just isn't the case with HTML5. It has been put together by a small number of large media corporations with vested interests in having the utmost control over a user's browsing experience. Sure, Apple and Google develop browsers, but they're media companies first and foremost when it comes to the Internet.
HTML5 will fuck developers over, and it will fuck users over. The browser vendors will never reach a consensus on which codecs to use. We, as developers, will have to waste our time supporting these browser differences, rather than improving our sites. As users, we'll get stuck having to deal with broken sites. But what's stupidest of all, of course, is that there are so many patent-free, open source options available for the vendors to standardize on.
Fuck HTML5. It's a shitty standard that's being forced on us, rather than documented commonality arising from our shared needs.
What a baseless little child sitting here as an anonymous coward ranting about not getting his choice of Porridge.
but it's their control over the thing that makes it as easy to use as possible.
When is the last time you used Apple's YouTube application (which ironically, CAN play YouTube videos). It is an utter JOKE. But too bad - if you decide to use a regular browser to deal with the many deficiencies in Apple's application, you can't play videos! How is this good? It's pathetically comedic at best.
Doing research before spouting off makes you credible. You clearly got a high rating because some one was just as bad at research as you clearly demonstrate.
I'm not involved in cutting video but I work with someone who is, and they tell me they like H.264 a lot better than Ogg Theora.
A writer may like PDF or FrameMaker ahead of html but if they want people to read their stuff its going to have to be published in html. Where would we be if you had to use a restricted format to read normal web pages?
Every major operating system has pdf viewers. PDF is an ISO standard. Sorry but authors [talented writers, not bloggers] who make a living getting their work published aren't targeting html.
Steve jobs is no charismatic guru, he's just a turtlenecked faggot in the right place at the right time who speaks with a wimpy-voiced lisp. He had the chance to earn more mainstream credibility with getting the slate form factor right, but he failed because he assumed that everybody else would suck his cock without wanting those things called "features". Only a Frisco faggot insulated from the rest of the thinking country* could be as arrogant as the Hep-C-ridden Steve Jobs, who attained a second chance at life because he had money. Linux is kicking MacOS' ass as we speak.
* Steve Jobs is the George W. Bush of Cupertino.
Begged to suck his knob and got kneed in the sack, eh?
From your references, the AVC/H.264Patent List is a 49 page pdf file. Each page shows about 10 to 20 patent numbers, or around 700 by a quick calculation.
Interestingly, Apple has only one patent.
But feel free to demonize Apple as the 800lb gorilla in this patent trap. It seems every irrational dweeb is on that band wagon.
How old are you? 12? I can correct all sorts of BS you're slinging beeing a NeXT and Apple alum, but what's the point? The Net is great at slinging BS.
Did he seriously just say he wanted a 6000x4000 24" LCD with a 0.08mm dot pitch (compared to average CRTs with 0.22-0.28mm) so he could look at smooth text?
Yes he did, and he's absolutely right. In print media (color or black&white) 300dpi is considered a bare minimum, yet on computer displays we get a measly 96dpi? Yuck! We have to employ all sorts of anti-aliasing tricks to mask the problem but if we had 300dpi we wouldn't need anti-aliasing at all. And text would be much easier on the eyes.
Also, does he realize this is all his employers' (Microsoft) fault? XP was set by default to 96 DPI. Sure you could set it to "large size" 120 DPI when running high, but that usually ended up distorting everything.
In my experience this simply isn't true --whenever I specify a custom dpi for windows it handles it pretty well (I have noticed that you some apps look janky until you reboot, but fine afterwards).
Ironically, this is one UI issue that XP/Vista handles way better than OSX, I just got the 15" macbook pro with the optional 1680x1050 display, and the only way to change the dpi is with the developer tools (and when you do the UI is a total mess).
Websites didn't look right, text would be all over the pages, some text would be larger but other things wouldn't be, like text in Flash or on images.
This *is* annoying but hopefully will be getting better. Shitty web developers are finding out that if they specify "pt" instead of "px" their content is still readable on high-dpi devices like iPhone/Droid.
So why would manufactures offer 300dpi when customers would just set them back to the 96 DPI they're use to?
Sadly, you've got a point. I would love a 300dpi display, and I think people would come around if they saw the potential, but until the OS and content can maximize that potential the manufacturers won't be motivated.
So true, though I'd be happy if we started with 600dpi so that includes all those HP 4/4+ Postscript printers of old and the WYSIWYG resolution on screen could at least match that baseline, ala 1994.
I've f'ing had it with all the "when you eyes go" apologetics and rationales. I lost count how many people said this, and yours is the comment that broke the flamer's back (to massacre a old saying).
I'm 50 years old. I can STILL see the pixels on my 24-inch 1920x1200. I want MORE pixels. And I want then NOW, while I can still enjoy them, and not in 30 years after I'm dead or senile.
2560x1600 isn't much of an upgrade, but if I could get that on a 24-inch or smaller form-factor, I would pay over a thousand to do it. Why one needs to go to a minimum of 30 inches to do it, I do not know. I'm not interested in a 30-inch desk-eating monster. I'm prefectly fine with the 24 inchers. ALas, they are not made.
Also - those "studies" of what gamers use: how much of it is biased by the fact that gamers tend to be younger, often still in school, and generally don't have much disposable cash to spend better, more expensive stuff. The teen who plays at 1280x960 because that's what got handed down to him, can't be said to have actively chosen this resolution over all others.
Besides when his eyes go in a few years he won't care about the high resolutions anymore.
Because he is staring at low resolution screens! For the sake of your eyes, get a high resolution display!
This is incorrect. His eyes will go in a few years because once you hit the age of about 40 years, the lens in your eyes become less flexible, making it harder to focus on objects that are relatively close. See presbyopia.
Thanks for the broad generalization. I'm approaching 41 and my eye pressure, prescription, and all that goes into an ophthalmology test haven't changed since 1996. Sorry, but not everyone's eyes crap out.
Slashdot Mirror
Interpolation aren't just best guesses. They are numerical analysis curve fitting algorithms to best represent non-linearity in discrete linear slopes that become increasingly correct as the differential [distance between two points on the curve] decreases. The trade off reaches a point of diminishing returns [depending on your curve fit method of choice] and wasted clock cycles as you can do it infinitely and get no perceptual improvement to the human eye.
Apple only killed off DRM when Amazon started selling music with no DRM at lower prices than Apple. It was a reactionary move.
You have your time line backwards.
I sure as hell am not interested in buying a new "web" fee to have them in my web site.
Everyone knows Nixon was a sissy liberal. He met Elvis and his evil gyrating hips.
And "Elvis" is an anagram of "evils". How much more proof do you need?
Or, ``Lives.''
You're absolutely right. I'm Irish and to me, the Democrats are, at best, moderate and at worst, on the hard right compared to my left wing politics. In fact, the former American Ambassador to Ireland, Tom Foley, once called me "an out and out Marxist". Now I'm no Marxist, hell, I'm not even communist, but considering his politics and the huge swing to the right that Americans have had since Reagan, I took it as being that I was simply one of the few true left wingers that he had encountered in those early days of his tenure in Ireland!
That would be Thomas C. Foley, not to be confused with Tom Foley [Thomas S. Foley], retired Democrat and former Speaker of the House from Spokane, WA.
My petroleum footprint is a lot lower than most. I'm glad Wine and other liquors are still in glass. I'm glad pickles, olive oil, mixed vegetables and more are available still in glass. Hopefully, glass makes a comeback.
That is if I want to easily port my app to different platforms I will have to abstract the platform dependant portions so that I can re-use the rest of the code directly, and have separate bits of code for the various APIs and such.
They just disallowed doing exactly this, and required that you only use their API directly, without your custom wrapper library.
Factually incorrect. Your low level code that are doing your platform independent routines must be written in C, C++, ObjC or ObjC++ and even Javascript. The hooks to the OS must use the iPhone OS APIs. That's it.
This of course has nothing to do with Mac OS X proper.
That isn't even a remotely close analogy.
XNA is just an API and runtime. Yes, it happens to exist only Microsoft OSes. But Microsoft doesn't require that ALL games that run on its operating systems are written with XNA, which is effectively what Apple is doing.
Mac OS X doesn't either. We're talking about the embedded iPhone OS platform, and XNA and the 360 platform requires XNA only the XBox 360.
I hadn't thought of this, and this is exactly right. I don't even think they need to find an email: this seems (perhaps illegally) anti-competitive on its face.
You're clearly never been a developer for an OEM or an OS corporation. They have legal contracts disclosing directions long in advance of their marketing campaigns.
Actually, it is plainly obvious from Mr. Jobs' comments that the point of the restriction is to prevent cross-platform applications. Apple wants iPhone apps to be designed for the iPhone, not ported from another platform.
-dZ.
Try this one on for size: You write MS Office on Windows using their GUI interfaces. Apple wants MS Office written on OS X to use their GUI interfaces and other communication APIs that are unique to their platform. The same for Windows. It would be incumbent upon the developer to make their architecture modular and reuse as much of their low level C/C++ code available to both platforms and just fork their code base in the areas of Platform dependent APIs.
Apple does not require developers to use Apple tools, only the approved languages, which were not invented and neither are owned by Apple: Objective C, C, and C++. XCode is the IDE provided by Apple, and it uses GCC to compile the code.
You are free to use whatever you want, as long as the code is originally written in one of those languages and not ported from a different platform.
-dZ.
Apple owns Objective-C. They have licensed portions back to GCC w/o the Apple runtime.
HTML5 and WHATWG were a workaround to the W3C standards process because certain powerful interests didn't want to support the strictness of XHTML2.
Now that WHATWG's efforts have been accepted by W3C and the superior standard of XHTML2 has been shelved, what can we do to try and make the web work properly?
Sorry, but having floundered through a DECADE of XML and it's Bazillion offspring HTML5 was crying to be made.
"Hasn't been sued yet" is different from "patent-free".
Sure, because those are totally orthogonal dimensions. You can get sued for using any codec (and you might even be a juicier target with something like h.264). When you buy an h.264 license, you're only indemnified against the patents the consortium holds, and you're explicitly not covered against anything else that was infringed along the way.
I see you ignored the parent posters factual response that HTML 5 is not VIDEO 5 as you seem to fixate on.
HTML5 is shaping up to be one of the biggest screw jobs we've seen yet when it comes to web standards.
At least previous standards were written with the browser users and web developers in mind. However, that just isn't the case with HTML5. It has been put together by a small number of large media corporations with vested interests in having the utmost control over a user's browsing experience. Sure, Apple and Google develop browsers, but they're media companies first and foremost when it comes to the Internet.
HTML5 will fuck developers over, and it will fuck users over. The browser vendors will never reach a consensus on which codecs to use. We, as developers, will have to waste our time supporting these browser differences, rather than improving our sites. As users, we'll get stuck having to deal with broken sites. But what's stupidest of all, of course, is that there are so many patent-free, open source options available for the vendors to standardize on.
Fuck HTML5. It's a shitty standard that's being forced on us, rather than documented commonality arising from our shared needs.
What a baseless little child sitting here as an anonymous coward ranting about not getting his choice of Porridge.
but it's their control over the thing that makes it as easy to use as possible.
When is the last time you used Apple's YouTube application (which ironically, CAN play YouTube videos). It is an utter JOKE. But too bad - if you decide to use a regular browser to deal with the many deficiencies in Apple's application, you can't play videos! How is this good? It's pathetically comedic at best.
Doing research before spouting off makes you credible. You clearly got a high rating because some one was just as bad at research as you clearly demonstrate.
I'm not involved in cutting video but I work with someone who is, and they tell me they like H.264 a lot better than Ogg Theora.
A writer may like PDF or FrameMaker ahead of html but if they want people to read their stuff its going to have to be published in html. Where would we be if you had to use a restricted format to read normal web pages?
Every major operating system has pdf viewers. PDF is an ISO standard. Sorry but authors [talented writers, not bloggers] who make a living getting their work published aren't targeting html.
Steve jobs is no charismatic guru, he's just a turtlenecked faggot in the right place at the right time who speaks with a wimpy-voiced lisp. He had the chance to earn more mainstream credibility with getting the slate form factor right, but he failed because he assumed that everybody else would suck his cock without wanting those things called "features". Only a Frisco faggot insulated from the rest of the thinking country* could be as arrogant as the Hep-C-ridden Steve Jobs, who attained a second chance at life because he had money. Linux is kicking MacOS' ass as we speak. * Steve Jobs is the George W. Bush of Cupertino.
Begged to suck his knob and got kneed in the sack, eh?
Steve jobs has NEVER been a nice fellow. :)
He was always nice to me at NeXT and Apple. Maybe he doesn't like whiny little pricks?
From your references, the AVC/H.264 Patent List is a 49 page pdf file. Each page shows about 10 to 20 patent numbers, or around 700 by a quick calculation. Interestingly, Apple has only one patent.
But feel free to demonize Apple as the 800lb gorilla in this patent trap. It seems every irrational dweeb is on that band wagon.
Turns out that Canonical is an H.264 licensee. They don't care much more about free video formats than Steve Jobs does.
Every serious OS vendor is a licensee of H.264.
Yes but the H.264 implementation only infringes on the patents of the holders of the H.264 patents.
How do you know?
Seriously? Read their patents.
How old are you? 12? I can correct all sorts of BS you're slinging beeing a NeXT and Apple alum, but what's the point? The Net is great at slinging BS.
Yes he did, and he's absolutely right. In print media (color or black&white) 300dpi is considered a bare minimum, yet on computer displays we get a measly 96dpi? Yuck! We have to employ all sorts of anti-aliasing tricks to mask the problem but if we had 300dpi we wouldn't need anti-aliasing at all. And text would be much easier on the eyes.
In my experience this simply isn't true --whenever I specify a custom dpi for windows it handles it pretty well (I have noticed that you some apps look janky until you reboot, but fine afterwards).
Ironically, this is one UI issue that XP/Vista handles way better than OSX, I just got the 15" macbook pro with the optional 1680x1050 display, and the only way to change the dpi is with the developer tools (and when you do the UI is a total mess).
This *is* annoying but hopefully will be getting better. Shitty web developers are finding out that if they specify "pt" instead of "px" their content is still readable on high-dpi devices like iPhone/Droid.
Sadly, you've got a point. I would love a 300dpi display, and I think people would come around if they saw the potential, but until the OS and content can maximize that potential the manufacturers won't be motivated.
So true, though I'd be happy if we started with 600dpi so that includes all those HP 4/4+ Postscript printers of old and the WYSIWYG resolution on screen could at least match that baseline, ala 1994.
I've f'ing had it with all the "when you eyes go" apologetics and rationales. I lost count how many people said this, and yours is the comment that broke the flamer's back (to massacre a old saying).
I'm 50 years old. I can STILL see the pixels on my 24-inch 1920x1200. I want MORE pixels. And I want then NOW, while I can still enjoy them, and not in 30 years after I'm dead or senile.
2560x1600 isn't much of an upgrade, but if I could get that on a 24-inch or smaller form-factor, I would pay over a thousand to do it. Why one needs to go to a minimum of 30 inches to do it, I do not know. I'm not interested in a 30-inch desk-eating monster. I'm prefectly fine with the 24 inchers. ALas, they are not made.
Also - those "studies" of what gamers use: how much of it is biased by the fact that gamers tend to be younger, often still in school, and generally don't have much disposable cash to spend better, more expensive stuff. The teen who plays at 1280x960 because that's what got handed down to him, can't be said to have actively chosen this resolution over all others.
Agreed.
Besides when his eyes go in a few years he won't care about the high resolutions anymore.
Because he is staring at low resolution screens! For the sake of your eyes, get a high resolution display!
This is incorrect. His eyes will go in a few years because once you hit the age of about 40 years, the lens in your eyes become less flexible, making it harder to focus on objects that are relatively close. See presbyopia.
Thanks for the broad generalization. I'm approaching 41 and my eye pressure, prescription, and all that goes into an ophthalmology test haven't changed since 1996. Sorry, but not everyone's eyes crap out.