You want a console that never requires you to upgrade? How is that 8-bit NES working for you? Still playing around with Excitebike, are you?
Does your "PC" console satisfy those criteria?
Goddamn right it does. My PC is ridiculously high-end enough that the system requirements don't apply. This is what "state of the art means", in case you're wondering. Even games that have "suggested hardware" are way behind the specs of my machine. That's the secret - upgrade every few years to the top of the line and system requirements no longer apply to you. I built my new computer for Skyrim when it came out and from the start I could run it smoothly at 1920x1200 with all display settings maxed out, even with the high-res texture and other graphics mods (you do have mods for your console games, right?). I even have a spare video card slot just waiting for a second Geforce once the polygon counts get even more ridiculous in a few years. By that time it will cost me maybe $200 or $300 to effectively double my machine's gaming performance.
But, if you're happy with a new gaming machine every 5+ years that gets released with hardware that is already out of date and has games that you aren't able to modify, then a console is definitely for you. You don't have to check system requirements, so you've got that going for you I guess. That must be nice.
A tumor grows. Does that mean the tumor is alive and deserves federal protection? A fetus really isn't all that different than a parasite, it can only exist as long as the host does.
Or you know, we could call birth the point at which you count as being "alive" and then not need to worry about all the edge cases like rape.
I propose we standardize things and call the point at which you can claim a person as a dependent on your taxes also the same point at which they are considered "alive". It seems a little odd that people insist that a growing fetus is alive, but you sure as hell can't claim a fetus as a dependent.
Stop thinking in terms of, "What's the minimum we can get away with and still be useful."
That's not my argument. My argument was that just before the MBPs came out, there wasn't a huge clamoring for higher DPI monitors, there just wasn't. But now all of a sudden it's the major selling point that people are using to justify why this is such a great purchase. Higher DPI is coming, for sure, but I'm not going to base any future computer purchases on a high DPI over all of the other important parts in a computer. I would prefer SSD drives, large amounts of fast RAM, or a faster processer to a high DPI, for instance. As far as gaming goes, I don't think the current generation of video cards would be able to pump out that many pixels at the high settings we like to use either.
I bet you can patent a brain wave. No seriously, I bet you could convince a judge that brain waves are "patentable material", especially if you're using some weird-sounding stimulus to influence them.
I just have to say that I find the "pixels are too damn large" comment a little ridiculous. I don't remember anyone complaining about large pixels before the new MBP came out. But all of a sudden large pixels are the next big problem that Apple has solved. They produce a solution, and people will find a problem for it to fix.
Your eyes must be a hell of a lot better than mine, because I have to get about 3 inches away from my 17" screen to discern individual pixels. It looks like the period at the end of this sentence is 2 x 1 pixels. Seeing as how my eyes are normally about 2 feet away from the screen, the pixels are most certainly not too damn large. The rent is still too damn high though.
The 30 feet is the good part. But you wouldn't have a resolution that small on a screen that big. My 28" monitors are 1920x1200 native. A 30 foot screen would at least get 1080p I'm sure. But, again, when you go to those extremes it is the physical size you're paying for. You don't sit two feet away from a 30 foot screen like you do with a laptop.
A 15 inch screen simply doesn't need a resolution like that. My laptop has a larger screen than any MBP and it doesn't look any more jagged or rough than it did before the new Apple laptops came out. I mean, who prioritizes the number of pixels on their display over everything else, including the actual size of the display? Which jobs require a huge number of pixels for you to work efficiently, and is every MBP buyer who points out the resolution employed in one of those fields? No, they're not. They don't need that resolution, it doesn't serve any practical purpose for them other than bragging rights. That's called snob appeal.
Screw Mars, this conspiracy is much closer to home than that. I demand an explanation from the government concerning why they want us to think that water is wet.
Meanwhile, the $2 billion went to the real secret mission to the "face" on Mars, where they found aliens in 2004 with the previous decoy Spirit mission.
That's quite a coincidence. What are the chances they would make the discovery with the decoy mission instead of the actual one?
I don't think there are a ton of great options for creating, for example, a simulation of an existing piece of software where you need to exactly reproduce everything including the fonts, positioning, the blinking cursor, keyboard navigation, etc while having audio narration synced up with animation on screen. I can't imagine trying to build a set of tools for our courseware developers to use to create that. We already have those tools built using Flash. Artists (non-programmers) are able to use those tools to build the sims, if we moved to a pure HTML5 model then do we have to throw out the Flash authoring environment and replace all of our artists with programmers?
Anyway, what do you use to create software simulations that get delivered online and track their progress on an LMS? Say the Air Force comes to you with the software they use to, I don't know, process cargo and passengers on their planes, and they need to have a simulation of the entire program that they can use to train their people with. Which tool is preferred in that case?
I think people are missing the point of TLDs. With applications for AAA, AARP, ABARTH (thanks, Fiat), ABBOTT, ABC, ABLE, ACCENTURE, etc, I don't think a TLD is supposed to represent a single brand. That's just going to confuse everything. What do you do if you want to go to Amazon, type in "amazon.amazon"? "store.amazon"? That sounds a little backwards. "amazon.store" would make a lot more sense. But even then, that only makes sense to consumers if everything is there. If there's an amazon.store but no ebay.store or bestbuy.store then people wouldn't know where to go.
Aw, who am I kidding, they just go to Yahoo and search for it anyway.
believe it or not Adobe also has HTML5 development software they sell
Does it have a similar feature set compared to Flash? Are things like animation and syncing audio supported? Can you create vector graphics and have it exported as a canvas or SVG? I think it's going to be a bitch to transition to HTML5 for creating e-learning content. The ideal situation would be that Flash would be able to export to HTML5 without losing any functionality, I can't see that happening though.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks, I just spent 10 minutes reading about vomiting.
You want a console that never requires you to upgrade? How is that 8-bit NES working for you? Still playing around with Excitebike, are you?
Does your "PC" console satisfy those criteria?
Goddamn right it does. My PC is ridiculously high-end enough that the system requirements don't apply. This is what "state of the art means", in case you're wondering. Even games that have "suggested hardware" are way behind the specs of my machine. That's the secret - upgrade every few years to the top of the line and system requirements no longer apply to you. I built my new computer for Skyrim when it came out and from the start I could run it smoothly at 1920x1200 with all display settings maxed out, even with the high-res texture and other graphics mods (you do have mods for your console games, right?). I even have a spare video card slot just waiting for a second Geforce once the polygon counts get even more ridiculous in a few years. By that time it will cost me maybe $200 or $300 to effectively double my machine's gaming performance.
But, if you're happy with a new gaming machine every 5+ years that gets released with hardware that is already out of date and has games that you aren't able to modify, then a console is definitely for you. You don't have to check system requirements, so you've got that going for you I guess. That must be nice.
You know what else grows? Crystals. Stalagmites. Black holes.
I'd say it seems odd that you'd say such a thing
Yes, I'm sure your myopic thought process makes you think a lot of things are "odd".
How can something grow if it isn't alive?
A tumor grows. Does that mean the tumor is alive and deserves federal protection? A fetus really isn't all that different than a parasite, it can only exist as long as the host does.
Or you know, we could call birth the point at which you count as being "alive" and then not need to worry about all the edge cases like rape.
I propose we standardize things and call the point at which you can claim a person as a dependent on your taxes also the same point at which they are considered "alive". It seems a little odd that people insist that a growing fetus is alive, but you sure as hell can't claim a fetus as a dependent.
I won't get into the theory of why, because it will potentially piss off feminists. I'll just say it is documented and statistically significant.
Well, I'm sold. Excuse me while I go fire off a mass email to my elderly relatives.
And then there are those of us who live in non-linear time.
Are you trying to say that the parent is educated stupid?
does this mean we're moving irresistibly into an era of 'sealed-unit computing,' even for power users?
No. Next question, please.
If the problem was as easy to solve as throwing some tomatoes at the third world
Well maybe someone needs to organize a competition where we throw tomatoes at poor and hungry people.
Stop thinking in terms of, "What's the minimum we can get away with and still be useful."
That's not my argument. My argument was that just before the MBPs came out, there wasn't a huge clamoring for higher DPI monitors, there just wasn't. But now all of a sudden it's the major selling point that people are using to justify why this is such a great purchase. Higher DPI is coming, for sure, but I'm not going to base any future computer purchases on a high DPI over all of the other important parts in a computer. I would prefer SSD drives, large amounts of fast RAM, or a faster processer to a high DPI, for instance. As far as gaming goes, I don't think the current generation of video cards would be able to pump out that many pixels at the high settings we like to use either.
According to that logic, we should all be using 14" CRT .51 dot pitch monitors.
Actually, no. No, that's not what that means at all.
I bet you can patent a brain wave. No seriously, I bet you could convince a judge that brain waves are "patentable material", especially if you're using some weird-sounding stimulus to influence them.
I just have to say that I find the "pixels are too damn large" comment a little ridiculous. I don't remember anyone complaining about large pixels before the new MBP came out. But all of a sudden large pixels are the next big problem that Apple has solved. They produce a solution, and people will find a problem for it to fix.
Your eyes must be a hell of a lot better than mine, because I have to get about 3 inches away from my 17" screen to discern individual pixels. It looks like the period at the end of this sentence is 2 x 1 pixels. Seeing as how my eyes are normally about 2 feet away from the screen, the pixels are most certainly not too damn large. The rent is still too damn high though.
What good is 1680x1050 if it's on a 30' screen?
The 30 feet is the good part. But you wouldn't have a resolution that small on a screen that big. My 28" monitors are 1920x1200 native. A 30 foot screen would at least get 1080p I'm sure. But, again, when you go to those extremes it is the physical size you're paying for. You don't sit two feet away from a 30 foot screen like you do with a laptop.
A 15 inch screen simply doesn't need a resolution like that. My laptop has a larger screen than any MBP and it doesn't look any more jagged or rough than it did before the new Apple laptops came out. I mean, who prioritizes the number of pixels on their display over everything else, including the actual size of the display? Which jobs require a huge number of pixels for you to work efficiently, and is every MBP buyer who points out the resolution employed in one of those fields? No, they're not. They don't need that resolution, it doesn't serve any practical purpose for them other than bragging rights. That's called snob appeal.
Just think how much more smug you are when you're running free software on over-priced hardware. It's a smug upgrade!
It has 17 cameras, not 8. It has 8 HazCams, 4 NavCams, 2 MastCams, MAHLI, MARDI, and ChemCam.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curiosity_rover#Rover_instruments
Screw Mars, this conspiracy is much closer to home than that. I demand an explanation from the government concerning why they want us to think that water is wet.
Meanwhile, the $2 billion went to the real secret mission to the "face" on Mars, where they found aliens in 2004 with the previous decoy Spirit mission.
That's quite a coincidence. What are the chances they would make the discovery with the decoy mission instead of the actual one?
At least you connected to the show, I thought they were referring to the band.
I don't think there are a ton of great options for creating, for example, a simulation of an existing piece of software where you need to exactly reproduce everything including the fonts, positioning, the blinking cursor, keyboard navigation, etc while having audio narration synced up with animation on screen. I can't imagine trying to build a set of tools for our courseware developers to use to create that. We already have those tools built using Flash. Artists (non-programmers) are able to use those tools to build the sims, if we moved to a pure HTML5 model then do we have to throw out the Flash authoring environment and replace all of our artists with programmers?
Anyway, what do you use to create software simulations that get delivered online and track their progress on an LMS? Say the Air Force comes to you with the software they use to, I don't know, process cargo and passengers on their planes, and they need to have a simulation of the entire program that they can use to train their people with. Which tool is preferred in that case?
I think people are missing the point of TLDs. With applications for AAA, AARP, ABARTH (thanks, Fiat), ABBOTT, ABC, ABLE, ACCENTURE, etc, I don't think a TLD is supposed to represent a single brand. That's just going to confuse everything. What do you do if you want to go to Amazon, type in "amazon.amazon"? "store.amazon"? That sounds a little backwards. "amazon.store" would make a lot more sense. But even then, that only makes sense to consumers if everything is there. If there's an amazon.store but no ebay.store or bestbuy.store then people wouldn't know where to go.
Aw, who am I kidding, they just go to Yahoo and search for it anyway.
believe it or not Adobe also has HTML5 development software they sell
Does it have a similar feature set compared to Flash? Are things like animation and syncing audio supported? Can you create vector graphics and have it exported as a canvas or SVG? I think it's going to be a bitch to transition to HTML5 for creating e-learning content. The ideal situation would be that Flash would be able to export to HTML5 without losing any functionality, I can't see that happening though.
Looks like I evoked my inner Indian there. Hoping you are having the nice day.