How can this be? Anything over 28 FPS is indistinguishable to mere humans.
I don't believe that there is a fixed limit on what is considered indistinguishable. If games had real motion blur, then maybe 28 fps would suffice. Scenes that move faster would naturally require a higher frame rate if there is no motion blur. A car moving across the screen really fast would appear to jump across the screen.
Input/feedback rate may also be the reason why gamers want fast FPS. I'm not sure what the human threshold are for reactions, but it could be that the visual feedback of your mouse movements require more than 30 fps for it to appear smoothly.
There are actually people who use 3D cards for things other than gaming. Even still, we haven't reached a point where 3D cards are sufficient for gaming.
I don't think that the purpose of newer video cards is to allow someone to run at higher resolution. Sure it is a byproduct of having a faster card, but the main goal is to push more detail at the lower resolutions. I'd rather play a game that only ran at 640x480 but had realistic lighting and was indistinguishable from a TV broadcast, than a game that looked like Q3 but jacked up to 64000x48000
I'd like to know what games play 'flawlessly' at 1152x968 on a GeForce2 MX. I have a GF2 GTS Ultra with 2x1.5 GHz PIV (win2k) and have troubles maintaining 60 fps at 800x600 for games like RTCW, and Ghost Recon with full-detail (the way these games should be played). Sure QIII runs solid, but I don't consider that a new game. IMHO, gaming is horrible at anything less than 60fps and disabling vsync is ugly.
... difference is that they don't have 6.4 GB/s second of throughput like the XBox. Instead of letting the GPU share the slow CPU's RAM (like on those ghetto UMA PCs/laptops).. the Xbox lets the CPU share the GPU's (fast) RAM.
DirectX isn't the same thing as OpenGL, however you can compare D3D and OpenGL
You are correct... Direct3D is at version 8.0 and OpenGL is at 1.3. That means Direct3D is ~6.15384 times better than OpenGL. If you have been told otherwise then you have been misinformed.
I think that Microsoft's reason for disallowing you to resell PC software was that it is very easy to copy something and then resell it. That way MS could potentially lose the sale of the product. That seems like a legitimate reason for disallowing software reselling.
If they did a good job on the copy protection on their discs, then they shouldn't have to worry about things like that. Console games have a fairly strong market for used games and hardware. I'm not even sure if Microsoft can do that since most of the games will end up being 3rd party.
There are people out there who don't visit warez sites and use p2p software. There are some who would rather have 24/7 access to the email and IM services. I'm not one of them =P.
Anyways, ISPs work nicely assuming that not all their customers are online/using bandwidth simultaneously. The same deal goes with phone lines.. If something caused everyone to simultaneously use the phone (sept/11), then the circuits will be overloaded and calls wont be connected. It's proabably easier for a phone company to determine how many customers will be using the lines at any given time. It's harder for the ISP to maintain consistent service to their customers just because more and more people are saturating their bandwidth capabilities (ie. P2P software that thinks it's OK to saturate your bandwith when you are not using it). Unless broadband starts charging for bandwidth usage, ISPs will need to have a [user_base*user_bandwidth] connection to the net.
Back to my original point, if you rarely need more than 56kbps then dialup may still be a good idea.
Why bother posting such irrelevant news? Is it because it gives the impression that XP is not gaining any popularity? or that MS did something non-standard which makes RR unusable?
Maybe slashdot should post articles about all the products/services that don't 'officially' support linux (even though they can be used with it). It seems as though you guys are running out of ways to convince your followers that linux isn't losing ground to MS. Go round up some more web server benchmarks...
I had a very noisy system which has 6 fans and 2 HDs. My system drive is very noisy when it works (Quantum Fireball KA).
I quieted my system by adding strips of thick felt at all of the mount points within my case. Between the power supply and all the drives.
My system isn't quite stealth yet, but this modification did lower the noise level significantly. The thrashing noise that me HD makes has been reduced to a low mumble and the vibration that my PS makes doesnt rattle my case anymore.
Most of the noise that I have now comes from the CPU fans.
The aftermarket products are often superior to the factory installed one. That is why that market thrives. In the Microsoft case, the competition is at best equal in quality to the 'factory installed' one.
There is a reason why MS is where they are now. The whole monopoly issue has a little to do with it, but you got to admit there hasn't been many products that are clearly superior to the MS equivalents. Stop bitching and get your open source punks to write something better.
The article post clearly says, "We've done a couple of articles about these weapons before, but Scientific American has good explanations and diagrams and some new information."
Your comment was made on April 02, so you must be serious. We are least sensitive to changes in blue. Our intensity resolution is highest for green (out of the RGB primaries).
True. What I meant was that we are most sensitive to changes 'of hue' around blue and yellow. When it comes to luminance, we are the most sensitive around 550nm (green-yellow). That just means that we perceive it as a brighter color.
24bpp is pretty good when you look at it on a corrected monitor. RGB (which is device dependent) is not the best way to use those 24 bits since it doesnt take into account that we are more sensitive to changes in blue and yellow, but its easy to work with given todays hardware.
48bpp would be serious overkill for use in video cards, memory is tight even with those 64MB cards. 48bpp is more of an intermediate format image synthesis or processing where you need precision. 48bpp is nice, but i'd rather see better use of the 24bits, perhaps CIE XYZ/Luv (device independent).
What would really be nice is if we could make monitors with a 4 (or more) primaries. AFAIK, the gamut of a monitor doesn't include many of the shades of green that we are capable of seeing. Does anyone know the gamut of LCD is any better, or are they supposed to conform with RGB709?
Dont' recall mentioning that the MS EULA is an ideal license, and as you mentioned, GPL is not in the same class as MSEULA. I should have been more clear and stated that I was referring to source code related licenses.
Source code should be truly free, not open source free. Im not saying that no source should be GPL, I am just saying that GLPed code is not truly free and people should not say it is.
So what you're saying is that you want to be able to take other people's code, use it to make your program work, and then close it up so that people can't do the same thing?
I dont quite get your argument here. If you use other peoples code, use it to make your program work, how does that prevent others from doing the same thing? If I used public code in my closed program, you are still allowed to that public code.
If you dont like the fact that others can do this to your public code, then dont call it 'free' call it something else. The open source definition of free is misleading.
GPL only promotes freedom in ways that the open source community defines it.
I am NOT free to use GPLed code without being FORCED to act accordingly. By using it, I am bound by the laws and philosophies of open source. People may say, "well if you dont like our mandate, then dont use the code." Now how is this freedom?
A software license should grant you the permission to use it freely (the real meaning of free, not the bastardized open source definition), while releasing the authors from liability.
Of course this post will be modded as -1 Flamebait by Andover and brainwashed open source groupies.
That is the open source excuse for everything. "Its still in development." What makes you think that Microsoft isn't improving IE also. In a year, maybe Mozilla will be where IE was a year ago.
As for Java, it WAS a good idea. Sun failed to bring it any further than that. Don't know of many killer apps written in Java, other that the dozens of line drawing applets on joe bob's homepage.
**please wait while downloading class files** **yeah, you are still downloading** **starting applet (computer starts swapping GB of RAM)** **Null pointer exception** **please wait while i crash netscape for you**
Slashdot Mirror
I don't believe that there is a fixed limit on what is considered indistinguishable. If games had real motion blur, then maybe 28 fps would suffice. Scenes that move faster would naturally require a higher frame rate if there is no motion blur. A car moving across the screen really fast would appear to jump across the screen.
Input/feedback rate may also be the reason why gamers want fast FPS. I'm not sure what the human threshold are for reactions, but it could be that the visual feedback of your mouse movements require more than 30 fps for it to appear smoothly.
There are actually people who use 3D cards for things other than gaming. Even still, we haven't reached a point where 3D cards are sufficient for gaming.
I don't think that the purpose of newer video cards is to allow someone to run at higher resolution. Sure it is a byproduct of having a faster card, but the main goal is to push more detail at the lower resolutions. I'd rather play a game that only ran at 640x480 but had realistic lighting and was indistinguishable from a TV broadcast, than a game that looked like Q3 but jacked up to 64000x48000
I'd like to know what games play 'flawlessly' at 1152x968 on a GeForce2 MX. I have a GF2 GTS Ultra with 2x1.5 GHz PIV (win2k) and have troubles maintaining 60 fps at 800x600 for games like RTCW, and Ghost Recon with full-detail (the way these games should be played). Sure QIII runs solid, but I don't consider that a new game. IMHO, gaming is horrible at anything less than 60fps and disabling vsync is ugly.
... difference is that they don't have 6.4 GB/s second of throughput like the XBox. Instead of letting the GPU share the slow CPU's RAM (like on those ghetto UMA PCs/laptops).. the Xbox lets the CPU share the GPU's (fast) RAM.
Stop subscribing to those asian porn sites.
You are correct... Direct3D is at version 8.0 and OpenGL is at 1.3. That means Direct3D is ~6.15384 times better than OpenGL. If you have been told otherwise then you have been misinformed.
I think that Microsoft's reason for disallowing you to resell PC software was that it is very easy to copy something and then resell it. That way MS could potentially lose the sale of the product. That seems like a legitimate reason for disallowing software reselling.
If they did a good job on the copy protection on their discs, then they shouldn't have to worry about things like that. Console games have a fairly strong market for used games and hardware. I'm not even sure if Microsoft can do that since most of the games will end up being 3rd party.
... bog down ISPs and cause people to "Dump broadband, and dig out their modem".
There are people out there who don't visit warez sites and use p2p software. There are some who would rather have 24/7 access to the email and IM services. I'm not one of them =P.
Anyways, ISPs work nicely assuming that not all their customers are online/using bandwidth simultaneously. The same deal goes with phone lines.. If something caused everyone to simultaneously use the phone (sept/11), then the circuits will be overloaded and calls wont be connected. It's proabably easier for a phone company to determine how many customers will be using the lines at any given time. It's harder for the ISP to maintain consistent service to their customers just because more and more people are saturating their bandwidth capabilities (ie. P2P software that thinks it's OK to saturate your bandwith when you are not using it). Unless broadband starts charging for bandwidth usage, ISPs will need to have a [user_base*user_bandwidth] connection to the net.
Back to my original point, if you rarely need more than 56kbps then dialup may still be a good idea.
Why bother posting such irrelevant news? Is it because it gives the impression that XP is not gaining any popularity? or that MS did something non-standard which makes RR unusable?
Maybe slashdot should post articles about all the products/services that don't 'officially' support linux (even though they can be used with it). It seems as though you guys are running out of ways to convince your followers that linux isn't losing ground to MS. Go round up some more web server benchmarks...
I had a very noisy system which has 6 fans and 2 HDs. My system drive is very noisy when it works (Quantum Fireball KA).
I quieted my system by adding strips of thick felt at all of the mount points within my case. Between the power supply and all the drives.
My system isn't quite stealth yet, but this modification did lower the noise level significantly. The thrashing noise that me HD makes has been reduced to a low mumble and the vibration that my PS makes doesnt rattle my case anymore.Most of the noise that I have now comes from the CPU fans.
...hack goatse.cx and put up a non-vulgar picture.
...how a community that praises a "release early, release often" philosophy thinks that Apple's idea to relase many patches is bad.
I agree
The aftermarket products are often superior to the factory installed one. That is why that market thrives. In the Microsoft case, the competition is at best equal in quality to the 'factory installed' one.
There is a reason why MS is where they are now. The whole monopoly issue has a little to do with it, but you got to admit there hasn't been many products that are clearly superior to the MS equivalents. Stop bitching and get your open source punks to write something better.
The article post clearly says, "We've done a couple of articles about these weapons before, but Scientific American has good explanations and diagrams and some new information."
Stop being such a karma whore =P.
True. What I meant was that we are most sensitive to changes 'of hue' around blue and yellow. When it comes to luminance, we are the most sensitive around 550nm (green-yellow). That just means that we perceive it as a brighter color.
48bpp would be serious overkill for use in video cards, memory is tight even with those 64MB cards. 48bpp is more of an intermediate format image synthesis or processing where you need precision. 48bpp is nice, but i'd rather see better use of the 24bits, perhaps CIE XYZ/Luv (device independent).
What would really be nice is if we could make monitors with a 4 (or more) primaries. AFAIK, the gamut of a monitor doesn't include many of the shades of green that we are capable of seeing. Does anyone know the gamut of LCD is any better, or are they supposed to conform with RGB709?
I agree, I wasnt too sure if I was looking at a REAL face with half the skull exposed, or a computer generated one.
Source code should be truly free, not open source free. Im not saying that no source should be GPL, I am just saying that GLPed code is not truly free and people should not say it is.
I dont quite get your argument here. If you use other peoples code, use it to make your program work, how does that prevent others from doing the same thing? If I used public code in my closed program, you are still allowed to that public code.
If you dont like the fact that others can do this to your public code, then dont call it 'free' call it something else. The open source definition of free is misleading.
I am NOT free to use GPLed code without being FORCED to act accordingly. By using it, I am bound by the laws and philosophies of open source. People may say, "well if you dont like our mandate, then dont use the code." Now how is this freedom?
A software license should grant you the permission to use it freely (the real meaning of free, not the bastardized open source definition), while releasing the authors from liability.
Of course this post will be modded as -1 Flamebait by Andover and brainwashed open source groupies.
Mozilla bashing is so fun.
If it's netscape 4 on Win32 or Unix do X
If it's netscpae 4 on mac do this
If it's netscape 6/ Gecko do this
If it's IE do this
etc
This was a real pain in the ass to write but...
Hint: you can remove the "if it's ns6/gecko" section since you browser would have already crashed if you are using mozilla.
As for Java, it WAS a good idea. Sun failed to bring it any further than that. Don't know of many killer apps written in Java, other that the dozens of line drawing applets on joe bob's homepage.
**please wait while downloading class files**
**yeah, you are still downloading**
**starting applet (computer starts swapping GB of RAM)**
**Null pointer exception**
**please wait while i crash netscape for you**
If a user has to go out of their way to use a program, then what good is it?