It makes SO much difference when you can strafe AND turn at the same time, you can arc around your enemies while you fire at them. Although it would be possible to play without doing them at the same time, you would need to devote more thinking to maneuvering then to shooting hellspawn. You want to devote as much to shooting those demons.
I've heard of a subway store that couldn't start business because daylight savings had occurred early and the computer didn't know this, so it wouldn't let things be bought for an hour. Imagine if the computer system refused to open the store if it thought it shouldn't be.
Then you doom opensource software to be unable to use h264 in their products. FFmpeg and x264 get away with it due to their source-only distribution, although I'm sure MPEG-LA could come after them if they really wanted. If you wanted h264 in firefox, that will be a few million dollars please, per year that is. Considering that that amount of money is a significant fraction of their earnings, I don't think that they will be doing it anytime soon. So thankyou for dooming us all to propriety consumer equipment. Also consider that MPEG-LA reserves the right to start charging for the distribution of h264, although they are very unlikely to do this, vp8 has free use and distribution irrevocably given to you.
Also, h264 and vp8 are rather close, close enough that a lot of hardware can decode it with just a software update. This is truly the difference between having a codec that is only feasible to use by big companies, or something that is feasible for use in anything. If things get moving then you should get vp8 support in your devices, at that point you should be good.
Of the tests that are floating around the internet, WebM is comparable to H264 base or main, but not high (the different profiles are almost like different codecs, requiring more features as you get higher). Considering pretty much no phones can play high, or maybe even main, the quality comparison is kind of moot, unless you roll multiple versions of the video for different devices.
But no, the one of the advantages of WebM is that it is patent free (there is always a chance of submarine patents though, same with theora, although since VP8 was originally made by a company it is hoped that the patent pool is complete). The other advantage is that it doesn't cost money to use it. Currently it costs a few million dollars per year to buy the rights to distribute a program with the h264 codec, if you look at mozilla for example, this is a significant fraction of the money they raise each year. Currently anybody is free to distribute h264 video, but MPEG-LA could change this at anytime (although, it would be a very bad move if they did). So you have a codec is irrevocably free, or something that requries money to distribute codecs of and could cost money to distribute videos in.
Actually, VP8 uses many of the same techniques to encode video as h264, it is just implemented in a different way. The techniques themselves aren't patented, just the ways of using them, which is firmware not hardware trouble (well, depending how the h264 acceleration hardware was written).
I study at Adelaide University, and have seen what these introduced species do in the wild. Guess what the number one use for iPads in lectures is? Facebook. The wireless that used to be rather fast is now rather slow, due to the large influx of these new devices. This may just be the university not giving the network department more money for infrastructure updates though (they run quite a decent system, so you can't blame them).
From memory, the licensing fee for h264 is about 5 million dollars, I think that was just for the year too. This is a significant fraction of firefox's income, which would mean a lot of cuts in other areas. The way VLC uses MPEG standards is technically illegal, and don't think MPEG-LA won't move if something like Mozilla uses h264 without paying.
It is also doubtful whether a USER distributing h264 material will be able to get away with no fee. The MPEG-LA has 'promised' this to be free till 2015 at least, but it is always possible they can charge people to distribute not just the codec, but video in the codec.
Also, I highly double HE-AAC or high-profile h264 will ever get onto the web. Portable devices can't play these, not even your iPad or iPod.
Did I miss something? I mean, I really haven't read anything about android sales surpassing iPhone sales. Don't get me wrong, it would be cool and everything, but I just don't see it happening.
If firefox is using userland threads, then the library they use must only be able to use one OS thread. This is a disadvantage in a computing world where desktop cores seems to be increasing in number and decreasing in power. Using a separate thread for each tab might be more trivial than trying to make the userland library OS thread aware.
I'm really hoping that separating the tabs will help with memory leaks. Although there is a cost of memory using separate processes, the leaked memory will close with the tab and not stay for the entire session.
For most people, a word processor is a fundamental part of the operating system. Some people also do not have access to the internet. This means that there WILL be some people who want to use a word processor before they are able to access the internet, which means they won't have a change to download open office or be able to use google docs. This is why an off-line, light weight alternative should be included.
The situation with the gimp was different. They identified the fact that not everyone needs a tool shed, so could just use a toolbox. With this issue, a user of the OS would be reasonably confident that they have a word processor by default, which they wouldn't if they did not have a connection to the internet. Although I don't know of a total replacement for all of open office, abiword is an example of a possible light weight word processor.
I saw Chrome's "process manager" for the first time the other day and was quite impressed. The fact that Google collects information via Chrome, and its limited extension/plugin repository (which doesn't provide the functionality I want) has so far kept me from giving it much of a serious look, but now, I'm having second thoughts.
It's not the supposed legality of the site that is the main problem in my view, it is the fact that they were not given much time before the site was pulled down. According to the site this is not very common, usually sites have a few days to respond. Coupled with the fact that the office is closed for christmas, there domain may 'expire'. The EFA has also accepted to help, which means it must not be as clear cut as mentioned above.
But this still leaves the problem of developing that alternative content for alternative browsers. This is why we need HTML 5, which doesn't just define HTML, but also how it should be rendered. This will mean there will be no inconsistencies.
He seems to support topics of this kind, like anti-gambling. Things that a lot of people in the community would want, but big guys - like corporations - wouldn't.
Religions give followers a sense of belonging and an answer to questions like who made the universe and what happens when I die. They also give a group of people a sense of belonging.
It's just a pity when religions get in the way of our society (abortion, contraceptives and gay rights are good things) and when people take them too far (terrorism). Also when they exist solely for monetary gain.
Slashdot Mirror
It makes SO much difference when you can strafe AND turn at the same time, you can arc around your enemies while you fire at them. Although it would be possible to play without doing them at the same time, you would need to devote more thinking to maneuvering then to shooting hellspawn. You want to devote as much to shooting those demons.
I've heard of a subway store that couldn't start business because daylight savings had occurred early and the computer didn't know this, so it wouldn't let things be bought for an hour. Imagine if the computer system refused to open the store if it thought it shouldn't be.
Then you doom opensource software to be unable to use h264 in their products. FFmpeg and x264 get away with it due to their source-only distribution, although I'm sure MPEG-LA could come after them if they really wanted. If you wanted h264 in firefox, that will be a few million dollars please, per year that is. Considering that that amount of money is a significant fraction of their earnings, I don't think that they will be doing it anytime soon. So thankyou for dooming us all to propriety consumer equipment. Also consider that MPEG-LA reserves the right to start charging for the distribution of h264, although they are very unlikely to do this, vp8 has free use and distribution irrevocably given to you.
Also, h264 and vp8 are rather close, close enough that a lot of hardware can decode it with just a software update. This is truly the difference between having a codec that is only feasible to use by big companies, or something that is feasible for use in anything. If things get moving then you should get vp8 support in your devices, at that point you should be good.
Of the tests that are floating around the internet, WebM is comparable to H264 base or main, but not high (the different profiles are almost like different codecs, requiring more features as you get higher). Considering pretty much no phones can play high, or maybe even main, the quality comparison is kind of moot, unless you roll multiple versions of the video for different devices.
But no, the one of the advantages of WebM is that it is patent free (there is always a chance of submarine patents though, same with theora, although since VP8 was originally made by a company it is hoped that the patent pool is complete). The other advantage is that it doesn't cost money to use it. Currently it costs a few million dollars per year to buy the rights to distribute a program with the h264 codec, if you look at mozilla for example, this is a significant fraction of the money they raise each year. Currently anybody is free to distribute h264 video, but MPEG-LA could change this at anytime (although, it would be a very bad move if they did). So you have a codec is irrevocably free, or something that requries money to distribute codecs of and could cost money to distribute videos in.
Actually, VP8 uses many of the same techniques to encode video as h264, it is just implemented in a different way. The techniques themselves aren't patented, just the ways of using them, which is firmware not hardware trouble (well, depending how the h264 acceleration hardware was written).
I study at Adelaide University, and have seen what these introduced species do in the wild. Guess what the number one use for iPads in lectures is? Facebook. The wireless that used to be rather fast is now rather slow, due to the large influx of these new devices. This may just be the university not giving the network department more money for infrastructure updates though (they run quite a decent system, so you can't blame them).
From memory, the licensing fee for h264 is about 5 million dollars, I think that was just for the year too. This is a significant fraction of firefox's income, which would mean a lot of cuts in other areas. The way VLC uses MPEG standards is technically illegal, and don't think MPEG-LA won't move if something like Mozilla uses h264 without paying.
It is also doubtful whether a USER distributing h264 material will be able to get away with no fee. The MPEG-LA has 'promised' this to be free till 2015 at least, but it is always possible they can charge people to distribute not just the codec, but video in the codec.
Also, I highly double HE-AAC or high-profile h264 will ever get onto the web. Portable devices can't play these, not even your iPad or iPod.
Did I miss something? I mean, I really haven't read anything about android sales surpassing iPhone sales. Don't get me wrong, it would be cool and everything, but I just don't see it happening.
It's not the memory of spawning new processes, but the fact that you need to have the browser runtime in the memory of each of the new processes.
If firefox is using userland threads, then the library they use must only be able to use one OS thread. This is a disadvantage in a computing world where desktop cores seems to be increasing in number and decreasing in power. Using a separate thread for each tab might be more trivial than trying to make the userland library OS thread aware.
I'm really hoping that separating the tabs will help with memory leaks. Although there is a cost of memory using separate processes, the leaked memory will close with the tab and not stay for the entire session.
For most people, a word processor is a fundamental part of the operating system. Some people also do not have access to the internet. This means that there WILL be some people who want to use a word processor before they are able to access the internet, which means they won't have a change to download open office or be able to use google docs. This is why an off-line, light weight alternative should be included.
The situation with the gimp was different. They identified the fact that not everyone needs a tool shed, so could just use a toolbox. With this issue, a user of the OS would be reasonably confident that they have a word processor by default, which they wouldn't if they did not have a connection to the internet. Although I don't know of a total replacement for all of open office, abiword is an example of a possible light weight word processor.
No, actually the google IS in chromium. Iron is chromium minus the google, because if chromium didn't have any google, why would iron exist?
I saw Chrome's "process manager" for the first time the other day and was quite impressed. The fact that Google collects information via Chrome, and its limited extension/plugin repository (which doesn't provide the functionality I want) has so far kept me from giving it much of a serious look, but now, I'm having second thoughts.
You should look at iron then: http://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron.php
It's google chrome minus the google.
It's not the supposed legality of the site that is the main problem in my view, it is the fact that they were not given much time before the site was pulled down. According to the site this is not very common, usually sites have a few days to respond. Coupled with the fact that the office is closed for christmas, there domain may 'expire'. The EFA has also accepted to help, which means it must not be as clear cut as mentioned above.
But this still leaves the problem of developing that alternative content for alternative browsers.
This is why we need HTML 5, which doesn't just define HTML, but also how it should be rendered. This will mean there will be no inconsistencies.
here is his blog http://www.greebo.net/
They won't invade Australia because they already speak english and they're in the sphere of influence of the british crown.
Please, the crown is more of a figure head then anything. The crown's representatives don't exercise there power much either.
Both of the leaders for our main political parties are active church goers (wiki Kevin Rudd and Tony Abbott), and (at least) Tony Abbott is pro-life.
these options seem like the best option and fulfil all the requirements
the rate is quite decent too
He seems to support topics of this kind, like anti-gambling. Things that a lot of people in the community would want, but big guys - like corporations - wouldn't.
Religions give followers a sense of belonging and an answer to questions like who made the universe and what happens when I die. They also give a group of people a sense of belonging.
It's just a pity when religions get in the way of our society (abortion, contraceptives and gay rights are good things) and when people take them too far (terrorism). Also when they exist solely for monetary gain.