I don't know if you actually remember the first iPhone, but it was similarly horrid. Not only was the build quality very low...
I can appreciate that you prefer Android and Windows CE phones over Apple phones, some people do. But to say that Apple went from a non-player in the mobile phone space to a dominant force almost overnight on the coattails of a "horrid" first iPhone with "build quality very low" and then didn't get any better until Android came along (although unveiled in 2007, first Android phone was released way later in October 2008, btw), is just revisionist history. Don't take my word for it, here are some actual quotes from 2007 reviews, a full 15 months before the release of the first Android set:
ENGADGET:
if we had to boil the iPhone's SMS down to a one-word description, "purty" would certainly be a finalist
The iPhone's calendar may possibly be the most usable we've ever seen on a cellphone
For two megapixels, no autofocus, and no flash, we're about as impressed as we can be.
NEW YORK TIMES:
The iPhone matches most of its hype
And it went on and on, and the rest is history... Yes, Android is great too. Windows CE, well, you hang on to that one.
Um... I'm no fan of all the lawsuits, patents, etc, but honestly, does anybody actually remember what cell phones were like before the iPhone came out? They were just awful. I built a catapult for my Motorola Q just so I could launch it off my roof.
I'm no fan of Apple's lawsuits, but I also can admit that they did move the ball forward by leaps and bounds beyond the plastic pieces of shit we were all messing with in 2006.
When playing a game, I can easily tell if it's running at 30 fps or 60 fps, and I *much* prefer the higher framerate, for obvious reasons
Games are a bit different with regards to frame rate, since there is no physical camera, so there is no full frame-to-frame motion blur. That's why you need to have higher frame rates for games to look comparable to movies (otherwise games look choppy at 24fps). Movie frames blend into one another since the capture of each frame takes time (based on the shutter speed), and the playback just shows you each frame with the motion blur bakes in (at whatever frame rate). To take that concept a step further, if you were to get a light-sensitive movie camera and crank up the shutter speed while maintaining 24fps, you'll still get similar choppy motion from a movie camera since the increased shutter speed/angle will decrease the frame-to-frame motion blur. Also, if you're panning quickly, 24fps motion blur becomes very extreme and difficult to watch.
So, moving to 48-fps isn't really "better" per se in any objective measure, it's just different. You sacrifice frame-to-frame motion blur as the fps goes up, which means it isn't really "smoother", it's just "different".
I'm all for video and motion being at 48fps, and maybe even 100fps+ for super smoothness which will also help cure motion blur
Motion blur can be a very good thing, and is regularly used stylistically in photography, motion graphics, and video. It's used for effect and implies motion, and IMO, doesn't require a "cure."
Mankind has been selectively breeding plants and animals for at least that long, even though we've only recently started learning why it works
I personally have more of an issue when the GMO's have cross-species genetic modifications, not so much with selective breeding (biased selection) applied within a species. When my dog tries to mount my cat, sure, it's funny, but I wouldn't eat the offspring...
I wouldn't go that far, but Google's personality is one where it doesn't agressively go out to destroy the other party.
Lol... You've clearly never worked in the advertising space, where Google only provides price breaks on things like Adwords API credits to companies spending over approx $1M/mo. Those sorts of policies result in all "small" advertisers being charged exorbitant rates for equivalent ad space, effectively subsidizing large advertisers. Their behavior is similar to how big-box stores get discounted anchor rates per square footage in strip malls, which forces unsustainably high rates onto small shops, effectively putting non-venture backed businesses out of business.
I'm not saying they don't have the right to abuse the little guy, but let's not pretend that "Don't be evil" is anything more than a catchy slogan, carefully crafted and pushed by an ambitious in-house marketing team?
"But then I cleaned Assange up with a credit-card fluffed gallivant down Rodeo Drive, allowing him to spend an obscene sum of my money on clothes, leaving me to go back to the drudgery of my work as he transformed from out-of-place hooker to silently virile gentleman. Assange went back to the shop where he was refused service from the previous day to show the shopkeepers the big mistake they made! Then back at hotel, Assange finally looked like a genuine guest, pleasantly surprising the suspicious, yet good-natured hotel manager. But when I got home I was still busy with work weighing on my mind. Assange tenderly soothed my heavy state with a magical bath together, allowing us to talk and talk into the night about our pasts, dreams, and how we ended up where we are today.
It was a seemingly perfect, uncomplicated story of love and longing until my short, balding, self-absorbed business partner made him feel like a whore again... I'm sorry Julian. I'm sorry."
Slashdot Mirror
version control.
In my experience, rewrites generally occur due to architectural changes or limitations, while refactors generally occur to improve code.
So version control is extremely helpful for refactors, but not really a solution in itself for rewrites.
Translated: "Unless you control the purse strings, you're fucked."
I don't know if you actually remember the first iPhone, but it was similarly horrid. Not only was the build quality very low...
I can appreciate that you prefer Android and Windows CE phones over Apple phones, some people do. But to say that Apple went from a non-player in the mobile phone space to a dominant force almost overnight on the coattails of a "horrid" first iPhone with "build quality very low" and then didn't get any better until Android came along (although unveiled in 2007, first Android phone was released way later in October 2008, btw), is just revisionist history. Don't take my word for it, here are some actual quotes from 2007 reviews, a full 15 months before the release of the first Android set:
ENGADGET:
NEW YORK TIMES:
And it went on and on, and the rest is history... Yes, Android is great too. Windows CE, well, you hang on to that one.
Maybe the right question is whether it's better than the previous interfaces, for which the answer--although hotly debatable--is probably no?
Um... I'm no fan of all the lawsuits, patents, etc, but honestly, does anybody actually remember what cell phones were like before the iPhone came out? They were just awful. I built a catapult for my Motorola Q just so I could launch it off my roof.
I'm no fan of Apple's lawsuits, but I also can admit that they did move the ball forward by leaps and bounds beyond the plastic pieces of shit we were all messing with in 2006.
Oh, that gives me such a warm feeling inside...
Eeen Sovyet Rusha... I meen eeen Amereekan Redmond, kompuuter yoozes you!
Simulated, no.
I'm guessing you wear Band-aids as fashion accessories.
lol... it's preventative...
When playing a game, I can easily tell if it's running at 30 fps or 60 fps, and I *much* prefer the higher framerate, for obvious reasons
Games are a bit different with regards to frame rate, since there is no physical camera, so there is no full frame-to-frame motion blur. That's why you need to have higher frame rates for games to look comparable to movies (otherwise games look choppy at 24fps). Movie frames blend into one another since the capture of each frame takes time (based on the shutter speed), and the playback just shows you each frame with the motion blur bakes in (at whatever frame rate). To take that concept a step further, if you were to get a light-sensitive movie camera and crank up the shutter speed while maintaining 24fps, you'll still get similar choppy motion from a movie camera since the increased shutter speed/angle will decrease the frame-to-frame motion blur. Also, if you're panning quickly, 24fps motion blur becomes very extreme and difficult to watch. So, moving to 48-fps isn't really "better" per se in any objective measure, it's just different. You sacrifice frame-to-frame motion blur as the fps goes up, which means it isn't really "smoother", it's just "different".
I'm all for video and motion being at 48fps, and maybe even 100fps+ for super smoothness which will also help cure motion blur
Motion blur can be a very good thing, and is regularly used stylistically in photography, motion graphics, and video. It's used for effect and implies motion, and IMO, doesn't require a "cure."
Mankind has been selectively breeding plants and animals for at least that long, even though we've only recently started learning why it works
I personally have more of an issue when the GMO's have cross-species genetic modifications, not so much with selective breeding (biased selection) applied within a species. When my dog tries to mount my cat, sure, it's funny, but I wouldn't eat the offspring...
I wouldn't go that far, but Google's personality is one where it doesn't agressively go out to destroy the other party.
Lol... You've clearly never worked in the advertising space, where Google only provides price breaks on things like Adwords API credits to companies spending over approx $1M/mo. Those sorts of policies result in all "small" advertisers being charged exorbitant rates for equivalent ad space, effectively subsidizing large advertisers. Their behavior is similar to how big-box stores get discounted anchor rates per square footage in strip malls, which forces unsustainably high rates onto small shops, effectively putting non-venture backed businesses out of business.
I'm not saying they don't have the right to abuse the little guy, but let's not pretend that "Don't be evil" is anything more than a catchy slogan, carefully crafted and pushed by an ambitious in-house marketing team?
Yeah, but "$50" to "$50 million" reads better...
Why spend $50 on a model when you can spend $50 million on a model?
Look, quit your whining! What you clearly fail to understand is that Verizon is actually HELPING you by
On the bright side, does GPS help find their dead body?
"But then I cleaned Assange up with a credit-card fluffed gallivant down Rodeo Drive, allowing him to spend an obscene sum of my money on clothes, leaving me to go back to the drudgery of my work as he transformed from out-of-place hooker to silently virile gentleman. Assange went back to the shop where he was refused service from the previous day to show the shopkeepers the big mistake they made! Then back at hotel, Assange finally looked like a genuine guest, pleasantly surprising the suspicious, yet good-natured hotel manager. But when I got home I was still busy with work weighing on my mind. Assange tenderly soothed my heavy state with a magical bath together, allowing us to talk and talk into the night about our pasts, dreams, and how we ended up where we are today.
It was a seemingly perfect, uncomplicated story of love and longing until my short, balding, self-absorbed business partner made him feel like a whore again... I'm sorry Julian. I'm sorry."
After an hour of processing I contracted lead poisoning and was inexplicably hungry...
Where, exactly, is the "lashing out"? He's criticizing, not throwing chairs here.
Both approaches have pro's and con's... why is that so tough for people to be ok with?