Some people simply don't get the point. It is very easy to create anti-aliased fonts but the truth is that they don't look that good. They're simply too blurred and 10 and 12pt fonts simply look like crap (as this screenshot attests to that).
The reason why Microsoft's fonts look so good is because they are hinted and hand-tuned by humans. This is a painstakingly long process but it produces the best looking fonts. Linux is still lacking a copyright-free font set which looks good. Lots of people run the TT font server and use MS fonts because they are simply top-notch. Hinted fonts are essential when it comes to displaying fonts on the computer screen since reproducing quality and readable outlines on a low frequency, discrete grid is not easy.
Linux community needs to produce a quality set of serif and non-serif hinted fonts. Only then will Linux desktop look as good as MS Windows one.
AA is a step in the right direction but it is not a solution.
If you want to learn more about hinting, my I suggest this link: http://microsoft.com/typography/hinting/hinting.ht m?fname=%20&fsize=
I am not 100% sure but they do give a lot of hints. If you take a look at overview they have a reference to Janus engine and also to probabilistic connection algorithms. In FAQ they also say that they cache connection info with minimal information.
My guess is (and it's pretty obvious to me at least) that when you wish to communicate with a certain node, you have to find it first by querying various cluster leaders and that is done by checking leaders' cache of names of cluster members. They should be able to tell, with certain probability, whether a member they are looking for is in the cluster. If they chose an algo that I have in mind, they should be able to find a node that they are looking for within a short period of time by sensing direction.
PS: I e-mailed the author and I can forward you his mail when he replies if you wish.
They should have classified it as permanent vs. temporary pain. RSI definitely does exist. WHen I type for a long time I do feel pain in my hand and it is real (my brain determines that reality at least). There might not be much physical evidence but the pain is pain.
They're only broadcasting within a certain radius; just like Gnutella does searches, for example. When you don't have routing (and no addressing/labeling for that matter!).... this is the only choice.
You can't compare USENET/Internet with anonymous nets (that's why they are anon in the first place)... it's a whole other ballgame.
Well.. you're *the* expert on Freenet so I shall not even try to contest your claims on Freenet:)
From what I've understoon about Cryptobox, I think that it is extremely scalable since the bulk of message passing occurs in small groups. The rest of the messages are 'administartive' and they are exchanged with other clusters. Since it doesn't really matter what the degree of the nodes inside a cluster is (due to the optimizations) they can afford more bandwidth. Also, since they keep cells fairly small (60 nodes in each?) it doesn't really matter how big the whole network is (it can be hundreds of millions of nodes). Finding nodes with Janus is smart.. I never thought of that.
More anonymous since it is totally immune to MITM attack - beyond suspicion (from my memory, Freenet is not). An observer would need millenia to figure out which messages are real and which are fake and can't even figure out whether a node is sending anything useful since it is sending messages all the time anyway.
Anyway, I'm a PhD candidate in crypto and I'm not an expert on networking.
PS: They do mention dining cryptographers but decided against it... my guess is because they have a way to statistically thwart correlation.. I don't know for sure but I will definitely mail them and see whether they will tell me how they do it.
Read it again... I just finished reading the whole thing and it does appear scaleable. They split it only when it reaches a certain limit. Mixmaster thing is a minor part IMHO (I'm no expert on either though). They seem to be handling DOS attack stuff by removing the maliscious nodes (I saw that near the end).
Re-read my second last sentence for some answers to your questions/arguments.
The cases where companies sue from different industries over trademarks are FILLED with IP law journals.
You'd also have to read the clauses on 'future values and expansions' but I won't bother since you'd need a JD to understand my arguments. A simple example which Ford could argue is by saying: "We want to protect the trademark Explorer in the computer industry because we might release a game with the same name or a screensaver or a VR Explorer exhibit and we feel that MS is diluting our TM." That worked for a ton of companies and it would work for Ford.
Re:The big difference no one wants to hear
on
2600 v. Ford Motors
·
· Score: 1
Ok... let's discuss this one in simple details... When you type in a domain name into the 'Address' box you are asking the DNS server to provide you with the numeric IP so that you can connect to the server with the info you need. There is one more step in there since the FuckFord.com actually redirects you to a different server. When you 'click' on the link which is anchored with "FuckFord.com" and points to Ford.com you are asking DNS server for the numeric IP of Ford.com and after which you can connect to it.
The end result is exactly the same! In any case, you connect to the Ford.com. So what you're saying that one methiod is legal and other is not?
There is no difference and I'm even willing to argue that the embedded HTML link can be even more damaging to Ford than redirect. How many people type in FuckFord.com daily? How many type Ford.com? I think that the ratio is over 10000:1 in favor of Ford.com.
Re:Lets look at another angle here shall we
on
2600 v. Ford Motors
·
· Score: 1
Buut linking is the _foundation_ of the Internet:) Exactly the same thing happens when we slashdot a site. Should a slashdotted site sue because of the uninvited bandwith charges? Hell no! They put it up knowing very well that that could happen. There is NO difference.
Difference might be only in the way the linking is implemented but the overall consequence stays the same.
Ford has absolutely no right to sue under the law and I have a feeling that this case will be dismissed very soon. Let's hope they get a judge who's not in the pocket of the big comapnies.
There is only one thing you can do under the current laws (and let's hope they stay
If Ford is so serious about 'protecting' their properties wtf don't they sue Microsoft over the Explorer trademark? MS is using Internet Explorer and Windows Explorer and Ford has trademarked long time ago Ford Explorer. Sure they are competing in different industris but Ford could bring it up under the trademark dilution clause.
Ford needs to be boycotted so they back the f*ck off!
They are basically saying that you do not have the right to link to their site through "indicent" phrases or words. The linking issue has been resolved already in the Ticketmaster case and I'm sure that it will be upheld yet again.
Ford is just harassing small people. They have a huge team of lawyers and they need some 'exercise' by filing frivolous lawsuits against those who can't defend themselves properly. Why didn't Ford contact them and ask them not to point there or even rejected the headers from the domain name that they didn't like?
When you initially choose a door, probability of getting a prize is 1/3 (3 doors, one prize, hence 1 in 3 chance). The chance of picking a goat is 2/3.
After a host opens one of the two doors, he does so with FULL knowledge! He will not open a prize door by tossing a coin, he will always open a door with a goat. This is EXTREMELY important clue to the puzzle!
Now, after he open a door with a goat, he does so with full knowledge AND the door that he opens is one of the TWO doors that you didn't choose (i.e. he will not open a door that you chose). Once he does that, things change BIG time.
The probability of your current door having the prize is still 1/3! Nothing changed since you picked the door among three other doors. The door that's left (DoorL), however, now has a chance of 2/3 of being the door with a prize! Why? Well... initially it (DoorL) had a chance of being the prize with P=1/3, the door that was opened (DoorG) had a chance of P=1/3 but now the chance of the DoorG having the prize is P=0! So, the chance of DoorL having the prize now must be P=2/3.
Here's my explanation of the Monty Hall problem that so many of you think is wrong.
When you initially choose a door, probability of getting a prize is 1/3 (3 doors, one prize, hence 1 in 3 chance). The chance of picking a goat is 2/3.
After a host opens one of the two doors, he does so with FULL knowledge! He will not open a prize door by tossing a coin, he will always open a door with a goat. This is EXTREMELY important clue to the puzzle!
Now, after he open a door with a goat, he does so with full knowledge AND the door that he opens is one of the TWO doors that you didn't choose (i.e. he will not open a door that you chose). Once he does that, things change BIG time.
The probability of your current door having the prize is still 1/3! Nothing changed since you picked the door among three other doors. The door that's left (DoorL), however, now has a chance of 2/3 of being the door with a prize! Why? Well... initially it (DoorL) had a chance of being the prize with P=1/3, the door that was opened (DoorG) had a chance of P=1/3 but now the chance of the DoorG having the prize is P=0! So, the chance of DoorL having the prize now must be P=2/3.
Well.. I prefer being precise. The way/. reported is misleading:)
And now for something completely different...
Let me digress a bit... I checked your homepage and I agree 100% with what you said right here: http://www.uwm.edu/People/mikeash/kosovo.html
It's amazing how now things changed. Check this link: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Kosovo-Ne w-Allies.html Looks like Serbs and NATO are now allies?! Our gov. has lied to us again.
I think that this passage from 1984 sums it all up the best:
On the sixth day of Hate Week, after the processions, the
speeches, the shouting, the singing, the banners, the posters,
the films, the waxworks, the rolling of drums and squealing of
trumpets, the tramp of marching feet, the grinding of the
caterpillars of tanks, the roar of massed planes, the booming
of guns -- after six days of this, when the great orgasm was
quivering to its climax and the general hatred of Eurasia had
boiled up into such delirium that if the crowd could have got
their hands on the 2,000 Eurasian war-criminals who were to be
publicly hanged on the last day of the proceedings, they would
unquestionably have torn them to pieces -- at just this moment
it had been announced that Oceania was not after all at war
with Eurasia. Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Eurasia was an
ally.
There was, of course, no admission that any change had
taken place. Merely it became known, with extreme suddenness
and everywhere at once, that Eastasia and not Eurasia was the
enemy. Winston was taking part in a demonstration in one of the
central London squares at the moment when it happened. It was
night, and the white faces and the scarlet banners were luridly
floodlit. The square was packed with several thousand people,
including a block of about a thousand schoolchildren in the
uniform of the Spies. On a scarlet-draped platform an orator of
the Inner Party, a small lean man with disproportionately long
arms and a large bald skull over which a few lank locks
straggled, was haranguing the crowd. A little Rumpelstiltskin
figure, contorted with hatred, he gripped the neck of the
microphone with one hand while the other, enormous at the end
of a bony arm, clawed the air menacingly above his head. His
voice, made metallic by the amplifiers, boomed forth an endless
catalogue of atrocities, massacres, deportations, lootings,
rapings, torture of prisoners, bombing of civilians, lying
propaganda, unjust aggressions, broken treaties. It was almost
impossible to listen to him without being first convinced and
then maddened. At every few moments the fury of the crowd
boiled over and the voice of the speaker was drowned by a wild
beast-like roaring that rose uncontrollably from thousands of
throats. The most savage yells of all came from the
schoolchildren. The speech had been proceeding for perhaps
twenty minutes when a messenger hurried on to the platform and
a scrap of paper was slipped into the speaker's hand. He
unrolled and read it without pausing in his speech. Nothing
altered in his voice or manner, or in the content of what he
was saying, but suddenly the names were different. Without
words said, a wave of understanding rippled through the crowd.
Oceania was at war with Eastasia! The next moment there was a
tremendous commotion. The banners and posters with which the
square was decorated were all wrong! Quite half of them had the
wrong faces on them. It was sabotage! The agents of Goldstein
had been at work! There was a riotous interlude while posters
were ripped from the walls, banners torn to shreds and trampled
A person named Phil Carmody has found a very interesting prime number. When converted to hexadecimal, the result is a gzip that contains a DeCSS implementation.
The odds of this happening in this order are slim to none. If you believe in this chain of the evenets I have some stock to sell you. What really happened was most certainly the reverse. He took gzip that contained DeCSS, converted it to hex and analyzed the number. The good geek karma dictated that this number should be a prime and the rest is now the history =)
What makes this interesting is that they include a little bit about the NV2 chip which was developed originally for the Dreamcast. It was using quadratic texture maps (a derivative of NURBS) rather than polygons!
I'm sorry but this makes no sense. NV2 chip used qudratic surfaces and not quadratic texture maps. This is like comparing apples and oranges.
There is a sneaky way of capturing screenshots of overlay with a PrintScr key... here's how. Pause the movie at the position where you want to capture it. Minimize Media Player and maximize it again. Press Alt+PrintScr (to capture curreent window only) key and try to see if the image is showing. In vast majority of cases this will work since the minimization of a window destroys the overlay surface and when it's maximized it's re-displayed in a primary buffer.
If this fails, get a trial version of HDX: http://www.hyperionics.com/index.html HyperSnap-DX can capture from all kinds of devices... realy useful.
I managed to get all of the project Mayo files last night and test it on a flick. I tried it on a misc DVD I had lying around... All I have to say is WOW!
The new DivX is awesome! What's amazing about it is that it has support for automatic insertion of I-frames! To do a quality rip with old codec, you'd have to cut your media into low and fast changing scenes and recombine them at the end. Now, that's automatic. VKI is something that was missing before and we got numerous promises that it's gonna be in there and now it's finally reality.
The second thing that's amazing is better overall image quality without post-processing! That's right, no post-processing. This was one of the bottlenecks in the old design and now it's gone!
Specks say that new decoder decodes around 80fps on a PIII 700. Well, I have an Athlon 800 and I'm seeing frames whiz by me so fast that I actually believe them.
After a big flop of 3ivX, I can say that these guys have delivered... and delivered big.
As a side note, M$ released their WM8 Encoder Beta 2. Check it here.
Slashdot Mirror
Some people simply don't get the point. It is very easy to create anti-aliased fonts but the truth is that they don't look that good. They're simply too blurred and 10 and 12pt fonts simply look like crap (as this screenshot attests to that).
t m?fname=%20&fsize=
The reason why Microsoft's fonts look so good is because they are hinted and hand-tuned by humans. This is a painstakingly long process but it produces the best looking fonts. Linux is still lacking a copyright-free font set which looks good. Lots of people run the TT font server and use MS fonts because they are simply top-notch. Hinted fonts are essential when it comes to displaying fonts on the computer screen since reproducing quality and readable outlines on a low frequency, discrete grid is not easy.
Linux community needs to produce a quality set of serif and non-serif hinted fonts. Only then will Linux desktop look as good as MS Windows one.
AA is a step in the right direction but it is not a solution.
If you want to learn more about hinting, my I suggest this link: http://microsoft.com/typography/hinting/hinting.h
I am not 100% sure but they do give a lot of hints. If you take a look at overview they have a reference to Janus engine and also to probabilistic connection algorithms. In FAQ they also say that they cache connection info with minimal information.
My guess is (and it's pretty obvious to me at least) that when you wish to communicate with a certain node, you have to find it first by querying various cluster leaders and that is done by checking leaders' cache of names of cluster members. They should be able to tell, with certain probability, whether a member they are looking for is in the cluster. If they chose an algo that I have in mind, they should be able to find a node that they are looking for within a short period of time by sensing direction.
PS: I e-mailed the author and I can forward you his mail when he replies if you wish.
They should have classified it as permanent vs. temporary pain. RSI definitely does exist. WHen I type for a long time I do feel pain in my hand and it is real (my brain determines that reality at least). There might not be much physical evidence but the pain is pain.
First interview should also be on that list... maybe even first VC offer.
They're only broadcasting within a certain radius; just like Gnutella does searches, for example. When you don't have routing (and no addressing/labeling for that matter!).... this is the only choice.
You can't compare USENET/Internet with anonymous nets (that's why they are anon in the first place)... it's a whole other ballgame.
Well.. you're *the* expert on Freenet so I shall not even try to contest your claims on Freenet :)
From what I've understoon about Cryptobox, I think that it is extremely scalable since the bulk of message passing occurs in small groups. The rest of the messages are 'administartive' and they are exchanged with other clusters. Since it doesn't really matter what the degree of the nodes inside a cluster is (due to the optimizations) they can afford more bandwidth. Also, since they keep cells fairly small (60 nodes in each?) it doesn't really matter how big the whole network is (it can be hundreds of millions of nodes). Finding nodes with Janus is smart.. I never thought of that.
More anonymous since it is totally immune to MITM attack - beyond suspicion (from my memory, Freenet is not). An observer would need millenia to figure out which messages are real and which are fake and can't even figure out whether a node is sending anything useful since it is sending messages all the time anyway.
Anyway, I'm a PhD candidate in crypto and I'm not an expert on networking.
PS: They do mention dining cryptographers but decided against it... my guess is because they have a way to statistically thwart correlation.. I don't know for sure but I will definitely mail them and see whether they will tell me how they do it.
Read it again... I just finished reading the whole thing and it does appear scaleable. They split it only when it reaches a certain limit. Mixmaster thing is a minor part IMHO (I'm no expert on either though). They seem to be handling DOS attack stuff by removing the maliscious nodes (I saw that near the end).
I checked Infoanarchy.org's queue this morning and this news story is extremely interesting. Check the sourceforge page here.
After reading the overview of that project, it looks much safer and more anonymous than Freenet (it probably even scales better too).
yep ;)
I answered this here.
And yes, I have a JD.
Re-read my second last sentence for some answers to your questions/arguments.
The cases where companies sue from different industries over trademarks are FILLED with IP law journals.
You'd also have to read the clauses on 'future values and expansions' but I won't bother since you'd need a JD to understand my arguments. A simple example which Ford could argue is by saying: "We want to protect the trademark Explorer in the computer industry because we might release a game with the same name or a screensaver or a VR Explorer exhibit and we feel that MS is diluting our TM." That worked for a ton of companies and it would work for Ford.
Ok... let's discuss this one in simple details... When you type in a domain name into the 'Address' box you are asking the DNS server to provide you with the numeric IP so that you can connect to the server with the info you need. There is one more step in there since the FuckFord.com actually redirects you to a different server. When you 'click' on the link which is anchored with "FuckFord.com" and points to Ford.com you are asking DNS server for the numeric IP of Ford.com and after which you can connect to it.
The end result is exactly the same! In any case, you connect to the Ford.com. So what you're saying that one methiod is legal and other is not?
There is no difference and I'm even willing to argue that the embedded HTML link can be even more damaging to Ford than redirect. How many people type in FuckFord.com daily? How many type Ford.com? I think that the ratio is over 10000:1 in favor of Ford.com.
Buut linking is the _foundation_ of the Internet :) Exactly the same thing happens when we slashdot a site. Should a slashdotted site sue because of the uninvited bandwith charges? Hell no! They put it up knowing very well that that could happen. There is NO difference.
Difference might be only in the way the linking is implemented but the overall consequence stays the same.
Ford has absolutely no right to sue under the law and I have a feeling that this case will be dismissed very soon. Let's hope they get a judge who's not in the pocket of the big comapnies.
There is only one thing you can do under the current laws (and let's hope they stay
If Ford is so serious about 'protecting' their properties wtf don't they sue Microsoft over the Explorer trademark? MS is using Internet Explorer and Windows Explorer and Ford has trademarked long time ago Ford Explorer. Sure they are competing in different industris but Ford could bring it up under the trademark dilution clause.
Ford needs to be boycotted so they back the f*ck off!
They are basically saying that you do not have the right to link to their site through "indicent" phrases or words. The linking issue has been resolved already in the Ticketmaster case and I'm sure that it will be upheld yet again.
Ford is just harassing small people. They have a huge team of lawyers and they need some 'exercise' by filing frivolous lawsuits against those who can't defend themselves properly. Why didn't Ford contact them and ask them not to point there or even rejected the headers from the domain name that they didn't like?
It's just way too weird... guy publishes on slashdot and on O'Rilley + has an open source project called Jellybean but he never uses his real name?
What's even weirder is that even his resume doesn't contain his real name!
Unless this person legally changed his name to 'chormatic', this is just a bit too eccentric for my taste. Anyone got some insight?
PS: I'm asking this because I'd like to know who exactly am I criticizing when I'm placing comments on someone's reviews.
MS Paid for it... it is theirs.
Heh... what's the point of him opening a door with a prize? That'd be a pretty stupid show IMHO.
When you initially choose a door, probability of getting a prize is 1/3 (3 doors, one prize, hence 1 in 3 chance). The chance of picking a goat is 2/3.
After a host opens one of the two doors, he does so with FULL knowledge! He will not open a prize door by tossing a coin, he will always open a door with a goat. This is EXTREMELY important clue to the puzzle!
Now, after he open a door with a goat, he does so with full knowledge AND the door that he opens is one of the TWO doors that you didn't choose (i.e. he will not open a door that you chose). Once he does that, things change BIG time.
The probability of your current door having the prize is still 1/3! Nothing changed since you picked the door among three other doors. The door that's left (DoorL), however, now has a chance of 2/3 of being the door with a prize! Why? Well... initially it (DoorL) had a chance of being the prize with P=1/3, the door that was opened (DoorG) had a chance of P=1/3 but now the chance of the DoorG having the prize is P=0! So, the chance of DoorL having the prize now must be P=2/3.
Q.E.D.
You're completely wrong buddy.
Here's my explanation of the Monty Hall problem that so many of you think is wrong.
When you initially choose a door, probability of getting a prize is 1/3 (3 doors, one prize, hence 1 in 3 chance). The chance of picking a goat is 2/3.
After a host opens one of the two doors, he does so with FULL knowledge! He will not open a prize door by tossing a coin, he will always open a door with a goat. This is EXTREMELY important clue to the puzzle!
Now, after he open a door with a goat, he does so with full knowledge AND the door that he opens is one of the TWO doors that you didn't choose (i.e. he will not open a door that you chose). Once he does that, things change BIG time.
The probability of your current door having the prize is still 1/3! Nothing changed since you picked the door among three other doors. The door that's left (DoorL), however, now has a chance of 2/3 of being the door with a prize! Why? Well... initially it (DoorL) had a chance of being the prize with P=1/3, the door that was opened (DoorG) had a chance of P=1/3 but now the chance of the DoorG having the prize is P=0! So, the chance of DoorL having the prize now must be P=2/3.
Q.E.D.
Well.. I prefer being precise. The way /. reported is misleading :)
e w-Allies.html Looks like Serbs and NATO are now allies?! Our gov. has lied to us again.
And now for something completely different...
Let me digress a bit... I checked your homepage and I agree 100% with what you said right here: http://www.uwm.edu/People/mikeash/kosovo.html
It's amazing how now things changed. Check this link: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Kosovo-N
I think that this passage from 1984 sums it all up the best:
On the sixth day of Hate Week, after the processions, the
speeches, the shouting, the singing, the banners, the posters,
the films, the waxworks, the rolling of drums and squealing of
trumpets, the tramp of marching feet, the grinding of the
caterpillars of tanks, the roar of massed planes, the booming
of guns -- after six days of this, when the great orgasm was
quivering to its climax and the general hatred of Eurasia had
boiled up into such delirium that if the crowd could have got
their hands on the 2,000 Eurasian war-criminals who were to be
publicly hanged on the last day of the proceedings, they would
unquestionably have torn them to pieces -- at just this moment
it had been announced that Oceania was not after all at war
with Eurasia. Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Eurasia was an
ally.
There was, of course, no admission that any change had
taken place. Merely it became known, with extreme suddenness
and everywhere at once, that Eastasia and not Eurasia was the
enemy. Winston was taking part in a demonstration in one of the
central London squares at the moment when it happened. It was
night, and the white faces and the scarlet banners were luridly
floodlit. The square was packed with several thousand people,
including a block of about a thousand schoolchildren in the
uniform of the Spies. On a scarlet-draped platform an orator of
the Inner Party, a small lean man with disproportionately long
arms and a large bald skull over which a few lank locks
straggled, was haranguing the crowd. A little Rumpelstiltskin
figure, contorted with hatred, he gripped the neck of the
microphone with one hand while the other, enormous at the end
of a bony arm, clawed the air menacingly above his head. His
voice, made metallic by the amplifiers, boomed forth an endless
catalogue of atrocities, massacres, deportations, lootings,
rapings, torture of prisoners, bombing of civilians, lying
propaganda, unjust aggressions, broken treaties. It was almost
impossible to listen to him without being first convinced and
then maddened. At every few moments the fury of the crowd
boiled over and the voice of the speaker was drowned by a wild
beast-like roaring that rose uncontrollably from thousands of
throats. The most savage yells of all came from the
schoolchildren. The speech had been proceeding for perhaps
twenty minutes when a messenger hurried on to the platform and
a scrap of paper was slipped into the speaker's hand. He
unrolled and read it without pausing in his speech. Nothing
altered in his voice or manner, or in the content of what he
was saying, but suddenly the names were different. Without
words said, a wave of understanding rippled through the crowd.
Oceania was at war with Eastasia! The next moment there was a
tremendous commotion. The banners and posters with which the
square was decorated were all wrong! Quite half of them had the
wrong faces on them. It was sabotage! The agents of Goldstein
had been at work! There was a riotous interlude while posters
were ripped from the walls, banners torn to shreds and trampled
A person named Phil Carmody has found a very interesting prime number. When converted to hexadecimal, the result is a gzip that contains a DeCSS implementation.
The odds of this happening in this order are slim to none. If you believe in this chain of the evenets I have some stock to sell you. What really happened was most certainly the reverse. He took gzip that contained DeCSS, converted it to hex and analyzed the number. The good geek karma dictated that this number should be a prime and the rest is now the history =)
What makes this interesting is that they include a little bit about the NV2 chip which was developed originally for the Dreamcast. It was using quadratic texture maps (a derivative of NURBS) rather than polygons!
I'm sorry but this makes no sense. NV2 chip used qudratic surfaces and not quadratic texture maps. This is like comparing apples and oranges.
There is a sneaky way of capturing screenshots of overlay with a PrintScr key... here's how. Pause the movie at the position where you want to capture it. Minimize Media Player and maximize it again. Press Alt+PrintScr (to capture curreent window only) key and try to see if the image is showing. In vast majority of cases this will work since the minimization of a window destroys the overlay surface and when it's maximized it's re-displayed in a primary buffer.
If this fails, get a trial version of HDX: http://www.hyperionics.com/index.html HyperSnap-DX can capture from all kinds of devices... realy useful.
I managed to get all of the project Mayo files last night and test it on a flick. I tried it on a misc DVD I had lying around... All I have to say is WOW!
The new DivX is awesome! What's amazing about it is that it has support for automatic insertion of I-frames! To do a quality rip with old codec, you'd have to cut your media into low and fast changing scenes and recombine them at the end. Now, that's automatic. VKI is something that was missing before and we got numerous promises that it's gonna be in there and now it's finally reality.
The second thing that's amazing is better overall image quality without post-processing! That's right, no post-processing. This was one of the bottlenecks in the old design and now it's gone!
Specks say that new decoder decodes around 80fps on a PIII 700. Well, I have an Athlon 800 and I'm seeing frames whiz by me so fast that I actually believe them.
After a big flop of 3ivX, I can say that these guys have delivered... and delivered big.
As a side note, M$ released their WM8 Encoder Beta 2. Check it here.
Let the battle begin!