claim that the end user has a "right" to make a backup copy of a music disc. Where is this written and why haven't I been informed? That's a serious question, one that I'd like answered
Well here in Ireland, it is not illegal to copy and distribute, it is illegal to copy and distribute for profit. If I want to, I can run off a copy for my own personal use (if you want the law references - give me a few days. My grandfather's law books are in storage. He was a TD (see congressman) so they were very up to date)
If I cannot copy a disc for my own personal use, I can return the disc to the shop and by law I will get a refund (sale of goods act - not fit for purpose. It is a cd, I should be able to copy for my own use).
Off-topic: Nice thing about Ireland/Europe, the majority of the disclaimers on product licenses and manuals are illegal/ irrelevant. You cannot have your rights as a consumer under law removed/restricted by the licensing practised by a lot of american megacorps.
at which point MS is due to ship the XP master disks
I used to work for one of the largest OEM manufacturers (the one with sites in Texas and Ireland etc..) in the validation labs. I was testing the beta WinME code on various golden configs.. IIRC, Microsoft didn't ship master disks, they just made available the necessary files.
After the code had gone gold, there were many revisions to the code, to address some of the issues that we found with the OEM-specific hardware configurations... and patch files to suit. Part of the programme that MS runs with the top-tier OEM builders would be to do an OEM-specific reinstall cd, with the necessary patches on it. I was not sure whether the patches were included in the final retail boxed sets...
You will be able notice an improvement in quality even with small increases above 60Hz for the following reason:
In a first-person game, angular movements are large and sharp, over an area of (for me 1200 deg^2). E.g. I walk into a room and turn 90 degrees in a half second. Thats 180 degrees per second. If my fps is a constant 45, that means that I get 4 degrees apparent movement per frame. That _is_ noticeable as a flicker. At 90FPS, the mevement is reduced to 2 degrees per frame, and is still noticeable. At 180FPS, 1 degree apparent movement per frame, less noticeable.
My point is you _will_ notice differences in framerates above the accepted limits, as the human eye/brain system is very good at picking up on the above effect, once you know what to look for. When animations are fast moving, the eye cannot see each individual frame, but it will pick up on the superimposition of adjacent frames, a 'doubling' or 'streaking' of the image. The higher the FPS, the smaller the gaps between each adjacent frame.
experimenting with neurofeedback devices that measure brain waves themselves, and translate them into computer-generated images and sounds
From what I have heard, feedback loops using brainwaves to create patterns (audio or visual) can cause an epileptic fit..
Staring at Geforce for long periods of time if photoepiliptic, can be a bad idea, although to know if you are susceptible to such things, it is good to find out when sitting down, not when e.g. driving down tree-lined avenue on sunny day - another common photoepileptic trigger).
as users are looking for a device that can handle professional applications like MS Office and StarOffice, and most users will also be playing limited games.
Remember what it was like back in the glory days of, say, pII-233? More than fast enough for office. Limited games, yes, but will be held back by lack of input device, and graphic adapter. A crusoe powered desktop and a GF2\kyro2 would be well powerful enough for the 95% of games available out there..
Looks very good for crusoe. Whatever about Microsoft's previous operating systems, the company usually comes out with good hardware. Also looks good for our friend Linus, although I know that some people will object to his 'getting into bed' with Gates et al. But, commercial success is what puts the bread on the table..
The spec sounds reasonable, the components exist to have small current requirements, and a long battery life.
No need to wonder which o/s will be running on this baby.. I don't care - I will still want one.
I think it would suit your lowly self to adopt a large pile of SPAM into your home, for just 40 cents a day you can give SPAM the warm, caring place in your inbox it deserves. Please, give generously, the marketing department thanks you. pio@skynet.ie...the de-obfuscatah, because mailinglists need love too.
Doesn't bother me at all my friend. Spam I get, spam I bin. Nice to know people like you exist, just proves how shallow the other end of the gene pool is
I think that it would suit Intel to have some of the r&d costs spread around, and Intel cannot afford to have the ability to produce 'better' parts, without the 3rd party support in chipsets/ram etc. (looking to maybe 4-6 years in the future..). Intel would not invite the others in the industry unless it suited Intel somwhere along the line.
Reason why higher fps is good:
Personally I can easily see the difference between 30 and 70 FPS, for example while turning quickly, (say to aim at somewhere behind you). At 30 fps, you get 15 frames drawn over 180 degrees of movement, assuming that it takes a half second to turn that much. That is a spread of 12 degrees, or 1/10th screen width (fov120)per frame difference. Very noticable gaps. At say 120fps - common setup for Q3, this spread between frames goes down to 4 degrees, or 1/40 screen width. This difference comes across subjectively as 'smoothness'. For those that consider >200 dollars a lot of mony to spend on something like that, think of those that mod their cars, getting things like dump valves, large bore exhausts, stuff like that. These give maybe 10-15 percent performance improvement, for a similar outlay (high quality components, not too sure of actual costs but comparison is still valid).
People will always spend money on things that improve their experience. If you are at the **phile end of the hobby, the cost will always be considered worth the return.
Personally I used a p3-500 and tnt2 for a year. It played fairly well, getting reasonable framerates. After upgrading to p3-800, it was a bit better, but not that noticeable a difference. Then I got a geforce2, and my gaming experience became so much better. If you get the use of the new hardware, what does the cost matter if you can afford it and are willing to pay for it - even if I managed to get the card on an employee discount.....:)
As far as I knew, Nvidia are using commercial technology in the chipset and drivers that they do not own the intellectual property on. Nvidia have to license this technology, from the relevant third parties. To open the sources, this would require Nvidia to buy the rights to the intellectual property. Why bother do this, when it already costs them enough to get the use of the technology. It does not make commercial sense to do this.
It is a pity that this is the case, but such is life.
Maybe they could encapsulate the proprietary stuff in a small binary, and put as much as possible into the open section? More than they do already..
Having had a lot of work done with the q3a experience I think that a lot of the problems have been identified, and when you know tha problem, it is quicker to solve them.
Here's hoping!
Slashdot Mirror
Well here in Ireland, it is not illegal to copy and distribute, it is illegal to copy and distribute for profit. If I want to, I can run off a copy for my own personal use (if you want the law references - give me a few days. My grandfather's law books are in storage. He was a TD (see congressman) so they were very up to date) If I cannot copy a disc for my own personal use, I can return the disc to the shop and by law I will get a refund (sale of goods act - not fit for purpose. It is a cd, I should be able to copy for my own use).
Off-topic: Nice thing about Ireland/Europe, the majority of the disclaimers on product licenses and manuals are illegal/ irrelevant. You cannot have your rights as a consumer under law removed/restricted by the licensing practised by a lot of american megacorps.
I used to work for one of the largest OEM manufacturers (the one with sites in Texas and Ireland etc..) in the validation labs. I was testing the beta WinME code on various golden configs..
IIRC, Microsoft didn't ship master disks, they just made available the necessary files.
After the code had gone gold, there were many revisions to the code, to address some of the issues that we found with the OEM-specific hardware configurations... and patch files to suit. Part of the programme that MS runs with the top-tier OEM builders would be to do an OEM-specific reinstall cd, with the necessary patches on it. I was not sure whether the patches were included in the final retail boxed sets...
You will be able notice an improvement in quality even with small increases above 60Hz for the following reason:
In a first-person game, angular movements are large and sharp, over an area of (for me 1200 deg^2). E.g. I walk into a room and turn 90 degrees in a half second. Thats 180 degrees per second. If my fps is a constant 45, that means that I get 4 degrees apparent movement per frame. That _is_ noticeable as a flicker. At 90FPS, the mevement is reduced to 2 degrees per frame, and is still noticeable. At 180FPS, 1 degree apparent movement per frame, less noticeable.
My point is you _will_ notice differences in framerates above the accepted limits, as the human eye/brain system is very good at picking up on the above effect, once you know what to look for. When animations are fast moving, the eye cannot see each individual frame, but it will pick up on the superimposition of adjacent frames, a 'doubling' or 'streaking' of the image. The higher the FPS, the smaller the gaps between each adjacent frame.
experimenting with neurofeedback devices that measure brain waves themselves, and translate them into computer-generated images and sounds
From what I have heard, feedback loops using brainwaves to create patterns (audio or visual) can cause an epileptic fit..
Staring at Geforce for long periods of time if photoepiliptic, can be a bad idea, although to know if you are susceptible to such things, it is good to find out when sitting down, not when e.g. driving down tree-lined avenue on sunny day - another common photoepileptic trigger).
Remember what it was like back in the glory days of, say, pII-233? More than fast enough for office. Limited games, yes, but will be held back by lack of input device, and graphic adapter. A crusoe powered desktop and a GF2\kyro2 would be well powerful enough for the 95% of games available out there..
The spec sounds reasonable, the components exist to have small current requirements, and a long battery life.
No need to wonder which o/s will be running on this baby.. I don't care - I will still want one.
:-P
hehe. p
I think that it would suit Intel to have some of the r&d costs spread around, and Intel cannot afford to have the ability to produce 'better' parts, without the 3rd party support in chipsets/ram etc. (looking to maybe 4-6 years in the future..). Intel would not invite the others in the industry unless it suited Intel somwhere along the line.
Reason why higher fps is good: :)
Personally I can easily see the difference between 30 and 70 FPS, for example while turning quickly, (say to aim at somewhere behind you). At 30 fps, you get 15 frames drawn over 180 degrees of movement, assuming that it takes a half second to turn that much. That is a spread of 12 degrees, or 1/10th screen width (fov120)per frame difference. Very noticable gaps.
At say 120fps - common setup for Q3, this spread between frames goes down to 4 degrees, or 1/40 screen width. This difference comes across subjectively as 'smoothness'.
For those that consider >200 dollars a lot of mony to spend on something like that, think of those that mod their cars, getting things like dump valves, large bore exhausts, stuff like that. These give maybe 10-15 percent performance improvement, for a similar outlay (high quality components, not too sure of actual costs but comparison is still valid). People will always spend money on things that improve their experience. If you are at the **phile end of the hobby, the cost will always be considered worth the return. Personally I used a p3-500 and tnt2 for a year. It played fairly well, getting reasonable framerates. After upgrading to p3-800, it was a bit better, but not that noticeable a difference. Then I got a geforce2, and my gaming experience became so much better. If you get the use of the new hardware, what does the cost matter if you can afford it and are willing to pay for it - even if I managed to get the card on an employee discount.....
As far as I knew, Nvidia are using commercial technology in the chipset and drivers that they do not own the intellectual property on. Nvidia have to license this technology, from the relevant third parties. To open the sources, this would require Nvidia to buy the rights to the intellectual property. Why bother do this, when it already costs them enough to get the use of the technology. It does not make commercial sense to do this. It is a pity that this is the case, but such is life. Maybe they could encapsulate the proprietary stuff in a small binary, and put as much as possible into the open section? More than they do already..
Having had a lot of work done with the q3a experience I think that a lot of the problems have been identified, and when you know tha problem, it is quicker to solve them. Here's hoping!