Installations are NOT transferrable as a normal course of operations... especially if they're OEM copies. (You can call and specifically ask for a transfer from the MS support desk and they'll usually help you out with that though... once...)
And how do you *prove* the creator of the work? Pre-'76, registration was given more legal weight.
There was also a problem in that you couldn't sue for derviations of your work unless you were registered. So it somebody "stole" your copyright by registering it and then gave permission for someone else to publish it, you had to first sue to get the registration revoked, THEN you had to sue on violation of the copyright.
Auto-registration from time of work solves that legal problem.
And it *is* a race condition when you have two requests on a single work. There are lots and lots of cases of people creating works and then one of the party goes off and tries to screw the other by pawning it off as his/her own. First to registration, WINS.
Seemingly, you're just the stereotypical slashdotter.
By "peer group approval" I think he means that teams and developers are getting bogged down in making the "perfect" game or a work of art that will be approved by 99% of the world instead of 90%.
It takes a lot of cost and effort to get that last 10% and it breaks the back of a lot of companies. So in business sense, it's better to ship a product that's "good enough" than to never ship one at all because it wasn't "great".
As a consumer of games, yeah that's a moronic statement! We want GREAT games! But in reality it doesn't pay the bills. Unfortunately it also means we're going to get saddled with commodity games... like "Aviator: The flight simulator"
But for 2D interfaces you don't blit the entire screen. Only the portions that change (and the mouse drawing/redrawing is handled in hardware). That's why there's all this built-in functionality in the Windows GDK to handle clipping and redraw areas and such.
For a 3D interface, you're pretty much guaranteed of having to redraw the entire screen. Now that's doable with a 3D card and you have the same performance. But as I pointed out, it knocks off certain other users that have "non-approved" cards or older hardware (which is almost always non-approved after a year or so)
I'm not against 3D rendered interfaces (they're cool for games and fancy displays) but I question the need for such a beast on a video editing tool.
It also breaks UI "law". The interface is no longer consistent with Windows so it requires some effort on the part of the user to learn new interactions. (Though in this techno-savvy society I don't think that's as big of a concern).
Or to put it more simply: It's a whiz bang feature that adds a nice coat of gloss to a product but cuts off a percentage or potential customers by the sheer hardware requirements and/or custom interface.
That it's faster to render the 3D controls than to do a 2D paint of them?
Even the article points out that it restricts the user to specific hardware configurations and shuts out traditionally popular cards for video editing. All for a "purty" interface.
The underlying workings of 3D Edit mean that it is picky what platform it runs on. There's a long list of compatible graphics cards on Tenomichi's website at http://www.tenomichi.com/Compatible.htm. Essentially, a DirectX 9 adapter is required, which currently doesn't include any of Matrox's graphics cards.
In geek-terms, it resolves a race condition. Under the new system as soon as you create a work it gains copyright from the date of creation. If somebody steals your work and passes it off as their own and you can show proof of the date, they've violated your copyright.
Under the old system, somebody could steal your work by taking it and copyrighting it under their name. Even if you could prove you had the earlier work the other guy had a better chance of winning because he had actually applied for, and gotten, the copyright.
These same sources, however, said they had not ruled out that the White House and NASA might be canceling the Hubble servicing mission as the opening gambit in the annual struggle that goes on every budget year, fully expecting that Congress will add money to the agency's budget over the course of the year to pay for a mission that has strong public support.
Although I'd be a lot happier if they just said YES FUND IT.
They both serve similar purposes. Science is a tool for telling us what the physical world is. Religion is a tool for telling us what's going on in the human heart and mankind (arguably an irrational subject to begin with).
And frankly...your example sucks. ONE Religion demands faith. Many others do not (IE Buddhism) Science doesn't demand anything. At best it should be just *is*. I don't want ANYTHING demanding adherence of me. I'll make my own decisions, thank you. (And if the bullet kills me when I shoot myself because my magic +5 shield of invulnerability didn't work, that's my fault).
I wasn't sure if they did inhouse development or outsourced everything. (I only recall it being shut down along with the animation division after Titan AE bombed) but a google search turns up this
The Fox Interactive link in that article is dead and reroutes you to Fox home.
4 years for every COPY distributed? Or 4 years for every copy DISTRIBUTED? (IE is he potentially going to jail 12 years for putting up 3 movies or 4 * 1000 thousand downloads?)
Isn't it more efficient to use the GPS in it to tell me where I am than to submit an image?
Seriously it's a good thing but the uses are somewhat limited. What if you don't have a digital image or a photograph to be scanned? How would you translate the image in your minds-eye into something searchable by the PC? (yah, mindlink... I know...)
I did about a 2 week crunch on the game, staying up late to complete it. I got stuck on one of the levels where you had to shoot out all the security cameras without being detected. Of course, this was time based so you had to do it quickly.
Next morning I'm walking down the office hallway when I look up to see a security sensor and for a split second my body tensed up and I tried to react until my higher brain kicked in and went "whoa partner! This is *reality*"
Gave me a new appreciation for practicing and training for things.
I have visions of Superman 3 going through my head... (or maybe a real life version of ExistenZ)
Curious. The sci-fi approach has always been machine interfacing with man but I don't think too much thought was given to specially engineered organic components that are all wetware but serve non-organic functions. (Well, maybe Giger...)
The banding is *not* a fault of the Plasma/LCD screens, it's a quirk of the nature of pixel displays over the analog painting of phosphors the way the CRT does.
DCDI and other similar picture correction chipsets (which is in my DVD player and some TVs) will do a smoothing of the picture which helps that problem greatly.
Seriously, CRT is definitely a better picture and tt was definitely an emotional purchase except for one overriding factor.
I didn't want to lug up a 300 lb 50" TV screen up stairs to my apartment.
The picture had looked fantastic at the store, but when I got it home into a lower light setting, ooh boy... My plasma magnified every mpeg artifact in the DirectTV compression. Color banding was everywhere. Watching Band of Brothers episode 4 (I believe) resulted in a great primal scream from me. (It's the episode where they sneak up to the German camp on a foggy night with a full moon in the background. All I could see was 64 shades of gray coming off the moon in circular bands. Jeep headlights in that same episode exhibited the same problem).
However, with the proper calibrations (using a dvd like video essentials) you can get a decent picture. You can get an even better picture with DVD material using an upconverting DVD player with DCDI (especially if your Plasma/LCD TV doesn't have good picture correction to begin with.)
But take away the geeky sexiness of it, if they had a lighter wide screen CRT, I'd probably be looking at that.
Just a year, but it was enough. Money, unions, political kickbacks, etc;
ALL employees were required to go to bi-annual meetings where they were "asked" to join the lobbying group to call the government and relay the phone company's agenda. You had to either sign-up or sign a waiver.
I'm not a fan of the bells, but they don't have much room left to maneuver. They're got a government regulated monopoly to deliver local phone service. Cheap. To everybody. For a dying service because everybody's using cell phones. They can now compete in long distance and TV now but everybody's using their cell phone for long distance and cable and satellite are far more popular choices for TV than "the phone company". And yet they've still got this boat-anchor around their necks in delivering high quality and low cost 100% uptime POTS lines to every person in an area. If they want to raise rates or change service, they have to get permission from the government.
So now along comes high speed service which is about the only feature they can compete on and now the SAME governments that forced them into these bizarre redtape bureaucratic maneuvers want to build their own fiber lines! For a political boondoggle! Yeah, if I were a Bell exec, I'd be pulling every trick in the regulatory book I could to keep my business afloat.
Now personally, I think the bells are dinosaurs and they're screwing over my favorite ISP by offering their DSL at cut rate prices but forcing my ISP to resale at $10/month more. But don't be suprised when the Bells use the tools at their disposal to survive. Instead wonder why it is that the legislatures seem to think they're at the mercy of the Bells and not the other way around!
Slashdot Mirror
Installations are NOT transferrable as a normal course of operations... especially if they're OEM copies. (You can call and specifically ask for a transfer from the MS support desk and they'll usually help you out with that though... once...)
Super Monkey Ball?
Feel the Magic?
Good games in their own right, but is it enough to keep the once great Sega empire afloat?
And how do you *prove* the creator of the work? Pre-'76, registration was given more legal weight.
There was also a problem in that you couldn't sue for derviations of your work unless you were registered. So it somebody "stole" your copyright by registering it and then gave permission for someone else to publish it, you had to first sue to get the registration revoked, THEN you had to sue on violation of the copyright.
Auto-registration from time of work solves that legal problem.
And it *is* a race condition when you have two requests on a single work. There are lots and lots of cases of people creating works and then one of the party goes off and tries to screw the other by pawning it off as his/her own. First to registration, WINS.
Seemingly, you're just the stereotypical slashdotter.
By "peer group approval" I think he means that teams and developers are getting bogged down in making the "perfect" game or a work of art that will be approved by 99% of the world instead of 90%.
It takes a lot of cost and effort to get that last 10% and it breaks the back of a lot of companies. So in business sense, it's better to ship a product that's "good enough" than to never ship one at all because it wasn't "great".
As a consumer of games, yeah that's a moronic statement! We want GREAT games!
But in reality it doesn't pay the bills. Unfortunately it also means we're going to get saddled with commodity games... like "Aviator: The flight simulator"
You're still requiring a GPU.
(I know, I know... it's like saying "but you're still requiring a math-coprocessor" just before the Pentium came out... I'm just sayin'...)
But for 2D interfaces you don't blit the entire screen. Only the portions that change (and the mouse drawing/redrawing is handled in hardware). That's why there's all this built-in functionality in the Windows GDK to handle clipping and redraw areas and such.
For a 3D interface, you're pretty much guaranteed of having to redraw the entire screen. Now that's doable with a 3D card and you have the same performance. But as I pointed out, it knocks off certain other users that have "non-approved" cards or older hardware (which is almost always non-approved after a year or so)
I'm not against 3D rendered interfaces (they're cool for games and fancy displays) but I question the need for such a beast on a video editing tool.
It also breaks UI "law". The interface is no longer consistent with Windows so it requires some effort on the part of the user to learn new interactions. (Though in this techno-savvy society I don't think that's as big of a concern).
Or to put it more simply: It's a whiz bang feature that adds a nice coat of gloss to a product but cuts off a percentage or potential customers by the sheer hardware requirements and/or custom interface.
Oh wait, they can't, because the government there controls speech even when it's FOR them.
In geek-terms, it resolves a race condition. Under the new system as soon as you create a work it gains copyright from the date of creation. If somebody steals your work and passes it off as their own and you can show proof of the date, they've violated your copyright.
Under the old system, somebody could steal your work by taking it and copyrighting it under their name. Even if you could prove you had the earlier work the other guy had a better chance of winning because he had actually applied for, and gotten, the copyright.
So... if you make Solaris compatible with Linux won't this solve the problem somewhat?
Although I'd be a lot happier if they just said YES FUND IT.
They both serve similar purposes. Science is a tool for telling us what the physical world is. Religion is a tool for telling us what's going on in the human heart and mankind (arguably an irrational subject to begin with).
And frankly...your example sucks. ONE Religion demands faith. Many others do not (IE Buddhism) Science doesn't demand anything. At best it should be just *is*. I don't want ANYTHING demanding adherence of me. I'll make my own decisions, thank you. (And if the bullet kills me when I shoot myself because my magic +5 shield of invulnerability didn't work, that's my fault).
I wasn't sure if they did inhouse development or outsourced everything. (I only recall it being shut down along with the animation division after Titan AE bombed) but a google search turns up this
The Fox Interactive link in that article is dead and reroutes you to Fox home.
4 years for every COPY distributed? Or 4 years for every copy DISTRIBUTED? (IE is he potentially going to jail 12 years for putting up 3 movies or 4 * 1000 thousand downloads?)
All that's left after the martian holocaust...
Isn't it more efficient to use the GPS in it to tell me where I am than to submit an image?
Seriously it's a good thing but the uses are somewhat limited. What if you don't have a digital image or a photograph to be scanned? How would you translate the image in your minds-eye into something searchable by the PC? (yah, mindlink... I know...)
there was once a Fox Interactive game division that folded because they couldn't make any money and the game market wasn't that lucrative.
I did about a 2 week crunch on the game, staying up late to complete it. I got stuck on one of the levels where you had to shoot out all the security cameras without being detected. Of course, this was time based so you had to do it quickly.
Next morning I'm walking down the office hallway when I look up to see a security sensor and for a split second my body tensed up and I tried to react until my higher brain kicked in and went "whoa partner! This is *reality*"
Gave me a new appreciation for practicing and training for things.
I have visions of Superman 3 going through my head... (or maybe a real life version of ExistenZ)
Curious. The sci-fi approach has always been machine interfacing with man but I don't think too much thought was given to specially engineered organic components that are all wetware but serve non-organic functions. (Well, maybe Giger...)
which was last years FED, everything will be fine.
(TV technology as vaporware... we've come a long way baby!)
The banding is *not* a fault of the Plasma/LCD screens, it's a quirk of the nature of pixel displays over the analog painting of phosphors the way the CRT does.
DCDI and other similar picture correction chipsets (which is in my DVD player and some TVs) will do a smoothing of the picture which helps that problem greatly.
Coz' it makes me kew!
Seriously, CRT is definitely a better picture and tt was definitely an emotional purchase except for one overriding factor.
I didn't want to lug up a 300 lb 50" TV screen up stairs to my apartment.
The picture had looked fantastic at the store, but when I got it home into a lower light setting, ooh boy... My plasma magnified every mpeg artifact in the DirectTV compression. Color banding was everywhere. Watching Band of Brothers episode 4 (I believe) resulted in a great primal scream from me. (It's the episode where they sneak up to the German camp on a foggy night with a full moon in the background. All I could see was 64 shades of gray coming off the moon in circular bands. Jeep headlights in that same episode exhibited the same problem).
However, with the proper calibrations (using a dvd like video essentials) you can get a decent picture. You can get an even better picture with DVD material using an upconverting DVD player with DCDI (especially if your Plasma/LCD TV doesn't have good picture correction to begin with.)
But take away the geeky sexiness of it, if they had a lighter wide screen CRT, I'd probably be looking at that.
My ISP charges $34.95 for 1.5m/128k.
SBC charges $26.95 for 384-1.5m/128 (but gives 1.5m/128k anyway)
and $36.95 for 1.5m-3.0m/384...
Just a year, but it was enough. Money, unions, political kickbacks, etc;
ALL employees were required to go to bi-annual meetings where they were "asked" to join the lobbying group to call the government and relay the phone company's agenda. You had to either sign-up or sign a waiver.
How's THAT for political pressure?
I'm not a fan of the bells, but they don't have much room left to maneuver. They're got a government regulated monopoly to deliver local phone service. Cheap. To everybody. For a dying service because everybody's using cell phones. They can now compete in long distance and TV now but everybody's using their cell phone for long distance and cable and satellite are far more popular choices for TV than "the phone company". And yet they've still got this boat-anchor around their necks in delivering high quality and low cost 100% uptime POTS lines to every person in an area. If they want to raise rates or change service, they have to get permission from the government.
So now along comes high speed service which is about the only feature they can compete on and now the SAME governments that forced them into these bizarre redtape bureaucratic maneuvers want to build their own fiber lines! For a political boondoggle! Yeah, if I were a Bell exec, I'd be pulling every trick in the regulatory book I could to keep my business afloat.
Now personally, I think the bells are dinosaurs and they're screwing over my favorite ISP by offering their DSL at cut rate prices but forcing my ISP to resale at $10/month more.
But don't be suprised when the Bells use the tools at their disposal to survive. Instead wonder why it is that the legislatures seem to think they're at the mercy of the Bells and not the other way around!