Yes. But there are two points to be made: 1. 24hz into 60hz ends up creating signifigant amounts of jitter, as each input frame is displayed for 2 or 3 output frames. 2. Since when is movie watching the only thing you do in your PC? There's gaming, which/does/ make good use of higher(real) refresh rates.
As far as I'm concerned, unless it actually will take a particular frame rate in through the input and display it, it doesn't have any more than a "fake" refresh rate - at best, you're dealing with motion-processing algorithms, at worst, all it does is reduce the effects of overdrive.
And no, no HDTVs I've seen support over 60hz/fps/input/ - Unless it has DVI-D or HDMI 1.4, it/can't/.
I do know about the posturing/dithering, and at least it's static dithering not dynamic - solid colors have faint "grain" to them, versus the image shimmering. As far as 3D goes, not quite. These monitors require active shutter glasses for 3D, and yes, when used with said glasses you get 60hz x 2 eyes. But without the glasses, you get the full 120hz.
And yes, I've checked that - if the monitor is set with a 60hz refresh rate, quick mouse moves have far more jump in pixels than if it's set to 120hz, and the "ghosts" last longer.
I believe you about the actual transition speed, but I figure it's better than TN panels driven at 60hz, which give ~16ms frame times and thus overdriven pixels will either take longer to get to, or be driven further past what it's supposed to be(remember, all modern screens tend to use overdrive technology to get the response time down)
Personally, I think a 100hz+ IPS display with a 2560x1600 resolutuon would be great... but I'd be surprised it I ever see it.
The best I've found are the "Nvidia 3D Vision" compatible monitors - TN LCDs, 1680x1050 or 1920x1080 which run at 120HZ natively and use DVI-D to actually get that sort of input. Best part is that they aren't anything special 3D wise - all the 3D stuff is in the active glasses and drivers. Without those, you just have a nice, high-refresh-rate monitor.
Personally, I've got a Alienware AW2310. You can pick them up for under $350 - not as cheap as regular monitors, but not too high considering the alternatives(or lack thereof).
You know they make/true/ 120hz LCD monitors? Just look up Nvidia 3d Vision. The monitors are just standard TN LCDs that have the input electronics to handle 120fps(and require DVI-D to do it). Looks nice even if all you're doing is moving the mouse around quickly; the mouse jumps fewer pixels per frame.
I call "not understanding technology" on the post above: Most screens these days only will update at 60hz, especially larger ones. Even 1280x1024 screens will only do maby 85hz. Unless you're using a CRT or a Nvidia 3D Vision compatible monitor, you're not getting more frames than that/displayed to you/. Which means the frames are simply dropped, and thus won!t look any better. You'd be better off enabling vsync, so you've got a constant maximum fps, at whatever rate your monitor is set to, and not wasting frame rendering time.
Mod parent insightful. Just check out the Maemo 5(Nokia N900) community - many, many apps, at least 99% free. Most done as a hobby or because the dev needed that feature him/herself.
I must point out that you are missing one crucial factor - Just because your app doesn't sell(or does, for that matter), the hardware is still usable. You can always install Windows on your Mac and have a fully functional PC and develop for Windows(same with Linux, for that matter). You can also use that same machine as a gaming/internet box. So the real "apple tax" is more like $99/year + (cost of Mac - cost of equavlent Dell system) + cost of iDevice(and possibly +$100 for a copy of windows). Not quite as high as it might seem.
Disclaimer: I do not own any Apple products, and consider iDevices useless junk. But that doesn't mean I can't give credit where it is due.
We can always go for hydro. May kill off a few rivers worth of fisn and destroy some ecosystems, but hey, if that what it takes for me to get cheap electricity for my job, TV and car, it'd be worth it.
Fortunately, hydrogen is easily producable from the most common substance on earth - water. Just add energy, which can come from any number of sources. Sure, it may not be 100% effecient to get it that way, but it is an option. And is easier than making/most/ fuels in terms of availability.
If you can remove the limiter from your car without 'bricking' it, you've got a car. If you can't, you've got a toy. It's not whether a device has certain settings or abilities stock that matters, it's whether you can/modify/ it to have them. The N900 can be hacked into doing anything possible with the hardware. The Lumia 900, well, show me you can even replace the kernel with a non-signed one and I'll be amazed.
But that's where it's so brilliant! I can have my Debian heavyweight desktop running Chrome as an app alongside firefox and everything else, still use the cloud tools from that along with my nice local ones. And when I'm on the go, I can use my phone which *also* runs chromium and use the same web applications along with it's local ones. And I can borrow a ChromeOS netbook from my employer for a task, run the same Chrome webapps, and not have to worr about getting software loaded on it... No, a ChromeOS device will never replace a desktop for most. It won't even replace a phone. But it could/compliment/ both.
And, as the grandparent post pointed out, once you have your apps running via a web browser -- even if they are 'intranet' apps vs 'cloud' ones -- you just might give up on windows for a signifigant fraction of machines. Some, of course, will always need a real OS. But not your Kiosks, database-frontends etc. -- All things that require remote servers anyway, so why not just use a webapp instead of a local app? And at that point, why not get rid of windows for Chrome OS, something lightweight, secure, and hard to screw up?
Well, erm... 8 years ago was 2004. You're talkihg about Pentium M and later Northwood P4s. There's/no way/ most of those would run Windows 7 - Do you think that AMD or Nvidia has w7 drivers for things that far back? No way. Linux on the other hand... No problem. I'm currently running 10.10(current when I installed it) on a HP TC1100, which is ~9 years old, and I was able to use an older set of Nvidia blobs with it's Geforce 4 Go chipset. May not be much, but it/was/ able to (slowly) run the OpenGL mode of Runescape. Also, I have Debian squeeze running on a P4 3.2ghz Northwood with 2GB of ram as a server(running off a CF card as it's HD, plus 3x 2TB drives(raid 5'ed together) for data storage)... Which works like a charm.
Plus, of course, if you want to do stuff like run old (low-end) HP printers, forget about it; We've got a couple of reasonable cheapies at my work which refuse to work ncely with Win 7 X64, and iffily work with the x86 version. (works fine with xp). Linux, on the other hand... Never had an issue; every printer I've tried has been plug and play for me, at least on Ubuntu. Debian requires a little more sometimes, but I knew what I was getting into with that.
Of course... Thanks to open-source tools that support massive lists of file-types, I don't see this happening a lot. I'm sure there's some specific proprietary files that require one specific version of a program to read... But, thanks to emulators, even that isn't a problem so long as you can find/some/ commonality between emulated system and host for getting the data off.
It's likely so you can have your win server and run the Linux that you need for a vendors LAMP-based application in a VM. Because running it natively means one less license for MS... and one more reasons for hardware vendors to try to improve linux hardware support. At least in a VM, you are using MS's drivers, and can keep Linux safely away from the hardware... and at some point drop compatibility if needed without any recourse for customers.
The Imperial system analogy brings up an interesting point, actually: People don't like change. It's why someone who likes XP and Office 2003 may just plain reject the 'ribbon' look of Vista/7 apps/office 2010... Which explains why xp marketshare will continue to be high for quite a while. Same with the imperial system - unless absolutely forced, we aren't going to change to another system. Especially one with no tangible benefits for us.
I think you've got something configured wrong. I'm sure you can play 240p or 360p videos easily enough with that and Adobe flash(gnash isn't quite up to it), as I've done it. Alternately, use a HTML5-complient browser and watch the webm versions.
Y'know, I think this has less to do with windows than it does with applications. Back when I used Windows, one reinstall I decided to go for open source applications instead of the usual freeware stuff. My reinstall time went from 6 months to over a year, and it was still working fine when I ended up switching to Linux.
I agree completely. That being said, on the AMD side of things, it's exactly the opposite: The Radeon OSS driver, when it works(had to run a Debian Experimental xorg for good support) is *much* faster than it's closed source counterpart for desktop use: With KDE, by default it wouldn't even enable direct rendering on the Catalyst driver(meaning one cpu core used for compositing; horrible performance), and forcing it resulted in a low framerate and glitches. Radeon driver on the other hand... I'm getting a good 60fps most of the time, low cpu load, and gorgeous transparency and effects... at the cost of slower OpenGL game performance.
This looks interesting. Why not a little test app, see if/how they work?
------ Personally, I use VirtuaWin for my virtual desktops on Windows; it works 'well enough'; good for keeping a consistent setup between Windows and Linux.
Mod parent up. That's actually a good point, and for all we know, he may still have a copy of the files laying around which would drive traffic there/instantly/.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes. But there are two points to be made: /does/ make good use of higher(real) refresh rates.
1. 24hz into 60hz ends up creating signifigant amounts of jitter, as each input frame is displayed for 2 or 3 output frames.
2. Since when is movie watching the only thing you do in your PC? There's gaming, which
As far as I'm concerned, unless it actually will take a particular frame rate in through the input and display it, it doesn't have any more than a "fake" refresh rate - at best, you're dealing with motion-processing algorithms, at worst, all it does is reduce the effects of overdrive.
And no, no HDTVs I've seen support over 60hz/fps /input/ - Unless it has DVI-D or HDMI 1.4, it /can't/.
I do know about the posturing/dithering, and at least it's static dithering not dynamic - solid colors have faint "grain" to them, versus the image shimmering.
As far as 3D goes, not quite. These monitors require active shutter glasses for 3D, and yes, when used with said glasses you get 60hz x 2 eyes. But without the glasses, you get the full 120hz.
And yes, I've checked that - if the monitor is set with a 60hz refresh rate, quick mouse moves have far more jump in pixels than if it's set to 120hz, and the "ghosts" last longer.
I believe you about the actual transition speed, but I figure it's better than TN panels driven at 60hz, which give ~16ms frame times and thus overdriven pixels will either take longer to get to, or be driven further past what it's supposed to be(remember, all modern screens tend to use overdrive technology to get the response time down)
Personally, I think a 100hz+ IPS display with a 2560x1600 resolutuon would be great... but I'd be surprised it I ever see it.
The best I've found are the "Nvidia 3D Vision" compatible monitors - TN LCDs, 1680x1050 or 1920x1080 which run at 120HZ natively and use DVI-D to actually get that sort of input.
Best part is that they aren't anything special 3D wise - all the 3D stuff is in the active glasses and drivers. Without those, you just have a nice, high-refresh-rate monitor.
Personally, I've got a Alienware AW2310. You can pick them up for under $350 - not as cheap as regular monitors, but not too high considering the alternatives(or lack thereof).
You know they make /true/ 120hz LCD monitors? Just look up Nvidia 3d Vision. The monitors are just standard TN LCDs that have the input electronics to handle 120fps(and require DVI-D to do it).
Looks nice even if all you're doing is moving the mouse around quickly; the mouse jumps fewer pixels per frame.
I call "not understanding technology" on the post above: Most screens these days only will update at 60hz, especially larger ones. Even 1280x1024 screens will only do maby 85hz. /displayed to you/.
Unless you're using a CRT or a Nvidia 3D Vision compatible monitor, you're not getting more frames than that
Which means the frames are simply dropped, and thus won!t look any better. You'd be better off enabling vsync, so you've got a constant maximum fps, at whatever rate your monitor is set to, and not wasting frame rendering time.
Mod parent insightful. Just check out the Maemo 5(Nokia N900) community - many, many apps, at least 99% free. Most done as a hobby or because the dev needed that feature him/herself.
I must point out that you are missing one crucial factor - Just because your app doesn't sell(or does, for that matter), the hardware is still usable. You can always install Windows on your Mac and have a fully functional PC and develop for Windows(same with Linux, for that matter). You can also use that same machine as a gaming/internet box. So the real "apple tax" is more like $99/year + (cost of Mac - cost of equavlent Dell system) + cost of iDevice(and possibly +$100 for a copy of windows). Not quite as high as it might seem.
Disclaimer: I do not own any Apple products, and consider iDevices useless junk. But that doesn't mean I can't give credit where it is due.
We can always go for hydro. May kill off a few rivers worth of fisn and destroy some ecosystems, but hey, if that what it takes for me to get cheap electricity for my job, TV and car, it'd be worth it.
Fortunately, hydrogen is easily producable from the most common substance on earth - water. Just add energy, which can come from any number of sources. /most/ fuels in terms of availability.
Sure, it may not be 100% effecient to get it that way, but it is an option. And is easier than making
It's definitely required /watching/: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Pratchett's_Going_Postal
Yeah, and even then it's too small. Needs to be scaled up a bit, and made even thicker IMHO.
If you can remove the limiter from your car without 'bricking' it, you've got a car. If you can't, you've got a toy. /modify/ it to have them. The N900 can be hacked into doing anything possible with the hardware. The Lumia 900, well, show me you can even replace the kernel with a non-signed one and I'll be amazed.
It's not whether a device has certain settings or abilities stock that matters, it's whether you can
But that's where it's so brilliant! I can have my Debian heavyweight desktop running Chrome as an app alongside firefox and everything else, still use the cloud tools from that along with my nice local ones. And when I'm on the go, I can use my phone which *also* runs chromium and use the same web applications along with it's local ones. And I can borrow a ChromeOS netbook from my employer for a task, run the same Chrome webapps, and not have to worr about getting software loaded on it... /compliment/ both.
No, a ChromeOS device will never replace a desktop for most. It won't even replace a phone. But it could
And, as the grandparent post pointed out, once you have your apps running via a web browser -- even if they are 'intranet' apps vs 'cloud' ones -- you just might give up on windows for a signifigant fraction of machines.
Some, of course, will always need a real OS. But not your Kiosks, database-frontends etc. -- All things that require remote servers anyway, so why not just use a webapp instead of a local app? And at that point, why not get rid of windows for Chrome OS, something lightweight, secure, and hard to screw up?
Well, erm... /no way/ most of those would run Windows 7 - Do you think that AMD or Nvidia has w7 drivers for things that far back? No way. /was/ able to (slowly) run the OpenGL mode of Runescape.
8 years ago was 2004. You're talkihg about Pentium M and later Northwood P4s. There's
Linux on the other hand... No problem. I'm currently running 10.10(current when I installed it) on a HP TC1100, which is ~9 years old, and I was able to use an older set of Nvidia blobs with it's Geforce 4 Go chipset. May not be much, but it
Also, I have Debian squeeze running on a P4 3.2ghz Northwood with 2GB of ram as a server(running off a CF card as it's HD, plus 3x 2TB drives(raid 5'ed together) for data storage)... Which works like a charm.
Plus, of course, if you want to do stuff like run old (low-end) HP printers, forget about it; We've got a couple of reasonable cheapies at my work which refuse to work ncely with Win 7 X64, and iffily work with the x86 version.
(works fine with xp). Linux, on the other hand... Never had an issue; every printer I've tried has been plug and play for me, at least on Ubuntu. Debian requires a little more sometimes, but I knew what I was getting into with that.
Of course... Thanks to open-source tools that support massive lists of file-types, I don't see this happening a lot. I'm sure there's some specific proprietary files that require one specific version of a program to read... But, thanks to emulators, even that isn't a problem so long as you can find /some/ commonality between emulated system and host for getting the data off.
It's likely so you can have your win server and run the Linux that you need for a vendors LAMP-based application in a VM. Because running it natively means one less license for MS... and one more reasons for hardware vendors to try to improve linux hardware support. At least in a VM, you are using MS's drivers, and can keep Linux safely away from the hardware... and at some point drop compatibility if needed without any recourse for customers.
The Imperial system analogy brings up an interesting point, actually: People don't like change. It's why someone who likes XP and Office 2003 may just plain reject the 'ribbon' look of Vista/7 apps/office 2010... Which explains why xp marketshare will continue to be high for quite a while.
Same with the imperial system - unless absolutely forced, we aren't going to change to another system. Especially one with no tangible benefits for us.
I think you've got something configured wrong. I'm sure you can play 240p or 360p videos easily enough with that and Adobe flash(gnash isn't quite up to it), as I've done it.
Alternately, use a HTML5-complient browser and watch the webm versions.
Y'know, I think this has less to do with windows than it does with applications. Back when I used Windows, one reinstall I decided to go for open source applications instead of the usual freeware stuff. My reinstall time went from 6 months to over a year, and it was still working fine when I ended up switching to Linux.
I agree completely. That being said, on the AMD side of things, it's exactly the opposite: The Radeon OSS driver, when it works(had to run a Debian Experimental xorg for good support) is *much* faster than it's closed source counterpart for desktop use: With KDE, by default it wouldn't even enable direct rendering on the Catalyst driver(meaning one cpu core used for compositing; horrible performance), and forcing it resulted in a low framerate and glitches.
Radeon driver on the other hand... I'm getting a good 60fps most of the time, low cpu load, and gorgeous transparency and effects... at the cost of slower OpenGL game performance.
Mod. Parent. Up.
You said it exactly - why a slashdot type system is better, and why FB would never allow it.
I agree completely.
This looks interesting.
Why not a little test app, see if/how they work?
------
Personally, I use VirtuaWin for my virtual desktops on Windows; it works 'well enough'; good for keeping a consistent setup between Windows and Linux.
Mod parent up. That's actually a good point, and for all we know, he may still have a copy of the files laying around which would drive traffic there /instantly/.
Yes. I agree completely.