I think neither, really. I don't like how the rough matte treatment diffuses light, and I don't like how gloss reflects it.
I really like smooth screens with an anti-glare surface. I see them on camera lenses and some of the better CRTs. Something like it is available as an optional coating on eyeglasses. It's a series of very thin coatings that's about the wavelength of the light, and it gradually steps up the index of refraction so light is more likely to pass through than be reflected. What very little reflection that remains might have a deep green, blue or purple color to it, if you can see it, because only the brightest lights reflect noticeably, even then, only marginally.
I have not seen this sort of treatment on LCDs until I bought a camcorder last week, the flip-out panel has a treatment that looks like this. So I'm hopeful that the treatment is applied to computer screens soon.
IANAL, so does anybody know if these kinds of deals might have the effect of invalidating an ISP's 'common carrier' protections?
I think it's some Slashdotters that are perpetrating the myth that "common carrier protections" exist for data providers. As far as I know, that's not true, that it's only for voice, as in POTS.
Yes, but I don't see it as my responsibility to collect taxes for a state or city I've never been in, simply because I mailed something there. My business isn't about tax collecting, and I see it as a needless distraction from what I'm trying to do.
Which isn't to deride projectors,... but side by side plasma was jaw dropping.
If picture quality was your only consideration, then, the plasma is definitely superior. But when you figure in the cost, installation considerations, portability, I think that generally sways the consideration to a front projector.
Also, good point on the projector, the only problem is during daytime if you have windows open you can't really see much, but aside from that it is a cheaper alternative that's equally good.
Which is why I said it's not for everyone. But a good home theater room has to have good light control anyway. You don't want glare being reflected from the screen if you have a plasma.
It's not that simple. The Supreme Court placed specific requirements on states and cities before they are allowed to do this, and I don't think any of them have complied yet.
I have a problem with governments being able to reach beyond their jurisdiction to demand out of state / out of city companies collect their taxes for them.
I sell things online, and I don't want to be liable for collecting taxes for 30 states and maybe hundreds of cities. I've heard that the big internet retailers are fine with these taxes, because it's a burden they can easily absorb while hurting smaller internet retailers.
The large plasma may get the best picture quality possible, the 50" is probably an incredibly fine unit too. One can get big picture on a lower budget with a projector. It's not for everyone, but a projector that's half the cost of that Kuro can throw a 150" image in full 1080p, with a picture quality that's good enough that I really don't care that I don't have a plasma.
I'd do away with the Monster products (speakers and "voltage stabilizers") in that list too. I just don't like seeing money spent on snake oil manufacturers.
The FDA can't be perfect, but they are generally they get it right most of the time except for the high profile cases.
They let the side effects of Vioxx slip because of testing that didn't go to the prescribed length, but Vioxx was a useful drug. The problem is that Merck advertised Vioxx in such a way that it was used "off label" much more widely than it should have been. It was effective in significantly reducing intense chronic pain for certain things, such that the people that could use it were willing to deal with the side-effect risk because life would have been disabling pain without it.
It's funny how despite the fact that the crowd at Slashdot is generally overwhelmingly pro-tech, the average reader is also very hostile to the idea of in-flight calls based on past stories on this.
Moreover, it's funny how despite the fact that the crowd at Slashdot is generally overwhelmingly anti-government regulation, when it comes to things they want the government to regulate, like banning in-flight cellular phone use, they're generally more than happy to acquiesce.
First, you must understand that every crowd generally has many ranges of different demographics, here, different people respond to different stories. I mean, the people that post in a story about the RIAA might openly talk about how they get their illegal copies of music, but those that post about a company violating the GLP license might have a different take on copyright laws and licenses. There may well also be people that have reconciled or justified both views as well.
One response to your observation is that most of the technologies "we" like don't involve devices that irritate everyone that's in the same, and sometimes, the next room, the devices that do make noise are usually used in private, not blaring or chirping in public. I wouldn't mind if they had wireless internet, but I'd hate to be in the same cabin as people running their phones in PTT mode, loudly chirping away and broadcasting the other end of the conversation for everyone to hear. I'm actually not sure how effective phones will be given how loud airplane cabins are, though not loud enough to drown out conversations you don't want to listen to, but loud enough to make listening through the earpiece a chore.
We ourselves, each and everyone one of us, outsource all of the time. Go ahead can say Dell is terrible because they outsourced a call center to India or the Philippines, but we outsource every time we use a stapler or a printer, or for that matter, even a computer
Poppycock. It's one thing to outsource things that aren't your core business, I mean, those not in the stapler business shouldn't be making staplers. But if you're in the stapler business and you outsource the manufacturing, assembly, and support of staplers, then exactly what IS your business? What opportunity does that get you? You've mostly switched the business from being a manufacturer to a distributor. Assuming the distribution hasn't been outsourced. Maybe Dell is becoming just a retailer. All this sounds like is getting rid of your business and painting yourself into a corner.
Shareholders are supposed to sell when they receive an advantageous offer.
The motivation to sell in this specific case is not the recession but a failed business model.
Is it really advantageous? A swap of Yahoo stock to Microsoft stock doesn't make much sense to me. Microsoft has been buying out a lot of businesses, and most of them don't seem to pay back their initial investment, they're lucky that their OS and Office business keeps them profitable despite throwing all this money around. Yahoo has made unwise company purchases too, but not nearly to the scale of MS. With buying Yahoo, MS is going to have to take on debt when they never have before, after they've frittered away much of their mountain of cash, making an investment into MS look not so good.
I really think that "failed business model" is a bit of a stretched claim, their net income is down a little bit, but Yahoo is still solidly in the black.
Isn't it the very point? By not saying what MTBF really means, it's another way to dupe even the smart people.
The way I understand MTBF to really be, one in ten drives failing might translate to an MTBF of 30 years, assuming the drive is replaced at the end of a 3 year service life, or 50 years assuming a 5 year service life.
For the most part, buying a more expensive drive doesn't necessarily mean it's more reliable. The Google paper on the subject said that they saw no significant difference between the regular desktop drives and the pricey Fiber Channel drives.
I think from the definition put forward, It may be that everyone is using open source to some extent. Even if you're using Windows, IIRC, there is some BSD code in there. A lot of home routers are based on some open source code. Having an account on a web service using LAMP components might count. I think Nokia is using a Linux-based OS, and Apple relies heavily on open source stuff.
You act as if planned and/or announced features/products have never been canceled or abandoned and Apple is the only one to ever do this. *COUGH!*M$VISTA*COUGH!**COUGH!*
Why should an Apple fan have to justify it by comparing it to Microsoft?
From what it sounds like, at WWDC 07, people had to ask Apple reps where Carbon 64 went, there were no dev sessions in 07, when there were Carbon 64 dev sessions in WWDC 06. It sounds like Apple went out of their way to hope that people forgot about it. Maybe we should ask Apple when Final Cut Studio will be all Cocoa.
Podcasts were overhyped (and overly panned to), but the concept is pretty good. It allows me to get niche "radio" shows, get away from the truly awful ads on radio, and not have to fiddle with a tuner, think about when a show is on the air and so on. Being able to pause it, reorder it, skip an episode and all that is nice too. I don't think it's going to beat Clear Channel, but it doesn't need to as long as I have my favorite shows. It's just an alternative distribution medium.
There are a lot of products which software or a jumper changes what the device is. The workstation graphics card is one such example, the drivers and software are optimized for other uses, but the silicon is often the same. But I don't really have a problem with that, both versions of the product do work as advertised, and generally, pretty reliably. Developing and certifying the workstation card software to work properly with certain software does cost money, and there's fewer users of those high end programs to spread around the development cost, and it's not of use to the typical consumer either.
I do have a problem with what Creative did though.
Effectively, what you're really paying for is maintaining the physical & electrical link, the hardware on both ends, though of course, the marketing, executive limo, and all that is in there too. The numbers I've seen in the papers in terms of data cost are pretty low, I recall seeing a number something like it's about $2.50 per household on average. So I really don't see how things will change a lot if people were charged a lower base fee plus the bandwidth you use. Another reason the pricing is unlikely to change is that there's minimal competition.
I've got a 1080p DLP rear projector with a 50" screen. Why can't I just take off the screen and project the picture onto an even larger wall from further away?
Maybe you can, but there may be issues as well. It might be designed only to focus within a few inches of the existing screen, because it wasn't expected that a person would try that, it's just easier to make. You would probably void your warranty. You probably can't set it to ceiling mount mode and hang it from the ceiling.
Slashdot Mirror
I think neither, really. I don't like how the rough matte treatment diffuses light, and I don't like how gloss reflects it.
I really like smooth screens with an anti-glare surface. I see them on camera lenses and some of the better CRTs. Something like it is available as an optional coating on eyeglasses. It's a series of very thin coatings that's about the wavelength of the light, and it gradually steps up the index of refraction so light is more likely to pass through than be reflected. What very little reflection that remains might have a deep green, blue or purple color to it, if you can see it, because only the brightest lights reflect noticeably, even then, only marginally.
I have not seen this sort of treatment on LCDs until I bought a camcorder last week, the flip-out panel has a treatment that looks like this. So I'm hopeful that the treatment is applied to computer screens soon.
When there were 4:3 screens, they were a lot less expensive per unit area than widescreen, of the same screen type and brand.
IANAL, so does anybody know if these kinds of deals might have the effect of invalidating an ISP's 'common carrier' protections?
I think it's some Slashdotters that are perpetrating the myth that "common carrier protections" exist for data providers. As far as I know, that's not true, that it's only for voice, as in POTS.
Yes, but I don't see it as my responsibility to collect taxes for a state or city I've never been in, simply because I mailed something there. My business isn't about tax collecting, and I see it as a needless distraction from what I'm trying to do.
Which isn't to deride projectors, ... but side by side plasma was jaw dropping.
If picture quality was your only consideration, then, the plasma is definitely superior. But when you figure in the cost, installation considerations, portability, I think that generally sways the consideration to a front projector.
Also, good point on the projector, the only problem is during daytime if you have windows open you can't really see much, but aside from that it is a cheaper alternative that's equally good.
Which is why I said it's not for everyone. But a good home theater room has to have good light control anyway. You don't want glare being reflected from the screen if you have a plasma.
It's not that simple. The Supreme Court placed specific requirements on states and cities before they are allowed to do this, and I don't think any of them have complied yet.
I have a problem with governments being able to reach beyond their jurisdiction to demand out of state / out of city companies collect their taxes for them.
I sell things online, and I don't want to be liable for collecting taxes for 30 states and maybe hundreds of cities. I've heard that the big internet retailers are fine with these taxes, because it's a burden they can easily absorb while hurting smaller internet retailers.
The large plasma may get the best picture quality possible, the 50" is probably an incredibly fine unit too. One can get big picture on a lower budget with a projector. It's not for everyone, but a projector that's half the cost of that Kuro can throw a 150" image in full 1080p, with a picture quality that's good enough that I really don't care that I don't have a plasma.
I'd do away with the Monster products (speakers and "voltage stabilizers") in that list too. I just don't like seeing money spent on snake oil manufacturers.
The FDA can't be perfect, but they are generally they get it right most of the time except for the high profile cases.
They let the side effects of Vioxx slip because of testing that didn't go to the prescribed length, but Vioxx was a useful drug. The problem is that Merck advertised Vioxx in such a way that it was used "off label" much more widely than it should have been. It was effective in significantly reducing intense chronic pain for certain things, such that the people that could use it were willing to deal with the side-effect risk because life would have been disabling pain without it.
It's funny how despite the fact that the crowd at Slashdot is generally overwhelmingly pro-tech, the average reader is also very hostile to the idea of in-flight calls based on past stories on this.
Moreover, it's funny how despite the fact that the crowd at Slashdot is generally overwhelmingly anti-government regulation, when it comes to things they want the government to regulate, like banning in-flight cellular phone use, they're generally more than happy to acquiesce.
First, you must understand that every crowd generally has many ranges of different demographics, here, different people respond to different stories. I mean, the people that post in a story about the RIAA might openly talk about how they get their illegal copies of music, but those that post about a company violating the GLP license might have a different take on copyright laws and licenses. There may well also be people that have reconciled or justified both views as well.
One response to your observation is that most of the technologies "we" like don't involve devices that irritate everyone that's in the same, and sometimes, the next room, the devices that do make noise are usually used in private, not blaring or chirping in public. I wouldn't mind if they had wireless internet, but I'd hate to be in the same cabin as people running their phones in PTT mode, loudly chirping away and broadcasting the other end of the conversation for everyone to hear. I'm actually not sure how effective phones will be given how loud airplane cabins are, though not loud enough to drown out conversations you don't want to listen to, but loud enough to make listening through the earpiece a chore.
We ourselves, each and everyone one of us, outsource all of the time. Go ahead can say Dell is terrible because they outsourced a call center to India or the Philippines, but we outsource every time we use a stapler or a printer, or for that matter, even a computer
Poppycock. It's one thing to outsource things that aren't your core business, I mean, those not in the stapler business shouldn't be making staplers. But if you're in the stapler business and you outsource the manufacturing, assembly, and support of staplers, then exactly what IS your business? What opportunity does that get you? You've mostly switched the business from being a manufacturer to a distributor. Assuming the distribution hasn't been outsourced. Maybe Dell is becoming just a retailer. All this sounds like is getting rid of your business and painting yourself into a corner.
Shareholders are supposed to sell when they receive an advantageous offer.
The motivation to sell in this specific case is not the recession but a failed business model.
Is it really advantageous? A swap of Yahoo stock to Microsoft stock doesn't make much sense to me. Microsoft has been buying out a lot of businesses, and most of them don't seem to pay back their initial investment, they're lucky that their OS and Office business keeps them profitable despite throwing all this money around. Yahoo has made unwise company purchases too, but not nearly to the scale of MS. With buying Yahoo, MS is going to have to take on debt when they never have before, after they've frittered away much of their mountain of cash, making an investment into MS look not so good.
I really think that "failed business model" is a bit of a stretched claim, their net income is down a little bit, but Yahoo is still solidly in the black.
Isn't it the very point? By not saying what MTBF really means, it's another way to dupe even the smart people.
The way I understand MTBF to really be, one in ten drives failing might translate to an MTBF of 30 years, assuming the drive is replaced at the end of a 3 year service life, or 50 years assuming a 5 year service life.
For the most part, buying a more expensive drive doesn't necessarily mean it's more reliable. The Google paper on the subject said that they saw no significant difference between the regular desktop drives and the pricey Fiber Channel drives.
I think from the definition put forward, It may be that everyone is using open source to some extent. Even if you're using Windows, IIRC, there is some BSD code in there. A lot of home routers are based on some open source code. Having an account on a web service using LAMP components might count. I think Nokia is using a Linux-based OS, and Apple relies heavily on open source stuff.
It seems like most of the tasks so far undone involve improved integration, improved ease of use and wider use of things already being done.
I recommend that it be made into a product and named "Tempest".
You act as if planned and/or announced features/products have never been canceled or abandoned and Apple is the only one to ever do this. *COUGH!*M$VISTA*COUGH!**COUGH!*
Why should an Apple fan have to justify it by comparing it to Microsoft?
From what it sounds like, at WWDC 07, people had to ask Apple reps where Carbon 64 went, there were no dev sessions in 07, when there were Carbon 64 dev sessions in WWDC 06. It sounds like Apple went out of their way to hope that people forgot about it. Maybe we should ask Apple when Final Cut Studio will be all Cocoa.
I think he offered me Heineken Steam or Heineken Plasma, but both are too much for me.
Has the Hawking radiation been observed? I thought it was still a hypothesis.
Podcasts were overhyped (and overly panned to), but the concept is pretty good. It allows me to get niche "radio" shows, get away from the truly awful ads on radio, and not have to fiddle with a tuner, think about when a show is on the air and so on. Being able to pause it, reorder it, skip an episode and all that is nice too. I don't think it's going to beat Clear Channel, but it doesn't need to as long as I have my favorite shows. It's just an alternative distribution medium.
There are a lot of products which software or a jumper changes what the device is. The workstation graphics card is one such example, the drivers and software are optimized for other uses, but the silicon is often the same. But I don't really have a problem with that, both versions of the product do work as advertised, and generally, pretty reliably. Developing and certifying the workstation card software to work properly with certain software does cost money, and there's fewer users of those high end programs to spread around the development cost, and it's not of use to the typical consumer either.
I do have a problem with what Creative did though.
Effectively, what you're really paying for is maintaining the physical & electrical link, the hardware on both ends, though of course, the marketing, executive limo, and all that is in there too. The numbers I've seen in the papers in terms of data cost are pretty low, I recall seeing a number something like it's about $2.50 per household on average. So I really don't see how things will change a lot if people were charged a lower base fee plus the bandwidth you use. Another reason the pricing is unlikely to change is that there's minimal competition.
I've got a 1080p DLP rear projector with a 50" screen. Why can't I just take off the screen and project the picture onto an even larger wall from further away?
Maybe you can, but there may be issues as well. It might be designed only to focus within a few inches of the existing screen, because it wasn't expected that a person would try that, it's just easier to make. You would probably void your warranty. You probably can't set it to ceiling mount mode and hang it from the ceiling.
Seriously though, a projector isn't a substitute for a monitor, the same goes for the reverse too. It just depends on what you want to do with it.