Hypocrisy is overrated. Given that the goal of of democracy is to create a government subordinate to and responsible to the people, government secrecy is anti-democratic-- it the people don't know what their government is up to, they can't encourage, correct, or modify the behavior of their government.
The Incredibles looked pretty good when NBC showed it in 1080i--though on an interlaced set, it probably would suffer. And a good, clean 35mm print of a Disney animated film really does convey a certain elegance that's utterly absent from a 480i source.
On the other hand, I don't have a Wii-- and so my experience is filtered through salesmen who really don't know what they're doing. Ever seen a PS3 hooked up through composite?
When you use S-Video instead of Component Video, you are discarding some of the color information stored on the DVD. S-Video connections separate the Luminance and Chrominance signals, but on a DVD, the Chrominance signal is subdivided into Pr and PB signals. That's why component video became popular with the advent of DVD.
And, if on occasions, you see combing and other deinterlaceing related artifacts, you may want to deinterlace in the player and send 480p over component video-- S-Video only allows for 480i and 576i signals.
This is entirely separate from upscaling, which generally requires an HDMI or DVI-D connection. OK there are some DVD players out there with upscaling VGA outputs, but the video quality still leaves something to be desired
Um, those are experimental tests for stuff like, "does the Jizz whale have the same nucleotide sequence in location X as a goat". Remind me what that has to do with evolution? That's biochemistry.
You like your little compartments don't you? All nice and neat with no overlap: Animals in one box, plants in another, and humans in yet a third. I think that's why biochemistry appeals to people like Behe-- all the proteins can be though of little gears, sprockets and girders that can be used by some intelligent designer to assemble an organism-- with no extra parts, no half assed solutions, no Rube Goldberg devices. I have some advice for you: read a biochemistry journal or textbook sometime-- they aren't evolution free zones.
And if you want to actually work on sequence analysis, an understanding of the statistical ramifications of evolution is invaluable.
EE appears to be part of a strategy to change that. In June, Louisiana became the first state to enact a law specifically enabling the use of supplemental materials for the critical evaluation of evolution; similar legislation has been introduced in several other states. EE appears to have been intelligently designed to be the sort of supplemental text that's appropriate under the Louisiana legislation, and so it's likely to be making an appearance in classrooms there. But EE may appear in other states, as the approval process for supplementary material is often far less strict than that governing textbooks.
There's nothing wrong with using a couple of texts per class, provided that costs don't spiral out of control.In literature classes, for instance, the use of supplementary texts allows the class to read unabridged novels and epic poems.
I don't know if you were being figurative, but rabbit ears are VHF antennas. Many of the HDTV signals are UHF, which require a different type of antenna. The UHF equivalent is the loop, but I would not recommend it. A double bow tie from "antennas direct" is what I use.
Although digital over the air transmission is my primary means of receiving television, I don't know if I'm "ready for the transition". My preamp and antenna are optimized for UHF, and several of the stations have indicated that they will switch back to their old VFH frequencies.
What I meant to say is that "5.1" describes an awful lot of systems (home theater in a box, bose, etc) that are poorly designed, with small tinny speakers and (of course) a fairly wimpy subwoofer.
Many of the cheaper players don't have multichannel outputs, so a receiver that can decode audio over HDMI is quite useful Speakers should sound pretty decent even without a subwoofer. And the subwoofer(s) should be able to cleanly reproduce music around the 20 Hz range.
Whether you go with 7 speakers or 5 speakers depends largely on your budget and on the size of your living room.
Read the projector's manual. There may be a cheapish way to get component in there, possibly with a dongle. Some vendors are selling HDMI to VGA conversion devices-- but since HDCP incorporates a blacklist, they may prove to be less useful in the future.
Regular folks tend to prefer 43" screens after they get a 55" and it is *too big* for ordinary workin type's living rooms (who needs a 60" screen when you are 12' from the screen). It's this huge black eye when it is turned off. Blu ray on 43" screen is not that much better than DVD. Esp. with upconverting player.
One of the reasons that actual movies, shown in an actual theater are so involving is that the screen basically fills your field of view. If you want to mimic that effect, you'll need a 110 inch screen (a projector, basically). But DVDs shown on such a large screen will look, at worst blocky and jagged, and at best, slightly ill defined and possibly somewhat blurry.
Which is where bluray (and hdtv) comes in-- they offer the pixels to look relatively sharp and in focus, even on a home movie screen. Given a codec that doesn't obscure the details, it can look pretty spectacular.
However, if you don't want a TV to look as large as a movie screen, or can't afford one that big, or don't want to "sit closer to the screen" dammit, the benefits of bluray seem slightly nebulous at best and certainly not worth a $10--$15 premium.
Bluray is a luxury good pitched at people who can't afford it
It sees your SPDIF connection to your stereo and pitches a fit.
Really? Are you speaking from personal experience, or are you just extrapolating from SACD (which couldn't use it) or DVD-Audio (which turned it off in some players)
If you want to cut off the air that Linux breathes, as Microsoft certainly does, one of the choke points where you try to get your Windows tentacles wrapped around is supercomputing, or what people for some reason now call high performance computing. But to take on Linux in HPC requires a slightly different tack than what worked for Windows in the data center, and it requires something a little more subtle than the cheap software and portability across architectures that made Linux the darling of academic, government, and corporate supercomputing centers in a mere decade, supplanting Unix.
Microsoft's strategy - one that no supercomputer maker and no X64 chip maker can ignore - is to attack from the bottom, to find those myriad new HPC users who never learned Unix, never learned Linux, and have no desire to. This strategy is what moved Windows from the desktop to the data center in the 1990s, and it worked so brilliantly that Windows machines account for more than two-thirds of server revenues each quarter and the lion's share of shipments. People use the software they are comfortable with, and Linux was an easy transition for Unix shops, just as moving from a Windows desktop to Windows servers is relatively simple.
So Cray is trying to democratize the supercomputer-- just as DEC democratized the mainframe.
There is no copyright infringement that I can see or any from infringement of intellectual property rights in what is giving out by PubMed Central. They only show you a short abstract of your full article what is published and they link you to the full article to publisher.
I'm having difficulty parsing your words. The articles in Pubmed Central are free.
All the articles in PMC are free (sometimes on a delayed basis). Some journals go beyond free, to Open Access.
PubMed Central is a small subset of PubMed, which also indexes non-free articles. For most of those, free access is limited to the abstract or, occasionally, the first 100 words or so.
Obviously this can be fixed but it doesn't work just yet.
I think people who buy large servers with more than 64 cores expect that they'll see a significant performance increase over a mere 64 core device. At this point, Microsoft may have a buggy product, it may have a working product that provides only a marginal increase in performance, or it may have a product that scales well, and is ready for release.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah yes, India. Home of the Brain Electrical Oscillations Signature scam.
How one dimensional of you.
Hypocrisy is overrated. Given that the goal of of democracy is to create a government subordinate to and responsible to the people, government secrecy is anti-democratic-- it the people don't know what their government is up to, they can't encourage, correct, or modify the behavior of their government.
assclown? English has tens of thousands of potential insults-- and you come up with "assclown"?
Don't really mind a tight fit..
At the moment, Opus is in the animal shelter, so my guess is that he'll be euthanized.
(what is a 'muck'?)
Among other things, muck is horse manure. To muck a stall is to remove all the droppings and change the bedding.
The Incredibles looked pretty good when NBC showed it in 1080i--though on an interlaced set, it probably would suffer. And a good, clean 35mm print of a Disney animated film really does convey a certain elegance that's utterly absent from a 480i source.
On the other hand, I don't have a Wii-- and so my experience is filtered through salesmen who really don't know what they're doing. Ever seen a PS3 hooked up through composite?
When you use S-Video instead of Component Video, you are discarding some of the color information stored on the DVD. S-Video connections separate the Luminance and Chrominance signals, but on a DVD, the Chrominance signal is subdivided into Pr and PB signals. That's why component video became popular with the advent of DVD.
And, if on occasions, you see combing and other deinterlaceing related artifacts, you may want to deinterlace in the player and send 480p over component video-- S-Video only allows for 480i and 576i signals.
This is entirely separate from upscaling, which generally requires an HDMI or DVI-D connection. OK there are some DVD players out there with upscaling VGA outputs, but the video quality still leaves something to be desired
Um, those are experimental tests for stuff like, "does the Jizz whale have the same nucleotide sequence in location X as a goat". Remind me what that has to do with evolution? That's biochemistry.
You like your little compartments don't you? All nice and neat with no overlap: Animals in one box, plants in another, and humans in yet a third. I think that's why biochemistry appeals to people like Behe-- all the proteins can be though of little gears, sprockets and girders that can be used by some intelligent designer to assemble an organism-- with no extra parts, no half assed solutions, no Rube Goldberg devices. I have some advice for you: read a biochemistry journal or textbook sometime-- they aren't evolution free zones.
And if you want to actually work on sequence analysis, an understanding of the statistical ramifications of evolution is invaluable.
From the article:
EE appears to be part of a strategy to change that. In June, Louisiana became the first state to enact a law specifically enabling the use of supplemental materials for the critical evaluation of evolution; similar legislation has been introduced in several other states. EE appears to have been intelligently designed to be the sort of supplemental text that's appropriate under the Louisiana legislation, and so it's likely to be making an appearance in classrooms there. But EE may appear in other states, as the approval process for supplementary material is often far less strict than that governing textbooks.
There's nothing wrong with using a couple of texts per class, provided that costs don't spiral out of control.In literature classes, for instance, the use of supplementary texts allows the class to read unabridged novels and epic poems.
I don't know if you were being figurative, but rabbit ears are VHF antennas. Many of the HDTV signals are UHF, which require a different type of antenna. The UHF equivalent is the loop, but I would not recommend it. A double bow tie from "antennas direct" is what I use.
Although digital over the air transmission is my primary means of receiving television, I don't know if I'm "ready for the transition". My preamp and antenna are optimized for UHF, and several of the stations have indicated that they will switch back to their old VFH frequencies.
What I meant to say is that "5.1" describes an awful lot of systems (home theater in a box, bose, etc) that are poorly designed, with small tinny speakers and (of course) a fairly wimpy subwoofer.
Many of the cheaper players don't have multichannel outputs, so a receiver that can decode audio over HDMI is quite useful Speakers should sound pretty decent even without a subwoofer. And the subwoofer(s) should be able to cleanly reproduce music around the 20 Hz range.
Whether you go with 7 speakers or 5 speakers depends largely on your budget and on the size of your living room.
Read the projector's manual. There may be a cheapish way to get component in there, possibly with a dongle. Some vendors are selling HDMI to VGA conversion devices-- but since HDCP incorporates a blacklist, they may prove to be less useful in the future.
not if comcast has anything to say about it.
5.1 surround system
Forget "5.1 surround system". It needs to be good enough to resolve the differences between an mp3 and a CD.
Regular folks tend to prefer 43" screens after they get a 55" and it is *too big* for ordinary workin type's living rooms (who needs a 60" screen when you are 12' from the screen). It's this huge black eye when it is turned off. Blu ray on 43" screen is not that much better than DVD. Esp. with upconverting player.
One of the reasons that actual movies, shown in an actual theater are so involving is that the screen basically fills your field of view. If you want to mimic that effect, you'll need a 110 inch screen (a projector, basically). But DVDs shown on such a large screen will look, at worst blocky and jagged, and at best, slightly ill defined and possibly somewhat blurry.
Which is where bluray (and hdtv) comes in-- they offer the pixels to look relatively sharp and in focus, even on a home movie screen. Given a codec that doesn't obscure the details, it can look pretty spectacular.
However, if you don't want a TV to look as large as a movie screen, or can't afford one that big, or don't want to "sit closer to the screen" dammit, the benefits of bluray seem slightly nebulous at best and certainly not worth a $10--$15 premium.
Bluray is a luxury good pitched at people who can't afford it
It sees your SPDIF connection to your stereo and pitches a fit.
Really? Are you speaking from personal experience, or are you just extrapolating from SACD (which couldn't use it) or DVD-Audio (which turned it off in some players)
500MB per day? That's disgusting. I recently reinstalled MacOSX 10.5--the patches totaled 700 MB.
The Register says
If you want to cut off the air that Linux breathes, as Microsoft certainly does, one of the choke points where you try to get your Windows tentacles wrapped around is supercomputing, or what people for some reason now call high performance computing. But to take on Linux in HPC requires a slightly different tack than what worked for Windows in the data center, and it requires something a little more subtle than the cheap software and portability across architectures that made Linux the darling of academic, government, and corporate supercomputing centers in a mere decade, supplanting Unix.
Microsoft's strategy - one that no supercomputer maker and no X64 chip maker can ignore - is to attack from the bottom, to find those myriad new HPC users who never learned Unix, never learned Linux, and have no desire to. This strategy is what moved Windows from the desktop to the data center in the 1990s, and it worked so brilliantly that Windows machines account for more than two-thirds of server revenues each quarter and the lion's share of shipments. People use the software they are comfortable with, and Linux was an easy transition for Unix shops, just as moving from a Windows desktop to Windows servers is relatively simple.
So Cray is trying to democratize the supercomputer-- just as DEC democratized the mainframe.
There is no copyright infringement that I can see or any from infringement of intellectual property rights in what is giving out by PubMed Central. They only show you a short abstract of your full article what is published and they link you to the full article to publisher.
I'm having difficulty parsing your words. The articles in Pubmed Central are free.
All the articles in PMC are free (sometimes on a delayed basis). Some journals go beyond free, to Open Access.
PubMed Central is a small subset of PubMed, which also indexes non-free articles. For most of those, free access is limited to the abstract or, occasionally, the first 100 words or so.
It's marketing jargon, pure and simple.
The question shouldn't be
"Does Microsoft have a product on the shelves that it capable of addressing more than 64 cores?"
but rather
"How much reengineering will Microsoft have to do to release a bugfree product capable of efficiently using more than 64 cores?"
Marketers dream. Engineers do all the work.
By the way, it's "Radio detection and Ranging". The acronym captures the tactical applications of RADAR quite well, don't you think?
you tell me
Hay Days?
Mores Law?
Please update your speech recognition software.
Obviously this can be fixed but it doesn't work just yet.
I think people who buy large servers with more than 64 cores expect that they'll see a significant performance increase over a mere 64 core device. At this point, Microsoft may have a buggy product, it may have a working product that provides only a marginal increase in performance, or it may have a product that scales well, and is ready for release.