It's a bit old, but the "Call of Duty 2" game had a "high quality" rendering mode that was leaps and bounds above normal quality. Graphically, that is. I'm not sure that it provided any benefit except to look pretty.
Doom 3 was not a DX9 game. It was an OpenGL game. I don't think the GeForce4 Ti supported the arb2 rendering path; most likely the game fell back to the "nv20" scheme.
When buying a computer, it's never very wise to pick a model that merely meets your expectations, or undercuts them. A computer that's only suitable "for surfing the web"and "word processing" may just happen to choke on web video.
Even if you aren't a hardcore gamer, there's always a chance that some company might release a compelling title-- that doesn't even run on your new barebones laptop,
Ok, so you run linux. Ever thought of tweaking the code? A faster laptop might reduce build times to the point where coding is pleasurable-- from hours to minutes.
But you've looked at this from a architecture cynic's point of view-- there's no way that programmers will learn parallel processing, rendering a 4 core machine (like the i7) useless. That too might pass.
It's a joke that dual core is useful for flash because one cpu can choke, and the other can make the system responsive enough to shut down the offending video. But a second or third core can be used by the OS to house clean, make backups, index files, scan for viruses, In addition, various languages and tools are emerging that make concurrent, multithreaded programming easier than before. SInce single threaded performance is not the sole focus of future CPU design anymore, programmers will have no choice but to program for multiple cores.
Today, not six months from now, but today, Google Chrome generates multiple processes, one for each window. Might it be faster on a Core i7? Next year, to surf the web in style, you just might "need" a Core i9 with 24 GB RAM.
Although faster is better and will be every Slashdotter's wet dream, but I'd rather have power-efficient laptops rather than a gazillion Ghz laptop.
That's you. You're at peace with the world, and feel compelled to announce it.
. I don't get why an average Joe needs a Core 2 Duo laptop for Word processing and surfing the web, which is what most people have and what most people do now. And now they're going to put i7 on the laptops.
Ah, Joe Average is a man of limited aspirations. Web and Word. Web and Word. All day long. Joe Average doesn't need to game, But then, Joe Average runs Linux. There are no games for Linux.
And now they're going to put i7 on the laptops. There will be some people who needs it, but not the majority of casual laptop users, who don't do video encoding or kernel compilation (which should be the work of a desktop IMHO).
Video encoding-- everybody wants to encode video. Why? Maybe that's why they keep the old word processor around, to draft letters to attorneys. Now kernel compilation-- that's real work there-- though someone who was hacking the kernel instead of recompiling the latest point release would probably appreciate a lightweight, portable machine for coding. Does emacs count as a "word processor"?
I have two atom powered laptops and I even sold my laptops because I was so in love with those machines, which wouldn't burn my lap and my balls whenever I have to sit them on my laps. Other than the pitiful 950 graphics, I have nothing to complain about.
Quite. Because any games that would put a dent in Core 2 Duo wouldn't run very well on a gma 950.
I know, I know. We're in the middle of a depression, and one's aspirations must be humble. But in buying a laptop, which can't be expanded very easily, it's often wise to plan for future needs.
{MB} No, not currently. The filesystem servers need to be changed to not map the whole store into memory, which is not too difficult. For large files, some interfaces need to be changed, which is a bit harder but still doable.
Sometimes the journalist may come to the wrong conclusion on the basis of limited information, despite diligent research. The public arguably has an interest in knowing if corporations evade income taxes, and the corporations arguably have an interest in making tax avoidance strategies as opaque as possible. A journalist may come to conclusions, well supported by the available evidence, that are nevertheless wrong
I think you would have to prove that the newspaper published information in reckless disregard for the truth--that it, in essence, made it up. If you're a public figure, you would also have to prove malicious intent.
Let's say that you were seen carrying a bloody knife in the vicinity of a corpse. A journalist might reasonably come to the conclusion that you were a murderer, unless they had evidence to the contrary.
(c) Remedies- (1) ORDER TO BAR ENFORCEMENT AND OTHER INJUNCTIVE RELIEF- In a cause of action described in subsection (a), if the court determines that the applicable writing, utterance, or other speech at issue in the underlying foreign lawsuit does not constitute defamation under United States law, the court shall order that any foreign judgment in the foreign lawsuit in question may not be enforced in the United States, including by any Federal, State, or local court, and may order such other injunctive relief that the court considers appropriate to protect the right to free speech under the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States. (2) DAMAGES- In addition to the remedy under paragraph (1) and if the conditions for release under that paragraph are satisfied, damages shall be awarded to the United States person bringing the action under subsection (a), based on the following: (A) The amount of any foreign judgment in the underlying foreign lawsuit. (B) The costs, including reasonable legal fees, attributable to the underlying foreign lawsuit that have been borne by the United States person. (C) The harm caused to the United States person due to decreased opportunities to publish, conduct research, or generate funding.
(d) Treble Damages- If, in an action brought under subsection (a), the court or, if applicable, the jury determines by a preponderance of the evidence that the person or entity bringing the foreign lawsuit which gave rise to the cause of action intentionally engaged in a scheme to suppress rights under the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States by discouraging publishers or other media from publishing, or discouraging employers, contractors, donors, sponsors, or similar financial supporters from employing, retaining, or supporting, the research, writing, or other speech of a journalist, academic, commentator, expert, or other individual, the court may award treble damages.
Maybe. This article says "ten thousand euros." Perhaps worth it to a professional. A student can learn on a less expensive instrument, but at some point, that student's talent might "outgrow" the violin.
There's competition from China, but many of those cheap violins are tarted up to "look like" a more expensive instrument. Unless they also "sound like" the real thing, it's pointless.
You and I might fish for fun, and might even spend large sums of money chartering a fishing yacht. Commercial fisherman though, expect to make a profit-- fuel outlays, boat rental/maintenance and so on must be less than the price paid by a fishmonger. That profit, in turn must be large enough to sustain a living, maybe even a good living.
If there are no fish, the fisherman can't pay his expenses, and can't earn a living. So he turns to piracy. The cost of informants, weapons, a better boat, and so on, must be offset by the ransoms received. It's a business,
Poorly guarded merchant ships will sail through somalian waters regardless of the state of somalian fisheries.
I think that the analogy has been stretched to the limit.
Violins are finely crafted instruments. They are hand tuned, and require some expertise to build well. If there was some sort of formula for precision crafting great violins, mass production would be simple.
But even then, there would be measurable differences between a $100 violin and a $10,000 violin. It's not as if there's some foundry cranking out violin chips, and the difference between models lies in whether the "case" is woodgrained plastic or genuine maple, spruce and willow.
You can look at a multi thousand dollar DVD player, say "digital's digital", and eschew it for a $30 version-- if you don't mind the occasional jams and vibrations that come from using a plastic case.
But apply that same reasoning to a turntable, and you'll end up with a device that simply can't play records very well. Every wobble, every slew of the motor, every imbalanced gear will ultimately find its way into the sound and distort it.
Speaker cables? Bah. I'd rather use speaker cables than coat hangers-- flexibility is useful. But most of the arguments used to sell boutique speaker cable are false analogies to phonographs, where vibrations tend to matter.
Finally, the general public doesn't buy expensive violins Violinists do. If a violinist believes that the expensive violin's tone is sweeter to her highly trained ears, if the expensive violin is somehow more responsive to how she wants it to sound, then she'll find the money and pay the higher price. And if fungi treated wood makes a good violin sound extraordinary to a violinists ears, I'm all for it.
Play the instrument louder? One of the supposed advantages of the Strad is is that it can be played loudly, which is rather important in a large concert hall. No amplification, remember?
Teaching a robot to play a violin would be an interesting exercise in AI. I'd imagine that there's a certain amount of feedback involved--"this technique sounds particularly good on this violin, I shall use more of it."
In the test, the British star violinist Matthew Trusler played five different instruments behind a curtain, so that the audience did not know which was being played. One of the violins Trusler played was his own strad, worth two million dollars. The other four were all made by Rhonheimer â" two with fungally-treated wood, the other two with untreated wood. A jury of experts, together with the conference participants, judged the tone quality of the violins. Of the more than 180 attendees, an overwhelming number â" 90 persons â" felt the tone of the fungally treated violin "Opus 58" to be the best. Truslerâ(TM)s stradivarius reached second place with 39 votes, but amazingly enough 113 members of the audience thought that "Opus 58" was actually the strad! "Opus 58" is made from wood which had been treated with fungus for the longest time, nine months.
Slashdot Mirror
The GMA X3100 actually has a hardware T&L unit. Not that this makes it a good card.
It's a bit old, but the "Call of Duty 2" game had a "high quality" rendering mode that was leaps and bounds above normal quality. Graphically, that is. I'm not sure that it provided any benefit except to look pretty.
Doom 3 was not a DX9 game. It was an OpenGL game. I don't think the GeForce4 Ti supported the arb2 rendering path; most likely the game fell back to the "nv20" scheme.
When buying a computer, it's never very wise to pick a model that merely meets your expectations, or undercuts them. A computer that's only suitable "for surfing the web"and "word processing" may just happen to choke on web video.
Even if you aren't a hardcore gamer, there's always a chance that some company might release a compelling title-- that doesn't even run on your new barebones laptop,
Ok, so you run linux. Ever thought of tweaking the code? A faster laptop might reduce build times to the point where coding is pleasurable-- from hours to minutes.
But you've looked at this from a architecture cynic's point of view-- there's no way that programmers will learn parallel processing, rendering a 4 core machine (like the i7) useless. That too might pass.
It's a joke that dual core is useful for flash because one cpu can choke, and the other can make the system responsive enough to shut down the offending video. But a second or third core can be used by the OS to house clean, make backups, index files, scan for viruses, In addition, various languages and tools are emerging that make concurrent, multithreaded programming easier than before. SInce single threaded performance is not the sole focus of future CPU design anymore, programmers will have no choice but to program for multiple cores.
Today, not six months from now, but today, Google Chrome generates multiple processes, one for each window. Might it be faster on a Core i7? Next year, to surf the web in style, you just might "need" a Core i9 with 24 GB RAM.
I hope that answers your questions.
Although faster is better and will be every Slashdotter's wet dream, but I'd rather have power-efficient laptops rather than a gazillion Ghz laptop.
That's you. You're at peace with the world, and feel compelled to announce it.
. I don't get why an average Joe needs a Core 2 Duo laptop for Word processing and surfing the web, which is what most people have and what most people do now. And now they're going to put i7 on the laptops.
Ah, Joe Average is a man of limited aspirations. Web and Word. Web and Word. All day long. Joe Average doesn't need to game, But then, Joe Average runs Linux. There are no games for Linux.
And now they're going to put i7 on the laptops. There will be some people who needs it, but not the majority of casual laptop users, who don't do video encoding or kernel compilation (which should be the work of a desktop IMHO).
Video encoding-- everybody wants to encode video. Why? Maybe that's why they keep the old word processor around, to draft letters to attorneys. Now kernel compilation-- that's real work there-- though someone who was hacking the kernel instead of recompiling the latest point release would probably appreciate a lightweight, portable machine for coding. Does emacs count as a "word processor"?
I have two atom powered laptops and I even sold my laptops because I was so in love with those machines, which wouldn't burn my lap and my balls whenever I have to sit them on my laps. Other than the pitiful 950 graphics, I have nothing to complain about.
Quite. Because any games that would put a dent in Core 2 Duo wouldn't run very well on a gma 950.
I know, I know. We're in the middle of a depression, and one's aspirations must be humble. But in buying a laptop, which can't be expanded very easily, it's often wise to plan for future needs.
My guess is that Microsoft will have to worry about whiney users complaining about "The new DRM Microsoft wants us to use." And it will break things.
I'm not much into angling.
Are you trolling for an "Insightful?"
Doubtful.
The twentieth week of 1984 was in mid May. The introduction was in January.
It does indeed. Did you know that the 128k Macintosh was the very first Macintosh model ever produced? The very first, I tell you!
Plugging the serial number into the Early Macintosh Serial decoder yields:
Your Macintosh 128 (M0001), with serial number F4200NUM0001, was the 776th manufactured during the 20th week of 1984 in Fremont, CA.
From that same FAQ:
Can I use partitions larger than 2GB?
{MB} No, not currently. The filesystem servers need to be changed to not map the whole store into memory, which is not too difficult. For large files, some interfaces need to be changed, which is a bit harder but still doable.
When was the last time you used a 2GB partition?
Still no 1.0 release
Sometimes the journalist may come to the wrong conclusion on the basis of limited information, despite diligent research. The public arguably has an interest in knowing if corporations evade income taxes, and the corporations arguably have an interest in making tax avoidance strategies as opaque as possible. A journalist may come to conclusions, well supported by the available evidence, that are nevertheless wrong
I think you would have to prove that the newspaper published information in reckless disregard for the truth--that it, in essence, made it up. If you're a public figure, you would also have to prove malicious intent.
Let's say that you were seen carrying a bloody knife in the vicinity of a corpse. A journalist might reasonably come to the conclusion that you were a murderer, unless they had evidence to the contrary.
Fuel Economy, naturally.
S. 449: Free Speech Protection Act of 2009 seems like an interesting response.
(c) Remedies-
(1) ORDER TO BAR ENFORCEMENT AND OTHER INJUNCTIVE RELIEF- In a cause of action described in subsection (a), if the court determines that the applicable writing, utterance, or other speech at issue in the underlying foreign lawsuit does not constitute defamation under United States law, the court shall order that any foreign judgment in the foreign lawsuit in question may not be enforced in the United States, including by any Federal, State, or local court, and may order such other injunctive relief that the court considers appropriate to protect the right to free speech under the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
(2) DAMAGES- In addition to the remedy under paragraph (1) and if the conditions for release under that paragraph are satisfied, damages shall be awarded to the United States person bringing the action under subsection (a), based on the following:
(A) The amount of any foreign judgment in the underlying foreign lawsuit.
(B) The costs, including reasonable legal fees, attributable to the underlying foreign lawsuit that have been borne by the United States person.
(C) The harm caused to the United States person due to decreased opportunities to publish, conduct research, or generate funding.
(d) Treble Damages- If, in an action brought under subsection (a), the court or, if applicable, the jury determines by a preponderance of the evidence that the person or entity bringing the foreign lawsuit which gave rise to the cause of action intentionally engaged in a scheme to suppress rights under the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States by discouraging publishers or other media from publishing, or discouraging employers, contractors, donors, sponsors, or similar financial supporters from employing, retaining, or supporting, the research, writing, or other speech of a journalist, academic, commentator, expert, or other individual, the court may award treble damages.
Compared to a virtuoso, its rendition was a trifle stilted and, well, robotic.
source
Maybe. This article says "ten thousand euros." Perhaps worth it to a professional. A student can learn on a less expensive instrument, but at some point, that student's talent might "outgrow" the violin.
There's competition from China, but many of those cheap violins are tarted up to "look like" a more expensive instrument. Unless they also "sound like" the real thing, it's pointless.
You and I might fish for fun, and might even spend large sums of money chartering a fishing yacht. Commercial fisherman though, expect to make a profit-- fuel outlays, boat rental/maintenance and so on must be less than the price paid by a fishmonger. That profit, in turn must be large enough to sustain a living, maybe even a good living.
If there are no fish, the fisherman can't pay his expenses, and can't earn a living. So he turns to piracy. The cost of informants, weapons, a better boat, and so on, must be offset by the ransoms received. It's a business,
Poorly guarded merchant ships will sail through somalian waters regardless of the state of somalian fisheries.
I think that the analogy has been stretched to the limit.
Violins are finely crafted instruments. They are hand tuned, and require some expertise to build well. If there was some sort of formula for precision crafting great violins, mass production would be simple.
But even then, there would be measurable differences between a $100 violin and a $10,000 violin. It's not as if there's some foundry cranking out violin chips, and the difference between models lies in whether the "case" is woodgrained plastic or genuine maple, spruce and willow.
You can look at a multi thousand dollar DVD player, say "digital's digital", and eschew it for a $30 version-- if you don't mind the occasional jams and vibrations that come from using a plastic case.
But apply that same reasoning to a turntable, and you'll end up with a device that simply can't play records very well. Every wobble, every slew of the motor, every imbalanced gear will ultimately find its way into the sound and distort it.
Speaker cables? Bah. I'd rather use speaker cables than coat hangers-- flexibility is useful. But most of the arguments used to sell boutique speaker cable are false analogies to phonographs, where vibrations tend to matter.
Finally, the general public doesn't buy expensive violins Violinists do. If a violinist believes that the expensive violin's tone is sweeter to her highly trained ears, if the expensive violin is somehow more responsive to how she wants it to sound, then she'll find the money and pay the higher price. And if fungi treated wood makes a good violin sound extraordinary to a violinists ears, I'm all for it.
Play the instrument louder? One of the supposed advantages of the Strad is is that it can be played loudly, which is rather important in a large concert hall. No amplification, remember?
Teaching a robot to play a violin would be an interesting exercise in AI. I'd imagine that there's a certain amount of feedback involved--"this technique sounds particularly good on this violin, I shall use more of it."
The $500 violin would fail. Miserably.
source
Did you even read the article?
In the test, the British star violinist Matthew Trusler played five different instruments behind a curtain, so that the audience did not know which was being played. One of the violins Trusler played was his own strad, worth two million dollars. The other four were all made by Rhonheimer â" two with fungally-treated wood, the other two with untreated wood. A jury of experts, together with the conference participants, judged the tone quality of the violins. Of the more than 180 attendees, an overwhelming number â" 90 persons â" felt the tone of the fungally treated violin "Opus 58" to be the best. Truslerâ(TM)s stradivarius reached second place with 39 votes, but amazingly enough 113 members of the audience thought that "Opus 58" was actually the strad! "Opus 58" is made from wood which had been treated with fungus for the longest time, nine months.
That's your blind test, right there.
Why the Mafia Loves Garbage.
Somalians turned to piracy because they were pissed about dumping and poaching.