This is like MS claiming to have invented a new technology when they came out with their "optical mouse".
Well, they did. All previous optical mice required grids. Microsoft's mouse uses a camera and software capable of comparing images very quickly to determine speed and direction. A far cry from grid-based optical mice.
I have no respect for Larry or anyone else who can't realize what's good for the earth.
Puhleeze... "what's good for the earth"? You don't care about the earth, you care about you. Does the earth need electricity? Are we in danger of the planet slowing down or something?
No, you want Larry Ellison to use less power because you are worried that eventually this will effect YOU in some way.
I want Larry Ellison to use as much electricity as possible. And Bill Gates, too. I hope they leave all one million lights on in their houses when they go to work in the morning. Why? Because stress on any system is GOOD. It promotes CHANGE. If you want more efficient electricity, then BREAK the current system.
No, instead let's all huddle around a sterno for Christmas, huh?
The earth will be here a loooooooooooong time after we're gone... don't be so self-righteous.
In many ways, I don't think the greatest tragedy of our times is that we've become too materialistic, or the inequity between the rich and the poor. I think it the characteristic tragedy of our era is that people like this are held up as heroes.
I'm sorry... remind me again of the last time Larry Ellison was held up as anything other than the 2nd richest man in the world. A hero? Since when has he been called that?
Try not to contradict yourself in the same post. You first called the guy a libertarian, and then you complain about all the government spending to fund the building of useless nuclear subs.
Because the makers of Opera are not Netscape/Microsoft when it comes to cash? Because Netscape could make money off their other software, as could Microsoft? Because they are not a non-profit organization? Take your pick.
Opera's move is equivalent to treason in the browser world.
The sad part is that the only reason you feel that way is because Microsoft successfully made it seem legitimate for a company to give away a product that costs many man-hours to produce, and the only reason they could do that was because of their monopoly power and huge profit margins on everything else.
That's like charging $20 for a cup of water at a marathon when the tables are providing them for free.
No it's like charging $2 for a bottle of water when you can drink it out of a fountain. Oh wait! There are already successful companies doing just that! How do they succeed? Because they offer something people are willing to pay for: clean water, water that tastes better than tap-water, water that comes in a convenient sized bottle.
Is it starting to sink in yet?
After seeing this story, I hope that Opera makes it onto [fuckedcompany.com].
Yeah! The less competition, the better!
Software designers are so infatuated with the fact that they can, that they don't stop to think if they should.
The free software/hardware, as long as you take the adds model has failed.
No, it's only failed where the company gives you no other option but their free-with-ads product.
Companies like Opera, Eudora, Globalcomm (CuteFTP), etc. are basically providing unrestricted shareware. The catch is that unlike regular shareware with "nag" features, this shareware actually makes a little money for them. It also means people will be less likely to try and hack their software to run past the trial date, since there is no more date restricted use.
They will probably make more money doing this than staying with their old business model. Comparing it to ZapMe and that type of business is just wrong man, it's JUST WRONG!!
Although it's rather annoying and a hit to privacy: you're still getting the software for free.
No, handing your credit card to the waiter you don't even know is a hit to privacy. Your privacy is not really invaded unless someone learns something PERSONAL about you. Whether or not you like business/science/technology related advertisements is hardly a privacy problem.
you get dot with some bizzare, grainy-looking pattern in it, due to the interference pattern caused by the reflected light's interaction with itself (the light is not reflected evenly, since any household surface will have small irregularities in it
Then wouldn't it stand to reason that the way they got around this interference problem is to not use a household surface? I.e. obviously they
are going to want to use a surface that reflects the light evenly...
Re:Programmers Make Computers Slower Year by Year
on
Netscape 6 Vs. 4.7x
·
· Score: 2
And finally a lot of people just don't know how to architect or code. I think we could all benefit from learning and writing some assembly, so we could really understand what our software is doing.
Maybe then we could strip out some of the thick layers of software bureaucracy that lies between the user and his cpu.
Great idea! The programs would be faster, but they'd take four times as long to ship, "just like in the good old days."
Knowing that, do you really think that once a theater buys a digital projector, that they will ever, ever upgrade? No! Whatever gets installed today will be it for generations to come. The resolution will never increase. That's what has me worried.
Puhleeze! Do you honestly think these projectors will remain $250,000 units forever? They are expensive now because they're basically brand new. DVD players used to be $1000+. Now you can get a decent one for under $200. It's the same for every new product.
A movie made nearly 40 years ago looks better than anything being made today.
I think you're living in some other world! I have never seen an old movie that matches the quality of, say, Contact or any other movie in the past 5 years. Sure, some old black and white movies look incredibly sharp, but it's not just film stock and resolution that matter to me, it's (more importantly) the vivid, accurate colors and sharpness that is present in most recent movies.
Encryption should be regulated by the government. The smoking gun that caught Microsoft was the e-mails that they sent. Imagine if they had been all encrypted. Microsoft would be even more powerful right now.
It's just like saying you believe in free speech, but tell those goddamn KKK people to shut up!
I'll bet the movie you used to make your comparison was "Toy Story 2", wasn't it?
I've seen both Toy Story 2 and Tarzan. I did not think the film projection looked any worse than other films I have seen, and I am pretty particular about the audio and video in a movie theatre. I'm the first one to leave the room and complain about the audio, the video being out of focus, the lens not being screwed on tightly (causing a strange glare effect on-screen), etc.
The digital projections were bright, clear, and flawless. I will leave my final opinion until I see Star Wars 2 projected in both methods on huge screens (i.e. live action, filmed digitally). But I see no reason to complain thus far.
I also realize that the movie is in the theatre for a few months, but it's in my DVD collection forever. I'd be very surprised if SW2 doesn't look phenomonally better than the best DVD's that are out now. Again, I will wait and see, but have no reason to complain thus far.
If you can hear the noise from the projector in your theater, then it's not properly insulated. Well-designed theaters do not have that problem.
Well unfortunately the most well-designed theatre we have in Orlando is probably the AMC at Disney, and I don't feel like driving 45 minutes anymore to get to it. The new Regal theatre is 10 minutes away, and is the one I speak of regarding the noisy projector.
It sounds like you have never seen properly done film projection. That's too bad, because it's quite an experience.
It must be wonderful to have such a theatre near you, but I bet most of the US does NOT have such a theatre, and digital projection will be a huge step up for all of those people. Like the other guy said, digital projection leaves less room for error in regards to the audio and picture focus... and I'm all for that.
Maybe someday there will be a digital system that matches film bit-for-bit, pixel-for-pixel, but not at the moment.
That's like saying they shouldn't have started filming in technicolor when it first came out, because if they just wait a decade, the color will be so much better.
The fact is: films are constantly being filmed in higher and higher qualities. The picture qualities get better all the time. Now we're going to make the leap to digital format, for dozens of reasons named already and more. As digital film projectors get more popular, they will become cheaper. As they become cheaper, they will become more advanced. As they become more advanced, they will reach the pixel quality that matches film density.
I'd want to work with the film image, because there's more to work with and a few dust imperfections can be fixed--if they're even noticeable.
Sorry, I'd want to work with the digital as long as it looked better, lasted longer, and offered the other perks of digital works. That's why I use a good digital camera instead of an awesome film camera.
Slashdot Mirror
This is like MS claiming to have invented a new technology when they came out with their "optical mouse".
Well, they did. All previous optical mice required grids. Microsoft's mouse uses a camera and software capable of comparing images very quickly to determine speed and direction. A far cry from grid-based optical mice.
I have no respect for Larry or anyone else who can't realize what's good for the earth.
Puhleeze... "what's good for the earth"? You don't care about the earth, you care about you. Does the earth need electricity? Are we in danger of the planet slowing down or something?
No, you want Larry Ellison to use less power because you are worried that eventually this will effect YOU in some way.
I want Larry Ellison to use as much electricity as possible. And Bill Gates, too. I hope they leave all one million lights on in their houses when they go to work in the morning. Why? Because stress on any system is GOOD. It promotes CHANGE. If you want more efficient electricity, then BREAK the current system.
No, instead let's all huddle around a sterno for Christmas, huh?
The earth will be here a loooooooooooong time after we're gone... don't be so self-righteous.
-thomas
In many ways, I don't think the greatest tragedy of our times is that we've become too materialistic, or the inequity between the rich and the poor. I think it the characteristic tragedy of our era is that people like this are held up as heroes.
I'm sorry... remind me again of the last time Larry Ellison was held up as anything other than the 2nd richest man in the world. A hero? Since when has he been called that?
Try not to contradict yourself in the same post. You first called the guy a libertarian, and then you complain about all the government spending to fund the building of useless nuclear subs.
So why the hell is Opera $50?
Because the makers of Opera are not Netscape/Microsoft when it comes to cash? Because Netscape could make money off their other software, as could Microsoft? Because they are not a non-profit organization? Take your pick.
Opera's move is equivalent to treason in the browser world.
The sad part is that the only reason you feel that way is because Microsoft successfully made it seem legitimate for a company to give away a product that costs many man-hours to produce, and the only reason they could do that was because of their monopoly power and huge profit margins on everything else.
That's like charging $20 for a cup of water at a marathon when the tables are providing them for free.
No it's like charging $2 for a bottle of water when you can drink it out of a fountain. Oh wait! There are already successful companies doing just that! How do they succeed? Because they offer something people are willing to pay for: clean water, water that tastes better than tap-water, water that comes in a convenient sized bottle.
Is it starting to sink in yet?
After seeing this story, I hope that Opera makes it onto [fuckedcompany.com].
Yeah! The less competition, the better!
Software designers are so infatuated with the fact that they can, that they don't stop to think if they should.
What are you, the Jeff Goldblum of Jurassic Dork?
The free software/hardware, as long as you take the adds model has failed.
No, it's only failed where the company gives you no other option but their free-with-ads product.
Companies like Opera, Eudora, Globalcomm (CuteFTP), etc. are basically providing unrestricted shareware. The catch is that unlike regular shareware with "nag" features, this shareware actually makes a little money for them. It also means people will be less likely to try and hack their software to run past the trial date, since there is no more date restricted use.
They will probably make more money doing this than staying with their old business model. Comparing it to ZapMe and that type of business is just wrong man, it's JUST WRONG!!
-thoams
Although it's rather annoying and a hit to privacy: you're still getting the software for free.
/.)
No, handing your credit card to the waiter you don't even know is a hit to privacy. Your privacy is not really invaded unless someone learns something PERSONAL about you. Whether or not you like business/science/technology related advertisements is hardly a privacy problem.
(Really sick of the privacy nuts on
-thomas
Eudora Pro is an excellent example of this. It's far superior to Outlook or any other mail client out there.
Holy shit! And I've been using an inferior product all this time, damnit to hell!
you get dot with some bizzare, grainy-looking pattern in it, due to the interference pattern caused by the reflected light's interaction with itself (the light is not reflected evenly, since any household surface will have small irregularities in it
Then wouldn't it stand to reason that the way they got around this interference problem is to not use a household surface? I.e. obviously they
are going to want to use a surface that reflects the light evenly...
Someone dig up Holst, please.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
Ok, do we have any backup on the claim that the interval is random? This could just mean you have to put the cd's back in every month.
Wonderful, that would be much better.
"Bob! You're going to be late for work!"
"Sorry, Marge, it's the 1st of the month, and I've got to insert all 500 of my CD's, one-by-one, so that I can benefit from the usability of MP3!"
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
No way of knowing what would happen, of course. Apple Computer is the single most unpredictable force on earth.
No. You're confusing Apple with a tornado.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"And if it's true, that plastic is not degradable, well! the planet will simply incorporate plastic into a new paradigm: the Earth plus plastic."
-- George Carlin
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"And if it's true, that plastic is not degradable, well! the planet will simply incorporate plastic into a new paradigm: the Earth plus plastic."
-- George Carlin
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"I am definitely downloading this baby, and I'll use it, too, if Explorer crashes or something."
Gee, such biting sarcasm. We know MSIE never crashes!
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
And finally a lot of people just don't know how to architect or code. I think we could all benefit from learning and writing some assembly, so we could really understand what our software is doing.
Maybe then we could strip out some of the thick layers of software bureaucracy that lies between the user and his cpu.
Great idea! The programs would be faster, but they'd take four times as long to ship, "just like in the good old days."
I like it!
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
Why don't you go do something valuable for your fellow humans?
Why should YOU be the arbiter of what is valuable to other humans?
<Insert Microsoft Joke Here>
-thomas
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
Knowing that, do you really think that once a theater buys a digital projector, that they will ever, ever upgrade? No! Whatever gets installed today will be it for generations to come. The resolution will never increase. That's what has me worried.
Puhleeze! Do you honestly think these projectors will remain $250,000 units forever? They are expensive now because they're basically brand new. DVD players used to be $1000+. Now you can get a decent one for under $200. It's the same for every new product.
A movie made nearly 40 years ago looks better than anything being made today.
I think you're living in some other world! I have never seen an old movie that matches the quality of, say, Contact or any other movie in the past 5 years. Sure, some old black and white movies look incredibly sharp, but it's not just film stock and resolution that matter to me, it's (more importantly) the vivid, accurate colors and sharpness that is present in most recent movies.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
Freedom of speech is NOT unlimited. Speech that is harmful to others is not protected (Yelling fire in a crowded theatre, yadda yadda).
Are you trying to say that Microsoft's emails talking about their tactics is harmful, and therefore not protected speech?!
Some of the most harmful speech we have right now are the lies that Microsoft has told consumers.
Uhhh, please. It's not harmful in the same way as someone yelling fire in a crowded theatre. (Possibly the stupidest example of unprotected speech.)
How do you think they became a monopoly?
I can assure you, not by merely TALKING about it via email!
The government has a responsibility to protect regular citizens from the lies of corporatism.
Where is that in the Constitution?
You voted for Nader, didn't you?
-thomas
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
Encryption should be regulated by the government. The smoking gun that caught Microsoft was the e-mails that they sent. Imagine if they had been all encrypted. Microsoft would be even more powerful right now.
It's just like saying you believe in free speech, but tell those goddamn KKK people to shut up!
Freedom goes both ways. Love it or leave it.
-thomas
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
It is sent via SSL to securedelivery.com.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
I'll bet the movie you used to make your comparison was "Toy Story 2", wasn't it?
... and I'm all for that.
I've seen both Toy Story 2 and Tarzan. I did not think the film projection looked any worse than other films I have seen, and I am pretty particular about the audio and video in a movie theatre. I'm the first one to leave the room and complain about the audio, the video being out of focus, the lens not being screwed on tightly (causing a strange glare effect on-screen), etc.
The digital projections were bright, clear, and flawless. I will leave my final opinion until I see Star Wars 2 projected in both methods on huge screens (i.e. live action, filmed digitally). But I see no reason to complain thus far.
I also realize that the movie is in the theatre for a few months, but it's in my DVD collection forever. I'd be very surprised if SW2 doesn't look phenomonally better than the best DVD's that are out now. Again, I will wait and see, but have no reason to complain thus far.
If you can hear the noise from the projector in your theater, then it's not properly insulated. Well-designed theaters do not have that problem.
Well unfortunately the most well-designed theatre we have in Orlando is probably the AMC at Disney, and I don't feel like driving 45 minutes anymore to get to it. The new Regal theatre is 10 minutes away, and is the one I speak of regarding the noisy projector.
It sounds like you have never seen properly done film projection. That's too bad, because it's quite an experience.
It must be wonderful to have such a theatre near you, but I bet most of the US does NOT have such a theatre, and digital projection will be a huge step up for all of those people. Like the other guy said, digital projection leaves less room for error in regards to the audio and picture focus
Maybe someday there will be a digital system that matches film bit-for-bit, pixel-for-pixel, but not at the moment.
That's like saying they shouldn't have started filming in technicolor when it first came out, because if they just wait a decade, the color will be so much better.
The fact is: films are constantly being filmed in higher and higher qualities. The picture qualities get better all the time. Now we're going to make the leap to digital format, for dozens of reasons named already and more. As digital film projectors get more popular, they will become cheaper. As they become cheaper, they will become more advanced. As they become more advanced, they will reach the pixel quality that matches film density.
This is how technology advances. Bring it on!
-thomas
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
At night, when we're seeing mainly with our rods
That's strange. At night I think mainly with my rod. Or at least that's what my girlfriend says.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
BTW, Gore's lawyer, Boyd, is the lead government lawyer in the Microsoft case, don't know if anyone's mentioned that yet.
Probably not, since his name is Boies.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
I'd want to work with the film image, because there's more to work with and a few dust imperfections can be fixed--if they're even noticeable.
Sorry, I'd want to work with the digital as long as it looked better, lasted longer, and offered the other perks of digital works. That's why I use a good digital camera instead of an awesome film camera.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."