Umm, no. They tune in to see these high quality ads for the first time. After a couple viewings of even teh funniest commercial, if given the option, people are going to want to skip it.
It would seem to me that if Big Media has a problem with Commercial Advance, they'd have a problem with ALL DVRs
And they do. Why do you think you hardly ever see ads (especially on TV) for PVRs? Any device that makes it easy to record shows and has so much as a fast forward function is dangerous to advertisers. And if advertisers don't like it, then the networks don't like. Pretty simple.
You're exactly the kind of unsympathetic, joyless dork he's talking about. I've been a big Spider-Man fan since I was a kid, but to tell you the truth, the rational side of me always told me that it's absurd that some high schooler came up with an invention that essentially no human has been able to come up with. It's been crippling the character all these years. The movie actually made it more believable.
Absolutely. What you need is a transcoder. They usually run around $100.
I have a PC in my component rack doing VGA out -> transcoder -> component video -> my 16x9 TV. Using PowerStrip, I'm running a resolution of 960x540 (in 540p mode). It's the perfect environment for watching DivX movies. Many high quality DivX rips look near-DVD quality on it. S-video doesn't even come close.
It's a lot more than that. EJBs don't have anything to do with connection pooling. What they do pool is themselves. They are inherently single-threaded, so you get a pool of them, which the container controls. More work needs to get done, more EJBs are dynamically instantiated. You do get automatic transactionality, that's a nice benefit, but as others have said, it's not a really difficult thing (though the rules relating to locking and concurrency options are handled nicely in deployment descriptors instead of code).
You also get built-in support for security (again, thru deployment descriptors). And of course, Entity EJBs give you a persistent data structure, essentially a table row, in which you provide no database-specific code.
Whoever said clustering is easy simply isn't paying attention. The routing part is the easy part, but what about stateful information, like a user's http session? That needs to be replicated so that when one server goes down, a backup has a copy of what was going on in his session. Sure, you could back it up to the database, but that's a DB hit every page click or so. Session replication is not a trivial problem to solve. This is why you pay big bucks for J2EE app servers, among other reasons.
UML is not older than Java. UML is a amalgation of different modeling notations, namely Rumbaugh's Object Modeling Technique (OMT) and Grady Booch's "Clouds". No one liked the clouds... UML looks more like OMT if you ask me.
Anyway, Java came out in what? 1994, 1995? UML wasn't final until at least 1997.
...definitely flares when playing video games. Especially these console games where you can't save your goddamn game and have to play 10 minutes of the same bullshit EVERY FUCKING TIME YOU RESTART THE LEVEL just to play the last 1 minute that you can't beat!
Where do you get 1000 processes from? JVMs are multi-threaded, and share a codebase. If you're talking 1000 JVMs on different boxes, yes, they each do their own JIT-ing. And the whole point of adaptive optimizations (if you would read the link) is that it is superior to JIT-ing alone.
What exactly is the issue, here? Have you looked at any modern-day JVMs? None of them interpret bytecode on the fly anymore. They all just-in-time compile their code, and can do adaptive optimizations as the program runs.
For a "server-side" JVM, check out BEA's JRockit. I it is available as a free download (registration required). Right now it only runs on Intel boxes (Linux and Windows) though.
How many times do you people have to be corrected on this to get it thru your thick skulls? Microsoft dropping Java only has to do with client-side Java. It has exactly zero to do with server side programming, which is what the book is about.
Java is alive and well. It is still the platform of choice for web development.
It all started with my dad making color copies of photos. I said "Dad, that paper is going to deteriorate faster than the original photos. What you need is a digital copy, and with backups, it'll basically live forever." So he challenged me on the best scheme for browsing the photos. I said there must be software out there to do what we want. Then we discussed what we wanted.
My dad then set to scanning in 3000+ photos.
Meanwhile, I wrote the software (JSP/Servlet/JDBC). It was quite a task, and it's by no means perfect. But I didn't find any software out there that did exactly what we wanted. I didn't really care about pre-arranging albums for people... I might allow them to make their own in the future, but the key aspect is that we figured out what info was important, and then I wrote a search engine. You can search on any combo of family (up to 3), year, location, event, and keyword. The software scales the original scan (usually at a pretty high res) to a "web size" suitable for display on the page, and a thumbnail for the search results page. I make some assumptions about the pictures for the sake of expediency, but generally it looks okay.
Over time, we've added features like biographies for individuals, and now he wants to be able to put in stories about people and link photos and/or biographies to those. Talk about scope-creep. And then there's always new admin tools he wants me to write for him. Still, he's spending 4+ hours a day entering descriptions for the photos. He's got most of them done now.
At the risk of slashdotting the site (which runs off my pitiful cable modem), I'll post the URL: http://www.johnsonfamilyhistory.com/
Now I just have to figure out how to get him to spell and write a little better.:)
"EVEN the last Darth Maul fight in E-1 was better"?
It was way better, yes, but it sounds like you're saying it wasn't any good. Ray Park, who played Darth Maul is fantastically energetic onscreen and made the two Jedi look good, when they were really merely decent. That fight was incredible. One of the best ever put on film.
The fact that you can make money doing Perl is beside the point. The point is that there is a helluva lot more cash going into Java development than Perl development. I challenge you to find me a statistic that says otherwise.
And sure, there's money to be made doing Perl - it's relegated to niche status as far as most companies are concerned, and there's not as many proficient Perl programmers. Simple supply and demand.
Java is used all over the place. The vast majority of Fortune 500 companies have custom applications using enterprise Java. J2EE is the standard for new systems doing back-end transaction processing. The libraries are mature and very robust. C++ doesn't have anything standardized as part of the language that even remotely competes.
Granted, our jingoistic, bloodthirsty, home-grown perpetrators of atrocities are going after people of similar moral virtue, so at least we aren't knocking off Lapps, Tuvans or Bushmen... but I'd still like to see a fair fight.
I'm sorry that we're not fulfilling your expectations for proper entertainment, jackass.
Re:doing the same to other movies?
on
Review: Zoolander
·
· Score: 3, Informative
They've already done it for the Spider-Man trailer.
There was news that Windows XP will not ship with any native support for Java. Certainly, a user could add Java support him/herself, but how many users are going to take initiative to do so?
With hundreds of thousands of copies of an OS that won't do Java, that will have a very deep impact on developers. It doesn't do much good to make software that nobody can run.
I think you've entirely missed the point, here. As many other posters have mentioned, Java is primarily flourishing on the server these days. This is where the majority of Java developers write their apps. The client side is usually web-based and therefore has no need for Java to be installed on the user's PC.
Applets are far from the only (or even primary) use of Java.
Again, the laser "spot" is no different - it's not a real "thing," it doesn't move across the screen. It's still x number of photons striking the screen and bouncing back to your eye. The "spot" you see at one instant of time is not the same "spot" that you see at another instant. This is nothing like a ship, or even a beam of photons moving across a screen. They are leaving the emission device, striking the screen, and (a few) going back to your eye. They are never moving across the screen, or the sky, or whatever it is that the illusion perpetrates.
The rotating disk is another interesting thought experiment, but this one has a different explanation, which is simply that you will find that no matter what construction you choose, the energy needed to bring that disc spinning fast enough that the outer edge is going faster than lightspeed exceeds infinity.
Sorry, it's harder than that to come up with a violation of relativity.
There are a lot of things that happen faster than light. You can even demonstrate one to yourself right now.
Go outside. Shine a flashlight into the sky and sweep it back and forth. At some point Out There, your spot of light will be moving from side to side faster than the speed of light. Do the geometry if you want to figure out how far away that is.
This is completely misleading and incorrect. I actually thought of this in high school physics class and asked my father (a physics professor about this) about it...
The part that you're making an incorrect assumption about is the fact that the spot is not actually an entity capable of moving. All you're seeing is a grouping of photons bouncing off atmosphere and returning to your retina. As you swing the flashlight across the sky at ever-quicker speeds, less and less photons compose that "spot".
Slashdot Mirror
Umm, no. They tune in to see these high quality ads for the first time. After a couple viewings of even teh funniest commercial, if given the option, people are going to want to skip it.
And they do. Why do you think you hardly ever see ads (especially on TV) for PVRs? Any device that makes it easy to record shows and has so much as a fast forward function is dangerous to advertisers. And if advertisers don't like it, then the networks don't like. Pretty simple.
If this were true, I'd be having kids just to use them as batteries.
I recall reading somewhere that DOA3 does 720p. I have a widescreen TV and the HD pack but I always forget to try it.
You're exactly the kind of unsympathetic, joyless dork he's talking about. I've been a big Spider-Man fan since I was a kid, but to tell you the truth, the rational side of me always told me that it's absurd that some high schooler came up with an invention that essentially no human has been able to come up with. It's been crippling the character all these years. The movie actually made it more believable.
Absolutely. What you need is a transcoder. They usually run around $100.
I have a PC in my component rack doing VGA out -> transcoder -> component video -> my 16x9 TV. Using PowerStrip, I'm running a resolution of 960x540 (in 540p mode). It's the perfect environment for watching DivX movies. Many high quality DivX rips look near-DVD quality on it. S-video doesn't even come close.
Umm... it stores HDTV. That's why.
It's a lot more than that. EJBs don't have anything to do with connection pooling. What they do pool is themselves. They are inherently single-threaded, so you get a pool of them, which the container controls. More work needs to get done, more EJBs are dynamically instantiated. You do get automatic transactionality, that's a nice benefit, but as others have said, it's not a really difficult thing (though the rules relating to locking and concurrency options are handled nicely in deployment descriptors instead of code).
You also get built-in support for security (again, thru deployment descriptors). And of course, Entity EJBs give you a persistent data structure, essentially a table row, in which you provide no database-specific code.
Whoever said clustering is easy simply isn't paying attention. The routing part is the easy part, but what about stateful information, like a user's http session? That needs to be replicated so that when one server goes down, a backup has a copy of what was going on in his session. Sure, you could back it up to the database, but that's a DB hit every page click or so. Session replication is not a trivial problem to solve. This is why you pay big bucks for J2EE app servers, among other reasons.
UML is not older than Java. UML is a amalgation of different modeling notations, namely Rumbaugh's Object Modeling Technique (OMT) and Grady Booch's "Clouds". No one liked the clouds... UML looks more like OMT if you ask me.
Anyway, Java came out in what? 1994, 1995? UML wasn't final until at least 1997.
...definitely flares when playing video games. Especially these console games where you can't save your goddamn game and have to play 10 minutes of the same bullshit EVERY FUCKING TIME YOU RESTART THE LEVEL just to play the last 1 minute that you can't beat!
Where do you get 1000 processes from? JVMs are multi-threaded, and share a codebase. If you're talking 1000 JVMs on different boxes, yes, they each do their own JIT-ing. And the whole point of adaptive optimizations (if you would read the link) is that it is superior to JIT-ing alone.
What exactly is the issue, here? Have you looked at any modern-day JVMs? None of them interpret bytecode on the fly anymore. They all just-in-time compile their code, and can do adaptive optimizations as the program runs.
For a "server-side" JVM, check out BEA's JRockit. I it is available as a free download (registration required). Right now it only runs on Intel boxes (Linux and Windows) though.
our backend is written in VB while the front is Java
Worst. Architecture. Ever.
How many times do you people have to be corrected on this to get it thru your thick skulls? Microsoft dropping Java only has to do with client-side Java. It has exactly zero to do with server side programming, which is what the book is about.
Java is alive and well. It is still the platform of choice for web development.
It all started with my dad making color copies of photos. I said "Dad, that paper is going to deteriorate faster than the original photos. What you need is a digital copy, and with backups, it'll basically live forever." So he challenged me on the best scheme for browsing the photos. I said there must be software out there to do what we want. Then we discussed what we wanted.
:)
My dad then set to scanning in 3000+ photos.
Meanwhile, I wrote the software (JSP/Servlet/JDBC). It was quite a task, and it's by no means perfect. But I didn't find any software out there that did exactly what we wanted. I didn't really care about pre-arranging albums for people... I might allow them to make their own in the future, but the key aspect is that we figured out what info was important, and then I wrote a search engine. You can search on any combo of family (up to 3), year, location, event, and keyword. The software scales the original scan (usually at a pretty high res) to a "web size" suitable for display on the page, and a thumbnail for the search results page. I make some assumptions about the pictures for the sake of expediency, but generally it looks okay.
Over time, we've added features like biographies for individuals, and now he wants to be able to put in stories about people and link photos and/or biographies to those. Talk about scope-creep. And then there's always new admin tools he wants me to write for him. Still, he's spending 4+ hours a day entering descriptions for the photos. He's got most of them done now.
At the risk of slashdotting the site (which runs off my pitiful cable modem), I'll post the URL: http://www.johnsonfamilyhistory.com/
Now I just have to figure out how to get him to spell and write a little better.
It was way better, yes, but it sounds like you're saying it wasn't any good. Ray Park, who played Darth Maul is fantastically energetic onscreen and made the two Jedi look good, when they were really merely decent. That fight was incredible. One of the best ever put on film.
So if it's open sourced, does that mean I can paint a little Hitler mustache on him and put that video on my site?
The fact that you can make money doing Perl is beside the point. The point is that there is a helluva lot more cash going into Java development than Perl development. I challenge you to find me a statistic that says otherwise.
And sure, there's money to be made doing Perl - it's relegated to niche status as far as most companies are concerned, and there's not as many proficient Perl programmers. Simple supply and demand.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
None.
Java is used all over the place. The vast majority of Fortune 500 companies have custom applications using enterprise Java. J2EE is the standard for new systems doing back-end transaction processing. The libraries are mature and very robust. C++ doesn't have anything standardized as part of the language that even remotely competes.
This isn't 1970.
It's not a troll at all. In the corporate world, those are the main standards. Sorry guys, Perl is not where the money is at.
I'm sorry that we're not fulfilling your expectations for proper entertainment, jackass.
They've already done it for the Spider-Man trailer.
I think you've entirely missed the point, here. As many other posters have mentioned, Java is primarily flourishing on the server these days. This is where the majority of Java developers write their apps. The client side is usually web-based and therefore has no need for Java to be installed on the user's PC.
Applets are far from the only (or even primary) use of Java.
The rotating disk is another interesting thought experiment, but this one has a different explanation, which is simply that you will find that no matter what construction you choose, the energy needed to bring that disc spinning fast enough that the outer edge is going faster than lightspeed exceeds infinity.
Sorry, it's harder than that to come up with a violation of relativity.
This is completely misleading and incorrect. I actually thought of this in high school physics class and asked my father (a physics professor about this) about it...
The part that you're making an incorrect assumption about is the fact that the spot is not actually an entity capable of moving. All you're seeing is a grouping of photons bouncing off atmosphere and returning to your retina. As you swing the flashlight across the sky at ever-quicker speeds, less and less photons compose that "spot".