Right, most codecs handle the creation of keyframes (complete frames) automatically based on scene change detection, a threshold for the ammount of change since the previous keyframe, and a user-definable max time since last keyframe. This last attribute is especially important in a streaming environment, where data can be lost and users may not begin viewing exactly at a keyframe - they will not get a complete image until the next keyframe, so most compressionists set a max time between keyframes for anywhere from 3 to 10 seconds.
Pardon me, but that is exactly what every modern video codec does - it's called interframe compression, and is standard with the MPEG codecs, DixX, Windows Media and pretty well every other delivery format (and even some source formats). Since a sequence of frames may have enormous redundancy, most modern codecs actually use bidirectional interframes, meaning a frame can be described relative to either or both of its keyframes (before and after itself).
This "technology" that you mention is quite different - supersampling still images from overlapping frames of video, resulting in a higher-resolution image of the scene (as compared to a single frame from the same video).
Why would it? Windows Media doesn't support it (out of the box) on Windows either... of course there are a number of DirectShow filters which support MPEG-2, and you probably have one if you have installed a DVD player app on Windows, so this might lead you to think Windows Media itself supports MPEG-2. However, even with the MPEG-2 filters, Windows Media Player doesn't support RTSP (or other realtime protocols) for delivering MPEG-2 (only standard file-based transports like http, ftp, file, etc)
But yes, Quicktime 6 will ship with a comprehensive MPEG-2 decoder, including apparently RTSP-delivered MPEG-2... and given Kasenna and Apple have had a relationship for some time - both through Kasenna's previous media servers which streamed Quicktime, as well as through their mutual status' as founders of ISMA - I am hoping for interop between QT6 and the next Kasenna MediaBase XP (which I recently licensed for a VOD application).
The value in recreating the process is for conservation and an understanding of the development of photography for historical reasons. Conservation efforts seek to understand the genesis of all works, whether paintings, sculptures, or photography, in order to understand the context of the work.
Actually a great many features in OSX, and even in OS9, won't work without Quicktime installed. Quicktime is far more than a media player, it comprises and entire layer of APIs for manipulating all forms of media. It is used to display desktop pictures, previews in the Finder, and for core functionality of tons of apps. Removing Quicktime, at this point, would drastically break the Mac OS.
I'm not getting sucked into this debate, but at least get your facts straight.
There are quite a few opensource RTSP servers based on Apple's Darwin Streaming Server... i've tested builds on Solaris 8, Linux, and Win2000, very impressive and quite free. If you can't use an RTSP-friendly format then you probably don't want streaming anyway (or want Windows Media - and we know where to look for that!) then you'll get your "streaming" fix with MPEG-1 on Apache!
Yeah, and Linus was unable to finish an OS himself so he to GNU code... isn't that the SPIRIT of OpenSource? Or is it "you can only reuse our code when it's politically correct, otherwise you have to reinvent every wheel while we make fun of you for doing that"?
OSX runs on a Mach microkernel, the BSD layer is just that - a layer above the kernel providing BSD compatibility at the API level, exactly what Linus advocates (portable APIs written in platform specific ways). Had they left out the BSD layer you would have said "well, it doesnt have a POSIX-compliant CLI so it's not worth a shit" and had they written their own it would have been "I don't trust any *nix API layer written entirely by Apple". Can't win, huh?
So many bitter Linux users on/.
As for the article, I'm not certain OSX is displacing Linux, I've seen nothing but some of the parrotted anecdotes referenced in this article... it's a nice OS, but this is a big world with room for lots of choice. OSX appeals to a few user segments which may in some cases overlap with Linux (scientific users for one, at least in my experience, who want a nice Unix and are sick of Linux or Solaris for workstations), but it will, at least initially, likely appeal to segments that aren't Linux strongholds.
As much as I like OSX, I despise so much of the Mac fanatic scene, which tends to do itself a disfavor with its loudly demonstrated narrow view of the world and the technology market. So long as we have as much choice as we have right now, everything is just peachy - I wanna see a Jobs-dominated industry about as much as I enjoy Gates' reign of stagnation.
There was a very similar tale about Dylan on his recent tour at a venue in Oregon or Washington, but this was confirmed and reported in numerous papers.
Dylan attempted to get back to a private area after the show and was denied entrance by several guards (who may or may not have recognized him but wouldn't budge).
Their manager congratulated them all, though I don't know that they got cash. Dylan was incensed but I'm sure he got over it!
Sorry, but the Mac OS version of the browser plugin does not expose itself to AppleScript on IE or Netscape, though it does expose itself to JavaScript on Netscape.
The Quicktime Player *application* has an AppleScript dictionary, but there is no way to programmatically access the plugin when running in Internet Explorer via JavaScript OR AppleScript. This is because IE on Mac does not SUPPORT a scripting interface to Netscape plugins. Complain to Microsoft, or use Netscape.
I have nothing against MNG - in fact I await the day we have MNG support in Quicktime as yet another example of QT's flexibility.
The point of my MNG comment was rhetorical, and properly expanded/disambiguated would have been soomething like this:
"What suitable replacement options do you have for the Quicktime architecture? MNG?"
Yes, MNG has it's place, and will I'm sure be supported as an import, track, and export media type within Quicktime. We currently have PNG support everywhere that counts, it's not much of a leap. My point was that all the non-Quicktime options out there are primarily distribution formats/codecs, not the all-encompassing media architecture that Quicktime provides. Even if you were wanting to end up with an MNG file there would be benefits to using Quicktime to produce it - namely, the application support and integration of multiple media types available on Mac OS and Windows. Yes, if you just have a bunch of still frames to merge into an MNG this is trivial - but if you want to produce video in an NLE with content coming from a variety of sources, Quicktime is the foundation that makes this happen.
While I support Quicktime fully, your statement number two is completely wrong:
Quicktime for Java is there to bridge the gap between Java/JMF and Quicktime, yes, but ONLY on operating systems with Quicktime already installed and supported. Quicktime for Java does NOT implement Quicktime IN Java, it simply allows Java developers to use the Quicktime APIs from native Java applications.
Interesting. MPEG-1 is not "multimedia", it is a desktop video codec and file format specification. Quicktime IS "multimedia" - a single file format/container and API for audio, video, text, still imaging, realtime effects, scripting, and much more.
Anyway, the issue is hardly who "invented" multimedia anymore than we would question who "invented" desktop digital imaging. Apple, however, revolutionized this part of the desktop media industry and if you worked in video or multimedia you would likely know this.
MPEG has always been a delivery platform, not a content creation, editing, and delivery platform. That means a single API to support many arbitrary codecs and datatypes, a huge boon to media application developers and for content creators themselves who don't have to deal with compatibility issues between their creative apps.
Why the backlash? Typical SlashDot "if it doesn't run on Linux it isn't worth a pile of beans"... of course this just reflects your world, not the opinions of people who have actually been working in those particular trenches which would have a professional perspective on the subject.
Hold Apple responsible? Yeah, nice idea. How about we hold Microsoft responsible for the forking of the GUI world? Or Linus for the forking of the Unix world?
Proprietary multimedia standards exist for a reason, as do their open equivalents. Standards groups like MPEG and JPEG create specs that are of great interest to hardware vendors and others who rely on interoperability with packaged products like cellphones and set-top boxes which aren't practical to flash update all the time. Proprietary solutions fill the void left by the standards-based solutions, primarily for flexibility and updatability but also on the much-forgotten CONTENT CREATION level, which you seem to ignore.
This all may change with MPEG-4, but then that's a highly proprietary solution too whose standards body can't even decide on broad licensing issues. What else do you suggest? Animated GIF? Sorry, CompuServe's got that one. MNG? Oh please.
Currently the only two systems capable of satisfying the single-solution demands are Quicktime and MPEG-4, however MPEG-4 still doesn't have established profiles for studio and high-end needs, nor the flexibility of Quicktime, let alone the OS-level support needed to encourage developers to jump on the bandwagon. And as Quicktime supports most "standards" as well the content is not locked-in, unlike Windows Media and Real (which are technically non-editable, though hacks do exist).
Unless you have pointers to a project working on a cross-platform multimedia architecture then methinks you haven't the foggiest.
I'm sorry, I assumed such a high-tech crowd knew how to use search engines or simply take a stab and try http://www.eyetronics.com...
I apologize if I seem snotty, I've got 12 hours of work to do before tomorrow morning, and I'm stuck in a meeting destined to last until at LEAST then:)
Cheers,
But the competition is even cooler!
on
Minolta 3D Camera
·
· Score: 2
I have worked with this package as well as other competing products and am quite impressed with the level of quality vs. effort required for this form of 3D imaging. The funny thing is I am sitting in a meeting as I type presenting the various options for this form of image capture as my company's technology lead, and I just was doing my rounds (on my new WaveLAN 11MB Silver wireless card!) on the Web when I saw this article!
If you want Linux compatibility in fact, plus a much better, less restrictive product overall, checkout Eyetronics... in fact, last time I spoke to a developer there he said that Linux was his PREFERRED platform for his software. The main benefits of Eyetronic's technology are the following:
It's format agnostic... choose the 3D format YOU want to deliver (or archive) in.
It's camera-agnostic... you choose the camera YOU want to capture in. We have used everthing from a Digital 8 consumer video camera to high-end stationary Sony cameras with 100 MB+ image output.
The only requirement is their software, ShapeSnatcher and ShapeMatcher (I know, bad names!), a standard slide that works in any slide projector (I'd recommend something with a quality glass lens for low distortion), and a block of wood with a printed pattern on it (you can make yourself from included PostScript files) for calibration of the system.
The software is DAMN impressively, well designed, rock-solid, and highly trainable... you could teach a monkey to build high-polygon models with gorgeous, perfectly aligned textures.
The only downside is cost (and for you guys, if you haven't guess yet, it is NOT Open Source and probably won't be anytime soon)... total cost of software is about $7,000 I believe, though you don't necessarily need both components.
If you want more info feel free to ask.. I've demoed and used most of the available 3D capture technologies, and for non-critical work (engineering, etc.) these new breed of photographic solutions seem the best. And there aren't as many kinks or hitches as you might think, you'd be suprised what these guys have done with image- and contour-analysis and a lot of intelligence on their part.
I may be wrong, but I believe Eyetronics started as a university project in Sweden or Denmark... probably Denmark.
Btw, before I get flamed for being a fraud, I work for a market-leader in ecommerce-oriented 3D imaging, but this is as close to my real identity as I can post under. If you can figure out who I work for, bully on you, but it isn't "0110".
I think the most pertinent part of the following quote from Be's FAQ is the last segment of this sentence:
There's also two legal issues, one, would Apple let us do this (who cares if legally it's OK, they have a lot more lawyers than we do), and two, could we use the Linux sources and still keep the BeOS proprietary (which we intend to do, see the FAQ on that).
Sounds like Be is concerned about legal issues alright, just not necessarily of Apple's doing... they don't want to do the work, maybe, but they really just don't want to stray from their proprietary status (acceptable, but hardly as noble as being the corporate underdog staying out from under the unpredictable Apple bully.)
Implementing the kind of hardware support they need from an open source base like LinuxPPC would presumably be a very difficult thing to be kept distinct (in a licensing sense) from their own proprietary product.... and they probably don't have enough lawyers to go to bat on such a sticky issue.
Ummm, not wanting to incriminate myself in any way, I will say that what you are referring to is the Alias Manager, a good bit more powerful than simple path-based links. However, your statements regarding moving those specific applications between machines, post-install, isn't accurate... aliasing is used more to allow such behavior easily (moving files, maintaing the link, even across AppleTalk networks if available and with privs via Program Linking). And aliasing isn't maintained, strictly speaking, as a simple number, it is a delicate but determined waltz between file manager, alias manager, and the OS.
In any case, most Mac-friendy apps do use aliases for many reasons, both for locating resources like libraries, the preferences folder, other applications, etc. They dont store a number per se (least not any more than any other binary data is really a number) but rather an alias object, easily created with the current path/reference of the target object (aliases are for more than just files).
Just so you know... and if Macs really operated that way I wouldn't think it was too nifty. In fact I love the way I can move installed apps between volumes or machines and NOT have to reinstall (at worst, on a different machine, you normally have to move only a single pref file or folder, except MS products which feature dozens of libraries and folders).
Also, I dont know what you think is funky about Mac pathnames, it simply uses ":" as a delimiter instead of "/"... the leftmost item is the volume name, just like most other OSes, and the rest is the path, again like other OSes. All thats different is the delim.
> chances are if someone else didnt think of it first then the idea is silly to begin with
Not that I disagree with your analysis of the previous post as a DRASTIC over-simplification, but that aside, your quote above is almost as laughable... you must not be very creative, every time you come up with an idea a Pavlovian response inside must tell your that it's just silly.
Binary Boy
-- Not afraid to have new, and occassionally silly, ideas.
Sorry, problem with this is that currently none of the PC emulators have native support for any hardware on your PCI bus OTHER than a Voodoo card... this means that even though your Mac has a RAGE 128 chipset VirtualPC isn't writing to it directly, but rather to VirtualPCs emulated video card, which in turn writes to the MacOSs video subsystem... if you tried to run the GLIDE wrappers under VirtualPC I wouldnt be suprised if they worked (VPC is quite a stable bugger), but they sure as hell won't be any faster than VirtualPC already is, and I image really quite a bit slower. Both Connectix and Insignia, plus the new BlueLabel Power Emulator, all plan more native hardware support in their emus, a la the 3dfx support implemented in recent months/year... BLPE seems to have the head start with its totally modular design, basically allowing (or soon, when the sdk is out) coders to develop x86 drivers for hardware in your Mac, meaning unloading a HUGE load off the emulator (and therefore your CPU) and bringing emulated x86 ever closer to realtime...
Try Gravity's Rainbow by Pynchon or Foucalt's Pendulum (Umberto Eco)... I practically forgot my English after a Pendulum marathon one weekend.:) Binary Boy
Hmmm, while I have never taken a speed-reading course, or so much as inquired into its methodology, I have had many friends who did so as a natural part of the programs we were enrolled in for high school. One thing I have always found is that not only did i naturally read faster than those who went through the training, my comprehension was also much better... I dont know what style, method, or form of "speed reading" i practice, but I know it is indeed fast, and certainly works as Ive done it my whole life, with everything I read.
So, whether it is possible to train someone to speed read I do not know, but I do know that I am a very fast reader, with very high comprehension and retention... I can recall reading this way as far back as 5 though, so I doubt that I could teach, in a neat and tidy curriculum, my own methods - I dont bother to care HOW it works as reading itself is such a time-consumer and I really only want to maximize my bang-per-minute since I suffer from constant time-anxiety.
Hmmmm, I had NEVER considered that any form of nationalism or ethno-centrism played any role in the distribution of support of the various leaders of this movement, and I think its downright stupid... I think, certainly, RMS' extremism might appeal to some Americans (like myself, certainly) as a leader in the defense of our intellectual freedoms, but other than that I can see no connection as Im sure people across the globe are actracted (or repulsed) for similar reasons.
Id tend to agree with the (overtly-obvious and shallow) essay above in that RMS is a valuable "sqeaky wheel", while Linus is infinitely more valuable as the de facto leader and warm-and-fuzzy representative of the movement...
Very astute, and I hope no one will be suprised when the release performs exactly as you say... for anyone who has used Office98 (a Mac-only release), or even read the benchmarks, Im sure you know what I mean...
When PowerPC-based machine performs an ORDER OF MAGNITUDE slower than a comparable x86 box in Excel on raw calculations you think someone would be fired, but Im sure the marketing genius in charge of insuring crippling performance in Mac apps gets a bonus everytime they make another office worker convert because of unacceptible performance.
Sure, launch time may not be as bad as Word 6.0 was (we're talking two-digit minute counts), but at least once it ran it didnt seem especially lame... Office98 runs like a mangey, one-legged pony.
Well said! The world can, as we all did, come to Linux, and not the other way around... there is no need to waste precious time and focus (since money has been traditionally less of a currency in this community) "battling" Microsoft when I think its ridiculous to even lump the two together as opponents... proprietary OS developers have no interest in the goals and strategies of the OSS community, and likewise, save vendors like RedHat, we should pay no interest to what they consider "business" since Linux wasn't created as a commercial product to begin with...
anyways, lets all just turn our noses and not even glance sideways at those devils in Washington... comparing Linux to NT only makes those presenting the comparison look like fools because they miss the point of OSS entirely... the goal isnt to compete with proprietary, it is to provide viable alternatives for those brave and pioneering geeks among us:) maybe someday the OSS syndrome will be significantly dominant that producing proprietary software will not be realistic, and until then, just ignore the other side.
Slashdot Mirror
Right, most codecs handle the creation of keyframes (complete frames) automatically based on scene change detection, a threshold for the ammount of change since the previous keyframe, and a user-definable max time since last keyframe. This last attribute is especially important in a streaming environment, where data can be lost and users may not begin viewing exactly at a keyframe - they will not get a complete image until the next keyframe, so most compressionists set a max time between keyframes for anywhere from 3 to 10 seconds.
Pardon me, but that is exactly what every modern video codec does - it's called interframe compression, and is standard with the MPEG codecs, DixX, Windows Media and pretty well every other delivery format (and even some source formats). Since a sequence of frames may have enormous redundancy, most modern codecs actually use bidirectional interframes, meaning a frame can be described relative to either or both of its keyframes (before and after itself).
This "technology" that you mention is quite different - supersampling still images from overlapping frames of video, resulting in a higher-resolution image of the scene (as compared to a single frame from the same video).
Why would it? Windows Media doesn't support it (out of the box) on Windows either... of course there are a number of DirectShow filters which support MPEG-2, and you probably have one if you have installed a DVD player app on Windows, so this might lead you to think Windows Media itself supports MPEG-2. However, even with the MPEG-2 filters, Windows Media Player doesn't support RTSP (or other realtime protocols) for delivering MPEG-2 (only standard file-based transports like http, ftp, file, etc)
But yes, Quicktime 6 will ship with a comprehensive MPEG-2 decoder, including apparently RTSP-delivered MPEG-2... and given Kasenna and Apple have had a relationship for some time - both through Kasenna's previous media servers which streamed Quicktime, as well as through their mutual status' as founders of ISMA - I am hoping for interop between QT6 and the next Kasenna MediaBase XP (which I recently licensed for a VOD application).
The value in recreating the process is for conservation and an understanding of the development of photography for historical reasons. Conservation efforts seek to understand the genesis of all works, whether paintings, sculptures, or photography, in order to understand the context of the work.
Actually a great many features in OSX, and even in OS9, won't work without Quicktime installed. Quicktime is far more than a media player, it comprises and entire layer of APIs for manipulating all forms of media. It is used to display desktop pictures, previews in the Finder, and for core functionality of tons of apps. Removing Quicktime, at this point, would drastically break the Mac OS.
I'm not getting sucked into this debate, but at least get your facts straight.
Cheers
There are quite a few opensource RTSP servers based on Apple's Darwin Streaming Server... i've tested builds on Solaris 8, Linux, and Win2000, very impressive and quite free. If you can't use an RTSP-friendly format then you probably don't want streaming anyway (or want Windows Media - and we know where to look for that!) then you'll get your "streaming" fix with MPEG-1 on Apache!
Hope this helps,
BB
Yeah, and Linus was unable to finish an OS himself so he to GNU code... isn't that the SPIRIT of OpenSource? Or is it "you can only reuse our code when it's politically correct, otherwise you have to reinvent every wheel while we make fun of you for doing that"?
/.
OSX runs on a Mach microkernel, the BSD layer is just that - a layer above the kernel providing BSD compatibility at the API level, exactly what Linus advocates (portable APIs written in platform specific ways). Had they left out the BSD layer you would have said "well, it doesnt have a POSIX-compliant CLI so it's not worth a shit" and had they written their own it would have been "I don't trust any *nix API layer written entirely by Apple". Can't win, huh?
So many bitter Linux users on
As for the article, I'm not certain OSX is displacing Linux, I've seen nothing but some of the parrotted anecdotes referenced in this article... it's a nice OS, but this is a big world with room for lots of choice. OSX appeals to a few user segments which may in some cases overlap with Linux (scientific users for one, at least in my experience, who want a nice Unix and are sick of Linux or Solaris for workstations), but it will, at least initially, likely appeal to segments that aren't Linux strongholds.
As much as I like OSX, I despise so much of the Mac fanatic scene, which tends to do itself a disfavor with its loudly demonstrated narrow view of the world and the technology market. So long as we have as much choice as we have right now, everything is just peachy - I wanna see a Jobs-dominated industry about as much as I enjoy Gates' reign of stagnation.
Cheers,
BB
There was a very similar tale about Dylan on his recent tour at a venue in Oregon or Washington, but this was confirmed and reported in numerous papers.
Dylan attempted to get back to a private area after the show and was denied entrance by several guards (who may or may not have recognized him but wouldn't budge).
Their manager congratulated them all, though I don't know that they got cash. Dylan was incensed but I'm sure he got over it!
Sorry, but the Mac OS version of the browser plugin does not expose itself to AppleScript on IE or Netscape, though it does expose itself to JavaScript on Netscape.
The Quicktime Player *application* has an AppleScript dictionary, but there is no way to programmatically access the plugin when running in Internet Explorer via JavaScript OR AppleScript. This is because IE on Mac does not SUPPORT a scripting interface to Netscape plugins. Complain to Microsoft, or use Netscape.
- BB
I have nothing against MNG - in fact I await the day we have MNG support in Quicktime as yet another example of QT's flexibility.
The point of my MNG comment was rhetorical, and properly expanded/disambiguated would have been soomething like this:
"What suitable replacement options do you have for the Quicktime architecture? MNG?"
Yes, MNG has it's place, and will I'm sure be supported as an import, track, and export media type within Quicktime. We currently have PNG support everywhere that counts, it's not much of a leap. My point was that all the non-Quicktime options out there are primarily distribution formats/codecs, not the all-encompassing media architecture that Quicktime provides. Even if you were wanting to end up with an MNG file there would be benefits to using Quicktime to produce it - namely, the application support and integration of multiple media types available on Mac OS and Windows. Yes, if you just have a bunch of still frames to merge into an MNG this is trivial - but if you want to produce video in an NLE with content coming from a variety of sources, Quicktime is the foundation that makes this happen.
Cheers,
BB
While I support Quicktime fully, your statement number two is completely wrong:
Quicktime for Java is there to bridge the gap between Java/JMF and Quicktime, yes, but ONLY on operating systems with Quicktime already installed and supported. Quicktime for Java does NOT implement Quicktime IN Java, it simply allows Java developers to use the Quicktime APIs from native Java applications.
This gets Linux users nowhere.
- BB
Interesting. MPEG-1 is not "multimedia", it is a desktop video codec and file format specification. Quicktime IS "multimedia" - a single file format/container and API for audio, video, text, still imaging, realtime effects, scripting, and much more.
Anyway, the issue is hardly who "invented" multimedia anymore than we would question who "invented" desktop digital imaging. Apple, however, revolutionized this part of the desktop media industry and if you worked in video or multimedia you would likely know this.
MPEG has always been a delivery platform, not a content creation, editing, and delivery platform. That means a single API to support many arbitrary codecs and datatypes, a huge boon to media application developers and for content creators themselves who don't have to deal with compatibility issues between their creative apps.
Why the backlash? Typical SlashDot "if it doesn't run on Linux it isn't worth a pile of beans"... of course this just reflects your world, not the opinions of people who have actually been working in those particular trenches which would have a professional perspective on the subject.
Hold Apple responsible? Yeah, nice idea. How about we hold Microsoft responsible for the forking of the GUI world? Or Linus for the forking of the Unix world?
Proprietary multimedia standards exist for a reason, as do their open equivalents. Standards groups like MPEG and JPEG create specs that are of great interest to hardware vendors and others who rely on interoperability with packaged products like cellphones and set-top boxes which aren't practical to flash update all the time. Proprietary solutions fill the void left by the standards-based solutions, primarily for flexibility and updatability but also on the much-forgotten CONTENT CREATION level, which you seem to ignore.
This all may change with MPEG-4, but then that's a highly proprietary solution too whose standards body can't even decide on broad licensing issues. What else do you suggest? Animated GIF? Sorry, CompuServe's got that one. MNG? Oh please.
Currently the only two systems capable of satisfying the single-solution demands are Quicktime and MPEG-4, however MPEG-4 still doesn't have established profiles for studio and high-end needs, nor the flexibility of Quicktime, let alone the OS-level support needed to encourage developers to jump on the bandwagon. And as Quicktime supports most "standards" as well the content is not locked-in, unlike Windows Media and Real (which are technically non-editable, though hacks do exist).
Unless you have pointers to a project working on a cross-platform multimedia architecture then methinks you haven't the foggiest.
Binary Boy
Digital Media Specialist
I have a .edu address at work... @getty.edu
.edu
We are a non-profit arts and education organization, not a school, and we operate under a
I'm sorry, I assumed such a high-tech crowd knew how to use search engines or simply take a stab and try http://www.eyetronics.com...
I apologize if I seem snotty, I've got 12 hours of work to do before tomorrow morning, and I'm stuck in a meeting destined to last until at LEAST then :)
Cheers,
I have worked with this package as well as other competing products and am quite impressed with the level of quality vs. effort required for this form of 3D imaging. The funny thing is I am sitting in a meeting as I type presenting the various options for this form of image capture as my company's technology lead, and I just was doing my rounds (on my new WaveLAN 11MB Silver wireless card!) on the Web when I saw this article!
If you want Linux compatibility in fact, plus a much better, less restrictive product overall, checkout Eyetronics... in fact, last time I spoke to a developer there he said that Linux was his PREFERRED platform for his software. The main benefits of Eyetronic's technology are the following:
If you want more info feel free to ask.. I've demoed and used most of the available 3D capture technologies, and for non-critical work (engineering, etc.) these new breed of photographic solutions seem the best. And there aren't as many kinks or hitches as you might think, you'd be suprised what these guys have done with image- and contour-analysis and a lot of intelligence on their part.
I may be wrong, but I believe Eyetronics started as a university project in Sweden or Denmark... probably Denmark.
Btw, before I get flamed for being a fraud, I work for a market-leader in ecommerce-oriented 3D imaging, but this is as close to my real identity as I can post under. If you can figure out who I work for, bully on you, but it isn't "0110".
:)
I think the most pertinent part of the following quote from Be's FAQ is the last segment of this sentence:
There's also two legal issues, one, would Apple let us do this (who cares if legally it's OK, they have a lot more lawyers than we do), and two, could we use the Linux sources and still keep the BeOS proprietary (which we intend to do, see the FAQ on that).
Sounds like Be is concerned about legal issues alright, just not necessarily of Apple's doing... they don't want to do the work, maybe, but they really just don't want to stray from their proprietary status (acceptable, but hardly as noble as being the corporate underdog staying out from under the unpredictable Apple bully.)
Implementing the kind of hardware support they need from an open source base like LinuxPPC would presumably be a very difficult thing to be kept distinct (in a licensing sense) from their own proprietary product.... and they probably don't have enough lawyers to go to bat on such a sticky issue.
Ummm, not wanting to incriminate myself in any way, I will say that what you are referring to is the Alias Manager, a good bit more powerful than simple path-based links. However, your statements regarding moving those specific applications between machines, post-install, isn't accurate... aliasing is used more to allow such behavior easily (moving files, maintaing the link, even across AppleTalk networks if available and with privs via Program Linking). And aliasing isn't maintained, strictly speaking, as a simple number, it is a delicate but determined waltz between file manager, alias manager, and the OS.
In any case, most Mac-friendy apps do use aliases for many reasons, both for locating resources like libraries, the preferences folder, other applications, etc. They dont store a number per se (least not any more than any other binary data is really a number) but rather an alias object, easily created with the current path/reference of the target object (aliases are for more than just files).
Just so you know... and if Macs really operated that way I wouldn't think it was too nifty. In fact I love the way I can move installed apps between volumes or machines and NOT have to reinstall (at worst, on a different machine, you normally have to move only a single pref file or folder, except MS products which feature dozens of libraries and folders).
Also, I dont know what you think is funky about Mac pathnames, it simply uses ":" as a delimiter instead of "/"... the leftmost item is the volume name, just like most other OSes, and the rest is the path, again like other OSes. All thats different is the delim.
Just so we don't have any misunderstandings...
Bb.
> chances are if someone else didnt think of it first then the idea is silly to begin with
Not that I disagree with your analysis of the previous post as a DRASTIC over-simplification, but that aside, your quote above is almost as laughable... you must not be very creative, every time you come up with an idea a Pavlovian response inside must tell your that it's just silly.
Binary Boy
-- Not afraid to have new, and occassionally silly, ideas.
.. do you mean to tell me you can't see that WITHOUT enhancement? Yikes, i thought my eyes were bad.
Sorry, problem with this is that currently none of the PC emulators have native support for any hardware on your PCI bus OTHER than a Voodoo card... this means that even though your Mac has a RAGE 128 chipset VirtualPC isn't writing to it directly, but rather to VirtualPCs emulated video card, which in turn writes to the MacOSs video subsystem... if you tried to run the GLIDE wrappers under VirtualPC I wouldnt be suprised if they worked (VPC is quite a stable bugger), but they sure as hell won't be any faster than VirtualPC already is, and I image really quite a bit slower. Both Connectix and Insignia, plus the new BlueLabel Power Emulator, all plan more native hardware support in their emus, a la the 3dfx support implemented in recent months/year... BLPE seems to have the head start with its totally modular design, basically allowing (or soon, when the sdk is out) coders to develop x86 drivers for hardware in your Mac, meaning unloading a HUGE load off the emulator (and therefore your CPU) and bringing emulated x86 ever closer to realtime...
Try Gravity's Rainbow by Pynchon or Foucalt's Pendulum (Umberto Eco)... I practically forgot my English after a Pendulum marathon one weekend. :)
Binary Boy
Hmmm, while I have never taken a speed-reading course, or so much as inquired into its methodology, I have had many friends who did so as a natural part of the programs we were enrolled in for high school. One thing I have always found is that not only did i naturally read faster than those who went through the training, my comprehension was also much better... I dont know what style, method, or form of "speed reading" i practice, but I know it is indeed fast, and certainly works as Ive done it my whole life, with everything I read.
So, whether it is possible to train someone to speed read I do not know, but I do know that I am a very fast reader, with very high comprehension and retention... I can recall reading this way as far back as 5 though, so I doubt that I could teach, in a neat and tidy curriculum, my own methods - I dont bother to care HOW it works as reading itself is such a time-consumer and I really only want to maximize my bang-per-minute since I suffer from constant time-anxiety.
Binary Boy
Hmmmm, I had NEVER considered that any form of nationalism or ethno-centrism played any role in the distribution of support of the various leaders of this movement, and I think its downright stupid... I think, certainly, RMS' extremism might appeal to some Americans (like myself, certainly) as a leader in the defense of our intellectual freedoms, but other than that I can see no connection as Im sure people across the globe are actracted (or repulsed) for similar reasons.
Id tend to agree with the (overtly-obvious and shallow) essay above in that RMS is a valuable "sqeaky wheel", while Linus is infinitely more valuable as the de facto leader and warm-and-fuzzy representative of the movement...
Very astute, and I hope no one will be suprised when the release performs exactly as you say... for anyone who has used Office98 (a Mac-only release), or even read the benchmarks, Im sure you know what I mean...
When PowerPC-based machine performs an ORDER OF MAGNITUDE slower than a comparable x86 box in Excel on raw calculations you think someone would be fired, but Im sure the marketing genius in charge of insuring crippling performance in Mac apps gets a bonus everytime they make another office worker convert because of unacceptible performance.
Sure, launch time may not be as bad as Word 6.0 was (we're talking two-digit minute counts), but at least once it ran it didnt seem especially lame... Office98 runs like a mangey, one-legged pony.
Binary Boy
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.
-- Derek Bok,
Well said! The world can, as we all did, come to Linux, and not the other way around... there is no need to waste precious time and focus (since money has been traditionally less of a currency in this community) "battling" Microsoft when I think its ridiculous to even lump the two together as opponents... proprietary OS developers have no interest in the goals and strategies of the OSS community, and likewise, save vendors like RedHat, we should pay no interest to what they consider "business" since Linux wasn't created as a commercial product to begin with...
:) maybe someday the OSS syndrome will be significantly dominant that producing proprietary software will not be realistic, and until then, just ignore the other side.
anyways, lets all just turn our noses and not even glance sideways at those devils in Washington... comparing Linux to NT only makes those presenting the comparison look like fools because they miss the point of OSS entirely... the goal isnt to compete with proprietary, it is to provide viable alternatives for those brave and pioneering geeks among us
Binary Boy
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.
-- Derek Bok,