I think the games for the Xbox are going to be better than those for the PS2. Just look at the specifications and anyone with half a brain will see the games just have to be better. I've played a lot of games and have not been disappointed by games with big system requirements. Just look at games like Daikatana. You know there's gonna be a port to Xbox. Besides, the Xbox will be much more stable than the PS2.
just thought I'd mention that I was planning on oiling my hinges on my car doors. Just hope that there is no additional accumulation of dirt and that it has a high level of cheviness after I'm done.
I'm sure they have enough pictures of the machine. Why doesn't someone take the time to build a copy? That way we can throw the old worn out machine in the trash can. We're living in a digital age. Who cares about the original so long as we can make cheap copies?
Why don't you have customers post questions on Slashdot? There are always more than enough people who seem to be experts in every subject who discuss every point to death. Oh, wait, it has to be a meaningless question.
if someone made a simulation of real life. Like we could walk around and eat and sleep and all of that stuff using a computer. You could actually talk to other people and share ideas face to face instead of actually typing in rants about people getting a life.
I agree and think it would be great if IBM or Red Hat patented Linux. If IBM patented Linux, it would finally have full support of a large corporation. This would be great since Linux would no longer rely on volunteers. Paid professionals would be able to enhance reliability and performance greatly.
On the other hand, RH accounts for 86% of the Linux installations in the world and should be awarded squatters rights.
Anyway you boil it down, Linux would greatly benefit from corporate control.
Maybe Slashdot should patent Beowulf so Microsoft and nanotech mutants from the future can't steal it and the government can't use it to hunt open source warriors.
(Even a moderator with less than average intelligence would moderate this all the way up. Thanks in advance!:) )
I agree, nyquist does hold. What I'm arguing is that if you have a triangle wave of a certain frequency, the harmonics needed to create that triangle wave are at higher frequencies than the original (a harmonic is F * 2^N where F is frequency and N is a positive harmonic number.) So out 11.025 KHz will have harmonics at 22.05 KHz, 44.1KHz, 88.1KHz, 176.2KHz, and so on. The higher the sampling rate, the more harmonics stored.
Now, whether your ears can tell the difference between an 11.025KHz triangle and sine wave is another difference. There may be something to do with the power level which is easily corrected unless amplitude also matters. But I'm only guessing hear.
I agree that you can accurately reproduce a sine wave if you sample at twice the frequency of the original. Problem is that anything other than a sine wave has higher order components. Fourier tells us this. Reproducing a square wave or something that approximates it requires infinite bandwidth using the sum of sine waves.
I've mentioned this in another post. If you sample a sine and triangle wave four times a cycle, there is no differentiating the results if the sample times coincide with zero crossings and peaks. Now you can throw any sort of DSP at it while chanting Nyquists theorm, but the reproduction is not going to be accurate. Nyquist's theorem applies to sine, but when higher order components are involved the sampling frequency increases accordingly.
I do not have any problem with CD as a storage mechanism, just the standard format. It would be possible to exceed the specifications of DVD or SACD in terms of bits per sample and samples per second at the cost of reduced play back time.
I will agree that 4 sample points are enough if you are dealing with a sine wave... but what if the original signal is a triangle wave. For both the sine signal I'd mentioned earlier and the triangle wave there are four samples per cycle. If the signal was sampled at peak and zero crossing, how can a DSP tell the difference between these two signals. I'd say it can't.
It would be cool if these could accept a square wave input were able to take shots off phase. That way, you could have a master camera sending out a square wave and the other three taking shots at 1/4, 1/2, and 3/4 off phase effectively quadrupling your sample rate with four cameras or N-rupling your sample rate with N cameras.
I'm not sure about the who speaker cable thing. I've recently bought a new pair of cables to smooth out a receiver I have and do notice a difference (even a girlfriend who is an anti-audiophile could hear the diffrence.) However, the cables are MIT terminator's which have passive components in them which may be filtering somethings out. MIT claims they are correcting for phase changes across various freqs. Who knows? All I know is my ears don't bleed when using these cables.
I do have to ask you though, can you hear the difference between a square and sine wave?
There is a way when you are talking discrete samples. What do you think a 11.025 KHz sine wave looks like when sampled at 44.1Khz. I'll give you a hint, each cycle has four samples. With this number of samples it is possible to miss the peaks and the waveform is not sinusoidal. Can you hear the difference between a sine, triangle, and square wave? I think most people can.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but don't most CD players upsample to smooth out the decoded signal? This is why some people spend a lot of money single disc CD player. (This is not me!!!) Your player has to make some kind of a guess at what the original signal looked like and reproduce it. Sony is removing some of the guesswork. From what I've read, SACD beats the pants off of all but the best CD players. But then again, Sony's original CD player is said to be a piece of garbage, so let's see what happens.
I'm pretty optimistic about what is possible. Unfortunately, I'm pessimistic about people's willingness to change. Most people buy there audio equipment based on features like does it have a cool looking remote or can I do some weird DSP stuff (which only is tried once or twice.) The average consumer has been brainwashed to think CD's are the greatest and the best that audio can be.
True, you cannot "hear" anything above 20kHz, but a recent Stereophile Magazine article has mentioned that some of the upper frequencies are somehow sensed. They mention that it is those upper frequencies that add reality to sound. The example they gave is along the lines that even an untrained listener is capable of differentiating between someone playing a trumpet down the hall and a recording. After listening to much stereo equipment I can tell you there is something missing in today's recordings.
Also, think about this for a second. A standard CD has a sample rate of 44.1KHz. If you are playing a 11.025KHz signal, there are 4 samples per cycle. This will hardly matches the appearance of the original signal. There are many waveforms and people are capable of differentiating between saw, sine, and square waves to name a few. On top of that, a single sine wave is seldom played by itself. There are often multiple waves played (different instruments and instruments more complex than a sine wave generator.)
I am one of those people who is not satisfied with typical consumer audio equipment. There is more to audio gear than simply outputing digital samples at two times the upper limit of "audible" sound.
Man! Why does everyone yell whenever Beowulf is mentioned? To me, it seems like a good idea to plug Beowulf any chance one can get. If enough people mention Beowulf, maybe some AOL lovin', Mac OS usin' lamers will get it through their heads and build multiple Linux boxes and install Beowulf. I'm not saying Beowulf is gonna bring about world peace or anything like that. I do think it would be a better place if everyone had about 10 486's running Beowulf. Those that don't want to hear about Beowulf should go and read MacWeek where they don't ever mention Beowulf.
The US Patent Office is a puppet of major corporations. Look at the way Micro$oft buys its way. There will be some company with the cash to patent protons and the court battles will rage while nanotech spreads faster than the latest teen rock through napster.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the games for the Xbox are going to be better than those for the PS2. Just look at the specifications and anyone with half a brain will see the games just have to be better. I've played a lot of games and have not been disappointed by games with big system requirements. Just look at games like Daikatana. You know there's gonna be a port to Xbox. Besides, the Xbox will be much more stable than the PS2.
help finding things on the Internet try www.yahoo.com
to Eskimoes.
Done! It's called you are lame.
Yes, who will pay for someones bed after they were sick in it? Now that's what I call art!
just thought I'd mention that I was planning on oiling my hinges on my car doors. Just hope that there is no additional accumulation of dirt and that it has a high level of cheviness after I'm done.
I'm sure they have enough pictures of the machine. Why doesn't someone take the time to build a copy? That way we can throw the old worn out machine in the trash can. We're living in a digital age. Who cares about the original so long as we can make cheap copies?
Why don't you have customers post questions on Slashdot? There are always more than enough people who seem to be experts in every subject who discuss every point to death. Oh, wait, it has to be a meaningless question.
if someone made a simulation of real life. Like we could walk around and eat and sleep and all of that stuff using a computer. You could actually talk to other people and share ideas face to face instead of actually typing in rants about people getting a life.
Someone should write a Linux emulator for Windows 2000. That way your system would keep running even after Linux crashes.
I agree and think it would be great if IBM or Red Hat patented Linux. If IBM patented Linux, it would finally have full support of a large corporation. This would be great since Linux would no longer rely on volunteers. Paid professionals would be able to enhance reliability and performance greatly.
On the other hand, RH accounts for 86% of the Linux installations in the world and should be awarded squatters rights.
Anyway you boil it down, Linux would greatly benefit from corporate control.
Maybe Slashdot should patent Beowulf so Microsoft and nanotech mutants from the future can't steal it and the government can't use it to hunt open source warriors.
:) )
(Even a moderator with less than average intelligence would moderate this all the way up. Thanks in advance!
I agree, nyquist does hold. What I'm arguing is that if you have a triangle wave of a certain frequency, the harmonics needed to create that triangle wave are at higher frequencies than the original (a harmonic is F * 2^N where F is frequency and N is a positive harmonic number.) So out 11.025 KHz will have harmonics at 22.05 KHz, 44.1KHz, 88.1KHz, 176.2KHz, and so on. The higher the sampling rate, the more harmonics stored.
Now, whether your ears can tell the difference between an 11.025KHz triangle and sine wave is another difference. There may be something to do with the power level which is easily corrected unless amplitude also matters. But I'm only guessing hear.
I agree that you can accurately reproduce a sine wave if you sample at twice the frequency of the original. Problem is that anything other than a sine wave has higher order components. Fourier tells us this. Reproducing a square wave or something that approximates it requires infinite bandwidth using the sum of sine waves.
I've mentioned this in another post. If you sample a sine and triangle wave four times a cycle, there is no differentiating the results if the sample times coincide with zero crossings and peaks. Now you can throw any sort of DSP at it while chanting Nyquists theorm, but the reproduction is not going to be accurate. Nyquist's theorem applies to sine, but when higher order components are involved the sampling frequency increases accordingly.
I do not have any problem with CD as a storage mechanism, just the standard format. It would be possible to exceed the specifications of DVD or SACD in terms of bits per sample and samples per second at the cost of reduced play back time.
I will agree that 4 sample points are enough if you are dealing with a sine wave... but what if the original signal is a triangle wave. For both the sine signal I'd mentioned earlier and the triangle wave there are four samples per cycle. If the signal was sampled at peak and zero crossing, how can a DSP tell the difference between these two signals. I'd say it can't.
It would be cool if these could accept a square wave input were able to take shots off phase. That way, you could have a master camera sending out a square wave and the other three taking shots at 1/4, 1/2, and 3/4 off phase effectively quadrupling your sample rate with four cameras or N-rupling your sample rate with N cameras.
I'm not sure about the who speaker cable thing. I've recently bought a new pair of cables to smooth out a receiver I have and do notice a difference (even a girlfriend who is an anti-audiophile could hear the diffrence.) However, the cables are MIT terminator's which have passive components in them which may be filtering somethings out. MIT claims they are correcting for phase changes across various freqs. Who knows? All I know is my ears don't bleed when using these cables.
I do have to ask you though, can you hear the difference between a square and sine wave?
There is a way when you are talking discrete samples. What do you think a 11.025 KHz sine wave looks like when sampled at 44.1Khz. I'll give you a hint, each cycle has four samples. With this number of samples it is possible to miss the peaks and the waveform is not sinusoidal. Can you hear the difference between a sine, triangle, and square wave? I think most people can.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but don't most CD players upsample to smooth out the decoded signal? This is why some people spend a lot of money single disc CD player. (This is not me!!!) Your player has to make some kind of a guess at what the original signal looked like and reproduce it. Sony is removing some of the guesswork. From what I've read, SACD beats the pants off of all but the best CD players. But then again, Sony's original CD player is said to be a piece of garbage, so let's see what happens.
I'm pretty optimistic about what is possible. Unfortunately, I'm pessimistic about people's willingness to change. Most people buy there audio equipment based on features like does it have a cool looking remote or can I do some weird DSP stuff (which only is tried once or twice.) The average consumer has been brainwashed to think CD's are the greatest and the best that audio can be.
True, you cannot "hear" anything above 20kHz, but a recent Stereophile Magazine article has mentioned that some of the upper frequencies are somehow sensed. They mention that it is those upper frequencies that add reality to sound. The example they gave is along the lines that even an untrained listener is capable of differentiating between someone playing a trumpet down the hall and a recording. After listening to much stereo equipment I can tell you there is something missing in today's recordings.
Also, think about this for a second. A standard CD has a sample rate of 44.1KHz. If you are playing a 11.025KHz signal, there are 4 samples per cycle. This will hardly matches the appearance of the original signal. There are many waveforms and people are capable of differentiating between saw, sine, and square waves to name a few. On top of that, a single sine wave is seldom played by itself. There are often multiple waves played (different instruments and instruments more complex than a sine wave generator.)
I am one of those people who is not satisfied with typical consumer audio equipment. There is more to audio gear than simply outputing digital samples at two times the upper limit of "audible" sound.
If it wasn't for RH, Beowulf would not be as popular as it is today.
I don't know if anyone's actually mentioned it (I haven't had time to read any replies), but...
Could you imagine a Beowulf cluster of these babies!!!
Gimme Karma!!!!!!
Could you imagine what would happen if you gave Scott Adams a Beowulf cluster?
Finally, a way to make some adult sized underoo's!!!! (The adult-sized T's got real restrictive after the age of 17.)
Well, at least I didn't mention Beowulf.
Man! Why does everyone yell whenever Beowulf is mentioned? To me, it seems like a good idea to plug Beowulf any chance one can get. If enough people mention Beowulf, maybe some AOL lovin', Mac OS usin' lamers will get it through their heads and build multiple Linux boxes and install Beowulf. I'm not saying Beowulf is gonna bring about world peace or anything like that. I do think it would be a better place if everyone had about 10 486's running Beowulf. Those that don't want to hear about Beowulf should go and read MacWeek where they don't ever mention Beowulf.
The US Patent Office is a puppet of major corporations. Look at the way Micro$oft buys its way. There will be some company with the cash to patent protons and the court battles will rage while nanotech spreads faster than the latest teen rock through napster.