Did you see the footage? 90% of it was blue/green screens.
If George Lucas had filmed Lord of the Rings, all of Bag-End would have been blue-screened. Compare to WETA who actually builds a small-scale set, a large-scale set, and an outdoor real location. Guess what, it makes it look like the actors are really there!
Attack of the Clones was endless, flat, eye-level camera shots. It looked like everyone was acting on a theater stage (in a bad way), and it was shot that way. The reason? They WERE on a stage, and the rest of the movie was created in post-production. So we get zillions of little CG elements whizzing around all the time.
Meanwhile, WETA takes the time to build a real Fangorn forest in their warehouse, and a real Dead Marshes in their parking lot.
Sorry, but from how you describe him, he sounds like an ancient, stubborn old UNIX hacker who is several decades behind in computer use paradigms. I think you can see this anti-usability undercurrent in most Linux projects. For God's sake, instead of getting people to type for him, he can't click a button?
Apparently Longhorn is supposed to do that. Even older pre-Longhorn apps will be properly scaled, though I'm sure Longhorn-compiled apps will enjoy much richer visual improvements.
So going towards the Windows UI and tweaking it along the way is possibly a good thing. Remember MS has spent millions probably on researching the User Interface for Dummies. If we want linux to be on the worlds' desktops you can't ignore MS and Apple's work.
Yes, but that means Linux, instead of having its own niche in the visual realm, will always be playing catch-up to Windows/MacOS. Do you really want the Linux GUI to be compared to Windows forever? "How much does this look like Windows? Not enough! Push out a new minor revision with a Windows-like control panel!"
Apple and Microsoft keep pushing their GUIs forward year after year. Linux, on the other hand, is running after them instead of treading its own path. I understand that there is a fair amount of borrowing and competitive inspiration on everyone's part, but someone needs to sit down and draft up a pleasant, powerful-yet-accessible GUI for Linux. Pretty please? Right now, OS X has the advantage of being retardedly simple to use and yet powerful because I can instantly access a UNIX-like command shell. That's what I've been wanting from Linux since I first tried it in '96.
Longhorn's GUI will be Direct3D-accelerated. They haven't unveiled the new "3D photorealistic" interface yet and don't plan to until release--to avoid copiers, they claim.
Windows cheats and loads the gui extremely fast, but if you watch your hardrive light, and tool tray, you will noticed things are still being loaded in the background. The system is busy for a few more seconds. You can load an application, and it waits till after the services start.
So, you're saying X by itself is as slow as both Windows AND its services loading up?
I don't know about you, but my Linux services get loaded before X starts up.
Yes, Microsoft did successfully break from IBM. But did he personally invent and write Windows? I don't think so.
In the beginning, yes. Well, he worked with the core team.
That's like asking if Linus single-handedly wrote Linux 2.6. You do realize since the 0.x days, a ton of other people BESIDE Linus have been writing Linux, don't you?
If you want to talk about how wonderful Bill Gates is, please just TRY to restrict yourself to ACTUAL activities.
Ignoring the fact that you think there should be a line break after every sentence--you seem to have forgotten that Bill Gates is literally the world's biggest philanthropist and has given more billions to more charities than you or your children or your children's children will in their lifetimes.
Yes, I see why he's being Knighted. Have you looked at all the medical research he's funded? Or are you just buying into the frothing, blind, Slashbot mentality of "M$ AND BILL GATES = BAD!!1 BECAUSE I USE GNU/LINUX"
And yet IBM has done things just as evil if not more so, yet they're championed here on Slashdot because they had no other choice but to embrace and push Linux once NT was taking off, and they had no product of their own to push.
You're not the only one, although when I mentioned once that I liked custom pieces, I got modded down.
I grew up with Lego in the mid-80s, where it was a mix of basic blocks and custom blocks. So, you'd have big 4x4 bricks to make the police station, and then custom little motorcycles and a slope piece with a phone painted on it.
I never found a problem with it, and the pieces were quite usable with anything else I needed. I used those custom pieces everywhere--and so did Lego, actually. I used to examine their model sets and note the interesting ways they used the same radar dish or antenna piece for so many different things.
I don't get the big deal. Wait, yes I do--it's people being nostalgic. Anything that happened during your childhood is somehow better than the way it is happening now. I see that mental fallacy all the time. Meanwhile, kids now will say the same things in 20 years.
By the contracts the band itself signs you, of course, mean the only viable contract. As if there were an alternative.
According to absolutely everybody, there ARE alternatives...indie labels, Internet distribution, etc.
You're behaving like the RIAA is forcing you to sign with their labels, as if there is no choice. Well, gee, you should let the other 80% of the music world know, since there is a non-RIAA world.
You, of course, mean the contract where the artist pays for the wining and dining necessary to get airplay.
So don't. There's Internet or other radio stations that DON'T require payola.
I'm so sick of this whiny victim mentality. Bands can do just fine without going to an RIAA label--they do it all the time. If you sign a contract, you sign a contract! What, is there a gun pointing to your head? Is that what you're saying when you write "no alternative?"
Oh, please. It wasn't "Flamebait." I was illustrating a point that, like michael, I too can arbitrarily deem something's "wholesale" price. I love Slackware.
I hear constantly how the RIAA's "business model is failing." I never hear about the people themselves who are doing the illegal downloading.
So, if the RIAA were somehow destroyed tomorrow and artists didn't sign the contracts anymore that paid the people advertising their music everywhere, you all would suddenly stop downloading their music for free off Kazaa? Just curious.
Highlighting text intuitively implies making a copy of it? Absolutely no way.
How do you expect to make a copy of something if you don't point out what it is you want to make a copy of? It is intuitive. It's so natural, this is the first time I've ever thought about it.
Slashdot Mirror
I answered the "weakness" question with a short pause, then said that my determination to get the task done causes me to overlook my weaknesses.
You must be new here. Let me show you around a bit.
You must be the new one.
Why do people take obviously sarcastic posts seriously?
Did you see the footage? 90% of it was blue/green screens.
If George Lucas had filmed Lord of the Rings, all of Bag-End would have been blue-screened. Compare to WETA who actually builds a small-scale set, a large-scale set, and an outdoor real location. Guess what, it makes it look like the actors are really there!
Attack of the Clones was endless, flat, eye-level camera shots. It looked like everyone was acting on a theater stage (in a bad way), and it was shot that way. The reason? They WERE on a stage, and the rest of the movie was created in post-production. So we get zillions of little CG elements whizzing around all the time.
Meanwhile, WETA takes the time to build a real Fangorn forest in their warehouse, and a real Dead Marshes in their parking lot.
I would have figured the LOTR movies will be the ones influencing kids to become filmmakers, just like Star Wars did in the 70s.
Where did I say that the command-line was obsolete? Talk about knee-jerk reaction.
You think they stopped being evil in 1984? Are you serious?
God compiles LFS-CVS.
Yikes.
Sorry, but from how you describe him, he sounds like an ancient, stubborn old UNIX hacker who is several decades behind in computer use paradigms. I think you can see this anti-usability undercurrent in most Linux projects. For God's sake, instead of getting people to type for him, he can't click a button?
Doubtful. Microsoft's own Virtual PC 6 even runs Linux, FreeBSD, and others quite happily.
Apparently Longhorn is supposed to do that. Even older pre-Longhorn apps will be properly scaled, though I'm sure Longhorn-compiled apps will enjoy much richer visual improvements.
So going towards the Windows UI and tweaking it along the way is possibly a good thing. Remember MS has spent millions probably on researching the User Interface for Dummies. If we want linux to be on the worlds' desktops you can't ignore MS and Apple's work.
Yes, but that means Linux, instead of having its own niche in the visual realm, will always be playing catch-up to Windows/MacOS. Do you really want the Linux GUI to be compared to Windows forever? "How much does this look like Windows? Not enough! Push out a new minor revision with a Windows-like control panel!"
Apple and Microsoft keep pushing their GUIs forward year after year. Linux, on the other hand, is running after them instead of treading its own path. I understand that there is a fair amount of borrowing and competitive inspiration on everyone's part, but someone needs to sit down and draft up a pleasant, powerful-yet-accessible GUI for Linux. Pretty please? Right now, OS X has the advantage of being retardedly simple to use and yet powerful because I can instantly access a UNIX-like command shell. That's what I've been wanting from Linux since I first tried it in '96.
You're kidding, Slashdot got it wrong?
I'm going to go now and boot up my Windows Media Center PC more quickly using Linux!
Longhorn's GUI will be Direct3D-accelerated. They haven't unveiled the new "3D photorealistic" interface yet and don't plan to until release--to avoid copiers, they claim.
Windows cheats and loads the gui extremely fast, but if you watch your hardrive light, and tool tray, you will noticed things are still being loaded in the background. The system is busy for a few more seconds. You can load an application, and it waits till after the services start.
So, you're saying X by itself is as slow as both Windows AND its services loading up?
I don't know about you, but my Linux services get loaded before X starts up.
Why? If you're going to knight Linus, you'd have to knight the thousands upon thousands of other people who've written Linux in the past decade.
Yes, Microsoft did successfully break from IBM. But did he personally invent and write Windows? I don't think so.
In the beginning, yes. Well, he worked with the core team.
That's like asking if Linus single-handedly wrote Linux 2.6. You do realize since the 0.x days, a ton of other people BESIDE Linus have been writing Linux, don't you?
If you want to talk about how wonderful Bill Gates is, please just TRY to restrict yourself to ACTUAL activities.
Ignoring the fact that you think there should be a line break after every sentence--you seem to have forgotten that Bill Gates is literally the world's biggest philanthropist and has given more billions to more charities than you or your children or your children's children will in their lifetimes.
Yes, I see why he's being Knighted. Have you looked at all the medical research he's funded? Or are you just buying into the frothing, blind, Slashbot mentality of "M$ AND BILL GATES = BAD!!1 BECAUSE I USE GNU/LINUX"
And yet IBM has done things just as evil if not more so, yet they're championed here on Slashdot because they had no other choice but to embrace and push Linux once NT was taking off, and they had no product of their own to push.
You're not the only one, although when I mentioned once that I liked custom pieces, I got modded down.
I grew up with Lego in the mid-80s, where it was a mix of basic blocks and custom blocks. So, you'd have big 4x4 bricks to make the police station, and then custom little motorcycles and a slope piece with a phone painted on it.
I never found a problem with it, and the pieces were quite usable with anything else I needed. I used those custom pieces everywhere--and so did Lego, actually. I used to examine their model sets and note the interesting ways they used the same radar dish or antenna piece for so many different things.
I don't get the big deal. Wait, yes I do--it's people being nostalgic. Anything that happened during your childhood is somehow better than the way it is happening now. I see that mental fallacy all the time. Meanwhile, kids now will say the same things in 20 years.
By the contracts the band itself signs you, of course, mean the only viable contract. As if there were an alternative.
According to absolutely everybody, there ARE alternatives...indie labels, Internet distribution, etc.
You're behaving like the RIAA is forcing you to sign with their labels, as if there is no choice. Well, gee, you should let the other 80% of the music world know, since there is a non-RIAA world.
You, of course, mean the contract where the artist pays for the wining and dining necessary to get airplay.
So don't. There's Internet or other radio stations that DON'T require payola.
I'm so sick of this whiny victim mentality. Bands can do just fine without going to an RIAA label--they do it all the time. If you sign a contract, you sign a contract! What, is there a gun pointing to your head? Is that what you're saying when you write "no alternative?"
Oh, please. It wasn't "Flamebait." I was illustrating a point that, like michael, I too can arbitrarily deem something's "wholesale" price. I love Slackware.
I hear constantly how the RIAA's "business model is failing." I never hear about the people themselves who are doing the illegal downloading.
So, if the RIAA were somehow destroyed tomorrow and artists didn't sign the contracts anymore that paid the people advertising their music everywhere, you all would suddenly stop downloading their music for free off Kazaa? Just curious.
By "stuff in vaults," of course, you mean printed on CDs you buy at the store.
By "goes to the management," of course, you mean the parties and percentages listed in the contracts the band itself signs.
What's the issue here?
Neither is the free Slackware distribution I downloaded last week. At least, it's not worth $10 "wholesale."
Highlighting text intuitively implies making a copy of it? Absolutely no way.
How do you expect to make a copy of something if you don't point out what it is you want to make a copy of? It is intuitive. It's so natural, this is the first time I've ever thought about it.