If you have, I bet you've never tried playing a game at 30fps, then again at 60fps, then 120fps (what most CRTs could handle). The difference really is night and day.
You can see this yourself here (zipped AVI file). Original page here, but of course YouTube can't do more than 30fps yet.
Also, are you seriously trying to tell me that traditional film content (filmed at 24fps no matter how it's presented later) looks no less smooth to you than broadcast television (effective 50fps or 60fps depending on where you live)? Perhaps you're now limiting your argument to 48 vs higher frame rates which is slightly less outrageous.
But if you're wanting a study on why even vurrent TV frame rates are not sufficient, here's one by the BBC.
That's only because you've been conditioned. Day time soap operas are filmed with TV cameras at effectively 60fps, so when you see motion approaching this rate you associate the two.
You think 24fps looks epic because that's all you've ever seen big movies move at. In short, you've been conditioned to like crap, and will get over it.
Not when I see juddery pans in theatres, then rent the same movie on DVD to watch on my 100Hz TV with motion interpolation and see a beautiful, sharp, smooth pan of a scene that was almost entirely lost on the big screen.
Cinemas had to upgrade when talkies were introduced too. Likewise for 3D.
Okay, so many people aren't fond of 3D, fair enough. However high frame-rate is a much better improvement and long, long overdue.
Movies will look much better as we get the perception of actual moving pictures and not juddery slide-shows of today. Once people get over the soap-opera effect nobody will want to go back.
That's one reason that on the rare occasion I do see a movie, it's right at the end of its release schedule. I figured the local business needs the money more than the MPAA affiliates.
I see RPM's and DEB's but no static nor dynamic tarballs. In the past these have been useful for installing to other distros like Arch, and cases where the packaged versions conflict with existing libraries. Are they available somewhere?
Not that I'm a big Skype user nor supporter myself, but I know I'm going to get bugged by other people about this.
We've had so many visitors come by here who have either had their wireless connections randomly drop out (requiring Airport disable/enable) or just altogether not work at all, and they've all had one thing in common - MBP. All others were fine (PC, MacBook Air, netbook, etc).
Those are recent models too. The 2008 MBPs had decent wireless (IIRC) but were much more likely to cook their GPUs, motherboards or screens. An utter nightmare.
Anyone here who is the least bit surprised at this move needs to turn in their geek cards immediately.
While Skype's popularity has continued to steadily increase, its quality has unquestionably been in decline since even before Microsoft bought them. Now that they're MS-owned the only real option is to seek out alternatives.
Holy shit, I had no idea the Gates foundation was involved with the criminal racket Monsanto, who are one of the few companies I regard as more evil than Microsoft and much, much more dangerous not only to the economy but to our entire food chain.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, that and having every woman on the planet wearing a burqa.
Sorry, but I had to laugh a bit.
You've never played any PC games have you?
If you have, I bet you've never tried playing a game at 30fps, then again at 60fps, then 120fps (what most CRTs could handle). The difference really is night and day.
You can see this yourself here (zipped AVI file). Original page here, but of course YouTube can't do more than 30fps yet.
Also, are you seriously trying to tell me that traditional film content (filmed at 24fps no matter how it's presented later) looks no less smooth to you than broadcast television (effective 50fps or 60fps depending on where you live)? Perhaps you're now limiting your argument to 48 vs higher frame rates which is slightly less outrageous.
But if you're wanting a study on why even vurrent TV frame rates are not sufficient, here's one by the BBC.
Wait, you feel like a fool because you voted for Kodos and not Kang?
I'm not sure that's the correct reason...
That's only because you've been conditioned. Day time soap operas are filmed with TV cameras at effectively 60fps, so when you see motion approaching this rate you associate the two.
You think 24fps looks epic because that's all you've ever seen big movies move at. In short, you've been conditioned to like crap, and will get over it.
No.
Not when I see juddery pans in theatres, then rent the same movie on DVD to watch on my 100Hz TV with motion interpolation and see a beautiful, sharp, smooth pan of a scene that was almost entirely lost on the big screen.
Please investigate 3:2 pulldown and come back to us here.
Well said, sir.
*applause*
Lynching. I believe it's still legal to lynch such offenders in movie theatres.
Cinemas had to upgrade when talkies were introduced too. Likewise for 3D.
Okay, so many people aren't fond of 3D, fair enough. However high frame-rate is a much better improvement and long, long overdue.
Movies will look much better as we get the perception of actual moving pictures and not juddery slide-shows of today. Once people get over the soap-opera effect nobody will want to go back.
That's one reason that on the rare occasion I do see a movie, it's right at the end of its release schedule. I figured the local business needs the money more than the MPAA affiliates.
It's a great indictment on Slashdot that this comment was not modded all the way up.
I see RPM's and DEB's but no static nor dynamic tarballs. In the past these have been useful for installing to other distros like Arch, and cases where the packaged versions conflict with existing libraries. Are they available somewhere?
Not that I'm a big Skype user nor supporter myself, but I know I'm going to get bugged by other people about this.
As another person dissatisfied with Skype, could you please take a bit of time to describe what other solutions you are using?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Thanks.
1) It's controlled by Microsoft, who have a very well proven and consistent track record.
2) It's Windows. On a phone.
I was with you all the way up to "for the hardware..."
Most TV's don't depend on large lithium polymer batteries inside them, do they?
Does the wireless in this model work?
We've had so many visitors come by here who have either had their wireless connections randomly drop out (requiring Airport disable/enable) or just altogether not work at all, and they've all had one thing in common - MBP. All others were fine (PC, MacBook Air, netbook, etc).
Those are recent models too. The 2008 MBPs had decent wireless (IIRC) but were much more likely to cook their GPUs, motherboards or screens. An utter nightmare.
Besides, RMS is too busy going all Rain Man at the airport to worry about eating.
Oh yes, the Internet. Or perhaps you mean the dodgy pop culture parts that expect everyone to be a narcissistic masturbating monkey.
Anyone here who is the least bit surprised at this move needs to turn in their geek cards immediately.
While Skype's popularity has continued to steadily increase, its quality has unquestionably been in decline since even before Microsoft bought them. Now that they're MS-owned the only real option is to seek out alternatives.
Yes it does, and yes.
Statistically, yes.
Even for a computer.
Holy shit, I had no idea the Gates foundation was involved with the criminal racket Monsanto, who are one of the few companies I regard as more evil than Microsoft and much, much more dangerous not only to the economy but to our entire food chain.
This needs publicity.
No, but people still remember Edison as an inventor.
That's PR at work right there.