VHS is analog. DVD is digital. Your stepfather is either a) blind, or b) a videophile for the ages that can tune his VHS equipment to achieve digital-like reproduction of source material.
In terms of vertical resolution, the jump from PAL to 720p is not AS significant, but still quite significant. However, since they are different aspect ratios, if you look at total resolution PAL and 480p are nearly the same, with PAL only having 8% more resolution than 480p. While 720p just kills both of them, with 125% more resolution than 480p, and 108% more resolution than PAL.
Assuming you have the same source material, and similar firmware to process the source material, 720p kills both 480p and PAL. However, if you take a crappy 720p processer and compare it to an excellent PAL processer, they'll look much more similar. But that's not exactly fair.
That actually sounds like a good idea for an investment firm. Maybe I should start it up, get a bunch of people to put their money into it, then run off to the Bahamas.
The quality of existing DVDs is quite amazing and I think most people will be happy with it for a while.
Have you seen HD compared to DVD? I've only seen 720p, and the comparison to 480i (or p) is absolutely amazing. I can't imagine what 1080p looks like. And this isn't just for videophiles either. Take your average Joe and show him HD compared to DVD and they will be in love with the obvious differences. That's why all these people have been heading to Circuit City, Best Buy, etc in droves to buy HD TVs. For your average sitcom or comedy movie, nobody really cares about HD too much. But for action movies, sporting events, etc - the lust for HD is intense.
Re:General Questions about Adventure Games
on
Ask Sid Meier
·
· Score: 1
That's why I'm talking about turning it into a full-fledged game. I've never taken part in one of those raids (or in any MMORPG, I don't have the time to warrant $15/month). But it sounds like you would have to move beyond even what WoW is doing. I'm talking a full-length game like HL2 or Far Cry with just as much detail and depth. You would have to get a group together that can dedicate a couple hours at a time to the game, so I'm not sure how the saving/loading would work or what would happen if someone was dropped from the game in the middle of a fire fight. But those are all semantics in the grand scheme.
As for posting instructions for completing the game... people post walk throughs for single player games within a day or two of their release, so that doesn't seem to be an issue. Instructions for completing raids is an issue because people simply want to get the goodies at the end of the raid. But in a standalone game, all that does is get you to the end of the game. The fun is in how you get there. What happened at the end of HL2? You were disappointed because you wanted more. You didn't care what was at the end of the game (except for the story unfolding).
I think the fact that this style has taken off in WoW is evidence enough that a standalone (well made) game would catch on quickly. People want to play with each other, we're sociable creatures. The biggest hurdle would probably be dealing with people coming and going. But I think requirements that you have to play with all parties present, and that you would need to set an hour or two aside at a time so that your friends don't get pissed when you leave 10 minutes in, would not be show-stoppers because the cooperative game play would just be enthralling. Developers could have a heyday with the rest of the game, because they are no longer restricted to a single player saving the world. Now, they have a full team to create the entire game around.
Valve should do this with HL3, I think they would be the best to take a first stab at this genre:)
But does the internet negate the "porn factor" in a format war anymore?
Re:General Questions about Adventure Games
on
Ask Sid Meier
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
If you have half life installed, check out some TFC adventure maps. They are quite crude, basically finding ways to hit switches and collect items. But the whole idea of working together cooperatively to complete the goal is quite interesting. I think if someone took a game like Half Life 2, that plays well but requires a minimal amount of thinking, expanded the thinking end of it, and added in a multiplayer requirement (ie you HAVE to work together with people to be successful), it would revolutionize the gaming industry. You would see a whole new "Adventure Coop" genre sprout up and spread like wild fire. Even the very crude TFC adventure maps have a significant amount of replay value. These would probably have an even more significant impact on console gaming than PC gaming. PC gamers all over the place are perfectly content to load up their games in the evening and play a couple hours alone (but maybe online with others). Whenever I see people playing consoles, they always call their buddy over to play or have 5 or 6 friends over with a GC or two, or a PS2 or two. If someone tailored an adventure coop game to this environment... man, watch out.
I think we saw the beginning of this with games like Natural Selection (1.0, 2.0, they seem to have fallen back with 3.0). They weren't entirely adventure-based, but their cooperative team play caught on like wild fire. And each team member had a original role to contribute to the team.
Someone needs to explore this and put some money into the idea. I'm sure it'll be a hit.
You could say the same for the Model T and Ford's latest Mustang. I mean, they both have wheels, right? They both have engines, right? They both have doors, right? Well, they must have not changed much in the design. Hell, what are we paying these morons for?
The overall layout of a GPS antenna is not going to change much, you're always going to have to shoot your signal in a certain direction. However, the efficiency of the components and the effectiveness of the materials has all been re-engineered. As well, I'm sure the bus is being continually improved.
Well, 350W has been good enough for me for the past 2 years, but the next generation of video cards are actually demanding 400W and 450W power supplies (with auxiliary 4 pin molex power connections). And I'm not talking bleeding-edge graphics cards either. I'm just talking a fairly new GeForce 6800 for $140. Manufacturers could be overstating things, but if functions on my cards start fizzling out because they aren't getting enough power... then what?
Yeh, but is EAX4 really all that much better than EAX3? Or EAX2 or EAX? Do you really need to shell out the big bucks for a card that does EAX4, or can you cut your expenditures significantly and go with a card that does something less than EAX4 (but still something really good)?
One of the DoE's primary marching orders is nuclear weapons research. They need computers that large to simulate nuclear explosions to determine yields, burst effects, etc. I'd much prefer them doing this on a super computer than testing the warheads out in the south pacific.
The seller of a product will usually set the price of a product to a level that he thinks the market is able bear without turning to alternatives (theft, competition, abstinence, etc.).
Wait a minute. So you are saying that if condoms went up to $100/box, then you would stop having sex? Wow man, that is just crazzzzzy.
It's kinda dumb anyhow, because Sunnyvale runs right into Mountain View, which runs right into Palo Alto, etc, etc and there's no obvious border between any of them. Somebody new to the area would never know they were traveling between the towns if it weren't for the signs (and slight differences in the urban structure).
Why don't people just stop listening to music sanctioned by the RIAA? There are plenty of music sites out there that offer songs much cheaper. I did a free trial at emusic.com and the selection of Alt/Rock/Indie/Etc is pretty good, but I don't think any of it is under the umbrella of the RIAA. And their normal rate is something like $10 per month with a limit of 40 downloads per month, only $0.25 per song (if you download more, I think they have other pricing tiers that give you an even better deal). I haven't listened to music from RIAA labels in years other than on the radio. And the radio just keeps playing the same shit over and over and over and over and over and over and over again so that you get sick of it extremely fast. In fact, my favorite radio segment is when a local station spends a few hours one night featuring local upcoming bands. I'm guessing most of them haven't signed deals yet. But their music is so refreshing and new. Hopefully they can find a way to publish their music before the RIAA sucks them up and bastardizes them. People just need to cut the RIAA off cold-turkey style.
Jobs is not greedy. He is just a control freak. Hence his positions with respect to Apple and Pixar, and why many of his product lines take the routes that they do.
Actually, I think you are wrong in assuming that the majority of people steal music. I would be willing to bet that the majority of people either a) don't care about music on the computer and stick with their LPs or CDs, or b) have switched to iTunes, AllOfMP3, eMusic, MSNMusic, or a host of other alternatives. Considering that 12.4% of the population in the USA is over 65, you can probably count them out as caring about music on the computer. That's already 1/4 of the way to 50%.
In places such as Sweden, where the distribution is not explicity illegal (that's my impression from the discussion), a tax for compensation would be more in line with what you are saying. But in the USA, where such distribution is illegal, a tax for compensation does not suddenly make it legal. It simply states that such illegal activities do occur, and in order to offset some of the illegal activities that are not caught, they will collect a tax. So basically, anyone in support of such tax would be admitting that they and others steal music, and this would be a way for them to legitimize their theft. And that's the only reason you would feel "OK" with it. However, if you think about it further and realize that despite paying this tax, you can still be hauled off to jail (or sued in civil court) for your actions, you might feel differently.
That's bullshit. I haven't downloaded any copyrighted material from labels in the RIAA, yet if I want to have an MP3 player to carry around my free Indie music, I have to pay the RIAA? About all you're saying with your post is that you are admitting you steal music, and you want everyone else to pay to legitimize your theft.
I did not mean investment in the sense that NASA expects to get 10% back on their money or something. I meant it as an investment in man kind. If NASA can spend $10 billion 20 times to attempt to launch a man in space and have it blow up on the launch pad every time, or spend $200 billion once to have 1 successful launch, they are better off spending the $200 billion once. Man kind expects a return on it's effort. We do throw money away all the time, but NASA is not expected to just throw money away. They are expected to spend money on scientific endeavors that have the possibility of helping man kind by advancing our understanding of our world and our universe through science. Whether these advancements are commercially advantageous is not NASA's prerogative.
Actually, we could not be on the moon by the end of the month. It would probably be physically impossible (amount of time it takes to pour solid rocket boosters, amount of time it takes to fill liquid propellant tanks, amount of time it takes to machine parts, etc) and it would definitely be logistically impossible. Assuming we use all existing infrastructure (so we can save time by not building new infrastructure), it actually takes time for a booster produced in Utah to travel to the mating facility in Denver, to then travel to the launch facility in California, Texas, or Florida.
And that excludes development. No matter how many people you have working on a problem, there is a minimum amount of time it takes to design something. See in the industry, there are things called "requirements" and there is a process called "requirement flow down". It works like this:
What's our goal? Get to the Moon. Requirement 1: Get to the moon. Requirement 1.1: Need XX km/sec velocity to achieve an orbit that meets req 1 Requirement 1.1.1: Need XX N thrust to achieve req 1.1 Requirement 1.1.1.1: Need motor with X kg mass to achieve req 1.1.1 Requirement 1.1.1.1.1: Need bolt with X cm thickness to hold motor from req 1.1.1.1 and sustain accelerations from req 1.1.1
You have to do that if you want even a glimmer of hope (say 50% chance) that you'll succeed. What's the point of throwing $200 billion at a program if you can only achieve a 1% chance of success (by just throwing things together and not making sure requirements are met)? Going to space is an investment, and we need to ensure our investment is not entirely in vain. That's why spending $200 billion (for all practical purposes, an unlimited amount of money) to get to the Moon still took 8 years to develop the program.
People do design from the bottom up, but guess what? They fail 90% of the time. That's the whole reason for designing from the top down.
If you want to take a tin can, duct tape it to some explosives, and see if you can make it to the Moon, then go ahead. But you're not going to spend $200 billion to approach the situation in that manner.
I'd say a minimum of 4 years with the right budget to produce a system that has a reasonable chance of making it to the Moon. But you know what? All we need is a 1 term president that is dedicated enough and has enough pull with congress, and we can get it done.
Slashdot Mirror
VHS is analog. DVD is digital. Your stepfather is either a) blind, or b) a videophile for the ages that can tune his VHS equipment to achieve digital-like reproduction of source material.
In terms of vertical resolution, the jump from PAL to 720p is not AS significant, but still quite significant. However, since they are different aspect ratios, if you look at total resolution PAL and 480p are nearly the same, with PAL only having 8% more resolution than 480p. While 720p just kills both of them, with 125% more resolution than 480p, and 108% more resolution than PAL.
Assuming you have the same source material, and similar firmware to process the source material, 720p kills both 480p and PAL. However, if you take a crappy 720p processer and compare it to an excellent PAL processer, they'll look much more similar. But that's not exactly fair.
That actually sounds like a good idea for an investment firm. Maybe I should start it up, get a bunch of people to put their money into it, then run off to the Bahamas.
The quality of existing DVDs is quite amazing and I think most people will be happy with it for a while.
Have you seen HD compared to DVD? I've only seen 720p, and the comparison to 480i (or p) is absolutely amazing. I can't imagine what 1080p looks like. And this isn't just for videophiles either. Take your average Joe and show him HD compared to DVD and they will be in love with the obvious differences. That's why all these people have been heading to Circuit City, Best Buy, etc in droves to buy HD TVs. For your average sitcom or comedy movie, nobody really cares about HD too much. But for action movies, sporting events, etc - the lust for HD is intense.
That's why I'm talking about turning it into a full-fledged game. I've never taken part in one of those raids (or in any MMORPG, I don't have the time to warrant $15/month). But it sounds like you would have to move beyond even what WoW is doing. I'm talking a full-length game like HL2 or Far Cry with just as much detail and depth. You would have to get a group together that can dedicate a couple hours at a time to the game, so I'm not sure how the saving/loading would work or what would happen if someone was dropped from the game in the middle of a fire fight. But those are all semantics in the grand scheme.
... people post walk throughs for single player games within a day or two of their release, so that doesn't seem to be an issue. Instructions for completing raids is an issue because people simply want to get the goodies at the end of the raid. But in a standalone game, all that does is get you to the end of the game. The fun is in how you get there. What happened at the end of HL2? You were disappointed because you wanted more. You didn't care what was at the end of the game (except for the story unfolding).
:)
As for posting instructions for completing the game
I think the fact that this style has taken off in WoW is evidence enough that a standalone (well made) game would catch on quickly. People want to play with each other, we're sociable creatures. The biggest hurdle would probably be dealing with people coming and going. But I think requirements that you have to play with all parties present, and that you would need to set an hour or two aside at a time so that your friends don't get pissed when you leave 10 minutes in, would not be show-stoppers because the cooperative game play would just be enthralling. Developers could have a heyday with the rest of the game, because they are no longer restricted to a single player saving the world. Now, they have a full team to create the entire game around.
Valve should do this with HL3, I think they would be the best to take a first stab at this genre
But does the internet negate the "porn factor" in a format war anymore?
If you have half life installed, check out some TFC adventure maps. They are quite crude, basically finding ways to hit switches and collect items. But the whole idea of working together cooperatively to complete the goal is quite interesting. I think if someone took a game like Half Life 2, that plays well but requires a minimal amount of thinking, expanded the thinking end of it, and added in a multiplayer requirement (ie you HAVE to work together with people to be successful), it would revolutionize the gaming industry. You would see a whole new "Adventure Coop" genre sprout up and spread like wild fire. Even the very crude TFC adventure maps have a significant amount of replay value. These would probably have an even more significant impact on console gaming than PC gaming. PC gamers all over the place are perfectly content to load up their games in the evening and play a couple hours alone (but maybe online with others). Whenever I see people playing consoles, they always call their buddy over to play or have 5 or 6 friends over with a GC or two, or a PS2 or two. If someone tailored an adventure coop game to this environment ... man, watch out.
I think we saw the beginning of this with games like Natural Selection (1.0, 2.0, they seem to have fallen back with 3.0). They weren't entirely adventure-based, but their cooperative team play caught on like wild fire. And each team member had a original role to contribute to the team.
Someone needs to explore this and put some money into the idea. I'm sure it'll be a hit.
You could say the same for the Model T and Ford's latest Mustang. I mean, they both have wheels, right? They both have engines, right? They both have doors, right? Well, they must have not changed much in the design. Hell, what are we paying these morons for?
The overall layout of a GPS antenna is not going to change much, you're always going to have to shoot your signal in a certain direction. However, the efficiency of the components and the effectiveness of the materials has all been re-engineered. As well, I'm sure the bus is being continually improved.
Well, 350W has been good enough for me for the past 2 years, but the next generation of video cards are actually demanding 400W and 450W power supplies (with auxiliary 4 pin molex power connections). And I'm not talking bleeding-edge graphics cards either. I'm just talking a fairly new GeForce 6800 for $140. Manufacturers could be overstating things, but if functions on my cards start fizzling out because they aren't getting enough power ... then what?
Maybe he already visited, but then his actions had drastic consequences. So he visited 1 minute earlier, and stopped himself.
Yeh, but is EAX4 really all that much better than EAX3? Or EAX2 or EAX? Do you really need to shell out the big bucks for a card that does EAX4, or can you cut your expenditures significantly and go with a card that does something less than EAX4 (but still something really good)?
Huh? Did you even RTFA? That's what they have. I was saying they should implement the rollers "locking up" to simulate running into a wall.
One of the DoE's primary marching orders is nuclear weapons research. They need computers that large to simulate nuclear explosions to determine yields, burst effects, etc. I'd much prefer them doing this on a super computer than testing the warheads out in the south pacific.
Funny part is that if you run into a wall, the ball locks up and you go flying.
Yeh, and what happens when we find out that the Sun is having problems? We all run around like mad because there's nothing we can do to stop it.
The seller of a product will usually set the price of a product to a level that he thinks the market is able bear without turning to alternatives (theft, competition, abstinence, etc.).
Wait a minute. So you are saying that if condoms went up to $100/box, then you would stop having sex? Wow man, that is just crazzzzzy.
It's kinda dumb anyhow, because Sunnyvale runs right into Mountain View, which runs right into Palo Alto, etc, etc and there's no obvious border between any of them. Somebody new to the area would never know they were traveling between the towns if it weren't for the signs (and slight differences in the urban structure).
Why don't people just stop listening to music sanctioned by the RIAA? There are plenty of music sites out there that offer songs much cheaper. I did a free trial at emusic.com and the selection of Alt/Rock/Indie/Etc is pretty good, but I don't think any of it is under the umbrella of the RIAA. And their normal rate is something like $10 per month with a limit of 40 downloads per month, only $0.25 per song (if you download more, I think they have other pricing tiers that give you an even better deal). I haven't listened to music from RIAA labels in years other than on the radio. And the radio just keeps playing the same shit over and over and over and over and over and over and over again so that you get sick of it extremely fast. In fact, my favorite radio segment is when a local station spends a few hours one night featuring local upcoming bands. I'm guessing most of them haven't signed deals yet. But their music is so refreshing and new. Hopefully they can find a way to publish their music before the RIAA sucks them up and bastardizes them. People just need to cut the RIAA off cold-turkey style.
Jobs is not greedy. He is just a control freak. Hence his positions with respect to Apple and Pixar, and why many of his product lines take the routes that they do.
Actually, I think you are wrong in assuming that the majority of people steal music. I would be willing to bet that the majority of people either a) don't care about music on the computer and stick with their LPs or CDs, or b) have switched to iTunes, AllOfMP3, eMusic, MSNMusic, or a host of other alternatives. Considering that 12.4% of the population in the USA is over 65, you can probably count them out as caring about music on the computer. That's already 1/4 of the way to 50%.
In places such as Sweden, where the distribution is not explicity illegal (that's my impression from the discussion), a tax for compensation would be more in line with what you are saying. But in the USA, where such distribution is illegal, a tax for compensation does not suddenly make it legal. It simply states that such illegal activities do occur, and in order to offset some of the illegal activities that are not caught, they will collect a tax. So basically, anyone in support of such tax would be admitting that they and others steal music, and this would be a way for them to legitimize their theft. And that's the only reason you would feel "OK" with it. However, if you think about it further and realize that despite paying this tax, you can still be hauled off to jail (or sued in civil court) for your actions, you might feel differently.
I'm glad that I know Google's home town is actually Mountain View.
Oh come on. Where else are you going to learn about kitten huffing?
That's bullshit. I haven't downloaded any copyrighted material from labels in the RIAA, yet if I want to have an MP3 player to carry around my free Indie music, I have to pay the RIAA? About all you're saying with your post is that you are admitting you steal music, and you want everyone else to pay to legitimize your theft.
"If you build it, they will come." is meant for shining beacons of light.
What you are describing is akin to a pile of horse manure: if you build it, people will come so they can slip in it and sue you.
I did not mean investment in the sense that NASA expects to get 10% back on their money or something. I meant it as an investment in man kind. If NASA can spend $10 billion 20 times to attempt to launch a man in space and have it blow up on the launch pad every time, or spend $200 billion once to have 1 successful launch, they are better off spending the $200 billion once. Man kind expects a return on it's effort. We do throw money away all the time, but NASA is not expected to just throw money away. They are expected to spend money on scientific endeavors that have the possibility of helping man kind by advancing our understanding of our world and our universe through science. Whether these advancements are commercially advantageous is not NASA's prerogative.
Actually, we could not be on the moon by the end of the month. It would probably be physically impossible (amount of time it takes to pour solid rocket boosters, amount of time it takes to fill liquid propellant tanks, amount of time it takes to machine parts, etc) and it would definitely be logistically impossible. Assuming we use all existing infrastructure (so we can save time by not building new infrastructure), it actually takes time for a booster produced in Utah to travel to the mating facility in Denver, to then travel to the launch facility in California, Texas, or Florida.
And that excludes development. No matter how many people you have working on a problem, there is a minimum amount of time it takes to design something. See in the industry, there are things called "requirements" and there is a process called "requirement flow down". It works like this:
What's our goal? Get to the Moon.
Requirement 1: Get to the moon.
Requirement 1.1: Need XX km/sec velocity to achieve an orbit that meets req 1
Requirement 1.1.1: Need XX N thrust to achieve req 1.1
Requirement 1.1.1.1: Need motor with X kg mass to achieve req 1.1.1
Requirement 1.1.1.1.1: Need bolt with X cm thickness to hold motor from req 1.1.1.1 and sustain accelerations from req 1.1.1
You have to do that if you want even a glimmer of hope (say 50% chance) that you'll succeed. What's the point of throwing $200 billion at a program if you can only achieve a 1% chance of success (by just throwing things together and not making sure requirements are met)? Going to space is an investment, and we need to ensure our investment is not entirely in vain. That's why spending $200 billion (for all practical purposes, an unlimited amount of money) to get to the Moon still took 8 years to develop the program.
People do design from the bottom up, but guess what? They fail 90% of the time. That's the whole reason for designing from the top down.
If you want to take a tin can, duct tape it to some explosives, and see if you can make it to the Moon, then go ahead. But you're not going to spend $200 billion to approach the situation in that manner.
I'd say a minimum of 4 years with the right budget to produce a system that has a reasonable chance of making it to the Moon. But you know what? All we need is a 1 term president that is dedicated enough and has enough pull with congress, and we can get it done.