Exactly like I said, if your background color is not white, it will show up. Put the png in a div or span with a white background and apply the IE5.5+ hack and the message makes sense. The point is the png uses #ff00ff as the background color, and IE/NS4/etc that do not support true alpha transparency will typically blend the alpha into the background color specified in the png.
Well weather.com's silly javascript based animation *never* works for me. I have no idea why, but it takes 10x as much time to load, then doesn't display anything but a white box. I don't want any features but a simple repeating loop, and accuweather.com's is perfect.
This may or may not be the issue you are seeing, but I notice on 15/16 bit displays that quite often the rounding of color values is different, even on the same browser but between different image types. CC is 11001100 binary, and I have seen cases where, for example, a GIF with that color in its palette will round down to 11001000 and diplay as #0000C8 but a PNG with a pixel that is supposed to be the same color will round up to 11010000 and display as #0000D0
This is the reason I absolutely never use the silly "web-safe" palette system. It makes much more sense to assume that any modern system will have at least 5 bits per color channel, and simply leave the last 3 bits as zero to avoid any rounding issue. This means that instead of using 33/66/99/CC/FF you use x0m x8 or FF. It gives you a lot more colors to pick from as well.
If you don't want to use the ugly IE5.5+ hack for alpha PNGs, you can at least set the background color setting in the PNG, which IE will use to blend into. I think you can set the background color tag from a pngcrush command line parameter if your software doesn't support that feature.
For example alpha-msg.png should show a message written in magenta (the background color) if your browser blends using the background color of the PNG instead of the background color of the page. If your background color is white, you won't see any message if you are using Mozilla/Firefox/Opera. If you put that image in a div with a white background and use a IE5.5+ alpha hack of some sort, the image's message actually makes sense too.
I'll give you the transparency (which IE does not support on PNG without gross hacks) but GIF supports infinite colors basically, in increments of 256. gif-with-32697-colors
Last I checked winpcap could be installed without a reboot or any user intervention via a silent option to the installer, at least under 2000/XP. I know for a fact you can construct raw packets however you want with winpcap since I use it in my tunneling program. I don't really see what would stop somebody from embeding winpcap or something similar and spewing out garbage completely bypassing windows tcp/ip stack. Other then size of course, it would be a large worm to include a bunch of dlls just for that.
If everything in Word is text or images or containers, inside of more containers, there is no reason you cannot visualize this like html or WP Reveal Codes. This whole "forest of gibberish" really seems quite similar to CSS. So many containers (tags with a specific class) share the same properties, as defined by the gibberish (CSS entry for the class). As far as I can tell, this internal structure of Word would actually give it the ability to have a *more powerful* interface (like HTML+CSS) as compared to Word Perfect (which is just like well formed HTML but with no CSS). All they have to do is add an option to show the boundries of the containers, and not just turn spaces into little dots and such.
Did you really read that link? I'm not following how a "container" is any different than a "start marker", the "contents", and the "end marker" in Word Perfect.
For every <b> you have a </b> in html, for every [BOLD] you have a [bold] in Word Perfect, so whats so different about Word that you can't show a {container start} and {container end} tag and someplace show a {container properties=bold}?
In fact, I don't think it even matters what the properties of the container are, you could hide that in a right-click menu. As long as you could see where the container started and ended, so you know EXACTLY what text and other containers where in it, you could percisely move text in and out of containers, instead of randomly guessing how certain mouse clicks will mess up your documet.
Well handling mailto: is a start. If it handled simple-MAPI that would be awesome. Webmail sucks for that exact reason - any MAPI-aware application is going to load your last set default mail program, which is going to be Outlook Express, or nothing. Many programs include features such as "email document" to make it really easy for the non-technical to automatically attach a file to a new email, but if you use webmail, then sorry! you are left out. Figure out how to save the file and upload it and attach it yourself.
The chip is native PCI Express. NVidia apparently is betting on the success of a second chip that they made for AGPPCI Express translation. The chip can operate in both directions and thus older GPUs can use this chip to work with PCI Express boards and this new 6600 GPU can use this same chip in the other direction to work with AGP boards. I wonder how much of a slowdown this chip brings though.
Not to mention 25ms response time (thats equal to 40Hz refresh, or 40 fps max) Its like having mouse trails enabled in windows, only its permanently enabled in hardware, and for everything that moves, not just the mouse!
Oh I never said it should done at all, just look at the difference in file sizes. Its just one of neat things you could do with GIF if you wanted, that PNG can't do. Not particularly useful though, no.
IE supports 256color PNG files with a single palette transparency with no JS or special crap like is required to support the 32bit PNG's alpha channel. The PNG is usually smaller too. Unless you need animation, PNG is just better.
GIF may be indexed color, but since the animation extension is supposed to allow for multiple palettes that DO NOT overwrite the previous palette, as well as the ability to have each frame render a small piece of a larger picture with mostly transparent background, you can "draw" a true color GIF.
Note that the GIF is 180K and the PNG is 14K, but they are both truecolor.
Unfortunately, many non-animated programs will only display the first frame, so you only see the upper left corner, and some will improperly overwrite the palette of every frame with the current frame's palette, causing the image to pulse widely as it draws and end up in the wrong colors.
Most windows system functions use the PASCAL/__stdcall calling convention, which tells you how the parameters are passed and returned, and if the size of the return value is = 32bits, I believe it is passed in EAX.
I think the problem is that documentary means "facts" and "objective" not 'opinion'. The thing may very well be one particular person's interpretation of the facts, but that doesn't make it a documentary. I would think the facts would have to be independently researched, verified, and agreed upon by most people in order to really call it a documentary.
Power supplies? Makes me wonder if the issue goes back to the old capacitor problems with the bulging and exploding and stolen electrolyte, etc.. I know I've seen more then just motherboards with bad capacitors and done a bit of soldering now. Heck, I have a linksys 10/100 switch with a single buldging capacitor in it, not to mention the Antec power supply with several bad ones as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly like I said, if your background color is not white, it will show up. Put the png in a div or span with a white background and apply the IE5.5+ hack and the message makes sense. The point is the png uses #ff00ff as the background color, and IE/NS4/etc that do not support true alpha transparency will typically blend the alpha into the background color specified in the png.
Well weather.com's silly javascript based animation *never* works for me. I have no idea why, but it takes 10x as much time to load, then doesn't display anything but a white box. I don't want any features but a simple repeating loop, and accuweather.com's is perfect.
blue value will match #0000CC
This may or may not be the issue you are seeing, but I notice on 15/16 bit displays that quite often the rounding of color values is different, even on the same browser but between different image types. CC is 11001100 binary, and I have seen cases where, for example, a GIF with that color in its palette will round down to 11001000 and diplay as #0000C8 but a PNG with a pixel that is supposed to be the same color will round up to 11010000 and display as #0000D0
This is the reason I absolutely never use the silly "web-safe" palette system. It makes much more sense to assume that any modern system will have at least 5 bits per color channel, and simply leave the last 3 bits as zero to avoid any rounding issue. This means that instead of using 33/66/99/CC/FF you use x0m x8 or FF. It gives you a lot more colors to pick from as well.
If you don't want to use the ugly IE5.5+ hack for alpha PNGs, you can at least set the background color setting in the PNG, which IE will use to blend into. I think you can set the background color tag from a pngcrush command line parameter if your software doesn't support that feature.
For example alpha-msg.png should show a message written in magenta (the background color) if your browser blends using the background color of the PNG instead of the background color of the page. If your background color is white, you won't see any message if you are using Mozilla/Firefox/Opera. If you put that image in a div with a white background and use a IE5.5+ alpha hack of some sort, the image's message actually makes sense too.
Does Mozilla (or IE for that matter) support server push with PNGs?
Not that server push helps auto-looping images, and live images probably dont need PNG, but just curious if it does support it with PNGs..
http://sirocco.accuweather.com/nxssa_r1_h_500x620d /r1h/inxr1kgrra_h.gif
This is better then any alternative java or javascript crap I have seen.
I'll give you the transparency (which IE does not support on PNG without gross hacks) but GIF supports infinite colors basically, in increments of 256.
gif-with-32697-colors
Last I checked winpcap could be installed without a reboot or any user intervention via a silent option to the installer, at least under 2000/XP. I know for a fact you can construct raw packets however you want with winpcap since I use it in my tunneling program.
I don't really see what would stop somebody from embeding winpcap or something similar and spewing out garbage completely bypassing windows tcp/ip stack. Other then size of course, it would be a large worm to include a bunch of dlls just for that.
If everything in Word is text or images or containers, inside of more containers, there is no reason you cannot visualize this like html or WP Reveal Codes. This whole "forest of gibberish" really seems quite similar to CSS. So many containers (tags with a specific class) share the same properties, as defined by the gibberish (CSS entry for the class).
As far as I can tell, this internal structure of Word would actually give it the ability to have a *more powerful* interface (like HTML+CSS) as compared to Word Perfect (which is just like well formed HTML but with no CSS). All they have to do is add an option to show the boundries of the containers, and not just turn spaces into little dots and such.
Did you really read that link? I'm not following how a "container" is any different than a "start marker", the "contents", and the "end marker" in Word Perfect.
For every <b> you have a </b> in html, for every [BOLD] you have a [bold] in Word Perfect, so whats so different about Word that you can't show a {container start} and {container end} tag and someplace show a {container properties=bold}?
In fact, I don't think it even matters what the properties of the container are, you could hide that in a right-click menu. As long as you could see where the container started and ended, so you know EXACTLY what text and other containers where in it, you could percisely move text in and out of containers, instead of randomly guessing how certain mouse clicks will mess up your documet.
Well handling mailto: is a start. If it handled simple-MAPI that would be awesome. Webmail sucks for that exact reason - any MAPI-aware application is going to load your last set default mail program, which is going to be Outlook Express, or nothing. Many programs include features such as "email document" to make it really easy for the non-technical to automatically attach a file to a new email, but if you use webmail, then sorry! you are left out. Figure out how to save the file and upload it and attach it yourself.
The chip is native PCI Express. NVidia apparently is betting on the success of a second chip that they made for AGPPCI Express translation. The chip can operate in both directions and thus older GPUs can use this chip to work with PCI Express boards and this new 6600 GPU can use this same chip in the other direction to work with AGP boards. I wonder how much of a slowdown this chip brings though.
Not to mention 25ms response time (thats equal to 40Hz refresh, or 40 fps max)
Its like having mouse trails enabled in windows, only its permanently enabled in hardware, and for everything that moves, not just the mouse!
MplayerC (find it on sf) plays all qt and wmp content and allows fullscreen and such too.
Can you watch TV on it?
On the remote itself?
For $700 I hope so.
And if some of those places in the world block all outgoing connections on port 25 and force you to use their smtp server?
Oh I never said it should done at all, just look at the difference in file sizes. Its just one of neat things you could do with GIF if you wanted, that PNG can't do. Not particularly useful though, no.
IE supports 256color PNG files with a single palette transparency with no JS or special crap like is required to support the 32bit PNG's alpha channel.
The PNG is usually smaller too.
Unless you need animation, PNG is just better.
GIF may be indexed color, but since the animation extension is supposed to allow for multiple palettes that DO NOT overwrite the previous palette, as well as the ability to have each frame render a small piece of a larger picture with mostly transparent background, you can "draw" a true color GIF.
See gif-with-32697-colors.gif
If your browser draws it right, it will look like this
Note that the GIF is 180K and the PNG is 14K, but they are both truecolor.
Unfortunately, many non-animated programs will only display the first frame, so you only see the upper left corner, and some will improperly overwrite the palette of every frame with the current frame's palette, causing the image to pulse widely as it draws and end up in the wrong colors.
Most windows system functions use the PASCAL/__stdcall calling convention, which tells you how the parameters are passed and returned, and if the size of the return value is = 32bits, I believe it is passed in EAX.
Well if it doesn't exist yet, look for a cross between a bonzi buddy, clippy, desktop girl, asian chick, and windows narrator comming soon.
You raise a good point.
I think the problem is that documentary means "facts" and "objective" not 'opinion'. The thing may very well be one particular person's interpretation of the facts, but that doesn't make it a documentary. I would think the facts would have to be independently researched, verified, and agreed upon by most people in order to really call it a documentary.
Power supplies? Makes me wonder if the issue goes back to the old capacitor problems with the bulging and exploding and stolen electrolyte, etc..
I know I've seen more then just motherboards with bad capacitors and done a bit of soldering now. Heck, I have a linksys 10/100 switch with a single buldging capacitor in it, not to mention the Antec power supply with several bad ones as well.
You can leave a message offline using ICQ, and thats one of the biggest reasons I still use the ICQ network.