You've got to be kidding... a 2-digit ID for $115? That's absurd;-)
I recently saw someone post with a 1-digit ID... I think it was #7 or something. I wonder how many of us with IDs 100 are still using the site legitimately from the beginning (back in the Chips & Dips days).....
*Of course* MSIE support issue is a flaw in MSIE... I never claimed otherwise. That doesn't change the fact that it impacts whether PNG is usable for today's web developer.
As far as the gamma value goes, the problem is that PNG has the ability to shoot itself in the foot, and I have neither the tools nor the patience to verify if every single image I publish (some of which I didn't directly produce) has the proper value saved. With GIF, this simply isn't an issue.
Browsers have a pallete of colors -- #0000ff is as blue as blue can be *on every single browser*. With GIF if I make a pixel in the image #0000ff I am *GUARANTEED* that it will match a DIV with a BACKGROUND-COLOR set to the same hex value.
The same can't be said for PNGs without verifying each of them by hand. That's the fatal flaw to which I speak -- it's just too damned hard to use them for the types of images they're supposed to be used for.
Web developer has been my full-time job since 1995, and I have tried *so many times* to switch to PNG. And every single time, I slowly (and unfortunately) end up reverting back to GIF.
The two reasons that PNGs are unsuitable for large-scale use are:
* MSIE support sucks. It is getting better, but it still sucks (yes, I know this is a Microsoft issue not a PNG issue, but I'm not trying to place blame here.)
* Gamma value variation. Look at a PNG on one browser, and the blue value will match #0000CC, but look in another browser on another OS, and IT WON'T! Talk about maddening... this is one situation where the extra control by having the ability to specify a gamma value is a curse, not a blessing.
Yes, I know there are workarounds for both of thses issues. But the fact that they are both fatal flaws, and both have to be worked around, makes PNGs unusable for every-day use.
I was actually reading the article with great interest until I read the paragraph you quoted above. After that, thoughts of "how much is this writer getting paid to write this?" started dancing in my head.
proving yet again that the day of the machines has not yet arrived
Sigh. Such an obviously human-biased conclusion to what is indisputably one of the great achievments of computer chess. The fact that Fritz, running on rather modest hardware, drew Kasparov, is an incredible feat. The obvious followup is that the days of a human world champion are numbered. And most likely that number is most conveniently expressed in months, not years.
Running on an Intel Xeon server with four 2.8 GHz processors.
I'm waiting for the same 7x0 form factor with built-in WiFi and Bluetooth, and perhaps a slighly larger screen. Although the 7x0's 640x480 screen is absolutely stunningly beautiful for a PDA, it could be about an inch wider and still fit in the enclosure.
obComment: uid length isn't always a good indicator of the insight of a given poster;-)
I don't see/. as being a biased news site, as much as I see it's *audience* being biased. There is certainly a heavy Linux influence among/. readers, which is completely natural when you consider that this is news for nerds, and build-your-own OS is certainly more nerdy than buying one off the shelf.
> Please show me a system with better price/performance than the V440:
Is this a joke? You can (and we do) easily buy five Intel dual-processor 3Mhz, 2GB RAM machines for $25K -- with three year support contracts (hint: www.dell.com). Are you actually saying that this single box will outperform those five Intel servers? Now of course CPU Mhz doesn't tell the whole story (doesn't come close) but in almost all other regards (RAM excluded) the systems are similar, and you get *five* of them.
There are two ways to look at this issue; one is to make forward-looking predictions which are justified with little more than hand-waiving arguments, and the other to look at past history and see what type of hand-waiving arguments of days gone by have actually come to fruition.
The author touches on the issue, but IMO is comparing apples to oranges in this quote:
Imagine this. Imagine that you could travel back in time to the year 1900. Imagine that you stand on a soap box on a city street corner in 1900 and you say to the gathering crowd, "By 1955, people will be flying at supersonic speeds in sleek aircraft and traveling coast to coast in just a few hours." In 1900, it would have been insane to suggest that. In 1900, airplanes did not even exist. Orville and Wilbur did not make the first flight until 1903. The Model T Ford did not appear until 1909.
Rather than talk about airplanes, let's talk about robotics since that's the subject of the article. Off the top of my head, the industries in which robots have dominated more than any other are in chip fabs and automobile assembly lines, and this has been the case for over a decade. Are we seeing the type of doomsday scenario for the workforce that this article implies?
Sales are down over the last two years not due to lost opportunities as a result of file sharing, they are down due to the fact that CD TECHNOLOGY HAS BEEN SURPASSED by magnetic media.
News flash: LP sales are down every year since 1990. You know why? Because CDs replaced them. Well guess what? CDs are now yesterday's technology... I can't fathom spending money to buy a physical medium that's more difficult to transport, less durable, skips, can't record, etc. etc. etc. The combination of computer digital media management plus affordable portable digital music players have made CDs OBSOLETE.
Would love to hear your suggestions... as far as the accuracy goes, we've measured it (since that is our business after all). I think you'd be surprised at the relative accuracy.
If you're interested, check out SportsLine.com's GAMECENTERs. Unrivaled coverage of live sporting events, for any sport, but *especially* baseball and football.
Slashdot Mirror
You've got to be kidding... a 2-digit ID for $115? That's absurd ;-)
I recently saw someone post with a 1-digit ID... I think it was #7 or something. I wonder how many of us with IDs 100 are still using the site legitimately from the beginning (back in the Chips & Dips days).....
*Of course* MSIE support issue is a flaw in MSIE... I never claimed otherwise. That doesn't change the fact that it impacts whether PNG is usable for today's web developer.
As far as the gamma value goes, the problem is that PNG has the ability to shoot itself in the foot, and I have neither the tools nor the patience to verify if every single image I publish (some of which I didn't directly produce) has the proper value saved. With GIF, this simply isn't an issue.
Browsers have a pallete of colors -- #0000ff is as blue as blue can be *on every single browser*. With GIF if I make a pixel in the image #0000ff I am *GUARANTEED* that it will match a DIV with a BACKGROUND-COLOR set to the same hex value.
The same can't be said for PNGs without verifying each of them by hand. That's the fatal flaw to which I speak -- it's just too damned hard to use them for the types of images they're supposed to be used for.
Web developer has been my full-time job since 1995, and I have tried *so many times* to switch to PNG. And every single time, I slowly (and unfortunately) end up reverting back to GIF.
The two reasons that PNGs are unsuitable for large-scale use are:
* MSIE support sucks. It is getting better, but it still sucks (yes, I know this is a Microsoft issue not a PNG issue, but I'm not trying to place blame here.)
* Gamma value variation. Look at a PNG on one browser, and the blue value will match #0000CC, but look in another browser on another OS, and IT WON'T! Talk about maddening... this is one situation where the extra control by having the ability to specify a gamma value is a curse, not a blessing.
Yes, I know there are workarounds for both of thses issues. But the fact that they are both fatal flaws, and both have to be worked around, makes PNGs unusable for every-day use.
Definately.
Beowulf and the Critics, an insightful look at some of Tolkein's work.
Chips and dips anyone?
[If you don't recognize the reference, it was slashdot before slashdot]
I was actually reading the article with great interest until I read the paragraph you quoted above. After that, thoughts of "how much is this writer getting paid to write this?" started dancing in my head.
In what way, exactly?
Perhaps it's sad, but this is seriously the only joke I've ever made up in my life.
Q: How many quanta does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
A: One and a half.
proving yet again that the day of the machines has not yet arrived
Sigh. Such an obviously human-biased conclusion to what is indisputably one of the great achievments of computer chess. The fact that Fritz, running on rather modest hardware, drew Kasparov, is an incredible feat. The obvious followup is that the days of a human world champion are numbered. And most likely that number is most conveniently expressed in months, not years.
Running on an Intel Xeon server with four 2.8 GHz processors.
It appears indeed that there is *no* hardware change in this model vs. the 760, which begs the question "why the name change"?
Zaurus Forum thread on the topic
I'm waiting for the same 7x0 form factor with built-in WiFi and Bluetooth, and perhaps a slighly larger screen. Although the 7x0's 640x480 screen is absolutely stunningly beautiful for a PDA, it could be about an inch wider and still fit in the enclosure.
Reading the specs, nothing jumped out at me as being new when you compare it to the excellent C760. Am I missing something?
Product Specs
Review #1
Review #2
The Zaurus c7XX line has a 640x480 resolution. The screen is superb.
obComment: uid length isn't always a good indicator of the insight of a given poster ;-)
/. as being a biased news site, as much as I see it's *audience* being biased. There is certainly a heavy Linux influence among /. readers, which is completely natural when you consider that this is news for nerds, and build-your-own OS is certainly more nerdy than buying one off the shelf.
I don't see
> Please show me a system with better price/performance than the V440:
Is this a joke? You can (and we do) easily buy five Intel dual-processor 3Mhz, 2GB RAM machines for $25K -- with three year support contracts (hint: www.dell.com). Are you actually saying that this single box will outperform those five Intel servers? Now of course CPU Mhz doesn't tell the whole story (doesn't come close) but in almost all other regards (RAM excluded) the systems are similar, and you get *five* of them.
If only I had some mod points (and could post & mod in the same discussion).
Well done!
Someone stop me.
p lit//,$2).$3!gei,print'
perl -ne's!\b(\w)(\w+)(\w)\b!$1.join("",sort{.5+rand}s
A little better... can anyone improve?
#!/usr/bin/perl
s!\b(\w)(\w+)(\w)\b!$ 1.join('',sort{.5+rand}split//,$2).$3!gei,print while<>;
Note: slashdot is putting in an extra space after the \b!$. Remove that to try it out.
Well here is something close...
, 1 while@a;join'',@b;}) ([a-z])\b/$1.sc($2).$3/gei;print;}
/. seems to be putting it in there.
#!/usr/bin/perl
sub sc{my(@a,@b)=split//,shift;push@b,splice@a,rand@a
while(<>){s/\b([a-z])([a-z]+
Note that there shouldn't be a space on the last line...
Please, oh please someone do justice to the Perl language and post this in a one-liner! Certainly 5 lines are more than sufficient!!!
A little bit older, but don't forget Netscape's ONE.
is to make forward-looking predictions which are
justified with little more than hand-waiving
arguments, and the other to look at past
history and see what type of hand-waiving
arguments of days gone by have actually come
to fruition.
The author touches on the issue, but IMO is
comparing apples to oranges in this quote:
Rather than talk about airplanes, let's talk
about robotics since that's the subject of the
article. Off the top of my head, the
industries in which robots have dominated
more than any other are in chip fabs and
automobile assembly lines, and this has been
the case for over a decade. Are we seeing
the type of doomsday scenario for the
workforce that this article implies?
Sales are down over the last two years not due
to lost opportunities as a result of file sharing,
they are down due to the fact that CD TECHNOLOGY
HAS BEEN SURPASSED by magnetic media.
News flash: LP sales are down every year since
1990. You know why? Because CDs replaced them.
Well guess what? CDs are now yesterday's
technology... I can't fathom spending money to
buy a physical medium that's more difficult to
transport, less durable, skips, can't record,
etc. etc. etc. The combination of computer
digital media management plus affordable
portable digital music players have made CDs
OBSOLETE.
Jeesh. Wake up RIAA.
-Pez
Would love to hear your suggestions... as far
as the accuracy goes, we've measured it (since
that is our business after all). I think you'd
be surprised at the relative accuracy.
If you're interested, check out SportsLine.com's
GAMECENTERs. Unrivaled coverage of live sporting
events, for any sport, but *especially* baseball
and football.
SportsLine's home page
Disclaimer: I work for SportsLine.