Sorry but I have a firsthand experience, Flash runs pretty well on my nexus one, you turn it on selectively and flash video plays fine and thats all I need it for.
the price is not, it is 700 Euros which is more expensive than the iPad 9 inch version and it only has seven inches screensize. I just wonder how many of those Samsung wants to sell here with their pay more get less politics...
Well face it AppleTV has been a pointless garbage product and ever will be until Apple steps from its high horse or we do not want TV on AppleTV, which probably will happen when hell freezes over. The only thing which was a plus for the old apple tv you could mod it to a real power mac and use it more or less as a cheap unix server, but thats it period. With the new one they took the only real interesting part away and now it is totally pointless and uniteresting unless you want a streaming client which cannot even do UPnP for 99$.
You also could have done some reasearch instead of running to your phone net supplier typed in as us american the google webshop and bought a nexus one. It speaks legends that now the nexus one is sold over the dev channel worldwide, google is selling so many of them that they have a supply problem, and before when it was only available in the US no one bought it except for a few.
3d failed a second time in the 80s when they used the same 3d systems they do now. The main difference back then was that it was harder to shoot and distribute than it is now, but the 3d technology itself despite all the hype generated by companies like real3d was in the basics the same, as was the image quality. You either have to use shutter glasses or polarized light, period.
Actually arthouse cinemas in the city saved the movie experience for me. They simply deliver what moviegoing should be an affordable 2 hours without having to sit through the obligatory we want your money and we want all of it whipping.
Jepp except for the idiots thing I agree, his kids are not idiots quite the opposite. Whatever kids like, it is a fading as I kid I loved 3d as well, but now I hate it passionately and I probably would hated it from 15 onwards due to the obvious scam involved with the prices and all negative aspects like headaches etc...
But as a kid you simply love novelties however shitty it is, but that soon wears off. It has something to do with the way kids see the world where everything is new and must be experienced and discovered for themselves.
3d always was there, the technologies uses now are the same as 30 years ago, mainly shutter glasses or polarized light. I have seen Sharks 3 (a tremendously terrible movie) in the 80s guess what they used the same polarized light than they did in Avatar 3d when I watched it with the same distracting results caused by several things including having to wear the glasses.
Main difference, back then it was analog, but that did not make a noticable difference, and they did not ask for a surcharge of almost 50% evenly split between 3d surcharge and glass lending fee (or whatever they called it here)
And I agree 3d is here to stay to some degree, if you have a computer animated movie it is easy to render a decently looking 3d versions (back then you had to shoort specially for 3d) but for live action it probably will be a fad again, as it has been the last two times, first in the 50s with the blue and red glasses and secondly in the 80s with the polarized light.
Funny thing is besides the headaches 3d gives to many people and other annoyances, which slowly is giving 3d a bad rep (do I have to say again, we have been there several times), how do you want to use 3d.
If you want to use it subtle then nothing has been gained for using 3d, if you want to use it big time with things flying around then it is distracting. I have seen Avatar and I cannot really see what 3d has given the movie specially. Maybe I was sitting too far away from the screen to really having enjoyed the 3d but it just made a 2d movie more like a stage play by adding a 3rd dimension and it gave me a constant distraction due to the glasses and an headache due to the length and sometimes effects which were badly placed and made my brain go haiwire on the depth focus.
For me 3d is the next price hike scheme from hollywood period...
May I doubt that 3d is going to consume a lot. The problem is simply that there are so many disadvantages. While 3d works in certain movies and is finally here to stay, it is handled mostly as the next price hike scheme currently and thus getting slowly a bad reputation. The problems are: a) 3d glasses, the number one problem b) Headaches for many people, this is not a problem which does not affect a load of people c) 3d tries to hide bad movies like FMV did the last 10 years d) Price hikes like added glass surcharges for glasses which you then have to give back, or 3d premium price
In the end it is not worth it. Heck even the movie prices are not worth it anymore. I have a family, and I think twice about going to the movies anymore. Over here in europe the experience is like following:
Having to drive there one way or the other Fully overpriced snacks (usually 2-3times the price of what you have to pay at a supermarket) Pay almost the same prices as the buy DVD (which is too much for two persons + children) Have to sit through the obligatory you are a thief insult, which alone already made me leave the movie once upfront Have to sit through commercials for 15 minutes, 30 if it is a blockbuster with an initial weeks run Have to sit through the obligatory what is coming up
Once you have fallen asleep the movie starts...
I personally made a choice and went from going to the movies once per week to the big theatres to zero per year, well ocasionally every few years, it is not worth bothering anymore. Arthouse cinemas still see me regularily though. Oh shock cinemas without sound which blows your ears away huge halls of 500 people, but they have movie experience without being insulted having to go through ads etc... And they play actually movies worthwhile watching because they have stories instead of fmv+ story blueprints rehashed.
The last time I saw a movie in one of the big houses was Avatar 3d just to see if 3d had improved since the 80s when I last saw a 3d movie and it basically just gave me the impression that nothing has changed, the same glasses they used 20 years ago, the same polarized light, the same headaches etc... And of course the list of theatre annoyances I listed before which again made the experiences unbearable upfront. I just wonder why people are so masochistic and really do that to themselves, I assume it is probably for doing something with their friends and less for enjoying the movie.
I would not call iOS really superior... it has the NextCore which Apple has been feeding on for 10 years now, but the Android guys also took a serious lesson in userspace API design and went for a even more modern option. Underneath both operating systems there is a Unix core but it is not exposed that much to the end user. I would call both operating systems up to par with Android being better in the low level core tasks of multitasking and easier to program on userspace level, but thats basically it.
Microsofts luck always that the others did not have mass market exposure, even Bill Gates at the helm would not be more successful. The difference between Microsoft ca. 1990-1995 and Microsoft today is, back then they copied apple and most people did not know it. This time they trail Apple and literally everyone has been exposed to the original.
It really depends on how fast the MBA middle management can get in and slow down things. It is really that once the engineering focus is lost and the MBA guys have marched in things change and definitely not to the better. Things move from an engineering driven place to a place of politics and forms with engineering being a pestillence which has to be silenced and tamed...
There is not too much engineering going on at Big Blue anymore... IBM is on its way out of the business they deal mostly with consulting nowadays. Engineering is mostly still kept alive as legacy ivory tower and safety net if consulting does not work out anymore. The big hardware business is not IBMs core business anymore, IBM does what MBAs understand best, they do pointless consulting mostly. I personally think there will not be an IBM anymore in 30 years if they do not change their course.
The problem is not Ballmer, the problem is generally the way they do business. Microsoft never was about invention it was about copying or buying the competition. This worked until the late 90s when most people were not exposed to the better competition. The game has changed now, and Microsofts problem still is the lack of innovation they still copy apple like they did the last 30 years but people know the original nowadays. Add to that that Bill Gates despite his constant mispredictions had a good feeling where technology was heading or at least recognizing it before it was too late while Ballmer as the sales guy never had it, but also the upper and mid management does not seem to be in touch with that sense (probably an MBA thunking layer they built on top of engineering)
Microsoft simply has become what Bill Gates despised in the early 80s, the next IBM. Boring but there, earning lots of money, but not really that interesting anymore.
Sorry to say that but Microsoft wont change too much, it is almost in the stage of an engineering driven corporation.
First stage: Founders and young engineers develop products
Second stage: Founders and young engineers drive the company to a corporate status and have a good sense of what has to come, corporation becomes successful (Google is there currently) and dominating
Third stage: MBAs and sales guys take over more and more, engineers are leaving en masses as soon as possible or give up internally to develop something amazing, company is still thriving with new products from the back catalog and the left talented engineering force which becomes smaller and smaller and is replaced by mediocre people
Fourth stage: Company is entirely MBA driven, engineers are seen as commodity and work is more and more outsourced, product development is miserable and often behind the competition, the company becomes more and more like a bank (Microsoft today), depending on the business and assets built up in the initial stages this state can last for decades.
Fifth stage: Company either folds or becomes slowly a bank with some other assets which are dropped if they are not profitable enough (Siemens and others which are on their way out of engineering)
Problem with Moorestone again is the power consumption while it is better than stock Atom there is a reason why Intel just gives the idle/sleep mode battery consumption numbers, because as soon as Moorestown has anything to do the power consumption goes way up an is worse than ARM. Even if the A9 is only as fast as Moorestown (I personally think in reality it is somewhat faster than a plain ATOM) why would you switch to Moorestown, same or worse performance higher power consumption than anything ARM has to offer.
True the Amiga never really was the choice for artits and musicians the ST with its midi capabilities was. The Amiga however made major inroads in the video editing and cutting industry and even early 3d rendering industry. The reason was its programmable custom chips which until the early to mid 90s gave a speed advantage in those areas. The Amigas problem never was Commodore its main problem was the custom stuff, which initially gave a huge speed advantage but as the PC platform matured and overtook the Amiga in 2d graphics slowly but surely the hardware was to costly to scale up Commodore simply did not have the financial background to scale the hardware up, and they were too afarid to perform a full system change so the Amiga slowly but surely moved out of the marketplace being overtaken by more powerful generic hardware pcs. I think the turning point was the introduction of VGA which was good enough to slowly overtake the low end Amiga in graphics and the final nail was Windows 95 which finally removed gaming from Dos and with it the restrictions on resolution and color depth. In between was the emergence of cheap affordable soundcards which also like VGA were first good enough but relatively swiftly surpassed the capabilities of the Amiga. The end then was the emergence of hardware accelerated 3d gaming, that was when the Amiga as a home machine was dead. The video cutting and editing secort followed a few years laster.
You can see that transitional period with Babylon 5 where the first 1-2 seasons were rendered on an Amiga and things moved over then to dedicated 3d rendering hardware (or pcs I cannot remember) with significant gains in quality.
fastest x86 to run it on. Right now the fastest shipping ARM cores probably have less performance than the slowest x86 - the Intel Atom. The
Actually not really true the current cortex A9 is about 2-3 times as fast as the Atom, you can google the performance numbers. Which would probably make an extremely well optimized x86 emulation on such a thing slightly slower or about half as fast as an Atom processor.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry but I have a firsthand experience, Flash runs pretty well on my nexus one, you turn it on selectively and flash video plays fine and thats all I need it for.
the price is not, it is 700 Euros which is more expensive than the iPad 9 inch version and it only has seven inches screensize.
I just wonder how many of those Samsung wants to sell here with their pay more get less politics...
Well face it AppleTV has been a pointless garbage product and ever will be until Apple steps from its high horse or we do not want TV on AppleTV, which probably will happen when hell freezes over. The only thing which was a plus for the old apple tv you could mod it to a real power mac and use it more or less as a cheap unix server, but thats it period. With the new one they took the only real interesting part away and now it is totally pointless and uniteresting unless you want a streaming client which cannot even do UPnP for 99$.
You also could have done some reasearch instead of running to your phone net supplier typed in as us american the google webshop and bought a nexus one.
It speaks legends that now the nexus one is sold over the dev channel worldwide, google is selling so many of them that they have a supply problem, and before when it was only available in the US no one bought it except for a few.
Yepp the court trial went on for several years, after Microsoft lost they paid...
Wasnt the btrfs development also financed by Oracle, or am I wrong here?
Most intelligent people? Heck everyone knows it by now, you dont need any intelligence to know it.
3d failed a second time in the 80s when they used the same 3d systems they do now. The main difference back then was that it was harder to shoot and distribute than it is now, but the 3d technology itself despite all the hype generated by companies like real3d was in the basics the same, as was the image quality. You either have to use shutter glasses or polarized light, period.
Actually arthouse cinemas in the city saved the movie experience for me. They simply deliver what moviegoing should be an affordable 2 hours without having to sit through the obligatory we want your money and we want all of it whipping.
Jepp except for the idiots thing I agree, his kids are not idiots quite the opposite. Whatever kids like, it is a fading as I kid I loved 3d as well, but now I hate it passionately and I probably would hated it from 15 onwards due to the obvious scam involved with the prices and all negative aspects like headaches etc...
But as a kid you simply love novelties however shitty it is, but that soon wears off. It has something to do with the way kids see the world where everything is new and must be experienced and discovered for themselves.
3d always was there, the technologies uses now are the same as 30 years ago, mainly shutter glasses or polarized light. I have seen Sharks 3 (a tremendously terrible movie) in the 80s guess what they used the same polarized light than they did in Avatar 3d when I watched it with the same distracting results caused by several things including having to wear the glasses.
Main difference, back then it was analog, but that did not make a noticable difference, and they did not ask for a surcharge of almost 50% evenly split between 3d surcharge and glass lending fee (or whatever they called it here)
And I agree 3d is here to stay to some degree, if you have a computer animated movie it is easy to render a decently looking 3d versions (back then you had to shoort specially for 3d) but for live action it probably will be a fad again, as it has been the last two times, first in the 50s with the blue and red glasses and secondly in the 80s with the polarized light.
Funny thing is besides the headaches 3d gives to many people and other annoyances, which slowly is giving 3d a bad rep (do I have to say again, we have been there several times), how do you want to use 3d.
If you want to use it subtle then nothing has been gained for using 3d, if you want to use it big time with things flying around then it is distracting.
I have seen Avatar and I cannot really see what 3d has given the movie specially.
Maybe I was sitting too far away from the screen to really having enjoyed the 3d but it just made a 2d movie more like a stage play by adding a 3rd dimension and it gave me a constant distraction due to the glasses and an headache due to the length and sometimes effects which were badly placed and made my brain go haiwire on the depth focus.
For me 3d is the next price hike scheme from hollywood period...
May I doubt that 3d is going to consume a lot. The problem is simply that there are so many disadvantages. While 3d works in certain movies and is finally here to stay, it is handled mostly as the next price hike scheme currently and thus getting slowly a bad reputation.
The problems are:
a) 3d glasses, the number one problem
b) Headaches for many people, this is not a problem which does not affect a load of people
c) 3d tries to hide bad movies like FMV did the last 10 years
d) Price hikes like added glass surcharges for glasses which you then have to give back, or 3d premium price
In the end it is not worth it. Heck even the movie prices are not worth it anymore. I have a family, and I think twice about going to the movies anymore.
Over here in europe the experience is like following:
Having to drive there one way or the other
Fully overpriced snacks (usually 2-3times the price of what you have to pay at a supermarket)
Pay almost the same prices as the buy DVD (which is too much for two persons + children)
Have to sit through the obligatory you are a thief insult, which alone already made me leave the movie once upfront
Have to sit through commercials for 15 minutes, 30 if it is a blockbuster with an initial weeks run
Have to sit through the obligatory what is coming up
Once you have fallen asleep the movie starts...
I personally made a choice and went from going to the movies once per week to the big theatres to zero per year, well ocasionally every few years, it is not worth bothering anymore. Arthouse cinemas still see me regularily though. Oh shock cinemas without sound which blows your ears away huge halls of 500 people, but they have movie experience without being insulted having to go through ads etc... And they play actually movies worthwhile watching because they have stories instead of fmv+ story blueprints rehashed.
The last time I saw a movie in one of the big houses was Avatar 3d just to see if 3d had improved since the 80s when I last saw a 3d movie and it basically just gave me the impression that nothing has changed, the same glasses they used 20 years ago, the same polarized light, the same headaches etc... And of course the list of theatre annoyances I listed before which again made the experiences unbearable upfront. I just wonder why people are so masochistic and really do that to themselves, I assume it is probably for doing something with their friends and less for enjoying the movie.
I would not call iOS really superior... it has the NextCore which Apple has been feeding on for 10 years now, but the Android guys also took a serious lesson in userspace API design and went for a even more modern option.
Underneath both operating systems there is a Unix core but it is not exposed that much to the end user.
I would call both operating systems up to par with Android being better in the low level core tasks of multitasking and easier to program on userspace level, but thats basically it.
Microsofts luck always that the others did not have mass market exposure, even Bill Gates at the helm would not be more successful.
The difference between Microsoft ca. 1990-1995 and Microsoft today is, back then they copied apple and most people did not know it. This time they trail Apple and literally everyone has been exposed to the original.
When was the last time Microsoft innovated, guess what, never!
It really depends on how fast the MBA middle management can get in and slow down things. It is really that once the engineering focus is lost and the MBA guys have marched in things change and definitely not to the better.
Things move from an engineering driven place to a place of politics and forms with engineering being a pestillence which has to be silenced and tamed...
There is not too much engineering going on at Big Blue anymore... IBM is on its way out of the business they deal mostly with consulting nowadays. Engineering is mostly still kept alive as legacy ivory tower and safety net if consulting does not work out anymore.
The big hardware business is not IBMs core business anymore, IBM does what MBAs understand best, they do pointless consulting mostly.
I personally think there will not be an IBM anymore in 30 years if they do not change their course.
Three and four Intel never got that excessive MBA crowd for now.
Between stage 4 and 5... ibm is already on a slow road down...
The problem is not Ballmer, the problem is generally the way they do business. Microsoft never was about invention it was about copying or buying the competition. This worked until the late 90s when most people were not exposed to the better competition. The game has changed now, and Microsofts problem still is the lack of innovation they still copy apple like they did the last 30 years but people know the original nowadays.
Add to that that Bill Gates despite his constant mispredictions had a good feeling where technology was heading or at least recognizing it before it was too late while Ballmer as the sales guy never had it, but also the upper and mid management does not seem to be in touch with that sense (probably an MBA thunking layer they built on top of engineering)
Microsoft simply has become what Bill Gates despised in the early 80s, the next IBM. Boring but there, earning lots of money, but not really that interesting anymore.
Sorry to say that but Microsoft wont change too much, it is almost in the stage of an engineering driven corporation.
First stage: Founders and young engineers develop products
Second stage: Founders and young engineers drive the company to a corporate status and have a good sense of what has to come, corporation becomes successful (Google is there currently) and dominating
Third stage: MBAs and sales guys take over more and more, engineers are leaving en masses as soon as possible or give up internally to develop something amazing, company is still thriving with new products from the back catalog and the left talented engineering force which becomes smaller and smaller and is replaced by mediocre people
Fourth stage: Company is entirely MBA driven, engineers are seen as commodity and work is more and more outsourced, product development is miserable and often behind the competition, the company becomes more and more like a bank (Microsoft today), depending on the business and assets built up in the initial stages this state can last for decades.
Fifth stage: Company either folds or becomes slowly a bank with some other assets which are dropped if they are not profitable enough (Siemens and others which are on their way out of engineering)
Problem with Moorestone again is the power consumption while it is better than stock Atom there is a reason why Intel just gives the idle/sleep mode battery consumption numbers, because as soon as Moorestown has anything to do the power consumption goes way up an is worse than ARM. Even if the A9 is only as fast as Moorestown (I personally think in reality it is somewhat faster than a plain ATOM) why would you switch to Moorestown, same or worse performance higher power consumption than anything ARM has to offer.
True the Amiga never really was the choice for artits and musicians the ST with its midi capabilities was. The Amiga however made major inroads in the video editing and cutting industry and even early 3d rendering industry. The reason was its programmable custom chips which until the early to mid 90s gave a speed advantage in those areas.
The Amigas problem never was Commodore its main problem was the custom stuff, which initially gave a huge speed advantage but as the PC platform matured and overtook the Amiga in 2d graphics slowly but surely the hardware was to costly to scale up Commodore simply did not have the financial background to scale the hardware up, and they were too afarid to perform a full system change so the Amiga slowly but surely moved out of the marketplace being overtaken by more powerful generic hardware pcs.
I think the turning point was the introduction of VGA which was good enough to slowly overtake the low end Amiga in graphics and the final nail was Windows 95 which finally removed gaming from Dos and with it the restrictions on resolution and color depth. In between was the emergence of cheap affordable soundcards which also like VGA were first good enough but relatively swiftly surpassed the capabilities of the Amiga.
The end then was the emergence of hardware accelerated 3d gaming, that was when the Amiga as a home machine was dead. The video cutting and editing secort followed a few years laster.
You can see that transitional period with Babylon 5 where the first 1-2 seasons were rendered on an Amiga and things moved over then to dedicated 3d rendering hardware (or pcs I cannot remember) with significant gains in quality.
fastest x86 to run it on. Right now the fastest shipping ARM cores probably have less performance than the slowest x86 - the Intel Atom. The
Actually not really true the current cortex A9 is about 2-3 times as fast as the Atom, you can google the performance numbers. Which would probably make an extremely well optimized x86 emulation on such a thing slightly slower or about half as fast as an Atom processor.