24 fps? Heck, they better do better than that. I've seen 60fps clips (and, yes, they require insane amounts of space), but increasing the framerate does way more wonders than increasing the resolution.
After seeing 60 fps clips, 30fps equivalents just look crude. For instance, strobes flashing don't really seem to be very flashy at all. Panning around a scene look choppy and actually distracting to what goes on. 60 fps makes things seem way more natural than increasing the resolution ever did. At least that's my opinion and experience.
But if they did both those things I would be as exstatic as a audiophile/videophile/geek could ever be.
Yes. I know film is shot a 24fps, but there's no reason they should be, nor is there any reason why a new standard should inherit the weaknesses of existing ones.
Licence agreement? What licence agreement? You buy a disc, you get a disc. There's no licence or agreement anywhere in this process.
Stop FUDing around already.
As for ethics... You making a copy of something you've bought and which is your property versus a business making sure copyright will never end, stealing what belongs to the public. Which to side with? Tough choice indeed.
Get some sense of proportion. It's a link. It's actually a link to a product you have to buy. And do you honestly believe that there still are people on this planet using computers that haven't heard about MS Office yet?
Visual Studio has had most of these features for ages. Be it inline documentation or database integartion or the plug-in ability.
Just because it's not done entirely like in eclipse or you didn't bother to find out how doesn't make it so. It just makes you a troll. I can more or less refure any point on that list, but then again, I'm actually a certified developer and have actually worked up some knowledge on the product I'm talking about. Totally unlike you.
The only valid point you have is that is your are a OSS zealot, Exclipse is actually free as in speech and that Eclipse is designed for many languges while Visual Studio.NET is designed for the.NET framework (big surprise there, ey?). People like you make the OSS seem like ignorant and zealous morons. Do the OSS community a favour and shut up.
That's a grudge with developers, not the language. And that argument goes for any language. Give a lousy developer a tool and he will abuse it to no end.
Personally... I've coded both Java and C#, and to be honest.. I prefer C#. I think it's all the goods of Java plus a little nice extras.
As the DB complexity and size increases, my trust in MySQL diminishes. I honestly believe that MySQL is one of the lesser scalable DBs around. There's a reason even OSS people don't use it for everything. I mean...
They just implemented Stored procedures and Views (or at least that's what I've heard). It may be fine for blogs and simple stuff that could might as well been stored in flat text files, but as a serious DB... There's a reason there are other actors around, both commercial and non-commercial.
and, adiitionally, i don't hear much "you can trust big systems to ms products" nowadays;)
I hear the Microsoft site runs rather well and unhacked. And it has been up for quite a while. "Insecure" Microsoft servers are just as much the result of a incompetent admin as much as anything else. Just as using Linux won't secure you one bit if you don't know what you are doing.
Just as Firefox won't stop stupid users from Downloading "free screensavers". The product can't secure the shortcomings of a incompetent user/admin.
And as far as MSSQL goes. That's a damn solid database.
If it's an in-house web application, and he's not distributing it to a third party
Notice the "if" in your sentence. Some people actually sell software which needs DB-backing. And when you do sell a MySQL based application, you either have to GPL your own software or pay up. Ie MySQL is no longer a free DB.
And as I said. Not everyone is eager to GPL the stuff that makes the company money. Just read what I wrote, m'kay? I'm not writing it again.
He meant that not everyone is eager to show the world their sourcecode. In that case, if you use MySQL as a datastore in your application, you will need to buy a "commercial" licence, in order to avoid having to GPL your own software.
But you knew that already and were just trying to seem clever. Right?
To be honest I think feature wise MS SQL Server beats the shit out of MySQL. And that the "old" 2000 version, not the new 2005 which had quite a few improvements.
The only limitation in these "express editions" is how large the DB can be, how much ram it will utilize and how many CPUs it will run on. 4GB dbs, 2 GB ram and 1 CPU iirc. Feature and performance-wise on that same (limited) hardware it will perform as good as the commercial version.
As for large databases I woulnd't trust MySQL at all. It's a good light database, but I don't know how well it would hold up under serious load. Yes it has improved, but it hasn't even caught up with the features SQL Server 2000 had when it was released. Indexed Views coming anytime soon? As for PostgreSql I wouldn't know. I haven't tried that.
I agree with those other people in this thread who think this comparison is silly. If it should be meaningful in any way there should be more DBs and there should be actual benchmarks.
It's just sad, but that's the way things are going. Killing the intent of copyright in the name of intectual property. Not to mention asine DRM and anti-consumer acts no other business in the world could have done and still survived.
And thus. My respect for copyright and copyright-holders have diminished into nothingness. I don't buy their stuff anymore. At least not european or american stuff. I hardly even pirate that stuff anymore. I don't feel like giving those whining douches any of my attention at all. I simply can't be bothered.
But I must say... The asian cinema scene is looking better and better!
No shit. I can't remember the last movie nor the last CD I happened to buy.
It's not just the sheer among of recycled crap that's being released. It's political. I don't support bastards like that. And to be honest, I don't really feel like I'm missing out on much.
Let the bastards screw themselves over if they so much please. I don't care.
(Note to any outraged future posters: I am not endorsing terrorism, I am simply asking we look at their motivations analytically rather than emotionally)
I think this satire pretty much nails the state of the democracy in the US of A.
Ok. So people may not vote agianst the other party, but if there's any democracy in the world where polerization and demonization seems to be the main mechanism for attracting voters, that's the USA for you.
Basicly. The USA seems to be pretty stagnant, and most people aren't willing to "waste" their vote on a third candidate because noone else is. You guys are fucked:P
Deleting a file doesn't actually get rid of the info. I believe it simply rids the FAT (File Allocation Table) of the entry for that file.
In the case of FAT it doesn't even do that. Get any decent filesystem editor and you will see that only the first letter in the filename has been replaced by another character telling the OS to ignore the entry. That's why you had to provide the first letter in the filename when undeleting with any given recovery tool back in the DOS days.
In the case of NTFS, I do believe that the actual filesystem-entry is removed. Because undelete in NTFS takes freakin' decades. Even for small amounts of data.
On the day that Visual Studio was released to the MSDN, amid great fanfar, I downloaded that night at 650KB/second (the cap on my cable modem) for the entirity of the download.
And so did I and probably quite a few thousand other developers worldwide. Our rate were between 500 and 900 KB/s.
To think that you can slashdot Microsofts site because of a puny WMV-file is naive.
Not to give you a heartattack or anything, but you can actually choose your searchengine of choice in IE7. It works pretty much like you it does in Firefox. They copied everything good about Firefox (which Firefox in most cases got from Opera) and implemented it poorly.
Yours sincerely, Firefox-user who has tried IE7 Beta 1.
I've tried IE7 Beta 1 and let me tell you. They fucked up the UI in every single way possible. Rearranged everything known, and basicly implemented tabs in the poorest way I've ever seen it implemented.
Even people complaining about Opera's "untraditional" default UI, would praise Opera after seeing this mess. The best part? It can't be configured to work in a sane or usable way.
In short, from top and down: Tabs on top. Then the URL-bar. Then the toolbar and finally the menu-bar. In all honesty, you can rearrenge the toolbar and menubar, but the tabs and URL-bar has to remain on top.
Maybe there are fixes, but if an advanced user can't figure it out in 5 minutes, I call it "broken". Which seems to be the most fitting word I can think of for IE7.
Slashdot Mirror
HD
1900x1080 at 24hz -- 2mp
24 fps? Heck, they better do better than that. I've seen 60fps clips (and, yes, they require insane amounts of space), but increasing the framerate does way more wonders than increasing the resolution.
After seeing 60 fps clips, 30fps equivalents just look crude. For instance, strobes flashing don't really seem to be very flashy at all. Panning around a scene look choppy and actually distracting to what goes on. 60 fps makes things seem way more natural than increasing the resolution ever did. At least that's my opinion and experience.
But if they did both those things I would be as exstatic as a audiophile/videophile/geek could ever be.
Yes. I know film is shot a 24fps, but there's no reason they should be, nor is there any reason why a new standard should inherit the weaknesses of existing ones.
Licence agreement? What licence agreement? You buy a disc, you get a disc. There's no licence or agreement anywhere in this process.
Stop FUDing around already.
As for ethics... You making a copy of something you've bought and which is your property versus a business making sure copyright will never end, stealing what belongs to the public. Which to side with? Tough choice indeed.
and 2006 won't be the year of Linux on the desktop.
I'm still willing to bet money that slashdot will report it is anyway.
Indeed. Is this an article or an ad? "Sure to be a hit with the kids"? Seriously. WTF?
And some people are paranoid.
Get some sense of proportion. It's a link. It's actually a link to a product you have to buy. And do you honestly believe that there still are people on this planet using computers that haven't heard about MS Office yet?
Christ. Talk about overreaction.
"The lawyers will have a field day" indeed.
Disabling auto-run is not circumvention. It's either common sense, or just a preference of how you'd like to use your media.
So in effect, you don't need to do anything to break the protection. It's ineffective.
Visual Studio has had most of these features for ages. Be it inline documentation or database integartion or the plug-in ability.
Just because it's not done entirely like in eclipse or you didn't bother to find out how doesn't make it so. It just makes you a troll. I can more or less refure any point on that list, but then again, I'm actually a certified developer and have actually worked up some knowledge on the product I'm talking about. Totally unlike you.
The only valid point you have is that is your are a OSS zealot, Exclipse is actually free as in speech and that Eclipse is designed for many languges while Visual Studio .NET is designed for the .NET framework (big surprise there, ey?). People like you make the OSS seem like ignorant and zealous morons. Do the OSS community a favour and shut up.
That's a grudge with developers, not the language. And that argument goes for any language. Give a lousy developer a tool and he will abuse it to no end.
Personally... I've coded both Java and C#, and to be honest.. I prefer C#. I think it's all the goods of Java plus a little nice extras.
As the DB complexity and size increases, my trust in MySQL diminishes. I honestly believe that MySQL is one of the lesser scalable DBs around. There's a reason even OSS people don't use it for everything. I mean...
They just implemented Stored procedures and Views (or at least that's what I've heard). It may be fine for blogs and simple stuff that could might as well been stored in flat text files, but as a serious DB... There's a reason there are other actors around, both commercial and non-commercial.
and, adiitionally, i don't hear much "you can trust big systems to ms products" nowadays ;)
I hear the Microsoft site runs rather well and unhacked. And it has been up for quite a while. "Insecure" Microsoft servers are just as much the result of a incompetent admin as much as anything else. Just as using Linux won't secure you one bit if you don't know what you are doing.
Just as Firefox won't stop stupid users from Downloading "free screensavers". The product can't secure the shortcomings of a incompetent user/admin.
And as far as MSSQL goes. That's a damn solid database.
If it's an in-house web application, and he's not distributing it to a third party
Notice the "if" in your sentence. Some people actually sell software which needs DB-backing. And when you do sell a MySQL based application, you either have to GPL your own software or pay up. Ie MySQL is no longer a free DB.
And as I said. Not everyone is eager to GPL the stuff that makes the company money. Just read what I wrote, m'kay? I'm not writing it again.
He meant that not everyone is eager to show the world their sourcecode. In that case, if you use MySQL as a datastore in your application, you will need to buy a "commercial" licence, in order to avoid having to GPL your own software.
But you knew that already and were just trying to seem clever. Right?
To be honest I think feature wise MS SQL Server beats the shit out of MySQL. And that the "old" 2000 version, not the new 2005 which had quite a few improvements.
The only limitation in these "express editions" is how large the DB can be, how much ram it will utilize and how many CPUs it will run on. 4GB dbs, 2 GB ram and 1 CPU iirc. Feature and performance-wise on that same (limited) hardware it will perform as good as the commercial version.
As for large databases I woulnd't trust MySQL at all. It's a good light database, but I don't know how well it would hold up under serious load. Yes it has improved, but it hasn't even caught up with the features SQL Server 2000 had when it was released. Indexed Views coming anytime soon? As for PostgreSql I wouldn't know. I haven't tried that.
I agree with those other people in this thread who think this comparison is silly. If it should be meaningful in any way there should be more DBs and there should be actual benchmarks.
Now with a correct link!
If these words were people, I would embrace their genocide.
It's just sad, but that's the way things are going. Killing the intent of copyright in the name of intectual property. Not to mention asine DRM and anti-consumer acts no other business in the world could have done and still survived.
And thus. My respect for copyright and copyright-holders have diminished into nothingness. I don't buy their stuff anymore. At least not european or american stuff. I hardly even pirate that stuff anymore. I don't feel like giving those whining douches any of my attention at all. I simply can't be bothered.
But I must say... The asian cinema scene is looking better and better!
No shit. I can't remember the last movie nor the last CD I happened to buy.
It's not just the sheer among of recycled crap that's being released. It's political. I don't support bastards like that. And to be honest, I don't really feel like I'm missing out on much.
Let the bastards screw themselves over if they so much please. I don't care.
I rarely stand behind MS, but i think this is all getting a bit silly now.
Now, now. We all know that the patent system is working 100% as intended. If the patent system tells us MS is bad, it can't possibly be wrong.
Why should switching formats make me go buy music again (like it used to). Am I supposed to go out and buy a few hundred CDs to replace them?
Yes. Hope this helps.
Yours sincerely
the RIAA.
(Note to any outraged future posters: I am not endorsing terrorism, I am simply asking we look at their motivations analytically rather than emotionally)
But then we wouldn't have anyone to 'liberate'!
I think this satire pretty much nails the state of the democracy in the US of A.
Ok. So people may not vote agianst the other party, but if there's any democracy in the world where polerization and demonization seems to be the main mechanism for attracting voters, that's the USA for you.
Basicly. The USA seems to be pretty stagnant, and most people aren't willing to "waste" their vote on a third candidate because noone else is. You guys are fucked :P
Deleting a file doesn't actually get rid of the info. I believe it simply rids the FAT (File Allocation Table) of the entry for that file.
In the case of FAT it doesn't even do that. Get any decent filesystem editor and you will see that only the first letter in the filename has been replaced by another character telling the OS to ignore the entry. That's why you had to provide the first letter in the filename when undeleting with any given recovery tool back in the DOS days.
In the case of NTFS, I do believe that the actual filesystem-entry is removed. Because undelete in NTFS takes freakin' decades. Even for small amounts of data.
You forgot "hackers".
On the day that Visual Studio was released to the MSDN, amid great fanfar, I downloaded that night at 650KB/second (the cap on my cable modem) for the entirity of the download.
And so did I and probably quite a few thousand other developers worldwide. Our rate were between 500 and 900 KB/s.
To think that you can slashdot Microsofts site because of a puny WMV-file is naive.
Not to give you a heartattack or anything, but you can actually choose your searchengine of choice in IE7. It works pretty much like you it does in Firefox. They copied everything good about Firefox (which Firefox in most cases got from Opera) and implemented it poorly.
Yours sincerely, Firefox-user who has tried IE7 Beta 1.
I've tried IE7 Beta 1 and let me tell you. They fucked up the UI in every single way possible. Rearranged everything known, and basicly implemented tabs in the poorest way I've ever seen it implemented.
Even people complaining about Opera's "untraditional" default UI, would praise Opera after seeing this mess. The best part? It can't be configured to work in a sane or usable way.
In short, from top and down: Tabs on top. Then the URL-bar. Then the toolbar and finally the menu-bar. In all honesty, you can rearrenge the toolbar and menubar, but the tabs and URL-bar has to remain on top.
Maybe there are fixes, but if an advanced user can't figure it out in 5 minutes, I call it "broken". Which seems to be the most fitting word I can think of for IE7.