The Mac Air has 56% marketshare in the ultraportable segment as of July 1st (http://bgr.com/2013/07/01/macbook-air-market-share/). So while you claim that "nobody is buying these", sales figures instead prove that "most people are buying these".
While it can replace most notebook uses, the mac air *is* an ultraportable... You'd be hard pressed to get more than 8GB of RAM into a laptop with a single SODIMM slot too.
That said, 8GB is more than enough to run three Win7 VMs simultaneously, what matters at that point is what you're running inside of it.
I didn't, the thunderbolt GigE adapter is cheap (thirty bucks), so I just toss it in my bag in case I need it (if you want to use video output and GigE at the same time, use a USB3 GigE adapter instead).
It seems like it might not do that today, but it sounds like they're opening up the API so that anybody can add support to stream to it.
What would probably need to happen is Plex's media server would need to add support for that, and then you'd use the iOS or Android interface to browse the content and instruct your Plex box to send the video to the TV.
Certainly, I agree with you. However, most people already have a computer or smartphone or tablet. My parents currently have both iPhones and an iPad. In fact, the Netflix interface on their bluray player is so slow (often images don't load at all, but streaming works perfectly) that they browse for content on the iPad and then use the bluray remote to type the name of the show in directly, so eliminating one of those steps (by allowing them to just hit a button on the iPad after finding the content) would really simplify things.
It's obvious in my parents case that Samsung's Netflix app is simply broken, but buying something to replace it would cost more than they're willing to spend (zero). An $11 purchase is something I can just buy for them.
So, the problem to be solved is "the Netflix-capable box my parents currently use is almost unusably slow, forcing them to find content on an iPad and then search directly for it on the TV to avoid using the barely functional Netflix box".
Your solution is to spend $100 on an AppleTV or similar. That definitely solves the problem, yes. But my solution is to spend $11 on a ChromeCast so that they can just hit a button in the iPad app they're already using and have it appear on the TV. It's both more usable (iPad interface is better than any remote control could be) and cheaper ($11 vs $100).
I have to set anything technical up for them anyhow, so I'm not sure how that's relevant. I had to set up Netflix for them, I had to set up their wifi hotspot, and they don't do local streaming media. They're not technically savvy: they're using what I've set up for them now, and this device looks like a cheap way to make that experience much simpler and better for them.
We're talking about the Rift supporting other platforms (since TFA says it doesn't), not Vendetta. Oculus is a 50 person company, so it shouldn't be surprising that they're maintaining official support for OS X and Linux.
The thing is $35, and (at least for now) includes 3 free months of Netflix (even for existing subscribers).
That means that if you want a 1080p Netflix box for your TV, this thing costs you $11... that's one heck of a lot cheaper than an AppleTV or Roku.
My parents have been complaining about how ridiculously slow Netflix is on their Samsung bluray player (the streaming works fine, the interface takes forever to load pages), so this might just be their solution...
Considering the Oculus SDK supports Windows, OS X, and Linux, I think the "only supports Windows" comment is simply wrong. The Rift is definitely officially supported on platforms other than Windows.
Astronomy is important, but professional astronomy doesn't happen in the heart of large cities, so light levels in large cities aren't relevant to professional astronomy... Even if there was zero light, most major cities aren't in good geographic locations for astronomy anyhow. The atmosphere is rather detrimental to making observations, hence why observatories tend to be located at very high elevations.
Except that "light pollution" isn't pollution by definition, and the safety benefits of illumination in cities far outweighs any potential inconvenience to astronomers.
There is no such thing as "light pollution". That's not to say that shining a floodlight through a neighbours window isn't inconsiderate, but it's not "pollution".
The proper solution to the OP's problem is to:
1) Stop shining your lights in the direction of your neighbour 2) Use a motion-sensing light so that it at least only turns on when it needs to be
WinRT and Win32 are different APIs, and all indications are that Windows RT supports Win32. Emulation of application code, while calling into native Win32 code, could work. And does work, since there are community projects doing just that. It's what Apple did with Rosetta, and before that with their 68k emulator.
The thing is that the SurfaceRT would typically HAVE a mouse and keyboard; both the keyboard covers include a trackpad, and if that's not enough, you can connect an actual mouse and keyboard via the full-sized USB port. This would seem to make the RT a great option for people who want a tablet, but turn it into a laptop on occasion (the Surface Pro is way too heavy for tablet use).
Another user in another reply pointed out that RT can be jailbroken to remove the restriction on running unsigned apps, and that the community has basically done a lot of what I talked about. They've got.NET going, they've ported opensource Win32 apps (where they can be recompiled), they've even got a userland x86 emulator going. If only Microsoft had done this officially, it would be a heck of a lot more polished.
Well, maybe when the RT gets to liquidation-level pricing, I'll grab one and try it out:)
Windows RT ships with a full Windows desktop and includes all the normal built-in desktop apps and utilities, as well as a desktop version of Microsoft Office, so there can't be that many libraries missing, if any. And unless they made some radical change, all that stuff is using Win32 on RT.
Its not that the API/libraries/runtimes isn't there, it's that they don't let you run unsigned code.
Basically, I'm suggesting that your entire post is wrong, disproved by Windows RT itself.
16-bit apps tend to have other compatibility issues than just the death of Win16, though, and were better served via virtualization or emulation even before the 64-bit transition. I don't think it's reasonable to expect software designed for a software environment from over 20 years ago to work perfectly fine in a very different software environment today. It makes more sense to provide those applications or games with an appropriate software environment running on the same hardware.
The Surface RT hardware is pretty nice. I'm an iPad user, but playing around with the Surface RT in a Microsoft store impressed me. The kickstand is neat, and the keyboard covers work really well (especially the one with actual travel). The problem was software.
People point out Metro as an issue, but that's not quite it; Metro is a travesty on the desktop (or laptop), true, but on a mobile touch platform it's very appropriate. The problem was lack of familiarity, lack of compatibility, and lack of marketing.
For the first issue, what I mean to say is that Surface RT has a full desktop interface, but restricts it severely. Metro is much better suited to a tablet, but people are used to the desktop interface, and Surface RT can still make a decent laptop (plug a mouse in and use the keyboard cover). Had the desktop been unrestricted on RT (no side-loading restrictions, same as regular Windows), then people could have transitioned more gradually, at their own pace, or even stuck to the desktop entirely if they wanted. This would have let people use the RT as a tablet when they wanted to, or as a laptop when they wanted to.
For the second issue, lack of compatibility, there is basically none. This ties in a bit to the third point, but the thing looks identical to normal Win8, so people expect it to run the same stuff. It doesn't. As has been pointed out, the architectural differences would not have prevented.NET apps from running at full speed on the RT (Microsoft just doesn't support it), and emulation of x86 code would have worked well for many apps, since any call to an OS function via Win32 would have resulted in native code execution anyhow. Depending on the application, that means that large parts of an x86 application would be running natively anyhow.
The third issue is lack of marketing. Microsoft did a terrible job educating people about what RT is (and how it differs from regular Windows), or why they would want it instead of an ultrabook or chromebook or other tablet. Users who did buy the RT were likely confused about why it wouldn't run their programs.
I think that a combination of an unrestricted desktop, compatibility with existing apps (via a native.NET environment and emulation), and better marketing could have made the Surface RT a success. Not necessarily a market leader, but at least it would have sold enough units to be considered successful. I know that I was personally tempted to get one to replace both my tablet and laptop until I realized how all the stuff that interested me would be disabled...
Unless you're dealing with legacy 16-bit apps, the 32-bit to 64-bit transition on Windows has been largely transparent and painless to users... Can you name some compatibility problems that a typical user (emphasis on typical) might face?
Key point, though, this isn't in the US, and the laws in Canada don't work the same way. Canadians don't necessarily have the exact same values as Americans, and one of those values is that hate speech is criminal rather than protected. These laws (and related ones) are occasionally controversial, but not nearly to the extent they would be in the US.
How secure does this need to be? Burn a copy to m-discs (rated at 1000 years), put a copy on tape (rated a few decades), put a copy in the cloud (like BackBlaze). Printing this out on paper doesn't make any sense. If you do that, be sure to store it in an OCR-compatible format, and be sure to use something that has heavy amounts of error correction built in so that you can get a 100% data reproduction even with OCR errors.
Another option is to put several QR codes on a page. QR codes max out (by spec) at between 1,276 and 2,956 bytes at version 40 (the largest size) depending on how much error correction is involved. At max level, 1,276 bytes are stored and 30% of the QR code can be destroyed before data loss. At min level, 2,956 bytes can be stored and 7% can be lost. Not all apps can read such large barcodes, however.
Yeah, don't get me wrong, Paper Mario wasn't a bad game, I just think it was silly to call it the spiritual successor (or even direct sequel, since Paper Mario was originally called "Super Mario RPG 2" until they realized they couldn't legally call it that without Square's involvement).
Slashdot Mirror
The Mac Air has 56% marketshare in the ultraportable segment as of July 1st (http://bgr.com/2013/07/01/macbook-air-market-share/). So while you claim that "nobody is buying these", sales figures instead prove that "most people are buying these".
While it can replace most notebook uses, the mac air *is* an ultraportable... You'd be hard pressed to get more than 8GB of RAM into a laptop with a single SODIMM slot too.
That said, 8GB is more than enough to run three Win7 VMs simultaneously, what matters at that point is what you're running inside of it.
I didn't, the thunderbolt GigE adapter is cheap (thirty bucks), so I just toss it in my bag in case I need it (if you want to use video output and GigE at the same time, use a USB3 GigE adapter instead).
Sorry, I should have said TFS, not TFA:
"A few limitations: Windows only (because the Rift only supports Windows)"
That statement is false, as TFA illustrates. It is the game that only supports Windows, not the Rift.
It seems like it might not do that today, but it sounds like they're opening up the API so that anybody can add support to stream to it.
What would probably need to happen is Plex's media server would need to add support for that, and then you'd use the iOS or Android interface to browse the content and instruct your Plex box to send the video to the TV.
Certainly, I agree with you. However, most people already have a computer or smartphone or tablet. My parents currently have both iPhones and an iPad. In fact, the Netflix interface on their bluray player is so slow (often images don't load at all, but streaming works perfectly) that they browse for content on the iPad and then use the bluray remote to type the name of the show in directly, so eliminating one of those steps (by allowing them to just hit a button on the iPad after finding the content) would really simplify things.
It's obvious in my parents case that Samsung's Netflix app is simply broken, but buying something to replace it would cost more than they're willing to spend (zero). An $11 purchase is something I can just buy for them.
So, the problem to be solved is "the Netflix-capable box my parents currently use is almost unusably slow, forcing them to find content on an iPad and then search directly for it on the TV to avoid using the barely functional Netflix box".
Your solution is to spend $100 on an AppleTV or similar. That definitely solves the problem, yes. But my solution is to spend $11 on a ChromeCast so that they can just hit a button in the iPad app they're already using and have it appear on the TV. It's both more usable (iPad interface is better than any remote control could be) and cheaper ($11 vs $100).
I have to set anything technical up for them anyhow, so I'm not sure how that's relevant. I had to set up Netflix for them, I had to set up their wifi hotspot, and they don't do local streaming media. They're not technically savvy: they're using what I've set up for them now, and this device looks like a cheap way to make that experience much simpler and better for them.
We're talking about the Rift supporting other platforms (since TFA says it doesn't), not Vendetta. Oculus is a 50 person company, so it shouldn't be surprising that they're maintaining official support for OS X and Linux.
They might cut off support for any platform, but Oculus is publishing versions of the SDK for all three platforms.
I'm not saying it works as if saying "it's not supported but it isn't broken"... Oculus is literally providing an official OS X version of the SDK...
The thing is $35, and (at least for now) includes 3 free months of Netflix (even for existing subscribers).
That means that if you want a 1080p Netflix box for your TV, this thing costs you $11... that's one heck of a lot cheaper than an AppleTV or Roku.
My parents have been complaining about how ridiculously slow Netflix is on their Samsung bluray player (the streaming works fine, the interface takes forever to load pages), so this might just be their solution...
Considering the Oculus SDK supports Windows, OS X, and Linux, I think the "only supports Windows" comment is simply wrong. The Rift is definitely officially supported on platforms other than Windows.
Astronomy is important, but professional astronomy doesn't happen in the heart of large cities, so light levels in large cities aren't relevant to professional astronomy... Even if there was zero light, most major cities aren't in good geographic locations for astronomy anyhow. The atmosphere is rather detrimental to making observations, hence why observatories tend to be located at very high elevations.
Except that "light pollution" isn't pollution by definition, and the safety benefits of illumination in cities far outweighs any potential inconvenience to astronomers.
There is no such thing as "light pollution". That's not to say that shining a floodlight through a neighbours window isn't inconsiderate, but it's not "pollution".
The proper solution to the OP's problem is to:
1) Stop shining your lights in the direction of your neighbour
2) Use a motion-sensing light so that it at least only turns on when it needs to be
WinRT and Win32 are different APIs, and all indications are that Windows RT supports Win32. Emulation of application code, while calling into native Win32 code, could work. And does work, since there are community projects doing just that. It's what Apple did with Rosetta, and before that with their 68k emulator.
The thing is that the SurfaceRT would typically HAVE a mouse and keyboard; both the keyboard covers include a trackpad, and if that's not enough, you can connect an actual mouse and keyboard via the full-sized USB port. This would seem to make the RT a great option for people who want a tablet, but turn it into a laptop on occasion (the Surface Pro is way too heavy for tablet use).
Another user in another reply pointed out that RT can be jailbroken to remove the restriction on running unsigned apps, and that the community has basically done a lot of what I talked about. They've got .NET going, they've ported opensource Win32 apps (where they can be recompiled), they've even got a userland x86 emulator going. If only Microsoft had done this officially, it would be a heck of a lot more polished.
Well, maybe when the RT gets to liquidation-level pricing, I'll grab one and try it out :)
Windows RT ships with a full Windows desktop and includes all the normal built-in desktop apps and utilities, as well as a desktop version of Microsoft Office, so there can't be that many libraries missing, if any. And unless they made some radical change, all that stuff is using Win32 on RT.
Its not that the API/libraries/runtimes isn't there, it's that they don't let you run unsigned code.
Basically, I'm suggesting that your entire post is wrong, disproved by Windows RT itself.
16-bit apps tend to have other compatibility issues than just the death of Win16, though, and were better served via virtualization or emulation even before the 64-bit transition. I don't think it's reasonable to expect software designed for a software environment from over 20 years ago to work perfectly fine in a very different software environment today. It makes more sense to provide those applications or games with an appropriate software environment running on the same hardware.
That sounds more like a bunch of niche cases. Your average Joe consumer isn't going to care as much about that particular problem set.
The Surface RT hardware is pretty nice. I'm an iPad user, but playing around with the Surface RT in a Microsoft store impressed me. The kickstand is neat, and the keyboard covers work really well (especially the one with actual travel). The problem was software.
People point out Metro as an issue, but that's not quite it; Metro is a travesty on the desktop (or laptop), true, but on a mobile touch platform it's very appropriate. The problem was lack of familiarity, lack of compatibility, and lack of marketing.
For the first issue, what I mean to say is that Surface RT has a full desktop interface, but restricts it severely. Metro is much better suited to a tablet, but people are used to the desktop interface, and Surface RT can still make a decent laptop (plug a mouse in and use the keyboard cover). Had the desktop been unrestricted on RT (no side-loading restrictions, same as regular Windows), then people could have transitioned more gradually, at their own pace, or even stuck to the desktop entirely if they wanted. This would have let people use the RT as a tablet when they wanted to, or as a laptop when they wanted to.
For the second issue, lack of compatibility, there is basically none. This ties in a bit to the third point, but the thing looks identical to normal Win8, so people expect it to run the same stuff. It doesn't. As has been pointed out, the architectural differences would not have prevented .NET apps from running at full speed on the RT (Microsoft just doesn't support it), and emulation of x86 code would have worked well for many apps, since any call to an OS function via Win32 would have resulted in native code execution anyhow. Depending on the application, that means that large parts of an x86 application would be running natively anyhow.
The third issue is lack of marketing. Microsoft did a terrible job educating people about what RT is (and how it differs from regular Windows), or why they would want it instead of an ultrabook or chromebook or other tablet. Users who did buy the RT were likely confused about why it wouldn't run their programs.
I think that a combination of an unrestricted desktop, compatibility with existing apps (via a native .NET environment and emulation), and better marketing could have made the Surface RT a success. Not necessarily a market leader, but at least it would have sold enough units to be considered successful. I know that I was personally tempted to get one to replace both my tablet and laptop until I realized how all the stuff that interested me would be disabled...
Unless you're dealing with legacy 16-bit apps, the 32-bit to 64-bit transition on Windows has been largely transparent and painless to users... Can you name some compatibility problems that a typical user (emphasis on typical) might face?
Key point, though, this isn't in the US, and the laws in Canada don't work the same way. Canadians don't necessarily have the exact same values as Americans, and one of those values is that hate speech is criminal rather than protected. These laws (and related ones) are occasionally controversial, but not nearly to the extent they would be in the US.
How secure does this need to be? Burn a copy to m-discs (rated at 1000 years), put a copy on tape (rated a few decades), put a copy in the cloud (like BackBlaze). Printing this out on paper doesn't make any sense. If you do that, be sure to store it in an OCR-compatible format, and be sure to use something that has heavy amounts of error correction built in so that you can get a 100% data reproduction even with OCR errors.
Another option is to put several QR codes on a page. QR codes max out (by spec) at between 1,276 and 2,956 bytes at version 40 (the largest size) depending on how much error correction is involved. At max level, 1,276 bytes are stored and 30% of the QR code can be destroyed before data loss. At min level, 2,956 bytes can be stored and 7% can be lost. Not all apps can read such large barcodes, however.
Yeah, don't get me wrong, Paper Mario wasn't a bad game, I just think it was silly to call it the spiritual successor (or even direct sequel, since Paper Mario was originally called "Super Mario RPG 2" until they realized they couldn't legally call it that without Square's involvement).