Powershell isn't so bad, you know. Supports all of that nifty whiz-bang stuff plus interfaces for directly manipulating documents, files, registry keys, etc etc. Remotely, too.
No no no... There's no reason to make a Linux distribution look like a Windows. You need to give people a LITTLE bit of credit.. I mean, they can figure out how to use web sites, and they aren't all exactly like Microsoft.com, so I see no reason every desktop has to look like Windows or else somehow people can't even open a web browser.
I don't think so. The Windows 7 UI is just fine. The Windows 95 UI was fine, so was the 98 through Vista UI.
There's a lot of problems with Windows, but the user interface is not one of them. It's very usable and it works. The new taskbar on Windows 7 is very usable and keeps task clutter down.
I don't have a problem with modern Gnome UI, it's a lot better than it used to be, and I keep waiting for KDE 4 to stop sucking some day because it has a lot of potential too.
Ohh, you need to give Gnome more credit here. I used to be very much a KDE guy and I really didn't like Gnome at all. But that's changed now - I still like KDE (and I look forward to using a more stable and supported KDE 4) but Gnome has come a long way. It's very usable, customizable, and stable.
The software does what it does because the people that MADE it wanted it that way. KDE, nor any other free software, is not being made for YOU - you don't pay for it. It's being made to suit the developers and if you get some use out of it, great!
I'm guessing there will be polarized projectors available at some point (which use a polarizing wheel inside to alternate the frames, like RealD uses at a movie theater) and they will be compatible with the same 3D signal as the shudder systems use. However, polarization is only useful for projectors and RPTV's. Dual-projector setups seem overkill to me (and are difficult to set up) considering the polarization wheel scheme works so well.
If you want to have a flat panel, shudder will be the solution.
I haven't used the Sony glasses. The Samsung ones look a bit more goofy but they are as light as a feather. Lighter than my sunglasses.
Yes, I can SEE 60hz on a CRT display. It's a foot from your face. It bothers me, yes, when I'm sitting in front of one all day long.
But 24hz on a movie screen doesn't.
Active-Matrix LCD screens don't "refresh" like a CRT. The Hz on those refers to how quickly the electronics can respond to a signal and how quickly the pixels can shift.
You seem to be the only one here complaining about this stuff. If 120hz (60hz per eye) isn't good enough for you, you're just being an elitist. You probably also think 320kbit MP3 just sucks next to flac, huh?
And I agree with them. 3D stuff is awesome. 3D games look awesome. 3D movies look awesome.
Sorry, but I love the 3D stuff, even if you want to be all alternative and say it's no good to be different. The rest of us will enjoy the fuck out of it and you can keep watching your B&W TV because that's "pure TV" huh?
I just got a Samsung 63" Plasma TV that's 3D enabled (shudder based) for $3400 at Best Buy. I can't imagine Zalman's screens being any more reasonably priced than that, and this TV is HDMI 1.3 and detected as a 3D display. No hackery required. TV Switches into 3D mode automatically.
You've obviously never put on any of the new shudder glasses. They are lighter than my sunglasses. They use a 2035 or 2025 battery. They last for 50 - 80 hours on a single button cell battery.
You're making an argument here when none should exist. Shudder glasses are really good now a days. And the new 3D stuff with shudder glasses is very high refresh. It works very well!
You should just try it sometime. There's nothing wrong with shudder glasses.
There's a difference between "detecting" and letting it bother you. I can see flicker at the movies, and I can see a tiny bit of flicker on my Plasma TV (incidentally, not when watching 3D stuff) but they just don't bother me. I can't stare at a 60hz CRT computer screen for long, but that's a foot away from your eyes.
So, I don't see what the problem is. 60hz is very smooth video, and the new 3D TV's are very good. If you want to reject such awesome things because you "notice" something, it's your loss dude.
Well, Active Matrix LCD screens don't refresh the entire screen like that. There's a capacitor for each pixel which keeps the pixel lit or not lit or whatever. The refresh on an LCD is how quickly it can respond to changes in a pixel, as well as the input signal. LCD screens don't flicker.
However, I can't look at a CRT monitor at 60hz. It burns my brain. 72hz is fine. But, I don't notice any flicker with my 3d TV and glasses, and the flicker at the movies doesn't bother me. You're not watching a movie with the screen 12 inches from your eyes.
I'm not disagreeing with you - you can't see the flicker - IF you're looking at the TV. When my glasses are active, you can see a little bit of flicker if you look outside the window on a sunny day. Indoor lights, you don't see flicker.
So, unless someone is complaining about flicker when looking at things NOT on the TV screen, they're full of shit if they say they can see any flicker with a new 3D TV and shudder glasses.
There's a number of non-serious illnesses that can cause 3D to either not work for you, or give you adverse effects. Eye problems such as astigmatism or lazy eye can prevent you from being able to see 3D properly, or can give you extra eye strain.
I can watch 3D on my new TV for several hours playing games and watching movies and I've have zero problems. It's not the technology, the tech works. It just doesn't work great for everyone, because of any number of medical issues.
No, it's not more complicated. You use the glasses that go with your TV, that's it. As long as your TV is connected via HDMI and the PS3 detects it as a 3D display, the PS3 3D stuff will work. I have a Samsung TV with Samsung glasses and the 3D PS3 games work just great.
Honestly, besides the issues of old HDMI 1.1/1.2 receivers not working with the 3D stuff (you need at least HDMI 1.3) it's really a very simple set up. If you have a 3D Capable TV, it's not more complicated than buying the wireless glasses to go with it.
It's not really twice the bandwidth, as far as I can tell.
I have a new Samsung 63" Plasma display (the new plasmas these days are impressive as hell and have long life spans) and I have a 3D BluRay player and a PS3. When the device (PS3 or BluRay player) goes into "3d Mode" the TV automatically switches and starts emitting the signal for the glasses. If you look at the screen in 3D mode, you see a lot more dithering of the video signal, especially in low light scenes.
When you have the glasses on, you really can almost not see the dithering, because your brain combines the images, but when the glasses are off you can definitely tell that there's less data being sent to the display for each "eye's" screen.
I'll tell you though, the 3D stuff on the Plasma with the shudder glasses is really good. You rarely see any "bleed" (eye sees images/ghosting from other eye) and it's no worse than an IMAX. Of course, the screen isn't as big, so you don't get the full impact of a full IMAX 3D screen but the quality of the 3D is great.
The motorstorm 3D demo on the PS3 kicks SERIOUS ass.
I can't wait go be able to get more than 2 movies and three games:)
But in cases like this, there's a good reason. 1GB a month isn't a lot, especially if you get a good signal.
If the carriers really did want to just even out their networks, instead of just get more money (which apparently most of the people around here don't believe to be true for some reason?) they wouldn't make the cap so low. If they said "It's now 10GB a month" or even 5 or 6GB, it wouldn't be a big deal.
Everyone with an iPhone could easily do 1GB without even meaning to do so. Stream that Qix video or do video chat and you're screwed. You'll find out real fast why the ISP's decided to put a 1GB cap.
And yea, Wireless Carriers aren't ISP's for some reason? They provide Internet access. They're ISP's.
Slashdot Mirror
Powershell isn't so bad, you know. Supports all of that nifty whiz-bang stuff plus interfaces for directly manipulating documents, files, registry keys, etc etc. Remotely, too.
No no no... There's no reason to make a Linux distribution look like a Windows. You need to give people a LITTLE bit of credit.. I mean, they can figure out how to use web sites, and they aren't all exactly like Microsoft.com, so I see no reason every desktop has to look like Windows or else somehow people can't even open a web browser.
I don't think so. The Windows 7 UI is just fine. The Windows 95 UI was fine, so was the 98 through Vista UI.
There's a lot of problems with Windows, but the user interface is not one of them. It's very usable and it works. The new taskbar on Windows 7 is very usable and keeps task clutter down.
I don't have a problem with modern Gnome UI, it's a lot better than it used to be, and I keep waiting for KDE 4 to stop sucking some day because it has a lot of potential too.
I guess I don't understand your comment. Hanging out on my lawn?
The more time passes, the less time people understand anything about their computers, and unfortunately this includes most kids these days..
Ohh, you need to give Gnome more credit here. I used to be very much a KDE guy and I really didn't like Gnome at all. But that's changed now - I still like KDE (and I look forward to using a more stable and supported KDE 4) but Gnome has come a long way. It's very usable, customizable, and stable.
The software does what it does because the people that MADE it wanted it that way. KDE, nor any other free software, is not being made for YOU - you don't pay for it. It's being made to suit the developers and if you get some use out of it, great!
Go fuck yourself.
I'm guessing there will be polarized projectors available at some point (which use a polarizing wheel inside to alternate the frames, like RealD uses at a movie theater) and they will be compatible with the same 3D signal as the shudder systems use. However, polarization is only useful for projectors and RPTV's. Dual-projector setups seem overkill to me (and are difficult to set up) considering the polarization wheel scheme works so well.
If you want to have a flat panel, shudder will be the solution.
I haven't used the Sony glasses. The Samsung ones look a bit more goofy but they are as light as a feather. Lighter than my sunglasses.
Yes, I can SEE 60hz on a CRT display. It's a foot from your face. It bothers me, yes, when I'm sitting in front of one all day long.
But 24hz on a movie screen doesn't.
Active-Matrix LCD screens don't "refresh" like a CRT. The Hz on those refers to how quickly the electronics can respond to a signal and how quickly the pixels can shift.
You seem to be the only one here complaining about this stuff. If 120hz (60hz per eye) isn't good enough for you, you're just being an elitist. You probably also think 320kbit MP3 just sucks next to flac, huh?
And I agree with them. 3D stuff is awesome. 3D games look awesome. 3D movies look awesome.
Sorry, but I love the 3D stuff, even if you want to be all alternative and say it's no good to be different. The rest of us will enjoy the fuck out of it and you can keep watching your B&W TV because that's "pure TV" huh?
And yet, even if a movie is $20 to see, it's still cheaper than two hours at the bar, and probably more entertaining.
Sorry you can't watch 3D stuff without getting sick. 99% of us can. Hey, I can't play basket ball for shit, so I guess it's even huh?
I just got a Samsung 63" Plasma TV that's 3D enabled (shudder based) for $3400 at Best Buy. I can't imagine Zalman's screens being any more reasonably priced than that, and this TV is HDMI 1.3 and detected as a 3D display. No hackery required. TV Switches into 3D mode automatically.
You've obviously never put on any of the new shudder glasses. They are lighter than my sunglasses. They use a 2035 or 2025 battery. They last for 50 - 80 hours on a single button cell battery.
You're making an argument here when none should exist. Shudder glasses are really good now a days. And the new 3D stuff with shudder glasses is very high refresh. It works very well!
You should just try it sometime. There's nothing wrong with shudder glasses.
There's a difference between "detecting" and letting it bother you. I can see flicker at the movies, and I can see a tiny bit of flicker on my Plasma TV (incidentally, not when watching 3D stuff) but they just don't bother me. I can't stare at a 60hz CRT computer screen for long, but that's a foot away from your eyes.
So, I don't see what the problem is. 60hz is very smooth video, and the new 3D TV's are very good. If you want to reject such awesome things because you "notice" something, it's your loss dude.
Well, Active Matrix LCD screens don't refresh the entire screen like that. There's a capacitor for each pixel which keeps the pixel lit or not lit or whatever. The refresh on an LCD is how quickly it can respond to changes in a pixel, as well as the input signal. LCD screens don't flicker.
However, I can't look at a CRT monitor at 60hz. It burns my brain. 72hz is fine. But, I don't notice any flicker with my 3d TV and glasses, and the flicker at the movies doesn't bother me. You're not watching a movie with the screen 12 inches from your eyes.
I'm not disagreeing with you - you can't see the flicker - IF you're looking at the TV. When my glasses are active, you can see a little bit of flicker if you look outside the window on a sunny day. Indoor lights, you don't see flicker.
So, unless someone is complaining about flicker when looking at things NOT on the TV screen, they're full of shit if they say they can see any flicker with a new 3D TV and shudder glasses.
There's a number of non-serious illnesses that can cause 3D to either not work for you, or give you adverse effects. Eye problems such as astigmatism or lazy eye can prevent you from being able to see 3D properly, or can give you extra eye strain.
I can watch 3D on my new TV for several hours playing games and watching movies and I've have zero problems. It's not the technology, the tech works. It just doesn't work great for everyone, because of any number of medical issues.
Because 3D is fucking awesome.
The few PS3 games available in 3D look fucking awesome. The two movies I have look fucking awesome.
We see everything in real life in 3D. We have two ears, so stereo was natural. We have two eyes, so 3D video is also natural. It's great!
The only people I see complaining about it are A) Complainiacs that will never be happy with anything or B) Too poor to ever afford it.
No, it's not more complicated. You use the glasses that go with your TV, that's it. As long as your TV is connected via HDMI and the PS3 detects it as a 3D display, the PS3 3D stuff will work. I have a Samsung TV with Samsung glasses and the 3D PS3 games work just great.
Honestly, besides the issues of old HDMI 1.1/1.2 receivers not working with the 3D stuff (you need at least HDMI 1.3) it's really a very simple set up. If you have a 3D Capable TV, it's not more complicated than buying the wireless glasses to go with it.
So, let's ditch 3D because you can't keep your shit organized enough to have a spare battery (with a 70hr life span) or that you'll misplace them?
Let's ditch cars because you always lose your keys, too.
Fortunately, some of us are a tad little bit more responsible than that.
It's not really twice the bandwidth, as far as I can tell.
:)
I have a new Samsung 63" Plasma display (the new plasmas these days are impressive as hell and have long life spans) and I have a 3D BluRay player and a PS3. When the device (PS3 or BluRay player) goes into "3d Mode" the TV automatically switches and starts emitting the signal for the glasses. If you look at the screen in 3D mode, you see a lot more dithering of the video signal, especially in low light scenes.
When you have the glasses on, you really can almost not see the dithering, because your brain combines the images, but when the glasses are off you can definitely tell that there's less data being sent to the display for each "eye's" screen.
I'll tell you though, the 3D stuff on the Plasma with the shudder glasses is really good. You rarely see any "bleed" (eye sees images/ghosting from other eye) and it's no worse than an IMAX. Of course, the screen isn't as big, so you don't get the full impact of a full IMAX 3D screen but the quality of the 3D is great.
The motorstorm 3D demo on the PS3 kicks SERIOUS ass.
I can't wait go be able to get more than 2 movies and three games
Simply make the thing say "Could be cancer" for every type of ailment.
I win!
Sure, sometimes people just want to complain.
But in cases like this, there's a good reason. 1GB a month isn't a lot, especially if you get a good signal.
If the carriers really did want to just even out their networks, instead of just get more money (which apparently most of the people around here don't believe to be true for some reason?) they wouldn't make the cap so low. If they said "It's now 10GB a month" or even 5 or 6GB, it wouldn't be a big deal.
Everyone with an iPhone could easily do 1GB without even meaning to do so. Stream that Qix video or do video chat and you're screwed. You'll find out real fast why the ISP's decided to put a 1GB cap.
And yea, Wireless Carriers aren't ISP's for some reason? They provide Internet access. They're ISP's.