that will pick up and handle above 44Khz (Note: they DON'T) it's worthless. Let alone the fact that your speakers CANT reproduce anything above 30Khz equals abilities that mean nothing
No you idiot, you're confusing sample rate with actual sound frequency.
I'm tired of people saying "the human ear can't hear the difference." That's bullshit, and these people saying this bullshit simply don't have their facts straight.
It is fair. Sorry that you have lost your free bandwidth lunch.
Well, "fair" isn't really the issue here sense we're talking about a business.
Of course, if the service is being advertised as "unlimited" still, then that is an issue. And the rates that are set are also an issue - you don't want $10/GB for example. $2 - $4 a GB per month appears to be a reasonable price that people are willing to pay.
I subscribed to my service when it was advertised as 24/7 unlimited access to the Internet. Now they may change it around on me, now that I'm a happy customer. 24/7 unlimited access has been around since the days of shell accounts and 14.4k modems.
$2-$4 a GB? Good god, are you mad? I easilly have a gigabyte of traffic in one day. I am thankful I am not a Comcast customer. Though I fear the day when my ISP no longer has flat-rate service.
Imagine it: you'd get software updates from your friends because you're afraid of crossing your bandwidth limit. You close instant messanger clients, e-mail programs, and other software that regularly accesses the internet because you're afraid it'll push you over the edge when you're away from your PC.
I use P2P to download amateur porn which is perfectly legal. Why should I have to pay more? I also video-conference quite often (got some hot internet girlfriends) and I'm sure that uses quite a bit of bandwidth.
I also download the latest Linux distros and FreeBSD and share them on P2P to take some of the load off of mirror sites (I actually download the distros off of P2P when I can).
I also am a musician who lives far from my fellow band members. We send audio tracks back and forth when we've recorded something. We sometimes mix tracks together without ever playing the song together.
I use a lot of bandwidth for legitimate legal reasons. Why should I be deprived of a flat-rate? I'm even willing to pay an extra $5 a month if I can keep the flat rate.
I wonder if it's really healthy... I like beans:) but I don't eat them because they aren't very good for your body.
What beans are you talking about here? Beans are very good for you, for example black beans are nothing but good. If you're not eating beans only because you think they're bad for you, you should reassess your source of health information.
At least most porno doesn't seem to be region controlled.
Re:Heres the post everyone should read first
on
Mozilla RC3 Released
·
· Score: 0
but they make good products
I've been a computer enthusiast for the last 15 years. And have never cared for Windows every since version 3.0. However when I started using Linux back in 1994, it was simply a superior OS (to Windows) and I instantly loved it (being a fan of UNIX helped). MSFT didn't make a decent OS until Windows 2000. What took them so long? Sure they may made a decent product here and there, but I don't think they consistently make good products.
As a computer enthusiast, I want to see technology advance. MSFT has always been good at crushing the truly innovative creations that come along. I don't care whether the innovations are open-source or free or closed, really. But MSFT has always been in conflict with the computer enthusuast, and that's why we seek alternatives.
This is neverending debate that'll never be settled (quoting someone's webpage won't end it).
In my opinion, given good quality equipment, vinyl gives you something that CD-quality sound just doesn't have. And I would go as far as to say it sounds better. I own several albums on both CD and vinyl and can see that vinyl simply sounds better. Its all subjective I guess.
I think the difference in sound quality is most obvious when I'm at a club. DJ's are almost always playing records. Why? Because they sound better.
Though, 95% of the time I'm listening to digital audio, putting on a record is just a pain. Its nice to throw one on every now and then though, and just feel the music.
Vinyl provided better "sampling rates" and live performances are obviously much better.
Yeah, we all know that. But you can't download vinyl.
128k mp3's will eventually satisfy everyone just like CDs did
I don't think selling 128k mp3's will become standard. There are enough of us who listen to music in our car (with amplifier and subs and good quality speakers and all) or on decent equipment at home, that this won't happen. Or at least a lot of us will continue to buy CDs rather than download music.
For example (as an analogy) the people who buy DVDs that expect good sound and video quality and have bought appropriate equipment to enjoy this. They aren't going to be happy with a downloaded movie that has half the video resolution and 2-channel sound. There's a lot of them. And they probably feel the same about music.
With CD audio, I think that 16-bit 44.1k/sec was about the best they could do with digital sound at the time (you might be able to argue this, I dunno). It was better than cassettes which was the popular format at the time.
I'm hoping to see an improvement in consumer digital audio (at least 18-bit, though 24-bit would be nice). Sure I can listen to vinyl, but not in my car, and I prefer the convenience of digital. Maybe I should just record the vinyl at 24-bit:)
Maybe you're right though, I can see a lot of people not caring about the bitrate of their mp3's or even that they're not getting the quality that they could be getting. We'll just have to wait and see. In any case, they probably won't bother selling CD-quality audio, and will most likely stick with mp3.
If it was a full quality audio file (e.g. WAV or FLAC file) and not a file compressed with lossy compression, I'd say it'd be worth it. I just don't think the music in the MP3 *format* is worth paying for. Other than that, I think this is great way to sell music.
The Sims surpassed Myst because chicks play the Sims (in addition to the usual lame dudes who play these point-and-click time wasters). Its a girlie game anyways, its like if dollhouse and Barbie sales surpassed the sales of like G.I. Joe or something (sorry I'm not up to date with the latest kids toys).
This technology will be a bad thing when: 1) Someone else develops / acquires the same technology and goes on a bombing spree around the U.S. 2) Someone cracks this technology and is able hijack the planes and go on a bombing spree around the U.S.
#1 is inevitable and is no reason to not create such technology. #2 is something that I really hope doesn't happen but is always a possibility.
Screw all that.. I'm going to continue paying ~$8 for recordings I buy from independent labels.. and give the major labels the finger. If I want to listen to crap, I can turn on the radio or MTV.
In any case, what did Sega ever put out that was that original?
Phantasy Star 1 (Sega Master System). Every Phantasy Star after that was distinctly different and had some cool new feature (PS4's macros were extremely cool).
Zaxxon.. Wonderboy.. Fantasy Zone.. The entire Shinobi series. There's plenty more, I'd have to open up my boxes and look.
However I like Nintendo, too of course. They keep using the same characters over and over again, but their games are really good! Capcom does the same thing, look at the Street Fighter games, Marvel vs Capcom and other crossover fighters, Super Puzzle Fighter II.. all great games with the same characters.
Sega on the other hand, doesn't seem to recycle characters as much. I think its because none of their characters every grew really popular. There's Sonic, but after Sonic Adventure 1 came out and it sucked, no one cared about him anymore. But with Nintendo, everyone will always love Mario, Luigi, Link, etc. Just like with Capcom everyone loves all the original Street Fighter 2 characters. So why would they want to change things up?
Hmmm, well.. I completed missed this the first time they posted about it. I tend to read the titles first and then the details, and thus skipped over it the first time. No harm done by posting a repeat. Especially something that is this hilarious.
I don't know what your talking about. That was a great ephisode. The inclusion of Roy in there was brilliant. If they were actually poking fun at critical fans, good, they're supposed to poke fun at everyone. That whole season (8) was great in fact.
I do think, however, the Simpsons lost their great witty humor a few seasons later (in season 10 or 11). The quality just really started to suffer. There were some ephisodes where I just said wtf? at the end of the ephisode and I quit recording ephisodes. But they started putting out funny ephisodes after a rash of awful ones, just with lesser frequency. The last few new ephisodes I caught were pretty hilarious. If you quit watching the new ephisodes you really should check them out, they still throw out some nice surprises.
Slashdot Mirror
*My* human ear CAN tell the difference so STFU.
Never trust anything (or anyone) called "Random Love" - you'll only have your heart broken.
That and herpes
that will pick up and handle above 44Khz (Note: they DON'T) it's worthless. Let alone the fact that your speakers CANT reproduce anything above 30Khz equals abilities that mean nothing
No you idiot, you're confusing sample rate with actual sound frequency.
I'm tired of people saying "the human ear can't hear the difference." That's bullshit, and these people saying this bullshit simply don't have their facts straight.
I think the red-hats will shoot themselves in the foot.
zoot!
ZOOT!
Well if she's in the dorms she's gotta be covert about it. I would bake her up a nice batch of pot brownies. You simply can't go wrong.
Anyone who could consider this a "Funny" quip, really doesn't know the reality.
Yeah, the Star Wars nerds can't help it, they're in love with Star Wars.
Here's the pics you want
This one is really good
I'd bang her...
It is fair. Sorry that you have lost your free bandwidth lunch.
Well, "fair" isn't really the issue here sense we're talking about a business.
Of course, if the service is being advertised as "unlimited" still, then that is an issue. And the rates that are set are also an issue - you don't want $10/GB for example. $2 - $4 a GB per month appears to be a reasonable price that people are willing to pay.
I subscribed to my service when it was advertised as 24/7 unlimited access to the Internet. Now they may change it around on me, now that I'm a happy customer. 24/7 unlimited access has been around since the days of shell accounts and 14.4k modems.
$2-$4 a GB? Good god, are you mad? I easilly have a gigabyte of traffic in one day. I am thankful I am not a Comcast customer. Though I fear the day when my ISP no longer has flat-rate service.
Imagine it: you'd get software updates from your friends because you're afraid of crossing your bandwidth limit. You close instant messanger clients, e-mail programs, and other software that regularly accesses the internet because you're afraid it'll push you over the edge when you're away from your PC.
Downstream caps is a little more reasonable.
I use P2P to download amateur porn which is perfectly legal. Why should I have to pay more? I also video-conference quite often (got some hot internet girlfriends) and I'm sure that uses quite a bit of bandwidth.
I also download the latest Linux distros and FreeBSD and share them on P2P to take some of the load off of mirror sites (I actually download the distros off of P2P when I can).
I also am a musician who lives far from my fellow band members. We send audio tracks back and forth when we've recorded something. We sometimes mix tracks together without ever playing the song together.
I use a lot of bandwidth for legitimate legal reasons. Why should I be deprived of a flat-rate? I'm even willing to pay an extra $5 a month if I can keep the flat rate.
Water cooling.. Its the only way to go..
I wonder if it's really healthy... I like beans :) but I don't eat them because they aren't very good for your body.
What beans are you talking about here? Beans are very good for you, for example black beans are nothing but good. If you're not eating beans only because you think they're bad for you, you should reassess your source of health information.
At least most porno doesn't seem to be region controlled.
but they make good products
I've been a computer enthusiast for the last 15 years. And have never cared for Windows every since version 3.0. However when I started using Linux back in 1994, it was simply a superior OS (to Windows) and I instantly loved it (being a fan of UNIX helped). MSFT didn't make a decent OS until Windows 2000. What took them so long? Sure they may made a decent product here and there, but I don't think they consistently make good products.
As a computer enthusiast, I want to see technology advance. MSFT has always been good at crushing the truly innovative creations that come along. I don't care whether the innovations are open-source or free or closed, really. But MSFT has always been in conflict with the computer enthusuast, and that's why we seek alternatives.
This is neverending debate that'll never be settled (quoting someone's webpage won't end it).
In my opinion, given good quality equipment, vinyl gives you something that CD-quality sound just doesn't have. And I would go as far as to say it sounds better. I own several albums on both CD and vinyl and can see that vinyl simply sounds better. Its all subjective I guess.
I think the difference in sound quality is most obvious when I'm at a club. DJ's are almost always playing records. Why? Because they sound better.
Though, 95% of the time I'm listening to digital audio, putting on a record is just a pain. Its nice to throw one on every now and then though, and just feel the music.
Vinyl provided better "sampling rates" and live performances are obviously much better.
:)
Yeah, we all know that. But you can't download vinyl.
128k mp3's will eventually satisfy everyone just like CDs did
I don't think selling 128k mp3's will become standard. There are enough of us who listen to music in our car (with amplifier and subs and good quality speakers and all) or on decent equipment at home, that this won't happen. Or at least a lot of us will continue to buy CDs rather than download music.
For example (as an analogy) the people who buy DVDs that expect good sound and video quality and have bought appropriate equipment to enjoy this. They aren't going to be happy with a downloaded movie that has half the video resolution and 2-channel sound. There's a lot of them. And they probably feel the same about music.
With CD audio, I think that 16-bit 44.1k/sec was about the best they could do with digital sound at the time (you might be able to argue this, I dunno). It was better than cassettes which was the popular format at the time.
I'm hoping to see an improvement in consumer digital audio (at least 18-bit, though 24-bit would be nice). Sure I can listen to vinyl, but not in my car, and I prefer the convenience of digital. Maybe I should just record the vinyl at 24-bit
Maybe you're right though, I can see a lot of people not caring about the bitrate of their mp3's or even that they're not getting the quality that they could be getting. We'll just have to wait and see. In any case, they probably won't bother selling CD-quality audio, and will most likely stick with mp3.
If it was a full quality audio file (e.g. WAV or FLAC file) and not a file compressed with lossy compression, I'd say it'd be worth it. I just don't think the music in the MP3 *format* is worth paying for. Other than that, I think this is great way to sell music.
The Sims surpassed Myst because chicks play the Sims (in addition to the usual lame dudes who play these point-and-click time wasters). Its a girlie game anyways, its like if dollhouse and Barbie sales surpassed the sales of like G.I. Joe or something (sorry I'm not up to date with the latest kids toys).
This technology will be a bad thing when:
1) Someone else develops / acquires the same technology and goes on a bombing spree around the U.S.
2) Someone cracks this technology and is able hijack the planes and go on a bombing spree around the U.S.
#1 is inevitable and is no reason to not create such technology. #2 is something that I really hope doesn't happen but is always a possibility.
Screw all that.. I'm going to continue paying ~$8 for recordings I buy from independent labels.. and give the major labels the finger. If I want to listen to crap, I can turn on the radio or MTV.
Now where am I going to get my amateur porn from?
Kazaa (and Morpheus before its collapse) was the best place to acquire and trade amateur porn, which I should note is completely legal.
In any case, what did Sega ever put out that was that original? Phantasy Star 1 (Sega Master System). Every Phantasy Star after that was distinctly different and had some cool new feature (PS4's macros were extremely cool). Zaxxon.. Wonderboy.. Fantasy Zone.. The entire Shinobi series. There's plenty more, I'd have to open up my boxes and look. However I like Nintendo, too of course. They keep using the same characters over and over again, but their games are really good! Capcom does the same thing, look at the Street Fighter games, Marvel vs Capcom and other crossover fighters, Super Puzzle Fighter II.. all great games with the same characters. Sega on the other hand, doesn't seem to recycle characters as much. I think its because none of their characters every grew really popular. There's Sonic, but after Sonic Adventure 1 came out and it sucked, no one cared about him anymore. But with Nintendo, everyone will always love Mario, Luigi, Link, etc. Just like with Capcom everyone loves all the original Street Fighter 2 characters. So why would they want to change things up?
Hmmm, well.. I completed missed this the first time they posted about it. I tend to read the titles first and then the details, and thus skipped over it the first time. No harm done by posting a repeat. Especially something that is this hilarious.
I don't know what your talking about. That was a great ephisode. The inclusion of Roy in there was brilliant. If they were actually poking fun at critical fans, good, they're supposed to poke fun at everyone. That whole season (8) was great in fact.
I do think, however, the Simpsons lost their great witty humor a few seasons later (in season 10 or 11). The quality just really started to suffer. There were some ephisodes where I just said wtf? at the end of the ephisode and I quit recording ephisodes. But they started putting out funny ephisodes after a rash of awful ones, just with lesser frequency. The last few new ephisodes I caught were pretty hilarious. If you quit watching the new ephisodes you really should check them out, they still throw out some nice surprises.
Ah well, you can only take a series so far.