Nope.
Even ignoring all the "Smart TV" features. No TVs these days are "monitors". Monitors, weather you're talking about screens or speakers, are built with the expressed purpose of accurately rendering the signal you feed into them. TVs these days do all sorts of video processing to make the picture look "good" not "accurate". They intentionally increase (distort) the contrast and color saturation. They apply additional sharpening, predictive motion smoothing, and who knows what else. You have to dig into the settings and try to find and disable all those setting to get an accurate picture that looks like it was intended to. Computer monitors don't do any of that. They have a few settings to adjust contrast, brightness, and color; but those are only there to fine tune for better accuracy.
I want my TV to be a monitor, not a video filter processor.
There are actually a few different 4Ks. When pro-quality digital film cameras and theater projectors say 4K they mean 4096 × 2160. 4K UltraHD is 3840 × 2160.
However none of those definitions are close to 4096 × 4096.
That was the first thing I though of when I read it. Microsoft's unreleased next gen browser is faster than current generations of it's competition's browsers.
That would be the minimum bar of acceptable speed improvement in my mind. If it was faster than the others in-development versions I would be impressed.
It may be easier to quickly gauge your use to the 250GB limit if it gets translated to numbers we more normally see. 250GB divided by 30 days, 24hours, 60 minuets, 60 seconds, equals 809kb. That's an average of every second for 30 straight days. You can roughly estimate your usage and bandwidth to that.
Google Calc
Dual format players seam a bit of a red herring. There is no practical way for both formats to survive equally. Eventually one will become dominant, and the other will quickly fail.
People who buy dual format players, or both single format players, hurt the market more than anything else. They prolong the undecided status. Assuming one has the money, it would be better for them to choose a side, and vote with their wallets.
I tried Ubuntu a few months ago. The live CD had no problems giving me a 1920x1440 3D accelerated desktop. Once I installed, It wouldn't. Said my graphics card wasn't capable. That is just stupid. Plus there are still no real drivers to install (official or otherwise) for LogiTech's Mice (specifically MX1000). The closest I found was manually editing config files. Linux is still seems more difficult to set up properly than Vista. Which installed, and runs flawlessly for me. Admittedly it would run probably better with a second gig of memory.
If I have Winamp running and put in a USB CF reader with photos on it, I get a prompt about Winamp managing this possible media player. Of course I decline and copy off my photos, then remove the card. As soon as I remove the card, Winamp crashes.
So while I'm sure using iTunes will probably be fine, The USB media device management has some issues that ether Microsoft or the software makers need to handle. I would bet that is what Apple is talking about.
Thanks. I was just concerned over what it seamed like I was reading. It didn't make sense to to me that they would be given to the absolute bottom, who are still working on the basic needs.
Thanks for remeasuring me this is not a waisted project
I understand that there are various levels wealth in the middle. And in fact that was what I was talking about. From what I have read it sounded like the target was the bottom, I suggested in the second paragraph that the target for this be more in the middle.
Your self and others have now confirmed for me, that is actually the plan. Thank you.
It would not surprise me if others have brought this up, but I have not seen it.
Is the target market for this thing really those kids we see on the Christian Children's Fund adds? If they are, I think a better goal for the worlds resources would be something like "A pair of shoes for every chilled" I would imagine that starving people in the Sudan, or wherever they end up distributing these things, will pass them of in a heartbeat if it gets them a meal for a day.
If the goal is to give computers to people who don't have them, a good place to start would be in developed and nearly developed countries. Right here in the US, 2000 census claims 42% of American households have a computer, and only 22% have internet access. That leaves millions of kids in American schools who don't have a computer. I think they, and those like them in other countries, should be the real targets of a project like this.
People misinterpret the purpose of contracts all the time. Something written in a contract is not automatically illegal. Breaking a contract is not illegal ether. A contract is a an agreement between 2 or more parties. If any party does not comply with what is agreed upon in the contract the other parties involved have solid legal ground to sue the non-compliant for damages resulting from their breach of the contract.
Basically in this case, if they participate in another debate, they would probably loose the resulting civil law suit. Now he would probably loose, it's not guaranteed. If they dose lose then they would have to pay the other party(s).
So the contract is basically a way to make sure you can sue somebody later, if they do something you don't want. In no way does it make somthing legal or ilegal.
This is the first I have heard of the movie. Batman is a great character and many people who love to complain about the batman movies, completely forget about the first. It was actually very good. The second movie was saved by the fantastic cast. 3 and 4 were just kid movies not meant to be anything more.
The trailer indicates that they are going back to when Bruce Wane first decided to become Batman. It also looks like this one will have a more serous tone than even the first. I suspect their won't even be any real "bad guy".
This appears to be very different from any previous Batman movie to date. I don't think anybody should be quick to judge this one based on some of it predecessors.
So it can't be a box with buttons.
Those all look like machines. ....
I think your going to have to build your own. Maby if your good with vanear you can make one look like a pice of furnature.
In that idea you could build one into an end table you keep next to your desk. That wouldnt look like a machine. Actualy i kinda like that idea. I might try it, eventualy.... *sigh* I need 30 hour days, and the will power to quit sleeping.
Interesting and superior technology to whats out there, but sounds like this will go the way of the betamax
Not even! This system is to impractical for any real use. Beta was a contender in the mass public market. This won't get out of the lab. Many companies have done expairements lots of sound systems. None I heard of were ever this cool though!
My site is fully XHTML1.1 and CSS compliant. However i seem to have found a bug in the CSS validator. My XHTML valadites just fine. but the CSS pre validator complaines about a line and colum that dosent exist.
At that time, that was one way web browsers were trying to gain market share. if the created their own "cool" features for web devs the developers would use their "cool" things and the end user would like all the prety colors and flashy lights.
But then the web devs learned that all of the propritary goodies would work the same or at all on other browsers. But it was to late the exects loved them and forced the devs to continue using them.
Then Microshit glued IE and Windose together, and the war was over. Now all the devs had to write "IE Compliant" code that most other browsers don't support.
The XHTML1.0 and 1.1 standards are finished. You can write your code to meet them and every "modern" browser will be fine with it. XHTML1.0 "Transitional" is vurtualy identical to HTML4.01, all the same tags are supported. The only changes are minor. So at this point no corprate influence can effect them. Nore has any before they were finalised. As others have said the W3C is an organisation of promarly web developers, who simply want to end the conflict tifrent browsers have in rendering pages by setting rules for developers and browsers makers to follow together in perfect harmony. Course that is a little idealic, but they have defentaly made large steps in that direction.
For tab Options you should look into "Tabbrowser Extensions". You will have more tab options than you will know what to do with. It will work with Firefox or Mozilla suite.
Home theater is a very good example. becouse everybody hears and sees setups better than a movie theater at Best Buy. All they want is to watch the game. On a big HDTV with DVR and 6.1 channel suround sound.
My neibor just did this. he paied $500 for a pro to set up everything for him. Now he has 5 remote controls. He 3 needs just to watch the game. He has no clue how to use any of it. I come over to help. every thing is hooked up the only way they will work together. But in order to watch TV he has to have the TV on the imput labled DVD, and the recever set to CD.
Now if he realy knew how the things worked and chose and put all the peices toghther him self it would work exactly the way he wanted. He wouldnt have to pay $500 to set it up. and most importantly he wouldnt have to call me every week to switch the AMP from AM Tuner back to CD.
So no It's not a problem to want the best. If you know what you REALY want. As the saying go "The Devil is in the Details". In order to make sure you get what you want and not what you ask for. you have to understand how the details work.
When people buy a car. Most spend time reading reviews from those who are mutch smarter about cars. They look at all the options, find out if it will fit in the garage. Will it fit their camping gear. What kind of and how many airbags. Can the passanger bag be disabled for a kid?. but what most dont realise is Computers are 10x as complicated as cars. But they all will work when you turn them on. The diffrence is people know what they want in a car. Most don't know what they want in a computer. They trust the salesmen to tell them what they want.
Chiroractors, can't fix hernaited disks. In fact if you tell one they will Never touch you. becouse oftin they make hernia's worse. Even paralasis is possable with a hernia.
And you were Lucky that time worked. I have known people to go years with hernia problems.
Since I was about 10 or basicaly as long as I could remember. I would have headaches maby 3-4 times a week. In, I think 9th grade, playing basket ball, I took a knee prety hard to one side of my back. No big at the time I got up and continued to play. But the next morning I thought I was going to die, trying to get out of bed.
My parents and I though I pulled somthing. A week later, still in lots of unsubsiding pain, I went to a doctor. X-Ray's hole nine, Doc. told me to see a Crackolgist. The Doctor Told Me they would be able to fix it.
In one visit (insurance covered) he fixed the back pain, in like 5 min i felt mutch better. He asked if I had anyother issues. My mother mentioned the headaches. Back on the table. With my feet haning off the edge, and my head stright down my heals wern't even. when i turned my head to one side (I can't remembver which) they evened out. One twisting of the neck, that hurt alot and ached a little for maby an hour. i didnt have annother headach for 3 months.
When they came back, I went and same thing was discovered. Then 6 maby 9 months went by, annother trip. After that I havent had the recuring headachs for more than a decade now.
I also have a herdatory predispostion for cracking joints (statisticaly proven to be harmless). I can crack my fingers(mutipal joints per) toes, ankles, wrists, knees, elbow, sholder and hip's on rare un-intentional ocations, even my kneck and back in sevral places (my situps can cound like popcorn). Cracking joints and what ciropractors do are very diffrent. It feels diffrent and has diffrent effects.
People who think what they do is useless, or trivial in any way, has never had it when they needed it, or was mis diagnosed and had it when they didn't need it.
Slashdot Mirror
Nope. Even ignoring all the "Smart TV" features. No TVs these days are "monitors". Monitors, weather you're talking about screens or speakers, are built with the expressed purpose of accurately rendering the signal you feed into them. TVs these days do all sorts of video processing to make the picture look "good" not "accurate". They intentionally increase (distort) the contrast and color saturation. They apply additional sharpening, predictive motion smoothing, and who knows what else. You have to dig into the settings and try to find and disable all those setting to get an accurate picture that looks like it was intended to. Computer monitors don't do any of that. They have a few settings to adjust contrast, brightness, and color; but those are only there to fine tune for better accuracy. I want my TV to be a monitor, not a video filter processor.
There are actually a few different 4Ks. When pro-quality digital film cameras and theater projectors say 4K they mean 4096 × 2160. 4K UltraHD is 3840 × 2160.
However none of those definitions are close to 4096 × 4096.
That was the first thing I though of when I read it. Microsoft's unreleased next gen browser is faster than current generations of it's competition's browsers.
That would be the minimum bar of acceptable speed improvement in my mind. If it was faster than the others in-development versions I would be impressed.
This is not news at all. This is the same thing they did with the Vista launch. This plan was rumored months ago.
During a period before the next OS release anyone who buys a computer with the old OS will be able to upgrade to the new OS for free, via their OEM.
The are NOT giving all the Vista users a free upgrade.
It may be easier to quickly gauge your use to the 250GB limit if it gets translated to numbers we more normally see. 250GB divided by 30 days, 24hours, 60 minuets, 60 seconds, equals 809kb. That's an average of every second for 30 straight days. You can roughly estimate your usage and bandwidth to that. Google Calc
Dual format players seam a bit of a red herring. There is no practical way for both formats to survive equally. Eventually one will become dominant, and the other will quickly fail.
People who buy dual format players, or both single format players, hurt the market more than anything else. They prolong the undecided status. Assuming one has the money, it would be better for them to choose a side, and vote with their wallets.
I tried Ubuntu a few months ago. The live CD had no problems giving me a 1920x1440 3D accelerated desktop. Once I installed, It wouldn't. Said my graphics card wasn't capable. That is just stupid. Plus there are still no real drivers to install (official or otherwise) for LogiTech's Mice (specifically MX1000). The closest I found was manually editing config files. Linux is still seems more difficult to set up properly than Vista. Which installed, and runs flawlessly for me. Admittedly it would run probably better with a second gig of memory.
If I have Winamp running and put in a USB CF reader with photos on it, I get a prompt about Winamp managing this possible media player. Of course I decline and copy off my photos, then remove the card. As soon as I remove the card, Winamp crashes.
So while I'm sure using iTunes will probably be fine, The USB media device management has some issues that ether Microsoft or the software makers need to handle. I would bet that is what Apple is talking about.
Thanks. I was just concerned over what it seamed like I was reading. It didn't make sense to to me that they would be given to the absolute bottom, who are still working on the basic needs.
Thanks for remeasuring me this is not a waisted project
I understand that there are various levels wealth in the middle. And in fact that was what I was talking about. From what I have read it sounded like the target was the bottom, I suggested in the second paragraph that the target for this be more in the middle.
Your self and others have now confirmed for me, that is actually the plan. Thank you.
It would not surprise me if others have brought this up, but I have not seen it.
Is the target market for this thing really those kids we see on the Christian Children's Fund adds? If they are, I think a better goal for the worlds resources would be something like "A pair of shoes for every chilled" I would imagine that starving people in the Sudan, or wherever they end up distributing these things, will pass them of in a heartbeat if it gets them a meal for a day.
If the goal is to give computers to people who don't have them, a good place to start would be in developed and nearly developed countries. Right here in the US, 2000 census claims 42% of American households have a computer, and only 22% have internet access. That leaves millions of kids in American schools who don't have a computer. I think they, and those like them in other countries, should be the real targets of a project like this.
People misinterpret the purpose of contracts all the time. Something written in a contract is not automatically illegal. Breaking a contract is not illegal ether. A contract is a an agreement between 2 or more parties. If any party does not comply with what is agreed upon in the contract the other parties involved have solid legal ground to sue the non-compliant for damages resulting from their breach of the contract.
Basically in this case, if they participate in another debate, they would probably loose the resulting civil law suit. Now he would probably loose, it's not guaranteed. If they dose lose then they would have to pay the other party(s).
So the contract is basically a way to make sure you can sue somebody later, if they do something you don't want. In no way does it make somthing legal or ilegal.
I hqave never seen Screen shots from U3 That dose look nearly movie quality!
ADD, and Firefox loading Slashdot, The Register, and Megatokyo in tabs on startup.
We are very alike.
This is the first I have heard of the movie. Batman is a great character and many people who love to complain about the batman movies, completely forget about the first. It was actually very good. The second movie was saved by the fantastic cast. 3 and 4 were just kid movies not meant to be anything more.
The trailer indicates that they are going back to when Bruce Wane first decided to become Batman. It also looks like this one will have a more serous tone than even the first. I suspect their won't even be any real "bad guy".
This appears to be very different from any previous Batman movie to date. I don't think anybody should be quick to judge this one based on some of it predecessors.
So it can't be a box with buttons.
....
Those all look like machines.
I think your going to have to build your own. Maby if your good with vanear you can make one look like a pice of furnature.
In that idea you could build one into an end table you keep next to your desk. That wouldnt look like a machine. Actualy i kinda like that idea. I might try it, eventualy.... *sigh* I need 30 hour days, and the will power to quit sleeping.
Interesting and superior technology to whats out there, but sounds like this will go the way of the betamax
Not even! This system is to impractical for any real use. Beta was a contender in the mass public market. This won't get out of the lab. Many companies have done expairements lots of sound systems. None I heard of were ever this cool though!
My site is fully XHTML1.1 and CSS compliant. However i seem to have found a bug in the CSS validator. My XHTML valadites just fine. but the CSS pre validator complaines about a line and colum that dosent exist.
-----
At that time, that was one way web browsers were trying to gain market share. if the created their own "cool" features for web devs the developers would use their "cool" things and the end user would like all the prety colors and flashy lights.
But then the web devs learned that all of the propritary goodies would work the same or at all on other browsers. But it was to late the exects loved them and forced the devs to continue using them.
Then Microshit glued IE and Windose together, and the war was over. Now all the devs had to write "IE Compliant" code that most other browsers don't support.
The XHTML1.0 and 1.1 standards are finished. You can write your code to meet them and every "modern" browser will be fine with it. XHTML1.0 "Transitional" is vurtualy identical to HTML4.01, all the same tags are supported. The only changes are minor. So at this point no corprate influence can effect them. Nore has any before they were finalised. As others have said the W3C is an organisation of promarly web developers, who simply want to end the conflict tifrent browsers have in rendering pages by setting rules for developers and browsers makers to follow together in perfect harmony. Course that is a little idealic, but they have defentaly made large steps in that direction.
-----------
$5 is cheep.
If tomorow Mozilla foundation said they had to charge like normal software? What would you pay for a comertal product equal to mozilla?
$10? $25? $50?
What is a safe and functional internet experance worth to you?
As soon as they started the "Foundation" and started accepting donations. I put in $50 and I plan to do that again this year.
For tab Options you should look into "Tabbrowser Extensions". You will have more tab options than you will know what to do with. It will work with Firefox or Mozilla suite.
Home theater is a very good example. becouse everybody hears and sees setups better than a movie theater at Best Buy. All they want is to watch the game. On a big HDTV with DVR and 6.1 channel suround sound.
My neibor just did this. he paied $500 for a pro to set up everything for him. Now he has 5 remote controls. He 3 needs just to watch the game. He has no clue how to use any of it. I come over to help. every thing is hooked up the only way they will work together. But in order to watch TV he has to have the TV on the imput labled DVD, and the recever set to CD.
Now if he realy knew how the things worked and chose and put all the peices toghther him self it would work exactly the way he wanted. He wouldnt have to pay $500 to set it up. and most importantly he wouldnt have to call me every week to switch the AMP from AM Tuner back to CD.
So no It's not a problem to want the best. If you know what you REALY want. As the saying go "The Devil is in the Details". In order to make sure you get what you want and not what you ask for. you have to understand how the details work.
When people buy a car. Most spend time reading reviews from those who are mutch smarter about cars. They look at all the options, find out if it will fit in the garage. Will it fit their camping gear. What kind of and how many airbags. Can the passanger bag be disabled for a kid?. but what most dont realise is Computers are 10x as complicated as cars. But they all will work when you turn them on. The diffrence is people know what they want in a car. Most don't know what they want in a computer. They trust the salesmen to tell them what they want.
Why wou you go to a chiropractor if you dont have any problem?
Why would you go to a hospital if dont have any problem?
Pain is also primarly psychological in nature.
You can pinch yourself. It will hurt. Will it do any damage? No.
Lets be real your 2 prevous statments had no real relevence.
And I haver never sean a Chiropractor in a lab coat.
How many enimies do you have?
Chiroractors, can't fix hernaited disks. In fact if you tell one they will Never touch you. becouse oftin they make hernia's worse. Even paralasis is possable with a hernia. And you were Lucky that time worked. I have known people to go years with hernia problems.
Since I was about 10 or basicaly as long as I could remember. I would have headaches maby 3-4 times a week. In, I think 9th grade, playing basket ball, I took a knee prety hard to one side of my back. No big at the time I got up and continued to play. But the next morning I thought I was going to die, trying to get out of bed.
My parents and I though I pulled somthing. A week later, still in lots of unsubsiding pain, I went to a doctor. X-Ray's hole nine, Doc. told me to see a Crackolgist. The Doctor Told Me they would be able to fix it.
In one visit (insurance covered) he fixed the back pain, in like 5 min i felt mutch better. He asked if I had anyother issues. My mother mentioned the headaches. Back on the table. With my feet haning off the edge, and my head stright down my heals wern't even. when i turned my head to one side (I can't remembver which) they evened out. One twisting of the neck, that hurt alot and ached a little for maby an hour. i didnt have annother headach for 3 months.
When they came back, I went and same thing was discovered. Then 6 maby 9 months went by, annother trip. After that I havent had the recuring headachs for more than a decade now.
I also have a herdatory predispostion for cracking joints (statisticaly proven to be harmless). I can crack my fingers(mutipal joints per) toes, ankles, wrists, knees, elbow, sholder and hip's on rare un-intentional ocations, even my kneck and back in sevral places (my situps can cound like popcorn). Cracking joints and what ciropractors do are very diffrent. It feels diffrent and has diffrent effects.
People who think what they do is useless, or trivial in any way, has never had it when they needed it, or was mis diagnosed and had it when they didn't need it.