What? No. Lenovo has had IPS panels for years that are full 8-bit. You can still get them on some models, though I've heard Lenovo will be phasing them out due to trouble with suppliers.
Can you show me where any dell or gateway ad or page advertising a 6-bit display as showing 'millions of colors' without dithering? I don't think you can, but you really have to to justify your false equivalence argument, I think.
Of course. Why wouldn't more (or bettter) relevant data that applies on a case-y-case basis provide more improved results than a "improved algorithm" (what does that mean, really?) that applied generally and globally?
I think we need much, much more rigorous definitions of "more data" and "better algorithm" in order to discuss this in any meaningful way.
Do you think 10-bit color provides only 2^10 or 1024 colors? I assume (hope) not, so why would 6-bit color be only 64 colors? The 10/8/6 bits are per channel (Red, Blue, Green) so 6-bit color is 2^18, or ~262k. 8 bit is 2^24 or ~2.7million, 10-bit is 2^30.
That said, you're right that 6-bit makes gradients (and many more things) look like shit. But, to be fair, not 64-color total shit.
The Amiga had 4096 colors (12-bit total, 4 bit per channel) in the 90's. 1024 total colors, now in 2008, on the best displays available? What were you thinking?
But do manufacturers publish specs on what colour depth is supported? Is there some quantitative measure of how well a display shows different colours and how wide the gamut is? How can I avoid getting caught out like these hapless iMac buyers?
Yes, of course. The LCD manufacturers will spec 6-, 8-. or 10-bit color for their panels. Then Apple will buy the 6-bit and claim it's an 8-bit. Then you sue Apple and get your money back and lunch with Steve, or something like that.
But seriously, yes, LCD (and any decent LCD mfgr) will spec the color bit depth of a panel. A really good mfgr (NEC, LG, Samsung) will have gamut charts available to OEMs and possibly end users. But if Apple chooses not to share, or worse just lies about it, there's not much you can do other than try to do some independent research to figure out what panels Apple uses, then contact the panel mfgr to (try to) get some specs.
Strange, the first case that was "settled out of court under undisclosed terms" seems to have been just two guys. Surely there are more than two photographers who bought macs thinking they would get 8-bit color and later realized it was only 6-bit. I wonder why no class-action was initiated? Since it wasn't though, it seems like Apple is still open to potentially thousands or more lawsuits for this false advertising.
That's what it is, right? They say "millions of colors" when it's really 262k colors. Or is there some precedent that lets a company claim dithering = unique color?
I voted for Bush against Gore, but not against Kerry. I think Bush is an imbecile, but I don't think he intentionally lies or compromises his beliefs or values for political gain.
Would you call out your priest knowing doing so would likely lose you a any support you had from your own community?
Yes. Of course. In fact, I have -- and ended up leaving my old church in Florida, over my refusal to sit quietly and listen to what I considered to be thinly-veiled racist sentiments. And those were nothing compared to Wright's nonsense. If Obama is too gutless to speak out for fear of losing the support of a (racist) community then I don't trust him to deal with a foreign dictator in any kind of brave or honest manner.
That, just like Hillary's recent pathetic lie about "dodging bullets" (riiight) do show them both to be people who will sacrifice principles and honesty for political gain in my opinion. And that's an unacceptable characteristic in a leader, to me. Feel free to tolerate it yourself, but most of America won't; you'll see.
What? Obama is all about going against what his "spiritual mentor" and pastor for 20 years preaches, but McCain is a pawn of two pastors who came out in favor of him (unsolicited, BTW)? McCain didn't attend the churches of either of those preachers, nor does he call either of them "friend" or "spiritual advisor." Look, I am (was?) for Obama, but that's just ridiculous.
And what you call "brave" I call revealing that he's not really interested in looking past race and racism to unify America, rather he wants to focus on it. Because its such a huge problem that needs fixing . . . just like Wright says.
I hear this argument often and it baffles me how otherwise intelligent persons can confuse correlation with causality so thoroughly. Do you mean to imply that executive experience is what made Dick Cheney like Dick Cheney? If so, then we must conclude that Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are like Dick Cheney, as is Bill Clinton and, if you believe her, Hillary Clinton. This, of course, is utter nonsense. Dick Cheney is like Dick Cheney because he's Dick Cheney! His experience didn't make him "evil", just more capable of executing his designs, which happen to have been "evil."
Clearly, the same kind of experience would be good for a "good" politician (the Anti-Cheney, if you will) to have, so as to facilitate the skillful execution of his or her "good" designs. With no experience or ability, what good is intent? So they get nothing done but they "meant well" -- and how does this help anything? And no matter how many experienced people they choose (how do you know they'll be "good" rather than "evil" -- since he's inexperienced he could easily be tricked by a "Dick Cheney") without experience in managing people, how will he be sure they execute his "good" designs?
So what if we head the whole speech (it's on youtube, in it's entirety,) don't think Obama's a racist, but do think it's shameful and disgusting that Obama would attend, with his family, a church that espoused and outwardly expressed ridiculous notions like whites inventing AIDS to kill blacks and 9/11 conspiracy theories? What if we remember Obama saying "I don't think my church is controversial" then later in his "race speech" saying he remembers Wright making controversial remarks, but not the ones in question? To me, if Obama didn't have the guts to stand up and walk out, or at least tell Wright face-to-face that he disagrees, then he doesn't have the guts to be my president. (I was actually in favor of Obama until all this came out.)
And to the GP: I guess you don't realize that the president doesn't create policy or laws. Congress does that. The president just executes them, hence "executive" branch. Whatever policy a candidate says he or she will support means nothing more than they'll try to convince congress to enact laws to support it, or try to appoint judges/justices who they think might interpret existing law that way. A candidate's "policies" aren't nearly as important as their character and trustworthiness. I object to the notion that since we shouldn't fully trust any politician, then we should utterly ignore actual examples of a politician lying when considering voting for them. That's a bit like throwing the baby out with the bathwater, isn't it?
Sorry you're so pessimistic and distressed, but I'm glad Obama's and Hillary's lies have been revealed now rather than later.
The real problem is this idea that we cannot acknowledge the fact that some kids are genuinely better than others. Worse is getting past the idea that hard work really does pay off.
Amen brother! It gets scarier, too. read this and start fearing for the future of science in the US even more.
Welp, you convinced me. I see it now: the only possible way to avoid heartbreaking "defeat" of the power-management system designed by a bunch of geniuses at apple is to forbid all background tasks. Clearly, were there a better solution, the geniuses at apple would have implemented it. So no, this is it -- the pinnacle of power management. Don't talk about user-definable priorities or refresh periods. Don't bring up network-refresh windows that tasks can use to minimize radio on/off. Nope -- apple says it's either no background tasks, or you'll be miserable and blame them, and we know apple must be right. I surrender my will to Steve. I apologize for resisting for so long, now I see that it was futile. I will always remember you, pohl, as the one who saved my soul.
I would also like to apologize for claiming it is likely that many/. users would be displeased at being locked out of using features of devices they purchased. This is clearly ridiculous as no one on/. has ever complained about such a thing in the past nor will anyone in the foreseeable future. I would also like to apologize on behalf of the moderator who gave me +1 insightful, and respectfully request Taco to undo that moderation.
While the article summaries here often leave a lot to be desired, let's give credit when it's due.
The article:
A report by the Financial Times (registration required) cites unnamed executives who say that Apple is in talks with record labels to offer access to the entire iTunes music library for a lump sum price.
The summary:
Apple is in discussions with the big music companies about an 'all you can eat' model for buying music that would give customers free access to its entire iTunes music library in exchange for paying a premium for its iPod and iPhone devices.
The post title:
Apple Mulls Flat-Rate "Unlimited Music" Option
Sounds good to me. Maybe this will help you:
mull/ml/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[muhl] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
-verb (used without object)
1. to study or ruminate; ponder.
-verb (used with object)
2. to think about carefully; consider (often fol. by over): to mull over an idea.
3. to make a mess or failure of.
[Origin: 1815-25; perh. identical with dial. mull to crumble, pulverize; see mull4]
--Synonyms 1. consider, weigh.
That was pretty funny. A little friendly tip about your sig: a sentence about someone being smarter or not should probably use then/than correctly. Otherwise it can be (unintentionally) funny as well;)
Slashdot Mirror
What? No. Lenovo has had IPS panels for years that are full 8-bit. You can still get them on some models, though I've heard Lenovo will be phasing them out due to trouble with suppliers.
"98% fewer colors" is exactly what it says -- 90% fewer discrete colors. It says nothing about gamut or color range, so it's not misleading at all.
Can you show me where any dell or gateway ad or page advertising a 6-bit display as showing 'millions of colors' without dithering? I don't think you can, but you really have to to justify your false equivalence argument, I think.
Of course. Why wouldn't more (or bettter) relevant data that applies on a case-y-case basis provide more improved results than a "improved algorithm" (what does that mean, really?) that applied generally and globally?
I think we need much, much more rigorous definitions of "more data" and "better algorithm" in order to discuss this in any meaningful way.
Wouldn't a videophobe prefer to have no display at all?
Hard to argue? I'd think anyone with eyes could easily and successfully argue that they purchased it for the "high-quality" display.
Which windows pc or laptop, exactly, advertises "millions of colors" but provides only 6-bit panels?
Do you think 10-bit color provides only 2^10 or 1024 colors? I assume (hope) not, so why would 6-bit color be only 64 colors? The 10/8/6 bits are per channel (Red, Blue, Green) so 6-bit color is 2^18, or ~262k. 8 bit is 2^24 or ~2.7million, 10-bit is 2^30.
That said, you're right that 6-bit makes gradients (and many more things) look like shit. But, to be fair, not 64-color total shit.
The Amiga had 4096 colors (12-bit total, 4 bit per channel) in the 90's. 1024 total colors, now in 2008, on the best displays available? What were you thinking?
I'm going to have to assume that this post is an April Fool's joke, since it so perfectly is in exact opposition to reality. Nice work!
But seriously, yes, LCD (and any decent LCD mfgr) will spec the color bit depth of a panel. A really good mfgr (NEC, LG, Samsung) will have gamut charts available to OEMs and possibly end users. But if Apple chooses not to share, or worse just lies about it, there's not much you can do other than try to do some independent research to figure out what panels Apple uses, then contact the panel mfgr to (try to) get some specs.
Strange, the first case that was "settled out of court under undisclosed terms" seems to have been just two guys. Surely there are more than two photographers who bought macs thinking they would get 8-bit color and later realized it was only 6-bit. I wonder why no class-action was initiated? Since it wasn't though, it seems like Apple is still open to potentially thousands or more lawsuits for this false advertising.
That's what it is, right? They say "millions of colors" when it's really 262k colors. Or is there some precedent that lets a company claim dithering = unique color?
After his re-election, Bush received increasingly heated criticism...
I voted for Bush against Gore, but not against Kerry. I think Bush is an imbecile, but I don't think he intentionally lies or compromises his beliefs or values for political gain.
That, just like Hillary's recent pathetic lie about "dodging bullets" (riiight) do show them both to be people who will sacrifice principles and honesty for political gain in my opinion. And that's an unacceptable characteristic in a leader, to me. Feel free to tolerate it yourself, but most of America won't; you'll see.
It must be annoying to be bugged by things that exist only in your imagination.
Just FYI, that's still not funny. But chin up, maybe it will be the 5 millionth time! I'm sure you'll let us know!
What? Obama is all about going against what his "spiritual mentor" and pastor for 20 years preaches, but McCain is a pawn of two pastors who came out in favor of him (unsolicited, BTW)? McCain didn't attend the churches of either of those preachers, nor does he call either of them "friend" or "spiritual advisor." Look, I am (was?) for Obama, but that's just ridiculous.
And what you call "brave" I call revealing that he's not really interested in looking past race and racism to unify America, rather he wants to focus on it. Because its such a huge problem that needs fixing . . . just like Wright says.
I hear this argument often and it baffles me how otherwise intelligent persons can confuse correlation with causality so thoroughly. Do you mean to imply that executive experience is what made Dick Cheney like Dick Cheney? If so, then we must conclude that Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are like Dick Cheney, as is Bill Clinton and, if you believe her, Hillary Clinton. This, of course, is utter nonsense. Dick Cheney is like Dick Cheney because he's Dick Cheney! His experience didn't make him "evil", just more capable of executing his designs, which happen to have been "evil."
Clearly, the same kind of experience would be good for a "good" politician (the Anti-Cheney, if you will) to have, so as to facilitate the skillful execution of his or her "good" designs. With no experience or ability, what good is intent? So they get nothing done but they "meant well" -- and how does this help anything? And no matter how many experienced people they choose (how do you know they'll be "good" rather than "evil" -- since he's inexperienced he could easily be tricked by a "Dick Cheney") without experience in managing people, how will he be sure they execute his "good" designs?
Which church did McCain attend for 20 years led by a racist, bigoted, truther/conspiracy nut preacher? I must have missed that.
So what if we head the whole speech (it's on youtube, in it's entirety,) don't think Obama's a racist, but do think it's shameful and disgusting that Obama would attend, with his family, a church that espoused and outwardly expressed ridiculous notions like whites inventing AIDS to kill blacks and 9/11 conspiracy theories? What if we remember Obama saying "I don't think my church is controversial" then later in his "race speech" saying he remembers Wright making controversial remarks, but not the ones in question? To me, if Obama didn't have the guts to stand up and walk out, or at least tell Wright face-to-face that he disagrees, then he doesn't have the guts to be my president. (I was actually in favor of Obama until all this came out.)
And to the GP: I guess you don't realize that the president doesn't create policy or laws. Congress does that. The president just executes them, hence "executive" branch. Whatever policy a candidate says he or she will support means nothing more than they'll try to convince congress to enact laws to support it, or try to appoint judges/justices who they think might interpret existing law that way. A candidate's "policies" aren't nearly as important as their character and trustworthiness. I object to the notion that since we shouldn't fully trust any politician, then we should utterly ignore actual examples of a politician lying when considering voting for them. That's a bit like throwing the baby out with the bathwater, isn't it?
Sorry you're so pessimistic and distressed, but I'm glad Obama's and Hillary's lies have been revealed now rather than later.
Hmmm, tough one. Is the finger lubed or dry?
Welp, you convinced me. I see it now: the only possible way to avoid heartbreaking "defeat" of the power-management system designed by a bunch of geniuses at apple is to forbid all background tasks. Clearly, were there a better solution, the geniuses at apple would have implemented it. So no, this is it -- the pinnacle of power management. Don't talk about user-definable priorities or refresh periods. Don't bring up network-refresh windows that tasks can use to minimize radio on/off. Nope -- apple says it's either no background tasks, or you'll be miserable and blame them, and we know apple must be right. I surrender my will to Steve. I apologize for resisting for so long, now I see that it was futile. I will always remember you, pohl, as the one who saved my soul.
/. users would be displeased at being locked out of using features of devices they purchased. This is clearly ridiculous as no one on /. has ever complained about such a thing in the past nor will anyone in the foreseeable future. I would also like to apologize on behalf of the moderator who gave me +1 insightful, and respectfully request Taco to undo that moderation.
I would also like to apologize for claiming it is likely that many
The article: The summary: The post title: Sounds good to me. Maybe this will help you:
That was pretty funny. A little friendly tip about your sig: a sentence about someone being smarter or not should probably use then/than correctly. Otherwise it can be (unintentionally) funny as well ;)