I guess it's a little better for that, but really, flipping pages on one of the slower ones isn't so bad. The big jump in functionality comes when you can zoom, scroll and have a fully functional GUI.
I looked at a Sony once and it didn't seem to be appreciably better. Maybe the new ones are. 6 fps, especially if you need to clear the screen in between, doesn't really get you that much more functionality though.
He said travel, not tourism. Package tours are not travel. Travel is both cheaper and far more enlightening than tourism.
Yes, if you live in a major city you may be able to talk to people from around the world by going down to the pub but you will a) not be forced to and b) only hear about it. Travel forces you to experience other ways of life.
No, for reading novels a kindle is perfect. I've been tempted to get one for that purpose, but for the amount of pure, reflowable text I read it simply isn't worth it. If it were $99, then maybe. If ebooks were a reasonable price, maybe.
Where eink is going to get slaughtered is in education. Things like textbooks, where you want colour and zooming and scrolling. And if everyone gets used to using a tablet in school, they'll probably use one when they get out too.
I think ebook readers are experiencing a sort of golden age. Soon they'll have to drop their prices in order to convince people to buy one in addition to, not instead of, a more computer-like tablet.
I prefer Canada Post to other package delivery services like UPS and FedEx. They're cheaper, just as fast if you use the express options (which are STILL cheaper) and will generally deliver packages to my door, because the delivery guy has a key. If not, I can (literally) run down to the drug store and pick it up. FedEx and UPS on the other hand cost more, won't leave the package if you're not home (which is most of the time since they only deliver during working hours) and to pick up the package you have to drive halfway across the city, navigate through an industrial area between the tracks and the airport, and wait in line at their office.
But now I see why American companies hate shipping things via the post office so much.
I love books. I have a bunch of them. Through several moves I've pared down my collection to about a hundred that I really like, with the rest in storage until I end up somewhere semi-permanently. Since I got an iPad I've been STRONGLY preferring ebooks for almost everything. They take up a lot less space and are much easier to move.
Maybe they'd be better off implementing it as a wave travelling across the screen, to look more like a page turn in a book.
The problem though, is that you can't use e-ink for doing much except reading. And I don't mind plugging a device in every couple of days to gain the ability to scroll, have video and be able to implement animation and things like drag and drop.
They recommend 20x100 binoculars. The 20 is the magnification. The 100 means 100 mm, which is the "aperture," or light gathering capability of the binoculars. I put that in quotes because I mean actual aperture, not the aperture/focal length ratio photographers usually mean when they say "aperture." Think of it (roughly) as the diameter of the main lens. The supernova is dim, so you need a fair amount of light gathering power to brighten it to where you can see it with your eyes. If you're using a camera you can make up for a smaller aperture with a longer exposure.
Magnification is completely irrelevant when you're looking at a point source like a star or a supernova, except that it determines your field of view, which makes a more or less pretty picture. But a point is still a point no matter how much you magnify it.
The focal length of the lens and the distance of the object has very little to do with it.
You can't get a good picture of the moon in an automatic mode because it's very bright. Go to a manual mode, dial in 1/250 s (to start) at f8 and move around until you get a picture you like.
Focal length isn't going to make a bit of difference when you're looking at something 21 million light years away. It's a point, no matter what. The focal length of your lens will determine whether you JUST get a point of light in the frame, or whether you get some surrounding stars for context.
No matter what, your light meter is completely useless when taking pictures of stars.
Go read my comment more carefully. I said "Engadget and Slashdot might be a LITTLE bit biased towards geeks." And by that I meant their readership is probably geek-enriched.
If News Corp wants to know what I'm reading, they have to ask me. The one exception is their online subscription service, but in that case I'm paying them. Their free subscription thing (do they still do that?) is held in deep suspicion by Slashdotters (hm...) and isn't linked to all sorts of OTHER information about me, collected by other products from News Corp.
I pay Verizon (or I would, if I were an American and had an account with them). I am their customer.
I also pay Microsoft, except for their free online services, which you're right, are not different from Google's and should be regarded with the knowledge that they exist to get information about you and sell it to advertisers.
I didn't say there was bias AGAINST Apple, I said that Engadget's readership was probably biased towards being geeks. Do I need to prove that to you, or will you stipulate it?
Geeks probably care a whole lot more about whether the Galaxy Tab is available than anyone else does.
Except that for television networks you specifically had to opt into giving them information, through ratings tracking companies.
Yes, Google's business model is just like an over-the-air TV network's. Except that Google has much more information about us, is now in charge of many or most of the communication channels we use to talk to each other, AND effectively controls much of the information we receive. So Google is kind of like the television networks, newspapers, postal service, phone company and government service branches all rolled into one. Oh, and they'd really like your medical records too, please.
I'm sorry, I thought I was talking to an adult. Go run and play in your own little world and keep thinking everyone who disagrees with your myopic worldview is an idiot, full of himself and brainwashed.
Read more carefully. MAKING a cheap tablet isn't shooting yourself in the foot. Making a cheap tablet and calling it that is.
If you're making a budget priced car, you don't call it a luxury sedan. Like it or not, "tablet" is associated with "iPad." Calling your product a tablet gets it compared to the iPad. In the media, in people's minds, on Slashdot. And your $200 device will come up short, just like a $15,000 Kia will come up short against a $70,000 Lexus. That's why there's a Lexus in the first place - if you've got cash to burn you're not going to buy a Toyota.
I'm sure some smart company will come up with yet another product category but until they do, the successful products are "tablets" compared directly to the iPad, and "ebook readers" compared directly to the Kindle. The Nook is wisely marketed as an ebook reader because that's what it's intended to be, and it stacks up well against the Kindle. It is not a direct competitor for the iPad.
I suppose someone might make a successful 7" tablet but so far it doesn't seem to be an easy thing to do. Personally, I don't think it will happen. 7" is good for reading text but doesn't seem to be ideal for anything else.
A $200 tablet isn't going to be a direct competitor for a $600 iPad (or similarly priced Android tablet). Expecting it to be is a good way to be disappointed, and is unfair to what might actually be a decent budget tablet.
Rabid Apple haters seem to have a problem with their brains shutting off whenever they see the name of an Apple product.
Slashdot Mirror
Full duplex on one channel using a radio is a LITTLE bit innovative.
And this is why we don't put Slashdot in charge of the patent system.
The Slashdot editors probably want to point out that they don't ONLY post stories submitted by a few favoured blog spammers.
Actually, maybe they took some flak for it because there's been a lot less of the usuals lately.
I guess it's a little better for that, but really, flipping pages on one of the slower ones isn't so bad. The big jump in functionality comes when you can zoom, scroll and have a fully functional GUI.
I looked at a Sony once and it didn't seem to be appreciably better. Maybe the new ones are. 6 fps, especially if you need to clear the screen in between, doesn't really get you that much more functionality though.
He said travel, not tourism. Package tours are not travel. Travel is both cheaper and far more enlightening than tourism.
Yes, if you live in a major city you may be able to talk to people from around the world by going down to the pub but you will a) not be forced to and b) only hear about it. Travel forces you to experience other ways of life.
No, for reading novels a kindle is perfect. I've been tempted to get one for that purpose, but for the amount of pure, reflowable text I read it simply isn't worth it. If it were $99, then maybe. If ebooks were a reasonable price, maybe.
Where eink is going to get slaughtered is in education. Things like textbooks, where you want colour and zooming and scrolling. And if everyone gets used to using a tablet in school, they'll probably use one when they get out too.
I think ebook readers are experiencing a sort of golden age. Soon they'll have to drop their prices in order to convince people to buy one in addition to, not instead of, a more computer-like tablet.
I prefer Canada Post to other package delivery services like UPS and FedEx. They're cheaper, just as fast if you use the express options (which are STILL cheaper) and will generally deliver packages to my door, because the delivery guy has a key. If not, I can (literally) run down to the drug store and pick it up. FedEx and UPS on the other hand cost more, won't leave the package if you're not home (which is most of the time since they only deliver during working hours) and to pick up the package you have to drive halfway across the city, navigate through an industrial area between the tracks and the airport, and wait in line at their office.
But now I see why American companies hate shipping things via the post office so much.
Damn it, ruining another good Slashdot conspiracy theory with actual numbers. What's wrong with you?
Textbooks and scientific papers. In other words, unless you read almost exclusively fiction, lots.
I love books. I have a bunch of them. Through several moves I've pared down my collection to about a hundred that I really like, with the rest in storage until I end up somewhere semi-permanently. Since I got an iPad I've been STRONGLY preferring ebooks for almost everything. They take up a lot less space and are much easier to move.
Maybe theoretically, but any existing e-ink display I've seen has a refresh rate of much less than 6 fps. More like 0.5-1 fps.
Maybe they'd be better off implementing it as a wave travelling across the screen, to look more like a page turn in a book.
The problem though, is that you can't use e-ink for doing much except reading. And I don't mind plugging a device in every couple of days to gain the ability to scroll, have video and be able to implement animation and things like drag and drop.
They recommend 20x100 binoculars. The 20 is the magnification. The 100 means 100 mm, which is the "aperture," or light gathering capability of the binoculars. I put that in quotes because I mean actual aperture, not the aperture/focal length ratio photographers usually mean when they say "aperture." Think of it (roughly) as the diameter of the main lens. The supernova is dim, so you need a fair amount of light gathering power to brighten it to where you can see it with your eyes. If you're using a camera you can make up for a smaller aperture with a longer exposure.
Magnification is completely irrelevant when you're looking at a point source like a star or a supernova, except that it determines your field of view, which makes a more or less pretty picture. But a point is still a point no matter how much you magnify it.
The focal length of the lens and the distance of the object has very little to do with it.
You can't get a good picture of the moon in an automatic mode because it's very bright. Go to a manual mode, dial in 1/250 s (to start) at f8 and move around until you get a picture you like.
Focal length isn't going to make a bit of difference when you're looking at something 21 million light years away. It's a point, no matter what. The focal length of your lens will determine whether you JUST get a point of light in the frame, or whether you get some surrounding stars for context.
No matter what, your light meter is completely useless when taking pictures of stars.
Go read my comment more carefully. I said "Engadget and Slashdot might be a LITTLE bit biased towards geeks." And by that I meant their readership is probably geek-enriched.
No mention of bias towards or against Apple.
If News Corp wants to know what I'm reading, they have to ask me. The one exception is their online subscription service, but in that case I'm paying them. Their free subscription thing (do they still do that?) is held in deep suspicion by Slashdotters (hm...) and isn't linked to all sorts of OTHER information about me, collected by other products from News Corp.
I pay Verizon (or I would, if I were an American and had an account with them). I am their customer.
I also pay Microsoft, except for their free online services, which you're right, are not different from Google's and should be regarded with the knowledge that they exist to get information about you and sell it to advertisers.
I didn't say there was bias AGAINST Apple, I said that Engadget's readership was probably biased towards being geeks. Do I need to prove that to you, or will you stipulate it?
Geeks probably care a whole lot more about whether the Galaxy Tab is available than anyone else does.
What's with the "but?"
Sounds awesome. If they can't pull it off in real life yet, they should make a movie.
Except that for television networks you specifically had to opt into giving them information, through ratings tracking companies.
Yes, Google's business model is just like an over-the-air TV network's. Except that Google has much more information about us, is now in charge of many or most of the communication channels we use to talk to each other, AND effectively controls much of the information we receive. So Google is kind of like the television networks, newspapers, postal service, phone company and government service branches all rolled into one. Oh, and they'd really like your medical records too, please.
Engadget and Slashdot might be a LITTLE bit biased towards geeks who would probably buy a Galaxy Tab over an iPad anyway.
I really doubt most of Apple's target market cares.
I'm sorry, I thought I was talking to an adult. Go run and play in your own little world and keep thinking everyone who disagrees with your myopic worldview is an idiot, full of himself and brainwashed.
Run along now.
Read more carefully. MAKING a cheap tablet isn't shooting yourself in the foot. Making a cheap tablet and calling it that is.
If you're making a budget priced car, you don't call it a luxury sedan. Like it or not, "tablet" is associated with "iPad." Calling your product a tablet gets it compared to the iPad. In the media, in people's minds, on Slashdot. And your $200 device will come up short, just like a $15,000 Kia will come up short against a $70,000 Lexus. That's why there's a Lexus in the first place - if you've got cash to burn you're not going to buy a Toyota.
For that matter, it displays fine on the 960x640 screen on an iPhone!
(hint: the number of dots isn't the issue)
I'm sure some smart company will come up with yet another product category but until they do, the successful products are "tablets" compared directly to the iPad, and "ebook readers" compared directly to the Kindle. The Nook is wisely marketed as an ebook reader because that's what it's intended to be, and it stacks up well against the Kindle. It is not a direct competitor for the iPad.
I suppose someone might make a successful 7" tablet but so far it doesn't seem to be an easy thing to do. Personally, I don't think it will happen. 7" is good for reading text but doesn't seem to be ideal for anything else.
A $200 tablet isn't going to be a direct competitor for a $600 iPad (or similarly priced Android tablet). Expecting it to be is a good way to be disappointed, and is unfair to what might actually be a decent budget tablet.
Rabid Apple haters seem to have a problem with their brains shutting off whenever they see the name of an Apple product.