The penguin.swf blog is just an endless stream of excuses. Adobe absolutely can accelerate YUV->RGB. It's standard practice in software development to create a special fast path for a common scenario when performance matters. They can fall back to the slow path if the swf is trying to do something incompatible with the fast path.
Anyone writing a flash-based video player would opt for the fast path and follow whatever rules are necessary. But thanks to Adobe's laziness, that option isn't available. Flash is just a dinosaur that doesn't want to evolve.
FYI, here's how to accelerate video: Flash draws the scene in layers, back to front. For alpha blending or anti-aliasing of edges, it must read the RGB value below the layer currently being drawn to blend it with the current color. This is the problem, and there's a fairly simple solution. After rendering a YUV layer, render the layers above to an RGBA surface that starts out 100% transparent. Then send the output layers (RGB below video, YUV video, RGBA above video) to the video card for final compositing. The only scenario where this wouldn't work is if the player uses filters above the video. Have you ever seen a flash-based player that uses filters?
This, right here, is your problem. AGW is not a good thing, and no sane person would want it to be true. To the contrary, people want it to be false. Some hope to achieve that by regulating AGW out of existence, while others merely pretend it's not true.
So can lies. Don't get so offended when people state that fact that you have to project malicious motives onto others. Your post is a perfect example of what Obama was referring to: armies of mindless parrots, squawking about in a giant echo chamber, mindlessly repeating falsehoods.
And these falsehoods aren't even harmless urban legends and ghost stories. They have clear political motives and serve someone's interests. Can't you get a clue from that? Do you like being a pawn?
You aren't responsible for what others say, but once you repeat it you are to blame for any lies you spread. So do some fact checking. You know, personal responsibility and all that.
Where will Microsoft or Sony be in five years? They both already hit the point of greatly diminishing returns for system power, and they're playing their last cards right now with their motion controls. What can they add next? Not much. Nintendo, however, has at least one successful new console in their future. One with HD and PS3-level graphics or above.
Re:If you think HTML5 is ready to replace Flash...
on
Flash Is Not a Right
·
· Score: 1
If you compared Flash performance against native applications, you'd think Flash wasn't ready to replace native stuff yet.
Ayn Rand-types won't necessarily pay zero for this. You're assuming they give no thoughts to future desires and only think of immediate costs and instant gratification, and that just isn't true.
I don't think that's the assumption. A $30 donation isn't enough to produce future games from these developers. Neither is a $300 donation or $3000. An individual isn't going to have enough money to donate to single-handedly ensure future games from these developers.
A donor has to understand that even though their own individual actions are insignificant, the collective behavior enabled by themselves and others donating small amounts will make a difference. But the defining trait of randites is that they do NOT understand this, because the philosophy is founded on a complete abject failure to understand the commons dilemma.
I'm not parsing the label too broadly. They're using it too broadly. The labels are for propaganda, not description. I don't engage in doublespeak, so I take those phrases for their logical meaning.
You seem somewhat critical of the labels yourself, so I don't know why you don't see the irony here. It's based around the use of overly-broad labels.
Now as for choice, it's superficial to be so concerned about having choice while completely ignoring what those choices actually are. Would you rather be stabbed in the face or shot with a gun? Because that's the kind of choice you get if you can't afford insurance. And that's if you get a choice. You could instead have a "pre-existing condition."
I think choosing affordable insurance or paying a fine (contingent on income) is a better choice than choosing between unaffordable insurance or no coverage.
"Appearing to" is the key phrase here. Regardless, we don't have to worry about the sun exploding for about five billion years.
To say that we don't really know for sure about such things isn't being skeptical. Quite the opposite. It's just an excuse to believe whatever you want by declaring everything uncertain and all uncertainties equal. Then no competing point of view can prove itself superior to yours.
If that's how you think, why not skydive without a parachute? You might survive or you might die. Just like any normal day and just like skydiving with a parachute. So no problem, right?
So you don't understand conservation of mass? That's even more basic than conservation of angular momentum.
Anyway, the point is that it's grossly inaccurate to equate the certainty of one of the most well-substantiated facts about the future with your belief in your own guess about what a human will choose to do in the future.
My personal problem with that text (as I actually had a conversation about this very topic the other day), is how about when my brain "glitches" and shows me things that happen well* in advance. *Well meaning years in advance.
No it doesn't. It glitches and makes you think that's what happened, probably by misplacing your memory of thinking about the event, moving it to before the event in your mental timeline. Or, after the event, you dream that you predicted that event and confuse the dream for a real memory.
Sys as in "system setting" and false as in "don't use it". Which makes mousewheel.withnokey.numlines take effect. The default true setting means "use system setting".
Linux doesn't belong to you any more than Windows does. The code is clearly copyrighted to the authors and all of this illusion of public ownership is merely that. You have a EULA with Linux just as much as you do with Windows.
Wrong on all counts. Where is this Linux EULA you speak of? You ever see one at install time or upon first boot? And Linux belongs to you as much as it belongs to any of its authors. They, just like you, must abide by the GPL (a distribution license) because 99% of the code is still copyrighted by people other than themselves. You own it just as much as they do.
Are you arguing that the LACK of diversity in games is somehow an asset?
No, I am not. You're missing the point. I'm saying having ten shooters isn't as great as you think it is. It's not twice as good as having five shooters. Each new game in a given category counts less and less as the category fills up, because you're less likely to get that game. If you ultimately don't choose to get a particular game, then that game's existence didn't do you any good.
So do I get to count Orange Box as 5 games?
Yes, of course, you sure do! Oh, but it didn't make the list, sorry... Only 89 points. Too bad, so sad... Oh, are you looking at the Xbox 360 score of 96? Well, then by all means, feel free to adjust the count, but you missed the point again.
I wasn't arguing that the count was off, I was arguing that the method is inherently flawed and inaccurate. Metroid Prime Trilogy was just a clearly demonstrable example of how a review score can grossly mis-estimate the value of a title. Truth is, it happens all the time, but not in such an obvious way.
Game scores generally measure how good a game is while you're playing it, but completely ignore how long you'll be playing.
No, reviewers almost always take game length and replay ability into account. Read some reviews.
Look at some review scores. I didn't say reviews ignore length and replay value. I said review scores ignore length and replay value. Like for Metroid Prime Trilogy. Apparently adding 200% more game (approximately) is worth 1 point on a 100-point scale.
Not only that, Metroid Prime 1 & 2 have scores of 97 and 92, respectively, so why is a pack that includes both worth only 91 points? If review points measure value and are linearly additive, then the trilogy should have a score of 279.
It is a fact that there is a wide consensus among those that review games professionally that the vast majority of wii games suck.
First of all, that's true for everything. But if you mean to say that the Wii has more awful games than the other two consoles, then yes, I agree. That happens to the winner of every generation. The PS2 had the greatest quantity of awful games last generation, for example.
But it's not a big deal. Just don't buy the bad games. People choose consoles based on what good games they have, not how many bad games they have. SPOGS Racing does not have cooties. It doesn't "taint" the Wii.
Your only argument against this is to attack the CONCEPT of aesthetics. By your reasoning "Schindler's List" and "Freejack" are equally good because different viewers might be looking for something different.
I never said or implied anything even remotely like that. Work on reading comprehension.
Video games are art. And art criticism exists. So either all art criticism is meaningless, or video game reviews are valid. It's as simple as that.
I never said reviews are invalid. And there's a difference between the review scores and the reviews themselves. How hard is that to understand?
What's more important is variety. Are you really going to get both Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2?
I haven't played that particular series but if I like a game and find it completable then i'll amost certainly buy the sequal [...]
Fair enough, but in comparing consoles I examine things from the perspective of someone starting fresh, because that's who the comparison would be useful to. I imagine such a person will typically buy just the latest and greatest of whichever series and genres catch their interest. If they like a game they may still just wait for the next game rather than buying the previous one.
Remember, they have fewer games that they've already purchased so they have more options open for their next purchase. If they have enough interest in racing games to buy just one for their new system, chances are they haven't bought it yet, and that option is competing with the choice to buy the prior game. Whereas you might have the same level of interest in the game but already have your one racing game. The extra alternative options for a new console owner combined with a potential sequel on the horizon make people more likely to wait for new games in a series they like, rather than getting the older ones.
There's also the issue of online play. The online communities for older games die down and to the degree a person cares about online play, those games lose value. I know there are people out there that basically ignore single player modes in shooters and play online constantly. To them, only the newer games will be worthwhile.
Slashdot Mirror
The penguin.swf blog is just an endless stream of excuses. Adobe absolutely can accelerate YUV->RGB. It's standard practice in software development to create a special fast path for a common scenario when performance matters. They can fall back to the slow path if the swf is trying to do something incompatible with the fast path.
Anyone writing a flash-based video player would opt for the fast path and follow whatever rules are necessary. But thanks to Adobe's laziness, that option isn't available. Flash is just a dinosaur that doesn't want to evolve.
FYI, here's how to accelerate video: Flash draws the scene in layers, back to front. For alpha blending or anti-aliasing of edges, it must read the RGB value below the layer currently being drawn to blend it with the current color. This is the problem, and there's a fairly simple solution. After rendering a YUV layer, render the layers above to an RGBA surface that starts out 100% transparent. Then send the output layers (RGB below video, YUV video, RGBA above video) to the video card for final compositing. The only scenario where this wouldn't work is if the player uses filters above the video. Have you ever seen a flash-based player that uses filters?
.... People who want agw to be true ...
This, right here, is your problem. AGW is not a good thing, and no sane person would want it to be true. To the contrary, people want it to be false. Some hope to achieve that by regulating AGW out of existence, while others merely pretend it's not true.
You're pushing an agenda right now with that comment.
Dissent can become viral
So can lies. Don't get so offended when people state that fact that you have to project malicious motives onto others. Your post is a perfect example of what Obama was referring to: armies of mindless parrots, squawking about in a giant echo chamber, mindlessly repeating falsehoods.
And these falsehoods aren't even harmless urban legends and ghost stories. They have clear political motives and serve someone's interests. Can't you get a clue from that? Do you like being a pawn?
You aren't responsible for what others say, but once you repeat it you are to blame for any lies you spread. So do some fact checking. You know, personal responsibility and all that.
Where will Microsoft or Sony be in five years? They both already hit the point of greatly diminishing returns for system power, and they're playing their last cards right now with their motion controls. What can they add next? Not much. Nintendo, however, has at least one successful new console in their future. One with HD and PS3-level graphics or above.
If you compared Flash performance against native applications, you'd think Flash wasn't ready to replace native stuff yet.
In Australia a petty criminal will be armed with a knife, not a firearm.
That's not a knife.
That's a knife!
Ayn Rand-types won't necessarily pay zero for this. You're assuming they give no thoughts to future desires and only think of immediate costs and instant gratification, and that just isn't true.
I don't think that's the assumption. A $30 donation isn't enough to produce future games from these developers. Neither is a $300 donation or $3000. An individual isn't going to have enough money to donate to single-handedly ensure future games from these developers.
A donor has to understand that even though their own individual actions are insignificant, the collective behavior enabled by themselves and others donating small amounts will make a difference. But the defining trait of randites is that they do NOT understand this, because the philosophy is founded on a complete abject failure to understand the commons dilemma.
Therefore, a randite would pay zero.
Nice job proving you're not racist...
.
Every respectful person is sure to twitter his or her death as it's happening.
"Ugh ugh I'm dying you idiot!"
Man, this is an old and obscure reference...
I hope she skips the goatse 3D pictorial.... even for the Blind, once something has been 'touched' it can't be 'untouched'.
Oh, they know to stay away! How else do you think they went blind in the first place?
Which raises the question, if seeing Goatse blinds you, what does feeling it do?
PING 0xdeadbeef (222.173.190.239) 56(84) bytes of data.
From 219.146.113.214 icmp_seq=1 Time to live exceeded
How appropriate.
I'm not parsing the label too broadly. They're using it too broadly. The labels are for propaganda, not description. I don't engage in doublespeak, so I take those phrases for their logical meaning.
You seem somewhat critical of the labels yourself, so I don't know why you don't see the irony here. It's based around the use of overly-broad labels.
Now as for choice, it's superficial to be so concerned about having choice while completely ignoring what those choices actually are. Would you rather be stabbed in the face or shot with a gun? Because that's the kind of choice you get if you can't afford insurance. And that's if you get a choice. You could instead have a "pre-existing condition."
I think choosing affordable insurance or paying a fine (contingent on income) is a better choice than choosing between unaffordable insurance or no coverage.
It was the "right to life" people that threatened to block life-saving medical care for millions.
"Appearing to" is the key phrase here. Regardless, we don't have to worry about the sun exploding for about five billion years.
To say that we don't really know for sure about such things isn't being skeptical. Quite the opposite. It's just an excuse to believe whatever you want by declaring everything uncertain and all uncertainties equal. Then no competing point of view can prove itself superior to yours.
If that's how you think, why not skydive without a parachute? You might survive or you might die. Just like any normal day and just like skydiving with a parachute. So no problem, right?
So you don't understand conservation of mass? That's even more basic than conservation of angular momentum.
Anyway, the point is that it's grossly inaccurate to equate the certainty of one of the most well-substantiated facts about the future with your belief in your own guess about what a human will choose to do in the future.
We don't know that the Sun is going to rise above the horizon tomorrow
Apparently you don't know about the laws of motion and conservation of angular momentum.
Isn't it funny how we endorse collective suicide as long as it's in the name of 'freedom'?
My personal problem with that text (as I actually had a conversation about this very topic the other day), is how about when my brain "glitches" and shows me things that happen well* in advance. *Well meaning years in advance.
No it doesn't. It glitches and makes you think that's what happened, probably by misplacing your memory of thinking about the event, moving it to before the event in your mental timeline. Or, after the event, you dream that you predicted that event and confuse the dream for a real memory.
what can be understood as the victory sign in France...
France has a sign for victory?!
set mousewheel.withnokey.sysnumlines to false
Sys as in "system setting" and false as in "don't use it". Which makes mousewheel.withnokey.numlines take effect. The default true setting means "use system setting".
Linux doesn't belong to you any more than Windows does. The code is clearly copyrighted to the authors and all of this illusion of public ownership is merely that. You have a EULA with Linux just as much as you do with Windows.
Wrong on all counts. Where is this Linux EULA you speak of? You ever see one at install time or upon first boot? And Linux belongs to you as much as it belongs to any of its authors. They, just like you, must abide by the GPL (a distribution license) because 99% of the code is still copyrighted by people other than themselves. You own it just as much as they do.
Are you arguing that the LACK of diversity in games is somehow an asset?
No, I am not. You're missing the point. I'm saying having ten shooters isn't as great as you think it is. It's not twice as good as having five shooters. Each new game in a given category counts less and less as the category fills up, because you're less likely to get that game. If you ultimately don't choose to get a particular game, then that game's existence didn't do you any good.
So do I get to count Orange Box as 5 games?
Yes, of course, you sure do! Oh, but it didn't make the list, sorry... Only 89 points. Too bad, so sad... Oh, are you looking at the Xbox 360 score of 96? Well, then by all means, feel free to adjust the count, but you missed the point again.
I wasn't arguing that the count was off, I was arguing that the method is inherently flawed and inaccurate. Metroid Prime Trilogy was just a clearly demonstrable example of how a review score can grossly mis-estimate the value of a title. Truth is, it happens all the time, but not in such an obvious way.
Game scores generally measure how good a game is while you're playing it, but completely ignore how long you'll be playing.
No, reviewers almost always take game length and replay ability into account. Read some reviews.
Look at some review scores. I didn't say reviews ignore length and replay value. I said review scores ignore length and replay value. Like for Metroid Prime Trilogy. Apparently adding 200% more game (approximately) is worth 1 point on a 100-point scale.
Not only that, Metroid Prime 1 & 2 have scores of 97 and 92, respectively, so why is a pack that includes both worth only 91 points? If review points measure value and are linearly additive, then the trilogy should have a score of 279.
It is a fact that there is a wide consensus among those that review games professionally that the vast majority of wii games suck.
First of all, that's true for everything. But if you mean to say that the Wii has more awful games than the other two consoles, then yes, I agree. That happens to the winner of every generation. The PS2 had the greatest quantity of awful games last generation, for example.
But it's not a big deal. Just don't buy the bad games. People choose consoles based on what good games they have, not how many bad games they have. SPOGS Racing does not have cooties. It doesn't "taint" the Wii.
Your only argument against this is to attack the CONCEPT of aesthetics. By your reasoning "Schindler's List" and "Freejack" are equally good because different viewers might be looking for something different.
I never said or implied anything even remotely like that. Work on reading comprehension.
Video games are art. And art criticism exists. So either all art criticism is meaningless, or video game reviews are valid. It's as simple as that.
I never said reviews are invalid. And there's a difference between the review scores and the reviews themselves. How hard is that to understand?
What's more important is variety. Are you really going to get both Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2?
I haven't played that particular series but if I like a game and find it completable then i'll amost certainly buy the sequal [...]
Fair enough, but in comparing consoles I examine things from the perspective of someone starting fresh, because that's who the comparison would be useful to. I imagine such a person will typically buy just the latest and greatest of whichever series and genres catch their interest. If they like a game they may still just wait for the next game rather than buying the previous one.
Remember, they have fewer games that they've already purchased so they have more options open for their next purchase. If they have enough interest in racing games to buy just one for their new system, chances are they haven't bought it yet, and that option is competing with the choice to buy the prior game. Whereas you might have the same level of interest in the game but already have your one racing game. The extra alternative options for a new console owner combined with a potential sequel on the horizon make people more likely to wait for new games in a series they like, rather than getting the older ones.
There's also the issue of online play. The online communities for older games die down and to the degree a person cares about online play, those games lose value. I know there are people out there that basically ignore single player modes in shooters and play online constantly. To them, only the newer games will be worthwhile.