Well I have a PS3 and at the time I got it there were loads of special offers for blu-ray movies (5 free with my PS3 and tons of website that were 2-for-1 offers or better) so needless to say I have a decent collection of about 30 blu-ray movies that cost me less than if I were to buy them on DVD. That aside, personally I feel the difference between DVD and blu-ray is as drastic and awesome as the difference between VHS and DVD was, so nearly every movie I watch on blu-ray, imo, is awesome and worth it.
But for some good recommendations, well it depends on the types of movies you enjoy watching, but a few that I enjoyed were;
- The Fifth Element (I was really impressed an old movie from the 90s could look so good)
- Lord of War (nothing like having a crystal clear picture & audio to help you get into the story and emotion of a movie)
- Ultra Violet (ya, its a kinda cheesy comic book movie, but the visual effects and styling of this movie are stunning, the only thing better than blu-ray on this would be the imax)
- House of Flying Daggers (yes, its subtitled but the uncompressed audio is amazing and coupled with the visuals in this movie really help tell a great story)
- Corpse Bride (wow, just wow. The wow factor for me on this movie was how clear the picture was, sometimes it was legitamely difficult to decern some of the textures from real cloth. To be fair though, I think in some places they actually did this, so I might be wrong, but either way this movie looks amazing.)
- Crank (I personally love this movie, a lot of people I've talked to don't like it for one reason or another, but I first watched it on DVD and then later on blu-ray and it nearly seems like a different movie. This movie benefits immensely from having great picture quality and audio)
- Planet Earth (this is a documentary basically about the ecosystem of our planet, its not too exciting but it is interesting to say the least. The important factor for this movie is it is absolutely beautiful, worth watching)
I personnally prefer blu-ray over DVD and I feel it offers a great amount of value for me when watching movies, as it stands the only experience that succeeds it would be an IMAX theatre. But to be fair blu-ray wouldn't be worth it if it isn't coupled with a nice 1080p HDTV and a decent sound system so it is a substancial investment for someone that is looking to just watch movies. Blu-ray is more of a side benefit for me because my home theatre is mostly used to play video games.
As far as I'm concerned blu-ray is still an early adopter's brand, based even on the comments in this thread its not ready for the mainstream, but I'm fairly confident it will come and I think a lot of the people here will enjoy watching their blu-ray movies in the future.
The praticipants in this study are far too biased and are expecting Windows when they sit down at a computer and we're likely expecting a Windows clone when they sat down for the study. I think to effectly rate the quality in comparison of the KDE UI vs Whatever else is to have people that have never used one of these types of user interfaces before and have more than 10 minutes to use each one of them.
The real judges should be our grandparents. (people that predate computers in the workplace)
KDE is a far superior desktop UI than Windows. The file manager expecially. It has regular expression, file filters, splitable panes, and mouse over previews for f**k sakes! The password manager is universal between all of your K applications. There's virtual desktops, CTRL+ALT+ESC for XKill, CTRL+ESC for Ksysgaurd! You can set hot key macros for any sort function, whether its window/desktop management, opening applications, or running shell scripts to order you pizza from pizza hut with your favorite toppings(http://slashdot.org/articles/04/05/07/138 238.shtml).
Computers and modern operating systems are designed to make your job faster, more effecient and easier, with windows you only get easier, with KDE you get all three. Sure the initial setup might take more than 12 brain cells to figure out but its so much more worth it in the end.
The advice i always give new linux users is "forget everything you know about windows"
Note, I'm only debating the desktop environment here, with a few basic tools. I agree that Windows has better office suite programs, but that's not the case here. Also konqueror needs some work as far as it goes as a webbrowser(stick with firefox/mozilla for now).
Wla-mart?? at 3 in the morning?
is there a 24/7 walmart in the states or what? i'm just curious, because here in Canada wal-marts everywhere are only open from 8am to 11pm
Microsoft has no place to talk about choice! That's 100% bs. When are you ever really given a choice with ms products? MS just doesn't want iTunes for windows because they know that they'll loose money.
yeah if someone sets a bunch of trees on fire and you die in the fire from a tree that was 100km from where the person set them on fire, it's not the tree's fault, of course it's the guy who set the tree on fire. But you have to think of this situation as if there are 100 people in a line and they each have their own tree, now the first person sets his own tree on fire and then tells the guy next to him to set his tree on fire and then he does it and then he tells the next guy to set his tree on fire and it goes on until finally it gets down to the end and some guy, say, has a bush and he sets it on fire and gets burned, he can only blame himself for being a fucken idiot and listening to the guy next to him to set his own tree on fire. You have to understand this at a technical level, the computers are accepting the virus, and you are letting them accept it by a) not securing your system and/or b) connecting it to a medium where there is the risk. A computer is a drone and you are solely responsible for what it does unless someone directly controls it.
and the internet will always be a free place as long as there are sperate countries, because whos gonna control it? Microsoft? fuck on, if the people don't like it they make a "new" internet. it's pretty simple guys.
Connect to the internet at your own risk! A virus is simple a service provided you choose to accept. Sure there's no fancy dialog that ask you if you want to get infected but just by connecting to the internet and knownly running insecure software you are agreeing to anything that can happen to you. The internet is free ground, you can't govern it and no laws apply, i'm sorry to break it to you but you can't whine about what has happened here, it's your fault for connecting to the internet and knownly using insecure software. If you don't want a virus, shutdown, seriously. So stop blaming the author. He/She can only be liable for infections that he/she directly physically applied, all the rest is the fault of those that chose to accept it.
if you don't understand how the author isn't liable, it works like this.
The internet is Free ground, no laws, no government, anything goes. The virus author infects a computer, then the computer sends it out to the internet. Right there is where the liablity ends for the author. Because now it's up to an other computer to accept whats coming. Unless the author physically puts the virus in the computer through none 'internet' means then they can't be liable. It was the computer's choice to accpect what was coming from the internet, and so it's liable, but since a computer can't be liable and you are liable for your own computer then you are liable for getting infected, and infecting other computers that are connected through any law governed medium, anything except the internet. Again, your now infected computer sends the infection out through the internet, there now your liablity ends, you aren't liable for those infections. And it keeps going on. So it boils down to that everyone that got infected is equally liable as the author or more, because once that virus goes through the internet all liablity for it is dropped because no laws can apply to it. Think about it. It's comparible to open waters, or something that happens out in space or on another planet.
All I can say is that Microsoft has to be the whiniest entity known to man, not even my girlfriend whines that much! So I just want to tell microsoft that if you are going to make it, people are going to hack it, wheather you like it or not, so fuck off!
Ok, listen up windozes users that are complaining about the 3cds for a fresh RH installation.(I'm not sure about the content of the RH installation CDs so I'm going to otherwise use Mandrake linux as an example) Now you have 3CDs for a MDK install, the first CD is for the OS and apps critical for the OS functionallity, this disk is easialy comparible to the one cd required for a Windows installation. Now the 2nd MDK disk, is filled with apps that are not so critical but can be very useful and mostly apps that an average user wants or needs. Then the 3rd disk has more or less toys or the odd apps out, ones that are not very widely used and not very commonly used. Now I think off of a fresh FULL to the teeth MDK8.1 install you get the OS and about 6000 apps, and yes this is only 3 disks. Now you have your Windows 'wonderful single disk install' that will provide you with at most 50 useful apps. Time for some math:
we have 3 MDK8.1 cds that have about 6000 apps and we have 1 windows install with about 50. Now if you were to make a windows install with 6000 apps, when all other apps for windows average off about 1 cd per extra app not on the install cd. How many cds would you need for a 6000 app windows install?
well, 6000-50= 5050 CDs for extra windows applications. Now to be fair we all know that about 2000+-1000 would be downloads, like winamp, icq, etc. That still leaves you with 2050+-1000 CDs that you need to make a 6000 app windows OS. Note i'm not saying that either party would accually want a 6000 app install but think about it. Even if you only wanted 200 app install. Most of that if not all will be on a linux distro cd, opposed to windows where you would either have to download them or acquire a copy somehow(cdr or purchase). So are you complaining about convience?
Slashdot Mirror
Well I have a PS3 and at the time I got it there were loads of special offers for blu-ray movies (5 free with my PS3 and tons of website that were 2-for-1 offers or better) so needless to say I have a decent collection of about 30 blu-ray movies that cost me less than if I were to buy them on DVD. That aside, personally I feel the difference between DVD and blu-ray is as drastic and awesome as the difference between VHS and DVD was, so nearly every movie I watch on blu-ray, imo, is awesome and worth it.
But for some good recommendations, well it depends on the types of movies you enjoy watching, but a few that I enjoyed were;
- The Fifth Element (I was really impressed an old movie from the 90s could look so good)
- Lord of War (nothing like having a crystal clear picture & audio to help you get into the story and emotion of a movie)
- Ultra Violet (ya, its a kinda cheesy comic book movie, but the visual effects and styling of this movie are stunning, the only thing better than blu-ray on this would be the imax)
- House of Flying Daggers (yes, its subtitled but the uncompressed audio is amazing and coupled with the visuals in this movie really help tell a great story)
- Corpse Bride (wow, just wow. The wow factor for me on this movie was how clear the picture was, sometimes it was legitamely difficult to decern some of the textures from real cloth. To be fair though, I think in some places they actually did this, so I might be wrong, but either way this movie looks amazing.)
- Crank (I personally love this movie, a lot of people I've talked to don't like it for one reason or another, but I first watched it on DVD and then later on blu-ray and it nearly seems like a different movie. This movie benefits immensely from having great picture quality and audio)
- Planet Earth (this is a documentary basically about the ecosystem of our planet, its not too exciting but it is interesting to say the least. The important factor for this movie is it is absolutely beautiful, worth watching)
I personnally prefer blu-ray over DVD and I feel it offers a great amount of value for me when watching movies, as it stands the only experience that succeeds it would be an IMAX theatre. But to be fair blu-ray wouldn't be worth it if it isn't coupled with a nice 1080p HDTV and a decent sound system so it is a substancial investment for someone that is looking to just watch movies. Blu-ray is more of a side benefit for me because my home theatre is mostly used to play video games.
As far as I'm concerned blu-ray is still an early adopter's brand, based even on the comments in this thread its not ready for the mainstream, but I'm fairly confident it will come and I think a lot of the people here will enjoy watching their blu-ray movies in the future.
{ }
Wla-mart?? at 3 in the morning? is there a 24/7 walmart in the states or what? i'm just curious, because here in Canada wal-marts everywhere are only open from 8am to 11pm
lol, ass.. i followed that all the way to the end, gg.
Good story.. that could make a cool movie or something
-puppetier
Microsoft has no place to talk about choice! That's 100% bs. When are you ever really given a choice with ms products? MS just doesn't want iTunes for windows because they know that they'll loose money.
You all obviously don't understand my point.
yeah if someone sets a bunch of trees on fire and you die in the fire from a tree that was 100km from where the person set them on fire, it's not the tree's fault, of course it's the guy who set the tree on fire. But you have to think of this situation as if there are 100 people in a line and they each have their own tree, now the first person sets his own tree on fire and then tells the guy next to him to set his tree on fire and then he does it and then he tells the next guy to set his tree on fire and it goes on until finally it gets down to the end and some guy, say, has a bush and he sets it on fire and gets burned, he can only blame himself for being a fucken idiot and listening to the guy next to him to set his own tree on fire. You have to understand this at a technical level, the computers are accepting the virus, and you are letting them accept it by a) not securing your system and/or b) connecting it to a medium where there is the risk. A computer is a drone and you are solely responsible for what it does unless someone directly controls it.
and the internet will always be a free place as long as there are sperate countries, because whos gonna control it? Microsoft? fuck on, if the people don't like it they make a "new" internet. it's pretty simple guys.
Connect to the internet at your own risk! A virus is simple a service provided you choose to accept. Sure there's no fancy dialog that ask you if you want to get infected but just by connecting to the internet and knownly running insecure software you are agreeing to anything that can happen to you. The internet is free ground, you can't govern it and no laws apply, i'm sorry to break it to you but you can't whine about what has happened here, it's your fault for connecting to the internet and knownly using insecure software. If you don't want a virus, shutdown, seriously. So stop blaming the author. He/She can only be liable for infections that he/she directly physically applied, all the rest is the fault of those that chose to accept it.
if you don't understand how the author isn't liable, it works like this.
The internet is Free ground, no laws, no government, anything goes. The virus author infects a computer, then the computer sends it out to the internet. Right there is where the liablity ends for the author. Because now it's up to an other computer to accept whats coming. Unless the author physically puts the virus in the computer through none 'internet' means then they can't be liable. It was the computer's choice to accpect what was coming from the internet, and so it's liable, but since a computer can't be liable and you are liable for your own computer then you are liable for getting infected, and infecting other computers that are connected through any law governed medium, anything except the internet. Again, your now infected computer sends the infection out through the internet, there now your liablity ends, you aren't liable for those infections. And it keeps going on. So it boils down to that everyone that got infected is equally liable as the author or more, because once that virus goes through the internet all liablity for it is dropped because no laws can apply to it. Think about it. It's comparible to open waters, or something that happens out in space or on another planet.
All I can say is that Microsoft has to be the whiniest entity known to man, not even my girlfriend whines that much! So I just want to tell microsoft that if you are going to make it, people are going to hack it, wheather you like it or not, so fuck off!
Ok, listen up windozes users that are complaining about the 3cds for a fresh RH installation.(I'm not sure about the content of the RH installation CDs so I'm going to otherwise use Mandrake linux as an example) Now you have 3CDs for a MDK install, the first CD is for the OS and apps critical for the OS functionallity, this disk is easialy comparible to the one cd required for a Windows installation. Now the 2nd MDK disk, is filled with apps that are not so critical but can be very useful and mostly apps that an average user wants or needs. Then the 3rd disk has more or less toys or the odd apps out, ones that are not very widely used and not very commonly used. Now I think off of a fresh FULL to the teeth MDK8.1 install you get the OS and about 6000 apps, and yes this is only 3 disks. Now you have your Windows 'wonderful single disk install' that will provide you with at most 50 useful apps. Time for some math:
we have 3 MDK8.1 cds that have about 6000 apps and we have 1 windows install with about 50. Now if you were to make a windows install with 6000 apps, when all other apps for windows average off about 1 cd per extra app not on the install cd. How many cds would you need for a 6000 app windows install?
well, 6000-50= 5050 CDs for extra windows applications. Now to be fair we all know that about 2000+-1000 would be downloads, like winamp, icq, etc. That still leaves you with 2050+-1000 CDs that you need to make a 6000 app windows OS. Note i'm not saying that either party would accually want a 6000 app install but think about it. Even if you only wanted 200 app install. Most of that if not all will be on a linux distro cd, opposed to windows where you would either have to download them or acquire a copy somehow(cdr or purchase). So are you complaining about convience?