I used to see a black and red error screen all the time on what is now the "TV Guide" channel. (The tv programming scroller thing.)
Through the magic of emulation, I later discovered this is the exact error you'd see after an amiga crash. The "red and black" screen of death so to speak. Apparently they weren't rare since i would see the channel doing that about 2 or 3 times a week.
Durtro? I think he banned me for 6 months (6 months? Who bans for freakin' 6 months?) for something stupid.
#linux on efnet is one of the worst channels, perhaps next to #bearcave.
And thus, why #linuxhelp exists.
At college, there was a kid that could barely set up a network connection in Windows alone use Linux. (Funny he was an IT major.) We took a spare CD-ROM, mounted it inside his computer such that he didn't know it was there, and put a knoppix CD in it. Both of his hard drives were in tact and there were no discs in either of his actual cd-roms. It took him 3 hours before he decided to take off the case and see what actually happened.
$50 an hour showing some nitwit how to install kazaa?
Most of the time people need my services, they pay me so i can show them how to UNINSTALL kazaa, since its usually whats causing "tons of pop ups, sluggishness, and frequent crashing"
If you ask me, the obvious reason DVD-R got more momentum despite "DVD+R" being the theoretically better format on paper, is because right when DVD-RW drives dropped below $400 (i.e. when I purchased my Pioneer DVR-104) is because there was no such thing as DVD+R yet, just DVD+RW.
DVD+RW media is (was? I don't even know since I don't buy it) expensive and significantly less comptable than DVD-R, so anyone looking to write something that could actually play in their set top dvd player pretty much needed DVD-R.
I think the DVR-106's inclusion of +R and +RW is just a matter of making it look more competitive on paper. Thus I end this with a question... for anyone who owns a drive that supports both -r and +r, how frequently do you use one kind of media over another? I wouldn't be surprised if most people that own a -r/+r drive rarely use +r.
While it is true that LCDs that compare to more reasonably priced CRTs exist, you can't have comparable color/contrast reproduction AND just "a slight inrease in price."
There is more to video reproduction than pixels, and basic contrast ratios and brightness output.
LCDs are light valve technology, and as such they rely on another source of light such as a built in backlight. It is much more difficult to make the liquid crystal fully opaque and thus block out the interior bulb than it is to display black on a directview CRT display. Thus, though theu may have reasonable contrast ratios and brightness, most LCDs are terrible at reproducing very very dark grays without clipping it to black. It is the lack of linear grayscale reproduction that would prevent me from EVER purchasing an LCD or any light valve technology display. OLED will be nice, but thats a topic for a different discussion.
For $200, I can get a 17" PC monitor that has better grayscale tracking than a $300 or $400 15" LCD. For me, desk space is not an issue so the depth of the screen is really irrelevant. LCD is hardly a "better" option though most certainly a different option should you have the need and the money. However, reasonably priced LCDs are always going to be inferior to reasonably priced CRTs when it comes to resolution, brightness, contrast, and color, not to mention viewing angle and refresh time. They may be "better than ever" but they're still not as good as CRT if you actually value picture quality. I liken the LCD vs CRT debate to something such as Bose vs any real hifi speakers in the same price range, but once again thats a getting a bit far off topic. The point is, while it is a fact that LCDs are certainly smaller than CRTs, the argument for LCD picture quality seems to be based more in brainwashing advertising than real world comparisons.
I wonder if there is a specific reason why he didn't make the circle tighter and go for a full 180 degree view. That way, you could set it up so you could look 90 degrees to the left and get a true left view, instead of "almost left." It seems as if you'd just have to turn each monitor in at a slightly greater angle, but is there another optical issue that I'm missing out on?
I don't know about everyone else but...
on
Rent a Segway
·
· Score: 1
I never had a problem with riding my bike around Block Island. It would be nice if they outlawed scooters on the island, but I don't think its even that big of a problem to start off with.
Heres a thought though... if they did a multi branching version of it, the old footage/sound wouldn't necessarily match up with the new footage. They would have to update the original footage shots to 5.1 so that the audio from both versions "fits" and fix up all the errors like R2D2 black & white in outerspace, or the transparency problem in the battle of Hoth. And if they go through and make these changes to the original shots, is it still the "original edition" anymore? I think the only way to keep it consistent is to go back and use the exact same film they used to make the Definitive Collection laserdiscs and have it on a separate disc, or have a branching semi-special edition with the option to not watch the added scenes. (The latter option surely couldn't be considered the "original version.") They made a LOT of changes ranging from small to huge, it is just a matter of how big of a change it takes before it goes from the relm of "original trilogy" to "special edition." A true original edition branched with the special edition on the same disc would be completely unfeasible.
And anyway, I already made DVDs of the Definitive Collection laserdiscs. Its not as trivial as "Oh just rip it and write it" but I think what I did came out pretty good.
VHS has 3mhz of bandwidth, which works out to be about 240 lines of resolution horizontally. However, all NTSC formats are 525 lines tall (with about 480 visible.) If it has 480 vertical lines, and it is a 4:3 display, then multiply by 4:3 and divide by either 2.35 or 1.85 or whatever to get the number of scan lines it will use. For 1.85 its 346 lines, for 2.35 its 272 lines.
Slashdot Mirror
I used to see a black and red error screen all the time on what is now the "TV Guide" channel. (The tv programming scroller thing.) Through the magic of emulation, I later discovered this is the exact error you'd see after an amiga crash. The "red and black" screen of death so to speak. Apparently they weren't rare since i would see the channel doing that about 2 or 3 times a week.
You have been kicked by Dudrio (Wanker)
Durtro? I think he banned me for 6 months (6 months? Who bans for freakin' 6 months?) for something stupid. #linux on efnet is one of the worst channels, perhaps next to #bearcave. And thus, why #linuxhelp exists.
At college, there was a kid that could barely set up a network connection in Windows alone use Linux. (Funny he was an IT major.) We took a spare CD-ROM, mounted it inside his computer such that he didn't know it was there, and put a knoppix CD in it. Both of his hard drives were in tact and there were no discs in either of his actual cd-roms. It took him 3 hours before he decided to take off the case and see what actually happened.
$50 an hour showing some nitwit how to install kazaa?
Most of the time people need my services, they pay me so i can show them how to UNINSTALL kazaa, since its usually whats causing "tons of pop ups, sluggishness, and frequent crashing"
If you ask me, the obvious reason DVD-R got more momentum despite "DVD+R" being the theoretically better format on paper, is because right when DVD-RW drives dropped below $400 (i.e. when I purchased my Pioneer DVR-104) is because there was no such thing as DVD+R yet, just DVD+RW.
DVD+RW media is (was? I don't even know since I don't buy it) expensive and significantly less comptable than DVD-R, so anyone looking to write something that could actually play in their set top dvd player pretty much needed DVD-R. I think the DVR-106's inclusion of +R and +RW is just a matter of making it look more competitive on paper. Thus I end this with a question... for anyone who owns a drive that supports both -r and +r, how frequently do you use one kind of media over another? I wouldn't be surprised if most people that own a -r/+r drive rarely use +r.
While it is true that LCDs that compare to more reasonably priced CRTs exist, you can't have comparable color/contrast reproduction AND just "a slight inrease in price."
There is more to video reproduction than pixels, and basic contrast ratios and brightness output.
LCDs are light valve technology, and as such they rely on another source of light such as a built in backlight. It is much more difficult to make the liquid crystal fully opaque and thus block out the interior bulb than it is to display black on a directview CRT display. Thus, though theu may have reasonable contrast ratios and brightness, most LCDs are terrible at reproducing very very dark grays without clipping it to black. It is the lack of linear grayscale reproduction that would prevent me from EVER purchasing an LCD or any light valve technology display. OLED will be nice, but thats a topic for a different discussion.
For $200, I can get a 17" PC monitor that has better grayscale tracking than a $300 or $400 15" LCD. For me, desk space is not an issue so the depth of the screen is really irrelevant. LCD is hardly a "better" option though most certainly a different option should you have the need and the money. However, reasonably priced LCDs are always going to be inferior to reasonably priced CRTs when it comes to resolution, brightness, contrast, and color, not to mention viewing angle and refresh time. They may be "better than ever" but they're still not as good as CRT if you actually value picture quality. I liken the LCD vs CRT debate to something such as Bose vs any real hifi speakers in the same price range, but once again thats a getting a bit far off topic. The point is, while it is a fact that LCDs are certainly smaller than CRTs, the argument for LCD picture quality seems to be based more in brainwashing advertising than real world comparisons.
I wonder if there is a specific reason why he didn't make the circle tighter and go for a full 180 degree view. That way, you could set it up so you could look 90 degrees to the left and get a true left view, instead of "almost left." It seems as if you'd just have to turn each monitor in at a slightly greater angle, but is there another optical issue that I'm missing out on?
I never had a problem with riding my bike around Block Island. It would be nice if they outlawed scooters on the island, but I don't think its even that big of a problem to start off with.
Heres a thought though... if they did a multi branching version of it, the old footage/sound wouldn't necessarily match up with the new footage. They would have to update the original footage shots to 5.1 so that the audio from both versions "fits" and fix up all the errors like R2D2 black & white in outerspace, or the transparency problem in the battle of Hoth. And if they go through and make these changes to the original shots, is it still the "original edition" anymore? I think the only way to keep it consistent is to go back and use the exact same film they used to make the Definitive Collection laserdiscs and have it on a separate disc, or have a branching semi-special edition with the option to not watch the added scenes. (The latter option surely couldn't be considered the "original version.") They made a LOT of changes ranging from small to huge, it is just a matter of how big of a change it takes before it goes from the relm of "original trilogy" to "special edition." A true original edition branched with the special edition on the same disc would be completely unfeasible. And anyway, I already made DVDs of the Definitive Collection laserdiscs. Its not as trivial as "Oh just rip it and write it" but I think what I did came out pretty good.
But I do remember it, and I thought I was nuts because nobody else I knew remembered it and I did.
VHS has 3mhz of bandwidth, which works out to be about 240 lines of resolution horizontally. However, all NTSC formats are 525 lines tall (with about 480 visible.) If it has 480 vertical lines, and it is a 4:3 display, then multiply by 4:3 and divide by either 2.35 or 1.85 or whatever to get the number of scan lines it will use. For 1.85 its 346 lines, for 2.35 its 272 lines.