I use character's from Neil Gaiman's Sandman comics. Machine I'm typing from is the second incarnation of Morpheus (a dark and broody dell desktop), to my right I have Rose (a mac laptop) and a machine called Destruction (an acquisition from a previous job which is the only machine in the house which dual bots into an MS product...) and my EEE is dubbed Barbie.
Over the years, I've had most of the main cast represented in this way for various reasons which all made perfect sense at the time:-).
Personally, I've let the whole SMS thing slide until recently - the whole concept of messaging text with 12 buttons is unpleasant and something that I didn't feel like paying to use (and yes, I tried the T9 thing - found it just as bad).
This changed when I bought a Samsung Pixon and, finally, I'm happy with an SMS interface - touch screen qwerty available by rotating the device by 90 degrees, and each keypress gets a physical feedback via a subtle vibration. It has a predictive T9 type of interface too, but tbh, I find that more obtrusive and confusing than just using the keyboard.
I hope when this phone dies on me, I'll be able to replace it with a cheaper model with a similar interface and that the current forms of 12 button interfaces are only provided as an option (if at all).
OK - was trying for funny (obviously failing:-)), but the point is a genuine one - I really can't stand the trackpad - the first thing I do is look for ways to turn off the 'click' behaviour. Being forced to use it is a deal breaker for me.
(For the record, I have four mac machines in the house which are in fairly regular use by various members of my family - that includes the mac book pro I'm typing this message on).
And the entire trackpad is the button. It gives you more area on the trackpad and keeps you from hunting for that button. You can get multi-button support from software. And we've added some new four-finger gestures that are really nice.
I have a nice 2 finger gesture in response to that.
Everybody knows that American and English cars are crap.
Speak for yourself - I have a black car. I like black cars. As to the manufacturer, model and country it originates from, and what the competitive black cars are like, I am willfully ignorant.
My wife may share your opinion or want to add to it, but for me, a car is a car is a car (as long as it's black).
So I am to gather that the current situation with Ford, GM and Chrysler is imaginary too. That real people will not lose their jobs, homes, savings, and it's only their investments which (you think) they shouldn't have done anyway which is forfeit?
I am so glad you helped clear up the confusion for so many. Any chance you could have a word with the world leaders and sort it out for them too - am sure they'd really appreciate it...
HD native would be intolerable - but for limited stuff using low res proxy formats, sure, it'd work just fine for the basic clipping/timeline work. Of course, it might not be very practical though:-).
This doesn't surprise me too much - unless the film is laden with huge scenes and/or heavy on the visual fx, HD is a waste of space.
The only genres it really works in are sci-fi, action, sports and nature documentaries. Personally, I don't get the appeal of it (even though I own enough HD equipment to make me look like a fanatic:-)) - the whole thing feels like a con to make broadcasters, content providers and consumers alike feel they need to purchase new equipment and replace their media collections.
Your point is well made - it's a business decision. That's fine. Now, since I'm not going to profit from the sale of this device, their business reasoning bothers me not a jot... but I can't help thinking...
It'd be so COOL on Linux. Linux is for gaming etc.
Unsure - agreed that overscan is in both directions, but the horizontal is more of an issue when talking about computer display.
Taking the PAL 720x576 4:3 case, the height * 4 / 3 = 768 is the horizontal square pixel size. But the sar is 59:54 which gives us 720 * 59 / 54 = approx 786 (rounding down) which means you have 8 [square] pixels on left/right which should not be shown in the 768x576 display, hence the horizontal squish I was talking about (it's actually still ever so subtly wrong, but the remainder is just due to the sar being inaccurate). The same is true of all PAL 118:81, NTSC 10:11 and 40:33 - there's always a little surplus when you compare height * ar and width * sar.
Interesting - I would have thought it was more common to scale horizontally (hence scaling down in the 720x480 10:11 case). But your figures seem to be missing the overscan, so unless you're cropping that away somewhere else, you're going to be showing too much (and you'll be slightly squished horizontally as a result...).
This is true for NTSC 4:3 standard definition (sort of...). Basically, NTSC is 720x480 and a sample aspect ratio of 10:11 - ie: each pixel is rectangular with a width/height ratio of 10 to 11.
Thus, to get the display width, 720 * 10 / 11 = 654. The additional 14 pixels is called overscan and is not shown on a standard TV.
PAL is 720x576 @ 59:54 which gives a display width of 786 and 768 of those are shown on a TV (with the remaining pixels being overscan).
There are actually rounding errors in those calcs as the sample aspect ratio is an approximation but it's only out by a couple of pixels:-).
16:9 widescreen sar's for PAL and NTSC are 118:81 and 40:33 respectively.
It generally isn't though - for most people, it just comes across as though someone got the expression hideously wrong and negated the intention of their statement in the process.
Umm - isn't it obvious who the GP thought should 'get coding'? Did he say 'your grandmother'? It's pretty obvious who should be coding this - those who want it and those that can (inclusive).
How does the GPL stop you doing that? It can't possibly - it just means you can't use GPL components in your efforts (and thus reduce the true freedom which is extended to everyone by the GPL).
Not to diminish the point you're making, but as I see it, your system would require everyone to play fair when the rules aren't enforced. They don't. RMS took a pragmatic decision with that one and I think it was the right call.
Yes - that was the point I was making - most software is generally not a good product in itself - but it's useful for making products.
GPL enables that and at the same time, protects the people who purchase those products (and in turn, allows them to modify and sell variants based on the sofware used - since they're forced to release their own software mods, the situation remains unchanged for all).
It's a fair system, and it doesn't stop a good product from dominating a market, but it does reduce the risk of a monopoly.
People aren't giving all those free software based products away are they? Funny, I seemed to pay some money for my Asus eee 900 the other day, a linksys router from a while back, a dreambox satellite receiver and my gps system.
The distinction is that not all software is a product in itself (and I really wouldn't consider an OS to be a product, though it can enable and host many products).
Slashdot Mirror
I use character's from Neil Gaiman's Sandman comics. Machine I'm typing from is the second incarnation of Morpheus (a dark and broody dell desktop), to my right I have Rose (a mac laptop) and a machine called Destruction (an acquisition from a previous job which is the only machine in the house which dual bots into an MS product...) and my EEE is dubbed Barbie.
Over the years, I've had most of the main cast represented in this way for various reasons which all made perfect sense at the time :-).
He's already done it and been regenerated (many times...) - more info here. It was written by Steven Moffat as well.
Personally, I've let the whole SMS thing slide until recently - the whole concept of messaging text with 12 buttons is unpleasant and something that I didn't feel like paying to use (and yes, I tried the T9 thing - found it just as bad).
This changed when I bought a Samsung Pixon and, finally, I'm happy with an SMS interface - touch screen qwerty available by rotating the device by 90 degrees, and each keypress gets a physical feedback via a subtle vibration. It has a predictive T9 type of interface too, but tbh, I find that more obtrusive and confusing than just using the keyboard.
I hope when this phone dies on me, I'll be able to replace it with a cheaper model with a similar interface and that the current forms of 12 button interfaces are only provided as an option (if at all).
Confused - what's OOP got to do with this?
Troll? Really?
OK - was trying for funny (obviously failing :-)), but the point is a genuine one - I really can't stand the trackpad - the first thing I do is look for ways to turn off the 'click' behaviour. Being forced to use it is a deal breaker for me.
(For the record, I have four mac machines in the house which are in fairly regular use by various members of my family - that includes the mac book pro I'm typing this message on).
And the entire trackpad is the button. It gives you more area on the trackpad and keeps you from hunting for that button. You can get multi-button support from software. And we've added some new four-finger gestures that are really nice.
I have a nice 2 finger gesture in response to that.
Everybody knows that American and English cars are crap.
Speak for yourself - I have a black car. I like black cars. As to the manufacturer, model and country it originates from, and what the competitive black cars are like, I am willfully ignorant.
My wife may share your opinion or want to add to it, but for me, a car is a car is a car (as long as it's black).
So I am to gather that the current situation with Ford, GM and Chrysler is imaginary too. That real people will not lose their jobs, homes, savings, and it's only their investments which (you think) they shouldn't have done anyway which is forfeit?
I am so glad you helped clear up the confusion for so many. Any chance you could have a word with the world leaders and sort it out for them too - am sure they'd really appreciate it...
In a perfect world, their right to vote would be forfeited and they would be in a 10'x12' cell.
But in the real world of economic uncertainty, can we afford to give them that much space? Might be better to squeeze a few in there...
HD native would be intolerable - but for limited stuff using low res proxy formats, sure, it'd work just fine for the basic clipping/timeline work. Of course, it might not be very practical though :-).
This doesn't surprise me too much - unless the film is laden with huge scenes and/or heavy on the visual fx, HD is a waste of space.
The only genres it really works in are sci-fi, action, sports and nature documentaries. Personally, I don't get the appeal of it (even though I own enough HD equipment to make me look like a fanatic :-)) - the whole thing feels like a con to make broadcasters, content providers and consumers alike feel they need to purchase new equipment and replace their media collections.
Don't know about T Mobile, but three.co.uk have a 49 quid modem with PAYG and it works fine on Ubuntu (little bit of googling will reveal all).
I think the three deal is better anyway...
Well the results of some of those LSD experiments were quite interesting watching anyway.
Your point is well made - it's a business decision. That's fine. Now, since I'm not going to profit from the sale of this device, their business reasoning bothers me not a jot... but I can't help thinking...
It'd be so COOL on Linux. Linux is for gaming etc.
Ooops - 9 left/right not 8 :-). Real figure should be 10 anyway :-).
Unsure - agreed that overscan is in both directions, but the horizontal is more of an issue when talking about computer display.
Taking the PAL 720x576 4:3 case, the height * 4 / 3 = 768 is the horizontal square pixel size. But the sar is 59:54 which gives us 720 * 59 / 54 = approx 786 (rounding down) which means you have 8 [square] pixels on left/right which should not be shown in the 768x576 display, hence the horizontal squish I was talking about (it's actually still ever so subtly wrong, but the remainder is just due to the sar being inaccurate). The same is true of all PAL 118:81, NTSC 10:11 and 40:33 - there's always a little surplus when you compare height * ar and width * sar.
Interesting - I would have thought it was more common to scale horizontally (hence scaling down in the 720x480 10:11 case). But your figures seem to be missing the overscan, so unless you're cropping that away somewhere else, you're going to be showing too much (and you'll be slightly squished horizontally as a result...).
This is true for NTSC 4:3 standard definition (sort of...). Basically, NTSC is 720x480 and a sample aspect ratio of 10:11 - ie: each pixel is rectangular with a width/height ratio of 10 to 11.
Thus, to get the display width, 720 * 10 / 11 = 654. The additional 14 pixels is called overscan and is not shown on a standard TV.
PAL is 720x576 @ 59:54 which gives a display width of 786 and 768 of those are shown on a TV (with the remaining pixels being overscan).
There are actually rounding errors in those calcs as the sample aspect ratio is an approximation but it's only out by a couple of pixels :-).
16:9 widescreen sar's for PAL and NTSC are 118:81 and 40:33 respectively.
I agree with you on 'pants', but 'bollocks' dates back a long way. It's a great word that covers a multitude of situations.
It generally isn't though - for most people, it just comes across as though someone got the expression hideously wrong and negated the intention of their statement in the process.
Umm - isn't it obvious who the GP thought should 'get coding'? Did he say 'your grandmother'? It's pretty obvious who should be coding this - those who want it and those that can (inclusive).
How does the GPL stop you doing that? It can't possibly - it just means you can't use GPL components in your efforts (and thus reduce the true freedom which is extended to everyone by the GPL).
Not to diminish the point you're making, but as I see it, your system would require everyone to play fair when the rules aren't enforced. They don't. RMS took a pragmatic decision with that one and I think it was the right call.
Yes - that was the point I was making - most software is generally not a good product in itself - but it's useful for making products.
GPL enables that and at the same time, protects the people who purchase those products (and in turn, allows them to modify and sell variants based on the sofware used - since they're forced to release their own software mods, the situation remains unchanged for all).
It's a fair system, and it doesn't stop a good product from dominating a market, but it does reduce the risk of a monopoly.
Nonsense - free software is entirely free market.
People aren't giving all those free software based products away are they? Funny, I seemed to pay some money for my Asus eee 900 the other day, a linksys router from a while back, a dreambox satellite receiver and my gps system.
The distinction is that not all software is a product in itself (and I really wouldn't consider an OS to be a product, though it can enable and host many products).