The V stands for Versatile, but officially the format is simply "DVD" with no acronymical expansion provided.
True, I thought to correct myself after posting, but decided somebody else probably would;-). Realistically, the V in DVD tends to be used colloquially as "video", even though it was originally and more accurately specified as "versatile", and HD-DVD is mostly used for video storage right now, not data storage. Another problem with the HD-DVD name is that, if it's not being used for video, "High Definition" doesn't make any sense.
I was just thinking as I read this comment that HDVD is such a better name than HD-DVD. It flows off the tongue better without the double-d. And really, do we still need "Digital" in the name? Isn't High Definition Video Disc good enough? of course it's Digital...everything is digital now.
I remember when you just had to push some buttons on a little box that you bought from that guy who always wore a trench coat, and the calls were free;-)
You are aware that all the terrorists on the 9/11 attacks had valid visas right?
I'm pretty sure they didn't enter via the Canadian or Mexican borders...a fact which nobody ever seems to mention when discussing the security of our borders...
One other point: What this Nimrod is suggesting is that you can't trust Google to respect the privacy of your data, but that you can trust them to encrypt it for you. I don't quite see how that works...
Well, the first implies trusting the company and its policies. The second implies trusting the company _and_ any employee who has access to the data. At least if it's encrypted before being written to disk, there's probably a few less people who have access to the unencrypted data. I still wouldn't store anything sensitive on it that I hadn't encrypted myself. Frankly, I just store files on my Linux box, and SCP into it if I need a file...
The "busiest shopping day" is not a "per store" statistic. I'm sure that at the bikini store, it's probably around Memorial Day. That's irrelevant, particularly at the scale that this discussion is about.
Please, please, please: learn to be wary of anecdotal reasoning.
I would suggest that Avid is a significant step above Final Cut, but I don't really work with video, so I could be mistaken. I work with audio, so I see a lot of video work being done, and can do a little myself, but I'm hardly an expert. Regardless, my point was that there are comparable products available for Windows. I think we've established that as true.
Well, like I said, I'm an audio guy. Unless one of those packages is something like Pro Tools, Cubase, Nuendo, Logic, or Sonar, Linux is unfortunately not quite ready for my needs on the desktop...
Look, I'd like to completely switch over to Linux as much as the next guy, but no, I don't jest.
Or does DreamWorks no longer use more than 1,500 Linux desktops and 3,500 Linux servers?
On the desktop, Dreamworks runs Windows software via VMWare, and the native software they use is their own proprietary software. On the server, yes, Linux is often used for creating 3D render farms. I know it's possible to do that with 3DS Max, and it's probably possible to do in Maya and other 3D applications. However, on the desktop side of things, aside from Blender, which isn't really used in many professional settings, I don't think there are any 3D applications that run natively under Linux.
Regardless, to the best of my knowledge there aren't any professional-level video editing suites commercially available for Linux, and as we near my own profession (audio) I _know_ there aren't any pro-level audio programs. There are a few packages that show promise. Rosegarden and Audacity are decent, but neither are really usable professionally...yet. There is also a need for Linux drivers for a lot of popular pro-audio hardware.
Like I said, I really like Linux. I have an Ubuntu box under my desk as a web and file/backup server. I'd love to be able to switch to Linux, but no, the multimedia elements of Linux are not quite ready for prime time, unless, like Dreamworks, you're willing to run Windows software non-natively, and you write all of your other software yourself, which isn't practical in most organizations.
Cubase/Protools seems an odd argument for either platform, considering that PT (the real version, not whatever you got with your MBox) has historically been more stable on the Mac, while Steinberg products (Cubase/Nuendo) have historically been more stable on the PC.
Which is why I generally run Cubase on Windows, and PT on OSX. However, I have successfully used PT on Windows, and Cubase on OSX. And no, I don't have an MBox.
Could you explain this statement a little more please? I'm not sure the difference between a recordist and a composer?
Well, within the music industry, recording of bands at record studios tends to be done on Pro Tools, partly because it's rock solid, and partly because it's what everybody else uses. If you're recording the Axl Rose / Slash reunion album, and you only get one take before they kill each other, you don't want there to be a glitch that ruins the take. Also, in a record studio, you often have an engineer who may not know anything about writing or performing music, but knows a heck of a lot about recording it. For composers who work, say, on video game or film music, or even a lot of electronica producers, a glitch (often caused by overloading the capabilities of the computer) doesn't always make much of a difference, and might even be a gateway to a new creative idea. The composition tools of Pro Tools have never quite measured up to Logic, Cubase, or Sonar, so a lot of us go for those programs instead, especially since they're less expensive than Pro Tools.
Are you saying a composer does more before hitting the studio than the other group, which goes into the studio with more basic ideas and works up the tunes from those live?
Not at all. I'm basically looking at it from the perspective of the guy behind the computer. If you're an engineer at a record studio, your primary concern is getting the best recording possible. Glitches are a no-go. You're not really a part of the compositional process. If you're a composer who's producing music entirely "in the box", you might be more interested in greater creative expression, and less in stability. Not that any of these programs are unstable, but Pro Tools does a better job of not letting you over-extend the capabilities of your system, thus causing problems.
Do not forget Apple's own Logic Pro/Studio. Forget Cubase, if you are serious or professional you'll know it's a prosumer app.
You don't know what you're talking about. I am a professional, and among the other professionals that I associate with, Pro Tools is the clear industry standard among a certain group, namely, those who do more recording than they do composing. Among composers, Logic, Cubase, and Sonar have about equal distribution, with a few others like Digital Performer thrown in. I do like Logic, and would probably use it if it were still cross-platform, but it isn't, so I generally don't. However, to act like Logic has any significant features / capabilities that Cubase doesn't have is just plain wrong.
Am I the only tired of the PC being cast as a Windows machine?
I said PC because I meant PC. I didn't specifically mention Linux, but when talking about games, I said "PC". To me, that includes Linux, because you can run a lot of Windows games on Linux using Wine. I only referred to Windows when talking about professional multimedia creation tools, because that is an area where Linux is seriously lacking.
Or they would use Adobe Premiere / Adobe Aftereffects for video on the PC, or Cubase (Mac and PC), Sonar (PC Only), or ProTools (Mac and PC) for Music...
Am I the only one who's tired of the PC being cast as the boring office-machine while OSX is fun? Or, as the article puts it, "ancient HP WageSlave 486s in strip-lit spreadsheet farms across the world". Not that I give a crap about which OS is more fun...I'm just tired of hearing the same message repeated over and over again. Yeah, I get it, Apple wants me to think PCs are for work, and Macs are for fun.
Less is more. War is peace. 2+2=5.
Whatever.
I'm currently typing this on a Mac, but seriously, gaming has always been way better on the PC than on the Mac, and while OSX comes with better entry-level multimedia-creation tools, on the professional front, I can't think of a single OSX application that doesn't have a comparable Windows-based competitor. It's not like anybody serious about movie or music making would use iMovie or GarageBand, anyway.
I moved my home's marker just fine, but when I went to move my parents', I got this error: "Because of technical restrictions, you cannot edit this location at this time."
I wonder, does it check to make sure my IP address is near the location I'm moving, or is it just a glitch?
If you download and run an executable that *any* website offers you on the Internet, to provide you with "more security", then you're an idiot. Oh, and if you think otherwise you're an idiot too.
Linux is often viewed as more secure than Windows...If I download a Linux distro, am I an idiot? Same goes for Firefox. The second bullet point on the Firefox web page is "Stay Secure on the Web". What if I download a Windows firewall update that Microsoft claims is more secure than the old version? Am I an idiot?
Slashdot Mirror
That theory has been fairly soundly debunked.
Not true. The Mythbusters episode clearly showed that the paint, which was essentially thermite, had quite a lot to do with the speed of the burn:
http://mythbusters-wiki.discovery.com/page/Hindenburg+Mystery?t=anon
Not that the giant balloon filled with hydrogen helped matters.
Is there really not a LIMIT? That's insane...
The V stands for Versatile, but officially the format is simply "DVD" with no acronymical expansion provided.
;-). Realistically, the V in DVD tends to be used colloquially as "video", even though it was originally and more accurately specified as "versatile", and HD-DVD is mostly used for video storage right now, not data storage. Another problem with the HD-DVD name is that, if it's not being used for video, "High Definition" doesn't make any sense.
True, I thought to correct myself after posting, but decided somebody else probably would
I was just thinking as I read this comment that HDVD is such a better name than HD-DVD. It flows off the tongue better without the double-d. And really, do we still need "Digital" in the name? Isn't High Definition Video Disc good enough? of course it's Digital...everything is digital now.
Yes, I wonder who can be the first to win over the hearts and minds of the tens of...web-based office users...
Yeah. Galaxy Zoo, Wikipedia and the like, I get, but what, exactly, is my incentive to write code (for free) for a company to make money from?
The companies market it as a way to "give young programmers real-life experience" and "something to use in their portfolio".
No, the MPAA's #1 issue is their high prices and crappy movies.
Agreed. My first thought was that the Motion Picture Association of America's #1 issue should be creating quality motion pictures...
I remember when you just had to push some buttons on a little box that you bought from that guy who always wore a trench coat, and the calls were free ;-)
You are aware that all the terrorists on the 9/11 attacks had valid visas right?
I'm pretty sure they didn't enter via the Canadian or Mexican borders...a fact which nobody ever seems to mention when discussing the security of our borders...
If you tell me you 'need' a language to implement a website I know I need to find someone else to build it.
Yeah! Especially HTML!
One other point: What this Nimrod is suggesting is that you can't trust Google to respect the privacy of your data, but that you can trust them to encrypt it for you. I don't quite see how that works...
Well, the first implies trusting the company and its policies. The second implies trusting the company _and_ any employee who has access to the data. At least if it's encrypted before being written to disk, there's probably a few less people who have access to the unencrypted data. I still wouldn't store anything sensitive on it that I hadn't encrypted myself. Frankly, I just store files on my Linux box, and SCP into it if I need a file...
The "busiest shopping day" is not a "per store" statistic. I'm sure that at the bikini store, it's probably around Memorial Day. That's irrelevant, particularly at the scale that this discussion is about. Please, please, please: learn to be wary of anecdotal reasoning.
But my friend, the bikini store owner, says....
I would suggest that Avid is a significant step above Final Cut, but I don't really work with video, so I could be mistaken. I work with audio, so I see a lot of video work being done, and can do a little myself, but I'm hardly an expert. Regardless, my point was that there are comparable products available for Windows. I think we've established that as true.
Well, like I said, I'm an audio guy. Unless one of those packages is something like Pro Tools, Cubase, Nuendo, Logic, or Sonar, Linux is unfortunately not quite ready for my needs on the desktop...
You jest?
Look, I'd like to completely switch over to Linux as much as the next guy, but no, I don't jest.
Or does DreamWorks no longer use more than 1,500 Linux desktops and 3,500 Linux servers?
On the desktop, Dreamworks runs Windows software via VMWare, and the native software they use is their own proprietary software. On the server, yes, Linux is often used for creating 3D render farms. I know it's possible to do that with 3DS Max, and it's probably possible to do in Maya and other 3D applications. However, on the desktop side of things, aside from Blender, which isn't really used in many professional settings, I don't think there are any 3D applications that run natively under Linux.
Regardless, to the best of my knowledge there aren't any professional-level video editing suites commercially available for Linux, and as we near my own profession (audio) I _know_ there aren't any pro-level audio programs. There are a few packages that show promise. Rosegarden and Audacity are decent, but neither are really usable professionally...yet. There is also a need for Linux drivers for a lot of popular pro-audio hardware.
Like I said, I really like Linux. I have an Ubuntu box under my desk as a web and file/backup server. I'd love to be able to switch to Linux, but no, the multimedia elements of Linux are not quite ready for prime time, unless, like Dreamworks, you're willing to run Windows software non-natively, and you write all of your other software yourself, which isn't practical in most organizations.
I picked something roughly comparable to Final Cut, but yes, Avid is the industry standard...
Cubase/Protools seems an odd argument for either platform, considering that PT (the real version, not whatever you got with your MBox) has historically been more stable on the Mac, while Steinberg products (Cubase/Nuendo) have historically been more stable on the PC.
Which is why I generally run Cubase on Windows, and PT on OSX. However, I have successfully used PT on Windows, and Cubase on OSX. And no, I don't have an MBox.
Could you explain this statement a little more please? I'm not sure the difference between a recordist and a composer?
Well, within the music industry, recording of bands at record studios tends to be done on Pro Tools, partly because it's rock solid, and partly because it's what everybody else uses. If you're recording the Axl Rose / Slash reunion album, and you only get one take before they kill each other, you don't want there to be a glitch that ruins the take. Also, in a record studio, you often have an engineer who may not know anything about writing or performing music, but knows a heck of a lot about recording it. For composers who work, say, on video game or film music, or even a lot of electronica producers, a glitch (often caused by overloading the capabilities of the computer) doesn't always make much of a difference, and might even be a gateway to a new creative idea. The composition tools of Pro Tools have never quite measured up to Logic, Cubase, or Sonar, so a lot of us go for those programs instead, especially since they're less expensive than Pro Tools. Are you saying a composer does more before hitting the studio than the other group, which goes into the studio with more basic ideas and works up the tunes from those live?
Not at all. I'm basically looking at it from the perspective of the guy behind the computer. If you're an engineer at a record studio, your primary concern is getting the best recording possible. Glitches are a no-go. You're not really a part of the compositional process. If you're a composer who's producing music entirely "in the box", you might be more interested in greater creative expression, and less in stability. Not that any of these programs are unstable, but Pro Tools does a better job of not letting you over-extend the capabilities of your system, thus causing problems.
Do not forget Apple's own Logic Pro/Studio. Forget Cubase, if you are serious or professional you'll know it's a prosumer app.
You don't know what you're talking about. I am a professional, and among the other professionals that I associate with, Pro Tools is the clear industry standard among a certain group, namely, those who do more recording than they do composing. Among composers, Logic, Cubase, and Sonar have about equal distribution, with a few others like Digital Performer thrown in. I do like Logic, and would probably use it if it were still cross-platform, but it isn't, so I generally don't. However, to act like Logic has any significant features / capabilities that Cubase doesn't have is just plain wrong.
Am I the only tired of the PC being cast as a Windows machine?
I said PC because I meant PC. I didn't specifically mention Linux, but when talking about games, I said "PC". To me, that includes Linux, because you can run a lot of Windows games on Linux using Wine. I only referred to Windows when talking about professional multimedia creation tools, because that is an area where Linux is seriously lacking.
Running cubase or protools on mac vs the pc is exactly what got lots of pros going for the mac.
I run both on both Windows and OSX, and I've never had a problem.
Or they would use Adobe Premiere / Adobe Aftereffects for video on the PC, or Cubase (Mac and PC), Sonar (PC Only), or ProTools (Mac and PC) for Music...
Am I the only one who's tired of the PC being cast as the boring office-machine while OSX is fun? Or, as the article puts it, "ancient HP WageSlave 486s in strip-lit spreadsheet farms across the world". Not that I give a crap about which OS is more fun...I'm just tired of hearing the same message repeated over and over again. Yeah, I get it, Apple wants me to think PCs are for work, and Macs are for fun.
Less is more. War is peace. 2+2=5.
Whatever.
I'm currently typing this on a Mac, but seriously, gaming has always been way better on the PC than on the Mac, and while OSX comes with better entry-level multimedia-creation tools, on the professional front, I can't think of a single OSX application that doesn't have a comparable Windows-based competitor. It's not like anybody serious about movie or music making would use iMovie or GarageBand, anyway.
I moved my home's marker just fine, but when I went to move my parents', I got this error: "Because of technical restrictions, you cannot edit this location at this time."
I wonder, does it check to make sure my IP address is near the location I'm moving, or is it just a glitch?
If you download and run an executable that *any* website offers you on the Internet, to provide you with "more security", then you're an idiot. Oh, and if you think otherwise you're an idiot too.
Linux is often viewed as more secure than Windows...If I download a Linux distro, am I an idiot? Same goes for Firefox. The second bullet point on the Firefox web page is "Stay Secure on the Web". What if I download a Windows firewall update that Microsoft claims is more secure than the old version? Am I an idiot?