Sounds smart and very similar but yes just as stupid and an obvious failure already before launch.
I understand why they want to develop their technology but the best technology isn't what makes MP3 the most popular, it's because it was (among?) the first compressed music format and there for still is the most used one.
It has been covered in the browser thread, but basicly since the part which interpret the HTML, CSS and so on isn't all of the browser.
The javascript engine is different, the loading of plugins is different, the allocation of resources and freeing them up again is different, the network code is different, the presentation is different, and so on.
I recently was in the market for a new soundcard. Not just a soundcard but one that does 5.1 and EAX support for the games I play.
This is harder then it sounds because Creative is shooting straight for the bottom. Their new X-fi chip is so bad they had to allow a third party to use it to get a decent soundcard out. Oh well, luckily I am dutch and I could test the X-fi myself, simply by buying it, running it over the weekend, then returning it on monday when it didn't work out. Full money back. Tried another sound card, returned that too, money back.
Yeah, everything Creative suck, don't Vista use it's own sound stuff though and disable audio acceleration or something such?
Except you can't choose your song on last.fm, it choose similar songs to your criteria/taste and play it for you.
So it's rather like choosing a radio station of your preference.
Also I contribute my taste to them, and they used to contribute suggestions of other things I may like. I expect the people who make use of their service as advertisement of their songs to let them use their works for free, I do however understand that actual hosting, bandwidth and employees cost money though.
"Yeah, Starcraft 2 looks like a nice game, but my Playstation 3 won't play it!", no shit, if you decide to get a device which don't support whatever feature you want suit yourself.
They are? I'm quite confident iPods can play Flac or some lossless format and if not there also exist good MP3 players from for instance Cowon/iAudio. Sony, Samsung, Sandisk and so on got plenty of nice players to.
And why put the MP3 part there at all? Why would you need it if you already have a lossless file?
If you transfer it to a player not capable of playing the lossless file it doesn't make sense to store it all over there, so converting it to a lossy only file is the way to do it, and well, you can do that while transferring the file...... but then using "MP3" and their technology doesn't make sense at all since there already exist plenty of lossless formats and one compressed one would be enough.
It would had been enough if they had made an app which hooked into Windows file copying to UMS devices and encoded any lossless formats into MP3 during the transfer.
All in all, yes, it's useless, and a stupid idea. (And if you already have a lossless file while not convert to something like AAC or OGG instead?)
But you don't need a fucking quadro card for your Photoshop work, I was just explaining why the expensive laptop you had chosen was so expensive, go fuck yourself. I may not have a life but you're still to much of a waste of my time.
As I posted people say the GeForce and Quatro cards are the same.
I was the one saying that, eventually among others.
And well, they are not "the same", but they eventually have the same GPUs. Different firmware and drivers though I think, since the consumer cards don't work for accelerating the rendering apps unmodified.
Nvidia sell them for different purposes and at different price points because they can. People who need a Quadro card pay because it's worth it for them.
because of your bias not mine.
I just present facts, you want to convince yourself that macs are reasonable priced, that PC laptops cost as much or more for decent performance and that you need a card you don't even know what it's used for.
I was using the term "pro" for cards capable of doing 3D for quality and use pro 3D apps vs 3D for speed in games.
I have the fucking same MBP, mine was delivered 30th august 2008.
And I've already said in this thread that the cards usually could be upgraded to the "pro"/quatro version since it was the same GPUs but sold for different markets and that they was marked up in price a lot due to that. And that your laptop price comparison didn't made much sense because of that since the Quatro cards are overpriced.
And as long as you don't run Quattro drivers your card don't work as one, but for your Photoshop work that probably doesn't matter (though latest Photoshop do make use of the GPU.)
In any case it's useless discussing it with you since you will always be focused on your opinion/bias and want to interpret things in ways which suits you.
Slashdot Mirror
and the disk you put in grandma's desktop.
Yeah, the later is of vinyl.
Or rather because some idiots actually buy accessories from Apple.
Or well, I guess I could claim buying anything at all in the first place was a misstake, but I won't go there now.
But then it's probably stupid to add various optionals from say Dell to.
Don't master him, he's trying to convince everyone how awesome he is :/
Though, it's still interesting why they cost so much more.
She was like that when I got here! / Necrophilia defence ftw!
Yeah, that's why I leave my semen in every room I every visit, and on every person I meet.
CSI: DIY crime scene?
Sounds smart and very similar but yes just as stupid and an obvious failure already before launch.
I understand why they want to develop their technology but the best technology isn't what makes MP3 the most popular, it's because it was (among?) the first compressed music format and there for still is the most used one.
It has been covered in the browser thread, but basicly since the part which interpret the HTML, CSS and so on isn't all of the browser.
The javascript engine is different, the loading of plugins is different, the allocation of resources and freeing them up again is different, the network code is different, the presentation is different, and so on.
no.
What do I play it with then? VLC?
He probably have read it and understood it, though your reading comprehension of his last sentence seem to fail.
But if you have to pay Spotify may be better.
I recently was in the market for a new soundcard. Not just a soundcard but one that does 5.1 and EAX support for the games I play.
This is harder then it sounds because Creative is shooting straight for the bottom. Their new X-fi chip is so bad they had to allow a third party to use it to get a decent soundcard out. Oh well, luckily I am dutch and I could test the X-fi myself, simply by buying it, running it over the weekend, then returning it on monday when it didn't work out. Full money back. Tried another sound card, returned that too, money back.
Yeah, everything Creative suck, don't Vista use it's own sound stuff though and disable audio acceleration or something such?
Anyway, just get an ASUS Xonar card.
Would you be willing to pay for a radio station that only plays songs you like or might like without jabbering on and on?
No, I'd rather just use last.fm.
Or, wait ..
Except you can't choose your song on last.fm, it choose similar songs to your criteria/taste and play it for you.
So it's rather like choosing a radio station of your preference.
Also I contribute my taste to them, and they used to contribute suggestions of other things I may like. I expect the people who make use of their service as advertisement of their songs to let them use their works for free, I do however understand that actual hosting, bandwidth and employees cost money though.
has this killed Last.fm's appeal, globally?
Yes, totally useless now.
Way of autofail.
Pandora Radio is a good one.
No, pandora sucks way more.
Uhm, most in percent maybe, but FLAC would make a hell of a lot more sense.
Yeah, it's like saying:
"Yeah, Starcraft 2 looks like a nice game, but my Playstation 3 won't play it!", no shit, if you decide to get a device which don't support whatever feature you want suit yourself.
Lots of devices play OGG, it's just that iPods and many mobile phones don't.
Kinda all korean, chinese and so on players play OGG.
http://dapreview.net/
http://pmptoday.com/
Oh well, atleast there are plenty of other decent players out there.
They are? I'm quite confident iPods can play Flac or some lossless format and if not there also exist good MP3 players from for instance Cowon/iAudio. Sony, Samsung, Sandisk and so on got plenty of nice players to.
And why put the MP3 part there at all? Why would you need it if you already have a lossless file?
If you transfer it to a player not capable of playing the lossless file it doesn't make sense to store it all over there, so converting it to a lossy only file is the way to do it, and well, you can do that while transferring the file ... ... but then using "MP3" and their technology doesn't make sense at all since there already exist plenty of lossless formats and one compressed one would be enough.
It would had been enough if they had made an app which hooked into Windows file copying to UMS devices and encoded any lossless formats into MP3 during the transfer.
All in all, yes, it's useless, and a stupid idea.
(And if you already have a lossless file while not convert to something like AAC or OGG instead?)
The chinese companies already have MP5 players ;)
But you don't need a fucking quadro card for your Photoshop work, I was just explaining why the expensive laptop you had chosen was so expensive, go fuck yourself. I may not have a life but you're still to much of a waste of my time.
As I posted people say the GeForce and Quatro cards are the same.
I was the one saying that, eventually among others.
And well, they are not "the same", but they eventually have the same GPUs. Different firmware and drivers though I think, since the consumer cards don't work for accelerating the rendering apps unmodified.
Nvidia sell them for different purposes and at different price points because they can. People who need a Quadro card pay because it's worth it for them.
because of your bias not mine.
I just present facts, you want to convince yourself that macs are reasonable priced, that PC laptops cost as much or more for decent performance and that you need a card you don't even know what it's used for.
Please learn something and answer later.
I was using the term "pro" for cards capable of doing 3D for quality and use pro 3D apps vs 3D for speed in games.
I have the fucking same MBP, mine was delivered 30th august 2008.
And I've already said in this thread that the cards usually could be upgraded to the "pro"/quatro version since it was the same GPUs but sold for different markets and that they was marked up in price a lot due to that. And that your laptop price comparison didn't made much sense because of that since the Quatro cards are overpriced.
And as long as you don't run Quattro drivers your card don't work as one, but for your Photoshop work that probably doesn't matter (though latest Photoshop do make use of the GPU.)
In any case it's useless discussing it with you since you will always be focused on your opinion/bias and want to interpret things in ways which suits you.