Well, how about running the code of your choice an Xbox? How does that sound? (Hint: it used to be impossible without doing a hardware mod.)
Disclaimer: Since I don't own an Xbox, some of these details are a little sketchy and may be incorrect.
This hack lets you load unsigned software, such as Linux, of your choice onto an XBox, without using a mod-chip or making any hardware mods. Previously, you could only run software that is signed by Microsoft on an Xbox, unless you voided the warranty and made Xbox Live impossible by installing a mod-chip or flashing the BIOS.
You need a copy of 007: Agent of Fire. You load the "unsigned" (*) code, such as Linux, and a specially hacked 007: AUF savegame onto a special kind of memory card that connects to your PC.
You then fire up 007: AUF, and load the hacked savegame, which takes advantage of the buffer overflow exploit in order to load your "unsigned" code. This "unsigned" code could be Xbox Linux, XboxMediaPlayer, or any of the other homebrew projects out there for Xbox.
If you haven't heard of the open-source XboxMediaPlayer, it looks pretty sweet. It can play all kinds of audio and video files from your Xbox's hard drive or a streaming server, such as: WMV, ASF, WMA, VCD, SVCD, MPEG, JPEG, GIF, BMP, DivX, XVid, etc. It basically turns your Xbox into a cheap Media Centre PC (except for the TV recording part).
(*) Actually, according to the article, you have to sign the code yourself, but it's easy in this case, because of the way the exploit works.
Oh, and OT, but this idiot can't write a sentance, there's no doubt he discovered this after falling asleep on the keyboard.
Once again, our intrepid hero, known to his legions of fans as "Slashdot Grammar Nazi", fails to check his own grammar and spelling as he ruthlessly tears apart another post for...poor grammar and spelling.
If you know what an LCD is and how it works, you'd understand better why anything but the optimal res will not look good.
I understand why anything other than the optimal resolution will not look good. However, what if I want to play older games, emulated games, or certain 2D games that will not run at the optimal resolution? My point is, as long as I can think of an application that works better on a CRT than an LCD, then I still have a use for CRTs. Are we supposed to just give up the idea of having multiple resolutions forever?
> motion blur LCDs these days are coming out with 16ms to 20ms pixel response time, this is fine for movies and fast action games. Nearly down to 0ms. Even 25ms is fine for movies etc, try it and see.
> limited viewing angle This is wrong. Any good LCD will have a 160deg viewing angle. (some advertised as 170deg, ie apple's). this is as good as it gets, why would you need any more than this, you are nearly 180deg with the damn thing, you can't see anything. 160 deg is perfect
Cool. I guess it *is* a preference thing. But as long as I know certain issues exist (lack of proper support for multiple resolutions, motion blur, and limited viewing angle) I won't be able to say "LCD ownz CRT". (Of course, CRT displays have their own issues: bulk, weight, greater power consumption, etc.) I think they have different things to offer for different people.
>> Just run the damn lcd in its native resolution >> and increase the default font sizes!!!!!!!
> How does this help when doing word processing? > Do you really want 1/2" tall text out of your > printer?
Ahem. When he said "increase the default font sizes", he meant increase the default SCREEN FONT SIZES in your operating system. In Windows:
1) Right-click on the desktop 2) Click on "Properties" 3) Click on the "Settings" tab 4) Click "Advanced" 5) Under the General tab, there is a "Font Size" setting. You can select "Small Fonts" (96 dots per inch), "Large Fonts" (120 dpi), or "Other" (whatever you want).
You'll notice that when you select "Other", Windows shows an example of how 10 point Arial text will be displayed on your screen with the modified settings. By dragging the ruler, you can increase or decrease the displayed size of 10-pt Arial text.
That's right, you can change the onscreen size of your text (measured in dots per inch) without affecting the printed size of your text (measured in points). I hope that clears everything up. Next time, don't jump to rash conclusions.
BTW, I can see the benefits of LCDs, but I don't see how LCD fanboys can proclaim "CRT is inferior". Sure, LCD is superior if you don't mind being locked into one resolution, motion blur, etc. For business and word processing use, I'm sure LCD is just fine. For gaming, graphic design, movie playback, I would go with a CRT.
Well, if you install a mod chip, you can replace the XBox's hard drive with a much larger drive and you can use the open-source Xbox Media Player to play various kinds of movies, music and pictures on your Xbox, transforming it into a cheap (and uncrippled) "Media Centre PC".
On the other hand, they just found a way to run Xbox Media Player without using a modchip, so I guess there goes one excuse....
Matt Oppenheim: "If you are attempting to distribute recordings that you own the rights to and the RIAA is in any way preventing you from doing so, you should contact us immediately."
Matt Oppenheim: "Individuals are not permitted to make copies of their copyrighted recordings and distribute them to others without permission from the copyright owner. Whether or not you do it for free or for profit is irrelevant; the impact on the copyright owner is the same, they do not have the ability to sell their artistic work to others because they have received an unauthorized free copy."
Excuse me while I go distribute music that I own with Mr. RIAA's permission, then go get sued because of Mr. RIAA's decrees.
There is no contradiction at all. Just because you disagree with Matt Oppenheim, that's no reason to take potshots, especially when they are way off target.
Matt's first statement says: let the RIAA know if it is preventing you from distributing recording you own the rights to. Given the RIAA's well-known politics, it should be obvious he is talking about the copyright. He means that if you are the copyright owner of a recording, the RIAA will graciously allow you to distribute your own music.
Matt's second statement says: the RIAA will not "permit" individuals to distribute copyrighted recording without the permission of the copyright owner.
In the first statement, the individual is the copyright owner. In the second statement, he is not.
Slashdot Mirror
No need to wait. Here is his follow-up paper, which focuses on Lynds's so-called resolution to Zeno's paradoxes.
What does this hack let you do?
Well, how about running the code of your choice an Xbox? How does that sound? (Hint: it used to be impossible without doing a hardware mod.)
Disclaimer: Since I don't own an Xbox, some of these details are a little sketchy and may be incorrect.
This hack lets you load unsigned software, such as Linux, of your choice onto an XBox, without using a mod-chip or making any hardware mods. Previously, you could only run software that is signed by Microsoft on an Xbox, unless you voided the warranty and made Xbox Live impossible by installing a mod-chip or flashing the BIOS.
You need a copy of 007: Agent of Fire. You load the "unsigned" (*) code, such as Linux, and a specially hacked 007: AUF savegame onto a special kind of memory card that connects to your PC.
You then fire up 007: AUF, and load the hacked savegame, which takes advantage of the buffer overflow exploit in order to load your "unsigned" code. This "unsigned" code could be Xbox Linux, XboxMediaPlayer, or any of the other homebrew projects out there for Xbox.
If you haven't heard of the open-source XboxMediaPlayer, it looks pretty sweet. It can play all kinds of audio and video files from your Xbox's hard drive or a streaming server, such as: WMV, ASF, WMA, VCD, SVCD, MPEG, JPEG, GIF, BMP, DivX, XVid, etc. It basically turns your Xbox into a cheap Media Centre PC (except for the TV recording part).
(*) Actually, according to the article, you have to sign the code yourself, but it's easy in this case, because of the way the exploit works.
Oh, and OT, but this idiot can't write a sentance, there's no doubt he discovered this after falling asleep on the keyboard.
Once again, our intrepid hero, known to his legions of fans as "Slashdot Grammar Nazi", fails to check his own grammar and spelling as he ruthlessly tears apart another post for...poor grammar and spelling.
If you know what an LCD is and how it works, you'd understand better why anything but the optimal res will not look good.
I understand why anything other than the optimal resolution will not look good. However, what if I want to play older games, emulated games, or certain 2D games that will not run at the optimal resolution? My point is, as long as I can think of an application that works better on a CRT than an LCD, then I still have a use for CRTs. Are we supposed to just give up the idea of having multiple resolutions forever?
> motion blur
LCDs these days are coming out with 16ms to 20ms pixel response time, this is fine for movies and fast action games. Nearly down to 0ms. Even 25ms is fine for movies etc, try it and see.
> limited viewing angle
This is wrong. Any good LCD will have a 160deg viewing angle. (some advertised as 170deg, ie apple's). this is as good as it gets, why would you need any more than this, you are nearly 180deg with the damn thing, you can't see anything. 160 deg is perfect
Okay, point taken. Thanks.
Cool. I guess it *is* a preference thing. But as long as I know certain issues exist (lack of proper support for multiple resolutions, motion blur, and limited viewing angle) I won't be able to say "LCD ownz CRT". (Of course, CRT displays have their own issues: bulk, weight, greater power consumption, etc.) I think they have different things to offer for different people.
>> Just run the damn lcd in its native resolution
>> and increase the default font sizes!!!!!!!
> How does this help when doing word processing?
> Do you really want 1/2" tall text out of your
> printer?
Ahem. When he said "increase the default font sizes", he meant increase the default SCREEN FONT SIZES in your operating system. In Windows:
1) Right-click on the desktop
2) Click on "Properties"
3) Click on the "Settings" tab
4) Click "Advanced"
5) Under the General tab, there is a "Font Size" setting. You can select "Small Fonts" (96 dots per inch), "Large Fonts" (120 dpi), or "Other" (whatever you want).
You'll notice that when you select "Other", Windows shows an example of how 10 point Arial text will be displayed on your screen with the modified settings. By dragging the ruler, you can increase or decrease the displayed size of 10-pt Arial text.
That's right, you can change the onscreen size of your text (measured in dots per inch) without affecting the printed size of your text (measured in points). I hope that clears everything up. Next time, don't jump to rash conclusions.
BTW, I can see the benefits of LCDs, but I don't see how LCD fanboys can proclaim "CRT is inferior". Sure, LCD is superior if you don't mind being locked into one resolution, motion blur, etc. For business and word processing use, I'm sure LCD is just fine. For gaming, graphic design, movie playback, I would go with a CRT.
Okay, let's test that theory out. You remember the Pythagorean Theorem from high school, don't you:
a^2 + b^2 = h^2 (a-squared + b-squared = h-squared)
h: length of the hypotenuse of a right triangle
a, b: lengths of the two other sides
The aspect ratio of a non-widescreen display is 4 to 3. Therefore, for a 17" screen:
(a^2) + (b^2) = 17^2 (1)
b/a = 4/3 (2)
From the second equation, b = 4a/3. Combining equations 1 and 2:
a^2 + (4a/3)^2 = 17^2
a^2 + 16a^2/9 = 17^2
25a^2/9 = 289
5a/3 = 17
a = 51/5 = 10.2
b = 13.6
a*b = 138.72
The area of the 17" non-widescreen display is 138.72 inches squared.
For the 17" widescreen display, which has an aspect ratio of 16 to 9:
(a^2) + (b^2) = 17^2 (3)
b/a = 16/9 (4)
From equation 4, b = 16a/9.
a^2 + 256a^2/81 = 17^2
337a^2/81 = 17^2
a^2 = 17^2*81/337
a^2 = 69.46
a = 8.33
b = 16a/9 = 14.82
a*b = 123.42
The area of the 17" widescreen display is 123.42 inches squared.
Sorry, what was that you were saying about the two displays having the same area?
Well, if you install a mod chip, you can replace the XBox's hard drive with a much larger drive and you can use the open-source Xbox Media Player to play various kinds of movies, music and pictures on your Xbox, transforming it into a cheap (and uncrippled) "Media Centre PC". On the other hand, they just found a way to run Xbox Media Player without using a modchip, so I guess there goes one excuse....
Matt Oppenheim:
"If you are attempting to distribute recordings that you own the rights to and the RIAA is in any way preventing you from doing so, you should contact us immediately."
Matt Oppenheim:
"Individuals are not permitted to make copies of their copyrighted recordings and distribute them to others without permission from the copyright owner. Whether or not you do it for free or for profit is irrelevant; the impact on the copyright owner is the same, they do not have the ability to sell their artistic work to others because they have received an unauthorized free copy."
Excuse me while I go distribute music that I own with Mr. RIAA's permission, then go get sued because of Mr. RIAA's decrees.
There is no contradiction at all. Just because you disagree with Matt Oppenheim, that's no reason to take potshots, especially when they are way off target.
Matt's first statement says: let the RIAA know if it is preventing you from distributing recording you own the rights to. Given the RIAA's well-known politics, it should be obvious he is talking about the copyright. He means that if you are the copyright owner of a recording, the RIAA will graciously allow you to distribute your own music.
Matt's second statement says: the RIAA will not "permit" individuals to distribute copyrighted recording without the permission of the copyright owner.
In the first statement, the individual is the copyright owner. In the second statement, he is not.