>>>20 years from now, closed source software will be dead.
HA! HA! Just like communism will be capitalism!?!
Utopian dreams are just that. Dreams. Please, for the love of practicality, get real.
Come on, the OLPC project is a great thing but it's not gonna reduce the incidence of AIDS in Africa or wipe out global hunger. The Gates Foundation is focused on the really fundamental issues that unshaven, smelly trolls like RMS haven't even begun to make a dent in.
yikes. i paid $200 for a mio c3 digiwalker 2 years ago. still works fine for my purposes, and i haven't had to lay out any additional dough. i would guess, to be quite frank, that my usage patters are probably more in-line with a 'traditional' gps user than yours, looking at all the additional stuff you've added on, so i suppose an iphone 3g would make more sense for you...
why is a good camera so important on this? if you're gonna play ansel adams it seems like you'd probably get a REAL camera instead of using the iphone cam... for what it does, the builtin cam is quite fine IMHO
give me a point!:)
ok, that aside, I'm sure i'm echoing what other people have already said, but it seems to me that this dude is simply a)clutching to an obsolete past, and b)regretting that he bought into the wrong technology, and now that he's invested countless hours of setup time to get his MD player to work properly, he doesn't want to make the transition over to the mainstream. so instead, he evangelizes (translated: complains) about a near-worthless technology that no one cares about. good luck, pal. i think everyone here is pretty sold on their ipod.
Yeah, but try going to the new MSN in IE for Mac (OS 9.0). In the grand tradition of Microsoft development, MSN.com looks like complete hell. Way to go Microsoft. Another one out of the park.;)
Ah yes, poor Eric and "Writer's Block". Then there was the infamous "Eliza", which I believe had the most expensive production budget ($100K, just for production - not post) in recent history for a USC short. What's tragic is that "Eliza" NEVER GOT FINISHED, because the FX were so comprehensive that they were simply too overwhelming to finish by just one student. The lesson here: even though you may have all the greatest gear in the world, giving you the ability to do cool FX, it still takes thousands of man-hours and tons of talent to do them right. That's why places like Rhythm & Hues, ILM and Imageworks still exist and have staffs of hundreds of talented artists.
I graduated from USC Cinema about 3 years ago, just as all these wonderful toys were being set up. My experience with student filmmaking is this:
Many of the students there would spend boatloads of money on their thesis projects to put them on 35mm Anamorphic film, get a Dolby Digital mix, put in glitzy special effects, etc... (one I helped out on had a $100K budget - no joke). The problem was that their films ended up looking like beautiful pieces of nothing, because they had spent so much time on production issues that they never had time to really nail down the script. So they were great to look at, always technically proficient, but lacking in story. So to have SCFX is great for people who want a technical training, but I went to USC to understand visual storytelling, and you really don't need much in the way of effects to do that properly.
As a side note, a classmate of mine (he was a few semesters ahead of me) spent a minimal $11,000 on his thesis film, shot it on 16mm black and white, optical sound, and it won the Palm d'Or at the Cannes Film Festival. Go figure.
Actually, very few people are moving to Final Cut Pro, basically because Avid is a) Incredibly entrenched in the industry and b) a superior product (no, I'm not bringing in flamebait, it's a professional opinion). By and large, every editor I know of loathes FCP and swears by Avid. In television FCP has had minor market penetration, but mostly only in the lower budget productions. I'm a USC film grad myself, and I edit for 'The Amazing Race', and it's Avid all the way here. Same goes for most every other production I know of, with only very few exceptions.
Yes, Digibeta is still the best as far as SD video quality, but IMX is going to take it over for most video applications. IMX is Sony's newest all-digital format, based on MPEG-2 (its full name is MPEG-IMX), but it's a fairly high bit rate and the quality approaches that of Digibeta. One benefit of it is that the IMX decks play all the Sony pro formats: SP, SX, Digi and IMX.
The other HUGE benefit is for reality/documentary/ENG - the small tape loads (for camera) hold 60 minutes instead of the 30 you see in SP and Digi. Halves the tape requirements for field crews. Also, the file format of IMX is going to be used on Sony's future optical- and hard-drive based recorders. Basically, instead of recording to tape and then digitizing into Avid, you'll be able to shoot and then immediately offline via file transfer- no digitizing required. Very nice... but still in its infancy.
As do I (reality television editor), and I have to second this. HD recording is a long way off. I work on a very successful, well-known and highly-watched show and they're still using BetaSP (although they're finally upgrading to IMX now).
What annoys me about all the newest crop of consumer camcorders is that they are adding features that actually aren't improving video quality, but instead slightly downgrading it. The slow movement away from MiniDV to Mpeg-2 represents a drastic cut in bandwidth and makes editing your footage a pain in the ass. And when it comes to camcorders, smaller is rarely- if ever- better. There is NO SUBSTITUTE for a big CCD (3 x 2/3") and good glass (a high-quality Fujinon lens, for example).
I work in Los Angeles as a television editor, and I can tell you this much- I have _never once_ used FCP on a professional shoot. Additionally I know many audio editors, and they all without exception use Protools. I'm not saying this to slight any competing programs, I'm volunteering this info to let you know that if you're looking for a _career_ in the film/TV biz, those are the programs you should start to become very comfortable with. I've edited tons of network TV shows and it's always been Avid Media Composer/Adrenaline/XPressDV. the great thing about avid is that the interfaces are all the same, so if you know XPressDV, you em all, so I recommend that program whole-heartedly.
For everything else, do what the others say and RENT first. Don't blow a ton of money on expensive gear- especially digital equipment that runs the course to obsolence so quickly these days. Rent some decent gear- it will force you to budget your time and shoot efficiently. It will also force you to pre-produce effectively- you should have the entire film/video/short/whatever shot in your head (or storyboarded) before you roll a single frame of actual tape or film. You should spend most of your time WRITING!!!! That's where the craft is- making story count, because there isn't a bell or whistle on any of these fancy cameras that will save a crappy story- I guarantee you.
John Carmack said about a year and a half ago that Doom 3 would run 'well' on a top-end system of that time- which was a 3.06 GHz P4 equipped with a Radeon 9700 Pro. What's frightening/upsetting is that this SLI setup really isn't coming into play to satisfy the games of today like Doom 3- it's coming into play for the games of next year and the year after. It's just a little off-putting that in order to play the newest games you need a SET of graphics cards with those kind of power and space requirements.
>If you want to play games, you can also order the G5 with a Radeon 9800 XT built in.
If you want to play games, you should probably just buy a PC.:)
Don't get me wrong, I think Apple makes phenomenal hardware and software- it's just that in general it seems as if Macs are always about a year behind PCs and consoles when it comes to game development.
Mac users shoud just continue to enjoy the lead on 2D graphics, video editing, 3D graphics/rendering, etc.- the stuff that'll earn you the money to buy a gaming machine.:)
I grew in Santa Barbara. In the early 90's we had a killer drought- our water supply (Lake Cachuma) went down to about 3% capacity. Low-flow toilets and showerheads were distributed freely and it was a ticketable offense to water your lawn between 11am and 4pm. So the taxpayers sank like 32 million bucks into a desal plant. I believe it was ON THE VERY DAY the plant was to go into operation that IT POURED, and the thing has rarely, if ever, been actually used.
Guess it'll do as a backup...
I'm an editor for reality television and behind-the-scenes materials for DVDs. If you're looking at the $1000 range I've always recommend a Sony to my buddies. If you can eke it out, get the 3CCD TRV-950, otherwise, just get one of the consumer-grade single CCD Sony cameras- they're all a solid buy, have good optics (which, like the guy above said, is easily one of the most important issues) and well-built.
The main weapons of choice for the guys on film sets would either be the Panasonic DVX100 or the Sony PD150. Yeah, these are a little out of your proce range (understatement) but if you really want something that will last and has outstanding image quality, you can't lose with either. The new JVC camera that records HD to a MiniDV tape actually only has a single CCD, so you'll get good sharpness but little in the way of color depth- and when you compare images in a side-by-side, you realize how important the vividness and clarity of your colors can be.
One final thing to note- the Sonys in general have a much more solid build quality than anything else out there. The Panasonic has a really unique look in 24P mode, but it's not quite as robust and it can't handle low light as well. Good luck.
Slashdot Mirror
...i liked it.
>>>20 years from now, closed source software will be dead. HA! HA! Just like communism will be capitalism!?! Utopian dreams are just that. Dreams. Please, for the love of practicality, get real.
Come on, the OLPC project is a great thing but it's not gonna reduce the incidence of AIDS in Africa or wipe out global hunger. The Gates Foundation is focused on the really fundamental issues that unshaven, smelly trolls like RMS haven't even begun to make a dent in.
yikes. i paid $200 for a mio c3 digiwalker 2 years ago. still works fine for my purposes, and i haven't had to lay out any additional dough. i would guess, to be quite frank, that my usage patters are probably more in-line with a 'traditional' gps user than yours, looking at all the additional stuff you've added on, so i suppose an iphone 3g would make more sense for you...
I'm guess $99 for an 8gig model... LOL
why is a good camera so important on this? if you're gonna play ansel adams it seems like you'd probably get a REAL camera instead of using the iphone cam... for what it does, the builtin cam is quite fine IMHO
yes, but you're not going to spend an additional $100/month to use your GPS device.
INTERNETS: SERIOUS BUSINESS
give me a point! :)
ok, that aside, I'm sure i'm echoing what other people have already said, but it seems to me that this dude is simply a)clutching to an obsolete past, and b)regretting that he bought into the wrong technology, and now that he's invested countless hours of setup time to get his MD player to work properly, he doesn't want to make the transition over to the mainstream. so instead, he evangelizes (translated: complains) about a near-worthless technology that no one cares about. good luck, pal. i think everyone here is pretty sold on their ipod.
FUCK WAL-MART.
</troll>
Come on, April-Fool's-people! Johnathan Swift already pulled something similar to this about THREE HUNDRED YEARS AGO.
;)
You guys must not have been paying attention in your high school American lit classes.
MSN.com comes up completely improperly formatted in IE 5.1 for Mac (OS9). And then it locks the browser up.
Why is it that in IE for Mac, the pages I seem to have the most problems with are Microsoft pages?!?
Yeah, but try going to the new MSN in IE for Mac (OS 9.0). In the grand tradition of Microsoft development, MSN.com looks like complete hell. Way to go Microsoft. Another one out of the park. ;)
Grow up.
Ah yes, poor Eric and "Writer's Block". Then there was the infamous "Eliza", which I believe had the most expensive production budget ($100K, just for production - not post) in recent history for a USC short. What's tragic is that "Eliza" NEVER GOT FINISHED, because the FX were so comprehensive that they were simply too overwhelming to finish by just one student. The lesson here: even though you may have all the greatest gear in the world, giving you the ability to do cool FX, it still takes thousands of man-hours and tons of talent to do them right. That's why places like Rhythm & Hues, ILM and Imageworks still exist and have staffs of hundreds of talented artists.
You probably should read the whole thread first. :)
I graduated from USC Cinema about 3 years ago, just as all these wonderful toys were being set up. My experience with student filmmaking is this:
Many of the students there would spend boatloads of money on their thesis projects to put them on 35mm Anamorphic film, get a Dolby Digital mix, put in glitzy special effects, etc... (one I helped out on had a $100K budget - no joke). The problem was that their films ended up looking like beautiful pieces of nothing, because they had spent so much time on production issues that they never had time to really nail down the script. So they were great to look at, always technically proficient, but lacking in story. So to have SCFX is great for people who want a technical training, but I went to USC to understand visual storytelling, and you really don't need much in the way of effects to do that properly.
As a side note, a classmate of mine (he was a few semesters ahead of me) spent a minimal $11,000 on his thesis film, shot it on 16mm black and white, optical sound, and it won the Palm d'Or at the Cannes Film Festival. Go figure.
Actually, very few people are moving to Final Cut Pro, basically because Avid is a) Incredibly entrenched in the industry and b) a superior product (no, I'm not bringing in flamebait, it's a professional opinion). By and large, every editor I know of loathes FCP and swears by Avid. In television FCP has had minor market penetration, but mostly only in the lower budget productions. I'm a USC film grad myself, and I edit for 'The Amazing Race', and it's Avid all the way here. Same goes for most every other production I know of, with only very few exceptions.
Yes, Digibeta is still the best as far as SD video quality, but IMX is going to take it over for most video applications. IMX is Sony's newest all-digital format, based on MPEG-2 (its full name is MPEG-IMX), but it's a fairly high bit rate and the quality approaches that of Digibeta. One benefit of it is that the IMX decks play all the Sony pro formats: SP, SX, Digi and IMX. The other HUGE benefit is for reality/documentary/ENG - the small tape loads (for camera) hold 60 minutes instead of the 30 you see in SP and Digi. Halves the tape requirements for field crews. Also, the file format of IMX is going to be used on Sony's future optical- and hard-drive based recorders. Basically, instead of recording to tape and then digitizing into Avid, you'll be able to shoot and then immediately offline via file transfer- no digitizing required. Very nice... but still in its infancy.
As do I (reality television editor), and I have to second this. HD recording is a long way off. I work on a very successful, well-known and highly-watched show and they're still using BetaSP (although they're finally upgrading to IMX now).
What annoys me about all the newest crop of consumer camcorders is that they are adding features that actually aren't improving video quality, but instead slightly downgrading it. The slow movement away from MiniDV to Mpeg-2 represents a drastic cut in bandwidth and makes editing your footage a pain in the ass. And when it comes to camcorders, smaller is rarely- if ever- better. There is NO SUBSTITUTE for a big CCD (3 x 2/3") and good glass (a high-quality Fujinon lens, for example).
I work in Los Angeles as a television editor, and I can tell you this much- I have _never once_ used FCP on a professional shoot. Additionally I know many audio editors, and they all without exception use Protools. I'm not saying this to slight any competing programs, I'm volunteering this info to let you know that if you're looking for a _career_ in the film/TV biz, those are the programs you should start to become very comfortable with. I've edited tons of network TV shows and it's always been Avid Media Composer/Adrenaline/XPressDV. the great thing about avid is that the interfaces are all the same, so if you know XPressDV, you em all, so I recommend that program whole-heartedly.
For everything else, do what the others say and RENT first. Don't blow a ton of money on expensive gear- especially digital equipment that runs the course to obsolence so quickly these days. Rent some decent gear- it will force you to budget your time and shoot efficiently. It will also force you to pre-produce effectively- you should have the entire film/video/short/whatever shot in your head (or storyboarded) before you roll a single frame of actual tape or film. You should spend most of your time WRITING!!!! That's where the craft is- making story count, because there isn't a bell or whistle on any of these fancy cameras that will save a crappy story- I guarantee you.
John Carmack said about a year and a half ago that Doom 3 would run 'well' on a top-end system of that time- which was a 3.06 GHz P4 equipped with a Radeon 9700 Pro. What's frightening/upsetting is that this SLI setup really isn't coming into play to satisfy the games of today like Doom 3- it's coming into play for the games of next year and the year after. It's just a little off-putting that in order to play the newest games you need a SET of graphics cards with those kind of power and space requirements.
>If you want to play games, you can also order the G5 with a Radeon 9800 XT built in.
:)
:)
If you want to play games, you should probably just buy a PC.
Don't get me wrong, I think Apple makes phenomenal hardware and software- it's just that in general it seems as if Macs are always about a year behind PCs and consoles when it comes to game development.
Mac users shoud just continue to enjoy the lead on 2D graphics, video editing, 3D graphics/rendering, etc.- the stuff that'll earn you the money to buy a gaming machine.
I grew in Santa Barbara. In the early 90's we had a killer drought- our water supply (Lake Cachuma) went down to about 3% capacity. Low-flow toilets and showerheads were distributed freely and it was a ticketable offense to water your lawn between 11am and 4pm. So the taxpayers sank like 32 million bucks into a desal plant. I believe it was ON THE VERY DAY the plant was to go into operation that IT POURED, and the thing has rarely, if ever, been actually used. Guess it'll do as a backup...
I'm an editor for reality television and behind-the-scenes materials for DVDs. If you're looking at the $1000 range I've always recommend a Sony to my buddies. If you can eke it out, get the 3CCD TRV-950, otherwise, just get one of the consumer-grade single CCD Sony cameras- they're all a solid buy, have good optics (which, like the guy above said, is easily one of the most important issues) and well-built.
The main weapons of choice for the guys on film sets would either be the Panasonic DVX100 or the Sony PD150. Yeah, these are a little out of your proce range (understatement) but if you really want something that will last and has outstanding image quality, you can't lose with either. The new JVC camera that records HD to a MiniDV tape actually only has a single CCD, so you'll get good sharpness but little in the way of color depth- and when you compare images in a side-by-side, you realize how important the vividness and clarity of your colors can be.
One final thing to note- the Sonys in general have a much more solid build quality than anything else out there. The Panasonic has a really unique look in 24P mode, but it's not quite as robust and it can't handle low light as well. Good luck.