I did. Maybe there was a strange interaction with the source image.
I re-installed and am trying it today on other images (I don't have the original from yesterday, it was just wallpaper and after resizing, I ditched the original).
I know this is off topic, but I am not going to bother joining a GIMP forum.
I installed GIMP (windows) yesterday. I wanted to downscale some images and do a light USM, but GIMP downscaled images came out looking over-sharpened before I even got to the USM step. I know downscaling does make images appear sharper if the original was a bit soft.
But this is compared to downscaling in other programs. GIMP output looked over-sharpened with artifacts.
I could find no setting that indicated it was doing any USM on scaling, so I promptly un-installed GIMP, since it can't do something this basic without degrading the image.
Development is likely near complete. They have been generating buzz, They have dropped several demo video and claimed it was coming later this year, it was front and center at CES. Internal Spec sheets and competitive analysis has leaked. All signs were fully on serious launch until Palm acquisition. So now what?
It is going to take time to put together a proper WebOS tablet and get in shipping condition, likely well into 2011.
It makes sense to go with the Windows Slate that many claim they want, that they have generated buzz for and have put R&D money into. If they had a business case before for this device, they still have one now.
That gives them breathing room to get the WebOS slate rolling and they can ship them together and continue to assess whether both have a place in the lineup.
So IMO it will ship because the WebOS acquisition doesn't change anything in the time frame it was supposed to ship.
Sorry Man, I am over 40 and your picture with the grey beard looked like someone older than me.... Thus old codger.
Note my post involves viewing distance and visual acuity. A laptop has a much closer viewing distance than a desktop monitor in my experience. Thus you want a higher DPI display on a laptop.
Put your ample money (Microsoft) where your rant is and buy one of the high density options that are available. Hunt down an IBM T221 200 DPI monitor, or even that new 27" 2560 display I mentioned, and then tell me you AREN'T turning up the size of the interface elements.
I briefly owned a Dell 30" 2560x1600 100 dpi display. Even that was borderline too fine a DPI for default in windows and scaling in XP was complete garbage. Maybe it works adequately now, but I no longer have a display that needs it.
If you play games, a 200 dpi display would bring even a $500 dollar graphics card to its knees unless you run at non native resolutions which will look much worse than simply having an lower DPI monitor to start with.
Even if Windows 7 now scales the interface perfectly when you using the web, your will end up screwing up the layout of pages by doubling the font size relative to the non scalable elements, unless you zoom everything, again looking worse than simply having an appropriate native DPI monitor.
At that distance even 100 dpi is kind of small, you can't see individual pixel, so what does more resolution buy you? Bragging rights?
If you want to have higher DPI you can get a Dell U2711 with 2560x1440 crammed into a small space. I guarantee if the old codger ranting had one of these the first thing he would do is crank up the size of everything in the OS so he could see it. So again what is the point?
In a world where there is a cost and tradeoff for everything, it makes sense to have DPI of your display stop near the same point typical visual acuity does, for typical viewing distance.
If you are running higher DPI monitors and then cranking the interface size in the OS, you are just wasting resources.
You need more bandwidth in connectors to drive it, you need more transistors for the pixels (higher cost and power draw) and if you game you need MUCH more powerful graphics cards.
"On a computer screen, I want as much resolution as possible! And.. even on my hdtv, I want as much resolution as possible. Even in my living room, watching a Bluray at 1080p, I still see the pixels from 10-12 feet away on the couch. Maybe I'm more picky than the average person.. or maybe I have better eyes (not really.. i wear contacts)..."
Really that is shenanigans worthy. 12 feet away and you see pixels??? Just how big is your TV?
I have 20:15 vision and pixels are invisible at 5 feet on my 40" TV (I just broke out a measuring tape).
Adobe wants to make Flash the platform for mobile devices.
Apple wants to keep application development native so the can control their own platform.
Both of these are reasonable goals.
Personally I would rather have native applications, than cross platform Flash-to-App generator.
If you think there is too much crapware in the Appstore now, what would it look like when every flash writer starts hitting "convert to iPhone button"?
So while I don't know if that wording change means that there will be no Flash-to-App conversion in the Appstore, I certainly hope that is the case.
I am sad that nothing can be done to keep it off Android...
Speed delta between chrome/FF have shrunk to irrelevant.
Firefox is rock solid for me on Windows 7.
Those seem to be the two main Chrome "advantages" I see touted as the reason why people should switch to chrome.
In reality those reason are hugely exaggerated.
OTOH Firefox has a huge advantage in available extensions and the effectiveness of those extensions. Flashblock on Chrome doesn't work on all flash, only some. Naturally the flash it doesn't work on are annoying flash adverts.
Google also runs annoying call home process even when Chrome isn't running (that alone was enough to ditch chrome for Iron).
Overall I think the reports of Firefox death are greatly exaggerated.
Re:Yes, it is nothing more than a big iPod Touch
on
iPad Review
·
· Score: 1
AFAIK, you just tap a page and it switches to the next, you don't have to drag your finger across and do the page curl.
I don't get the pissing and moaning from my fellow techies on this one.
Sure It has limitations and software is controlled by Apple (unless you jailbreak).
But this is more like an appliance than a full fledged computer and it isn't really meant to replace your laptop or desktop, but co-exist with them.
From the hands on videos, it is clear the engineering on this one is very tight. HW/SW integration produces an extremely responsive package in a small lightweight package that can go all day.
As an appliance platform, it appears to be impeccable.
Not every device has to be totally open. I don't need or even want to spend hours similar to what I spend tweaking my PC also tweaking a tablet appliance.
I don't own anything Apple and I am not sure I will buy an iPad, but it doesn't look like it delivers a fine coffee table appliance and I would certainly like to try it.
I really can't get anyone who considers themselves a tech enthusiast being too close minded to try one for themselves.
I discovered that the GeForce GTX 480 video card was sitting at 90C in an idle state since I had two monitors installed on my system. I talked with some of the NVIDIA engineers about this 'issue' I was having and found that it wasn't really an issue per say as they do it to prevent screen flickering. This is what NVIDIA said in response to our questions:
"We are currently keeping memory clock high to avoid some screen flicker when changing power states, so for now we are running higher idle power in dual-screen setups. Not sure when/if this will be changed. Also note we're trading off temps for acoustic quality at idle. We could ratchet down the temp, but need to turn up the fan to do so. Our fan control is set to not start increasing fan until we're up near the 80's, so the higher temp is actually by design to keep the acoustics lower." - NVIDIA PR
Regardless what the reasons are behind this, running a two monitor setup will cause your system to literally bake.
Yikes!
I already wasn't impressed, but after reading this it looks more like a fiasco, than just a mild disappointment.
My problem with iPad. Is that it's not an open platform.
Which is precisely why it might be a successful appliance.
I won't address your many incorrect bullet points, (mainly variations on Apple approves apps) as Kendall already did that well (someone mod him up), but I will point out that this isn't meant to replace your desktop environment.
Apples touch devices are more meant to be an Appliance platform. Each application can expect to take over the device and turn it into a new type of appliance. Maintaining a high level of quality control for applications instead of a free for all, improves the user experience by eliminating a large among of buggy junk they won't have to wade through. There is next to nothing useful actually missing, but it does give complainers something to complain about.
Likewise having controlled multi-tasking also allows much better use of resources. I suspect the will have new back-grounding API in 4.0 but only for applications that get approved for that usage, like Pandora (just about the only thing I ever see when people try to make the case that they need multi-tasking).
My only gripe with the iPad is I don't have a Mac and coding my own apps more or less require it (yeah, I know there are kludgy alternatives...).
I would like to know what mechanism he attributes to the extra LCD eyestrain to.
You can just as easily argue that having a fully adjustable back light allows you to reduce eyestrain by always having access to ideal illumination levels.
I have more than a decade looking at CRT/LCDs for 10+ hours day. I have read entire novels on a Palm Pilot for up to 5 hours continuously all without any eye issues.
To me E-Ink looks like some kind of Cyberpunk tech I would have seen in the movie Brazil
"Just look at the DS vs. the PSP... which one is more rugged? "
Have any stats? I know the DS has a lot more hinge problems than the PSP and from googling oddly enough I seem to also see a lot more DS broken screens as well.
How can you NOT see the advantage in two screens? Are you really that short sighted that you think just because you can't watch movies on it that it's useless?
Did you read what I said?
You can just use software to split a larger screen and do ANYTHING on one bigger screen that you can do on two little ones.
From a software/interface perspective, one larger split screen can do all the same things as two smaller ones.
Breaking a screen into two smaller ones and sticking a giant hinge/bezel in the middle isn't an advantage.
Think about watching video on this. You have half the screen and turned sideways.
Even reading a regular text ebook. Two screens aren't an advantage, they are a hindrance.
Now it might be good for a few things where you can flick it between the two small screens, BUT you could easily do the same thing on one bigger screen by creating a software split between the halves.
Now MS may have some good SW ideas, I'll wait until they exist outside of a cartoon to comment on those, but I think they would be better delivered on a one screen device.
Slashdot Mirror
I found the original image from yesterday, here is the link:
http://img1.socwall.com/Nature/Landscapes/200803094555-9639.jpg
I am downsizing to 1920x1200 for desktop wallpaper.
I tested all three GIMP scaling algorithms and while there are slight variations all three look sharpened and artificial.
I tested against irfanview and paint.net on their defaults(and cubic).
There is a massive difference between all the Gimp downsizes vs all paint/Irfan (which look very similar to each other).
So it does look to me like there is something funny with Gimp scaling. Flipping between Gimp vs other is like before and after USM.
I don't have photoshop elements installed anymore, but I noticed its resize was not that different from paint.net/Irfanview.
Something is definitely peculiar here with GIMP Scaling.
I did. Maybe there was a strange interaction with the source image.
I re-installed and am trying it today on other images (I don't have the original from yesterday, it was just wallpaper and after resizing, I ditched the original).
I haven't seen any strange results yet.
I know this is off topic, but I am not going to bother joining a GIMP forum.
I installed GIMP (windows) yesterday. I wanted to downscale some images and do a light USM, but GIMP downscaled images came out looking over-sharpened before I even got to the USM step. I know downscaling does make images appear sharper if the original was a bit soft.
But this is compared to downscaling in other programs. GIMP output looked over-sharpened with artifacts.
I could find no setting that indicated it was doing any USM on scaling, so I promptly un-installed GIMP, since it can't do something this basic without degrading the image.
Development is likely near complete. They have been generating buzz, They have dropped several demo video and claimed it was coming later this year, it was front and center at CES. Internal Spec sheets and competitive analysis has leaked. All signs were fully on serious launch until Palm acquisition. So now what?
It is going to take time to put together a proper WebOS tablet and get in shipping condition, likely well into 2011.
It makes sense to go with the Windows Slate that many claim they want, that they have generated buzz for and have put R&D money into. If they had a business case before for this device, they still have one now.
That gives them breathing room to get the WebOS slate rolling and they can ship them together and continue to assess whether both have a place in the lineup.
So IMO it will ship because the WebOS acquisition doesn't change anything in the time frame it was supposed to ship.
That also seems a bit far fetched. Try this Acuity test:
http://carltonbale.com/visual-acuity-viewing-distance-test-it-for-yourself
Sorry Man, I am over 40 and your picture with the grey beard looked like someone older than me.... Thus old codger.
Note my post involves viewing distance and visual acuity. A laptop has a much closer viewing distance than a desktop monitor in my experience. Thus you want a higher DPI display on a laptop.
Put your ample money (Microsoft) where your rant is and buy one of the high density options that are available. Hunt down an IBM T221 200 DPI monitor, or even that new 27" 2560 display I mentioned, and then tell me you AREN'T turning up the size of the interface elements.
I briefly owned a Dell 30" 2560x1600 100 dpi display. Even that was borderline too fine a DPI for default in windows and scaling in XP was complete garbage. Maybe it works adequately now, but I no longer have a display that needs it.
If you play games, a 200 dpi display would bring even a $500 dollar graphics card to its knees unless you run at non native resolutions which will look much worse than simply having an lower DPI monitor to start with.
Even if Windows 7 now scales the interface perfectly when you using the web, your will end up screwing up the layout of pages by doubling the font size relative to the non scalable elements, unless you zoom everything, again looking worse than simply having an appropriate native DPI monitor.
I sit at 2.5 - 3ft from my monitor.
At that distance even 100 dpi is kind of small, you can't see individual pixel, so what does more resolution buy you? Bragging rights?
If you want to have higher DPI you can get a Dell U2711 with 2560x1440 crammed into a small space. I guarantee if the old codger ranting had one of these the first thing he would do is crank up the size of everything in the OS so he could see it. So again what is the point?
In a world where there is a cost and tradeoff for everything, it makes sense to have DPI of your display stop near the same point typical visual acuity does, for typical viewing distance.
If you are running higher DPI monitors and then cranking the interface size in the OS, you are just wasting resources.
You need more bandwidth in connectors to drive it, you need more transistors for the pixels (higher cost and power draw) and if you game you need MUCH more powerful graphics cards.
"On a computer screen, I want as much resolution as possible! And.. even on my hdtv, I want as much resolution as possible. Even in my living room, watching a Bluray at 1080p, I still see the pixels from 10-12 feet away on the couch. Maybe I'm more picky than the average person.. or maybe I have better eyes (not really.. i wear contacts)..."
Really that is shenanigans worthy. 12 feet away and you see pixels??? Just how big is your TV?
I have 20:15 vision and pixels are invisible at 5 feet on my 40" TV (I just broke out a measuring tape).
If a book publisher doesn't publish your book, you can always try another publisher.
You can always try another platform. Apple doesn't owe anyone a place in their store.
Apple is a Publisher, Appstore is their venue.
They can reject anything for any reason they feel like.
Just like book publishers.
It isn't news when a publisher rejects publishing a work.
This is all about getting your app published in the App store.
Apple is the publisher here. No news that they are nearly arbitrary in what they accept or reject. Similar to a book publisher.
Can you sue to get published??
I would think not, not even there were no where else to get published (and there is).
I can't imagine this is seriously something Adobe is considering.
It is nearly as bad as the childish rant from their platform evangelist.
Adobe wants to make Flash the platform for mobile devices.
Apple wants to keep application development native so the can control their own platform.
Both of these are reasonable goals.
Personally I would rather have native applications, than cross platform Flash-to-App generator.
If you think there is too much crapware in the Appstore now, what would it look like when every flash writer starts hitting "convert to iPhone button"?
So while I don't know if that wording change means that there will be no Flash-to-App conversion in the Appstore, I certainly hope that is the case.
I am sad that nothing can be done to keep it off Android...
Speed delta between chrome/FF have shrunk to irrelevant.
Firefox is rock solid for me on Windows 7.
Those seem to be the two main Chrome "advantages" I see touted as the reason why people should switch to chrome.
In reality those reason are hugely exaggerated.
OTOH Firefox has a huge advantage in available extensions and the effectiveness of those extensions. Flashblock on Chrome doesn't work on all flash, only some. Naturally the flash it doesn't work on are annoying flash adverts.
Google also runs annoying call home process even when Chrome isn't running (that alone was enough to ditch chrome for Iron).
Overall I think the reports of Firefox death are greatly exaggerated.
AFAIK, you just tap a page and it switches to the next, you don't have to drag your finger across and do the page curl.
I don't get the pissing and moaning from my fellow techies on this one.
Sure It has limitations and software is controlled by Apple (unless you jailbreak).
But this is more like an appliance than a full fledged computer and it isn't really meant to replace your laptop or desktop, but co-exist with them.
From the hands on videos, it is clear the engineering on this one is very tight. HW/SW integration produces an extremely responsive package in a small lightweight package that can go all day.
As an appliance platform, it appears to be impeccable.
Not every device has to be totally open. I don't need or even want to spend hours similar to what I spend tweaking my PC also tweaking a tablet appliance.
I don't own anything Apple and I am not sure I will buy an iPad, but it doesn't look like it delivers a fine coffee table appliance and I would certainly like to try it.
I really can't get anyone who considers themselves a tech enthusiast being too close minded to try one for themselves.
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1258/15/
I discovered that the GeForce GTX 480 video card was sitting at 90C in an idle state since I had two monitors installed on my system. I talked with some of the NVIDIA engineers about this 'issue' I was having and found that it wasn't really an issue per say as they do it to prevent screen flickering. This is what NVIDIA said in response to our questions:
"We are currently keeping memory clock high to avoid some screen flicker when changing power states, so for now we are running higher idle power in dual-screen setups. Not sure when/if this will be changed. Also note we're trading off temps for acoustic quality at idle. We could ratchet down the temp, but need to turn up the fan to do so. Our fan control is set to not start increasing fan until we're up near the 80's, so the higher temp is actually by design to keep the acoustics lower." - NVIDIA PR
Regardless what the reasons are behind this, running a two monitor setup will cause your system to literally bake.
Yikes!
I already wasn't impressed, but after reading this it looks more like a fiasco, than just a mild disappointment.
My problem with iPad. Is that it's not an open platform.
Which is precisely why it might be a successful appliance.
I won't address your many incorrect bullet points, (mainly variations on Apple approves apps) as Kendall already did that well (someone mod him up), but I will point out that this isn't meant to replace your desktop environment.
Apples touch devices are more meant to be an Appliance platform. Each application can expect to take over the device and turn it into a new type of appliance. Maintaining a high level of quality control for applications instead of a free for all, improves the user experience by eliminating a large among of buggy junk they won't have to wade through. There is next to nothing useful actually missing, but it does give complainers something to complain about.
Likewise having controlled multi-tasking also allows much better use of resources. I suspect the will have new back-grounding API in 4.0 but only for applications that get approved for that usage, like Pandora (just about the only thing I ever see when people try to make the case that they need multi-tasking).
My only gripe with the iPad is I don't have a Mac and coding my own apps more or less require it (yeah, I know there are kludgy alternatives...).
Something about this strikes me, as not very Google like.
I can figure out both the advantages/disadvantages of Apples model.
Does Google really need to hire someone to smear Apples model in Public.
I don't own any Apple product, so I don't think I qualify as an Apple fanboy, but I do respect the work of both companies.
But this really does lower Google a notch in my eyes, it is the kind of thing I expect Steve Balmer to say about the competition.
I would like to know what mechanism he attributes to the extra LCD eyestrain to.
You can just as easily argue that having a fully adjustable back light allows you to reduce eyestrain by always having access to ideal illumination levels.
FUD
I have more than a decade looking at CRT/LCDs for 10+ hours day. I have read entire novels on a Palm Pilot for up to 5 hours continuously all without any eye issues.
To me E-Ink looks like some kind of Cyberpunk tech I would have seen in the movie Brazil
B&W, low contrast, 1 second refresh.
Let's just say I wouldn't buy stock in E-Ink.
"Just look at the DS vs. the PSP... which one is more rugged? "
Have any stats? I know the DS has a lot more hinge problems than the PSP and from googling oddly enough I seem to also see a lot more DS broken screens as well.
"it's designed for successful businesspeople to carry into meetings and synchronize all their schedules and email via wi-fi."
LOL. Designed not just for businesspeople, but successful ones. ;-)
So syncing email/schedules, so it's a 1LB blackberry replacement??
Right now it is just a computer render of some use cases. I am just commenting on the basic HW concept of two screens which isn't really so hot.
How can you NOT see the advantage in two screens? Are you really that short sighted that you think just because you can't watch movies on it that it's useless?
Did you read what I said?
You can just use software to split a larger screen and do ANYTHING on one bigger screen that you can do on two little ones.
From a software/interface perspective, one larger split screen can do all the same things as two smaller ones.
Breaking a screen into two smaller ones and sticking a giant hinge/bezel in the middle isn't an advantage.
Think about watching video on this. You have half the screen and turned sideways.
Even reading a regular text ebook. Two screens aren't an advantage, they are a hindrance.
Now it might be good for a few things where you can flick it between the two small screens, BUT you could easily do the same thing on one bigger screen by creating a software split between the halves.
Now MS may have some good SW ideas, I'll wait until they exist outside of a cartoon to comment on those, but I think they would be better delivered on a one screen device.
Well I doubt they are working on every device.
I am an outsider, but I was thinking about getting a Archos 5. When I checkout reviews and they are checking android games, half of them didn't work.