That 1024x768 screen in the iPad makes all the difference compared to the 960x640 display of it's business card sized brother. Just like swimming laps in a bath tub!
Sounds like a great argument until you actually think about it.
Now, Windows doesn't work well on tiny screens, that's true, but it's completely unrelated to your pushing of the nonsensical specialness of the iPad. It's also not clear why you think there no common need or big market for a device when you assume that the iPad is needed for some magical "full experience". To me, a "full experience" would include either fitting in my pocket or having a keyboard. The iPad offers neither of these things.
The problem with 200 dpi on a desktop monitor is viewing distance and the fact that UI's don't scale as we would like them to. T221's can be bought on eBay and there's a Yahoo newgroup that discusses how to use them. Apple even provided support in OS X once upon a time, but that's fallen into useless disrepair. Try one, but you probably won't like it.
Imperial makes perfect sense to those who have learned it and that's the key. Metric doesn't do anything valuable for the public as a whole who already know another functional system. Most people really could care less whether everything is in units of 10. Where it matters, metric is already used.
Re:High fructose corn syrup is slow acting poison.
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 2
You never said you read the entire article, either, and it's apparent you didn't see at any of it. Otherwise you'd know there isn't any difference between "real sugar" that your "peasants" can't afford and the HFCS that's being used as a "population control" mechanism as you absurdly claim.
"white sugar", as you call it, is a problem equal to HFCS, not less than "half the problem" as you suggest. Another "expert" that hasn't watched the presentation.
As others as already pointed out, aspertame is not proven to be a problem at all. Of all sweeteners, only sugar/HFCS is proven to be harmful.
Re:Are all forms of sugar equally toxic?
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 1
Cane sugar and HFCS are equally toxic. What the presentation, you may learn something.
"PCs still are glorified office machinery and except for work everyone hates them."
What?
"And Google should be very careful not to turn Android into another highly complex and confusing OS with an desktop-like interface. This is exactly what most people are running away from."
"To the liberal minions standards, it's hate speech, threatening speech. Remmber, these are the people that think Palin said she could see Russia from Alaska (that was an SNL skit); they would take it literally. Someone is clearly going to get hurt.
Sort of like crosshairs on a map or reloading. Remember how that was kept in context on a 500+ comment thread."
No, it's not hate speech and Palin did say she could see Russia from Alaska.
- "They're our next door neighbors. And you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska."
Sarah Palin in Charles Gibson interview
You don't really mean negative utility, you mean it works against an agenda you support. It's quite clear that H.264 support would be of great utility, especially to those who aren't interested in your battle.
"JOBS vision to create "cool" Macs instead of the old beige/bland Macs/MP3s, basically saved Apple from the same fate that hit Atari and Commodore. Plus he had the vision to create the sleek, easy-to-use iPod."
The less you know, the more your "facts" can align with your personal view. Both the Mac and the iPod succeeded despite Jobs's "vision". Neither was originally his.
He is not a politician nor does he hold public office. The concept of "elected" here is meaningless. He was chosen among a small group of peers in a manner similar to a jury.
A system with 1 stop of dynamic range can only produce white or black, there is no "50% gray". If you use more than one bit per pixel with such a system, everything between 0 and maxpixel is noise. If it weren't then, by definition, the system would have more than 1 stop of range.
You defined a stop, not an f-stop. You are not alone in the confusion. There is a big difference between the dynamic range of the sensor, in stops, and the exposure settings necessary to utilize it. The author of the article doesn't understand that either.
For some arbitrarily pessimistic definition of "6 usable stops" maybe so, but every DSLR EVER has had more than 6 usable stops by any reasonable definition. Ignorant photographers, most of whom are self-professed experts with a film background, like to say 6 usable stops based on a personal, arbitrary standard of having some number of usable shades of gray in the lowest "stop" without realizing that those shades define additional stops. Those fools, among them you, confuse stops and zones. 32 shades of gray in 6 "usable stops" is actually 11 stops of dynamic range. That is what is typically possible in today's DSLRs.
"If this is true, it must have been done in 'clean room' fashion without reference to the original code (apart from external interfaces) otherwise it could still be a derivative work."
This is wrong. A "clean room" is not required to write code "from scratch". Otherwise we wouldn't have any unburdened code.
Slashdot Mirror
That 1024x768 screen in the iPad makes all the difference compared to the 960x640 display of it's business card sized brother. Just like swimming laps in a bath tub!
Sounds like a great argument until you actually think about it.
Now, Windows doesn't work well on tiny screens, that's true, but it's completely unrelated to your pushing of the nonsensical specialness of the iPad. It's also not clear why you think there no common need or big market for a device when you assume that the iPad is needed for some magical "full experience". To me, a "full experience" would include either fitting in my pocket or having a keyboard. The iPad offers neither of these things.
A 30" version with the same total resolution as 24" at 200dpi would be far more useful anyway. 150dpi is a lot at desktop viewing distances.
IBM produced that 10 years ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_T220/T221_LCD_monitors
The problem with 200 dpi on a desktop monitor is viewing distance and the fact that UI's don't scale as we would like them to. T221's can be bought on eBay and there's a Yahoo newgroup that discusses how to use them. Apple even provided support in OS X once upon a time, but that's fallen into useless disrepair. Try one, but you probably won't like it.
You are using an iPad on a corporate LAN and accessing "boatloads of data"? Haha.
Some people have real work to do.
Right, because Laserdisc and CD are nearly the same.
Imperial makes perfect sense to those who have learned it and that's the key. Metric doesn't do anything valuable for the public as a whole who already know another functional system. Most people really could care less whether everything is in units of 10. Where it matters, metric is already used.
As though that were in any way unusual.
You never said you read the entire article, either, and it's apparent you didn't see at any of it. Otherwise you'd know there isn't any difference between "real sugar" that your "peasants" can't afford and the HFCS that's being used as a "population control" mechanism as you absurdly claim.
"white sugar", as you call it, is a problem equal to HFCS, not less than "half the problem" as you suggest. Another "expert" that hasn't watched the presentation.
As others as already pointed out, aspertame is not proven to be a problem at all. Of all sweeteners, only sugar/HFCS is proven to be harmful.
Cane sugar and HFCS are equally toxic. What the presentation, you may learn something.
This gets modded Insightful...
"PCs still are glorified office machinery and except for work everyone hates them."
What?
"And Google should be very careful not to turn Android into another highly complex and confusing OS with an desktop-like interface. This is exactly what most people are running away from."
What?
"They want something plain, pretty and "magic"."
Bought into the Apple rhetoric, did you?
"To the liberal minions standards, it's hate speech, threatening speech. Remmber, these are the people that think Palin said she could see Russia from Alaska (that was an SNL skit); they would take it literally. Someone is clearly going to get hurt.
Sort of like crosshairs on a map or reloading. Remember how that was kept in context on a 500+ comment thread."
No, it's not hate speech and Palin did say she could see Russia from Alaska.
- "They're our next door neighbors. And you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska."
Sarah Palin in Charles Gibson interview
You don't really mean negative utility, you mean it works against an agenda you support. It's quite clear that H.264 support would be of great utility, especially to those who aren't interested in your battle.
Here's a comment that genuinely earns it's insightful rating.
"JOBS vision to create "cool" Macs instead of the old beige/bland Macs/MP3s, basically saved Apple from the same fate that hit Atari and Commodore. Plus he had the vision to create the sleek, easy-to-use iPod."
The less you know, the more your "facts" can align with your personal view. Both the Mac and the iPod succeeded despite Jobs's "vision". Neither was originally his.
He is not a politician nor does he hold public office. The concept of "elected" here is meaningless. He was chosen among a small group of peers in a manner similar to a jury.
Do you know ANYTHING about scuba tanks? Apparently you haven't been to many scuba stores.
They are "guilty" of what exactly? If they aren't distributing them, so what?
HDRx uses two exposures. The exposures aren't merged, either, they are stored as separate tracks in the data stream.
A system with 1 stop of dynamic range can only produce white or black, there is no "50% gray". If you use more than one bit per pixel with such a system, everything between 0 and maxpixel is noise. If it weren't then, by definition, the system would have more than 1 stop of range.
You defined a stop, not an f-stop. You are not alone in the confusion. There is a big difference between the dynamic range of the sensor, in stops, and the exposure settings necessary to utilize it. The author of the article doesn't understand that either.
For some arbitrarily pessimistic definition of "6 usable stops" maybe so, but every DSLR EVER has had more than 6 usable stops by any reasonable definition. Ignorant photographers, most of whom are self-professed experts with a film background, like to say 6 usable stops based on a personal, arbitrary standard of having some number of usable shades of gray in the lowest "stop" without realizing that those shades define additional stops. Those fools, among them you, confuse stops and zones. 32 shades of gray in 6 "usable stops" is actually 11 stops of dynamic range. That is what is typically possible in today's DSLRs.
All DSLR's sold today do better than 7 stops. You have to go back to the Nikon D1 to find something near 7 stops. And what does "10% or so" mean?
The system proposed claimed 20 stops which is preposterous. It was a BS article written by someone fundamentally ignorant of photography
"If this is true, it must have been done in 'clean room' fashion without reference to the original code (apart from external interfaces) otherwise it could still be a derivative work."
This is wrong. A "clean room" is not required to write code "from scratch". Otherwise we wouldn't have any unburdened code.