I wasn't trying to sell it to you, just answering the question in the headline. I have seen a streamer fast enough that I often use it to play unsupported video on an iPad (I'd rather do things like that locally than use one of the many "cloud browsers" that used to get articles here when iOS's lack of Flash was still worth talking about) , and have played a little Fallout 3 on it when the TV was in use. It's also worth noting that the streamer does run on Linux: http://www.splashtop.com/linux
Benefits aside, I've come to hate a Splashtop as a company, and they manage to make the software progressively worse with each update. If there were a FOSS alternative, I'd switch in a heartbeat.
They do have an Ubuntu package for the streamer, at least, or they used to. But not a client? I don't know. I've only ever needed to connect to Lonux, never from.
As for trust, yeah, no. My understanding is that the first version did, in fact, stream your screen completely unencrypted over the internet for remote sessions. And they charge a subscription for remote connections. Ridiculous. Which is why I use a VPN when I stream, and never log into their awful account system.
Yes. Splashtop Remote. I haven't used VNC in years, literally. Splashtop streams audio and video we'll enough to play games over, locally. Their account-based system nonsense is horrific, buy you can avoid it if you connect over a VPN.
It's not a lens problem. The lenses are trying to correct for the fact that current games display 3D images meant for display on flat surfaces. The lense is there to distort to image and make it wrap around your eyes, but the portion of the image you're wrapping is distorted and lacking detail, even before the lens smears it across your peripheral vision. This is a method for making the initial image much better and full of data so that less aggressive smearing is necessary, and the per-smear image has more data in it to begin with.
Oculus Rift is one of the greatest products ever, and Ima let you finish, but this is even better for multi-monitor gaming.
At least Oculus Rift had identified and addressed the problem of distortion, even though their solution loses image quality. Multi-monitor gaming has been garbage for a decade because everyone seems content with horrific distortion at large FOVs.
I know, it's all a matter of screen placement and eye positioning. That's dumb. I want a wrap-around image. I want to aim a projector at each of three walls and have the result make sense.
If you've tried Fisheye Quake, you know it's hell on your system, and still doesn't look great. If this technique is at all performance, everyone needs to start shipping with support, and they need to start yesterday.
I agree with the general thrust of the article, but comparing Kodak to Instagram is straight-up retarded. Instagram is not replacing Kodak. It does not do what Kodak used to do with only 13 people. It does almost nothing, and does nothing worthwhile.
Maybe instead of shutting down commentary, they should have implemented the kind of half-decent moderation system that the only usable comment sites have adopted.
The only people I've ever met who liked table tennis were terrible people. I'm not sure if terrible people are drawn to table tennis, or if table tennis is a black scourge that seeps into men's souls and consumes the heart of them while it still beats, but there is an absolute correlation.
I'm not just looking for an advantage (and not talking about competitive games, importantly. I know how important FOV equality is at that level), I'm just looking for immersion. Skyrim with an ultra-wide FOV let's me see approaching enemies a little sooner, but it looks absolutely atrocious. Beyond that, human vision can cover a 270-degree field if you allow eye movement (but not head movement). That's 90 more degrees than any shooter will give you.
And that's why they'll also never port their first-party library to Linux. Except that they are doing that, and there are probably more multi-monitor (or potential multi-monitor) gamers than there are Linux gamers.
The biggest problem with multi-monitor gaming is that it's just plain garbage in any kind of "surround" configuration. Apart from Fisheye-Quake and some fancy pants flight sims and racing games, arcing three or more monitors does nothing but waste power and processing capability to render a smeared-out mess on every monitor but the one in the center. Most games aren't even mathematically capable of producing a 180-degree FOV. I've never been quite sure who should get the ball rolling in that department, but I've just decided it should be Valve. I don't have a good reason. Get on it, guys! Ubiquitous support for rendering games to multiple-viewports.
They did. It's the 4s. You can still buy a new one. They announced a new, more capable device, and they refreshed the current model. Do you really need them to design a brand-new worse iPhone with the sole goal of making it less capable that the 5?
Why write this article abut the 5C? It's literally last year's model.
When the 4s came out, it would have been stupid to complain that the 4 didn't break presale records. The 5C isn't meant to rock you like a hurricane. It's meant to make your consolation prize more palatable.
/. Obligatory Disclaimer: I won't be buying either of them.
So, it's just like America, where you can say whatever you want about politics, but if three people are holding protest signs on the side of the road, the FBI will try to wiretap and infiltrate them.
As noted in the comments the first time this was posted, this story doesn't mention the number of complaints received BEFORE the change, making the number 500,000, and the entire article, almost completely meaningless. Apple has millions of customers and, as with every company, a shocking percentage of them are either imbeciles or spend their days and nights pining for minor slights to write angry emails about. This could be perfectly average. The entirety of the information provided for the story comes from a party to the dispute.
Slashdot Mirror
I wasn't trying to sell it to you, just answering the question in the headline. I have seen a streamer fast enough that I often use it to play unsupported video on an iPad (I'd rather do things like that locally than use one of the many "cloud browsers" that used to get articles here when iOS's lack of Flash was still worth talking about) , and have played a little Fallout 3 on it when the TV was in use. It's also worth noting that the streamer does run on Linux: http://www.splashtop.com/linux
Benefits aside, I've come to hate a Splashtop as a company, and they manage to make the software progressively worse with each update. If there were a FOSS alternative, I'd switch in a heartbeat.
It's only one of the many things iOS 7 has done to make me hate it.
They do have an Ubuntu package for the streamer, at least, or they used to. But not a client? I don't know. I've only ever needed to connect to Lonux, never from.
http://www.splashtop.com/linux
As for trust, yeah, no. My understanding is that the first version did, in fact, stream your screen completely unencrypted over the internet for remote sessions. And they charge a subscription for remote connections. Ridiculous. Which is why I use a VPN when I stream, and never log into their awful account system.
Yes. Splashtop Remote. I haven't used VNC in years, literally. Splashtop streams audio and video we'll enough to play games over, locally. Their account-based system nonsense is horrific, buy you can avoid it if you connect over a VPN.
I don't know.... iSomething? Something Air? Something Touch? None of those are quite Apply enough...
It's not a lens problem. The lenses are trying to correct for the fact that current games display 3D images meant for display on flat surfaces. The lense is there to distort to image and make it wrap around your eyes, but the portion of the image you're wrapping is distorted and lacking detail, even before the lens smears it across your peripheral vision. This is a method for making the initial image much better and full of data so that less aggressive smearing is necessary, and the per-smear image has more data in it to begin with.
Oculus Rift is one of the greatest products ever, and Ima let you finish, but this is even better for multi-monitor gaming.
At least Oculus Rift had identified and addressed the problem of distortion, even though their solution loses image quality. Multi-monitor gaming has been garbage for a decade because everyone seems content with horrific distortion at large FOVs.
I know, it's all a matter of screen placement and eye positioning. That's dumb. I want a wrap-around image. I want to aim a projector at each of three walls and have the result make sense.
If you've tried Fisheye Quake, you know it's hell on your system, and still doesn't look great. If this technique is at all performance, everyone needs to start shipping with support, and they need to start yesterday.
I agree with the general thrust of the article, but comparing Kodak to Instagram is straight-up retarded. Instagram is not replacing Kodak. It does not do what Kodak used to do with only 13 people. It does almost nothing, and does nothing worthwhile.
That's a thing, right? Am I making that up?
I think he's building a railroad...?
Maybe instead of shutting down commentary, they should have implemented the kind of half-decent moderation system that the only usable comment sites have adopted.
The only people I've ever met who liked table tennis were terrible people. I'm not sure if terrible people are drawn to table tennis, or if table tennis is a black scourge that seeps into men's souls and consumes the heart of them while it still beats, but there is an absolute correlation.
So, flip the switch when you cross into enemy territory. Don't switch it over North Carolina.
The cobalt thorium g doomsday device from Dr. Strangelove?
Should I be calling it "Butterface"? Because I am calling it "Butterface."
I'm not just looking for an advantage (and not talking about competitive games, importantly. I know how important FOV equality is at that level), I'm just looking for immersion. Skyrim with an ultra-wide FOV let's me see approaching enemies a little sooner, but it looks absolutely atrocious. Beyond that, human vision can cover a 270-degree field if you allow eye movement (but not head movement). That's 90 more degrees than any shooter will give you.
Exactly! But it's easily (haha) solved by rendering a separate view for each monitor.
And that's why they'll also never port their first-party library to Linux. Except that they are doing that, and there are probably more multi-monitor (or potential multi-monitor) gamers than there are Linux gamers.
The biggest problem with multi-monitor gaming is that it's just plain garbage in any kind of "surround" configuration. Apart from Fisheye-Quake and some fancy pants flight sims and racing games, arcing three or more monitors does nothing but waste power and processing capability to render a smeared-out mess on every monitor but the one in the center. Most games aren't even mathematically capable of producing a 180-degree FOV. I've never been quite sure who should get the ball rolling in that department, but I've just decided it should be Valve. I don't have a good reason. Get on it, guys! Ubiquitous support for rendering games to multiple-viewports.
They did. It's the 4s. You can still buy a new one. They announced a new, more capable device, and they refreshed the current model. Do you really need them to design a brand-new worse iPhone with the sole goal of making it less capable that the 5?
Why write this article abut the 5C? It's literally last year's model.
/. Obligatory Disclaimer: I won't be buying either of them.
When the 4s came out, it would have been stupid to complain that the 4 didn't break presale records. The 5C isn't meant to rock you like a hurricane. It's meant to make your consolation prize more palatable.
So, it's just like America, where you can say whatever you want about politics, but if three people are holding protest signs on the side of the road, the FBI will try to wiretap and infiltrate them.
You're right. I've only managed to strip off three levels, and it's left your comment completely unreadable!
Nagob has the true scroll. He knows where to find it.
As noted in the comments the first time this was posted, this story doesn't mention the number of complaints received BEFORE the change, making the number 500,000, and the entire article, almost completely meaningless. Apple has millions of customers and, as with every company, a shocking percentage of them are either imbeciles or spend their days and nights pining for minor slights to write angry emails about. This could be perfectly average. The entirety of the information provided for the story comes from a party to the dispute.