Why do these reviews never include an "interoperability" or a "plays nicely with others" score?
they always seem to test with all win98 clients or all NT clients. Ok, I don't know maybe most places are all Microsoft nowadays but in my environment we have mac, unix and NT clients and that's not going to change anytime soon. We have applications that we need access to on all platform's.
Then all these issues like microsoft's "enhancement" of DNS in Windows 2000, their deliberate breaking of samba authentication in NT SP3 and all sorts of other cases where MS toys "do not play nicely with others" would get mentioned.
And MS would get dead last in this category every time.
These are factors real sys and network admins need to know about.
Sorry, I beg to differ and I bet a lot of other people do to.
I don't require that everypiece of software is GPL'ed, or even that every piece of software is freely available in any form.
Binary only software distribution has it's place and so does (gasp horror) binary only software that you have to pay money for.
What is important about linux gaining mainstream driver support (even in binary only form) is that people now have a real choice in the future on intel rather than being forced to use Microsoft operating systems by default.
With the mostly collapse of non-intel architecture unix platforms in the workstation market (Sun, SGI, HP etc) we needed a robust unix based low cost alternative.
Linux is it, and I don't care if some software is binary only or I have to pay money for it.
I originally posted this in a previous crusoe article but no one commented on whether it's actually feasible or not. Any big brain VLIW gurus want to tell me if what I suspect might actually be true?
The quake3 performance we saw on the ZDTV webcast was pretty damn impressive. Everyone seems to be assuming that they had 3d accelerators in those TM5400 laptops.
You can run quake 3 in software mode under mesa at about 3 frames per second.
But this is transmeta we're talking about and that was Dave Taylor, the SAME dave taylor that once leaked a document onto usenet ranting about the inferiority of hardware graphics accelerators and that what he really wanted was a generic parallel processing chip that could do arbitary transforms.
GEE, a lot like the crusoe chip can do?
(anyone got the link to that usenet posting on deja that dave taylor tried to cancel?)
Isn't it feasible that they have put hooks into their code morphing software that optimises specially for 3d transforms and mesa/opengl?
Especially in the linux version? Where they have all the source code to linux and mesa?
Hmm, what fancy optimisations could those clever brains come up with?
Maybe those transmeta laptops WON'T need 3d accelerator ships?
And it would completely defeat the purpose of a low power laptop to put a big,hot,power sucking 3d chip in it. So I'm assuming that demo of quake3 they showed WAS running in software mode with some pretty fancy dynamic optimisations going on.
Maybe the reason they didn't make a big deal about this is that it's still a "work in progress" as Linus said about mobile linux so they don't want to hype it yet.
You can run quake 3 in software mode under mesa as you say at about 3 frames per second.
But you're missing something here. This is transmeta we're talking about and that was Dave Taylor, the SAME dave taylor that once leaked a document onto usenet ranting about the inferiority of hardware graphics accelerators and that what he really wanted was a generic parallel processing chip that could do arbitary transforms.
(anyone got the link to that usenet posting on deja that dave taylor tried to cancel?)
GEE, a lot like the crusoe chip can do?
Isn't it feasible that they have put hooks into their code morphing software that optimises specially for 3d transforms and mesa/opengl?
Especially in the linux version? Where they have all the source code to linux and mesa?
Hmm, what fancy optimisations could those clever brains come up with.
Maybe those transmeta laptops WON'T need 3d accelerator ships?
And it would completely defeat the purpose of a low power laptop to put a big,hot,power sucking 3d chip in it. So I'm assuming that demo of quake3 they showed WAS running in software mode.
I had to do exactly this when I flew on AEROFLOT from Delhi/India to Moscow. They confiscated all my batteries from my electrical devices in a little plastic baggy, then returned them at my destination.
Apparently the reason they do this (the staff told me) is that indian passengers refuse to obey instructions about not using electrical devices at take off and landing so they confiscate all the batteries.
HUH? You don't consider a palmtop with a colour screen, that runs x86 linux, netscape, plays mp3's with xmms and has a 24 hour battery life or longer a killer app?
Why do they need to emulate the dragonball? How long do you think it will take for someone to write some nice date/calender/todo apps and a hotsync function for their linux webpad?
I'd much rather have a crusoe linux webpad than a beefed up pilot.
-Linus got his ass kicked by Dave Taylor (co author of doom and quake) not the CEO. But the quake3 performance was great if they didn't have a 3d graphics card in there. (i.e. is was running in software mode).
- The code morphing software WILL NOT be open sourced. It doesn't have to be it's not part of the linux kernel. The code morphing software sits below the kernel translating the x86 instructions into vliw.
-They will release the "Mobile linux" source code but it looks like all that is is a low memory optimised version of linux with power management and an onscreen keyboard application. Nothing earth shaking there.
they said that they may not release the native vliw instruction set because they want to keep the freedom to change it in the future and don't want to worry about breaking compatilibility.
While this is a good thing in one sense it means we're limited to only the code morphing software they want to release (since that's native).
So if they don't release code morphing software for PPC, or MIPS or SPARC or ALPHA then you're SOL, you can't write it. And may also be difficult or impossible to write a native version of linux.
But Cassius and Chaos 2 are flippers, just highly refined flippers who themselves have a defense against flipping. The trend in battle Robot evolution appears to be towards very low slung robots that can't be rammed, flip to attack and have a self righting mechanism - like biohazard.
Their winning strategy is just to be better at flipping than anyone else and hope they can flip their opponent onto a wall or barricade or into another position where the self righting doesn't work.
Hopefully, Razer shows another direction and one which will prevail.
(Razer is SO much cooler looking than most of the boring flipper robots, kind of a evil metallic armadillo with a scorpions sting).
linux != binary compatibility or ease of porting
on
Linux on DaVincis
·
· Score: 1
uh, running Linux does not equal binary compatibility. Most probably they will have their own device drivers, gui library and I highly doubt it can support the full standard glibc libary.
So while it will help a bit in the porting, basically any linux software you want to run will have to be ported to a very specific platform. You won't be running KDE or GTK apps on it anytime soon!
I had a look at the battlebots and robotwars websites. I haven't seen any actual competitions yet but it seems that the winners are always robots that try to immobilize the opponents by a "flipping or tossing" strategy - like the battlebots reigning champion - Biohazard.
(check out the description of battles and see pictures here: http://www.robotbooks.com/biohazard.htm )
It seems even robots that have some protection against this, i.e. an arm to right themselves or a wheels on both sides, end up getting flipped into some position they can't recover from.
Do the robots that go for outright blunt destruction ever win? Kind of boring if flipping is the only viable strategy.
if we're talking about the biggest improvement in the last year and one which will have the biggest impact on the future of Linux, it has to be the combined Mesa / Utah-Glx 3d hardware support.
This is what is going to take Linux out of just the server market in universities and companys and into the workstation desktop market (NOT consumer desktop market, that's another thing).
Thanks to Mesa and Utah-Glx, all kinds of scientific visualisation, cad design, 3d animaton and games can now be done in a robust unix environment without paying out big bucks for an SGI or Sun workstation.
In the future, Precision Insights DRI will be an important part of this but we really haven't seen it yet so that's one for next years award.
I vote for a combined award to Mesa / Utah-Glx (split the money and the glory 50/50.
Doesn't seem to be a lot of thirdparty software for the current davincis. I took a look at www.royal.com/davinci and www.davinciworld.com.
Seems the SDK is "not available" at the moment, also seems they've already changed once from Motorola processors to Sharp processors and are now to change to another incompatible OS (linux).
Doesn't seem like a good way to build a base of 3rd party developers....
Anyone got detailed tech specs and info on any 3rd party software for them?
Personally I'd rather pay the extra for a Palm so I can have a bunch of software for the thing.
You're probably right that any improvement in latency would have a negative effect on bandwidth.
But that doesn't mean it would automatically be rejected. Suppose it was option that could be compiled into the kernel but was disabled as a default. i.e. "Optimise TCP/IP stack for games?" as a question in the "make config".
A games focused distro could have this kernel provided with it as well as a pre-configured XFree 86 Utah-glx-Mesa setup for out of the box 3d support.
And I'm sure JC's quake code is ugly as all hell, but he's been contributing to the utah-glx project for a while now so I'm sure he is capable of writing "open-source" style well documentated code.
The article you linked to at "The African" is very interesting and the author is spot on about the biblical parrallels, he made one glaring mistake. He thinks Morpheus name is a coruption of Orpheus (the greek bard who goes to hell to rescue his dead wife) and a combination of "Moor+Europe". I.e. the moor in europe and then makes him into a symbol of white oppression of blacks.
But Morpheus is the greek god of dreams, and the symbolism there is very obvious you don't need to stretch his name into one that makes him a figurehead for all black oppresion.
I like this definition I found here http://templar.bess.net/Comp_names/bookofgods/gr kgdshm.html
Morpheus The god of dreams and the son of Somnus (god of sleep). Morpheus formed the dreams that came to those asleep.
Check out this little tidbit from the MacOS rumors coverage of SF2000 http://macosrumors.com/?powerexpress=mwsf2K
At the bottom they claim John Carmack said that the next id software game will be exclusively for MacOS X!!!
I can't believe that would mean no Windows or Linux version??
Or does he mean that it will be developed on MacOS X as the primary dev platform? Quite likely as JohnC is a big fan of NeXTStep and there's still a lot of nextishness underneath MacOS X Doom was developed first under NeXTStep for example.
Must admit the user interface looks damn nice, lets hope they leave an accessable CLI in the consumer version.
Some people have raised the concern that there will be an additional latency in first person shooters that some gamers would notice, since it's rendering the next frame ahead before it displays when you haven't hit the key to decide your actions in that frame yet. Maybe not noticable to some people but for the hard core gamer....
The Voodoo2 SLI and multichip Voodoo4/5 cards don't have this problem because they render portions of the same frame.
It's also very inefficient to have 32 MB per chip rather than a shared 64MB pool.
You're better off going for a Voodoo5 if you want the absolute highest fill rate or a GeForce DDR if you want maximum geometry throughput.
The pixels are "anamorphically sampled". What this means is that even though the mirrors that project the pixels are square they use a lens that distorts the rectangular picture to a square one when they digitise the movie. Then they do the opposite when projecting. So on screen your pixels end up being wider than they are tall.
Note, because they used anamorphic sampling when they digitised the movie you do not end up with the people being stretched out.
But the image fills the cinema screen with no black bars (thankfully).
Yes it only has a resolution of 1280 by 1024. HD systems at home do have more resolution than this, but the home HD systems are cathode rays not projection. It's much harder to make a projection system very high resolution than a tube system.
But the resolution will get even higher. Hughes has a system already the ILA-12K (http://www.hjt.com/products/ila12k.html) that does 2000 by 1280. It will keep increasing.
The effective resolution of film (ie. the analog messy strip of celluoid) is around 4000 by 3000 pixels. Digital special effects that are mixed with live film footage are rendered at aywhere from 2048x1550 to the above 4K rsolution.
But the advantage of digital is that the colour reproduction is much more accurate and when you project film, the film is moving at high speed and jitters from side to side so you get blurring.
I imagine only films that have a large proportion of their content created digitally will go with digital projection in the near future. Then there is a real advantage for the director that he knows the colours he sees on the computer screens when they are creating the effects are exactly what will be projected. When you shoot to film there are a huge array of isssues with film stock, look up tables, gamma curves and the only way to know what your colours will actually look like is do go out to film and do a test screening (expensive).
Digital projection is the future but the current systems will improve a lot before it becomes the only system used.
Um excuse me, I used to sysadmin a mail domain and got hit my a spammer. This was before antispam and relaying denied filters were common on sendmail servers.
The performance problem was Real, the spammer was attempting to send 10's of thousands of emails an hour though my server. Then there were the thousands of messages bouncing back due to bogus addresses in the spammers mailing list.
This was clogging up out internet link (which was only 128KB at the time). Sendmail was queueing messages and verifying each address as it sent it, resulting in a mail queue that completely filled the disk space on my server which effectively took the whole thing down. It also prevented all our genuine mail from being delivered because it as backlogged behind the spam, including important emails from our clients. Also people were getting slow access to our web server because of the spam flowing back and forth clogging our link.
In total it wasted probably 20 hours of my time cleaning up the mess and implementing anti-spam filters... plus potentially lost messages, damage to our reputation etc etc
As anyother sendmail admin would tell you spammers can cause very real performance problems.
Make up your mind CmdrTaco, you hate SPAM but you don't want to see lawsuits to stop it? What?
There is a law against unsoliticted email in the US I believe and read the article, what these apricot sellers did is close to fraud. They ignored cease and desists, tried to fake their from address etc etc. We need more lawsuits like this, only the realisation that the money they may be fined is more than the amount they can make will stop these companies.
Free speech is one thing, anyone should be able to put up a web site expressing any view BUT your right to free speech does NOT equal a right to send strangers unsolicited email using someone else's network.
Slashdot Mirror
Why do these reviews never include an "interoperability" or a "plays nicely with others" score?
they always seem to test with all win98 clients or
all NT clients. Ok, I don't know maybe most places are all Microsoft nowadays but in my environment we have mac, unix and NT clients and that's not going to change anytime soon. We have applications that we need access to on all platform's.
Then all these issues like microsoft's "enhancement" of DNS in Windows 2000, their deliberate breaking of samba authentication in NT SP3 and all sorts of other cases where MS toys "do not play nicely with others" would get mentioned.
And MS would get dead last in this category every time.
These are factors real sys and network admins need to know about.
Sorry, I beg to differ and I bet a lot of other people do to.
I don't require that everypiece of software is GPL'ed, or even that every piece of software is freely available in any form.
Binary only software distribution has it's place and so does (gasp horror) binary only software that you have to pay money for.
What is important about linux gaining mainstream driver support (even in binary only form) is that people now have a real choice in the future on intel rather than being forced to use Microsoft operating systems by default.
With the mostly collapse of non-intel architecture unix platforms in the workstation market (Sun, SGI, HP etc) we needed a robust unix based low cost alternative.
Linux is it, and I don't care if some software is binary only or I have to pay money for it.
I originally posted this in a previous crusoe article but no one commented on whether it's actually feasible or not. Any big brain VLIW gurus want to tell me if what I suspect might actually be true?
The quake3 performance we saw on the ZDTV webcast was pretty damn impressive. Everyone seems to be assuming that they had 3d accelerators in those TM5400 laptops.
You can run quake 3 in software mode under mesa at about 3 frames per second.
But this is transmeta we're talking about and that was Dave Taylor, the SAME dave taylor that once leaked a document onto usenet ranting about
the inferiority of hardware graphics accelerators and that what he really wanted was a generic parallel processing chip that could do arbitary transforms.
GEE, a lot like the crusoe chip can do?
(anyone got the link to that usenet posting on deja that dave taylor tried to cancel?)
Isn't it feasible that they have put hooks into their code morphing software that optimises specially for 3d transforms and mesa/opengl?
Especially in the linux version? Where they have all the source code to linux and mesa?
Hmm, what fancy optimisations could those clever brains come up with?
Maybe those transmeta laptops WON'T need 3d accelerator ships?
And it would completely defeat the purpose of a low power laptop to put a big,hot,power sucking 3d chip in it. So I'm assuming that demo of quake3 they showed WAS running in software mode with some pretty fancy dynamic optimisations going on.
Maybe the reason they didn't make a big deal about this is that it's still a "work in progress" as Linus said about mobile linux so they don't want to hype it yet.
Someone prove me wrong?
You can run quake 3 in software mode under mesa as you say at about 3 frames per second.
But you're missing something here. This is transmeta we're talking about and that was Dave Taylor, the SAME dave taylor that once leaked a document onto usenet ranting about the inferiority of hardware graphics accelerators and that what he really wanted was a generic parallel processing chip that could do arbitary transforms.
(anyone got the link to that usenet posting on deja that dave taylor tried to cancel?)
GEE, a lot like the crusoe chip can do?
Isn't it feasible that they have put hooks into their code morphing software that optimises specially for 3d transforms and mesa/opengl?
Especially in the linux version? Where they have all the source code to linux and mesa?
Hmm, what fancy optimisations could those clever brains come up with.
Maybe those transmeta laptops WON'T need 3d accelerator ships?
And it would completely defeat the purpose of a low power laptop to put a big,hot,power sucking 3d chip in it. So I'm assuming that demo of quake3 they showed WAS running in software mode.
Someone prove me wrong?
I had to do exactly this when I flew on AEROFLOT from Delhi/India to Moscow. They confiscated all my batteries from my electrical devices in a little plastic baggy, then returned them at my destination.
Apparently the reason they do this (the staff told me) is that indian passengers refuse to obey instructions about not using electrical devices at take off and landing so they confiscate all the batteries.
Stange but true.
OK, ok offtopic, slam me if you want....
HUH? You don't consider a palmtop with a colour screen, that runs x86 linux, netscape, plays mp3's with xmms and has a 24 hour battery life or longer a killer app?
Why do they need to emulate the dragonball? How long do you think it will take for someone to write some nice date/calender/todo apps and a hotsync function for their linux webpad?
I'd much rather have a crusoe linux webpad than a beefed up pilot.
-Linus got his ass kicked by Dave Taylor (co author of doom and quake) not the CEO. But the quake3 performance was great if they didn't have a 3d graphics card in there. (i.e. is was running in software mode).
- The code morphing software WILL NOT be open sourced. It doesn't have to be it's not part of the linux kernel. The code morphing software sits below the kernel translating the x86 instructions into vliw.
-They will release the "Mobile linux" source code but it looks like all that is is a low memory optimised version of linux with power management and an onscreen keyboard application.
Nothing earth shaking there.
But hell, I still want a linux webpad.....
another interesting point...
it was mentioned near the end that the vliw instructions AND the code morphing software on the two chips are different and NOT binary compatible.
So possibly no Linux on the 700Mhz version?
(they said it's optimised for 16 bit x86 instructions)
they said that they may not release the native vliw instruction set because they want to keep the freedom to change it in the future and don't want to worry about breaking compatilibility.
While this is a good thing in one sense it means
we're limited to only the code morphing software they want to release (since that's native).
So if they don't release code morphing software for PPC, or MIPS or SPARC or ALPHA then you're SOL, you can't write it. And may also be difficult or impossible to write a native version of linux.
Anyone have any thouhgts on this?
But Cassius and Chaos 2 are flippers, just highly refined flippers who themselves have a defense against flipping. The trend in battle Robot evolution appears to be towards very low slung robots that can't be rammed, flip to attack and have a self righting mechanism - like biohazard.
Their winning strategy is just to be better at flipping than anyone else and hope they can flip their opponent onto a wall or barricade or into another position where the self righting doesn't work.
Hopefully, Razer shows another direction and one which will prevail.
(Razer is SO much cooler looking than most of the boring flipper robots, kind of a evil metallic armadillo with a scorpions sting).
uh, running Linux does not equal binary compatibility. Most probably they will have their own device drivers, gui library and I highly doubt it can support the full standard glibc libary.
So while it will help a bit in the porting, basically any linux software you want to run will have to be ported to a very specific platform. You won't be running KDE or GTK apps on it anytime soon!
I had a look at the battlebots and robotwars websites. I haven't seen any actual competitions yet but it seems that the winners are always robots that try to immobilize the opponents by a "flipping or tossing" strategy - like the battlebots reigning champion - Biohazard.
(check out the description of battles and see pictures here: http://www.robotbooks.com/biohazard.htm )
It seems even robots that have some protection against this, i.e. an arm to right themselves or a wheels on both sides, end up getting flipped into some position they can't recover from.
Do the robots that go for outright blunt destruction ever win? Kind of boring if flipping is the only viable strategy.
if we're talking about the biggest improvement in the last year and one which will have the biggest impact on the future of Linux, it has to be the combined Mesa / Utah-Glx 3d hardware support.
This is what is going to take Linux out of just the server market in universities and companys and into the workstation desktop market (NOT consumer desktop market, that's another thing).
Thanks to Mesa and Utah-Glx, all kinds of scientific visualisation, cad design, 3d animaton and games can now be done in a robust unix environment without paying out big bucks for an SGI or Sun workstation.
In the future, Precision Insights DRI will be an important part of this but we really haven't seen it yet so that's one for next years award.
I vote for a combined award to Mesa / Utah-Glx (split the money and the glory 50/50.
Doesn't seem to be a lot of thirdparty software for the current davincis. I took a look at www.royal.com/davinci and www.davinciworld.com.
Seems the SDK is "not available" at the moment, also seems they've already changed once from Motorola processors to Sharp processors and are now to change to another incompatible OS (linux).
Doesn't seem like a good way to build a base of 3rd party developers....
Anyone got detailed tech specs and info on any 3rd party software for them?
Personally I'd rather pay the extra for a Palm so I can have a bunch of software for the thing.
You're probably right that any improvement in latency would have a negative effect on bandwidth.
But that doesn't mean it would automatically be rejected. Suppose it was option that could be compiled into the kernel but was disabled as a default. i.e. "Optimise TCP/IP stack for games?" as a question in the "make config".
A games focused distro could have this kernel provided with it as well as a pre-configured XFree 86 Utah-glx-Mesa setup for out of the box 3d support.
And I'm sure JC's quake code is ugly as all hell, but he's been contributing to the utah-glx project for a while now so I'm sure he is capable of writing "open-source" style well documentated code.
The article you linked to at "The African" is
r kgdshm.html
very interesting and the author is spot on about the biblical parrallels, he made one glaring
mistake. He thinks Morpheus name is a coruption of Orpheus (the greek bard who goes to hell to rescue his dead wife) and a combination of "Moor+Europe". I.e. the moor in europe and then makes him into a symbol of white oppression of blacks.
But Morpheus is the greek god of dreams, and the symbolism there is very obvious you don't need to stretch his name into one that makes him a figurehead for all black oppresion.
I like this definition I found here
http://templar.bess.net/Comp_names/bookofgods/g
Morpheus
The god of dreams and the son of Somnus (god of sleep). Morpheus formed the dreams that came to those asleep.
Very appropiate for the Matrix.
You're missing a 0.
One lakh is 100,000 Rupees. So 10 Lakh is $23,000 US.
Thats enough to build a fairly impressive Beowulf cluster.
Although still not using the DRI interface it now supports hardware 3d rendering in 32 bit and, wait for it, the GeForce!
Get it here: click me
Score -1: Off topic, Score +1: Informative..
thank you and goodnight
Check out this little tidbit from the MacOS rumors coverage of SF2000
http://macosrumors.com/?powerexpress=mwsf2K
At the bottom they claim John Carmack said that
the next id software game will be exclusively for MacOS X!!!
I can't believe that would mean no Windows or Linux version??
Or does he mean that it will be developed on MacOS X as the primary dev platform? Quite likely as JohnC is a big fan of NeXTStep and there's still a lot of nextishness underneath MacOS X Doom was developed first under NeXTStep for example.
Must admit the user interface looks damn nice, lets hope they leave an accessable CLI in the consumer version.
There's a few problems with this card.
Some people have raised the concern that there will be an additional latency in first person shooters that some gamers would notice, since it's rendering the next frame ahead before it displays when you haven't hit the key to decide your actions in that frame yet. Maybe not noticable to some people but for the hard core gamer....
The Voodoo2 SLI and multichip Voodoo4/5 cards don't have this problem because they render portions of the same frame.
It's also very inefficient to have 32 MB per chip rather than a shared 64MB pool.
You're better off going for a Voodoo5 if you want the absolute highest fill rate or a GeForce DDR if you want maximum geometry throughput.
Have you checked out SGI's patches for
NFSV3 against the 2.2.10 kernel?
Works fine for me as an NFS3 client.
oss.sgi.com/projects
Also included as part of SGI's modified version
of Redhat, sgilinux 1.1.
You can make any resolution fit any aspect ratio depending on the shape of your pixels (ie. non square pixels)
r wars.shtml
Check this page:
http://www.ti.com/dlp/products/cinema/specs_sta
The pixels are "anamorphically sampled". What this means is that even though the mirrors that project the pixels are square they use a lens that distorts the rectangular picture to a square one when they digitise the movie. Then they do the opposite when projecting. So on screen your pixels end up being wider than they are tall.
Note, because they used anamorphic sampling when they digitised the movie you do not end up with the people being stretched out.
But the image fills the cinema screen with no black bars (thankfully).
The system used for the recent Phantom Menace digital projections was the Texas Instruments DLP system. The specs are here:
r wars.shtml
http://www.ti.com/dlp/products/cinema/specs_sta
Or here for more on the system:
http://www.ti.com/dlp/products/cinema/
Yes it only has a resolution of 1280 by 1024. HD systems at home do have more resolution than this, but the home HD systems are cathode rays not projection. It's much harder to make a projection system very high resolution than a tube system.
But the resolution will get even higher. Hughes has a system already the ILA-12K (http://www.hjt.com/products/ila12k.html) that does 2000 by 1280. It will keep increasing.
The effective resolution of film (ie. the analog messy strip of celluoid) is around 4000 by 3000 pixels. Digital special effects that are mixed with live film footage are rendered at aywhere from 2048x1550 to the above 4K rsolution.
But the advantage of digital is that the colour reproduction is much more accurate and when you project film, the film is moving at high speed and jitters from side to side so you get blurring.
I imagine only films that have a large proportion of their content created digitally will go with digital projection in the near future. Then there is a real advantage for the director that he knows the colours he sees on the computer screens when they are creating the effects are exactly what will be projected. When you shoot to film there are a huge array of isssues with film stock, look up tables, gamma curves and the only way to know what your colours will actually look like is do go out to film and do a test screening (expensive).
Digital projection is the future but the current systems will improve a lot before it becomes the only system used.
Um excuse me, I used to sysadmin a mail domain
and got hit my a spammer. This was before antispam and relaying denied filters were common on sendmail servers.
The performance problem was Real, the spammer was attempting to send 10's of thousands of emails an hour though my server. Then there were the thousands of messages bouncing back due to bogus addresses in the spammers mailing list.
This was clogging up out internet link (which was only 128KB at the time). Sendmail was queueing messages and verifying each address as it sent it, resulting in a mail queue that completely filled the disk space on my server which effectively took the whole thing down. It also prevented all our genuine mail from being delivered because it as backlogged behind the spam, including important emails from our clients. Also people were getting slow access to our web server because of the spam flowing back and forth clogging our link.
In total it wasted probably 20 hours of my time cleaning up the mess and implementing anti-spam filters... plus potentially lost messages, damage to our reputation etc etc
As anyother sendmail admin would tell you spammers can cause very real performance problems.
Make up your mind CmdrTaco, you hate SPAM but you don't want to see lawsuits to stop it? What?
There is a law against unsoliticted email in the US I believe and read the article, what these apricot sellers did is close to fraud. They ignored cease and desists, tried to fake their from address etc etc. We need more lawsuits like this, only the realisation that the money they may be fined is more than the amount they can make will stop these companies.
Free speech is one thing, anyone should be able to put up a web site expressing any view BUT your right to free speech does NOT equal a right to send strangers unsolicited email using someone else's network.