Get the Return of the King Extended version, and soon after they will release a complete box set of The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, and Return of the King, that have even more footage than all the previous extended versions combined. Have they even released a complete set yet? It's obviously going to happen.
But, of course, there weren't things like an Interstate road system or a national electrical grid. And just why did those come into existance? They were created for national defense by those horrible capitalist industries.
... don't forget the Internet. You know. This thing you're looking at right now.
Code that doesn't do any UI stuff is portable between them, but user interfaces have to be implemented extra for each of those models.
So Java MIDP doesn't have any standardised UI? The specs(PDF) have the following text...
A mobile User Interface
MIDP features a high level user interface API that shields developers from the complexity of building portable applications. This high level API enables developers to build easy to use, highly graphical and portable applications optimized for mobile information devices, and reduces development effort.
MIDP user interface functionality includes predefined screens for displaying and selecting lists, editing text, popping up alert dialogs, and adding scrolling tickers. Forms are screens that can include any number of predefined items -- images, read-only text fields, editable text fields, editable date and time fields, charts, and choice groups -- as well as any custom items added by developers to provide unique functionality and graphics. All screens and items are device-aware, with built-in support for the native display size, input and navigation capabilities. This enables developers to define a highly portable, flexible user interface that changes its layout and navigation to fully leverage each device.
It sounds like it's supposed to have a standard UI, but then again Java was supposed to be a "write once, run anywhere" programming language for computers. Have they managed to get it right for mobiles, or does the actual implementation differ from the advertised functionality the way it did for computers?
Wouldn't mobile phone network providers lobby against this sort of thing? If a city went wireless, portable WiFi VoIP devices could be used as an alternative to mobile phones, without the call charges. Since mobile phone carriers have deep pockets and people wanting a city to go wireless wouldn't have as much influence, chances are politicians would go in favor of maintaining "soft money" lobbyists protecting their source of revenue.
If you are developing applications for mobile phones, do you have to target a specific range of models using the same OS like Symbian, or can you just make mobile Java apps that run on a broad range of mobile phone models that can have systems other than Symbian?
The mobile phone applications I've looked at online only seem to support a small number of models from specific vendors. I was hoping that there would be a way of writing Java applications for mobile phones that could possibly run on all 3G mobiles.
What the OP was trying to say is, that it's just overpriced. Surely I bet Oakleys look/fit better, are stronger and whatever but if the the research and manufacturing is really $400 a piece then I think it's overdesigned
The comment in the thread I was replying to described Oakleys as "very VERY advanced eyewear". I was just relating my experience to their design. For something to completely draw your attention in a swarm of sunglasses, it must have something distinct in its design, even in comparison to others almost the same price. I know that their products may be overpriced simply because they are the Oakley brand, just as the OP suggested, but I also think that there can be more to their products than just a brand name. BTW, (inability to control spending habits && sweating it out while waiting for credit card bill) != a lot of money.
Check this out for eyewear displays. It's an OEM developer kit, so I'm sure it can be used to make something that looks better, but the way it uses a reflective part of the lens itself for a display is brilliant.
Believe me, I am not one to believe that "money = quality". But I also refuse to accept the counterculture view that "money = luxurious waste".
I bought a pair of $400(AU) Oakleys around two years ago that I still use. I didn't go by brand or price. I just looked at all the shades in a sunglass shop, and picked out the one that appealed to me the most aesthetically, which coincidentally happened to be one of the most expensive ones in the shop. But I don't care if something I want to buy is cheap or expensive, and I don't look at the brand, all that matters to me is if I am drawn to it the most. It could have just as well been the cheapest in the store (as long as it had the proper UV protection). As it so happens, whenever I do that for sunglasses, I always pick something that costs a fortune.
Okay, the high pixel density is neat and all, but can anyone name an application that would need a small screen with such high resolution.
This may sound ridiculous, but I think it would be a fun (albeit useless) novelty item to have a tiny little retro PC with a VGA display, running an operating system that could only be used on desktops back when VGA was the standard.
Here's an idea for head position tracking hardware: put a bunch of bright balls around the outside of a helmet, and have the person surrounded by a handful of cameras.
Better yet would be the use of tiny gyroscopes like this that provide 6DOF, although this one doesn't. No need for worn optical cues and cameras. There is also this product that has 3DOF, which claims to "have metallic interference virtually eliminated". I presume it is some kind of magnetic tracker that isn't as vulnerable to the weaknesses of normal magnetic motion tracking methods, which I think the grandparent poster is referring to.
The method you are mentioning using bright balls and cameras are optical motion trackers. Magnetic ones have advantages over optical ones. Optical ones have other disadvantages, and don't normally work in real-time, so they wouldn't be viable for head position tracking for virtual reality.
Even better would be if the display is partially transparent, you could use it as an overlay, where you can see what's around you
Check out this bifocal display. The image is actually reflected on that tiny little bit on the eyeglass lens itself that looks like a bifocal, that you can hardly see. It's clearer in the PDF specification sheet.
Let's not forget that those are also reflective LCDs, not transmissive. The technology is more or less the same, but it's not identical.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that the LCD projectors have transparent LCDs that the light passes through, and it is the DLP projectors that have a reflective chip. Wouldn't this LCD display count as a transparent one?
I just found this user comment on the CNET review mentioned...
Pros: - 16 Hour play back - 20GB HDD - Bright Colour Screen - Radio and line in recording - USB Host, allow user to transefer pics from digital camera
You're in luck. You don't even need to use the USB CompactFlash reader. Simply link the two devices together with a USB cable and you can transfer images over.
I dont see why we wouldn't do this, it can only help. It is much more reliable and fool-proof and it does nothing but help our economy by having to hire people to count the ballots.
Slashdot Mirror
Get the Return of the King Extended version, and soon after they will release a complete box set of The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, and Return of the King, that have even more footage than all the previous extended versions combined. Have they even released a complete set yet? It's obviously going to happen.
But, of course, there weren't things like an Interstate road system or a national electrical grid. And just why did those come into existance? They were created for national defense by those horrible capitalist industries.
... don't forget the Internet . You know. This thing you're looking at right now.
Code that doesn't do any UI stuff is portable between them, but user interfaces have to be implemented extra for each of those models.
So Java MIDP doesn't have any standardised UI? The specs(PDF) have the following text...
It sounds like it's supposed to have a standard UI, but then again Java was supposed to be a "write once, run anywhere" programming language for computers. Have they managed to get it right for mobiles, or does the actual implementation differ from the advertised functionality the way it did for computers?
Wouldn't mobile phone network providers lobby against this sort of thing? If a city went wireless, portable WiFi VoIP devices could be used as an alternative to mobile phones, without the call charges. Since mobile phone carriers have deep pockets and people wanting a city to go wireless wouldn't have as much influence, chances are politicians would go in favor of maintaining "soft money" lobbyists protecting their source of revenue.
If you are developing applications for mobile phones, do you have to target a specific range of models using the same OS like Symbian, or can you just make mobile Java apps that run on a broad range of mobile phone models that can have systems other than Symbian?
The mobile phone applications I've looked at online only seem to support a small number of models from specific vendors. I was hoping that there would be a way of writing Java applications for mobile phones that could possibly run on all 3G mobiles.
As crazy as it sounds, nobody give these animals any credit.
One rodent gets a lot of credit. Royalties too. M-I-C-K-E-Y-M-O-U-S-E
My thought exactly. The rats aren't looking to rescue survivors. They will be looking for food.
Troll?!? How was this modded a troll? If anybody is trolling it is the moderator that modded this troll!
Plazanet and colleagues prepared a liquid solution containing ?-cyclodextrine (?CD), water and 4-methylpyridine (4MP).
Is it edible?
What the OP was trying to say is, that it's just overpriced. Surely I bet Oakleys look/fit better, are stronger and whatever but if the the research and manufacturing is really $400 a piece then I think it's overdesigned
The comment in the thread I was replying to described Oakleys as "very VERY advanced eyewear". I was just relating my experience to their design. For something to completely draw your attention in a swarm of sunglasses, it must have something distinct in its design, even in comparison to others almost the same price. I know that their products may be overpriced simply because they are the Oakley brand, just as the OP suggested, but I also think that there can be more to their products than just a brand name. BTW, (inability to control spending habits && sweating it out while waiting for credit card bill) != a lot of money.
Check this out for eyewear displays. It's an OEM developer kit, so I'm sure it can be used to make something that looks better, but the way it uses a reflective part of the lens itself for a display is brilliant.
I find it ironic that people on Slashdot are bashing this. Maybe it isn't geeky enough.
It needs to have semi-transparent computer displays integrated into the lenses, or provite night vision. And it needs to run Linux.
Believe me, I am not one to believe that "money = quality". But I also refuse to accept the counterculture view that "money = luxurious waste".
I bought a pair of $400(AU) Oakleys around two years ago that I still use. I didn't go by brand or price. I just looked at all the shades in a sunglass shop, and picked out the one that appealed to me the most aesthetically, which coincidentally happened to be one of the most expensive ones in the shop. But I don't care if something I want to buy is cheap or expensive, and I don't look at the brand, all that matters to me is if I am drawn to it the most. It could have just as well been the cheapest in the store (as long as it had the proper UV protection). As it so happens, whenever I do that for sunglasses, I always pick something that costs a fortune.
See also this comment.
I see that comment was also a reply to another post containing the phrase "Correct me if I'm wrong".
Okay, the high pixel density is neat and all, but can anyone name an application that would need a small screen with such high resolution.
This may sound ridiculous, but I think it would be a fun (albeit useless) novelty item to have a tiny little retro PC with a VGA display, running an operating system that could only be used on desktops back when VGA was the standard.
Here's an idea for head position tracking hardware: put a bunch of bright balls around the outside of a helmet, and have the person surrounded by a handful of cameras.
Better yet would be the use of tiny gyroscopes like this that provide 6DOF, although this one doesn't. No need for worn optical cues and cameras. There is also this product that has 3DOF, which claims to "have metallic interference virtually eliminated". I presume it is some kind of magnetic tracker that isn't as vulnerable to the weaknesses of normal magnetic motion tracking methods, which I think the grandparent poster is referring to.
The method you are mentioning using bright balls and cameras are optical motion trackers. Magnetic ones have advantages over optical ones. Optical ones have other disadvantages, and don't normally work in real-time, so they wouldn't be viable for head position tracking for virtual reality.
Even better would be if the display is partially transparent, you could use it as an overlay, where you can see what's around you
Check out this bifocal display. The image is actually reflected on that tiny little bit on the eyeglass lens itself that looks like a bifocal, that you can hardly see. It's clearer in the PDF specification sheet.
Let's not forget that those are also reflective LCDs, not transmissive. The technology is more or less the same, but it's not identical.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that the LCD projectors have transparent LCDs that the light passes through, and it is the DLP projectors that have a reflective chip. Wouldn't this LCD display count as a transparent one?
... then you too are an internet junkie.
Hiking in the mountains is a good candidate because it is also rewarding : you get to see some magnificent landscape when you reach the top.
I suppose the line-of-sight position you're in would also provide better wireless access to the net.
Look at computer nerds in high school.
Or a mirror.
I just found this user comment on the CNET review mentioned...
You're in luck. You don't even need to use the USB CompactFlash reader. Simply link the two devices together with a USB cable and you can transfer images over.
I dont see why we wouldn't do this, it can only help. It is much more reliable and fool-proof and it does nothing but help our economy by having to hire people to count the ballots.
Like they say... if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Want to buy some tinfoil hats?
Just make sure they're not made by Diebold.