I was going to moan at you that it was obvious from the context that he meant 'brakes', but then someone goes and replies to you and thought he really did mean 'break'. Sigh... I was really going to enjoy the moan too;)
Yes, time is already factored into the watt as we know, but one of the most common errors is for people to say "x watts per hour". So if we instead say to people, "don't mention time ('per hour') if we mention watts", I personally think that's a lot clearer.
If one wanted to give him a fuller explanation involving joules, then yes, it makes sense to mention time then, but he can go to Wikipedia for that.
It's a shame you totally forget you can't mention Watt without time.
Er, hello?
You not only can, you SHOULD mention watts without speaking of time. Power does need a time unit to qualify it. If something's rated at 40 watts, you shouldn't go saying "40 watts per hour" etc. (unless you're speaking of the rate of change of power per hour, which is in practice very rare).
For a given weight, certain battery technologies can only provide so much power output. So it does make sense to say "power per kilogram" as well as the obvious "energy per kilogram". Try Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Supercapacitors_chart.svg
A shame you probably won't read this and be able to learn though as you posted anon.
According to this page they state "SCiBTM is a well-balanced battery that combines high power output and large capacity with power density almost equal to that of capacitors": http://www.scib.jp/en/product/detail.htm
According to Wikipedia, the disadvantage compared to Lithium Ion batteries is that they store less energy in a given space/weight, which is why this tech may not extend to small devices such as laptops.
Can we make electric motors with zero friction if we had RTSCs? It would seem that even the best of electric motors need bearings support the main rotating mechanism.
It would amazing to have giant 5 metre size motors that were completely silent.
Yeah, I hate that where the game lets you cheat. Such a lazy cop-out for the programmers it's unbelievable, but they never seem to care. Even Mario World has as infinite lives thing going for it.
Er, I played F7 on the PS years ago, and there was never any strategy because you never died (being impossibly easy). You just kept going on and on through the storyline. Compare that to say, Mystaria (Riglord Saga) on the Saturn where you at least had to try a bit.
Our Flying Spaghetti Monster, who art in gravy, Hallowed be thy Noodly Appendage. Thy serving come. Thy will be yum, On Earth as it is in on the dinner plate. Give us this day our daily pasta. And forgive us our pizza tendencies, As we forgive those who eat tofu. And lead us not into McDonalds, But deliver us from starvation. For thine is the noodle, and the meatballs, and the sauce, for ever and ever. Ramen.
I'm with you on the whole instant switch off/on thing. Heck, I even detest the 2 seconds I have to wait on my current Roland FP4:) I also dislike fan noise (my own PC is silent even with a quadcore, after careful choice of components). One can always decrease the GHz if heat is a problem. SSD is perfect for VST storage, and again silent and durable.
But having said all that, I can't see why it isn't possible to interpret a VST even without a full blown OS. Software and hardware can do virtually anything, and the amount of versatility it would give to a keyboard would be amazing (it's a pain to cart around a laptop when playing at gigs etc.).
You mention about 'installing' the VST, but I know of many VSTs which are just single files and work off the bat (they're not even zipped up). The custom hardware inside the keyboard can surely see what parameters the VST has, and assign them to a knob, so you wouldn't need a screen to do this necessarily. I use a tracker program called 'Renoise', and behind the graphical frippery of the VST's GUI is basically just number parameters, and Renoise will allocate each of these a simple slider. You can see how that would translate to a knob or slider on a real keyboard.
Granted, it might take more specialized hardware than what keyboards currently have, but a full OS..... really?
If what you say is true and VSTs really need a full OS to run, then all I can say is that the VST format is more than a bit broken.
Maybe you can tell me though why keyboard manufacturers haven't already done this. Whatever the OS it runs on (or maybe they can create their own mini OS inside the keyboard?), the whole idea is that you have an almost infinite collection of instruments at your disposal. Each of the parameters of the VST could be assigned to a knob or button on the keyboard. It could be extremely easy to use, and the user doesn't have to know an underpinning OS is at work behind it all.
The whole idea of VST is universality, where it can be used anywhere. Why not take that a step further and put it inside a keyboard? If I want to 'upgrade' my keyboard to use a better piano sound, I can keep with the same keyboard, but buy a brilliant piano VST to use with it.
Just to reply to my own comment, if keyboards could use VSTs as input instruments, the quadraSID VST would be perfect for attempting something like he's done:
You see, this guy's a genius, but it shouldn't have to be this hard.
Not so long ago, I enquired to see if there was a keyboard (preferably weighted) which can take VSTs as input to allow for an infinitude of possible instruments.
Guess what? No such keyboard exists.
It would be incredible to use and play a keyboard, but with the infinite range of VST instruments and effects out there. Unfortunately though, manufacturers like to 'lock in' their keyboards with the own limited range. It's pretty sad.
They were already there, hence it's automatically on topic. It's almost like saying "Sigh, here comes another Slashdot story..." which will inevitably relate to the much more important topic surrounding shark mounted lasers.
Hence, I'm happier with this Slashdot story because it's actually *more* on topic than usual.
Speaking as an ignoramus about phones and monthly plans (my mobile is years old), can you tell me in a nutshell why Skype-like programs aren't widespread by now? You'd think the public would want to dash towards free calls.
In other news, there appears to be a curious increase in the density of sharks near US Navy based locations. It is unknown whether the sharks are being coerced to these hot spots, or whether they are gathering from their own free will, but some of the sharks appear to exhibit some kind of a 'metal saddle' (for want of a better description) over their backs, almost like as if something were meant to, y'know, be attached to it. A spokesman was not available for further comment.
I've sometimes heard how matte screens 'spread' the reflectivity over the surface, so instead of a few really potentially bright areas, you get an averaged opaqeness to the screen.
I wonder if it's possible in theory to remove the reflections altogether. Perhaps there's a material that can divert the light out of visual range. Or maybe one where light can travel through one way (towards you), but not the other way (and so disperses as heat).
Don't worry. Microsoft, along with multiple abstraction layers (through the browser etc.), and slower interpreted programming languages to the rescue!!
Slashdot Mirror
I was going to moan at you that it was obvious from the context that he meant 'brakes', but then someone goes and replies to you and thought he really did mean 'break'. Sigh... I was really going to enjoy the moan too ;)
Yes, time is already factored into the watt as we know, but one of the most common errors is for people to say "x watts per hour". So if we instead say to people, "don't mention time ('per hour') if we mention watts", I personally think that's a lot clearer.
If one wanted to give him a fuller explanation involving joules, then yes, it makes sense to mention time then, but he can go to Wikipedia for that.
Ooops typo, that's meant to be: "Power does*N'T* need a time unit to qualify it" - I don't want to confuse you further...
It's a shame you totally forget you can't mention Watt without time.
Er, hello?
You not only can, you SHOULD mention watts without speaking of time. Power does need a time unit to qualify it. If something's rated at 40 watts, you shouldn't go saying "40 watts per hour" etc. (unless you're speaking of the rate of change of power per hour, which is in practice very rare).
For a given weight, certain battery technologies can only provide so much power output. So it does make sense to say "power per kilogram" as well as the obvious "energy per kilogram". Try Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Supercapacitors_chart.svg
A shame you probably won't read this and be able to learn though as you posted anon.
No the 1000-10000 w/kg is power density. Energy density would be W-h / kg. Power density is W/kg. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Supercapacitors_chart.svg
According to this page they state "SCiBTM is a well-balanced battery that combines high power output and large capacity with power density almost equal to that of capacitors":
http://www.scib.jp/en/product/detail.htm
Also on this page, they state 96 watts per kilogram (12 volt x 8 amp):
http://www.scib.jp/en/product/spec.htm
Only 96 watts per kg? That's not close to a capacitor which is about 1000-10000 watts per kg. Maybe I'm missing something but what gives?
According to Wikipedia, the disadvantage compared to Lithium Ion batteries is that they store less energy in a given space/weight, which is why this tech may not extend to small devices such as laptops.
Can we make electric motors with zero friction if we had RTSCs? It would seem that even the best of electric motors need bearings support the main rotating mechanism.
It would amazing to have giant 5 metre size motors that were completely silent.
Jesus sometimes talks about hell, even in a threatening manner.
That's good (bad) enough for me.
Yeah, I hate that where the game lets you cheat. Such a lazy cop-out for the programmers it's unbelievable, but they never seem to care. Even Mario World has as infinite lives thing going for it.
I'm in the UK btw...
Er, I played F7 on the PS years ago, and there was never any strategy because you never died (being impossibly easy). You just kept going on and on through the storyline. Compare that to say, Mystaria (Riglord Saga) on the Saturn where you at least had to try a bit.
Glad to see another FSM follower. Let's pray:
Our Flying Spaghetti Monster, who art in gravy,
Hallowed be thy Noodly Appendage.
Thy serving come.
Thy will be yum,
On Earth as it is in on the dinner plate.
Give us this day our daily pasta.
And forgive us our pizza tendencies,
As we forgive those who eat tofu.
And lead us not into McDonalds,
But deliver us from starvation.
For thine is the noodle,
and the meatballs, and the sauce,
for ever and ever.
Ramen.
I'm with you on the whole instant switch off/on thing. Heck, I even detest the 2 seconds I have to wait on my current Roland FP4 :) I also dislike fan noise (my own PC is silent even with a quadcore, after careful choice of components). One can always decrease the GHz if heat is a problem. SSD is perfect for VST storage, and again silent and durable.
But having said all that, I can't see why it isn't possible to interpret a VST even without a full blown OS. Software and hardware can do virtually anything, and the amount of versatility it would give to a keyboard would be amazing (it's a pain to cart around a laptop when playing at gigs etc.).
You mention about 'installing' the VST, but I know of many VSTs which are just single files and work off the bat (they're not even zipped up). The custom hardware inside the keyboard can surely see what parameters the VST has, and assign them to a knob, so you wouldn't need a screen to do this necessarily. I use a tracker program called 'Renoise', and behind the graphical frippery of the VST's GUI is basically just number parameters, and Renoise will allocate each of these a simple slider. You can see how that would translate to a knob or slider on a real keyboard.
Granted, it might take more specialized hardware than what keyboards currently have, but a full OS..... really?
If what you say is true and VSTs really need a full OS to run, then all I can say is that the VST format is more than a bit broken.
Maybe you can tell me though why keyboard manufacturers haven't already done this. Whatever the OS it runs on (or maybe they can create their own mini OS inside the keyboard?), the whole idea is that you have an almost infinite collection of instruments at your disposal. Each of the parameters of the VST could be assigned to a knob or button on the keyboard. It could be extremely easy to use, and the user doesn't have to know an underpinning OS is at work behind it all.
The whole idea of VST is universality, where it can be used anywhere. Why not take that a step further and put it inside a keyboard? If I want to 'upgrade' my keyboard to use a better piano sound, I can keep with the same keyboard, but buy a brilliant piano VST to use with it.
Just to reply to my own comment, if keyboards could use VSTs as input instruments, the quadraSID VST would be perfect for attempting something like he's done:
http://refx.com/?page=products/quadrasid/summary
You see, this guy's a genius, but it shouldn't have to be this hard.
Not so long ago, I enquired to see if there was a keyboard (preferably weighted) which can take VSTs as input to allow for an infinitude of possible instruments.
Guess what? No such keyboard exists.
It would be incredible to use and play a keyboard, but with the infinite range of VST instruments and effects out there. Unfortunately though, manufacturers like to 'lock in' their keyboards with the own limited range. It's pretty sad.
They were already there, hence it's automatically on topic. It's almost like saying "Sigh, here comes another Slashdot story..." which will inevitably relate to the much more important topic surrounding shark mounted lasers.
Hence, I'm happier with this Slashdot story because it's actually *more* on topic than usual.
Speaking as an ignoramus about phones and monthly plans (my mobile is years old), can you tell me in a nutshell why Skype-like programs aren't widespread by now? You'd think the public would want to dash towards free calls.
In other news, there appears to be a curious increase in the density of sharks near US Navy based locations. It is unknown whether the sharks are being coerced to these hot spots, or whether they are gathering from their own free will, but some of the sharks appear to exhibit some kind of a 'metal saddle' (for want of a better description) over their backs, almost like as if something were meant to, y'know, be attached to it. A spokesman was not available for further comment.
I've sometimes heard how matte screens 'spread' the reflectivity over the surface, so instead of a few really potentially bright areas, you get an averaged opaqeness to the screen.
I wonder if it's possible in theory to remove the reflections altogether. Perhaps there's a material that can divert the light out of visual range. Or maybe one where light can travel through one way (towards you), but not the other way (and so disperses as heat).
Don't worry. Microsoft, along with multiple abstraction layers (through the browser etc.), and slower interpreted programming languages to the rescue!!
Are If branches only slow because of what someone said below:
"If you run into a branch in the code, then you lose your parallelism, as the divergent threads are frozen until they come back together."
Because if that's the case, that's fine by me. The worst case length that a thread can run can be defined and even low in some cases I know of.
When you provide facts to someone, but also look as though you're arguing against their position, it hurts their ego to switch to your side.
The trick is to show you don't care who's right, give the facts, and then not argue afterwards. Then it's not a battle of egos anymore.
Indeed, I want the UI to be able to receive analogue-ish input, as well as the traditional clicky input.