I don't do much video encoding and I certainly have never worked on a codec, but wouldn't it be possible to encode a 16 minute video file on 4 processors by breaking it into 4 minute sections and encoding these separately?
I know that frames often depend on previous frames, but each section could overlap the following one slightly, up to a frame that did not reference previous data. That would make stitching the files back together relatively easy at the cost of encoding a few frames twice.
Of course this doesn't work with encoding a realtime stream.
The "In Theory" part is right. I worked for a large company with a huge Notes installation. We were supposed to be running with all sorts of customizations but I could never tell the difference.
The REAL problem with Notes is not its arcane interface or weird scripting. Notes' fatal flaw is that although it may have seemed cool in 1995, its claim to fame (simple distributed database backed forms) would be better done by web apps. This was true in 2000 and it is certainly true now. Being obsoleted by newer technology is no shame, but Notes isn't even a very good mail client.
I agree, but on the other hand any technology that suppresses Lotus Notes is during meetings (or at any other time) is a boon for mankind, even if it takes out other apps as well.
I predicted the article would be bollocks before I clicked, and I was right! Let me make some other predictions:
3D Gaming - these glasses have been around for years. Maybe they work better now that everyone has bigger screens with higher refresh rates, but they were useless before. Nobody wants to sit in front of a PC wearing glasses. Perhaps if it were released for consoles it may take off, but I don't think the penetration of 120Mhz TVs is large enough to justify it.
Blu-Ray Super Disc - do games really need that much storage? Nope. My prediction for the number of games released in 2009 using super discs? Zero.
Brain Computer Interfaces - I am sure they could sell a few as a gimmick but my understanding is that control is very limited - a few noisy axises at best. I have a hard time imagining a game that could be controlled by brain easier than by fingers. I put it in the Sounds-Good-to-Investors-Neat-Picture-For-Press-Release-Consumers-Don't-Care bucket.
OLED screens - on their way, but immature. It will take years before they are competitive with LCD. In any case, not really gaming related as such.
Wii MotionPlus - well duh, great scoop there, IGN! The MotionPlus opens up some additional options for games, I expect some neat things. But it won't be the game-changer that the Wii originally was. Nintendo have a history of adding stuff to consoles, none of their previous efforts have really set the world alight. A modest success, used by only a few games (but these may be classics).
Windows 7/DirectX11 - better faster, stronger, snore. Nothing revolutionary from the users perspective. Developers might be tempted if Windows7 takes off (which I think it will, if only because it will be shoved down our throats)
240Mhz TVs - good I guess, but this is not the time to launch an expensive piece of equipment. Its not like consoles are actually going to output at 240Mhz, so the motion-compensation filters had better be good.
Play-TV - could be a game changer if Sony pulls finger and markets it world-wide. Sony really needs to give the public a new reason to have a PS3, PlayTV could be the tipping point. But I think it might be too little, too late since PVRs aren't exactly rare at this point and it seems limited.
Don't get me wrong, I think its cool that projects like this exist and I am not going to criticize anyone for spending time working on it.
But Silverlight really seems like a solution in search of a problem. Flash provides nice interactivity at the cost of an annoying plugin, and HTML5 is quickly catching up and should be the long term method of constructing web apps.
The only advantage of Silverlight seems to be the unified language for both backend and content, but that doesn't seem compelling to me. Anyone here using Silverlight for anything interesting that couldn't be done in Flash or HTML?
...from someone's crossover slash fanfic of Drizzt on Legolas while being flogged by Commander Rico under the supervision of Corwin, with many Lensmen watching the show.
Your supposedly off-the-cuff example is strangely detailed.
I somehow managed to screw up the second paragraph, because I am an idiot. It is supposed to read:
Columbia Data Products eventually came up with their own version of the BIOS by having one team of engineers reverse-engineer the IBM BIOS and write a specification. That specification was given to a totally separate team to implement. This so-called "clean room" development method was designed so that IBM could never claim that the CDP BIOS was a direct copy of theirs even though it was pretty much exactly compatible down the to register level. [wikipedia.org]
This is a very interesting part of computer history. Basically IBM used a whole lot of off-the-shelf stuff in the IBM PC (both the hardware and MSDOS). A few other companies realized that they could get in on the game, but they needed the BIOS which IBM would never give them.
It's not so much the lost revenues from sales to Apple users (which will be low compared to Windows) that they should be worried about.
MMOG are by nature group games, I want to play with my friends. Even if 10 of us are using Windows, if one of my friends can't play because of the lack of a Mac version then we will find another game.
This is one thing that Blizzard understands, and it has made them a lot of money. I would be surprised if Mac users make 10% of their revenue for WoW, but the addition to their total revenue due having multiple versions will be huge.
Nintendo should really be pushing its developers to do this kind of thing. The Wiimote is perfect for point-n-click adventures and the gameplay would suit the causal, cooperative style of play that the Wii embodies.
An official, licensed version of Monkey Island (for example) would more than pay for itself, especially since the dev costs would be minimal.
The Oort cloud could hold a planetary mass comet on a collision course with Earth and we would know about it only right before the event or just after.
I am pretty sure we would notice something was amiss during the collision as well.
Apple's stock price is high because wall street expects that Apple's profits will increase substantially in the future.
ummm, no. Apple's stock is high because Wall Street expects Apple's stock to be ever higher in the future. Stock price is only tenuously connected with expected profits - it's speculation that drives todays market.
If iPods ever become uncool then Apple will make something else. People stopped carrying walkmans and wearing stonewashed jeans, but Sony and Levi are still with us today. I would be more worried about an economic recession taking away Apple's market, but if that happens then any stock you choose will be toast.
Bingo, that is exactly what I meant. I can't even look at strategy games on the other consoles now, selecting units or indicating positions with a joystick is just painful.
Well it sure looks nice, puting pictures along with the results is a cool touch. It's a pity that the usefulness of the returned links is not on par with google.
Only sort of. With embedded video they cannot make ads that you cannot skip, they can't force you to watch one file after another, and they can't show links to other places on their site after the video plays like youtube does, giving them free advertising on thousands of sites.
Yes, but youtube has a custom flash based movie player, in which they can and do display their own UI and branding. They could even force you to watch ads before the movie if they wanted to (you can be sure somebody has brought it up with them) and lots of other streaming sites do exactly that. Youtube could provide links to h.264/quicktime/wma files, but they never will for the reasons that others have stated. Flash video gives a good user experience where things like quicktime often fail, but it doesn't have to be that way. Hopefully when video support is built into the browsers the usability will be better.
OK, I want to reqord my original wish - what I really want is a standard way of doing basic manipulation (rotate, transparency, etc) that works across all browsers without having to code things more than once. The webkit implementation provides pretty much what I need for now. The IE implementation seems like a dead-end that not even Microsoft mentions any more. The MS filter for transparency got used on some sites because Microsoft did not support a proper alpha-channel on PNG files. I believe that is fixed in recent versions of IE. As an aside: I am really digging the additions that the webkit team is making to CSS. I hope they become part of the standard, they all seem useful.
Yeah, but IE filters could only rotate in 90 degree increments - not very useful. And the syntax was so horrible that few people bothered to use it, I don't think I have ever seen it used on a web site despite it being around for years. Say what you like about the webkit team introducing proprietary style attributes, at least they are clean and properly prefixed with the team name.
Safari recently implemented transformations on elements using CSS (-webkit-transfom), which allows you to rotate and scale block element on screen. I used this in my WordPress theme and it looks very cool, but of course it only works in Safari. I wish other browsers would work to support it, it really has a lot of uses.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't do much video encoding and I certainly have never worked on a codec, but wouldn't it be possible to encode a 16 minute video file on 4 processors by breaking it into 4 minute sections and encoding these separately?
I know that frames often depend on previous frames, but each section could overlap the following one slightly, up to a frame that did not reference previous data. That would make stitching the files back together relatively easy at the cost of encoding a few frames twice.
Of course this doesn't work with encoding a realtime stream.
The "In Theory" part is right. I worked for a large company with a huge Notes installation. We were supposed to be running with all sorts of customizations but I could never tell the difference.
The REAL problem with Notes is not its arcane interface or weird scripting. Notes' fatal flaw is that although it may have seemed cool in 1995, its claim to fame (simple distributed database backed forms) would be better done by web apps. This was true in 2000 and it is certainly true now. Being obsoleted by newer technology is no shame, but Notes isn't even a very good mail client.
I agree, but on the other hand any technology that suppresses Lotus Notes is during meetings (or at any other time) is a boon for mankind, even if it takes out other apps as well.
I predicted the article would be bollocks before I clicked, and I was right! Let me make some other predictions:
3D Gaming - these glasses have been around for years. Maybe they work better now that everyone has bigger screens with higher refresh rates, but they were useless before. Nobody wants to sit in front of a PC wearing glasses. Perhaps if it were released for consoles it may take off, but I don't think the penetration of 120Mhz TVs is large enough to justify it.
Blu-Ray Super Disc - do games really need that much storage? Nope. My prediction for the number of games released in 2009 using super discs? Zero.
Brain Computer Interfaces - I am sure they could sell a few as a gimmick but my understanding is that control is very limited - a few noisy axises at best. I have a hard time imagining a game that could be controlled by brain easier than by fingers. I put it in the Sounds-Good-to-Investors-Neat-Picture-For-Press-Release-Consumers-Don't-Care bucket.
OLED screens - on their way, but immature. It will take years before they are competitive with LCD. In any case, not really gaming related as such.
Wii MotionPlus - well duh, great scoop there, IGN! The MotionPlus opens up some additional options for games, I expect some neat things. But it won't be the game-changer that the Wii originally was. Nintendo have a history of adding stuff to consoles, none of their previous efforts have really set the world alight. A modest success, used by only a few games (but these may be classics).
Windows 7/DirectX11 - better faster, stronger, snore. Nothing revolutionary from the users perspective. Developers might be tempted if Windows7 takes off (which I think it will, if only because it will be shoved down our throats)
240Mhz TVs - good I guess, but this is not the time to launch an expensive piece of equipment. Its not like consoles are actually going to output at 240Mhz, so the motion-compensation filters had better be good.
Play-TV - could be a game changer if Sony pulls finger and markets it world-wide. Sony really needs to give the public a new reason to have a PS3, PlayTV could be the tipping point. But I think it might be too little, too late since PVRs aren't exactly rare at this point and it seems limited.
Don't get me wrong, I think its cool that projects like this exist and I am not going to criticize anyone for spending time working on it.
But Silverlight really seems like a solution in search of a problem. Flash provides nice interactivity at the cost of an annoying plugin, and HTML5 is quickly catching up and should be the long term method of constructing web apps.
The only advantage of Silverlight seems to be the unified language for both backend and content, but that doesn't seem compelling to me. Anyone here using Silverlight for anything interesting that couldn't be done in Flash or HTML?
Your supposedly off-the-cuff example is strangely detailed.
How long were you thinking about it? Be honest.
This happens everywhere. Why, even this very comment was modded to +2 before I even made it. You can't trust anyone these days.
I somehow managed to screw up the second paragraph, because I am an idiot. It is supposed to read:
This is a very interesting part of computer history. Basically IBM used a whole lot of off-the-shelf stuff in the IBM PC (both the hardware and MSDOS). A few other companies realized that they could get in on the game, but they needed the BIOS which IBM would never give them.
Columbia Data Products eventually came up with their own version of the BIOS by having one team of engineers reverse-engineer the IBM BIOS and write a specification. That specification was given to a totally separate team to implement. This so-called development method was designed so that IBM could never claim that the CDP BIOS was a direct copy of theirs even though it was pretty much exactly compatible down the to register level.
Of course, this was all before software methods could be patented - it is likely that any company doing something similar today would be sued.
Never in any field of human endeavor have so few words been arranged into a sentence so incorrect.
You don't have to take the some route for the return trip - just find your way back using other downhill roads.
I do it all the time on my push bike, hardly have to pedal at all.
It's not so much the lost revenues from sales to Apple users (which will be low compared to Windows) that they should be worried about. MMOG are by nature group games, I want to play with my friends. Even if 10 of us are using Windows, if one of my friends can't play because of the lack of a Mac version then we will find another game.
This is one thing that Blizzard understands, and it has made them a lot of money. I would be surprised if Mac users make 10% of their revenue for WoW, but the addition to their total revenue due having multiple versions will be huge.
Nintendo should really be pushing its developers to do this kind of thing. The Wiimote is perfect for point-n-click adventures and the gameplay would suit the causal, cooperative style of play that the Wii embodies.
An official, licensed version of Monkey Island (for example) would more than pay for itself, especially since the dev costs would be minimal.
I am pretty sure we would notice something was amiss during the collision as well.
ummm, no. Apple's stock is high because Wall Street expects Apple's stock to be ever higher in the future. Stock price is only tenuously connected with expected profits - it's speculation that drives todays market.
If iPods ever become uncool then Apple will make something else. People stopped carrying walkmans and wearing stonewashed jeans, but Sony and Levi are still with us today. I would be more worried about an economic recession taking away Apple's market, but if that happens then any stock you choose will be toast.
Bingo, that is exactly what I meant. I can't even look at strategy games on the other consoles now, selecting units or indicating positions with a joystick is just painful.
Video support is a problem that has largely been solved with plugins. Where is my @font-face support?
I wish there were more games for the Wii like this - the WiiMote seems tailor made for turn based strategy and board games.
I can't understand why x-box live gets all the board games when the x-box controller is so ill-suited for the task.
Yeah, I bet google rues the day they registered such a silly sounding domain name.
Well it sure looks nice, puting pictures along with the results is a cool touch. It's a pity that the usefulness of the returned links is not on par with google.
Only sort of. With embedded video they cannot make ads that you cannot skip, they can't force you to watch one file after another, and they can't show links to other places on their site after the video plays like youtube does, giving them free advertising on thousands of sites.
Yes, but youtube has a custom flash based movie player, in which they can and do display their own UI and branding. They could even force you to watch ads before the movie if they wanted to (you can be sure somebody has brought it up with them) and lots of other streaming sites do exactly that.
Youtube could provide links to h.264/quicktime/wma files, but they never will for the reasons that others have stated.
Flash video gives a good user experience where things like quicktime often fail, but it doesn't have to be that way. Hopefully when video support is built into the browsers the usability will be better.
OK, I want to reqord my original wish - what I really want is a standard way of doing basic manipulation (rotate, transparency, etc) that works across all browsers without having to code things more than once.
The webkit implementation provides pretty much what I need for now. The IE implementation seems like a dead-end that not even Microsoft mentions any more. The MS filter for transparency got used on some sites because Microsoft did not support a proper alpha-channel on PNG files. I believe that is fixed in recent versions of IE.
As an aside: I am really digging the additions that the webkit team is making to CSS. I hope they become part of the standard, they all seem useful.
Yeah, but IE filters could only rotate in 90 degree increments - not very useful. And the syntax was so horrible that few people bothered to use it, I don't think I have ever seen it used on a web site despite it being around for years.
Say what you like about the webkit team introducing proprietary style attributes, at least they are clean and properly prefixed with the team name.
style="-webkit-transform=rotate:270deg"
is much better than:
style ="filter:'progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.BasicImage(rotation=3)'
Safari recently implemented transformations on elements using CSS (-webkit-transfom), which allows you to rotate and scale block element on screen. I used this in my WordPress theme and it looks very cool, but of course it only works in Safari. I wish other browsers would work to support it, it really has a lot of uses.