The comic reboots all the time with ret-con. It is part of the reason I don't collect comics. Color me crazy, but I want a story that I can read from beginning to end, that will form a coherent arc. Both TV and comics are mediums where you are intersted in getting to the next issue. Usually, people aren't intersted in telling a complete story.
If you went in with low expectations, there some sequences where you could have fun. However, I can't imagine wanting to watch it a second time.
What bothered me more than the way Venom was handled, and the odd jazz sequences was how Harry knew and wanted to kill Peter, but waited for no good reason. Then he picks a random moment to try and kill Peter. They fight, and Harry develops amensia. Then at the end of the film, with no reasoning at all, the amnesia disappears and Harry wants to fight Peter again. Then, at the end the family butler comes out and says "I happen to know your father died by his own hands, but I've waited all this years and allowed you to foster notions of revenge that tore apart your friendship. I hope you don't mind that I waited several years to speak up."
Kevin Smith talks about how Hollywood demands big fights and action sequences in certain portions of the script, whether they make sense or not. I'm pretty sure they screwed the entire Harry storyline just to try and keep the standard formula of action pacing.
Note, this is the same terrible writer that Sony is keeping instead of keeping Raimi, Macguire, etc.
Each film made near a billion dollars. Raimi fought with the studios over the script for 3, which was terrible. So now the studio is forcing the same writer for 4, and gave him a contract to write future Spider-man movies as well. Let's keep the guy who wrote a TERRIBLE script, and punish a much-loved and successful director.
As Kevin Smith said, in Hollywood, you fail upwards.
I'm not suggesting that everything Raimi did was perfect, but when Spider-man 2 was released, many hailed it as the best superhero film of all time.
I'm at work using IE 7. I just closed down to one tab after heavy use, and IE is still at 64 megs of physical memory, and 180 megs of virtual memory. Sound like Firefox wins there.
The only browser I've seen that can properly close memory from closed tabs is Chrome.
Firefox INTENTIONALLY AS A FEATURE (not a memory leak) does keep fully rendered pages, with full history and the cache of X rendered pages, for some time after you close the tab. You can right-click on the tab bar and reopen recently closed tabs. I actually love that feature and miss it all the time in IE. However, you can probably turn off the feature with about:config if you need to.
In all seriousness, with dynamic clocking, why use 2 GPUs and switch between the two? Why not just under-clock and under-volt the primary GPU when you're not gaming?
Firefox has been much better on memory management since FF3. Everyone talks about Chrome being lean and fast, and FF being this bloated piece of crap.
You do realize that using current builds of both, Firefox uses less memory? The UI will likely never be quite as fast due to XUL, but Firefox's memory management is pretty dang good. They could probably take a page from how Chrome handles garbage collection with their V8 Javascript engine, but that's another story.
Do you know what made me happy? Before the Atlanta Olympics, I saw CNN run a story that Ted Turner paid people to pick up all of the homeless in Atlanta and forcibly relocate them outside of city limits. Ted Turner was a majority stockholder in CNN at the time.
I don't assume there has to be a balance of positive and negative news. I want objective journalism to focus on the facts.
I write reviews for iPhone apps. That is the only Apple product I own. And I'm certainly not in love with it. I bought an iPhone because T-Mobile doesn't cover Omaha, so an Android phone was out of the question at the time, and I didn't want Windows Mobile.
I refuse to watch Fox News or use them as a source. I loathe biased news. But MSNBC is just as biased.
I once considered a career in journalism. I spent the past few years working for a newspaper (in IT though, not as an editor, though I almost crossed over at one point).
The sad thing is that biased news sells better. People prefer it. And they'll argue it isn't bias so long as it supports what they already want to believe. But it is very much bias.
There seem to be very few people in this country who give a shit about objective, responsible journalism.
Internal documents prove that embrace, extend, extinguish was at the very least a tactic they used in the past.
Are they quite as evil today? That's hard to say. Microsoft does seem to be opening up and playing a little nicer.
Gates isn't CEO anymore. Ray Ozzie doesn't come across as quite so evil. Ballmer is still there. And I don't assume every division and team at Microsoft is staffed by evil people.
I'm not saying Microsoft is a great company. I'm simply saying that the/. bias is to assume every move is pure evil.
Perhaps a better example might be Google. They donate tons of code. They open up all kinds of things. They develop for Linux. They pay for Summer of Code. They pay staff members to do nothing by contribute upstream (like Andrew Morton, one of the most influence kernel hackers). Yet every few days I see a Slashdot story on how evil Google is, and how they aren't open enough.
Slashdot shows repeated bias that as a large corporation, they must be evil, regardless of all evidence to the contrary.
Compare that to Apple's repeated evil actions, and how Slashdot treats Apple as the greatest company on the planet.
Microsoft has done plenty of evil things. Yet when they do something nice, such as opening tons of documentation to the Samba team, people spin it as part of some evil scheme. In reality, it is a nice move largely predicated by the EU judgement against them.
While I share the general dislike for Microsoft, it doesn't change that/. is very biased against Microsoft at the same time.
I believe all Chrome extensions are pure HTML and JS. Many people have criticized that learning how to use XUL is a pain, and that most memory leaks and instability issues come from poorly coded extensions. Everytime Firefox has a major release, they break all old extensions. People either update/re-write their extensions or they don't work anymore. If Mozilla says the latest Firefox requires your extension to operate as pure HTML and JS, it wouldn't be the end of the world.
As far as I know, it is still 120Hz of standard video. 60 frames are designed for the left eye, and 60 frames are designed for the right eye. Shutter glasses are synced with the TV to shut off one eye or the other in time with what image is being displayed. Your brain reassembles the images into 3D.
I was under the impression, that the input could determine what it displays. So any 120Hz display can take a 30Hz or 60Hz signal and simply repeat frames, but it can also take the 3D 120Hz signal and display that.
I also thought that iD got bought by Bethesda, and that Bethesda has said iD won't be using OpenGL anymore, and won't be releasing source code anymore.
I'm not a game programmer, but back when 2.0 first launched, I did hear programmers say it had valid technical merits over DirectX at the time. Yet now all I hear is that the openGL 3.0 standard didn't evolve the way people wanted, and it isn't nearly as good as DirectX anymore. Is there any truth to this?
On the PC, all I need is the Nvidia glasses and a display that can do 120 Hz. I heard that with TVs, you can do the same thing. So, do we just need a TV that does 120 Hz, and let the receiver do the rest, or do we need a special TV?
DirecTV hasn't said what their 3D receiver will be yet.
This technology wouldn't be used like a typical P2P network of people openly sharing files, since the files with by DRM encrypted, unless it is the Zune model of loaning out a file, and losing the rights to it, until that loaner is returned to you.
BT-style downloads make a great deal of sense for a company like Microsoft or Apple who is pushing tons of downloads.
The two 360 titles I really cared about were Mass Effect and Bioshock. Bioshock eventually went PS3, but I just picked both up on the PC.
I thought Fable was horribly overrated. I beat it in 20 hours, and the game became extremely easy once I realized it had a broken mechanic. There was a spell that gave you a shield where you didn't take damage. You could earn exponential experience if you maintained a combo of hitting without taking damage. You cast the spell, hit enemies, lathered, rinsed and repeated. Not a single fight in the game presented any challenge, and I had a maxed character almost immediately.
There are plenty of TVs on the market now that take a 30 FPS source, and then create frames in between. Many LCDs are offering 120 HZ and 240 HZ models. I've heard some new Plasmas are bragging about 600 HZ.
Does it matter if a game only provides 30 or 60 FPS, if the TV is actually refreshing at 240 HZ?
Slashdot Mirror
The comic reboots all the time with ret-con. It is part of the reason I don't collect comics. Color me crazy, but I want a story that I can read from beginning to end, that will form a coherent arc. Both TV and comics are mediums where you are intersted in getting to the next issue. Usually, people aren't intersted in telling a complete story.
If you went in with low expectations, there some sequences where you could have fun. However, I can't imagine wanting to watch it a second time.
What bothered me more than the way Venom was handled, and the odd jazz sequences was how Harry knew and wanted to kill Peter, but waited for no good reason. Then he picks a random moment to try and kill Peter. They fight, and Harry develops amensia. Then at the end of the film, with no reasoning at all, the amnesia disappears and Harry wants to fight Peter again. Then, at the end the family butler comes out and says "I happen to know your father died by his own hands, but I've waited all this years and allowed you to foster notions of revenge that tore apart your friendship. I hope you don't mind that I waited several years to speak up."
Kevin Smith talks about how Hollywood demands big fights and action sequences in certain portions of the script, whether they make sense or not. I'm pretty sure they screwed the entire Harry storyline just to try and keep the standard formula of action pacing.
Note, this is the same terrible writer that Sony is keeping instead of keeping Raimi, Macguire, etc.
Each film made near a billion dollars. Raimi fought with the studios over the script for 3, which was terrible. So now the studio is forcing the same writer for 4, and gave him a contract to write future Spider-man movies as well. Let's keep the guy who wrote a TERRIBLE script, and punish a much-loved and successful director.
As Kevin Smith said, in Hollywood, you fail upwards.
I'm not suggesting that everything Raimi did was perfect, but when Spider-man 2 was released, many hailed it as the best superhero film of all time.
I'm at work using IE 7. I just closed down to one tab after heavy use, and IE is still at 64 megs of physical memory, and 180 megs of virtual memory. Sound like Firefox wins there.
The only browser I've seen that can properly close memory from closed tabs is Chrome.
Firefox INTENTIONALLY AS A FEATURE (not a memory leak) does keep fully rendered pages, with full history and the cache of X rendered pages, for some time after you close the tab. You can right-click on the tab bar and reopen recently closed tabs. I actually love that feature and miss it all the time in IE. However, you can probably turn off the feature with about:config if you need to.
I suddenly want to dig out my old 286.
In all seriousness, with dynamic clocking, why use 2 GPUs and switch between the two? Why not just under-clock and under-volt the primary GPU when you're not gaming?
Doesn't the second GPU just add cost?
I use the 64-bit Flash on Linux precisely so I don't have to double up so many libraries in memory. I have no problems with it.
Microsoft offers 64-bit Silverlight and Java has 64-bit versions.
Flash and Flash alone seems to be forcing people to stick with 32-bit browsers, and it is a real pain.
Firefox has been much better on memory management since FF3. Everyone talks about Chrome being lean and fast, and FF being this bloated piece of crap.
You do realize that using current builds of both, Firefox uses less memory? The UI will likely never be quite as fast due to XUL, but Firefox's memory management is pretty dang good. They could probably take a page from how Chrome handles garbage collection with their V8 Javascript engine, but that's another story.
You are aware that Exchange has better interoperability with other products today than in the past, right?
You're also aware that Microsoft just pledged to provide documentation and open up the .pst format, right?
http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/46752
Do you know what made me happy? Before the Atlanta Olympics, I saw CNN run a story that Ted Turner paid people to pick up all of the homeless in Atlanta and forcibly relocate them outside of city limits. Ted Turner was a majority stockholder in CNN at the time.
I don't assume there has to be a balance of positive and negative news. I want objective journalism to focus on the facts.
I write reviews for iPhone apps. That is the only Apple product I own. And I'm certainly not in love with it. I bought an iPhone because T-Mobile doesn't cover Omaha, so an Android phone was out of the question at the time, and I didn't want Windows Mobile.
I refuse to watch Fox News or use them as a source. I loathe biased news. But MSNBC is just as biased.
I once considered a career in journalism. I spent the past few years working for a newspaper (in IT though, not as an editor, though I almost crossed over at one point).
The sad thing is that biased news sells better. People prefer it. And they'll argue it isn't bias so long as it supports what they already want to believe. But it is very much bias.
There seem to be very few people in this country who give a shit about objective, responsible journalism.
There are users with conflicting opinions, but the /. staff of editors pick which stories to put on the site, and what summaries to put with them.
When I say that /. has a bias, I refer to the staff. The userbase is a little more diverse.
Internal documents prove that embrace, extend, extinguish was at the very least a tactic they used in the past.
Are they quite as evil today? That's hard to say. Microsoft does seem to be opening up and playing a little nicer.
Gates isn't CEO anymore. Ray Ozzie doesn't come across as quite so evil. Ballmer is still there. And I don't assume every division and team at Microsoft is staffed by evil people.
I'm not saying Microsoft is a great company. I'm simply saying that the /. bias is to assume every move is pure evil.
Perhaps a better example might be Google. They donate tons of code. They open up all kinds of things. They develop for Linux. They pay for Summer of Code. They pay staff members to do nothing by contribute upstream (like Andrew Morton, one of the most influence kernel hackers). Yet every few days I see a Slashdot story on how evil Google is, and how they aren't open enough.
Slashdot shows repeated bias that as a large corporation, they must be evil, regardless of all evidence to the contrary.
Compare that to Apple's repeated evil actions, and how Slashdot treats Apple as the greatest company on the planet.
Microsoft has done plenty of evil things. Yet when they do something nice, such as opening tons of documentation to the Samba team, people spin it as part of some evil scheme. In reality, it is a nice move largely predicated by the EU judgement against them.
While I share the general dislike for Microsoft, it doesn't change that /. is very biased against Microsoft at the same time.
Slashdot has *always* been very biased. Slashdot is pro Linux and Apple, and very anti Microsoft for example.
It really gets me that people only identify bias that they don't agree with, and then assume that bias that matches your views isn't considered bias.
MSNBC and Fox News are equally biased for instance, but it seems Fox News gets called out for it considerably more.
I believe all Chrome extensions are pure HTML and JS. Many people have criticized that learning how to use XUL is a pain, and that most memory leaks and instability issues come from poorly coded extensions. Everytime Firefox has a major release, they break all old extensions. People either update/re-write their extensions or they don't work anymore. If Mozilla says the latest Firefox requires your extension to operate as pure HTML and JS, it wouldn't be the end of the world.
As far as I know, it is still 120Hz of standard video. 60 frames are designed for the left eye, and 60 frames are designed for the right eye. Shutter glasses are synced with the TV to shut off one eye or the other in time with what image is being displayed. Your brain reassembles the images into 3D.
I was under the impression, that the input could determine what it displays. So any 120Hz display can take a 30Hz or 60Hz signal and simply repeat frames, but it can also take the 3D 120Hz signal and display that.
I also thought that iD got bought by Bethesda, and that Bethesda has said iD won't be using OpenGL anymore, and won't be releasing source code anymore.
I'm not a game programmer, but back when 2.0 first launched, I did hear programmers say it had valid technical merits over DirectX at the time. Yet now all I hear is that the openGL 3.0 standard didn't evolve the way people wanted, and it isn't nearly as good as DirectX anymore. Is there any truth to this?
On the PC, all I need is the Nvidia glasses and a display that can do 120 Hz. I heard that with TVs, you can do the same thing. So, do we just need a TV that does 120 Hz, and let the receiver do the rest, or do we need a special TV?
DirecTV hasn't said what their 3D receiver will be yet.
This technology wouldn't be used like a typical P2P network of people openly sharing files, since the files with by DRM encrypted, unless it is the Zune model of loaning out a file, and losing the rights to it, until that loaner is returned to you.
BT-style downloads make a great deal of sense for a company like Microsoft or Apple who is pushing tons of downloads.
A better solution (which Android provides and the iPhone does not) is access to the source code. Fix the core email app and sync functionality.
The two 360 titles I really cared about were Mass Effect and Bioshock. Bioshock eventually went PS3, but I just picked both up on the PC.
I thought Fable was horribly overrated. I beat it in 20 hours, and the game became extremely easy once I realized it had a broken mechanic. There was a spell that gave you a shield where you didn't take damage. You could earn exponential experience if you maintained a combo of hitting without taking damage. You cast the spell, hit enemies, lathered, rinsed and repeated. Not a single fight in the game presented any challenge, and I had a maxed character almost immediately.
There are plenty of TVs on the market now that take a 30 FPS source, and then create frames in between. Many LCDs are offering 120 HZ and 240 HZ models. I've heard some new Plasmas are bragging about 600 HZ.
Does it matter if a game only provides 30 or 60 FPS, if the TV is actually refreshing at 240 HZ?