So that's exactly what we're going to do! Instead of getting mostly science with a bit of creationism thrown it, now it's no science at all. Good job denying the young people a science education and punishing the people not responsible.
It's not pleasant, but it sure is effective against cancer.
Being that the diameter of the lens on the camera would be an order of magnitude greater than the lens on the phone, I don't there's much question.
I'd add that the article's pictures, regardless of what was written, clearly shows that the "camera" in these phones are lousy. Lousy to the point that it doesn't matter what the diferences are. In a comparison to a "real" camera, just as you said, there would be no discussion. Take two pictures and post them on the web. Who cares about the details when the difference is that significant.
With this new display the spec is intended to convey* that even under demanding circumstances a display driven at 75Hz the pixel will be the correct color at least 76 percent of the time. This would be a huge improvement over what is the current situation, which has the same flaws in your example...
at 300Hz with an ideal black to white time of 3ms by the time your pixel arives at the correct value, the value of that pixel has changed (similar to modern panels in the 10-13ms range at 75Hz. That is, your theoretical display never displays the correct color before the color changes (assuming black to white). At 300Hz you would only see a medium gray color, and it's likely that at that fast a refresh rate on a perfect panel the flickering between the two would be fast enough to appear to be a medium gray anyway. If you could comprehend changes at that rate, you would see the same problems with colors "smearing" and "ghosting" that we have on modern panels.
*It's all marketing lies. The truth is this is an improvement, but nowhere near as good as they are trying to convince you it is. I'm sure one of our favorite tech sites will have the real facts soon enough.
Is Extreme Tech for spending the time making fancy graphs of things we already knew.
A: The eight hundred dollar gap between the bottom and the top in the same class of processors only buy's you 25 percent on a good day, with the wind at your back.
B: For games, your video card negates much of the speed difference of the processors.
C: Manufacturers price competatively with respect to others products.
A: Admins don't care about Aero Glass, the Windows 2000 UI will do just fine for Vista installs.
B: This is only usefull for runing Aero Glass if the only thing you are running is Aero Glass. Real work will have to take a back seat while this is grinding through the glorious shading of your progress bar.
C: This totally misses the point of what Aero is for. Getting the UI grunt work off of the CPU and onto the video card.
This is a neat trick, and possibly usefull for some very specific purposes such as foolproof DX9.0 rendering in Linux reguardless of the state of device drivers. Hardware review sites could get some milage out of this. Especially when they need to know what a game/benchmark is doing in certain situations and image quality comparisons.
Where is Lumines for PlayStation 2?
Tetris, more popular than Lumines, basicly the same game, but 20 dollars instead of 300.
A lot of people live in a world wherein they make shit up and expect their credibility to go unchallenged.
I for one don't see the purpose of buying movies on UMD, especially since you can buy a full-size DVD and rip it to your PC to use on a memory stick. Much more versatile that way.
Especially when the DVD is a third less expensive>.
I think the games are diff'rent, read "incompatible".
Naw, PSP games are just conversions of the same games that weren't that good on the PS2 a few years ago.
Why pay twice as much money for games that are gimped versions of their plugged in bretheren? Especially if you're only going to spend more money on a device to display it on a television.
Whoever owns it can do what they please with it (modulo any contractual constraints).
Exactly, there is no "delima" here. Just a jackass trying to bait slashdot community readers into pressuring (read: flood their mailbox with hate mail and "suggestions") ROL into doing what they want?
I suppose LaTeX support is nice for the math geeks, though you would think that they are already using a program with support for it if they need it.
Asking someone to type LaTeX and claiming to include equation editing as a feature is not all that different than telling your users to format their document with HTML in a text editor and rebranding Firefox as your "word processor".
Scientific Word is the benchmark. If you want people to use your software in the math world you really need live equation editing. External editors (ala MathType) are too cumbersome for regular editing and LaTeX is too raw.
That screenshot looks suspiciously like a reskinned version of XP... looks very similar to the Avalon skin.
Or is that the whole point?
Microsoft has a habbit of not showing off what it's UI will really look like until they get much closer to release. The final product also tends to be a lot less "flashy" than the early builds. The side bar, for instance, made an appearance in prerelease XP (including the final beta) but has never made it into the final release. Also, there are (apparently) no tools to develop UI with so I would imagine it will be a while after that happens. Last I read, it was taking a hiddeous amount of time to build a modestly appointed window in XML by hand.
Agree with the article poster - Lame. Not only is this a lackluster MP3 unit (which by virtue of being firewire will be limited to Apple Mac owners), but it has virtually no UI wizardry that might define it as an Apple product. A total waste of time.
"Raise your hand if you have iTunes...
Raise your hand if you have a FireWire port...
Raise your hand if you have both...
Raise your hand if you have $400 to spend on a cute Apple device...
There is Apple's market. Pretty slim, eh? I don't see many sales in the future of iPod."
Goofy internal projects, expensive gaffes trying to "diversify" into areas it has only a tenuous relationship to, a complete inability to understand markets, and a constitutional immunity against learning from their mistakes. There is no future in a $400 (about $250 too expensive) firewire-only (5% of computer users) hardrive-based (read: fragile) mp3 player. Any one of these critical flaws might doom the product - take them all together and you have another classic corporate farce. When you see silliness on this level, though, normally you expect to see a raging egotist who is immune to common sense and criticism in some position of power in the company... oh wait, Steve Jobs. Never mind. This just reinforces my steadily growing sense of foreboding about Apple. Yes, I've said this before and been wrong, but I'll say it again anyway. They're living on borrowed time."
I seem to remember something about the FCC making interoperability a requirement for AOL based on some agreement many years ago. Of course they never did anything about it. The MS/Yahoo news isn't about opening up the system it's consolodation.
Thank god these companies were not involved in the early development of the internet or... well we just wouldn't have an "internet". We'd have a collection of online fiefdoms that were as useful and innovative as Microsoft Bob.
I wonder what percentage of Mini purchasers will ever know that they got something slightly better/different than what they ordered? People I know who actually bought one, they'll never know.
It's not as if someone is going to notice through normal use. I might notice that Expose works and from there discover that the machine has more video ram. But that's just because I heard that it doesn't work on machines with less than 64 mb of ram. If something on the machine labeled it as having a 1.5 ghz processor I'd write it off as a rounding issue.
If I had to guess, the price of the old components have become more expensive than the new better parts.
I can make one up... Because other software was installed on the users pc with the agreement that Claria's software be installed as well.
Removing Claria's software violates that agreement. If that is the case, removal is not the best recomendation.
Last I saw, Claria was pretty above board about their intentions at install time. And it is easy to remove through the Add/Remove programs application. Those two points alone elevate them above the bulk of the software that is removed via Anti-Spyware solutions.
Let's just hope this screen resists scratches much better than the nano. At least you do not have to look at the nano to enjoy listening to it...
Considering they are made of the same material, I'd imagine that it is just as scratch prone. The difference according to apple is people didn't complain about it with the larger iPod. I would guess, that in addition to only coming in white, the nano gets put into tighter quarters (jeans pockets and whatnot).
Maybe someday TDK will save us that trouble. Unless there is some horrible truth about their coating, it seems everything scratchable should come coated in the stuff.
The real (new) story that the submiter missed is that Radio Shack has decided to offer these state side.
Apparently Radio Shack thinks they can offer it up for lease in the US in a market where a full size PC costs 220 to 340 dollars (linux vs windows at walmart). I would imagine this involves leasing them to a market they hope exists for a robust, if severely limited computing platform.
They might be right, there is probably some value in a computer that can't be buggered by the user.
There's not a graphics card alive that's going to need 64 bit addressing to render literally billions of particles, and there won't be for at least 10 years, barring some extreme advances, or the use of alien technology (teehee). Same with decals, even if you "only" had memory to store the location of 512 million of 'em, there's no way the system will handle displaying even a few thousand all at once.
Glows? Unless they need 64 precision math done on the CPU (which they don't), yeah, non-issue. Consumer GPUs are limited to what? 24 bit plus alpha? Same for pixel shaders, this has nothing to do with the CPU in almost all instances.
FYI
NVidia has been working 32 bit for a long time now. ATI's new hardware is all 32, and developers (John Carmack in that article specifically) want a lot more (64 bits or better) precision because quantization errors get pretty ugly when you start making a lot of passes.
Again, that's not a correction, as you said, the game's quality has nothing to do with AMD's processor. If there is a limitation is an artificial one.
This is not the first time AMD has lured a developer into sheadding some character in order to promote their processors, Far Cry for instance. When AMD first released their 64 bit processor THere were a number of bogus features/limitations based on the processor's precision.
"Grand Theft Auto - Whole of the damned Continenal United States" anyone?
I know I'm picking nits here... but.
The GTA franchise is a cross platform product which means that the PS3 could have all the capacity/capability in the world but because it has to run on the XBox and Revolution as well it will not see much enhancement beyond the feature sets available on all of the consoles.
This is one of the points Nintendo is talking about when they say cross platform titles are bad for the industry.
BTW... Microsoft has said that there will be no games published in the new format. Ever. Because the first generation XBox360 will be shipping with a plain jane DVD drive.
...which also scratches fairly easily! Even with light use, some sort of case is a good idea. I got one of those rubber skins for my 4G and it works great.
Slashdot Mirror
So that's exactly what we're going to do! Instead of getting mostly science with a bit of creationism thrown it, now it's no science at all. Good job denying the young people a science education and punishing the people not responsible.
It's not pleasant, but it sure is effective against cancer.
Or the size of the file. I mean, under the right circumstances my lan can transfer a two hour movie faster than that.*
*Bitrates may vary.
Being that the diameter of the lens on the camera would be an order of magnitude greater than the lens on the phone, I don't there's much question.
I'd add that the article's pictures, regardless of what was written, clearly shows that the "camera" in these phones are lousy. Lousy to the point that it doesn't matter what the diferences are.
In a comparison to a "real" camera, just as you said, there would be no discussion. Take two pictures and post them on the web. Who cares about the details when the difference is that significant.
You missunderstand the relationship.
With this new display the spec is intended to convey* that even under demanding circumstances a display driven at 75Hz the pixel will be the correct color at least 76 percent of the time. This would be a huge improvement over what is the current situation, which has the same flaws in your example...
at 300Hz with an ideal black to white time of 3ms by the time your pixel arives at the correct value, the value of that pixel has changed (similar to modern panels in the 10-13ms range at 75Hz. That is, your theoretical display never displays the correct color before the color changes (assuming black to white). At 300Hz you would only see a medium gray color, and it's likely that at that fast a refresh rate on a perfect panel the flickering between the two would be fast enough to appear to be a medium gray anyway. If you could comprehend changes at that rate, you would see the same problems with colors "smearing" and "ghosting" that we have on modern panels.
*It's all marketing lies. The truth is this is an improvement, but nowhere near as good as they are trying to convince you it is. I'm sure one of our favorite tech sites will have the real facts soon enough.
Is Extreme Tech for spending the time making fancy graphs of things we already knew.
A: The eight hundred dollar gap between the bottom and the top in the same class of processors only buy's you 25 percent on a good day, with the wind at your back.
B: For games, your video card negates much of the speed difference of the processors.
C: Manufacturers price competatively with respect to others products.
What expertise do they have?
HOW does this fit into what they are doing now?
How about you read the fucking article and find out.
A: Admins don't care about Aero Glass, the Windows 2000 UI will do just fine for Vista installs.
B: This is only usefull for runing Aero Glass if the only thing you are running is Aero Glass. Real work will have to take a back seat while this is grinding through the glorious shading of your progress bar.
C: This totally misses the point of what Aero is for. Getting the UI grunt work off of the CPU and onto the video card.
This is a neat trick, and possibly usefull for some very specific purposes such as foolproof DX9.0 rendering in Linux reguardless of the state of device drivers. Hardware review sites could get some milage out of this. Especially when they need to know what a game/benchmark is doing in certain situations and image quality comparisons.
Somehow this keeps coming to mind:
And suprisingly close to the truth.
Where is Lumines for PlayStation 2? Tetris, more popular than Lumines, basicly the same game, but 20 dollars instead of 300. A lot of people live in a world wherein they make shit up and expect their credibility to go unchallenged.
You've paid three times as much. (never mind the cost of the PSP and TV thing)
Especially when the DVD is a third less expensive>.
Naw, PSP games are just conversions of the same games that weren't that good on the PS2 a few years ago.
Why pay twice as much money for games that are gimped versions of their plugged in bretheren? Especially if you're only going to spend more money on a device to display it on a television.
Whoever owns it can do what they please with it (modulo any contractual constraints).
Exactly, there is no "delima" here. Just a jackass trying to bait slashdot community readers into pressuring (read: flood their mailbox with hate mail and "suggestions") ROL into doing what they want?
Rude.
I suppose LaTeX support is nice for the math geeks, though you would think that they are already using a program with support for it if they need it.
Asking someone to type LaTeX and claiming to include equation editing as a feature is not all that different than telling your users to format their document with HTML in a text editor and rebranding Firefox as your "word processor".
Scientific Word is the benchmark. If you want people to use your software in the math world you really need live equation editing. External editors (ala MathType) are too cumbersome for regular editing and LaTeX is too raw.
Microsoft has a habbit of not showing off what it's UI will really look like until they get much closer to release. The final product also tends to be a lot less "flashy" than the early builds. The side bar, for instance, made an appearance in prerelease XP (including the final beta) but has never made it into the final release. Also, there are (apparently) no tools to develop UI with so I would imagine it will be a while after that happens. Last I read, it was taking a hiddeous amount of time to build a modestly appointed window in XML by hand.
by http://slashdot.org/~Ars-Fartsica
"Raise your hand if you have iTunes ...
Raise your hand if you have a FireWire port ...
Raise your hand if you have both ...
Raise your hand if you have $400 to spend on a cute Apple device ...
There is Apple's market. Pretty slim, eh? I don't see many sales in the future of iPod."
by http://slashdot.org/~LoudMusic
Goofy internal projects, expensive gaffes trying to "diversify" into areas it has only a tenuous relationship to, a complete inability to understand markets, and a constitutional immunity against learning from their mistakes. There is no future in a $400 (about $250 too expensive) firewire-only (5% of computer users) hardrive-based (read: fragile) mp3 player. Any one of these critical flaws might doom the product - take them all together and you have another classic corporate farce. When you see silliness on this level, though, normally you expect to see a raging egotist who is immune to common sense and criticism in some position of power in the company... oh wait, Steve Jobs. Never mind. This just reinforces my steadily growing sense of foreboding about Apple. Yes, I've said this before and been wrong, but I'll say it again anyway. They're living on borrowed time."
by http://slashdot.org/~DaveWood
I seem to remember something about the FCC making interoperability a requirement for AOL based on some agreement many years ago. Of course they never did anything about it. The MS/Yahoo news isn't about opening up the system it's consolodation.
Thank god these companies were not involved in the early development of the internet or... well we just wouldn't have an "internet". We'd have a collection of online fiefdoms that were as useful and innovative as Microsoft Bob.
I wonder what percentage of Mini purchasers will ever know that they got something slightly better/different than what they ordered? People I know who actually bought one, they'll never know.
It's not as if someone is going to notice through normal use. I might notice that Expose works and from there discover that the machine has more video ram. But that's just because I heard that it doesn't work on machines with less than 64 mb of ram. If something on the machine labeled it as having a 1.5 ghz processor I'd write it off as a rounding issue.
If I had to guess, the price of the old components have become more expensive than the new better parts.
I can make one up... Because other software was installed on the users pc with the agreement that Claria's software be installed as well.
Removing Claria's software violates that agreement. If that is the case, removal is not the best recomendation.
Last I saw, Claria was pretty above board about their intentions at install time. And it is easy to remove through the Add/Remove programs application. Those two points alone elevate them above the bulk of the software that is removed via Anti-Spyware solutions.
Considering they are made of the same material, I'd imagine that it is just as scratch prone. The difference according to apple is people didn't complain about it with the larger iPod. I would guess, that in addition to only coming in white, the nano gets put into tighter quarters (jeans pockets and whatnot).
Maybe someday TDK will save us that trouble. Unless there is some horrible truth about their coating, it seems everything scratchable should come coated in the stuff.
Apparently Radio Shack thinks they can offer it up for lease in the US in a market where a full size PC costs 220 to 340 dollars (linux vs windows at walmart). I would imagine this involves leasing them to a market they hope exists for a robust, if severely limited computing platform.
They might be right, there is probably some value in a computer that can't be buggered by the user.
Glows? Unless they need 64 precision math done on the CPU (which they don't), yeah, non-issue. Consumer GPUs are limited to what? 24 bit plus alpha? Same for pixel shaders, this has nothing to do with the CPU in almost all instances.
FYI
NVidia has been working 32 bit for a long time now. ATI's new hardware is all 32, and developers (John Carmack in that article specifically) want a lot more (64 bits or better) precision because quantization errors get pretty ugly when you start making a lot of passes.
Again, that's not a correction, as you said, the game's quality has nothing to do with AMD's processor. If there is a limitation is an artificial one.
This is not the first time AMD has lured a developer into sheadding some character in order to promote their processors, Far Cry for instance. When AMD first released their 64 bit processor THere were a number of bogus features/limitations based on the processor's precision.
In terms of volume, they're pretty damn close.
I know I'm picking nits here... but.
The GTA franchise is a cross platform product which means that the PS3 could have all the capacity/capability in the world but because it has to run on the XBox and Revolution as well it will not see much enhancement beyond the feature sets available on all of the consoles.
This is one of the points Nintendo is talking about when they say cross platform titles are bad for the industry.
BTW... Microsoft has said that there will be no games published in the new format. Ever. Because the first generation XBox360 will be shipping with a plain jane DVD drive.
Whatever happened to TDK's all singing all dancing scratch proof coating that was going to save us from this kind of annoyance?
Seems to me that pretty much everything that ships in a protective plastic skin ought to be using that instead.