The advantage of MPEG-4 or VC1 over MPEG-2 is that given the same bitrate, they offer a better quality than MPEG-2. When MPEG-2 is used, a single-layer 25 GB Blu-ray disc do not offer enough capacity to encode 1080p video content at a quality matching a DVD. A Blu-ray video frame (1920*1080) contains 5 times more pixels than a PAL DVD frame (720*576), while a single-layer BD (25 GB) offers only 3 times more capacity than a dual-layer DVD (9 GB) => the storage cap increase does not match the pixel count increase.
That is why people notice so many encoding artifacts on MPEG-2 BDs while the quality is better on VC1 HD-DVDs.
Most people don't know this but
the quality of current Blu-ray titles does not match the quality offered
by HD-DVD's for a very simple reason. The couple of Blu-ray titles
that have been released so far are all encoded using MPEG-2,
while HD-DVD titles are using the more advanced MPEG-4 based VC1 codec.
What is even more frustrating is that Blu-ray titles could have
been VC1 encoded. The Blu-ray and HD-DVD standards both support the same
set of video codecs. But for some reason the Blu-ray camp decided to
encode the first titles using MPEG-2. I don't follow closely enough
the format war to know why such a decision has been taken, but I know
this is a stupid decision because most non-technical people will have
a bad first impression of Blu-ray. It is even more frustrating knowing
that Blu-ray titles have the technical potential to look at least as good as HD-DVD
titles.
It seems a lot of articles have been against Sony while this fear of Sony's set top player being overpriced is relatively unfounded.
Exactly. People seem to have forgotten that prices for DVD players in 1997 were even higher:
$1000 and up !
Sure a grand for a DVD/Blu-ray/Whatever player is expensive but it is NOT overpriced.
It is perfectly normal for new formats to be sold at a high price when first introduced.
That said, I am also impressed by the HD-DVD guys who have found a nice way to leverage the
existing DVD technology to be able to introduce HD-DVD players at "only" $400.
Two days ago, and I mean litteraly two days ago, I discovered the Doctor Fun comic. And now I am learning that it has come to an end ! This is my luck. This is my luck ! *angry*.
What an hilarious coincidence ! Listen to this:
Bruce Schneier is currently
running a contest on his blog
where people are
asked to invent dumb movie-plot terrorist threats. The purpose of
this contest is to demonstrate that such invented threats are only
"good for scaring people, but it's just silly to build national
security policy around them". And a
recent suggestion (that predates TFA!)
is precisely based on the idea that terrorists could build faulty parts
into automobiles.
I litteraly ROTFL when I heard the director of the U.S. Cyber Consequences Unit
saying that terrorists could cause cars to explode:)
You "agree in principle". This is good, it means you get my point:-)
[...]there is a long way to go.
When you think about it, this is not true. Most of the work of building a good, reliable, and flexible OS has been done. The remaining things to do are only relatively small technical details that ARE EASILY FIXABLE and will be fixed by Ubuntu in the near future. I totally agree that they are important, as this is currently an "inhibitory step towards switching for an average desktop user", and I will always be the first to complain that such details are still unfixed. But that's really it: they only require a relative small amount of work to be fixed by Ubuntu developers. It's not like they will have to fully redesign the kernel and userland apps to make everything work flawlessly.
But what still continues to boggle me is the following paradox: if people are so critical about Linux (and it's their right, Linux is not perfect), how can they be so tolerant of the current Windows flaws (cf. my GP post) ?
Your post seems to emphasize the negative sides of your experience with Linux. But as Columcille put it in his reply to my post, it is all a question of perspective. I would like you to look at your experience from another viewpoint, so look at my comments below...
it took me 3 weeks of posting to forums (fora?) to get my sound card and video card working
What happened to you here is NOT the norm in Ubuntu.
For most users, Ubuntu correctly detects and configures the sound & graphic cards. It's not 100% reliable (else you wouldn't be here to complain), but you shouldn't assume it to be totally unreliable either:-) The current situation is already rather good (it works in most cases), and the Ubuntu developers are continuing their efforts to fix the remaining cases. So you should expect it to work when you install Ubuntu on another box.
and a further week to get the laptop to connect to a projector for presentations etc
Enabling the secondary video output is indeed a feature that often relies on chipset-specific features and there is no common API in Linux to configure this. Which explain your problems.
Not a lot of work has been put into making this feature more user-friendly because only a minority of desktop users need it. I am not trying to justify the poor support for it, I am just explaining the current state of affairs. So once again please realize you belong to those 10% of users that, unfortunately, need to use something that has not yet been made user-friendly in Linux in general. The remaining 90% of Linux users don't care at all about this feature so it is not a pb for them (IOW you shouldn't expect your bad experience as something that HAS to happen to anybody trying out Linux).
I've already done all my searches for replacements for proprietary software, but it took a long time.
Why did it take you a long time ? You may not realize it, but your current knowledge of Windows apps is something that has taken you months/years to acquire. You seem to think that somehow, it's not normal that Linux doesn't provide you with a similar knowledge almost "instantly and magically":-) But the truth is that, as with Windows, you have to gain this knowledge by yourself. So you shouldn't see that as an inconvenient of Linux only. This is an inconvenient present in ALL OSes.
Also something that upsets me (and this thread proves it once again) is that EACH time people criticize Linux (and they have the right to do it since Linux is not perfect), somehow NOBODY ever points out the current huge flaws inherent to Windows environments in general. Namely: no package management system, no way to fully upgrade the system, quality of third party drivers not guaranteed, lack of innovation (Windows == one of the last OS to have been ported to AMD64), vendor lock-in, poor security track record, costly proprietary applications, forced h/w upgrades (Vista will require 512 MB of RAM), poor interoperability with other systems in enterprise environments, etc.
I have been using, contributing, and developping source code for alternative OSes and various open source projects since 1998; all of my 5 personal boxes have been running Linux/BSD only since 2000; and 95% of the server and desktop machines I have installed or administered at my previous and current jobs have been running Linux/BSD. So I think I have a pretty good view on the advantages (and inconvenients) of alternative OSes.
Let me reply to your questions. It is true that Xgl is very new and will continuously need to improve. It is true that not ALL apps are packaged by Ubuntu, however with a current count of 17,000+ it is way enough for an average desktop user (I have personally only had to package myself obscure command-line tools that nobody else should ever need). However you are fundamentally wrong when stating that "it has still got a long way to go" for the desktop user. The remaining issues can basically all be regrouped under 2 banners: "lack of open source drivers" or "lack of proprietary software XYZ under Linux". Those 2 things are VERY important, but the whole framework for a successful operating system is already here. If your hardware has open source drivers and if you don't depend on a particular proprietary application, then there are virtually nothing preventing you from fully enjoying Ubuntu as a desktop user.
Unfortunately I also recognize that it is apparently going to take quite some time to convince the remaining "closed" hardware vendors to release open specs of their devices, and that commercial software vendors are also only very slowly starting to consider Linux as a target OS.
Necessary I don't know, but it is useful because so many people out there are totally unaware of the great features offered by alternative OSes. Regarding Ubuntu, in no particular order: Aero-like features already available via Xgl (while Vista is not yet released), centralized package management system, 1-click full system update and security patches installation (under Windows, MS-only software is upgraded), generally easier to use than Windows (according to one of my family member who is an average desktop computer user), easy to install, no drivers to download from the hardware vendors (the kernel recognize everything by default), etc.
You still don't get it. You said "every person who gets a copy from their friend is one less sale to the record company/television studio/etc". In what reality are you living in ? It has been repeatedly demonstrated that this is incorrect. Sure, some people who pirate things would have legally bought them if pirate copies weren't available, but this is only a minority of people. Most people who pirate stuff are people who wouldn't normally have bought these things. Hell, just look at one of the numerous studies showing the boom of CD sales when piracy is actually going up !
(Note that I am not judging whether piracy is a good practice or not, I am just reporting facts that you get wrong. Please stop spreading your incorrect views on how piracy affect sales.)
Are you shortsighted ? Silicon "fucking sand" dioxide is SiO2. One atom of silicon (Si) and two atoms of oxygen (O2). The scientists' idea is to extract oxygen atoms from SiO2 molecules by heating them up in order to break them up.
Palm-like devices are attracting indeed. I wish I could use one but unfortunately I could only use it for about 30% of my tasks, such as reading documents, connecting to remote servers via SSH, etc. For the remaining 70% I need a full-featured PC, mainly for Linux development.
I am surprised nobody mentioned it, but the perfect device for a MacSaber-like application will be the Wiimote because the Wii controller will have sensors of course, but also a built-in speaker. Which means as you move the Wiimote, it could emit laser saber sounds;-)
Many people criticize the Wiimote sensors as being a gimmick, but the popularity of MacSaber just proved quite the contratry. It proved that people like physical interactions with games !
<<
I would be curious how well a 990 gram notebook would take the impact of a 5 pound book from 2 feet?
>>
Light doesn't necessarily means fragile. In particular Panasonic laptops are known to be relatively tough.
AFAIK Panasonic have designed the R, T, W and Y series primarily for mass-production in order to sell them to schools in Japan. The current models (R5, T5, W5, Y5) belong to the fifth generation and represent the culmination of multiple years of R&D and feedback from the schools and students using them intensively. Which totally explains why these laptops are particularly robust. I have heard a representative from a company importing Panasonic laptops and reselling on the US market, saying that the return rate is less than 1%, which is remarkable. My 990g R3 is still in perfect shape after 1 year of heavy usage. Ok I have never dropped it from a table top height but, heh, if your "lifestyle" requires you to use heavy and sturdy laptops, that's your problem;-)
For me the 3 extra lbs make a huge difference, let me explain you why.
First it's not all about the weight, but also about the physical space
a laptop takes.
Second, I agree that this extra weight/space is not really annoying when you CARRY it, but in fact it really impacts the way you USE it.
If you are the kind of person who exclusively use your laptop laid on a desk or occasionally on your laps for short periods of time (< 1h) and carry it in a regular laptop bag, then yes maybe you won't care about 5 lbs vs. 2 lbs.
But if you are like me and like to use it like a book, to carry it with one hand with no bag when you walk short distances, to being sit comfortably on a couch with the laptop laid on ONE lap (because it's so small), etc, then 5 lbs vs. 2 lbs makes a lot of differences.
In addition to the weight/space advantage, such small laptops generally never overheat because they use ULV (ultra low voltage) processors, they have no fans so they are totally silent, and they have a long battery life: about 5h with my laptop, close to 7h with the new Panasonic R5, and probably around 10h with the T5 (Panasonic advertises 15h) !
Ultraportables (generally it means anything less than 1 kg = 2.2 lbs) have really changed the way I feel about laptops. It's as if there was a kind of "barrier" at 2-3 lbs: suddendly when you go under this barrier a lot of things become possible that you would not do with a 3+ lbs laptop.
I have used it quite a lot, in average 5 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year, since I bought it 1 year ago. I continue to use it as much and I still love it. I am so used to the flexibility offered by its small size and its long battery life (I can really bring it with me ANYWHERE and leave the power adapter AT HOME) that I don't think I will ever buy a laptop over 3 pounds again. I am still running it on the original battery and its quality has not (yet?) decreased. I have a battery life of 4h30 when I use it intensively and up to 9h50 when I just power it up and don't use it at all (I even measured 9h58 one time, of course that's a totally pointless benchmark but I was just curious about how long it could stay up with a blank screen and a spun down harddrive).
Slashdot Mirror
Don't hit. Don't hit.
What's the difference between floppy disks and Paris Hilton ?
None, you can mount both of them.
See parent post.
For an unknow reason, their device automatically falls into sleep mode after having counted too many electrons.
The advantage of MPEG-4 or VC1 over MPEG-2 is that given the same bitrate, they offer a better quality than MPEG-2. When MPEG-2 is used, a single-layer 25 GB Blu-ray disc do not offer enough capacity to encode 1080p video content at a quality matching a DVD. A Blu-ray video frame (1920*1080) contains 5 times more pixels than a PAL DVD frame (720*576), while a single-layer BD (25 GB) offers only 3 times more capacity than a dual-layer DVD (9 GB) => the storage cap increase does not match the pixel count increase.
That is why people notice so many encoding artifacts on MPEG-2 BDs while the quality is better on VC1 HD-DVDs.
Most people don't know this but the quality of current Blu-ray titles does not match the quality offered by HD-DVD's for a very simple reason. The couple of Blu-ray titles that have been released so far are all encoded using MPEG-2, while HD-DVD titles are using the more advanced MPEG-4 based VC1 codec.
What is even more frustrating is that Blu-ray titles could have been VC1 encoded. The Blu-ray and HD-DVD standards both support the same set of video codecs. But for some reason the Blu-ray camp decided to encode the first titles using MPEG-2. I don't follow closely enough the format war to know why such a decision has been taken, but I know this is a stupid decision because most non-technical people will have a bad first impression of Blu-ray. It is even more frustrating knowing that Blu-ray titles have the technical potential to look at least as good as HD-DVD titles.
Exactly. People seem to have forgotten that prices for DVD players in 1997 were even higher: $1000 and up ! Sure a grand for a DVD/Blu-ray/Whatever player is expensive but it is NOT overpriced. It is perfectly normal for new formats to be sold at a high price when first introduced.
That said, I am also impressed by the HD-DVD guys who have found a nice way to leverage the existing DVD technology to be able to introduce HD-DVD players at "only" $400.
Two days ago, and I mean litteraly two days ago, I discovered the Doctor Fun comic. And now I am learning that it has come to an end ! This is my luck. This is my luck ! *angry*.
What an hilarious coincidence ! Listen to this: Bruce Schneier is currently running a contest on his blog where people are asked to invent dumb movie-plot terrorist threats. The purpose of this contest is to demonstrate that such invented threats are only "good for scaring people, but it's just silly to build national security policy around them". And a recent suggestion (that predates TFA!) is precisely based on the idea that terrorists could build faulty parts into automobiles. I litteraly ROTFL when I heard the director of the U.S. Cyber Consequences Unit saying that terrorists could cause cars to explode :)
You "agree in principle". This is good, it means you get my point :-)
When you think about it, this is not true. Most of the work of building a good, reliable, and flexible OS has been done. The remaining things to do are only relatively small technical details that ARE EASILY FIXABLE and will be fixed by Ubuntu in the near future. I totally agree that they are important, as this is currently an "inhibitory step towards switching for an average desktop user", and I will always be the first to complain that such details are still unfixed. But that's really it: they only require a relative small amount of work to be fixed by Ubuntu developers. It's not like they will have to fully redesign the kernel and userland apps to make everything work flawlessly.
But what still continues to boggle me is the following paradox: if people are so critical about Linux (and it's their right, Linux is not perfect), how can they be so tolerant of the current Windows flaws (cf. my GP post) ?
Your post seems to emphasize the negative sides of your experience with Linux. But as Columcille put it in his reply to my post, it is all a question of perspective. I would like you to look at your experience from another viewpoint, so look at my comments below...
What happened to you here is NOT the norm in Ubuntu. For most users, Ubuntu correctly detects and configures the sound & graphic cards. It's not 100% reliable (else you wouldn't be here to complain), but you shouldn't assume it to be totally unreliable either :-) The current situation is already rather good (it works in most cases), and the Ubuntu developers are continuing their efforts to fix the remaining cases. So you should expect it to work when you install Ubuntu on another box.
Enabling the secondary video output is indeed a feature that often relies on chipset-specific features and there is no common API in Linux to configure this. Which explain your problems. Not a lot of work has been put into making this feature more user-friendly because only a minority of desktop users need it. I am not trying to justify the poor support for it, I am just explaining the current state of affairs. So once again please realize you belong to those 10% of users that, unfortunately, need to use something that has not yet been made user-friendly in Linux in general. The remaining 90% of Linux users don't care at all about this feature so it is not a pb for them (IOW you shouldn't expect your bad experience as something that HAS to happen to anybody trying out Linux).
Why did it take you a long time ? You may not realize it, but your current knowledge of Windows apps is something that has taken you months/years to acquire. You seem to think that somehow, it's not normal that Linux doesn't provide you with a similar knowledge almost "instantly and magically" :-) But the truth is that, as with Windows, you have to gain this knowledge by yourself. So you shouldn't see that as an inconvenient of Linux only. This is an inconvenient present in ALL OSes.
Also something that upsets me (and this thread proves it once again) is that EACH time people criticize Linux (and they have the right to do it since Linux is not perfect), somehow NOBODY ever points out the current huge flaws inherent to Windows environments in general. Namely: no package management system, no way to fully upgrade the system, quality of third party drivers not guaranteed, lack of innovation (Windows == one of the last OS to have been ported to AMD64), vendor lock-in, poor security track record, costly proprietary applications, forced h/w upgrades (Vista will require 512 MB of RAM), poor interoperability with other systems in enterprise environments, etc.
In my country, we patch them regularly.
- Vladimir
I have been using, contributing, and developping source code for alternative OSes and various open source projects since 1998; all of my 5 personal boxes have been running Linux/BSD only since 2000; and 95% of the server and desktop machines I have installed or administered at my previous and current jobs have been running Linux/BSD. So I think I have a pretty good view on the advantages (and inconvenients) of alternative OSes.
Let me reply to your questions. It is true that Xgl is very new and will continuously need to improve. It is true that not ALL apps are packaged by Ubuntu, however with a current count of 17,000+ it is way enough for an average desktop user (I have personally only had to package myself obscure command-line tools that nobody else should ever need). However you are fundamentally wrong when stating that "it has still got a long way to go" for the desktop user. The remaining issues can basically all be regrouped under 2 banners: "lack of open source drivers" or "lack of proprietary software XYZ under Linux". Those 2 things are VERY important, but the whole framework for a successful operating system is already here. If your hardware has open source drivers and if you don't depend on a particular proprietary application, then there are virtually nothing preventing you from fully enjoying Ubuntu as a desktop user. Unfortunately I also recognize that it is apparently going to take quite some time to convince the remaining "closed" hardware vendors to release open specs of their devices, and that commercial software vendors are also only very slowly starting to consider Linux as a target OS.
Necessary I don't know, but it is useful because so many people out there are totally unaware of the great features offered by alternative OSes. Regarding Ubuntu, in no particular order: Aero-like features already available via Xgl (while Vista is not yet released), centralized package management system, 1-click full system update and security patches installation (under Windows, MS-only software is upgraded), generally easier to use than Windows (according to one of my family member who is an average desktop computer user), easy to install, no drivers to download from the hardware vendors (the kernel recognize everything by default), etc.
You still don't get it. You said "every person who gets a copy from their friend is one less sale to the record company/television studio/etc". In what reality are you living in ? It has been repeatedly demonstrated that this is incorrect. Sure, some people who pirate things would have legally bought them if pirate copies weren't available, but this is only a minority of people. Most people who pirate stuff are people who wouldn't normally have bought these things. Hell, just look at one of the numerous studies showing the boom of CD sales when piracy is actually going up !
(Note that I am not judging whether piracy is a good practice or not, I am just reporting facts that you get wrong. Please stop spreading your incorrect views on how piracy affect sales.)
'Yes' and 'no'. To answer the question "Are you sure you want to go up ?".
Are you shortsighted ? Silicon "fucking sand" dioxide is SiO2. One atom of silicon (Si) and two atoms of oxygen (O2). The scientists' idea is to extract oxygen atoms from SiO2 molecules by heating them up in order to break them up.
Perfect date to power those Intel Core 6 Octo CPUs running Windows Vista !
I'm back, baby ! My friends and I were just in this bar, right around the corner !
-- Bender
Yes. What prevents me of using a handheld is the limited local storage space and computing power.
Palm-like devices are attracting indeed. I wish I could use one but unfortunately I could only use it for about 30% of my tasks, such as reading documents, connecting to remote servers via SSH, etc. For the remaining 70% I need a full-featured PC, mainly for Linux development.
I am surprised nobody mentioned it, but the perfect device for a MacSaber-like application will be the Wiimote because the Wii controller will have sensors of course, but also a built-in speaker. Which means as you move the Wiimote, it could emit laser saber sounds ;-)
Many people criticize the Wiimote sensors as being a gimmick, but the popularity of MacSaber just proved quite the contratry. It proved that people like physical interactions with games !
Light doesn't necessarily means fragile. In particular Panasonic laptops are known to be relatively tough. AFAIK Panasonic have designed the R, T, W and Y series primarily for mass-production in order to sell them to schools in Japan. The current models (R5, T5, W5, Y5) belong to the fifth generation and represent the culmination of multiple years of R&D and feedback from the schools and students using them intensively. Which totally explains why these laptops are particularly robust. I have heard a representative from a company importing Panasonic laptops and reselling on the US market, saying that the return rate is less than 1%, which is remarkable. My 990g R3 is still in perfect shape after 1 year of heavy usage. Ok I have never dropped it from a table top height but, heh, if your "lifestyle" requires you to use heavy and sturdy laptops, that's your problem ;-)
For me the 3 extra lbs make a huge difference, let me explain you why. First it's not all about the weight, but also about the physical space a laptop takes. Second, I agree that this extra weight/space is not really annoying when you CARRY it, but in fact it really impacts the way you USE it. If you are the kind of person who exclusively use your laptop laid on a desk or occasionally on your laps for short periods of time (< 1h) and carry it in a regular laptop bag, then yes maybe you won't care about 5 lbs vs. 2 lbs. But if you are like me and like to use it like a book, to carry it with one hand with no bag when you walk short distances, to being sit comfortably on a couch with the laptop laid on ONE lap (because it's so small), etc, then 5 lbs vs. 2 lbs makes a lot of differences.
In addition to the weight/space advantage, such small laptops generally never overheat because they use ULV (ultra low voltage) processors, they have no fans so they are totally silent, and they have a long battery life: about 5h with my laptop, close to 7h with the new Panasonic R5, and probably around 10h with the T5 (Panasonic advertises 15h) !
Ultraportables (generally it means anything less than 1 kg = 2.2 lbs) have really changed the way I feel about laptops. It's as if there was a kind of "barrier" at 2-3 lbs: suddendly when you go under this barrier a lot of things become possible that you would not do with a 3+ lbs laptop.
I have used it quite a lot, in average 5 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year, since I bought it 1 year ago. I continue to use it as much and I still love it. I am so used to the flexibility offered by its small size and its long battery life (I can really bring it with me ANYWHERE and leave the power adapter AT HOME) that I don't think I will ever buy a laptop over 3 pounds again. I am still running it on the original battery and its quality has not (yet?) decreased. I have a battery life of 4h30 when I use it intensively and up to 9h50 when I just power it up and don't use it at all (I even measured 9h58 one time, of course that's a totally pointless benchmark but I was just curious about how long it could stay up with a blank screen and a spun down harddrive).