Your "proof" isn't consistent with what I am seeing - that's all. You probably just never installed any patches.
My point still stands - I bet you rarely if ever get called on your sig. But I can only imagine the flames in my in-box if I had a Linux-related sig like that.
I know this is somewhat offtopic, but what's the deal with your sig? The fclose code in Visual Studio is nothing like that, and certainly not "broken" as your sig implies.
Maybe, at some point, years ago, there was a bug in the code. But it seems to be fine now, and at least since 1997.
Imagine how much flame mail I'd get if I had a similar sig with some trivial Linux kernel bug in it from 1997.
The author doesn't even go into the respective DESIGNS of the toolkits either.
I've used several toolkits on several platforms in shipping, commercial software over the past 10 years, and taken a look at many of the "free" toolkits out there, and ended up going with Qt just because it has a superior (in my opinion) design.
I've spent more than a few hours trying to get these so-called cross-platform toolkits to build on Windows and Mac, and usually, they are half-finished implementations - just like you would expect from people not getting paid for their work. I'd rather not fiddle endlessly with code that doesn't quite compile, different build environments per platform, or just plain poorly-designed APIs. I was almost on the verge of writing my own GUI toolkit when I came across Qt - never looked back, blah blah.
wxWindows, in my opinion, has a design too similar to MFC - reliance on resource files, enumerated control IDs, message maps, etc just seems like a blatant rip-off of MFC, which is one of the worst toolkits out there.
Qt's built-in Motif-like layout, signals/slots, unreliance on resource files, great cross-platform build environment, and great documentation is amazing, and makes it well worth the cost for commercial development.
Okay, it's C/C++ only, and non-validating, but my XMLIO processor was designed to avoid his concerns. It's a push/pull hybrid (you tell it what you want, so you pull only what you need, but it can push elements/data at you and automatically pack into your data-structures).
It's designed not to even bother parsing sections of the XML stream you aren't interested in, which makes it perfect for low-memory situations (it is used by various cell-phone and test equipment manufacturers).
Many movies are full of these 'invisible' effects. Some of my favorites use effects to help extend what the camera can do.
For example: In Contact, there is a shot where the camera starts outside the house and moves into the house. Another shot tracks the young Ellie from the front as she runs down the hall, then somehow magically flips as she opens the bathroom cupboard door, as if we were seeing the whole shot from the reflection in the mirror. Another shot tracks Ellie into the VLA building and up the steps to look out the windows at the VLA. They weren't allowed to shoot in the VLA, so they had to transition from an outside shot of her opening the door and running inside to the rest of the shot with her running inside a set.
In Birdcage, the movie opens with the camera flying over the city, and in one continuous shot it flies down into the street, crosses the street, and goes into the front doors of a bar. (Cool effect, especially since I wrote the software they used to transition the shots.)
Forrest Gump is full of effects like these. The feather at the beginning is a "puppet" being performed against a blue screen, until it "lands" on Forrest's shoe, where it morphs (again, same software) into another feather that was against his shoe, but was painted out during part of the landing. Or the part where they transition from Lt. Dan's new titanium leg with a pan up showing the rest of his body. That and all of his leg-removal shots tricked people into thinking Gary Senise didn't really have legs.
Check out the scene in What Lies Beneath where Harrison Ford caries Michelle Pfeiffer into the bathroom and places her in the tub. The camera tracks them into the bathroom from behind, where you can see the tub, then pans over their heads and drops down BEHIND the tub where you can see him place her into the water from below, all in one continuous shot.
It is always fun to be surprised by these seamless, 'invisible' effects, that a surprising number of people never notice. It is embarassing to be sitting there going 'ohh, coool, did you see that?' and only get blank stares.
So is the article described correctly in the susbscription slashdot?
Re:no show has ever been in DD5.1 on CBS-HD
on
The Rise of CSI
·
· Score: 1
You are right I must be in a dream world. One were honest mistakes don't happen and people flame for the slightest thing.
Re:Have you seen it in hi-def?
on
The Rise of CSI
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I never would have watched it if not for it being in HD. It was the first available show on while I was checking out my HD OTA reception on my new 51" wide-screen TV.
I'll always remember the first time I saw it come on. The tailing end of Survivor was on, in 4:3 with gray bars. Then up came CSI, at 4:3 with gray bars. As the 5.1 music kicked in, the "Simulcast in HDTV" faded in at the bottom, and at the same time the gray bars moved apart and the image (nighttime shot of Vegas) grew to fill the space. Incredible! I sat there with my mouth hanging open with tears in my eyes. What a beautiful sight! (they haven't done the animated bars since though)
For those of you who think you're getting the same experience with your $100 HD decoder card and your 17" monitor, dream on.
I can see maybe wanting to save up some shows to watch on laptop for a long flight, but who actually sits at their PC to watch TV shows? I just don't get it. I have a rec room with big HDTV for watching TV. The PC is for doing "PC" stuff.
I played the first DM while a freshman at NC State Raleigh. I, my dormmate, and a few others from the hall would go down to the quad each night, load up on snacks (I literally came back with $4 worth of MM's and candy bars, and a 22 ounce soda, each night), come back and play the game. One guy would map, I would drive, and the others would chill on the bunk behind us. People would occasionally stop by to see how far we had gotten.
The coolest experience ever was when we discovered you could kill the mutant shrubs by getting it to stand in a doorway and watch the door smash it to bits! We laughed for hours after.
This was about 10 years, ago, but a buddy of mine and I wanted to see what we could get away with. I wrote a letter to my girlfriend on the inside of a pint-sized carton of milk (empty), then taped it back up to look like the original carton, and put the address on the outside. It got there about a month later, flattened open and stuffed inside a mailing envelope. You should have seen the looks from people in line behind me. I had forgotten all about it and was at her house the day it showed up.
We also discussed what would happen if we mailed a pineapple, with "hand cancel" written on the outside. Those spines are sharp!
Slashdot Mirror
Your "proof" isn't consistent with what I am seeing - that's all. You probably just never installed any patches.
My point still stands - I bet you rarely if ever get called on your sig. But I can only imagine the flames in my in-box if I had a Linux-related sig like that.
I know this is somewhat offtopic, but what's the deal with your sig? The fclose code in Visual Studio is nothing like that, and certainly not "broken" as your sig implies.
Maybe, at some point, years ago, there was a bug in the code. But it seems to be fine now, and at least since 1997.
Imagine how much flame mail I'd get if I had a similar sig with some trivial Linux kernel bug in it from 1997.
The author doesn't even go into the respective DESIGNS of the toolkits either.
I've used several toolkits on several platforms in shipping, commercial software over the past 10 years, and taken a look at many of the "free" toolkits out there, and ended up going with Qt just because it has a superior (in my opinion) design.
I've spent more than a few hours trying to get these so-called cross-platform toolkits to build on Windows and Mac, and usually, they are half-finished implementations - just like you would expect from people not getting paid for their work. I'd rather not fiddle endlessly with code that doesn't quite compile, different build environments per platform, or just plain poorly-designed APIs. I was almost on the verge of writing my own GUI toolkit when I came across Qt - never looked back, blah blah.
wxWindows, in my opinion, has a design too similar to MFC - reliance on resource files, enumerated control IDs, message maps, etc just seems like a blatant rip-off of MFC, which is one of the worst toolkits out there.
Qt's built-in Motif-like layout, signals/slots, unreliance on resource files, great cross-platform build environment, and great documentation is amazing, and makes it well worth the cost for commercial development.
And does it have shadowed menus? I really don't think I could use such a program if it didn't have shadowed menus.
The correct number is 1-888-703-0010.
They do ask you what you noticed wrong about the movies. And they do read the little message from Universal with the widescreen/fullscreen typo.
Okay, it's C/C++ only, and non-validating, but my XMLIO processor was designed to avoid his concerns. It's a push/pull hybrid (you tell it what you want, so you pull only what you need, but it can push elements/data at you and automatically pack into your data-structures).
It's designed not to even bother parsing sections of the XML stream you aren't interested in, which makes it perfect for low-memory situations (it is used by various cell-phone and test equipment manufacturers).
Yeah but nobody would be able to find the source.
At a development office I once contracted at, the person who broke the build had to where one of those Cheesehead hats from Wisconsin.
Being from Wisconsin, I thought they had done something particularly cool until they told me.
Get a Tivo. Then you can watch the whole thing in 14 hours.
One thing we did when we bought our most recent house is just not to list our phone number. We rarely get unsolicited calls.
We were getting them several times a week at our last house. The only difference - listed phone number.
And, if you DO get someone, it's easier just to say "this is an unlisted number, take me off your call list" and hang up.
No - AOTC was FILMED with HD cameras, so the recorded size is 1080 pixels high. There is no higher-res master.
All your bits are belong to us!
IRIX as well, at least for the past 10 years.
Many movies are full of these 'invisible' effects. Some of my favorites use effects to help extend what the camera can do.
For example:
In Contact, there is a shot where the camera starts outside the house and moves into the house. Another shot tracks the young Ellie from the front as she runs down the hall, then somehow magically flips as she opens the bathroom cupboard door, as if we were seeing the whole shot from the reflection in the mirror. Another shot tracks Ellie into the VLA building and up the steps to look out the windows at the VLA. They weren't allowed to shoot in the VLA, so they had to transition from an outside shot of her opening the door and running inside to the rest of the shot with her running inside a set.
In Birdcage, the movie opens with the camera flying over the city, and in one continuous shot it flies down into the street, crosses the street, and goes into the front doors of a bar. (Cool effect, especially since I wrote the software they used to transition the shots.)
Forrest Gump is full of effects like these. The feather at the beginning is a "puppet" being performed against a blue screen, until it "lands" on Forrest's shoe, where it morphs (again, same software) into another feather that was against his shoe, but was painted out during part of the landing. Or the part where they transition from Lt. Dan's new titanium leg with a pan up showing the rest of his body. That and all of his leg-removal shots tricked people into thinking Gary Senise didn't really have legs.
Check out the scene in What Lies Beneath where Harrison Ford caries Michelle Pfeiffer into the bathroom and places her in the tub. The camera tracks them into the bathroom from behind, where you can see the tub, then pans over their heads and drops down BEHIND the tub where you can see him place her into the water from below, all in one continuous shot.
It is always fun to be surprised by these seamless, 'invisible' effects, that a surprising number of people never notice. It is embarassing to be sitting there going 'ohh, coool, did you see that?' and only get blank stares.
It's obvious he lives in the UK. They must have PAL time there, whereas we're stuck with a Film-based time system.
The new LifeBook is only slightly larger, has a 7-hour battery, 1280x768 screen, DVD, 3 lbs, and built-in wireless.
So is the article described correctly in the susbscription slashdot?
You are right I must be in a dream world. One were honest mistakes don't happen and people flame for the slightest thing.
I never would have watched it if not for it being in HD. It was the first available show on while I was checking out my HD OTA reception on my new 51" wide-screen TV.
I'll always remember the first time I saw it come on. The tailing end of Survivor was on, in 4:3 with gray bars. Then up came CSI, at 4:3 with gray bars. As the 5.1 music kicked in, the "Simulcast in HDTV" faded in at the bottom, and at the same time the gray bars moved apart and the image (nighttime shot of Vegas) grew to fill the space. Incredible! I sat there with my mouth hanging open with tears in my eyes. What a beautiful sight! (they haven't done the animated bars since though)
For those of you who think you're getting the same experience with your $100 HD decoder card and your 17" monitor, dream on.
I can see maybe wanting to save up some shows to watch on laptop for a long flight, but who actually sits at their PC to watch TV shows? I just don't get it. I have a rec room with big HDTV for watching TV. The PC is for doing "PC" stuff.
Yeah, they also said it was a Boeing Airbus, and the size info they got was from Boeing's web-site.
Um, yeah. Way to go CNN.
Herman Miller Aeron Chair
I work out of the house, and bought one of these a few years ago. It really is amazing.
I played the first DM while a freshman at NC State Raleigh. I, my dormmate, and a few others from the hall would go down to the quad each night, load up on snacks (I literally came back with $4 worth of MM's and candy bars, and a 22 ounce soda, each night), come back and play the game. One guy would map, I would drive, and the others would chill on the bunk behind us. People would occasionally stop by to see how far we had gotten.
The coolest experience ever was when we discovered you could kill the mutant shrubs by getting it to stand in a doorway and watch the door smash it to bits! We laughed for hours after.
So you never heard the phrase 'putting the bat in the upper deck'?
This was about 10 years, ago, but a buddy of mine and I wanted to see what we could get away with. I wrote a letter to my girlfriend on the inside of a pint-sized carton of milk (empty), then taped it back up to look like the original carton, and put the address on the outside. It got there about a month later, flattened open and stuffed inside a mailing envelope. You should have seen the looks from people in line behind me. I had forgotten all about it and was at her house the day it showed up.
We also discussed what would happen if we mailed a pineapple, with "hand cancel" written on the outside. Those spines are sharp!