"It'd be much, much worse actually - the scale-up from a 50x50 to a 200x200 image would mean a theoretical 16x increase in bandwidth"
oh yea.. hehe, I kinda thought he just doubled the dpi but he quadrupled it. wow that's smart:P
I've difficulty keeping the size of the graphics per page down to 200-300kb on some more "edge" multimedia modern sites, so that would make roughly 4 MB page.
"With proper interpolation, an 72dpi NxN image will look about as good at NxN on a 200dpi screen as on 72dpi screen. Slightly worse, but not much."
IE7 applies such proper interpolation - bicubic.
On the contrary however it looks much worse, and to illustrate that try running 640x480 mode on a stock 1280x1024 LCD and on a CRT of the same size.. Even though modern LCD's apply bilinear or bicubic interpolation, it looks aliased and overall pretty bad, on CRT it looks just right.
That's the same reason you can't fool the eye with a 72dpi print on a 300dpi paper even though the same image looks ok on a 72dpi screen. Interpolation can smooth things a bit, but of course won't add the missing detail.
"On the 225dpi screen, Opera is the only option for a browser, since most web sites use resolution-dependent units for many things and end up with something too small to read."
Images are resolution dependent, it's their nature. Even if all CSS used % and em, images would remain resolution dependent.
Apparently the problem is with IE6 and Firefox not resizing images, not the sites. IE7 will also sport zoom mode so here's a second option for you.
I have a question: what the 'ell is that consumer device with a 225dpi screen:) ?
And another question: would you like to waste the 4x RAM and 4x bandwidth when browsing high dpi sites?
Let's say the Web designer uses a 50×50 pixel image for the button. What if you could use a 200×200 image instead?
Let me answer this one: the raster graphics in your site will be close to 4 times larger in bandwidth.
The SVG solution is as viable as ignoring Internet Explorer for a site can be, but of course you can have Flash as a fallback as there are many SVG parsers and renderers written for Flash. Whether you want to do that is another question, as 2-3 pieces of Flash on a page can be ok, but 20-30 can easily kill your CPU and RAM.
Why are we talking about that at all?
The industry is still struggling to get average-DPI screens right and high-DPI screens are still a thing that's "to come any moment now" for quite some time.
An OS lasts a long time and adoption is slow, so it makes sense that OSX and Vista have to be high-DPI ready (Vista already is, and the next OSX also will be I believe).
But a website has a very short span of life and needs to be updated on an almost daily basis, and there's no such thing as "update adoption": next time the user visits the site he gets the latest copy.
So bottom line: sounds like a fad and does more harm than help. Let's have high DPI screen adoption first and people demanding high DPI sites, and it's all a matter of updating your site to reach that audience the moment you upload the changes.
"In other news, people claim that Vista is "the biggest disappontment ever", and it remains to be seen if the bulk of users really switches to Vista."
Paul Thurott is not "people", he's just a guy with a very popular site about MS software who got used to bitching about stuff he wants his way as if Bill Gates is his subordinate.
In his 2003 review of upcoming's Vista features he was shocked by the flexibility of Avalon, nothing from Avalon was dropped and all that flexibility is implemented in Vista and as a free XP upgrade as well, but now it's suddenly "nothing cool to see here, move along". Some consistency and logic would help critical visitors of taking him more seriously.
Also don't forget that what drives adoption of Windows is not upgrades as much as the PC vendors preinstalling it in the machines they sell. It'll take some time, say 4-6 years, before we see serious Vista adoption, but it's inevitable.
Depends on the meaning you put behind "many", but either way expect "many" to morph to "barely any" as WinFX apps start popping with Vista's adoption in the next 4-5 years.
Not to mention that the Wine project is getting pretty dang close to Win32. DirectX included.
Great, you probably realize it's pretty funny they are only now "getting pretty close to Win32" as Microsoft is phasing it out. It's an already lost war.
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has suggested a mandatory website self-rating system. The system, very similar to one suggested under Clinton's administration, would require by law
Mr attorney, have you never heard of those two simple facts:
1. Internet means "international network" as in being not only in US, but being, you know, international. 2. US law doesn't apply automatically over the entire world.
How did this get moderated "funny"? It's serious. Surely this law would have to ban nudes in art. The next step would then be to remove them from public display in museums.
And further steps to follow:
Plugging the Analog Hole by having cameras detect nudity and refuse to take photos.
Sewing the clothes to people's skin with 5 to 15 years jail time threatening those who dare to take it off
You may recognize that porting Win32 is far from enough to have modern and future Windows apps running on OSX. They'll have to port DirectX,.NET, Avalon, Indigo, in the near future WinFS and more like those.
Porting Win32 is hard enough, but I can tell you Apple has neither time nor resources to port the entire WinFX framework.
And this, besides making it easy for devs to make Vista apps, is the whole reason WinFX exists in first place, to lock apps further into Windows with a sophisticated, very flexible and capable, yet simple to use framework.
That's the key, isn't it? You just don't know YET what will you put on it.
Increasing the capacity of the network speed, storage, RAM, cpu speed: they don't just make doing what you're already doing faster. They open the possibility for entire new class of tasks impossible and unthinkable before.
If you asked a guy from the late 80-s what would he do with a 200 GB gigabyte disk on his original IBM PC he'd either laugh, dismiss you or tell you you're crazy.
This is because for him 200 gigabyte is over 200 billion of text characters, and therefore that's really a huge load of books, and something he'll never use.
You're doing the same, trying to compute how many DVD-s or RAW photos you can stuff on that disk. How about thinking how many Blue-Ray (30GB) movies you can store? And that's just a random example since I don't really know what use people will find for that space, I just know it'll naturally come.
I have 400 GB worth of disks on my work PC and they're filled up. When I got my first 120 GB disk first thing I said naturally was "shit I'll NEVER EVER run out of space again!", I ran out of space few months later.
Surprisingly as storage increased in late 80-s / early 90-s, people didn't start storing a huge load of books, they started storing images, crude videos and other multimedia and data never before possible on a computer. You know how incredibly cool that ~ 320x120 10fps video intro looked on StarCraft right, you'd think "wow just like on a TV, my computer is like a TV!"
As it increased further, better-than-VCR quality movies became possible on a computer, so people used the storage for that.
Did you think Windows 95 was huge OS at being around 50 MB? Vista is gonna be over a gig. To put things in perspective, not long ago, on my AMD K5 100MHz I used to sport a 1.08 GB disk and I had ~ 600 MB free most of the time.
"have no propblem joking about themselves, or the group they identify with"
Seeing the situation doesn't change in time, apparently joking about yourself doesn't solve the problems you joke about.
Also you've just done what grandparent said, and turned "joking about how miserable we are" into "since we're smarter and the rest are dumber and can't".
But in the end it's a self defence mechanism, you can either get depressed about it or laugh about it, but it's still there either way.
Constantly kidding about stuff around you and especially about yourself is a book example of suppressed emotions and trying to attract attention from the people around you.
Expect a massive migration away from compressed formats, for example - JPEGs going to PNGs and TIFFs.
Having larger disk doesn't make my Internet go faster so JPG-s are here to stay. As for photos, all mid-range and hi-end cameras already use RAW formats.
Your music collection of MP3/OGG/AAC may be re-sold to you in 32-bit (regular CDs use 16-bit, which was always just barely acceptable to critics of the format).
They have only whitnessed this over how many generations? I would imagine with every offspring, you have a handful more mutations. After a while, you have oatmeal.
It'd better be oatmeal, since I wouldn't like bear, deer and mouse versions of X-men walking around.
This is just what we need, another excuse to talk about the differences between "us" and "them." We are smart and inqusitive. They are stupid and lacking imagination.
What I find interesting is that when one Slashdotter jokes about how the rest of the Slashdotter are in deep romantic relationship with their left hand, or how they live in their mom's basement, the rest of the Slashdotters cheer him up and pat him on the back in agreement, and mod him +5 Funny.
Is that the result of being intellectually... uhmmm curious?
Goran Jovanovic reports his invention is approximately the size of a credit card.
I'm wow-factor-shocked! Size of a credit card.
Ok now that this has passed, the amount of fuel you can process with one of these a diesel butterfly, for more, you need a pretty large stack of those.
Pretty impressive and futuristic nonetheless, even if the prospect of carrying a portable biodiesel reactor in your wallet is busted.
You have to read the entire contract. It appears from the first several paragraphs that these limitations apply only to journal *owners* and not to readers:
But then it doesn't make sense, does it. The penalty is possible account termination. So what, if I install ad-block and jump from journal to journal I'm effectively doing a mass journal massacre.
So, beware, cause I'm installing it right now and coming.
Katamari Damacy concentrates on gameplay, where Revolution makes it seem if you don't use the capabilities of the new joystick your game will suck. It's understandable that he can become a bit frustrated having to rethink the control use and build a gameplay around it, he might also give couple of bitter intervews but with time he'll get over it...
And by the way, without the add-on the Revolution controller has one joystick and Katamari requires two, one more reason for his grievance.
"Apple is not subject to monopoly constraints because they don't have sufficient market presence."
OSX have 100% market share on the market of Apple computers, don't they.
Apparently law undertstanding is pretty flexible if you're willing to put it to a critical analysis. You can claim Windows has a dominant position on PC's, PC's is just a special case of a programmable electronic device, just like Apple Macintosh is a special case of a personal computer machine.
Windows isn't dominant on electronic devices that accept an OS as a whole, so from that point of view they are suddenly not a monopoly, just like you claim Apple isn't a monopoly since you look at the whole PC market and not just the Macintosh computers market.
----
Also you become a monopoly if you have a dominant position you say, what % is that share that makes it a dominant position? If Apple turns out successful in time, could you be really nice, please, and let them know at which % they should turn the policy up side down and immediately dismantle their OS in pieces.
Do you know what this reminds me of. The Analog Hole proposal. The same those Slashdot users that flame MS on being monopolistic and how this is so different from the position Linux and Apple is, were pointing out how ridiculous it is to have DRM on "consumer" devices" but no DRM on "professional" devices (so they can do their work).
And the problem was the same: if a professional device model gradually becomes affordable and popular, at what point it turns into a consumer device, which will, of course automatically mean the said device manifacturer is sued as hell for selling consumer devices without DRM.
Slashdot Mirror
"It'd be much, much worse actually - the scale-up from a 50x50 to a 200x200 image would mean a theoretical 16x increase in bandwidth"
:P
oh yea.. hehe, I kinda thought he just doubled the dpi but he quadrupled it. wow that's smart
I've difficulty keeping the size of the graphics per page down to 200-300kb on some more "edge" multimedia modern sites, so that would make roughly 4 MB page.
"With proper interpolation, an 72dpi NxN image will look about as good at NxN on a 200dpi screen as on 72dpi screen. Slightly worse, but not much."
IE7 applies such proper interpolation - bicubic.
On the contrary however it looks much worse, and to illustrate that try running 640x480 mode on a stock 1280x1024 LCD and on a CRT of the same size.. Even though modern LCD's apply bilinear or bicubic interpolation, it looks aliased and overall pretty bad, on CRT it looks just right.
That's the same reason you can't fool the eye with a 72dpi print on a 300dpi paper even though the same image looks ok on a 72dpi screen. Interpolation can smooth things a bit, but of course won't add the missing detail.
"On the 225dpi screen, Opera is the only option for a browser, since most web sites use resolution-dependent units for many things and end up with something too small to read."
:) ?
Images are resolution dependent, it's their nature. Even if all CSS used % and em, images would remain resolution dependent.
Apparently the problem is with IE6 and Firefox not resizing images, not the sites. IE7 will also sport zoom mode so here's a second option for you.
I have a question: what the 'ell is that consumer device with a 225dpi screen
And another question: would you like to waste the 4x RAM and 4x bandwidth when browsing high dpi sites?
Let's say the Web designer uses a 50×50 pixel image for the button. What if you could use a 200×200 image instead?
Let me answer this one: the raster graphics in your site will be close to 4 times larger in bandwidth.
The SVG solution is as viable as ignoring Internet Explorer for a site can be, but of course you can have Flash as a fallback as there are many SVG parsers and renderers written for Flash. Whether you want to do that is another question, as 2-3 pieces of Flash on a page can be ok, but 20-30 can easily kill your CPU and RAM.
Why are we talking about that at all?
The industry is still struggling to get average-DPI screens right and high-DPI screens are still a thing that's "to come any moment now" for quite some time.
An OS lasts a long time and adoption is slow, so it makes sense that OSX and Vista have to be high-DPI ready (Vista already is, and the next OSX also will be I believe).
But a website has a very short span of life and needs to be updated on an almost daily basis, and there's no such thing as "update adoption": next time the user visits the site he gets the latest copy.
So bottom line: sounds like a fad and does more harm than help. Let's have high DPI screen adoption first and people demanding high DPI sites, and it's all a matter of updating your site to reach that audience the moment you upload the changes.
"In other news, people claim that Vista is "the biggest disappontment ever", and it remains to be seen if the bulk of users really switches to Vista."
Paul Thurott is not "people", he's just a guy with a very popular site about MS software who got used to bitching about stuff he wants his way as if Bill Gates is his subordinate.
In his 2003 review of upcoming's Vista features he was shocked by the flexibility of Avalon, nothing from Avalon was dropped and all that flexibility is implemented in Vista and as a free XP upgrade as well, but now it's suddenly "nothing cool to see here, move along". Some consistency and logic would help critical visitors of taking him more seriously.
Also don't forget that what drives adoption of Windows is not upgrades as much as the PC vendors preinstalling it in the machines they sell. It'll take some time, say 4-6 years, before we see serious Vista adoption, but it's inevitable.
Wine already works with many XP apps.
Depends on the meaning you put behind "many", but either way expect "many" to morph to "barely any" as WinFX apps start popping with Vista's adoption in the next 4-5 years.
Not to mention that the Wine project is getting pretty dang close to Win32. DirectX included.
Great, you probably realize it's pretty funny they are only now "getting pretty close to Win32" as Microsoft is phasing it out. It's an already lost war.
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has suggested a mandatory website self-rating system. The system, very similar to one suggested under Clinton's administration, would require by law
Mr attorney, have you never heard of those two simple facts:
1. Internet means "international network" as in being not only in US, but being, you know, international.
2. US law doesn't apply automatically over the entire world.
And further steps to follow:
You may recognize that porting Win32 is far from enough to have modern and future Windows apps running on OSX. They'll have to port DirectX, .NET, Avalon, Indigo, in the near future WinFS and more like those.
Porting Win32 is hard enough, but I can tell you Apple has neither time nor resources to port the entire WinFX framework.
And this, besides making it easy for devs to make Vista apps, is the whole reason WinFX exists in first place, to lock apps further into Windows with a sophisticated, very flexible and capable, yet simple to use framework.
What will you PUT on it?
That's the key, isn't it? You just don't know YET what will you put on it.
Increasing the capacity of the network speed, storage, RAM, cpu speed: they don't just make doing what you're already doing faster. They open the possibility for entire new class of tasks impossible and unthinkable before.
If you asked a guy from the late 80-s what would he do with a 200 GB gigabyte disk on his original IBM PC he'd either laugh, dismiss you or tell you you're crazy.
This is because for him 200 gigabyte is over 200 billion of text characters, and therefore that's really a huge load of books, and something he'll never use.
You're doing the same, trying to compute how many DVD-s or RAW photos you can stuff on that disk. How about thinking how many Blue-Ray (30GB) movies you can store? And that's just a random example since I don't really know what use people will find for that space, I just know it'll naturally come.
I have 400 GB worth of disks on my work PC and they're filled up. When I got my first 120 GB disk first thing I said naturally was "shit I'll NEVER EVER run out of space again!", I ran out of space few months later.
Surprisingly as storage increased in late 80-s / early 90-s, people didn't start storing a huge load of books, they started storing images, crude videos and other multimedia and data never before possible on a computer. You know how incredibly cool that ~ 320x120 10fps video intro looked on StarCraft right, you'd think "wow just like on a TV, my computer is like a TV!"
As it increased further, better-than-VCR quality movies became possible on a computer, so people used the storage for that.
Did you think Windows 95 was huge OS at being around 50 MB? Vista is gonna be over a gig. To put things in perspective, not long ago, on my AMD K5 100MHz I used to sport a 1.08 GB disk and I had ~ 600 MB free most of the time.
"have no propblem joking about themselves, or the group they identify with"
Seeing the situation doesn't change in time, apparently joking about yourself doesn't solve the problems you joke about.
Also you've just done what grandparent said, and turned "joking about how miserable we are" into "since we're smarter and the rest are dumber and can't".
But in the end it's a self defence mechanism, you can either get depressed about it or laugh about it, but it's still there either way.
Constantly kidding about stuff around you and especially about yourself is a book example of suppressed emotions and trying to attract attention from the people around you.
that will hold almost half of my porn!
:)
Aaah! Getting modded up on Slashdot, almost as good as having a life
2006:
A terabyte is a lot. It will be a lot 5 years later, and quite a lot even 10 years later.
1996:
A gibabyte is a lot. It will be a lot 5 years later, and quite a lot even 10 years later.
1986:
20 megabytes is a lot. It will be a lot 5 years later, and quite a lot even 10 years later.
Expect a massive migration away from compressed formats, for example - JPEGs going to PNGs and TIFFs.
:)
Having larger disk doesn't make my Internet go faster so JPG-s are here to stay. As for photos, all mid-range and hi-end cameras already use RAW formats.
Your music collection of MP3/OGG/AAC may be re-sold to you in 32-bit (regular CDs use 16-bit, which was always just barely acceptable to critics of the format).
Yep, DVDA is such a hit!
They have only whitnessed this over how many generations? I would imagine with every offspring, you have a handful more mutations. After a while, you have oatmeal.
It'd better be oatmeal, since I wouldn't like bear, deer and mouse versions of X-men walking around.
A former Soviet Republic has developed Radioactive Bears?
You wish... Thing is that footprint isn't a radioactive bear footprint, just a really really big radioactive mouse footprint.
With Microsoft having the largest Mac and Linux labs, no wonder they forgot they've a Windows release to finish.
You see, them scientist were wrong! Let's drink a cup of radioactive drink and nuke each other in celebration.
They conclude that 60 million Americans can be called "intellectually curious." Intellectually, I'm curious what that makes the rest of them."
;)
The rest are "socially curious". The two groups are mostly mutually exclusive.
This is just what we need, another excuse to talk about the differences between "us" and "them." We are smart and inqusitive. They are stupid and lacking imagination.
What I find interesting is that when one Slashdotter jokes about how the rest of the Slashdotter are in deep romantic relationship with their left hand, or how they live in their mom's basement, the rest of the Slashdotters cheer him up and pat him on the back in agreement, and mod him +5 Funny.
Is that the result of being intellectually... uhmmm curious?
Goran Jovanovic reports his invention is approximately the size of a credit card.
I'm wow-factor-shocked! Size of a credit card.
Ok now that this has passed, the amount of fuel you can process with one of these a diesel butterfly, for more, you need a pretty large stack of those.
Pretty impressive and futuristic nonetheless, even if the prospect of carrying a portable biodiesel reactor in your wallet is busted.
You have to read the entire contract. It appears from the first several paragraphs that these limitations apply only to journal *owners* and not to readers:
But then it doesn't make sense, does it. The penalty is possible account termination. So what, if I install ad-block and jump from journal to journal I'm effectively doing a mass journal massacre.
So, beware, cause I'm installing it right now and coming.
So wait, we're talking about a rumour of Google coming up with a product... Microsoft quickly responds with a rumour of a product too.
Go Microsoft, go!
Katamari Damacy concentrates on gameplay, where Revolution makes it seem if you don't use the capabilities of the new joystick your game will suck. It's understandable that he can become a bit frustrated having to rethink the control use and build a gameplay around it, he might also give couple of bitter intervews but with time he'll get over it...
And by the way, without the add-on the Revolution controller has one joystick and Katamari requires two, one more reason for his grievance.
"Apple is not subject to monopoly constraints because they don't have sufficient market presence."
OSX have 100% market share on the market of Apple computers, don't they.
Apparently law undertstanding is pretty flexible if you're willing to put it to a critical analysis. You can claim Windows has a dominant position on PC's, PC's is just a special case of a programmable electronic device, just like Apple Macintosh is a special case of a personal computer machine.
Windows isn't dominant on electronic devices that accept an OS as a whole, so from that point of view they are suddenly not a monopoly, just like you claim Apple isn't a monopoly since you look at the whole PC market and not just the Macintosh computers market.
----
Also you become a monopoly if you have a dominant position you say, what % is that share that makes it a dominant position? If Apple turns out successful in time, could you be really nice, please, and let them know at which % they should turn the policy up side down and immediately dismantle their OS in pieces.
Do you know what this reminds me of. The Analog Hole proposal. The same those Slashdot users that flame MS on being monopolistic and how this is so different from the position Linux and Apple is, were pointing out how ridiculous it is to have DRM on "consumer" devices" but no DRM on "professional" devices (so they can do their work).
And the problem was the same: if a professional device model gradually becomes affordable and popular, at what point it turns into a consumer device, which will, of course automatically mean the said device manifacturer is sued as hell for selling consumer devices without DRM.