That part depends not only on each individual's own sensory system (we all don't see/hear exactly the same way!), but our own values, desires, and preferences. Those things are inheriently subjective.
You act like I don't understand what you're saying. I do, which is why, as I mentioned (and you ignored), your argument could just as well be that there's no difference between 1 pixel flashing on the screen and HD. A blind man could easily say we're crazy for not just listening to the radio. Subjectively, he's right. To him, there would be no difference.
The thing is, that argument has no bearing on reality, and please don't tell me reality is all about perception... Saying truth or reality depends on perception could be applied to anything. "When I see planes flying, it has nothing to do with 'lift'. Angels carry the planes." "Cellphones? Easy, fairies carry your voice to and from other phones. I see them!"
And maybe I really do see them--maybe I'm hallucinating. You certainly can't argue with me, because you can't see what I see. Anything you say is irrelevant when it comes to my subjective reality, my subjective truth...which is exactly why it shouldn't be mentioned in any sort of factual discussion.
And until you and the other BD fans grok that distinction, you'll never understand why BD hasn't gone anywhere in the market, and in its present form, probably never will.
I could not care less if Blu-ray never became more popular. You're lumping me into some generic group of "BD fans", as if my goal here is to espouse the merits of the format, decisively converting non-believers. It's really not... I simply thought it was silly for the GP to put "visual quality" in quotes, as if Blu-ray didn't beat DVD there--as if all those cable and satellite providers were wrong for selling HD channels.
I don't know how to state this more clearly. Since you've already ignored it twice now, I imagine it's going to happen again, but here goes... Just because you can't see the difference, just because that difference is not appealing to you, does not mean there is no difference.
I get that quality is subjective. I get that you can't see the difference. I also get that just because I can't perceive something doesn't mean it's not there. I'm not so egocentric that I believe what I see or don't see is reality.
What's the difference between MP3-320k and FLAC for me? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.
Yeah, same for me. Hell, I can't even hear a difference between 128kbps mp3s and FLAC. Now, repeat after me: That doesn't mean there isn't a difference.
Frankly, I don't even understand what point you're trying to make. That you can't tell the difference? Good for you, but who cares? Like I said and you quoted, just because it's not appealing to you doesn't mean it's not true. That's it. That was my whole point.
I'm not debating whether or not you can see the difference. Honestly, I don't care that you can't. You could just as easily tell me that you can't tell the difference between 1 pixel and HD and your argument would be the exact same.
Think about it: are you really wanting to claim that all a painter has to do to make a better painting is to throw more paint on the canvas? More paint *always* means a better painting?!?
Of course not, just like I'm not claiming that watching Gigli in HD makes it a better movie. It makes it look better--that's all. It doesn't make it a better movie. If a painter created a 2" x 2" painting and stretched it to fit a 50" TV, it would naturally not contain the same level of detail as if he had created it on a 50" canvas.
Why put visually better in quotes? It is visually better. That's the whole point. Sure, maybe that's not enough to make it appealing to you, but that's no reason to act like it's not true.
In general, I find it silly to compare the Wii and the 360. In my eyes, they're really not competitors. I'm not at all trying to dismiss the Wii--it's selling great, it's got a lot of hype surrounding it, and it definitely has an incredibly innovative control system, but beyond that it's just not very interesting as a gaming system or as a media device.
If you look at the numbers, you'll quickly find that the 360 has a much higher software to hardware attachment rate. The simple fact of the matter is the 360 has far more good games. In fact, it has 3-4x as many (depending on whether or not you want to count RE4) games in the 90's on Metacritic. Beyond Super Mario Galaxy, Corruption, and Twilight Princess, there's just not that much available for the Wii. Don't get me wrong, I'll likely be buying one at some point for Mario alone, but in the past 3 weeks, I've bought Call of Duty 4, Assassin's Creed, and Mass Effect for the 360 (with Rock Band soon to follow). Even if each of those games were on the Wii, they wouldn't be near as appealing due to the limited graphics I'd see relative to either of the other next-gen consoles.
On a somewhat related note, I still don't own a single game for my PS3. MGS4 and LittleBigPlanet should hopefully be changing that, but until then it's unfortunately nothing more than a glorified DVD player for me. Once again, only 3 games in the 90's on Metacritic...
Sounds like it's the fault of the company every step of the way. Lazy IT department, incompetent management, and whiny (surely incompetent, as well) employees.
The fact that the story is about Outlook in particular (as you've pointed out very clearly here) and the headline references all of Office 2007 is FUD enough. Besides, did you just not read the rest of his post?
And for the record, I've tried importing the mail from an Outlook 2007 PST file in Outlook 2003, and it works perfectly fine. There's also apparently workarounds for importing 2007 PST files into earlier versions of Outlook - including 2003 into XP, 2000, and so forth - as described here [microsoft.com].
Your assumption seems to be that Novell could hand out copies of linux that are licensed with GPLv3, and Microsoft could do nothing about. If that's the case, how can you seriously consider Microsoft to be distributing the software? If they have NO ability to decide what software the users receive, I highly doubt that constitutes distribution in any important sense of the word.
I wouldn't disagree that busywork is nothing but a waste of time. However, I would contend that you probably shouldn't be considered a "model student". Honestly, I doubt anybody considered you a bad student, but that's not really the point. It's a false dichotomy to believe you're a bad student simply because you're not a model student.
The popularity of Halo and Halo 2 shows just the opposite. Microsoft didn't copy anybody with Halo (though they did buy Bungie), they didn't "re-package it as something brand new", and they got it right in version one.
Geez, ad hominem attacks really derogate your argument. Honestly, anything you might have said that had any credibility is lost to me now. I imagine you'll reply with some sort of "I don't care what you think" retort, but really... How hard is to debate with legitimate arguments?
I've seen people comparing the PS3 to the iPhone because of their similar prices in more than one place recently, but that makes very little sense. They're entirely different products, and there's no reason to compare their prices. Now I can say any $600 product is "down right cheap", simply because I think the iPhone is overpriced at that level?
I'm not even suggesting that the PS3 is overpriced, but to suggest otherwise on the basis that the iPhone costs the same amount is pretty ridiculous. In any event, you've got to realize that Apple has been successful selling much of their hardware at a premium for years now. They know their market.
Bah. A typical car does most of the same things as a BMW. Likewise, I'm sure your SLVR does a lot of the same things as a Treo. Regardless, a lot of people think they're worth the extra cost. It will probably be the same for the iPhone.
Just for the record, imho, you were neither nitpicky nor impatient. For that matter, you were also right. When it comes to technical discussions, it's often very important to understand the terms one is throwing around. The AC clearly has no idea what AJAX actually is or how to use it intelligently.
That can easily be taken into account for by creating a mobile version of the particular web app. Google has done a great job with the mobile version for Gmail, for instance. The fact of the matter is that what the grandparent stated is true in most cases. Why not make the common case faster when you can still account for the other cases?
You really said nothing to refute my point. Yes, these things can and have been done legally. Yes, they help stop crime. Sure, maybe most European governments have fewer restrictions than the U.S.
So what? If the government isn't doint it legally, they're doing it illegally. So, plain and simple, that means it's illegal. There's the problem. I don't care if it stops crime. It's illegal, and there's a reason it's illegal.
Because European governments have fewer restrictions, that should convince me that it's ok for our government to capitalize on that? No, it doesn't work that way. I don't care where in the world our government is operating, our laws should still apply to them, especially when it comes to the freedoms of our citizens.
As I sad before, and you failed entirely to respond to, there are a lot of things we could do to stop terrorism. Don't allow the populace out on the streets. Now anybody found outside is a prime terror suspect. That doesn't make it right.
The side I'm on is the one that is always against terrorists. I am a veteran and I vote, deal with it.
Your being a veteran has nothing to do with this debate. The only reason you'd mention it is because you obviously feel that makes your vote more important, which is utter bullshit. If that was the case, you'd think some of these retired generals would be taken a little more seriously, wouldn't you?
Slashdot Mirror
You act like I don't understand what you're saying. I do, which is why, as I mentioned (and you ignored), your argument could just as well be that there's no difference between 1 pixel flashing on the screen and HD. A blind man could easily say we're crazy for not just listening to the radio. Subjectively, he's right. To him, there would be no difference.
The thing is, that argument has no bearing on reality, and please don't tell me reality is all about perception... Saying truth or reality depends on perception could be applied to anything. "When I see planes flying, it has nothing to do with 'lift'. Angels carry the planes." "Cellphones? Easy, fairies carry your voice to and from other phones. I see them!"
And maybe I really do see them--maybe I'm hallucinating. You certainly can't argue with me, because you can't see what I see. Anything you say is irrelevant when it comes to my subjective reality, my subjective truth...which is exactly why it shouldn't be mentioned in any sort of factual discussion.
I could not care less if Blu-ray never became more popular. You're lumping me into some generic group of "BD fans", as if my goal here is to espouse the merits of the format, decisively converting non-believers. It's really not... I simply thought it was silly for the GP to put "visual quality" in quotes, as if Blu-ray didn't beat DVD there--as if all those cable and satellite providers were wrong for selling HD channels.
I don't know how to state this more clearly. Since you've already ignored it twice now, I imagine it's going to happen again, but here goes... Just because you can't see the difference, just because that difference is not appealing to you, does not mean there is no difference.
I get that quality is subjective. I get that you can't see the difference. I also get that just because I can't perceive something doesn't mean it's not there. I'm not so egocentric that I believe what I see or don't see is reality.
Yeah, same for me. Hell, I can't even hear a difference between 128kbps mp3s and FLAC. Now, repeat after me: That doesn't mean there isn't a difference.
Frankly, I don't even understand what point you're trying to make. That you can't tell the difference? Good for you, but who cares? Like I said and you quoted, just because it's not appealing to you doesn't mean it's not true. That's it. That was my whole point.
I'm not debating whether or not you can see the difference. Honestly, I don't care that you can't. You could just as easily tell me that you can't tell the difference between 1 pixel and HD and your argument would be the exact same.
Of course not, just like I'm not claiming that watching Gigli in HD makes it a better movie. It makes it look better--that's all. It doesn't make it a better movie. If a painter created a 2" x 2" painting and stretched it to fit a 50" TV, it would naturally not contain the same level of detail as if he had created it on a 50" canvas.
Why put visually better in quotes? It is visually better. That's the whole point. Sure, maybe that's not enough to make it appealing to you, but that's no reason to act like it's not true.
Since they're volunteers, it's ok that they're killed?
In general, I find it silly to compare the Wii and the 360. In my eyes, they're really not competitors. I'm not at all trying to dismiss the Wii--it's selling great, it's got a lot of hype surrounding it, and it definitely has an incredibly innovative control system, but beyond that it's just not very interesting as a gaming system or as a media device.
If you look at the numbers, you'll quickly find that the 360 has a much higher software to hardware attachment rate. The simple fact of the matter is the 360 has far more good games. In fact, it has 3-4x as many (depending on whether or not you want to count RE4) games in the 90's on Metacritic. Beyond Super Mario Galaxy, Corruption, and Twilight Princess, there's just not that much available for the Wii. Don't get me wrong, I'll likely be buying one at some point for Mario alone, but in the past 3 weeks, I've bought Call of Duty 4, Assassin's Creed, and Mass Effect for the 360 (with Rock Band soon to follow). Even if each of those games were on the Wii, they wouldn't be near as appealing due to the limited graphics I'd see relative to either of the other next-gen consoles.
On a somewhat related note, I still don't own a single game for my PS3. MGS4 and LittleBigPlanet should hopefully be changing that, but until then it's unfortunately nothing more than a glorified DVD player for me. Once again, only 3 games in the 90's on Metacritic...
"YOu're 15, I;ll cutr you some slack." "Until you really get to know them, then somethings people say on slashdot will just make your brain hurt."
Surely Ad Hominem is on that list. Did you happen to read it yourself?
Hm, you must be the guy that decided not to include pictures messaging in the iPhone. Thank you very much for that.
Yeah, Halo was certainly pitiful after Bungie's acquisition.
And yet if Office hadn't radically changed their UI, the comments would likely be about the fact that Office is the same every year... How ironic.
Amazon Unbox. Pretty simple replacement, really.
Judging by the grammar and spelling in your post, you have no room to be calling anybody else incompetent. Coward.
Sounds like it's the fault of the company every step of the way. Lazy IT department, incompetent management, and whiny (surely incompetent, as well) employees.
Oh, for fuck's sake... Installing a compatibility pack or simply choosing to save as another file format is not the same as using Linux.
Your assumption seems to be that Novell could hand out copies of linux that are licensed with GPLv3, and Microsoft could do nothing about. If that's the case, how can you seriously consider Microsoft to be distributing the software? If they have NO ability to decide what software the users receive, I highly doubt that constitutes distribution in any important sense of the word.
I wouldn't disagree that busywork is nothing but a waste of time. However, I would contend that you probably shouldn't be considered a "model student". Honestly, I doubt anybody considered you a bad student, but that's not really the point. It's a false dichotomy to believe you're a bad student simply because you're not a model student.
And that happens to be entirely irrelevant.
Oh wtf? This is what gets modded insightful?
The popularity of Halo and Halo 2 shows just the opposite. Microsoft didn't copy anybody with Halo (though they did buy Bungie), they didn't "re-package it as something brand new", and they got it right in version one.
That has FUD written all over it.
Geez, ad hominem attacks really derogate your argument. Honestly, anything you might have said that had any credibility is lost to me now. I imagine you'll reply with some sort of "I don't care what you think" retort, but really... How hard is to debate with legitimate arguments?
I've seen people comparing the PS3 to the iPhone because of their similar prices in more than one place recently, but that makes very little sense. They're entirely different products, and there's no reason to compare their prices. Now I can say any $600 product is "down right cheap", simply because I think the iPhone is overpriced at that level?
I'm not even suggesting that the PS3 is overpriced, but to suggest otherwise on the basis that the iPhone costs the same amount is pretty ridiculous. In any event, you've got to realize that Apple has been successful selling much of their hardware at a premium for years now. They know their market.
Bah. A typical car does most of the same things as a BMW. Likewise, I'm sure your SLVR does a lot of the same things as a Treo. Regardless, a lot of people think they're worth the extra cost. It will probably be the same for the iPhone.
Just for the record, imho, you were neither nitpicky nor impatient. For that matter, you were also right. When it comes to technical discussions, it's often very important to understand the terms one is throwing around. The AC clearly has no idea what AJAX actually is or how to use it intelligently.
That can easily be taken into account for by creating a mobile version of the particular web app. Google has done a great job with the mobile version for Gmail, for instance. The fact of the matter is that what the grandparent stated is true in most cases. Why not make the common case faster when you can still account for the other cases?
You really said nothing to refute my point. Yes, these things can and have been done legally. Yes, they help stop crime. Sure, maybe most European governments have fewer restrictions than the U.S.
So what? If the government isn't doint it legally, they're doing it illegally. So, plain and simple, that means it's illegal. There's the problem. I don't care if it stops crime. It's illegal, and there's a reason it's illegal.
Because European governments have fewer restrictions, that should convince me that it's ok for our government to capitalize on that? No, it doesn't work that way. I don't care where in the world our government is operating, our laws should still apply to them, especially when it comes to the freedoms of our citizens.
As I sad before, and you failed entirely to respond to, there are a lot of things we could do to stop terrorism. Don't allow the populace out on the streets. Now anybody found outside is a prime terror suspect. That doesn't make it right.
The side I'm on is the one that is always against terrorists. I am a veteran and I vote, deal with it.
Your being a veteran has nothing to do with this debate. The only reason you'd mention it is because you obviously feel that makes your vote more important, which is utter bullshit. If that was the case, you'd think some of these retired generals would be taken a little more seriously, wouldn't you?