Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Meet the new version, same as the old version. (Score 1) 605

Most of my friends who use macs (none of whom are technical, they're all in the design space) just gave up on trying to get their old software to work with the new version and bought all new software. Compare that with Microsoft where althought they're not officially supported, almost all DOS applications will still run. So if you bought some piece of software in 1988 for DOS 3.0 chances are pretty good that it will run on Vista.

That's great, but nobody in the design space is using 1988-era software on the Mac. In fact, nobody in any space, really.

Comment Re:Desperation and bloodlust (Score 1) 97

(The thing about conscious vs conscience is a pet peeve of mine, because so many people use it as you did while firmly believing that it is acceptable as a noun, and such usage always grates on me.)

You're right about the bloodthirsty dog pack phenomenon, but I'm not convinced that the Seinfeld/Gates foray achieved anything to counter it. To my view, it simply reinforced the notion of Microsoft being out of touch with popular taste and sensibility, and further evidence that they are wildly trying to do something without a solid understanding of what they're trying to do or how to properly do it (q.v. historical Windows, Zune, etc.)

-b

Comment Re:The Gates/Seinfeld thing. . . (Score 1) 97

Now, act III involves the placement of the upcoming Windows 7 in the public conscious, which, surprise, surprise, is getting lots of positive response and sympathy, general good-will and a collective hope that it won't suck.

1. "conscious" is an adjective. Perhaps you mean "conscience".

2. I do not see a logical connection between "acts I and II" and "act III". My understanding is that Windows Vista is widely perceived as garbage, and simply therefore, people bent on Windows will be optimistic about its successor.

b

Comment Re:Not so fast. (Score 3, Insightful) 120

I think you are proving the parent's point.

Parent:

we are already at the point where it's the LENS that's the limiting factor for picture quality

You:

Not at all - 22mpix is about film resolution [...] Long way to go before that's on my phone.

The lens on your phone is a piece of shit; a better lens will make your phone's 1 megapixel picture look better than would a 22 megapixel sensor.

-b

Comment Re:Frame rate (Score 1) 603

Right, that's because there's a shutter which is necessarily forced to cut off the light 48 times per second. On a LCD or plasma panel though, there is no blanking. Or are you telling me that this 120Hz display is going black all the time?

-b

Comment Re:Frame rate (Score 1) 603

It's not any different, but good luck trying to buy a TV that can display at 24Hz. Instead, manufacturers build mostly TVs that have only one display rate. With that restriction, a 120Hz display rate makes sense for covering 24fps, 30fps, and 60fps material.

Then what about 23.98, 29.97, 59.94?

HD specifies all of the above frame rates (integer and non) as viable. Indeed, most programming in North America will be 59.94i or 23.98p, but 30.00 and so on are valid as well.

b

Slashdot Top Deals

A morsel of genuine history is a thing so rare as to be always valuable. -- Thomas Jefferson

Working...