Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Science Fiction? (Score 1) 782

The CG effects were worth every penny. I saw it in IMAX 3D and wished I hadn't. The depth factor makes you want to focus to other things in the background because they are so beautifully done. Only, you can't, because they're blurred out by the camera that's focusing on the actor's face, which in my opinion was a lot less watchable than the beautiful detail in the background. Note to film makers: if you're going to make it viewable in 3D, PLEASE keep everything in focus so that the audience can choose what they would like to focus on. It multiplies the immersion factor. Keeping the background out of focus is telling your viewer, "this is not 3D because you can only look at what I want you to look at". That's ok to do in 2D, but not when the perception of depth is that much more pronounced. That's the impression I came away with, anyway. PS> If they do release a 3D version where everything is in focus, I'd watch it again and a few more times in a heartbeat. As of now though, I could have spent that money and time on better things.

Comment Re:It will NEVER catch on. (Score 1) 178

Actually, I think it will. The difference between 2D and the perceived 3D the glasses offer is enough that people will be willing to put up with the glasses, __ as long as they look good wearing them and as long as the glasses are comfortable __ . I mean, people all over the world are perfectly fine with wearing glasses so they can see clearer. The trade off - asking them to don glasses for a couple of hours for a much more immersive entertainment experience - is not really that big an ask. In addition, the next stumbling block would be the kind of VR sickness you get from too much 3D content if the camera angles don't co-incide with what your eyes are used to. I'm thinking of watching stuff like the Lord Of The Rings Trilogy in 3D. Its tiring enough watching them back to back in 2D :) Finally, I think the glasses will be temporary. In fact, I suspect there already are practical solutions that don't require glasses (if you take SIGGraph from 10 years ago as any kind of indication). Its just that the consumer is being made to shell out for incremental upgrades.

Comment Re:Uhhh... (Score 1) 438

Since you asked... Playing tennis on the Wii - she's really competitive :) Using XBMC with a Wiimote The fact that she can browse the net/watch movies over the home wi-fi network ...I've saved the best for last... The KDE desktop - she loves the big over sized clock widget on the second monitor and has not found one that does the same on Windows. Why? because she can still see the time from 20 feet away and she actually uses it from the kitchen, even though the stove has two built in timers :)

Comment Re:Not Really (Score 1) 849

Mod parent up. The "loudness" of the track has increased quite a bit in recent years. This is because a lot of sound engineers realize that 90%+ of the public are going to listen to music on relatively cheap systems/headphones, in relatively noisy environments and almost always in an environment that isn't tuned for perfect reproduction. The result? Try to jam in as much as possible for the audience - reduced dynamic range, aka louder tracks. This is also why commercials on the radio tend to sound louder although the volume remains the same - they use the same trick, but push things a bit further.

Comment Re:Not Really (Score 2, Interesting) 849

The brain bases the "quality" of music you listen to on the majority of music you have listened to in your younger ears. If that has been mp3, well then you would "prefer" an mp3 sound, weird as that may be. This is the same phenomenon that is responsible for people preferring vinyl over CD, for example. Try the same experiment on your kids and yes, they will prefer the mp3 version. If you were already listening to a lot of music when mp3s hit the mainstream, you'll probably find you prefer the lossless version and can tell the difference. Personally, I prefer lossless, though I have to admit that above 256kbps, my error rate goes up :)

Comment Re:Maybe because we treat them like criminals (Score 1) 757

Having lived nearly a quarter of my life in the US, I can tell you that I jumped at the chance to get away from it. Wouldn't go back there to live. Holiday, sure - its a beautiful place to holiday in with great people. Live there? Nope. The US media, pre-university education system, health care system, government policies and lobby groups will have to change big time before I even consider that.

The US's Reverse Brain Drain 757

We may have to rethink the assumption that Silicon Valley is the hotbed of innovation in which all the world's best and brightest want to work and live. TechCrunch has a piece by an invited expert on the reverse brain drain already evident and growing in the US as Indian, Chinese, and European students and workers in the US plan to return home, or already have. From an extensive interview with Chinese and Indian workers who had already left: "We learned that these workers returned in their prime: the average age of the Indian returnees was 30 and the Chinese was 33. They were really well educated: 51% of the Chinese held masters degrees and 41% had PhDs. Among Indians, 66% held a masters and 12% had PhDs. These degrees were mostly in management, technology, and science. ... What propelled them to return home? Some 84% of the Chinese and 69% of the Indians cited professional opportunities. And while they make less money in absolute terms at home, most said their salaries brought a 'better quality of life' than what they had in the US. ... A return ticket home also put their career on steroids. About 10% of the Indians polled had held senior management jobs in the US. That number rose to 44% after they returned home. Among the Chinese, the number rose from 9% in the US to 36% in China."

Comment Re:Quake Fit? (Score 1) 185

Well, add in the gun, a city with lots of 3D buildings and some physics and you have an experience that's anything but mundane. Heck, take out the person, add in a car which allows you to race through the city. Now put guns back on the car and make it multi player for a "Death Race" kind of experience. Even wilder, allow a player to roam a real city using their exported World of Warcraft character and mount for a crazy glimpse of what it would look like if you merged our modern cities with a magic world. Not unlike the whole Harry Potter thing, but there is something to be said about a wizard on a mount getting a Whopper at a Burger King ride thru ;)

Comment Re:So... (Score 1) 263

This is good. Really good. Because this will drive more people towards AMD's video cards. This will also make those who are contributing to getting AMD's video cards working well in Linux redouble their efforts. This is essentially the beginning of the end for NVIDIA. Yes, it is a good business decision for them in the short term, but a VERY bad one for them in the long term and somebody high up will be paying the price a few years down the line because it was their call. So I say again, buy AMD and make the AMD drivers better than the binaries that NVIDIA is shipping. Take away the reason for anyone who is using Linux to buy NVIDIA. Keep competition alive and support companies that support open source. Whether NVIDIA sees it or not, Linux's mind share is going to increase by an order of magnitude over the next couple of years simply because of smart phones. More people are also going to be running it as their desktop, in particular the mum and dad types who just want to browse the internet on cheap hardware and not worry about viruses. Again, the reason I say this is good is that this is an opportunity for us, the open source community to show companies who are watching from the sidelines, what a difference supporting open source can make. Use your coding skills. Contribute. Help AMD and others who support Linux and open source. We can make a huge difference to a company's fortunes. Flaming NVIDIA is not going to help. Contributing to make sure the competition's products work so well that there is no need for NVIDIA's products is.

Slashdot Top Deals

Computers are unreliable, but humans are even more unreliable. Any system which depends on human reliability is unreliable. -- Gilb