Comment Not just gaming (Score 1) 283
of course, the Gold Plated USB with Gajillion Hz Polling is a little much.
That seems incredibly dumb. Especially since apple advertises the fact that they sell 100ppi displays and higher (or at least used to) so that means their own cinema displays are out of wack. I'm a big fan of OSX, but you'd think for "The Desktop Publishing OS" they'd get that right.
You might want to try the command line though. I think there's something like: defaults write -g AppleDisplayScaleFactor SomeFloatingPointNumber that would help out. Netbook hackintosh users use it to make things fit on the screen without changing resolution. You have to kill finder and restart it for it to take effect. This may be the feature that went "missing" when they switched from NeXTStep.
When will the pixel density of my desktop monitor go up? It's been stuck at about 100ppi for quite some time now, and it's not like the prices for displays have dropped whenever they come out with new technologies like this. Did people really stop caring once they could fit a movie on their screen?
Though I suppose it would be a bad idea (for my eyesight at least) to feed the habit of running text-based consoles at max resolution. Mmmm... Monospaced characters. I'm a real hacker now!
If 3D content creators would stop making window violations and (my favourite) changing the convergence point of the screen without zooming (and vice versa) the idea that 3d is going to give headaches wouldn't have as much fact to go on. I'm sure some people get headaches anyway, but the majority of the people get them because of this stupid filmography. Also, stop changing the 3d depth every shot. I'm looking at you, Avatar.
If you give the brain realistic input that could actually happen, people would be more comfortable with it and it would be more likely to sell.
Also, the ghosting on some glasses is terrible. I could even see it in RealD, but it wasn't nearly as bad as some systems I've used (especially anaglyphs).
I hope it gets good before everyone becomes disinterested, because I'm actually excited for 3d to become kindof standard.
Does making sheet music take days of editing to get it to sound just right? No.
It really does. In fact, it can take weeks or even months before the artist is satisfied with their composition. During that time, the composer doesn't get nearly as much money as the people who are just recording, (as they can output faster) with about the same amount of effort (providing the artist isn't procrastinating). They have to make up that money in the end by selling copies of their composition. Granted, this isn't true for every composer, but to simply dismiss composition as a "cheaper" form of art is rather short-sighted. (Unless we're talking about top-20 hits or so, that is cheap composition)
(Side note: My Dad's an artist, and I definitely feel the difference in family budget when his prints are selling or not.)
I've actually never met any audio guys who *use* windows. They've all been mac users, except for this one guy who used linux (his setup was rather strange, though).
My main issue with windows is I have a hell of a time with the audio subsystem. With Mac it just works (yay CoreAudio!), Linux took minimal twiddling with Jack (still not for non-geeky types though), but Windows would always work some days and not others. There were also annoying crackles and pops that would keep showing up no matter what settings or buffer size I used. Same stuff happened on XP, Vista, and 7 - with the same hardware (that works fine on Mac and Linux) Maybe Windows audio doesn't like firewire? - that sounds bad.
It's true that most of the DAW software and such work fine on windows, but I just don't trust the audio back end. I could see it being used for mixing and non realtime-critical tasks though - when I would need those specialized plugins.
While it's true you can't really hear a huge difference over 48khz, it really depends on what you're doing. If you're recording audio, you should probably sample at 96khz so that when you pass it through a plugin that does something temporally with the audio, there's less artifacts. It's true those algorithms fix most stuff, but for anything that sounds "nearly identical," there will be generational loss. 192 khz is for when you feel insane (I've had these moments, but always noticed having no disk space afterwards)
It's a little bit the same way HD downscaled to SD looks better than SD that was recorded as SD originally.
For playback, you don't need 96khz, unless you have thousand-dollar speakers. (I tried some out, the difference exists). In reality the quality comes down more to how good the recording engineer was before you can blame the sample rate.
Also I was under the impression that it was 44.1khz because of the video hardware they hacked together to see what they were doing while developing CDs?
Somebody ought to cross ball point pens with coat hangers so that the pens will multiply instead of disappear.