248 posts • joined 2 Jul 2009
Re: If I had £899 to spend on a computer
My point was that if I had £899 to spend, then it's more than likely I was originally in the market for a mid-high range computer in the first place.
Regardless of your take on inflation, there are some much more reasonably priced mundane-task-specced laptops for less than half the cost! In fact, some of those are even BETTER specced than this.
This computer is specced in the low-end market, but priced in the mid-high end market. People will still buy it though, cos you know, fruity fanboys and all that.
If I had £899 to spend on a computer
I would certainly not even consider this.
Totally ridiculous price for those specs.
lol no it wont.
Re: Size matters...
DPI does matter.
Particularly working with a lot of text, and imaging (photographers, designers etc). Current 1080p displays, even at sub-24inch are absolutely terrible and a massive backward step from where we were with CRT.
Then they go and start packing in outrageous DPI's on mobile phone displays, like anyone actually uses those for work?
IMO, 4K monitors are not good enough and have taken FAR too long to get this far. It's not like we haven't had the technology or ability to mass produce it cheaply for the past 5 years. Pure price fixing by the panel manufacturers, and this article points quite clearly to that.
Re: Only a beellion?
Yeah but unless you're buying the Globetrotters, they won't be nearly half as useful as this.
Re: 2560 x 1440 on a 5.5" phone
Yup, it makes absolutely no sense.
Whoever said viewing distance - thats bollocks. I can see pixels on my 1920x1200 24" desktop monitor from 1m away and it annoys me. If my desktop screen res was the same as this phone, I'd be a lot happier. Higher would be better, but there simply isnt a desktop screen on the market that goes any higher within a reasonable budget.
Higher res laptop and desktop displays. MUCH higher.
More 4x3 aspect options (WITH higher-res than 1280x1024). Seriously we dont ALL watch movies/TV on our monitors. Some of us actually do work.
Also, the abolishment of Captcha.
Bigger batteries in phones. Or just better out-of-box settings, like turning off ALL auto-update bollocks by default.
Re: yes but...
I dont understand why Chrome is particularly "untrustworthy"... weren't Google the company that did no evil at one point? (disclaimer: I dont buy into that personally, but you gotta draw a line somewhere between paranoia and sense).
Also, my issues were obviously exaggerated. Except the Flash problem.
I also noticed it wasnt suffering the same issue on all of my computers, particularly with the speed thing. But that's part of the experience I guess - Chrome behaves the same no matter what machine I'm on.
Have they sped it up so it doesn't take half hour to load (on an SSD)?
Have they fixed the constant crashing issue every time you load a page with flash in it?
I stopped using FF grudgingly because of these issues specifically. Not really tempted to go back since Chrome just works so much nicer.
Nothing about this idea is good...
Nothing. Or even workable.
Even if they do it on resolution, instead of screen size, all it will do is mean that poorer families watch nothing but 480p on their 1080p TV's, ruining the experience.
This dude shouldn't be working for a movie company if this is his thinking.
Re: Why do they always blame enterprise for slow adoption?
I plan on brushing up my skills when the time comes. My point was that until this hypothetical situation of yours occurs, there is zero benefit to switching to IPv6. If anything we lose certain securities etc. The differences in protocols are huge in places from what little I currently understand of v6.
My other point was that this magical device I conceived, armed with my in-depth knowledge of IPv6 (utter lie), would be able to dynamically NAT v4 > v6 addressing and vice-versa, storing a local NAT table so it can remember what client was requesting what site.
That magical v6 to v4 NAT box of doom would be a piece of ISP kit that bridges the customer equipment running IPv4 with the ISP equipment running IPv6.
Why do they always blame enterprise for slow adoption?
So IPv4 is running out of address space and has been for years.
But surely this is only a problem for ISP's and big public data network providers?
As a network engineer for a large corporation, we have no intention of changing our LAN or WAN to IPv6. Quite frankly there is no reason to. Our network is private and we only require a handful of public IP addresses for certain services. NAT fulfills our needs fine for this.
In order to get out of trouble, at least in my little head, the ISPs should be deploying IPv6 networks and supplying customer kit that does IPv4 to IPv6 translation/bridging. So essentially all customer networks would be a private IPv4 network, and in order to get online they would need to hook up to an IPv6 ISP network via some kit that does some clever translation between the two IP stacks.
Maybe this is just pipe dream conjecture, since I dont fully understand how IPv6 works. There are a lot of fundamental differences - I know at least that much.
Why can't we have this DPI on desktop LCD monitors and laptops?
I'm tired of 1920x1080 and 1366x768 displays.
We had higher res back in the old CRT days, and DPI this high is fucking useless on such puny screens.
For the love of god give us this DPI on desktop displays!!!!
Sums up the thought processes here nicely.
Can we please bring back the start menu in Server 2012?
Seriously, who thought that a touch interface on a SERVER OS was a good idea?
Take a bow whoever that was.
its a shop.
I can tell by the pixels. And I've seen some shops in my time.
Organic vs non.
Organic food is the same as normal food, except overpriced and probably less healthy.
I ALWAYS avoid this shit in the supermarket. People come at me with opinions all the time saying how this chemical will kill you slowly or this GMO is unnatural and thus directly causes cancer. Guess what? These are OPINIONS. Not facts.
Fact is, GMO foods have many benefits over non-GMO and pesticides help to increase the resilience of crops to undesired insects, which have BOTH been proven over and over again to have zero negative-impact on human health.
Any of you organic food-fuckers come at me with anything otherwise, I want some peer-reviewed scientific proof, or I smack you upside the head with my GMO-enhanced marrow.
Greenpeace? Guerilla hippies more like.
Nuke power should be along side renewable for 'green-ness'
CO2 is good for trees and reforestation.
Greenpeace should rename themselves to Guerilla Hippies.
You dont know how much of a tech-hipster you sound like right now.
Is this sort of thing now common? I was sure this kind of use-case was very minimal (in global terms). Desktop use may not have changed much (in generic terms) in the past 2 decades, but the usability of the technology has, as well as become very much more refined. You XP hipsters are holding that up, which is where a lot of this weird hate seems to stem from.
In any case, you lot can rage all you want. Fact is, Microsoft are a corporation, and like all corporations on this planet, here to make money. Lots and lots of money. How can they do that if you tech-hipsters won't buy their new stuff?
How did you ever like Microsoft in the first place if you feel this way? Why aren't you using a 10 year old Linux kernel instead?
Now, can we get out of the 80's mainframe man mindset and continue pushing technology forward?
I heard you like spying, so I'm gonna spy on your spying to see if you're spying.
This is not how Android, as the underlying OS works or operates. Just because it was built by an advertising giant doesn't make this sort of thing inherent to the system. There is much lack of understanding here.
The problem comes from the fact that most carrier networks cook their own Android ROMS, with very little to no controlling influence from Google. Ergo, it is the fault of the carrier and their unscrupulous ways that lead to this issue.
If you want to be truly free of this sort of shit, IOS is not the way to go either, as you'll get all the crap from Apple bundled into the device and be forced to use only the services they let you use (until industry groups pressure them to open it up).
The best way to avoid this shit is to either buy a sim-free Nexus device, or grab a custom ROM, such as CyanogenMod, and flash your phone as soon as you get it from whatever carrier contract you bought it on. The flash process has recently been made much easier, thanks to some great community contributions over at Xdadevelopers and CM (among others).
Of course, that isn't a good solution for a lot of people, in which case my only piece of advice would be to avoid anything advertised to you with the word "free" in it.
list clearly satire
Fucking please. If it actually is satire its not even funny.
I'm having trouble understanding the purpose of a fine here....
Police force funded 100% by taxpayer money and government
Police force gets fined, by the government
It's like an infinite loop of cash from then on.
Re: Not correct!
So the pop artist(s), Chaka Demas and Pliers, translates to Pliers and Pliers. Every day is a school day!!
nope, just Friday!
You're the first person I've seen intone that anyone said anything negative about it.
Seriously, how does one manage to say for sure either way when it's only just been opened for beta?
"Such a one-way journey poses a real risk to life, and that can never be justified in Islam,"
No, not a high enough body count.
Re: Wii failed
Yeah I can swallow that - there was a lot of personal opinion in my post.
However, the epic fail comes both in terms of the impact on Nintendo's image as a core gamer company, and impact on what it will be able do next. People that liked the Wii and still play it (those casual "non-gamers" I mentioned) have absolutely no reason to upgrade to a new overpriced console, which is being shunned by 3rd party devs. The only thing that will keep Ninty going will be its portables (DS, DS 3D etc).
As for the Wii's success - sales figures are one thing, but I know that most of the Wii consoles sold over the years got used for a few days/weeks, then spent the rest of their lives in the attic gathering dust (like mine). I wouldn't dare speculate on exact figures, but at a complete random guess, I reckon it would be over the 50% mark.
I could be wrong though. They might come up with a new gimmick that will pull them from the abyss.
"Gameplay is more important than graphics."
True, but when you release a unit that outputs display at SD resolutions, when I'd dare say EVERY single household that bought one had a HD display... very short sighted decision there.
We all know how awful SD looks on a HD display (particularly the earlier generation and cheaper HD displays that don't have sophisticated software to smooth it out).
I hear what you're saying there. I owned a Saturn (didnt bother with 32X - what a waste of effort that was) and I have to say as much as I wanted it to be awesome, it was a very lackluster console. I think Sega's main issue with that was lack of decent titles, and Sony releasing the PS1 to a huge marketing campaign. Sega didnt seem to spend a penny on their marketing - or more likely couldnt afford to from what I hear.
Very unfortunate, since the Dreamcast should have turned their fortunes around. I guess we have the fickle gamer mentality to thank for that. And Sony's budget.
Oh believe me, I know this trick! One of them I killed myself while attempting to use a PS/2 optical mouse to replace my broken Dreamcast mouse - alas PS/2 into a custom USB bus kinda blew the USB controller in the Dreamcast up.
The next one was a terminal PSU failure.
The next a GD-ROM drive failure (yes, I forgot Sega even bought out their own disc format! Gigabyte Disc)
The last another PSU failure. I think. I may have thrown it out not realising it was still working. If I did I will kick myself.
They all lasted well over a year though with a LOT of use.
Oh yeah and I forgot Ready 2 Rumble boxing. Frikkin awesome game.
With you on the Dreamcast thing.
I am still, to this day, baffled as to how this did not save Sega from oblivion. The console was so far ahead of its time, clearly, even gamers didn't realise what they were missing out on.
The graphics were amazing. The online capability worked so well for a lot of games. It had a keyboard and frikkin' mouse you could use to play Quake 3 online with for christ's sake! Powerstone obliterated the playing field for 4-player on-screen fighting action, followed closely by 4 player DOA, and Soul Calibur blew my mind. Metropolis Street Racer bought racing to the streets of London in all its graphical glory (still not sure the PS2 was that much better, if at all!). Crazy Taxi, such an epic game, showed how you were supposed to do arcade ports (for all intents and purposes, it was EXACTLY the same game minus the coin-op).
I could go on. I owned 4 Dreamcasts and played them into oblivion (they slowly died over the years). I still have all my games. I miss Sega :(
Maybe Nintendo were shit scared after seeing what happened to Sega, and decided to release the shitty consoles they do these days. IMO, Nintendo were not worth a rub since the N64. Nothing after that came close to any of their predecessors, or any of the competition.
Re: Wii failed
No, I'm pretty sure he was talking about the Wii.
While a financial success for the box shifter in Nintendo, the console itself was an epic fail. Mainly due to the reasons already given; looked AWFUL on a HD LCD telly, gutless and substance lacking games, kiddy visuals, non-gamers bought it (that should have said it all)... the list goes on.
I bought one - I admit it. I got caught up in the hype, and wanted one purely for the gimmicky controller. I played some Wii Sports (tennis and bowling) but that was about it. After 10 minutes, it then sat and gathered dust for the rest of its warranty lifetime, whilst I played some real games on a real console (PS3 and PC).
For a kid, who had a 360 or PS3 (or even a PC) I could very well understand the disappointment they had when seeing the awful migraine inducing graphics for the first time.
Alas with my Wii, I really tried to make it work. I even bought a Sega game (Sega on Nintendo is a sacrilege in most gamers opinion despite the fact I was always a Sega fanboy growing up) - Madworld. Fun game, but again after about half hour, I was bored of mindlessly swiping my chainsaw to kill blurry black and white cartoons.
All in all, Wii was a prolonged, elongated path to failure for Nintendo.
I am totally lost, dazed and confused. This game was wank. What the fuck has gotten into people?
Good to hear at least someone doing well in the PC biz. Especially considering PC gaming is to thank.
Still think nVidia's top-end hardware is unable to stand up in a price:performance market against AMD though. Although superior GPU's, the AMD equivalents are far cheaper. Drivers are a non--issue these days.
Re: Potty time dilema
My Kindle is my potty time companion. Although I get looks in the office now when they see me walking toward the duns with a Kindle in my hand.
yup, I'm seeing this too.
But the URL it always gets stuck on is ads.rubiconproject.com
Each article I click on loads the first paragraph and gets stuck for like 60-120 seconds before loading the rest, no matter how many refreshes I do.
A lot of bad drivers here.
Anyone who says you need 100% concentration on the road ahead is talking out of their arse.
Peripheral vision is highly valuable (with racing/rally driving you practically never look at whats directly in front of you unless you want to crash). Rear-view and wing mirrors are indispensable and a requirement to pass your test. Checking your speed, engine temps, dash information - all essential to driving.
So; to say a pair of glasses that can provide a graphical HUD to display this information in one place WILL cause you to crash is utter bollocks.
Obviously they would need to implement some way of preventing the user from reading their emails/text. But IMO, those users who want to read their emails while driving will just go straight for their mobile phone and do it anyway! So whats the point?
Why penalise those of us who would like to see practical uses applied to this technology to spite those that would flaunt this privilege?
no problems here
I have to say Three have been the most reliable network I've been on - and I've used them all (whether personal or company phone). Hassle free on my personal phone for a good 6 years now.
Data is, bar none, the fastest there is on mobile - well maybe except EE 4G now, but coverage is limited and speeds aren't THAT impressive in metropolitan areas.
My friends, by comparison, have chopped and changed networks with each phone they get, constantly whinging about speed, coverage and downtime. That was till I convinced them to go to Three.
Ok grovelling over.
For a publicly traded company like Ubisoft, with only two things on their minds - make more money for their shareholders at any cost and how to shaft their paying customers - I can understand why you'd pirate their games/software. EA included. Adobe included. Microsoft included.. ad nauseum.
However, to shaft the individual devs of these indie titles (and lets not limit this to games!) for the sake of a fucking McDonalds cheeseburger? Cretins!
It's not even worth the effort, surely?
Re: @Someone Else Pot calling the kettle black?
Mr. Gumby, I believe you are missing the reason people don't agree with you. The patents in question here are laughably invalid, due to prior art, obviousness or ambiguity. Often all of the above.
The USPTO has only just begun to make some changes to their practice when awarding software patents, but they are both not enough, and too late - since the wars and non-producing holding companies (read: trolls) are already well into the patent dance. They (USPTO) now have to go back and rescind the existing patents they awarded to stop it.
Worst. Analogy. Ever.
It's so wrong, it makes well documented wrong things look right.
yay for this.
Great move from Valve - more sauce for moving away from Windows and DirectX's monopoly on gaming.
With you on this one. Whatever ad is doing this is driving me nuts. Get 1/2 way through an article then suddenly I'm at the end...
I too respect the requirement for tea, biscuits and nice pottery for Vulture Central's shed, but this is taking in your face advertising too far.
No, but also off-topic, I am getting more than a little annoyed at the slow-to-load page elements that cause the text formatting on the main article completely move around. I lose my place, but its just annoying as hell on EVERY article.
Bloody adverts. Reg, fix your code please!
But whos to say that Google Glass couldn't actually benefit your awareness?
Why are you so close-minded when you think of this. I like to think that most people are not stupid enough to be watching cat videos on YouTube while driving, but thats besides the point as others will.
BUT, why cant this tech be used to help you identify hazards, the same tech Google are also building for their self-driving cars!? They have a 'driving mode' which I would imagine does exactly that, and with newer cars with added sensors (the like you'd normally see on a self-driving car), they can all link in to Glass and assist in your driving.
Why is this a bad thing? You havent a clue what Glass is like to use, and you wont even accept that there ARE potential benefits of the technology.
Go ahead though, carry on living in the 1900's. The rest of the world will leave you there.
- NASA boffin: RIDDLE of odd BULGE FOUND on MOON is SOLVED
- Pic Mars rover 2020: Oxygen generation and 6 more amazing experiments
- Microsoft's Euro cloud darkens: US FEDS can dig into foreign servers
- Plug and PREY: Hackers reprogram USB drives to silently infect PCs
- Boffins spot weirder quantum capers as neutrons take the high road, spin takes the low