 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 18:16:37 +0100, Orchid XP v7 wrote:
> I'm very puzzled as to why anyone would want more than 25 FPS.
In animations that do not contain motion blur, such as video game movies,
the difference between 30 FPS and 60 FPS is actually easily observable.
For example, compare these two movies:
http://bisqwit.iki.fi/torrents/supermariobros2-timeattack-peachonly-genisto.avi.torrent
(31.9 MB)
http://bisqwit.iki.fi/torrents/supermariobros2-tas-princessonly-adelikat.avi.torrent
(15.4 MB)
It is clearly seen that the 60 fps movie (the latter) is
smoother than the other, which is jittery in movement.
In motion blurred video such as television shows, the shortcoming
of a low FPS such as 24 or 25 is not as easily seen, but a trained
eye can still notice it.
--
Joel Yliluoma - http://bisqwit.iki.fi/
: comprehension = 1 / (2 ^ precision)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/129
>
> A partial reinstall? ;-)
More like endless multiply reinstalls...
> (fdisk /mbr should get rid of Grub from the MBR, BTW)
Yes. You need to possess fdisk to do that though. :-P
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 19:05:37 +0200, Orchid XP v7 <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
>
>> (fdisk /mbr should get rid of Grub from the MBR, BTW)
>
> Yes. You need to possess fdisk to do that though. :-P
'fixmbr' does much the same, and is available in the recovery console.
--
FE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 18:05:37 +0100, Orchid XP v7 wrote:
>>> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/129
>>
>> A partial reinstall? ;-)
>
> More like endless multiply reinstalls...
Ah, I see. :-)
>> (fdisk /mbr should get rid of Grub from the MBR, BTW)
>
> Yes. You need to possess fdisk to do that though. :-P
Doesn't XP include it any more? No matter, though, OpenDOS is still
available. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> When I first had Geiss, I remember my mum's poor old Pentium I 233 MHz
> thing with 16 MB RAM *dying* trying to run it. The poor thing would
> stutter along at roughly 12 FPS with 320x240 at 30% letterbox. Last night,
> I tried it on my current PC. Even at the highest settings I could use, it
> was still exceeding 75 FPS. Seriously, the screen was just a blur. It was
> *way* too fast.
>
> I'm very puzzled as to why anyone would want more than 25 FPS. I'm also
> confused as to how on earth you managed to put it into 1920x1200. (Mine
> won't let me go above 1280x1024.) And finally, I'm puzzled as to why you
> would consider any of this "slow". But there we are...
If you assume roughly linear "processing time" based on the number of
pixels, then 75 fps at 1280x1024 equals 42 fps at 1920x1200.
I guess your monitor only goes up to 1280x1024, I have 3 display devices
here that are 1600x1200 (desktop), 1920x1200 (laptop) and 1920x1080 (TV).
25 fps looks very jerky compared to 30 or 60 fps for CG. I wish I still had
the demo that split the screen into 4 and ran each quarter at 15,30,60 and
120 fps. This was on my CRT that would do 120 HZ refresh. You could easily
tell the difference between each of them, the 120 Hz looking so silky
smooth. Nowadays with LCD we're kinda stuck with 60. IIRC some research
report I read said that the eye can process information up to about 70-80
Hz...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> (fdisk /mbr should get rid of Grub from the MBR, BTW)
People who don't know how to use linux shouldn't use it, IMO.
Just a couple of days ago someone in irc commented that he needed
to reinstall linux because he had forgotten the root password. Well,
someone who knew better saved him some hours of useless work.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> People who don't know how to use linux shouldn't use it, IMO.
Well, *that* would lead to widespread adoption, wouldn't it?
> Just a couple of days ago someone in irc commented that he needed
> to reinstall linux because he had forgotten the root password. Well,
> someone who knew better saved him some hours of useless work.
People who don't know the security holes in Linux shouldn't forget their
root password? >8)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Remember the good old days, when we
used to complain about cryptography
being export-restricted?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> > People who don't know how to use linux shouldn't use it, IMO.
> Well, *that* would lead to widespread adoption, wouldn't it?
I remember reading somewhere a list of common misconceptions about linux.
IIRC one of them went something like "linux developers and advocates are
trying very hard to get linux into mainstream, to make it widely adopted".
Yes, while *some* really have that mentality, it's still a misconception.
Linux developers and advocates couldn't care less if someone else uses
linux. They are making linux for *themselves*, not for everybody. They are
not competing for market share. They just want to make a good alternative
to commercial OSes. One which they like to use (not one which appeals to
the masses).
I tend to agree with that.
> > Just a couple of days ago someone in irc commented that he needed
> > to reinstall linux because he had forgotten the root password. Well,
> > someone who knew better saved him some hours of useless work.
> People who don't know the security holes in Linux shouldn't forget their
> root password? >8)
Resetting the root password from local console is not a security hole.
It's regular maintenance. It's by design.
There's no such a thing as security if you have physical access to the
computer. It doesn't matter which OS you are using. Heck, you can take
a sledgehammer and bring down the system with it.
The point in security is whether the system can be hacked remotely.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> I'm very puzzled as to why anyone would want more than 25 FPS. I'm
>> also confused as to how on earth you managed to put it into 1920x1200.
>> (Mine won't let me go above 1280x1024.) And finally, I'm puzzled as to
>> why you would consider any of this "slow". But there we are...
>
> If you assume roughly linear "processing time" based on the number of
> pixels, then 75 fps at 1280x1024 equals 42 fps at 1920x1200.
OK. Well 42 FPS is still faster than you need.
> I guess your monitor only goes up to 1280x1024, I have 3 display devices
> here that are 1600x1200 (desktop), 1920x1200 (laptop) and 1920x1080 (TV).
Well, it's a 21 inch CRT. I'm not sure why it would stop at 1280x1024,
but it is of course possible...
> 25 fps looks very jerky compared to 30 or 60 fps for CG.
Really? I observed virtually no visible difference at all (except the
speed of the motion).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Resetting the root password from local console is not a security hole.
> It's regular maintenance. It's by design.
Possibly, depending on how you think about it. It certainly makes for
insecure personal desktop computers in a corporate environment, for
example.
> There's no such a thing as security if you have physical access to the
> computer.
Sure there is. Otherwise, why would anyone build encrypting disk
drivers, mandatory access control, etc?
> It doesn't matter which OS you are using.
This would be factually incorrect also, unless you believe ...
> Heck, you can take
> a sledgehammer and bring down the system with it.
... counts as "insecure."
> The point in security is whether the system can be hacked remotely.
I think you're overgeneralizing. I think it's because security isn't a
binary property of a system.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Remember the good old days, when we
used to complain about cryptography
being export-restricted?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
