 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott <sco### [at] scott com> wrote:
> > The only way I can think of doing this is to just rerender the entire
> > frame multiple times - which would obviously not work in realtime. So
> That's one way of doing it, and it works ok if your scene is simple enough,
> or if you only want to motion blur certain parts of it (eg a fast moving
> missile).
Note that antialiasing also is based on rendering the frame multiple
times (although current cards might have some tricks to reduce the amount
of required rendering).
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Eero Ahonen <aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid> wrote:
> > People often have prejudices against the touch screen in the iPhone,
> > but that's because they have never tried it.
> >
> To be honest, that would be the first touchscreen ever that would be
> daily-usable in something as intensive as telephone I've ever touched.
> It doesn't mean it's impossible - it just means I'm very, *very*
> skeptical about a touchscreen.
But the touchscreen in the iPhone is just amazing. It's not just a
touchscreen, it's a multitouchscreen. For example, you can zoom and rotate
images (or webpages or maps or...) by using two fingers, etc. Now do that
with your 12-key keyboard. ;)
Also the scrolling is just cool. (After having using the scrolling feature
in the iPhone, any other non-touchscreen phone will feel almost completely
unusable...)
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>> The only way I can think of doing this is to just rerender the entire
>>> frame multiple times - which would obviously not work in realtime. So
>
>> That's one way of doing it, and it works ok if your scene is simple enough,
>> or if you only want to motion blur certain parts of it (eg a fast moving
>> missile).
>
> Note that antialiasing also is based on rendering the frame multiple
> times (although current cards might have some tricks to reduce the amount
> of required rendering).
nVidia claims their full-frame AA works by just rendering the entire
thing to a larger framebuffer and downsampling with smoothing, but their
faster "smart AA" works by using filtered texturing, and does AA only at
polygon edges (using something like Bresenham's algorithm I would think,
rather than actual supersampling, since a polygon edge is a straight line).
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> But the touchscreen in the iPhone is just amazing. It's not just a
> touchscreen, it's a multitouchscreen. For example, you can zoom and rotate
> images (or webpages or maps or...) by using two fingers, etc. Now do that
> with your 12-key keyboard. ;)
>
> Also the scrolling is just cool. (After having using the scrolling feature
> in the iPhone, any other non-touchscreen phone will feel almost completely
> unusable...)
Ooo... so we have smudges and smeres as opposed to just finger prints?
Neat! :-D
Again, my sat nav allows you to scroll like this - but it's very
unpredictable. It doesn't "respond" very well to the touches you're
trying to make. I don't know why. Also, it's very hard to *slide* warm,
sticky fingers over a plastic surface in a smooth motion.
Still, at least it sounds like Apple actually thought about useful ways
to use a touchscreen rather than just throwing on in there to be contrary...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Again, my sat nav allows you to scroll like this - but it's very
> unpredictable. It doesn't "respond" very well to the touches you're trying
> to make. I don't know why. Also, it's very hard to *slide* warm, sticky
> fingers over a plastic surface in a smooth motion.
Your satnav is likely a resistive touch screen, it works when you physically
bend the top layer enough to make contact with the bottom layer
electrically, and then just like a variable resistor you can measure the
resistance to work out the position you touched. The iPhone uses a
capacitive screen, as soon as you touch the surface of the screen the
electronics can detect the capacitance of your finger, also using clever
electronics/software it can work out the position of 2 fingers in contact,
to allow those wacky zoom and rotate operations.
The disadvantage of capacitive touch screens is that they only work with
your bare fingers, not while you are wearing gloves, or any sort of stylus.
The accuracy is also much lower than resistive touch screens, but that
doesn't really matter when you're using your fingers.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> Again, my sat nav allows you to scroll like this - but it's very
>> unpredictable. It doesn't "respond" very well to the touches you're
>> trying to make. I don't know why. Also, it's very hard to *slide*
>> warm, sticky fingers over a plastic surface in a smooth motion.
>
> Your satnav is likely a resistive touch screen, it works when you
> physically bend the top layer enough to make contact with the bottom
> layer electrically, and then just like a variable resistor you can
> measure the resistance to work out the position you touched. The iPhone
> uses a capacitive screen, as soon as you touch the surface of the screen
> the electronics can detect the capacitance of your finger, also using
> clever electronics/software it can work out the position of 2 fingers in
> contact, to allow those wacky zoom and rotate operations.
>
> The disadvantage of capacitive touch screens is that they only work with
> your bare fingers, not while you are wearing gloves, or any sort of
> stylus. The accuracy is also much lower than resistive touch screens,
> but that doesn't really matter when you're using your fingers.
Damnit, I wish I knew some people IRL who possess such encyclopedic
knowledge... I'd never be bored again!
[FWIW, the sat nav *does* in fact have a stylus. Unlike my dad's cheap
device, the stylus is optional on mine. On my dad's, only the stylus
will operate it...]
PS. Is it only me who things pointing a sharp pointy thing at a delicate
and fragile layer of semi-liquid gloop fashioned into an intricate
display mechanism is a bad idea?
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Damnit, I wish I knew some people IRL who possess such encyclopedic
> knowledge... I'd never be bored again!
It's my job to know such information, ask me anything about history or
literature and I'd be totally stumped.
> PS. Is it only me who things pointing a sharp pointy thing at a delicate
> and fragile layer of semi-liquid gloop fashioned into an intricate display
> mechanism is a bad idea?
Don't worry, the semi-liquid gloop is behind 2 or 3 layers of glass, a
polariser and some air space, so unless you press *really* hard... From the
specs I remember seeing, you could press with up to 50 N of force before
anything went wrong.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Damnit, I wish I knew some people IRL who possess such encyclopedic
>> knowledge... I'd never be bored again!
>
> It's my job to know such information, ask me anything about history or
> literature and I'd be totally stumped.
...and I care about history or literature because...? ;-)
Seriously, is it normal for LCDs to get warm during operation?
>> PS. Is it only me who things pointing a sharp pointy thing at a
>> delicate and fragile layer of semi-liquid gloop fashioned into an
>> intricate display mechanism is a bad idea?
>
> Don't worry, the semi-liquid gloop is behind 2 or 3 layers of glass, a
> polariser and some air space, so unless you press *really* hard... From
> the specs I remember seeing, you could press with up to 50 N of force
> before anything went wrong.
...is 50 N a lot?
Heee, do you remember the old laptops with the blue/purple monochrome
LCDs? Where if you touched the screen, the whole picture rippled slightly?
[Actually, our photocopier has a display like that. And I think it needs
a screen saver, cos some of the controls are well burnt into it! I
didn't think LCDs could "burn" like that?]
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 14:05:21 +0100, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>
>...and I care about history or literature because...? ;-)
It shows that you are not a complete ignoramus.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> ...and I care about history or literature because...? ;-)
>
> It shows that you are not a complete ignoramus.
I love the way not knowing about differential calculus is perfectly
acceptable, but not knowing about English literature gets you labelled
as some kind of idiot. As if English literature is somehow "more
important" than differential calculus...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
