 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Fri, 18 Jul 2008 10:47:10 +0100, Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] dev null>
did spake, saying:
>>> Actually that sounds like my phone, and that has something like 35MB
>>> RAM ;-)
>> Heh and the ones running Windows Mobile will even run cut down
>> versions of Word and Excel while allowing you to make phone calls,
>> check your diary, browse the 'net and pick up your email... Perhaps we
>> should all be running that version on our desktops instead ;-)
>
> ...and THIS is why I'm reluctant to buy a new phone. Who would want to
> pay money for something that runs an M$ OS? :-S
A lot of the problems we had stemmed from the third-party interface
plonked on the top, once I removed that it was quite stable. They would
occasionally refuse to link to the computer unless you restarted the
phone, but I've had the same problem with the NokiaOS.
I'm still impressed that if you made a change in Outlook while the phone
was connected it would automatically sync that item and was quite happy
syncing between multiple unconnected computers; something that both the
Nokia and Sony Ericsson phones still don't do or have problems with.
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> ...and THIS is why I'm reluctant to buy a new phone. Who would want to
>> pay money for something that runs an M$ OS? :-S
>
> A lot of the problems we had stemmed from the third-party interface
> plonked on the top, once I removed that it was quite stable. They would
> occasionally refuse to link to the computer unless you restarted the
> phone, but I've had the same problem with the NokiaOS.
>
> I'm still impressed that if you made a change in Outlook while the phone
> was connected it would automatically sync that item and was quite happy
> syncing between multiple unconnected computers; something that both the
> Nokia and Sony Ericsson phones still don't do or have problems with.
Well let me put it this way. My current mobile phone is a little bit
worn out now. And it wasn't a very good phone to start with. But on the
other hand, it doesn't seem to be *possible* to buy a mobile phone
that's just a phone any more. It has to also try to be a camera and a
music system and a database and... I just want a phone?
Also, for some reason flip phones seem to be extremely rare right now.
Personally I dislike being charged money because my phone has
accidentally called somebody while it's in my pocket. Some phones allow
you to "lock" the keypad, but it can still call 999, causing a pretty
serious hazard as it might block out a *real* emergency call.
(My current phone was clearly designed by idiots. Or at least, by people
who have never attempted to *use* their product! For example, if you
write an SMS and select "Options", option #1 is... adjust the screen
setting? WTF? Surely you're going to do this, like, ONCE, when you first
get the phone, and never change it again. By contrast, the option you'll
want 99% of the time is "send" - which is option #4. If you *receive* an
SMS, "reply" is option #8 - which doesn't even fit onto the screen
without scrolling. At least my old Nokia had a sane menu system...)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Well let me put it this way. My current mobile phone is a little bit worn
> out now. And it wasn't a very good phone to start with. But on the other
> hand, it doesn't seem to be *possible* to buy a mobile phone that's just a
> phone any more. It has to also try to be a camera and a music system and a
> database and... I just want a phone?
Try the Nokia 1208, it's really cheap (like 20 quid cheap) and doesn't have
hardly any features so should be just what you're looking for.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Fri, 18 Jul 2008 11:44:15 +0100, Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull>
did spake, saying:
>>> ...and THIS is why I'm reluctant to buy a new phone. Who would want to
>>> pay money for something that runs an M$ OS? :-S
>> A lot of the problems we had stemmed from the third-party interface
>> plonked on the top, once I removed that it was quite stable. They would
>> occasionally refuse to link to the computer unless you restarted the
>> phone, but I've had the same problem with the NokiaOS.
>> I'm still impressed that if you made a change in Outlook while the
>> phone was connected it would automatically sync that item and was quite
>> happy syncing between multiple unconnected computers; something that
>> both the Nokia and Sony Ericsson phones still don't do or have problems
>> with.
>
> Well let me put it this way. My current mobile phone is a little bit
> worn out now. And it wasn't a very good phone to start with. But on the
> other hand, it doesn't seem to be *possible* to buy a mobile phone
> that's just a phone any more. It has to also try to be a camera and a
> music system and a database and... I just want a phone?
They're out there just not displayed as prominently because they're cheap.
> Also, for some reason flip phones seem to be extremely rare right now.
They were in vogue for a while along with sliding ones, perhaps people got
fed-up with the flip/slide breaking? Or it was just cheaper not to build
them that way?
> Personally I dislike being charged money because my phone has
> accidentally called somebody while it's in my pocket. Some phones allow
> you to "lock" the keypad,
I've not seen a phone that doesn't allow this.
> but it can still call 999, causing a pretty serious hazard as it might
> block out a *real* emergency call.
It can still call any emergency number, but the I bet the likelyhood of
hitting the three correct digits and dial remains small.
> (My current phone was clearly designed by idiots. Or at least, by people
> who have never attempted to *use* their product! For example, if you
> write an SMS and select "Options", option #1 is... adjust the screen
> setting? WTF? Surely you're going to do this, like, ONCE, when you first
> get the phone, and never change it again. By contrast, the option you'll
> want 99% of the time is "send" - which is option #4. If you *receive* an
> SMS, "reply" is option #8 - which doesn't even fit onto the screen
> without scrolling. At least my old Nokia had a sane menu system...)
Again I like my SE phone menu system. You can navigate through using the
numbers next to the choices, I can lock it and switch it to silent with
two key presses likewise get the date, model and my telephone number from
the Phone Status two clicks away (the number of times I've seen people
being asked exactly which model of phone they have and being stumped
because it's not shown anywhere amazes me).
It has its problems - there are two ways of locking and silent and they
appear in each menu in a different order; the call log is unintuitive if
you want to know the time someone tried to call you yesterday, and has a
nasty habit of compressing multiple calls into one entry so it appears
they've only tried once. Other then those it's fine.
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> music system and a database and... I just want a phone?
>
Motorola F3 (GIYF)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Well let me put it this way. My current mobile phone is a little bit
>> worn out now. And it wasn't a very good phone to start with. But on
>> the other hand, it doesn't seem to be *possible* to buy a mobile phone
>> that's just a phone any more. It has to also try to be a camera and a
>> music system and a database and... I just want a phone?
>
> They're out there just not displayed as prominently because they're cheap.
Heh, I'll bet. ;-)
>> Also, for some reason flip phones seem to be extremely rare right now.
>
> They were in vogue for a while along with sliding ones, perhaps people
> got fed-up with the flip/slide breaking? Or it was just cheaper not to
> build them that way?
Lots of slide phones around, not seeing many flip phones...
>> but it can still call 999, causing a pretty serious hazard as it might
>> block out a *real* emergency call.
>
> It can still call any emergency number, but the I bet the likelyhood of
> hitting the three correct digits and dial remains small.
Um... hit 9 three times? (Or alternatively, just hold down the 9 key for
a second or so.) It's really very easy. I made many, many calls this way
with my old Nokia 3210.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am Fri, 18 Jul 2008 07:34:25 -0400 schrieb Michael Zier:
>> music system and a database and... I just want a phone?
>>
> Motorola F3 (GIYF)
I forgot: geek bonus points for using e-paper!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Fri, 18 Jul 2008 12:36:09 +0100, Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull>
did spake, saying:
>>> Well let me put it this way. My current mobile phone is a little bit
>>> worn out now. And it wasn't a very good phone to start with. But on
>>> the other hand, it doesn't seem to be *possible* to buy a mobile phone
>>> that's just a phone any more. It has to also try to be a camera and a
>>> music system and a database and... I just want a phone?
>> They're out there just not displayed as prominently because they're
>> cheap.
>
> Heh, I'll bet. ;-)
Same deal with contracts.
>>> Also, for some reason flip phones seem to be extremely rare right now.
>> They were in vogue for a while along with sliding ones, perhaps people
>> got fed-up with the flip/slide breaking? Or it was just cheaper not to
>> build them that way?
>
> Lots of slide phones around, not seeing many flip phones...
I suppose the slide is more durable then a flip?
>>> but it can still call 999, causing a pretty serious hazard as it might
>>> block out a *real* emergency call.
>> It can still call any emergency number, but the I bet the likelyhood
>> of hitting the three correct digits and dial remains small.
>
> Um... hit 9 three times? (Or alternatively, just hold down the 9 key for
> a second or so.) It's really very easy. I made many, many calls this way
> with my old Nokia 3210.
Hmm all the phones I've had you've had to hit dial before or after the
number.
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 09:25:07 +1000, Dre wrote:
> yes, it doesn't crash for me, in fact I haven't had it crash for me in
> *years*.
I can say that as well, but that's probably more due to the fact that I
use OpenOffice rather than MS Office. :-)
But I do know lots of people who use Word frequently (and use advanced
features) and don't have it crash. Last time I worked on a book, I was
required to use Word with templates and it never crashed on me - and I
think that was even Word 97.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
> For a games console it's probably enough. What do you hold in RAM during a
> game? All the 3D meshes and textures are on the GPU video memory only*.
That's actually not true.
In big games typical scenes may consist of hundreds of thousands, if not
even millions of polygons. You *can't* render them all even with the most
modern graphics cards.
Game engines implement an ample variety of techniques to reduce the amount
of polygons sent to the graphics card. The optimal situation is that only
those polygons which are visible in the current frame are sent to the
graphics card to be rendered.
Many of these techniques are things which are not supported by graphics
cards but must be calculated by the CPU. These include things like BSP
trees, dividing the scene into sectors, portals, occlusion volumes,
billboard sprites, etc.
Also in most modern games the scene to be rendered is seldom static,
but changes all the time. For example dynamic shadows, at least if
implemented using shadow volumes, require new shadow polygons to be
created at each frame and sent to the graphics card. Of course in order
to create the shadow polygons in the first place you need the scene
itself (and all of its optimizations) in RAM.
Games also need to do a whole lot more than that as well. For example
most current games have some kind of physics engine, which requires its
memory. The list is endless.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
