On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 11:19:04 +0000, Invisible wrote:

>> It's time consuming to visit 100 sites to see if there's anything new.
>> It's far easier to be alerted when there's something new that might be
>> of interest.
> 
> 100 sites?! o_O
> 
> Damn, you actually follow that much stuff? Jees...

Yes, I do.  Now for things like Slashdot or The Register, I skim 
headlines in Google Reader.  I don't always read the full article - but 
if a headline is intriguing, I'll dig in a little deeper.

With Slashdot, if I read the headline and it looks interesting, I'll read 
the story there.  If it looks more interesting, then I'll open the link 
to the /. story and follow the links to the actual story.

>>>>> That's why I just built a new PC - to experience the Core i7
>>>>> first-hand.
>>>>> :-P
>>>>
>>>> So then why bother going to Tom's Hardware again?
>>>
>>> Sarcasm? :-P
>>
>> Or perhaps to find out what the latest processor is that you might be
>> able to afford?
> 
> For that, I go to various shopping websites. I visit Tom's Hardware to
> find out which products have good performance.

Bingo.  Thank you, you've made my point.  You *can* actually learn stuff 
by reading about it on the 'net.

>>> Want to bet that the BBC has servers all over the world?
>>
>> So you just happened to get a crappy connection, while I got a good
>> one?
> 
> Or the BBC offers different quality levels in different parts of the
> world? Heck, maybe they're even using a different codec or something? I
> don't know.

I see.  So the BBC offers really crap quality to those who pay the 
licensing fee in the UK, but offers really good quality to those who 
don't?

>> Then your eyes are better than mine, or you got a really crappy
>> connection.
> 
> Yes. Because it's the connection that determines the picture quality,
> not the sender. Oh, wait...

Yes, it is the connection that determines the picture quality.  If I only 
have a 32 Kbps connection, I'm not going to get a good quality HD picture.

> Sure, it's all compressed. But that almost always means lossy
> compression. You have to trade how much bandwidth you have for what
> level of picture quality you want. And that's the problem - it seems
> that to stream realtime over the Internet, you have to accept really low
> picture quality.

Would you like me to take a picture of Netflix streaming on my 10' wide 
screen with a 3 Mbps ADSL connection?  Would that make you happy?

Jim

Post a reply to this message