http://www.bash.org/?777977  Is that, uh, legal?
http://www.bash.org/?758379  PWN3D!
http://www.bash.org/?420855  How can people be so stupid?! >_<
http://www.bash.org/?217453  That's cute. :-S
http://www.bash.org/?268247  Haha - 0wned.
http://www.bash.org/?283491  This probably happens...
http://www.bash.org/?764876  OMG, I wish I saw that!
http://www.bash.org/?587801  WTH?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> http://www.bash.org/?420855  How can people be so stupid?! >_<

There may have been more to their sandwiches than one having bacon and 
the other one not.  In any event, only a moron expects a McDonald's 
worker to get a special order right.

> http://www.bash.org/?268247  Haha - 0wned.

With a capital "P"...

> http://www.bash.org/?283491  This probably happens...

Some uni profs would have knowingly brought the first guy in.

Regards,
John

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> http://www.bash.org/?777977  Is that, uh, legal?

No. Biting people like that just *can't* be legal.


-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 09:45:08 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

> http://www.bash.org/?587801  WTH?

Do you know what Black Friday is?

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>> http://www.bash.org/?587801  WTH?
> 
> Do you know what Black Friday is?

No I don't, but... what's so great about an Xbox?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> what's so great about an Xbox?

http://files.xboxic.com/xbox-360/splinter-cell-double-agent/scda-screen-x360-shoot-01-05-06.jpg


-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 20:26:50 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

>>> http://www.bash.org/?587801  WTH?
>> 
>> Do you know what Black Friday is?
> 
> No I don't, but... 

In the US, it's the day after Thanksgiving - biggest shopping day of the 
holiday season (if not the year).

> what's so great about an Xbox?

I've wondered that myself.  Not enough to go look, though, as I don't 
spend a lot of time playing games.  I find that many modern games just 
lack the gameplay I'm used to.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:

>
http://files.xboxic.com/xbox-360/splinter-cell-double-agent/scda-screen-x360-shoot-01-05-06.jpg

...your point being?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Warp wrote:

> >
http://files.xboxic.com/xbox-360/splinter-cell-double-agent/scda-screen-x360-shoot-01-05-06.jpg

> ...your point being?

  You asked a question, I answered it.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

>> ...your point being?
> 
>   You asked a question, I answered it.

I don't think the Xbox is alone in having the ability to display 
realtime 3D graphics. ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

"Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:48556cf9$1@news.povray.org...
> >> http://www.bash.org/?587801  WTH?
> >
> > Do you know what Black Friday is?
>
> No I don't, but... what's so great about an Xbox?

Hype. Same with the iPhone, same with the Wii, same with the Playstation,
etc
Lots of people standing in line for ages, really, really wanting one of the
item in question, then hearing that the shop's almost sold out. It's asking
for a mob.

Plus, afaik, Black Friday often sees things on sale at discounted rates.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> >> ...your point being?
> > 
> >   You asked a question, I answered it.

> I don't think the Xbox is alone in having the ability to display 
> realtime 3D graphics. ;-)

  The point is the quality.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

>> I don't think the Xbox is alone in having the ability to display 
>> realtime 3D graphics. ;-)
> 
>   The point is the quality.

Oh, OK. It didn't seem all that spectacular to me, but maybe it looks 
better in motion...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:485686a1$1@news.povray.org...
> >> I don't think the Xbox is alone in having the ability to display
> >> realtime 3D graphics. ;-)
> >
> >   The point is the quality.
>
> Oh, OK. It didn't seem all that spectacular to me, but maybe it looks
> better in motion...

On a good TV, the graphics the XBox puts out looks awesome.

Post a reply to this message

>> Oh, OK. It didn't seem all that spectacular to me, but maybe it looks
>> better in motion...
> 
> On a good TV, the graphics the XBox puts out looks awesome.

Yeah, the picture does seem to be in a widescreen aspect for some reason...

I had a go at playing something called "call of duty 4" on my sister's 
PS3. [Yes, I know. I still find it hard to believe a real person 
somewhere actually owns one.] It seemed rather impressive on a vast 
29-inch LCD TV. I mean, the graphics seemed really astounding anyway, 
but I expect just about any game seems immense on such a huge display 
surface...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

>> No I don't, but... what's so great about an Xbox?
> 
> Hype. Same with the iPhone, same with the Wii, same with the Playstation,
> etc

Ah. I was wondering why everybody is so excited about the iPhone. (Is it 
because it has an "i" in the name? I'm still waiting for Apple's 
intelligent vacuum cleaner, the "iSuck". :-P )

As for the Wii... Apart from the obviously ridiculous name, I think it's 
an "interesting" concept. But when I tried to play with my sister's 
boyfriend's Wii [do NOT say this out loud in public!] it just made my 
arm hurt [do NOT include this part in public either!!]

Seriously - the centrifugal forces just make the veins in my hand 
overpressure. And my wrist hurt.

I wonder... surely there have been some pretty serious injuries / 
property damage due to the Wii, no?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 20:13:37 +0100, Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull>
wrote:

>But when I tried to play with my sister's 
>boyfriend's Wii [do NOT say this out loud in public!] it just made my 
>arm hurt [do NOT include this part in public either!!]

lol
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> 
> Ah. I was wondering why everybody is so excited about the iPhone. (Is it 
> because it has an "i" in the name? I'm still waiting for Apple's 
> intelligent vacuum cleaner, the "iSuck". :-P )

It's a incredible product from Apple - afaik it doesn't have even the 
one button Apple is famous of! And still it's a telephone, beat that if 
you can.

> As for the Wii... Apart from the obviously ridiculous name, I think it's 
> an "interesting" concept. 

I honestly want one, just haven't had the cash on me while surfing the 
shops. But before x-mas I believe I'll own one. It's one of the rare 
changes to get me intresting in something even remotely sporty.

> But when I tried to play with my sister's 
> boyfriend's Wii [do NOT say this out loud in public!] it just made my 
> arm hurt [do NOT include this part in public either!!]

You know... It already is printed in the internet?
http://news.povray.org/povray.off-topic/message/%3C4856bb5f%40news.povray.org%3E/#%3C4856bb5f%40news.povray.org%3E

> Seriously - the centrifugal forces just make the veins in my hand 
> overpressure. And my wrist hurt.

It'll pass.

> I wonder... surely there have been some pretty serious injuries / 
> property damage due to the Wii, no?

Yes. That's why they added the wristband.

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

>> But when I tried to play with my sister's boyfriend's Wii [do NOT say 
>> this out loud in public!] it just made my arm hurt [do NOT include 
>> this part in public either!!]
> 
> You know... It already is printed in the internet?

...which isn't the same as SAYING IT OUT LOUD, because writing it down 
makes it completely unambiguous that you're talking about an electronics 
product. ;-)

>> I wonder... surely there have been some pretty serious injuries / 
>> property damage due to the Wii, no?
> 
> Yes. That's why they added the wristband.

Wait - they *added* the wristband?

As in, it wasn't there initially?

Oh dear. ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

(damn, you're fast - but I might be faster)

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> 
> ...which isn't the same as SAYING IT OUT LOUD, because writing it down 
> makes it completely unambiguous that you're talking about an electronics 
> product. ;-)

More like on the internet more people will read it than ever could hear 
you say it out loud once :p.

> Wait - they *added* the wristband?

Yes.

> As in, it wasn't there initially?

Yep :).

> Oh dear. ;-)

Rumours tell that casualties inhold a lot of TV's ;).

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

Eero Ahonen wrote:
> (damn, you're fast - but I might be faster)

Too Fast & Too Curious. ;-)

>> ...which isn't the same as SAYING IT OUT LOUD, because writing it down 
>> makes it completely unambiguous that you're talking about an 
>> electronics product. ;-)
> 
> More like on the internet more people will read it than ever could hear 
> you say it out loud once :p.

I was more concerned about the extreme ambiguity of the name Wii when 
uttered out loud - but yeah, I guess nobody listens to *me* anyway. :-P

>> Wait - they *added* the wristband?
> 
> Yes.
> 
>> As in, it wasn't there initially?
> 
> Yep :).
> 
>> Oh dear. ;-)
> 
> Rumours tell that casualties inhold a lot of TV's ;).

Ooooohhhh dear god!

I'm sure You Tube has video evidence. ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Eero Ahonen <aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid> wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> > 
> > Ah. I was wondering why everybody is so excited about the iPhone. (Is it 
> > because it has an "i" in the name? I'm still waiting for Apple's 
> > intelligent vacuum cleaner, the "iSuck". :-P )

> It's a incredible product from Apple - afaik it doesn't have even the 
> one button Apple is famous of! And still it's a telephone, beat that if 
> you can.

  Actually it does have one button. But that's about the only button it has.

  IMO the iPhone is rather innovative. Before the iPhone you had basically
just two options for smartphones: Either ones with the standard phone
12-key keyboard (plus a few), where writing anything was a big pain in the
ass, or ones with a lot of space wasted for a full-fledged qwerty keyboard
(although the Nokia E70 style of keyboarded phone does this a bit more
efficiently).

  So the people at Apple thought: Why waste valuable space for a full-fledged
physical qwerty keyboard when that space could be used for the actual
*display* of the phone, and a fully *customizable* qwerty keyboard could
be used on that display?

  There are obvious advantages: The keyboard layout and contents is not
fixed (as it inevitably is with a physical keyboard) but can be customized
on a per-application basis. And, most importantly, the keyboard doesn't
take any space *at all* when it's not needed. That space can be used for
whatever you want because it's just a display. A rather enormous one.

  IMO Apple has taken a significant step in phone innovation, which others
will certainly soon follow. (And, not surprisingly, Nokia and a bunch of
others have already announced their own versions of touchscreen-only
phones.)

  People often have prejudices against the touch screen in the iPhone,
but that's because they have never tried it.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:

>   IMO the iPhone is rather innovative. Before the iPhone you had basically
> just two options for smartphones: Either ones with the standard phone
> 12-key keyboard (plus a few), where writing anything was a big pain in the
> ass, or ones with a lot of space wasted for a full-fledged qwerty keyboard
> (although the Nokia E70 style of keyboarded phone does this a bit more
> efficiently).
> 
>   So the people at Apple thought: Why waste valuable space for a full-fledged
> physical qwerty keyboard when that space could be used for the actual
> *display* of the phone, and a fully *customizable* qwerty keyboard could
> be used on that display?
> 
>   There are obvious advantages: The keyboard layout and contents is not
> fixed (as it inevitably is with a physical keyboard) but can be customized
> on a per-application basis. And, most importantly, the keyboard doesn't
> take any space *at all* when it's not needed. That space can be used for
> whatever you want because it's just a display. A rather enormous one.
> 
>   IMO Apple has taken a significant step in phone innovation, which others
> will certainly soon follow. (And, not surprisingly, Nokia and a bunch of
> others have already announced their own versions of touchscreen-only
> phones.)

On the other hand, there are equally obvious disadvantages. [That they 
are obvious doesn't necessarily mean they're important of course.]

You now have fingerprints all over your viewing area. Good luck cleaning 
skin oil off a plastic display. ;-)

You get no tactile feedback from the "keyboard". Various HCI studies 
have showed that this is a very important factor. [I would imagine you 
could easily provide audible feedback - maybe the iPhone does this? - 
but it wouldn't be as good as being able to "feel" when you've pressed a 
key, or when your fingers are correctly aligned to the keys.]

But certainly - for such a small device - it has undeniable advantages. 
As a matter of fact, my sat nav device uses a similar on-screen 
keyboard. While it's a little slow to operate, it's not *too* bad... The 
key [pun!] is to make the keys big enough to hit reliably. Not all 
products manage this.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Eero Ahonen wrote:
>> (damn, you're fast - but I might be faster)

Nope, I wasn't - 5mins against your 3.

> Too Fast & Too Curious. ;-)

Yep ;).

> I was more concerned about the extreme ambiguity of the name Wii when 
> uttered out loud - but yeah, I guess nobody listens to *me* anyway. :-P

Aaaah yess.. An old joke nowadays, I just didn't catch it.

>> Rumours tell that casualties inhold a lot of TV's ;).
> 
> Ooooohhhh dear god!
> 
> I'm sure You Tube has video evidence. ;-)

If you'll find some, throw a link :).

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> 
>   Actually it does have one button. But that's about the only button it has.

Power button? I was actually wondering this, but I though Apple would 
make it "hip" to lack one :p.

>   IMO the iPhone is rather innovative. Before the iPhone you had basically
> just two options for smartphones: Either ones with the standard phone

Yes, it is. It still is lacking some features, though, but it really is 
something different than anything before it.

For me the worst part would be the marriage it has for one operator. I 
do use Sonera's network here in Finland (it's the only one to provide 
enough access for me), but I still don't want a phone that can't operate 
on some other network. The other ones would be the complete lack of 
keyboard (yes, I like the 12-button one, and that's just my opinion) and 
the fact that it's a smartphone (it has a lot of features, being also a 
pda and still being PITA while lacking configurability and some 
options). Not that I'd want a S60 -phone any more than iPhone, they are 
one arses to use, if you ask me. OTOH I might be forced to change 
sometime soon, since my 6310i is wearing out, even though it ain't even 
5 years old yet.

> 
>   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.

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> No I don't, but... what's so great about an Xbox?
>>
>> Hype. Same with the iPhone, same with the Wii, same with the Playstation,
>> etc
> 
> Ah. I was wondering why everybody is so excited about the iPhone. (Is it 
> because it has an "i" in the name? I'm still waiting for Apple's 
> intelligent vacuum cleaner, the "iSuck". :-P )
> 
> As for the Wii... Apart from the obviously ridiculous name, I think it's 
> an "interesting" concept. But when I tried to play with my sister's 
> boyfriend's Wii [do NOT say this out loud in public!] it just made my 
> arm hurt [do NOT include this part in public either!!]
> 
> Seriously - the centrifugal forces just make the veins in my hand 
> overpressure. And my wrist hurt.
> 

Don't swing so hard, it maxes out at 3Gs.

> I wonder... surely there have been some pretty serious injuries / 
> property damage due to the Wii, no?
> 

No injuries, thankfully. I think we only had one person slip while 
playing Tennis, and bowling in socks on a hardwood floor is just asking 
to learn to do splits. I can just imagine someone going to the doctor 
with a sprained wrist or elbow . . .
Doc: "What have you been doing that might have caused this?"
Patient: "Well, I've just been playing with my Wii."

Post a reply to this message

>> Seriously - the centrifugal forces just make the veins in my hand 
>> overpressure. And my wrist hurt.
>
> 
> Don't swing so hard, it maxes out at 3Gs.

Oh *now* you tell me!

Actually, the one that got me was the boxing. No matter how you wave the 
controller around, my character remains motionless. I can't figure that 
out...

>> I wonder... surely there have been some pretty serious injuries / 
>> property damage due to the Wii, no?
>>
> 
> No injuries, thankfully. I think we only had one person slip while 
> playing Tennis, and bowling in socks on a hardwood floor is just asking 
> to learn to do splits.

Heh. Too true!

But when girls do the splits, it looks sexy. When guys do it, it just 
looks awkward and painful. [Which it is...]

A bit like dancing, I guess?

> I can just imagine someone going to the doctor 
> with a sprained wrist or elbow . . .
> Doc: "What have you been doing that might have caused this?"
> Patient: "Well, I've just been playing with my Wii."

Yeah - there are *so* many ways that one product name can get you weird 
looks. [Although possibly not from a doctor - surely they've already 
seen half a dozen people who did the same thing, or worse!]

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 09:45:08 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> 
>> http://www.bash.org/?587801  WTH?
> 
> Do you know what Black Friday is?

Assuming that I still work in retail sales come the last Friday in 
November, I shall experience seven hours of it first hand.  (I work in 
retail sales.)

Regards,
John

Post a reply to this message

"Eero Ahonen" <aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid> wrote in message
news:4856c1f6@news.povray.org...

> > Oh dear. ;-)
>
> Rumours tell that casualties inhold a lot of TV's ;).

I've heard of TV casualties from the wrist band snapping. LCDs and Plasmas.
The glass on a CRT is usually strong enough to survive,
I have to wonder what kind of force is necessary to get it to snap. It
seemed pretty secure the few times I've played.

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 23:09:04 +0200, Gail Shaw sa dot com>  
<"<initialsurname"@sentech> wrote:
> I've heard of TV casualties from the wrist band snapping. LCDs and  
> Plasmas.
> The glass on a CRT is usually strong enough to survive,
> I have to wonder what kind of force is necessary to get it to snap. It
> seemed pretty secure the few times I've played.


The strap on the earlier models was weaker than the current one. When the  
damage reports started trickling in, they redesigned it.


-- 
FE

Post a reply to this message

Eero Ahonen wrote:
> Power button? I was actually wondering this, but I though Apple would 
> make it "hip" to lack one :p.

I thought it has a power button on top and a "home" button on the front.

It has a nice UI tho, I will say. That isn't what's stopping me from 
buying one, tho. :-)

-- 
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
  Helpful housekeeping hints:
   Check your feather pillows for holes
    before putting them in the washing machine.

Post a reply to this message

> I had a go at playing something called "call of duty 4" on my sister's 
> PS3. [Yes, I know. I still find it hard to believe a real person somewhere 
> actually owns one.]

"Europe PS3 sales 'overtake 360'"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7386879.stm

I got mine because it was the cheapest blu-ray player out there.  I also use 
it a lot to stream music and videos from my PC wirelessly into the living 
room.  Oh and show off some POV animations on the big TV at 1920x1080 
resolution :-) And I sometimes play a couple of games on it too (the 
graphics from GT5 are awesome).

http://www.greatwallofgaming.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/gt5-prologue-5.jpg

The focal blur is a bit too optimised for speed and sometimes doesn't look 
realistic, but while playing you hardly notice.  But the HDR rendering and 
tonemapping are great, and the detail of the car models both inside and out 
are staggering.

> It seemed rather impressive on a vast 29-inch LCD TV.

And I suspect that on a 29" TV you weren't even playing it at the highest 
resolution (I don't think (m)any 29" TVs support 1920x1080 resolution).

Post a reply to this message

> As for the Wii... Apart from the obviously ridiculous name, I think it's 
> an "interesting" concept. But when I tried to play with my sister's 
> boyfriend's Wii [do NOT say this out loud in public!] it just made my arm 
> hurt [do NOT include this part in public either!!]
>
> Seriously - the centrifugal forces just make the veins in my hand 
> overpressure. And my wrist hurt.
>
> I wonder... surely there have been some pretty serious injuries / property 
> damage due to the Wii, no?

We broke a light, dented a door and I had to stay home from work one day due 
to pulling a muscle in my back!

When we got our Wii we played the Wii sports games almost every day for like 
2 or 3 months, we are a bit bored of it now, actually I don't remember the 
last time we played.  Definitely don't regret playing it though, we spent so 
long on the tennis and bowling games.

Post a reply to this message

>> I've heard of TV casualties from the wrist band snapping. LCDs and 
>> Plasmas.
>> The glass on a CRT is usually strong enough to survive,

Yup, whereas the glass in an LCD is usually under 1mm thick - the polarisers 
stop it shattering, but it still cracks easily and then it's useless.

>> I have to wonder what kind of force is necessary to get it to snap. It
>> seemed pretty secure the few times I've played.

Ditto.

> The strap on the earlier models was weaker than the current one. When the 
> damage reports started trickling in, they redesigned it.

I really don't understand how they did not test such an obvious part before 
starting production.  I mean surely, when designing it, they *must* have 
asked themselves "ok, how strong does it need to be".  They could have 
easily got some strong dude to swing something around extremely violently, 
the multiplied the required strength by 2 or 3.  And even then, if something 
went wrong when they started making the sample parts, you think it would 
have shown up in their testing that they were snapping earlier than 
expected.

Post a reply to this message

> You now have fingerprints all over your viewing area. Good luck cleaning 
> skin oil off a plastic display. ;-)
>
> You get no tactile feedback from the "keyboard".

Previously Nokia and still today many car manufacturers rejected the 
touchscreen keyboard approach for those very two reasons.

> As a matter of fact, my sat nav device uses a similar on-screen keyboard. 
> While it's a little slow to operate, it's not *too* bad... The key [pun!] 
> is to make the keys big enough to hit reliably. Not all products manage 
> this.

It's not just getting the tactile feedback of having pressed a button, but 
getting the tactile feedback that you are over a button before you press. 
Try pressing those buttons on your satnav screen while driving fast on the 
motorway - then try controlling your radio while driving using real 
buttons - which is easier/safer?

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
>> I had a go at playing something called "call of duty 4" on my sister's 
>> PS3. [Yes, I know. I still find it hard to believe a real person 
>> somewhere actually owns one.]
> 
> "Europe PS3 sales 'overtake 360'"

Yeah. Obviously *somebody* must buy these things. It just seems weird 
meeting somebody who actually owns one. In real life.

> http://www.greatwallofgaming.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/gt5-prologue-5.jpg 

Now that's a little more like it. That actually looks good.

In fact, I'd go as far as to say this is the first scanline-rendered 
image I've seen that manages to make crude polygon tesselations and 
deceptive illumination trickery look like real curves.

I see what you mean about the blur though...

[Unrelated, but... TF2 somehow manages to achieve motion blur. On a 
standard 3D card. I'm not really sure how that's physically possible...]

>> It seemed rather impressive on a vast 29-inch LCD TV.
> 
> And I suspect that on a 29" TV you weren't even playing it at the 
> highest resolution (I don't think (m)any 29" TVs support 1920x1080 
> resolution).

While we're here... Is there a *reason* why HDMI leads cost £80 each??

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

>> http://www.greatwallofgaming.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/gt5-prologue-5.jpg
>
> Now that's a little more like it. That actually looks good.
>
> In fact, I'd go as far as to say this is the first scanline-rendered image 
> I've seen that manages to make crude polygon tesselations and deceptive 
> illumination trickery look like real curves.

Looking at it closer, the while line painted on the edge of the road is not 
very curvey.

> [Unrelated, but... TF2 somehow manages to achieve motion blur. On a 
> standard 3D card. I'm not really sure how that's physically possible...]

Why not?  Motion blur is not impossible to do on a 3D card - there's even a 
demo sample in the DirectX SDK showing you how to do it.

> While we're here... Is there a *reason* why HDMI leads cost £80 each??

Where were you looking?  I typed "hdmi cable" into amazon and this one is 
only 51p!!!

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Fisual-Install-GOLD-Plated-Cable/dp/B0014WH8EY

There are lots around 10 pounds if you want to spend a bit more.

Post a reply to this message

>> [Unrelated, but... TF2 somehow manages to achieve motion blur. On a 
>> standard 3D card. I'm not really sure how that's physically possible...]
> 
> Why not?  Motion blur is not impossible to do on a 3D card - there's 
> even a demo sample in the DirectX SDK showing you how to do it.

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 
I'm not sure what clever trick they've found to make it fast enough...

>> While we're here... Is there a *reason* why HDMI leads cost £80 each??
> 
> Where were you looking?

PC World, Curries, Dixons... hey wait, those are all the same shop! o_O

> I typed "hdmi cable" into amazon and this one is only 51p!!!
> 
> There are lots around 10 pounds if you want to spend a bit more.

...so it's a tax on stupidity then?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

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).

> I'm not sure what clever trick they've found to make it fast enough...

Another way is to render the scene to a texture, and at the same time render 
the velocity information of each pixel to another texture.  Then a final bit 
of code (running on the GPU naturally) creates the final image each frame 
using that data.  This method maybe slows down rendering by 5-10% on a 
complex scene, but allows full screen motion blur, all you need to do is 
make sure you add some velocity data to each mesh you render.

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> You now have fingerprints all over your viewing area. Good luck cleaning 
> skin oil off a plastic display. ;-)

I think it's glass actually. It's designed to be easily wiped down, at 
any rate.

Post a reply to this message

scott <sco### [at] scottcom> 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