On 11/04/2012 02:05 AM, Darren New wrote:
> On 4/10/2012 8:54, Invisible wrote:
>> How about, uh, speed?
>
> Look at cars where speed above 70MPH actually matters. Like, say, race
> cars. They've gotten much faster.

Pfft. Every time the engineers find a way to make the cars faster, the 
FIA finds a way to make them go slower again. :-P

Post a reply to this message

On 11/04/2012 02:07 AM, Darren New wrote:
> On 4/10/2012 7:55, scott wrote:
>> text was all a bit blocky or blurry depending what setting you used.
>
> 300DPI is still a bit blocky and blurry on paper.

I still think you're insane. :-P

Post a reply to this message

>> text was all a bit blocky or blurry depending what setting you used.
>
> 300DPI is still a bit blocky and blurry on paper.

Another important point when discussing resolution is what the source 
data is you are trying to display.  If it's vector based then you can 
decide each pixel value perfectly using a simple algorithm, however if 
you're trying to scale a bitmap to display (eg from a webpage or camera 
data) it's very hard to make it look as good as the vector based data, 
no matter what AA algorithm you use.

Post a reply to this message

>> Look at cars where speed above 70MPH actually matters. Like, say, race
>> cars. They've gotten much faster.
>
> Pfft. Every time the engineers find a way to make the cars faster, the
> FIA finds a way to make them go slower again. :-P

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fastest_production_cars

The problem with top speed is that it depends on the cube root of power, 
so you need huge increases of power to get any significant top speed 
improvements.

The bigger improvements have been in cornering speeds and braking 
ability (both in racing cars and road cars).  If you look at videos of 
old F1 races there are many corners where they used to brake and change 
gear whereas in today's cars they just run flat out (Eau Rouge at Spa is 
the classic one, or 130R at Suzuka).  Tyres, suspension and aerodynamics 
have improved vastly to make such things possible.  Even in your road 
car braking distances have vastly reduced due to tyre, suspension and 
brake design (not ABS, that only really helps if you want to steer and 
brake or it's wet).

Post a reply to this message

scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
> The main problem is that Windows doesn't work nicely with higher 
> resolutions.

  I think a bigger problem is that the amount of data that needs to be
transferred from the computer to the display becomes prohibitively large
as the resolution grows.

  There is, after all, a physical limit on how many bits of information
per second can be transferred through circuitry and cables.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 11/04/2012 10:07 AM, Warp wrote:
> scott<sco### [at] scottcom>  wrote:
>> The main problem is that Windows doesn't work nicely with higher
>> resolutions.
>
>    I think a bigger problem is that the amount of data that needs to be
> transferred from the computer to the display becomes prohibitively large
> as the resolution grows.
>
>    There is, after all, a physical limit on how many bits of information
> per second can be transferred through circuitry and cables.

I think the bigger problem is Windows. If that could be fixed and 
resolutions started climbing, eventually what you're talking about would 
become the next problem. But I don't think we're currently near that 
limit yet.

Post a reply to this message

>    There is, after all, a physical limit on how many bits of information
> per second can be transferred through circuitry and cables.

DisplayPort already allows up to 3840x2160x30bpp @ 60 Hz, so that should 
be enough for a few years before they come up with something else (which 
they surely will if there is demand for it).

Post a reply to this message

Le 2012/04/11 04:55, scott a écrit :
>>> Look at cars where speed above 70MPH actually matters. Like, say, race
>>> cars. They've gotten much faster.
>>
>> Pfft. Every time the engineers find a way to make the cars faster, the
>> FIA finds a way to make them go slower again. :-P
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fastest_production_cars
>
> The problem with top speed is that it depends on the cube root of power,
> so you need huge increases of power to get any significant top speed
> improvements.
>
> The bigger improvements have been in cornering speeds and braking
> ability (both in racing cars and road cars). If you look at videos of
> old F1 races there are many corners where they used to brake and change
> gear whereas in today's cars they just run flat out (Eau Rouge at Spa is
> the classic one, or 130R at Suzuka). Tyres, suspension and aerodynamics
> have improved vastly to make such things possible. Even in your road car
> braking distances have vastly reduced due to tyre, suspension and brake
> design (not ABS, that only really helps if you want to steer and brake
> or it's wet).

ABS is very often bad. Most are all/nothing affairs taking only one 
sample per wheel rotation that can jerk you around and make you loose 
controll. In some cases, the brake pedal will shake and hit your foot 
real hard, even to the point of causing some injuries...

A real good ABS must be progressive, take MANY samples per rotation, 
gradualy reduce the breaking power as needed acording to the breaking 
related torque and wheel load. In short, find the limit of adherance and 
stay around it untill you stop.




Alain

Post a reply to this message

> A real good ABS must be progressive, take MANY samples per rotation,
> gradualy reduce the breaking power as needed acording to the breaking
> related torque and wheel load. In short, find the limit of adherance and
> stay around it untill you stop.

That won't work, as once you get past the limit of adherence, gradually 
reducing the braking power will not stop the wheel locking.  The 
friction gets less, so you need less brake power to lock the wheel, it 
gets slower so friction gets even less etc. it's in a positive feedback 
loop condition.

Once you are past the limit, the best thing to do is to instantly reduce 
the brake pressure completely, this will move the wheel back into the 
region of higher friction as quickly as possible and you can then 
reapply the brake pressure.  It may not seem intuitive though that 
totally releasing the brake pressure will make you stop quicker in the 
end, but consider that 99.9% of the time is probably spent below the 
limit and only 0.1% above the limit with the brake pressure cut.

Of course the faster your system is the less noticeable the "pulsing" is 
and the more you can stay around the limit, but a progressive or gradual 
system is not the best way to do it, and would be much more expensive.

Post a reply to this message

On 13/04/2012 09:01 AM, scott wrote:

> That won't work, as once you get past the limit of adherence, gradually
> reducing the braking power will not stop the wheel locking.

> Of course the faster your system is the less noticeable the "pulsing" is
> and the more you can stay around the limit, but a progressive or gradual
> system is not the best way to do it, and would be much more expensive.

One winter I was driving along. I forget why, but I pulled into a side 
street, which turned out to have half an inch of solid ice coating it. 
The ABS cut in when I tried to coast to a stop. It sure juddered my foot 
around. (But then, it's a cheap car.) The car did stop, however. If only 
they could make a way for the steering to also continue working. :-P

The only flaw I noticed was that once the car is moving slowly enough, 
the wheels just lock, and won't unlock. (And by "slowly enough", I mean 
"slow enough that you could walk up to the car and play curling with it.")

Post a reply to this message