 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/5/2012 14:11, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Sep 2012 20:53:37 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>
>> On 05/09/2012 05:43 PM, nemesis wrote:
>>> hello, caveman. Our minimum smartphone screen sizes are now 4"
>>
>> Wouldn't that make the phone too small to fit in your pocket?
>
> Is there /any/ physical circumstances where something could be /too
> small/ to fit in a container?
Only when you start talking quantum levels.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"They're the 1-800-#-GORILA of the telecom business."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 05 Sep 2012 21:21:35 -0700, Darren New wrote:
> On 9/5/2012 14:11, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Wed, 05 Sep 2012 20:53:37 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/09/2012 05:43 PM, nemesis wrote:
>>>> hello, caveman. Our minimum smartphone screen sizes are now 4"
>>>
>>> Wouldn't that make the phone too small to fit in your pocket?
>>
>> Is there /any/ physical circumstances where something could be /too
>> small/ to fit in a container?
>
> Only when you start talking quantum levels.
Sounds interesting - but that would be a very tiny mobile phone indeed. ;)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/4/2012 11:43, Patrick Elliott wrote:
> "Lamarr's and Antheil's frequency-hopping idea serves as a basis for modern
> spread-spectrum communication technology, such as Bluetooth, COFDM used in
> Wi-Fi network connections, and CDMA used in some cordless and wireless
> telephones."
Or, more specifically,
http://denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/2002/04/Howspreadingactuallyworks.shtml
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"They're the 1-800-#-GORILA of the telecom business."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Damn. And here I was thinking that's what people watch the news and read
>> newspapers for...
>
> Not WHILE they are being shot at!
>
> Did you miss the part where I said that "There were lots of people _in
> that theater_ who wanted to know what the heck was going on."
And I thought the only people who use electronic communications rather
than running for their lives are the people who write those IRC quotes
on bash.org :-P
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> And you use an on screen keyboard.
>
> http://blog.makezine.com/2012/08/30/mechanical-typewriter-keyboard-for-ipad/
1. That looks like it would probably shatter the screen.
2. Isn't this the /opposite/ of portability?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 05/09/2012 10:08 PM, Francois Labreque wrote:
>> On 05/09/2012 02:57 PM, Francois Labreque wrote:
>>> "Apps" are the software that you run on iThings.
>>>
>>> For example, the Wolfram Alpha app that you mentioned earlier.
>>
>> ...the Wolfram Alpha app I mentioned as an example of utter
>> pointlessness?
>
> Having a front-end client that sanitizes the user's input before sending
> transactions back to the back-end server is NOT pointless when you are
> dealing with devices that have limited (and/or expensive) bandwidth
> capabilities, or small screen resolutions.
In the case of Wolfram Alpha, it's /supposed/ to accept free-form
natural language input, which it then does extensive sophisticated [and
frequently changing] processing on at the server side. Attempting to
work out whether a given query string will return any results on the
client side would require a severe amount of processing, not to mention
access to Alpha's multi-terebyte database... It's just not feasible.
> for example, on my phone, I could fire up the browser and access the
> phone book web site, wait while it downloads the logos, ads, etc... and
> then have to either zoom in and scroll all over the place to put the
> person's name and city and then scroll some more until I get to the
> "search" button, or I can use the app that acts as a front-end client
> for the web site and is more suited to the 640x480 resolution of the
> phone's screen. I suspect the Wolfram app is similar. (Disclaimer: I may
> be wrong, as I haven't tried it.)
Wait - they perfected web page zooming?? o_O
> Privacy concerns aside, I don't know of anyone who would want to have
> their phone vibrate whenever they get in the vicinity of a particular
> chain of clothing store. Then again, I'm not a teenage girl!
My lolrus!
>>> There are
>>> also word processors, spreadsheets, presentation packages, etc...
>>
>> How can you operate a word processor or a spreadsheet without a keyboard?
>
> Magic!
>
>
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTWfurnBt-2DPkqVngr0dQE37Vj8xclsMZDmmuGo9_BR38Ne2-t
That must be the slowest, most awkward thing EVER! o_O
>>> Who said the only thing you could do on a tablet was surf the net?
>>
>> I didn't say tablet, I said iPad.
>
> And the iPad is what, in your opinion, if not a tablet?
An iPad is one specific model of tablet. From what I've seen, "tablet"
covers a wide and vaguely-defined range of devices. (E.g., I once
purchased a "tablet" that was merely a normal PC laptop with a touch
screen. But it was the size and weight of a laptop, with a physical
keyboard, running Microsoft Windows on a normal x86 CPU. None of which
are things that describe an iPad...)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 05/09/2012 10:11 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Sep 2012 20:53:37 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>
>> On 05/09/2012 05:43 PM, nemesis wrote:
>>> hello, caveman. Our minimum smartphone screen sizes are now 4"
>>
>> Wouldn't that make the phone too small to fit in your pocket?
>
> Is there /any/ physical circumstances where something could be /too
> small/ to fit in a container?
*facepalm*
Obviously I meant to type "too big"...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 06/09/2012 05:15 AM, Darren New wrote:
> "Is it supposed to smoke when I turn it on?"
>
> "What? No, of course not!"
>
> "Should I turn it off, then?"
This thing is brilliant! I mean, it's ACTUALLY ILLUMINATING THE ROOM!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> OK, but... like what?
Well nowadays you can implement pretty much anything as a web page, so
you could argue that any phone app could instead be implemented as a web
page. The point of an app is that it can take on the same UI as the rest
of your device (menu options, saved data, sync options etc) rather than
being more limited as a web page.
Maybe there are some things web pages can't do though, like take control
of your microphone, camera, acceleration sensors etc, so you'd need an
app for them. For example I have a guitar tuner app, not sure if that
would be possible as a web page. Or the one that allows me to control
the camera remotely, again not sure a web page could manage that.
> Full HD, on a screen only an inch across. How pointless...
>
> (You realise that the human eye can only focus on objects a certain
> distance away from your face, right? Never mind if you want to see it
> with both eyes simultaneously.)
Most arguments against higher dpi displays forget/ignore the fact that
images typically displayed are not perfectly anti-aliased. Even images
from the camera are scaled by some non-optimal algorithm before being
sent to the display (unsurprisingly Apple's algorithm seemed to be the
best at this). Image that are computer generated, especially in
real-time, are likely to have far more aliasing artefacts even with so
called "AA" features enabled. You've seen how slow POV goes when you use
"+am2 +r4" - you can't afford to do that (or similar) on a mobile device.
When you have images like this you can *easily* spot the difference
between a 300 and 600 dpi display at a normal 30 cm viewing distance. At
my previous job we did lots of testing on this, and the worst image we
had was something like this, supposedly from a game (not this exact
image, but it had a lot of aliasing around certain parts of the cars):
http://cdn.digitaltrends.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/gran-turismo-5-sema-2009-screenshots-9.jpg
A lot of people could even tell the difference between the 600 and 1200
dpi version of that one. 600 dpi = full HD on a ~4" phone.
> Oh, I know Facebook is /constantly/ trying to shove stuff like that in
> my face...
Surprising, I thought it detected the device that was requesting the
webpage and only popped up the message if you were on a phone or tablet
etc - never seen it on the desktop site.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>> Damn. And here I was thinking that's what people watch the news and read
>>> newspapers for...
>>
>> Not WHILE they are being shot at!
>>
>> Did you miss the part where I said that "There were lots of people _in
>> that theater_ who wanted to know what the heck was going on."
>
> And I thought the only people who use electronic communications rather
> than running for their lives are the people who write those IRC quotes
> on bash.org :-P
Ok, maybe being shot at was a little exageration. The shooting happened
outside the back entrance.
Premier is on stage giving her speech. Slight commotion is heard
backstage. Plain clothes police officers rush her off stage. Uniformed
cops appear everywhere... Everyone - including the 5 tv channels
covering the event - goes "Whuh?" *Tweet* *Tweet* *Tweet*
--
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/* flabreque */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/* @ */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/* gmail.com */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
