d-range
About
- Username
- d-range
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- -
- Roles
- member
- Badges
- 0
- Posts
- 396
Reactions
Comments
-
Quote: Originally Posted by Futuristic This may have been addressed already, but I don't feel like reading through 5+pages worth of comments to find out. But, if this whole pixel-doubling is true, I see/hope that Apple is moving to a vector-base…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by Bageljoey The only way a "retina display" iPad made sense for this year is if it is a high-end BTO option. They can barely get enough of the current screens made to keep up with exploding demand--how anyone could expe…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum Do you think they can get the manufacturing volume they need? If so, then should they offer a 2x rez model at a premium price? About manufacturing volume: I don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised …
-
Quote: Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum So, then people suggest that maybe one of the intermediate rezes, 1.25x or 1.50x (below) could be used. 1.00 x == 1024 ×768 1.25 x == 1280×960 1.50 x == 1536×1152 2.00 x == 2048 ×1536 …
-
Wow, these profits really are mind-boggling. I know how great most Apple products are so I'm not surprised they do well, but the fact that they have so much traction in so many markets really is phenomenal. With the $2 billion higher profits tha…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by Gustav I agree. What we would end up with with is every developer providing @2x as the only image, and the OS has to scale each image for non-retina devices. But the problem is that it's adding an extra performance pen…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by DaHarder "when Apple introduced the iPad and its 9.7 inch, 1024x768 screen, it did not simply deliver a bigger version of the existing iPhone interface. Instead, it created a distinct user interface that took advantage…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by asdasd Quite right. The number of people who think that last years model will be sold at $499 is astonishing. This is the model to take on the cheap Androids - at $399. They always reduce the price of last years model.…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by Firefly7475 In any case I can't see this going anywhere unless Google phases out h.264 from YouTube. If they ever do that they would basically be saying "we think Android and Google services are more important to users…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by tjw Massive technical inferiority? Do you know anything about video encoding? Read some of the comparisons between the two formats, there are pros and cons in both and the fact that webm may be patent free (and if it's…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by StephenHoward How pathetic, you're happy to create a commercial monopolist because it makes life easier for you today, don't worry about tomorrow. Drama queen Of course selling your soul to a single company that…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by StephenHoward He's entirely wrong regarding H.264. The history of the internet is replete with examples of businesses trying to lever their proprietary products into key infrastructure roles. Each time open source …
-
Quote: Originally Posted by Superbass Ogg Theora, however is 100% open, and is now supported by both Mozilla and Chrome. Since Google owns YouTube, I assume YouTube will switch to Ogg very shortly. That leaves Safari with H264, which is not ex…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by ifail I've already dispelled the lower quality part. The visual differences are minimal, at best. H.264 is only a hair better, and its definitely the winner for resource hogging. Again, the latest builds of VP8 have H.…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by sprockkets I think they simply turn a blind eye to it No, the reason I believe is that there aren't any patents for the codec in France, where the video lan project is. Although I remember Dolby or DTS complaining …
-
Quote: Originally Posted by screamingfist i am not saying that he doesn't have something 'wrong' with him...lol...but it is his hard-ass, unforgiving, zero tolerance, 'free' thoroughness that leads me to think that webm is probably 'free' and won…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by sprockkets I have scoured their licensing terms about encoders and decoders and have not found any exceptions for non-profit use. Web use is already accounted for. Please link to and quote the clause where this is s…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by screamingfist i have to laugh at the comments that point out how the commentator has all the problems solved and proclaims the ones actually doing the work as 'idiots'. of course Stallman has done absolutely nothing i…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by sprockkets And you can do research yourself and find that webm isn't that far away from h.264, unlike theora, or you can keep talking out of your ass. VP8 as a codec isn't terrible, it's on par with many other codec…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by ifail It is only partially free, to end users like i said. Things that encode/decode are completely screwed, and is why Mozilla still will not support it. H.264 benefits NO ONE. Sorry but its trash and the only reason …