Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!



Siphons Work Due To Gravity, Not Atmospheric Pressure: Now With Peer Review

_Shorty-dammit Widespread? 1st time I've ever heard it (360 comments)

Never in my 42 years have I heard anyone explain siphons working from atmospheric pressure. Obviously it is gravity. The same atmospheric pressure exists at both ends of the hose.

about 5 months ago

Titanfall Dev Claims Xbox One Doesn't Need DX12 To Improve Performance

_Shorty-dammit I thought current consoles were like current PCs (117 comments)

Only they're also known targets, and should be able to be easily programmed for, as a result. Performance for 1920x1080 shouldn't be an issue for any title on the hardware available. It boggles the mind at how poor these developers must be if they can't even target known hardware, console-style, and get good performance out of the thing. Average PC game devs don't seem to have any problem doing so on the PC, and that's a moving target. Why would any competent devs have a problem with a fixed target? They've got decent CPUs. They've got decent GPUs. They've got a decent amount of RAM. Yet they found a way to get horrible performance out of it. Send in the firing squad.

about 5 months ago

A 2560x1440 VR Headset That's Mobile

_Shorty-dammit Re:Field of view (135 comments)

Plenty of 'iRacers' have multiple 3D monitors. It works fine.

I have no doubt that your 'sense of presence' might be better with a VR headset, but to say I will not get a sense of presence with three monitors in front of me is ridiculous. You say don't discount VR's VRness. I say don't discount wide FOV for vastly improving the immersiveness factor, too. My view of the race track in this particular sim (thanks to its display calculator in the graphics options) gives me a 1:1 view of the sim world. It would look exactly the same to me if I were in that car at that track in the real world, save for the fact that I would have a full FOV in all directions rather than just the monitors in front of me.

Believe me, once the racing starts I am in that world. I completely lose the fact that I'm looking at monitors because of how much of my FOV it is taking up. The bezel gaps disappear. I fail to notice anything beyond the monitors' display area. A good VR headset *with* as much or greater FOV would be even better, yes. But I would not want a VR headset with less FOV than I have now, no matter what else the headset brings to the table in terms of immersiveness. FOV is too important, and trumps all the other headset pluses, for me, with this usage.

about 5 months ago

A 2560x1440 VR Headset That's Mobile

_Shorty-dammit Re:Field of view (135 comments)

A larger field of view by turning your head is not the same thing as a larger field of view at once. If I can't have both, I choose larger field of view at once. And, btw, you can do 3D with monitors. And I don't notice the bezel gaps while I'm racing on iRacing. I notice the track in front of me and the large FOV means I can see the cars beside me. It would be great to be able to turn my head to see even better beside me, but most of the time peripheral vision is enough for that use. But that absolutely requires a large FOV. In that use, a smaller FOV with head-tracking is still going to be a disadvantage compared to the larger FOV. The larger FOV will still be greatly preferable.

about 5 months ago

A 2560x1440 VR Headset That's Mobile

_Shorty-dammit Field of view (135 comments)

The resolution of these types of devices is a huge factor in whether or not I would find them acceptable to use, but the field of view they have is an even bigger factor. With very inexpensive monitors I can have a combined display that takes up a very large portion of my horizontal vision. I currently have three 24" monitors that give me a combined field of view of 123 degrees in their current configuration, with a 5760x1080 resolution also being a plus. Going to a VR headset with a FOV of only 90 degrees would be a step down as far as I'm concerned, and I would not take that step. The VR aspect of it, while cool in and of itself, would be a non-starter for me if the FOV was well below what I can do with monitors. Getting slightly bigger monitors, like 27" ones, would give me an even larger FOV, and alterations to their physical configuration can also change that FOV value and give me close to 180 degrees if I want.

As far as I'm concerned, if a VR headset isn't giving me something near/beyond a 180 degree FOV I really couldn't care less. I'd rather keep my head stationary and look at a display setup that does give me a larger FOV. Hopefully they get there soon, because everything else that goes along with the idea is pretty damn cool. But I don't want to look at an image where only a small portion of my vision is taken up. The immersiveness of a large horizontal FOV (vertical is less important to our vision, but would still be desirable) is too much to give up. I've lived with this setup for a couple years now, and wouldn't want to go without something similar/greater in FOV capability.

about 5 months ago

UK To Finally Legalize Ripping CDs and DVDs

_Shorty-dammit That didn't take long. (92 comments)

But what about cassettes?

about 6 months ago

11-Year UK Study Reports No Health Danger From Mobile Phone Transmissions

_Shorty-dammit Re:I am still skeptical (180 comments)

It's still non-ionizing radiation. Be as skeptical as you want. The rest of us will just point and laugh.

about 7 months ago

EA Caves: SimCity Offline Mode Coming

_Shorty-dammit Might actually buy it now. (198 comments)

I might actually buy it now. That was a ridiculous policy.

about 8 months ago

A Year With Google Glass

_Shorty-dammit All it takes is Google Glass? Doubtful. (292 comments)

Somehow I doubt that all would be required to make you forget you're squeezing a baby out is Google Glass. I'm fairly confident in saying nothing would do that, actually.

about 9 months ago

Why You Shouldn't Buy a UHD 4K TV This Year

_Shorty-dammit 4k will never be useful for a TV at home (271 comments)

I said this in the last 4k TV discussion. I have a 60" 1080P set, and my couch is 8 feet from it, or 96 inches. According to 60" 1920x1080 pixels should only be visible to the average retina up to 94". That 8 foot distance is about as close as I would want to sit to a TV that size anyway, so I lucked out there. If I got a 60" 4k TV it WOULD NOT LOOK ANY DIFFERENT at that distance. The 1920x1080 pixels are already just small enough to not see.

Now, go back to isthisretina and punch in 3840x2160 and 60" and what do you get? Yep, 47". Do you want to sit 47" from a 60" TV? Pretty sure you don't. I know I don't. You need to double the size to 120" in order to make the 8-foot viewing distance happen. But, again, do you want to sit 8 feet from a 120" TV? I don't think I would want to. Nevermind that an 85" 4k TV is something like $40,000! haha. How much would a 120" one be? Pff, yeah. That'll happen.

Also nevermind the fact that the last time you were in a movie theater with that big screen you were looking at a 4k picture. Did you see pixels during the movie? No. (And you were probably looking at a lot of 2k content during that movie anyway.)

TLDR: 4k is useless for the home, and always will be.

about 10 months ago

Alfred Poor Says HDTV Manufacturers are Hurting (Video)

_Shorty-dammit It depends how far away and how big the set is (307 comments)

I have a 60" 1080P set that is 8 feet from my couch, or 96 inches. I actually fluked out, without knowing this in advance or even thinking about it at the time, in that a 60" 1080P image only has visible pixels at up to 94 inches away, beyond which point you're past the average retina capability. Punch in 1920 x 1080 and 60" at this site.

Not only that, but I don't think I would want to sit closer than 8 feet from a set that big, anyway. It's a pretty big image from that far away. Now, if you go back to and punch in 3840 x 2160 and 60" and what do you get? Half of what you did before, or 47"! Sorry, but I do not want to sit 47" away from a 60" TV in order to appreciate all the pixels I would have paid for.

Now, extrapolate. If I wanted to continue to sit 8 feet from my TV, but I wanted a 4K TV that I could actually see (or nearly see) the pixels I paid for, knowing the information from above, how big would it need to be? That's right, 120" is what it would need to be. So we get back to the same problem again. I don't think I would want to sit 8 feet away from a 120" TV. But that's exactly what I would need to do in order to make use of 3840 x 2160 at that distance.

Maybe that wouldn't be too bad for watching movies, actually, but I doubt I would want to carry out my regular TV watching at that size/distance. I wouldn't mind trying it, but I am not confident that I would actually like it. Again, maybe for movies. Maybe.

about 10 months ago

AMD's Radeon R9 290X Review

_Shorty-dammit Re:Fastest? Do they draw every frame yet? (212 comments)

They couldn't test for dropped and runt frames, and said so. So, the tests tell me nothing I want to know, other than I'll still be sticking with NVidia. ;)

"That leaves us with Fraps. And of course, there’s no way for us to pick up dropped and runt frame using Fraps. So, we immediately shed the dual-GPU solutions from our charts."

about a year ago

AMD's Radeon R9 290X Review

_Shorty-dammit Fastest? Do they draw every frame yet? (212 comments)

Do they actually draw every frame yet? Can't exactly call it the fastest if they're still cheating. I'm looking forward to the pcper dot com review to see if they're actually doing what they're supposed to be doing yet. But only out of curiosity, as their track record means I'll continue buying NVidia. Go to the pcper website and look for the "Frame Rating: Eyefinity vs Surround in Single and Multi-GPU Configurations" article.

about a year ago

Ask Slashdot: Speeding Up Personal Anti-Spam Filters?

_Shorty-dammit Re:Popfile (190 comments)

I don't know why anyone would use anything other than gmail, but I guess some people have their uses. I'll cast another vote for popfile, as I used that before gmail, but I don't really know how it might perform with a large volume of email. It was awesome for just my own personal mail while I was using it.

1 year,19 days

Sony Touts 25 Hour Battery Life For Haswell-Equipped Vaio Pro

_Shorty-dammit When small is small enough (154 comments)

I've always wondered why companies making computing devices that run off batteries continually made things smaller and smaller, with the goal of also keeping the same (poor) battery life, rather than realizing that after a certain point these devices are small enough and they should instead start cramming ever bigger batteries into the same form factor.

Take an iPhone 4 and 5 as a recent example. The size of an iPhone 4 is just fine. I wouldn't want something smaller, in fact. Yet, with the iPhone 5 they had as one of their goals the idea to make the thing thinner in order to make it smaller. And while they made the power usage of the device better than the older device, they also made the battery smaller, relatively speaking. So in the end, the battery life isn't dramatically better than before. It is merely about the same, while you do get better performance from the device than you do the older one. I'd much rather have a device that was still the same thickness as before, with all the components inside still having undergone the size reduction they did, and with all the same power usage advances, but a much larger battery taking up all the saved space. This would give you a much better usable battery life. The device was already small enough. Making it smaller wasn't much of a gain.

Laptops have been the same story ever since there were laptops. It would be nicer if they lasted longer while running on the battery. They were pretty bulky in the beginning, but after a few years they got to a certain size that was most certainly small enough. And as time marched on, everything inside them got smaller and smaller, and we got smaller and smaller machines. And power usage for them kept getting better and better, but they kept putting smaller and smaller batteries in them as the overall device got smaller, too. And so, battery life was never improving. It was still being built to a certain battery life goal, which is all well and good, unless that goal is too short.

By this time, with all the power usage improvements that we've seen, and battery design improvements that we've seen, we should have had laptops that lasted 24-48 hours on a single charge many years ago. This story about Sony's device getting 24 hours of usable life out of a charge, with an external add-on battery for crying out loud, shouldn't be something to salivate over. This should've been the norm many years ago. With a battery inside the thing that is already capable of such usable life per charge. After a certain point, small is small enough, and we should be putting that space to use for more usable life out of those suckers.

about a year ago

Green Lantern Writer To Pen Blade Runner Sequel

_Shorty-dammit Re:Does BR even rate having a sequel? Explain plea (326 comments)

It's probably my favourite movie. Unfortunately the definitive version doesn't exist. At least, the best version isn't the best it could have been, for they inexplicably changed one word in a key scene that completely changed the tone of that scene. The Final Cut is the best one to see. Even better if you could see my copy where I've replaced the audio data for that line with the data that contains the original line. ;)

about a year ago

Happy Culture Freedom Day!

_Shorty-dammit Poor Righteous Teachers (45 comments)

The rapper from Poor Righteous Teachers has his own day now?! I didn't think that many people even knew about them. ;)

about a year ago



Internet Explorer 9 the most compatible?

_Shorty-dammit _Shorty-dammit writes  |  more than 4 years ago

_Shorty-dammit (555739) writes "Microsoft has released some numbers showing that the IE9 Platform Preview is more standards-compatible than Mozilla Firefox 3.6.3, Opera 10.52, Apple Safari 4.05, and Google Chrome 4.1. This seemed rather interesting at first, until I stopped looking at the charts and re-read the introduction, which states that they are all test pages that Microsoft wrote. They do, however, say that they were developed in conjunction with the W3C. Though I wonder how the IE9 PP would fair against the same competitors in a test that they had no hand in laying out."
Link to Original Source

Seagate 3.AAK firmware update fixes performance

_Shorty-dammit _Shorty-dammit writes  |  more than 6 years ago

_Shorty-dammit (555739) writes "Remember the Seagate 3.AAK firmware performance problems in this story? Well, I just received a 3.AAM firmware update from Seagate tech support, and the performance problem is fixed! I highly suggest contacting them and asking for this firmware update if you have a 3.AAK drive, as the performance difference is quite noticable, as you can tell by looking at the 3.AAE performance versus 3.AAK firmware. Looks like they found whatever the problem was! If whoever you end up contacting doesn't know about the 3.AAM firmware update yet, ask them to contact another person there going by "Alan TS49" as that's who I had success with. He was apparently in direct contact with the engineers that write their firmware, and should be able to help get you straightened away."


_Shorty-dammit has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>