Latest posts of: JavaJones - DonationCoder.com
Welcome Guest.   Make a donation to an author on the site July 03, 2015, 03:01:14 AM  *

Please login or register.
Or did you miss your validation email?


Login with username and password (forgot your password?)
Why not become a lifetime supporting member of the site with a one-time donation of any amount? Your donation entitles you to a ton of additional benefits, including access to exclusive discounts and downloads, the ability to enter monthly free software drawings, and a single non-expiring license key for all of our programs.


You must sign up here before you can post and access some areas of the site. Registration is totally free and confidential.
 
Learn about the DonationCoder.com microdonation system (DonationCredits).
   
  Forum Home Thread Marks Chat! Downloads Search Login Register  
  Show Posts
      View this member's profile 
      donate to someone Donate to this member 
Pages: Prev 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 100 Next
201  Other Software / Found Deals and Discounts / Re: Sagelight Editor - $39.95 Lifetime Promotion Ending July 1st on: November 23, 2011, 06:54:43 PM
Good points Dormouse. One perhaps counter-intuitive (but nonetheless effective) change you might consider is being less frequent and detailed with releases and release promises and instead settle on a regular schedule you can stick to within the year. People like updates, but reading through this thread and your blog, you can see that the "It took a lot longer than I thought" comment is frequent and regular. So you'll say "4.2 is coming soon" but then it won't because hey, it took longer than you expected. That's fine, the problem isn't necessarily (or at least solely) with it taking longer than expected but that you externalized that expectation by hinting at or even in some cases announcing it. If you had said nothing and instead just had a general policy of bi-annual updates, and making them major updates (i.e. 4.0 at beginning of the year, 4.5 mid-year, 5.0 at the beginning of next year), that would create that sense of stability while taking some pressure off you.

Heck even annual releases are not necessarily to be expected from a lot of (professional) software. Lightroom gets point releases, but they're mostly bug fixes and support for new camera RAW files. With Version Control you can easily do patch releases while working on separate tracks with major features and merge them later for a big release.

I would not suggest reducing communications overall necessarily, I think your engagement with your users through the blogs, videos, and tutorials is part of the appeal of SL, but you could stick to helping people learn existing tools, creating videos for future features behind the scenes if desired and then releasing those when the version with those features eventually comes out.

Just a thought... All I know for sure is not announcing release dates ahead of time has worked a lot better in my experience. cheesy

- Oshyan
202  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Need Advice on a TV... on: November 23, 2011, 01:10:40 AM
Looks like a pretty good choice. LG makes nice displays.

Just a quick note regarding number of HDMI ports: the best way to handle this in my opinion is actually with your home theater receiver/surround decoder (if you have one - if not, then yes, TV needs lots of HDMI). Modern ones will handle simultaneous switching of audio/video signal, which can otherwise be a pain if you do have a separate amp and surround system (i.e. you're not just relying on the TV's speakers). The receiver is what has all the HDMI inputs and then 1 or more outputs and it handles switching internally, feeding your TV the appropriate video signal over HDMI, without having to switch your TV's own input source (i.e. HDMI 1, 2, etc. on the TV).

- Oshyan
203  Other Software / Found Deals and Discounts / Re: Sagelight Editor - $39.95 Lifetime Promotion Ending July 1st on: November 23, 2011, 12:57:33 AM
As someone whose "other editor" is $300 (Lightroom), I find your pricing considerations and general range to be very, very reasonable! Now granted LR does things that Sagelight does not do, things I wish SL did, and I cannot replace LR with SL right now because of that. Photo organizing, tagging, and uploading are the majority of that, but also things like HDR plugins. At the same time SL can do things that LR doesn't, or at least do things in ways that are easier to control and/or produce better results. The new lens blur/bokeh stuff is a great example.

So while I understand people's comments about "the app world" and whatnot, I also see the other side of things where SL is actually a tremendous deal compared to other *similarly capable* apps. That's the thing though, does SL have a professional reputation and if not, could it develop one? That's what you need to charge more than about $50 I think, or $100 at most. It's little or nothing to do with the actual capabilities which, as I've said, are excellent and already surpass programs that cost much more in some ways.

If I'm being honest, I think the UI design is probably the lest professional-seeming thing about SL. It's hard to put my finger on, but it feels less clean and polished than LR, Bibble, and the like. More colors, gradients, and icons than clear lines and text, perhaps. Beveled edges, that sort of thing. And the general feel and workflow is good, but still somehow just doesn't "feel" as "solid" as LR and others. That may be just my personal, subjective opinion of course.

At any rate I definitely understand the pricing difficulties. I admire your dedication to keeping features accessible, and that's one thing I've dealt with personally at Planetside Software where we make a fully free (with some limitations) version of our software available. I also understand the pro vs. hobbyist vs. amateur debate and the difficulty in establishing the right perceptions of your product, *especially* when you want to keep things accessible to a wide range of users and price points. I suspect that sometimes you do just have to make a sacrifice of one or the other, or take some radical approach like making an entirely different product (at least in name). But I do have some suggestions for a pro vs. "light" split if you're interested. I suspect you might not agree, but I think any decision you make on it is going to involve some compromise in your core desires and values. If that weren't the case I expect you'd have made a decision by now. Wink

By the way, great to hear that HDR functionality (that I recently emailed you about) is planned!

- Oshyan
204  DonationCoder.com Software / MEWLO Web Framework / Re: OLD - Unfinished Web project: YUMPS on: November 23, 2011, 12:23:19 AM
Meanwhile I'm doing my part by supplying mouser with commercial projects to test and improve YUMPS on. cheesy

- Oshyan
205  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Need Advice on a TV... on: November 19, 2011, 04:58:16 PM
The basic competing tech is LCD and Plasma. LED is a back lighting method for LCDs; plasmas don't use backlights as far as I know.

Of those two, LED is more common and has no screen "burn in" issues, plasma is cheaper and has better blacks and hence contrast ratios (due to no backlights), but does burn in if you leave a static image on it too long (or something like a logo in the corner of a TV station screen). Burn in is probably less an issue for newer Plasmas, but still a concern, depending on your usage (e.g. video game playing with a game's HUD). There are much fewer plasmas and the tech tends to be less "advanced" than LCD, in general, as far as fancy features supported, etc. Also I think plasma still tends to use more power. The upside of plasma is basically you can get the same screen size and resolution as an LCD, usually for cheaper, and with potentially better image quality (depending).

Go for some form of Internet capability if you want to, but basing much of your decision on it seems foolish to me as almost all of this tech is limited (not a general "You can do anything a browser can do, but on your TV!). The better solution in my view is to hook up a nice little HTPC and then you truly get all capabilities. Plus, who wants to type URLs on a TV remote? Wink

Now if you're talking about *media streaming* support (DLNA, etc.), that's different, it actually has little or nothing to do with Internet support, per se (except that they're both network-based, of course). And in that case yes it can be useful, unless you have the previously mentioned HTPC. Bottom line is I think getting a "dumb TV" with a "smart computer" attached to it is going to give you way more long-term flexibility and capability than any other option. But if you really don't want to deal with an HTPC, don't want to spend the extra money, don't have space in your AV space, etc. for one, then I guess try to get as much of that stuff built-in as possible. Just keep in mind that the industry is in flux and a lot of stuff that's supported now may not be supported in, say, 5 years, and if you're planning for a 10yr lifetime, well... then again you can always buy an HTPC and add it on to any TV you get. cheesy

The other thing to think about is 3D. I personally dislike almost all 3D media and technologies I've seen so I wouldn't bother and it tends to add to the price anyway. If 3D is important to you, you might want to wait for better tech if at all possible. I would basically suggest not getting 3D (and saving money), and then buy something new in 5yrs for 3D if you really want it.

I know that's not a comprehensive answer to everything you asked, but hopefully it's somewhat useful. smiley

- Oshyan
206  DonationCoder.com Software / Find And Run Robot / Re: FARR and Indexing Option - Feedback Requested on: November 18, 2011, 09:32:14 PM
Strange, my experiences with Windows Search have been consistently awful, ever since Vista and including Win7. Maybe I should give it another try, but it's hard to trust it after blatantly missing files I was clearly and easily able to find with other tools (and simple folder browsing).

Everything is certainly not the only indexer/search option, it's just the best and fastest, in my experience (by far). As for its status, sure it's a good indexer already, so what more needs to be done, right? Well, how about icons/thumbnails for file types, for example? On the developer's list, I know that much, but after a year of no updates, well one starts to wonder if anything more will ever happen. How important is it? Not terribly, I guess, but future OS or file system upgrades may break it, for example. It's a real bummer when you come to rely deeply on a tool - and Everything is exactly the kind of tool that gets deep into your regular computer experience - and then it goes away. Hard to adjust.

- Oshyan
207  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: Photo managers with face recognition? on: November 18, 2011, 09:22:22 PM
Yes, basically Lightroom now. I'm *reasonably* happy with it, but still not thrilled. I may go into another period of testing alternatives soon too...

- Oshyan
208  DonationCoder.com Software / Find And Run Robot / Re: FARR and Indexing Option - Feedback Requested on: November 12, 2011, 08:32:49 PM
However... Relying on a 3rd party could mean have an indexing option rapidly with minimal efforts on mouser's part. And if the 3rd party options doen't get updated/don't work after a while (a couple years?), mouser can then develop his own indexing mechanism...

Isn't that exactly what happened with the Everything plugin?

- Oshyan
209  DonationCoder.com Software / Find And Run Robot / Re: FARR and Indexing Option - Feedback Requested on: November 12, 2011, 02:47:56 PM
For some reason I think there is particularly high turnover in the search/indexing market too, perhaps because it was a "hot topic" a few years back so a bunch of seemingly unrelated companies (Yahoo, Google) as well as many individual coders jumped into the fray, and now we're seeing things settle down to just a few providers. Still somehow the best of them (Everything) isn't nearly as well supported as I'd like it to be. Maybe the market for those tools just isn't what I thought it was, but I sure do love Everything - more, I will admit, than FARR, though I love FARR too. I'd almost like Everything-esque functionality in FARAR (and yes I know there are FARR plugins to integrate EV) to get me to use FARR more. cheesy

- Oshyan
210  DonationCoder.com Software / Find And Run Robot / Re: FARR and Indexing Option - Feedback Requested on: November 12, 2011, 02:16:50 PM
Funny, I would have agreed with "don't duplicate effort" a year or two ago, but now that Everything - my favorite instant search app - has been so slow to update for so long, seeming nearly abandoned, and so many other similar apps are being cancelled, abandoned, etc. (Google Desktop, Yahoo Desktop, etc.), I'm actually in favor of having a reliable dev whom I know (mouser) tackle this problem and keep the app updated! With the popularity of Everything, if FARR could match it for speed and features in terms of file search, while also having all its other capabilities, well it'd be a pretty "killer app" and I think such a feature would actually help drive FARR adoption quite a lot. People might start just for the quick file indexing and search, that's the first taste of the drug that is FARR, but over time they could realize how much more it can do and it'd become indispensable. All that is to say that I think a lightning quick full hard drive indexed search tool is more universally appealing than a type-to-launch app like FARR is.

As for Windows Search/Indexing, my god I've never found it to be anything but appallingly slow, inefficient, and just plain incapable of finding my files. I mean shockingly so. This started with Windows Vista (XP's file search wasn't great, but at least it found all files). Vista file searches suddenly weren't turning up files I *knew* were there! Very strange. I had hoped Win7 would fix it but it didn't. So now I just use Everything and XYPlorer (which I won a license for on DC many moons ago!).

- Oshyan
211  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: Powerpoint sucks - what to use instead? on: November 11, 2011, 12:33:52 PM
Reviving this one as I just randomly ran across a couple of interesting related projects.

S5 is an HTML, CSS, and Javascript slide show system that appears to be a descendant of Opera's early slide show concept: http://meyerweb.com/eric/tools/s5/

HTML Slidey seems to be in a similar vein and I'm not yet sure what sets it apart from S5: http://www.w3.org/Talks/Tools/Slidy2/#(1)

Slideous is the project that made me aware of the other two so is presumably more advanced, though I'm not entirely sure how yet: http://goessner.net/articles/slideous/

None of these include full-on authoring tools, which would be necessary for my original needs (which actually still exist!), but at least they define a standard way to represent slide shows in HTML and CSS such that perhaps an open source HTML authoring tool could be made to create this stuff...

- Oshyan
212  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: I know I've got a dose of absenteeism... but it's going to get worse on: November 10, 2011, 02:07:16 PM
Wow, the time just flew by for us! Wink Welcome back and glad to hear it was a success! I'm looking forward to seeing your pics and I now see I should go look at all I missed in your logs, hehe.

Edit: Or are your logs posted yet? I know there was the GPS log, but I wasn't following along (shame on me!) and it doesn't seem to be coming up now. Anyway, would love to see any related materials about the trip as I neglected to keep up as you went along. cheesy

- Oshyan
213  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Is "Thank you for your service" enough for veterans? on: November 06, 2011, 01:59:50 AM
I was going to chime in but mouser said it for me. Good work. I support and appreciate those who serve, regardless of my views on any particular conflict or political decision that may put them in harm's way.

That being said, in service you must also uphold moral and ethical behavior as much as possible. I know this is often hard on the battlefield, tough choices have to be made in a split second, and things aren't always clear. Yet there are also plenty of examples where that wasn't the case, but a bad choice was clearly made anyway (Abu Ghraib anyone?). Fortunately the vast majority of people in the military are good people, doing the best they can, and don't want to hurt people unnecessarily. They deserve respect even more because I'm sure it's hard to do what they are asked to do while maintaining the core of their essentially good human nature. Killing someone can never be easy unless you are a psychopath.

Respect.

- Oshyan
214  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Post Your Funny Videos Here [NSFW] on: November 06, 2011, 01:44:22 AM
Ahhh, the Gregory Brothers strike again! Love these guys (responsible for Autotune the News as well). Here's their Youtube channel with lots more fun: http://www.youtube.com/user/schmoyoho

- Oshyan
215  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: I don't understand relative volume on a PC at all. on: November 01, 2011, 11:41:33 PM
Ah, that would make sense it being a USB model. Does it have any separate volume controls in software, in the audio device settings or anything?

- Oshyan
216  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Steve Jobs is dead. on: October 29, 2011, 08:05:06 PM
Oh Steve...

Honestly I think it's difficult or impossible to get to where he got without basically being a dick and a weirdo. I have no problem with him having been those things, it just irritates me when people ignore the complexities and give and take in him and see only the good (or the bad, for that matter). Anyway, enough has been said on this.

Jobs was not a programmer by the way, you're thinking of Dennis Richie, responsible for the C programming language, and the following week John McCarthy, "father" of AI and Lisp. Both died recently, both arguably as influential as Jobs (in other, less visible ways), neither garnered 1/100th the media attention.

But I mostly just wanted to say hooray for James Burke. cheesy

- Oshyan
217  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: Photo managers with face recognition? on: October 29, 2011, 07:12:57 PM
Thanks for the reply Iain. I agree that Picasa has progressed since my original post, but honestly not as much as I would hope in the face recognition dept. Worse yet, other packages haven't really stepped up to the plate either, so the options are not much different now than they were, unfortunately. In response to your specific points:

While Picasa does rescans on its own (you can set whether you want it to do so on a per-folder basis), it still seems to miss a lot of faces for some reason. This happens even if you force a rescan. It is mysterious. This answers point 2 as well. Maybe my experience is different than yours. My environment is probably atypical for a Picasa user: I work mostly with RAW files and I have over 50,000. So admittedly it's a tall task to ask Picasa to deal with all that with face recognition. But that's what I must ask, or ask for a similar app at a professional level that *can* handle that. There should be *some* solution for this.

To point 3, the idea of tagging multi-selected people to create "groups" is interesting, but it's really a relatively limited workaround that doesn't actually accomplish the goal of persistent grouping. As you said, you can't have it auto-tag new photos with a recognized face, so it's not persistent and requires continuous, laborious maintenance. Not only that but one possible benefit of having categories would be to e.g. collapse categories to reduce visual clutter and allow me to concentrate on the groups of people I am more interested in maintaining records of. A solution using the existing tagging system doesn't allow that.

Regarding meta data, there are a couple standards for it and have been for some time. Picasa supports several of them, but each to varying degrees, and long-standing bugs have caused corruption and unreadable data for other apps (e.g. Lightroom). A quick search will turn up lots of threads spanning the last several years describing these issues. The real problem I guess is Picasa doesn't necessarily play nice with other apps. I wouldn't really care to use Picasa at all and would just focus on other apps *if* other apps offered good face recognition.

As to Picasa's limited editing capability, I probably shouldn't have even made the Lightroom comparison. A better one might be Photoshop Elements, or even Paint.net. Being more specific, there are really just a *few* tools that should be added and/or tweaked to make Picasa much more capable, in my opinion. But the flip side of my point - and the real desire for me - was for a higher-end app like Lightroom to support some of the cool capabilities of Picasa, particularly good face recognition. That's the real disappointment for me. As I said above I basically only use Picasa for the face recognition stuff. All my editing is done in other apps, mostly Lightroom and Photoshop. I would be *happy* if I didn't have to jump over to Picasa for face stuff. So really it's the other software publishers lagging that I'm most frustrated with. Lack of competition not driving progress and all that. Hopefully Lightroom 4 will come out soon with native face recognition and HDR tone mapping. cheesy

- Oshyan
218  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Do You Freelance? on: October 29, 2011, 05:27:54 PM
I used to. Still take the occasional one-off, but really just as favors. I donate more of my computer "consulting" time than anything. I might get back into it in a couple years if my current projects don't pan out though. cheesy

- Oshyan
219  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: I don't understand relative volume on a PC at all. on: October 29, 2011, 04:55:39 PM
Deo, your headset is USB, it's not terribly surprising (to me) that the volume controls don't work the same or quite right. It probably even has its own separate volume control as a separate audio device. That being said, doesn't it have in-line (on cord) controls?

Audio volume settings can indeed be quite confusing as there are many things that affect them. With Windows 7's new per-app volume control, you now have more flexibility but also potentially more confusion with volume. I'll try to break down how all this works, maybe it will help you understand, if not solve, these issues.

First, a quick run down of the major factors that could come into play:

  • Original recorded audio volume
  • Effects applied during playback (e.g. compression, normalization)
  • Individual *in-app* audio levels
  • Codec-specific audio levels and effects (e.g. AC3 decoder)
  • Sound driver levels and effects
  • Individual *Windows* audio levels (Win 7 only)
  • Main Windows volume
  • Volume of the output device (speakers, headphones)

I think the first step is to determine if there actually is a real difference *when playing the same audio file*. So maybe take an MP3, play it locally in your audio player of choice, then upload it to e.g. Amazon Music, Google Music, etc. and play it back through the browser. Is the volume different? If so, then you check all the various volume settings described above to make sure they're the same, and only then can you really be sure that somehow the browser is treating audio differently. My guess is that one of the above factors is involved.

If you care to dig deeper, read on....

Recorded sound is complicated in general. Here's a good reference from Audacity's documentation. And More info from Wikipedia. Now the reason I'm starting at such a basic level is that it's important to realize sound is not an absolute, especially recorded sound. A recording is encoding differing pressures detected by a measurement device (microphone usually) that itself has limitations on the amount of pressure it can actually detect before it breaks or faults. So basically a recorded sound ends up being from 0 (silence) to the maximum sound pressure level the recording device can handle, and that can be encoded in digital recording as say a floating point value from 0 to 1, with 1 being the maximum volume. It's not nearly as simple as that in actuality because frequency is also encoded, but we're considering volume alone here for the moment.

With that out of the way let's consider the computer-specific elements. Start with the base audio file/stream itself. The recorded range in the audio file mentioned above (0-1) is translated into actual sound by the output device - speakers, headphones - which essentially moderates the ultimate sound volume, but the absolute volume of the source still has a big effect and can have a huge impact on the relative "loudness". This is why for example TV commercials tend to be louder than TV shows, even though you're not changing the volume of your TV speakers.

So if you were to take a look at the wave form of an audio file, a normal audio segment might look something like this:



There are two wave forms because this is a stereo track (left/right). Note the scale on the left (ignore the lines across) and how there is both positive and negative measurement from a baseline of 0. Now, you can see that the audio here seldom - if ever - reaches the maximum on the scale, and likewise it's seldom at 0 either. Now imagine what happens if you amplify the recorded values in this audio file. You might get something more like:



Notice there are still some dynamics - variable highs and lows - but the overall wave form is "taller", getting closer to the max/min more of the time.

Now, here's where it hopefully starts getting interesting. A lot of audio and video players have "normalize" options which are set to on by default in some cases. Likewise a lot of audio content *sources* are normalized before they get to you. Normalizing essentially takes an audio file and adjusts the amplitude (volume) such that the maximum and minimum are within a certain range. Note that normalizing shouldn't change the *dynamics* of the audio, just its relative volume. This can make a quieter recording into one with more normal volume.

Another process that is sometimes applied dynamically in audio/video players, and even more often applied in audio processing for music and other things, is Dynamic Range Compression, and this is really where you'll hear some big changes. The intention of audio compression is to bring all the sound levels to a similar amplitude, giving you much more even volume through the recording, and removing a lot of the "dynamics". Unlike the previous wave forms with clear highs and lows, a compressed file might look something more like this:



Now compression usually removes both significant highs and significant lows, but depending on the setting it's not going to result in *louder* maximum audio levels, just more even volume. If you compress and normalize to max volume, *then* you end up with something that is uniformly loud, and about as loud as can be encoded in an audio file. Something more like this:



As I said, these are effects that are often applied to audio, both music and TV, as well as elsewhere. Now are these factors in a browser-vs-desktop-player volume difference? Obviously not if you are playing the same audio. However it's important to be aware that certain audio sources *do* have normalization and/or compression applied as a general rule. As I mentioned your audio player may also have one of these effects enabled (KMPlayer for example tends to have Normalize enabled by default for some audio types).

When you take those complexities into account, along with the original list of possible factors, you can see how complicated it can be to really figure out what the output level will be for even a specific audio file, let alone "audio in general". Since you've probably checked all the basic stuff like system volume vs. app-specific volume, I'd dig deeper into stuff like audio codec effects and whatnot. But first, as I said at the beginning, you'd want to verify that there is indeed a difference using the same exact files. If you're talking about something more like playing back a movie (encoded with e.g. AC3 or DTS audio) on your computer is quieter than playing, say, a Youtube video, well that's not at all surprising. AC3 and DTS decoders will tend to produce much quieter output and are generally intended to be fed into a multi-channel amplifier. When that output just goes through stereo speakers, it loses a lot in the translation, so to speak.

In short, it's important to know the specifics of what you're comparing and to make sure you're comparing apples to apples.

- Oshyan
220  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Post Your Funny Videos Here [NSFW] on: October 20, 2011, 01:35:16 PM
Apparently it's made of around a ton of gold, so it might be hard to get it out down the stairs/elevator and out the door. Wink

- Oshyan
221  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: Finally made it to Windows 7 -- looking for partitioning reccomendations on: October 20, 2011, 01:34:44 PM
I've never understood why people go crazy with disk partitions. Some people seem to use them like one would use folders. There's no good reason I can think of to have a "movies" partition, a "music" partition, etc. 2 partitions, as 40hz said, boot and data, or at most 3, with boot, data, recovery/images. Of course keeping recovery/images on the same physical drive limits its applicability in the case of disaster. *Some* system problems can be recoverable that way (i.e. something that doesn't involve physical issues with the whole drive), but it's really better to keep sys images and recovery partitions on a separate drive IMO.

- Oshyan
222  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Amazon Signs Up Authors, Writing Publishers Out of Deal on: October 20, 2011, 01:29:44 PM
Yes, YouTube is a great example! I find tons of stuff I like on YouTube every day with minimal effort. Why? Because the system has rating, tagging, categories, etc. all of which help me find good stuff easily. It simply doesn't matter that how much crap there is (and I agree there will be more crap published if you lower the bar). It's possible to create systems that reward quality, or at least mass appeal, and they don't require a publisher, an A&R guy, etc.

The issues that occurred with Amazon's app store seem to me to be more "sour grapes" than anything. Amazon made perfectly clear what would happen with the featured (free for the day) apps, as far as I've read. People chose to participate because they thought it would help their app earn money through increased popularity, when all it tended to do was load down their servers with free requests. Bummer, but the terms were clear, none of them should have been under any illusion that they would make tons of money off of it unless they had a really good plan for upgrading free users to pay (in-app purchases, etc.). This is a lot like small companies who do Groupons and the like and then get overwhelmed by demand and can't fulfill it all. Too bad, take the time to think through the promotion you're agreeing to participate in before going through with it.

As for the business side and "writers want to write", of course they do. I'm not suggesting every writer buy 500 copies of their book and hawk them on the streets. What I'm saying is you have a range of options, all the way from that base level, up through contracting with individual experts to handle particular aspects of your publishing project (i.e. you hire an editor and a sales rep directly), up to contracting with a full-service publishing house. It's more options, not less.

- Oshyan
223  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Smart Response Technology and partitioning on: October 19, 2011, 11:32:46 PM
All I want to know is will SRT work and make a difference in the case where you have a primary SSD and a secondary spinning disk, and want to cache the 2nd disk (which is not the boot drive). Anyone know? SSDs are still too expensive to use for large amounts of primary storage but if I can get improved data access speed to my mass storage hard drive using SRT that would still be worthwhile, even in addition to a main SSD.

Here's an example usage scenario where I could see the caching actually working, despite large file sizes: I'm an amateur photographer, I shoot in RAW and use Lightroom to rate, select, edit, and publish my photos. Usually I spend several days - sometimes even a week or more - on a set of shots, depending on how big the set is, how much free time I have to work on it, and how much editing each shot requires. Now a set is never larger than 32GB (the size of my memory card), and generally much smaller, averaging 5-10GB. I load up Lightroom and import the folder, all images are loaded, previews and thumbnails are generated, etc. Now I leave Lightroom open and every time I switch between images it should be noticing the increased use of these files and caching them. In a given start-to-finish selection and editing process I may look at a single image 100 times, from the start where I do a quick pass to select likely good ones, to the 2nd pass where I select the cream of the crop, to the editing phase, and then the final pass where I weed out any edits that didn't work out, through to the meta data editing phase, and finally publishing where I upload to Picasa and Facebook. In all those stages the large image files need to be accessed multiple times. So I reiterate the question, would SRT help at all in such a scenario? I'm getting a Z68 motherboard and tempted to test it...

- Oshyan
224  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Wow: Google insider explains why Big G may lose the Internet wars on: October 19, 2011, 11:23:42 PM
G+ is frankly still in early stages I'd say. Where is the Events system (integrated with Google Calendar)? Where are company pages? As soon as these and a few other major features of FB make it onto G+, there will be another big surge. Surprisingly, FB's event system still pretty much sucks (can I have it email me a reminder of events? no. is there a simple calendar view of events I'm invited to? no. etc.). Google can leverage the power of existing GCalendar for this, just as an example. For businesses, Google already has "Places", integrate that with G+ and you have a powerful platform for companies to relate to their customers.  I'm honestly surprised Hangouts haven't gotten more attention actually, especially as it gains features. It's more powerful as a business tool than a personal tool now actually. They should introduce shared photo album viewing like the new Flickr feature and then promote Hangouts as a killer feature (because it is). Now I'm not saying Google will do all this, but they're sensible steps with powerful potential.

Basically I think it's foolish to compare G+ now to FB now (yes, even though they are theoretically competing in the same market already). All it takes is one or two "must have" new features and a few more related population explosions to gain critical mass. Many people use FB primarily for photo sharing and event organizing. Right now G+ only has 1 of those functions. Introduce the other and it makes a big difference, people no longer have to split their attention. This is especially true since G+, unlike FB, can optionally share with people by email address only, so it can be an excellent event organizer even if your friends aren't on it.

So bring on the new features Google! Let's hope you have a better "platform vision" than Mr. Yegge fears.

- Oshyan
225  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Post Your Funny Videos Here [NSFW] on: October 19, 2011, 11:02:15 PM
Not funny, but interesting... am I the only one who thinks this would make for an awesome locale for a heist movie?

Yeah, they should steal the golden cow!

- Oshyan
Pages: Prev 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 100 Next
DonationCoder.com | About Us
DonationCoder.com Forum | Powered by SMF
[ Page time: 0.051s | Server load: 0.34 ]


Share on Facebook
submit to reddit