Recent Posts
Today, in German papers, they speak about MS Office 2013.-clean (February 06, 2013, 06:31 AM)
(this mainly about price and number of licenses):By the way, in case anyone is interested, the voice is Jack Wagner, an announcer famous for being the "Voice of Disneyland" and the recording is available in much better quality, here on archive.org-app103 (February 02, 2013, 08:31 PM)
I actually was, the clip with George Carlin was annoying me because it pretty clearly wasn't George. I knew it had to be some kind of announcer - the cadences "just were announcer-y".-TaoPhoenix (February 02, 2013, 10:35 PM)
Sorry, I only realised later, after making the opening post, that Firefox+DownloadHelper seem to be able to "see" and download only 50 of the available files listed.-IainB (February 06, 2013, 01:25 AM)
Ho humm - digital zooming. I've honestly never really seen good results from that - and if one of the marketing pitches is "we use the insane mpix to resize down to acceptable quality and doing noise filtering stuff", doesn't that imply your image will get noisier and noisier the more you zoom?-f0dder (February 05, 2013, 02:39 PM)
All those MPs are used to increase the quality of a lower resolution image (artifacts and noise can apparently be reduced a lot via averaging).Wouldn't it be better to go for a lower mpix input and get a lot less noise to begin with? I'm not much into the tech behind, but I had the impression that the more mpix you try to squeeze out of a (physically too small) CCD, the more noise you get?-tomos (February 04, 2013, 10:07 AM)-f0dder (February 05, 2013, 10:37 AM)
But thank you for caring-Curt (February 04, 2013, 03:11 PM)
(please, God, don't let me need to download my backup!)-Curt (February 04, 2013, 01:41 PM)
(see attachment in previous post)turns out we read the article too quickly
It's history folks! Stagestack is no more.
[..]
Full article here.
-40hz (January 17, 2013, 01:28 PM)
(but it still sounds like it's not alive as a big project)... Quasado might start an open source project. Interestingly enough, this is exactly what the Quasado team is now considering.
[...]
For now Quasado is looking for your input on the possible future of the project.
What are our next steps
- Try to improve communication ASAP without wasting to much time better spent in programming. As a first step, at least weekly status reports as well as a monthly newsletter might be a good step.
- Focus on innovation, leaving other aspects of Freehand (expect it's better usability) a side for later revisions
- Focus on getting somewhere even if worse then others at this point but keep improving
- Try to stick on timelines
- Work on this project as much as we (I?) can without funding right now
What are we currently doing?
As a first step of better communication, I want to tell you what I've been working on lately and just finished today.
My idea was to rework the current, underlying model of handling graphic documents. The current model has several weaknesses including not being able to load/save, no proper undo/redo, no propery linking between nodes (i.e. for styles etc.), not prepared for multi-threading and so on. To save time for the future, I've decided myself about three months ago to write a separate project that included a completely new model as well as rendering engine. Now, today I've finished with the new model and overall, I'm pretty much satisfied with it. It supports all the features mentioned before and ought to be a good ground base for a better Stagestack Core. And as a goody, here's the first usable output of loading/saving, as you can see, we're trying to stick with standardized xml:
yes to that !41 megapixels is pure marketing BS. Sure it isn't supposed to read 4.1 ?
Can't remember where I read it but there was a technical article I read a while ago that argued the more pixels actually equals poorer pictures unless you increased the sensor size.-Carol Haynes (January 24, 2013, 10:30 AM)
41 megapixels is correct, but the default is less to decrease noise and improve low-light sensitivity.-Arizona Hot (February 04, 2013, 09:51 AM)
And I see i just broke my own rule about not participating in the Basement because I didn't notice this discussion had been reassigned. Ok. I'll let stand what I've already posted - but I'm out. Steady on! :Thmbsup-40hz (February 03, 2013, 10:13 PM)
Here's an article I read this evening, it is *not* science but written by a scientist-tomos (February 03, 2013, 01:55 PM)
I respect Brin, particularly as a SF writer. But he is squarely missing the mark in this essay -- again, in the same manner I've been complaining about. Although in his introduction he very briefly mentions costs and alternatives, his discussion never actually visits those topics. The entire essay is entirely devoted to whether someone should be considered an open-minded skeptic, or is a closet denier. But knowing what label to hang on a person doesn't get us any closer to deciding if any action needs to be taken, and if so, which one.-CWuestefeld (February 03, 2013, 07:53 PM)
Absolutely!The tone of most skeptics' delivery is guaranteed to alienate the majority-tomos (February 03, 2013, 01:03 PM)
That's true. But on the other hand, Al Gore has admitted that he's willing to exaggerate the arguments if that's what it takes to make his point. When (at least) one side of the debate (maybe both) is willing to engage in intellectual dishonesty in order to achieve their own ends, the chances of reaching the best outcome is rather poor.-CWuestefeld (February 03, 2013, 01:20 PM)
until reading it myself, so I'll not comment there). Anyways, it made me think a bit.unfortunately it's another of those {"I'm for" \ "I'm against" \ "You're a plonker"} kind of 'debates' which, even just at the level of whether it's happening, is no debate at all.-tomos (February 03, 2013, 09:26 AM)
Yep. And if you have any questions, you're a heretic. Because you're questioning a religious dogma.-Renegade (February 03, 2013, 09:42 AM)
-Stephen66515 (February 03, 2013, 09:16 AM)
