• CIPWTTKT&GC V41 - I understood some words
    5,010 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Giraffen93;51015208][img]http://rp.braxnet.org/scr/147327585957317.jpg[/img] form over function 4ever, i don't care about what anyone says regarding minimalism, i want work done :v:[/QUOTE] At that point I'd ditch the background and just use a flat & solid color that makes everything else as visible as possible. [QUOTE=GoDong-DK;51015297]I'm not cheering them, just saying that not including the adapter and selling it for $30 would literally just be Tim Cook shitting down his customers' throats. Personally I'd like a new wired standard to come along that is less prone to breaking (when using headphones on the go) than 3.5mm, though. Maybe I'm retarded, but something like the magnetic charging cables *could* *potentially* be nice.[/QUOTE] It's not perfect, but for a old standard it has proven its worth and durability, unless China cuts corners and turns a triangle into a circle. Part of the reason it survived for so long is because the plug can rotate in the socket without losing electrical connection. Either way, Apple are (again...) being fuckwads.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;51015121]Beyond battery life, I'd never get small wireless earbuds simply because you'd lose them all the time. Headphones... maybe some day, but I really, really dislike the idea of ditching the headphone jack at this point in time. At least Apple includes a lightning to jack converter, but yeah.[/QUOTE] The problem is there's never a good time to get rid of the 3.5mm jack because as long as it's being used on modern devices, earbuds and other peripherals will continue to support it. That said, maybe that should be the hint that it shouldn't go away - wireless earbuds sound like an awful idea.
[QUOTE=Van-man;51015342]It's not perfect, but for a old standard it has proven its worth and durability, unless China cuts corners and turns a triangle into a circle. Part of the reason it survived for so long is because the plug can rotate in the socket without losing electrical connection. Either way, Apple are (again...) being fuckwads.[/QUOTE] Every pair I've used on the go has eventually bent a bit, though, resulting in mono sound unless turned to perfection. I don't think I'm all that rough with any of my equipment, but that always went wrong eventually.
[QUOTE=Van-man;51015342]At that point I'd ditch the background and just use a flat & solid color that makes everything else as visible as possible.[/QUOTE] true, but i can't select flat background colors on this rom, and i can't be bothered to make one myself :v:
[QUOTE=Dr. Evilcop;51015364]The problem is there's never a good time to get rid of the 3.5mm jack because as long as it's being used on modern devices, earbuds and other peripherals will continue to support it. That said, maybe that should be the hint that it shouldn't go away - wireless earbuds sound like an awful idea.[/QUOTE] My argument is that contrary to the floppy, DVD drive and whatnot, audio quality will not be better with the new solution (in fact, it might be worse), and on top of that I don't need to charge my DVDs or whatever. The 5 hour battery life of their new AirPods should be a pretty clear sign that this is a bad solution.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;51015368]Every pair I've used on the go has eventually bent a bit, though, resulting in mono sound unless turned to perfection. I don't think I'm all that rough with any of my equipment, but that always went wrong eventually.[/QUOTE] I've only once fucked up a pair of mini-jack plugs, and that were when a emergency happened and I ran away from my computer while wearing my plugged-in headphones (sounds weird without context, I know). Never my earbuds for my mobile devices, but I've always splurged a good amount on cash on quality earbuds. Everyone I know have only ruined mini-jacks pretty much the same way, and it's always headphones and computers, never earbuds and mobile devices. [QUOTE=GoDong-DK;51015389]My argument is that contrary to the floppy, DVD drive and whatnot, audio quality will not be better with the new solution (in fact, it might be worse), and on top of that I don't need to charge my DVDs or whatever. The 5 hour battery life of their new AirPods should be a pretty clear sign that this is a bad solution.[/QUOTE] I await the grim future where people lug around battery banks for poth their smartphones, [B]AND [/B]their wireless earbuds/headphones.
We've seen ports get phased out because something better comes along - see USB-C replacing micro USB, DVI/HDMI/DP replacing VGA, Lightning replacing the 30-pin connector. For the iPhone 7, it's incredibly obvious that the audio port wasn't phased out because something better came along.
[QUOTE=Sam Za Nemesis;51015417]This creates a huge fragmentation for accessories though.[/QUOTE] Not from Apple's perspective. Now people will want to buy the AirPods or, God forbid, a pair of wireless Beats headphones. It only serves to sell their users another accessory (One that only works with their products, to boot!).
In Apple's defense, if they come out with their "lower-than-Bluetooth-power" protocol, and the ear buds have proper batteries similar to a hearing aid, you could probably expect to see a week worth of playtime between charges.
[QUOTE=Revenge282;51015427]In Apple's defense, if they come out with their "lower-than-Bluetooth-power" protocol, and the ear buds have proper batteries similar to a hearing aid, you could probably expect to see a week worth of playtime between charges.[/QUOTE] That'd be nice, but I'm not holding my breath that they will open up the protocol to other manufacturers, at least not for a long while. The AirPods have 24 hours of battery life advertised and I'm pretty sure that includes the battery of the case, so who knows how long continuous battery life lasts on them?
[QUOTE=Revenge282;51015427]In Apple's defense, if they come out with their "lower-than-Bluetooth-power" protocol, and the ear buds have proper batteries similar to a hearing aid, you could probably expect to see a week worth of playtime between charges.[/QUOTE] Doubt they'll accomplish that, Bluetooth LE is about as low-power you can get with a stable data-stream. Also power to the amplifier for the drivers, especially since people tend to walk around in public with volume cranked up to max, that increases power consumption. [QUOTE=Protocol7;51015452][B]That'd be nice, but I'm not holding my breath that they will open up the protocol to other manufacturers[/B][/QUOTE] Not without paying a fat royalty to Apple. Also yay, more gadget fragmentation due to proprietary standards...
[QUOTE=SataniX;51013709]Those are the worst routers I've ever had to use. Had to share one between an 8 student house, I think it was about a week before we put it into modem mode and bought another wireless router.[/QUOTE] I am very close to doing that. The wifi signal from it is shit, it drops ethernet, the firmware takes ages to load anything, you can't change DHCP settings (you're stuck with Virgin's DNS...). It is just completely awful. Anyone got a suggestion for an AC router with OpenWRT support?
Everything else about the new iPhone is pretty good but really this headphone jack omission is complete and utter bullshit. That's really all I have to say. The camera is cool, the waterproofing is cool, Apple's displays are always wonderful. But as someone who has the new MacBook which is full of compromises, getting rid of the 3.5mm jack is just completely stupid. Even the MacBook has one. And then they have the gall to talk about how courageous it is. No, it's fucking daylight robbery and fragments the already shitty smartphone accessory market tenfold.
[QUOTE=Protocol7;51015501]Everything else about the new iPhone is pretty good but really this headphone jack omission is complete and utter bullshit. That's really all I have to say. The camera is cool, the waterproofing is cool, Apple's displays are always wonderful. But as someone who has the new MacBook which is full of compromises, getting rid of the 3.5mm jack is just completely stupid. Even the MacBook has one. And then they have the gall to talk about how courageous it is. No, it's fucking daylight robbery and fragments the already shitty smartphone accessory market tenfold.[/QUOTE] People buying the port gimped macbooks enabled Apple into thinking this is a good idea.
No it's definitely courageous, but sometimes courage is synonymous with stupidity.
New keyboard came. Box was beat up and they didn't use a secondary shipping box, but the unit looks fine. It is a solid forged piece of aluminum after all. New switches will take a little getting used to since they are basically shorter travel slightly. They also seem quieter. They're MX Speed switches.
[QUOTE=Van-man;51015552]People buying the port gimped macbooks enabled Apple into thinking this is a good idea.[/QUOTE] I mean, I can see that, but I bought the port gimped MacBook because I never connect anything to my laptops anyway - and the one mouse I do have is Bluetooth which works fine. They're definitely not for everyone, and the thing is that they supplement the very well-equipped MBP line. Whereas the iPhone is now "Well the latest and greatest doesn't come with that port, you'll need the adapter to use your headphones or buy our fancy new ones." That's much worse.
[QUOTE=Giraffen93;51015131]never heard of it totally misleading stuff seriously, why is it even called 1080p or whatever then should be labeled more on stuff, false advertising of not having a true image[/QUOTE] 4:4:4 was a lot of data, regardless of what resolution you pick. When everything went from analog to digital, everyone realized that all of this stuff is going to use up a ton of storage space so they thought up of ways of decreasing the file size, but still keeping the image itself good enough for use. 4:2:0 is a lot less data to deal with and still generally good enough for shooting and delivering content in. Then you have compression codecs that uses 4:2:0 to decrease the file size even more. Why not just shoot 1080p 4:4:4? Because no one cares about that. It's mostly marketing and having more pixels to work with when in reality, you can zoom into a 4k 4:2:0 image the same as a 1080p 4:4:4 image. The pixels are essentially the same. The only interesting part is when you run into cameras with 4K and 4:4:4 or even 4:2:2. That's a lot more data to work with, which is beneficial for being able to better manipulate the image since you have the data to work with in the first place. The increase in resolution is more useful when the cameras also do better in terms of recording. Stuff like dynamic range is typically getting better and better with newer, higher resolution cameras. Also the consumer isn't going to care. 4K is 4 times the pixels of 1080p, therefore it is better. They are not going to care about colour space, or chroma sampling.
My dad has only had his external HDD for 4 days and it's already fucked, jeez WD.
[QUOTE=garychencool;51015684]4:4:4 was a lot of data, regardless of what resolution you pick. When everything went from analog to digital, everyone realized that all of this stuff is going to use up a ton of storage space so they thought up of ways of decreasing the file size, but still keeping the image itself good enough for use. 4:2:0 is a lot less data to deal with and still generally good enough for shooting and delivering content in. Then you have compression codecs that uses 4:2:0 to decrease the file size even more. Why not just shoot 1080p 4:4:4? Because no one cares about that. It's mostly marketing and having more pixels to work with when in reality, you can zoom into a 4k 4:2:0 image the same as a 1080p 4:4:4 image. The pixels are essentially the same. The only interesting part is when you run into cameras with 4K and 4:4:4 or even 4:2:2. That's a lot more data to work with, which is beneficial for being able to better manipulate the image since you have the data to work with in the first place. The increase in resolution is more useful when the cameras also do better in terms of recording. Stuff like dynamic range is typically getting better and better with newer, higher resolution cameras. Also the consumer isn't going to care. 4K is 4 times the pixels of 1080p, therefore it is better. They are not going to care about colour space, or chroma sampling.[/QUOTE] but 1080p is essentially 960x540, that's [I]bad[/I]
[QUOTE=Giraffen93;51015705]but 1080p is essentially 960x540, that's [I]bad[/I][/QUOTE] It is bad, but it was good enough for video engineers to use it worldwide, make it a standard and now all of the cameras and such use chroma sampling.
[QUOTE=Revenge282;51015427]In Apple's defense, if they come out with their "lower-than-Bluetooth-power" protocol, and the ear buds have proper batteries similar to a hearing aid, you could probably expect to see a week worth of playtime between charges.[/QUOTE] So according to a Tweet from the Apple event today, the [I]AirPods[/I] will have only 5 hours of play time... I apologize for the optimism.
I don't think I've ever plugged my phone into a charger and used headphones at the same time.
[QUOTE=Revenge282;51015788]So according to a Tweet from the Apple event today, the [I]AirPods[/I] will have only 5 hours of play time... I apologize for the optimism.[/QUOTE] For small earbuds, that's kind of impressive. However, I'm happy with my slightly more cumbersome bluetooth earbuds that last 12 hours between charges :v:
[QUOTE=Dr McNinja;51015798]I don't think I've ever plugged my phone into a charger and used headphones at the same time.[/QUOTE] You will if you played Ingress or Pokemon GO, and you wanted to listen to music at the same time. You can spot the Ingress or Pokemon Go player from their large power banks plugged into their phones.
[QUOTE=Giraffen93;51015705]but 1080p is essentially 960x540, that's [I]bad[/I][/QUOTE] but it aint tho the color channels are which are far less precision noticeable than the luma. Yes people can tell the difference, but even in my opinion I think it's fine considering even before compression you save 50% bandwidth.
I have a computer here somewhere that can do analog 4:4:4:4 What is that last 4 even for?
[QUOTE=pentium;51015879]I have a computer here somewhere that can do analog 4:4:4:4 What is that last 4 even for?[/QUOTE] Bragging rights
[QUOTE=garychencool;51015805]You will if you played Ingress or Pokemon GO, and you wanted to listen to music at the same time. You can spot the Ingress or Pokemon Go player from their large power banks plugged into their phones.[/QUOTE] I used to emergency charge my phone by piggybacking off my Nexus 7 with an OTG cable.
[QUOTE=Brt5470;51015817]but it aint tho the color channels are which are far less precision noticeable than the luma. Yes people can tell the difference, but even in my opinion I think it's fine considering even before compression you save 50% bandwidth.[/QUOTE] Like no one is going to care if the video is compressed most of the time. As long as it looks good enough, it's good enough. More people are going to complain that their Internet is too slow for the 1080p 4:4:4 (or 4K 4:2:0) than bitch about the YouTube compression for 1080p 4:2:0. YouTube and other services picked what compression, etc. to use because it's the most efficient and good enough one.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.