• CIPWTTKT&GC V41 - I understood some words
    5,010 replies, posted
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;51015923]Would it be an unpopular opinion if I said Bluetooth is a shit standard and it took way too long to get where it is now?[/QUOTE] And why do you think it's a shit standard?
[QUOTE=Lyokanthrope;51015906]I used to emergency charge my phone by piggybacking off my Nexus 7 with an OTG cable.[/QUOTE] I remember calling Google support phone line just to ask them how much is the output of the Nexus 7 2013 via USB OTG when I am charging my phone with it. They had no clue and took the manager to come on the line and say, "we don't know. it's a question that we don't have the answer to. sorry". Highlight of the day back then.
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;51015923]Would it be an unpopular opinion if I said Bluetooth is a shit standard and it took way too long to get where it is now?[/QUOTE] Depends, certain parts of it is quite shit, especially PIN based device security and that Low Energy first arrived in recent years. But as a whole as a fairly open standard, I'll have to fight you if you call it shit outright.
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;51015923]Would it be an unpopular opinion if I said Bluetooth is a shit standard and it took way too long to get where it is now?[/QUOTE] I think it is something that works well for how many devices support it (hence it being a standard), I just wished that it wasn't on 2.4GHz since everything is on it and interference is always annoying. When I first saw the specs of it many years ago, I was like, oh god it's so slow. Then I realized that it isn't really for mass data transfers, it's more for having the bandwidth for audio and being good enough that if you have to transfer a file, you better hope it's a small one.
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;51015923]Would it be an unpopular opinion if I said Bluetooth is a shit standard and it took way too long to get where it is now?[/QUOTE] I wouldn't go as far as to say it's shit, but it can definitely be problematic to work with.
[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] Probably alpha blending resolution.
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;51015960]Let's take bt4.0 as our example. It took years to get to where it is now. It's slow. Range isnt particular fantastic. I was doing a phone to phone transfer with a Samsung j5 to a core prime LTE and it was slow at transferring a single 2MB photo. It took under a minute. I've never had a good experience with it.[/QUOTE] Mass data transfer never really were Bluetooth's forté, so that ain't really fair. Well it was back in the day where the only way to transfer data between mobile devices locally was via IrDA, but around the time Bluetooth's data transfer speeds became a big problem, the devices started to come with wi-fi. Bluetooth simply evolved into being a wireless standard for the things wi-fi is horribly suited for. Also you can't have good range with a itty-bitty-tiny antenna (which it needs to fit in devices) while the bluetooth chipset itself has a maximum power consumption of around 1 watt. You're bitching at sematics.
Single device connectivity is my greatest qualm with BT. We live in an age of carrying multiple devices, and yet we can only connect one at a time. I could be at school carrying a laptop, phone, wireless headphones (""""AirPods""") and a smart watch. Why do I have to choose which one I want over the others?
[QUOTE=Revenge282;51016071]Single device connectivity is my greatest qualm with BT. We live in an age of carrying multiple devices, and yet we can only connect one at a time. I could be at school carrying a laptop, phone, wireless headphones (""""AirPods""") and a smart watch. Why do I have to choose which one I want over the others?[/QUOTE] Because then the "slave" devices has to be smart, and thus costs rises and you'll also need a interface on the slave devices to manage that. [URL="https://secure.logitech.com/en-us/product/multi-device-keyboard-k480?crid=27"]Logitech made a keyboard for tablets that can switch between 3 hosts[/URL], but it's pretty much 3 devices with a switch to choose between which one of them is active. [B]BUT [/B]if you're talking about a "host" device communicating with multiple "slave" devices on the same time, then I've only heard of problems if the devices were based on identical bluetooth profiles. Personally never had any problems when I used a bluetooth OBD dongle along with a bluetooth-to-minijack adapter at the same time with my old-ass ICS Android phone.
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;51015960]Let's take bt4.0 as our example. It took years to get to where it is now. It's slow. Range isnt particular fantastic. I was doing a phone to phone transfer with a Samsung j5 to a core prime LTE and it was slow at transferring a single 2MB photo. It took under a minute. I've never had a good experience with it.[/QUOTE] That's why WiFi Direct is a thing. Too bad not everything supports it, and there's some proprietary versions of it.
[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] it's exactly what it is though, just check the difference on the pictures i posted, even when the 4k is downscaled it looks [I]tons[/I] better
[QUOTE=Giraffen93;51016130]it's exactly what it is though, just check the difference on the pictures i posted, even when the 4k is downscaled it looks [I]tons[/I] better[/QUOTE] Not all media will or does have as big of a gap in perceived quality. With that said, it does not look like chroma subsampling is the cause for that shit quality. It looks like it's pixel binning or something. Even luma edges are super blurry.
[QUOTE=garychencool;51016127]That's why WiFi Direct is a thing. Too bad not everything supports it, and there's some proprietary versions of it.[/QUOTE] I'm still dumbfounded why they didn't make so you could exchange 'identity information' and verify the devices are on the same wi-fi network via bluetooth, and then do the actual file-transfer(s) over wi-fi. Basically so all the formal 'red tape' is done via bluetooth, and the heavy lifting is handled by wi-fi. That way both protocols would've been used for what they're good for.
[QUOTE=Giraffen93;51016130]it's exactly what it is though, just check the difference on the pictures i posted, even when the 4k is downscaled it looks [I]tons[/I] better[/QUOTE] If the 1080p was 4:4:4 instead of 4:2:0, it would probably look the same as the 4K downscaled to 1080p.
[QUOTE=Brt5470;51016152]With that said, it does not look like chroma subsampling is the cause for that shit quality. It looks like it's pixel binning or something. Even luma edges are super blurry.[/QUOTE] well tell that to lg [QUOTE=garychencool;51016166]If the 1080p was 4:4:4 instead of 4:2:0, it would probably look the same as the 4K downscaled to 1080p.[/QUOTE] good
[QUOTE=Giraffen93;51016169] good[/QUOTE] There still would be factors that could make them look different tho, i.e. the way the camera does the sensor read out, how much data is lost in compression, etc. but yeah, in theory 1080p 4:4:4 should be the same as 4K 4:2:0.
[QUOTE=TrafficMan;51013844]2^128 IP addresses is enough for every atom in every human currently on earth to have almost SEVEN each[/QUOTE] This comic happens in a universe where helifreak already bought a couple septilion out from under them.
[QUOTE=01271;51016279]This comic happens in a universe where helifreak already bought a couple septilion out from under them.[/QUOTE] I didn't pay for them. IPv4 addresses were 1.99 euro/month but the /48 IPv6 was free. It kinda makes sense given that allocating this many v6 addresses is allocating a 65536th as much as if you were allocated a single v4 address.
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;51015960]It's slow. Range isnt particular fantastic.[/QUOTE] BT was never designed to be a speed demon nor have an extended range in the first place. Bluetooth was designed as a Personal Area Network device in the first place for devices around you to communicate. By shortening the range, this will greatly reduce power consumption for battery operated devices. Bluetooth was essentially wireless UART. This greatly simplified interfacing between the host devices and communication complexity using an existing standard. UART is slow and asynchronous, which was great for the kind of devices bluetooth was originally designed for. These two areas are only starting to improving because demands for other BT applications has evolved. It's not really fair to complain about the range and speed of BT because that's still not what they're designed for. Consider using adhoc WIFI if you need to wireless transfer large amounts of data.
[QUOTE=B!N4RY;51016759]BT was never designed to be a speed demon nor have an extended range in the first place. Bluetooth was designed as a Personal Area Network device in the first place for devices around you to communicate. By shortening the range, this will greatly reduce power consumption for battery operated devices. Bluetooth was essentially wireless UART. This greatly simplified interfacing between the host devices and communication complexity using an existing standard. UART is slow and asynchronous, which was great for the kind of devices bluetooth was originally designed for. These two areas are only starting to improving because demands for other BT applications has evolved. It's not really fair to complain about the range and speed of BT because that's still not what they're designed for. Consider using adhoc WIFI if you need to wireless transfer large amounts of data.[/QUOTE] I think people forget to put the actual volume of data you can transfer into perspective, even for standards such as BT. I mean the fact I can stream a song from my phone to my car stereo is pretty astonishing considering the amount of data involved.
[QUOTE=Dorkslayz;51016825]I think people forget to put the actual volume of data you can transfer into perspective, even for standards such as BT. I mean the fact I can stream a song from my phone to my car stereo is pretty astonishing considering the amount of data involved.[/QUOTE] There's a lot more data involved in streaming a 4k video and you can do that on your phone over LTE too.
Well finally arrived here in Denver and I already have an interview lined up for an IT job tomorrow [editline]7th September 2016[/editline] Sorry for the blogpunch
[QUOTE=Levelog;51017150]Well finally arrived here in Denver and I already have an interview lined up for an IT job tomorrow [editline]7th September 2016[/editline] Sorry for the blogpunch[/QUOTE] Welcome to Denver, fun things to do include: getting in a fistfight with a hobo, getting diarrhea from Casa Bonita, and drinking shitty craft beer and pretending it's good.
Sounds lovely
[QUOTE=Makol;51017275]Sounds lovely[/QUOTE] Yeah that's a word for it
[QUOTE=Protocol7;51017251]Welcome to Denver, fun things to do include: getting in a fistfight with a hobo, getting diarrhea from Casa Bonita, and [B]drinking shitty craft beer and pretending it's good.[/B][/QUOTE] At this point I'm sure that applies to a fair few towns in the US. That kind of thing is pretty big here, too.
I'm almost absolutely certain that's the entire US at this point.
alcohol is gross
I just had to give the news to a student that the university tech support trashed their laptop. He dropped it off to be dusted and when he got it back the power button was dead and so was the trackpad. He calls up support who say "Not my problem lol" and hang up. I open the laptop and none of the bezel cables are plugged in so reconnecting that bullshit brought back the power button but the trackpad is still flat. It's not being powered. I feel sad he paid $30 to get it worked on.
[QUOTE=helifreak;51016829]There's a lot more data involved in streaming a 4k video and you can do that on your phone over LTE too.[/QUOTE] LTE costs more money. Bluetooth is practically free.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.