I know Apple, but I'm unfamiliar with "Mac". Is that something Scottish? This reminds of the google mail thing. I don't think anyone will reach that 1 gig limit anytime soon. I have six or seven years of email archived and it doesn't even come close to that.
craeonics
The only thing that annoys me is when people talk about "Matrix effects" when they see other movies, while none of them had innovative effects.
If on one hand you don''t know much about it and on the other think it might be "limiting" (a & b = illogical), why not give ManDrake a shot first to get some experience. Don''t think it matters much what you run. They all have installers these days.
/me doesn''t spend anything, for he still (yes, still) has to move out
Install 98 first on C:, then install XP on D:. XP will recognise 98 and set up the necessary dual boot options. Provided you paid attention and gave the right answers during setup ofcourse.
Mayonaise. No contest.
Oh yeah, works fine for me. The only time I ever see the player is when messing with the playlist. The rest of the time, it's just hotkeys.
.NET framework? Now I remember why I didn't bother to try this.
Oh great, so those seemingly completely useless keys are in fact... completely useless. NumLock, on the other hand, is not so useless. It lets the numeric pad (the right side of the keyboard) switch between numeric input or the ins/del/etcetera functions. Okay, so the entire numeric pad is redundant, but those keys do have different scancodes than their equivalents elsewhere on the keyboard, meaning that you can safely use 'em as hotkeys. I've got NUM+ and NUM- mapped to volum
What the? Where did all those other comments come from?
It's a bit meagre on its own for an article. Maybe I'll group this with some of the other 3D interfaces and write about that (somewhere in the far and distant future).
IMHO = in my humble opinion
Yeah, but is it a gimmick or something you would use on a daily basis?
...or not.
He probably means NextStart and he seems to want the "start menu" looks like it normally does.
You can ditch the "Net" aspect of that. It's mere power play. Something which you'll find in real life as well (clerics, angry neighbours). Were I to play psychiatrist, I'd say they are unhappy witht heir lives and act it out on others. On the Net that, ofcourse, is easy, since you're practically untouchable there.
Froggy, didn't you momma ever warned you about uploading hi-res images? So, introduce us. Who's who? And who does what?
Sooo, to continue and loop this back to where we took off. If we can somehow let the screen display things at different angels, depending on which angle we are looking at it, it's visually as 3D as the real thing. We'd only need a device to determine what angle we are staring at the screen and software that will determine and draw the gui at the correct angle. /me think he's been intelligent enough for today
Speaking of rotation, something I miss in most graphic apps is the ability to rotate the canvas without translating the pixels (and thus blurring, anti-aliasing and messing up the image). Normally when I draw, I draw wiht my right hand and rotate the paper back and forth with my left hand all the time. The only app I know that seems to incorporate that is Painter. /me slides off topic
Right, that one ^^^ should be in between your posts (otherwise it'd be out of context).
Umm, yeah that's exactly my point. When I talk about scaling, it's on the topic of "the future of skinning", if a GUI used that does allow scaling.
We need holographics gui's. If you think about it, your eyes don't see 3D either. The image is projected as a flat image on tyour retina and only after the brain does its image processing magic, do you perceive it as 3D. Even worse, I'd say that 3D can only exist in a 4D world, for you need time to be able to see a 3D object form different angles. You can't do that from an instant. /me is in a philosophic mood
Ahum, I appear to have completely re-iterated the first post. At first, vectors would seem to be the ultimate solution. For scaling upwards that is. Scaling downwards is a different beast altogether. With vectors, you'd run the risk of critical details being blurred out when you get too small, so in that case bitmaps would be better.
Yeah, but, I wasn't talking about hardware resolutions, but software resolution. Windows will be drawn at 72 dpi no matter what res your hardware has. Perhaps "dpi" isn't the right term for this. What I mean is that an icon will be drawn as (say) 48 pixels, regardless and independent of what your hardware res is. This is because the GUI is bitmap based. So if you want to get that in sync with your hardware res, you'd either need multiple versions of each icon, scale things up
If he did, he would have to quit his day job, kiss his wife goodbye and forget about sleeping.