bakerstreet

bakerstreet

Joined Member # 217
0 Posts 163 Replies 7,083 Reputation

i dunno if the gap is getting wider. I greater percentage of the people I know now would be considered 'information gods', as compared to a couple of years ago. I have been struck lately, though, with a read, tangible fear. I try to imagine 1980. Not in terms of games and techy-toys, but in terms of not having to wonder about anything. No fact is further from me than my keyboard at present. If I did lose my internet connection, I could at a minimum get to a library or kinkos fairly

12 Replies 7,397 Views

I used to gripe about stardock apps, but when I did it was young software, running on the average 300-400mgz computer, on windows 98, with a circa 1999 video card(>16meg). The problems were factual, annoying, and universal. Now, people are still griping about stardock, and oddly using the same statements people made then, even though all those problems are mostly historical. Just like you, griping about bugs that were in beta versions of Winamp3. It kind of bothers me that the facts I, and o

35 Replies 11,308 Views

grayhaze: Those DHTML adverts you mention are absolutly the most annoying thing since "punch the monkey". I seriously will not frequent sites that use them. One of the sites in our commmunity has them periodically and I find that I really don't visit there at all anymore. Their odd shape and movement make them harder to kill, and some of them don't have the close window button at all. That is no worse than the javascript-trick windows that pron sites use, imho. They take control of my deskto

18 Replies 10,467 Views

Iframes are frames that are surrounded by the other frame, like a frame as an image. They are not supported by pre-6.0 versions of netscape. I was thinking they didn't work with Java turned off, too, I could be wrong about that...

3 Replies 1,375 Views

Jafo: pfft, You see fast cars all the time. Driving one is for wimps, isn't it more manly to dodge them as they slide around the curves? You even get a better view! You can't see them if you are in the car...

30 Replies 6,881 Views

Voodoo_FreaK You still didn't explain to me why it runs fine on most people's systems... You are only using that gdi and ram if you have it maximized, i.e. looking at it. No one I know sits and looks at it. If you are, then you probably don't need the extra ten megs. Here's a shot of my task manager. roughly 10 minutes running, 3000 file playlist, minimized, a 6 meg MP3 playing: http://www.geocities.com/bakerstr33t/w3pic.jpg the performance tab is

35 Replies 11,308 Views

Voodoo_FreaK: What I am saying, is that if it crashes on your system, and runs smoothly on a vast majority of other systems, should you conclude that the problem is 'crappy' software? If you think expensive hardware has any less 'issues' than cheap hardware, you haven't bought a lot of it. I have seen celeron 400's with low-end hardware that would run an app smoothly sitting right next to bleeding-edge boxes that would crash the second the same app was loaded. Top-of-the-li

35 Replies 11,308 Views

I think you meant 1 gig of ram. It is never the issue unless you *make* it the issue, which you did. People worked a lot of hours on that software, and you blow it off without even bothering to track down *why* it *might* suck on *your* system. If you were sitting with the developers of winamp 3, you'd never trash them like that, but anonymously, on a board that thousands of people a day read, you'll trash them and their software. pfft.

35 Replies 11,308 Views

pfft. aren't kids precious? (I saw a guy in a chat argue that Sonique sucked because it caused his computer to crash while he was playing Everquest...) Machine: p4 1.8ghz, 1gig of ram, matrox g450 video card, Windows 2000 SP2. stats taken immediately after loading; playing, skinned, with a 3000 song playlist (running alongside Photoshop, HTML kit, and two IE windows). Coolplayer: 1.5 minutes to load the playlist, 9.6 megs of ram. Winamp 3: 10 seconds to lo

35 Replies 11,308 Views

Ad placement is an iffy issue, and the one thing that makes them hard on the internet. If you place them well, people claim that you are obscuring content, or at least distracting from it. I have seen commercial style ads, i.e. you load a full page ad for 10 seconds or so before it continues on to the content, but they go against the original intent, distributing content quickly and efficiently. People expect commercials on tv. It would take a lot of getting used to on the internet. <br

18 Replies 10,467 Views

hrm. One would have to have a pretty sorry virus checker for it to allow that kind of activity, though. Virii are usually built to spread these days. Kind of like AIDS versus Ebola. If it kills you quick, then it doesn't spread as well. If someone did develop a virus like this, they were old-school, or didn't think it through very well. I'll be interested to see if it is a hoax or not. When will people stop opening attatchments? I wouldn't open an attatchment from *anyone*, ever,

11 Replies 3,940 Views

Advertising isn't working on the internet because far too much is expected of it, far more than print or television. For some reason the expectation online is that each time a banner is loaded, it is going to equal a site visit, or even a sale. Does Chanel expect you to rush out and buy a gallon of expensive perfume the moment you crack open Vogue magazine? No, they don't. They expect that very, very expensive advertising to cement their BRAND, i.e when you want perfume, you

18 Replies 10,467 Views

Adobe Photoshop with the stock filters. PSP is getting really good as well, if you want to spend less. A popuplar misconception is that you have to use a 3D app to make something look photo-realistically 3D. The power of a 3D app is making a model and then not having to re-make it when you want a different perspective on the object in question. I know some people really, really like 3D apps, but people have been rendering images with realistic depth for a thousand years with no help

11 Replies 3,853 Views

Jark: I find it really, really hard to believe that you argued this for hours under the impression that we were all talking about making something for personal use. We all have stuff that could be termed 'derivative' that we use and don't distribute. I'm using an anime wallpaper right now that I took from a screenshot. I would never distribute it, though. Did you really think I was saying that it wasn't physically possible for someone to make a derivative work? That "can't, can't, can't!" m

88 Replies 20,911 Views

To sum up the last few hours: bakerstreet's point: "You cannot, cannot, cannot! make a work based on other people's without permission, regardless of how much you change it. United States Copyright Office's FAQ, states that: "Only the owner of copyright in a work has the right to prepare, or to authorize someone else to create a new version of that work. Accordingly, you cannot claim copyright to another's work, no matter how much you change it, unless you have

88 Replies 20,911 Views

Fine, I apologize for being personal about it, but you broke in on a conversation and told someone basically that I was wrong, and they could take images they didn't own and make DX objects out of them. You were wrong, are wrong, and sadly, unrepentantly wrong. Anyhoo, If I hit below the belt, I take it back, I certainly didn't need to.

88 Replies 20,911 Views

If I understand Jark correctly, he is saying that if someone else's work is modified heavily enough, and if you don't claim a copyright on it yourself, you can distribute it as "derivative" to your heart's content. That doesn't explain this quote from the US Copyright circular 14: "WHO MAY PREPARE A DERIVATIVE WORK? Only the owner of copyright in a work has the right to pre- pare,or to authorize someone else to create,a new version of that work." I mentione

88 Replies 20,911 Views

"anyhow...i never referred to anything regarding claiming copyright of a work. in fact, most of the individuals submitting to deviantart, who use copyrighted images in photo manipulations, are not creating for the purpose of copyrighting their work. they are merely creating derivative works. therefore, people are authorized to use images according to this document. " Then why does Devart slap a copyright statment under them? Damn, Jark, can you not read?

88 Replies 20,911 Views