The Year in Review: The Good, The Bad and the Ugly
Barry Gerber talks about key events in a busy year for technology enthusiasts. He covers HDTV, Windows Vista, exploding batteries, the need for mobile phone standardization, spam, CPUs and portable music and video players.
Those are some darn good expectations. I have been waiting for someone to blow the market away by "integrating," at least in a rought sense, a cell phone and a mp3 player. Verizon and Cingular have tried to do this with the Chocolate and Rokr, respectively, but failed because the phone came first and the mp3 functionality was pathetic. What I woudl expect to see, in the next 3 years, is a VoIP company joint venture with Intel (or a cell phone company) and hardware manufacterer. If skype could get such a product to market utilising WiMax (or EV network of Verizon, EDGE network of Cingular), they could make a killing. I would buy such a device in an instant, provided it did its job well. I have an iPod for music, Shure E3C headphones to match, a LG VX8500, a bluetooth headset for that, and usually my PDA.... it is ridiculous.
I have been waiting for wireless headphones since Bluetooth was announced. I realize the battery life might be compromised, but there is so much to gain from the elimination of such annoying wires. If you can make a bluetooth headset as clear as the Discovery 655, but headphones for an iPod (or equivilant), I would be willing to accept less than perfect audio quality.
I had the same HDTV experience, once you get used to it you will never go
back. I researched a long time, and bought a Samsung 26, that being the
ideal size for 1080, except it's 1024 x 1366, which leads to some slight
stretching in certain programs, but overall the picture is amazing.
The onboard sound sucks tho, really cheap.
I have a Dishnet 200 receiver and about 20 HD channels, of varying quality
since old movies and the like were recorded at a lo resolution initially. One
very bad thing is the HDMI output doesn't work at all, and a large number
of subscribers can't get it to either. Fortunately the composite output is
almost as good, I really couldn't see the difference (it worked for one day).
Dishnet says there is a software fix on the way (sound familiar?) but that
was a few months ago. It only becomes an issue if you have other devices
that need the composite.
With the cost of HD monitors coming down so much it looks like the next
gen of TV is really here.
I just couldn't help it but say that I too share the same enthusiasm for technology as Berry Gerber does. Reading the article really helped me out to understand the feeling!
I justa had to tell yo bro,
It really rocks!
And I'm sure there are a lot of people out there who share the same opinion.
I've been reading Tom's hardware since the very very beginning and can say that this is THE site for technology enthusiasts. Well done!
I disagree with this comment(and I have no clue what that "Mickey Mouse" part of the comment means)>Quote:(none of that Mickey Mouse built-in HD tuner stuff for me),
I disagree because I feel that buying a HDTV with a built in tuner can be a good thing. Why? because just for example you might live in an area where all of the local stations that broadcast in HD aren't availible through your cable/satellite provider in this instance it would be a good thing to have a tuner built into the TV and not have to buy a standalone tuner.
Quote:I disagree because I feel that buying a HDTV with a built in tuner can be a good thing. Why? because just for example you might live in an area where all of the local stations that broadcast in HD aren't availible through your cable/satellite provider in this instance it would be a good thing to have a tuner built into the TV and not have to buy a standalone tuner.
Having an HDTV monitor with a stand alone tuner is allows you to upgrade the tuner as better technology (eg anti aliasing) comes along without also investing in a new display.
There are a couple of good solutions to curb spam.
Being an Exchange guru, you should know one of them by heart. Both SPF and Sender ID Framework working together could significantly curb spam, at least the zombie driven kind, and help out all inboxes. Sender ID Framework (originally called "Caller ID" is a Microsoft idea, but all-in-all it's not that different that SPF in it's end result.
Today a vast number of spam messages come from zombie computers. Computers that would never in the wildest dreams of the spams be allowed to be entered on DNS as proper e-mail machines using either SPF and/or SIDF markings. Once all legitimate e-mail servers are using these tools, then the spam repellents could be turned on high for any message not containing both proper forms of identification through these tools.
Now, how do we get this to work? Simple. Demand it from your ISP or Work's e-mail administrator. If they are not using it, they need to be told how important it is to use in order to help get rid of spam. Make sure any e-mail server you use is properly registered (you can check at http://www.openspf.org/ and http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/safety/technologies/senderid/default.mspx)
Sometimes i don't quite understand Mr. Gerber, the author of this and other articles. If i remember correctly, there was this heated debate in the forums about Mr. Gerber article on the Sony UX180P some time ago. And again for god sake, you can't expect every piece of technology is going to be upgraded to your likes. The UX180 sacrifices upgradability in the name of a small sized device :idea: , compreende ?
Now, should i complain about my nforce2 chipset not supporting PCIe or DDR2 DIMM's ? ... Probably not. But i bet Mr. Gerber complains his 286sx is still waiting for a VESA-LB daughterboard ... :roll: Try reading about Rock's Law and the way technology evolves. Readers will thank you for a well informed argumentation, rather than subjective likes and dislikes.
Anyway, the article is rather confusing, it mixes many concepts, making too often apples vs oranges comparisons. No conclusion as well .... hmmmm, we all know technology evolves, but i have the feeling the author is not able to root itself at some determinate time, and draw a pro vs con summary. Weird , why so many writers can do so ....