i want to see big dog dance, wtf is with the japanese building animatronic junk and pretending its an advance in tech. even old abe from disneyland moved better.

only issue with bluray is the price of films. seriously they gotta stop charging the premium over dvd....17-25~ dollars for blurays when dvds go from 7-12 dollars is just a deal breaker. doesn't matter how cheap your player is when your do that.

"Yea, the idea of being able to take a sword in a game and directly slash at things with this sort of accuracy is pretty nice. The best feature on natal is the fact one can control their xbox without picking up a controller at all."

upon first thought. when you think about how your actions really translate into gameplay, not so much. theres probably a slight lag for one, and most importantly there is no feedback. your spacial awareness of your sword is limited, clash swords has no meaning when you can't feel resistance. so like the wii, it won't be a simulation of reality, but performing "motions" the game "expects". in other words you are doing ridiculous "gesture" based gameplay instead of any real immersive control.

yea he needs to show a video where he actually kicks ass with the thing.

not quite hyori cute.

its such bs. you ALWAYs had browser freedom. the eu only would have a point if ms behaved like apple with their appstore and forbid you from installing a competitors product. i mean seriously if the eu were consistant bmw's would not come with car stereos, you know..to protect the after market from unfair bundling competition. nokias should not have any extra features, a bundled calculator is screwing someone out there out of calculator money....

wat

posted by spinball

http://www.avpodcast.co.uk/podcast.mp3?p=108
av podcast has a laugh at this article.

"There's a difference between resolution and pixels, old film may have lots of pixels but it doesn't have the resolution of HD, HD has a sharper picture even if it has less actual pixels than the silverparticles in film.
I've seen film, projected film not done with digital projectors, and it's not THAT sharp, lenses and edge sharpness play a role.
In short ridiculing a guy with a ridiculous popular cliché is a bit fail."

they are the same. film doesn't have pixels.it has grain, its resolution is an approximation. but it does capture detail at resolutions higher than hd. in fact its superior in ways because the regular pixel grid pattern of pixels is a defect that the eye catches, meaning you need that much more pixels just to nullify that artifact. this is esp noticeable on digital projectors that produce a screen door effect.

"
Also, nothing beats a CRT for image quality (not the ones used in TV, computer CRTs used to be able to do HD). Except perhaps for the LaserVue and the latest plasmas. And OLEDs, though current ones are too small. A projector? Oh come on. I want black blacks."

no, not in reality. very few crts had anything close to 1080p actual resolution. most cheapies could be called edtv's at best if the labels were honest. they were lucky to approach 720p. 1080 blind scans on super coase dot pitch screens was enough to have the 1080i label applied, regardless of whether any detail was rendered. beyond the few sony super fine pitch tvs none got even close. so the whole spiel about crt is based on fantasy when it comes to hd.