|
On March 29 2013 18:34 Doublemint wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2013 17:09 skyR wrote:
Yes, the 7950 is by far superior with that pricing and the additional game. Indeed. If it was not for the second game that comes with the 7950 I would have to think twice about it - but no way in hell does the PhysX support and slightly better drivers outweigh that AMD package 
"Better drivers" is pretty debatable, both Nvidia's and AMD's drivers have been so-so as of late. PhysX is virtually useless too, except maybe in Borderlands 2? Not really sure of anyone else dumb enough to use it.
|
Funny, I came here with the intention to ask about 7950 as well, xD.
So which iteration people, Gigabyte, Sapphire or XFX?
*the store gives crysis 3 and bioshock infinite with the sapphire one.
|
Does anybody know if there is an equivalent of the Windows Resource Monitor on the Mac OS?
http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/closer-windows-resource-monitor/
Want to see if there's an application that may be affecting my home's Internet network. Since my Internet goes to shit when this Macbook is connected to the network...
|
Task manager of OS X is known as activity manager. It's built in, just use spotlight and search for it.
|
On March 30 2013 02:27 Rollin wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2013 18:34 Doublemint wrote:On March 29 2013 17:09 skyR wrote:
Yes, the 7950 is by far superior with that pricing and the additional game. Indeed. If it was not for the second game that comes with the 7950 I would have to think twice about it - but no way in hell does the PhysX support and slightly better drivers outweigh that AMD package "Better drivers" is pretty debatable, both Nvidia's and AMD's drivers have been so-so as of late. PhysX is virtually useless too, except maybe in Borderlands 2? Not really sure of anyone else dumb enough to use it.
Batman Arkam City uses PhysX pretty nicely as well for instance... Mafia 2 looks badass as well. No idea why you have to be dumb to reap the benefits ~ Though I agree that the Tomb Raider fiasco was quite the blow to Nvidia's reputation having better drivers.
|
On March 30 2013 12:37 Doublemint wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2013 02:27 Rollin wrote:On March 29 2013 18:34 Doublemint wrote:On March 29 2013 17:09 skyR wrote:
Yes, the 7950 is by far superior with that pricing and the additional game. Indeed. If it was not for the second game that comes with the 7950 I would have to think twice about it - but no way in hell does the PhysX support and slightly better drivers outweigh that AMD package "Better drivers" is pretty debatable, both Nvidia's and AMD's drivers have been so-so as of late. PhysX is virtually useless too, except maybe in Borderlands 2? Not really sure of anyone else dumb enough to use it. Batman Arkam City uses PhysX pretty nicely as well for instance... Mafia 2 looks badass as well. No idea why you have to be dumb to reap the benefits ~ Though I agree that the Tomb Raider fiasco was quite the blow to Nvidia's reputation having better drivers.
I meant dumb to be a game dev using a tool that's only supported by 1/3 of current graphics vendors. If you're a consumer, using an Nvidia card isn't dumb.
|
Bioshock Infinite has a PhysX logo on it FWIW, though I have no idea what benefit, if any, an Nvidia card would get from it. Incidentally it also has a big AMD partner thing as part of its load. Who knows if there's any difference at all at the end of the day.
Since we're only the subject, I'll also say two things about Bioshock. Firstly, it maxes out my 7970 Ghz pair at a constant 99-100% usage. Secondly, frames occasionally dip briefly, but enough to notice. There are theories that there may be patching needed on Bioshock's side to resolve some of this, rather than it being a hardware issue. Also, supposedly very high and ultra are very close in appearance, but can be much smoother. Food for thought for anyone playing this atm.
|
On March 30 2013 12:50 Rollin wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2013 12:37 Doublemint wrote:On March 30 2013 02:27 Rollin wrote:On March 29 2013 18:34 Doublemint wrote:On March 29 2013 17:09 skyR wrote:
Yes, the 7950 is by far superior with that pricing and the additional game. Indeed. If it was not for the second game that comes with the 7950 I would have to think twice about it - but no way in hell does the PhysX support and slightly better drivers outweigh that AMD package "Better drivers" is pretty debatable, both Nvidia's and AMD's drivers have been so-so as of late. PhysX is virtually useless too, except maybe in Borderlands 2? Not really sure of anyone else dumb enough to use it. Batman Arkam City uses PhysX pretty nicely as well for instance... Mafia 2 looks badass as well. No idea why you have to be dumb to reap the benefits ~ Though I agree that the Tomb Raider fiasco was quite the blow to Nvidia's reputation having better drivers. I meant dumb to be a game dev using a tool that's only supported by 1/3 of current graphics vendors. If you're a consumer, using an Nvidia card isn't dumb.
Well, for "serious" gamers there are only 2 graphics vendors. Though you make a good point nonetheless. With AMD providing the gpu for both next gen consoles how much of a say will Nvidia have in pushing their technologies? Chances are high that PhysX might become obsolete IMO.
//edit: Afaik Unreal Engine 3 kinda supports PhysX from the get go.
|
PhysX was always useless? Maybe like 1 in 100 games support it... and that one game isn't even popular. The Playstation 4 supports PhysX just so you know.
|
On March 30 2013 13:30 skyR wrote:
PhysX was always useless? Maybe like 1 in 100 games support it... and that one game isn't even popular. The Playstation 4 supports PhysX just so you know.
That's interesting, did not know that. Don't want to start anything here... just saying PhysX is nice to have - but definitely not a must-have.
|
Right, CPUs do PhysX calculations just fine but of course AMD's GPU in the PS4 will not support it.
That said, if they're using 8 cores (though it's Atom-level type Bobcat-based low-power cores) then sure, gotta find something for them to do.
Without the possibility of hardware GPU acceleration, it's just another physics library out there.
|
On March 30 2013 03:56 Steveling wrote:
Funny, I came here with the intention to ask about 7950 as well, xD.
So which iteration people, Gigabyte, Sapphire or XFX?
*the store gives crysis 3 and bioshock infinite with the sapphire one.
Get the Sapphire one. The Gigabyte one is fine too, but apparently doesn't come with the free games. XFX is not good. You might get a good card, but XFX's quality control on its coolers sucks.
|
On March 30 2013 15:26 MisterFred wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2013 03:56 Steveling wrote:
Funny, I came here with the intention to ask about 7950 as well, xD.
So which iteration people, Gigabyte, Sapphire or XFX?
*the store gives crysis 3 and bioshock infinite with the sapphire one. Get the Sapphire one. The Gigabyte one is fine too, but apparently doesn't come with the free games. XFX is not good. You might get a good card, but XFX's quality control on its coolers sucks.
Thx for the input mate, I decided to go for the sapphire one(free games<3).
|
Gmail just switched to the new compose (and soon, the old way will be gone with no way to go back).
The main thing I am bothered about is that after you type an email address, it automatically gets set to whatever name the person had it set as. Is there a way to change it so the full address is always displayed? This wasn't present in the previous version of compose.
This isn't just "I dislike new stuff because I'm used to the old stuff" but because the old one was better:
1. When you hit reply, a fully detailed (detailed) box/widow came. It had BCC, CC, etc. I use BCC often.
2. Emails are listed as their address and not as whatever name people use. (This is when composing and reply, for example if I type "Bob"'s email address, it immediately gets set to show only whatever he set his gmail name as. So this makes it hard to double check if I got the email right. What if I had three bobs, and they all had similar addresses? It sucks for composing and replying to emails.)
This is very important. I don't want to see an email as "Bob" but I want to see their address, whatever their address is (what if I had two Bobs on my contact list for example?).
Now, the new compose makes it so you have to go out of the way to do both #1 and #2.
I like two things in the things I use:
1. Simplicity and ease. I use Windows 7 but have set the task bar to display files as a "list view with text" (like in Vista, XP, and before) rather than the "table with giant pictures that I find very ineffecient to use".
In Counter-Strike 1.6, I disabled the GUI (which is enabled by default) and set the buy menu, the select team, etc to display text only.
Because it is far superior to the GUI (which is useless, takes up the whole screen, etc).
2. My preferences aren't a "minimalistic" one. I like anything with all the details if possible. Text instead of icons aren't minimalistic, it's detailed (but yet practical and simple to use).
It seems like everything (websites, browsers, programs, etc) is heading away from the #1 and #2. Instead of text that is detailed, we have icons (hmm, I wonder what this icon does). I mean, #1 and #2 aren't important for like mobile stuff (especially with touch pads, I know trying to hit line of text with your fingers would be harder than trying to hit a giant icon, for example, so I understand) but for desktop computers this is madness I say, madness !
Instead of displaying the full email address, we have "Bob". What if we have two or more Bobs on our contact list ? I know you can view the actual email but they made it so "Bob" is displayed as default instead of the address!
Also here is something from google
Q. The compose box is too small for me to write in!
Most emails people send are short and simple. The new compose helps you write these faster and get more done. For the occasions where you want a larger canvas, you can pop out the compose and reply windows.
Emails aren't twitter... if you want to use twitter, use twitter >.>.
It's no big deal. The only real complaint I have with the new gmail (besides the fact everything has become inefficient like how you now you have to click multiple times to find the BCC button in replies) is the fact that when you compose or reply to an address, it quickly causes it to default to the name (instead of the keeping the full address in view).
I am disappointed Google. At least Yahoo (for some reason) still has the option to use the old version of their email service (I use gmail over yahoo because gmail has that "detailed but yet simple" thing going for them which I do like... which they are slowly going away and just jumping on the "minimalistic" bandwagon.)
The biggest annoyance with all the changes is that people don't explain or realize why some people dislike it (especially on some random tech news site).
It's not because "it's natural to not like change", it's because most of these changes are inefficient, impractical, and inferior to the old one. (I like using my "I set C.S. 1.6 to be text only for menus" example. People don't think of it much in when using the desktop but when it comes to video games, it's srsly business about efficiency.)
The Battle.net 2.0 UI started as huge icons, it was okay. People were fine with the first version of SC2 B.net 2.0 because you didn't have to click like 20 times to find 1v1 or whatever (unlike SC2 1.5).
The new compose in gmail is like SC 1.5 version (the arcade update) which made things "simple". Now instead of the BCC buttons being right there from the beginning, you now have to click 20 times to find it, just how you had to click 20 times to find the 1v1 screen in SC2 1.5 (but imagine if you had no hotkeys to do it since there are none in gmail, without mods I assume). (Also I am exaggerating a bit. To be fair, it does only takes one click to find the BCC button now.)
SC2 2.xx (the HotS update) made things simple "but" it was still detailed. Also, now you don't have to click 20 times to find the 1v1 button (unlike what the new gmail has done).
Most things are simple but yet when you want detail, you have detail. Map stats, levels for your races, clan name, ID number, etc.
So, kudos to Blizzard, they did UI right. (Of course, it is unfair because I am comparing a desktop game, SC2, with an email service site, which may be used on touch screens or mobile devices where all the stuff gmail has done actually makes sense.)
Well, this became a long post >.>. I understand a lot of these changes do make sense if they're using mobile phones or <insert portable device here with touch screen> but it'd be nice if google kept the old compose. Yahoo does it, why can't google  . (Also why doesn't google have a non-business premium version of their email like Yahoo does .)
(Again, the only thing I am "really" bothered about is emails automatically being "name only" instead of "address and name" after you type an email in reply or compose. Is there a way to turn this off? I'll look at the settings again later.)
Edit - To be fair, I haven't tried messing around with the new compose that much (though I'll keep most of the rants because a lot of what I say are also apply to a lot of new UI in most stuff in general - That instead of "simple and detailed and easy to read" it has moved to "giant icons and 'you have to click 20 times to find something'" (which again, is okay for mobile phones but for things like Windows 7+, there is no excuse I say)! (Hopefully the registry edits to make Windows 7 task bar have "list programs active in a list view with text" is still present in windows 8...)
|
Besides the initial window size, your complaints aren't even warranted lol.
You are typing in the email so how would you fuck this up? You can edit the names of your contacts as well. Poor management skills = not UI update's fault.
BBC and CC works the exact same way so not sure what you're talking about. ctrl shift c and ctrl shift b. Not being efficient = not UI update's fault.
Google doesn't offer any premium email for businesses so not sure what you're talking about. Everything that Yahoo Plus and Hotmail Plus offers is available for free on Gmail? Maybe you're talking about Google Apps...? If you want to use a custom domain with Google than what's stopping you from using it? It was free up until late last year.
|
If you want to talk about the shift away from power (text) to consumer-centric (mobile, large graphics) - thank the mobile revolution via smartphones and tablets for the dumbing down of, well, everything.
FYI - I've been on the new compose method for a while. GMail isn't serious email tbh so I don't really have a high bar for it. It's just another throwaway to be used.
|
I find the default GMail interface to be one of the most unintuitive and annoying UIs I've ever used and that's counting the likes of old Outlook and Lotus Notes.
|
I'm a little tired, but if a language can describe it's own rules does that count for anything? I don't know what to google.
|
Anyone know anything about the google os? I read it's a modified version of linux, does that mean it won't be able to run exe files? My mom was thinking of getting one of their new laptops but I have no idea if that's a good idea or not.
|
United Kingdom20322 Posts
I think Chromebooks are extremely limited.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
