So Microsoft have offered a video preview into what windows users can expect from the new operating system. Apparently it's new design is heavily influenced by the Windows Phone's which basically means you'll have a new home screen with tiles representing various functions.
Microsoft assure potential future users that this isn't a 'compramise' and that this OS will be equally useful on mobile device's and home PC's. Microsoft have also said that it will be a lot less processor hungry than Windows 7, which i personally thought was a horrendous OS. Hopefully Microsoft can actually up their game with this OS because i still haven't been temped away from XP after using every other newer OS available.
If i'm honest i think that they should stop abandoning poorly developed OS's like Vista and 7 and actually finish updating and working out the kinks before moving on to another, but that's Microsoft for you.
If you want to see what it looks like for yourself there is a video on this website: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/microsoft/8551957/Microsoft-previews-Windows-8.html
Renkano's Literal Volcano
A little of everything i find interesting
Ad's
Friday 3 June 2011
Thursday 26 May 2011
Internet Regulation
So i'm sure most of you have heard about some governments desiring regulation of the web. Two of most influential and powerful internet tycoons have spoken out against this. 'Mark Zuckerberg said governments cannot cherry pick which aspects of the web to control and which not to.'
In my opinion this all boils down to the fact that a lot of countries are struggling economically and they could really do with the money that piracy has/is taking from them. It seems that some are willing to stifle the potential future innovations of the internet for this attempt at a quick buck.
Well quite frankly; it won't work and i think there are some freedom issue's. We all know a lot people are involved in piracy and we all know there is worse going on through the medium of the internet, however those are just the downsides and you cannot have all the benefits without the flaws.
This being said, a politicians job is to look after the publics best interests's, however the majority of people download music illegally; 95% in fact. I'm not saying i agree with music or film piracy, but you can clearly see government interests are not for the public, it seems the public is quite content with free music (despite the consequence's). (http://www.tomsguide.com/us/mp3-downloads-music-piracy-ifpi,news-3315.html)
Government's are going to have to accept that regulating such a vast and fast moving technological advancement such is the internet is not possible and moreover; If two of the most influential business tycoons stand up to disagree with you on a subject you know little about comparatively; you should listen.
Here's the BBC article on the subject: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-13553943
What do you think about it?
In my opinion this all boils down to the fact that a lot of countries are struggling economically and they could really do with the money that piracy has/is taking from them. It seems that some are willing to stifle the potential future innovations of the internet for this attempt at a quick buck.
Well quite frankly; it won't work and i think there are some freedom issue's. We all know a lot people are involved in piracy and we all know there is worse going on through the medium of the internet, however those are just the downsides and you cannot have all the benefits without the flaws.
This being said, a politicians job is to look after the publics best interests's, however the majority of people download music illegally; 95% in fact. I'm not saying i agree with music or film piracy, but you can clearly see government interests are not for the public, it seems the public is quite content with free music (despite the consequence's). (http://www.tomsguide.com/us/mp3-downloads-music-piracy-ifpi,news-3315.html)
Government's are going to have to accept that regulating such a vast and fast moving technological advancement such is the internet is not possible and moreover; If two of the most influential business tycoons stand up to disagree with you on a subject you know little about comparatively; you should listen.
Here's the BBC article on the subject: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-13553943
What do you think about it?
Wednesday 25 May 2011
Trance Fans
For anyone who's a fan of trance you defiantly wanna check this guy out; http://www.alexleavon.com/
Hours and hours of really good, FREE music. Enjoy =)
Also, completely unrelated but i thought i'd just upload this pic of a sunset on mars just because i think its beautiful.
Hours and hours of really good, FREE music. Enjoy =)
Also, completely unrelated but i thought i'd just upload this pic of a sunset on mars just because i think its beautiful.
Monday 23 May 2011
Medical Science News
Apparently breast cancer is linked with the obesity gene latest research suggests. I found this to be an interesting discovery and thought i'd share it with you guys.
'ScienceDaily (May 23, 2011) — New research aimed to better identify the genetic factors that lead to breast cancer has uncovered a link between the fat mass and obesity associated gene (FTO) and a higher incidence of breast cancer. According to the study conducted at Northwestern Memorial Hospital, people who possess a variant of the FTO gene have up to a 30 percent greater chance of developing breast cancer. Research to identify why the link exists is ongoing, but experts say the finding takes us one step closer to personalized medicine based on genetic risk which would allow for better monitoring and prevention of illness, as well as targeted treatment.'
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/05/110523124402.htm
'ScienceDaily (May 23, 2011) — New research aimed to better identify the genetic factors that lead to breast cancer has uncovered a link between the fat mass and obesity associated gene (FTO) and a higher incidence of breast cancer. According to the study conducted at Northwestern Memorial Hospital, people who possess a variant of the FTO gene have up to a 30 percent greater chance of developing breast cancer. Research to identify why the link exists is ongoing, but experts say the finding takes us one step closer to personalized medicine based on genetic risk which would allow for better monitoring and prevention of illness, as well as targeted treatment.'
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/05/110523124402.htm
Saturday 21 May 2011
Why Battlefield Bad Company 2 is better Than C.O.D
Firstly i'm going to talk about spawn killing, the most annoying of all kills. Before you even get to fire one bullet PLOW you're blown to bits. This has only ever happened to me on C.O.D games on Battlefield it's NEVER happened to me.
The graphics of battlefield may be arguebley less smooth and detailed (definitely not Black Ops though), but who cares we have HUGE maps, and they certainly look more realistic - i think that's much more important when it comes to a good fps. I mean seriously, look at this image, a great big map, a great big gun and a realistic looking environment, what more do you want?
Oh wait, a bit of balance maybe; there's no point in even picking up a sniper rifle in Black Ops, and pretty much all guns are just ridiculously unbalanced. Whereas in Battlefield its well balanced and every gun and class has its good and bad points.
One of the most important things about a first person shooter is that when you shoot someone in the face point blank with a shotgun you expect them to die. Not always in C.O.D. Battlefield however saves you from any of that hit detected frustration and your left with a satisfying feeling of just murdering a man a split second before he was about to murder you... ahh virtual violence.
Finally the maps. I've already spoken about how huge Battlefield maps are and how well placed the spawn points are, but that isn't the cheery on the cake. In battlefield you can frekin blow up buildings, knock through walls with explosives. Got an annoying camper hidden in a building? BLOW. THEM. THE. HELL. UP. If it was C.O.D you'd be running in and dying 10 times in a row before you hear a hoard of angry 12 years olds screaming 'camper! camper!' down the microphone shortly before they cry themselves to sleep at night over a poorly made video game they should have never bought.
With Battlefield 3 well on the way too i'll be surprised if C.O.D survive's much longer.
I think the choice is pretty obvious myself!
The graphics of battlefield may be arguebley less smooth and detailed (definitely not Black Ops though), but who cares we have HUGE maps, and they certainly look more realistic - i think that's much more important when it comes to a good fps. I mean seriously, look at this image, a great big map, a great big gun and a realistic looking environment, what more do you want?
Oh wait, a bit of balance maybe; there's no point in even picking up a sniper rifle in Black Ops, and pretty much all guns are just ridiculously unbalanced. Whereas in Battlefield its well balanced and every gun and class has its good and bad points.
One of the most important things about a first person shooter is that when you shoot someone in the face point blank with a shotgun you expect them to die. Not always in C.O.D. Battlefield however saves you from any of that hit detected frustration and your left with a satisfying feeling of just murdering a man a split second before he was about to murder you... ahh virtual violence.
Finally the maps. I've already spoken about how huge Battlefield maps are and how well placed the spawn points are, but that isn't the cheery on the cake. In battlefield you can frekin blow up buildings, knock through walls with explosives. Got an annoying camper hidden in a building? BLOW. THEM. THE. HELL. UP. If it was C.O.D you'd be running in and dying 10 times in a row before you hear a hoard of angry 12 years olds screaming 'camper! camper!' down the microphone shortly before they cry themselves to sleep at night over a poorly made video game they should have never bought.
With Battlefield 3 well on the way too i'll be surprised if C.O.D survive's much longer.
I think the choice is pretty obvious myself!
Wednesday 18 May 2011
Some Space Images I Really Like =)
So today i thought i'd upload some hubble images i really like and i think everyone should see in their lifetime. This is an image of our galaxy and our position within it! A find this to be a very humbling and informative image.
This is another beautiful image taken by the hubble telescope and is another fine example of our minuscule place within the universe as a whole.
This is an image of the hubble telescope itself majestically floating above the earth. I find it amazing to think about how just below the image the blue glow of the earth is home to everything and everyone we know, our little space in the universe. The home of all of our history, knowledge and life. It's a shame the majority of humanity has such little respect for it.
y
This is perhaps the most famous image taken by the hubble, there is so much knowledge to gain from this simple image.
Firstly, almost every point of light you see is not a star, but a whole galaxy containing billions or even trillions of stars. These vast numbers are often hard to imagine but this picture does justice in displaying the vast size of our universe. It's important to note that the hubble scanned a relatively small (2.5 arcminutes across, two parts in a million of the whole sky) and empty looking bit of space and then looked further into the universe than ever before; this is what you can see even if you look into an apparently 'empty' bit of space if you look far enough.
It's also important to note that when you look into space you are in fact looking back in time this is because light takes time to reach us. It takes the suns light 8 minutes to travel to our
planet, so in theory if the sun suddenly disappeared we wouldn't even know for 8 minutes.
The same knowledge applies here, but instead of looking back in time a mere 8 minutes we're looking back into the early parts of the universe some 400-800 million years after the big bang. In relation to the age of the universe which is at least 15 billions years old, this is absolutely nothing; these are the oldest observed celestial objects known to man.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)