Post your unpopular Technology opinions?

[Mosha]

Are you being intentionally dense or did you literally ignore the part where I explained that higher fps reduces input lag?

The fact that you think this is some huge discovery is what makes this hilarious. The irony that you keep linking water is wet is making this gold.

I assumed this had slightly more depth to your 'scientific' discovery but I guess this really is all you had to offer lol.

[jellmoo]

I know you just jumped into this, but I never said this was wrong or even that I disagreed with it, I obviously agree with it. Dude here just said it was scientifically proven so I was looking to see if he had some sort of study I would have been interested in reading.

But it turns out he just said that as a buzzword because why not lol.

Oh, I'm not saying you did or anything. This is after all a thread about unpopular opinions. I just thought it would be fun to throw in a source link that's actually a pretty interesting watch, if nothing else.

[Mosha]

Oh, I'm not saying you did or anything. This is after all a thread about unpopular opinions. I just thought it would be fun to throw in a source link that's actually a pretty interesting watch, if nothing else.

I see, thanks!

[Kharadin]

The fact that you think this is some huge discovery is what makes this hilarious. The irony that you keep linking water is wet is making this gold.

I assumed this had slightly more depth to your 'scientific' discovery but I guess this really is all you had to offer lol.

You're confused again, despite it being provably true and thus it is scientific fact, your issue with that turn of phrase originates with the first guy you were screeching at for sources.

So you don't need further clarification on how higher fps improves performance?

[Mosha]

You're confused again, despite it being provably true and thus it is scientific fact, your issue with that turn of phrase originates with the first guy you were screeching at for sources.

So you don't need further clarification on how higher fps improves performance?

I mean if all you had to say was that higher fps improves your pcs performance then there never was a question. Sorry for assuming you had something slightly more complex to offer bud.

[Funkyjunky]

I dislike that the term lag has become a synonym for latency.

[Kharadin]

I mean if all you had to say was that higher fps improves your pcs performance then there never was a question. Sorry for assuming you had something slightly more complex to offer bud.

No, I'm saying higher fps reduces the theoretical minimum reaction time that can be detected, up to a limit of around 300fps, corresponding to a lower bound around 0.3ms iirc.

Thus, competitive gamers will literally perform better if able to make use of that reduced input lag threshold.

Does this clarify my point for you?

[Funkyjunky]

I never got the "x breaks if you drop it" anyways like.. maybe don't drop it? Are people just clumsy or what?

ye, i kinda agree with this. Most of my phones have been replaced due to the battery being worn out or me just wanting more features.

But i have dropped my current phone once. It didnt break, but somehow it managed to get bend. I am quite amazed by that the screen didnt shatter and that i now can make dumb jokes about having a foldable phone :>

[Kharadin]

I dislike that the term lag has become a synonym for latency.

I don't follow, aren't they literally synonyms? Lag and latency both refer to a period of time between doing something and something happening, whether it's from keyboard to computer or computer to internet back to computer, or am I missing something?

[locketto]

i5 4th gen can run any game in high quality (with good videocard)

[Mosha]

No, I'm saying higher fps reduces the theoretical minimum reaction time that can be detected, up to a limit of around 300fps, corresponding to a lower bound around 0.3ms iirc.

Thus, competitive gamers will literally perform better if able to make use of that reduced input lag threshold.

Does this clarify my point for you?

Lol you really just tried to make a super simple concept sound complicated by googling some words and phrases. Bud, I thought you had something more complicated to offer, that's the end of it.

[jellmoo]

I don't follow, aren't they literally synonyms? Lag and latency both refer to a period of time between doing something and something happening, whether it's from keyboard to computer or computer to internet back to computer, or am I missing something?

Not really. High latency can cause lag. Latency refers to a delay in a packet, usually from a server to your machine. Lag is the visual delay of an input and when it happens on screen. They create a similar problem, but are actually different things that can be independent of one another.

[Kharadin]

Lol you really just tried to make a super simple concept sound complicated by googling some words and phrases. Bud, I thought you had something more complicated to offer, that's the end of it.

What do you propose I had to google? You really are doing your best to appear as conceited as possible.

[Mosha]

What do you propose I had to google? You really are doing your best to appear as conceited as possible.

Wow you really do like continuing conversations when confronted with being simple. Sorry for pointing it out to you. Have a good one.

[Kharadin]

Not really. High latency can cause lag. Latency refers to a delay in a packet, usually from a server to your machine. Lag is the visual delay of an input and when it happens on screen. They create a similar problem, but are actually different things that can be independent of one another.

You're using synonyms to refer to two different phenomena, both are examples of either lag or latency but the difference in terminology is of your own choosing. Neither lag nor latency specifically refer to either, they both essentially just mean a delay between an input and an output.

You could argue one is more commonly used to refer to one thing over another for sure but they are still synonymous.

I decided to look it up between my first post and this one.

[Kagthul]

i don't like ssd's. they are far too expensive compared to hdd's.

Um what? THese days, a 1TB SSD is MAYBE 2x as expensive as a 1TB HDD.

- - - Updated - - -

Lol I'm not finding you a source for what is both common knowledge and easy to google.

I'm sorry you seem so offended by the idea that others might be able to inform you on subjects you know amusingly little about.

He doesn't understand how basic debate works.

And he's STILL managing to derail this thread into another "how many FPS can the eye see" which i was DELIBERATELY trying to avoid by telling him to drop it and/or just make a separate fucking thread.

You are required to "source" your data in a debate when the premise you're trying to push/point your trying to make is against the generally understood facts.

I dont have to "prove" that the sun comes up in the east. Because its the accepted fact. If you want to claim otherwise, YOU have to prove that it comes up in the north, or whatever.

The generally accepted facts are that the human eye can see WELL past hundreds of fps, and people can accurately even tell you what fps they are seeing up into the 120-150 range just by looking. Everyone's eyes are different, but thats a general rule.

Ill just leave this here, because at this point my attempts to move this out of this thread and prevent a derailment have failed:

https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrac...nly_see_30fps/

Its written by an eye doctor student. And then has several other optimologist and opthamlogists, and some biomed students contributing.

the TL;DR is:

The USAF, in testing their pilots for visual response time, used a simple test to see if the pilots could distinguish small changes in light. In their experiment a picture of an aircraft was flashed on a screen in a dark room at 1/220th of a second. Pilots were consistently able to "see" the afterimage as well as identify the aircraft. This simple and specific situation not only proves the ability to percieve 1 image within 1/220 of a second, but the ability to interpret higher FPS.

Using a tachistoscope, Samual Renshaw was able to demonstrate that, with training, people can, "grasp nine-digit numbers at 3/1,000,000 of a second."

And for the fool who refused to drop this (i put him on ignore a few pages ago) the reason this is "scientifically proven better" is stone simple. More frames = smoother motion. It looks smoother, more natural, and "better". Thats not something you can have an opinion about. Smoother is better.

The valid opinion that the guy i was quoting had, is wether or not this "better" is worth the additional cost, which is a valid matter to have an opinion on.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

modern tech is evil and rapidly destroying the spirit of humanity

....No... just horribly raised people ruining things.

[Donald Hellscream]

I never got the "x breaks if you drop it" anyways like.. maybe don't drop it? Are people just clumsy or what?

I have dropped my Iphone SE before, well more like it slid out my pocket while I was sitting down as I was wearing loose shorts and the phone being made glass for the most made it easy for it to slip out and of course it got a little scratched up in the corner from landing on the cobblestone, but I mean most people who aren't me would probably buy a case for their mostly glass phone right away rather than waiting until something like it sliding out of their pocket happens.

My previous Iphone 5s survived landing screen first on the tarmac of an airstrip as I was departing a plane, without more than a few notches in the aluminium frame.

[Kagthul]

Human eye can't see more then 30fps

Insert ASCII-Picard Facepalm here.

(remember the whine when Peter Jackson decided to make the Hobbit in 30fps?)

No, because he didn't do that. Film is 24fps. Which is the -bare minimum- required for the human eye to perceive it as fluid motion. He shot in 48fps.

Which was an issue because that particular framerate has some weird issues with juddering and because film-projection (and capturing to film) isn't the same as digital screens or purely digital cameras).

This sums it up but may be tech-speaky:

Joe Kilner - One extra issue with games is that you are outputting an image sampled from a single point in time, whereas a frame of film / TV footage is typically an integration of a set of images over some non-infinitesimal time.

This is something that, once stated, is blatantly obvious to me, but it's something I simply never thought deeply about. What it's saying is that when you render a frame in a game, say the frame at t=1.0 in a game running at 60 FPS, what you're doing is capturing and displaying the visual state of the world at a discrete point in time (i.e. t=1.0). Doing the analogous operation with an analogous physical video camera means you are capturing and compositing the "set of images" between t=1.0 and t=1.016667, because the physical camera doesn't capture a discrete point in time, but rather opens its shutter for 1/60th of a second (0.16667 seconds) and captures for that entire interval. This is why physical cameras have motion blur, but virtual cameras do not (without additional processing, anyway).

This is obvious to anyone with knowledge of 3D graphics or real-world cameras, but it was a cool little revelation for me. In fact, it's sparked my interest enough to start getting more familiar with the subject. I love it when that happens!

Article here: http://accidentalscientist.com/2014/...tml?#gsc.tab=0

Now, can we move the fuck on?

[Phyrexia-KulTiras]

#TRIGERWARNING

Apple isn't as bad as the android haters say it is

It's ok if your grandma uses an eye fone.. but we don't need to hear an essay on how steve jobs is taking your money because your grandma hasn't died yet, and you're mad she's using your pre-death inheritance because she needs a device that just works instead of having to know technology like all of us here on mmo-c.com and thus the cycle of basement dwelling cry babies QQ'ing about iOS vs Droid was born

Bruh... Ever heard of using a period? Also your "arguments" are just some mean comments in hope to trigger people, rather then an actual arugment. You sir, are a dick.