Showing Visitor Messages 141 to 150 of 276
July 19th, 2012 08:42 AMTwiggyI think I'll have to settle for 60 / 60 for Boot Camp this Sunday. I have to do it then, seeing as I don't have any blank media.
I still remember when Intel graphics sucked. Not so with HD Graphics series - I actually can manage 20-30 FPS at native resolution in Skyrim for some reason if I'm playing at low.
July 19th, 2012 08:33 AMArcherWhile playing games on the Air won't be the best experience, go Boot Camp, definitely. Otherwise it's virtualised and the graphics drivers don't have direct access to the GPU and there's massive overheads. 3D games, I mean.
Can't Parallels access your Boot Camp partition? My concern with Boot Camp on an Air is the space limits. I have a 640GB HDD in my Macbook Pro and I feel pushed for space with my Win8 partition taking up 150GB.
EDIT: and PC is fine here, ATM.
July 19th, 2012 07:09 AMTwiggyDid PokéCommunity blow up on you?
July 19th, 2012 07:00 AMTwiggyOf course, when an OS crashes like no tomorrow, it's another problem entirely. (That's what happened with openSUSE and my old desktop)
Nuking Windows on the laptop means that OS X gets a chance to be used all the time, and in the week, it's a pretty awesome experience.
For some reason, the dragon wallpaper I've got on my Mac right now also clued me into color calibration issues.
I've gotten pretty used to how things work in the OS X environment at this point, and I've also installed the Windows 8 Release Preview on Parallels (bought via cheap bundle)... it works better than expected.
When it comes to playing games, would you go Parallels or Boot Camp? I've noticed negligible performance degradation, if any, at least in 2D graphics performance. You know it's a problem when Safari on OS X is relatively slower than IE10 on virtualization
July 19th, 2012 06:40 AMArcherlol, you're a pushy one. Sorry, I've been meaning to reply, I just didn't notice it had been 3 days. lol. All of my computer time has been focused on the Steam sales. I've downloaded about 40GB of games in the last 5 days and played most of them for a good few hours.
Yeah, the gamma certainly helps things appear more vivid. You can pump it up in most graphics control panels (ie. AMD or Nvidia's), although because most screens aren't even close to what they should be, it's still not perfect. The Mac screens (not so much the Airs) are among the best in the industry, partially because they're high quality IPS, partially because they're a standard platform, so they're easy to keep the same. Any LED-backlit IPS panel without anti-glare coating will look pretty good, as does my desktop monitor.
When you say Ubuntu isn't well-designed, I assume you've been using the newer versions with the Unity DE? Yes, it's horrible, but it wasn't when it still used Gnome. Ubuntu 9.04 was my main OS once. If you do want to play around with Linux, Mint isn't bad. Or if you want to try KDE, I always liked openSUSE. You're absolutely right, though. If you want to get used to a new OS, there are two important things to remember. Firstly, don't go back to the old one the minute you get annoyed. Work through it. Secondly, don't expect it to work the same way. Don't try to force your old methods and understandings onto the new platform.
I've just finished studying a unit at uni about educational psychology. We have cognitive patterns called schema, where we learn a process/rule/fact that we apply and eventually internalise (it becomes automatic and we don't think about it or even question it). Now when something comes along that doesn't agree with our current schema, we firstly try to force it to fit. This doesn't work and we get frustrated. In order to learn the new system, we either need to modify the schema or create a new one to deal with the new information. That then needs to be reinforced for it to stick properly. Some people don't do this and don't learn or adapt effectively as a result. This carries over to OS and platform changes. You need to accept the differences and try to appreciate them.
That reply should probably make up for the amount of time I left you hanging. :cer_laugh:
July 19th, 2012 05:31 AMTwiggy(I've noticed that you seem to reply when you think it's feasible... right? So I'll just post a new VM anyway, seeing as you seem to be not responding.)
Seems like even regular PCs should use gamma of 2.2... ideally. I've already seen my share of messed-up monitors. These OEMs don't do the calibration right, huh?
July 16th, 2012 08:13 AMTwiggyI guess I like posting VMs over and over... xD
It's like the edit button never existed!
What about the other way around? OS X font rendering, while now way better than it used to be after tweaking (lines are not fuzzy anymore), I wonder whether there is such a thing as a font rasterizer replacer for OS X. I know some exist for Windows, but as for OS X... I think I'd like to see something that respects hinting (rule number 0: you need this unless your display is Retina-grade). Still, it is now closer to DirectWrite Windows 7 at this point.
Seems like according to my personal adjustments, the ideal gamma for my MacBook Air's screen isn't Mac Standard 2.2, but 2.0. o.O 2.2 goes too dark in the color ramps too early. Or maybe not. 2.2 seems to work for now...
The easiest way to make yourself used to a different OS, assuming that it is well-designed (Ubuntu isn't one), is to obliterate any other OSes to make sure that you're actually spending the time with the OS in question.
July 16th, 2012 07:27 AMArcherDude, the edit button. Please use it.
There are programs to tune Windows' Cleartype, but it won't end up quite the same as OSX fonts.
July 16th, 2012 06:09 AMTwiggyNow, if only there was a way to fudge OS X's font rendering...
July 16th, 2012 06:02 AMTwiggyI don't know, but when I opened the laptop from sleep, I was greeted with a black screen.
All times are UTC -8. The time now is 05:23 PM.