Desde 2009 está em vigor oficialmente em Portugal e no Brasil o Acordo Ortográfico da Língua Portuguesa (AO), sendo esperada a sua rápida adoção por parte de outros países da CPLP. Uma das questões potencialmente levantadas pelo AO tem que ver com a dificuldade e o tempo que acarreta a transição, por parte de instituições e do público em geral, para a nova ortografia. O Lince é uma ferramenta de apoio à aplicação do AO que tem como objetivo fazer face a estas necessidades, permitindo uma rápida adaptação às novas regras ao facilitar a atualização ortográfica de grandes volumes de texto de modo simples.
O que é o Lince
O Lince converte o texto de ficheiros nos formatos mais comuns para a nova ortografia, gravando o resultado num novo ficheiro com o nome do original, que é mantido, acrescido da indicação de se tratar do ficheiro 'convertido'.
O Lince não é um editor de texto nem um verificador ou corretor ortográfico, e apenas converte texto escrito corretamente segundo os instumentos ortográficos anteriormente em vigor, nomeadamente o Formulário Ortográfico de 1943, seguido no Brasil, e o Acordo Ortográfico da Língua Portuguesa de 1945, vigente nos restantes países da CPLP, segundo as suas revisões de 1971 e 1973, respetivamente.
Tendo sido pensado tanto para o público em geral como para utilizadores com necessidades específicas, como empresas e profissionais que lidam com a língua portuguesa, o Lince oferece uma interface de utilização muito simples e também algumas opções de configuração.
Os formatos suportados são:
DOC e DOCX - documentos Microsoft Word
HTML - páginas web
ODT - documentos do OpenOffice.org
PDF - formato de documento portátil*No caso específico do formato PDF, os ficheiros terão que ter sido criados a partir de um ficheiro de texto (e não, por exemplo, a partir de uma digitalização) e o resultado da conversão será um ficheiro de formato HTML em que parte da formatação é perdida. Estas limitações são impostas pelas especificidades do formato PDF.
RTF - formato de texto rico
TXT - documentos de texto
XML - linguagem de marcação
qualquer documento de texto simples sem anotação
Principais características
O Lince é uma aplicação que converte o texto de ficheiros dos formatos listados acima para a grafia do novo acordo. A aplicação cria uma cópia com nome diferente e já com o texto convertido em que, com exceção dos ficheiros PDF (cf. nota acima), todo o conteúdo e formatação dos textos são mantidos.
O Lince foi pensado de modo a fazer dele uma ferramenta universal, rápida, simples e robusta. Sendo uma ferramenta construída com financiamento público, é, antes de tudo, gratuita e livremente distribuível, como todos os recursos disponíveis no Portal, e é suportado por todos os sistemas operativos mais usados.
Embora a performance dependa necessariamente das capacidades do computador em que é utilizado, o Lince permite converter na generalidade dos sistemas, mesmo os menos poderosos, qualquer número de ficheiros de qualquer dimensão em simultâneo.
Os critérios de interpretação do Acordo Ortográfico são os seguidos para o Vocabulário Ortográfico do Português (VOP), seu vocabulário de base, cujo milhão e meio de formas flexionadas serviu de universo para a base de dados do Lince. Esta base de dados inclui não apenas formas explícitas, mas também elementos de formação que podem ser usados para construir novas palavras; isto permitiu economia e eliminação de redundâncias no tratamento, por exemplo, de palavras prefixadas, compostas e de formas verbais empregadas com pronome.
A aplicação inclui o texto do novo Acordo Ortográfico, bem como uma apresentação das principais mudanças, os critérios de interpretação seguidos e uma secção de ajuda.
Opções e definições
O Lince foi desenvolvido de modo a servir igualmente o interesse do público em geral e de utilizadores especializados. Por isso, integra uma área de opções avançadas que possibilita configurar algumas preferências.
Estas opções permitem ao utilizador escolher, por exemplo, a sua variante preferida em casos de opcionalidade gerados pelo AO nas alterações que provoca no Acordo Ortográfico de 1945. Para facilitar estas definições, as formas que apresentam opcionalidade são agrupadas em lemas, que por sua vez são agrupados com palavras com afinidades morfológicas que partilham o facto de passarem a apresentar variação. Assim, por exemplo, o utilizador pode optar entre punct ou punt, afetando deste modo todas as formas que contenham aquela sequência e apresentem variação, como acupun(c)tura, acupun(c)turar e eletropun(c)tura, entre outras. No entanto, dado que há falantes que não têm sempre a mesma preferência para palavras próximas, é possível escolher isoladamente a variante preferida para cada palavra. Isto permite também que os valores de origem, determinados pela equipa do Lince a partir de fontes de referência, possam dar origem a um grupo não homogéneo de palavras, como no caso de aspec / aspect, dado que, embora seja mais frequente a preferência dos falantes recair em aspeto (por oposição a aspecto), no caso de aspectual (por oposição a aspetual) é mais comum o c ser pronunciado.
Além disto, o Lince permite marcar excertos de texto que se queiram excluir da conversão através de marcadores que podem ser colocados no início e no fim da sequência que deseja não converter. Estes marcadores podem eles próprios ser definidos pelo utilizador, de modo a evitar interferências com outras marcações que possam já existir no documento e de modo a tirar partido de marcação prévia já existente no ficheiro.
As definições do utilizador podem ser exportadas de modo a gravar perfis de utilização específicos, permitindo, por exemplo, voltar rapidamente às definições de origem da aplicação sem no entanto perder a personalização feita. As definições gravadas podem facilmente ser carregadas novamente na aplicação, restaurando o estado anterior da personalização feita.
Lince permite ainda definir o local em que são guardados os ficheiros com o texto convertido, facilitando a organização de versões sempre que se procura converter sistematicamente um grande número de textos.
Para usar a aplicação, que é gratuita e de distribuição livre, escolha o instalador adequado.
•Windows
•Mac OS X
•Linux
O Lince exige Java em versão 1.5 ou superior, que pode descarregar AQUI
Fonte:http://www.portaldalinguaportuguesa.org/
12 de fevereiro de 2011
Nokia N8 Review: Nokia's New Flagship.
I remember one of the first mobile phones I ever used being a Nokia 5110i. It was among Nokia’s earliest of devices that packed an easy to use and straightforward interface in a supremely well-built package.
Since we didn’t have as many phone launches each month back then as there are stars in the sky, the 5110i served me very well for more than 3 years without showing any signs of aging. That was in the mid to late 90’s.
Fast forward to the end of this decade and we see Nokia’s current flagship, the N8-00, continuing to hold on to the Nokia tradition of building what are arguably some of the best constructed mobile devices on the market. In fact in many ways, with the Nokia N8-00 (referred to as the N8 from here on) it seems as though Nokia has let its hardware and industrial design teams have a field day; this phone feels almost over engineered when held in your hands. While the current flagship demonstrates Nokia’s engineering prowess quite well, previous models seemed to epitomize what I felt was the company’s philosophy; build the software around the hardware. This worked just perfectly for as long as mobile phones were just that, devices used to make and receive calls and/or texts.
Sometime in the last decade, Apple, Google, Palm and Microsoft redefined mobile experiences, and as a result old flaws have slowly become gaping holes in the Finnish device manufacturer’s proverbial armor.
The devil is in the details…
The N8’s symmetric design is attractive in a very understated manner. It won’t immediately grab your attention in any way if you look at it. The 3.5” 640 x 360 AMOLED screen commands the majority of the real estate on the front with tapering edges on all 4 corners. The menu/home button at the bottom left corner is the only detail on the face of the phone which narrowly saves the N8 design from being branded bland.
While the button did seem a bit oddly placed when I first saw it, the overall profile and weight distribution of the phone didn’t lead to any issues in actual use (although left-handed users may disagree).
Upon closer inspection, you will find the front facing VGA camera, the ambient light sensor and the proximity sensor sitting behind the (Gorilla) glass on the top right corner. The left side houses a well-constructed but tad finicky and plastic “suicide” door of sorts to cover the microSD and SIM card slots. There’s also a multifunction micro-USB port (more on this later) and a charging light indicator. The right side seems a bit busy with the volume controls, a spring loaded screen lock button and a 2-stage camera shutter button. This is the only part of the phone that I have issues with, when it comes to design. The volume controls have a lot of play and don’t give good feedback when pressed. The spring loaded screen lock button, while a good idea in itself, is not well placed. On multiple occasions, I kept hitting the volume button while attempting to lock the phone.
The left and right sides of the Nokia N8. Notice how it cannot lay flat on its back.
The top of the phone plays host to a 3.5mm jack (that can also serve as an AV-output if used with the appropriate connector), and a mini-HDMI port hidden behind a plastic flap and the power/profile selection button. At the bottom you will find a lone connector for your charger, although it could easily pass off as a microphone because of its placement and size, along with a lanyard or strap port.
The top and bottom of the N8
The rear of the phone prominently shows the N-series branding and houses the crowning jewel of the N8; its 12MP Xenon-flash assisted autofocus camera. Because of the complexity of the camera module and the associated optics used in the N8, the camera itself (along with the loudspeaker) is housed in a bulge, and as a result the phone cannot lay flat on any surface. While that in and of itself isn’t an issue, what concerns me is the possibility of excessive visible wear appearing on the lower part of this bulge as it is the only part of the phone that comes in contact with any surface when the phone is made to rest on its back.
The back of the Nokia N8 (left); What makes up the “bulge” (right)
Also, something I did notice was the fact that just within a week of use, dust started accumulating in the crevice between the top of the bulge and the back of the phone.
While the design may get mixed feedback, what will garner unanimous praise is the build quality and overall construction of the device. The unibody N8 is constructed of anodized aluminum and has a smooth, matte-like finish to it. It is available in Orange, Green, Blue, White and Gray – which as you can tell was the color of our review unit. While not as grippy as the soft touch rubber finish that some devices come with, it is light years ahead of the cheap, glossy black plastic that clads a lot of phones these days. Also, by design, the aluminum back of the N8 acts as a heat dissipation surface. So with prolonged use, it does get a bit warm…but nothing toasty. Another reason why the phone feels so well put together is because Nokia has taken a leaf out of Apple’s design book and gone ahead with a non-user replaceable battery, and hence eliminated the need for a battery opening in the N8 chassis. But reports seem to suggest that the battery isn’t all that hard to get to and replace, should the need arise. So those exposed torx screws aren’t just for show…
Since we didn’t have as many phone launches each month back then as there are stars in the sky, the 5110i served me very well for more than 3 years without showing any signs of aging. That was in the mid to late 90’s.
Fast forward to the end of this decade and we see Nokia’s current flagship, the N8-00, continuing to hold on to the Nokia tradition of building what are arguably some of the best constructed mobile devices on the market. In fact in many ways, with the Nokia N8-00 (referred to as the N8 from here on) it seems as though Nokia has let its hardware and industrial design teams have a field day; this phone feels almost over engineered when held in your hands. While the current flagship demonstrates Nokia’s engineering prowess quite well, previous models seemed to epitomize what I felt was the company’s philosophy; build the software around the hardware. This worked just perfectly for as long as mobile phones were just that, devices used to make and receive calls and/or texts.
Sometime in the last decade, Apple, Google, Palm and Microsoft redefined mobile experiences, and as a result old flaws have slowly become gaping holes in the Finnish device manufacturer’s proverbial armor.
The devil is in the details…
The N8’s symmetric design is attractive in a very understated manner. It won’t immediately grab your attention in any way if you look at it. The 3.5” 640 x 360 AMOLED screen commands the majority of the real estate on the front with tapering edges on all 4 corners. The menu/home button at the bottom left corner is the only detail on the face of the phone which narrowly saves the N8 design from being branded bland.
While the button did seem a bit oddly placed when I first saw it, the overall profile and weight distribution of the phone didn’t lead to any issues in actual use (although left-handed users may disagree).
Upon closer inspection, you will find the front facing VGA camera, the ambient light sensor and the proximity sensor sitting behind the (Gorilla) glass on the top right corner. The left side houses a well-constructed but tad finicky and plastic “suicide” door of sorts to cover the microSD and SIM card slots. There’s also a multifunction micro-USB port (more on this later) and a charging light indicator. The right side seems a bit busy with the volume controls, a spring loaded screen lock button and a 2-stage camera shutter button. This is the only part of the phone that I have issues with, when it comes to design. The volume controls have a lot of play and don’t give good feedback when pressed. The spring loaded screen lock button, while a good idea in itself, is not well placed. On multiple occasions, I kept hitting the volume button while attempting to lock the phone.
The left and right sides of the Nokia N8. Notice how it cannot lay flat on its back.
The top of the phone plays host to a 3.5mm jack (that can also serve as an AV-output if used with the appropriate connector), and a mini-HDMI port hidden behind a plastic flap and the power/profile selection button. At the bottom you will find a lone connector for your charger, although it could easily pass off as a microphone because of its placement and size, along with a lanyard or strap port.
The top and bottom of the N8
The rear of the phone prominently shows the N-series branding and houses the crowning jewel of the N8; its 12MP Xenon-flash assisted autofocus camera. Because of the complexity of the camera module and the associated optics used in the N8, the camera itself (along with the loudspeaker) is housed in a bulge, and as a result the phone cannot lay flat on any surface. While that in and of itself isn’t an issue, what concerns me is the possibility of excessive visible wear appearing on the lower part of this bulge as it is the only part of the phone that comes in contact with any surface when the phone is made to rest on its back.
The back of the Nokia N8 (left); What makes up the “bulge” (right)
Also, something I did notice was the fact that just within a week of use, dust started accumulating in the crevice between the top of the bulge and the back of the phone.
While the design may get mixed feedback, what will garner unanimous praise is the build quality and overall construction of the device. The unibody N8 is constructed of anodized aluminum and has a smooth, matte-like finish to it. It is available in Orange, Green, Blue, White and Gray – which as you can tell was the color of our review unit. While not as grippy as the soft touch rubber finish that some devices come with, it is light years ahead of the cheap, glossy black plastic that clads a lot of phones these days. Also, by design, the aluminum back of the N8 acts as a heat dissipation surface. So with prolonged use, it does get a bit warm…but nothing toasty. Another reason why the phone feels so well put together is because Nokia has taken a leaf out of Apple’s design book and gone ahead with a non-user replaceable battery, and hence eliminated the need for a battery opening in the N8 chassis. But reports seem to suggest that the battery isn’t all that hard to get to and replace, should the need arise. So those exposed torx screws aren’t just for show…
Dell U3011 Review: Dell's New 30-inch Flagship.
If there's one thing I've learned doing display reviews, it's that the 30-inch segment represents (as it should) the best of the best. Entries here have the most input options, features, best panels, and the highest resolution you can get for the money.
It's a breath of fresh air to play with a real 16:10, 2560x1600 display after toying with 1080P monotony for so long. If the displays industry worked anything like the CPU industry, we'd have 300 PPI displays with no response lag, infinite contrast, and all for way less than we're paying now. If there was a new year's resolution display manufacturers should make, it's that they stop making 1080P panels in 2011.
Anyhow, today we're talking about the Dell U3011. I got the chance to review HP's 30 inch monitor, the ZR30w, back when it launched, and will use it as a mental comparison. The Dell U3011 is a refresh of the Dell U3008WFP, and brings a 10-bit per color panel with 12-bit internal processing, more input options, factory calibration (more on that later), and is supposedly 1 ms faster in the response time department.
The specs for Dell's new 30 inch display are in the table below:
Dell UltraSharp U3011
Video Inputs 2xHDMI, 2xDVI-D w/HDCP, 1xDisplayPort, VGA (D-SUB), Component
Audio Output 3x3.5mm audio jacks (5.1 audio out supported)
Panel Type H-IPS with CCFL Backlight (Panel: PH5NY07U076L)
Pixel Pitch 0.2505 mm
Colors 1.07 billion (30 BPP color - 12 BPC internal processing)
Brightness 370 nits (typical)
Contrast Ratio 1,000:1, or 100,000:1 (dynamic)
Response Time 7 ms (GTG), 17 ms (GTX max)
Viewable Size 30" (756.23 mm)
Resolution 2560 x 1600 at 60 Hz
Viewing Angle 178 degrees horizontal and vertical
Power Consumption (operation) 250 watts (max), 110 watts (typical)
Power Consumption (standby) 2 watts standby, 1 watt off
Screen Treatment Matte/Anti-Glare, Hard Coating
Height-Adjustable Yes: 3.55 inches travel
Tilt Yes: 10 degrees - 20 degrees
Pivot No
Swivel Yes
VESA Wall Mounting Yes: 100 mm x 100 mm
Dimensions w/ Base (WxHxD) 27.34" (694.5 mm) x 22.5" (571.3 mm) x 8.32" (211.3 mm)
Weight 27.72 lbs (12.6 kg) with stand, 20.40 lbs (9.3 kg) without stand
Additional Features Integrated USB 2.0 hub with 4 USB ports, 7 in 1 media reader, 5.1 audio pass through, factory calibration
Limited Warranty 3 years - repair or replacement
Accessories Power, DVI, DisplayPort, VGA cables. Factory Calibration Report.
Price U3011: $1349.00
So first up is the display itself. Aesthetically it's almost exactly what you'd expect from Dell in a monitor, and follows their relatively consistent industrial design quite well. The display bezel is entirely black plastic just like we've seen with almost every other Dell, and there's a huge square black stand.
The U3011 has a silver-colored strip that runs around the outside of the display, much like the ZR30w has. However, unlike HP's metal strip, Dell's is plastic. The display bezel on the U3011 is just under 1 cm thinner at the edge than HP's, though both get much thicker at the center.
The stand the U3011 comes with is decently sturdy, providing tilt, rotation and height adjustment, but no pivot. Height on the U3011 can adjust from about 3 cm to 12 cm from the top of the plastic stand to the bottom of the bezel. Dell advertises 10 cm of travel - I can definitely see that much travel, which is definitely welcome. The other added bonus is that HDMI, DVI, and DisplayPort cables don't crash into the plastic base and bend worrisomely even with the display at its lowest height adjustment setting. I wish the U3011 went up a bit higher, because it seems like I inevitably use the highest adjustment point whenever I'm connecting cables, but too lazy to rotate the whole monitor. It's just shy of being tall enough where I can squeeze my head underneath - oh c'mon, everyone does that, right?
There's also about 30 degrees of tilt in the up direction, and about 5 degrees downwards.
Rotation on the base is about +/- 30 degrees, which is more than sufficient. Thankfully, the base on the U3011 is nice and smooth through the rotation, with no annoying backlash or chatter which generally makes entire displays and desks shudder.
Dell has placed the 7 in 1 card reader (xD/SD/MS/MMC) on the left side of the U3011. Down below it are two of the four USB 2.0 ports connected to the U3011's internal hub.
The lower one has a power symbol which indicates that it's capable of supplying more current - 1.5 amps of it to be exact, for 7.5 watts of charging power. Though that should be more than sufficient to charge an iPad, connecting one resulted in the same "Not Charging" behavior one would see from a normal 500 mA port. It's unclear to me whether the USB charging specification is being implemented correctly on the display or not. Other devices charge fine, but likewise do so on normal 500 mA ports. In addition, the USB ports only provide power when the upstream USB-B port is connected - you can't use the ports to just charge devices without connecting the hub to something. I tested a 32 GB SD card in the reader, which worked just fine as well.
The backside of the U3011 is nothing new or special if you've seen Dell's other recent display designs. It's just scaled up to be larger, and looks the same. Personally, I find it classy and applaud the consistency, even if the Dell logo up top is positively gigantic (but then again, everyone does that). The stand has a cable routing port, but lacks positioning clips or guides like I've seen on other displays.
Finally, the I/O ports on the U3011 are where they should be at the base of the display, but high enough up that we don't run into cable routing issues. The U3011 also has a nice sticker facing outwards with all the ports positioned appropriately - something super useful when connecting things up from a weird contorted angle. The U3011 provides a ton of input options - two DVI-D ports, two HDMI 1.3a ports with Deep Color support, D-SUB for VGA, DisplayPort, and component video in. Moving along are the two remaining USB 2.0 downstream ports, USB-B upstream port, and lastly three 3.5mm audio out jacks for doing 5.1 audio pass through from HDMI. Oh, there's also a DC power jack in case you're using the Dell speaker bar with the U3011 which is an added accessory - we didn't get a chance to try that. I'd say the input options on the U3011 are impressive overall, just like we expect from a 30-inch display.
If you use your own VESA mounts with displays, the U3011 will work as long as you get one beefy enough for it. The weird part about the U3011's mounting arm is that it connects to the 100 mm VESA mount on the backside of the display with 4 T-10 Torx screws. That just seems like an obtuse choice for something which should be easily user-accessible. It's a small nit to pick, but this choice just really puzzles me since I doubt average users have all the Torx bits sitting around.
The U3011 is supposed to come calibrated from the factory, accompanied by a calibration report showing Delta-E tracking averaging below 5.0. Our U3011 came with no such report, and as we'll show later also didn't perform very well out of box in our color tracking validation test. We later learned that this is because our U3011 is a pre-production sample which is identical to the shipping model, just without factory calibration. In addition our panel was the A00 revision.
Last but not least is packaging. The U3011 packaging is generic and doesn't draw attention - there's Dell written on it, and U3011 on the corner. It's like the other Dell packaging I've seen before. What I found interesting is that the U3011 comes fully assembled and in one piece inside the box. The mounting arm is preattached, and two styrofoam pieces at top and bottom which hold it securely. The U3011 packaging is actually far smaller than HP's for the ZR30w
It's a breath of fresh air to play with a real 16:10, 2560x1600 display after toying with 1080P monotony for so long. If the displays industry worked anything like the CPU industry, we'd have 300 PPI displays with no response lag, infinite contrast, and all for way less than we're paying now. If there was a new year's resolution display manufacturers should make, it's that they stop making 1080P panels in 2011.
Anyhow, today we're talking about the Dell U3011. I got the chance to review HP's 30 inch monitor, the ZR30w, back when it launched, and will use it as a mental comparison. The Dell U3011 is a refresh of the Dell U3008WFP, and brings a 10-bit per color panel with 12-bit internal processing, more input options, factory calibration (more on that later), and is supposedly 1 ms faster in the response time department.
The specs for Dell's new 30 inch display are in the table below:
Dell UltraSharp U3011
Video Inputs 2xHDMI, 2xDVI-D w/HDCP, 1xDisplayPort, VGA (D-SUB), Component
Audio Output 3x3.5mm audio jacks (5.1 audio out supported)
Panel Type H-IPS with CCFL Backlight (Panel: PH5NY07U076L)
Pixel Pitch 0.2505 mm
Colors 1.07 billion (30 BPP color - 12 BPC internal processing)
Brightness 370 nits (typical)
Contrast Ratio 1,000:1, or 100,000:1 (dynamic)
Response Time 7 ms (GTG), 17 ms (GTX max)
Viewable Size 30" (756.23 mm)
Resolution 2560 x 1600 at 60 Hz
Viewing Angle 178 degrees horizontal and vertical
Power Consumption (operation) 250 watts (max), 110 watts (typical)
Power Consumption (standby) 2 watts standby, 1 watt off
Screen Treatment Matte/Anti-Glare, Hard Coating
Height-Adjustable Yes: 3.55 inches travel
Tilt Yes: 10 degrees - 20 degrees
Pivot No
Swivel Yes
VESA Wall Mounting Yes: 100 mm x 100 mm
Dimensions w/ Base (WxHxD) 27.34" (694.5 mm) x 22.5" (571.3 mm) x 8.32" (211.3 mm)
Weight 27.72 lbs (12.6 kg) with stand, 20.40 lbs (9.3 kg) without stand
Additional Features Integrated USB 2.0 hub with 4 USB ports, 7 in 1 media reader, 5.1 audio pass through, factory calibration
Limited Warranty 3 years - repair or replacement
Accessories Power, DVI, DisplayPort, VGA cables. Factory Calibration Report.
Price U3011: $1349.00
So first up is the display itself. Aesthetically it's almost exactly what you'd expect from Dell in a monitor, and follows their relatively consistent industrial design quite well. The display bezel is entirely black plastic just like we've seen with almost every other Dell, and there's a huge square black stand.
The U3011 has a silver-colored strip that runs around the outside of the display, much like the ZR30w has. However, unlike HP's metal strip, Dell's is plastic. The display bezel on the U3011 is just under 1 cm thinner at the edge than HP's, though both get much thicker at the center.
The stand the U3011 comes with is decently sturdy, providing tilt, rotation and height adjustment, but no pivot. Height on the U3011 can adjust from about 3 cm to 12 cm from the top of the plastic stand to the bottom of the bezel. Dell advertises 10 cm of travel - I can definitely see that much travel, which is definitely welcome. The other added bonus is that HDMI, DVI, and DisplayPort cables don't crash into the plastic base and bend worrisomely even with the display at its lowest height adjustment setting. I wish the U3011 went up a bit higher, because it seems like I inevitably use the highest adjustment point whenever I'm connecting cables, but too lazy to rotate the whole monitor. It's just shy of being tall enough where I can squeeze my head underneath - oh c'mon, everyone does that, right?
There's also about 30 degrees of tilt in the up direction, and about 5 degrees downwards.
Rotation on the base is about +/- 30 degrees, which is more than sufficient. Thankfully, the base on the U3011 is nice and smooth through the rotation, with no annoying backlash or chatter which generally makes entire displays and desks shudder.
Dell has placed the 7 in 1 card reader (xD/SD/MS/MMC) on the left side of the U3011. Down below it are two of the four USB 2.0 ports connected to the U3011's internal hub.
The lower one has a power symbol which indicates that it's capable of supplying more current - 1.5 amps of it to be exact, for 7.5 watts of charging power. Though that should be more than sufficient to charge an iPad, connecting one resulted in the same "Not Charging" behavior one would see from a normal 500 mA port. It's unclear to me whether the USB charging specification is being implemented correctly on the display or not. Other devices charge fine, but likewise do so on normal 500 mA ports. In addition, the USB ports only provide power when the upstream USB-B port is connected - you can't use the ports to just charge devices without connecting the hub to something. I tested a 32 GB SD card in the reader, which worked just fine as well.
The backside of the U3011 is nothing new or special if you've seen Dell's other recent display designs. It's just scaled up to be larger, and looks the same. Personally, I find it classy and applaud the consistency, even if the Dell logo up top is positively gigantic (but then again, everyone does that). The stand has a cable routing port, but lacks positioning clips or guides like I've seen on other displays.
Finally, the I/O ports on the U3011 are where they should be at the base of the display, but high enough up that we don't run into cable routing issues. The U3011 also has a nice sticker facing outwards with all the ports positioned appropriately - something super useful when connecting things up from a weird contorted angle. The U3011 provides a ton of input options - two DVI-D ports, two HDMI 1.3a ports with Deep Color support, D-SUB for VGA, DisplayPort, and component video in. Moving along are the two remaining USB 2.0 downstream ports, USB-B upstream port, and lastly three 3.5mm audio out jacks for doing 5.1 audio pass through from HDMI. Oh, there's also a DC power jack in case you're using the Dell speaker bar with the U3011 which is an added accessory - we didn't get a chance to try that. I'd say the input options on the U3011 are impressive overall, just like we expect from a 30-inch display.
If you use your own VESA mounts with displays, the U3011 will work as long as you get one beefy enough for it. The weird part about the U3011's mounting arm is that it connects to the 100 mm VESA mount on the backside of the display with 4 T-10 Torx screws. That just seems like an obtuse choice for something which should be easily user-accessible. It's a small nit to pick, but this choice just really puzzles me since I doubt average users have all the Torx bits sitting around.
The U3011 is supposed to come calibrated from the factory, accompanied by a calibration report showing Delta-E tracking averaging below 5.0. Our U3011 came with no such report, and as we'll show later also didn't perform very well out of box in our color tracking validation test. We later learned that this is because our U3011 is a pre-production sample which is identical to the shipping model, just without factory calibration. In addition our panel was the A00 revision.
Last but not least is packaging. The U3011 packaging is generic and doesn't draw attention - there's Dell written on it, and U3011 on the corner. It's like the other Dell packaging I've seen before. What I found interesting is that the U3011 comes fully assembled and in one piece inside the box. The mounting arm is preattached, and two styrofoam pieces at top and bottom which hold it securely. The U3011 packaging is actually far smaller than HP's for the ZR30w
Flash Player 10.2 Boosts Video with Less CPU Power.
Better video with less CPU power is promised by Adobe's Flash Player 10.2, which uses a hardware-acceleration technology called Stage Video. Adobe said Stage Video playback is 34 times more efficient and needs only one to 15 percent CPU usage for greater battery life. Flash Player 10.2 also supports multiple displays and better text readability.
Adobe Systems has released version 10.2 of its Flash Player, which introduces a hardware Relevant Products/Services-accelerated video Relevant Products/Services technology called Stage Video. The company said Stage Video offers higher-quality video "while using dramatically less processing power Relevant Products/Services, giving users a better experience, greater performance, and longer battery Relevant Products/Services life."
In fact, Adobe said, when tested on supported systems, Stage Video was 34 times more efficient than the previous video playback on Flash. Supported systems include Windows 7, Vista and XP; Windows Server 2003 and 2008; Mac OS X 10.4 through 10.6; three versions of Linux; and Solaris 10.
'Slick HD Home Theaters'
Adobe said 1080p HD video can now be played back with only one to 15 percent CPU usage on a Mac or Windows machine using various browsers. In its tests, the company said, Flash Player 10.2 was used with Stage Video on a two-year-old Mac Mini and a low-power GPU-enabled Windows netbook, and "smooth full HD 1080p video" used less than eight percent of the CPU. More current or more powerful computers can be expected to use less.
"Many millions of additional PCs, from netbooks to desktops, can now become slick HD home theaters on the web," the company said.
Flash Player 10.1 has hardware-accelerated decoding for H.264, on which Stage Video builds. But the impact Adobe is describing may take some time to ripple through the web, as web sites and content providers need to update their site video players so Stage Video can be presented. Video libraries don't need updating.
The Flash technology is widespread. According to Adobe, Flash content reaches between 98 and 99 percent of all Internet users. Player 10.1 has an 87.4 percent penetration in the U.S. and Canada, and 86.2 percent in Europe, plus more than 80 percent in other markets. The company said 80 percent penetration is the tipping point, when developers start to use features in a new version.
Other New Features
While Stage Video is the headliner for 10.2, there are several other new features as well. There's multiple display full screen support, so that, for instance, a user can watch Flash video on one screen and use a Flash-based tool or game on another.
There's also support for custom native mouse cursors for creating static and animated cursors, sub-pixel text rendering enhancements to enhance text readability in Flash, and support for the GPU rendering technology in Microsoft Relevant Products/Services's new Internet Explorer 9 browser.
Jeffrey Hammond, an analyst with industry research firm Forrester, said Stage Video's impact could be big "as we see new tablets and other ARM-based devices with Nvidia chipsets" lend hardware acceleration to high-quality video playback.
The result, he said, will be "much longer battery life" while playing HD video, and a boon for long-distance travelers who want to watch video without continually swapping batteries or recharging.
In the struggle against Apple, which has disparaged Flash as being a glutton for memory and power, Hammond said Stage Video will show that the technology runs "pretty efficiently."
Adobe Systems has released version 10.2 of its Flash Player, which introduces a hardware Relevant Products/Services-accelerated video Relevant Products/Services technology called Stage Video. The company said Stage Video offers higher-quality video "while using dramatically less processing power Relevant Products/Services, giving users a better experience, greater performance, and longer battery Relevant Products/Services life."
In fact, Adobe said, when tested on supported systems, Stage Video was 34 times more efficient than the previous video playback on Flash. Supported systems include Windows 7, Vista and XP; Windows Server 2003 and 2008; Mac OS X 10.4 through 10.6; three versions of Linux; and Solaris 10.
'Slick HD Home Theaters'
Adobe said 1080p HD video can now be played back with only one to 15 percent CPU usage on a Mac or Windows machine using various browsers. In its tests, the company said, Flash Player 10.2 was used with Stage Video on a two-year-old Mac Mini and a low-power GPU-enabled Windows netbook, and "smooth full HD 1080p video" used less than eight percent of the CPU. More current or more powerful computers can be expected to use less.
"Many millions of additional PCs, from netbooks to desktops, can now become slick HD home theaters on the web," the company said.
Flash Player 10.1 has hardware-accelerated decoding for H.264, on which Stage Video builds. But the impact Adobe is describing may take some time to ripple through the web, as web sites and content providers need to update their site video players so Stage Video can be presented. Video libraries don't need updating.
The Flash technology is widespread. According to Adobe, Flash content reaches between 98 and 99 percent of all Internet users. Player 10.1 has an 87.4 percent penetration in the U.S. and Canada, and 86.2 percent in Europe, plus more than 80 percent in other markets. The company said 80 percent penetration is the tipping point, when developers start to use features in a new version.
Other New Features
While Stage Video is the headliner for 10.2, there are several other new features as well. There's multiple display full screen support, so that, for instance, a user can watch Flash video on one screen and use a Flash-based tool or game on another.
There's also support for custom native mouse cursors for creating static and animated cursors, sub-pixel text rendering enhancements to enhance text readability in Flash, and support for the GPU rendering technology in Microsoft Relevant Products/Services's new Internet Explorer 9 browser.
Jeffrey Hammond, an analyst with industry research firm Forrester, said Stage Video's impact could be big "as we see new tablets and other ARM-based devices with Nvidia chipsets" lend hardware acceleration to high-quality video playback.
The result, he said, will be "much longer battery life" while playing HD video, and a boon for long-distance travelers who want to watch video without continually swapping batteries or recharging.
In the struggle against Apple, which has disparaged Flash as being a glutton for memory and power, Hammond said Stage Video will show that the technology runs "pretty efficiently."
The Battle of the P67 Boards - ASUS vs. Gigabyte at $190.
In the world of motherboards and manufacturer competition, the idea is to beat your competitor. To develop the product, with more features, more fancy gadgets, and perform better than your competitor at every price point.
Today, we pit arguably the two most popular motherboard vendors at a price point that will see a significant number of sales from consumers and enthusiasts alike – the ASUS P8P67 Pro and the Gigabyte P67A-UD4, which were both released during the Sandy Bridge week for $190. Forget all the marketing fluff; this is a showdown!
When a new platform is released, a myriad of motherboards hit the shelves at the same time. Each vendor will usually come out with a few products, targeting their prospective markets. Big motherboard players, like ASUS and Gigabyte, will release motherboards ranging from the cheap low end, to that high-end halo product. They will bombard you with data, ideas, concepts, and reasons why their high-end products are better than their low end – in terms of numbers, features, or what is in the box. Whether you can really trust what each manufacturer says on the box depends on the interpretations of the benchmarks and analyses by review sites like AnandTech.
At the time of writing, Newegg has 56 Sandy Bridge motherboards available – 22 for H67 and 34 for P67. Of those in the P67 range, you can pick up an Intel motherboard for as little as $115, or an ASUS as expensive as $320. So what makes that expensive motherboard worth almost three times as much as the low-end board? What makes a $200 board better than a $150 board? Features? Warranty? Overclockability? Price? All of these points, while valid, carry different weight with every different consumer.
I reviewed the ASRock P67 Extreme4 at the Sandy Bridge release, and they offered a great product that is available online for $153. Today, we have two boards released at $190 by two of the biggest motherboard manufacturers – the ASUS P8P67 Pro, and the Gigabyte P67A-UD4. Firstly, the question is: if you had $190, which one would you buy? Then secondly, we have to ask: are these boards worth the ~$40 difference to the P67 Extreme4? Luckily, at least in my opinion, after using all three of the boards, the answers to both of these questions were self-evident.
Today, we pit arguably the two most popular motherboard vendors at a price point that will see a significant number of sales from consumers and enthusiasts alike – the ASUS P8P67 Pro and the Gigabyte P67A-UD4, which were both released during the Sandy Bridge week for $190. Forget all the marketing fluff; this is a showdown!
When a new platform is released, a myriad of motherboards hit the shelves at the same time. Each vendor will usually come out with a few products, targeting their prospective markets. Big motherboard players, like ASUS and Gigabyte, will release motherboards ranging from the cheap low end, to that high-end halo product. They will bombard you with data, ideas, concepts, and reasons why their high-end products are better than their low end – in terms of numbers, features, or what is in the box. Whether you can really trust what each manufacturer says on the box depends on the interpretations of the benchmarks and analyses by review sites like AnandTech.
At the time of writing, Newegg has 56 Sandy Bridge motherboards available – 22 for H67 and 34 for P67. Of those in the P67 range, you can pick up an Intel motherboard for as little as $115, or an ASUS as expensive as $320. So what makes that expensive motherboard worth almost three times as much as the low-end board? What makes a $200 board better than a $150 board? Features? Warranty? Overclockability? Price? All of these points, while valid, carry different weight with every different consumer.
I reviewed the ASRock P67 Extreme4 at the Sandy Bridge release, and they offered a great product that is available online for $153. Today, we have two boards released at $190 by two of the biggest motherboard manufacturers – the ASUS P8P67 Pro, and the Gigabyte P67A-UD4. Firstly, the question is: if you had $190, which one would you buy? Then secondly, we have to ask: are these boards worth the ~$40 difference to the P67 Extreme4? Luckily, at least in my opinion, after using all three of the boards, the answers to both of these questions were self-evident.
Subscrever:
Mensagens (Atom)