Xbox 360 Fall Update


Recommended Posts

I am not sure how 16:10 support can come. I mean Xbox 360 supports 720p and 1080p so if you support 16:10 resolution it means that people who have a resolution of 1440x900 will be somewhere between 720p and 1080p right ?

I mean i am not too sure about this whole concept. Can someone explain how it can be done and all ?

The Xbox can allready render inbetween resolutions if you have VGA cable, for example instead opf rendering 720p on 720p sets you can instead use their native 768 res (and I still don't understand why 720 sets are made with 768 res)

The biggest problem I suspect is that 16:10 actually bring another aspect ration, not the resolution. and some games may have their GUI hardcoded at 720 or 16:9 aspect, instead of having a dynamic GUI coded based on distances from their closest corner.

The Xbox can allready render inbetween resolutions if you have VGA cable, for example instead opf rendering 720p on 720p sets you can instead use their native 768 res (and I still don't understand why 720 sets are made with 768 res)

The biggest problem I suspect is that 16:10 actually bring another aspect ration, not the resolution. and some games may have their GUI hardcoded at 720 or 16:9 aspect, instead of having a dynamic GUI coded based on distances from their closest corner.

I see

I just hope they introduce 16:10 support since lots of people are using it although i am a little skeptical about it

The biggest problem I suspect is that 16:10 actually bring another aspect ration, not the resolution. and some games may have their GUI hardcoded at 720 or 16:9 aspect, instead of having a dynamic GUI coded based on distances from their closest corner.

True, But I'd even be happy for it just to place black bars top and bottom. My display won't adjust the image but so instead I get a 10% vertical stretch on the VGA input.

I really hope they'd add support for DivX/Xvid, but I don't think it'll ever happen. Which is sad, cuz I have loads of Xvid and h264 vids but Zero WMV files. So much for sharing with my 360. Oh, and maybe better MP3 support? I just can't seem to play 320kbps MP3s?

I really hope they'd add support for DivX/Xvid, but I don't think it'll ever happen. Which is sad, cuz I have loads of Xvid and h264 vids but Zero WMV files. So much for sharing with my 360. Oh, and maybe better MP3 support? I just can't seem to play 320kbps MP3s?

Probability of Xvid/Divx making it to the fall dashboard upgrade is high seeing how Microsoft has already introduced it in the Windows MCE Extenders v2 so i am quite sure that its gonna be coming to Xbox 360 too. Anyways you can always use ffdshow codec in your computer and stream all your xvid/divx files through MCE as Xbox 360 can act as an extender you can easily view stuff.

I see

I just hope they introduce 16:10 support since lots of people are using it although i am a little skeptical about it

It is entirely possible to scale images to different sizes. Technically, Halo 3 does this since it's native resolution is 640p or something, so it has to be scaled up to 720p and then again to 1080p in certain cases, so it's nothing new. The side effect is you get a lot more aliasing than usual (aka "jaggies"). The least Microsoft could do is add in the support for it, it wouldn't be that difficult, but the question remains - do enough people use 16:10 widescreen monitors to justify it? Only Microsoft knows the answer to this.

So why is everyone crying?

Difference in resolution. Xbox 360 jumps from 1388x768 or something like that all the way up to 1920x1080 on VGA with nothing in between. There are two very common widescreen LCD monitor resolutions in between those.

This means my monitor has to scale from the lower res, and it doesn't do as well as 360 at scaling.

On the 360? Not very noticeable. I didn't even know my TV was 16:10 until people started talking about it and I looked it up.

I can notice a difference, especially watching a DVD. The image is stretched out, especially if the aspect ratio is that so you normally wouldn't see any black bars (ie: properly formatted for 16:9), people's heads are stretched out and everyone looks way too skinny. :p

I can notice a difference, especially watching a DVD. The image is stretched out, especially if the aspect ratio is that so you normally wouldn't see any black bars (ie: properly formatted for 16:9), people's heads are stretched out and everyone looks way too skinny. :p

But why would you ever set your TV to stretch???

Only one I really care about is the full support of the media center library. I.e. if Media Center has no problems playing back xvid/divx/etc then I want the 360 to play it. Exactly like I'd expect it to do.

I don't really care about anything else.

I can't get streaming of Xvid/DivX to work on my 360, I get a codec not supported error. So I dunno what's up with that. Using TVersity btw. Though everything plays perfect on my PC. I guess that it's just something in the encodes I have that the 360 doesn't like regardless.

You can. The 360 fully supports that, but some games disable it for bandwidth reasons.

Games disable it when they enter online mode to preserver your network for speed.

soem older games, the coders where sloppy and they just enabled online gamign mode when you started the game :)

BROWSER

i dont care what anyone says about it not being a computer and just a console...theres f'in media center/ movie dls/ they want it to be a computer but not giving the browser...and i really want a browser on my 360

Codec...other stuff would be nice too.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Windows ME was worse.
    • Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 by Razvan Serea TeraCopy is a compact program designed to copy and move files at the maximum possible speed, also providing you with a lot of features. Copy files faster. TeraCopy uses dynamically adjusted buffers to reduce seek times. Asynchronous copy speeds up file transfer between two physical hard drives. Pause and resume transfers. Pause copy process at any time to free up system resources and continue with a single click. Error recovery. In case of copy error, TeraCopy will try several times and in the worse case just skips the file, not terminating the entire transfer. Interactive file list. TeraCopy shows failed file transfers and lets you fix the problem and recopy only problem files. Shell integration. TeraCopy can completely replace Explorer copy and move functions, allowing you work with files as usual. TeraCopy is free for non-commercial use only. For commercial use you need to buy a license. The paid version of the program includes the following features: Copy/move to your favorite folders. Save reports as HTML and CSV files. Select files with the same extension/folder. Remove the selected files from the copy queue. TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 changelog: Added support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. Improved exception handling and automated bug report upload. Fixed several minor bugs and small memory leaks. Build 26 (June 24) Fixed a rare exception when a transfer completed. Features added since version 3.17: Enhanced speed graph. New multi-threaded copy engine. Support for copying to multiple targets. Queue system for managing multiple copy operations. Support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. TeraCopy entry in the modern Windows Explorer context menu. Integrated toolbar in the title bar. Why receive LocalSend transfers with TeraCopy? Handle file conflicts: Skip, overwrite, or rename files when a file with the same name already exists. LocalSend always creates another copy, which can waste time and disk space, especially when resuming an interrupted transfer. Filter unwanted files: Apply ignore lists or remove files manually before accepting a transfer, so unnecessary files are not downloaded. Better performance on fast networks: In tests over a 10 Gbps connection, TeraCopy received files several times faster than the standard LocalSend app on Windows. Download: TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 | 14.5 MB (Freeware, paid upgrade available) View: TeraCopy Website | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Briefly used Turbo Pascal (and Turbo C++) in 97 and soon after that I bought PC magazine that included a full version of Delphi 2. I still use Delphi today, some 29 years later.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      453
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!