JCHelios

Commenters: "Windows 7? I wish Linus had used a newer operating system!"

Monkey's Paw finger contracts.

Commenters: "NOT LIKE THAT!" 😱

I was going to say, Asus would've been better off going with the "Porn for Gamers" slogan. 😆

They never promised 4 years. They promised 3 years and delivered 3 years. What's your point?

I had experienced a lot of issues myself you wouldn't expect from a modern and quite expensive phone:
the back button is either fixed to the left side (away from my thumb) or you have to use gestures (I opted for gestures which also annoy me time and time again because input is misinterpreted) instead of directly toggling between speaker and ear-piece on calls, there is now a sub-menu where you need to select the output device - unnecessary steps and complexity to add insult to injury, sometimes calls are randomly routed to connected devices the phone regularly locks up (doesn't react to inputs) after unlocking and you need to lock it and unlock it again to make it work I get spammed with system notifications whenever my bluetooth earbuds connected. Every 5 seconds the phone would vibrate to tell me the headphones are now connected. The only fix was to mute system notifications altogether... Except I have a Pixel 8 Pro. So I am wondering how much the LTT review of the Fairphone reflects issues with the Fairphone and how much it reflects the state of current Android itself. The back button is 100% an Android issue and not a FP5 issue.
With the absence of recent phone reviews on the main channel (especially running a stock or low modified version of Android) I would have liked a more educated approach to this topic. It seems like some things are attributed to the device for a lack of knowledge what stock Android does today.
 I'm also not sure if the Pixel 8 is the right contender (the OS without extensive custom work seems to be a good match). The FP5 comes in at 699€ (256GB) while the Pixel is 859€ (256GB) - a 23% mark-up in Europe. This should have at least been mentioned in the video. The price difference alone puts these two phones barely in the same scope, while the unique "fair" aspect of the FP makes it almost impossible to compare to other phones. There is no other device with a similar meticulously documented supply chain and there is probably a good reason no major phone manufacturer has done something like this.
I want to make clear that I'm not hating on the LTT review of the FP5. I think a lot of the talking points are fair criticism, but I also feel like Linus got carried away into the negative a little bit too far.
 
My bottom line of a recent phone upgrade: It's mostly not worth it. A Note 5 might probably not look too bad in comparison to any modern phone.
I upgraded from my 2018 Huawei Mate 20 Pro because it won't receive updates and I take a lot of photos in low-light conditions. Taking a phone with one of the best cameras was a given. The Pixel 8 Pro has an objectively well improved camera system - the rest of the device is a sidegrade at best and sometimes even a downgrade.
Customizability has decreased, efficient workflows now take additional steps and the overall look and feel is just ok. Why do clocks need to be gigantic nowadays? Why is there a gaping hole in the middle of my screen. Why am I unable to unlock my phone with my face in bed at night? Because an IR sensor would not fit in the budget of a 1100€+ phone? I haven't experienced major improvements in runtime, in speed or in efficiency (of usage). The only thing that's way up is the amount of software issues I experienced so far. I can not recall any similar shenanigans with my previous Android devices.

The Linux of phones.

"Never" in this poll should have been separated out into "Never, because I don't want to" and "Never, because my GPU doesn't support ray tracing." (@Cardoso there gets it!)


 
It's important because those two answers point in opposite directions: People who don't care about RT features can focus purely on rasterization, and would be just as happy with AMD cards. But to the extent that people are still using old pre-RT cards... which, as you pointed out by citing the Steam Hardware Survey, is substantially the case... then they could be champing at the bit to turn on RT just as soon as they upgrade, and would want a card that can do that well (i.e., Nvidia).

With that having been said, I certainly l agree with the larger point, which I take to be along the lines of "Hey, remember when the GTX 970 was $329? Wasn't that great?!" Heck yeah it was. Requiescat in pace, attractively-priced 70-class cards. 🪦

Haha, I love this shot:



And this line:
 
 
😆

Don't worry - they only sold 46 so far..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Sorry - 46,000.

Linus, if this guy uses your engineering department to build a doomsday weapon and conquer/destroy the world, then that's on you, buddy.
 

Linus, if this guy uses your engineering department to build a doomsday weapon and conquer/destroy the world, then that's on you, buddy.
 

Linus, if this guy uses your engineering department to build a doomsday weapon and conquer/destroy the world, then that's on you, buddy.
 

Summary
 
Playing an encrypted 4K (UHD) Blu-ray on a computer in a legally unambiguous way seems to require a hardware-level DRM scheme, which in practice means Intel's SGX (Software Guard Extensions). But SGX is not included in 11th- and 12th-gen Intel processors (as well as all AMD processors). From Intel's Alder Lake SDP page (⭕ added) :
 
 
This has caused Cyberlink to clarify in PowerDVD's FAQ that:
 
Cyberlink even goes so far as to caution against upgrading your OS and drivers!
 
The article in Bleeping Computer notes that SGX was deprecated because of all its security vulnerabilities:
 
Internet commenter Beammeup5 persuasively clarifies that while PowerDVD is "one of the very few officially authorized software vendors for encrypted UHD disc playback," it's still possible to play an encrypted UHD Blu-ray disc on PC, if you use a decryption solution that's presumably not officially authorized (emphasis mine) :
 
My thoughts
Narrowly, this whole debacle shows that Linus is right to rip his Blu-rays to hard disc: If computers can't play modern Blu-rays without gray-market solutions, then why not just use a gray-market solution to rip them to a more convenient, future-proof format?
 
More broadly, I have to imagine that this augers poorly for the future of Blu-ray specifically, and physical media generally. Media companies' inability to work with tech companies to preserve compatibility comes off as a huge vote-of-no-confidence in their own ecosystem.
 
Oh, and — at the risk of stating the obvious — don't follow Cyberlink's advice to avoid upgrading your OS and drivers, unless your computer is air-gapped from the Internet! 😆
 
Sources
News article: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/new-intel-chips-wont-play-blu-ray-disks-due-to-sgx-deprecation/
PowerDVD FAQ page: https://www.cyberlink.com/support/faq-content.do?id=26690
Intel page confirming SGX deprecation in Alder Lake: https://edc.intel.com/content/www/us/en/design/ipla/software-development-platforms/client/platforms/alder-lake-desktop/12th-generation-intel-core-processors-datasheet-volume-1-of-2/004/deprecated-technologies/
There was already no PowerDVD compatibility with AMD processors: https://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/62724.page
Commenter Beammeup5's clarifications: https://www.ghacks.net/2022/01/14/intels-dropping-of-sgx-prevents-ultra-hd-blu-ray-playback-on-pcs/#comment-4512746

Summary
 
Playing an encrypted 4K (UHD) Blu-ray on a computer in a legally unambiguous way seems to require a hardware-level DRM scheme, which in practice means Intel's SGX (Software Guard Extensions). But SGX is not included in 11th- and 12th-gen Intel processors (as well as all AMD processors). From Intel's Alder Lake SDP page (⭕ added) :
 
 
This has caused Cyberlink to clarify in PowerDVD's FAQ that:
 
Cyberlink even goes so far as to caution against upgrading your OS and drivers!
 
The article in Bleeping Computer notes that SGX was deprecated because of all its security vulnerabilities:
 
Internet commenter Beammeup5 persuasively clarifies that while PowerDVD is "one of the very few officially authorized software vendors for encrypted UHD disc playback," it's still possible to play an encrypted UHD Blu-ray disc on PC, if you use a decryption solution that's presumably not officially authorized (emphasis mine) :
 
My thoughts
Narrowly, this whole debacle shows that Linus is right to rip his Blu-rays to hard disc: If computers can't play modern Blu-rays without gray-market solutions, then why not just use a gray-market solution to rip them to a more convenient, future-proof format?
 
More broadly, I have to imagine that this augers poorly for the future of Blu-ray specifically, and physical media generally. Media companies' inability to work with tech companies to preserve compatibility comes off as a huge vote-of-no-confidence in their own ecosystem.
 
Oh, and — at the risk of stating the obvious — don't follow Cyberlink's advice to avoid upgrading your OS and drivers, unless your computer is air-gapped from the Internet! 😆
 
Sources
News article: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/new-intel-chips-wont-play-blu-ray-disks-due-to-sgx-deprecation/
PowerDVD FAQ page: https://www.cyberlink.com/support/faq-content.do?id=26690
Intel page confirming SGX deprecation in Alder Lake: https://edc.intel.com/content/www/us/en/design/ipla/software-development-platforms/client/platforms/alder-lake-desktop/12th-generation-intel-core-processors-datasheet-volume-1-of-2/004/deprecated-technologies/
There was already no PowerDVD compatibility with AMD processors: https://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/62724.page
Commenter Beammeup5's clarifications: https://www.ghacks.net/2022/01/14/intels-dropping-of-sgx-prevents-ultra-hd-blu-ray-playback-on-pcs/#comment-4512746

Why did you not do this on Linux?  Not only have you been able to do this for several years the installation are much easier.

I have one on hand. As I'm working for a computer shop.
GALAX RTX 2060 PLUS.
They do mark the 12GB VRAM tho.
Won't reveal cost price. Local retail price: $680.
$20 rebate if bundling with a Silverstone VIVA 750W (retail@$80)
 
P/s: Profit margin is usually 10%, you can calculate yourself ideal/logical cost price.

really not a fan of the new editing style

But is it worth it?

But is it worth it?

"we didn't have time to run music benchmarks"
 
because you had to meet that 490 day deadline i guess

Now before you spam replies with motion blur hate, please watch this video: Tech Focus - Motion Blur: Is It Good For Gaming Graphics?

On multiple occasions Linus, when maxing out game settings, will go out of his way to turn off motion blur. This especially angered me when he did it for the game Crysis, as the developers put a lot of effort into making sure the motion blur looked as good as possible. Slides (skip to slide 41 for info about crytek's motion blur) They dedicated 20/78 slides to motion blur, so obviously it wasn't some dumb effect that made it look worse if they put THAT much effort into making it look good.
 
Like obviously this isn't an important issue my any means, but I always felt like Linus gave motion blur way more hate than it deserved. And there are probably people who hate motion blur because they see Linus turn it off all the time. But the thing is, Motion Blur can really help with image continuity between frames, especially at low FPSs. Even at higher FPSs, it can add that little bit more of continuity to make the game feel that much smoother.

IDK, whats your opinion.

Edit: y'all clearly didn't read the first sentence and decided, you know what, let me ignore these points and just spam the classic "motion blur bad."

Edit 2: Ok so this post was featured in an LTT video, which all my friends pointed out to me immediately. My point is, Motion Blur isn't for everyone, but it isn't objectively bad either. I feel like for benchmarks, its important to use all the features to be objective.

You should've turned the power supply around so that the PSU could work as an exhaust for the 3080's passthrough cooling fan.

Ten-year PSU warranty, so why not?? I bet the video's sponsor, Seasonic would've looooooooved that! 😆

 

Just means they have the best stuff. /s

Ya we had focus issues on the main camera! 
 

The content was good and thanks for the heads up on the new channel (sounds interesting, like classic LTT shoot and drop it in one go filming) but there was just something weird about the video quality. At first I thought that something was wrong with my connection and Youtube was bumping me down to 360p and up again but it turned out to be the video itself. Everytime the shot switched from the wider one to the closer one (with Linus's head still in frame) the video became very noticably blurry, like the lense was out of focus. Is this bad digital zooming or was it intentional?