There's also the zlib/libpng-licensed Irrlicht, which is my graphics engine of choice.
Then there's Lightfeather, which I'm less keen on.
As far as OSS physics engines go, I only know of ODE, but as far as I know it's rigid body only, so I doubt you could get it to do any aerodynamics. There are plenty of examples/tutorials of people integrating it with all of these graphics engines.
Fining people for throwing a tissue out the window is not to protect the environment; it's for aesthetics. It's the same reason they used to fine people for spitting on the sidewalk. They don't want their streets looking like a sewer.
The GPL is about giving only to people who will give back. That's the whole point. The "freedom" refers to your rights to modify the software and share your modifications, not to distribute closed binaries.
If you want to take the bad with the good, use BSD.
Re:I disagree with Smart Appliances being listed
on
The Top 21 Tech Flops
·
· Score: 1
Yeah, the article had a few of those. I disagreed with the paperless office. Yes, the paperless office hasn't arrived yet, but that's because we're just now finally getting to the point where we have the software to manage huge databases of files accessible by hundreds of employees, the widespread internet connectivity to make electronic documents easier to mail than paper ones, and the storage space required to actually hold the stuff.
I'd like to think that slowly, companies will be more interested in data storage than having to maintain a warehouse full of millions of sheets of paper. Hard drives crash, but buildings burn down. It's a heck of a lot easier to archive data twice than to build two warehouses.
With the GPLv2, people can use patents to avoid giving back. They can use signed binaries to avoid giving back. These are the people we don't want to give to anymore.
To keep the eye occupied, you should be changing slides. Roughly 30s-2min per slide. A good guide is same number of slides as the length in minutes of your presentation.
I really, *really* like the wordy popups. It's one of the few things I was very happy with in Vista. I'd like to think it encourages people to read the screen, and to feel like their computer is there to help them by providing them with this information. I'd like to think that the first person scenarios on the buttons ("I trust this program or I have used it before") encourages people to think about what they're clicking on before they do so.
Maybe this is just wishful thinking. Still, as the local computer geek for friends and family, I get incredibly frustrated when they get an OK/Cancel box and ask me what to click on, and I simply repeat the question in the box and they immediately understand and choose themselves. Vista's popups give me the impression that they'll alleviate this at least a little.
What actually is painful, however, is how the screen flashes black before and after a UAC popup comes up. That is BLINDING.
Side note, I'm very surprised that the author managed to survive 30 days at all with Vista. I tried switching from Kubuntu to Vista for two weeks; I managed to last 4 days, and at the end of it I wanted to throw my computer out the window. It really is that slow and unstable.
I think what he meant is that the wireless browsing and configuration is worlds better. Feisty has the beautiful NetworkManager interface by default now, which makes connecting to wireless networks a breeze (much easier and friendlier than it is in Windows).
Hardware compatibility is totally irrelevant for a pre-installed distro; they're obviously going to pick working hardware when they build the thing.
Why must all GUI desktop vendors (and it's not just MS; Nautilus follows suit) default to this behavior? I really don't want every file "thumbnailed" by default. That's just it. You don't want thumbnails. That's fine. But why should your configuration be the default just because you use it? I know I have some fairly obscure configuration options that I would die without, but would be a horrible idea to adopt as default.
Most people, including myself, very much like having thumbnails. Not only does it make browsing through pictures and video very intuitive, but there are times when it's pretty much necessary. Try dumping five hundred pictures off your digital camera all named IMG#####, and see how long it takes you to sort them without thumbnails.
That's why I get all the more pissed off when people say things like "It's easy to fix this bug, just disable X feature". No, how about they fix the damn feature!
This happened to me too the other day. I opened a folder with some pictures in it, and the machine slowed to a crawl trying to make thumbnails. It wouldn't let me close or cancel, so I decided to just wait it out. I clicked onto my Firefox window which I had open, and rather than just letting me browse the net while I waited, it had the nerve to tell me Firefox stopped responding! I finally managed to close the thumbnail window, and what do you know, Firefox kept on working happily.
That's about the time I switched back to Kubuntu. It's so strange; thumbnails actually work quite well in Windows XP. How is it so broken in Vista?
Hardly. I reinstalled XP Pro last week and (of course) failed a genuine check; Microsoft asked me for $300 bucks to pay for a new XP Pro license. This when Vista has already been out for months.
It's not just price you have to worry about; there's also size and heat dissipation. Though yes, I agree with you, it's nowhere near the million dollar mark.
Anyone who uses a desktop or notebook knows that crashes happen from time to time, regardless of the OS. First, this is what years of using Windows has taught you, and it's not true. Second, OpenBSD is meant for servers, not notebooks. Servers should never, ever crash; they should be able to run for a decade without crashing (and OpenBSD does).
There is no known way to run attacker's code, and TFA suggests that there is unlikely to be one. Yes, there is. Not only is it exploitable, but CoreLabs actually demonstrated a proof of concept remote code execution.
In Canada, Bell's High Speed DSL has unlimited bandwidth. We're six college students on one DSL line; we probably go through hundreds of gigs a month, and we've never had so much as a phone call or letter of any kind.
Duh, eMule is DESIGNED to do this automatically. They want you to run a server.
Game clients have a completely opposite networking purpose; they're meant to be dependent on a centralized system, and the specs and software that this system runs are never publicly released or supported. Remember when some group of hackers cloned Battle.net to play pirated Starcraft? It took them YEARS to accomplish that.
In Ubuntu or Kubuntu you need to replace both GNOME and KDE to get something stable. They apply a bunch of experimental patches to "improve" the experience, but the patches often creates more bugs. I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. What would you replace these with? Was that a plug for XFCE/Fluxbox/etc disguised as a flaw in Ubuntu? What "experimental patches" are you talking about?
There also seems to lack mature features for installing 3rd party content. This might not be much of a problem for really basic desktop user, but for a standard Linux users not being able to install and run tar-balls is a real problem (ubuntu doesn't even include/usr/local to PATH!) That's an outright fabrication.
I install tarballs for various applications (including things like Loki installers) all the time. I've been doing so since Dapper and it has always worked flawlessly. When was the last time you tried Ubuntu?
This is just ludicrous. Since when do mainstream users change video cards? Since when do mainstream users install Apache? Changing your hardware is user-friendly, but editing a text file is not? Editing the Windows registry is user-friendly, but editing a text file is not?
So I'm running it so i can run Windows programs under my free OS? No, you're running it so you can help develop and test it. No one is advocating running it in a VM in a production environment. It's a testing and development release. Obviously the real thing will run on the bare metal; it's just not ready for that yet.
Creating an alpha environment to run proprietary software just seems wrong. This is just stupid as hell. They don't make it alpha on purpose. It's not finished yet.
ReactOS 0.3.1 has been "scheduled to be released within a week" for months now. Development is apparently still progressing; maybe they're just not concentrating on making a release.
Either way, it's unfortunately still a very long way off.
In IPv4, an entire class A address only corresponds to about 17 million addresses. When IPv4 was new, the IANA didn't envision every person and every mom & pop shop wanting an IP address; giving a large company like AT&T 17 million addresses seemed reasonable.
In IPv6, a range like aaa1:: corresponds to 5e33 addresses; that's five billion trillion trillion addresses. One would hope that the IANA would have more common sense than to give that many addresses to one company.
I still can't figure out whether the other replies to my post were serious or not. We will *never* run out of IPv6 addresses. You could give each person that will ever exist a trillion IP addresses and we will *never* run out.
But anyway, IPv6 is going to keep us out of trouble for now until we make the same mistake (history has a tendency to repeat itself) and we have to invent IPv8 or so. The IPv6 address space allows for 3.4x10^38 IP addresses. Assuming we can fit, say, ten trillion people per solar system, we can colonize about 80% of the entire known universe before we run out of IP addresses.
I suppose at that point, history will repeat itself and we'll have to invent IPv8.:/
You can definitely get the dot to move faster than c. As you rotate your hand, the speed of the dot is directly proportional to the distance between the pointer and the target; there is no relativistic factor here, so you can get the dot to move as fast as you want by simply pointing it at something far enough away. The only thing relativity does is delay the time between when you rotate your hand and when the dot moves.
Here are a few good explanations Google has found for me:
http://www.scifi.com/sfw/issue195/labnotes.html
There are a few other things that can go faster than light, by virtue of not being "things" at all. The spot from a laser pointer is one example--shine it at the wall in front of you and you can make it move around quite rapidly. The farther the wall, the faster (and dimmer) the moving spot; shine it at a target thirty thousand miles away and you can easily move it faster than "c." The individual photons, of course, still move as slowly as ever--it's exactly like waving a firehose around so that the splash of its impact travels faster than the speed of the water through the hose. The splash is a process, not an object, so it isn't constrained by relativity. http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/2000-02/95083 4634.Ph.r.html
You don't even need a shadow to get this effect; just sweep a laser pointer across the sky. No single photon travels faster than light, but (at a far enough distance) the beam seems to sweep from point A to point B faster than light could ever travel. Does this violate relativity? No. It's the entire "beam" that appears to be moving faster than light, not any one particle. And the "beam" is just a way of thinking about the collection of individual photons, it's not a real object. More importantly, the above example wouldn't transmit any information from A to B -- all of the information is coming from your laser pointer -- so no information is travelling faster then the speed of light, and relativity is safe.
Actually, your analogy is bad because in the case of cars in a traffic jam, if wave of cars did indeed move faster than light (even if the individual ones didn't), that would still violate special relativity because there would be information (there's no more blockage) transmitted faster than the speed of light. The correct analogy is not that the wave moves faster than the speed of light, it's that the wave moves faster than the top speed of a car. In this case the analogy is slightly flawed because you could use it to transmit information faster than the top speed of a car; the only reason this is possible is because the drivers are using light to see when to accelerate:D
Slashdot Mirror
There's also the zlib/libpng-licensed Irrlicht, which is my graphics engine of choice.
Then there's Lightfeather, which I'm less keen on.
As far as OSS physics engines go, I only know of ODE, but as far as I know it's rigid body only, so I doubt you could get it to do any aerodynamics. There are plenty of examples/tutorials of people integrating it with all of these graphics engines.
Fining people for throwing a tissue out the window is not to protect the environment; it's for aesthetics. It's the same reason they used to fine people for spitting on the sidewalk. They don't want their streets looking like a sewer.
The GPL is about giving only to people who will give back. That's the whole point. The "freedom" refers to your rights to modify the software and share your modifications, not to distribute closed binaries.
If you want to take the bad with the good, use BSD.
Yeah, the article had a few of those. I disagreed with the paperless office. Yes, the paperless office hasn't arrived yet, but that's because we're just now finally getting to the point where we have the software to manage huge databases of files accessible by hundreds of employees, the widespread internet connectivity to make electronic documents easier to mail than paper ones, and the storage space required to actually hold the stuff.
I'd like to think that slowly, companies will be more interested in data storage than having to maintain a warehouse full of millions of sheets of paper. Hard drives crash, but buildings burn down. It's a heck of a lot easier to archive data twice than to build two warehouses.
You are giving to someone who will give back.
With the GPLv2, people can use patents to avoid giving back. They can use signed binaries to avoid giving back. These are the people we don't want to give to anymore.
To keep the eye occupied, you should be changing slides. Roughly 30s-2min per slide. A good guide is same number of slides as the length in minutes of your presentation.
I really, *really* like the wordy popups. It's one of the few things I was very happy with in Vista. I'd like to think it encourages people to read the screen, and to feel like their computer is there to help them by providing them with this information. I'd like to think that the first person scenarios on the buttons ("I trust this program or I have used it before") encourages people to think about what they're clicking on before they do so.
Maybe this is just wishful thinking. Still, as the local computer geek for friends and family, I get incredibly frustrated when they get an OK/Cancel box and ask me what to click on, and I simply repeat the question in the box and they immediately understand and choose themselves. Vista's popups give me the impression that they'll alleviate this at least a little.
What actually is painful, however, is how the screen flashes black before and after a UAC popup comes up. That is BLINDING.
Side note, I'm very surprised that the author managed to survive 30 days at all with Vista. I tried switching from Kubuntu to Vista for two weeks; I managed to last 4 days, and at the end of it I wanted to throw my computer out the window. It really is that slow and unstable.
Hm. That's quite a bit higher than I expected. Maybe it's worth getting into game programming after all.
;-)
My gut reaction is that the price is skewed by a guy who's biweekly paycheck is a new Porsche...
I think what he meant is that the wireless browsing and configuration is worlds better. Feisty has the beautiful NetworkManager interface by default now, which makes connecting to wireless networks a breeze (much easier and friendlier than it is in Windows).
Hardware compatibility is totally irrelevant for a pre-installed distro; they're obviously going to pick working hardware when they build the thing.
Most people, including myself, very much like having thumbnails. Not only does it make browsing through pictures and video very intuitive, but there are times when it's pretty much necessary. Try dumping five hundred pictures off your digital camera all named IMG#####, and see how long it takes you to sort them without thumbnails.
That's why I get all the more pissed off when people say things like "It's easy to fix this bug, just disable X feature". No, how about they fix the damn feature!
This happened to me too the other day. I opened a folder with some pictures in it, and the machine slowed to a crawl trying to make thumbnails. It wouldn't let me close or cancel, so I decided to just wait it out. I clicked onto my Firefox window which I had open, and rather than just letting me browse the net while I waited, it had the nerve to tell me Firefox stopped responding! I finally managed to close the thumbnail window, and what do you know, Firefox kept on working happily.
That's about the time I switched back to Kubuntu. It's so strange; thumbnails actually work quite well in Windows XP. How is it so broken in Vista?
Hardly. I reinstalled XP Pro last week and (of course) failed a genuine check; Microsoft asked me for $300 bucks to pay for a new XP Pro license. This when Vista has already been out for months.
It's not just price you have to worry about; there's also size and heat dissipation. Though yes, I agree with you, it's nowhere near the million dollar mark.
There is no known way to run attacker's code, and TFA suggests that there is unlikely to be one. Yes, there is. Not only is it exploitable, but CoreLabs actually demonstrated a proof of concept remote code execution.
In Canada, Bell's High Speed DSL has unlimited bandwidth. We're six college students on one DSL line; we probably go through hundreds of gigs a month, and we've never had so much as a phone call or letter of any kind.
Duh, eMule is DESIGNED to do this automatically. They want you to run a server.
Game clients have a completely opposite networking purpose; they're meant to be dependent on a centralized system, and the specs and software that this system runs are never publicly released or supported. Remember when some group of hackers cloned Battle.net to play pirated Starcraft? It took them YEARS to accomplish that.
There also seems to lack mature features for installing 3rd party content. This might not be much of a problem for really basic desktop user, but for a standard Linux users not being able to install and run tar-balls is a real problem (ubuntu doesn't even include
nick@nick:~$ echo $PATH
I install tarballs for various applications (including things like Loki installers) all the time. I've been doing so since Dapper and it has always worked flawlessly. When was the last time you tried Ubuntu?
This is just ludicrous. Since when do mainstream users change video cards? Since when do mainstream users install Apache? Changing your hardware is user-friendly, but editing a text file is not? Editing the Windows registry is user-friendly, but editing a text file is not?
You're dreaming.
Creating an alpha environment to run proprietary software just seems wrong. This is just stupid as hell. They don't make it alpha on purpose. It's not finished yet.
ReactOS 0.3.1 has been "scheduled to be released within a week" for months now. Development is apparently still progressing; maybe they're just not concentrating on making a release.
Either way, it's unfortunately still a very long way off.
In IPv4, an entire class A address only corresponds to about 17 million addresses. When IPv4 was new, the IANA didn't envision every person and every mom & pop shop wanting an IP address; giving a large company like AT&T 17 million addresses seemed reasonable.
In IPv6, a range like aaa1:: corresponds to 5e33 addresses; that's five billion trillion trillion addresses. One would hope that the IANA would have more common sense than to give that many addresses to one company.
I still can't figure out whether the other replies to my post were serious or not. We will *never* run out of IPv6 addresses. You could give each person that will ever exist a trillion IP addresses and we will *never* run out.
Turns out I overestimated the number of galaxies in the universe; I used 100 trillion, whereas it's actually more like 100 billion.
So every one of those ten trillion people in every solar system in every galaxy in 80% of the known universe can have 1000 devices each. Enjoy.
I suppose at that point, history will repeat itself and we'll have to invent IPv8.
Here are a few good explanations Google has found for me:
http://www.scifi.com/sfw/issue195/labnotes.html There are a few other things that can go faster than light, by virtue of not being "things" at all. The spot from a laser pointer is one example--shine it at the wall in front of you and you can make it move around quite rapidly. The farther the wall, the faster (and dimmer) the moving spot; shine it at a target thirty thousand miles away and you can easily move it faster than "c." The individual photons, of course, still move as slowly as ever--it's exactly like waving a firehose around so that the splash of its impact travels faster than the speed of the water through the hose. The splash is a process, not an object, so it isn't constrained by relativity. http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/2000-02/9508