Most gaming companys aren't open source, it doesn't mean that there giving that community the finger; it's an issue of hackers, companies such as blizzard are all ready flooded w/ hacks for there games, which takes them months to fix. As for a sudden acceptance of windows just for Diablo II or equivalent games come is a necessary evil to have access to the game.
Their power and speed affect the quality of graphics being generated at higher res's. For an example of this all you need to do is play almost any of todays 3D games. The higher end 3D cards allow for better texture and colour quality w/o losing fps, and that makes a big difference
for civilian purposes not many, you could annoy people by jamming whatever GPS systems they had w/ short rapid transmissions, so they get part of the transmission, but not all; which generally is more annoying it has more purpose for use in the military, b/c GPS is a form of comms, and the military likes to be able to jamm all forms of comms, leaving their enemies blind, deaf and stupid
What happens when you lose after getting 200000 pts, what does the rocket ship look like? some day linux will be able to play QT, or QT will be replaced whichever comes first
in the case of mozilla, it doesn't move far enough away from the standard interface to have a large learning curve, but does maintain a different appearance which is what I think is good. As for being subjected to learning new interfaces, that happens w/ most software of similar types; like word and word perfect, they have similar purposes but several of their features are different or have different means of accessing them. Since we subjected to different interfaces like that anyways, it shouldn't be too much more difficult to adapt to different looking interfaces like mozilla. It maintains the same type of interface, w/ file menus, back, forward buttons, but it looks different and new, which is why I think it's better.
Mozilla is netscape 6 for one, but differences between mozilla and previous versions is are many improvements. The most obvious is the interface differences: mozilla moves away from the standard interface of windows programs (eg; ie) other differences are the major speed differences between loading pages, for example mozilla loads slashdot about 5 seconds before ie on my 56K connection most changes that I know of are behind the scenes, but I like it, its a big improvement from the 4.x generation CodeKnight
but they do gain the users attention by going against the standards, Netscape 6 for example is much more noticable than ie because of its "new" look CodeKnight
Slashdot Mirror
No, they already have it :)
Most gaming companys aren't open source, it doesn't mean that there giving that community the finger; it's an issue of hackers, companies such as blizzard are all ready flooded w/ hacks for there games, which takes them months to fix.
As for a sudden acceptance of windows just for Diablo II or equivalent games come is a necessary evil to have access to the game.
Their power and speed affect the quality of graphics being generated at higher res's. For an example of this all you need to do is play almost any of todays 3D games.
The higher end 3D cards allow for better texture and colour quality w/o losing fps, and that makes a big difference
for civilian purposes not many, you could annoy people by jamming whatever GPS systems they had w/ short rapid transmissions, so they get part of the transmission, but not all; which generally is more annoying it has more purpose for use in the military, b/c GPS is a form of comms, and the military likes to be able to jamm all forms of comms, leaving their enemies blind, deaf and stupid
You can also use it as a flashlight when it blue screens
It would have a short burst of uptime followed by a low, there would have to be somekind of refill port :)
You can cool you drinks really fast too!
What happens when you lose after getting 200000 pts, what does the rocket ship look like? some day linux will be able to play QT, or QT will be replaced whichever comes first
in the case of mozilla, it doesn't move far enough away from the standard interface to have a large learning curve, but does maintain a different appearance which is what I think is good. As for being subjected to learning new interfaces, that happens w/ most software of similar types; like word and word perfect, they have similar purposes but several of their features are different or have different means of accessing them. Since we subjected to different interfaces like that anyways, it shouldn't be too much more difficult to adapt to different looking interfaces like mozilla. It maintains the same type of interface, w/ file menus, back, forward buttons, but it looks different and new, which is why I think it's better.
It also doesn't work very well for nocturnal programmers
Mozilla is netscape 6 for one, but differences between mozilla and previous versions is are many improvements. The most obvious is the interface differences: mozilla moves away from the standard interface of windows programs (eg; ie) other differences are the major speed differences between loading pages, for example mozilla loads slashdot about 5 seconds before ie on my 56K connection most changes that I know of are behind the scenes, but I like it, its a big improvement from the 4.x generation CodeKnight
but they do gain the users attention by going against the standards, Netscape 6 for example is much more noticable than ie because of its "new" look CodeKnight