If you've got a game on your PC, why would you want to show it on a console? I thought they whole argument for not gaming on PC was that it was too expensive so you stick to dumbed down games and tiny controllers in order to save some money. Yet here the scoop is that you can have both and stream between them, doubling the expense...
I'm probably not going to get a Steam Box ever. But to me it's biggest selling point is that it is precisely NOT an xbox. Using the word "useless" is pure FUD.
Early keyboards I used never had a second control key. And it wasn't around when I learned to touch type. So I learned to do things like Ctrl-A by just shifting the fingers over one space (control key *always* being where capslock is).
Whenever I'm on someone else's keyboard and control key is down in the idiotic IBM position it drives me crazy. Even the Windows and Alt keys are easier to press (Windows/Command is pretty easy as you use your thumb). To push that stupid Control key I have to curl up the pinkie finger and push it with the knuckle.
I never use laptop keyboards unless I'm forced to, I always use an external keyboard.
Hmm, never need Windows-D, the desktop is the only thing that ever shows. Minimize all windows is never needed (but sadly happens without my asking if my mouse drifts over to the hot corner). Explorer is less useful than right clicking on the pinned Explorer icon on the task bar and choosing the recently used location. Windows-R I have used a few times, but I often just create my own shortcut for the 3 things I have ever used that for (cmd, calc, and regedit).
So I could pry off that Windows key and never miss it, it can even fit into the same coffin as that pointless menu key.
Completely stupid feature, as stupid as Mozilla or Chrome. Microsoft won't be able to manage this, even now 90% of their updates have exactly the same title because they don't want to confuse users. You can only tell them apart by the KB12345678 number. To get the actual description of what is fixed you have to click once and be told "this fixes an issue, for more information click this link here" and then on the second click you have to go to a web page and wait for it to load (script heavy crap). It's just too cumbersome to get all the information. My only conclusion here is that Microsoft wants the users to be dumb and docile.
Hmm, when I upgraded to Windows 8 it did the application scan and listed applications that may have known problems. However it did not uninstall or disable them as I recall, but it's been awhile.
The thing is that it is going to update the OS. That means it may wipe out a lot of things, probably devastate the registry, probably delete stuff in "Program Files". For some programs it will try to migrate them if it's a well behaved application that it can figure out, meaning putting settings back in place when it's done, leaving it showing up in the start menu, etc. So "uninstall" may just mean it's not going to migrate it for you and then you have to dig down into the files to get to it. However maybe Windows 10 takes things a bit further and actually removes the application, as in deleting the files.
I think you can just run the tool to see if you're compatible. Anything that's flagged you can just make sure you have a backup of and that license keys are available if you have to reinstall. Or if it's flagged, give up and don't do the upgrade. It doesn't hurt to do the check.
The pro version doesn't require this. I also read somewhere (but have not verified) that they changed their mind at the last minute and added the capability to not update automatically to Home edition (see, a public outcry does work).
Luckily I have the Pro edition of Windows 8 anyway (for $14 it was a no-brainer to get that edition).
From what I saw somewhere else, you can give this command to get your existing Windows 7 or 8 key: wmic path softwarelicensingservice get OA3xOriginalProductKey Then you enter that key when installing from the ISO.
Re:"Edge" browser inside 10 reputed to be very goo
on
Windows 10 Launches
·
· Score: 1
I saw a review that was a big negative on Edge. A highly glowing review about Edge of course, because you're not allowed to be really negative about anything from Microsoft without setting yourself up for termination. So the review was mostly "It's awesome, but really new so there are bugs, but it's great and you'll learn to love it, but it doesn't have all the features or polish you expect because it's new, but it's going to be a hit!"
Hurray, a feature from the 80s finally showing up on Windows.
Re:Everything the tech press says about Win 10
on
Windows 10 Launches
·
· Score: 1
The first warning sign I saw was that there was no negativity. Every article was glowing, with maybe a line like "it's not perfect, but you should go get it now." Yup, that's someone trying to be edgy in the Microsoft approved way.
How do we find this out? My experience is that it won't give me even a hint of a chance to opt out of pointless applications during install and that I have to scrub them all away later on.
Did File History stick around? So far, every single version of Windows has completely changed how they want to do backups and the like. Not sure why. Though I turned off File History, it's not really how I want to do backups. Microsoft works too hard to make something too easy for the consumer and thus ends up ruining the concept. Ie, no one seriously puts all their stuff into "libraries", so why have a backup solution that mindlessly backs up only full copies of the libraries? It would help if Windows could make a good distinction in the basic user directory between "these are useful files to backup" and "this is cruft that can be discarded" so it's a tedious process to pick and choose what to back up and what to leave alone (especially with the tool to migrate to a new computer).
I want something like Time Machine on the Mac (works the same way on every edition since it was added), simple to use, convenient to use, low overhead, easy to restore, easy to browse what is backed up, easy to exclude stuff, no planning out complicated backup strategies or cycling through incrementals, etc.
I have a macbook pro, but never open it. It's not a laptop for me, but a very thin desktop. So I use the mouse and keyboard, much more sensible (after you swap off Apple's idiotic idea of reversing the scroll direction to match phones).
I rarely use it on Windows 8. It's a stupid key. I don't use the feature to find program by name, it's too weird for me. If a program isn't pinned or on an icon, it's just not going to have a name I know by heart (ie, I'd probably type Word instead of Microsoft Word). For explorer it's pinned there and easy to use (and right click to get recent entries is more convenient than just getting explorer).
When I do use the windows key, it's to pop up (ugh) metro then click "all programs" to get a bizarrely organized start menu where I can browse for stuff I don't know the name of or to see what's there (things install with readme files or extra utilities that you'd never see if you didn't have a start menu or some other way to browse through it all).
Windows 10 now has a real start menu again, so even they recognize the folly of removing it even if their fanboys won't.
Hmm, do they get used symmetrically? The right shift key for me is used but not that often, whereas the other keys like Windows (ugh), Alt, Command, etc, are really rarely touched and never on the right side (though I never need AltGr).
I still remap it to control. It's the only proper use of that key. If you have tools that use control key, it's extremely inconvenient to use the "standard" control key position, it just doesn't work for touch typists.
The capslock functionality itself is mostly useless too. You'd only really need it if you were using some language that only used upper case keywords, but even then it's cumbersome to keep turning it on and off.
Except that this wasn't murder. It's more like the equivalent of pushing the stranger out of your yard against his will, maybe resorting to a few punches. But there's no way to push the drone away so you resort to some property damage to something that's on your own property.
It did happen to Skyrim. Some modders left forever because of it. They weren't paid for a long time, then one weekend they thought they were going to get paid, the community exploded, the promise of payment vanished, and then they took their toys and went home never to return. On the other side, some players also decided to never use a mod again, being just as petty as the other side. It honestly did feel like chum in the water, the level of malice rising so fast was amazing. I think most people never really got their views across so that others could understand it because there were so many insults flying and any reasonable views were buried in the threads.
But these aren't professional modders. They got hired to do more stuff *after* the mods. If they had demanded to be paid up front, those mods would probably not have gotten much traction. The whole point was that now that you've paid $50 for a game, some of your fellow game players have found a way to extend that further. That is, "fellow game players", not "some random guys who want money".
With Doom you had hundreds or thousands of new levels out there, people doing it for free and knowing that they would never be paid or get a job because of that, and they did it anyway. They just wanted to show off what they did, or they wanted to make something fun for other people. But they didn't have the silly attitude that time is money. In fact, Doom had a good model in itself - the first episode, a FULL game was free without the normal guilt trip whine to be paid that most crappy shareware had at the time; only the subsequent episodes were paid and you had plenty of time to do a full and thorough evaluation. Plus you could write your own free levels for this free game. Win, win, win all around.
If the great modders create a great product then they can get donations, just don't require the money to be paid. If they think they're not getting enough in donations then they should reevaluate why they're writing the mods in the first place. If they only create mods to be paid then tough luck, get a better job. But if they create mods to share and to improve the community, then the money shouldn't matter. If they want mandatory paid for mods then they should do it smart - do the Doom way, make the first part great and free, then people who love it will pay for the next parts.
Slashdot Mirror
And don't forget, competition is good. Single sourcing leads to technical stagnation.
If you've got a game on your PC, why would you want to show it on a console? I thought they whole argument for not gaming on PC was that it was too expensive so you stick to dumbed down games and tiny controllers in order to save some money. Yet here the scoop is that you can have both and stream between them, doubling the expense...
I'm probably not going to get a Steam Box ever. But to me it's biggest selling point is that it is precisely NOT an xbox. Using the word "useless" is pure FUD.
Early keyboards I used never had a second control key. And it wasn't around when I learned to touch type. So I learned to do things like Ctrl-A by just shifting the fingers over one space (control key *always* being where capslock is).
Whenever I'm on someone else's keyboard and control key is down in the idiotic IBM position it drives me crazy. Even the Windows and Alt keys are easier to press (Windows/Command is pretty easy as you use your thumb). To push that stupid Control key I have to curl up the pinkie finger and push it with the knuckle.
I never use laptop keyboards unless I'm forced to, I always use an external keyboard.
Hmm, never need Windows-D, the desktop is the only thing that ever shows. Minimize all windows is never needed (but sadly happens without my asking if my mouse drifts over to the hot corner). Explorer is less useful than right clicking on the pinned Explorer icon on the task bar and choosing the recently used location. Windows-R I have used a few times, but I often just create my own shortcut for the 3 things I have ever used that for (cmd, calc, and regedit).
So I could pry off that Windows key and never miss it, it can even fit into the same coffin as that pointless menu key.
Completely stupid feature, as stupid as Mozilla or Chrome. Microsoft won't be able to manage this, even now 90% of their updates have exactly the same title because they don't want to confuse users. You can only tell them apart by the KB12345678 number.
To get the actual description of what is fixed you have to click once and be told "this fixes an issue, for more information click this link here" and then on the second click you have to go to a web page and wait for it to load (script heavy crap). It's just too cumbersome to get all the information. My only conclusion here is that Microsoft wants the users to be dumb and docile.
I heard that pictures of the Earth were faked, even those taken at street level.
Hmm, when I upgraded to Windows 8 it did the application scan and listed applications that may have known problems. However it did not uninstall or disable them as I recall, but it's been awhile.
The thing is that it is going to update the OS. That means it may wipe out a lot of things, probably devastate the registry, probably delete stuff in "Program Files". For some programs it will try to migrate them if it's a well behaved application that it can figure out, meaning putting settings back in place when it's done, leaving it showing up in the start menu, etc. So "uninstall" may just mean it's not going to migrate it for you and then you have to dig down into the files to get to it. However maybe Windows 10 takes things a bit further and actually removes the application, as in deleting the files.
I think you can just run the tool to see if you're compatible. Anything that's flagged you can just make sure you have a backup of and that license keys are available if you have to reinstall. Or if it's flagged, give up and don't do the upgrade. It doesn't hurt to do the check.
The pro version doesn't require this. I also read somewhere (but have not verified) that they changed their mind at the last minute and added the capability to not update automatically to Home edition (see, a public outcry does work).
Luckily I have the Pro edition of Windows 8 anyway (for $14 it was a no-brainer to get that edition).
From what I saw somewhere else, you can give this command to get your existing Windows 7 or 8 key:
wmic path softwarelicensingservice get OA3xOriginalProductKey
Then you enter that key when installing from the ISO.
http://hothardware.com/news/of...
I saw a review that was a big negative on Edge. A highly glowing review about Edge of course, because you're not allowed to be really negative about anything from Microsoft without setting yourself up for termination. So the review was mostly "It's awesome, but really new so there are bugs, but it's great and you'll learn to love it, but it doesn't have all the features or polish you expect because it's new, but it's going to be a hit!"
Hurray, a feature from the 80s finally showing up on Windows.
The first warning sign I saw was that there was no negativity. Every article was glowing, with maybe a line like "it's not perfect, but you should go get it now." Yup, that's someone trying to be edgy in the Microsoft approved way.
How do we find this out? My experience is that it won't give me even a hint of a chance to opt out of pointless applications during install and that I have to scrub them all away later on.
Did File History stick around? So far, every single version of Windows has completely changed how they want to do backups and the like. Not sure why.
Though I turned off File History, it's not really how I want to do backups. Microsoft works too hard to make something too easy for the consumer and thus ends up ruining the concept. Ie, no one seriously puts all their stuff into "libraries", so why have a backup solution that mindlessly backs up only full copies of the libraries? It would help if Windows could make a good distinction in the basic user directory between "these are useful files to backup" and "this is cruft that can be discarded" so it's a tedious process to pick and choose what to back up and what to leave alone (especially with the tool to migrate to a new computer).
I want something like Time Machine on the Mac (works the same way on every edition since it was added), simple to use, convenient to use, low overhead, easy to restore, easy to browse what is backed up, easy to exclude stuff, no planning out complicated backup strategies or cycling through incrementals, etc.
Laptops are ergonomic nightmares. Attach a real keyboard except for those times when you're stuck in a weird locale (ie, on the bus).
I have a macbook pro, but never open it. It's not a laptop for me, but a very thin desktop. So I use the mouse and keyboard, much more sensible (after you swap off Apple's idiotic idea of reversing the scroll direction to match phones).
Alt key is same as meta most of the time. For alternate characters you use AltGr, even though it's not on US keyboards.
I rarely use it on Windows 8. It's a stupid key. I don't use the feature to find program by name, it's too weird for me. If a program isn't pinned or on an icon, it's just not going to have a name I know by heart (ie, I'd probably type Word instead of Microsoft Word). For explorer it's pinned there and easy to use (and right click to get recent entries is more convenient than just getting explorer).
When I do use the windows key, it's to pop up (ugh) metro then click "all programs" to get a bizarrely organized start menu where I can browse for stuff I don't know the name of or to see what's there (things install with readme files or extra utilities that you'd never see if you didn't have a start menu or some other way to browse through it all).
Windows 10 now has a real start menu again, so even they recognize the folly of removing it even if their fanboys won't.
Hmm, do they get used symmetrically? The right shift key for me is used but not that often, whereas the other keys like Windows (ugh), Alt, Command, etc, are really rarely touched and never on the right side (though I never need AltGr).
I still remap it to control. It's the only proper use of that key. If you have tools that use control key, it's extremely inconvenient to use the "standard" control key position, it just doesn't work for touch typists.
The capslock functionality itself is mostly useless too. You'd only really need it if you were using some language that only used upper case keywords, but even then it's cumbersome to keep turning it on and off.
There's no reasonable expectation that the guy won't get kicked in the balls either.
Except that this wasn't murder. It's more like the equivalent of pushing the stranger out of your yard against his will, maybe resorting to a few punches. But there's no way to push the drone away so you resort to some property damage to something that's on your own property.
It did happen to Skyrim. Some modders left forever because of it. They weren't paid for a long time, then one weekend they thought they were going to get paid, the community exploded, the promise of payment vanished, and then they took their toys and went home never to return. On the other side, some players also decided to never use a mod again, being just as petty as the other side. It honestly did feel like chum in the water, the level of malice rising so fast was amazing. I think most people never really got their views across so that others could understand it because there were so many insults flying and any reasonable views were buried in the threads.
But these aren't professional modders. They got hired to do more stuff *after* the mods. If they had demanded to be paid up front, those mods would probably not have gotten much traction. The whole point was that now that you've paid $50 for a game, some of your fellow game players have found a way to extend that further. That is, "fellow game players", not "some random guys who want money".
With Doom you had hundreds or thousands of new levels out there, people doing it for free and knowing that they would never be paid or get a job because of that, and they did it anyway. They just wanted to show off what they did, or they wanted to make something fun for other people. But they didn't have the silly attitude that time is money. In fact, Doom had a good model in itself - the first episode, a FULL game was free without the normal guilt trip whine to be paid that most crappy shareware had at the time; only the subsequent episodes were paid and you had plenty of time to do a full and thorough evaluation. Plus you could write your own free levels for this free game. Win, win, win all around.
If the great modders create a great product then they can get donations, just don't require the money to be paid. If they think they're not getting enough in donations then they should reevaluate why they're writing the mods in the first place. If they only create mods to be paid then tough luck, get a better job. But if they create mods to share and to improve the community, then the money shouldn't matter. If they want mandatory paid for mods then they should do it smart - do the Doom way, make the first part great and free, then people who love it will pay for the next parts.