I never said it was 100% compatible, that's why I said "supported platform" and "consider the mono documentation". They are very good about documenting what isn't available or will work 'irregularly'.
If I were to drop C#, I'd go with C or C++ Java. However, I don't see it as likely that people will give up on Mono any time soon, it's not as popular as Java, but it's still to popular, and having programed a lot in Java, C#, Python and Perl, of the higher level languages, C# is the easiest to use IMO.
I never said.Net/Mono is more viable than Objective-C, just has a different platform-space. Objective C will cover more big-iron style servers than Mono, and Mono will cover more personal-user space. Then again, if you think android is only about malware, then you've already shown yourself to be a Macinlemming/Macintroll.
Mono has GTK#, as well as a cross-platform implementation of GDI... So, yes, And the latter, at least has been around since the 1.x versions of Mono.
I've had to write my java code to work with Linux, Windows and HPUX, all using the Sun (later oracle) Java implementation. At the time I ran into the issue, we were using 1.4 (we skipped 1.5 to 1.6, and I believe it went away in 1.5 or 1.6). Anyway, there was an issue with a string search function (indexOf?) that wasn't listed as using regexes, but actually was. I had some backslashes in my search string (hardcoded, not entered via GUI or command line). Anyway, it worked great on Linux, Windows (native and Cygwin), but the HPUX implementation failed, we found out they decided to use the native regex implementation (varies by system) rather than their own.
Yet, they use their own (shitty) SSL implementation which had screwy key management until 1.5 or 1.6...
FUD..NET is NOT windows only. There is an open source cross platform implementation that works quite well. Actually, in my experience, so long as it is on a supported platform, and the developers consider the Mono documentation, it is better than Java using the Sun (now Oracle) java implementation in terms of compatibility/reliability between platforms - though it does tend to be slightly slower on many platforms.
Objective-C is mostly MacOS/iOS, I don't know of an Objective-C compiler for Android - it's typically Java or a translator from another language into java into the Dalvik bytecode (other languages such as C# and C, but maybe Objective-C is in that list).
Where are you getting 90%? C#, which is much more popular than the second most popular.NET language (VB.NET) never got up to 9% according to TIOBE, let alone 90%...
Like Java, C# will be attractive to nubblecake coders due to the ease of use, but I'd have to say, in my experience, the documentation is way better, and, provided you follow what's listed on the Mono project as compatible, you get better cross platform compatibility as well.
Anything can crash with an incompetent coder. If you think C# is bad, imagine what they'd do on a less well documented language like Java, or a much more skill-dependent language like C, C++ or assembler.
It's depressing that Objective-C, Ruby and VB.Net have gone up, and see C# go down... But nice to see C and Bash go up, as well as Java go down. Then again, Java goes down on everything, that's how much it blows. I need a job that doesn't require me to program so much of that. Oh well, occasionally I can get to use C, Bash or Python...
Sadly, parent is correct. We got this shitty system from Brittain (who got it partially from France?).
Can we move on to something better now. It's a waste of time, metric is simpler, just as effective, and therefore will cause less problems. The only case I can't see for metric is temperature, and that's because there's not a lot of magnitude-unit conversions that we deal with in temperature, and the ANSI/Imperial system is more granular if you stick to integers (or the same decimal precision) when comparing to metric.
That's just due to how much you work with it. I was the same way, and after using metric enough, I could visualize either, but doing conversions (say inch vs. foot or cm vs meter) is a hell of a lot quicker in metric, since we use that type of math (base 10) more in our day to day lives, and it's ingrained into our number system (vs. ANSIs base-whatever-the-hell-we-want-for-these-two).
I used to be of the same opinion prior to college.
Then, in the sciences. I used metric. I hate the ANSI (modified imperial) system, especially when cooking. I do have to, in every day life, occasonally do conversions between one ANSI unit and another of the same type (i.e. volume or distance). It is so tedious compared to metric.
We sure as hell accept the modified Imperial system of the Brits, and that's a steaming pile of shit (except, possibly, for the temperature scale, which, while arbitrary, has a little more granularity per whole-number). Speaking of, doesn't G.B. still use the Imperial system (mostly)?
Don't blame all Americans because the author of that tripe was a moron.
Given that that the thrive model is done, and the A6X is a set line of processors... If it's not true now, it'll never be true.
But hey, if you'd rather argue with snide remarks than data, have fun with that.
Technically speaking, the CPUs are about the same in both - I've yet to see much to distinguish them. However, Apple can write their software to target a small number of CPUs (and their compilers to better optimize), whereas Google/Android has a significantly larger variety. This means that there's a pretty damn good reason WHY Apple's software would be more efficient.
So... technically similar CPUs, and a good reason why Apple would have more efficient software. And you want to blame the CPU.
I'm more inclined to believe Apple has a better Javascript JIT compiler then - same version of ARM (even if different manufacturers), both are dual core, IIRC, same clock speed. I've yet to see a good technical hardware reason why the Apple CPU is better, and given the semi-generic hardware availability for Android, I can think of a lot of good reasons why Apple's software would be more efficient in it's use of hardware.
After playing Eve, and then taking a look at other MMORPGs/RPGS, I've come to the conclusion there are only a couple quests, and it's just a paint job that makes them appear different.
1) Go somewhere - Optional: bring something there - Optional: alter something there - Optional: come back -- Optional: bring something back 2) Kill some set of creatures - Optional: Bring something back or to another location
Most games I've played (including WoW) you can go through without grinding, by going around and finding quests... but most people don't want to spend the time searching for every little quest (and grinding can actually be less of a headache).
You can grind in Zelda games, but it has the (a) low character progression range, and (b) most advancements are only from 'quests'. As for Diablo, you can grind that (I had to, to beat it the first time) - you restart the game with your character, and it regenerates the world, but you have your level and items from the 'old' game. Basically grinding, but the world changed a bit.
Of course, a combination - the character advancement range of a Diablo type game, but where the experience/advancements are from quests only... That's a good idea.
That's not the A6X, that's the OS. The A6X is only about as powerful as what I have in my Toshiba Thrive. iOS, is, therefore, much more efficient than android/dalvik.
I thought I've seen some pattern detection stuff in AVs before, that was supposed to try to detect suspicious activity.
Problem is, there are a lot of legitimate things that look suspicious. Writing a predictive scanner is an even more difficult task than getting the base OS secure without losing too much performance, usability, or user friendliness.
The glyph systems are the easiest part of any language, unless it is a language where the glyphs represent words rather than phonemes.
I can say that with ease. I speak Russian. It is a huge challenge to learn for a native English speaker. You can learn the alphabet in a week or two of modest studying. The vocab is a challenge, but patterns emerge that make things easier. The grammar, case endings on pretty much everything but adverbs. According to my Russian friends, many/most native English speakers never master the adjective/noun case/gender/plurality endings. Not sure how they screw up the plurality, that's at least fairly simple - genetive, the rest though...
With any language, once you know it, it isn't so bad, it's the learning part that is hard. I know people who know various combinations of the others.
Russian is definitely a challenge, and not because of the alphabet. From what I hear, Arabic isn't too hard - but my friend who speaks it is a linguistic genius, and 'not too hard' for her, covers a lot of ground, unfortunately.
Two objects can be of equal quality without being equal. If object A is better at X, and object B is better at Y, they can be of equal quality, but depending on your task, one may still be better than the other.
By hiring people with MSOffice experience they (1) Allow for better testing of ms-docformat compatibility (2) Help find the 'Y' features that office is better at, and improve them, taking Google Docs from quality-parity to overall better quality.
An example of this. A friend of mine has a Mac, and on her Mac she has MS office in a Windows VM (because the Mac version, to everyone's total lack of surprise, sucks) and Apple's office program. Depending on what she is doing, she'll either use Microsoft Excel (better for data analysis) or Apple Calc(?) which does formatting and layout better.
She cannot describe either as a 'better' spreadsheet without knowing the task, because both are excellent, but not at quite the same things.
From what I can tell, the Surface pro doesn't provide anything on that list that isn't provided on my Toshiba Thrive (and I expect, on the newer Excite).
However, the Surface Pro does cost a lot more, and have a shorter battery life. If you find the advantage of using normal desktop applications on the table worth that tradeoff - go for it, otherwise, I wouldn't bother.
Actually, I suspect most androids have better alternate OS support than the Surface, given that you should be able to goldcard any of them, and then you just need to install your alt. OS. I'm not sure why Timmothy was complaining about that.
I know many Toshiba tablets (including my Thrive) have full sized USB ports (my thrive has 2), and full sized HDMI. Timmy should have done a little more research before buying his tablet.
I've used USB keyboards, mice and harddrives with the ports. I've connected my tablet to my 1080p TV with the HDMI.
There's always going to be some kind of grindfest when you compete against other players in terms of in-game character development. The only games that would lack that, are ones that don't have character's grow and develop, or have a very small growth range. Otherwise you'll always be grinding to beat that guy who's slightly better than you.
There are a lot of people who like that range of growth, and find the grindfest a worthwhile penalty for it.
That being said, given the nature of the character setup in The Elder Scrolls, I think a developer from Turbine who worked on AC1 would be a better for the development of TES:O.
Slashdot Mirror
To my knowledge, it aims to be as generic as C, but with features you can find in Java, Python or C#
More most developers it is harder than something like C#, Perl, Python or Java, because most people seem confused by pointers and memory management.
To me it is more straight forward (especially compared to Python or Java), however I do not consider myself the normal case.
I never said it was 100% compatible, that's why I said "supported platform" and "consider the mono documentation". They are very good about documenting what isn't available or will work 'irregularly'.
If I were to drop C#, I'd go with C or C++ Java. However, I don't see it as likely that people will give up on Mono any time soon, it's not as popular as Java, but it's still to popular, and having programed a lot in Java, C#, Python and Perl, of the higher level languages, C# is the easiest to use IMO.
I never said .Net/Mono is more viable than Objective-C, just has a different platform-space. Objective C will cover more big-iron style servers than Mono, and Mono will cover more personal-user space. Then again, if you think android is only about malware, then you've already shown yourself to be a Macinlemming/Macintroll.
Yeah, and you have to program specifically for TK, QT, GTK in other languages...
Do those not count? You have to program specifically for any GUI library you use.
Mono has GTK#, as well as a cross-platform implementation of GDI... So, yes, And the latter, at least has been around since the 1.x versions of Mono.
I've had to write my java code to work with Linux, Windows and HPUX, all using the Sun (later oracle) Java implementation. At the time I ran into the issue, we were using 1.4 (we skipped 1.5 to 1.6, and I believe it went away in 1.5 or 1.6). Anyway, there was an issue with a string search function (indexOf?) that wasn't listed as using regexes, but actually was. I had some backslashes in my search string (hardcoded, not entered via GUI or command line). Anyway, it worked great on Linux, Windows (native and Cygwin), but the HPUX implementation failed, we found out they decided to use the native regex implementation (varies by system) rather than their own.
Yet, they use their own (shitty) SSL implementation which had screwy key management until 1.5 or 1.6...
FUD. .NET is NOT windows only. There is an open source cross platform implementation that works quite well. Actually, in my experience, so long as it is on a supported platform, and the developers consider the Mono documentation, it is better than Java using the Sun (now Oracle) java implementation in terms of compatibility/reliability between platforms - though it does tend to be slightly slower on many platforms.
Objective-C is mostly MacOS/iOS, I don't know of an Objective-C compiler for Android - it's typically Java or a translator from another language into java into the Dalvik bytecode (other languages such as C# and C, but maybe Objective-C is in that list).
Where are you getting 90%? C#, which is much more popular than the second most popular .NET language (VB.NET) never got up to 9% according to TIOBE, let alone 90%...
You'll probably laugh, and it does need some polish and more effort, but what about D?
That being said, while it lacks a lot of conveniences, C certainly isn't a bad language, just not the easiest to learn and write in.
Seconded.
Like Java, C# will be attractive to nubblecake coders due to the ease of use, but I'd have to say, in my experience, the documentation is way better, and, provided you follow what's listed on the Mono project as compatible, you get better cross platform compatibility as well.
Anything can crash with an incompetent coder. If you think C# is bad, imagine what they'd do on a less well documented language like Java, or a much more skill-dependent language like C, C++ or assembler.
Not going to complain about that.
It's depressing that Objective-C, Ruby and VB.Net have gone up, and see C# go down...
But nice to see C and Bash go up, as well as Java go down. Then again, Java goes down on everything, that's how much it blows. I need a job that doesn't require me to program so much of that. Oh well, occasionally I can get to use C, Bash or Python...
Sadly, parent is correct. We got this shitty system from Brittain (who got it partially from France?).
Can we move on to something better now. It's a waste of time, metric is simpler, just as effective, and therefore will cause less problems. The only case I can't see for metric is temperature, and that's because there's not a lot of magnitude-unit conversions that we deal with in temperature, and the ANSI/Imperial system is more granular if you stick to integers (or the same decimal precision) when comparing to metric.
That's just due to how much you work with it. I was the same way, and after using metric enough, I could visualize either, but doing conversions (say inch vs. foot or cm vs meter) is a hell of a lot quicker in metric, since we use that type of math (base 10) more in our day to day lives, and it's ingrained into our number system (vs. ANSIs base-whatever-the-hell-we-want-for-these-two).
I used to be of the same opinion prior to college.
Then, in the sciences. I used metric. I hate the ANSI (modified imperial) system, especially when cooking. I do have to, in every day life, occasonally do conversions between one ANSI unit and another of the same type (i.e. volume or distance). It is so tedious compared to metric.
We sure as hell accept the modified Imperial system of the Brits, and that's a steaming pile of shit (except, possibly, for the temperature scale, which, while arbitrary, has a little more granularity per whole-number). Speaking of, doesn't G.B. still use the Imperial system (mostly)?
Don't blame all Americans because the author of that tripe was a moron.
What makes a grind is different to everyone.
All of those feel like a grind to me.
Given that that the thrive model is done, and the A6X is a set line of processors... If it's not true now, it'll never be true.
But hey, if you'd rather argue with snide remarks than data, have fun with that.
Technically speaking, the CPUs are about the same in both - I've yet to see much to distinguish them. However, Apple can write their software to target a small number of CPUs (and their compilers to better optimize), whereas Google/Android has a significantly larger variety. This means that there's a pretty damn good reason WHY Apple's software would be more efficient.
So... technically similar CPUs, and a good reason why Apple would have more efficient software.
And you want to blame the CPU.
I'm more inclined to believe Apple has a better Javascript JIT compiler then - same version of ARM (even if different manufacturers), both are dual core, IIRC, same clock speed. I've yet to see a good technical hardware reason why the Apple CPU is better, and given the semi-generic hardware availability for Android, I can think of a lot of good reasons why Apple's software would be more efficient in it's use of hardware.
After playing Eve, and then taking a look at other MMORPGs/RPGS, I've come to the conclusion there are only a couple quests, and it's just a paint job that makes them appear different.
1) Go somewhere
- Optional: bring something there
- Optional: alter something there
- Optional: come back
-- Optional: bring something back
2) Kill some set of creatures
- Optional: Bring something back or to another location
Most games I've played (including WoW) you can go through without grinding, by going around and finding quests... but most people don't want to spend the time searching for every little quest (and grinding can actually be less of a headache).
You can grind in Zelda games, but it has the (a) low character progression range, and (b) most advancements are only from 'quests'.
As for Diablo, you can grind that (I had to, to beat it the first time) - you restart the game with your character, and it regenerates the world, but you have your level and items from the 'old' game. Basically grinding, but the world changed a bit.
Of course, a combination - the character advancement range of a Diablo type game, but where the experience/advancements are from quests only... That's a good idea.
That's not the A6X, that's the OS. The A6X is only about as powerful as what I have in my Toshiba Thrive. iOS, is, therefore, much more efficient than android/dalvik.
Bigger doesn't always mean better. Given my experiences with Samsung, I'd expect lower failure rates, or parity, at worst.
I thought I've seen some pattern detection stuff in AVs before, that was supposed to try to detect suspicious activity.
Problem is, there are a lot of legitimate things that look suspicious. Writing a predictive scanner is an even more difficult task than getting the base OS secure without losing too much performance, usability, or user friendliness.
The glyph systems are the easiest part of any language, unless it is a language where the glyphs represent words rather than phonemes.
I can say that with ease. I speak Russian. It is a huge challenge to learn for a native English speaker. You can learn the alphabet in a week or two of modest studying. The vocab is a challenge, but patterns emerge that make things easier. The grammar, case endings on pretty much everything but adverbs. According to my Russian friends, many/most native English speakers never master the adjective/noun case/gender/plurality endings. Not sure how they screw up the plurality, that's at least fairly simple - genetive, the rest though...
With any language, once you know it, it isn't so bad, it's the learning part that is hard. I know people who know various combinations of the others.
Russian is definitely a challenge, and not because of the alphabet. From what I hear, Arabic isn't too hard - but my friend who speaks it is a linguistic genius, and 'not too hard' for her, covers a lot of ground, unfortunately.
mostly.
Two objects can be of equal quality without being equal. If object A is better at X, and object B is better at Y, they can be of equal quality, but depending on your task, one may still be better than the other.
By hiring people with MSOffice experience they
(1) Allow for better testing of ms-docformat compatibility
(2) Help find the 'Y' features that office is better at, and improve them, taking Google Docs from quality-parity to overall better quality.
An example of this. A friend of mine has a Mac, and on her Mac she has MS office in a Windows VM (because the Mac version, to everyone's total lack of surprise, sucks) and Apple's office program. Depending on what she is doing, she'll either use Microsoft Excel (better for data analysis) or Apple Calc(?) which does formatting and layout better.
She cannot describe either as a 'better' spreadsheet without knowing the task, because both are excellent, but not at quite the same things.
From what I can tell, the Surface pro doesn't provide anything on that list that isn't provided on my Toshiba Thrive (and I expect, on the newer Excite).
However, the Surface Pro does cost a lot more, and have a shorter battery life. If you find the advantage of using normal desktop applications on the table worth that tradeoff - go for it, otherwise, I wouldn't bother.
Actually, I suspect most androids have better alternate OS support than the Surface, given that you should be able to goldcard any of them, and then you just need to install your alt. OS. I'm not sure why Timmothy was complaining about that.
Most of those don't seem too unreasonable.
I know many Toshiba tablets (including my Thrive) have full sized USB ports (my thrive has 2), and full sized HDMI. Timmy should have done a little more research before buying his tablet.
I've used USB keyboards, mice and harddrives with the ports. I've connected my tablet to my 1080p TV with the HDMI.
There's always going to be some kind of grindfest when you compete against other players in terms of in-game character development. The only games that would lack that, are ones that don't have character's grow and develop, or have a very small growth range. Otherwise you'll always be grinding to beat that guy who's slightly better than you.
There are a lot of people who like that range of growth, and find the grindfest a worthwhile penalty for it.
That being said, given the nature of the character setup in The Elder Scrolls, I think a developer from Turbine who worked on AC1 would be a better for the development of TES:O.