If you really do C++ for a living then you probably know about Boost, which does a lot of the important things that other languages may have built in (such as threads and sockets).
I may have hypothetically have done exactly this too. Nothing to do, no one is calling because their shit is breaking (summer), had an empty lab for the 2 tech monkeys.
I looked it up, and go figure - it's Crysis. Possibly the most unoptimized piece of crap ever written, and even if it were optimized, it'd still be demanding. I mean a normal game that can fit within system and video memory of normal gamers, or can load not-so-often enough that the FPS doesn't change so much.
Quit digging, XP executes it by default - You can prevent it from doing so, but it will execute it unless you know some arcane shortcut that no one knows exists. In Vista/7, the default is to ASK. And it doesn't do *anything* unless you tell it to. That's a WORLD of difference.
They do not execute Autorun.exe (or inf, w/e) by default, they ask if you want to execute the default. In the world of autorun, that is a massive difference.
Once again, AndrewNeo is right: Windows Vista and 7 do not execute *anything* by default, unlike XP. They *ask* if you want to execute.
First of all, please learn the difference between <strong> and <a href="">. One is bold, the other is a reference.
Don't act like an idiot, it's obvious what I meant.
Secondly, the “default” choice is still to execute the autorun. You just have to click Ok before it will perform the default action. I never said it autoruns without any prompting whatsoever; it prompts, and the default (highlighted) option is to autorun.
So AndrewNeo was right then, not wrong. Jesus. I'm pointing how how you contradicted yourself within one sentence and you wrote an essay about the semantics of autorun.
Except your bold "WRONG" statement applied to "Vista and 7 don't execute Autorun.exe by default.", which has nothing to do with whether a user is stupid or not. Fact is, Vista and 7 do not execute anything autorun by default. They ask you first.
God damn, you don't have to be so fucking literal about everything. If the user sees "AUTOPLAY" and clicks "OK", then he selected it and approves.
99% of the time the user wants to run autoplay, because he's inserting a CD, DVD or a software disk. The only valid thing to do here is to pop that menu and let him "confirm", as you said.
Lately, there was a patch that caused a BSoD on malware-infested machines. I can guarantee you that I can cause a kernel panic on your machine if you run my malware as root.
AMD capable motherboards tend to be a lot cheaper, that can easily save you enough money on a highly capable gaming system to replace the HD with an SSD, and that will have far more influence on game performance then the Intel chip will. In gaming, AMD performs a lot better. Always make sure to read the entire review of a CPU for the stats that are relevant to you. For instance, if you once in a blue moon use Office and never use a database on your PC, what do you care about how fast/slow your CPU is at them?
Huh what? SSDs won't change your game performance at all. You'll take 10 seconds less to load, but you'll still lag running around the game world. The Intel chip, however, will give you higher FPS (which is what matters in games), indeed at a slightly higher price.
I don't know why you're calling me retarded when you're the one who is assuming that the file table getting corrupted is relevant - It's not. First off, it doesn't really happen to people with working hardware, and second off, people usually reboot their computers regularly regardless of OS. So the same would happen on Linux with that broken hard drive.
I don't care what he said, telnet is still in 64-bit Windows. You're just as uninformed if you simply use his non-fact as part of the basis for not using Windows. There's plenty of reasons not to use Windows, and plenty of reasons not to use Linux, but lack of a telnet client that in fact exists, is not one of them. Also nmap works just fine on WinXP. More FUD, yay!
Slashdot Mirror
Except MS doesn't randomly expire keys for kicks and giggles.
QWERTY was technically better considering it didn't jam your typewriter.
If you really do C++ for a living then you probably know about Boost, which does a lot of the important things that other languages may have built in (such as threads and sockets).
At that point in time it was the only way to be sure.
I may have hypothetically have done exactly this too. Nothing to do, no one is calling because their shit is breaking (summer), had an empty lab for the 2 tech monkeys.
At their slippers?
I looked it up, and go figure - it's Crysis. Possibly the most unoptimized piece of crap ever written, and even if it were optimized, it'd still be demanding. I mean a normal game that can fit within system and video memory of normal gamers, or can load not-so-often enough that the FPS doesn't change so much.
I understand that, I just differentiate between "executing without asking" as a default and "executing after asking" as a default.
Quit digging, XP executes it by default - You can prevent it from doing so, but it will execute it unless you know some arcane shortcut that no one knows exists. In Vista/7, the default is to ASK. And it doesn't do *anything* unless you tell it to. That's a WORLD of difference.
Vista and 7 don't execute Autorun.exe by default.
They do not execute Autorun.exe (or inf, w/e) by default, they ask if you want to execute the default. In the world of autorun, that is a massive difference.
Once again, AndrewNeo is right: Windows Vista and 7 do not execute *anything* by default, unlike XP. They *ask* if you want to execute.
First of all, please learn the difference between <strong> and <a href="">. One is bold, the other is a reference.
Don't act like an idiot, it's obvious what I meant.
Secondly, the “default” choice is still to execute the autorun. You just have to click Ok before it will perform the default action. I never said it autoruns without any prompting whatsoever; it prompts, and the default (highlighted) option is to autorun.
So AndrewNeo was right then, not wrong. Jesus. I'm pointing how how you contradicted yourself within one sentence and you wrote an essay about the semantics of autorun.
Except your bold "WRONG" statement applied to "Vista and 7 don't execute Autorun.exe by default.", which has nothing to do with whether a user is stupid or not. Fact is, Vista and 7 do not execute anything autorun by default. They ask you first.
God damn, you don't have to be so fucking literal about everything. If the user sees "AUTOPLAY" and clicks "OK", then he selected it and approves.
99% of the time the user wants to run autoplay, because he's inserting a CD, DVD or a software disk. The only valid thing to do here is to pop that menu and let him "confirm", as you said.
So me and AndrewNeo are right, then? Autoplay will be ran only if you select it? Good. Carry on.
Just like UAC will run programs with admin privileges if you give it permission to run them.
You don't tell it to. It asks. All you have to do is click "Yes".
Lately, there was a patch that caused a BSoD on malware-infested machines. I can guarantee you that I can cause a kernel panic on your machine if you run my malware as root.
You mean the device will autoplay if you tell it to autoplay? Oh my god!
AMD capable motherboards tend to be a lot cheaper, that can easily save you enough money on a highly capable gaming system to replace the HD with an SSD, and that will have far more influence on game performance then the Intel chip will. In gaming, AMD performs a lot better. Always make sure to read the entire review of a CPU for the stats that are relevant to you. For instance, if you once in a blue moon use Office and never use a database on your PC, what do you care about how fast/slow your CPU is at them?
Huh what? SSDs won't change your game performance at all. You'll take 10 seconds less to load, but you'll still lag running around the game world. The Intel chip, however, will give you higher FPS (which is what matters in games), indeed at a slightly higher price.
Except she probably doesn't call him every patch tuesday.
Except you don't have to keep pumping money into CPU time. You just plug it in and it raises the power bill, which is normal because it's a computer.
Or, you could, you know, just carry a key around.
Yeah, which means you're essentially forced to carry a set of regular keys for your car, house, etc. anyway.
Because you're Jason Bourne?
I don't know why you're calling me retarded when you're the one who is assuming that the file table getting corrupted is relevant - It's not. First off, it doesn't really happen to people with working hardware, and second off, people usually reboot their computers regularly regardless of OS. So the same would happen on Linux with that broken hard drive.
I don't care what he said, telnet is still in 64-bit Windows. You're just as uninformed if you simply use his non-fact as part of the basis for not using Windows. There's plenty of reasons not to use Windows, and plenty of reasons not to use Linux, but lack of a telnet client that in fact exists, is not one of them. Also nmap works just fine on WinXP. More FUD, yay!