The original point still stands. Like you said, Perfect Dark is from Rare (i'm going on what you said here). The first post is correct, Nintendo needs more then themselves and Rare to survive. Having Square and Konami back would help alot.
Do you remember when the N64 came out? How bout the Super Nintendo? Albeit, not as bad as the PS2, they weren't exactly easy to come by. They also came out circa pre E-Bay so it wasn't possible to just go and bid some obscene amount of money for the console. By next October, the PS2 will be available everywhere and the price will probably have dropped once which will make the Gamecube more expensive.
Unless the Gamecube offers something very good, it's going to hurt Nintendo pretty badly. They lost most of their 3rd party support to Sony after the N64, and a good number of their fans (myself included).
But back to point, the MSRB is meaningless until we see how many units are produced; the MSRB of a PS2 is $300, not $5000.
The only problem is that by the time the Gamecube comes out, the PS2 will be cheaper and easily available and right now, Sony has much more 3rd part support then Nintendo. Remember, Square, Konami and company were Nintendo developers and jumped ship to Sony. Nintendo will need to show something much better then Sony is doing to get those developers back.
Of course, this is all based on past history and assumption, so it may be completely incorrect when things actually go down.
It doesn't matter. The big impact of the article is that KDE developers said they wouldn't do something like this and then turned face and did. I use both KDE and Gnome and have found good and bad things in both of them. But the actions of the KDE developers make me feel like I'm back in Redmond.
Gtk+ is object oriented. Gtk-- is a c++ wrapper. Just because it's not written in C++ (or a so called object oriented language) doesn't stop it from being object oriented.
Re:I'm getting tired of this...
on
Men of Zeal
·
· Score: 1
If you're worried about working for a company making a profit, you're in the wrong industry.;-) (And damn it, nobody better take this seriously)
Bullshit. C++ doesn't encourage good design. You can write a straight C program using a C++ compiler and it won't complain once. How is that encouraging good design? Or any different a design from C? The only thing that matters when picking a language for a project is what you're most confortable with. Telling me python is a better choice is meaningless if I don't know python.
Re:KDE/GNOME war hurts developers...
on
KDE Strikes Back
·
· Score: 1
They could, as the Gnome team could remove Corba without affecting the interface. The point still stands however, the currently (IMHO) the benefits of Corba outweigh the problems considering how everyone (read MS, Sun, Oracle, IBM) want their apps to be embeddable over a network.
You might want to read some more. Windows does not have a good random number generator. GPG doesn't come with a good RNG. Until it does, keys generated under windows (or any other os without a good RNG such as/dev/random) are insecure.
Please also point out that the only things this ever applied to were apps that Helix wrote (like their installer). It never applied to the software they didn't write in house or existed before they formed.
Re:QT CAN BE USED for commercial projects,
on
KDE Strikes Back
·
· Score: 1
But not all of these companies want to release open source software yet still want to integrate nicely with a desktop. For these people (and you can be sure that IBM, Sun, HP, et.al. thought about this) you need to pay a licensing fee to use Qt. They've lived with that using Motif for how long now? Now they decided that they want a toolkit that can be used open or closed source without having to pay a fee. I personally don't think that is such a bad thing (I don't like closed source software, but I respect that some companies want to release that way).
Re:KDE/GNOME war hurts developers...
on
KDE Strikes Back
·
· Score: 1
Perhaps if Bonobo only used sockets for communication that would be true. Bonobo works in 3 different modes depending on the location of the client and server. The first is using shared memory. If both the client and server parts of the app are in the same process, then shared memory is used to communicate. The second is on the same machine. In that case IPC is used. The third case is the apps are on 2 different machines. Then Bonobo goes to using network sockets to communicate.
What does all that mean in real life? KDE's implementation requires recoding to make you're object network aware. Bonobo (using ORBit) will be slightly bigger and slower then KParts (simply because you have the ORB to deal with) but not significantly. Even the KDE developers said that most of the problems they had with Corba probably could have been fixed if they dropped mico and used ORBit or something similar. They, however, decided that KParts was good enough and just used it. My personal opinion is that they made a bad choice.
Nice troll. What does this have to do with the article? I like both desktops and use apps from both of them. Gnome users weren't saying anything until KDE users and developers starting writting article after article about how bad the Gnome Foundation is (and if you think it's bad, go bitch to the Apache Foundation too while you're at it). This kind of bickering is dumb. People develop for different systems for whatever their reason. You're name is be-fan, well I tried be and didn't like it. Do you hear me ranting about it all the time? Have I taken time out of my day to belittle something someone else has done just because I didn't like it for whatever reason? No. The problem many users (Gnome, KDE and non-DE) have right now is that a subset of KDE users and developers have done nothing but whined since the moment the announcement was made. Maybe they think this is the end of KDE (I for one hope not). Maybe they think they can't compete if big companies are helping Gnome out. Whatever the reason, don't sit there and troll with this holier then thou attitude about a handful of people.
Oh, and one last thing. Last time I checked, nobody was saying "how GNOME is going to totally take of the Linux desktop." What I've heard is "how KDE is scared to use" and from the way some of their users and the developers have spoken out about the Gnome Foundation (i.e. mindless FUd), it's true.
People can't defend there own rights. If took my code, what could I do? Take them to court? Maybe if I had the money. No, I'd get to piss and moan and hope for someone to come along and donate a lawyer or some money to do something about it. In a world where court cases are decided by who can throw the most money at it, people can't defend things like copyright on their own. And you're lying to yourself if you actually believe you can.
Have you tried to write portable software? The point to all of those typedef's is to ensure portability. If you looked at the code, you should have seen all the #ifdef's to see what the byte ordering and bitlength of different datatypes are. It's all just there to ease porting between platforms. An int is perfectly fine if you don't care if it's 32 or 64bits long. An int is not fine if you need it to be a certain length. And many of the typedef's are just there to ensure consistency. A gint is a wrapper around the systems's normal int. gint32 is a 32bit int. A gpointer is a void *. Nothing fancy there, it just makes all of your type declarations consistent (i.e. they all start with g).
And as far as calling the list/hash functions ineffecient, why don't you rewrite them using better algorithms. It's not that difficult (yes, I've looked at the code and they have been fast enough for everything I've done).
No, you really can't write any sizeable app without using a POSIX call. And many of GTK+/Gnome's wrapper calls just aren't always flexible enough to use. And you confuse VFS layers. The Gnome's layer is completely different from an OS. Their layer is to give you the same filesystem on different protocols... i.e. ftp and http. They still need the OS to actually access a disk.
And the whole compatibility layer comment is bullshit. Show me how to run mysql without a threads library. Show me how to run any X app without the X libraries. Does that mean they are compatility libraries? No, certain apps rely on certain libraries to run. To run a Gnome app you need the Gnome libraries, to run a KDE app you need the KDE libraries (or statically link either and that goes away). Either way, you can run Gnome apps under KDE and KDE apps under Gnome without any problems, assuming you have the libraries that they require installed.
Your FreeBSD comment falls apart under the same logic. FreeBSD has a linux loader/executor. But, linux apps need glibc and company to run. They aren't compatibility libaries, they are just the standard libraries an app needs to run cause that's how their author ran them.
If you really want to give a good example, Wine is a compatibility library. Now, do you want to say that Windows and Linux are the same OS with linux running Wine?
The article is good and bad. In general it's true. The standard posix utilites by themselves don't provide for much of a user experience. As the article states, however, Unix is an excellent operating system foundation. Unix with X and KDE or the GNOME is looking to be a good desktop. Unix with Apache/Samba/Bind/whatever make for great servers. Apple is hoping Unix+Aqua will be a replacement for MacOS.
The only real problem I have with the article is that he should be speaking of an operating environment. I use a web browser for at least an hour a day. But it shouldn't be in the OS. I use a GUI 90% of the day, but it shouldn't be in the OS. These are applications that have nothing to do with devices, memory, or i/o. Adding these applications results in buggy crash-prone operating systems like windows.
One way or another, Unix is a great OS, and a great foundation for building new tools for the developer, end user and network admin.
Bonobo is more open because it does not in any way depend on Gnome. Kparts, however, (last time I checked) depends on KDE. Any app can take advantage of Bonobo and not use any other part of the Gnome (besides ORBit of course). That is why it's less proprietary.
Well, although I did kind of hide it, I do agree with you that COM sucks. I've had to go thru the joys of Win32 programming myself and the only thing I enjoyed less than COM is MAPI. But, you must agree that COM is a fundamentally good idea. Code reuse is always a good idea. And Miguel admits that he got most of his ideas from Win32 docs. Lets just both hope that the actual implementation works the right way the first time. =)
And visual C++ 6 is a pretty good compiler and it does generate some damn good code, and it does optimize better then g++, but the damn thing crashes *way* to often for me.
You're arguing 2 different things here. The first is that IE is big, bloated, unstable, etc. That I will agree with. The second is that COM sucks. Somehow, you managed to infer the second argument from the first.
The idea behind the COM model doesn't suck. It's actually much closer to the lots of small programs that do one things really well and then string them together model of *nix. But, as Miguel points out in the paper, the string small apps together idea falls apart at a certain level. Right now under *nix, most apps do everything themselves. Again as Miguel points out, why don't Apache, Sendmail, Bind, et al use some of the same routines. They are all network daemons. They can all use similar init routines, security routines, etc. But they don't, each one rewrote the wheel. With a COM model, if I need an HTML renderer or an XML parser, I can get one. It shouldn't matter what language the component is in, I should just be able to use it.
Now, back to your first argument. Yes, the Microsoft implementation of COM might not be the best. And their components might be buggy and bloated. But we're talking open source here. Those components can be rewritten and fixed. The COM infrastructure can be debugged until it's perfect. You might as well say that C++ sucks as a langauge because Visual C++ is a shitty compiler. The two have nothing in common.
What is your point ? If you want a web browser, download one. Mozilla doesn't depend on GNOME or KDE, neither does good old netscape. If you want to use a GNOME app you need GNOME. Kinda like how if you want to run a Win32 app, you need the Win32 library. If you want to run a Mac app... yup, you need whatever libraries MacOS provides. Lets even jump back a step. Why do I have to install pthreads if I want to run mySQL ? Some programs have requirements, and some people decided that they are going to write a GNOME app. So, you can either download the libraries (I prefer them to come in several small libraries then in on 100+MB library) or you go off and write your own.
No one is forcing you to use GNOME or KDE or XFce, and some people genuinely like them.
Or maybe you can go to their web page and look. They also provide.deb's,.rpm's,.srpm's and.tar.gz's if you want to compile it on your own. The helix installer is just a frontend to whatever package manager you happen to have installed on your *nix flavor of choice.
GT is Epic's publisher (Unreal Tournament). And GT wouldn't even put the linux verion in the box, you had to download it (and I believe Loki now supports the Linux UT). Activision was the Win32 publisher for Q3A and Loki is the Linux publisher for Q3A.
I almost agree with you. When I first started using ports, I thought they were great. Then I wanted to upgrade GNOME. Oh, wait, there's no way to upgrade ports. So, I got to get a list of each and every package that seemed to have something to do with GNOME and delete them one by one, then go and reinstall the whole thing over again.
And if they go back and do it again, an apt-get like system would be nice. Compiling is great, but for some large software systems (ala KDE/GNOME) it just takes too long to compile the whole thing.
If they can fix those two problems, I'll agree that the ports system is the best out there. Until then, I'd have to say.deb's are the best.
Slashdot Mirror
The original point still stands. Like you said, Perfect Dark is from Rare (i'm going on what you said here). The first post is correct, Nintendo needs more then themselves and Rare to survive. Having Square and Konami back would help alot.
Do you remember when the N64 came out? How bout the Super Nintendo? Albeit, not as bad as the PS2, they weren't exactly easy to come by. They also came out circa pre E-Bay so it wasn't possible to just go and bid some obscene amount of money for the console. By next October, the PS2 will be available everywhere and the price will probably have dropped once which will make the Gamecube more expensive.
Unless the Gamecube offers something very good, it's going to hurt Nintendo pretty badly. They lost most of their 3rd party support to Sony after the N64, and a good number of their fans (myself included).
But back to point, the MSRB is meaningless until we see how many units are produced; the MSRB of a PS2 is $300, not $5000.
The only problem is that by the time the Gamecube comes out, the PS2 will be cheaper and easily available and right now, Sony has much more 3rd part support then Nintendo. Remember, Square, Konami and company were Nintendo developers and jumped ship to Sony. Nintendo will need to show something much better then Sony is doing to get those developers back. Of course, this is all based on past history and assumption, so it may be completely incorrect when things actually go down.
It doesn't matter. The big impact of the article is that KDE developers said they wouldn't do something like this and then turned face and did. I use both KDE and Gnome and have found good and bad things in both of them. But the actions of the KDE developers make me feel like I'm back in Redmond.
Just let them try and then they'll have to face the wrath of Amazon's patent lawyers. =)
Gtk+ is object oriented. Gtk-- is a c++ wrapper. Just because it's not written in C++ (or a so called object oriented language) doesn't stop it from being object oriented.
If you're worried about working for a company making a profit, you're in the wrong industry. ;-) (And damn it, nobody better take this seriously)
Bullshit. C++ doesn't encourage good design. You can write a straight C program using a C++ compiler and it won't complain once. How is that encouraging good design? Or any different a design from C? The only thing that matters when picking a language for a project is what you're most confortable with. Telling me python is a better choice is meaningless if I don't know python.
They could, as the Gnome team could remove Corba without affecting the interface. The point still stands however, the currently (IMHO) the benefits of Corba outweigh the problems considering how everyone (read MS, Sun, Oracle, IBM) want their apps to be embeddable over a network.
You might want to read some more. Windows does not have a good random number generator. GPG doesn't come with a good RNG. Until it does, keys generated under windows (or any other os without a good RNG such as /dev/random) are insecure.
Please also point out that the only things this ever applied to were apps that Helix wrote (like their installer). It never applied to the software they didn't write in house or existed before they formed.
But not all of these companies want to release open source software yet still want to integrate nicely with a desktop. For these people (and you can be sure that IBM, Sun, HP, et.al. thought about this) you need to pay a licensing fee to use Qt. They've lived with that using Motif for how long now? Now they decided that they want a toolkit that can be used open or closed source without having to pay a fee. I personally don't think that is such a bad thing (I don't like closed source software, but I respect that some companies want to release that way).
Perhaps if Bonobo only used sockets for communication that would be true. Bonobo works in 3 different modes depending on the location of the client and server. The first is using shared memory. If both the client and server parts of the app are in the same process, then shared memory is used to communicate. The second is on the same machine. In that case IPC is used. The third case is the apps are on 2 different machines. Then Bonobo goes to using network sockets to communicate.
What does all that mean in real life? KDE's implementation requires recoding to make you're object network aware. Bonobo (using ORBit) will be slightly bigger and slower then KParts (simply because you have the ORB to deal with) but not significantly. Even the KDE developers said that most of the problems they had with Corba probably could have been fixed if they dropped mico and used ORBit or something similar. They, however, decided that KParts was good enough and just used it. My personal opinion is that they made a bad choice.
Nice troll. What does this have to do with the article? I like both desktops and use apps from both of them. Gnome users weren't saying anything until KDE users and developers starting writting article after article about how bad the Gnome Foundation is (and if you think it's bad, go bitch to the Apache Foundation too while you're at it). This kind of bickering is dumb. People develop for different systems for whatever their reason. You're name is be-fan, well I tried be and didn't like it. Do you hear me ranting about it all the time? Have I taken time out of my day to belittle something someone else has done just because I didn't like it for whatever reason? No. The problem many users (Gnome, KDE and non-DE) have right now is that a subset of KDE users and developers have done nothing but whined since the moment the announcement was made. Maybe they think this is the end of KDE (I for one hope not). Maybe they think they can't compete if big companies are helping Gnome out. Whatever the reason, don't sit there and troll with this holier then thou attitude about a handful of people.
Oh, and one last thing. Last time I checked, nobody was saying "how GNOME is going to totally take of the Linux desktop." What I've heard is "how KDE is scared to use" and from the way some of their users and the developers have spoken out about the Gnome Foundation (i.e. mindless FUd), it's true.
People can't defend there own rights. If took my code, what could I do? Take them to court? Maybe if I had the money. No, I'd get to piss and moan and hope for someone to come along and donate a lawyer or some money to do something about it. In a world where court cases are decided by who can throw the most money at it, people can't defend things like copyright on their own. And you're lying to yourself if you actually believe you can.
Have you tried to write portable software? The point to all of those typedef's is to ensure portability. If you looked at the code, you should have seen all the #ifdef's to see what the byte ordering and bitlength of different datatypes are. It's all just there to ease porting between platforms. An int is perfectly fine if you don't care if it's 32 or 64bits long. An int is not fine if you need it to be a certain length. And many of the typedef's are just there to ensure consistency. A gint is a wrapper around the systems's normal int. gint32 is a 32bit int. A gpointer is a void *. Nothing fancy there, it just makes all of your type declarations consistent (i.e. they all start with g).
And as far as calling the list/hash functions ineffecient, why don't you rewrite them using better algorithms. It's not that difficult (yes, I've looked at the code and they have been fast enough for everything I've done).
No, you really can't write any sizeable app without using a POSIX call. And many of GTK+/Gnome's wrapper calls just aren't always flexible enough to use. And you confuse VFS layers. The Gnome's layer is completely different from an OS. Their layer is to give you the same filesystem on different protocols ... i.e. ftp and http. They still need the OS to actually access a disk.
And the whole compatibility layer comment is bullshit. Show me how to run mysql without a threads library. Show me how to run any X app without the X libraries. Does that mean they are compatility libraries? No, certain apps rely on certain libraries to run. To run a Gnome app you need the Gnome libraries, to run a KDE app you need the KDE libraries (or statically link either and that goes away). Either way, you can run Gnome apps under KDE and KDE apps under Gnome without any problems, assuming you have the libraries that they require installed.
Your FreeBSD comment falls apart under the same logic. FreeBSD has a linux loader/executor. But, linux apps need glibc and company to run. They aren't compatibility libaries, they are just the standard libraries an app needs to run cause that's how their author ran them.
If you really want to give a good example, Wine is a compatibility library. Now, do you want to say that Windows and Linux are the same OS with linux running Wine?
The article is good and bad. In general it's true. The standard posix utilites by themselves don't provide for much of a user experience. As the article states, however, Unix is an excellent operating system foundation. Unix with X and KDE or the GNOME is looking to be a good desktop. Unix with Apache/Samba/Bind/whatever make for great servers. Apple is hoping Unix+Aqua will be a replacement for MacOS.
The only real problem I have with the article is that he should be speaking of an operating environment. I use a web browser for at least an hour a day. But it shouldn't be in the OS. I use a GUI 90% of the day, but it shouldn't be in the OS. These are applications that have nothing to do with devices, memory, or i/o. Adding these applications results in buggy crash-prone operating systems like windows.
One way or another, Unix is a great OS, and a great foundation for building new tools for the developer, end user and network admin.
Bonobo is more open because it does not in any way depend on Gnome. Kparts, however, (last time I checked) depends on KDE. Any app can take advantage of Bonobo and not use any other part of the Gnome (besides ORBit of course). That is why it's less proprietary.
Well, although I did kind of hide it, I do agree with you that COM sucks. I've had to go thru the joys of Win32 programming myself and the only thing I enjoyed less than COM is MAPI. But, you must agree that COM is a fundamentally good idea. Code reuse is always a good idea. And Miguel admits that he got most of his ideas from Win32 docs. Lets just both hope that the actual implementation works the right way the first time. =)
And visual C++ 6 is a pretty good compiler and it does generate some damn good code, and it does optimize better then g++, but the damn thing crashes *way* to often for me.
You're arguing 2 different things here. The first is that IE is big, bloated, unstable, etc. That I will agree with. The second is that COM sucks. Somehow, you managed to infer the second argument from the first.
The idea behind the COM model doesn't suck. It's actually much closer to the lots of small programs that do one things really well and then string them together model of *nix. But, as Miguel points out in the paper, the string small apps together idea falls apart at a certain level. Right now under *nix, most apps do everything themselves. Again as Miguel points out, why don't Apache, Sendmail, Bind, et al use some of the same routines. They are all network daemons. They can all use similar init routines, security routines, etc. But they don't, each one rewrote the wheel. With a COM model, if I need an HTML renderer or an XML parser, I can get one. It shouldn't matter what language the component is in, I should just be able to use it.
Now, back to your first argument. Yes, the Microsoft implementation of COM might not be the best. And their components might be buggy and bloated. But we're talking open source here. Those components can be rewritten and fixed. The COM infrastructure can be debugged until it's perfect. You might as well say that C++ sucks as a langauge because Visual C++ is a shitty compiler. The two have nothing in common.
What is your point ? If you want a web browser, download one. Mozilla doesn't depend on GNOME or KDE, neither does good old netscape. If you want to use a GNOME app you need GNOME. Kinda like how if you want to run a Win32 app, you need the Win32 library. If you want to run a Mac app ... yup, you need whatever libraries MacOS provides. Lets even jump back a step. Why do I have to install pthreads if I want to run mySQL ? Some programs have requirements, and some people decided that they are going to write a GNOME app. So, you can either download the libraries (I prefer them to come in several small libraries then in on 100+MB library) or you go off and write your own.
No one is forcing you to use GNOME or KDE or XFce, and some people genuinely like them.
Or maybe you can go to their web page and look. They also provide .deb's, .rpm's, .srpm's and .tar.gz's if you want to compile it on your own. The helix installer is just a frontend to whatever package manager you happen to have installed on your *nix flavor of choice.
GT is Epic's publisher (Unreal Tournament). And GT wouldn't even put the linux verion in the box, you had to download it (and I believe Loki now supports the Linux UT). Activision was the Win32 publisher for Q3A and Loki is the Linux publisher for Q3A.
Hope that helps.
I almost agree with you. When I first started using ports, I thought they were great. Then I wanted to upgrade GNOME. Oh, wait, there's no way to upgrade ports. So, I got to get a list of each and every package that seemed to have something to do with GNOME and delete them one by one, then go and reinstall the whole thing over again.
.deb's are the best.
And if they go back and do it again, an apt-get like system would be nice. Compiling is great, but for some large software systems (ala KDE/GNOME) it just takes too long to compile the whole thing.
If they can fix those two problems, I'll agree that the ports system is the best out there. Until then, I'd have to say