Replying to myself. How bad is that!? Well, I've done my homework and learned a couple of nice things on the subject.
On classic MVC, each widget is decomposed on a View/Controller pair. Controller changes model, view get updated by observing model.
Then you have MVP (model view presenter), which defends that you are supposed to have sort of a unique controller for all widgets. The controller part of each widget get the event and calls the presenter (main controller) to ask for a chance at the model. Still, the view part get updated by notification. It observers the model directly. This way, much of the logic that would end up dispersed on a couple of small controllers would get bunched together at the Presenter (main Controller)
The final twist is when you have a Passive View. This is a View that is as dumb as possible. It could even stop listening to the Model. On this case, the controller should observe the Model and update the Passive View accordingly
From TFA: "The system, which IBM calls the Open Collaboration Client, combines the Linux operating system with IBM's open source Lotus Symphony desktop package."
giving away 100 gifts on a daily basis, all for a $1 fixed price"
Isn't this wrong? If you charge for something, you are not giving it away, right? It seem that it is more like selling for a cheap price that anything else...
One of the things I stumble with MVC is the following. First, note that I am talking about desktop applications, and not web...
The view is supposed to present model's data, right? Should the view do it by directly observing the model or the controller should observe it and then notify the view if something changes?
But the least of my problems is banning! What pisses me off is the lack o freedom to do whaterver a want with my license (give it away, combine it with another steam account, etc, etc)
The problem is the license is already tied to the guy's account and he plays other stuff online. I can't just log in with his account because this would prevent him from playing his other games.
I don't get it. I've spent money on steam stuff before. If I do it again, isn't an additional instance of something that happened before? Why can't I say "again"?
With the bonus that I am talking about a real case in the software industry!;-) Brazilian prices for software are unbelievable when compared with middle class wages. The price they charge now is more reasonable
I wouldn't mind paying a small fee for the transfer. It drives me crazy to see that it is not possible. It would drive me crazy too if I had to pay, lets say, 20 bucks to transfer a $25 game
Trolling some times is funny, heh!? You buy a car and then sell it to me. Is ford giving me a free car? I guess no... The same applies here.
This specific license of the game is not that important to me. But this case points out the bad scenarios I would have to deal with if I buy steam games. So, its no steam for me at all. Ever.
Mmmm, you understand me wrongly. There are other issues regarding steam besides VAC protected cheating. My case is a used game that can't be transfered from my friend's account to mine. The guy want to give it to me but steam doesn't allow this kind of stuff. On console gaming I would just go home with the disk and bam. The game is mine from now on.
Microsoft cut their prices in Brazil in half. You know what happened with their profit? Went up 500%. They sold 10 TIMES MORE.That says quite a lot about piracy, IMO.
90% piracy with 10 times more sales is nothing. They put DRM and the total sales go down with piracy counts...
In fact the only people I've heard about who have had their accounts disabled or VAC bans are almost always cheating/hacking in some way or engaged in some other nefarious activity.
And what happen with those that don't? They get fucked and loose their money. No, thank's. Steam is out for me.
Note that the account kill switch is a multiple-game license kill switch. If someone at Valve's decides that you are a fucking bastard, he can take away from you a bunch of licenses that are worth hundreds of dollars. This is the worst type of DRM I've ever seen. It combines all your stuff in one package that is all or nothing.
And that's the reason I am began to get more interested in console games. PC games are getting to crippled. The license is mine and I should have the right to pass it along just as a xbox or PS3 disk.
They will just plain kill pc gaming if this becomes a trend
My case was very simple. A friend of mine bought Half Life 2 and didn't liked it (crazy guy...), so he gave me the game.
Only then I figured out that it is impossible to transfer a game from one account to another! There is no way I can play the game without stopping him from playing his other games. I contacted steam support and they just told me that it is impossible to transfer the game.
This really sucks. I, for one, just began to hate valve and steam. I don't intend to spend my money there ever again.
I do not however have to live with your claim that large numbers of people use office suites to do nothing more than write letters based on the anecdotal example
Well, I came here to listen to other's experience and tell them mine. If you refuse to live with my claim that I know a lot of people that don't print labels, then we have two choices:
1) You kill yourself, which I don't want to happen my any means
2) I stop telling you my experience on the subject.
Slashdot Mirror
Replying to myself. How bad is that!? Well, I've done my homework and learned a couple of nice things on the subject.
On classic MVC, each widget is decomposed on a View/Controller pair. Controller changes model, view get updated by observing model.
Then you have MVP (model view presenter), which defends that you are supposed to have sort of a unique controller for all widgets. The controller part of each widget get the event and calls the presenter (main controller) to ask for a chance at the model. Still, the view part get updated by notification. It observers the model directly. This way, much of the logic that would end up dispersed on a couple of small controllers would get bunched together at the Presenter (main Controller)
The final twist is when you have a Passive View. This is a View that is as dumb as possible. It could even stop listening to the Model. On this case, the controller should observe the Model and update the Passive View accordingly
Nice idea. It is a little cumbersome as I had to call him every time I wanna play, but it's better than nothing.
From TFA: "The system, which IBM calls the Open Collaboration Client, combines the Linux operating system with IBM's open source Lotus Symphony desktop package."
I see nothing special in here...
giving away 100 gifts on a daily basis, all for a $1 fixed price"
Isn't this wrong? If you charge for something, you are not giving it away, right? It seem that it is more like selling for a cheap price that anything else...
And now he hast to get a Vista version. That sound really bad for science!
One of the things I stumble with MVC is the following. First, note that I am talking about desktop applications, and not web...
The view is supposed to present model's data, right? Should the view do it by directly observing the model or the controller should observe it and then notify the view if something changes?
But the least of my problems is banning! What pisses me off is the lack o freedom to do whaterver a want with my license (give it away, combine it with another steam account, etc, etc)
No, I am basically avoiding future headaches. It is a lot more simples than you are making it sound.
The problem is the license is already tied to the guy's account and he plays other stuff online. I can't just log in with his account because this would prevent him from playing his other games.
I don't get it. I've spent money on steam stuff before. If I do it again, isn't an additional instance of something that happened before? Why can't I say "again"?
With the bonus that I am talking about a real case in the software industry! ;-) Brazilian prices for software are unbelievable when compared with middle class wages. The price they charge now is more reasonable
And it can't be transfered!? Crap! Am I the only one who thinks this is outrageous?!
I wouldn't mind paying a small fee for the transfer. It drives me crazy to see that it is not possible. It would drive me crazy too if I had to pay, lets say, 20 bucks to transfer a $25 game
Trolling some times is funny, heh!? You buy a car and then sell it to me. Is ford giving me a free car? I guess no... The same applies here.
This specific license of the game is not that important to me. But this case points out the bad scenarios I would have to deal with if I buy steam games. So, its no steam for me at all. Ever.
Mmmm, you understand me wrongly. There are other issues regarding steam besides VAC protected cheating. My case is a used game that can't be transfered from my friend's account to mine. The guy want to give it to me but steam doesn't allow this kind of stuff. On console gaming I would just go home with the disk and bam. The game is mine from now on.
Microsoft cut their prices in Brazil in half. You know what happened with their profit? Went up 500%. They sold 10 TIMES MORE.That says quite a lot about piracy, IMO.
90% piracy with 10 times more sales is nothing. They put DRM and the total sales go down with piracy counts...
In short. Steam improves things for the company and fucks-up the user. I agreed 100% with you
In fact the only people I've heard about who have had their accounts disabled or VAC bans are almost always cheating/hacking in some way or engaged in some other nefarious activity.
And what happen with those that don't? They get fucked and loose their money. No, thank's. Steam is out for me.
You say so until you, as a legitimate user, asks them for something (like a license transfer) and get a no-no as an answer.
Agreed. But I still wanna play Half Life 2 on a DRM-free way
Note that the account kill switch is a multiple-game license kill switch. If someone at Valve's decides that you are a fucking bastard, he can take away from you a bunch of licenses that are worth hundreds of dollars. This is the worst type of DRM I've ever seen. It combines all your stuff in one package that is all or nothing.
And that's the reason I am began to get more interested in console games. PC games are getting to crippled. The license is mine and I should have the right to pass it along just as a xbox or PS3 disk.
They will just plain kill pc gaming if this becomes a trend
My case was very simple. A friend of mine bought Half Life 2 and didn't liked it (crazy guy...), so he gave me the game.
Only then I figured out that it is impossible to transfer a game from one account to another! There is no way I can play the game without stopping him from playing his other games. I contacted steam support and they just told me that it is impossible to transfer the game.
This really sucks. I, for one, just began to hate valve and steam. I don't intend to spend my money there ever again.
I do not however have to live with your claim that large numbers of people use office suites to do nothing more than write letters based on the anecdotal example
Well, I came here to listen to other's experience and tell them mine. If you refuse to live with my claim that I know a lot of people that don't print labels, then we have two choices:
1) You kill yourself, which I don't want to happen my any means
2) I stop telling you my experience on the subject.
That being said, I will stop this thread here
I never RTFAs but I'm sure a mouse is quite a bit more complicated than a 1/4 pounder with cheese and a super sized coca-cola.
Sorry man, but you are being redundant. This is slashdot. Of course you didn't RTFAs.