Note, wa are talking about old game !!!. Ask Carmak to release Quake 4 ( or whatever.. I don't play this stuff) under GPL and see how he responds. Just a bit of reality.
I tend to agree with you that this seems silly but on the other hand, that's his job - to explore things like that. Boring job, I should add but it's just me...
Well last time I checked, gcc was generally slowest of all 3 major commercial compilers ( MS, Borland, Watcom.) So why would you want to recompile release version with that ?
Some of them are , some of them don't. Windows is not the best solution for everything but it is an option , viable option. It is not 3.11 days anymore..
Well, it might but I surely hope that we will not end up with "... a move that would allow competitors to create and sell their own modified versions of Windows."
Think about it - 10 different versions of Windows from ten different companies ? This is recipe for disaster ( specially for software developers on Windows - support nightmare)
You talking about writing entrire programs in ASM , I am talking about optimizing specific , usually small part of program. Of course compiler will do better job cause it can apply optimization to the whole program... But it will never do a better job for something small and specific like transparent run-lenght encoded blit. Half decent asm programmer will always be able to roll faster routine simply because he knows more at the problem at hand than compiler does.
Heeheh... assembler version ? You know, C _is_ assembler version when it gets executed.
"Expressing the problem specification at a higher level allows greater degrees of freedom to the optimization machinery. "
It is exactly the other way around. It is true that sometimes compiler can generated better asm code than begining asm programmer but only because it has hardcoded knowledge about particular ASM. However, hardcored knowledge can't compete with flexible mind the same way, expert systems can't compete with real thinking person...
Netware is faster but hardly more stable... Maybe recently something changed but before.. hehe, ever tried to run crappy NLMs there ? or running short on memory ?
Nice theory. Unfortunatelly, as it is now, niether of two sides can use "bits from other software" , thanks to copyright laws and GPL. In fact, if you look at this closely, GPL is just as restrictive as standart copyright... you are allowed to use code only under very specific restriction. Basically, GPL "protects" rights of GPL developers in the same sense that copyright protects commercial products but only in regard to using the code by other developers. Its design is completely biased to the customer side who has all the rights and leaves developers with no asurance whatsoever that their idea will make them money... I don't like GPL.
Niether Europe nor USA has any alternative to MS dekstop OS. Beside, most companies don't give a damn about this stuff.. as long as Windows works for them ( and generally it does )
Yes. But how much time does it take to implement this in Linux ? Don't assume anything... just typical Windows user who got his Linux box preinstalled.
Unfortunately, Watcom C++ is no more... Borland is not being used so the only option is VC++ ( and 90% of the code available for Windows APIs will compile with MS compiler)
MIRC is not MS chat !! On the other hand, even MS Comic Chat can be turned into quite decent "standard" IRC client ( this comic-book crap can be easily turned off )
Of course, I don't mind having latest software for Linux . I was simply responding that there are valid reasons why some companies still refuse to port their products to Linux. It might change but for now, Linux is mostly server OS and I can live with that.
Slashdot Mirror
This is in the FAQ. Go and check it out - it is quite interesting.
No it is not you. Specially last couple weeks ( connection makes no difference, T1-56 , different provider )
It is getting worse.
Sorry, but idea of people working together for the good of "community" failed.
It doesn't work. People are at their best when working for themselves.
Dream On..
.. I don't play this stuff) under GPL and see how he responds.
Note, wa are talking about old game !!!. Ask Carmak to release Quake 4 ( or whatever
Just a bit of reality.
I tend to agree with you that this seems silly but on the other hand, that's his job - to explore things like that. Boring job, I should add but it's just me ...
Nope. I was talking about executables created by GCC not the compile time.
Well last time I checked, gcc was generally slowest of all 3 major commercial compilers ( MS, Borland, Watcom .) So why would you want to recompile release version with that ?
Really ? You remember what happend in Unix world during 80s ?
Some of them are , some of them don't. Windows is not the best solution for everything but it is an option , viable option. It is not 3.11 days anymore..
Well, it might but I surely hope that we will not end up with "... a move that would allow competitors to create and sell their own modified versions of Windows."
Think about it - 10 different versions of Windows from ten different companies ? This is recipe for disaster ( specially for software developers on Windows - support nightmare)
Windows is way more stable than Wine ... so your comment is well ... pointless ?
You talking about writing entrire programs in ASM , I am talking about optimizing specific , usually small part of program. Of course compiler will do better job cause it can apply optimization to the whole program ... But it will never do a better job for something small and specific like transparent run-lenght encoded blit.
Half decent asm programmer will always be able to roll faster routine simply because he knows more at the problem at hand than compiler does.
Heeheh ... assembler version ?
...
You know, C _is_ assembler version when it gets executed.
"Expressing the problem specification at a higher level allows greater degrees of freedom to the optimization machinery. "
It is exactly the other way around.
It is true that sometimes compiler can generated better asm code than begining asm programmer but only because it has hardcoded knowledge about particular ASM. However, hardcored knowledge can't compete with flexible mind the same way, expert systems can't compete with real thinking person
SMP support in Windows is way ahead as compared with Linux ...
.... ..
If you don't know about that then obviously you know nothing about Windows
Huh,, just anonther vi expert
Netware is faster but hardly more stable ... .. hehe, ever tried to run crappy NLMs there ? or running short on memory ?
Maybe recently something changed but before
Netware is stable , in the way DOS was.
Nice theory. Unfortunatelly, as it is now, niether of two sides can use "bits from other software" , thanks to copyright laws and GPL. ... you are allowed to use code only under very specific restriction. Basically, GPL "protects" rights of GPL developers in the same sense that copyright protects commercial products but only in regard to using the code by other developers. Its design is completely biased to the customer side who has all the rights and leaves developers with no asurance whatsoever that their idea will make them money...
In fact, if you look at this closely, GPL is just as restrictive as standart copyright
I don't like GPL.
So, basically you admit that Open Source will not pay bills. Thank you.
Niether Europe nor USA has any alternative to MS dekstop OS. .. as long as Windows works for them ( and generally it does )
Beside, most companies don't give a damn about this stuff
French revolution was a disaster that keeps hounting humanity to this day.
.)
Monopoly is not illegal if obtained by legal means ( and shouldn't be
In general, nothing is illegal that is not specifically prohibited by the law.
That's why I left Europe. I don't like society where it is widely accepted that goverment knows better how to spend my money than I do ...
Yes. But how much time does it take to implement this in Linux ? ... just typical Windows user who got his Linux box preinstalled.
Don't assume anything
Unfortunately, Watcom C++ is no more ... Borland is not being used so the only option is VC++ ( and 90% of the code available for Windows APIs will compile with MS compiler)
MIRC is not MS chat !! On the other hand, even MS Comic Chat can be turned into quite decent "standard" IRC client ( this comic-book crap can be easily turned off )
Of course, I don't mind having latest software for Linux . I was simply responding that there are valid reasons why some companies still refuse to port their products to Linux.
It might change but for now, Linux is mostly server OS and I can live with that.
Why no Linux player ? Maybe because they recognize Linux for what it is - a decent server and not desktop machine ( and certainly not mulitmedia box )
Right tool for the job.