You mean hardly anyone buys a Mac for the games. However, people really do buy games for the Mac and ALL of the titles in 3d are using OpenGL these days because there ain't no way in Hell the MS would put out Direct3d on the Mac. It might seem like the game market is slim for the Mac and for a corporate game dev house IT IS NON-EXISTENT. But for independent developers you can actually make a nice living making games for the Mac that flat out won't sell on the PC due to the large amount of competition with other small time developers. -Just another way to look at why you might choose to develop using OpenGL.
1) Avoid Technical Risk -- don't develop new game engines. Use an existing engine and plug new content into it.
It's not bad that they prefer to use an existing game engine. Really. At this point, game engines are really like the DVD player is to Hollywood. The amount of effort and talent that it takes to harness new technology as fast as it comes out is huge. Better to subdivide that task off to other sectors of the industry than to push it in-house. I'm not knocking what you're saying but I think the situation has changed in the last few years so maybe what you're saying isn't entirely relevent with this particular example. I agree with all your points for the most part but using an existing engine is not limited to or consisting only of "plugging in new content". At this point I believe we're actually better off on every level by companies taking advantage of the latest offerings from the game engine developers.
My mom actually believed it. LOL!!! She came to me and said, "Uh, I think there's something wrong with the computer." Judging by the tone of her voice I said, "Oh, shit, what did you manage to do this time?" I got to the computer and I asked her what in the Hell she clicked on. I was rolling on the floor after that one!!! What's even funnier is that she was using a Mac!!! You gotta love that one! Those guys are geniuses in they're own respect. They deserve the honor of getting sued for it IMO.
So, I can tell you all that it is coming. There are people at universities who realize that this is a big deal.
I understand your assertion, but... Those people who "realize that this is a big deal" don't happen to be the same people who run the books in the collection office. You know, that office behind that little curtain that no one ever notices? Look, in reality, colleges/universities/etc. are in the business of making money. The game industry does not make much money compared to traditional computing such as databases, word processors, blah blah blah. The only capacity that they'll ever include game design courses in will be that token "Let's attract some more students with a COOL course or two for the suckers out there, Bob." course. I do hear you, but there is a financial reality to the business of educating people that must be overcome first and that reality happens to be somewhere around 100 billion dollars in the case of software engineers. Call me a skeptic but I don't think the situation will change as soon as you think it will.
Well, you said it right there. The video game industry is worth roughly 10 billion I think. That's about what Apple is worth annually... Roughly... I think... The PC software industry as I've heard it is worth over 100 billion annually. Universities make money by getting students to come to their campus and fork over lots of money to teach them the skills to get hired. The university/college teaches skills that pertain to the largest segments of employable fields to accomplish this. You'll see more education for the game industry when you see more education for getting a job working for Apple. IOW, prolly not for a long time if ever.
I think this is great for the taxi drivers because now they can actually turn this around and profit from it. All they have to do now is get the radio stations to pay THEM for choosing their radio station to play for the taxi customers. Nice!
Dude, that's really cool. I'm going to try that. How much of "shift your weight" do you mean? As much as you can without falling over, or just a few inches? Or maybe just enough to simulate the space between the eyes? 3d glasses/viewers are not really in widespread use, much less cameras. I think that some day they probably will be. Until then it's nice to have a good, cheap, easy technique to make those cool photographic moments available for the future when they can be converted for the use then.
I read the first one several years ago, Red Mars( At least I think it was the first one IIRC ), and I was totally into it at first. But then it seemed to fall apart into the last half or so and I just couldn't understand why he decided to focus so much on the effed up personal interactions and I decided to put it down. Maybe I was tired at some crucial point in the plot but I got lost. But I must say that the first half was by far the coolest portrayal of a hypothetically real manned mission to Mars I've ever read.
I must be visiting the evil robotic imposter/. instead. I mean, this is a *minor* update for Mac OS X as far as I'm concerned. I would have crapped my pants two years ago if/. posted something like this just to "let me know". Must be a slow news day or something. And before you tag me as trolling just keep in mind that I've been a long time Mac user and/. reader. This stuff is getting weird around here.
Okay, let's test your filter. I hate you. How does that make you feel? Do you really care? Does it offend you in some way? Isn't this at all interesting to you that we're talking about hate? This would, presumably, be filtered out automatically so you'd never have to see it again right? Free speech must be defended as an absolute because it's the easiest right to take away. Taking away any part of it sets a precedent that makes it easier to take away the next hardest part and so on. We have to put up with all the crappy side effects to do this. Proof? There are lots and lots of history books out there so I won't quote here but that is where you can find your proof. And just remember when you're searching for that proof that nobody is making you read only one version of that history. Think about it. I can read Mein Kampf and I can read the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich just the same. To me, one of them is obviously hateful and incorrect but they both speak of the same portion of history. Can you guess which one I'm talking about? Is it up to me or you? Or would you rather say that it's okay for your government(s) to take one of them away letting them have control, possibly removing my belief in the truth about what happened because the other side of the story was not there for me to judge for myself? Please, think about this.
This is exactly the kind of crap that other countries do to their citizens that makes people come to the U.S. legally or otherwise. I'm sorry, I just had to puke that out of my system. It may sound like I hate illegal immigrants from this statement. Which is simply is not true but I'd bet they'd filter me out regardless. Then I wouldn't even get the opportunity to tell them I hate them for hating me thinking that I hate someone else... This is stupid! Sheesh, when will they stop cranking out the morons? Can I hate morons? Pleeez? Or would that mean that I hate myself? Could I do that? Where would it stop? Okay, I'll stop. Here. No here... N
The reason I don't own a 2-button mouse is because Apple has yet to make one.
Screw Apple, try the Microsoft Intellimouse or Explorer. I have the Intellimouse. It doesn't suck. The only reason Apple only makes a one button mouse anymore is to really encourage developers to make apps work with only one button LIKE THEY SHOULD! But as a user, you should be aware of the fact that OS X has decent, built-in support for multi-button mice with scroll wheels and more. Use them. They are good.
{$IFC NOT OPAQUE_TOOLBOX_STRUCTS }
DialogRecordPtr = ^DialogRecord;
DialogRecord = RECORD
window: WindowRecord; { in Carbon use GetDialogWindow or GetDialogPort }
items: Handle; { in Carbon use Get/SetDialogItem }
textH: TEHandle; { in Carbon use GetDialogTextEditHandle }
editField: SInt16; { in Carbon use SelectDialogItemText }
editOpen: SInt16; { not available in Carbon }
aDefItem: SInt16; { in Carbon use Get/SetDialogDefaultItem }
END;
DialogPeek = ^DialogRecord; {$ENDC}
Is this "backwards compatible"? I'll send you the whole damned directory if you want it. I'll send a copy of MPW if you want it. You'll have to buy Codewarrior yourself if you're not satisfied with MPW's pascal tools.
I didn't use an example of a system call, it was a system callback. I specified that. I used an example from Cabon in OS X to point out that even Apple's own routines were written in pascal so I don't see how you could actually say that they provided "no support".
I hear you. But I think that where Carmack is coming from here is the fact that no matter how you look at what they do, the end result is still an entertainment product. Plain and simple. Trying to characterize it as something else is simply incorrect. At least from the public's perspective. You're a programmer. You know damn well that what you do is an art. Carmack knows that too. That doesn't mean he should go crying from the highest tree that his game is really an art-form and not a game! Especially not let someone else characterize his own product in their own words. That would would be "a kind of sophistry from people who want to aggrandize our industry", as he says. And I couldn't agree more with that particular reply.
I know this is way off topic, but I had to post it somewhere. About ten minutes ago (9:16 MSDT) I happened to see something explode over West Texas crossing the sky. Not like anyone really gives a rip, but it was cool! Looks like it was heading a little north of east and I would guess it's near Arkansas by now. Main object flamed yellow and four smaller objects below flaming red. Spooky!
Missle defense is nothing but a gift to the defense contractors.
While I don't entirely disagree with your post, I implore you and the moderators to consider another viewpoint concerning this statement. Logically it is easier to think of it as a "welfare program" for the defense industry. When people talk about the missile defense shield they think, "why build it if it costs so much and isn't going to stop all forms of nuclear attack and maybe won't work in the first place?" Enter the knee-jerk response - "Don't make it with MY money!" Okay, this is actually rational I must admit. But there's more to it than that:
First, we had a lot of technology developed during the Cold War. You can't uninvent Nukes. Likewise, scientific knowledge is another genie that cannot be put back in the bottle. You can't make a person "forget" that he/she knows how to develop high-end missile guidance systems without physically harming them in some way (killing, lobotomizing, etc.). It really only takes one well educated and trained high-energy nuclear physicist/rocket scientist to move to China and help them out. That figure that people keep throwing around about them being only twenty or so years behind us would be reduced to maybe only ten. Why don't we just give them high paying jobs as high-school teachers instead? Unfortunately, that concept goes flying out the window when taxpayers decide that they are getting ripped off by having to pay a half a mil a year to teach their kids algebra. I think it's a much harder sell to the public than a high-tech defense project. At least they'll be getting something for their money.
So that leads to the next point. At least they'll be getting something for their money. You can argue for or against that point all day. The truth is, it doesn't matter if the missile shield can actually shoot down other missiles. We just need everyone to THINK that it does. Let me explain that. One of the most ancient and well-known principles of war/conflict/politics/dealing with kids and so on, is that you always offer your opponent choices and make one of them seem the most attractive. BTW, I don't look at kids as enemies but if you have one, I'm sure you can relate;-) Even crazy dictators are smart enough to know not to shoot a nuke at us but they're also smart enough to develop their own missiles given enough time and money. When they have the missiles they have big political bargaining chips that could eventually lead to another cold war or worse. The threat of a briefcase attack does not achieve political objectives, only moral objectives. To take away political power using missiles, we just outspend them by building a magic shield, working or not, to make it seem much less attractive to own an ICBM and at the same time we take away their pool of talent to build them anyway. We can even recoup some of the costs of developing it by leasing missile protection as a service to other countries like Russia. I'll bet you thought that Russia was opposed to our defense shield because of the old ABM treaty didn't you? No, they're just using that as a lever to get a cheaper price from the US when they want to rent it. They want it for free if possible.
Great! So if a bad guy attacks, it will be with a briefcase instead! What's the difference? The difference is that missiles can be launched within minutes in an irrational fit of rage by a dictator with a button, arrive at their target in minutes, and cannot be stopped. A freighter takes days to arrive at the target, someone can change their mind, and it can be stopped if detected. I know, we can't stop illegal aliens from entering the country so how are we gonna stop one briefcase? Simple. People don't have radiation signatures. At least not the same signature as fissile material does anyway. Okay, so just hide the radiation signature. It's not that easy. But I'm not saying it can't be done. Read "The Sum of All Fears" by Tom Clancy. There's actually a whole bunch more to this subject. But I don't like reading super-long posts so I'll digress.
The mac is going to become the best computer to surf the web pretty soon.
Apple would sure like you to think so.
It doesn't support most 4th generation javascript sites so you can't get annoyed by these ads really.
Not in my experience. And X-10 can go to Hell with the rest of them.
It doesn't support most ecommerce sites so you can't spend money online when you are ready to (big plus here, by the time you think twice you won't buy these gizmos anyway.)
I actually wish that were true.
Finally if you reach a web site where you can finally see something bigger than in 4 points font it usually shows the text, IE or Netscape usually crash in the next 10 secs, forcing you to reboot your machine or better unplug it and go to play basketball outside.
Text can suck sometimes. Just push the big "+" in your customized IE 5 or greater and the text gets bigger. This only happens when visiting dumb-ass-PC-guy-all-the-way-web-designer-I-think-I 'm-cool-as-shit-because-I-can-make-microscopic-tex t-that-only-looks-good-on-a-pc websites. I disagree about the crashes. Maybe YOUR Mac sucks.
Not to mention that s' kiddies don't give a dam about infecting 3% of the marketshare. Not worse the effort, therefore little viruses on the machine.
That's why I use PC's and Macs but almost all of my serving equipment is Mac based.
Now, I heard Apple is coming out with OS X and it's apparently worse as for Web user experience. Good!!! PPA
I heard your mommy smokes crack but I didn't go telling everybody else like you did.
I've never heard of Steve Bennett. Now I have. Loony or not loony. Bad or good. Press is still press. Money is still money. And in a world where effective (IOW not spam), cheap mass marketing is hard to come buy, he certainly has his name recognition campaign off the ground. HOMER: Stupid cement mixer! Doh!
As in Tuna? Or as in Aqua? Let me guess, it's based off of a totally new and innovative core foundation called, Sherwin. Right? And the graphics API is Schwartz? Right? Wrong! But you're probably happy as Hell that I made the comparison right? Microsteal, you suck sometimes. Whoever thought it should be called Luna should be fired based upon sheer principle. Look, you guys make a great OS on your own. No, let me restate that. You make an OS so great that almost every PC user in the world uses it. Why couldn't you just name it Chuck or maybe Star Dust or maybe Jadice or Diamond? Lord knows you have the financial resources to hire someone to come up with a clearly originally inspired name. Sheesh!
I could not agree more. I just spent 18 months developing high-speed online database access using binary CGI (not a script, but an executable). There are so many varieties of options available out there. After my first dev cycle I was very distracted by trying to find something faster. Spent a total of about four months trying to find better language/system/drag-n-drop solution. I found that they all have strengths and weeknesses. In the process I wound up completely redesigning my original CGI in it's original C and the end result came out way better than the other options could have done. It's way more than ten times faster after a good redesign. My only regret is that I wasted four months chasing a red herring. Also, as a result of redesigning it, I am intimately familiar with the entire system now. I also designed it so it scales easily. Just get another box and another IP. It even registers itself with the DNS. I haven't even turned on compiler optimizations yet. I'll save that for a rainy day. And then I'll hand roll assembly if I have to panic. Which won't happen because of the scalability. Which brings me to a point that I'd like to contribute. I find that it makes me a lot more comfortable to know that my code has room to improve so I can get it when I need it. As opposed to,"there's no way I can make the system go any faster. I already have it optimized as much as it can be".
Slashdot Mirror
You mean hardly anyone buys a Mac for the games. However, people really do buy games for the Mac and ALL of the titles in 3d are using OpenGL these days because there ain't no way in Hell the MS would put out Direct3d on the Mac. It might seem like the game market is slim for the Mac and for a corporate game dev house IT IS NON-EXISTENT. But for independent developers you can actually make a nice living making games for the Mac that flat out won't sell on the PC due to the large amount of competition with other small time developers. -Just another way to look at why you might choose to develop using OpenGL.
It's not bad that they prefer to use an existing game engine. Really. At this point, game engines are really like the DVD player is to Hollywood. The amount of effort and talent that it takes to harness new technology as fast as it comes out is huge. Better to subdivide that task off to other sectors of the industry than to push it in-house. I'm not knocking what you're saying but I think the situation has changed in the last few years so maybe what you're saying isn't entirely relevent with this particular example. I agree with all your points for the most part but using an existing engine is not limited to or consisting only of "plugging in new content". At this point I believe we're actually better off on every level by companies taking advantage of the latest offerings from the game engine developers.
My mom actually believed it. LOL!!! She came to me and said, "Uh, I think there's something wrong with the computer." Judging by the tone of her voice I said, "Oh, shit, what did you manage to do this time?" I got to the computer and I asked her what in the Hell she clicked on. I was rolling on the floor after that one!!! What's even funnier is that she was using a Mac!!! You gotta love that one! Those guys are geniuses in they're own respect. They deserve the honor of getting sued for it IMO.
So, I can tell you all that it is coming. There are people at universities who realize that this is a big deal.
I understand your assertion, but... Those people who "realize that this is a big deal" don't happen to be the same people who run the books in the collection office. You know, that office behind that little curtain that no one ever notices? Look, in reality, colleges/universities/etc. are in the business of making money. The game industry does not make much money compared to traditional computing such as databases, word processors, blah blah blah. The only capacity that they'll ever include game design courses in will be that token "Let's attract some more students with a COOL course or two for the suckers out there, Bob." course. I do hear you, but there is a financial reality to the business of educating people that must be overcome first and that reality happens to be somewhere around 100 billion dollars in the case of software engineers. Call me a skeptic but I don't think the situation will change as soon as you think it will.
Well, you said it right there. The video game industry is worth roughly 10 billion I think. That's about what Apple is worth annually... Roughly... I think... The PC software industry as I've heard it is worth over 100 billion annually. Universities make money by getting students to come to their campus and fork over lots of money to teach them the skills to get hired. The university/college teaches skills that pertain to the largest segments of employable fields to accomplish this. You'll see more education for the game industry when you see more education for getting a job working for Apple. IOW, prolly not for a long time if ever.
I think this is great for the taxi drivers because now they can actually turn this around and profit from it. All they have to do now is get the radio stations to pay THEM for choosing their radio station to play for the taxi customers. Nice!
Dude, that's really cool. I'm going to try that. How much of "shift your weight" do you mean? As much as you can without falling over, or just a few inches? Or maybe just enough to simulate the space between the eyes? 3d glasses/viewers are not really in widespread use, much less cameras. I think that some day they probably will be. Until then it's nice to have a good, cheap, easy technique to make those cool photographic moments available for the future when they can be converted for the use then.
Yes
I read the first one several years ago, Red Mars( At least I think it was the first one IIRC ), and I was totally into it at first. But then it seemed to fall apart into the last half or so and I just couldn't understand why he decided to focus so much on the effed up personal interactions and I decided to put it down. Maybe I was tired at some crucial point in the plot but I got lost. But I must say that the first half was by far the coolest portrayal of a hypothetically real manned mission to Mars I've ever read.
If you haven't read Ender's Game yet then you must do so immediately if not sooner. I'm not kidding.
they'd eventually find a good use for stippling some day... Other than lunch money and tutorials that is.
I must be visiting the evil robotic imposter /. instead. I mean, this is a *minor* update for Mac OS X as far as I'm concerned. I would have crapped my pants two years ago if /. posted something like this just to "let me know". Must be a slow news day or something. And before you tag me as trolling just keep in mind that I've been a long time Mac user and /. reader. This stuff is getting weird around here.
Okay, let's test your filter. I hate you. How does that make you feel? Do you really care? Does it offend you in some way? Isn't this at all interesting to you that we're talking about hate? This would, presumably, be filtered out automatically so you'd never have to see it again right? Free speech must be defended as an absolute because it's the easiest right to take away. Taking away any part of it sets a precedent that makes it easier to take away the next hardest part and so on. We have to put up with all the crappy side effects to do this. Proof? There are lots and lots of history books out there so I won't quote here but that is where you can find your proof. And just remember when you're searching for that proof that nobody is making you read only one version of that history. Think about it. I can read Mein Kampf and I can read the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich just the same. To me, one of them is obviously hateful and incorrect but they both speak of the same portion of history. Can you guess which one I'm talking about? Is it up to me or you? Or would you rather say that it's okay for your government(s) to take one of them away letting them have control, possibly removing my belief in the truth about what happened because the other side of the story was not there for me to judge for myself? Please, think about this.
This is exactly the kind of crap that other countries do to their citizens that makes people come to the U.S. legally or otherwise. I'm sorry, I just had to puke that out of my system. It may sound like I hate illegal immigrants from this statement. Which is simply is not true but I'd bet they'd filter me out regardless. Then I wouldn't even get the opportunity to tell them I hate them for hating me thinking that I hate someone else... This is stupid! Sheesh, when will they stop cranking out the morons? Can I hate morons? Pleeez? Or would that mean that I hate myself? Could I do that? Where would it stop? Okay, I'll stop. Here. No here... N
The reason I don't own a 2-button mouse is because Apple has yet to make one.
Screw Apple, try the Microsoft Intellimouse or Explorer. I have the Intellimouse. It doesn't suck. The only reason Apple only makes a one button mouse anymore is to really encourage developers to make apps work with only one button LIKE THEY SHOULD! But as a user, you should be aware of the fact that OS X has decent, built-in support for multi-button mice with scroll wheels and more. Use them. They are good.
I didn't use an example of a system call, it was a system callback. I specified that. I used an example from Cabon in OS X to point out that even Apple's own routines were written in pascal so I don't see how you could actually say that they provided "no support".
"Pascal at all"? Huh?
pascal OSErr QuitAppleEventHandler( const AppleEvent *appleEvt, AppleEvent* reply, SInt32 refcon );
This is a Carbon callback for OS X.
Never heard of 'em. Do they use Unix?
I hear you. But I think that where Carmack is coming from here is the fact that no matter how you look at what they do, the end result is still an entertainment product. Plain and simple. Trying to characterize it as something else is simply incorrect. At least from the public's perspective. You're a programmer. You know damn well that what you do is an art. Carmack knows that too. That doesn't mean he should go crying from the highest tree that his game is really an art-form and not a game! Especially not let someone else characterize his own product in their own words. That would would be "a kind of sophistry from people who want to aggrandize our industry", as he says. And I couldn't agree more with that particular reply.
I know this is way off topic, but I had to post it somewhere. About ten minutes ago (9:16 MSDT) I happened to see something explode over West Texas crossing the sky. Not like anyone really gives a rip, but it was cool! Looks like it was heading a little north of east and I would guess it's near Arkansas by now. Main object flamed yellow and four smaller objects below flaming red. Spooky!
While I don't entirely disagree with your post, I implore you and the moderators to consider another viewpoint concerning this statement. Logically it is easier to think of it as a "welfare program" for the defense industry. When people talk about the missile defense shield they think, "why build it if it costs so much and isn't going to stop all forms of nuclear attack and maybe won't work in the first place?" Enter the knee-jerk response - "Don't make it with MY money!" Okay, this is actually rational I must admit. But there's more to it than that:
First, we had a lot of technology developed during the Cold War. You can't uninvent Nukes. Likewise, scientific knowledge is another genie that cannot be put back in the bottle. You can't make a person "forget" that he/she knows how to develop high-end missile guidance systems without physically harming them in some way (killing, lobotomizing, etc.). It really only takes one well educated and trained high-energy nuclear physicist/rocket scientist to move to China and help them out. That figure that people keep throwing around about them being only twenty or so years behind us would be reduced to maybe only ten. Why don't we just give them high paying jobs as high-school teachers instead? Unfortunately, that concept goes flying out the window when taxpayers decide that they are getting ripped off by having to pay a half a mil a year to teach their kids algebra. I think it's a much harder sell to the public than a high-tech defense project. At least they'll be getting something for their money.
So that leads to the next point. At least they'll be getting something for their money. You can argue for or against that point all day. The truth is, it doesn't matter if the missile shield can actually shoot down other missiles. We just need everyone to THINK that it does. Let me explain that. One of the most ancient and well-known principles of war/conflict/politics/dealing with kids and so on, is that you always offer your opponent choices and make one of them seem the most attractive. BTW, I don't look at kids as enemies but if you have one, I'm sure you can relate
Great! So if a bad guy attacks, it will be with a briefcase instead! What's the difference? The difference is that missiles can be launched within minutes in an irrational fit of rage by a dictator with a button, arrive at their target in minutes, and cannot be stopped. A freighter takes days to arrive at the target, someone can change their mind, and it can be stopped if detected. I know, we can't stop illegal aliens from entering the country so how are we gonna stop one briefcase? Simple. People don't have radiation signatures. At least not the same signature as fissile material does anyway. Okay, so just hide the radiation signature. It's not that easy. But I'm not saying it can't be done. Read "The Sum of All Fears" by Tom Clancy. There's actually a whole bunch more to this subject. But I don't like reading super-long posts so I'll digress.
I've never heard of Steve Bennett. Now I have. Loony or not loony. Bad or good. Press is still press. Money is still money. And in a world where effective (IOW not spam), cheap mass marketing is hard to come buy, he certainly has his name recognition campaign off the ground. HOMER: Stupid cement mixer! Doh!
As in Tuna? Or as in Aqua? Let me guess, it's based off of a totally new and innovative core foundation called, Sherwin. Right? And the graphics API is Schwartz? Right? Wrong! But you're probably happy as Hell that I made the comparison right? Microsteal, you suck sometimes. Whoever thought it should be called Luna should be fired based upon sheer principle. Look, you guys make a great OS on your own. No, let me restate that. You make an OS so great that almost every PC user in the world uses it. Why couldn't you just name it Chuck or maybe Star Dust or maybe Jadice or Diamond? Lord knows you have the financial resources to hire someone to come up with a clearly originally inspired name. Sheesh!
I could not agree more. I just spent 18 months developing high-speed online database access using binary CGI (not a script, but an executable). There are so many varieties of options available out there. After my first dev cycle I was very distracted by trying to find something faster. Spent a total of about four months trying to find better language/system/drag-n-drop solution. I found that they all have strengths and weeknesses. In the process I wound up completely redesigning my original CGI in it's original C and the end result came out way better than the other options could have done. It's way more than ten times faster after a good redesign. My only regret is that I wasted four months chasing a red herring. Also, as a result of redesigning it, I am intimately familiar with the entire system now. I also designed it so it scales easily. Just get another box and another IP. It even registers itself with the DNS. I haven't even turned on compiler optimizations yet. I'll save that for a rainy day. And then I'll hand roll assembly if I have to panic. Which won't happen because of the scalability. Which brings me to a point that I'd like to contribute. I find that it makes me a lot more comfortable to know that my code has room to improve so I can get it when I need it. As opposed to,"there's no way I can make the system go any faster. I already have it optimized as much as it can be".