Giving away free (gratis) access to some proprietary technology is nothing more than a complex marketing ploy to try to attract more commercial licensee in the long term, by gaining more fans and hackers in the short term. The basic idea is "let the Indie market play around with the engine, and if some group emerge with a new killer-app, they'll have to license our engine".
Oh noes! Epic actually wants people to use their technology and make money from it! The horror! The horror!
No need to get smarmy with the poster. I see nothing he wrote that is likely to be untrue. Doesn't make things "bad", but it's still a truth.
Anyone that installs Anti-Virus on their PC and expects it to protect them from their own stupidity deserves what they get.
So you're basically saying that the VAST majority of computer users DESERVE to be infected? Wow... you're an asshole.
It's true that people shouldn't rely on AV as the first point of protection - ideally their behavior should be a little more savvy when on the net. But they have to know that in the first place; they've been brainwashed into believing all that bullshit by security software companies that AV and security suites are all you need, they've forgotten critical thinking.
I'm saying, as a general rule, that breaking the agreement is at your peril. Obviously companies are going to be most affected, but the letter of the law can scale down if it seems financially appropriate.
Stop nitpicking, it's makes you look like you don't have much to do.
One of ubuntu's (and Linux in general) main obstacles is the lack of public awareness
Recently I was watching a free-to-air TV channel we have in Australia called GO. I noticed however that the station ID had changed slightly. Normally it's just the GO logo bouncing around the inside of a small room, with lots of colourful effects and whatnot. Now... it's the GO logo bounding around the same room along with the WINDOWS LOGO bouncing around the room too!
FFS - how can Linux compete in mindshare when Microsoft has enough money to change the advertisements for TV stations?
On the other hand, I shouldn't be surprised. They like to advertise Bing a lot and their website is http://go.ninemsn.com.au/ , so it's obvious who their partners are.
I despise MS as much as anyone, but this is too much.
For me, the more Slashdot bashes Microsoft unfairly, the less I despise Microsoft. If Microsoft is supposedly so rotten, why does Slashdot feel the need to lie? It makes Slashdot look like it's run by a bunch of idiots with an agenda, and makes me question how much of the bashing of MS is legitimate.
I've been reading comments about this in many forums. There ARE a number of people who state they will pirate the game as a protest. I'm not saying every lost sale = a pirated copy, just a lot will be. These gamers are admitting the fact, so it's hardly a lame argument.
Assuming people have the balls to actually cancel their pre-order and not buy the game. There are a lot of people who bitch and moan about game companies decision's concerning their games, but very rarely do these people seem to do the most effective thing to tell the game company that they don't like it, which is to NOT BUY THE GAME. Its like the people who complain about securROM yet who still buy the game and just send a letter(or so they claim) to the company. They don't give a shit about any of that letter crap, once they have your money they could care less, and if you continue to buy their games you're just perpetuating the problem. Vote with your wallets people.
It's actually worse than that. A lot of people will end up pirating the game and make it clear on forums or whatever that they pirated the game as their way of "protesting". But all that does is two things:
* It shows that those complaining can't really be that serious as they aren't prepared to do without, which makes one's position much less credible, and * It gives publishers another data point when talking about game piracy numbers.
If you really truly have an issue with a particular software company, and you feel that the only way to make an impact is to not give them any money, then you also have to accept the fact that making a credible stance HAS to also include not using their software, even for free. Otherwise, you're part of the problem.
Having said all that, sticking to these principles can be rather difficult. Particularly when one is young and was brought up on having tons of pirated content on their hard drives.:)
There's no technical reason for the lack of dedicated server support. It has to have bene a purely business decision, so fuck you Activision. Why are you doing this?
I've heard some developers/publishers say that PC gamers complain a lot. When they pull shit like this, can you really blame 'em?
I'm not one for the holy wars and I hate to sound like I'm defending Microsoft
It really annoys me when people feel they have to preface their perfectly logic argument with an apology because they chose not to bash Microsoft within the argument.
Seriously, make your argument, and don't worry about sounding like you're defending Microsoft. If anyone feels offended, criticizes you of being a troll/shrill/fag/whatever, then big deal. They're not worth having a conversation with anyway.
Depending on the version, you may want to try using DOSBox or eduke32 to run Duke Nukem 3D instead of relying on a crack. The game is old enough that no-cd cracks aren't really needed anymore even in your case.
One issue I have with it is that I like to disable real-time scanning with any AV software I use, because it makes file management rather sluggish, particularly if I'm working in a folder containing a lot of executables. Before trying MSE I've been using AVG Free with the real-time scanning turned off, which works really well. If I download something new and I'm suspicious, I simply scan it manually via a right-click and scan in Explorer. Plus, I can tell AVG to ignore the fact I've turned the real-time scanning off and it won't bug me or complain about the fact. With MSE, if you disable real-time scanning, the tray icon goes read, and in Windows 7 you'll be prompted by the action center that it's disabled, but unlike AVG, I can't find any way to tell it that I know what I'm doing, and to trust my judgement.
Real-time scanning is a pain in the ass. It's necessary if you don't have any discipline when using a Windows machine, but if you do, you should be able to disable it without the AV software treating you like an idiot.
I'm guessing Microsoft Security Essentials is a close cousin to Windows Defender code which would explain a lot.
According to the Ars Technica link in the summary, MSE is a superset of Windows Defender, to the point where the MSE installer will disable Windows Defender completely if detected.
As for the single core issue, quite possible. I noticed for example that Vista's Windows automatic update detection check utilized 100% CPU of my (then) single-core machine for several seconds, affecting performance considerably. But when I moved to a dual-core, the effect was completely unnoticeable. Seems as if single-core is no longer considered when testing software performance and impact on the rest of the system.
AppLocker WILL make it more difficult to run unauthorised apps, even if they're distributed/run via USB. It won't block things entirely but just like every security measure, it will make things more difficult, and that's all you should be able to expect. Give Microsoft some credit - I'd love to get a hold of one of these netbooks.
there's nothing wrong with Hyper-V. It's going to what my company will be using to run multiple VMs as it's integrated into Windows 2008 and works seamlessly. Sure there's alternatives, but the company is also a Microsoft shop, so I guess I have to learn about it too.
Do they have to block you from purchasing it or not?
I'm not sure if the law has been ammended in Australia yet regarding digital purchases, but I bet Valve would prefer to err on the side of caution and not sell to us Aussies right now, just in case.
How so? The Internet is full of tons of shit, but there's good stuff to be found within it. Just like deviantART. Or YouTube. If you're incapable of finding quality content, that's more a reflection of your search parameters.
Just close the fucking website, it's a worthless piece of shit anyway if it puts ads first and content later.
deviantART once had a Flash add which utilised 100% of my CPU, and since it was at the time a single-core CPU, I was barely able to bring up the Task Manager to kill it. Interestingly enough, it was that experience which pushed me to using Adblock Plus.
Point is, deviantART is hardly a worthless piece of shit. Sometimes they just made bad choices about what ads to use. Generalizations are bad, m'kay?
It's not obsolete as you thought it was. You should be careful about making remarks about IE8 for the same reasons.
From XP onwards, BSODs will generally occur due to damaged/poorly-coded drivers or problematic hardware. I won't argue with you - BSODs are still around, but they're NOT as frequent as the Win 95/98 days. There are still a lot of people who joke about it as if it's a common problem, which it isn't.
IE8 in Vista/Windows 7 runs in a sandbox. Firefox doesn't. I'm not going to immediately say that IE8 is now more secure than FF, but I do believe that the security issues of IE6 aren't relevant anymore with the latest versions of IE.
The joke about IE being insecure is going to become as obsolete as the BSOD jokes, although I expect it to still be trotted out at Slashdot for years to come.
Slashdot Mirror
But what if it was Hitler having the heart attack?
* Yes, thread Goodwined, but worth it!
No need to get smarmy with the poster. I see nothing he wrote that is likely to be untrue. Doesn't make things "bad", but it's still a truth.
So you're basically saying that the VAST majority of computer users DESERVE to be infected? Wow... you're an asshole.
It's true that people shouldn't rely on AV as the first point of protection - ideally their behavior should be a little more savvy when on the net. But they have to know that in the first place; they've been brainwashed into believing all that bullshit by security software companies that AV and security suites are all you need, they've forgotten critical thinking.
Where did I say individual?
I'm saying, as a general rule, that breaking the agreement is at your peril. Obviously companies are going to be most affected, but the letter of the law can scale down if it seems financially appropriate.
Stop nitpicking, it's makes you look like you don't have much to do.
Sure: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psystar_Corporation#Legal_issues
They challenged the EULA and the court favored Apple.
Come on people! This is Slashdot, you should have already known about this. The EULA has got precedent. The time for arguing it hasn't is over.
Break the agreement at your peril.
Morally, they don't.
Legally, they DO (and has been proven in court).
Break the agreement at your peril.
Recently I was watching a free-to-air TV channel we have in Australia called GO. I noticed however that the station ID had changed slightly. Normally it's just the GO logo bouncing around the inside of a small room, with lots of colourful effects and whatnot. Now... it's the GO logo bounding around the same room along with the WINDOWS LOGO bouncing around the room too!
FFS - how can Linux compete in mindshare when Microsoft has enough money to change the advertisements for TV stations?
On the other hand, I shouldn't be surprised. They like to advertise Bing a lot and their website is http://go.ninemsn.com.au/ , so it's obvious who their partners are.
For me, the more Slashdot bashes Microsoft unfairly, the less I despise Microsoft. If Microsoft is supposedly so rotten, why does Slashdot feel the need to lie? It makes Slashdot look like it's run by a bunch of idiots with an agenda, and makes me question how much of the bashing of MS is legitimate.
I've been reading comments about this in many forums. There ARE a number of people who state they will pirate the game as a protest. I'm not saying every lost sale = a pirated copy, just a lot will be. These gamers are admitting the fact, so it's hardly a lame argument.
It's actually worse than that. A lot of people will end up pirating the game and make it clear on forums or whatever that they pirated the game as their way of "protesting". But all that does is two things:
* It shows that those complaining can't really be that serious as they aren't prepared to do without, which makes one's position much less credible, and
* It gives publishers another data point when talking about game piracy numbers.
If you really truly have an issue with a particular software company, and you feel that the only way to make an impact is to not give them any money, then you also have to accept the fact that making a credible stance HAS to also include not using their software, even for free. Otherwise, you're part of the problem.
Having said all that, sticking to these principles can be rather difficult. Particularly when one is young and was brought up on having tons of pirated content on their hard drives. :)
There's no technical reason for the lack of dedicated server support. It has to have bene a purely business decision, so fuck you Activision. Why are you doing this?
I've heard some developers/publishers say that PC gamers complain a lot. When they pull shit like this, can you really blame 'em?
I'm not defending Intel at all, but...
ATI's done it: http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/display/20030526040035.html
NVIDIA's done it: http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1048824/nvidia-cheats-3dmark-177
They've probably done it several times in the past with other benchmarking software as well.
They're all dishonest. Don't trust anyone!
It really annoys me when people feel they have to preface their perfectly logic argument with an apology because they chose not to bash Microsoft within the argument.
Seriously, make your argument, and don't worry about sounding like you're defending Microsoft. If anyone feels offended, criticizes you of being a troll/shrill/fag/whatever, then big deal. They're not worth having a conversation with anyway.
Depending on the version, you may want to try using DOSBox or eduke32 to run Duke Nukem 3D instead of relying on a crack. The game is old enough that no-cd cracks aren't really needed anymore even in your case.
It's a Core2Duo. I can prove the slowdown on any machine. Perhaps you're just trolling.
It's OK, I guess.
One issue I have with it is that I like to disable real-time scanning with any AV software I use, because it makes file management rather sluggish, particularly if I'm working in a folder containing a lot of executables. Before trying MSE I've been using AVG Free with the real-time scanning turned off, which works really well. If I download something new and I'm suspicious, I simply scan it manually via a right-click and scan in Explorer. Plus, I can tell AVG to ignore the fact I've turned the real-time scanning off and it won't bug me or complain about the fact. With MSE, if you disable real-time scanning, the tray icon goes read, and in Windows 7 you'll be prompted by the action center that it's disabled, but unlike AVG, I can't find any way to tell it that I know what I'm doing, and to trust my judgement.
Real-time scanning is a pain in the ass. It's necessary if you don't have any discipline when using a Windows machine, but if you do, you should be able to disable it without the AV software treating you like an idiot.
According to the Ars Technica link in the summary, MSE is a superset of Windows Defender, to the point where the MSE installer will disable Windows Defender completely if detected.
As for the single core issue, quite possible. I noticed for example that Vista's Windows automatic update detection check utilized 100% CPU of my (then) single-core machine for several seconds, affecting performance considerably. But when I moved to a dual-core, the effect was completely unnoticeable. Seems as if single-core is no longer considered when testing software performance and impact on the rest of the system.
AppLocker WILL make it more difficult to run unauthorised apps, even if they're distributed/run via USB. It won't block things entirely but just like every security measure, it will make things more difficult, and that's all you should be able to expect. Give Microsoft some credit - I'd love to get a hold of one of these netbooks.
there's nothing wrong with Hyper-V. It's going to what my company will be using to run multiple VMs as it's integrated into Windows 2008 and works seamlessly. Sure there's alternatives, but the company is also a Microsoft shop, so I guess I have to learn about it too.
I'm not sure if the law has been ammended in Australia yet regarding digital purchases, but I bet Valve would prefer to err on the side of caution and not sell to us Aussies right now, just in case.
Which is great fun to read because Vista already HAS a Service Pack 2
When the trails can't even base their flames around information that makes sense, you know they're idiots.
How so? The Internet is full of tons of shit, but there's good stuff to be found within it. Just like deviantART. Or YouTube. If you're incapable of finding quality content, that's more a reflection of your search parameters.
deviantART once had a Flash add which utilised 100% of my CPU, and since it was at the time a single-core CPU, I was barely able to bring up the Task Manager to kill it. Interestingly enough, it was that experience which pushed me to using Adblock Plus.
Point is, deviantART is hardly a worthless piece of shit. Sometimes they just made bad choices about what ads to use. Generalizations are bad, m'kay?
From XP onwards, BSODs will generally occur due to damaged/poorly-coded drivers or problematic hardware. I won't argue with you - BSODs are still around, but they're NOT as frequent as the Win 95/98 days. There are still a lot of people who joke about it as if it's a common problem, which it isn't.
IE8 in Vista/Windows 7 runs in a sandbox. Firefox doesn't. I'm not going to immediately say that IE8 is now more secure than FF, but I do believe that the security issues of IE6 aren't relevant anymore with the latest versions of IE.
The joke about IE being insecure is going to become as obsolete as the BSOD jokes, although I expect it to still be trotted out at Slashdot for years to come.