He's said before that Doom III's got a renderpath in there for the GeForce 2, so I think that puts a few holes in your argument. Even if it requires a GHz machine.... hey, that's where we're at nowadays, right?
Honestly, the only thing I'd be suspicious about is whether or not he's waiting for NVidia to pop out a rev board in mass quantities. And even that's a reach.
What I think is going on--nay, know--is what's known in the industry as "finishing the %^&*ing game." Usually that means finishing all the little features you meant to put in, but didn't have time to earlier because you were too busy working on the bigger stuff. Or they relied on the bigger stuff. Or you couldn't put 'em in 'cause art assets weren't finished, or you didn't have the sound effects..
Probably not as big of a problem at ID, but some places make you write a design doc for everything, which has to be initialed before you can begin work. It takes time to push paper..
Since there's no mention of them playing the game, it sounds like they haven't really hit the fine-tuning phase yet, which is where they playtest the thing to high hell to make sure everything's stable and solid and they didn't forget anything. (Then again, in modern games, that stage sometimes doesn't happen until after she's shipped..)
So anyways, I think you can safely set aside your "holding back until something comes out that can run it" theory for now. Sure, it might be a side effect, but don't mistake it for the cause. There's a lotta crap that has to happen to make a game these days. Don't worry; they're working on it.
You can, but they're huge; as huge as the GBA itself. (Original GBA, not the SP. Don't think they'd work with SP.)
One of them requires you have a GBA game in the cart slot so it can steal it's boot sequence. The other has it's own boot code. Only one has a plug for an external antenna or cable. Both allow you to hook another (composite?) source into them, like a Gamecube or PS2, or even the output of a computer, if you're nuts. Both require an extra 4 AA batteries, on top of those that are already in the GBA, in order to run..
He did have a good point about there being a big difference between Canadian and NA news. But I think he missed the point; while people in the US are watching CNN, CBC Newsworld is the closest thing we have here. Instead of having live continuous commentary, though, they alternate between showing groups of experts giving their opinions and running documentaries on the subject.
Likewise, the closest we have to CNN Headline News is CTV Newsnet. They have to stick closely to the script, and when they decide to run an opinion piece, it's very clear that it's an opinion piece because it's not coming from the main anchors.
During the early Iraq coverage, CBC Newsworld switched over to a live format, hosted by Peter Mansbridge. Rather than taking every incoming report as fact, they were continuously evaluating the level of trust they should put into their reports, and passing that onto the viewer along with the information. This all took place in front of the viewer; Peter Mansbridge discussed them with a panel of experts, who were very well informed, and could make predictions on the liklihood of what they were hearing, and what direction things were heading in, based on intimate knowledge of the topic, and previous experience.
CNN, I find, has a heavy tendancy to take some prediction or first report, and run with it. They never second-guess the information coming in to them, or at least not in view of the viewer, and if they do make a mistake, it takes a long time for them to turn the train around. The secret to their success seems not to be in helping the viewer make informed decisions, but rather in telling them just what they need to know. (Possibly so as to foster a reliance on the network.)
Anyways, backing up a bit, I think that while news is a big influence, the larger is government. In the US, the federal government's war on drugs is the big one. In order to be able to believe that marijuana is an addictive substance, that it is evil or whathaveyou, a huge blind spot had to be placed in front of the eyes of a lot of smart people. It's that blind spot, I believe, that is the problem, and that lack of understanding and compassion, as a result, that makes the difference.
Are you actually using 1024x768, or are you using 1280x960? The latter mode has issues on my own ATi hardware, when displaying the stippled shutdown screen. Officially, ATi doesn't support that mode on their cards, probably due to these problems. (I had to re-enable the mode with a registry hack.)
I'm curious if it's maybe a more general issue with that mode, rather than just an ATi problem, considering as you're using a GeForce2. I mean, if it is the same res, then that might be it.
Personally, I loved End of Evangelion. Gotta love the sploosh! (sploosh.. sploosh....)
That, and Komm Sutter Todd is an awesome song.
You're definitely right about Escaflowne, though; that was a real pile of trash. If you want to watch something that makes a similar amount of sense, but at least it doesn't make you want to go slit your wrists... I suggest you check out the Utena movie. Wonderful music. Prettier too, imo. A bit of nudity, but that's to be expected of any movie that deals with sex and gender roles.. while dropping acid..
Its a matter of liability. If they start warning people, then they have the right to refuse. If the person doesn't get back to them in time, and they get slashdotted, then they could sue 'cause they didn't give them approval, and they knowingly assisted in the slashdotting.
My guess is that they feel they're in a better legal position by pretending they don't know any better.
Personally, I think it'd be kinda useful if there was a little icon next to each link in an article; either a checkmark or an X or a bomb maybe, telling whether or not the site was available. Stem the tide once they actually take down a site.
But yeah, the proper way to do it would be to either mirror it, or redirect to the google cache. (Assuming the google dudes don't immediately cut them off.;)
Realistically, nothing's gonna happen, tho. Even if it isn't a matter of reduced liability, they've introduced that new membership thing where people find out about articles a half hour before they go "live." If stuff gets slashdotted, it's only more incentive to pay, right?
Damn.. those sound personal and professional, and seem to really fit the mac. Nothing like the overproduced or sound-clipish Windows sounds.. or the relative silence of Gnome..
Personally, my faves are the Quadra AV's. Thanks for the link!:)
- It's obvious audio must be integral. Integrate it.
Why is that obvious? I, for one, don't see it at all. XFree86 sends stuff to your video card and your monitor, the audio drivers send stuff to your sound card and your speakers.
X is network transparency. It should not just be about graphics, it should be about providing a standard means by which the end-user experience can be piped to any display anywhere easily.
This is not to say that X should give up speed for flexibility. Rather, I believe that X should continue to strive towards this goal. My concern is that we have a standard method of interleaving the audio with the video stream.
This is, again, not to say that it should be required that the audio stream be always sent with the video. Rather, that there be a standard means by which this data can be transferred, and a central authority for routing this data.
(GStream.)
The problem I see, and the problem I'd like to see avoided, is wherein you need to forward a whole ream of ports back and forth all the way through in order to get a remote desktop running. I should be able to just forward one port, and have all of my X experience flow through that.
Then I could pipe all of my data through encryption at once, instead of having to set it up for each individually.
Is this the fact that the combat dummy tried to attack..?
Re:The problem of rewriting/forking XFree
on
XFree86 Politics
·
· Score: 1
I think you need to read the forking article; the problem is that he CAN'T make any changes because he doesn't have write access to the source tree. How is he supposed to make current X better if he can't change anything!??
Further to that.. you're talking out of your ass. Nobody in their right mind would try and implement a massive architecture overhaul like you're suggesting on their main tree. They'd branch (fork!) first, and work on it there.
People said the same thing about forking the Linux kernel. Look how its doing.
Further to that, XFree86 is NOT X. X is a standard. As long as any forks adhere to the X standards, and implement the same extensions XFree86 does, there should be no problems whatsoever.
As far as writing separate patches for separate package versions is concerned, I don't think this'll be a problem. X seems sufficiently modular that a few driver changes here and there shouldn't have any effect on interoperability.
With any luck, this will: (a) be a temporary issue, and give the XFree86 people a kick in the pants that is sorely needed to get them to open things up a bit more. Or, (b) supercede the old XFree86 branch as the version to include with a distro.
Unless you come here for the incredibly insightful follow up posts;)
Hey, that's why I'm here. Thing is, I still haven't figured out why I can't just see all the posts below a certain threshold, rather than all those annoying preachy ones above....
I'm joking of course. I love all of you guys. No, really... even you, there, with that porn link in your sig....
Okay, so I lied; anyone with a link in their sig should be shot....
Not that I'm advocating or condoning violence.. that's just wrong. Especially against... uh...
Dangit, I meant the desks were concave. Hopefully that came through by the description of it being a U shape..
Ph33r my Big-O action figures! *clunk* *clunk*.. *smash!* Whee! Oh no, look out, it's an Eva unit... *badda badda badda bup badabada badda badda badda bup badabada..* No, not with the knife, mister Eva.. *slash!* >:D
No, really; that's what the system's for, after all.
Re:The Truth That Dare Not Speak Its Name
on
The Tyranny of Email
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Your first suggestion is a good idea, although it can be taken too far. I once worked in an office that was completely open-concept like that. The desks were U shaped, and you sat in the convex side of the U. The other side was like a right-angled V, meant to go up against a cubicle wall, so you got your own corner.
Well, the management was strictly anti-cubicle, so instead of having a cubicle wall on either side of the monitor, they put the right angles together and put the computers on the inside corners of this little construction. I got to face my fellow employees on either sides. Every bloody hour of the day.
You have no idea how distracting this can be. Especially when one of them keeps a different schedule, so while you're deep in code, they're programming. Or taking company time to talk to their signifigant other on MSN, and laughing at their replies. And the other scowls, and yells to people behind him without turning his head. And the one across from you, behind yours and his monitor, which you can see over both of, bobs his head to his music that he's listening to on headphones.
I have no doubt that I posed as much of a distraction to them as they did to me. (If not moreso.) 'Cause I had action figures...:D
Slashdot Mirror
Actually....
As my roommate said, there's one truck you sure wouldn't want to get into an accident with..
He's said before that Doom III's got a renderpath in there for the GeForce 2, so I think that puts a few holes in your argument. Even if it requires a GHz machine.... hey, that's where we're at nowadays, right?
Honestly, the only thing I'd be suspicious about is whether or not he's waiting for NVidia to pop out a rev board in mass quantities. And even that's a reach.
What I think is going on--nay, know--is what's known in the industry as "finishing the %^&*ing game." Usually that means finishing all the little features you meant to put in, but didn't have time to earlier because you were too busy working on the bigger stuff. Or they relied on the bigger stuff. Or you couldn't put 'em in 'cause art assets weren't finished, or you didn't have the sound effects..
Probably not as big of a problem at ID, but some places make you write a design doc for everything, which has to be initialed before you can begin work. It takes time to push paper..
Since there's no mention of them playing the game, it sounds like they haven't really hit the fine-tuning phase yet, which is where they playtest the thing to high hell to make sure everything's stable and solid and they didn't forget anything. (Then again, in modern games, that stage sometimes doesn't happen until after she's shipped..)
So anyways, I think you can safely set aside your "holding back until something comes out that can run it" theory for now. Sure, it might be a side effect, but don't mistake it for the cause. There's a lotta crap that has to happen to make a game these days. Don't worry; they're working on it.
The Dreamcast also had 4 controller ports on it.
What I'm curious about, wrt these new PS2s, is how long it will be before the new mod chips start coming out..
On the upside, you'll never read the internet alone again.
You can, but they're huge; as huge as the GBA itself. (Original GBA, not the SP. Don't think they'd work with SP.)
One of them requires you have a GBA game in the cart slot so it can steal it's boot sequence. The other has it's own boot code. Only one has a plug for an external antenna or cable. Both allow you to hook another (composite?) source into them, like a Gamecube or PS2, or even the output of a computer, if you're nuts. Both require an extra 4 AA batteries, on top of those that are already in the GBA, in order to run..
That's about where I stopped reading up on 'em.
He did have a good point about there being a big difference between Canadian and NA news. But I think he missed the point; while people in the US are watching CNN, CBC Newsworld is the closest thing we have here. Instead of having live continuous commentary, though, they alternate between showing groups of experts giving their opinions and running documentaries on the subject.
Likewise, the closest we have to CNN Headline News is CTV Newsnet. They have to stick closely to the script, and when they decide to run an opinion piece, it's very clear that it's an opinion piece because it's not coming from the main anchors.
During the early Iraq coverage, CBC Newsworld switched over to a live format, hosted by Peter Mansbridge. Rather than taking every incoming report as fact, they were continuously evaluating the level of trust they should put into their reports, and passing that onto the viewer along with the information. This all took place in front of the viewer; Peter Mansbridge discussed them with a panel of experts, who were very well informed, and could make predictions on the liklihood of what they were hearing, and what direction things were heading in, based on intimate knowledge of the topic, and previous experience.
CNN, I find, has a heavy tendancy to take some prediction or first report, and run with it. They never second-guess the information coming in to them, or at least not in view of the viewer, and if they do make a mistake, it takes a long time for them to turn the train around. The secret to their success seems not to be in helping the viewer make informed decisions, but rather in telling them just what they need to know. (Possibly so as to foster a reliance on the network.)
Anyways, backing up a bit, I think that while news is a big influence, the larger is government. In the US, the federal government's war on drugs is the big one. In order to be able to believe that marijuana is an addictive substance, that it is evil or whathaveyou, a huge blind spot had to be placed in front of the eyes of a lot of smart people. It's that blind spot, I believe, that is the problem, and that lack of understanding and compassion, as a result, that makes the difference.
Just my two bits.
Are you actually using 1024x768, or are you using 1280x960? The latter mode has issues on my own ATi hardware, when displaying the stippled shutdown screen. Officially, ATi doesn't support that mode on their cards, probably due to these problems. (I had to re-enable the mode with a registry hack.)
I'm curious if it's maybe a more general issue with that mode, rather than just an ATi problem, considering as you're using a GeForce2. I mean, if it is the same res, then that might be it.
Splooshing just can't compare to an ocean of blood.
Says you!
Personally, I loved End of Evangelion. Gotta love the sploosh! (sploosh.. sploosh....)
That, and Komm Sutter Todd is an awesome song.
You're definitely right about Escaflowne, though; that was a real pile of trash. If you want to watch something that makes a similar amount of sense, but at least it doesn't make you want to go slit your wrists... I suggest you check out the Utena movie. Wonderful music. Prettier too, imo. A bit of nudity, but that's to be expected of any movie that deals with sex and gender roles.. while dropping acid..
Its a matter of liability. If they start warning people, then they have the right to refuse. If the person doesn't get back to them in time, and they get slashdotted, then they could sue 'cause they didn't give them approval, and they knowingly assisted in the slashdotting.
;)
:)
My guess is that they feel they're in a better legal position by pretending they don't know any better.
Personally, I think it'd be kinda useful if there was a little icon next to each link in an article; either a checkmark or an X or a bomb maybe, telling whether or not the site was available. Stem the tide once they actually take down a site.
But yeah, the proper way to do it would be to either mirror it, or redirect to the google cache. (Assuming the google dudes don't immediately cut them off.
Realistically, nothing's gonna happen, tho. Even if it isn't a matter of reduced liability, they've introduced that new membership thing where people find out about articles a half hour before they go "live." If stuff gets slashdotted, it's only more incentive to pay, right?
(Don't mind me.. just a little cynical.
Damn.. those sound personal and professional, and seem to really fit the mac. Nothing like the overproduced or sound-clipish Windows sounds.. or the relative silence of Gnome..
:)
Personally, my faves are the Quadra AV's. Thanks for the link!
Now do the same to explain the X style of cut and paste.
You'd pick Howard the Duck?!?!!?!
Definitely a great movie. : )
Another favorite of mine, also a war parody, is Canadian Bacon .
I concur.
A real bitch.
Someone oughta let a useability standards guru loose on the X spec sometime..
- It's obvious audio must be integral. Integrate it.
Why is that obvious? I, for one, don't see it at all. XFree86 sends stuff to your video card and your monitor, the audio drivers send stuff to your sound card and your speakers.
X is network transparency. It should not just be about graphics, it should be about providing a standard means by which the end-user experience can be piped to any display anywhere easily.
This is not to say that X should give up speed for flexibility. Rather, I believe that X should continue to strive towards this goal. My concern is that we have a standard method of interleaving the audio with the video stream.
This is, again, not to say that it should be required that the audio stream be always sent with the video. Rather, that there be a standard means by which this data can be transferred, and a central authority for routing this data.
(GStream.)
The problem I see, and the problem I'd like to see avoided, is wherein you need to forward a whole ream of ports back and forth all the way through in order to get a remote desktop running. I should be able to just forward one port, and have all of my X experience flow through that.
Then I could pipe all of my data through encryption at once, instead of having to set it up for each individually.
(Stop me if I'm talking out of my ass, here.)
Is this the fact that the combat dummy tried to attack..?
I think you need to read the forking article; the problem is that he CAN'T make any changes because he doesn't have write access to the source tree. How is he supposed to make current X better if he can't change anything!??
Further to that.. you're talking out of your ass. Nobody in their right mind would try and implement a massive architecture overhaul like you're suggesting on their main tree. They'd branch (fork!) first, and work on it there.
People said the same thing about forking the Linux kernel. Look how its doing.
Further to that, XFree86 is NOT X. X is a standard. As long as any forks adhere to the X standards, and implement the same extensions XFree86 does, there should be no problems whatsoever.
As far as writing separate patches for separate package versions is concerned, I don't think this'll be a problem. X seems sufficiently modular that a few driver changes here and there shouldn't have any effect on interoperability.
With any luck, this will:
(a) be a temporary issue, and give the XFree86 people a kick in the pants that is sorely needed to get them to open things up a bit more. Or,
(b) supercede the old XFree86 branch as the version to include with a distro.
Either way, this is a good thing.
Unless you come here for the incredibly insightful follow up posts ;)
Hey, that's why I'm here. Thing is, I still haven't figured out why I can't just see all the posts below a certain threshold, rather than all those annoying preachy ones above....
I'm joking of course. I love all of you guys. No, really... even you, there, with that porn link in your sig....
Okay, so I lied; anyone with a link in their sig should be shot....
Not that I'm advocating or condoning violence.. that's just wrong. Especially against... uh...
Yeah; I shut up now..
Dangit, I meant the desks were concave. Hopefully that came through by the description of it being a U shape..
Ph33r my Big-O action figures! *clunk* *clunk*.. *smash!* Whee! Oh no, look out, it's an Eva unit... *badda badda badda bup badabada badda badda badda bup badabada..* No, not with the knife, mister Eva.. *slash!* >:D
Should've patented the idea.
No, really; that's what the system's for, after all.
Your first suggestion is a good idea, although it can be taken too far. I once worked in an office that was completely open-concept like that. The desks were U shaped, and you sat in the convex side of the U. The other side was like a right-angled V, meant to go up against a cubicle wall, so you got your own corner.
:D
Well, the management was strictly anti-cubicle, so instead of having a cubicle wall on either side of the monitor, they put the right angles together and put the computers on the inside corners of this little construction. I got to face my fellow employees on either sides. Every bloody hour of the day.
You have no idea how distracting this can be. Especially when one of them keeps a different schedule, so while you're deep in code, they're programming. Or taking company time to talk to their signifigant other on MSN, and laughing at their replies. And the other scowls, and yells to people behind him without turning his head. And the one across from you, behind yours and his monitor, which you can see over both of, bobs his head to his music that he's listening to on headphones.
I have no doubt that I posed as much of a distraction to them as they did to me. (If not moreso.) 'Cause I had action figures...
No offence, but with this, I think slashdot's finally jumped the shark.