Maybe it's becouse MS software is mature and usable enough for an non-so-techie user.
Do you really care about software (even if it does have plenty of (even serious) bugs) which works reasonably for you? I'd say not at all. Look at mozilla - each milestone was a icon - and now? It's stable and usable - only a very small minority of users foolishes to get the latest milestone or even latest build...
I've always like the idea to let recording ass. a few cents from a potentially made copy. Now if I can't even do a copy I'm excited to pay a few cents for my own backups of my work.
Just my two cents has now a new innovative meaning...
Of course it's similar to Java. My comment could apply to Java as well.
It's not trully OO language - for example types - once you use a standard integer you can forget above doing OO above it. You'd have to use a standard object integer type (which is included) but nobody uses it (speed reason). It's kinda procedural language (not quite but...)
There are many similar-to-c type conversions...
Data structures builtins? (String handling? Dictionaries? Weighted trees?) Oh,...
More but I don't want to start flamebait here...
If C/Java is mice/elefants what about Python,Smalltalk,Prolog,Mercury? Aliens?
At least java had RMI which was a great step ahead in terms of higher level of language. C# lacks this again...
Well if one needs to develop a new language why, for God's sake, must everyone reimplement language at the nearly-the-same level as C?
And (unlike C), most of this so-called-portable languages use a stack VM machine. We don't know much about optimizing it in hardware and we don't have compilers capable doing that.
Guess why ppc (which is slower than most x86 in real apps) wins in float SPECs that much. Guess why hammer and p4 have sse2. Hint - 80387 design... which is... yes you got it.
It depends on how this C# is intended to be use. If it is only to leech from MS.net it's not an alternative - you'll still be tied to MS thoughts of a row ahead...
About GNU GPL: I don't understand this fully. If you are an author of some code you can always dual-licence it and negotate with a commercial company to pay you for software you had developed (if they want keep it closed). The problem might be a larger number of contributors - you'd have to ask them if they agree with dual-licencing their contributions and pay them off (or exclude/reimplement their code). But I don't see how this changes with BM's licence (source must be available to me) - he might have the source but it'd be unfair to sell someone else's work anyway.
Note that what I said above sais nothing about his decision. Charityware is a nice idea!
Most socialistic countries in late 60. Europe tried to transform their model to a Socialism with a human face or something like that. The russian Big Brother smashed this but anyway this lead to nowhere. This model talked about economics, freedom etc. It forgot to talk about people. Most people were not motivated to do anything so they didn't.
If Free Software does want to be the primary bussiness model it has to to find a motivation for most developers at first.
Yes, I can still edit my project's source in vim as I could with my old P133 but I dislike waiting (about) 12minutes to compile the affected subtree
instead of 2 minutes on my Athlon.
I believe this is not that case becouse all underlying engines (in particular: video, 3d, sound) already work perfectly on other platforms. The highlevel programming is not such a pain to port.
You're not alone. I have a friend working (in a gaming company) on a quite powerfull 3D engine. It's been already used for a deer huting game or what was it. The whole code runs under Linux/mesa(opengl) on full optimalization without any problems. They use even openal for audio effects.
The game which runs on this engine uses some (very redundant MS Windows dependent sw (activeX or such)) so the result won't run anything else but MS windows.
However, it'd take a week or so to port to Linux but noone is willing to do it.
take nife [ but what with it? it's gross... ]
2 hours later, bitching, trying everything on everything sharp knife with grass [ found scanning through the game files]
---
This is from Larry. What would one solve in CML2?
Becouse SCSI is thought as "high-end" technology and manufacturers let you pay for it. This won't change anytime soon becouse they don't count content users but money... (what would you expect?;)
You can only hope that firewire devices would be more affordable and won't get similar stamp. Firewire is also more friendly (no terminators) and quite cheap now.
So buzz manufacturers that you want an internal firewire disc...
Actually this is not very safe method. If things go bad for some reason (short
circuit, for example) you will have +5V where you should have no voltage! It may seriously damage your system. If you do this be sure to put in some extra Zener's diodes at least...
I have an alter-ego at Red Dwarf. Don't remind me that coward.
I risk my karma for this but...one of the reasons why many people are talking about the death instead of infancy is that:
they see no deadline for a usable office (try to find it on openoffice.org). Thus they think: "Staroffice is not usable for me right now and the change will never come".
they don't want outlined features. What's the point of clicking a button in gnome to get a crash or nothing. They demand (at least) minimal but stable user interface.
they can't use clipboard in a reasonable way. Many applications (like emacs, gvim, mozilla, gnotes, gnome-apps, qt-apps) can't share it without problems. Sometimes you have to use the third button, sometimes crtl-ins, cometimes, ctrl-c, you know...
I have an alter-ego at Red Dwarf. Don't remind me that coward.
Slashdot Mirror
Dumbhead. Period. ;)
Buy something supporte or pay someone to write the driver if you need it so badly.
Sure, you're a techie. As well as me ;). For me it's also not enough. But for 95% people using windows seems to be.
Maybe it's becouse MS software is mature and usable enough for an non-so-techie user.
Do you really care about software (even if it does have plenty of (even serious) bugs) which works reasonably for you? I'd say not at all. Look at mozilla - each milestone was a icon - and now? It's stable and usable - only a very small minority of users foolishes to get the latest milestone or even latest build...
I've always like the idea to let recording ass. a few cents from a potentially made copy. Now if I can't even do a copy I'm excited to pay a few cents for my own backups of my work.
Just my two cents has now a new innovative meaning...
- It's not trully OO language - for example types - once you use a standard integer you can forget above doing OO above it. You'd have to use a standard object integer type (which is included) but nobody uses it (speed reason). It's kinda procedural language (not quite but
...)
- There are many similar-to-c type conversions...
- Data structures builtins? (String handling? Dictionaries? Weighted trees?) Oh,...
- More but I don't want to start flamebait here
...
If C/Java is mice/elefants what about Python,Smalltalk,Prolog,Mercury? Aliens?At least java had RMI which was a great step ahead in terms of higher level of language. C# lacks this again
Well if one needs to develop a new language why, for God's sake, must everyone reimplement language at the nearly-the-same level as C?
... which is ... yes you got it.
And (unlike C), most of this so-called-portable languages use a stack VM machine. We don't know much about optimizing it in hardware and we don't have compilers capable doing that.
Guess why ppc (which is slower than most x86 in real apps) wins in float SPECs that much. Guess why hammer and p4 have sse2. Hint - 80387 design
It depends on how this C# is intended to be use. If it is only to leech from MS .net it's not an alternative - you'll still be tied to MS thoughts of a row ahead...
About GNU GPL: I don't understand this fully. If you are an author of some code you can always dual-licence it and negotate with a commercial company to pay you for software you had developed (if they want keep it closed). The problem might be a larger number of contributors - you'd have to ask them if they agree with dual-licencing their contributions and pay them off (or exclude/reimplement their code). But I don't see how this changes with BM's licence (source must be available to me) - he might have the source but it'd be unfair to sell someone else's work anyway.
Note that what I said above sais nothing about his decision. Charityware is a nice idea!
Sure, why not? At least one penguin would be in any Linux user ;)
Ad 1. This is not a solution. You would have to formally prove that even the interpreter/compiler has no flaws.
Ad 2. This is perfect but show me a usable (non 101-function) program with a formal proof of its functionality.
Ad 3. Same as ad 1.
More, I think that both rules you suggest are already used - s/legacy C programs/programs/g
Most socialistic countries in late 60. Europe tried to transform their model to a Socialism with a human face or something like that. The russian Big Brother smashed this but anyway this lead to nowhere. This model talked about economics, freedom etc. It forgot to talk about people. Most people were not motivated to do anything so they didn't.
If Free Software does want to be the primary bussiness model it has to to find a motivation for most developers at first.
The turbo button defaulted to ON. You could switch it off if you wanted to play old bad designed game which would be unplayably fast ;-)
Yes, I can still edit my project's source in vim as I could with my old P133 but I dislike waiting (about) 12minutes to compile the affected subtree
;)
instead of 2 minutes on my Athlon.
Yes, I'm impatient
This is multiplayer only. And no - you have to have a cd key. The mp-level from the demo is included.
I believe this is not that case becouse all underlying engines (in particular: video, 3d, sound) already work perfectly on other platforms. The highlevel programming is not such a pain to port.
But yes, in general, you're right.
I'm still skeptical of their business model
You're not alone. I have a friend working (in a gaming company) on a quite powerfull 3D engine. It's been already used for a deer huting game or what was it. The whole code runs under Linux/mesa(opengl) on full optimalization without any problems. They use even openal for audio effects.
The game which runs on this engine uses some (very redundant MS Windows dependent sw (activeX or such)) so the result won't run anything else but MS windows.
However, it'd take a week or so to port to Linux but noone is willing to do it.
take nife ... ]
[ but what with it? it's gross
2 hours later, bitching, trying everything on everything
sharp knife with grass
[ found scanning through the game files]
---
This is from Larry. What would one solve in CML2?
Sharks haven't evolute for ages ;) They're not living? Visit Florida ;)
DDOS attacks are very hard to avoid becouse they're not "real attacks". It's a sort of vandalism - you can't hurt it like a hacker, so just
...i'm so mighty! YES!
while true; do press 'submit' button; done
can they stand it? No, well
Becouse SCSI is thought as "high-end" technology and manufacturers let you pay for it. This won't change anytime soon becouse they don't count content users but money... (what would you expect? ;)
...
You can only hope that firewire devices would be more affordable and won't get similar stamp. Firewire is also more friendly (no terminators) and quite cheap now.
So buzz manufacturers that you want an internal firewire disc
I have an alter-ego at Red Dwarf. Don't remind me that coward.
I risk my karma for this but...one of the reasons why many people are talking about the death instead of infancy is that:
I have an alter-ego at Red Dwarf. Don't remind me that coward.
I have an alter-ego at Red Dwarf. Don't remind me that coward.
I have an alter-ego at Red Dwarf. Don't remind me that coward.
I have an alter-ego at Red Dwarf. Don't remind me that coward.