I fail to see how rendering a scene at a high framerate would be any more challenging than rendering a complex scene at a lower frame rate. Remember that the hardware either is or is not in use.
Complex scenes entail a lot changes in renderstate which all end up taking a bit of time but don't really task the GPU to the max. You can pump a simple scene as fast as you can and it'll most likely be so neatly packaged that the GPU can just keep on churning. IMHO, as I've understood it, it's SC2's fault only to the extent that it's retarded to run anything faster than a screens v-sync let alone double it.
Creationism doesn't actually have anything to do with religion; it's just a theistic explanation for where we all came from and, when it gets accepted, it'll start to explain what happens when the skyzombie comes back.
because some of us run more than one thing at a time....
Granted, but the hiccup comes when you have something that's CPU hungry and doesn't properly make use of the plethora of cores, might just use one; it will take a long time to finish or it performs badly as a real-time app. In that situation you'd get better results with less cores at a higher CPU frequency.
Pfft.. this reminds me a bit of the jump to DirectX 9 graphics cards; in general the old cards performed better in brute force triangles per second whereas the new ones would perform better at the more technically advanced stuff (read: the things you disable when you're serious about fps). How much use is it having 6 or 8 cores if the program being run only efficiently uses 2 or 4 of them most of the time? It's not like everything can just be multithreaded like that and even if it can, there's bound to be some overhead for doing it.
Ah, 7 years ago, I was a complete Linux noob... but I do remember that majority of mainstream programs weren't available on Linux; download pages always wanted me to specify my Windows-version if even that, not so anymore. In 2003 I didn't have proper drivers for most of my hardware, admittedly just generic stuff like sound/graphics cards, not so anymore. It would've been an absurd idea to walk around a supermarket back then and expect to find a laptop sporting Linux let alone have Linux power home-entertainment systems... It does seem like the userbase has grown enough to force the software/hardware/retail people to take Linux from the back of the store to the front.
Free software has made great strides throughout it's conception, it just doesn't always take the front seat. In the beginning it's just innocuous stuff like libraries, web browsers and web servers (GPL/Linux are not, separately or together, the whole of free software). Then when you've been weened off of IE, the neighbor's kid shows you Linux and tells you it can run circles around Windows on your old hardware with the browser of your choice... who's to say no? Just for the hell of it I'm using a Pentium3 550MHz 384MB 4G harddrive machine with the _latest_ Ubuntu. Having had no problems or unbearable slowdowns, hell it even recognized the mobile broadband modem my Windows-machine shunned, I think the theory does lend to practice.
From my point of view, now is the worst time ever to call it since Linux is finally something I can just pop in and start using. Sure I won't have all the software I could have on Windows, but a) that's life though the situation is getting better e.g. there are ports and better substitutes b) chances are that in 7 years time you won't be able to run them either on the Windows of the future.
This is also the reason why Ubuntu, or Linux, will never become a major player in the consumer OS market.
Way too early to make that call. People are constantly getting more computer savvy, Linux distros more easily accessible for the layman and companies more attuned to people having Linux. Also the problems of switching from Windows to Linux when you're a novice computer user are often overstated; not a huge step to use a web browser or an email client in Linux compared to Windows and let's face it, that's what most people use their computer for.
Agreed. Much the same as having a "humane" method like the lethal injection makes death penalty politically viable when in reality it's only humane for the people doing the execution.
I guess beating a dead horse is as good a hobby as any if you're a zombie like SCO. The snippets make it look like if Stephen King was trying to sue a fifth grader over the use of "It was a dark and stormy night".
Another probable dead horse is the Microsoft angle where it was insinuated that they might be funding this debacle via bumped up licensing fees to SCO. It sort of made sense to me way back then; if they could increase the risks of adopting free software in general it would enable them to keep their market shares.
However you decide to kill people they will object thus doing everything in their power to be outside this compassionate response. Essentially in this case the suicide booth would be a doctors reception, prison or whichever place the establishment would get a chance to sample your blood.
I guess you won't be dissuaded by how much worse the world* would be if we even had a chance to put something like this solution into motion. So I'll just say that, just from the human point of view, it really bums me out.
(* or at least the somewhat civilized parts of it)
You assume that people would be lining up for the suicide booth even if AIDS did mean a death penalty back then. I did not approach my flippant answer from the moral point of view, you only have to take into account self preservation. This would end up hiding the problem and thus making it worse whereas nowadays a concerted no bs effort could meet your objectives.
Besides, your solution would need to get approved worldwide and I don't see that happening; not to mention that Greenpeace would probably tear you a new one if you tried to go after the monkeys:)
Sometimes you have to leave people behind... I nominate the ones using IE.
Back in the day you couldn't use it because just visiting a site would replace your bookmarks with pages of ladies with negotiable virtue. Nowadays, last I looked at it, it's an opera clone; but hell, I guess at least they're mimicking the first class look and feel.
You can take the original by the base and shake it to easily make the switches click, not happening on the remake. But it's still hard to say how much of that is all the thousands of hours of decathlon/track&field/blood&guts.
I opened up both the original and the Speed-Link Competition Pro remake; remake is all microswitches whereas the original's buttons use a spring resistance which keeps two metal plates apart. They also don't make them like they use to since all the wiring in the remake is soldered on vs. old style having these quaint push-in-place metal connectors.
Looking at how simple they both seem makes me think you could just pop a d-socket in the remake version and attach an original C64 joystick to it. Probably still easier to buy one of those adapters if you want to the original feel.
A product I recently heard of (haven't tested myself, bought the speedlink competition pros); basically an adapter for atari compatible joysticks http://atariage.com/store/index.php?l=product_detail&p=267. So just dust of the good old grenade joystick from the attic, bring it down to the basement where you live and let the games begin.
p.s. The competition pro clones are alright for the occasional SWOS-match, a bit clunky compared to the working order original but that may pass with time.
The whole point of software patent wording has become to ensure maximum ambiguity; the more ground you cover the less there is room for your competition to lay it's own claims or to avoid patent extortion. Who you gonna call when an industry monster sends it's goons around? Probably some nonprofit organization that'll tell you to cave cause it might get rough out there.
Slashdot Mirror
I fail to see how rendering a scene at a high framerate would be any more challenging than rendering a complex scene at a lower frame rate. Remember that the hardware either is or is not in use.
Complex scenes entail a lot changes in renderstate which all end up taking a bit of time but don't really task the GPU to the max. You can pump a simple scene as fast as you can and it'll most likely be so neatly packaged that the GPU can just keep on churning. IMHO, as I've understood it, it's SC2's fault only to the extent that it's retarded to run anything faster than a screens v-sync let alone double it.
Pfft... people should just stop giving the dinky flash people money so we'd get our interwebz back.
Creationism doesn't actually have anything to do with religion; it's just a theistic explanation for where we all came from and, when it gets accepted, it'll start to explain what happens when the skyzombie comes back.
Just don't be surprised then the electricity bill will be much higher then using some modern hardware.
It's postmodern hardware so it'll come with a handcrank.
because some of us run more than one thing at a time....
Granted, but the hiccup comes when you have something that's CPU hungry and doesn't properly make use of the plethora of cores, might just use one; it will take a long time to finish or it performs badly as a real-time app. In that situation you'd get better results with less cores at a higher CPU frequency.
Pfft.. this reminds me a bit of the jump to DirectX 9 graphics cards; in general the old cards performed better in brute force triangles per second whereas the new ones would perform better at the more technically advanced stuff (read: the things you disable when you're serious about fps). How much use is it having 6 or 8 cores if the program being run only efficiently uses 2 or 4 of them most of the time? It's not like everything can just be multithreaded like that and even if it can, there's bound to be some overhead for doing it.
Ah, 7 years ago, I was a complete Linux noob... but I do remember that majority of mainstream programs weren't available on Linux; download pages always wanted me to specify my Windows-version if even that, not so anymore. In 2003 I didn't have proper drivers for most of my hardware, admittedly just generic stuff like sound/graphics cards, not so anymore. It would've been an absurd idea to walk around a supermarket back then and expect to find a laptop sporting Linux let alone have Linux power home-entertainment systems... It does seem like the userbase has grown enough to force the software/hardware/retail people to take Linux from the back of the store to the front.
Free software has made great strides throughout it's conception, it just doesn't always take the front seat. In the beginning it's just innocuous stuff like libraries, web browsers and web servers (GPL/Linux are not, separately or together, the whole of free software). Then when you've been weened off of IE, the neighbor's kid shows you Linux and tells you it can run circles around Windows on your old hardware with the browser of your choice... who's to say no? Just for the hell of it I'm using a Pentium3 550MHz 384MB 4G harddrive machine with the _latest_ Ubuntu. Having had no problems or unbearable slowdowns, hell it even recognized the mobile broadband modem my Windows-machine shunned, I think the theory does lend to practice.
From my point of view, now is the worst time ever to call it since Linux is finally something I can just pop in and start using. Sure I won't have all the software I could have on Windows, but a) that's life though the situation is getting better e.g. there are ports and better substitutes b) chances are that in 7 years time you won't be able to run them either on the Windows of the future.
This is also the reason why Ubuntu, or Linux, will never become a major player in the consumer OS market.
Way too early to make that call. People are constantly getting more computer savvy, Linux distros more easily accessible for the layman and companies more attuned to people having Linux. Also the problems of switching from Windows to Linux when you're a novice computer user are often overstated; not a huge step to use a web browser or an email client in Linux compared to Windows and let's face it, that's what most people use their computer for.
Agreed. Much the same as having a "humane" method like the lethal injection makes death penalty politically viable when in reality it's only humane for the people doing the execution.
You're missing the point; not only are they saying that all Koreans don't look alike, but that they also don't sound alike either... it's news to me.
I guess beating a dead horse is as good a hobby as any if you're a zombie like SCO. The snippets make it look like if Stephen King was trying to sue a fifth grader over the use of "It was a dark and stormy night".
Another probable dead horse is the Microsoft angle where it was insinuated that they might be funding this debacle via bumped up licensing fees to SCO. It sort of made sense to me way back then; if they could increase the risks of adopting free software in general it would enable them to keep their market shares.
However you decide to kill people they will object thus doing everything in their power to be outside this compassionate response. Essentially in this case the suicide booth would be a doctors reception, prison or whichever place the establishment would get a chance to sample your blood.
I guess you won't be dissuaded by how much worse the world* would be if we even had a chance to put something like this solution into motion. So I'll just say that, just from the human point of view, it really bums me out.
(* or at least the somewhat civilized parts of it)
You assume that people would be lining up for the suicide booth even if AIDS did mean a death penalty back then. I did not approach my flippant answer from the moral point of view, you only have to take into account self preservation. This would end up hiding the problem and thus making it worse whereas nowadays a concerted no bs effort could meet your objectives.
Besides, your solution would need to get approved worldwide and I don't see that happening; not to mention that Greenpeace would probably tear you a new one if you tried to go after the monkeys:)
Sometimes you have to leave people behind... I nominate the ones using IE.
Back in the day you couldn't use it because just visiting a site would replace your bookmarks with pages of ladies with negotiable virtue. Nowadays, last I looked at it, it's an opera clone; but hell, I guess at least they're mimicking the first class look and feel.
Yeah, let's create a situation where getting caught with a disease means instant death; then we'll really be on top of things.
You can take the original by the base and shake it to easily make the switches click, not happening on the remake. But it's still hard to say how much of that is all the thousands of hours of decathlon/track&field/blood&guts.
I opened up both the original and the Speed-Link Competition Pro remake; remake is all microswitches whereas the original's buttons use a spring resistance which keeps two metal plates apart. They also don't make them like they use to since all the wiring in the remake is soldered on vs. old style having these quaint push-in-place metal connectors.
Looking at how simple they both seem makes me think you could just pop a d-socket in the remake version and attach an original C64 joystick to it. Probably still easier to buy one of those adapters if you want to the original feel.
A product I recently heard of (haven't tested myself, bought the speedlink competition pros); basically an adapter for atari compatible joysticks http://atariage.com/store/index.php?l=product_detail&p=267. So just dust of the good old grenade joystick from the attic, bring it down to the basement where you live and let the games begin.
p.s. The competition pro clones are alright for the occasional SWOS-match, a bit clunky compared to the working order original but that may pass with time.
The whole point of software patent wording has become to ensure maximum ambiguity; the more ground you cover the less there is room for your competition to lay it's own claims or to avoid patent extortion. Who you gonna call when an industry monster sends it's goons around? Probably some nonprofit organization that'll tell you to cave cause it might get rough out there.