When it comes to (Java) webservers and/or MySQL, the Opteron definitely has the advantage. In some cases, the Opteron simply annihilates the Xeon, but luckily for Intel the latter offers some resistance in our GZIP dominated benchmarks.
Humorously, the also say this:
The Opteron will probably remain the fastest CPU for the server tasks tested here until Intel introduces Nocona, the Xeon Prescott at 3.4-3.6 GHz (1 MB L2, 800 MHz FSB) at the end of the 2nd quarter of 2004.
Now we know that the Nocona is here, and it's getting slaughtered at the Altar of The Opteron.
>It's difficult to show copyright infringement in entertainment.
Not if there's actual infringement, it's not. It's really hard if you're imagining infringement, or trying to exercise rights you don't have; like for instance "I've copyrighted the idea of a RTS!"
>Is Age of Empires really that different from Command & Conquer?
Dude, they're completely different games. You might as well say "is one ocean painting really that different from any other?". I'm not sure what that'd get you, really. The mechanics of the game doesn't even seem relevant as far as copyrights go.
"Brent Spiner Will Reportedly Appear On Enterprise. Marina Sirtis spilled the beans at a convention in Dallas that Spiner will appear in three episodes playing the grandfather of Data's creator, Dr. Noonien Soong." -- TVTome
Let me try to think for just two seconds how I'd handled it instead...
Okay, I'd made the flashlight attachable to weapons, but I'd also make it so that running around with the lights on would make you an easier target for the monsters (who shouldn't all have night vision), and even design som monster to be _attracted_ to bright light.
See? Now the player can decide on his own wheter or not he wants to run around in the dark shooting things. There's suddenly a _logical_ reason both for chosing darkness, and for chosing light.
What do you mean useless? Lyons did his job as a paid shill for SCO and made sure the stock got pumped today.
While the lambs are buying into SCOX on the recommendations of SCO-paid shills like Lyons and The Enderle Troll (who just a few days ago called SCOX a great investment), the insiders and big holders are having a nice little lamb slaughter unloading their stock.
Note how SCO didn't go to court with their "new hot evidence", they went to a paid shill. Now, why is that?
I have no idea if this affects pscp too, but I've brought my pscp download resume patch up to date anyhow. Grabbed the source snapshot which I assume post-dates the 0.55 fixes.
Because it'd cost them ~$0.3/game more to release on DVD, and since the customers get no choice anyhow (well, except warezing the game), they maximize profits by going with regular CDs instead of a DVD.
The really cynical developers/distributors will wait a year and then release a DVD-version. When that doesn't sell, declare DVD-distribution a failure. (It's a little like selling boxed linux games). Then stop producing the original CD version, and release a Game of the Year or "Gold" version instead, on CD, but this time you include extra levels or even an expansion. Price it just below DVD release.
Compare new release to concurrent DVD sales. Declare new CD release a success! Use these magic numbers to explain to customers why there won't be any DVD-releases in the near future.
I had to stop playing because it SERIOUSLY creeped me out
Me too! But -- unlike with Doom 3 -- even though I took a break from the game for a while at that point (key word "reanimate"), I still wanted to go back! I wanted to see it through, to learn its secrets, experience its wonders. And I did, and it was sort of rewarding.
My limited, granted, time with Doom 3 gave me nothing of that. Why would I want to go back? To find another zombie hiding in a corner? "Ohh.. that's exciting".
Finding new monsters, and weapons that were uninspired in Doom 3, doesn't do it for me.
There's an old "rule" in various occupations that you should put in as much as you need, no more.
Good writers strive to cut out as much filler as they can. You write, and then for each sentence you go "Could I say this more succinctly?", "Could I cut this?". This makes the story tight. Rewrite, rewrite, rewrite.
It's been said that you can tell an amateur artist from the master at a glance, based on the fact that the amateur will overdo it and put a lot of things into the painting/sculpture/set, where the master will approach the problem without the clutter.
An old-style founder will tell you that it's the simple lines that are the hardest to get right, not the ornaments. Mastery of the simple lines is what sets you apart from the grunts in the middle of the pack.
The ID crew should load up Thief 3 and play "The Cradle". "The Cradle" is scary but interesting. Instead of a never ending stream of monsters, you have a limited amount, and they're not actually all out to get you per default. You can engage, or you can sneak past. One option more than in Doom 3 (as far as I can tell)
"The Cradle" is scary because you'll imagine the worst possible thing happening all the time, and even though the worst possible thing that you imagine doesn't happen, the game use sound, visual and story-telling to keep you on your toes throughout.
In Doom 3, the worst possible thing pretty much happens every turn. If there's a ledge with an item on it, the ledge will fall as you walk on it. If you're backing into a dark corner, there will be a zombie waiting for you This is a much less rewarding experience overall.
Take the place where you find the first shotgun. ID's design: Put a piece of ammo/armor on the floor off the given path. Player jumps over rail the grab item, floor falls out, player ends up in dark room with three/four zombies attacking.
I would probably have designed it thus for a first try:.. player jumps over rail to grab item, floor falls out revealing dark room, player+floor ends up falling on zombie, killing it (can use humor here). Lessons learned: 1) Be careful where you walk. 2) Dangerous creatures are lurking for you in the darkness. 3) They can be killed by dropping heavy things in their heads.
Both approaches would teach the player that exploration is rewarded and that it can be dangerous, one just isn't so obvious about it.
Doom 3 just made me realize how good a game Thief really is. Way underrated.
At least in Thief the lighting made sense most of the time.
[...] is a little more hard work than assigning a number to a set of file version.
I never said anything about how it was done or how much effort or pain or money it involved, I just said what the end result (as I see it) is. A release is a date and a set of software versions.
For someone who is continuously updating his box, I don't see that a release date is of much consequence. It might be important for the process as a whole, it might be be important to the developers themselves (easier to work towards a goal), but as a user of debian/stable which is served stable software upgrades between releases? Not so much.
That's a valid point, a small one -- installing is like 0.005% of running Debian -- but a valid one none the less.
Except for the basic installation (partitioning, filesystem layout), installation is just a linear sequence of package installs based on apt, dpkg and debconf -- software which is constantly updated regardless of release dates. I've always found the basic install more than adequate. Don't get my wrong, I hate dselect, but you never actually have to use dselect to install Debian. If you had, then hell yes I'd be ecstatic about a new release if it meant doing away with dselect.
The only thing more perplexing than the obsession around release dates (which I can at least understand at some level, if only historically) is the obsession around installers.
You apt-get upgrade the debian/stable boxes regularly to get the latest fixes, right?
I don't see how the set of versions of a debian/stable upgraded continuously up till date X would differ from one installed with a release dated X. So the goal is the same.
Now, since it's the stable branch, updates are safe -- at least compared to not upgrading and being stuck with security issues. So the path is safe.
If you believe otherwise, if being "stable" is so important that you can't rely on [blindly] upgrading at any point between releases, then I don't see how you can [blindly] upgrade at release, in which case again, the actual date doesn't matter since if you're going to "vet" the release anyhow... well, you could do that to any point between releases.
I've never understod this obsession with debian release dates. Since you can apt-get dist-upgrade every day to keep up to date, "release date" is simply the assigning of a particular date to a set of file versions.
Utterly unimportant in the grand scheme of things, if you ask me.
It's good. Not fantastic, in my opinion, but good (note: I'm a CRPGer first, tactical FPSer second).
I like them because they're unforgiving and they can get your heart racing. They're pretty much the anti-Quake of FPSing. On the negative side, the online player community is kind of snotty. Single player is fun, and LAN-play is fun if you play with people who understand that the game isn't Quake. If you try to play one of these like you play Quake, you'll die at first contact with the enemy.
The old Rainbow Six games can be had for next to no $ at all and does runs on pretty much anything. Rainbow Six, R6: Rogue Spear, etc are anti-terrorist games with the weapons, tactics and situations to match. Note, the first game is getting quite old now, but if you've been out of the loop that shouldn't be much of a problem (and it's always nice to get games cheaply)
If you want military style play you should look into the Ghost Recon series instead/in addition. I enjoyed the original Ghost Recon missions.
If you can live with less realism (but maybe more action), try the Delta Force series. Here I suggest you begin with the (original) "Delta Force: Black Hawk Down" -- the older games are way outdated, and I didn't really care for the "team Sabre" expansion.
Splinter Cell is a good game too, but less focused on realism than the R6 series. More cinematic in feel and execution. I played it through, so it's good.
Hitman 2 is another fine game, but now we're really walking the outskirts of the tactical shooter genre.
Slashdot Mirror
I just hope it isn't your standard RTS that has been defined by warcraft....
RTS is "defined" by Total Annihilation, not *craft or Red Alert or any other game/series.
Wow. What a silly article.
There are older dual and quad Opteron vs Xeon reviews around.
Humorously, the also say this:
Now we know that the Nocona is here, and it's getting slaughtered at the Altar of The Opteron.
>It's difficult to show copyright infringement in entertainment.
Not if there's actual infringement, it's not. It's really hard if you're imagining infringement, or trying to exercise rights you don't have; like for instance "I've copyrighted the idea of a RTS!"
>Is Age of Empires really that different from Command & Conquer?
Dude, they're completely different games. You might as well say "is one ocean painting really that different from any other?". I'm not sure what that'd get you, really. The mechanics of the game doesn't even seem relevant as far as copyrights go.
What about transparent end-point to end-point encryption over VoIP? Not part of the VoIP standard(s)? If not, why?
I'd watch it too. Borg are the coolest thing about the ST-universe.
I could never cheer for the Goa'uld though. They're way too stupid to be worthy of it.
"Brent Spiner Will Reportedly Appear On Enterprise. Marina Sirtis spilled the beans at a convention in Dallas that Spiner will appear in three episodes playing the grandfather of Data's creator, Dr. Noonien Soong." -- TVTome
The question of checking the signature after download not withstanding, if you check the torrent you'll see that the tracker is... cdimage.debian.org.
It's up to you to decide if that's "official enough".
.. available at suprnova.org.
Debian 3.1 (Sarge) Release Candidate 1 - CD 1 of 12 ...
But it's a lame irritating gameplay device!
Let me try to think for just two seconds how I'd handled it instead...
Okay, I'd made the flashlight attachable to weapons, but I'd also make it so that running around with the lights on would make you an easier target for the monsters (who shouldn't all have night vision), and even design som monster to be _attracted_ to bright light.
See? Now the player can decide on his own wheter or not he wants to run around in the dark shooting things. There's suddenly a _logical_ reason both for chosing darkness, and for chosing light.
The article is surprisingly useless.
What do you mean useless? Lyons did his job as a paid shill for SCO and made sure the stock got pumped today.
While the lambs are buying into SCOX on the recommendations of SCO-paid shills like Lyons and The Enderle Troll (who just a few days ago called SCOX a great investment), the insiders and big holders are having a nice little lamb slaughter unloading their stock.
Note how SCO didn't go to court with their "new hot evidence", they went to a paid shill. Now, why is that?
I have no idea if this affects pscp too, but I've brought my pscp download resume patch up to date anyhow. Grabbed the source snapshot which I assume post-dates the 0.55 fixes.
Because it'd cost them ~$0.3/game more to release on DVD, and since the customers get no choice anyhow (well, except warezing the game), they maximize profits by going with regular CDs instead of a DVD.
The really cynical developers/distributors will wait a year and then release a DVD-version. When that doesn't sell, declare DVD-distribution a failure. (It's a little like selling boxed linux games). Then stop producing the original CD version, and release a Game of the Year or "Gold" version instead, on CD, but this time you include extra levels or even an expansion. Price it just below DVD release.
Compare new release to concurrent DVD sales. Declare new CD release a success! Use these magic numbers to explain to customers why there won't be any DVD-releases in the near future.
Jaded yet?
I had to stop playing because it SERIOUSLY creeped me out
Me too! But -- unlike with Doom 3 -- even though I took a break from the game for a while at that point (key word "reanimate"), I still wanted to go back! I wanted to see it through, to learn its secrets, experience its wonders. And I did, and it was sort of rewarding.
My limited, granted, time with Doom 3 gave me nothing of that. Why would I want to go back? To find another zombie hiding in a corner? "Ohh.. that's exciting".
Finding new monsters, and weapons that were uninspired in Doom 3, doesn't do it for me.
There's an old "rule" in various occupations that you should put in as much as you need, no more.
Good writers strive to cut out as much filler as they can. You write, and then for each sentence you go "Could I say this more succinctly?", "Could I cut this?". This makes the story tight. Rewrite, rewrite, rewrite.
It's been said that you can tell an amateur artist from the master at a glance, based on the fact that the amateur will overdo it and put a lot of things into the painting/sculpture/set, where the master will approach the problem without the clutter.
An old-style founder will tell you that it's the simple lines that are the hardest to get right, not the ornaments. Mastery of the simple lines is what sets you apart from the grunts in the middle of the pack.
This seems to be the failure of Doom 3.
I'd mod you up if I hadn't wanted to post.
The ID crew should load up Thief 3 and play "The Cradle". "The Cradle" is scary but interesting. Instead of a never ending stream of monsters, you have a limited amount, and they're not actually all out to get you per default. You can engage, or you can sneak past. One option more than in Doom 3 (as far as I can tell)
"The Cradle" is scary because you'll imagine the worst possible thing happening all the time, and even though the worst possible thing that you imagine doesn't happen, the game use sound, visual and story-telling to keep you on your toes throughout.
In Doom 3, the worst possible thing pretty much happens every turn. If there's a ledge with an item on it, the ledge will fall as you walk on it. If you're backing into a dark corner, there will be a zombie waiting for you This is a much less rewarding experience overall.
Take the place where you find the first shotgun. ID's design: Put a piece of ammo/armor on the floor off the given path. Player jumps over rail the grab item, floor falls out, player ends up in dark room with three/four zombies attacking.
I would probably have designed it thus for a first try: .. player jumps over rail to grab item, floor falls out revealing dark room, player+floor ends up falling on zombie, killing it (can use humor here). Lessons learned: 1) Be careful where you walk. 2) Dangerous creatures are lurking for you in the darkness. 3) They can be killed by dropping heavy things in their heads.
Both approaches would teach the player that exploration is rewarded and that it can be dangerous, one just isn't so obvious about it.
Doom 3 just made me realize how good a game Thief really is. Way underrated.
At least in Thief the lighting made sense most of the time.
[...] is a little more hard work than assigning a number to a set of file version.
I never said anything about how it was done or how much effort or pain or money it involved, I just said what the end result (as I see it) is. A release is a date and a set of software versions.
For someone who is continuously updating his box, I don't see that a release date is of much consequence. It might be important for the process as a whole, it might be be important to the developers themselves (easier to work towards a goal), but as a user of debian/stable which is served stable software upgrades between releases? Not so much.
That's a valid point, a small one -- installing is like 0.005% of running Debian -- but a valid one none the less.
Except for the basic installation (partitioning, filesystem layout), installation is just a linear sequence of package installs based on apt, dpkg and debconf -- software which is constantly updated regardless of release dates. I've always found the basic install more than adequate. Don't get my wrong, I hate dselect, but you never actually have to use dselect to install Debian. If you had, then hell yes I'd be ecstatic about a new release if it meant doing away with dselect.
The only thing more perplexing than the obsession around release dates (which I can at least understand at some level, if only historically) is the obsession around installers.
You apt-get upgrade the debian/stable boxes regularly to get the latest fixes, right?
I don't see how the set of versions of a debian/stable upgraded continuously up till date X would differ from one installed with a release dated X. So the goal is the same.
Now, since it's the stable branch, updates are safe -- at least compared to not upgrading and being stuck with security issues. So the path is safe.
If you believe otherwise, if being "stable" is so important that you can't rely on [blindly] upgrading at any point between releases, then I don't see how you can [blindly] upgrade at release, in which case again, the actual date doesn't matter since if you're going to "vet" the release anyhow... well, you could do that to any point between releases.
That's how I see it.
I've never understod this obsession with debian release dates. Since you can apt-get dist-upgrade every day to keep up to date, "release date" is simply the assigning of a particular date to a set of file versions.
Utterly unimportant in the grand scheme of things, if you ask me.
It's good. Not fantastic, in my opinion, but good (note: I'm a CRPGer first, tactical FPSer second).
I like them because they're unforgiving and they can get your heart racing. They're pretty much the anti-Quake of FPSing. On the negative side, the online player community is kind of snotty. Single player is fun, and LAN-play is fun if you play with people who understand that the game isn't Quake. If you try to play one of these like you play Quake, you'll die at first contact with the enemy.
The old Rainbow Six games can be had for next to no $ at all and does runs on pretty much anything. Rainbow Six, R6: Rogue Spear, etc are anti-terrorist games with the weapons, tactics and situations to match. Note, the first game is getting quite old now, but if you've been out of the loop that shouldn't be much of a problem (and it's always nice to get games cheaply)
If you want military style play you should look into the Ghost Recon series instead/in addition. I enjoyed the original Ghost Recon missions.
If you can live with less realism (but maybe more action), try the Delta Force series. Here I suggest you begin with the (original) "Delta Force: Black Hawk Down" -- the older games are way outdated, and I didn't really care for the "team Sabre" expansion.
Splinter Cell is a good game too, but less focused on realism than the R6 series. More cinematic in feel and execution. I played it through, so it's good.
Hitman 2 is another fine game, but now we're really walking the outskirts of the tactical shooter genre.
Hope this helps.
PS. Download demos before you buy.
Strawman.
I don't know about the US, but comparing the boxed Athlon64 3000+ against a 3.2GHz P4 I see that the P4 is ~50% more expensive.
Not to mention, it doesn't run 64-bit software.
I can start off with The Gate by Endre Barath [Endi]
Walkthrough.
Because if you do, you might survive a slashdotting, cut down on bandwidth costs and, finally, actually reach your intended audience.
We wouldn't want that, now would we?