Isn't it amazing how you can tell straight away when a game is made by Sid Meyer? Call to Power has all the shortcomings of CivII plus a bigger map more tedious gameplay and a general feeling of a rip off. Every time Sid comes out with a game it is always an improvement on the previous one. Only Sid could come up with "designed units" and even "designed political system". Those lamers at Activision can't hold the candle to Sid's genius.
Is is possible to use the demo with the Windows version of the game? I guess all the data should be fine. They usually just port the game executable. Has anyone tried it yet? After all I already paid for SMAC...
...the window is 480x320 but half of it is occupied by knobs and sliders and there is a thick tv-like frame around the viewing that's 50 pixels on each side. In fact the viewing area is only a tad smaller than a first class postage stamp. BTW. there's no broadband access in the UK and we won't see it for a good few months yet so the picture's not animated either. We're almost there Tony, e-revolution rocks, belch.
Yes but their current source base is so big now that it's quite intimidating to just join in. And GNOME developers don't produce mucho documentation at all. Which brings us to an interesting issue with open source. Projects that are successful grow enormously and usually lack documentation so new people tend to reimplement everything from scratch instead of contributing to existing projects. Why do you think we have hundreds of IRC clients? You can claim it's diversity but to me it spells "insufficient documentation/examples".
whether the author of the review has read the Gang of Four "Design Patterns". It's a book that also generated a lot of heat when it was published.
If the reviewer hasn't read the GoF this is the place to start when we're talking patterns. Every book like this should be jugded against the GoF 'bible'. In my opinion.
This thing will really take off. I have a feeling that the KDE project is definitely going somewhere. These guys have a vision and they stick to it while being pragmatic enough to actually get the coding done. Some will say that KDE is an unremarkable project because it mimics Windows interface. Whether it mimics anything or not is a whole different story (it actually encompases bits from various UIs). However, they are consistently productive and their project is progressing extremely rapidly.
GNOME guys have this grand vision to produce the one and only desktop that will be everything to everyone. I feel they are trying to take on too much and hence the progress is very slow. I was once on a (commercial) project like this. We wanted to build the ultimate application in the industry, encompass everything and still leave plenty of room for expansion. The project grew enormously before it became usable and the initial "grand design" had to be replaced by something simpler and leaner. I think this stage is still ahead of the GNOME guys. The age old KISS rule will bite them very soon (if it's not biting them already). They may have the great plan and superb architecture but I have my own views on designing architectures before anything uses it. No offence to the GNOME team but a thought from experience. KDE has all the aces their desktop is leaner, more functional and more stable thanks to its simpler design. Bonobo may be great one day but it will take them years to get it going especially if they try to rewrite StarOffice with it.
What the ----? OK, one of the major underlying themes of BladeRunner (at least for me) was the question of what defines a human, and whether a "human" like Deckard could fall in love with a replicant (like Rachel). Changing Deckard to a replicant sort of blows the whole meaning of the film in that regard, and pretty much makes the humans into the bad guys overall.
What makes you say that this defeats the meaning of the film? Given your point of view the fact that Deckard is a replicant enhances it!
If Deckard is a replicant which can fall in love with another replicant or otherwise what exactly makes him different from any other human being apart from the way he was brought into this world? This is the big question that PKD asks in his novels. What is it that makes us human? Is it our thoughts, our emotions, our memories or something else. Since the definition of a human is nonexistent it's quite conceivable that one day our planet will be populated by beings that will meet the common criteria for "humanity". PKD asks us how we are going to relate to those beings and gives one possible (gloomy) scenario. This is one of his favourite themes. You shoul read the Androids book (if you haven't already) and We can build you to see slightly different approaches to this issue. I vaguely remember that Martian time slip also had paragraphs relating to that. Anyhow a visit to www.philipkdick.com will give you more food for thought than my stupid blabbing. Take care.
so few PKD's books were screened. Frankly the androids book is pretty mediocre by Philip K Dick's standards. I truly hope that one day someone will turn UBIK into a movie. It's my favourite SF book by a long shot.
Does anyone know which PKD's book were turned into screenplays. I only saw "Blade Runner" and "Total Recall". Is there more?
Oh Dear! Never thought that I'd upset you THAT much. I refuse to be called a sicko however, no matter how much my earlier post upset you. GPL enforces the availability of the source code the same way that communism enforced everything to be communal. The ideology behind it is the same. Besides I think that the fact that BSD licensed software continues to thrive is the living proof that GPL is totally redundant. As long as people play a fair game and don't try to take credit for the efforts of others everything works. But GPL will not protect against this sort of abuse anyway.
BTW. I think FLTK rocks and version 2 is looking very promising. And no I have no intentions of stealing it and taking credit away from you.
Can anyone suggest a graphics board which will give me 3D acceleration on my FreeBSD box. As I understand NVidia have some drivers for Linux but they are binary only so perhaps Matrox or 3dfx or ATI would have source code for their drivers. Sorry if these are stupid questions. I want to get a new graphics card and want to have my 3d accelerated and don't want to purchase the wrong board again.
Again you're falling into RMS's trap of thinking in terms of some vaguely defined Free Software community. What constitutes that community? The users? The developers/testers? Those who are aware of it? Perhaps only those who contribute financially? There is no definition of the community.
See you are talking using words like 'enemy' or 'competition'. You are probably a student and you're feeling very hostile towards companies of any sort. At the end of the day however it will be one of those very companies you love to hate that will be putting bread on your table. They are not out there to kill the open source movement (at least not the vast majority). They want a symbiotic relationship.
It doesn't matter that the BSD core was one day turned into Solaris and sold at a hefty price. Frankly the person who did it (Bill Joy) had every right to do just that it was HIS code after all, would you agree?
And has BSD survived? Hell yes! just the very fact that you are reading this shows that FreeBSD is just as viable as the GPLd Linux even though it uses this 'dangerous' license. As long as there are enthusiasts who are willing to contribute good code for the common good there is no need for enforced sharing. Sharing which is enforced by law is called confiscation as far as I'm concerned. Sharing must be voluntary to be successful. So what if company X, Y or Z forks a project and makes a commercial version. If the free version developers think it's neat they'll add the feature to the free version if it's something they want. On the other hand the company can make the software successful and will probably 'pay' the original developers in one form of another (suggesting bug fixes, giving away some of their code or even sponsoring the developers). I don't care about the end users half as much as RMS does. Because 99.9% of them just use the code and don't even bother to send a thank you note never mind contribute something positive I think those should simply be grateful for getting a freebie.
On the contrary the GPL license states that 'once free always free' which means that companies must watch closely what they're doing. No company can ever make profit from GPLing their code it gives them nothing apart from good PR because the minute the code gets GPL'd they waive their right to make any sensible profit off that code and we've yet to see a single company make money selling support for GPLd software. Free software and commercial software needs to coexist. Free software shouldn't and can't replace proprietary packages. I lik to have both options. The day everyone is forced to do with their code as RMS tells them will be the day I quit programming.
Reminds me why I run FreeBSD. I mean look at where you ended up with GPL. The whole debate of what is or isn't derived work and what is or isn't a distribution. This precisely shows that GPL is not worth the paper it was written on. It shows that it's vague enough that any interpretation can be defended in court and just the very fact that it's so vague that it needs the court to decide what goes and what doesn't makes this GPL thing worthless.
Look at the issue from this angle. If Open Source(tm) software (as understood by Mr. Perens) is supposed to be such as superior development model it should survive on it's own merit without the necessity of licensing to protect it.
GPL zealots reject any suggestions of it being similar to the communist system but it is in a way. At least the fact that GPL enforces sharing is strinkgly similar to what communists did to the farming industry. They took all farms from the private hands (with or without the owners consent) and turned them into megafarms producing food that was shared amongst those who worked on them and the surplus (if any) would be sold to the shops. Eventually they 'phased out' private ownership altogether. How well that worked we all know now.
Sharing works at times but there must be a way for someone to bail out if they feel they gave more than they received and that they can do better outside of the commune. Some may actually contributed very little but may have the enterpreneurial trait that make them believe they can add value to what the commune produced and better themselves. And that's quite OK! The reason is that that's ok is because they REALLY have to add value. Think about it. RMS tells you that without GPL a company can 'steal' our code and turn it into a product that they sell for profit. The reality is that it will not work unless said company can add a lot of value to the original code in which case they deserve to make profit in my book. On the other hand if they just shrinkwrap and add a minor improvement here and there there is no incentive for the (informed) buyer to purchase the commercial version.
Communes and sharing always seem to work great in the beginning when the enthusiasm is there and all animals seem equal (GPL community). But after the initial excitement some notice that not every pig is equal because some pigs try to get a little more from the system without giving back (think all those who use GPLd software but never write/test/document any). Eventually someone tries to ride the wave and take the credit from good horses who just quietly code all the time (Mr. Raymond comes to mind).
So GPL doesn't benefit everyone. Just like communism it benefits those who are visible and loud but not those who work hard. A BSD coder can extend their code and one day decide they want to turn their effort into a product and they can do it. The freeloaders don't have the right to complain because they still have the old version which is free. For a GPL programmer this isn't an option, once communal always communal is the name of the game here. To put it bluntly: GPL protects noone and restricts the programmer while the BSD license gives the freedom to both the programmer and the user to do whatever they like.
Still, it must feel pretty grim to be a foreigner in a society where a quarter of the adults voted for a party whose main agenda is to rid of all foreign workers. Even though the other three quarters are bound to be extremely friendly your chances of getting mugged for not having an Austrian accent must be fairly high. I heard that Vienna was extremely pretty though.
but where they'll accept you. I'm sorry to rain on your parade but most countries in the western world have very strict immigration laws. I'm afraid to say that the UK Home Office can be particularly difficult. In fact most EU countries will be fairly difficult to get a work permit for. Sometimes it may be worth getting a lawyer to help you deal with the work permit issues. This is what I had to do anyway.
Of the western countries that have foreigner friendly immigration services three clearly stand out: Canada, Australia, New Zealand. All three have policies that with a bit of luck will allow you to work there for a while and even settle. Their governments run various programmes to attract foreign individuals with the right skill sets. Canada is probably the most prominent of the three so that's where I'm heading in September;). All of them will have a requirement that you have some experience in your field prior to your work permit application. Usually they ask for two or three years.
Also with some luck you may get to South Africa. If you feel you are open minded enough you should try some Central Europe countries. Hungary, Poland and Chech Republic are the most developed of the lot and their major cities will have quite a few techie jobs. Their immigration policies are now in place but at least in Poland it's not a problem to get a permit as long as you have some sensible qualifications. The employers will be quite enthusiastic towards English speaking foreigners there as well so you'll probably feel quite welcome.
As for Asia I don't know much about it but I heard Taiwan is seeking English speaking foreigners to work for their companies but it's not something I could confirm. Don't know about the rest of Asia though.
So that's it. As you can see there isn't that many choices you have. Being an American if you have no or little work experience you can rule out pretty much all of EU straight away, unfortunately. They won't let you in. Consider Canada, Oz or New Zealand or perhaps Central Europe. Sorry about this pragmatic tone but despite all the media blabbing about global workforce the governments are still placing awkward barriers even for highly skilled people. This is something you will have to wrestle with. Good luck with your endavour.
These have all been very cool games, totally drawing me into their gameplay, with the addition of having nice graphics and sound even. There is a lot of crap clones out there, but there's hardly been a collapse of good games.
OK talking of a collapse in the industry that eclipses the Hollywood movie business might be a bit of exaggeration but my point remains valid. The games you mentioned (I don't know all the titles) were available in the eighties and early nineties under other titles. They were often simpler (a weakness or a strength depending on which way you look at it) and had poor graphics by today's standards but were much more addictive because at that time they carried an element of novelty. Today all I see is countless clones of those games.
BTW. I don't have a web page but check out my user info for some more on this topic:-).
Really? I think you are grossly mistaken here. We see more and more games companies going bust or cutting down in size. I think those companies really underestimate the word of mouth marketing of games titles. The result is a series of titles that are no different from each other beside the artwork they wrap around the old schemes. How much longer will we have to suffer populous clones?
I really wish this industry took a second look and started attacking niche markets more. I'd stil buy a good text adventure if it was available. New processors offer the power that could add immense levels of playability to text adventures yet the game shops are flooded with those basic types:
F1, Grand Prix, drive fast crap (you run around in circles as fast as you can). I had more fun with the speccy racing games than the pc offerings
Fly in the sky Flight simulator (so realistic that you need a FAA license before taking off. Sorry guys but a game is supposed to be FUN not a practice session. Games are not simulators they are for entertainment
Kill em all bastards! Hopeless, no comment.
Populous x (Yes AoE and AoK is in this bucket together with Caesar I, II, III and whatever else)
"Get a hammer and hit that nail" type of things (All the Lara Cruft crap and countless others.
Now that's about it. There is NOTHING else in shops (at least here in the UK). It's completely hopeless to assume that there is a huge market for what is essentially countless clones of four basic games. In the eighties game designers had to be more inventive because they had to deal with limited resources now we have eye candy crap that can only amuse a thirteen year old and not for very long. I'd still take C64 Pirates over the lame PeeCee stuff and even lamer console crap. In the nineties we witnessed a spectacular collapse of quality in the games industry with Civ being possibly the single exception. If games companies want to stay afloat they once again have to start being innovative, throwing scores of artists at your titles will not do.
I always wanted to have something to do with compiler design but no company in this field offered me a job. I have a linker behind my belt though;-). Guess I'm volunteering here...
I mean really this is the chance for the open source freaks to release this at the same time as MS or even ahead of them! Besides the language looks good enough to replace java. Given the support that SUN showed to the OSS community over the java port I think they deserve less support from us.
to just 1 (one) picture of Hemos and Adrienne (together) which is in focus? Downloading tens of jpegs with most being bigger than 600Kb is not fun on a 28.8K connection. Cheers
Don't know what exactly a system has to be to be considered 'trusted' but OMG tested MICO against their CORBA spec for free in recognition of their efforts. MICO passed and hence can be legally branded as a CORBA implementation. Could MICO be considered a 'trusted system' then? It was tested in a very formal way.
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't it amazing how you can tell straight away when a game is made by Sid Meyer? Call to Power has all the shortcomings of CivII plus a bigger map more tedious gameplay and a general feeling of a rip off. Every time Sid comes out with a game it is always an improvement on the previous one. Only Sid could come up with "designed units" and even "designed political system". Those lamers at Activision can't hold the candle to Sid's genius.
Is is possible to use the demo with the Windows version of the game? I guess all the data should be fine. They usually just port the game executable. Has anyone tried it yet? After all I already paid for SMAC...
...the window is 480x320 but half of it is occupied by knobs and sliders and there is a thick tv-like frame around the viewing that's 50 pixels on each side. In fact the viewing area is only a tad smaller than a first class postage stamp. BTW. there's no broadband access in the UK and we won't see it for a good few months yet so the picture's not animated either. We're almost there Tony, e-revolution rocks, belch.
Yes but their current source base is so big now that it's quite intimidating to just join in. And GNOME developers don't produce mucho documentation at all. Which brings us to an interesting issue with open source. Projects that are successful grow enormously and usually lack documentation so new people tend to reimplement everything from scratch instead of contributing to existing projects. Why do you think we have hundreds of IRC clients? You can claim it's diversity but to me it spells "insufficient documentation/examples".
If the reviewer hasn't read the GoF this is the place to start when we're talking patterns. Every book like this should be jugded against the GoF 'bible'. In my opinion.
Great idea! Do other KParts components (not just panel applets) have the same capability?
FYI. I'm 28 years old.
GNOME guys have this grand vision to produce the one and only desktop that will be everything to everyone. I feel they are trying to take on too much and hence the progress is very slow. I was once on a (commercial) project like this. We wanted to build the ultimate application in the industry, encompass everything and still leave plenty of room for expansion. The project grew enormously before it became usable and the initial "grand design" had to be replaced by something simpler and leaner. I think this stage is still ahead of the GNOME guys. The age old KISS rule will bite them very soon (if it's not biting them already). They may have the great plan and superb architecture but I have my own views on designing architectures before anything uses it. No offence to the GNOME team but a thought from experience. KDE has all the aces their desktop is leaner, more functional and more stable thanks to its simpler design. Bonobo may be great one day but it will take them years to get it going especially if they try to rewrite StarOffice with it.
What makes you say that this defeats the meaning of the film? Given your point of view the fact that Deckard is a replicant enhances it!
If Deckard is a replicant which can fall in love with another replicant or otherwise what exactly makes him different from any other human being apart from the way he was brought into this world? This is the big question that PKD asks in his novels. What is it that makes us human? Is it our thoughts, our emotions, our memories or something else. Since the definition of a human is nonexistent it's quite conceivable that one day our planet will be populated by beings that will meet the common criteria for "humanity". PKD asks us how we are going to relate to those beings and gives one possible (gloomy) scenario. This is one of his favourite themes. You shoul read the Androids book (if you haven't already) and We can build you to see slightly different approaches to this issue. I vaguely remember that Martian time slip also had paragraphs relating to that. Anyhow a visit to www.philipkdick.com will give you more food for thought than my stupid blabbing. Take care.
Does anyone know which PKD's book were turned into screenplays. I only saw "Blade Runner" and "Total Recall". Is there more?
Also read We can build you by the same author. Excellent book as well.
there was a mistery at all. I thought that the unicorn dream was a pretty solid hint. Never realised that someone could have any doubts. Oh, well...
Explains exactly as much as I need to know about WAP.
BTW. I think FLTK rocks and version 2 is looking very promising. And no I have no intentions of stealing it and taking credit away from you.
Take care.
Matt
Can anyone suggest a graphics board which will give me 3D acceleration on my FreeBSD box. As I understand NVidia have some drivers for Linux but they are binary only so perhaps Matrox or 3dfx or ATI would have source code for their drivers. Sorry if these are stupid questions. I want to get a new graphics card and want to have my 3d accelerated and don't want to purchase the wrong board again.
See you are talking using words like 'enemy' or 'competition'. You are probably a student and you're feeling very hostile towards companies of any sort. At the end of the day however it will be one of those very companies you love to hate that will be putting bread on your table. They are not out there to kill the open source movement (at least not the vast majority). They want a symbiotic relationship.
It doesn't matter that the BSD core was one day turned into Solaris and sold at a hefty price. Frankly the person who did it (Bill Joy) had every right to do just that it was HIS code after all, would you agree?
And has BSD survived? Hell yes! just the very fact that you are reading this shows that FreeBSD is just as viable as the GPLd Linux even though it uses this 'dangerous' license. As long as there are enthusiasts who are willing to contribute good code for the common good there is no need for enforced sharing. Sharing which is enforced by law is called confiscation as far as I'm concerned. Sharing must be voluntary to be successful. So what if company X, Y or Z forks a project and makes a commercial version. If the free version developers think it's neat they'll add the feature to the free version if it's something they want. On the other hand the company can make the software successful and will probably 'pay' the original developers in one form of another (suggesting bug fixes, giving away some of their code or even sponsoring the developers). I don't care about the end users half as much as RMS does. Because 99.9% of them just use the code and don't even bother to send a thank you note never mind contribute something positive I think those should simply be grateful for getting a freebie.
On the contrary the GPL license states that 'once free always free' which means that companies must watch closely what they're doing. No company can ever make profit from GPLing their code it gives them nothing apart from good PR because the minute the code gets GPL'd they waive their right to make any sensible profit off that code and we've yet to see a single company make money selling support for GPLd software. Free software and commercial software needs to coexist. Free software shouldn't and can't replace proprietary packages. I lik to have both options. The day everyone is forced to do with their code as RMS tells them will be the day I quit programming.
Look at the issue from this angle. If Open Source(tm) software (as understood by Mr. Perens) is supposed to be such as superior development model it should survive on it's own merit without the necessity of licensing to protect it.
GPL zealots reject any suggestions of it being similar to the communist system but it is in a way. At least the fact that GPL enforces sharing is strinkgly similar to what communists did to the farming industry. They took all farms from the private hands (with or without the owners consent) and turned them into megafarms producing food that was shared amongst those who worked on them and the surplus (if any) would be sold to the shops. Eventually they 'phased out' private ownership altogether. How well that worked we all know now.
Sharing works at times but there must be a way for someone to bail out if they feel they gave more than they received and that they can do better outside of the commune. Some may actually contributed very little but may have the enterpreneurial trait that make them believe they can add value to what the commune produced and better themselves. And that's quite OK! The reason is that that's ok is because they REALLY have to add value. Think about it. RMS tells you that without GPL a company can 'steal' our code and turn it into a product that they sell for profit. The reality is that it will not work unless said company can add a lot of value to the original code in which case they deserve to make profit in my book. On the other hand if they just shrinkwrap and add a minor improvement here and there there is no incentive for the (informed) buyer to purchase the commercial version.
Communes and sharing always seem to work great in the beginning when the enthusiasm is there and all animals seem equal (GPL community). But after the initial excitement some notice that not every pig is equal because some pigs try to get a little more from the system without giving back (think all those who use GPLd software but never write/test/document any). Eventually someone tries to ride the wave and take the credit from good horses who just quietly code all the time (Mr. Raymond comes to mind).
So GPL doesn't benefit everyone. Just like communism it benefits those who are visible and loud but not those who work hard. A BSD coder can extend their code and one day decide they want to turn their effort into a product and they can do it. The freeloaders don't have the right to complain because they still have the old version which is free. For a GPL programmer this isn't an option, once communal always communal is the name of the game here. To put it bluntly: GPL protects noone and restricts the programmer while the BSD license gives the freedom to both the programmer and the user to do whatever they like.
Check out the Extreme Use of Nearly Universal Cooling Hardware for a sample of what real overclockers can overclock!
Still, it must feel pretty grim to be a foreigner in a society where a quarter of the adults voted for a party whose main agenda is to rid of all foreign workers. Even though the other three quarters are bound to be extremely friendly your chances of getting mugged for not having an Austrian accent must be fairly high. I heard that Vienna was extremely pretty though.
Of the western countries that have foreigner friendly immigration services three clearly stand out: Canada, Australia, New Zealand. All three have policies that with a bit of luck will allow you to work there for a while and even settle. Their governments run various programmes to attract foreign individuals with the right skill sets. Canada is probably the most prominent of the three so that's where I'm heading in September ;). All of them will have a requirement that you have some experience in your field prior to your work permit application. Usually they ask for two or three years.
Also with some luck you may get to South Africa. If you feel you are open minded enough you should try some Central Europe countries. Hungary, Poland and Chech Republic are the most developed of the lot and their major cities will have quite a few techie jobs. Their immigration policies are now in place but at least in Poland it's not a problem to get a permit as long as you have some sensible qualifications. The employers will be quite enthusiastic towards English speaking foreigners there as well so you'll probably feel quite welcome.
As for Asia I don't know much about it but I heard Taiwan is seeking English speaking foreigners to work for their companies but it's not something I could confirm. Don't know about the rest of Asia though.
So that's it. As you can see there isn't that many choices you have. Being an American if you have no or little work experience you can rule out pretty much all of EU straight away, unfortunately. They won't let you in. Consider Canada, Oz or New Zealand or perhaps Central Europe. Sorry about this pragmatic tone but despite all the media blabbing about global workforce the governments are still placing awkward barriers even for highly skilled people. This is something you will have to wrestle with. Good luck with your endavour.
OK talking of a collapse in the industry that eclipses the Hollywood movie business might be a bit of exaggeration but my point remains valid. The games you mentioned (I don't know all the titles) were available in the eighties and early nineties under other titles. They were often simpler (a weakness or a strength depending on which way you look at it) and had poor graphics by today's standards but were much more addictive because at that time they carried an element of novelty. Today all I see is countless clones of those games.
BTW. I don't have a web page but check out my user info for some more on this topic :-).
Really? I think you are grossly mistaken here. We see more and more games companies going bust or cutting down in size. I think those companies really underestimate the word of mouth marketing of games titles. The result is a series of titles that are no different from each other beside the artwork they wrap around the old schemes. How much longer will we have to suffer populous clones?
I really wish this industry took a second look and started attacking niche markets more. I'd stil buy a good text adventure if it was available. New processors offer the power that could add immense levels of playability to text adventures yet the game shops are flooded with those basic types:
- F1, Grand Prix, drive fast crap (you run around in circles as fast as you can). I had more fun with the speccy racing games than the pc offerings
- Fly in the sky Flight simulator (so realistic that you need a FAA license before taking off. Sorry guys but a game is supposed to be FUN not a practice session. Games are not simulators they are for entertainment
- Kill em all bastards! Hopeless, no comment.
- Populous x (Yes AoE and AoK is in this bucket together with Caesar I, II, III and whatever else)
- "Get a hammer and hit that nail" type of things (All the Lara Cruft crap and countless others.
Now that's about it. There is NOTHING else in shops (at least here in the UK). It's completely hopeless to assume that there is a huge market for what is essentially countless clones of four basic games. In the eighties game designers had to be more inventive because they had to deal with limited resources now we have eye candy crap that can only amuse a thirteen year old and not for very long. I'd still take C64 Pirates over the lame PeeCee stuff and even lamer console crap. In the nineties we witnessed a spectacular collapse of quality in the games industry with Civ being possibly the single exception. If games companies want to stay afloat they once again have to start being innovative, throwing scores of artists at your titles will not do.I always wanted to have something to do with compiler design but no company in this field offered me a job. I have a linker behind my belt though ;-). Guess I'm volunteering here...
I mean really this is the chance for the open source freaks to release this at the same time as MS or even ahead of them! Besides the language looks good enough to replace java. Given the support that SUN showed to the OSS community over the java port I think they deserve less support from us.
to just 1 (one) picture of Hemos and Adrienne (together) which is in focus? Downloading tens of jpegs with most being bigger than 600Kb is not fun on a 28.8K connection. Cheers
Don't know what exactly a system has to be to be considered 'trusted' but OMG tested MICO against their CORBA spec for free in recognition of their efforts. MICO passed and hence can be legally branded as a CORBA implementation. Could MICO be considered a 'trusted system' then? It was tested in a very formal way.