When you say "over 40 different revs" then you are probably referring to the same models in different areas of the world. There were the following models: 1001, 5501, 7001, 7501, 9001, and the PSOne 101 and 102 models. There might have been a few more, but there were hardly 40 different revisions. I'm willing to bet that there were less than 8-10, actually- excluding Yaroze and development units and the likes. The PSX came out in the mid-'90s. If you think about that, then it really doesn't seem like there were that many models.
Most of these were made to fix physical problems and cut costs. early models had problems with disk skipping. Some models had power supply problems. The new firmware code that broke modchips happened to just be included. It wasn't until late in the PSX's life that they tried any sort of software solution "Dino Crisis comes to mind". They intentionally included mod-chip detection into some late games, but even that is quite different than something similar to Palladium.
Its normal to release different revisions of hardware every year or so. The idea that this was done to foil X-Box hackers is kinda obsurd, if you ask me. Firmware changes are normal. They fix problems, and cut costs by streamlining hardware more and more. Give it time though, and someone will hack the new models.
The PSX isn't a networkable device that uses a combination of software/hardware implementations of a "tattle-and-authorize" system. Software for the X-Box will be designed to phone home (if it isn't already able to do it). It can use ever-changing software to constantly have a suitable authorization system in place.
Sony's PSX copy protection is not the same as Palladium. You'd be better off comparing the PSX to something like a DVD player.
Frankly, I don't blame Microsoft for doing it. All game companies have done it this way. The main issue is that they have a bigger plan for these set-top-boxes that doesn't just involve gaming. They want complete control of this closed box (like Apple).
And before anyone tells me that I am full of it, think about what this would mean for them. They are already in the position to do this... They just need to do it before it is too late. The X-Box was never intended to be only a gaming platform, and we all know that. Microsoft has other reasons for protecting this hardware.
With everything that they know now, the X-Box hackers won't take long to figure out a way to do this. It's always been this way with all consoles. Someone always finds a way.
Microsoft may have a lot of money, but they aren't going to keep modifying their manufacturing facilities unless it means saving money on production. I doubt that they are going to churn out a drastically different X-Box every month in order to thwart hacks...
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=40580&thresh ol d=1&commentsort=0&tid=154&mode=nested&cid=4318 699
Unless you have a newer, or alpha build of Mozilla, you are probably using a significantly older, stable release of Gecko. Phoenix's Gecko is dated as of yesterday, therefore it is *not* the same renderer.
Phoenix seems to be using a release of Gecko dated 2002.9.23. That is significantly newer than the 1.x release I have of Mozilla. I am willing to bet that unless you get an Alpha or CVS-type release of Mozilla, that it will render a good bit differently.
A good example is www.microsoft.com. My copy of Mozilla isn't perfectly new by any means (1.1a), but it has a Gecko build date of 2002.06.11. Three months difference seem to make a big difference in rendering. The "search" box is placed improperly in Mozilla 1.1a. In Gecko and Opera 6.05, it looks great. Of course, this is probably because someone (ahem- Microsoft) broke it on purpose. Maybe, maybe not.
Anyway. I've noticed some other differences in text too, so your observation is correct.
Opera 7 is coming soon. I'm pretty psyched, and I hopethat it is going to use QT3 on Linux this time (Instead of 2.x). It supposedly will have the better DOM and CSS support this time around. I love Opera. It's a great peice of software, but just has these little things that keep it down right now.
Overall though, Phoenix is looking like a nice way to run Mozilla. It may even get me hooked.
Sure, we have Galeon and K-Meleon (and others), but if this is the direction that Mozilla is going to be taking, then I'm going to be hooked. I am an Opera user, and I think that the recent Mozilla builds are pretty nice, but they still lack the speed and refinement that I desire in the UI.
I'm testing it on a much older Windows machine at work, and I must say that I am very impressed with Phoenix's speed and responsiveness. At home, on my Slackware 8.1 box, I'll keep using Opera for now (i like the speed and antialising support with QT) until I upgrade to Slackware 9 with the newer Gnome2/GTK libraries. Then, I'll have to give Phoenix a spin on Linux.
I'm really impressed though. I hope that this eventually replaces the current Mozilla UI, after it becomes a stable release and gets mroe features.
I'll refer you again to Parhelia, Matrox's technology that actually matters. The G450 is a good card, but they had nothing to lose by releasing OS drivers. Perhelia is quite different. It has 3D capabilites that are actually useful today (albeit not the fastest, but that doesn't matter) and their tri-head capabilties are quite advanced.
If you demanded that kind of thing from other manufacturers, they'd just laugh at you and ignore you. If you demanded that again from Matrox, on their Parhelia boards, they'd laugh at you and ignore you.
"I want to be a Linux fan but there is no Linux company that will get off their ass and make a version where I don't have to compile shit."
OK, goofball. I actually hope you don't want to be a Linux fan, because you obviously don't know what in the hell you are talking about...
You can't make Linux cross-platform/multi-distribution and not have to compile programs. Every Linux distribution is a little bit different. They all rely on shared libraries for things to get done. If you download a Gnome app, it requires GTK. KDE apps require QT. Other apps have similar needs. You *can* include the libraries with Linux applications, and you won't need to compile the program for architecture or file locations, but that defeats one of Linux's main benefits.
Besides... You must be really damn lazy if you can't type 3 simple commands to compile a program.
Got a better solution? Write your own OS. I personally like compiling my programs. It is simple, and gives me complete control over the finished/installed app. Plus, I know that I can run it on any architecture that I could ever wish to use, with some minor tweaks.
What you are basically asking for is for everyone to support only *one* Linux distribution. Gee... Where does that leave us? With another Microsoft-esque solution? (Insert obligatory Red Hat/Suse/Connectiva/SCO/TurboLinux/UnitedLinux flame here)
I'm hoping for something as simple to disable as the old PIII processor serial numbers.
Really though, I doubt that this will have any real impact on non-Windows software just yet.
Personally, I hope that it stops piracy, so that people will stop pirating Windows programs and use GNU/GPL software instead. Windows wouldn't nearly be as big if people were forced to stop pirating software. Hardly any Windows users that I know actually pay for their stuff. It's kinda ironic, isn't it? I use Linux, yet support my favorite Linux software companies better than most Windows users.
nVidia would be handing out their technology if they did that! "Here... Steal our designs!". Only part of the codes that glue the cloused-source GL drivers to the kernel and X are open. This is the same as the PowerVR drivers, and the new Parhelia drivers with 3-head support.
The game is *supposed* to work with PowerVR Kyro series cards on Linux (They DO support S3TC despite popular rumors), but there is an alleged "driver bug" that prevents it from running. I personally blame it on a hoaky GL engine that was written in a week.
Regardless, PowerVR and even ATi may very well have the game running on their cards by the time it comes out. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
I use a 1400 MHz machine at home with 1024 MB of RAM, 3 hard drives, and a reasonably good videocard. I made the transition from Windows to Linux this year, and I was surprised to find that if you have the right hardware- there are games to be played. There are even plenty of good 3D games. My computer is by no means top-of-the-line anymore, but it will still run all current Linux games at good speeds. I'll be upgrading the machine by sometime early next year. I take Linux gaming pretty seriously as a hobby. The platform works great for that stuff, it just needs a bit more of a boost from the game companies.
That said, I understand what you mean about giving up on your favorite games. Giving up on MOH:AA was one of the biggest decisions that almost made me not want to switch completely, but the benefits have outweighed that single game for me.
I might be a Linux advocate, but this is the real question... Does it effect Apache for Windows and other platforms? Perhaps the media is immefiately associating Apache with Linux- something that it is not really even part of.
I would suspect that the worm would possibly effect the ports too. Does anyone have any info on that?
I'm sorry, but you guys must mistake Windows 2000/XP for being a platform that can run all DOS and Windows 32 code.
Oh, wait a minute... It can't.
So basically, your remarks mean squat. Windows apps from only a few years ago fail to run. Some games still don't work in Windows XP.
In most cases, yes, they will work. But so will older apps on Linux. All old Linux apps run on my machine, as do all new apps. Only *once* has an app failed to work on an upgrade- Opera, which requires an old version of QT? Technically, I could have solved it by downloading the version that included the linked libraries.... *Ahem*? Did you hear that? INCLUDED. Like most Windows apps do, you can include libraries and link against them. Instead though, I opted to install QT2.x alongside my 3.x/KDE 3 installation.
I never have any problems.
It sounds like you guys are more people trying to spread bullshit lies about something that doesn't really exist. Really, must you berate other products because you don't understand them?
I have plenty of karma, so do what you will. I'm just sick of these trolls spreading doubt and lies among everyone.
You can use a program like PowerStrip to force 1920x1080i (or nearly any other suitable HDTV resolution) with your PC. This is what we did. Here are some notes:
That's nice, but from my own experience with 50+ inch HDTV units (we have one), they are cool for gaming, but are totally unsuitable for text. I am talking about using a real db-15 hooked up to the television with some proper discrete timing tweaks. It is still very rough on the eyes.
The fact is, HDTV units (all of them) are still not "HD" enough for use as a monitor. They work, but my parent's mid-90's Packard Bell monitor had a much more crisp image than any projection HDTV that I have seen.
A high quality projector will still get you a better image than any consumer grade HDTV.
Also. I just read that European Dreamcasts also work fine with the import BBA units.
Also- it looks like the region number that they are referring to is not part of the BBA, but the Dreamcast itself. It is a standard region lockout. Normally, this only effects software. It doesn't effect peripherals on the Dreamcast (except for light guns, which operate just a bit differently).
All of the software that was ever created for the Dreamcast (regardless of region) uses the broadband devices in the exact same way, so there should be no differences from these and the original units. This is why you could play the Japanese PSO on a Dreamcast from another region, with any BBA unit from any region.
I also got the same email, but I do not believe that it is a legitimate concern. There has been no problem with the import broadband devices in the past. They have worked fine on the other NTSC Dreamcast (I know that the American models work).
Assuming that they are made the same way as the last units that they produced, then there should be no problem. I don't see why they would be any different.
Besides... Even the import Dreamcasts themselves work fine. We will see what happens though. I diubt that there will be a problem. American and Japanese voltages (frequency, actually 50/60Hz)do differ, slightly, but it isn't enough to really make a difference on modern devices. If I were in Europe, then I might be concerned. But I am not, and I use an NTSC console.
The Kyro series of cards has fully functional drivers in Linux. They are beta drivers, but are fast and stable. In AnandTech's comparison, it favored well with similar results as the GeForce 2 cards of last year. It isn't a high-end card by any means, but looks like it works well in a game that was designed around nVidia GPUs.
I use a Kyro 2 in my Linux box and have no complaints. RTCW flies in 1024x768x32- max details. It looks pretty and runs fast. All of my other Linux OpenGL apps work great too, as does XV accelleration for Video playback with MPlayer.
There are alternatives. It might not be viable to buy one now, but when the card game out a year ago, it was a perfect substitute to the GeForce 2 (all models).
I agree... And even then, it is still rediculous that they can't package the game with a fully-functional install script. It takes 15 minutes to write one. It is crazy to require an installation of WINE (or better yet, Windows) to install a game. Scratch that- It is downright idiotic.
They think that they are doing us some favor by releasing this game. I know that someone is going to say "Well, they don't owe you Linux users anything!"... Maybe so... But the least that these guys could do is not mislead people into buying their stuff. I might sound angry about this whole thing. I am angry, because I am sick of excuses.
So, Epic. I appreciate the fact that you are claiming that you will release these binaries. Maybe all of those posts on happypenguin about disgruntled gamers claiming that they wouldn't run your servers if you didn't release a client program made some sense. But don't try to get us to buy the game and then turn around and release it 6 months later (Ahem... BioWare, no excuses can make your customers any happier about it).
Perhaps if developers would start *designing multiplatform games from the ground up* then they could increase profits and help make alternative OS's (e.g. non-Windows) viable platforms for gaming.
"It's really easy to support all 3 OSes if you start from the beginning with that in mind." -Raybondo of Guild Software.
Check out screenshot of their *multi-platform* demo for a space MMORPG called "Vendetta" at Guild Software's Vendetta Page.
Another great game that is available on all three platforms is Space Tripper. Developers; Take a note from this 2 man development team on how to make *excellent* multi-platform OpenGL games. I played the demo, and within 10 minutes I was ordering the full version from them.
Slashdot Mirror
When you say "over 40 different revs" then you are probably referring to the same models in different areas of the world. There were the following models: 1001, 5501, 7001, 7501, 9001, and the PSOne 101 and 102 models. There might have been a few more, but there were hardly 40 different revisions. I'm willing to bet that there were less than 8-10, actually- excluding Yaroze and development units and the likes. The PSX came out in the mid-'90s. If you think about that, then it really doesn't seem like there were that many models.
Most of these were made to fix physical problems and cut costs. early models had problems with disk skipping. Some models had power supply problems. The new firmware code that broke modchips happened to just be included. It wasn't until late in the PSX's life that they tried any sort of software solution "Dino Crisis comes to mind". They intentionally included mod-chip detection into some late games, but even that is quite different than something similar to Palladium.
Its normal to release different revisions of hardware every year or so. The idea that this was done to foil X-Box hackers is kinda obsurd, if you ask me. Firmware changes are normal. They fix problems, and cut costs by streamlining hardware more and more. Give it time though, and someone will hack the new models.
The PSX isn't a networkable device that uses a combination of software/hardware implementations of a "tattle-and-authorize" system. Software for the X-Box will be designed to phone home (if it isn't already able to do it). It can use ever-changing software to constantly have a suitable authorization system in place.
Sony's PSX copy protection is not the same as Palladium. You'd be better off comparing the PSX to something like a DVD player.
Frankly, I don't blame Microsoft for doing it. All game companies have done it this way. The main issue is that they have a bigger plan for these set-top-boxes that doesn't just involve gaming. They want complete control of this closed box (like Apple).
And before anyone tells me that I am full of it, think about what this would mean for them. They are already in the position to do this... They just need to do it before it is too late. The X-Box was never intended to be only a gaming platform, and we all know that. Microsoft has other reasons for protecting this hardware.
With everything that they know now, the X-Box hackers won't take long to figure out a way to do this. It's always been this way with all consoles. Someone always finds a way.
Microsoft may have a lot of money, but they aren't going to keep modifying their manufacturing facilities unless it means saving money on production. I doubt that they are going to churn out a drastically different X-Box every month in order to thwart hacks...
See my above post about Gecko.
h ol d=1&commentsort=0&tid=154&mode=nested&cid=4318 699
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=40580&thres
Unless you have a newer, or alpha build of Mozilla, you are probably using a significantly older, stable release of Gecko. Phoenix's Gecko is dated as of yesterday, therefore it is *not* the same renderer.
Phoenix seems to be using a release of Gecko dated 2002.9.23. That is significantly newer than the 1.x release I have of Mozilla. I am willing to bet that unless you get an Alpha or CVS-type release of Mozilla, that it will render a good bit differently.
A good example is www.microsoft.com. My copy of Mozilla isn't perfectly new by any means (1.1a), but it has a Gecko build date of 2002.06.11. Three months difference seem to make a big difference in rendering. The "search" box is placed improperly in Mozilla 1.1a. In Gecko and Opera 6.05, it looks great. Of course, this is probably because someone (ahem- Microsoft) broke it on purpose. Maybe, maybe not.
Anyway. I've noticed some other differences in text too, so your observation is correct.
"Presto", change-o...
Opera 7 is coming soon. I'm pretty psyched, and I hopethat it is going to use QT3 on Linux this time (Instead of 2.x). It supposedly will have the better DOM and CSS support this time around. I love Opera. It's a great peice of software, but just has these little things that keep it down right now.
Overall though, Phoenix is looking like a nice way to run Mozilla. It may even get me hooked.
Sure, we have Galeon and K-Meleon (and others), but if this is the direction that Mozilla is going to be taking, then I'm going to be hooked. I am an Opera user, and I think that the recent Mozilla builds are pretty nice, but they still lack the speed and refinement that I desire in the UI.
I'm testing it on a much older Windows machine at work, and I must say that I am very impressed with Phoenix's speed and responsiveness. At home, on my Slackware 8.1 box, I'll keep using Opera for now (i like the speed and antialising support with QT) until I upgrade to Slackware 9 with the newer Gnome2/GTK libraries. Then, I'll have to give Phoenix a spin on Linux.
I'm really impressed though. I hope that this eventually replaces the current Mozilla UI, after it becomes a stable release and gets mroe features.
I'll refer you again to Parhelia, Matrox's technology that actually matters. The G450 is a good card, but they had nothing to lose by releasing OS drivers. Perhelia is quite different. It has 3D capabilites that are actually useful today (albeit not the fastest, but that doesn't matter) and their tri-head capabilties are quite advanced.
If you demanded that kind of thing from other manufacturers, they'd just laugh at you and ignore you. If you demanded that again from Matrox, on their Parhelia boards, they'd laugh at you and ignore you.
OK, goofball. I actually hope you don't want to be a Linux fan, because you obviously don't know what in the hell you are talking about...
You can't make Linux cross-platform/multi-distribution and not have to compile programs. Every Linux distribution is a little bit different. They all rely on shared libraries for things to get done. If you download a Gnome app, it requires GTK. KDE apps require QT. Other apps have similar needs. You *can* include the libraries with Linux applications, and you won't need to compile the program for architecture or file locations, but that defeats one of Linux's main benefits.
Besides... You must be really damn lazy if you can't type 3 simple commands to compile a program.
Got a better solution? Write your own OS. I personally like compiling my programs. It is simple, and gives me complete control over the finished/installed app. Plus, I know that I can run it on any architecture that I could ever wish to use, with some minor tweaks.
What you are basically asking for is for everyone to support only *one* Linux distribution. Gee... Where does that leave us? With another Microsoft-esque solution? (Insert obligatory Red Hat/Suse/Connectiva/SCO/TurboLinux/UnitedLinux flame here)
I'm hoping for something as simple to disable as the old PIII processor serial numbers.
Really though, I doubt that this will have any real impact on non-Windows software just yet.
Personally, I hope that it stops piracy, so that people will stop pirating Windows programs and use GNU/GPL software instead. Windows wouldn't nearly be as big if people were forced to stop pirating software. Hardly any Windows users that I know actually pay for their stuff. It's kinda ironic, isn't it? I use Linux, yet support my favorite Linux software companies better than most Windows users.
"Try America's Army."
Well, I would, but the US Government hates Linux- hence, no port.
nVidia would be handing out their technology if they did that! "Here... Steal our designs!". Only part of the codes that glue the cloused-source GL drivers to the kernel and X are open. This is the same as the PowerVR drivers, and the new Parhelia drivers with 3-head support.
The game is *supposed* to work with PowerVR Kyro series cards on Linux (They DO support S3TC despite popular rumors), but there is an alleged "driver bug" that prevents it from running. I personally blame it on a hoaky GL engine that was written in a week.
Regardless, PowerVR and even ATi may very well have the game running on their cards by the time it comes out. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
I use a 1400 MHz machine at home with 1024 MB of RAM, 3 hard drives, and a reasonably good videocard. I made the transition from Windows to Linux this year, and I was surprised to find that if you have the right hardware- there are games to be played. There are even plenty of good 3D games. My computer is by no means top-of-the-line anymore, but it will still run all current Linux games at good speeds. I'll be upgrading the machine by sometime early next year. I take Linux gaming pretty seriously as a hobby. The platform works great for that stuff, it just needs a bit more of a boost from the game companies.
That said, I understand what you mean about giving up on your favorite games. Giving up on MOH:AA was one of the biggest decisions that almost made me not want to switch completely, but the benefits have outweighed that single game for me.
I might be a Linux advocate, but this is the real question... Does it effect Apache for Windows and other platforms? Perhaps the media is immefiately associating Apache with Linux- something that it is not really even part of.
I would suspect that the worm would possibly effect the ports too. Does anyone have any info on that?
Easier than the Internet? Well that's new. I can download OpenOffice faster than I can get out the door to my car.
I'm sorry, but you guys must mistake Windows 2000/XP for being a platform that can run all DOS and Windows 32 code.
Oh, wait a minute... It can't.
So basically, your remarks mean squat. Windows apps from only a few years ago fail to run. Some games still don't work in Windows XP.
In most cases, yes, they will work. But so will older apps on Linux. All old Linux apps run on my machine, as do all new apps. Only *once* has an app failed to work on an upgrade- Opera, which requires an old version of QT? Technically, I could have solved it by downloading the version that included the linked libraries.... *Ahem*? Did you hear that? INCLUDED. Like most Windows apps do, you can include libraries and link against them. Instead though, I opted to install QT2.x alongside my 3.x/KDE 3 installation.
I never have any problems.
It sounds like you guys are more people trying to spread bullshit lies about something that doesn't really exist. Really, must you berate other products because you don't understand them?
I have plenty of karma, so do what you will. I'm just sick of these trolls spreading doubt and lies among everyone.
You can use a program like PowerStrip to force 1920x1080i (or nearly any other suitable HDTV resolution) with your PC. This is what we did. Here are some notes:
Custom timings, custom resolutions, and HDTV.
Of course, it totally depends on the hardware you use.
That's nice, but from my own experience with 50+ inch HDTV units (we have one), they are cool for gaming, but are totally unsuitable for text. I am talking about using a real db-15 hooked up to the television with some proper discrete timing tweaks. It is still very rough on the eyes.
The fact is, HDTV units (all of them) are still not "HD" enough for use as a monitor. They work, but my parent's mid-90's Packard Bell monitor had a much more crisp image than any projection HDTV that I have seen.
A high quality projector will still get you a better image than any consumer grade HDTV.
Also. I just read that European Dreamcasts also work fine with the import BBA units.
Also- it looks like the region number that they are referring to is not part of the BBA, but the Dreamcast itself. It is a standard region lockout. Normally, this only effects software. It doesn't effect peripherals on the Dreamcast (except for light guns, which operate just a bit differently).
All of the software that was ever created for the Dreamcast (regardless of region) uses the broadband devices in the exact same way, so there should be no differences from these and the original units. This is why you could play the Japanese PSO on a Dreamcast from another region, with any BBA unit from any region.
I also got the same email, but I do not believe that it is a legitimate concern. There has been no problem with the import broadband devices in the past. They have worked fine on the other NTSC Dreamcast (I know that the American models work).
Assuming that they are made the same way as the last units that they produced, then there should be no problem. I don't see why they would be any different.
Besides... Even the import Dreamcasts themselves work fine. We will see what happens though. I diubt that there will be a problem. American and Japanese voltages (frequency, actually 50/60Hz)do differ, slightly, but it isn't enough to really make a difference on modern devices. If I were in Europe, then I might be concerned. But I am not, and I use an NTSC console.
Yes you can. The network is still up, and in most cases, you can play the games. But there aren't many people online anymore.
PSO V2 is still popular, but isn't nearly the way it was a year ago.
The Kyro series of cards has fully functional drivers in Linux. They are beta drivers, but are fast and stable. In AnandTech's comparison, it favored well with similar results as the GeForce 2 cards of last year. It isn't a high-end card by any means, but looks like it works well in a game that was designed around nVidia GPUs.
I use a Kyro 2 in my Linux box and have no complaints. RTCW flies in 1024x768x32- max details. It looks pretty and runs fast. All of my other Linux OpenGL apps work great too, as does XV accelleration for Video playback with MPlayer.
There are alternatives. It might not be viable to buy one now, but when the card game out a year ago, it was a perfect substitute to the GeForce 2 (all models).
I agree... And even then, it is still rediculous that they can't package the game with a fully-functional install script. It takes 15 minutes to write one. It is crazy to require an installation of WINE (or better yet, Windows) to install a game. Scratch that- It is downright idiotic.
They think that they are doing us some favor by releasing this game. I know that someone is going to say "Well, they don't owe you Linux users anything!"... Maybe so... But the least that these guys could do is not mislead people into buying their stuff. I might sound angry about this whole thing. I am angry, because I am sick of excuses.
So, Epic. I appreciate the fact that you are claiming that you will release these binaries. Maybe all of those posts on happypenguin about disgruntled gamers claiming that they wouldn't run your servers if you didn't release a client program made some sense. But don't try to get us to buy the game and then turn around and release it 6 months later (Ahem... BioWare, no excuses can make your customers any happier about it).
Perhaps if developers would start *designing multiplatform games from the ground up* then they could increase profits and help make alternative OS's (e.g. non-Windows) viable platforms for gaming.
"It's really easy to support all 3 OSes if you start from the beginning with that in mind." -Raybondo of Guild Software.
Check out screenshot of their *multi-platform* demo for a space MMORPG called "Vendetta" at Guild Software's Vendetta Page.
Another great game that is available on all three platforms is Space Tripper. Developers; Take a note from this 2 man development team on how to make *excellent* multi-platform OpenGL games. I played the demo, and within 10 minutes I was ordering the full version from them.