Close--the * quantifier in a regular expression means "zero or more instances of the previous pattern". It's the + quantifier that means "one or more instances of the previous pattern".
(Though I readily admit to cheating by adding extra commas. I should have put "600,000600,000600,000600,000" -- but that looks like poo and isn't as funny.)
A fair opinion, but something about his remarks threw a caution flag in my mind. I may very well be overreacting, but at the same time, this sort of thing is how the ball gets rolling...
Not so much missing the point--I'm aware of the counterfeiting industry in Asia--as saying that such remarks can easily be extended to our own nation. The context doesn't translate directly to our own nation, but the spirit of his comments does. There's been a crackdown on IP violators in our country over the past few years, and we tend to favor stiff penalties in the name of deterrence; Sec. Evans' comments strike me as indicative of things to come for the US...
True, it refers specifically to remarks made in the context of China's laws--but it's perfectly reasonable to extrapolate Secretary Evans' views from China's legal system to our own. This administration has a taken a very strong pro-business stance, and business wants very much to crack down on IP violations. Evans, though he was addressing the Chinese, made clear his opinion of how IP violations should be handled by the legal apparatus. It's pretty easy to envision Evans promoting the same changes to our own legal code, especially if they can point to successes in other countries...
Remember, kids, it's all about being tough on crime. If, for some inexplicable reason, crime continues to exist--you're simply not being tough enough. Throw more people in prison; make the sentences longer to keep 'em there. To hell with reform; make sentences punitive and harsh for the sake of scaring people straight. It'll work eventually, right?
1 out of 37 Americans have served time in prison. Our incarceration rates continue to skyrocket. How much more will it take for people to throw their hands in the air and say "Enough!"?
More power to ya--you've got something you like more than what Apple gave you free of charge.
What if I don't want to wait for content to be written to a disk (that might be full) before playing it.
You chage the setting.
To change the default action the system takes when an audio CD is inserted, look in the "CDs and DVDs" system preference pane; to change the action iTunes takes when it detects a new CD, look in iTunes' "Preferences".
What if I don't have an internet connection and don't want my computer to bark about it when it tries to look up the playlist
You change the setting. Look in iTunes' "Preferences".
or what if I want to use another playlist besides CDDB because they are collecting spyware info from me.
Then you've got a good reason not to use iTunes. Instead, use Audion, CCDP, CDFinder, iCDc, InCDius, NMP3, or whatever you want. There's a bunch of stuff out there for OS X--commercial, shareware, free, and Free.
Apples "integration" is poorly considered and not necessarily a good thing.
Hey, different strokes, different folks. You seem pretty comfortable with your setup, as I am with mine. I disagree with you, though--I think that Apple has done one helluva good job engineering OS X, and that the apps Apple (and others) write are quite well-integrated into the system. They considered the hell out of it, and while it certainly isn't perfect, I find that it is quite well-designed and well-realized.
Well, if you don't know what other common desktops provide, why do you go around beating the drums for OS X? None of the examples you give are particularly unusual.
I like the way my PowerBook works. I say as much. What, exactly, is wrong with that?
If you feel KDE is better, why not tell me so without the figurative roll of the eyes and heavy sigh? Why the jumping down my throat? Am I wrong that OS X is a well designed operating system, and that the apps Apple makes to go with it are well-integrated?
Unfortunately, most of that stuff only works well as long as you stick exactly to Apple's applications. Try using a different mail application, photo application, or music player, and all that slick integration goes out the window and you may actually have windows popping up inconsistently all over the place.
Surprisingly, no. Apple has done a great job of making this sort of thing easy for programmers, and they've given us a number of handy integration vectors, including services, scripting, and a well-designed API. If a third-party piece of software does a lousy job of getting through the door, it isn't because Apple didn't open it wide enough.
(And don't talk to me about Apple's external monitor connections--I have stood more than once in front of an audience trying to get a Powerbook to talk to some projector and only getting a blank screen or part of the whole scree, or other weird effects.)
Hey, we all have our ancedotal evidence. Mine has been great so far. Surprisingly enough, that's what I tell other people. That sucks that you've had such rotten luck with dual-head setups and OS X--it's never fun to have a presentation explode on you.
I don't know what KDE provides in this capacity, so I can't give you an example of what OS X + Apple apps provides that KDE doesn't.
I can give you some examples of what OS X lets me do, though. When I run an iPhoto slideshow, it lets me choose an iTunes playlist to run in the background. When my system detects a new audio CD, it automatically launches iTunes, rips the contents to my library, and autopopulates the CDDB info. When I drag a document onto the Mail.app icon, it automatically launches Mail and begins a new message with the dragged document attached. When I drag a bunch of files onto my active Terminal window, it dumps the filenames--space-delimited with full paths--to the command line. When I pull up the print dialogue from any application, I have the option to output to PDF. When I choose my screensaver and desktop, I have the option to cycle through any of my iPhoto albums. When I drag contacts from Address Book into the to: field in a new message in Mail, it drops those email addresses into the to line; conversely, I can add addresses directly to Address Book from Mail.app. Since Address Book is its own application, other apps can hook into it without ever having to talk to Mail.app.
It isn't just the app integration, though. The entire system is well-designed. Nothing feels tacked on. Example: I can plug my computer's video output into a TV input, and it's there. If I'd previously set it to mirror the screen, it rescales my laptop display; if I'd previously set it to treat the TV as a second display, it does. The only intervention on my part is sticking a cable in the side of my computer. Even better, DVD Player remembers which screen it was set to, so I just plug in the TV, insert disk, press play, and the in-laws get to watch home videos while I futz about with code. It's forehead-smackingly simple.
Like I said, I can't speak to KDE specifically, but I'm constantly amazed at how well OS X does so many different things.
a perfectly good office suite (free) already exists? OpenOffice.org has an OSX version.
That OperOffice.org runs under X11 on OS X is enough reason not to use it for 98% of the people out there. It can't even use native menus and widgets, for Pete's sake.
I love that I can run The GIMP and friends through X11 on my Mac, but there's no way in hell I'd call it "perfectly good". X11 on Mac is adequate--enough to get the job done, but little more than that. I'll take native apps over X11 any day of the week.
The office suite is the lynchpin of practically every single consumer computer setup, with the possible exception of dedicated gaming machines. Apple has been repeatedly demonstrating that they want to give people a computer that "Just Works". The integration between Apple applications and the system is simply amazing.
Who wouldn't welcome a slick, well-integrated, back-to-basics, consumer-grade office suite to come out of Apple?
Well, unless you can get your hands on the necessary hardware and space, you're not going to be able to pull this one off. For a LAN party of any significant size, you're going to need large amounts of cabling, a solid power source, better-than-consumer-grade LAN hardware, folding chairs/tables, food, and a dedicated security team. You might consider contacting your local conference center, as they may have the capacity for such an event, because odds are that your school isn't really equipped to handle such a thing--even the power requirements would be tricky for your typical high school.
Consider, too, that a LAN party can be a logistical nightmare; Google around and check out some of the horror stories out there about mid/large-scale LAN parties that have gone horribly awry due to a lack of planning. Consider that the onus of "getting it done right" will fall squarely on your shoulders, and that you'll need to be prepared to handle such things as n00bs with viruses, jerks with aimbots, kleptomaniacs with quick fingers, and chest-beaters who aren't afraid to let the bloodletting spill over into Real Life. Consider, too, that you'll need to coordinate with folks at your school in advance to decide on which games they're willing to let you all play. Finally, understand that you're not likely to have a single second to sit down and actually play if you're the organizer. You'll be busy days in advance and hours after the last person has gone home.
Seriously--you may want to look at candy bars and car washes if your goal is to raise money. LAN parties are neither easy nor lucrative for the small operator.
The statistical risk of humans getting wiped out in the next 100 years due to a super volcano or asteroid or comet impact is 1 in 455
...oh, come now. Sure, he says "wiped out", but we all know that's just a teaser.
What he really meant to say is this:
The statistical risk of humans getting wiped out in the next 100 years due to a super volcano or asteroid or comet impact would be 1 in 455--were it not for the heroic actions of one man, his wise-cracking, non-WASP sidekick, and a plucky band of researcher/rock star/mercenaries...
The big draw for the Blitz* languages is that you can drastically reduce the amount of time you spend pfutzing around with the code itself. I'm perfectly capable of writing code in C++, but I've found that I really prefer spending my game-making time on other aspects of the task--such as audio, graphics design, and playability twaeaking. Sure, my code isn't as bombproof or fast as it could be if I were to use C++, but these there's little need to squeeze those last few drops of performance out of your system for your typical 2D game. Barring insane sprite-count overkill, you're not going to be stressing modern machines out with a reasonably well-designed Blitz* game. Even a 100% boost in efficiency isn't going to be that big of a deal if the game already runs smoothly on a three-year-old machine. Like any other programming task, the biggest factor is going to be whether or not you know how to program--that is, if you can select efficient algorithms, avoid wasting cycles, and design your app in a streamlined fashion.
Look at it this way: programming is but one of many, many facets of building a game. If the programming aspect is what you most enjoy, then by all means, you should use C++. If, on the other hand, you just want the code to be done so you can focus on other aspects, Blitz* is an excellent way to get there.
I've got the coding background, but to be honest, I'm becoming less and less interested in the code itself. Or rather, I've lost interest in the minutae; I still enjoy the broader matters of overall application design, but I don't really get a kick out of churning out line after line of code. I've come to realize that I'm more than happy to take a loss on performance and flexibility to be able to just churn things out; I've ceased caring about the ins-and-outs of initializing the graphics driver. It's interesting and important stuff, but it isn't what interests me. That's where Blitz* comes in handy--it's a happy medium between mindless click 'n' drool RAD game construction kits and hardcore C++.
It's not just about the right tool for the job--it's also about the right tool for the worker, especially when you're writing games as a hobby.
I wrote version 1 of Jardinains in BlitzBasic for Windows. For version 2, I want to expand to the Big 3 desktop platforms and use modern 2D techniques (realtime scaling/rotations, transparency effects, etc,) among other things. Until just seconds ago, I was pretty much locked into using Torque for this. I checked out SDL, but it was a little lacking in OS X support (for example, double buffering wasn't supported (!).) BlitzBasic was hella-easy to write in, but it didn't have cross-platform support and had limited 2D capabilities--that is, it was 'old school' 2D, not the nice, smooth 3D-in-2D that most modern 2D games use. Torque is wicked slick, but it's overkill for my needs.
If you want to make games and not focus on programming geekery and coding arcana, Blitz is a great little toolset. With the cross-platform support and in the 2D graphics using OpenGL and you've got a very happy little package here.
Jesus Fucking Christ. If you don't like it, LEAVE. Slashdot is NOT a part of the commons....so why should we listen to you? Are you an employee of OSDN, or are you just another Slashdot stringer like the rest of us?
If you'd rather not hear certain opinions, it's a simple matter of marking these people as "foes" and auto-tanking their scores in your preferences. Hell, feel free to start with me--I'm one of those jerks who thinks that Slashdot is a great thing that could be even better, and I don't hold my tongue about it.
If this seems like too much work for you, then you're welcome to simply not read the comments. Or, if more drastic measures are necessary, you could always leave.
Don't act so shocked that people express interest in improving the quality of Slashdot. We're not all like you; some of us would rather act to improve things than give up and walk away.
Apropos of nothing, I saw a movie in the theaters a few days ago. At the official start time, the lights dimmed. Then there were 14 minutes of commercials (Pepsi, hair mousse, cologne, etc.) followed by 13 minutes of movie trailers (which are also advertising, of course), followed by a few minutes of junk, followed by a 100-minute movie.
Wow--heavy, insightful stuff. Looks like somebody is gunning for a Pulitzer!
Company A releases a sweet little handheld gaming system in time for Christmas. The system is truly innovative and well-designed. The system has a few issues, but for the most part it meets or exceeds most people's expectataions.
Company B releases a sweet little handheld gaming system in time for Christmas. The system isn't particularly revolutionary; its biggest selling point is that it features very powerful components for a handheld system. The system has a variety of issues, several of which should have been caught in the design/development phase.
We don't owe China or the rest of the world a trillion dollars. The government owes US citizens and corporations a trillion dollars.
Its not so bad, get over it.
(Yes, some of that is to foreign nations that have purchased our bonds. But its a very small number. 1.3% at the latest count if I am not mistaken.
You are very much mistaken.
"
According to the Treasury Department, major foreign holdings of U.S. Treasury securities total $1.35 trillion. Over the first seven months of 2003, mainland China and Hong Kong accumulated $177 billion of U.S. debt.
Currently, China is the world's second-largest buyer of our debt, exceeded only by Japan. Furthermore, China's purchases of U.S. government securities rose 20 percent over the first half of this year and have more than doubled since 2001."
...but many of these games are still selling. True, some of them are selling at bargain prices, but many of them are still selling and are still damn good games. Sly Cooper 2 isn't even three months old, and it's one a helluva good game! Similarly, Hot Shots Fore is a whopping four months young. GT3 may be ancient, but it is still one of the best games for the PS2 there is.
Just because there are some dated stinkers in the pile doesn't mean it's all old and busted. And, like you said, you wouldn't expect 'em to pony up for San Andreas; how do titles like Jak 2, Sly Cooper 2, and GT3 not fill the middle ground?
Slashdot Mirror
(Though I readily admit to cheating by adding extra commas. I should have put "600,000600,000600,000600,000" -- but that looks like poo and isn't as funny.)
That could be 600,000,600,000,600,000,600,000,600,000,600,000 units--or even more! Simply astounding!
(Of course, it could also be no units sold...)
A fair opinion, but something about his remarks threw a caution flag in my mind. I may very well be overreacting, but at the same time, this sort of thing is how the ball gets rolling...
Not so much missing the point--I'm aware of the counterfeiting industry in Asia--as saying that such remarks can easily be extended to our own nation. The context doesn't translate directly to our own nation, but the spirit of his comments does. There's been a crackdown on IP violators in our country over the past few years, and we tend to favor stiff penalties in the name of deterrence; Sec. Evans' comments strike me as indicative of things to come for the US...
True, it refers specifically to remarks made in the context of China's laws--but it's perfectly reasonable to extrapolate Secretary Evans' views from China's legal system to our own. This administration has a taken a very strong pro-business stance, and business wants very much to crack down on IP violations. Evans, though he was addressing the Chinese, made clear his opinion of how IP violations should be handled by the legal apparatus. It's pretty easy to envision Evans promoting the same changes to our own legal code, especially if they can point to successes in other countries...
Remember, kids, it's all about being tough on crime. If, for some inexplicable reason, crime continues to exist--you're simply not being tough enough. Throw more people in prison; make the sentences longer to keep 'em there. To hell with reform; make sentences punitive and harsh for the sake of scaring people straight. It'll work eventually, right?
1 out of 37 Americans have served time in prison. Our incarceration rates continue to skyrocket. How much more will it take for people to throw their hands in the air and say "Enough!"?
More power to ya--you've got something you like more than what Apple gave you free of charge.
What if I don't want to wait for content to be written to a disk (that might be full) before playing it.
You chage the setting.
To change the default action the system takes when an audio CD is inserted, look in the "CDs and DVDs" system preference pane; to change the action iTunes takes when it detects a new CD, look in iTunes' "Preferences".
What if I don't have an internet connection and don't want my computer to bark about it when it tries to look up the playlist
You change the setting. Look in iTunes' "Preferences".
or what if I want to use another playlist besides CDDB because they are collecting spyware info from me.
Then you've got a good reason not to use iTunes. Instead, use Audion, CCDP, CDFinder, iCDc, InCDius, NMP3, or whatever you want. There's a bunch of stuff out there for OS X--commercial, shareware, free, and Free.
Apples "integration" is poorly considered and not necessarily a good thing.
Hey, different strokes, different folks. You seem pretty comfortable with your setup, as I am with mine. I disagree with you, though--I think that Apple has done one helluva good job engineering OS X, and that the apps Apple (and others) write are quite well-integrated into the system. They considered the hell out of it, and while it certainly isn't perfect, I find that it is quite well-designed and well-realized.
I like the way my PowerBook works. I say as much. What, exactly, is wrong with that?
If you feel KDE is better, why not tell me so without the figurative roll of the eyes and heavy sigh? Why the jumping down my throat? Am I wrong that OS X is a well designed operating system, and that the apps Apple makes to go with it are well-integrated?
Unfortunately, most of that stuff only works well as long as you stick exactly to Apple's applications. Try using a different mail application, photo application, or music player, and all that slick integration goes out the window and you may actually have windows popping up inconsistently all over the place.
Surprisingly, no. Apple has done a great job of making this sort of thing easy for programmers, and they've given us a number of handy integration vectors, including services, scripting, and a well-designed API. If a third-party piece of software does a lousy job of getting through the door, it isn't because Apple didn't open it wide enough.
(And don't talk to me about Apple's external monitor connections--I have stood more than once in front of an audience trying to get a Powerbook to talk to some projector and only getting a blank screen or part of the whole scree, or other weird effects.)
Hey, we all have our ancedotal evidence. Mine has been great so far. Surprisingly enough, that's what I tell other people. That sucks that you've had such rotten luck with dual-head setups and OS X--it's never fun to have a presentation explode on you.
I can give you some examples of what OS X lets me do, though. When I run an iPhoto slideshow, it lets me choose an iTunes playlist to run in the background. When my system detects a new audio CD, it automatically launches iTunes, rips the contents to my library, and autopopulates the CDDB info. When I drag a document onto the Mail.app icon, it automatically launches Mail and begins a new message with the dragged document attached. When I drag a bunch of files onto my active Terminal window, it dumps the filenames--space-delimited with full paths--to the command line. When I pull up the print dialogue from any application, I have the option to output to PDF. When I choose my screensaver and desktop, I have the option to cycle through any of my iPhoto albums. When I drag contacts from Address Book into the to: field in a new message in Mail, it drops those email addresses into the to line; conversely, I can add addresses directly to Address Book from Mail.app. Since Address Book is its own application, other apps can hook into it without ever having to talk to Mail.app.
It isn't just the app integration, though. The entire system is well-designed. Nothing feels tacked on. Example: I can plug my computer's video output into a TV input, and it's there. If I'd previously set it to mirror the screen, it rescales my laptop display; if I'd previously set it to treat the TV as a second display, it does. The only intervention on my part is sticking a cable in the side of my computer. Even better, DVD Player remembers which screen it was set to, so I just plug in the TV, insert disk, press play, and the in-laws get to watch home videos while I futz about with code. It's forehead-smackingly simple.
Like I said, I can't speak to KDE specifically, but I'm constantly amazed at how well OS X does so many different things.
It's amazing when done in an elegant, robust, scalable fashion, as Apple has done in OS X. Where did I say anything about Microsoft?
That OperOffice.org runs under X11 on OS X is enough reason not to use it for 98% of the people out there. It can't even use native menus and widgets, for Pete's sake.
I love that I can run The GIMP and friends through X11 on my Mac, but there's no way in hell I'd call it "perfectly good". X11 on Mac is adequate--enough to get the job done, but little more than that. I'll take native apps over X11 any day of the week.
Who wouldn't welcome a slick, well-integrated, back-to-basics, consumer-grade office suite to come out of Apple?
Consider, too, that a LAN party can be a logistical nightmare; Google around and check out some of the horror stories out there about mid/large-scale LAN parties that have gone horribly awry due to a lack of planning. Consider that the onus of "getting it done right" will fall squarely on your shoulders, and that you'll need to be prepared to handle such things as n00bs with viruses, jerks with aimbots, kleptomaniacs with quick fingers, and chest-beaters who aren't afraid to let the bloodletting spill over into Real Life. Consider, too, that you'll need to coordinate with folks at your school in advance to decide on which games they're willing to let you all play. Finally, understand that you're not likely to have a single second to sit down and actually play if you're the organizer. You'll be busy days in advance and hours after the last person has gone home.
Seriously--you may want to look at candy bars and car washes if your goal is to raise money. LAN parties are neither easy nor lucrative for the small operator.
What he really meant to say is this:
The statistical risk of humans getting wiped out in the next 100 years due to a super volcano or asteroid or comet impact would be 1 in 455--were it not for the heroic actions of one man, his wise-cracking, non-WASP sidekick, and a plucky band of researcher/rock star/mercenaries...
Look at it this way: programming is but one of many, many facets of building a game. If the programming aspect is what you most enjoy, then by all means, you should use C++. If, on the other hand, you just want the code to be done so you can focus on other aspects, Blitz* is an excellent way to get there.
I've got the coding background, but to be honest, I'm becoming less and less interested in the code itself. Or rather, I've lost interest in the minutae; I still enjoy the broader matters of overall application design, but I don't really get a kick out of churning out line after line of code. I've come to realize that I'm more than happy to take a loss on performance and flexibility to be able to just churn things out; I've ceased caring about the ins-and-outs of initializing the graphics driver. It's interesting and important stuff, but it isn't what interests me. That's where Blitz* comes in handy--it's a happy medium between mindless click 'n' drool RAD game construction kits and hardcore C++.
It's not just about the right tool for the job--it's also about the right tool for the worker, especially when you're writing games as a hobby.
If you want to make games and not focus on programming geekery and coding arcana, Blitz is a great little toolset. With the cross-platform support and in the 2D graphics using OpenGL and you've got a very happy little package here.
If you'd rather not hear certain opinions, it's a simple matter of marking these people as "foes" and auto-tanking their scores in your preferences. Hell, feel free to start with me--I'm one of those jerks who thinks that Slashdot is a great thing that could be even better, and I don't hold my tongue about it.
If this seems like too much work for you, then you're welcome to simply not read the comments. Or, if more drastic measures are necessary, you could always leave.
Don't act so shocked that people express interest in improving the quality of Slashdot. We're not all like you; some of us would rather act to improve things than give up and walk away.
Wow--heavy, insightful stuff. Looks like somebody is gunning for a Pulitzer!
Company B releases a sweet little handheld gaming system in time for Christmas. The system isn't particularly revolutionary; its biggest selling point is that it features very powerful components for a handheld system. The system has a variety of issues, several of which should have been caught in the design/development phase.
Which of these systems would you rather own?
Meet today's nominee for the 2004 Worst Application of Flash Award.
The screencaps are pretty impressive--the in-game characters look every bit as emotive and engaging as the actors in the movies!
No, no, that wasn't me just sqealing like a little schoolgirl just now. It was...erm, my case fan!
Now go away. I--uh, need to replace my case fan.
You are very much mistaken.
" According to the Treasury Department, major foreign holdings of U.S. Treasury securities total $1.35 trillion. Over the first seven months of 2003, mainland China and Hong Kong accumulated $177 billion of U.S. debt.
Currently, China is the world's second-largest buyer of our debt, exceeded only by Japan. Furthermore, China's purchases of U.S. government securities rose 20 percent over the first half of this year and have more than doubled since 2001."
(Source: Congressman John Tanner
Some more reading:
http://mwhodges.home.att.net/nat-debt/debt-nat-b.h tm#foreign
Just because there are some dated stinkers in the pile doesn't mean it's all old and busted. And, like you said, you wouldn't expect 'em to pony up for San Andreas; how do titles like Jak 2, Sly Cooper 2, and GT3 not fill the middle ground?