That is solvable with a DBFS query. Making links in a registry-type database almost guarantees that you'll have problems stemming from uninstalls, reinstalls, and other movements of files. A quick search of the FS data system, however, can get you the information you need just as fast, and FAR more accurately.
It's still the wrong way of doing it. The Windows NTFS filesystem has full support for storing meta-data on the files. Windows SHOULD be storing registry type stuff as attributes on the program file. But it doesn't. Which means that you're making a mess no matter what you do. Lots of extra/unnecessary garbage to manage.
These claims are both false and do a profound disservice to Einstein.
If that were true, then why do you argue my very points from a different perspective?
He asked the same questions as everyone else, but he sought answers in places no one else thought to look. In particular, with regard to special relativity, while everyone else was looking at dynamics and positing undetectable entities, he lifted the carpet of kinematics and found amongst the loose change lying there a diamond: clear and hard and perfect. Nor was this a random search on his part--it was precisely his genius that let him ignore the clutter and noise of the dynamical theorists and see the tiny lump that diamond made in the carpet while everyone else was standing on it and not noticing.
If Einstien were asking the same questions as everyone else, then he never would have conducted his famous thought experiment where he dropped a stone from a moving train. This line of reasoning led him to ask about light on a train. Asking about light on a train led him to ask about relative perceptions. Relative perceptions led him to develop the Special Theory of Relativity.
It was not a random search, as you say. It was Einstien asking the questions that revealed the true nature of the Universe. Everyone else had the raw data in hand, but no one could make heads or tails of it.
Nor did he use "nothing more than logical deduction". His work was profoundly creative.
Yes, profoundly creative in that he developed thought experiments that allowed him to search the universe without performing a single actual experiment. Thought experiments had been used before (primarily in Mathematics), but Einstein's work may have been the first time they had ever been used to such great effect in physics.
Einstein was unique because of his character, not his genius. The masses recognized that Einstein was an extraordinarily humane and humble man.
BWHAHAHA! Is this the same Einstein who pissed off 90% of his professors in college because he was such a rogue?
Einstein was a giant among physicists because of his extrodinary intelligence. He asked the questions no one else thought to ask, and produced the answers through nothing more than logical deduction. The answers he produced were so profound and world changing that it took decades for science to really grab ahold of them.
But perhaps the most interesting part about Mr. Einstein is that he was heavily anti-institutional. His rogue personality not only clashed heavily with the "established" scientific community (who thought they had all the answers when they had precisely zilch), but he tore them apart and made way for a completely new breed of scientist.
Will there ever be another Einstein? No. No more than there will be another Isaac Newton. There will be a completely new figure who will have such an incredible way of looking at the Universe that it will put everyone else to shame.
Ah, come off it. Sometimes it's myself, sometimes it's TripMasterMonkey, and sometimes it's dada21. It all depends on who's got extra time on his hands and something insightful to say. Since you obviously have nothing insightful to say, sir, may I recommend you keep your mouth closed until such a time arrives that you do?
P.S. To Dada21: Just so happens I'm in Chicago. Perhaps I'll bump into you sometime.:-)
As you say, the problem is the size of the screen, not so much the resolution. The game will *look* fine, but whether it plays fine on such a small screen is an entirely different matter. You can probably make the gaming fun, but the experience between a handheld and a PC will never be the same.:-)
And what is the silhouette of a polygon in a Quake model?
A complex texture mapping on top of another complex texture mapping?
By using the term "ClearType", I was oversimplifying. True, the "ClearType" brand implementation is limited to text by design, but the concept of subpixel rendering for LCDs is general enough to apply to any image with sharp edges.
The term you want is anti-aliasing. It takes sharp edges and makes them smooth. And I find it doubtful you'll be doing it in real time on a puny little ARM processor running at a few hundred MHz, with no 3D acceleration.
BTW, Quake II is a 3D renderer. That means that it can already pull sub-rendering tricks for MipMap filtering to make the textures look much better. The anti-aliasing only helps the edges, which you're unlikely to notice while the game is in play.
Cleartype is a font rendering technology, not a cool way to resize images. It works on the idea that the text will be a solid color on a solid background. Throw an image at it and Cleartype will do absolutely nothing.
320x240 is a little grainy for a 17" screen, but it should look just fine on a 3"-5" screen. You'll never even notice the low resolution because the pixels are so small. IIRC, Quake II should have no problem with this resolution as it was designed with such ModeX's in mind. SuperVGA was fully supported, also, but it wasn't required.
Note that little item in #4's list of requirements: Java
That's right people, Tribal Trouble was created by a long-time Java programmer. Don't be surprised if more and more Indies are done in Java. Cross-Platform support comes free, and development tends to be easier and faster. Tribal Trouble wasn't the first Indie game done in Java (*cough*heresafew*cough*), and it won't be the last.:-)
So either one or both agencies in question are simply incompetent, or lying to us. Which do you think is more plausible?
Never attribute malice to that which can be explained by stupidity.
I don't really think they'd gain much by putting cookies on the machines of web users. If terrorists do come to their site, their IP address will give them away far better than a cookie. Now if anyone finds an image on other sites pointing back to the NSA or CIA, then you may have found your smoking gun.
Only 6 minutes? Is that long enough to really see how this stuff is made?
You'd be surprised. Many manufacturing processes are quite fast. That's why they can turn out thousands of widgets, sprockets, and cogs each day. Most of the time is usually spent in things like heating or rolling, processes where you don't need to record the entire thing to video. These are usually pipelined in such a way that the time taken has little to no impact on producing a widget per minute.
Of course, there are still some processes (such as making snow boards) which have several manual steps. These take much longer and have fairly low production, but they're also highly expensive products sought out for their hand-crafted quality.
Ah, how I wish I could take you back in a time machine to the late 60's, then the 1920's. On our first stop in the 60's, I'd take you around various companies and show you the massive number of keypunchers, programmers, analysts, and other Managment Information Systems people who keep their companies working. I'd then take you to a company too small for a mainframe and let you witness the poor fellows struggle with mountains of paperwork.
On our next stop, we'd drop by the 1920's. No automation here. You can literally find hundreds of typists per company, all lined up in rows. Secretaries abound, filing documents left and right. Personal assistents follow company executives around, keeping track of every minor detail. In short, lots of manpower for a return that we can realize today with a few PCs and other electronic gadgets.
I haven't even gotten into manufacturing, and how technology has changed the world there.
In short, technology has made us more productive. It doesn't always seem like it with all the technological distractions we now have, but you have to understand that the efficiency of modern technology is what gives us time and energy for those distractions. The greatest challenge today is to find better ways of optimizing business and personal matters. All the low-hanging fruit has already been realized, so we're on to the difficult part of squeezing out efficiency a few percent at a time.
If you're paying any more than $0.00 dollars to kick the tires, then you've got problems. I've developed for Oracle, Sybase, and DB2 all without paying a single red cent. What cool channel do I use for this? Simple! I go to their websites and DOWNLOAD them. Even Microsoft has a 90 day limited version of SQL Server.
Now, I don't know anything about MySQL, but it seems that this is just a simple matter of changing the Transaction Isolation level.
*cough* What transaction isolation level? MySQL hasn't had transactions for YEARS. Once it finally got them, it turned out they were being faked anyway. A real database works correctly BECAUSE it has proper transaction isolation.
Oh, I'm well aware. I just had to add Sybase support to a product I work on. Oracle and DB2 offer the same deal. But for this "comparison" they're taking products designed for developers to kick the proverbal tires and then comparing them to the full version of MySQL. They're not even really poking at the features or performance. All they're doing is saying, "Well, MySQL can run on LOTS of CPUs and is unlimited in its disk usage, so therefore it's better than these other products. Oh, and we've got enough checkmarks from the marketing materials to say that MySQL is just as feature rich as these big DBs."
At best that's a rather "interesting" way to slant the results. Tune in next week when we'll be comparing apples to blocks of lead!:-)
Even if the EULA applied here (which it doesn't, this isn't benchmarks), this is a lame "comparison". What they do is take the crippled versions of $$$ commercial databases that are "free" for development or personal use, and then compare them against only ONE OSS database. Would you like to guess which OSS database that is?
The entire story feels trumped up to appeal to MySQL fans.
Yes, but since we're talking about JSP pages (introduced around the time of Java 2), it's not an issue. Also, an interface for Jitting existed in the original versions of Java as Sun expected others to pick up the slack. (Which was true up until Microsoft screwed everyone over.)
Board Member 1: "I motion that we evict Mr. Thompson from all future board meetings."
Board Member 2: "Seconded!"
President: "All those in favor of evicting Mr. Thompson from..."
Interrupting all at once: "AYE!!!!"
President: "Do I hear any Nays?"
Thompson: "Um? Nay?"
President: "The Ayes have it. From this date forward, Mr. Thompson will no longer be allowed to board meetings until such a time as a motion is made and carried to allow him to rejoin these meetings. Considering that the only way I can forsee that happening is if Mr. Thompson owns a controlling share, we can assume for the moment that his banishment is permanant."
I'm sorry, were you trying to agree with my original post? It came across as if you were arguing, thus my attempt to clarify my position. My apologies if I misunderstood.
If you call those comprehensive libraries, then I have a bridge to sell you. The 1.1 library (which was where Java first started taking off) had such features as a standard SQL API, advanced I/O capabilities, remote method invocation, GUI support, image handling, standardized complex data structures, cryptographic support, text processing, data compression, and many other features lacking in libc/STL. The Java 2 library and on added a metric boatload of useful new APIs (XML, CORBA, collections, XSL, Logging, Registry, RegEx, Directories, Sound, MIDI, etc.), guaranteed to be on every platform Java was. That's one hell of a feature!
That's mostly a web server issue,
Serlvets and JSP are "standard" Java libraries that made the language well suited to the task. It's irrelevant if it's a "web server" issue or not. It directly impacted its popularity.
and it's technically untrue. You could write a multithreaded C program to handle web requests using pipes or other IPC mechanisms.
(rolls eyes) Well then, KDE wasn't the first Open Source desktop because I could have written one first!
That's a stupid argument, sir. Part of Java's popularity was that Servlet and JSP technology was the first technology on the market with these features. If someone wrote a customer server to do the same prior to Java, it didn't help the rest of the market at all.
Again, what? All functional languages support reflection because functions are first class objects.
Riiiggghhht. So let me just compile this code here, and then have this program I wrote a few months back over here automatically investigate the functions and run them.
No wait, I can't do that. The compiler threw away that information after compile. Plus I need to write a very special loader to get the code into executable memory to begin with. And it's platform dependent.
Java is inherently reflective at runtime. Native languages only keep that information for DLLs and the like.
You looked in the wrong dark corners, oblivious to the superior (yes, even to Java) functional languages that, true, have been ignored by "mainstream" users, even in computer science.
Another poor argument. I said that the other languages failed to bring many features mainstream like Java did. You agree but state that I'm wrong. How does that work, sir?
Slashdot Mirror
P.S. FireFox 1.5 screws up the CSV load. You can read the source spreadsheet if you have problems.
http://games.datadino.com/4K_2005/scores.html
Be nice to the poor server, please.
Precisely. After all, what is genius but asking the right questions? If you ask the right question, then the answer should produce itself.
That is solvable with a DBFS query. Making links in a registry-type database almost guarantees that you'll have problems stemming from uninstalls, reinstalls, and other movements of files. A quick search of the FS data system, however, can get you the information you need just as fast, and FAR more accurately.
It's still the wrong way of doing it. The Windows NTFS filesystem has full support for storing meta-data on the files. Windows SHOULD be storing registry type stuff as attributes on the program file. But it doesn't. Which means that you're making a mess no matter what you do. Lots of extra/unnecessary garbage to manage.
That's why Linux has a real opportunity to pull ahead.
These claims are both false and do a profound disservice to Einstein.
If that were true, then why do you argue my very points from a different perspective?
He asked the same questions as everyone else, but he sought answers in places no one else thought to look. In particular, with regard to special relativity, while everyone else was looking at dynamics and positing undetectable entities, he lifted the carpet of kinematics and found amongst the loose change lying there a diamond: clear and hard and perfect. Nor was this a random search on his part--it was precisely his genius that let him ignore the clutter and noise of the dynamical theorists and see the tiny lump that diamond made in the carpet while everyone else was standing on it and not noticing.
If Einstien were asking the same questions as everyone else, then he never would have conducted his famous thought experiment where he dropped a stone from a moving train. This line of reasoning led him to ask about light on a train. Asking about light on a train led him to ask about relative perceptions. Relative perceptions led him to develop the Special Theory of Relativity.
It was not a random search, as you say. It was Einstien asking the questions that revealed the true nature of the Universe. Everyone else had the raw data in hand, but no one could make heads or tails of it.
Nor did he use "nothing more than logical deduction". His work was profoundly creative.
Yes, profoundly creative in that he developed thought experiments that allowed him to search the universe without performing a single actual experiment. Thought experiments had been used before (primarily in Mathematics), but Einstein's work may have been the first time they had ever been used to such great effect in physics.
Einstein was unique because of his character, not his genius. The masses recognized that Einstein was an extraordinarily humane and humble man.
BWHAHAHA! Is this the same Einstein who pissed off 90% of his professors in college because he was such a rogue?
Einstein was a giant among physicists because of his extrodinary intelligence. He asked the questions no one else thought to ask, and produced the answers through nothing more than logical deduction. The answers he produced were so profound and world changing that it took decades for science to really grab ahold of them.
But perhaps the most interesting part about Mr. Einstein is that he was heavily anti-institutional. His rogue personality not only clashed heavily with the "established" scientific community (who thought they had all the answers when they had precisely zilch), but he tore them apart and made way for a completely new breed of scientist.
Will there ever be another Einstein? No. No more than there will be another Isaac Newton. There will be a completely new figure who will have such an incredible way of looking at the Universe that it will put everyone else to shame.
Ah, come off it. Sometimes it's myself, sometimes it's TripMasterMonkey, and sometimes it's dada21. It all depends on who's got extra time on his hands and something insightful to say. Since you obviously have nothing insightful to say, sir, may I recommend you keep your mouth closed until such a time arrives that you do?
:-)
P.S. To Dada21: Just so happens I'm in Chicago. Perhaps I'll bump into you sometime.
As you say, the problem is the size of the screen, not so much the resolution. The game will *look* fine, but whether it plays fine on such a small screen is an entirely different matter. You can probably make the gaming fun, but the experience between a handheld and a PC will never be the same. :-)
And what is the silhouette of a polygon in a Quake model?
A complex texture mapping on top of another complex texture mapping?
By using the term "ClearType", I was oversimplifying. True, the "ClearType" brand implementation is limited to text by design, but the concept of subpixel rendering for LCDs is general enough to apply to any image with sharp edges.
The term you want is anti-aliasing. It takes sharp edges and makes them smooth. And I find it doubtful you'll be doing it in real time on a puny little ARM processor running at a few hundred MHz, with no 3D acceleration.
BTW, Quake II is a 3D renderer. That means that it can already pull sub-rendering tricks for MipMap filtering to make the textures look much better. The anti-aliasing only helps the edges, which you're unlikely to notice while the game is in play.
Cleartype is a font rendering technology, not a cool way to resize images. It works on the idea that the text will be a solid color on a solid background. Throw an image at it and Cleartype will do absolutely nothing.
320x240 is a little grainy for a 17" screen, but it should look just fine on a 3"-5" screen. You'll never even notice the low resolution because the pixels are so small. IIRC, Quake II should have no problem with this resolution as it was designed with such ModeX's in mind. SuperVGA was fully supported, also, but it wasn't required.
Note that little item in #4's list of requirements: Java
:-)
That's right people, Tribal Trouble was created by a long-time Java programmer. Don't be surprised if more and more Indies are done in Java. Cross-Platform support comes free, and development tends to be easier and faster. Tribal Trouble wasn't the first Indie game done in Java (*cough*heresafew*cough*), and it won't be the last.
So either one or both agencies in question are simply incompetent, or lying to us. Which do you think is more plausible?
Never attribute malice to that which can be explained by stupidity.
I don't really think they'd gain much by putting cookies on the machines of web users. If terrorists do come to their site, their IP address will give them away far better than a cookie. Now if anyone finds an image on other sites pointing back to the NSA or CIA, then you may have found your smoking gun.
Has anyone seen Gemini? I think Mr. Veil would like a word with him..
Only 6 minutes? Is that long enough to really see how this stuff is made?
You'd be surprised. Many manufacturing processes are quite fast. That's why they can turn out thousands of widgets, sprockets, and cogs each day. Most of the time is usually spent in things like heating or rolling, processes where you don't need to record the entire thing to video. These are usually pipelined in such a way that the time taken has little to no impact on producing a widget per minute.
Of course, there are still some processes (such as making snow boards) which have several manual steps. These take much longer and have fairly low production, but they're also highly expensive products sought out for their hand-crafted quality.
Most of this stuff is common knowledge, but here are a few links I was able to dig up:
Wikipedia Criticisms (with sources)
Comprehensive list of MySQL "gotchas"
Interesting Blog Entry
Google should be able to provide more info on MySQL's problems. It's getting better, but I still trust my data to PostgreSQL.
Is all this technology making us more productive?
Ah, how I wish I could take you back in a time machine to the late 60's, then the 1920's. On our first stop in the 60's, I'd take you around various companies and show you the massive number of keypunchers, programmers, analysts, and other Managment Information Systems people who keep their companies working. I'd then take you to a company too small for a mainframe and let you witness the poor fellows struggle with mountains of paperwork.
On our next stop, we'd drop by the 1920's. No automation here. You can literally find hundreds of typists per company, all lined up in rows. Secretaries abound, filing documents left and right. Personal assistents follow company executives around, keeping track of every minor detail. In short, lots of manpower for a return that we can realize today with a few PCs and other electronic gadgets.
I haven't even gotten into manufacturing, and how technology has changed the world there.
In short, technology has made us more productive. It doesn't always seem like it with all the technological distractions we now have, but you have to understand that the efficiency of modern technology is what gives us time and energy for those distractions. The greatest challenge today is to find better ways of optimizing business and personal matters. All the low-hanging fruit has already been realized, so we're on to the difficult part of squeezing out efficiency a few percent at a time.
If you're paying any more than $0.00 dollars to kick the tires, then you've got problems. I've developed for Oracle, Sybase, and DB2 all without paying a single red cent. What cool channel do I use for this? Simple! I go to their websites and DOWNLOAD them. Even Microsoft has a 90 day limited version of SQL Server.
Now, I don't know anything about MySQL, but it seems that this is just a simple matter of changing the Transaction Isolation level.
*cough* What transaction isolation level? MySQL hasn't had transactions for YEARS. Once it finally got them, it turned out they were being faked anyway. A real database works correctly BECAUSE it has proper transaction isolation.
Oh, I'm well aware. I just had to add Sybase support to a product I work on. Oracle and DB2 offer the same deal. But for this "comparison" they're taking products designed for developers to kick the proverbal tires and then comparing them to the full version of MySQL. They're not even really poking at the features or performance. All they're doing is saying, "Well, MySQL can run on LOTS of CPUs and is unlimited in its disk usage, so therefore it's better than these other products. Oh, and we've got enough checkmarks from the marketing materials to say that MySQL is just as feature rich as these big DBs."
At best that's a rather "interesting" way to slant the results. Tune in next week when we'll be comparing apples to blocks of lead!:-)
Even if the EULA applied here (which it doesn't, this isn't benchmarks), this is a lame "comparison". What they do is take the crippled versions of $$$ commercial databases that are
"free" for development or personal use, and then compare them against only ONE OSS database. Would you like to guess which OSS database that is?
The entire story feels trumped up to appeal to MySQL fans.
Yes, but since we're talking about JSP pages (introduced around the time of Java 2), it's not an issue. Also, an interface for Jitting existed in the original versions of Java as Sun expected others to pick up the slack. (Which was true up until Microsoft screwed everyone over.)
Board Member 1: "I motion that we evict Mr. Thompson from all future board meetings."
Board Member 2: "Seconded!"
President: "All those in favor of evicting Mr. Thompson from..."
Interrupting all at once: "AYE!!!!"
President: "Do I hear any Nays?"
Thompson: "Um? Nay?"
President: "The Ayes have it. From this date forward, Mr. Thompson will no longer be allowed to board meetings until such a time as a motion is made and carried to allow him to rejoin these meetings. Considering that the only way I can forsee that happening is if Mr. Thompson owns a controlling share, we can assume for the moment that his banishment is permanant."
Thompson: "But..."
President "Meeting Ajourned."
I'm sorry, were you trying to agree with my original post? It came across as if you were arguing, thus my attempt to clarify my position. My apologies if I misunderstood.
C included libc, C++ has libc+STL
If you call those comprehensive libraries, then I have a bridge to sell you. The 1.1 library (which was where Java first started taking off) had such features as a standard SQL API, advanced I/O capabilities, remote method invocation, GUI support, image handling, standardized complex data structures, cryptographic support, text processing, data compression, and many other features lacking in libc/STL. The Java 2 library and on added a metric boatload of useful new APIs (XML, CORBA, collections, XSL, Logging, Registry, RegEx, Directories, Sound, MIDI, etc.), guaranteed to be on every platform Java was. That's one hell of a feature!
That's mostly a web server issue,
Serlvets and JSP are "standard" Java libraries that made the language well suited to the task. It's irrelevant if it's a "web server" issue or not. It directly impacted its popularity.
and it's technically untrue. You could write a multithreaded C program to handle web requests using pipes or other IPC mechanisms.
(rolls eyes) Well then, KDE wasn't the first Open Source desktop because I could have written one first!
That's a stupid argument, sir. Part of Java's popularity was that Servlet and JSP technology was the first technology on the market with these features. If someone wrote a customer server to do the same prior to Java, it didn't help the rest of the market at all.
Again, what? All functional languages support reflection because functions are first class objects.
Riiiggghhht. So let me just compile this code here, and then have this program I wrote a few months back over here automatically investigate the functions and run them.
No wait, I can't do that. The compiler threw away that information after compile. Plus I need to write a very special loader to get the code into executable memory to begin with. And it's platform dependent.
Java is inherently reflective at runtime. Native languages only keep that information for DLLs and the like.
You looked in the wrong dark corners, oblivious to the superior (yes, even to Java) functional languages that, true, have been ignored by "mainstream" users, even in computer science.
Another poor argument. I said that the other languages failed to bring many features mainstream like Java did. You agree but state that I'm wrong. How does that work, sir?