Your right the treaty doesn't assume everyone is equal, because (oddly enough) they arn't all the same! Some nations - such as those in the EU and in North America - can afford to make greater sacrificies as they are significantly more developed.
I am quite happy to give nations like India greater allowances for some time, to allow them to build their economy and industry up to a greater level. I'm not surprised to hear Americans say they are unwilling to do that though (even though as an EU member citizen I'm happy to make greater sacrifices because I know we can afford it, and I think the vast majority of EU members think the same way).
The rest of the world has a very low opinion of the US now (not because of GWB, but because you were so collectively retarded as to re-elect him, not because he's Republican, just because he's the wost president the US has ever had). You guys can do what you like now, other people have ceased to care what Americans think or do. The sad truth is America no longer has any real friends in the international community.
Note I say that as someone who has been a big fan of the US for along time and is both pro-globalisation, and was in favour of the invasion of Iraq (because it meant disposing Saddam). I'm not a typical 'anti-American/anti-capitalist' left wing loonie. I just think the US has simply burned too many bridges now, the re-election of GWB was seen mind bogglingly stupid (especially given that in the end he was found to have lost the popular vote by 900,000 votes in the first election). The rest of the world looked on last week and thought "WTF?".
I've been to North America many times, as far west as San Fransico, as far east as New York, as far south as Cape Kennedy and as far north as Canada. I will not being going back though. The requirements to be finger printed and iris scanned are the most over the top in the western world. Law enforcement is comparibly officious and oppresive and the people are highly insulated with very limited knowledge of the world in which they live. I think Americans are lovely people, just staggeringly poorly informed.
This is not intended as a flame or troll, it's very tragic, but really I honestly don't think people care if you sign up or not anymore, because as a nation you've made it quite clear you don't give a damn about 'the free world' (or those who are not free), just yourselves.
It's also tragic that in such a close election you never the less have a Republican House, Republican Senate and Republican Supreme Court, along with the divisive final term Republican president (politically empowered to do what ever the hell he likes, even though the result was so close). The system is fubard and Americans don't seem to even notice or admit it to themselves, let alone care. *sigh*.
I was about 50% of the way through the install when mine died (possibly during optimisation, being in the middle of the screen the relevent was obsured by the crash message).
I had left it alone and had turned my Bluetooth mouse on at that time to use the system and it died. After rebooting it said it was 10..3.6 but be sure I downloaded the install as a.dmg and installed it frmo that to be on the safe side.
It wasn't much beyond getting the NT MIPS/PPC install CD - I *think* it was a multi format disc, but I'm not positive about that - (which we got as part of somones MSDN subscription I think - one of the guys in the company had a personal subscription). I think following the breif instructions on the README contained on the disc was enough.
There was some faffing around I think, but it was straight foward as I recall (seem to be a few Google hits for it, so guessing there are more detailed instructions somewhere).
* Potential NDA Breakage * (though I think this is really public domain knowledge by now).
Actually Rhapsody (and Open Step) ran well on average stock x86 hardware. I installed it on several systems of mine all without issue. None were specifically ordered or built to run it.
It was perfectly stable, worked a variety of graphics cards, motherboards and CD ROM drives avalible. I didn't come across any systems it wouldn't install on (though in fairness I wasn't trying to install it on weird POS systems, which I would fully expect it to not install on, but I don't see that as a major obstical to adoption).
It has a 'supported hardware list' yes, but in reality it worked with a much wider list than the offically supported list - as long a CD DRIVE supported ATAPI I found it worked with Rhapsody, for example (and you really need to go looking to find a POS drive that *wasn't* compatible). There were even 3rd party drivers for devices like Modems which extended the functionality.
It's the implimentation of the OS which makes it's work so well, not just that they are working to a limited hardware set. While poor quality commodity hardware and low quality 3rd party drivers is a primary source of problems on Windows and the poor quality of 3rd party hardware and software is not Microsoft's fault, at the same time it's something that's used to excused the poor manner in which Windows has delt with supporting devices.
Though in their defense I think they are very much doing the right thing with XP now (with signed drivers, warning users when they install unverified drivers and reminding users to check to the XP compatility logo on hardware they purchase).
Supporting a decent set of standard hardware isn't really all that difficult (as an example, it's unusual to find a modern desktop system that's not supported by Linux or FreeBSD these days). Rhapsody did a grand job proving it is possible and it's a distrotion of reality to suggest it's not possible.
Sure, Microsoft haven't managed to really pull it off well even after being in the game so long, but then they haven't even manged to pull of a decent browser after the best part of a decade either. They don't exactly have a great track record TBF.
NT for PPC could run on third party (non-Apple) PowerPC systems as the clone PowerMac's were all CHRP/PReP compliant. They could run Mac OS and NT for PPC (and other OS's designed for CHRP/PReP including; OS/2 WARP, AIX, Solaris and Taligent).
I think it's sad CHRP didn't really take off beyond the short-lived clone Mac's.
Apple branded PowerPC systems were (annoyingly) not CHRP compliant, so you couldn't run any of the above on them (though you could still run Linux and one or more BSD based OS's). I think it would have helped CHRP (and would have helped Apple) if Apple systems had been CHRP compliant in the early days.
I remeber installing NT on a MIPS system too- an SGI (Indy). Results from Google say variously that that is 'impossible' or 'not possible with special software and hardware modifications', which is just plain wrong (or secrect MS ninjas snuk into our basement and modified it when we wern't looking). It ran okay, though the redraws were a little flakey.
You may return your ego to it's jar - I assure you I usually read the Journals and a few past posts of people when replying to someone.
Your still a nut job for so closely monitoring the URL's your kid is looking at and the processes he is running (and then engaging in trying to catch him out, succeeding and punishing him further). It's not 'pop-psychology' to suggest that the behaviour your indulging in is appropriate, I would hope it would be common sense and obvious that it's OTT behaviour.
It's not normal, your micro-managing him, and engaging in control freakery.
For his sake (and also for the sake of your future adult relationship, but primarily for his sake) take a big step back and stop it.
Oh, and of course he's not always going to tell the truth, especially if you phrase things in a manner where he's inclined to lie (adults sure as hell don't behave like that). Humans lie, especially when they think it willl get them out of trouble. Entraping him and then punishing him in that manner is not an effective teaching methodology through which you can best re-enforce positive behaviour.
Your sending out big signals to him indicating you don't trust him, and that he's not able to be trusted to manage himself. No shit, lots of people have similar problems (and work that kind of stuff out for themselves when they natrually grow into responsiblities in their late teens and in their twenties), giving them an inferiority complex about it doesn't help them. Try working on things that he can do to build up a level of trust then start exercising that trust by showing you can and do trust him. Don't come down on him like a tonne of bricks every time he makes a mistake, because that really isn't going to help, it's just going to store up new problems for him to deal with.
"Well, you're grounded from the computer for 2 weeks. One for goofing off, and one for lying to me. Any questions?"
Bloody hell, good grud on greenie...
** I'm having a vison..... **
Nick leaves home at the earliest possible legal age to achive freedom from his controlling parents. He looks back on his childhood with unhappy memories, grows up to resent his controlling parents (even if it's just the father that's the controlling one, because he'll end up resenting his mothers complicity too) - who he rarely talks to about real issues because of distance created by them in establishing such an oppressive parent/child relationship. Unhappy/oppressed teenager grows up to be unhappy and angry young adult.
I've seen parents who give their kids way to much freedom (not many though) to the extent they have really nasty mean kids (who at least usually grow out of it eventually) but far more instances of parents who are too controlling and where the damage done is irreperable. Without a doubt, all the families I know of that have controlling parents - none of whom consider themselves controlling, just 'looking out for their kids' - have turned out really screwed up kids.
To pick some personal examples that spring to mind, one kid (a really nice kid by all accounts) punched his father in the nose and left home that day, just before his 16th birthday IIRC (and so hasn't spoken to either of them in years). Another family (who's parents are/were notoriously controlling amoung the people I know who also know them) has two children (a girl and a boy) that were really nice kids (at least the _seemed_ nice as kids) but have grown up into abusive angry resentful teenagers who again, left home at the early possible age (struggling for work to support themselves because they've crippiled their education as a result). I know a son from another family who, very sadly, killed himself because he was unable to tell his controlling parents he was gay (they refused to acknowledge it).
If you don't push your kids enough they might not achive what they otherwise could have, they might be critical of you for it later, but they almost certainly won't grow up to resent you because of things like that you didn't do. However, if you push your kids even just a little bit too hard I think you'll find they will resent you for doing that.
After combining the above post and the vitrolic abuse I see makes up your Journal entries I can't say I have much faith in your ability to look after other human beings, you seem to have a tough enough time of it managing yourself.
You would have to be a complete knob to keep anything important in a free webmail account.
*raises eyebrow*
1) Use GPG to encrypt your emails (using a web-to-imap/pop proxy from freshmeat.net, together with your email client of choice [mutt, pine, evolution, Mail.app etc]).
2) Get said proxy together with fetchmail and/or quick 10 min $script_lang script to suck it down and just back it up locally every now and again.
2. pisses off everyone who wants the game but doesn't want to use/cannot use Steam
'OMG I'm on a modem, you've got broadband that's not fair, I don't want you to be able to download the game, I have to wait till I can travel to a store that stocks it and so should you cause otherwise it's not fair and I'm telling my mum!'
If someone who doesn't have broadband or who simply doesn't want to run Steam then fine, they don't have to, I'm okay with that. Screw them if they arn't happy that I want to get it via online download though, I don't see why they should get to prevent the rest of us from getting it via online download. It's not like the store based retail market going to suddenly vanish overnight while there is still demand. I think many people will find they prefer it though (no more naff media to worry about, no more trips to the store only to find they sold out at lunch time and to come back in a few days when they will get more stock in, maybe).
*wobbly voice* Welcome to the world of tomorrow! */wobbly voice*
Online downloads = in. Spotty yoof who lie about when they are expecting deliveries of HL2 = out.
If it's not avalible for instant activation online via Steam you can be sure a significant number of people will be using alternative download mechanisims like 'Bit Torrent' and 'DC' to download and play it the same day it's released (or before then..).
I play a very small number of copied games, not many and if they are good I buy them. I would always pay for them if the were easier to get - and I'd buy a lot more games too - but it's a pain in the arse to go to and from an appropriate store to find out that the usual local stores are all out of stock (even in, or maybe because it's London).
I almost exclusively play MMOG's these days, because bizzarely these are the only types of new games I can download and play (other than ropey shareware), because the rest of the industry doesn't get that lots of people want to be able to download them, they are downloading 300+ MB demos (in some cases, 1.5GB +) so it makes sense they may as well just be able to enter a credit card online and get the full thing.
Screw Vivendi. Steam's implimentation is naff in several ways (though I like the 'just in time' loading and I call BS on the unreliability as I've never had a problem connecting to it), but if it gets the ball rolling again with online downloads for commercial titles then that's great news IMO. I'd probably spend an extra 50-100 USD on software a month if I had access to all retail games via a system like Steam.
Plenty of consumers saw this coming, Vivendi's overpaid under-competant waste-of-space management should have seen this coming (god knows they are paid enough for there supposed ability), but they did nothing but try and slow progress to delay the inevitable (much like the RIAA's attitude to online music), and so they will continue to slide down hill till they go out of business and/or assets are bought by some other cash rich (probably bumbling and equally doomed) entity. Tatty bye Vivendi!
The UT 2K4 demo on my PowerBook (1.5 Ghz, 1 GB RAM, Radeon 9700 w/ 128 MB) performs if anything a little worse than the full UT 2k3 on old PowerBook (400 Mhz, 384 MB RAM, 4 MB VRAM IIRC).
Obviously it's a bit nicer and doing more (particularly on the open maps featuring vehicles) but from the demo it doesn't seem as aggressively optimised as previous versions. Performance on 'normal' indoor levels is certainly not as fast as UT 2k3 was under OS 9 on less powerful hardware.
Most OS X games still seem to feature feature fairly dubious performance (UT 2K4 seems 'okay', but I'd really expect better on this hardware, even though it's PowerBook), the only major exception I've come across has been Call of Duty which has been a first class port which works really well even with 4 X FSAA activated (though Aspyr ports seem to have been 'hit and miss' recently, I wonder how much of that depends on the quality of the code they start with...).
I've love to try out Halo on the Mac (I've bought it - and completed it - on PC and X-Box but it's nice to have something to play when I've only got my PowerBook and it's very replayable) but there is *still* no demo - and looks like there never will be - and I'm not willing to shell out for it unless I know the performance is going to be reasonable (and given how many problems Gearbox had with the PC port, I am not all that hopeful).
For example, VPC would be a -lot- faster if instead of allocating a ton of RAM to VPC, you instead had a VM plug-in for Windows that caused it to ask the emulator (through a trap of some kind) to request RAM from the Mac OS X VM system.
Hmm that seems like a good idea as far as VM handling goes and I think I've heard it come up before, I think they are probably going to just rely on people throwing physical RAM at the problem for now.
On the issue of being optimised for Windows, I could swear that Virtual PC 4.0 had hooks for Windows 95/98 that speeded up performance for those systems under Mac OS Classic (given the comparison between how fast a Windows 98 install behaved and how a Linux w/ X11 or a Windows 2000 system behaved on the same Mac).
Similarly, if more games and stuff used OpenGL instead of DirectX, they could make OpenGL calls pass straight through to Mac OS X's implementation in much the same way that X11 OpenGL apps do. To some extent, the same tricks could be done with DirectX, I think. That should be a much cleaner solution than trying to mimic a much more limited graphics card.
Yes, that's actually exactly what it used to do in Version 3.0 but that feature was dropped (I assume it became no longer commercially viable to support).
Personally, I think that MS will end up doing some sort of hybrid pass through vrs 'emulation' for the graphics card.
As consumer graphics cards for Mac have different firmware (presumably/hopefully for something like alternate endianness so they are more Mac friendly rather than just to lock customers in...) that pass through might have issues so some function mangling might be necessary in which case it would be easier for them just to support a lower 'base' set of specifications for all Nvidia and all Radeon cards than to keep releasing new VPC versions/drivers each time a new Mac comes out. It would also seem to simplify doing support across the existing Mac range, so while performance / features are going to be reduced it could make it 'more cost effective' for them to add this feature.
I have used VPC a lot under OS 9 and OS X on my Powerbook (800 Mhz G4). Yes it is faster under 9, but the difference is nowhere near an order of magnitude
You can say 'BS" all you like but I have run it under both and there is a *vast* difference between Windows 98 on my 400 Mhz G4 than Windows 98 (or 2000, or XP) on Mac OS X classic on my 1.5 Ghz G4.
The difference is staggering. But then both my systems where optimised for performance - lots of RAM in both and lots of RAM dedicated to the Virtual PC (and in the case of the older system with Mac OS Classic - no Virtual Memory (that's important).
If your systems are configured poorly then yes, I'm sure it will run equally crappily on both. If you configure your system correctly however it will run very well on Mac OS Classic. You need lots of physical RAM because you need to dedicate plenty to your Virtual PC (and I would also advise you to strongly turn off VRAM in Mac OS Classic too as that will also make quite a difference).
If you think Virtual PC performance on Mac OS X (that is, with versions 5 and 6) is 'normal' for the series then your entire experience with it must really suck. It was actually a very good program that's just gone steadily downhill since version 3.0 (after which they decided they couldn't be bothered / it wasn't commercial viable to supportthe 3D accelleration any more and releases have bascially contained the bare minium to keep it hobbling along).
And I would bet you good money that a 400 Mhz machine will not run it faster than a 1.5 Ghz machine under ANY OS.
Sounds like you've never gotten VPC running well under Classic because you've not assigned it enough RAM. Try it with 1 GB (no VRAM - VRAM in Mac OS Classic will seriously impact VPC performance!) and assign *at least* 256 MB, preferably 512 MB to your Virtual PC (otherwise it will want to swap under emulation on it's virtual Hard Disk which will just kill performance completely too).
Note: If you compare Windows 2000 (or XP, etc) on both systems then there is much less of difference (it's never run either all that well as those who've been using it for a while can testify, but OS X performance is certainly worse over all - this is noticeable with my Linux and FreeBSD VPC's too, I use them to test builds before I roll them out so I'm pretty familer with them and really notice the performance difference in build times).
Virtual PC is actually pretty fast running on Mac OS Classic on a ~ 500 Mhz G4 or better (it compares very well to a low end entry level Intel notebook certainly), it's just that it's slow on Mac OS X. Obviously now you can't boot newer Mac's in classic it's a problem as under OS X Virtual PC is complete dog. I am really pissed off that the latest G4's don't support Mac OS Classic specifically because I used to like being able to run Windows at a good speed too. I can't help thinking it would have been great on my new 1.5 Ghz PowerBook if only I could boot it into Mac OS Classic...
Virtual PC on Mac OS 9 is an order of magnitude faster on even a 400 MHZ G4 under Mac OS Classic than Virtual PC is on a 1.5 Ghz G4 under OS X. Virtual PC (and OS X) are in need of significant optimising.
I would point out though that the biggest significant factor is RAM. You need to assign the Virtual PC 256 MB of RAM and you want to have 1 GB of RAM in your system. I have 1 GB of RAM in my current PowerBook - without 1 GB of physical RAM and without assigning 256 MB for the Virtual PC itself Windows XP in Virtual PC is fairly unusable.
Windows 98 used to be particularly fast with Virtual PC and the recommended OS. Sadly, something in the switch to Mac OS X made Windows 98 become much slower than Win 2K + under VPC in OS X and that was never addressed. Bascially the situation currently sucks. Now you need 1 GB of RAM, and at it's best it's still 1/4 the speed of VPC on Mac OS Classic.
I think that graphics card emulation is important though. It *really* speeds up the perception and responsiveness of the system, because it lowers the CPU load on your Mac, leaving it free to consentrate on the actual x86 emulation. For the lucky few that had 3D cards back when Virtual PC 3.0 (which *did* have hardware pass through support) you could play Quake at full speed inside Virtual PC.
It always amazes me that geeks think that everyone should know how a computer works. Why? Does a automechanic or plumber or electrician expect the same? I hire a guy to fix my brakes, change the oil, install a new heater and air conditioner in my house, and, frankly, I don't want to know how they do what they do.
I should think they ought to expect you to know how to change a fuse, check your fuse-box and test a light-bulb and/or be able to debug causes of a leak in your plumbing (unconnected overflow pipe, blockage in the drain pipe from your utility room, etc).
People who don't know how (and cant work out) how to change oil in their car, install an air conditioner or do rudimentary plumbing are inept and ought to be ashamed of their ignorance of such fundamental concepts of modern civilisation.
Logic, Google and/or a visit to a library/bookstore are tools everyone should be able to use to find out more information about a subject and educate themselves. Somethings are worth the short time to learn a little bit about because your likely to need to know about them several times in your life.
I am a prime advocate of making software as easy to use and conducive to increasing productivity as possible, but it's fair to have basic expectations too (like knowing how to install and remove programs, use files and folders/directories).
I think that for any layman hiring someone to perform a task like upgrade your PC's hardware or fix the breaks in your car, or re-wire the electricity sockets in a room is sensible and justifiable, it's time consuming to find out how to do that, and it could be potentially dangerous and/or expensive to 'fix' if you make a mistake.
However, if you too much of a fool to know how to change the oil on your car, to use your computer for basic tasks and solve simple problems, or know to turn off the stopcock if you have a gas or mains water leak then you should be highly embarrassed at how utterly inept you are.
I'm 25 and don't even drive (I don't own a car, nor a driving license) - I live in London and figure there is no point, I don't want to pollute London's already toxic atmosphere because I'm too lazy and selfish to walk or use public transport - but I can and have changed a tire, changed the oil, 'debugged' faulty components (like bad connectors on an alternator). I've done some basic plumbing in the house, and some minor electrical work soldering components. I wasn't taught this stuff, I just 'RTFM'd' and look for more information on sites like howstuffworks.com or in a book. It's not rocket science.
Before you drop into identity theft and such, how many people don't even know what they're credit score is? And you don't even need a computer to find that out.
I asked someone at my bank the name of a the leading credit agency here in the UK, it was Experian, so I googled and got back www.experian.co.uk. I went to the site and requested a copy of my report and they mailed me mine right away (for a very reasonable P&P fee of about 2.50 UKP). You can also call them and do the same thing over the phone.
I used it to clear up a number of problems due to incorrect information on my card - which had been sent to them by store retailers in error. I contacted them via email and they made the corrections right away, they were very polite and helpful and it was a pleasure dealing with them, I was very impressed with their professionalism).
So yes, I expect people to be able to do that too.
This is basic 'dealing with life' stuff that average human beings should be able to cope with, adults who can't do this stuff without being spoonfed the information like very young children are inadequate (and I'd rather they didn't breed).
I suggest you spend a little less time contemplating your own navel (re: the content of 'nemski.com') and instead go to google.com and type "HOWTO change oil car" and hit "I feel lucky". The result returns no only gives a generic step by step guide of how to change the oil on a car (virtually any car) accompanied by photographs, but it has a free video of how to do it too.
That post was so badly written it was hard to read.
Their loss leader adn then there is insanity. a ram disk? I highly doubt it
A RAM disk is a software construct not a physical device. It doesn't cost anything.
The X-Box 2 is apparently due to ship with ~256+ MB RAM, a RAM disk just means taking part of that and using it to emulate a physical disk (as X-Box 1 games would of course only use 64 MB they wouldn't need the rest, leaving plenty left over for a RAM disk).
The only point to Bc is to preserve the library so the next system will have titles at launch. It helps bridge it. What value do you see in BC for MS?
It seems you just answered that question yourself. Did see how few launch titles there were? If you bothered to read what was written you would see that I've already said only MS are in a position to judge if the time and effort it is worth it for them.
We don't know if they will or not, but we do know it's easily technically possible based on what information is available about the hardware. That you don't understand that that has do to with you having very limited knowledge of the subject being discussed.
With emulation you take a HUGE hit in speed. You may be running windows you your powerbook (I did also in the past), but to do anything but really basic applications you would encounter a massive speed penalty.
Ah this depends on what you are emulating and what you are emulating on. They are proposing a brand new 'high end' CPU along the lines of a three-core 3.5GHz Power PC chip, to emulate a 700 Mhz low end Intel chip (which was already 'low end' even when the X-Box was released). The gross disparity should make this possible easily.
Even today, Virtual PC running on a 1.5+ Ghz G4 is able to emulate a 700 Mhz Intel processor closely (on Mac OS Classic - with OS X the performance has clearly gone through the floor).
Virtual Game Station was really cool as well, but there also you took speed hits because of emulation.
That depends on the hardware you ran it on though. On a low end iMac it did struggle, still not a bad effort given the guys developed in in less than 4 years and had no access to the important design specs of the PlayStation and so had to reverse engineer the functionality. On a decent Power Mac the performance was just fine. The Windows release had even better performance (and was doing an even tricker task - emulating a PowerPC system on an Intel system).
Unless they pull a memory card RAID (doable, but why bother, and way more expensive) that seems to be a deathblow to any reverse compatability rumors.
I'll be lazy and copy what I've already written about this in another post:
In the case of saved games just write to a memory card or a virtual drive on line (which I suspect they may be planning on doing). If none is present return the function handler can return a simple out of space error, or trap the result and display it's own message.
If it's also need for cache write you could simply write to a ram disk (If it's relying on swap it's got to be a specific reserved amount, given the X-Box doesn't seem to reserve much for that it's not going to need much).
Not to troll, but what are your more than 10 excellent xbox exclusive games? Last time I counted Halo was only working on number 2... Splinter Cell has been ported
The poster said clearly 5-10 X-Box games, not X-Box *exclusive* games. It doesn't matter if they are exclusive or not. Most people will only buy *one* console, and what they will care about is if they can run their own X-Box games they already have on any new console (and/or that they can still buy and sell their old X-Box games, in the same way that PS one games still sell surprisingly well today).
I'd also point out that X-Box versions of certain games are quite a bit better than the other ports avalible, thanks to it's superior hardware.
Also, having to pay royalities on two video cards might bring the price up a bit.
They don't have do. Quite apart from the fact I would think they have bought the rights to the hardware designed for it and so could impliment features using that technology others could not (Microsoft have fairly good lawers and I would have thought they got that one down off the bat), there are no legal issues with translating the instructions from one card on another (it's been done many many times and been proven in court as already pointed out).
Well rebutted? The original 'reasoning' was quite well debunked as already being shown to be possible (in fact I am doing some of those things now).
I stand by my assessment and add the fact that there is no HD as one of your repliers mentions
In the case of saved games just write to a memory card or a virtual drive on line (which I suspect they may be planning on doing). If none is present return the function handler can return a simple out of space error, or trap the result and display it's own message.
If it's just for cache write you could simply write to a ram disk (If it's relying on swap it's got to be a specific reserved amount, given the X-Box doesn't seem to reserve much for that in the region of 512 MB would be more than sufficient I would have thought, and RAM is dirt cheap and increasingly so).
Not hard! I solve more difficult software problems that that before lunch. I can only assume the people who seem to think *that's* a problem don't have to solve these kind of issues themselves.
Have you run emulation latley? for 20 year old games, they run flawlessly. on 15 year old games, almost perfect. on the last decade of game, their shit
Em, did read my post?
The aforementioned Connectix PlayStation emulator ran fine on Both Mac's and PC's *at full speed* and was released in 1999, *less* than four years after the PlayStation was released. There is a similar story for the N64 emulation scene.
If these people managed to write 'pretty good' emulators - good enough to be commercial successes, good enough for Sony to sue them twice, lose and end up buying the rights to the software - and do all that in 4 years, then in 4+ years why the hell would Microsoft *not* be able to write their own near *perfect* emulator, given the much larger number of staff, the fact they *already* own an emulator to make the x86 emulation possible, their enormous budget and *all the plans to the hardware* (which crucially the others did not).
Take into account Moore's Law, the time between release dates, the step up to a considerably more powerful PowerPC chip (this is a very significant point) and it starts to appear a comparatively trivial task.
The only issue here is now long it would take to implement it and if they come to the conclusion that's worth it for them commercially.
It also says that it supports ports to Windows though, and to Mac OS X, as those are the two platforms they have demo'd on (and even though Mac OS X is Unix like the display mananger is obviously quite unique and propriatory).
It's possible there is a 'catch' (and I'm sure there is *some* sort of 'catch') it could be they are using XFree86 on both Windows and Mac OS X. That would seem to make their job a bit easier I would image.
I was going to be nice, but I see the lusers have been out modding you up and now I just want to start slapping people for their unutterable cluelessness.
*INSERT CLUE TO CONTINUE*
1- they changed CPU architectures.
Okay I am trying hard not to laugh here...
Even as I type I am running Intel x86 Linux *and* Microsoft Windows (at the same time, but different instances) on my PowerPC PowerBook.
Not only has this been done many many times (Connectix's Virtual Game Station that allows you to play Playstation games on the PC or Mac for a start, and there are plenty of other emulators that emulate other chips specifically to allow you to play titles for consoles like the N64 on other platforms), but Microsoft *just purchased* the leading software product which emulates x86 on PPC.
2- They changed GPU's and the previous GPU is hevaily heavily copyrighted.
Are you actually suggesting that would make it impossible or illegal? You'd of course be very wrong on both counts. So what's your point?
Someone already released a wrapper to allow you to run the leading Nvidia demo on an ATI system (as would be the case here), not only that but it performed faster on the fastest ATI card at the time compared to the fastest Nvidia card at that time.
As another example I'd again point to Connectix's excellent Playstation emulator for PC and Macintosh (which was tested in the courts, Sony's law suit failed, twice, in the end Sony just bought the technology from them it was that good).
Just to be clear - Connectix where also the makers of the said x86 to PPC emulator that Microsoft just bought.
3- they have only 5-10 games worth playing on Xbox
Not only do I disgreee with you on that given my own game collection, but I think I've established that I don't think your opinon isn't all that informed.
4- Emu of 3d graphics w/o glitches is a dream. Even ps2 had glitches and it included the god damn hardware.
You only have to be good enough, not pixel perfect in every single title. Virtual PC, Virtual Gamestation (released 1999) and a large number of other emulators pull (e.g. UltraHLE, Project64) it off just fine - certainly well enough it would seem to have been proven. Apparently you have been in a cave for the last 5 years.
Microsoft are the origional developers of both products here and they have huge reasources, talented staff and of course an intimate knowledge of both platforms, as well as a full x86 to PowerPC processor emulator (where as teams like Connectix and the UltraHLE developers had to reverse engineer the systems on their own with much smaller teams and reasources and no inside knowledge and they *still* managed to do a great job). In comparison to what teams like that have already done, for Microsoft doing this would be a cakewalk.
Your going to need an IR remote (and receiver) too (and a PSU too, if the Linkworld doesn't comes with one - and it it does I shudder to think of the quality!).
So then, you have, for a whole 1/3 more, a device that's not only uglier but significantly more noisy (both things people dislike in a 'living room' Media Center scenario - the most common use for them that I can see) and it's built from quite likely unreliable parts (certainly not as reliable as a mass produced proven X-Box system I'm sure).
The X-Box is powerful enough to do everything people want in a Media Center, it's *vastly* more powerful than my TiVo for a start. Spending extra money to do the same trivial functions that an X-Box can do seems a pointless waste of money.
I can toally understand both doing it on the cheap and getting an X-Box and spending a grand building a really good home PVR/media center (quality LCD equipped low profile case with appropriate front-mounted buttons, 'slient' PSU/CPU fan system, DVD writer, etc) but building a noisy, ugly shonkey system from dodgy components seems like foolish spending to me.
Slashdot Mirror
I didn't say it was though. It is, as I said in North America.
It's amazing how many people correct me saying it isn't though (which I find very weird).
Your right the treaty doesn't assume everyone is equal, because (oddly enough) they arn't all the same! Some nations - such as those in the EU and in North America - can afford to make greater sacrificies as they are significantly more developed.
I am quite happy to give nations like India greater allowances for some time, to allow them to build their economy and industry up to a greater level. I'm not surprised to hear Americans say they are unwilling to do that though (even though as an EU member citizen I'm happy to make greater sacrifices because I know we can afford it, and I think the vast majority of EU members think the same way).
The rest of the world has a very low opinion of the US now (not because of GWB, but because you were so collectively retarded as to re-elect him, not because he's Republican, just because he's the wost president the US has ever had). You guys can do what you like now, other people have ceased to care what Americans think or do. The sad truth is America no longer has any real friends in the international community.
Note I say that as someone who has been a big fan of the US for along time and is both pro-globalisation, and was in favour of the invasion of Iraq (because it meant disposing Saddam). I'm not a typical 'anti-American/anti-capitalist' left wing loonie. I just think the US has simply burned too many bridges now, the re-election of GWB was seen mind bogglingly stupid (especially given that in the end he was found to have lost the popular vote by 900,000 votes in the first election). The rest of the world looked on last week and thought "WTF?".
I've been to North America many times, as far west as San Fransico, as far east as New York, as far south as Cape Kennedy and as far north as Canada. I will not being going back though. The requirements to be finger printed and iris scanned are the most over the top in the western world. Law enforcement is comparibly officious and oppresive and the people are highly insulated with very limited knowledge of the world in which they live. I think Americans are lovely people, just staggeringly poorly informed.
This is not intended as a flame or troll, it's very tragic, but really I honestly don't think people care if you sign up or not anymore, because as a nation you've made it quite clear you don't give a damn about 'the free world' (or those who are not free), just yourselves.
It's also tragic that in such a close election you never the less have a Republican House, Republican Senate and Republican Supreme Court, along with the divisive final term Republican president (politically empowered to do what ever the hell he likes, even though the result was so close). The system is fubard and Americans don't seem to even notice or admit it to themselves, let alone care. *sigh*.
A few people have had it crash during optimizing/install (myself included), seems to have been a dodgy update. Grr.
It's been in testing for ages too, so it must have come up.
I was about 50% of the way through the install when mine died (possibly during optimisation, being in the middle of the screen the relevent was obsured by the crash message).
.dmg and installed it frmo that to be on the safe side.
I had left it alone and had turned my Bluetooth mouse on at that time to use the system and it died. After rebooting it said it was 10..3.6 but be sure I downloaded the install as a
Sorry I don't specifically remember the details.
It wasn't much beyond getting the NT MIPS/PPC install CD - I *think* it was a multi format disc, but I'm not positive about that - (which we got as part of somones MSDN subscription I think - one of the guys in the company had a personal subscription). I think following the breif instructions on the README contained on the disc was enough.
There was some faffing around I think, but it was straight foward as I recall (seem to be a few Google hits for it, so guessing there are more detailed instructions somewhere).
* Potential NDA Breakage * (though I think this is really public domain knowledge by now).
Actually Rhapsody (and Open Step) ran well on average stock x86 hardware. I installed it on several systems of mine all without issue. None were specifically ordered or built to run it.
It was perfectly stable, worked a variety of graphics cards, motherboards and CD ROM drives avalible. I didn't come across any systems it wouldn't install on (though in fairness I wasn't trying to install it on weird POS systems, which I would fully expect it to not install on, but I don't see that as a major obstical to adoption).
It has a 'supported hardware list' yes, but in reality it worked with a much wider list than the offically supported list - as long a CD DRIVE supported ATAPI I found it worked with Rhapsody, for example (and you really need to go looking to find a POS drive that *wasn't* compatible). There were even 3rd party drivers for devices like Modems which extended the functionality.
It's the implimentation of the OS which makes it's work so well, not just that they are working to a limited hardware set. While poor quality commodity hardware and low quality 3rd party drivers is a primary source of problems on Windows and the poor quality of 3rd party hardware and software is not Microsoft's fault, at the same time it's something that's used to excused the poor manner in which Windows has delt with supporting devices.
Though in their defense I think they are very much doing the right thing with XP now (with signed drivers, warning users when they install unverified drivers and reminding users to check to the XP compatility logo on hardware they purchase).
Supporting a decent set of standard hardware isn't really all that difficult (as an example, it's unusual to find a modern desktop system that's not supported by Linux or FreeBSD these days). Rhapsody did a grand job proving it is possible and it's a distrotion of reality to suggest it's not possible.
Sure, Microsoft haven't managed to really pull it off well even after being in the game so long, but then they haven't even manged to pull of a decent browser after the best part of a decade either. They don't exactly have a great track record TBF.
NT for PPC could run on third party (non-Apple) PowerPC systems as the clone PowerMac's were all CHRP/PReP compliant. They could run Mac OS and NT for PPC (and other OS's designed for CHRP/PReP including; OS/2 WARP, AIX, Solaris and Taligent).
I think it's sad CHRP didn't really take off beyond the short-lived clone Mac's.
Apple branded PowerPC systems were (annoyingly) not CHRP compliant, so you couldn't run any of the above on them (though you could still run Linux and one or more BSD based OS's). I think it would have helped CHRP (and would have helped Apple) if Apple systems had been CHRP compliant in the early days.
I remeber installing NT on a MIPS system too- an SGI (Indy). Results from Google say variously that that is 'impossible' or 'not possible with special software and hardware modifications', which is just plain wrong (or secrect MS ninjas snuk into our basement and modified it when we wern't looking). It ran okay, though the redraws were a little flakey.
You may return your ego to it's jar - I assure you I usually read the Journals and a few past posts of people when replying to someone.
Your still a nut job for so closely monitoring the URL's your kid is looking at and the processes he is running (and then engaging in trying to catch him out, succeeding and punishing him further). It's not 'pop-psychology' to suggest that the behaviour your indulging in is appropriate, I would hope it would be common sense and obvious that it's OTT behaviour.
It's not normal, your micro-managing him, and engaging in control freakery.
For his sake (and also for the sake of your future adult relationship, but primarily for his sake) take a big step back and stop it.
Oh, and of course he's not always going to tell the truth, especially if you phrase things in a manner where he's inclined to lie (adults sure as hell don't behave like that). Humans lie, especially when they think it willl get them out of trouble. Entraping him and then punishing him in that manner is not an effective teaching methodology through which you can best re-enforce positive behaviour.
Your sending out big signals to him indicating you don't trust him, and that he's not able to be trusted to manage himself. No shit, lots of people have similar problems (and work that kind of stuff out for themselves when they natrually grow into responsiblities in their late teens and in their twenties), giving them an inferiority complex about it doesn't help them. Try working on things that he can do to build up a level of trust then start exercising that trust by showing you can and do trust him. Don't come down on him like a tonne of bricks every time he makes a mistake, because that really isn't going to help, it's just going to store up new problems for him to deal with.
"Well, you're grounded from the computer for 2 weeks. One for goofing off, and one for lying to me. Any questions?"
Bloody hell, good grud on greenie...
** I'm having a vison..... **
Nick leaves home at the earliest possible legal age to achive freedom from his controlling parents. He looks back on his childhood with unhappy memories, grows up to resent his controlling parents (even if it's just the father that's the controlling one, because he'll end up resenting his mothers complicity too) - who he rarely talks to about real issues because of distance created by them in establishing such an oppressive parent/child relationship. Unhappy/oppressed teenager grows up to be unhappy and angry young adult.
Suggested xmas gifts: Trenchcoat, shotgun, Prozac.
I've seen parents who give their kids way to much freedom (not many though) to the extent they have really nasty mean kids (who at least usually grow out of it eventually) but far more instances of parents who are too controlling and where the damage done is irreperable. Without a doubt, all the families I know of that have controlling parents - none of whom consider themselves controlling, just 'looking out for their kids' - have turned out really screwed up kids.
To pick some personal examples that spring to mind, one kid (a really nice kid by all accounts) punched his father in the nose and left home that day, just before his 16th birthday IIRC (and so hasn't spoken to either of them in years). Another family (who's parents are/were notoriously controlling amoung the people I know who also know them) has two children (a girl and a boy) that were really nice kids (at least the _seemed_ nice as kids) but have grown up into abusive angry resentful teenagers who again, left home at the early possible age (struggling for work to support themselves because they've crippiled their education as a result). I know a son from another family who, very sadly, killed himself because he was unable to tell his controlling parents he was gay (they refused to acknowledge it).
If you don't push your kids enough they might not achive what they otherwise could have, they might be critical of you for it later, but they almost certainly won't grow up to resent you because of things like that you didn't do. However, if you push your kids even just a little bit too hard I think you'll find they will resent you for doing that.
After combining the above post and the vitrolic abuse I see makes up your Journal entries I can't say I have much faith in your ability to look after other human beings, you seem to have a tough enough time of it managing yourself.
You would have to be a complete knob to keep anything important in a free webmail account.
*raises eyebrow*
1) Use GPG to encrypt your emails (using a web-to-imap/pop proxy from freshmeat.net, together with your email client of choice [mutt, pine, evolution, Mail.app etc]).
2) Get said proxy together with fetchmail and/or quick 10 min $script_lang script to suck it down and just back it up locally every now and again.
2. pisses off everyone who wants the game but doesn't want to use/cannot use Steam
'OMG I'm on a modem, you've got broadband that's not fair, I don't want you to be able to download the game, I have to wait till I can travel to a store that stocks it and so should you cause otherwise it's not fair and I'm telling my mum!'
If someone who doesn't have broadband or who simply doesn't want to run Steam then fine, they don't have to, I'm okay with that. Screw them if they arn't happy that I want to get it via online download though, I don't see why they should get to prevent the rest of us from getting it via online download. It's not like the store based retail market going to suddenly vanish overnight while there is still demand. I think many people will find they prefer it though (no more naff media to worry about, no more trips to the store only to find they sold out at lunch time and to come back in a few days when they will get more stock in, maybe).
*wobbly voice*
Welcome to the world of tomorrow!
*/wobbly voice*
Online downloads = in.
Spotty yoof who lie about when they are expecting deliveries of HL2 = out.
If it's not avalible for instant activation online via Steam you can be sure a significant number of people will be using alternative download mechanisims like 'Bit Torrent' and 'DC' to download and play it the same day it's released (or before then..).
I play a very small number of copied games, not many and if they are good I buy them. I would always pay for them if the were easier to get - and I'd buy a lot more games too - but it's a pain in the arse to go to and from an appropriate store to find out that the usual local stores are all out of stock (even in, or maybe because it's London).
I almost exclusively play MMOG's these days, because bizzarely these are the only types of new games I can download and play (other than ropey shareware), because the rest of the industry doesn't get that lots of people want to be able to download them, they are downloading 300+ MB demos (in some cases, 1.5GB +) so it makes sense they may as well just be able to enter a credit card online and get the full thing.
Screw Vivendi. Steam's implimentation is naff in several ways (though I like the 'just in time' loading and I call BS on the unreliability as I've never had a problem connecting to it), but if it gets the ball rolling again with online downloads for commercial titles then that's great news IMO. I'd probably spend an extra 50-100 USD on software a month if I had access to all retail games via a system like Steam.
Plenty of consumers saw this coming, Vivendi's overpaid under-competant waste-of-space management should have seen this coming (god knows they are paid enough for there supposed ability), but they did nothing but try and slow progress to delay the inevitable (much like the RIAA's attitude to online music), and so they will continue to slide down hill till they go out of business and/or assets are bought by some other cash rich (probably bumbling and equally doomed) entity. Tatty bye Vivendi!
"metoo"
The UT 2K4 demo on my PowerBook (1.5 Ghz, 1 GB RAM, Radeon 9700 w/ 128 MB) performs if anything a little worse than the full UT 2k3 on old PowerBook (400 Mhz, 384 MB RAM, 4 MB VRAM IIRC).
Obviously it's a bit nicer and doing more (particularly on the open maps featuring vehicles) but from the demo it doesn't seem as aggressively optimised as previous versions. Performance on 'normal' indoor levels is certainly not as fast as UT 2k3 was under OS 9 on less powerful hardware.
Most OS X games still seem to feature feature fairly dubious performance (UT 2K4 seems 'okay', but I'd really expect better on this hardware, even though it's PowerBook), the only major exception I've come across has been Call of Duty which has been a first class port which works really well even with 4 X FSAA activated (though Aspyr ports seem to have been 'hit and miss' recently, I wonder how much of that depends on the quality of the code they start with...).
I've love to try out Halo on the Mac (I've bought it - and completed it - on PC and X-Box but it's nice to have something to play when I've only got my PowerBook and it's very replayable) but there is *still* no demo - and looks like there never will be - and I'm not willing to shell out for it unless I know the performance is going to be reasonable (and given how many problems Gearbox had with the PC port, I am not all that hopeful).
Oooooooh cool. Thanks I'd not seen that.
It currently works, and it comes in a nice sexy Mac OS X package format sutible for slack jawed yokels to install. Yay! \o/
For example, VPC would be a -lot- faster if instead of allocating a ton of RAM to VPC, you instead had a VM plug-in for Windows that caused it to ask the emulator (through a trap of some kind) to request RAM from the Mac OS X VM system.
Hmm that seems like a good idea as far as VM handling goes and I think I've heard it come up before, I think they are probably going to just rely on people throwing physical RAM at the problem for now.
On the issue of being optimised for Windows, I could swear that Virtual PC 4.0 had hooks for Windows 95/98 that speeded up performance for those systems under Mac OS Classic (given the comparison between how fast a Windows 98 install behaved and how a Linux w/ X11 or a Windows 2000 system behaved on the same Mac).
Similarly, if more games and stuff used OpenGL instead of DirectX, they could make OpenGL calls pass straight through to Mac OS X's implementation in much the same way that X11 OpenGL apps do. To some extent, the same tricks could be done with DirectX, I think. That should be a much cleaner solution than trying to mimic a much more limited graphics card.
Yes, that's actually exactly what it used to do in Version 3.0 but that feature was dropped (I assume it became no longer commercially viable to support).
Personally, I think that MS will end up doing some sort of hybrid pass through vrs 'emulation' for the graphics card.
As consumer graphics cards for Mac have different firmware (presumably/hopefully for something like alternate endianness so they are more Mac friendly rather than just to lock customers in...) that pass through might have issues so some function mangling might be necessary in which case it would be easier for them just to support a lower 'base' set of specifications for all Nvidia and all Radeon cards than to keep releasing new VPC versions/drivers each time a new Mac comes out. It would also seem to simplify doing support across the existing Mac range, so while performance / features are going to be reduced it could make it 'more cost effective' for them to add this feature.
I have used VPC a lot under OS 9 and OS X on my Powerbook (800 Mhz G4). Yes it is faster under 9, but the difference is nowhere near an order of magnitude
You can say 'BS" all you like but I have run it under both and there is a *vast* difference between Windows 98 on my 400 Mhz G4 than Windows 98 (or 2000, or XP) on Mac OS X classic on my 1.5 Ghz G4.
The difference is staggering. But then both my systems where optimised for performance - lots of RAM in both and lots of RAM dedicated to the Virtual PC (and in the case of the older system with Mac OS Classic - no Virtual Memory (that's important).
If your systems are configured poorly then yes, I'm sure it will run equally crappily on both. If you configure your system correctly however it will run very well on Mac OS Classic. You need lots of physical RAM because you need to dedicate plenty to your Virtual PC (and I would also advise you to strongly turn off VRAM in Mac OS Classic too as that will also make quite a difference).
If you think Virtual PC performance on Mac OS X (that is, with versions 5 and 6) is 'normal' for the series then your entire experience with it must really suck. It was actually a very good program that's just gone steadily downhill since version 3.0 (after which they decided they couldn't be bothered / it wasn't commercial viable to supportthe 3D accelleration any more and releases have bascially contained the bare minium to keep it hobbling along).
And I would bet you good money that a 400 Mhz machine will not run it faster than a 1.5 Ghz machine under ANY OS.
Sounds like you've never gotten VPC running well under Classic because you've not assigned it enough RAM. Try it with 1 GB (no VRAM - VRAM in Mac OS Classic will seriously impact VPC performance!) and assign *at least* 256 MB, preferably 512 MB to your Virtual PC (otherwise it will want to swap under emulation on it's virtual Hard Disk which will just kill performance completely too).
Note: If you compare Windows 2000 (or XP, etc) on both systems then there is much less of difference (it's never run either all that well as those who've been using it for a while can testify, but OS X performance is certainly worse over all - this is noticeable with my Linux and FreeBSD VPC's too, I use them to test builds before I roll them out so I'm pretty familer with them and really notice the performance difference in build times).
Virtual PC is actually pretty fast running on Mac OS Classic on a ~ 500 Mhz G4 or better (it compares very well to a low end entry level Intel notebook certainly), it's just that it's slow on Mac OS X. Obviously now you can't boot newer Mac's in classic it's a problem as under OS X Virtual PC is complete dog. I am really pissed off that the latest G4's don't support Mac OS Classic specifically because I used to like being able to run Windows at a good speed too. I can't help thinking it would have been great on my new 1.5 Ghz PowerBook if only I could boot it into Mac OS Classic...
Virtual PC on Mac OS 9 is an order of magnitude faster on even a 400 MHZ G4 under Mac OS Classic than Virtual PC is on a 1.5 Ghz G4 under OS X. Virtual PC (and OS X) are in need of significant optimising.
I would point out though that the biggest significant factor is RAM. You need to assign the Virtual PC 256 MB of RAM and you want to have 1 GB of RAM in your system. I have 1 GB of RAM in my current PowerBook - without 1 GB of physical RAM and without assigning 256 MB for the Virtual PC itself Windows XP in Virtual PC is fairly unusable.
Windows 98 used to be particularly fast with Virtual PC and the recommended OS. Sadly, something in the switch to Mac OS X made Windows 98 become much slower than Win 2K + under VPC in OS X and that was never addressed. Bascially the situation currently sucks. Now you need 1 GB of RAM, and at it's best it's still 1/4 the speed of VPC on Mac OS Classic.
I think that graphics card emulation is important though. It *really* speeds up the perception and responsiveness of the system, because it lowers the CPU load on your Mac, leaving it free to consentrate on the actual x86 emulation. For the lucky few that had 3D cards back when Virtual PC 3.0 (which *did* have hardware pass through support) you could play Quake at full speed inside Virtual PC.
It always amazes me that geeks think that everyone should know how a computer works. Why? Does a automechanic or plumber or electrician expect the same? I hire a guy to fix my brakes, change the oil, install a new heater and air conditioner in my house, and, frankly, I don't want to know how they do what they do.
I should think they ought to expect you to know how to change a fuse, check your fuse-box and test a light-bulb and/or be able to debug causes of a leak in your plumbing (unconnected overflow pipe, blockage in the drain pipe from your utility room, etc).
People who don't know how (and cant work out) how to change oil in their car, install an air conditioner or do rudimentary plumbing are inept and ought to be ashamed of their ignorance of such fundamental concepts of modern civilisation.
Logic, Google and/or a visit to a library/bookstore are tools everyone should be able to use to find out more information about a subject and educate themselves. Somethings are worth the short time to learn a little bit about because your likely to need to know about them several times in your life.
I am a prime advocate of making software as easy to use and conducive to increasing productivity as possible, but it's fair to have basic expectations too (like knowing how to install and remove programs, use files and folders/directories).
I think that for any layman hiring someone to perform a task like upgrade your PC's hardware or fix the breaks in your car, or re-wire the electricity sockets in a room is sensible and justifiable, it's time consuming to find out how to do that, and it could be potentially dangerous and/or expensive to 'fix' if you make a mistake.
However, if you too much of a fool to know how to change the oil on your car, to use your computer for basic tasks and solve simple problems, or know to turn off the stopcock if you have a gas or mains water leak then you should be highly embarrassed at how utterly inept you are.
I'm 25 and don't even drive (I don't own a car, nor a driving license) - I live in London and figure there is no point, I don't want to pollute London's already toxic atmosphere because I'm too lazy and selfish to walk or use public transport - but I can and have changed a tire, changed the oil, 'debugged' faulty components (like bad connectors on an alternator). I've done some basic plumbing in the house, and some minor electrical work soldering components. I wasn't taught this stuff, I just 'RTFM'd' and look for more information on sites like howstuffworks.com or in a book. It's not rocket science.
Before you drop into identity theft and such, how many people don't even know what they're credit score is? And you don't even need a computer to find that out.
I asked someone at my bank the name of a the leading credit agency here in the UK, it was Experian, so I googled and got back www.experian.co.uk. I went to the site and requested a copy of my report and they mailed me mine right away (for a very reasonable P&P fee of about 2.50 UKP). You can also call them and do the same thing over the phone.
I used it to clear up a number of problems due to incorrect information on my card - which had been sent to them by store retailers in error. I contacted them via email and they made the corrections right away, they were very polite and helpful and it was a pleasure dealing with them, I was very impressed with their professionalism).
So yes, I expect people to be able to do that too.
This is basic 'dealing with life' stuff that average human beings should be able to cope with, adults who can't do this stuff without being spoonfed the information like very young children are inadequate (and I'd rather they didn't breed).
I suggest you spend a little less time contemplating your own navel (re: the content of 'nemski.com') and instead go to google.com and type "HOWTO change oil car" and hit "I feel lucky". The result returns no only gives a generic step by step guide of how to change the oil on a car (virtually any car) accompanied by photographs, but it has a free video of how to do it too.
That post was so badly written it was hard to read.
Their loss leader adn then there is insanity. a ram disk? I highly doubt it
A RAM disk is a software construct not a physical device. It doesn't cost anything.
The X-Box 2 is apparently due to ship with ~256+ MB RAM, a RAM disk just means taking part of that and using it to emulate a physical disk (as X-Box 1 games would of course only use 64 MB they wouldn't need the rest, leaving plenty left over for a RAM disk).
The only point to Bc is to preserve the library so the next system will have titles at launch. It helps bridge it. What value do you see in BC for MS?
It seems you just answered that question yourself. Did see how few launch titles there were? If you bothered to read what was written you would see that I've already said only MS are in a position to judge if the time and effort it is worth it for them.
We don't know if they will or not, but we do know it's easily technically possible based on what information is available about the hardware. That you don't understand that that has do to with you having very limited knowledge of the subject being discussed.
With emulation you take a HUGE hit in speed. You may be running windows you your powerbook (I did also in the past), but to do anything but really basic applications you would encounter a massive speed penalty.
Ah this depends on what you are emulating and what you are emulating on. They are proposing a brand new 'high end' CPU along the lines of a three-core 3.5GHz Power PC chip, to emulate a 700 Mhz low end Intel chip (which was already 'low end' even when the X-Box was released). The gross disparity should make this possible easily.
Even today, Virtual PC running on a 1.5+ Ghz G4 is able to emulate a 700 Mhz Intel processor closely (on Mac OS Classic - with OS X the performance has clearly gone through the floor).
Virtual Game Station was really cool as well, but there also you took speed hits because of emulation.
That depends on the hardware you ran it on though. On a low end iMac it did struggle, still not a bad effort given the guys developed in in less than 4 years and had no access to the important design specs of the PlayStation and so had to reverse engineer the functionality. On a decent Power Mac the performance was just fine. The Windows release had even better performance (and was doing an even tricker task - emulating a PowerPC system on an Intel system).
Alright, I'll mention one the gparent forgot.
5. No hard drive.
Unless they pull a memory card RAID (doable, but why bother, and way more expensive) that seems to be a deathblow to any reverse compatability rumors.
I'll be lazy and copy what I've already written about this in another post:
In the case of saved games just write to a memory card or a virtual drive on line (which I suspect they may be planning on doing). If none is present return the function handler can return a simple out of space error, or trap the result and display it's own message.
If it's also need for cache write you could simply write to a ram disk (If it's relying on swap it's got to be a specific reserved amount, given the X-Box doesn't seem to reserve much for that it's not going to need much).
Not to troll, but what are your more than 10 excellent xbox exclusive games? Last time I counted Halo was only working on number 2... Splinter Cell has been ported
The poster said clearly 5-10 X-Box games, not X-Box *exclusive* games. It doesn't matter if they are exclusive or not. Most people will only buy *one* console, and what they will care about is if they can run their own X-Box games they already have on any new console (and/or that they can still buy and sell their old X-Box games, in the same way that PS one games still sell surprisingly well today).
I'd also point out that X-Box versions of certain games are quite a bit better than the other ports avalible, thanks to it's superior hardware.
Also, having to pay royalities on two video cards might bring the price up a bit.
They don't have do. Quite apart from the fact I would think they have bought the rights to the hardware designed for it and so could impliment features using that technology others could not (Microsoft have fairly good lawers and I would have thought they got that one down off the bat), there are no legal issues with translating the instructions from one card on another (it's been done many many times and been proven in court as already pointed out).
Well rebutted? The original 'reasoning' was quite well debunked as already being shown to be possible (in fact I am doing some of those things now).
I stand by my assessment and add the fact that there is no HD as one of your repliers mentions
In the case of saved games just write to a memory card or a virtual drive on line (which I suspect they may be planning on doing). If none is present return the function handler can return a simple out of space error, or trap the result and display it's own message.
If it's just for cache write you could simply write to a ram disk (If it's relying on swap it's got to be a specific reserved amount, given the X-Box doesn't seem to reserve much for that in the region of 512 MB would be more than sufficient I would have thought, and RAM is dirt cheap and increasingly so).
Not hard! I solve more difficult software problems that that before lunch. I can only assume the people who seem to think *that's* a problem don't have to solve these kind of issues themselves.
Have you run emulation latley? for 20 year old games, they run flawlessly. on 15 year old games, almost perfect. on the last decade of game, their shit
Em, did read my post?
The aforementioned Connectix PlayStation emulator ran fine on Both Mac's and PC's *at full speed* and was released in 1999, *less* than four years after the PlayStation was released. There is a similar story for the N64 emulation scene.
If these people managed to write 'pretty good' emulators - good enough to be commercial successes, good enough for Sony to sue them twice, lose and end up buying the rights to the software - and do all that in 4 years, then in 4+ years why the hell would Microsoft *not* be able to write their own near *perfect* emulator, given the much larger number of staff, the fact they *already* own an emulator to make the x86 emulation possible, their enormous budget and *all the plans to the hardware* (which crucially the others did not).
Take into account Moore's Law, the time between release dates, the step up to a considerably more powerful PowerPC chip (this is a very significant point) and it starts to appear a comparatively trivial task.
The only issue here is now long it would take to implement it and if they come to the conclusion that's worth it for them commercially.
It also says that it supports ports to Windows though, and to Mac OS X, as those are the two platforms they have demo'd on (and even though Mac OS X is Unix like the display mananger is obviously quite unique and propriatory).
It's possible there is a 'catch' (and I'm sure there is *some* sort of 'catch') it could be they are using XFree86 on both Windows and Mac OS X. That would seem to make their job a bit easier I would image.
I was going to be nice, but I see the lusers have been out modding you up and now I just want to start slapping people for their unutterable cluelessness.
*INSERT CLUE TO CONTINUE*
1- they changed CPU architectures.
Okay I am trying hard not to laugh here...
Even as I type I am running Intel x86 Linux *and* Microsoft Windows (at the same time, but different instances) on my PowerPC PowerBook.
Not only has this been done many many times (Connectix's Virtual Game Station that allows you to play Playstation games on the PC or Mac for a start, and there are plenty of other emulators that emulate other chips specifically to allow you to play titles for consoles like the N64 on other platforms), but Microsoft *just purchased* the leading software product which emulates x86 on PPC.
2- They changed GPU's and the previous GPU is hevaily heavily copyrighted.
Are you actually suggesting that would make it impossible or illegal? You'd of course be very wrong on both counts. So what's your point?
Someone already released a wrapper to allow you to run the leading Nvidia demo on an ATI system (as would be the case here), not only that but it performed faster on the fastest ATI card at the time compared to the fastest Nvidia card at that time.
As another example I'd again point to Connectix's excellent Playstation emulator for PC and Macintosh (which was tested in the courts, Sony's law suit failed, twice, in the end Sony just bought the technology from them it was that good).
Just to be clear - Connectix where also the makers of the said x86 to PPC emulator that Microsoft just bought.
3- they have only 5-10 games worth playing on Xbox
Not only do I disgreee with you on that given my own game collection, but I think I've established that I don't think your opinon isn't all that informed.
4- Emu of 3d graphics w/o glitches is a dream. Even ps2 had glitches and it included the god damn hardware.
You only have to be good enough, not pixel perfect in every single title. Virtual PC, Virtual Gamestation (released 1999) and a large number of other emulators pull (e.g. UltraHLE, Project64) it off just fine - certainly well enough it would seem to have been proven. Apparently you have been in a cave for the last 5 years.
Microsoft are the origional developers of both products here and they have huge reasources, talented staff and of course an intimate knowledge of both platforms, as well as a full x86 to PowerPC processor emulator (where as teams like Connectix and the UltraHLE developers had to reverse engineer the systems on their own with much smaller teams and reasources and no inside knowledge and they *still* managed to do a great job). In comparison to what teams like that have already done, for Microsoft doing this would be a cakewalk.
Iraq: no nuclear weapons, very weak conventional army, not really a military threat to any of its neighbours
Be sure to tell that to Kuwait, and er, Iran (during Saddams Iraq attack on on which over 1 million people were killed as a result).
Your going to need an IR remote (and receiver) too (and a PSU too, if the Linkworld doesn't comes with one - and it it does I shudder to think of the quality!).
So then, you have, for a whole 1/3 more, a device that's not only uglier but significantly more noisy (both things people dislike in a 'living room' Media Center scenario - the most common use for them that I can see) and it's built from quite likely unreliable parts (certainly not as reliable as a mass produced proven X-Box system I'm sure).
The X-Box is powerful enough to do everything people want in a Media Center, it's *vastly* more powerful than my TiVo for a start. Spending extra money to do the same trivial functions that an X-Box can do seems a pointless waste of money.
I can toally understand both doing it on the cheap and getting an X-Box and spending a grand building a really good home PVR/media center (quality LCD equipped low profile case with appropriate front-mounted buttons, 'slient' PSU/CPU fan system, DVD writer, etc) but building a noisy, ugly shonkey system from dodgy components seems like foolish spending to me.