Actually they took the cool parts of 3 (the user interface) and added them to 2.
That's Winamp 5. It's not a complete rewrite. So the cool parts of 5 (that are not the cool parts of 2) are actually the cool parts of 3.
And I liked the 3, for, about half an hour, before going back to 2. No really, I liked the video window, and to me winamp 5 is the best of both worlds.
If that's true then for Intel is very important to have the compiler that can compile the fastest linux kernel, and to be able to link other software that runs on linux.
Very good way to show the world that linux is more mainstream every day.
I see no other reason to make the compiler binary-compatible with GCC. (Yes, BSD benefits too.)
They could have designed it without any ini-settings, just hard wired values, like compile time defines. It's still much more their product than anyone else's, including ini-modders.
If it were binary game patches to fix these issues, that would be something worth describing as "taking credit".
VirtualPC emulates everything, even a 3d accelerated video card.
So if you have an old game that only runs in Win98, you can install VirtualPC with win98 and install the game there and play. I tested it with Descent Freespace and some other things.
You can't do that in VMWare as it uses a special only-2d-driver. Some applications crash or don't work under VMWare (directX related).
On the other hand, VMWare is faster and has much better networking.
And having seen the speed of the changes in the latest betas of Opera 7.20 I can guess that feature will be ready in a matter of a couple of weeks or less.
I love the idea of have used php which I know well to create our OLAP enabled services.
But there are no available good Open Source OLAP servers (just something in the works with Java). So I'm using ASP which is ugly but has the powerful MS olap server. I don't like to use MS products, but in this case is the one with the most favorable cost/benefit ratio.
Want to increase PHP market share... integrate it with OLAP technologies. Help Open Source OLAP technologies. You will increase marketshare and I will use something nice, stable and open.
The two main toolkits for Python are tk/tcl and wxWindows. wxWin is a big winner here, and is not more known just because Guido van Rossum doesn't know how to use it.
It's being used by Mitch Kapor to create a competitor to MS exchange/outlook called Chandler.
I've seen template bloat in a lot of places, but MI bloat?
Just because something can be done in the language doesn't mean everybody just goes and uses it. You're right that MI is too prone to mistakes, and it can be replaced most of the time by java-like interfaces.
I use C++ because is deterministic, can be used to really big proyects, when it runs is fast as hell (can be faster than C when using inline functions), and because I don't use every shitty feature of the language just because it's there. The right tool for the job can be a subset of C++.
These is the point where teory and practice met. And in theory STL does everything right and good once for all. But in practice there is MFC, Qt, wxWin, and so on for real programs, because STL is still a teoric tool unless you are the writer of the STL itself and know how to debug templates.
I believe that mastering templates is more complex and long than mastering everything else in the C++ language. And that's their main pitfall, despite being absolutely powerfull and even turing complete (just see some entries in ioccc).
I tought the same bout C++ until I found wxWindows
on
Java vs .NET
·
· Score: 1
which is a joy to program in. In a lot of cases is funnier than Java.
Slashdot Mirror
I forgot to mention the feature that made me choose winamp 5 over all others (including iTunes): global hotkeys!
Enjoy them.
Actually they took the cool parts of 3 (the user interface) and added them to 2.
That's Winamp 5. It's not a complete rewrite. So the cool parts of 5 (that are not the cool parts of 2) are actually the cool parts of 3.
And I liked the 3, for, about half an hour, before going back to 2. No really, I liked the video window, and to me winamp 5 is the best of both worlds.
means something to you? :)
So if something is broke because of their decisions they would vastly prefer that no such options are present.
That's why religions exists. If something is wrong there is someone else to blame.
And in that sense, yes, sometimes, people don't want to choose, they want you to choose for them.
Only when options are meaningless, like desktop themes, or colors, they want choice.
Scientology is not a religion but a organized extortion scheme.
Saying it's a political thing it's much more than those criminals deserve.
And Opera is also a nicer Browser :)
If that's true then for Intel is very important to have the compiler that can compile the fastest linux kernel, and to be able to link other software that runs on linux.
Very good way to show the world that linux is more mainstream every day.
I see no other reason to make the compiler binary-compatible with GCC. (Yes, BSD benefits too.)
I usually mark some warnings as errors so that compilations stops when it founds one.
It also runs all regression tests as part of the compilation process. It is not a separate step.
Yes the whole thing takes a minute. But then I am more careful when coding.
It seems from the posts that it's also shit in a lot of european languages.
Taking credit for the ini-modders?
They could have designed it without any ini-settings, just hard wired values, like compile time defines. It's still much more their product than anyone else's, including ini-modders.
If it were binary game patches to fix these issues, that would be something worth describing as "taking credit".
Anyway, I do agree with the rest of your post.
Windows XP Game Advisor requires the use of the Windows XP operating system and the Internet Explorer (version 5.5 or later) browser.
That's really good anime.
VirtualPC emulates everything, even a 3d accelerated video card.
So if you have an old game that only runs in Win98, you can install VirtualPC with win98 and install the game there and play. I tested it with Descent Freespace and some other things.
You can't do that in VMWare as it uses a special only-2d-driver. Some applications crash or don't work under VMWare (directX related).
On the other hand, VMWare is faster and has much better networking.
Both of them can do sound just fine.
Borland can't.
This is not a borland created product, is a very powerful and mature framework that is both open source and bussiness friendly.
Borland builder can be killed, but not wxWindows. I use it with mingw GCC and VC++ and I don't think I will change it anytime soon.
Like the ones in microwave ovens should be able to pass the test. That would be a new market too.
It permits everything in the binary releases, so no developer is held by a weird license.
There is now several projects in source forge using that license and it is aproved by the FSF.
As some slashdotter used in his/her sign:
I hate MS, but I find the GPL as a greater threat.
I do prefer the wxWindows license, and in second place the BSD.
And having seen the speed of the changes in the latest betas of Opera 7.20 I can guess that feature will be ready in a matter of a couple of weeks or less.
I love the idea of have used php which I know well to create our OLAP enabled services.
But there are no available good Open Source OLAP servers (just something in the works with Java). So I'm using ASP which is ugly but has the powerful MS olap server. I don't like to use MS products, but in this case is the one with the most favorable cost/benefit ratio.
Want to increase PHP market share... integrate it with OLAP technologies. Help Open Source OLAP technologies. You will increase marketshare and I will use something nice, stable and open.
I honestly don't think so.
'nuff said.
The two main toolkits for Python are tk/tcl and wxWindows. wxWin is a big winner here, and is not more known just because Guido van Rossum doesn't know how to use it.
It's being used by Mitch Kapor to create a competitor to MS exchange/outlook called Chandler.
I've seen template bloat in a lot of places, but MI bloat?
Just because something can be done in the language doesn't mean everybody just goes and uses it. You're right that MI is too prone to mistakes, and it can be replaced most of the time by java-like interfaces.
I use C++ because is deterministic, can be used to really big proyects, when it runs is fast as hell (can be faster than C when using inline functions), and because I don't use every shitty feature of the language just because it's there. The right tool for the job can be a subset of C++.
These is the point where teory and practice met. And in theory STL does everything right and good once for all. But in practice there is MFC, Qt, wxWin, and so on for real programs, because STL is still a teoric tool unless you are the writer of the STL itself and know how to debug templates.
I believe that mastering templates is more complex and long than mastering everything else in the C++ language. And that's their main pitfall, despite being absolutely powerfull and even turing complete (just see some entries in ioccc).
which is a joy to program in. In a lot of cases is funnier than Java.
But of course, Java is better for some things.