Sounds like a key feature of DirectX 11.1, the stereoscopic 3D rendering, is a feature of WDDM 1.2 and given WDDM 1.2 is only available in Windows 8, that kinda ties DirectX 11.1 to it as well.
Windows 7 uses WDDM 1.1. Could Microsoft safely update this to version 1.2 such that DirectX 11.1 could be made available for it as well? Probably (Microsoft developed it all, so there's no reason why they couldn't). Would it be a worthwhile investment for them to do so? Probably not; they're having enough trouble getting people to want to use Windows 8 as it is - forcing people to shift to it in any way possible, no matter how slimey, is not above them.
I doubt it'll matter much though - you'd have to be particularly crazy to develop a game that requires DirectX 11.1 any time soon. especially given the backlash against Windows 8.;
Well I suppose I must know how to use Windows better if I choose malware-free software. I will admit this is a skill that comes from experience, but I have a LOT of Windows experience and see little point in switch from something that works so damn well. Windows 8? It can go to hell. Hopefully Metro fails and Windows 9 allows for a more traditional desktop operating system.
I actually donated to Linux Mint about a month ago, and yet I've given up Linux (again) for Windows 7 (again) due to a lack of comparable software (no, 80% functionality isn't good enough compared to the 100% I get with Windows unfortunately). So I feel kinda stupid for donating and yet still abandoning the operating system. Then again, I do appreciate Linux on an intellectual level so hopefully it helps.
Well I wasn't aware of this issue before I purchased it, and it's not a big enough deal to go through the effort to return it (particularly since it was bought online). I mean, it's just something that I see as a negative with a product that overall is fine for my purposes. But aren't I allowed to vent just a little bit?
FWIW - I'm part of the engineering community (FPGA and embedded systems developer), but I don't want to have to hack or reverse something just to get what I want, even if I can. As for the type of posters on Slashdot - well, my signature I hope explains how I feel about the quality of posts here (sometimes anyway).
Sounds like you're suggesting that if it wasn't mandatory to require accounts for the remote, then it's likely less people would register and hence the device database would be less populated than it already is.
I will concede that perhaps there is some benefit in mandatory registration for a programmable remote. But only because of its specific purpose to control any number of devices from many different manufacturers. A mouse requires no such ability.
I apologise for the roughness/profanity in my previous post. But I just want you to understand - your post basically turns the onus on the customer rather than the company to provide what is missing (i.e. the ability to program the remote without requiring access to Logitech). It's belittling because it defuses any complains anyone can have with, well, anything.
It's the same damn problem I see time and time again in the Linux community - does such-and-such open source program lack functionality already existent in a Windows program? Don't complain, learn programming and improve the code yourself! It's open source! No, I think not. I'd rather go back to Windows where I don't have to expend the extra time for no real benefit apart from being able to say "I run Linux". And then people like yourself get angry because they can't understand why people don't want to expend their valuable spare time in performing such a task compared to, say, having sex or playing games.
Your comment doesn't help because it makes the user appear like he's complaining about something that could be made just a bit better. As if they shouldn't be complaining at all, regardless of whether it's PRACTICAL for the user to have to make the changes themselves. Maybe you've been a geek for too long. I'm trying to avoid losing touch with how regular folks work myself.
Not at the moment. The other issue with this remote is that there is a slight lag between when you press a button and when it sends out the IR code. People have been experimenting with the delay settings of the remote, but there seems to be a minimum delay of about 200ms between button push and transmission. Seems to be due to the remote's processor being a bit slow in creating the required code after each button press.
You really think I want to go to that effort? Just because it's technically possible with a lot of work, doesn't mean it should be necessary in the first place. Your criticism is exactly the same reason why people avoid Linux like the plague - not everyone wants to have to be a fucking geek to get things done. And it shouldn't be necessary for them to do so. It's a fucking consumer product.
I didn't know the history of the Harmony line, so I always appreciate having my ignorance corrected.
Having said that, I am aware of how Logitech's database of codes is continually updated for newer models and devices (as I said in my post). But this shouldn't mean that the user needs a mandatory account with Logitech for the database to be used by a native application. There's no technical reason that I can see for not having the extra functionality OPTIONAL, rather than required.
I'm also not really suggesting some conspiracy issue here either. I just have a healthy distrust over tying myself into online services when they shouldn't be necessary to obtain basic functionality. There have been too many cases (such as the one in the article) where said services aren't available when the user actually needs them the most. It's the same reason I don't buy games with Steam and prefer DRM-free stuff like GOG.
I recently purchased a Logitech Harmony 700 programmable remote to use on my HTPC (it's a highly recommended remote by XBMC users). The problem however is that there are only two ways to configure it:
(1) The official way is that you go to http://www.myharmony.com/ and register an account. Once done, you log into the site and it opens up a Silverlight interface (that's right, Silverlight - not HTML/HTML5, not even Flash, but a rarely used Microsoft plugin who's Linux equivalent, Moonlight, doesn't work properly anyway) that allows some coarse configuration but not much in the way of fine grained options.
(2) The less official way is to download the Logitech control application (Windows only, of course), which still requires an account. It also feels very much like a web application in a native window since it's still slow as it loads up various pages from the Internet anyway. But at least you get full control using it.
Point is that in both scenarios, you MUST have an account to program the remote. Now of course having this data available in the "cloud" means that should you reformat or otherwise need to reconfigure your remote after a reinstall of the software, you can still obtain your carefully-configured settings. The other idea is that Logitech have a database of pre-configured devices that can be uploaded to the remote which is continaully updated with newer models, but it's not like the native application couldn't just obtain that info without requiring an account.
Logitech deliberately made it so that they must know how your remote is being used. Not that they'll work out anything interesting with it, except perhaps what devices I use and how I use them. But fuck me, this is not a good direction to go with - requiring registration over one's hardware before it can be used fully.
You'd deliberately going on a tangent about a movie quote I made rather than focus on my point - which is, a walled garden doesn't impact most people and the benefits for MOST people (but not even myself ffs!) far outweight the disadvantages. Why are you obsessed with having the last word?
You should know by now that the only thing accomplished by dealing with a FOSS fanboy is an increase in blood pressure. Let them live in their own little reality - so long as it's insulated from the rest of us, they can be as deluded as they want to be.:)
Most people won't be fully victimized, that's the point. Besides, I've tried the ultimate open platform (Linux), and I continue to go back to Windows because practical concerns trump everything else, in the world we live in anyway.
Also, what is it with geeks always taking things to extremes and not understanding balanace? Stallman is a stereotypically hippy geek in appearance and behavior, I argue that dressing and acting a bit more presentable (nothing huge, just a bit of effort) would ultimately improve the ability to present his message, and I have two replies assuming I mean he should dress like some business type on Wall Street. Neat, clean, smart dress does wonders to help remove all distractions someone has when talking to them about something important. Only geeks and nerds fail to understand this rather critical facet about how humans work.
Unlike Jobs, Elon Musk seems like a nice guy. With any luck he can show how to be a pioneering leader in the technology sphere without having to be a dick at the same time.
Cypher from The Matrix put it very simply: "Ignorance is bliss". We live, we die. Might as well have comfort from as many things as possible until we become worm food. Most people will not likely not encounter the issues that a walled garden presents, but reap all the benefits. I was cursed to be a geek and so cannot accept this, but sometimes I wish I could.
Ah, Stallman. He's full of wisdom but continually misses the most important thing about trying to get your message across - appearances matter.
He seems to believe that his message is sufficiently important such that he does not not need to dress, groom and act in an appropriate manner. But humans are visual and social creatures - the best orators and presenters know this. His audience is generally the same types of folks - free/open-source fans and/or curious techies. But even they can be repulsed when your presenter is eating stuff off his toes.
Turn the ads off then. There's an option in the Skype settings to do so (think it's around Notifications somewhere). Old versions just expose you to security vulnerability that are fixed in newer versions, not to mention older protocols and lower quality codecs.
At this point I'd like to think that anyone who's still paying subscriptions to this place is a fool. It's not like their money is being used to uphold some standards in quality.
What a fucking douche you are. Do you really think Windows users (i.e. most of the computing world, including those where I work in which we work with cutting-edge hardware) are all idiots? Either I'm being trolled or you reminded me why I don't want to be associated with you types.
In fact, I'm not going to bother with the Linux transition at all. I enjoy being an idiot because everyone else is too.:D
Don't be patronizing with me dude. Most people who've used Windows for long enough learn what behavior causes one to become infected, and hence learns what NOT to do (assuming they're sufficiently tech literate). To show I'm not ignorant, I'll expand in that I know that files in Linux, by default, do not have the +x (executable) flag set, and hence newly downloaded binaries or scripts or whatever specifically require extra steps to run, which can help with avoiding undesirable things from running. But if you want infect someone, just get them to add something from a repo or follow some commands. You can't AV against human ignorrance.
Also, if your AV is waking you up in the middle of the night, CHANGE THE FUCKING OPTION! Why are you blaming Window and not your AV?
I'm actually in the process of moving from Windows to Linux (Mint specifically) because of the direct Microsoft is taking things, but Jesus it's as if you don't know how to use a computer and prefer showing off your ignorance by being a Linux user. Am I gonna turn into people like you by using Linux as well?
Why do you blame Windows for that though? Once the computer has been suspended the hardware takes control over when it wakes up. If it resumes from suspend randomly in Windows then it should be doing so in Linux too.
FWIW, whatever AV you've got installed, uninstall that crap and install Microsoft Security Essentials. Free and light, and no-one has a bad word to say about it except the makers of all other AV.
Slashdot Mirror
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Display_Driver_Model#WDDM_1.2
Sounds like a key feature of DirectX 11.1, the stereoscopic 3D rendering, is a feature of WDDM 1.2 and given WDDM 1.2 is only available in Windows 8, that kinda ties DirectX 11.1 to it as well.
Windows 7 uses WDDM 1.1. Could Microsoft safely update this to version 1.2 such that DirectX 11.1 could be made available for it as well? Probably (Microsoft developed it all, so there's no reason why they couldn't). Would it be a worthwhile investment for them to do so? Probably not; they're having enough trouble getting people to want to use Windows 8 as it is - forcing people to shift to it in any way possible, no matter how slimey, is not above them.
I doubt it'll matter much though - you'd have to be particularly crazy to develop a game that requires DirectX 11.1 any time soon. especially given the backlash against Windows 8.;
Amusingly enough, if one takes your post and your sig and swaps the order around (plus a little editing), you get this:
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
r2d2 falls into a deep sleep...
Well I suppose I must know how to use Windows better if I choose malware-free software. I will admit this is a skill that comes from experience, but I have a LOT of Windows experience and see little point in switch from something that works so damn well. Windows 8? It can go to hell. Hopefully Metro fails and Windows 9 allows for a more traditional desktop operating system.
I actually donated to Linux Mint about a month ago, and yet I've given up Linux (again) for Windows 7 (again) due to a lack of comparable software (no, 80% functionality isn't good enough compared to the 100% I get with Windows unfortunately). So I feel kinda stupid for donating and yet still abandoning the operating system. Then again, I do appreciate Linux on an intellectual level so hopefully it helps.
Well I wasn't aware of this issue before I purchased it, and it's not a big enough deal to go through the effort to return it (particularly since it was bought online). I mean, it's just something that I see as a negative with a product that overall is fine for my purposes. But aren't I allowed to vent just a little bit?
FWIW - I'm part of the engineering community (FPGA and embedded systems developer), but I don't want to have to hack or reverse something just to get what I want, even if I can. As for the type of posters on Slashdot - well, my signature I hope explains how I feel about the quality of posts here (sometimes anyway).
Sounds like you're suggesting that if it wasn't mandatory to require accounts for the remote, then it's likely less people would register and hence the device database would be less populated than it already is.
I will concede that perhaps there is some benefit in mandatory registration for a programmable remote. But only because of its specific purpose to control any number of devices from many different manufacturers. A mouse requires no such ability.
I apologise for the roughness/profanity in my previous post. But I just want you to understand - your post basically turns the onus on the customer rather than the company to provide what is missing (i.e. the ability to program the remote without requiring access to Logitech). It's belittling because it defuses any complains anyone can have with, well, anything.
It's the same damn problem I see time and time again in the Linux community - does such-and-such open source program lack functionality already existent in a Windows program? Don't complain, learn programming and improve the code yourself! It's open source! No, I think not. I'd rather go back to Windows where I don't have to expend the extra time for no real benefit apart from being able to say "I run Linux". And then people like yourself get angry because they can't understand why people don't want to expend their valuable spare time in performing such a task compared to, say, having sex or playing games.
Your comment doesn't help because it makes the user appear like he's complaining about something that could be made just a bit better. As if they shouldn't be complaining at all, regardless of whether it's PRACTICAL for the user to have to make the changes themselves. Maybe you've been a geek for too long. I'm trying to avoid losing touch with how regular folks work myself.
Not at the moment. The other issue with this remote is that there is a slight lag between when you press a button and when it sends out the IR code. People have been experimenting with the delay settings of the remote, but there seems to be a minimum delay of about 200ms between button push and transmission. Seems to be due to the remote's processor being a bit slow in creating the required code after each button press.
You really think I want to go to that effort? Just because it's technically possible with a lot of work, doesn't mean it should be necessary in the first place. Your criticism is exactly the same reason why people avoid Linux like the plague - not everyone wants to have to be a fucking geek to get things done. And it shouldn't be necessary for them to do so. It's a fucking consumer product.
I didn't know the history of the Harmony line, so I always appreciate having my ignorance corrected.
Having said that, I am aware of how Logitech's database of codes is continually updated for newer models and devices (as I said in my post). But this shouldn't mean that the user needs a mandatory account with Logitech for the database to be used by a native application. There's no technical reason that I can see for not having the extra functionality OPTIONAL, rather than required.
I'm also not really suggesting some conspiracy issue here either. I just have a healthy distrust over tying myself into online services when they shouldn't be necessary to obtain basic functionality. There have been too many cases (such as the one in the article) where said services aren't available when the user actually needs them the most. It's the same reason I don't buy games with Steam and prefer DRM-free stuff like GOG.
I recently purchased a Logitech Harmony 700 programmable remote to use on my HTPC (it's a highly recommended remote by XBMC users). The problem however is that there are only two ways to configure it:
(1) The official way is that you go to http://www.myharmony.com/ and register an account. Once done, you log into the site and it opens up a Silverlight interface (that's right, Silverlight - not HTML/HTML5, not even Flash, but a rarely used Microsoft plugin who's Linux equivalent, Moonlight, doesn't work properly anyway) that allows some coarse configuration but not much in the way of fine grained options.
(2) The less official way is to download the Logitech control application (Windows only, of course), which still requires an account. It also feels very much like a web application in a native window since it's still slow as it loads up various pages from the Internet anyway. But at least you get full control using it.
Point is that in both scenarios, you MUST have an account to program the remote. Now of course having this data available in the "cloud" means that should you reformat or otherwise need to reconfigure your remote after a reinstall of the software, you can still obtain your carefully-configured settings. The other idea is that Logitech have a database of pre-configured devices that can be uploaded to the remote which is continaully updated with newer models, but it's not like the native application couldn't just obtain that info without requiring an account.
Logitech deliberately made it so that they must know how your remote is being used. Not that they'll work out anything interesting with it, except perhaps what devices I use and how I use them. But fuck me, this is not a good direction to go with - requiring registration over one's hardware before it can be used fully.
You'd deliberately going on a tangent about a movie quote I made rather than focus on my point - which is, a walled garden doesn't impact most people and the benefits for MOST people (but not even myself ffs!) far outweight the disadvantages. Why are you obsessed with having the last word?
You should know by now that the only thing accomplished by dealing with a FOSS fanboy is an increase in blood pressure. Let them live in their own little reality - so long as it's insulated from the rest of us, they can be as deluded as they want to be. :)
Most people won't be fully victimized, that's the point. Besides, I've tried the ultimate open platform (Linux), and I continue to go back to Windows because practical concerns trump everything else, in the world we live in anyway.
Also, what is it with geeks always taking things to extremes and not understanding balanace? Stallman is a stereotypically hippy geek in appearance and behavior, I argue that dressing and acting a bit more presentable (nothing huge, just a bit of effort) would ultimately improve the ability to present his message, and I have two replies assuming I mean he should dress like some business type on Wall Street. Neat, clean, smart dress does wonders to help remove all distractions someone has when talking to them about something important. Only geeks and nerds fail to understand this rather critical facet about how humans work.
Do people enjoy your company if you resort to sarcasm in the flesh? Or do you only act this way because I'm just some guy on the Internet?
... should learn to write smaller summaries.
Unlike Jobs, Elon Musk seems like a nice guy. With any luck he can show how to be a pioneering leader in the technology sphere without having to be a dick at the same time.
Cypher from The Matrix put it very simply: "Ignorance is bliss". We live, we die. Might as well have comfort from as many things as possible until we become worm food. Most people will not likely not encounter the issues that a walled garden presents, but reap all the benefits. I was cursed to be a geek and so cannot accept this, but sometimes I wish I could.
What you see as a potential vulnerability, most people (but not I) see it as a reasonable compromise. Which is why Apple is so successful.
Ah, Stallman. He's full of wisdom but continually misses the most important thing about trying to get your message across - appearances matter.
He seems to believe that his message is sufficiently important such that he does not not need to dress, groom and act in an appropriate manner. But humans are visual and social creatures - the best orators and presenters know this. His audience is generally the same types of folks - free/open-source fans and/or curious techies. But even they can be repulsed when your presenter is eating stuff off his toes.
Turn the ads off then. There's an option in the Skype settings to do so (think it's around Notifications somewhere). Old versions just expose you to security vulnerability that are fixed in newer versions, not to mention older protocols and lower quality codecs.
At this point I'd like to think that anyone who's still paying subscriptions to this place is a fool. It's not like their money is being used to uphold some standards in quality.
What a fucking douche you are. Do you really think Windows users (i.e. most of the computing world, including those where I work in which we work with cutting-edge hardware) are all idiots? Either I'm being trolled or you reminded me why I don't want to be associated with you types.
In fact, I'm not going to bother with the Linux transition at all. I enjoy being an idiot because everyone else is too. :D
Don't be patronizing with me dude. Most people who've used Windows for long enough learn what behavior causes one to become infected, and hence learns what NOT to do (assuming they're sufficiently tech literate). To show I'm not ignorant, I'll expand in that I know that files in Linux, by default, do not have the +x (executable) flag set, and hence newly downloaded binaries or scripts or whatever specifically require extra steps to run, which can help with avoiding undesirable things from running. But if you want infect someone, just get them to add something from a repo or follow some commands. You can't AV against human ignorrance.
Also, if your AV is waking you up in the middle of the night, CHANGE THE FUCKING OPTION! Why are you blaming Window and not your AV?
I'm actually in the process of moving from Windows to Linux (Mint specifically) because of the direct Microsoft is taking things, but Jesus it's as if you don't know how to use a computer and prefer showing off your ignorance by being a Linux user. Am I gonna turn into people like you by using Linux as well?
Why do you blame Windows for that though? Once the computer has been suspended the hardware takes control over when it wakes up. If it resumes from suspend randomly in Windows then it should be doing so in Linux too.
FWIW, whatever AV you've got installed, uninstall that crap and install Microsoft Security Essentials. Free and light, and no-one has a bad word to say about it except the makers of all other AV.