I've brought up a couple times in our meetings that we should at least try to see if we can easily compile our code under Linux with Winelib.
Unfortunately, it's far from trivial to do.
No offense, but if that's the case, you have problems.
Targetting Linux has many more advantages than just targetting Linux per se. It forces you to write cleaner, more portable and more modular code. This is A Good Thing (TM) as it will make your life easier when/if you try to port to GameCube, XBox, PS2, etc.
Carmack made similar remarks, but I can no longer find that URL.
Sure, we have OpenGL, but with the release of DirectX 8, the cross-platform API just doesn't cut it anymore. Lacking universal support for vertex and pixel shaders, developers are forced into the situation where they can either reduce the quality of their titles by ignoring the improved features that the newer releases of DirectX offer, or by ignoring Linux.
What a crock. With OpenGL extensions, you can use the latest bang-whiz features of nearly any card out there, often even before it is available in DirectX.
Take a look here for all the extensions available to you (including shaders) right now.
Take a look
here for NVidia's OpenGL SDK which includes, yup, vertex shaders.
In the DX8 world developer's will also need to cripple their software if the card doesn't support the shaders in hardware. So I really fail to see what the argument is here.
European governments have recognised this for sometime, and take care of these issues for them by implementing strong censorship of violence. Hence there is little violence in European countries
Japanese cinema is loaded with violence, yet there is little overall violence in Japan.
If the IETF was already independently working on a system similar that which has been patented, doesn't that immediately either constitute prior art or demonstrate the obviousness of the patent?
Rather than emulation efforts, I'd rather see people spending their time writing e-mails, filling out surveys (like this one for NBA Live!, for example), and filling out petitions (like this one) telling publishers that you want Linux games. "Putting your money where your mouth is", so to speak, is also a good way to urge publishers along: go buy some
Loki products, for example.
Legally they cannot charge anything for it, so they try and make it up by charging for paper, shrinkwrap and support
You are sadly misinformed. Check out
Selling Free Software. Even RMS says selling free software is OK.
Also given the fact that anyone can simply download the software and read the book online, something of a disincentive to even buy the shrinkwrap.
Free MP3's on Napster, and yet CD sales are up.
How does this figure into your argument?
Linux should be developed along with other products..such as how ibm distributes servers with linux on them. They make the money from the server, not the software
That's one model. Service + Support is another model. It remains to be seen how each model will fare.
Don't make investment choices based on this post.:)
On that we agree... in fact, don't make any sort of decision from what you read on/.:)
While I don't claim to fully understand all the numbers and how a loss can somehow be masaged into "break even", that list of major deals is quite impressive. If they can keep up that sort of momentum, then "real" profitability (like, the sort even I can understand) can't be too far away.
Excuse me?! when did you die and come back with all this knowledge?
She is saying that this represents something different from all the other known fossils from that time period, not that we suddenly know everything. Duh.
Scientists BELIEVE their theory of evolution to be the unmitigated truth, no question in their minds.
Actually evolution is a fact of nature, observed countless times. That's why it is no longer questioned. As far as theories go, that's still a fairly lively issue of debate (natural selection, punctuated equilibria, how much of a role does mutation play? etc).
"No educated person any longer questions the validity of the so-called theory of evolution, which we now know to be a simple fact." -- Ernst Mayr, Professor of Zoology Emeritus, Harvard University (Scientific American July 2000 page 83)
Adam and Eve are ignored for the same reason that the Giant Tortoise that laid the egg that became the Universe is ignored.... they are a myth.
As for the absence of a fossil record... huh?
The sheer numbers of fossils uncovered in the last few centuries is staggering. I think what you're really trying to say is "that there are no transitional forms"... that is handily refuted at Transitional Fossils FAQ
The semantic meaning of the word evolution means, ?a gradual process in which something changes into a better and/or more complex form?
Acutally, if you stopped at the word "changes", you'd be cake. The fact of biological evolution is simply that things change: whether that change is "better" or not is irrelevent to the fact that things do change over time. In other contexts "evolution" may carry the semantics of being "better", but not in biology.
Yes, I agree, the general public are confused about the terms "evolution" and "natural selection". Just remember that "natural selection is a theory to explain the fact of evolution" and you'll be way ahead of the curve.
I said that there's a 50% chance that it's true, and a 50% chance that it's a lie.
I think "that it's false" would be better than "it's a lie".
Anyways, that isn't what you said in your original post. You said (paraphrasing) "either it is true or it isn't". Now you're saying something else. If you had said this in the first place, we'd be in agreement.
Evolution is a fact of nature. It is the cornerstone of modern biology. "Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of biology" said Theodosius Dobzhansky. To say "there is not such thing as evolution supported in science" is just, well, ignorant.
Natural selection is a theory that explains the fact of evolution. This is the theory that most biologists support since it is most consistent with observed evidence.
Think of it this way:
Fact Massive bodies attract.
Theory to explain fact Gravity.
Fact Biological "things" evolve.
Theory to explain fact Natural selection.
If you are still confused about the issue, check these out:
Slashdot Mirror
Ryan T. Sammartino
Ryan T. Sammartino
And of course the DX3, DX5, DX7, DX8 interfaces never changed eh? :)
Anyway, who knows what the future of OpenGL is? It doesn't have anywhere near the support it used to.
Eh? NVidia loves OpenGL. Alias|Wavefront loves OpenGL. etc
As for "crippling" your software to fit hardware specs, well, you always have to do that, whether you use OpenGL or DirectX or any other API.
Er, yeah, that was my whole point.
of course, Dx has always been more flexible in making assumptions involving synchronicity and state, so this is only true if one really wants Linux
Or GameCube, which will have an OpenGL-like API (according to these guys, and some other links I've since lost).
Ryan T. Sammartino
Targetting Linux has many more advantages than just targetting Linux per se. It forces you to write cleaner, more portable and more modular code. This is A Good Thing (TM) as it will make your life easier when/if you try to port to GameCube, XBox, PS2, etc.
Carmack made similar remarks, but I can no longer find that URL.
Ryan T. Sammartino
Ryan T. Sammartino
Take a look here for all the extensions available to you (including shaders) right now.
Take a look here for NVidia's OpenGL SDK which includes, yup, vertex shaders.
In the DX8 world developer's will also need to cripple their software if the card doesn't support the shaders in hardware. So I really fail to see what the argument is here.
Ryan T. Sammartino
Japanese cinema is loaded with violence, yet there is little overall violence in Japan.
How does that figure into your argument?
Ryan T. Sammartino
Ryan T. Sammartino
Ryan T. Sammartino
I guess you:
Ryan T. Sammartino
Rather than emulation efforts, I'd rather see people spending their time writing e-mails, filling out surveys (like this one for NBA Live!, for example), and filling out petitions (like this one) telling publishers that you want Linux games. "Putting your money where your mouth is", so to speak, is also a good way to urge publishers along: go buy some Loki products, for example.
Trust me, such things do get attention.
Ryan T. Sammartino
You can download code and patches for wine right now. And I've seen (but lost the link to) screenshots of Alice running with their system.
Far from vapourware :)
Ryan T. Sammartino
Ryan T. Sammartino
You are sadly misinformed. Check out Selling Free Software. Even RMS says selling free software is OK.
Also given the fact that anyone can simply download the software and read the book online, something of a disincentive to even buy the shrinkwrap.
Free MP3's on Napster, and yet CD sales are up. How does this figure into your argument?
Linux should be developed along with other products..such as how ibm distributes servers with linux on them. They make the money from the server, not the software
That's one model. Service + Support is another model. It remains to be seen how each model will fare.
Don't make investment choices based on this post. :)
On that we agree... in fact, don't make any sort of decision from what you read on /. :)
Ryan T. Sammartino
I don't claim to be qualified to understand all the mumbo jumbo, but it's food for thought at least.
Ryan T. Sammartino
Ryan T. Sammartino
She is saying that this represents something different from all the other known fossils from that time period, not that we suddenly know everything. Duh.
Scientists BELIEVE their theory of evolution to be the unmitigated truth, no question in their minds.
Actually evolution is a fact of nature, observed countless times. That's why it is no longer questioned. As far as theories go, that's still a fairly lively issue of debate (natural selection, punctuated equilibria, how much of a role does mutation play? etc).
Ryan T. Sammartino
Adam and Eve are ignored for the same reason that the Giant Tortoise that laid the egg that became the Universe is ignored.... they are a myth.
As for the absence of a fossil record... huh? The sheer numbers of fossils uncovered in the last few centuries is staggering. I think what you're really trying to say is "that there are no transitional forms"... that is handily refuted at Transitional Fossils FAQ
Ryan T. Sammartino
Acutally, if you stopped at the word "changes", you'd be cake. The fact of biological evolution is simply that things change: whether that change is "better" or not is irrelevent to the fact that things do change over time. In other contexts "evolution" may carry the semantics of being "better", but not in biology.
Yes, I agree, the general public are confused about the terms "evolution" and "natural selection". Just remember that "natural selection is a theory to explain the fact of evolution" and you'll be way ahead of the curve.
Ryan T. Sammartino
An honest question. I cannot give an adequate treatment of the subject here, other than to direct you to:
"Getting Off The Ground", Chapter 4, Climbing Mount Improbable , Richard Dawkins, 1996, W. W. Norton.
That chapter lucidly describes the evolution of flight in several species.
Well worth the read... pick it up.
Ryan T. Sammartino
I think "that it's false" would be better than "it's a lie".
Anyways, that isn't what you said in your original post. You said (paraphrasing) "either it is true or it isn't". Now you're saying something else. If you had said this in the first place, we'd be in agreement.
Ryan T. Sammartino
Dammit :)
Ryan T. Sammartino
Evolution is a fact of nature. It is the cornerstone of modern biology. "Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of biology" said Theodosius Dobzhansky. To say "there is not such thing as evolution supported in science" is just, well, ignorant.
Natural selection is a theory that explains the fact of evolution. This is the theory that most biologists support since it is most consistent with observed evidence.
Think of it this way:
Fact Massive bodies attract.
Theory to explain fact Gravity.
Fact Biological "things" evolve.
Theory to explain fact Natural selection.
If you are still confused about the issue, check these out:
- Talk Origins
- The World of Dawkins
That should be enough to get you started.Ryan T. Sammartino
Ryan T. Sammartino
Ryan T. Sammartino