One comment there really drove me up the wall. Carmack admits that it took years and many major revisions to make DirectX 8 into a decent graphics API -- competitive with OpenGL -- but then he waves his hand and dismisses that as merely "water under the bridge" and says people shouldn't harp on it.
The reason that bugs me is because I remember years ago when the whole OpenGL versus Direct3D issue first came up. Somebody wise in the ways of software development (sorry, I don't recall who it was) posted a prediction. He said: Direct3D is pitiful compared to OpenGL. Somewhere several years down the road, after several major revisions, Microsoft will finally get Direct3D to work as well as OpenGL already does today. A few smart developers will use OpenGL, but the vast majority of them will let Microsoft lead them around by the nose for a few years before finally getting basically the same thing -- except without cross-platform portability.
And it happened exactly the way that guy predicted. And I watched it happen, helplessly. The question I have is, why do developers go along with this kind of thing? I mean, are they STUPID? Don't they ever LEARN? John Carmack calls this "water under the bridge". Sure. . . It's all in the past now -- until Microsoft rolls out their next "de facto standard" (dot-net, anyone?) in a half-completed state, expecting developers to sign onto it en masse. Which most of them will, just because it's from Microsoft. Then wait four or five years for Microsoft to get it working right -- and oh, by the way, it only works on M$'s operating system.
NASA doesn't have a demonstrated need for a shuttle replacement? According to one estimate I've heard, it takes 20,000 people to launch a shuttle. Instead of a cheaper way to get into space -- as it was originally intended to be -- it turned out the most expensive. The shuttle's operation is so costly that it's eaten up much of NASA's (continually shrinking) budget, leaving other programs with scraps.
And of course, there's the International Space Station -- made more complex and expensive by the need to launch and assemble many small modules, the shuttle being unable to loft large ones.
To me, all of this adds up to a *pressing* need for something better than the shuttle.
I am on a local ISP, and it's great. Years ago Hometown Computing was the first ISP to provide access here (in central Texas) on a local-call dialup, at a time when I was desperate to get any kind of internet access at all.
When I needed to scan images for my web site, I went down to the htcomp office and borrowed their scanner. The owner of the company was there, he sat down with me and showed me how to operate the software. Is that service, or what?
Well, I have my own scanner now.... Last week I got MMDS high-speed wireless service installed here. Once again, htcomp was the first to offer high-speed service in this area when nobody else (including Sprint) made the effort. MMDS is a new thing, and there were some glitches that had to be ironed out, but the staff worked hard on it and kept in touch with me until it was fixed.
I'm sure you can imagine my loyalty to this company. It really makes me wonder why big ISPs are taking over. If small companies can't make money selling dial-up access for $20 a month, they should charge $25 or $30. It would still be a bargain for the kind of reliable and responsive service that I've had from my ISP. (Heck, I pay more than that for satellite TV.)
Slashdot Mirror
One comment there really drove me up the wall. Carmack admits that it took years and many major revisions to make DirectX 8 into a decent graphics API -- competitive with OpenGL -- but then he waves his hand and dismisses that as merely "water under the bridge" and says people shouldn't harp on it.
The reason that bugs me is because I remember years ago when the whole OpenGL versus Direct3D issue first came up. Somebody wise in the ways of software development (sorry, I don't recall who it was) posted a prediction. He said: Direct3D is pitiful compared to OpenGL. Somewhere several years down the road, after several major revisions, Microsoft will finally get Direct3D to work as well as OpenGL already does today. A few smart developers will use OpenGL, but the vast majority of them will let Microsoft lead them around by the nose for a few years before finally getting basically the same thing -- except without cross-platform portability.
And it happened exactly the way that guy predicted. And I watched it happen, helplessly. The question I have is, why do developers go along with this kind of thing? I mean, are they STUPID? Don't they ever LEARN? John Carmack calls this "water under the bridge". Sure. . . It's all in the past now -- until Microsoft rolls out their next "de facto standard" (dot-net, anyone?) in a half-completed state, expecting developers to sign onto it en masse. Which most of them will, just because it's from Microsoft. Then wait four or five years for Microsoft to get it working right -- and oh, by the way, it only works on M$'s operating system.
I don't get it.
NASA doesn't have a demonstrated need for a shuttle replacement? According to one estimate I've heard, it takes 20,000 people to launch a shuttle. Instead of a cheaper way to get into space -- as it was originally intended to be -- it turned out the most expensive. The shuttle's operation is so costly that it's eaten up much of NASA's (continually shrinking) budget, leaving other programs with scraps. And of course, there's the International Space Station -- made more complex and expensive by the need to launch and assemble many small modules, the shuttle being unable to loft large ones. To me, all of this adds up to a *pressing* need for something better than the shuttle.
I am on a local ISP, and it's great. Years ago Hometown Computing was the first ISP to provide access here (in central Texas) on a local-call dialup, at a time when I was desperate to get any kind of internet access at all.
When I needed to scan images for my web site, I went down to the htcomp office and borrowed their scanner. The owner of the company was there, he sat down with me and showed me how to operate the software. Is that service, or what?
Well, I have my own scanner now.... Last week I got MMDS high-speed wireless service installed here. Once again, htcomp was the first to offer high-speed service in this area when nobody else (including Sprint) made the effort. MMDS is a new thing, and there were some glitches that had to be ironed out, but the staff worked hard on it and kept in touch with me until it was fixed.
I'm sure you can imagine my loyalty to this company. It really makes me wonder why big ISPs are taking over. If small companies can't make money selling dial-up access for $20 a month, they should charge $25 or $30. It would still be a bargain for the kind of reliable and responsive service that I've had from my ISP. (Heck, I pay more than that for satellite TV.)