That's not true. On the xbox all the dev sees is "there is x space on the hard drive". The user then has to go to a seperate menu outside of the game to copy from the HD to a card. That is what the parent was complaining about.
I'm sorry but Gartner? These are the same people who said the AIDs virus wasn't a big deal and was overhyped. (Before I get modded troll, it really is true)
Google does more business in advertising than any company except clearchannel. No, Google doesn't make TV shows and doesn't make magazines. The fact that their main value is in their index doesn't make that contribution somehow less important than TV shows and magazines. Their index has changed the way millions use the internet and have actually made the content therein much easier to access and navigate. Did they write this content themselves? No, but they have made it usable.
No one is saying free speech trumps everything. What they are saying is that an NDA between you and someone else should have no effect on me, even if I know about it. I wasn't a party to the contract, if I get information forbidden under the contract from someone who was a part of it I should not be liable at all. I never agreed to any contract. Also you have a slight problem that if we took your view of privacy we would basically create in a lot of instances a new legal equivalent of a patent that lasts til... infinity.
Invalidating those laws wouldn't have that much of an effect simply because most of the works under them have already expired. All that it would do is any work which currently is under copyright because of a past extention that was inacted after it was already copyrighted would fall out of copyright. This only makes sense anyway; a retroactive extension cannot be justified.
They did, but it gets compiled into the binaries. When you compile something... general it gets converted to assembly at some stage. So no, it isn't hand coded, but it is still there in the binary.
"Nothing. Average users won't notice a thing. OSX has been running on x86 secretly for 5 years, and according to apple, its extremly easy to port software," oh nice, according to Apple. Do you think we would ever here, according to Apple, that it wasn't? I'm not saying that just because Apple could embellish this point means that they did. All I'm saying is that it is pretty worthless to even mention. Of course they are going to say it is easy--whether it really is or not. Dealing with endianess is a pain and x86 is one of the only architectures still holding out on the little-endian way.
It probably won't have to be. Intel is ditching the current P4 design in order to bring the success of the technology behind their mobile offerings to the desktop. If you haven't noticed, their mobile offerings (when compared with their desktop offerings) themselves dispel the MHz myth. But I did like your post, what with Apple being famous for a certain commercial in 1984 about 1984 and all.
I guess you don't own a laptop. There are all kinds of issues getting the graphics drivers to work stably (for instance with an nvidia card if you use nvidia drivers closing the lid and opening it again completely borks the display on many many laptops, some of them can't even turn the screen off when you close the lid, killing your backlight). Many wintel modems don't even work. Strange problems occur with wireless cards. If you get the right hardware, yes it is stable as hell. But the whole point was that with a huge diversity of hardware it is hard to get stability on anything and that is still true of linux.
You don't understand his point. Open Office hasn't been ported to Cocoa or Carbon. It runs on X11 on Mac. It runs now. His point was that switching to Intel isn't going to help make Open Office run well (or at least seamless) on Mac OS X, it will still be an X11 app. The parent seemed to imply that the switch to x86 would make tons of linux apps run much better. This is only true for stuff which runs other x86 code (vmware and wine), and for closed source apps which currently need x86 emulation to run.
Hi. Slashdot won't let me do ASCII art so you'll have to use your imagination. It isn't that difficult. Consider a slope underwater. You go to the bottom of the slope, and slowly work your way up, decompressing along the way. Some people call this a competent dive plan. There are situations where there is something deep down you really want to see and there is no upward slope to keep you viewing interesting things, well then this device won't help to much with those, or at least with the boredom of decompressing during those. But if you use a little bit of your brain you can easily see that this device isn't something that you will be able to sucessfully argue is "worthless" when you are only given the brief knowledge you get in an article like this. You aren't taking it down on technical merits, just on some crazy reasoning under which nothing can ever please you.
Well intel has tons of money for R&D and yet they have to stick to x86 because of backwards compatibility. So if the same fab techniques, etc. that intel can afford to develop and use on x86 could be used instead on a clean architecture like Power then we would see tremendous improvements. If only intel could shed that backwards compatibility requirement it would produce something truely revolutionary. THIS WHOLE POST WAS A JOKE JUST LIKE (AND BECAUSE OF) ITANIUM.
Who really cares if a [post] is a [complaint about a]dupe? You are not forced to read it, just skip it and go on to the next one. People that feel the need to point out [the idea that complaints about] dupes [add nothing to the discussion] are just as useless as the grammar/spelling nazis. If you really have nothing to add to the discussion and are just going to whine, why post at all?
Ok this is one of the most wrong posts I've ever read. I don't know what crazy fictional Orwell government you under but 2 + 2 is not 5. Consider this: no headphones plugged in. Then you have just air between the contacts, and that has a super high resistance right? So by your logic having nothing plugged in uses more power than having the iPod earbuds plugged in?
Likewise how about if you just had a small length of wire (an eletrical short) connecting the contacts, that would have an extremely low resistance right? Metal wire is known for its conductivity and not its resistivity I thought... hang on I'm checking with a nearby toddler. Yep he confirmed it.
"(Probably don't have to explain this on/., but lower ohms = lower resistance = less power.)" I don't know which is worse. The fact that you said you didn't have to explain it here or the fact that you didn't even go on to explain it (you just made a blind assertion).
#1 problem is not the looks. It is the trademark violation. Granted this is implicit the name of the poject itself and not just the logo. GPLFlash needs to change its name if it ever wants to be taken seriously and at the same time stay out of trouble. Otherwise as soon as it starts working well again it will be slammed with a ceast and desist--probably no lawsuit since it isn't really going to cost Macrodobe money (it isn't a Flash editor), but definitely a cease and desist because to keep a trademark you have to protect it.
"Spoken like someone who doesn't play NFL/football games, but likes to read online." I admitted to the first half of that and my posting on slashdot necessitates the second half. My post was a little extreme in its criticism of the unchanging nature of these franchises. I haven't played these games in years but I do know for a fact that back on super nintendo the Madden games were just series of roster changes along with very very minor improvements. I admittedly don't know enough about the current state of them, but by the same token you know too much.
As such a huge fan I don't think you will argue that a change which the average person playing really doesn't notice is infact a huge difference to you. I'm wrong about the extent to which I said they don't change but I also believe you are wrong about the extent to which they do.
They don't do it to stop piracy; at least that's not the main reason. They do it to prevent third parties from making games and not paying up to Sony for the priviledge. For instance when Sega used to have its systems require that games did a little unlock sequence that played the Sega logo do you think they did so to prevent piracy? Not whatsoever, if you were willing to break copyright law you would be willing to break trademark law. They did so simply to keep third parties paying massive royalties. The courts ruled that an invalid use of trademark law, and also with similar lockout systems an invalid use of copyright law. Lexmark tried the same thing with toner cartridges and the district court (though not yet, and perhaps never, the Supreme Court) relied heavily on these past rulings in rendering its decision. So what these companies have settled on is crytographic signing of the binaries.
This has certainly worked well for the console industry. Essentially trademark and copyright didn't work so instead they have gone the trade secret route, with the trade secret being their private key.
If you really think about it, crytographically signed binaries don't stop piracy at all--they are available on the disk, you can just bit for bit copy them. The only place it helps is that you can't make a homebrew launcher that ignores the other anti-piracy measures on the disk (if there weren't any then you could just do an exact copy of the DVD and bam you have the same crytographically signed game). Basically these anti-piracy measures just make the xbox game disc a nonstandard DVD that can't be completely copied over.
"However, the vast majority of CRTs out there are crap that costs less than half that amount and you know it." Umm considering you are talking about some hardcore gaming LCD... the same can be said of most LCDs with respect to it: However, the vast majority of LCDss out there are crap that costs less than half that amount and you know it. The fact is if you aren't considered with A) desk space and B) weight then CRTs are MUCH better for the price.
Slashdot Mirror
That's not true. On the xbox all the dev sees is "there is x space on the hard drive". The user then has to go to a seperate menu outside of the game to copy from the HD to a card. That is what the parent was complaining about.
I'm sorry but Gartner? These are the same people who said the AIDs virus wasn't a big deal and was overhyped. (Before I get modded troll, it really is true)
Wow, way to kill a good joke. You suck.
Nice pathetic generalization. Slashdot is full of university types.
Google does more business in advertising than any company except clearchannel. No, Google doesn't make TV shows and doesn't make magazines. The fact that their main value is in their index doesn't make that contribution somehow less important than TV shows and magazines. Their index has changed the way millions use the internet and have actually made the content therein much easier to access and navigate. Did they write this content themselves? No, but they have made it usable.
That's why I didn't say it allows a patent. I said it allows an equivalent of a patent.
Beyond the first few weeks after the release of a new popular MMORPG you cannot realistically make minimum wage on them. Not even close.
No one is saying free speech trumps everything. What they are saying is that an NDA between you and someone else should have no effect on me, even if I know about it. I wasn't a party to the contract, if I get information forbidden under the contract from someone who was a part of it I should not be liable at all. I never agreed to any contract. Also you have a slight problem that if we took your view of privacy we would basically create in a lot of instances a new legal equivalent of a patent that lasts til... infinity.
He said it more in the context of running VMWare or a similar program.
Invalidating those laws wouldn't have that much of an effect simply because most of the works under them have already expired. All that it would do is any work which currently is under copyright because of a past extention that was inacted after it was already copyrighted would fall out of copyright. This only makes sense anyway; a retroactive extension cannot be justified.
They did, but it gets compiled into the binaries. When you compile something... general it gets converted to assembly at some stage. So no, it isn't hand coded, but it is still there in the binary.
"Nothing. Average users won't notice a thing. OSX has been running on x86 secretly for 5 years, and according to apple, its extremly easy to port software," oh nice, according to Apple. Do you think we would ever here, according to Apple, that it wasn't? I'm not saying that just because Apple could embellish this point means that they did. All I'm saying is that it is pretty worthless to even mention. Of course they are going to say it is easy--whether it really is or not. Dealing with endianess is a pain and x86 is one of the only architectures still holding out on the little-endian way.
It probably won't have to be. Intel is ditching the current P4 design in order to bring the success of the technology behind their mobile offerings to the desktop. If you haven't noticed, their mobile offerings (when compared with their desktop offerings) themselves dispel the MHz myth. But I did like your post, what with Apple being famous for a certain commercial in 1984 about 1984 and all.
I guess you don't own a laptop. There are all kinds of issues getting the graphics drivers to work stably (for instance with an nvidia card if you use nvidia drivers closing the lid and opening it again completely borks the display on many many laptops, some of them can't even turn the screen off when you close the lid, killing your backlight). Many wintel modems don't even work. Strange problems occur with wireless cards. If you get the right hardware, yes it is stable as hell. But the whole point was that with a huge diversity of hardware it is hard to get stability on anything and that is still true of linux.
He was referring to the ipods with color screens.
You don't understand his point. Open Office hasn't been ported to Cocoa or Carbon. It runs on X11 on Mac. It runs now. His point was that switching to Intel isn't going to help make Open Office run well (or at least seamless) on Mac OS X, it will still be an X11 app. The parent seemed to imply that the switch to x86 would make tons of linux apps run much better. This is only true for stuff which runs other x86 code (vmware and wine), and for closed source apps which currently need x86 emulation to run.
Hi. Slashdot won't let me do ASCII art so you'll have to use your imagination. It isn't that difficult. Consider a slope underwater. You go to the bottom of the slope, and slowly work your way up, decompressing along the way. Some people call this a competent dive plan. There are situations where there is something deep down you really want to see and there is no upward slope to keep you viewing interesting things, well then this device won't help to much with those, or at least with the boredom of decompressing during those. But if you use a little bit of your brain you can easily see that this device isn't something that you will be able to sucessfully argue is "worthless" when you are only given the brief knowledge you get in an article like this. You aren't taking it down on technical merits, just on some crazy reasoning under which nothing can ever please you.
Well intel has tons of money for R&D and yet they have to stick to x86 because of backwards compatibility. So if the same fab techniques, etc. that intel can afford to develop and use on x86 could be used instead on a clean architecture like Power then we would see tremendous improvements. If only intel could shed that backwards compatibility requirement it would produce something truely revolutionary. THIS WHOLE POST WAS A JOKE JUST LIKE (AND BECAUSE OF) ITANIUM.
Who really cares if a [post] is a [complaint about a]dupe? You are not forced to read it, just skip it and go on to the next one. People that feel the need to point out [the idea that complaints about] dupes [add nothing to the discussion] are just as useless as the grammar/spelling nazis. If you really have nothing to add to the discussion and are just going to whine, why post at all?
It cuts both ways.
1 molecule is only an order of magnitude below the number of molecules in these logic gates.
(For those that don't get it, each lego block is a giant polymer molecule)
Ok this is one of the most wrong posts I've ever read. I don't know what crazy fictional Orwell government you under but 2 + 2 is not 5. Consider this: no headphones plugged in. Then you have just air between the contacts, and that has a super high resistance right? So by your logic having nothing plugged in uses more power than having the iPod earbuds plugged in?
Likewise how about if you just had a small length of wire (an eletrical short) connecting the contacts, that would have an extremely low resistance right? Metal wire is known for its conductivity and not its resistivity I thought... hang on I'm checking with a nearby toddler. Yep he confirmed it.
"(Probably don't have to explain this on /., but lower ohms = lower resistance = less power.)" I don't know which is worse. The fact that you said you didn't have to explain it here or the fact that you didn't even go on to explain it (you just made a blind assertion).
#1 problem is not the looks. It is the trademark violation. Granted this is implicit the name of the poject itself and not just the logo. GPLFlash needs to change its name if it ever wants to be taken seriously and at the same time stay out of trouble. Otherwise as soon as it starts working well again it will be slammed with a ceast and desist--probably no lawsuit since it isn't really going to cost Macrodobe money (it isn't a Flash editor), but definitely a cease and desist because to keep a trademark you have to protect it.
"Spoken like someone who doesn't play NFL/football games, but likes to read online." I admitted to the first half of that and my posting on slashdot necessitates the second half. My post was a little extreme in its criticism of the unchanging nature of these franchises. I haven't played these games in years but I do know for a fact that back on super nintendo the Madden games were just series of roster changes along with very very minor improvements. I admittedly don't know enough about the current state of them, but by the same token you know too much.
As such a huge fan I don't think you will argue that a change which the average person playing really doesn't notice is infact a huge difference to you. I'm wrong about the extent to which I said they don't change but I also believe you are wrong about the extent to which they do.
They don't do it to stop piracy; at least that's not the main reason. They do it to prevent third parties from making games and not paying up to Sony for the priviledge. For instance when Sega used to have its systems require that games did a little unlock sequence that played the Sega logo do you think they did so to prevent piracy? Not whatsoever, if you were willing to break copyright law you would be willing to break trademark law. They did so simply to keep third parties paying massive royalties. The courts ruled that an invalid use of trademark law, and also with similar lockout systems an invalid use of copyright law. Lexmark tried the same thing with toner cartridges and the district court (though not yet, and perhaps never, the Supreme Court) relied heavily on these past rulings in rendering its decision. So what these companies have settled on is crytographic signing of the binaries.
This has certainly worked well for the console industry. Essentially trademark and copyright didn't work so instead they have gone the trade secret route, with the trade secret being their private key.
If you really think about it, crytographically signed binaries don't stop piracy at all--they are available on the disk, you can just bit for bit copy them. The only place it helps is that you can't make a homebrew launcher that ignores the other anti-piracy measures on the disk (if there weren't any then you could just do an exact copy of the DVD and bam you have the same crytographically signed game). Basically these anti-piracy measures just make the xbox game disc a nonstandard DVD that can't be completely copied over.
"However, the vast majority of CRTs out there are crap that costs less than half that amount and you know it." Umm considering you are talking about some hardcore gaming LCD... the same can be said of most LCDs with respect to it: However, the vast majority of LCDss out there are crap that costs less than half that amount and you know it. The fact is if you aren't considered with A) desk space and B) weight then CRTs are MUCH better for the price.