I was at LSM'05 just last week where most keyboards were dvorak. I found it took me only a few tries to sort out at least half-speed typing...
I didn't find it any more comfortable though... you know why? For the exact same reason as switching isn't hard!!!
Many of the keys are in the same place, only a few common ones like a and m [well others too but those are the ones I noticed the most] are different.
You know what saves you from RSI? Streching and breaks. Try doing extensions in your cubicle, may look weird but will help.
Try this other nifty idea as "get the fuck up, walk over to the water cooler, look out the window for 2 mins then go sit back down".
Seriously. If you type so long and hard that your fingers go numb you're an idiot. I did that a few times when I was a kid and had no self-restraint [at least about the computers issues, let's leave food alone for the moment]. Now I regularly take breaks every 15-30 mins for a few moments just to stretch. You don't need to take long breaks, just long enough to take say 30-50 steps while moving your arms and hands...
I really wish people would stop quoting more address space as a feature.
First off, have you ever tried to enter an IP over a noisy phone connection? Now try it with eight 4-digit groups!
Not all addresses are going to be::192.168.0.1;-)
Second, Do you have any idea how many dark/8s there are? Do you have any idea how many people have/8s that shouldn't? There is no IP shortage problem for now.
Keep in mind a lot of the problems on the net are from irresponsible ISPs. I mean why should I be able to send packets [for instance] where the source IP is not my own? My ISP should filter that out.
That's just one example.
Besides you do realize tha digital cable is often done over TCP/IP on a private network right? If you have a digital box look around on the web there usually are keys you can hit to get to diagnostic screens. One of them will have your MAC and IP address.
The big thing lacking for all that VOIP/HDTV over IP isn't a good delivery standard [UDP/IP is more suitable btw] it's the bandwidth.
HDTV is 20mbps so if you have a million viewers... you can do the math...
It's not really marketting. It's choice. If you look at the "ma and pa" computer stores they prominently sell both Intel and AMD because they're not big enough for Intel to push around yet there are enough of them to matter.
When you look at Circuit city, Dell, Compaq, etc... they basically only sell Intel [well Compaq has a few nice AMD laptops].
So it's not really that people are actively looking for Intel [though I'd say there are probably enough] but moreso they just want a puter to play and browse the web with and they're not going to hunt down for a different computer when they don't know much about Intel let alone AMD.
I say AMD owns it by the fact that any serious person doing work will not buy an Intel given the choice. AMD's performance is just too much higher.
Cost: You're comparing the entry dual-core Intel to the top of the line [currently] AMD dual core... You don't need 2.4Ghz and 1MB of L2 to match the performance of a P4 3.2Ghz...
I know, I own a Prescott 3.2Ghz and my NewCastle 2.2Ghz would beat it in any build test you can throw at it [or bignum or crypto task]. A dual-core 2.2Ghz [e.g. 4200+] would more than be enough to beat a 3.2Ghz dual core [e.g. 840]. So your price comparison is a bit flawed.
The ability for Intel to meet demand is just based on their monopoly. Think about it. For how many years has Intel been the only choice through Intel pressure?
I imagine in the last 3 years alone they probably sold a few dozen million processors alone through Dell. That means at 56$ profit per processor they'd have enough to build a new fabs.
When you add in that Intel processors usually are bundled only with intel chipsets and intel graphics and intel networking...
It adds up quickly. I'm sure if Dell went to AMD and said here's two billion dollars build us 50 million athlon64's they'd be more than happy to do it.
The point is that Intel has done things that are anti-competitive [or at least very likely]. It isn't a cry sore-loser thing it's what's best for all.
Think about it. By Intel owning such a large share of the market your ability to go out and pick what is best for YOU is basically neglected. Intel can tell you "if you want a computer you run our processor and you pay our price".
It's not like society would benefit from not having computers so we are forced to buy their processors at their price.
And you could say "well I could just stock AMD and let the chips fall" [pardon the pun] except you're there to make money and stay in business. If intel turns to you and says "stop selling AMD or we stop shipments" you have essentially no choice at this point.
So at the end of the day you pay basically whatever Intel wants for whatever overhyped piece of shit design they can spew on you [hint: P4 should have died on the drawing board...]
Buy nForce chipsets. I just bought one on the weekend and I didn't even require a kernel change to get it to boot. Changed the network modules around and voila onboard LAN worked fine.
Yeah, dedicated chipsets are good but the VIA and nForce chipsets have always been good.
And you know what, get this
There are VIA ***AND*** nvidia chipsets for AMD processors.
It's called competition! Which is the whole point in the first place.
Well I don't know the reasoning but let's examine some facts
1. Leading Intel solutions [P4] are worse performers than the AMD32 and AMD64 [the P3 was better than the P4]. The PentiumM is a good runner but the recent AMD processors still take less power and get higher IPCs
2. AMD owns the 64-bit x86 world.
3. The future will be either x86_64 or not x86_* at all.
4. AMD processors are just as reliable and often more so as they generate less heat. Even a two year old AMD Athlon XP-M 2400+ 1.8Ghz generates comparable heat to a NEW Intel Celeron 1.4Ghz [both Presarios] and have the same battery life.
5. AMD processors cost less.
6. AMD processors are x86_* compatible.
So coupled with all these facts why would you go with Intel? I seriously doubt it has to do with a technical advantage [specially in the SMP world].
Even the advertising isn't that important as the average computer buyer doesn't really know the difference anyways [hint: Intel commercials are not educational].
So a customer given fair pricing points is probably equally likely to buy an AMD box over an Intel box.
That is, if you had two beige boxes, with identical ram, video, monitor, disk, peripherals and cost you'd probably sell 50% AMD and 50% Intel if you just let the customer pick.
Yet, intel gets more share.
If you think companies like Dell and their "Intel only" sales don't affect marketshare you're a fairly stupid fellow.
But why doesn't Dell sell AMD processors? I doubt it's for technical reasons. They're by and large equally difficult to tech-support as well [I mean really how much tech support do they give for the processor anyways?].
It can't be for pricing reasons because they both RETAIL [I know Dell probably gets discounts which is part of the anti-trust as well] differently in favour of AMD.
Could it be Dell just doesn't want to sell AMD? What does it matter? It gives their customers more choice and more product to sell.
I wonder if it could be that Intel threatens to pull the plug if they include AMD lineups... geez...
That's the whole point. anti-competition means no free market. Dell should be free to buy both AMD and Intel without penalty and let the market decide what product they want.
Right now unless Dell wants to drop their ENTIRE Intel line [which they have marketted extensively] they're totally screwed.
Personally I find it funny. I bought an Athlon X2 4200+ [dual core 2.2Ghz, 2x128KB L1, 2x512KB L2] with a new mobo, GeForce6600 PCI-E card and tax for roughly 1300$.
At the same store the cheapest dual P4 with EM64T cost 1460$ before tax [all prices in CAD].
I'm positive that on all non-DMA tasks my AMDx2 setup will smoke the P4 setup and still cost a 700$ less [the X2 cost me 742$ or so].
Why would a store selling a "gamer box" want to pack a dual-core Intel in there? It doubles the cost of the cpu and gets you a slower box [==less happy customer].
Even then the Apple computers were overpriced underpowed inconvenient pieces of shit...
Some things never change...
BTW whoever thought of making the Mac so hard to configure for booting [hint: yaboot can make a Mac Mini inoperable, I know I've done it] deserves to be shot.
The PC may suck [for whatever reason I can't fathom as my dual core AMD64 runs fast and isn't on fire] they at least have a BIOS that is easy to get into [hit F2 or DEL] and easy to configure. None of this alt-option-o-f [and MAY work didn't at all for me] crap or "we only boot off hard disk".
Apple computers are about as useful as a wrist watch. Look good and can tell you the time but if you had to sit down and do real work you might as well get an x86 series box [e.g. AMD64].
"Please name a 'steller' product to come out of AMD?"
The AthlonXP gave the P3 a run for its money and basically owned the P4. The P4 basically is really good at a few things [it is, for instance, a very good DMA emulator]
But you're right there are AMD laptops out there. The average bestbuy or whatnot usually has a few.
As for stocking two sets, that's bullshit. You have either X intel or A intel + B AMD where X = A + B. You think Dell does much to the computers they build? Um plomp a few components in and go on their way, they don't actually make the cpus, chipsets or motherboards...
The newer AMD64s take significantly less power than before [which was still less than most Intel offerings].
In terms of laptops... I'd like to remind you that you have a spinny disk, ram, monitor [with light], etc... running which consume more than their fair share of power.
Even still I'd be hard pressed to say Intel wins with a PentiumM vs. Turion64 when you compare MIPS/W.
Better chip in what way? AMD has basically held the IPC crown since the K7 came out. Now with the AMD64's they not only hold the IPC crown [very firmly] but the power-efficiency crown.
Are you talking about cost? AMD chips costs less.
I'm sure if you went out and signed a multi-billion dollar with AMD they'd consider a new fabs [e.g. think if Dell+Compaq+Sony for instance all went to AMD for the next set of desktops/laptops].
Intel is no way the leader in efficient and powerful processor design anymore.
Put it this way, my AMDx2 4200+ [which I bought on the weekend] is idling now at around 29C in a 21C room. That's two cores at 2.2Ghz.
Intel at it's best with the P4 can't even come close to that. Under full load my X2 hits around 45C with both cores going. The intel single core chips routinely hit 50-55C at full load.
Ok, if I was a company [like say Motorola] and wanted to make some sort of portable device [say a cellphone perhaps?] I'd take a READILY AVAILABLE ARM core and drop the sucker into my design.
What really are they offering there other than perhaps a "standard" [though amongst ARM cores there are standards and they use well documented interfaces, etc...]
Um this is total bullshit. Have you ever been in an airplane? Notice the loud engines? Notice they get a lot quieter 30 mins into the flight?
mmm I wonder why.
Also I'm getting my facts from my Brother,... who is a pilot. You can fly further [slower] on less fuel at a lower thrust.
The reason they don't 100% thrust has nothing to do with hardware failure and just about everything to do with "won't make it there on the same amount of fuel".
Try it though, get on a good long interstate. Now drive it [if you can without getting caught] at say 80mph. Then fuel up, count the gallons and then drive back at 65mph and count the gallons. You'll most likely see a different.
Sure 65mph will take you longer but you'll also have burned less fuel.
And in the world of "tens of thousands of gallons of fuel per flight" you want mpg efficiency not mph efficiency.
Oh you liberal hippies... If North America did anything it would mean the end of our way of life as we know it. I mean, you simply need that 3.6L 400HP engine to get groceries from the store. It's a necessity of life!
The economy would collapse if North America wasn't able to live in excess. I mean there is a reason why McDonalds can only charge you a $1.29 for a meal AND STILL PROFIT.
And of course the best part about these monstrosities [cars] is that they guzzle enough gas to legitimately increase the "demand" for fuel and hence the price as well.
Someday I swear I'm just gonna start lighting those stupid trucks and SUVs on fire... The fucking morons who drive those things ought to learn!!!
I'm not looking for a windows emulator that works well. Windows sucks ass. I'm upset they don't make games for Linux.
And why don't they? Because the average no talent hack that thinks they're eleet can barely code a for loop let alone code anything of importance or stability without using a wizard of some sort.
Speak for yourself. I'm not working some two-bit gui-pumper shop. I'm doing R&D and I can use pretty much anything at hand to get the job done.
Where we have a standard for OS/tools are on the hardware boxes and that's just to make the debuging process simpler.
As for Java vs. GTK+ that's not the point. I was trying to point out that "if you're not using Java there is more than C++ with MFC to use." You go from one extreme to the other.
Might as well say "I would switch from Java but COBOL is just so old!" or "I would switch from breathing but hot fire pokers in the eye just hurt to much!"
It's called efficiency. The engines or motors or whatever are probably only most efficient in certain lobes of speed [e.g. like a car at ~90km/h].
You'd be surprised [hopefully not] but driving a normal car at 150km for 30 mins will burn more fuel then a car at 75km for 60 mins. [well not always but your mpg goes way down].
The point is the train is probably rated to hit 200mph if they make it the least efficient thing in the world.
Seriously, you think the only contender against a Java applet is C++ with MFC?
How about C with GTK+? GTK+ is not only portable but works with minimal overhead and is easy to develop for with the DRAG AND DROP gui designer Glade.
I mean you literally drag and drop buttons, controls, whatever onto a dialog, hit "save source" and it emits C code that uses GTK+ to make the dialog.
If you write a modular program e.g.
backend frontend GTK+ code
You're additions to the code that Glade produces are minimal and the entire design process is portable any number of other platforms [e.g. other Linux, BSD, MacOS and even windows OSes]....
Once you pull your head out of your arse and try new tools [e.g. non-mandated by the three week devry college you went to] you'll learn there is a "whole big world out there" of other tools and development methodologies.
[gun-debate] "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."... So are all these gun owners part of a militia? Granted we have rifles/etc at my home we don't CC them around like some lunatics out there. We use our weapons for target shooting only. So when we're not on the way to/from the range they stay at home, not under a shirt in a holster...
[/gun-debate]
As for the other issue, the question is whether they intended for people to violate copyrights. Having never been to their website or used their software I have no clue nor do I really care. P2P over traditional non-BT means is a total fucking waste of bandwidth.
Slashdot Mirror
I was at LSM'05 just last week where most keyboards were dvorak. I found it took me only a few tries to sort out at least half-speed typing...
I didn't find it any more comfortable though... you know why? For the exact same reason as switching isn't hard!!!
Many of the keys are in the same place, only a few common ones like a and m [well others too but those are the ones I noticed the most] are different.
You know what saves you from RSI? Streching and breaks. Try doing extensions in your cubicle, may look weird but will help.
Try this other nifty idea as "get the fuck up, walk over to the water cooler, look out the window for 2 mins then go sit back down".
Seriously. If you type so long and hard that your fingers go numb you're an idiot. I did that a few times when I was a kid and had no self-restraint [at least about the computers issues, let's leave food alone for the moment]. Now I regularly take breaks every 15-30 mins for a few moments just to stretch. You don't need to take long breaks, just long enough to take say 30-50 steps while moving your arms and hands...
Simple shit like that can keep ya going.
Tom
I really wish people would stop quoting more address space as a feature.
::192.168.0.1 ;-)
/8s there are? Do you have any idea how many people have /8s that shouldn't? There is no IP shortage problem for now.
First off, have you ever tried to enter an IP over a noisy phone connection? Now try it with eight 4-digit groups!
Not all addresses are going to be
Second, Do you have any idea how many dark
Tom
Hence IPv6?
Keep in mind a lot of the problems on the net are from irresponsible ISPs. I mean why should I be able to send packets [for instance] where the source IP is not my own? My ISP should filter that out.
That's just one example.
Besides you do realize tha digital cable is often done over TCP/IP on a private network right? If you have a digital box look around on the web there usually are keys you can hit to get to diagnostic screens. One of them will have your MAC and IP address.
The big thing lacking for all that VOIP/HDTV over IP isn't a good delivery standard [UDP/IP is more suitable btw] it's the bandwidth.
HDTV is 20mbps so if you have a million viewers... you can do the math...
Tom
It's not really marketting. It's choice. If you look at the "ma and pa" computer stores they prominently sell both Intel and AMD because they're not big enough for Intel to push around yet there are enough of them to matter.
When you look at Circuit city, Dell, Compaq, etc... they basically only sell Intel [well Compaq has a few nice AMD laptops].
So it's not really that people are actively looking for Intel [though I'd say there are probably enough] but moreso they just want a puter to play and browse the web with and they're not going to hunt down for a different computer when they don't know much about Intel let alone AMD.
Tom
I say AMD owns it by the fact that any serious person doing work will not buy an Intel given the choice. AMD's performance is just too much higher.
...
...
Cost: You're comparing the entry dual-core Intel to the top of the line [currently] AMD dual core... You don't need 2.4Ghz and 1MB of L2 to match the performance of a P4 3.2Ghz
I know, I own a Prescott 3.2Ghz and my NewCastle 2.2Ghz would beat it in any build test you can throw at it [or bignum or crypto task]. A dual-core 2.2Ghz [e.g. 4200+] would more than be enough to beat a 3.2Ghz dual core [e.g. 840]. So your price comparison is a bit flawed.
The ability for Intel to meet demand is just based on their monopoly. Think about it. For how many years has Intel been the only choice through Intel pressure?
I imagine in the last 3 years alone they probably sold a few dozen million processors alone through Dell. That means at 56$ profit per processor they'd have enough to build a new fabs.
When you add in that Intel processors usually are bundled only with intel chipsets and intel graphics and intel networking
It adds up quickly. I'm sure if Dell went to AMD and said here's two billion dollars build us 50 million athlon64's they'd be more than happy to do it.
The point is that Intel has done things that are anti-competitive [or at least very likely]. It isn't a cry sore-loser thing it's what's best for all.
Think about it. By Intel owning such a large share of the market your ability to go out and pick what is best for YOU is basically neglected. Intel can tell you "if you want a computer you run our processor and you pay our price".
It's not like society would benefit from not having computers so we are forced to buy their processors at their price.
And you could say "well I could just stock AMD and let the chips fall" [pardon the pun] except you're there to make money and stay in business. If intel turns to you and says "stop selling AMD or we stop shipments" you have essentially no choice at this point.
So at the end of the day you pay basically whatever Intel wants for whatever overhyped piece of shit design they can spew on you [hint: P4 should have died on the drawing board...]
Tom
Buy nForce chipsets. I just bought one on the weekend and I didn't even require a kernel change to get it to boot. Changed the network modules around and voila onboard LAN worked fine.
Yeah, dedicated chipsets are good but the VIA and nForce chipsets have always been good.
And you know what, get this
There are VIA ***AND*** nvidia chipsets for AMD processors.
It's called competition! Which is the whole point in the first place.
Tom
Well I don't know the reasoning but let's examine some facts
1. Leading Intel solutions [P4] are worse performers than the AMD32 and AMD64 [the P3 was better than the P4]. The PentiumM is a good runner but the recent AMD processors still take less power and get higher IPCs
2. AMD owns the 64-bit x86 world.
3. The future will be either x86_64 or not x86_* at all.
4. AMD processors are just as reliable and often more so as they generate less heat. Even a two year old AMD Athlon XP-M 2400+ 1.8Ghz generates comparable heat to a NEW Intel Celeron 1.4Ghz [both Presarios] and have the same battery life.
5. AMD processors cost less.
6. AMD processors are x86_* compatible.
So coupled with all these facts why would you go with Intel? I seriously doubt it has to do with a technical advantage [specially in the SMP world].
Even the advertising isn't that important as the average computer buyer doesn't really know the difference anyways [hint: Intel commercials are not educational].
So a customer given fair pricing points is probably equally likely to buy an AMD box over an Intel box.
That is, if you had two beige boxes, with identical ram, video, monitor, disk, peripherals and cost you'd probably sell 50% AMD and 50% Intel if you just let the customer pick.
Yet, intel gets more share.
If you think companies like Dell and their "Intel only" sales don't affect marketshare you're a fairly stupid fellow.
But why doesn't Dell sell AMD processors? I doubt it's for technical reasons. They're by and large equally difficult to tech-support as well [I mean really how much tech support do they give for the processor anyways?].
It can't be for pricing reasons because they both RETAIL [I know Dell probably gets discounts which is part of the anti-trust as well] differently in favour of AMD.
Could it be Dell just doesn't want to sell AMD? What does it matter? It gives their customers more choice and more product to sell.
I wonder if it could be that Intel threatens to pull the plug if they include AMD lineups... geez...
That's the whole point. anti-competition means no free market. Dell should be free to buy both AMD and Intel without penalty and let the market decide what product they want.
Right now unless Dell wants to drop their ENTIRE Intel line [which they have marketted extensively] they're totally screwed.
Personally I find it funny. I bought an Athlon X2 4200+ [dual core 2.2Ghz, 2x128KB L1, 2x512KB L2] with a new mobo, GeForce6600 PCI-E card and tax for roughly 1300$.
At the same store the cheapest dual P4 with EM64T cost 1460$ before tax [all prices in CAD].
I'm positive that on all non-DMA tasks my AMDx2 setup will smoke the P4 setup and still cost a 700$ less [the X2 cost me 742$ or so].
Why would a store selling a "gamer box" want to pack a dual-core Intel in there? It doubles the cost of the cpu and gets you a slower box [==less happy customer].
But that's EXACTLY WHAT DELL DOES!!!!
Tom
There are a lot of sony developers in the US. Getting the thingy capable of playing the stuff the developers writes ... think about it.
... ;-)
Though yeah, it is anti-competitive as it bars newcomers to the field since they can't afford the cut.
But alas... whatever, we're all gonna work for Taco bell anyways
Tom
I have better alternatives myself...
Tom
Even then the Apple computers were overpriced underpowed inconvenient pieces of shit...
Some things never change...
BTW whoever thought of making the Mac so hard to configure for booting [hint: yaboot can make a Mac Mini inoperable, I know I've done it] deserves to be shot.
The PC may suck [for whatever reason I can't fathom as my dual core AMD64 runs fast and isn't on fire] they at least have a BIOS that is easy to get into [hit F2 or DEL] and easy to configure. None of this alt-option-o-f [and MAY work didn't at all for me] crap or "we only boot off hard disk".
Apple computers are about as useful as a wrist watch. Look good and can tell you the time but if you had to sit down and do real work you might as well get an x86 series box [e.g. AMD64].
Tom
Google said their ad would show up when a relevent search or page is loaded. They did that.
Google said they'd charge per click on the links. They did that.
Google never said the clicks would be legitimate.
Tom
Two sides to this
1. People ought to have fully understood what they were getting into.
2. Google should protect people from rampant clickage.
If an ad would normally get 1 click/day and all of a sudden got 200 or 200,000/day then you can say "wtf?".
That being said most ads on google are tripe anyways. "Blowfish EncRyptor" my ass...
Tom
"Please name a 'steller' product to come out of AMD?"
The AthlonXP gave the P3 a run for its money and basically owned the P4. The P4 basically is really good at a few things [it is, for instance, a very good DMA emulator]
But you're right there are AMD laptops out there. The average bestbuy or whatnot usually has a few.
As for stocking two sets, that's bullshit. You have either X intel or A intel + B AMD where X = A + B. You think Dell does much to the computers they build? Um plomp a few components in and go on their way, they don't actually make the cpus, chipsets or motherboards...
Tom
Get an X2... that'll change your mind. ;-)
The newer AMD64s take significantly less power than before [which was still less than most Intel offerings].
In terms of laptops... I'd like to remind you that you have a spinny disk, ram, monitor [with light], etc... running which consume more than their fair share of power.
Even still I'd be hard pressed to say Intel wins with a PentiumM vs. Turion64 when you compare MIPS/W.
Tom
Better chip in what way? AMD has basically held the IPC crown since the K7 came out. Now with the AMD64's they not only hold the IPC crown [very firmly] but the power-efficiency crown.
Are you talking about cost? AMD chips costs less.
I'm sure if you went out and signed a multi-billion dollar with AMD they'd consider a new fabs [e.g. think if Dell+Compaq+Sony for instance all went to AMD for the next set of desktops/laptops].
Intel is no way the leader in efficient and powerful processor design anymore.
Put it this way, my AMDx2 4200+ [which I bought on the weekend] is idling now at around 29C in a 21C room. That's two cores at 2.2Ghz.
Intel at it's best with the P4 can't even come close to that. Under full load my X2 hits around 45C with both cores going. The intel single core chips routinely hit 50-55C at full load.
Tom
So it's an embedded computing platform?
Ok, if I was a company [like say Motorola] and wanted to make some sort of portable device [say a cellphone perhaps?] I'd take a READILY AVAILABLE ARM core and drop the sucker into my design.
What really are they offering there other than perhaps a "standard" [though amongst ARM cores there are standards and they use well documented interfaces, etc...]
Is this just better because it's newer or?
Tom
Um this is total bullshit. Have you ever been in an airplane? Notice the loud engines? Notice they get a lot quieter 30 mins into the flight?
... who is a pilot. You can fly further [slower] on less fuel at a lower thrust.
mmm I wonder why.
Also I'm getting my facts from my Brother,
The reason they don't 100% thrust has nothing to do with hardware failure and just about everything to do with "won't make it there on the same amount of fuel".
Try it though, get on a good long interstate. Now drive it [if you can without getting caught] at say 80mph. Then fuel up, count the gallons and then drive back at 65mph and count the gallons. You'll most likely see a different.
Sure 65mph will take you longer but you'll also have burned less fuel.
And in the world of "tens of thousands of gallons of fuel per flight" you want mpg efficiency not mph efficiency.
Tom
Oh you liberal hippies... If North America did anything it would mean the end of our way of life as we know it. I mean, you simply need that 3.6L 400HP engine to get groceries from the store. It's a necessity of life!
The economy would collapse if North America wasn't able to live in excess. I mean there is a reason why McDonalds can only charge you a $1.29 for a meal AND STILL PROFIT.
And of course the best part about these monstrosities [cars] is that they guzzle enough gas to legitimately increase the "demand" for fuel and hence the price as well.
Someday I swear I'm just gonna start lighting those stupid trucks and SUVs on fire... The fucking morons who drive those things ought to learn!!!
Tom
Have you looked at the average game? Basically Q3A engine with a few new graphics and a title like "medal of honour!".
Same shit different day.
Not to say they're not partially fun. Just not worth being in windows for.
I'd rather [and do] do without then install windows.
I do play UT2K4 once in a while because they made a Linux port that works well.
Tom
Big fucking deal.
I'm not looking for a windows emulator that works well. Windows sucks ass. I'm upset they don't make games for Linux.
And why don't they? Because the average no talent hack that thinks they're eleet can barely code a for loop let alone code anything of importance or stability without using a wizard of some sort.
Tom
Speak for yourself. I'm not working some two-bit gui-pumper shop. I'm doing R&D and I can use pretty much anything at hand to get the job done.
Where we have a standard for OS/tools are on the hardware boxes and that's just to make the debuging process simpler.
As for Java vs. GTK+ that's not the point. I was trying to point out that "if you're not using Java there is more than C++ with MFC to use." You go from one extreme to the other.
Might as well say "I would switch from Java but COBOL is just so old!" or "I would switch from breathing but hot fire pokers in the eye just hurt to much!"
Tom
Next you'll ask why planes fly at 55% thrust ...
It's called efficiency. The engines or motors or whatever are probably only most efficient in certain lobes of speed [e.g. like a car at ~90km/h].
You'd be surprised [hopefully not] but driving a normal car at 150km for 30 mins will burn more fuel then a car at 75km for 60 mins. [well not always but your mpg goes way down].
The point is the train is probably rated to hit 200mph if they make it the least efficient thing in the world.
See also: Diminishing returns.
Tom
GET OUT OF WINDOWS.
...
Seriously, you think the only contender against a Java applet is C++ with MFC?
How about C with GTK+? GTK+ is not only portable but works with minimal overhead and is easy to develop for with the DRAG AND DROP gui designer Glade.
I mean you literally drag and drop buttons, controls, whatever onto a dialog, hit "save source" and it emits C code that uses GTK+ to make the dialog.
If you write a modular program e.g.
backend frontend GTK+ code
You're additions to the code that Glade produces are minimal and the entire design process is portable any number of other platforms [e.g. other Linux, BSD, MacOS and even windows OSes].
Once you pull your head out of your arse and try new tools [e.g. non-mandated by the three week devry college you went to] you'll learn there is a "whole big world out there" of other tools and development methodologies.
Tom
[gun-debate] ... So are all these gun owners part of a militia? Granted we have rifles/etc at my home we don't CC them around like some lunatics out there. We use our weapons for target shooting only. So when we're not on the way to/from the range they stay at home, not under a shirt in a holster...
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
[/gun-debate]
As for the other issue, the question is whether they intended for people to violate copyrights. Having never been to their website or used their software I have no clue nor do I really care. P2P over traditional non-BT means is a total fucking waste of bandwidth.
Tom
Not really. They're likely running stock linux on an ARM box with their own external kernel modules. So their GPL usage probably stops at the kernel.
....*looks around* here I've got something for you.
Want that code?
Just because you use GPL code doesn't mean your use of it falls under GPL.
Tom