...quirky, yet romantic. You know why you get bored with things quickly (probably once you feel you could complete them if you had the desire)? It is because you have no self discipline and you lack the self-knowledge to understand that *not* moving onto another project which interests before finishing the last is a sign of immaturity.
Re:Hmmm,. I wonder if it is very nVidia centric?
on
GPU Gems
·
· Score: 1
Good points, I guess I wasn't very clear in the beginning that what I didn't like about the book was the (imho) feel that they were intentionally making the book sound vendor neutral and part of the 'gems' series. It has value, just as Shader X does, as a reference for shading in general (because ideas are not language specific.) I'm sure it does have use, I just took issue with the presentation of the book as such.
Yeah, WINE is impressive technologically speaking, but the reality of the situation is quite different;). I wouldn't want to run Far Cry on it, lol.
I've always thought that if Linux created a competitor to DirectX (sort of a super SDL) it would easy things, especially if it worked on Windows (thereby gaining instant acceptance and at the same time making porting Win games to Linux MUCH easier just like the PC to XBox conversions.)
Re:Hmmm,. I wonder if it is very nVidia centric?
on
GPU Gems
·
· Score: 1
I guess we'll just have to disagree on this one, because I think a book can be written about a topic that is not the language used to implement the topic of discussion. I don't believe every book needs to advertise on the title what language they use to implement the thing they're interested in discussing. I don't see anything wrong with it when a book does say "Doing such and such in C++", but usually those books are very interested in the details of implementing the topic in that language. There isn't a great deal of implementation detail differences between GLSL, HLSL, and Cg.
Yes, I'm absolutely aware of who the authors work for and I'm not naive in thinking that they did not pick the language because of that association with NVIDIA. But I just don't give a shit about that because the information that's contained in the book is so easily applicable to any other shading framework. I just think it's ridiculous to trash the book because you don't like the language. But I find it more likely that you just don't like NVIDIA for some fanboy sort of reason, and make silly remarks and assumptions for those reasons.
Assmasher - What an assinine comment. I think a book can be written
about a topic that is not the language used to implement the topic of
discussion. What this has to do with our discussion I don't know because
you seem to think I have a problem with the fact that the book uses Cg to
implement ideas, I do not. I have a problem with the fact that the book is
presented as a Gems series type of book, written by an nVidia employee,
entirely written using Cg rather than an open shader language such as GLSL, and
because the title makes it sound like it is vendor neutral when it is anything
but.
are VERY nVidia-centric) about how to write Cg
No, you're just wrong here. I own this book and have read it. It is not about the Cg language, but it uses it. It does not even contain a chapter on syntax for Cg or HLSL. There isn't even a fucking appendix chapter about language-specific details. You're just full of shit here, I'm sorry. If you buy David Eberly's "Game Physics" book, it includes source that is written in C++, but it does not teach you C++, nor does it try to. It is about game physics, not about the language.
Assmasher - First, I'm not wrong, and I'm not surprised that you won't
admit to what an objective and neutral reader would acknowledge, that the book
is very nVidia centric unnecessarily. You're pedantry is even more
apparent when you can't keep yourself from using profanity in a simple
discussion. What exactly am I full of shit for? I asserted that it
is nVidia centric, it OBVIOUSLY is. You can argue whether that is bad or
not, but you can't argue that it isn't accurate.
given that it VERY explicitly claims to be (1)a Gems book when it isn't actually part of that series
Which series do you mean? You probably mean the "Game Programming Gems" series, which is published by Charles River Media. But they don't own the concept of a "gem" book, and in fact they were not the first ones to do that. There was a series before that called "Graphics Gems" that was published by Academic Press.
Assmasher - Surely you found it obvious that I was referring to that
series, yes? More pedantic behavior? Of course they don't own the
CONCEPT of a gem book, just like George Lucas doesn't own the CONCEPT of a war
amongst the stars, but you sure can't go selling things with the phrase Star
Wars on them without arousing suspicion.
As for no one being able to use GLSL, you're obviously not very knowledgeable regarding GLSL. For instance, you can use GLSL with ATI cards as of 6 months ago. Early support was pretty damn sketchy, but 4.5+ Catalyst drivers are pretty good. Another example of your ignorance is that nVidia themselves have released drivers which support GLSL.
I'm well aware of the level of support by both NVIDIA and ATI,
GAMES GAMES baby. I'm 32 but I still love to play the games. Yes, I have some games on my MDK9.2 partitions, but they mostly suck (sadly.)
If games came out on Linux at even roughly the same rate as WinXP boxes, I'd NEVER LOOK BACK (except at work where I have to [currently] use XP.)
Re:Hmmm,. I wonder if it is very nVidia centric?
on
GPU Gems
·
· Score: 1
Actually, the guy who comes along and says "It should be called Programming games in C++" is correct. You seem to think it is pedantic to believe that many book titles seem to be misleading (even if only somewhat.)
As for why they used Cg, surely you're not stupid enough to believe they just 'picked one', or (from reading your post) perhaps you are. Do you know who the author works for? Do you know what company pushes Cg? It isn't some 'conspiracy theory' but it IS a conflict of interest given that it VERY explicitly claims to be (1)a Gems book when it isn't actually part of that series, and not even from the same publisher (A little misdirection there) and (2)the book purports to be about programming your GPU when it is actually (I looked through it at B&N the other day and the samples [especially regarding optimization tricks] are VERY nVidia-centric) about how to write Cg. This doesn't make it a poor book, but it is certainly deceptive. FFS, if this was a Microsoft book title, people would be going nuts on Slashdot.
As for no one being able to use GLSL, you're obviously not very knowledgeable regarding GLSL. For instance, you can use GLSL with ATI cards as of 6 months ago. Early support was pretty damn sketchy, but 4.5+ Catalyst drivers are pretty good. Another example of your ignorance is that nVidia themselves have released drivers which support GLSL.
Perhaps you should (1)learn how to discuss your differences in a more adult manner and (2)spend the 30 seconds on google to validate some of your more ridiculous assertions.
Have a nice day:). Great name by the way. I'm sure it is quite indicative of your personality.
DOH! Oh yeah, I forgot... That was the entire value of the entanglement to begin with, LOL! Dumbass (me)... That was the basis for faster than light communications;).
...pairs at some point during the transmission (for instance when pumping the signal strength over distance)? Observing the entangled photon(s) would not change the originals...
Re:Hmmm,. I wonder if it is very nVidia centric?
on
GPU Gems
·
· Score: 1
I'm not particularly anti Cg; however, what is it that you actually use it for? In house tools or applications, no problem using it imho. Public applications and commercial games? It is a bad choice afaic.
My original complaint about the book is that a book is being published which purports to be a guide to programming GPUs and yet rather than use GLSL or HLSL it uses a private corporations shading language.
It is like someone producing a book on C++ and making Microsoft friendly examples rather than maintaining no conflict of interest.
Re:Hmmm,. I wonder if it is very nVidia centric?
on
GPU Gems
·
· Score: 1
Yes, the book is bad because it purports to be a book about 'GPU programming' "Gems", when it should be titled "Cg Programming" with a little mention of other shader languages for consideration. Talk about dumb...
Re:Hmmm,. I wonder if it is very nVidia centric?
on
GPU Gems
·
· Score: 1
Dood,apparently you're not aware that Cg optimizations (when producing HLSL or vertex/fragment programs) are HEAVILY nVidia focused and tend to produce rather poor code for the Radeon series (even, mysteriously, when converting to HLSL which has the same syntax, hmmm?) Ergo, calling it hardware independent is ridiculous.
In any case, the nVidia Cg compiler produces much more inefficient code than you would get from the HLSL compiler; ergo, if you're actually interested in producing games, learn GLSL/OSL and learn HLSL. Pick one to work with first. No reason at all to use Cg because in a production environment you wouldn't in any case.
It would be nice to mention that before the furor erupts...
Re:Hmmm,. I wonder if it is very nVidia centric?
on
GPU Gems
·
· Score: 1
It is ridiculous, imho, to claim that something has value as being API dependent when it is HARDWARE dependent (which is much, much worse.) If you're going to learn something (the purpose of this book) and GLSL is out and available for use, use it. If you're looking to put code into production, you're not going to want to use Cg in any case unless you can say "you MUST use nVidia hardware to run my application."
Hmmm,. I wonder if it is very nVidia centric?
on
GPU Gems
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
lol... Why did they bother to use Cg at all? Could it be because nVidia is putting this book out? Some conflict of interest? Hehe. There are books on HLSL and OSL that are more valuable than this one.
Most of the pirated movies, of decent or better quality, are taken BY THE MOVIE THEATRE STAFF THEMSELVES after hours. A couple of years ago a friend of mine told me that he did this a few times to make copies for himself (he stopped doing it for some reason, possibly moral), and what he would do would be to just play the movie after the last showtime and record everything himself in perfect sound and image.
Can anyone else see us weird special 'codec capable' glasses at the movie theatre to prevent piracy?;) lol.
And what do we say when the Windows pukes claim this very same reason (correctly)? Nearly all the Windoze attacks you hear about have fixes. The net worms, stupidly easy fixes, et cetera... Linux is still much better regarding security, but don't let that lull you into a false sense of invincibility (save that for when drinking Tequila...)
...downloading a dirty help file or else manage to get them to view your html via their help client.
The first example (downloading) applies to people just as stupid as to download an executable and run it as well. The second would require you (afaik) to have a local help file that referenced another link that had been replaced with infected html.)
I don't think you can (even with some effort) view a webpage via HTML help without being linked there by a help file which you already have.
So, it doesn't appear to be an end of the world scenario by any means... Of course, on Slashdot we like to make fun of the devil a little bit too much.;)
That is one of the most brilliant things I've seen
on
3D, FPS File Manager
·
· Score: 1
...in a long while. Congrats to the team that built it. PMSL!
...is not important, then why not just have everything statically linked and erase the biggest problem with Linux applications today, the dependency issues.
This is doing the same thing except to extremes.
He's harsh and given to a bit of hyperbole but...
on
Making Things Easy Is Hard
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
...he's on the mark regarding many issues facing Linux today.
The major factor in why commercial products tend to have better (not always) UI's is that the UI is there only differentiator. I mean, how many different ways are there to burn a CD? Create a 3D mesh? Handle e-mail? Configure a networked printer?
Now, with the varied and sometimes overwhelming number of hardware configurations out there the base functionality code makes up a greater percentage of an actual 'finished closed source' product that he gives credit for; however, as he was saying the UI is absolutely critical.
How many people have been turned away from the FANTASTIC application that is Emacs simply by starting it up and looking at it (then running away quickly to fire up KEdit to maintain their blissful ignorance)?
UI design and implementation IS the hardest and (usually) most boring portion of project development. Good UI developers are indeed worth their weight in gold, just as good technical writers are. Unfortunately, gold costs money...
Slashdot Mirror
...quirky, yet romantic. You know why you get bored with things quickly (probably once you feel you could complete them if you had the desire)? It is because you have no self discipline and you lack the self-knowledge to understand that *not* moving onto another project which interests before finishing the last is a sign of immaturity.
Good points, I guess I wasn't very clear in the beginning that what I didn't like about the book was the (imho) feel that they were intentionally making the book sound vendor neutral and part of the 'gems' series. It has value, just as Shader X does, as a reference for shading in general (because ideas are not language specific.) I'm sure it does have use, I just took issue with the presentation of the book as such.
Yeah, WINE is impressive technologically speaking, but the reality of the situation is quite different ;). I wouldn't want to run Far Cry on it, lol.
I've always thought that if Linux created a competitor to DirectX (sort of a super SDL) it would easy things, especially if it worked on Windows (thereby gaining instant acceptance and at the same time making porting Win games to Linux MUCH easier just like the PC to XBox conversions.)
Assmasher - What an assinine comment. I think a book can be written about a topic that is not the language used to implement the topic of discussion. What this has to do with our discussion I don't know because you seem to think I have a problem with the fact that the book uses Cg to implement ideas, I do not. I have a problem with the fact that the book is presented as a Gems series type of book, written by an nVidia employee, entirely written using Cg rather than an open shader language such as GLSL, and because the title makes it sound like it is vendor neutral when it is anything but.
No, you're just wrong here. I own this book and have read it. It is not about the Cg language, but it uses it. It does not even contain a chapter on syntax for Cg or HLSL. There isn't even a fucking appendix chapter about language-specific details. You're just full of shit here, I'm sorry. If you buy David Eberly's "Game Physics" book, it includes source that is written in C++, but it does not teach you C++, nor does it try to. It is about game physics, not about the language.
Assmasher - First, I'm not wrong, and I'm not surprised that you won't admit to what an objective and neutral reader would acknowledge, that the book is very nVidia centric unnecessarily. You're pedantry is even more apparent when you can't keep yourself from using profanity in a simple discussion. What exactly am I full of shit for? I asserted that it is nVidia centric, it OBVIOUSLY is. You can argue whether that is bad or not, but you can't argue that it isn't accurate.
Which series do you mean? You probably mean the "Game Programming Gems" series, which is published by Charles River Media. But they don't own the concept of a "gem" book, and in fact they were not the first ones to do that. There was a series before that called "Graphics Gems" that was published by Academic Press.
Assmasher - Surely you found it obvious that I was referring to that series, yes? More pedantic behavior? Of course they don't own the CONCEPT of a gem book, just like George Lucas doesn't own the CONCEPT of a war amongst the stars, but you sure can't go selling things with the phrase Star Wars on them without arousing suspicion.
I'm well aware of the level of support by both NVIDIA and ATI,
Assm
GAMES GAMES baby. I'm 32 but I still love to play the games. Yes, I have some games on my MDK9.2 partitions, but they mostly suck (sadly.)
If games came out on Linux at even roughly the same rate as WinXP boxes, I'd NEVER LOOK BACK (except at work where I have to [currently] use XP.)
Actually, the guy who comes along and says "It should be called Programming games in C++" is correct. You seem to think it is pedantic to believe that many book titles seem to be misleading (even if only somewhat.)
:). Great name by the way. I'm sure it is quite indicative of your personality.
As for why they used Cg, surely you're not stupid enough to believe they just 'picked one', or (from reading your post) perhaps you are. Do you know who the author works for? Do you know what company pushes Cg? It isn't some 'conspiracy theory' but it IS a conflict of interest given that it VERY explicitly claims to be (1)a Gems book when it isn't actually part of that series, and not even from the same publisher (A little misdirection there) and (2)the book purports to be about programming your GPU when it is actually (I looked through it at B&N the other day and the samples [especially regarding optimization tricks] are VERY nVidia-centric) about how to write Cg. This doesn't make it a poor book, but it is certainly deceptive. FFS, if this was a Microsoft book title, people would be going nuts on Slashdot.
As for no one being able to use GLSL, you're obviously not very knowledgeable regarding GLSL. For instance, you can use GLSL with ATI cards as of 6 months ago. Early support was pretty damn sketchy, but 4.5+ Catalyst drivers are pretty good. Another example of your ignorance is that nVidia themselves have released drivers which support GLSL.
Perhaps you should (1)learn how to discuss your differences in a more adult manner and (2)spend the 30 seconds on google to validate some of your more ridiculous assertions.
Have a nice day
...I have an infant daughter and I still get tons of work done, I just spend my evenings and weekends working at home when I can.
DOH! Oh yeah, I forgot... That was the entire value of the entanglement to begin with, LOL! Dumbass (me)... That was the basis for faster than light communications ;).
lol, only $9.99 at your local radio shack (in the year 2044...)
...pairs at some point during the transmission (for instance when pumping the signal strength over distance)? Observing the entangled photon(s) would not change the originals...
I'm not particularly anti Cg; however, what is it that you actually use it for? In house tools or applications, no problem using it imho. Public applications and commercial games? It is a bad choice afaic.
My original complaint about the book is that a book is being published which purports to be a guide to programming GPUs and yet rather than use GLSL or HLSL it uses a private corporations shading language.
It is like someone producing a book on C++ and making Microsoft friendly examples rather than maintaining no conflict of interest.
Yes, the book is bad because it purports to be a book about 'GPU programming' "Gems", when it should be titled "Cg Programming" with a little mention of other shader languages for consideration. Talk about dumb...
Dood,apparently you're not aware that Cg optimizations (when producing HLSL or vertex/fragment programs) are HEAVILY nVidia focused and tend to produce rather poor code for the Radeon series (even, mysteriously, when converting to HLSL which has the same syntax, hmmm?) Ergo, calling it hardware independent is ridiculous.
In any case, the nVidia Cg compiler produces much more inefficient code than you would get from the HLSL compiler; ergo, if you're actually interested in producing games, learn GLSL/OSL and learn HLSL. Pick one to work with first. No reason at all to use Cg because in a production environment you wouldn't in any case.
It would be nice to mention that before the furor erupts...
It is ridiculous, imho, to claim that something has value as being API dependent when it is HARDWARE dependent (which is much, much worse.) If you're going to learn something (the purpose of this book) and GLSL is out and available for use, use it. If you're looking to put code into production, you're not going to want to use Cg in any case unless you can say "you MUST use nVidia hardware to run my application."
lol... Why did they bother to use Cg at all? Could it be because nVidia is putting this book out? Some conflict of interest? Hehe. There are books on HLSL and OSL that are more valuable than this one.
Funny, they are for sale through MANY American companies for use as a hunting aid, as well as for use by ornithologists, and civilian security firms.
Most of the pirated movies, of decent or better quality, are taken BY THE MOVIE THEATRE STAFF THEMSELVES after hours. A couple of years ago a friend of mine told me that he did this a few times to make copies for himself (he stopped doing it for some reason, possibly moral), and what he would do would be to just play the movie after the last showtime and record everything himself in perfect sound and image.
;) lol.
Can anyone else see us weird special 'codec capable' glasses at the movie theatre to prevent piracy?
...especially the keyboard and the glowing liquid containers in the case.
...not "it falsely validated him."
Both the register and this slashdot article act as if crying or eyelashes will 'authorize you' when in fact, it just ensures that you fail.
Nice reporting.
And what do we say when the Windows pukes claim this very same reason (correctly)? Nearly all the Windoze attacks you hear about have fixes. The net worms, stupidly easy fixes, et cetera... Linux is still much better regarding security, but don't let that lull you into a false sense of invincibility (save that for when drinking Tequila...)
...downloading a dirty help file or else manage to get them to view your html via their help client.
;)
The first example (downloading) applies to people just as stupid as to download an executable and run it as well. The second would require you (afaik) to have a local help file that referenced another link that had been replaced with infected html.)
I don't think you can (even with some effort) view a webpage via HTML help without being linked there by a help file which you already have.
So, it doesn't appear to be an end of the world scenario by any means... Of course, on Slashdot we like to make fun of the devil a little bit too much.
...in a long while. Congrats to the team that built it. PMSL!
...is not important, then why not just have everything statically linked and erase the biggest problem with Linux applications today, the dependency issues.
This is doing the same thing except to extremes.
...he's on the mark regarding many issues facing Linux today.
The major factor in why commercial products tend to have better (not always) UI's is that the UI is there only differentiator. I mean, how many different ways are there to burn a CD? Create a 3D mesh? Handle e-mail? Configure a networked printer?
Now, with the varied and sometimes overwhelming number of hardware configurations out there the base functionality code makes up a greater percentage of an actual 'finished closed source' product that he gives credit for; however, as he was saying the UI is absolutely critical.
How many people have been turned away from the FANTASTIC application that is Emacs simply by starting it up and looking at it (then running away quickly to fire up KEdit to maintain their blissful ignorance)?
UI design and implementation IS the hardest and (usually) most boring portion of project development. Good UI developers are indeed worth their weight in gold, just as good technical writers are. Unfortunately, gold costs money...