I find it slightly ironic that a person who is more than likely advocating the use of C or C++ is whining about details of the BASIC language introducing bugs.
I once had an Atari with 512 bytes of memory... Then I got a TRS-80 with 32k of memory. It was a strange and surreal experience. Then I got a PC with 4Mb of memory. That too was a strange and surreal experience. Now I own a PC with 512MB of memory and a hundred gigs of hard drive space. Surrealism has left the building. It's just strange.
Perhaps you should seek counselling for your CHRONIC BRAIN DAMAGE before blaming the programming language.
Honestly. Blaming a programming language not for a few bad habits, but for a TOTAL INABILITY to learn another? Please, tell me, what horrible design flaws of QB have so crippled your ability to reason and learn to the point that you can't even pick up another programming language without it overwhelming your obviously superior intelligence?
In it's defense, QB can be just as structured as others if you remember to throw out the GOTO statement and line numbers. It's more the way BASIC is taught, as a relic of old MS BASIC on 8 bit machines, that dictate that it is nessessarily less structured than other languages.
I invite you to take a look at what I've done with the language (technically, I'm still starting out with programming, but considering that I'm going into a different field, I don't really feel the need to move to anything more powerful since I've managed to make a nice little 2d engine using Qbasic) at my website.
What the bloody hell are you talking about? More importantly, why is it that every time someone poses a viewpoint here, someone decides it's someone who read a book and took it too seriously? I've pondered long hours hammering out my personal beliefs, and unlike some people, whose personal philosophy is composed of a gallery of one-liners from their favourite movies, mine is mine alone.
What I said, no matter how blunty I said it, is the truth. Right now we have people who have never written a line of code in their lives telling us how to write software. People who have never designed anything in their lives telling us how to design software projects, people who have never pondered greater strategies for more than an instant telling us where to take things, it's a zoo. As far as I'm concerned, only people who have created something should be able to say these things. Only they know the burden of creation. Everyone else is just an irritating consumer who thinks he knows better than everyone else because he watched a couple made for TV movies.
There are two kinds of people in the world -- consumers and creators. Only other creators have the slightest right to critisize others who devote their lives to creation. The rest are parasites.
Why would they? If the card does what they want it to do, why bother searching the entire market for another alternative -- especially for a 5FPS difference in Game X(and a 5 FPS loss in Game Y)?
I'm going to be frank. I don't believe you're in a position to be talking about linux, especially not in the context of telling it what it needs. From the way to speak of it as if it's not an inanimate abstract object made mostly of magnetic impulses to the strange and unrelenting demands you put on the browser and the office suite, to the incoherent way you change your story, to the list of things you do with your machine, I get the impression you might not have all the tools you need to be appraising it.
You seem to have a couple things confused. I could be mistaken, but it looks that way.
Taking forever to choose a platform for graphics and sound isn't a product of compatibility, it's a product of choice. I know that's a foreign concept to a lot of computer users, so I'll explain. You see, in an efficient marketplace, there are generally several competitors, all who have their respective strengths and weaknesses. Sometimes, it will take a customer more than half a second(!!) to decide, based on these strengths and weaknesses, which is fine, because in that way, mulitple products(now, this is the important part now) can co-exist because not every customer has the same requirements. To put this in a less abstract way, look at your grocers juice aisle, at the orange juice. Odds are, there might be Sun Rype, Dole, Minute Maid and Sunkist, all in the same aisle. They don't stock them all because it's the idealistic thing to do, they do it because some people have different goals and different desires.(My personal favourite is Sun Rype, because the rest taste like orange peels).
As for the installer, last time I checked, Linux was not Red Hat. Mandrake, for instance, has an installation from scratch that puts the Windows 2k or XP installations to shame in terms of allowing the beginner to install the product without knowing a thing, yet allowing experts to delve into details.
I wouldn't really argue that Linux is technically superior in every way to Windows, as there are a few features which I think windows does better than the Linux platforms I've seen(and I doubt that will change until the 2.6 kernel is released and bundled into new distributions), but you haven't given an example otherwise. The lack of choice on the Windows platform and the fact that you don't think the installer is simple enough are not technical reasons Windows would be superior to Linux. They're pet peeves at best, and massive misinterpetations of what exactly "Linux" is at worst.
Great idea using the old "I'll probably get modded down for saying this" bluff. Gets 'em every time. Weakminded fools. Though I'll probably be modded to hell for saying that.;)
Prime minister Poutine thanks you for your support in rebuilding our National Igloo. Rest assured, now that we have Grade 3 and FM Radio, every canadian will know who their congressman is, and their neibouring states.
Nope, that's not a multi-Ghz box, that's BeOS. I did that kind of thing on my k6-2 400 back in the day, and was incredibly impressed. This is part of the reason BeOS has such a fanatical following, and why even years after Bes demise, there are still people who are willing to defend it, and develop for it.
By the way, the 3d demos were BROKEN in this release, which is why it was mentioned. There is software OpenGL support, which only makes the demonstration more impressive.
You know, if this was any other forum, I'd kick your ass. People say things like that all the time, and they're entitled to their opinions. A person says they like the Porsche 911 better than the Ford Pinto, and you don't need to even ask -- it's just a feeling that comes from quality engineering and design. It can be exremely difficult to qualify something like that, but it's there. Just look at the control panel in BeOS for an example. Or the way text files can have meta tags embedded in them. Or the way you can pause a movie, drag the image to the desktop, and have a screenshot right there. It's a thousand little things that make the an interface well designed, just like it's a thousand little things that make a 911 nicer than a pinto to drive.
Remember that there has been a Kazaa download for every person in America. It's utter ignorance to think that only geek types see the value in free movies, music, and software. In fact, nearly every non-geek I know who has DSL has a pretty good shared folder with movies and music in there.
but if it compiles, and it runs, then practically, it works. It might not run everywhere, but it does run where you want it to run. Not exactly "BZZZZZZZT! WRONG!!!"...
I never said anything about it being standard, or even paticularly smart. But it is possible, and it would compile, so the "BZZZZT!!! WRONG!" comment isn't exactly completely accurate.
Bzzzzt. Wrong. main() in C must always return an integer.
You fail it, thank you for playing.
Look twice. Unless you're using a different compiler than mine, "void main() { }" compiles. there's nothing technically wrong with "void main(void) { }" either, but it's ugly to throw the command line data into the bitbucket, IMHO.
I don't understand -- I thought when they were repeatedly found stealing code from other companies(Stacker, DEC, etc...) was when they showed how innane any arguement about the matter is when it involves them on the "don't steal code!" side...
Doesn't exist. Sorry. When it does, it will run on a 700Mhz machine with a dx6 video card, because valve is run by intelligent people who want their current fanbase to be able to run the game.
Might I remind you that these same idiots were calling for UT2003 to be the end of modern hardware as well, and it'll run just fine on a p4 1.6Ghz with a Geforce 2 MX 200 video card(not at a paticularly high resolution, but it's very playable). "Cold war" style upgrading is so unbelievably stupid, and flies in the face of so much conventional logic, that anyone who does it has no choice but to look like an utter idiot.
not even the Geforce 4 MX is in the same backwards reigion as the Radeon 7000! the radeons were competing with the Geforce 2s, IIRC, wheras the 8500s were just barely nicking the geforce 3s. the geforce 4 would be such a better card, on such a groundbreaking level, that you'd have to be NUTS to think the 7000 is anything more than an aging relic of ATIs previously sparse value line!
Slashdot Mirror
I find it slightly ironic that a person who is more than likely advocating the use of C or C++ is whining about details of the BASIC language introducing bugs.
I once had an Atari with 512 bytes of memory...
Then I got a TRS-80 with 32k of memory. It was a strange and surreal experience.
Then I got a PC with 4Mb of memory. That too was a strange and surreal experience.
Now I own a PC with 512MB of memory and a hundred gigs of hard drive space. Surrealism has left the building. It's just strange.
Perhaps you should seek counselling for your CHRONIC BRAIN DAMAGE before blaming the programming language.
Honestly. Blaming a programming language not for a few bad habits, but for a TOTAL INABILITY to learn another? Please, tell me, what horrible design flaws of QB have so crippled your ability to reason and learn to the point that you can't even pick up another programming language without it overwhelming your obviously superior intelligence?
In it's defense, QB can be just as structured as others if you remember to throw out the GOTO statement and line numbers. It's more the way BASIC is taught, as a relic of old MS BASIC on 8 bit machines, that dictate that it is nessessarily less structured than other languages.
I invite you to take a look at what I've done with the language (technically, I'm still starting out with programming, but considering that I'm going into a different field, I don't really feel the need to move to anything more powerful since I've managed to make a nice little 2d engine using Qbasic) at my website.
What the bloody hell are you talking about? More importantly, why is it that every time someone poses a viewpoint here, someone decides it's someone who read a book and took it too seriously? I've pondered long hours hammering out my personal beliefs, and unlike some people, whose personal philosophy is composed of a gallery of one-liners from their favourite movies, mine is mine alone.
What I said, no matter how blunty I said it, is the truth. Right now we have people who have never written a line of code in their lives telling us how to write software. People who have never designed anything in their lives telling us how to design software projects, people who have never pondered greater strategies for more than an instant telling us where to take things, it's a zoo. As far as I'm concerned, only people who have created something should be able to say these things. Only they know the burden of creation. Everyone else is just an irritating consumer who thinks he knows better than everyone else because he watched a couple made for TV movies.
There are two kinds of people in the world -- consumers and creators. Only other creators have the slightest right to critisize others who devote their lives to creation. The rest are parasites.
Why would they? If the card does what they want it to do, why bother searching the entire market for another alternative -- especially for a 5FPS difference in Game X(and a 5 FPS loss in Game Y)?
I'm going to be frank. I don't believe you're in a position to be talking about linux, especially not in the context of telling it what it needs. From the way to speak of it as if it's not an inanimate abstract object made mostly of magnetic impulses to the strange and unrelenting demands you put on the browser and the office suite, to the incoherent way you change your story, to the list of things you do with your machine, I get the impression you might not have all the tools you need to be appraising it.
You seem to have a couple things confused. I could be mistaken, but it looks that way.
;)
Taking forever to choose a platform for graphics and sound isn't a product of compatibility, it's a product of choice. I know that's a foreign concept to a lot of computer users, so I'll explain. You see, in an efficient marketplace, there are generally several competitors, all who have their respective strengths and weaknesses. Sometimes, it will take a customer more than half a second(!!) to decide, based on these strengths and weaknesses, which is fine, because in that way, mulitple products(now, this is the important part now) can co-exist because not every customer has the same requirements. To put this in a less abstract way, look at your grocers juice aisle, at the orange juice. Odds are, there might be Sun Rype, Dole, Minute Maid and Sunkist, all in the same aisle. They don't stock them all because it's the idealistic thing to do, they do it because some people have different goals and different desires.(My personal favourite is Sun Rype, because the rest taste like orange peels).
As for the installer, last time I checked, Linux was not Red Hat. Mandrake, for instance, has an installation from scratch that puts the Windows 2k or XP installations to shame in terms of allowing the beginner to install the product without knowing a thing, yet allowing experts to delve into details.
I wouldn't really argue that Linux is technically superior in every way to Windows, as there are a few features which I think windows does better than the Linux platforms I've seen(and I doubt that will change until the 2.6 kernel is released and bundled into new distributions), but you haven't given an example otherwise. The lack of choice on the Windows platform and the fact that you don't think the installer is simple enough are not technical reasons Windows would be superior to Linux. They're pet peeves at best, and massive misinterpetations of what exactly "Linux" is at worst.
Great idea using the old "I'll probably get modded down for saying this" bluff. Gets 'em every time. Weakminded fools. Though I'll probably be modded to hell for saying that.
In the words of the immortal Mr. T:
"I pity the fool who thinks those suckas want what consumers want!"
Wouldn't that be like a company called "Manufacturer" making a product called "Personal Comptuer", and trying to trademark both?
Prime minister Poutine thanks you for your support in rebuilding our National Igloo. Rest assured, now that we have Grade 3 and FM Radio, every canadian will know who their congressman is, and their neibouring states.
Nope, that's not a multi-Ghz box, that's BeOS. I did that kind of thing on my k6-2 400 back in the day, and was incredibly impressed. This is part of the reason BeOS has such a fanatical following, and why even years after Bes demise, there are still people who are willing to defend it, and develop for it.
By the way, the 3d demos were BROKEN in this release, which is why it was mentioned. There is software OpenGL support, which only makes the demonstration more impressive.
You know, if this was any other forum, I'd kick your ass. People say things like that all the time, and they're entitled to their opinions. A person says they like the Porsche 911 better than the Ford Pinto, and you don't need to even ask -- it's just a feeling that comes from quality engineering and design. It can be exremely difficult to qualify something like that, but it's there. Just look at the control panel in BeOS for an example. Or the way text files can have meta tags embedded in them. Or the way you can pause a movie, drag the image to the desktop, and have a screenshot right there. It's a thousand little things that make the an interface well designed, just like it's a thousand little things that make a 911 nicer than a pinto to drive.
Would someone please show me where the washroom is?
Remember that there has been a Kazaa download for every person in America. It's utter ignorance to think that only geek types see the value in free movies, music, and software. In fact, nearly every non-geek I know who has DSL has a pretty good shared folder with movies and music in there.
GREAT! Now that we don't need to follow the laws of reality anymore, let's go CRAZY!
Eminems hair is a crime against humanity.
The last star wars movie was a murder weapon.
Brittany Spears is a used crack needle!
Kangaroo Jack is a tool for Treason!
Princess Mononoke is a terrorist tool used by the CIA to spy on the japs!
but if it compiles, and it runs, then practically, it works. It might not run everywhere, but it does run where you want it to run. Not exactly "BZZZZZZZT! WRONG!!!"...
I never said anything about it being standard, or even paticularly smart. But it is possible, and it would compile, so the "BZZZZT!!! WRONG!" comment isn't exactly completely accurate.
Bzzzzt. Wrong. main() in C must always return an integer.
You fail it, thank you for playing.
Look twice. Unless you're using a different compiler than mine, "void main() { }" compiles. there's nothing technically wrong with "void main(void) { }" either, but it's ugly to throw the command line data into the bitbucket, IMHO.
I don't understand -- I thought when they were repeatedly found stealing code from other companies(Stacker, DEC, etc...) was when they showed how innane any arguement about the matter is when it involves them on the "don't steal code!" side...
Doesn't exist. Sorry. When it does, it will run on a 700Mhz machine with a dx6 video card, because valve is run by intelligent people who want their current fanbase to be able to run the game.
Might I remind you that these same idiots were calling for UT2003 to be the end of modern hardware as well, and it'll run just fine on a p4 1.6Ghz with a Geforce 2 MX 200 video card(not at a paticularly high resolution, but it's very playable). "Cold war" style upgrading is so unbelievably stupid, and flies in the face of so much conventional logic, that anyone who does it has no choice but to look like an utter idiot.
Are you absolutely INSANE?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
not even the Geforce 4 MX is in the same backwards reigion as the Radeon 7000! the radeons were competing with the Geforce 2s, IIRC, wheras the 8500s were just barely nicking the geforce 3s. the geforce 4 would be such a better card, on such a groundbreaking level, that you'd have to be NUTS to think the 7000 is anything more than an aging relic of ATIs previously sparse value line!
Tenebrae comes close. :)
:) )
(To be fair, my first encounter with glQuake was on an s3 ViRGE, so I can't say too much in that regard.