DON'T BUY HARDWARE THAT ONLY HAS PROPRIETARY DRIVERS
You forgot the last part: "where there is a viable alternative."
If you want decent 3D acceleration of any kind you either buy ATi or nVidia. There are no longer any other serious competitors in this area.
Don't rag on nVidia - as has been said here before, they can't OS their drivers because of licences from third parties. They are the ones we should be talking to.
It would be great to have suspend2 (aka hibernate) support. When I'm not using my home computer I want it to use zero power but still be able to leave all my applications and documents open.
Bungie stated out time and again that Microsoft didn't affect Halo's development, but somehow the message never seems to get through.
You're kidding, right? A Microsoft department says that nothing has changed now that they are owned by Microsoft? What else did you expect them to say? "Our dictators have screwed us over and changed everything, now can we have a raise?". Do you really believe Bungie was developing Halo with the XBox in mind?
If Halo would have been such an amazing game, why didn't Microsoft go with that?
Simple - they had to dumb the game down until it could fit into the confines of the limited time/memory space of the XBox. They made it as good as it could be for the target hardware, but of course the target hardware had changed from Mac and PC to XBox. When they decide to release it for PC, they have a problem. If they pull out all the stops and develop for the platforms capabilities, the comparison will reflect poorly on the XBox, so of course they have to keep it dumbed down. The poor quality and performance of Halo on PC compared with similarly specced games at the time is well known and can be easily observed. The other alternative is that the original game engine was crap to begin with but I find this unlikely given early (pre-MS-buyout) reports.
What I disagree with is any claim that Firefox passes the Acid2 test. It doesn't. Firefox fails the Acid2 test. End of story.
It's not a problem though, as you say, since the Acid2 test isn't a show-stopper for being a viable web browser. So I guess we're really just debating semantics.
You didn't really miss much. unless you look at what HALO was supposed to be. To quote myself from another article:
Halo is a PC game. It was designed to be a PC game and the original version always will be an unfinished PC game. Bungy made it, and they made it great.
Unforunately, not long before the game was ready, Microsoft bought Bungie studios and shelved Halo. They then ported whatever they could from the carcass to the then new XBox just in time for a Christmas release. Thus Halo/XBox was born.
A few months later, Microsoft were kind enough to grace us PC gamers with a port of Halo/XBox to the PC. But make no mistake - this was not the original version by any means. Because it's a port of an XBox game, game play is severely retarded due to the pathetic 64MB memory of the XBox, textures are repetitive and performenace is dog slow. This is Halo/XBox/PC.
But still, in practice, wouldn't "passes most of the test modules" (i.e. Firefox) be better than "requires users to replace their PC or peripherals or both" (i.e. Konqueror/Safari, which has no native Win32 port)?
In many cases it would probably be better, yes. But the program still fails that test. All you've done is dismissed that test as not critical.
Uh, for a computer program to pass any QA test it needs to produce output *exactly* as expected. This isn't some University exam, it's a collection of 1's and 0's. Either it renders the page as it's supposed to (in this case handling invalid input correctly) or it doesn't.
Or, put another way by means of a Simpson's quote: "Come on, do they give a Nobel Prize for attempted chemistry"?
I'm personally not sure 'free' is the way to go. I'm willing to pay if it means I'm getting a quality service. Obviously you'd prefer not to pay but if it means the difference between an unreliable service and one the quality of Xbox Live, are you willing to pay?
Well, any lingering hope that Zonk might not be a Microsoft shill just flushed noisily down the gurgler.
So Sony is now doing bad for offering a service for free huh? Talk about damned if you do...
Why not just ask "if paying money means the difference between an unreliable operating system and one the quality of Windows, are you willing to pay?"
Slashdot Mirror
Your situation sounds interesting.
Did you find some kind of resolution? Did you manage to find another 3D card with FOSS drivers or are you still battling the closed-source ones.
Ah, more Spamming on XBox Live, I see.
I wish Zonk would stop doing that.
DON'T BUY HARDWARE THAT ONLY HAS PROPRIETARY DRIVERS
You forgot the last part:
"where there is a viable alternative."
If you want decent 3D acceleration of any kind you either buy ATi or nVidia. There are no longer any other serious competitors in this area.
Don't rag on nVidia - as has been said here before, they can't OS their drivers because of licences from third parties. They are the ones we should be talking to.
It would be great to have suspend2 (aka hibernate) support. When I'm not using my home computer I want it to use zero power but still be able to leave all my applications and documents open.
Score: 0 (-1 offtopic, +1 interesting)
I believe the term Über can be translated to either Over or Super, which are both synonymous.
THe purpose of trademarks is entirely for consumer protection, to prevent confusion in the marketplace.
Well that's not entirely true is it? Otherwise what incentive would companies have to register their trademarks?
Of course you're right.
Funny, though, that the most offensive of those cartoons are now believed to have originated from Muslims and blamed on those "Infidel Zionists".
Bungie stated out time and again that Microsoft didn't affect Halo's development, but somehow the message never seems to get through.
You're kidding, right? A Microsoft department says that nothing has changed now that they are owned by Microsoft? What else did you expect them to say? "Our dictators have screwed us over and changed everything, now can we have a raise?". Do you really believe Bungie was developing Halo with the XBox in mind?
If Halo would have been such an amazing game, why didn't Microsoft go with that?
Simple - they had to dumb the game down until it could fit into the confines of the limited time/memory space of the XBox. They made it as good as it could be for the target hardware, but of course the target hardware had changed from Mac and PC to XBox. When they decide to release it for PC, they have a problem. If they pull out all the stops and develop for the platforms capabilities, the comparison will reflect poorly on the XBox, so of course they have to keep it dumbed down. The poor quality and performance of Halo on PC compared with similarly specced games at the time is well known and can be easily observed. The other alternative is that the original game engine was crap to begin with but I find this unlikely given early (pre-MS-buyout) reports.
Agreed 100%.
What I disagree with is any claim that Firefox passes the Acid2 test. It doesn't. Firefox fails the Acid2 test. End of story.
It's not a problem though, as you say, since the Acid2 test isn't a show-stopper for being a viable web browser. So I guess we're really just debating semantics.
You didn't really miss much. unless you look at what HALO was supposed to be. To quote myself from another article:
Halo is a PC game. It was designed to be a PC game and the original version always will be an unfinished PC game. Bungy made it, and they made it great.
Unforunately, not long before the game was ready, Microsoft bought Bungie studios and shelved Halo. They then ported whatever they could from the carcass to the then new XBox just in time for a Christmas release. Thus Halo/XBox was born.
A few months later, Microsoft were kind enough to grace us PC gamers with a port of Halo/XBox to the PC. But make no mistake - this was not the original version by any means. Because it's a port of an XBox game, game play is severely retarded due to the pathetic 64MB memory of the XBox, textures are repetitive and performenace is dog slow. This is Halo/XBox/PC.
I doubt Halo/PC will ever see the light of day.
But still, in practice, wouldn't "passes most of the test modules" (i.e. Firefox) be better than "requires users to replace their PC or peripherals or both" (i.e. Konqueror/Safari, which has no native Win32 port)?
In many cases it would probably be better, yes. But the program still fails that test. All you've done is dismissed that test as not critical.
The asterisk confuses me... what the #%@! is h*ck supposed to mean?
hack, heck, hick, hock, huck, or my favourite hyck of course.
duh
Yes, I wish he'd stop doing that.
/. about Xbox Live?
How many articles have we seen from Zonk recently that are basically XboxLive ads?
Or should that be Spamming on
Uh, for a computer program to pass any QA test it needs to produce output *exactly* as expected. This isn't some University exam, it's a collection of 1's and 0's. Either it renders the page as it's supposed to (in this case handling invalid input correctly) or it doesn't.
Or, put another way by means of a Simpson's quote:
"Come on, do they give a Nobel Prize for attempted chemistry"?
Microsoft has held the web back long enough with their refusal to implement proper PNG rendering - their holding back the web has to stop now.
Most of us web devs treat MS browsers as damage and route around them anyway.
Unfortunately not all web devs can do that through fear of driving away customers.
Just use Ogg Vorbis and get better quality for less bitrate.
Oh, and forget about DRM or the need to pay evil patent royalties to Fraunhoffer/Thomson.
Just in case you don't know, selective abortion = infanticide.
I don't know. Is it any more than in countries that kill baby boys and girls if the mum finds them inconvenient?
"Africa's $100 Laptop Mocks Gates"
What the blazes is Microsoft doing running a Government Leaders Forum? We already know that Gates isn't fit to run a country.
I'm personally not sure 'free' is the way to go. I'm willing to pay if it means I'm getting a quality service. Obviously you'd prefer not to pay but if it means the difference between an unreliable service and one the quality of Xbox Live, are you willing to pay?
Well, any lingering hope that Zonk might not be a Microsoft shill just flushed noisily down the gurgler.
So Sony is now doing bad for offering a service for free huh? Talk about damned if you do...
Why not just ask "if paying money means the difference between an unreliable operating system and one the quality of Windows, are you willing to pay?"
I'm not sure - does the current day end with a 'y'?
That aside, Xbox Live makes up for it all. It's an incredible experience and it alone makes buying an X360 worth it.
Really? Some crappy online experience makes playing with consoles more fun? Makes me wonder why I ever stopped playing QuakeWorld.
The Xbox runs a very, very customized version of the Windows 2000 kernel, but that's about where things end.
That and the fact that the XBox is basically a hardware implementation of the DirectX libraries.
Why do you think they were going for 5x face value on eBay?
Because like with any new technology, some very silly people will pay anything for a new toy for bragging rights.
Look, if you like Microsoft and their products then either you are someone who doesn't know Microsoft or you are Microsoft. Which are you my friend?
Why do people dismiss PostgreSQL
It's because LAMP sounds so much cooler than LAPP!
... it wasn't official the last two times?