Re:But what I am rellay looking forward to...
on
KDE 3.1 Released
·
· Score: 1
Have you tried the "kdekillall" program?
Re:Maybe they should stick with the older hardware
on
Adopt a KDE Geek
·
· Score: 1
As a whole? never? I use ccache?
Compiling KDE on _that_ machine? barely ever. although I do use it for distcc once in a while. On that machine, I barely ever go into X anyways, and I skipped KDE 3.0 as a whole (KDE 2.2.2, I beleive to KDE 3.1 rc3)
Are you talking from experience or from stories you heard of the early versions of MacOSX?
I tend to beleive the latter, as MacOSX 10.1, and especially Jaguar (10.2), has very fast graphics rendering that doesn't use the system's ram. Quartz Extreme keeps the visual representations of windows in video card ram as textures. This is extremely fast, and in day to day usage, as fast as nearly all of pre-Win2k GDI methods and most of the new GDI methods in win2k and XP (GDI+ is completely different.. btw.)
In my ibook, I can open up quite a few fully transparent terminal windows, each with "yes tttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt" running (which continously puts output to stdout), and it's quite a while before any slowdown happens. In MacOSX 10.0, it would have happened after just a few windows.
Wow, I suppose years of research by a company who is reputed to have one of the best human interface development groups and a great set of guidelines, is all to waste. All because a half-witted Slashdot troll who calls himself "IamTheRealMike", disagrees with their design.
> Games that I currently own and play at maximum settings:
Uh, I *really* doubt that you can play those games at 1600x1200, 32 bit, and any kind of AA or anisotropic filtering.
On my R9700Pro, I can barely use more than 4xAA/4x quality aniso (both by no means maximum settings) at those settings, so I *highly* doubt that your GeForce 2 MX can handle that.
So either you're ignorant about what maximum settings means, or you're lieing.
> It's kinda useless to speculate on what their next-gen cards can do
next gen? the ATI 9900 (I've seen 9900 more than 9800 in the rumor mills) Pro will come out within a few months (according to the end of wonderboy's article), and it will still be cheaper than the fx.
> Give nVidia a month or two (when the FX will go general availability)
Give ATI a month or two, and the Radeon 9900/Pro will be announced.. (R9700 with a bump in speed from 300 to 375-400 mhz). AND, it will likely ship for 100$ less than FX Ultra, as it has significantly less manufacturing costs than the FX (0.15 vs. 0.13 micron process, and 9 layer PCB versus 12 layer PCB).
> and get the source small enough to compile within an hour or so.
great.. go rewrite g++ for them so that compiling large C++ apps (mozilla, kde, OO) takes less time.
Re:Maybe they should stick with the older hardware
on
Adopt a KDE Geek
·
· Score: 1
Funny, KDE 3.x runs fine on my pII 450 with 128 mb ram.
I remember KDE 2.1.x running fine on my powerpc 603e 200 mhz (603e=slow chip.. slower than PPC 604 and G3) with 48 mb of ram.
Re:Ok, I have a solution for them.
on
Adopt a KDE Geek
·
· Score: 1
> to hell with feature bloat that they love so dearly, and to hell with chasing the unuseable do everything file manager... rip the damned html and other readers fro mthe file managers...
Uh, if you aren't using the html part from konqueror (and nautilus), it's not even loaded into memory. Like IE, Konq and Nautilus are mostly plugin shells. This contributes to their smallness greatly.
Next are you going to say to remove all modules capablities from Linux?
KDE 1 runs fine on really old PII's. KDE 3.x runs fine on higher end pII's (like my pII 450). Of course, it's performance could be better, but once you disable most of the visual effects, it works fine. I dont end up running KDE much on it however, as it's a router box and I dont run X on it much.
See.. some people hate having to compile thirty or so odd packages. Other people hate having to compile six or so packages in which they can't chose to compile some. Either way, you can't have both.
Of course, i routinely rebuild kde, mozilla, and OO several times on my box(es) each week (not each one several times), and stay fairly up-to-date on xfree-cvs too. This is brought to you by the magic of ccache, distcc, and emerge.
In the new days, with computers that match the hardware, these desktops are still snappy as hell. If you want to run the newest version of KDE or GNOME, then get new hardware. They run quite fine on my Athlon XP 2200+. Perhaps you have slow hardware that makes things look bloated.
Windows 3.1 was slow on my 286 (and I beleive the computer could only do cga). I ran Windows 3.0 instead.
Re:It's all about the bandwidth anyway...
on
Shutting down Kazaa
·
· Score: 1
> Roughly 0% of those I know with dial-up download stuff, they ask those above for a burned CD, but often they don't like asking for hand-outs.
This might be true now, but wasn't true back when the p2p revolution started (e.g, Napster). There were a shitload of modem users on Napster. There were some cable and DSL people, and quite a few college students (the t1/t3'rs). The modem users back then probably just got broadband later.
> Downloading giFT currently requires CVS and SSH.
No it doesn't. It requires CVS only. SSH is only used for sf.net's non-anonymous cvs (i.e, you are a developer for giFT and have write access)
> Compiling UNIX code on Windows requires Cygwin, and running it requires an X server. (Or has it been ported to pure Win32 to compile with the MinGW compiler?)
Uh, the main method of compiling giFT is to use a product called Microsoft Visual C++. Perhaps you've heard of it, no? giFT includes the VC project files within the win32 directory. The secondary method is to use MinGW. I've heard of cygwin builds, but it really isn't necessary.
> Compiling UNIX code on Windows requires Cygwin, and running it requires an X server.
Uh, giFT is a deamon. Even on linux, it doesn't require a X server. Some frontends do, but even the most popular frontend for linux, giFTcurs, is console based. So what X server?
> In other words, praising giFT on Slashdot is spreading vapour.
Not really. there are a bunch of people on slashdot who have compilers, whether they be on an UNIX-like OS (many people are), or have a compiler in a windows OS (many people are developers).
Slashdot is news for nerds. Many nerds have this shit. get over it.
Re:P2P Needs a More Secure Base (e.g. FreeNetProje
on
Shutting down Kazaa
·
· Score: 1
The problem with freenet, at least what I've seen in the past, is that it just doesn't do the p2p side of things very well, as things are not as direct as it is with other networks. The average p2p user is rather going to want content coming into their hd immediately.
> Kazaa is, AFAIK, a closed-source proprietary network. This network is presumably written and maintained by a small staff of dedicated programmers.
Unless the protocol is not broken, like it has been in the past (giFT 0.9.x). The main reason that the current protocol hasn't been broken yet is because 1). it's tough and time consuming to do, but not impossible 2). once it's done, the kazaa programmers could easily break it again, which they did in the past (KaZaA 1.3.3)
If the kazaa programmers were taken out of the picture, I'm pretty sure that groups like the "givers" who broke the protocol before, would do it again.
> I happen to be on one hub which requires 100gig verified share and 10mbit of bandwidth...
Which is *very* easy to fake. I can grab dc_gui from here, install it, goto the user prefs tab, goto shares, change the size offset to 150.43 GB (or whatever you want), and add a virtual share directory of my current download directory.
If I really did want to share anything, I could change the QOS settings to low cost IN the client, or add a very small upload bandwidth limit (minimum 0.5 kb/s in it)
Slashdot Mirror
Have you tried the "kdekillall" program?
As a whole? never? I use ccache?
Compiling KDE on _that_ machine? barely ever. although I do use it for distcc once in a while. On that machine, I barely ever go into X anyways, and I skipped KDE 3.0 as a whole (KDE 2.2.2, I beleive to KDE 3.1 rc3)
Are you talking from experience or from stories you heard of the early versions of MacOSX?
I tend to beleive the latter, as MacOSX 10.1, and especially Jaguar (10.2), has very fast graphics rendering that doesn't use the system's ram. Quartz Extreme keeps the visual representations of windows in video card ram as textures. This is extremely fast, and in day to day usage, as fast as nearly all of pre-Win2k GDI methods and most of the new GDI methods in win2k and XP (GDI+ is completely different.. btw.)
In my ibook, I can open up quite a few fully transparent terminal windows, each with "yes tttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt" running (which continously puts output to stdout), and it's quite a while before any slowdown happens. In MacOSX 10.0, it would have happened after just a few windows.
Wow, I suppose years of research by a company who is reputed to have one of the best human interface development groups and a great set of guidelines, is all to waste. All because a half-witted Slashdot troll who calls himself "IamTheRealMike", disagrees with their design.
Pretty cool, eh.
> It runs perfectly acceptably - i've not noticed any slow down at all (admittedly only 1024x768 but that's fine for a game)
What other settings are you running? Any AA? Is aniso on?
Guess what, UT and q3 are both three year old games. If they didn't run on a p3/600, there would be something horribly wrong with the games.
> Games that I currently own and play at maximum settings:
Uh, I *really* doubt that you can play those games at 1600x1200, 32 bit, and any kind of AA or anisotropic filtering.
On my R9700Pro, I can barely use more than 4xAA/4x quality aniso (both by no means maximum settings) at those settings, so I *highly* doubt that your GeForce 2 MX can handle that.
So either you're ignorant about what maximum settings means, or you're lieing.
They said "fiscal year 2004", not the year 2004. Worlds of difference, since most of fiscal year 2004 is the end of 2003.
> It's kinda useless to speculate on what their next-gen cards can do
next gen? the ATI 9900 (I've seen 9900 more than 9800 in the rumor mills) Pro will come out within a few months (according to the end of wonderboy's article), and it will still be cheaper than the fx.
> Give nVidia a month or two (when the FX will go general availability)
Give ATI a month or two, and the Radeon 9900/Pro will be announced.. (R9700 with a bump in speed from 300 to 375-400 mhz). AND, it will likely ship for 100$ less than FX Ultra, as it has significantly less manufacturing costs than the FX (0.15 vs. 0.13 micron process, and 9 layer PCB versus 12 layer PCB).
If you think that a gf4 mx is load, wait till the FX! 77 dB baby.
look here
> and get the source small enough to compile within an hour or so.
great.. go rewrite g++ for them so that compiling large C++ apps (mozilla, kde, OO) takes less time.
Funny, KDE 3.x runs fine on my pII 450 with 128 mb ram.
I remember KDE 2.1.x running fine on my powerpc 603e 200 mhz (603e=slow chip.. slower than PPC 604 and G3) with 48 mb of ram.
> to hell with feature bloat that they love so dearly, and to hell with chasing the unuseable do everything file manager... rip the damned html and other readers fro mthe file managers...
Uh, if you aren't using the html part from konqueror (and nautilus), it's not even loaded into memory. Like IE, Konq and Nautilus are mostly plugin shells. This contributes to their smallness greatly.
Next are you going to say to remove all modules capablities from Linux?
Probably because the guy who started this is a KDE hacker, and thus has the closest links with other KDE developers :)
:)
> I'm hoping to see something like adopt an open source developer.
start it then
KDE 1 runs fine on really old PII's. KDE 3.x runs fine on higher end pII's (like my pII 450). Of course, it's performance could be better, but once you disable most of the visual effects, it works fine. I dont end up running KDE much on it however, as it's a router box and I dont run X on it much.
See.. some people hate having to compile thirty or so odd packages. Other people hate having to compile six or so packages in which they can't chose to compile some. Either way, you can't have both.
Of course, i routinely rebuild kde, mozilla, and OO several times on my box(es) each week (not each one several times), and stay fairly up-to-date on xfree-cvs too. This is brought to you by the magic of ccache, distcc, and emerge.
In the new days, with computers that match the hardware, these desktops are still snappy as hell. If you want to run the newest version of KDE or GNOME, then get new hardware. They run quite fine on my Athlon XP 2200+. Perhaps you have slow hardware that makes things look bloated.
Windows 3.1 was slow on my 286 (and I beleive the computer could only do cga). I ran Windows 3.0 instead.
> Roughly 0% of those I know with dial-up download stuff, they ask those above for a burned CD, but often they don't like asking for hand-outs.
This might be true now, but wasn't true back when the p2p revolution started (e.g, Napster). There were a shitload of modem users on Napster. There were some cable and DSL people, and quite a few college students (the t1/t3'rs). The modem users back then probably just got broadband later.
> although there isn't as much content yet(that's why more people need to use is).
Of course, once giFT is released, and win32 frontends are released unto download.com and the like, I think this will change.
> Downloading giFT currently requires CVS and SSH.
No it doesn't. It requires CVS only. SSH is only used for sf.net's non-anonymous cvs (i.e, you are a developer for giFT and have write access)
> Compiling UNIX code on Windows requires Cygwin, and running it requires an X server. (Or has it been ported to pure Win32 to compile with the MinGW compiler?)
Uh, the main method of compiling giFT is to use a product called Microsoft Visual C++. Perhaps you've heard of it, no? giFT includes the VC project files within the win32 directory. The secondary method is to use MinGW. I've heard of cygwin builds, but it really isn't necessary.
> Compiling UNIX code on Windows requires Cygwin, and running it requires an X server.
Uh, giFT is a deamon. Even on linux, it doesn't require a X server. Some frontends do, but even the most popular frontend for linux, giFTcurs, is console based. So what X server?
> In other words, praising giFT on Slashdot is spreading vapour.
Not really. there are a bunch of people on slashdot who have compilers, whether they be on an UNIX-like OS (many people are), or have a compiler in a windows OS (many people are developers).
Slashdot is news for nerds. Many nerds have this shit. get over it.
The problem with freenet, at least what I've seen in the past, is that it just doesn't do the p2p side of things very well, as things are not as direct as it is with other networks. The average p2p user is rather going to want content coming into their hd immediately.
> Kazaa is, AFAIK, a closed-source proprietary network. This network is presumably written and maintained by a small staff of dedicated programmers.
Unless the protocol is not broken, like it has been in the past (giFT 0.9.x). The main reason that the current protocol hasn't been broken yet is because 1). it's tough and time consuming to do, but not impossible 2). once it's done, the kazaa programmers could easily break it again, which they did in the past (KaZaA 1.3.3)
If the kazaa programmers were taken out of the picture, I'm pretty sure that groups like the "givers" who broke the protocol before, would do it again.
> I happen to be on one hub which requires 100gig verified share and 10mbit of bandwidth...
Which is *very* easy to fake. I can grab dc_gui from here, install it, goto the user prefs tab, goto shares, change the size offset to 150.43 GB (or whatever you want), and add a virtual share directory of my current download directory.
If I really did want to share anything, I could change the QOS settings to low cost IN the client, or add a very small upload bandwidth limit (minimum 0.5 kb/s in it)