Note I said "IMHO", meaning a Windows based solution doesn't qualify as a solution for me because it would be the equivalent of a black box. A "proper" Linux based solution would give me much more flexibility.
Really trying not to flame here, but if you're running Linux. The Radeon 8500 does *not* qualify as a "Real HTPC" *yet*. ATi needs to get off their bums and do a bit more for the 8500 Linux driver situation before I would consider this a "Real HTPC" solution.
IMHO, a Windows based PC is *not* a real HTPC, and with the current state of Radeon 8500 drivers under Linux, it disqualifies this. Also, to be quite honest, there are very few extremly well polished *fully legal* DVD players for Linux. (Software)
There is NO direct link to the download because of theregistration process.
Here is how to get it:
1) Goto http://scopes.real.com/real/player/unix/unix.html 2) Fill in the form and Choose Linux 2.x (libc6 i386). 3) click on "Download Community Supported Player" 4) Don't click on the normal download links. Go look at the very bottom of the page. You will see
" RealOne Player for Unix - Preview Release If you would like to try the alpha version of RealOne Player for Linux 2.2 x86, use the button below."
This is one of the best written articles I've read on slashdot in a while, almost makes me want to hit that subscribe button in my profile:p
Somehow I wonder if the author of the Spiderman property would agree with it being 'simple'. Maybe, but to me comic book heroes have never been simple. Their psyche, their motivations, loves, etc. are merely reflections (IMHO) of the author who writes them. It has oft been said that a painting paints the picture of an artist, rather than the other way around.
For me though, I agree that to a certain extent Batman has been horribly Saturday Morning Disney Cartoonized. I miss the more hamlet-like soliloquys that used to pervade comics like Batman. At the same time, I don't think they're "dead yet", some of the work that was done in the early 90's late 80's on the animated serious was plenty dark sometimes. Harvey in the animated series was often a chracter that brought an appropriate amount of darkness to the show.
I disagree with the assumption that most people will like Spiderman better than AoC simply because of a 'simpler story'. Look at the enormous popularity of the Lord of the Rings movie, it is far from simple.
True, but still less uninformed than would appear to be originally. *BUT* it was not nearly as customizable until the days of Windows ME/XP where it came "built in". And besides, IE4 was pretty crappy:p
Wow, you're uninformed:) Every since users could download and install IE 5.5, there has been the 'web desktop' option, that makes all launching and most windows behaviors use single-click instead of double-click...
I don't own a VIA chipset because I had so many problems with AGP and the like, so I can't vouch for that. Although the word from other people is that it works better with the VIA chipset now. (Although it was VIA's fault to begin with IMO). SMP? Not sure there either. Although there are SMP people who use the Audigy from what I can gather on the lists. The compelling reason for me to go to the Audigy from the Live! was the difference in audio quality I have a klipsch pro media 4.1 set and the drastic difference in clarity and crossover frequency response justified the mere $99 it cost me:)
Re:Drivers, Updates, and Creative gouging us?
on
Testing the Audigy
·
· Score: 1
Not true, they still offer 'liveware' driver updates. Just not the software, which if you have ever worked in the software business you'd realize that their Liveware updates are large, which means they have to provide bandwidth (which is still semi-expensive these days), they have to provide servers to host it, or pay for them, the software in the updates is often a major revision and not a minor one, and since it's a new version new support training/etc. is required. With the margins on their soundcards, it's almost necessary. Although I agree they should flat out say this instead of giving a lame excuse:)
Re:Stay away from Creative Products: full of bugs
on
Testing the Audigy
·
· Score: 1
1) 'driver support is abysmal...'
Perhaps for an Abysmal operating system like Win2k:) Of course driver support in general from *MANY* companies wasn't that great for Win2k, but hell support wasn't that great from Microsoft itself with all the oddball service packs that thing had to have.
2) 'they also insist on trying to install tons of buggy, useless bloatware software that rarely gets used...'
That's funny at last check it was *OPTIONAL* to install any of the 'unnecessary' software. And some people (not I, but some) who are not power computer users *do* like those 'bloatware' utilities.
3) 'not smp safe...' You are *NOT* the average user, *LOTS* of things aren't SMP safe, and you should have done some research to check if it was first before jumping the gun and buying.
4) 'support of the Live! cards in Linux was initially dreadful...'
Perhaps because it was a community supported/developed driver? Hmmm? I've owned the live almost since it came out and I've always got decent sound out of it under Linux/Windows. And all of you trolls have been posting that 'Audigy has no support under Linux, blah blah blah...' without bothering to check their freakin Linux driver section which will lead you to http://opensource.creative.com/ where if you look in the mailing list at all you'll find full instructions and some documentation on the technicals of the Audigy card and support for it under Linux....grrrr
5) 'All creative Labs offers are cheap components. Literally. IMHO, they're not worth effort.'
I've owned Creative Labs products since the original SoundBlaster, and I've really never had that many problems with them except for one time and that was because of a crappy ass motherboard so I can't exactly blame that on them. As far as cheap components, I've heard the sound out of my Audigy compared to others and on my Klipsch Promedia 4.1's the crossover frequency response is undeniably great compared to others IMHO....
3 figure price tag? Only if you go for the platinum model. People really need to research better before they speak. It's $99- USD if you get the plain ole' gamer model. Which the card in each version is no different only the software and 'expansion' cards...breakout box, etc.
It works perfectly for me under Windows XP and under Linux, so something must be configured incorrectly or you have not 100% compatible hardware (or compatible but flaky hardware).
The AUDIGY *DOES* work under Linux
on
Testing the Audigy
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
The OpenSource drivers for the emu10k1 in CVS on the 'audigy' branch at http://opensource.creative.com/ allow the Audigy to work 'perfectly' under Linux. I've had no problems thanks to some great volunteers in the community with sound w/ my Audigy under Linux. Might I also add that when I enable sound under Linux in 3d games, I don't take a performance hit like I do in windows:)
Look through the mailing list archive for instructions on how to install the CVS version of the drivers for the Audigy.
700,000 lines is actually pretty small compared to most commercial products these days. And depending on the language it's written in that can vary. Of course it's often been said that most Open Source projects don't have a lot of quality control in the programming department. A lot of strict guidelines are enforced on both coding style and coding documentation where I work.
It is nice to see that the Open Source community can produce something that's every bit as good as Outlook in functionality (I didn't say stability:)...
Why should they support an OS that isn't even out yet? Hold your judgement until it's released. I know for a fact that Creative already has drivers in the works for their entire Live! series of cards later this october for 9x/Me/NT/XP
(web support... how to I access support if I can't access the net because my redhat install bombed?)
Easy, buy the option that includes phone support:) Support is most of the cost of that retail product. And other distributions are raising their prices too. You just have to remember that Red Hat was profitable and they want to stay that way, and the sad truth of the matter is that prices must go up and not down to a certain extent.
No SDL sound does not suck, and OpenAL was written because of that. It wasn't written to provide cross-plastform 3d audio. OpenAL is not really designed to do traditional 2d audio like SDL is.
You can sue the manufacturer of your non-free software (despite licensing agreements to the contrary)
Funny that you say that, because large corporations with large teams of lawyers tend to disagree with that statement. Open Source/Free Software is used at the user's own risk.
And so is a lot of commercial software, apparently...
A developer that improves code does not benefit from the original code, but benefits the original code.
I think you have the wrong idea here, the person who is supposed to benefit is the user.
The person who makes those improvements should have the right to make money off those changes.
Perhaps, but the idea behind the GPL is to ensure that the software remains free. And obviously there are ways for the author to still make money off of changes.
The GPL restricts freedom by restricting source code augmentation to only those who have nothing to gain by releasing changes. This not only restricts the number of people who could use the source, but also severely hampers development efforts to improve "Free" software.
Hmm...I really don't agree with this view at all. This kind of attitude IMHO clearly demonstrates why the GPL is needed. A person's release of their changes to a program is an investment back into the community that gave them a great gift to begin with. The only time that this restricts the number of people who could use the source are when those people have restricted themsleves or accept the restrictions of others upon them. The only reason it could possibly hamper development IMHO would be because the involved individual really has no interest in giving back to the community that so generously donated to them first.
Yes, this means that, with a few exceptions, the vast majority of GPL-Free software is crap and no person or company can be held responsible for its crappiness.
Well, IMO the vast majority of "non-free" software is crap and no person or comapny can be held responsible for its crappiness:) At least you have the opportunity to improve "free" software as you see fit, wheareas "non-free" software remains crappy as long as those who produce it let it remain crappy.
Slashdot Mirror
There are many Mac OS X advocates that would disagree with you :)
Note I said "IMHO", meaning a Windows based solution doesn't qualify as a solution for me because it would be the equivalent of a black box. A "proper" Linux based solution would give me much more flexibility.
Really trying not to flame here, but if you're running Linux. The Radeon 8500 does *not* qualify as a "Real HTPC" *yet*. ATi needs to get off their bums and do a bit more for the 8500 Linux driver situation before I would consider this a "Real HTPC" solution.
IMHO, a Windows based PC is *not* a real HTPC, and with the current state of Radeon 8500 drivers under Linux, it disqualifies this. Also, to be quite honest, there are very few extremly well polished *fully legal* DVD players for Linux. (Software)
Again this is just my opinion...
Not redundant because I was unaware of the post above, I had looked to see if anyone else had said that, I wouldn't have postd it otherwise.
There is NO direct link to the download because of theregistration process.
Here is how to get it:
1) Goto http://scopes.real.com/real/player/unix/unix.html
2) Fill in the form and Choose Linux 2.x (libc6 i386).
3) click on "Download Community Supported Player"
4) Don't click on the normal download links. Go look at the very
bottom of the page. You will see
" RealOne Player for Unix - Preview Release
If you would like to try the alpha version of RealOne Player for
Linux 2.2 x86, use the button below."
5) Click on that button and download.
This is one of the best written articles I've read on slashdot in a while, almost makes me want to hit that subscribe button in my profile :p
Somehow I wonder if the author of the Spiderman property would agree with it being 'simple'. Maybe, but to me comic book heroes have never been simple. Their psyche, their motivations, loves, etc. are merely reflections (IMHO) of the author who writes them. It has oft been said that a painting paints the picture of an artist, rather than the other way around.
For me though, I agree that to a certain extent Batman has been horribly Saturday Morning Disney Cartoonized. I miss the more hamlet-like soliloquys that used to pervade comics like Batman. At the same time, I don't think they're "dead yet", some of the work that was done in the early 90's late 80's on the animated serious was plenty dark sometimes. Harvey in the animated series was often a chracter that brought an appropriate amount of darkness to the show.
I disagree with the assumption that most people will like Spiderman better than AoC simply because of a 'simpler story'. Look at the enormous popularity of the Lord of the Rings movie, it is far from simple.
Anyway, I've rambled enough.
True, but still less uninformed than would appear to be originally. *BUT* it was not nearly as customizable until the days of Windows ME/XP where it came "built in". And besides, IE4 was pretty crappy :p
Wow, you're uninformed :) Every since users could download and install IE 5.5, there has been the 'web desktop' option, that makes all launching and most windows behaviors use single-click instead of double-click...
Windows XP has the same thing built in...
Yes, but you can often get it online cheaper than $99 so with shipping it's still under a $100 which means two digits, NOT three :)
I was speaking of the Audigy.
I don't own a VIA chipset because I had so many problems with AGP and the like, so I can't vouch for that. Although the word from other people is that it works better with the VIA chipset now. (Although it was VIA's fault to begin with IMO). SMP? Not sure there either. Although there are SMP people who use the Audigy from what I can gather on the lists. The compelling reason for me to go to the Audigy from the Live! was the difference in audio quality I have a klipsch pro media 4.1 set and the drastic difference in clarity and crossover frequency response justified the mere $99 it cost me :)
Not true, they still offer 'liveware' driver updates. Just not the software, which if you have ever worked in the software business you'd realize that their Liveware updates are large, which means they have to provide bandwidth (which is still semi-expensive these days), they have to provide servers to host it, or pay for them, the software in the updates is often a major revision and not a minor one, and since it's a new version new support training/etc. is required. With the margins on their soundcards, it's almost necessary. Although I agree they should flat out say this instead of giving a lame excuse :)
1) 'driver support is abysmal...'
:) Of course driver support in general from *MANY* companies wasn't that great for Win2k, but hell support wasn't that great from Microsoft itself with all the oddball service packs that thing had to have.
Perhaps for an Abysmal operating system like Win2k
2) 'they also insist on trying to install tons of buggy, useless bloatware software that rarely gets used...'
That's funny at last check it was *OPTIONAL* to install any of the 'unnecessary' software. And some people (not I, but some) who are not power computer users *do* like those 'bloatware' utilities.
3) 'not smp safe...' You are *NOT* the average user, *LOTS* of things aren't SMP safe, and you should have done some research to check if it was first before jumping the gun and buying.
4) 'support of the Live! cards in Linux was initially dreadful...'
Perhaps because it was a community supported/developed driver? Hmmm? I've owned the live almost since it came out and I've always got decent sound out of it under Linux/Windows. And all of you trolls have been posting that 'Audigy has no support under Linux, blah blah blah...' without bothering to check their freakin Linux driver section which will lead you to http://opensource.creative.com/ where if you look in the mailing list at all you'll find full instructions and some documentation on the technicals of the Audigy card and support for it under Linux....grrrr
5) 'All creative Labs offers are cheap components. Literally. IMHO, they're not worth effort.'
I've owned Creative Labs products since the original SoundBlaster, and I've really never had that many problems with them except for one time and that was because of a crappy ass motherboard so I can't exactly blame that on them. As far as cheap components, I've heard the sound out of my Audigy compared to others and on my Klipsch Promedia 4.1's the crossover frequency response is undeniably great compared to others IMHO....
3 figure price tag? Only if you go for the platinum model. People really need to research better before they speak. It's $99- USD if you get the plain ole' gamer model. Which the card in each version is no different only the software and 'expansion' cards...breakout box, etc.
It works perfectly for me under Windows XP and under Linux, so something must be configured incorrectly or you have not 100% compatible hardware (or compatible but flaky hardware).
The OpenSource drivers for the emu10k1 in CVS on the 'audigy' branch at http://opensource.creative.com/ allow the Audigy to work 'perfectly' under Linux. I've had no problems thanks to some great volunteers in the community with sound w/ my Audigy under Linux. Might I also add that when I enable sound under Linux in 3d games, I don't take a performance hit like I do in windows :)
Look through the mailing list archive for instructions on how to install the CVS version of the drivers for the Audigy.
"minor" services wrinkles? Bwhahahahaa.....more likely total service outage :) I know, that's why we ended up moving #twilight to another IRC server ;)
700,000 lines is actually pretty small compared to most commercial products these days. And depending on the language it's written in that can vary. Of course it's often been said that most Open Source projects don't have a lot of quality control in the programming department. A lot of strict guidelines are enforced on both coding style and coding documentation where I work.
:)...
It is nice to see that the Open Source community can produce something that's every bit as good as Outlook in functionality (I didn't say stability
Why should they support an OS that isn't even out yet? Hold your judgement until it's released. I know for a fact that Creative already has drivers in the works for their entire Live! series of cards later this october for 9x/Me/NT/XP
(web support... how to I access support if I can't access the net because my redhat install bombed?)
:) Support is most of the cost of that retail product. And other distributions are raising their prices too. You just have to remember that Red Hat was profitable and they want to stay that way, and the sad truth of the matter is that prices must go up and not down to a certain extent.
Easy, buy the option that includes phone support
Er...yes, the "alternate" executables work just fine :)
No SDL sound does not suck, and OpenAL was written because of that. It wasn't written to provide cross-plastform 3d audio. OpenAL is not really designed to do traditional 2d audio like SDL is.
Hence why OpenAL was written (AFAIK)...
You can sue the manufacturer of your non-free software (despite licensing agreements to the contrary)
Funny that you say that, because large corporations with large teams of lawyers tend to disagree with that statement.
Open Source/Free Software is used at the user's own risk.
And so is a lot of commercial software, apparently...
A developer that improves code does not benefit from the original code, but benefits the original code.
I think you have the wrong idea here, the person who is supposed to benefit is the user.
The person who makes those improvements should have the right to make money off those changes.
Perhaps, but the idea behind the GPL is to ensure that the software remains free. And obviously there are ways for the author to still make money off of changes.
The GPL restricts freedom by restricting source code augmentation to only those who have nothing to gain by releasing changes. This not only restricts the number of people who could use the source, but also severely hampers development efforts to improve "Free" software.
:) At least you have the opportunity to improve "free" software as you see fit, wheareas "non-free" software remains crappy as long as those who produce it let it remain crappy.
Hmm...I really don't agree with this view at all. This kind of attitude IMHO clearly demonstrates why the GPL is needed. A person's release of their changes to a program is an investment back into the community that gave them a great gift to begin with. The only time that this restricts the number of people who could use the source are when those people have restricted themsleves or accept the restrictions of others upon them. The only reason it could possibly hamper development IMHO would be because the involved individual really has no interest in giving back to the community that so generously donated to them first.
Yes, this means that, with a few exceptions, the vast majority of GPL-Free software is crap and no person or company can be held responsible for its crappiness.
Well, IMO the vast majority of "non-free" software is crap and no person or comapny can be held responsible for its crappiness