Depends on what they try to show. Something like Homestar Runner (or any other intelligently-designed SWF animation) would probably be just fine, size-wise. Trying to stream 600MB of video over the dialup modem seems kinda silly, though.
shutting them down or relocating their staff from Las Vegas
If by "shutting down or relocating" you mean "firing most of them and offering most of them unfavorable relocation terms", then yes, this is accurate.
BTW: There were plans for a GDI/Nod based C&C, using the Generals engine, but this was prior to the Vegas closure... so who knows if it is still in the mix or not. It seems that EA is far more interested in exploiting present-day tragedy than in providing epic fantasy.
it's not something you typcially need to know about unless you're trying to do something weird, like use a C++ library from within an Objective-C program
What's so weird about this? Personally, I find Objective-C to be a problematic, weird language, with an unappealing syntax. I know Apple considers the dynamic binding to be a "feature", but I'm all about static type checking... hell, I'd add more rigid type checking to C++ if I could:-)
I vastly prefer to work in C++. No way do I want to use Objective-C more than I have to.
(For the record, I have written plenty of code in Objective-C, back in the pre-Apple NextStep days. So this is not a completely ignorant comment:-)
Dude, it's not all about games. The drive on my work laptop is agonizingly slow, so much so that the system pretty much goes to its knees during I/O bound activity, like, say, recompiling lots of code. I would kill to have a developer-oriented laptop with really, really fast internal drive speed. (Any manufacturers listening out there?:-)
Exists. Or rather, existed: the Corbin Sparrow, a three-wheeled electric fiberglass thing made by Corbin Motors. I had one (briefly) and it was a brilliant concept, but was derailed by the Corbin's utter lack of a freakin' clue about building vehicles (or running a business in general)... they were incredibly unreliable, and as it turns out, fundamentally unstable in some real-world road situations. Anyway, they went out of business last year, but you can still find info about this by googling for Corbin Sparrow....
The automakers have distinct and instantly recognizable product lines for each segment of the market. None of the hundreds of Linux distributions have the visibility of Windows or the Mac or as clearly defined a target audience.
Well, there you have it then: to make Linux a success, just have the various distros take on the persona of the automakers.
No shit. I wish one had existed when I was working for A Major Game Publisher -- I would have joined in a heartbeat.
After 6 months on 80-100 hour weeks, though, with no overtime, no royalties, no meaningful bonuses, I left, and I'd say I'm done with games forever, most likely, barring a major change in industry practices.
...when they finally make a native port, will it be based on GTK or Qt?
And there's the rub: there are too many moving targets for the existing (huge, evil, money-grubbing) commerical Windows vendors to economically do a port.
Want Windows ports? Provide a wrapper library for me to port MFC apps into Qt and/or Gtk easily, while maintaining a more-or-less MFC source base.
It may not be ideologically "pure", but in this case, it's not about art, it's about percentage...
Look, folks: if you want to see a slew of Windows apps ported "native" to Linux, there's one thing that will make it happen much more quickly:
Come up with an MFC-to-KDE (or MFC-to-Gnome) adapter library. A huge proportion of apps (including most of Macromedia's) are written in MFC internally -- even the Mac versions, which use an MFC "wrapper".
This may not be as ideologically "pure" as you would like, but I guarantee it's the only way that a lot of existing Windows-based apps would get ported quickly.
Re:I though otherwise, so did my physics teacher.
on
Comic Book Physics
·
· Score: 1
Actually, there was an excellent take on this in an old Fantastic Four (or was it Avengers?), if I recall correctly.
(Warning, major comic book geekiness here)
Anyway... Gladiator (roughly a Shi'ar equivalent of Superman) picks up a building by one corner, which Reed Richards correctly realizes is impossible to do by simple strength, due to structural issues. They end up taking advantage of this realization to stop him.
Agreed here. I find it truly sad that this wasn't a high priority of the standards committees and/or compiter writers from way back. It seems mind-boggling that some sort of Universal Wrapper Definition still doesn't exist for C++....
Wow... I have the strongly disagree on both points here. C is definitely simple, but not elegant. Of course, C++ is neither, but I find it immensely more productive and reliable for real-world coding.
Objective-C is, IMHO, an a poor compromise of a language, which extended C syntax to add object-orientation, but in a way syntactically bizarre compared to other C usage. Not to mention the fact that it hasn't even kept up pace with the C standard; last time I checked, using C99 code like
for (int i = 0; i FOO; ++i) {... }
wouldn't compile (at least, using Apple's version of gcc), since it wouldn't accept the inside-the-parens var declaration...
"As a plus, Hertzfeld notes in the faq that the python code running the well-designed and easy to navigate site will be made public in the near future."
Cool. This looks like a neat software setup for a website. I'll be interested in trying it out after it gets released.
Not overselling bandwidth would be the stupidest thing any ISP ever did. It would make it absolutely impossible to profit. This thing only works because at any given moment only 5% of our customers are downloading.
Fine, but if you're not really offering 768/128 on a 24x7 basis, you should make that clear. Offer a monthly transfer cap that works out to that 5% average, then charge (appropriately) for overages.
I certainly don't mind paying for the bandwidth I use, but I need to know what those "reasonable" limits are.
> What do you guys want?... They're not going to > change their advertising to state bandwidth > limitations just to appease the hardcore nerds
Well, yeah, actually that is exactly what I want.
If they advertise "unlimited", they should mean "unlimited", aka "as much as I can possibly suck down, 24/7". If this isn't what they mean, they shouldn't say it. Duh.
I don't mind having a limit. But I *do* want to know, up front, what it is.
Why not make a spam auto-responder that will go thru your spam folder, and attempt to respond to any emails, "click" on any links, etc... that would start to cost *them* bandwidth:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Depends on what they try to show. Something like Homestar Runner (or any other intelligently-designed SWF animation) would probably be just fine, size-wise. Trying to stream 600MB of video over the dialup modem seems kinda silly, though.
Does this mean I'll finally be able to watch Homestar Runner on my TiVo?
If by "shutting down or relocating" you mean "firing most of them and offering most of them unfavorable relocation terms", then yes, this is accurate.
BTW: There were plans for a GDI/Nod based C&C, using the Generals engine, but this was prior to the Vegas closure... so who knows if it is still in the mix or not. It seems that EA is far more interested in exploiting present-day tragedy than in providing epic fantasy.
I think for everyone here when I say: WTF?
Do NOT click on these links. One is spoofed to the infamous tubgirl.
What's so weird about this? Personally, I find Objective-C to be a problematic, weird language, with an unappealing syntax. I know Apple considers the dynamic binding to be a "feature", but I'm all about static type checking... hell, I'd add more rigid type checking to C++ if I could :-)
I vastly prefer to work in C++. No way do I want to use Objective-C more than I have to.
(For the record, I have written plenty of code in Objective-C, back in the pre-Apple NextStep days. So this is not a completely ignorant comment :-)
Dude, it's not all about games. The drive on my work laptop is agonizingly slow, so much so that the system pretty much goes to its knees during I/O bound activity, like, say, recompiling lots of code. I would kill to have a developer-oriented laptop with really, really fast internal drive speed. (Any manufacturers listening out there? :-)
Exists. Or rather, existed: the Corbin Sparrow, a three-wheeled electric fiberglass thing made by Corbin Motors. I had one (briefly) and it was a brilliant concept, but was derailed by the Corbin's utter lack of a freakin' clue about building vehicles (or running a business in general)... they were incredibly unreliable, and as it turns out, fundamentally unstable in some real-world road situations. Anyway, they went out of business last year, but you can still find info about this by googling for Corbin Sparrow....
Well, there you have it then: to make Linux a success, just have the various distros take on the persona of the automakers.
So who who gets regarded as BMW and who is Kia?
No shit. I wish one had existed when I was working for A Major Game Publisher -- I would have joined in a heartbeat.
After 6 months on 80-100 hour weeks, though, with no overtime, no royalties, no meaningful bonuses, I left, and I'd say I'm done with games forever, most likely, barring a major change in industry practices.
"We used to code in zeroes and ones, and sometimes we didn't even have ones. I once had to write an entire database using only zeroes."
"You had zeroes? You were lucky. We had to make do with the letter 'o'..."
It's not quite as bad as stealthy goatse links, but damn, it's close.
And there's the rub: there are too many moving targets for the existing (huge, evil, money-grubbing) commerical Windows vendors to economically do a port.
Want Windows ports? Provide a wrapper library for me to port MFC apps into Qt and/or Gtk easily, while maintaining a more-or-less MFC source base.
It may not be ideologically "pure", but in this case, it's not about art, it's about percentage...
Look, folks: if you want to see a slew of Windows apps ported "native" to Linux, there's one thing that will make it happen much more quickly:
Come up with an MFC-to-KDE (or MFC-to-Gnome) adapter library. A huge proportion of apps (including most of Macromedia's) are written in MFC internally -- even the Mac versions, which use an MFC "wrapper".
This may not be as ideologically "pure" as you would like, but I guarantee it's the only way that a lot of existing Windows-based apps would get ported quickly.
(Warning, major comic book geekiness here)
Anyway... Gladiator (roughly a Shi'ar equivalent of Superman) picks up a building by one corner, which Reed Richards correctly realizes is impossible to do by simple strength, due to structural issues. They end up taking advantage of this realization to stop him.
What's to wonder about?
Seems pretty clear to me...
You have a point. Still, whales seem a bit too intelligent for me to feel good about eating 'em. Same with horses.
Cows and chickens, on the other hand, are about as intelligent as the average plant, as far as I can tell. So I figure I'm doing them a favor :-)
> you cannot easily call C++ from other languages
Agreed here. I find it truly sad that this wasn't a high priority of the standards committees and/or compiter writers from way back. It seems mind-boggling that some sort of Universal Wrapper Definition still doesn't exist for C++....
Wow... I have the strongly disagree on both points here. C is definitely simple, but not elegant. Of course, C++ is neither, but I find it immensely more productive and reliable for real-world coding.
... }
Objective-C is, IMHO, an a poor compromise of a language, which extended C syntax to add object-orientation, but in a way syntactically bizarre compared to other C usage. Not to mention the fact that it hasn't even kept up pace with the C standard; last time I checked, using C99 code like
for (int i = 0; i FOO; ++i) {
wouldn't compile (at least, using Apple's version of gcc), since it wouldn't accept the inside-the-parens var declaration...
"As a plus, Hertzfeld notes in the faq that the python code running the well-designed and easy to navigate site will be made public in the near future."
Cool. This looks like a neat software setup for a website. I'll be interested in trying it out after it gets released.
"...except for that inconvenient 'free speech' part of the First Amendment."
Um, sorry, he won't be getting MY vote.
Fine, but if you're not really offering 768/128 on a 24x7 basis, you should make that clear. Offer a monthly transfer cap that works out to that 5% average, then charge (appropriately) for overages.
I certainly don't mind paying for the bandwidth I use, but I need to know what those "reasonable" limits are.
> What do you guys want? ... They're not going to
> change their advertising to state bandwidth
> limitations just to appease the hardcore nerds
Well, yeah, actually that is exactly what I want.
If they advertise "unlimited", they should mean "unlimited", aka "as much as I can possibly suck down, 24/7". If this isn't what they mean, they shouldn't say it. Duh.
I don't mind having a limit. But I *do* want to know, up front, what it is.
Why not make a spam auto-responder that will go thru your spam folder, and attempt to respond to any emails, "click" on any links, etc... that would start to cost *them* bandwidth :-)
If by "Attrition" you mean "Leaving in disgust after being treated like shit", then yes...
Seriously, most of that team is gone.