\
(Now, if only OS's could get crappier over time, like cars...) I haven't used Vista yet but every Windows version I used up until now did get crappy over time. It's called Windows Rot. As someone who installs lots of software on his machine this is single handedly the most annoying Windows "feature" ever.
Of course this can be fixed by reinstalling but it's really not a viable solution.
How is it a double standard if someone doesn't want to support Microsoft while wanting support a company they like, such as Blizzard? If MS were a better company with better practices, supported standards better and didn't abuse their monopoly position, I am sure there would be a lot more supporters on the side of Microsoft.
Me personally, I won't give any of my bandwidth to Microsoft. Let them pay for it. Now if Microsoft wanted to pay me to use my bandwidth, I would consider that option.
So you don't like MS because their practices are not moral in your POV, but you are willing to help them if there is a little bit in it for you. That's like a double stan... never mind.
Windows is an pathetic excuse for a platform. It doesn't even properly implement the minimal syscalls required by the POSIX standard (open, close, read, write, fork, exec).
Well, they don't really have to, do they? Who said that every OS needs to be POSIX compatible? If they thought POSIX was superior they would have based their system on it and not try to create a new one. Windows Services For Unix's purpose is to help in migration and not be a full POSIX implementation.
If they actually cared about getting more open source developers to port their applications to Windows, they'd harmonise their API with the other major operating systems (Linux, OS X, Solaris, *BSD). As it is, this just looks like (yet another) an attempt by Microsoft to paint over the gaping flaws in both their business model and their approach to software development.
Wake me up when that changes. Until then, I really couldn't give a shit about Microsoft's supposed "friendliness" to open source software or their non-free "open" license.
Microsoft's OSS purpose is not to spread free software and love but to help educate the people who use and develop for MS software. MS finally understands that letting developers peak inside and see exactly how the API they are using does its job is educational and helps developers create better software. This of course indirectly affects the quality of MS software and platforms and as a result, their bottom line.
Their is OSS as a software development paradigm and their is Free software. Going Free is not going to help MS one bit, showing the world their code is.
I remember "Apache 2000" that came with a 200 page manual printed in high quality paper and a very good translation to my native language (Hebrew). These day I feel happy if a game even comes with a printed manual. I don't care much for translation since it usually look like they use babelfish to produce it.
This really doesn't apply here. If you own a relatively successful site that caters to the general public browser stats will reflect the browser and OS usage stats pretty accurately.
The stats that are gathered by Alexa are not meaningless, only the stats they give access to are.
Even Java is better than.NET from a users point of view (at least you don't have to install one jre for each major version).
End users don't like Java because of the bad UI performance (and usually, look and feel) and because they have to download a big runtime..NET doesn't have UI problems and since Vista it comes bundled with the OS. Are there any other reasons that end users don't like managed code that I am missing?
is to build a new OS from scratch. This is the only thing that can save Windows from its own increasingly complex API and general sluggish performance The Singularity Project could give us a clue of what a future OS from MS could look like.
The problem is that MS cannot just abandon all the software that is built on NT so the only solution is to take it very very slowly..NET is a move in the right direction, pushing and encouraging developers to use managed code. Legacy code will probably run under some virtualization technology.
Getting good performance under a virtual machine still requires a lot of resources that the average home user never has. Perhaps in order to push home users to buy this new version of windows - which will give everyone worse performance when using the software they all know and love (NT software) - MS will decide to give it away for free and make their money selling ads
Of course this is just wild speculation and I haven't really looked into its viability from a business point of view.
So if this system is really "unbeatable", what happens if you set it up to play against itself? They still haven't managed to make the system beat itself but that is understandable since all their resources are now going towards developing an algorithm to stop first post hijackers.
Don't compare this to Project Gutenberg. This is the supposed to be the Internet Movie Database" for books (as far as I understand anyway).
Anyway, I am pretty sure that a big part of this information can filled with calls to Amazon web services.
His statement was reflecting the fact that virtually all game studios are developing with DirectX today and if you want to get in the industry some day and make money you should invest your time in DirectX and not Java game programming.
If you want to build games for yourself than you can use whatever you want.
It has nothing to do with feeling superior, it has everything to do with being superior. Even at my 73% console usage, I am clearly superior to you. Exactly what I was saying.
A feature that I really want: being able to see which comments were added since the last time I loaded the page.
Currently, there is not way to follow discussions you haven't participated. D2 doesn't even have the possibility to temporarily sort comments or threads from newest to oldest without doing it through the preferences page (which you need to access again if you want to change it back when you load a new story). For stories with a large number of comments this means that new comments will barely be read by anyone.
This is not a complaint by someone who is pissed of that no one will read his comments (see diggers and their new discussion system) but by someone who appreciates the overall quality of discussion on slashdot. Let's face it, these days there are better places to get the news, slashdot's quality is in the comments. This is where new features should go to.
I totally agree. I started playing WOW not a long time ago and one of the things that amazes me is the beauty of the graphics. Perhaps the actual characters are not the best ever, and maybe they are not using the latest technology but the scenery is simply amazing. I think this style of graphics was an excellent choice simply because it still looks fresh and beautiful 3 years after release and will still look like it years from now. That's an important point for a MMO which is meant to last much more than the average single player game.
I cant think of any words spawned by the internet which I really dislike but one internet phenomena that irritates me are people who reply to the first comment just to get their post near the top even though they have no intention to actually reply to the parent.
I feel the same. I actually enjoy WoW and EVE quite a lot, but I get this strange feeling that I don't really own the game, that it's not mine. WoW and EVE are probably not the best example but lets say that an new MMO comes out that I really like but it never actually takes off and the company shuts it down after a year or two. Now, although I paid for the game I simply cannot play it anymore (not to mention 10 years from now for nostalgia).
MMO's are not perfect, but what I like about them is the huge world available for exploration and tons of items and different classes to try. As far as I understand, the monthly fee is supposed to cover server costs and the updates to the game. So why aren't companies creating such massive worlds for single player games? Someone correct me if I am wrong but the only game that comes close to the vastness of an MMO is Oblivion, and even that one is very small compared to the world available in a game like WoW.
Because of this: "What you need is a game that starts up and once you've created you character it just has a big message that scrolls across the screen that says "YOU WIN!!"
Single-Player RPG's have always excelled, and will always excel, at what they do: They tell stories.
To me, single player RPG's let you feel like a character in the story, while MMO's let you feel like you are a regular guy who's actually living in this world. They both have their place.
Although ultimately gameplay is the most important aspect, polish and presentation skills are not far behind (at least to me). How come blizzard is almost the only one to figure that out? attractive website, superb art, jaw dropping CG, these things sell! Ultimately if your game sucks than there is nothing that will keep you afloat, but I am definitely ready to give it a shot if the packaging looks nice. There are many other games competing for my cash.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course this can be fixed by reinstalling but it's really not a viable solution.
Me personally, I won't give any of my bandwidth to Microsoft. Let them pay for it. Now if Microsoft wanted to pay me to use my bandwidth, I would consider that option.
So you don't like MS because their practices are not moral in your POV, but you are willing to help them if there is a little bit in it for you. That's like a double stan... never mind.
Windows is an pathetic excuse for a platform. It doesn't even properly implement the minimal syscalls required by the POSIX standard (open, close, read, write, fork, exec).
Well, they don't really have to, do they? Who said that every OS needs to be POSIX compatible? If they thought POSIX was superior they would have based their system on it and not try to create a new one. Windows Services For Unix's purpose is to help in migration and not be a full POSIX implementation.If they actually cared about getting more open source developers to port their applications to Windows, they'd harmonise their API with the other major operating systems (Linux, OS X, Solaris, *BSD). As it is, this just looks like (yet another) an attempt by Microsoft to paint over the gaping flaws in both their business model and their approach to software development.
Wake me up when that changes. Until then, I really couldn't give a shit about Microsoft's supposed "friendliness" to open source software or their non-free "open" license.
Microsoft's OSS purpose is not to spread free software and love but to help educate the people who use and develop for MS software. MS finally understands that letting developers peak inside and see exactly how the API they are using does its job is educational and helps developers create better software. This of course indirectly affects the quality of MS software and platforms and as a result, their bottom line.Their is OSS as a software development paradigm and their is Free software. Going Free is not going to help MS one bit, showing the world their code is.
Thanks for the trip down memory lane. Here's an image for those who didn't have the pleasure.
I remember "Apache 2000" that came with a 200 page manual printed in high quality paper and a very good translation to my native language (Hebrew). These day I feel happy if a game even comes with a printed manual. I don't care much for translation since it usually look like they use babelfish to produce it.
We were just talking about how browser stats are useless.
This really doesn't apply here. If you own a relatively successful site that caters to the general public browser stats will reflect the browser and OS usage stats pretty accurately.The stats that are gathered by Alexa are not meaningless, only the stats they give access to are.
End users don't like Java because of the bad UI performance (and usually, look and feel) and because they have to download a big runtime.
is to build a new OS from scratch. This is the only thing that can save Windows from its own increasingly complex API and general sluggish performance The Singularity Project could give us a clue of what a future OS from MS could look like.
.NET is a move in the right direction, pushing and encouraging developers to use managed code. Legacy code will probably run under some virtualization technology.
The problem is that MS cannot just abandon all the software that is built on NT so the only solution is to take it very very slowly.
Getting good performance under a virtual machine still requires a lot of resources that the average home user never has. Perhaps in order to push home users to buy this new version of windows - which will give everyone worse performance when using the software they all know and love (NT software) - MS will decide to give it away for free and make their money selling ads
Of course this is just wild speculation and I haven't really looked into its viability from a business point of view.
Mod parent up. There is no way to keep track on threads you didn't participate in. Exactly like I mentioned a couple of weeks ago
Crazy.
Don't believe parent. 80% of all statistics are wrong.
Don't compare this to Project Gutenberg. This is the supposed to be the Internet Movie Database" for books (as far as I understand anyway). Anyway, I am pretty sure that a big part of this information can filled with calls to Amazon web services.
I can replace Java (or in your case JAVA) with .Net and it will still be true if not truer.
.Net's stepfather though.
Java is
His statement was reflecting the fact that virtually all game studios are developing with DirectX today and if you want to get in the industry some day and make money you should invest your time in DirectX and not Java game programming.
If you want to build games for yourself than you can use whatever you want.
Don't you mean "I don't feel superior to lesser nerds if I don't use the console 100% of the time and compile everything myself"? :)
A feature that I really want: being able to see which comments were added since the last time I loaded the page.
Currently, there is not way to follow discussions you haven't participated. D2 doesn't even have the possibility to temporarily sort comments or threads from newest to oldest without doing it through the preferences page (which you need to access again if you want to change it back when you load a new story). For stories with a large number of comments this means that new comments will barely be read by anyone.
This is not a complaint by someone who is pissed of that no one will read his comments (see diggers and their new discussion system) but by someone who appreciates the overall quality of discussion on slashdot. Let's face it, these days there are better places to get the news, slashdot's quality is in the comments. This is where new features should go to.
I totally agree. I started playing WOW not a long time ago and one of the things that amazes me is the beauty of the graphics. Perhaps the actual characters are not the best ever, and maybe they are not using the latest technology but the scenery is simply amazing. I think this style of graphics was an excellent choice simply because it still looks fresh and beautiful 3 years after release and will still look like it years from now. That's an important point for a MMO which is meant to last much more than the average single player game.
I cant think of any words spawned by the internet which I really dislike but one internet phenomena that irritates me are people who reply to the first comment just to get their post near the top even though they have no intention to actually reply to the parent.
I feel the same. I actually enjoy WoW and EVE quite a lot, but I get this strange feeling that I don't really own the game, that it's not mine. WoW and EVE are probably not the best example but lets say that an new MMO comes out that I really like but it never actually takes off and the company shuts it down after a year or two. Now, although I paid for the game I simply cannot play it anymore (not to mention 10 years from now for nostalgia).
MMO's are not perfect, but what I like about them is the huge world available for exploration and tons of items and different classes to try. As far as I understand, the monthly fee is supposed to cover server costs and the updates to the game. So why aren't companies creating such massive worlds for single player games? Someone correct me if I am wrong but the only game that comes close to the vastness of an MMO is Oblivion, and even that one is very small compared to the world available in a game like WoW.
I couldn't agree less. The art design is one of the things I like most about this game. I still ENJOY taking long flight paths.
Because of this: "What you need is a game that starts up and once you've created you character it just has a big message that scrolls across the screen that says "YOU WIN!!"
To me, single player RPG's let you feel like a character in the story, while MMO's let you feel like you are a regular guy who's actually living in this world. They both have their place.
Why does the official website look so ugly?
Although ultimately gameplay is the most important aspect, polish and presentation skills are not far behind (at least to me). How come blizzard is almost the only one to figure that out? attractive website, superb art, jaw dropping CG, these things sell! Ultimately if your game sucks than there is nothing that will keep you afloat, but I am definitely ready to give it a shot if the packaging looks nice. There are many other games competing for my cash.