>> in "The Ring", the girl had demonic origins - her parents weren't supposed to be able to have children, but they went overseas and came back with one.
The girl in Ringu probably had demonic origins too, it just wasn't in your face, just slightly hinted at.
>>Backwards compatibility in consoles only exists with the PS2 and PS1, and the sole reason there is because the PS2 basically *has* a PS1 inside of it!
Actualy the PS2 does not have a PS1 inside of it, the reason that the PS2 can emulate the PS1 is because one of the processors in the PS2 (the Input Output Processor(IOP), used for eg sound andr reading from DVD/CD) is actualy the same processor as the original PS1 CPU, when executing a PS1 game the PS2 executes the game at the IOP but uses a software layer to emulate all access to the hardware (wich is compleatly different in a PS2), wich is fairly simple because the PS1 hardware was hidden in the PS1 from the developer by a API so no PS1 game hade direct contact with the hard ware anyway.
Nintendo can do the same if they want to, the hardware is hidden in the GameCube from the developer by an API, if the processor in their next cosole is compatible with the current one, and the new GPU can do everything the current one can there would be nothing preventing from doing that.
The same goes for the Xbox2, wich would moust certainly compatible with the xbox1.
The only platform this may not be true for is the PS3, when Sony constructed the PS2 they did not as in the PS1 hide the hardware behing an software layer, instead the hardware is fully exposed and to emulate a PS2 in a PS3 funtionaly identical hardware must probably be inside the PS3, wich may very well be the case as Sony recently Anounced that they had managed to construct a PS2 on a chip, the PS3 may very well include such as chip.
>>>Dear Troll/Ignorant Buffoon,
>>>Please seize and desist all further attempts at such blatant disinformation.
Don't call me a Troll or Buffon, nothing in my posting was wrong, the GPU is NOT a Radeon and the design of the chip is Nintendos, the fact that ArtX designed it for them and was originaly meant to produce it doesent change the fact that the design belongs to Nintendo.
The GPU in a GameCube is NOT a Radeon, it is built on a proprietary chip design designed by Nintendo themself even if it is manufactured by ATI.
It is actualy a very nice chip, I am a professional game developer and have worked with XBOX, PS2 and GC. Of the current consoles GC is by far the most fun to develop for, a very nice API, good fillrate very good at multitexturing an per-pixel operations.
Everyone seems to believe that the XBOX is the most powerfull, it probably is if you only look at number of textured pixels/second and soo on.
But if you are going to do things with a lot of textures, bumpmapping, etc. The GameCube rulez.
I agree and what's even more important is the fac that the main purpose of a file manager is NOT to execute programms (you use things the windows/kde/gnome taskbar to do things like that), but to manage files.
As selecting files should be a much more common action than executing an application it does not make much sense to make it much harder/non intuitive to do.
I know that most power users (most slashdot readers), (miss)uses file managers in a old MacOS execute program by double click a document way, but that does not make it the right way for an unexperienced user, singleclick in the file manager will only confuse those users into thinking the filemanager(s) is some kind of windows3.x style program manager.
Sourcecode for the changes they made to KDE can be found at http://net2.com/lindows/source/
As for the changes to wine they seem to have submited them all to the main wine tree, at least the says so in
"Specifically, there are no WINE source code mods here, because ALL of our WINE changes
(even those changes we made when WINE was X11) have been submitted for inclusion to the
main LGPL wine tree. Pretty much all of our changes were accepted and are currently in
wine. Lindows.com currently does all their development on the LGPL wine tree, submitting
all our changes back."
Nonsense, the russian economy may be broken today, but it sertainly wasn't so at the time of Stalins death. You have to rememer that at the time of the first and second russian revolutions Russian was at the the same economic level as India and China at the same time.
Arguing that the russian economy would have developed faster without the Soviet union is Counterfactual-factual speculation, there is no way to know that for sure.
I do however admit that the problems of russia today is rooted in what Stalin did, but who knows were the new-liberal Chilean economy will be 15 years from now?
Besides it's all beside the point, the point of my last post was to prove the flaws and cynisism of "Isle"'s logic.
"When comparing dictators you cant look at the amóunt of violence, since it is needed to protect the regime. You can only look at what state they left the country in."
Following that logic YOU must think that Stalin is a even better dictator than Picochet. He did afterall turn his country into an modern industrial superpower.
The reason that there is a movement from parallel standards towards serial standards is not because serial transfer is faster, in most cases it is not, a parallel solution will in most cases always be faster (unless the time it takes to de-paralize the data is to high), the problem with paralell transfer at hig speed is isolation.
When you transfer data at high speed with cheep cables like the normal IDE once, the signals in the different cables tend to polute each other.
Three different solution exists to this problem:
1. We could build better cables (like the ones you usualy have with Ultra2/Ultra160/320 scsi interface).
2. We could send the data with cheap cables but with a better error correction. (like is done with ATA66/100/133)
3. We could develop a serial interface.(Like Serial ATA)
Re:Why are people still using a 30 year old langua
on
C
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Reasons to still use C (at least sometimes):
1. It is the native language to most operating systems API (*nix, MS-*).
2. It is the language most third party librarys and code is written in.
3. It is the language a lot of old code is written in.
4. Interfacing other languages with libraries or APIs written for C is never as easy as the documentation says it is and issues may slow down development time significantly.
5. It is the only widely used standardized all purpose language that is available to all platforms.
C++ - is hardly standardized (most compilers still does not come close to the ANSI-C++ standard).
ADA - Is not widely used.(unfortunately)
Java - Is not an all purpose language.
6. It is a very elegeant and consistent language (unlike C++).
I think that's exactly what they are planning, the cartridges displayed att
BBC's article seems to be just wrappers around DVD/CD sized records.
I think that when you play old CD/DVD records it will work like with some old PC-CDROM players, where you place it in a cartridge before you put it in the player.
Re:Here's a reference
on
.NETly News
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I don't think sun is laying or hiding things from us;
1. It's not an 'unsafe' mode like in the CLR, it apears to be just a wrapper around some JNI calls. It's not the same thing.
2. It may be undocumented but you can do the exact same thing with the documented
java.nio.ByteBuffer
3. It's not that 'unsafe' you can only access bytes in memory you have allocated yourself
Still people around? There is probably more ObjC programmers in the world today than ever before, MacOSX is based on ObjC, a lot of old mac programmers are currently learning to use ObjC.
Actualy, Win3.1 is not entirely cooperative, it uses cooperative multitasking for windows 3.1 programs but preemptive multitasking for MS-DOS applications.
A segmentation fault, is either a serious bug in your code or the objC libraries, not by itself a proof that a language is unsafe! A bug in the java VM could produce the same same fault, it does not mean that Java by deffinition is unsafe.
Neither is the ability to make a program cease to run, you can do this (or something similar) in almost any language:
abort();
objC is unsafe (it builds on C), but not because of the reasons you mentioned. It does however make a little bit easier to make safe code than ANSI C.
Actualy, there are two different widely used 1st/2nd/3rd deffinitions. The oldest that was invented by two economist in Algeria, as a reaction to the onesided and prejudical view of industrialized versus development countries. They divided the world in;
1st world: superpowers (USA, USSR).
2nd: developed countries (Europe west & east, Japan, New Zealand etc).
3d: the rest.
This view was popularized in the third world by a lot of third world leaders and thinker such as Mao Zedung. During the sixties it was even popular among a lot of left winged groups.
Another view also was developed during the same time as a rection to or perhaps a misunderstanding of the third Algerian model;
1st world: Industrialized countries in the West
2nd: Industrialized countries in the East
3d: Undeveloped countries
There has been several other models but these two models are the two most comman ones.
No you are wrong. Microsoft does not use decimals in version numbers, they use integers sepparated by points.
eg. MS-DOS 4.01 == MS-DOS 4.1
Some companies use decimals in version numbers eg. Netscape (eg. Netscape 4.05 != Netscapape 4.5), but Microsoft does not.
Slashdot Mirror
>> in "The Ring", the girl had demonic origins - her parents weren't supposed to be able to have children, but they went overseas and came back with one.
3 701869
The girl in Ringu probably had demonic origins too, it just wasn't in your face, just slightly hinted at.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0178868/board/thread/
Covers this interpretation pretty well.
>>Backwards compatibility in consoles only exists with the PS2 and PS1, and the sole reason there is because the PS2 basically *has* a PS1 inside of it!
Actualy the PS2 does not have a PS1 inside of it, the reason that the PS2 can emulate the PS1 is because one of the processors in the PS2 (the Input Output Processor(IOP), used for eg sound andr reading from DVD/CD) is actualy the same processor as the original PS1 CPU, when executing a PS1 game the PS2 executes the game at the IOP but uses a software layer to emulate all access to the hardware (wich is compleatly different in a PS2), wich is fairly simple because the PS1 hardware was hidden in the PS1 from the developer by a API so no PS1 game hade direct contact with the hard ware anyway.
Nintendo can do the same if they want to, the hardware is hidden in the GameCube from the developer by an API, if the processor in their next cosole is compatible with the current one, and the new GPU can do everything the current one can there would be nothing preventing from doing that.
The same goes for the Xbox2, wich would moust certainly compatible with the xbox1.
The only platform this may not be true for is the PS3, when Sony constructed the PS2 they did not as in the PS1 hide the hardware behing an software layer, instead the hardware is fully exposed and to emulate a PS2 in a PS3 funtionaly identical hardware must probably be inside the PS3, wich may very well be the case as Sony recently Anounced that they had managed to construct a PS2 on a chip, the PS3 may very well include such as chip.
>>>Dear Troll/Ignorant Buffoon, >>>Please seize and desist all further attempts at such blatant disinformation.
Don't call me a Troll or Buffon, nothing in my posting was wrong, the GPU is NOT a Radeon and the design of the chip is Nintendos, the fact that ArtX designed it for them and was originaly meant to produce it doesent change the fact that the design belongs to Nintendo.
The GPU in a GameCube is NOT a Radeon, it is built on a proprietary chip design designed by Nintendo themself even if it is manufactured by ATI.
It is actualy a very nice chip, I am a professional game developer and have worked with XBOX, PS2 and GC. Of the current consoles GC is by far the most fun to develop for, a very nice API, good fillrate very good at multitexturing an per-pixel operations.
Everyone seems to believe that the XBOX is the most powerfull, it probably is if you only look at number of textured pixels/second and soo on.
But if you are going to do things with a lot of textures, bumpmapping, etc. The GameCube rulez.
Yes,
I agree and what's even more important is the fac that the main purpose of a file manager is NOT to execute programms (you use things the windows/kde/gnome taskbar to do things like that), but to manage files.
As selecting files should be a much more common action than executing an application it does not make much sense to make it much harder/non intuitive to do.
I know that most power users (most slashdot readers), (miss)uses file managers in a old MacOS execute program by double click a document way, but that does not make it the right way for an unexperienced user, singleclick in the file manager will only confuse those users into thinking the filemanager(s) is some kind of windows3.x style program manager.
Sourcecode for the changes they made to KDE can be found at http://net2.com/lindows/source/ As for the changes to wine they seem to have submited them all to the main wine tree, at least the says so in
l es.txt
http://net2.com/lindows/source/AboutTheseSourceFi
"Specifically, there are no WINE source code mods here, because ALL of our WINE changes (even those changes we made when WINE was X11) have been submitted for inclusion to the main LGPL wine tree. Pretty much all of our changes were accepted and are currently in wine. Lindows.com currently does all their development on the LGPL wine tree, submitting all our changes back."
Nonsense, the russian economy may be broken today, but it sertainly wasn't so at the time of Stalins death. You have to rememer that at the time of the first and second russian revolutions Russian was at the the same economic level as India and China at the same time.
Arguing that the russian economy would have developed faster without the Soviet union is Counterfactual-factual speculation, there is no way to know that for sure.
I do however admit that the problems of russia today is rooted in what Stalin did, but who knows were the new-liberal Chilean economy will be 15 years from now?
Besides it's all beside the point, the point of my last post was to prove the flaws and cynisism of "Isle"'s logic.
"When comparing dictators you cant look at the amóunt of violence, since it is needed to protect the regime. You can only look at what state they left the country in."
Following that logic YOU must think that Stalin is a even better dictator than Picochet. He did afterall turn his country into an modern industrial superpower.
Face it!!! your logic is both cynical and flawed.
The reason that there is a movement from parallel standards towards serial standards is not because serial transfer is faster, in most cases it is not, a parallel solution will in most cases always be faster (unless the time it takes to de-paralize the data is to high), the problem with paralell transfer at hig speed is isolation.
When you transfer data at high speed with cheep cables like the normal IDE once, the signals in the different cables tend to polute each other.
Three different solution exists to this problem:
1. We could build better cables (like the ones you usualy have with Ultra2/Ultra160/320 scsi interface).
2. We could send the data with cheap cables but with a better error correction. (like is done with ATA66/100/133)
3. We could develop a serial interface.(Like Serial ATA)
Reasons to still use C (at least sometimes):
1. It is the native language to most operating systems API (*nix, MS-*).
2. It is the language most third party librarys and code is written in.
3. It is the language a lot of old code is written in.
4. Interfacing other languages with libraries or APIs written for C is never as easy as the documentation says it is and issues may slow down development time significantly.
5. It is the only widely used standardized all purpose language that is available to all platforms.
C++ - is hardly standardized (most compilers still does not come close to the ANSI-C++ standard).
ADA - Is not widely used.(unfortunately)
Java - Is not an all purpose language.
6. It is a very elegeant and consistent language (unlike C++).
Exactly!
I think that's exactly what they are planning, the cartridges displayed att BBC's article seems to be just wrappers around DVD/CD sized records.
I think that when you play old CD/DVD records it will work like with some old PC-CDROM players, where you place it in a cartridge before you put it in the player.
I don't think sun is laying or hiding things from us; 1. It's not an 'unsafe' mode like in the CLR, it apears to be just a wrapper around some JNI calls. It's not the same thing.
2. It may be undocumented but you can do the exact same thing with the documented java.nio.ByteBuffer
3. It's not that 'unsafe' you can only access bytes in memory you have allocated yourself
Still people around? There is probably more ObjC programmers in the world today than ever before, MacOSX is based on ObjC, a lot of old mac programmers are currently learning to use ObjC.
Actualy, Win3.1 is not entirely cooperative, it uses cooperative multitasking for windows 3.1 programs but preemptive multitasking for MS-DOS applications.
; EN-US;q11248
More information:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb
A segmentation fault, is either a serious bug in your code or the objC libraries, not by itself a proof that a language is unsafe! A bug in the java VM could produce the same same fault, it does not mean that Java by deffinition is unsafe.
Neither is the ability to make a program cease to run, you can do this (or something similar) in almost any language:
abort();
objC is unsafe (it builds on C), but not because of the reasons you mentioned. It does however make a little bit easier to make safe code than ANSI C.
Like they haven't already:
; EN-US;q247804
i nuxmyths.asp
http://www.koehntopp.de/kris/pics/iwerb/msad1.jpg
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/19396.html
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb
The most famous: http://www.microsoft.com/ntserver/nts/news/msnw/l
has apparently been removed but you can read about it here or here
Actualy, there are two different widely used 1st/2nd/3rd deffinitions. The oldest that was invented by two economist in Algeria, as a reaction to the onesided and prejudical view of industrialized versus development countries. They divided the world in; 1st world: superpowers (USA, USSR). 2nd: developed countries (Europe west & east, Japan, New Zealand etc). 3d: the rest. This view was popularized in the third world by a lot of third world leaders and thinker such as Mao Zedung. During the sixties it was even popular among a lot of left winged groups. Another view also was developed during the same time as a rection to or perhaps a misunderstanding of the third Algerian model; 1st world: Industrialized countries in the West 2nd: Industrialized countries in the East 3d: Undeveloped countries There has been several other models but these two models are the two most comman ones.
No you are wrong. Microsoft does not use decimals in version numbers, they use integers sepparated by points. eg. MS-DOS 4.01 == MS-DOS 4.1 Some companies use decimals in version numbers eg. Netscape (eg. Netscape 4.05 != Netscapape 4.5), but Microsoft does not.