Well, the *name* might be theirs, but the technology wasn't original!
Actually, the technology is original. Apple was using subpixel rendering on the ][gs to give the finder 640x200 instead of 320x200. However apple wasn't using this to anti-alias fonts, which is what cleartype does. It's like saying that anti-aliasing was invented at the same time grayscale was invented.
In fact, Apple didn't use anything like cleartype until Jaguar, well after the introduction of cleartype. (Even after FreeType had it)
Re:Really? Infamous?
on
Review: KDE 3.2
·
· Score: 4, Informative
I just think that wrapping up your objects into a nice OO layer makes UI development much easier.
So do that. www.gtkmm.org
Just because gnome is written in C, doesn't mean there aren't C++ wrappers for it.
Make open source win by showing it to be of a higher quality than closed -- not by trying to debate why closed source doesnt work. The evidence is against you.
No it's not. Case in point, our entire business relies on a product called QPS. It's a content management system for Quark.. hundreds of newspapers use it. Yours probably uses it too.
Well, the makers of QPS have dropped it completely, and have replaced it with something completely different.
If we want to upgrade from OS 9 to OSX, we'd have to change CMS systems.. this is a huge deal. You can't exactly do this slowly, you can't print half the paper using one system and the other half using another system.
Needless to say, we're going to try. But if QPS was opensource, we'd be able to put together an upgrade path that wasn't as painful as "scrap the current system, switch to the new system at all once".
Your cel phone, car, coffee pot, desk phone, computer(s), microwave, car and God knows what else all tell time for you.
When I'm outside doing yard work, none of these things is with me.
How many people bring their cell phones along with them when they go jogging, or when playing baseball, or anything that requires more-than-sloth-like movement?
The X11 you could download for Jaguar was a BETA, and was never intended to be production-quality.
Also, Apple never promised that the finished version would work on Jaguar.
Well they certainly implied it. Why did they release it as a beta for an OS they had no intention of releasing it for? More importantly, what is in the final version that requires Panther? The beta was certainly full featured.. what feature of the release version requires Panther?
By all means don't test your web pages for Safari compatibility. All I ask is standard HTML.
Then don't be suprised to see things act quirky under safari.
Safari still has stupid bugs.. like if this textarea I'm typing in had less than 4 rows, safari would never draw scrollbars on it, regardless of how much text I typed.
Stuff needs to be tested in as many browsers as possible. Because they don't all render identically.
Welcome to Reality. Safari utilizes more and more Cocoa which has been pushed into the forefront and Carbon into the recesses as it should be.
Are we sure about this? Apple seems to be purposely bolting software to Panther.
xCode and X11 were both beta tested on Jaguar, but when they were released, they required Panther. If Panther was really a requirement for either of those products, then wasn't all the beta testing completely worthless?
Either that, or Apple purposely required Panther in order to get people to upgrade.
Who's to say that Safari 1.2's reliance on Panther isn't arbitrary as well? Only Apple knows.. that's the price of closed source.
The block size safari uses before rendering output is just too big.
Just for the record, the block size that safari uses is 16k. Mozilla and IE have an initial blocksize of around that much, but after the first 16k or so, mozilla and IE will render byte-by-byte. Safari requires another 16k
Both Mozilla and IE will render byte-by-byte after getting a close body tag as well.
This definately needs to be fixed, it makes safari seem very slow.
But I *make* them look it up the old fashioned way.
You don't make them do anything. Everytime a cop pulls behind you, a camera records your license plate, and the cop gets a nice little screen full of information about you. Far more than anything stored on that magnetic strip.
So unless you're going to be driving someone elses car, you aren't doing anything but wasting your time.
Nintendo doesn't really label greatest hits. They have a players-choice label, but there are tons of games that are out that are available for cheap that aren't labelled "player's choice".
One game that comes to mind is Eternal Darkness. You can find that everywhere for $15-$20.. yet it's not on the list.
and it *can* cost less than a commercial model with the same features, especially if you equip a lot of features into the system.
There's one feature it will always lack. The ability to fit into my TV cabinet.
I have a feeling that the people who put computers in their living room are the same people who have TVs on milk crates and sit on folding chairs that they scavenged out of the dumpster.
Losing to computers in chess will be like losing to calculators in a addition match. People and computers aren't really in competition. They do very different things.
Damn straight. A computer may be able to beat me at chess, but at least I can visually identify a chess set in a crowded room.
Instead what you see now, are huge cabinets sporting some really interesting input devices.
Or combo rides. For the past 6 years, the must-play game in town is a crazy 4 story shooter where you're strapped in a seat, and each time you pass a level, the seat zooms up to the next story. When you die, you fall all the way to the bottom. So there's incentive to get to the very top, just so you have a fun ride down when you die.
Can't get that in your home system! (Course it is $3 a play)
Then you must not do a lot of assembly programming for it...
I do, and I cut my teeth on Apple][gs (fun with 3 registers) and mips assembly.
The x86 is still a lot of fun to write assembly for. It may be quirky, but its quirkiness allows for some really ingenious optimizations and rather clever code.
Just look at the existance of VMware to see how amazing the x86 instruction set is.
The way I see it, the only reason to write assembly these days (unless you write device drivers or BIOSes), is for fun. And PPC assembly is just boring, tedious work.
Slashdot Mirror
1) Pseudo-compiled languages are easily decompiled.
Um, compiled languages are easily decompiled as well.
http://hte.sf.net is a badass hexeditor/disassembler.
Case in point, I walked through the assembly of iTunes to figure out the AES key that iTunes uses for iTMS. And iTunes was written in C++.
Fine with me. A java-like language that doesn't gobble ram like no tomorrow? Sounds good.
As a bonus, Gtk# has the best API I've ever used in a gui toolkit.
Well, the *name* might be theirs, but the technology wasn't original!
Actually, the technology is original. Apple was using subpixel rendering on the ][gs to give the finder 640x200 instead of 320x200. However apple wasn't using this to anti-alias fonts, which is what cleartype does. It's like saying that anti-aliasing was invented at the same time grayscale was invented.
In fact, Apple didn't use anything like cleartype until Jaguar, well after the introduction of cleartype. (Even after FreeType had it)
I just think that wrapping up your objects into a nice OO layer makes UI development much easier.
So do that. www.gtkmm.org
Just because gnome is written in C, doesn't mean there aren't C++ wrappers for it.
Infamous is when you're more than famous. This desktop KDE, he's not just famous, he's infamous.
I'd say that KDE has a plethora of Options.
- virtual folders in kmail - a folder that holds the contents of a search, but behaves like a normal mail folder
Evolution anyone?
Make open source win by showing it to be of a higher quality than closed -- not by trying to debate why closed source doesnt work. The evidence is against you.
No it's not. Case in point, our entire business relies on a product called QPS. It's a content management system for Quark.. hundreds of newspapers use it. Yours probably uses it too.
Well, the makers of QPS have dropped it completely, and have replaced it with something completely different.
If we want to upgrade from OS 9 to OSX, we'd have to change CMS systems.. this is a huge deal. You can't exactly do this slowly, you can't print half the paper using one system and the other half using another system.
Needless to say, we're going to try. But if QPS was opensource, we'd be able to put together an upgrade path that wasn't as painful as "scrap the current system, switch to the new system at all once".
there is no widespread replacement for SMTP, which makes the protocol extremely difficult (read: impossible) to deprecate.
Ah, but there is, it's called XMPP, and it's available for every platform.
You may know it as Jabber.
Do many analog watches support syncing to atomic clocks?
Depends on your definition of "many".
one
two
three
Your cel phone, car, coffee pot, desk phone, computer(s), microwave, car and God knows what else all tell time for you.
When I'm outside doing yard work, none of these things is with me.
How many people bring their cell phones along with them when they go jogging, or when playing baseball, or anything that requires more-than-sloth-like movement?
The X11 you could download for Jaguar was a BETA, and was never intended to be production-quality.
Also, Apple never promised that the finished version would work on Jaguar.
Well they certainly implied it. Why did they release it as a beta for an OS they had no intention of releasing it for? More importantly, what is in the final version that requires Panther? The beta was certainly full featured.. what feature of the release version requires Panther?
It reeks of bait and switch.
Have you used Panther?? If you have you should know to just plonk down the cash and stop complaining.
That's right.. don't question The Great Leader. Just give him your money.
Because after all, Apple can nickel and dime you to death, and it's OK simply because they're not named "Microsoft".
By all means don't test your web pages for Safari compatibility. All I ask is standard HTML.
Then don't be suprised to see things act quirky under safari.
Safari still has stupid bugs.. like if this textarea I'm typing in had less than 4 rows, safari would never draw scrollbars on it, regardless of how much text I typed.
Stuff needs to be tested in as many browsers as possible. Because they don't all render identically.
Welcome to Reality. Safari utilizes more and more Cocoa which has been pushed into the forefront and Carbon into the recesses as it should be.
Are we sure about this? Apple seems to be purposely bolting software to Panther.
xCode and X11 were both beta tested on Jaguar, but when they were released, they required Panther. If Panther was really a requirement for either of those products, then wasn't all the beta testing completely worthless?
Either that, or Apple purposely required Panther in order to get people to upgrade.
Who's to say that Safari 1.2's reliance on Panther isn't arbitrary as well? Only Apple knows.. that's the price of closed source.
The block size safari uses before rendering output is just too big.
Just for the record, the block size that safari uses is 16k. Mozilla and IE have an initial blocksize of around that much, but after the first 16k or so, mozilla and IE will render byte-by-byte. Safari requires another 16k
Both Mozilla and IE will render byte-by-byte after getting a close body tag as well.
This definately needs to be fixed, it makes safari seem very slow.
But I *make* them look it up the old fashioned way.
You don't make them do anything. Everytime a cop pulls behind you, a camera records your license plate, and the cop gets a nice little screen full of information about you. Far more than anything stored on that magnetic strip.
So unless you're going to be driving someone elses car, you aren't doing anything but wasting your time.
I can't believe no one mentioned Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory!!!
imho, best damn multiplay fps out there now - an' it's free!
They didn't mention it because it's not available for the mac.
Nintendo doesn't really label greatest hits. They have a players-choice label, but there are tons of games that are out that are available for cheap that aren't labelled "player's choice".
One game that comes to mind is Eternal Darkness. You can find that everywhere for $15-$20.. yet it's not on the list.
So you pay $50/mo for EACH, right? That would be $100/mo.
No, I pay $50/mo total. My cox bill last month was $56.27. (So it's actually closer to $60)
and it *can* cost less than a commercial model with the same features, especially if you equip a lot of features into the system.
There's one feature it will always lack. The ability to fit into my TV cabinet.
I have a feeling that the people who put computers in their living room are the same people who have TVs on milk crates and sit on folding chairs that they scavenged out of the dumpster.
Losing to computers in chess will be like losing to calculators in a addition match. People and computers aren't really in competition. They do very different things.
Damn straight. A computer may be able to beat me at chess, but at least I can visually identify a chess set in a crowded room.
Instead what you see now, are huge cabinets sporting some really interesting input devices.
Or combo rides. For the past 6 years, the must-play game in town is a crazy 4 story shooter where you're strapped in a seat, and each time you pass a level, the seat zooms up to the next story. When you die, you fall all the way to the bottom. So there's incentive to get to the very top, just so you have a fun ride down when you die.
Can't get that in your home system! (Course it is $3 a play)
Goddammit YES. The IBM Model M is the best keyboard ever made. I have 6 of them.
I know, I can always hear you typing on them from over here!
Funny, my boss just asked me how well mysql scales.
It scales rather well, the problem is that for some dumbass reason they put a maxclients of 100 in default mysql installations.
The first thing we do when installing mysql or apache on a server is up the max clients from 100 and 256 respectively. (To around 512 a piece)
Then you must not do a lot of assembly programming for it...
I do, and I cut my teeth on Apple][gs (fun with 3 registers) and mips assembly.
The x86 is still a lot of fun to write assembly for. It may be quirky, but its quirkiness allows for some really ingenious optimizations and rather clever code.
Just look at the existance of VMware to see how amazing the x86 instruction set is.
The way I see it, the only reason to write assembly these days (unless you write device drivers or BIOSes), is for fun. And PPC assembly is just boring, tedious work.