Is learning the specifics of the PS2 hardware that worthwhile?
If someone wrote a decent game to a platform abstracted API like SDL (and even had it running on multiple platforms), would it be of less value?
It's free because it is developed using a leading-edge development method that's superior to the old-fashioned way that Microsoft develops software. Microsoft software is expensive because the conventional methods they use to create it are inefficient. That's why there are so many Microsoft viruses around. There aren't any OpenOffice viruses. Why don't you give it a try?
While I generally prefer the open source style of development, it isn't really inherently better than closed source... just different.
I don't know if your second highlighted section is trying to say that there are so many bugs in Microsoft software in general because it is closed source (it's arguable, Macs are closed source and they don't have the same number of bug complaints that MS software does), or that it is capable to get viruses in Office simply because it is closed source, which is totally untrue. The reason that it's capable to get viruses with word files is because it's possible to embed executable code in them, not because it was developed closed source. While I agree that having executable code in a document is a really dumb idea, it's not one that couldn't have been made in an Free application either.
I don't know... the geek in me wants all the marketting trash out of the window. The prevelance of viruses in microsoft software is probably due as much to the widespread usage (bigger target), and focus on usability rather than security (easier target) in it's software than in Free Software ("free software is only free if your time has no value").
That said, converting people to free software by spewing half truths just is just something I can't do.. it's like encouraging someone to buy a pentium 4 because it's clockspeed is high, or buy an athlon XP because it's obviously compatible with Microsoft XP, it's as much marketting as it is truth.
Re:Our double standards...
on
KDE 3.0 is Out
·
· Score: 1
There is a big difference, between the relationship of slashdot and KDE and the original napster and the music industry. Napster was pretty indifferent about the music industry, while slashdot wants to promote KDE.
I am saying that the applications should be the most dependant, and not at all depended upon. Gnome should be highly dependant on glibc, however, the behavior of glibc should be indepdendant of gnome. Applications should be the bottom layer of the depdenency tree. A standard c library will probably be really high on the dependency graph, while apps (that themselves are not directly needed to build the code, make, compiler, etc) should be low in the graph.
Why should a media player belong in an office document?
Microsoft is complaining that it would be an unmanagement mess to rip IE, Media player, etc, etc out of windows, because it would cause so many different combinations of software to support. However, the different combinations really shouldn't matter. The behavavior of MSN should be indepednant of the behavior of IE, and the behavior of office should be indepedant of windows media player. As has been said before, it's bullcrap. The core functionality of the OS should be indepdendant of its web browser.
From the article...
""From an engineering standpoint, No. 1, we cannot remove software code for multiple functionalities without degrading other functionalities of the operating system," Microsoft spokesman Jim Desler said. "You just can't yank Internet Explorer out." "
I don't see how Windows should be crippled without IE specifically. Surely, I wouldn't want an OS without a browser, but that doesn't mean that a particular browser neccesary for the OS to run.
HTML renderers are an important part of a modern usable desktop system. However, there is no need for a web browser to be integrated into the OS. While there is lynx, konqeuror, mozilla, galeon, opera, etc, availible for usage on Linux, none of them are required for the kernel to be functional.
Making a programming langauge depedant on the ability to handle strings is a reasonable thing to do.
All the classes Sun considered fundamental to the langauge is in the java.lang.*.* packages. Notice how small the fundamental classes are in java relative to the total number of classes in the API. This is how a good system is designed. There is a small core functionality on top of which other things are built.
Being able to read and display webpages with a graphical interface should not be fundamental to an OS. For example, if Java lost it's java.net package, surely, a significant number of Java programs would fail to work. However, the large majority of packages (not net related) would still work fine. IE shouldn't be anymore needed for the core of the OS than should office.
Give me an example of how using an open source can cause you to lose your IP.
It's not like they are developing software and might be tempted to link in some GPLed their code, they are just using the software, not modifying it.
I think he meant more like forcing binary distrobutions of the program to be bought from the original author. making it illegal for them to be transferred, whilst still enabling the source to be spread freely. This way the hackers can still fix the product, if they so desire, but the 99% of people who just use the product, and have no interest in actually modifying it are forced to buy it.
I posted something similiar yesterday.
tp://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=29629&cid=317954 1
I was thinking about that as well. What about a license that forbade distrubition of binaries, but which the source could be distributed freely? This way the people who want to simply use it, with no ability to actually make changes to it must buy it, whilst those capable enough to compile the source (and thus potentially able to improve it) can hack at it all they wish.
Of course, breaking such a license is so easy, trivial even, and just being able to compile something says almost nothing about one's ability to modify it.
A couple of my favorites are
http://gltron.sourceforge.net/
The author of gltron is a really nice guy.. he even implemented a feature that I asked for over IRC.
and ClanBomber, which has motivated me to try to create my own Bomberman implementation.
http://www.happypenguin.org/show?ClanBomber
You don't get predetermined destruction in of the garbage collected langauges. If you don't want to track memory allocations in C++, you can use the boost shared_ptr, which is pretty likely to become standard (or some variation thereof) in the next C++ standard.
http://www.boost.org/libs/smart_ptr/shared_ptr.htm
To each their own. I just wish I wasn't so damned poor:(. You are not paying for what they have now, you are paying for what you will have in the future.
Are you delusional? Starcraft requires no where near the "mental ability" as does chess. I used to be a pretty good starcraft player (placed in a few regional money tournaments, beat people who travelled to Korea for big money tourneys), but gaming requires a much different skill than chess does. People engage in deep thought in chess games.. there is nearly no thinking in games of Starcraft... it's all reactionary. Sure, some thinking goes on before and after the game, but the amazing unit/economy management of professional Starcraft players is simply pure quickness. Gaming skill is a lot more like boxing than it is like chess, you have to be quick during the match to win. Surely, a lot of prepation (including perhaps some deep contemplation about the game) goes into getting good at it, but in the match it really comes down to quickness.
What other console dev kits can you get for $500? Sure, you can't really distribute what you make (other than to other geeks who have bought the kit), but it's still gotta be a good way to get some hands on experience with game programming for a console.
I disagree. As a CS major who doesn't pirate anything (Linux is free, thanks), I am constantly telling friends to "feed the programmers" as they warez crap left and right at a MB/s from a LAN direct connect hub, only to be constantly told "fuck the programmers."
Slashdot Mirror
Is learning the specifics of the PS2 hardware that worthwhile? If someone wrote a decent game to a platform abstracted API like SDL (and even had it running on multiple platforms), would it be of less value?
Heh, no Open Source project is complete without numerous usage of the F word. http://lwn.net/1998/1015/a/f-word.html
Yeah.. doxygen. http://www.doxygen.org It works for Java as wel as C++.
It's not about the money, it's about Microsoft's hypocrisy. A company that hates software theft steals software.
It's free because it is developed using a leading-edge development method that's superior to the old-fashioned way that Microsoft develops software. Microsoft software is expensive because the conventional methods they use to create it are inefficient. That's why there are so many Microsoft viruses around. There aren't any OpenOffice viruses. Why don't you give it a try?
While I generally prefer the open source style of development, it isn't really inherently better than closed source... just different.
I don't know if your second highlighted section is trying to say that there are so many bugs in Microsoft software in general because it is closed source (it's arguable, Macs are closed source and they don't have the same number of bug complaints that MS software does), or that it is capable to get viruses in Office simply because it is closed source, which is totally untrue. The reason that it's capable to get viruses with word files is because it's possible to embed executable code in them, not because it was developed closed source. While I agree that having executable code in a document is a really dumb idea, it's not one that couldn't have been made in an Free application either.
I don't know... the geek in me wants all the marketting trash out of the window. The prevelance of viruses in microsoft software is probably due as much to the widespread usage (bigger target), and focus on usability rather than security (easier target) in it's software than in Free Software ("free software is only free if your time has no value"). That said, converting people to free software by spewing half truths just is just something I can't do.. it's like encouraging someone to buy a pentium 4 because it's clockspeed is high, or buy an athlon XP because it's obviously compatible with Microsoft XP, it's as much marketting as it is truth.
There is a big difference, between the relationship of slashdot and KDE and the original napster and the music industry. Napster was pretty indifferent about the music industry, while slashdot wants to promote KDE.
I am saying that the applications should be the most dependant, and not at all depended upon. Gnome should be highly dependant on glibc, however, the behavior of glibc should be indepdendant of gnome. Applications should be the bottom layer of the depdenency tree. A standard c library will probably be really high on the dependency graph, while apps (that themselves are not directly needed to build the code, make, compiler, etc) should be low in the graph.
Why should a media player belong in an office document?
Microsoft is complaining that it would be an unmanagement mess to rip IE, Media player, etc, etc out of windows, because it would cause so many different combinations of software to support. However, the different combinations really shouldn't matter. The behavavior of MSN should be indepednant of the behavior of IE, and the behavior of office should be indepedant of windows media player. As has been said before, it's bullcrap. The core functionality of the OS should be indepdendant of its web browser.
From the article...
""From an engineering standpoint, No. 1, we cannot remove software code for multiple functionalities without degrading other functionalities of the operating system," Microsoft spokesman Jim Desler said. "You just can't yank Internet Explorer out." "
I don't see how Windows should be crippled without IE specifically. Surely, I wouldn't want an OS without a browser, but that doesn't mean that a particular browser neccesary for the OS to run.
HTML renderers are an important part of a modern usable desktop system. However, there is no need for a web browser to be integrated into the OS. While there is lynx, konqeuror, mozilla, galeon, opera, etc, availible for usage on Linux, none of them are required for the kernel to be functional.
Making a programming langauge depedant on the ability to handle strings is a reasonable thing to do.
All the classes Sun considered fundamental to the langauge is in the java.lang.*.* packages. Notice how small the fundamental classes are in java relative to the total number of classes in the API. This is how a good system is designed. There is a small core functionality on top of which other things are built.
Being able to read and display webpages with a graphical interface should not be fundamental to an OS. For example, if Java lost it's java.net package, surely, a significant number of Java programs would fail to work. However, the large majority of packages (not net related) would still work fine. IE shouldn't be anymore needed for the core of the OS than should office.
Give me an example of how using an open source can cause you to lose your IP. It's not like they are developing software and might be tempted to link in some GPLed their code, they are just using the software, not modifying it.
I was looking around the emusic site.. couldn't find any talk about what the client runs on though. Is it exclusively windows?
Yeah.. but will you write any of it yourself, or make it easier to install than the most popular OS out there?
I think he meant more like forcing binary distrobutions of the program to be bought from the original author. making it illegal for them to be transferred, whilst still enabling the source to be spread freely. This way the hackers can still fix the product, if they so desire, but the 99% of people who just use the product, and have no interest in actually modifying it are forced to buy it. I posted something similiar yesterday. tp://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=29629&cid=317954 1
I was thinking about that as well. What about a license that forbade distrubition of binaries, but which the source could be distributed freely? This way the people who want to simply use it, with no ability to actually make changes to it must buy it, whilst those capable enough to compile the source (and thus potentially able to improve it) can hack at it all they wish. Of course, breaking such a license is so easy, trivial even, and just being able to compile something says almost nothing about one's ability to modify it.
A couple of my favorites are http://gltron.sourceforge.net/ The author of gltron is a really nice guy.. he even implemented a feature that I asked for over IRC. and ClanBomber, which has motivated me to try to create my own Bomberman implementation. http://www.happypenguin.org/show?ClanBomber
You don't get predetermined destruction in of the garbage collected langauges. If you don't want to track memory allocations in C++, you can use the boost shared_ptr, which is pretty likely to become standard (or some variation thereof) in the next C++ standard. http://www.boost.org/libs/smart_ptr/shared_ptr.htm
Yeah, it's time limited. I participated in a couple of the online tournaments (they host 2 a week) and got destroyed... I can't handle the time limit.
To each their own. I just wish I wasn't so damned poor :(. You are not paying for what they have now, you are paying for what you will have in the future.
Are you delusional? Starcraft requires no where near the "mental ability" as does chess. I used to be a pretty good starcraft player (placed in a few regional money tournaments, beat people who travelled to Korea for big money tourneys), but gaming requires a much different skill than chess does. People engage in deep thought in chess games.. there is nearly no thinking in games of Starcraft... it's all reactionary. Sure, some thinking goes on before and after the game, but the amazing unit/economy management of professional Starcraft players is simply pure quickness. Gaming skill is a lot more like boxing than it is like chess, you have to be quick during the match to win. Surely, a lot of prepation (including perhaps some deep contemplation about the game) goes into getting good at it, but in the match it really comes down to quickness.
What other console dev kits can you get for $500? Sure, you can't really distribute what you make (other than to other geeks who have bought the kit), but it's still gotta be a good way to get some hands on experience with game programming for a console.
I disagree. As a CS major who doesn't pirate anything (Linux is free, thanks), I am constantly telling friends to "feed the programmers" as they warez crap left and right at a MB/s from a LAN direct connect hub, only to be constantly told "fuck the programmers."
Hey, look mom, there is this portable, open source DirectX alternative called SDL that solves exactly that problem.
http://www.libsdl.org
I've heard this a lot, software as a service. Are there any examples of it actually working though? Where are the professional "software servers"?