It's nice that you're a ASP.Net developer and all, but your statements about Java performance are unfounded. I think perhaps you should download and use Lightweight Java Game Library which can be grabbed from sourceforge.net. There are people using this library doing games that use pixel shaders and such. LWJGL has a binding to OpenGL and since (if you know anything about rendering loops) your application will be spending more time on the card than you will rendering the scene graph you will see how the results they've achieved on any modern machine - (i.e 800Mhz+) are the same as as what you get out of Managed.Net with DirectX performance wise.
The reason why there are no professional games in Java and why there won't be any in.Net is that game development is a risk averse industry. The community adopts new technologies VERY slowly and unless there is some compelling reason to use a new technology, using it only increases the level of risk in an already highly risky business. Java doesn't really buy that community much. They aren't really gung ho on building anything other than server components for Linux, and the mac is still mostly neglected. So what real value is there in writing code in Java? Especially considering that most of these studios are bound at the hip to middleware like NDL and Renderware which only support DirectX (properly) for their PC interface?
Nevertheless, most Java developers who are writing games in Java are compiling their applications into.exes using Jet anyways - so when you DO take the time to actually follow up on this post, realize that some of the commercial games out there DO use Java and have been compiled into.exe form for distribution. RoboForge isn't the only Java game to make it to retail store shelves:)
Starting with DirectX 9, Microsoft has started giving tutorials at developer conferences about "Managed DirectX" with.Net. Whether or not.Net will actually be relevant to anyone (let alone game developers) remains to be seen, but one can already access DirectX through.Net.
Dvorak has already stated that he believes that the Apple platform is already dead, so why would a dead platform even bother switching. Further, why would he care?
That's not entirely true. Certain developers get their hands on PS3 early, but the vast majority get it in a mere 12 months before the launch, or at least that's the way it was with PS2.
It does not amaze me that Microsoft is doing something funky, and while I remain curious why Microsoft would target Opera specifically - it doesn't surprise me in the least that they are still busting browsers.
It will be interesting to see how they respond to this considering that they went out of their way to block access to MSN by non-IE browsers in the past. I guess the only good thing that can come of this is that people will stop using MSN:)
You've clearly never tried to call one of these places on the phone. Call Walmart and ask them if they have Tyson's Hot Wings in stock - by the time you get your answer I'm sure mine will have arrived by walmart brand carrier pidgeon.
Yeah. The AOL/TW execs will be able to buy very low and then ride the stock back up as the company starts showing profitability over the next 10 years.
Actually no its not. While I won't go into the details of the case what it boils down to is this:
* Microsoft used anticompetitive behavior in an attempt to destroy Java
* Microsoft is now trying to exploit this advantage and push something that also competes with Java
* If the gov't does nothing, then market forces will bring about the end of Java (see actual case documents for more about this)
* Sun is likely to win their antitrust suit (though it has long been withheld that you don't need to show that you will win inorder to get a prelim injunction).
* Thus if the injunction isn't granted, Microsoft takes their unfair position and by the time Sun wins their antitrust suit - the market forces will have already gone into play and Java will be dead regardless of what the courts say (see Netscape for similar scenario - it doesn't matter how many billions they could possibly get for it, the product is dead and can never recover).
Sure it would stand up legally, its called breach of contract. Pretty fundamental aspect of the legal system. When you agree to not do something in order to get your hands on something else, you cannot later decide you're going to do it anyway.
So long as the contract is legal, which this one clearly is, its enforcable.
You would be able to get a patent on the system that was doing the work, and a patent on each drug produced - provided you made claims about what each drug did and how it operated because you cannot gain exclusivity on the cure - just your approach to it.
Sure, if all you want are large businesses around. The patent system levels the playing field so that smaller companies can actually operate and compete with larger ones. If I'm a company of 50 and come up with something, for arguments sake lets call it the Wave motion gun, there would be nothing from Lockheed taking the idea and mass producing WMGs because they have both the ability to produce them and the backing to sell a lot more of them than I would.
This is not a good thing. It leaves big business perpetually in control.
That's good, but in today's patent system - you still have to reduce to practice the work you want to patent. The Patent Act isn't exactly not a part of the existing patent system. Everything that is patentable must be a tangible entity - you cannot patent an idea. So even in this specific case, that wording doesn't help - because a computer processor is a physical invention that has been reduced to practice.
Unless the computer is actually implementing it to, there is no issue. A computer cannot 'generate' a patent. Any patent must make claims about its use. In fact let me just list out the patent application process:
1. A statement identifying the field of the invention, or the type of apparatus, device, method or other object it relates to.
2. An introductory portion, which describes what is known at the time of writing with respect to this field, and which identifies a problem, disadvantage or need that exists therein.
3. A brief description of the invention, stating the measures taken in the apparatus or method according to the invention, and the advantages or solutions it brings.
4. A detailed description, in the above-mentioned level of detail. This detailed description should mention all aspects of the invention. In some countries it is even required to describe the best way to practice the invention (the "best mode"). In any case, the description should fully describe all aspects of the invention. The detailed description is almost always accompanied by a number of figures. The figures are usually found at the end of the application, except for US patent applications, where they are present at the beginning.
5. A number of claims. A claim can be regarded as a definition of what the inventor is trying to claim as "his" invention. There are two types of claims. Independent claims stand on their own; they provide a complete definition. If something else matches the definition of the independent claim, it infringes on the patent. The dependent claims refer back to the independent claims, and provide additional (optional) measures. Should an independent claim be declared invalid, the dependent claims referring back to that claim can be used as a fallback position.Claims can be defined in various categories, such as apparatus, arrangement, device, method, system, computer program, medicine, and so on.
6. An abstract, which gives a short description of what the invention is about. The abstract is not legally binding and does not serve to identify the scope in any way - that's what the claims are for. The abstract is there to help readers quickly examine the relevance of the patent.
A lack of sales of games vs sales of consoles means nothing other than that your platform has crappy games that noone wants. That's like claiming that the N64 must have obviously be modded because there were mod chips available for it and the tie ratio of games to consoles was poor. And again, why would a publisher care that consoles are modded. Just because a console is modded doesn't mean that you aren't playing games on it. I consider that far less likely than for someone to be modding a console and using it as a webserver or browsing platform.
The problem is that noone would know how many XBoxes are chipped. Major console game publishers will look at the 'installed base' of a platform to determine its viability - not whether or not the platform is chipped. No one is going to order market research from mod chip manufacturers, and regardless - modding the XBox doesn't make it incapable of playing the content they are shipping.
Slashdot Mirror
It's nice that you're a ASP.Net developer and all, but your statements about Java performance are unfounded. I think perhaps you should download and use Lightweight Java Game Library which can be grabbed from sourceforge.net. There are people using this library doing games that use pixel shaders and such. LWJGL has a binding to OpenGL and since (if you know anything about rendering loops) your application will be spending more time on the card than you will rendering the scene graph you will see how the results they've achieved on any modern machine - (i.e 800Mhz+) are the same as as what you get out of Managed .Net with DirectX performance wise.
.Net is that game development is a risk averse industry. The community adopts new technologies VERY slowly and unless there is some compelling reason to use a new technology, using it only increases the level of risk in an already highly risky business. Java doesn't really buy that community much. They aren't really gung ho on building anything other than server components for Linux, and the mac is still mostly neglected. So what real value is there in writing code in Java? Especially considering that most of these studios are bound at the hip to middleware like NDL and Renderware which only support DirectX (properly) for their PC interface?
.exes using Jet anyways - so when you DO take the time to actually follow up on this post, realize that some of the commercial games out there DO use Java and have been compiled into .exe form for distribution. RoboForge isn't the only Java game to make it to retail store shelves :)
The reason why there are no professional games in Java and why there won't be any in
Nevertheless, most Java developers who are writing games in Java are compiling their applications into
Starting with DirectX 9, Microsoft has started giving tutorials at developer conferences about "Managed DirectX" with .Net. Whether or not .Net will actually be relevant to anyone (let alone game developers) remains to be seen, but one can already access DirectX through .Net.
Sweet! Me and my friends are going to start looting Plasma TV stores. After all they are too expensive and there is no reason for that :)
what would happen if you overclocked him :)
Dvorak has already stated that he believes that the Apple platform is already dead, so why would a dead platform even bother switching. Further, why would he care?
That's not entirely true. Certain developers get their hands on PS3 early, but the vast majority get it in a mere 12 months before the launch, or at least that's the way it was with PS2.
Actually that's an excellent name. And when the little browser thing is moving they can just animate the lizard running on water :)
It does not amaze me that Microsoft is doing something funky, and while I remain curious why Microsoft would target Opera specifically - it doesn't surprise me in the least that they are still busting browsers.
:)
It will be interesting to see how they respond to this considering that they went out of their way to block access to MSN by non-IE browsers in the past. I guess the only good thing that can come of this is that people will stop using MSN
You've clearly never tried to call one of these places on the phone. Call Walmart and ask them if they have Tyson's Hot Wings in stock - by the time you get your answer I'm sure mine will have arrived by walmart brand carrier pidgeon.
Yeah. The AOL/TW execs will be able to buy very low and then ride the stock back up as the company starts showing profitability over the next 10 years.
Perhaps you should actually find out what a monopoly *is* first.
Wow... your point needed to be made so strongly that you posted anonymously.
Not only found to be a monopoly (which in itself poses no legal remedy), but when Sun uses its Monopoly power to blight CLR.
Actually no its not. While I won't go into the details of the case what it boils down to is this: * Microsoft used anticompetitive behavior in an attempt to destroy Java * Microsoft is now trying to exploit this advantage and push something that also competes with Java * If the gov't does nothing, then market forces will bring about the end of Java (see actual case documents for more about this) * Sun is likely to win their antitrust suit (though it has long been withheld that you don't need to show that you will win inorder to get a prelim injunction). * Thus if the injunction isn't granted, Microsoft takes their unfair position and by the time Sun wins their antitrust suit - the market forces will have already gone into play and Java will be dead regardless of what the courts say (see Netscape for similar scenario - it doesn't matter how many billions they could possibly get for it, the product is dead and can never recover).
Sure it would stand up legally, its called breach of contract. Pretty fundamental aspect of the legal system. When you agree to not do something in order to get your hands on something else, you cannot later decide you're going to do it anyway.
So long as the contract is legal, which this one clearly is, its enforcable.
I'm not getting that. I'm using Mozilla 10.2 and Phoneix 0.4 and both get to excite.com just fine.
Oh great - now when super intelligent squirrels take over the world and enslave humanity you know who to thank.
You would be able to get a patent on the system that was doing the work, and a patent on each drug produced - provided you made claims about what each drug did and how it operated because you cannot gain exclusivity on the cure - just your approach to it.
You sure about that? I see Dell pushing their $500 PCs on TV all the time.
You can check out http://www.dell.com/tv to even see what they're pushing on TV.
Sure, if all you want are large businesses around. The patent system levels the playing field so that smaller companies can actually operate and compete with larger ones. If I'm a company of 50 and come up with something, for arguments sake lets call it the Wave motion gun, there would be nothing from Lockheed taking the idea and mass producing WMGs because they have both the ability to produce them and the backing to sell a lot more of them than I would. This is not a good thing. It leaves big business perpetually in control.
That's good, but in today's patent system - you still have to reduce to practice the work you want to patent. The Patent Act isn't exactly not a part of the existing patent system. Everything that is patentable must be a tangible entity - you cannot patent an idea. So even in this specific case, that wording doesn't help - because a computer processor is a physical invention that has been reduced to practice.
Mod parent up. This is very informative for many here who don't understand patent law.
A lack of sales of games vs sales of consoles means nothing other than that your platform has crappy games that noone wants. That's like claiming that the N64 must have obviously be modded because there were mod chips available for it and the tie ratio of games to consoles was poor. And again, why would a publisher care that consoles are modded. Just because a console is modded doesn't mean that you aren't playing games on it. I consider that far less likely than for someone to be modding a console and using it as a webserver or browsing platform.
The problem is that noone would know how many XBoxes are chipped. Major console game publishers will look at the 'installed base' of a platform to determine its viability - not whether or not the platform is chipped. No one is going to order market research from mod chip manufacturers, and regardless - modding the XBox doesn't make it incapable of playing the content they are shipping.