The only plus consoles get are having a single programming platform.
Console controllers are better for 3rd person games that don't require heavy aiming precision. Games like Doom III and Quake need the mouse and keyboard combo to be played best.
A lot of consoles can have keyboards plugged in through USB now, but until I can plug a mouse along side it, I'll be sticking to PCs.
Consoles don't promote advances in technology either. Games for them can't "push the limits". The better PC games will have great gameplay and push physics, graphics, and sound as high as the computer can handle. An intense battle with great graphics and sound brings you into the game and get adrenaline pumping a lot faster than one with mediocre attempts limited by hardware.
C++ offers everything Java and C# do but it also can do so much more. I mean Java and C# have only recently gotten generics. In C++ it is beyond simple to old your old C API's (although C# is pretty simple also).
It offers everything that they do? I've been coding C++ for a long time, where are my web service classes, my xml parsers? It's easier to use a single interface than have a ton of different libraries that can cause dependancy hell.
Some people complain that C++ is too complex, but as Java and C# mature they are becoming just as complex.
Java and C# are a lot easier than C++. A simple example:
foreach(string str in strings) Console.WriteLine(str);
The C# one looks less intimidating. If a new developer sees both, I'm sure the only thing that might keep him from going to C# is the small speed tradeoff.
Why not make it easy get the best performance out of your hardware
JITed languages are only noticeably slower when GUI is involved. A JIT can also produce code specialized for your exact hardware- something a C/C++ compiler can't do.
As for cross platform compatibility... Both C and C++ are extremely portable. It's the API's that are not always so easy. However, this is no different than Java or C#. At some level you're using a C or C++ subsystem that needs to be ported to each platform. Why not just use it in the first place?
What is better: Porting only a single application, or porting every application? That is an especially strong question when business is involved. Creating portable C/C++ code can be challenging when you have to migrate between Linux, Windows, Mac, 32bit, 64bit, and some guys cell phone. Portable C/C++ will be bigger and look a lot uglier than equivalent Java/C#.
I've seen a few viruses that do this. One was written from the MyDoom worm, and patched the hole after using it to get in.
While the person who wrote it had good intensions, the network traffic turned out to be devastating for some businesses, and caused more trouble than leaving it alone would have.
Not to mention, it is still illegal. Just like going into a sub7 zombie to remove the trojan that is ddosing you is illegal.
Seriously, guys. Use what you know. Write in C++, write in Python. For GUI use GTK or QT or wxWindows, or just GNOME/KDE libs. If you write game use SDL or plib or ClanLib or anything else you will find. Do not check what is "trendy", just code.
I doubt they are using Java and Mono because they are "trendy". If anyone strays more from "trendy" things, it'll be developers. We use what is best for the job, be it C or C#.
If you have ever coded in one of these languages you would know it increases productivity beyond anything possible in C or C++. They are easier to code, easier to debug, easier to manage. Processors are getting fast enough to handle the small speed decrease of using a JIT. Languages like these are the future- C/C++ will easily be phased out as much as ASM was, as soon as the JITed languages become fast enough.
I am asking same question again - why Linux world need to copy everything from Windows world? Do not integrate, do not unify, be free.
Being so loosely integrated is one of the major limiting factors on linux advancing anywhere in the desktop world. Sure- having a ton of choices is great for development and customization, but for Joe User it is hell to have to learn so much crap to get things working. And if he asks his friend for help, chances are the friend will be using something entirely different and not be able to give much if any.
While Windows has it's faults, it is king of integration. It is also the driving force for a lot of new technologies. It sucks, but unless Linux apps want to be left behind, they have got to be more like Windows apps. Copying from them is OK in my book, so long as they don't copy MS's security practices:)
I've seen a few advertisements that take up the whole browser window, but none of them had motion, all static pictures.
And I havn't seen any fullscreen advertisements on the those sites in the past couple months, event after hunting for them.
How much people actually saw these ads? Maybe they were limited to region..
still haven't been able to produce a rip of Natural City that satisfies me even when the last one I tried was nearly 4GB (lots of film grain in that one and I don't care to lose it).
If you want to keep the grain only because you don't want to lose detail, I recommend you take a look at Avisynth's undot and pixiedust filters. These do wonders on removing the grain and keeping detail- the output of them usually looks better than the dvd itself, and compresses much easier.
The only tradeoff is, pixiedust is slow as hell. Process everything to a huffyuv avi then do a two-pass of xvid.
Why is stupid stuff like this getting onto the front of/. - are we really *that* obsessed with ms?
Instead, why not report on something more useful, like the new apache 1.x/2.x remote exploit floating around. I'm sure that effects a lot more people here than a bugfix from ms.
with no big company to support them (IBM, Sun and other Linux/Open source backers already have a huge stake in Java)
*cough* Novell is supporting Mono.
The type checking is much weaker thus introducing new potential holes for error to slip through.
In collections, generics make type checking much stronger. They allow you to find casting problems at compile time instead of run time by not boxing things to Object and back. This also gives a huge speed increase (about 300% in my tests).
software we used at my company required 64 bit precision for accuracy. That would be painfully slow on a 32 bit machine.
Note, that all modern processors already have 64/128bit extensions, which most compilers will use. 64bit processors won't be any faster at double-precision FP operations.
Longhorn won't be out till 2005 if I'm correct and many users are very insatisfied with Windows XP, from Sobig/Blaster outbreaks dragging down productivity levels to random annoyances like messenger popups and a full suite of internet blockers/virus stoppers/software firewalls needed to surf the web.
All laymen users I know will say this- they know about the security, and they will say it's messed up, but it hasn't effected their productivity at all.
Windows XP SP2 due out later this year will fix the popups/virus/firewall problems. With Windows Update v5, users can keep their machine up to date without effort.
The people who do know that there are alternatives out there recognize that they will gain speed and pass Windows someday, but aren't willing to change until durastic changes take place in ease of use. When mentioning Linux most think it's CLI, and that's a downgrade.
I'm no supporter of microsofts way of "improving" on standards, but I think you have the wrong people.
The browser is one thing but all the web scripters out there need to get off their ass and write good W3C compliant code.
Security. Everybody wants tehm to be more secure but it isn't like they are putting the bugs in on purpose. They may be sending the products out the door before they are ready but that isn't going to change
Beefing security would be a lot easier if they added some more people to their team that specializes in that.
That "sending the products out the door before they are ready" line is bullshit. I've been on testing teams for lots of Microsoft products (most of which last for 3 to 4 months), and by the end of the betas it's near impossible to find anything wrong with them.
Yes, Microsoft has released some buggy as hell software (ME anyone?), but they have gotten MUCH better in the past few years.
Slashdot Mirror
if you do a normal google for a street address, it will point you to yahoo mapping.
Porting one huge library and app
Not true. I don't know about Java, but Mono's class library is written entirely in C#. The only thing they worry about porting is the JIT.
The only plus consoles get are having a single programming platform.
Console controllers are better for 3rd person games that don't require heavy aiming precision. Games like Doom III and Quake need the mouse and keyboard combo to be played best.
A lot of consoles can have keyboards plugged in through USB now, but until I can plug a mouse along side it, I'll be sticking to PCs.
Consoles don't promote advances in technology either. Games for them can't "push the limits". The better PC games will have great gameplay and push physics, graphics, and sound as high as the computer can handle. An intense battle with great graphics and sound brings you into the game and get adrenaline pumping a lot faster than one with mediocre attempts limited by hardware.
It offers everything that they do? I've been coding C++ for a long time, where are my web service classes, my xml parsers? It's easier to use a single interface than have a ton of different libraries that can cause dependancy hell.
Some people complain that C++ is too complex, but as Java and C# mature they are becoming just as complex.
Java and C# are a lot easier than C++. A simple example:
The C# one looks less intimidating. If a new developer sees both, I'm sure the only thing that might keep him from going to C# is the small speed tradeoff.
Why not make it easy get the best performance out of your hardware
JITed languages are only noticeably slower when GUI is involved. A JIT can also produce code specialized for your exact hardware- something a C/C++ compiler can't do.
As for cross platform compatibility... Both C and C++ are extremely portable. It's the API's that are not always so easy. However, this is no different than Java or C#. At some level you're using a C or C++ subsystem that needs to be ported to each platform. Why not just use it in the first place?
What is better: Porting only a single application, or porting every application? That is an especially strong question when business is involved. Creating portable C/C++ code can be challenging when you have to migrate between Linux, Windows, Mac, 32bit, 64bit, and some guys cell phone. Portable C/C++ will be bigger and look a lot uglier than equivalent Java/C#.
Don't give Balmer ammo. The GPL is already viral, imagine the new "evidence" him and Gates could present to all the countries switching to OSS.
I've seen a few viruses that do this. One was written from the MyDoom worm, and patched the hole after using it to get in.
While the person who wrote it had good intensions, the network traffic turned out to be devastating for some businesses, and caused more trouble than leaving it alone would have.
Not to mention, it is still illegal. Just like going into a sub7 zombie to remove the trojan that is ddosing you is illegal.
Seriously, guys. Use what you know. Write in C++, write in Python. For GUI use GTK or QT or wxWindows, or just GNOME/KDE libs. If you write game use SDL or plib or ClanLib or anything else you will find. Do not check what is "trendy", just code.
:)
I doubt they are using Java and Mono because they are "trendy". If anyone strays more from "trendy" things, it'll be developers. We use what is best for the job, be it C or C#.
If you have ever coded in one of these languages you would know it increases productivity beyond anything possible in C or C++. They are easier to code, easier to debug, easier to manage. Processors are getting fast enough to handle the small speed decrease of using a JIT. Languages like these are the future- C/C++ will easily be phased out as much as ASM was, as soon as the JITed languages become fast enough.
I am asking same question again - why Linux world need to copy everything from Windows world? Do not integrate, do not unify, be free.
Being so loosely integrated is one of the major limiting factors on linux advancing anywhere in the desktop world. Sure- having a ton of choices is great for development and customization, but for Joe User it is hell to have to learn so much crap to get things working. And if he asks his friend for help, chances are the friend will be using something entirely different and not be able to give much if any.
While Windows has it's faults, it is king of integration. It is also the driving force for a lot of new technologies. It sucks, but unless Linux apps want to be left behind, they have got to be more like Windows apps. Copying from them is OK in my book, so long as they don't copy MS's security practices
I've seen a few advertisements that take up the whole browser window, but none of them had motion, all static pictures. And I havn't seen any fullscreen advertisements on the those sites in the past couple months, event after hunting for them. How much people actually saw these ads? Maybe they were limited to region..
I, for one, welcome our new giant rat overlords!
still haven't been able to produce a rip of Natural City that satisfies me even when the last one I tried was nearly 4GB (lots of film grain in that one and I don't care to lose it).
If you want to keep the grain only because you don't want to lose detail, I recommend you take a look at Avisynth's undot and pixiedust filters. These do wonders on removing the grain and keeping detail- the output of them usually looks better than the dvd itself, and compresses much easier.
The only tradeoff is, pixiedust is slow as hell. Process everything to a huffyuv avi then do a two-pass of xvid.
Why is stupid stuff like this getting onto the front of /. - are we really *that* obsessed with ms?
Instead, why not report on something more useful, like the new apache 1.x/2.x remote exploit floating around. I'm sure that effects a lot more people here than a bugfix from ms.
Most systems now have 512MB, in two years they will probably have 1GiB or more. I've got 1GiB in mine right now.
In SP2 they changed their plugin interface a bit (now they are Add-Ons?). Wasn't that done to avoid this issue?
with no big company to support them (IBM, Sun and other Linux/Open source backers already have a huge stake in Java) *cough* Novell is supporting Mono.
The type checking is much weaker thus introducing new potential holes for error to slip through.
In collections, generics make type checking much stronger. They allow you to find casting problems at compile time instead of run time by not boxing things to Object and back. This also gives a huge speed increase (about 300% in my tests).
I'd say more like C#.
I'm sure Intel will have SSE3 and SSE4 out soon and eventually AMD will license those as well
Apparently SSE3 is already in the prescott.
software we used at my company required 64 bit precision for accuracy. That would be painfully slow on a 32 bit machine.
Note, that all modern processors already have 64/128bit extensions, which most compilers will use. 64bit processors won't be any faster at double-precision FP operations.
I'm on freenode as Don_PhrostByte, come n' get me. You could also nmap int64.org, and see that it's running Debian.
Longhorn won't be out till 2005 if I'm correct and many users are very insatisfied with Windows XP, from Sobig/Blaster outbreaks dragging down productivity levels to random annoyances like messenger popups and a full suite of internet blockers/virus stoppers/software firewalls needed to surf the web.
All laymen users I know will say this- they know about the security, and they will say it's messed up, but it hasn't effected their productivity at all.
Windows XP SP2 due out later this year will fix the popups/virus/firewall problems. With Windows Update v5, users can keep their machine up to date without effort.
The people who do know that there are alternatives out there recognize that they will gain speed and pass Windows someday, but aren't willing to change until durastic changes take place in ease of use. When mentioning Linux most think it's CLI, and that's a downgrade.
The email harvesters are going to have a great time.
10,000 emails is nothing, harvesters grab that amount in less than 30min.
the new 64bit technologies could handle that easily.
I'm no supporter of microsofts way of "improving" on standards, but I think you have the wrong people. The browser is one thing but all the web scripters out there need to get off their ass and write good W3C compliant code.
Security. Everybody wants tehm to be more secure but it isn't like they are putting the bugs in on purpose. They may be sending the products out the door before they are ready but that isn't going to change
Beefing security would be a lot easier if they added some more people to their team that specializes in that.
That "sending the products out the door before they are ready" line is bullshit. I've been on testing teams for lots of Microsoft products (most of which last for 3 to 4 months), and by the end of the betas it's near impossible to find anything wrong with them.
Yes, Microsoft has released some buggy as hell software (ME anyone?), but they have gotten MUCH better in the past few years.
Actually, whidbey is the codename for the new .NET framework.