Interesting assumption. I'm not a Mac guy. My two computers are an Intel Pentium II 266 MHz and a WinChip C6 200 MHz.
I just happen to agree that G3s are amazing processors.
Why do you x86 zealots immediately jump to the assumption that anybody who says something good about the Mac must be a Mac zealot? I'm not even a Mac user, much less a Mac zealot.
Well, I listen to music for 6+ hours a day. I cannot afford to buy that much music on CD, so I buy the best of it on CD, and the rest, which is still good, but not the best, I download. It's not that it's not worth me owning it, it's just that there is other stuff that is *more* worth me owning, and I can't own it all.
There's also the stuff that is entertaining to me the first 3 or 4 times listening to it, but gets old really fast. That stuff I also download on mp3. I only buy CDs of stuff that I can listen to many times and still like it.
You are starting to get the idea
on
Why Kids Kill
·
· Score: 1
Well, several gun manufacturers are being sued by some cities claiming their weapons are responsible for the cities' murders. That's somewhat like weapons being put on trial.
Yes, all (new) G3s are shipped standard with a Rage 128, which is two generations newer technology than the Rage Pro Carmack was using in his comparison. The Rage 128 is comparable to a Voodoo2, so the Mac is more than good enough to run Quake3 quite nicely.
So, basically, yes, there is a higher performance 3d solution for the Mac that you (and apparently Carmack) were unaware of.
Where exactly are you going to find that top-of-the-line Ultrasparc or Alpha EV7 for $3000 again?
Unsubstantiated comments such as "Apple is really shit" are completely worthless. I could say "Linux is shit," but that doesn't make any more sense than your rant did. If i said "Linux is shit because the only hardware OpenGL support is has is through Mesa which relies on proprietary closed-source 3dfx Glide drivers," then I'd make more sense.
Only the beta test, if i read correctly. The retail versions will be released simultaneously i believe.
But then Carmack continues to say that Mac hardware is not as fast as Wintel.
Depends on the hardware. A top-of-the-line G3 beats any Intel hardware I've seen, but a pIII 500 MHz can certainly smoke an iMac (albeit for three times the price).
Then he says that he might consider MacOS X as his development machine. And last he says 'MacOS still suck'. And not a word about Linux, *sob*.
MacOS X, according to the people I know who use it, is quite good as a development environment. Lots of nifty utilities and IDEs that are better than their Windows counterparts (and don't even exist for Linux). However, I've never used it myself, so I can't really say. I do all my programming in real-mode (16-bit) DOS...
But my question is how close to UNIX is MacOS X?
Well, the kernel is basically BSD, so it's quite similar. Think of it as a modifed BSD with a much better GUI than X11.
Does it support X11 and UNIX98?
Not sure about X11. It might, but why would you want it to, when the MacOS GUI is much better?
As for UNIX98, it's not UNIX98 branded, to the best of my knowledge, but then again, neither is Linux or FreeBSD.
How easy is it to port Linux/UNIX applications to it?
Shouldn't be too hard, since the kernel is the same. Of course, if you want to port from X to the MacOS GUI, that could entail some work.
Some school administrators do get it
on
Why Kids Kill
·
· Score: 1
Sounds like a good idea to me. Much better than banning trenchcoats or Marilyn Manson anyway.
However, can it continue past the media spotlight? Will the school continue doing these things? More importantly, will these cliques continue trying to understand each other after the initial shock of the event has faded, or will they go back to being intolerant of each other?
myth: "no school shootings in Canada"
on
Why Kids Kill
·
· Score: 1
That's the distinction I don't get. I can see its interest for psychologists, but why does it really matter to the rest of us? The people are still dead, regarless of whether it was a fellow student or an outsider who killed them.
The hundreds of kids killed while driving to/from school every year are also dead, but nobody pays nearly as much attention to them.
Speaking of mp3s: Well, what happens if I was not going to buy the CD to begin with? I only have so much money I can spend on CDs, so I buy the ones I like the most. The bands whose CDs fall in the upper end of the "mediocre" catagory I listen to on mp3. Basically, my choices are: 1) Download the mp3. The record company gets no money. 2) Do not download the mp3. The record company gets no money.
Either way, I have no interest in purchasing the CD.
In addition, I have actually purchased several CDs as a direct result of mp3s. Several bands I'd never even heard of before, or had only vaguely heard of before, turned out to be quite good when I heard their mp3s.
Umm, that argument makes no sense. I'm not in favor of abolishing intellectual property, but I still don't understand your argument. How would getting rid of intellectual property somehow also force us to get rid of physical property and become communists?
You raise some good points about the ethics of pirating, but I don't see how any of your examples are related. The connection between video piracy and Free Software is a somewhat tenuous one. Also, I don't see how a script kiddie (person who uses rootshell.com-type scripts to circumvent security) has anything to do with movie piracy.
It's not a survey about Open Source(tm) Software, at least not anymore. From the page: This survey originally used the term "open source", which is a registered mark of the Open Source Initiative. Since the OSI definition didn't have the same meaning we intended to convey, I've changed all occurrences of "open source" to "free-source." Here's a more complete (though not exhaustive) explanation.
Ok, I'll rephrase then: The fact that the kids were in possession of firearms directly led to the killings.
I suppose I should've said the bullets are what actually killed them, since the gun merely fired the bullets.
Does it really matter?
on
Why Kids Kill
·
· Score: 1
In the overall scheme of things, why are we spending so much time and effort trying to understand and/or do something about school shootings? I have a better chance of being killed on the road driving to school than of being killed at school, yet the media never has prime-time in-depth coverage when kids are killed while driving to school.
What about 2 million+ people that died in Rwanda? There was relatively little (compared to this) media coverage of that incident. Is this media racism (Rwandans are not white), or is it apathy towards anything that doesn't happen in the United States?
What about the hundreds of kids killed in inner-cities? Is it racism again, since most of them are black, that nobody cares about them? Or is it because they live in poverty, while this was in a wealthy suburb, that makes it more important?
Basically, I want to know why these 15 deaths are given proportionally so much more attention than any other group of 15 deaths in the United States or anywhere else in the world.
Disclaimer: I am not trying to be callous saying "i don't care that these 15 kids died," I'm just wondering why we care that these 15 kids died but we don't care that hundreds of thousands of kids die in other places?
Aren't you doing *exactly* the same thing?
on
Why Kids Kill
·
· Score: 1
However, the guns are what killed the people. The bombs produced a significant number of the injuries (shrapnel wounds mostly), but nearly all (all?) the fatalities were from gunshot wounds.
Disclaimer: I'm not necessarily in favor of banning guns - just clarifying things.
Well, one kid who did treat them decently (who wasn't a member of the group, but who nonetheless did not treat them like shit) was warned by one of the soon-to-be shooters ahead of time, so he left.
He's alive now. I suppose that's his reward for treating fellow humans decently.
Well, the Matrix does have somewhat of a connection, as the main character in the movie enters the military facility dressed in a black trenchcoat that has weapons inside.
There are quite a few legitimate concerns raised about the pervasiveness of violence in American society, especially the media and entertainment industry. However, what people need to be able to do is to find a way to address the issues without resorting to lawsuits and legislative remedies, and without censorship.
Sure, you can go say Doom is evil, and causes people to kill each other. I disagree, since if only two people killed somebody after playing the game, in the eight-plus years it's been out, that's hardly any more of an influence to kill people than listening to Mozart is (several serial killers are Mozart fans). Nonetheless, even if you think it's evil, you cannot ban it. I personally like the game, and I do not kill people. My right to play a game I enjoy should not be infringed upon because somebody else cannot control their actions. The same goes for music, movies, etc. Hell, I listen to KMFDM and Marilyn Manson, play Doom, and use the Internet. Even with all these evil influences combined, I have still not killed anybody. I should be allowed to continue enjoying these forms of entertainment.
The average AOL user can hardly operate windows 95, and they expect them to run linux?
The same can be said of the average earthlink user, the average MSN user, the average mindspring user, the average MCI user, the average SprintNet user, and just about any other large national ISP. If we rule out everybody, who exactly is it that is going to be running Linux? Or are you planning on achieving "world domination" as a server OS?
Is there any particular reason that 'a' in C is an int and not a char? I see that in the functions that I mentioned (getc(), putc(), getch(), etc.), but it's puzzling.
If it's an all-java version, why is it for Solaris? Why will the Linux all-java version be coming later? I thought the entire point of Java was the "write once, run anywhere" mantra.
To be fair, IDE can support more than four devices. Two devices per controller. Most motherboards come with two controllers, but you can buy more, so you can have six or eight IDE devices hooked up.
As for USB, what's wrong with it? As long as you're not trying to do anything *really* high-bandwidth like a harddrive, it seems fine to me.
Ok, well C++ is designed to be a superset of C and compile all legacy C programs fine, but apparently it didn't work out quite that way. Legacy C support is why the class keyword was added with its members defaulting to private, because changing the struct keyword to default to private would break old C programs.
For your first example, that puzzles me. I seem to have read something about characters being (in some cases) considered integers in C, which could be why sizeof('a') returns 2 in C. getch(), getc(), and several other functions return a character as an int with a high-order byte of 0. C++ apparently decided to be more sane and report sizeof('a') as being equal to sizeof(char).
For your second example, that's the unavoidable side effect of adding a new commenting style. It's theoretically possible to break some code, as you demonstrated, but if you were doing that in your C code to begin with, you have problems =)
Slashdot Mirror
When are you Mac guys going to get it?
Interesting assumption. I'm not a Mac guy. My two computers are an Intel Pentium II 266 MHz and a WinChip C6 200 MHz.
I just happen to agree that G3s are amazing processors.
Why do you x86 zealots immediately jump to the assumption that anybody who says something good about the Mac must be a Mac zealot? I'm not even a Mac user, much less a Mac zealot.
Well, I listen to music for 6+ hours a day. I cannot afford to buy that much music on CD, so I buy the best of it on CD, and the rest, which is still good, but not the best, I download. It's not that it's not worth me owning it, it's just that there is other stuff that is *more* worth me owning, and I can't own it all.
There's also the stuff that is entertaining to me the first 3 or 4 times listening to it, but gets old really fast. That stuff I also download on mp3. I only buy CDs of stuff that I can listen to many times and still like it.
Well, several gun manufacturers are being sued by some cities claiming their weapons are responsible for the cities' murders. That's somewhat like weapons being put on trial.
Yes, all (new) G3s are shipped standard with a Rage 128, which is two generations newer technology than the Rage Pro Carmack was using in his comparison. The Rage 128 is comparable to a Voodoo2, so the Mac is more than good enough to run Quake3 quite nicely.
So, basically, yes, there is a higher performance 3d solution for the Mac that you (and apparently Carmack) were unaware of.
Where exactly are you going to find that top-of-the-line Ultrasparc or Alpha EV7 for $3000 again?
Unsubstantiated comments such as "Apple is really shit" are completely worthless. I could say "Linux is shit," but that doesn't make any more sense than your rant did. If i said "Linux is shit because the only hardware OpenGL support is has is through Mesa which relies on proprietary closed-source 3dfx Glide drivers," then I'd make more sense.
Those lucky bastards will get Q3T first.
Only the beta test, if i read correctly. The retail versions will be released simultaneously i believe.
But then Carmack continues to say that Mac hardware is not as fast as Wintel.
Depends on the hardware. A top-of-the-line G3 beats any Intel hardware I've seen, but a pIII 500 MHz can certainly smoke an iMac (albeit for three times the price).
Then he says that he might consider MacOS X as his development machine. And last he says 'MacOS still suck'. And not a word about Linux, *sob*.
MacOS X, according to the people I know who use it, is quite good as a development environment. Lots of nifty utilities and IDEs that are better than their Windows counterparts (and don't even exist for Linux). However, I've never used it myself, so I can't really say. I do all my programming in real-mode (16-bit) DOS...
But my question is how close to UNIX is MacOS X?
Well, the kernel is basically BSD, so it's quite similar. Think of it as a modifed BSD with a much better GUI than X11.
Does it support X11 and UNIX98?
Not sure about X11. It might, but why would you want it to, when the MacOS GUI is much better?
As for UNIX98, it's not UNIX98 branded, to the best of my knowledge, but then again, neither is Linux or FreeBSD.
How easy is it to port Linux/UNIX applications to it?
Shouldn't be too hard, since the kernel is the same. Of course, if you want to port from X to the MacOS GUI, that could entail some work.
Sounds like a good idea to me. Much better than banning trenchcoats or Marilyn Manson anyway.
However, can it continue past the media spotlight? Will the school continue doing these things? More importantly, will these cliques continue trying to understand each other after the initial shock of the event has faded, or will they go back to being intolerant of each other?
That's the distinction I don't get. I can see its interest for psychologists, but why does it really matter to the rest of us? The people are still dead, regarless of whether it was a fellow student or an outsider who killed them.
The hundreds of kids killed while driving to/from school every year are also dead, but nobody pays nearly as much attention to them.
Speaking of mp3s:
Well, what happens if I was not going to buy the CD to begin with? I only have so much money I can spend on CDs, so I buy the ones I like the most. The bands whose CDs fall in the upper end of the "mediocre" catagory I listen to on mp3. Basically, my choices are:
1) Download the mp3. The record company gets no money.
2) Do not download the mp3. The record company gets no money.
Either way, I have no interest in purchasing the CD.
In addition, I have actually purchased several CDs as a direct result of mp3s. Several bands I'd never even heard of before, or had only vaguely heard of before, turned out to be quite good when I heard their mp3s.
Umm, that argument makes no sense. I'm not in favor of abolishing intellectual property, but I still don't understand your argument. How would getting rid of intellectual property somehow also force us to get rid of physical property and become communists?
You raise some good points about the ethics of pirating, but I don't see how any of your examples are related. The connection between video piracy and Free Software is a somewhat tenuous one. Also, I don't see how a script kiddie (person who uses rootshell.com-type scripts to circumvent security) has anything to do with movie piracy.
It's not a survey about Open Source(tm) Software, at least not anymore.
From the page:
This survey originally used the term "open source", which is a registered mark of the Open Source Initiative. Since the OSI definition didn't have the same meaning we intended to convey, I've changed all occurrences of "open source" to "free-source." Here's a more complete (though not exhaustive) explanation.
Ok, I'll rephrase then:
The fact that the kids were in possession of firearms directly led to the killings.
I suppose I should've said the bullets are what actually killed them, since the gun merely fired the bullets.
In the overall scheme of things, why are we spending so much time and effort trying to understand and/or do something about school shootings? I have a better chance of being killed on the road driving to school than of being killed at school, yet the media never has prime-time in-depth coverage when kids are killed while driving to school.
What about 2 million+ people that died in Rwanda? There was relatively little (compared to this) media coverage of that incident. Is this media racism (Rwandans are not white), or is it apathy towards anything that doesn't happen in the United States?
What about the hundreds of kids killed in inner-cities? Is it racism again, since most of them are black, that nobody cares about them? Or is it because they live in poverty, while this was in a wealthy suburb, that makes it more important?
Basically, I want to know why these 15 deaths are given proportionally so much more attention than any other group of 15 deaths in the United States or anywhere else in the world.
Disclaimer: I am not trying to be callous saying "i don't care that these 15 kids died," I'm just wondering why we care that these 15 kids died but we don't care that hundreds of thousands of kids die in other places?
However, the guns are what killed the people. The bombs produced a significant number of the injuries (shrapnel wounds mostly), but nearly all (all?) the fatalities were from gunshot wounds.
Disclaimer: I'm not necessarily in favor of banning guns - just clarifying things.
Well, one kid who did treat them decently (who wasn't a member of the group, but who nonetheless did not treat them like shit) was warned by one of the soon-to-be shooters ahead of time, so he left.
He's alive now. I suppose that's his reward for treating fellow humans decently.
Well, the Matrix does have somewhat of a connection, as the main character in the movie enters the military facility dressed in a black trenchcoat that has weapons inside.
There are quite a few legitimate concerns raised about the pervasiveness of violence in American society, especially the media and entertainment industry. However, what people need to be able to do is to find a way to address the issues without resorting to lawsuits and legislative remedies, and without censorship.
Sure, you can go say Doom is evil, and causes people to kill each other. I disagree, since if only two people killed somebody after playing the game, in the eight-plus years it's been out, that's hardly any more of an influence to kill people than listening to Mozart is (several serial killers are Mozart fans). Nonetheless, even if you think it's evil, you cannot ban it. I personally like the game, and I do not kill people. My right to play a game I enjoy should not be infringed upon because somebody else cannot control their actions. The same goes for music, movies, etc. Hell, I listen to KMFDM and Marilyn Manson, play Doom, and use the Internet. Even with all these evil influences combined, I have still not killed anybody. I should be allowed to continue enjoying these forms of entertainment.
The average AOL user can hardly operate windows 95, and they expect them to run linux?
The same can be said of the average earthlink user, the average MSN user, the average mindspring user, the average MCI user, the average SprintNet user, and just about any other large national ISP. If we rule out everybody, who exactly is it that is going to be running Linux? Or are you planning on achieving "world domination" as a server OS?
Well, MS-DOS is a Microsoft OS that is less demanding than Linux.
Of course, you'd probably want to use DR-DOS since the source code to it is available for you to tweak.
Is there any particular reason that 'a' in C is an int and not a char? I see that in the functions that I mentioned (getc(), putc(), getch(), etc.), but it's puzzling.
If it's an all-java version, why is it for Solaris? Why will the Linux all-java version be coming later? I thought the entire point of Java was the "write once, run anywhere" mantra.
To be fair, IDE can support more than four devices. Two devices per controller. Most motherboards come with two controllers, but you can buy more, so you can have six or eight IDE devices hooked up.
As for USB, what's wrong with it? As long as you're not trying to do anything *really* high-bandwidth like a harddrive, it seems fine to me.
Try that with the upcoming Quake III Arena. Don't think you'll be able to play mp3s and Quake at the same time on that PPro200.
Ok, well C++ is designed to be a superset of C and compile all legacy C programs fine, but apparently it didn't work out quite that way. Legacy C support is why the class keyword was added with its members defaulting to private, because changing the struct keyword to default to private would break old C programs.
For your first example, that puzzles me. I seem to have read something about characters being (in some cases) considered integers in C, which could be why sizeof('a') returns 2 in C. getch(), getc(), and several other functions return a character as an int with a high-order byte of 0. C++ apparently decided to be more sane and report sizeof('a') as being equal to sizeof(char).
For your second example, that's the unavoidable side effect of adding a new commenting style. It's theoretically possible to break some code, as you demonstrated, but if you were doing that in your C code to begin with, you have problems =)