"for each game which runs native on linux" to quote myself, note the "native". I am fairly sure a lot of the other ones I have mentioned run under WineX as well. At any rate I dare claim that I can list two games that work under windows but not under WineX for each game you can name under WineX as well.
Linux has won a lot of battles over the last 10 years but the battle hasnt even started when it comes to gaming.
OK, lets play a game then, for each game that runs native on linux you mention I mention two that do not (picked quite randomly);
* Uru: Ages Beyond Myst * System Shock 2 * Silent Hill 3 * Serious Sam * MechWarrior 4: Vengeance * Homeworld2 * Europa Universalis * Deus Ex: Invisible War * Dark Age of Camelot * Beyond Good & Evil * Planescape: Torment * Master of Orion III * Mafia * Far Cry * Warcraft III * Max Payne * Grand Theft Auto: Vice City * Command & Conquer Generals * Sacrifice * Grim Fandango
Sure, but the reason why they get good press is because they are doing a good thing. It would be quite odd if everything that gave them good press were evil it would be quite hard for microsoft to do anything good.
The X11R6 subdir makes a lot of sense, if you are on an X terminal then include X11R6/bin in your path, if you arent then dont. This cleans up the namespace nicely when the fantazillion programs that require X really cant be run anyway. I actually feel that one should divide up the directory tree more (or use Plan9-style tree overlaying). I really dont see the point of throwing everything together anyway.
What? Two Javas? This sounds weird. Obviously an open source implementation will grow and respond to demand rapidly and outpace something proprietary, yet it sounds like there will still be a proprietary version. Can anyone shed light on this? I'm confused.
I cant see clearly at all that an open-source java would necessarily outpace a proprietary version, why do you assume that that would be the case? I'm confused.
I hear this all the time, gravity being weak and all that and I have no idea at all where this idea comes from. Weak compared to what? What would be a more appropriate strength of gravity? Please explain it to us less educated.
Except that Google drops punctuation like '/' and '.' so the search ends up being 'ed'. It is fairly obvious that ed would win, being the only editor for real men and all.
"The ed utility is the standard text editor."
-- The 'ed' manpage
> My 15" Titanium PowerBook, the last round of the > series before they became the 15" AlPB, was > advertised to contain a Radeon 9000. > Nevertheless, bus scanning output from in shows I > actually have an 8500. What's the difference?
The 8500 performs quite a bit better but requires a bit more power.
Spoof might even be too strong a word considering how easy it is, most devices these days come with a pointy-clicky friendly gui to change the mac address even.
I am a bit suprised. Strictly speaking exactly what a byte is is somewhat poorly defined. At least the reference I just looked up has a load byte and store byte (where byte has the common 8-bit meaning). If one uses the definition you have though one can find a lot of examples yes, the basic MIPS and a lot of its descendants are notable.
I actually meant to refer to really old computers that could have a word-size of 12 bits and such, making a 8-bit memory location truly odd. I kinda ignored the modern RISCy machines since they can easily handle 8-bit data and typically have a 8-bit chars in a C implementation. I admit that I probably were a bit off though:)
The fun part about the sig is that 'bit' is apparently also a coin, worth $0.125. All the equalities are correct if the first three are interpreted as the coin and the last as computer-style 'bits' (except a byte might not be 8 bits on *all* hardware, hardware where it is not true is quite rare at this point however:).
A quite neat sig all in all, decently clever enough to make people think (or in some cases apparently not think).
A bit late but who knows who might still be watching:)
You said nothing at all about this case, you said: "I have never seen a case where emulation does not entail a performance hit.". I couldn't care less about any opinion you have about windows drivers on linux, this is a too general statement that is simply not true.
While I applaud new thinking from any OS vendor, this type of re-architecting will mean little to the core MS-DOS user. Do we really need to run more than one program at once? Are people really ready to leave the control of their computer up to a scheduler and virtual memory system to manage? Maybe, but consider the risks:
1. It is discovered to be broken shortly after release. This would cripple the entire OS and require a huge mae culpa from MS.
2. It is insecure. Once again, the whole OS would be undermined, users would revolt.
3. No one "gets it". The R&D cost and time spent will be for naught, people will keep on thinking like they always have - I am working in this program so I will run only this program.
Considering the huge installed base of MS-DOS and relatively low requirements of MS users (Lotus123, Commander Keen), it just doesn't seem worth the risk. I would offer that secure, reliable mediocrity is what they should shoot for, they already own the market for desktop OSs and can't possibly convert the 35% who use Apple/UNIX/AmigaOS etc.
Football fields are confusing, they are typically used for area measurements. For things like the distance it is better to use a two-level pseudo-measurement system, for example; All the people in New York standing on each others shoulders would... and so on. Then we get two odd units (population of new york and the average height for a person in new york. Doubling the confusion in the name of explaining things for the daft;)
Unlikely that you will ever see a company do something out of the goodness of their soul (on account of not having a soul) so I think that a company doing the right thing because it is good PR is about as close to foing the right thing for the right reason as one gets.
The only thing COBOL showed about natural language is that naming things in a computer language after natural language words is ultimately just confusing since the language is nowhere closer to actully accepting natural language because of that. There is a lot of difference between accepting natural languages and fooling people into thinking you do and then failing to interpret what they say.
As has been mentioned in earlier posts it appears a great part of the purpose of this computer will be to test out their software system for fault tolerance. Probably interesting research.
Oh nos!1!! The supercomputer will be all loud and stuffs! Whatever shall we do? It will be a pain to play quake on it and ecverything. A monumental failure this.
Slashdot Mirror
"for each game which runs native on linux" to quote myself, note the "native". I am fairly sure a lot of the other ones I have mentioned run under WineX as well. At any rate I dare claim that I can list two games that work under windows but not under WineX for each game you can name under WineX as well.
Linux has won a lot of battles over the last 10 years but the battle hasnt even started when it comes to gaming.
OK, lets play a game then, for each game that runs native on linux you mention I mention two that do not (picked quite randomly);
* Uru: Ages Beyond Myst
* System Shock 2
* Silent Hill 3
* Serious Sam
* MechWarrior 4: Vengeance
* Homeworld2
* Europa Universalis
* Deus Ex: Invisible War
* Dark Age of Camelot
* Beyond Good & Evil
* Planescape: Torment
* Master of Orion III
* Mafia
* Far Cry
* Warcraft III
* Max Payne
* Grand Theft Auto: Vice City
* Command & Conquer Generals
* Sacrifice
* Grim Fandango
Your turn
Sure, but the reason why they get good press is because they are doing a good thing. It would be quite odd if everything that gave them good press were evil it would be quite hard for microsoft to do anything good.
The X11R6 subdir makes a lot of sense, if you are on an X terminal then include X11R6/bin in your path, if you arent then dont. This cleans up the namespace nicely when the fantazillion programs that require X really cant be run anyway. I actually feel that one should divide up the directory tree more (or use Plan9-style tree overlaying). I really dont see the point of throwing everything together anyway.
I cant see clearly at all that an open-source java would necessarily outpace a proprietary version, why do you assume that that would be the case? I'm confused.
I hear this all the time, gravity being weak and all that and I have no idea at all where this idea comes from. Weak compared to what? What would be a more appropriate strength of gravity? Please explain it to us less educated.
Except that Google drops punctuation like '/' and '.' so the search ends up being 'ed'. It is fairly obvious that ed would win, being the only editor for real men and all.
"The ed utility is the standard text editor."
-- The 'ed' manpage
> My 15" Titanium PowerBook, the last round of the
> series before they became the 15" AlPB, was
> advertised to contain a Radeon 9000.
> Nevertheless, bus scanning output from in shows I
> actually have an 8500. What's the difference?
The 8500 performs quite a bit better but requires a bit more power.
Spoof might even be too strong a word considering how easy it is, most devices these days come with a pointy-clicky friendly gui to change the mac address even.
I am a bit suprised. Strictly speaking exactly what a byte is is somewhat poorly defined. At least the reference I just looked up has a load byte and store byte (where byte has the common 8-bit meaning). If one uses the definition you have though one can find a lot of examples yes, the basic MIPS and a lot of its descendants are notable.
:)
I actually meant to refer to really old computers that could have a word-size of 12 bits and such, making a 8-bit memory location truly odd. I kinda ignored the modern RISCy machines since they can easily handle 8-bit data and typically have a 8-bit chars in a C implementation. I admit that I probably were a bit off though
1000 bits is one byte when counting in binary.
:).
The fun part about the sig is that 'bit' is apparently also a coin, worth $0.125. All the equalities are correct if the first three are interpreted as the coin and the last as computer-style 'bits' (except a byte might not be 8 bits on *all* hardware, hardware where it is not true is quite rare at this point however
A quite neat sig all in all, decently clever enough to make people think (or in some cases apparently not think).
Ah, thanks for pointing that out. I'm not stupid enough to attempt to use any form of sarcasm on slashdot of course.
True true, just look at 2.4.
And it being disabled is different from it being removed how? Other than that the word used for getting it back is "reenable" instead of "add"?
And no european would paly madden football ;)
A bit late but who knows who might still be watching :)
You said nothing at all about this case, you said: "I have never seen a case where emulation does not entail a performance hit.". I couldn't care less about any opinion you have about windows drivers on linux, this is a too general statement that is simply not true.
A statement easily disproven: HP Dynamo
No one *really* said anything about emulation, this is about implementing a compatible API, which by no means have to be slow.
Google is not such a great example, it uses only algorithms that are extremely well explored in parallellism, far from all problems are as easy.
1. It is discovered to be broken shortly after release. This would cripple the entire OS and require a huge mae culpa from MS.
2. It is insecure. Once again, the whole OS would be undermined, users would revolt.
3. No one "gets it". The R&D cost and time spent will be for naught, people will keep on thinking like they always have - I am working in this program so I will run only this program.
Considering the huge installed base of MS-DOS and relatively low requirements of MS users (Lotus123, Commander Keen), it just doesn't seem worth the risk. I would offer that secure, reliable mediocrity is what they should shoot for, they already own the market for desktop OSs and can't possibly convert the 35% who use Apple/UNIX/AmigaOS etc.
Football fields are confusing, they are typically used for area measurements. For things like the distance it is better to use a two-level pseudo-measurement system, for example; All the people in New York standing on each others shoulders would... and so on. Then we get two odd units (population of new york and the average height for a person in new york. Doubling the confusion in the name of explaining things for the daft ;)
Unlikely that you will ever see a company do something out of the goodness of their soul (on account of not having a soul) so I think that a company doing the right thing because it is good PR is about as close to foing the right thing for the right reason as one gets.
The only thing COBOL showed about natural language is that naming things in a computer language after natural language words is ultimately just confusing since the language is nowhere closer to actully accepting natural language because of that. There is a lot of difference between accepting natural languages and fooling people into thinking you do and then failing to interpret what they say.
As has been mentioned in earlier posts it appears a great part of the purpose of this computer will be to test out their software system for fault tolerance. Probably interesting research.
Oh nos!1!! The supercomputer will be all loud and stuffs! Whatever shall we do? It will be a pain to play quake on it and ecverything. A monumental failure this.