The xbox is running a x86 intel chip, I'm sure most of us here don't need to be reminded that the current x86 chips we use today are descendants of of chips designed purely to crunch numbers for business applications.
I'm sure most of us here don't need to be reminded that the numbers used in business applications are different to the numbers used in games. As an example, I offer for your consideration 19.99, a number most often associated with business applications. It is rare indeed to find such a number as this used in a game.
20, on the other hand, or even 100, are numbers commonly found in computer games. It could be argued that these numbers are found in business applications also, so instead I ask you to consider the venerable pi, or even the square root of two; numbers so intensely game-oriented they come with their own description!
An English-speaking Indian would laugh at your attempted spelling of the word "definitely".
So you made a racist joke and you got modded all the way up as funny. Woop-de-doo. Your intended victims at least get the pleasure that your joke, regarding their apparently poor English skills, has neatly rebounded and shown you up for the ignorant buffoon you really are.
A note to all the moderators who modded the post up as funny: Perhaps a little self-examination is in order?
You're right, it's just you. Don't feel bad though, you are probably too young to remember or know about these early non pre-emptive operating systems.
Windows didn't have pre-emptive multitasking till Windows95 and I'm not sure about Macs (but check the link in the first paragraph..) but I remember a Mac-mate of mine getting all excited about OS X because of the "pre-empted many-tasking" he had heard about.
In early versions of Windows the operating system (and I use the term loosely) only regained control when a program issued a GetMessage() or PeekMessage() call (well, mainly, there were some others as well). A program could easily tie up the system if it didn't call any of these API functions in a timely manner.
Yeah, but actually Blondie24 was better than that! I just checked my copy of the book and in fact "Blondie's rating of 2,045.85 placed her in the top five hundred of all registered players on zone.com, which had now increased to more than 120,000 people. That is, Blondie was better than 99.61 percent of all the rated players at the website."
The rating of 2,045.85 puts Blondie24 in the 'expert' category.
Blondie24 is a PC program that plays checkers (draughts) at an internationally recognised expert level. The clever thing is that Blondie24 taught itself to play via Evolutionary Neural Networks. The programmers just coded in the rules for moving, then unleashed it on itself for six months, selecting the winner of each tournament to breed the next generation. OK, I am simplifying but you can read about it in the book.
Because the programmers are such crappy checkers players they tested Blondie24 by playing the program against humans on Microsoft's game site. Blondie24's rating puts the program in the top 5% of players. Note that there is another program, Chinook, that is the current man-machine world champion checkers program, but chinook was programmed using human expert knowledge and plays using brute force. Blondie24 has NO human knowledge about the game programmed in.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, check out the book "Aaron's Code: Meta-Art, Artificial Intelligence and the Work of Harold Cohen" and Dr. Dobbs article.
Having said that...
I'm sure most of us here don't need to be reminded that the numbers used in business applications are different to the numbers used in games. As an example, I offer for your consideration 19.99, a number most often associated with business applications. It is rare indeed to find such a number as this used in a game.
20, on the other hand, or even 100, are numbers commonly found in computer games. It could be argued that these numbers are found in business applications also, so instead I ask you to consider the venerable pi, or even the square root of two; numbers so intensely game-oriented they come with their own description!
In conclusion, I'd just like to say thank you.
hahaha!!!
Do you honestly want us to believe that the only reason Carmack is so good is because he has access to better hardware than you?
And I suppose then that you would be able to compete with iD and John Carmack if only you had a GeForce5million before everyone else.
It's an interesting theory, I'm sure... Well, funny, anway.
An English-speaking Indian would laugh at your attempted spelling of the word "definitely".
So you made a racist joke and you got modded all the way up as funny. Woop-de-doo. Your intended victims at least get the pleasure that your joke, regarding their apparently poor English skills, has neatly rebounded and shown you up for the ignorant buffoon you really are.
A note to all the moderators who modded the post up as funny: Perhaps a little self-examination is in order?
Windows didn't have pre-emptive multitasking till Windows95 and I'm not sure about Macs (but check the link in the first paragraph..) but I remember a Mac-mate of mine getting all excited about OS X because of the "pre-empted many-tasking" he had heard about.
In early versions of Windows the operating system (and I use the term loosely) only regained control when a program issued a GetMessage() or PeekMessage() call (well, mainly, there were some others as well). A program could easily tie up the system if it didn't call any of these API functions in a timely manner.
Yeah, but actually Blondie24 was better than that! I just checked my copy of the book and in fact "Blondie's rating of 2,045.85 placed her in the top five hundred of all registered players on zone.com, which had now increased to more than 120,000 people. That is, Blondie was better than 99.61 percent of all the rated players at the website." The rating of 2,045.85 puts Blondie24 in the 'expert' category.
Blondie24 is a PC program that plays checkers (draughts) at an internationally recognised expert level. The clever thing is that Blondie24 taught itself to play via Evolutionary Neural Networks. The programmers just coded in the rules for moving, then unleashed it on itself for six months, selecting the winner of each tournament to breed the next generation. OK, I am simplifying but you can read about it in the book. Because the programmers are such crappy checkers players they tested Blondie24 by playing the program against humans on Microsoft's game site. Blondie24's rating puts the program in the top 5% of players. Note that there is another program, Chinook, that is the current man-machine world champion checkers program, but chinook was programmed using human expert knowledge and plays using brute force. Blondie24 has NO human knowledge about the game programmed in.