Cascading Style Sheet docs recommend specifying multiple fonts for exactly this reason, suggesting that you use one of the generic font family names last as a fallback (serif, sans-serif, cursive, fantasy, or monospace).
On the contrary, I think a 96-bit addressing system would work just fine.
That's still assuming a 64-bit local address space to fit EIC-64 addresses in.
See, with a 64-bit network address, that means there can be up to 18,446,744,073,709,551,616. That's 18.4 quintillion network addresses (or 18.4 trillion if you use the other naming system).
A 32-bit network address would still make 4,294,967,296 (4.3 billion or 4,300 million) network addresses available. That's over two-thirds of the number of people on our planet just in network addresses. (The current estimated world population is 6,609,253,022 according to the US Census Bureau)
The only disadvantage I see to having a 96-bit address is that, to express it as a set of unsigned 64-bit integers, you'd have an empty 32-bits in one of them. However, if it's being treated as unsigned 32-bit integers, then you'd need exactly 3 of them.
As far as I'm aware, the only time MAC addresses aren't globally unique is when MAC address cloning is being used, such as on a home system where your ISP has your MAC address registered in their system, and you want to connect through a cable/DSL router instead.
I knew IPv6 addresses were 128 bits long, but I didn't realize that 64 of those are used for local addressing.
I mean, I can understand that this is done so MAC addresses can be mapped into it, but come on... all of IPv4 is 32-bits. Do we really need 64-bits for local addressing?
Anyway, I've check it out myself, and sure enough, the Inspiron 1720 similarly equipped is $1,974 USD. To anyone reading this, you can check this yourself by starting here and making the following changes from the default:
Processor: Change to "Intel® Core 2 Duo T7700 (2.4GHz/800Mhz FSB/4MB cache)"
Display: Change to "High Resolution, glossy widescreen 17.0 inch display (1920 x 1200)" (there doesn't appear to be a non-glossy high res screen for this laptop)
Video Card: Change to "256MB NVIDIA® GeForce® 8600M GT"
Bluetooth Options: Check "Built-in Bluetooth capability (2.0 EDR)"
Integrated Webcam: Change to "Integrated 2.0 Megapixel Webcam"
Right, but the great-great-grandparent never said gperf is more portable than getopt. What he did say was that getopt() doesn't work on Windows and that it only handles short arguments. From that, you drew a conclusion not supported by the facts in evidence (to put it in lawyer speak).
I would not consider speed of command line option processing to be bottleneck in any application, the overhead of starting of the program is far greater.
Have you tested this using getopt() and getopt_long() , or did you mean by parsing them manually?
Getting rid of the grind has this one eensy-weensy little problem. Whatever you come up with to replace it has to be interesting, and more importantly, has to remain interesting so that people continue to pay a monthly fee. For the most part, that means continually updating the game.
Allowing player-created content is all well and good, but it's not something you can rely on if you intend to collect a monthly fee. Most people won't pay a monthly fee if they're expected to do all the work.
The point he was trying(at least I am hoping he was trying) to make is that in WoW the difference between a lower level and a higher level is pretty vast and outright. Lower levels are worthless in groups, or parties. In Ultima Online, you only grind if you feel the need to. You are virtually effective at any level. Just at higher levels you are more effective. This was one of Garriot's core game design issues when designing UO. I remember high "level" players coming to my blacksmith for gear, and repairs well before I was 100 in my blacksmithy skill(which is the max in UO).
Can you say the same in WoW? Is there any reason for a high level player to go to a low level crafter? Or how about low level players helping on high level quests?
For tradeskills, there are some, but they are few and far between. The best example I can think of is the quest A Short Incubation, a level 47 quest which requires 2xElixir of Fortitude, which can be crafted by someone with 175 skill in Alchemy (which in turn requires a character of at least level 20).
Before the disenchanting nerf, low level enchanters could disenchant any level item. This would have been quite handy for the expansion, as other professions, such as Tailoring and Engineering, start to require enchanting materials.
I haven't yet checked my BIOS settings, but in the Device Manager, it appears as connected to the NVIDIA nForce3 250 Serial ATA Controller (v2.6) with Serial ATA DMA as the transfer type, although the dropdown is greyed out because Let BIOS select transfer mode is checked. (I installed my motherboard drivers afterwards, plus the board's nForce3 chipset isn't exactly new.)
And how do I reinstall an operating system if the setup program doesn't recognize SATA?
If you're referring to Windows, that's what pressing F6 during the start of the textmode setup is for (I suspect you still have a floppy connected, though I could easily be wrong), or you can use nLite to slipstream your SATA drivers. Both solutions will work. If you're talking Linux, it shouldn't be a big issue to get a later revision that supports it.
Look, it's going to be inconvenient if you don't have SATA ports on your motherboard. (As I said in a couple other posts, I'm in that boat too. Though I did have a spare PCI slot.) But you can't reasonably expect companies to support legacy technology forever. It does cost them money to support the two standards, and I doubt they'll lose many sales because of this.
I have a Windows XP SP2 disc, and it recognized my SATA controller and drive without any problems.
Is this a limitation of the program itself or is it just a limitation of what Intel is willing to validate it on. I mean, I can understand Intel not testing other people's processors and only making a claim to thier current crop that is available.
If there is not technical limitation to the use on other processors and Intel just didn't warrant or claim it works on them, then it might work well with them, you just need a way to find out for sure. I ma guessing this might lead to a designed and tested for Intel processors logo or something.
I know that AMD processors would largely fall under "Non Intel processors compatible with the above processors."
I took these lists from the TBB Product Overview page (linked as the word limited in the original post). These are Intel's words, not mine.
"Supported" doesn't necessarily mean "will only run on" - it's just what they explicitly say it'll run on, and probably rigorously test against. The fact is that it advertises working in GCC on Linux and OS X, and so I'd expect it to work anywhere icc or gcc and pthreads or OpenMP is available (i.e. anywhere where threading matters to anyone writing new software.)
While that's true, I assume that they would have listed one of the BSDs if they knew it worked on it. As far as I know, it required specific things in the Mach and Linux kernels, or something specific in glibc (I didn't know if the BSDs used glibc, I just assumed that they didn't).
Just don't expect Intel to advertise their product working on AMD or Sun processors, even if it does.
"Non Intel processors compatible with the above processors" would cover AMD processors, I'm not sure about Sun processors.
(Oops, I cut off the s in processors in the original post.)
Slashdot Mirror
FYI: Blizzard is currently claiming that Death Knights will be available to both Horde and Alliance.
*throws continuity out the window*
Having said that, I expect that to change.
Cascading Style Sheet docs recommend specifying multiple fonts for exactly this reason, suggesting that you use one of the generic font family names last as a fallback (serif, sans-serif, cursive, fantasy, or monospace).
On the contrary, I think a 96-bit addressing system would work just fine.
That's still assuming a 64-bit local address space to fit EIC-64 addresses in.
See, with a 64-bit network address, that means there can be up to 18,446,744,073,709,551,616. That's 18.4 quintillion network addresses (or 18.4 trillion if you use the other naming system).
A 32-bit network address would still make 4,294,967,296 (4.3 billion or 4,300 million) network addresses available. That's over two-thirds of the number of people on our planet just in network addresses. (The current estimated world population is 6,609,253,022 according to the US Census Bureau)
The only disadvantage I see to having a 96-bit address is that, to express it as a set of unsigned 64-bit integers, you'd have an empty 32-bits in one of them. However, if it's being treated as unsigned 32-bit integers, then you'd need exactly 3 of them.
As far as I'm aware, the only time MAC addresses aren't globally unique is when MAC address cloning is being used, such as on a home system where your ISP has your MAC address registered in their system, and you want to connect through a cable/DSL router instead.
I knew IPv6 addresses were 128 bits long, but I didn't realize that 64 of those are used for local addressing.
I mean, I can understand that this is done so MAC addresses can be mapped into it, but come on... all of IPv4 is 32-bits. Do we really need 64-bits for local addressing?
They'd just better watch out that SGI doesn't sue them. After all, SGI created the 3D File System Navigator.
I hear it was widely used during the development of Jurassic Park.
Anyway, I've check it out myself, and sure enough, the Inspiron 1720 similarly equipped is $1,974 USD. To anyone reading this, you can check this yourself by starting here and making the following changes from the default:
So, the Mac user sees a bar and ducks. But the PC user doesn't see ducks. Does that mean the Mac user is hallucinating? :P
Obligatory Daily Show video
Right, but the great-great-grandparent never said gperf is more portable than getopt. What he did say was that getopt() doesn't work on Windows and that it only handles short arguments. From that, you drew a conclusion not supported by the facts in evidence (to put it in lawyer speak).
Are you seriously trying to use such a blatant and obvious strawman?
I see that as a good reason to use tabs. Don't like how far it's indented? Change how wide your editor displays tabs.
Have you tested this using getopt() and getopt_long() , or did you mean by parsing them manually?
Just make sure your random quests don't suck. See: Star Wars Galaxies.
Getting rid of the grind has this one eensy-weensy little problem. Whatever you come up with to replace it has to be interesting, and more importantly, has to remain interesting so that people continue to pay a monthly fee. For the most part, that means continually updating the game.
Allowing player-created content is all well and good, but it's not something you can rely on if you intend to collect a monthly fee. Most people won't pay a monthly fee if they're expected to do all the work.
For tradeskills, there are some, but they are few and far between. The best example I can think of is the quest A Short Incubation, a level 47 quest which requires 2xElixir of Fortitude, which can be crafted by someone with 175 skill in Alchemy (which in turn requires a character of at least level 20).
Before the disenchanting nerf, low level enchanters could disenchant any level item. This would have been quite handy for the expansion, as other professions, such as Tailoring and Engineering, start to require enchanting materials.
While it's not exactly assisted living, the Simpsons Star Trek XII: So Very Tired clip is still funny.
I don't know... I think Brent Spiner (Data) had some screen presence. Probably not as much as Shatner, but it was definitely there.
Which is probably why the later seasons had a lot of Data episodes.
That was word for word what I was thinking when I saw this article.
You know, I think you might be right... after all, the volume meter on the screen is left to right.
Most of the time when I'm watching TV shows, I'm watching them on my PC, which doesn't have a remote.
I haven't yet checked my BIOS settings, but in the Device Manager, it appears as connected to the NVIDIA nForce3 250 Serial ATA Controller (v2.6) with Serial ATA DMA as the transfer type, although the dropdown is greyed out because Let BIOS select transfer mode is checked. (I installed my motherboard drivers afterwards, plus the board's nForce3 chipset isn't exactly new.)
Integrated SATA.
I have a Windows XP SP2 disc, and it recognized my SATA controller and drive without any problems.
I know that AMD processors would largely fall under "Non Intel processors compatible with the above processors."
I took these lists from the TBB Product Overview page (linked as the word limited in the original post). These are Intel's words, not mine.
While that's true, I assume that they would have listed one of the BSDs if they knew it worked on it. As far as I know, it required specific things in the Mach and Linux kernels, or something specific in glibc (I didn't know if the BSDs used glibc, I just assumed that they didn't).
"Non Intel processors compatible with the above processors" would cover AMD processors, I'm not sure about Sun processors.
(Oops, I cut off the s in processors in the original post.)