You're not playing a "Doom III Demo". You're playing a leaked alpha copy. Someone at ATI leaked it. You're not going to get good framerates on it, it's very unoptimized.
Wait for a real demo, with that system (onboard nForce2 video?) it should be playable at the lowest settings, but stick a GF3 or better in there, and it'll fly.
I really don't understand why the AG has the right to sue on a consumer's behalf. Why can't those businesses effected by the huge amounts of spam sue the companies directly for eating up all their bandwidth? I'm not sure we need another law here to deal with spam. If the AG sues on someone's behalf, where does the money go?
I take the personal position that there doesn't need to be any new laws for dealing with the Internet, all the old laws still apply. Government is far more evil and powerful than all the spammers combined, and if we let them regulate this one aspect of the Internet (spam), they're going to see that as permission to run around and regulate everything else too
(.kid anyone?).
I might sound paranoid, but I really think this timid, politically-correct legislation is a springboard for a more heavily regulated Internet.
Like some other posters have already pointed out, no IE, no "stunning samples".
Screw them, honestly. What arrogance. I hate their whole "all-Microsoft" strategy. Would I buy a Sony DVD player and expect it to only play CDs or DVDs from Sony? People would be outraged!
This is why I have a hard time seeing Microsoft expanding beyond the very limited PC market. That's why the whole "Trojan horse in the living room" X-Box strategy will never work. Microsoft has a stronghold over PC operating systems, and can mostly get away with stuff like this. But if they refuse to cooperate with other companies already in the living room with technology like this, they're only hurting themselves.
And since I can't see the "stunning samples" in Mozilla, I'm not so stunned.
Yes, a computer is more general purpose than those things (toaster, tv, etc). But the vast majority of people who use computers use it for a specific purpose. You can pretty much narrow that down to office apps, web browsing, music, and the occasional game. If Linux is going to be succesful on the desktop, it has to EXCEL at those specific areas. It should be a no-brainer to set up.
Macs are great at this. They have the *nix under the hood, but for everyday normal people, it "just works". I know you hate that phrase, but that just goes to show that it isn't impossible, and saying otherwise is a complete lazy cop-out.
And cars do "just work", much better than computers. Yeah, you have to shift, and steer, etc. That's not an unreasonable expectation, and you can compare that to opening windows, typing some stuff, choosing boldface font, etc. But the average car person SHOULD NOT have to open the hood and swap out a new engine, or even change their own oil for that matter. Just like the average computer user has no desire to manually edit config files, or type complex commands into a console.
There has to be a mix of power and simplicity to win on the desktop. Linux has the power, but the simplicity is a joke for the average and even better than average user. Apple proved it isn't impossible to make *nix friendly on the desktop to the average user. I hope Linux can catch up, and I honestly think it will. But only if people work on it, and accept all criticism from newbies as valid rather than trying to rationalize it away.
I see some problems with this. Last I checked, Windows did not have very good tech support, online or offline.
I'm not sure where you're getting that. I can get the answer to any question about windows just by googling that question. The help is usually sufficient as well. Users don't really need to access that help as often as they would under another OS, because things just work.
And, the author needs to RTFM.... there are plenty of good resources to use for Linux help, www.justlinux.com being one I frequently used when I needed help
You are totally missing the point. 99.999% of the people in the world are not like you. They see the computer as a tool that shouldn't get in their way, like, say, a toaster. If you buy a $15 toaster from Wal-Mart, do you expect to have to go to http://www.justtoaster.com or something like that to get it working properly? You're looking at that statement from the perspective of someone who enjoys tinkering with their computer. The vast majority of people out there just want to play solitaire or surf the net. They don't want to have to search all over the web just go get their video card working.
The writer falls into the trap that most do, assuming Windows is THE perfect operating system. And, it's not, there are just as many faults in installation as there are in Linux. I've seen many failed driver installs, no/bad video, etc. I think linux support is better in some aspects, actually.
That's ridiculous! I've installed several Linux distros, and I've installed Win98, WinME, Win2K, WinXP on probably a hundred machines. I have NEVER had difficulty getting hardware to work under any of the Windows versions except one digital camera that wouldn't work under Win2K. I've had countless difficulties under Linux getting printers, video cards, modems, sound, etc. to work properly, and sometimes they just never do.
I just wish writers would view things a bit better before going off complaining about how tough Linux is. If Windows was held to the same standard, the same complaints could be made as well.
According to the article, she was using Win95 (ugh) for a long time without any of the similiar problems. So how is it an unfair comparison?
I like Linux a lot. It's great for someone like me. But try watching the average person install a software package under windows, then try and do the same thing under Linux. They can't do it. Linux isn't ready for the average person, and taking this article as anything other than constructive criticism isn't helping it get there.
What I don't get is what commercial use it is to an airline company to have information on who you travel with, or what bedsize you prefer.
If nothing else, they can sell that information to another company. Selling all the info you have on your customers is pretty profitable, the more data you have on them the merrier. SOMEONE will pay to know anything about you.
Until the rediculous amounts of Internet Sex related content are somehow lowerd, i would not let my kids touch the internet until there about 13 and are already shown all that in school.
I think it's funny you chose 13 as the age you're willing to let them explore the Internet, in all of it's sexual content glory...:)
That's the age I really got interested in the Internet!
Why do laws like this, which are completely impossible to force and redundant (possession of child porn is ALREADY illegal, why force ISPs to filter it?) manage to get passed?
Because who the hell expects to get any votes after voting against a child-porn law?
They only get away with stupid laws like this because most people don't look past the title, so we get things like "The Patriot Act"...
I'm trying to get my head around how this will actually help any kind of armed force. Simulations _are_ useful for doing wargame situations etc... But how are you supposed to simulate humans?
AI has come a long way, it isn't perfect, but it's sufficient for training purposes.
I can just see marines that have been through hundreds of simulations walk on to a battlefield and into a landmine, because the simulation never said anything about that.
Simulation closes peoples minds. Training is important, but you can't forget how unpredictable a human is. The trainee walks on to the battlefield (or whatever he/she is being trained for) and thinks s/he is ready, but a simulation can not possibly exhaust every situation.
While those are decent points, I think they lose some of their validity when you take into account the fact that simulations are not the only thing the military uses to train soldiers. They're just a tiny part of the overall picture, an important tool. I think they have the potential to be very effective in combination with everything else they already go through...
Until people start looking to alternatives to the two parties we have in place today.
Republicans and Democrats will keep increasing the size of Government, and it will intrude more and more into your daily lives. Does stuff like this really surprise anyone?
The Government has grown out of control, but no one does anything about it, too afraid they may "waste their vote".
You're wasting your votes anyway, quit voting for the two major parties and at least you'll be doing it on principle!
Re:I know no one is allowed to speak in the States
on
Why XML Doesn't Suck
·
· Score: 1
Well then Johnny, tell us why it is about oil. I'll point you to an article that explains why it isn't.
AOL is planning on sweeping into a market with an obviously inferior product that gives consumers less control than products that are already on the market, they'll probably charge more for it (wild guess there), and they seriously expect this to be a profit-making venture.
I don't know, at this point CNN coverage is just a live feed from Al-Jazeera and a couple of moronic talking heads babbling about things they don't understand. I wouldn't call it entertaining myself, just boring and uninspired coverage.
Also I'm not sure what you mean about the education level being so low. I don't think "kids" are as stupid as you say they are. I'm 21, but I have four younger brothers, as young as 12 years old. They all understand this is nothing like Counter-Strike 2, and they don't have a "pathetic intellect". They even know how to properly spell the word "people".
It's weird to me that he could say nothing interesting at all in his 3 sentence post, and still get modded up to a 4...
The good news in the article is that the much "better" memory GDDR3 will be standardized from the beginning with may suppliers and hopefully a lower price. Forget GDDR2!
I think they only say that because GDDR3 is farther off into the future.
I've noticed once these things get closer to an actual release date, these people tend to take off their rose colored glasses. My money says there won't be much of a difference between the two different memory types when they're actually released. Not enough to justify what will most definitely be a much higher price for GDDR3.
Look at the GeForce FX. It's going to kill NVIDIA.
Why do you say that?
So the FX didn't exactly blow out the Radeon 9700 Pro like it was supposed to, it's still a very fast, very good card capable of rendering anything a game throws at it for the next couple of years.
nVidia is very smart. They don't make very much money off the highest of the high-end market. Where they make most of their money is in that lower-mid range market, where they've traditionally marketed their "MX" products.
At the GDC nVidia was talking about implementing the full DX9 feature set in a card for $79. That's where they're going to make a killing.
I honestly don't think nVidia cares THAT MUCH if they don't have the absolute fastest card in every benchmark. Like any other company, they want to stick around for awhile and make some money.
Price-performance is VERY important in the market. That's why AMD is still around, despite the fact that P4's are undoubtedly faster now. I think people just see nVidia as being the king of the hill for awhile, and would like to see them taken down a notch.
The video-card market is very healthy, we have good competition, and the FX is definitely not going to kill nVidia. I think their strategy is right on.
On Windows desktop share:
95+ ! Hah - more like 90% and falling.
Well we can argue about a ticky tacky few percentage points here, or we can reclaim some sanity and just say "MOST PEOPLE WHO WILL DOWNLOAD THE MP3s ARE RUNNING WINDOWS"...???
Windows is marketshare in servers, desktops and developers keeps on sinking. It's will always be a somewhat viable choice for new-users, but the days of it's dominace are over.
Do you live in a cave? It's one thing to advocate alternative OS's, it's another thing entirely to act as if you haven't talked to the average computer user EVER.
No super-computer runs Windows.
No root domain server runs Windows.
No satelite runs Windows.
No large-scale database runs Windows.
No cave system runs Windows.
No militaty flight simulator run Windows.
No bank runs it's federal transations on Windows
And this matters to the average person who would download MP3s from this band because...???
Sure, MS has most the desktop video-game market, most of the simple spread-sheet market and simple document creation market to itself - but nothing really of importance.
Nothing really of importance huh? Then why isn't Microsoft bankrupt? Why are they always accused of being a monopoly? I'd say all the servers and desktops out there running MS Windows are important. Millions of people use Windows, that IS important.
What percent of the band's audience uses a "decent OS" by your definition?
10%. One in 10. Enough, that they should have a.tar.
So if you were that band, would you distribute it as a.tar file?
You'd be silly to do that, because you'd be confusing the vast majority of your target audience. Don't be silly, them using ZIP files doesn't hurt you at all, what are you complaining about???
Genres based on technology and it's limitations
on
Top Ten Dying Game Genres
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
8) Light Gun 7) Text Adventure 5) Virtual Reality 3) Full Motion Video
All of these shouldn't be considered game genres, they're just a description of the technology involved. Any "genre" based on a technology is a fad, and that technology will eventually be replaced.
Text Adventures were "Text" Adventures because they didn't have the graphics horsepower around back then that they have now. If the creators of Zork started out today, they'd make a game with a simliar design with 3d graphics.
You could have a virtual reality shoot'em up, a virtual reality rpg, a virtual reality adventure game, and so on. Again, it's a description of the technology used to implement the game, it's not the genre. It was a fad.
Full Motion Video is the most obvious non-genre here. Again, based on a technological fad. We can put movies in a game, so why not turn the "game" into a movie? There were different kinds of games that had a lot of FMV in them, I wouldn't put them all in the same genre. Though they did all pretty much suck.
And as for puzzle games, if they don't cost $50 anymore, does that mean they're dead??? No! Puzzle games are probably the most alive and kicking genre there is today! They're everywhere, even your Grandma probably plays a couple of them!
I do agree with the article on one point at least: Oregon Trail for the Apple II most certainly did rock.
Re:PENTAGON THREATENSTO KILL INDEPENDENTREPORTERS
on
Brian Hook Interview
·
· Score: 1
Sure does seem credible!
They can't even spell Baghdad correctly on the site you linked to. Color me skeptical!
Slashdot Mirror
Or the demons will eat you.
You're not playing a "Doom III Demo". You're playing a leaked alpha copy. Someone at ATI leaked it. You're not going to get good framerates on it, it's very unoptimized.
Wait for a real demo, with that system (onboard nForce2 video?) it should be playable at the lowest settings, but stick a GF3 or better in there, and it'll fly.
I really don't understand why the AG has the right to sue on a consumer's behalf. Why can't those businesses effected by the huge amounts of spam sue the companies directly for eating up all their bandwidth? I'm not sure we need another law here to deal with spam. If the AG sues on someone's behalf, where does the money go?
I take the personal position that there doesn't need to be any new laws for dealing with the Internet, all the old laws still apply. Government is far more evil and powerful than all the spammers combined, and if we let them regulate this one aspect of the Internet (spam), they're going to see that as permission to run around and regulate everything else too (.kid anyone?).
I might sound paranoid, but I really think this timid, politically-correct legislation is a springboard for a more heavily regulated Internet.
Like some other posters have already pointed out, no IE, no "stunning samples".
Screw them, honestly. What arrogance. I hate their whole "all-Microsoft" strategy. Would I buy a Sony DVD player and expect it to only play CDs or DVDs from Sony? People would be outraged!
This is why I have a hard time seeing Microsoft expanding beyond the very limited PC market. That's why the whole "Trojan horse in the living room" X-Box strategy will never work. Microsoft has a stronghold over PC operating systems, and can mostly get away with stuff like this. But if they refuse to cooperate with other companies already in the living room with technology like this, they're only hurting themselves.
And since I can't see the "stunning samples" in Mozilla, I'm not so stunned.
Yes, a computer is more general purpose than those things (toaster, tv, etc). But the vast majority of people who use computers use it for a specific purpose. You can pretty much narrow that down to office apps, web browsing, music, and the occasional game. If Linux is going to be succesful on the desktop, it has to EXCEL at those specific areas. It should be a no-brainer to set up.
Macs are great at this. They have the *nix under the hood, but for everyday normal people, it "just works". I know you hate that phrase, but that just goes to show that it isn't impossible, and saying otherwise is a complete lazy cop-out.
And cars do "just work", much better than computers. Yeah, you have to shift, and steer, etc. That's not an unreasonable expectation, and you can compare that to opening windows, typing some stuff, choosing boldface font, etc. But the average car person SHOULD NOT have to open the hood and swap out a new engine, or even change their own oil for that matter. Just like the average computer user has no desire to manually edit config files, or type complex commands into a console.
There has to be a mix of power and simplicity to win on the desktop. Linux has the power, but the simplicity is a joke for the average and even better than average user. Apple proved it isn't impossible to make *nix friendly on the desktop to the average user. I hope Linux can catch up, and I honestly think it will. But only if people work on it, and accept all criticism from newbies as valid rather than trying to rationalize it away.
I see some problems with this. Last I checked, Windows did not have very good tech support, online or offline.
I'm not sure where you're getting that. I can get the answer to any question about windows just by googling that question. The help is usually sufficient as well. Users don't really need to access that help as often as they would under another OS, because things just work.
And, the author needs to RTFM.... there are plenty of good resources to use for Linux help, www.justlinux.com being one I frequently used when I needed help
You are totally missing the point. 99.999% of the people in the world are not like you. They see the computer as a tool that shouldn't get in their way, like, say, a toaster. If you buy a $15 toaster from Wal-Mart, do you expect to have to go to http://www.justtoaster.com or something like that to get it working properly? You're looking at that statement from the perspective of someone who enjoys tinkering with their computer. The vast majority of people out there just want to play solitaire or surf the net. They don't want to have to search all over the web just go get their video card working.
The writer falls into the trap that most do, assuming Windows is THE perfect operating system. And, it's not, there are just as many faults in installation as there are in Linux. I've seen many failed driver installs, no/bad video, etc. I think linux support is better in some aspects, actually.
That's ridiculous! I've installed several Linux distros, and I've installed Win98, WinME, Win2K, WinXP on probably a hundred machines. I have NEVER had difficulty getting hardware to work under any of the Windows versions except one digital camera that wouldn't work under Win2K. I've had countless difficulties under Linux getting printers, video cards, modems, sound, etc. to work properly, and sometimes they just never do.
I just wish writers would view things a bit better before going off complaining about how tough Linux is. If Windows was held to the same standard, the same complaints could be made as well.
According to the article, she was using Win95 (ugh) for a long time without any of the similiar problems. So how is it an unfair comparison?
I like Linux a lot. It's great for someone like me. But try watching the average person install a software package under windows, then try and do the same thing under Linux. They can't do it. Linux isn't ready for the average person, and taking this article as anything other than constructive criticism isn't helping it get there.
What I don't get is what commercial use it is to an airline company to have information on who you travel with, or what bedsize you prefer.
If nothing else, they can sell that information to another company. Selling all the info you have on your customers is pretty profitable, the more data you have on them the merrier. SOMEONE will pay to know anything about you.
Until the rediculous amounts of Internet Sex related content are somehow lowerd, i would not let my kids touch the internet until there about 13 and are already shown all that in school.
:)
I think it's funny you chose 13 as the age you're willing to let them explore the Internet, in all of it's sexual content glory...
That's the age I really got interested in the Internet!
Uhm, they already have...
Why do laws like this, which are completely impossible to force and redundant (possession of child porn is ALREADY illegal, why force ISPs to filter it?) manage to get passed?
Because who the hell expects to get any votes after voting against a child-porn law?
They only get away with stupid laws like this because most people don't look past the title, so we get things like "The Patriot Act"...
I'm trying to get my head around how this will actually help any kind of armed force. Simulations _are_ useful for doing wargame situations etc... But how are you supposed to simulate humans?
AI has come a long way, it isn't perfect, but it's sufficient for training purposes.
I can just see marines that have been through hundreds of simulations walk on to a battlefield and into a landmine, because the simulation never said anything about that. Simulation closes peoples minds. Training is important, but you can't forget how unpredictable a human is. The trainee walks on to the battlefield (or whatever he/she is being trained for) and thinks s/he is ready, but a simulation can not possibly exhaust every situation.
While those are decent points, I think they lose some of their validity when you take into account the fact that simulations are not the only thing the military uses to train soldiers. They're just a tiny part of the overall picture, an important tool. I think they have the potential to be very effective in combination with everything else they already go through...
Larry Ellison gets his name in the papers!
Sorry if I sound underwhelmed, but I think this is just another example of him doing a good job at getting some publicity.
Yeah Apache's winning, on the server side, Linux is winning... but the desktop, if it ever happens, is waaaay into the future.
Microsoft isn't stupid, they won't go down that easy. And Ellison is THAT good at self-promotion.
Until people start looking to alternatives to the two parties we have in place today.
Republicans and Democrats will keep increasing the size of Government, and it will intrude more and more into your daily lives. Does stuff like this really surprise anyone?
The Government has grown out of control, but no one does anything about it, too afraid they may "waste their vote".
You're wasting your votes anyway, quit voting for the two major parties and at least you'll be doing it on principle!
Well then Johnny, tell us why it is about oil. I'll point you to an article that explains why it isn't.
Read this
I read a few of your other posts, and you desperately need to become more informed before posting in the future. Reading this article is a start.
Yeah it worked for them before. Too bad for them I haven't noticed much of any of what they're doing working out for them lately.
AOL is dying. When it's finally gone, someone needs to throw a huge party.
So let me get this straight...
AOL is planning on sweeping into a market with an obviously inferior product that gives consumers less control than products that are already on the market, they'll probably charge more for it (wild guess there), and they seriously expect this to be a profit-making venture.
AOL is dumber than Enron.
AOL playing catch-up??? NAH!!!
Sorry, too easy...
I don't know, at this point CNN coverage is just a live feed from Al-Jazeera and a couple of moronic talking heads babbling about things they don't understand. I wouldn't call it entertaining myself, just boring and uninspired coverage.
Also I'm not sure what you mean about the education level being so low. I don't think "kids" are as stupid as you say they are.
I'm 21, but I have four younger brothers, as young as 12 years old. They all understand this is nothing like Counter-Strike 2, and they don't have a "pathetic intellect". They even know how to properly spell the word "people".
It's weird to me that he could say nothing interesting at all in his 3 sentence post, and still get modded up to a 4...
I'm not sure why that got modded as flamebait, he has a point.
:)
We're not taking away children's rights here, governments take away rights. Parents parent.
Was it just me, or was there a ton of missing kids this last year? Something like this would
have done a lot of good in those cases.
It's a parents job to watch their kids. It's a parents job to know where their kids are. Something like this just makes it easier on them.
We can put it under "Your rights online" when the government wants to use it to track citizens, whether kids or grownups.
But this sounds like a valuable tool for parents, especially in this day and age of young kids being abducted left and right.
Parents have the CHOICE of using this or not, and that's the way it should be.
Just my $.02
The good news in the article is that the much "better" memory GDDR3 will be standardized from the beginning with may suppliers and hopefully a lower price. Forget GDDR2!
I think they only say that because GDDR3 is farther off into the future.
I've noticed once these things get closer to an actual release date, these people tend to take off their rose colored glasses. My money says there won't be much of a difference between the two different memory types when they're actually released. Not enough to justify what will most definitely be a much higher price for GDDR3.
I say upgrade when I find a game I can't play at 1280x1024x32 with all details turned on high!
:)
My 21" Trinitron spoils me, I can't live with any less than that.
Look at the GeForce FX. It's going to kill NVIDIA.
Why do you say that?
So the FX didn't exactly blow out the Radeon 9700 Pro like it was supposed to, it's still a very fast, very good card capable of rendering anything a game throws at it for the next couple of years.
nVidia is very smart. They don't make very much money off the highest of the high-end market. Where they make most of their money is in that lower-mid range market, where they've traditionally marketed their "MX" products.
At the GDC nVidia was talking about implementing the full DX9 feature set in a card for $79. That's where they're going to make a killing.
I honestly don't think nVidia cares THAT MUCH if they don't have the absolute fastest card in every benchmark. Like any other company, they want to stick around for awhile and make some money.
Price-performance is VERY important in the market. That's why AMD is still around, despite the fact that P4's are undoubtedly faster now. I think people just see nVidia as being the king of the hill for awhile, and would like to see them taken down a notch.
The video-card market is very healthy, we have good competition, and the FX is definitely not going to kill nVidia. I think their strategy is right on.
On Windows desktop share:
.tar .
.tar file?
95+ ! Hah - more like 90% and falling.
Well we can argue about a ticky tacky few percentage points here, or we can reclaim some sanity and just say "MOST PEOPLE WHO WILL DOWNLOAD THE MP3s ARE RUNNING WINDOWS"...???
Windows is marketshare in servers, desktops and developers keeps on sinking. It's will always be a somewhat viable choice for new-users, but the days of it's dominace are over.
Do you live in a cave? It's one thing to advocate alternative OS's, it's another thing entirely to act as if you haven't talked to the average computer user EVER.
No super-computer runs Windows. No root domain server runs Windows. No satelite runs Windows. No large-scale database runs Windows. No cave system runs Windows. No militaty flight simulator run Windows. No bank runs it's federal transations on Windows
And this matters to the average person who would download MP3s from this band because...???
Sure, MS has most the desktop video-game market, most of the simple spread-sheet market and simple document creation market to itself - but nothing really of importance.
Nothing really of importance huh? Then why isn't Microsoft bankrupt? Why are they always accused of being a monopoly? I'd say all the servers and desktops out there running MS Windows are important. Millions of people use Windows, that IS important.
What percent of the band's audience uses a "decent OS" by your definition?
10%. One in 10. Enough, that they should have a
So if you were that band, would you distribute it as a
You'd be silly to do that, because you'd be confusing the vast majority of your target audience. Don't be silly, them using ZIP files doesn't hurt you at all, what are you complaining about???
8) Light Gun
7) Text Adventure
5) Virtual Reality
3) Full Motion Video
All of these shouldn't be considered game genres, they're just a description of the technology involved. Any "genre" based on a technology is a fad, and that technology will eventually be replaced.
Text Adventures were "Text" Adventures because they didn't have the graphics horsepower around back then that they have now. If the creators of Zork started out today, they'd make a game with a simliar design with 3d graphics.
You could have a virtual reality shoot'em up, a virtual reality rpg, a virtual reality adventure game, and so on. Again, it's a description of the technology used to implement the game, it's not the genre. It was a fad.
Full Motion Video is the most obvious non-genre here. Again, based on a technological fad. We can put movies in a game, so why not turn the "game" into a movie? There were different kinds of games that had a lot of FMV in them, I wouldn't put them all in the same genre. Though they did all pretty much suck.
And as for puzzle games, if they don't cost $50 anymore, does that mean they're dead??? No! Puzzle games are probably the most alive and kicking genre there is today! They're everywhere, even your Grandma probably plays a couple of them!
I do agree with the article on one point at least: Oregon Trail for the Apple II most certainly did rock.
Sure does seem credible!
They can't even spell Baghdad correctly on the site you linked to. Color me skeptical!