Since most windows these days use dual-paned glass for its insulating properties, presumably only the outer pane would be made of this stuff. It then shouldn't matter if the room interior is a bit less than 84 F.
I'm playing Max Payne. I got it for $9.99 from Target last week.
In about four years, I figure I'll pick up Doom 3 for a similar price, assuming that it doesn't suck.
Why on Earth people are in such a hurry I have no idea. The game isn't going to vanish if you don't buy it the first day, and it's not like it's the only good game in existence.
Yup. I'm 39 and you can find often me playing Onslaught on the UT2k4 servers.
Things do change. I might get called to change a pooper diaper at an instant or to "celebrate" someone's naptime, so INGAME SAVES ARE REQUIRED for any game I play.
I have the funds to buy pretty much any game I want. I avoid MMORPGs because I simply do not have the time. I'm sure I'd like them, but if I'm lucky, I might get a good hour to game in a given day.
I do have some wishes. One wish would be for there to be game servers were no one under 25 was allowed. Call me an age-bigot, but I suspect that'd get rid of most of the trash-talkers, cheaters and other morons.
That story is wrong! The truth is that U2 has delayed their album a year because they have to change the security measures on the album so that hackers won't be able to use the stolen version to write quick cheats.
Microsoft hasn't successfully entered a market since the browser wars. When the histories are written in fifty years, Microsoft's peak will be said to have been in 2000. They are starting to lose share in browsers. They are not dominating the PDA market like they wanted to. They are not the king of set top boxes. They are slowly but surely losing the server market. Despite reams of hype and much marketting muscle on Microsoft's part, Sony still sells ten Playstations for every Xbox.
Microsoft is where IBM was in 1980. They are on top, but headed for a fall. The reason? Because despite the rhetoric, Microsoft can't innovate. They can only copy.
Not as new as you think. One reason this is much easier in Linux than it would be in Windows is because Unix (And X) was originally designed around the notion of multiple terminals.
The key word is "dumb". These terminals had very little smarts. I suspect a modern keyboard has as much. A dumb terminal really was little more than a keyboard attached to a screen.
No, the first Unix systems were designed for multiple keyboard/screen combinations. (Which, in those days, were called "terminals".)
An old-skool terminal had little smarts, little more than a modern keyboard would have today. it was really just a keyboard and a monitor hooked together with a little bit of hardwired smarts to do graphics. That's why something like xterm is called a "terminal emulator". It's emulating a piece of hardware in software.
Unix has always supported this. It's the PC hardware that's not designed for multiheaded displays.
I don't dispute all that. I just hate the way computer geeks (of which I am one) can be so ignorant of what things are like for real people. "Just download it" is great if you have three other boxes you have access to. It fails when an average user is trying install his own computer that he bought at Wal-Mart.
An average user who doesn't happen to know a linux savvy friend is going to have to buy some stock Linux at the local Best Buy to get the computer he bought at Wal-Mart working.
OS/2 1.0 was a joint Microsoft/IBM project. OS/2 was to be IBM only with OS/2 3.0 to be Microsoft only. They got pissed at each other, broke up, and OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT 3.51.
Yeah, quite a difference. I mean, it's not like you can run Firefox or Thunderbird or OpenOffice or Bash or Gaim or Gimp or Eclipse or any other of the fine free software out there runs on Windows.
Oh...wait...those all run on Windows.
Unless you're a gamer, it is easy to find all the free software you'd need for Windows.
The article is talking about kernels...but it's true of the look-and-feel as well. I run almost entirely the same software sweet on Windows that I run on Linux. Other than the games available only on Windows, the only significat differences are Winamp instead of XMMS and Visual Studio, which I'm required to use for work.
One of the nice things about free software is that despite what a lot of people think, it isn't a Linux movement. It's a software movement. So while it is hard to find Windows apps that have been ported to Linux, many free software projects support Windows and Linux.
Heh. Reminds me of a demo I did when I worked for a music website. Part of the demo was a music sample. I heard the same fifteen second excerpt of a Coldplay song over and over and over...probably thousands of times.
Slashdot Mirror
Since most windows these days use dual-paned glass for its insulating properties, presumably only the outer pane would be made of this stuff. It then shouldn't matter if the room interior is a bit less than 84 F.
And I really appreciate the suckers^wearly adopters for subsidizing my entertainment.
In about four years, I figure I'll pick up Doom 3 for a similar price, assuming that it doesn't suck.
Why on Earth people are in such a hurry I have no idea. The game isn't going to vanish if you don't buy it the first day, and it's not like it's the only good game in existence.
Because humans can't be taken over remotely, and they can't have their signal jammed.
Heh. If he's a decent Windows admin, he'd know how to delete the place Windows restores it from.
Why go to that much trouble? Just delete the executable.
I suspect the cluestick will come in the form of crappy sales.
I find it interesting that PalmOS is not even mentioned in the "PDA" category. Is it truly dead?
Things do change. I might get called to change a pooper diaper at an instant or to "celebrate" someone's naptime, so INGAME SAVES ARE REQUIRED for any game I play.
I have the funds to buy pretty much any game I want. I avoid MMORPGs because I simply do not have the time. I'm sure I'd like them, but if I'm lucky, I might get a good hour to game in a given day.
I do have some wishes. One wish would be for there to be game servers were no one under 25 was allowed. Call me an age-bigot, but I suspect that'd get rid of most of the trash-talkers, cheaters and other morons.
That story is wrong! The truth is that U2 has delayed their album a year because they have to change the security measures on the album so that hackers won't be able to use the stolen version to write quick cheats.
Microsoft hasn't successfully entered a market since the browser wars. When the histories are written in fifty years, Microsoft's peak will be said to have been in 2000. They are starting to lose share in browsers. They are not dominating the PDA market like they wanted to. They are not the king of set top boxes. They are slowly but surely losing the server market. Despite reams of hype and much marketting muscle on Microsoft's part, Sony still sells ten Playstations for every Xbox.
Microsoft is where IBM was in 1980. They are on top, but headed for a fall. The reason? Because despite the rhetoric, Microsoft can't innovate. They can only copy.
I agree with your first sentence. I presume the rest of your comment is as good. Maybe I'll get around to reading it later.
But to the point at hand, the VT1xx terminals were typically used on Unix mainframes.
Not as new as you think. One reason this is much easier in Linux than it would be in Windows is because Unix (And X) was originally designed around the notion of multiple terminals.
The key word is "dumb". These terminals had very little smarts. I suspect a modern keyboard has as much. A dumb terminal really was little more than a keyboard attached to a screen.
No, the first Unix systems were designed for multiple keyboard/screen combinations. (Which, in those days, were called "terminals".)
An old-skool terminal had little smarts, little more than a modern keyboard would have today. it was really just a keyboard and a monitor hooked together with a little bit of hardwired smarts to do graphics. That's why something like xterm is called a "terminal emulator". It's emulating a piece of hardware in software.
Unix has always supported this. It's the PC hardware that's not designed for multiheaded displays.
They're geeks. They're not getting laid anyway.
No, No, No...
The originally planned OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT 3.51. Later, IBM released a new version of OS/2, which they called OS/2 3.0. Confusing, I know...
Microsoft was involved in the first GUI version of OS/2, OS/2 1.3, but dumped all the GUI portions for a more "Windows" look and feel.
It's unclear how much code made it from OS/2 to NT. Nobody disputes that Microsoft had the rights to the entire codebase.
I don't dispute all that. I just hate the way computer geeks (of which I am one) can be so ignorant of what things are like for real people. "Just download it" is great if you have three other boxes you have access to. It fails when an average user is trying install his own computer that he bought at Wal-Mart.
An average user who doesn't happen to know a linux savvy friend is going to have to buy some stock Linux at the local Best Buy to get the computer he bought at Wal-Mart working.
It is. It was just originally called "OS/2".
OS/2 1.0 was a joint Microsoft/IBM project. OS/2 was to be IBM only with OS/2 3.0 to be Microsoft only. They got pissed at each other, broke up, and OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT 3.51.
Considering that they share source code. Windows NT was based on OS/2 1.0, which was coauthored by Microsoft.
Yeah, quite a difference. I mean, it's not like you can run Firefox or Thunderbird or OpenOffice or Bash or Gaim or Gimp or Eclipse or any other of the fine free software out there runs on Windows.
Oh...wait...those all run on Windows.
Unless you're a gamer, it is easy to find all the free software you'd need for Windows.
The article is talking about kernels...but it's true of the look-and-feel as well. I run almost entirely the same software sweet on Windows that I run on Linux. Other than the games available only on Windows, the only significat differences are Winamp instead of XMMS and Visual Studio, which I'm required to use for work.
One of the nice things about free software is that despite what a lot of people think, it isn't a Linux movement. It's a software movement. So while it is hard to find Windows apps that have been ported to Linux, many free software projects support Windows and Linux.
Choice, the best part of free software.
Kinda hard to do that if you don't have a computer with an OS on it yet.
Sony owns Everquest.
Heh. Reminds me of a demo I did when I worked for a music website. Part of the demo was a music sample. I heard the same fifteen second excerpt of a Coldplay song over and over and over...probably thousands of times.