Not having a console myself, I've only played the PC version, and found it fun (bought it recently for $20. Seemed fine for that price). What was different about it from the console version that made it a crappy port, aside from the multiplayer aspect?
Also known as Net Vs Gross profit. It's not just the movies. All sorts of biz deals are made that screw people with that type of accounting. Always get a % of the gross, never the net.
The movie translation of DOOM3 is going to rock though.
Imagine, a big star like The Rock playing the hero. You kinda/sorta see him as he walks through corridor after corridor, able to see only a small flashlight-lit area. Then of course there will be times when the screen will go black because he's switching from his flashlight to his gun. Then we see several gun-blast flashes. Then dark. Then the flashlight-lit area again. Sweet.
What's the likelihood that Intel will finally give its legacy x86 parts (including x87 and MMX) the axe in the near future? They waste valuable transistor space, and are essentially useless to Apple.
Extremely unlikely. Windows machines make up a vastly larger market for Intel than Apple. They aren't going to re-do an x86 chip just for Apple. It's way too expensive.
In any case, it would be nice to just have a pure 64-bit RISC-like design, without the compatibility hardware piled on top. For one, it would help tone down the vehement anti-Intel sentiment.
That describes Itanium. The problem is Intel can't make them cheaply, and using them would drive the cost if Intel-Macs way way up.
And exactly why do you think OSS will support the new chips before Microsoft? Multi-core chips are basically just SMP systems. Microsoft 2003 Server Datacenter Edition already supports 64-way SMP. Why don't you think they'd support these new AMD chips quickly?
No, the argument is not circular reasoning. Information and intelligence differ on many levels. God, being infinite, does not have a beginning. Therefore, he would not have a cause either.
What is the scientific evidence that god is infinite? How do you know there aren't 7 other gods above him each being more powerfull than the last, like a bunch of russian nesting dolls? How do you don't know there isn't a giant turtle with a penchent for crossdressing that runs the universe? You don't. There is no scientific evidence for either. That's why it's, say it with me, NOT SCIENCE. It's philosophy/religion.
Darwinism has lots of coorolating evidence to back it up. Genetics, carbon dating, the experimental existance of micro-evolution. God does not.
I hate to tell you, but I don't think James Earl Jones wrote the script or had much input into what his lines would be. He delivered the scene the way Lucas wrote it. Put the blame where it belongs. On Lucas.
Please take a physics class. The existence of stars in no way goes against the second law of thermodynamics.
Likewise, plants and animals do not spontaneously accumulate energy. It is provided by light from the sun. The earth is not a closed system. No laws of thermodynamics are broken.
The presence of information 'strongly suggests' an intelligent creator eh? Why? Just because it 'strongly suggests' it to you and your philosphy, that doesn't make it science. If only an intelligence could provide 'information' to create the universe, who provided the intelligence to create that universe-creating-intelligence? See the cyclical nature of the argument? That's not a science argument. That's philosophy. A totally different field of study. It has no basis for being taught in a science class.
As a fellow agnostic, and a scientist, I'll tell you why. Because there isn't any real evidence for creationism as science. If the want to teach it in some religious class, fine, but it has nothing to do with science, and shouldn't be taught in science class.
That shouldn't matter. The Catholic church actually accepts evolution as 'one of the ways God might have done it'. They don't rule out evolution, or incist that the world is only 6000 years old. That's the Protestant fundies.
Wikipedia is an entirely unreliable source. Anyone can edit it to say what they want. Only if someone later corrects it (with what they 'think' is the truth) will it reflect accurate data. Never trust it as a real source of data, just as a jumping off point for research.
And how do you know it won't be supported? How do you know how different the hardware will be, or how hard it would be to 'hack' windows to run it if it were 'unsopported'? Developers don't even have machines yet, and even those will likely not be the same was the final product Apple ships. Wait till it's not vaporware to say it's not supported or requires any hacking.
And which do you think it will take MS more effort to make it work on? They can make it work on non-standard hareware, but the hardware we are talking about isn't even available yet. At least wait until a few months after Apple starts shipping real hardware before complaining that Windows can't run on it.
Windows isn't flexible enought to work on a non-standard PC???
Windows 3.5 and 4.0 ran on PPC, MIPS and Alpha platforms in addition to x86 hardware. MS only discontinued those flavors because there just wasn't much of a market for those systems. Windows is plenty flexible enough to move to another 'non-standard' platform.
How can you hammer the Dell for getting scratched up looking without mentioning the same thing about the Apples? As the owner of both a Dell Inspiron and a 12" aluminum Mac, I can tell you the Mac definitly looks more cratched up with about equal abuse.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess you didn't catch the sarcasm in that post.
Not having a console myself, I've only played the PC version, and found it fun (bought it recently for $20. Seemed fine for that price). What was different about it from the console version that made it a crappy port, aside from the multiplayer aspect?
You do know they made a version for the PC right? With a downloadable demo and everything. It's not just for consoles.
Also known as Net Vs Gross profit. It's not just the movies. All sorts of biz deals are made that screw people with that type of accounting. Always get a % of the gross, never the net.
Imagine, a big star like The Rock playing the hero. You kinda/sorta see him as he walks through corridor after corridor, able to see only a small flashlight-lit area. Then of course there will be times when the screen will go black because he's switching from his flashlight to his gun. Then we see several gun-blast flashes. Then dark. Then the flashlight-lit area again. Sweet.
I don't think that has loaded by default since like Office 97. Do you know the recent versions load it for sure???
Extremely unlikely. Windows machines make up a vastly larger market for Intel than Apple. They aren't going to re-do an x86 chip just for Apple. It's way too expensive.
In any case, it would be nice to just have a pure 64-bit RISC-like design, without the compatibility hardware piled on top. For one, it would help tone down the vehement anti-Intel sentiment.
That describes Itanium. The problem is Intel can't make them cheaply, and using them would drive the cost if Intel-Macs way way up.
Even if they totally went out of the CPU biz, getting royalties from Intel, AMD, IBM, etc, is still income.
And exactly why do you think OSS will support the new chips before Microsoft? Multi-core chips are basically just SMP systems. Microsoft 2003 Server Datacenter Edition already supports 64-way SMP. Why don't you think they'd support these new AMD chips quickly?
What is the scientific evidence that god is infinite? How do you know there aren't 7 other gods above him each being more powerfull than the last, like a bunch of russian nesting dolls? How do you don't know there isn't a giant turtle with a penchent for crossdressing that runs the universe? You don't. There is no scientific evidence for either. That's why it's, say it with me, NOT SCIENCE. It's philosophy/religion.
Darwinism has lots of coorolating evidence to back it up. Genetics, carbon dating, the experimental existance of micro-evolution. God does not.
I hate to tell you, but I don't think James Earl Jones wrote the script or had much input into what his lines would be. He delivered the scene the way Lucas wrote it. Put the blame where it belongs. On Lucas.
Likewise, plants and animals do not spontaneously accumulate energy. It is provided by light from the sun. The earth is not a closed system. No laws of thermodynamics are broken. The presence of information 'strongly suggests' an intelligent creator eh? Why? Just because it 'strongly suggests' it to you and your philosphy, that doesn't make it science. If only an intelligence could provide 'information' to create the universe, who provided the intelligence to create that universe-creating-intelligence? See the cyclical nature of the argument? That's not a science argument. That's philosophy. A totally different field of study. It has no basis for being taught in a science class.
As a fellow agnostic, and a scientist, I'll tell you why. Because there isn't any real evidence for creationism as science. If the want to teach it in some religious class, fine, but it has nothing to do with science, and shouldn't be taught in science class.
Make that 'insist'. I can't type today.
That shouldn't matter. The Catholic church actually accepts evolution as 'one of the ways God might have done it'. They don't rule out evolution, or incist that the world is only 6000 years old. That's the Protestant fundies.
Wikipedia is an entirely unreliable source. Anyone can edit it to say what they want. Only if someone later corrects it (with what they 'think' is the truth) will it reflect accurate data. Never trust it as a real source of data, just as a jumping off point for research.
The 20" box fans was a better way to go. It would have moved more air and ran quieter than several dozen 80mm fans.
And how do you know it won't be supported? How do you know how different the hardware will be, or how hard it would be to 'hack' windows to run it if it were 'unsopported'? Developers don't even have machines yet, and even those will likely not be the same was the final product Apple ships. Wait till it's not vaporware to say it's not supported or requires any hacking.
And which do you think it will take MS more effort to make it work on? They can make it work on non-standard hareware, but the hardware we are talking about isn't even available yet. At least wait until a few months after Apple starts shipping real hardware before complaining that Windows can't run on it.
Make that Windows 'NT' versions 3.5 and 4.0. (2000 and XP's predecessors)
Windows 3.5 and 4.0 ran on PPC, MIPS and Alpha platforms in addition to x86 hardware. MS only discontinued those flavors because there just wasn't much of a market for those systems. Windows is plenty flexible enough to move to another 'non-standard' platform.
They are moving to Intel chips, not AMD. Aside from mobiles, I think #1 just became more difficult for them.
How can you hammer the Dell for getting scratched up looking without mentioning the same thing about the Apples? As the owner of both a Dell Inspiron and a 12" aluminum Mac, I can tell you the Mac definitly looks more cratched up with about equal abuse.
I didn't use any caps. You replied to the wrong post. Must be that line down the middle of your screen throwing you off.
Sorry, posted the wrong link. Here's a live one that includes the oceans.