> I consider lag going into a sim and having it take two minutes to finish drawing. You're downloading thousands of pictures in a sim sometimes, far more than your average webpage contains, and you're complaining it takes long? Uh, Either increase the bandwith bar or/and get a faster connection. Asset server bugs were fixed long ago in 1.7.
> The physics engine in the game is implemented terribly. I'd rather the server handle the physics than individual clients, I'm not too keen on the security issues that games like Valve's half life 2's engine brings. Plus, you can idealy do a lot more with the physics engine in SL than in most other games with less.
> They've been saying the upgrade to Havok 2 is just around the corner since I started logging in Yeah, since 1.4. I remain unconvinced it's going to make much better however.
> And a whole slew of other crap that doesn't make the game less annoying to play or fix any of the problems that have been plaguing it for the last year. I stopped reading the polls when people were posting moronic stuff like: "make land free", "create a constitution of rights", "Bacon and cheese", "Use the graphic engine X" (which relies completely on prerendering, so it wouldn't be useful for SL.
When removing telehubs, LL did various research on the effects it would have on zoning, effect on the economy, asking residents for their opinion etc.
If LL has todo this for every *possible* highly voted poll, it's quite understandable why they maybe slow.
I've found that spotlight has slowed down Macs I've had access to (compared to before). Although if you want to compare desktop search, I suppose you could try Windows's indexing service (since that integrates with window search). However undeniably, it's quite 'stupid' in it's functionality.
I've heard that Yahoo's desktop search utility is somewhat better than Google desktop by the way.
As for lag, I'm living in Poland and the average lag for me to SecondLife sims tends to be 200ms. Sims being slowed down by overactive scripts and such, tend to generally only be in the most popular of areas.
As for bugs? Uh.. Well, there is a bug that whipes out the mute list everytime you login now. Other than that, I've not heard any other complaining on SL.
> Um, what? Installing software in OS X is a matter of dragging a file to a specific folder.
Compare installing apache 2.x from apache.org on macosx to installing apache 2.x on windows...
On MacOSX, it's a bit more complicated, and less easy, especially since you don't have a installer, can't exactly just drag into a folder and it'll work.
In the end, it depends on the software you're installing, and how the developer(s) 'packaged' it.
> Make 3 different versions available pre-compiled for 486/586/686 and BE LOGICAL you do not NEED ISA/PS2/etc. devices to even be options in a 686 compiled distro.
It's called Mandriva.
> Yes, choice is fine when it is one of 3 or 4 options, when there are 200 text editors and 40 IBM PS2 kernel options IT IS NOT.
If you want it dumb proof, use Lindows. Stop trolling.
> Try starting up KDE and launching OpenOffice.Org and tell me how it responds compared to Windows XP and MS Office.
From my experience:
- Linux + KDE certainly starts faster than windows XP pro
- OpenOffice.org is faster under windows (noticeable).
- MS Office is a little faster than OOo2 at starting up. However certain operations make it 'lag behind' OOo, like when one inserts objects into a document.
- MS Office is noticeably slower than Koffice (Which is the office suite I use the most).
- The standard File -> Open/Save dialogs are instant for me in K applications, they take forever on a fresh windows XP install.
- Browsing the web using opera under Linux is certainly faster than IE, Opera, Firefox, Mozilla under Windows (extremely noticeable).
- E-mail, to be honest I've never used outlook or outlook express, simply because I don't need to waste my time with a automated virus that got onto my system. But comparing with Thunderbird, I noticed it behaves slower under windows. However it is noticeable slower than Kmail under KDE and Linux.
> Find me even a company that can release this mammoth software with such huge software and hardware support in the same amount of time.
Out of the box, many various Linux distributions fit this criteria. However if you're into more manual labor of getting software, drivers etc. Windows would win.
> while also releasing quality development tools Why is there a frigging spell checker in MS VS.NET's IDE? Don't they have anything better to stick into it?
> fighting several massive lawsuits requiring them to remake versions of their software. What? Sources please?
Haha, you've obviously never ran Apache under MacOSX. That filesize limit bug is frigging annoying.
Re:Utter Bunk - Compatibility Not That Great
on
Why Windows is Slow
·
· Score: 1
Actually, I have never come across a DOS application I couldn't run under windows 2k/xp. Of course there were plenty of applications that didn't run out of the box, and I had to customize settings for them (properties of the executable), run them in their own seperated memory (sand boxed) from the rest of the system, so it wouldn't do anything evil to windows (use the start command).
Things later developed like VDMsound, only enhanced being able to run DOS apps under win2k/xp, as you could get propper sound for older DOS apps, that particulary only worked with older soundcards.
I am quite keen on my DOS compatability, as I do play a lot of old DOS games and tend to boot up old dos software to steal ideas for design implementations in software I write;)
I can't say the backwards compatability in that sense under Windows was bad. Of course, binary compatability isn't a issue it seems in newer versions of windows.
Any how, wouldn't a more reasonable comparison of MacOS classic apps running on MacOSX? Be windows 3.11 apps running on windows xp... So far, I haven't discovered any problems with running such old software either (games, old custom software companies use, Heck even macroeconomics test software which I baught a year ago [I can't believe they're selling software that was designed for win3.11 still]).
And about MacOSX compatability, I do recall that Apple clearly stating that they're not going to supporting classic applications on MacIntels, so, they are dropping support for older apps it seems.
I know this wasn't mentioned in the NY article, but I'll talk about it anyway. The things that I've seen which slow down windows a lot, are mostly just.. idiotic designs. Such as using the internet explorer rendering engine to draw JPEGs as the background (BMPs have a totally different engine for drawing in the background). Plus, you really don't want to know why File -> open/save dialogs *can* take along time to display, it's insane.
> If we stay idle, isn't that as evil as the dictator who commits this genocide?
In a word, 'No'. But then again the USA went into Iraq for WMD, not to remove Saddam. Removing Saddam in my opinion was just to save face.
> It's horrible that roughly 32-38,000 have died in the Iraqi war, but what is this number compared to the execution of 600,000 Iraqi civilians under Saddam? Or the 100,000 Kurds? Or the 500,000 Iranians?
It's unfortunate that the amount of people that had to die. However we don't know if less people would have died if Saddam had remained in power or not. So if you're going to play with statistics, you better find statistics that show it was worth while. For all we know, far less people could have died if Iraq was left alone.
> For those who don't know the quite well known fact, OSX is based on BSD...
Mac OS X is actually based on Darwin, which is built from the Mach kernel and the FreeBSD implementation of a Posix enviroment, which were incorporated into NEXTSTEP.
Not much remains of the original 'BSD' components that can be cross-referenced with other BSD systems.
I still remember when I was given a x86 box that had windows 3.11 and MSDOS on it.
I spent 20 minutes thinking the "C:\ _" prompt was a loading screen. Since, after all, DOS on the Amiga was purely graphical, had a windowed enviroment and everything.
I was very unimpressed with the x86 machine no doubt.
Slashdot Mirror
ASL?
Wasn't the issue with the lady that split coffee, that she got 3rd degree burns?
> I consider lag going into a sim and having it take two minutes to finish drawing.
You're downloading thousands of pictures in a sim sometimes, far more than your average webpage contains, and you're complaining it takes long? Uh, Either increase the bandwith bar or/and get a faster connection. Asset server bugs were fixed long ago in 1.7.
> The physics engine in the game is implemented terribly.
I'd rather the server handle the physics than individual clients, I'm not too keen on the security issues that games like Valve's half life 2's engine brings. Plus, you can idealy do a lot more with the physics engine in SL than in most other games with less.
> They've been saying the upgrade to Havok 2 is just around the corner since I started logging in
Yeah, since 1.4. I remain unconvinced it's going to make much better however.
> And a whole slew of other crap that doesn't make the game less annoying to play or fix any of the problems that have been plaguing it for the last year.
I stopped reading the polls when people were posting moronic stuff like:
"make land free",
"create a constitution of rights",
"Bacon and cheese",
"Use the graphic engine X" (which relies completely on prerendering, so it wouldn't be useful for SL.
When removing telehubs, LL did various research on the effects it would have on zoning, effect on the economy, asking residents for their opinion etc.
If LL has todo this for every *possible* highly voted poll, it's quite understandable why they maybe slow.
I've found that spotlight has slowed down Macs I've had access to (compared to before). Although if you want to compare desktop search, I suppose you could try Windows's indexing service (since that integrates with window search). However undeniably, it's quite 'stupid' in it's functionality.
I've heard that Yahoo's desktop search utility is somewhat better than Google desktop by the way.
I've seen reviews that claim things to be utter crap. I don't know if that puts a dent in sales, but I imagine it would.
This is what Furcadia does, and it scares me that it actually works.
I've noticed some people think 'lag' is low FPS.
As for lag, I'm living in Poland and the average lag for me to SecondLife sims tends to be 200ms. Sims being slowed down by overactive scripts and such, tend to generally only be in the most popular of areas.
As for bugs? Uh.. Well, there is a bug that whipes out the mute list everytime you login now. Other than that, I've not heard any other complaining on SL.
Oblivion can use prerendering. Second life cannot.
> Um, what? Installing software in OS X is a matter of dragging a file to a specific folder.
Compare installing apache 2.x from apache.org on macosx to installing apache 2.x on windows...
On MacOSX, it's a bit more complicated, and less easy, especially since you don't have a installer, can't exactly just drag into a folder and it'll work.
In the end, it depends on the software you're installing, and how the developer(s) 'packaged' it.
> Make 3 different versions available pre-compiled for 486/586/686 and BE LOGICAL you do not NEED ISA/PS2/etc. devices to even be options in a 686 compiled distro.
It's called Mandriva.
> Yes, choice is fine when it is one of 3 or 4 options, when there are 200 text editors and 40 IBM PS2 kernel options IT IS NOT.
If you want it dumb proof, use Lindows. Stop trolling.
> Try starting up KDE and launching OpenOffice.Org and tell me how it responds compared to Windows XP and MS Office.
From my experience:
- Linux + KDE certainly starts faster than windows XP pro
- OpenOffice.org is faster under windows (noticeable).
- MS Office is a little faster than OOo2 at starting up. However certain operations make it 'lag behind' OOo, like when one inserts objects into a document.
- MS Office is noticeably slower than Koffice (Which is the office suite I use the most).
- The standard File -> Open/Save dialogs are instant for me in K applications, they take forever on a fresh windows XP install.
- Browsing the web using opera under Linux is certainly faster than IE, Opera, Firefox, Mozilla under Windows (extremely noticeable).
- E-mail, to be honest I've never used outlook or outlook express, simply because I don't need to waste my time with a automated virus that got onto my system. But comparing with Thunderbird, I noticed it behaves slower under windows. However it is noticeable slower than Kmail under KDE and Linux.
> Find me even a company that can release this mammoth software with such huge software and hardware support in the same amount of time.
Out of the box, many various Linux distributions fit this criteria. However if you're into more manual labor of getting software, drivers etc. Windows would win.
> while also releasing quality development tools
Why is there a frigging spell checker in MS VS.NET's IDE? Don't they have anything better to stick into it?
> fighting several massive lawsuits requiring them to remake versions of their software.
What? Sources please?
> Hey I don't really care for Windows much
I do.
"why because this car maintenance is ZERO"
Haha, you've obviously never ran Apache under MacOSX. That filesize limit bug is frigging annoying.
Actually, I have never come across a DOS application I couldn't run under windows 2k/xp. Of course there were plenty of applications that didn't run out of the box, and I had to customize settings for them (properties of the executable), run them in their own seperated memory (sand boxed) from the rest of the system, so it wouldn't do anything evil to windows (use the start command).
;)
Things later developed like VDMsound, only enhanced being able to run DOS apps under win2k/xp, as you could get propper sound for older DOS apps, that particulary only worked with older soundcards.
I am quite keen on my DOS compatability, as I do play a lot of old DOS games and tend to boot up old dos software to steal ideas for design implementations in software I write
I can't say the backwards compatability in that sense under Windows was bad. Of course, binary compatability isn't a issue it seems in newer versions of windows.
Any how, wouldn't a more reasonable comparison of MacOS classic apps running on MacOSX? Be windows 3.11 apps running on windows xp... So far, I haven't discovered any problems with running such old software either (games, old custom software companies use, Heck even macroeconomics test software which I baught a year ago [I can't believe they're selling software that was designed for win3.11 still]).
And about MacOSX compatability, I do recall that Apple clearly stating that they're not going to supporting classic applications on MacIntels, so, they are dropping support for older apps it seems.
I know this wasn't mentioned in the NY article, but I'll talk about it anyway. The things that I've seen which slow down windows a lot, are mostly just.. idiotic designs. Such as using the internet explorer rendering engine to draw JPEGs as the background (BMPs have a totally different engine for drawing in the background). Plus, you really don't want to know why File -> open/save dialogs *can* take along time to display, it's insane.
One word, 'spotlight'.
Some companies will fire you if you're not able to be contacted when needed.
"NO U!"
Oi! You forgot "dirty".
> If we stay idle, isn't that as evil as the dictator who commits this genocide?
In a word, 'No'. But then again the USA went into Iraq for WMD, not to remove Saddam. Removing Saddam in my opinion was just to save face.
> It's horrible that roughly 32-38,000 have died in the Iraqi war, but what is this number compared to the execution of 600,000 Iraqi civilians under Saddam? Or the 100,000 Kurds? Or the 500,000 Iranians?
It's unfortunate that the amount of people that had to die. However we don't know if less people would have died if Saddam had remained in power or not. So if you're going to play with statistics, you better find statistics that show it was worth while. For all we know, far less people could have died if Iraq was left alone.
> - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-90 (I positively love its height ;-))
Pah, I raise you http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-800
Hulk smash!
No! Don't you know about the Cylons?
He wasn't gay, so it's okay.
Perhaps they see the people they're fighting against as terrorists and not themselves.
> For those who don't know the quite well known fact, OSX is based on BSD...
Mac OS X is actually based on Darwin, which is built from the Mach kernel and the FreeBSD implementation of a Posix enviroment, which were incorporated into NEXTSTEP.
Not much remains of the original 'BSD' components that can be cross-referenced with other BSD systems.
I still remember when I was given a x86 box that had windows 3.11 and MSDOS on it.
I spent 20 minutes thinking the "C:\ _" prompt was a loading screen. Since, after all, DOS on the Amiga was purely graphical, had a windowed enviroment and everything.
I was very unimpressed with the x86 machine no doubt.