Win95 ran all Win32 tasks inside one process, it was one of the many disgusting compromises done in the name of speed. (Microsoft had promised Win95 would run on a 386 with 4MB of memory, and unfortunately they kept that promise. You couldn't really do anything with a machine like that, but the OS booted.)
Storing all graphical resources for modern resolutions and bitdepths as uncompressed bitmaps is a great way to reduce bloat! And who the fuck needs any characters not included in the ASCII set? Speak english or die, I say. To further reduce bloat and speed up start times we should also ditch shared libraries, because it's far more efficient to link everything statically than having to deal with relocations and shit. In fact, we should all go back to single-tasking computers so the operating system doesn't have to waste resources juggling several programs at once. In fact, why don't we ditch the operating system altogether?
The iPods use ARM7-based CPUs. They do not have an MMU, which means you cannot run Darwin on it. Eg. the iPod Linux project is based on uClinux which does not require an MMU.
Where is Microsoft's answer to:
Killzone ... Honestly did they really think anyone would be fooled with the tired old trying to pass off cut scenes as real game play bullshit?
It's not quite as clear-cut as that, as the Wine DLLs are not distributed separately but are baked into some binary inside the Parallels applications folder. I don't have the LGPL in fresh memory but IIRC that would place the whole binary where it's included under the same license, at least if you ask the FSF's opinion.
It gets more complex, because as far as I can see the Wine libraries are not distributed separately from the main Parallels VM. Once you've installed the "Parallels Tools" inside the VM you get a wined3d.dll sitting inside your Windows\system32 folder. Is it statically linked? Does it form one single work, thus placing the whole package under the GPL?
The Zelda collection on Gamecube used an emulator and OoT ran just fine. Majora's Mask had sound issues, but it will fit into the Wii's memory just fine. If you doubt that it used an emulator it was extracted and available on the net as a separate download. I personally tested it with Super Mario 64 and it worked perfectly, even though the loading process was extremely cumbersome.
You're also a bit off regarding the Wii's architecture. The 24MB 1T-SRAM is the "main memory", unchanged from Gamecube, likely for compatibility reasons. The 64MB of GDDR3 memory is the "auxiliary memory", up from 16MB DRAM in the Gamecube. The 3MB of GPU-embedded SRAM is the same, which tells you a bit about how much the chips changed between the Gamecube and the Wii.
The 64MB of aux ram will fit even the largest released N64 cartridge. The RDRAM image takes up a maximum of 8MB, and the remaining 16MB is more than enough space for the emulator code.
AFAIK they all have similar requirements. If you have a good demo running on eg. a PC then Microsoft and Sony may be willing to take a chance and sponsor your game, but it's still professionals only. If you subscribe to Microsoft's XNA you can AFAIK even sell your games on Live, but you're limited to managed.NET. Sony don't offer a similar program, but you can develop for the PS3 using the "otheros" functionality, typically under Linux. You will however not have accelerated graphics, software rendering only.
But they're still not interested in hobbyists - professional game developers only. I don't know where people got this idea that cheap would equal available to everyone, as Nintendo have never shown the slightest interest in hobbyist developers.
You see, the plan when Sony started to work on that what that it would be powerful enough to serve as both CPU and GPU.
To be precise, the original design had two Cell CPUs - one for game logic and one for rendering graphics. I think that one additional reason the idea was scrapped was that they realized developers wouldn't be too keen on writing software renderers.
If Nintendo requires you to buy thousands of dollars of hardware to be considered, I'm not sure how successful they'll be at getting support from indie developers.
This is where the promised $2000 devkits are going. If you can't afford even that then I don't think Nintendo want you on board - at least previously you had to show that you were serious and financially sound before getting a development license.
Reiser is worried that Sturgeon is trying to teach Rory and Niorline that pain can be fun and is furious when Sturgeon gives them what Reiser refers to in a sworn court filing as "gender confused alternative sexuality dolls."
Question is, how come you patch microcode hardware flaw with a software patch - is this affecting performance? Possibly.
If the patch replaces a very common hardcoded instruction then you will quite likely see a performance decrease. However, a slow instruction that produces the correct results is infinitely better than a quick one that doesn't.
but the bottom line is that if a processor has a bug in its microcode
Very few instructions are microcoded anymore, but Intel's processors have a feature where a hardcoded instructions can be patched out with loaded microcode. That is how these updates work, and I assume AMD have similar features.
The errors described in that article were most certainly not caused by the FDIV bug, but by far simpler software flaws. IIRC, earlier versions of the calculator used straight floating-point calculations which obviously won't yield correct answers in a huge number of cases. Newer versions use arbitrary-precision math and don't suffer from these problems.
First off it wouldn't work, as Rockstar already are licensed developers and thus have signed the NDAs, have the gear and so on.
Secondly it won't work because unlike the olden days console manufacturers finally have effective means to lock out unlicensed developers. Unless the encryption is broken or the keys leaked there is no way to boot your unlicensed game. Future modchips may allow you to do so, but no-one in their right mind would bet their company on that.
Slashdot Mirror
Win95 ran all Win32 tasks inside one process, it was one of the many disgusting compromises done in the name of speed. (Microsoft had promised Win95 would run on a 386 with 4MB of memory, and unfortunately they kept that promise. You couldn't really do anything with a machine like that, but the OS booted.)
Storing all graphical resources for modern resolutions and bitdepths as uncompressed bitmaps is a great way to reduce bloat! And who the fuck needs any characters not included in the ASCII set? Speak english or die, I say. To further reduce bloat and speed up start times we should also ditch shared libraries, because it's far more efficient to link everything statically than having to deal with relocations and shit. In fact, we should all go back to single-tasking computers so the operating system doesn't have to waste resources juggling several programs at once. In fact, why don't we ditch the operating system altogether?
The iPods use ARM7-based CPUs. They do not have an MMU, which means you cannot run Darwin on it. Eg. the iPod Linux project is based on uClinux which does not require an MMU.
I would assume that with a price drop Sony would switch to the EE-less PS3 everywhere, meaning backwards compatiblity takes a hit.
It's a question of drivers, not applications.
It's not quite as clear-cut as that, as the Wine DLLs are not distributed separately but are baked into some binary inside the Parallels applications folder. I don't have the LGPL in fresh memory but IIRC that would place the whole binary where it's included under the same license, at least if you ask the FSF's opinion.
It gets more complex, because as far as I can see the Wine libraries are not distributed separately from the main Parallels VM. Once you've installed the "Parallels Tools" inside the VM you get a wined3d.dll sitting inside your Windows\system32 folder. Is it statically linked? Does it form one single work, thus placing the whole package under the GPL?
Same difference, the point is that they're not changing the battery in the phone you hand in.
You're also a bit off regarding the Wii's architecture. The 24MB 1T-SRAM is the "main memory", unchanged from Gamecube, likely for compatibility reasons. The 64MB of GDDR3 memory is the "auxiliary memory", up from 16MB DRAM in the Gamecube. The 3MB of GPU-embedded SRAM is the same, which tells you a bit about how much the chips changed between the Gamecube and the Wii.
The 64MB of aux ram will fit even the largest released N64 cartridge. The RDRAM image takes up a maximum of 8MB, and the remaining 16MB is more than enough space for the emulator code.
AFAIK they all have similar requirements. If you have a good demo running on eg. a PC then Microsoft and Sony may be willing to take a chance and sponsor your game, but it's still professionals only. If you subscribe to Microsoft's XNA you can AFAIK even sell your games on Live, but you're limited to managed .NET. Sony don't offer a similar program, but you can develop for the PS3 using the "otheros" functionality, typically under Linux. You will however not have accelerated graphics, software rendering only.
But they're still not interested in hobbyists - professional game developers only. I don't know where people got this idea that cheap would equal available to everyone, as Nintendo have never shown the slightest interest in hobbyist developers.
It used to be all Russkies were KGB, now they're all Russian mafia.
Everyone associated with the case is fucking nuts and should be locked up just out of principle.
The same way the microcode is implemented, only with a lot more transistors.
The errors described in that article were most certainly not caused by the FDIV bug, but by far simpler software flaws. IIRC, earlier versions of the calculator used straight floating-point calculations which obviously won't yield correct answers in a huge number of cases. Newer versions use arbitrary-precision math and don't suffer from these problems.
Secondly it won't work because unlike the olden days console manufacturers finally have effective means to lock out unlicensed developers. Unless the encryption is broken or the keys leaked there is no way to boot your unlicensed game. Future modchips may allow you to do so, but no-one in their right mind would bet their company on that.
Ultima Underworld had true 3D in 1992. Use a slingshot or other ranged weapons and you could even call it a shooter!