>Why would startup times not be important? To me it is important. Full stop.
If I'm going to use an application for a few hours...or have a service running on a server indefinitely, and my only complaint about the application, or the serivce, is the startup time, then it's a pretty damned good application.
From reading what she wrote, it looks like BuyMusic specificy a Windows Media Player plugin by Roxio as the only way you can burn CDs from it.
I'm guessing it has to be a WMP plugin so that WMP can validate the license on the music.
I think she had a pretty fair point, they tell you that you are allowed to burn a CD from the music, and they tell you the software that you must use to do it. The software doesn't work, they tell you it's not their problem - I'd be pissed off too.
I take it that the "most" imap clients you're talking about don't include netscape messenger 4.x, that's always been my favourite IMAP client. It may be relatively light on features as a mail client, but the only thing from your list it doesn't do, is subfolder checking, but if you don't have server side filtering then you don't really need it. (And roaming profiles mean that you can still get similar functionality).
I wonder if roaming profiles will ever make it back into a Mozilla based product?
Re:Before all the flamers get in.
on
Qt On DirectFB
·
· Score: 1
> I just have to run TOP to see that X is currently using almost 10% of my cpu time, and it's using somthign in the range of 75M of ram
hmm...let me guess, 32 or 64 meg video card?
X ran (and still runs) fine on machines with 4meg of memory...
The memory usage you see from X is a combination of the size of the X Server itself, the framebuffer memory in your video card that's been mmapped into the process (which isn't using real RAM), and any offscreen buffers being used by the applications. I'd say it'd be likely that the X server itself is probably only using 4 or so meg, and all the rest is stuff that you'd see regardless of whether you were using X, DirectFB, Fresco, or/dev/fb0 directly.
>why not just make a rootless X server that can run on directfb for backwards compatibilty?
Well you'd need to do that anyway, DirectFB isn't a windowing system, so you'd still need one. The best way would probably be to have a DirectFB X Server, or a directDB driver for XFree86. That way regular applications use X as normal, whilst still allowing applications like games to bypass the X protocol and talk directly to DirectFB. Unfortunately, until there is real support for DirectFB from video card vendors, this is unlikely to happen, as there really isn't anything wrong with X for regular work, and very little wrong for games, since modern games are mostly 3d - and DRI and NVidia's drivers already bypass the X protocol - (to the point where there are reports of slightly better framerates in some games compared with their Windows versions).
Re:Before all the flamers get in.
on
Qt On DirectFB
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I don't get it, why do so many people think that
1. remote displays are the thing that makes X "slow" and "bloated" 2. That X is slow and bloated in the first place (put GTK or QT on top of DirectFB and you'll see the same "slow" "bloated" behaviour) 3. That remote displays are some obsolete technology that no one really uses any more? (If that's the case, then how come even Microsoft have finaly started putting the functionality into it's desktop operating systems?)
The Labour party can go around proposing enquiries all they like....maybe it'll take the focus off their other problems.....but until the _Government_ does something...it's not gonna happen.
Not to mention the fact that if the investigator estimated 1MPH _lower_ than the defendant claimed, I don't think they'd be bothering to see what the EDR recorded.....
>It seems to me that the last two star wars movies have had far more digital effects (to their disadvantage)
That's probably a comment on the quality...
The best special effects are the ones you don't notice. Alfterall, the point of specially effects in movies is to add realism and impact. If you notice a special effect as just that, then it has failed.
I'm afraid you can't blame QBASIC for spaghetti code.
It may let you write it, but it defintely doesn't force you too - any more than C does.
QBasic was an excellent structured BASIC flavour.
It was infinitely better than any of the earlier versions of MS Basic used in the various 8 bit computers - and even better than Amiga Basic (In terms of the language itself)
It's not about eliminating all chance, it's about taking reasonable measures to ensure that you've done what you can.
The decrease in chance of downloading compromised code between downloading straight from the vendor, and downloading from a mirror + comparing the vendor's MD5 sum is too small to be worth the extra time it may take downloading directly from the vendor (assuming that it does take longer)
Nothing in this world is certain, and there is a point at which the returns diminish to the point where you'd be wasting 99% of your time trying to be 'certain' about everything, when spending 5% of your time taking (and documenting that you took) reasonable precautions would have been sufficient.
Slashdot Mirror
>Why would startup times not be important? To me it is important. Full stop.
If I'm going to use an application for a few hours...or have a service running on a server indefinitely, and my only complaint about the application, or the serivce, is the startup time, then it's a pretty damned good application.
From reading what she wrote, it looks like BuyMusic specificy a Windows Media Player plugin by Roxio as the only way you can burn CDs from it.
I'm guessing it has to be a WMP plugin so that WMP can validate the license on the music.
I think she had a pretty fair point, they tell you that you are allowed to burn a CD from the music, and they tell you the software that you must use to do it. The software doesn't work, they tell you it's not their problem - I'd be pissed off too.
It's probably just people finaly upgrading from Netscape Communicator....
I take it that the "most" imap clients you're talking about don't include netscape messenger 4.x, that's always been my favourite IMAP client. It may be relatively light on features as a mail client, but the only thing from your list it doesn't do, is subfolder checking, but if you don't have server side filtering then you don't really need it. (And roaming profiles mean that you can still get similar functionality).
I wonder if roaming profiles will ever make it back into a Mozilla based product?
> I just have to run TOP to see that X is currently using almost 10% of my cpu time, and it's using somthign in the range of 75M of ram
/dev/fb0 directly.
hmm...let me guess, 32 or 64 meg video card?
X ran (and still runs) fine on machines with 4meg of memory...
The memory usage you see from X is a combination of the size of the X Server itself, the framebuffer memory in your video card that's been mmapped into the process (which isn't using real RAM), and any offscreen buffers being used by the applications. I'd say it'd be likely that the X server itself is probably only using 4 or so meg, and all the rest is stuff that you'd see regardless of whether you were using X, DirectFB, Fresco, or
>why not just make a rootless X server that can run on directfb for backwards compatibilty?
Well you'd need to do that anyway, DirectFB isn't a windowing system, so you'd still need one.
The best way would probably be to have a DirectFB X Server, or a directDB driver for XFree86. That way regular applications use X as normal, whilst still allowing applications like games to bypass the X protocol and talk directly to DirectFB.
Unfortunately, until there is real support for DirectFB from video card vendors, this is unlikely to happen, as there really isn't anything wrong with X for regular work, and very little wrong for games, since modern games are mostly 3d - and DRI and NVidia's drivers already bypass the X protocol - (to the point where there are reports of slightly better framerates in some games compared with their Windows versions).
I don't get it, why do so many people think that
1. remote displays are the thing that makes X "slow" and "bloated"
2. That X is slow and bloated in the first place (put GTK or QT on top of DirectFB and you'll see the same "slow" "bloated" behaviour)
3. That remote displays are some obsolete technology that no one really uses any more? (If that's the case, then how come even Microsoft have finaly started putting the functionality into it's desktop operating systems?)
>So, any ideas on how they could actually do this? especially if it's hosted in another country.
They couldn't, and if you'd read the article...or even the SUMMARY then you'd know that they're not trying to.
what the hell is there to mess up in an XP install??
the worst thing you might do, is spell your name wrong....
Name any news site that is
First well managed console that it's not ridiculously easy to copy the games for.
Well here's one that says JSP is faster.
But, then it is from a servlet container vendor.
So you're saying that paying Au$500 to upgrade from NT5.0 (W2k), to get to NT 5.1(XP) is OK when Microsoft do it?
BTW, that's XP 2003 with the 64bit support, which is most likely NT5.2, and another payed for dot revision upgrade.
Yes, but that's _AFTER_ the buffer's been overrun.
snprintf is the one that's needed.
The Labour party can go around proposing enquiries all they like....maybe it'll take the focus off their other problems.....but until the _Government_ does something...it's not gonna happen.
Transact isn't ADSL - though it's better....
But it's a little more expensive than ADSL still, and only available to about 30% of Canberra...
An acronym would be "SCO" , not S C O, since an acronym is pronounceable as a word.
perhaps you mean initials....
>But then, do Intel or AMD have any 64-bit desktop machines on the market yet?
No they don't
Intel have basically said it'll be 10 years before they think it'll be worthwhile...and AMD aren't releasing Athlon64 until nearer the end of the year
All of Blizzard's current games are also excellent single player games, that are worth the cover price without the multiplayer....
Diablo II was 3 CDs worth....
Of course they're making money...but they're hardly ripping us off...
Version 1.2 of the java platform is based on version 2 of the java language.
Not to mention the fact that if the investigator estimated 1MPH _lower_ than the defendant claimed, I don't think they'd be bothering to see what the EDR recorded.....
>It seems to me that the last two star wars movies have had far more digital effects (to their disadvantage)
That's probably a comment on the quality...
The best special effects are the ones you don't notice.
Alfterall, the point of specially effects in movies is to add realism and impact. If you notice a special effect as just that, then it has failed.
I'm afraid you can't blame QBASIC for spaghetti code.
It may let you write it, but it defintely doesn't force you too - any more than C does.
QBasic was an excellent structured BASIC flavour.
It was infinitely better than any of the earlier versions of MS Basic used in the various 8 bit computers - and even better than Amiga Basic (In terms of the language itself)
It's not about eliminating all chance, it's about taking reasonable measures to ensure that you've done what you can.
The decrease in chance of downloading compromised code between downloading straight from the vendor, and downloading from a mirror + comparing the vendor's MD5 sum is too small to be worth the extra time it may take downloading directly from the vendor (assuming that it does take longer)
Nothing in this world is certain, and there is a point at which the returns diminish to the point where you'd be wasting 99% of your time trying to be 'certain' about everything, when spending 5% of your time taking (and documenting that you took) reasonable precautions would have been sufficient.
Nobody's forcing you to buy UT2k4...
if you think it's worth the money at the time, then buy it.
Otherwise, don't.
I've always wondered how you 'call bullshit'
I guess now I know...