Actually it was not virtualized. It was just run on the EE. access to the IOP was limited due to aspects of the asynchronous communications. You can have full access to hardware, it just isn't easy. For example, the memory card access was limited to a specific folder on each card. (a little patch fixed this). Useful for installing the PS2independence exploit.
As for normal access one could exit the linux environment into a new one that resembled the homebrew equivalent. (I never tried it but it is said to work).
Let me clarafy. I used preview but... I had an after thought. Basically the PS2 can do 35M flat or simply textured polys per second. The system is tied up doing this so if you add enough other things then you slow down a bit... plus you need steady frame rates. The IOP takes most care of most things regarding controll and other IO (sound etc.. thus the name;) ) but the EE will have to take the brunt of things like animation and physics (its quite a bit better than the IOP for this stuff). So... a really well written engine *could* get close to 25M polygons per sec.
Actually you are right. The quote seems acurate. But... The game actually has many dynamic objects added to the level during game play (charater, enemies, sfx, gui). This brings the total up by a bit. Just remember the diff. between 75M simple polygons and 15M textured and shaded polygons with other efects shuch as alpha blending. The LoD is quite agressive on most games. What I was getting at was that the game looks great! The PS2 is "enough" to pull of current generation games. While it doesn't beat XBox (which, btw, also has highly inflated specs) it get the job done.
The high point that cannot be reached. You can get about 35 million vetrices per second (~40 is probably max if you use a few more tricks). I know this is a fact as I have done it myself. This is very low. But using triangle strips and fans you can get close to the above number. 15M is a bit low for an estimate of raw poly power as the 75M was supposed to represent.
All in all, I think we have rightly been mad but that does not stop the PS2 from being capable.
IMO FF8 is well beyond Toy Story in quality and complexity. I do agree that Toy Story is a bit much... though if you ever watch that movie again you will be suprised by its simplicity compaired to current day films. I would say that PS2 can do amaizing stuff people just keep steping on it because some stupid marketing people opened their mouth. It did unfortunately take then a LONG time to master the system and its design.
You just need to remember what the bottle neck was. It was memory bandwidth. In this case samrter VU programs have lead to being closer to the 75M mark (not very near but much closer than early on). The trick is in how you send geometry that is to be transformed into a display list to the GS (I use "display list" losely here). So really how the poly was shaded did impact performance but not as much as bandwidth. Texturing is still a problem but games can still look great. Look at Ratchet & Clank 3. Notice the simpler textures. Metal Gear Solid 3 also uses similar textures in almost every scene. But both push a "good" (I don't have a number) amount of geometry. Calling it a lie really is like calling any paper launch a lie. PS2 is not the only one guilty of such. It was a radical aproach to game console design that did not really pay off as well as I hope it will in the future.
Quite simple. The PS2, for example, has a GPU (called the GS -- graphics synth.). The pipe that usually feeds the GS in the PS2 is actually one of the vector units that is part of the EE (VU1 I think). This vector unit provides an intermediate processor for primitives sent to be rastered by the GS. Most of the time this kind of stuff is done by the GPU on a traditional architecture (i.e. XBox) but the PS2 extracts it. This makes PS2 very flexible but harder to program (their tools have become better over time -- like their Vector Assembly tools important to higher quility games we've seen lately). The Cell on the other hand will have more vector power and MUCH more bandwidth. If all your processing is done and you just need the darn thing to be drawn then you need a good rasterizer and that is just what nVidia will probably give them.
There is memory protection. Read the whole thing. What I think bit you was the fact he said there was no virtual memory... well even then his wording is confusing as virtual memory is just swaping out pages of memory as you need more. This can be done on the Cell. What I think he is talking about it adress translation. Paging hardware must not implement a full LogicalAddr==>LinearAddr==>PhysicalAddr paging/segmentation unit(I have not read the patent myself). He mentions that during runtime the adress must be physical/real and that, when running on an APU, they may be given access restrictions. I must regress though and tell you that I am no expert either.
The OS is in for quite a bit of work when dispatching apulets as i can see adjusting addressing and other things will be as interesting (or more) as different scheduling mechanisms are today in current systems.
To get a secure system out of this will require protected memory and if i remember correctly the Cell may be capable of running multiple OSs in parallel VMs. This can be explained by considering that IBM has their own software layer that ones OS would talk to (at least the article made it seem that way). Its amlost like having a micro kernel (or exokernel in some ways) that then have real things atached to it. Like linux for example. Linux can already be run in user mode and even ontop of the L4 micro kernel. Linux has shown to be portable enough (along with most good modern software). I would not have any doubt in seeing this happen with IBM.
Are you mistaken? there are many users of Ruby... heck check out how many people use FreeBSD ports (Ports' update system)? Then there are the Rails users. Japan alone brings many many thousand (more popular that Python over there). And plenty more (just google). I myself have used them on many products. I think Ruby is right up there with Perl and Python these days.
Take what I said lightly:)
I guess I was just generalizing open source and academic as non comercial. I think you probably got what I was trying to say... you may disregard my post as I wrote it just after staying up all night coding;)
That is what you think... I have been through many companies and aquiring brings "value" (sarcastically used -- whether or not it makes your company more successful or larger). I agree in a basic sense that companies need to concentrate on themselves before they go out like this but investors just don't think that way so your stock may or may not change in the short term (yeah... darn short sighted CEOs who want their bonus;) ).
Just like art, people in academics (try to) look down on professionals. Many of these people were on research teams (commercial but still research) while carmack was out to make a buck. I agree though.
The "father of flash" and a few others are exceptions. I guess they were lucky.
Like I said above: The list would be huge if every deserving person was on it.
That reminds me, my dad used to tell me stories about some of his classmates at the airforce academy. One of them was the VB guy... he's asleep right now so I won't bother him. Google and find it. Grady Booch also went to the Airforce Academy (one year ahead of my dads class). That was back when Comp. Sci. was just part of Aerospace Eng. at the academy (good old punch cards:s ).
The last conference I went to there was a flood of white notebooks (guess who). I am not compairing the two... it was just an observation. I did not have a laptop at that time (I used my sharp zaurus SL-C760).
I hope, somehow, that games run in two modes: plugged in and not. For me the PSP would be nice for a pick up and go then sit back down and plug in. I don't have to haul a TV, lots of wires, controllers, and it does support small amounts of battery life... but if I am just out to play a game anywhere I will be taking my DS.
Look. It doesn't matter now. I was trying to say that I was not thinking they sent those types for the same reason you flamed me. "reading comprehension" please?
I actually am against mods in general. Too many people pirate (they claim they don't -- but you know they do). I am for homebrew (which I do some myself). Mods on XBOXs give very little feature wise that is IMHO clearly on the legal side. (Don't flame on this please... I just don't think it's for any good unless you are a homebrew hacker or a curious fellow -- I know most of the world doesn't fit in that catagory yet there are still so many mods.)
I also son't think graphics are the only reason to get the XBOX version. Many people like XBOX Live (I don't want to pay;) ). I hate the XBOX controllers (both large and small)... In fact I like the game cube's best for many games while d-pad centric games are great on the DS2. But some people like the XBOX controllers for their hold style.
People are too caught up in very little difference in video quality. Its a GAME. play it. It's not hollywood here. Gameplay has always come first for me. Don't get me wrong: graphics do matter, up to the point where you can express what you need to.. . anything beyond that is just eye candy. Eye candy is nice but I will forget about it after I start thinking, "DAAANG! This is FUN."
As for modded functionality: I can do it on my PS2 (or my XBOX if I modded) with the independence exploit OR the Linux kit. I use both depending on what I am going to do.
Things I do like about the XBOX: Four controller ports and games actually use the HDD. I am not really the kind of guy who even has enough money to own an HDTV, so graphically, games are close enough or good enough for me.
Things I like about the PS2: Fun (and hard) to program (it's a challenge), some GREAT games (no I do NOT like GTA:) ), good controller design, and plays my PS1 games.
Things I like about the GCN: Fun games with some good exclusives (yes they exist), four ports, cheap, easy to run imports (freeloader).
There are some things I like about all of them in general: All are capable of quality graphics (Progrssive, good 3d, etc...), games (again:) ), and good multiplayer (the human factor makes things interesting).
There are some things I don't like about all of them but I will not start a flame war over this off topic post anyway:)
Point: It doesn't matter. None of it does. blah > blah > blah is just junior high kid talk. Get what you want and don't let anyone tell you that you won't have fun because: You can have fun on all of them. One could liken this to how people follow sports:
1) X team sucks!
2) No they rock!
1) No Y team could beat them any day!
2) Y team has no clue what they are doing!
Narrator/me) Neither team "sucks". They are both professionals. one may win a game but that doesn't take away the fact that the other still knows how to play well. It may not be as well as the other team but it's still darn good.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually it was not virtualized. It was just run on the EE. access to the IOP was limited due to aspects of the asynchronous communications. You can have full access to hardware, it just isn't easy. For example, the memory card access was limited to a specific folder on each card. (a little patch fixed this). Useful for installing the PS2independence exploit. As for normal access one could exit the linux environment into a new one that resembled the homebrew equivalent. (I never tried it but it is said to work).
Let me clarafy. I used preview but... I had an after thought. Basically the PS2 can do 35M flat or simply textured polys per second. The system is tied up doing this so if you add enough other things then you slow down a bit... plus you need steady frame rates. The IOP takes most care of most things regarding controll and other IO (sound etc.. thus the name ;) ) but the EE will have to take the brunt of things like animation and physics (its quite a bit better than the IOP for this stuff). So... a really well written engine *could* get close to 25M polygons per sec.
Actually you are right. The quote seems acurate. But... The game actually has many dynamic objects added to the level during game play (charater, enemies, sfx, gui). This brings the total up by a bit. Just remember the diff. between 75M simple polygons and 15M textured and shaded polygons with other efects shuch as alpha blending. The LoD is quite agressive on most games. What I was getting at was that the game looks great! The PS2 is "enough" to pull of current generation games. While it doesn't beat XBox (which, btw, also has highly inflated specs) it get the job done.
The high point that cannot be reached. You can get about 35 million vetrices per second (~40 is probably max if you use a few more tricks). I know this is a fact as I have done it myself. This is very low. But using triangle strips and fans you can get close to the above number. 15M is a bit low for an estimate of raw poly power as the 75M was supposed to represent.
All in all, I think we have rightly been mad but that does not stop the PS2 from being capable.
IMO FF8 is well beyond Toy Story in quality and complexity. I do agree that Toy Story is a bit much... though if you ever watch that movie again you will be suprised by its simplicity compaired to current day films. I would say that PS2 can do amaizing stuff people just keep steping on it because some stupid marketing people opened their mouth. It did unfortunately take then a LONG time to master the system and its design.
You just need to remember what the bottle neck was. It was memory bandwidth. In this case samrter VU programs have lead to being closer to the 75M mark (not very near but much closer than early on). The trick is in how you send geometry that is to be transformed into a display list to the GS (I use "display list" losely here). So really how the poly was shaded did impact performance but not as much as bandwidth. Texturing is still a problem but games can still look great. Look at Ratchet & Clank 3. Notice the simpler textures. Metal Gear Solid 3 also uses similar textures in almost every scene. But both push a "good" (I don't have a number) amount of geometry. Calling it a lie really is like calling any paper launch a lie. PS2 is not the only one guilty of such. It was a radical aproach to game console design that did not really pay off as well as I hope it will in the future.
Quite simple. The PS2, for example, has a GPU (called the GS -- graphics synth.). The pipe that usually feeds the GS in the PS2 is actually one of the vector units that is part of the EE (VU1 I think). This vector unit provides an intermediate processor for primitives sent to be rastered by the GS. Most of the time this kind of stuff is done by the GPU on a traditional architecture (i.e. XBox) but the PS2 extracts it. This makes PS2 very flexible but harder to program (their tools have become better over time -- like their Vector Assembly tools important to higher quility games we've seen lately). The Cell on the other hand will have more vector power and MUCH more bandwidth. If all your processing is done and you just need the darn thing to be drawn then you need a good rasterizer and that is just what nVidia will probably give them.
There is memory protection. Read the whole thing. What I think bit you was the fact he said there was no virtual memory... well even then his wording is confusing as virtual memory is just swaping out pages of memory as you need more. This can be done on the Cell. What I think he is talking about it adress translation. Paging hardware must not implement a full LogicalAddr==>LinearAddr==>PhysicalAddr paging/segmentation unit(I have not read the patent myself). He mentions that during runtime the adress must be physical/real and that, when running on an APU, they may be given access restrictions. I must regress though and tell you that I am no expert either. The OS is in for quite a bit of work when dispatching apulets as i can see adjusting addressing and other things will be as interesting (or more) as different scheduling mechanisms are today in current systems. To get a secure system out of this will require protected memory and if i remember correctly the Cell may be capable of running multiple OSs in parallel VMs. This can be explained by considering that IBM has their own software layer that ones OS would talk to (at least the article made it seem that way). Its amlost like having a micro kernel (or exokernel in some ways) that then have real things atached to it. Like linux for example. Linux can already be run in user mode and even ontop of the L4 micro kernel. Linux has shown to be portable enough (along with most good modern software). I would not have any doubt in seeing this happen with IBM.
Not all of us are like that. I find this kid to be offending. I think one could sum up his attitude as scum. It's too bad...
Are you mistaken? there are many users of Ruby... heck check out how many people use FreeBSD ports (Ports' update system)? Then there are the Rails users. Japan alone brings many many thousand (more popular that Python over there). And plenty more (just google). I myself have used them on many products. I think Ruby is right up there with Perl and Python these days.
Back in the day... before color... before black and white ... it was black. just black.
Just remember that Javascript is OO but not via classes. It is a prototype OO language (see others like Self).
Take what I said lightly :) ;)
I guess I was just generalizing open source and academic as non comercial. I think you probably got what I was trying to say... you may disregard my post as I wrote it just after staying up all night coding
Time for a nap.zZ
That is what you think... I have been through many companies and aquiring brings "value" (sarcastically used -- whether or not it makes your company more successful or larger). I agree in a basic sense that companies need to concentrate on themselves before they go out like this but investors just don't think that way so your stock may or may not change in the short term (yeah... darn short sighted CEOs who want their bonus ;) ).
Just like art, people in academics (try to) look down on professionals. Many of these people were on research teams (commercial but still research) while carmack was out to make a buck. I agree though.
The "father of flash" and a few others are exceptions. I guess they were lucky.
Like I said above: The list would be huge if every deserving person was on it.
That reminds me, my dad used to tell me stories about some of his classmates at the airforce academy. One of them was the VB guy... he's asleep right now so I won't bother him. Google and find it. Grady Booch also went to the Airforce Academy (one year ahead of my dads class). That was back when Comp. Sci. was just part of Aerospace Eng. at the academy (good old punch cards :s ).
That and where is Yukihiro Matsumoto? I would be nowhere today without the three scripting language fathers.
Oh well... the list would be too long as there are many more that i can think of.
The last conference I went to there was a flood of white notebooks (guess who). I am not compairing the two... it was just an observation. I did not have a laptop at that time (I used my sharp zaurus SL-C760).
I hope, somehow, that games run in two modes: plugged in and not. For me the PSP would be nice for a pick up and go then sit back down and plug in. I don't have to haul a TV, lots of wires, controllers, and it does support small amounts of battery life... but if I am just out to play a game anywhere I will be taking my DS.
I am sure the devs were on drugs... no the less, it is still VERY fun.
Look. It doesn't matter now. I was trying to say that I was not thinking they sent those types for the same reason you flamed me. "reading comprehension" please?
Ironically /l stripped them out... I'll put
's in next time
Interesting. Thanks for the post :)
Good point. I would mod you up if I could.
I actually am against mods in general. Too many people pirate (they claim they don't -- but you know they do). I am for homebrew (which I do some myself). Mods on XBOXs give very little feature wise that is IMHO clearly on the legal side. (Don't flame on this please... I just don't think it's for any good unless you are a homebrew hacker or a curious fellow -- I know most of the world doesn't fit in that catagory yet there are still so many mods.) I also son't think graphics are the only reason to get the XBOX version. Many people like XBOX Live (I don't want to pay ;) ). I hate the XBOX controllers (both large and small)... In fact I like the game cube's best for many games while d-pad centric games are great on the DS2. But some people like the XBOX controllers for their hold style.
People are too caught up in very little difference in video quality. Its a GAME. play it. It's not hollywood here. Gameplay has always come first for me. Don't get me wrong: graphics do matter, up to the point where you can express what you need to.. . anything beyond that is just eye candy. Eye candy is nice but I will forget about it after I start thinking, "DAAANG! This is FUN."
As for modded functionality: I can do it on my PS2 (or my XBOX if I modded) with the independence exploit OR the Linux kit. I use both depending on what I am going to do.
Things I do like about the XBOX: Four controller ports and games actually use the HDD. I am not really the kind of guy who even has enough money to own an HDTV, so graphically, games are close enough or good enough for me.
Things I like about the PS2: Fun (and hard) to program (it's a challenge), some GREAT games (no I do NOT like GTA :) ), good controller design, and plays my PS1 games.
Things I like about the GCN: Fun games with some good exclusives (yes they exist), four ports, cheap, easy to run imports (freeloader).
There are some things I like about all of them in general: All are capable of quality graphics (Progrssive, good 3d, etc...), games (again :) ), and good multiplayer (the human factor makes things interesting).
There are some things I don't like about all of them but I will not start a flame war over this off topic post anyway :)
Point: It doesn't matter. None of it does. blah > blah > blah is just junior high kid talk. Get what you want and don't let anyone tell you that you won't have fun because: You can have fun on all of them. One could liken this to how people follow sports:
1) X team sucks!
2) No they rock!
1) No Y team could beat them any day!
2) Y team has no clue what they are doing!
Narrator/me) Neither team "sucks". They are both professionals. one may win a game but that doesn't take away the fact that the other still knows how to play well. It may not be as well as the other team but it's still darn good.
You know.. If we agrue this much about it: It doesn't matter. It can be seen either way so lets just drop it and let the readers decide.