Nor is it really Tetris without tetraminoes or scoring. Not to berate the effort, but it's a lot easier to downsize something when you drop half of the main features.
This, plus proliferation of antialased rendering offsets advancements in CPU power - to the point that navigating source code in QtCreator on my Linux box is not that smooth as I'd like it to be.
That almost certainly has more to do with either display sync issues (which sadly aren't uncommon on a composited X desktop especially with non-free drivers) or the various services of the IDE. Anti-aliased font and line drawing aren't that demanding to begin with, and can be GPU-accelerated with pretty much any hardware you might have picked up within the last five years or so.
DNF was finished thanks to being given to a development team that had actually released a game within the last ten years. So it's completely plausible that they finally got people into Hurd whose goal is to finish real projects as opposed to chasing perfect ideas.
Quote: "Adopting a new image format in Web browsers is a big decision. Once a format becomes a part of the Web, it will have to be supported in perpetuityâ"adding overhead to the browserâ"even if it largely fizzles and only gains a small niche following."
It's akin to if Web browsers were required to support failed formats like ANIM or HAM or IFF.
In practice that doesn't seem to be the case; see, for instance, the state of MNG support in Gecko-based browsers. On the other hand, the adoption of APNG in Firefox has been a catalyst for its spread into wider use.
It truly amazes me how lazy developers are when it comes to supporting new things. They whine and bitch and drag their feet and blame MS, rather than just admitting they have to learn something new and doing it.
I'd expect that a lot of developers just don't see the significance, as long as they can get a product out that works in a reasonable number of real cases. That's where their bread comes from, after all.
I just went on and put XP back on it though, I'm very seriously considering putting Ubuntu on it now.
I can heartily recommend it. The last release came into a bit of a weird spot as far as graphics drivers were concerned, but now everything runs a lot smoother again and the accelerated desktop is properly vsynced as well. Compared to XP, there seems to be less disk rattling and throttling of fans, though battery life is about equal.
Just do a bit of googling up front; there were a few minor issues with my Samsung NC10 too, but nothing people hadn't thought to pre-package fixes for.
So that means that about 200 days/year (if you are PERFECT) you are backing up this data. At 15 minutes per day, that adds up to 50 hours/year of time spent... backing up data.
That's okay, it's not like he has to stand there turning a crank while the bits are being moved. Even Windows has the possibility of scheduling scripted events, which most likely is the method applied here.
The sad thing is that I've met plenty of computer geeks who basically say that physics is useless. They then go back to their beloved computers without realizing the tragic irony of what they just said.
Still, you're making that remark using a web browser running on top of a software stack made up of at least a multi-tasking OS kernel, a dynamic linker and an assortment of userspace libraries, written in various high-level programming languages with optimising compilers. It's not as if the transistors came up with all that by themselves.
Physics in itself is important, there's just no need for most people to be physicists.
Right, because so many people have issues where Windows breaks on their hardware.
Only every time something in the driver APIs changes or the hardware vendor in question otherwise can't be bothered to do their part properly. Which, of course, is simply unheard of.
OS X reports disk space better than Windows, Finder reports a 2.5MB file as taking 2,572,834 bytes of disk space.
Which version of Windows are you talking about? There would seem to be a "Size on disk" field in the properties dialog of at least XP and 7, and I'm pretty sure it's been there in several older versions.
Yeah, I mean, wouldn't it be great if we had motherboards with connectors on them that you could use to stick in, say, more memory or like even a massively parallel stream processor for graphics, or an additional NIC or sound ca...
Hey, if it's old-fashioned stuff you find t3h l33t, why not teach the kids Brainfuck? It's essentially the same language as P", devised by the man Böhm himself in 1964, way before all of this pish posh about how to conveniently build non-trivial programs, but also including the modern concepts of input and output. Make no mistake, however - with only eight operations to choose from, it's about as simple as you can get, and many a programmer will attest that it's fun to play with!
Technically true, if your program only processes a large chunk of stuff once and never has to wait for network activity, disk access, user input or some other kind of external event. NOPs aren't what the parent spoke of, however. These days, a program typically uses a blocking call or voluntarily yields execution when there's nothing for it to react to, so in the absence of active processes the OS can tell the processor to halt (possibly slowing down or turning off parts of itself until an interrupt comes by and wakes it up).
QBasic was written to be run as the sole program on an architecture which didn't have the benefit of such features, so it uses a different mechanism, which is a bad fit to modern power saving schemes.
It's possible that the drivers handling power management on one set of peripherals are better at their jobs than other ones, or play more nicely with some managerial component. With exceptionally crufty codebases there's lots of opportunities for unexpected effects; whether that has anything to do with this accusation of "bloat" depends on what is actually meant.
Somehow I doubt most people making it know either, nor have enough acquaintance with Windows's innards to make an expert judgment.
but as for my computer, uh, let me know when i can play simcity 4 on it.
Sadly, I don't own the game so I can't verify, but a current version of WINE might be worth a shot. Judging by the reports you should expect at least some slight graphical glitching.
I bought a Power Computing clone and it was fine at first, right up until it was time to start updating the system.
Funny, that sounds a lot like my experience with genuine Apple computers - don't bother getting one unless you can afford to replace it every two years or so.
Slashdot Mirror
Nor is it really Tetris without tetraminoes or scoring. Not to berate the effort, but it's a lot easier to downsize something when you drop half of the main features.
I am all for experimentation and choice. Gnome wants to remove that choice.
If you preferred GNOME 2, you might want to check out MATE. As far as I know, the GNOME Project has done nothing to hinder their efforts.
GFWL seems to be usually mentioned among the system specs. GTA4's store page was a particularly good detergent, for example.
This, plus proliferation of antialased rendering offsets advancements in CPU power - to the point that navigating source code in QtCreator on my Linux box is not that smooth as I'd like it to be.
That almost certainly has more to do with either display sync issues (which sadly aren't uncommon on a composited X desktop especially with non-free drivers) or the various services of the IDE. Anti-aliased font and line drawing aren't that demanding to begin with, and can be GPU-accelerated with pretty much any hardware you might have picked up within the last five years or so.
Oh - you mean those things we used back when USB sticks weren't big enough?
Agreed. These announcements would be a lot more interesting if the demo material didn't resemble special effects nightmares from the 90's.
DNF was finished thanks to being given to a development team that had actually released a game within the last ten years. So it's completely plausible that they finally got people into Hurd whose goal is to finish real projects as opposed to chasing perfect ideas.
Are we still talking about the people who roll out custom Android firmware?
Quote: "Adopting a new image format in Web browsers is a big decision. Once a format becomes a part of the Web, it will have to be supported in perpetuityâ"adding overhead to the browserâ"even if it largely fizzles and only gains a small niche following."
It's akin to if Web browsers were required to support failed formats like ANIM or HAM or IFF.
In practice that doesn't seem to be the case; see, for instance, the state of MNG support in Gecko-based browsers. On the other hand, the adoption of APNG in Firefox has been a catalyst for its spread into wider use.
Then again, ed is the standard editor.
It truly amazes me how lazy developers are when it comes to supporting new things. They whine and bitch and drag their feet and blame MS, rather than just admitting they have to learn something new and doing it.
I'd expect that a lot of developers just don't see the significance, as long as they can get a product out that works in a reasonable number of real cases. That's where their bread comes from, after all.
It's an awesome flight, but you only get one shot and in the end you still mess things up?
2011 will be the year of DisplayPort on the desktop!
I just went on and put XP back on it though, I'm very seriously considering putting Ubuntu on it now.
I can heartily recommend it. The last release came into a bit of a weird spot as far as graphics drivers were concerned, but now everything runs a lot smoother again and the accelerated desktop is properly vsynced as well. Compared to XP, there seems to be less disk rattling and throttling of fans, though battery life is about equal.
Just do a bit of googling up front; there were a few minor issues with my Samsung NC10 too, but nothing people hadn't thought to pre-package fixes for.
So that means that about 200 days /year (if you are PERFECT) you are backing up this data. At 15 minutes per day, that adds up to 50 hours/year of time spent... backing up data.
That's okay, it's not like he has to stand there turning a crank while the bits are being moved. Even Windows has the possibility of scheduling scripted events, which most likely is the method applied here.
The sad thing is that I've met plenty of computer geeks who basically say that physics is useless. They then go back to their beloved computers without realizing the tragic irony of what they just said.
Still, you're making that remark using a web browser running on top of a software stack made up of at least a multi-tasking OS kernel, a dynamic linker and an assortment of userspace libraries, written in various high-level programming languages with optimising compilers. It's not as if the transistors came up with all that by themselves.
Physics in itself is important, there's just no need for most people to be physicists.
Right, because so many people have issues where Windows breaks on their hardware.
Only every time something in the driver APIs changes or the hardware vendor in question otherwise can't be bothered to do their part properly. Which, of course, is simply unheard of.
OS X reports disk space better than Windows, Finder reports a 2.5MB file as taking 2,572,834 bytes of disk space.
Which version of Windows are you talking about? There would seem to be a "Size on disk" field in the properties dialog of at least XP and 7, and I'm pretty sure it's been there in several older versions.
Yeah, I mean, wouldn't it be great if we had motherboards with connectors on them that you could use to stick in, say, more memory or like even a massively parallel stream processor for graphics, or an additional NIC or sound ca...
Oh, right.
Hey, if it's old-fashioned stuff you find t3h l33t, why not teach the kids Brainfuck? It's essentially the same language as P", devised by the man Böhm himself in 1964, way before all of this pish posh about how to conveniently build non-trivial programs, but also including the modern concepts of input and output. Make no mistake, however - with only eight operations to choose from, it's about as simple as you can get, and many a programmer will attest that it's fun to play with!
Technically true, if your program only processes a large chunk of stuff once and never has to wait for network activity, disk access, user input or some other kind of external event. NOPs aren't what the parent spoke of, however. These days, a program typically uses a blocking call or voluntarily yields execution when there's nothing for it to react to, so in the absence of active processes the OS can tell the processor to halt (possibly slowing down or turning off parts of itself until an interrupt comes by and wakes it up).
QBasic was written to be run as the sole program on an architecture which didn't have the benefit of such features, so it uses a different mechanism, which is a bad fit to modern power saving schemes.
Hope that helps.
It's possible that the drivers handling power management on one set of peripherals are better at their jobs than other ones, or play more nicely with some managerial component. With exceptionally crufty codebases there's lots of opportunities for unexpected effects; whether that has anything to do with this accusation of "bloat" depends on what is actually meant.
Somehow I doubt most people making it know either, nor have enough acquaintance with Windows's innards to make an expert judgment.
I see you've never had to provide tech support for macs.
but as for my computer, uh, let me know when i can play simcity 4 on it.
Sadly, I don't own the game so I can't verify, but a current version of WINE might be worth a shot. Judging by the reports you should expect at least some slight graphical glitching.
Funny, that sounds a lot like my experience with genuine Apple computers - don't bother getting one unless you can afford to replace it every two years or so.