well, if a company really wanted to write something cross-platform, they wouldn't use something like DX, which is mostly locked to a single platform, even if it gets reimplemented on other platforms.
Id isn't just generous, their games are also well made. Compare q3a to UT. Q3a works both in WINE and natively, and still works today, except for alsa issues, and alsa didn't exist when q3a came out. I haven't tried their products in WINE, so I can't say that they work in it first hand, but it's reported in TFA, and in other places as well. UT doesn't work on either platform, Windows or Linux, on today's hardware. The fact that Id's windows clients tend to work well in WINE is probably not a coincidence. It is more likely a result of them trying to write portable code so that the game would run on both platforms. Then they GPL the quake III engine after 6 years or so and now we have q3a running on windows PDAs and such. Plus it's still being used in the CPL as of this year.
Note that I don't mean to bash UT, though, I like UT2004, it's just that q3a is a shining example of what game engines should aspire to be like, in my opinion. It starts up quickly, is cross-platform, performs well, looks good, and the game itself is very fun to play.
I agree, sane defaults are good, and firefox lack them on occasion, but it's still better than IE. And if you're running WinXP on 192MB of memory, it doesn't matter what firefox does, your OS is going to enjoy chugging every now and then. I've used it on 256MB of memory and I ran into problems at times, and I've seen it crawl on a computer with 128MB of memory, so logically, 192MB has to be somewhat worse than 256MB.
Also, not every power user goes and gets 2 gigs of RAM. Nowadays, I think there are even some people who think that because they obtained 2GB of RAM, they are now a power user. I, however, have been on a rather hefty laptop with 512MB of RAM for the past two years. And I'll be using it for another year at least, though probably with some kind of memory upgrade.
Simply because it's permanently browser dependent and proprietary, and thus has no place on any website whose purpose isn't related to pushing updates into windows installations.
http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=1720 41
I agree, 1.5's memory caching uses up a lot of memory, but if you're literate enough to notice that, you should be able to use a search engine and figure out how to tweak it, assuming it disagrees with you at all. I have left it as is up till now, and while I agree that firefox has some defaults that I don't like, it's still better than using IE. I don't understand how someone can rationalize using IE 6 at all.
Just this time, however, I've saved you the trouble:
freedb is a free CD and music data base service to look up textual metadata about music, audio or data CDs. This is done by a client which queries the freedb database. As a result, the client displays the artist, CD title, track list and some additional information. Clients are for example CD player, CD ripper and CD burn software. Freedb does not offer such clients.
Why would you use RAR? Does its performance justify paying for (or illegally using) it to archive these files?
Just a thought from your friendly neighborhood freedom lover:)
Agreed, this is completely untrue, the Globe and Mail likes to act like things are newsworthy, when they are not.
See what Michael Geist has to say about this.
Well, think about it from my point of view at the time, I was (ironically) a student, and Java was my second programming language after VB (stop laughing at me!). I was just trying to debug my program, not learn language semantics..
there are some things that are hard to debug with print statements, such as hey, which chunk of memory is this Java array pointing to? AFAIK, that's an impossible thing to figure out. There was a time when I didn't know that multi-D array copying was shallow, and it took an IDE to figure it out.
He knows that... the grandparent should be modded funny, he's mocking the submitter for using slashdot as a substitute for rudimentary research. That or he's serious - either way though, his request isn't tied to the original post.
It's a huge stretch to call that a review - I would rate such a clump of words a preview at best. It irritates me just to read it and contemplate the limits of the author's writing ability. I mean, he basically pastes a bunch of screenshots down, states the obvious, picks on trivial things, and makes sure to avoid anything that actually matters, like how it compares to other distributions that bundle GNOME 2.14, or whether it fixes common pitfalls in other distros. It's sad to note that this guy probably doesn't realize what he's doing wrong:(
LynuxWorks? Yes, I'm sure that's a complete, good faith coincidence... How am I supposed to pronounce that without saying Linux? I don't like the use of confusion here.
I disagree about device driver compatibility with Linux.. Though you're guaranteed to get support on Windows, it can be crappy support, and it usually involves a driver installation. With Linux, the driver's either in the kernel, where it will likely be quite stable, or not in the kernel. With some devices, the user will have to compile a module, but a lot of drivers on Linux "just work" better than they would on Windows. I'm not saying Linux has the upper hand, but I do think the driver development model there is better, it just lacks a lot of first party support.
just one reason why I stick to Linux:) I guess it could be argued that the parent poster was thinking about the performance differences and what not if Windows (and not Linux) moved the swap to the platter, but that's irrelevant anyway, because we have no say in what MS does with the technology, and the article's about Linux. Thing is, Linux will probably have to be developed on the technology only after it is released. Unless Samsung is collaborating with someone, I assume they wouldn't have access to it at all.
This would only have an effect if your swap gets used. During regular usage patterns ( so most of the time), my swap doesn't get used, with 512M of RAM.
You talk like these people are freeloading from the "noble" individuals that choose to make real products, but this is completely misguided. It takes a very basic knowledge of economics to realize that if too few "real" products were produced, then the price of those products would end up increasing, and people would have less money available to them to fund intangible things. This would make it more lucrative to switch back to producing the real products that are in demand, and things would balance out. It would be impossible for this market, and plenty of other markets that you might be bothered by, to prosper during a serious recession.
Slashdot Mirror
well, if a company really wanted to write something cross-platform, they wouldn't use something like DX, which is mostly locked to a single platform, even if it gets reimplemented on other platforms.
Id isn't just generous, their games are also well made. Compare q3a to UT. Q3a works both in WINE and natively, and still works today, except for alsa issues, and alsa didn't exist when q3a came out. I haven't tried their products in WINE, so I can't say that they work in it first hand, but it's reported in TFA, and in other places as well. UT doesn't work on either platform, Windows or Linux, on today's hardware. The fact that Id's windows clients tend to work well in WINE is probably not a coincidence. It is more likely a result of them trying to write portable code so that the game would run on both platforms. Then they GPL the quake III engine after 6 years or so and now we have q3a running on windows PDAs and such. Plus it's still being used in the CPL as of this year.
Note that I don't mean to bash UT, though, I like UT2004, it's just that q3a is a shining example of what game engines should aspire to be like, in my opinion. It starts up quickly, is cross-platform, performs well, looks good, and the game itself is very fun to play.
he just meant to use one of those to take an image, not to virtualise her OS all the time.
I agree, sane defaults are good, and firefox lack them on occasion, but it's still better than IE. And if you're running WinXP on 192MB of memory, it doesn't matter what firefox does, your OS is going to enjoy chugging every now and then. I've used it on 256MB of memory and I ran into problems at times, and I've seen it crawl on a computer with 128MB of memory, so logically, 192MB has to be somewhat worse than 256MB. Also, not every power user goes and gets 2 gigs of RAM. Nowadays, I think there are even some people who think that because they obtained 2GB of RAM, they are now a power user. I, however, have been on a rather hefty laptop with 512MB of RAM for the past two years. And I'll be using it for another year at least, though probably with some kind of memory upgrade.
rofl
Simply because it's permanently browser dependent and proprietary, and thus has no place on any website whose purpose isn't related to pushing updates into windows installations.
touché.. my response? I don't see why anyone would want to use ActiveX controls either, except for windowsupdate.com, or because work forces them to.
http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=1720 41
I agree, 1.5's memory caching uses up a lot of memory, but if you're literate enough to notice that, you should be able to use a search engine and figure out how to tweak it, assuming it disagrees with you at all. I have left it as is up till now, and while I agree that firefox has some defaults that I don't like, it's still better than using IE. I don't understand how someone can rationalize using IE 6 at all.
http://justfuckinggoogleit.com/....
Just this time, however, I've saved you the trouble:
YES! South Park reference!
s/shift+i,tab,escape/shift+>/g
Why would you use RAR? Does its performance justify paying for (or illegally using) it to archive these files? Just a thought from your friendly neighborhood freedom lover :)
Agreed, this is completely untrue, the Globe and Mail likes to act like things are newsworthy, when they are not. See what Michael Geist has to say about this.
Well, think about it from my point of view at the time, I was (ironically) a student, and Java was my second programming language after VB (stop laughing at me!). I was just trying to debug my program, not learn language semantics..
there are some things that are hard to debug with print statements, such as hey, which chunk of memory is this Java array pointing to? AFAIK, that's an impossible thing to figure out. There was a time when I didn't know that multi-D array copying was shallow, and it took an IDE to figure it out.
He knows that... the grandparent should be modded funny, he's mocking the submitter for using slashdot as a substitute for rudimentary research. That or he's serious - either way though, his request isn't tied to the original post.
The above is pasted from Penny Arcade.
It's a huge stretch to call that a review - I would rate such a clump of words a preview at best. It irritates me just to read it and contemplate the limits of the author's writing ability. I mean, he basically pastes a bunch of screenshots down, states the obvious, picks on trivial things, and makes sure to avoid anything that actually matters, like how it compares to other distributions that bundle GNOME 2.14, or whether it fixes common pitfalls in other distros. It's sad to note that this guy probably doesn't realize what he's doing wrong :(
LynuxWorks? Yes, I'm sure that's a complete, good faith coincidence... How am I supposed to pronounce that without saying Linux? I don't like the use of confusion here.
I disagree about device driver compatibility with Linux.. Though you're guaranteed to get support on Windows, it can be crappy support, and it usually involves a driver installation. With Linux, the driver's either in the kernel, where it will likely be quite stable, or not in the kernel. With some devices, the user will have to compile a module, but a lot of drivers on Linux "just work" better than they would on Windows. I'm not saying Linux has the upper hand, but I do think the driver development model there is better, it just lacks a lot of first party support.
Wow, it's like playing Desert Bus, only longer.
just one reason why I stick to Linux :) I guess it could be argued that the parent poster was thinking about the performance differences and what not if Windows (and not Linux) moved the swap to the platter, but that's irrelevant anyway, because we have no say in what MS does with the technology, and the article's about Linux. Thing is, Linux will probably have to be developed on the technology only after it is released. Unless Samsung is collaborating with someone, I assume they wouldn't have access to it at all.
This would only have an effect if your swap gets used. During regular usage patterns ( so most of the time), my swap doesn't get used, with 512M of RAM.
You talk like these people are freeloading from the "noble" individuals that choose to make real products, but this is completely misguided. It takes a very basic knowledge of economics to realize that if too few "real" products were produced, then the price of those products would end up increasing, and people would have less money available to them to fund intangible things. This would make it more lucrative to switch back to producing the real products that are in demand, and things would balance out. It would be impossible for this market, and plenty of other markets that you might be bothered by, to prosper during a serious recession.
I Have Been Trolled (tm)