...the games industry could do little more than ask nicely that you not pirate their wares????
i assume you were not playing games in the 80's?
because using copy protection is as old as computer games. in the 80's the manufacturers used little tricks like writing bad sectors on a floppy disk which were not able to be copied without special hardware.
but in these days there where people (i was one of them) called crackers. i never understood why nowadays they are not called crackers anymore, but they still are here. please kids, tell me: how are they called today? theguysthatremovecopyprotectionandcannotcalledcrac kerbecausewenewkidscallhackerscrackers?
even if they can't do anything against starforce version dunno now, just give them a few month and you're free again to copy your games.
and exactly this is why i don't get the game developers... why spending several thousands of dollars for a software, this is already useless, or at least useless soon?
under what license was the virus published? as a company they have to respect copyright. what would f-secure say if someone would have done this to the viruses they have developed... er, sorry, i ment anti virus software... ofcourse...
But this is hardware. Putting these registers down on the die aren't really that big of a deal, and if you don't use them they don't cause system crashes, or other odd things.
well, there's not only registers, there's that 16 interrupts, nowadays doubled to 32 interrupts... yes, it looks like plug and play, but underneath it's still using the interrupts, which is broken by desing. it's the little endianess, which only gives advantage, if you have limited ram and have to limit opcodes to as less space as possible. it's the no way extendability of the whole pc. it's the whole design (cisc).
Why do you consider this such a big deal? Or are you like me a Mac user who was disappointed and unlike me not optimistic at all?
well, this pretty much is the point. but it's not because of the switch to intel, it's because of the switch from high quality hardware to low quality hardware, which was taking place somewhere around the switch from g3 to g4. nowadays i use a sun ultrasparc at work. at home i still use a intel/linux box, but just a few days, until my (brand new, in form of never used by anybody) amiga 1200 arrives, which will be my new main system... it will be slower, but it will be a big step forward
i was talking about the processor... we have macs running in our company, that are about 7 years old. they are 604's upgraded to a g4, used for photoshoping and stuff. on intel, you get a motherboard for one single processor type in a range of, lets say, 3-4 ghz. so if you wan't to plug a new processor in your intel in 5 years, you have lost. you need a new motherboard, new ram, new other stuff that has changed, it usually is cheaper and less work (!) to buy a new pc. on (old) mac, you just invest a few 100 dollars, get one (!) card, plug it in, and get a almost uptodate system.
and in case you didn't notice... scsi has also progressed, actual scsi is still better than sata, especially if it comes to high availability stuff like raid
because you were telling your customers for years, that the powerpc plattform is the superior platform?
because the intel platform ist still dragging crap with it, that is 20 years old?
because the intel platform is little endian, which needs extra operations on some cross platform things, like networking, which lowers performace?
ok, to agree with you: it was a logical step:
604 macs: scsi, quality hardware, pluggable/upgradable processor slot, pretty expensive, in upgraded form still in use in our company
g3 macs: scsi, quality hardware, video hardware, pluggable/upgradable processor slot, a bit more expensive than a pc, in upgraded form still in use in our company
g4 macs: ide, cheap fans and power unit, as cheap as a pc, no upgrade processor slot, but processor card manufacturers found a way to upgrade it anyway, most of them in our company broke down and are either repaired at least once, or on garbage dump
so the logical step is:
intel macs: cheap and weak hardware, not upgradable in any form, throw it away after 2 years... if they still work then
i also have a theory why apple switched to intel... it is because ibm made them.
apple was whining because there was no g5 which they could build into ther so well selling powerbooks. this was a not accaptable situation for apple, because the powerbooks are a important part for apple.
ibm said, no there won't be a solution in the near future.
well, than apple switched... because of the better power per watts (sic) situation on intel
and than there was nintendo... telling about two weeks after the apple announcement, that theire new revolution console will have a dual g5, passivly cooled
so it is obvious... apple was using the SLOWEST and WORST and CHEAPEST processor of the powerpc family. the powerpc, usually a LOT better than the intel, was in a somewhat bad light, as the slowest version was not really a lot faster than intels, which puts the powerpc at all in a not so good light, because most people haven't ever seen any other powerpc system than the apple.
ibm had to find a way to end this, if they didn't want to lose theire face. that few processors apple bought, were in no relation to the publicity loss ibm was getting out of this relationship
i personally - as a former mac user - am really happy about this, because it shows that i was right switching to other systems years ago, this incident show what i was always knowing: apple is no single bit better than microsoft. they give a shit about there users - which where ALL proud about not using that lame (an ancient) intel hardware.
Slashdot Mirror
...the games industry could do little more than ask nicely that you not pirate their wares????
c kerbecausewenewkidscallhackerscrackers?
i assume you were not playing games in the 80's?
because using copy protection is as old as computer games. in the 80's the manufacturers used little tricks like writing bad sectors on a floppy disk which were not able to be copied without special hardware.
but in these days there where people (i was one of them) called crackers. i never understood why nowadays they are not called crackers anymore, but they still are here. please kids, tell me: how are they called today? theguysthatremovecopyprotectionandcannotcalledcra
even if they can't do anything against starforce version dunno now, just give them a few month and you're free again to copy your games.
and exactly this is why i don't get the game developers... why spending several thousands of dollars for a software, this is already useless, or at least useless soon?
under what license was the virus published? as a company they have to respect copyright. what would f-secure say if someone would have done this to the viruses they have developed... er, sorry, i ment anti virus software... ofcourse...
in fact not only on linux, i use it on linux/(i386|ppc) and solaris/sparc:
the ion windowmanager ( http://modeemi.cs.tut.fi/~tuomov/ion/ ) and your favourite shell (bash in my case, but zsh or csh are as good )
most time on a desktop you spend with resizing or moving or focusing windows, so why using windows anyway?
does he mean because of important features and tools missing or what?
But this is hardware. Putting these registers down on the die aren't really that big of a deal, and if you don't use them they don't cause system crashes, or other odd things.
well, there's not only registers, there's that 16 interrupts, nowadays doubled to 32 interrupts... yes, it looks like plug and play, but underneath it's still using the interrupts, which is broken by desing. it's the little endianess, which only gives advantage, if you have limited ram and have to limit opcodes to as less space as possible. it's the no way extendability of the whole pc. it's the whole design (cisc).
Why do you consider this such a big deal? Or are you like me a Mac user who was disappointed and unlike me not optimistic at all?
well, this pretty much is the point. but it's not because of the switch to intel, it's because of the switch from high quality hardware to low quality hardware, which was taking place somewhere around the switch from g3 to g4. nowadays i use a sun ultrasparc at work. at home i still use a intel/linux box, but just a few days, until my (brand new, in form of never used by anybody) amiga 1200 arrives, which will be my new main system... it will be slower, but it will be a big step forward
i was talking about the processor... we have macs running in our company, that are about 7 years old. they are 604's upgraded to a g4, used for photoshoping and stuff. on intel, you get a motherboard for one single processor type in a range of, lets say, 3-4 ghz. so if you wan't to plug a new processor in your intel in 5 years, you have lost. you need a new motherboard, new ram, new other stuff that has changed, it usually is cheaper and less work (!) to buy a new pc. on (old) mac, you just invest a few 100 dollars, get one (!) card, plug it in, and get a almost uptodate system.
and in case you didn't notice... scsi has also progressed, actual scsi is still better than sata, especially if it comes to high availability stuff like raid
because you were telling your customers for years, that the powerpc plattform is the superior platform?
because the intel platform ist still dragging crap with it, that is 20 years old?
because the intel platform is little endian, which needs extra operations on some cross platform things, like networking, which lowers performace?
ok, to agree with you: it was a logical step:
so the logical step is:
i also have a theory why apple switched to intel... it is because ibm made them.
apple was whining because there was no g5 which they could build into ther so well selling powerbooks. this was a not accaptable situation for apple, because the powerbooks are a important part for apple.
ibm said, no there won't be a solution in the near future.
well, than apple switched... because of the better power per watts (sic) situation on intel
and than there was nintendo... telling about two weeks after the apple announcement, that theire new revolution console will have a dual g5, passivly cooled
so it is obvious... apple was using the SLOWEST and WORST and CHEAPEST processor of the powerpc family. the powerpc, usually a LOT better than the intel, was in a somewhat bad light, as the slowest version was not really a lot faster than intels, which puts the powerpc at all in a not so good light, because most people haven't ever seen any other powerpc system than the apple.
ibm had to find a way to end this, if they didn't want to lose theire face. that few processors apple bought, were in no relation to the publicity loss ibm was getting out of this relationship
i personally - as a former mac user - am really happy about this, because it shows that i was right switching to other systems years ago, this incident show what i was always knowing: apple is no single bit better than microsoft. they give a shit about there users - which where ALL proud about not using that lame (an ancient) intel hardware.