The same position they were in with browsers. Netscape also 'worked great with windows.' It didn't help it a bit and netscape was doing pretty well on the old legal front on that battle.
Can they still pull that move when people know what they are doing? Time will tell.
I've used DVI from the start. I suspect that I could use component cables and make it happen, but my worry was that it be a worse image than the DVI port. Am I wrong? I know the difference between the VGA and DVI port on my last monitor was immense. (Mainly color.)
I agree. This would be plenty powerful to run servers for static webpages, ftp to network drives, and screen with naim and torrent downloaders (to network drives) and free up my server for other things. I don't think I've try to run Ruby on Rails on it or anything, but for the majority of my needs, it'd be awesome. Too bad it doesn't have 2 ethernet ports it could make a nice little router as well. (I know it's possible without, but the security isn't as tight.)
I do have an HDTV... I have a 37" HDTV LCD hooked to my computer, as well as my dvd player. And my dvd player can also play divx and xvid via USB. It's quite handy to throw stuff on a thumb drive or usb hard drive and watch it there and free up my computer. (Or not even have it on.)
And I never have to worry about 'registration' or finding out at the last minute the software glitched and I can't watch what I want after all. No thanks.
Nothing irks me more than having to download a whole slew of apps to 'fix' Windows' problems every time I am forced to reinstall it. (every 6 months, minimum.) Metapad (for the line ending problem) and Firefox are obviously at the top of the list.
Well, I could probably think of SOMETHING that irks me more... But that's at the top of the list for the moment.
But I seriously doubt I could bring myself to pay $2 an ep to watch it. And there's no way in hell I'd pay per ep if I'm limited to watching it in low res, in a shitty window, and have no control over what device I get to watch it on.
I'm sorry, but I think you got the wrong idea about my post. The post I was replying to was about 'LifeShare' where you spend 50 years at a time in cold storage for fun. Not for medical necessity. (I have to admit I didn't read your whole text, because mine had nothing to do with therapies.)
"If it happens, you'll be one of billions of penniless people."
I have to disagree with this. Remember, 45 years have gone by in my scenario. If the majority of the people are still dirt poor after 45 years, government has completely collapsed and there's no way someone could keep the cryo tanks running. And after only 5 years, things haven't changed so much that you can't use your business savvy to save yourself.
No, I'm talking about when we perfect alchemy and can transmute from any atom to any other atom at will. Say the day you cryo, they invent this. The guy is really on the ball and gets out of court in 5 years. 5 more years sees him licensing out his idea to other companies and suddenly everything can be created at will, without standard factories. No matter what your company did, it now doesn't do it the same way, 15 years later. After another 35 years (50 total) You company could have completely nose-dived and disappeared, along with all your fortune that 2 generations of your ancestors have frittered away. (No matter how much faith you have in your children, their spouses and children aren't predictable.)
With the way tech goes these days, this situation is quite likely. But there are also many, many other advances that could do the same thing to your funds. (This one hits your stored gold and gems the hardest, though.)
I have to disagree that the risks are 'manageable'... Maybe it's still worth the risk to you, but not to me.
Nobody has definite plans to buy a luxury electronics more than a year out. The market is too unpredictable.
Having said that, at a guess, yeah, I'll probably buy a 1080p TV by then. My current one does 1366x768 native. It says it'll accept 1080 input (I forget which one) but of course it's going to downsample that.
I only paid $1700 for mine about 6 months ago. It's a Polaroid, so I didn't expect much from a cheap LCD, but I've been very very happy with it. I could wish it would accept the signal from the PC at 1366x768, for example... 1280x720 or 1600x1200 and it resamples both. Oh well. Still looks amazing.
My dad has historically bought all my TVs when I upgraded, so he's been asking (for like 4 months) "When are you going to sell me that TV?"
On the other hand, if you've got to make changes to the schema, you really should not be upset about having to make changes to the tests that go with it... It's all part and parcel. I don't foresee a magic version of DBUnit that handles all that for you.
DBUnit doesn't suffice? What's it missing? It's only function is to place the database into a known state before the test, to make sure the data is correct before you test with it. How can that not do what you want?
It also occurs to me that if you can't even decide what data is 'useful and valid to everyone' then your test data is nothing like the live data you will have. Here's my suggestion: If it seems like it'll be even slightly relevant to anyone, use it. Otherwise you aren't testing everything.
The constantly changing schema is puzzling also. Did you not plan your database beforehand? I'm guessing this is an XP shop then, eh? XP doesn't stand for 'no planning'. I can understand changes to the schema in the early stages of programming, but if you're getting close to 'multiple releases' then the schema should be pretty solid by now, and the little changes needed to make to DBUnit shouldn't be a big bother.
It's a good point, but you forget the expenses involved. Only the very rich will be able to afford this. And since they can't manage their money while they are asleep, they could lose it at any time and wake up penniless. And that's just assuming normal market factors.
What about a revolution in 5 years where the country's currency is worth absolutely nothing, but you've paid for 50 years sleep time. You wake up 45 years after the major change with no money, no assets, and no idea what's going on. You're now a homeless person instead of the "LifeShare" traveler that you thought you were.
No, most people couldn't afford to do this, and those that could would be smart enough not to.
1) lift a lid 2) stick a paper in a well-defined corner 3) press a button
for the hassle of:
1) align a camera on a tripod, including angle as well as position 2) align a paper with no guide 3) adjust the lighting so that you get an even tone 4) make sure you didn't accidentally move the camera, the tripod, or bump the desk 5) step on a foot pedal that you jury-rigged to make take a picture OR 5) Push a button on a camera that you can't afford to move even a hair. 6) Use image software to continue adjusting the photo so that the OCR will read it properly 7) Hope you did everything right the first time.
I have to disagree with this. Some people only -have- 1 idea. And it may be great. But that's all they had to give.
Those that have more ideas and the company won't listen... Those people will find or start a new company.
In the mean time, those franchises keep fun games on the market when most 'innovative' games are garbage. We only see the ideas worth spending the mega-$ to make a console game out of them. Without the major series, we'd see fewer big titles and smaller titles would be able to get their feet in the door. That doesn't suddenly make them good games, it just makes them more noticeable.
Also notice that some series (Elder Scrolls, Final Fantasy) evolve and the latest games are nothing like the first ones. If you (for the first time) played ES1 and then ES4, you'd never guess they were related. The same with FF1 and FF10. Nothing alike.
I think there are just as many innovative and fun new titles as ever, but they are harder to see because of the huge games with their massive media presence.
There's been quite a few games just recently that prove innovation is alive and well. Katamari Damacy, Loco Roco, Shadow of the Colossus. These were small-company games that made it big time. (SotC had Ico for a fan-base, but Ico is another example.)
As opposed to writing them just after you code something, and the specs change anyhow? What's it matter if you code the test before or after the actual code, if the specs change -after- you've done both?
One big idea from test-first is to keep you coding things that actually matter, instead of adding stuff 'I'll need later' and then never do. There's also the obvious benefit of having tests to cover everything.
I mostly agree. However, you've forgotten that not all programers ARE like that. Some do actually work well when that close to someone else. I would love to find another programmer of my level (too much higher or lower would cause many problems, I'm sure) and try it. I suspect I'm too hard-headed-control-freak to allow someone else to do things while I just watch, even half the time. But there are people who can and DO do pair-programming and produce code faster, with fewer mistakes.
Unit testing is my new best friend, btw. It has helped me find so many issues and even prevent issues that I can't exist without it now.
They picked up Sam and Max about a year ago, I think. Haven't actually SEEN anything from them, and their Bone games don't impress me at all. (Game-wise, anyhow. They seem to be programmed well.) But if their Sam n Max games have the same humor as their Bone games, count me out. That game was ALL about the humor.
Slashdot Mirror
The same position they were in with browsers. Netscape also 'worked great with windows.' It didn't help it a bit and netscape was doing pretty well on the old legal front on that battle.
Can they still pull that move when people know what they are doing? Time will tell.
I've used DVI from the start. I suspect that I could use component cables and make it happen, but my worry was that it be a worse image than the DVI port. Am I wrong? I know the difference between the VGA and DVI port on my last monitor was immense. (Mainly color.)
I agree. This would be plenty powerful to run servers for static webpages, ftp to network drives, and screen with naim and torrent downloaders (to network drives) and free up my server for other things. I don't think I've try to run Ruby on Rails on it or anything, but for the majority of my needs, it'd be awesome. Too bad it doesn't have 2 ethernet ports it could make a nice little router as well. (I know it's possible without, but the security isn't as tight.)
I know, when I read that I was so pumped! I thought: ""
No, I'm saying I won't pay $2/episode for content that I can't enjoy how I want. gg coward.
I do have an HDTV... I have a 37" HDTV LCD hooked to my computer, as well as my dvd player. And my dvd player can also play divx and xvid via USB. It's quite handy to throw stuff on a thumb drive or usb hard drive and watch it there and free up my computer. (Or not even have it on.)
And I never have to worry about 'registration' or finding out at the last minute the software glitched and I can't watch what I want after all. No thanks.
Nothing irks me more than having to download a whole slew of apps to 'fix' Windows' problems every time I am forced to reinstall it. (every 6 months, minimum.) Metapad (for the line ending problem) and Firefox are obviously at the top of the list.
Well, I could probably think of SOMETHING that irks me more... But that's at the top of the list for the moment.
Eureka is a great show.
But I seriously doubt I could bring myself to pay $2 an ep to watch it. And there's no way in hell I'd pay per ep if I'm limited to watching it in low res, in a shitty window, and have no control over what device I get to watch it on.
Thanks, but sorry. The TV manual specifically says it will only take certain resolutions as input from the PC. I did try that already, though.
Except Facebook, of course. Your secret life will be woefully exposed in blow-by-blow detail, there!
I'm sorry, but I think you got the wrong idea about my post. The post I was replying to was about 'LifeShare' where you spend 50 years at a time in cold storage for fun. Not for medical necessity. (I have to admit I didn't read your whole text, because mine had nothing to do with therapies.)
"If it happens, you'll be one of billions of penniless people."
I have to disagree with this. Remember, 45 years have gone by in my scenario. If the majority of the people are still dirt poor after 45 years, government has completely collapsed and there's no way someone could keep the cryo tanks running. And after only 5 years, things haven't changed so much that you can't use your business savvy to save yourself.
No, I'm talking about when we perfect alchemy and can transmute from any atom to any other atom at will. Say the day you cryo, they invent this. The guy is really on the ball and gets out of court in 5 years. 5 more years sees him licensing out his idea to other companies and suddenly everything can be created at will, without standard factories. No matter what your company did, it now doesn't do it the same way, 15 years later. After another 35 years (50 total) You company could have completely nose-dived and disappeared, along with all your fortune that 2 generations of your ancestors have frittered away. (No matter how much faith you have in your children, their spouses and children aren't predictable.)
With the way tech goes these days, this situation is quite likely. But there are also many, many other advances that could do the same thing to your funds. (This one hits your stored gold and gems the hardest, though.)
I have to disagree that the risks are 'manageable'... Maybe it's still worth the risk to you, but not to me.
Nobody has definite plans to buy a luxury electronics more than a year out. The market is too unpredictable.
Having said that, at a guess, yeah, I'll probably buy a 1080p TV by then. My current one does 1366x768 native. It says it'll accept 1080 input (I forget which one) but of course it's going to downsample that.
I only paid $1700 for mine about 6 months ago. It's a Polaroid, so I didn't expect much from a cheap LCD, but I've been very very happy with it. I could wish it would accept the signal from the PC at 1366x768, for example... 1280x720 or 1600x1200 and it resamples both. Oh well. Still looks amazing.
My dad has historically bought all my TVs when I upgraded, so he's been asking (for like 4 months) "When are you going to sell me that TV?"
On the other hand, if you've got to make changes to the schema, you really should not be upset about having to make changes to the tests that go with it... It's all part and parcel. I don't foresee a magic version of DBUnit that handles all that for you.
DBUnit doesn't suffice? What's it missing? It's only function is to place the database into a known state before the test, to make sure the data is correct before you test with it. How can that not do what you want?
It also occurs to me that if you can't even decide what data is 'useful and valid to everyone' then your test data is nothing like the live data you will have. Here's my suggestion: If it seems like it'll be even slightly relevant to anyone, use it. Otherwise you aren't testing everything.
The constantly changing schema is puzzling also. Did you not plan your database beforehand? I'm guessing this is an XP shop then, eh? XP doesn't stand for 'no planning'. I can understand changes to the schema in the early stages of programming, but if you're getting close to 'multiple releases' then the schema should be pretty solid by now, and the little changes needed to make to DBUnit shouldn't be a big bother.
It's a good point, but you forget the expenses involved. Only the very rich will be able to afford this. And since they can't manage their money while they are asleep, they could lose it at any time and wake up penniless. And that's just assuming normal market factors.
What about a revolution in 5 years where the country's currency is worth absolutely nothing, but you've paid for 50 years sleep time. You wake up 45 years after the major change with no money, no assets, and no idea what's going on. You're now a homeless person instead of the "LifeShare" traveler that you thought you were.
No, most people couldn't afford to do this, and those that could would be smart enough not to.
So to clarify... You want to trade the hassle of:
1) lift a lid
2) stick a paper in a well-defined corner
3) press a button
for the hassle of:
1) align a camera on a tripod, including angle as well as position
2) align a paper with no guide
3) adjust the lighting so that you get an even tone
4) make sure you didn't accidentally move the camera, the tripod, or bump the desk
5) step on a foot pedal that you jury-rigged to make take a picture
OR
5) Push a button on a camera that you can't afford to move even a hair.
6) Use image software to continue adjusting the photo so that the OCR will read it properly
7) Hope you did everything right the first time.
I think I'd pick door number 1.
Never underestimate the power of throwing huge amounts of money at a corporation.
That was rather long-winded, wasn't it?
I kid, I kid!
"I think franchises stifle creativity"
I have to disagree with this. Some people only -have- 1 idea. And it may be great. But that's all they had to give.
Those that have more ideas and the company won't listen... Those people will find or start a new company.
In the mean time, those franchises keep fun games on the market when most 'innovative' games are garbage. We only see the ideas worth spending the mega-$ to make a console game out of them. Without the major series, we'd see fewer big titles and smaller titles would be able to get their feet in the door. That doesn't suddenly make them good games, it just makes them more noticeable.
Also notice that some series (Elder Scrolls, Final Fantasy) evolve and the latest games are nothing like the first ones. If you (for the first time) played ES1 and then ES4, you'd never guess they were related. The same with FF1 and FF10. Nothing alike.
I think there are just as many innovative and fun new titles as ever, but they are harder to see because of the huge games with their massive media presence.
There's been quite a few games just recently that prove innovation is alive and well. Katamari Damacy, Loco Roco, Shadow of the Colossus. These were small-company games that made it big time. (SotC had Ico for a fan-base, but Ico is another example.)
As opposed to writing them just after you code something, and the specs change anyhow? What's it matter if you code the test before or after the actual code, if the specs change -after- you've done both?
One big idea from test-first is to keep you coding things that actually matter, instead of adding stuff 'I'll need later' and then never do. There's also the obvious benefit of having tests to cover everything.
That's an advantage? I'm doing something wrong then...
I mostly agree. However, you've forgotten that not all programers ARE like that. Some do actually work well when that close to someone else. I would love to find another programmer of my level (too much higher or lower would cause many problems, I'm sure) and try it. I suspect I'm too hard-headed-control-freak to allow someone else to do things while I just watch, even half the time. But there are people who can and DO do pair-programming and produce code faster, with fewer mistakes.
Unit testing is my new best friend, btw. It has helped me find so many issues and even prevent issues that I can't exist without it now.
Yes, but only those who have licensed the Sam and Max copyrights can write an official Sam and Max game. That's the difference.
They picked up Sam and Max about a year ago, I think. Haven't actually SEEN anything from them, and their Bone games don't impress me at all. (Game-wise, anyhow. They seem to be programmed well.) But if their Sam n Max games have the same humor as their Bone games, count me out. That game was ALL about the humor.