Another issue is that I can't find control panels and wizards that I've somehow wandered into earlier. For example, how do I roll back to a restore point? I know I've done it before, but yesterday I couldn't find a way to get there! I brought up the System control panel, and it only let me configure how much disk space to use for the system restore feature, not configure which restore point to roll back to! Argh!
Open the Start menu, go to 'Help and Support'. Search for 'System restore'. Second item in the search results is 'undo the last restoration'.
They are designed to cater to a group of people who are more creative and right brained.
You got that almost right. A lot of Apple's marketing dollars are aimed at people who think they are creative, or really want to be. It's amazing how many people seem to think that if they buy a Mac, suddenly they'll be all creative and stuff.
Being creative comes from within. Not from the computer you use. After all, 99.99% of the real 'creative types' are using Word and Photoshop, etc. anyway. For most of their day, they might as well be using Windows.
Somebody else summed it up much better than I can here - read the part about the graphics tablet.
(Aside: I have no particular hatred for Macs in general, it's just that my brain explodes out of my ears whenever I hear someone say "Yeah, and of course these guys will need Macs because they're creative...")
I'm not sure of the current details, but it used to be that there were two costs to developing a game for, e.g. Sony:
Cost of devkits - e.g. a PS2 devkit used to cost $30,000 at the start (and you didn't even own it)
Sony get a fee per disc sold. For PS1 it was something like $8 for a new game that was released at the usual RRP (e.g. $40-ish).
It might even be a fee per disc pressed by Sony, rather than per disc sold. For example, Nintendo had a similar deal (at one time; possibly not anymore) where you had to pay for the cartridges up front (all of them), and a minimum run for a territory was 10,000. That meant that for smaller games in some territories it was a bit of a risk as to whether you'd actually break even on the Nintendo cartridge costs.
I think there's a similar arrangement for Microsoft/Xbox (the fee per disc, not the minimum run per territory thing). You can also get revenue streams from Xbox Live but I think most games just use the standard fixed fee services (i.e. Live is just a selling point for the game, not a profit centre).
In summary, the last time I heard (PS2/Xbox/GC), you basically pay a fee to the console manufacturer for each item they make for you. (Because of course only the console manufacturer is allowed to make discs that run on unmodded consoles.) The fee probably depends on if you're someone like Bungie or Naughty Dog, or Dave's BackRoom Game Developer.
Also remember that retail takes a huge cut too - it's not uncommon for half the retail price of a game to go straight to the retailer. I was involved in pricing discussions for a PC game a couple of years ago in the UK, and for a £30 game, I think the publisher ended up getting about £12.50 from each sale. Then the developer gets their development advance paid off by a cut of that (which usually means they never make a profit, so remain at the mercy of publishers).
Any professional developer* worth anything will ask the following questions when investigating a library for use in a product:
Does it do what we want?
Are we allowed to use it, and what are the license conditions?
It's not Rocket Surgery - I do this as a matter of course when evaluating libraries at work.
It is Job #1. Not Job #DoItAfterWeShip.
Sure, the GPL might scare people off using a library, but then...so what? If they don't want to share, then they write the code themselves. Their choice. If they don't want to share, I'm not saying that's 'evil', just that they don't get the benefit of the free software someone else produced on the condition that others share too. I myself have been in both positions, and whether you choose to use GPL software for a particular task is specific to what you are doing. You make a choice and you move on.
Whining about the license stopping you use a library is like whining about the price of a commercial library stopping you using the library. In either case it doesn't do you any good, and to paraphrase Linus, whoever wrote the code gets to decide the license and the cost, and nobody else gets to complain.
But this "we used GPL'd code without doing even the most basic license checks on our libraries, and now we have to release our code! no fair!" stuff is just bullshit. They fucked up. They're idiots. End of story.
As for 'holding developers back', it's a bit like calling out a roadside recovery service when you break down in your car, and getting upset when they tell you they will charge you. "You won't tow me unless I pay you? If I don't agree to your terms, I'll have to do it without you?! You're holding me baaaaaaaack, man!"
It takes a lot less than 12 minutes to break into just about any car.
The reason Windows (and other OSs) fare so badly is the process is automated.
Whenever I've seen security reports on car break-ins, there's usually like 1 or 2 models (not manufacturers) that get a special mention because it takes longer than 90 seconds to get into them or something ridiculous like that. Most cars succumb to the tame car thief in the tests in about 15 seconds or less. Compulsory immobilisers (in the UK, at least) on new cars are helping, but it's still trivial to break into a car to steal property.
If there were armies of millions of car thief robots roaming the streets breaking into random cars at will and driving them into trees, then your analogy might be apt.
So there's a vanishingly small chance that anyone ever gets infected via a website/javascript, or an email attachment?
Or are you restricting 'attacked' to mean direct attack via an open port? If so, then yes, if you don't have any open ports then the chance is quite small of being attacked that way.
For future reference, Startup Control Panel is a handy tool. You can probably also use MSConfig, but I don't know if that catches as many startup methods as the control panel applet.
For preventative measures, you could try Startup Monitor by the same guy. I've not tried it - I'm trying MS Anti-Spyware at the moment, which does a similar thing as part of its protection.
I think one of the biggest first exclusive agreements was tombraider on the ps1.
Au contraire, if I remember correctly.
The first Tomb Raider game was a massive hit partly because it was a virtually simultaneous release on the PS1, PC and Saturn. Basically, if you'd heard about the game, you could buy it for your system. I remember a fair amount of coverage at the time about this being an advantage for Core/Eidos' sales figures.
Exclusives may have happened for the sequels, but to be honest the Saturn was dying when TR2 arrived, wasn't it? As you say, it never affected the PC release of TR sequels, which usually seemed to happen at (roughly) the same time as the PS1 releases.
(It was also a hit because it was a good game, but I digress.)
Re:So Call Me Old And Cranky
on
Effective C#
·
· Score: 1
Hmm...replying to myself...after a few minutes of background brain actitivy, my mind has just piped up and decided that I misinterpreted your post completely, owlstead. So ignore the second half of my post as it makes no sense:-).
Well, it makes sense on some level, but it's not relevant to the topic...for some reason my mind had decided that the thread had got onto Java/C++ differences. Must sleep.
Re:Is it just me, or why not explain it better?
on
Eclipse 3.1 Released
·
· Score: 1
Seriously, give it up. If you ever complain about a slashdot story because you haven't got a clue what it's about, even though it's in your area, there are a million and one people here who will claim it's obvious and you are an idiot for not knowing about it. Even if adding a few words to the summary would make it 10 times more obvious.
I heard about Eclipse a year or two ago from a friend who was telling me about its extensibility, etc. If I hadn't had that conversation I probably wouldn't know about it either.
In short, don't waste the effort. They're like the guys who don't comment their code because they can remember how it all works.
Re:So Call Me Old And Cranky
on
Effective C#
·
· Score: 1
For instance, as a Java developer I was astounded that you still need to explicitely mark a method "virtual" for it to be virtual
Well, if you found that astounding, you probably need to get out more:).
Seriously, it's more of a mundane language decision than something to be astounded about. Coming from C++, when I read that Java methods were all virtual, I thought, "Ok, I see what they're doing there." But by no stretch of the imagination did it astound me.
(this is probably because it makes porting from c++ easier).
I'd say it's more to do with C++'s policy of "You don't pay for something unless you ask for it."
This (virtual being optional) means you can use C++/classes on architectures with small caches (e.g. Sony PS2) that would otherwise always get hammered by vtable loads.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, I wonder why they do that. Probably have like 50 years of statistics to back it up, or some bullshit like that.
Er, it's ok to speed if you're on the wrong side of the road?!
Or am I misunderstanding what you mean by passing?
Open the Start menu, go to 'Help and Support'. Search for 'System restore'. Second item in the search results is 'undo the last restoration'.
It tells you what to do.
You got that almost right. A lot of Apple's marketing dollars are aimed at people who think they are creative, or really want to be. It's amazing how many people seem to think that if they buy a Mac, suddenly they'll be all creative and stuff.
Being creative comes from within. Not from the computer you use. After all, 99.99% of the real 'creative types' are using Word and Photoshop, etc. anyway. For most of their day, they might as well be using Windows.
Somebody else summed it up much better than I can here - read the part about the graphics tablet.
(Aside: I have no particular hatred for Macs in general, it's just that my brain explodes out of my ears whenever I hear someone say "Yeah, and of course these guys will need Macs because they're creative...")
You might have a point if slashdot wasn't also replete with posts from Americans about how great the US is, how Europe sucks, etc.
Stupidity is not limited to any geographical area of the world, unfortunately.
16oz Claw Hammers aren't known as the Electrician's Screwdriver for nothing! :)
Of course, I also think everyone should have to look at this one too, but that's only because it's freaking awesome :-)
It's news to most electricians, certainly - they think hammers are for putting in screws.
Hey, that does seem pretty good. Some scary stuff in the startup...well, mainly just how much stuff has to run when I start Windows. But still.
Thanks.
So that's what happened to Pakistan!
It might even be a fee per disc pressed by Sony, rather than per disc sold. For example, Nintendo had a similar deal (at one time; possibly not anymore) where you had to pay for the cartridges up front (all of them), and a minimum run for a territory was 10,000. That meant that for smaller games in some territories it was a bit of a risk as to whether you'd actually break even on the Nintendo cartridge costs.
I think there's a similar arrangement for Microsoft/Xbox (the fee per disc, not the minimum run per territory thing). You can also get revenue streams from Xbox Live but I think most games just use the standard fixed fee services (i.e. Live is just a selling point for the game, not a profit centre).
In summary, the last time I heard (PS2/Xbox/GC), you basically pay a fee to the console manufacturer for each item they make for you. (Because of course only the console manufacturer is allowed to make discs that run on unmodded consoles.) The fee probably depends on if you're someone like Bungie or Naughty Dog, or Dave's BackRoom Game Developer.
Also remember that retail takes a huge cut too - it's not uncommon for half the retail price of a game to go straight to the retailer. I was involved in pricing discussions for a PC game a couple of years ago in the UK, and for a £30 game, I think the publisher ended up getting about £12.50 from each sale. Then the developer gets their development advance paid off by a cut of that (which usually means they never make a profit, so remain at the mercy of publishers).
I'm getting pretty sick of this argument.
Any professional developer* worth anything will ask the following questions when investigating a library for use in a product:
It's not Rocket Surgery - I do this as a matter of course when evaluating libraries at work.
It is Job #1. Not Job #DoItAfterWeShip.
Sure, the GPL might scare people off using a library, but then...so what? If they don't want to share, then they write the code themselves. Their choice. If they don't want to share, I'm not saying that's 'evil', just that they don't get the benefit of the free software someone else produced on the condition that others share too. I myself have been in both positions, and whether you choose to use GPL software for a particular task is specific to what you are doing. You make a choice and you move on.
Whining about the license stopping you use a library is like whining about the price of a commercial library stopping you using the library. In either case it doesn't do you any good, and to paraphrase Linus, whoever wrote the code gets to decide the license and the cost, and nobody else gets to complain.
But this "we used GPL'd code without doing even the most basic license checks on our libraries, and now we have to release our code! no fair!" stuff is just bullshit. They fucked up. They're idiots. End of story.
As for 'holding developers back', it's a bit like calling out a roadside recovery service when you break down in your car, and getting upset when they tell you they will charge you. "You won't tow me unless I pay you? If I don't agree to your terms, I'll have to do it without you?! You're holding me baaaaaaaack, man!"
* Or any developer worth anything, come to that.
Whew, this slashdot posting business is tough. I might just have to go back to loan-sharking for a while to get some vacation.
It takes a lot less than 12 minutes to break into just about any car.
The reason Windows (and other OSs) fare so badly is the process is automated.
Whenever I've seen security reports on car break-ins, there's usually like 1 or 2 models (not manufacturers) that get a special mention because it takes longer than 90 seconds to get into them or something ridiculous like that. Most cars succumb to the tame car thief in the tests in about 15 seconds or less. Compulsory immobilisers (in the UK, at least) on new cars are helping, but it's still trivial to break into a car to steal property.
If there were armies of millions of car thief robots roaming the streets breaking into random cars at will and driving them into trees, then your analogy might be apt.
So there's a vanishingly small chance that anyone ever gets infected via a website/javascript, or an email attachment?
Or are you restricting 'attacked' to mean direct attack via an open port? If so, then yes, if you don't have any open ports then the chance is quite small of being attacked that way.
That's not the only attack vector though.
For preventative measures, you could try Startup Monitor by the same guy. I've not tried it - I'm trying MS Anti-Spyware at the moment, which does a similar thing as part of its protection.
In 1996 and 2002
To the best of my knowledge, "e.g." means "for example".
Bullshit! That's short for "ergo"!
He's a super dumbass!
Au contraire, if I remember correctly.
The first Tomb Raider game was a massive hit partly because it was a virtually simultaneous release on the PS1, PC and Saturn. Basically, if you'd heard about the game, you could buy it for your system. I remember a fair amount of coverage at the time about this being an advantage for Core/Eidos' sales figures.
Exclusives may have happened for the sequels, but to be honest the Saturn was dying when TR2 arrived, wasn't it? As you say, it never affected the PC release of TR sequels, which usually seemed to happen at (roughly) the same time as the PS1 releases.
(It was also a hit because it was a good game, but I digress.)
So basically, Mode 7 graphics = shit :)
Hmm...replying to myself...after a few minutes of background brain actitivy, my mind has just piped up and decided that I misinterpreted your post completely, owlstead. So ignore the second half of my post as it makes no sense :-).
Well, it makes sense on some level, but it's not relevant to the topic...for some reason my mind had decided that the thread had got onto Java/C++ differences. Must sleep.
Seriously, give it up. If you ever complain about a slashdot story because you haven't got a clue what it's about, even though it's in your area, there are a million and one people here who will claim it's obvious and you are an idiot for not knowing about it. Even if adding a few words to the summary would make it 10 times more obvious.
I heard about Eclipse a year or two ago from a friend who was telling me about its extensibility, etc. If I hadn't had that conversation I probably wouldn't know about it either.
In short, don't waste the effort. They're like the guys who don't comment their code because they can remember how it all works.
Well, if you found that astounding, you probably need to get out more :).
Seriously, it's more of a mundane language decision than something to be astounded about. Coming from C++, when I read that Java methods were all virtual, I thought, "Ok, I see what they're doing there." But by no stretch of the imagination did it astound me.
I'd say it's more to do with C++'s policy of "You don't pay for something unless you ask for it."
This (virtual being optional) means you can use C++/classes on architectures with small caches (e.g. Sony PS2) that would otherwise always get hammered by vtable loads.