Take up rock climbing, it's an individual activity, that usually spawns into a social activity, and ends up being something you couldn't imagine doing alone.
Considering I spend my days writing software in OpenGL, and I have experience with DirectX as well, I would say that Microsoft wrote a mediocre API, but they gave it heavy backing and incentivized the adoption of it into the community. To my knowledge, in the beginning and even still, they sometimes offer complimentary training and development support in DirectX, while equivalent things in OpenGL don't exist on nearly the same level. Also, because of the install base, it is easy to tailor windows-based games to use windows-based DirectX because many of the parts overlap and interoperate well (easy to do when you own both).
Personally, I'm sticking to my more powerful, portable, and clearer OpenGL 2.0 than taking on things that force me into a proprietary mindset. Also note that until 2003 (originating around 1992 I believe), Microsoft was a member of the ARB, the group that maintains OpenGL. Note also that in 2003 DirectX 9 was out, and they had already gutted whatever experience they needed from development of a graphics API from OpenGL/ARB. If you think Microsoft made a good API, its because they took the methodologies of DirectX and adopted them to a Microsoft (horrible) approach that happens to work easily on systems that Microsoft (OMG!) wrote.
My 3 cents.
The same analogy about downgrading from Vista to XP holds for downgrading from XP to 2000. No loss of functionality (virtually identical kernels) and a major speed increase!
There such a thing as a limit to how fast we can move information between the memory and the processor. We can only show information we know we want to show, using calculations (in the processor) on things in memory. If we have 200 MB PER PAGE, a lot of that has to be gone through for rendering/error checking/scripting/etc which means lots of swapping of things in and out of caches, hence lower performance across the board. Last I checked, doing calculations on 200 MB of memory as fast as possible takes time that doing it with 25 MB usage doesn't take.
It's going to be self referential! By the time the 50k articles get picked out, there will be an article on the book and hopefully the book will contain the article on itself! Sweet!
It can run anything. If you read the paper, it explains that once you desynchronize the interpreter from the validator, you are running x86 instructions. One might have to tailor the exploit to work differently on Linux/Unix than on Windows due to the different executable addressing schemes, but once that is determined you are in business.
Ever heard of OpenGL? It works on everything. And it doesn't have arbitrary lockin per OS (like DirectX 10 does). Don't you remember the team that got DX10 to work on XP?
Slashdot Mirror
The one thing you are forgetting is that corporations can hold copyrights. As such, since they never die, the copyrights don't expire.
Take up rock climbing, it's an individual activity, that usually spawns into a social activity, and ends up being something you couldn't imagine doing alone.
Considering I spend my days writing software in OpenGL, and I have experience with DirectX as well, I would say that Microsoft wrote a mediocre API, but they gave it heavy backing and incentivized the adoption of it into the community. To my knowledge, in the beginning and even still, they sometimes offer complimentary training and development support in DirectX, while equivalent things in OpenGL don't exist on nearly the same level. Also, because of the install base, it is easy to tailor windows-based games to use windows-based DirectX because many of the parts overlap and interoperate well (easy to do when you own both). Personally, I'm sticking to my more powerful, portable, and clearer OpenGL 2.0 than taking on things that force me into a proprietary mindset. Also note that until 2003 (originating around 1992 I believe), Microsoft was a member of the ARB, the group that maintains OpenGL. Note also that in 2003 DirectX 9 was out, and they had already gutted whatever experience they needed from development of a graphics API from OpenGL/ARB. If you think Microsoft made a good API, its because they took the methodologies of DirectX and adopted them to a Microsoft (horrible) approach that happens to work easily on systems that Microsoft (OMG!) wrote. My 3 cents.
A LOC is a Library of Congress.... That's how he got to that figure...
The same analogy about downgrading from Vista to XP holds for downgrading from XP to 2000. No loss of functionality (virtually identical kernels) and a major speed increase!
I've never experienced this problem personally... On Windows 2003 Server R2 or Windows XP
Technically any car can do 0 mpg.... just let it idle in neutral until the gas runs out.
The highest I've personally seen, and read about, in Texas (I read the transportation code) was 75 mph. Wouldn't that make 80 mph 5 above the limit?
There such a thing as a limit to how fast we can move information between the memory and the processor. We can only show information we know we want to show, using calculations (in the processor) on things in memory. If we have 200 MB PER PAGE, a lot of that has to be gone through for rendering/error checking/scripting/etc which means lots of swapping of things in and out of caches, hence lower performance across the board. Last I checked, doing calculations on 200 MB of memory as fast as possible takes time that doing it with 25 MB usage doesn't take.
This might sounds like blasphemy on slashdot... but there are some things that are TOO rich.
Actually, that was probably me. Sorry about that. And no, I'm not joking.
The thing you don't realize though, is that just because it's not "authorized" doesn't mean it is illegal.
No, Judges == Lawyers with more power.
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/09/snooping_on_tex.html/
It's going to be self referential! By the time the 50k articles get picked out, there will be an article on the book and hopefully the book will contain the article on itself! Sweet!
It can run anything. If you read the paper, it explains that once you desynchronize the interpreter from the validator, you are running x86 instructions. One might have to tailor the exploit to work differently on Linux/Unix than on Windows due to the different executable addressing schemes, but once that is determined you are in business.
But supposedly google "does no evil"...
To plaigerize and summarize great men before me: those tho would sacrifice privacy for safety deserve neither.
Based on the engineers I know, it's more like "Give an Engineer a working Computer, and he'll give you a broken radio."
second
Learn what the question mark is please, and use it.
If I had any mod points, I would totally give you all of them.
But people don't run on logic.
Ever heard of OpenGL? It works on everything. And it doesn't have arbitrary lockin per OS (like DirectX 10 does). Don't you remember the team that got DX10 to work on XP?
You forgot to mention the GE minigun.
http://www.kitsune.addr.com/Firearms/Machine-Guns/GE_XM214_Minigun.htm/