They can't run the game from CD, the performance is lousy.
Really? That's why all xbox 360 games, original xbox games, Wii games, PS2 games, PS1 games, Sega Saturn and MegaCD games require installing to a hard-disk.
Wait, they don't?
The last game I worked on, "Wheelman", actually streams better from the 360 DVD than from some peoples' PCs' hard-disks. We had reviews all the way from "awesome" to "bad". Out of the few bad reviews, most were GTA fanboys not getting that Wheelman != GTA, but some were playing the PC version on PCs that weren't up to the task, and blaming us for the resulting problems.
Unlike the DRM on some modern games, which only allows you to install the game three times, and relies on the game publisher's servers to allow even that?
I'll make it simple: Submarine, in water of 1001 atm pressure. Pressure in sub is 1atm (for people). This makes a difference between the inside and outside of 1000 atm. The sub can't withstand any more. Sub has a box in. The box is welded to a table in the sub. The table is welded to the floor. Box has 0atm pressure (vacuum) inside. The box can only withstand about 2 atm pressure difference between its inside and outside at max. But this is ok, the box is in the sub, and the sub has 1 atm pressure in. The box's walls only have 1atm of pressure difference between inside and outside, even though they are 1000 atm pressure deep in the ocean. The difference between inside the box and outside the sub is 1001 atm, even though neither the sub or the box can withstand 1001 atm difference on its own.
The box is no different to having a second, inner hull.
Two people are holding a metal sheet, one each side, and doing so they can hold 200kg placed on top off of the ground. The 200kg weight represents pressure, the sheet represents the submarine's hull, and the people represent the hull's ability to withstand pressure. There is a melon on the floor below, representing a melon in the sub. Hull failing from too much pressure == people dropping everything from too much weight. Either way the melon gets squished.
Now, adding another hull outside the first would be represented by adding another sheet above the first, with another two people holding it, and moving the weight to the upper sheet. Note, the new people are also standing on the ground, not on the original sheet. As it is, any weight on the upper sheet wouldn't affect the lower sheet, until you added too much and they dropped it on to the one below, which would cause the bottom guys to drop theirs too (failure cascade). Now we are simulating an inner hull and an outer hull, with the pressure on both sides of the inner hull being equal.
We can't represent pressurising the space between the inner and outer hull with weight, because pressure would also exert a force outwards on the outer hull. So we'll use compressed springs.
Removing the weights, putting compressed springs between the two sheets and getting the people to hold the sheets in the same position as before (against the compressed springs) would represent a sub with twin hulls and the space between them compressed, sitting on the surface (so inside the inner hull and outside the outer hull is both 1atm).
If they drop the bottom one it means the inner hull has imploded, if the upper one is let go it will mean the outer hull has exploded (the sheet will go up!). If the springs exert more force than the original 200kgs of weight, this is what would happen.
If you added weight to the upper sheet at this point, the people trying to hold the upper sheet down against the springs would actually have less work to do as you added weight, until it cancelled out the upward force from the springs below, and the people weren't having to do anything. This would represent a sub with twin hulls at a depth where the outer hull had the same pressure on the inside and outside, and the inner hull had 1atm on the inside. All is fine so far.
The people below wouldn't feel anything any different during this, the springs they're trying to hold the bottom sheet up against would go from being compressed by the people holding the upper sheet to being compressed by weight, but it would be the same amount of force the whole time.
You can now add even more weight, and the people holding the upper sheet would end up supporting more and more of it, until the upper sheet has 400kg on, and both the people holding the upper sheet and the people holding the lower sheet feel the force of 200kg.
The people below apply 200kg of upward force to the lower sheet, which the springs transfer to the upper sheet. The people holding the upper sheet apply 200kg of additional force, cancelling out the force from 400kg of weight, and holding the same thing stable, if looking a little complicated and stupid.
After all, as people, they could just all hold the same sheet, with all the weight on (which would represent using a stronger hull, which is what normally gets done, being much simpler).
My point is that that inner container has one less atm of pressure relative to the water outside than the inside of the sub itself, but neither sees any difference.
It's proof that layering different pressures inside each other doesn't require the inner container to be able to withstand the total pressure difference.
Your example with the plywood sheets fails because each is supported by the one below, so the weight transfers through. In other words, they can move up and down as much as necessary to let the weight through, and provide no resistance to the weight.
With a complete shell and pressure, you're not moving the shell, you're making the shell shrink or expand, which it resists doing.
Multiple shells would work. If you have a shell which can withstand a 500atm pressure difference, you can put one inside another to get a total pressure difference to the outside of 1000atm. What you can't do is connect them together too rigidly, or the small shrinkage of the outer hull from the pressure will push the connecting beams in and cause pressure to the inner hull. If you only join them together from one side, e.g. the bottom, as if one was resting inside the other, there would be no problem.
Unfortunately using a pressurised outer hull has two problems which stop its use: Getting in and out of the inner hull (a hatch directly to the outside would have to take the full pressure difference, and therefore makes layered pressure hulls pointless). On the surface the pressurised outer hull would have a positive pressure compared to the outside, making it try to explode instead of implode, and designing a container to withstand both is much harder than just one.
Actually, I worked on a pc/xbox360/ps3 game which was released a few months back. It was called "Wheelman".
Go try the 360 demo, it's good fun, if a little unrealistic.
I've just remembered we did some in-house testing, but also some outsourced testing. It's entirely possible the sims 3 beta leaked from an outsource place.
Would it make any difference to a normal sub if you had a steel chamber containing a vacuum inside the crew area? Or to the vaccum chamber? Nope. The sub still has the same pressure inside, so the vaccuum chamber still has the same pressure on the outside. Neither sees any difference.
I wish there was some way of searching for "somethingorother review" without turning up pages and pages of sites saying: "somethingorother for sale. There are no user reviews for somethingorother. Write a review?"
I currently have a ~1.36 TB raid 5 array (4 x "500 GB" disks) because I ran out of space on the ~840 GB array (4 x "300 GB" disks). Unfortunately a flaw in the pci bus of that machine makes it incapable of taking a gigabit network card or a second raid card, so I had to copy the data over 100 mbps ethernet.
It wasn't a cheap upgrade, and the next one promises to be more expensive (when it becomes necessary), thanks to the fact that if the array exceeds 2 TB I'll need to buy a "64 bit" raid card. Despite the fact that my current card advertises 48-bit LBA support, it doesn't actually seem to be capable of using more than 32-bits of that.
If you're not careful you'll get modded to +6 and break slashdot.
I recently played "Diablo", a 13-year-old game from the Windows 95 era, on Windows 7. Software that was written correctly in the first place just works, even across that many versions of Windows.
Mod parent informative. I would, but I'm out of points.
Many people don't understand power requirements, and if you're building your own pc you really should.
Also, if you get an 85% efficiency certified PSU, not only is that proof that it can actually manage its advertised output, but it is also at least 85% efficient at any power draw between 10% and 100% of its rating. High efficiency will save you a lot of money in the long run, and the build quality needed for that efficiency also means the PSU lasts much longer.
I have a 2.8GHz AMD dual-core, 4GB of ram, a GTX 285, three hdds and two optical drives in my pc. How big of a PSU do I need?
The same Tagan 480W PSU I've been using for ~ 5 years.
Just because your 500W psu didn't have enough power connectors doesn't mean 500W isn't enough. Just make sure you have one capable of sustaining its max output, instead of only being able to sustain half of what is on the box (and being able to do 1ms spikes of the power output they advertise). The 80% and 85% efficiency certifications are a great way to confirm this, as well as getting you an efficient PSU.
I can see PSU requirements being much higher for multiple graphics chips (the top end ones use 200W when going flat out), but do you really need multiple (for example) GTX 285s? I run all my games at max res, with HDR, AA, AF, and all the game's own options on max, and I can still put vsync on afterwards because the framerate's so high. And that's on one GTX 285.
There isn't one, really. I've heard good things about CFS.
An ideal SSD scheduler would need to perform read/write grouping, but only within the SSD blocks (with a read block and a write block being different sizes). Grouping across a block boundary is pointless for an SSD, you'd be better off letting the request at the top of the queue go. For a spinning disk, grouping is important all the time, thanks to it essentially being one continuous spiral track (close enough anyway).
Unfortunately SSDs do work better with a bit of write reordering/grouping, due to the massive erase blocks. noop isn't the ideal scheduler for SSDs that you claim.
Slashdot Mirror
If the projects have custom build steps set up they can execute any program they like before / after / to compile.
That's all it's warning about.
What if you get blindsided by a Mac truck when you are going through a green stop light?
Funny, our "stop" lights are red. Round here, the green traffic lights mean "go"... :P
They can't run the game from CD, the performance is lousy.
Really? That's why all xbox 360 games, original xbox games, Wii games, PS2 games, PS1 games, Sega Saturn and MegaCD games require installing to a hard-disk.
Wait, they don't?
The last game I worked on, "Wheelman", actually streams better from the 360 DVD than from some peoples' PCs' hard-disks.
We had reviews all the way from "awesome" to "bad". Out of the few bad reviews, most were GTA fanboys not getting that Wheelman != GTA, but some were playing the PC version on PCs that weren't up to the task, and blaming us for the resulting problems.
Unlike the DRM on some modern games, which only allows you to install the game three times, and relies on the game publisher's servers to allow even that?
I prefer steam to that.
I'll make it simple:
Submarine, in water of 1001 atm pressure.
Pressure in sub is 1atm (for people).
This makes a difference between the inside and outside of 1000 atm. The sub can't withstand any more.
Sub has a box in. The box is welded to a table in the sub. The table is welded to the floor.
Box has 0atm pressure (vacuum) inside.
The box can only withstand about 2 atm pressure difference between its inside and outside at max.
But this is ok, the box is in the sub, and the sub has 1 atm pressure in.
The box's walls only have 1atm of pressure difference between inside and outside, even though they are 1000 atm pressure deep in the ocean.
The difference between inside the box and outside the sub is 1001 atm, even though neither the sub or the box can withstand 1001 atm difference on its own.
The box is no different to having a second, inner hull.
Here's a replacement example for you:
Two people are holding a metal sheet, one each side, and doing so they can hold 200kg placed on top off of the ground.
The 200kg weight represents pressure, the sheet represents the submarine's hull, and the people represent the hull's ability to withstand pressure. There is a melon on the floor below, representing a melon in the sub.
Hull failing from too much pressure == people dropping everything from too much weight. Either way the melon gets squished.
Now, adding another hull outside the first would be represented by adding another sheet above the first, with another two people holding it, and moving the weight to the upper sheet. Note, the new people are also standing on the ground, not on the original sheet. As it is, any weight on the upper sheet wouldn't affect the lower sheet, until you added too much and they dropped it on to the one below, which would cause the bottom guys to drop theirs too (failure cascade).
Now we are simulating an inner hull and an outer hull, with the pressure on both sides of the inner hull being equal.
We can't represent pressurising the space between the inner and outer hull with weight, because pressure would also exert a force outwards on the outer hull. So we'll use compressed springs.
Removing the weights, putting compressed springs between the two sheets and getting the people to hold the sheets in the same position as before (against the compressed springs) would represent a sub with twin hulls and the space between them compressed, sitting on the surface (so inside the inner hull and outside the outer hull is both 1atm).
If they drop the bottom one it means the inner hull has imploded, if the upper one is let go it will mean the outer hull has exploded (the sheet will go up!). If the springs exert more force than the original 200kgs of weight, this is what would happen.
If you added weight to the upper sheet at this point, the people trying to hold the upper sheet down against the springs would actually have less work to do as you added weight, until it cancelled out the upward force from the springs below, and the people weren't having to do anything. This would represent a sub with twin hulls at a depth where the outer hull had the same pressure on the inside and outside, and the inner hull had 1atm on the inside. All is fine so far.
The people below wouldn't feel anything any different during this, the springs they're trying to hold the bottom sheet up against would go from being compressed by the people holding the upper sheet to being compressed by weight, but it would be the same amount of force the whole time.
You can now add even more weight, and the people holding the upper sheet would end up supporting more and more of it, until the upper sheet has 400kg on, and both the people holding the upper sheet and the people holding the lower sheet feel the force of 200kg.
The people below apply 200kg of upward force to the lower sheet, which the springs transfer to the upper sheet. The people holding the upper sheet apply 200kg of additional force, cancelling out the force from 400kg of weight, and holding the same thing stable, if looking a little complicated and stupid.
After all, as people, they could just all hold the same sheet, with all the weight on (which would represent using a stronger hull, which is what normally gets done, being much simpler).
My point is that that inner container has one less atm of pressure relative to the water outside than the inside of the sub itself, but neither sees any difference.
It's proof that layering different pressures inside each other doesn't require the inner container to be able to withstand the total pressure difference.
Your example with the plywood sheets fails because each is supported by the one below, so the weight transfers through. In other words, they can move up and down as much as necessary to let the weight through, and provide no resistance to the weight.
With a complete shell and pressure, you're not moving the shell, you're making the shell shrink or expand, which it resists doing.
Multiple shells would work. If you have a shell which can withstand a 500atm pressure difference, you can put one inside another to get a total pressure difference to the outside of 1000atm. What you can't do is connect them together too rigidly, or the small shrinkage of the outer hull from the pressure will push the connecting beams in and cause pressure to the inner hull. If you only join them together from one side, e.g. the bottom, as if one was resting inside the other, there would be no problem.
Unfortunately using a pressurised outer hull has two problems which stop its use:
Getting in and out of the inner hull (a hatch directly to the outside would have to take the full pressure difference, and therefore makes layered pressure hulls pointless).
On the surface the pressurised outer hull would have a positive pressure compared to the outside, making it try to explode instead of implode, and designing a container to withstand both is much harder than just one.
They squat it so that it can only be bought through them. If you did buy through them, you wouldn't even have noticed.
Actually, I worked on a pc/xbox360/ps3 game which was released a few months back. It was called "Wheelman".
Go try the 360 demo, it's good fun, if a little unrealistic.
I've just remembered we did some in-house testing, but also some outsourced testing. It's entirely possible the sims 3 beta leaked from an outsource place.
I said a steel chamber containing a vacuum is placed inside the sub.
You're assuming really flexible hulls.
Would it make any difference to a normal sub if you had a steel chamber containing a vacuum inside the crew area? Or to the vaccum chamber?
Nope. The sub still has the same pressure inside, so the vaccuum chamber still has the same pressure on the outside. Neither sees any difference.
I've used "Quetek File Scavenger". It allows you to define a raid array from individual disks, including raid 5 with missing disks.
Actually, he might have meant that :S
Hard to know unless he replies.
I wish there was some way of searching for "somethingorother review" without turning up pages and pages of sites saying: "somethingorother for sale. There are no user reviews for somethingorother. Write a review?"
I currently have a ~1.36 TB raid 5 array (4 x "500 GB" disks) because I ran out of space on the ~840 GB array (4 x "300 GB" disks). Unfortunately a flaw in the pci bus of that machine makes it incapable of taking a gigabit network card or a second raid card, so I had to copy the data over 100 mbps ethernet.
It wasn't a cheap upgrade, and the next one promises to be more expensive (when it becomes necessary), thanks to the fact that if the array exceeds 2 TB I'll need to buy a "64 bit" raid card.
Despite the fact that my current card advertises 48-bit LBA support, it doesn't actually seem to be capable of using more than 32-bits of that.
I fail at linking: 3.7Gbps
I make it less than 4 Gb/s.
(1920 x 1080) pixels x 32 bits/pixel x 60 per second = 3.7 Gbps
If you're not careful you'll get modded to +6 and break slashdot.
I recently played "Diablo", a 13-year-old game from the Windows 95 era, on Windows 7. Software that was written correctly in the first place just works, even across that many versions of Windows.
Read closer. He said 2 x 10^9 vs 2^30.
2^30 is approx 1 x 10^9.
Which means your answer is wrong.
Mod parent informative. I would, but I'm out of points.
Many people don't understand power requirements, and if you're building your own pc you really should.
Also, if you get an 85% efficiency certified PSU, not only is that proof that it can actually manage its advertised output, but it is also at least 85% efficient at any power draw between 10% and 100% of its rating. High efficiency will save you a lot of money in the long run, and the build quality needed for that efficiency also means the PSU lasts much longer.
I have a 2.8GHz AMD dual-core, 4GB of ram, a GTX 285, three hdds and two optical drives in my pc. How big of a PSU do I need?
The same Tagan 480W PSU I've been using for ~ 5 years.
Just because your 500W psu didn't have enough power connectors doesn't mean 500W isn't enough. Just make sure you have one capable of sustaining its max output, instead of only being able to sustain half of what is on the box (and being able to do 1ms spikes of the power output they advertise). The 80% and 85% efficiency certifications are a great way to confirm this, as well as getting you an efficient PSU.
I can see PSU requirements being much higher for multiple graphics chips (the top end ones use 200W when going flat out), but do you really need multiple (for example) GTX 285s? I run all my games at max res, with HDR, AA, AF, and all the game's own options on max, and I can still put vsync on afterwards because the framerate's so high. And that's on one GTX 285.
There isn't one, really. I've heard good things about CFS.
An ideal SSD scheduler would need to perform read/write grouping, but only within the SSD blocks (with a read block and a write block being different sizes). Grouping across a block boundary is pointless for an SSD, you'd be better off letting the request at the top of the queue go. For a spinning disk, grouping is important all the time, thanks to it essentially being one continuous spiral track (close enough anyway).
Only if you are talking about arithmetic mean.
By average I meant "most of the time", so more of a median.
Well true about the RTM version, but what about the beta?
How can they NOT manage to keep the beta private, or know who distributed it?
Unfortunately SSDs do work better with a bit of write reordering/grouping, due to the massive erase blocks. noop isn't the ideal scheduler for SSDs that you claim.