Mass Effect 2 might be worth buying *if* you're interested in seeing the story continue-- I didn't buy it because EA took over the studio, and fuck EA. Halo games, again, worth it to see the story continue. Gears? Waste of money, it's not different enough from the first game. I haven't played Dragon Age, Dead Space, or Mirror's Edge, so I can't comment on those.
The last sequel I bought was Crackdown 2. Pacific City was rundown and depression, the vehicles unnecessary and unfun, and the story consisted of (believe it or not) fighting ZOMBIES! Much like Prince of Persia: Warrior Within before it, they decided the best way to make a sequel was to remove everything fun about the first game. Ugh.
By default, UAC has no teeth and is just annoying. You just click 'allow' and go. Sudo, on the other hand, at the very least will require a password, if you're in the sudoers file. I think that's part of the complaint: if you're going to implement a security feature, make it secure by default.
You know you can turn that on, right?
The default configuration doesn't ask for a password, but, then again, neither does OS X-- and nobody's griping about OS X being insecure.
What is ironic is on the huge trucks at quarries, they use a large ICE engine which powers a generator. The generator powers the wheels which all have electric motors. The reason for this is that the driveshaft needed for the immense torque required if done mechanically would be huge, and would snap instantly.
Ironic, but not surprising; that's the same arrangement on the similarly-sized and similarly-powered diesel-electric locomotives running our nation's railroads.
I think what the grandparent is referring to is that as technology improves the size of vehicle that benefits from this arrangement gets smaller and smaller, until normal semis and delivery trucks would benefit from a diesel-electric drive.
Huh? How do you get that. Now you have the resources of *two* giants working on Java and ensuring it remains compatible and new features are added.
Have you ever used any software from IBM? Or from Oracle?
All of their apps have shitty UIs, half of them still require IE6. (You know when people complained they have to use IE6 for some shitty app at work? These are the companies making those shitty apps! Also Siemens.) Oracle's headlining product is a database that can't tell an empty string apart from null. IBM's headlining product is Lotus Notes-- enough said!
Glaciers move faster than these guys when adopting new ideas or OS features-- IBM's Lotus Notes for Windows gained multi-user support a mere decade and change after Windows did!
Anyway, there's no way this is a good thing. A good headline would be something like, "IBM and Oracle, after realizing how bad their own developers are, just make the Google distribution the default one because Google has their shit together."
However, what goes on in the server room is linked to what happens on the desktop and visa versa.
Yah, that explains why OS/400 is on so many company desktops. And remember when everybody sat down at their PC and booted up Netware in the morning? Good times.
The debian website is terrible, always has been. It's pretty easy to install though.
If they can't get their shit together with the website, why should I (as a potential Debian user) believe they can get their shit together with the OS itself? Especially since maintaining an OS is orders of magnitude harder than maintaining a good website.
(Using Word here, because it's most people's example of a "bloated" writing tool. I wager every word processor has a similarly-minimal fullscreen mode.)
Microsoft SQL Server doesn't have unsigned types, because the SQL standard doesn't have unsigned types. SQL RDBs with unsigned types are in violation of the standard. (Of course, since all SQL implementations differ from the standard-- MS SQL Server's T-SQL isn't even remotely close-- this isn't really saying much... but there you go.)
Part of working with databases is knowing the limitations of each RDB. I'm sure Slashdot is going to bitch and moan at Microsoft for leaving out such an "obvious" feature, but Slashdot bitches and moans about everything Microsoft does anyway.
What? Intro DB courses all mention using unsigned columns for numeric/incremented indices. I use unsigned ints by habit for numbered indices. I'll grant you I've seen plenty of really terrible DB designs in the wild that happen to use signed ints, but "especially in databases" unsigned ints are more frequently used, at least by the competent pros I've met.
MS SQL doesn't have unsigned types. (Go ahead, make fun of Microsoft now.) I would question the level of education you got in your "intro DB courses" if it didn't mention this particular quirk of one of the most popular RDBs in existence.
That said, it does have Bigint which should have been used for this table.
I guess the submitter to this *INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY* site didn't realize that 1 record != 1 person. Of course, it's Slashdot, so no real surprise there...
With our database structure, we get about 400-500 records (in a specific table) for each actual user. 2 billion wouldn't be hard to reach at all if we had more users.
In the end, the shootings were provoked by Norman who should be tracked down and prosecuted to the extent possible.
It might be interesting to re-interview him, but I doubt a prosecutor could convince a jury that it was his gun based on this evidence. They'd need a much stronger case.
I've always hated Word and its ilk because the program is constantly fighting how I want to work. I spend more time fighting with the program than I do creating new content.
I think people psychologically like that. Because, otherwise, you'd just hit the preferences and turn off whatever Auto-whatever was "fighting" you... and in 10 seconds, you'd never, ever have the problem again.
So people who make this complaint either: 1) Don't know how to work the Settings 2) Like to see it has a conflict, and purposefully don't change the Settings (why else would you use the word "fighting"?)
No crap. This guy sounds like a total douchebag. He has some psychological quirk about "simplicity" that he's trying to parlay into some kind of popular movement or something? Look, if having a boldface button stops you from writing, that just means you're a shitty writer.
BTW, the reason nobody rides fixed-gear bikes or drives cars without power steering is *safety*. This hipster douchebag is going to kill himself or somebody else sooner or later.
Plus there were already publicly-accessible servers that were promising not to clear their database as upgrades came along... so those security flaws were already exploitable. (I'm not sure if those servers have closed down or not.)
So it's a mixed bag: sure more people can look at the code, but you also can't prevent people from *deploying* the code.
how to handle sub-pixel anti-aliasing (like in Windows ClearType) when one monitor is rotated and the other one is not?
ClearType (specifically; I can't speak for other OSes) is per-monitor. You might have to run the ClearType Tuning Wizard, but once you've done that it copes just fine.
Ok; so where do you buy an Android phone that is completely free?
My HTC Aria from ATT had to be rooted before I could remove the ATT built-in apps. Considering all the hype over how "open" Android is, I expected to just be able to install the Google distro-- Nope! You have to root it exactly like you would an iPhone!
I really felt deceived by all of the people who recommended Android to me by citing how "open" it was. The fact is, other than Google's phone which is discontinued, "open" Android phones don't exist, no more than "open" iPhones or "open" Blackberries.
Third, why can't CSS styles inherit other styles or use constants? You were *finally* going to add that into CSS, and then some jackass decided not to include it because it would make it more *complicated*. Do you know what's complicated? Having to change 40 instances of a color in a CSS file because I can't define a damn constant.
My biggest gripe is lack of math. You can't add up static measures, like pixels, with user agent-defined measures, like ems. There's no way to say, in CSS, make this border 5 pixels + 10 ems. Huge oversight... what were they thinking?
HTML5 was going at lightning pace (relative to any W3C work) until the W3C took it over, now it's stalled to a near-halt. Screw them, at this point they're more holding back progress than increasing interoperability.
Use HTML5, just be prepared to make changes to your app if needed.
Another commenter mentioned Bob. It wasn't successful, but it was original.
Also, I'd say that Zune and Kin UIs are different enough than anything else to count as original, at least as original as you can get considering there are hundreds of devices doing the same task. Xbox 360's "Blade" interface looks original, but the implementation is pretty... eh.
What I had envisioned is that every webclient currently displaying a web page would effectively act as a seed for the content (including pictures, embedded videos, etc) that the browser has loaded from that page for as long as the user has that page open, radically reducing the load required by the webserver where the original data was hosted when a lot of people want to see the content at the same time.
If the webserver's overloaded, what makes you think it can serve lists of seeds any better than it can serve webpages?
Even if it could, wouldn't the overhead of your browser looking at the list of seeds, checking for one that still has the page open, attempting to communicating with it (NAT or firewalls could block that)... wouldn't that whole process take an order of magnitude longer than just getting the damned page in the first place? I mean, torrents take anywhere from 1-5 minutes to get all the handshaking done, there's no reason to think your browser-based torrent would be any faster.
Slashdot Mirror
Bioshock 2 is far superior to the original. FYI.
Mass Effect 2 might be worth buying *if* you're interested in seeing the story continue-- I didn't buy it because EA took over the studio, and fuck EA. Halo games, again, worth it to see the story continue. Gears? Waste of money, it's not different enough from the first game. I haven't played Dragon Age, Dead Space, or Mirror's Edge, so I can't comment on those.
The last sequel I bought was Crackdown 2. Pacific City was rundown and depression, the vehicles unnecessary and unfun, and the story consisted of (believe it or not) fighting ZOMBIES! Much like Prince of Persia: Warrior Within before it, they decided the best way to make a sequel was to remove everything fun about the first game. Ugh.
But Bioshock 2 was amazing.
By default, UAC has no teeth and is just annoying. You just click 'allow' and go. Sudo, on the other hand, at the very least will require a password, if you're in the sudoers file. I think that's part of the complaint: if you're going to implement a security feature, make it secure by default.
You know you can turn that on, right?
The default configuration doesn't ask for a password, but, then again, neither does OS X-- and nobody's griping about OS X being insecure.
What is ironic is on the huge trucks at quarries, they use a large ICE engine which powers a generator. The generator powers the wheels which all have electric motors. The reason for this is that the driveshaft needed for the immense torque required if done mechanically would be huge, and would snap instantly.
Ironic, but not surprising; that's the same arrangement on the similarly-sized and similarly-powered diesel-electric locomotives running our nation's railroads.
I think what the grandparent is referring to is that as technology improves the size of vehicle that benefits from this arrangement gets smaller and smaller, until normal semis and delivery trucks would benefit from a diesel-electric drive.
Huh? How do you get that. Now you have the resources of *two* giants working on Java and ensuring it remains compatible and new features are added.
Have you ever used any software from IBM? Or from Oracle?
All of their apps have shitty UIs, half of them still require IE6. (You know when people complained they have to use IE6 for some shitty app at work? These are the companies making those shitty apps! Also Siemens.) Oracle's headlining product is a database that can't tell an empty string apart from null. IBM's headlining product is Lotus Notes-- enough said!
Glaciers move faster than these guys when adopting new ideas or OS features-- IBM's Lotus Notes for Windows gained multi-user support a mere decade and change after Windows did!
Anyway, there's no way this is a good thing. A good headline would be something like, "IBM and Oracle, after realizing how bad their own developers are, just make the Google distribution the default one because Google has their shit together."
One thing Java doesn't, and never has, have:
It's shit together for GUI desktop apps.
However, what goes on in the server room is linked to what happens on the desktop and visa versa.
Yah, that explains why OS/400 is on so many company desktops. And remember when everybody sat down at their PC and booted up Netware in the morning? Good times.
The debian website is terrible, always has been. It's pretty easy to install though.
If they can't get their shit together with the website, why should I (as a potential Debian user) believe they can get their shit together with the OS itself? Especially since maintaining an OS is orders of magnitude harder than maintaining a good website.
You can put Word 2007 into an extremely minimal writing mode in 2 clicks:
http://schend.net/images/screenshots/minimal_word.png
(Using Word here, because it's most people's example of a "bloated" writing tool. I wager every word processor has a similarly-minimal fullscreen mode.)
Microsoft SQL Server doesn't have unsigned types, because the SQL standard doesn't have unsigned types. SQL RDBs with unsigned types are in violation of the standard. (Of course, since all SQL implementations differ from the standard-- MS SQL Server's T-SQL isn't even remotely close-- this isn't really saying much... but there you go.)
Part of working with databases is knowing the limitations of each RDB. I'm sure Slashdot is going to bitch and moan at Microsoft for leaving out such an "obvious" feature, but Slashdot bitches and moans about everything Microsoft does anyway.
What? Intro DB courses all mention using unsigned columns for numeric/incremented indices. I use unsigned ints by habit for numbered indices. I'll grant you I've seen plenty of really terrible DB designs in the wild that happen to use signed ints, but "especially in databases" unsigned ints are more frequently used, at least by the competent pros I've met.
MS SQL doesn't have unsigned types. (Go ahead, make fun of Microsoft now.) I would question the level of education you got in your "intro DB courses" if it didn't mention this particular quirk of one of the most popular RDBs in existence.
That said, it does have Bigint which should have been used for this table.
I guess the submitter to this *INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY* site didn't realize that 1 record != 1 person. Of course, it's Slashdot, so no real surprise there...
With our database structure, we get about 400-500 records (in a specific table) for each actual user. 2 billion wouldn't be hard to reach at all if we had more users.
In the end, the shootings were provoked by Norman who should be tracked down and prosecuted to the extent possible.
It might be interesting to re-interview him, but I doubt a prosecutor could convince a jury that it was his gun based on this evidence. They'd need a much stronger case.
I've always hated Word and its ilk because the program is constantly fighting how I want to work. I spend more time fighting with the program than I do creating new content.
I think people psychologically like that. Because, otherwise, you'd just hit the preferences and turn off whatever Auto-whatever was "fighting" you... and in 10 seconds, you'd never, ever have the problem again.
So people who make this complaint either:
1) Don't know how to work the Settings
2) Like to see it has a conflict, and purposefully don't change the Settings (why else would you use the word "fighting"?)
They don't necessarily want or need the fancy assists that keep the rest of us from failing in spectacular fashion.
Yes, but he's not making this claim:
"I'm a professional writer, therefore I don't need all the features in Word."
The claim he's making is:
"I'm a professional writer, therefore all the features in Word obstruct my work."
Those aren't equivalent claims, and the second one is complete bullshit by any measure. There's nothing in Word that's causing you to fail.
No crap. This guy sounds like a total douchebag. He has some psychological quirk about "simplicity" that he's trying to parlay into some kind of popular movement or something? Look, if having a boldface button stops you from writing, that just means you're a shitty writer.
BTW, the reason nobody rides fixed-gear bikes or drives cars without power steering is *safety*. This hipster douchebag is going to kill himself or somebody else sooner or later.
Plus there were already publicly-accessible servers that were promising not to clear their database as upgrades came along... so those security flaws were already exploitable. (I'm not sure if those servers have closed down or not.)
So it's a mixed bag: sure more people can look at the code, but you also can't prevent people from *deploying* the code.
how to handle sub-pixel anti-aliasing (like in Windows ClearType) when one monitor is rotated and the other one is not?
ClearType (specifically; I can't speak for other OSes) is per-monitor. You might have to run the ClearType Tuning Wizard, but once you've done that it copes just fine.
Hey, how about a solution to the problem that doesn't involve time travel? And being a condescending prick?
Ok; so where do you buy an Android phone that is completely free?
My HTC Aria from ATT had to be rooted before I could remove the ATT built-in apps. Considering all the hype over how "open" Android is, I expected to just be able to install the Google distro-- Nope! You have to root it exactly like you would an iPhone!
I really felt deceived by all of the people who recommended Android to me by citing how "open" it was. The fact is, other than Google's phone which is discontinued, "open" Android phones don't exist, no more than "open" iPhones or "open" Blackberries.
Third, why can't CSS styles inherit other styles or use constants? You were *finally* going to add that into CSS, and then some jackass decided not to include it because it would make it more *complicated*. Do you know what's complicated? Having to change 40 instances of a color in a CSS file because I can't define a damn constant.
My biggest gripe is lack of math. You can't add up static measures, like pixels, with user agent-defined measures, like ems. There's no way to say, in CSS, make this border 5 pixels + 10 ems. Huge oversight... what were they thinking?
HTML5 was going at lightning pace (relative to any W3C work) until the W3C took it over, now it's stalled to a near-halt. Screw them, at this point they're more holding back progress than increasing interoperability.
Use HTML5, just be prepared to make changes to your app if needed.
Microsoft has pulled it off in the past-- the Kin came out of nowhere.
Another commenter mentioned Bob. It wasn't successful, but it was original.
Also, I'd say that Zune and Kin UIs are different enough than anything else to count as original, at least as original as you can get considering there are hundreds of devices doing the same task. Xbox 360's "Blade" interface looks original, but the implementation is pretty... eh.
I come back every 6-8 months or so. I don't consistently play it. Even then I've managed 2 level 80s, a 78, a 70 and misc. chars in the 40s.
What I had envisioned is that every webclient currently displaying a web page would effectively act as a seed for the content (including pictures, embedded videos, etc) that the browser has loaded from that page for as long as the user has that page open, radically reducing the load required by the webserver where the original data was hosted when a lot of people want to see the content at the same time.
If the webserver's overloaded, what makes you think it can serve lists of seeds any better than it can serve webpages?
Even if it could, wouldn't the overhead of your browser looking at the list of seeds, checking for one that still has the page open, attempting to communicating with it (NAT or firewalls could block that)... wouldn't that whole process take an order of magnitude longer than just getting the damned page in the first place? I mean, torrents take anywhere from 1-5 minutes to get all the handshaking done, there's no reason to think your browser-based torrent would be any faster.
Your idea isn't making sense to me.