 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Txemi Jendrix" <nomail@nomail> schreef in bericht
news:web.46fc582846e00faab25751830@news.povray.org...
>
> Nice it has turned freeware, now if Lutz could make it work with povray
> 3.6,
> I could use it with Vista.
>
I am afraid, Txemi, that you/we will have to wait until POV-Ray 4.0 is out,
not before :-(
See the thread 'Status of Moray?' in povray.general.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Elliott <sel### [at] rraz net> wrote:
> Oh good, yet another reason to not want to use it. Like sound working
> differently so "all" DirectSound using games breaking, DRM being
> embedded, which can, in some cases, screw up the sound from "non-
> approved" hardware, and a whole list of other BS things.
Also many older hardware has stopped working in Vista because Vista
has no support them (even though XP has, go figure) and the hardware is
too old for the manufacturers to bother upgrading the drivers to Vista.
This list was amusing:
http://mindprod.com/jgloss/vista.html
A few highlights:
"It will no longer run my Olympus digital camera or my Labtek Web cam."
"Microsoft Visual C++, TopStyle, TweakDUN, Opera and the free version
of PGP no longer work. The camera snap feature of Paint Shop Pro no
longer works. Visual Slick Edit(r) no longer lets you drag and drop
tool bars."
"It no longer supports WinHelp format. This was done to ensure older
programs would stop working."
"When you boot for the first time, it just sits there for about 20
minutes, looking for all the world like it is in a loop. It issues no
progress messages of any kind. Further it reboots several times
without telling you what it is up to. You can easily imagine it not
working properly."
"Vista has no index of file names, just contents of some of the files.
So when you ask it to search for a directory or file, it starts at the
beginning of disk C: and linearly searches all the disks."
"The recycle bin has a delete option. You would think this means
discard the files in the recycle bin, but instead it deletes the
recycle bin itself, without warning, something you would almost never
want to do."
"Deleting files is painfully slow, reminiscent of the top speed on an
> What is the point of making an OS that only *just* avoids making
> everything stop working on it anyway? Just wondering. lol
Strenghten the dependency of hardware manufacturers on Microsoft.
Microsoft has already demonstrated how incredibly powerful they are
and how dependent hardware manufacturers are on them when they released
the requirement specs for certain hardware to work properly in Vista
(most prominently display hardware), and the hardware manufacturers
have had no other option than to submit and to spend money and resources
in creating compatible hardware.
I think there's something very wrong when one single company can
dictate what a myriad of other companies must do, lest they make a
financial suicide. That sounds illegal. Monopoly laws anyone?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Cook <z99### [at] bellsouthnet> wrote:
> Only if you turn off Aero, which doesn't like the OpenGL display. :3
I can run Moray in Vista, that's not the problem. The problem is that I
cannot run povray 3.5 in Vista so I can't render directly from Moray and I
can't use the material editor. Of course, I can export the pov file, open
it in povray (3.6 or 3.7) and render the file, but that's not the point, I
think.
Actually I don't use Vista but XP. My girlfriend has Vista and wanted to
learn to work with Moray.
Anyway, does anybody know if it runs with the current version of WINE? I
tried it in the past, but the only solution I found was to run windows
inside Linux with QEMU.
Regards
> --
> Tim Cook
> http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-empyrean
>
> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> Version: 3.12
> GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
> N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
> PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
> D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
> ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Txemi Jendrix
http://www.txemijendrix.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <46fcd21d@news.povray.org>, war### [at] tagpovrayorg says...
> I think there's something very wrong when one single company can
> dictate what a myriad of other companies must do, lest they make a
> financial suicide. That sounds illegal. Monopoly laws anyone?
>
Yeah, and the thing that pisses me off the most is that, if I wanted to
play any of them, I can't play any DirectX 10 games without buying their
crappy OS, at least until Linux people manage to use the open sourced
drivers now available from ATI and nVidia to do the same stuff. MS is
cutting their own throat this time imho, but it might take some time for
the corpse to show signs of the real necrosis.
Oh, another good one. Telling it you want to use it in an "office" when
installing automatically disables huge amounts of the multimedia
components (if they even get installed at all). A lot of the "this won't
work anymore" stuff seems to derive from people picking "this will be
used in an office" instead of "as a home computer" when installing it.
:p
--
void main () {
call functional_code()
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Txemi Jendrix wrote:
> I can run Moray in Vista, that's not the problem. The problem is that I
> cannot run povray 3.5 in Vista so I can't render directly from Moray and I
> can't use the material editor.
Really? POV 3.5 works fine in Vista for me. Sure, it hangs Moray if I
try to render from Moray without POV being open first, but if I close
and restart Moray it's fine.
--
Tim Cook
http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-empyrean
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Microsoft has already demonstrated how incredibly powerful they are
> and how dependent hardware manufacturers are on them when they released
> the requirement specs for certain hardware to work properly in Vista
> (most prominently display hardware), and the hardware manufacturers
> have had no other option than to submit and to spend money and resources
> in creating compatible hardware.
>
> I think there's something very wrong when one single company can
> dictate what a myriad of other companies must do, lest they make a
> financial suicide. That sounds illegal. Monopoly laws anyone?
I call BS. Microsoft hardly forces anyone to write programs that just
run on Windows; everybody just decides that they won't support other
OSes. The could if they wanted. They're the ones choosing not to.
I think it's wrong when a myriad of other companies can dictate what one
single company is allowed to do with their own product. Don't like
where MS is going? Switch to *nix or make Steve Jobs all giddy by going
Mac en masse. MS'll get the point.
--
Tim Cook
http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-empyrean
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Elliott <sel### [at] rraznet> wrote:
> MS is
> cutting their own throat this time imho, but it might take some time for
> the corpse to show signs of the real necrosis.
Unfortunately I don't believe that's the case this time either.
When Windows95 hit the shelves for the first time it was a horrible,
horrible "OS" (if it can even be called that). It was rushed half-ready
because of deadline pressures, it was extremely heavy for the computers
of the time, it was full of bugs, it was full of hardware problems, it
was full of backwards compatibility problems...
Does this sound familiar? Yet it took but 1-2 years for Windows95 to
become the "industry standard", even though some struggled with Windows 3.x
for a few years more.
Windows XP was for long time vaporware, delivered very late, it was
promised to be the next "big step" in the Windows history (equal, if not
even larger step than the Win3 -> Win95 step), a promise which was only
half-fulfilled (well, I would say only 1/4-fulfilled). When it hit the
shelves it was ridiculously heavy, with ridiculous hardware requirements,
it was very buggy, and almost all reviews recommended waiting for SP1
before changing to it at the big scale.
Does this sound familiar? Yet, once again, it took 1-2 years for WinXP
to become the "industry standard".
I don't see Vista being any different from this. It's ridiculously
heavy, it's buggy, it has backwards-compatibility issues... It's the
same story repeated once again. In 1-2 years it *will* be the "industry
standard".
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Cook <z99### [at] bellsouthnet> wrote:
> I call BS. Microsoft hardly forces anyone to write programs that just
> run on Windows; everybody just decides that they won't support other
> OSes. The could if they wanted.
Sadly that's simply not true. The vast majority of hardware and software
manufacturers can *not* abandon Windows and start making software for
other platforms instead. It would be an economical suicide.
In the majority of cases making the software for Windows *and* other
platforms is not cost-effective enough. If the Windows version brings 99.5%
of the money and the other versions the remaining 0.5%, it's certainly not
worth the money and resources spent porting the software to those other
platforms.
It's *not* a choice. They *have* to make Windows software if they want
to stay in business. (Sure, there are exceptions, but those are few. We
are talking about the average hardware/software house here, not the few
lucky exceptions.)
This simply gives Microsoft a monopoly status. They can dictate how and
what those manufacturers do. If Microsoft says "for the new version of
Windows all software must use DRM or Windows will refuse to run it" then
they have no choice but to add DRM to their software or it will not sell.
Microsoft might not be "guilty" for being so popular (although some
could argue against that), but that doesn't change the fact that abusing
monopoly status is illegal in most countries.
A good example: Apple cannot be considered "guilty" of being so popular
in the mp3 player business. However, that doesn't mean they can start
abusing their enormous monopoly however they like. This was clearly seen
when the EU sued Apple for abusing their monopoly status (related to DRM
protection which basically gave Apple unfair competition over other
companies).
One could think that "it's their product, they can do whatever they
like with it". Even though that's true in small-scale applications, that's
not how fair trade works at the big scale. Monopoly and cartel laws exist
for a reason.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <46fdf7e6@news.povray.org>, war### [at] tagpovrayorg says...
> Patrick Elliott <sel### [at] rraznet> wrote:
> > MS is
> > cutting their own throat this time imho, but it might take some time fo
r
> > the corpse to show signs of the real necrosis.
>
> Unfortunately I don't believe that's the case this time either.
>
> When Windows95 hit the shelves for the first time it was a horrible,
> horrible "OS" (if it can even be called that). It was rushed half-ready
> because of deadline pressures, it was extremely heavy for the computers
> of the time, it was full of bugs, it was full of hardware problems, it
> was full of backwards compatibility problems...
>
> Does this sound familiar? Yet it took but 1-2 years for Windows95 to
> become the "industry standard", even though some struggled with Windows 3
.x
> for a few years more.
>
> Windows XP was for long time vaporware, delivered very late, it was
> promised to be the next "big step" in the Windows history (equal, if not
> even larger step than the Win3 -> Win95 step), a promise which was only
> half-fulfilled (well, I would say only 1/4-fulfilled). When it hit the
> shelves it was ridiculously heavy, with ridiculous hardware requirements,
> it was very buggy, and almost all reviews recommended waiting for SP1
> before changing to it at the big scale.
>
> Does this sound familiar? Yet, once again, it took 1-2 years for WinXP
> to become the "industry standard".
>
> I don't see Vista being any different from this. It's ridiculously
> heavy, it's buggy, it has backwards-compatibility issues... It's the
> same story repeated once again. In 1-2 years it *will* be the "industry
> standard".
>
Depressing thought...
--
void main () {
call functional_code()
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <46fdfa28@news.povray.org>, war### [at] tagpovrayorg says...
> Tim Cook <z99### [at] bellsouthnet> wrote:
> > I call BS. Microsoft hardly forces anyone to write programs that just
> > run on Windows; everybody just decides that they won't support other
> > OSes. The could if they wanted.
>
> Sadly that's simply not true. The vast majority of hardware and softwar
e
> manufacturers can *not* abandon Windows and start making software for
> other platforms instead. It would be an economical suicide.
> In the majority of cases making the software for Windows *and* other
> platforms is not cost-effective enough. If the Windows version brings 99.
5%
> of the money and the other versions the remaining 0.5%, it's certainly no
t
> worth the money and resources spent porting the software to those other
> platforms.
> It's *not* a choice. They *have* to make Windows software if they want
> to stay in business. (Sure, there are exceptions, but those are few. We
> are talking about the average hardware/software house here, not the few
> lucky exceptions.)
>
Not to mention that often MS makes special deals with many companies to
include Windows only features, such that they not only are not supported
by other OSes, they can't be. DirectX is one of the biggest examples of
this, however, many software companies have fallen for that sort of
"deal" as well, where MS allows them a look at the dark recesses of the
web of connections within their code, as well as help making it work,
knowing full well that the agreements they make to get that benefit will
prevent them from providing the same functionality to anyone else's OS.
Most companies are starting to wake up and realize they sold their souls
to the devil via those agreements, but some of them are so heavily
reliant on the products that exist under such cross licensing that it
would in fact be financial suicide to try to break loose from them.
--
void main () {
call functional_code()
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
