Saturday Night through Sunday AM:  Installed over a 45K dialup 
connection (this took hours).

Sunday evening:  Created new project using old code.

Sunday evening:  Discovered that VC 2k8 Express doesn't come with the 
OpenGL headers or libraries.

Just Now:  Remembered that Dev-C++ and OpenWatcom do.

Just Now:  Uninstalled MS VC 2008 Express Edition.

Life is good.

Regards,
John

Post a reply to this message

John VanSickle <evi### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Sunday evening:  Discovered that VC 2k8 Express doesn't come with the 
> OpenGL headers or libraries.

> Just Now:  Remembered that Dev-C++ and OpenWatcom do.

> Just Now:  Uninstalled MS VC 2008 Express Edition.

  I'm sorry to say this, but that sounds kind of stupid.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

John VanSickle <evi### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Life is good.

Life certainly is good away from monopolies.  But in this particular case,
wouldn't it just be a matter of downloading OpenGL headers and libs?

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
> wouldn't it just be a matter of downloading OpenGL headers and libs?

Presumedly, since the other compilers already work with OpenGL, he 
doesn't even need to download them, yes?

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     On what day did God create the body thetans?

Post a reply to this message

While I agree that MSVC++ *should* include OpenGL, could you not have 
installed the headers and libraries yourself?

H²

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
> > wouldn't it just be a matter of downloading OpenGL headers and libs?
>
> Presumedly, since the other compilers already work with OpenGL, he
> doesn't even need to download them, yes?

he said he lost several hours on a dialup connection to download VSX in the
first place.  And just wiped it out before trying because would have to
download an additional, what, 2MB?  I'm not a pro M$ guy, you know.  But it
seems it was a complete waste of time.

Or, if he already had the other tools available, couldn't he just point VSX to
the available headers and libs via paths or environment variables or something?

Post a reply to this message

Halbert wrote:
> While I agree that MSVC++ *should* include OpenGL, 

Why? It's freely available elsewhere. Why should MS include free 
software and pay for the bandwidth for everyone to download it when many 
(most) people won't want it, given that it's presumedly simply a matter 
of downloading it from the authors somewhere?

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     On what day did God create the body thetans?

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Halbert wrote:
> > While I agree that MSVC++ *should* include OpenGL,
>
> Why? It's freely available elsewhere. Why should MS include free
> software and pay for the bandwidth for everyone to download it when many
> (most) people won't want it, given that it's presumedly simply a matter
> of downloading it from the authors somewhere?

yeah, and besides it would work against M$ policy of pushing their own standards
(DirectX) rather than work together with the rest of the industry in
industry-strength standards... why give ideas to developers by including
foreign tech?...

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> John VanSickle <evi### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>> Sunday evening:  Discovered that VC 2k8 Express doesn't come with the 
>> OpenGL headers or libraries.
> 
>> Just Now:  Remembered that Dev-C++ and OpenWatcom do.
> 
>> Just Now:  Uninstalled MS VC 2008 Express Edition.
> 
>   I'm sorry to say this, but that sounds kind of stupid.

I'm inclined to think that, at the very least, such a quick decision was 
perhaps a little too hasty. I mean, it's only an eventuality that the 
time will arise in which Dev-C++ or some other compiler will not meet 
the stringent standards demanded by xxx-library. VC is no small 
download, not for those of us still struggling with dialup (I get 24Kpbs 
here :(...)

Sam

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
> yeah, and besides it would work against M$ policy of pushing their own standards
> (DirectX) rather than work together with the rest of the industry

Yep. Welcome to for-profit software companies.

Name two other for-profit software companies that encourage you to use 
the competitors' software when you try out theirs for free?

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     On what day did God create the body thetans?

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:

> Name two other for-profit software companies that encourage you to use 
> the competitors' software when you try out theirs for free?

Here's a better one: Name two other software companies [that anybody has 
heard of]. ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
>> yeah, and besides it would work against M$ policy of pushing their own 
>> standards
>> (DirectX) rather than work together with the rest of the industry
> 
> Yep. Welcome to for-profit software companies.
> 
> Name two other for-profit software companies that encourage you to use 
> the competitors' software when you try out theirs for free?

The MS Platform SDK does include the OpenGL headers, however. MS are 
obviously not too worried about promoting competing products.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
> > yeah, and besides it would work against M$ policy of pushing their own standards
> > (DirectX) rather than work together with the rest of the industry
>
> Yep. Welcome to for-profit software companies.
>
> Name two other for-profit software companies that encourage you to use
> the competitors' software when you try out theirs for free?

It's not the "competitors' software", it's an industry-strength API.  They could
provider their own implementation, but regardless of MS participating of
standards bodies like the W3C, they just choose to turn it down in favour of
their proprietary incompatible "standards".

Supporting industry-strength standards should only be a good thing.  It's
something major players in the industry agreed are a good thing.  It's
something consumers would agree to be a good thing if only the most used
platform more actively supported it, because it would allow competing platforms
running similar software based on the same standards to interoperate.  And
competition means better quality products on the market and fair prices.  Of
course, that's not on MS' agenda...

Other major industry-standards well supported by all major players are things
like XML, TCP/IP, HTTP etc.  As you see, most are network related, not platform
specific.  Since Windows don't rule on the server, it'd better comply or else MS
customers wouldn't find much happiness on the internet...

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:47b16fb5$1@news.povray.org...
> Darren New wrote:
>
> > Name two other for-profit software companies that encourage you to use
> > the competitors' software when you try out theirs for free?
>
> Here's a better one: Name two other software companies [that anybody has
> heard of]. ;-)

Oracle
Sun

Post a reply to this message

Gail Shaw wrote:

>> Here's a better one: Name two other software companies [that anybody has
>> heard of]. ;-)
> 
> Oracle
> Sun

I thought Sun only made hardware?

[Oh, mind you, they did do that little Java fad...]

OK, 10 points to Gail.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Gail Shaw wrote:
> 
>>> Here's a better one: Name two other software companies [that anybody has
>>> heard of]. ;-)
>>
>> Oracle
>> Sun
> 
> I thought Sun only made hardware?
> 
> [Oh, mind you, they did do that little Java fad...]
> 
> OK, 10 points to Gail.

Adobe
Apple

can I have 10 points too? :D

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:47b1c391@news.povray.org...
> Gail Shaw wrote:
>
> > Oracle
> > Sun
>
> I thought Sun only made hardware?
>
> [Oh, mind you, they did do that little Java fad...]

And MySQL. Don't forget SunOS. They may have done Solaris too, but I'm not
sure.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible escribió:
> Gail Shaw wrote:
> 
>>> Here's a better one: Name two other software companies [that anybody has
>>> heard of]. ;-)
>>
>> Oracle
>> Sun
> 
> I thought Sun only made hardware?
> 
> [Oh, mind you, they did do that little Java fad...]
> 

How about Solaris? (Sun's Unix)

Also, did you hear Sun bought MySQL recently? :)

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:

> Also, did you hear Sun bought MySQL recently? :)

Heh. How do you guys know all this stuff?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:47b1c4a8@news.povray.org...
> Invisible wrote:
> > Gail Shaw wrote:
> >
> >>> Here's a better one: Name two other software companies [that anybody
has
> >>> heard of]. ;-)
> >>
> >> Oracle
> >> Sun
> >
> > I thought Sun only made hardware?
> >
> > [Oh, mind you, they did do that little Java fad...]
> >
> > OK, 10 points to Gail.
>
> Adobe
> Apple
>
> can I have 10 points too? :D

Borland
Blizzard

Wanna keep on going?

Post a reply to this message

Bill Pragnell wrote:

> Adobe
> Apple
> 
> can I have 10 points too? :D

*sigh*

10 points to Bill.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Gail Shaw wrote:

> Borland

Are they still going?

> Blizzard

...who?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:47b1c5b4$1@news.povray.org...
> Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
>
> > Also, did you hear Sun bought MySQL recently? :)
>
> Heh. How do you guys know all this stuff?

We read the news sites.

Post a reply to this message

>> Heh. How do you guys know all this stuff?
> 
> We read the news sites.

Wouldn't that take an absurd amount of time?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:47b1c5f1$1@news.povray.org...
> Gail Shaw wrote:
>
> > Borland
>
> Are they still going?

Sure
http://www.borland.com/

> > Blizzard
>
> ...who?

Diablo
Warcraft
Starcraft
World of Warcraft

Gaming company.

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:47b1c61d$1@news.povray.org...
> >> Heh. How do you guys know all this stuff?
> >
> > We read the news sites.
>
> Wouldn't that take an absurd amount of time?

Max 10 min a day for me. Usually over morning coffee. Many offer a daily
email or rss feed
It beats coming across as ignorant in conversation.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible escribió:
>>> Heh. How do you guys know all this stuff?
>>
>> We read the news sites.
> 
> Wouldn't that take an absurd amount of time?
> 

Doesn't that explain why I don't progress on my coding?

Post a reply to this message

>>> Borland
>> Are they still going?
> 
> Sure

Oh, OK. I thought they went under after Delphi failed...

>>> Blizzard
>> ...who?
> 
> Diablo
> Warcraft
> Starcraft
> World of Warcraft
> 
> Gaming company.

Oh, OK. I hadn't heard of them. [But then, I've never played or even 
seen any of the games you mention, so...]

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

>>> We read the news sites.
>> Wouldn't that take an absurd amount of time?
> 
> Max 10 min a day for me. Usually over morning coffee. Many offer a daily
> email or rss feed
> It beats coming across as ignorant in conversation.

Mmm, OK. I guess if I was talking to people who actually care about such 
matters I might do the same... ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:47b1c732@news.povray.org...
> >>> We read the news sites.
> >> Wouldn't that take an absurd amount of time?
> >
> > Max 10 min a day for me. Usually over morning coffee. Many offer a daily
> > email or rss feed
> > It beats coming across as ignorant in conversation.
>
> Mmm, OK. I guess if I was talking to people who actually care about such
> matters I might do the same... ;-)

Hmm.

Does that mean we don't care, or that we're not people?

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
>>>> Borland
>>> Are they still going?
>>
>> Sure
> 
> Oh, OK. I thought they went under after Delphi failed...
> 

I cringe any time I have to drag out the old Borland C++ IDE..

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
>>> Heh. How do you guys know all this stuff?
>>
>> We read the news sites.
> 
> Wouldn't that take an absurd amount of time?
> 

It's a symptom of not willfully living underneath a rock.

Post a reply to this message

Gail Shaw wrote:
> "Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
> news:47b1c391@news.povray.org...
>> Gail Shaw wrote:
>>
>>> Oracle
>>> Sun
>> I thought Sun only made hardware?
>>
>> [Oh, mind you, they did do that little Java fad...]
> 
> And MySQL. Don't forget SunOS. They may have done Solaris too, but I'm not
> sure.

yep, Solaris is genuinely a Sun Unix.  MySQL is not from them, they just 
acquired the company responsible.  So far, so good and no forks made...

Post a reply to this message

>>> It beats coming across as ignorant in conversation.
>> Mmm, OK. I guess if I was talking to people who actually care about such
>> matters I might do the same... ;-)
> 
> Hmm.
> 
> Does that mean we don't care, or that we're not people?

You're not going to fire me if you think I'm an idiot, are you? ;-)

Besides, I thought most of the people in here are more interested in 
software products than who-owns-who type details?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
>>>> Heh. How do you guys know all this stuff?
>>>
>>> We read the news sites.
>>
>> Wouldn't that take an absurd amount of time?
>>
> 
> It's a symptom of not willfully living underneath a rock.

I just try not to spend time on things that don't interest me. [I 
thought everybody else did too...]

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

stbenge <stb### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> VC is no small 
> download, not for those of us still struggling with dialup (I get 24Kpbs 
> here :(...)

  Which is exactly why it sounds so stupid to immediately uninstall it
right after he had downloaded and tested it, and just because of such
a mundane reason.

  How about thinking of it like this: If the whatever-non-standard-library
he wanted to be included was included, the download would have been even
larger, and it's a library not everyone needs or wants. Now he can download
a smaller package, and then optionally download whatever additional libraries
he wants for it.

  Ditching the compiler because it doesn't come with some non-standard
library by default is like ditching a linux distro because it doesn't
come with all possible software by default. It doesn't make sense.
  What makes more sense in this example is that you download the small
distro, install it, and then you install whatever additional software
you need. This way you don't have to spend three days downloading a
package where half of the stuff is something you will never need.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
> > wouldn't it just be a matter of downloading OpenGL headers and libs?

> Presumedly, since the other compilers already work with OpenGL, he 
> doesn't even need to download them, yes?

  If the other compilers work ok, then why did he even download VS?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Gail Shaw <initialsurname@sentech sa dot com> wrote:
> > I thought Sun only made hardware?
> >
> > [Oh, mind you, they did do that little Java fad...]

> And MySQL. Don't forget SunOS. They may have done Solaris too, but I'm not
> sure.

  Of course Solaris is made by Sun. And don't forget OpenOffice.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> > Blizzard

> ...who?

  In my books you have stopped being a computer nerd from this moment
forward.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>>> Blizzard
> 
>> ...who?
> 
>   In my books you have stopped being a computer nerd from this moment
> forward.

:-(

Why? Because I don't play certain types of games?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Gail Shaw <initialsurname@sentech sa dot com> wrote:
>>> I thought Sun only made hardware?
>>>
>>> [Oh, mind you, they did do that little Java fad...]
> 
>> And MySQL. Don't forget SunOS. They may have done Solaris too, but I'm not
>> sure.
> 
>   Of course Solaris is made by Sun. And don't forget OpenOffice.

Oh yeah. And StarOffice. I completely forgot that part...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Warp escribió:
> Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>>> Blizzard
> 
>> ...who?
> 
>   In my books you have stopped being a computer nerd from this moment
> forward.
> 

I have never played *any* MMORPG. And I know what WoW is and who its 
maker is.

Post a reply to this message

>>   In my books you have stopped being a computer nerd from this moment
>> forward.
>>
> 
> I have never played *any* MMORPG. And I know what WoW is and who its 
> maker is.

I don't even know what a MMORPG *is*.

[Well, I mean obviously it's a massively-multiplayer online role-playing 
game. But what the hell does that even mean anyway?]

Uh... wait... would anybody else like to hold this shovel for a minute?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:47b1cdac@news.povray.org...
>
>   Of course Solaris is made by Sun. And don't forget OpenOffice.
>

I wasn't sure if it was Sun themselves, or a subsiduary. Haven't worked with
either for quite some years

I prefer to sound uncertain than to state a fact as categorically true when
it's not.

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:47b1cfc6$1@news.povray.org...

> I don't even know what a MMORPG *is*.
>
> [Well, I mean obviously it's a massively-multiplayer online role-playing
> game. But what the hell does that even mean anyway?]

GIYF. So is wiki, for that matter.

But if you're too lazy/uninterested to do a search....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMORPG

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:

> 
> Why? Because I don't play certain types of games?
> 

I'm not a gamer in even the remotest sense, and *I* knew who Blizzard was.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> > Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> >>> Blizzard
> > 
> >> ...who?
> > 
> >   In my books you have stopped being a computer nerd from this moment
> > forward.

> :-(

> Why? Because I don't play certain types of games?

  I have never played a game by Blizzard, yet I know what Blizzard is.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:

> 
> Oh yeah. And StarOffice. I completely forgot that part...
> 

Speaking of wasting time downloading software ... a few years ago, I 
downloaded and tried Staroffice. I found it seriously lacking. Felt like 
MS Office circa Windows 3.1

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford <mra### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Speaking of wasting time downloading software ... a few years ago, I 
> downloaded and tried Staroffice. I found it seriously lacking. Felt like 
> MS Office circa Windows 3.1

  You should demand a refund, then.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
>>>> Borland
>>> Are they still going?
>>
>> Sure
> 
> Oh, OK. I thought they went under after Delphi failed...
> 
>>>> Blizzard
>>> ...who?
>>
>> Diablo
>> Warcraft
>> Starcraft
>> World of Warcraft
>>
>> Gaming company.
> 
> Oh, OK. I hadn't heard of them. [But then, I've never played or even 
> seen any of the games you mention, so...]

I cringe any time I see Orchid display his ignorance.

World of Warcraft?  what kind of geek are you to not know Blizzard?! 
they are the id of hack-and-slash games...

Post a reply to this message