 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 21:49:16 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>
>>>> Either way, don't you find that huge amounts of hardware stops working
>>>> properly when you start it back up again?
>>> Maybe that happens on Windows, but I don't have that experience on
>>> openSUSE 11. Therefore, Windows sucks. ;-)
>> I just observe that there's a *vast* list of KB articles about "device X
>> does something weird after hibernation", "device Y does something weird
>> after hibernation", "device Z stops working after hibernation"... Maybe
>> they fixed all the problems by now, but the fact that so many exist in
>> the first place suggests that getting this to work properly is
>> fundamentally "difficult".
>>
>> (Personally, I wouldn't know. I never, ever, use any kind of standby
>> mode. My PC is always on, or off.)
>
> You kinda missed my point. ;-)
You missed mine. If it's buggy on Windows, why would it not be buggy on
every OS in Creation?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> Text mode X11 configuration apps have been around for a while, longer
>>> than sax2, in fact.
>> ...which is of no help whatsoever if you can't *find* them.
>
> http://letmegooglethatforyou.com/?q=x11+text+mode+configuration
...which again requires Internet access.
>> (Actually, at the time I tried out klogic, we *did* have an Internet
>> connection, but I didn't even bother to *attempt* to make it work under
>> Linux. Making the "simple" stuff work was hard enough...)
>
> Well, then, there's really no excuse for not submitting bugs, is
> there? ;-)
How do you figure that?
> Tux Racer has been around for dog's ages (the last *update* is 7 years
> ago, in fact). "Not much" isn't a good assessment unless you've bought
> into the FUD.
I guess for a suitable definition of "not much" you could argue it
doesn't apply. After all, 3 is greater than 4 for sufficiently large 3. :-P
>> Weirdly, almost all of Valve's games run on Linux - or rather, the GAME
>> SERVER runs on Linux. The clients are Windows-only. (In fairness, what
>> does a game server do? It sends and receives UPD datagrams. Can't be
>> *that* hard to port it. Drawing 3D graphics is another matter...)
>
> Not if you use a crossplatform library like openGL or Mesa. Plenty of
> people write games that use those libraries.
Both of those only support graphics. A game also needs sound, complex
keyboard access, realtime control, etc., all of which varies by platform.
I'm not saying it's impossible to make cross-platform games. But when
you have a huge codebase invested in DirectX, it would be tantamount to
a complete rewrite to move to OpenGL. (Plus Valve games make use of lots
of advanted stuff like DirectX 10. Guess where that's supported...)
>> So you've got several GB of data, and
>> you can only pick apart a few dozen bytes of it per day. Sure, shouldn't
>> take long.
>
> It's not about the complexity, it's about the concept. And the tools.
Of course, why would complexity be any obsticle to comprehending something?
> Reverse-engineering is not generally illegal.
Sure. The fact that the EULA says "you may not reverse engineer this"
doesn't make it illegal at all. No sir.
> In that, you have one team that determines the specs. You compile a
> specification for those functions.
>
> Then you turn the specifications over to a second team that has not
> looked at the code for the original and have them reimplement it.
Given how painfully difficult it is just working out how to *use* the
Win32 API, the chances of somebody correctly implementing a clone of it
seem vanishingly small. (Especially given the vast sea of software that
intimately depends on undocumented functionallity, glitches and the
like.) Also, I hear that various M$ products depend on entire APIs which
are kept "secret".
> That's how we ended up with clone PCs - clean room reverse engineering of
> IBM's BIOS.
Because the BIOS *totally* has the same complexity level as an entire OS
with 20 years of backwards compatibility.
> Have a look at WINE's FAQ about Windows patents and whatnot. You'll
> learn a lot.
I don't see anything in the FAQ about legallity.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
>
>> Andrew, both emacs and vi come with quite good interactive tutorials.
>
> Sure. And do you know how to *find* that?
Run vimtutor instead of vim.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>> Andrew, both emacs and vi come with quite good interactive tutorials.
>> Sure. And do you know how to *find* that?
>
> Run vimtutor instead of vim.
Heh. It always seems easy once you already know how. ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> I'm not saying it's impossible to make cross-platform games. But when
> you have a huge codebase invested in DirectX, it would be tantamount to
> a complete rewrite to move to OpenGL.
They could link their program to Winelib. It would still be a native Linux
binary, and they can use Linux-specific stuff, but the Windows-specific
stuff they use would be handled by Wine.
That's how Picasa for Linux was made (a photo organizer by Google).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> I'm not saying it's impossible to make cross-platform games. But when
>> you have a huge codebase invested in DirectX, it would be tantamount to
>> a complete rewrite to move to OpenGL.
>
> They could link their program to Winelib. It would still be a native Linux
> binary, and they can use Linux-specific stuff, but the Windows-specific
> stuff they use would be handled by Wine.
>
> That's how Picasa for Linux was made (a photo organizer by Google).
Then I guess we're left with "insufficient demand". I presume if Valve
thought there was money in it, they'd do it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 19:01:33 -0500, nemesis wrote:
>
>> Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
>>> Wow... The concept of using a free OS on a product specifically
>>> designed for vendor lock-in seems astounding to me...
>>
>> Nobody can stop free software from running anywhere, not even Apple or
>> Dell!! :D
>
> Apple's having a good run at that on the iPhone....
There's even an iPhoneLinux project...
(although I think they haven't yet got it to *work at all*, last I checked
they were just playing with bootloaders)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> There's even an iPhoneLinux project...
>
> (although I think they haven't yet got it to *work at all*, last I checked
> they were just playing with bootloaders)
I find it amusing that some 3rd party firmware for my MP3 player works
better than the firmware written by the people who designed and
manufactured the player...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I find it amusing that some 3rd party firmware for my MP3 player works
> better than the firmware written by the people who designed and
> manufactured the player...
That's because a 3rd party doesn't have the pressure that every month they
spend developing the software is a month of sales lost...
At some point the OEM has to draw the line and release the product, ok so if
the software was better they would sell 20% more units, but if they waited
until the software was better they would sell 20% fewer units because better
alternatives would become available sooner in the product lifecycle.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> I find it amusing that some 3rd party firmware for my MP3 player works
>> better than the firmware written by the people who designed and
>> manufactured the player...
>
> That's because a 3rd party doesn't have the pressure that every month
> they spend developing the software is a month of sales lost...
>
> At some point the OEM has to draw the line and release the product, ok
> so if the software was better they would sell 20% more units, but if
> they waited until the software was better they would sell 20% fewer
> units because better alternatives would become available sooner in the
> product lifecycle.
Well, they release firmware updates from time to time. Only problem is,
they've more or less stopped doing that any more. The last update was
years ago. (And the player is only about 6 months old.)
It just amuses me though that a bunch of people can take the device
apart and figure out how it works with no access to any technical data
at all. This should be 100% impossible, but somehow they did it. And
they did it better than the makers themselves...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
