> From: Alberto Monteiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > The Fool wrote: > > >> Now you force me to do a little Linux bashing :-) > > > > Never a bad thing. > >
> Yes, because it keeps our criticism, not because > Linux is worse than the standard PC-alternative :-P But 99% of open source progams outside of the the top 30 are terrible, horrble, craptackularly bad. > >> Also, I never found a newsgroup with gurus that could help me. > >> All my problems were analysed, solutions were proposed, but > >> they seldom worked. > > > > Funny I never had that problem with the microsoft newsgroups I used. > > But I could _never_ get any satisfactory solution to windows problems > that didn't boil down to: > > (a) F&R > > or > > (b) buy or get a pirate copy of a very expensive software You gotta know the right people in the right newsgroup. > >> End of Linux bashing - OTOH, the things that work are really > >> great, with many possibilities for intelligent design [oops...] > >> and learning. > > > > I'll reiterate that I can have uptimes of 6 months without crashes in > > windows NT 4.0sp6 and windows2000sp4. I can have upwards of 60 > > separate Internet explorer sessions going, for literally months, > > without any crashes whatsoever. > > > > It's about knowing what you doing. > > Or it's about getting very expensive software? Like? (I got Vc++ for $100 and that came with NT 4.0 (~'$299 value' at the time), and VB for $100 and thats it). > BTW, most of the "dual" things that I do with my computer > are _many_ times faster with Linux than with Windows [except > boot and reset]. > > Even things are designed for windows, like games in Flash, > run faster in Linux - my 6-year-old once complained that a > game was too fast for him on Linux, before he got the knack > to win it. > > Windows sometimes seems horribly slow. I don't know what > the damned thing is doing. Maybe it's compensating the > faster boot :-) It's running a whole bunch of services that you can turn off, like indexing service, and probably some others (office), which don't really help you very often. You can also use task manager to see which programs are running and using what percent of the cpu at any given time. Any game that doesn't have built in timing isn't a very well written game. Any game that's using Flash is probably pure $h!t anyway. Anything run in browser is going to run like $h!t because of Java$h!t. > > Write your own c++ compiler that has built in strings, no buffer > > overflow flaws (no evil printf like functions), built in lex, and > > yacc, and perl-like functionality. > > The problem with those projects is that I can't get motivated > by them. Aeons ago, I like to write games, but now I look at You don't do it because it is easy. You do it because it is hard. If you are really looking for some hardcore programmming to do as a hobby try starting here: <<http://romhacking.net>> or <<http://www.rpgone.net>> or <<http://agtp.romhack.net/>> None of that sissy c++. All hardcore ASM. > the games I wrote with nostalgia - I can't get anyone to play > those dumb text interfaces. And graphic programming requires too > much effort for a meagre outcome. Even a Strip Tic-Tac-Toe would > be too complex to be worth writing. What tic-tack-toe logic would be difficult? Seems like their would only be about 10 significant patterns you'd need to match. > Ok, I think I have a project worth writing: gnuchess is too strong, > and there's no way to weaken its play. xboard is the CGI to gnuchess, > and it enables an _other_ chess program to play. So maybe I should > write a chess program that plays _random_ moves, as a challenging > chess oponent to my 6-year-old :-) > > I could beat all computer chess programs up to about 1990 or so. > By then the match was tough, but now with gnuchess I can only win > by cheating. > > Maybe a windows-gnuchess port would be a beatable opponent :-) Find an old board game that noones made a version of. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
