You can do video chat on the PS3. And you can chat with multiple people at the same time. I've personally done it with three people. I don't know what the limit is. All you need is a PS3, a compatible webcam (could be a Playstation Eye, PS2 EyeToy, and there's various other webcams that supposedly work), and a network connection and you're done. Oh, sorry, replied too fast...missed the requirement about needing to be viewable on a PC. Well if that's not a strict requirement, then you can think about the PS3 option.

They'd get 42 dollars?

As far as casual 2D desktop usage is concerned, ATI is probably fine. The problems, for me, come when needing hardware OpenGL drivers. ATI has been working on it and seems to possibly be improving, but in years past, ATI's support for OpenGL has been a crap shoot at best. First, was whether OpenGL even worked on whatever ATI card you put in. Next, was what bugs to be expecting. Basic things like gl_FragCoord (in fragment shaders) were completely broken...for a long time. And there were several other bugs a developer had to deal with. As an OpenGL developer, you pretty much had the following expectations:

Nvidia driver: OpenGL worked as spec'd. Very few if any bugs.
ATI driver: OpenGL was a crap shoot. Sometimes worked well enough. Sometimes had a ton of bugs that needed working around.
Intel driver: Revert to _software_ OpenGL rendering because Intel's drivers were so completely useless.

If a new extension comes out, or a new version of OpenGL comes out:

Nvidia: expect a new driver within weeks to support it.
ATI: expect support somewhere 6 months to a year later.
Intel: OpenGL? what's that?

ATI seems to be working to improve their situation, but they're still not quite to the level of OpenGL support that NVidia has provided.

This could've lead to a somewhat funny situation as well. QA could've filed a bug saying autofocus didn't work. Then by the time the developer looked at the bug, it could've been in the working period and the developer could've marked the bug as 'WORKSFORME'. Which, when it gets back to that QA guy's plate, depending on whether it was still in the working period or not, the QA guy could've tested it and marked it as 'RESOLVED' if it was working, or re-open the bug if it still wasn't working. If it was re-opened, the whole cycle could continue to repeat.

I don't know if such a thing happened, but it would've been funny (in hindsight at least) if it had.

Actually, it's required to pass your checkride. The FAA examiner will at some point during your checkride do something to distract you and see how well you react to it (drop a pencil on your side of the floor, ask you to calculate true airspeed, etc.).

What's needed are higher standards for driving period. Right now, practically anyone can pass a driver's test and the written test is a joke. If it was more like getting a pilot's license, (harder test, more extensive practical test, required number of hours driving with an instructor), we'd probably all be a lot safer. Fewer idiots would pass the tests and be on the road. Only safe drivers and really determined idiots would be on the road :)

Umm, I think so Brain. But why do we need polka dotted pants at a lan party? Narf!

Hi, nice to meet you. Now increment the number of people you know who cut their teeth writing code on the linux kit before getting into the games business by 1. The Linux kit helped me get to know the GS and VU0, VU1, which came in handy a few months / year later when I interviewed for a position at Playstation (and then got that position). I work elsewhere now, but that PS2 Linux kit was definately valuable to me.

yeah, but i hate the drive from the mainland to hawaii. i just can't hold my breath underwater for that long :(

I knew a guy who was a Physicist. Government cancelled the program he was working on. It was highly classified, so he couldn't put his work experience on a resumé. He decided to take classes at a local community college and got a job delivering pizzas. He eventually got his degree in Computer Science and came to work with us at Kennedy Space Center.

Smart guy. And I really respect how he took a job he normally wouldn't do in order to help re-educate himself in a new field.

I used to ask the same question. I now work for a small startup. Most of us develop on Linux, a couple on Windows, and a couple on Mac. If we could afford to do a linux-only version, we would. But in order to have any kind of marketshare on the desktop, we need to output a Windows version.

The mac and linux versions mostly "just work" and simply need testing. But about a month before release, the entire team needs to stop what they're doing and get the Windows version fully working and tested. Windows development is a resource hog (in terms of people). In some ways, Windows is just different, but it seems in many ways, Windows is deliberately incompatable with anything else at the source code level. Windows makes it as difficult as possible to be cross-platform.

As a result, we get the Windows version out and working before we have time to test the Linux and Mac versions. It kinda sucks to spend that much time and resources on a Windows version. It's either that, or re-route our development resources to Windows-only and ignore the other platforms. Of course, we don't want to do that.

Either Microsoft is really stupid or really evil. Along with declaring printf(), et. al. "not portable, use _printf() instead", we should now use memcpy_s(). Let me go see where that is defined in the C standard. Oh, that's right, it isn't. It's only on Microsoft platforms.

So, what's going on here? Make up your own function (not in the C standard) to replace memcpy() and tell people to use that rather than memmove() (which is in the C standard). What the hell is the motivation here?