Even a dual-core scores fine in the "does it run emulators" column that damnbunni's post mentioned.

Just to make sure I understand you correctly:

In other words, make sure key labels are correct for the current key bindings, and not hardcoded to the names of Xbox 360 controller buttons. Also make options in on-screen menus clickable with the mouse.

How could such an explanation be done correctly?

In other words, Steam Big Picture is atypical. And what's the difference between a 1080p HDTV and a 1080p desktop PC monitor, or between a 720p HDTV and a 720p laptop monitor?

Let me know when these dedicated gaming appliances support community-developed game mods.

The RFCs specifying what is needed before an IANA "designated expert" will accept a new Internet Media Type are a lot of documentation for a new programmer to read and understand, and my attempts to search the web for easier-to-digest introductory information from third parties weren't very fruitful. There's also a week's turnaround for this designated expert to make a decision. And if, say, the development of a new video game produces 20 different internal asset data formats used by the game and by its modding tools, would the designated expert appreciate having to review the registration of each of these formats as an Internet Media Type? I think I'm misunderstanding something very fundamental, and I know there's much I don't know.

Or io.github.some_username.some_projectname.some_type, right? I can get behind that in theory. But it'll take a lot of reengineering of container formats such as file systems and archives. Does FAT32, the default file system for removable storage media 32 GB or smaller such as USB flash drives and SDHC cards, support attributes such as content type? Wikipedia says FAT32 does not support extended attributes. Does exFAT, the default file system for larger removable storage media such as SDXC cards? Wikipedia does not say one way or the other. And Zip, a very common archive format, currently doesn't fully support extended attributes either and won't until Info-ZIP Zip 3.1 comes out.

I'm assuming you're talking about 1. PC games with comparable scope to console disc games, and 2. the first year of sales, as opposed to several years later when a console disc game is likely to have gone out of print. Am I right? If so, I'd love to read a few sources.

You could try one of JXD's gaming tablets, such as the JXD S5110b or the JXD S7300.

In your opinion, what should a company porting a console game to PC do to improve the PC version's interface?

I don't see how this is a plus for consoles over PC, given that Xbox 360 wired controllers work out of the box with PCs and there are PC adapters for classic joypads.

PC can serve this as well, as integrated graphics on Intel's Haswell CPUs has surpassed previous-generation (PS3) console graphics.

If you have more gamers than gaming PCs in the household, or you want to play a particular console's exclusive games (or games that are on PS3+360 or PS4+XbOne but not PC such as Red Dead Redemption), then a console might be indicated. For example, what's the PC alternative to a platform fighter like PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale or Super Smash Bros.?

The publisher makes more revenue from each copy sold in a Steam sale than from each used console game disc sold by GameStop.

Newton looked at the spectrum and saw that it contained six distinct colours to the human eye: red, orange, yellow, green, blue, purple. But his alchemist beliefs considered 7 to be a magic number and so wanted the spectrum to have seven colours. He decided that purple should be split into indigo and violet to reflect this, but didn't split any of the others (even where the difference is at least as pronounced) because it contradicted his mystical thinking.

If even Newton 'One of the smartest men to ever live' couldn't manage to keep his science separate from his mysticism, what hope do you think other religious people have?

No, sorry. A compiler is, in theoretical terms, a partial application of an interpreter to a program. In practical terms, a compiler transforms the input into some other form, which is then executed, whereas an interpreter executes the input directly. JIT compilation is still compilation. A just-in-time compiler is the term given to compilers that produce their output just before it is executed, as opposed to ahead-of-time (AoT) compilers, which produce it all up front, even if some paths are never executed.

There's some complication, because most environments that do JIT compilation also include interpreters that gather profiling information to incorporate into the JIT compiled code and to improve startup times. JavaScript implementations, in particular, often spend a reasonable amount of time in the interpreter because most web pages contain a load of JavaScript that's only run one or two times and the time taken to compile it is more than the time saved to execute it. Some have multiple compilers - JavaScriptCore from the WebKit project has an interpreter and three different JIT compilers that have different points in the space between compilation time and execution time - they'll recompile hot paths multiple times as they're executed more, with more optimisation each time. The key difference between the interpreter and compilers here is that the compilers are each invoked once on a segment of code and it's then executed without involving the compiler. The interpreter is involved every time the bytecode is run. It reads a bytecode and then jumps to the segment of interpreter code that executes it and then returns. The compiler takes a sequence of bytecodes, generates a fragment of native code to execute them, and then this fragment is combined with other fragments to produce a running program.

The shader compilers in drivers, however, are not JIT compilers. They are AoT compilers that are invoked at load time - often at install time. They don't compile the code just before it's run, they typically compile it once and cache the result for multiple invocations of the program. Some drivers (Windows and Android come to mind) have a mechanism that allows you to do the compilation at install time. Unlike most JIT environments, graphics drivers don't tend to use run-time profiling for optimisation, the bytecode exists solely for the purpose of providing an ISA-neutral distribution format.

Ugh, trust MS to fuck up a reasonable UI choice. On OS X, by default, it only happens for programs and requires you to close the dialog and then bring up the context menu for the program while holding a modifier key. You don't know how to do it unless you've actually read all of the way to the end of the dialog, so it generally protects people.

There are some interesting corner cases though, such as shell scripts. The file manager doesn't know if the thing that you tell it to open a shell script with is a text editor or a script interpreter, so may warn spuriously.