Comment Re:Should be (Score 1) 572
Or he was, you know, joking. Like he said. Just sayin'.
The fact of the matter is that, at least in the case of WoW, private servers are downright terrible. They are so incredibly bad that, after spending a few weeks trying some different ones, I was actually driven to spend money on the real deal to have a decent gameplay experience.
Besides obvious problems like population shortage, all the servers I tried had two things in common; the first was XP scaling. In every server I tried, without fail, the exp scaling was always either too low, making it impossible to level properly through normal questing, or far, FAR too high, to the point that you'd finish a quest and have to walk a few miles to find another one you could get XP for.
The second problem common to all of these servers is really stupid glitches, especially terrain glitches. They come in all shapes and sizes. On every private server I tried, it is basically impossible to do any quest around small houses or in a mine (unless you are part of a party or already too high of a level), because as soon as a mob notices you, ten or so mobs in other rooms notice you and charge you through the walls. On servers that already have trouble with not dealing out enough XP this is pretty damn frustrating.
How could they do that given their public, legally binding commitments not to do this?
Would somebody out there PLEASE explain to me how the community promise is even SLIGHTLY legally binding? I keep asking and nobody can adequately explain it to me.
Seriously, are you people completely braindead?
A guy in charge of the website and donations disappears for a while, and the project developers write an "open letter" to get his ass back in line.
There is absolutely no change in the development of the distro itself, which is the part you supposedly use.
Yet for some reason, you're pissed off? To the point of considering migration to other distros?
Who the fuck are you? This was a completely internal problem. Any consequences were, as well, completely internal.
The only reason you even heard about it was because the members used the power of the internet to get to a webmaster who wasn't paying attention.
So please, explain to me: How is your reaction even remotely rational?
I love you guys.
You're hardly a software developer - you aren't willing to find solutions yourself
You know, I used to have this kind of attitude. Then I grew up.
Hyuck hyuck!
Did you know Dennis Ritchie uses Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Outlook to read email and post to Usenet? Have you every thought about why?
No, but I'm sure you'll tell us.
The thing is this: everything works out of the box in Windows XP (well, except for the sound card, but the workaround is posted online and it about 15 minutes of bother to get going).
Unless you happen to be one of the few people who use SATA.
I, at this point in my life, have better things to do with my time than to get things to work in Linux when they already work in Windows. Such as actually develop software.
Part of developing software is learning to set up your environment. Period. If you can't do that much without someone holding your hand, you have no chance of wrapping your head around the internals of a project. You may as well switch to teaching.
This is the problem with the Linux community at Slashdot. It's a very immature and insecure community; when people mention they have problems and are using Windows instead because of those problems, people react with denial and attack the messenger instead of being mature and acknowledging the problems.
Oh, there are problems, to be sure. Some small, some huge. That's why most average users never consider Linux distros. But developers are not average users.
Excuse me, but I tried compiling various ALPS drivers in CentOS. I spent, oh, about 2 hours on it and, to make a long story short, it didn't work. If the Linux community wants to flame me instead of trying to help me (or, at least being civil), that's fine. Your message is clear: You don't want people using Linux. You want people using Windows XP. You do not want to make Linux a viable desktop operating system.
It's viable for me. It's viable for lots of people. Anyone who doesn't mind understanding their platform is usually ok.
And, oh, about Ubuntu: It was very unstable for me, with constant crashes. I blogged all about it.
That seems to be a typical Ubuntu experience for a lot of people.
Thanks for playing.
Linux zealots piss me off.
Well, garsh! Hyuck hyuck!
Exactly the thing making people not use open source.
What do GUI toolkits, audio subsystems, and graphic subsystems have to do with source code licensing?
It is when used on GTK systems.
From wxwidgets.org:
wxWidgets lets developers create applications for Win32, Mac OS X, GTK+, X11, Motif, WinCE, and more using one codebase. It can be used from languages such as C++, Python, Perl, and C#/.NET. Unlike other cross-platform toolkits, wxWidgets applications look and feel native. This is because wxWidgets uses the platform's own native controls rather than emulating them.
Constantly having to use second rate programs because the the GPL is so restrictive and viral that no software vendor wants to deal with it. As much as people spout 'open source' it isn't. It places as hard or harder restrictions on its use as any proprietary software, they are just different restrictions.
Am I understanding this correctly? You are complaining about having to use 'second-rate' GPL programs because the GPL prevents software vendors from using their code? What?
Sure, you can run Creative Suite on a PC, but I don't know a single graphic designer who does it. They all run it on OSX.
You could have saved yourself a lot of time and said the same thing by saying
I don't know a single graphic designer.
you obviously don't believe what others tell you, even when they are seasoned systems level software engineers who have written both Windows and Linux device drivers professionally
You have an interesting definition of 'seasoned'. I guess just about anyone can become a codemonkey these days.
Here's a revolutionary thought: Cite sources or show some sort of supporting research when you make claims about something. Otherwise, nobody has any reason to take you seriously. Any 'professional' should be perfectly ok with that.
The key elements in human thinking are not numbers but labels of fuzzy sets. -- L. Zadeh
