Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Windows 7: "I'm up here, boys!" (Score 2, Funny) 452

by ZinnHelden (#29835713) Attached to: Engineers Tell How Feedback Shaped Windows 7

You'd almost forget about carrying around her legacy baggage or those nights when, for seemingly no reason at all, she would simply stop speaking to you and when you asked what was wrong she'd just spit a string of hex code at you and expect you to figure it out.

Seems like a lot of /.'ers would find women easier to comprehend if this were the case.

Comment: Re:I wouldn't have considered piracy (Score 1) 737

by ZinnHelden (#28546877) Attached to: Blizzard Confirms No LAN Support For <em>Starcraft 2</em>
My guess is using Arbiters to Recall in a bunch of carriers that were sitting safely in the base. I'd rather have the carriers protecting the arbiters, especially since they move at roughly the same speed. Now, arbiters and carriers, which then warp in ground troops... that's punishing.

Comment: Re:Disappointing (Score 1) 737

by ZinnHelden (#28545523) Attached to: Blizzard Confirms No LAN Support For <em>Starcraft 2</em>
But is it smart enough to use your internal IP's or is it going to set up your connections to the external IP? It feels like to get it to work you'd have to route it at the external IP, since almost everyone is on 192.168.1.0/24 when at home. I guess a way around this would be a game type or checkbox that said "We are all on the same LAN"

Comment: Re:I wouldn't have considered piracy (Score 5, Informative) 737

by ZinnHelden (#28545447) Attached to: Blizzard Confirms No LAN Support For <em>Starcraft 2</em>
The official forums are filled at this point with people either deriding the exclusion of LAN play or people popping up to defend this as a good move... Though I can't say I like the implicit assumption that all the people that want LAN play back are pirates, as in this Blizzard response from Karune: Source

As mentioned by Rob Pardo in interviews, piracy is a serious problem and often times tie in closely with LAN. At the end of the day, we want the best for the community and fans that support our games, and having chunk of the community pirate the game actually hurts the community.

1) Pirated servers splinter the community instead of consolidating all players who love to play the game. Battle.net will bring players together in skirmishes, ladder play, custom games, and allow everyone the opportunity to share a common experience.

2) More people on Battle.net means more even more resources devoted to evolving this online platform to cater to further community building and new ways to enjoy the game online. World of Warcraft is a great example of a game that has evolved beyond anyone's imagination since their Day 1 and will continue to do so to better the player experience for as long as players support the title. The original StarCraft is an even better example of how 11 years later, players still love and play this title, and we will continue to support and evolve it with patches.

We would not take out LAN if we did not feel we could offer players something better.

If I were to buy StarCraft II or any other title, I know the money I spent would be going to supporting that title. Personally, I would be upset that others were freeloading while others are legitimately supporting a title that has great potential and goals of making this title have 'long legs.'

If you like a song a lot, buy it, and that artist will only come out with more awesome songs for you. If you like a game, buy it, and we will promise to constantly work to make the player experience better at every corner we can.

Support the causes you believe in (This is applicable to all things, not just gaming).

Don't be a leech to society, innovation, and further awesome creations.

Bolding is his.

Comment: Disappointing (Score 5, Insightful) 737

by ZinnHelden (#28544977) Attached to: Blizzard Confirms No LAN Support For <em>Starcraft 2</em>
Quite disappointing, considering some friends and I still get together and play an 8 man LAN every month or so of Starcraft 1. Feels like an internet connection would be saturated if we were all trying to send data back and forth to BNet, especially the uplink. Maybe if BNet is just used for a quick auth and lobby, then a LAN game is started, that might not be so bad, but it's not looking that way.

Shame the official reason is to combat piracy as well, since it seems this will cause more players to find BNet emulators and won't solve the piracy problem.
Mozilla

New Firefox Project Could Mean Multi-Processor Support 300

Posted by timothy
from the but-should-a-browser-need-multi-processors dept.
suraj.sun writes with this excerpt from Mozilla Links "Mozilla has started a new project to make Firefox split in several processes at a time: one running the main user interface (chrome), and another or several others running the web content in each tab. Like Chrome or Internet Explorer 8 which have implemented this behavior to some degree, the main benefit would be the increase of stability: a single tab crash would not take down the whole session with it, as well as performance improvements in multiprocessor systems that are progressively becoming the norm. The project, which lacks a catchy name like other Mozilla projects (like TaskFox, Ubiquity, or Chocolate Factory) is coordinated by long time Mozillian, Benjamin Smedberg; and also integrated by Joe Drew, Jason Duell, Ben Turner, and Boris Zbarsky in the core team. According to the loose roadmap published, a simple implementation that works with a single tab (not sessions support, no secure connections, either on Linux or Windows, probably not even based on Firefox) should be reached around mid-July."

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (2) Thank you for your generous donation, Mr. Wirth.

Working...