Linux is "that hacker platform" while Windows is "what all businesses use".
Uh, sure. In 1993. It's 2012
The only safety involved is "this here is Microsoft country, and the Microsofties on the board want Microsoft. MICROSOFT!" If you're getting generous donations, you don't want to piss off your corporate overlords.
Optimus with bumblebee works just like it would in Windows. Render using the nvidia card on-demand and display using the integrated card. This is perfectly fine. There is no "screwing around" involved if you use Ubuntu or similar idiot-oriented distros.
The switching bit is additional functionality; it's like switching in the BIOS between integrated and discrete, except you don't have to reboot. The common user is unlikely to care about this, nor is it necessary, but it's pretty nifty if you want it. Or are we going from complaining about lack of options to complaining about the existence of options?
I have an nvidia optimus/k1000m on a shiny new thinkpad w530. The kernel-included nouveau and intel drivers work fine. Switching between these without restarting is even theoretically possible with vga_switcheroo (though it apparently doesn't entirely work on the w530 specifically). Using the "optimus" bit is also perfectly possible with bumblebee.
However, even with bumblebee, the drivers are included with the kernel, allowing you to fully use KMS, bootup logos, etc. For full 3D, you can even still rely on the builtin intel drivers and use the proprietary nvidia drivers with bumblebee (or not, if your system allows you to switch fully to discrete mode).
(spoilers, if you've never read Asimov)
Unlike the horrible movie, the book "I, Robot" was a series of short stories dealing with the ambiguity of the laws. (The movie was more some bizarre combination of "free the robots!" mixed with "the three laws are a lie".) Additionally, the ambiguity of the laws came up multiple times in the Robot/Foundation universe, such as in "The Naked Sun" and "The Robots of Dawn."
The laws are paradoxically hard-and-fast yet ambiguous. In any case where any law is essentially violated (using one of the workarounds), the robots "go crazy" or die. This applies to the Zeroth Law; witness the end of Giskard due to the mere inability to determine if an action was harmful or not.
In the end, it's something like a moral version of the Halting Problem. Even if you can define "harm" to the satisfaction of everyone, you can't determine if something ultimately leads to harm or not.
Doom3 may have these things, but they don't make it any more scary. It's still bland, boring, and unimaginative. The discussion was about "terrifying," which it isn't, not "is it a FPS" or "does it have certain gameplay elements".
There are better FPS's. There are better Horror FPS's. Some of these are even actually scary. For instance, Amnesia. Doom 3 is just bad.
That said, the Doom3 engine may not be bad, and hey, it's GPL'd now, so you can even go fix it if it is. This is entirely orthogonal to Doom3 the game. But now you have a (probably good, mature, stable) 3D engine that can output to the Oculus Rift, and it's Free(tm).
I found it terrifying.
I have not played "BFG Edition," so perhaps this is the version where they entirely remade it into something actually scary by dumping everything from the original and remaking it from the ground up. Otherwise, the only "terrifying" it was was terrifyingly bad.
I mean by this point "space marines go to hell" isn't exactly surprising or a spoiler like it was with the original, so most of the game comes down to flashing lights and generic monsters predictably jumping out of things. This isn't scary. This doesn't even make you jump in your seat, unless maybe it's your first game of this variety.
(Even the original wasn't really scary per se, but it did build the "wtf" factor and provided a lot more interesting levels and atmosphere IMO
But if you think this game is scary, you should play more actually scary games. Silent Hill 2, Fatal Frame, Lone Survivor, or plenty of others. Games that actually have you worried when you get up to open a door. Games that don't "scare" you by having things jump out of the closet, but scare you when something isn't there, that have you questioning what actually just happened.
I can understand not liking it, but there are a lot worse games out there.
This may be technically true, but Doom 3 isn't even good enough to waste your time playing it when there are far better games out there. A waste of a waste of time!
And, failing that, if they just got some reasonable and non-discriminatory patent licensing terms, there's a few million dollars lying about that they could have a chunk of just by NOT suing.
A few million dollars is nothing
I know this is a poor analogy because of all the variables, but to emulate PS2 you need a very hefty PC with a real GPU. Something far beyond the power of a PS3.
Utterly irrelevant. A PS2 uses an unusual proprietary architecture and games tend to take advantage of very low-level architecture-specific tweaks. A PSP is a pretty standard MIPS R4000 and a fairly crappy but fairly standard GPU. With high-level emulation, dyamic recompilation, etc, it shouldn't be hard to emulate even on modest hardware. With today's GHz+ CPUs in phones, brute forcing may even be a reasonable option.
[...] lets you play PSP Games with a touchscreen which was something PSP owners had wanted for years.
I've never heard anyone want this. Is this anything like all the people who wanted a non-UMD version of the PSP, and eventually got it in the PSPgo, which promptly fell flat on its face due to lack of actual interest?
Of course, I can always imagine an emulator being popular, if it plays copies of games (regardless of whether you consider this OK or not).
Same thing. The point is that they'd colonized the galaxy (one of the faulty assumptions), and we'd see them, or evidence thereof, and we don't, for any of the given reasons.
Otherwise you'll have to come up with a really good reason why we wouldn't be asking or questioning their clear existence despite a lack of any observation or evidence.
The Fermi Paradox assumes quite a few things which may not be true, such as interstellar travel being practical or desirable, life and intelligence being similar to our own, the fact we could actually spot it with our current techology (or that it would desire to be seen), and that artifacts of past civilizations would actually last for the millions of years between said civilization and our own.
We are barely able to start seeing extrasolar planets. The idea that "if it's out there, we would have seen it" seems a bit silly for any number of reasons. For instance, noticing, here on earth, the tiny blip in time a civilization that might use radio waves seems unlikely. People who subscribe to the technological singularity might assume that any civilization with high enough technology would be incomprehensible to us; think of us trying to tune into a radio show (or look for smoke signals) when they're using the internet. I think the article above lists a few more.
Star Trek may well not be possible as you say; that doesn't mean something better isn't.
Apple chose to use the "nuclear option," and have no-one to blame but themselves. These things are typically settled reasonably
Apple can't win this way in the long run. They may have a big pile of cash, but if everything they want to do suddenly gets nickel-and-dimed, they'll find that only goes so far.
The controller raises a lot of interesting possibilities
Just like the Wii! And the GameCube! And the N64! Yet, somehow, none of these "interesting possbilities" ever seem to pan out into a large library of games.
But I haven't been hearing a lot of buzz about it, considering it's supposed to be launching next month. I know it's supposed to be as powerful as the PS3/360.
Wow, it's just as powerful as the consoles I've had for the last 5 years. And it's going to cost more than they have in a long time. And guess what! Instead of one of those puny 500GB PS3-with-a-game bundles, we're going to get a whole 32GB flash, and a piece of crap. Yawn. They could try a lot harder.
But I haven't heard much about the debut game lineup.
Then you haven't been paying attention. It's going to have some games at launch: a lot of non-exclusives with a few bizarre exclusives (Bayonetta 2?) and yet more rehashing of old Nintendo franchises.
Frankly I think Nintendo, for all their faults (most notably, their admittedly piss-poor online support), kind of gets the short-shrift in the gaming community. Their systems may not have the cutting edge CPU's and GPU's, but they do what they do pretty well.
This is utter BS and I'll tell you why Nintendo is getting well-deserved apathy: games. The NES and SNES had amazing lineups of games that are still playable today. The N64 started a long line of bad decisions for Nintendo: tiny cartridges; it had Mario64 and Zelda64 that were genre-defining games, but little else that stands up. The GameCube had slightly more, but due to tiny disc size and bizarrely-different controller, the lineup wasn't huge. Still, I'd take it over the Wii, which has nothing defining, lots of rehashing (Mario, Zelda, Metroid, few of them any good), and the occasionally good third-party title Nintendo refuses to import (Xenoblade).
It's not (just) because Nintendo panned the community by repeatedly insulting the "hard-core" constituents, it's a continuing downward spiral of crap gaming library. Granted, this hasn't been the last-last generation where I packed six shelves with just the good PS2 games, but the PS3 has a solid three shelves, and the 360 has a good two shelves, and I don't give a crap where any of the Wii games are.
Now I should be excited about the Wii U, which is just now playing catchup with last gen and getting lots of ports? Sony is already pushing to have the Vita and PS3 interact to kill whatever "interesting possbilities" the WiiU wants to hold exclusive. Love or hate Sony, they can build a platform that has a game library worth playing. If Microsoft does something similar with smartphones or the Surface, say bye to any interest in the Wii U from anyone.
possesive
"Possessive," but then, Muphry's Law.
8 Catfish = 1 Octo-puss
