Having a romantic breakup is a lifestyle choice (at least that's what the other poster is arguing), and you put it into the same category as mental illness.
and only gives you 10GB of data. Line rental is extra for the dial-up package as well. In terms of units better understood by the general public, that is about 8 hours of BBC iPlayer per month.
Not sure how you did that calculation. iPlayer HD is 3.6-4Mb/s, which works out at around 5-8 hours for 10GB. Standard definition content is 0.7Mb/s, which works out at just under 32 hours in 10GB.
I bet you're talking about a hackintosh
You'd lose that bet. It was one of the first-generation Core 2 MacBook Pros (I waited to replace my G4 PowerBook until they came out with 64-bit ones, because I didn't think 32-bit support in OS X would be around for much longer).
I never had any trouble with Parallels on Core 2 Duos on actual Mac hardware, ran it on 20 iMacs day in day out.
You don't mention what version you ran. They fixed it in Parallels 3.
I should also mention that the Parallels support team was amazing... a post to their forums received immediate attention.
That's the exact opposite of my experience. The ticket about the random crashing had a lot of backtraces attached but silence from Parallels support staff. It was eventually closed once they fixed the bug, with a note saying 'Fixed in Parallels 3'. The cause of the bug was that they completely failed to read the Intel docs on how IPIs work and it only worked on Core 1 as a result of an implementation detail that was explicitly not guaranteed by Intel. After reading that, even if it had been a free upgrade, I wouldn't have been inclined to trust them with code in ring 0.
All that trouble, and an old fashioned screen font still looks better.
Sure, as long as you only ever have one screen DPI to deal with and only need to support a small number of font sizes and don't ever need to print. Of course things look better if you draw them for the exact output format that you're targeting.
The Voodoo Rush was released in 1997. The TNT2 in 1999, the GeForce 2MX in 2000 and GeForce 4200 in 2002. All of them are low-end parts except for the TNT2, and so that's one low-end GPU every 2 years. That's about the upgrade cycle that I remember for people who were active gamers. Certainly not spending hundreds of dollars every year on high-end GPUs, as the original poster claimed.
They've created an entire virtual machine for the sole purpose of font rendering. Doesn't that strike you as just a little bit over the top? Text is just symbols arranged on the screen -- I'm certain better ways of doing this could be imagined that wouldn't require an exploitable VM with root permissions
Spoken like someone who has never actually written code to display text. Sure, with monospaced bitmap fonts, this is an easy problem. For modern text, you start off with a set of bezier paths representing each glyph. That's fairly easy to render, and you can just start drawing each one to the right of the previous one. That will give you blurry characters with ugly spacing, but it's a start.
So how do you fix the blurriness? Now you need some hinting telling the renderer when it should try to snap lines to the nearest pixel rather than approximate it and just rely on antialiasing. Oh, and those hints have to work on every combination of point size for the font and pixel size for the display (and, ideally, for different sub-pixel layouts) and so they're heavily parameterised. Doesn't need to be quite Turing-complete yet, but you're getting very close to Lambda calculus, although you can get away without recursion.
But you still have spacing problems. Consider this trivial example: To. Now, in your naive approach, the left hand side of the o is the same distance from the right hand end of the cross-bar of the T. This distance will be the same as the distance between characters in nm. If you see this at the start of a word, like Tool, then it will look like there is more space between To than between oo or ol and that's ugly. So now you need some kerning hints that tell you how to tweak the spacing for each pair of letters, and these need to be parameterised over every pair of letters. For a simple ASCII font, that's 2^14 combinations, so you don't want to list them individually, you need to compute them.
And that's just very basic letter layout. On a typical window, you may have thousands of characters, which all need to be laid out correctly (and deterministically, so characters don't jump around on every redraw). And so this is on the fast path. Is it surprising that it ends up in the fast path?
Both Windows and *NIX have had serious exploits involving font rendering. X used to put FreeType in the X server (which ran as root), windows used to put an equivalent in the kernel. Both have resulted in vulnerabilities from documents that embed fonts. When you have something that's performance critical (slow text rendering translates to slow window updates, which directly translates to user-perceived slowness) and depends on user-provided data, it's not surprising that there are security holes. X11 now moves font rendering to the client (although, like Quartz, it composites the glyphs on the server), so a font exploit doesn't get you root, it just gets you arbitrary code execution in your current application, for example the web browser.
Lady was quoted by Il Giornale newspaper in 2009 as saying: "I'm not guilty. I'm only responsible for carrying out orders that I received from my superiors."
When that's your best defence, you know you've been doing something wrong...
HELP!!!! I'm being held prisoner in /usr/games/lib!