Spring RTS Engine

PicassoCT wrote:owned by the wind..

lets do the ms-sequence

95 sucked
98 okay
me/2000 sucked

xp excellent
vista sucked
win 7 acceptable

windowswhatever sucks for sure
windowswtf gonna be okay

Ridiculious

95 was the best thing at the time
98, was just windows 95 2
2000 was windows 95 3
xp was a new ball game, and good at the time
vista was fine
7 is far better than anthing before it

I'll stick with XP fuck these bubblegum OSs

Petah wrote: vista was fine

I have a vista box. I really dont' see much difference between that and Windows 7 except for Windows 7's silly "superbar". I know 7 has a lot of wonderful optimizations happening under the hood that I wish were in Vista, but on the surface they feel about the same.

So yeah, I think Vista gets a bad rap because of its rocky launch, which was to be expected - new driver model and finally locking down their user-security model with UAC meant that there were going to be some inevitable growing pains as driver and app developers got their crap together.

Lol me and 2000 was nothing alike, 2000 was pretty good, ME sucked, XP semi sucked (similar to win98 in suck factor)

Forboding Angel wrote:When Photoshop runs natively on linux and so do my games, I'll consider it.

Understandable. Classic hen-egg-problem (popularity<->more apps).

Forboding Angel wrote:Also, when I can change my fucking resolution without having to edit xorgconf (seriously, how fucking stupid is that?).

I smell FUD... When was the last time you tried a modern Linux distro?
Switching resolution, laptop-ext.monitor-outputs, rotation, output-order (left-of, above etc), LCD-hinting, refresh-rate, brightness is all done with graphical progs that are integrated into your standard Ubuntu/Fedora/OpenSUSE/Arch/whatever-non-exotic. This is all totally standard for some time now.
Where the Linux desktop is lagging behind is its OpenGL implementation and things like color profiles and a proper desktop-sound-system (backends are good though).

My experience: 95, 98, 2000, ME = crash, crash, crash and crash all day long. XP = finally stable, might have switched to linux if not for XP. Vista and 7 pretty much the same thing, agree with Pxtl.

dansan wrote:I smell FUD... When was the last time you tried a modern Linux distro?

I'm sorry, are you referring to my ubuntu 11.04 installation on a computer that is connected to a 42" lcd 1080p hdtv? The same one that I cannot change the fucking resolution to anything above 1024x768 because the OS doesn't recognize the monitor? The same computer/hdtv setup that works fine on win7?

Yeah, I'd say that's pretty fucking modern.

Licho wrote:Lol me and 2000 was nothing alike, 2000 was pretty good, ME sucked, XP semi sucked (similar to win98 in suck factor)

^^This

Pxtl wrote:I have a vista box. I really dont' see much difference between that and Windows 7 except for Windows 7's silly "superbar". I know 7 has a lot of wonderful optimizations happening under the hood that I wish were in Vista, but on the surface they feel about the same.

Seven is entirely different. Using vista and xp makes me want to rip my own balls off.

I like XP. I like 7. Linux makes me "oooh." Vista makes me "ehhh."

It's probably worth noting that I really like ubuntu, but it has some pretty big shortcomings in the wtf were the developers thinking? department. And gnome 3 is pretty.

Don't forget about the massive memory leaks in win98. Those were made of awesome and failcaeks.

Forboding Angel wrote:42" lcd 1080p hdtv resolution 1024x768

That must look awesome

Probability is high, the monitor is not exporting correct EDID-data. Did you install a driver in Win7, or did it work out of the box?

If you want, PM me your xorg.conf*, Xorg.0.log, lspci, lsmod, dmesg, dmidecode, edid (read-edid | edid-decode) and I'll assist you in debugging (and hopefully solving) the problem.

Keep in mind it was connected via vga cable, not dvi/hdmi. I didn't feel like giving away one of my hdmi ports to it.

And yes, it's like nails on a chalkboard. The tv doesn't care for it too much either. And me dicking around with xorg for hours got me nowhere, so I ditched it for 7. Less headaches. Easier use.

Also, even funnier, xorg.conf is now depreciated meaning that all of a sudden you don't even have a way to force it anymore. Good idea.

Jesus developers are shitty designers.

Forboding Angel wrote:
Don't forget about the massive memory leaks in win98. Those were made of awesome and failcaeks.

Those were not intentionally? I always considered those a feature, basically motherlly bluescreen waiting in the background, to send you outside for a smoke or walk to calm yourself, after all your work got eaten by dr. voidberg.

Son, you need some exercise, you need to get outside, meet some girls, get alive, look at you screaming and cursing like a opiated sailor.. those were the kabala meanings of those error numbers.

I'm sorry, are you referring to my ubuntu 11.04 installation on a computer that is connected to a 42" lcd 1080p hdtv? The same one that I cannot change the fucking resolution to anything above 1024x768 because the OS doesn't recognize the monitor? The same computer/hdtv setup that works fine on win7?

Yeah, I'd say that's pretty fucking modern.

I was fixing the family computer ( an old machine of mine ) that ran Ubuntu 11, and installed the nvidia drivers ( it was using software rendered default drivers).

Rebooted to find a screen resolution of 600x300. ( Yes the screen had a smaller vertical resolution than a gameboy!) I couldn't change it, and the ubuntu reccomended actions failed miserably because it couldn't find the gamma of the monitor

This thread now has a artifical anus... will this stop it from dieing? Only time will tell!

http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/archives/ ... _in_th.php

PicassoCT wrote:http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/archives/ ... _in_th.php

That is an awesome clock invention!