Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:43 am Post subject:
32 Bit Crap
I got Vista several months ago and i did a dual boot with my WinXp MCE
and so i went snooping through the vista folders and tried to run some apps but everytime i just get a message saying that its not a valid Win32 application. So I searched for something that may contain some info on this with nothing. BTW my Vista is 32 Bit Edition/version/whatever
If there is a work around, i might be running DirectX 10 on XP soon
Also, does anyone know specifically what files are needed for XP to run like getting rid of calc notepad network crap unneeded language files etc... _________________ With sadness in my heart and joy in my mind QUICK_EDIT
Personally i dont trust vista yet, I will still be using xp for a few more years yet.
SomeGuy[YR:SF] wrote:
Im with Dregan. Vista is too "new" to trust from Microsoft yet.
Hell I might skip it altogether like I did ME/NT2000.
But I already have it, I have had it for several months as in I own it and non-returnable (wouldn't anyway) but yes in several years, they will be releasing another Windows anyway.
TSHyper wrote:
Some Vista executables are different to standard XP ones, i have no clue why though.
Yea, i don't understand what they did, but I went through various files and they contain a "MUI" thing which i think is for backup recovery _________________ With sadness in my heart and joy in my mind QUICK_EDIT
Also Known As: banshee_revora (Steam) Joined: 15 Aug 2002 Location: Brazil
Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:55 pm Post subject:
My new laptop came with Vista. I don't like Vista. It uses a shitload of RAM and asks my authorization to do everything. And it also has this DRM crap included. I'll keep XP on my main pc for a longer time, but Vista will stay on my laptop because... err... it's genuine. And it gives some advantages for programmers... although I don't like programming on Microsoft platforms... QUICK_EDIT
I got vista with laptop too... sad story.
Uses 700mb of ram while being idle =/
I'm dual booting it with linux, the only reason I still have vista is because linux and my university's wifi don't like each other. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 07 Mar 2006 Location: In ur BIOS, Steeln ur Megahurtz!
Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:07 am Post subject:
im not gonna say it. i'll just let you guys ruin your lives with XP and Linux. _________________ Please, read the signature rules of the forum. QUICK_EDIT
Staying with XP for some time, as I did with Win98.
Then I'll go for some simple Linux distro.
Chiel, ever actually seen any Linux? Some of them are veery easy to use.
Seriosly, you are a trend slave. _________________ Time will tell...
Sooner or later...
Time will tell... QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 10 May 2007 Location: NERV headquarters in EVA-01
Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:09 pm Post subject:
vista is evil i cant run most C&C games or some of my other games, i feel your pain _________________ U flame me the evangelion series will kill u QUICK_EDIT
I'll revert to Vista when I'll buy a new PC (my current one was bought in 2002 and even though I bought new videocard and increased RAM, my PC is crap nowadays...). However, I don't like the fact that Vista eats up 512 Mb of RAM only on desktop, without any applications.
Some stores sell laptops with 512 Mb RAM and Vista installed :S These are complete idiots... _________________
Sealab 2021 wrote:
Marco: So you rigged the OFF button with a tear gas grenade? Ho ho ho, you magnificent bastard!
Sparks: Oh, that's nothin', man. The ON button is a 50-megaton hydrogen bomb.
Most games.
Unreal Engine 3 runs on Linux, and many games based on it will, too.
Unreal Tournament 3 is already announced.
Same goes for ID Tech 5.
You can expect most of the future games using Unreal 3 (or 4) and ID Tech 5.
Also, right now, usage of Linux is going up about 50% a year (two last years), so more game-makers will probably start considering it as a gaming platform. _________________ Time will tell...
Sooner or later...
Time will tell... QUICK_EDIT
im not gonna say it. i'll just let you guys ruin your lives with XP and Linux.
Its called dual booting...
XP Pro + Vista + One 1TB Hard Drive plzthx.
Kiith-Sa wrote:
Also, right now, usage of Linux is going up about 50% a year (two last years), so more game-makers will probably start considering it as a gaming platform.
I became one of them. T.T _________________ ... QUICK_EDIT
Me too:p.
What are you working on?
XP+Linux of choice on 80GB drive in my case. _________________ Time will tell...
Sooner or later...
Time will tell... QUICK_EDIT
Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 12:14 am Post subject:
DirectXbox?
Vista is good graphically, but in performance its shit along with compatibility.
Most big title games are only for Windows but it seems Macs are seeing the light and linux doesn't let you play them either. but Macs are only good for paper weights so whatever...(they do the same things Windows does but not as much)
Joined: 28 Sep 2005 Location: Mixing psilocybin in your drinks.
Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 4:36 am Post subject:
Re: DirectXbox?
Renegangsta wrote:
but Macs are only good for paper weights so whatever...(they do the same things Windows does but not as much)
You don't seem to realize that Apples are more secure than Windows (just not nearly as secure as what their PR department would have you think, though), and that though they can do everything a Windows machine can (almost everything, actually...), they can do those things better.
Don't forget that the Alky project is still in Alpha stage, as well. It'll take a while to perfect the whole thing, you know. _________________
[quote="DCoder"]There is no sanity left in this thread.[/quote] QUICK_EDIT
Macs are not more secure, it's just that no cracker bothers trying to look for security bridges in this god forsaken OS.
Only thing Macs can do 'better' is video editing... seriously, all mac users do is endlessly talk about how great their OS is. QUICK_EDIT
Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 9:47 am Post subject:
Re: DirectXbox?
Sir Modsalot wrote:
You don't seem to realize that Apples are more secure than Windows (just not nearly as secure as what their PR department would have you think, though), and that though they can do everything a Windows machine can (almost everything, actually...), they can do those things better.
This just shows your intelligence on a Apple...AKA 0%. Please return to your special people class. The only reason Apple is labeled as secure, is because nobody gives a rats ass about it in the first place.
Styledatol wrote:
Macs are not more secure, it's just that no cracker bothers trying to look for security bridges in this god forsaken OS.
Only thing Macs can do 'better' is video editing... seriously, all mac users do is endlessly talk about how great their OS is.
I have a Mac nearby, and you don't hear positive things about it from me.
IcySon55 wrote:
I have great loathing for the Mac OS. I hate almost everything about it.
No kidding, makes me wish some hackers would target the Macs rather then Windows. -_-
ChielScape wrote:
im not gonna say it. i'll just let you guys ruin your lives with XP and Linux.
Take the ego outside, while you feel Vistas all bright and wonderful, you have to remember that us tech support people are shooting blind in the dark currently with Vista.
Pray that computer with Vista doesn't break down.
Another thing, some of us like to play oooold games that Vista flat out doesn't support, yet XP does, so I think you can see why people prefer XP over Vista still. The whole removal of compatibility with things before XP was more or less of a shot in the foot for Microsoft...luckily they missed the toes. _________________ ... QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 28 Sep 2005 Location: Mixing psilocybin in your drinks.
Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 10:35 am Post subject:
Re: DirectXbox?
Von Kriplespac wrote:
This just shows your intelligence on a Apple...AKA 0%. Please return to your special people class. The only reason Apple is labeled as secure, is because nobody gives a rats ass about it in the first place.
Lolwut? OS X is built on a UNIX foundation, so if nothing else this makes it, even slightly, more secure than Windows. I invite you to take careful note that I said "even slightly" before commenting on that. So what if nobody cares about it? Doesn't mean viruses haven't been written for it. _________________
[quote="DCoder"]There is no sanity left in this thread.[/quote] QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 26 Nov 2002 Location: Algae Colony On Mars
Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 1:03 pm Post subject:
Quote:
I have great loathing for the Mac OS. I hate almost everything about it.
I love you. I want your babies.
I'm going to say this once and once only: if you want stability and security, use Linux, BSD or Solaris. OSX is NOT as secure as claimed. It is more secure and stable than Windows but not by that much. The main reason for the stability/security of the other three is the open source of the code. OSX may have built upon Darwin but the code has less eyes looking on it, looking for bugs and exploits. If you don't like Linux/BSD/Solaris for whatever reason (no reason to not like Linux really, it's advanced to a level of user-friendlyness and has pretty much whatever you need available in the repositories) then if you want security/stability then use Windows 2000. 2000 is the single best piece of software ever made by Microsoft, full stop.
Macs are overpriced and for elitist wankers who know nothing about a computer and believe Steve Jobs is the Messiah. They have more money than sense and are under the impression that they are hip and cool. I would rather everyone on this planet use Windows XP than Mac OSX, that's how strongly I feel. _________________
Quote:
This is sexier than what this forum was supposed to tolerate. - Banshee
Joined: 28 Sep 2005 Location: Mixing psilocybin in your drinks.
Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 6:25 pm Post subject:
Clazzy wrote:
2000 is the single best piece of software ever made by Microsoft, full stop.
Macs are overpriced and for elitist wankers who know nothing about a computer and believe Steve Jobs is the Messiah. They have more money than sense and are under the impression that they are hip and cool. I would rather everyone on this planet use Windows XP than Mac OSX, that's how strongly I feel.
QFT, my way of thinking, as well. I find Apple's computers to be decent, but I'll always choose plain Windows over it because of games (and because of freedom of hardware), and you'll never see me using an iPod or iPhone. Not ever. Too much proprietary bullcrap for me to find them truly functional devices. When I myself would be moving to Linux, well, I don't know. I haven't felt like switching, I've just been comfortable with XP. Since switching from Home to Pro I haven't had any system crashes or BSODs, and the extra network and server functions will do just great in the future for me. _________________
[quote="DCoder"]There is no sanity left in this thread.[/quote] QUICK_EDIT
Posted: Wed Dec 26, 2007 5:07 am Post subject:
Programmin' Biznitches
Two Months Later
So instead of creating another worthless thread i figured i'd just dump this here.
Well I have been pondering the possibility of programming but i'm stuck in three spots:
What language is best (in your own opinion if needed)
im thinking C++ it sounds good
i want something wide ranged, something you don't have to do tons of updates and patches for like VB and .net... i think ¬_¬
Where best tutorials and or sample codes and what not can be found
How to program
Once I know what tools to use and order and all that I can get a hold on it
Personally, if you don't have a solid grasp on Object Orientated Programming, and by that I mean OOP design patterns (such things called Adapters, Factories, Builders, Observer classes...), I suggest you start with C.
C is really handy for small projects, supported by many, and will introduce you to systems level programming. From there, you could pick up a book on software design patterns and learn how to undertake OOP effectively, then move onto C++ or java. By all means, you could jump to C++ or java immediately without learning patterns, but overall, I think it really helps to know OOP design patterns, and helps you create good code.
I first started out with Visual Basic 6.0 / .NET, then moved onto C. After a while moved to Java and then went on to LISP and C++. But C remains my ‘language of choice’, since it is quite universal, and you can use it to program a powerful supercomputer through to a simple RISC processor. In my free time I usually program small apps, so C functional programming isn’t that bad.
The most fun language I have come across is LISP (scheme), it gives you a new perspective on things. They used it to create Jak and Daxter! QUICK_EDIT
C does not do functional programming... Functional programming is what Lisp, Scheme (two different languages, btw), Haskell and python lambdas do (and c++ stl's <functional> is worth mentioning, although not quite there).
And starting with C is the easiest way to shoot yourself in the foot. Manual memory allocation, pointers, stack vs heap variable storage, pass-by-value, no bounds checking, need I go on? Sure, all that is good when you know what you're doing, but to start off with something like that is a bad idea. QUICK_EDIT
DCoder is totally right about C being annoying. However, it is my opinion that learning C is like building an electrical circuit, it will teach you a lot about debugging / probing, in an unaided environment where you must investigate, learn and take note. He is more experienced then I, so it might be best to listen to him.
The one problem with me starting out on high abstraction / higher level languages was that, I didn't initally understand how the computer did what I told it in detail. C filled that void, and taught me the principles behind computer architecture. It also allowed me to program on many systems from the sony PSP, solaris, linux and windows for some. However, I suppose it's like saying one should learn statistical mechanics before one learns thermodynamics and condensed matter theory, or general relativity before special relativity, so DCoder does have a point.
DCoder wrote:
Lisp, Scheme (two different languages, btw)
'scheme' is a dialect of LISP, as you know, I didn't mean otherwise. If I didn't know they were different, why whould I put (scheme) in brackets to denote that? I am just used to LISP interpreters supporting a variety of dialects, and hence usually treat scheme as a variant of LISP (i.e. heavily related to it). QUICK_EDIT
Thanks for the info yall,
but i got several more questions:
1. What do the extensions .h .c .cpp and any others i didn't list mean?
2. Is the Microsoft Visual C++ and or the other packages what i should use for programming
3. What are some basic things i need to know about creating programs
like memory management what not
Eq, my point was exactly what you said about statistical mechanics. Sure you should know how the stuff works in detail, I'm not arguing that, but you should not start with that, since your mind will most likely overload. Also, while you were curious to see the low level stuff, some people will most likely be content with just having working code without boggling their minds with malloc vs new vs new[] and such.
Gangsta, so you've decided to start with C++? Keep in mind that each compiler has its own extra features and shortcomings, so code that compiles in one compiler will not necessarily compile in another. And most of the windows compilers, including Microsoft's and Borland's, don't port to Linux. Certain IDEs have better GUI development tools than others, and all of those GUI tools are also, you guessed it, incompatible with each other. So, whatever you pick, you're going to have problems should you decide to switch later. I personally use Borland's old C++ Builder 6 and Dev-C++, and am looking into updating to Borland's new Turbo C++ Explorer.
As for file extensions, .h/.hpp is a header file, which contains the declarations ("there is a class called cMonkey, and it has functions Eat() and Run()"), but no actual code, .c/.cpp/.csharp is a source code file, which contains the actual implementations of those functions.
All that is covered in any decent e-book on C/C++ programming. So is memory management and other "basic things". Since you are focusing on C++, read Bjarne Stroustrupp's "The C++ Programming Language" and Bruce Eckel's "Thinking In C++", but steer away from "Beginning C++ Game Programming". Herbert Schildt also writes good stuff, but his attitude irks me. QUICK_EDIT
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
32 Bit Crap
