From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Fri Jul 15 00:57:21 2005 X-Original-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Delivered-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=HLJLW2ZYrLlS1F7U1WI1NYvIYXkFw9Zkf7/DsIOOKhFgcGdaZbt08XrNnGIyDoXH3drSxqBf7VQcGzep5e4W7Wq6Jk+RW++b5DihmZHhv6Q4A+MQhtyyaD03O0vOHisFSZ2WmOBTt33v2DAtayJuihuoEZg0NC70k3MqriZpavY= ; Message-ID: <20050714225458.32683.qmail@web31014.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 15:54:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Frederic Fouche Subject: Re: [MiNT] Re[3]: usage of wind_calc() To: Evan Langlois Cc: mint In-Reply-To: <1121380077.16044.91.camel@taro.coolrunningconcepts.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-870187692-1121381698=:31726" X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-To: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: x130844@yahoo.com Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-Id: X-List-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Status: No, hits=4.0 tagged_above=-50.5 required=7.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_00, FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD, FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS, FROM_WEBMAIL_END_NUMS6, HTML_MESSAGE X-Spam-Level: *** --0-870187692-1121381698=:31726 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable even from XP sp1 to sp2, many applications stopped working, those have to= be upgraded. =20 I have many games that ran perfectly fine in win98, (a race car game), wh= en I went to windows XP, NO WORKY anymore! went to the vendors site who = did NOT have patches and forum users were aware of windows XP and that ga= me compatibility. What do they do if they want to run it? run windows = 98. that's IT!, end of story, they need to reboot to switch from XP to w9= 8. =20 I had blown my win98 partition, so no more game for me.=20 =20 Evan Langlois wrote: On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 14:42 -0700, Frederic Fouche wrote: > This thread is going nowhere, Indeed. You aren't listening to a simple point. > It was said that an application written years ago might not work if > Xaaes gets new implementations, as drastic as they may be.=20 No - no one ever said anything like that. The additions don't prevent older applications from running. Its still backwards compatible. So, if you can run old apps on the new OS, then you don't have to reboot.=20 > Same thing that happened with other OS, (linux, see gtk2 vs gtk1 as > someone mentioned earlier), same with macos and windows XP.=20 You really need a better example!=20 You keep saying stuff like this, but its not true! GTK1 applications run under Gnome2/GTK2 just fine. If one had to reboot to run XMMS (a GTK1 application), than I can guarantee it would have been forked and rewritten by now (actually it has, but XMMS has more plugins than the fork) but it runs just fine, so it stays. So, thanks for the example that proves my point. XMMS would have to be rewritten to be GTK2 compatible and use GTK2 features, but it still runs with no changes, no reboots, no logging out - just double-click and mp3 and up pops XMMS. Also, GTK2 was done because of shortcomings in GTK1. GTK2 is faster and more efficient, has way more features for the developer, and therefore the user, and application development increased dramatically when GTK2 came out. Thats what we want to do with XaAES. GTK3 should be coming out soon! They're cleaning up incompatible APIs and the 4 ways to write fonts, and 3 different canvas widgets and 20 different ways of handling graphics and using Cairo for all of it, and it will break binary API again. Apps will have to be rewritten to work with GTK3, but GTK2 will still be there, and GTK2 apps will still run without rebooting. Thats what we want to do with XaAES. Thats the sort of upgrade we're talking about. New API, needs new stuff to work, new features, but old apps will continue to run. > If you want to run all your applications (old and new), you will need > to reboot to change your OS.=20 Not *MY* OS. How can you make such a statement when I'm currently running everything I need to, and my boot menu has nothing on it but my main OS and an emergency partition with some rescue tools (I'm a Unix Admin so I'm careful)! I have stuff (somewhere) that goes back to Linux pre-1.0 days, back when I still had an STe, and it will run on newer systems providing you have the libraries around that it was meant to link with. > This is fairly clear and simple, yet you always find a comeback to > continue arguing.=20 >=20 > Obviously I am missing something, so I'll stfu. Here's what you are missing. I do NOT reboot to run an older application. Not ever!! I don't believe its acceptable to do so. Thats the one point you keep missing. You keep saying that its some impossible utopia, but thats the situation I have RIGHT NOW.=20 But yet, you call me a liar and tell me STFU. Evidently I struct a nerve if you lash out and tell me to STFU, and I stand by my accusation of some sort of insanity or mental disorder. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around=20 http://mail.yahoo.com=20 --0-870187692-1121381698=:31726 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
even from XP sp1 to sp2, many applications stopped working, those ha= ve to be upgraded.
 
I have many games that ran perfectly fine in win98, (a race car game= ), when I went to windows XP, NO WORKY anymore!  went to the vendors= site who did NOT have patches and forum users were aware of windows XP a= nd that game compatibility.  What do they do if they want to run it?=    run windows 98. that's IT!, end of story, they need to reboo= t to switch from XP to w98.
 
I had blown my win98 partition, so no more game for me.
 

Evan Langlois <Evan@CoolRunningConcepts.com>= wrote:
On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 14:42 -0700, Freder= ic Fouche wrote:
> This thread is going nowhere,

Indeed. You= aren't listening to a simple point.

> It was said that an appl= ication written years ago might not work if
> Xaaes gets new implem= entations, as drastic as they may be.

No - no one ever said anyth= ing like that. The additions don't prevent
older applications from run= ning. Its still backwards compatible. So,
if you can run old apps on t= he new OS, then you don't have to reboot.

> Same thing that ha= ppened with other OS, (linux, see gtk2 vs gtk1 as
> someone mention= ed earlier), same with macos and windows XP.

You really need a be= tter example!

You keep saying stuff like this, but its not true! = GTK1 applications
run under Gnome2/GTK2 just fine. If one had to reboo= t to run XMMS (a
GTK1 application), than I can guarantee it would have been forked and
rewritten by now (actually it= has, but XMMS has more plugins than the
fork) but it runs just fine, = so it stays. So, thanks for the example
that proves my point. XMMS wou= ld have to be rewritten to be GTK2
compatible and use GTK2 features, b= ut it still runs with no changes, no
reboots, no logging out - just do= uble-click and mp3 and up pops XMMS.

Also, GTK2 was done because o= f shortcomings in GTK1. GTK2 is faster and
more efficient, has way mor= e features for the developer, and therefore
the user, and application = development increased dramatically when GTK2
came out. Thats what we w= ant to do with XaAES.

GTK3 should be coming out soon! They're clea= ning up incompatible APIs
and the 4 ways to write fonts, and 3 differe= nt canvas widgets and 20
different ways of handling graphics and using= Cairo for all of it, and
it will break binary API again. Apps will ha= ve to be rewritten to work
with GTK3, but GTK2 will still be there, and GTK2 apps will still run
without rebooting. = Thats what we want to do with XaAES.

Thats the sort of upgrade we'= re talking about. New API, needs new stuff
to work, new features, but = old apps will continue to run.

> If you want to run all your ap= plications (old and new), you will need
> to reboot to change your = OS.

Not *MY* OS. How can you make such a statement when I'm curre= ntly
running everything I need to, and my boot menu has nothing on it = but my
main OS and an emergency partition with some rescue tools (I'm = a Unix
Admin so I'm careful)! I have stuff (somewhere) that goes back = to Linux
pre-1.0 days, back when I still had an STe, and it will run o= n newer
systems providing you have the libraries around that it was me= ant to
link with.

> This is fairly clear and simple, yet you= always find a comeback to
> continue arguing.
>
> Ob= viously I am missing something, so I'll stfu.

Here's what you are missing. I do NOT reboot to run an olde= r
application. Not ever!! I don't believe its acceptable to do so.
= Thats the one point you keep missing. You keep saying that its some
im= possible utopia, but thats the situation I have RIGHT NOW.

But ye= t, you call me a liar and tell me STFU. Evidently I struct a
nerve if = you lash out and tell me to STFU, and I stand by my accusation
of some= sort of insanity or mental disorder.




= __________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
T= ired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http:/= /mail.yahoo.com=20 --0-870187692-1121381698=:31726--