Quote from RatzMilk :

No, this isn't the reb/blue system of 3d. The glass shut of the view through each lens in turn and the screen renders a separate image for each eye. The glass and the screen are in sync. That's also why the glasses use a battery.

This method is far superior to the old red/blue system. I have tried it with the flight sim IL2 and it was fantastic.

I remember reading about this at last years CES. The problem is you need a high refresh screen like 120Hz just to see it at a normal speed. A normal LCD that has a 60 or 70hz refresh would look barely like 30fps.

Still a good step. They also had two player games using this technology; the glasses would only let light through every other frame, allowing both people to look at one screen and yet see two different pictures. The only problems they had were people getting headaches from using it longer than a few minutes.

Quote from bunder9999 :

pass. if i ever go back to windows it'll probably be win2k... much better memory footprint than xp or vista... i highly doubt "7" will perform any better. i tried the vista beta and i've used vista since, and they both annoy the shit out of me.

(i guess that begs the question, does lfs run on win2k? or did they follow suit like other games and force the requirement of xp?)

The newest server edition based off vista was probably MS's best release so far.

That said I love 7 so far. The only bad thing is googling for help with issues. With Xp, typing windows XP was unique, so hits were easy to find. With windows 7 I get a whole bunch of crap from google.

Quote from Velociround :

Windows 7 does support this and does render both screens correctly without the need of additional software, and also Windows XP does. But for Windows XP you'll need to set your graphics card driver for double monitor, so it'll display correctly, while for Windows 7 it enables this by default (at least this is what I've noticed, because I didn't change anything on graphics driver settings and I can see the option in LFS to use 2048x768 [my secondary monitor is 15"], but on Windows XP I needed to configure it on graphics driver).
I don't know about Vista though.
Well, all you need to have is two monitor and slots for plugging them in (e.g.: nVidia or ATi graphics card with 2 DVI slots)

But actually, 1440x900 is normal monitor widescreen (16:10), so he wasn't using this thing you mentioned

2 of my three monitors are 1440X900 but I just stretched across both. Used a custom POV and man is having dual screens nice

Quote from Velociround :

I completely disagree with both things.
If someone doesn't pay for the most important software on his computer, why would he ever pay for anything else he uses on it? (even if it's LFS )
Today you are pirating the OS, tomorrow you're going to pirate the programs you use on it and sooner or later you'll end up pirating everything you can. It's a vicious cycle. Of course it's my opinion and I can't affirm for sure, but I think for example if you didn't actually need to pay for S2 to play LFS online you wouldn't have paid for it, and would've used a pirated version instead.

If one thinks Windows 7 or <insert_product_name_here> isn't worth it, why pirating it? This just proves he actually wants it but does't want to pay for it, and this is really bad for everyone.

I've never ever pirated anything. Everything I use on my computer from the OS to the games and music were legally bought ($$). If I can't afford something at some time or don't feel like spending my money with it, I wait until I change my mind (or get some money) and then take what I want (or not).

I'm just trying to make some points that I think are important, I have nothing against anyone or something like that, nor this post is supposed to be a rant

Because LFS and Win7 are 2 different entities. One is a program made by a handful of people. The other is a massive corporation that makes the majority of it's money from xbox and OEM sales.

With that said I pirate most everything, so I've already peaked on my 'viscious cycle' lol. There are very few games I have gone out and bought after playing because they deserve my hard earned cash, and I won't pay $60 for a game I haven't played first hand. Dead space, S.T.A.L.K.E.R., Doom 3, Advent Rising, Crysis, and Farcry are a few of the game I remember that I actually paid for. That, and LFS. Thats why LFS got me hooked and why I shelled out money for their quality product.

I don't even want to talk about how much money I have spent on single developer projects for windows mobile I have donated money to. Far too much for a phone program lol

Hell I don't pay for CD's either. If I like a band, I will go see their shows knowing full well that shows are where most bands make the majority of their money.

Pirating Win7 or XP or vista does not hurt MS as much as they say it does. It's worse in foreign countries like korea where most every copy is pirated, but MS still makes the majority of its OS sales through OEM to companies like Dell and Sony. I will say I was wrong on my first statement; people buying software is a BIG market. However for OS sales for MS, it is not.

Besides, MS wants people to move on from XP. I'll happily move on, but not to the tune of 300 dollars. Thats a months worth of food for me.

The problem here is that we get into an idealogical argument, which is never going to end. Someone who has taken the moral highground (no offense intended) by not pirating and someone else who doesn't care as much.

Fack, this is way too serious of a conversation *Runs off to FE gold rev to drift some* ahhhh much better

Quote from Shotglass :

read again those 99% (a number which i just expertly pulled out of my arese) are oem copies ie copies ms would sell either way

Thats why MS got in trouble with Vista. It lowered the minimum specs so it could be put on more laptops (more oem sales) even though they knew it would run like shit.

Ultimately the people actually buying the software are too small of a market.

I for one am almost sure I am going to pirate it. Buying LFS and buying Win7 are 2 completely different things.

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

And you're forgetting you're running on a fresh install. I'm sure if you installed XP fresh it'd be roughly the same as Windows 7.

Windows 7 manages windows differently than XP. At least in my case, where I am stretching across 2 monitors there is a very big improvement.

Quote from danthebangerboy :

Not really. An IP address can give an approximate geographical location of the user. Your IP can change if you have a dynamic IP, whereby your ISP provide you a new one every now and again but it will again be an IP quite near to your location, but not exact enough to go knock on the persons door, its usually <50 miles or so. (i'm near cambridge and my IP is now a london H9 postcode)

To find a rough location of an IP (particularly useful if you suspect scams or spams.) Or if you just want to know how far away your IP is compared to where you live ( i ended up being assigned a manchester IP last week, it was sloooow) you can do it here.

http://whatismyipaddress.com


As the OP says, the IP from which the unsuccessful login attempts were made from comes back to somewhere close to the city of bratislava in slovakia.

The only way a users real IP is untraceable (or false) is if he or she is using a proxy server to route their connection through, thus hiding their true IP and geographical location, from this proxy server, they can select an IP from a list of sometimes hundreds to use from pretty much any country in the world, and they can also change it whenever they want. Some people do this to send spam, or to choose an IP from somewhere that allows them to watch stuff like youtube videos that are banned in their own country.

It's an approximation because large portions of land are connected through common backbones, and each backbones has a range of IP's it assigns. I know there are 2 or 3 on the east coast that pretty much everyone connects through here, allowing people to get an approximate location but not have it be like the movies where you get an address. Certain types of internet are also dynamic or static; DSL has it's IP change every time you connect to the net whereas cable has a static IP for the most part.

Fun stuff. Just felt like adding my .02$

If this little bugger can do it, so can your laptop

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPtJDqeVmgM

EEEpc running LFS. 900mhz with a shared intel video chipset. This makes me want to hook my wheel up to my eeepc 701 just for shear goofiness

I have a extra joystick laying around. I really only used it for star seige, and am willing to sacrifice it in order to make a clutch pedal since my DFP doesn't have one.

I'm thinking modifying it a bit with a flat plate so my foot rests at the base and pushing forward would just be assigned to the clutch.

Good idea or no?

Just a quick update.. there was a driver patch released for my card. The framerate now displays a very modest 30-60fps depending on what I am doing in game. Which spread across 2 1440X900 monitors on full everything is pretty good IMO.

This is on a 8800GTS with no overclocking.

Quote from Shotglass :

random access is much more important which will be quite a lot quicker on a good flash drive than on a hdd



so what a fast usb stick with 8 gig is ~20€ these days and even with windows on it in daily use it should easily work well for 2 years

anyway ive has several linuxes on mine and loading times were just fine... sure a hdd is quicker but its not annoyingly slow by any means

Linux is NOT windows. If you run linux then you shouldn't be on the side of the argument that windows seven can run off a usb stick without issues.

That random access is faster on a stick but the overall bandwidth is what makes USB not something that bigger operating systems can run on well. Besides, latency works for the speed of finding the file not moving it. you would still bottle neck on larger files in startup and any time you used anything over a few KB.

I don't know what you are smoking but a modern hard drive (sata II) run at 1.2gb/s sustained. 1200 vs 25-30.

As for the writing argument, I guess you all don't remember when compact flash came out? Everyone thought it would be awesome to use a CF card to run their OS on with a HDD adapter and a card. I ran through 5 of those cards. One lasted a week. One a few months. The average was about a month tops. This was on linux, with the fstab modified to query and write the hard drive less. Running something off a USB stick for extended periods of time is not a viable option, especially with cheap sticks.

That said I still keep a Ubuntu 8.04 stick around in case my desktop or anything else nukes itself.

Quote from LFSn00b :

Can i run Win7 through a CD or USB stick and make games work?(just asking to make sure)

I would say no. It would load so incredibly slowly it wouldn't even be worth it.

You can install through a stick; it's not hard and the dvd image isn't that big so it's not a big problem.

The only OSs that reliably run off of a stick without being laggy as all hell as lightweight linux systems.

DSLinux on a stick? Good. Win7 on a stick? Bad.

Quote from duktayp :

maybe i'm misunderstanding your post, but there is quite a big difference between 17 fps ans 110 fps, unless you have bad eyesight

edit: or maybe you mean between your monitor's native refresh (60/75 or 100/120?) and the fps ur getting now..

Yup, the latter. Running a game at 120fps and aiming for it is useless because you are stuck with a refresh rate of 60-70 times per second.

Not saying I don't mind the increase at all! But what you see from the monitor at 70fps at a 70Hz refresh rate, and 110fps at 70Hz is the same thing.

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

Tbh John, Windows 7 might be the next OS I move onto, so long as it sorts out the "OMG RESOURCES" that Vista didn't. I'd like to upgrade in the future but Vista isn't worth it over XP in its current state, imo.

It's worth an upgrade definitely, but have it on a separate partition. Then again I'm an engineering kid; I have 6-7 computers with varying flavors of XP, vista, and linux on them.

It has a commit charge of about 700mb at startup with all features enabled. I could prolly get it down more but I'm happy with it.

It starts up faster than my XP partition, and is on par with any one of my linux computers and my linux parition for startup.

It's as fast if not faster poking around the net and the computer than XP, but slower than linux. Windows media player is actually easy to use and works great. Just ditch IE8.

While we are on the subject, I will agree mac is unparalleled in hardware compatibility. But thats what you get when you work with a completely closed hardware platform. Windows is used worldwide and has to deal with compatibility of every possibility.

Vista sucked with that. Until now linux has been the only OS that could be IMO installed on just about any system and run out of the box fine. I haven't tested windows 7 on other boxes; just my main one so I can't comment aside from the fact that 7 installed everything short of my wireless without a hitch and worked out of the box.

Side note: Why do people assume macs are best for design? I have worked with design firms and have yet to see one be mac exclusive. There are very few programs worthwhile that aren't on both mac and windows. Mainly it's just art kids I see running around with macs claiming they are the holy grail of design. They don't run solidworks anyways. Design fail!

Lmao, I didn't know you could do that. Does that mean I should signal before passing to be nice?

Anatomy is logical. The arm bone is connected to the shoulder bone. The shoulder bone is connected to the clavicle bone.

Programming? The driver name is connected to the crash damage model.

Weird lol.

Yea that was my thread. It runs fine. I gave it administrative rights but I don't know if you have to.

Gotta say, I installed the beta last night.

The wheel drivers went on very easy (used vista drivers, it is a vista kernel after all) and LFS runs great! I just had to reactivate my game.

In dual screen mode it runs better.

On my 8800GTS and AMD dual core it ran at 17fps over 2 screens, and 180ish on one fully cranked up at 1440X900. It ran at 17fps even when fully overclocked using the profile I use for crysis.

Now, it runs and 110fps over 2 screens, again fully cranked up at 1440X900. No overclocking needed.

I know there isn't a perceivable difference between a FPS at the refresh rate and above, but it's still a huge performance increase!

So just posting for you all; if you want to install the windows 7 beta, go for it!

Quote from Hallen :

As a side note, I mostly see people equate realism with visual/graphical things. In other words, if the picture on the screen looks more real to them, then the sim is more real. Even when speaking of physics and tire behavior, I have found that many people are still influenced by how things look as opposed to how things behave.

Part of the simulation is immersion, and looks help with that immensly. It would be hard to believe you were in a car, no matter how good the physics are, if the cars looked like boxes and the track and grass were just black and green mats.

Thats said, there is nothing better than running triple monitors, with full force feedback and a good sound system for immersion