Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 23:25 this Saturday (GMT):
> On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 14:30:04 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 22:29 this Wednesday
>> (GMT):
>>
>>> On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 12:46:35 -0400, Joel wrote:
>>>
>>>> A lot of laptops are sold to gamers - this new technology has real
>>>> advantages for laptops.
>>>
>>> It would if it worked. I notice that Fortnite, for example, will not
>>> run on Windows-for-ARM. Gamers are not going to buy into it until their
>>> games work. And the game developers won’t do that until they are
>>> assured of a return on their sizeable investment. Which nobody can
>>> guarantee.
>>
>> So, it's a chicken or the egg issue?
>
> Bingo. The product needs some feature(s) to appeal to customers out of the
> box, to overcome the lack of apps. Then its popularity with customers will
> pull in the developers to fill in that lack of apps.
>
> That’s how you overcome the chicken-and-egg issue, as Android did.
> Windows-on-Qualcomm-ARM has nothing like that.

The battery life thing seems like a nice feature, but that's the only
huge benefit I can think of.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 23:24 this Saturday (GMT):
> On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 14:30:07 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 01:05 this Friday (GMT):
>>
>>> On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 15:37:42 -0400, Joel wrote:
>>>
>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I notice that Fortnite, for example, will not run on Windows-for-ARM.
>>>>
>>>> I do realize that x86 has advantages, but they can all be emulated or
>>>> something equivalent to that.
>>>
>>> Not the lower-level stuff like game anti-cheat. That cannot be
>>> emulated: it has to be done in CPU-native code.
>>
>> Kernel anti-cheat was a bad idea anyways.
>
> Bad idea or not, it’s an inescapable fact of the Windows gaming world.
>
> Fortnite doesn’t run on the Linux-based Steam Deck, either; but
> fortunately that has other reasons to appeal to customers, that Windows-
> on-ARM lacks.

Yeah, the steam deck was marketed fantastically.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote at 21:19 this Saturday (GMT):
> On 2024-07-13 10:30 a.m., candycanearter07 wrote:
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 01:05 this Friday (GMT):
>>> On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 15:37:42 -0400, Joel wrote:
>>>
>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I notice that Fortnite, for example, will not run on Windows-for-ARM.
>>>>
>>>> I do realize that x86 has advantages, but they can all be emulated or
>>>> something equivalent to that.
>>>
>>> Not the lower-level stuff like game anti-cheat. That cannot be emulated:
>>> it has to be done in CPU-native code.
>>
>>
>> Kernel anti-cheat was a bad idea anyways.
>
> I disagree. The people cheating online have ruined the very idea of
> playing with strangers online. Back in 2001 when NHL 2002 came out, I
> was one of the strongest players online. I would seldom lose, but when I
> did, I noticed that my players were moving extremely slowly whereas the
> opponent's were very fast. Even back then, people would cheat because
> like Muslims, online players have no honour whatsoever.

Except that games with K-AC still can get hackers (Valorant), and games
that might have a lackluster anticheat can still fight back effectively
if they actually tried and had real fan backlash (TF2).

Not to mention the privacy issues.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 15:30:05 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:

> chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote at 11:26 this Sunday (GMT):
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> Joel wrote:
>>>>
>>>> A lot of laptops are sold to gamers - this new technology has real
>>>> advantages for laptops.
>>>
>>>It would if it worked. I notice that Fortnite, for example, will not
>>>run on Windows-for-ARM. Gamers are not going to buy into it until their
>>>games work. And the game developers won’t do that until they are
>>>assured of a return on their sizeable investment. Which nobody can
>>>guarantee.
>>
>> Gamers don't usually care if they save 100W of power, either.
>
>
> Having a laptop that dies in 2 hours is very frustrating sometimes.

That sounds like a laptop on its last legs. My 13 year old Acer Aspire
does better than that.

That does bring up the question of how much battery life is enough. 5
hours, 8 hours, 16 hours? When does the battery weight become cumbersome?

chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> Joel wrote:
>>>
>>> A lot of laptops are sold to gamers - this new technology has real
>>> advantages for laptops.
>>
>>It would if it worked. I notice that Fortnite, for example, will not run
>>on Windows-for-ARM. Gamers are not going to buy into it until their games
>>work. And the game developers won’t do that until they are assured of a
>>return on their sizeable investment. Which nobody can guarantee.
>
>Gamers don't usually care if they save 100W of power, either.

That's not a comprehensive analysis of the advantages with a high end
laptop. Particularly as time goes on and the code is actually
targeting ARM.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 15:30:04 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:

> rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote at 18:04 this Saturday (GMT):
>> On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 12:01:33 -0400, Joel wrote:
>>
>>> They will start compiling Win64 apps for ARM, though, with these
>>> devices hitting the market.
>>
>> https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/arm/overview
>>
>> There will be a ripple effect. Many programs pull in NuGet packages,
>> third party software for a particular task. Newtonsoft.jspn, for
>> example, is a popular package for working with JSON although Microsoft
>> finally came up with System.Text.Json which is arguably better. Of
>> course if your existing app uses NewtonSoft switching isn't painless.
>
> Wait, MS didn't have native JSON support??

They did have Json.NET which was cumbersome as tied in with LINQ. That
goes back to 2006 or so. That was mostly replaced by Newtonsoft.Json
although ASP.NET still has Json.NET dependencies. System.Text.Json was
added in .NET Core 3.0, which was separate from .NET Framework 3.1. .NET
Framework is a dead end at 4.8.2, I think and what is referred to as .NET
is Core. beginning at .NET 5. Confused yet?

Even more confusing James Newton-King was instrumental in all three
attempts and I thing Newtonsoft was actually a company although he works
for MS now.

In Microsoft's defense JSON wasn't all that popular in 2006 with XML still
king of the hill. They also were promoting XAML, a XML derivative. They
still are since MAUI is XAML based. They also were/are heavily invested
in SOAP, which is XML based using WCF.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Communication_Foundation

fwiw I and almost everyone else in the world hates WCF. Unfortunately many
of the interfaces I deal with use SOAP. It took them forever to move from
the Datamaxx DMPP 2020 protocol and hell will be undergoing global cooling
before they move to REST. Government agencies move with the speed of an
arthritic sloth.

On 2024-07-14 11:50 a.m., candycanearter07 wrote:
> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote at 21:19 this Saturday (GMT):
>> On 2024-07-13 10:30 a.m., candycanearter07 wrote:
>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 01:05 this Friday (GMT):
>>>> On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 15:37:42 -0400, Joel wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I notice that Fortnite, for example, will not run on Windows-for-ARM.
>>>>>
>>>>> I do realize that x86 has advantages, but they can all be emulated or
>>>>> something equivalent to that.
>>>>
>>>> Not the lower-level stuff like game anti-cheat. That cannot be emulated:
>>>> it has to be done in CPU-native code.
>>>
>>>
>>> Kernel anti-cheat was a bad idea anyways.
>>
>> I disagree. The people cheating online have ruined the very idea of
>> playing with strangers online. Back in 2001 when NHL 2002 came out, I
>> was one of the strongest players online. I would seldom lose, but when I
>> did, I noticed that my players were moving extremely slowly whereas the
>> opponent's were very fast. Even back then, people would cheat because
>> like Muslims, online players have no honour whatsoever.
>
>
> Except that games with K-AC still can get hackers (Valorant), and games
> that might have a lackluster anticheat can still fight back effectively
> if they actually tried and had real fan backlash (TF2).
>
> Not to mention the privacy issues.

This kind of crap is very much why I stay away from online gaming. I
used to love playing online, especially in 2008 with NHL 2K9 that I was
very good at, but nobody cheated back then. Nowadays, every little shit
and their brother only get into a game once they're learned of how they
can get an unfair advantage over everyone else. It's disgusting, but
there is no honour among players anymore.

--
CrudeSausage
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king
Progressives are monsters

On 2024-07-14 2:53 p.m., rbowman wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 15:30:05 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>
>> chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote at 11:26 this Sunday (GMT):
>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>>> Joel wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> A lot of laptops are sold to gamers - this new technology has real
>>>>> advantages for laptops.
>>>>
>>>> It would if it worked. I notice that Fortnite, for example, will not
>>>> run on Windows-for-ARM. Gamers are not going to buy into it until their
>>>> games work. And the game developers won’t do that until they are
>>>> assured of a return on their sizeable investment. Which nobody can
>>>> guarantee.
>>>
>>> Gamers don't usually care if they save 100W of power, either.
>>
>>
>> Having a laptop that dies in 2 hours is very frustrating sometimes.
>
> That sounds like a laptop on its last legs. My 13 year old Acer Aspire
> does better than that.
>
> That does bring up the question of how much battery life is enough. 5
> hours, 8 hours, 16 hours? When does the battery weight become cumbersome?

I get eight hours on this machine. I would prefer to get fourteen, if
only to feel as though it is unnecessary for me to carry a charger with
the computer at all times.

--
CrudeSausage
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king
Progressives are monsters

candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
wrote:

>The battery life thing seems like a nice feature, but that's the only
>huge benefit I can think of.

It's indicative to why I think the life of the device generally
benefits from the more modern design - newer devices may end up
supporting things but there will be a foundation where this Dell we
already see is a great purchase, really putting the technology to
show. I would not buy what Newegg is offering, right now, I would
wait until I can assemble ARM.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:

>On 7/13/2024 5:19 PM, CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>Slimer's back!

If that's him, why the name, Andrzej?

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 23:22:36 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On 13 Jul 2024 18:04:27 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>>
>>> I expect many apps will be running in the Prism emulator while
>>> companies scramble for a native Arm solution or they might decide
>>> emulation is good enough.
>>
>> Some things won’t run under emulation, as I pointed out elsewhere.
>
>Absolutely but you are claiming Windows on Arm won't have the apps out of
>the box that will attract developers. Will enough apps run under Prism to
>attract users before native apps are developed? Of 'some apps' means games
>that can't use anti-cheat code is that the market they're even aiming at?
>
>Typically gamers don't list low power as part of the criteria. I think
>some of them have worked their way up to vapor phase cooling.

We realize that a lot so far, in running software under an ARM CPU and
Windows, has been emulation. That will quickly evolve. CISC CPUs can
continue to try to compete all they want, but people even like myself
will see the positives with ARM gear. And I am nowhere near using a
laptop. Laptops are the largest installed base of computers better
than a phone.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 14 Jul 2024 04:20:18 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 23:22:36 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On 13 Jul 2024 18:04:27 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>>
>>> I expect many apps will be running in the Prism emulator while
>>> companies scramble for a native Arm solution or they might decide
>>> emulation is good enough.
>>
>> Some things won’t run under emulation, as I pointed out elsewhere.
>
> Absolutely but you are claiming Windows on Arm won't have the apps out
> of the box that will attract developers.

To attract users. It is users that attract developers, not the other way
round.

On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 18:15:15 -0400, Joel wrote:

> We realize that a lot so far, in running software under an ARM CPU and
> Windows, has been emulation. That will quickly evolve.

Assuming Windows-on-Qualcomm-ARM takes off. You keep assuming that.

On 14 Jul 2024 19:36:32 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Communication_Foundation
>
> fwiw I and almost everyone else in the world hates WCF.

s/world/Windows world/

Outside of Windows, nobody has even heard of WCF.

On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 07:34:09 -0400, Joel wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>>They won’t start “hitting the market” until customers demand them.
>
> Dell already has this XPS 13 model.

Just one?

Just for comparison, how many Windows RT devices did they offer?

On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 15:30:07 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 23:24 this Saturday (GMT):
>
>> Fortnite doesn’t run on the Linux-based Steam Deck, either; but
>> fortunately that has other reasons to appeal to customers, that
>> Windows-on-ARM lacks.
>
> Yeah, the steam deck was marketed fantastically.

Marketing is necessary, but not sufficient: it’s a product that actually
offers something new, that Windows does not.

On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 15:30:06 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:

> The battery life thing seems like a nice feature, but that's the only
> huge benefit I can think of.

And you would lose that running emulated code, with its greater CPU
requirements.

On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 07:39:47 -0400, Joel wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> Yes - but the egg will come. They will port everything to ARM64.
>>
>> Who is “they”? Proprietary developers are not going to spend the
>> considerable amounts it would take to port their apps unless they can
>> be assured of some return on that investment. There is no such
>> assurance.
>
> If they can do this they gain in the Mac marketplace with their Windows
> ARM support, and they stay with the PC marketplace as Dell is showing
> has a demand for ARM hardware.

Having a Mac-on-ARM port of some proprietary software is no assurance that
a Windows-on-ARM port will be any easier.

We saw this sort of thing with Microsoft itself, when Apple moved from
PowerPC to x86: you’d think that, since Microsoft Office already ran on
x86 on Windows, Microsoft would have an easier time porting its Mac
version to x86. But it didn’t.

On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 01:47:55 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On 14 Jul 2024 19:36:32 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Communication_Foundation
>>
>> fwiw I and almost everyone else in the world hates WCF.
>
> s/world/Windows world/
>
> Outside of Windows, nobody has even heard of WCF.

Obviously. I won't make a blanket statement but I don't think SOAP had
much penetration outside the Windows world and MS supplies tools to take a
wsdl and create the proxies. You might be able to do it by hand but it
would be as much fun as doing ONC RPC without rpcgen.

Unfortunately in my world people use Windows probably for the same
political reasons CERN uses Windows, and that's not because they are
gamers.

On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 15:00:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07
<candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote in
<slrnv955a7.53m.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid>:

> Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> wrote at 14:45 this Saturday
> (GMT):
>> Le 13-07-2024, candycanearter07
>> <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> a écrit :
>>>
>>> So, it's a chicken or the egg issue?
>>
>> The answer has been provided a long time ago. I have no idea why some
>> people still consider it's still an issue.
>> Either you are a believer and it's the chicken (read the bible: God
>> created the animals, not the eggs).
>> Or you are a scientist and it's the egg (something which was not yet a
>> chicken make a chicken egg).
>>
>> There is nothing more to investigate or to discuss about it.
>
>
> I was using a common saying...

As seen on Sesame Street:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixgf5SlvOB4

--
-v ASUS TUF Dash F15 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3060 Mobile
OS: Linux 5.15.0-113-lowlatency Release: Mint 21.3 Mem: 15.9G
"Entropy isn't what it used to be."

On 15 Jul 2024 04:59:23 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> Unfortunately in my world people use Windows probably for the same
> political reasons CERN uses Windows ...

Who says CERN uses Windows (much)? I posted that link to the page where
they list the various different Linux distros they support? You think they
support a comparable number of Windows versions? I don’t think so.

rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote at 18:53 this Sunday (GMT):
> On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 15:30:05 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>
>> chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote at 11:26 this Sunday (GMT):
>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>>> Joel wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> A lot of laptops are sold to gamers - this new technology has real
>>>>> advantages for laptops.
>>>>
>>>>It would if it worked. I notice that Fortnite, for example, will not
>>>>run on Windows-for-ARM. Gamers are not going to buy into it until their
>>>>games work. And the game developers won’t do that until they are
>>>>assured of a return on their sizeable investment. Which nobody can
>>>>guarantee.
>>>
>>> Gamers don't usually care if they save 100W of power, either.
>>
>>
>> Having a laptop that dies in 2 hours is very frustrating sometimes.
>
> That sounds like a laptop on its last legs. My 13 year old Acer Aspire
> does better than that.

It better not be, I just got this 2 years ago.

> That does bring up the question of how much battery life is enough. 5
> hours, 8 hours, 16 hours? When does the battery weight become cumbersome?

Kinda depends on how much you travel, but what I'd think is like: after
an average day of travel, you still have 30% or so left.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 01:50 this Monday (GMT):
> On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 15:30:07 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 23:24 this Saturday (GMT):
>>
>>> Fortnite doesn’t run on the Linux-based Steam Deck, either; but
>>> fortunately that has other reasons to appeal to customers, that
>>> Windows-on-ARM lacks.
>>
>> Yeah, the steam deck was marketed fantastically.
>
> Marketing is necessary, but not sufficient: it’s a product that actually
> offers something new, that Windows does not.

To be fair, Valve's reputation helped too. But yeah, the steam deck
being an actually good "portable handheld pc" was fantastic.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote at 20:02 this Sunday (GMT):
> On 2024-07-14 11:50 a.m., candycanearter07 wrote:
>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote at 21:19 this Saturday (GMT):
>>> On 2024-07-13 10:30 a.m., candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 01:05 this Friday (GMT):
>>>>> On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 15:37:42 -0400, Joel wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I notice that Fortnite, for example, will not run on Windows-for-ARM.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do realize that x86 has advantages, but they can all be emulated or
>>>>>> something equivalent to that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not the lower-level stuff like game anti-cheat. That cannot be emulated:
>>>>> it has to be done in CPU-native code.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Kernel anti-cheat was a bad idea anyways.
>>>
>>> I disagree. The people cheating online have ruined the very idea of
>>> playing with strangers online. Back in 2001 when NHL 2002 came out, I
>>> was one of the strongest players online. I would seldom lose, but when I
>>> did, I noticed that my players were moving extremely slowly whereas the
>>> opponent's were very fast. Even back then, people would cheat because
>>> like Muslims, online players have no honour whatsoever.
>>
>>
>> Except that games with K-AC still can get hackers (Valorant), and games
>> that might have a lackluster anticheat can still fight back effectively
>> if they actually tried and had real fan backlash (TF2).
>>
>> Not to mention the privacy issues.
>
> This kind of crap is very much why I stay away from online gaming. I
> used to love playing online, especially in 2008 with NHL 2K9 that I was
> very good at, but nobody cheated back then. Nowadays, every little shit
> and their brother only get into a game once they're learned of how they
> can get an unfair advantage over everyone else. It's disgusting, but
> there is no honour among players anymore.

I don't play that many games in general, the only "online" games I
really play nowadays are TF2 (thank god the bots are actually dealt
with) and jackbox on calls. Also sometimes GMOD if it doesn't feel like
crashing
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

>>>They won’t start “hitting the market” until customers demand them.
>>
>> Dell already has this XPS 13 model.
>
>Just one?
>
>Just for comparison, how many Windows RT devices did they offer?

This isn't like that.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.