xcv123

37 ms·

601.
by xcv123 3y ago
This is not sarcasm. You are asking for basic development capability in the base OS installation. Vast majority of Windows development uses .NET, or uses frameworks etc. The barebones C++ compiler and standard library simply won't work
602.
by xcv123 3y ago
That simply won't work for most Windows development. Need all the frameworks, including .NET. At least tens of gigabytes. Full Visual Studio 2022 installation is 210 GB.
603.
by xcv123 3y ago
Obviously you get a C++ IDE for free for a few months or so. No one is forcing you to install it. Your rant is pointless. I own CLion and will try it out. It probably works well enough. If not then I simply won't use it.
604.
by xcv123 3y ago
> or at least give a free version of the c/c++ ide. The Nova preview is free to use. License not required until it is merged into CLion.
605.
by xcv123 3y ago
> (a C++ IDE) has been reinvented four times by the same company They only have one C++ IDE. That is CLion. Rider is a .NET IDE. ReSharper C++ is an extension for Visual Studio. Rider includes parts of ReSharper. The preview is not for a
606.
by xcv123 3y ago
You should get a job at Microsoft and fix it.
607.
by xcv123 3y ago
It's not an excuse. Visual Studio is multiple gigabytes. Yes they should make it smaller but unless that happens it would be stupid to include it by default. Waste of space.
608.
by xcv123 3y ago
> microsoft could start shipping a fucking compiler Visual Studio is a free download. Most users are not developers. Waste of space to include it by default. https://visualstudio.microsoft.com/vs/community/
609.
by xcv123 3y ago
All you are saying is that you have been been working on trivial software systems and haven't been exposed to anything particularly large scale or complex so far in your career. Also you must be confusing basic arithmetic (1+1=2) with
610.
by xcv123 3y ago
> not because the person who wrote it was incompetent. You haven't seen it yet. Some developers should be barred from the industry. Criminally incompetent.
611.
by xcv123 3y ago
> Which is a part of the x86 instruction set. As equally as with Apple's own simd instructions: Yes M1 does not have AVX. That is x86 only. So if the application does not use M1 SIMD then it won't run as quickly. Benchmark resu
612.
by xcv123 3y ago
Wow. You have issues. > PS - you didn't need two messages for that. I only wrote one message for that. Anyway, put that aside. The benchmark suite at Phoronix is biased to AMD due to a lot of tests being optimized for x86 instructio
613.
by xcv123 3y ago
> As is clear from the 100+ tests it doesn't compare to a generation old Ryzen architecture I checked the Phoronix test results. Looks like AMD is ahead specifically in DSP / linear algebra tests where the code was designed fo
614.
by xcv123 3y ago
> A number of their tests have been shown to instead rely on memory and SSD bandwidth These are simulating common CPU workloads, so of course they will be partly constrained by the processors memory controller bandwidth and latency, as i
615.
by xcv123 3y ago
Yes it is based on a mobile optimized architecture but M2 Ultra is scoring ~90% as high as the top model Intel i9-13900KS on Geekbench 6. It's up there with Intels best. And it's keeping up on the CPU side while having a massive G
616.
by xcv123 3y ago
> ... In some tests, it is entirely probable that an i5 would smoke an M1 I'm aware that there is no such thing as a perfect benchmark. Geekbench has been useful for me and is good enough to get a general idea of performance. Check
617.
by xcv123 3y ago
> You should really learn to comprehend entire thoughts Both of these replies from you are poorly written, hence you're getting downvoted by others. You should learn to form clearer thoughts that are worth communicating, and work on
618.
by xcv123 3y ago
Benchmarks (or any timed CPU performance tests) are precisely how we prove how fast CPUs are. No need for quotes on "prove". It's an objective measure, an actual proof. Geekbench 6 is one suite of tests that is reliable and h
619.
by xcv123 3y ago
> they were about as fast as the then 6 years old 4 core i5 I was using at the time No they were faster than your old quad core i5. My M1 Pro laptop has a Geekbench 6 score of 12,626. My Ryzen 5600X desktop (6 cores, faster than a quad i
620.
by xcv123 3y ago
> They don't really have a solution for desktop. These are still mobile/laptop chips. They released the M1 Ultra last year. Desktop only. M2 Ultra is also desktop only. The M3 Ultra is not released yet but will also be a deskto
621.
by xcv123 3y ago
The GUI was rendered in text mode. It's called a TUI (Text-based User Interface)
622.
by xcv123 3y ago
Because I would pay money to not use Windows 11, and the Macbook hardware is generally better than the alternatives.
623.
by xcv123 3y ago
> Imagine if you could have replace the MacOs top bar, because it is a program that just answers to some IPC protocol? That is irrelevant in the bigger scheme of things. I grew out of that tinkering phase after I was a student running G
624.
by xcv123 3y ago
> makes me seriously question why developers need macbook pro's For work I am developing a massive JVM monolith server application and even the M1 Pro 16" takes minutes for it just to start up. Compilation is also slow with mil
625.
by xcv123 3y ago
> I greatly expect Apple's power to performance advantage to drop significantly, if not be overtaken by the likes of AMD, etc Nope. Apple and AMD both use TSMC for manufacturing. It's all made by the same factory. AMD does not
626.
by xcv123 3y ago
That's only from orbit. The Moon is tidally locked to Earth, so Earth remains in roughly the same spot in the sky.
627.
by xcv123 3y ago
> I have RTX 2070 running in 3440x1440. I'm at 35fps on low setting LOL. You just proved my point.
628.
by xcv123 3y ago
The issue is that if it runs at 50 FPS on an RTX 4090, it's going to run at 5 FPS on an average GPU.
629.
by xcv123 3y ago
Of course the sound chip is emulated. That's the purpose of MAME. It emulates everything in the original hardware, sound included.
630.
by xcv123 3y ago
> If you continue to use them despite supposedly not trusting them No valuable data stored on the gaming PC

More ›