I was the one trying to talk the friend group out of pre-ordering for years. Oddly enough, I haven't needed to do that in a while.
Might have something to do with how the last time that discussion happened, the game in question was Fallout 76.
I didn't even have to say "told you so" for it to never come up again.
Yeah I'm pretty sure the banks would shut down anything that clones NFC payment functionality onto a device without them knowing about it.
Nothing else ever really achieved what the pebble did. I just wanted a cheap second point of interaction with my phone.
After it went under the industry has doubled down on insane cost, pointless features, abysmal battery life.
I don't get it. Pepple made all the right trade offs and the third party support was incredible.
I hope this works out.
Yup. And it'll be a huge improvement overall to simply have both performance and accuracy in one, and not have to pick one or the other, regardless of what application is being run.
fsync isn't part of wine, which is what they are referring to.
Fsync and Esync are both inaccurate representations, and while they help performance in many places (particularly games), they break other things. Hence, while useful, they never got mainlined.
NTsync is an accurate reimplementation, hence why this functionality will finally become part of wine proper.
then what's the advantage of using that over the native capabilities of btrfs?
btrfs multi device file systems have some limitations. Adding a drive is instant, but if you want to stripe the data using raid0, that requires a lengthy balancing operation. The alternative is "single" mode, which does not concern itself with striping, and just pools the storage available. The disadvantage, is that in single mode you get the risk of raid0, with no performance benefit. btrfs does not actually make sure that the different blocks that constitute a single file end up on the same drive, which means that if one fails, you still likely lose everything.
MergerFS does not mess with any of the filesystems being combined. It can be configured to work in different ways, but each drive will remain its own, consistent, functioning file system. Drives can be browsed individually, removed, added etc. Instantly. To "empty" a drive, you just move the files on it to the rest by using the non merged folders. By default, "writing" a new file will always go to the drive with the most free space, and individual files cannot be stored "across" several drives even though the contents of a folder can be. This way, whatever is on each drive, can never be damaged by the failure of another drive.
So the benefits are isolation, and convenience. The downside is a definite performance hit, which may not be significant depending on your system or what you're storing in the merged filesystem.
So I could do that for the root folder as well I imagine?
No. And you wouldn't want to. First for the performance hit. Second, because mergerfs merges folders (drives have to be mounted, first), and uses a third as a mountpoint. As an example, to "expand" your home folder, you'd move your homefolder somewhere else, then merge that moved folder with the new drive (which you still have to mount somewhere), and then you'd mount the resulting file system where your old home folder was before.
You could even have two folders on the second drive. Use one to merge somewhere you want to pool all your storage, and the other to put stuff on the second drive in a way where losing the first won't make half the files go missing. You might use that to store a copy of the OS install from the first drive, for example.
If you want to just extend storage space, maybe mergerfs?
/media is now for the system to mount stuff automatically. Using /mnt for something you're configuring personally is fine.
You could mergerfs the new drive with some folder you're already storing a bunch of stuff, and it will pool the storage capacity of the drives for that folder.
Even before then, people were up in arms about several changes.
Me and one friend used to play regularly, but they just straight up removed duos for almost a year. Trying to integrate a random third player into our teamwork just didn't work, so we stopped playing.
By the time they added duos back, we'd lost interest.
They made several changes like that, and I'm fairly certain hundreds of thousands of players felt burned in similar ways. You can't just "temporarily" remove the reason your players stick around, and expect them to stick around.
Obviously.
There are a total of seven indicators, the only one that is labeled with numbers is the one that estimates how much VRAM will be used.
The rest are just unlabeled bars for "Processing Load" and visual effects categories. They don't ACTUALLY have anything to do with how much your system is able to do, they just indicate what a setting does in relation to themselves. (checkmarks show which bars the currently selected setting affects)
I feel like instead of the "settings have been optimized for your hardware" pop up that almost always sets them to something that doesn't account for the trade-off between looks and framerate that a player wants, there should be a "these settings are designed for future hardware and may not work well today" pop up when a player sets everything to max.
I've noticed some games also don't actually max things out when you select the highest preset.
I also really like the settings menu of the RE engine games. It has indicators that aggregate how much "load" you're putting on your system by turning each setting up or down, which lets you make more informed decisions on what settings to enable or disable. And it in fact will straight up tell you when you turn stuff too high, and warns you that things might not run well if you do.
I finished the whole game on a core 2 duo, and some nvidia gpu from the same era I don't even remember.
Edit: I feel like my comment got colored by a lot of the consequent replies. I'm not saying you shouldn't, nor that if you want every detail, there isn't more to see by playing it first. I'm saying AW2 isn't among the interconnected games that you might as well not even play unless you're up to date on every detail. Yes, it has a lot of interconnects with other Remedy games, but it's fan-bloody-tastic entirely on its own.