On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 07:56:10PM +0100, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
On Fri, 29 Mar 2002 09:36:47 -0800 (PST),
Alex Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm only familiar with the performance of old cards. The Matrox G400
is 'ok'.
...as in V fps at X x Y x Z bpp?
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
The thing is that the default bindings have to be for something. If
you're rebinding anyway, then changing the 'squared' feature isn't a
lot of extra work. I find that the squared feature makes an enormous
difference in usability for regular
Jim Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
The thing is that the default bindings have to be for something. If
you're rebinding anyway, then changing the 'squared' feature isn't a
lot of extra work. I find that the squared feature makes an enormous
On Friday 29 March 2002 09:24, you wrote:
Andy Ross wrote:
Norman Vine wrote:
I have always thought that FGFS development has been primarily aimed
at a RAW OPENGL SURFACE which is considerably different then any
Window !
This isn't the case, even in windows. OpenGL rendering
David Megginson wrote:
Julian Foad writes:
However, I think it would be a good idea to change the default to
false because this squared feature is not the Right Thing for
a general input axis. It is, like a dead band, an arbitrary
work-around for normally-centred, low-resolution
Andy Ross writes:
There's no pleasing everyone. I'm actually of a mind with Julian here
-- the squaring makes sense for auto-centering controls, where it
provides fine control in the center of travel while preserving the
full range of control authority. This is a good fit for ailerons,
Andy Ross writes:
David Megginson wrote:
Julian Foad writes:
However, I think it would be a good idea to change the default to
false because this squared feature is not the Right Thing for
a general input axis. It is, like a dead band, an arbitrary
work-around for normally-centred,
On Sat, 30 Mar 2002 12:01:01 -0800,
Andy Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
As for the Right Thing analysis, though, we're basically SOL on that
already. Real controls have forces that depend on things other than
control position, and PC joysticks don't (well,
On Sat, 30 Mar 2002 17:30:49 +,
Alasdair Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Friday 29 March 2002 09:24, you wrote:
Andy Ross wrote:
Norman Vine wrote:
I have always thought that FGFS development has been primarily
aimed at a RAW OPENGL SURFACE
On Sun, 31 Mar 2002 02:00:55 +1100,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Simon Fowler) wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 07:56:10PM +0100, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
On Fri, 29 Mar 2002 09:36:47 -0800 (PST),
Alex Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm
I saw this on OpenGL.org:
http://www.billardgl.de/index-en.html
It is an astoundingly real looking billiards game. Lots of fun.
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
On Sat, 30 Mar 2002 17:27:43 -0600,
Jonathan Polley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Since I spend most of my FlightGear time using the Magic Carpet FDM, I
decided to make some minor tweaks. I have added the ability of the
FDM to change its pitch and roll. This way
12 matches
Mail list logo
