{OT} Flight Simulator

Heh.

Bit of a beer / keyboard moment there ;-)

 

Try here http://www.the-underdogs.org/game.php?id=2254

Keith

 

Le Sat, 13 Sep 2003 15:31:21 -0500, JC <.@.> a écrit :

{ snip }

I wasn't going to bother, posting (and reading) in a putty ssh session ...
then I remembered that I was sitting in a cybercafé. Oooh, that was rather
nice indeed ...

 

Was that with a sidewinder ?

 

I had a copy of the helicopter one (not Gunship ... the one that came
after, done by Jane's, but don't recall the name), which was rather fun.
The Hellfire rockets that you could fire after popping up from behind a
hill, and watching dozens of troops on the ground 'get theirs', did wonders
for my pacifist leanings ...

 

"FlightGear" is the "native" Linux sim. Haven't looked into it, recently,
mind.

http://www.flightgear.org/

Trying to get very complex programs to run under WINE is a pain, IME.
Hell, I haven't even managed to get Gravity to work, yet (hence use of the
somewhat less impressive "Pan")

 

Cheers, Wik. OSX binaries available, too

You want to try SLRN. Personally, I quite like Pine, but it's getting
long in the tooth, and just doesn't look 'right' running in a terminal
window on OSX.

 

I got on really well with Knode during my Linux experiments.

 

Could be - not used it myself, but it's what everyone recommends for
Linux / Unix.

Oh, I went prodding around shite old Rover P6s with Timo.....

 

I don't have a Linux box that's up to running something like that, so I
downloaded the Win32 binaries. And I have to say; isn't Microsoft Flight
Simulator fuckin' excellent. As opposed to this piece of shit which, to be
frank, isn't worth the money they don't charge for it.

This opinion is brought to you under the GNU public license.

 

SteveH was seen penning the following ode to ... whatever:

It is indeed text mode, and a very UNIXy program at that. I.e. it's
very powerful but it'll take a while until it's configured 'just
right'.

 

Thought so. Sounds similar (in power and learning-curve steepness) to vi
and sed.

Erk.

I'm very much "noo skool" Linux[1]; I want a GUI and for software to be
easy to install and intuitive once up and running.

[1] I can hear the "old skool" lot wailing and gnashing their teeth
already; LIGAF.

 

Heh. In graphics terms, it's about where MSFS was five or so years ago.

There simply aren't the tools, it would seem, available to that community
that there are for the Windows lot.

 

Le Sun, 14 Sep 2003 15:22:11 +0100, SteveH <> a écrit :

{ snip }

slrn is very good, but tin [1] is better, if for no other reason that you
can configure headers and .sig files based on newsgroup, which (*AFAIK*)
you can't do with slrn.



[1] http://www.tin.org/

 

Le Mon, 15 Sep 2003 07:51:00 +0100, Wik <> a écrit :

{ snip }

Pan

 

Oops, hadn't seen this, when I posted 'pan'.

Try tin. It *rocks* [1].


[1] I'll be going back to using it, once I get my ADSL line up and
working [2]
[2] for those pickety cunts who see 'slrn' in my headers, and ask why, if
tin is so good, I'm not using it

 

AOL and all that. Try flying it with a force feedback joystick ... much
fun, indeed.

 

Le Mon, 15 Sep 2003 07:51:00 +0100, Wik <> a écrit :

{ snip }

_Much_ easier to learn than vi/m/.

If you 'go the slrn way', I can send you my .slrn, which will allow you to
get a working config. going, and then tweak it to your needs.

 

Does tin do threading?

I'd recommend trn; (threaded tin)

 

Wik wrote

Snot bad is it? Snot good but it works, sort of.

If some **** ported Turnpike 5 into *nix it would take over the world.