rec.autos.simulators

Daytona Patch gone

Ron O'De

Daytona Patch gone

by Ron O'De » Tue, 28 May 1996 04:00:00

Yeah!  What size track?  Dirt trackin'! Whee!  Hmm... time for
IWCCCARS to make an ARCA carset, eh?  Heh.

Haven't read the group in a while.  Been practicing a bit now that I got
a T2.  Instantly I was able to drive without bouncing off walls.  Finally
not as frustrating.  Set fastest practice speed at Atlanta with 100%
opponent strength, and even managed not to hit anyone while in the middle
of a three-a*** situation all the way around a couple corners.  Just
gotta get a consistency down; my average times were still worse than the
opponents.

Oh, and, uh, getting the other tracks down too might help, eh?

--

http://www.racesimcentral.net/~keeper/toons.html -- Contemporary WB cartoons info.
http://www.racesimcentral.net/~keeper/midi.html -- My own MIDI music and arrangements.

Eduardo Piovani Di

Daytona Patch gone

by Eduardo Piovani Di » Tue, 04 Jun 1996 04:00:00


%>>
%>>> The Daytona Patch Preview on The Pits is gone. Does anybody know why
%>>> they removed it? I think that it must finally be done and going to come
%>
%>They removed it because Daytona asked them to and they didn't want to lock
%>horns legally.  They're still looking at the idea that they might be able to
%>produce the same track, without the Daytona name, but, at the moment, the
%>'Daytona' conversion is dead.
%>

        I really don't get this thing with the name Daytona. Does that means
that I can't spell Daytona without infringing the law?? Absurd! And the things
in "The Pits" aren't meant to make money, are they?? Remember when Intel tried
to register the number 80586 for the Pentium?? The judges laughed the shit out
of themselves; imagine someone having to pay for using the number Pi, for
instance... This whole thing is outrageous!
 I'm gonna write 'till I get tired: Daytona,  Daytona,  Daytona,  Daytona,  
Daytona,  Daytona,  Daytona,  Daytona,  Daytona,  Daytona,  Daytona,  Daytona,
 Daytona,  Daytona,  Daytona,  Daytona,  Daytona,  Daytona,  Daytona, .... Sue
me, Sega!!!

     ________
    /    |__ \          Eduardo Piovani Dias - Systems Programmer
   /     |  \ \         State University of Campinas, SP - Brazil (UNICAMP)
  /      |   ) \        "Gleb Wataghin" Physics Institute            (IFGW)
 (------ |__/   )       "John David Rogers" Computing Center        (CCJDR)

   \     |    /         personal e-mail:
    \____|___/          

David Spark

Daytona Patch gone

by David Spark » Fri, 07 Jun 1996 04:00:00


>And the things in "The Pits" aren't meant to make money, are they??

Several people have tried to explain this before. It has absolutely nothing
to do with making money. It has everything to do with making an effort to
protect your property. If you fail to protect your property, be it real
estate or intellectual property, then you can lose it to someone else. In
the case of intellectual property, you lose it to everyone, i.e. it becomes
public domain.

Dave "davids" Sparks
Sequoia Motorsports

Chris and/or Da

Daytona Patch gone

by Chris and/or Da » Sat, 08 Jun 1996 04:00:00


True, but if Daytona was to ever be made, which would you rather get,
a free copy or a purchased copy???  That's one reason, others have
given just as valid reasons as that one.  

As far as Intel with the 80586, the real reasoning was for patent
purposes.  The patent office can't patent a number, so Intel changed
to the Pentium, which allowed them a patent.  With the pattent in
place, AMD, Cyrix, and others couldn't just reverse engineer the chip,
they had to acually come up with an original design.  That's why Intel
chips performed so much better than Cyrix's first 5x86 chip.  

Stopping the babling....
Chris

David Spark

Daytona Patch gone

by David Spark » Sat, 08 Jun 1996 04:00:00


>As far as Intel with the 80586, the real reasoning was for patent
>purposes.  The patent office can't patent a number, so Intel changed
>to the Pentium, which allowed them a patent.  With the pattent in
>place, AMD, Cyrix, and others couldn't just reverse engineer the chip,
>they had to acually come up with an original design.  That's why Intel
>chips performed so much better than Cyrix's first 5x86 chip.  

Intel was granted a trademark on the name, not a patent. You can't patent a
name, you patent a process. And Intel's trademark on the name Pentium(R)
has nothing whatsoever to do with the ability of other companies to
reverse-engineer the chip, it only prevents them from selling chips that
use the Pentium name. Intel may also have patents on the technology used in
the Pentium, but that has nothing to do with the name.

Dave "davids" Sparks
Sequoia Motorsports


rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.