Slashdot Mirror
Slashback: 640K, Pioneer, Payback
Kudos to the guys behind Pioneer 10! Soft writes: "As a follow-up to yesterday's story, Pioneer 10 was successfully contacted for its 30th birthday, as announced in sci.space.news. The commands that were sent yesterday have been executed by the spacecraft, and more data has been collected by the Geiger Tube Telescope." lostchicken adds a link to Associated Press wire story on Yahoo!', writing "Not bad for a 30 year-old spacecraft. Perhaps those making time capsules could learn something from this?" Several readers also pointed out the SpaceDaily version of the goings on.
What, in the middle of Canadian winter?! schon writes: "An update to this /. story - The Canadian Copyright Board has announced the details of the public hearings on Canadian Digital Copyrights, at http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/rp00838e.html. Interested parties should register before attending (details available on the page.)"
Sent to you in compliance with the current Federal legislation An Anonymous Coward writes: "Back in June of 2000 Slashdot.org reported a story called ' Taking On A Spammer' about a spammer being hacked by a pissed sys-admin. The Behind Enemy Lines web page talked about a pump-and-dump spam done by Premier Services and Mark Rice."
(See this page for more information on that scam.)
"Well on February 25, 2002 the SEC filed charges against Mark Rice!"
Death of a legend? Jean-Luc writes "The New York Review of Books has published an article that contains an e-mail from Bill Gates denying he ever said the infamous "640K should be enough for anyone" quote. He foists the blame on IBM and claims he tried to convince them to include more address space from the get go. Very technical and fairly convincing, showing that for all his might Bill is still basically a geek's geek."
They hadn't even gotten to the bowlderizing chip yet ... Dan Gilmor pointed out Intel's strong statement Thursday on copy protection front, "much stronger than the letter sent yesterday. Surprising given their history..." Maybe Intel believes they can do a better job of what deciding what goes into Silicon than a committee of bureaucrats steered by the entertainment moguls can.
That they contacted Pioneer 10 with two tin cans and a very long string.
do they have any plans to have voyager ten still be usefull?
I thought it was Pioneer 10, not Voyager 10. IIRC, there was no such thing as voyager 10.
No, I don't want a free iPod
The software on the voyager has been running for 30 years without crashing. You know it couldn't be running Windows :-)
I love music and movies. I'm slowly becoming an afficiando of the art of film--more so than most other J6P I know. The SSSCA would only introvert me--I would not consider to purchase any product that met the required compliance. I'd buy everything I could from Taiwan--mostly b/c you damn well know they are going to capitalize on any openings in the market that they can.
I've written my representitives, have you?
I'm glad to see some of the big players in the tech industry are standing up for consumers. I hope AMD and other companies will follow suit and maybe make Hollywood realize that they can't change technology and the internet, they will have to change their buisness model to adapt to this new medium.
After reading all the pushing the media industry was doing it sure makes me feel better that someone with some money and power is standing up for end user rights and even going so far as to express their dislike of the DMCA.
How can /. publish an article on Pioneer 10 one day, then muck it all up by calling it "Voyager 10" the next?
Guess it's easier to type "Voyager" than "Pioneer" when you've got you've got your left thumb stuck up your butt...
-JT
... but he is also still Microsoft's Chief Software Architect. He very much isn't stupid when it comes to the internals of the PC. MS-DOS tried to work around the 640k limitations IBM set in place using EMM386 and HIMEM.
The bloody problem was that segments overlapped.
.. FFFF full 64k .. FFFF full 64k (total 640K)
:)
i.e. Only 16 bytes *didn't* overlap in 2 consecutive segments -- meaning there was 65535 different ways to address the *same* memory location. (Ok, 64K wrap-around in a segment sucked too.)
Why the heck couldn't Intel just have "zero" memory for when the CPU accessed segmented memory that didn't exist.
i.e.
segment:memory
0000:0000
0009:0000
000A:000
: all zero when read
B7FF:0000
B800:0000 frame buffer (mono or cga, I forgot)
A000:0000 VGA frame buffer
At least "real mode" is dead (finally
We have just recently passed through the 32-bit limit and are going to 64-bit
I'm sorry I must have just been dreaming about alpha's and sparcs these past few years.
Thanks for Bitch-slapping Hollywood. I don't know what else to really say but I'm glad finally Companies with money are starting to get tough, and we need more of it or one day I'm going to wake up and everything in my house is branded, regulated and monitored by the the MPAA/RIAA..
..There's a-dooin's a-transpirin'
Interesting you ASSUMED the worst possible interpetation to that statement.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
"Ten years from now, they could do it in a few seconds." -- The Racketeer of the Hellfire Club, 1993, Phrack 42
Not only that, but I'm not sure about how his explanation makes him a "geek's geek". He was reciting common knowledge about address space. Also, in no way does his 640K statement have anything to do with his knowledge of addresses.
I still stick with my assessment that Bill Gates is a business man, not a geek. He knows about computers, but I wouldn't trust him to code his way out of a wet paper bag.
Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
Rice has consented to the entry of an order that would enjoin him from future violations of the foregoing provisions
Could someone explain...it appears that Rice has agreed not to break the laws he already broke?! Damn... "I promise not to rape, pillage and plunder any more!"
It looks like a panty-waist settlement. Does anyone know the punitive damages etc the FTC is asking for? This looks like a PR move, but no real action.
Cheers
I've yet to see substantial backing as to his "great coder" skills. Paul Allen, yes I'd agree with. He started Microsoft with his parents money. He was sent to college on his parents dime (and IIRC, was not doing all that well academic wise).
Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
Oh, how very geek -- a my-computer-was-shittier-than-thine post.
Well, I'll bite. My first computer had a monochrome display, 40 character columns and 8k memory. We upgraded it with a hard drive for close to $3000; the hard drive was 4 meg.
That machine is less than a tenth of the power of my cellular phone. I emulate it on my Pocket PC while playing A Flock of Seagulls MP3s in the background. Ahh memories...
Seriously though, 640k WAS enough for most programs when they knew how to manage the top ram. They just had to treat it the same way we deal with swap files today -- stick memory up there if you don't want to get rid of it but don't actively need it. There are plenty of devices, programs and utilities that run with command stacks under 128k (the size of the biggest x86 command cache i'm aware of) that swap miscellaneous data (ie pictures, sounds, even text) out of the larger ram. The problem was that sloppy compilers (MS is not the only one to blame; if I remember Borland was the biggest player in the compilation game back when 640k was 'nuff) DIDN'T do the swapping for you.
Windows has spoiled us all by doing such things under the scenes -- to the point that code optimizers are hot commodities that are prized for their savant abilities. In short: the same practices that create the code bloat we all cringe at were responsible for the streamlining of some very sticky swap processes. Resource files, i hate you and I could kiss you.
Hey freaks: now you're ju
We, the people, need a charismatic, high-profile champion with no stake other than the public interest. Who will take up the mantle?
Yes, Dan Gillmor is absolutely right, we need a champion for individual rights. Someone who can make a case for the public domain that doesn't devolve into an argument about which company can make more money.
Intel isn't going to do it, because Intel is interested only in Intel's profits.
Someone needs to say things like:
- Copyright is not an absolute right, it is a compromise. There can be, and there is such a thing as "too much copyright"
- There is such a thing as public domain.
- All inventions and writings should end up in the public domain, because that's where they came from.
- Dead people's works don't need copyright protection.
- Individuals copy because they want to. A government interested in "freedom" should find a way to ensure people can do what they want. A corporation interested in "capitalism" should find a way to profit from the things people want to do.
- America is about Opportunity, not Guarantee (I believe Lincoln said words to that effect). If your business model doesn't work, find another one.
and so forth. Normally, the Government is supposed to represent the People. Unfortunately, the Government has been priced out of reach of the People.We have a moratorium on internet taxes.. why didn't we have a moratorium on internet copyrights until things got sorted out?
So indeed, who will pick up the mantle?
The only person I know of who makes a moral argument for this is RMS, but unfortunately he doesn't quite fit the description "charismatic"....
While I don't know if BG actually made the 640K quote or not, the history that he provides (i.e., we really wanted to do things right, but the evil hardware people wouldn't let us) is self-serving and not exactly correct.
The Motorolla 68000 did have a 32-bit design, but it only had 24-bit addressing when it came out, which was the same as Intel was attempting to provide with the 80286.
However, it was impossible to use the address space of the 286 because it required the chip to go into protected mode, and MS-DOS made assumptions that made this impossible. While DOS 1.0 certainly couldn't have predicted this, MS had early access to the 286 specs, but they never made the appropriate changes. Digital Research did, with Concurrent CPM-86, but by that time, the MS-DOS juggernaught had pretty much rolled over everyone else.
I'd trust Gates about as far as I could throw a Buick.
Anyone remember words to this effect?
"Bill Gates, CEO of Microsoft Corp. a fiercely competitive company(...)" - Microsoft Encarta, 1996
"Bill Gates, CEO of Microsoft is a contributor to several charitable causes, including...(...)" Microsoft Encarta 2000
Bowie J. Poag
I don't know which topic this is in regard to, but it looks hella cool. Some friends of mine mentioned playing it. Apparently it is developing quite a following.
Freeware also. Nice.
Check out their forums. Not bad.
-Rothfuss
The Canadian Copyright Board has announced the details of the public hearings on Canadian Digital Copyrights...
What? Aren't the DMCA, UCITA, and SSSCA good enough for them?
Why some backwater state in the USA would need their own special laws on this is totally beyond me...
(Before you flame, yes, I know.)
I got my Linux laptop at System76.
7.42 billion miles, a little over 22 light hours away. Lesseee, divide by 22, times 2, divide by 27380 mph, divide by 24 hours/day: so in 1026 days, or about 3 years, it will cross the 1 light day boundary...
Luxury!
My first computer was a Timex Sinclair 1000, with 2k of memory. BASIC was built in, and the first time you pressed a key on the keyboard, it would expand to a BASIC keyword.
And we LIKED it!
I got my Linux laptop at System76.
Well, I'll bite. My first computer had a monochrome display, 40 character columns and 8k memory. We upgraded it with a hard drive for close to $3000; the hard drive was 4 meg.
You had a hard drive? you we're lucky!
I had to assembly my first computer, using a soldiering iron! it had 4 Mhz. hard drive? we had a cassette player, and it took 2 hours to load a chess game, which failed half the time!
:)
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Its all fine and dandy to deny something after the fact, but is he claiming he sent this email out before anyone at Microsoft had ever heard of the internet (long after 640K became a problem)
You imply consent went you connect to there system. programming to the behaviour of a client is perfectly acceptible.
thew problem is getting browser to turn off the "feature".
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
you don't get the popups if you use a browser like mozilla that will let you disable them. hmm... maybe a conspiracy between slashdot and mozilla... :)
Smokey the Bear says, "Strip mining prevents forest fires!"
I don't think Bill's saying, "I never said that." I think that what he's saying is, "That was taken out of context." Perhaps what Bill G. said was, "640k should be enough for anyone ... for now." Which is pretty much what I always figured had happened.
Disclaimer: I think Microsoft sucks donkey balls, and the sooner they stop being a monopoly, the sooner the world will be a much better place.
You know how the liberals go around saying that if guns were outlawed no one would have guns?
I think the RIAA and MPAA are really liberals in disguise. They think if they can just get a law passed banning certain kinds of hardware then that hardware couldn't possibly exist any more.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
You all HAVE to read this. Seriously. This is a good bit of nice dry tech specs on the Pioneer 10.
Personally, this is a very good read. I found this bit especially interesting:
The processor is completely redundant with the exception of the interface circuits. Upon command from the spacecraft, the signal processor can be switched from the main logic system to a standby redundant logic system. The function of the processor is to sequentially accumulate data on a frame basis from the seven detectors. Data are accumulated in a 24 bit register and then compressed quasi-logarithmically to 12 bits for transmission.
As the other artices say, that baby is getting quite cold. There's a year by year printout of it's tmperature on that page too.
Anyway, I just thougt I'd point this out for those interested in a little more "dry" facts on the thing other than the hoopla of it talking back (which is a feat, don't get me wrong).
I'm not a prophet or a stone-age man,
I'm just a mortal with potential of a super man.
Guess it's easier to type "Voyager" than "Pioneer" when you've got you've got your left thumb stuck up your butt...
votahewr
voryager
vottager
pioneer
ppioneer
ioneer
I did a lot better with pioneer. And my left hand stinks now. Thanks a lot.
PUBLIC SPLIT ON WHETHER BUSH IS A DIVIDER -CNN scrolling banner, 10/15/2004
I was working in the compiler group at Microsoft in the early '80s, so I remember some of the historical context.
:-))
I recall suggesting to my boss (who reported to Bill back then) that Apple made a mistake by choosing 128K as the initial memory size for the Mac. My argument was that they'd need 256K to eliminate code swapping in the apps that were under development. The next-generation memory chips would make 1MB machines affordable, and I thought that would be enough for the foreseeable future. (I'm not claiming I was a visionary, either.
My boss replied that the consensus opinion at Microsoft was that no one would ever buy machines with a megabyte of memory. Even if it were affordable, just consider how long it would take to clear it! An app would never really *use* that much memory on a PC; it would just be too slow.
(CPU speeds and memory speeds were not only much lower than they are today, they tended to be more closely coupled. Datapaths were much narrower. And Moore's Law wasn't widely understood outside a relatively small group of hardware-savvy folks.)
So Bill may have been fully prescient, and busy paving the way for large-memory machines. But that definitely wasn't the general belief at Microsoft around 1983. If he really did understand things as well as he says, he didn't manage to communicate it successfully even to his direct reports in engineering.
In any case, people generally aren't saying that Microsoft was responsible for the 640k limit. What Microsoft really is responsible for is delivering MS-DOS and Windows 3.x. If Gates did that despite knowing better, deliberately condemning the industry to more than a decade of blue screens and flaky software, that would be much worse. So, which is it: was Gates merely ignorant or callously opportunistic back then?
Pfff.. MY first computer (~20 years ago) had only 5k of RAM, 176x184 resolution (22 columns), and a cassette tape drive.. and to get it I had to walk 10 miles, uphill both ways. It did have 16 colors though, so you've got me there.
My current machine has 2000 times the processing power (2x1GHz vs. 1.0227 MHz) , 90 times the screen real estate, and 200,000 times the memory... but I'll always remember my VIC-20 with fondness.
All movements for social change begin as missions, evolve into businesses, and end up as rackets.
Just think about that phrase for a minute.
If it ain't broke, you need more software.
1) MS is based on upgrade software where more machine resources is required to run each subsequent version of the same software.
...
.. he is a liar and the father of lies." NIV
2) BG is the Anti-Christ, as such he is master of space and time (and other amusing parlor tricks)
3) BG knew for a fact the 640K would not last long, it fact it would be impede the upgrade treadmill for a number of years.
Thus, BG would never have said it. However, I wonder about
4) John 8:44 "for the devil
I could be wrong.
I can make a good case for 192 bit addressing.
64 bits local memory address plus
128 bits of IPv6 address.
So you could have a pointer to memory location X on IP address Y. Distributed memory access over a network.
256 bits might make more sense, then both parts would be equal (128 bits).
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
Not really that cold. But then if you consider that it has a pretty hot on board heat source (i.e. reactor), and the ONLY means for dissippating it is black body radiation (yup, its a hard vaccuum)... This means its pretty dark (i.e. cold, since its a vaccuum, the only external heat source would be incident radiation).
;)
So, ya, its cold out in deep space
Well, I suppose I keep it turned on because many sites use Javascript a lot more responsibly.
Steve Magruder, Metro Foodist
I would rather Slashdot stop the popup ads. I already do some things to block them, but I can still tell there was an attempt to launch one. Just the idea of a popup ad is greatly annoying, and for the sake of Slashdot, I would hope that they stop trying to annoy their users off their site.
Steve Magruder, Metro Foodist
Maybe they're "test-marketing" them. Well, I think Slashdot has this user's reaction. :)
By the way, I have yet to "fly off the handle." If you could see me, you would see a very calm individual. :)
Steve Magruder, Metro Foodist
My first computer I owned had 1Kb of memory which was shared between the video display and the program memory. The processor was a Z80. I assembled it with a soldering iron and it still runs today [ZX81].
Thats nothing, my first computer had 256 bytes of memory and was programed using a hex pad and displayed results on a one line LED display. [Kim1]
You were lucky, we had to refine sand to make our own silicon for the circuits and had to load the bootstrap program by wiring up magnetic beads ont' ferrite core memory - and you tell the kids of today that and they don't believe you
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Yeah, like you really dodged the bullet and avoided that hack -- NOT! Bank switching was what LIM EMS memory (LIM standing for Lotus, Intel, and Microsoft) was all about. Because you never ported MSDOS to the 80286 or 80386, we developers had to resort to hacks like EMS to fit our bloated code (ok, that part is my fault) into the address space.
If Microsoft had kept up with the hardware technology, maybe I wouldn't have torn out so much hair in the 80s, and maybe I wouldn't hate them as much today....
... nah, I'd still hate 'em, because once better OSes started to show up for the 386 (e.g. OS/2 version 2) and people finally started saying adios to DOS, Microsoft couldn't stand the thought of it, so they started pushing Windows down everyone's throats, using dirty techniques such as preloads, per processor licensing, etc.
It's the same pattern that MS used with the Internet and the same that we'll see again with whatever comes next. Microsoft has always been about denying technology, and then when everyone gets fed up with their backwoods Amish luddite mentality and start to leave them, MS does something underhanded (usually involving a monopoly leverage) to lock people in again... only to let their followers/victims rot again while visionless Microsoft grows fat and complacent. Over'n'over because sheep are too stupid to learn. But some of us remember.
Damn, where did that pointless rant come from? Oh yeah, Gates quote reminded me of when I saw them kill the personal computer revolution. Funny how that always gets my dander up.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
I guess I just realized that Karma is tantamount to Political Capital. :) So be it.
Steve Magruder, Metro Foodist
Gates didn't design the hardware.
The original PC came with a choice of 3 operating systems, CPM/86, Windoze (a cheap knockoff of CPM) and UCSD P system. It was _not_ 'designed' to Microsofts specs.
The software designers were (as usual) not consulted, and had to work with what they were given.
I work with embedded systems, and those mistakes keep getting made. Hardware designers design minimum-cost boards, without consulting the softies at all. We're presented with a finished board, and told to put s/w on it. I've seen hundreds of man-hours wasted on working around design decisions that saved 5 cents a board, and we typically ship in quantities of 100-200 boards per project.
The solution, of course, is to have a prolonged session with the hardware designers and a large bit of 4 by 2, but management doesn't see it that way.
Quidquid Latine dictum sit, altum videtur (anything said in Latin sounds important)
The link's just hosed. Try this:
- N-Dump.htm
http://belps.freewebsites.com/Stock-Scammers/Pump
-Dan
We don't need no Net Explorer We don't need no Thought control
Perhaps because he gave away quite a bit of money to charitable causes during that time?
(Encarta 2000 was, after all, put out just around the time they were forming the "Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation" - I'm sure charity was on their mind at that time.)
I mean, I don't admire the guy particularly and I don't use his company's products, but slamming the guy for updating his bio (after 4 years) seems a bit silly.
-- My Weblog.
Your points are appreciated, but the whole matter really is this simple: I clicked to go to Slashdot and look at (and contribute to) Slashdot content; I didn't click to popup the advertisement. It's an issue of Slashdot taking advantage of my good will and doing something they very well know works against me and any other visitor. Popup ads are a scourge on the web, and only loud/consistent complaints (or vacating the sites) will work to get them removed. The onus should *not* be on the user to block them, although certainly I (being a techie) will do just that quite handily.
Steve Magruder, Metro Foodist
Hmm. I have a Tandy 2000 in my closet, which is an 80186-based machine. (Yes, 80186, not 80286.) MS-DOS was initially being pushed as a CP/M-like system, tied to CPUs but not specific hardware, and Radio Shack built the Model 2000 as an MS-DOS machine that wasn't PC-compatible. And you know what? It could address more than 640K of memory.
"Protected mode" has to do with whether the machine's memory can be addressed all in one contiguous space or has to be addressed in segments. MS-DOS was written with the assumption it had to be addressed in segments... but it could still address all the memory the CPU could address in that fashion. The 640K limit came from the way the IBM PC mapped video memory. The Tandy 2000 mapped its video memory to the top of the machine's physical RAM--however much it happened to have, up to the 1M limit the 80186 was able to address.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
As I am a South Carolina resident, I'm about to ship off a letter to Fritz Hollings. Please critique it and feel free to suggest ways to improve it before it goes. I wonder if complaining about the draft of the SSSCA at this point is worthwhile since they seem to ignore its existence. I also wonder if I'm going overboard by insinuating he's acting in the interests of his contributors and not citizens. It seems fair to me, but I want my arguments to look reasonable and not have my letter ignored.
The Honorable Ernest F. Hollings
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Mr. Hollings,
I am a professional software developer and a constituent in your state. I've recently become concerned with your proposed bill, the Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA). I am against such a bill, and I'll explain why below.
No Public Participation / No Regard for Fair Use: In Section 104(b)(1)(A), the proposed bill describes the security standard as being determined by "representatives of interactive digital device manufacturers and representatives of copyright owners." In effect, you are permitting corporations to determine the scope of this law, with no input from the public who will be using such devices. The public's fair-use rights have been slowly whittled away by recent laws. The SSSCA will continue this disappointing trend of protecting the profits of media companies at the expense of the consumer.
Open Source Software: There is an entire industry of software manufacturers and support organizations that write software that is freely available. This software is installed on millions of computers around the world, including servers that run the Internet. Software engineers like myself earn a living supporting this software. Open source software contains software code that is freely published. Your draft bill could, in effect, make this type of software illegal, since developers would be unable to "hide" security software in open code.
Digital Devices: There are any number of digital devices that have no need for these protection schemes. My scientific calculator is a "digital device." So is my Global Positioning System unit. They have absolutely no need for built-in protection systems. Your bill would place an undue burden on digital hardware manufacturers to protect things that don't need it. This will result in less hardware being produced, and increased development expenses which will be passed on to consumers.
Copyright protection can be maintained with state-of-the-art technology. Your bill will encourage companies to create mediocre protection schemes backed by the threat of prosecution. Piracy will continue unabated in foreign countries.
I am not sure exactly how you think you are benefiting South Carolina with this bill. My reading of the proposal is that it will only benefit the large corporations in this country, especially the media conglomerates. Please don't act solely in the interest of your high-dollar contributors.
I believe you are doing a disservice to South Carolinians and Americans by proposing this bill, and I urge you to do away with it.
There was a /. story on someone who reverse engineered some of Gates' (and Allen's) stuff, and found some pretty nice work.
Unfortunately, the sorry state of the slashdot search engine prevents me from finding it.
The 133t coders here should realize that coding a language interpreter that has to fit in a 4k computer with no keyboard or monitor is a little different than pounding out a few perl scripts.
The bar WAS higher back then.
Is anyone able to access the CCRB site? I get a blank page...
(I hope that's not a really bad sign of just how restrictive our copyrights are going to become!)
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Look, guys, I know that most people named "Gilmore" spell it that way but you reference Dan's tech writing often enough here that you ought to know how to spell his name by now. Set your autocorrector to change "Gilmore" to "Gillmor" and you'll come out way ahead of the game, at least here on /.
Learn to spell: nickel, missile, lose, solely, amendment, speech, kernel, probably, ridiculous, deity, hierarchy, versus
Below is the Date/Site & Contact info for the Dept.of Ind & Cdn Heritage hearings -- please, if you life in any of these cities GOTO these hearings. If not to present/speak, at least to applaud && boo at the appropriate times.
This is the final step before Canada gets its very own DMCA.... What fun that will be.
Halifax, Nova Scotia - Friday, March 8, 2002
Citadel Halifax Hotel
(902) 422-1391
Vancouver, British Columbia - Friday, March 15, 2002
Sheraton Vancouver Wall Centre Hotel
(604) 893-7257
Montreal, Quebec - Thursday, March 21, 2002
Holiday Inn Montreal-Midtown
(514) 842-6111
Toronto, Ontario - Tuesday, March 26, 2002
Holiday Inn On King
(416) 599-4000
Ottawa, Ontario - Thursday, April 11, 2002
Government Conference Centre
(613) 990-6700
From the letter puportedly by Bill Gates:
The answer is that in that 1M of address space we had to accommodate RAM [random access memory], ROM [read-only memory], and I/O addresses [Input/Output addresses used for "peripherals" like keyboards, disk drives, and hard drives],
BZZT! As I recall, Intel doesn't use memory-mapped I/O. The I/O address space and the memory address space are separate.
Also, even if Billy could get the technical points right, should we trust what he says? Past history shows him to be very veracity-challenged.
"that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody
I see. It's a "troll" to point out that Bill Gates is lying.
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
Amen to that. Saving to a cassette tape, hooked to a TV.
I have memories of being a kid and my parents asleep on the couch (me and my two younger sisters had probably worn them out). I was laying on the floor in front of the TV with the zx81 entering in BASIC code.
I remember typing in
10 PRINT "some very very very long text string that I don't quite remember now"
and being so upset that it either gave me an error or truncated the text string because it was too long.
I also remember the skiing program that came in the manual where you had to manuvuer your little black dot to the bottom of the screen between other dots that were the gates.
I really need to buy another one of those - I think my Dad still has our old one.
Sigh.
Absolutely. Richest man in the world, but just look at the hair.
"Check out the bowl-job, Marge!" --Homer
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
My first computer was a 3-bit digital mechanical computer, manually clocked at about 1 Hz.
Anyone else remember the Digicomp?
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
In five years the cost of computation will really be effectively decreased. We'll be able to put on somebody's desk, for an incredibly low cost, a processor with far more capability than you could ever take advantage of. Hardware in effect will become a lot less interesting. The total job will be in the software, and we'll be able to write big fat programs. We can let them run somewhat inefficiently because there will be so much horsepower that just sits there.
This makes is unlikely he ever thought 640K would be enough...but he also said, in the same interview (p. 18-19):
16-bits is extremely important, and it is not because of speed...the main reason for the 16-bit micro being advantageous is its increased address space...The logical address space limit...is for all practical purposes gone away. The chip is designed to address a megabyte."
So he did seem to indicate that one megabyte address space was basically limitless.
- adam
In case you haven't heard, Fritz Hollings is opposed to "cash-and-carry" government. What are you worried about? This has to be in your interest, otherwise, he wouldn't be bringing it up.
Potato chips are a by-yourself food.
What is important to note here is that the department feels that anti-circumvention may already be covered by copyright law and that restricting devices to circumvent protection is too broad. If you read the original paper (http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/rp01099e.html) the tone is very much in favour of making these laws so that they strike a balance between the public and rights holders (i.e., those who provide content).
Of course, this is not the final law and there is much to be addressed. However, the outlook, in my opinion, is good. There is no way the reform, as discussed on the department's site (so far) is indicative of DMCA-ish measures. People should keep this in mind before shooting their mouths off about Canadian copyright reform (of course, this is
This does not mean, however, that those interested in truely keeping the balance of copyright in a sane manner can just be apathetic. My comments are registered on the department's site and I'm probably going to one of the meetings (either in Toronto or Ottawa).
Woz
What's up? Are you okay? Don't work so hard!
OK, that's not quite a legitimate question. Bill is and always has been a geek on his good days. (and a nerd on his bad days, and a sleazball on the other 90% of the days)
However, his version of events doesn't correspond with anyone else's, or with recorded history. In other words, Bill Gates is a liar.
Now let's quit quoting him and saying, "oh hey--we were wrong all these decades."
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
It was a joke! Laugh! It's called 'hyperbole' Sometimes liberals just have no sense of humour...
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Guys, I can't believe no one has yet posted the true reason why the 640K limit was a problem. Well, I'll explain it.
The IBM PC BIOS was designed to abstract the hardware. These days Linux or Windows do that for us, but in those days the BIOS was what you had. Your DOS programs were never supposed to talk to the hardware, they were supposed to go through the BIOS.
The problem was that the BIOS sucked. Want to draw a character on the screen? Fine; there is a BIOS call for that. (BIOS calls were called "interrupts" because you used an interrupt to call them, but I'll just call them "BIOS calls".) Want to draw a whole string of characters on the screen? You would think there would be a BIOS call for that too, right? But there wasn't. You would have to do one interrupt per character, and poke your string onto the screen one character at a time! And interrupts were really expensive; remember that we are talking a 4.7 MHz chip with slo-o-o-o-w memory.
And suppose you wanted to read the keyboard? Not a problem; there was a BIOS call for that. Of course, it had a few limitations: it could only recognize a little more than 500 distinct keypresses. If your app wanted to recognize Alt+F1, no problem, that was one of the recognized keys. But if you wanted to recognize Ctrl+Alt+Shift+F1, too bad. The obvious and correct way to read the keyboard is to return the scan code for which key was pressed, coupled with a chord of which shift keys were down (e.g. Ctrl and Alt were down, shift wasn't, or whatever). With two bytes of data, you could handle any combination of Alt+Shift+Ctrl+whatever. But the BIOS didn't do it that way.
There are other examples, but I think those two are enough. Given this broken a BIOS, the application writers all decided to go around the BIOS and talk directly to the hardware. Get the address of the keyboard controller, find out what keys the user hit, and support any combination of keys you want. Get the address of the video card's character buffer, and use MOVS to blast a string into it with zero overhead. Now your copy of Microsoft Word 1.0 runs much faster than if it used the BIOS.
Guess what address the video card was at? That's right, 640K. By the time people began seriously hurting for more address space, there was way too much software out there writing directly into the character buffer of the video card, so it was now too late to move the buffer somewhere else. The 640K limit was set in stone.
Even if everyone had used the BIOS, there would have still been a 1024K limit, since that's all you could address on an 8088. But that would have been much better, and it would have been much easier to write environments like DesqView. (You could have done something like DesqView on an 8088 if it only had to run well-behaved apps, i.e. apps that never went to the hardware but always went through the BIOS.)
P.S. Slightly offtopic, but I have fond memories of using a multitasking environment called OmniView. It did much the same thing as DesqView, except that it didn't try to do the overlapping windows thing with the apps; it ran your apps full-screen. You could use function key combos to switch your full screen among app sessions, almost exactly like using Ctrl+Alt+Fn in Linux to switch full-screen among virtual ttys. DesqView got the fame and fortune, but OmniView was a little bit more efficient and I got some real work done using it on my 33 MHz 386 system. I used to run compiles in parallel: one compile would cause the disk to load the source, and the other compiles that used the same source file would find the data already buffered. I could finish four compiles in only a little more time than a single compile took on its own; the compiles were fairly disk-bound.
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
I know i risk taking yet more damage on this but what they hell.
/. is pointless, instead how about some intelligent comment on what they do wrong and what they do right - they must have done some things well, or are well all denying that they have done one thing for it?
/. and open source is doomed - inflexibility and an unwillingness to compromise or discuss issues is what has put Microsoft in the poisition they are in and yet day in and day out slashdot proves its not isolated to closed source.
Can someone explain how the hell my comment is flamebait?
I was aware that posting a non abusive microsft comment might be seen as slightly controversial but can you actually deny ANYTHING in the comment as incorrect ?
The meaningless microsoft is evil bashing on
I dont mind being modded down but i dislike immensely the flamebait tag - it shows that the moderator simply takes personal dislike to the post and marks it as such not on the merits. I moderate too and try to always be honest and on occasion i have also posted a comment to explain why i moderate down. Perhaps we need to attach a user name to moderations to stop this stuff ?
If you want to attack anything that does not toe the party line line then
do you all seriously think Microsoft are going to go away and die?
What the government will shut down a multi billion dollar company and plunge the industry into collapse in the process ?
Youre still going to have to put up with MS and they will still make and sell OS products, even if split up, bashing anything to do with them is a negative waste of time - if you can do something better do it, the world is your oyster and open source has so many wonderful reasons to succeed, but bitching and whining about MS wont make linux the worlds premiere operaiting system, it wont fix the numerous issues that prevent it being the desktop choice for everyman, it wont bring a unified face to kernel development or drivers, it wont convince companies to switch, all it will do is make the open source movement as a whole look petty and childish and thats not what we are at all.
I have used and supported open source for a long time, i started my career on HP UX and have never forgotten it and up until recently i ran a number of linux servers and desktops at home and work -i stopped because i couldnt take the lack of support and drivers, the endless make and configures and patches and work arounds and lack of documentation and a million other little things, i stopped because so many of you would rather attack anyone with a rational opinion as a flamebaiter or troll.
The sad thing is that so many people in the world get their opinions on what open source is about from sites like slashdot, god knows what they think.
Oh for the days when open source meant open minded as well.
I refuse to argue with Anonymous Cowards - if you want a discussion get an account....
Good point - my spelling and grammar tend to suck lately - too many years working in abbreviated speak i suspect - pretty lousy for someone who started out as a journalist !
I refuse to argue with Anonymous Cowards - if you want a discussion get an account....
He falls short of saying he invented Moore's law here, but by not crediting Moore it makes his later Intel bashing sound more plausible.
perl -e 'fork||print for split//,"hahahaha"'
Trolling using another account since 2005.
NASA omitted one very important little line from the plaque onboard Pioneers.
Alien A: OK. So now we know who they are, where they live, and how big they are.
Alien B: Umm...but where do babies come from?
All Rights Reversed.
"In three or four years the industry will have moved over to 64-bit architecture, and it looks like it will suffice for more than a decade."
Honestly, back then I realized that we should have skipped 64-bit architecture, and moved right to 128-bit, but nobody would listen to me. It was that me-damned Open Source movement, they were out to get me. Can you spare some change? Ahhhhhh! Penguins! Penguins everywhere!!!!
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
First: A real liberal believes that you should be allowed to own gun. The people you are talking about are called "Democrats".
Second: In the UK, where people don't (by and large) have guns, MANY MANY fewer people are killed or injured by guns. Fact.
Third: They don't think they will cause those devices to cease to exist any more than the (intelligent members of) the gun control lobby believe[s] that outlawing guns means they won't exist, or exist in the populace; The idea is to greatly reduce the numbers.
The fact is that the industry believes that piracy decreases revenue. In some cases, they are certainly correct; Even I have copied things I would ordinarily paid for. Then again, I've also purchased things by an artist (sometimes things I already owned) based on what I downloaded, so that can possibly work both ways. The fact that having a computer implies having at least a small amount of money does seem to indicate that it's more likely to generate revenue than take it away; For more information on that idea check out Stephenson's explanation for the proliferation of advertising in the Metaverse in Snow Crash. I don't have the book on me, so I won't type it here.
In any case, they want to make sure that there are as few piracy-enabling devices (Yes, I know that's something as simple as a CDR, I'm not an idiot thank you) running around the market as possible. They just want to decrease the number of these devices, not eradicate them; The know the latter is impossible. The former, however, can only be very attractive.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I can bite on this one :) In 1999, I was a Unix administrator for a combination Sun3/Sun4 systems. The Sun3 systems were from about the same era as that Mac LC, and had a m68k processor (Sun3 were before Sun started their own processor line, which they began with the Sun4 system. Ahhh, the huge VME bus systems, a huge board of memory was 8 megs, a 150 pound hardwdrive was 500 megs... Oh, and those write protect rings, so colorful and fun... Of source the Sun3 systems didn't enjoy the new fangled equipment that the Sun4s did, they were all made into diskless X terminals. Most of the Sun4s were diskless as well, netbooting and loading everything off of nfs, but they did their own processing, And then there was the speeddemon, the Sparc 1+. Then they had to ruin all the fun and get donated HP 712 and similar HP-UX systems that were only a few years old, as opposed to 12-14 years old. No more soldering to save malfunctioning VME boards, sigh...
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Much worse than th 1Meg barrier was the fact that IBM stuck the video memory right about in the middle, leaving 640K below, and perhaps 200K above. This was unbelievabley stupid. They could have at least mapped it at one end. Better yet a switch to turn the mapping on/off, which would also have prevented the huge number of direct-mapping programs that frozer hardware design for years.
The high memory managers were written by Lotus, I think. They were pretty awful and relied on copying small blocks from higher addresses by changing the segment overlap and writing them into the "hole" above the video memory and below 1Meg.
Yeah, and Bill Gates probably didn't say that the internet is just a passing fad either. But only because the Book in which he wrote this has undergone some massive editing, majorly in chapters which have anything to do with communication among computers.
But bill Gates is a great businessman, he'll manage to sell that "new truth" about the 640K Limit too.
--
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks