Slashdot Mirror


Slashback: Hardware, Lexis, Free

Slashback tonight has followups and clarifications on glitch-delayed Pentium IV shipments, Free software for chainware operating systems, the real distinction between 3G and 2.5G phone systems and more -- read on below for the details.

More RAM than I can afford. RyanT5000 writes "The article referenced in "Getting Rid of the Disks" incorrectly states that the maximum RAM for a 32-bit Intel compatible system is 4 GB. This was true up to and including the original Pentium processor, and it makes a lot of sense (after all, 2^32 = 4 294 967 296). However, with the Pentium Pro, Intel added 4 pins to the address bus, expanding the maximum physical address space to 64 GB (using paging, since it still uses 32 bit addressing). I would assume AMD has a similar feature. If you're on Windows, you'll need a server version to get above 4 GB, but most major Linux/BSD/etc. OSes support it. This would probably be cheaper (and definitely faster) than SCSI SSDs. If you need more than 64 GB of solid state storage, you probably shouldn't be running on an Intel."

"Free" always makes people suspicious. imevil writes "A while ago slashdotters asked some questions to the GNUWin II team. Well, here are the answers. In the meantime, more people joined the team, and more languages were added (this one looks pretty cool)." There's also a short article about GNUWin running at NewsForge.

On a related note, cos(0) writes "According to this(1), this(2), and other stories, many people are interested in running open source, high-quality software on MS Windows. The author of this site provides an up-to-date CD image of the latest versions of numerous high-quality OSS applications (complete list on the site), updated monthly, downloadable via BitTorrent. (The same site also offers a web-based Code Beautifier.)"

Cool distribution method! (And if you're on dialup, $5 seems like a great bargain -- Are you listening, Cheapbytes?)

Toys are so tempting to the wallet ... OrenWolf writes "Ars Technica Has a review up of BroadQ's QCast Tuner software. Unlike the earlier /. review, this article goes into great detail about the technical capabilities of the software. A must read for PS2 owners looking for a PC-PVR-esque solution."

Yeah, but does this review include any original software? ;) And david_adams writes "Slashdot linked to an article I wrote last month about my experience with a CDMA2000 1x wireless network from SprintPCS. It sparked quite a bit of controversy, but not for the reasons I expected. Because I called Sprint's service 3G in the title, but admitted it was 2.5G in the first paragraph, I heard from people on both sides, chiding me on the one hand for calling it 3G, and on the other for calling it 2.5G. I decided to research and write a new article to get to the bottom of it. What is truly 3G? Where is the line between 2.5G and 3G?"

The time to wait is now! ThunderDawg writes "Intel resumed Canterwood Pentium 4 3 GHz 800FSB shipments yesterday. TAFKAEFKAF (The Anomaly Formerly Known as Errata Formerly Known as Flaw) was corrected with a software patch.

Intel is again shipping its new 3GHz Pentium 4 processor, a week after it halted shipments due to the discovery of an "anomaly," an Intel spokesman said Monday. PC makers that use the chip in their systems have been supplied with a software update to fix the issue, George Alfs, an Intel spokesman said. Vendors including Hewlett-Packard, Dell Computer, and Gateway introduced desktop systems based on the chip when it was released on Monday last week. The issue with the 3GHz Pentium 4 with support for an 800MHz system bus occurs only in rare circumstances and users are unlikely to be affected, according to Alfs."

I'd take google and a strong AI any day. hondo77 writes "A bit of a followup to this article from back in February, LexisNexis has been named the publisher of official reports by the California Supreme Court, according to this press release. "The public will have free access to the official text of the opinions at a Web site hosted by LexisNexis linked to the court's Web site." IANAL but it doesn't sound ominous to me."

40 of 130 comments (clear)

  1. more like 16 gigabytes by jrstewart · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While theoretically you can put up to 64 gigs into a recent IA32 machine, my understanding is that in Linux at least the practical limit is 16 gigabytes. After that the page tables won't fit in kernel space.

    I'd expect that most other OSes have limits like that due to architectures designed when nobody was close to using a full 4 gigs.

    1. Re:more like 16 gigabytes by coupland · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well historically maximum memory sizes have always been limited by implementations (how long after OS/2 2.0 before you could buy a server with 4.0 GB RAM?). However demand usually pushes supply. When 32GB of RAM becomes needed by the IA32 architecture it's a sure bet that Linux and eventually Windows will catch up to meet the need. The fact that it isn't realistically possible today is immaterial. There is no demand. (Please spare me the examples of theoretical clients...)

    2. Re:more like 16 gigabytes by JoeBuck · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I understand that the way around that one is to use large pages, to decrease the overhead for each page. Pages can be of variable sizes. I'm not a kernel expert, but there was a talk on this topic at the last Ottawa Linux Symposium.

    3. Re:more like 16 gigabytes by afidel · · Score: 4, Informative

      Ummm, large X86 systems from Dell, HP, Unisys and others already support the full 64GB of ram that the architecture allows. Sure not everyone (or even many) who uses Linux needs large PAE support but it would be nice for those who do. Of course most of the people I know who wanted to use large amounts of ram on x86 are waiting for Opteron because generally if you need that much ram you need it all for one or two processes and that doesn't work with PAE. btw if you think no one wants access to large chunks of ram on x86 then you haven't dealt with people with large databases or who route large ASIC's/cpus. It costs shedloads to buy Sun's with lots of ram, an Opteron or Xeon with the same amount of ram will probably cost about 1/3rd as much, which when you are talking about dozens of systems adds up to a lot of money. (My back of the envelope calculation was that for our ASIC group it would save somewhere in the neighborhood of about a quarter million a year =)

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    4. Re:more like 16 gigabytes by jrstewart · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's been a while since I've needed to know this for anything, but...

      There are two page sizes on IA32, 4k and 4m. Actually I think there's a mode with 2m pages as well, but we can lump it in with the 4m case for our purposes.

      Windows uses 4m pages for at least some always-resident kernel pages. Linux I believe always uses 4k pages but I'm not certain. There are issues with 4m pages, like they're annoying for copy-on-write or swapping out. Also less convenient for page-on-demand for executables. In fact, I would venture to say that they're only useful in rather specialized situations. It's not that often that you have 4m of pinned non-CoW memory (maybe video memory would be the only case in most systems).

      As another poster rightly pointed out we should worry too much about a practical limit of 16 gigs, since there's not really a market demand for this in IA32. When it gets to be an issue somebody will find a way around it.

      Of the people who might want >16 gigs of RAM right now I expect almost all of them are working with large databases of one form or another and could work around the hassles of 4m pages, thus scaling
      all the way to 64 gig.

    5. Re:more like 16 gigabytes by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2, Informative
      64gb ram is actually more than the arch allows. The arch allows 4gb.

      The IA-32 architecture (32-bit x86) allows 4gb of linear virtual address space. (It allows a larger segmented address space, but those segmented addresses get mapped into the 4gb linear space.)

      Versions of the x86 architecture implemented by the Pentium Pro and beyond allow more than 4gb of physical address space, and thus allow (with the appropriate chipset and OS support) machines with more than 4gb of RAM; you just can't have more than 4gb of that memory mapped into the virtual address space at any given time (those presumably being the "paging tricks" to which you refer; mmap() and other memory-mapping APIs, and multi-tasking, are your friends here).

    6. Re:more like 16 gigabytes by nbvb · · Score: 2, Interesting

      http://www.sun.com/servers/highend/sunfire15k/inde x.xml

      Sometimes, you just need the memory.

      I have a pair of E10k's at work that each have 64gb of RAM in them, and could probably stand to use some more ...

      When we replace them with SF 15k's, we'll probably go with 256GB of memory each ...

      Yeah, so really, there are OS's that can not only address, but use (and efficiently too!) that much memory ...

      You don't know the meaning of Super Duper Ultra F'n Cool until you dynamically reconfigure a 10k/15k... It's just awe-inspiring. :) Rip boards out, take CPU's, memory & I/O offline and keep the OS running .... nice! And even better, add 'em back in...

      --DM

  2. no slashback on the spam survey? by larry+bagina · · Score: 2, Funny

    What if we missed it the first 3 times?!

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  3. Also by The+Bungi · · Score: 4, Informative
    CD image of the latest versions of numerous high-quality OSS applications

    There's also Cygwin, which is a sort of mini-distro for Windows complete with XFree and a few basic window managers (fwm and OpenBox among them). Great package manager, lots of mirrors and great quality overall. It sometimes beats booting into Debian =)

    Note that you'll want to run it in NT4 or better (IMO), but it's a very nice introduction to UNIX-like environments, especially the X server support (since bash is not very flashy). It's actually quite neat to have a full screen X session running on top of the Windows desktop.

    It also ships with the GNU toolchain so you can even write your own little aps (console, GTK or plain X).

    1. Re:Also by ncc74656 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      It's actually quite neat to have a full screen X session running on top of the Windows desktop.

      It's useful for cross-platform development...ssh with X tunnelling into a Linux server lets you run emacs, DDD, etc. across the network with reasonable speed for debugging Linux apps from a Win32 desktop. It saves the hassle of rebooting to switch between them when both of your desktop machines are Win32 boxen.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
  4. Sounds eerily familiar... by Zarquon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ..."The issue with the 3GHz Pentium 4 with support for an 800MHz system bus occurs only in rare circumstances and users are unlikely to be affected, according to Alfs."

    Wasn't that what they said about the floating point bug, too? Well, both of them? :)

    Sounds like they are fixing it with a microcode patch, much as they fixed the PII FIST/FISTP bug, but the article was rather short on details.

    --
    "'Tis great confidence in a friend to tell him your faults, greater to tell him his." --Poor Richard's Almanac
    1. Re:Sounds eerily familiar... by uchi · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A quick thought popped into my head when you said microcode patch: If infact it is patchable with an executable which fixes the microcode, isn't it likewise "patchable" by a virus or something of some sort, rendering the processor completely useless? I would assume that the microcode controlled non-trivial things, since they went all the way of releasing a patch for it. Just a thought - please tell me if its true? Thanks. -Uchi

    2. Re:Sounds eerily familiar... by TheAwfulTruth · · Score: 2, Informative

      The BIOS controls the writable state of the microcode and it is always off as shipped to the consumer.

      The manufacturers can burn the update on machines where it is enabled then turn the option off or move the chip to a machine where it is disabled.

      --
      Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!
    3. Re:Sounds eerily familiar... by Zarquon · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, last time I looked at it, it worked like this: There is a default version, probably rom-masked, on chip. Then, at _each_ boot, the bios uploads an updated microcode to volatile memory on chip. And finally, the OS or anything else running at ring-0 can upload a new version.

      Typically, this is fairly black-box (undocumented) binary code you get from your vendor (intel/amd/whatever).

      Basically, if software is already running at Ring 0, you are in trouble anyway. It can wipe the HD, flash the bios, whatever.

      --
      "'Tis great confidence in a friend to tell him your faults, greater to tell him his." --Poor Richard's Almanac
    4. Re:Sounds eerily familiar... by morcheeba · · Score: 3, Informative

      Here's a good (but dated) article explaining this feature. The short answer: they used encryption plus security-through-obscurity (no internal documentation!). This would be cool to hack for good, too -- imagine if you ran one major application that could be sped up with one additional specialized instruction!

  5. LexisNexis by Jedi+Paramedic · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think it's interesting that California chose Lexis, but perhaps not as ominous as it would seem. As part of their obligation to provide true public access to the law, many (or maybe most) courts have law libraries.

    Yes, it's on paper, yes, it's not searchable from the comfort of your home... but I think that's what you pay for when you get the access through Lexis or Westlaw's online service.

    Many law libraries even have searchable case law on archived CDs, or cheap/free alternatives (like Loislaw and Lexis One.

    Remember, lots of legal treatises (and perhaps some other states' "official publications") are published by LexisNexis, as are any books that used to be published under the Matthew Bender name...

    --

    That's my purse! I don't know you! -- Bobby Hill
    1. Re:LexisNexis by QuessFan · · Score: 2, Informative

      I am the county law librarian at one of the California County Law Libraries.

      Before the court unification(Joining the muni court with superior court) We do serve as court library. But with the unification, things are very different. Some county law library still function as court library. While some had became very independent of the court.

      If you live near the county seat of a larger county, then you have access to county law library that is as good as most law firm library. I had compare notes with several firm law library, and I have a bigger material budget compares to most of them. They have the advantage in that they only have to collect materials in the subject area their firm specialized in. While I have to spread my collection dollars thin on many different subjects.

      California appellate court decisions are already being posted on the Judicial Council(The state's version of Judicial Conference) web site.

      http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov

      What new about this contract is that the older case, going back to 1850s will be aviliable free. And the cost of getting new volumes will be cheaper than what west is charging now. But I suspect West will just increase the price on West's California Reporter.(The unofficial one)

    2. Re:LexisNexis by jred · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A day late, but better late than never, right? :D

      From what I understand, the big difference is how the individual cases are referenced. IANAL, but my gf is a law student :) Basically, when referencing prior judgements during a case/trial, you'd use something like "volume 3, page 453, paragragh 3". There's only one "standard" reference that anyone will understand what the heck you're talking about. The actual cases are public domain, but the index/ref. #s are copywrited. So whoever wants to can publish the info, but only one source is acceptable in court. IIRC, this is LexisNexis. So if you're wanting to do anything at all practical with the info, they have a virtual monopoly.

      *note: all this is from memory, & mine's not too good. But I think that's what the big deal is.

      --

      jred
      I'm not a mechanic but I play one in my garage...
  6. Sorry, 4GB is probably it for most folks by unfortunateson · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I was just looking into motherboards this afternoon, and most of the newest P4 motherboards only support 4 gig -- and the older ones only support 3 or 2 gig.

    Go check out Tom's Hardware if you don't believe me.

    So maybe the chip does support 64GB (I don't have a link for that)... the limit could be the chipset, the motherboard makers, or perhaps its just the max size of RAM available?

    --
    Design for Use, not Construction!
    1. Re:Sorry, 4GB is probably it for most folks by afidel · · Score: 4, Informative

      Get large systems fron Dell, HP, IBM, or Unisys and you get large memory support, up to 64GB for most of them on the largest x86 servers. The low end 1 and 2 way chipsets don't support large amounts of memory because PAE support takes a lot of silicon that just isn't needed by 99.9999% of the people who buy such systems. That and you'd need more slots as the largest commonly available ram modules are 1GB, though 4GB modules are seen a little more often these days.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    2. Re:Sorry, 4GB is probably it for most folks by Dark+Lord+Seth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hmm, yes, but you're prolly looking at motherboards aimed at the individual computer users for personal uses. 4+gB amounts of memory are mianly needed in the server and clustering bit of computing, not for home/office use. (Well, with Win2k3 coming upon us, we might never know.) Although the video/photoediting branche of computing might have a use for that much memory, I doubt they are in favour of the x32 architecture anyways, considering Apple's strength and foothoold in the video/photo editing branche...

      And like it's been stated before, if you really do need that much memory on a single machine, you might be better of with a different architecture anyways, possibly a whole different solution to the problem.

  7. SprintPCS 3G is kinda slow by Mundocani · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'd always thought that the boasts about 3G's speed seemed overblown. I bought a Toshiba 2032 3G cellphone/pda last December and it just never seemed to be all that fast at fetching my email or pulling up a map in Yahoo. I never knew that Sprint's (Qualcomm's?) implementation only barely meets 3G speed requirements. I feel sort of ripped off, but as the author of the article points out, $10 a month for unlimited data service is really hard to complain about, even if it is only around 128 kbps. I think I should try to stop buying into this "wonderful" cutting edge technology so early and start assuming that claims are exaggerated.

    1. Re:SprintPCS 3G is kinda slow by Mundocani · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's just the standard SprintPCS Vision price. Of course, you still have to have their cellphone service as well. Sorry if that was misleading.

  8. Re:Exactly why I don't use intel.... by ergo98 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Interesting that the fix is a software fix. While this sounds like some sort of BIOS patch or the like, apparently the P4 has downloadable microcode so perhaps it's actually reprogramming the chips themselves. Dvorak, of PC Magazine fame, had a conspiratorial article once about the threat that this presents in that information on how to reset the microcode in the hands of a virus writer could be devastating (and achieve the holy pinnacle of computer vandals of actually damaging hardware, and least perceptably).

    On a whole other topic, isn't it about time that Intel dumped the "Pentium" name? Pentium of course was named to be a variation of pent*, meaning 5, which was natural given that it followed the 486. Here we are how many years later still using the term "Pentium" despite a processor core that shares virtually nothing with its predecessors. Will we have a "Pential Pentium"? Should the HT P4 be a Pentium Pentium? And of course naming the newly designed mobile chip "Pentium M" was an absolutely moronic branding maneuver. Maybe they should call their consumer 64-bit processor the "Triber SX"?

    I digress but just wanted to complain about Intel naming conventions as of late.

  9. Re:Exactly why I don't use intel.... by JabberWokky · · Score: 2, Funny
    I kinda liked III. Not only did you have Lloyd's Klingon chewing the scenery, but you have the stirring scene when Kirk destroys the Enterprise, watching it tear up in the atmosphere, and he says "My god, Bones... what have I done?"

    I agree with you about I, though. The f00fing V'Ger was decidedly a floating point error.

    --
    Evan

    --
    "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
  10. West Publishing... by akmed · · Score: 2, Informative

    already publishes a lot of official reporters. I believe Lexis publishes some as well. It's really not a big deal. There are no copyrights in court opinions (or they can't be exploited anyway; there's some case out there saying that). They're free to the public as far as I know. Lexis-Nexis and WestLaw both make their money adding additional content to opinions (e.g. headnotes, their own pagination). But they also do business publishing reporters.

  11. Overclocking Virus.... by TibbonZero · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Dvorak, of PC Magazine fame, had a conspiratorial article once about the threat that this presents in that information on how to reset the microcode in the hands of a virus writer could be devastating (and achieve the holy pinnacle of computer vandals of actually damaging hardware, and least perceptably).
    Perhaps I shouldn't say this.... because perhaps I am unleashing some evil from my mind on the world that should never be unleashed...

    Ah, what the hell, let's open pandora's box!!!

    What if you wrote a virus that simply overclocked some part on the computer? If the processor was software overclockable (I don't overclock much so I don't know...) you could perhaps have a virus that would simply change the clock multiplier from say... 6x to perhaps 10x. That would fry the chip? I don't know much about CPU overclocking, but I know that video overclocking is easily done.
    Alot of people use either Nvidia or ATI cards, and i know the Nvidia cards share the detonator driver set (on windows), not sure about ATI. What if you had something that just forced the card to it's Max??? And if you have a program that controls fans... turn them off? Just have the virus try for ATI cards, Nvidia cards, and susecptable CPUs, and mobo's with controlable fans- then send them through the roof. Sure your computer would run faster for a few seconds... but i remember a Tom's Hardware where they took the fan off an Athalon, and it burst into flames...

    I hope I never see this virus in my inbox...

    --
    Tibbon
    tibbon.com
  12. Total RAM != addressable RAM by pla · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The problem with the 4GB limit (and under more realistic assumptions, 2GB) has little to do with the maximum memory a system can use.

    The problem comes from how much memory a single user-space process can use, which on IA32, as I said above, comes out to only 2GB, reliably.

    As a simple example of why this matters, let's say you have a system that needs tons of memory, like for rendering complex scenes or serving a huge database. Each process will want as much RAM as possible, but on IA32 (well, on any architecture, but the current problem only really applies to cheap-and-popular IA32), can only use up to the addressable limit.

    So you might think that you could use a machine with 64GB for a number of slightly smaller (but still memory-hungry) tasks. The flaw with that idea? Get real. If you need that much memory for one task, you need to dedicate the machine to doing that task. If you need to do rendering on your huge DB server, you need to upgrade BADLY

    1. Re:Total RAM != addressable RAM by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2, Insightful
      but on IA32 (well, on any architecture, but the current problem only really applies to cheap-and-popular IA32),

      ...or an apple XServe (unless they go to, say, a PowerPC 970 in future models).

      can only use up to the addressable limit.

      ...at any given time. An application could use a memory-mapping API such as mmap() to map pieces of a >4GB object into the address space as needed. Yes, that's rather ugly, but people have done it before, e.g. on PDP-11s back in the old days.

      Another thing you can use lots of memory for is a disk cache; I know of one series of x86 machines that supports more than 4GB of memory, most of which is used for disk caching (given that all those machines do is file service).

  13. LexisNexis vs. Google by danb35 · · Score: 5, Informative
    Quoth Timothy:
    I'd take google and a strong AI any day.
    ...which just goes to show that you don't know much about LexisNexis (or you've got lots better AI than I've ever seen). Google indexes and searches a lot of information, almost certainly more than LexisNexis. However, if you're an attorney (which is one of LN's major markets), LN carries a lot of stuff that you're just not going to find on Google, or anywhere else on the web. Their search engine is also considerably more advanced--it'll allow you to search proximity (x within 5 words of y), caps/lowercase, minimum number of occurrences of a term, etc., which Google doesn't do.

    Now, in this case, LN has gotten the contract to be the official publisher of the Cal. case reports; West had previously had the contract. This isn't really a big deal for the public as such; after all, somebody has to publish them, at least as far as the dead tree version is concerned. The actual text of the opinions will remain in the public domain, of course, and lawyers (and the public) will still be able to get them from LN, Westlaw, the local law library, web sites, or any of a number of other sources.

    It's interesting to note that often, publishers lose money on the things they publish as the "official" publisher. Several states, for example, set insanely low prices for their codes, particularly when you consider that they are heavy-duty, hardbound volumes. Publishers do it, of course, because they expect to sell other things to attorneys in those states, and figure there's money to be made on those items. Whether this is the case with the Cal. reports, I don't know.

    Disclaimer: I do work for LN, but the above are entirely my own opinions.

    1. Re:LexisNexis vs. Google by odin53 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Google indexes and searches a lot of information, almost certainly more than LexisNexis.

      According to Google's website, Google searches over 3 billion pages. According to Lexis's website, lexis covers 3.3 billion documents. I suspect that converting web pages into documents, Google would cover somewhat less than 3 billion documents. You should know that! Tsk tsk. Tell us about the lexis network infrastructure -- I've heard it's pretty cool.

      Disclaimer: I'm an attorney that greatly prefers lexis.com over westlaw, but the above is entirely factual (at least, according to the respective services).

    2. Re:LexisNexis vs. Google by rgmoore · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Their search engine is also considerably more advanced--it'll allow you to search proximity (x within 5 words of y), caps/lowercase, minimum number of occurrences of a term, etc., which Google doesn't do.

      More significant, perhaps, is that Google's approach to searching is unlikely to work nearly as well for legal documents as it does for the web. The trick to Google is that web documents are frequently updated, so that two sites can each reference each other. That doesn't work for most other kinds of documents, which are set when first written and can't refer to anything published after they were. That means that Google's whole approach of recursively defining the importance of a document's links according the importance of the links coming to it won't necessarily work.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    3. Re:LexisNexis vs. Google by UserGoogol · · Score: 3, Informative
      it'll allow you to search proximity (x within 5 words of y)

      You can do this in Google. Its not implemented naturally, so you have to write a front end of some kind (if you include "doing it in your head" as a front end, which is stupid, really)

      "A B" OR "A * B" OR "A * * B" OR "A * * * B" OR "A * * * * B" OR "A * * * * * B"

      Because in quotation marks, you can just type * for "some word." Write a little Javascript or maybe PHP script to automate this, and you've just enhanced your googling.

      --
      "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." -- Hanlon's Razor
  14. Re:What's the point? by JJahn · · Score: 3, Interesting
    The trick is keeping the hard drive up-to-date with the memory. These are called solid-state drives, and have been around for a long time in hardware. (Why I have some 134 mb ones in a linux alphaserver right now) So I would assume the software implementation would just have to do the same thing.

    Of course if the power goes out, you could still lose things that were not yet sync'ed up. Better to have a UPS on your system in that case.

  15. Re:Exactly why I don't use intel.... by Galvatron · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Sorry if I'm telling you something you already know, but there's a reason that the Pentium was called "Pentium" instead of "586." A court case found that they could not trademark a 3 digit number, so other companies were free to call their chips 486, or 486-compatible. Pentium is a trademarked term.

    As for why they don't come up with a new trademarkable name, I'm really not sure. I suppose they figure that "Sexium" would just get too many giggles and not be taken seriously, so any new name would have to be just pulled out of their ass. After all the time spent getting people who know nothing about computers to learn the term "Pentium," I don't think they want to have to start all over again. For the most part, they'd rather keep the marketing advantage of numbers (so that people know "4 is better than 3") while prefixing it with a trademarked term, so that other people can't copy their naming scheme.

    --
    "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
  16. Text of site with CD image by Ian+Peon · · Score: 2

    Who the hell thought that a guy running a site on his ADSL modem could withstand the slashdot crowd?? Was this some cruel joke - his address is myip.org! Anyway, here's the text of the first page, couldn't get anything else (27% of the .torrent file *sigh*)

    http://pmw.myip.org/oss/
    Open Source Software CD
    Update: 2003-04-20 23:19
    Size: 523M
    1. What is it?
    It is a burnable image for a CD that contains high-quality, Free, open-source software for Microsoft Windows 95 and higher. See the contents. The latest versions of all software is included. Because there is space left over, some non-OSS but free and useful software has been placed on the CD. See section 4 for more info.

    2. Where and how can I get it?
    You have two choices.
    The first and best choice is to use BitTorrent, revolutionary P2P software that allows multiple simultaneous downloads to share bandwidth for an ultimately faster download. Download with BitTorrent.. Please be courteous afterward and leave the client running so that it would serve others. Although BitTorrent ensures download integrity, you may verify the MD5 checksum after having downloaded the image.
    The second choice is to purchase a physical CD from me, the maintainer. The cost is $5, which covers the AirShield envelope, shipping/handling, the CD blank, and the service. This is likely the only way you can get this CD if you are on a dial-up or do not have a CD burner. You may either mail a money order, having requested the street address via e-mail, or transfer funds via PayPal to pwhite at mailhaven dot com.
    A link to the real .iso image is not offered, because in light of the alternative (BT) and my weak Internet connection, that is a selfish way to download it.

    3. How often is it updated?
    The goal is to offer an updated version of the CD image once a month, if enough programs have been updated to warrant it. I could update and remaster it more often (even once a week), but then BitTorrent and other mirrors would get outdated too often and I can't afford to offer a new image solely from my ADSL connection very often -- I would much rather release more rarely but facilitate faster transfers for everyone.
    Tentatively, the next update will be April 30, to set the regular update to the last day of each month. If there haven't been enough updates to warrant an update and repopulation of mirrors, the release date will be set to a month ahead.

    4. Can I suggest another program for bundling?
    Yes, provided that it's under an OSI-approved license. Please e-mail www@pwhite.mailhaven.com to make your suggestion. New programs will replace currently-bundled non-OSS software. If your program is larger than space (700 MB) permits and there is no more non-OSS software to squeeze out, then your suggested software must be either high enough in quality or sufficiently useful to replace another piece of software. This decision will be left solely to me and my hand-picked "committee" of real-life friends, although you're welcome to include persuasive arguments in your e-mail -- they will be definitely considered.

    5. This is incredibly slow. Can I mirror your image to alleviate your bandwidth requirements?
    Definitely -- feel free to mirror it or redistribute it any way you wish. The best way to help is to leave your BitTorrent client running after you download the file. The latter does not require much on your part but contributes to the bandwdith pool and greatly helps EVERYONE else who downloads it. The absolute height of my expectations is for you to set up a script that would automatically download the .torrent on the first day of each month and begin the transfer. :)

    Last update to this webpage: 2003-04-22 21:25. Hit counter: 1512

  17. Contents.txt by Ian+Peon · · Score: 2, Informative

    CONTENTS OF THIS COMPACT DISC

    Package Version(s) License(s) Web site
    Mozilla 1.0.2 / 1.3 / 1.4a MPL/LGPL/GPL http://www.mozilla.org
    A web browser suite designed for standards compliance, performance and
    portability.

    OpenOffice.org 1.0.3 LGPL/SISSL http://www.openoffice.org
    The leading international office suite that will run on all major
    platforms and provide access to all functionality and data through
    open-component based APIs and an XML-based file format.

    Phoenix 0.5 MPL/LGPL/GPL http://www.mozilla.org/projects/phoenix
    A branch of Mozilla that aims for a small file and memory footprint
    while retaining Mozilla's functionality, standards compliance, and portability.
    Phoenix has been renamed to Firebird, but that name has not yet been used.

    Thunderbird 2003-04-16 MPL/LGPL/GPL http://www.mozilla.org/mailnews/minotaur
    A cross platform stand-alone mail application.

    PuTTY & PSFTP 0.53b MIT http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty
    Telnet, secure Telnet (SSH) and secure FTP (SFTP) clients, giving you
    the ability to manage remote hosts and transfer files.

    FileZilla 2.1.6 GPL http://filezilla.sf.net
    A graphical FTP/SFTP client with multi-language support, drag & drop
    support, upload/download queues, ability to resume transfers and much more.

    7-Zip 2.30 beta 30 LGPL http://www.7-zip.com
    A file archiver with support for 10 formats, 38 languages, Windows
    Explorer integration and a powerful command-line version.

    Gaim 0.61 GPL http://gaim.sourceforge.net
    A versatile instant messaging program, capable of supporting nine
    different IM protocols.

    The GIMP 1.2.4 (prerelease) GPL http://www.gimp.org
    A very powerful image editor, comparable to Adobe Photoshop.
    (Included prerequisite: GTK+ 1.3.0)

    TightVNC 1.2.8 GPL http://www.tightvnc.org
    A great client/server software package allowing remote network access to
    graphical desktops. With VNC, you can access your machine from everywhere
    provided that your machine is connected to the Internet.
    (VNC is an abbreviation for Virtual Network Computing)

    CDex 1.50 beta 10 GPL http://cdexos.sourceforge.net
    A utility for extraction (ripping) of audio files from an audio CD.

    Psi 0.8.7 GPL http://psi.sourceforge.net
    One of the best GUI clients for the Jabber instant messaging protocol.

    Freenet webinstall GPL http://freenet.sourceforge.net
    Freenet is a large-scale peer-to-peer network, which pools the power of member
    computers around the world to create a massive virtual information store, much
    like a global hard drive. The main aim of Freenet is to help preserve freedom
    of speech on the Internet.

    Tux Racer 0.61a GPL http://tuxracer.sourceforge.net
    Tux Racer lets you take on the role of Tux the Linux Penguin as he races down
    steep, snow-covered mountains. Enter cups and compete to win the title! Tux
    Racer includes a variety of options for gameplay, including the ability to race
    courses in fog, at night, and under high winds.

    Celestia 1.3.0 GPL http://www.shatters.net/celestia
    A real-time space simulation that lets you experience our universe in three
    dimensions. Unlike most planetarium software, Celestia doesn't confine you to
    the surface of the Earth. You can travel throughout the solar system, to any
    of over 100,000 stars, or even beyond the galaxy.

    Emacs 21.2

  18. Re:Exactly why I don't use intel.... by Rain · · Score: 3, Informative
    apparently the P4 has downloadable microcode so perhaps it's actually reprogramming the chips themselves

    FWIW, every Intel chip since the Pentium Pro has had downloadable microcode. AFAIK, the instructions that are handled by the microcode are notably slower, so not all of them are handled there. I don't have much information about that, though...

    The microcode (at least with the p3 and before, probably still so with the p4) isn't stored on the CPU permanently--it needs to be uploaded on every system boot. For this reason, at least some motherboard manufacturers store the microcode in the BIOS and upload it on boot. I also believe that Win2k and above automatically upload the microcode as well, but I'm not sure on that.

    I don't know whether AMD's processors support upgradable microcode (and, quite honestly, am too lazy to look right now), but I wouldn't be surprised if they do.

  19. Re:Exactly why I don't use intel.... by Specialist2k · · Score: 2, Informative
    Dvorak, of PC Magazine fame, had a conspiratorial article once about the threat that this presents in that information on how to reset the microcode in the hands of a virus writer could be devastating

    AFAIK microcode updates are signed or at least protected by a MAC, so it isn't that trivial to update...

    Additionally, the CPU might only allow one update (remember, the update is volatile) after the CPU is reset which is always done by the BIOS in current systems. So, a malicious program would have to inject the (correctly signed) new microcode before the BIOS performs its upload.

    But this opens interesting possibilities like running some time-intensive OPS until the CPU core shuts down due to overheating *eg*

  20. Windows Open Source by Doppler00 · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://www.theopencd.org/

    It's not the same ISO, but it also seems to include a lot of good open source windows applications.

    * OpenOffice.org 1.0.1
    * DictInstall 0.9.3.2
    * AbiWord 1.0.1
    * Beonex Communicator 0.8.1
    * FileZilla 2.1.1
    * Putty 0.52
    * WinVNC 3.3.3r9
    * XChat 1.8.10a
    * Audacity 1.0
    * CDex 1.40
    * 7-Zip 2.24
    * NetTime 2.0b6
    * Win Privacy Tray 0.5.5
    * Sokoban YASC 1.53
    * Celestia 1.2.4