Slashdot Mirror
Intel Kills Consumer Larrabee Plans
An anonymous reader tips news that Intel has canceled plans for a consumer version of their long-awaited and oft-delayed Larrabee chip, opting instead to use it as a development platform product. From VentureBeat:
"'Larrabee silicon and software development are behind where we had hoped to be at this point in the project,' said Nick Knuppfler, a spokesman for Intel in Santa Clara, Calif. 'Larrabee will not be a consumer product.' In other words, it’s not entirely dead. It’s mostly dead. Instead of launching the chip in the consumer market, it will make it available as a software development platform for both internal and external developers. Those developers can use it to develop software that can run in high-performance computers. But Knuppfler said that Intel will continue to work on stand-alone graphics chip designs. He said the company would have more to say about that in 2010."
No consumer version means this will turn into another i860. I guess ATI will remain the only viable competitor to NVIDIA then.
So they intend to take a product, who's chief advantage was that it could run old x86 code, and only sell it people who are designing new software? Am I the only one that sees a problem with this?
A nicer way of saying:
Uhm, guys, remember how we were supposed to ship a year ago and said recently we will ship a year from now? Well, add 5 to that now...but we will provide and totally kick ass, promise.
One that hath name thou can not otter
In case you've forgotten what a Larrabee was (like I had), it was Intel's planned graphics / vector processing chip, competing with nVidia and AMD / ATI graphics systems. Here's the Wikipedia article.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Too bad, Larrabee looked like the next thing.
Hmm... I think Intel's plan is for Larrabee GPU's to launch at the same time as Duke Nukem Forever! :)
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2009/12/2/intel-larrabee-finally-hits-1tflops---27x-faster-than-nvidia-gt200!.aspx
way faster than amd's or nvid's hottest....
Sarah O'Connor? Would she be the mother of Jonny O'Connor from County Cork, who'll lead humanity to victory in the war against the machines and the English?
So the next mini, low end imac and 13" macbook's will be stuck with shit video and the mac pro will start at $3000 with 6 core cpus.
Will apple move to amd just to get better video in low end systems?
The idea that the future of parallel processing somehow rests on the use of a bunch of hybrid cores built on the same die was wrong right out of the gate. If parallel CPU cores are a pain in the ass to program, what makes them think that it will be easier by combining them with a non-compatible type of parallel hardware? The CPU/GPU marriage is a match made in hell and, deep down, Intel knows it. Larrabee was just so much puffery and chest beating, king of the jungle and all that jazz.
The way to solve the parallel programming crisis is by first acknowledging that last century's computing paradigms are completely inadequate in the age of massive parallelism. It is time to change to the true computing religion and abandon the outmoded worship of the hopelessly flawed Turing Machine.
Next in line for destruction: AMD's Fusion. You read it here first.
How to Solve the Parallel Programming Crisis
I spent most of internship in intel arguing with people hyping larabee as the 2nd coming of jesus that it would never happen... And now i can finally say HAH!
Apple already dropped GMA for low end stuff, they're using GeForce 9400M instead. They're also using Radeons on most iMac models.
Intel insiders have seen this coming. Dadi won. Three strikes and you're out for Pat.
1. Itanium
2. Pentium 4
3. Larrabee
Fortunately for the guys in Hillsboro, Nehalem is a glowing success.
I'm not sure what you're referring to. Macbook and Macbook Pros are configured with Nvidia 9400M or 9600M chipsets. They may not be powerful but at least they are dedicated graphics solutions. Far superior to Intel Integrated graphics, and they provide working hardware acceleration for H.264/VC-1. The Intel G45 chipset does so - but only with MPC-HC - not for commercial blu-ray playback - and it had some corruption last I checked.
Marketroids buy parts for systems, not engineers. Apple has a contract with Intel and they will continue to buy from Intel until the profit margins shrink.
This is being mis-reported or mis-communicated by Intel, I believe.
The first version of Larrabee silicon isn't going to consumers, that's all.
From the consumer's perspective, it's a delay. Yet to be seen if it's fatal.
Otherwise, who'd want to use it to develop software?
This is wholy depressing.
Open source graphics stack is disheartening to say the least and the kms/gallium architecture is probably 1.5 years
from delivering on it's promise to optimize open graphics.
I was hoping that larrabee would at least motivate ATI to put some real man-power behind
their half-hearted support for the xf86-video-ati driver.
This is almost sad enough to make me run to nvidia with my wallet wide open!
I'm not dead yet!"
Maybe it's just resting?
Stunned?
Pining for the fjords?
I'll show myself out.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
Intel has shown real commitment to supporting their video hardware on Linux with full time staff employed to produce high quality open source drivers in addition to providing open specifications for (most) of their contemporary hardware. Unfortunately this hardware provides only limited 3D acceleration. I was hoping that Larrabee would conflate these two and provide vendor supported, open, high performance accelerated 3D for Linux.
So much for that happening anytime soon...
I can't understand why Intel cedes the GPU market to it's competitors. Have I been getting duped into paying hundreds while everyone else gets free GPUs? People are paying good money for these chips, right? NVidia's got Playstation 3 and Apple. ATI got the 360. Intel has nothing the the discrete GPU market at all. Why? What blocker within Intel prevents them from taking a piece of that pie?
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
A better question is when will AMD come out with a competitive mobile platform, because Apple sure as hell would never use their current stuff.
I think the announcement of the 48-core Intel 'Bangalore' chip just recently is not a coincidence.
When I first read about the Larrabee chip, I thought the decision to make it a cache coherent SMP chip to be simply insane - architectures like that are very difficult to scale, as the inter-core chatter scales roughly as the factorial of the number of cores. Remember how Larrabee was designed around a really wide 1024-bit ring bus? I bet that's required because otherwise the cores would spend all of their time trying to synchronize between each other.
So, Larrabee is effectively cancelled, but only a day or two before Intel announced an almost identical sounding part without cache-coherence! It sounds to me like they've given up on the 100% x86 compatibility, and realised that a chip with some extra instructions around explicit software controlled memory synchronization and message passing would scale way better. Without cache coherence, a "many core" chip is basically just an independent unit repeated over and over, so scalability should be almost infinite, and wouldn't require design changes for different sizes. That sounds like a much better match for a graphics processor.
While Intel kept their cards relatively close to their chest, from all of the presentations I've seen, no first-gen Larrabee chip could scale beyond 24 cores even with a 1024 bit bus, while the new Bangalore chip starts at 48 cores. There's no public info on how many lanes Bangalore has in its on-chip bus but based on the bandwidth of its 80 core experimental predecessor, I'm guessing it's either 32-bit or 64-bit (per core).
will be working on a graphics chip project at Intel then:
- You know someone in management hates you
- You need to move your cube to a different floor
- You don't go to any meetings and if you do look like shit and fall asleep often
- Your career will be forever tarnished
- You will never get those 18 months back
and last but not least -- You know you shouldn't have put that whoopee cushion on Paul Ottelini's chair
I like the Fusion concept, and feel that Intel will ultimately be forced to imitate it as well. Their abandonment of Larrabee is consistent with that. Hell, I even hope that Scorpius will become the foundation for Nintendo's Wii-2 or Wii-HD.
Wow... thanks for your insight! Should have known Intel would be logical even about their failures, and roll them over to something that has a chance of applicability. The only thing I wish they would do is skip the 64-bit crap and make 128-bit architectures that are compatible with both 32- and 64-bit predecessors. It would ease the development of new applications since the life time of 128-bit archs would be decades as opposed to developing all 64-bit apps to only have 128-bit archs appear in 5-10 years.
i3/i5 cut off nvidia and the low end cpus have gma build in and apple likely will put i3 in the mini and stick it with carp video at $800 as well.
Wow... thanks for your insight! Should have known Intel would be logical even about their failures, and roll them over to something that has a chance of applicability. The only thing I wish they would do is skip the 64-bit crap and make 128-bit architectures that are compatible with both 32- and 64-bit predecessors. It would ease the development of new applications since the life time of 128-bit archs would be decades as opposed to developing all 64-bit apps to only have 128-bit archs appear in 5-10 years.
I'm not sure if you're trolling or not, but 64-bit memory capacity is not "twice" as big as 32-bit, it's 4.3 billion times as big. That's more than just 5 to 10 years of Moore's law, that's more like 50 years. Physical bus widths have nothing to do with architecture bitness either, there are memory buses for 64-bit architectures that only have a few pins.
Is this a precursor to some nvidia/intel alliance?
It's a shame this isn't going to happen. If anything this would have kicked wide open the video market with a known GPU instruction set. We may well be doomed to proprietary driver hell with system stability becomming more and more reliant on the proficiency of nvidia/amd. For linux users they are the weak point in system stability.
sounds more like gma video good on paper but the divers / performance is just not there.
Ah, I thought you were talking about their current rather than future offerings.
Many people really don't care about their graphics card. If you don't do games, an Intel chipset graphics unit works fine. It accelerates the shiny interface in Windows 7 and everything is nice and responsive. For business uses, this is plenty.
Ok well if you do care about games, then you want a discreet graphics solution. Integrated solutions will just never do well. Big reason is memory. You can make your card as fast as you like, if it shares system memory it is severely bottlenecked. Graphics cards needs their own dedicated high speed memory to perform well.
As such I just don't see ATi having a slightly better integrated solution as something people will care much about. The bigger question is who makes the better CPUs that that is firmly in Intel's arena. Their CPUs are faster, and can be lower power. So regardless of if you want a power saving app or a performance solution, they've got a good chip.
AMD really has to get their chips up to snuff before they'll start competing with Intel more. They don't have to beat Intel at everything, but they need to have at least one area they are better for and they really don't seem to. Also they need to do better with chipsets and motherboards. A big advantage Intel has with regards to the reseller market is that they do their own solutions. Intel will sell you a CPU, chipset and motherboard and they all work together well. OEMs like this, cuts down on supply chain problems and problems of vendors blaming each other when there's trouble.
This has also historically been a weakpoint for AMD. I remember when their Athlons came out and there was no question, they beat the P3's price/performance ratio. They were the kings of the hill. I bought one... and returned it two weeks later. The reason? Chipsets. I could not get a chipset that would work with my GeForce 256 properly. They had poor regulation of the AGP signal and it just wouldn't work. Bought an Intel chip/board and it worked flawlessly the first time.
So when AMD has a good CPU/chipset/mobo combo and CPUs competitive with Intel in at least one arena, I think maybe they'll make gains. Until then, I think they'll mainly be relegated to "cheap brands" and to enthusiast BYO systems.
Now that Intel has full use of AMDs ATI graphics patents I'm not surprised they have dumped Larrabee.... I would expect to see a new GPU product announcement from them next year that is similar to AMDs offerings....
"mostly dead". maybe Miracle Max has a cure!
I suspect the Intel and PowerVR partnership may have have something to do with no consumer Larrabee plans. This partnership already has resulted in the 3100ce and PowervR has been working on some 1080p media accelerators. Larrabee does use a lot of power for the level of performance it would offer as a 3D chipset perhaps Intel and PowerVR have came with with something that does not use 160watts.
My wife and I play wow but most users prefer to use a wii or ps3 if they want to play games.
Its frustrating and I agree that the intel chipsets and integrated chips (not true video cards) put desktops 5 - 6 years behind and piss off game developers forcing them to port only to consoles.
The netbook phenomena shows this trend for slim boring graphics that are cheap cheap and uh cheap.
Most game developers have left the pc as a result due to angry kids whose parents get a nice i945 graphics chipset computer for them and they wonder why Crysis is a slide show.
http://saveie6.com/
Sounds like a character played by Rodney Dangerfield in a teen grope movie.
... and then they built the supercollider.
The problem is, a many-core non cache-coherent x86-like system isn't particularly interesting. The big advantage of Larrabee was that you could treat it like a normal SMP system, including (presumably) running standard multithreaded C code on it. Once you have to deal with memory synchronization explicitly, Larrabee starts to look a lot more (from a programming standpoint) like Fermi, Cypress or whatever other Nvidia/ATI GPUs are out at the time.
There's nothing magic about x86/AMD64 in the HPC world. It's attractive because it is cheap and has good performance. Clusters can, have been, and still are built using POWER and other architectures.
Intel realized a big problem in computing that they cannot solve easily. The cache coherency is a real problem that cannot be solved simply. But their platform is good for evolutionary computing and I barely see a hardware solution other than Laarabee. the only solution is that each core goes with its memory and you have a distributed approach like grid-computing. Many computational optimization problems can be solved with evolutionary computing and not with a central memory. Data is processed on the agent. Moving small data back and forth from main memory is an overkill. You need PCIe clusters of quad core CPUs (mainly like atom) with their own memory to maintain clock speeds low. For example mpeg4 decoding can be done this way. you sent chunks of continuous frames for decoding to clusters and collect back the results. But you need a high speed interconnect, but I think PCIe is enough.
but at least they are dedicated graphics solutions
Actually, the 9400m is not. It uses system memory but does a much better job then Intel. It also acts as the memory controller and does system IO. The reason for the parent's comments is that all future Intel CPUs will have integrated memory controllers (like the i7 and i5) and an integrated GPU. Performance will suck but it will make for cheap systems. This will make it difficult for system builders to make a low end system with good graphic performance as the market for such systems will be small. The smaller market will reduce the quality/performance of available parts for those system builders - one of which is Apple.
You laugh now, but you'll be calling for his help once Sky O'Net blows up the British nuclear stockpiles of up to 50 warheads.
Marketroids? Leo, is that you?
Woops, my mistake. it was Mike Smithwick who coined the term? Though I don't know if Mike is on Slashdot, and I do know Leo was posting to comp.sys.amiga back when Mike coined the term only a few years after the release of its inspiration: Robotron.
Or maybe it was Leo after all. Which came first the demo or the fanfic?
The problem is, a many-core non cache-coherent x86-like system isn't particularly interesting. The big advantage of Larrabee was that you could treat it like a normal SMP system, including (presumably) running standard multithreaded C code on it. Once you have to deal with memory synchronization explicitly, Larrabee starts to look a lot more (from a programming standpoint) like Fermi, Cypress or whatever other Nvidia/ATI GPUs are out at the time.
There's nothing magic about x86/AMD64 in the HPC world. It's attractive because it is cheap and has good performance. Clusters can, have been, and still are built using POWER and other architectures.
But for "embarrassingly parallel" problems, which are the target application for these chips, cache coherence is often not necessary, and simply imposes a design burden. There are lots of problems where it's better to have 1000x the performance than 1/2 the developer time.
It may not even involve less development time: Others have pointed out that the Unix "fork" mechanism combined with "copy-on-write" at the memory page level would also work, and wouldn't require cache coherency. Similarly, any existing code designed for message-passing supercomputers would work out of the box, with only a recompile using a new library. Developers just have to start thinking in terms of "many processes" instead of "many threads".
I suspect that in the long term (decades), cache coherency will simply not scale, and most computers will use explicit message-passing internally, even at the single processor level. The transition has already started: most new servers are NUMA systems, where there's a concept of "near" and "far" memory visible to the software, and most of the real heavy lifting in PCs are done by the GPUs, some of which do not have complete cache coherency across all cores.
Hmmm. IBM's cell processor was killed two weeks ago. ... coincidence? Intel dragged along enough HPC customers to get the the Cell processor out of the market. Mission Accomplished. Itanium made promises it didn't keep for 5+ years, but the promises of Intel alone were enough to kill Sparc and Alpha. Intel's MO is to promise just enough to kill the competition without having to deliver a viable product until well into the future.
Chief: Max! They killed Larabee!
Agent 86: Sorry about that Chief
If Intel stays out of the high-end graphic segment for a year or two longer and AMD/ATI keeps hammering nVidia, Intel will be able to acquire nVidia while claiming to preserve or increase competition in the segment. Apply Intel manufacturing to nVidia designs for a winning product.
"The new macbook pro, now with AMD... and only 3 hours of battery"
Somehow I think AMD still has a few things to learn about mobiles, and that's the mac's main market.
Intel; 5th December 2009, for immediate release:
Intel Corp. today announced the release of their new FirstPost processor(tm), known internally as FristPsot and FrostyPiss. This new processor will let you post first on any web internet board. Demos of this processor's achievements have been given showing astounding performance on sites such as Slashdot.
The FirstPost processor(tm) will be available in Q1 2010. Sorry, 2014.
It's likely that Apple will have to use discrete graphics on all but the lowest-of-the-low (a theoretical $799 MacBook) in order to not regress graphically. NVIDIA GT240 could be an option as a discrete replacement for the integrated 9400M.
It will require motherboard redesigns, but the CPU will force that anyway. The Intel I/O hub for the new systems is quite small, so there should be room.
However Apple have regressed graphically in the past (Radeon 9550M -> Intel 2006 rubbish integrated graphics). It wouldn't fit in well with OpenCL and all that stuff that Apple harp on about though.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1464606&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=30306268
Please read that URL, & reply to me there (I don't know WHY you are avoiding this but... you are definitely the person to approach here on /., because you have stated you work as a dev. mgr. from MS).
Thanks for your time.
APK
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1464606&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=30306268
Please read that URL, & reply to me there (I don't know WHY you are avoiding this but... you are definitely the person to approach here on /., because you have stated you work as a dev. mgr. from MS).
Thanks for your time.
APK
P.S.=> This is so you folks @ MS realize there are:
----
1.) Problems in HOSTS files now in VISTA/Server 2008/Windows 7 (ever since 12/08/2009 "MS Patch Tuesday" from the aforementioned versions of Windows, but, not for Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003)
2.) Problems in the local DNS cache client also (with "larger" HOSTS files)
3.) Problems that ROOTKIT.COM has pointed out regarding the WFP/NDIS6 firewall design now being used in the newest/latest/greatest versions of Windows (with code they state works for unhooking said firewall easily, AND, that it is in fact, easier to do on the newest models of Windows I mention here in my p.s. (but, not for olders versions of Windows NT-based OS', such as Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003).
----
Once more? Thanks for your time, this is well-intended on my part, in my pursuit of your acknowledging this... apk
Dear god, please stop spamming. Contrary to what you expect, people do not actually have an obligation to answer to whining ACs on Slashdot.
"I am not going to reply to you again as Anonymous Coward on Slasdhot. Commenting on my blog requries a wordpress logon. It would be great if you got a Slashdot user name. This will enable people to follow you." - by Foredecker (161844) * on Monday December 07, @12:11AM (#30349432) Homepage
"Spelled sideways", your reply means you have been running from replying to me is all, and when you DID reply (on your blog)? I am disputing the points you made there (on HOSTS, and on "writing style" too, below, point by point).
Here we go:
NOW, on POINTS FROM YOUR REPLIES ON YOUR BLOG YOU NOTED (which I quote above):
http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/
"Now about host file size Im not an expert about the use of the hosts file, but Im pretty sure its not designed to grow really large." - http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/
It can grow to the size limit of any TEXT file, period. There is no restrictions other than that, & even @ 18mb in size here (654,000++ entries using 0.0.0.0 as the blocking IP address) isn't even ANYWHERE NEAR THAT SIZE. Not by a long shot.
----
"Lets say that each line averages 50 characters an IP address, some white space, a host name and possibly a short comment. In this case, a 16,000 line hosts file would be about 780 kilo bytes in size. Thats pretty big." - http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/
Yes, & BIGGER if you use the default "loopback adapter" address of 127.0.0.1... not as big IF you use 0.0.0.0, & smallest (+ thus, fastest read) using 0 as the blocking address vs. known bad servers (such as Spybot Search & destroy provide, SRI, & Mr. Dancho Danchev also) + botnet "C&C servers" too.
E.G.:
Using 654,000 line HOSTS file I have, same entries, only diff. blocking addresses:
127.0.0.1 = 23mb HOSTS file
0.0.0.0 = 18mb HOSTS file
0 = 14mb HOSTS file
"ARGUE WITH THE NUMBERS", & my whole point is that in MS removing 0 as a valid blocking address (oddly, considering it was there in Windows 2000 SP#2-3 onwards, right up into VISTA until 12/09/2008 MS Patch Tuesday & that patch removed it) has harmed HOSTS files, period, by making them slower to read & larger (& larger files read up slower from disk, period).
----
"What Im saying is that we didnt proactively design for hosts files to be this large." - http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/
MS didn't design it: UNIX folks did. MS just used the BSD base reference design for their IP stack is all. This is & has been widely known & recognized industry-wide.
----
"Again, while Im not an expert in network security, I suspect that there are many better ways for security software to control and block access to host names than to use the legacy hosts file. And it is a legacy thing, it is what was used before DNS worked reliably or broadly. - http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/
You are probably NOT the guy to speak to then, can you tell me WHO IS @ MS then, instead, OR can YOU mention it to they?
(Thanks for an email address or even a BLOG address, & to the "RIGHT" MS personnel...)
----
"You are assuming I am the best person to answer your questions" -
http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/
"
1. It is not a compact format
2. It has to be read into memory often the file itself isnt searchable or indexed.
3. No support for Unicode host names (its an ANSI text file, not UTF8)
4. There is no way to control access for readers and writers its a text file not a database
5. If I was a malware writer this is the first place Id look to change things. Oliver day mentions this in his article. So does Wikipedia. - http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/
Per your points, 1 by 1, an emumerated reply:
1. It is not a compact format - by Foredecker.
APK REPLY/REBUTTAL: It isn't when you folks removed what makes it smaller & F A S T E R to read up from disk/file, into memory (0 blocking address, no longer possible in VISTA, Windows Server 2008, & Windows 7 ever since MS Patch Tuesday 12/08/2008, when Microsoft REMOVED 0 as a legit blocking IP address in HOSTS files in those versions of Windows NT based OS).
Funny - because Windows 2000 had it, but, not in its original model for sale on CD... 0 was added in a service pack, afterwards (because it is smaller & faster, & a good thing... a good thing I am wondering WHY you have removed from HOSTS in Windows VISTA onwards... when it DID WORK ON VISTA, up to 12/09/2008 MS Patch Tuesday, but not afterwards!)
----
2. It has to be read into memory often the file itself isnt searchable or indexed. - by Foredecker.
APK REPLY/REBUTTAL: NO, it does not.
The local DNS client can handle it, but ONLY UP TO A CERTAIN SIZE (another problem IS the DNS CLIENT CACHE ITSELF, failing on larger HOSTS files, mind you)... so, you disable the local DNS client service is all.
Then, your local diskcache subsystem caches the file & "repeated reads" are ELIMINATED!
----
3. No support for Unicode host names (its an ANSI text file, not UTF8) - by Foredecker
APK REPLY/REBUTTAL: The HOSTS file doesn't require this. Not on *NIX variants, not on Windows. It is a text file, period.
----
4. There is no way to control access for readers and writers its a text file not a database - by Foredecker.
APK REPLY/REBUTTAL: You can READ ONLY (set this attribute on it) protect it. Easy enough (or more radically, apply ACL security to it)
----
5.) If I was a malware writer this is the first place Id look to change things. Oliver day mentions this in his article. - by Foredecker
APK REPLY/REBUTTAL: HENCE, what I noted in my reply to your POINT #4 above...
====
"too, Too, TOO EASY"...
APK
P.S.=> I only hope you have the good sense to contact your peers, specifically those in charge of the IP Stack @ MS, & let them see my points here... after all, HOSTS are known to make you go faster AND SAFER online, if you have a good custom one, & you can protect them vs. malwares easily enough also! See my points above, AND, those I made in reply to you here -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1467692&cid=30355842 as well! Thanks for your time... apk
"3. No support for Unicode host names (its an ANSI text file, not UTF8) - http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/
See subject-line above, & my other 2 replies to you, here on /. (most importantly this one next below, as it disputes & disproves your "points" quite easily):
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1467692&cid=30356844
AND, here also (my original reply to you):
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1467692&cid=30355842
APK
P.S.=> Anything else you'd like to debate/discuss? Because I will, & gladly, until you folks @ MS correct your mistake on HOSTS files!
The mistake(s) being in Microsoft (your company you work for):
----
1.) Removing the smallest & fastest blocking address possible, in 0, which MS themselves added onto Windows 2000 (not in its oem release though, only added in a service pack later & kept that way right up into VISTA, & removed on 12/08/2008 MS Patch Tuesday)
2.) Instead now, Microsoft leaving HOSTS files ONLY BEING ABLE TO USE THE LARGER & SLOWER 0.0.0.0 as a blocking address vs. bad sites or servers (or even adbanners, which also have been infested with bad code for years now too @ times), OR the default LARGEST & SLOWEST BLOCKING ADDRESS of ALL, in 127.0.0.1, the 'default loopback adapter address' instead...
3.) The problem that Microsoft local DNS Client cache service has with "larger" (relative term) HOSTS files (iirc, above the 1-4mb mark)
----
apk
LOL, nor do people have to "outright RUN" from valid questions, such as the ones asked of Foredecker, here:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1467692&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=30349432
Which is where Foredecker has made HUGE technical blunders on in his "assumptions" & replies to myself, and on his own blog!
Yes, it makes me wonder how a manager @ MS, who claims he is into "performance improvement" can overlook the fact that Microsoft took away a performance enhancing feature from the HOSTS file!
(AMD. one MS added to HOSTS file also, no less, in using 0 as a blocking address in HOSTS files, all the way from Windows 2000 SP# ? (not sure WHICH one, but SP#4 definitely implements it, where the original release of Win2k did not, mind you) up thru Windows VISTA (until 12/08/2008 MS "Patch Tuesday", when 0 based blocking addresses in HOSTS files were removed from VISTA/Windows Server 2008/Windows 7 onwards... why?).
I ask the last question, because of SIMPLE math backing me!
I.E.-> First of all, a SMALLER file reads up from disk/file, into RAM, faster... & using 0 (1 byte) vs. the next smallest possible blocking address of 0.0.0.0 (7 bytes) and lastly the worst of the lot performance-wise, in the default 127.0.0.1 "loopback adapter address" (LARGEST & SLOWEST, 9 bytes, but also because of what it is, it performs a "loopback operation" too, taking more time) - so, in a HOSTS file that is larger than the default one MS gives you (which they got from BSD no less)?
Ok, here are the numbers you get (same line entries, just diff. preceeding blocking addresses of 0, 0.0.0.0, & 127.0.0.1):
----
127.0.0.1 = 23mb sized HOSTS file (w/ the same 654,000++ line items entries for blocking out known bad sites/servers as the others below have)
0.0.0.0 = 18mb sized HOSTS file (w/ the same 654,000++ line items entries for blocking out known bad sites/servers as the others above, & below, have)
0 = 14mb sized HOSTS file (w/ the same 654,000++ line items entries for blocking out known bad sites/servers as the others above have)
----
Using the smaller & F A S T E R (read up from disk/file into memory (be that the local diskcache, OR the local DNS cache service client (which the latter also has problems with larger hosts files (relative term), & 'breaks down' with them, & thank goodness one can instead rely on the diskcache for that caching of a HOSTS' files' content)) 0 based blocking address schema (Which is completely legit, because on Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003, ping'ing sites blocked w/ 0 returns 0.0.0.0) you get around/approximately/rougly a 65++% improvement in SIZE ON DISK (& thus, faster reads up into RAM)
SO: "that all said & aside"?
Go "ARGUE WITH THE NUMBERS"... &, "good luck" (you'll need it - lol, more like a miracle would be needed to dispute those valid numbers above!)
APK
P.S.=> And, for your snide wiseguy comment? Ok - MAKE ME stop posting (you can't do that either, too bad)! So, so much for your b.s., eh? apk
You're an AC, but your use of "we" is interesting in the grammar analysis realm. You are clearly posting from a subjective point of view and your post is worthy of note.
I think your opinion is interesting, though I don't share it.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
"Hi APK - thanks for the posts. I see them." - by Foredecker (161844) * on Tuesday December 08, @09:57PM (#30373646) Homepage
I thought you were not going to reply to me anyone, per this quote from you?
"I am not going to reply to you again as Anonymous Coward on Slasdhot. Commenting on my blog requries a wordpress logon. It would be great if you got a Slashdot user name. This will enable people to follow you.
Best Regards
Foredecker" - by Foredecker (161844) * on Monday December 07, @12:11AM (#30349432) Homepage Journal
?
Well, since you did though?? OK, some points in reply:
First of all:
Now, why should I get a logon on wordpress, when it has bugs & security issues, by the "truckload" no less?
See here -> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=%22wordpress%22+and+%22security+issue%22&btnG=Google+Search
(There are PAGES of security vulnerability issues surrounding wordpress (not sure if they are current or not, one is from Sept. 2009 (not too distant from 12/09/2009 for the date of THIS post on my part, offered as a "frame of reference" for posterities' sake), so... NO thank-you!)
Plus - Hey, I don't want to "give away" my IP Address to just anybody (& I am NOT 110% sure of what you can see when I post to your blogs either so... I don't think so, on Wordpress, for ALL of the reasons above (mainly, the pages of security bugs I see tell about wordpress above, & of course, no desire on my part to just toss my IP Address around to others, needlessly)).
I'd rather meet on "neutral ground" & on a SAFE site (as this one is, I am not aware of ANY issues /. has, security "bugs-wise" @ least, so it qualifies on this account... imo @ least)
----
"Get a slashdot login. That way, I can easily spot your posts and not confuse them with other posts from Anonymous Cowards." - by Foredecker (161844) * on Tuesday December 08, @09:57PM (#30373646) Homepage
Secondly:
Why should I get a /. logon, when it does nothing but make me trackable?? Especially when I do NOT want to be???
(After all - it's how I have been able to find YOU so easily to contact you in regards to these mistakes/issues MS has going on, in regards to the HOSTS file & the local DNS cache client service!)
----
1.) Removing the smallest & fastest blocking address possible, in 0, which MS themselves added onto Windows 2000 (not in its oem release though, only added in a service pack later & kept that way right up into VISTA, & removed on 12/08/2008 MS Patch Tuesday)
2.) Instead now, Microsoft leaving HOSTS files ONLY BEING ABLE TO USE THE LARGER & SLOWER 0.0.0.0 as a blocking address vs. bad sites or servers (or even adbanners, which also have been infested with bad code for years now too @ times), OR the default LARGEST & SLOWEST BLOCKING ADDRESS of ALL, in 127.0.0.1, the 'default loopback adapter address' instead...
3.) The problem that Microsoft local DNS Client cache service has with "larger" (relative term) HOSTS files (iirc, above the 1-4mb mark)
----
"You have three long posts for me to consider and I have a lot going on right now." - by Foredecker (161844) * on Tuesday December 08, @09:57PM (#30373646) Homepage
Same here, so, I said what I had to in said 3 replies here (vs. your points specifically too no less):
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1467692&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=30349432
APK
P.S.=>
"Also, did
It appeared to me that you attacked this ac apk's writing and yet you are guilty of misspellings yourself on your part. That was quoted by apk. You are attempting what he stated in that you are attempting to undermine ac apk's credibility by saying his writings are essentially unintelligble. I feel otherwise and that his writing is completely legible and intelligible. I also feel that his points disprove yours with relative ease and this is the why of why you are attempting to state he cannot write. That is as he stated, an adhominem attack (adhominem meaning "to the man"). You are attempting to attack him personally rather than disprove his points and that makes your so called arguments and picking on he (quite unjustly) as weak as your so called points on your blog were (which the ac apk tore apart with ease, and with facts, in addition to showing that you yourself cannot write well in your misuse of disjoint, when it should have been disjointed). If you're going to critique the writing of others, you had better be perfect in writing yourself Foredecker (and you are not based on the evidence ac apk presented). I think ac apk has a strong set of points on hosts files actually by this point, and you do not, based on the errors you made in regards to hosts files Foredecker. This makes me wonder if you are indeed a manager at Microsoft. Especially in the area of performance because ac apk has a strong point there. By Microsoft removing the ability to use the smaller 0 blocking address in hosts files from vista, windows servr 2008, and windows 7, you have harmed performance. This is because you are making lines that are read in 1 character at a time until the enter keypress is encountered (and eventually the end of file marker), and making them longer using 0.0.0.0 or worse so 127.0.0.1 slows down loads and reads of hosts files.
Ya - I know. But someting in me couldn't resist. I suppose its character flaw... :)
You complained of others' writing, but you don't practice what you preach yourself right there above in bold. The correct use of the phrase is " I suppose its a character flaw...". Your complaints that the ac can't write are now applicable to yourself on 2 counts at this point. 1 in your blog in your misuse of "disjoint" and now in your misuse of the term noted above. Practice what you preach would be the statement that's in order now I feel. It is too bad that the best you have are these attempts at adhominem attacks in some attempt to save face for yourself Foredecker. The ac is only trying to point out problems in the area you claim is one of your focus at Microsoft in performance. He has a solid grounds he stands on in that you erred on the construction of hosts files (they are only ASCII text as the ac noted). They are not a databased indexed format as you seem to imply. Perhaps they ought to be, but they are not. You refused to address his points, point by point. He does so with your enumerated list here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1467692&cid=30349432 conversely, and he did so effectively. Using adhominem attacks on the ac along with your hypocrisy is not very effective. Especially considering he is not attacking you but trying to actually help you and your company Microsoft.
My appologies for not being more specific: I should have said: "I'm not going to reply lengthly replies to here on Slasdhot."
About supplying email alias to MSFT people: It's just the wrong thing - on many lelves - for me to post the email address of MSFT employees on any public forum.
The most effective way for you to get in touch with teams at MSFT and to have an actionable conversation with them is to use the Microsoft connect site.
Also, i belive I said in another post somewhere that I enabled no-login comments on my blog. So, you don't need a wordpress login to comment.
Ok, its fine that you want to protect your IP address and not be tracked. That's cool.
I'll continue to post longer repsonses on my blog, and short ones here.
Best Regards -Foredecker
Jibe!
"Dud - you are so the APK guy. Its pretty hilarious that you are posting as two differenet people." - by Foredecker (161844) * on Wednesday December 09, @02:08PM (#30379666) Homepage
No, he's not "the APK guy": I am though. The person you're replying to? He's right enough.
You critique others' writing style (& yet you produce no PHD in English to bolster your credibility on that front, not that it would matter, because it's just like resumes. 1 "expert on resumes" will love your resume, another "expert on resumes" will not. You can't please everyone, & that is that).
NOW, on that matter: Well, since you critique others writings, perhaps you ought to be prepared to get the same then, & on the spelling front, because you admit you cannot spell apparently. I have to state it again here too though -> See your sentence above? SOME "FYI" -> It's "Dude" not Dud...
So, "practice what you preach", & get ready for some of the same directed YOUR way now is all, like -> "Your writing is 'polemic @ best' & the spelling is 'disjointed'"...
(On your spelling -
1.) Doesn't Microsoft make a spell checker, right in their OWN products? Sure they do: In Microsoft Word!
2.) Doesn't /.'s own forums engine offer spell checks? Sure it does: When you misspell a word, it underlines it in RED...
(Use either one)).
APK
P.S.=> Still, attacking others' writing on your part? That's NOT correctly overcoming my objections & points here, vs. your own (quoted there with their source URL from your own blog), in regards to HOSTS files & their usage + function:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1467692&cid=30356844
REITERATING THAT POST HERE, FOR POSTERITIES' SAKE:
http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/ [wordpress.com]
"1. It is not a compact format
2. It has to be read into memory often the file itself isnt searchable or indexed.
3. No support for Unicode host names (its an ANSI text file, not UTF8)
4. There is no way to control access for readers and writers its a text file not a database
5. If I was a malware writer this is the first place Id look to change things. Oliver day mentions this in his article. So does Wikipedia." - http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/
Per your points, 1 by 1, an emumerated reply:
"1. It is not a compact format" - http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/
APK REPLY/REBUTTAL:
It isn't when you folks removed what makes it smaller & F A S T E R to read up from disk/file, into memory (0 blocking address, no longer possible in VISTA, Windows Server 2008, & Windows 7 ever since MS Patch Tuesday 12/08/2008, when Microsoft REMOVED 0 as a legit blocking IP address in HOSTS files in those versions of Windows NT based OS).
Funny - because Windows 2000 had it, but, not in its original model for sale on CD... 0 was added in a service pack, afterwards (because it is smaller & faster, & a good thing... a good thing I am wondering WHY you have removed from HOSTS in Windows VISTA onwards... when it DID WORK ON VISTA, up to 12/09/2008 MS Patch Tuesday, but not afterwards!)
----
"2. It has to be read into memory often the file itself isnt searchable or indexed." - http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/
See subject-line above, & this URL of my reply to you:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1467692&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=30383500#30383894
APK
P.S.=> I won't logon to wordpress, too many KNOWN security issues (& I really do NOT want to give away my IP Address to you, to be blunt about it, as well) so... the URL above? That settled all I wanted anyhow, so... nice meeting you! apk
No worries APK. Its good to meet you as well. Its your IP address to control.
Jibe!
"Of course, larger files take longer to load." - by Foredecker (161844) * on Wednesday December 09, @10:34PM (#30384666) Homepage
Exactly my point. I am showing how to make it smaller & thus, faster on loads from disk, + reads internally, in the same pass. All via a more efficient HOSTS file internal format (using 0 as a valid blocking IP address, which you STILL CAN DO on Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003... but, not VISTA (since 12/08/2008 MS Patch Tuesday update, when you could before that), Windows Server 2008, & Windows 7 - robbing all 3 of the lattermost versions of Windows NT-based OS' of a performance &/or efficiency gain, in the same pass as well))
----
"In any case, like I said before. I appreciate your questions and points about the host file. They are interesting and Im working on finding an answer. Again, please be patient." - by Foredecker (161844) * on Wednesday December 09, @10:34PM (#30384666) Homepage
Well, I am surprised in a way: You're into performance, as you claim, right? I'd have thought YOU would be the anxious one to find a result from your people's end of things, actually. The security end interests me FAR more, & HOSTS are valuable for that, and speed gaisn online surfing the web... bigtime.
(AND... Me? I'm as "patient as a saint", or hasn't my persistence in getting SOME response from you in regards to this not indicative of that much? LOL!)
----
"On another note, I have a few questions for you.
How many entries do you have in your HOSTS file?
What OS are you running and is it 64 or 32 bit?" - by Foredecker (161844) * on Wednesday December 09, @10:34PM (#30384666) Homepage
Currently it weighs in @:
654,504 lines (minus 200 or so for internal documentations + headers/comments) of known bad sites blocked
18mb in size (using 0.0.0.0, on Windows 7 64-bit)
654,504 lines (minus 200 or so for internal documentations + headers/comments) of known bad sites blocked
14mb in size (using 0, on Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 32-bit)
(Quite a savings in size there alone, going from 18mb size using 0.0.0.0, down to 14mb only, by using 0 as a blocking address in a HOSTS file - & 61% improvement over 127.0.0.1 as a blocking address in a HOSTS file. Huge. Means faster loadspeeds from disk into memory, AND, faster internal parsings due to less characters in use))
(Composed of a list of my own approximately 30,000 entries long in 2001, but using all other known forms of populating it I use (documented in my other posts here and in my HOSTS file itself) + all the others @ wikipedi(deduplicated/normalized), & updates weekly since 2001 from various sources of information online that are public & reliable/reputable)
"How do you manage such a large HOSTS file? Do you edit by hand? Do you have tools that do it? If so, what tools?" - by Foredecker (161844) * on Wednesday December 09, @10:34PM (#30384666) Homepage
I wrote my own automator program (copyright APK) called "APK Hosts File Grinder 4.0++" which does anything &/or eveerything "HOSTS file", possible imo. Takes me about 1 hour to update it minus repeats + in any leading blocking IP address format I like (0, 0.0.0.0, or 127.0.0.1 even if I like - not that I do on the latter), deduplicate/normalize the entries in HOSTS files, & lastly "ping" a list of your favorite sites keeping them up to date hostsnames/domainnames-wise vs. their current IP address resolution... all for forming the file in a normalized + faster format (yielding literally 61% filesize decreases & thus faster loadspeeds + faster internal character by character/line by line parses (less characters) of HOSTS file internals... & yet returning the same valuable function as any other blocking format)
---
"You mention the proper channels. Again, I encourage you to use Microsoft Connect. Thats the proper channels.
SymbolNOBODY:
You said what's quoted below from you, here -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1476008&cid=30428430
"It's tolerated (perhaps encouraged) in part because these annoying actors are otherwised engaged in improving Linux. Major Debian and BSD contributors, for example, use slashdot as a workspace for their human-machine interaction side experiments, of which APK is probably one. In addition many of these trolls post links which, if you follow them, will completely hose a Windows machine. This is part of the game. - by symbolset (646467) on Monday December 14, @01:15AM (#30428430) Journal
I took offense to the BOLDED part... & ALL you EVER seem to have is "ad hominem" based attacks on people, not the points they make. So, my reply in the URL below was simple (and logical):
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1476008&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=30428430#30430244
Additionally, "symbolNOBODY"? Well - the day you can make something like this (& that got you PAID for it, & that has done as well for others online):
http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=b861a743aa23c4568b7d73e07ef7ecec&showtopic=2662
That's also gone over 250.000 views worldwide in 1++ yrs.' time online, & across 15 forums where that guide for Windows Security has been made either an:
1.) "Sticky/Pinned" thread
2.) An "Essential Guide"
3.) Rates 5/5 stars (etc.)
AND, gets "feedback" like this from users that have applied it:
----
http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28430
PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT:
"...recently, months ago when you finally got this guide done, had authorization to try this on simple work station for kids. My client, who paid me an ungodly amount of money to do this, has been PROBLEM FREE FOR MONTHS! I haven't even had a follow up call which is unusual. Now I don't recommend this for the average joe, but it if can work for a kids PC it can work for anything! Now, i substituted OpenDNS and activated the Adult Content filter with them for this kids computer. I know its not perfect, but will catch over 99.5% of said sites."
and
http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=10f9ba9ad5ff990aaae1e7ec91f593a2&t=28430&page=3
"Its 2009 - still trouble free! I was told last week by a co worker who does active directory administration, and he said I was doing overkill. I told him yes, but I just eliminated the half life in windows that you usually get. He said good point. So from 2008 till 2009. No speed decreases, its been to a lan party, moved around in a move, and it still NEVER has had the OS reinstalled besides the fact I imaged the drive over in 2008. Great stuff! My client STILL Hasn't called me back in regards to that one machine to get it locked down for the kid. I am glad it worked and I am sure her wallet is appreciated too now that it works. Speaking of which, I need to call her to see if I can get some leads. APK - I will say it again, the guide is FANTASTIC! Its made my PC experience much easier. Sandboxing was great. Getting my host file updated, setting services to system service, rather than system local. (except AVG updater, needed system local)"
Thronka - forums member @ xtremepccentral.com
----
THEN, when you have done so, on THAT account? THEN, you can talk!
Also?
When you have done all of this as I have over time in this Art & S
"1. It is not a compact format
2. It has to be read into memory often the file itself isnt searchable or indexed.
3. No support for Unicode host names (its an ANSI text file, not UTF8)
4. There is no way to control access for readers and writers its a text file not a database
5. If I was a malware writer this is the first place Id look to change things. Oliver day mentions this in his article. So does Wikipedia. - http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/
Per your points on HOSTS files, my disprovals of your points are below, 1 by 1, via an emumerated reply:
====
"1. It is not a compact format" - by Foredecker http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/
APK REPLY/REBUTTAL: It isn't when you folks removed what makes it smaller & F A S T E R to read up from disk/file, into memory (0 blocking address, no longer possible in VISTA, Windows Server 2008, & Windows 7 ever since MS Patch Tuesday 12/08/2008, when Microsoft REMOVED 0 as a legit blocking IP address in HOSTS files in those versions of Windows NT based OS).
Funny - because Windows 2000 had it & still does (as do Windows XP & Windows Server 2003 still). However, Windows 2000 didn't have 0 as a LEGITIMATE BLOCKING ADDRESS FOR HOSTS FILES in its original model for sale on CD... 0 was added in a service pack, afterwards (because it is smaller & faster, & a good thing... a good thing I am wondering WHY you have removed from HOSTS in Windows VISTA onwards... when it DID WORK ON VISTA, up to 12/09/2008 MS Patch Tuesday, but not afterwards!)
----
"2. It has to be read into memory often the file itself isnt searchable or indexed" - by Foredecker http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/
APK REPLY/REBUTTAL: NO, it does not.
The local DNS client can handle it, but ONLY UP TO A CERTAIN SIZE (another problem IS the DNS CLIENT CACHE ITSELF, failing on larger HOSTS files, mind you)... so, you disable the local DNS client service is all.
Then, your local diskcache subsystem caches the file & "repeated reads" are ELIMINATED!
----
"3. No support for Unicode host names (its an ANSI text file, not UTF8)" - by Foredecker http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/
APK REPLY/REBUTTAL: The HOSTS file doesn't require this. Not on *NIX variants, not on Windows. It is a text file, period & SPECIFICALLY, an ASCII text file (not the types you stated), per RFC 606, 608, & 627 (nor is it a database as you seem to be alluding to above, this is how it was designed not by Microsoft, but by the folks in the *NIX world, period, via the BSD reference design which Microsoft uses for their IP stack).
----
"4. There is no way to control access for readers and writers its a text file not a database" - by Foredecker http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/
APK REPLY/REBUTTAL: You can READ ONLY (set this attribute on it) protect it. Easy enough (or more radically, apply ACL security to it)
----
"5.) If I was a malware writer this is the first place Id look to change things. Oliver day mentions this in his article" - by Foredecker http://foredecker.wordpres
"1. It is not a compact format
2. It has to be read into memory often the file itself isnt searchable or indexed.
3. No support for Unicode host names (its an ANSI text file, not UTF8)
4. There is no way to control access for readers and writers its a text file not a database
5. If I was a malware writer this is the first place Id look to change things. Oliver day mentions this in his article. So does Wikipedia. - http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/
Per your points on HOSTS files, my disprovals of your points are below, 1 by 1, via an emumerated reply:
====
"1. It is not a compact format" - by Foredecker http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/
APK REPLY/REBUTTAL: It isn't when you folks removed what makes it smaller & F A S T E R to read up from disk/file, into memory (0 blocking address, no longer possible in VISTA, Windows Server 2008, & Windows 7 ever since MS Patch Tuesday 12/08/2008, when Microsoft REMOVED 0 as a legit blocking IP address in HOSTS files in those versions of Windows NT based OS).
Funny - because Windows 2000 had it & still does (as do Windows XP & Windows Server 2003 still). However, Windows 2000 didn't have 0 as a LEGITIMATE BLOCKING ADDRESS FOR HOSTS FILES in its original model for sale on CD... 0 was added in a service pack, afterwards (because it is smaller & faster, & a good thing... a good thing I am wondering WHY you have removed from HOSTS in Windows VISTA onwards... when it DID WORK ON VISTA, up to 12/09/2008 MS Patch Tuesday, but not afterwards!)
----
"2. It has to be read into memory often the file itself isnt searchable or indexed" - by Foredecker http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/
APK REPLY/REBUTTAL: NO, it does not.
The local DNS client can handle it, but ONLY UP TO A CERTAIN SIZE (another problem IS the DNS CLIENT CACHE ITSELF, failing on larger HOSTS files, mind you)... so, you disable the local DNS client service is all.
Then, your local diskcache subsystem caches the file & "repeated reads" are ELIMINATED!
----
"3. No support for Unicode host names (its an ANSI text file, not UTF8)" - by Foredecker http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/
APK REPLY/REBUTTAL: The HOSTS file doesn't require this. Not on *NIX variants, not on Windows. It is a text file, period & SPECIFICALLY, an ASCII text file (not the types you stated), per RFC 606, 608, & 627 (nor is it a database as you seem to be alluding to above, this is how it was designed not by Microsoft, but by the folks in the *NIX world, period, via the BSD reference design which Microsoft uses for their IP stack).
----
"4. There is no way to control access for readers and writers its a text file not a database" - by Foredecker http://foredecker.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/dear-anonymous-slashdot-guy/
APK REPLY/REBUTTAL: You can READ ONLY (set this attribute on it) protect it. Easy enough (or more radically, apply ACL security to it)
----
"5.) If I was a malware writer this is the first place Id look to change things. Oliver day mentions this in his article" - by Foredecker http://foredecker.wordpres