If OpenGL is faster, and it has a comparable feature set, and hardware support is excellent... why is Direct3D still the de facto API?
Because Valve is using DX9, not DX11. Even the Gallium3D developers have stated DX11 is much cleaner, easier, and feature rich than OpenGL. There are many things DX11 can do 2x-3s faster than DX9 but breaks engine compatibility with DX9, which makes me wonder how a proper DX11 optimized engine would compare to OpenGL.
Rule of thumb is if a graphics engine works with DX9/OpenGL, then it is not making full use of DX11 because the optimal flow of data is different and would require an entirely differently designed engine.
The whole reason we have the distinction between male and female competition is because the male body gives an "unfair" advantage mostly by providing heightened levels of testosterone.
If you want to make things simple, just have everyone compete together instead of splitting men and women. If you want to split up men and women, then we need a way to determine the difference between men and women and categorize people correctly.
Let's not even get into the "mesh" thing. Electricity has inate losses in transport and unless you want to convert those panels to push out 40kV so you can get to the next village without significant loss only to downconvert it the other end, you're wasting your time by the time it gets there.
Most of the time, the power generated locally doesn't need to transfer to the next village, but only a short trip down the road. From your flat, out to the street and back into someone else's flat.
It would be similar to everyone having a very small water pump that can only trickle a small 10cm of water/sec. The water doesn't need to flow the entire way back, most of the time it will flow to whomever is locally using water. It will work at the aggregate level with a bias towards local usage.
And I DARE a pussy like you to come and confront me.... 45cal to the chest will change your mind.
"I was scared for my life! he came after me into my yard!"
My god, what trash. Only trash talks big like that.
Yet the user does not care about access to the source, only the developer does. Not to mention it is freedom for the user at the expense of the developer.
I have yet to hear a logical response to back the claim of "more freedom". I'm not saying a logical argument to back the idea of GPL, but of the claim made by those claiming "freedom".
In a world of shared resources, freedom is a balance
Since when has an idea been a "shared" resource? Yes, there is a limit to how many ideas can be created, but there is no limit to how much an idea can be consumed.
You are claiming that consuming without creating causes damage. By your logic, end users cause as much "damage" as a developer who does not contribute back.
Yes, I understand the idea of the "users down the line". GPL is more like socialism. It is not a bad thing, in fact, it is a good thing. Everyone working together to better the world as a whole. I have no problem with that.
What I am arguing is that GPL gives rights to future end users at the expense of current developers. The creator must give up the right of keep their ideas to themselves in order to use "free" ideas.
it only remove the "freedom" to remove somebody else's freedom
It is already impossible to remove someone else's freedom in the context you are talking about. It doesn't "remove the freedom to remove freedom" it just "removes freedom".
Having your code used in something proprietary does not detract from your original code. GPL is awesome and if you don't want your code used in something proprietary, then great. Your code, do what you want, but don't go around stating logical fallacies.
IBM Deskstars used glass platters which had a much higher expansion per unit of heat. After they got too warm, the heads would be out of position relative to the surface. Freezing those drives were nearly every time for me. I do find it interesting that the drives couldn't compensate correctly for expansion, but they worked just fine for contraction as the platters should have shrunk at the same rate as they cooled.
Virtually every feature in PHP is broken somehow. The language, the framework, the ecosystem, are all just bad. And I can’t even point out any single damning thing, because the damage is so systemic.
In large enough aggregation, bandwidth spikes don't really happen. QoS is really only an issue near the edge or if the core can't handle the traffic.
Given a large enough edge, the load at the core will be almost 100% predictable and constant from day-to-day. As long as your throw enough bandwidth at it, QoS won't matter.
For GPON, the edge QoS is effectively TDMA. It makes sure that at full load, a given port will evenly distribute the bandwidth in a low-latency and relatively low-jitter way while making almost 100% use of theoretical peak bandwidth.
Once you get away from a given port, you're talking about a a card with several other ports on it. At this point, there is 200Gb/s-320Gb/s of bandwidth. Average start to show themselves and you get constant predictable load. Again, QoS is about pointless.
Once you get away from the card and on to the back-plane of the chassis, you're talking about 2+Tb/s of bandwidth with teamable 100Gb/s uplink ports.
These are the stats for most GPON chassis and there are faster ones coming out. Assuming the suggested and most common 32 customers/port, most chassis can handle about 32,000 customers. 32,000 people sharing a 2Tb/s back-plane and 100Gb-400Gb/s of uplink, sounds perfectly fine to me.
An ISP with only 32k customers probably isn't going to have a 400Gb internet pipe, so the chassis would not be the weak point.
Current GPON is 2.5Gb/s shared, but 10Gb is coming out next year and 40Gb in 3-5 years after 10Gb.
Assuming 32 customers, which is the recommend
2.5Gb/32 = about 78Mb/s/customer
10Gb/32 = about 312Mb/s/customer
40Gb/32 = about 1250Mb/s/customer
A local ISP also has wording stating that hosting a server is against the ToS. They also mention that they will not discriminate or monitor your traffic for any reason other than ordered by law. They also have no data caps.
If they don't monitor your connection outside of maintenance reasons, then how can you find you're running a server?
So I agree with that the "no server" wording is just to cover their butts for legal reasons.
Slashdot Mirror
If OpenGL is faster, and it has a comparable feature set, and hardware support is excellent... why is Direct3D still the de facto API?
Because Valve is using DX9, not DX11. Even the Gallium3D developers have stated DX11 is much cleaner, easier, and feature rich than OpenGL. There are many things DX11 can do 2x-3s faster than DX9 but breaks engine compatibility with DX9, which makes me wonder how a proper DX11 optimized engine would compare to OpenGL.
Rule of thumb is if a graphics engine works with DX9/OpenGL, then it is not making full use of DX11 because the optimal flow of data is different and would require an entirely differently designed engine.
So when I bank online, I shouldn't have a right to privacy for others to see my bank info?
Whatever he's smoking, it's making him very optimistic. I would love to be so blissfully happy.
"we just need an educated public" - Why not just ask for a utopia?
There will always be a sucker willing to give up their FB info, who is "good enough" to fill a position that you want.
Why bring science into this?
The whole reason we have the distinction between male and female competition is because the male body gives an "unfair" advantage mostly by providing heightened levels of testosterone.
If you want to make things simple, just have everyone compete together instead of splitting men and women. If you want to split up men and women, then we need a way to determine the difference between men and women and categorize people correctly.
Life is an "edge case". You can try to rectify your own instance if you truly believe what you stated.
About one week
Let's not even get into the "mesh" thing. Electricity has inate losses in transport and unless you want to convert those panels to push out 40kV so you can get to the next village without significant loss only to downconvert it the other end, you're wasting your time by the time it gets there.
Most of the time, the power generated locally doesn't need to transfer to the next village, but only a short trip down the road. From your flat, out to the street and back into someone else's flat.
It would be similar to everyone having a very small water pump that can only trickle a small 10cm of water/sec. The water doesn't need to flow the entire way back, most of the time it will flow to whomever is locally using water. It will work at the aggregate level with a bias towards local usage.
NK total population: about 25mil
Tokyo total population: about 35.6mil
Tokyo is about 50% larger by population. There is no way an inhabited city in NK can compare to Tokyo, even if everyone in NK lived in the same city.
And I DARE a pussy like you to come and confront me.... 45cal to the chest will change your mind. "I was scared for my life! he came after me into my yard!"
My god, what trash. Only trash talks big like that.
I remember those days. Being rude didn't need to be a crime because it could result in a punch to the gut and the police would point and laugh.
I agree that it is a great ideal, but that is not freedom.
Yet the user does not care about access to the source, only the developer does. Not to mention it is freedom for the user at the expense of the developer.
I have yet to hear a logical response to back the claim of "more freedom". I'm not saying a logical argument to back the idea of GPL, but of the claim made by those claiming "freedom".
Freedom to modify is not a downstream requirement for BSD
Yes it is. The original code still exists to be modified.
In a world of shared resources, freedom is a balance
Since when has an idea been a "shared" resource? Yes, there is a limit to how many ideas can be created, but there is no limit to how much an idea can be consumed.
You are claiming that consuming without creating causes damage. By your logic, end users cause as much "damage" as a developer who does not contribute back.
Yes, I understand the idea of the "users down the line". GPL is more like socialism. It is not a bad thing, in fact, it is a good thing. Everyone working together to better the world as a whole. I have no problem with that.
What I am arguing is that GPL gives rights to future end users at the expense of current developers. The creator must give up the right of keep their ideas to themselves in order to use "free" ideas.
That is not "Free", that is "mostly free".
Same thing could be said about history class or phy-ed or even english/comm/language. A person in a coma can survive just fine in today's society.
it only remove the "freedom" to remove somebody else's freedom
It is already impossible to remove someone else's freedom in the context you are talking about. It doesn't "remove the freedom to remove freedom" it just "removes freedom".
Having your code used in something proprietary does not detract from your original code. GPL is awesome and if you don't want your code used in something proprietary, then great. Your code, do what you want, but don't go around stating logical fallacies.
The only freedom the GPL takes away is the freedom to take the other freedoms away
Please explain how someone can take away your "Freedom" if you don't use GPL?
GPL has a requirement. All requirements remove freedom.
I am not saying GPL is "Bad", but one cannot say that it is 100% free.
IBM Deskstars used glass platters which had a much higher expansion per unit of heat. After they got too warm, the heads would be out of position relative to the surface. Freezing those drives were nearly every time for me. I do find it interesting that the drives couldn't compensate correctly for expansion, but they worked just fine for contraction as the platters should have shrunk at the same rate as they cooled.
Virtually every feature in PHP is broken somehow. The language, the framework, the ecosystem, are all just bad. And I can’t even point out any single damning thing, because the damage is so systemic.
fun read
Most people that I know making under $30k/year are paying $150 for internet+TV. I'm sure they'll gladly pay $125 for TV+1Gb internet.
The equipment to filter or traffic shape would cost more than the bandwidth they'd be saving. Bandwidth is f'n cheap on the backbone.
In large enough aggregation, bandwidth spikes don't really happen. QoS is really only an issue near the edge or if the core can't handle the traffic.
Given a large enough edge, the load at the core will be almost 100% predictable and constant from day-to-day. As long as your throw enough bandwidth at it, QoS won't matter.
For GPON, the edge QoS is effectively TDMA. It makes sure that at full load, a given port will evenly distribute the bandwidth in a low-latency and relatively low-jitter way while making almost 100% use of theoretical peak bandwidth.
Once you get away from a given port, you're talking about a a card with several other ports on it. At this point, there is 200Gb/s-320Gb/s of bandwidth. Average start to show themselves and you get constant predictable load. Again, QoS is about pointless.
Once you get away from the card and on to the back-plane of the chassis, you're talking about 2+Tb/s of bandwidth with teamable 100Gb/s uplink ports.
These are the stats for most GPON chassis and there are faster ones coming out. Assuming the suggested and most common 32 customers/port, most chassis can handle about 32,000 customers. 32,000 people sharing a 2Tb/s back-plane and 100Gb-400Gb/s of uplink, sounds perfectly fine to me.
An ISP with only 32k customers probably isn't going to have a 400Gb internet pipe, so the chassis would not be the weak point.
Current GPON is 2.5Gb/s shared, but 10Gb is coming out next year and 40Gb in 3-5 years after 10Gb.
Assuming 32 customers, which is the recommend
2.5Gb/32 = about 78Mb/s/customer
10Gb/32 = about 312Mb/s/customer
40Gb/32 = about 1250Mb/s/customer
upload speeds
2.5Gb/1.25Gb
10Gb/2.5Gb
40Gb/10Gb
I am excited. Local ISP is rolling out GPON.
I agree.
A local ISP also has wording stating that hosting a server is against the ToS. They also mention that they will not discriminate or monitor your traffic for any reason other than ordered by law. They also have no data caps.
If they don't monitor your connection outside of maintenance reasons, then how can you find you're running a server?
So I agree with that the "no server" wording is just to cover their butts for legal reasons.
where the culture doesn't like paying for software
You must have missed out on the Humble Bundle average payment per person when grouped by OS. Linux won by quite a bit.