I heard from a source I can't remember (some interview on Wired, maybe?)... They want to use all-optical switching at the highest levels.
Where all of the data starts to branch up into the bigger pipes you eventually reach the biggest ones. Switching data among these pipes can be quite a task consider the large volumes of data and of course speed.
The problem boils down to being able to decipher the destination of the packets as they're coming through. That means "opening" each packet and understanding its destination before you can send it on its way. That "inspection" is time consuming and is the main bottleneck.
Their goal is to use optical equipment at the lesser pipes to encode the data destined for specific other pipes into a colored light (i.e. red for destA, green for destB and blue for destC, etc.). At this level there is less data, so it is feasible.
All of these are then merged into a quasi-white light that is sent though the big pipes. The switches can then simply "filter" the light without having to examine the packets. The red filter sends data bound for destA to destA without even "opening" the packets. The other data is similar filtered for their destinations without being "opened".
Thus, switching at the highest most intensive level is accomplished without mechanical switching or logical understanding of the data.
The fonts on the PalmOS can be horribly inelligble. The best way to increase distinguishability of letters on these screens is to increase the number of pixels each letter is rendered with. That can be accomplished with bigger fonts (leading to less information that can fit on the screen) or by increasing resolution of the fonts. I'd rather have the latter.
Certainly it is impressive what has been done with 160x160. And I think what you said about developers acknowleding the small space and designing for it is important. But I also think that seeing the distinct square shape of each pixel from 3 feet away is poor.
I think the same design philosophy used at 160x160 could be used at, say, 320x320. I only hope that if the resolution is increased that the philosophy is adhered to in practice.
First of all, let's make it clear that Motorolla will be maintaining backwards compatability with the Dragonball series. Thus, new Palms can still run old programs.
Regarding the speed comparison, it is the uninformed buyer that would assume a 200MHz WinCE^H^H^H^H^HPocketPC is faster than a 33MHz Palm. True that at 200MHz you can add integers a heck of a lot faster, but the PocketPC OS requires you to add many times more integers to accomplish the same thing. For example, consider the work involved in drawing an "OK" button in PocketPC-land vs. Palm-land.
That said, using Palm's simplicity on a fatser ARM-based processor will simply make the Palm's faster -- which will make them perceivablty faster than PocketPCs even if PocketPC can still add integers faster.
When I ordered a handheld did I care if it had USB? No.
The big deal with USB is that its many MANY times faster. My Handspring Visor Deluxe syncs over USB in a matter of 5 seconds or less, depending on contents. I'd say its about four times faster than my old Palm through serial.
I've long lectured this same thing. 160x160 doesn't quite cut it (though, they've done quite well with it.
There are things to consider when adding new scree functionality to PalmOS PDAs which may give some insight into the great delay.
Prohibitive cost of larger screens (you just know these 160x160 screens are cheaper than a Happy Meal toy).
Memory -- larger sreens means larger bitmaps, larger font definitions, more memory for back-saving, etc.
Backwards compatability. Of course, I believe Palm could easily go to 320x320 and provide backwards compatability by making older apps use 2x2 pixels on the screen.
Considering those things, I think Palm should still do it as long as they are wise about it. For example, this time, build generic hooks into the OS to support a wide range of color depths and reosolutions that they don't yet forsee. Of course, the downside to this is that there willbe more complicated data structures to handle such generic hooks. That will lead to slower programs and more memory consumption.
So, can they do it without becoming laden with backwards compatability baggage?
I have a feeling softwrae sucks because it is not engineered properly.
As the author of the article points out, hardware is getting more complex and better. But hardware is designed. It's designed, tested, built upon, etc.
And while we're all taught that we shoudl use proper design for software, few of us take it whole heartedly. Sure, we might do a few object models, flow charts, etc. But how many of us use propositional logic and predicate calculus to prove our software will work as it is intended? And still further, how many of us have unbiased testing of our software?
I think the larger the corporation, the more of these practices might be enforced. But it is still up to the programmer to truly adhere and take these to heart. I don't think we quite have the discrete tools that hardware designers have. Nor do we have the worry that once the circuit is printed, you can't easily "fix" it.
Here in the U.S. I use DSL form my local phone company. A support group sort of evolved on a local newsgroup to complain about the poor service we felt we were receiving (frequent outages, poor availability, etc.)
Then, we started to find the truth. Other service providers were even worse. We were ashamed of our disgust for our own providers when we learned of others' troubles. We even found that our provider was *gasp* ranked one of the best!
That being said, how do the service providers rank in service and customer service across the lake?
I don't see how a planet such as Earth could have life. Its gravity is so weak, due to its small mass it could only capture *one* moon! With such low gravity, the gaeous pressure is so low that no organism could possibly find enough nutrients at that density to sustain its life.
Furthermore, even if it could, its body would surely explode due to the low atmospheric pressure. Or, perhaps the weight of the organism could not be suspended by the atmospheric pressure and it would crash to the center of the planet.
There is also the thin atmosphere. The planet is small enough, but its atmosphere is a tiny shell and hasd a relatively massive solid core. That leaves little room for life to develop.
I tell you, Earth is no more habitable to life than Mars is now ever since the Matrians turned their gas giant into a desolate rock!
I think it is misleading to assume that such planets are the best place to look for life. Certainly it is the best place to look for life as we know it -- carbon based, laden with liquid water, etc. But what of silicon-based life, or interstellar life forms?
Still, the best reason to look for planets like that is they might be good candidates for a new home when we destroy/overpopulate/get-bored-with/quarantine/etc . earth.
In one room, there is a black ceiling. He wanted to have black smoke detectors in that room so they woudln't stand out. But, non one makes black smoke detectors and simply paining white ones black would break their FCC approval. So, some special black smoke detectors were made and then approved by the FCC (not a cheap process) for Bill's room.
In another room with fancy wood panels -- including the ceiling -- he didn't want obtrusive sprinkler heads (presumably required due to the nature of the room) uglying the looks. So, special drop-away wooden ceiling panels were used that would hide the sprinkler heads until a fire broke out.
So, there's more to a fancy house than just high-tech gadgets for the sake of high-tech. There's also aesthetics involved.
What about the old-fashioned Bubble RAM? What about organic-crystalline hologrpahic memory? What about how my Visor Deluxe can store 8MB of contents for 2 months on a pair of AAAs?
Seriously. What makes MRAM so special that it can beat out those other concepts?
Doesn't the DoD also have an expensive missle defense system? Couldn't they instead let those Iridium satellites fall to earth as targets to test out their precious new toys?
Here in Cincinnati, the local phoen company already ran out of numbers. New area codes were created. 513 is the Cincinnati area code, 859 is the new Northern Kentucky (part of the Metropolitan Cincinnati area) area code. So, to dial someone in N.KY from my home, I just dial 859-xxx-xxx. As far as I can count, that *is* ten digits and its still treated as a local call?
Of course, what the FCC is talking about is above and beyond area codes, I believe. 7 digits can only hold 10,000,000 phone numbers -- but large chunks are already taken out by fixed combinations (i.e. 911, 0, 411, 1..., 0..., etc.). So for larghe metropolitan areas, like New York City or LA, it seems they are trying to increase the size of the pool of numbers to avoid adding more area codes.
But what is the difference between a 10-digit number and dialing an area code plus 7 more digits? Perhaps there is a difference on the backend, but to the user it seems it would be the same. So why all the fuss?
The biggest problem, in my mind, is that it has long been rumored that humans are poor at memorizing sequences that are more than 7 digits long. Of course, I remember what local area code someone is in separately from the number itself, so its more like associating a 3-digit number with a 7-digit one.
I've disabled the ads in AIM just because I dont want anything dirtying my bandwidth without my permission, no matter how small it might be.
Do tell, How does one manage to do this? I'd love to be rid of those flashing, RAM hogging, ugly things.
Well, first of all, I've only done this in recent version of AIM for Windows. Go to the AIM folder and look for a file named aim.odl. Open it up and search for "advert". There are several locations in the file where something reffers to advert. Comment out the line, or the whole group if that is all that is in the group. Save the file and restart AIM. The ads should be gone now.
If you liked it so much, I assume you purchased a copy? The upgrade from 4.02 to 5.0 (for Windows) is free, has no ads, and doesn't need you to dig your key out from your old e-mails.
Opera is a great browser. I'm using 4.02 (for Windows, shhh!) to write this reply right now. It has a number of features that I love, like the MDI interface, zooming web pages, and the fact that if it crashes, it doesn't necessarily take Windows with it. I also like that when I re-open Opera, it remembers the last web pages I had open (a-la multiple default home pages).
In my opinion, the big thing holding Opera back was that you had to pay for it. I showed it to a number of friends who agreed they'd use it if it weren't for the cost. After all, Netscape and IE were both free.
However, Opera is a Norwegian company and probably didn't have as much money in the coffers as Netscape and certainly not Microsoft. How could they offer it for free? Well, by golly, free via ads is the next best thing.
Personally, my concern is with the bandwidth those ads might consume. I've disabled the ads in AIM just because I dont want anything dirtying my bandwidth without my permission, no matter how small it might be.
I think one thing to keep in mind here is the progression of things.
Years ago, people programed computers by rearraning pluggable wire connections.
Years later, we had machine code, them ASM, then started to get more functional languages like Fortran, Cobal, C, etc. Now we seem to be moving into OO languages with Java, Smalltalk, C++, etc. (let's forget how *pure* they are).
The same thing has happened with OS's and programs. People are becoming removed from the hardware. More layers are being inserted inbetween.
Both of those things are OK because memory keeps getting cheaper and computers keep getting faster. This enables us to force the computer to do more work so the numan has to do less. That goes for using the computer, programming the computer, assembling the computer (anyone remember the pre-PnP days?)
So, I argue that the fact that Java is slower isn't a bad thing. It's faster development at the cost of runtime speed, just like Justin Dubs said. The older technologies will probably never die out (Lego Mindstorms uses pluggable wires of sorts), but they will no longer be mainstream.
I was hoping you wouldn't point that out. My point is severely damaged by the fact, as you said, that most music on Napster would still fall within reasonable copyright terms.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, if you were a reclusive alien species trying to keep from being found, just which of our nine planets would you choose to hide out on? Hmmm?
Where all of the data starts to branch up into the bigger pipes you eventually reach the biggest ones. Switching data among these pipes can be quite a task consider the large volumes of data and of course speed.
The problem boils down to being able to decipher the destination of the packets as they're coming through. That means "opening" each packet and understanding its destination before you can send it on its way. That "inspection" is time consuming and is the main bottleneck.
Their goal is to use optical equipment at the lesser pipes to encode the data destined for specific other pipes into a colored light (i.e. red for destA, green for destB and blue for destC, etc.). At this level there is less data, so it is feasible.
All of these are then merged into a quasi-white light that is sent though the big pipes. The switches can then simply "filter" the light without having to examine the packets. The red filter sends data bound for destA to destA without even "opening" the packets. The other data is similar filtered for their destinations without being "opened".
Thus, switching at the highest most intensive level is accomplished without mechanical switching or logical understanding of the data.
Now, AOL buys said company and once again wholly owns every AIM-compatible IM client.
The fonts on the PalmOS can be horribly inelligble. The best way to increase distinguishability of letters on these screens is to increase the number of pixels each letter is rendered with. That can be accomplished with bigger fonts (leading to less information that can fit on the screen) or by increasing resolution of the fonts. I'd rather have the latter.
Certainly it is impressive what has been done with 160x160. And I think what you said about developers acknowleding the small space and designing for it is important. But I also think that seeing the distinct square shape of each pixel from 3 feet away is poor.
I think the same design philosophy used at 160x160 could be used at, say, 320x320. I only hope that if the resolution is increased that the philosophy is adhered to in practice.
Regarding the speed comparison, it is the uninformed buyer that would assume a 200MHz WinCE^H^H^H^H^HPocketPC is faster than a 33MHz Palm. True that at 200MHz you can add integers a heck of a lot faster, but the PocketPC OS requires you to add many times more integers to accomplish the same thing. For example, consider the work involved in drawing an "OK" button in PocketPC-land vs. Palm-land.
That said, using Palm's simplicity on a fatser ARM-based processor will simply make the Palm's faster -- which will make them perceivablty faster than PocketPCs even if PocketPC can still add integers faster.
The big deal with USB is that its many MANY times faster. My Handspring Visor Deluxe syncs over USB in a matter of 5 seconds or less, depending on contents. I'd say its about four times faster than my old Palm through serial.
Perhaps it is the traditional model that is backwards and Palm has taken the lead in doing it in a better way -- i.e. if you build it, they will come.
I've long lectured this same thing. 160x160 doesn't quite cut it (though, they've done quite well with it.
There are things to consider when adding new scree functionality to PalmOS PDAs which may give some insight into the great delay.
Considering those things, I think Palm should still do it as long as they are wise about it. For example, this time, build generic hooks into the OS to support a wide range of color depths and reosolutions that they don't yet forsee. Of course, the downside to this is that there willbe more complicated data structures to handle such generic hooks. That will lead to slower programs and more memory consumption.
So, can they do it without becoming laden with backwards compatability baggage?
So did Handspring. Of course, taht says nothing for Palm who seems to be playing catchup with Handspring more than Microsoft.
As the author of the article points out, hardware is getting more complex and better. But hardware is designed. It's designed, tested, built upon, etc.
And while we're all taught that we shoudl use proper design for software, few of us take it whole heartedly. Sure, we might do a few object models, flow charts, etc. But how many of us use propositional logic and predicate calculus to prove our software will work as it is intended? And still further, how many of us have unbiased testing of our software?
I think the larger the corporation, the more of these practices might be enforced. But it is still up to the programmer to truly adhere and take these to heart. I don't think we quite have the discrete tools that hardware designers have. Nor do we have the worry that once the circuit is printed, you can't easily "fix" it.
Then, we started to find the truth. Other service providers were even worse. We were ashamed of our disgust for our own providers when we learned of others' troubles. We even found that our provider was *gasp* ranked one of the best!
That being said, how do the service providers rank in service and customer service across the lake?
Furthermore, even if it could, its body would surely explode due to the low atmospheric pressure. Or, perhaps the weight of the organism could not be suspended by the atmospheric pressure and it would crash to the center of the planet.
There is also the thin atmosphere. The planet is small enough, but its atmosphere is a tiny shell and hasd a relatively massive solid core. That leaves little room for life to develop.
I tell you, Earth is no more habitable to life than Mars is now ever since the Matrians turned their gas giant into a desolate rock!
Still, the best reason to look for planets like that is they might be good candidates for a new home when we destroy/overpopulate/get-bored-with/quarantine/etc . earth.
- In one room, there is a black ceiling. He wanted to have black smoke detectors in that room so they woudln't stand out. But, non one makes black smoke detectors and simply paining white ones black would break their FCC approval. So, some special black smoke detectors were made and then approved by the FCC (not a cheap process) for Bill's room.
- In another room with fancy wood panels -- including the ceiling -- he didn't want obtrusive sprinkler heads (presumably required due to the nature of the room) uglying the looks. So, special drop-away wooden ceiling panels were used that would hide the sprinkler heads until a fire broke out.
So, there's more to a fancy house than just high-tech gadgets for the sake of high-tech. There's also aesthetics involved.Seriously. What makes MRAM so special that it can beat out those other concepts?
Doesn't the DoD also have an expensive missle defense system? Couldn't they instead let those Iridium satellites fall to earth as targets to test out their precious new toys?
That's about the best concept I could get out of the article as well. Of course, this poses two problems:
Of course, what the FCC is talking about is above and beyond area codes, I believe. 7 digits can only hold 10,000,000 phone numbers -- but large chunks are already taken out by fixed combinations (i.e. 911, 0, 411, 1..., 0..., etc.). So for larghe metropolitan areas, like New York City or LA, it seems they are trying to increase the size of the pool of numbers to avoid adding more area codes.
But what is the difference between a 10-digit number and dialing an area code plus 7 more digits? Perhaps there is a difference on the backend, but to the user it seems it would be the same. So why all the fuss?
The biggest problem, in my mind, is that it has long been rumored that humans are poor at memorizing sequences that are more than 7 digits long. Of course, I remember what local area code someone is in separately from the number itself, so its more like associating a 3-digit number with a 7-digit one.
Do tell, How does one manage to do this? I'd love to be rid of those flashing, RAM hogging, ugly things.
Well, first of all, I've only done this in recent version of AIM for Windows. Go to the AIM folder and look for a file named aim.odl. Open it up and search for "advert". There are several locations in the file where something reffers to advert. Comment out the line, or the whole group if that is all that is in the group. Save the file and restart AIM. The ads should be gone now.
If you liked it so much, I assume you purchased a copy? The upgrade from 4.02 to 5.0 (for Windows) is free, has no ads, and doesn't need you to dig your key out from your old e-mails.
In my opinion, the big thing holding Opera back was that you had to pay for it. I showed it to a number of friends who agreed they'd use it if it weren't for the cost. After all, Netscape and IE were both free.
However, Opera is a Norwegian company and probably didn't have as much money in the coffers as Netscape and certainly not Microsoft. How could they offer it for free? Well, by golly, free via ads is the next best thing.
Personally, my concern is with the bandwidth those ads might consume. I've disabled the ads in AIM just because I dont want anything dirtying my bandwidth without my permission, no matter how small it might be.
Years ago, people programed computers by rearraning pluggable wire connections.
Years later, we had machine code, them ASM, then started to get more functional languages like Fortran, Cobal, C, etc. Now we seem to be moving into OO languages with Java, Smalltalk, C++, etc. (let's forget how *pure* they are).
The same thing has happened with OS's and programs. People are becoming removed from the hardware. More layers are being inserted inbetween.
Both of those things are OK because memory keeps getting cheaper and computers keep getting faster. This enables us to force the computer to do more work so the numan has to do less. That goes for using the computer, programming the computer, assembling the computer (anyone remember the pre-PnP days?)
So, I argue that the fact that Java is slower isn't a bad thing. It's faster development at the cost of runtime speed, just like Justin Dubs said. The older technologies will probably never die out (Lego Mindstorms uses pluggable wires of sorts), but they will no longer be mainstream.
Who knows what the future holds?
Oh well :)
And how much of the pirated music on Napster was created in the United States?