Note: that could be misread. I've seen the 7 criteria that are listed on the wikipedia page, listed in many other places (particularly textbooks) for at least 20 years now. Wikipedia hasn't been around that long, so I"m sure some someone would love to read that in a completely different manner...
I've see the same seven criteria listed on the wikipedia page for 20 years now, at least.
*Homeostasis - The ability to keep an internal environment different from the external environment *Organization - use of cells in the Wikipedia page is bad, it would be better to say regions or compartments that keep their own specialized environments (organelles and even regions in/around enzymes count for this) *Metabolism - Doesn't have to be carbon/oxygen based, just the use of chemical energy storage. I've heard this extended to use of any energy mechanism, which almost makes it a redundant criteria *Growth - Needed, if nothing else, to repair injuries *Adaptation - Adapts over time to changes the environment, considered long term / evolutionary change. *Responds to stimuli - Short term changes in an organism to deal with short term environmental changes *Reproduction - Given sufficient energy and materials, the creature must be able to reproduce on it's own volition. I've heard this extended to creatures that fit the previous definition as well as their descendants (thus, sterile descendants are still alive).
How can any have been sold, it hasn't been developed yet. A better comparison would be Windows 7 Phone, which has sold some (not much, but some). Moving in any direction always requires a first step. MS is moving to the cloud with many apps, so you can add a client-architecture irrelevance to the list of things easing the move. Just as many users don't care about dev/gaming, they also, sadly, don't care/realize the dangers of the cloud.
Mind you, 5 years from now is a long time, it look less time than that for Apple to go from an all-Power architecture to mostly using x86s with some Power stuff for legacy purposes only. And they didn't use any cloud crap. Why couldn't MS do the same switch?
Harming Intel 5 years down the road does not necessarily harm MS, and vice versa.
intel should be making these on 22nm and new products being released now,
I think the reason they don't is because 22nm requires more power to operate at a high speed.
??? How's that happen, typically the lower the process size, the lower the energy use for the same design (and the higher possible clock speed before heat issues occur).
Mark my words in the next 5 years ARM is going to have a CPU good enough for a laptop. the cost structure of Wintel will make this a huge financial/profit opportunity for laptop makers
I don't think this matters. The CPU is not why laptops are expensive, so even if some ARM manufacturer manages to match Intel in performance (unlikely), what motivation is there to dump all your legacy software that only runs on Intel?
Also, if AMD couldn't overtake Intel with chips that were at times superior, why do you think VIA or Qualcomm could?
The issue isn't cost, but performance. Even a low end x86 (except Atom and AMDs equivalent) can outperform an ARM chip significantly. Also, have you seen the price of replacement notebook CPUs? They are a lot more expensive than similar desktop CPUs. It's not the only reason they are more expensive, but it certainly is part of it.
ARM may in fact catch up to x86 - the question then is, will Intel focus more on their own ARM development? Performance focus has been moving from per-thread performance (where x86 is usually pretty good, and performance/watt is not necessarily a huge concern) to multi-threaded performance (where performance/watt can translate quite well, since you just have to add more cores to up the overall performance). I believe ARM is better at performance/watt than x86, so with ARM catching up on core count (and probably exceeding x86 soon), x86 may indeed lose it's lead. Of course, that only hurts Intel if they focus on x86.
Then again, I can see a slightly different future. Both multi-threaded and monolithic-threaded have their advantages. For notebooks (and maybe desktops/servers) I can see a primary ARM CPU handling most of the work, and an x86 (or Power, or whatever?) taking on the brute force stuff when needed, and otherwise powering down. Of course, applications and libraries will now need to store both ARM and x86 versions, and the OS will need to have code to allow cross talk between x86 and ARM at least at the cross-process level, but possibly even within processes themselves. Then again, that would be a huge undertaking and possibly not worth the effort.
"Wintel"? Focusing on Apple products? Fanboi much?
MS is moving to an platform of ARM/x86 cross compatibility, and Apple uses Intel on it's notebook products, so really, the only focus here is Intel, but some how you have to add Windows to it anyway?
Trying to figure out if your post is a subtle troll, or you are really just that obsessed...
Yeah, no kidding. Where I work we use MS Outlook/Exchange (formerly Oracle, I can't believe we could actually find something that's a downgrade from THAT, but we managed), MS Project and an open source vacation/leave request system. ALL of these have the features mentioned above, and have for YEARS.
Ok, they don't have a drop-down box or something idiotic like that, if that is part of the patent, but for outlook/exchange, I set my away message to show up when I will leave the office (say, noon 2012-01-12), I block off that chunk of the day on my calandar (noon-6pm, just to be safe, so nobody schedules me for a late meeting, thinking I'll be back), In project, I mark '4' hours under 'vacation' and I put '4' in the 'hours' spot of our vacation request program for that day.
I've been doing that for years. WTF is wrong with the patent system for granting this garbage?
People tend to act in opposite ways outside of the outside/work/professional life, than they do in them.
For example - programming requires a lot of logic and analytical skill, however that can be stressful and boring, they may want some "unwinding", and so they act particularly illogical outside of their professional life, or even within it, when not actually programming..
Lynx isn't command line, it's console. Having used both (primarily firefox), yes, Lynx IS faster than firefox, but if you like pictures, stick with FireFox...
Most of the time I'm on Linux (or BSD for that matter), I use the command line. Mostly because, for what I do with it, the GUI tools available on either aren't very good. Particularly for file navigation/management. In general they either look like garbage, or just feel kludgy in the way the act.
It may have had an advantage at one time (such as viral resistance).
However it could also be a no-benefit/no-cost change, which can also happen, it isn't degeneration (a weakening of the creature), and even degeneration would be a subset of evolution, since it would involve changes over time which are influenced by natural selection, genetic drift, etc.
I know a case where a gal was driving way to fast, and slammed into a tree in her van. She was ejected and killed instantly. From the state of the cabin of the van, she probably would have ended up with broken ribs, whiplash and maybe a concussion if she had worn her seatbelt.
Neither option ALWAYS provides better results, and usually the seat belt is the better option. I was just trying to point out that it isn't always the better option, and just because someone didn't wear their seat belt, even in a really bad accident, doesn't mean they will always be worse off (just usually, and usually probably being > 99% of the time).
Oh, you are definitely more likely to be injured if you are ejected, than if you follow all safety procedures.
But more likely isn't guaranteed, and that's the key point. Exceptions can happen, even if they are only 1%, when something happens a lot of times, there will be plenty of 1%s. I never said that you would be better off being ejected all the time, I simply stated that it isn't always the case that you would be worse off because you fail to do something that is usually beneficial. Usually you'll be worse off, but not always.
Again, wrong. I've seen cases where someone actually survived an accident with little injury from *not* wearing a seatbelt, where they'd have died if they didn't wear one. In the case I'm thinking of, the accident popped the windshield out, and they got jettisoned before the passenger cabin had deformed significantly.
Also, it's not the speed you were going, but the rate at which you change velocity (and the duration of that, at any given rate), that causes the damage. Even crashing, a light post will be different from a brick wall, which will differ from a tree, which will differ from a 50' diameter marshmallow.
I'll take Germany's legislative system which allows (and encourages) more variety of opinion, and France's executive system of voting any day.
Next war? Who knows? I doubt it would be anything but a retaliatory thing (albeit, possibly very loosely logiced out, like Iraq), or the defense of an allie.
Slashdot Mirror
Note: that could be misread. I've seen the 7 criteria that are listed on the wikipedia page, listed in many other places (particularly textbooks) for at least 20 years now. Wikipedia hasn't been around that long, so I"m sure some someone would love to read that in a completely different manner...
3/7, you fail.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition_of_life#Biology
I've see the same seven criteria listed on the wikipedia page for 20 years now, at least.
*Homeostasis - The ability to keep an internal environment different from the external environment
*Organization - use of cells in the Wikipedia page is bad, it would be better to say regions or compartments that keep their own specialized environments (organelles and even regions in/around enzymes count for this)
*Metabolism - Doesn't have to be carbon/oxygen based, just the use of chemical energy storage. I've heard this extended to use of any energy mechanism, which almost makes it a redundant criteria
*Growth - Needed, if nothing else, to repair injuries
*Adaptation - Adapts over time to changes the environment, considered long term / evolutionary change.
*Responds to stimuli - Short term changes in an organism to deal with short term environmental changes
*Reproduction - Given sufficient energy and materials, the creature must be able to reproduce on it's own volition. I've heard this extended to creatures that fit the previous definition as well as their descendants (thus, sterile descendants are still alive).
I am a Biologist, and the GP missed 4 of the 7 criteria
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition_of_life#Biology
Why not just give the biological definition of life?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition_of_life#Biology
No where does it mention water or carbon. In regards to the moronic title over TFS, there is no need to change this.
Oh. well then, you *woosh*ed me, as I've never used it.
You should have at least gotten your *wooosh* in there. Bad slashdotter. No cookie.
How can any have been sold, it hasn't been developed yet. A better comparison would be Windows 7 Phone, which has sold some (not much, but some). Moving in any direction always requires a first step. MS is moving to the cloud with many apps, so you can add a client-architecture irrelevance to the list of things easing the move. Just as many users don't care about dev/gaming, they also, sadly, don't care/realize the dangers of the cloud.
Mind you, 5 years from now is a long time, it look less time than that for Apple to go from an all-Power architecture to mostly using x86s with some Power stuff for legacy purposes only. And they didn't use any cloud crap. Why couldn't MS do the same switch?
Harming Intel 5 years down the road does not necessarily harm MS, and vice versa.
intel should be making these on 22nm and new products being released now,
I think the reason they don't is because 22nm requires more power to operate at a high speed.
??? How's that happen, typically the lower the process size, the lower the energy use for the same design (and the higher possible clock speed before heat issues occur).
Mark my words in the next 5 years ARM is going to have a CPU good enough for a laptop. the cost structure of Wintel will make this a huge financial/profit opportunity for laptop makers
I don't think this matters. The CPU is not why laptops are expensive, so even if some ARM manufacturer manages to match Intel in performance (unlikely), what motivation is there to dump all your legacy software that only runs on Intel?
Also, if AMD couldn't overtake Intel with chips that were at times superior, why do you think VIA or Qualcomm could?
The issue isn't cost, but performance. Even a low end x86 (except Atom and AMDs equivalent) can outperform an ARM chip significantly. Also, have you seen the price of replacement notebook CPUs? They are a lot more expensive than similar desktop CPUs. It's not the only reason they are more expensive, but it certainly is part of it.
ARM may in fact catch up to x86 - the question then is, will Intel focus more on their own ARM development? Performance focus has been moving from per-thread performance (where x86 is usually pretty good, and performance/watt is not necessarily a huge concern) to multi-threaded performance (where performance/watt can translate quite well, since you just have to add more cores to up the overall performance). I believe ARM is better at performance/watt than x86, so with ARM catching up on core count (and probably exceeding x86 soon), x86 may indeed lose it's lead. Of course, that only hurts Intel if they focus on x86.
Then again, I can see a slightly different future. Both multi-threaded and monolithic-threaded have their advantages. For notebooks (and maybe desktops/servers) I can see a primary ARM CPU handling most of the work, and an x86 (or Power, or whatever?) taking on the brute force stuff when needed, and otherwise powering down. Of course, applications and libraries will now need to store both ARM and x86 versions, and the OS will need to have code to allow cross talk between x86 and ARM at least at the cross-process level, but possibly even within processes themselves. Then again, that would be a huge undertaking and possibly not worth the effort.
"Wintel"? Focusing on Apple products? Fanboi much?
MS is moving to an platform of ARM/x86 cross compatibility, and Apple uses Intel on it's notebook products, so really, the only focus here is Intel, but some how you have to add Windows to it anyway?
Trying to figure out if your post is a subtle troll, or you are really just that obsessed...
Being made by the company requesting the patent, it doesn't count as prior art...
Yeah, no kidding. Where I work we use MS Outlook/Exchange (formerly Oracle, I can't believe we could actually find something that's a downgrade from THAT, but we managed), MS Project and an open source vacation/leave request system. ALL of these have the features mentioned above, and have for YEARS.
Ok, they don't have a drop-down box or something idiotic like that, if that is part of the patent, but for outlook/exchange, I set my away message to show up when I will leave the office (say, noon 2012-01-12), I block off that chunk of the day on my calandar (noon-6pm, just to be safe, so nobody schedules me for a late meeting, thinking I'll be back), In project, I mark '4' hours under 'vacation' and I put '4' in the 'hours' spot of our vacation request program for that day.
I've been doing that for years. WTF is wrong with the patent system for granting this garbage?
People tend to act in opposite ways outside of the outside/work/professional life, than they do in them.
For example - programming requires a lot of logic and analytical skill, however that can be stressful and boring, they may want some "unwinding", and so they act particularly illogical outside of their professional life, or even within it, when not actually programming..
The design failure is that they don't allow users to select the ribbon OR classic menus.
Unless you have to support the product :-)
Lynx isn't command line, it's console. Having used both (primarily firefox), yes, Lynx IS faster than firefox, but if you like pictures, stick with FireFox...
Most of the time I'm on Linux (or BSD for that matter), I use the command line. Mostly because, for what I do with it, the GUI tools available on either aren't very good. Particularly for file navigation/management. In general they either look like garbage, or just feel kludgy in the way the act.
It may have had an advantage at one time (such as viral resistance).
However it could also be a no-benefit/no-cost change, which can also happen, it isn't degeneration (a weakening of the creature), and even degeneration would be a subset of evolution, since it would involve changes over time which are influenced by natural selection, genetic drift, etc.
I know a case where a gal was driving way to fast, and slammed into a tree in her van. She was ejected and killed instantly. From the state of the cabin of the van, she probably would have ended up with broken ribs, whiplash and maybe a concussion if she had worn her seatbelt.
Neither option ALWAYS provides better results, and usually the seat belt is the better option. I was just trying to point out that it isn't always the better option, and just because someone didn't wear their seat belt, even in a really bad accident, doesn't mean they will always be worse off (just usually, and usually probably being > 99% of the time).
Oh, you are definitely more likely to be injured if you are ejected, than if you follow all safety procedures.
But more likely isn't guaranteed, and that's the key point. Exceptions can happen, even if they are only 1%, when something happens a lot of times, there will be plenty of 1%s. I never said that you would be better off being ejected all the time, I simply stated that it isn't always the case that you would be worse off because you fail to do something that is usually beneficial. Usually you'll be worse off, but not always.
Yes. Indeed.
Again, wrong. I've seen cases where someone actually survived an accident with little injury from *not* wearing a seatbelt, where they'd have died if they didn't wear one. In the case I'm thinking of, the accident popped the windshield out, and they got jettisoned before the passenger cabin had deformed significantly.
Also, it's not the speed you were going, but the rate at which you change velocity (and the duration of that, at any given rate), that causes the damage. Even crashing, a light post will be different from a brick wall, which will differ from a tree, which will differ from a 50' diameter marshmallow.
addition: And a person, if luck, could get away with it, with only bruises, many of which, internal and not visible.
Accelerometers are cheap. A crash from that speed isn't necessarily lethal.
but the patent says the one with the code should be left at home to keep it secure. You just totally screwed that pooch.
But, cross-species chimeras? I'm not familiar with that in nature.
Yes, but if they surpass humanity in too many regards... Planet of the Apes... err... chimps.
I'm not arguing, our voting system sucks.
I'll take Germany's legislative system which allows (and encourages) more variety of opinion, and France's executive system of voting any day.
Next war? Who knows? I doubt it would be anything but a retaliatory thing (albeit, possibly very loosely logiced out, like Iraq), or the defense of an allie.