Not really the interpreter, but the language spec. Add the following: - Ability to do static typing when needed - Add optional dialect to use delimiters instead of whitespace for block and statement scoping that can be enabled and disabled within a file. - Add ability to specify uniform and auto-vectorized parameters to functions and have the system auto parallelize, vectorize, dispatch to GPU,...
Many of these may exist in other languages, but I haven't spent a lot of time looking. I'm mostly a c++ and Python guy. Groovy seems to have a lot of cool features, too, but I find it hard to learn because of the too-loose syntax rules.
$50 per year for unlimited data, and you can use your own encryption keys to encrypt prior to upload. Will take a loooong time to back up that much data initially, but incremental updates are pretty quick (depending on how quickly you add new media).
Note: Not affiliated with altdrive, just a happy customer. altdrive.com
Intel has a VERY long history of questionable;) benchmarks, all the way to tweaking processor designs to run benchmark code faster. Microsoft's "Get The Facts" propaganda is just a pale imitation of Intel's history.
Supposedly, benchmarks are written to simulate real workloads. It seems to me that tweaking processor designs to run benchmarks faster is a good idea. If you have a better idea for what applications to design a processor for perhaps you should join a processor company in the workload analysis or planning group.
I agree that Intel, or any company with enough "muscle" (see Nvidia, ATI/AMD, MSFT, IBM, HP, Oracle, etc.), will try to influence the press and show their products in the best possible way, even dishonestly on occasion. I'm not saying that the fact that "everyone does it" makes it right, just that everyone does do it.
I also think that these companies receive a lot of blame for articles / "research reports" like this one that they have absolutely no involvement with. To think that EVERY positive Intel article is funded or influenced by Intel would:
1) Ignore the fact that Intel does make fairly good products most of the time 2) Greatly overestimate Intel's marketing prowess.:)
I rather think that they don't get in trouble because their recorded income subject to FICA and medicare is much higher than $1. Salary is not the only form of compensation for them.
For example, I work for Intel. Last year my base salary accounted for about 68% of my taxed income. The rest came from 2 different bonus programs and from stock grants and a discounted stock purchase program. All of that income was recorded on my W2 and taxed appropriately.
I believe for most of $1 salary guys, the cash bonuses are the in high hundreds of thousands and the stock grants are in the millions. That still gets taxed as income and the IRS doesn't have a problem with it. The low salary is done for 2 reasons: 1) Make all of their income dependent on company performance, 2) Morale booster for the rank and file.
Drive from the Canadian border, down through Washington, Oregon, Idaho, etc on the way South to Nevada, and you'll find lots of 83 and 85 octane gas pumps.
This usually depends on the elevation of the region where the gas station is. At high altitudes lower octane gas provides better performance. All of the states you listed contain lots of mountains and mountain passes.
Lower octane fuel actually ignites easier. The reason high-performance cars like high-octane fuel is to increase compression ratios without having the fuel self-ignite. When driving in high altitude there is less oxygen in the air. Having lower-octane fuel helps offset the oxygen level difference.
I once drove through Wyoming using 87 gas and couldn't make it up some of the hills without dropping below the speed limit. Changing to 85 helped a lot. Of course it didn't help that the vehicle was a POS...
Windows NT 3.x = kernel version 3.x
Windows NT 4 = kernel version 4
Windows 2000 = kernel version 5
Windows XP = kernel version 5.1
Windows Vista = kernel version 6
Windows 7 = kernel version 7
Note: Current betas of Win7 are kernel version 6.1, but I'm guessing that it will change before release.
Because power generally increases at a rate of frequency^3 (that's cubed). Adding more cores generally increases power linearly.
For example. Let's start with a single-core Core 2 @ 2GHz. Let's say it uses 10 W (not sure what the actual number is).
Running it at twice the frequency results in a (2^3) = 8X power increase. So, we can either have a single-core 4 GHz Core 2 at 80W, or we can have a quad-core 2GHz Core 2 at 40W. Which one makes more sense?
Sossaman is not 64-bit enabled (but does support VT). Merom will have the same power usage as Yonah with a 20% performance advantage.
Intel will still sell Yonahs because the die is smaller and not everyone needs 64-bit support (or the additional speed). They will become the "cheap" processor for laptops while still remaining profitable.
Sometimes I wish you could mod comments as "-1 Incorrect":)
Merom has exactly the same core as Conroe / Woodcrest. In fact, the design team for the Core 2 Duo used the codename "Merom" - not Conroe, not Woodcrest. The only thing that differentiates a Merom from a Conroe is clockspeed and socket (package).
You might have the DX10 runtime and software reference rasterizer on the system, but you are NOT running DX10 with an ATI X1300. DX10 is NOT backwards compatible with DX9 hardware. In order to run DX10, you WILL need to upgrade to a graphics card that isn't publicly available yet.
The big jets are pretty resistant. I've been hit by lightning in a 777 3 times (twice on the same flight!). I've been hit by lighting in a much smaller plane as well. Other than the pretty lights and a loud boom, nothing really happened.
To be honest, Nintendo's keynote was light on any real info. He spent more than half of the keynote going over how the game Brain Age for the DS came about, how they convinced stores to carry it, and had a live demo / showdown of the game with some "friends". The most popular part of this was when he announced that everyone in attendance would be getting a copy of the game (which turned out to be a demo).
He then talked about Metroid Prime: Hunters, and again had a live deathmatch between some of the developers. He wrapped up the DS segment with a preview of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass (which looks a combination of Link to the Past + Wind Waker).
Finally, he spent a (small) bit of time talking about the Revolution and the Sega / TurboGfx agreements.
His whole keynote stressed that pushing tech for tech's sake wasn't sustainable and that true innovation needed to happen. Nintendo is innovating with their DS, with games like Brain Age, and with the Revolution (controller, content agreements, etc.). All real information + hands-on games will be available at E3.
So, unless you really care about the life of Brain Age, you aren't missing much.:-)
That has not been true for a long long time. Since PCIe became a standard, bidirectional communication between CPUs and GPUs has been as easy as unidirectional communication.
Even if communication from the GPU to the CPU was instantaneous, this would still be a performance bottleneck. GPU's are typically 1-2 frames behind the CPU. If you wanted CPU readback of GPU results, the CPU has to stall until the GPU finishes it's task. It's not the bandwidth (which was limited on AGP) that is the bottleneck, it's the latency.
This is just wrong. Conroe has a 65W TDP. I believe that the FX-60 is pushing 100W (if not over).
Re:Layer upon layer of encryption sounds so much..
on
CableCARD In-Depth
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Umm, it's not layer upon layer. It's the same encryption with different keys at different times. One set of keys for the cable transmission. One set of keys from the cable-card to the host decoder. One set of keys from the decoder to the display device (if the decoder is not in the display device). None of them are weak encryption. The HDCP system used from the decoder to the display device has been in use for about 3 years, no one has cracked it yet.
Having said all that, I'm not really looking forward to our digital future.:(
Probably one of the first (and best) examples of comprehensive leaderboard support was Project Gotham Racing 2 for the Xbox. When connected to Xbox Live, every event you completed was uploaded to the leaderboard. I was extremely happy to crack the top 1000 on most boards. The top 10 entries on each board had their "ghost" uploaded so that you could view their record setting run and/or race against it. While there were some issues (they should have created leaderboards for each medal class), on the whole it was extremely well done and contributed greatly to the replayability of the game.
By all accounts, the new machine's insides are practically designed by Intel. Intel CPU's, Intel chipsets, probably Intel motherboards. While the SW for Intel will definitely get better over time, I doubt the HW will be less bug-prone (it's already very solid).
The only big change on the horizon is the switch to Merom/Conroe/Woodcrest in the second half. This will bring the eventual switch to a fully 64-bit OS X.
Use SW raid (this is THE most important part!). The best mix of redundancy and speed is using RAID 5 or 6. If you're only using it for a file server, SW raid will be the fastest. A modern (or not-so modern) CPU will be much faster at XOR operations than almost any HW raid card (which typically use XScale CPU's for XOR calculations). Also, with HW you typically have CARD lockin. If you want to move the raid to a different machine (or swap RAID cards), it's nearly impossible with HW raid to keep the data without doing a back-up and restore. SW raid also lets you use external (FW or USB) drives as an option.
Start big. You want 500GB, go for 1-2TB. HD space is cheap. Minimal to start with would be 3 500GB drives (or 4 300GB drives) offering about 1TB of space in RAID 5 configuration. Adding new drives to an existing RAID array is very hard without doing a full backup and restore.
Use LVM. If you need to expand, add another array (either internally or externally) and use LVM to add it to the same logical file system. This reduces SW restrictions and managment related to path information. You also have the option to consolidate arrays at a later time when bigger drives become available.
Use active monitoring. Use something like mdadm to email you (or your cell phone) when drives start failing. Drives will fail!
Don't buy all the drives from the same place at the same time. This may not be an issue, but buying 5 identical drives from the same place at the same time will increase the possiblity of multiple simultaneous drive failures.
If you can afford it, use a rackmount chassis and notebook drives. It will decrease power consumption, heating, and noise issues. However, you will need more drives for the same amount of drive space.
This is personal preference, but use Seagate drives. They have the best warranty and in my experience, the best dependability. Having said that, I've had drives from ALL manufacturers (including Seagate) die before they should.
What doesn't work:
HW RAID (see above)
RAID 0. Avoid like the plague. Seeing as you're doing this for data redundancy, you probably already know this.
Using raid as your backup solution. You still need backups.
Oh yeah, and keep an eye on/proc/mdstat -- when your first disk dies, you want to know it happened, instead of finding out a year later when your second disk dies. (I use a lil' python script that displays the array status on a VFD using lcdproc. But there are lots of other ways to deal with it. Just make sure you deal with it somehow.)
Or use something like mdadm. You can run it in monitor mode to email you (email your cell phone if you're really paranoid) when a disk is failing. Active notification is a lot better, especially if the machine is in a back room somewhere. But yeah, sw raid is really the only solution for portability and expandability.
Smart ass answer: Google for the words Merom, Conroe, or Woodcrest Somewhat useful answer: Wait for the second half of 2006 - your wish will be granted.
All cable companies offering digital cable MUST offer cable cards as of July 1st, 2004. This was by FCC mandate. They don't advertise it, but if your cable company offers digital cable and won't give you a cable card if you ask, report them to the FCC.
Slashdot Mirror
Not really the interpreter, but the language spec. Add the following: ...
- Ability to do static typing when needed
- Add optional dialect to use delimiters instead of whitespace for block and statement scoping that can be enabled and disabled within a file.
- Add ability to specify uniform and auto-vectorized parameters to functions and have the system auto parallelize, vectorize, dispatch to GPU,
Many of these may exist in other languages, but I haven't spent a lot of time looking. I'm mostly a c++ and Python guy. Groovy seems to have a lot of cool features, too, but I find it hard to learn because of the too-loose syntax rules.
Heh, I'm assuming you're referring to this: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt01...
$50 per year for unlimited data, and you can use your own encryption keys to encrypt prior to upload. Will take a loooong time to back up that much data initially, but incremental updates are pretty quick (depending on how quickly you add new media).
Note: Not affiliated with altdrive, just a happy customer. altdrive.com
Intel has a VERY long history of questionable ;) benchmarks, all the way to tweaking processor designs to run benchmark code faster. Microsoft's "Get The Facts" propaganda is just a pale imitation of Intel's history.
Supposedly, benchmarks are written to simulate real workloads. It seems to me that tweaking processor designs to run benchmarks faster is a good idea. If you have a better idea for what applications to design a processor for perhaps you should join a processor company in the workload analysis or planning group.
I agree that Intel, or any company with enough "muscle" (see Nvidia, ATI/AMD, MSFT, IBM, HP, Oracle, etc.), will try to influence the press and show their products in the best possible way, even dishonestly on occasion. I'm not saying that the fact that "everyone does it" makes it right, just that everyone does do it.
I also think that these companies receive a lot of blame for articles / "research reports" like this one that they have absolutely no involvement with. To think that EVERY positive Intel article is funded or influenced by Intel would:
1) Ignore the fact that Intel does make fairly good products most of the time :)
2) Greatly overestimate Intel's marketing prowess.
Where, in any of the linked articles, was any data provided by Intel?
I rather think that they don't get in trouble because their recorded income subject to FICA and medicare is much higher than $1. Salary is not the only form of compensation for them.
For example, I work for Intel. Last year my base salary accounted for about 68% of my taxed income. The rest came from 2 different bonus programs and from stock grants and a discounted stock purchase program. All of that income was recorded on my W2 and taxed appropriately.
I believe for most of $1 salary guys, the cash bonuses are the in high hundreds of thousands and the stock grants are in the millions. That still gets taxed as income and the IRS doesn't have a problem with it. The low salary is done for 2 reasons: 1) Make all of their income dependent on company performance, 2) Morale booster for the rank and file.
Drive from the Canadian border, down through Washington, Oregon, Idaho, etc on the way South to Nevada, and you'll find lots of 83 and 85 octane gas pumps.
This usually depends on the elevation of the region where the gas station is. At high altitudes lower octane gas provides better performance. All of the states you listed contain lots of mountains and mountain passes.
Lower octane fuel actually ignites easier. The reason high-performance cars like high-octane fuel is to increase compression ratios without having the fuel self-ignite. When driving in high altitude there is less oxygen in the air. Having lower-octane fuel helps offset the oxygen level difference.
I once drove through Wyoming using 87 gas and couldn't make it up some of the hills without dropping below the speed limit. Changing to 85 helped a lot. Of course it didn't help that the vehicle was a POS...
Windows NT 3.x = kernel version 3.x
Windows NT 4 = kernel version 4
Windows 2000 = kernel version 5
Windows XP = kernel version 5.1
Windows Vista = kernel version 6
Windows 7 = kernel version 7
Note: Current betas of Win7 are kernel version 6.1, but I'm guessing that it will change before release.
Option "XkbOptions" "ctrl:nocaps"
In MS Windows, try caps-as-ctrl.reg. You will need to reboot after installing.
Because power generally increases at a rate of frequency^3 (that's cubed). Adding more cores generally increases power linearly.
For example. Let's start with a single-core Core 2 @ 2GHz. Let's say it uses 10 W (not sure what the actual number is).
Running it at twice the frequency results in a (2^3) = 8X power increase. So, we can either have a single-core 4 GHz Core 2 at 80W, or we can have a quad-core 2GHz Core 2 at 40W. Which one makes more sense?
Sossaman is not 64-bit enabled (but does support VT). Merom will have the same power usage as Yonah with a 20% performance advantage.
Intel will still sell Yonahs because the die is smaller and not everyone needs 64-bit support (or the additional speed). They will become the "cheap" processor for laptops while still remaining profitable.
Sometimes I wish you could mod comments as "-1 Incorrect" :)
Merom has exactly the same core as Conroe / Woodcrest. In fact, the design team for the Core 2 Duo used the codename "Merom" - not Conroe, not Woodcrest. The only thing that differentiates a Merom from a Conroe is clockspeed and socket (package).
You might have the DX10 runtime and software reference rasterizer on the system, but you are NOT running DX10 with an ATI X1300. DX10 is NOT backwards compatible with DX9 hardware. In order to run DX10, you WILL need to upgrade to a graphics card that isn't publicly available yet.
The big jets are pretty resistant. I've been hit by lightning in a 777 3 times (twice on the same flight!). I've been hit by lighting in a much smaller plane as well. Other than the pretty lights and a loud boom, nothing really happened.
To be honest, Nintendo's keynote was light on any real info. He spent more than half of the keynote going over how the game Brain Age for the DS came about, how they convinced stores to carry it, and had a live demo / showdown of the game with some "friends". The most popular part of this was when he announced that everyone in attendance would be getting a copy of the game (which turned out to be a demo).
:-)
He then talked about Metroid Prime: Hunters, and again had a live deathmatch between some of the developers. He wrapped up the DS segment with a preview of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass (which looks a combination of Link to the Past + Wind Waker).
Finally, he spent a (small) bit of time talking about the Revolution and the Sega / TurboGfx agreements.
His whole keynote stressed that pushing tech for tech's sake wasn't sustainable and that true innovation needed to happen. Nintendo is innovating with their DS, with games like Brain Age, and with the Revolution (controller, content agreements, etc.). All real information + hands-on games will be available at E3.
So, unless you really care about the life of Brain Age, you aren't missing much.
Even if communication from the GPU to the CPU was instantaneous, this would still be a performance bottleneck. GPU's are typically 1-2 frames behind the CPU. If you wanted CPU readback of GPU results, the CPU has to stall until the GPU finishes it's task. It's not the bandwidth (which was limited on AGP) that is the bottleneck, it's the latency.
This is just wrong. Conroe has a 65W TDP. I believe that the FX-60 is pushing 100W (if not over).
Umm, it's not layer upon layer. It's the same encryption with different keys at different times. One set of keys for the cable transmission. One set of keys from the cable-card to the host decoder. One set of keys from the decoder to the display device (if the decoder is not in the display device). None of them are weak encryption. The HDCP system used from the decoder to the display device has been in use for about 3 years, no one has cracked it yet.
:(
Having said all that, I'm not really looking forward to our digital future.
Probably one of the first (and best) examples of comprehensive leaderboard support was Project Gotham Racing 2 for the Xbox. When connected to Xbox Live, every event you completed was uploaded to the leaderboard. I was extremely happy to crack the top 1000 on most boards. The top 10 entries on each board had their "ghost" uploaded so that you could view their record setting run and/or race against it. While there were some issues (they should have created leaderboards for each medal class), on the whole it was extremely well done and contributed greatly to the replayability of the game.
While the dev systems uses intel GMA900 integrated graphics, both the MacBook and new iMac use ATI Radeon X1600 chips.
The iBook and mini may use integrated graphics, but they will probably use newer chipsets with graphics faster than the GMA900.
By all accounts, the new machine's insides are practically designed by Intel. Intel CPU's, Intel chipsets, probably Intel motherboards. While the SW for Intel will definitely get better over time, I doubt the HW will be less bug-prone (it's already very solid).
The only big change on the horizon is the switch to Merom/Conroe/Woodcrest in the second half. This will bring the eventual switch to a fully 64-bit OS X.
What doesn't work:
Or use something like mdadm. You can run it in monitor mode to email you (email your cell phone if you're really paranoid) when a disk is failing. Active notification is a lot better, especially if the machine is in a back room somewhere. But yeah, sw raid is really the only solution for portability and expandability.
Smart ass answer: Google for the words Merom, Conroe, or Woodcrest
Somewhat useful answer: Wait for the second half of 2006 - your wish will be granted.
All cable companies offering digital cable MUST offer cable cards as of July 1st, 2004. This was by FCC mandate. They don't advertise it, but if your cable company offers digital cable and won't give you a cable card if you ask, report them to the FCC.