I don't see why they can't. As soon as Google informs you that you are not permitted to access their map images unless you agree to their terms you should have to comply. If you don't know of the terms you may be able to legitimately say "I used a standard protocol," but once you've been informed of a condition for accessing someone elses property/server then you're on notice.
Fuck this -- we have always gone with the best chip out there, starting with the 6502, and we always will.
If that were the case they'd be using AMD chips. There is clearly something more to this deal...an agreement on margins, help with platform development, etc. We'll know over the next year what else is driving this.
Reading the cooltechzone article on AMD, I'm wondering if they bothered to check out anything they wrote or if they just made the whole thing up. First they say "AMD continues to strike out many of the world's largest PC OEMs, such as Dell." But Dell is actually the only significant OEM left that does not sell any AMD systems. And the unknown on fab 36 is not unknown at all...volume product will begin next year, which should easily meet Apple's needs.
If anything is causing Apple to go single-vendor with Intel I think it is either their willingness to sell a lot of parts are really low margins or chipset support or some other intangible. Right now AMD's CPU division is too profitable to give too many concessions to a new vendor, even a large one. Personally I think there is a decent chance that AMD will be in the PowerMacs of tomorrow since they are so superior in performance. But that will play out over the next year or so.
I've always been an AMD fan; their chips are better. I don't understand why they can't come out with a 1.8 Ghz or even 1.6 Ghz Dual Core chip at around 200 dollars, and simply trounce all the competition. Right now, what they're doing is "Oh Look! Here's some shiny new chips. Shame you can't afford them."
Why would AMD sell you a chip for $200 when they can sell it for $550-1000? They've got a chip that outperforms the Intel counterparts and would be stupid not to sell them for premium prices when there is that level of demand. AMD will no doubt introduce a cheaper dual core once it is economically sensible to do so.
Auto companies often recall their cars based on problems in less than 10 cars. And a lot of times it is questionable if it was even a problem in the part or damage after manufacturing.
Its amazing there aren't more recalls considering how little is necessary to actually trigger one.
I had a dell notebook once that had a battery recall. I didn't even know about the recall until one day I found an Airborn Express box on my porch with a new battery and a prepaid box to return the old one. After returning it I promptly got an ADDITIONAL battery and a $30 gift certificate to Dell's website as a thankyou/sorry. I thought that was pretty cool of them, the recall consumed about 2 minutes of my time to seal the battery in the return box, and I got a bunch of free stuff out of it too.
The interesting thing here is that you're totally welcome to use segmentation in protected mode, its just that no one does. The paging mechanisms almost, but not quite, duplicate the protection offered by enforcing segmentation.
Right now modern operating systems simply set the segmentation registers to have a base of 0 and a limit of the end of memory, thus creating one big segment. You could have segments as well as paging, but that would be a pain in the ass. Of course we now see the problem with failing to use the segmentation registers, but the addition of the NX bit pretty much solves that. Now if we can just get people to recompile to USE the NX bit.
The cool thing about Google is that if the european site ends up being really useful, they might cross link to their content (like with answers.com or mapquest or whatever). Google has proven that they will give users the option of their own product and other well known products.
Do you believe that Apple / Jobs are bullying Wiley? Do you honestly think that Apple's online store is responsible for a noticable percentage of Wiley's sales?
The question is not whether this hurts Wiley's sales. The question is, does this lower APPLE profits? If it does, then Steve Jobs is dead wrong to do this. It doesn't matter if he "is" the company. His highest responsibility is maximizing profits for the owners of the company.
I am curious though, I wonder if the 64-bit Windows version can easily switch to 32-bit, a la Solaris?
I'm not sure I get why you would want to do this. 32-bit software runs on 64-bit windows, so I can't imagine why you would want to switch between a 32-bit and 64-bit version of the OS. The only 32-bit software that wont work anymore is drivers.
Incidentally, there is one switch from 32- to 64-bit in this version of windows...because the OS must start in real mode, switch to 32-bit protected mode, then switch into 64-bit long mode.
Yes I have. Sun has reduced their loss from 1.2 Billion to 27 million QonQ, and their hardware sales growth has been strong and steady. So I think they've certainely improved although they have a lot of work to do.
Give me a break. Sun has been growing and recovering quite well lately, without the GPL. This is in no small part due to their new sever lines (yes, Sun is in no small part a hardware company). You are making a mistake if you look at them as a company like Red Hat. They are much much different.
It is pretty arrogant to assume that the GPL is the key to making or breaking a company.
I think Hyperthreading is important for Intel more because of their deep pipeline, although the increased memory latency makes it help too. The main issue is that on a branch mispredict or other stall you can end up with a much larger bubble on an Intel pipeline as compared to an AMD pipeline. So, by keeping some extra work hanging around they can keep execution units busy while the bubble passes.
This is one reason why AMD hasn't implemented this yet...they wouldn't see as much benefit, so the effort of implementation is not worth it.
This is pretty disasterous for Intel. The game benchmarks show significant performance penalties for dual core chips, as expected. Intel launched its dual core specifically as an Extreme Edition for games.
On other benchmarks the AMD dual core gets 10-20% better performance! SiSoft Sandra is an exception, where there is a mixed bag between the two processors.
This pretty much verifies for me that Intel did a seriously rushed cludge to get this thing out the door. The only reason I can think of to target this to gamers is that no OEMs would want to buy them for server or desktop use, so you have to target people who like the latest technology even if it isn't that great.
AMD on the other hand seems to have a pretty good product here. I can't wait until the desktop versions come out.
Is this post a joke? I am usually found defending windows around here against overly harsh criticism, but this post makes absolutely no sense. Every (or nearly every) major company uses linux systems already, linux is not shareware, you don't put experimental systems into a production server pool, of COURSE linux has SMP and journaled filesystem support, etc.
I have to assume this is trolling...
Re:It would not be good for Dell's bottom line
on
Dell Still Intel Only
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
You don't seem to understand that we're talking servers here. Those are not Dell's razor thin margin products, and they're already all very specialized. Adding AMD chips wouldn't be a big deal in the server space, IMO. The reality is that Intel pays Dell not to do it. Understandable that Dell then doesn't, but it isn't an issue of infrastructure or technology.
Your analogy is all wrong. The xbox and PS2 are completely different architectures...there is no way you could make them interoperable without a complete emulation.
On the other hand, the iPod and other players are all capable of players all the same formats. AAC is an open standard, Fairplay is not. So it is an artificial limitation that I oppose.
What this is really quite similar to is region encoding on DVDs. 100% bullshit artificial restriction.
Hmm, the commercials before movies are really crappy in the US. They're usually an incredibly obnoxious Mountain Dew commercial or something. And pretty much every movie trailer has been "approved for all audiences" no matter if you're at Finding Nemo or Sin City.
In fact, I think I'll write a letter to my senator demaning R-rated previews at R-rated movies:)
They are? How exactly would you propose to create a chip that can run 32-bit and 64-bit applications without having a mode for each? Compatibility mode and 64-bit mode can be switched between with not a single instruction to the processor. You just set a bit in the code segment descriptor to indicate what mode it should be run in and the processor does it. Not one waste cycle switching between modes.
Re:Is there a list of softare ready for it?
on
Windows XP X64 Goes Gold
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Here are the gripes I have: Drivers must be 64-bit == Most Drivers 'cept nVidia and a select few others are 32.Net Framework 64 is "out" With the lack of driver support, running XP-64 is a hit or miss operation currently.
FYI, 64-bit drivers are required when running in 64-bit long mode on the processor. So it isn't an artificial limitation of Windows 64, but rather a requirement imposed by the processor.
For those who aren't real familiar with AMD64 architecture, it works basically like this: The processor starts in real mode, and at some point the operating system sets up the necessary mechanisms to support protection, paging, interrupts, etc. At the point it switches the processor into protected mode which is where all modern operating system and code run. There is also a virtual 8086 mode to run native DOS type applications, which is where the run dialog in windows executes. These three modes are known collectively as legacy mode.
From protected mode if you want to run 64-bit code you need to switch into long mode, which is a collective name for 64-bit mode and compatibility mode. 64-bit mode is a pure 64-bit environment. The operating system must run in this mode, and all drivers must be 64-bit. I believe this is because interrupts automatically switch the processor into 64-bit mode. On a code segment by code segment basis you can also run in compatibility mode, which allows 32-bit code to be run in long mode. That is how all the current 32-bit apps will be able to run even in long mode. so from protected mode the OS must switch into compatibility mode, then into 64-bit mode to run 64-bit code. Once in compatibility mode any interrupt will force a switch to 64-bit mode, which is why drivers need to be 64-bit.
Its also worth noting that switching from 64-bit mode to compatibility mode and back has been designed to have no performance penalty.
You wont take a card without a signature, but you will take a card with a signature that doesn't match the signature on the charge slip? That is completely fucking stupid.
VISA (I don't know about Discover) *specifically* says not to write "see id" on the back. The card isn't valid.
As stupid as this is, you are right. I just found on VISA.com a page that says "see id" can't be used. However, it then says that they can sign the card on the spot, ask for government identification and compare the signatures.
It almost defies logic that VISA doesn't allow them to just compare the signature on the charge slip with the government ID, but companies are stupid. Still, the OP was obviously wrong when he said he couldn't allow them to sign the card on the spot. That is exactly what VISA tells merchants to do.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't see why they can't. As soon as Google informs you that you are not permitted to access their map images unless you agree to their terms you should have to comply. If you don't know of the terms you may be able to legitimately say "I used a standard protocol," but once you've been informed of a condition for accessing someone elses property/server then you're on notice.
If that were the case they'd be using AMD chips. There is clearly something more to this deal...an agreement on margins, help with platform development, etc. We'll know over the next year what else is driving this.
If anything is causing Apple to go single-vendor with Intel I think it is either their willingness to sell a lot of parts are really low margins or chipset support or some other intangible. Right now AMD's CPU division is too profitable to give too many concessions to a new vendor, even a large one. Personally I think there is a decent chance that AMD will be in the PowerMacs of tomorrow since they are so superior in performance. But that will play out over the next year or so.
Why would AMD sell you a chip for $200 when they can sell it for $550-1000? They've got a chip that outperforms the Intel counterparts and would be stupid not to sell them for premium prices when there is that level of demand. AMD will no doubt introduce a cheaper dual core once it is economically sensible to do so.
Its amazing there aren't more recalls considering how little is necessary to actually trigger one.
I had a dell notebook once that had a battery recall. I didn't even know about the recall until one day I found an Airborn Express box on my porch with a new battery and a prepaid box to return the old one. After returning it I promptly got an ADDITIONAL battery and a $30 gift certificate to Dell's website as a thankyou/sorry. I thought that was pretty cool of them, the recall consumed about 2 minutes of my time to seal the battery in the return box, and I got a bunch of free stuff out of it too.
Right now modern operating systems simply set the segmentation registers to have a base of 0 and a limit of the end of memory, thus creating one big segment. You could have segments as well as paging, but that would be a pain in the ass. Of course we now see the problem with failing to use the segmentation registers, but the addition of the NX bit pretty much solves that. Now if we can just get people to recompile to USE the NX bit.
The cool thing about Google is that if the european site ends up being really useful, they might cross link to their content (like with answers.com or mapquest or whatever). Google has proven that they will give users the option of their own product and other well known products.
The question is not whether this hurts Wiley's sales. The question is, does this lower APPLE profits? If it does, then Steve Jobs is dead wrong to do this. It doesn't matter if he "is" the company. His highest responsibility is maximizing profits for the owners of the company.
And I think you've missed the point...most people don't give a shit whether it is free as in anything as long as it does what they need.
I'm not sure I get why you would want to do this. 32-bit software runs on 64-bit windows, so I can't imagine why you would want to switch between a 32-bit and 64-bit version of the OS. The only 32-bit software that wont work anymore is drivers.
Incidentally, there is one switch from 32- to 64-bit in this version of windows...because the OS must start in real mode, switch to 32-bit protected mode, then switch into 64-bit long mode.
Yes I have. Sun has reduced their loss from 1.2 Billion to 27 million QonQ, and their hardware sales growth has been strong and steady. So I think they've certainely improved although they have a lot of work to do.
It is pretty arrogant to assume that the GPL is the key to making or breaking a company.
This is one reason why AMD hasn't implemented this yet...they wouldn't see as much benefit, so the effort of implementation is not worth it.
On other benchmarks the AMD dual core gets 10-20% better performance! SiSoft Sandra is an exception, where there is a mixed bag between the two processors.
This pretty much verifies for me that Intel did a seriously rushed cludge to get this thing out the door. The only reason I can think of to target this to gamers is that no OEMs would want to buy them for server or desktop use, so you have to target people who like the latest technology even if it isn't that great.
AMD on the other hand seems to have a pretty good product here. I can't wait until the desktop versions come out.
Typical double standard. I don't see people bitching about Mozilla projects using a similar license.
I guess I'm naieve...I generally only read at higher moderation levels, but I went to score 0 on this one. Whoops ;)
I have to assume this is trolling...
You don't seem to understand that we're talking servers here. Those are not Dell's razor thin margin products, and they're already all very specialized. Adding AMD chips wouldn't be a big deal in the server space, IMO. The reality is that Intel pays Dell not to do it. Understandable that Dell then doesn't, but it isn't an issue of infrastructure or technology.
On the other hand, the iPod and other players are all capable of players all the same formats. AAC is an open standard, Fairplay is not. So it is an artificial limitation that I oppose.
What this is really quite similar to is region encoding on DVDs. 100% bullshit artificial restriction.
In fact, I think I'll write a letter to my senator demaning R-rated previews at R-rated movies
They are? How exactly would you propose to create a chip that can run 32-bit and 64-bit applications without having a mode for each? Compatibility mode and 64-bit mode can be switched between with not a single instruction to the processor. You just set a bit in the code segment descriptor to indicate what mode it should be run in and the processor does it. Not one waste cycle switching between modes.
FYI, 64-bit drivers are required when running in 64-bit long mode on the processor. So it isn't an artificial limitation of Windows 64, but rather a requirement imposed by the processor.
For those who aren't real familiar with AMD64 architecture, it works basically like this: The processor starts in real mode, and at some point the operating system sets up the necessary mechanisms to support protection, paging, interrupts, etc. At the point it switches the processor into protected mode which is where all modern operating system and code run. There is also a virtual 8086 mode to run native DOS type applications, which is where the run dialog in windows executes. These three modes are known collectively as legacy mode.
From protected mode if you want to run 64-bit code you need to switch into long mode, which is a collective name for 64-bit mode and compatibility mode. 64-bit mode is a pure 64-bit environment. The operating system must run in this mode, and all drivers must be 64-bit. I believe this is because interrupts automatically switch the processor into 64-bit mode. On a code segment by code segment basis you can also run in compatibility mode, which allows 32-bit code to be run in long mode. That is how all the current 32-bit apps will be able to run even in long mode. so from protected mode the OS must switch into compatibility mode, then into 64-bit mode to run 64-bit code. Once in compatibility mode any interrupt will force a switch to 64-bit mode, which is why drivers need to be 64-bit.
Its also worth noting that switching from 64-bit mode to compatibility mode and back has been designed to have no performance penalty.
You wont take a card without a signature, but you will take a card with a signature that doesn't match the signature on the charge slip? That is completely fucking stupid.
As stupid as this is, you are right. I just found on VISA.com a page that says "see id" can't be used. However, it then says that they can sign the card on the spot, ask for government identification and compare the signatures.
It almost defies logic that VISA doesn't allow them to just compare the signature on the charge slip with the government ID, but companies are stupid. Still, the OP was obviously wrong when he said he couldn't allow them to sign the card on the spot. That is exactly what VISA tells merchants to do.