I've driven "standard" arcade monitors with Voodoo 3 and Geforce 2 MX cards. the V3 had no problem going down to 320x240. The Geforce needed to run at 640x240 min to satisfy its min 12MHz pixclock requirement. Here are the XF86Config Modelines:
I assume the "medium res" 384 line monitors are similar, but don't have the timing handy. If you are developing arcade games, it is very useful to support these monitors, because then you can sell your product in "kit" form that will work with all monitors. Also, for some reason, big arcade resolution monitors are a lot cheaper than VGA arcade monitors.
I played I on a apple ][ and allways wondered what I did with the disks.
I think I still have my disks in a shoebox somewhere along with the old Apple ][+. Usually, I get rid of stuff pretty quickly, but for some reason, I've held onto the old system. I wonder if it still works. Also in the shoebox: Galactic Empire, Apple Panic, Zorks I - III, Ultima III.
Man - I remember the F-F-F-P-P-P well. I sure burned a lot of time on that game on the old Apple ][+. Remember Locksmith and how you needed to use "synchronized" tracks to get it to copy and it didn't work well anyway. The 3D wireframe dungeons were so cool at the time. Ahh - the good old days before responsibility...
So first.NET is a way to require subscription fees to use Windows and Office
Is this true? MS's site addresses some of the technical details and vision issues, which may or may not have substantial merit, but is this.NET thing also an attempt to get people to pay subscriptions for software that has been traditionally paid for once?
C is:
-most simple
-most portable
-most universal
-most concise
-most easy to follow somebody else's code
-most "cut-and-paste-able" from project to project
Ahh - you've stumbled on the singular legacy of our current commander-in-chief: the establishment that blow-jobs don't count as sex. Future generations of young men owe him a debt of gratitude.
I generally agree with you. People certainly should not be in prison for using drugs, but profiting from trafficing hard drugs is immoral and should remain illegal and punished seriously (although not disproportionately as the manditory minimums specify).
If we don't keep up the pressure on hard drug dealers, the price will drop and the use will spread. Moreover, even if I agreed that we should ease up on the "law enforcement" front, it is not politically possible at this point in time.
So right now, we should do what most reasonable people agree about: decriminalize reefer. We would likely see a drop in hard drug use from that act alone by eliminating the need for reefer users to hook up with the underworld.
From the interview: The IES is composed of a combination of Open Source and proprietary elements....
Here's how it breaks down: All driver level code,
API implementations, and kernel code is Open Source and freely available. The only exceptions to this are the components of drivers... and the Xtrema (our UI) API implementation.
Without the serious development $$$, it will lag the X-box in price/performance, so all it really has going for it is its free and open nature. But these guys make their API proprietary. They are shooting themselves in the foot.
It will get hacked as soon as it gets released. It'll be a piece of cake. Of course everybody with their hands on one now has been bought by MS and signed NDAs, so don't expect them to help.
they will take a loss with the hardware and make their $$$ with the software.
Hence, the inevitable linux hacks are a very serious threat. Imagine a kickass web server/firewall for $300 running only open source software subsidized by Mr. Gates and company.
They are in the identical situation to CueCat. We can expect them to behave just like CueCat, if not worse. There will definitely be great entertainment when they attempt to clamp down on us hax0rs.
The 'insiders' will get in at $18.
Trading will open at $45+
First Day runup will be to $80+.
High point will be in first couple weeks.
Now guys - lets remember:
DON'T GET GREEDY. If you've made some good money, sell when the price is up. This stock is no different than any other hyped ipo. Money is there to be made, but the excessively greedy get burned.
I refer to the 700MHz or 800MHz data rate, which corresponds to double the 350MHz, 400MHz clocks for the two current speed grades.
The super-high-end of the market about which you speak is such a small fraction that is really is insignificant. And if the volumes remain low, there is no way Rambus will ever become cost effective.
Do you really think Moore's law would be holding up if there wasn't a shitload of money in it for the people who produced the silicon?
The companies that produce the silicon are entitled to make money and fuel Moore's law. However, RMBS doesn't produce anything except a stack of patent applications.
BTW, I am a practicing EE and earn my living every day working with traces and picoseconds. I learned in EE school years before RMBS existed about synchronous communication and PLLs and DLLs and DRAM circuits. If you were really an EE, you would agree that the concept of "syncronous DRAM" is obvious and therefore not patentable.
RDRAM failed. If their design doesn't work properly or can't be manufactured cost-effectively, they are to be blamed.
They want it both ways. They own the intellectual property, and presumably did the design work, but when it doesn't work, it's Intel's fault.
RMBS will be lucky if RDRAM makes it into any PCs in 2001, including high-end machines.
Intel is smart to dump their asses. If I recall correctly, though, their deal with RMBS prohibits from using non-RMBS memory at >1GB/s for another year or two. That probably explains why they state their future use of SDRAM, not DDR. But they'll need to use DDR to stay competitive. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out.
But the flip side is that for the same parity, Rambus needs 4x the speed.
Today, having a 64 bit data bus is no sweat. But having a 700+MHz bus is a big deal. Hence RMBS's low yields and high costs.
If Rambus had designed their stuff to use the same number of pins and tried for 1.5-2x the speed, they might have had something.
Regarding RDRAM's latency, it may or may not be that bad. I don't know. But in any event, RDRAM contains a great deal of additional circuitry, which drives the cost up even more. Face it. RDRAM is dead.
RMBS claims they own the entire concept of synchronous DRAM. That is akin to owning the concept of a vehicle with 4 wheels. For a patent to be valid, it must be non-obvious to an expert in the field at the time. There are plenty of examples of prior art using synchronous communication in other areas. In my opinion, it was inevitable that DRAM would go synchronous sooner or later. It was RMBS's luck that they secured some key patents.
The fact they have the patents does not prove their contribution to the industry. It merely illustrates how the patent office has turned into a rubber-stamp machine of late.
I'm not opposed to making $$$ in the computer business. I believe they are entitled to every dollar they make from RDRAM. The sad thing (for them) is that they could have won had they used their high speed data communication techniques along with a data path as wide as open standard ram.
Only 3 companies (Hitachi, Toshiba, OKi) have agreed to pay royalties, anyway, and the circumstances of these settlements are highly suspect. They did not disclose the details. The remaining manufacturers, seemingly, are getting together to get RMBS's patents invalidated.
All the settlements prove, anyway, is that the weasel lawyers have taken over our society.
The writing is on the wall for RDRAM. All new designs are using SDRAM and DDR SDRAM.
However, they still cling to life by trying to extort royalties on all synchronous memory. They did "invent" synchronous DRAM after all, and got some patents. Despite the recent flurry of bad news for RMBS, their stock value is still worth >$6B. They are clinging to life on the hope that memory manufacturers will buy them off, rather than risk a jury trial. In the mean time, the RMBS insiders just keep selling, taking in the millions.
These brainwashed OOP zealots are the insane ones.
There is nothing that can be done in C++ that cannot be done in C just as elegantly. All it does is hide the true functionality of the code. In case you haven't noticed, all the best programmers work in C. That's not because they're too stupid to learn C++. It is because they'd rather be in control. It's kinda like how serious driving enthusiasts prefer a manual transmission.
the problem is that it required a full install of Mozilla. I'm sure they created a nice browser interface, but for it to be truly complete, they need to throw out the Mozilla crap they don't need and create and distribute their own lib.
There are plenty of great projects that don't have excessive complexity. For example, I highly recommend the text editor e93.
It is really the individual application's responsibility to employ good form. Bad form by individual applactions is not the fault of unix.
Slashdot Mirror
I've driven "standard" arcade monitors with Voodoo 3 and Geforce 2 MX cards. the V3 had no problem going down to 320x240. The Geforce needed to run at 640x240 min to satisfy its min 12MHz pixclock requirement. Here are the XF86Config Modelines:
Modeline "320x240" 6.29 320 332 380 400 240 246 252 262 +Hsync +Vsync
Modeline "640x240" 12.58 640 664 760 800 240 246 252 262 +Hsync +Vsync
I assume the "medium res" 384 line monitors are similar, but don't have the timing handy. If you are developing arcade games, it is very useful to support these monitors, because then you can sell your product in "kit" form that will work with all monitors. Also, for some reason, big arcade resolution monitors are a lot cheaper than VGA arcade monitors.
Remember trying to balance your good players with the evil ones? And cool spells, like tiltowait and badios?
Don't remember the spells. I think I remember the super-bishop. Remember fighting the ninjas?
Remember Locksmith and setting the parms?
I played I on a apple ][ and allways wondered what I did with the disks.
I think I still have my disks in a shoebox somewhere along with the old Apple ][+. Usually, I get rid of stuff pretty quickly, but for some reason, I've held onto the old system. I wonder if it still works. Also in the shoebox: Galactic Empire, Apple Panic, Zorks I - III, Ultima III.
Man - I remember the F-F-F-P-P-P well. I sure burned a lot of time on that game on the old Apple ][+. Remember Locksmith and how you needed to use "synchronized" tracks to get it to copy and it didn't work well anyway. The 3D wireframe dungeons were so cool at the time. Ahh - the good old days before responsibility...
So first .NET is a way to require subscription fees to use Windows and Office
.NET thing also an attempt to get people to pay subscriptions for software that has been traditionally paid for once?
Is this true? MS's site addresses some of the technical details and vision issues, which may or may not have substantial merit, but is this
C is:
-most simple
-most portable
-most universal
-most concise
-most easy to follow somebody else's code
-most "cut-and-paste-able" from project to project
Ahh - you've stumbled on the singular legacy of our current commander-in-chief: the establishment that blow-jobs don't count as sex. Future generations of young men owe him a debt of gratitude.
I generally agree with you. People certainly should not be in prison for using drugs, but profiting from trafficing hard drugs is immoral and should remain illegal and punished seriously (although not disproportionately as the manditory minimums specify).
If we don't keep up the pressure on hard drug dealers, the price will drop and the use will spread. Moreover, even if I agreed that we should ease up on the "law enforcement" front, it is not politically possible at this point in time.
So right now, we should do what most reasonable people agree about: decriminalize reefer. We would likely see a drop in hard drug use from that act alone by eliminating the need for reefer users to hook up with the underworld.
Why are all drugs lumped together?
Reefer is no worse than alcohol and tobacco. You don't see any reefer addicts selling their babies or bodies to support their habit.
Anybody agree with me?
Micron, Infinion (fka Siemens), and Hyundai are all fighting.
From the interview: ...
Here's how it breaks down: All driver level code,
API implementations, and kernel code is Open Source and freely available. The only exceptions to this are the components of drivers ... and the Xtrema (our UI) API implementation.
The IES is composed of a combination of Open Source and proprietary elements.
Without the serious development $$$, it will lag the X-box in price/performance, so all it really has going for it is its free and open nature. But these guys make their API proprietary. They are shooting themselves in the foot.
It will get hacked as soon as it gets released. It'll be a piece of cake. Of course everybody with their hands on one now has been bought by MS and signed NDAs, so don't expect them to help.
I wouldn't mind using one as an mp3 player.
they will take a loss with the hardware and make their $$$ with the software.
Hence, the inevitable linux hacks are a very serious threat. Imagine a kickass web server/firewall for $300 running only open source software subsidized by Mr. Gates and company.
They are in the identical situation to CueCat. We can expect them to behave just like CueCat, if not worse. There will definitely be great entertainment when they attempt to clamp down on us hax0rs.
The 'insiders' will get in at $18.
Trading will open at $45+
First Day runup will be to $80+.
High point will be in first couple weeks.
Now guys - lets remember: DON'T GET GREEDY. If you've made some good money, sell when the price is up. This stock is no different than any other hyped ipo. Money is there to be made, but the excessively greedy get burned.
I should have seen through you, but this whole RMBS thing pisses me off.
What 700Mhz bus are you talking about?
I refer to the 700MHz or 800MHz data rate, which corresponds to double the 350MHz, 400MHz clocks for the two current speed grades.
The super-high-end of the market about which you speak is such a small fraction that is really is insignificant. And if the volumes remain low, there is no way Rambus will ever become cost effective.
You asked:
Do you really think Moore's law would be holding up if there wasn't a shitload of money in it for the people who produced the silicon?
The companies that produce the silicon are entitled to make money and fuel Moore's law. However, RMBS doesn't produce anything except a stack of patent applications.
BTW, I am a practicing EE and earn my living every day working with traces and picoseconds. I learned in EE school years before RMBS existed about synchronous communication and PLLs and DLLs and DRAM circuits. If you were really an EE, you would agree that the concept of "syncronous DRAM" is obvious and therefore not patentable.
Face the facts, Mr. Brannon.
RDRAM failed. If their design doesn't work properly or can't be manufactured cost-effectively, they are to be blamed.
They want it both ways. They own the intellectual property, and presumably did the design work, but when it doesn't work, it's Intel's fault.
RMBS will be lucky if RDRAM makes it into any PCs in 2001, including high-end machines.
Intel is smart to dump their asses. If I recall correctly, though, their deal with RMBS prohibits from using non-RMBS memory at >1GB/s for another year or two. That probably explains why they state their future use of SDRAM, not DDR. But they'll need to use DDR to stay competitive. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out.
Check it out yourself at pricewatch.com.
2.27x is a significant premium, IMHO.
True, to achieve parity, DDR needs 4x the pins.
But the flip side is that for the same parity, Rambus needs 4x the speed.
Today, having a 64 bit data bus is no sweat. But having a 700+MHz bus is a big deal. Hence RMBS's low yields and high costs.
If Rambus had designed their stuff to use the same number of pins and tried for 1.5-2x the speed, they might have had something.
Regarding RDRAM's latency, it may or may not be that bad. I don't know. But in any event, RDRAM contains a great deal of additional circuitry, which drives the cost up even more. Face it. RDRAM is dead.
SDRAM:
PC66: 66 MHz @ 64 bits = 4224 Mbit/s = 528 MB/s
PC100: 100 MHz @ 64 bits = 6400 Mbit/s = 800 MB/s
PC133: 133 MHz @ 64 bits = 8512 Mbit/s = 1.064 MB/s
DDR SRAM
PC1600: 100MHz x 2 @ 64 bits = 1600 MB/s
PC2100: 133MHz x 2 @ 64 bits = 2128 MB/s
RDRAM
700MHz @ 16 bits = 1400MB/s
800MHz @ 16 bits = 1600MB/s
RMBS will get their asses kicked by DDR, which is faster, cheaper, and has less latency.
I don't get how rmbs is still valued at $6B.
Come on, man.
RMBS claims they own the entire concept of synchronous DRAM. That is akin to owning the concept of a vehicle with 4 wheels. For a patent to be valid, it must be non-obvious to an expert in the field at the time. There are plenty of examples of prior art using synchronous communication in other areas. In my opinion, it was inevitable that DRAM would go synchronous sooner or later. It was RMBS's luck that they secured some key patents.
The fact they have the patents does not prove their contribution to the industry. It merely illustrates how the patent office has turned into a rubber-stamp machine of late.
I'm not opposed to making $$$ in the computer business. I believe they are entitled to every dollar they make from RDRAM. The sad thing (for them) is that they could have won had they used their high speed data communication techniques along with a data path as wide as open standard ram.
Only 3 companies (Hitachi, Toshiba, OKi) have agreed to pay royalties, anyway, and the circumstances of these settlements are highly suspect. They did not disclose the details. The remaining manufacturers, seemingly, are getting together to get RMBS's patents invalidated.
All the settlements prove, anyway, is that the weasel lawyers have taken over our society.
The writing is on the wall for RDRAM. All new designs are using SDRAM and DDR SDRAM.
However, they still cling to life by trying to extort royalties on all synchronous memory. They did "invent" synchronous DRAM after all, and got some patents. Despite the recent flurry of bad news for RMBS, their stock value is still worth >$6B. They are clinging to life on the hope that memory manufacturers will buy them off, rather than risk a jury trial. In the mean time, the RMBS insiders just keep selling, taking in the millions.
Dude - You are definitely not insane.
These brainwashed OOP zealots are the insane ones.
There is nothing that can be done in C++ that cannot be done in C just as elegantly. All it does is hide the true functionality of the code. In case you haven't noticed, all the best programmers work in C. That's not because they're too stupid to learn C++. It is because they'd rather be in control. It's kinda like how serious driving enthusiasts prefer a manual transmission.
the problem is that it required a full install of Mozilla. I'm sure they created a nice browser interface, but for it to be truly complete, they need to throw out the Mozilla crap they don't need and create and distribute their own lib.
There are plenty of great projects that don't have excessive complexity. For example, I highly recommend the text editor e93.
It is really the individual application's responsibility to employ good form. Bad form by individual applactions is not the fault of unix.