If it's being released tomorrow, why not post the story tomorrow when the site will actually work? (Usually people complain about Slashdot being a day behind all the other news sites, so this is a new one for me.)
I remember when the 8800GT came out at "$200-250"; in reality it was more like $270-320. Reviewers had to publish mea culpas for misleading prospective buyers.
I'm all in favor of openness and thus I don't plan to buy an iPhone, but it sounds like Google has to look pretty far to find advantages for Android. These "flaws" in the iPhone are obscure enough that I don't think most regular people would even understand them.
It's interesting to note that iPhone doesn't allow interpreted code... while Android doesn't allow native code. Which one of these is more "open"?
Can anyone tell me whether EFI (replacement of BIOS), provides a better way of talking with the hardware for power management needs? I think EFI still uses ACPI for power management, so it's the same old fail.
AIR apps are desktop apps, period. They can access all your files, listen on sockets, draw non-rectangular windows, etc. As long as you treat them like desktop apps (by thinking before installing), there's no problem.
One of the most mouth-watering proposed uses for HT3 that I've heard of was the possibility for an external HT3 bus on a machine which could be used to link together multiple physical machines into one giant NUMA beast. Horus was so mouth-watering that it may have driven Newisys out of business.
Couldn't see details, but this may use Sun's hypertransport switch as an interconnect. Sun doesn't make a Hypertransport switch and Ranger uses Infiniband just like other high-end x86 clusters.
Is it at all possible to automatically port any nontrivial z6 software to PPC, if it doesn't require the actually different HW of the z6 (or its much higher performance)? Sure, zLinux software can be trivially recompiled for Linux/PPC. But if you're talking about real legacy mainframe code, of course IBM doesn't want people to switch to a cheaper platform. (And I think you mean much higher reliability.)
Any possibility to run PPC SW on a z6, with some automatic porting for the higher performance? Most PPC software is written in C, so you can just recompile it for zLinux if you want to run it slower.
Seriously though, while you may have a point about the trouble of renumbering your internal networks, you have the same problem in IPV6, except in IPV6 you have to renumber every time you change ISPs. Large organizations don't renumber because they get PI addresses.
The problem is that they use a lot of those adresses for internal machines, that should really be using NAT for. Imagine that FooCorp and BarCorp both decide to be "responsible" Internet users and configure their networks to use 10.0.0.0/8 internally and use NAT to access the Internet. Now FooCorp and BarCorp merge and decide to merge their networks to "optimize IT efficiency" or whatever. Except they can't merge the networks without renumbering because they have duplicate addresses everywhere. This is just one scenario where unique internal IP addresses are useful.
Pardon my ignorange, but why can't we use some of those "green" blocks? Those blocks are available today but will all be allocated by 2012. The question is what to do after that.
I disagree. These performance functions really should be integrated into system libraries like zlib, libjpeg and GStreamer, but the developers of those libraries wouldn't touch APL when it was proprietary. Now that it's open, at least open source developers will be willing to look at it. It won't guarantee success, but now it has a chance.
Didn't we just read that chroot "jails" are not secure? I've read those arguments and find them confusing. Sure, root can break out of a chroot, but what about non-root users?
In multicore systems each core can only talk to two other cores. With a quad core system, each core cant directly talk to the core diagonal to it which slows things down. That's not correct. In the Phenom, all four cores are connected to the crossbar and can communicate equally.
I've been wondering, does there exist hardware accelerators usable by OpenSSL or GnuTLS? There's VIA PadLock; too bad you have to buy the slowest processor to get the fastest crypto.
If, for some reason, your application required many hundreds of 2U servers to host it, you could replace it with a single rack of Blue Gene, and save some floor space and power. However, for most applications, which use a couple dozen web servers, it seems like overkill. If you only need a few, the idea is that you rent them, EC2-style.
You say that "6to4 requires no configuration or state in the network" so how does the network know that I'm using 6to4?
The network doesn't know anything about 6to4, because 6to4 encapsulates everything in normal IPv4 packets which the network treats like any other traffic. Packets from one 6to4 host to another go directly between those hosts (no triangular routing like with tunnel brokers) and packets between a 6to4 host and a "native" IPv6 host go through a stateless relay which is located using anycast to a well-know IP address. The only special configuration required on the relay is to enable 6to4 relaying; it doesn't need to know which hosts will use it.
Most people don't understand anything about IP, yet they use the Internet just fine. If your OS or router enables 6to4 automatically then you don't need to know anything.
6to4 is pretty similar to configured tunnels, but it structures its IPv6 addresses in such a way that each endpoint can automatically discover the IPv4 address of the other endpoint. Thus 6to4 requires no configuration or state in the network.
Slashdot Mirror
If it's being released tomorrow, why not post the story tomorrow when the site will actually work? (Usually people complain about Slashdot being a day behind all the other news sites, so this is a new one for me.)
Also, this is a Slashvertisement.
Try tmpfs instead of a ramdisk.
I remember when the 8800GT came out at "$200-250"; in reality it was more like $270-320. Reviewers had to publish mea culpas for misleading prospective buyers.
I'm all in favor of openness and thus I don't plan to buy an iPhone, but it sounds like Google has to look pretty far to find advantages for Android. These "flaws" in the iPhone are obscure enough that I don't think most regular people would even understand them.
It's interesting to note that iPhone doesn't allow interpreted code... while Android doesn't allow native code. Which one of these is more "open"?
AIR apps are desktop apps, period. They can access all your files, listen on sockets, draw non-rectangular windows, etc. As long as you treat them like desktop apps (by thinking before installing), there's no problem.
ESM is for P2P live streaming, but the future of TV isn't live (except sports). For non-live data distribution, BitTorrent is the current leader.
Did you invent the term? Why is your definition correct and all others wrong?
I disagree. These performance functions really should be integrated into system libraries like zlib, libjpeg and GStreamer, but the developers of those libraries wouldn't touch APL when it was proprietary. Now that it's open, at least open source developers will be willing to look at it. It won't guarantee success, but now it has a chance.
This looks like the same old FairPlay crack, just with a better GUI. It doesn't strip any other kind of DRM.
With a quad core system, each core cant directly talk to the core diagonal to it which slows things down. That's not correct. In the Phenom, all four cores are connected to the crossbar and can communicate equally.
AFAIK, TrustBearer does not use Paypal's token; it uses a smartcard that requires drivers.
They probably won't reveal the absolute power consumption for competitive reasons.
You say that "6to4 requires no configuration or state in the network" so how does the network know that I'm using 6to4?
The network doesn't know anything about 6to4, because 6to4 encapsulates everything in normal IPv4 packets which the network treats like any other traffic. Packets from one 6to4 host to another go directly between those hosts (no triangular routing like with tunnel brokers) and packets between a 6to4 host and a "native" IPv6 host go through a stateless relay which is located using anycast to a well-know IP address. The only special configuration required on the relay is to enable 6to4 relaying; it doesn't need to know which hosts will use it.
Do all of your machines need to be publicly accessible? Subnets for the win.
Public machines use subnets too, you know. Besides, the promise of IP was one address for every machine, not every public server.
(Speaking as someone using many addresses inside 9/8.)
Most people don't understand anything about IP, yet they use the Internet just fine. If your OS or router enables 6to4 automatically then you don't need to know anything.
6to4 is pretty similar to configured tunnels, but it structures its IPv6 addresses in such a way that each endpoint can automatically discover the IPv4 address of the other endpoint. Thus 6to4 requires no configuration or state in the network.