It's not single-sign-on beccause you have to fill in your homesite at every different site you log in to. But it doesn't claim to be SSO, either; the submitter mangled the story as usual.
People wine at Sun "Open Java... Open Java... Open Java...".
Those people are whiners anyway; they have no credibility.
And when they finally look at doing so...
You didn't understand the article correctly. Sun is still not planning to open source their VM.
all I see people saying are things like "We already have GJC, you fuckers... we don't need you anymore".
One benefit of open source is that it makes users independent from vendors. Not needing Sun is very important for some people.
Apache made the political mistake of implying that they'll throw away GCJ etc. and start from scratch, which understandably has people in shock at the sheer hubris of it. (Of course, it doesn't matter whether that implication is true or not...)
if the problem is that Java is hard to distribute w/ OSS, shouldn't the solution figure out how to pressure Sun or IBM into distributing Java with OSS?
People have been working on that problem for almost ten years, and no progress has been made. It's time for a different approach.
The article didn't say anything about packet prioritization.
I think Amazon is a good analogy. Amazon advertises over the Internet, but they aren't exempt from false advertising laws. They also aren't exempt from sales tax (in some states). etc.
I was talking about heterogeneous microarchitecture but homogenous ISA chips (e.g. one big x86 and one small x86). Heterogeneous ISAs look good for embedded systems but I don't think they'd work in the desktop/server market.
What might be doable is running one core on one clock multiplier, and runnning the other core on a different (much lower) clock multiplier, and disabling the faster core when the proc is under a low load...
Some of my coworkers did some research showing that the best thing to do for server apps is to run both cores at the same frequency, and adjust the frequency to match the workload. For desktop machines, I suspect you should either run both cores at full frequency or disable the second core (as in Yonah). I think there are few situations where you'd want different frequencies.
Slashdot Mirror
Some Cell patches have been posted to linux-kernel already.
Difficult as it is, I think most programmers would rather learn multithreading than functional programming.
If you need this, you need it bad.
Conversely, if you don't need it (because you've already decided on a cluster), then you really don't need it.
"Compliance" is already a mini-industry with the usual big players and plenty of startups.
Email is so small that it's cheaper to keep everything.
That sounds like Passwd Composer.
You can't design, manufacture, and ship new hardware in 120 days.
What if I get a free blog, and after some time, they make me pay.
Free services are scams.
How am I suppost to take my OpenID with me?
Run your own OpenID server using a domain name that you own.
And what keeps me from making a blog site and using OpenID. When someone posts to my site, what keeps me from getting their password?
Only your homesite sees your password.
A site could support multiple identity systems.
It's not single-sign-on beccause you have to fill in your homesite at every different site you log in to. But it doesn't claim to be SSO, either; the submitter mangled the story as usual.
This is explained on the Web page.
Blu-Ray will either use AACS or something even worse. This is Sony we're talking about.
VoIP isn't exactly the least demanding application ever.
Yeah, I think ping is the least demanding application. 60-80kbps is not a lot of bandwidth.
Can TiVos get content from the Internet?
In theory it's possible if you have the TiVo connected to a broadband Internet connection.
First TiVo would need to design new boxes that support modern codecs. Then these companies would have to make deals with TiVo.
People wine at Sun "Open Java... Open Java... Open Java...".
Those people are whiners anyway; they have no credibility.
And when they finally look at doing so...
You didn't understand the article correctly. Sun is still not planning to open source their VM.
all I see people saying are things like "We already have GJC, you fuckers... we don't need you anymore".
One benefit of open source is that it makes users independent from vendors. Not needing Sun is very important for some people.
Apache made the political mistake of implying that they'll throw away GCJ etc. and start from scratch, which understandably has people in shock at the sheer hubris of it. (Of course, it doesn't matter whether that implication is true or not...)
if the problem is that Java is hard to distribute w/ OSS, shouldn't the solution figure out how to pressure Sun or IBM into distributing Java with OSS?
People have been working on that problem for almost ten years, and no progress has been made. It's time for a different approach.
Blackdown was never open source.
Even though "anyone can write a Java VM", so far there isn't a complete open source Java VM. If Apache wants to build one I'm not going to complain.
Those 8-layer discs are just prototypes; they're not included in the spec and Blu-ray players won't play them.
The article didn't say anything about packet prioritization.
I think Amazon is a good analogy. Amazon advertises over the Internet, but they aren't exempt from false advertising laws. They also aren't exempt from sales tax (in some states). etc.
Use the SVideo out port on your video card.
You mean after I buy a computer to put in my living room? No thanks.
That makes sense, although I wonder how long it would take to convert two hours of H.264 to MPEG-2.
Except for one thing: How do I watch iTunes movies on my TV?
I was talking about heterogeneous microarchitecture but homogenous ISA chips (e.g. one big x86 and one small x86). Heterogeneous ISAs look good for embedded systems but I don't think they'd work in the desktop/server market.
What might be doable is running one core on one clock multiplier, and runnning the other core on a different (much lower) clock multiplier, and disabling the faster core when the proc is under a low load...
Some of my coworkers did some research showing that the best thing to do for server apps is to run both cores at the same frequency, and adjust the frequency to match the workload. For desktop machines, I suspect you should either run both cores at full frequency or disable the second core (as in Yonah). I think there are few situations where you'd want different frequencies.
Of course, you could also put a bunch of simple, power-efficient x86 cores (VIA/Centaur C3) on one chip. It has nothing to do with RISC vs. CISC.