My understanding is that MathML isn't really intended for writing directly (though, of course, you could). Rather, it's an open standard for implementation in other programs.
Of course, it shouldn't be to hard to create a LaTeX -> MathML filter?
What I found especially interesting was the range of devices that MIPS chips are used in. It occurred to me that very few people probably need a 2GHz P4 in their inkjet printers and mobile phones.
I attended a lecture by Prof. Barak in Edinburgh sometime ago (so this next bit is fuzzy), but this is as I understand it;
Mosix started as a means of building high performance computing facilities, in the face of the export ban of HPC machines out of the US. It wasn't built to provide an excellent open clustering system, but to provide HPC facilites to University of (? Lebanon ?). I wouldn't be surprised if the military were involved. But certainly, it's been the University that's been paying the bills as it were, and so they'll have some (considerable, I suspect) say in what's going on.
Professor Barak struck me as a man very devoted to his work (he did give us a lecture in Edinburgh, after all), so don't diss him too readily.
This was all a while ago mind you, things may well have changed (drastically) since then.
This is because Linux has a macrokernel architecture - everything's compiled into "the kernel", which is a hassle for some people, but increases execution speed.
As I understand it, WinNT uses a microkernel architecture - the kernel proper does the bare minimum it can get away with, and the rest is handled by higher-level "services", which in theory can be worked on and upgraded without disturbing the microkernel.
Actually, Linux is somewhere between these, owing to the modules system. I agree though that it would be nice if modules were so reliant of what version of the kernel you were using. I don't know about the practicalities of this.
CCC/Harvest from CA uses Oracle at the backend, but I think that's only for version diff info. It's pretty cool for tracking specific revisions throughout different levels of release of code, but it's a pig to use if you're a coder.
Actually, IBM was doing this a long time ago. Owing to the cost of their hardware, companies started producing hardware that did the same job as IBM kit, but without the ability to upgrade the microcode. They ran faster (I believe), and were much cheaper. However, IBM put a stop to it, I think by changing the microcode and the OS binaries. Then the clone kit wouldn't run the new software, and that was that.
Would it be possible to include the Windows and Linux binaries in the box set then, making the data files available to both, but in one package? That way, no distribution channnels would need to change, and Linux users could buy games in their local games store.
OK, it's not quite the same, but Ars Technica have had a premium membership service that gives you access to technical PDFs and other info not normally available. Apparently it's been quite successful, so there's some sort of a market for paid-content.
Of course, it's always amusing watching free software advocates (who think software should be free/beer) whine about Microsoft giving away software for free.
This is a troll. Either that, or you don't understand the difference between free (as in beer) software and free (as in speech) software.
In any case, it's not free software - you still need to fork out for a licence for the OS to run the programs (you are paying for your software, aren't you? Thatta boy). Once you're on MS upgrade merri-go-round, they've got you by the balls unless you jump ship to $ALTERNATE_OS_OF_CHOICE. Hardly free, is it?
From what I understand, the need for so much bandwidth is due to the new particle accelerator at CERN, which'll be coming on line in a few years time. When that gets run, it'll generate data in the region of gigabits/s; that's why there's all these massive data pipes pointing at Switzerland - it's to shunt off all the data around Europe to get processed!
Slashdot Mirror
My understanding is that MathML isn't really intended for writing directly (though, of course, you could). Rather, it's an open standard for implementation in other programs.
Of course, it shouldn't be to hard to create a LaTeX -> MathML filter?
What I found especially interesting was the range of devices that MIPS chips are used in. It occurred to me that very few people probably need a 2GHz P4 in their inkjet printers and mobile phones.
I attended a lecture by Prof. Barak in Edinburgh sometime ago (so this next bit is fuzzy), but this is as I understand it;
Mosix started as a means of building high performance computing facilities, in the face of the export ban of HPC machines out of the US. It wasn't built to provide an excellent open clustering system, but to provide HPC facilites to University of (? Lebanon ?). I wouldn't be surprised if the military were involved. But certainly, it's been the University that's been paying the bills as it were, and so they'll have some (considerable, I suspect) say in what's going on.
Professor Barak struck me as a man very devoted to his work (he did give us a lecture in Edinburgh, after all), so don't diss him too readily.
This was all a while ago mind you, things may well have changed (drastically) since then.
This is because Linux has a macrokernel architecture - everything's compiled into "the kernel", which is a hassle for some people, but increases execution speed.
As I understand it, WinNT uses a microkernel architecture - the kernel proper does the bare minimum it can get away with, and the rest is handled by higher-level "services", which in theory can be worked on and upgraded without disturbing the microkernel.
Actually, Linux is somewhere between these, owing to the modules system. I agree though that it would be nice if modules were so reliant of what version of the kernel you were using. I don't know about the practicalities of this.
CCC/Harvest from CA uses Oracle at the backend, but I think that's only for version diff info. It's pretty cool for tracking specific revisions throughout different levels of release of code, but it's a pig to use if you're a coder.
Actually, IBM was doing this a long time ago. Owing to the cost of their hardware, companies started producing hardware that did the same job as IBM kit, but without the ability to upgrade the microcode. They ran faster (I believe), and were much cheaper. However, IBM put a stop to it, I think by changing the microcode and the OS binaries. Then the clone kit wouldn't run the new software, and that was that.
Would it be possible to include the Windows and Linux binaries in the box set then, making the data files available to both, but in one package? That way, no distribution channnels would need to change, and Linux users could buy games in their local games store.
OK, it's not quite the same, but Ars Technica have had a premium membership service that gives you access to technical PDFs and other info not normally available. Apparently it's been quite successful, so there's some sort of a market for paid-content.
Of course, it's always amusing watching free software advocates (who think software should be free/beer) whine about Microsoft giving away software for free.
This is a troll. Either that, or you don't understand the difference between free (as in beer) software and free (as in speech) software.
In any case, it's not free software - you still need to fork out for a licence for the OS to run the programs (you are paying for your software, aren't you? Thatta boy). Once you're on MS upgrade merri-go-round, they've got you by the balls unless you jump ship to $ALTERNATE_OS_OF_CHOICE. Hardly free, is it?
Ever heard of sarcasm?
From what I understand, the need for so much bandwidth is due to the new particle accelerator at CERN, which'll be coming on line in a few years time. When that gets run, it'll generate data in the region of gigabits/s; that's why there's all these massive data pipes pointing at Switzerland - it's to shunt off all the data around Europe to get processed!