Guess no one else has been paying attention. FPGA's can run at much higher clock frequencies then current CPU's because of fundamental architectural differences. This is what the new HAL hyper-computer (and others) are based on. I read the SA article and it's ground-breaking ideas with a reasonable plan to enable them. Amazing syncronicity that Transmeta's latest patent application would also come out today; read the fine print and you will see that it is also about software changing hardware. All these advances have in common increasing the association of data with processing (the operands with the operators).
I have just started looking into this. For TV quality, video capture cards are still expensive (see http://linuxmedialabs.com/ @ $410). While with enough compression (3.5 - 30) any bandwidth is supported, to do "TV quality" (much less DTV) you are pushing the limits of bus and hard drive speed. Altho' I'm sure a Quantum Atlas 10k 18Gb harddrive would handle it, that'd be $800+! And software under linux for this is still quite rudimentary. So for now, the Tivo player is quite a good deal - just wish they'd open up to the do-it-yourselfer's - a kit or card or software...? I wouldn't buy a Tivo because I'd expect so much more out of PC/TV integration - to quote from Steve Perlman in Wired: 1) Internet TV - web/email 2) response TV - audience survey 3) enhanced TV - web, tv guide, vcr functions 4) digital VCR - programming, user preferences 5) personal TV - virtual channels, audio/video on demand, etc Those of us with cable modems see a vast untapped potential. We're just starting to see streaming MP3's, but streaming video is pitiful and most of the internet is shrouded in darkness...
Re:I am no troll but you need some corrections her
on
EDA: Unix vs. NT
·
· Score: 1
worse than an ignorant troll... >1.)First off my point is that unix is a hell to setup compared to NT No it's not! "out of the box" many unix installations are far easier. You are comparing the one and only monolithic NT system install to an infinitely variable range of unix installations. My experience on the very same hardware has been 5 times longer on win98 (easier than NT of course!) than linux. Statement so ridiculously wrong, why bother... >2.)NT 4 has earned c2 certification not too long ago If you'd bothered reading the comments, you'd havae realized how wrong that statement is... >3.)The problem with the navy's computer was a divide by 0 error If you'd bothered reading the articles about this, you would remember that the problem was that an OS is NOT SUPPOSED TO CRASH when an app divides by 0! >My experiences with pppd are mine... Thus we see the root of the problem. >...Also NT will win at the rate its going... until eventually it's so bloated and bug-ridden it's completely unusable? >...only NT has the alpha cpu-to-card binding... Patch is already available. These are irrelevent observations. Linux is evolving far faster than NT. >No OS has every recovered from might [sic] microsoft. MS has only predominated because of cheap hardware. As hardware becomes even cheaper, it will become harder to justify spending major portion of a system's cost on the OS. Conclusion: Pull your head out of the sand!
yes, supposed to be intelligent... Financial benefits? I have no doubt that I earn almost twice as much as a consulting unix sys admin than a microserf does. Microsoft is NOT the dominant player. It has a monopoly in the PC niche, but that's all. Unfortunately, it's unearned wealth gives it inordinate influence over the media and PHB's. Our energies are devoted to supporting what we perceive thru our experience to be a significantly better way of doing things. P.S. No I haven't used ASP's; I suppose they could be one of the few exceptions to the rule that all microsoft stuff is goofy, bug-ridden, toys.
No, I was real disappointed to find out the xfs server that's now a part of XFree86 does _not_ support truetype. A patch is available however (look on freshmeat). I will just continue to use xfstt until the patch is official. I just make a link from/c/windows/fonts (mounted on/c, of course) to/usr/ttfonts.
well, guy, it's not that we are blind to M$'s good products. For most of us, we have had to _endure_ these second-rate, poorly designed excuses for "productivity" software until we found the superior solutions available in the open-source world. You obviously have no idea what "scripting" in unix is about if you think VBscript even qualifies.
Absolutely! They can't possibly compare the monolithic NT against an almost infinitely configurable system. "Oh, ip stack wasn't MT? Just replace a few library calls and recompile with the best MT library" (RH's patch already available!). Or egcs, or pgcc, or other commercial compilers already available. Recompile a minimal kernel, turn off extraneous processes, pin files and executables in memory...
loser. After having put up with FreeBSD for 2 years and observing how second-rate it was in functionality, performance, and stability to linux, I was glad to replace it. The few recent comparison benchmarks I have seen confirm that, and regarding your signature, no, linux has many ports than netbsd!
You make deference to unix, but I'm still wondering if you really have tried gnome. I find the vaunted win gui incredibly irritating and frustrating and reboot into linux with a sigh of relief. Gnome looks and feels much slicker than my win97. It has some bugs and holes (ver. 1.0 for kris'sake!), but what it does have is more functional and easier to use than windows. And I suspect win2k is just more of the same hand-holding, know-better-than-the-user, have-to-fix-holes-in-the-OS-with-3rd-party-softwar e.
I can't believe how many people responded with completely irrelevent replies about "faster hard drives". Improvements in memory & cpu have made my p2-750 ~1000x faster than my 8088. But that hard drive with the same basic technology is ~10x faster. Even if you throw memory at the bottleneck, you're still 100x slower than on-chip access. That's why future discontinuous improvements will be made with increasing local memory...but wait, isn't that how the brain work? The processing and memory use the very same architecture! This isn't so far off really; the hypercomputer (http://www.starbridgesystems.com/Pages/about.html ) will be cpu-instruction-set + memory programmable on the fly. By the way, check out http://www.sunsite.auc.dk/FreakTech/Hard.html for coming technology.
Metcalf was just being contrary for the Crowd. He's OSsified into complacency. Windows has already lost the race! In just a few years, linux' superior model has flown past it. It's only a matter of time before even fossilized pundits will be forced to admit it. Whether linux is even recognizable in 5 years is irrelevent (Yes, Transmeta?) Unix is more of a philosophy than a bunch of code - whomever forgets that, is doomed to repeat it.
I played with Abbott Demo a while back. It was only a technology demonstration. It was more amusing than useful. About 20% errors with no speech training.
hope it's a lot better than the beta
on
BFRIS Goes Gold
·
· Score: 1
I tried the game around 12/97 and it was unplayable. bummer.
Slashdot Mirror
Guess no one else has been paying attention. FPGA's can run at much higher clock frequencies then current CPU's because of fundamental architectural differences. This is what the new HAL hyper-computer (and others) are based on. I read the SA article and it's ground-breaking ideas with a reasonable plan to enable them. Amazing syncronicity that Transmeta's latest patent application would also come out today; read the fine print and you will see that it is also about software changing hardware. All these advances have in common increasing the association of data with processing (the operands with the operators).
Check out the benchmarks on Storagereview.com. Note the adapter will not be available to us till the fall.
heh, stop dreaming and start downloading: http://www.mainconcept.de
Please go to their web sites and read about these devices functionality - it is A LOT more than just a digital vcr.
I have just started looking into this. For TV quality, video capture cards are still expensive (see http://linuxmedialabs.com/ @ $410). While with enough compression (3.5 - 30) any bandwidth is supported, to do "TV quality" (much less DTV) you are pushing the limits of bus and hard drive speed. Altho' I'm sure a Quantum Atlas 10k 18Gb harddrive would handle it, that'd be $800+! And software under linux for this is still quite rudimentary. So for now, the Tivo player is quite a good deal - just wish they'd open up to the do-it-yourselfer's - a kit or card or software...? I wouldn't buy a Tivo because I'd expect so much more out of PC/TV integration - to quote from Steve Perlman in Wired:
1) Internet TV - web/email
2) response TV - audience survey
3) enhanced TV - web, tv guide, vcr functions
4) digital VCR - programming, user preferences
5) personal TV - virtual channels, audio/video on demand, etc
Those of us with cable modems see a vast untapped potential. We're just starting to see streaming MP3's, but streaming video is pitiful and most of the internet is shrouded in darkness...
worse than an ignorant troll...
>1.)First off my point is that unix is a hell to setup compared to NT
No it's not! "out of the box" many unix installations are far easier. You are comparing the one and only monolithic NT system install to an infinitely variable range of unix installations. My experience on the very same hardware has been 5 times longer on win98 (easier than NT of course!) than linux. Statement so ridiculously wrong, why bother...
>2.)NT 4 has earned c2 certification not too long ago
If you'd bothered reading the comments, you'd havae realized how wrong that statement is...
>3.)The problem with the navy's computer was a divide by 0 error
If you'd bothered reading the articles about this, you would remember that the problem was that an OS is NOT SUPPOSED TO CRASH when an app divides by 0!
>My experiences with pppd are mine...
Thus we see the root of the problem.
>...Also NT will win at the rate its going...
until eventually it's so bloated and bug-ridden it's completely unusable?
>...only NT has the alpha cpu-to-card binding...
Patch is already available. These are irrelevent observations. Linux is evolving far faster than NT.
>No OS has every recovered from might [sic] microsoft.
MS has only predominated because of cheap hardware. As hardware becomes even cheaper, it will become harder to justify spending major portion of a system's cost on the OS.
Conclusion: Pull your head out of the sand!
yes, supposed to be intelligent... Financial benefits? I have no doubt that I earn almost twice as much as a consulting unix sys admin than a microserf does. Microsoft is NOT the dominant player. It has a monopoly in the PC niche, but that's all. Unfortunately, it's unearned wealth gives it inordinate influence over the media and PHB's. Our energies are devoted to supporting what we perceive thru our experience to be a significantly better way of doing things.
P.S. No I haven't used ASP's; I suppose they could be one of the few exceptions to the rule that all microsoft stuff is goofy, bug-ridden, toys.
No, I was real disappointed to find out the xfs server that's now a part of XFree86 does _not_ support truetype. A patch is available however (look on freshmeat). I will just continue to use xfstt until the patch is official. I just make a link from /c/windows/fonts (mounted on /c, of course) to /usr/ttfonts.
well, guy, it's not that we are blind to M$'s good products. For most of us, we have had to _endure_ these second-rate, poorly designed excuses for "productivity" software until we found the superior solutions available in the open-source world. You obviously have no idea what "scripting" in unix is about if you think VBscript even qualifies.
Absolutely! They can't possibly compare the monolithic NT against an almost infinitely configurable system. "Oh, ip stack wasn't MT? Just replace a few library calls and recompile with the best MT library" (RH's patch already available!). Or egcs, or pgcc, or other commercial compilers already available. Recompile a minimal kernel, turn off extraneous processes, pin files and executables in memory...
many _more_ ports than netbsd...
Even your web server is offline!
loser. After having put up with FreeBSD for 2 years and observing how second-rate it was in functionality, performance, and stability to linux, I was glad to replace it. The few recent comparison benchmarks I have seen confirm that, and regarding your signature, no, linux has many ports than netbsd!
You make deference to unix, but I'm still wondering if you really have tried gnome. I find the vaunted win gui incredibly irritating and frustrating and reboot into linux with a sigh of relief. Gnome looks and feels much slicker than my win97. It has some bugs and holes (ver. 1.0 for kris'sake!), but what it does have is more functional and easier to use than windows. And I suspect win2k is just more of the same hand-holding, know-better-than-the-user, have-to-fix-holes-in-the-OS-with-3rd-party-softwar e.
I can't believe how many people responded with completely irrelevent replies about "faster hard drives". Improvements in memory & cpu have made my p2-750 ~1000x faster than my 8088. But that hard drive with the same basic technology is ~10x faster. Even if you throw memory at the bottleneck, you're still 100x slower than on-chip access. That's why future discontinuous improvements will be made with increasing local memory...but wait, isn't that how the brain work? The processing and memory use the very same architecture! This isn't so far off really; the hypercomputer (http://www.starbridgesystems.com/Pages/about.html ) will be cpu-instruction-set + memory programmable on the fly. By the way, check out http://www.sunsite.auc.dk/FreakTech/Hard.html for coming technology.
Metcalf was just being contrary for the Crowd. He's OSsified into complacency. Windows has already lost the race! In just a few years, linux' superior model has flown past it. It's only a matter of time before even fossilized pundits will be forced to admit it. Whether linux is even recognizable in 5 years is irrelevent (Yes, Transmeta?) Unix is more of a philosophy than a bunch of code - whomever forgets that, is doomed to repeat it.
I played with Abbott Demo a while back. It was only a technology demonstration. It was more amusing than useful. About 20% errors with no speech training.
I tried the game around 12/97 and it was unplayable. bummer.
Pacific HiTech has a Linux Games CD in multiple volumes (they release a new one every few months) Available from walnut creek oc.