I cannot help but wonder if UEFI is now Microsoft's backup plan to force casual PC users into Windows 8. There seems to be some resistance (the degree of which is debatable) to Windows 8 adoption. Perhaps users will, in the end, still be forced into Windows 8 if they lack the know-how to use alternate OSes?
How is that be any different to the way things are now?
This is hardly surprising, with Android smartphones, tablets and chromebooks as well as Google web apps if you've invested in that Google platform - and so many people have - then you probably don't *need* Windows. Not to mention creating a Windows RT tablet doesn't exactly do much in terms of integration for existing Windows customers (that is non-Metro UI users).
Also providers will only need to worry about writing changes to the Linux underpinnings (Gonk) for their hardware *once* and then leave all the Gecko updates to Mozilla.
So how is that different from running the latest browser on an older version of Android?
The article just mentions that there was an exploit added to the Cool Exploit Kit that exploits that specific vulnerability, it doesn't make any suggestion that was the one used or that the Cool Exploit Kit was used, it could have been any of the many 0-day exploits patched very recently.
Funny - there's no mention of Java 6 here, only Java 7.
Why are you only looking at one vulnerability? As reported by Ars Technica, the 15th February, Facebook was victim of a watering hole attack, involving a “popular mobile developer Web forum“. The attack was using a Java 0day that has been urgently patched, in Oracle Java CPU of first February, by version 7 update 11 and version 6 update 39.http://eromang.zataz.com/2013/02/20/facebook-apple-twitter-watering-hole-attack-additional-informations/
Re:It's not all about power....differentiators are
on
Sony Announces the PS4
·
· Score: 1
Why would I want it outside of my video card?
Because it's much higher bandwidth and shared between the CPU and GPU, a much more optimized setup than separate memory pools of different types and speeds for the CPU and GPU separated by the PCI bus.
Considering that at the upper most end 4GB is the highend limit right now for it.
How is that a limit?
But hey, it's only on consoles where we have to worry about poor memory optimizations for things like that.
No this is just a better architecture.
Re:It's not all about power....differentiators are
on
Sony Announces the PS4
·
· Score: 1
And if you want that AMD has been selling CPU/GPU combinations that do just that under the Fusion brand for 2 years now.
And if we circle back the original question, are you getting GDDR5? No.
Re:It's not all about power....differentiators are
on
Sony Announces the PS4
·
· Score: 2
GDDR5 is just DDR3 optimized for raw throughput. DDR3 has lower latencies.
Yes, it's significantly higher bandwidth and shared between the GPU and CPU as opposed to each having their own memory pools separated by the PCI bus.
A dedicated gaming console doesn't have the desktop OS overhead to deal with. You can squeeze more out of less in this case. Especially with devs working to a fixed target.
The key element there is the fixed target, you know what features the hardware supports - for example what GPU extensions are available, how much GPU memory, main memory and cache you have and at what speed it is, how many CPU cores and shader processors you have and how fast they are, what your bus speeds are, etc... Having these as concrete values allows you to tune your applications much more finely and you can avoid many abstraction layers.
Re:It's not all about power....differentiators are
on
Sony Announces the PS4
·
· Score: 2
Apple ripped open the MP3 player market and did what Blizzard did with WoW to the market. It showed that ALL the tiny players could have been tech giants, no THE biggest company in the WORLD for a long time... if only they had dared to simply sell to people devices that could hold a bit of music.
But Apple weren't the first, they didn't have the most storage and they didn't have the most features...they dared to strip away the commonplace features and focus on design and user experience.
I don't get why they blame Apple for this when clearly Oracle is at fault for letting Java stagnate this much.
The reason is because this flaw exists in Apple's implementation of Java 6 - which is still required by many people as not all apps work on Oracle's Java 7 (which was patched for this vulnerability some time ago).
No, you are missing the point, I'm not comparing an iPad to a car, I'm comparing an iPad to an ECU. An iPad, like an ECU is not designed to be servicable, they sacrifice servicability in the name of manufacturing cost, simplicity, size and weight...sure they could be broken out into separate individually-servicable components but that just negates those benefits.
If you damage your car, we're not replacing your car, just the parts that are broken.
I'm not talking about a car, I'm talking about an ECU.
This is as Linux as Android is. Hell Android is probably more Linux this this.
What do you mean 'Linux'? When you say that it seems you're referring to the userland and platform specific tools, the stuff in a Linux distro that isn't Linux?
I just dont understand why these mobile OS's keep wanting to force developers into a specific language.
They generally provide APIs for the language native to the platform, if you wanted to write in a different language you could always write your own bindings for that language, an example of this is PyWin32 that provides Python bindings for Win32, or OpenTK that provides.Net bindings for OpenGL functions, or JOGL that allows you to use OpenGL in Java.
I don't know about you, but I don't think I know a single person who isn't running Linux a at this point. Sure a lot of them also run other OSes, but they all run Linux.
Sure, but the RMS vision for GNU/Linux has largely failed, almost all the places - excluding some smartphones of course - that people use GNU/Linux they have no more freedom than if they used Windows or OSX, they don't have the freedoms or the control of the system that RMS professes is necessary. The place it really grants those freedoms is and control is on the desktop, which is where comparatively very few people actually use it.
I don't know about you, but I don't think I know a single person who isn't running Linux a at this point. Sure a lot of them also run other OSes, but they all run Linux.
You're right, but certainly RMS's vision has failed thus far, the idea was control of the system and freedom for the user, but in virtually all the places we use GNU/Linux we, as users, don't have that control or freedom - though on some smartphones we do have total control and freedom.
iOS (and app stores in general) is perfect example of vendor lock-in.
That's the case with all platforms, Windows, OSX, desktop Linux distros, Android, etc... It would be great if app developers decided that if you purchase their app on one platform you got access to it on all platforms where it was available, obviously it's less financially viable for the developers and certainly less attractive to platform vendors but it would be nice;)
I don't want either iOS or Android, but I might get a tablet with KDE Plasma Active.
Well most likely you'll get a tablet with Android which you'll have to wipe and then install KDE Plasma Active on, that's fine for you - and probably most of the readers of this site - but I see that as the major stumbling block when it comes to mainstream adoption.
By law I can't distribute copies of any software inside without a license, but I own it just the same.
Bullshit, if you own it you can distribute copies freely under your own terms because it's yours, the fact that you can't do such a thing is proof that you in fact do not own it and only license it.
What logic? You concluded that a massive incompatibility between version 6 and 7 meant that IE was always standards complaint. Only a MS spokesperson could type that without cracking up.
No, you failed to comprehend what was written, I said they broke from IE6's non-standard extensions, which is what broke compatibility, that is not to say any version of IE is standards compliant.
The fact that IE broke from non-standard extensions was a good thing, that there wasn't a compatibility speedbump migrating from Navigator to Firefox just shows that Firefox continued supporting non-standard Netscape extensions.
Slashdot Mirror
I cannot help but wonder if UEFI is now Microsoft's backup plan to force casual PC users into Windows 8. There seems to be some resistance (the degree of which is debatable) to Windows 8 adoption. Perhaps users will, in the end, still be forced into Windows 8 if they lack the know-how to use alternate OSes?
How is that be any different to the way things are now?
This is hardly surprising, with Android smartphones, tablets and chromebooks as well as Google web apps if you've invested in that Google platform - and so many people have - then you probably don't *need* Windows. Not to mention creating a Windows RT tablet doesn't exactly do much in terms of integration for existing Windows customers (that is non-Metro UI users).
Also providers will only need to worry about writing changes to the Linux underpinnings (Gonk) for their hardware *once* and then leave all the Gecko updates to Mozilla.
So how is that different from running the latest browser on an older version of Android?
It's the only vuln linked to as far as I can see.
The article just mentions that there was an exploit added to the Cool Exploit Kit that exploits that specific vulnerability, it doesn't make any suggestion that was the one used or that the Cool Exploit Kit was used, it could have been any of the many 0-day exploits patched very recently.
Funny - there's no mention of Java 6 here, only Java 7.
Why are you only looking at one vulnerability?
As reported by Ars Technica, the 15th February, Facebook was victim of a watering hole attack, involving a “popular mobile developer Web forum“. The attack was using a Java 0day that has been urgently patched, in Oracle Java CPU of first February, by version 7 update 11 and version 6 update 39. http://eromang.zataz.com/2013/02/20/facebook-apple-twitter-watering-hole-attack-additional-informations/
Why would I want it outside of my video card?
Because it's much higher bandwidth and shared between the CPU and GPU, a much more optimized setup than separate memory pools of different types and speeds for the CPU and GPU separated by the PCI bus.
Considering that at the upper most end 4GB is the highend limit right now for it.
How is that a limit?
But hey, it's only on consoles where we have to worry about poor memory optimizations for things like that.
No this is just a better architecture.
And if you want that AMD has been selling CPU/GPU combinations that do just that under the Fusion brand for 2 years now.
And if we circle back the original question, are you getting GDDR5? No.
GDDR5 is just DDR3 optimized for raw throughput. DDR3 has lower latencies.
Yes, it's significantly higher bandwidth and shared between the GPU and CPU as opposed to each having their own memory pools separated by the PCI bus.
A dedicated gaming console doesn't have the desktop OS overhead to deal with. You can squeeze more out of less in this case. Especially with devs working to a fixed target.
The key element there is the fixed target, you know what features the hardware supports - for example what GPU extensions are available, how much GPU memory, main memory and cache you have and at what speed it is, how many CPU cores and shader processors you have and how fast they are, what your bus speeds are, etc... Having these as concrete values allows you to tune your applications much more finely and you can avoid many abstraction layers.
More like $450 for that PC side, maybe $600.
You're getting 8GB GDDR5 as main memory for that?
Apple ripped open the MP3 player market and did what Blizzard did with WoW to the market. It showed that ALL the tiny players could have been tech giants, no THE biggest company in the WORLD for a long time... if only they had dared to simply sell to people devices that could hold a bit of music.
But Apple weren't the first, they didn't have the most storage and they didn't have the most features...they dared to strip away the commonplace features and focus on design and user experience.
I don't get why they blame Apple for this when clearly Oracle is at fault for letting Java stagnate this much.
The reason is because this flaw exists in Apple's implementation of Java 6 - which is still required by many people as not all apps work on Oracle's Java 7 (which was patched for this vulnerability some time ago).
You miss the point deliberately.
No, you are missing the point, I'm not comparing an iPad to a car, I'm comparing an iPad to an ECU. An iPad, like an ECU is not designed to be servicable, they sacrifice servicability in the name of manufacturing cost, simplicity, size and weight...sure they could be broken out into separate individually-servicable components but that just negates those benefits.
If you damage your car, we're not replacing your car, just the parts that are broken.
I'm not talking about a car, I'm talking about an ECU.
Doesn't apply with software, software is governed by the EULA which has been tested and upheld in court, see Vernor V Autodesk.
wtf is with /.? why didn't that post come through before? :S
This is as Linux as Android is. Hell Android is probably more Linux this this.
What do you mean 'Linux'? When you say that it seems you're referring to the userland and platform specific tools, the stuff in a Linux distro that isn't Linux?
I just dont understand why these mobile OS's keep wanting to force developers into a specific language.
They generally provide APIs for the language native to the platform, if you wanted to write in a different language you could always write your own bindings for that language, an example of this is PyWin32 that provides Python bindings for Win32, or OpenTK that provides .Net bindings for OpenGL functions, or JOGL that allows you to use OpenGL in Java.
I don't know about you, but I don't think I know a single person who isn't running Linux a at this point. Sure a lot of them also run other OSes, but they all run Linux.
Sure, but the RMS vision for GNU/Linux has largely failed, almost all the places - excluding some smartphones of course - that people use GNU/Linux they have no more freedom than if they used Windows or OSX, they don't have the freedoms or the control of the system that RMS professes is necessary. The place it really grants those freedoms is and control is on the desktop, which is where comparatively very few people actually use it.
I don't know about you, but I don't think I know a single person who isn't running Linux a at this point. Sure a lot of them also run other OSes, but they all run Linux.
You're right, but certainly RMS's vision has failed thus far, the idea was control of the system and freedom for the user, but in virtually all the places we use GNU/Linux we, as users, don't have that control or freedom - though on some smartphones we do have total control and freedom.
iOS (and app stores in general) is perfect example of vendor lock-in.
That's the case with all platforms, Windows, OSX, desktop Linux distros, Android, etc... It would be great if app developers decided that if you purchase their app on one platform you got access to it on all platforms where it was available, obviously it's less financially viable for the developers and certainly less attractive to platform vendors but it would be nice ;)
I don't want either iOS or Android, but I might get a tablet with KDE Plasma Active.
Well most likely you'll get a tablet with Android which you'll have to wipe and then install KDE Plasma Active on, that's fine for you - and probably most of the readers of this site - but I see that as the major stumbling block when it comes to mainstream adoption.
If it's a hardware fault you can replace the ECU
Yep and if it's a hardware fault you can replace the iPad.
By law I can't distribute copies of any software inside without a license, but I own it just the same.
Bullshit, if you own it you can distribute copies freely under your own terms because it's yours, the fact that you can't do such a thing is proof that you in fact do not own it and only license it.
What logic? You concluded that a massive incompatibility between version 6 and 7 meant that IE was always standards complaint. Only a MS spokesperson could type that without cracking up.
No, you failed to comprehend what was written, I said they broke from IE6's non-standard extensions, which is what broke compatibility, that is not to say any version of IE is standards compliant.
The close agreement between NS and the many other browsers shows there wasn't a great deal of standards breakage
Wrong, Firefox just maintains it's Netscape quirks mode.
The fact that IE broke from non-standard extensions was a good thing, that there wasn't a compatibility speedbump migrating from Navigator to Firefox just shows that Firefox continued supporting non-standard Netscape extensions.