I have yet to see a root level exploit in windows that has lasted even near as long before being patched.
I'm sorry, but a bug that is found today in NT 4.0or 2000 has most likely been around since the product came out. You're trying to say that Windows bugs don't exist until someone finds them, but Linux bugs are retroactive since the version that they are in came out. Compare apples to apples.
When the root exploit was found in Linux, the patch was available the very same day. Microsoft can't get a security fix out and tested with "a few days of work". They have hundreds of well paid programmers Linux is written by loosely tied mostly unpaid volunteers. You need to get the wool out of your eyes.
Microsoft isn't the only DOS vendor. As long as there is FreeDOS we have DOS boot disks.
I don't think that it's likely that the updater will ever run under windows. If that happened you couldn't flash your BIOS to solve problems that prevented Windows from booting fully. If anything changes with current BIOSs it would likly be a move to standalone updaters on a bootable disk.
Also, Intel has plans to replace the stnadard PC bios with EFI which is already used on IA-64 and is available for IA-32 vendors. The EFI 'bios' has a shell, and can self update. Now that there is no DOS, perhaps the dependance on BIOS calls will go away, and systems can start using this far superior system.
Re:Actual, unretouched screenshots?
on
First Review of Halo
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Why do people think I was trolling with this comment. I hadn't been able to find such a player (after much searching) and was wondering if anyone out there knew something I didn't. I have no intentions of living in a cave. I own both a DVD player, and almost a hundred DVDs. Whatever the cost is that is passed on from the licensing charges is not enough for me to refuse purchase. I'd just rather not give them extra cash if I don't have to. I've seen the foreign players, but from what it seems they may or may not license CSS. Just becuase they dont implement macrovision or region coding doesn't mean that they haven't forked over cash at some point.
If such a thing doesn't exist I will remain content maintaining my EFF membership.
Does anyone outh there know of any set top DVD players out there that use DeCSS instead of licensing CSS from the DVDCCA? I'm thinking of buying my mother a DVD player for Christmas and I'd perfer not to give the DVDCCA any more money then is nescissary.
Ok, that's probably what he meant. I didn't imediatly get that out of what he said....
Yes it is true that some software does not scale well but that's not nearly enough information to mean anything. Does that mean that if you add another machine you get more performace? Another CPU? More memory? Software that "scales well" in one environment (say on 4-8 CPU x86 machines) may not scale well in other environments (large mainframes).
Another point. Say that the performance of the software scales linearly, and your performace is multiplied by the number of whatever hardware devices you're adding that you have. You could argue that that software scales well, but if said software has a slow section of code in it's main execution path, optimization of that code (or removal if it's a fluff feature) shifts your whole curve. There is no reason that a piece of software can't both architecturaly scale well and perform like crap at the same time.
I have no experience with SQL server, so I cannot if this is the case or not. I do know that I would not be able to make a decision about it only knowing that is scales well.
is hardware bound. That means, add better hardware on it and u get a perf increase to match
Huh?
What tasks don't perform faster when you run them on faster hardware? Are you trying to say that the code and architecture are absolutly optimal, and no performance gains are possible without a hardware upgrade? Not likely.
I just wish that they didn't use those stupid limits to essentially charge me for an additional subscription for each TV I wanted to hook up. They could easily charge a very small amount for each box instead of charging $15 a month per box. It sucks paying $55 a month for basic cable on two TVs.
Oh and also, if they're going to require you to use their external tuner, they could at least provide a decent way of getting the signal to the TV. It sucks that it has to be sent through another tuner again.
There are many levels of POSIX complance. To be POSIX complient in the basic sense you just have to have the system calls, and there are no requirements on the C library. Just because windows has the apropriate system calls, doesn't mean that they have all the apropriate system calls. Windows NT/2000 only supports 110 of the 149 POSIX C library routines, which means that there is a very good chance that any given POSIX application won't "just work", even though they can claim basic compliance.
Re:NES cartridges contained more than ROM
on
Portable N64
·
· Score: 2
The mappers in an NES cartridge are really simple. You can emulate most of them all in the same PIC. The PIC is fast enough to read from the address buses and update the data busses for both 'ROMs' in one NES clock cycle.
I have plans drawn up to make an NES game cartridge with a Compact Flash card, a PIC, 2MB of SRAM and some latches. The parts are cost prohibative right now though, so I haven't assembled or tried it yet.
As far as I knew McKinley was not going to have backwards support. IA-32 support is an optional part of the IA-64 spec, and probably only Itanium will implement it.
Also, Apple's software emulator ran the 68k code on PPC at speeds that were roughly equivalent to the 68k. Itanium, when running 32bit and 64 bit programs at the same time, performs very poorly. Itanium also does not have the benefit of the MacOS engineering team that did a remarkable job making the transition seamless...
I hope that Intel finds a way to reduce the power consumption of their 64bit chips.
Ico, Onimusha, Dark Cloud, Dynasty Warriors 2, Klonoa 2, Red Faction, Gauntlet: Dark Legacy, Guilty Gear X, soon to be MGS2, and Final Fantasy X... There are way more too... Sounds like someone is assuming that there are no good games and not bothering to look.
There will be DOA3 for every platform, they'll just call it something like "DOA3 Special Edition" or something so that they can slap an XBox exclusive tag on it when XBox comes out and still get away with it. Like when "DOA2: Hardcore" came out for PS2. Either that, or it'll basically be the same game as DOA2.
The publisher will push the game for every nickel.
What matters is that no one can create a.doc file without Microsoft's say-so - and if someone manages to do it, all Microsoft has to do is twiddle a bit somewhere and make the new.doc XP (tm) incompatible with the old one.
This is just completely wrong. What version of Word/Excel/MS Whatever didn't support the older version's file format? Changing a bit can make it so people can't read the format, but once someone can make a.doc of a particular version, MS can't stop them.
Xemacs. Way better, and has had most of these features for a while. I think it's because they dont scare away coders by requireing them to sign their copyright over to the FSF.
Slashdot Mirror
Run your browser as a different user that doesn't have permissions to /dev/dsp
That way you can keep using all your sound generating apps without your browser butting in.
Unfortuantly all you windows users can't do this...
Shifted?
You're one of those people who thinks that every codepath should be retested if one of the developers changes a comment, aren't you?
I'm sorry, but a bug that is found today in NT 4.0or 2000 has most likely been around since the product came out. You're trying to say that Windows bugs don't exist until someone finds them, but Linux bugs are retroactive since the version that they are in came out. Compare apples to apples.
When the root exploit was found in Linux, the patch was available the very same day. Microsoft can't get a security fix out and tested with "a few days of work". They have hundreds of well paid programmers Linux is written by loosely tied mostly unpaid volunteers. You need to get the wool out of your eyes.
I don't think that it's likely that the updater will ever run under windows. If that happened you couldn't flash your BIOS to solve problems that prevented Windows from booting fully. If anything changes with current BIOSs it would likly be a move to standalone updaters on a bootable disk. Also, Intel has plans to replace the stnadard PC bios with EFI which is already used on IA-64 and is available for IA-32 vendors. The EFI 'bios' has a shell, and can self update. Now that there is no DOS, perhaps the dependance on BIOS calls will go away, and systems can start using this far superior system.
No, that was Microsoft
What are you talking about? emacs is the emacs of mail clients :)
customers that currently have boat anchors sitting on their desks
:)
On the contrary, the apple cases are way too lightweight to be used as boat anchors
Why do people think I was trolling with this comment. I hadn't been able to find such a player (after much searching) and was wondering if anyone out there knew something I didn't. I have no intentions of living in a cave. I own both a DVD player, and almost a hundred DVDs. Whatever the cost is that is passed on from the licensing charges is not enough for me to refuse purchase. I'd just rather not give them extra cash if I don't have to. I've seen the foreign players, but from what it seems they may or may not license CSS. Just becuase they dont implement macrovision or region coding doesn't mean that they haven't forked over cash at some point.
If such a thing doesn't exist I will remain content maintaining my EFF membership.
Does anyone outh there know of any set top DVD players out there that use DeCSS instead of licensing CSS from the DVDCCA? I'm thinking of buying my mother a DVD player for Christmas and I'd perfer not to give the DVDCCA any more money then is nescissary.
What are you using for a digital interconnect between your components? Which VCR has digital out?
Ok, that's probably what he meant. I didn't imediatly get that out of what he said....
Yes it is true that some software does not scale well but that's not nearly enough information to mean anything. Does that mean that if you add another machine you get more performace? Another CPU? More memory? Software that "scales well" in one environment (say on 4-8 CPU x86 machines) may not scale well in other environments (large mainframes).
Another point. Say that the performance of the software scales linearly, and your performace is multiplied by the number of whatever hardware devices you're adding that you have. You could argue that that software scales well, but if said software has a slow section of code in it's main execution path, optimization of that code (or removal if it's a fluff feature) shifts your whole curve. There is no reason that a piece of software can't both architecturaly scale well and perform like crap at the same time.
I have no experience with SQL server, so I cannot if this is the case or not. I do know that I would not be able to make a decision about it only knowing that is scales well.
is hardware bound. That means, add better hardware on it and u get a perf increase to match
Huh?
What tasks don't perform faster when you run them on faster hardware? Are you trying to say that the code and architecture are absolutly optimal, and no performance gains are possible without a hardware upgrade? Not likely.
I just wish that they didn't use those stupid limits to essentially charge me for an additional subscription for each TV I wanted to hook up. They could easily charge a very small amount for each box instead of charging $15 a month per box. It sucks paying $55 a month for basic cable on two TVs.
Oh and also, if they're going to require you to use their external tuner, they could at least provide a decent way of getting the signal to the TV. It sucks that it has to be sent through another tuner again.
Woops, I meant "doesn't mean that they have all the apropriate library calls."
Must stop posting so late...
There are many levels of POSIX complance. To be POSIX complient in the basic sense you just have to have the system calls, and there are no requirements on the C library. Just because windows has the apropriate system calls, doesn't mean that they have all the apropriate system calls. Windows NT/2000 only supports 110 of the 149 POSIX C library routines, which means that there is a very good chance that any given POSIX application won't "just work", even though they can claim basic compliance.
The mappers in an NES cartridge are really simple. You can emulate most of them all in the same PIC. The PIC is fast enough to read from the address buses and update the data busses for both 'ROMs' in one NES clock cycle.
I have plans drawn up to make an NES game cartridge with a Compact Flash card, a PIC, 2MB of SRAM and some latches. The parts are cost prohibative right now though, so I haven't assembled or tried it yet.
As far as I knew McKinley was not going to have backwards support. IA-32 support is an optional part of the IA-64 spec, and probably only Itanium will implement it.
Also, Apple's software emulator ran the 68k code on PPC at speeds that were roughly equivalent to the 68k. Itanium, when running 32bit and 64 bit programs at the same time, performs very poorly. Itanium also does not have the benefit of the MacOS engineering team that did a remarkable job making the transition seamless...
I hope that Intel finds a way to reduce the power consumption of their 64bit chips.
You assume that DBA's have the checkbook. All too often, spending decisions are made by the wrong poeple.
Ico, Onimusha, Dark Cloud, Dynasty Warriors 2, Klonoa 2, Red Faction, Gauntlet: Dark Legacy, Guilty Gear X, soon to be MGS2, and Final Fantasy X... There are way more too... Sounds like someone is assuming that there are no good games and not bothering to look.
Yeah, and DOA2 was Dreamcast only.
There will be DOA3 for every platform, they'll just call it something like "DOA3 Special Edition" or something so that they can slap an XBox exclusive tag on it when XBox comes out and still get away with it. Like when "DOA2: Hardcore" came out for PS2. Either that, or it'll basically be the same game as DOA2.
The publisher will push the game for every nickel.
What matters is that no one can create a .doc file without Microsoft's say-so - and if someone manages to do it, all Microsoft has to do is twiddle a bit somewhere and make the new .doc XP (tm) incompatible with the old one.
.doc of a particular version, MS can't stop them.
This is just completely wrong. What version of Word/Excel/MS Whatever didn't support the older version's file format? Changing a bit can make it so people can't read the format, but once someone can make a
What? A leagal battle with whom, and over what?
Xemacs. Way better, and has had most of these features for a while. I think it's because they dont scare away coders by requireing them to sign their copyright over to the FSF.
HZ is already 1024 on architectures such as Alpha and IA64. You have the source. Change it before you build; it's only a 2 byte change.