I finally see where you are comming from. Ok based
on that yes it is decidely possible that as far as
design goes transmeta is 5 years ahead of
the other guys, especially if as you say in five
years everyone realizes that code morphing is the
way to go. I was really thinking more in terms
of performance(battery life or otherwise), and
I just couldn't imagine Transmeta releasing
anything today that would be the top of its
market for 5 years to come.
This seems like as good a place as any.
There was a long discussion about this
a while back on the kernel list. Basically,
ResierFS needs to patch some very central
parts to kernel file system code. My
understanding was that the part of the kernel is
extremely integral to all file systems, not just
ReiserFS, and the changes that were being made
were radical enough that Linus refused to allow
them in relatively late in the development cycle.
This effectively forced ReiserFS out of the
kernel until the next kernel revision. Based on
this, it is conceivable that if a journaling file
system could be rolled out that didn't mess with
much integral to the kernel. It might make it into
the 2.4.x kernel. I would be surprised if we saw
it on the initial release though.
>1. Wave-table sound. Standard on the Amiga in 1985, but took until 1991 to be available on the PC (Gravis UltraSound).
Interesting, and I see your point, but I would tend to say these were not in direct competition.
> 2. Hardware 3D transformation. Standard on the Playstation, released in 1994 in Japan, but took until 1999 to show up on the PC (Nvidia TNT).
This is a serious case of apples, and oranges. It is just as invalid as stating that the high end computer graphics market has been doing it for years. The playstation, and PC are not competitive platforms.
>3. Color, handheld game system with ability to draw (flat shaded) polygons in hardware. First available in Atari Lynx, circa 1991. Still not
available in other systems.
Now I ask you this simple question. Do you really believe that the Lynx is more technologically advanced than the handhelds today? Unless, I'm mistaken the technological advance you are refering to amounted to little more than a novelty Item (Like so many other supposed technology advances). If the Lynx was really 10+ years ahead of its time you would expect it to still have a relatively large user base.
I think the crux of this arguement centers around two definitions:
1. Competition: If two devices aren't competing for the same comsumer space I don't consider one to be in competition with the other, and since the two have a different market audience it may simply be a matter of priorities rather than being so much ahead of the competition.
2. advanced tech: In my view for something to be ahead of its competition by 5 years. It must continue to outperform the competition for the next 5 years or provide needed services that its competition can't. I really don't see this to be the case with most of your examples.
Certainly, none of your examples are quite in line with the truly head to head nature of companies like AMD, Intel, and TransMeta. I guess time will tell.
Ok, I'm game. List one piece of consumer computer
hardware that has been released where competition
to 5 years to catch up? I certainly can't think
of any.
You can't dirrectly compare computer language development, and hardware development. They
have followed decidely different paths. The
fact is at no point in the comsumer hardware industry has anyone released a tech that was 5
years ahead of its time. Infact, It very difficult to predict what the tech will look like
in 5 years, other than in the vague terms of
Moore's law, much less say what you have now is
somehow 5 years ahead of the competition. It is
basically marketing. I mean while I suspect that
supercomputer tech is well ahead of comsumer level
technology, and I agree that languages, and
software developement methologies do not follow
a linear progession, and is more often cyclic with
the old often comming back around again and again.
It is comparing apples, and oranges to use these
as support for transmeta's claims.
This is a luidicrous statement. No technology
is that much ahead. that would be like the
AMD having the athlon at the same time as Intel
came out with the P200mmx. It is basically inconceivable that Transmeta would be that much
ahead of industry leaders like Intel, and AMD.
-wyn
>I've said it multiple times in this thread, yet you happily disregard it: race, language and culture are tightly correlated.
---
... and just like those who claim that language, and race have no correlation, your driving concept that discrimination based on language ability equals racism is incorrect. Just because two things are correlated does not make them the same thing. In fact, correlation implies two seperate things. According to your own statements race, and laguage are seperate, but tightly correlated. therefore following you own reasoning out to its logical conclussion if race is not equal to language then language based discrimination is not inherently equal to racism. Lets add an example of how your
reasoning breaks down.
I have two applicants for a Job both with the necessary technical skills both of Chinese descent. The difference is one has just immigrated, and speaks fluent Chinese, but poor English. The other applicant is 2nd generation, and speaks fluent english, but only a little bit of chinese. I as a manager hire native english speaker because from my perspective his "communication skills" are better. Am I racist? If so please explain how?
Now this has to take the cake for sexist stereo typing. If you really all asian women are bony, and flat chested. I can't help you because you obviously have serious vision problems. As for them all being docile, and easily controlled. If you really think that I know quite a few of them that would happily eat you for lunch. -wyn
Only christians are moral? Who is being Elitist now? Actually the first wasn't Elitist because the fact is the majority of the population does not understand technology, and therefore is not really in a good position judge it. As for the reaction to Christianity on/. I think you need look no further than posts like yours that condemn those that think differently than you to figure out why you are greeted with scorn. I mean what a closed view of the world. I should feel sorry for you, but I can't bring myself to. Besides your probably a troll. -wyn
You know. It is obvious that you know very little about Japan. The taxes are higher in the states than in Japan. I could go on, but if any country is more capitalist than the US it is Japan. As for teh social welfare system bit Japan's system is not any more extensive than the US's. I'm not sure why I'm posting this since you are more or less categorically wrong in every statement you made. -wyn
Slashdot Mirror
I finally see where you are comming from. Ok based
on that yes it is decidely possible that as far as
design goes transmeta is 5 years ahead of
the other guys, especially if as you say in five
years everyone realizes that code morphing is the
way to go. I was really thinking more in terms
of performance(battery life or otherwise), and
I just couldn't imagine Transmeta releasing
anything today that would be the top of its
market for 5 years to come.
--wyn
the next 5 years.
This seems like as good a place as any.
There was a long discussion about this
a while back on the kernel list. Basically,
ResierFS needs to patch some very central
parts to kernel file system code. My
understanding was that the part of the kernel is
extremely integral to all file systems, not just
ReiserFS, and the changes that were being made
were radical enough that Linus refused to allow
them in relatively late in the development cycle.
This effectively forced ReiserFS out of the
kernel until the next kernel revision. Based on
this, it is conceivable that if a journaling file
system could be rolled out that didn't mess with
much integral to the kernel. It might make it into
the 2.4.x kernel. I would be surprised if we saw
it on the initial release though.
--wyn
>1. Wave-table sound. Standard on the Amiga in 1985, but took until 1991 to be available on the PC (Gravis UltraSound).
Interesting, and I see your point, but I would tend to say these were not in direct competition.
> 2. Hardware 3D transformation. Standard on the Playstation, released in 1994 in Japan, but took until 1999 to show up on the PC (Nvidia TNT).
This is a serious case of apples, and oranges. It is just as invalid as stating that the high end computer graphics market has been doing it for years. The playstation, and PC are not competitive platforms.
>3. Color, handheld game system with ability to draw (flat shaded) polygons in hardware. First available in Atari Lynx, circa 1991. Still not
available in other systems.
Now I ask you this simple question. Do you really believe that the Lynx is more technologically advanced than the handhelds today? Unless, I'm mistaken the technological advance you are refering to amounted to little more than a novelty Item (Like so many other supposed technology advances). If the Lynx was really 10+ years ahead of its time you would expect it to still have a relatively large user base.
I think the crux of this arguement centers around two definitions:
1. Competition: If two devices aren't competing for the same comsumer space I don't consider one to be in competition with the other, and since the two have a different market audience it may simply be a matter of priorities rather than being so much ahead of the competition.
2. advanced tech: In my view for something to be ahead of its competition by 5 years. It must continue to outperform the competition for the next 5 years or provide needed services that its competition can't. I really don't see this to be the case with most of your examples.
Certainly, none of your examples are quite in line with the truly head to head nature of companies like AMD, Intel, and TransMeta. I guess time will tell.
--wyn
Ok, I'm game. List one piece of consumer computer
hardware that has been released where competition
to 5 years to catch up? I certainly can't think
of any.
--wyn
You can't dirrectly compare computer language development, and hardware development. They
have followed decidely different paths. The
fact is at no point in the comsumer hardware industry has anyone released a tech that was 5
years ahead of its time. Infact, It very difficult to predict what the tech will look like
in 5 years, other than in the vague terms of
Moore's law, much less say what you have now is
somehow 5 years ahead of the competition. It is
basically marketing. I mean while I suspect that
supercomputer tech is well ahead of comsumer level
technology, and I agree that languages, and
software developement methologies do not follow
a linear progession, and is more often cyclic with
the old often comming back around again and again.
It is comparing apples, and oranges to use these
as support for transmeta's claims.
--wyn
This is a luidicrous statement. No technology is that much ahead. that would be like the AMD having the athlon at the same time as Intel came out with the P200mmx. It is basically inconceivable that Transmeta would be that much ahead of industry leaders like Intel, and AMD. -wyn
>I've said it multiple times in this thread, yet you happily disregard it: race, language and culture are tightly correlated.
---
... and just like those who claim that language, and race have no correlation, your driving concept that discrimination based on language ability equals racism is incorrect. Just because two things are correlated does not make them the same thing. In fact, correlation implies two seperate things. According to your own statements race, and laguage are seperate, but tightly correlated. therefore following you own reasoning out to its logical conclussion if race is not equal to language then language based discrimination is not inherently equal to racism. Lets add an example of how your
reasoning breaks down.
I have two applicants for a Job both with the necessary technical skills both of Chinese descent. The difference is one has just immigrated, and speaks fluent Chinese, but poor English. The other applicant is 2nd generation, and speaks fluent english, but only a little bit of chinese. I as a manager hire native english speaker because from my perspective his "communication skills" are better. Am I racist? If so please explain how?
-wyn
Now this has to take the cake for sexist stereo typing. If you really all asian women are bony, and flat chested. I can't help you because you obviously have serious vision problems. As for them all being docile, and easily controlled. If you really think that I know quite a few of them that would happily eat you for lunch. -wyn
I only have one question. What does the Bible say about Trolls?
Only christians are moral? Who is being Elitist now? Actually the first wasn't Elitist because the fact is the majority of the population does not understand technology, and therefore is not really in a good position judge it. As for the reaction to Christianity on /. I think you need look no further than posts like yours that condemn those that think differently than you to figure out why you are greeted with scorn. I mean what a closed view of the world. I should feel sorry for you, but I can't bring myself to. Besides your probably a troll. -wyn
You know. It is obvious that you know very little about Japan. The taxes are higher in the states than in Japan. I could go on, but if any country is more capitalist than the US it is Japan. As for teh social welfare system bit Japan's system is not any more extensive than the US's. I'm not sure why I'm posting this since you are more or less categorically wrong in every statement you made. -wyn