Assumming these problems away, the construction of an average car also consumes 120,000 gallons of fresh water.
Consumes? Consumes?!? If it is consumed, where does it go? It certainly isn't converted into energy as heat. It isn't split into hydrogen and oxygen atoms either (cause that would be nuclear fission, and we'd probably know about that being used in car manufacturing). It is not combined with some sort of deadly pollutant and stored in tanks of water that we can no longer drink from. So, what the enviro-wackos mean when they say consumed is that the water is used in processes, then recycled back into the water supply. Theses figures tend to count water used by every person that touches the manufacturing process, so most of the "consumed" water was used for washing hands, drinking, showering, mopping the floor, etc.; it's not like it was all mixed with an acid or poison of some sort. As we all know, this water is treated and put back into the system continuously; it is not "consumed".
You're throwing a lot of red herrings in there. I never said anything about interoperability guarantees and I didn't say that users have any knowledge that a single codebase is in play. What I said was that when someone says "hey, there is a problem with X11", they are almost certainly, without knowing anything about it, referring to a single codebase that has the problem.
Furthermore, the X Window System is not UNIX; it is much simpler and the sample implementation is very compartmentalized. From talking with Jim Gettys and Keith Packard at the X.org conferences (and evidenced by the code base itself), the way that UNIX vendors created their versions of an X Server was not to start from the ground up and pull in pieces that suited them; rather, they started with the complete sample implementation and wrote only a device driver. The code evidences this because there are DDX layers for IBM hardware and OS written by IBM, DEC hardware and OS written by DEC, Sun hardware and OS written by Sun, and I think some form of HP hardware and OS support written by them, contributed to and maintained in the early sample implementations. DDXs can range from hardware support only and limited OS support, to a full implementation like the XFree86/X.org DDX that contains support for loading modules, reading config files, etc. Over the years, various vendors have contributed any major changes they made back to the sample implementation (or X.org at the moment). There is no need to break the protocol; they just make a new extension when new functionality is needed.
If you want to know more about it, just go to the next X.org developer's conference. Two years ago it was in Boston, MA at an HP office (now closed), two months ago it was here in Santa Clara, CA at a Sun office; next year we're going to try to keep it here on the West coast again. There are no mysteries about the X11 system and several of the original players attend the conferences in addition to developers from all the big X11 provider (HP, Sun, RedHat, Novell, sundry linux distros (Debian, Ubuntu, etc.)). You can ask anything you want and get all the history that you want; unfortunately, you'll also find that the term X11 effectively refers to one shared codebase:)
Wow, we're really talking past one another. I'm telling you how people use the term 'X11' these days, and you're railing on about points that I don't disagree with (that it is a protocol standard, etc. etc.).
Uhh... you made a statement about use of language, then tried to back up your point with tehcnical facts that have nothing to do with how people use words. I'm sure you hate it when people ask you if you have a Tivo at home and they really just want to know if you have a DVR:) My point is that the usage of the term X11 effectively refers to a code base and that most people use it this way, while it is technically incorrect.
Historical relations are what my comments were all about; there is only one code base in wide spread use (on the X Server side, which is what the article had to do with, I believe) for the protocol, the OS layer, the DIX layer, and the MI layer. It is rather trivial to implement a working X Server on top of this (you just have to write the DDX layer); I know, I've done it (Cygwin/X). While some people might like to imagine that Sun and HP have reimplemented all of that shared code, it simply isn't true, they have not (learned from discussions with their engineers at conferences, and the fact that they still contribute patches to these shared parts of the code).
In summary, I don't think you understand how much pull the sample implementation code has on X Servers on all platforms. In addition, there have been various experimental projects that have reimplemented the X11 protocol (such as XCB - not finished yet, thus not in use), a couple of proxy solutions (LBX - deprecated, nobody uses it in practice), NX (neat - but nobody uses it in practice), DXCP (again neat, the foundation of NX, but no one ever used it), and the only dozens of libraries that I know of all link against Xlib, thus they don't implement any of the X11 protocol:)
If you were in the industry you would be surprised how much of the code that is actually in use is shared.
Uhh... coming from someone with 5 years of experience in the X Window System, your statement that X11 refers to a protocol and not a codebase is overly pedantic and not truly reflective of reality.
The name 'X11' effectively refers to a code base because the 'sample implementation', which was extended for specific hardware by XFree86 and X.org, is the basis of almost all X Servers in existance. For example, Sun and HP both ship their own X Servers, but the base upon which they implemented their device-dependent code for specific video cards and input devices. Free X servers for Windows and Mac OS X both use the sample implementation (X.org to be specific). Commercial X Servers for Windows all seem to use the sample implementation as well. The only non-sample implementation X Server that I know of is WeirdX, an X Server written entirely in Java, which implies that everything would have to have been rewritten.
No, if you hire people in Silicon Valley that don't want $70K per year, then you are recruiting from the ranks of the homeless. Maybe $150K would have been a better target for "money grubbers" in this job market.
> But the leakage current problems have been increasing with __process shrinks__ [my emphasis] (not just at Intel, but also at IBM and AMD).
Not really true. Leakage current doesn't increase significantly with just a process shrink; rather, it tends to be associated with process shrinks because one of the main reasons for a process shrink is to rev the clock rate up. In this case there is little reason to rev the clock rate on an 802.11a/b/g chip that is processing signals at pre-defined frequencies. In other words, they have held all other things equal and shrunk the die; leakage current should not dramatically increase.
You'll also notice that the article mentioned power savings as a result of the shrink: so the answer was already in the article. If the leakage current and heat were going to be worse than Prescott they would only have touted the cost savings of the smaller die, not the power savings as well.
That sounds great if you are 18 and in perfect health. Wait till you turn 22 and get a lifelong disease. Since there is no national health care, you either pay $400 to $500 *per month* for *just your own* health insurance, or you have a job that pays the health insurance for you and no $11k/year job will include $6k/year of health insurance. Then when you have a wife, you mutliply that by two and just your health insurance would make you bankrupt; forget about a home, you don't need one if you are dead or in the hospital.
You have really got a lot to learn about the real world after high school.
Actually, the line about X.Org was mostly true until a few days ago. X.Org has just been reformed as a group that individuals can join and contribute too without any sort of monetary contribution. The new X.Org is essentially like the GNOME Foundation. Open elections will be held within the next coming months and anyone is free to participate in the elections and/or run for a seat. freedesktop.org is actually involved in the reformation of X.Org; there is a lot of overlap between the two projects and who is working on them. The xlibs release is something that the memebers of the new X.Org are interested in and are moving to as the future of X.
The headline that got put on the press release was misleading. The reality is that X.Org has been reformed to be more like the GNOME Foundation. There will be open elections to appoint a board. Votes will no longer be obtained through monetary contributions; in other words, any one can have a vote and be elected, no matter their affiliation. The actual information handed out by X.Org should be posted on their site in the next few days, which includes the mission statement and aims of the project.
Some developers that have at one time or another been associated with XFree86 are participating in the reformation of X.org. How that translated into "XFree86 and X.org have mereged" in the headline is beyond me.
Err... no, it doesn't have a traditional CVT. It has what the marketroids like to call an "electrically controlled CVT". What does that mean? No cones, no belts, no clutches, no shifting, no nothing. It is implemented using a single planetary gearset (normal automatic transmission have a few sets of planetary gears), one small (10 HP) motor generator, one large (40 to 60 HP, depending on 2003 or 2004) motor generator, and the internal combustion engine. The small MG is allowed to freewheel sometimes, sometimes it generates electricity, and other times it is actually driven to provide a different gear ratio at the expense of a little electrical energy. Reverse gear you ask? Doesn't have one; instead, it drives in reverse only via electrical energy, which is used to spin the large MG backwards (it is attached to the output of the engine/transmission combo so it can directly drive the wheels while freewheeling the smaller MG).
The Prius (especially the 2004) is really the nerds wet dream come true. It is chock full of technology that can't be had in another car for the same price (some of it can't be had at *any* price). The best thing about the electrically controlled transmission is that it is unlikely to need servicing since it has no parts that transition from being in contact to out of contact and back; this transmission is always engaged and has no friction surfaces that will wear out (like clutches).
It really is a cool car and it probably more complex than you think; you should check it out.
The xoncygwin project on SourceForge is unrelated to the current discussion. That was setup in 2001, if you noticed the "Registered" date.
SourceForge makes you pick licenses used by the project, so I picked GPL (which Cygwin uses) and MIT for the X Window System portion of the project.
The current issue is not a fork, nor is it anything that Cygwin or Cygnus had anything to do with. I am Harold Hunt. I am not Cygnus, nor amy I affiliated with Cygnus: I made this decision on my own. Licensing is not part of the current issue at all.
Have you got any idea what insulin shock is? No? Didn't think so.
If you were going into insulin shock, you wouldn't be going to a pharmacy to get something for it. If you did so happen to be in a pharmacy at the time, then they would know to give you orange juice or box of sugar candy, not anything from behind the counter. Of course, this is all if you are conscious... if not, they would most likely call 911 to avoid being liable for giving you the wrong thing.
Of course, this is all in the US... it could be worse in a few war-torn third-world countries, but I don't think that is the point of this article.
A friend of mine had an idea to write a program that beeps in morse code while you type in Windows applications. I was so intrigued with the idea that I had to try it, and wound up finishing it:)
Given that this idea is proposing to deploy fibre at (i would assume) at least 10Mb to the home, the upstream bandwidth will almost certainly need to be in the gigabits for this to be useful.
No, no it won't. Michigan State University has 40,000 students, with probably half living in dorms, thousands of workers, hosts a debian mirror (ftp.egr.msu.edu), you get the point... we are capped at 1 Gbps upstream and no one complains. Where are you getting your numbers from?
Rerun Cygwin's setup.exe, expand the XFree86 category in the package selection window, then select version 4.2.0-20 of the XFree86-xserv package. Next, edit your startup script (typically startxwin.bat), removing any window manager (mwm, twm, etc.) and adding the -multiwindow parameter to XWin.exe. Be sure to remove the -rootless and -fullscreen parameters if you are using them. Also, multiwindow mode chokes if you use the ``run'' utility on some programs, so try removing any program startup lines that use run if you have problems.
Oh yeah, and last night I hacked together a first implementation of the X Shape Extension for the MultiWindow mode. Here is a screenshot of the X Shape Extension (notice the shape of the xeyes and oclock windows).
...and you are so god damn happy that they just started making Diet Moutain Dew (oh yes, with artificial sweetner) so you can drink your favorite pop without having to run 5 miles or inject insulin.
Be thankful that you don't have diabetes or a weight problem, and keep your rants to yourself.
Slashdot Mirror
Assumming these problems away, the construction of an average car also consumes 120,000 gallons of fresh water.
Consumes? Consumes?!? If it is consumed, where does it go? It certainly isn't converted into energy as heat. It isn't split into hydrogen and oxygen atoms either (cause that would be nuclear fission, and we'd probably know about that being used in car manufacturing). It is not combined with some sort of deadly pollutant and stored in tanks of water that we can no longer drink from. So, what the enviro-wackos mean when they say consumed is that the water is used in processes, then recycled back into the water supply. Theses figures tend to count water used by every person that touches the manufacturing process, so most of the "consumed" water was used for washing hands, drinking, showering, mopping the floor, etc.; it's not like it was all mixed with an acid or poison of some sort. As we all know, this water is treated and put back into the system continuously; it is not "consumed".
Harold
You're throwing a lot of red herrings in there. I never said anything about interoperability guarantees and I didn't say that users have any knowledge that a single codebase is in play. What I said was that when someone says "hey, there is a problem with X11", they are almost certainly, without knowing anything about it, referring to a single codebase that has the problem.
:)
Furthermore, the X Window System is not UNIX; it is much simpler and the sample implementation is very compartmentalized. From talking with Jim Gettys and Keith Packard at the X.org conferences (and evidenced by the code base itself), the way that UNIX vendors created their versions of an X Server was not to start from the ground up and pull in pieces that suited them; rather, they started with the complete sample implementation and wrote only a device driver. The code evidences this because there are DDX layers for IBM hardware and OS written by IBM, DEC hardware and OS written by DEC, Sun hardware and OS written by Sun, and I think some form of HP hardware and OS support written by them, contributed to and maintained in the early sample implementations. DDXs can range from hardware support only and limited OS support, to a full implementation like the XFree86/X.org DDX that contains support for loading modules, reading config files, etc. Over the years, various vendors have contributed any major changes they made back to the sample implementation (or X.org at the moment). There is no need to break the protocol; they just make a new extension when new functionality is needed.
If you want to know more about it, just go to the next X.org developer's conference. Two years ago it was in Boston, MA at an HP office (now closed), two months ago it was here in Santa Clara, CA at a Sun office; next year we're going to try to keep it here on the West coast again. There are no mysteries about the X11 system and several of the original players attend the conferences in addition to developers from all the big X11 provider (HP, Sun, RedHat, Novell, sundry linux distros (Debian, Ubuntu, etc.)). You can ask anything you want and get all the history that you want; unfortunately, you'll also find that the term X11 effectively refers to one shared codebase
Wow, we're really talking past one another. I'm telling you how people use the term 'X11' these days, and you're railing on about points that I don't disagree with (that it is a protocol standard, etc. etc.).
Harold
Uhh... you made a statement about use of language, then tried to back up your point with tehcnical facts that have nothing to do with how people use words. I'm sure you hate it when people ask you if you have a Tivo at home and they really just want to know if you have a DVR :) My point is that the usage of the term X11 effectively refers to a code base and that most people use it this way, while it is technically incorrect.
:)
Historical relations are what my comments were all about; there is only one code base in wide spread use (on the X Server side, which is what the article had to do with, I believe) for the protocol, the OS layer, the DIX layer, and the MI layer. It is rather trivial to implement a working X Server on top of this (you just have to write the DDX layer); I know, I've done it (Cygwin/X). While some people might like to imagine that Sun and HP have reimplemented all of that shared code, it simply isn't true, they have not (learned from discussions with their engineers at conferences, and the fact that they still contribute patches to these shared parts of the code).
In summary, I don't think you understand how much pull the sample implementation code has on X Servers on all platforms. In addition, there have been various experimental projects that have reimplemented the X11 protocol (such as XCB - not finished yet, thus not in use), a couple of proxy solutions (LBX - deprecated, nobody uses it in practice), NX (neat - but nobody uses it in practice), DXCP (again neat, the foundation of NX, but no one ever used it), and the only dozens of libraries that I know of all link against Xlib, thus they don't implement any of the X11 protocol
If you were in the industry you would be surprised how much of the code that is actually in use is shared.
Harold
Uhh... coming from someone with 5 years of experience in the X Window System, your statement that X11 refers to a protocol and not a codebase is overly pedantic and not truly reflective of reality.
The name 'X11' effectively refers to a code base because the 'sample implementation', which was extended for specific hardware by XFree86 and X.org, is the basis of almost all X Servers in existance. For example, Sun and HP both ship their own X Servers, but the base upon which they implemented their device-dependent code for specific video cards and input devices. Free X servers for Windows and Mac OS X both use the sample implementation (X.org to be specific). Commercial X Servers for Windows all seem to use the sample implementation as well. The only non-sample implementation X Server that I know of is WeirdX, an X Server written entirely in Java, which implies that everything would have to have been rewritten.
Harold
> [...] convince a judge who have never heard of NTP [...]
I thought everyone has heard of NTP.
RIM shot.
No, if you hire people in Silicon Valley that don't want $70K per year, then you are recruiting from the ranks of the homeless. Maybe $150K would have been a better target for "money grubbers" in this job market.
> But the leakage current problems have been increasing with __process shrinks__ [my emphasis] (not just at Intel, but also at IBM and AMD).
Not really true. Leakage current doesn't increase significantly with just a process shrink; rather, it tends to be associated with process shrinks because one of the main reasons for a process shrink is to rev the clock rate up. In this case there is little reason to rev the clock rate on an 802.11a/b/g chip that is processing signals at pre-defined frequencies. In other words, they have held all other things equal and shrunk the die; leakage current should not dramatically increase.
You'll also notice that the article mentioned power savings as a result of the shrink: so the answer was already in the article. If the leakage current and heat were going to be worse than Prescott they would only have touted the cost savings of the smaller die, not the power savings as well.
Harold
That sounds great if you are 18 and in perfect health. Wait till you turn 22 and get a lifelong disease. Since there is no national health care, you either pay $400 to $500 *per month* for *just your own* health insurance, or you have a job that pays the health insurance for you and no $11k/year job will include $6k/year of health insurance. Then when you have a wife, you mutliply that by two and just your health insurance would make you bankrupt; forget about a home, you don't need one if you are dead or in the hospital.
You have really got a lot to learn about the real world after high school.
Harold
Actually, the line about X.Org was mostly true until a few days ago. X.Org has just been reformed as a group that individuals can join and contribute too without any sort of monetary contribution. The new X.Org is essentially like the GNOME Foundation. Open elections will be held within the next coming months and anyone is free to participate in the elections and/or run for a seat. freedesktop.org is actually involved in the reformation of X.Org; there is a lot of overlap between the two projects and who is working on them. The xlibs release is something that the memebers of the new X.Org are interested in and are moving to as the future of X.
Harold
The headline that got put on the press release was misleading. The reality is that X.Org has been reformed to be more like the GNOME Foundation. There will be open elections to appoint a board. Votes will no longer be obtained through monetary contributions; in other words, any one can have a vote and be elected, no matter their affiliation. The actual information handed out by X.Org should be posted on their site in the next few days, which includes the mission statement and aims of the project.
Some developers that have at one time or another been associated with XFree86 are participating in the reformation of X.org. How that translated into "XFree86 and X.org have mereged" in the headline is beyond me.
Harold
Err... no, it doesn't have a traditional CVT. It has what the marketroids like to call an "electrically controlled CVT". What does that mean? No cones, no belts, no clutches, no shifting, no nothing. It is implemented using a single planetary gearset (normal automatic transmission have a few sets of planetary gears), one small (10 HP) motor generator, one large (40 to 60 HP, depending on 2003 or 2004) motor generator, and the internal combustion engine. The small MG is allowed to freewheel sometimes, sometimes it generates electricity, and other times it is actually driven to provide a different gear ratio at the expense of a little electrical energy. Reverse gear you ask? Doesn't have one; instead, it drives in reverse only via electrical energy, which is used to spin the large MG backwards (it is attached to the output of the engine/transmission combo so it can directly drive the wheels while freewheeling the smaller MG).
The Prius (especially the 2004) is really the nerds wet dream come true. It is chock full of technology that can't be had in another car for the same price (some of it can't be had at *any* price). The best thing about the electrically controlled transmission is that it is unlikely to need servicing since it has no parts that transition from being in contact to out of contact and back; this transmission is always engaged and has no friction surfaces that will wear out (like clutches).
It really is a cool car and it probably more complex than you think; you should check it out.
Harold
No, that is not it at all.
The xoncygwin project on SourceForge is unrelated to the current discussion. That was setup in 2001, if you noticed the "Registered" date.
SourceForge makes you pick licenses used by the project, so I picked GPL (which Cygwin uses) and MIT for the X Window System portion of the project.
The current issue is not a fork, nor is it anything that Cygwin or Cygnus had anything to do with. I am Harold Hunt. I am not Cygnus, nor amy I affiliated with Cygnus: I made this decision on my own. Licensing is not part of the current issue at all.
Just wanted to clear that up.
Harold
Malcovich, Malcovich Malcovich.
Malcovich?!?
Malcovich!
Have you got any idea what insulin shock is? No? Didn't think so.
If you were going into insulin shock, you wouldn't be going to a pharmacy to get something for it. If you did so happen to be in a pharmacy at the time, then they would know to give you orange juice or box of sugar candy, not anything from behind the counter. Of course, this is all if you are conscious... if not, they would most likely call 911 to avoid being liable for giving you the wrong thing.
Of course, this is all in the US... it could be worse in a few war-torn third-world countries, but I don't think that is the point of this article.
Harold
A friend of mine had an idea to write a program that beeps in morse code while you type in Windows applications. I was so intrigued with the idea that I had to try it, and wound up finishing it :)
Morse Code Beeper
Both the source code and compiled binaries can be downloaded from the above site. Enjoy.
Harold
Great! So computers can talk to themselves but they still haven't got anything to say.
Given that this idea is proposing to deploy fibre at (i would assume) at least 10Mb to the home, the upstream bandwidth will almost certainly need to be in the gigabits for this to be useful.
No, no it won't. Michigan State University has 40,000 students, with probably half living in dorms, thousands of workers, hosts a debian mirror (ftp.egr.msu.edu), you get the point... we are capped at 1 Gbps upstream and no one complains. Where are you getting your numbers from?
"ligher [sic] version"
:)
Shoot, they are even dropping unecesary consonants
>OpenBSD does not secure by limiting or removing functinality.
:)
Yeah, OpenBSD secures by removing vowels.
Harold
Rerun Cygwin's setup.exe, expand the XFree86 category in the package selection window, then select version 4.2.0-20 of the XFree86-xserv package. Next, edit your startup script (typically startxwin.bat), removing any window manager (mwm, twm, etc.) and adding the -multiwindow parameter to XWin.exe. Be sure to remove the -rootless and -fullscreen parameters if you are using them. Also, multiwindow mode chokes if you use the ``run'' utility on some programs, so try removing any program startup lines that use run if you have problems.
Oh yeah, and last night I hacked together a first implementation of the X Shape Extension for the MultiWindow mode. Here is a screenshot of the X Shape Extension (notice the shape of the xeyes and oclock windows).
Damn link was broken:
Screenshot
To anyone waiting for Cygwin/XFree86 (the free X Server for Windows) to support a multi-windowing mode, the wait is over:
r ee 86-multiwindow.png
http://xfree86.cygwin.com/screenshots/cygwin-xf
Rasterman: Desktop Linux is Dead
10 years later...
Desktop Linux: Rasterman is Dead
...and you are so god damn happy that they just started making Diet Moutain Dew (oh yes, with artificial sweetner) so you can drink your favorite pop without having to run 5 miles or inject insulin.
Be thankful that you don't have diabetes or a weight problem, and keep your rants to yourself.
Thank you,
Harold