I thought 'Harmony' was just Real's reverse engineering of FairPlay, no? They advertise RealPlayer with 'Harmony Technology.' So won't their FairPlay songs play just fine in RealPlayer no matter what Apple does? But if you put it into iTunes or on an iPod it won't work. Hence, Apple's problem.
If they license FairPlay to Real or anyone else and that company outsells them, won't that company then have leverage to dictate FairPlay/DRM changes to Apple? If Real gets 50% of the iPod music market, won't Apple be forced to give them a say in iPod technology? That'd be bad for Apple and, I think, the iPod.
Well GPS is GPS whether you're on a road or a lake. And GPS was big with boaters long before they could make them small enough to fit in your hand. The only question is if there are map products for that area. Browse around the marine sections of Garmin and Magellan. You'll probably find something that will work for him.
Vinton Cerf (generally acknowledged as the father of the Internet):
I am taking the liberty of sending to you both a brief summary of Al Gore's Internet involvement, prepared by Bob Kahn and me. As you know, there have been a seemingly unending series of jokes chiding the vice president for his assertion that he "took the initiative in creating the Internet."
Bob and I believe that the vice president deserves significant credit for his early recognition of the importance of what has become the Internet.
No, not a tablet. I'm imagining an LCD screen for your Mac/iMac that detaches from its stand and can be carried around the house. Wireless video voodoo. Not intended to be a standalone computer but just a portable display with touchscreen. Needs Wifi and a Mac nearby. You can use it as a remote for AirportExpress, as a 'non-portable laptop,' i.e. it doesn't leave the house, usually. Maybe you can take the screen over to a friends house or to work and log into a Mac there with it. Hmmm....
The author of this, Daniel Lyons, is their resident Linux FUD slinger. It seems his only role is to spread this type of manure. The Forbes must have a lot of MS stock or something.
There is no conspiracy. Supercomputers solve problems that DC cannot begin to address. Your example DC simualtion wouldn't work because of the time it would take to communicate all that information. The latency issue alone would make it unsusable.
Do you really think only prestigous scientists get to use supercomputers? That the little guy is being intentionally kept down by the supercomputing man? The idea is ludicrous. If someone has a truly 'brilliant idea' they will get on the superomputer.
There are things that supercomputers can do that no other computing systems can do. If that wasn't true, people would be doing weather forecasting with their Forecasting@Home clients.
No offense, but you don't understand supercomputing.
The TeraGrid is distributed-computing but not like what the poster is calling DC. The poster is talking about things like SETI and encryption cracking. They are massively parrallel -- i.e. problems that can be broken up up into discrete units and worked on by unconnected machines.
Anyway, I'm for both and against misinformation about what both are. The poster confuses the issue terribly.
True, if you're not simulating how those molecules interact. Don't get me wrong, DC is great for a lot of things. My point is that for certain problems DC just isn't up to the task.
Correct. Usage is not restricted to the people who work there. In fact, 99.999% of the work done on the NSF supercomputing resources is done by people who do not work at the supercomputing centers. Researchers from U.S. institutions apply for time on the supercomputers. The centers are a computing resource for the whole country.
The problem with large projects like TeraGrid, EarthSimulator and other supercomputer sites is that the underfunded _brilliant_ ideas are left behind by those who can afford to pay for or build these centers and sites.
What are you talking about? These are publically funded resources. You apply to the NSF for time on these machines. If you're at a U.S. institution and you have a real need for supercomputing you can get time on these machines.
While TeraGrid is a powerfool tool it is one that thousands of scientists and laboratories are standing in line to use. Meanwhile Distributed Computing is available, cheap and relatively quick.
And Distributed Computing can't even begin to solve some of the problems that supercomputers are designed to address.
While it may look good on your project to say you used a IBM BlueGENE or DeepComp 6800 is it really worth the extra cost and waiting in line for your chance to use?
Yes. When you want to simulate every molecule of a proteing in a water solution (~17000 atoms worth) you need a supercomputer. DC can't do it.
True Distributed Computing is the way to go and shows positive results. Now we just need to tinker with it some more!
...and many scientists with little funding but bright ideas are being left behind.
Care to cite a source?
When you apply to the PACI program you get a grant of Service Units -- i.e. time on the computers. You don't need huge amounts of funding. The requirements state that you need to be a researcher at a U.S. institution. It also helps if you can show that you actually need and can use that kind of computing power.
And, please, distributed computing and supercomputing are not synonymous in terms of what problems they address. Distributed computing cannot replace supercomputers in every case. DC is good for a limited set of problems.
This is the same Paul Murphy that was talking out his @$$ about Apple not having a CPU and how they should go with Sun. The Slashdot reference here makes me think this was written for Slashdot to get a link and hits.
Makes me wish the editors here would... well, edit.
$300/month for a Geo Metro? You'd have it paid off in 3 months.
My girlfriend and I split the cost of a Chevy Metro two years ago. Total cost $2500. I get >40mpg highway. It takes me everywhere I want to go. Although driving up hills with 2 people, a dog and camping gear for all really pushes the limits of those 3 cylinders.
The only thing I miss is space for hauling large items. My next car will probably be a station wagon.
Slashdot Mirror
I thought 'Harmony' was just Real's reverse engineering of FairPlay, no? They advertise RealPlayer with 'Harmony Technology.' So won't their FairPlay songs play just fine in RealPlayer no matter what Apple does? But if you put it into iTunes or on an iPod it won't work. Hence, Apple's problem.
If they license FairPlay to Real or anyone else and that company outsells them, won't that company then have leverage to dictate FairPlay/DRM changes to Apple? If Real gets 50% of the iPod music market, won't Apple be forced to give them a say in iPod technology? That'd be bad for Apple and, I think, the iPod.
So, which other MP3 players can play FairPlay DRM'd music?
I think Real are making a huge gamble that they will ultimately lose.
Well GPS is GPS whether you're on a road or a lake. And GPS was big with boaters long before they could make them small enough to fit in your hand. The only question is if there are map products for that area. Browse around the marine sections of Garmin and Magellan. You'll probably find something that will work for him.
Vinton Cerf (generally acknowledged as the father of the Internet):
More here: http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue5_10/wigginYou're ruining my fantasy. Stop it or I'm telling The Steve.
No, not a tablet. I'm imagining an LCD screen for your Mac/iMac that detaches from its stand and can be carried around the house. Wireless video voodoo. Not intended to be a standalone computer but just a portable display with touchscreen. Needs Wifi and a Mac nearby. You can use it as a remote for AirportExpress, as a 'non-portable laptop,' i.e. it doesn't leave the house, usually. Maybe you can take the screen over to a friends house or to work and log into a Mac there with it. Hmmm....
This only so they can catch people wearing Nike t-shirts.
The author of this, Daniel Lyons, is their resident Linux FUD slinger. It seems his only role is to spread this type of manure. The Forbes must have a lot of MS stock or something.
I don't doubt it so why did they pay SCO off?
Actually COWS are SUPPOSED to eat feed corn. Seed corn is grown for seed. Feed corn is grown for animals.
There is no conspiracy. Supercomputers solve problems that DC cannot begin to address. Your example DC simualtion wouldn't work because of the time it would take to communicate all that information. The latency issue alone would make it unsusable.
Do you really think only prestigous scientists get to use supercomputers? That the little guy is being intentionally kept down by the supercomputing man? The idea is ludicrous. If someone has a truly 'brilliant idea' they will get on the superomputer.
There are things that supercomputers can do that no other computing systems can do. If that wasn't true, people would be doing weather forecasting with their Forecasting@Home clients.
No offense, but you don't understand supercomputing.
The TeraGrid is distributed-computing but not like what the poster is calling DC. The poster is talking about things like SETI and encryption cracking. They are massively parrallel -- i.e. problems that can be broken up up into discrete units and worked on by unconnected machines.
Anyway, I'm for both and against misinformation about what both are. The poster confuses the issue terribly.
True, if you're not simulating how those molecules interact. Don't get me wrong, DC is great for a lot of things. My point is that for certain problems DC just isn't up to the task.
I would encourage you to visit www.teragrid.org and read more than the front page to learn what the Teragrid is
Correct. Usage is not restricted to the people who work there. In fact, 99.999% of the work done on the NSF supercomputing resources is done by people who do not work at the supercomputing centers. Researchers from U.S. institutions apply for time on the supercomputers. The centers are a computing resource for the whole country.
One project on the Teragrid used 17 Teraflops. The poster hasn't done his/her research on the Teragrid.
What are you talking about? These are publically funded resources. You apply to the NSF for time on these machines. If you're at a U.S. institution and you have a real need for supercomputing you can get time on these machines.
And Distributed Computing can't even begin to solve some of the problems that supercomputers are designed to address.
Yes. When you want to simulate every molecule of a proteing in a water solution (~17000 atoms worth) you need a supercomputer. DC can't do it.
DC is neither a religion nor a panacea.
They are public in the sense that they are publically funded. They are not owned by a private corporation or restricted to classified use.
Care to cite a source?
When you apply to the PACI program you get a grant of Service Units -- i.e. time on the computers. You don't need huge amounts of funding. The requirements state that you need to be a researcher at a U.S. institution. It also helps if you can show that you actually need and can use that kind of computing power.
And, please, distributed computing and supercomputing are not synonymous in terms of what problems they address. Distributed computing cannot replace supercomputers in every case. DC is good for a limited set of problems.
Lastly, an example of Teragrid research: Ketchup on the Grid with Joysticks.
This is the same Paul Murphy that was talking out his @$$ about Apple not having a CPU and how they should go with Sun. The Slashdot reference here makes me think this was written for Slashdot to get a link and hits.
Makes me wish the editors here would... well, edit.
$300/month for a Geo Metro? You'd have it paid off in 3 months.
My girlfriend and I split the cost of a Chevy Metro two years ago. Total cost $2500. I get >40mpg highway. It takes me everywhere I want to go. Although driving up hills with 2 people, a dog and camping gear for all really pushes the limits of those 3 cylinders.
The only thing I miss is space for hauling large items. My next car will probably be a station wagon.
Would that mean G5 Powerbooks too? I can't imagine the iMacs getting ahead of the Powerbooks.
How so?
Is UPnP adopted by any standards body?
Has anyone tried, even proof on concept, to create a virus or worm that innoculates zombies?
Are they giving away hardware and selling software or selling hardware and giving away software?
I think Sun is getting a bit senile in it's old age.