Funny reply, but that's the point. Confusing Star Trek and Star Wars is a classic joke. I saw Jedi T. Kirk on FFXI. I went to a LAN party, played Jedi Knight and made my nick 'Spock'. It's all to make the nerds say, "Nooo! Oh my god, you're wrong! Don't you know that you're screwing it all up!?".
After all, that's what tongue in check comedy of from Futurama is all about.
"If we can hit that bull's-eye, the rest of the dominos will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate!" -- Zap Brannigan
"But, but, that's dominoes and cards and darts, and... and"... yeah, it is. Laugh you mortals.
Yeah, about heat. It's clear that the G5 is a superior chip by design. You can actually stack Apple's Xserve servers on top of each other. This would be unheard of in the scores of Intel cabinets that I admin (nice ones from Dell too). It's a matter of power consumption and heat production. And don't tell me to make my server room colder...it's already cold. The Intel boxes get so hot, we have to skip 1/3 of a "U" in the rack to let air through. But at an Oracle headquarter server room I saw racks of Xserve units stacked tight.
They also claim less power usage per CPU. Power dissipation on the G5s in the Xserve are in the range of 40 watts while a P4 2.8ghz is in the range of 60 watts. I think power dissipation on the G5 2.5ghz is 80 watts (this isn't in the Xserve). 80W is a lot but those are liquid cooled (from the factory) in the desktops. And a 2.5ghz G5 is a far cry from a 2.8ghz P4.
I went to an Apple demo and they really harped on this point although they tried to angle it from a cost standpoint. I don't see how 1 rack in a datacenter would make the switch worthwhile. But if you're just comparing apples to apples, I still can't find anyone who actually stacks Xeon class (2.4ghz+) dual CPU box directly on top of one another. Even in a 60 degree datacenter.
We certainly don't and we're paying for rack space!
I think his article makes a lot of sense. Akin to the information world, life is a service and two planets would provide horizontal fail-over just like a two-node cluster.
It actually makes a lot of sense when you consider an ELE (extinction level event) type of situation. Imagine the costs of trying to protect the primary node (earth) from a huge asterroid. Imagine building a huge force field which would be impossible/expensive beyond all reason.
If Mars eventually became self sustaining, it would act as a backup for Earth.
In the database world, you can have a smaller less expensive box that provides at least some level of service rather than no service. Of course, you can't protect against all disasters. (if a black hole swallowed Earth, it'd be bound to swallow Mars) But you could protect yourself against at least the most likely (environmental disasters, political unrest - although would a dictator simply just have a two year invasion delay attack to Mars?).
One of the parts in the article mentions a user-specified error tolerance to control quality vs performance. I'd be curious to see how this performs in the real world.
There's already a gnome theme by the name of scalable gorilla that uses vector graphics. It runs a little slow on slow CPUs, but it looks fantastic and it's easily configurable. With a bitmap icon, I have to recreate the graphics file, with the Scalable Gorilla theme, I change text in a XML file. Another thing to keep in mind is the size of the hi-res bitmaps that would be required to compete with the computer synthesized perfection of vector graphics.
Isn't this a disk space vs CPU tradeoff? I have to store a bitmap where I have to compute a vector? I'm all for using my untapped CPU cycles instead of disk storage.
I think `ship' was the word they were searching for. Maybe they didn't install the latest patch for DirectX, you know, the thing that controls your keyboard and mouse input but you can't uninstall?
Previous points aside, I don't like having a server OS that shits [sic] with a "safe mode".
I've got a 128 meg SD card in mine. I put mp3s etc on it. I don't think the default player does ogg files. But thekompany.com has a non-free one.
Having an SD card is the only way to go. I've put everything from java sources (you can get jikes for the zaurus) to Atari 2600 roms to Doom wads (yes, you can get Doom for it).
Slashdot Mirror
Funny reply, but that's the point. Confusing Star Trek and Star Wars is a classic joke. I saw Jedi T. Kirk on FFXI. I went to a LAN party, played Jedi Knight and made my nick 'Spock'. It's all to make the nerds say, "Nooo! Oh my god, you're wrong! Don't you know that you're screwing it all up!?".
... and" ... yeah, it is. Laugh you mortals.
After all, that's what tongue in check comedy of from Futurama is all about.
"If we can hit that bull's-eye, the rest of the dominos will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate!" -- Zap Brannigan
"But, but, that's dominoes and cards and darts, and
Excelsior to the max. \m/
Yeah, about heat. It's clear that the G5 is a superior chip by design. You can actually stack Apple's Xserve servers on top of each other. This would be unheard of in the scores of Intel cabinets that I admin (nice ones from Dell too). It's a matter of power consumption and heat production. And don't tell me to make my server room colder...it's already cold. The Intel boxes get so hot, we have to skip 1/3 of a "U" in the rack to let air through. But at an Oracle headquarter server room I saw racks of Xserve units stacked tight.
They also claim less power usage per CPU. Power dissipation on the G5s in the Xserve are in the range of 40 watts while a P4 2.8ghz is in the range of 60 watts. I think power dissipation on the G5 2.5ghz is 80 watts (this isn't in the Xserve). 80W is a lot but those are liquid cooled (from the factory) in the desktops. And a 2.5ghz G5 is a far cry from a 2.8ghz P4.
I went to an Apple demo and they really harped on this point although they tried to angle it from a cost standpoint. I don't see how 1 rack in a datacenter would make the switch worthwhile. But if you're just comparing apples to apples, I still can't find anyone who actually stacks Xeon class (2.4ghz+) dual CPU box directly on top of one another. Even in a 60 degree datacenter.
We certainly don't and we're paying for rack space!
I think his article makes a lot of sense. Akin to the information world, life is a service and two planets would provide horizontal fail-over just like a two-node cluster.
It actually makes a lot of sense when you consider an ELE (extinction level event) type of situation. Imagine the costs of trying to protect the primary node (earth) from a huge asterroid. Imagine building a huge force field which would be impossible/expensive beyond all reason.
If Mars eventually became self sustaining, it would act as a backup for Earth.
In the database world, you can have a smaller less expensive box that provides at least some level of service rather than no service. Of course, you can't protect against all disasters. (if a black hole swallowed Earth, it'd be bound to swallow Mars) But you could protect yourself against at least the most likely (environmental disasters, political unrest - although would a dictator simply just have a two year invasion delay attack to Mars?).
Interesting.
One of the parts in the article mentions a user-specified error tolerance to control quality vs performance. I'd be curious to see how this performs in the real world.
There's already a gnome theme by the name of scalable gorilla that uses vector graphics. It runs a little slow on slow CPUs, but it looks fantastic and it's easily configurable. With a bitmap icon, I have to recreate the graphics file, with the Scalable Gorilla theme, I change text in a XML file. Another thing to keep in mind is the size of the hi-res bitmaps that would be required to compete with the computer synthesized perfection of vector graphics.
Isn't this a disk space vs CPU tradeoff? I have to store a bitmap where I have to compute a vector? I'm all for using my untapped CPU cycles instead of disk storage.
I think `ship' was the word they were searching for. Maybe they didn't install the latest patch for DirectX, you know, the thing that controls your keyboard and mouse input but you can't uninstall?
Previous points aside, I don't like having a server OS that shits [sic] with a "safe mode".
I like Linux's "safe mode": id:3:initdefault:
I've got a 128 meg SD card in mine. I put mp3s etc on it. I don't think the default player does ogg files. But thekompany.com has a non-free one.
Having an SD card is the only way to go. I've put everything from java sources (you can get jikes for the zaurus) to Atari 2600 roms to Doom wads (yes, you can get Doom for it).
Hours of fun when you're waiting in line.
I sense the bumper sticker: "Log Off and Drive."
--