> Isn't virtual memory a segment of hard drive space that is used as RAM?
No. You're describing the use of a paging file. Paging != virtual memory. Virtual memory only means every process gets its own virtual address space... which could be backed by any sort of memory including physical RAM or file on disk. The point of virtual memory is so that programs can use their own memory addresses and the operating system maps them to physical locations that don't conflict with other programs.
Re:Real Programmers use Notepad...
on
Vim 7 Released
·
· Score: 1
Well, I guess you'll be using notepad from now on.
And think about this when the world goes IPv6, no worry about running out of numbers, but do you want to re-programme your internal house network when you move ?
No, I wouldn't worry about it because there are these fancy shmancy technologies called "DHCP" and "Dynamic DNS" that would take care of things like that automatically. Isn't technology (and aren't open standards) grand?
It's true that the average user uses at best 10% of the features of those applications listed. But, they don't use the same 10%--they use a different 10% slice of the pie. Mozilla, OpenOffice, Windows, and MS Office are considered "bloated" for this ignorant reason. The "bloat" doesn't harm anyone when implemented properly.
iTMS files are not an open standard, but an encrypted AAC file. iTunes does however let you burn them to CD, then re-rip to MP3 if you want. However, going through a lossless compression twice (as required to get the music onto a nomad, etc.) will result in a significant loss in quality.
If an XP box isn't hooked up to a domain, then CTRL+ALT+DEL only brings up the task manager, not the Windows Security dialog box. So, either task manager showed up when it was pressed, just showed up in the background since BestBuy's app was on top, or they just deleted taskmgr.exe (requires disabling Windows File Protection) so nothing comes up when it is pressed.
No, there isn't, which is why Fast User Switching isn't enabled on a machine which connects to a domain (and should otherwise be disabled if security is a priority).
Re:Mo Money! Mo Money! Mo Money!
on
Windows ATMs by 2005
·
· Score: 4, Informative
They already run off the shelf software and have for quite some time. At least one major national bank runs NT on their ATMs, while most other ATMs in the country run OS/2.
The problem stems from them providing a free service, and then limiting who can use it by something as stupid as operating system preference.
No, the problem stems from idiots who think they have the right to bitch about anything when something is offered for FREE. Sorry, you don't. If you created a free service, you'd have the same right to control access however you wanted. If you're paying for it, it's one thing, but whining about something that's free when there are plenty of alternatives is typical American.
Regardless, this move by Microsoft is a good thing. They are locking out old protocols that don't use SSL to login like the new one (they don't tell you that kind of thing at Slashdot, though, they'd rather cry without looking for facts). It's more secure, and the only people that don't think this is a good thing are blind zealots.
Where did I say just a hack? What's wrong with a hack if it works?
And the appropriate analogy would have been FreeBSD vs. Linux, but that wouldn't gotten nearly the rise out of the Slashbot crowd as my comment did. Have a groovy day!
He said Veritest used gcc for both platforms, instead of Intel's compiler, simply because the benchmarks measure two things at the same time: compiler, and hardware. To test the hardware alone, you must normalize the compiler out of the equation -- using the same version and similar settings --
Wrong, entirely. GCC generating x86 code might as well be an entirely different compiler than GCC generating PPC code. The code generated is obviously entirely different. Also, different optimizations are performed for each platform.
if anything, Joswiak said, gcc has been available on the Intel platform for a lot longer and is more optimized for Intel than for PowerPC.
Also bunk. That doesn't prove that it is optimized better for Intel. If anything, because GCC has a lot of contributions from Apple and IBM it *should* optimize very well for PPC. Intel on the other hand has their own compiler--and they don't contribute nearly as much to GCC. A proper benchmark would use the typical compiler for the platform--which for performance apps on x86 would be Intel's compiler.
Intel puts a lot of R&D into it's compiler for good reason. The compiler is a very large factor in performance.
That said, the hoopla over this is overrated anyway. They are benchmarks and by nature don't prove a thing--especially for a product that won't ship for 2 months.
This is incorrect. The 20% is reserved for use by QoS only if it actually needs the bandwidth. In other words, unless you have an application that is reserving bandwidth with the QoS service, then all your bandwidth is still available.
That's a totally different issue. It doesn't matter how robust the game server is, the client can still cheat in a game unless there is protection on the client side.
Unless you do all the rendering and input processing on the server. Yeah, that'll fly.
Re:802.11g is not and never has been 54Mps
on
802.11g Slows Down
·
· Score: 1
WRONG.
The new raw bandwidth iw 54Mbps. The new effective throughput is now 20 Mbps. RTFA.
Oh, and a mixed (g and b) network has it's effective throughput increased from 5Mbps to 10Mbps.
In the fine print at the bottom (footnote 3): "To achieve maximum speed of 54 Mbps the wireless network may only have AirPort Extreme-enabled computers on it."
Slashdot Mirror
> Isn't virtual memory a segment of hard drive space that is used as RAM?
No. You're describing the use of a paging file. Paging != virtual memory. Virtual memory only means every process gets its own virtual address space... which could be backed by any sort of memory including physical RAM or file on disk. The point of virtual memory is so that programs can use their own memory addresses and the operating system maps them to physical locations that don't conflict with other programs.
Well, I guess you'll be using notepad from now on.
(View | Status Bar)... on XP, anyway.
properties are done in c# almost exactly like they are in delphi.
Well I can't think of any reason you'd need more than 640k of RAM on a personal computer.
Er... wait...
And think about this when the world goes IPv6, no worry about running out of numbers, but do you want to re-programme your internal house network when you move ?
No, I wouldn't worry about it because there are these fancy shmancy technologies called "DHCP" and "Dynamic DNS" that would take care of things like that automatically. Isn't technology (and aren't open standards) grand?
It's true that the average user uses at best 10% of the features of those applications listed. But, they don't use the same 10%--they use a different 10% slice of the pie. Mozilla, OpenOffice, Windows, and MS Office are considered "bloated" for this ignorant reason. The "bloat" doesn't harm anyone when implemented properly.
The virtual CD-R idea is clever. Unfortunately, it would lose all metadata associated with the original file.
not true
iTMS files are not an open standard, but an encrypted AAC file. iTunes does however let you burn them to CD, then re-rip to MP3 if you want. However, going through a lossless compression twice (as required to get the music onto a nomad, etc.) will result in a significant loss in quality.
If an XP box isn't hooked up to a domain, then CTRL+ALT+DEL only brings up the task manager, not the Windows Security dialog box. So, either task manager showed up when it was pressed, just showed up in the background since BestBuy's app was on top, or they just deleted taskmgr.exe (requires disabling Windows File Protection) so nothing comes up when it is pressed.
No, there isn't, which is why Fast User Switching isn't enabled on a machine which connects to a domain (and should otherwise be disabled if security is a priority).
They already run off the shelf software and have for quite some time. At least one major national bank runs NT on their ATMs, while most other ATMs in the country run OS/2.
And if the maker of the software is... Linus Torvalds... who already had a patch out 3 weeks ago?
Ridiculous.
The problem stems from them providing a free service, and then limiting who can use it by something as stupid as operating system preference.
No, the problem stems from idiots who think they have the right to bitch about anything when something is offered for FREE. Sorry, you don't. If you created a free service, you'd have the same right to control access however you wanted. If you're paying for it, it's one thing, but whining about something that's free when there are plenty of alternatives is typical American.
Regardless, this move by Microsoft is a good thing. They are locking out old protocols that don't use SSL to login like the new one (they don't tell you that kind of thing at Slashdot, though, they'd rather cry without looking for facts). It's more secure, and the only people that don't think this is a good thing are blind zealots.
just a hack?
Where did I say just a hack? What's wrong with a hack if it works?
And the appropriate analogy would have been FreeBSD vs. Linux, but that wouldn't gotten nearly the rise out of the Slashbot crowd as my comment did. Have a groovy day!
You're a quick one! Good job.
Only with geek wearing Slashdot shirts does the issue of a well designed solution (embedded deoderant) go up against a hacked (duct tape) one. :P
kinda like Windows against Linux, huh?
(Score:-1, Flamebait)
He said Veritest used gcc for both platforms, instead of Intel's compiler, simply because the benchmarks measure two things at the same time: compiler, and hardware. To test the hardware alone, you must normalize the compiler out of the equation -- using the same version and similar settings --
Wrong, entirely. GCC generating x86 code might as well be an entirely different compiler than GCC generating PPC code. The code generated is obviously entirely different. Also, different optimizations are performed for each platform.
if anything, Joswiak said, gcc has been available on the Intel platform for a lot longer and is more optimized for Intel than for PowerPC.
Also bunk. That doesn't prove that it is optimized better for Intel. If anything, because GCC has a lot of contributions from Apple and IBM it *should* optimize very well for PPC. Intel on the other hand has their own compiler--and they don't contribute nearly as much to GCC. A proper benchmark would use the typical compiler for the platform--which for performance apps on x86 would be Intel's compiler.
Intel puts a lot of R&D into it's compiler for good reason. The compiler is a very large factor in performance.
That said, the hoopla over this is overrated anyway. They are benchmarks and by nature don't prove a thing--especially for a product that won't ship for 2 months.
Troll?
That's the funniest post I've seen today. So much for humor.
This is incorrect. The 20% is reserved for use by QoS only if it actually needs the bandwidth. In other words, unless you have an application that is reserving bandwidth with the QoS service, then all your bandwidth is still available.
Has a Linux, or FreeBSD patch ever been pulled because it was broken? *yawn*
I'd say it was a slow news day, but it ain't even daytime yet.
That's a totally different issue. It doesn't matter how robust the game server is, the client can still cheat in a game unless there is protection on the client side.
Unless you do all the rendering and input processing on the server. Yeah, that'll fly.
WRONG.
The new raw bandwidth iw 54Mbps. The new effective throughput is now 20 Mbps. RTFA.
Oh, and a mixed (g and b) network has it's effective throughput increased from 5Mbps to 10Mbps.
Linux sucks far worse than BSD.
Just ask Google:
BSD sucks 28,400 results.
Linux sucks 228,000 results.
It is quite clear that the users have spoken: Linux Sucks! Long Live BSD!
Do your own homework: straight from apple.
In the fine print at the bottom (footnote 3):
"To achieve maximum speed of 54 Mbps the wireless network may only have AirPort Extreme-enabled computers on it."
Nope it's called a slippery slope argument, and it's a logical fallacy.