Well, except to the extent that a lot of that commerce was driven by debt spending. Essentially, other people paid to make us the 5th biggest economy, and now we're going to say 'screw them' and default on the obligations. Ha ha!
I just don't answer my personal cell phone during business hours unless the caller is known and someone I care about talking to. At my last job that worked just fine (at my new job it isn't a problem).
Why the fuck should a GPU company get the rights to a CPU architectural extension?
besides, I bet they're already working with Intel's stuff - it would explain why the Fermi burned like a bitch first-gen, they must've tried implementing netburst.
The fuck because they also used to be a chipset company in addition to a GPU company. That said, license to x86-64 is not the problem, its LGA1156 that's the problem.
It ran out. But what nvidia needs to go back to making intel chipsets is access to the patents on the chip interface (e.g. socket 1156/1155), which are recent (last 5 years).
It's not an axiom in traditional mathematics. That's restricted to Peano's axioms. 2+2=4 can be derived from the axioms, so it's a theory. Proven, even.
Yeah, but those guys are all unemployed, and it's reproducible that they're unemployed, so scientifically speaking it's a bad idea to go down that path. Or not, because it kant be proven.
Yeah exactly... it wasn't at all clear how 'generic' the grandparent wanted... so I actually replied twice depending on which level of generic they wanted.
Well, if the same entity that put all the original code under the gpl wants to relicense it/sell it/etc under a different license, they are obviously free to do so. I assumed that was not the case based on the story headline. I should have known better, though.
Then (if it weren't for marketing) maybe it would make sense to implement directx11 in the next generation, or the one after that, when they can actually make directx11 content usable.
Not unless minecraft improves the features they are using. It's a really primitive design, there's almost no way any existing card isn't rendering what minecraft puts out at maximum quality.
DX11 titles are so high-end, that no one would find them playable with the capabilities of intel HW. Intel HW indeed rules integrated graphics (until fusion is on the street), but no one plays high end dx10 titles, much less dx11 titles on such hardware. So why bother implementing dx11 at all (instead of, for example, making dx10 faster, possibly enough faster to play high end dx10 titles), when it won't be usably fast for any actual dx11 software? The answer of course is marketing.
Actually, on rereading your post... I think it may actually meet your definition. It isn't hard-wired for dx11. There will be a driver. That driver can be modified/optimized later. The hardware is, in fact, generic graphics hardware, at least in the sense I think you mean.
Slashdot Mirror
You're living in a fantasy world where people do stuff that makes sense.
Mainstream for who? California defines American culture (literally).
CA is the same situation. Almost the entire budget is education (60%) and health(25%). The next biggest item is prisons (9%).
Well, except to the extent that a lot of that commerce was driven by debt spending. Essentially, other people paid to make us the 5th biggest economy, and now we're going to say 'screw them' and default on the obligations. Ha ha!
I'd say odds are pretty high CA is going to rewrite the constitution to defund the worst pension abuses.
Exactly. Our choices for governor this election were depressing and scary. I voted depressing.
I just don't answer my personal cell phone during business hours unless the caller is known and someone I care about talking to. At my last job that worked just fine (at my new job it isn't a problem).
x86-64 is a CPU architecture.
Why the fuck should a GPU company get the rights to a CPU architectural extension?
besides, I bet they're already working with Intel's stuff - it would explain why the Fermi burned like a bitch first-gen, they must've tried implementing netburst.
The fuck because they also used to be a chipset company in addition to a GPU company. That said, license to x86-64 is not the problem, its LGA1156 that's the problem.
It ran out. But what nvidia needs to go back to making intel chipsets is access to the patents on the chip interface (e.g. socket 1156/1155), which are recent (last 5 years).
I sea what you did there.
FTFY.
Well, there's a theory that it isn't lucky, but causal. But that's not proven.
Traditional math excludes everything not Peano from the axioms.
It's not an axiom in traditional mathematics. That's restricted to Peano's axioms. 2+2=4 can be derived from the axioms, so it's a theory. Proven, even.
Yeah, but those guys are all unemployed, and it's reproducible that they're unemployed, so scientifically speaking it's a bad idea to go down that path. Or not, because it kant be proven.
Yes, but this is not the generation of hardware that will be able to make a dx11 title of any kind playable.
Yeah exactly ... it wasn't at all clear how 'generic' the grandparent wanted ... so I actually replied twice depending on which level of generic they wanted.
Well, if the same entity that put all the original code under the gpl wants to relicense it/sell it/etc under a different license, they are obviously free to do so. I assumed that was not the case based on the story headline. I should have known better, though.
Then (if it weren't for marketing) maybe it would make sense to implement directx11 in the next generation, or the one after that, when they can actually make directx11 content usable.
Precisely. So why is Intel bothering to support dx11? That's high-end only, and won't be playable on their hardware, even though it's 'supported'.
Not unless minecraft improves the features they are using. It's a really primitive design, there's almost no way any existing card isn't rendering what minecraft puts out at maximum quality.
You can get to the vendor specific features in directx also. But in either case, that's definitely the ugly way to write code.
gtx 400 isn't integrated onto a cpu, which I think was the point.
DX11 titles are so high-end, that no one would find them playable with the capabilities of intel HW. Intel HW indeed rules integrated graphics (until fusion is on the street), but no one plays high end dx10 titles, much less dx11 titles on such hardware. So why bother implementing dx11 at all (instead of, for example, making dx10 faster, possibly enough faster to play high end dx10 titles), when it won't be usably fast for any actual dx11 software? The answer of course is marketing.
Yeah, that's exactly why I had to put in the qualifier about the driver, unfortunately.
Actually, on rereading your post ... I think it may actually meet your definition. It isn't hard-wired for dx11. There will be a driver. That driver can be modified/optimized later. The hardware is, in fact, generic graphics hardware, at least in the sense I think you mean.