So why not do it generically? IBM Cell chips integrate a Vector chip on the CPU. Intel and AMD both have video chips integrated into the CPU. So why not integrate like the old Altvec of PPC a Vector co-processor.
Why not use a generic chip designed for that type of instruction set? That way your not limited software versions for your hardware.
Because sufficiently generic hardware is not sufficiently fast at the desired task, graphics computation. Even with the optimization intel has put into this, they'll be MORE than an order of magnitude of graphics performance behind the dedicated solutions of their competitors.
Yes. Assuming someone writes the driver. DX11 is a bit ahead of OGL in hardware requirements/capabilities, so full support for dx11 means it has everything OGL needs also.
I'm sure the article was thinking mainstream x86 line, but failed to say it. Or more likely, written by someone who doesn't care about the platforms atom is aimed at, and therefore didn't know.
Almost certainly. They want to sell hardware, and being a full generation or more behind their competitors, have no reason to hold back any secrets of their implementation.
The hardware has all the features necessary to support dx11. dx11 is generally a superset of what opengl can do. So yes, opengl should be fully supported, assuming someone writes the driver.
What happens to your nvidia 580 card when dx 12 comes along? Exactly the same thing happens with these cpus. Either you live with the reduced functionality, or you put in a new video card, assuming your motherboard has a graphics card slot.
It's not what you think. It's a built-in graphics card on the CPU. That graphics card has all the hardware necessary to support the directx 11 api. If they change the directx API, intel changes the driver.
For the foreseeable future you can have your pick of ARM and x86. On the plus side, x86 has been pretty much RISC internally for a long time now. And a lot of the ISA has been changed over too. Once they tack on one or two more ISA extension you'll be able to have 100% of your code avoid the x86 path.
Yes, if WinMTR was written from scratch, they are clearly fine. If it was replaced piece by piece, they are equally clearly in trouble. It's just the way the law is written. Either you built something standing upon the shoulders of someone else, or you didn't.
I see it the other way. Facebook has made that feature intentionally cumbersome. No one else has made it sufficiently easy to use yet. Until someone really gets it right, I expect zero impact on facebook, which is exactly what we observe.
Not really. WINE re-implements a lot of the api, to allow you to run windows programs on linux. They key differentiator from today's story is that they didn't start from windows code.
A “derivative work” is a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications, which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a “derivative work”.
103. Subject matter of copyright: Compilations and derivative works
(a) The subject matter of copyright as specified by section 102 includes compilations and derivative works, but protection for a work employing preexisting material in which copyright subsists does not extend to any part of the work in which such material has been used unlawfully.
(b) The copyright in a compilation or derivative work extends only to the material contributed by the author of such work, as distinguished from the preexisting material employed in the work, and does not imply any exclusive right in the preexisting material. The copyright in such work is independent of, and does not affect or enlarge the scope, duration, ownership, or subsistence of, any copyright protection in the preexisting material.
106. Exclusive rights in copyrighted works38
Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:
(2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work;
Effectively was a key word in my claim. People are clearly dissatisfied with whatever facebook supports, and in fact it seems most people can't even figure out that such a feature exists!
They're supposed to archive our culture. Like it or not, twitter is part of the culture. And at ~100B tweets, * 140 bytes, that's a whopping terabyte hard drive worth of data. I'm sure the taxpayers will miss the $100K/yr this archive may be costing us.
I mentioned this in another post, but yours is more relevant:
The first social networking site that properly and effectively allows you to sort your 'friends' into categories (college buddies, family, close friends...), and then effectively supports privacy settings to send updates only to specific subsets will wipe out facebook in a year.
Facebook wants everything to be as public as possible. They've stated that as a goal. It is a goal fundamentally incompatible with what most people want. Facebook is going to lose to a nimble competitor who gives people what they actually want.
Indeed, the thing that will replace facebook will allow you to group your 'friends' into useful categories (family, close friends, acquaintances, drinking buddies), and trivially route your updates to the appropriate sub-groups. The first site that figures this out right will wipe out facebook in a year.
I loathe facebook, but I understand the value of a combination push/pull medium with the right balance. Email misses the balance by consuming resources on the pull side even if the pull side is disinterested.
There is a blurry line, but the courts have been willing to enforce it in the past. You can't encourage murdering someone and get away scot free if they do it.
Force might have been a clearer word choice than violence, but technically they are synonyms, so IMO the op was justified in using it. I'd have likely used 'force' myself if I was making the same claim.
Well, I would say the police have shown us a lot of evidence that they will escalate to lethal force at the drop of a hat. They've even been known to murder defenseless compliant people. But that's somewhat beside the point. My point is only that they will escalate if you do, and it's the threat of that escalation to actual violence that keeps people in line, even when fairly massive amounts of money are at stake.
And no, I don't advocate the anarchist approach. I think the escalation to violence by police powers is the only way it works given human nature. I just don't lie to myself about how it works.
Slashdot Mirror
So why not do it generically? IBM Cell chips integrate a Vector chip on the CPU. Intel and AMD both have video chips integrated into the CPU. So why not integrate like the old Altvec of PPC a Vector co-processor.
Why not use a generic chip designed for that type of instruction set? That way your not limited software versions for your hardware.
Because sufficiently generic hardware is not sufficiently fast at the desired task, graphics computation. Even with the optimization intel has put into this, they'll be MORE than an order of magnitude of graphics performance behind the dedicated solutions of their competitors.
Yes. Assuming someone writes the driver. DX11 is a bit ahead of OGL in hardware requirements/capabilities, so full support for dx11 means it has everything OGL needs also.
No. That's a problem in the minecraft client, not in the hardware that displays it.
I'm sure the article was thinking mainstream x86 line, but failed to say it. Or more likely, written by someone who doesn't care about the platforms atom is aimed at, and therefore didn't know.
Almost certainly. They want to sell hardware, and being a full generation or more behind their competitors, have no reason to hold back any secrets of their implementation.
The 3d text mode in outlook 2012 is pretty cool. The words are practically poking you in the eyeballs!
The hardware has all the features necessary to support dx11. dx11 is generally a superset of what opengl can do. So yes, opengl should be fully supported, assuming someone writes the driver.
What happens to your nvidia 580 card when dx 12 comes along? Exactly the same thing happens with these cpus. Either you live with the reduced functionality, or you put in a new video card, assuming your motherboard has a graphics card slot.
It's not what you think. It's a built-in graphics card on the CPU. That graphics card has all the hardware necessary to support the directx 11 api. If they change the directx API, intel changes the driver.
For the foreseeable future you can have your pick of ARM and x86.
On the plus side, x86 has been pretty much RISC internally for a long time now. And a lot of the ISA has been changed over too. Once they tack on one or two more ISA extension you'll be able to have 100% of your code avoid the x86 path.
Yes, if WinMTR was written from scratch, they are clearly fine. If it was replaced piece by piece, they are equally clearly in trouble. It's just the way the law is written. Either you built something standing upon the shoulders of someone else, or you didn't.
I see it the other way. Facebook has made that feature intentionally cumbersome. No one else has made it sufficiently easy to use yet. Until someone really gets it right, I expect zero impact on facebook, which is exactly what we observe.
Somebody had to be the original author of the work from which it was derived. Someone's estate would have standing to sue.
Not really. WINE re-implements a lot of the api, to allow you to run windows programs on linux.
They key differentiator from today's story is that they didn't start from windows code.
I think you'd be in trouble for preparing a derivative work without the original copyright holder's permission, see below.
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#101
A “derivative work” is a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications, which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a “derivative work”.
103. Subject matter of copyright: Compilations and derivative works
(a) The subject matter of copyright as specified by section 102 includes compilations and derivative works, but protection for a work employing preexisting material in which copyright subsists does not extend to any part of the work in which such material has been used unlawfully.
(b) The copyright in a compilation or derivative work extends only to the material contributed by the author of such work, as distinguished from the preexisting material employed in the work, and does not imply any exclusive right in the preexisting material. The copyright in such work is independent of, and does not affect or enlarge the scope, duration, ownership, or subsistence of, any copyright protection in the preexisting material.
106. Exclusive rights in copyrighted works38
Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:
(2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work;
I don't keep up with it either. But you can't just have the feature, it has to be easy to use in the right way.
Effectively was a key word in my claim. People are clearly dissatisfied with whatever facebook supports, and in fact it seems most people can't even figure out that such a feature exists!
They're supposed to archive our culture. Like it or not, twitter is part of the culture. And at ~100B tweets, * 140 bytes, that's a whopping terabyte hard drive worth of data. I'm sure the taxpayers will miss the $100K/yr this archive may be costing us.
I mentioned this in another post, but yours is more relevant:
The first social networking site that properly and effectively allows you to sort your 'friends' into categories (college buddies, family, close friends ...), and then effectively supports privacy settings to send updates only to specific subsets will wipe out facebook in a year.
Facebook wants everything to be as public as possible. They've stated that as a goal. It is a goal fundamentally incompatible with what most people want. Facebook is going to lose to a nimble competitor who gives people what they actually want.
Indeed, the thing that will replace facebook will allow you to group your 'friends' into useful categories (family, close friends, acquaintances, drinking buddies), and trivially route your updates to the appropriate sub-groups. The first site that figures this out right will wipe out facebook in a year.
I loathe facebook, but I understand the value of a combination push/pull medium with the right balance. Email misses the balance by consuming resources on the pull side even if the pull side is disinterested.
There is a blurry line, but the courts have been willing to enforce it in the past. You can't encourage murdering someone and get away scot free if they do it.
But ... then that guy can hire an army of cleaners to maintain his 170 bedroom mansion.
Force might have been a clearer word choice than violence, but technically they are synonyms, so IMO the op was justified in using it. I'd have likely used 'force' myself if I was making the same claim.
Well, I would say the police have shown us a lot of evidence that they will escalate to lethal force at the drop of a hat. They've even been known to murder defenseless compliant people. But that's somewhat beside the point. My point is only that they will escalate if you do, and it's the threat of that escalation to actual violence that keeps people in line, even when fairly massive amounts of money are at stake.
And no, I don't advocate the anarchist approach. I think the escalation to violence by police powers is the only way it works given human nature. I just don't lie to myself about how it works.