How long before an FPGA is standard issue on motherboards? From Photoshop filters, to Audio work, this could be something very, very powerful.
IBM Mainframes have enormous abilities to work with data with very little in the way of MIPS. They do this by having processors that can do math on data going over I/O channels without the CPU ever dealing with it. A motherboard FPGA, programmed at the application level could change the way we think about computing, allowing us to deal with data, treating it as signals, processed simultaneously, instead of as numbers, processed sequentially.
Hell, it's the only way to go on Win32 also. Whenever I'm forced to use the official client for extended periods of time, the ads begin to make me seriously ill.
A process is a running piece of code on a UNIX machine. 'kill -9' kills the process, without giving it any chance to recover. It just terminates it right there.
Yeah. God forbid we find out the Network Administrators are people who often want an introduction to something rather than jumping headlong into it.
I don't have enough time to fully understand the details of database programming, so you aren't going to find books and books on the topic on my shelf. But, if I'm running an SQL server for the database guys, wouldn't it make you happy to see "SQL for Dummies" on my bookshelf? It's a quick, basic introduction. You have to start somewhere.
Even if you don't plan to deploy Solaris, some people might buy and read this book, because unlike Sun docs, you can pretty much just read them and have a general clue about things without having a machine to hack on. That keeps options open. Always a good thing.
While I wouldn't want a Network Administrator to buy this book while running a large cluster of Enterprise whatever-thousand servers, it would be nice to read before we buy.
I sure as hell can't afford classes. I could barely afford that Ultra 1 I bought at the 1st Saturday swap meet downtown (Dallas, TX, USA). (75$) Some printed documentation could be nice.
Just as the stand-alone browser/mail/composer/etc components are supported even though Mozilla is still a monolithic app, will the user still have the choice of a monolithic app when Mozilla becomes just a collection of software?
The Moz guys see splitting up as an unquestionable Good Thing, but they don't seem to realize that some people like Mozilla as it is.
Example, VMWare. There is nothing an app running under a virtual machine can do that can cause the entire host computer to crash. Sure, that's a lot of overhead, but it's proof that an operating system can insulate the app from the computer.
Geez. You're being quite insistant about a simple matter of fact. Lexmark is invoking the DMCA to prevent the use of 3rd party inks. Yes, it is total bullshit, but it's still true.
For Digital stuff, yes. Analog systems are a completely different story.
FPGAs can do things easily that would be very hard to do in software when you're in the analog domain. (Offtopic, i know, but interesting none the less.)
This, while intended to be funny, brings up a brilliant point.
The weak point in this type of application is not the servers, but the voters' computers themselves. While it's possible to make the servers a fortress of security, the voters mostly have computers that are, for the most part, crap for security and could easily be 'modified' by a worm that works by intercepting API calls and changing ballot names. It would be just as simple as sitting between the app and GDI (okay, that would be tricky, but not impossible) and changing 'Albert Gore' to 'Ralph Nader' before Windows painted the screen, and you have an even more massive Flordia like mess on your hands.
Could somebody help me (and I'm sure others) figure out how to pronounce Dr. Dijkstra's name? I just don't want to make an ass of myself when discussing him (and his ideas).
You might mount every other drive upside down as to cancel out the torque from spinning up/down. That would eliminate some stress on the disks, and then you can allow the drives to float more freely, reducing the shock from thruster action.
I'm not at home right now, but I will check it out. I acutally bought the Jane's ATWA book at a second hand book seller for 60USD. (new, it sells for 550USD).
When you read the whole raft of backups upon backups that's in a plane like the 777, you can't help but feel even safer when you fly one. Even the flight computers have three processors each, all running in parallel, but they aren't the same processor (one's a 486, one's a 68k and I don't remember the third) so CPU bugs don't come into play.
Acutally, a FBW aircraft (at least the 777) can be flown without flight computers. Quoting from the 1997-1998 Jane's All the World's Aircraft (if you don't know this book, you don't know aircraft. it's about as reliable of a source as you can get) from the section on the 777 (a fly by wire aircraft): "...ultimate standby is mechanical control of tailplane incidence for the pitch axis and two wing spoiler panels for lateral control." (page 604).
Oh, and that's the fifth backup system, two of which are analogue, so they don't need a computer.
Whenever I see anything about these tiny, tiny OS/Server/Browser systems, I ask myself if it would be possible to scale them up to modern systems for a really fast, simple operating system?
Slashdot Mirror
What's the index of refraction, as compared to glass fibre? This is one of the factors that limits flexability, and is really quite important.
...Why do they pick stupid and childish sounding names...Use Nullsofts NSIS installer...
Wow! That's a shitload of irony. I think "Nullsoft SuperPimp Install System" is about the most childish name ever.
How long before an FPGA is standard issue on motherboards? From Photoshop filters, to Audio work, this could be something very, very powerful.
IBM Mainframes have enormous abilities to work with data with very little in the way of MIPS. They do this by having processors that can do math on data going over I/O channels without the CPU ever dealing with it. A motherboard FPGA, programmed at the application level could change the way we think about computing, allowing us to deal with data, treating it as signals, processed simultaneously, instead of as numbers, processed sequentially.
Hell, it's the only way to go on Win32 also. Whenever I'm forced to use the official client for extended periods of time, the ads begin to make me seriously ill.
Use gaim.
Since the only thing common here (that we can see) is comments, wouldn't object code not be in violation, and hence, legal?
A process is a running piece of code on a UNIX machine. 'kill -9' kills the process, without giving it any chance to recover. It just terminates it right there.
Yeah. God forbid we find out the Network Administrators are people who often want an introduction to something rather than jumping headlong into it.
I don't have enough time to fully understand the details of database programming, so you aren't going to find books and books on the topic on my shelf. But, if I'm running an SQL server for the database guys, wouldn't it make you happy to see "SQL for Dummies" on my bookshelf? It's a quick, basic introduction. You have to start somewhere.
Even if you don't plan to deploy Solaris, some people might buy and read this book, because unlike Sun docs, you can pretty much just read them and have a general clue about things without having a machine to hack on. That keeps options open. Always a good thing.
While I wouldn't want a Network Administrator to buy this book while running a large cluster of Enterprise whatever-thousand servers, it would be nice to read before we buy.
I sure as hell can't afford classes. I could barely afford that Ultra 1 I bought at the 1st Saturday swap meet downtown (Dallas, TX, USA). (75$) Some printed documentation could be nice.
Just as the stand-alone browser/mail/composer/etc components are supported even though Mozilla is still a monolithic app, will the user still have the choice of a monolithic app when Mozilla becomes just a collection of software?
The Moz guys see splitting up as an unquestionable Good Thing, but they don't seem to realize that some people like Mozilla as it is.
It's posts like this that make /. need a post of the day feature even more.
Yes. It can.
Example, VMWare. There is nothing an app running under a virtual machine can do that can cause the entire host computer to crash. Sure, that's a lot of overhead, but it's proof that an operating system can insulate the app from the computer.
Doom IV: No way in hell.
Geez. You're being quite insistant about a simple matter of fact. Lexmark is invoking the DMCA to prevent the use of 3rd party inks. Yes, it is total bullshit, but it's still true.
See this and this. There's more, but I'm lazy.
You'll proudly stand up against paying for radio by...um...paying for radio?
For Digital stuff, yes. Analog systems are a completely different story.
FPGAs can do things easily that would be very hard to do in software when you're in the analog domain. (Offtopic, i know, but interesting none the less.)
Well, I'd bet that the DoD uses Loral's spacecraft for some non-sensitive point-to-point data stuff.
Yup, SkyNet.
This, while intended to be funny, brings up a brilliant point.
The weak point in this type of application is not the servers, but the voters' computers themselves. While it's possible to make the servers a fortress of security, the voters mostly have computers that are, for the most part, crap for security and could easily be 'modified' by a worm that works by intercepting API calls and changing ballot names. It would be just as simple as sitting between the app and GDI (okay, that would be tricky, but not impossible) and changing 'Albert Gore' to 'Ralph Nader' before Windows painted the screen, and you have an even more massive Flordia like mess on your hands.
Seriously? If so, that's the greatest name EVER.
Could somebody help me (and I'm sure others) figure out how to pronounce Dr. Dijkstra's name? I just don't want to make an ass of myself when discussing him (and his ideas).
You might mount every other drive upside down as to cancel out the torque from spinning up/down. That would eliminate some stress on the disks, and then you can allow the drives to float more freely, reducing the shock from thruster action.
Um...no.
BSD and Linux are two different code bases.
I'm not at home right now, but I will check it out. I acutally bought the Jane's ATWA book at a second hand book seller for 60USD. (new, it sells for 550USD).
When you read the whole raft of backups upon backups that's in a plane like the 777, you can't help but feel even safer when you fly one. Even the flight computers have three processors each, all running in parallel, but they aren't the same processor (one's a 486, one's a 68k and I don't remember the third) so CPU bugs don't come into play.
That's it. I'm changing my major to Evil Engineering.
Acutally, a FBW aircraft (at least the 777) can be flown without flight computers. Quoting from the 1997-1998 Jane's All the World's Aircraft (if you don't know this book, you don't know aircraft. it's about as reliable of a source as you can get) from the section on the 777 (a fly by wire aircraft):
"...ultimate standby is mechanical control of tailplane incidence for the pitch axis and two wing spoiler panels for lateral control." (page 604).
Oh, and that's the fifth backup system, two of which are analogue, so they don't need a computer.
Whenever I see anything about these tiny, tiny OS/Server/Browser systems, I ask myself if it would be possible to scale them up to modern systems for a really fast, simple operating system?
It's sorta the opposite of bloatware.