Well, it is simple once you know how. In my naivity I just assumed it was the wheel from a car. I'm not going to buy one now that I know they put funny weights in them - imagine how terrible it must handle with unbalanced wheels?!
First up, as others have noted, London and Sellafield are quite a long way away.
Secondly, the headline "Nuke Plant Loses 30 Kilos of Plutonium" is quite ridiculous. Anyone with half a brain would realise quite how off the mark this is. Has anyone thought about how you would go about doing a stock take on a collection of Plutonium?!! You don't just go and collect it from the storeroom and take it to the weighing scales.
In fact the auditing process involved some of the top UK statistics researchers and no doubt lots and lots of other people.
Does anyone here use their brain before they post stories?
No offence taken, I mean you only called me a cunt after all. You could think of adding twat, prick and wanker to your arsenal - plus you can no doubt come up with some special scottish ones also....
So, that would explain why Linux is so much slower than Windows since it installs much more software onto your disk, thereby creating problems with defragmentation, backup, recovery, search and indexing. I've always wondered why it was so. Thanks for illuminating matters.
Why would not having WMP improve performance? I mean, your average Linux distro comes with an order of magnitude more software than plain Windows and it doesn't cause problems. The presence of files on a disk doesn't make processes run slower.
Any else out there wondering why/. is so quiet on this very scary vuln. reported on Secunia?
It does seem a bit odd given how much publicity is given to vulnerabilities in IE. I wonder how many people have submitted stories only to have the rejected by the ruler mafia.....
3 vectors? SSE2 doesn't really help there. Our algorithms have lots of branches and P4 hates branching with its huge pipeline. Our application is not served by SSE2 - we have tried.
And what if our customers don't have SSE2 chips?
Best is for the manufacturers to make decent chips like AMD have done and like Intel have done with PM.
One area where Pentium M is fantastic is in scientific and engineering simulation software. My company produces such a piece of software called OrcaFlex (www.orcina.com). The code is mainly old fashioned 8087 FPU instructions doing 3 dimensional vector operations.
In the past few years clock speed has become much less important than memory architecture in determining how fast the simulations run. Of current architectures P4 stinks and is comprehensively stuffed by Opteron. However, PM even beats Opteron. Our fastest machine for OrcaFlex is a DELL Centrino notebook! This just edges out our top of the range Opteron workstation.
Has anyone else out there seen anything similar with other applications?
One of the beauties of open source is that you can compile software on any platform. This means that you can run your OSS scientific apps, development tools, languages, IDEs on Windows as well as *nix. This gives you the best of both worlds.
I work as as professional developer and our small company produces software only for Windows - it wouldn't make financial sense for us to support other platforms. Obviously then we use Windows machines. I can and do use all the standard *nix tools (compiled for Windows or through cygwin) and we use libraries like LAPACK, FFTPACK etc. in our product.
Remember, if you have the source, you can compile it for any platform!
Re:Many fields left where Linux is unsuitable
on
Cooking With Linux
·
· Score: 1
Hey, the majority of folk here do just that on a regular basis - only it's peddling untruths about Windows. If you don't like people talking rot I suggest you go someplace else!
Try Google. I searched for windows xp diskless booting (http://www.google.co.uk/search?query=windows+xp+d iskless+booting&hl=en) which takes you to http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnxpesp1/html/tchDeployingWindowsXP EmbeddedRemoteBoot.asp amongst many other links.
Why would a Windows distributed node need to run a GUI? The Windows kernel can function quite happily without a GUI.
Windows can be trimmed down. Remember that this is a future project so MS can do what they want. They do have the Windows source after all. No reason why they can't get a pared down OS.
Diskless booting of Windows is possible today.
Economically we don't know what the licensing for a distributed version of Windows would be since MS hasn't decided that yet - this product does not yet exist after all!
I'm not arguing that distributed Windows clusters will be a great success. All I'm saying is that this GUI stuff is not relevant. If a GUI eats resources then the product would have a console only mode.
MS has got a decent kernel, lots of experienced, clever developers and stacks of cash - it ought to be able to make this work if it so desired.
Who needs to run a GUI? Just use a different shell. Anyway, it's not as if running a GUI drains the machines resources anyway. It's only when the user is interacting that resources are used.
>>REmote desktop basically takes snapshots of the desktop that is running in memory
Who said Remote Desktop? RD is like VNC which runs on *NIX. Does that make VNC useless? No. RD would be one way to do remote access. Another would be telnet. Or is telnet so complicated that it doesn't work on Windows? No, I didn't think so.
Grid computing is not actually about GUIs. The ultimate ancestor said: " Windows is an overly-bloated OS which is very GUI-oriented". But Linux running a KDE or GNOME desktop is pretty similar. Why does that argument not sink Linux? Because it's not an argument. As for bloat, isn't X a little on the fat side?
Slashdot Mirror
What's it like to be such a smart arse?
Well, it is simple once you know how. In my naivity I just assumed it was the wheel from a car. I'm not going to buy one now that I know they put funny weights in them - imagine how terrible it must handle with unbalanced wheels?!
It wasn't real unless they have a different sort of gravity in Honda-land which allows tyres to accelerate when rolling uphill....
It's great that this is flamebait. The same comment applied to Windows sparks fevered debate and much FUD. He he he.
presumably the user interface makes the server run really slowly....
First up, as others have noted, London and Sellafield are quite a long way away.
Secondly, the headline "Nuke Plant Loses 30 Kilos of Plutonium" is quite ridiculous. Anyone with half a brain would realise quite how off the mark this is. Has anyone thought about how you would go about doing a stock take on a collection of Plutonium?!! You don't just go and collect it from the storeroom and take it to the weighing scales.
In fact the auditing process involved some of the top UK statistics researchers and no doubt lots and lots of other people.
Does anyone here use their brain before they post stories?
No offence taken, I mean you only called me a cunt after all. You could think of adding twat, prick and wanker to your arsenal - plus you can no doubt come up with some special scottish ones also....
Er, ever heard of sarcasm. Jokes on you and your great sense of humour.
So, that would explain why Linux is so much slower than Windows since it installs much more software onto your disk, thereby creating problems with defragmentation, backup, recovery, search and indexing. I've always wondered why it was so. Thanks for illuminating matters.
Er, I don't think MS is doing this on purpose.......
Why would not having WMP improve performance? I mean, your average Linux distro comes with an order of magnitude more software than plain Windows and it doesn't cause problems. The presence of files on a disk doesn't make processes run slower.
Any else out there wondering why /. is so quiet on this very scary vuln. reported on Secunia?
It does seem a bit odd given how much publicity is given to vulnerabilities in IE. I wonder how many people have submitted stories only to have the rejected by the ruler mafia.....
Or am I just paranoid?
Good point. But I wonder whether the idea might work on a really fast windowing system like X?
It's odd what using such a backward and outdated system of units does for one's sense of humour....
3 vectors? SSE2 doesn't really help there. Our algorithms have lots of branches and P4 hates branching with its huge pipeline. Our application is not served by SSE2 - we have tried.
And what if our customers don't have SSE2 chips?
Best is for the manufacturers to make decent chips like AMD have done and like Intel have done with PM.
You've got defence misspelled in the whole of north america...... ;-)
One area where Pentium M is fantastic is in scientific and engineering simulation software. My company produces such a piece of software called OrcaFlex (www.orcina.com). The code is mainly old fashioned 8087 FPU instructions doing 3 dimensional vector operations.
In the past few years clock speed has become much less important than memory architecture in determining how fast the simulations run. Of current architectures P4 stinks and is comprehensively stuffed by Opteron. However, PM even beats Opteron. Our fastest machine for OrcaFlex is a DELL Centrino notebook! This just edges out our top of the range Opteron workstation.
Has anyone else out there seen anything similar with other applications?
One of the beauties of open source is that you can compile software on any platform. This means that you can run your OSS scientific apps, development tools, languages, IDEs on Windows as well as *nix. This gives you the best of both worlds.
I work as as professional developer and our small company produces software only for Windows - it wouldn't make financial sense for us to support other platforms. Obviously then we use Windows machines. I can and do use all the standard *nix tools (compiled for Windows or through cygwin) and we use libraries like LAPACK, FFTPACK etc. in our product.
Remember, if you have the source, you can compile it for any platform!
Hey, the majority of folk here do just that on a regular basis - only it's peddling untruths about Windows. If you don't like people talking rot I suggest you go someplace else!
Try Google. I searched for windows xp diskless booting (http://www.google.co.uk/search?query=windows+xp+d iskless+booting&hl=en) which takes you to http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url= /library/en-us/dnxpesp1/html/tchDeployingWindowsXP EmbeddedRemoteBoot.asp amongst many other links.
Ooh, that's nasty. And you are.... That's right, Anonymous Coward! Not paid by Microsoft actually. Just capable of independent thought.
Well, AC, here goes.
Why would a Windows distributed node need to run a GUI? The Windows kernel can function quite happily without a GUI.
Windows can be trimmed down. Remember that this is a future project so MS can do what they want. They do have the Windows source after all. No reason why they can't get a pared down OS.
Diskless booting of Windows is possible today.
Economically we don't know what the licensing for a distributed version of Windows would be since MS hasn't decided that yet - this product does not yet exist after all!
I'm not arguing that distributed Windows clusters will be a great success. All I'm saying is that this GUI stuff is not relevant. If a GUI eats resources then the product would have a console only mode.
MS has got a decent kernel, lots of experienced, clever developers and stacks of cash - it ought to be able to make this work if it so desired.
And you can turn off Windows GUI.
ssh runs fine on Windows. You can edit registry from command line no probs.
>>Which computer is running that GUI?
Who needs to run a GUI? Just use a different shell. Anyway, it's not as if running a GUI drains the machines resources anyway. It's only when the user is interacting that resources are used.
>>REmote desktop basically takes snapshots of the desktop that is running in memory
Who said Remote Desktop? RD is like VNC which runs on *NIX. Does that make VNC useless? No. RD would be one way to do remote access. Another would be telnet. Or is telnet so complicated that it doesn't work on Windows? No, I didn't think so.
Grid computing is not actually about GUIs. The ultimate ancestor said: " Windows is an overly-bloated OS which is very GUI-oriented". But Linux running a KDE or GNOME desktop is pretty similar. Why does that argument not sink Linux? Because it's not an argument. As for bloat, isn't X a little on the fat side?
Yawn.