While a lot of people thinks that a 64bit CPU deserves a 64bit OS for the sake of speed, it seems it's not so clear that it'd be a good move. First, you need to have at least a single thread that requires more than 4GB RAM at once. Say after me: "a single thread that requires more than 4GB RAM at once". Probably an heavy loaded DB (to load a lot of indices in RAM) or a computer graphics imagery application or some other application with very very large data set to be worked on at once. Not impossible, but not so widespread. Maybe very large Java application can swallow all that RAM. For a general understanding of CPU horsepower, give a look to a very simple observation (I wouldn't call it a real TEST) you can find in Linux from Scratch documentation
a 64-bit build is only 4% faster and is 9% larger than the 32-bit build
This also means that you have (more or less) 9% more chances that your code won't fit into the CPU cache, making that 4% extra speed less effective. And that you'll need (more or less) 9% more RAM to execute 64bit programs. So, in my extremely humble opinion, unless you are running an heavy duty, heavy loaded server, you won't benefit that much from a 64bit OS on a 64bit6 CPU.
I am not arguing about the desktop/window manager of your choice. You can install whichever you like. But Ubuntu/Canonical took a number of questionable decisions and kept them despite the complaints.
KDE4, as of now, is quite usable and stable. The way I use it is very similar to KDE v3 as I have disabled all the fancy stuff. I am not using KDE v3 (or trinity) because it'd be too much work to have it working. Finally, I'm considering a switch to Awesome which is... aehm... awesome!
This is, in my opinion, the reason why Ubuntu will die. They did the same when they dropped a working KDE 3.5 in favour of an unusable KDE 4. KDE chose to move to v4, but this doesn't mean that Ubuntu needed to follow. The same applies to GNOME with the Unity twist.
The biggest value for Ubuntu/Canonical is the user base. Make them angry to loose both them and your value. Say after me: I'll listen to the user base!
Dropbox adds a much better user identification method, for the sake of privacy. As the second factor is an SMS, and because in all countries the law requires the mobile operator to be able to identify at any time who's the person using a certain SIM. Identification of a user based on her/his email address is trivially uneffective. Better security is a tiny side effect. Any techie of the VAS team at the mobile operator would be able to circumvent that method. As well as law enforcement men in black. Really better security would be a cryptographic certificate locally protected by a password, a-la SSH. Ah!
I pay a tax when I earn money (income tax). Then I pay an extra tax when I spend those taxed money (VAT). Then I pat for goods/services themselves.
So, what'd be the point for this extra tax? Pointless! If I want super fast giggo broadband, I buy premium. If I want normal, I buy vanilla. That's it.
This thing is going far beyond any reasonableness. Samsung is not adding an apple logo on their product. This is a fact. "SAMSUNG" is clearly different from "APPLE". This is a fact. There are not many choices to "design" a touch tablet/smartphone: - they have to have a rectangular shape (triangular? Pentagonal? Irregular?); - sharp corners are not viable, so they have to be more or less rounded; - thickness cannot be increased just to look different; - icons are a de facto standard in GUIs. Also these are facts. 99.9% of users can read and can tell an Apple product apart of a Samsung one. This is a fact.
So, finally, what's Apple protecting? The shape? The corners? The proportions? The icon shape and colors? The concept design of a store? Or are they concerned about their customers not being intelligent enough to distinguish two different brands?
Ah! All this is frivolous and needs a good quantity of crack to go on!
If I was Apple, I would rather sue the pletora of Chinese companies manufacturing and selling touch smartphones which are clearly designed and packaged to mimic Apple products.
All other ROMs, not just Apple's. I know IBM BIOSes contain a large number of Easter eggs. Unfortunately we started to call them "bugs" back in the 80s.
But the tecnologies used in some botnets are a goot starting points. That'd be, call home and try to pull anything you need to do the upgrade. The orbiter relay should be doing the same, first.
Uh? Why? cp -a is all you need once you put the HDD inside the target machine. And if you put it into another machine on the same network, then rsync is the answer. Forget about the buggy and slow SAMBA.
USB is for a second working copy. Backups should also ensure durability of the copy, while USB HDD have a shorter lifespan than a normal HDD which in turn has shorter lifespan than tapes, the usual medium for durable backups.
Slashdot Mirror
Show me the numbers!
While a lot of people thinks that a 64bit CPU deserves a 64bit OS for the sake of speed, it seems it's not so clear that it'd be a good move.
First, you need to have at least a single thread that requires more than 4GB RAM at once.
Say after me: "a single thread that requires more than 4GB RAM at once".
Probably an heavy loaded DB (to load a lot of indices in RAM) or a computer graphics imagery application or some other application with very very large data set to be worked on at once. Not impossible, but not so widespread. Maybe very large Java application can swallow all that RAM.
For a general understanding of CPU horsepower, give a look to a very simple observation (I wouldn't call it a real TEST) you can find in Linux from Scratch documentation
a 64-bit build is only 4% faster and is 9% larger than the 32-bit build
This also means that you have (more or less) 9% more chances that your code won't fit into the CPU cache, making that 4% extra speed less effective. And that you'll need (more or less) 9% more RAM to execute 64bit programs.
So, in my extremely humble opinion, unless you are running an heavy duty, heavy loaded server, you won't benefit that much from a 64bit OS on a 64bit6 CPU.
I am not arguing about the desktop/window manager of your choice. You can install whichever you like.
But Ubuntu/Canonical took a number of questionable decisions and kept them despite the complaints.
KDE4, as of now, is quite usable and stable. The way I use it is very similar to KDE v3 as I have disabled all the fancy stuff. ... aehm ... awesome!
I am not using KDE v3 (or trinity) because it'd be too much work to have it working.
Finally, I'm considering a switch to Awesome which is
I have mod points to bring you down. But that would be a waste of bits. Just like you are.
This is, in my opinion, the reason why Ubuntu will die.
They did the same when they dropped a working KDE 3.5 in favour of an unusable KDE 4.
KDE chose to move to v4, but this doesn't mean that Ubuntu needed to follow.
The same applies to GNOME with the Unity twist.
The biggest value for Ubuntu/Canonical is the user base. Make them angry to loose both them and your value.
Say after me: I'll listen to the user base!
The dolphins don't live on islands, they live around islands.
You don't think evolution is real, do you?
The apes and the dolphins. Whoever evolves first.
Did "Jurassic Park" teach nothing?
ABSOLUTELY NOT!
And with a few more words: single huge point of failure. Whichever failure.
By that time we'll all be using Dr. Fusion engines!
Dropbox adds a much better user identification method, for the sake of privacy.
As the second factor is an SMS, and because in all countries the law requires the mobile operator to be able to identify at any time who's the person using a certain SIM.
Identification of a user based on her/his email address is trivially uneffective.
Better security is a tiny side effect. Any techie of the VAS team at the mobile operator would be able to circumvent that method. As well as law enforcement men in black.
Really better security would be a cryptographic certificate locally protected by a password, a-la SSH.
Ah!
P.S.
Google is already willing to know your mobile phone number since long now.
My kitchen is full of ants! I need a firewall and a better router.
I pay a tax when I earn money (income tax).
Then I pay an extra tax when I spend those taxed money (VAT).
Then I pat for goods/services themselves.
So, what'd be the point for this extra tax? Pointless!
If I want super fast giggo broadband, I buy premium.
If I want normal, I buy vanilla. That's it.
... and who's going to buy something that won't display a picture, a web page or a video at full resolution?
Ah!
For the curious ones, just try google for "fake iphone"!
This thing is going far beyond any reasonableness.
Samsung is not adding an apple logo on their product. This is a fact.
"SAMSUNG" is clearly different from "APPLE". This is a fact.
There are not many choices to "design" a touch tablet/smartphone:
- they have to have a rectangular shape (triangular? Pentagonal? Irregular?);
- sharp corners are not viable, so they have to be more or less rounded;
- thickness cannot be increased just to look different;
- icons are a de facto standard in GUIs.
Also these are facts.
99.9% of users can read and can tell an Apple product apart of a Samsung one. This is a fact.
So, finally, what's Apple protecting? The shape? The corners? The proportions? The icon shape and colors? The concept design of a store?
Or are they concerned about their customers not being intelligent enough to distinguish two different brands?
Ah! All this is frivolous and needs a good quantity of crack to go on!
If I was Apple, I would rather sue the pletora of Chinese companies manufacturing and selling touch smartphones which are clearly designed and packaged to mimic Apple products.
All other ROMs, not just Apple's.
I know IBM BIOSes contain a large number of Easter eggs.
Unfortunately we started to call them "bugs" back in the 80s.
Troll?
Ok, it's time to switch to dotslash.org!
for all cases as mad as this very one.
does!
to see someone here knows this.
But the tecnologies used in some botnets are a goot starting points.
That'd be, call home and try to pull anything you need to do the upgrade.
The orbiter relay should be doing the same, first.
3.samba
Uh? Why?
cp -a is all you need once you put the HDD inside the target machine.
And if you put it into another machine on the same network, then rsync is the answer.
Forget about the buggy and slow SAMBA.
USB is for a second working copy.
Backups should also ensure durability of the copy, while USB HDD have a shorter lifespan than a normal HDD which in turn has shorter lifespan than tapes, the usual medium for durable backups.
50% increase over a few thousands in USA id not the same as 50% increase over 60M .