You actually have that correct. This really is a bunch of bad science. No discussion of VOCs or CO2 just particulate and SOX emissions. Well particulates at see are probably going to be pretty harmless. They will fall into the sea. SOX may or may not be an issue but motor vehicles really don't emit hardly any sulfur. I wonder what percentage total world emissions of sulfur this is. At least in the US ships shift to cleaner fuel when in coastal waters. Yes reducing the sulfur is also a good idea but this is really a worst case the sky is falling story.
One of the new Nokia tablets might be a better choice. They do have a smaller screen. They are a lot more hackable. You could create a "dock" with real buttons to add your tactile feed back. You can write your own custom interface. Many of the same features can be had with one of the new Dell "too big to be phone" phones. Like the Dell streak. Problem with that is that it is locked to AT&T.
Yes and if you destroy someones ship in international waters it is also covered by treaty and international law just like space... But this rocket is going to transit US air space to get into orbit, it is also owned by a US company, it is launching from the US, it is using the US eastern test range, it is flying under a US government contract, and I believe will land in US. The US has the right and frankly the obligation to certify that this flight will not be an epic mess up. So yea the FAA is going to deal with this.
Really? Why? A governmental organization tells you how and what you can drive to the store. A governmental organization tells you how and what you can fly in the sky. A governmental organisation tells you what you can sail on a lake or an ocean. Not to mention this isn't going to the "stars" it is going into orbit. And yes their are rules. A lot of rules for this kind of thing. The FAA had to approve the reentry and landing since it is probably going to be in US air space and or territory. On can imagine that they would not approve the landing to be at LAX. If you are flying anything in US airspace it is with the FAAs permission or you are breaking a law. Even a paper airplane... It is under a certain size and weight so the FAA says you may fly it. Other rules may apply like on littering.
But here is the question? How much ARC was used? Did they use L2ARC? If so that may not have been ideal when using SSDs. Did they use a ZIL drive? Does Btrfs support thinks like block deduplication compression, and snapshot shipping? What about adaptive replacement cache (ARC), L2ARC and intent log drives?
I am not dismissing Btrfs at all. It sounds like it is an excellent workstation file system and probably a very good server file system. I do not know if it has all the features that ZFS has and what it doesn't have it may gain. Truth is that things like L2ARC, ARC, ZIL, block deduplication, and compression are not all that useful on most workstations. But on a SAN or NAS server they can be really good to have. There is more to a file system than just speed. I will probably use btrfs on my next workstation. But I really want to use ZFS for my next NAS build.
Wow you drank the deep of the Microsoft kool-aid. The birth of desktop publishing was on the Mac years before Windows 3.1 You had real desktop publishing on the Mac, Amiga, Atari ST, and even the PC with Ventrua publish running on GEM long before Windows 3.1. Hell you even had GeoPublisher for the Commodore 64! Considering the limitations of the platform it did some amazing work. I will not even go into Next with it's use of Display Postscript.
"The new simplicity of being able to create good looking documents, handouts and brochures *without* having to know any arcane printer commands meant you no longer needed the WordPerfect Guru secretary who knew all the ins and outs of the printer command codes."
Wow you do know that at that time Only PC users where forced to deal with that crap. Really everybody else on the planet had already moved past that point. What a great example of how the PC held back a huge section of the population until Microsoft got around to catching up to Apple, Commodore, and Atari. What a victory of marketing over reality.
Windows 3.1 was when the PC was no longer a festering dung heap of a platform for desktop publishing not the birth of the desktop publishing revolution.
Not really since it was all public knowledge. What is funny is I did have clearance back when I was in college. I got a job with a contractor. After I was out of clearance I developed the habit of using the names of some of projects I helped launch as passwords. It was fun because another guy I worked for was just out of the military and would freak out every time I told him a password! He was still in clearance and he literally could not say them in public but I could.
Actually once the 30MB RLLs came out I would say it was about two HD systems for each none. And we sold very few 286 machines. The 8088s where dropping in price we sold a ton of them.
Actually we sold a lot of machines in 85/86 with Hardrives Kaypro 16s, Z-151's Z-158s. We also did a lot of business adding hard drives. 30 mb RLL was very popular. Windows 386 was 2.1 but it was sold as Windows 386 and only ran on 386. Again very few people bought it.
Why run DOS apps under Windows 3.11? Really simple. So you could run more than one at a time. That was Windows 386 and Windows 3.0's big feature. You could actually run a something like ACT! and your application at the same time! Formatting a floppy would still bring a system to it's knees but that is why they sold preformated floppies!
Netscape? You better get a copy of Trumpet Winsock first! Yes the browser plus 3.11 and Microsoft Office really helped. Truth is that only one part of Office really carried the day. That was Excel. Word was also a major also ran until Excel came out. And yes I had a copy of Word 1.0 back in the day. They also came bundled with the Zeniths. Nobody wanted it. They all wanted Wordstar, PFS:Write, QnA, and later WordPerfect.
Well it is hard to keep something 300 meters across in space a secret. Simple truth is that just about everybody that cared knew what type of satellite it was from the launch point and the launch vehicle. A friend of mine works on the Centaur and I saw him on Sunday. I asked how work was and he told me about the upcoming launch. It went like this. "Yeah it is going up on a Delta 4 heavy." "Really DOD?" "No NRO".
If it is a Delta 4 heavy with a Centaur from the Cape you can bet money it is a sigint bird. The capabilities are what is secret. But it can probably pick up a cell phone or wifi for geosync.
Actually it might. This is a sigint/comint bird. Not really much of leak since it is a big honking satellite on a Delta 4 heavy with a Centaur upper stage launched from the Cape. Really that was a given. This can pick up just about any wireless communication so yes it may find Bin Laden and it may stop a terrorist attack. It may do a lot of things. Sigint/Commint is has been very useful for a very long time.
In fact looking at your email address you may want to look up your own nation's history. A good part of the reason that you are not speaking German is because of commint.
Windows 1.0 was a total failure. Nobody used it. I worked at a computer store at the time and people would ask us to take it off the drives of the compter because they had no use for it. Windows 2.0 was also a total failure. Only when Windows 386 and WIndows 3.0 came out was Windows usable. Even then most people didn't use it. It just slowed down their dos programs. Only when Windows 3.11 came out did WIndows become popular. Mostly to run DOS apps. Windows won because Microsoft just gave it away for the longest time. Almost nobody would have paid for it. That is why all the others failed. Most people wouldn't pay for a program to run programs! Microsoft used the drug dealer method to win market share. But to call any version of Windows before 3.0 as not a failure is just not valid.
Well they tested on a single SSD. I have not used ZFS or Btrfs but I have read a lot about ZFS. This is not really the use case for ZFS. ZFS has many features for things like using an SSD to cache for the HDDs , RAID like functions, data compression and so on. The idea that a simpler less full featured file system is faster is no big shock. I would like to see tests with maybe two wan servers each with say 12 HHDs and an SSD for cacheing. That is more the use case for ZFS than a workstation with a single SSD.
Well the killer app really is video transcoding. One thing holding that back is the DMCA. I should have the option to transcode a DVD or BlueRay and put it on my mobile device, netbook, or tablet as simply as I do CDs. Yes I can get Handbrake but I am talking about with iTunes, Zune, or the any other mainstream software package. What we want is to have that ripped and transcoded in just a few under five minutes. But other than that you are correct most users have reached good enough a while ago. What everyone but the manufactures want is cheaper and more power efficient.
i would put it 9 years since it was an evolution of the 8080 and 8085. Even when new it was considered primitive and limited. The 386 and 64bit version have helped a lot but ARM has also evolved a lot more then But the ARM has had the advantage of a much more advanced starting point the X86 did. This arm has proven it's self in the market. That is just it as the x86 has creeped up so has the ARM and soon just like as the X86 has grown from the bottom up so has the ARM.
Not that big of an issue in the server space. Sparc and Power5 don't run Windows. And almost all the big server apps already run under Linux so those can recompile without much effort.
Funny but in 1990 I bet the said the same thing about Intel. In any office of say 50 or so people a 64 bit ARM would probably do just fine. NAS and SANs in bigger installations would probably also run very well on a 64 bit ARM. And then one has to wonder just how many ARM cores might fit on a die? ARM is a much more modern ISA than X86 so it will be interesting to see just where it goes. Trust me if you had told anyone in 1982 that someday there would be an X86 that was faster per clock cycle than a Cray1, ran with a multi ghz clock, and had a 64 bit address space they would have locked you in a rubber room.
Exactly Look at MS-DOS vs Amiga OS. MS-DOS a single tasking command line OS with a memory model that was frankly INSANE. Hard drives limited to 33mb partitions for a very long time. Real memory, high memory, XMS, EMM386... And to give the illusion of multitasking Terminate and Stay Resident programs. No device support for printing. Every program had to write it's own printer drivers. No device support for Graphics. No audio support outside of a beep. Hell you couldn't even use the comport with a modem unless your wrote your interrupt code to implement a circular queue.
And then you had the Amiga. A real multitasking OS. I believe hardrives where limited to 2 GB partions. A flat memory model but you did have make sure that any data the custom chips used was in chip ram but that wasn't a big deal. Device independent printing, a real user interface, an API for just about everything. DOS won? I mean really? The Amiga was even cheaper! MS-DOS being the standard held computers back for a long time. You didn't even really see the rise of high performance low cost hardware until AMD and Intel really got into it. That and the internet allowed people to shop around a lot more. So yes I lived through it. I was even part of it and writing software. Guess what? Those really where the good old days when you could dream of being the next Dell, Lotus, Microsoft, Apple, Atari, or Commodore.
Let's think about this. A future model for a computer may be very different from what we are using now. It could have dozens of cores and have to deal with local, network, and cloud storage. It may also have more than one kind of core as well. Look at the PS3 for example. You have the PPC cores, the Cell elements, and the GPU. That give you three very different types of cores in one system. Even if you stick with the X86 ISA how about this as an system, And 8 Core system with two cores being atoms and six being an I7. At idle the i7 cores power down and the system loafs along on the atom cores. Run a game or transcode a video and all 6 of the I7s fire up. Throw in a GPU or two and you have a very different type of system. Or maybe it will just have 48 or 64 ARM cores. Or maybe it will have CPLD blocks.
Will Windows or Linux scale will to those systems? They might but one should never marry a technology it will only lead to heartache.
Actually I do remember. Atari 800, Commodore SuperPet, TI99/4a TRS-80s, Apple II+, Commodore 64, Amiga, ST all of it. Guess what? It was exciting, lots of inovation. New stuff all the time. The Amiga did everything that the WIndows 95 did but in 1985. No I don't want one winner. PCs are deadly dull. Wow this CPU can encode H.264 at this many frames a second why this one can do it at this many. About the only even marginally exciting area are GPUs and that is just now moving. Wow do I want a black Windows 7 notebook or a silver one? Yawn..... No thanks the slow pace of change and the deadly dullness is too high a price to pay.
How do you update the software on the Control Console. Not the reporting console but the acutal control console? What about transferring data like software updates for the PLCs? The Stuxnet worm infected USB drives.
But I do not want one or even two to dominate. Really that sucks. Right now we have multiable consoles and that works out pretty well. I would like to see IOS, Android, MeeGo, QNX/Blackberry, and WebOS all have about equal shares. That would drive competition and improvements. Let's face it before IOS the state of MobilePhone OSs was pretty bad. Apple brought new ideas and fried everybody else up. WebOS for those that have not used it is IMHO has the best UI out. It has the best multitasking interface out there. BTW I own an Android phone, develop for IOS, and my wife has a WebOS phone so I have used all of them a good bit. Android brought a compass to the list of standard hardware on a smartphone. Apple is now bringing super dense displays and gyros. Microsoft brings it's name and a pretty UI. IMHO it is still lacking a lot of manditory features for a phone OS but that is just my opinon. So no I want everyone to have a nice sized slice of the pie. That will be the best possible outcome. I do not want to be stuck like we are with PCs where one OS has 70+ of the market and one ISA has 100+ of the consumer market. Oh and I want a new ISA for phones that isn't based on the ARM. PPC, MIPS, SH-4... Come on folks.
Slashdot Mirror
You actually have that correct.
This really is a bunch of bad science.
No discussion of VOCs or CO2 just particulate and SOX emissions.
Well particulates at see are probably going to be pretty harmless. They will fall into the sea.
SOX may or may not be an issue but motor vehicles really don't emit hardly any sulfur. I wonder what percentage total world emissions of sulfur this is.
At least in the US ships shift to cleaner fuel when in coastal waters. Yes reducing the sulfur is also a good idea but this is really a worst case the sky is falling story.
One of the new Nokia tablets might be a better choice.
They do have a smaller screen.
They are a lot more hackable. You could create a "dock" with real buttons to add your tactile feed back.
You can write your own custom interface.
Many of the same features can be had with one of the new Dell "too big to be phone" phones. Like the Dell streak.
Problem with that is that it is locked to AT&T.
Yes and if you destroy someones ship in international waters it is also covered by treaty and international law just like space...
But this rocket is going to transit US air space to get into orbit, it is also owned by a US company, it is launching from the US, it is using the US eastern test range, it is flying under a US government contract, and I believe will land in US. The US has the right and frankly the obligation to certify that this flight will not be an epic mess up.
So yea the FAA is going to deal with this.
Really?
Why?
A governmental organization tells you how and what you can drive to the store.
A governmental organization tells you how and what you can fly in the sky.
A governmental organisation tells you what you can sail on a lake or an ocean.
Not to mention this isn't going to the "stars" it is going into orbit.
And yes their are rules. A lot of rules for this kind of thing.
The FAA had to approve the reentry and landing since it is probably going to be in US air space and or territory. On can imagine that they would not approve the landing to be at LAX.
If you are flying anything in US airspace it is with the FAAs permission or you are breaking a law.
Even a paper airplane... It is under a certain size and weight so the FAA says you may fly it. Other rules may apply like on littering.
But here is the question?
How much ARC was used?
Did they use L2ARC? If so that may not have been ideal when using SSDs.
Did they use a ZIL drive?
Does Btrfs support thinks like block deduplication compression, and snapshot shipping?
What about adaptive replacement cache (ARC), L2ARC and intent log drives?
I am not dismissing Btrfs at all. It sounds like it is an excellent workstation file system and probably a very good server file system. I do not know if it has all the features that ZFS has and what it doesn't have it may gain.
Truth is that things like L2ARC, ARC, ZIL, block deduplication, and compression are not all that useful on most workstations.
But on a SAN or NAS server they can be really good to have.
There is more to a file system than just speed.
I will probably use btrfs on my next workstation. But I really want to use ZFS for my next NAS build.
I did read that. That is why I said that I didn't think this test was using a good use case for ZFS.
Wow you drank the deep of the Microsoft kool-aid.
The birth of desktop publishing was on the Mac years before Windows 3.1 You had real desktop publishing on the Mac, Amiga, Atari ST, and even the PC with Ventrua publish running on GEM long before Windows 3.1. Hell you even had GeoPublisher for the Commodore 64! Considering the limitations of the platform it did some amazing work. I will not even go into Next with it's use of Display Postscript.
"The new simplicity of being able to create good looking documents, handouts and brochures *without* having to know any arcane printer commands meant you no longer needed the WordPerfect Guru secretary who knew all the ins and outs of the printer command codes."
Wow you do know that at that time Only PC users where forced to deal with that crap. Really everybody else on the planet had already moved past that point.
What a great example of how the PC held back a huge section of the population until Microsoft got around to catching up to Apple, Commodore, and Atari.
What a victory of marketing over reality.
Windows 3.1 was when the PC was no longer a festering dung heap of a platform for desktop publishing not the birth of the desktop publishing revolution.
Not really since it was all public knowledge. What is funny is I did have clearance back when I was in college. I got a job with a contractor. After I was out of clearance I developed the habit of using the names of some of projects I helped launch as passwords.
It was fun because another guy I worked for was just out of the military and would freak out every time I told him a password!
He was still in clearance and he literally could not say them in public but I could.
Actually once the 30MB RLLs came out I would say it was about two HD systems for each none. And we sold very few 286 machines. The 8088s where dropping in price we sold a ton of them.
I know I was making a Colossus assumption.
Actually we sold a lot of machines in 85/86 with Hardrives Kaypro 16s, Z-151's Z-158s. We also did a lot of business adding hard drives. 30 mb RLL was very popular.
Windows 386 was 2.1 but it was sold as Windows 386 and only ran on 386. Again very few people bought it.
Why run DOS apps under Windows 3.11? Really simple. So you could run more than one at a time. That was Windows 386 and Windows 3.0's big feature.
You could actually run a something like ACT! and your application at the same time!
Formatting a floppy would still bring a system to it's knees but that is why they sold preformated floppies!
Netscape? You better get a copy of Trumpet Winsock first!
Yes the browser plus 3.11 and Microsoft Office really helped.
Truth is that only one part of Office really carried the day. That was Excel. Word was also a major also ran until Excel came out. And yes I had a copy of Word 1.0 back in the day. They also came bundled with the Zeniths. Nobody wanted it. They all wanted Wordstar, PFS:Write, QnA, and later WordPerfect.
Kaypro and Zeniths did.
Kaypro didn't come with Windows but it come with a lot of preinstalled software.
Well it is hard to keep something 300 meters across in space a secret. Simple truth is that just about everybody that cared knew what type of satellite it was from the launch point and the launch vehicle. A friend of mine works on the Centaur and I saw him on Sunday. I asked how work was and he told me about the upcoming launch.
It went like this.
"Yeah it is going up on a Delta 4 heavy."
"Really DOD?"
"No NRO".
If it is a Delta 4 heavy with a Centaur from the Cape you can bet money it is a sigint bird.
The capabilities are what is secret. But it can probably pick up a cell phone or wifi for geosync.
Actually it might. This is a sigint/comint bird. Not really much of leak since it is a big honking satellite on a Delta 4 heavy with a Centaur upper stage launched from the Cape.
Really that was a given. This can pick up just about any wireless communication so yes it may find Bin Laden and it may stop a terrorist attack. It may do a lot of things.
Sigint/Commint is has been very useful for a very long time.
In fact looking at your email address you may want to look up your own nation's history. A good part of the reason that you are not speaking German is because of commint.
Windows 1.0 was a total failure. Nobody used it. I worked at a computer store at the time and people would ask us to take it off the drives of the compter because they had no use for it.
Windows 2.0 was also a total failure.
Only when Windows 386 and WIndows 3.0 came out was Windows usable. Even then most people didn't use it. It just slowed down their dos programs.
Only when Windows 3.11 came out did WIndows become popular. Mostly to run DOS apps. Windows won because Microsoft just gave it away for the longest time. Almost nobody would have paid for it. That is why all the others failed. Most people wouldn't pay for a program to run programs!
Microsoft used the drug dealer method to win market share. But to call any version of Windows before 3.0 as not a failure is just not valid.
Well they tested on a single SSD.
I have not used ZFS or Btrfs but I have read a lot about ZFS.
This is not really the use case for ZFS. ZFS has many features for things like using an SSD to cache for the HDDs , RAID like functions, data compression and so on.
The idea that a simpler less full featured file system is faster is no big shock.
I would like to see tests with maybe two wan servers each with say 12 HHDs and an SSD for cacheing. That is more the use case for ZFS than a workstation with a single SSD.
Well the killer app really is video transcoding. One thing holding that back is the DMCA. I should have the option to transcode a DVD or BlueRay and put it on my mobile device, netbook, or tablet as simply as I do CDs. Yes I can get Handbrake but I am talking about with iTunes, Zune, or the any other mainstream software package.
What we want is to have that ripped and transcoded in just a few under five minutes.
But other than that you are correct most users have reached good enough a while ago. What everyone but the manufactures want is cheaper and more power efficient.
i would put it 9 years since it was an evolution of the 8080 and 8085. Even when new it was considered primitive and limited. The 386 and 64bit version have helped a lot but ARM has also evolved a lot more then
But the ARM has had the advantage of a much more advanced starting point the X86 did.
This arm has proven it's self in the market. That is just it as the x86 has creeped up so has the ARM and soon just like as the X86 has grown from the bottom up so has the ARM.
Not that big of an issue in the server space. Sparc and Power5 don't run Windows. And almost all the big server apps already run under Linux so those can recompile without much effort.
Funny but in 1990 I bet the said the same thing about Intel.
In any office of say 50 or so people a 64 bit ARM would probably do just fine. NAS and SANs in bigger installations would probably also run very well on a 64 bit ARM. And then one has to wonder just how many ARM cores might fit on a die?
ARM is a much more modern ISA than X86 so it will be interesting to see just where it goes. Trust me if you had told anyone in 1982 that someday there would be an X86 that was faster per clock cycle than a Cray1, ran with a multi ghz clock, and had a 64 bit address space they would have locked you in a rubber room.
Exactly
Look at MS-DOS vs Amiga OS.
MS-DOS a single tasking command line OS with a memory model that was frankly INSANE. Hard drives limited to 33mb partitions for a very long time. Real memory, high memory, XMS, EMM386...
And to give the illusion of multitasking Terminate and Stay Resident programs.
No device support for printing. Every program had to write it's own printer drivers.
No device support for Graphics.
No audio support outside of a beep.
Hell you couldn't even use the comport with a modem unless your wrote your interrupt code to implement a circular queue.
And then you had the Amiga. A real multitasking OS. I believe hardrives where limited to 2 GB partions. A flat memory model but you did have make sure that any data the custom chips used was in chip ram but that wasn't a big deal.
Device independent printing, a real user interface, an API for just about everything.
DOS won? I mean really? The Amiga was even cheaper!
MS-DOS being the standard held computers back for a long time. You didn't even really see the rise of high performance low cost hardware until AMD and Intel really got into it.
That and the internet allowed people to shop around a lot more.
So yes I lived through it. I was even part of it and writing software. Guess what? Those really where the good old days when you could dream of being the next Dell, Lotus, Microsoft, Apple, Atari, or Commodore.
Let's think about this. A future model for a computer may be very different from what we are using now. It could have dozens of cores and have to deal with local, network, and cloud storage. It may also have more than one kind of core as well. Look at the PS3 for example. You have the PPC cores, the Cell elements, and the GPU. That give you three very different types of cores in one system.
Even if you stick with the X86 ISA how about this as an system, And 8 Core system with two cores being atoms and six being an I7. At idle the i7 cores power down and the system loafs along on the atom cores. Run a game or transcode a video and all 6 of the I7s fire up.
Throw in a GPU or two and you have a very different type of system.
Or maybe it will just have 48 or 64 ARM cores.
Or maybe it will have CPLD blocks.
Will Windows or Linux scale will to those systems?
They might but one should never marry a technology it will only lead to heartache.
Actually I do remember. Atari 800, Commodore SuperPet, TI99/4a TRS-80s, Apple II+, Commodore 64, Amiga, ST all of it.
Guess what? It was exciting, lots of inovation. New stuff all the time. The Amiga did everything that the WIndows 95 did but in 1985.
No I don't want one winner. PCs are deadly dull. Wow this CPU can encode H.264 at this many frames a second why this one can do it at this many.
About the only even marginally exciting area are GPUs and that is just now moving. Wow do I want a black Windows 7 notebook or a silver one?
Yawn.....
No thanks the slow pace of change and the deadly dullness is too high a price to pay.
How do you update the software on the Control Console. Not the reporting console but the acutal control console?
What about transferring data like software updates for the PLCs?
The Stuxnet worm infected USB drives.
But I do not want one or even two to dominate.
Really that sucks.
Right now we have multiable consoles and that works out pretty well.
I would like to see IOS, Android, MeeGo, QNX/Blackberry, and WebOS all have about equal shares.
That would drive competition and improvements.
Let's face it before IOS the state of MobilePhone OSs was pretty bad. Apple brought new ideas and fried everybody else up.
WebOS for those that have not used it is IMHO has the best UI out. It has the best multitasking interface out there.
BTW I own an Android phone, develop for IOS, and my wife has a WebOS phone so I have used all of them a good bit.
Android brought a compass to the list of standard hardware on a smartphone. Apple is now bringing super dense displays and gyros.
Microsoft brings it's name and a pretty UI. IMHO it is still lacking a lot of manditory features for a phone OS but that is just my opinon.
So no I want everyone to have a nice sized slice of the pie. That will be the best possible outcome. I do not want to be stuck like we are with PCs where one OS has 70+ of the market and one ISA has 100+ of the consumer market.
Oh and I want a new ISA for phones that isn't based on the ARM. PPC, MIPS, SH-4... Come on folks.