When you hear about CPUs... they quote it in microns..
So instead of 0.13 microns (latest intel P4), it can acheive 0.01 micron.
But will the circuitry actually WORK at that size? I've heard 0.01 micron is about the limit of what semiconductors will work at until quantum effects step in and ruin the party;-)
This sounds exactly like the virtual world from Snowcrash. You get an avatar. Cool hackers can customize them, people on public terminals got slow, jerky, greyscale avatars. You have to travel on some sort of virtual transit system along a main road that was 32,768 miles long. 'Course the l33t hax0rs could travel many thousand miles a second.
Anyway... read it... it's a good book. This software however? I dunno... maybe if they guy would actually post a *LINK* to it hehe...
This site is starting to look a bit sketchy in his reviews. On one of the benchmarks they note that P4 got beat so bad because there "may be compatibility problems with the P4", yet for every benchmark where the Athlon came in behind nearly every other P4 chip, they make no mention or comment to that effect, except something like "clearly the Athlon sucks for this program cause its outdated" etc...
And who make Tom's the judge of the contest? Who gives a fuck who they "declare" the winner. I'll be the one to decide because in the end I decide with my Wallet. And my wallet likes AMD's chips cause they run nearly as fast with everything and cost 1/2 the price of Intel (at the highest speed). Duh... it's a no-brainer.
Itanium, Intel's 64bit chip will not require an emulator to run 32bit code. It will just run at a performance hit. This is exactly what happened when NT4 came out and people complained about 16bit apps running slower on it.
But rewriting all those apps for 64 bit will not happen overnight. That's why when I look at the options:
A: Buying intel's 64bit chip and suffering until my apps are ported over to 64bit.
-or
B: Buying AMD's 64bit chip and running all my existing apps at roughly double(*) the performance (and when 64bit apps come out, they will SCREAM.)
I tend to like AMD's plan. I think Intel is in serious trouble unless they either hurt their sales significantly before they can release the Hammer, or if AMD has major problems.
*(current 800Mhz preview seemed to provide around 2x performance, final is expected to be 1.2Ghz).
> It was read on WAAF (bottom of the dung pile "rock" station) by "Mistress Carrie" for crying out loud!
As if there was something better to listen to in Boston? Come on.
Last time I checked that was more than enough for thttpd. thttpd is a non-blocking non-threaded design... (select()). It's supposed to scale BETTER than apache, etc..
It will just have it's network link congested I think, but it won't *die* or *crash*.
rpm --rebuild mozilla-1.0.src.rpm rpm -ivh/usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/mozilla-1.0.i386.rp m
Course, if you need to tweak anything before compiling, do it this way...
rpm -ivh mozilla-1.0.src.rpm
SPEC file is in/usr/src/redhat/SPECS
It contains all the instructions on how to generate the RPM... specifically unpacking, patching, and running configure, make, and make install. And then which files to include into the final rpm.
Under/usr/src/redhat/SOURCES is the source tarball and any patches that will be applied or other files that are required to be installed.
Then do this:
cd/usr/src/redhat/SPECS rpm --ba mozilla.spec rpm -ivh/usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/mozilla-1.0.i386.rp m
If I don't want the email/news/chat cruft (and I don't), but I do want the basic browser on 3 systems, why should I download a 200K.exe three times, click on the same options three times, and download the same few-megabytes browser, three times?
Simple use the Net-Installer, and then save a copy of the.XPI's it downloads. or you can get them from the ftp site. It will use them off disk instead of retreive them several times.
I'm sorry but your asking for too much. IE already supports non "IE-Style" layers. It's called CSS1. It's fully implemented on both IE5.5+ and NS6+ (Mozilla, etc)... Same goes for scripting objects. Both support (more or less) the Document Object Model standard.. DOM1.
As for Image alignment. The "align" property is deprecated, you should be using style sheets by now. See W3.ORG.
"The white paper, Opening the Open Source Debate, from the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution (ADTI) will suggest that open source opens the gates to hackers and terrorists."
My $0.02:
... First of all, there ARE NO GATES! All software contains bugs, sometimes exploitable... closed source is NOT a "Gate" that blocks hacking... yes, exactly: nimda, codeRed, klez, iloveyou, and just about every other "virus" reported in the last two years... blah blah blah... ...shitty analogy...
See: Publications and Accomplishments http://www.adti.net/pubsaccomps.h tml
They don't exactly seem to be experts in any field of computers, networks, or security that I can tell. They did some reports for more traditional defense related topics several years ago, but thats it. They are however, very good at reporting on controversial issues, mainly politcal in nature. Hmmm..
Here's a question. Of the total number of security problems reported regarding closed vs. open source products, what percentage were pre-emptive fixes reported by whitehats, v.s. those exploited and thus forced to be officially reported?
My point is... a bug is a bug, but it's a hell of a lot better if it's patched before it's ever exploited. So it's totally wrong to look purely at # of reported security problems in product XYZ. I would expect an open source product to have a significantly higher # of reported problems. That's a good thing IMO, since that means there's less of them lurking.
The bottom line: Everything has bugs. More eyes, less bugs. More secure. Simple. Now would someone try and explain that to these anti-open-source nitwits?
Oh, and may I point out: (already reported) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar ticles/A600 50-2002May22.html http://www.nsa.gov/selinux/
Shut up. Your a troll damnit. I can smell a troll from a mile away. Just in case you were serious:
I'm sorry thay our www.mydogfluffy.com dynamic floating text widgets only work on antique browsers but the truth is, most major websites DO actually follow the standards (which are simpler and make more sense).
It's a standard. Tough. Deal with it. Everyone else has. "DHTML" in the sense that microsoft defined it, isn't a standard. And before you say another word, IE 5.5+ also supports the w3c DOM standard... making it quite a good standard in my book.
Slashdot Mirror
sheesh...
No... this talks about using fricken' "LASER BEAMS"... ;-)
When you hear about CPUs... they quote it in microns.. So instead of 0.13 microns (latest intel P4), it can acheive 0.01 micron. But will the circuitry actually WORK at that size? I've heard 0.01 micron is about the limit of what semiconductors will work at until quantum effects step in and ruin the party ;-)
if you are using Gnome 2.0, you're the one asking for abuse. *ugh*
...and how much does a mod chip cost currently?
(up to) 1,024 Processors....@ 500Mhz *EACH*
...so thats the equivelent of 0.5Thz =D
or
500-fucking-GIGAHERTZ!!!
This sounds exactly like the virtual world from Snowcrash. You get an avatar. Cool hackers can customize them, people on public terminals got slow, jerky, greyscale avatars. You have to travel on some sort of virtual transit system along a main road that was 32,768 miles long. 'Course the l33t hax0rs could travel many thousand miles a second.
Anyway... read it... it's a good book. This software however? I dunno... maybe if they guy would actually post a *LINK* to it hehe...
And who make Tom's the judge of the contest? Who gives a fuck who they "declare" the winner. I'll be the one to decide because in the end I decide with my Wallet. And my wallet likes AMD's chips cause they run nearly as fast with everything and cost 1/2 the price of Intel (at the highest speed). Duh... it's a no-brainer.
<pun> Obey your wallet. Choose AMD =) </pun>
But rewriting all those apps for 64 bit will not happen overnight. That's why when I look at the options:
A: Buying intel's 64bit chip and suffering until my apps are ported over to 64bit.
-or
B: Buying AMD's 64bit chip and running all my existing apps at roughly double(*) the performance
(and when 64bit apps come out, they will SCREAM.)
I tend to like AMD's plan. I think Intel is in serious trouble unless they either hurt their sales significantly before they can release the Hammer, or if AMD has major problems.
*(current 800Mhz preview seemed to provide around 2x performance, final is expected to be 1.2Ghz).
> It was read on WAAF (bottom of the dung pile "rock" station) by "Mistress Carrie" for crying out loud! As if there was something better to listen to in Boston? Come on.
Running @ 200Mhz.
Last time I checked that was more than enough for thttpd. thttpd is a non-blocking non-threaded design... (select()). It's supposed to scale BETTER than apache, etc..
It will just have it's network link congested I think, but it won't *die* or *crash*.
Course, if you need to tweak anything before compiling, do it this way...SPEC file is in
Under /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES is the source tarball and any patches that will be applied or other files that are required to be installed.
Then do this:
Simple use the Net-Installer, and then save a copy of the .XPI's it downloads. or you can get them from the ftp site. It will use them off disk instead of retreive them several times.
June 5th 2002 - Mozilla 1.0 Released
Roughly, about 4.5 years.
Could someone please explain why the Redhat 7.x RPMs that are distributed still dont support TrueType fonts (and therefore no anti-aliasing) ?
Might I expect an official Redhat RPM of Mozilla 1.0 released sometime soon with full TrueType support and antialiased fonts? It looks so nice!
I'm sorry but your asking for too much. IE already supports non "IE-Style" layers. It's called CSS1. It's fully implemented on both IE5.5+ and NS6+ (Mozilla, etc)... Same goes for scripting objects. Both support (more or less) the Document Object Model standard.. DOM1. As for Image alignment. The "align" property is deprecated, you should be using style sheets by now. See W3.ORG.
Rapidsite/Apa/1.3.20 could be some bastardized version of Apache which is closed source...
Though mod-ssl is open source.
As well as OpenSSL... (duh)..
$ httptype www.adti.net
Rapidsite/Apa/1.3.20 (Unix) FrontPage/4.0.4.3 mod_ssl/2.8.4 OpenSSL/0.9.6
Who wants to place bets as to when Microsoft learns of this, and promptly switches their systems?
Two problems with your assesment:
"The white paper, Opening the Open Source Debate, from the Alexis de
.. closed source is NOT a "Gate" that blocks
h tml
r ticles/A600 50-2002May22.html
.gov likes it just fine ;-)
Tocqueville Institution (ADTI) will suggest that open source opens the
gates to hackers and terrorists."
My $0.02:
... First of all, there ARE NO GATES! All software contains bugs,
sometimes exploitable.
hacking... yes, exactly: nimda, codeRed, klez, iloveyou, and just about
every other "virus" reported in the last two years... blah blah blah...
...shitty analogy...
See: Publications and Accomplishments
http://www.adti.net/pubsaccomps.
They don't exactly seem to be experts in any field of computers,
networks, or security that I can tell. They did some reports for more
traditional defense related topics several years ago, but thats it. They
are however, very good at reporting on controversial issues, mainly
politcal in nature. Hmmm..
Here's a question. Of the total number of security problems reported
regarding closed vs. open source products, what percentage were
pre-emptive fixes reported by whitehats, v.s. those exploited and thus
forced to be officially reported?
My point is... a bug is a bug, but it's a hell of a lot better if it's
patched before it's ever exploited. So it's totally wrong to look purely
at # of reported security problems in product XYZ. I would expect an
open source product to have a significantly higher # of reported
problems. That's a good thing IMO, since that means there's less of them
lurking.
The bottom line: Everything has bugs. More eyes, less bugs. More secure.
Simple. Now would someone try and explain that to these anti-open-source
nitwits?
Oh, and may I point out: (already reported)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/a
http://www.nsa.gov/selinux/
It seems like our
-Mark Renouf
=P
OOoh, maybe it can be added if the decoding hardware is generic enough? Wow.. that would ROCK!
My first first post?
I'm sorry thay our www.mydogfluffy.com dynamic floating text widgets only work on antique browsers but the truth is, most major websites DO actually follow the standards (which are simpler and make more sense).
It's a standard. Tough. Deal with it. Everyone else has. "DHTML" in the sense that microsoft defined it, isn't a standard. And before you say another word, IE 5.5+ also supports the w3c DOM standard... making it quite a good standard in my book.
That's funny.. Mozilla isn't trying to change the standards. Get this... it's actually FOLLOWING THEM!
Wow! What a concept.
>>The only major problem I have with it is that plugins are very hard to install (on Win2K) compared to IE.
Yeah... and no fun security exploits to play with =(