This is one of the reasons that Samba is becoming so popular as an OEM SMB solution, as writing your own SMB server from scratch is *hard*. People look at the published specs, think, well this can't be so bad:-), and start coding. Then they find the way the clients deviate from the spec and they're in a world of pain:-). Many of them end up licensing Microsoft server code, or start using Samba. SGI, Veritas, HP, Cobalt, Whistle (now IBM) and too many others to count are all shipping Samba based products now.
With examples like this of GPL code moving into main stream products we will see corporations being forced to publish software under the GPL.
If you don't want to release your software under the GPL then you have to get into bed with Microsoft to get a license for SAMBA.
Just one more example of Microsoft beaten by "amatures"
Software on the other hand, can be pretty dynamic. Code-morphing found in the Transmeta chips is one example
To be able to do what the brain does you have to have static hardware running the software that is emulating the "dynamic" hardware. From there the software is running on the "dynamic" hardware.
Kinda complex and obfuscated(SP) but taken this scenario the highest level of software is running. The emulation "dynamic" hardware morphs/adapts to the running software making it run faster. In time more programs running (growth of a human) the more morphing comes into play. At this point the "dynamic" hardware which is really software becomes in-efficient from constant morphing becuase it is no longer optimised for the hardware it is running on. The core processing power needs to be able to adapt for growth to continue.
Another part of the human brain which is unique is that it operates mostly on pattern recognition. Patterns are created in the brain (walking, talking, visual items, smells...). There are different patterns that are very similiar. The brain uses these patters as a type of preprocessor. An example of patterns is... "What does that cloud look like?" To different people it will look different because of the environment they grew up in. The brain is going to try to match the neblous cloud to a pattern that it recognises. To be more precice the brain is going to match the cloud to a pattern that it recognises and is most familiar with.
Nature is full of examples. You have the chamelion which changes it's color to change its pattern confusing a preditor and is able to get away. A cockroach runs away from a horney toad. The toad approaches to eat the 'roach and the 'roach flips on its back. The toad (not an extremely intelligent creature) recognised the pattern of a dead 'roach and leaves. The 'roach then runs away when the toad is gone.
Until computer software is capable of the immense pattern recognition of the human brain and the hardware that is running it is able to adapt to the programs running on it I do not believe that AI will be acomplished. (Sorry for the run on sentence)
I'm willing to bet that figuring out how to get that hardware to think will take centuries.
Human thinking is different than what most people percieve. You have to look at how an infant develops. It is trial and error. Once the infant figures out something (i.e. how to walk after falling many times) it repeats the action over and over. It is repetition which causes the brain to connect synapses to "hard wire" the action into the brain. The more repetition the more refined the "hard wiring" becomes. This is in effect an algorithim that is improved through something similiar to recursion. The act is refined by the very act its slef. The brain(CPU) is changing its internal structure to adapt to a new environment(the ability to walk in this example)
What I see is that hardware will never be complex enough to think. The brain is very dynamic. Its internal structure is in constant change. Hardware is extremely static. I do not see in the future hardware's internal structure becomming dynamic, but that is just my limited foresight. Until hardware is able to adapt like the brain to external stimulis and be able to refine its ability to process, AI will only be a dream.
In the movie Matrix, wasn't dependance on machines the reason that people were enslaved by them. This type of thought has been around for a long time. It is one of the biggest debates in the ethics of technology. Will we become the slaves of our creation?
With the ability of graphics hardware companies to distribute binary only drivers for Linux we may see vendors of other types of hardware pushing for this type of ability. We may see the networking vendors pushing for a binary compatible infrastructure so they can distribute their network cards with binary only drivers. Then the IDE chipset vendors, then the SCSI vendors, then the...
Where will this stop? We have to buy from vendors willing to distribute there hardware with open source drivers or we may loose control over what we covet most, the complete open nature of all of Linux and its drivers.
It is up to us to support/buy open source only graphics cards or we may loose everything.
A. The slashdot community is on the internet. B. When something like this gets put on slashdot it often results in the slashdot effect. C. Companies like Silicon.com generate revenue through ads D. More hits = more money E. Slashdot effect = More hits F. Slashdot effect = More money
Are we responsible in some way for the Linux FUD. By visiting these sites we are supporting the FUD.
He added that the issue could lead to proprietary versions of Linux being developed
Because of the GPL Linux cannot be propritary.
I'm getting sick of the articles based on Linux just to get looked at. The linux hype is moving from the stock market into journalisim(SP?). Where next... window cleaning?
Now any tom, dick or harry is going to say something controversial about Linux just to get publicity.
I truely belive that a mix of programming languages and methodologies is needed. Deciding on the mix is dependant on the project/problem at hand.
Often the choice of the mix will determine the outcome of a project more than the actual implementation.
For instance you take a huge project (200,000+ lines of code, not white spaces or comments). You have 20 programmers working on this project. Are all of them going to have the same skill set? Some are going to have a better grasp of OOP and some better at structured programming. This is where a good manager comes into play. He should be able to recognise who has what skills and devide the team accordingly. During this process the manager needs to find the people with strong aptitude towads the metholodigies which are going to interact and put them in charge of the interface of thoes metholodigies.
After the team has been devided then the proper tools for a correct solution needs to be selected. The programmers selected to be in charge of the interfaces should be the ones to select the tools/languages based on the expertise in each of the teams.
With a good mix of the above situation any software project is destined to be a success. I have personally been involved with a project of the one described and the results were phenominal! We used assembler, c and c++ with carefully designed interfaces. Each team had somebody who was extremely adept in what his team was working on and what his team was going to be interfacing with. The team was made up of the people who's aptitude mostly fit with the particular team. There were varying degrees of aptitude in which the expirenced tackeled the more complex problems and the novice tackeled the simpler problems or assisted the more expirenced.
Sadly I've not found this situation outside the college environment. The above mentioned project was with an unmanned aerial-vehicle competition. Most of the students were there for the fun of it. The project was to designe an aerial-vehicle to map a simulateed a toxic wast field. Finding and diferentiating(SP) between barrels with either a raidoactive or biohazerdous symbol on them. There were quite a few disperate subsystems which exsisted. Mainly communications from the vehicle to the ground station. The vision system and the acompying software. The navigation system... In one year we built a system that took 3rd place in an internationl competition held at Eppcot Center Orlando Florida.
Of course this type of environment needs decient people who know where their programming aptitude stands and not take offence to working on a simpler problem.
The term "quantum leap" does not apply. The development of XFree86 has been steadly advancing covering all ground between point a and point b. It's like a super nova. All of a sudden bam it is there super bright. You see instantanious results but don't forget that it took light hundreds/thousnds/millions of years to get from point a to point b.
The human eye cannot see more than 24 bit. Even if it could a monitor cannot display more than how much... A 1024x768 monitor can only display 786,432 pixels/colors. That is a far cry from 2^24 (16,777,216 possible colors). If you go to 1600x1200 you get 1,920,000 pixels still only 1/8 of a 24 bit color palette.
I've wrote the routines for image processing/manipulation. The human eye can only distinguish 64 shades of grey at one time. When it comes to color the human eye can only see arround 64K colors. That is why they use false color in scientific areas. You can see more definition with the color.
The extra bits in a 36 bit color depth is for image processing/manipulation. When doing histogram stretches and other process this is where the extra bits of resolution comes out and makes a dramatic inprovement in image quality.
11. BECAUSE THE PROGRAM IS LICENSED FREE OF CHARGE, THERE IS NO WARRANTY FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW. EXCEPT WHEN OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES PROVIDE THE PROGRAM "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION.
Under the UCITA this would absolve the author of any liability(SP?). I'm looking at this from a logical point of view. To use GPL software you have to agree to the license which is a shrinkwrap license hence the software would fall under the UCITA. I'm not saying that I'm right but from my point of view this could be the biggest boon for open source development.
A couple of points from the article which would help the Open Source movement.
One-sided shrinkwrap terms The GPL could be considered a shrinkwrap license. This would strengthen the GPL.
Cost of negotiated contracts If dealing with GPL software the only contract is the support contract which wouldn't be covered under the UCITA.
Software industry competitiveness Opensource software by nature isn't competivite along the same lines as comerical software. The quality wold be the same.
Electronic self help The ability to reposess software would be impossible. You've got the source code!
Reverse engineering You've got the source code! By nature the program is reverse engineered for you!
Transfer of ownership There is no ownership. You can do what you want within the limits of the GPL. Which isn't limiting.
Bug disclosure For open source development to work there needs to be a decient bug tracking system open to everybody.
From this point of view the UCITA would benifit the open source community greatly. But this point of view may be flawed.
Will Microsoft have enough time to supply the info. the Euro Commission is requesting. With all the effort they are putting into rolling out Win2K and there previous acts of delaying everyting when it comes into questioning there products. From what I read Microsoft will face heavy fines if they don't comply.
If they do what they have done it the past there product may be banned from Europe. Now wouldn't that put a burr up Bill's a**. Allow more time for Linux in Europe!
lawyers that can trick non-technical judges (read: most judges) into believing whatever they tell them
This comment exposes a possible problem in our judical system. With the rise of the information technology society we may need judges well versed in the technology and law to make a just and fair rueling. More amd more cases are based arround technology. Isn't it incompetence on the judicial systems part not to have a competent judge?
I agree patterns are beautiful! I've developed in C++ for 6 years. The most influential book in my development career is design patterns.
Right now I am working on an underfunded project. We are developing a realtime system to monitor many (150+) seperate subsystems. In general only 1 update a second from each subsystem is good enough but there are times where we will need updates from a couple of susbystesm 1000 times a second for a couple of seconds. The subsystems can communicate across a couple of different communication lines. Each of these lines uses different communication protocals. Right now we are useing RS-485 and CAN BUS 2.01b. The development of this is unimaginable. The patterns that I have found most usefull are the singleton and the factory. So much detail is abstracted using the factory I can add new subsystes/communications to the system by only affecting 5% of the code. Another pattern that I am using (I think it is actor, it's been a while since I read the book and it isn't handy right now) has abstracted the details of communicating with different subsystems so much that development is moving along almost too smoothly. On top of all this there are multiple, different GUIs that are to interact with the subsystems and what one GUI does the other GUIs (if applicable) are to respond accordingly. Either by displaying the info or acting on the change. The GUIs are to be able to connect and disconnect from the main system at will and any actions they performed are not to be lost.
We are using Linux as our development and deployment platform. I am heavly using System V IPC. If it wasn't for "Design Patterns" I would not have known where to beging. It opend my eyes to many different aspects of OOA OOD and OOP that other books just simply fell short. "Pattern Hatching: Design Patterns Applied" will be the next book that I add to my library. For the GUI I am using GTK. It fit so nicely in its OO approach that I couldn't pass it up.
I'm sorry if the above text is a little confusing but I cannot divulge any details due to the fact of the paranoia of managment of the competetors (Which in this industry is well founded)
The name of the "fingers" is called streamers. Sorry I can't provide better information. I have limited time. A breif explination is here... A breif description
I origionally learnd this from the discovery channel about 4 years ago. It was a cool program about lightning. They showd 1 picture of a streamer. They said that it was probably the only one to exsist.
Just because lightning doesn't strike nearby doesn't mean there is not enough energy. A little known phenomenon(SP?) concerning lightning is that it passes through a plasma chamber put up by the earth. The name of these excapes me right now. Multiple chambers are put out like fingers sometimes miles from eachother. They have just as much energy as lightning but only exsist for less than a second and only the first few feet are visible.
I saw one once. It appeared just above a tree and it was a super bright pink, almost white. Lightning struck at almost the same instant about 1/2 mile away.
Now I can get a laptop with linux supported by an OEM. Now when I have to do something for the boss I can take around laptop and show people on the go how awsome Linux is (And it is supported by Dell!) This will be a big boon for Linux in the corporation.
The Curso technology will probably make the Java chip a reality and improve upon the idea all in one shot. Program the morphing code to run Java Byte Code and you have a Java chip which optmises your code. A very clean language that you can easily maintain and not sacrifice execution speed. Every Software development Managers dream!
I'm using mozilla now. It is a little slow but much better than the previous release. I like the look and feel. I definatly renders microsoft ASP pagse better and faster than it did before and better than netscape 4.7. So far I haven't found any web pages it can't render. I'm really excited now. I can't wait for the beta release.
What is does under the hood, between it's translation of instructions and its optimization of the actual code (profiling on the fly), is phenomenal
Taking that into consideration, Transmeta could put 2 CPU cores on the die and bam you have doubled the speed of your CPU. This would be utilized by the translation layer making it seamless to the applications.
Why stop at 2 go to 4 or 8 or... the translation software will utilize the extra cores transparent of the softare. Now take this with multiple units on an SMP machine you have one hell of a powerfull server.
"Then he asked the reporters, "Do you have questions for someone else?" (No real surprises; except Bill Roses conceding that Mac compatibility was "theoretically possible.") "
If the Mac compatibility is "theoretically possible." a "Java Chip" could be part of the morphing code giving you awsome Java performance and cutting out the cumbersom Java Virtual Machine. Basically Java enabling EVERYTING.
Slashdot Mirror
then you have to get into bed with Microsoft to get a license for SAMBA
I mean get a license for the windows implementation of SMB.
Sorry
This is one of the reasons that Samba is becoming so popular as an OEM SMB solution, as writing your own SMB server from scratch is *hard*. People look at the published specs, think, well this can't be so bad :-), and start coding. Then they find the way the clients deviate from the spec and they're in a world of pain :-). Many of them end up licensing Microsoft server code, or start using Samba. SGI, Veritas, HP, Cobalt, Whistle (now IBM) and too many others to count are all shipping Samba based products now.
With examples like this of GPL code moving into main stream products we will see corporations being forced to publish software under the GPL.
If you don't want to release your software under the GPL then you have to get into bed with Microsoft to get a license for SAMBA.
Just one more example of Microsoft beaten by "amatures"
Software can emulate hardware..
Software on the other hand, can be pretty dynamic. Code-morphing found in the Transmeta chips is one example
To be able to do what the brain does you have to have static hardware running the software that is emulating the "dynamic" hardware. From there the software is running on the "dynamic" hardware.
Kinda complex and obfuscated(SP) but taken this scenario the highest level of software is running. The emulation "dynamic" hardware morphs/adapts to the running software making it run faster. In time more programs running (growth of a human) the more morphing comes into play. At this point the "dynamic" hardware which is really software becomes in-efficient from constant morphing becuase it is no longer optimised for the hardware it is running on. The core processing power needs to be able to adapt for growth to continue.
Another part of the human brain which is unique is that it operates mostly on pattern recognition. Patterns are created in the brain (walking, talking, visual items, smells...). There are different patterns that are very similiar. The brain uses these patters as a type of preprocessor. An example of patterns is... "What does that cloud look like?" To different people it will look different because of the environment they grew up in. The brain is going to try to match the neblous cloud to a pattern that it recognises. To be more precice the brain is going to match the cloud to a pattern that it recognises and is most familiar with.
Nature is full of examples. You have the chamelion which changes it's color to change its pattern confusing a preditor and is able to get away. A cockroach runs away from a horney toad. The toad approaches to eat the 'roach and the 'roach flips on its back. The toad (not an extremely intelligent creature) recognised the pattern of a dead 'roach and leaves. The 'roach then runs away when the toad is gone.
Until computer software is capable of the immense pattern recognition of the human brain and the hardware that is running it is able to adapt to the programs running on it I do not believe that AI will be acomplished. (Sorry for the run on sentence)
I'm willing to bet that figuring out how to get that hardware to think will take centuries.
Human thinking is different than what most people percieve. You have to look at how an infant develops. It is trial and error. Once the infant figures out something (i.e. how to walk after falling many times) it repeats the action over and over. It is repetition which causes the brain to connect synapses to "hard wire" the action into the brain. The more repetition the more refined the "hard wiring" becomes. This is in effect an algorithim that is improved through something similiar to recursion. The act is refined by the very act its slef. The brain(CPU) is changing its internal structure to adapt to a new environment(the ability to walk in this example)
What I see is that hardware will never be complex enough to think. The brain is very dynamic. Its internal structure is in constant change. Hardware is extremely static. I do not see in the future hardware's internal structure becomming dynamic, but that is just my limited foresight. Until hardware is able to adapt like the brain to external stimulis and be able to refine its ability to process, AI will only be a dream.
In the movie Matrix, wasn't dependance on machines the reason that people were enslaved by them. This type of thought has been around for a long time. It is one of the biggest debates in the ethics of technology. Will we become the slaves of our creation?
With the ability of graphics hardware companies to distribute binary only drivers for Linux we may see vendors of other types of hardware pushing for this type of ability. We may see the networking vendors pushing for a binary compatible infrastructure so they can distribute their network cards with binary only drivers. Then the IDE chipset vendors, then the SCSI vendors, then the...
Where will this stop? We have to buy from vendors willing to distribute there hardware with open source drivers or we may loose control over what we covet most, the complete open nature of all of Linux and its drivers.
It is up to us to support/buy open source only graphics cards or we may loose everything.
A. The slashdot community is on the internet.
B. When something like this gets put on slashdot it often results in the slashdot effect.
C. Companies like Silicon.com generate revenue through ads
D. More hits = more money
E. Slashdot effect = More hits
F. Slashdot effect = More money
Are we responsible in some way for the Linux FUD. By visiting these sites we are supporting the FUD.
Just an idle observation.
He added that the issue could lead to proprietary versions of Linux being developed
Because of the GPL Linux cannot be propritary.
I'm getting sick of the articles based on Linux just to get looked at. The linux hype is moving from the stock market into journalisim(SP?). Where next... window cleaning?
Now any tom, dick or harry is going to say something controversial about Linux just to get publicity.
Just makes me sick!
Now I can get a 10 GB Scotch HD.
Now the question is... Can I get it with a SCSI interface?
I truely belive that a mix of programming languages and methodologies is needed. Deciding on the mix is dependant on the project/problem at hand.
Often the choice of the mix will determine the outcome of a project more than the actual implementation.
For instance you take a huge project (200,000+ lines of code, not white spaces or comments). You have 20 programmers working on this project. Are all of them going to have the same skill set? Some are going to have a better grasp of OOP and some better at structured programming. This is where a good manager comes into play. He should be able to recognise who has what skills and devide the team accordingly. During this process the manager needs to find the people with strong aptitude towads the metholodigies which are going to interact and put them in charge of the interface of thoes metholodigies.
After the team has been devided then the proper tools for a correct solution needs to be selected. The programmers selected to be in charge of the interfaces should be the ones to select the tools/languages based on the expertise in each of the teams.
With a good mix of the above situation any software project is destined to be a success. I have personally been involved with a project of the one described and the results were phenominal! We used assembler, c and c++ with carefully designed interfaces. Each team had somebody who was extremely adept in what his team was working on and what his team was going to be interfacing with. The team was made up of the people who's aptitude mostly fit with the particular team. There were varying degrees of aptitude in which the expirenced tackeled the more complex problems and the novice tackeled the simpler problems or assisted the more expirenced.
Sadly I've not found this situation outside the college environment. The above mentioned project was with an unmanned aerial-vehicle competition. Most of the students were there for the fun of it. The project was to designe an aerial-vehicle to map a simulateed a toxic wast field. Finding and diferentiating(SP) between barrels with either a raidoactive or biohazerdous symbol on them. There were quite a few disperate subsystems which exsisted. Mainly communications from the vehicle to the ground station. The vision system and the acompying software. The navigation system... In one year we built a system that took 3rd place in an internationl competition held at Eppcot Center Orlando Florida.
Of course this type of environment needs decient people who know where their programming aptitude stands and not take offence to working on a simpler problem.
The term "quantum leap" does not apply. The development of XFree86 has been steadly advancing covering all ground between point a and point b. It's like a super nova. All of a sudden bam it is there super bright. You see instantanious results but don't forget that it took light hundreds/thousnds/millions of years to get from point a to point b.
The human eye cannot see more than 24 bit. Even if it could a monitor cannot display more than how much... A 1024x768 monitor can only display 786,432 pixels/colors. That is a far cry from 2^24 (16,777,216 possible colors). If you go to 1600x1200 you get 1,920,000 pixels still only 1/8 of a 24 bit color palette.
I've wrote the routines for image processing/manipulation. The human eye can only distinguish 64 shades of grey at one time. When it comes to color the human eye can only see arround 64K colors. That is why they use false color in scientific areas. You can see more definition with the color.
The extra bits in a 36 bit color depth is for image processing/manipulation. When doing histogram stretches and other process this is where the extra bits of resolution comes out and makes a dramatic inprovement in image quality.
From the GPL...
11. BECAUSE THE PROGRAM IS LICENSED FREE OF CHARGE, THERE IS NO WARRANTY FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW. EXCEPT WHEN OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES PROVIDE THE PROGRAM "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION.
Under the UCITA this would absolve the author of any liability(SP?). I'm looking at this from a logical point of view. To use GPL software you have to agree to the license which is a shrinkwrap license hence the software would fall under the UCITA. I'm not saying that I'm right but from my point of view this could be the biggest boon for open source development.
Here is an article that pretty sums up what the UCITA is all about? /features/990531ucita3.htm
htt p://archive.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.pl
A couple of points from the article which would help the Open Source movement.
One-sided shrinkwrap terms
The GPL could be considered a shrinkwrap license. This would strengthen the GPL.
Cost of negotiated contracts
If dealing with GPL software the only contract is the support contract which wouldn't be covered under the UCITA.
Software industry competitiveness
Opensource software by nature isn't competivite along the same lines as comerical software. The quality wold be the same.
Electronic self help
The ability to reposess software would be impossible. You've got the source code!
Reverse engineering
You've got the source code! By nature the program is reverse engineered for you!
Transfer of ownership
There is no ownership. You can do what you want within the limits of the GPL. Which isn't limiting.
Bug disclosure
For open source development to work there needs to be a decient bug tracking system open to everybody.
From this point of view the UCITA would benifit the open source community greatly. But this point of view may be flawed.
Here it is on BBC
d _636000/636886.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsi
Will Microsoft have enough time to supply the info. the Euro Commission is requesting. With all the effort they are putting into rolling out Win2K and there previous acts of delaying everyting when it comes into questioning there products. From what I read Microsoft will face heavy fines if they don't comply.
If they do what they have done it the past there product may be banned from Europe. Now wouldn't that put a burr up Bill's a**. Allow more time for Linux in Europe!
lawyers that can trick non-technical judges (read: most judges) into believing whatever they tell them
This comment exposes a possible problem in our judical system. With the rise of the information technology society we may need judges well versed in the technology and law to make a just and fair rueling. More amd more cases are based arround technology. Isn't it incompetence on the judicial systems part not to have a competent judge?
I agree patterns are beautiful! I've developed in C++ for 6 years. The most influential book in my development career is design patterns.
Right now I am working on an underfunded project. We are developing a realtime system to monitor many (150+) seperate subsystems. In general only 1 update a second from each subsystem is good enough but there are times where we will need updates from a couple of susbystesm 1000 times a second for a couple of seconds. The subsystems can communicate across a couple of different communication lines. Each of these lines uses different communication protocals. Right now we are useing RS-485 and CAN BUS 2.01b. The development of this is unimaginable. The patterns that I have found most usefull are the singleton and the factory. So much detail is abstracted using the factory I can add new subsystes/communications to the system by only affecting 5% of the code. Another pattern that I am using (I think it is actor, it's been a while since I read the book and it isn't handy right now) has abstracted the details of communicating with different subsystems so much that development is moving along almost too smoothly. On top of all this there are multiple, different GUIs that are to interact with the subsystems and what one GUI does the other GUIs (if applicable) are to respond accordingly. Either by displaying the info or acting on the change. The GUIs are to be able to connect and disconnect from the main system at will and any actions they performed are not to be lost.
We are using Linux as our development and deployment platform. I am heavly using System V IPC. If it wasn't for "Design Patterns" I would not have known where to beging. It opend my eyes to many different aspects of OOA OOD and OOP that other books just simply fell short. "Pattern Hatching: Design Patterns Applied" will be the next book that I add to my library. For the GUI I am using GTK. It fit so nicely in its OO approach that I couldn't pass it up.
I'm sorry if the above text is a little confusing but I cannot divulge any details due to the fact of the paranoia of managment of the competetors (Which in this industry is well founded)
The name of the "fingers" is called streamers. Sorry I can't provide better information. I have limited time. A breif explination is here...
A breif description
some documentation which references steamer here.. Abstract to a more detailed research paper - search for streamer
I origionally learnd this from the discovery channel about 4 years ago. It was a cool program about lightning. They showd 1 picture of a streamer. They said that it was probably the only one to exsist.
Just because lightning doesn't strike nearby doesn't mean there is not enough energy. A little known phenomenon(SP?) concerning lightning is that it passes through a plasma chamber put up by the earth. The name of these excapes me right now. Multiple chambers are put out like fingers sometimes miles from eachother. They have just as much energy as lightning but only exsist for less than a second and only the first few feet are visible.
I saw one once. It appeared just above a tree and it was a super bright pink, almost white. Lightning struck at almost the same instant about 1/2 mile away.
Now I can get a laptop with linux supported by an OEM. Now when I have to do something for the boss I can take around laptop and show people on the go how awsome Linux is (And it is supported by Dell!) This will be a big boon for Linux in the corporation.
The Curso technology will probably make the Java chip a reality and improve upon the idea all in one shot. Program the morphing code to run Java Byte Code and you have a Java chip which optmises your code. A very clean language that you can easily maintain and not sacrifice execution speed. Every Software development Managers dream!
I'm using mozilla now. It is a little slow but much better than the previous release. I like the look and feel. I definatly renders microsoft ASP pagse better and faster than it did before and better than netscape 4.7. So far I haven't found any web pages it can't render. I'm really excited now. I can't wait for the beta release.
What is does under the hood, between it's translation of instructions and its optimization of the actual code (profiling on the fly), is phenomenal
... the translation software will utilize the extra cores transparent of the softare. Now take this with multiple units on an SMP machine you have one hell of a powerfull server.
Taking that into consideration, Transmeta could put 2 CPU cores on the die and bam you have doubled the speed of your CPU. This would be utilized by the translation layer making it seamless to the applications.
Why stop at 2 go to 4 or 8 or
To quote the article...
"Then he asked the reporters, "Do you have questions for someone else?" (No real surprises; except Bill Roses conceding that Mac compatibility was "theoretically possible.") "
If the Mac compatibility is "theoretically possible." a "Java Chip" could be part of the morphing code giving you awsome Java performance and cutting out the cumbersom Java Virtual Machine. Basically Java enabling EVERYTING.