I guess you don't remember the 486 cards from the old days. It was a stunning flop. Too expensive, too underpowered, and almost nobody cared.
None of those criticisms apply to this product, however.;^)
It was cheaper, simpler, and more flexible to duct tape a real PC to the side of the box and add a KVM switch.
Cheaper and more flexible, but definitely not simpler.
Oh, and by the way, "integrated graphics" is a codeword for "cheap crappy graphics chip that satsfies Ma and Pa, but any serious gamer will disable in favor of his own card". Oops, there's no AGP slot on your PC-on-a-card!
First of all, gamers will play native G5 games rather than their PC counterparts.
Secondly, if the new ATI integrated graphics parts are used, they are sufficient for mid-level gaming if there's no Mac port available. They certainly aren't "crappy".
What I want to see is Windows apps running as separate apps in separate windows, just like Apple's X11 does. Not one big window that pretends to be a screen. And no stupid Start menu. Even nicer would be to make the apps support a real menu bar (ditto for X11), but considering all the Windows apps that make the menu bar into a toolbar, this might be tricky.
Why would you want that? Almost all Mac users who need this need to run an occasional Windows app alongside all their Mac stuff. That single app running full-screen in a single virtual desktop works fine.
If you need more, just allow multiple Windows "displays". No big deal.
G5s have PCI-X slots. Someone should make an ~$200 x86 card with sufficient performance to run Windows. Perhaps a low-power AMD Duron plus integrated graphics and up to, say, 1 GB RAM (256 MB standard). Mass storage could come from some virtualized Mac resources...perhaps Samba. Low-power Athlons could be used for upscale versions with more performance.
I'm sure Microsoft would go for an OEM bundle approach on XP Home, so that would only add $30 or so (maybe less). What did the emulators cost?
The only downside to this approach is that it involves opening the case and inserting a card, anathema for many Mac people. The obvious answer is a micro-form-factor PC hooked up via Firewire 800, with some (simple) custom software to handle display on the Mac. This should go for under $300.
OK, now that we have a business plan, who's ready to hire me as CTO?:-)
That wasn't a single exposure, it was a combination of exposures that added to 153,700 sec. That's actually how the deep fields are done. So you don't have to hold the telescope steady for that long (although it pretty much is anyway).
Given the way CCDs operate, any long exposure is typically made up of many shorter exposures. You are correct in that the telescope may not be pointed continuously over the entire exposure.
"We have absolute direct knowledge of this. If you go behind the scenes, the attacks that we get that don't have IBM's name on them, underneath the covers, are sponsored by IBM," McBride said.
Talk about delusional...
SCO has given sufficient reason to be disliked that it should have expected bullets from every direction..
Heck, I'm tempted to attack them myself, and I certainly have no affiliation with IBM!;-)
Yes, we all know that speeding up something 20x will speed up productivity. I don't remember my vid cards ever getting that big of upgrade in one generation.
For the 3DS type apps, that big of a jump will happen in one generation.
The reason being, the older cards simply couldn't render the bulk of a 3DS scene in hardware...the new ones can.
These cards are for the UI to the 3D app, not for rendering. The difference between 30 fps and 60 fps isn't going to save any significant amount of money.
First of all, that isn't true even with last-generation hardware - CAD apps sure need realtime rendering. Speeding up a complex model from.5 FPS to 10 (or 100) FPS can result in big productivity gains.
Even the VR apps like 3D Studio can use the programmable shader features of these newest cards to render production quality scenes in realtime or near realtime. One of the big presentations at E3 *last year* was a realtime rendering of one of the big scenes in the Two Towers - in full cinematic quality on a GeForce FX.
It would have been nice if they also benchmarked a $400 GeForceFX5900-256MB and a $425 Radeon 9800Pro-256MB then. (current prices from pricewatch)
Just for grins, it'd be great to see the Radeon 9600/9800 benchmarked in the new Apple G5s. Those also claim to support pro level applications.
The dirty little secret of the graphics chip industry is that these cards are really no different from the 'consumer' versions. It is simply a matter of the pro driver sensing a firmware dongle, then enabling the pro features like fast antialiased linedrawing for CAD.
So, I'm curious to see how Apple CAD applications fare with the 'consumer' cards in the G5s. The G5s should run these OpenGL benchmarks just fine (so should the G4s for that matter).
Battlefield 1942 is a Direct3D game; OpenGL drivers won't really help. Till game developers drop Direct3D completely, which I don't foresee happening in the near future, Linux (& Mac) gamers will always be missing a few titles.
Yep, too bad that author was shortsighted and used sucky APIs that locked 'em to a single platform.
Still, doing an OpenGL/SDL port probably wouldn't be too hard...
You were around for the Dot Com boom, right? Where everyone who claimed to be able to code HTML was treated like a C developer?
I'm not sure what you mean here. First of all, web development was so new that everyone was essentially on the same learning curve. Top developers that turned their attention in that direction typically picked it up very fast - I know I did.
Of course, in it's infinite wisdom the computer industry has proceeded to overcomplicate web development to the point where it's pretty much on par with C development...
Ah well, there are still plenty of interesting things to do out there!;-)
Since several responses made essentially these same points, this will be my blanket reply to the lot.
Silly me, and here I was thinking economy was not about holding on to money but about circulating money. The higher the pace of circulation, the better the economy.
It sure is. And guess what, the best scenario is for that money to circulate within the borders of the U.S. Not flow to another country like blood from a wound.
Should the world follow your advice then not only world trade would slowly grind to a halt but your cost of living would sky-rocket, eventually setting you back to the middle ages.
Not at all. Shipping CS/IS expertise out of the country is near akin to shipping nuclear weapons expertise out of the country, in terms of the long-term impact on U.S. strategic interests.
Using H1B workers is an interim solution to a longer term problem. The longer term problem is that of off-shore competition.
Using H1B workers accomplished nothing except to lower costs for American companies. The espoused "lack of technical talent" was a myth. There is/was an abundance of talent, however it was more experienced/expensive than the CEOs wanted to pay. Therefore the push for increased numbers of imported, entry-level foreign workers.
India's body-shopping business right now is negligable compared to what might happen if they start building and selling meaningful software themselves, instead of being hired to do so.
Exactly my point. We are training a workforce that can instantly turn into deadly competitors. As I said, that is stupid.
In your zero H1B visa world, the US will cease to develop software as it does now.
Look up the meanings of "non-sequitor" and "strawman" in your dictionary, please.
For this to happen, the pace of innovation in computer science needs to slow and the quality of computer science education of India needs to level with the western world.
Exactly...an undesirable result from a competitive standpoint. One hopes the West will remain well ahead.
I believe this is happening.
Yes, largely due to the stupidity and shortsightedness of our MBAs, CEOs, and politicians. Thank you for making my point so clearly.
But good luck with your isolationist agenda there.
My "agenda" is nothing resembling "isolationist". I support the current role of the U.S. in world affairs, and I support free trade. However, exporting "mission critical" technology and expertise to foreign countries is not part of either of those activities.
If you look at the moderations my post received, you'll see a lot of Slashdotters agree with me.
Someone thought Davis' approval was so low he could lose a recall. So, he was willing to pay for it.
Right, I'm with you so far.
The recall election was BOUGHT, plain and simple.
Bullcrap. The only reason it was "paid for" was to accelerate the process. The grass roots petition process would have collected enough signatures regardless.
The event says nothing about the position of California voters. You could get a million California voters to oppose the most popular governor.
However, no one would bother, since the governer wouldn't lose the recall election and whoever sponsored it would lose political capital. In the present case, those that've sponsored it have gained massive political capital where it matters here in California. If you've watched the polls, you've seen the momentum to recall Davis grow and grow.
The only reasons are his incompetence and seemingly limitless ability to lie...not "paid for" signatures.
Yah, sure, why get all worked up about minor issues like my livelyhood, or the future of my country...
I'm not going to discuss all your opinions, agreeing or not (yes, my english is poor),
Actually you seem to be doing just fine.
but take it easy when you speak about 3rd wold countries. Many times, they do they job just as well as people every where else.
That has nothing to do with my point.
Outsource tasks isn't easy for management issues, but you shouldn't put the things like it is the problem of 3rd world.
It is not a problem of the third world. It is a problem here in the U.S., where it has become a common practice. See my other responses for why it's not a good idea.
Don't forget the good contributions to technology (in Linux for example), that have done countries like Brazil or India.
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against third world countries or the work they do there. I think they should have a right to compete on an open world market. My point is simply that U.S. companies should be much less shortsighted about shipping jobs, money and expertise overseas. Those kind of 'investments' can come back to haunt you, in so many ways.
And a few less people who've swallowed the "H1B holders do the same work for much less" bullshit.
No, it's more like "H1B holders do more work for the same money", i.e. 80 hour weeks with no complaints, on salary. And that salary will be at the bottom of the relevant scale, every time.
Further, the use of H1B holders is stupid for two unrelated reasons: you're shipping money to overseas economies, and you're training a workforce to compete against you once it returns home (which most do).
Again, using H1B workers and/or outsourcing is moronic in the long run, and is against the best interests of the United States and it's citizens.
A scary thought, indeed...but who doesn't wonder the "whys" of management?
The 'whys' of management are simple indeed. Do whatever it takes to "maximize shareholder value".
Whether or not this short term strategy is in the best long-term interest of the company, country, or people is not an issue. This is the type of thinking all MBAs are currently taught, and it is the reason for blindly idiotic decisions like hiring H1-B visa holders and outsourcing to 3rd world countries.
I hope that cleared things up for you.
This country could use a lot more clearheaded, innovative thinking, and a lot less "MBA mentality".
Many of their arguments don't even help their case at all, since they have no interest in doing Unix business anymore anyway.
I'm not sure about this, they seem to be deluded enough to think that they will somehow survive as a software company after this.
SCO is doing its best to drag the (once) good name of Unix (not just Linux, all of them) through dirt,
I don't see it as SCO dragging the "name of Unix" through the mud. I think SCO has made a suicidal public relations decision, and unfortunately for them they won't win in court either. Game over.
making MSFT Windows look more and more attractive.
Eh?!? You should look up the definition of "non-sequitor" in the dictionary. You should also think about why Sun took out an SCO license, and has been making noise about Linux IP issues.
The OS that keeps looking better and better (especially in light of the new G5s) is MacOS X. The new PowerMacs are looking like a reasonable value, and there is simply a ton of great software for Mac that isn't available on Linux. Plus, the whole user experience is so much better...
Slashdot Mirror
None of those criticisms apply to this product, however. ;^)
It was cheaper, simpler, and more flexible to duct tape a real PC to the side of the box and add a KVM switch.
Cheaper and more flexible, but definitely not simpler.
Oh, and by the way, "integrated graphics" is a codeword for "cheap crappy graphics chip that satsfies Ma and Pa, but any serious gamer will disable in favor of his own card". Oops, there's no AGP slot on your PC-on-a-card!
First of all, gamers will play native G5 games rather than their PC counterparts.
Secondly, if the new ATI integrated graphics parts are used, they are sufficient for mid-level gaming if there's no Mac port available. They certainly aren't "crappy".
What I want to see is Windows apps running as separate apps in separate windows, just like Apple's X11 does. Not one big window that pretends to be a screen. And no stupid Start menu. Even nicer would be to make the apps support a real menu bar (ditto for X11), but considering all the Windows apps that make the menu bar into a toolbar, this might be tricky.
Why would you want that? Almost all Mac users who need this need to run an occasional Windows app alongside all their Mac stuff. That single app running full-screen in a single virtual desktop works fine.
If you need more, just allow multiple Windows "displays". No big deal.
I'm sure Microsoft would go for an OEM bundle approach on XP Home, so that would only add $30 or so (maybe less). What did the emulators cost?
The only downside to this approach is that it involves opening the case and inserting a card, anathema for many Mac people. The obvious answer is a micro-form-factor PC hooked up via Firewire 800, with some (simple) custom software to handle display on the Mac. This should go for under $300.
OK, now that we have a business plan, who's ready to hire me as CTO? :-)
I think this calls for a new definition.. Perhaps "dream-ware" or "never-ware".. maybe "talk-ware"
The term is "slideware" meaning someone made up a presentation, but that's about it... ;-)
And what is up with all the Apple news today?
Apple is doing some really great things lately. My next few thousand or so of hardware money is likely headed in that direction.
Did I claim to be a world-renowned organization with a multi-billion dollar budget run by (supposedly) some of the brightest people in the U.S.?
I think not.
Not only that, ggv darn near brought my system to it's knees with gs taking almost 700 MB of virtual mem. I only have 512 MB of physical mem. ;-)
*sigh*
Time for the BSD Babe post again... ;-)
Given the way CCDs operate, any long exposure is typically made up of many shorter exposures. You are correct in that the telescope may not be pointed continuously over the entire exposure.
One of the recent deep field frames had an impressive exposure time. Ah, I found it I think - only 153,700 s. Still, quite a while. ;-)
Judging from Hubble, long exposure times will not be a problem.
Talk about delusional...
SCO has given sufficient reason to be disliked that it should have expected bullets from every direction..
Heck, I'm tempted to attack them myself, and I certainly have no affiliation with IBM! ;-)
For the 3DS type apps, that big of a jump will happen in one generation.
The reason being, the older cards simply couldn't render the bulk of a 3DS scene in hardware...the new ones can.
I think he'd be happy to buy an extra yacht with the 100,000+ copies he would have sold for Mac though.
Linux support is simply going for geek-factor cool...which is worth a lot in word-of-mouth advertising. ;-)
First of all, that isn't true even with last-generation hardware - CAD apps sure need realtime rendering. Speeding up a complex model from .5 FPS to 10 (or 100) FPS can result in big productivity gains.
Even the VR apps like 3D Studio can use the programmable shader features of these newest cards to render production quality scenes in realtime or near realtime. One of the big presentations at E3 *last year* was a realtime rendering of one of the big scenes in the Two Towers - in full cinematic quality on a GeForce FX.
3D graphics is a tremendously exciting area.
Just for grins, it'd be great to see the Radeon 9600/9800 benchmarked in the new Apple G5s. Those also claim to support pro level applications.
The dirty little secret of the graphics chip industry is that these cards are really no different from the 'consumer' versions. It is simply a matter of the pro driver sensing a firmware dongle, then enabling the pro features like fast antialiased linedrawing for CAD.
So, I'm curious to see how Apple CAD applications fare with the 'consumer' cards in the G5s. The G5s should run these OpenGL benchmarks just fine (so should the G4s for that matter).
Yep, too bad that author was shortsighted and used sucky APIs that locked 'em to a single platform.
Still, doing an OpenGL/SDL port probably wouldn't be too hard...
I'm not sure what you mean here. First of all, web development was so new that everyone was essentially on the same learning curve. Top developers that turned their attention in that direction typically picked it up very fast - I know I did.
Of course, in it's infinite wisdom the computer industry has proceeded to overcomplicate web development to the point where it's pretty much on par with C development...
Ah well, there are still plenty of interesting things to do out there! ;-)
Silly me, and here I was thinking economy was not about holding on to money but about circulating money. The higher the pace of circulation, the better the economy.
It sure is. And guess what, the best scenario is for that money to circulate within the borders of the U.S. Not flow to another country like blood from a wound.
Should the world follow your advice then not only world trade would slowly grind to a halt but your cost of living would sky-rocket, eventually setting you back to the middle ages.
Not at all. Shipping CS/IS expertise out of the country is near akin to shipping nuclear weapons expertise out of the country, in terms of the long-term impact on U.S. strategic interests.
Using H1B workers is an interim solution to a longer term problem. The longer term problem is that of off-shore competition.
Using H1B workers accomplished nothing except to lower costs for American companies. The espoused "lack of technical talent" was a myth. There is/was an abundance of talent, however it was more experienced/expensive than the CEOs wanted to pay. Therefore the push for increased numbers of imported, entry-level foreign workers.
India's body-shopping business right now is negligable compared to what might happen if they start building and selling meaningful software themselves, instead of being hired to do so.
Exactly my point. We are training a workforce that can instantly turn into deadly competitors. As I said, that is stupid.
In your zero H1B visa world, the US will cease to develop software as it does now.
Look up the meanings of "non-sequitor" and "strawman" in your dictionary, please.
For this to happen, the pace of innovation in computer science needs to slow and the quality of computer science education of India needs to level with the western world.
Exactly...an undesirable result from a competitive standpoint. One hopes the West will remain well ahead.
I believe this is happening.
Yes, largely due to the stupidity and shortsightedness of our MBAs, CEOs, and politicians. Thank you for making my point so clearly.
But good luck with your isolationist agenda there.
My "agenda" is nothing resembling "isolationist". I support the current role of the U.S. in world affairs, and I support free trade. However, exporting "mission critical" technology and expertise to foreign countries is not part of either of those activities.
If you look at the moderations my post received, you'll see a lot of Slashdotters agree with me.
You forgot the most important part:
Right, I'm with you so far.
The recall election was BOUGHT, plain and simple.
Bullcrap. The only reason it was "paid for" was to accelerate the process. The grass roots petition process would have collected enough signatures regardless.
The event says nothing about the position of California voters. You could get a million California voters to oppose the most popular governor.
However, no one would bother, since the governer wouldn't lose the recall election and whoever sponsored it would lose political capital. In the present case, those that've sponsored it have gained massive political capital where it matters here in California. If you've watched the polls, you've seen the momentum to recall Davis grow and grow.
The only reasons are his incompetence and seemingly limitless ability to lie...not "paid for" signatures.
Yah, sure, why get all worked up about minor issues like my livelyhood, or the future of my country...
I'm not going to discuss all your opinions, agreeing or not (yes, my english is poor),
Actually you seem to be doing just fine.
but take it easy when you speak about 3rd wold countries. Many times, they do they job just as well as people every where else.
That has nothing to do with my point.
Outsource tasks isn't easy for management issues, but you shouldn't put the things like it is the problem of 3rd world.
It is not a problem of the third world. It is a problem here in the U.S., where it has become a common practice. See my other responses for why it's not a good idea.
Don't forget the good contributions to technology (in Linux for example), that have done countries like Brazil or India.
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against third world countries or the work they do there. I think they should have a right to compete on an open world market. My point is simply that U.S. companies should be much less shortsighted about shipping jobs, money and expertise overseas. Those kind of 'investments' can come back to haunt you, in so many ways.
No, it's more like "H1B holders do more work for the same money", i.e. 80 hour weeks with no complaints, on salary. And that salary will be at the bottom of the relevant scale, every time.
Further, the use of H1B holders is stupid for two unrelated reasons: you're shipping money to overseas economies, and you're training a workforce to compete against you once it returns home (which most do).
Again, using H1B workers and/or outsourcing is moronic in the long run, and is against the best interests of the United States and it's citizens.
Those are the facts, Jack.
in-frin-gle
v. in-frin-gled, in-frin-gling, in-frin-gles
v. tr.
- To infringe in some way by mingling copyrighted material with another work: SCO infringled Linux code into their Unix product.
ROFL.The 'whys' of management are simple indeed. Do whatever it takes to "maximize shareholder value".
Whether or not this short term strategy is in the best long-term interest of the company, country, or people is not an issue. This is the type of thinking all MBAs are currently taught, and it is the reason for blindly idiotic decisions like hiring H1-B visa holders and outsourcing to 3rd world countries.
I hope that cleared things up for you.
This country could use a lot more clearheaded, innovative thinking, and a lot less "MBA mentality".
I had trouble getting it to work ~1 year ago, but that was before these latest patches were available. I'm pretty sure that they are XP-friendly.
I need to find the time to give it a shot again myself. :-)
I'm not sure about this, they seem to be deluded enough to think that they will somehow survive as a software company after this.
SCO is doing its best to drag the (once) good name of Unix (not just Linux, all of them) through dirt,
I don't see it as SCO dragging the "name of Unix" through the mud. I think SCO has made a suicidal public relations decision, and unfortunately for them they won't win in court either. Game over.
making MSFT Windows look more and more attractive.
Eh?!? You should look up the definition of "non-sequitor" in the dictionary. You should also think about why Sun took out an SCO license, and has been making noise about Linux IP issues.
The OS that keeps looking better and better (especially in light of the new G5s) is MacOS X. The new PowerMacs are looking like a reasonable value, and there is simply a ton of great software for Mac that isn't available on Linux. Plus, the whole user experience is so much better...