Fork The Kernel, We dont need to Fork...
on
Fork the Linux Kernel?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The Steenkin Kernel.
Case in point: BSD vs SYS V. What sepereated these distrubtions was a design philosophy. There was a call to fork the kernel, based upon the replacement of the scheduler, but that can be handled with differing defines. But until there is a compelling design philosoply, like GNU vs Linux, or even a liscencing issue such as Purity of Open Source, vs mixing some 3D binary drivers. Dont FORK WITH LINUX. Use the dessert spoon.
This idea for server/client is a *Marketing* Idea. You can already install a subset of the full Redhat distrubtion for use as a server or a client workstation OR a developer workstation, and as I remember it, also a database server. ( MySQL et al ), but its too bad that I *hate* the RP package system so much, that I am using GenToo.
"According to Sir Ricahrd Gregory: Discovery, the spirit of science(London, 1916), a lady approched Faraday after one of his lectures on electromagnetism at the Royal Instution, relaming "But, Professor Faraday, even if the effect you expalined was obtained, what is the use of it?" Faraday's reply is fiven as: "Madam, will you tell me use of a newborn child?"
You can find this as a refrence: Seymour L. Chapin: 'A Legendary bon mot?: Franlink's 'What is the good of a newborn baby?" Proceedings of the American Philophical Society, 129(1985) 278-290.
The damn example is lame. The damn example is a dual processor SMP system with a I/O processor mistakenly put at the same level as the main processors. Look carefully. Read the Article.
Well, I just read hothardware.com for the *LAST* Time. Its clear, the editor should never has quit his job as a bad waiter.
TFA completely and totally misses the significance of a triple core processor.
The 3 core processor is announced as a budget quad core, but its really AMDs answer to the CoreDuo. Sun/Ultra Sparc already has 16 cores on their road map. ( and dual socket! )
There are two directions to go with a tri-core. Add a GPU for the forth core, and drop your pants ( lower the pice ) to compete with a dual-core+Integraged graphics or cheat/weld two tri-cores on one die to get a six-core to compete with Intels quad cores.
Although a lot of bad press went down from the 486sx diaster, Intel and AMD will probibly do someting like that in the future, because in 9 years, almost 6 generations have come and gone. Corporate america and the box box stores just want anything they can claim has some sensational advantage that they can milk at some certain price point. The enthusast market just isnt that big. Its big in the bucks, but not big in the overall market share.
Just like the day, the VP of CIS walked into our meeting, and the tech manager said in big bold words: "Compaq really has some great stuff rolling out this year." I could not get the airline bag to my mouth fast enough. I dont do Compaq.
I am no longer interested in watching Intel. They are not interesting. AMDs trick answers to intel ARE interesting.
Of course planes fly the great circle on an oblate spheroid ( earth's shape giving the bulging at the equator), but I hadnt thought about what the planes are doing up there. Oh My God! They are despositing water vapor directly into the polar stratospheric clouds. The Artic ozone hole is going to rip right open soon. Shipping companies have been eyeing the northern passage for a few years now. They need deep drafts to get full ships from Asia to Europe. ( ever notice how... in Asia, the bridges are not as tall for outbound traffic, and in America, the bridges are not as tall for inbound traffic? ).
From the year 2000 "Scientists and environmentalists are trying to figure out if commercial ships will be able to cross the Canadian Arctic on a regular basis in the late summer."
I have been following this lateest tatic of M$ to FUD the ISO, and I never heard this aspect of their unwillingness to follow their own standards, and of course, ship the clothes anyway.
I am going to let users know, and have them bail out of Office 2007 by the thousands.
"Forecast: ISO Will Announce on Tuesday that OOXML Approval has Failed."
and more bad behaivour by Microsoft:
"In one case, that behavior led to the Swedish national vote being thrown out and replaced with an abstention, after it became apparent that one company voted more than once (Microsoft admitted that an employee had sent a memo urging business partners to join the National Body and vote to approve, and assuring them that their related fees would be offset by Microsoft marketing incentives)."
But *sshat New York Times, Kevin J. O'Brien:
"BERLIN, Sept. 3 -- Amid intense lobbying, Microsoft is expected to squeak out a victory this week to have its open document format..."
Eric Raymond wrote in his blog, ( It not only bears repeating, but should be on the OUTSIDE OF EVERY COPY OF WINDOWS SOLD ): "Because Microsoft's behavior in the last few months with respect to OOXML has been egregious. They haven't stopped at pushing a "standard" that is divisive, technically bogus, and an obvious tool of monopoly lock-in; they have resorted to lying, ballot-stuffing, committee-packing, and outright bribery to ram it through the ISO standardization process in ways that violate ISO's own guidelines wholesale."
Lying, bribery and violation of guidelines. Business as ususal for Microsoft, No?
'Asimov' and 'Heinlein' are mentioned in the previous post, and this one.
Take me to the River DMCA. Are those names trademarks? We'll have to also TakeDown(tm) the wikipedia article on them, as well as have their names stricken from any record. Time to start reviving your library card, before the DMCA goes 1984 on you.
Dood! There is NO LIFE out side a linux box. None. Non-existant. The search for extra-terreserial life needs to be renamed the search for non-linux life.
1. The "Symposium" was "March 26-28, 2007" ( this is OLD news )
2. The MIT Team presented an invited paper that has *no* Abstract
"Variation (Invited Paper)"Duane Boning, et al"
3. The paper they presented from the article is for consumer electronics, at 65nm scale, which is basically yesterdays processor technology, ( they should ask AMD and Intel about *their* experence in 65nm fab, although they are working on digital computing silicon and not RFIC chips for digital televisons )
4. The problem they are working on is a constant battle, which everyone fights every time they shrink the channel size
Keep in mind, that silicon is *the most expensive real estate on earth*. The last time I heard about a breakthrough is when they started applying "Khachiyan's breakthrough, applying an approach known as the ellipsoid method to linear programming" to chip layout. now... what exactly is MITs contribution? Not much said, so SHOW ME THE PAPER.
Excuuse me? Four Milkyway sized galixies colliding and creating a 10x super sized galixy? Hmmm. Is all that dark matter going to come to light? Matter creation? energy to mass conversion? A lot of mass needs to be accounted for... Mabye I should just RTFA.
"There are exceptions to this rule, such as the Mac, where Photoshop has a patch which has multithreaded support for G4's even though no Mac OS below Mac OS X supports multiprocessing."
I am very familar with Macintosh hardware, but also use AMD and NeXT by choice.
I have been using loosely coupled and tightly coupled Multiprocessing machines for years.
Specifically:
http://www.lowendmac.com/ii/8-24.shtml
There exists an application that can use the graphics processor, back to Macintosh System 7.0
( the OS supports the multi-processing for graphics, albet poorly...)
and
The Mac IIfx used 6502s for IOPs, causing much consternation amoung developers, but again, you could use a multi-threaded application ( such as Magic disk to format floppies in the backround using the IOP )
and
http://lowendmac.com/radius/rocket.shtml
Which was supported by Macintosh System 7.0.1 and 7.1
also:
http://www.mug.jhmi.edu/mirrors/InfoAlley/0896/06/ power.html#1
"Apple's new multiprocessing system, the Power Macintosh 9500/180MP, takes advantage of two 180MHz, 604e PowerPC processors located on the logic board. The multiprocessing hardware, coupled with MP-aware software that has been written to take advantage of the second processor, will allow customers to be more effective and efficient when performing compute-intensive tasks."
The Apple API for multiprocessing that shipped with Mac OS Runs with Mac OS 7.5.3 up to and including Macintosh OS 9.1
You may view the speficications on these machines at:
http://www.info.apple.com/info.apple.com/applespec/applespec.taf?RID=204
also
http://til.info.apple.com/techinfo.nsf/artnum/n208 44
Slashdot Mirror
The Steenkin Kernel.
Case in point: BSD vs SYS V. What sepereated these distrubtions was a design philosophy.
There was a call to fork the kernel, based upon the replacement of the scheduler, but that can be handled with differing defines. But until there is a compelling design philosoply, like GNU vs Linux, or even a liscencing issue such as Purity of Open Source, vs mixing some 3D binary drivers. Dont FORK WITH LINUX. Use the dessert spoon.
This idea for server/client is a *Marketing* Idea. You can already install a subset of the full Redhat distrubtion for use as a server or a client workstation OR a developer workstation, and as I remember it, also a database server. ( MySQL et al ), but its too bad that I *hate* the RP package system so much, that I am using GenToo.
My 3 cents
"According to Sir Ricahrd Gregory: Discovery, the spirit of science(London, 1916), a lady approched Faraday after one of his lectures on electromagnetism at the Royal Instution, relaming "But, Professor Faraday, even if the effect you expalined was obtained, what is the use of it?" Faraday's reply is fiven as: "Madam, will you tell me use of a newborn child?"
You can find this as a refrence:
Seymour L. Chapin: 'A Legendary bon mot?: Franlink's 'What is the good of a newborn baby?"
Proceedings of the American Philophical Society, 129(1985) 278-290.
The damn example is lame. The damn example is a dual processor SMP system with a I/O processor mistakenly put at the same level as the main processors. Look carefully. Read the Article.
Well, I just read hothardware.com for the *LAST* Time. Its clear, the editor should never has quit his job as a bad waiter.
TFA completely and totally misses the significance of a triple core processor.
The 3 core processor is announced as a budget quad core, but its really AMDs answer to the CoreDuo. Sun/Ultra Sparc already has 16 cores on their road map. ( and dual socket! )
There are two directions to go with a tri-core. Add a GPU for the forth core, and drop your pants ( lower the pice ) to compete with a dual-core+Integraged graphics or cheat/weld two tri-cores on one die to get a six-core to compete with Intels quad cores.
Although a lot of bad press went down from the 486sx diaster, Intel and AMD will probibly do someting like that in the future, because in 9 years, almost 6 generations have come and gone. Corporate america and the box box stores just want anything they can claim has some sensational advantage that they can milk at some certain price point. The enthusast market just isnt that big. Its big in the bucks, but not big in the overall market share.
Just like the day, the VP of CIS walked into our meeting, and the tech manager said in big bold words: "Compaq really has some great stuff rolling out this year." I could not get the airline bag to my mouth fast enough. I dont do Compaq.
I am no longer interested in watching Intel. They are not interesting. AMDs trick answers to intel ARE interesting.
Of course planes fly the great circle on an oblate spheroid ( earth's shape giving the bulging at the equator), but I hadnt thought about what the planes are doing up there. Oh My God! They are despositing water vapor directly into the polar stratospheric clouds. The Artic ozone hole is going to rip right open soon. Shipping companies have been eyeing the northern passage for a few years now. They need deep drafts to get full ships from Asia to Europe. ( ever notice how... in Asia, the bridges are not as tall for outbound traffic, and in America, the bridges are not as tall for inbound traffic? ).
From the year 2000 "Scientists and environmentalists are trying to figure out if commercial ships will be able to cross the Canadian Arctic on a regular basis in the late summer."
OLD NEWS. Snore.....
I have been following this lateest tatic of M$ to FUD the ISO, and I never heard this aspect of their unwillingness to follow their own standards, and of course, ship the clothes anyway.
I am going to let users know, and have them bail out of Office 2007 by the thousands.
According to a site that is keeping very close track of things:
l e.php?story=2007090315253367
http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/artic
"Forecast: ISO Will Announce on Tuesday that OOXML Approval has Failed."
and more bad behaivour by Microsoft:
"In one case, that behavior led to the Swedish national vote being thrown out and replaced with an abstention, after it became apparent that one company voted more than once (Microsoft admitted that an employee had sent a memo urging business partners to join the National Body and vote to approve, and assuring them that their related fees would be offset by Microsoft marketing incentives)."
But *sshat New York Times, Kevin J. O'Brien:
"BERLIN, Sept. 3 -- Amid intense lobbying, Microsoft is expected to squeak out a victory this week to have its open document format..."
Eric Raymond wrote in his blog, ( It not only bears repeating, but should be on the OUTSIDE OF EVERY COPY OF WINDOWS SOLD ):
"Because Microsoft's behavior in the last few months with respect to OOXML has been egregious. They haven't stopped at pushing a "standard" that is divisive, technically bogus, and an obvious tool of monopoly lock-in; they have resorted to lying, ballot-stuffing, committee-packing, and outright bribery to ram it through the ISO standardization process in ways that violate ISO's own guidelines wholesale."
Lying, bribery and violation of guidelines. Business as ususal for Microsoft, No?
'Asimov' and 'Heinlein' are mentioned in the previous post, and this one.
Take me to the River DMCA. Are those names trademarks? We'll have to also TakeDown(tm) the wikipedia article on them, as well as have their names stricken from any record. Time to start reviving your library card, before the DMCA goes 1984 on you.
Dood! There is NO LIFE out side a linux box. None. Non-existant. The search for extra-terreserial life needs to be renamed the search for non-linux life.
I really *love* science reporting like this:
1. The "Symposium" was "March 26-28, 2007" ( this is OLD news )
2. The MIT Team presented an invited paper that has *no* Abstract
"Variation (Invited Paper)"Duane Boning, et al"
3. The paper they presented from the article is for consumer electronics, at 65nm scale, which is basically yesterdays processor technology, ( they should ask AMD and Intel about *their* experence in 65nm fab, although they are working on digital computing silicon and not RFIC chips for digital televisons )
4. The problem they are working on is a constant battle, which everyone fights every time they shrink the channel size
Keep in mind, that silicon is *the most expensive real estate on earth*. The last time I heard about a breakthrough is when they started applying "Khachiyan's breakthrough, applying an approach known as the ellipsoid method to linear programming" to chip layout. now... what exactly is MITs contribution? Not much said, so SHOW ME THE PAPER.
The origion of life has *NOTHING* to do with evoltion.
"Sir Fred Hoyle (1915-2001) and Chandra Wickramasinghe (born 1939)
were important proponents of the hypothesis who further contended that lifeforms continue to enter the Earth's atmosphere, and may be responsible
for epidemic outbreaks, new diseases, and the genetic novelty necessary for macroevolution."
Yea Wickramasinghe!
Ok... The article says that the last galixy is 4 times larger. New Math, 1+1+1+4=10... Still needs 3 more galixies to make 10...
Excuuse me? Four Milkyway sized galixies colliding and creating a 10x super sized galixy? Hmmm. Is all that dark matter going to come to light? Matter creation? energy to mass conversion? A lot of mass needs to be accounted for... Mabye I should just RTFA.
"There are exceptions to this rule, such as the Mac, where Photoshop has a patch which has multithreaded support for G4's even though no Mac OS below Mac OS X supports multiprocessing." I am very familar with Macintosh hardware, but also use AMD and NeXT by choice. I have been using loosely coupled and tightly coupled Multiprocessing machines for years. Specifically: http://www.lowendmac.com/ii/8-24.shtml There exists an application that can use the graphics processor, back to Macintosh System 7.0 ( the OS supports the multi-processing for graphics, albet poorly...) and The Mac IIfx used 6502s for IOPs, causing much consternation amoung developers, but again, you could use a multi-threaded application ( such as Magic disk to format floppies in the backround using the IOP ) and http://lowendmac.com/radius/rocket.shtml Which was supported by Macintosh System 7.0.1 and 7.1 also: http://www.mug.jhmi.edu/mirrors/InfoAlley/0896/06/ power.html#1
"Apple's new multiprocessing system, the Power Macintosh 9500/180MP, takes advantage of two 180MHz, 604e PowerPC processors located on the logic board. The multiprocessing hardware, coupled with MP-aware software that has been written to take advantage of the second processor, will allow customers to be more effective and efficient when performing compute-intensive tasks."
The Apple API for multiprocessing that shipped with Mac OS Runs with Mac OS 7.5.3 up to and including Macintosh OS 9.1
You may view the speficications on these machines at:
http://www.info.apple.com/info.apple.com/applespec /applespec.taf?RID=204
also
http://til.info.apple.com/techinfo.nsf/artnum/n208 44