I can assure you that our company would pay *right now* for a compiler that produces faster Linux code.
Use Intel compiler then, it produces amazingly fast code for P4 and very fast code for everthing else. Borland's compilers never produce very fast code, they are OK but not "fast" except when compared to gcc. The main appeal of borland tools is the whole RAD environment, its integration, ease of use, very high productivity in gui design etc. Compiler's positive contribution to this is its compilation speed.
Let me emphasize this before someone acuses me of being on crack: I don't know the internals of kylix, I don't know about the internals of lastest C++ Builder releaser. The above argument might not apply. It is based on structure of Delphi 3, C++ Builder 1.0 and C++ Builder 3.
Well, you are correct, but if the architecture of the platform has not changed drastically from earl builder days, it takes a certain amount of dedication to port the compiler but not the whole builder. The builder envorinment is exactly same as delphi environment except for parser and object inspector (plus a few extra tools for interoperability with other C++ environments, but that is irrelevant.) The builder parser is able to parse both C++ and object pascal, while the delphi parser can only OP. The intermediate code generator is same, the code generator is same, the linker, debugger etc. tools are identical, the code of libraries are identical except for headers etc. (and this too is non-vital, builder can use delphi units just fine, without C++ headers.) The object inspector has to be aware of C++ bindings, but that too is trivial once you have C++ parser. While normally it is rather hard to produce C++ Builder like IDE with onlt a C++ compiler in hand, with Kylix working, producing C++ Builder just takes a new parser and some fiddling. Since a C++ compiler has to have a C++ parser, borland can release a single compiler only if they specifically want not to release Builder.
This is not meant as a troll but take it what you will. I personally would prefer linux games that do not lock my keyboard and mouse after kde switches the display to something else and That plays sounds when an event that should produce a sound happens, not a few seconds after that.
Were you sober at that time? Linux even now is barely usable for desktop, it sucked hard back then. And who in their right mind would install an operating system just because they wanted to use a particular browser? I didn't do that when my bank disallowed anything but IE for online transactions which we use quite often. why would anyone do the opposite?
And did netscape suck! Windows port crashed every hour, linux port crashed every fifteen minutes. It was by no sane definition of the word usable. At least linux port didn't take the whole system with it.
Don't get me even started on staroffice single desktop and centuries of loading time.
"WTF!" I thought, when I clicked on the link you provided "they can't go that far, can they?" It turned out, they indeed didn't go that far. The link is incorrect and refers to a nonexistant user account, there should be a space before "tm" part.
Most people commenting on the subject, including you, seem to implicitly assume that comparing durons to something else to get a PR, that is not directly comparable to XP's PR, is acceptable. Yet I'm sure most of us would whine without end if they ever did this. PR numbers has to be consistent if they were to be applied to all product lines. In other words to use the tag of, say, a 1500+ rating, a Duron has to perform as well as 1133 MHz Athlon XP. Now, with some applications (very small data set, computing intensive) Duron can do that at 1133 MHz , while for some others (streaming data, low computing requirement) Duron needs at least 1500MHz, and with still others (data set size about 300kb, multiple iterations on whole set with random access) Duron cannot catch up XP even at much higher speeds. PR ratings when applied to XP-P4 comparison are already inconsistent across applications, trying to devise another number for Duron would make things a lot worse. Another thing is, if AMD tries to be conservative with PR ratings for Durons, the PR rating would be about the same as clock speed, which beats the purpose and may raise a lot of confusion ("What? A Duron 1600+ outperforms XP 1800+? I though they were budget chips!")
Well I had the same problem with the same setup, and after days of frustration it turned out to be overheating due to bad thermal contact and air flow. My problem never occured if I ran only one instance of seti, because cpu affinity of linux kernel sucks, and as a good sideeffect it can't overheat a single cpu. If single seti does not kill the machine, you should consider thermal problems.
All current high compression ratio audio comressors work in frequency space, and to some extend, perception "space." In frequency space if some frequencies are non existant, they are not encoded. It doesn't really matter what your original sampling frequency was.
Also 16 bits is quite enough, although not very well used. Nowadays most CDs are published with high average volume to have sort of an upper hand in broadcasts (check classic music titles for comparison), a better approach is maintaining only the peaks of music near to highest representable number, the high-average volume approach severly limits dynamic range. 65535 different volume steps is quite enough for human ear, you are not supposed to hear any difference beyond that for processed music (for raw recordings, it is better to have higher resolution.)
Ofcourse a database can only be "less breakable" not unbreakable and I'm willing to excuse the term. But 3 buffer overflows, discovered in a short amount of time does not sound very "less breakable" to me either. Neither "100 times faster" sounds like 1.5-3 times faster according to Oracle's own adds (IIRC they were comparing with an IBM database.) I don't think we have to be so forgiving about his BS. It is not much different than MS, really, each new version of windows DO add something, and IS faster on some tasks when they claim releases are "unlocking the full potential of PC." It is a matter of degree, but yours seem to be a bit too forgiving.
Oh, that, and the parent thread. Reading it may illimunate what may possibly happen if government can track all your actions and act without any wisdom and respect for different ideas.
Until I'm modded down to 0 or -1 too, here is your chance to be informed about one of the most controversial posts moderationwise I have ever seen. It sure is interesting and offtopic. I believe it is more interesting than offtopic. Anyway, this post won't last long, so it should better be brief too.
One of the -1 gems on/. (was +4 when I first read it), how many more we have to see until people stop not looking at low scores!
And you are supposed to be able to help someone sometimes, not just being helped all the time.
I had hated closed book exams, in real world who do lose all the referance material? But cooperation and cheating are not like this, you are supposed to know a fair bit, if not everything, about a particular field to be of any use. Cheating in toy homework projects means that you don't know even the amount that would give you passing grade (or perhaps you are just greedy, and cannot be accept a 2.67 GPA like me.) That, in my book, is unacceptable behaviour. Taco's comment does not make much sense unless even for complicated projects, team work is disallowed generally and considered cheating (I don't know how it is there, in Turkey teamwork is not only allowed but mandatory for most 3rd or 4th year class projects and exams.)
So you're essentially right, except that if you know, for instance, that either an electron or positron fell into a black hole, and you could somehow monitor its charge, you could distinguish which.
These are two thing I (as a chemical engineer) "know" about black holes which conflicts with each other. I have always wondered this, which one is correct so thanks for giving me a chance to ask:
1 - If a charged particle drops into a black hole it has to change black hole's chargebecause of conservation.
2 - It also happens to be the case that no information can be obtained from (if you excuse the term) "inside of" event horizon, we can determine mass changes and angular momentum changes because it changes the shape and size of event horizon. If something happens to the black hole that doesn't change the properties of its detectable "border", event horizon, we aren't supposed to be able to detect that.
So how can charge be preserved if it doesn't affect event horizons properties? How can you tell total charge of a black hole?
No, both can fall equally likely. You can feed a blackhole with either matter or antimatter and the hole wouldn't care, it will just grow. It will also attract both with equal probabilities.
How hawking radiation actaully occurs is something I understand but do not grok. I can't really explain from ground up, since I'm not an expert. I'll give it a try but don't quote me on this.
The whole process is lending a bit of energy from nothing, such that it won't violate conservation of energy by being strictly in limits of uncertanity part of uncertainity principle. Sometimes this energy is borrowed in form of two photons with opposite momentum, some times a particle-antiparticle pair. You have to pay back soon what you have borrowed, but sometimes the blackhole gets greedy and swallows either one of your photons or you particles. When the death calles for destruction, black hole no option but to pay back what debt it has inherited. So far, so good. Now here is the part I don't really understand (I can explain preceeding part in techincal terms and in detail if you prefer, but not this part) but accept: black hole for some reason pays the debt for the pair, not only the one it has assimilated. If it does this, the other particle, photon, whatever is free to roam the universe.
nope, hawking radiation is when a spontnous pair creation occurs, but one of the members of pair falls into the black hole while the other escapes.
Reply to parent: nothing. antimatter is not a very exotic thing, normal matter with reverse charge reverse spin. Once in the blackhole there is no telling whether what fell was matter or antimatter, they all behave the same (increase black hole's mass, that is, and nothing else.)
I don't know about opera on qnx, but I can say with confidence that my copy of ie6 on XP, is slower than:
- ie5 on w2k
- konqueror on mdk 8.1
- opera 5 on w2k
- opera 5 on mdk 8.0
- Galeon ? on mdk 8.1
and faster than mozilla 0.95 and 0.96 on mdk 8.1. Page rendering speed is horrible, I wait for it on a dual 1.53 AXP system! Especially annoying if you open a new page while one is rendered.
sucks. Rest of XP runs pretty fast though, a bit faster than w2k on my dual XP and much faster than 2k on a friend's dual celeron. I haven't tested it on any single processor machine, and microsoft says there are plenty of improvements in MP side of things, so I can't say how it actually compares to older usable windows versions (NT4 & 2k that is) on single machines. You should definetly check it out if you have a dual system and insist on using windows. Check out the memory size though, memory load is about 100megs without any running applications.
BTW, it boots much faster. I guess that is because it boots without negotiating network connections.
Just(!) a gram of antimatter required to get to Mars? Anti-neutron and "corresponding anti particle for all particles"? With a gram of antimatter I can get you to Alpha, fire those Nasa engineers who can only get you to Mars and hire me. But don't give me a gram of those anti-neutrons, I can't even get you to grocery store with those.
We've all said that as soon as there's an office suite that rivals MS Word, then maybe Linux will have a chance at displacing Windows.
You, sir, obviously have never used Hancom office. Staroffice is light years ahead. OpenOffice is only a light year behind Staroffice and closing. Perhaps none of these two can be used by Koreans, because they(especially openoffice) has little support for localization. For the western world, Hancom is not an option, it is confusing, awkard and expensive.
but every user of every distro can freely copy and redistribute all the GPL, LGPL, BSD, and other Free Software contained in it.
That only applies to GPL and LGPL because they, as you said, explictly limit imposable limits by their distributers. You can limit distribution of a derivative work of a BSD licenced, X licenced, public domain and perhaps other "free software" licenced software. In any case, many distos contain a lot of code which is not explicity GPLed (like install scripts.) That is enough to make them non-copyable freely.
But this really is not the point, a distro can be made of all free components (but not all GPLed components) and still be copy restricted. Think of it as a novel, none of the words contained in it are commercial, but the novel is a new entity in by its wholeness. The confusion arises from GPL's being free and enforcing derivative work to be avaliable freely; these two things are not interchangeable. Your simple rule is wrong, a collection of things as a whole is not same thing as individual things lumped together.
If it is because you really didn't think this deserves 2, OK, go ahead, your call. But if you downmodded this because you think you can freely copy all distros, as long as they are composed of GPL and such licences, just fuck off and gimme my karma back.
With all 100:1 compression ratios and XBox emulators, I wouldn't be surprised if most/.ers don't know how a distro can be a property of someone when individual packets in it are free.
Most distro producers give away download editions but that does not mean that all distributions are free. On the contrary, it is IP of the producer and cannot be reproduced without their approval (for download or free editions, this approval exists.) GPL, LGPL, BSD and other licences found in a typical linux distro does not forbid commercial activity.
Slashdot Mirror
Use Intel compiler then, it produces amazingly fast code for P4 and very fast code for everthing else. Borland's compilers never produce very fast code, they are OK but not "fast" except when compared to gcc. The main appeal of borland tools is the whole RAD environment, its integration, ease of use, very high productivity in gui design etc. Compiler's positive contribution to this is its compilation speed.
Let me emphasize this before someone acuses me of being on crack: I don't know the internals of kylix, I don't know about the internals of lastest C++ Builder releaser. The above argument might not apply. It is based on structure of Delphi 3, C++ Builder 1.0 and C++ Builder 3.
Well, you are correct, but if the architecture of the platform has not changed drastically from earl builder days, it takes a certain amount of dedication to port the compiler but not the whole builder. The builder envorinment is exactly same as delphi environment except for parser and object inspector (plus a few extra tools for interoperability with other C++ environments, but that is irrelevant.) The builder parser is able to parse both C++ and object pascal, while the delphi parser can only OP. The intermediate code generator is same, the code generator is same, the linker, debugger etc. tools are identical, the code of libraries are identical except for headers etc. (and this too is non-vital, builder can use delphi units just fine, without C++ headers.) The object inspector has to be aware of C++ bindings, but that too is trivial once you have C++ parser. While normally it is rather hard to produce C++ Builder like IDE with onlt a C++ compiler in hand, with Kylix working, producing C++ Builder just takes a new parser and some fiddling. Since a C++ compiler has to have a C++ parser, borland can release a single compiler only if they specifically want not to release Builder.
This is not meant as a troll but take it what you will. I personally would prefer linux games that do not lock my keyboard and mouse after kde switches the display to something else and That plays sounds when an event that should produce a sound happens, not a few seconds after that.
And did netscape suck! Windows port crashed every hour, linux port crashed every fifteen minutes. It was by no sane definition of the word usable. At least linux port didn't take the whole system with it.
Don't get me even started on staroffice single desktop and centuries of loading time.
"WTF!" I thought, when I clicked on the link you provided "they can't go that far, can they?" It turned out, they indeed didn't go that far. The link is incorrect and refers to a nonexistant user account, there should be a space before "tm" part.
Most people commenting on the subject, including you, seem to implicitly assume that comparing durons to something else to get a PR, that is not directly comparable to XP's PR, is acceptable. Yet I'm sure most of us would whine without end if they ever did this. PR numbers has to be consistent if they were to be applied to all product lines. In other words to use the tag of, say, a 1500+ rating, a Duron has to perform as well as 1133 MHz Athlon XP. Now, with some applications (very small data set, computing intensive) Duron can do that at 1133 MHz , while for some others (streaming data, low computing requirement) Duron needs at least 1500MHz, and with still others (data set size about 300kb, multiple iterations on whole set with random access) Duron cannot catch up XP even at much higher speeds. PR ratings when applied to XP-P4 comparison are already inconsistent across applications, trying to devise another number for Duron would make things a lot worse. Another thing is, if AMD tries to be conservative with PR ratings for Durons, the PR rating would be about the same as clock speed, which beats the purpose and may raise a lot of confusion ("What? A Duron 1600+ outperforms XP 1800+? I though they were budget chips!")
Well I had the same problem with the same setup, and after days of frustration it turned out to be overheating due to bad thermal contact and air flow. My problem never occured if I ran only one instance of seti, because cpu affinity of linux kernel sucks, and as a good sideeffect it can't overheat a single cpu. If single seti does not kill the machine, you should consider thermal problems.
Also 16 bits is quite enough, although not very well used. Nowadays most CDs are published with high average volume to have sort of an upper hand in broadcasts (check classic music titles for comparison), a better approach is maintaining only the peaks of music near to highest representable number, the high-average volume approach severly limits dynamic range. 65535 different volume steps is quite enough for human ear, you are not supposed to hear any difference beyond that for processed music (for raw recordings, it is better to have higher resolution.)
Fans make so much noise that I can't even hear my HDs.
Oh, that, and the parent thread. Reading it may illimunate what may possibly happen if government can track all your actions and act without any wisdom and respect for different ideas.
Until I'm modded down to 0 or -1 too, here is your chance to be informed about one of the most controversial posts moderationwise I have ever seen. It sure is interesting and offtopic. I believe it is more interesting than offtopic. Anyway, this post won't last long, so it should better be brief too.
One of the -1 gems on /. (was +4 when I first read it), how many more we have to see until people stop not looking at low scores!
And you are supposed to be able to help someone sometimes, not just being helped all the time. I had hated closed book exams, in real world who do lose all the referance material? But cooperation and cheating are not like this, you are supposed to know a fair bit, if not everything, about a particular field to be of any use. Cheating in toy homework projects means that you don't know even the amount that would give you passing grade (or perhaps you are just greedy, and cannot be accept a 2.67 GPA like me.) That, in my book, is unacceptable behaviour. Taco's comment does not make much sense unless even for complicated projects, team work is disallowed generally and considered cheating (I don't know how it is there, in Turkey teamwork is not only allowed but mandatory for most 3rd or 4th year class projects and exams.)
These are two thing I (as a chemical engineer) "know" about black holes which conflicts with each other. I have always wondered this, which one is correct so thanks for giving me a chance to ask:
1 - If a charged particle drops into a black hole it has to change black hole's chargebecause of conservation.
2 - It also happens to be the case that no information can be obtained from (if you excuse the term) "inside of" event horizon, we can determine mass changes and angular momentum changes because it changes the shape and size of event horizon. If something happens to the black hole that doesn't change the properties of its detectable "border", event horizon, we aren't supposed to be able to detect that.
So how can charge be preserved if it doesn't affect event horizons properties? How can you tell total charge of a black hole?
How hawking radiation actaully occurs is something I understand but do not grok. I can't really explain from ground up, since I'm not an expert. I'll give it a try but don't quote me on this.
The whole process is lending a bit of energy from nothing, such that it won't violate conservation of energy by being strictly in limits of uncertanity part of uncertainity principle. Sometimes this energy is borrowed in form of two photons with opposite momentum, some times a particle-antiparticle pair. You have to pay back soon what you have borrowed, but sometimes the blackhole gets greedy and swallows either one of your photons or you particles. When the death calles for destruction, black hole no option but to pay back what debt it has inherited. So far, so good. Now here is the part I don't really understand (I can explain preceeding part in techincal terms and in detail if you prefer, but not this part) but accept: black hole for some reason pays the debt for the pair, not only the one it has assimilated. If it does this, the other particle, photon, whatever is free to roam the universe.
Reply to parent: nothing. antimatter is not a very exotic thing, normal matter with reverse charge reverse spin. Once in the blackhole there is no telling whether what fell was matter or antimatter, they all behave the same (increase black hole's mass, that is, and nothing else.)
I don't agree, RAV4 (especially pre 2001 models) is a SUV done right.
- ie5 on w2k
- konqueror on mdk 8.1
- opera 5 on w2k
- opera 5 on mdk 8.0
- Galeon ? on mdk 8.1
and faster than mozilla 0.95 and 0.96 on mdk 8.1. Page rendering speed is horrible, I wait for it on a dual 1.53 AXP system! Especially annoying if you open a new page while one is rendered.
BTW, it boots much faster. I guess that is because it boots without negotiating network connections.
I wonder what cnn reporters smoke.
You, sir, obviously have never used Hancom office. Staroffice is light years ahead. OpenOffice is only a light year behind Staroffice and closing. Perhaps none of these two can be used by Koreans, because they(especially openoffice) has little support for localization. For the western world, Hancom is not an option, it is confusing, awkard and expensive.
And this message is supposed to be empty. But slashcode does not allow NT comments. tr=Turkey=my country.
That only applies to GPL and LGPL because they, as you said, explictly limit imposable limits by their distributers. You can limit distribution of a derivative work of a BSD licenced, X licenced, public domain and perhaps other "free software" licenced software. In any case, many distos contain a lot of code which is not explicity GPLed (like install scripts.) That is enough to make them non-copyable freely.
But this really is not the point, a distro can be made of all free components (but not all GPLed components) and still be copy restricted. Think of it as a novel, none of the words contained in it are commercial, but the novel is a new entity in by its wholeness. The confusion arises from GPL's being free and enforcing derivative work to be avaliable freely; these two things are not interchangeable. Your simple rule is wrong, a collection of things as a whole is not same thing as individual things lumped together.
With all 100:1 compression ratios and XBox emulators, I wouldn't be surprised if most /.ers don't know how a distro can be a property of someone when individual packets in it are free.
Most distro producers give away download editions but that does not mean that all distributions are free. On the contrary, it is IP of the producer and cannot be reproduced without their approval (for download or free editions, this approval exists.) GPL, LGPL, BSD and other licences found in a typical linux distro does not forbid commercial activity.