As I posted elsewhere in this discussion, long ago most realized that the first casualty of Linux in the OS wars would be Unix because it's nearly a drop-in replacement unless you have binary-only applications.
This is why Windows/Linux eats into HP-UX/AIX/Solaris market share.
Years ago we knew that the first casualty of Linux would be the proprietary Unix companies. The workstations first and then the servers. Although Linux is advocated as a Windows replacement most of the time, it's an even better Unix replacement. As Linux improves, it will just hurt Unix more. A friend works at a place where they've replaced almost all their Sun servers with Linux servers except the cluster of V880s that they have to still run certain software packages (Solaris only binaries). I could easily see them replacing those boxes with multi-cpu/core Opteron boxes (maybe even from Sun) running Linux if they had that software available. This is a place that has purchased multiple Sun E10Ks and multiple SGI O2Ks and the like in the past. Now, they are mostly Linux except where they have entrenched software or have issues where they need large systems (32p and 64p) and Linux doesn't work on them for some reason or work well on them.
OK. We are in agreement then:) I'm not convinced that FB-DIMMs will be that great for home/enthusiast machines either unless configured with multiple channels.
What you've described is how FB-DIMMs work on a single channel. Each FB-DIMM channel connects seperately to the memory controller and is a seperate path (the memory controller is a switch). Each channel off the memory controller is exactly as you describe... up to eight double sided memory modules daisy chained. See link for a picture of what you describe (which is a single FB-DIMM channel). Then go to page 2 of that article where it shows that the standard is up to six such channels can hang off a single memory controller. To sum it up:
Since the serial links have a lower pin-count than conventional memory buses and better data handling abilities, more channels can be implemented in a single memory controller. In entry-level servers and high-end desktops, four FB-DIMM modules, each with a channel of their own will have a considerable bandwidth advantage over a conventional dual-channel memory controller supporting two DDR2 DIMMS on each channel.
Just a side note... the price issues with RDRAM were (admitted in court) a result of a DRAM consortium using monopolistic tactics to undercut RDRAM and keep the prices high.
The problem with this? Latency goes up as you put in more DIMMs. Why? Because data from the 4th DIMM has to pass through (not just by) the 3rd DIMM, 2nd DIMM and 1st DIMM to get to the CPU.
This sounds contrary to "point-to-point" as mentioned at Micron. What you describe is that the FB-DIMMs are in serial. The data is transmitted serially but the topology of the FB-DIMMs is point-to-point, which means (potentially) parallel access to all FB-DIMMs (point-to-point implies a switched topology).
Also, by your arguments... it seems you'd prefer PATA HDDs over SATA HDDs (the same arguments apply there as well). I think many review sites tend to like SATA drives for a variety of reasons. I suggest reading up on a lot of the discussion about parallel data transfers vs. serial data transfers (in relation to buses) and see the advantages and weaknesses of each, particularly at high clock frequencies.
When you listen to a song many many times, you learn to discern new details about it.
Not when your ears become incapable of hearing those details. As was said, your ears degrade over time and become less sensitive to certain frequencies. If you lose the ability to hear certain frequencies, you will lose detail. For example, (and there were Slashdot stories about this) certain convenience stores have started playing sounds over their speakers that teenagers (in particular) can hear and find very slightly annoying while virtually no person over 30 years old can hear it. The objective is to keep the teens from loitering. The noise isn't annoying enough to prevent them from coming in and purchasing items but it is annoying enough to urge them to move on after a while.
I get Visual Studio.NET 2005 Express for Windows for free for development. I haven't developed software that needs access to domain manipulation. Checking/comparing login security credentials (when needed) is enough for what I've done. Using SSI and such is enough as well for database access (SQL Server 2005 Express is included for free with the above development software). I don't run web servers on Windows so I don't need the web server on a Windows box. I run Apache on my SuSE box, though. In all fairness, I actually own multiple Windows licenses (and multiple Linux distributions that I paid for) and one of which is actually Windows XP Pro. None of these things come bundled with any version of Windows. If it were, I'm sure we'd here lots of complaints about it and the "evil M$ monopoly", but that is another topic for other postings.
As far as downloading Linux and such, I don't have the time or the interest (any more) in downloading kernel sources and all that stuff and putzing around compiling the platform all day long. I want a platform to do the work that I am paid to do and the work that I want to do (the code I write for fun). Spending my time creating the platform in order to do all of those things is not what I want to spend time doing. I pay those who can provide a package that is the platform so that I'm not wasting my time doing things that are a waste of my time.
My price listed for XP Home was an upgrade, which I have lineage from Windows 95 (which was also bought as an upgrade to Windows 3.11) and every version of Windows I've purchased has been an upgrade. Had I purchased a complete machine new, from say Dell, the price of the OS has already been included in the machine and is, in fact, even cheaper than the upgrade price that is listed.
Why not compare it against Enterprise Windows 2003 Server, then, if the only relevant difference is price?
What bits of functionality are not present in Windows XP Home, that are present in Windows XP Professional and SuSE 10.0 which disqualify Windows XP Home as being an equivalent platform?
Other than that, being a full-time software developer, I understand the desire for those like me who like to be paid some reasonable amount on some reasonable interval. Since the only way to pay for full time developers in the OSS world is through service contracts, then that is how we pay and why I pay for my Linux distributions and why the cost must be considered as a part of my platform selection. For the featuresets that I need, Windows XP Home and SuSE 10.0 are comparable so those prices are relevant to me.
I've paid for SuSE 9.0 and 10.0 (upgrade prices) in the same period of time I've paid for Windows XP Home, which isn't $199 (upgrade) (I believe it was $89 for the upgrade).
This will be fine and all until all those people realize that they can't play games or that it is a lot of work to get the game to work (edit source files and recompile Wine to get Continuum to run - puhleaze...).
The entertainment side of PCs is a huge market as well. Until games come out on it at the same time as Windows releases, wide adoption will still be difficult. Of course, game companies can't make games without spending money so as long as game companies think (right or wrong) they won't make any money by spending the money to port to Linux, it will be an uphill battle for that.
Being Korea, I can't imagine those students being happy with being unable to play games.
Think about it - what if suddenly Linux/Unix/BSD was the mandated operating system for an entire country?
Well... since it would limit choice, I would say that it wouldn't be a GoodThing.
Drastically reduced costs not only for the operating system itself, but also for all of the extra crap you need to keep Windows limping along.
Prove it. Annecdotes about how you download your distro for free and such do not count. I actually pay for my Linux distribution (give money to the people so they can continue their work) and it costs the same amount as my Windows license. I don't use any more "extra crap" to keep my Windows box running than I use to keep my Linux box running. For me, it's a wash, neither is better than the other. As far as stability, they are the same as well but I take great care in buying hardware that I know is well supported (for either OS). In fact, my most unstable box lately has been my Linux box. I installed a kernel security patch and for some reason, every time I tried to FTP into it, the entire box would hang to the point of having to be power cycled. That has since been fixed, though.
Wow... Maybe more money for teachers, schools, computers(!!), roads, healthcare, etc...
The "forced" argument is misplaced. If government can decide to use Windows, they can also change their minds and decide to use Linux. Switching govt. owned PCs from Windows to Linux is in no way some new act of coercion.
It's not new, correct, but the original question was "is it right to force people to use something?" and there is also the old cliche of "two wrongs don't make a right". If F/OSS is about "choice", does the set of choices that F/OSS embraces include the choice of not using F/OSS? So far, most "proponents" (I would have said 'zealot') of F/OSS are all about "choice" as long as that "choice" is one they approve of. Sure, this isn't a new thing, but it doesn't make it any more right than Microsoft shoving Windows down our throats, either.
I would say that 64-bit VM is only a critical feature for a very, very small segment of the laptop user's market. Besides, using Linux on the laptop, you can easily have 32-bit versions of your codes as well so even the 32-bit laptop has use in developing/debugging applications and even running against smaller datasets for testing and the like. If you are running the large simulations, run them on your workstation where they will complete faster.
Your post is accurately written in the past tense. That review was a 2.4GHz Turion compared to a 2.0GHz Dothan and the Intel part was pretty impressive given a 20% lower clockrate. Core Duo is even faster (and has two cores and is shipping *now*). The CPU world will get a new injection of life and excitement this year as the new Intel parts ship and AMD seems to be resting on their laurels. I'm not a fanboi of either company. I buy what I think is best at the time I buy, which is why I have three Athlon64s, one Athlon64 X2, and three AthlonXPs and the only two Intel boxes I have are two Pentium-M based laptops. That may change by the end of the year if the predictions being made are accurate.
Yeah... I found the benchmarks pretty impressive given that the 2.0GHz Intel part was compared to a 2.4GHz AMD part (as per the test systems specs. And it wasn't even the latest version of the Intel parts (it wasn't a Yonah based part). Yonah has a few architectural improvements over the Dothan even, both in power management and in performance. I'm not a brand-loyal customer either, I buy what I think is best at the time I buy (which is why I have two Athlon64, one Athlon64 X2, and three Athlon XP machines). From the looks of things, my next machine may very well be an Intel based one if I decide to upgrade one at the end of 2006.
Agreed, but You can convey tone in writing, ever since the dawn of caveman with fingers dipped in deer blood, painting ideal stick cavewoman with two giantic circles and dots. is more pictogram than writing text, plus, we have no idea of the exact meaning the author of said pictogram was intending... sexual desire? simply stating fact? As the old saying goes... a picture is worth 1000 words.
Writers *do* convey tone, usually at the expense of brevity. I would say that most emails are written with brevity in mind (right or wrong, I'm not arguing) and tone is lost. Plus, writing with tone may sound stilted, even assuming that most people are capable of writing well enough to convey tone if they actually took the time to do so:)
Before I got my Apple ][c, I had an Apple ][+. The ][c was far more portable than the ][+:) Also, my first "computer parties" were with the ][c. We didn't have LANs back then, but we'd all bring our ][cs to a sleepover and we'd all be playing various games (many turn based play and we'd play several games at once by pipelining players). The 80s high school computer geek days are pretty nostalgic for me. Lots more interesting in many ways when it was so much more geeky:)
Yup. Basically you can't send body language and tonal indicators through typed text. These two things are very important to communication even though we aren't necessarily conciously analyzing a speaker for them. We know that someone is joking by the tonal qualities (where pitch varies and emphasis is placed) of the message and by body language (rolling of the eyes, a smile, etc.) This is why we have emoticons:)
I've heard of a number of people doing exactly this. Rapid turn around on DVDs and ripping the Netflix ones to HDD. I would imagine that it may be common enough and easily enough indicated (high volumn of DVDs shipped with rapid turn around) that Netflix feels safe doing that.
Slashdot Mirror
As I posted elsewhere in this discussion, long ago most realized that the first casualty of Linux in the OS wars would be Unix because it's nearly a drop-in replacement unless you have binary-only applications.
This is why Windows/Linux eats into HP-UX/AIX/Solaris market share.
Years ago we knew that the first casualty of Linux would be the proprietary Unix companies. The workstations first and then the servers. Although Linux is advocated as a Windows replacement most of the time, it's an even better Unix replacement. As Linux improves, it will just hurt Unix more. A friend works at a place where they've replaced almost all their Sun servers with Linux servers except the cluster of V880s that they have to still run certain software packages (Solaris only binaries). I could easily see them replacing those boxes with multi-cpu/core Opteron boxes (maybe even from Sun) running Linux if they had that software available. This is a place that has purchased multiple Sun E10Ks and multiple SGI O2Ks and the like in the past. Now, they are mostly Linux except where they have entrenched software or have issues where they need large systems (32p and 64p) and Linux doesn't work on them for some reason or work well on them.
OK. We are in agreement then :) I'm not convinced that FB-DIMMs will be that great for home/enthusiast machines either unless configured with multiple channels.
What you've described is how FB-DIMMs work on a single channel. Each FB-DIMM channel connects seperately to the memory controller and is a seperate path (the memory controller is a switch). Each channel off the memory controller is exactly as you describe... up to eight double sided memory modules daisy chained. See link for a picture of what you describe (which is a single FB-DIMM channel). Then go to page 2 of that article where it shows that the standard is up to six such channels can hang off a single memory controller. To sum it up:
Since the serial links have a lower pin-count than conventional memory buses and better data handling abilities, more channels can be implemented in a single memory controller. In entry-level servers and high-end desktops, four FB-DIMM modules, each with a channel of their own will have a considerable bandwidth advantage over a conventional dual-channel memory controller supporting two DDR2 DIMMS on each channel.
Just a side note... the price issues with RDRAM were (admitted in court) a result of a DRAM consortium using monopolistic tactics to undercut RDRAM and keep the prices high.
The problem with this? Latency goes up as you put in more DIMMs. Why? Because data from the 4th DIMM has to pass through (not just by) the 3rd DIMM, 2nd DIMM and 1st DIMM to get to the CPU.
This sounds contrary to "point-to-point" as mentioned at Micron. What you describe is that the FB-DIMMs are in serial. The data is transmitted serially but the topology of the FB-DIMMs is point-to-point, which means (potentially) parallel access to all FB-DIMMs (point-to-point implies a switched topology).
Also, by your arguments... it seems you'd prefer PATA HDDs over SATA HDDs (the same arguments apply there as well). I think many review sites tend to like SATA drives for a variety of reasons. I suggest reading up on a lot of the discussion about parallel data transfers vs. serial data transfers (in relation to buses) and see the advantages and weaknesses of each, particularly at high clock frequencies.
When you listen to a song many many times, you learn to discern new details about it.
Not when your ears become incapable of hearing those details. As was said, your ears degrade over time and become less sensitive to certain frequencies. If you lose the ability to hear certain frequencies, you will lose detail. For example, (and there were Slashdot stories about this) certain convenience stores have started playing sounds over their speakers that teenagers (in particular) can hear and find very slightly annoying while virtually no person over 30 years old can hear it. The objective is to keep the teens from loitering. The noise isn't annoying enough to prevent them from coming in and purchasing items but it is annoying enough to urge them to move on after a while.
I get Visual Studio .NET 2005 Express for Windows for free for development. I haven't developed software that needs access to domain manipulation. Checking/comparing login security credentials (when needed) is enough for what I've done. Using SSI and such is enough as well for database access (SQL Server 2005 Express is included for free with the above development software). I don't run web servers on Windows so I don't need the web server on a Windows box. I run Apache on my SuSE box, though. In all fairness, I actually own multiple Windows licenses (and multiple Linux distributions that I paid for) and one of which is actually Windows XP Pro. None of these things come bundled with any version of Windows. If it were, I'm sure we'd here lots of complaints about it and the "evil M$ monopoly", but that is another topic for other postings.
As far as downloading Linux and such, I don't have the time or the interest (any more) in downloading kernel sources and all that stuff and putzing around compiling the platform all day long. I want a platform to do the work that I am paid to do and the work that I want to do (the code I write for fun). Spending my time creating the platform in order to do all of those things is not what I want to spend time doing. I pay those who can provide a package that is the platform so that I'm not wasting my time doing things that are a waste of my time.
My price listed for XP Home was an upgrade, which I have lineage from Windows 95 (which was also bought as an upgrade to Windows 3.11) and every version of Windows I've purchased has been an upgrade. Had I purchased a complete machine new, from say Dell, the price of the OS has already been included in the machine and is, in fact, even cheaper than the upgrade price that is listed.
Why not compare it against Enterprise Windows 2003 Server, then, if the only relevant difference is price?
What bits of functionality are not present in Windows XP Home, that are present in Windows XP Professional and SuSE 10.0 which disqualify Windows XP Home as being an equivalent platform?
Other than that, being a full-time software developer, I understand the desire for those like me who like to be paid some reasonable amount on some reasonable interval. Since the only way to pay for full time developers in the OSS world is through service contracts, then that is how we pay and why I pay for my Linux distributions and why the cost must be considered as a part of my platform selection. For the featuresets that I need, Windows XP Home and SuSE 10.0 are comparable so those prices are relevant to me.
Like what, that's relevant?
I've paid for SuSE 9.0 and 10.0 (upgrade prices) in the same period of time I've paid for Windows XP Home, which isn't $199 (upgrade) (I believe it was $89 for the upgrade).
This will be fine and all until all those people realize that they can't play games or that it is a lot of work to get the game to work (edit source files and recompile Wine to get Continuum to run - puhleaze...).
The entertainment side of PCs is a huge market as well. Until games come out on it at the same time as Windows releases, wide adoption will still be difficult. Of course, game companies can't make games without spending money so as long as game companies think (right or wrong) they won't make any money by spending the money to port to Linux, it will be an uphill battle for that.
Being Korea, I can't imagine those students being happy with being unable to play games.
Think about it - what if suddenly Linux/Unix/BSD was the mandated operating system for an entire country?
Well... since it would limit choice, I would say that it wouldn't be a GoodThing.
Drastically reduced costs not only for the operating system itself, but also for all of the extra crap you need to keep Windows limping along.
Prove it. Annecdotes about how you download your distro for free and such do not count. I actually pay for my Linux distribution (give money to the people so they can continue their work) and it costs the same amount as my Windows license. I don't use any more "extra crap" to keep my Windows box running than I use to keep my Linux box running. For me, it's a wash, neither is better than the other. As far as stability, they are the same as well but I take great care in buying hardware that I know is well supported (for either OS). In fact, my most unstable box lately has been my Linux box. I installed a kernel security patch and for some reason, every time I tried to FTP into it, the entire box would hang to the point of having to be power cycled. That has since been fixed, though.
Wow... Maybe more money for teachers, schools, computers(!!), roads, healthcare, etc...
Prove it.
The "forced" argument is misplaced. If government can decide to use Windows, they can also change their minds and decide to use Linux. Switching govt. owned PCs from Windows to Linux is in no way some new act of coercion.
It's not new, correct, but the original question was "is it right to force people to use something?" and there is also the old cliche of "two wrongs don't make a right". If F/OSS is about "choice", does the set of choices that F/OSS embraces include the choice of not using F/OSS? So far, most "proponents" (I would have said 'zealot') of F/OSS are all about "choice" as long as that "choice" is one they approve of. Sure, this isn't a new thing, but it doesn't make it any more right than Microsoft shoving Windows down our throats, either.
Likewise, if it is a failure, it will become strong ammunition. Still, it is usually better to try and then fail than to not try at all.
I would say that 64-bit VM is only a critical feature for a very, very small segment of the laptop user's market. Besides, using Linux on the laptop, you can easily have 32-bit versions of your codes as well so even the 32-bit laptop has use in developing/debugging applications and even running against smaller datasets for testing and the like. If you are running the large simulations, run them on your workstation where they will complete faster.
Compare it to Core Solo, then. One core in that one.
Oops... forgot my other Linux box that I took to work... I have three Athlon64s, one Athlon64 X2, and three Athlon XPs.
Your post is accurately written in the past tense. That review was a 2.4GHz Turion compared to a 2.0GHz Dothan and the Intel part was pretty impressive given a 20% lower clockrate. Core Duo is even faster (and has two cores and is shipping *now*). The CPU world will get a new injection of life and excitement this year as the new Intel parts ship and AMD seems to be resting on their laurels. I'm not a fanboi of either company. I buy what I think is best at the time I buy, which is why I have three Athlon64s, one Athlon64 X2, and three AthlonXPs and the only two Intel boxes I have are two Pentium-M based laptops. That may change by the end of the year if the predictions being made are accurate.
Yeah... I found the benchmarks pretty impressive given that the 2.0GHz Intel part was compared to a 2.4GHz AMD part (as per the test systems specs. And it wasn't even the latest version of the Intel parts (it wasn't a Yonah based part). Yonah has a few architectural improvements over the Dothan even, both in power management and in performance. I'm not a brand-loyal customer either, I buy what I think is best at the time I buy (which is why I have two Athlon64, one Athlon64 X2, and three Athlon XP machines). From the looks of things, my next machine may very well be an Intel based one if I decide to upgrade one at the end of 2006.
Agreed, but You can convey tone in writing, ever since the dawn of caveman with fingers dipped in deer blood, painting ideal stick cavewoman with two giantic circles and dots. is more pictogram than writing text, plus, we have no idea of the exact meaning the author of said pictogram was intending... sexual desire? simply stating fact? As the old saying goes... a picture is worth 1000 words.
:)
Writers *do* convey tone, usually at the expense of brevity. I would say that most emails are written with brevity in mind (right or wrong, I'm not arguing) and tone is lost. Plus, writing with tone may sound stilted, even assuming that most people are capable of writing well enough to convey tone if they actually took the time to do so
Before I got my Apple ][c, I had an Apple ][+. The ][c was far more portable than the ][+ :) Also, my first "computer parties" were with the ][c. We didn't have LANs back then, but we'd all bring our ][cs to a sleepover and we'd all be playing various games (many turn based play and we'd play several games at once by pipelining players). The 80s high school computer geek days are pretty nostalgic for me. Lots more interesting in many ways when it was so much more geeky :)
Yup. Basically you can't send body language and tonal indicators through typed text. These two things are very important to communication even though we aren't necessarily conciously analyzing a speaker for them. We know that someone is joking by the tonal qualities (where pitch varies and emphasis is placed) of the message and by body language (rolling of the eyes, a smile, etc.) This is why we have emoticons :)
I've heard of a number of people doing exactly this. Rapid turn around on DVDs and ripping the Netflix ones to HDD. I would imagine that it may be common enough and easily enough indicated (high volumn of DVDs shipped with rapid turn around) that Netflix feels safe doing that.
I'm still waiting on my PS2 to give me real-time "Toy Story" quality rendered video like Sony promised when the PS2 was released :(
They're a lot different than any other architecture...
Actually, they are similar to a number of DSPs and other discrete solutions from the past. For example:
The TMS 320DM64x series of DSP from TI which has an ARM9 and a number of DSPs on it.
The TMS 320DM54x and 55x series of DSP from TI which has an ARM7 and a number of DSPs on it.
And a descrete version in the CSPI MAP 1310/11 which had a PPC and multiple multi-core DSP chips on it as early as 1997.