Personally, I think the Atom is a horrible architecture and would have preferred attempts to make a more efficient processor without sacrificing out of order execution, but that's just me.
Not just you. I've got no argument with that statement.
The 330 is marketed for "nettops," but it's the same physical size as a 230 and 270 (though it uses twice the power of the 230 and three times as much as the 270 so it needs different and larger cooling) so there's no real reason that it couldn't be used in a netbook... except that Intel threatened to heavily penalize any manufacturer that does.
Intel doesn't want the Atom eating into its laptop market in the same way that MS doesn't want Win7SE to eat into its high-margin sales. Don't you love monopolies artificially segmenting their markets? No healthy market would tolerate a supplier penalizing a customer.
Ummm, I was in Thailand when the Starter Edition was first introduced, and it was in response to the "Eua Athorn" computer that Thaksin was targetting toward low-income people. It was a Celeron computer based on a localized version of Linux created by NECTEC's OpenTLE team, and the organization sold (pre-order) almost a million of them. Before that, retail copies of MS Windows were the same price all over the world, but MS broke that rule for Thailand, establishing the $5 Starter Edition and getting it as an install option on the "Eua Athorn" computer when it was picked up.
Needless to say, most people chose to have the Starter Edition pre-installed for $5 rather than to learn a new operating system.
That's the first place the OS appeared and it was the first hole to appear in the MS price dam. There's no thinking or opinion about it -- it's just history. The anti-piracy spin happened later, but wasn't successful, at least in Thailand. No one wanted to pay $5 for a crippled version they had to install themselves when they could get a full one (pirated) for the same price. Since there's no real enforcement of consumer-level infringement, there's also no concern about the legality.
WRT the netbook issue, these are two sides of the same coin. Netbooks appeared with Linux because the early ones couldn't support Vista on 256MB RAM (as opposed to running like crap, which some later ones do). XP was scheduled for EOL. MS had to react. In order not to lose the market on those devices, it had to extend the life of XP, and in order to be competitive, it had to lower the price.
Linux wins another round. First, Linux in developing countries forced MS to break their "one price around the world" policy, creating the Starter Edition, then Linux on netbooks made MS extend XP and lower the price (further damaging Vista's sales), and now Linux on netbooks has forced MS to abandon its attempted segmentation of the market. Even without a large install base, Linux continues to be a force in the market.
If Americans have a minimum wage and laws about which taxes need to be paid, these need to be followed. If it has a system for determining who can work and who can't, that system needs to be followed. If people are in the country illegally, they need to be removed or made legal some way. Personally, I all for just opening up the borders in the NAFTA countries the way the EU has, but the US would have to change its laws in order to do that.
Allowing something illegal because your law sucks is idiotic. Change the law.
Koreans. 98% homogeneous and damn proud of it. You can tell a foreigner by the skin color or facial features. Elementary school teacher in my area even had a special seminar on how to deal with children who aren't full-blooded Korean. I have no tolerance for the blood purity movement here because it's philisophically no different than any other racial supremacy movement.
When I was about twelve and travelling through Texas with my family, we stopped at a diner. (Keep reading, this isn't a description of how I got the runs in the bathroom.) A bunch of local guys started harrassing a "spic" who kept trying to defend himself by pointing out that he was actually from the Middle East -- ironically, I think it was Iran, which wouldn't have been any better in 1980. No one listened and they kept up with word like "wetback" and "spic."
Since I lived in Hawaii, the only time I had seen something like that happen was when the guy was white and being taunted as a "haole." That diner really opened my eyes to prejudice and bigotry in the general population.
So... to answer your question -- yes, some people "can't tell the difference between someone from Central America and someone from the Middle East."
Since UDS is afire with talk about the "App Center" (which has been put on high priority for 9.10), I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that Canonical wants to offer Android apps for sale through the App Center.
As far as I know, it wasn't completely ODF1.0 compliant in the beginning and wasn't offered up officially as a reference implementation. I think it should have been, obviously.
I agree that should be the number one short-term goal for governments of the world. The only problem is, what do you do about issues like OOXML, which is a standard, and which MS supports in name, but which isn't actually supported by anyone? Gaming the standards system has become too easy and corrupting standards has no penalty.
What ever happened to the good ol' days when you put up an RFC and a reference implementation and everyone tried to make sure new stuff worked with the old stuff? If there had been a reference implementation (ahem... OO.o), we wouldn't have the weasel ODF support in MS Office SP2.
SSC spokesperson Marian Mortensen says government looks for three things in its negotiations: value for money, fitness for purpose and strategic benefit.
Mortensen says open source will be "part fo [sic] the mix, definitely". However, she adds, such choices will be made by individual agencies.
There's something, anyway, but it might not be much. It's up to the individual agencies.
"Distributed hashing tables are a class of decentralized distributed systems that provide a lookup service similar to a hash table: (key, value) pairs are stored in the DHT, and any participating node can efficiently retrieve the value associated with a given key." [1]
Slashdot Mirror
I was going to mention the Cortex in my last post, but I thought it might look like I was trying to derail the conversation. Nice video, BTW.
Personally, I think the Atom is a horrible architecture and would have preferred attempts to make a more efficient processor without sacrificing out of order execution, but that's just me.
Not just you. I've got no argument with that statement.
The 330 is marketed for "nettops," but it's the same physical size as a 230 and 270 (though it uses twice the power of the 230 and three times as much as the 270 so it needs different and larger cooling) so there's no real reason that it couldn't be used in a netbook ... except that Intel threatened to heavily penalize any manufacturer that does.
Intel doesn't want the Atom eating into its laptop market in the same way that MS doesn't want Win7SE to eat into its high-margin sales. Don't you love monopolies artificially segmenting their markets? No healthy market would tolerate a supplier penalizing a customer.
Ahem!:
Intel Atom Processor 330
...
Supported Features:
Ummm, I was in Thailand when the Starter Edition was first introduced, and it was in response to the "Eua Athorn" computer that Thaksin was targetting toward low-income people. It was a Celeron computer based on a localized version of Linux created by NECTEC's OpenTLE team, and the organization sold (pre-order) almost a million of them. Before that, retail copies of MS Windows were the same price all over the world, but MS broke that rule for Thailand, establishing the $5 Starter Edition and getting it as an install option on the "Eua Athorn" computer when it was picked up.
Needless to say, most people chose to have the Starter Edition pre-installed for $5 rather than to learn a new operating system.
That's the first place the OS appeared and it was the first hole to appear in the MS price dam. There's no thinking or opinion about it -- it's just history. The anti-piracy spin happened later, but wasn't successful, at least in Thailand. No one wanted to pay $5 for a crippled version they had to install themselves when they could get a full one (pirated) for the same price. Since there's no real enforcement of consumer-level infringement, there's also no concern about the legality.
WRT the netbook issue, these are two sides of the same coin. Netbooks appeared with Linux because the early ones couldn't support Vista on 256MB RAM (as opposed to running like crap, which some later ones do). XP was scheduled for EOL. MS had to react. In order not to lose the market on those devices, it had to extend the life of XP, and in order to be competitive, it had to lower the price.
Linux wins another round. First, Linux in developing countries forced MS to break their "one price around the world" policy, creating the Starter Edition, then Linux on netbooks made MS extend XP and lower the price (further damaging Vista's sales), and now Linux on netbooks has forced MS to abandon its attempted segmentation of the market. Even without a large install base, Linux continues to be a force in the market.
This is like saying "I run faster then a snail". While true, it doesn't prove much.
I can't tell if it's true or not. When I run your code through my interpreter it's gives the following error:
ERROR 317: Malformed sentence
Expected verb after "snail"
Please fix and resubmit.
If Americans have a minimum wage and laws about which taxes need to be paid, these need to be followed. If it has a system for determining who can work and who can't, that system needs to be followed. If people are in the country illegally, they need to be removed or made legal some way. Personally, I all for just opening up the borders in the NAFTA countries the way the EU has, but the US would have to change its laws in order to do that.
Allowing something illegal because your law sucks is idiotic. Change the law.
Koreans. 98% homogeneous and damn proud of it. You can tell a foreigner by the skin color or facial features. Elementary school teacher in my area even had a special seminar on how to deal with children who aren't full-blooded Korean. I have no tolerance for the blood purity movement here because it's philisophically no different than any other racial supremacy movement.
When I was about twelve and travelling through Texas with my family, we stopped at a diner. (Keep reading, this isn't a description of how I got the runs in the bathroom.) A bunch of local guys started harrassing a "spic" who kept trying to defend himself by pointing out that he was actually from the Middle East -- ironically, I think it was Iran, which wouldn't have been any better in 1980. No one listened and they kept up with word like "wetback" and "spic."
Since I lived in Hawaii, the only time I had seen something like that happen was when the guy was white and being taunted as a "haole." That diner really opened my eyes to prejudice and bigotry in the general population.
So ... to answer your question -- yes, some people "can't tell the difference between someone from Central America and someone from the Middle East."
I was thinking along the lines of "Cool! Pocket porn projector!."
OK, then, how about the "Brasero didn't work and Nautilus crashed when you put in a CDR because libbrasero replaced Nautilus CD burner" bug that came with Jaunty? Or the "Sound stops working randomly when using Flash in a browser" bug that came with Intrepid? Or how about the "F-Spot (the default photo manager) doesn't even run on AMD64" bug that came with Hardy?
Face it, Ubuntu is a "wait for SP1" distro. Release early and release often evolved to be release on time and fix it later, damn it!
Since UDS is afire with talk about the "App Center" (which has been put on high priority for 9.10), I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that Canonical wants to offer Android apps for sale through the App Center.
"C" was true about ODF 1.0, but not any more.
As far as I know, it wasn't completely ODF1.0 compliant in the beginning and wasn't offered up officially as a reference implementation. I think it should have been, obviously.
I agree that should be the number one short-term goal for governments of the world. The only problem is, what do you do about issues like OOXML, which is a standard, and which MS supports in name, but which isn't actually supported by anyone? Gaming the standards system has become too easy and corrupting standards has no penalty.
What ever happened to the good ol' days when you put up an RFC and a reference implementation and everyone tried to make sure new stuff worked with the old stuff? If there had been a reference implementation (ahem ... OO.o), we wouldn't have the weasel ODF support in MS Office SP2.
Maybe not a nail:
SSC spokesperson Marian Mortensen says government looks for three things in its negotiations: value for money, fitness for purpose and strategic benefit.
Mortensen says open source will be "part fo [sic] the mix, definitely". However, she adds, such choices will be made by individual agencies.
There's something, anyway, but it might not be much. It's up to the individual agencies.
Norhtec has a bunch of computers with Linux. Sure, a lot of them are miniature and low power, but there's always the Panda (SFF).
So would the different distros be different properties? Cos I'm not sure how I feel about building a datacenter (hotel) on Mandrake avenue.
Don't worry. It'll be in the purple properties.
Just kidding. Calm down, Mandrakers!
Exactly. Switzerland states that only MS will do, but how can you truly know what's available without a public bid?
You rock and I suck!
You argued that getting OO.o to compile is a bitch so you can't count on ODF. I said that there are other options. Don't re-frame the argument.
Merit is irrelevant. Microsoft has never won on merit alone. They bought their position wilfully [sic] and skilfully [sic].
That is true from the moment that Bill got the IBM contract for a product he didn't even have yet. Thanks, Mom!
ODF is a standard and more office suites read it than just OO.o. (Just stay away from MS Office SP2!)
"Distributed hashing tables are a class of decentralized distributed systems that provide a lookup service similar to a hash table: (key, value) pairs are stored in the DHT, and any participating node can efficiently retrieve the value associated with a given key." [1]
They should look at Bamboo DHT.