If I remember correctly, Cyrix made the "586". The Pentium was Intel's version (although still technically a 586). They were marketed seperately, with Cyrix's part getting the 586 moniker. But i've done lots of drinking since then, I could be wrong (it has happened before).
"Imagine the interest Apple could draw if they presented the world with a machine that runs the Classic, OS X, Unix and Windows applications... all in one environment and almost seamlessly."
They used to have this... you could buy some of the Performa lines waaaay back in the day with a card that was basically a mini-PC, and had a 586 and later a pentium on it. OrangeMicro used to have a line of em, could even cut and paste between environements, IIRC.
"Will we see Mac OS X running on two different platforms/CPUs?"
If we do, I think it would probably be only for a brief transition period, like when they switched from the 68K line of processors to PPC. But who knows. I really hope they don't switch to AMD, that would make people less inclined to write software that is still compatible with the PPC architecture I own (assuming they don't make binaries compatible with both... i don't think they can, can they?).
"Business Intelligence" is almost as oxymoronic as "military intelligence". At least in my experience with managers that have no idea about technology but yet think they can dictate how it is run.
"how irritatating it would be to try and dial that thing, with the buttons not layed out in the traditional, muscle memory configuration. Oh sure, you can use voice recognition, or look up numbers on a list, but even with all that enabled, I still end up *dialing* my phone about 50 - 60% of the time, and trying to deal with that keypad combination would suck, especially with numbers where you can only remember it by dialing it."
Did you also bitch when they switched from rotary dialers to touch tone? We handled the change back then, and unless you have an IQ well below 100, I think you can handle this too.
"Though they mention SACD, no where does the advert mention anything about copy protection. Some people are going to get a rude shock."
I don't think just because it is an SACD it has copy protection. I have a Tool CD (Lateralis) that is an SACD (or so it says on the jewel case, I don't have an SACD player to verify) and I had to problem ripping it to my computer.
I saw pioneer (i think) had a similar unit. It had a 40GB hard drive though. I'm not sure what this unit does, but the one that I saw, once you burn a recording onto DVD, it deletes it off the HD. I find that kind of annoying, but I guess they had to do that to compromise with the movie companies (only allow one copy at a time, and don't allow mass burns of the same program). I hope this one does not have tha behavior.
.. is to make the damn thing modular instead of one freakin huge app that loads all at the start. single binaries are nice, but like ms office (sorry to make the comparison) a lot can be gained by splitting it up and having interoperablility maintained, like load times and perceived responsiveness. Just my 2 cents.
"I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Mac (a 8600/300 w/64 Megs of RAM) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Mac, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that."
8600 you say? a computer made in 1995? I don't think anyone would ever expect an 8 year old computer to do things as fast as one today. Plus, IIRC, that computer has a blistering 5MB/sec SCSI bus internally, not exactly made for fast file transfers (in today's terms). Try the same transfer on anything made in 1997+ (with the ATA bus in it) and I think you will see a huge difference. Not to mention your computer seems pretty hackneyed, there was no 8600 with a 300MHz proc. I guess you may have upgraded to a G3 (or worse yet a 300MHz 604), but it is still on OLD computer and if you are trying to use OSX on it (read not supported), don't judge it.
"Woah. perl.com is running an article about this exact same problem. This [perl.com] article describes how to use SOAP::Lite to talk to a.NET Server. Well, mostly. I just glanced through it, since I don't do any XML work:)"
Yeah, i saw that, but what i'm doing is the reverse, using.NET to talk to a SOAP::Lite server. I have not found one shread of documentation on this anywhere (and have been searching for 2+ days).
I have to write SOAP calls for our.NET website, and i'll be damned if XML isn't the most irritating language ever. It wouldn't be so bad if everyone could agree on syntax, but since XML is so vague of a language for every implementation there is a different syntax, even amongst the SOAP standard XML specs. I am currently working on hafing our website make a SOAP call to a PERL::Lite SOAP server, and can't get the.NET to get the right data out of the response, even though the Perl server understands the.NET request fine, and is sending the right response. If it was really the panacea for programmers, there would be no interoperability problems. Sure, a human can look at any XML schema and know what is going on, but computers are the ones who have to deal with it, and they seem to have problems frequently.
oh man, i hope not. that would be scary. the horizontal lines are bad enough, but this metal fad has to die now. I feel like i'm living in a mad max movie. If i will not have the option of turning it off (as i do now in most apps with minor work), I will not like this new os. I hope that's just rumor, but we'll see.
"Peter Jackson is saying that the great battle must be several times larger than that of Helm?s Deep. This is not only stretching Massive to it?s limits but also the Intel 32bit processor architecture as well and Weta is looking at replacing the processors with 64bit ones. Whatever they do, RoTK is set to be pretty spectacular."
If that doesn't answer all the standard/. questions similar to "why are 64-bit processors even needed" I don't know what will. However, contrarilly, this could be the evidence that 64-bit processors aren't needed for average Joe User, since it obviously takes some very heavy computing to max out today's standard 32-bit processors. Still, needed or not, I'd still love to have a nice 64-bit (non-server) PC (I know I'm preaching to the choir on that one here on this site).
Agreed, I don't know how they plan on doing this. If they use MAC addresses, those can be easily spoofed. If they use IP addresses, those are easy to get around too, but there is also the problem of roommates sharing a connection between two computers in the same room. If your roomie is a bandwidth hog, depending on how they implement this, it could be very troubling.
Wow, all those acronyms are making my head spin. Sigh. What does the NSA think about the DNS servers switching from BIND to SND? Does it make thier TPS reports PDQ? I'd sure hope it uses SQL somehow too.
Isn't that why the CPU doesn't render the scene and send raw images across the AGP bus, it sends vectorized compressed data to the VC which then renders it and puts it on screen. There are now "Raw" images going acress the bus, so to speak, only the data needed for the card to form its own interpretation of the data. I say interpretation, because every brand of card will look a bit different, depending on precision, color depth, and detail settings. Its also why you CAN do 4x antialiased 1600x1200 gaming at > 60fps on the top-end cards. You are right though that the AGP bus wouldn't be able to transmit all that data if it were raw.
" and should end decades of academic dispute. Scientists ranging from Stephen Hawking, the Cambridge University physicist, to Albert Einstein, have argued that the universe eventually will stop expanding and then implode under the force of gravity, destroying all life."
That part cracks me up. Kinda makes it sound like they're full of shit. I kinda doubt that.
Slashdot Mirror
If I remember correctly, Cyrix made the "586". The Pentium was Intel's version (although still technically a 586). They were marketed seperately, with Cyrix's part getting the 586 moniker. But i've done lots of drinking since then, I could be wrong (it has happened before).
They used to have this... you could buy some of the Performa lines waaaay back in the day with a card that was basically a mini-PC, and had a 586 and later a pentium on it. OrangeMicro used to have a line of em, could even cut and paste between environements, IIRC.
If we do, I think it would probably be only for a brief transition period, like when they switched from the 68K line of processors to PPC. But who knows. I really hope they don't switch to AMD, that would make people less inclined to write software that is still compatible with the PPC architecture I own (assuming they don't make binaries compatible with both... i don't think they can, can they?).
Do I get a prize for that much dedication for a TRUE vaporware product? =P"
PRIZE? I don't even think you'll get your 5 dollars back....
"Business Intelligence" is almost as oxymoronic as "military intelligence". At least in my experience with managers that have no idea about technology but yet think they can dictate how it is run.
no, seriously. i thought i had everything. i was mistaken. now they just need to put the bar on wheels so it can follow me around ;)
Did you also bitch when they switched from rotary dialers to touch tone? We handled the change back then, and unless you have an IQ well below 100, I think you can handle this too.
Wow man, you really like to post this, don't you... http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=59343&threshol d=0&commentsort=3&tid=179&mode=thread&cid=5644317. If you have been waiting for that file copy for the weeks since you've last posted, may I suggest killing that process? In the mean time, come up with some new material to add to our discussion, Mr. Troll.
I don't think just because it is an SACD it has copy protection. I have a Tool CD (Lateralis) that is an SACD (or so it says on the jewel case, I don't have an SACD player to verify) and I had to problem ripping it to my computer.
I saw pioneer (i think) had a similar unit. It had a 40GB hard drive though. I'm not sure what this unit does, but the one that I saw, once you burn a recording onto DVD, it deletes it off the HD. I find that kind of annoying, but I guess they had to do that to compromise with the movie companies (only allow one copy at a time, and don't allow mass burns of the same program). I hope this one does not have tha behavior.
...this will be a good thing (hit return too early, don't drink and code).
.. is to make the damn thing modular instead of one freakin huge app that loads all at the start. single binaries are nice, but like ms office (sorry to make the comparison) a lot can be gained by splitting it up and having interoperablility maintained, like load times and perceived responsiveness. Just my 2 cents.
Sorry. The devil made me say it.
8600 you say? a computer made in 1995? I don't think anyone would ever expect an 8 year old computer to do things as fast as one today. Plus, IIRC, that computer has a blistering 5MB/sec SCSI bus internally, not exactly made for fast file transfers (in today's terms). Try the same transfer on anything made in 1997+ (with the ATA bus in it) and I think you will see a huge difference. Not to mention your computer seems pretty hackneyed, there was no 8600 with a 300MHz proc. I guess you may have upgraded to a G3 (or worse yet a 300MHz 604), but it is still on OLD computer and if you are trying to use OSX on it (read not supported), don't judge it.
Yeah, i saw that, but what i'm doing is the reverse, using .NET to talk to a SOAP::Lite server. I have not found one shread of documentation on this anywhere (and have been searching for 2+ days).
Just my 2 cents.
oh man, i hope not. that would be scary. the horizontal lines are bad enough, but this metal fad has to die now. I feel like i'm living in a mad max movie. If i will not have the option of turning it off (as i do now in most apps with minor work), I will not like this new os. I hope that's just rumor, but we'll see.
I had read somewhere (perhaps thinksecret.com) that mac os x 10.2.4 would have audigy 2 drivers built in. Can anyone verify this?
If that doesn't answer all the standard /. questions similar to "why are 64-bit processors even needed" I don't know what will. However, contrarilly, this could be the evidence that 64-bit processors aren't needed for average Joe User, since it obviously takes some very heavy computing to max out today's standard 32-bit processors. Still, needed or not, I'd still love to have a nice 64-bit (non-server) PC (I know I'm preaching to the choir on that one here on this site).
Agreed, I don't know how they plan on doing this. If they use MAC addresses, those can be easily spoofed. If they use IP addresses, those are easy to get around too, but there is also the problem of roommates sharing a connection between two computers in the same room. If your roomie is a bandwidth hog, depending on how they implement this, it could be very troubling.
Hmm, that's an interesting Outlook on things.
ps sence != sense
Wow, all those acronyms are making my head spin. Sigh. What does the NSA think about the DNS servers switching from BIND to SND? Does it make thier TPS reports PDQ? I'd sure hope it uses SQL somehow too.
Isn't that why the CPU doesn't render the scene and send raw images across the AGP bus, it sends vectorized compressed data to the VC which then renders it and puts it on screen. There are now "Raw" images going acress the bus, so to speak, only the data needed for the card to form its own interpretation of the data. I say interpretation, because every brand of card will look a bit different, depending on precision, color depth, and detail settings. Its also why you CAN do 4x antialiased 1600x1200 gaming at > 60fps on the top-end cards. You are right though that the AGP bus wouldn't be able to transmit all that data if it were raw.
That part cracks me up. Kinda makes it sound like they're full of shit. I kinda doubt that.