Well, I'm a pretty loudmouthed commentator, so my old account would be modded in both ways pretty often. I had 190 or something when the cap went into effect. After I was only able to lose it I basically stopped posting.
If you asked me, they should have either set everyone's cap to their current level, or just hacked everyone's total down to 50. seeing your karma slowly decline like that was just depressing:P
Any economist will also tell you that people going to school or bumming around Europe are not considered "unemployed."
No shit, dumbass. If they were the unemployment rate in this country would be about 55% Not 6. Notice the person you are replying to said 'workers' not 'people'
Before the 90s boom, most economists were beginning to give up on the idea of a 4% unemployment rate as realistic. The only time the unemployment rate was anywhere near 2% was during WWII!
In the interim, the rate was between 5 and 7, IIRC
You don't actually have to do a 'clean room' reverse engineering unless you are probably going to end up with lots of bit-for-bit stuff that looks like it was copied. In the case of Compaq and the IBM bios, you didn't have much space, and you weren't really doing much, so there was a really good chance that lots of the data would be exactly the same if it was going to work. If Compaq didn't use a clean room IBM could sue for copyright violation because the data would be the same.
Well, I suppose we'll have to see the license they use. Hopefully it will mean someone can strip out all the real networks garbage that spawns all over my machine when I install (or even use real player). Theoretically, Microsoft could even take their code and use it to support RM in media player.
I have no idea why Real thinks people would want to watch WM stuff in real player, or anything at all in real player.
Well, I think we are thinking of diffrent things, when I say "decode" I'm just talking about the conversion from CISC to RISC, not from general CPU instructions to microcode. Do you have a link to the SPEC benchmarks for PPC and Athlon?
I've always been a DSL proponent, because of the fact that DSL has regulation in place to create competition. Of course, the bush appointees to the FCC wants to take all of that away and allow for monopolies.
Of course, the way phone companies have been screwing independent DSL providers in spite of the law has bankrupted most of them. Its really sick.
Oh, and to those of you who say that only government regulation can cause monopolies, go fuck yourself.
CISC assembly is not anything like any high level language I've ever seen, and I've seen a lot. Any trained monkey would put an x86 program in a pile with other Assembly stuff and not in a pile with other high level stuff like C or java or Scheme.
See this this image of an Athlon CPU? (on this page. if the have hotlink protection)See the block labeled 'MENG/EDEC'? That's the decoder. It can do 3 at a time and as you can see it does not take up half the CPU.
Actually, I have nothing against Macs, it's Apple I don't like:). I'm sure they're fine machines with OSX now, but I really doubt they are faster then price equivalent PCs. I've always found Apples advertising to be basically FUD and insulting to the intelligence of PC users. (as well as the people who they are advertising to). This seems to lead to lots of ignorant and shrill Mac advocates who insult and deride the PC. And yes, believe it or not some people like the PC. When you just dis it like that you dis those people.
So whenever I see rabid pro-Mac posts like these I usually will take the time to argue with them. Mac Advocates (and apples advertising department) should read the Linux Advocacy HOWTO sometime.
Well, I don't know how easy it would be to yank off the x86 bit of the core and replace it with a PPC one. I'm sure the designs are pretty tightly coupled, for example the number of registers as well as things like SSE and MMX would need to work the way it does on an x86 chip.
I also seriously doubt the decoder takes up half the CPU space.
I also don't think Intel plans to sell the Itanium to the public for a long time. They may also add 64 bit capabilities to their Pentium line of chips to compete with AMD that way.
Also, it's only the iMac that has an 800 MHz chip. The PowerMac G4 has 1 GHz chips. I'm sure there will be speed steppings down the road if Apple feels threatened by Intel and asks for them.
Before it was AMD and Intel, it was Intel and motorolla. If you think about it, AMD's business model was kind of suicidal. "We are going to take on the market leader head on with a compatible product." Most people would try to 'go around' Intel, in the way transmeta did. But AMD stuck it out and came out as a variable alternative. In theory it could happen again.
Also, Apple could use AMDs x86-64 rather then IA-64, which would still give us choice in the market.
I also appreciate that, thanks to the G4, Intel can no longer claim clock speeds are the only meaningful chip performance measurement.
I remember when PPC speeds were higher then Intel speeds, and all the Mac zealots were claming their chips superior based on that. I haven't seen any benchmarks lately either way, but I have a hard time believing that Apple is actually faster. You notice they aren't claming a speed upgrade in their 'switch' ads? Its because they aren't faster.
There was a long time like it seemed like they were going straight to hell. 700 million dollar losses per quarter, etc. Before jobs came back the company looked to die.
My guess that while it will be running an Intel processor it won't run on 'Commodity' PC hardware. The fact that Apple controls the hardware and the software is what makes a Mac so great.
You mean "The fact that Apple controls the hardware and the software is what makes Apple so much money". You can build a PC that's just as stable if you use certified drivers and quality hardware. If apple dropped their exclusive hardware they would be in direct competition with M$. Not a good place to be. Anyway, If apple does switch to x86, they'll probably keep right on with the same business model of proprietary hardware, just with a different chip.
You can get open commodity PPC hardware just like you can with Intel stuff.
Look, the fact of the matter is, there is not really that much variation in hardware on the PC side. A lot of the problems you see on a PC come from crappy drivers written by companies that don't have enough money to create good ones.
If you buy the right hardware, from the right companies, you can build a very stable windows system (in fact, with windows 2000 you can get very good stability without super-high quality HW) that never, or rarely ever crashes.
Also, if you have any experience with PC OSs other then windows, you would know its quite easy to build systems that don't fuck up and crash using open source Unixes. And what is OSX based on? BSD (along with a Mach kernel)
It wouldn't be anything like trying to run a video game hard coded to a specific hardware implementation. Almost all of the OS code is going to be cross platform enough for you to get it up and running without changing very many lines of code. Of course, you're probably going to uncover new bugs, but those can be fixed. If apple programmers are writing their code so that it only works well on PPC hardware, they aren't doing their job. Sure they are going to be doing platform specific optimizations, but those optimizations can be redone for x86.
Slashdot Mirror
There's a limit to the number of posts you can make per day? That's pretty asinine.
Well, I'm a pretty loudmouthed commentator, so my old account would be modded in both ways pretty often. I had 190 or something when the cap went into effect. After I was only able to lose it I basically stopped posting.
:P
If you asked me, they should have either set everyone's cap to their current level, or just hacked everyone's total down to 50. seeing your karma slowly decline like that was just depressing
The most karma you could ever have was 50. After that it could only go down.
how can you get an H1-b for yourself? Did you get it from the VCs or what?
Any economist will also tell you that people going to school or bumming around Europe are not considered "unemployed."
No shit, dumbass. If they were the unemployment rate in this country would be about 55% Not 6. Notice the person you are replying to said 'workers' not 'people'
Before the 90s boom, most economists were beginning to give up on the idea of a 4% unemployment rate as realistic. The only time the unemployment rate was anywhere near 2% was during WWII!
In the interim, the rate was between 5 and 7, IIRC
If it's them or us, I vote us.
That's because you are a terrible person
How unbelievably uninteresting
You don't actually have to do a 'clean room' reverse engineering unless you are probably going to end up with lots of bit-for-bit stuff that looks like it was copied. In the case of Compaq and the IBM bios, you didn't have much space, and you weren't really doing much, so there was a really good chance that lots of the data would be exactly the same if it was going to work. If Compaq didn't use a clean room IBM could sue for copyright violation because the data would be the same.
Most of the time you don't need a clean room.
You can't copyright a protocol; if they use Microsoft patents then there might be some problems, even if they did a 'clean room' implementation.
Well, I suppose we'll have to see the license they use. Hopefully it will mean someone can strip out all the real networks garbage that spawns all over my machine when I install (or even use real player). Theoretically, Microsoft could even take their code and use it to support RM in media player. I have no idea why Real thinks people would want to watch WM stuff in real player, or anything at all in real player.
Well, I think we are thinking of diffrent things, when I say "decode" I'm just talking about the conversion from CISC to RISC, not from general CPU instructions to microcode. Do you have a link to the SPEC benchmarks for PPC and Athlon?
I've always been a DSL proponent, because of the fact that DSL has regulation in place to create competition. Of course, the bush appointees to the FCC wants to take all of that away and allow for monopolies.
Of course, the way phone companies have been screwing independent DSL providers in spite of the law has bankrupted most of them. Its really sick.
Oh, and to those of you who say that only government regulation can cause monopolies, go fuck yourself.
Havn't VCDs been around for like 10 years or so? While most people now have DVD players that will play them now, the format itself is hardly new.
CISC assembly is not anything like any high level language I've ever seen, and I've seen a lot. Any trained monkey would put an x86 program in a pile with other Assembly stuff and not in a pile with other high level stuff like C or java or Scheme.
See this this image of an Athlon CPU? (on this page. if the have hotlink protection)See the block labeled 'MENG/EDEC'? That's the decoder. It can do 3 at a time and as you can see it does not take up half the CPU.
Actually, I have nothing against Macs, it's Apple I don't like :). I'm sure they're fine machines with OSX now, but I really doubt they are faster then price equivalent PCs. I've always found Apples advertising to be basically FUD and insulting to the intelligence of PC users. (as well as the people who they are advertising to). This seems to lead to lots of ignorant and shrill Mac advocates who insult and deride the PC. And yes, believe it or not some people like the PC. When you just dis it like that you dis those people.
So whenever I see rabid pro-Mac posts like these I usually will take the time to argue with them. Mac Advocates (and apples advertising department) should read the Linux Advocacy HOWTO sometime.
Well, I don't know how easy it would be to yank off the x86 bit of the core and replace it with a PPC one. I'm sure the designs are pretty tightly coupled, for example the number of registers as well as things like SSE and MMX would need to work the way it does on an x86 chip.
I also seriously doubt the decoder takes up half the CPU space.
I also don't think Intel plans to sell the Itanium to the public for a long time. They may also add 64 bit capabilities to their Pentium line of chips to compete with AMD that way.
Korean cars are like korean RAM. In fact, Hyundai makes both
The BSOD is the windows equivelent of a kernel panic.
Also, it's only the iMac that has an 800 MHz chip. The PowerMac G4 has 1 GHz chips. I'm sure there will be speed steppings down the road if Apple feels threatened by Intel and asks for them.
not according to the apple store. The cheapest mac there with a 1ghz is a dual and costs $3k
Before it was AMD and Intel, it was Intel and motorolla. If you think about it, AMD's business model was kind of suicidal. "We are going to take on the market leader head on with a compatible product." Most people would try to 'go around' Intel, in the way transmeta did. But AMD stuck it out and came out as a variable alternative. In theory it could happen again.
Also, Apple could use AMDs x86-64 rather then IA-64, which would still give us choice in the market.
I also appreciate that, thanks to the G4, Intel can no longer claim clock speeds are the only meaningful chip performance measurement.
I remember when PPC speeds were higher then Intel speeds, and all the Mac zealots were claming their chips superior based on that. I haven't seen any benchmarks lately either way, but I have a hard time believing that Apple is actually faster. You notice they aren't claming a speed upgrade in their 'switch' ads? Its because they aren't faster.
Which could happen, and hold up the JPG2000 standard in court for years.
There was a long time like it seemed like they were going straight to hell. 700 million dollar losses per quarter, etc. Before jobs came back the company looked to die.
My guess that while it will be running an Intel processor it won't run on 'Commodity' PC hardware. The fact that Apple controls the hardware and the software is what makes a Mac so great.
You mean "The fact that Apple controls the hardware and the software is what makes Apple so much money". You can build a PC that's just as stable if you use certified drivers and quality hardware. If apple dropped their exclusive hardware they would be in direct competition with M$. Not a good place to be. Anyway, If apple does switch to x86, they'll probably keep right on with the same business model of proprietary hardware, just with a different chip.
You can get open commodity PPC hardware just like you can with Intel stuff.
Look, the fact of the matter is, there is not really that much variation in hardware on the PC side. A lot of the problems you see on a PC come from crappy drivers written by companies that don't have enough money to create good ones.
If you buy the right hardware, from the right companies, you can build a very stable windows system (in fact, with windows 2000 you can get very good stability without super-high quality HW) that never, or rarely ever crashes.
Also, if you have any experience with PC OSs other then windows, you would know its quite easy to build systems that don't fuck up and crash using open source Unixes. And what is OSX based on? BSD (along with a Mach kernel)
It wouldn't be anything like trying to run a video game hard coded to a specific hardware implementation. Almost all of the OS code is going to be cross platform enough for you to get it up and running without changing very many lines of code. Of course, you're probably going to uncover new bugs, but those can be fixed. If apple programmers are writing their code so that it only works well on PPC hardware, they aren't doing their job. Sure they are going to be doing platform specific optimizations, but those optimizations can be redone for x86.