I suppose it would be possible, if you applied the proper patches to the kernel. I'm not an expert in that category, however. I can put you in touch with somebody who is in the know about such things, if you'd like.
It should be noted that NITIX has it's own virtualization solution:P
Linux-based MS Exchange replacement. Due to the whole autonomic computing paradigm, it is much easier to set up than any competitors.
The downside is that it comes with its own OS, which could be an obstacle to some people. From my experience, though, companies don't care about the OS, they are just as happy to throw an entire box at the problem.
I simply type them into openoffice. My notes often amount to recreating copies of overheads or powerpoint slides for those profs that do not post those online. Often there is some detailed info in those things that needs to be memorized.
Cal 1 and 2 taken during university, since I was missing them as prerequisites. I find it much easier/faster to write out mathematical equations than actual text.
It depends, really. When Microsoft gives free points, most of the content is created by them, so it doesn't cost them anything. Obviously some marketplace content (such as games) is created by third parties, so that would cost Microsoft money.
Pepsi paid apple for those downloads, so somebody was still paying for those songs.
Regardless, the point is moot. Pepsi's promotion failed. When they did it in 2004, they had 100 million songs to give away, but only ended up giving away 5 million. I think they did a second promotion too. So taking away 10 million from a billion still leaves 990 million songs.
What good are they? Well, for somebody like me, they're required to take notes in anything but a math class.
My handwriting is rather slow and poor, and I can't keep up in most classes. Math classes are the exception, as there tends to be less writing while taking notes.
On the other hand, I'm a touch typist, and can easily type notes while making eye contact with the professor. How does a laptop prevent eye contact if I don't need to look at the keyboard or monitor to type?
If I were in that professor's class, I'd get the local student union on the case. Here in Quebec, student unions are actually accredited unions (like labour unions), so they have more power here than they do elsewhere.
As I said, since I can't handwrite notes in some classes, if a laptop is going to make the difference between taking bad notes and taking good notes, I'm not going to suffer due to a prof's misguided policy.
What was the average cost of items in real dollars? Avatars surely don't cost as much as entire games.
How many transactions remain if only count transactions that people actually paid for? In other words, excluding transactions made with points that came with the xbox or came with the xbox live subscription.
And of course, on top of all that, you can't really compare an online service that sells ONE item (songs, since we're only counting those in the 1 billion figure) to a service that sells everything from games to avatars.
Why do some people jump all over protocol-specific encryption as helping terrorists, or other such nonsense?
There is a great deal of concern over Skype being encrypted. People say it can be used by terrorists for encrypted communication. The thing is, throw up a VoIP server of some kind (Even the free ones like Ventrilo or TeamSpeak), and connect to it using something like Hamachi. Bam! All your UDP voice traffic is encrypted.
Heck, you can even do it with TCP. SSH tunnels encrypting two-way Shoutcast streams. Huzzah! Encrypted two-way voice communication! Heck, pump the shoutcast stream over HTTPS and that'd be encrypted too.
So, this is why I don't get it. Why complain about Skype when there will always be ways to encrypt voice traffic over the internet? Programs like Hamachi (Encrypted P2P VPN solution with an IM-like interface) make it insanely easy to set up more secure solutions than Skype, and there is always SSH tunnels as a fallback.
So how does this relate to the current situation? Well, people are sure to complain that this new program somehow helps terrorists. So I'm just saying that that is BS.
Is it possible? Yes. Is it worth the risk? No. This isn't FUD.
Want proof? SCO just announced a few days ago that their net loss for the last quarter of $4.58 million dollars. That is up from the year ago quarter's net loss of $2.96 million. Their profits are also down, going from the year ago quarter's $8.86 million to the current quarter's $7.34 million.
This is a company that, even if they don't get destroyed by IBM, will probably collapse under their own debt. They can't keep losing millions of dollars every quarter. Most of the investments they're getting are investors hoping they win the lawsuit. If they were to lose the suit, most of those investors would try to pull out, and they'd have a great deal of problem finding new ones.
Do some googling if you want to verify my numbers. It was a public conference call.
The video links people are posting are about a year old. So yeah, they're cool, but they're nothing new, and we haven't heard a peep about the game since then.
I'll start being interested when it comes out.
on
Spore Is EA's New Ace
·
· Score: 1
Seriously, the game has been in development for quite a while, and there has been no news of late of a potential release date. I'm excited about the game, sure, but until it comes out, I don't care if EA thinks it is going to save them or not.
IBM can't obtain IP that SCO doesn't own. SCO doesn't even own the Unix copyrights that they're claiming, Novell does.
So, there is a small chance that IBM would feel bad for SCO customers and offer to support them, but that is unlikely.
Besides, SCO is sueing IBM, not the other way around. I don't think IBM can claim damages when they're the defendant. I think the best they can do (and what they want to do) is have the lawsuit dismissed.
Another danger is that SCO will go bankrupt before the court case even ends. They've got enormous losses every quarter, and those losses are skyrocketing every quarter. Just a few days ago they announced a record loss.
You're missing my point. You still need to replace all your servers, port your content (which could be as simple as copying it over), and test it.
Replacing production servers either means downtime for a production system, or new hardware to be purchased. Setting up the new servers is time consuming. Testing HAS to be done any time you change config, let alone re-installing the OS.
So the potential danger is there, I think. Either you're going to spend a lot of money on the changeover buying new hardware to replace the old one with no downtime, or you're going to pay a still hefty chunk of change in labour, and accept the downtime, of migrating the existing servers.
There are emulation solutions, at least, that run on intel-based macs. Throw a copy of QEMU onto a MacBook and run it in fullscreen mode, and the photos would look real. It would even allow you to make a fake video easier than recording a video of a WinXP desktop and playing it back.
It isn't safe to use SCAMP. SCO's corporate future is uncertain. They've based their entire company around a lawsuit that it looks like they will probably lose. It would be a bad idea to use SCAMP for a production system only to have SCO go bankrupt a year or two later.
Sure, you could convert your SCAMP-based application to LAMP if that happens, but doing that on a production system is very costly due to all the manpower to switch platforms and all the testing to make sure everything works.
You should ask yourself, what advantages does SCAMP offer over LAMP that warrants the risk of using a platform from a dying company? Are there even any such advantages at all?
They officially abandonned the Megahertz Myth when they released the Pentium M years ago. Back then they were faced with the task of convincing consumers that a 1.7Ghz Pentium M was at least as fast as a 2.8GHz Pentium 4.
Conroe is simply the evolution of the Pentium M. From Banias to Dothan to Yonah to Merom/Conroe. The name of the product has changed as time goes on ("Pentium M" for Banias and Dothan, "Core" for Yonah, and possibly "Pentium 4" for Conroe), but the old Pentium 4 line is dead. Any naming similarity between Prescott P4s and Conroe P4s are just marketing.
It seems like Intel doesn't want to abandon the Pentium 4 moniker. They can't very well call Conroe "Core" like they will Merom, because they need a way to differentiate its higher performance from the mobile part. Personally I would like to think that Conroe qualifies as a Pentium 5 due to the completely different architecture. Heck, considering how the P4 has evolved over the years we should be at P6 or P7 by now. This time, though, the entire architecture is different, so calling it P4 is a bit silly.
It doesn't recognize the MODEL NUMBER because they're overclocking it. This is normal on an AMD board when you overclock a CPU. The motherboard simply can't figure out what model number to report when faced with a processor that doesn't actually exist.
Essentially, AMD is having huge performance issues with AM2 with their current prototypes. At the current point in time, overclocking a current DDR1 S939 chip is going to give you faster performance than a current DDR2 AM2 chip.
You missed the part where the parent said "within a single architecture".
Intel's heat issues started when they introduced Prescott, which was effectively a new architecture that didn't really deserve the moniker "Pentium 4".
When you compare the current P4 to the original P4, they have very little in common. Intel just stuck the P4 name on all of them for marketing reasons. In fact, if I'm reading all the coverage of Conroe correctly, they are going to call it a P4 too even though it is a completely different architecture derived from the Pentium M (which is itself derived from the Pentium III).
So the parent's point remains valid. When you compare the various initial speeds of the Conroe, since they will all be based on the same core, comparing performance based on clockspeed (between Conroe chips) will be a valid comparison.
If EA takes a bath for a quarter or two, the company's not going to suffer in the slightest.
I don't know, taking a bath in a pile of money would probably cause a lot of paper cuts. Thousands of paper cuts from bathing in money could possibly considered suffering.
I'm not terribly worried about companies like EA hurting in all this; they have a huge amount of cash and have no problem screwing over gamers if it means a higher profit. I'm more worried about the effect on small and independent developers who are forced to cut the prices of their new previous-gen games. Small and independent studios might not have the cash to take the hit, since unlike EA they don't have bathtubs full of money in which to frolic.
Yes, they do, as they should. If a programmer is consistent, this should pose no problem. If they do make some consistency errors, then the compiler is going to point it out to them with clear error messages telling you that a variable/function/etc is undefined.
If good style is to be consistent when it comes to case, why is case sensitivity a burden? At best a coder should never experience any case-related error messages. At worst, the compiler will help them fix any mistakes in this regard.
Who are these "alot" of you, and why do they say that those are bad syntax ideas? Are you assuming that becaues you dislike certain things, then everybody else must also dislike them?
I happen to like { and }, and case sensitivity makes code easier to read without being a burden on the coder.
apt-get is darned easy to use, but there are many things available through CNR that aren't in the apt repositories. It is certainly a nice supplement.
Look at it this way; it is optional. If you don't want it, you are in exactly the same situation as before. If you do want it, you get something extra. It is a win-win situation; you either ignore it, or benefit from it.
He might have use the wrong wording, but he is right, more or less. Many notebooks support standard slimline drives with a custom bezel and sometimes an adapter board and casing. Laptops with such drive bays are so popular that you can buy slimline notebook drives all over the place, sold by manufacturer name ("LG"), not notebook brand. Many laptops work fine with a the drive's built in bezel, though.
Personally, I think this is brilliant. Here everybody was thinking about how far off fuel cell notebooks were because the things had to be integrated with notebooks, when everybody missed the obvious; many notebooks support batteries in the semi-standard optical bay. My notebook is a Compal whitebook type that is a year or two old, and the manufacturer never made an optical-bay battery, but it DOES support a power source in the bay, since it was intended that they would introduce a battery.
So, a fuel cell that you can pop into everyday normal laptops and get huge increases in battery life. I like the idea. It'll depend on how expensive fuel cells are. If I could buy them cheap enough to use constantly, I'd pick some up. With an 8 hour battery life, as a student, I could see an 8-hour cartridge lasting me for a few days. It'd help with those times where there are back-to-back classes that push the runtime of the battery.
Slashdot Mirror
I suppose it would be possible, if you applied the proper patches to the kernel. I'm not an expert in that category, however. I can put you in touch with somebody who is in the know about such things, if you'd like.
:P
It should be noted that NITIX has it's own virtualization solution
I can't help but plug the software from the company I've worked for:
http://www.nitix.com/products/os/exchangeit.php
Linux-based MS Exchange replacement. Due to the whole autonomic computing paradigm, it is much easier to set up than any competitors.
The downside is that it comes with its own OS, which could be an obstacle to some people. From my experience, though, companies don't care about the OS, they are just as happy to throw an entire box at the problem.
I simply type them into openoffice. My notes often amount to recreating copies of overheads or powerpoint slides for those profs that do not post those online. Often there is some detailed info in those things that needs to be memorized.
Cal 1 and 2 taken during university, since I was missing them as prerequisites. I find it much easier/faster to write out mathematical equations than actual text.
It depends, really. When Microsoft gives free points, most of the content is created by them, so it doesn't cost them anything. Obviously some marketplace content (such as games) is created by third parties, so that would cost Microsoft money.
Pepsi paid apple for those downloads, so somebody was still paying for those songs.
Regardless, the point is moot. Pepsi's promotion failed. When they did it in 2004, they had 100 million songs to give away, but only ended up giving away 5 million. I think they did a second promotion too. So taking away 10 million from a billion still leaves 990 million songs.
What good are they? Well, for somebody like me, they're required to take notes in anything but a math class.
My handwriting is rather slow and poor, and I can't keep up in most classes. Math classes are the exception, as there tends to be less writing while taking notes.
On the other hand, I'm a touch typist, and can easily type notes while making eye contact with the professor. How does a laptop prevent eye contact if I don't need to look at the keyboard or monitor to type?
If I were in that professor's class, I'd get the local student union on the case. Here in Quebec, student unions are actually accredited unions (like labour unions), so they have more power here than they do elsewhere.
As I said, since I can't handwrite notes in some classes, if a laptop is going to make the difference between taking bad notes and taking good notes, I'm not going to suffer due to a prof's misguided policy.
What was the average cost of items in real dollars? Avatars surely don't cost as much as entire games.
How many transactions remain if only count transactions that people actually paid for? In other words, excluding transactions made with points that came with the xbox or came with the xbox live subscription.
And of course, on top of all that, you can't really compare an online service that sells ONE item (songs, since we're only counting those in the 1 billion figure) to a service that sells everything from games to avatars.
Why do some people jump all over protocol-specific encryption as helping terrorists, or other such nonsense?
There is a great deal of concern over Skype being encrypted. People say it can be used by terrorists for encrypted communication. The thing is, throw up a VoIP server of some kind (Even the free ones like Ventrilo or TeamSpeak), and connect to it using something like Hamachi. Bam! All your UDP voice traffic is encrypted.
Heck, you can even do it with TCP. SSH tunnels encrypting two-way Shoutcast streams. Huzzah! Encrypted two-way voice communication! Heck, pump the shoutcast stream over HTTPS and that'd be encrypted too.
So, this is why I don't get it. Why complain about Skype when there will always be ways to encrypt voice traffic over the internet? Programs like Hamachi (Encrypted P2P VPN solution with an IM-like interface) make it insanely easy to set up more secure solutions than Skype, and there is always SSH tunnels as a fallback.
So how does this relate to the current situation? Well, people are sure to complain that this new program somehow helps terrorists. So I'm just saying that that is BS.
Is it possible? Yes. Is it worth the risk? No. This isn't FUD.
Want proof? SCO just announced a few days ago that their net loss for the last quarter of $4.58 million dollars. That is up from the year ago quarter's net loss of $2.96 million. Their profits are also down, going from the year ago quarter's $8.86 million to the current quarter's $7.34 million.
This is a company that, even if they don't get destroyed by IBM, will probably collapse under their own debt. They can't keep losing millions of dollars every quarter. Most of the investments they're getting are investors hoping they win the lawsuit. If they were to lose the suit, most of those investors would try to pull out, and they'd have a great deal of problem finding new ones.
Do some googling if you want to verify my numbers. It was a public conference call.
The video links people are posting are about a year old. So yeah, they're cool, but they're nothing new, and we haven't heard a peep about the game since then.
Seriously, the game has been in development for quite a while, and there has been no news of late of a potential release date. I'm excited about the game, sure, but until it comes out, I don't care if EA thinks it is going to save them or not.
IBM can't obtain IP that SCO doesn't own. SCO doesn't even own the Unix copyrights that they're claiming, Novell does.
So, there is a small chance that IBM would feel bad for SCO customers and offer to support them, but that is unlikely.
Besides, SCO is sueing IBM, not the other way around. I don't think IBM can claim damages when they're the defendant. I think the best they can do (and what they want to do) is have the lawsuit dismissed.
Another danger is that SCO will go bankrupt before the court case even ends. They've got enormous losses every quarter, and those losses are skyrocketing every quarter. Just a few days ago they announced a record loss.
You're missing my point. You still need to replace all your servers, port your content (which could be as simple as copying it over), and test it.
Replacing production servers either means downtime for a production system, or new hardware to be purchased. Setting up the new servers is time consuming. Testing HAS to be done any time you change config, let alone re-installing the OS.
So the potential danger is there, I think. Either you're going to spend a lot of money on the changeover buying new hardware to replace the old one with no downtime, or you're going to pay a still hefty chunk of change in labour, and accept the downtime, of migrating the existing servers.
There are emulation solutions, at least, that run on intel-based macs. Throw a copy of QEMU onto a MacBook and run it in fullscreen mode, and the photos would look real. It would even allow you to make a fake video easier than recording a video of a WinXP desktop and playing it back.
It isn't safe to use SCAMP. SCO's corporate future is uncertain. They've based their entire company around a lawsuit that it looks like they will probably lose. It would be a bad idea to use SCAMP for a production system only to have SCO go bankrupt a year or two later.
Sure, you could convert your SCAMP-based application to LAMP if that happens, but doing that on a production system is very costly due to all the manpower to switch platforms and all the testing to make sure everything works.
You should ask yourself, what advantages does SCAMP offer over LAMP that warrants the risk of using a platform from a dying company? Are there even any such advantages at all?
They officially abandonned the Megahertz Myth when they released the Pentium M years ago. Back then they were faced with the task of convincing consumers that a 1.7Ghz Pentium M was at least as fast as a 2.8GHz Pentium 4.
Conroe is simply the evolution of the Pentium M. From Banias to Dothan to Yonah to Merom/Conroe. The name of the product has changed as time goes on ("Pentium M" for Banias and Dothan, "Core" for Yonah, and possibly "Pentium 4" for Conroe), but the old Pentium 4 line is dead. Any naming similarity between Prescott P4s and Conroe P4s are just marketing.
It seems like Intel doesn't want to abandon the Pentium 4 moniker. They can't very well call Conroe "Core" like they will Merom, because they need a way to differentiate its higher performance from the mobile part. Personally I would like to think that Conroe qualifies as a Pentium 5 due to the completely different architecture. Heck, considering how the P4 has evolved over the years we should be at P6 or P7 by now. This time, though, the entire architecture is different, so calling it P4 is a bit silly.
It doesn't recognize the MODEL NUMBER because they're overclocking it. This is normal on an AMD board when you overclock a CPU. The motherboard simply can't figure out what model number to report when faced with a processor that doesn't actually exist.
In fact, AM2 isn't superior to what Intel has, because DDR2 performance on AM2 is significantly SLOWER than AMD's current DDR performance.
See this article:
http://anandtech.com/weblog/default.aspx?bid=279
Essentially, AMD is having huge performance issues with AM2 with their current prototypes. At the current point in time, overclocking a current DDR1 S939 chip is going to give you faster performance than a current DDR2 AM2 chip.
You missed the part where the parent said "within a single architecture".
Intel's heat issues started when they introduced Prescott, which was effectively a new architecture that didn't really deserve the moniker "Pentium 4".
When you compare the current P4 to the original P4, they have very little in common. Intel just stuck the P4 name on all of them for marketing reasons. In fact, if I'm reading all the coverage of Conroe correctly, they are going to call it a P4 too even though it is a completely different architecture derived from the Pentium M (which is itself derived from the Pentium III).
So the parent's point remains valid. When you compare the various initial speeds of the Conroe, since they will all be based on the same core, comparing performance based on clockspeed (between Conroe chips) will be a valid comparison.
If EA takes a bath for a quarter or two, the company's not going to suffer in the slightest.
I don't know, taking a bath in a pile of money would probably cause a lot of paper cuts. Thousands of paper cuts from bathing in money could possibly considered suffering.
I'm not terribly worried about companies like EA hurting in all this; they have a huge amount of cash and have no problem screwing over gamers if it means a higher profit. I'm more worried about the effect on small and independent developers who are forced to cut the prices of their new previous-gen games. Small and independent studios might not have the cash to take the hit, since unlike EA they don't have bathtubs full of money in which to frolic.
Yes, they do, as they should. If a programmer is consistent, this should pose no problem. If they do make some consistency errors, then the compiler is going to point it out to them with clear error messages telling you that a variable/function/etc is undefined.
If good style is to be consistent when it comes to case, why is case sensitivity a burden? At best a coder should never experience any case-related error messages. At worst, the compiler will help them fix any mistakes in this regard.
Who are these "alot" of you, and why do they say that those are bad syntax ideas? Are you assuming that becaues you dislike certain things, then everybody else must also dislike them?
I happen to like { and }, and case sensitivity makes code easier to read without being a burden on the coder.
No, not all slots. The notebook has to support it.
apt-get is darned easy to use, but there are many things available through CNR that aren't in the apt repositories. It is certainly a nice supplement.
Look at it this way; it is optional. If you don't want it, you are in exactly the same situation as before. If you do want it, you get something extra. It is a win-win situation; you either ignore it, or benefit from it.
He might have use the wrong wording, but he is right, more or less. Many notebooks support standard slimline drives with a custom bezel and sometimes an adapter board and casing. Laptops with such drive bays are so popular that you can buy slimline notebook drives all over the place, sold by manufacturer name ("LG"), not notebook brand. Many laptops work fine with a the drive's built in bezel, though.
Personally, I think this is brilliant. Here everybody was thinking about how far off fuel cell notebooks were because the things had to be integrated with notebooks, when everybody missed the obvious; many notebooks support batteries in the semi-standard optical bay. My notebook is a Compal whitebook type that is a year or two old, and the manufacturer never made an optical-bay battery, but it DOES support a power source in the bay, since it was intended that they would introduce a battery.
So, a fuel cell that you can pop into everyday normal laptops and get huge increases in battery life. I like the idea. It'll depend on how expensive fuel cells are. If I could buy them cheap enough to use constantly, I'd pick some up. With an 8 hour battery life, as a student, I could see an 8-hour cartridge lasting me for a few days. It'd help with those times where there are back-to-back classes that push the runtime of the battery.