"Sun is not close sourcing existing portions of MYSQL. Just adding new features for the customers who will pay an arm and a leg..."
In the end, that is the same thing as closed source. The development will be in the direction of helping the "Enterprise", expensive version, and eventually, after many years, that will be the only version in wide use.
As they say on late-night infomercials, "There's more!"
From the Limewire web site about "LimeWire Extended PRO": "New! Extend your PRO benefits! Get PRO for 1 year for only $34.95! Best Value"
Quotes:
"LimeWire PRO get turbo-charged" The free version is not "turbo-charged"? What is turbo-charged, in the case of a bittorrent client? Instead of blowing air, they blow compressed air?
"Fastest P2P downloads on the planet"
"Downloads from multiple hosts" What? What does that mean? That it's a bittorrent client?
Yes, and maybe the story is an advertisement. It would be much better if Slashdot editors provided a statement with every story that no one at their company took money to post the story.
I looked at the Limewire web site and saw what I think is an attempt at manipulation of people who don't have enough technical knowledge to evaluate the usefulness of their product.
Anyhow, the Azureus web site says it is "the most popular bittorrent client". Azureus is open source and free, and, in my experience, works just fine.
Something is fishy about Slashdot's Limewire story. Mmmm. Lime with fish. Except this is apparently rotten fish.
In my opinion, Monster cable has been taking advantage of the lack of technical knowledge of the general public to convince people to buy EXTREMELY expensive cables, when much cheaper cables would provide equal performance.
Performance of audio systems is not heavily affected by cables, if only the size of the wires is adequate.
That is a quote from George W. Bush, as reported by CNN: "I hear
the voices, and I read the front page, and I know the speculation. But I'm the
decider, and I decide what is best. And what's best is for Don Rumsfeld to
remain as the secretary of defense."
However, it has been reported that Cheney makes a simple list of
options that shows the preferred option, talks with Bush alone, and Bush
chooses from the list. If Bush does not choose the option Cheney wants, then
there is further discussion about why Bush's choice is the wrong choice.
If anyone has any evidence that Bush thinks independently except in a
very simple way, please post a link.
You didn't read the information at the link I posted.
"Once an alcoholic, always an alcoholic." The person may stop
drinking, but his or her alcoholic personality does not change. The violence
(killing more than 1,000,000 Iraqis) and dishonesty and feelings of being
above everyone else that we see in the Bush administration are typical of
people with alcoholic personalities, just on a larger scale than usual.
Bush is not really president. As has been widely reported, Cheney
presents Bush with simple choices, with a strong recommendation about which he
should choose. Bush is a simple-minded man, and is happy being treated that
way. Bush calls himself the "Decider", but only a child would say that. Cheney
makes the decisions.
If you have any evidence that Bush thinks independently except in a
very simple way, please post a link.
On February 13, 2006, two years ago, Cheney shot his
lawyer in the face while they were hunting. Cheney admitted that he had been drinking. Quote: 'Mr. Whittington's doctors
"had no comment on whether Whittington's blood alcohol level had been tested
after the accident." ' As someone mentioned in the comments, everyone
stopped for DUI says they have had only one drink.
Iranians I've met in the United States, U.S. citizens living in the city where I live, agree that leaders of Iran are sometimes very de-centered. Nothing I have said is intended to indicate an acceptance of violence.
It helps understanding of the situation that officials of the U.S. government have publicly discussed bombing Iran. They view their threats as efforts to defend themselves.
Quote from a March 5, 2007 New Yorker article, The Redirection:
"Still, the Pentagon is continuing intensive planning for a possible bombing attack on Iran, a process that began last year, at the direction of the President. In recent months, the former intelligence official told me, a special planning group has been established in the offices of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, charged with creating a contingency bombing plan for Iran that can be implemented, upon orders from the President, within twenty-four hours."
Quote: "As for the oil investors (myself among them) there is absolutely NO profit in Iraq."
Not so. Saddam Hussein was selling oil to Europeans for Euros and trucking it through Turkey. Invading Iraq stopped that, restricted the supply of oil, making the price rise. That was exactly what was intended.
Protest: Your recounting of the story left out the most important
details.
1) The CIA, a secret organization, acted in a hidden way to interfere
with the political operation of a sovereign nation.
2) The hidden, sneaky U.S. government action had ONE purpose: To help
private groups, oil companies, make more profit.
3) The Iranians elected President Mossadegh in a democratic manner,
believing they had some control over the political future of their country.
The U.S. government's secret departments destroyed their democracy, only to
help private groups in the U.S. and the U.K. make more money.
4) The people of the U.S. believed that they had democratic control
over the future of their country. However, the secret agencies of the U.S.
government acted, and continue to act, in the interest of private groups,
completely without the knowledge of, and against the wishes of, the people of
the United States.
5) The people of Iranian paid heavily for the U.S. government's
action. They had to live under a dictator that was often violent toward them,
and who stole their money for himself.
6) The people of the U.S. paid heavily for the U.S. government's
action. The U.S. government's violent actions toward Arabs and Muslims are the
reason for the present violence. The CIA calls that "blowback". Blowback is
viewed favorably inside the CIA, because if there are more negative
consequences of U.S. government action, there is more money for the CIA and
for promotions inside the CIA.
7) The hidden actions of the U.S. government in Iran were the
beginning of a new, much larger level of corruption inside the U.S.
government.
"Could we be overthrown by an evil dictator soon?"
I wonder about that also. Will those who are in control of the U.S. government allow elections this time in November? Or will there be some "threat" that those in power say requires them to continue in power?
In my opinion, the purpose of the U.S. government's war with Iraq is largely to make money for weapons and oil investors.
But money is not the only purpose. One key to understanding why Cheney and Rumsfeld and the Bush family want violence is understanding the mental illness of anger. It is true that they are apparently helping their friends and family who have investments in weapons and largely hidden business with the U.S. government. But they are also acting out their anger. It's the anger of people who have put money first in their lives. It's the anger of alcoholic personalities; both George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have been arrested for driving while intoxicated.
It's about non-technical managers outsourcing so that they can say that technical things are no longer part of their responsibility. It's about avoidance of responsibility, and has nothing to do with improving anything or cutting costs.
The manager who outsources can blame someone else when projects fail. If things get really bad, the manager just goes to another company.
Exactly. Thanks for adding some reason to the discussion.
Quote from the Slashdot story: "The warplanes, now retired by the
military, could easily be purchased and transferred to the Iranian military,
which is seeking its components, the report said."
Why does Iran want F-14 parts? I'm guessing that is because the war
industry in the U.S. sold the Iranian government F-14s, with the permission
and the aid of the U.S. government. Presumably that happened when the Shah was
in control. The Shah was a U.S. government puppet, installed in 1953 after the
U.S. government destroyed the administration of the democratically elected President Mohammed Mossadegh". That's right, those who control the U.S.
government were against democracy, for violence, for interference in the
operation of other countries, and they put profit above all other issues.
Also, Iran is not the threat that is being presented to U.S. citizens.
Those who control the U.S. government are trying to demonize Iran the way they
demonized Iraq. They want a war, and the entire reason they want a war with
Iran is the same as the reason they wanted war with Iraq: to make more money.
Those who control the U.S. government have a sickness about money. They will
do anything to get more money, even lie and kill other people.
At the beginning of the first U.S. government-Iraq war, U.S. weapons
companies were still delivering weapons to Iraq, under a long-term contract.
Those who control the U.S. government and weapons companies want war,
continous war.
The U.S. government is the biggest promoter of violence in the world.
Don't say "we" when talking about war. There is no "we", unless you are part
of the group that makes the profits, while stealing from U.S. taxpayers.
If you love your wife, and she is having a difficult time, you don't
turn your back on her. You get involved and try to help. It's the same with
your country. If you love the U.S. like I do, you will help stop the violence.
The entire story to which the Slashdot linked is a disaster for Nvidia. The conference apparently communicated that no one at Nvidia has thought carefully about Nvidia's need to communicate the company's plans. Or, maybe there are no good plans.
My impression is that Huang is doing an Andy Grove. He has gotten tired, and is just not interested any more in dealing with the torrent of details necessary to running his company.
People don't become fully culturally integrated until the third generation, usually, and sometimes not even then.
Anyhow, it's obvious that Huang is an intelligent person. It's obvious also that he doesn't understand the implications of what he said, or he wouldn't have said it.
You said, "I beg to differ. Many questions surround this. Would you know
more than John Carmack?"
Certainly John Carmack knows far more about the subject than I, far
more.
Carmack is not saying he is against ray-tracing. He is only saying he
is against the raw ray-tracing he says Intel is proposing.
Quoting Carmack, from the article to which you linked: "But, I do
think that there is a very strong possibility as we move towards next
generation technologies for a ray tracing architecture that uses a specific
data structure; rather than just taking triangles like everybody uses and
tracing rays against them and being really, really expensive."
Carmack is correct, and so is Intel. Intel is talking about the
long-term issue of the continued success of Intel, and Carmack is talking
about what can sensibly be achieved in the near future.
You said, "Since many years ago, Intel has been the major supplier
of graphics hardware."
Then you said, "It's been all crappy integrated graphics so
far..."
Exactly right. The point of the conference with financial analysts
is that Nvidia is facing real competition that didn't exist before. Before,
anyone who wanted minimally good graphics needed to buy a separate graphics
adapter, which Intel did not sell.
Everyone agrees that development of games to new levels of realism
will require far more computing power than is available now. Nvidia is ready
to supply the new gaming GPUs. But, for the first time, Nvidia will have much
greater competition for the mid- and low-range GPUs from Intel, if Intel
begins supplying something other than extremely poor graphics.
I've had Chinese friends in 5 countries. I've spent weeks in Taiwan, and imported computer parts from Taiwan directly.
Even if I spoke fluent Chinese, and lived in Taiwan, I would never use a colloquial Chinese expression. Why? Because colloquial expressions tend to have many, many hidden meanings.
Jen-Hsun Huang is obviously very intelligent. However, he has had Taiwanese parents. He didn't understand the full meaning of the colloquial phrase he used. Someone who is ethnic American and educated would not say what he said.
There are other more serious reasons why he should have not said what he said.
The problem is not that Nvidia CEO Jen-Hsun Huang made one stupid statement.
The problem is that he said many foolish things, indicating that he is not a
good CEO. Here are some:
Quote from the article: "Nvidia CEO Jen-Hsun Huang was quite vocal
on those fronts, arguing hybrid chips that mix microprocessor and graphics
processor cores will be no different from systems that include Intel or AMD
integrated graphics today."
My opinion: There would be no need for all the talk if there were no
chance of competition. Everyone knows there will be new competition from
Intel Larabee and AMD/ATI. Everyone knows that "no different" is a lie. Lying
exposes the Nvidia CEO as a weak man.
"... he explained that Nvidia is continuously reinventing itself
and that it will be two architectural refreshes beyond the current generation
of chips before Larrabee launches."
The entire issue is that Intel+Larabee and AMD+ATI will make Nvidia
irrelevant for most users. The GPU will be on the motherboard. Nvidia will
sell only to gamers who are willing to pay extra, a lot extra.
"Huang also raised the prospect of application and API-level
compatibility problems with Larrabee. Intel has said Larrabee will support the
DirectX 10 and OpenGL application programming interfaces just like current AMD
and Nvidia GPUs, but Huang seemed dubious Intel could deliver on that
front."
Intel, in this case, is Intel and Microsoft working together. Both are poorly managed
companies in many ways, but they are both managed well enough to insure that the Microsoft
product works with the Intel hardware. Sure, it is an easy guess that Microsoft will release several
buggy versions, because Microsoft has a history of treating its customers as though they were beta testers,
but eventually everything will work correctly.
'[NVidia VP] Tamasi went on to shoot down Intel's emphasis on ray
tracing, which the chipmaker has called "the future for games." '
Ray tracing is certainly the future for games, there is no question
about that. The question is when, because the processor power required is
huge. It's my guess, but an easy guess, that Mr. Tamasi is lying; he is
apparently trying to take advantage of the ignorance of financial analists.
"Additionally, Tamasi believes rasterization is inherently more
scalable than ray tracing. He said running a ray tracer on a cell phone is
"hard to conceive."
This is apparently another attempt to confuse the financial analyists, who often
have only a pretend interest in technical things. Anyone understanding the statement
knows it is nonsense. No one is suggesting that there will be
ray-tracing on cell phones. My opinion is that this is another lie.
"We're gonna be highly focused on bringing a great experience to
people who care about it," he explained, adding that Nvidia hardware simply
isn't for everyone."
That was a foolish thing to say. That's the whole issue! In the
future, Nvidia's sales will drop because "Nvidia hardware simply isn't for
everyone." Most computers will not have separate video adapters, whereas
they did before. Only powerful game machines will need to by from Nvidia.
'Huang added, "I would build CPUs if I could change the world [in
doing so]." ' Later in the article, it says, "Nvidia is readying a platform to
accompany VIA's next-generation Isaiah processor, which should fight it out
with Intel's Atom in the low-cost notebook and desktop arena"
Translation: Before, every desktop computer needed a video adapter,
which came from a company different than the CPU maker, a company like Nvidia.
Now, the video adapters will be mostly supplied by CPU makers. In response,
Nvidia will start making low-end CPUs. It is questionable whether Nvidia
can compete with Intel and AMD making any kind of CPU.
"Huang says Nvidia is going to 'open a can of whoop-ass' on Intel..."
This is a VERY SERIOUS problem for the entire world. There are apparently no people available who have both technical understanding and social sophistication.
Huang is obviously ethnic Chinese. It is likely he is imitating something he heard in a movie or TV show. He certainly did not realize that only ignorant angry people use that phrase.
Translating, that phrase, and the boasting in general, says to me: "Huang must be fired. nVidia needs a better top manager."
An entire sentence from the Slashdot story, on 2008-04-10 at 12:53 PDT:
Microsoft.
The parent comment: "The great slashdot editors apparently thought that Microsoft deserved an entire sentence all to itself."
LOL. It amazes me how little Slashdot editors have learned over the years. Let that be a lesson to anyone who spends time playing video games. You need all your time learning how the world works. There is no time to spend being an angry button-presser.
Or, theory 2, maybe stories about Microsoft only need one proper noun. Articles, adjectives, verbs, and adverbs are understood. No need to repeat words like "evil", "Ballmer", "chair", "monopoly", "Chief of Grief", or "Software's Dr. Death".
That's an idea for a story submission. The entire Slashdot story could be just one word, "Microsoft". I'm sure there would be hundreds of comments. I know I'd post my usual comment: "The problem with Vista is that buyers are becoming technically knowledgeable enough that they don't want to be beta testers of a very unfinished product that requires them to buy more powerful hardware. Remember that Windows XP Service Pack 2 was released only 3 years ago. Before that was 3 years during which every Windows XP customer was a beta tester of a very unfinished product that didn't even handle USB very well."
Slashdot Mirror
"Sun is not close sourcing existing portions of MYSQL. Just adding new features for the customers who will pay an arm and a leg..."
In the end, that is the same thing as closed source. The development will be in the direction of helping the "Enterprise", expensive version, and eventually, after many years, that will be the only version in wide use.
Maybe Sun will change the name to "OurSQL".
As they say on late-night infomercials, "There's more!"
From the Limewire web site about "LimeWire Extended PRO": "New! Extend your PRO benefits! Get PRO for 1 year for only $34.95! Best Value"
Quotes:
"LimeWire PRO get turbo-charged" The free version is not "turbo-charged"? What is turbo-charged, in the case of a bittorrent client? Instead of blowing air, they blow compressed air?
"Fastest P2P downloads on the planet"
"Downloads from multiple hosts" What? What does that mean? That it's a bittorrent client?
"More Reliable Downloads"
"Connections to more sources"
"The Headline is Garbage"
Yes, and maybe the story is an advertisement. It would be much better if Slashdot editors provided a statement with every story that no one at their company took money to post the story.
I looked at the Limewire web site and saw what I think is an attempt at manipulation of people who don't have enough technical knowledge to evaluate the usefulness of their product.
Anyhow, the Azureus web site says it is "the most popular bittorrent client". Azureus is open source and free, and, in my experience, works just fine.
Something is fishy about Slashdot's Limewire story. Mmmm. Lime with fish. Except this is apparently rotten fish.
Good programmers are largely self-taught.
It may be useful to hang around with other people at a university so that you can compare yourself with them and decide where you fit.
In my opinion, Monster cable has been taking advantage of the lack of technical knowledge of the general public to convince people to buy EXTREMELY expensive cables, when much cheaper cables would provide equal performance.
Performance of audio systems is not heavily affected by cables, if only the size of the wires is adequate.
That is a quote from George W. Bush, as reported by CNN: "I hear the voices, and I read the front page, and I know the speculation. But I'm the decider, and I decide what is best. And what's best is for Don Rumsfeld to remain as the secretary of defense."
However, it has been reported that Cheney makes a simple list of options that shows the preferred option, talks with Bush alone, and Bush chooses from the list. If Bush does not choose the option Cheney wants, then there is further discussion about why Bush's choice is the wrong choice.
If anyone has any evidence that Bush thinks independently except in a very simple way, please post a link.
You didn't read the information at the link I posted.
"Once an alcoholic, always an alcoholic." The person may stop drinking, but his or her alcoholic personality does not change. The violence (killing more than 1,000,000 Iraqis) and dishonesty and feelings of being above everyone else that we see in the Bush administration are typical of people with alcoholic personalities, just on a larger scale than usual.
Bush is not really president. As has been widely reported, Cheney presents Bush with simple choices, with a strong recommendation about which he should choose. Bush is a simple-minded man, and is happy being treated that way. Bush calls himself the "Decider", but only a child would say that. Cheney makes the decisions.
If you have any evidence that Bush thinks independently except in a very simple way, please post a link.
On February 13, 2006, two years ago, Cheney shot his lawyer in the face while they were hunting. Cheney admitted that he had been drinking. Quote: 'Mr. Whittington's doctors "had no comment on whether Whittington's blood alcohol level had been tested after the accident." ' As someone mentioned in the comments, everyone stopped for DUI says they have had only one drink.
You didn't read what I said.
Iranians I've met in the United States, U.S. citizens living in the city where I live, agree that leaders of Iran are sometimes very de-centered. Nothing I have said is intended to indicate an acceptance of violence.
It helps understanding of the situation that officials of the U.S. government have publicly discussed bombing Iran. They view their threats as efforts to defend themselves.
Quote from a March 5, 2007 New Yorker article, The Redirection:
"Still, the Pentagon is continuing intensive planning for a possible bombing attack on Iran, a process that began last year, at the direction of the President. In recent months, the former intelligence official told me, a special planning group has been established in the offices of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, charged with creating a contingency bombing plan for Iran that can be implemented, upon orders from the President, within twenty-four hours."
Both Cheney and Bush have alcoholic personalities. Here is my understanding of the issues: The behavior of Bush and Cheney is consistent with the behavior of alcoholics. Bush and Cheney arrest Records.
Quote: "As for the oil investors (myself among them) there is absolutely NO profit in Iraq."
Not so. Saddam Hussein was selling oil to Europeans for Euros and trucking it through Turkey. Invading Iraq stopped that, restricted the supply of oil, making the price rise. That was exactly what was intended.
Protest: Your recounting of the story left out the most important details.
..."
1) The CIA, a secret organization, acted in a hidden way to interfere with the political operation of a sovereign nation.
2) The hidden, sneaky U.S. government action had ONE purpose: To help private groups, oil companies, make more profit.
3) The Iranians elected President Mossadegh in a democratic manner, believing they had some control over the political future of their country. The U.S. government's secret departments destroyed their democracy, only to help private groups in the U.S. and the U.K. make more money.
4) The people of the U.S. believed that they had democratic control over the future of their country. However, the secret agencies of the U.S. government acted, and continue to act, in the interest of private groups, completely without the knowledge of, and against the wishes of, the people of the United States.
5) The people of Iranian paid heavily for the U.S. government's action. They had to live under a dictator that was often violent toward them, and who stole their money for himself.
6) The people of the U.S. paid heavily for the U.S. government's action. The U.S. government's violent actions toward Arabs and Muslims are the reason for the present violence. The CIA calls that "blowback". Blowback is viewed favorably inside the CIA, because if there are more negative consequences of U.S. government action, there is more money for the CIA and for promotions inside the CIA.
7) The hidden actions of the U.S. government in Iran were the beginning of a new, much larger level of corruption inside the U.S. government.
8) This behavior continued and continues intensely. See, for example, Coups Arranged or Backed by the USA.
You said, "... to remove a man contrary to our interests
Did YOU make money from the action? If you didn't, then don't use the word "our".
"Could we be overthrown by an evil dictator soon?"
I wonder about that also. Will those who are in control of the U.S. government allow elections this time in November? Or will there be some "threat" that those in power say requires them to continue in power?
In my opinion, the purpose of the U.S. government's war with Iraq is largely to make money for weapons and oil investors.
But money is not the only purpose. One key to understanding why Cheney and Rumsfeld and the Bush family want violence is understanding the mental illness of anger. It is true that they are apparently helping their friends and family who have investments in weapons and largely hidden business with the U.S. government. But they are also acting out their anger. It's the anger of people who have put money first in their lives. It's the anger of alcoholic personalities; both George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have been arrested for driving while intoxicated.
Wow. "negative programming skills"
Negative management skills: The manager lowers the value of the company, but gets millions of dollars in pay and bonuses.
Yes, mod parent to +5.
"It's NOT about making things better..."
It's about non-technical managers outsourcing so that they can say that technical things are no longer part of their responsibility. It's about avoidance of responsibility, and has nothing to do with improving anything or cutting costs.
The manager who outsources can blame someone else when projects fail. If things get really bad, the manager just goes to another company.
Exactly. Thanks for adding some reason to the discussion.
Quote from the Slashdot story: "The warplanes, now retired by the military, could easily be purchased and transferred to the Iranian military, which is seeking its components, the report said."
Why does Iran want F-14 parts? I'm guessing that is because the war industry in the U.S. sold the Iranian government F-14s, with the permission and the aid of the U.S. government. Presumably that happened when the Shah was in control. The Shah was a U.S. government puppet, installed in 1953 after the U.S. government destroyed the administration of the democratically elected President Mohammed Mossadegh". That's right, those who control the U.S. government were against democracy, for violence, for interference in the operation of other countries, and they put profit above all other issues.
Also, Iran is not the threat that is being presented to U.S. citizens. Those who control the U.S. government are trying to demonize Iran the way they demonized Iraq. They want a war, and the entire reason they want a war with Iran is the same as the reason they wanted war with Iraq: to make more money. Those who control the U.S. government have a sickness about money. They will do anything to get more money, even lie and kill other people.
At the beginning of the first U.S. government-Iraq war, U.S. weapons companies were still delivering weapons to Iraq, under a long-term contract. Those who control the U.S. government and weapons companies want war, continous war.
The U.S. government is the biggest promoter of violence in the world. Don't say "we" when talking about war. There is no "we", unless you are part of the group that makes the profits, while stealing from U.S. taxpayers.
If you love your wife, and she is having a difficult time, you don't turn your back on her. You get involved and try to help. It's the same with your country. If you love the U.S. like I do, you will help stop the violence.
It wasn't funny. No one is laughing.
The entire story to which the Slashdot linked is a disaster for Nvidia. The conference apparently communicated that no one at Nvidia has thought carefully about Nvidia's need to communicate the company's plans. Or, maybe there are no good plans.
My impression is that Huang is doing an Andy Grove. He has gotten tired, and is just not interested any more in dealing with the torrent of details necessary to running his company.
People don't become fully culturally integrated until the third generation, usually, and sometimes not even then.
Anyhow, it's obvious that Huang is an intelligent person. It's obvious also that he doesn't understand the implications of what he said, or he wouldn't have said it.
You said, "I beg to differ. Many questions surround this. Would you know more than John Carmack?"
Certainly John Carmack knows far more about the subject than I, far more.
Carmack is not saying he is against ray-tracing. He is only saying he is against the raw ray-tracing he says Intel is proposing.
Quoting Carmack, from the article to which you linked: "But, I do think that there is a very strong possibility as we move towards next generation technologies for a ray tracing architecture that uses a specific data structure; rather than just taking triangles like everybody uses and tracing rays against them and being really, really expensive."
Carmack is correct, and so is Intel. Intel is talking about the long-term issue of the continued success of Intel, and Carmack is talking about what can sensibly be achieved in the near future.
You said, "Since many years ago, Intel has been the major supplier of graphics hardware."
Then you said, "It's been all crappy integrated graphics so far..."
Exactly right. The point of the conference with financial analysts is that Nvidia is facing real competition that didn't exist before. Before, anyone who wanted minimally good graphics needed to buy a separate graphics adapter, which Intel did not sell.
Everyone agrees that development of games to new levels of realism will require far more computing power than is available now. Nvidia is ready to supply the new gaming GPUs. But, for the first time, Nvidia will have much greater competition for the mid- and low-range GPUs from Intel, if Intel begins supplying something other than extremely poor graphics.
I've had Chinese friends in 5 countries. I've spent weeks in Taiwan, and imported computer parts from Taiwan directly.
Even if I spoke fluent Chinese, and lived in Taiwan, I would never use a colloquial Chinese expression. Why? Because colloquial expressions tend to have many, many hidden meanings.
Jen-Hsun Huang is obviously very intelligent. However, he has had Taiwanese parents. He didn't understand the full meaning of the colloquial phrase he used. Someone who is ethnic American and educated would not say what he said.
There are other more serious reasons why he should have not said what he said.
Analysts, the word is analysts.
Typing too fast.
The problem is not that Nvidia CEO Jen-Hsun Huang made one stupid statement. The problem is that he said many foolish things, indicating that he is not a good CEO. Here are some:
Quote from the article: "Nvidia CEO Jen-Hsun Huang was quite vocal on those fronts, arguing hybrid chips that mix microprocessor and graphics processor cores will be no different from systems that include Intel or AMD integrated graphics today."
My opinion: There would be no need for all the talk if there were no chance of competition. Everyone knows there will be new competition from Intel Larabee and AMD/ATI. Everyone knows that "no different" is a lie. Lying exposes the Nvidia CEO as a weak man.
"... he explained that Nvidia is continuously reinventing itself and that it will be two architectural refreshes beyond the current generation of chips before Larrabee launches."
The entire issue is that Intel+Larabee and AMD+ATI will make Nvidia irrelevant for most users. The GPU will be on the motherboard. Nvidia will sell only to gamers who are willing to pay extra, a lot extra.
"Huang also raised the prospect of application and API-level compatibility problems with Larrabee. Intel has said Larrabee will support the DirectX 10 and OpenGL application programming interfaces just like current AMD and Nvidia GPUs, but Huang seemed dubious Intel could deliver on that front."
Intel, in this case, is Intel and Microsoft working together. Both are poorly managed companies in many ways, but they are both managed well enough to insure that the Microsoft product works with the Intel hardware. Sure, it is an easy guess that Microsoft will release several buggy versions, because Microsoft has a history of treating its customers as though they were beta testers, but eventually everything will work correctly.
'[NVidia VP] Tamasi went on to shoot down Intel's emphasis on ray tracing, which the chipmaker has called "the future for games." '
Ray tracing is certainly the future for games, there is no question about that. The question is when, because the processor power required is huge. It's my guess, but an easy guess, that Mr. Tamasi is lying; he is apparently trying to take advantage of the ignorance of financial analists.
"Additionally, Tamasi believes rasterization is inherently more scalable than ray tracing. He said running a ray tracer on a cell phone is "hard to conceive."
This is apparently another attempt to confuse the financial analyists, who often have only a pretend interest in technical things. Anyone understanding the statement knows it is nonsense. No one is suggesting that there will be ray-tracing on cell phones. My opinion is that this is another lie.
"We're gonna be highly focused on bringing a great experience to people who care about it," he explained, adding that Nvidia hardware simply isn't for everyone."
That was a foolish thing to say. That's the whole issue! In the future, Nvidia's sales will drop because "Nvidia hardware simply isn't for everyone." Most computers will not have separate video adapters, whereas they did before. Only powerful game machines will need to by from Nvidia.
'Huang added, "I would build CPUs if I could change the world [in doing so]." ' Later in the article, it says, "Nvidia is readying a platform to accompany VIA's next-generation Isaiah processor, which should fight it out with Intel's Atom in the low-cost notebook and desktop arena"
Translation: Before, every desktop computer needed a video adapter, which came from a company different than the CPU maker, a company like Nvidia. Now, the video adapters will be mostly supplied by CPU makers. In response, Nvidia will start making low-end CPUs. It is questionable whether Nvidia can compete with Intel and AMD making any kind of CPU.
"Huang says Nvidia is going to 'open a can of whoop-ass' on Intel..."
This is a VERY SERIOUS problem for the entire world. There are apparently no people available who have both technical understanding and social sophistication.
Huang is obviously ethnic Chinese. It is likely he is imitating something he heard in a movie or TV show. He certainly did not realize that only ignorant angry people use that phrase.
Translating, that phrase, and the boasting in general, says to me: "Huang must be fired. nVidia needs a better top manager."
mikkl666, are you saying that you submitted good English, but the Slashdot editors ruined your story?
An entire sentence from the Slashdot story, on 2008-04-10 at 12:53 PDT:
Microsoft.
The parent comment: "The great slashdot editors apparently thought that Microsoft deserved an entire sentence all to itself."
LOL. It amazes me how little Slashdot editors have learned over the years. Let that be a lesson to anyone who spends time playing video games. You need all your time learning how the world works. There is no time to spend being an angry button-presser.
Or, theory 2, maybe stories about Microsoft only need one proper noun. Articles, adjectives, verbs, and adverbs are understood. No need to repeat words like "evil", "Ballmer", "chair", "monopoly", "Chief of Grief", or "Software's Dr. Death".
That's an idea for a story submission. The entire Slashdot story could be just one word, "Microsoft". I'm sure there would be hundreds of comments. I know I'd post my usual comment: "The problem with Vista is that buyers are becoming technically knowledgeable enough that they don't want to be beta testers of a very unfinished product that requires them to buy more powerful hardware. Remember that Windows XP Service Pack 2 was released only 3 years ago. Before that was 3 years during which every Windows XP customer was a beta tester of a very unfinished product that didn't even handle USB very well."