Re:Considering I don't use Windows...
on
iPod on Windows
·
· Score: 1
Sure you aren't the dude who buys it.
Yeah every algorythm will be important
on
Deep Algorithms?
·
· Score: 1
But developers need a bit more of computer education to code applications using 80-bit floating-point format instead of double-precision.
People still believe that SSE2 and its 64-bit precision will keep up with science applications, but that's not true.
Is interesting that cpus like Itanium support 40-bit integer format and a lot of registers, packing a single 80-bit operation plus a 40-bit integer instruction (128-bit pack, a 8-bit header, 120-bit free) is easy using explicit paralelism and should be a big win for many scientific applications.
Distributed.net is somewhat seemlike but different to clustering piped via NIC's.
Few processing power is required to handle the I/O between machines, data compression and validation compared to the cpu cycles those will be spend on "internal" processing. This is true for both boxed clusters and distributed.net.
Clustering management doesn't make an impact so the cpus will do all stages of processing "in-house", but due to a different architeture distributed.net needs power to handle "160000 PII 266 MHz".
Cool, but they should have presenting me with 10000 Athlons
2000+ plus 10000 Geforce4's and 10000 Game Tits XP instead. I mean, does
anybody know why they use PII's 266 MHz as a reference?
I told that girl to
don't rip off fragile experimental projects.
Afterall she's a lady and she would understand that's coward
action to phreack on big security holes... or not. To abuse distributed.net because exist on there big security holes.
We cannot rely on crackers' compassion, distributed.net must
find a way to turn clients' security into a better level.
The Quest series were much older than some of the great Sierra strategy games as Outpost. Isn't that hard and costly to make the KQ engine up and running, even with some modifications.
Actually I remember that at every release of KQ I guessed what mods had been made for KQ.
[sarcasm]Maybe because it was the first post anyway[/sarcasm]
Everybody have nostalgia with old games, thus why even trolls show some sign of respect.
I played several Sierra games for years, although I prefer Hunter Hunted, which is more recent. Sierra was one of the first game developers that have built very smart enemies and full-blown resource management into games.
Would be good if they remake games Civilization-like with even more complex management but inject more battle action into KQ-like games.
Taken from Mo'Slo website. Hopefully the remakes will run
under DirectX:-)
Sierra support technicians have suggested
Mo'Slo for slowing too-fast character movement in Space Quest
1-5, stopping 'error 47' in Space Quest 6, stopping a lock-up at
Bert's Park in Police Quest 1, slowing an uncontrollably-fast car
in Police Quest 3, and correcting runway overruns during take-off
in A-10 Tank Killer when DOS versions of these games are played
on fast systems. Also, a user reports that Mo'Slo solves a
problem with events (such as dying of thirst) happening too
quickly in the VGA version of Space Quest 1 when running at
233MHz. In our own tests, Mo'Slo stops events (such as being
zapped by the cyborg) from happening too quickly in the DOS
version of Space Quest IV. A user of the 16-color Red Baron
flight sim reports that Mo'Slo is needed for realistic play on
fast systems (slow the game until the demos run at the right
speed -- about 15% on a PII-233MHz).We have found that (!broken link!) Mo'Slo 4BIZ, using the alternate
slowdown method, gives more predictable slowdown of Space Quest
games on CPUs faster than 200MHz.
Instead of keeping way old pc's which
are near of their mobo capacitors bogging down, you'd get Mo'Slo.
Useful to make some DOS games running at
a decent speed (e.g. 60 fps, nor 850+ fps) on a Pentium3 or
Athlon.
You could make a boot disk to free up
"conventional" RAM, also. Most Microprose games for DOS
let an option to make efficient bootdisks. You should add some
lines in Autoexec.bat and Config.sys, though, usually paths to
your device drivers (sound, CD-ROM) and devices' configuration.
Add these lines to MSDOS.sys, attempting
to only change their value to "0" if they already were
in MSDOS.sys.
I'm not to redeem VIA, we can go ahead onto a insight manner
though.
VPSD exists to sell the P4X266/333 chipset
based motherboards, if other companies won't.
I forgot to write about this fact.
VIA doesn't get it right the first time
No real chipset manufacturer can, early i815's have
some serious issues related to their integrated video, some mobos with
the i440BX cannot support Geforce cards, is easy to find early
revisions of SiS chipsets which do corruption of data while
transferring it.
VIA doesn't know what it's doing
So, why they're the top-selling chipset
manufacturer for some time ago (before Intel hurts VIA with
stupid lawsuits) and I'm aware that many experienced DIY users
recommend their high-end chipsets?
VIA chipsets have an unusually high number
of bugs
Then you found why VIA releases chipset revisions
(which every chipset manufacturer does). Some of these
"bugs" were in fact add-in cards that don't make up
with right PCI specifications, such as the Sound Blaster Live!
(even WinXP has a patch to make the Creative crap working
properly). Note that Intel, nor only VIA, releases patches in
order to fix issues.
VIA has a poor attitude about its end
users Mentioning the USB issues, you'd make a complete
list of chipsets which don't have USB issues, sure you'll have to
find any single chipset that doesn't suffer from USB issues;-)
VIA started a new division, the VPSD, because some motherboard makers were screwing their designs to build famous cheap unstable VIA-based motherboards then the higher price of costly Intel-based motherboards should be justified.
VPSD came in action due people were spitting on VIA although most issues were related to faultly motherboard design.
This VPSD division makes nice motherboards, with *a lot* of BIOS settings that nameplate systems could never dream.
Just one more thing, may I type just "mobo" instead of "motherboard"?
As a freak overclock fan and die-hard tweaker I tuned for my
friends (they think I'm a tech) a lot of boxes from many OEM
manufacturers. A few things I notice:
- Their overclocking abilities are very limited, BIOSes don't let
you mess with things.
- Using TweakBIOS I
see clearly that memory modules in most cases were set at CL3.
- Changing CL to 2 makes OEM systems unstable in many cases.
- They use good HDD's though:-)
- Video card sucks:-P
- Integrated sound, lan, software modem forcing your cpu
to work under realmode, etc.
- Nice case.
Why should we use Linux? A lot of powerful GPL'ed tools.
To examplify, if we're using Linux to execute "some prog A" we may build clusters running Linux so we get most of the software. Memory management under Linux is on par to Win2k if it's not better. Who want a real professional execution of a desired application should stick with Linux.
While he doesn't mention Debian at all, it's clear that the article is strong on packaging. I actually prefer Debian's approach, having a list of sources from which you obtain software, and providing search tools for that list. The guy who made that doc signs there he works for IBM.
His intention clearly was to do straight points about "how to do this", and from a basic standpoint. Thus he mentioned everything a lot RHS-like, probably targeting the newbies.
Linux experts won't have such a problem to assimilate his guide and to make adaptations for their needs.
Your post could be interesting if you had explained to us why integration is bad.
IMO, the yields of object separation over integration packs have belong to the fact you'd compile separate parts of code such as libraries, device drivers and kernel, instead of being tied by a Windows-like central management and interpretation for kernel and virtual machines.
Then, "separation" benefits *nix.
On the other side, "integration" benefits Windows.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure you aren't the dude who buys it.
But developers need a bit more of computer education to code applications using 80-bit floating-point format instead of double-precision.
People still believe that SSE2 and its 64-bit precision will keep up with science applications, but that's not true.
Is interesting that cpus like Itanium support 40-bit integer format and a lot of registers, packing a single 80-bit operation plus a 40-bit integer instruction (128-bit pack, a 8-bit header, 120-bit free) is easy using explicit paralelism and should be a big win for many scientific applications.
This is too cool for Apple to sue over.
Distributed.net is somewhat seemlike but different to clustering piped via NIC's.
Few processing power is required to handle the I/O between machines, data compression and validation compared to the cpu cycles those will be spend on "internal" processing. This is true for both boxed clusters and distributed.net.
Clustering management doesn't make an impact so the cpus will do all stages of processing "in-house", but due to a different architeture distributed.net needs power to handle "160000 PII 266 MHz".
more than 160000 PII 266MHz computers
This is a present? For me?
Cool, but they should have presenting me with 10000 Athlons 2000+ plus 10000 Geforce4's and 10000 Game Tits XP instead. I mean, does anybody know why they use PII's 266 MHz as a reference?
I told that girl to don't rip off fragile experimental projects.
Afterall she's a lady and she would understand that's coward action to phreack on big security holes... or not. To abuse distributed.net because exist on there big security holes.
We cannot rely on crackers' compassion, distributed.net must find a way to turn clients' security into a better level.
The Quest series were much older than some of the great Sierra strategy games as Outpost. Isn't that hard and costly to make the KQ engine up and running, even with some modifications.
Actually I remember that at every release of KQ I guessed what mods had been made for KQ.
But and about their revolutionary strategy games like Outpost and gems like Caesar. Don't you mind remaking games based on those olders?
For a matter of curiosity.
I praise him. The site has a dawn good feel.
In the past had who guessed that a website may look better than top-notch pc game menu screens?
[sarcasm]Maybe because it was the first post anyway[/sarcasm]
Everybody have nostalgia with old games, thus why even trolls show some sign of respect.
I played several Sierra games for years, although I prefer Hunter Hunted, which is more recent. Sierra was one of the first game developers that have built very smart enemies and full-blown resource management into games.
Would be good if they remake games Civilization-like with even more complex management but inject more battle action into KQ-like games.
Taken from Mo'Slo website. Hopefully the remakes will run under DirectX :-)
Sierra support technicians have suggested Mo'Slo for slowing too-fast character movement in Space Quest 1-5, stopping 'error 47' in Space Quest 6, stopping a lock-up at Bert's Park in Police Quest 1, slowing an uncontrollably-fast car in Police Quest 3, and correcting runway overruns during take-off in A-10 Tank Killer when DOS versions of these games are played on fast systems. Also, a user reports that Mo'Slo solves a problem with events (such as dying of thirst) happening too quickly in the VGA version of Space Quest 1 when running at 233MHz. In our own tests, Mo'Slo stops events (such as being zapped by the cyborg) from happening too quickly in the DOS version of Space Quest IV. A user of the 16-color Red Baron flight sim reports that Mo'Slo is needed for realistic play on fast systems (slow the game until the demos run at the right speed -- about 15% on a PII-233MHz). We have found that (!broken link!) Mo'Slo 4BIZ , using the alternate slowdown method, gives more predictable slowdown of Space Quest games on CPUs faster than 200MHz.Instead of keeping way old pc's which are near of their mobo capacitors bogging down, you'd get Mo'Slo.
Useful to make some DOS games running at a decent speed (e.g. 60 fps, nor 850+ fps) on a Pentium3 or Athlon.
You could make a boot disk to free up "conventional" RAM, also. Most Microprose games for DOS let an option to make efficient bootdisks. You should add some lines in Autoexec.bat and Config.sys, though, usually paths to your device drivers (sound, CD-ROM) and devices' configuration.
Add these lines to MSDOS.sys, attempting to only change their value to "0" if they already were in MSDOS.sys.
[options]
drvspace=0
dblspace=0
Unless you stole it along with Windows.
Why would a guy stealing windows? Maybe a die-hard cleptomaniac.
I'm not to redeem VIA, we can go ahead onto a insight manner though.
VPSD exists to sell the P4X266/333 chipset based motherboards, if other companies won't. I forgot to write about this fact. VIA doesn't get it right the first time No real chipset manufacturer can, early i815's have some serious issues related to their integrated video, some mobos with the i440BX cannot support Geforce cards, is easy to find early revisions of SiS chipsets which do corruption of data while transferring it. VIA doesn't know what it's doing So, why they're the top-selling chipset manufacturer for some time ago (before Intel hurts VIA with stupid lawsuits) and I'm aware that many experienced DIY users recommend their high-end chipsets? VIA chipsets have an unusually high number of bugs Then you found why VIA releases chipset revisions (which every chipset manufacturer does). Some of these "bugs" were in fact add-in cards that don't make up with right PCI specifications, such as the Sound Blaster Live! (even WinXP has a patch to make the Creative crap working properly). Note that Intel, nor only VIA, releases patches in order to fix issues. VIA has a poor attitude about its end users Mentioning the USB issues, you'd make a complete list of chipsets which don't have USB issues, sure you'll have to find any single chipset that doesn't suffer from USB issuesDesigning your own motherboard? Moot issue.
VIA started a new division, the VPSD, because some motherboard makers were screwing their designs to build famous cheap unstable VIA-based motherboards then the higher price of costly Intel-based motherboards should be justified.
VPSD came in action due people were spitting on VIA although most issues were related to faultly motherboard design.
This VPSD division makes nice motherboards, with *a lot* of BIOS settings that nameplate systems could never dream.
Just one more thing, may I type just "mobo" instead of "motherboard"?
As a freak overclock fan and die-hard tweaker I tuned for my friends (they think I'm a tech) a lot of boxes from many OEM manufacturers. A few things I notice:
:-) :-P
- Their overclocking abilities are very limited, BIOSes don't let you mess with things.
- Using TweakBIOS I see clearly that memory modules in most cases were set at CL3.
- Changing CL to 2 makes OEM systems unstable in many cases.
- They use good HDD's though
- Video card sucks
- Integrated sound, lan, software modem forcing your cpu to work under realmode, etc.
- Nice case.
I heartly ask: Do OEM boxes worth your money?
Looking to the Apple-"Quanta" aspect... I'll consider that you'd quantize this.
If these brand names withdraw the usual and costly OEM software bloat in favor of CL2 memory.
Win2k/XP and Linux do benefit from lower latency DRAM (Linux does even more with latency patches).
OEM's, please wake up! Win9x time is over. Give us better memory bandwidth and latency, nor just more MB's of DRAM.
Are you talking of which Power Computing?
http://www.power-computing.com/: maybe their webdesigners helped Apple to do effective e-business without Apple having to knee in front of IBM.
www.powerc.com/: today they're a lot friendly to AthlonXP boxes, they'd admit that AMD makes the best cpu's ;-)
Or is it there... http://www.siemens.com/index.jsp?sdc_langid=0& sdc_ggid=&sdc_contentid=250851&sdc_conttyp e=4&sdc_unitid=12&sdc_mpid=0&sdc_count ryid=0&sdc_sid=7618516456&sdc_3dnvlstid=24 9719&sdc_secnavid=249550&sdc_sectionid=2&a mp;sdc_flags=0&sdc_rh=&sdc_m4r=
My two cents
Let's factuate it, Linux doesn't worth any cents. Linux is free
Why should we use Linux? A lot of powerful GPL'ed tools.
To examplify, if we're using Linux to execute "some prog A" we may build clusters running Linux so we get most of the software. Memory management under Linux is on par to Win2k if it's not better. Who want a real professional execution of a desired application should stick with Linux.
A real pity the subject WAS NOT talking about CmdrTaco, Windows and MS.
We're talking about Linux, 90% of the time.
Some trolls were jewels, though.
While he doesn't mention Debian at all, it's clear that the article is strong on packaging. I actually prefer Debian's approach, having a list of sources from which you obtain software, and providing search tools for that list.
The guy who made that doc signs there he works for IBM.
His intention clearly was to do straight points about "how to do this", and from a basic standpoint. Thus he mentioned everything a lot RHS-like, probably targeting the newbies.
Linux experts won't have such a problem to assimilate his guide and to make adaptations for their needs.
I had Red Hat 6.2 loaded with an obsolete RPM version that prevented me to install several packages.
Is amazing that Red Hat distributions were a *bit* similar to Windows sometimes.
An app which needs to be updated for making other apps to work.
Oh, maybe I'm exaggerating too much. No matter if you're using LSB or RHS you've to deal with libc's, gcc's and glibs' versions.
Thank God GIMP works with plug-ins!
Your post could be interesting if you had explained to us why integration is bad. IMO, the yields of object separation over integration packs have belong to the fact you'd compile separate parts of code such as libraries, device drivers and kernel, instead of being tied by a Windows-like central management and interpretation for kernel and virtual machines. Then, "separation" benefits *nix. On the other side, "integration" benefits Windows.