Well, don't worry because I installed Openoffice 1.1 rc5 yesterday (oops) and IIRC it offers preload.
Why are hacks bad? Because the same thing might be done in a better way.
I think it would be cool if the linux kernel would collect statistics on which pages tend to be resident in memory. Then after bootup, it could use idle disk time to read those pages so they'd be in the cache. The advantage is that this would benefit ALL apps without any application-specific coding.
There is no proof that Microsoft had anything to do with this, and I think they didn't. I believe what he said in the article, he was fired because of the ties @stake has with Msoft, not because they specifically called @stake and asked for him to be fired.
That's the irony. MS dominance threatens computer security be creating a software monoculture, in which even a single bug can take down 90% of computers. Geer's firing proves that MS dominance afflicts the industry itself; even taking Microsoft's name in vain makes heads roll. This is not the sign of a healthy industry or a competitive market, but rather a dictatorship - a political monoculture.
What would you do if your job required you to study MS Windows source? Even touching the code with a 10 foot pole is sure to entail signing The NDA From Hell. Even letting my name share a web page with the word "Linux" would make me nervous.
Not the itanium, it's in the class of the SPARC and Power4 due to its high cost.
What I really want to see is how the Athlon64 will run 64 bit code! If AMD is smart they will make sure gcc compiles *awesome* code for AMD64. They're really losing a selling point so long as the main feature is fast execution of IA32 code - Intel is pretty hard to beat at that game. They should have worked with RedHat to make sure AMD64 ran linux excellently on release.
The thing that really makes X sucky over high-latency links is perfect synchronization. For instance, if there is an animated gif banner ad, X will block as necessary until it can show every agonizing frame.
VNC isn't like that. The x client just continues on its merry way, rendering rapidly to the vnc server. The vnc viewer, meanwhile, sees only what it has enough bandwidth to download. You could play a movie over VNC if you wanted, but you'd only see a tiny fraction of the frames:) For this reason I find VNC greatly improved on slow/high-latency links compared to X.
I see this new thing uses a proxy, and that extra layer raises the possibility for sloppy synchronization. I wonder if that is part of the trick, of if it's just lots of caching?
They were pretty descriptive, weren't they! I certainly don't believe in astrology, I just think the page was well written. The author certainly gives the impression of being a real IT person, or at least somebody who knows their audience very well.
Tha main problem with a DVD version is that it'd take too long to boot.
I don't see why booting would take any longer. You're still just loading the kernel and some modules either way. All the extra crap that would fit on a DVD should only be loaded if/when you use it.
I don't get it either. You want to make memory access faster and faster, so you put it closer and closer to the cpu. Eventually the bus length reaches 0, as the two chips are physically adjacent. So what?
It's true that MS has all the resources in the world, but they also have a achilles heel, which is that Microsoft's interests tend to conflict with their customers' interests. For instance, normal businesses can profit more by charging competitive prices, to gain or keep market share, and this is good for consumers. Microsoft cannot gain, nor very easily lose market share, so their OS division has around 80% profit.
Why would MS want to run a search engine? There is some money in providing a good service without charging too much. That's google's business, but MS is too big to be interested in the income that business generates.
MS could only be interested in the larger sums of money that would come from providing an inferior service, one which revolves around advertising and skewing search results, and generally shepherding people back towards Microsoft at all times. Just like Java vs..net. People will use this search service because MS will make sure it's the most convenient. But that still leaves a market google. Unlike operating systems and (close file-format) business software, search engines are not a natural monopoly. That means somebody can survive by offering a better product.
Don't knock it, even if its operating at 1/3 the cpu bus, an extra 2MB of level 3 cache will give a significant boost to things like video games and many other interactive cpu intensive applications.
"...the top-model Xeon MP with a 2-MB L3 cache and 2.8 GHz costs $3692. " ...
"Our benchmark tests, which exactly reproduce workstation usage with appropriate applications, show that the additional L3 cache hardly adds any speed. Popular 3D software, such as 3D Studio Max, Cinema 4D and Lightwave, show no improvement in performance."
...
"To anyone faced with the choice of the dual Xeon 3.06 with or without the L3 cache, we would recommend the version without the additional cache. The additional cost is not justified."
What makes you think that? IRC has chugged along without deep pockets. Usenet, too. If anybody manages to spend a lot of money on IM, it's either 1) advertising 2) billing 3) legal costs of harassing people / companies and 4) hiring nannies to censor what people say. The basic IM service itself is stupid-simple.
I'm glad this is finally ready for an application. Mainly because it's a reflective rather than emissive display. That means when ambient light is brighter, so is the display, so it should look fine in sunlight. This is unlike CRTs and backlit LCDs which look washed out in bright light. This would free us nerds from lurking in dimly lit, mushroom-conducive workspaces. None of which is to say that this company has finally "solved" the problem, but a first real application is a big step!
I wonder what speed is that 80GB drive? I just got an IBM T40 with 80GB drive because I wanted the extra storage, but it was a tough choice because IBM's 80BG drive is slow (4200rpm?) I've only seen the faster laptop drives in smaller capacities.
Collecting is about exclusivity! If any moron with $500,000 can get one, well what is the point? But if it requires a personal army of lawyers, personal influence in DC, and a 10 year waiting period, well let's see the Joneses keep up with that!
In practice this argument can only take you so far! (Probably why your parent said "even low IPC won't help", though I think he meant HIGH IPC=instructions per cycle).
And since a P3-700(M) is roughly twice as fast as a Crusoe 800, raising the IPC argument is just grasping at straws. (Check out the
Fujitsu B-series 2562 vs. the Lifebook P2110 on that link).
Lisp syntax is TOO simple, just not expressive enough. When 2x^2+3x-4 becomes
(- (+ (sq (* 2 x))) (* 3 x)) 4) then something is wrong. I prefer the extra complication of operator precedence; learned once, it simplifies the code forever... just like many of the other syntactic quirks of other languages. And no static type checking? And although the syntax is very simple, can we say the same for Common Lisp as a whole? If people didn't want/need some complexity, Lisp would be Scheme.
Sure, and the difference between a bottle rocket and an bazooka is "just" a bigger bang.
Some people can justify any invasive use of technology by arguing that exactly the same thing could be accomplished, if only we had a police officer to monitor every citizen, so it must be OK. A funny argument, because nobody in their right mind wants to live in a society where every citizen is shadowed by a cop for no reason.
The question isn't whether police have the "right" to do this; the question is whether "We The People" feel like telling our police forces to use this tactic, or not. There is nobody to tell us (collectively) that we must.
Slashdot Mirror
Why are hacks bad? Because the same thing might be done in a better way.
I think it would be cool if the linux kernel would collect statistics on which pages tend to be resident in memory. Then after bootup, it could use idle disk time to read those pages so they'd be in the cache. The advantage is that this would benefit ALL apps without any application-specific coding.
What would you do if your job required you to study MS Windows source? Even touching the code with a 10 foot pole is sure to entail signing The NDA From Hell. Even letting my name share a web page with the word "Linux" would make me nervous.
What I really want to see is how the Athlon64 will run 64 bit code! If AMD is smart they will make sure gcc compiles *awesome* code for AMD64. They're really losing a selling point so long as the main feature is fast execution of IA32 code - Intel is pretty hard to beat at that game. They should have worked with RedHat to make sure AMD64 ran linux excellently on release.
You don't identify with that at all?
As for the young people addiction stuff, lighten up, it's just a radio promotion. The "professed aim" isn't really the point.
VNC isn't like that. The x client just continues on its merry way, rendering rapidly to the vnc server. The vnc viewer, meanwhile, sees only what it has enough bandwidth to download. You could play a movie over VNC if you wanted, but you'd only see a tiny fraction of the frames :) For this reason I find VNC greatly improved on slow/high-latency links compared to X.
I see this new thing uses a proxy, and that extra layer raises the possibility for sloppy synchronization. I wonder if that is part of the trick, of if it's just lots of caching?
They were pretty descriptive, weren't they! I certainly don't believe in astrology, I just think the page was well written. The author certainly gives the impression of being a real IT person, or at least somebody who knows their audience very well.
I don't get it either. You want to make memory access faster and faster, so you put it closer and closer to the cpu. Eventually the bus length reaches 0, as the two chips are physically adjacent. So what?
Why would MS want to run a search engine? There is some money in providing a good service without charging too much. That's google's business, but MS is too big to be interested in the income that business generates.
MS could only be interested in the larger sums of money that would come from providing an inferior service, one which revolves around advertising and skewing search results, and generally shepherding people back towards Microsoft at all times. Just like Java vs. .net. People will use this search service because MS will make sure it's the most convenient. But that still leaves a market google. Unlike operating systems and (close file-format) business software, search engines are not a natural monopoly. That means somebody can survive by offering a better product.
"...the top-model Xeon MP with a 2-MB L3 cache and 2.8 GHz costs $3692. "
...
...
"Our benchmark tests, which exactly reproduce workstation usage with appropriate applications, show that the additional L3 cache hardly adds any speed. Popular 3D software, such as 3D Studio Max, Cinema 4D and Lightwave, show no improvement in performance."
"To anyone faced with the choice of the dual Xeon 3.06 with or without the L3 cache, we would recommend the version without the additional cache. The additional cost is not justified."
(Yeah, I know WinModems opened up eventually... after several years)
Whoops, looks like somebody's been paying attention to the Constitution instead of current events.
Try video editing. You will be annoyed by the slowness of your shiny new chip.
I'm glad this is finally ready for an application. Mainly because it's a reflective rather than emissive display. That means when ambient light is brighter, so is the display, so it should look fine in sunlight. This is unlike CRTs and backlit LCDs which look washed out in bright light. This would free us nerds from lurking in dimly lit, mushroom-conducive workspaces. None of which is to say that this company has finally "solved" the problem, but a first real application is a big step!
I wonder what speed is that 80GB drive? I just got an IBM T40 with 80GB drive because I wanted the extra storage, but it was a tough choice because IBM's 80BG drive is slow (4200rpm?) I've only seen the faster laptop drives in smaller capacities.
One reason to mate the fastest CPU with the monolithic 17" 'laptop' might be the extra room for more battery.
Collecting is about exclusivity! If any moron with $500,000 can get one, well what is the point? But if it requires a personal army of lawyers, personal influence in DC, and a 10 year waiting period, well let's see the Joneses keep up with that!
Anybody got more?
And since a P3-700(M) is roughly twice as fast as a Crusoe 800, raising the IPC argument is just grasping at straws. (Check out the Fujitsu B-series 2562 vs. the Lifebook P2110 on that link).
Lisp syntax is TOO simple, just not expressive enough. When 2x^2+3x-4 becomes (- (+ (sq (* 2 x))) (* 3 x)) 4) then something is wrong. I prefer the extra complication of operator precedence; learned once, it simplifies the code forever... just like many of the other syntactic quirks of other languages. And no static type checking? And although the syntax is very simple, can we say the same for Common Lisp as a whole? If people didn't want/need some complexity, Lisp would be Scheme.
(BTW, LCDs don't have high voltages inside, do they?)
Some people can justify any invasive use of technology by arguing that exactly the same thing could be accomplished, if only we had a police officer to monitor every citizen, so it must be OK. A funny argument, because nobody in their right mind wants to live in a society where every citizen is shadowed by a cop for no reason.
The question isn't whether police have the "right" to do this; the question is whether "We The People" feel like telling our police forces to use this tactic, or not. There is nobody to tell us (collectively) that we must.