I think the summary said they were rewriting it in Java, which is bad enough. I don't know what it was written in, but if rewriting it in Java can be passed as an improvement, I am afraid to find out.
Maybe the original developers don't like Java. I certainly don't.
OMAP seemed to be like "ARM+" with lots of stuff that is not present in other ARM implementations, but OK. Let's say OMAP is ARM9+.
In any case, what's needed to get this started is a cheap ATX board (or mini-ITX, or whathever small) that can use regular memories and ATA/SATA disks. What's needed is a _fun_ platform.
"Only because it's not x86 and windows will not run on it???"
That's usually a big problem. You would design a complete platform that could not be sold for the typical PC user. While a great many PC users use their computers for little more than checking e-mail and web browsing, a good many of them need a specific Windows program for something that has no free equivalent (or none they know of).
I think a small scale manufacturer could grow thin-clients into desktop workstations in an additional product line rather easily.
Again, I would love to see comp-sci students with non-x86, interesting, odd architectures to play with. Multi-core and transactional memory are going to be big soon and we need them to get familiar with this stuff.
The interesting part, from my point of view, is that a free OS like Linux may foster the development of non-x86 binary architectures with different strengths.
I said this before: I would love to see a notebook chip with multiple ARM (or OMAP, or MIPS or whatever) cores that could be powered up and down depending on demand and desired power consumption.
The fact such machine would be completely Windows-proof would be a nice plus.
You can always capture their carbon and tuck it away in a sealed mine.
At the office, I joke that by printing a lot you are actually helping reduce CO2 because paper comes from fast-growing trees that eat up a lot of carbon in the process. As far as you don't burn it, you are reducing your carbon footprint. If we gathered all the paper we have to print and buried it deep we would be both reducing carbon in our biosphere and offering a nice stockpile of fossil fuel for the cockroach civilization that will follow ours in a couple dozen million years.
Obviously I never did the math. And I am not even slightly interested in doing it.
"There have been recent papers by Stanford on how to effectively use nuclear bombs against civilians?"
Do you need a paper for that?!
It's pretty straightforward: 1) find civilians 2) detonate nuke near them
It was pretty effective the last two times it was used. I would even go further as there seems to be no such thing as an ineffective nuke. Even the ones you are can't be really sure whether they exist or not are very good leverage in any diplomatic negotiation. People take you very seriously when there is some chance you can possibly have them.
It's very difficult to keep the under-100 IQ half of mankind focused long enough to explain what DRM is and why it's a bad idea. Make it under 110 and it's still hard enough and now they comprise a lot of people who can't care less about DRM, freedom and such things when there are shiny stuff they can get fascinated with.
Sadly, any strategy that relies on people being intelligent is more or less doomed to fail.
Just film yourself saying "I'm a PC and I run Linux", "I'm an engineer|doctor|writer|grandpa|whatever and my PC runs Linux|BSD|anythingbutwindows" and things like that. People will get the published movies, edit them and assemble them into movies that say the truths Microsoft is trying to hide - that PCs run things other than Windows and that lots of non-geeks run Linux.
Other suggestions: a phone saying "I'm a phone and I run Linux", a supercomputer saying "I'm a supercomputer and I run Linux", a home router saying "I am a router and I run Linux" and so on.
I must confess I am already annoying all my friends in the US to register as voters and to do it right this time. It's a huge problem when the clever ones refuse to vote.
Slashdot Mirror
Unless you intend to retain all features while following a different architectural route in order to provide some significant advantage down the road.
That's not unheard of.
I think the summary said they were rewriting it in Java, which is bad enough. I don't know what it was written in, but if rewriting it in Java can be passed as an improvement, I am afraid to find out.
Maybe the original developers don't like Java. I certainly don't.
OMAP seemed to be like "ARM+" with lots of stuff that is not present in other ARM implementations, but OK. Let's say OMAP is ARM9+.
In any case, what's needed to get this started is a cheap ATX board (or mini-ITX, or whathever small) that can use regular memories and ATA/SATA disks. What's needed is a _fun_ platform.
"Only because it's not x86 and windows will not run on it???"
That's usually a big problem. You would design a complete platform that could not be sold for the typical PC user. While a great many PC users use their computers for little more than checking e-mail and web browsing, a good many of them need a specific Windows program for something that has no free equivalent (or none they know of).
I think a small scale manufacturer could grow thin-clients into desktop workstations in an additional product line rather easily.
Again, I would love to see comp-sci students with non-x86, interesting, odd architectures to play with. Multi-core and transactional memory are going to be big soon and we need them to get familiar with this stuff.
The interesting part, from my point of view, is that a free OS like Linux may foster the development of non-x86 binary architectures with different strengths.
I said this before: I would love to see a notebook chip with multiple ARM (or OMAP, or MIPS or whatever) cores that could be powered up and down depending on demand and desired power consumption.
The fact such machine would be completely Windows-proof would be a nice plus.
Yes, but if this gets too efficient, we will end up in an ice age.
And everywhere will look like Canada.
You can always capture their carbon and tuck it away in a sealed mine.
At the office, I joke that by printing a lot you are actually helping reduce CO2 because paper comes from fast-growing trees that eat up a lot of carbon in the process. As far as you don't burn it, you are reducing your carbon footprint. If we gathered all the paper we have to print and buried it deep we would be both reducing carbon in our biosphere and offering a nice stockpile of fossil fuel for the cockroach civilization that will follow ours in a couple dozen million years.
Obviously I never did the math. And I am not even slightly interested in doing it.
I think oceans also do a pretty good job at that. And at the end of the chain you even get more fish (which is, to a certain extent, fixed carbon).
I would add that most people don't have that problem because they agree with the manufacturer on what the device should do.
Erm... I was joking.
It's wonderful how infinitely small we can feel ;-)
"Seems marginally useful"
For you, you insensitive clod. Someone with feelings wrote it!
"There have been recent papers by Stanford on how to effectively use nuclear bombs against civilians?"
Do you need a paper for that?!
It's pretty straightforward: 1) find civilians 2) detonate nuke near them
It was pretty effective the last two times it was used. I would even go further as there seems to be no such thing as an ineffective nuke. Even the ones you are can't be really sure whether they exist or not are very good leverage in any diplomatic negotiation. People take you very seriously when there is some chance you can possibly have them.
It's very difficult to keep the under-100 IQ half of mankind focused long enough to explain what DRM is and why it's a bad idea. Make it under 110 and it's still hard enough and now they comprise a lot of people who can't care less about DRM, freedom and such things when there are shiny stuff they can get fascinated with.
Sadly, any strategy that relies on people being intelligent is more or less doomed to fail.
I am sorry to tell you but the lack of proper punishment pretty much demonstrates they are above the law. It's a good time to upgrade it.
"We are a PC. Resistance is futile"
Just film yourself saying "I'm a PC and I run Linux", "I'm an engineer|doctor|writer|grandpa|whatever and my PC runs Linux|BSD|anythingbutwindows" and things like that. People will get the published movies, edit them and assemble them into movies that say the truths Microsoft is trying to hide - that PCs run things other than Windows and that lots of non-geeks run Linux.
Other suggestions: a phone saying "I'm a phone and I run Linux", a supercomputer saying "I'm a supercomputer and I run Linux", a home router saying "I am a router and I run Linux" and so on.
Too bad it has a lousy text editor.
Well. We already knew he would say anything for money. We just didn't knew how far he was willing to go.
Entertainment is a tool that increases emotional response and memory retention. The folks at Crispin Porter know it very well.
BTW, they already knew that - see how much we wrote about how lame the spots with Gates and Seinfeld were? Se how well we remember those?
Just a correction.
You have to commend Crispin Porter for that. Microsoft only hired them.
And, BTW, the piece was finished on a Mac. Running OSX.
That was the idea. Put out two horrible ads. The next one will, obviously, look like a masterpiece in comparison.
Some have related the use of vi to hair loss. I already switched to joe and emacs, just in case.
I must confess I am already annoying all my friends in the US to register as voters and to do it right this time. It's a huge problem when the clever ones refuse to vote.
If they preserve the brownish/yellowish themes, "Jaundiced Jackalope" would be a proper nickname ;-)