Now, there is some nonconspiracy theory here. AMD and Intel chips do have different capabilities, and I would assume that Intel's compiler would use, at most, zero of those that are exclusive to AMD and all of the bells and whistles of all of the Intel chips.
There is a big difference between:
- Optimizing your company's compilers to make use of your chip's special proprietary features, while letting other processors use the standard MMX calls etc.
- Restricting your company's compilers to use standard MMX calls only when it's your own processor, and to use ancient, slow methods for other processors, even though the other processors would support the MMX calls.
If Intel was acting competitively, they would have used the standard MMX calls for any processors that labeled itself an MMX capable processor; regardless of which company made the processor. Instead, Intel's code intentionally discriminated against AMD and any other non-Intel chip by disregarding their support for MMX, and acting on brand name only.
This is sort of like racial discrimination, but for processor brands.
It's like forcing a minority to take the stairs but letting the white guy use the elevator, even though both are perfectly capable of riding the elevator.
It does this if it's compiling the code targeting AMD or if it's compiling the code and an AMD chip is running the compiler?
If the latter... wow.
No, the compiler software doesn't care which processor it's running on (though I guess it might if the compiler software was compiled with itself). It's the compiled code - the actual produced software - that does the check and deliberately and needlessly cripples non-Intel processors.
Because for Itanium compatibility they'd have to port everything over to the Itanium proprietary instruction set. You can see how eager they've been to do that for Macs, so guess how likely they are to port it for Itanium.
How was the guy supposed to know that he didn't intend for the AP to be open to everyone.
I think that's the key... any company I've worked at always has a logon message for any server warning about unauthorized access and how it's a private network. Presumably that helps prove that any intruders knew they were intruding.
What if someone walked around with a laptop set up as a wireless access point and server, and tracked down anyone's PC that connected to it and sued them / had them arrested for unauthorized access? Where do you draw the line?
>>The first rule of PATRIOT act is do not talk about PATRIOT act
>Has it occurred to you that your sig is lying? There's no provision in the PATRIOT act that says you can't talk about it. You're just adding to the incoherent ramblings of the Left, which nobody listens to. There are plenty of real problems with the PATRIOT act, but your sig does nothing to address them. It's actually hurting by further making its opposition look like idiots.
Oh wise AC, verily, my slashdot sig is not doing enough to change society's problems. For that, I apologize profusely.
>> The jedi religion is just as real as any other, IMO, except perhaps better written.
>As well written as the romantic dialogue in Episodes 1,2,3?:)
Better written than the romance in the book of Genesis...
2Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
3And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth:
4And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:
5And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.
6And Seth lived an hundred and five years, and begat Enos: ...
30And Lamech lived after he begat Noah five hundred ninety and five years, and begat sons and daughters:
31And all the days of Lamech were seven hundred seventy and seven years: and he died.
32And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
All that begatting and not one scene of what causes the begatting!
Special notifications such as new email would be hard for them to detect.
There are pressable buttons on certain "multimedia" keyboards that open your email, open your web browser, etc.
A nice way to do notification for someone who can't hear or see would be to pop-out a similar button on the keyboard (or equivalent). When the email notification would normally appear / disappear on screen, the button would pop out / pop back in off the keyboard. The button could be pressed to start the email reading function.
Recreating the screen from a visual device into a tactile (feeling) device seems to be a common idea, so far.
First of all the 4200+ doesn't offer the best price/performance ratio of the Athlon x2 line - the 4400+ does.
It's not about a 2x cost processor giving 2x performance. You can't buy two 820's and use them in one computer, so it's moot. Even when you do in a multiprocessor environment, you do not get exactly double the performance.
Also, you could also buy an old celeron processor for 1/4 the cost, and it'll run at 1/3 the performance. But would you really want a slow Celeron, and wait longer to do all your tasks, just because the price/performance ration is better?
Consumers think with their wallets, such as "I have $500 to spend on a processor. What's the best for my money?"
What does AMD offer at the ~$256 price point? What does Intel offer for ~$585? Who wins at each level in relevant benchmarks for the intended user?
Now if you could show that the Pentium D 820 has the performance equivalent of an Athlon x2 4400, then that would put them in competition.
This would also blow the x2 out of the market. Why pay double for the same performance?
This price/performance landslide victory was true for AMD's Athlon XP and Athlon 64 processors over Intel's offerings. At every price point, AMD beat out Intel. Their Athlon FX processors still wipe the floor with Intel's Extreme Edition processors. Yet AMD didn't gain ni market share, and this was due to Intel strong-arming AMD's potential mass market customers with cash payoffs and coerced exclusivity deals.
AMD and Intel are competing to be to company whose processor goes in your PC. You can't use both in one computer, so you're only going to buy one or the other. They are thus competing to sell you a processor.
Actually $169 includes case, mobo, power supply. You'd need to add at least a processor, cd-rom, and hard drive, and whatever ethernet expansion you use.
Your best bet would be some Athlon Socket A shuttle barebones PC with integrated graphics to which you could add a multiport PCI ethernet card. Or, you could plug an external router / hub into the one included ethernet port (if you need more than can fit on a PCI card).
Or anybody's, for that matter. You could receive their gold. But anything good that they've equipped has become Soulbound, and can't ever be used by another player.
So unless you're both enchanters (in which case he could disenchant the stuff into raw materials and give them to you), you're out of luck.
I never said "it's not the criminal's fault". Nice strawman there.
lol, it's not a strawman, I know you never said that - I wasn't responding to anything you said. I was responding to the original comment where he said hackers are just messengers telling you you're insecure and they can't be blamed for infecting your computer. Right, and muggers are just public service announcers telling you that you don't know enough karate.
I think you and I are just arguing over the wording here... Yes, victims have an obligation to themselves to be as responsible as possible about their own safety, and you'd be foolish to never lock your door, etc. But it's important not to forget who's actually committing the crime.
My point was to respond to the comment I quoted, nothing else. I know my examples were extreme, but hyperbole can help to highlight subtle concepts.
"Blaming "the hackers" for finding and exploiting insecurities in your software is like blaming barking dogs for your insomnia. The dog is just being a dog."
I hate this "it's not the criminal's fault" argument. Yes, everyone should take reasonable measures to protect themselves in all aspects of life - and that includes protecting others by writing more secure program code, etc. But you can never blame the victims. Regardless of whether an exploit is available or patchable or should have been programmed better, the exploiter is to blame for exploiting it.
Blaming "the hackers" for finding and exploiting insecurities in your software is like blaming barking dogs for your insomnia. The dog is just being a dog. Hackers or dogs may or may not be providing you with a service, by alerting you to real trouble coming your way.
I appreciate my dog who barks when strangers approach the house - hey, it might be a problem, and early warning is useful.
Similarly, I appreciate hackers who find security holes and report them to the companies responsible.
I do NOT appreciate dogs who bite my arm and give me rabies just because I wasn't wearing a kevlar protection suit.
I do NOT appreciate hackers who install spyware on my machine just because I was a day late in applying the latest security patch.
Just because's a guy isn't wearing a cup, doesn't mean you should walk up and kick him in the groin.
Slashdot Mirror
Now, there is some nonconspiracy theory here. AMD and Intel chips do have different capabilities, and I would assume that Intel's compiler would use, at most, zero of those that are exclusive to AMD and all of the bells and whistles of all of the Intel chips.
There is a big difference between:
- Optimizing your company's compilers to make use of your chip's special proprietary features, while letting other processors use the standard MMX calls etc.
- Restricting your company's compilers to use standard MMX calls only when it's your own processor, and to use ancient, slow methods for other processors, even though the other processors would support the MMX calls.
If Intel was acting competitively, they would have used the standard MMX calls for any processors that labeled itself an MMX capable processor; regardless of which company made the processor. Instead, Intel's code intentionally discriminated against AMD and any other non-Intel chip by disregarding their support for MMX, and acting on brand name only.
This is sort of like racial discrimination, but for processor brands.
It's like forcing a minority to take the stairs but letting the white guy use the elevator, even though both are perfectly capable of riding the elevator.
It does this if it's compiling the code targeting AMD or if it's compiling the code and an AMD chip is running the compiler?
If the latter... wow.
No, the compiler software doesn't care which processor it's running on (though I guess it might if the compiler software was compiled with itself). It's the compiled code - the actual produced software - that does the check and deliberately and needlessly cripples non-Intel processors.
Wow... that's a great example, and you should gather as much evidence of it as you can, especially Intel's responses, and send it to AMD's legal team.
MOD PARENT UP
http://techworthy.com/PCUpgrade/SeptOct2004/64-Bit -Gaming.htm
Because for Itanium compatibility they'd have to port everything over to the Itanium proprietary instruction set. You can see how eager they've been to do that for Macs, so guess how likely they are to port it for Itanium.
More like:
(a) CmdrTaco
(b) Zonk
(c) write-in candidate
(b) Zonk
(d) CmdrTaco
(e) CowboyNeal
How was the guy supposed to know that he didn't intend for the AP to be open to everyone.
I think that's the key... any company I've worked at always has a logon message for any server warning about unauthorized access and how it's a private network. Presumably that helps prove that any intruders knew they were intruding.
What if someone walked around with a laptop set up as a wireless access point and server, and tracked down anyone's PC that connected to it and sued them / had them arrested for unauthorized access? Where do you draw the line?
>>The first rule of PATRIOT act is do not talk about PATRIOT act
>Has it occurred to you that your sig is lying? There's no provision in the PATRIOT act that says you can't talk about it. You're just adding to the incoherent ramblings of the Left, which nobody listens to. There are plenty of real problems with the PATRIOT act, but your sig does nothing to address them. It's actually hurting by further making its opposition look like idiots.
Oh wise AC, verily, my slashdot sig is not doing enough to change society's problems. For that, I apologize profusely.
http://slashdot.org/search.pl?query=12+Minutes
The other side of the arguement is that anime distributors won't bother with the US because they have to compete with the fansubs.
That's pretty irresponsible of the parents; considering the movie ticket costs could have mostly paid for a babysitter and kids movie rental instead.
>As well written as the romantic dialogue in Episodes 1,2,3?
Better written than the romance in the book of Genesis...
All that begatting and not one scene of what causes the begatting!
Special notifications such as new email would be hard for them to detect.
There are pressable buttons on certain "multimedia" keyboards that open your email, open your web browser, etc.
A nice way to do notification for someone who can't hear or see would be to pop-out a similar button on the keyboard (or equivalent). When the email notification would normally appear / disappear on screen, the button would pop out / pop back in off the keyboard. The button could be pressed to start the email reading function.
Recreating the screen from a visual device into a tactile (feeling) device seems to be a common idea, so far.
First of all the 4200+ doesn't offer the best price/performance ratio of the Athlon x2 line - the 4400+ does.
It's not about a 2x cost processor giving 2x performance. You can't buy two 820's and use them in one computer, so it's moot. Even when you do in a multiprocessor environment, you do not get exactly double the performance.
Also, you could also buy an old celeron processor for 1/4 the cost, and it'll run at 1/3 the performance. But would you really want a slow Celeron, and wait longer to do all your tasks, just because the price/performance ration is better?
Consumers think with their wallets, such as "I have $500 to spend on a processor. What's the best for my money?"
What does AMD offer at the ~$256 price point? What does Intel offer for ~$585? Who wins at each level in relevant benchmarks for the intended user?
Now if you could show that the Pentium D 820 has the performance equivalent of an Athlon x2 4400, then that would put them in competition.
This would also blow the x2 out of the market. Why pay double for the same performance?
This price/performance landslide victory was true for AMD's Athlon XP and Athlon 64 processors over Intel's offerings. At every price point, AMD beat out Intel. Their Athlon FX processors still wipe the floor with Intel's Extreme Edition processors. Yet AMD didn't gain ni market share, and this was due to Intel strong-arming AMD's potential mass market customers with cash payoffs and coerced exclusivity deals.
Thus, the lawsuit.
AMD and Intel are competing to be to company whose processor goes in your PC. You can't use both in one computer, so you're only going to buy one or the other. They are thus competing to sell you a processor.
Actually $169 includes case, mobo, power supply. You'd need to add at least a processor, cd-rom, and hard drive, and whatever ethernet expansion you use.
Your best bet would be some Athlon Socket A shuttle barebones PC with integrated graphics to which you could add a multiport PCI ethernet card. Or, you could plug an external router / hub into the one included ethernet port (if you need more than can fit on a PCI card).
This one might do nicely, though it is more than $100: Shuttle SK43G Socket A(462)
mod parent up for clever futurama reference :-)
>>Can I have your stuff? ;-P
>Nope and you can't have mine either.
Or anybody's, for that matter. You could receive their gold. But anything good that they've equipped has become Soulbound, and can't ever be used by another player.
So unless you're both enchanters (in which case he could disenchant the stuff into raw materials and give them to you), you're out of luck.
I never said "it's not the criminal's fault". Nice strawman there.
lol, it's not a strawman, I know you never said that - I wasn't responding to anything you said. I was responding to the original comment where he said hackers are just messengers telling you you're insecure and they can't be blamed for infecting your computer. Right, and muggers are just public service announcers telling you that you don't know enough karate.
I think you and I are just arguing over the wording here... Yes, victims have an obligation to themselves to be as responsible as possible about their own safety, and you'd be foolish to never lock your door, etc. But it's important not to forget who's actually committing the crime.
My point was to respond to the comment I quoted, nothing else. I know my examples were extreme, but hyperbole can help to highlight subtle concepts.
"Blaming "the hackers" for finding and exploiting insecurities in your software is like blaming barking dogs for your insomnia. The dog is just being a dog."
I hate this "it's not the criminal's fault" argument. Yes, everyone should take reasonable measures to protect themselves in all aspects of life - and that includes protecting others by writing more secure program code, etc. But you can never blame the victims. Regardless of whether an exploit is available or patchable or should have been programmed better, the exploiter is to blame for exploiting it.
http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com/
I avoid IE because of security problems, but ironically I need to use it to get Windows security patches.
They do say "If you prefer to use a different Web browser, updates to Windows may be downloaded from the Microsoft Download Center", though.
Somebody call the waaaahhmbulance.
Blaming "the hackers" for finding and exploiting insecurities in your software is like blaming barking dogs for your insomnia. The dog is just being a dog. Hackers or dogs may or may not be providing you with a service, by alerting you to real trouble coming your way.
I appreciate my dog who barks when strangers approach the house - hey, it might be a problem, and early warning is useful.
Similarly, I appreciate hackers who find security holes and report them to the companies responsible.
I do NOT appreciate dogs who bite my arm and give me rabies just because I wasn't wearing a kevlar protection suit.
I do NOT appreciate hackers who install spyware on my machine just because I was a day late in applying the latest security patch.
Just because's a guy isn't wearing a cup, doesn't mean you should walk up and kick him in the groin.
Two months is not a "brief moment" in the graphics card industry.
I figured you could get it from warez, but do they distribute it any other way besides a paid subscription?