Not everything need be a pulpit for linux (anti-ms) zealots.
Indeed, as not every reference to MS is bashing. I simply know very little about the MS platform, and don't want my lack of knowledge to get in the way of my understanding of the book. Now everyone seems to say this won't be the case, so that's just fine...
Err.. who mentioned Linux?
I appreciate that x86 assembler is the same all over, but that is what I am looking for, a *general* introduction.
Perhaps my question was badly phrased, but is this book a general introduction to x86 assembly or an introduction to x86 assembly on an MS platform? I don't know anything in any detail about the DOS / Win32 platform, and I don't want that hampering my reading of the book, that's all. Would this be the case?
I have not read the book... like a previous poster 6502 assembler was enough for me:-).
However from the review, this book seemed fairly Windows / DOS centric. Is this the case, or could it be of some use as an introduction to x86 assembler, not just MS platform specific x86 assembler?
In a bid to win over MS Windows users who up until now have been worried about loosing the registry bloat of their OS, Apple has invented an equivalent that gradually fills up with cruft and needs purging once in a while. Hehe:-D
A good point, and one I'm not far off sharing. The other (utopic) thing to keep in mind is that a lot of the DRM projects that people whige ceaslessly about (they're taking my freedom away...) only exist because people have stolen things in the past.
Burglars only find doorlocks and alarms because burlgars exist...
What I really object to is DRM that stops me from doing perfectly legal things, and really is just a pretext for enforcing monopolies (think Palladium).
I started using Free software for just that reason - it was free. I could have cracked Windows and a handful of apps, but I didn't. If something isn't free then stick to the terms the copyright holder requires or don't use it, and peer to peer mp3/warez swapping is a damn good example. And certainly don't complain if the copyright holders try to stop you doing it, especially as people who do this kind of thing are exactly the kind of people that encourage drastic legislation that might take freedom away from those who respect it (Think Palladium again, think DMCA).
I guess we're going to have to get used to this, or look elsewhere. Cut and paste your press release into Slashdot for a new fresher taste... Marketing spooge bukkake fest for/. ?
Except this guy didn't reverse engineer anything. Had he reverse engineered a Cisco PIX using commodity hardware *and* his own implementation of the software, things would be different.
All he did was build a hardware platform and blag the software from a (presumably illegal) PIX flash card.
There's no reverse engineering here, no more than building a PC and putting a warez copy of microsoft windows on it is reverse engineering windows *OR* the PC platform.
I completely agree. I am sorry to say that there is simply no news in this article, just a rumour. And a pretty dull one at that. To hell with my karma, this just isn't news, and shouldn't be on here. It's not even the release of a chip (which as others have pointed out happens at a predictable rate every month or so anyway... so probably isn't news either).
I think this setup is the overclocking equivalent of bukkake... excites geeks , and they'd all love to, but it's the kind of thing the ain't ever gonna do at home:-D
One night, after a heavy nights drinking, after getting through the 'I can drink more/faster than you', the 'I can piss further than you', the 'I can belch louder than you', Keefe finally staggered over to his mate Bob and said, 'Screw you Bub, errr, Bob, my website can handle way more hits than yours...'
Bob, missing a great occasion to keep his mouth shut and stagger home to bed, replied, 'Prove it Keith, errrr, Keefe. Dare you to put it on Slashdot..'
And so it went that Keefe, still hazy from the night before, drooling a heady mix of spit, beer and vomit over his keyboard, sent the story to Slashdot, and just moments later, swore he'd stop drinking.
To any trolls underneath this post that are actually interested in whats really under the hood of OS-X...
If they are interested in what it is, they should stear clear from your explanation.
Yes, OS X is heavily based on Mach, but it's not a "pure" microkernel.
No, Mach is not a "pure" microkernel. And OS-X isn't a ukernel at all, it's an OS. AFAIK, Darwin provides the kernel functionality using a single-server on a microkernel. OS-X runs on top of Darwin, and provides most of the userland functions (GUI, most notably).
Check GNU/Debian
That would be GNU running on Debian, as GNU/Linux is GNU running on Linux? I think you mean Debian GNU/Hurd or GNU, though your description of what it is suggests that as far as microkernels go, you don't know shit from rusty ice-cream.
UNIX server running under the HURD mk
First point, a server runs on top of an 'mk', not under it.
The Hurd (not HURD, Hurd or whatever) is actually a number of servers running on a microkernel (at the moment GnuMach, but also L4 projects exist). Contrary to Darwin and MkLinux which are mono-server implementations (ie one large server running on a ukernel), the Hurd has a number of servers running on a ukernel that attempt to provide POSIX functionality. The Hurd is simply not UNIX (as in GNU is not UNIX). As you correctly point out, monoserver implementations of microkernels don't add a great deal of anything except hardware abstraction compared with a monolithic UNIX kernel. The hardware abstraction was the reason why Apple initially liked MkLinux, as it allowed Linux to run on their machines without them having to give away precious info about how they worked.
These are just the blatant mistakes, I'll leave people who aren't too tired, late or lazy to do real research to fine tune this and the other stuff.
In the mean time, though, we'll just keep waiting for that day when we're all going to kick ourselves for not having read all the offtopic goatshit on Slashdot.
Real beers, as most real beer drinkers know, are not available much further than 50-odd miles away form the place where they were brewed.
Where I lived the Theakstons brewery was about 15 minutes drive away, and for a long time after it was bought by corporate goat piss purveyors Scottish and Newcastle, local pubs were still getting the traditional wooden barreled stuff from the brewery up the road, while the rest of the nation/world was getting aluminium barrels of goats piss. I wondered why more people didn't drink Theakstons in the UK until I tasted the stuff that they all got.
So, the moral of the story is to say, don't believe that any beer you get that isn't brewed up the road will be real beer. And of course just because it is brewed up the road, doesn't mean it is either - think Newcastle Brown for Newcastle folk, which is nothing to what it used to be. Thanks to S&N breweries for that too.
Remember that story on/. about the AI robot escaping...
This is the MS equivalent.
Re:Sadly Intel has the upper hand here
on
AMD's 64-Bit Chip
·
· Score: 1
32 bits can only address 4 GB of RAM, which is starting to look uncomfortably small for many applications (AI, modelling, gaming, video processing, etc.).
Err what games do you play that need that much RAM? And what operating system do you use to play them?
Slashdot Mirror
omg. lol. I r L337. u r0x0rz.
Taco, we know it's you.
You may not be aware of this, but there have been 3D porn movies for some time.
:-D
Anyone know if any (many?) of the major computer video formats (AVI, QuickTime, MPG, etc.) have specific support for 3-D?
You horny little devil
/me scratches his head and wonders if three walls at 180 degrees to each other wouldn't just look like one big wall.... :-D
Still guess you're right...
and four walls (floor and 3 vertical walls, i.e. a room without ceiling and one wall)
:-D
Glad you added that last bit - made it so much clearer
What? Have you read the article?
Not everything need be a pulpit for linux (anti-ms) zealots. Indeed, as not every reference to MS is bashing. I simply know very little about the MS platform, and don't want my lack of knowledge to get in the way of my understanding of the book. Now everyone seems to say this won't be the case, so that's just fine...
Err.. who mentioned Linux? I appreciate that x86 assembler is the same all over, but that is what I am looking for, a *general* introduction. Perhaps my question was badly phrased, but is this book a general introduction to x86 assembly or an introduction to x86 assembly on an MS platform? I don't know anything in any detail about the DOS / Win32 platform, and I don't want that hampering my reading of the book, that's all. Would this be the case?
I have not read the book... like a previous poster 6502 assembler was enough for me :-).
However from the review, this book seemed fairly Windows / DOS centric. Is this the case, or could it be of some use as an introduction to x86 assembler, not just MS platform specific x86 assembler?
In a bid to win over MS Windows users who up until now have been worried about loosing the registry bloat of their OS, Apple has invented an equivalent that gradually fills up with cruft and needs purging once in a while. Hehe :-D
A good point, and one I'm not far off sharing. The other (utopic) thing to keep in mind is that a lot of the DRM projects that people whige ceaslessly about (they're taking my freedom away...) only exist because people have stolen things in the past.
Burglars only find doorlocks and alarms because burlgars exist...
What I really object to is DRM that stops me from doing perfectly legal things, and really is just a pretext for enforcing monopolies (think Palladium).
I started using Free software for just that reason - it was free. I could have cracked Windows and a handful of apps, but I didn't. If something isn't free then stick to the terms the copyright holder requires or don't use it, and peer to peer mp3/warez swapping is a damn good example. And certainly don't complain if the copyright holders try to stop you doing it, especially as people who do this kind of thing are exactly the kind of people that encourage drastic legislation that might take freedom away from those who respect it (Think Palladium again, think DMCA).
I guess we're going to have to get used to this, or look elsewhere. Cut and paste your press release into Slashdot for a new fresher taste... Marketing spooge bukkake fest for /. ?
Except this guy didn't reverse engineer anything. Had he reverse engineered a Cisco PIX using commodity hardware *and* his own implementation of the software, things would be different.
All he did was build a hardware platform and blag the software from a (presumably illegal) PIX flash card.
There's no reverse engineering here, no more than building a PC and putting a warez copy of microsoft windows on it is reverse engineering windows *OR* the PC platform.
I completely agree. I am sorry to say that there is simply no news in this article, just a rumour. And a pretty dull one at that. To hell with my karma, this just isn't news, and shouldn't be on here. It's not even the release of a chip (which as others have pointed out happens at a predictable rate every month or so anyway... so probably isn't news either).
/.
I guess it's just a slow news day for
I think this setup is the overclocking equivalent of bukkake... excites geeks , and they'd all love to, but it's the kind of thing the ain't ever gonna do at home :-D
.../me looks around for some poor doctors :-D
One night, after a heavy nights drinking, after getting through the 'I can drink more/faster than you', the 'I can piss further than you', the 'I can belch louder than you', Keefe finally staggered over to his mate Bob and said, 'Screw you Bub, errr, Bob, my website can handle way more hits than yours...'
Bob, missing a great occasion to keep his mouth shut and stagger home to bed, replied, 'Prove it Keith, errrr, Keefe. Dare you to put it on Slashdot..'
And so it went that Keefe, still hazy from the night before, drooling a heady mix of spit, beer and vomit over his keyboard, sent the story to Slashdot, and just moments later, swore he'd stop drinking.
To any trolls underneath this post that are actually interested in whats really under the hood of OS-X...
If they are interested in what it is, they should stear clear from your explanation.
Yes, OS X is heavily based on Mach, but it's not a "pure" microkernel.
No, Mach is not a "pure" microkernel. And OS-X isn't a ukernel at all, it's an OS. AFAIK, Darwin provides the kernel functionality using a single-server on a microkernel. OS-X runs on top of Darwin, and provides most of the userland functions (GUI, most notably).
Check GNU/Debian
That would be GNU running on Debian, as GNU/Linux is GNU running on Linux? I think you mean Debian GNU/Hurd or GNU, though your description of what it is suggests that as far as microkernels go, you don't know shit from rusty ice-cream.
UNIX server running under the HURD mk
First point, a server runs on top of an 'mk', not under it.
The Hurd (not HURD, Hurd or whatever) is actually a number of servers running on a microkernel (at the moment GnuMach, but also L4 projects exist). Contrary to Darwin and MkLinux which are mono-server implementations (ie one large server running on a ukernel), the Hurd has a number of servers running on a ukernel that attempt to provide POSIX functionality. The Hurd is simply not UNIX (as in GNU is not UNIX). As you correctly point out, monoserver implementations of microkernels don't add a great deal of anything except hardware abstraction compared with a monolithic UNIX kernel. The hardware abstraction was the reason why Apple initially liked MkLinux, as it allowed Linux to run on their machines without them having to give away precious info about how they worked.
These are just the blatant mistakes, I'll leave people who aren't too tired, late or lazy to do real research to fine tune this and the other stuff.
is how can you see out?
Answer: Two, one to hold the light bulb, the other to pass him the chair to stand on.
Damn, wrong joke.
In the mean time, though, we'll just keep waiting for that day when we're all going to kick ourselves for not having read all the offtopic goatshit on Slashdot.
There have to be better ways to put those pages on the web than dozens of jpegs....
You don't actually know very much about Ireland do you?
Real beers, as most real beer drinkers know, are not available much further than 50-odd miles away form the place where they were brewed.
Where I lived the Theakstons brewery was about 15 minutes drive away, and for a long time after it was bought by corporate goat piss purveyors Scottish and Newcastle, local pubs were still getting the traditional wooden barreled stuff from the brewery up the road, while the rest of the nation/world was getting aluminium barrels of goats piss. I wondered why more people didn't drink Theakstons in the UK until I tasted the stuff that they all got.
So, the moral of the story is to say, don't believe that any beer you get that isn't brewed up the road will be real beer. And of course just because it is brewed up the road, doesn't mean it is either - think Newcastle Brown for Newcastle folk, which is nothing to what it used to be. Thanks to S&N breweries for that too.
Check this, this and this out...
Remember that story on /. about the AI robot escaping...
This is the MS equivalent.
32 bits can only address 4 GB of RAM, which is starting to look uncomfortably small for many applications (AI, modelling, gaming, video processing, etc.).
Err what games do you play that need that much RAM? And what operating system do you use to play them?