A quick Google suggests that Marvell's been busy, and that they have some higher-performance designs now, but maybe that's just buzz control. And we don't know what would be going into the OLPC, as they stray away from the Moby reference design (to something LOWER cost?), or whether Marvell will improve things.
Were you looking at the Armada 600 (which is in the current Moby reference) or some other Sheeva-based (Armada?) SoC from Marvell?
"[Shiva] core is amazing. It's just too bad about the rest of the SoC."
Can you take a few minutes to elaborate? Why is Shiva so wonderful, and what stinks about the rest of the system on a chip? What's weak? What does it not offer?
Also I get that Tegra and Snapdragon are much faster than Marvell's stuff, but what features are they offering (besides good video/GPU) that Marvell's SoC lacks?
Sounds like you have some helpful experience. Please share.
"scrap sugar and put on Android. Otherwise don't bother."
No, no, no. Put on android, and put Sugar on that. Sugar's not an OS, and I hear it's nice. Development of sugar shouldn't slow down production of the tablet, and the obvious way to develop a tablet quickly is to use the Android (and Linux) drivers already available. Get it up quick with Android (or Linux) and then work on Sugar on that. The teams shouldn't overlap.
The tablet market is already crushing itself to a zero margins race to the bottom even before the first Android tablets hit the shelves. The sweet spot for tablets is going to be $150.
With OLPC and Marvell getting into this, we can expect fairly good tablets with usable screens and good interfaces to be pushed closer to $100, and everyone will have to figure out how to follow suit or die.
I am happy about this because I am not a tablet manufacturer. I anticipate being a tablet user, though, and probably a tablet software developer, and I am going to profit on the pain of all these companies as they are forced to find ways to make tablets for closer and closer to free.
I know I should lighten up, but I really resent the decay of the term robot. Robots are autonomous devices. They were so when the term was first used in Rossum's Universal Robots.
A mechanical heart is not a robot. It only does work for you in a purely physics definition. (If you allow a physics definition of work for robot, then a lever that bends slightly is a robot -- it reacts to the amount of weight put on it by bending and it does 'work' for you.)
This heart is a mechanical device. It ends there. It is not a robot.
Similarly, remote-controlled devices, no matter how cool, are not robots. You are controlling them. They are not autonomous. We are not fighting the war in Afghanistan with robots. Stop saying that.
This pisses me off not because it's devaluing a term I think will be important someday, when we actually do have robots, but because it reflects a growing (or was it always there?) stupidity amongst the populace. They know what a robot is on a macro level, but they have no idea what this heart is on the most basic mechanical or control level. They don't understand machines of any sort, electronics of any sort, or fine distinctions of logic. They don't think about things and they're more interested in what sounds cool than what's correct.
Years ago, I put an extra question on all our screening tests for job applicants in computer jobs (networking, IT, etc). It was "How does a light bulb work?" The number of people who left the answer blank, answered "I don't know" or answered incorrectly was staggering. Not surprisingly, the people who knew enough to be considered for the computer job also generally knew how a light bulb worked and tended to answer the question in detail with something close to glee.
They constituted a vanishingly small percent of the applicants.
I thought a heard a whooshing sound in the distance. Hang on while I get out the handy app I've got that identifies missed concepts flying over people's heads...
No, I'm not trying to be funny. What are they paying, and have they gotten over the idiocy of looking for 1000 security guys amongst the military? They need experts on the effects and targets, but they also need real experts in security. If they only hire the first, they are idiots, and they're not going to find 1000 people in the military who do both. They're not even going to find 1000 people who can do one.
So what are they paying, where are they looking, who's their headhunter?
"I'm sorry, but I've never been able to respect a manager who could not have done my job, and has done in previous years. "
That's a formula for never hiring anyone who brings something new to the company. I've worked with managers who felt they needed to be able to do their underlings jobs, or else they shouldn't be manager. It's a disaster. Such people feel threatened by people below them whose jobs they could not do, and hire only people dumber than themselves.
Managers of programmers should not be programmers. They should be smart people with social/political skills. Both traits are needed. We, as programmers, can teach a smart person what's important about development, what we need to be given and what we need to be protected from. A person with social/political skills can effectually get us these things and protect us. A dumb person, or a person without social/political skills is of no use to us as a manager.
We don't need a programmer as a manager. We don't WANT a programmer as a manager. We're programmers. Our hands are dirty every day, and we know better what to do than a manager whose programming skills have fossilized.
A manager is different from a lead. A manager goes to meetings and manages the team. A team lead is top dog with the programmers -- first among 'equals'. They are NOT the same thing.
But isn't perjury a criminal beef rather than a civil one? Can you sue someone for perjury?
I don't know. Please tell me.
If you're expecting law enforcement to give a crap about a DMCA takedown perjury case with one fairly small guy against a really small guy, I think you shouldn't hold your breath. Prosecutors and judges won't understand why it should be important and wont want to waste time on it.
"I love how you undid your argument by immediately going too far."
Obama has done no visible sort of cleaning out of the knuckleheads that Bush appointed, or the draconian ideas about security and power.
The message from the top to the agents in the field ("Civil rights are back. Start thinking about people as citizens, again, not as the enemy or as peons you can spy on, abuse, etc.") never came. The agents still act like they did in the Bush administration. They may even now be worse, because they we expecting the message and it didn't come, which showed them that this is the new way of thinking: it wasn't just Bush, it's here to stay, and abusers of power are safe forever.
That's the administration. You can say the actions of the little people in any department are just the actions of those little people, and not the administration, but when there's an overall pattern, and the upper level does nothing to change it (or even makes it worse -- see the justice department and it's stepping up of Bush-era prosecutions) that's the administration.
I have not gone too far. Bush's government did, and the Obama administration has fixed nothing and even made things worse. He is to blame for this action, until we hear that someone from above reverses it and apologizes for it, showing that he appointed someone competent to oversee this department. We almost certainly won't hear any reversal or apology, because Obama has a mouth-breather in the position.
I voted for him. I want him to succeed. He has, so far, failed in (almost) every area.
ARM needs to get someone else to do their corporate videos. The talking heads make me cringe. I'm sure Eric Schorn's a great guy, but I wouldn't put him on a video that close-up. Really. Trust me on this.
"In the US, you're probably only a little more likely to be abused by a police officer than you are to die in an airplane crash."
No. I think you are either
A. Very frightened of flying (irrationally so) or B. Very, very white. No black or Hispanic friends, grew up in an all-white town, etc.
You are MUCH more likely to be abused by a police officer than to die in a plane crash. Based on numbers from
(Note that while many cases are found to be without merit, people are generally unlikely to file complaints, so the number of genuine cases is probably still a number very roughly equivalent to the number reported. Also note that the numbers in the second article are just for Chicago, which represents only 2.8 million of the 308 million people in the US, albeit a disproportionately rich sample -- 40% higher than average.)
Computers in the 80's required real thought to use. We fixed that.
We proved in the late 90's and the first decade of this century that computers are a huge detriment to learning in many schools. Grades go down when computers come in, particularly for economically poorer students.
(Also, we know that the more video children watch, the dumber they grow up to be. This includes how much Baby Einstein they watch -- chuck those tapes and DVDs in the garbage can today.)
Computers are not the answer. Attention from mentors, thinking, reading and writing are the answer, and computers tend to give us low-value versions of all but the last (and thanks to the wonders of plagiarism, undermine the last as well).
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks for the info.
A quick Google suggests that Marvell's been busy, and that they have some higher-performance designs now, but maybe that's just buzz control. And we don't know what would be going into the OLPC, as they stray away from the Moby reference design (to something LOWER cost?), or whether Marvell will improve things.
Were you looking at the Armada 600 (which is in the current Moby reference) or some other Sheeva-based (Armada?) SoC from Marvell?
"[Shiva] core is amazing. It's just too bad about the rest of the SoC."
Can you take a few minutes to elaborate? Why is Shiva so wonderful, and what stinks about the rest of the system on a chip? What's weak? What does it not offer?
Also I get that Tegra and Snapdragon are much faster than Marvell's stuff, but what features are they offering (besides good video/GPU) that Marvell's SoC lacks?
Sounds like you have some helpful experience. Please share.
"scrap sugar and put on Android. Otherwise don't bother."
No, no, no. Put on android, and put Sugar on that. Sugar's not an OS, and I hear it's nice. Development of sugar shouldn't slow down production of the tablet, and the obvious way to develop a tablet quickly is to use the Android (and Linux) drivers already available. Get it up quick with Android (or Linux) and then work on Sugar on that. The teams shouldn't overlap.
The tablet market is already crushing itself to a zero margins race to the bottom even before the first Android tablets hit the shelves. The sweet spot for tablets is going to be $150.
With OLPC and Marvell getting into this, we can expect fairly good tablets with usable screens and good interfaces to be pushed closer to $100, and everyone will have to figure out how to follow suit or die.
I am happy about this because I am not a tablet manufacturer. I anticipate being a tablet user, though, and probably a tablet software developer, and I am going to profit on the pain of all these companies as they are forced to find ways to make tablets for closer and closer to free.
I know I should lighten up, but I really resent the decay of the term robot. Robots are autonomous devices. They were so when the term was first used in Rossum's Universal Robots.
A mechanical heart is not a robot. It only does work for you in a purely physics definition. (If you allow a physics definition of work for robot, then a lever that bends slightly is a robot -- it reacts to the amount of weight put on it by bending and it does 'work' for you.)
This heart is a mechanical device. It ends there. It is not a robot.
Similarly, remote-controlled devices, no matter how cool, are not robots. You are controlling them. They are not autonomous. We are not fighting the war in Afghanistan with robots. Stop saying that.
This pisses me off not because it's devaluing a term I think will be important someday, when we actually do have robots, but because it reflects a growing (or was it always there?) stupidity amongst the populace. They know what a robot is on a macro level, but they have no idea what this heart is on the most basic mechanical or control level. They don't understand machines of any sort, electronics of any sort, or fine distinctions of logic. They don't think about things and they're more interested in what sounds cool than what's correct.
Years ago, I put an extra question on all our screening tests for job applicants in computer jobs (networking, IT, etc). It was "How does a light bulb work?" The number of people who left the answer blank, answered "I don't know" or answered incorrectly was staggering. Not surprisingly, the people who knew enough to be considered for the computer job also generally knew how a light bulb worked and tended to answer the question in detail with something close to glee.
They constituted a vanishingly small percent of the applicants.
I thought a heard a whooshing sound in the distance. Hang on while I get out the handy app I've got that identifies missed concepts flying over people's heads...
It would make more sense to ban Tuesdays than to ban the receivers or the app.
Well done. Unless the 1000 people means 500 janitors and 500 professionals, the money can't be all that great for the professionals. Excellent point.
No, I'm not trying to be funny. What are they paying, and have they gotten over the idiocy of looking for 1000 security guys amongst the military? They need experts on the effects and targets, but they also need real experts in security. If they only hire the first, they are idiots, and they're not going to find 1000 people in the military who do both. They're not even going to find 1000 people who can do one.
So what are they paying, where are they looking, who's their headhunter?
"I'm sorry, but I've never been able to respect a manager who could not have done my job, and has done in previous years. "
That's a formula for never hiring anyone who brings something new to the company. I've worked with managers who felt they needed to be able to do their underlings jobs, or else they shouldn't be manager. It's a disaster. Such people feel threatened by people below them whose jobs they could not do, and hire only people dumber than themselves.
Managers of programmers should not be programmers. They should be smart people with social/political skills. Both traits are needed. We, as programmers, can teach a smart person what's important about development, what we need to be given and what we need to be protected from. A person with social/political skills can effectually get us these things and protect us. A dumb person, or a person without social/political skills is of no use to us as a manager.
We don't need a programmer as a manager. We don't WANT a programmer as a manager. We're programmers. Our hands are dirty every day, and we know better what to do than a manager whose programming skills have fossilized.
A manager is different from a lead. A manager goes to meetings and manages the team. A team lead is top dog with the programmers -- first among 'equals'. They are NOT the same thing.
So a judge makes the call, not a prosecutor?
They're misreading it the situation.
If a landing were imminent, they would have appointed a complete incompetent as ambassador.
But isn't perjury a criminal beef rather than a civil one? Can you sue someone for perjury?
I don't know. Please tell me.
If you're expecting law enforcement to give a crap about a DMCA takedown perjury case with one fairly small guy against a really small guy, I think you shouldn't hold your breath. Prosecutors and judges won't understand why it should be important and wont want to waste time on it.
Well, no. But the legal proceedings against him (or more rightly, customers using his work-around) were costly: at least 3 million people dead.
Let's hope Intel shows a little more restraint than that.
Or just assume you can keep using the same horse.
I tought I taw a putty tat.
"I love how you undid your argument by immediately going too far."
Obama has done no visible sort of cleaning out of the knuckleheads that Bush appointed, or the draconian ideas about security and power.
The message from the top to the agents in the field ("Civil rights are back. Start thinking about people as citizens, again, not as the enemy or as peons you can spy on, abuse, etc.") never came. The agents still act like they did in the Bush administration. They may even now be worse, because they we expecting the message and it didn't come, which showed them that this is the new way of thinking: it wasn't just Bush, it's here to stay, and abusers of power are safe forever.
That's the administration. You can say the actions of the little people in any department are just the actions of those little people, and not the administration, but when there's an overall pattern, and the upper level does nothing to change it (or even makes it worse -- see the justice department and it's stepping up of Bush-era prosecutions) that's the administration.
I have not gone too far. Bush's government did, and the Obama administration has fixed nothing and even made things worse. He is to blame for this action, until we hear that someone from above reverses it and apologizes for it, showing that he appointed someone competent to oversee this department. We almost certainly won't hear any reversal or apology, because Obama has a mouth-breather in the position.
I voted for him. I want him to succeed. He has, so far, failed in (almost) every area.
I can't believe how little changed. What has seems for the worse.
What a colossal disappointment this administration is.
Isn't Chrome OS already dead on arrival?
But if we do decide to leave, we can do so safely in a plane. If we can get past the TSA...
"If I were black and lived in Detriot no doubt my perspective would be different, and I'd be the first to argue that this should not be the case."
You are a gentleman and a scholar.
ARM needs to get someone else to do their corporate videos. The talking heads make me cringe. I'm sure Eric Schorn's a great guy, but I wouldn't put him on a video that close-up. Really. Trust me on this.
Yes, that is indeed a problem. Much like our prison system.
"In the US, you're probably only a little more likely to be abused by a police officer than you are to die in an airplane crash."
No. I think you are either
A. Very frightened of flying (irrationally so)
or B. Very, very white. No black or Hispanic friends, grew up in an all-white town, etc.
You are MUCH more likely to be abused by a police officer than to die in a plane crash. Based on numbers from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation_accidents_and_incidents
3414 death between 2002 and 2004.
and
http://www.totalinjury.com/news/articles/police-brutality/chicago-police-brutality-roundup.aspx
10,000 complaints during the same time.
(Note that while many cases are found to be without merit, people are generally unlikely to file complaints, so the number of genuine cases is probably still a number very roughly equivalent to the number reported. Also note that the numbers in the second article are just for Chicago, which represents only 2.8 million of the 308 million people in the US, albeit a disproportionately rich sample -- 40% higher than average.)
Computers in the 80's required real thought to use. We fixed that.
We proved in the late 90's and the first decade of this century that computers are a huge detriment to learning in many schools. Grades go down when computers come in, particularly for economically poorer students.
(Also, we know that the more video children watch, the dumber they grow up to be. This includes how much Baby Einstein they watch -- chuck those tapes and DVDs in the garbage can today.)
Computers are not the answer. Attention from mentors, thinking, reading and writing are the answer, and computers tend to give us low-value versions of all but the last (and thanks to the wonders of plagiarism, undermine the last as well).
Is it currently illegal for a US company to trade with North Korea?
Is it illegal for a multi-national which does business in the US to do so?