Re:What's the [cost of your] production run?
on
Custom Motherboards?
·
· Score: 1
Production costs are way more than distribution costs, and "economics of scale" are important.
I hope you're not equating scale economics with scarcity.
Now if we could only get the "information wants to be free" crowd to read your post?
Information has a development cost. So does a motherboard (as its schematic is information). Information does not have a marginal cost of production, as its existence in unit form is not tied to scarce resources (unless you consider a human brain a scarce resource). A motherboard's existence is inextricably tied to scarce resources, so a marginal cost exists. "Stealing" information by making copies only dilutes a potential market. Stealing motherboards and reselling them not only dilutes a potential market, but also defrauds the producer who already paid for the components that went into the production of each motherboard. I hope you realize the absurdity of the comparison you have drawn.
Tapes really should be enclosed in metal casings like drives are...
Of course, that doesn't help you if the metal case isn't grounded at the time when you discharge static electricity into it or when it encounters a magnetic field.
And then file a bug at the Mozilla site, because Javascript resizing in a browser window with more than one tab currently open is clearly undesirable behavior.
Things change, and the right to change, I believe, is the basic right of any human being, and of any really free society.
If that's the case, then lobby for a Constitutional amendment. There is a process for that, after all. Why would defying the supreme law of the land be a better option than encoding those changing needs into law through the process already laid out for such?
It's widely theorized that Microsoft simply maintains Borland as a shell corporation to propagate the illusion of competition in the market for Windows development tools.
If Edison was an asshole with his lightbulbs, YOU should invent the flourescent bulb, or the LED, or whatever...
Unfortunately, that's an impossibility if Edison (or MegaloLightingCorp) is granted a patent on "Device utilizing electrical current to actuate photon emissions".
That's how the system works, AND that's HOW IT SHOULD WORK!
Something tells me you have never developed anything of practical value. If you had, you would realize that there are some very powerful moneyed interests that would also find your invention of value to them. Instead of licensing, they sue you, because they know you can't afford to defend yourself. The options are to sell/license your patent to a corporation who then raises the defense on your behalf, or to sell/license your patent to the suing corporation in exchange for not ruining you. Of course, since your hand is forced, if you choose licensing, you will not reap the benefits you feel you are entitled to if you were able to bring the product to market through your own money and investment network. That's not the way the system should work, in my opinion.
I would say the 4x register-file space increase is going to be far more important than the larger virtual memory.
It's true, but remember with that comes 2 more bits of register file address in every instruction. I don't know if the instructions are still encoded 32-bit, but hopefully it will leave enough room for other stuff (immediate, etc) to be efficiently encoded.
Basically, CISC chips have complex instructions that allow them to manipulate data IN MEMORY. Because they don't need to put as much in registers, there are far fewer GPRs.
Exactly how would the ALU manipulate data "in memory"? Oh, that's right, it *loads the value* into a temporary register, calculates the product, then *stores the value back* to memory. If you have many instructions using the same operands, this memory access is a horrific waste of CPU cycles.
So even though you can't see the GPR as a programmer, they are there under the hood.
So first you say that there is no need for GPRs because using them slows down your program, and now you say that it's okay because they are there anyway in CISC chips. A compiler can use registers more efficiently when it knows what is available, just the same as it can with functional units in out-of-order pipelines. Hiding this information from the compiler because of the necessity to maintain legacy compatibility or because CISC is perceived as easier for assembly programmers is a detriment for the rest of us, not a gain.
Otherwise, you can have a good processor design no matter the number of GPRs and a good compiler will handle the allocation efficiently.
Try hand-compiling a C block for a machine with, say, 2 GPRs. And sure, you can assume that it does renaming internally to avoid stalls. I think you will quickly see what the problem with a GPR-starved architecture is.
And just because you can't see the GPR as a programmer doesn't mean it isn't there being utilized by the processor internally.
That's correct, but not in the way that you think. Register renaming only prevents pipeline stalls, it doesn't help you when your program uses 9 variables at some local point and you have only 8 compiler-visible registers.
All commercial software for the Nintendo 64 featured 32-bit code, because that's what the compilers and OS/SDK supported. Strikingly similar to the situation of 32-bit Windows on Athlon 64 prior to this new development.
Windows NT OSes don't rely on a BIOS (at least the legacy PC definition of a BIOS) - for example, LinuxBIOS already can boot those operating systems having no real-mode support whatsoever.
What about drawing the disenfrachisement line at violent crime? After all, you don't want someone who has demonstrated contempt for the values your country is built upon being able to change the system in their favor, do you?
It's impossible to argue that the powerful would have less power, since that's an absurdity. As for the rich, there will be less of a social divide because of less taxation and government waste which enriches the whole of society, and because corporations will not get special treatment - they will be regulated as they should be in exchange for the limited liability they are granted. Proprietorships, on the other hand, will receive the full support of the law, since they are undertaking far more risk than a limited-liability prospect. The barrier to entry for everyone to own his or her small business would be over; the producer/consumer sandbox lines would be eliminated and the economy would perform more efficiently due to more effective specialization.
Look at the War On Drugs. Increased penalties have not decreased overall usage of drugs one bit. At some point, the motivation for breaking the law is rooted in passion, righteousness, or indignation, and at that point the consequences no longer matter with respect to preventing the act.
they can do so by creating another, entirely separate Postscript-generating layer (but without having to worry about performance or interactivity or other non-print Linux related things).
A process calling into the kernel *is* a context switch, because the "context" is defined by the combination of the processor state (registers) and activation record (the stack). When a system call is made, the GP registers are saved, and the stack is switched away from the process stack to a kernel stack. In fact, the only bit of context that isn't switched on a system call (at least on IA32) is the FP regs, and this is a Linux convention.
At least one other architecture (SPARC I think) has this nifty construction called register windows, where to save registers for a context switch, only one instruction needs to be executed (to change the register window pointer) rather than one instruction per register.
Why don't you go to the real Debian IRC channel at irc.openprojects.org #debian instead of some channel on a random network probably operated by people who have no affiliation with the project whatsoever, that happened to misuse the name of Debian to attract unsuspecting visitors? Debian project has no, and cannot possibly have any, control over channels that are named #debian but are not operated by them.
Complaining about bundling is nothing more than a warning for third party developers who want to choose Windows as their primary target platform - Microsoft may buy you out, or clone your product to put you out of business.
Now product tying is a completely different thing. Fortunately few of Microsoft's utilities are "tied" to Windows in the sense that you can't check them off in the installation. There are a few like IE and Media Player, and not being able to uninstall those without resorting to third party software is a legitimate complaint.
At some level, you have to accept certain claims as axiomatic. The axiom underlying the scientific method (and rejected by those who reject science) is that we are capable of observation and understanding of what goes on around us. Science is a faith in human ability and a faith that the universe (or some deity) is not attempting to play tricks on us to foil our understanding. These certainly seem to be reasonable axioms, but they are axioms nonetheless and must be accepted at face value since they are conclusions that cannot be reasoned to.
It is quite possible that there is a better way for us to find truth aside from the scientific method. For example, ancient philosophers rejected the idea that anything that is counterintuitive could be true, and thus used the mind's reaction to judge the truth of a claim. Unfortunately, it is impossible to prove an axiomatic system correct or wrong, because it is that very system which is instrumental in determining what is true and false.
Slashdot Mirror
And then file a bug at the Mozilla site, because Javascript resizing in a browser window with more than one tab currently open is clearly undesirable behavior.
It's widely theorized that Microsoft simply maintains Borland as a shell corporation to propagate the illusion of competition in the market for Windows development tools.
Kylix may be free as in beer, but you are mistaken if you believe it is open source.
All commercial software for the Nintendo 64 featured 32-bit code, because that's what the compilers and OS/SDK supported. Strikingly similar to the situation of 32-bit Windows on Athlon 64 prior to this new development.
Yeah. That approach worked great for Dmitri Skylarov.
Windows NT OSes don't rely on a BIOS (at least the legacy PC definition of a BIOS) - for example, LinuxBIOS already can boot those operating systems having no real-mode support whatsoever.
128K of L2 cache running at 500MHz is better for most applications than 512K of L2 cache running at 66MHz.
What about drawing the disenfrachisement line at violent crime? After all, you don't want someone who has demonstrated contempt for the values your country is built upon being able to change the system in their favor, do you?
It's impossible to argue that the powerful would have less power, since that's an absurdity. As for the rich, there will be less of a social divide because of less taxation and government waste which enriches the whole of society, and because corporations will not get special treatment - they will be regulated as they should be in exchange for the limited liability they are granted. Proprietorships, on the other hand, will receive the full support of the law, since they are undertaking far more risk than a limited-liability prospect. The barrier to entry for everyone to own his or her small business would be over; the producer/consumer sandbox lines would be eliminated and the economy would perform more efficiently due to more effective specialization.
Look at the War On Drugs. Increased penalties have not decreased overall usage of drugs one bit. At some point, the motivation for breaking the law is rooted in passion, righteousness, or indignation, and at that point the consequences no longer matter with respect to preventing the act.
At least one other architecture (SPARC I think) has this nifty construction called register windows, where to save registers for a context switch, only one instruction needs to be executed (to change the register window pointer) rather than one instruction per register.
Why don't you go to the real Debian IRC channel at irc.openprojects.org #debian instead of some channel on a random network probably operated by people who have no affiliation with the project whatsoever, that happened to misuse the name of Debian to attract unsuspecting visitors? Debian project has no, and cannot possibly have any, control over channels that are named #debian but are not operated by them.
dd_rescue does not die on read errors.
Now product tying is a completely different thing. Fortunately few of Microsoft's utilities are "tied" to Windows in the sense that you can't check them off in the installation. There are a few like IE and Media Player, and not being able to uninstall those without resorting to third party software is a legitimate complaint.
It is quite possible that there is a better way for us to find truth aside from the scientific method. For example, ancient philosophers rejected the idea that anything that is counterintuitive could be true, and thus used the mind's reaction to judge the truth of a claim. Unfortunately, it is impossible to prove an axiomatic system correct or wrong, because it is that very system which is instrumental in determining what is true and false.