First, it was compatible with Win 3.1. IBM had rights from thier failed agreement with MSFT to distibute the Win16 binaries as part of OS/2. Developers saw that they could write one version of code that would run on both Windows and OS/2. This made development of an OS/2 native app hard to justify.
Second, I remember doing accounting software back in 87/88 and evaluating a port to OS/2 for an important client. IBM wanted $800 up front, plus a $200 OS/2 sale for access to their SDK's. Thanks, but..
MSFT does give away a LOT of info about thier platform, and proselytizes quite effectively.
And to those who say OS/2 was good, remember that this is where LanMan was born. We are still paying the price for this with ANY MSFT based lan, weak encryption, NetBIOS exploits, etc.
How about a browser? Can you afford that?
My off the cuff implementation would be a web service. Agree on what is taxable/nontaxable, make an XML schema with the various categories ie 0.00.10Etc.
Sales Tax, ST 000122
Human readable, and easy to figure..
Furthermore, make the tax collector put up the service! Perhaps http://ZIPCODE.US.GOV/TaxRates
But anyway, taxes suck, so..
Yes, I know... They are different formats with different data rates. One is for audio, and one is for video. Video needs higher data rates, in general.
So anyway, the Sony drive in question can not read media as fast as it writes. I know of no other data storage mechanism that has this problem.
Furthermore, 24x CD burning is quite good for a DVD drive. Most others do far less. Even NEC's upcoming 4x DVD burner only burns CD's at 16X.
Insert disk and hit record, for a price point of $200.00 when it is in volume.
And 2.40 for a CDRW?!? Just jump to DVD(+-) RW. They are only $6.00, and getting cheaper, and would hold about as much as a long video cassette at similiar quality.
Also, tapes are not reliable either. They are only good for about 100 plays.
They expect google to never change it? In return for what? Do they have ANY business relationship with google, other than the obviously parasitic one?!?
During AMD's earnings conference call they delayed the rollout of clawhammer/opteron AGAIN.
This assumes they are still in business.. (They have been losing money for a while)
Also keep in mind that SPEC marks are *highly* manipulatable. Here you have a benchmark that is supposed to test the CPU. The problem with this is that is both compiler dependent *and* OS dependent.
Indeed. SpecFP has almost been reduced to a memory throughput test. What kind of bandwidth will the (hypothetical) Apple chipset deliver? Also, are these numbers base or peak?
Not to mention published Spec numbers must use a production system..
Indeed.
After contemplating my original post, and your response, I am now thinking App specific stuff in the CPU is BAD.
Back in the good old days Crays had Front End Processors which did all the IO for them. This concept is being resurrected (somewhat) by intelligent NIC's and caching disk controllers.
It would seem counterproductive to me to do TCP checksumming in the cpu. Why not just put some more smarts in the NIC, with some embedded ram, and just make the API stream based. IE Heres a web page, send it, and worry about all the ACK's, etc, for me. Doing all that memory accessing in the CPU would thrash the cache a lot, no? Especially with gigabit getting more common on motherboards (BTW Tyan has a new dual athlon with gigabit, and U320). Not to mention 10G ethernet coming soon. And then there is encryption! We are going to need a dedicated CPU to handle that, or you will not get much work done on your app!
Oh, and you could use n-2 gen chip fabs for these, since they would be smaller cheapers chips with regard to modern cpu's..
Instead of using a sequence of instructions to perform a common function, the operating system will use a single instruction that causes the entire function to be performed by the POWER5 microprocessor hardware. Examples of these common functions include TCP/IP processing, communications message-passing operations, and virtual memory subsystem operations, to name a few. The interfaces to all of these silicon accelerators will be open so that other operating systems, for example Linux, can take advantage of them.
and
When POWER6 arrives in 2006, it is expected to extend the Fast Path idea to even higher-level software such as DB2 and WebSphere processing. Again, all of the silicon accelerator interfaces will be open, so other software developers wil be able to take advantage of the improved performance.
Bill Gates once said that when a given bit of functionality is sufficiently standardized, it should be part of the OS.
No we will make it part of the CPU.
Slashdot Mirror
First, it was compatible with Win 3.1. IBM had rights from thier failed agreement with MSFT to distibute the Win16 binaries as part of OS/2. Developers saw that they could write one version of code that would run on both Windows and OS/2. This made development of an OS/2 native app hard to justify.
Second, I remember doing accounting software back in 87/88 and evaluating a port to OS/2 for an important client. IBM wanted $800 up front, plus a $200 OS/2 sale for access to their SDK's. Thanks, but..
MSFT does give away a LOT of info about thier platform, and proselytizes quite effectively.
And to those who say OS/2 was good, remember that this is where LanMan was born. We are still paying the price for this with ANY MSFT based lan, weak encryption, NetBIOS exploits, etc.
4.7 gig of MP3's would mean a lot less disks to tote around.
And as others have commented, make it burn DVD's, too..
How about a browser? Can you afford that? My off the cuff implementation would be a web service. Agree on what is taxable/nontaxable, make an XML schema with the various categories ie 0.00.10Etc. Sales Tax, ST 000122 Human readable, and easy to figure.. Furthermore, make the tax collector put up the service! Perhaps http://ZIPCODE.US.GOV/TaxRates But anyway, taxes suck, so..
Yes, I know... They are different formats with different data rates. One is for audio, and one is for video. Video needs higher data rates, in general. So anyway, the Sony drive in question can not read media as fast as it writes. I know of no other data storage mechanism that has this problem. Furthermore, 24x CD burning is quite good for a DVD drive. Most others do far less. Even NEC's upcoming 4x DVD burner only burns CD's at 16X.
http://www.cdrlabs.com/reviews/index.php?reviewid= 154&page=Features
Title says it all.. Burns them at 4x (if the media is available), and reads them at 2x.
CD Burning speed of 24x is nice tho.
Still patching?!?
1.10 has been promised for over a year!
High Quality Recording on High-Capacity 4.7GB DVD-RAM Discs Yes
And the media is not cheap..
They should put an ethernet port on it, too.
Insert disk and hit record, for a price point of $200.00 when it is in volume. And 2.40 for a CDRW?!? Just jump to DVD(+-) RW. They are only $6.00, and getting cheaper, and would hold about as much as a long video cassette at similiar quality. Also, tapes are not reliable either. They are only good for about 100 plays.
Name says it all. It is owned by google..
They expect google to never change it? In return for what? Do they have ANY business relationship with google, other than the obviously parasitic one?!?
FOAD..
Even if the FCC goes along with this, the telecom industry can not afford to roll it out.
They are heavily burdened by debt from Cell and cable modems.
Article was a bit light on facts but carbon fiber composites, and only one engine would give very low weight
There does not seem to be much room in it for fuel..
During AMD's earnings conference call they delayed the rollout of clawhammer/opteron AGAIN. This assumes they are still in business.. (They have been losing money for a while)
And applied some common physics. This is just a lab stunt.
Back to my original point, I see no way for this to be useful.. This will never leave the lab until you get it down to a few chips!
The 17GHz bandwidth of the signal is quite impressive, though.
120Ghz? I can not think of an op-amp that works anywhere near the freq. Not to mention a waveguide to get your output to the antenna.
As for omnidirectional, that would lower your effective point to point power further.
At these freq's it could only be useful for point-to-point comms.
I wonder why they did not just leave it all optical.
Looks like about 2 feet. And it would seem to be highly directional.
Not sure what this would be usefull for..
It will be 5 years behind schedule and 6.9 billion over budget.
Would you want your 3 year old drive replaced and or fixed? Why should they stock these? Maybe if they just sent me the cheapest one currently made..
Also keep in mind that SPEC marks are *highly* manipulatable. Here you have a benchmark that is supposed to test the CPU. The problem with this is that is both compiler dependent *and* OS dependent.
Indeed. SpecFP has almost been reduced to a memory throughput test. What kind of bandwidth will the (hypothetical) Apple chipset deliver? Also, are these numbers base or peak?
Not to mention published Spec numbers must use a production system..
The PowerPC 970 triples the length of the PowerPC pipeline
This will give it the same issues the P4 has. Namely a large penalty for branch mispredicts, etc. Instructions per clock will decrease.
OTOH, they should be able to crank the speed!
Not that hot NOW! They will have a lot of competition in that space with Opteron/Clawhammer, and the new Sparcs.
Still, glad to see something other than incremental progress.
Everything old is new again.
Indeed. After contemplating my original post, and your response, I am now thinking App specific stuff in the CPU is BAD.
Back in the good old days Crays had Front End Processors which did all the IO for them. This concept is being resurrected (somewhat) by intelligent NIC's and caching disk controllers.
It would seem counterproductive to me to do TCP checksumming in the cpu. Why not just put some more smarts in the NIC, with some embedded ram, and just make the API stream based. IE Heres a web page, send it, and worry about all the ACK's, etc, for me. Doing all that memory accessing in the CPU would thrash the cache a lot, no? Especially with gigabit getting more common on motherboards (BTW Tyan has a new dual athlon with gigabit, and U320). Not to mention 10G ethernet coming soon. And then there is encryption! We are going to need a dedicated CPU to handle that, or you will not get much work done on your app!
Oh, and you could use n-2 gen chip fabs for these, since they would be smaller cheapers chips with regard to modern cpu's..
Some interesting quotes:
Instead of using a sequence of instructions to perform a common function, the operating system will use a single instruction that causes the entire function to be performed by the POWER5 microprocessor hardware. Examples of these common functions include TCP/IP processing, communications message-passing operations, and virtual memory subsystem operations, to name a few. The interfaces to all of these silicon accelerators will be open so that other operating systems, for example Linux, can take advantage of them.
and
When POWER6 arrives in 2006, it is expected to extend the Fast Path idea to even higher-level software such as DB2 and WebSphere processing. Again, all of the silicon accelerator interfaces will be open, so other software developers wil be able to take advantage of the improved performance.
Bill Gates once said that when a given bit of functionality is sufficiently standardized, it should be part of the OS.
No we will make it part of the CPU.
Are they going to put adware/spyware to subsidize the cost?
Seems like the thing to do these days..
Then how does it compensate for the transfer function of the microphone?
Maybe a USB mic with the frequency profile embedded in it? Plug it in, and the DSP could compensate for it, too.