There IS a good reason to teach bubble sort. Bubble sort is a good sort to use (much better than quicksort even) if your data set is close to sorted already. In this case bubble sort is much better than N(O^2) and is a good algorithm to use.
You, being a CS student, should already know this.
1) Buy yourself a matrox G400 card or something as powerful. You can't easily do X on an S3 Trio 3d or similar chipsets. 32bit colour in high resolutions are very nice on the Matrox G400.
2) Get a PS/2 mouse and use it instead of a serial mouse. Serial mice don't seem to get enough updates under X and cause window moving and scrollbar fiddling to be slow and clunky. This is the most important part, Do Not Use A Serial Mouse In X.
3) If you want an extra blast of performace, install and use Xfree 4.0. Xfree 4.0 is much faster than Xfree 3.3.X, but isn't as compatible with strange hardware as Xfree 3.3.X
So there you have it, 3 steps to decent X performace. It won't be as good as windows, but it isn't far off.
If you are a celebrity, this is the last thing you would have on your mind if you were caught for speeding.
Firstly, the regular press will eat you alive. You won't get a chance to tell your side of the story.
Secondly, magazines like New Idea, Womans Day, will drag it out into a witch hunt, and suddenly find ways of linking it conspicies, not existant mental illnesses. Some idiot will come out of the woodwork to tell how terrible you have been (you probably never seen this person before) and break down in tears describing the terrible mood swings and violence you have exibited.
No, there is a good reason why celebrities get driven around by other people:-)
BTW, about Elian, why havn't they sent him back to cuba yet? His father is there, (he speaks to him on the phone regularly apparrently) so there should be little problem sending him back? What right do those idiot protesters have in deciding the future of a complete stranger? *sorry if this is offtopic, I don't really understand this, I am from Australia*
CrimeNET, as stupid as they are, is simply a compilation of all the crime information from newspapers ect. This information is already in the public domain and is freely avaliable.
To all those people holding flamethrowers, remember that this is not providing police crime records. If anyone commits a crime serious enough to get themselves into a newspaper, then maybe the stigma should stick to them.
PS. Newspapers don't really care very much about minor crimes, so I wouldn't worry about speeding tickets (unless the police were chasing you) and other minor offenses
Re:Because Intel has a vastly superior reputation.
on
Athlons Sold Out
·
· Score: 1
> The thing is, he's built probably around 50 > computers, and he's made probably 15 pentiums, > 18 pentium IIs, 2 K6-2s, and 15 Pentium IIIs (12 > specially by order.) So far, he's had 1 AMD fail > and 0 Pentiums. That says quite a bit, although > it's not outside the realm of probability.
I see how that would phase him quite a bit, however it is hard to formulate the general reliablity of a particualar peice of hardware with such a low sample set (2 cpus):-). If he had tried to build 50 K6-2 computers, and 25 processors were faulty, then there would be much more merit to the claim that K6-2s are unreliable. Anyway, for me, really crappy hardware would have to be a particular no-name soundcard I had tried out. I had tried 4 cards, (1 at a time) and they all were faulty. I finally gave up on them and went elsewhere with my money. Shudder!
Anyway, there are plenty of other reasons to call the K6-2 crap, including relativly poor FP performance, less than fantastic AGP support.
I shouldn't really talk too loudly though, I have a celeron-333 cpu:-) I am considering going for a spitfire CPU soon, though. The latest Celerons suck (maybe they will get better when intel are forced to improve them by the spitfire)
Re:Because Intel has a vastly superior reputation.
on
Athlons Sold Out
·
· Score: 1
Sorry, I guess I did go overboard with that comment, but it still irks me off no end that people will make a judgement about a blanket particular product based on one single faulty instance of it. You even said you had a computer in front of you that didn't express these problems.
Ops, I must have read the underclocking wrong (by 100mhz, not to 100mhz).
BTW, even OEM parts have warrenties. They ussually are not as long as retail warrenties, but even if didn't have a warrenty, you can still get it replaced (because it is the law). Especially since he is running a "cybercafe", he should have realized this immediately.
The last comment was directed at you though, for making such an absurd blanket judgement. I am sure that for every intel product, you will find just as many horror stories. It doesn't mean you declare all products as crap, it means you choose carefully and make sure you get reasonable support with whatever you buy. BTW, caps are suitable sometimes, but I did go overboard:-).
Re:Because Intel has a vastly superior reputation.
on
Athlons Sold Out
·
· Score: 1
> None of my friends buy Athlons because AMD has a > poor reputation. One of my friends bought a K6-2 > and it was a POS. We had to underclock it around > 100 mhz just to use it at all, and it crashed > frequently for no reason.
Gee, your friend was stupid, He should have taken his computer back to whereever he bought it, or the CPU to whereever he bought it, and demanded a replacement! WTF do you think warrenties are for, scratching your ass with? Do you really think every K6-2 has to be clocked at 100mhz to work!
> The days of tinkering are numbered, and I for > one am disappointed.
Well, get over it.
Back in the good old days (before ZIF (zero insertion force) sockets) motherboards have ALWAYS been tied to the motherboard they were running on. (8086, 286, 386, early 486). There was little overclocking too, since they used quartz timing chips that were difficult to remove or replace. You basicly used what you had.
Even during the years of the 486, pentium and pentium II, cpus were still more or less tied to the motherboard. There was simply no point in only replacing the CPU. The main reasons for this are:
1) Better resale value: most people looking for older hardware need the motherboard that came with the CPU and pay much better.
2) Newer motherboards have features and performace better than the older motherboards, Eg higher FSB's, better RAM support (although RDRAM is a bit dodgy). What is the point of sticking a 1Ghz cpu into a motherboard that can only do 66mhz, or cannot supply enough voltage. So the most logical thing to do is to remove the old motherboard and sell it with the CPU and get a decent motherboard.
It may be that intel are pushing through extra physical changes to their boards to boost chipset sales, but even if they didn't, the technology changes quickly enough that old motherboards are just useless with older CPU's (the only exception that I will mention is the BX board, which seems to scream no matter what pentium-II/III class processor you use in it)
The days of tinkering may be numbered, but don't imply that they existed of more than a few lucky years.
DON'T load the ide-cd driver, otherwise the ide driver steals the CD-ROM and doesn't allow ide-scsi to convert it to a scsi device. If you don't load ide-cd support, it should work
> b : an unlawful taking (as by embezzlement or > burglary) of property
The second definition does not deprive the owner of said property, which is the definition used commonly. Try reading the definition before making yourself look silly:P
Isn't it crazy that a society must protect children from society while at the same time protecting society from children.
1) More hardware. This means more cost + less reliable + harder to use and install.
2) Little flexablity. So this hardware lets you do a few nifty things you can tell your friends about? We use hardware/software in such a way that it is practical to pass it through the main processor. User sends report to printer. Computer loads report data from file, main CPU converts report data into a stream of postscript and sends it off to the printer.
3) Components become non-standard. Eg. Is my new hard-drive compatible with my printer, or is the new modem compatible with the hard drive. It is probably better to just to use standard components and let the flexible CPU control interaction between devices.
4) Who whould signifcantly benifet from any of this. I sure as hell don't have enough print jobs or move enough data around between disks to stress my CPU. Copying between disks is IO/bound. Printing is IO/bound. Intellegent devices aren't going to buy you anything here.
So basicly, 'intellegent devices' are useless for most people. If you really want them, go pay IBM lots of money for them. BTW, SCSI can do disk-disk transfers without CPU-intervention
I prefer not to go back 15 years when cpus were too slow for the devices around it, requiring the use of 'intellegent devices'.
Most average users who spend a lot of time swapping arn't going to be helped much by SCSI. (I have seen many sloppy swapping systems in my time) They simply overtax the system by running too many programs, not having enough ram. Using SCSI would simply be treating the symtoms rather than treating the cause.
I doesn't matter how fast your hard drives are, or IO systems are, once swapping starts to become noticeable, your performace dies. The answer for most people is not a faster hard drive, but more memory or fewer programs.
Yeah, I will admit I do a lot of non-CPU intensive stuff too. (I have a celeron 333). But all of this isn't disk intensive either:-) Compiling is nice on this system:-)
I agree that a lot of time in compiling is spent on disk, but the time lost on IDE is recouped with extra CPU speed. I have seen SCSI systems too, but I have never been able to see much difference to IDE with them. This is simply because nothing I do hits the disks hard. I imagine large fileservers and databases are a whole different ballpark though
Because MOST users don't really need SCSI. MOST users prefer the extra CPU speed to the minor improvment SCSI is. MOST users won't notice the difference between SCSI and IDE. You only see a real difference between SCSI and IDE on big servers that handle lots of hard drive requests simultaniously, have dozens of hard drives, and use RAID. A computer with a single hard drive, a single user at a time, under low to medium utilaization notices nothing between SCSI and IDE
Basicly, if a computer has enough physical ram (64-128meg), hard drive speed become secondary in all but a select few cases (like file servers ect).
I would go for the 733mhz system with IDE anyday over a 400mhz with SCSI. So with IDE, my bootup and program loading may take a very little bit longer, but I can play computer games, compile programs (with GCC, you want as much CPU power as possible), create mp3s, play DVD's all that much faster.
Mulitmedia does benifeit a LOT from caches. Often you must process (decrypt, convert) multimedia data in the processor, so the blocks of data being worked on are in the L1/L2 cache while the processor works on the data.
Also, the programs that convert this multimedia data also live in the L1 cache. Since mulitmedia programs are about moving and processing large amounts of data in a loop, it does well in an L1 cache.
Also, saying the rest of the computer should be as fast as the processor is wishing against hope. Lots of really nasty issues occur (feedback, crosstalk) when you try to drive wires on a motherboard at the speed of the CPU. The cost of designing and creating motherboards that can overcome this limitation are REALLY expensive and difficult to design.
So no, the way the computer is designed is not a conspiracy to rob us of computing power! It actually makes computers affordable and faster than they otherwise would be.
20 years from now I have this feeling there won't much left of copyright/patent law.
I hope not. I am looking forward to reading more books and watching more movies in my life. I may even pay for them once in a while.
If copyright law did not exist, then I doubt authors, movie makers, ect, would bother producing movies and publishing books.
The issue of copyright has nothing to do with the horse/car thing. Horses were replace by cars because cars were more effiecient. I don't see written work/films being replaced by anything soon.
And you have been on the coffee too much, all markets and products (except maybe the black market), require law to operate effeiently.
If you can manage to code it yes. But remember computers are sick tempermental bastards and the day something works just like that all the time is the day humans arn't using them.
Face it, computers arn't the simple things flashy advertising would have you believe, and a certain amount of tampering will always be required.
However, things are much better than they used to be, SO STOP COMPLAINING! You can compile a linux kernel in 15 min at the most on a modern machine (and that is conservative), go and have a coffee while you wait. Back in the good old days, compiling a kernel took hours and we were glad to do it:-). If you can't stand compiling your own kernel, DON'T. All distributions have modules for all the extra cards and devices you use, even slackware.
Compiling you own kernel is completely optional. The fact that an article mentions how to do it doesn't mean you have to. Feel free to moderate this blatent flame in any direction you wan't it.
Re:now we should have new NT vs. Linux Benchmarks
on
Samba 2.06 Released
·
· Score: 1
even *I* could speed up Samba drastically - just take out all the checks for password and username, and give everyone full access to the entire tree:+)
That wouldn't speed up samba drasticly, since that is not where the bottlenecks are. I imagine filename searching (case insensitive), name mangling, and oplocks are where the worse bottlenecks are.
Password authentication is rarely ever a bottleneck
More likely to be just a database error. The message above does sonnd very database like.
Perhaps you should email them reporting the problem instead of blindly attacking them.
I seriously doubt lycros could convice enough people to give them money to be on the search engine. They would have about 100 sites on the entire database if this was the case.
What they are doing is probably a bad idea all the same (see content neutrality a few comments back)
Cars were once impractical, so were planes, electricity, running water, computers and basicly everything else you use all the time.
Just because developing a technology may be extremely expensive initally, doesn't mean that it is a worthless technology. Space travel is a very advanced technology that will require a LOT of research and a LOT of money to develop. When computers were first produced, they cost a LOT of money, were impractical (no, a computer that is several tonne is not practical) and weren't very effective.
Also, space travel will provide spill over technologies in other industries as it is developed due to the new way scientists will solve problems. (I admit teflon sucks rocks though!).
It is extremely naive to simply dismiss an entire field of technology because of its expense. The results of this field could be incredible, given the money and resources required.
Oh, and NASA spends much less that the USA defence forces, so i can complain that USA spends 600 billion dollars (last time i checked) a year developing and using technology designed to kill people in a variety of ways, while keeping the technology secret so it cannot be used in other industries.
No that is the bit size of the alta-vec extentions that they hype almost as much as intel did MMX (just alta-vec is hopefully more useful than intels braindead MMX)
There seems to be some misunderstanding on the PowerPC archetecture.
The PowerPC architecture is a instruction set definition written by Apple/IBM. It specifies a set of 32bit and 64bit instructions that PowerPC implementations must follow. 32bit implementations do not need to implement the 64bit instructions. (they are specified as optional in the specifications)
Under PowerPC, 32bit and 64bit code can be executed at the same time (no mode switching like x86).
All current PowerPC chips are only 32bit implemenations. It appears that the G5 will be the first 64bit PowerPC implementation.
It makes no sense ditching the 32 bit instructions because supporting them is
1) Not very expensive in the PowerPC archiecture (unlike Merced) 2) You can write faster programs by mixing the faster 32 bit instructions with the slower 64 bit instructions when needed. 3) Allows people to run existing and 64bit software transparently. (imagine 64bit modules on a 32bit database server)
this is not a good idea, any tech support person should not be left with a computers root password, even dumb people deserve to have their security protected!
Slashdot Mirror
There IS a good reason to teach bubble sort. Bubble sort is a good sort to use (much better than quicksort even) if your data set is close to sorted already. In this case bubble sort is much better than N(O^2) and is a good algorithm to use.
You, being a CS student, should already know this.
If you want good performance under X you need to:
1) Buy yourself a matrox G400 card or something as powerful. You can't easily do X on an S3 Trio 3d or similar chipsets. 32bit colour in high resolutions are very nice on the Matrox G400.
2) Get a PS/2 mouse and use it instead of a serial mouse. Serial mice don't seem to get enough updates under X and cause window moving and scrollbar fiddling to be slow and clunky. This is the most important part, Do Not Use A Serial Mouse In X.
3) If you want an extra blast of performace, install and use Xfree 4.0. Xfree 4.0 is much faster than Xfree 3.3.X, but isn't as compatible with strange hardware as Xfree 3.3.X
So there you have it, 3 steps to decent X performace. It won't be as good as windows, but it isn't far off.
About celebrities.
:-)
If you are a celebrity, this is the last thing you would have on your mind if you were caught for speeding.
Firstly, the regular press will eat you alive. You won't get a chance to tell your side of the story.
Secondly, magazines like New Idea, Womans Day, will drag it out into a witch hunt, and suddenly find ways of linking it conspicies, not existant mental illnesses. Some idiot will come out of the woodwork to tell how terrible you have been (you probably never seen this person before) and break down in tears describing the terrible mood swings and violence you have exibited.
No, there is a good reason why celebrities get driven around by other people
BTW, about Elian, why havn't they sent him back to cuba yet? His father is there, (he speaks to him on the phone regularly apparrently) so there should be little problem sending him back? What right do those idiot protesters have in deciding the future of a complete stranger? *sorry if this is offtopic, I don't really understand this, I am from Australia*
CrimeNET, as stupid as they are, is simply a compilation of all the crime information from newspapers ect. This information is already in the public domain and is freely avaliable.
To all those people holding flamethrowers, remember that this is not providing police crime records. If anyone commits a crime serious enough to get themselves into a newspaper, then maybe the stigma should stick to them.
PS. Newspapers don't really care very much about minor crimes, so I wouldn't worry about speeding tickets (unless the police were chasing you) and other minor offenses
> The thing is, he's built probably around 50
:-). If he had tried to build 50 K6-2 computers, and 25 processors were faulty, then there would be much more merit to the claim that K6-2s are unreliable. Anyway, for me, really crappy hardware would have to be a particular no-name soundcard I had tried out. I had tried 4 cards, (1 at a time) and they all were faulty. I finally gave up on them and went elsewhere with my money. Shudder!
:-) I am considering going for a spitfire CPU soon, though. The latest Celerons suck (maybe they will get better when intel are forced to improve them by the spitfire)
> computers, and he's made probably 15 pentiums,
> 18 pentium IIs, 2 K6-2s, and 15 Pentium IIIs (12
> specially by order.) So far, he's had 1 AMD fail
> and 0 Pentiums. That says quite a bit, although
> it's not outside the realm of probability.
I see how that would phase him quite a bit, however it is hard to formulate the general reliablity of a particualar peice of hardware with such a low sample set (2 cpus)
Anyway, there are plenty of other reasons to call the K6-2 crap, including relativly poor FP performance, less than fantastic AGP support.
I shouldn't really talk too loudly though, I have a celeron-333 cpu
Sorry, I guess I did go overboard with that comment, but it still irks me off no end that people will make a judgement about a blanket particular product based on one single faulty instance of it. You even said you had a computer in front of you that didn't express these problems.
:-).
Ops, I must have read the underclocking wrong (by 100mhz, not to 100mhz).
BTW, even OEM parts have warrenties. They ussually are not as long as retail warrenties, but even if didn't have a warrenty, you can still get it replaced (because it is the law). Especially since he is running a "cybercafe", he should have realized this immediately.
The last comment was directed at you though, for making such an absurd blanket judgement. I am sure that for every intel product, you will find just as many horror stories. It doesn't mean you declare all products as crap, it means you choose carefully and make sure you get reasonable support with whatever you buy. BTW, caps are suitable sometimes, but I did go overboard
> None of my friends buy Athlons because AMD has a
> poor reputation. One of my friends bought a K6-2
> and it was a POS. We had to underclock it around
> 100 mhz just to use it at all, and it crashed
> frequently for no reason.
Gee, your friend was stupid, He should have taken his computer back to whereever he bought it, or the CPU to whereever he bought it, and demanded a replacement! WTF do you think warrenties are for, scratching your ass with? Do you really think every K6-2 has to be clocked at 100mhz to work!
PEOPLE LIKE YOU ARE TOO DUMB TO OWN A COMPUTER!
> The days of tinkering are numbered, and I for
> one am disappointed.
Well, get over it.
Back in the good old days (before ZIF (zero insertion force) sockets) motherboards have ALWAYS been tied to the motherboard they were running on. (8086, 286, 386, early 486). There was little overclocking too, since they used quartz timing chips that were difficult to remove or replace. You basicly used what you had.
Even during the years of the 486, pentium and pentium II, cpus were still more or less tied to the motherboard. There was simply no point in only replacing the CPU. The main reasons for this are:
1) Better resale value: most people looking for older hardware need the motherboard that came with the CPU and pay much better.
2) Newer motherboards have features and performace better than the older motherboards, Eg higher FSB's, better RAM support (although RDRAM is a bit dodgy). What is the point of sticking a 1Ghz cpu into a motherboard that can only do 66mhz, or cannot supply enough voltage. So the most logical thing to do is to remove the old motherboard and sell it with the CPU and get a decent motherboard.
It may be that intel are pushing through extra physical changes to their boards to boost chipset sales, but even if they didn't, the technology changes quickly enough that old motherboards are just useless with older CPU's (the only exception that I will mention is the BX board, which seems to scream no matter what pentium-II/III class processor you use in it)
The days of tinkering may be numbered, but don't imply that they existed of more than a few lucky years.
[root@sambaserver cdr]# /sbin/modprobe ide-cd
DON'T load the ide-cd driver, otherwise the ide driver steals the CD-ROM and doesn't allow ide-scsi to convert it to a scsi device. If you don't load ide-cd support, it should work
> b : an unlawful taking (as by embezzlement or
:P
> burglary) of property
The second definition does not deprive the owner of said property, which is the definition used commonly. Try reading the definition before making yourself look silly
Isn't it crazy that a society must protect children from society while at the same time protecting society from children.
There are good reasons against this:
1) More hardware. This means more cost + less reliable + harder to use and install.
2) Little flexablity. So this hardware lets you do a few nifty things you can tell your friends about? We use hardware/software in such a way that it is practical to pass it through the main processor. User sends report to printer. Computer loads report data from file, main CPU converts report data into a stream of postscript and sends it off to the printer.
3) Components become non-standard. Eg. Is my new hard-drive compatible with my printer, or is the new modem compatible with the hard drive. It is probably better to just to use standard components and let the flexible CPU control interaction between devices.
4) Who whould signifcantly benifet from any of this. I sure as hell don't have enough print jobs or move enough data around between disks to stress my CPU. Copying between disks is IO/bound. Printing is IO/bound. Intellegent devices aren't going to buy you anything here.
So basicly, 'intellegent devices' are useless for most people. If you really want them, go pay IBM lots of money for them. BTW, SCSI can do disk-disk transfers without CPU-intervention
I prefer not to go back 15 years when cpus were too slow for the devices around it, requiring the use of 'intellegent devices'.
EOR (End of Rant)
Hehe,
:-) Compiling is nice on this system :-)
Most average users who spend a lot of time swapping arn't going to be helped much by SCSI. (I have seen many sloppy swapping systems in my time) They simply overtax the system by running too many programs, not having enough ram. Using SCSI would simply be treating the symtoms rather than treating the cause.
I doesn't matter how fast your hard drives are, or IO systems are, once swapping starts to become noticeable, your performace dies. The answer for most people is not a faster hard drive, but more memory or fewer programs.
Yeah, I will admit I do a lot of non-CPU intensive stuff too. (I have a celeron 333). But all of this isn't disk intensive either
I agree that a lot of time in compiling is spent on disk, but the time lost on IDE is recouped with extra CPU speed. I have seen SCSI systems too, but I have never been able to see much difference to IDE with them. This is simply because nothing I do hits the disks hard. I imagine large fileservers and databases are a whole different ballpark though
EOR (end of rant)
Because MOST users don't really need SCSI. MOST users prefer the extra CPU speed to the minor improvment SCSI is. MOST users won't notice the difference between SCSI and IDE. You only see a real difference between SCSI and IDE on big servers that handle lots of hard drive requests simultaniously, have dozens of hard drives, and use RAID. A computer with a single hard drive, a single user at a time, under low to medium utilaization notices nothing between SCSI and IDE
Basicly, if a computer has enough physical ram (64-128meg), hard drive speed become secondary in all but a select few cases (like file servers ect).
I would go for the 733mhz system with IDE anyday over a 400mhz with SCSI. So with IDE, my bootup and program loading may take a very little bit longer, but I can play computer games, compile programs (with GCC, you want as much CPU power as possible), create mp3s, play DVD's all that much faster.
EOR (End of Rant)
Mulitmedia does benifeit a LOT from caches. Often you must process (decrypt, convert) multimedia data in the processor, so the blocks of data being worked on are in the L1/L2 cache while the processor works on the data.
Also, the programs that convert this multimedia data also live in the L1 cache. Since mulitmedia programs are about moving and processing large amounts of data in a loop, it does well in an L1 cache.
Also, saying the rest of the computer should be as fast as the processor is wishing against hope. Lots of really nasty issues occur (feedback, crosstalk) when you try to drive wires on a motherboard at the speed of the CPU. The cost of designing and creating motherboards that can overcome this limitation are REALLY expensive and difficult to design.
So no, the way the computer is designed is not a conspiracy to rob us of computing power! It actually makes computers affordable and faster than they otherwise would be.
20 years from now I have this feeling there won't much left of copyright/patent law.
I hope not. I am looking forward to reading more books and watching more movies in my life. I may even pay for them once in a while.
If copyright law did not exist, then I doubt authors, movie makers, ect, would bother producing movies and publishing books.
The issue of copyright has nothing to do with the horse/car thing. Horses were replace by cars because cars were more effiecient. I don't see written work/films being replaced by anything soon.
And you have been on the coffee too much, all markets and products (except maybe the black market), require law to operate effeiently.
If you can manage to code it yes. But remember computers are sick tempermental bastards and the day something works just like that all the time is the day humans arn't using them.
:-). If you can't stand compiling your own kernel, DON'T. All distributions have modules for all the extra cards and devices you use, even slackware.
Face it, computers arn't the simple things flashy advertising would have you believe, and a certain amount of tampering will always be required.
However, things are much better than they used to be, SO STOP COMPLAINING! You can compile a linux kernel in 15 min at the most on a modern machine (and that is conservative), go and have a coffee while you wait. Back in the good old days, compiling a kernel took hours and we were glad to do it
Compiling you own kernel is completely optional. The fact that an article mentions how to do it doesn't mean you have to. Feel free to moderate this blatent flame in any direction you wan't it.
even *I* could speed up Samba drastically - just take out all the checks for password and username, and give everyone full access to the entire tree :+)
That wouldn't speed up samba drasticly, since that is not where the bottlenecks are. I imagine filename searching (case insensitive), name mangling, and oplocks are where the worse bottlenecks are.
Password authentication is rarely ever a bottleneck
More likely to be just a database error. The message above does sonnd very database like.
Perhaps you should email them reporting the problem instead of blindly attacking them.
I seriously doubt lycros could convice enough people to give them money to be on the search engine. They would have about 100 sites on the entire database if this was the case.
What they are doing is probably a bad idea all the same (see content neutrality a few comments back)
My 5cents (since they got rid of 2c pieces)
Idiot, just cut off the australian public (who do not support the law) over some stupid law one politian wanted.
You are fighting the wrong people, the australian public is not your enemy and attacking them will not get the law lifted!
Sigh, and I thought america was bad!
Cars were once impractical, so were planes, electricity, running water, computers and basicly everything else you use all the time.
Just because developing a technology may be extremely expensive initally, doesn't mean that it is a worthless technology. Space travel is a very advanced technology that will require a LOT of research and a LOT of money to develop. When computers were first produced, they cost a LOT of money, were impractical (no, a computer that is several tonne is not practical) and weren't very effective.
Also, space travel will provide spill over technologies in other industries as it is developed due to the new way scientists will solve problems. (I admit teflon sucks rocks though!).
It is extremely naive to simply dismiss an entire field of technology because of its expense. The results of this field could be incredible, given the money and resources required.
Oh, and NASA spends much less that the USA defence forces, so i can complain that USA spends 600 billion dollars (last time i checked) a year developing and using technology designed to kill people in a variety of ways, while keeping the technology secret so it cannot be used in other industries.
Like GNU wants Linux to be called GNU/Linux. Who really cares when the meaning is clear!
No that is the bit size of the alta-vec extentions that they hype almost as much as intel did MMX (just alta-vec is hopefully more useful than intels braindead MMX)
:)
Hopefully G5 will also have these extentions.
just the answer
There seems to be some misunderstanding on the PowerPC archetecture.
The PowerPC architecture is a instruction set definition written by Apple/IBM. It specifies a set of 32bit and 64bit instructions that PowerPC implementations must follow. 32bit implementations do not need to implement the 64bit instructions. (they are specified as optional in the specifications)
Under PowerPC, 32bit and 64bit code can be executed at the same time (no mode switching like x86).
All current PowerPC chips are only 32bit implemenations. It appears that the G5 will be the first 64bit PowerPC implementation.
It makes no sense ditching the 32 bit instructions because supporting them is
1) Not very expensive in the PowerPC archiecture (unlike Merced)
2) You can write faster programs by mixing the faster 32 bit instructions with the slower 64 bit instructions when needed.
3) Allows people to run existing and 64bit software transparently. (imagine 64bit modules on a 32bit database server)
gee, moderation is bad. The guy who moderated this down must be on drugs.
I am for a system where comments cannot be moderated down to -1. It seems to be abused far too much.
In fact, i don't even use moderation because of how bad it is!
this is not a good idea, any tech support person should not be left with a computers root password, even dumb people deserve to have their security protected!