"Would I put an air traffic control system on Linux right now? No," says Carey. "But can it get there within five years? Absolutely."
I'm sorry, but wasn't there a story about this exact scenario being implemented not all too long ago? Perhaps someone should tell Carey that it is politically correct to trust linux for the critical stuff too.
It doesn't sound like Merril Lynch did a windows to linux migration. Rather they did a "Unix" to linux migration. BIG difference there. Most of their code, as someone else pointed out, being written in Perl, probably ported rather easily.
Re:Everyday life needs algorithms
on
Deep Algorithms?
·
· Score: 1
Or figuring out the shortest distance between meeting a beautiful woman and getting laid.
If you figure out how to optimize this one in a way that works every time, you will have solved all the important problems in the universe.
You've apparently never had an editor. She may not have even wrote this line. Would it make you feel better if she had said "breaking the laws of nature as we know them"? Let's try not to be a pedant. This article was after all, intended for the lay reader. (You didn't notice any theoretical/philosophical formulas or calculations in the article for example.) LA Times is not New Scientist or ieee.org.
(See my post above yours.) I still am very skeptical if they can deliver on 1000X performance though, for say $300.(what you average gamer is willing to spend on a special purpose console.) It seems a bit outlandish.
...Want to upgrade your PS3? Just buy another and stack it on top of your current ones.
I would argue that this would be a mistake. Seems to me the main advantage that the console has over the pc is that every console out there is identical. ie, one platform to debug your game on. Creating a market of consoles where some are more powerful than others is going to cause a support nightmare and ruin their margins. They will never do it like this. All boxes pretty much have to run the same. That is why I think if they are going to "cluster" your playstation, it will be a combination of on-chip and internal to a single unit.
...Finally, the old "how much power do you really need" and "what's the point if I just have a standard tv/monitor" arguments: imagine how much power rendering an interactive movie with life-like characters real-time would take. It's WAY beyond anything we can do in the home today.
This is way beyond anything we can do in the game development industry today.
That truly is the most horrible part of gaming on a console. I can throw mad hardware at a pc and play from the hard drive, this making load times barely noticeable. Can't do this with a playstation.
A processor a couple of years from now that can give them 8 times the power of the current PS2. Now imagine 32 of them on one die. Now put four of them in one box. Sounds like a nightmare to me, but I just can't imagine how else they intend to accomplish this without having some REALLY strong cohesion between processors. And I truly have no idea how they intend to produce this box for $300, even ten years from now. This whole article just smells like BS.
I've never known the police to track drug users. Drug users have a way of showing up all on their own. Unless of course they also think you are dealing...
Can you accomplish this by holding it up to the monitor and pressing "Degauss"? I'd never thought to try that until now. Personally, I'd just use a demagnetizer.
That is hardly a fair comparison. ATI was a market leader LONG before Nvidia made a name for themselves. Then Nvidia came to dominate the market segment. Then ATI had to play catch up. For a very short time as of late, one could even argue they were a market force again. Too bad Nvidia has already signed all the sweet deals in the video card industry, leaving ATI wondering what happened to the pie they baked...
Let us not forget that Nvidia GPUs happen to work really well with AMD chips.(think hypertransport here) Or the fact that Nvidia makes a chipset for AMD processors. I would say it is almost a given at this point that Nvidia will have the contract for Xbox2. So this would seem to be a decision based on technical merit, as well as market sense.(if this little rumor is true)
Besides, isn't there something very hypocritical in his disdain for Intel and the big marketing budget, and his love of Microsoft and their big marketing budget. I would have to remind him that anyone powerful enough to help you is also powerful enough to hurt you proportionately.
I would like to believe that AMD is playing lip service to MS. This may just be because "Linux" isn't a company so to speak, that markets a product. If you look at AMD's actions, it seems kind of obvious that they definitely support the Linux crowd. It's not as if most techies who use linux don't also support AMD!(At least that is the general impression I get.)
I certainly don't agree with all of his ideas.(Especially the ones about MS and Linux...) But this guy truly deserves credit for being on the side of technical superiority in his products, forcing a giant like Intel to HAVE to compete with a company that started with very humble beginnings. It's been a long time coming, but AMD is definitely one of my favorite tech companies. Keep an eye on this company's stock this fall when Hammer is unleashed on the world! And watch Intel's response when they are forced to swallow their pride and make a clone. Hah! Justice just might be served.
The fact that the magnetic north pole is leaving Canada is the only thing interesting about this. The magnetic north pole ALWAYS changes. Ever used a terrain map with twelve digit grid coordinates? Any highly accurate map will have both a compass arrow for north as well as magnetic north. These maps get replaced routinely every couple of years due to the shifting of magnetic north.
When it comes to building a system for my personal use, I completely agree with you. I will build what I want, no matter what the cost.
However, when I am purchasing systems for work by the dozen, I do not have the time to build all of those systems and I don't really care to hold the liability for problems when a part stops working in them after about five months. (Businesses like warranties.) The answer here? Dell. Or HP. Or choose your favorite vendor. And cost is an object for most companies too.
You've just gotta love the constructive feedback you get on this site. Not that it is in any way relevant, but I haven't used Windows in more time than I care to think about. The only times I am ever on a Windows machine anymore is to fix someone else's Windows problems.
Oh, and the only reason there a lot of us use Intel hardware instead of AMD hardware is because none of the big name vendors sell AMD. Period. Gateway tried it for a while, but they fucked those systems up pretty bad by only offering AMD chips with their "value line" garbage. (aka - all instegrated components, shared memory video card, etc... and an AMD processor) It's no wonder they didn't sell. People who buy AMD systems are doing so because they know technology and they want a good system! If Dell would sell a quality x86 box with AMD processors, that is all I would buy. But until that happens, it just isn't feasible to buy some off-the-wall vendor's hardware or build-it-yourself, just to have "AMD inside".
Perhaps it is just because of MacOS, but I have been really disappointed by the performance of the G4 "supercomputer". I haven't had the opportunity to run a real OS on one yet. (Played around with OSX for a while, but ended up switching back to OS9 because OSX is just too damn slow and doesn't actually run any software.) And I was using a pretty much top of the line(when it was purchased) G4 733 with 512 RAM! My not-so-supercomputer PIII desktop runs circles around that thing, at least from a useability/feel perspective.
One last thing, more on topic with this article, I wouldn't have a motherboard with a soldered on processor if you gave it to me. It reminds me too much of a certain old Cyrix machine(with a compaq badge on it) that we used to call "the beast". Unless it's embedded, processors don't belong soldered on a mainboard.
For many people, this has become an essential part of their jobs. Reporters, researchers of all types, anyone who needs to communicate with their staff uses e-mail. Hell many people use AIM because it facilitates an immediate communications channel.
This is my opinion: When you start to restrict the creative new ways people come up with to get business done, you are costing your organization more time and money (productivity) than could ever be lost by a stupid virus!
Happy employees are productive employees. And people who feel they are LOSING the privileges/tools they have grown accustomed to will tend not to be real happy about it. Here is my favorite example of what happens when an organization gets e-mail: For the first couple of days, employees pass cute little notes back and forth to each other, in effect familiarizing themselves with the system. After that, there is the routine "fwd:" crowd. Eventually, gradually, people discover new modes of communicating. They don't even realize just how reliant they become on a technology. Until it is taken away. Ever seen what happens when people can't get into their e-mail? You'd be hard-pressed to get an open phone line. Hell, I think the money companies save on phone bills alone because of e-mail makes e-mail worth every damn penny.
At any rate, all this talk of restricting users' privileges is just a bunch of BS. I don't believe any IT manager with half a brain is going to bring this up to his management. The idea will never even be born. Unfortunately, there are likely to be admins with less than half a brain, who think this is a good idea. Glad I don't work at their company. Glad they don't decide on my company's security policy.
One final note, instead of restricting the hell out of everyone's work to make things more secure, why not just make things more secure? For windows environments, Norton Antivirus Corporate goes a LONG way to eradicating virus damage, as do system images and nightly backups... Any Windows admin who hasn't figured out how to completely rebuild a system (unattended) in ten minutes or less just isn't worth their weight anyways.
"There is still only one desktop available for use at any given time. "
Not so sure about that. I believe the software allows you to connect remotely, while someone else can be connected locally and they will never know you are using the machine. Kind of like remote administration mode on a 2000 server.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sorry, but wasn't there a story about this exact scenario being implemented not all too long ago? Perhaps someone should tell Carey that it is politically correct to trust linux for the critical stuff too.
It doesn't sound like Merril Lynch did a windows to linux migration. Rather they did a "Unix" to linux migration. BIG difference there. Most of their code, as someone else pointed out, being written in Perl, probably ported rather easily.
If you figure out how to optimize this one in a way that works every time, you will have solved all the important problems in the universe.
You've apparently never had an editor. She may not have even wrote this line. Would it make you feel better if she had said "breaking the laws of nature as we know them"? Let's try not to be a pedant. This article was after all, intended for the lay reader. (You didn't notice any theoretical/philosophical formulas or calculations in the article for example.) LA Times is not New Scientist or ieee.org.
You mean like veal?
(See my post above yours.) I still am very skeptical if they can deliver on 1000X performance though, for say $300.(what you average gamer is willing to spend on a special purpose console.) It seems a bit outlandish.
I would argue that this would be a mistake. Seems to me the main advantage that the console has over the pc is that every console out there is identical. ie, one platform to debug your game on. Creating a market of consoles where some are more powerful than others is going to cause a support nightmare and ruin their margins. They will never do it like this. All boxes pretty much have to run the same. That is why I think if they are going to "cluster" your playstation, it will be a combination of on-chip and internal to a single unit.
This is way beyond anything we can do in the game development industry today.
It really makes me wonder why you got modded down. Moderation is dumb. I vote we do away with it entirely.
That truly is the most horrible part of gaming on a console. I can throw mad hardware at a pc and play from the hard drive, this making load times barely noticeable. Can't do this with a playstation.
A processor a couple of years from now that can give them 8 times the power of the current PS2. Now imagine 32 of them on one die. Now put four of them in one box. Sounds like a nightmare to me, but I just can't imagine how else they intend to accomplish this without having some REALLY strong cohesion between processors. And I truly have no idea how they intend to produce this box for $300, even ten years from now. This whole article just smells like BS.
I've never known the police to track drug users. Drug users have a way of showing up all on their own. Unless of course they also think you are dealing...
Can you accomplish this by holding it up to the monitor and pressing "Degauss"? I'd never thought to try that until now. Personally, I'd just use a demagnetizer.
You carry your passport in your wallet?
That is hardly a fair comparison. ATI was a market leader LONG before Nvidia made a name for themselves. Then Nvidia came to dominate the market segment. Then ATI had to play catch up. For a very short time as of late, one could even argue they were a market force again. Too bad Nvidia has already signed all the sweet deals in the video card industry, leaving ATI wondering what happened to the pie they baked...
Let us not forget that Nvidia GPUs happen to work really well with AMD chips.(think hypertransport here) Or the fact that Nvidia makes a chipset for AMD processors. I would say it is almost a given at this point that Nvidia will have the contract for Xbox2. So this would seem to be a decision based on technical merit, as well as market sense.(if this little rumor is true)
I would like to believe that AMD is playing lip service to MS. This may just be because "Linux" isn't a company so to speak, that markets a product. If you look at AMD's actions, it seems kind of obvious that they definitely support the Linux crowd. It's not as if most techies who use linux don't also support AMD!(At least that is the general impression I get.)
So perhaps it is all just a show...
I certainly don't agree with all of his ideas.(Especially the ones about MS and Linux...) But this guy truly deserves credit for being on the side of technical superiority in his products, forcing a giant like Intel to HAVE to compete with a company that started with very humble beginnings. It's been a long time coming, but AMD is definitely one of my favorite tech companies. Keep an eye on this company's stock this fall when Hammer is unleashed on the world! And watch Intel's response when they are forced to swallow their pride and make a clone. Hah! Justice just might be served.
The fact that the magnetic north pole is leaving Canada is the only thing interesting about this. The magnetic north pole ALWAYS changes. Ever used a terrain map with twelve digit grid coordinates? Any highly accurate map will have both a compass arrow for north as well as magnetic north. These maps get replaced routinely every couple of years due to the shifting of magnetic north.
When it comes to building a system for my personal use, I completely agree with you. I will build what I want, no matter what the cost.
However, when I am purchasing systems for work by the dozen, I do not have the time to build all of those systems and I don't really care to hold the liability for problems when a part stops working in them after about five months. (Businesses like warranties.) The answer here? Dell. Or HP. Or choose your favorite vendor. And cost is an object for most companies too.
You've just gotta love the constructive feedback you get on this site. Not that it is in any way relevant, but I haven't used Windows in more time than I care to think about. The only times I am ever on a Windows machine anymore is to fix someone else's Windows problems.
Oh, and the only reason there a lot of us use Intel hardware instead of AMD hardware is because none of the big name vendors sell AMD. Period. Gateway tried it for a while, but they fucked those systems up pretty bad by only offering AMD chips with their "value line" garbage. (aka - all instegrated components, shared memory video card, etc... and an AMD processor) It's no wonder they didn't sell. People who buy AMD systems are doing so because they know technology and they want a good system! If Dell would sell a quality x86 box with AMD processors, that is all I would buy. But until that happens, it just isn't feasible to buy some off-the-wall vendor's hardware or build-it-yourself, just to have "AMD inside".
Perhaps it is just because of MacOS, but I have been really disappointed by the performance of the G4 "supercomputer". I haven't had the opportunity to run a real OS on one yet. (Played around with OSX for a while, but ended up switching back to OS9 because OSX is just too damn slow and doesn't actually run any software.) And I was using a pretty much top of the line(when it was purchased) G4 733 with 512 RAM! My not-so-supercomputer PIII desktop runs circles around that thing, at least from a useability/feel perspective.
One last thing, more on topic with this article, I wouldn't have a motherboard with a soldered on processor if you gave it to me. It reminds me too much of a certain old Cyrix machine(with a compaq badge on it) that we used to call "the beast". Unless it's embedded, processors don't belong soldered on a mainboard.
For many people, this has become an essential part of their jobs. Reporters, researchers of all types, anyone who needs to communicate with their staff uses e-mail. Hell many people use AIM because it facilitates an immediate communications channel.
This is my opinion: When you start to restrict the creative new ways people come up with to get business done, you are costing your organization more time and money (productivity) than could ever be lost by a stupid virus!
Happy employees are productive employees. And people who feel they are LOSING the privileges/tools they have grown accustomed to will tend not to be real happy about it. Here is my favorite example of what happens when an organization gets e-mail: For the first couple of days, employees pass cute little notes back and forth to each other, in effect familiarizing themselves with the system. After that, there is the routine "fwd:" crowd. Eventually, gradually, people discover new modes of communicating. They don't even realize just how reliant they become on a technology. Until it is taken away. Ever seen what happens when people can't get into their e-mail? You'd be hard-pressed to get an open phone line. Hell, I think the money companies save on phone bills alone because of e-mail makes e-mail worth every damn penny.
At any rate, all this talk of restricting users' privileges is just a bunch of BS. I don't believe any IT manager with half a brain is going to bring this up to his management. The idea will never even be born. Unfortunately, there are likely to be admins with less than half a brain, who think this is a good idea. Glad I don't work at their company. Glad they don't decide on my company's security policy.
One final note, instead of restricting the hell out of everyone's work to make things more secure, why not just make things more secure? For windows environments, Norton Antivirus Corporate goes a LONG way to eradicating virus damage, as do system images and nightly backups... Any Windows admin who hasn't figured out how to completely rebuild a system (unattended) in ten minutes or less just isn't worth their weight anyways.
"There is still only one desktop available for use at any given time. "
Not so sure about that. I believe the software allows you to connect remotely, while someone else can be connected locally and they will never know you are using the machine. Kind of like remote administration mode on a 2000 server.
drivers
The original thread came from the kernel mailing list. I think you can see why a kernel developer might want to compile a kernel in 23 seconds...