You should hope to never have to work woth code that lasts so long, because chances are nobody's around to fix it.
I just reported a massive memory leak (up to 40MB per command... actually got the memory footprint up to a couple gigs before it stopped working) in a software tool that I use... the bug resolution was "That's been around since 1996. We don't have the people to fix it." I guess we're not selling it, so it's okay...
Every time the press release mentions "processor," they're talking about the CPU.
It is a god-awful press release written by someone in Microsoft, though. "Semiconductor processor technology." They might mean process technology, but last time I checked, MS wasn't interested in process technology. Look for the IBM press release to actually be coherent.
Right. This supercomputer project is detracting from the fact that IBM has around four server lines (p, x, z, iSeries) that run three processor architectures (Power, Xeon, Opteron, probably more) and about five enterprise operating systems (zOS, OS/390, AIX, Linux, WinServer2003).
This project is a way of grabbing market share in the supercomputer market, not any other market.
Oh, but wait a minute. That's right... IBM has over 30% of the server market. More than HP, Dell, and Sun. But they're 0.6% behind HP in supercomputers! They'd better getting working on that poor market share.
Intel wants to market Itanium as a server chip. That means that they are putting 3MB or 6MB on the high end Itaniums. Soon they will have a 9MB cache version. Lots of cache means lots of transistors means lots of heat.
I don't see your point here. More cache does not make it a better processor architecture.
Intel is not fabbing Itanium with a state of the art process. Intel leads the world in process technology, yet their Itanium is still on a 130nm process.
The PPC970 and Power4+ are both fabricated in 130nm technologies. Better silicon does not make it a better processor architecture.
Speaking of cache, somewhat under-reported in the technical press was IBM's revelations of its upcoming Power5 server architecture. Yup, that's four dual-core processors each with 2MB of L2 cache, and four 36MB L3 cache chips all in the same package. IBM is leveraging it's packaging advantages against Intel's process advantages. Well, that, and making each processor die dual-core multithreaded.
The scary thing is I actually thought twice. A number of folks have called BS on my last post, so I've resorted to google to back up my memories of several years back. There's a good article here. They were G3s and not G4s, like in that photo. My bad.
So they were turquoise G3s, and it was 12/11/2000 and not 2001. I'm no Mac fan. I mean, you're talking out of your ass and I called you on it, so the best you can do is complain that I can't ID an ugly G3 vs a G4?
Try google. Type "microsoft macintosh development." Hit enter. Click the second link. Look at the photo. Look at the G3s in the lab. Go to fucking hell.
They do it in Redmond, but they may also dev the Mac version of PowerPoint in SanFran. PowerPoint was actually an acquisition way back when, and the PowerPoint developers in the Office group are still in San Francisco.
Well sure, if ya'll want me to lay it out. When I interviewed for an internship with MS's Mac Office group in 2001, there were big turquoise G4s sitting right on people's desks and a big lab full of just about every Mac PowerPC model ever released. Shocking! And you know what? The developers were even using a non-MS IDE. Astonishing!
What I found back when I interned at MS was that they've got a significantly more open campus than most large companies. Go to Redmond on a Sunday and wander around outside the buildings if you want... no access control Gates at the main entrance, just the front office.
On the other hand, the security is 24-7 vigilant, especially when it comes to Bill Gates' parking spot. Seriously. Don't photograph it unless you want MS to pay for developing half your film.
In this case, though, you don't want people photographing pallets coming in and out of your facility no matter who you are. "You claim to have shipped 10 million copies of MS Bob, yet we have this photo of all those copies being loaded into a dump truck."
The BA is one of the most interesting and philosophically challenging degrees one can take.
I completely disagree with this. It might be true if many BA programs actually adhered to some sort of core curriculum, but many don't, and all too many BA degrees recipients have 1/3 major classes and 2/3 disjoint incoherent classes that sounded neat-o at the time. Like taking classes on Dylan Thomas or Sylvia Plath, but never getting a good grouding in anything written before 1940. Or taking that Buddhism class but never learning about Islam. There doesn't necessarily need to be strictly mandated canonical courses, but at least some advisor-focused attention on a holistic curriculum and survey classes should be attempted. Too many BA degrees are awarded to grads who wholly lack the qualities that you laud. Too many transcripts look more like program listings for the Discovery Channel and the History Channel than they do a university education.
On the other hand, I completely agree with your "limited field" point-- the basic nationally accredited engineering degrees are far too vocational in their focus. However, a good engineering curriculum can provide a great deal of insight into practical, ethical, and cost-effective problem solving, which many people might find more rewarding and useful than a philosophy class.
We deal with all these issues, in depth and that places us in a position to make decisions on things to which most are blind.
Oh come on... Wisdom doesn't come from that diploma on your wall because it's in Latin and not English. Dubya's got a Yale BA and just spent last week bumbling around southeast Asia wondering why everyone seems to hate the US so much.
Good question. The author seemed to think that cars using a bazillion plants worth of energy meant that cars are inefficient, but my first thought was, "Damn, gasoline is a fantastic energy source." No wonder we're having difficulty finding viable alternatives.
On the other hand, the article indicates something like a year's worth of plant growth on 40 acres equals a gallon of gas. How does a gallon of gas compare to the output of 40 acres of solar panels over a year's time? I was trying to figure this out, but got lost in the relation of 115,000 BTUs per gallon and 3 megawatts per acre. Seems to indicate that the solar panels win by a factor of a million or so.
Look at the numbers.....The Linux based 2.4Ghz cluster has almost 200 more CPU's on board with a 217 Gflop/sec difference. The Alpha clusters are running anywhere from 1,984 to 6,048 more CPU's.
For those of you wading through that huge postscript file, you want Table 3 on page 53, which actually shows the Big Mac beating a Xeon cluster, but just behind an Itanium 2 cluster.
Didn't you hear? SCO owns the GPL, too. Turns out the Sys V license contained the text "This License applies to" and so does the GPL! By inference, SCO owns all of the GPL.
They're working on a license licensing plan right now, but they have to sell it to some idiot venture capital firms and dumbass analysts first. Soon after, they'll let CNet write an article about it. Eventually, they may even let big companies buy one.
$699 is probably less than you pay your legal department for an hour of sitting around on retainer. Thus, it starts making more sense to just pay SCO this one time to get them to shut up and go away.
If I were going to hire myself a legal department, you can bet they'd be salaried employees.
Specially priced liscenses for Linux developers are $3 billion. They were going to ask for "three gazillion dollars," but couldn't agree how many zeros were in a gazillion.
Slashdot Mirror
You should hope to never have to work woth code that lasts so long, because chances are nobody's around to fix it.
I just reported a massive memory leak (up to 40MB per command... actually got the memory footprint up to a couple gigs before it stopped working) in a software tool that I use... the bug resolution was "That's been around since 1996. We don't have the people to fix it." I guess we're not selling it, so it's okay...
Definitely slashdot appropriate material.
And the entire industry has adopted copper for interconnect in modern processes, not just IBM.
It is a god-awful press release written by someone in Microsoft, though. "Semiconductor processor technology." They might mean process technology, but last time I checked, MS wasn't interested in process technology. Look for the IBM press release to actually be coherent.
All your console are belong to IBM.
This project is a way of grabbing market share in the supercomputer market, not any other market.
Oh, but wait a minute. That's right... IBM has over 30% of the server market. More than HP, Dell, and Sun. But they're 0.6% behind HP in supercomputers! They'd better getting working on that poor market share.
Speaking of cache, somewhat under-reported in the technical press was IBM's revelations of its upcoming Power5 server architecture. Yup, that's four dual-core processors each with 2MB of L2 cache, and four 36MB L3 cache chips all in the same package. IBM is leveraging it's packaging advantages against Intel's process advantages. Well, that, and making each processor die dual-core multithreaded.
And that was the sound of more hot air passing through one Deutsch sphincter.
Shit. Sorry, you're right. Never been a Mac fan, so unfortunately the coolness of the group was more lost on me than other potential candidates.
The scary thing is I actually thought twice. A number of folks have called BS on my last post, so I've resorted to google to back up my memories of several years back. There's a good article here. They were G3s and not G4s, like in that photo. My bad.
Try google. Type "microsoft macintosh development." Hit enter. Click the second link. Look at the photo. Look at the G3s in the lab. Go to fucking hell.
That poster was me. I interviewed in Redmond 12/11/2000. Do a quick google search, and you find this.
They do it in Redmond, but they may also dev the Mac version of PowerPoint in SanFran. PowerPoint was actually an acquisition way back when, and the PowerPoint developers in the Office group are still in San Francisco.
Well sure, if ya'll want me to lay it out. When I interviewed for an internship with MS's Mac Office group in 2001, there were big turquoise G4s sitting right on people's desks and a big lab full of just about every Mac PowerPC model ever released. Shocking! And you know what? The developers were even using a non-MS IDE. Astonishing!
On the other hand, the security is 24-7 vigilant, especially when it comes to Bill Gates' parking spot. Seriously. Don't photograph it unless you want MS to pay for developing half your film.
In this case, though, you don't want people photographing pallets coming in and out of your facility no matter who you are. "You claim to have shipped 10 million copies of MS Bob, yet we have this photo of all those copies being loaded into a dump truck."
It is difficult to develop Mac applications without Mac boxes.
On the other hand, I completely agree with your "limited field" point-- the basic nationally accredited engineering degrees are far too vocational in their focus. However, a good engineering curriculum can provide a great deal of insight into practical, ethical, and cost-effective problem solving, which many people might find more rewarding and useful than a philosophy class.
Oh come on... Wisdom doesn't come from that diploma on your wall because it's in Latin and not English. Dubya's got a Yale BA and just spent last week bumbling around southeast Asia wondering why everyone seems to hate the US so much.On the other hand, the article indicates something like a year's worth of plant growth on 40 acres equals a gallon of gas. How does a gallon of gas compare to the output of 40 acres of solar panels over a year's time? I was trying to figure this out, but got lost in the relation of 115,000 BTUs per gallon and 3 megawatts per acre. Seems to indicate that the solar panels win by a factor of a million or so.
Yeah, but it's a sunk cost.
They're working on a license licensing plan right now, but they have to sell it to some idiot venture capital firms and dumbass analysts first. Soon after, they'll let CNet write an article about it. Eventually, they may even let big companies buy one.
Specially priced liscenses for Linux developers are $3 billion. They were going to ask for "three gazillion dollars," but couldn't agree how many zeros were in a gazillion.