Every time some new worm is released onto the Internet, I ask myself what drives the sick people who create such things.
It'd be more interesting to know why people does harmful things and don't write a worm that patches your machine. It's the same effort, still people don't seem to like doing things that are good for others.
Its safe to say that 95% of the/. crowd is either running an amd64 chip, wants to run an amd64 chip, or at least considers them superior to Intel's offering
Where on earth did you get those figures?
I run Intel and I find it better than AMDs, period. Not because their CPUs are faster - they aren't - but because intel cpus have much better chipsets and motherboards - I'd rather be burnt before using a motherboard with that nvidia nforce thing, thanks...
The Pentium M is good, but it's essentially a Pentium Pro. That's 10 years old.
Well, duh, no and yes. If "low number of pipeline stages" means "old" for you, then AMD is quite old too. If "eating low power" is old, then AMD and Intel roadmaps are going back to the past!. Pentium M also features that micro-ops thing (which G5 does too but I think AMD doesn't do)
Some AMD presentations claimed that the integrated memory controller is reponsible of 15% of the performance improvements in the opteron CPU. I wouldn't be surprised if intel would do that too
That is, AMD didn't invent integrated memory controllers, so I don't see why on eart Intel would be "copying" AMD, if anything AMD has stolen the idea from PA-RISC/SPARC or whatever
Could people recommend some multithreading-related books? It's clear that in the future the best way to get the best performance for your app will be using all the power of those cores simultaneously
I don't think monad is buggy. I think that Monad's main problem is that it's too flexible - ie: like perl, python, etc. Just like it's easy to write a virus in a few lines of perl, it should be easier for virus writers to write virus with monad.
Remember that virus use "generic" tecnology, things that everybody has, IOW generic windows installations. If everybody has a powerful shell script like monad it'll be easier for virus writers to write virus. If it's optional, it will not be so dangerous because virus writers won't write virus for something that is not widespread, and still people who wants it will be happy because they'll be able to install it and use it
That has been always true, and all^Wmost of linux 2.6 features are there because vendors needed it - NTPL, SMP scalability...
It's no different than any other open source project. If I want something in slashcode, I code it according to my interests. In linux, big features are coded according with the interest of vendors. There's not a really big difference. Look at the poor state of graphic drivers in linux for example - if that was important for vendors we'd have great graphic drivers
One of the reasons many laptop makers use intel is that intel not longer sells you a cpu - it sells you a "platform", ie: audio, graphic chip, wireless, usb, main chipset, etc etc etc in one pack, and for few money.
for pcs the problem is not so big but laptops are a different world, laptop makers *love* the "platform" concept intel sells. AMD can't compete there. Actually, Intel is trying to take this approach to pcs - it's one of the reasons apple switched to apple too.
I mean, it's stupid. It "disassociates" tabs from the page, and it puts that menu in the middle. Why put in such relevant place a menu that it's so rarely used?
It's clearly a huge usability mistake IMO. It looks like IE developers though: "saving screen space == good usability". It's not. Good usability is good usability, and seeing that "file edit" menu there hurts my eyes.
I'm tired of all this bullshit of "microsoft copied this" or "someone copied google". Good ideas are good ideas, and if somebody has done something right, I can't find a reason why other people (including Microsoft) should copy that good idea
It's the same reason I'm against software patents - good ideas should be copied because that encourages innovation (if someone copies you, you've to create something different to be "the best" again). I'm happy that Microsoft is copying things from mac os x, kde, firefox or whatever.
Isn't technology wonderful, we can see pictures in caves from thousand of years ago and read books which have been written some centuries ago, but all our technology isn't capable of doing something better
I guess the best option is to re-record it, ej: store it periodically in the trendy medium people uses in a given decade, that'd be DVD for today.
I still find interesting that google seems to get the data from yahoo services, or at least they point to them when you need detailed data.
Yahoo is better when you need info about financial news. I guess that's one of the reasons yahoo doesn't gets so many visitors - the bests things they do are things that nobody needs (how many people needs to get info about stocks, really?)
Re:Still a single point of failure
on
Basics of RAID
·
· Score: 1
Instead of it being your hard drive, it is now your RAID controller. So what is the advantage?
Your RAID controller isn't who saves your data, so you don't lose your data, which is the point of several RAID modes?
"In future it may be possible to discover a way to gain administrative previledges thru IE, even when running with a non previledged a/c"
Huh, what the fuck? IE is a process and it runs with users' permissions. It's just not possible to gain administrative privileges through IE just because there's no part of IE running with administrator privileges
I'm tired of all that "IE is integrated with the OS" bullshit. Microsoft said that because otherwise they'd have to remove IE from windows and they've enought money to make the judgue believe that. IE is integrated in the "active desktop", the explorer or the help reader or msn messenger, but that does NOT mean it's integrated in the "os" in the real sense. It's integrated in the OS if you call "OS" to explorer.exe, but it is certainly not integrated in ej: the kernel or the libraries implementing the win32 API. And the programs which use it (explorer, etc) use it as a com object, ie: it's not really "tightly integrated"
Slashdot Mirror
I have XP SP1 and i'm not going to get that.. 'upgrade
You have a defective car which is know to crash randomly and kill the driver, the company offers you a fix and you reject it? Riiiight
Every time some new worm is released onto the Internet, I ask myself what drives the sick people who create such things.
It'd be more interesting to know why people does harmful things and don't write a worm that patches your machine. It's the same effort, still people don't seem to like doing things that are good for others.
Windows XP SP2 costs $100 for people whose computers came with Windows 98, Windows 2000, or Windows Millennium Edition.
Oh, windows 98. ME.
Are you aware that windows 98 and ME are UNSUPPORTED at this time and no security fixes are being released for them?
Your argument is "Potatoes are too expensive, I'd rather die from hunger". Well, die then, it was your choice.
..despite of the fact that SP2 is not affected and everyone should be running it since it was released in August 2004...
Hopefully this doesn't hit corperate environments too hard, where everyone uses Windows 2000 because it's the best Windows OS out there.
It is the best OS out there but a out-of-the-box XP SP2 or win 2003 aren't affected and windows 2000 is? Well...
Not even for non-suscribers. It has been more than a year since I saw this - how can people think this is "new(s)"?
Its safe to say that 95% of the /. crowd is either running an amd64 chip, wants to run an amd64 chip, or at least considers them superior to Intel's offering
Where on earth did you get those figures?
I run Intel and I find it better than AMDs, period. Not because their CPUs are faster - they aren't - but because intel cpus have much better chipsets and motherboards - I'd rather be burnt before using a motherboard with that nvidia nforce thing, thanks...
The Pentium M is good, but it's essentially a Pentium Pro. That's 10 years old.
Well, duh, no and yes. If "low number of pipeline stages" means "old" for you, then AMD is quite old too. If "eating low power" is old, then AMD and Intel roadmaps are going back to the past!. Pentium M also features that micro-ops thing (which G5 does too but I think AMD doesn't do)
Some AMD presentations claimed that the integrated memory controller is reponsible of 15% of the performance improvements in the opteron CPU. I wouldn't be surprised if intel would do that too
That is, AMD didn't invent integrated memory controllers, so I don't see why on eart Intel would be "copying" AMD, if anything AMD has stolen the idea from PA-RISC/SPARC or whatever
Could people recommend some multithreading-related books? It's clear that in the future the best way to get the best performance for your app will be using all the power of those cores simultaneously
I don't think monad is buggy. I think that Monad's main problem is that it's too flexible - ie: like perl, python, etc. Just like it's easy to write a virus in a few lines of perl, it should be easier for virus writers to write virus with monad.
Remember that virus use "generic" tecnology, things that everybody has, IOW generic windows installations. If everybody has a powerful shell script like monad it'll be easier for virus writers to write virus. If it's optional, it will not be so dangerous because virus writers won't write virus for something that is not widespread, and still people who wants it will be happy because they'll be able to install it and use it
Didn't Torvalds once say something along the line that 'perfect is the enemy of good' when criticizing BSD?
What linus has really said in the past:
"I retain the right to change my mind, as always. Le Linus e mobile."
"And don't get me wrong - I don't mind getting proven wrong. I change my opinions the way some people change underwear. And I think that's ok"
That has been always true, and all^Wmost of linux 2.6 features are there because vendors needed it - NTPL, SMP scalability...
It's no different than any other open source project. If I want something in slashcode, I code it according to my interests. In linux, big features are coded according with the interest of vendors. There's not a really big difference. Look at the poor state of graphic drivers in linux for example - if that was important for vendors we'd have great graphic drivers
One of the reasons many laptop makers use intel is that intel not longer sells you a cpu - it sells you a "platform", ie: audio, graphic chip, wireless, usb, main chipset, etc etc etc in one pack, and for few money.
for pcs the problem is not so big but laptops are a different world, laptop makers *love* the "platform" concept intel sells. AMD can't compete there. Actually, Intel is trying to take this approach to pcs - it's one of the reasons apple switched to apple too.
No really, they innovated a lot. Look at http://www.clothedandy.com/Writings/IE%207%20Beta% 201/Phishing-and-tabs-settings.png
Enable tabbed browsing (requires restart
I don't know if laugh or cry. Really.
it's just me who finds the new layout horrible?
% 201/screenshot.png. Why on earth did they put the "file edit view etc." menu between the tabs and the final page?
Really, look at this: http://www.clothedandy.com/Writings/IE%207%20Beta
I mean, it's stupid. It "disassociates" tabs from the page, and it puts that menu in the middle. Why put in such relevant place a menu that it's so rarely used?
It's clearly a huge usability mistake IMO. It looks like IE developers though: "saving screen space == good usability". It's not. Good usability is good usability, and seeing that "file edit" menu there hurts my eyes.
It seems you didn't tried the recovery console
And how do you plan to implement ie: a game with that?
Use whatever you need for your job, going for "server-side only webapps" has zero sense.
I'm tired of all this bullshit of "microsoft copied this" or "someone copied google". Good ideas are good ideas, and if somebody has done something right, I can't find a reason why other people (including Microsoft) should copy that good idea
It's the same reason I'm against software patents - good ideas should be copied because that encourages innovation (if someone copies you, you've to create something different to be "the best" again). I'm happy that Microsoft is copying things from mac os x, kde, firefox or whatever.
Isn't technology wonderful, we can see pictures in caves from thousand of years ago and read books which have been written some centuries ago, but all our technology isn't capable of doing something better
I guess the best option is to re-record it, ej: store it periodically in the trendy medium people uses in a given decade, that'd be DVD for today.
I, for one, erase my Ubuntu partition and welcome our new Utunbu overlords!
Sixth DebConf Ends in Success
Success? Could it be different; I mean, successful here means "it was not cancelled"?
I still find interesting that google seems to get the data from yahoo services, or at least they point to them when you need detailed data.
Yahoo is better when you need info about financial news. I guess that's one of the reasons yahoo doesn't gets so many visitors - the bests things they do are things that nobody needs (how many people needs to get info about stocks, really?)
Instead of it being your hard drive, it is now your RAID controller. So what is the advantage?
Your RAID controller isn't who saves your data, so you don't lose your data, which is the point of several RAID modes?
"In future it may be possible to discover a way to gain administrative previledges thru IE, even when running with a non previledged a/c"
Huh, what the fuck? IE is a process and it runs with users' permissions. It's just not possible to gain administrative privileges through IE just because there's no part of IE running with administrator privileges
I'm tired of all that "IE is integrated with the OS" bullshit. Microsoft said that because otherwise they'd have to remove IE from windows and they've enought money to make the judgue believe that. IE is integrated in the "active desktop", the explorer or the help reader or msn messenger, but that does NOT mean it's integrated in the "os" in the real sense. It's integrated in the OS if you call "OS" to explorer.exe, but it is certainly not integrated in ej: the kernel or the libraries implementing the win32 API. And the programs which use it (explorer, etc) use it as a com object, ie: it's not really "tightly integrated"