Well, considering that most of the apps i've written under MSVC utilize either MFC ( yea i know its 'orrible but gets the job done ), ATL and COM, with very little direct code interfacing to Win32 layer, this doesnt help much.
For similar app under linux its easier to start from a scratch and just lift the parts of the code that are separate classes/libs with no or little platform-specific dependencies.
That does not mean the CPU is not the central processing unit due to these enhancements...the operating [system]decides which processor executes what.
I dont think you got my point. See, operating systems ( and to some extent, apps ) also already decide what code to execute on GPU, what on APU and what should be handled by various different co-processors and controllers too.
What does the word central mean here ? Does it meant that what we commonly refer to as a CPU is a generic processing unit, capable of doing every computational task ? Well, todays GPUs are increasingly heading towards full programmability too, and although different by their architecture, i.e. built for massively parallel processing, those can too be used for processing generic tasks. Same could hold true for audio subsystems, possible future input processors/DSPs ( audio recognition, vision systems ) etc.
Nobody prevents any application, including database servers, to take full capability of those somewhat specialized, but still flexible processing units. So, what are you going to do, require licence for every chip present in the system ? What if at some point you can build an SMP system which includes multiple generic CPUs of different arhicectures, i.e. x86/PPC combo for instance ? Are both of them central processing units ? If they are, what if i have some specialized PCI card (for example, vision processor ) that simply uses a generic CPU to do its task ? Do i have to get a licence for this one too ?
In short, just because traditionally PCs contained one CPU, a jack of all trades, doesnt mean that we have to keep that paradigm up forever. There will be umpteen-core generic processors, somewhat specialized processors which already contain multiple "cores" or pipelines today, etc etc. Drawing the line for what is a multiprocessor system and what not will get increasingly more difficult.
"But the processor on a graphics card is a GPU, not a CPU. Hence, GPU (and for that matter co-processor) count does not apply. quod erat demonstrandum"
lets dissect that...
CPU= central processing unit
GPU= graphics processing unit
Say, if i have dual athlon mobo, how can both the processors be central processing units in the system ? Clearly, one is but a co-processor, and thus i shouldnt pay for extra licences ?
A system can, by the very definition of the term, only have one central processing unit, all the DSPs, cores and controllers are but co-processing units.
Or does it come down to processing unit being turing-complete or not ? Well, newer graphics cores already are turing-complete...
Six chapters covering about 75 pages discuss editors (Emacs and vi), make, the GNU debugger gdb, tracing, gcc options, glibc, memory debugging tools, libraries, and the environment
Huh ? At this time and age, no mention of automake/autoconf at all or did the review just skip that part ?
Who in their right mind still uses handwritten makefiles ?
should software be sold as a product or a service ?
Is there any particular type of software ( op sysems/enterprise apps/utilities/research software/etc ) that should be open source ? why ?
Actually, Heimdal at least should be directly interoperable with W2k version of Kerberos. No realm trusts needed. Which one are you using ? Look here, under "Using an MIT KDC with a Standalone Windows 2000 Workstation" for example of setup.
From what i gather, this is inductive power transmission and limited by distance.
Well, theres another kind: microwave transmission, which is also a demonstrated technology. Theorethically, we could beam power to any distance with it
At one point, Mitshubishi was planning on deployment of sattellite system that would have beamed microwave power to portable devices. SolarBird . They still list a launch date of 2005 but...
Heres a Space Solar Power Monitor, a site that keeps tabs on whats happening on WPT front.
Btw, here's a Wikipedia page on microwave tranmission
Hey, whats up with the exclusively moronic replies to robot news ?
Half of the posts are "robots taking over" and the second half make stupid anime jokes. and i thought Slashdotters are know their stuff when it comes to technology.
I recommend reading plyoump.com-s blog too, once you are on the site, for instance a recent post titled Sudden IQ drop among the "tech-bloggers" when robots are mentioned
I guess slashdot just proved the point again
umm.. er.. signed Java applet utilizing JNI can do the same.. whoop-the-f*cking-doo.. of course you can get screwed running random code from untrusted source, wheres the news ?
Actually, yes. "Lifters" work in the atmosphere with just electricity.
Unfortunately, nobody has built them big enough just yet to lift their own power source.
"To put people into space you have to send them up on a man rated launcher. The only people with those right now are NASA, "
You may or may not have been noticed, but NASA does not have the capability of putting humans on orbit in 2004. Its doubtful that they will have this capability in 2005.
Even worse, US government organizations, like NASA, are not allowed to purchase a seat for their astronauts on Soyuz, and i doubt that Shenzou seats are for sale at the moment.
The solid fueled boosters of the shuttle make assembly much more difficult, and if a shuttle SRB were to accidentally go off while in the assembly building, it would probably kill hundreds of people.
Or even worse, if one of the SRBs would malfunction during launch. The beast would be doing cartwheels all over KSC
You are probably thinking Brian "RocketGuy" Walker.
He hasnt made much of a progress as of late, due to personal life interfering.
You can follow all of those developments on HobbySpace RLV News and Space Log
"2. Most peope ride the brakes. If you chill out, you can engine brake and let the electric motor suck the power off the transmission rather than having the brakes turn it into heat. "
Ok, i see alot of people are lamenting excessive braking... now, why arent the hybrids built with electric brakes in the first place, with disks as only an emergency backup ? Why waste all the braking energy just for heating the brake disks and pads in the first place ?
"Limited range: The GOOD EVs I've seen can go about 100 miles per charge."
Bollocks.You havent paid attention.
http://www.acpropulsion.com/SEMAtrip2003.htm
"The tzero never faltered and arrived in Las Vegas, 245 miles from AC Propulsion headquarters in San Dimas, with at least 40 miles of reserve range."
"Recharge time: HOURS..."
Bollocks.
The tzero's Reductive charging system can plug in to any grounded 100 to 240V socket. The current draw from the line can be set by the user. With a 100-Amp 240-Volt connection, the tzero can fully charge in about an hour.
"Recharge locations: Limited."
Bollocks
"The tzero's Li-Ion battery and high energy efficiency got us to Las Vegas. Its onboard, plug-in-anywhere charger kept us going. We stayed with friends right in town, and upon arrival plugged into the outlet for their electric clothes dryer, had dinner, talked and went to bed. In the morning the tzero was fully charged. That's the great thing about electricity, it's already available just about anywhere."
For more, check out the details of Challenge Bibendums results, like i already recommended.
Give me Tango or Tzero over any hydrogen creation anytime. Simpler, saner, better performer.
Check out Michelins Challenge Bibendum results, EVs routinely kick those hybrids asses in every relevant category.
A couple more SA'04 trip reports from attendees:
Michael Mealling blogged the conference almost live over at RocketForge
Alan Boyle at MSNBC's Cosmic Log writes about both the conference and whats yet to come this summer. In a followup post he also mentions an X-Prize team that has has made some significant progress while remaining under the media radar.
Rand Simberg at Transterrestrial Musings also has a short post on SA'04 first and then some significant insights into legislative aspects.
If rocketry will evolve anything like computing industry did after first Apples and PCs i can buy a ticket to orbit in ten years.
BTW, John Carmack is going to do a hover test of their full-scale X-Prize vehicle next week. Yay !
The trouble with all this is, nowadays, an engine ( or a programmer ) does not a game make.
In a recent thread over at Beyond3D forums, we asked developer of Max Payne 2, how are the costs distributed in a project like this between middleware, code development and content development.
He said:
middleware 10%
content 60%
and the rest is code, i.e. only 30%
So, unless you wire up some really innovative procedural content generation routines, Open Source Software alone isnt going to get you far in game development.
Btw, im quite certain that the trend is ever growing, i.e. content part is going to take up more and more of game budgets.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, considering that most of the apps i've written under MSVC utilize either MFC ( yea i know its 'orrible but gets the job done ), ATL and COM, with very little direct code interfacing to Win32 layer, this doesnt help much.
For similar app under linux its easier to start from a scratch and just lift the parts of the code that are separate classes/libs with no or little platform-specific dependencies.
That does not mean the CPU is not the central processing unit due to these enhancements. ..the operating [system]decides which processor executes what.
I dont think you got my point. See, operating systems ( and to some extent, apps ) also already decide what code to execute on GPU, what on APU and what should be handled by various different co-processors and controllers too.
What does the word central mean here ? Does it meant that what we commonly refer to as a CPU is a generic processing unit, capable of doing every computational task ? Well, todays GPUs are increasingly heading towards full programmability too, and although different by their architecture, i.e. built for massively parallel processing, those can too be used for processing generic tasks. Same could hold true for audio subsystems, possible future input processors/DSPs ( audio recognition, vision systems ) etc.
Nobody prevents any application, including database servers, to take full capability of those somewhat specialized, but still flexible processing units. So, what are you going to do, require licence for every chip present in the system ? What if at some point you can build an SMP system which includes multiple generic CPUs of different arhicectures, i.e. x86/PPC combo for instance ? Are both of them central processing units ? If they are, what if i have some specialized PCI card (for example, vision processor ) that simply uses a generic CPU to do its task ? Do i have to get a licence for this one too ?
In short, just because traditionally PCs contained one CPU, a jack of all trades, doesnt mean that we have to keep that paradigm up forever. There will be umpteen-core generic processors, somewhat specialized processors which already contain multiple "cores" or pipelines today, etc etc. Drawing the line for what is a multiprocessor system and what not will get increasingly more difficult.
"But the processor on a graphics card is a GPU, not a CPU. Hence, GPU (and for that matter co-processor) count does not apply. quod erat demonstrandum"
...
lets dissect that...
CPU= central processing unit
GPU= graphics processing unit
Say, if i have dual athlon mobo, how can both the processors be central processing units in the system ? Clearly, one is but a co-processor, and thus i shouldnt pay for extra licences ?
A system can, by the very definition of the term, only have one central processing unit, all the DSPs, cores and controllers are but co-processing units.
Or does it come down to processing unit being turing-complete or not ? Well, newer graphics cores already are turing-complete
Six chapters covering about 75 pages discuss editors (Emacs and vi), make, the GNU debugger gdb, tracing, gcc options, glibc, memory debugging tools, libraries, and the environment
Huh ? At this time and age, no mention of automake/autoconf at all or did the review just skip that part ?
Who in their right mind still uses handwritten makefiles ?
should software be sold as a product or a service ?
Is there any particular type of software ( op sysems/enterprise apps/utilities/research software/etc ) that should be open source ? why ?
Actually, Heimdal at least should be directly interoperable with W2k version of Kerberos. No realm trusts needed. Which one are you using ?
Look here, under "Using an MIT KDC with a Standalone Windows 2000 Workstation" for example of setup.
Google frontpage: ~4KB HTML
MSN frontpage: umbteen kilobytes of clutter, flash, and totally irrelevant BS.
guess which one im gonna pull up for a simple web search.
So, which one will fit on a 128meg USB stick ?
CDs arent half as sexy for demoing and flashcards wont go everywhere.
Ah, btw heres a link to a model airplane project that flew using microwave-transmitted power
From what i gather, this is inductive power transmission and limited by distance. ...
Well, theres another kind: microwave transmission, which is also a demonstrated technology. Theorethically, we could beam power to any distance with it
At one point, Mitshubishi was planning on deployment of sattellite system that would have beamed microwave power to portable devices. SolarBird . They still list a launch date of 2005 but
Heres a Space Solar Power Monitor, a site that keeps tabs on whats happening on WPT front.
Btw, here's a Wikipedia page on microwave tranmission
Hey, whats up with the exclusively moronic replies to robot news ?
Half of the posts are "robots taking over" and the second half make stupid anime jokes. and i thought Slashdotters are know their stuff when it comes to technology.
I recommend reading plyoump.com-s blog too, once you are on the site, for instance a recent post titled Sudden IQ drop among the "tech-bloggers" when robots are mentioned
I guess slashdot just proved the point again
umm .. er .. signed Java applet utilizing JNI can do the same .. whoop-the-f*cking-doo .. of course you can get screwed running random code from untrusted source, wheres the news ?
Actually, yes. "Lifters" work in the atmosphere with just electricity.
Unfortunately, nobody has built them big enough just yet to lift their own power source.
They have been in the running for more than a year now. See older X-Prize newsletters on X-Prize site.
"To put people into space you have to send them up on a man rated launcher. The only people with those right now are NASA, "
You may or may not have been noticed, but NASA does not have the capability of putting humans on orbit in 2004. Its doubtful that they will have this capability in 2005.
Even worse, US government organizations, like NASA, are not allowed to purchase a seat for their astronauts on Soyuz, and i doubt that Shenzou seats are for sale at the moment.
The solid fueled boosters of the shuttle make assembly much more difficult, and if a shuttle SRB were to accidentally go off while in the assembly building, it would probably kill hundreds of people. Or even worse, if one of the SRBs would malfunction during launch. The beast would be doing cartwheels all over KSC
Thats their previous, April 8th flight.
Alans Mojave Weblog has more on that one
You are probably thinking Brian "RocketGuy" Walker.
He hasnt made much of a progress as of late, due to personal life interfering.
You can follow all of those developments on HobbySpace RLV News and Space Log
"2. Most peope ride the brakes. If you chill out, you can engine brake and let the electric motor suck the power off the transmission rather than having the brakes turn it into heat. " Ok, i see alot of people are lamenting excessive braking ... now, why arent the hybrids built with electric brakes in the first place, with disks as only an emergency backup ? Why waste all the braking energy just for heating the brake disks and pads in the first place ?
"Limited range: The GOOD EVs I've seen can go about 100 miles per charge."
Bollocks.You havent paid attention.
http://www.acpropulsion.com/SEMAtrip2003.htm
"The tzero never faltered and arrived in Las Vegas, 245 miles from AC Propulsion headquarters in San Dimas, with at least 40 miles of reserve range."
"Recharge time: HOURS..." Bollocks. The tzero's Reductive charging system can plug in to any grounded 100 to 240V socket. The current draw from the line can be set by the user. With a 100-Amp 240-Volt connection, the tzero can fully charge in about an hour.
"Recharge locations: Limited."
Bollocks
"The tzero's Li-Ion battery and high energy efficiency got us to Las Vegas. Its onboard, plug-in-anywhere charger kept us going. We stayed with friends right in town, and upon arrival plugged into the outlet for their electric clothes dryer, had dinner, talked and went to bed. In the morning the tzero was fully charged. That's the great thing about electricity, it's already available just about anywhere."
For more, check out the details of Challenge Bibendums results, like i already recommended.
Give me Tango or Tzero over any hydrogen creation anytime. Simpler, saner, better performer.
Check out Michelins Challenge Bibendum results, EVs routinely kick those hybrids asses in every relevant category.
I was looking for a XUL RAD tool myself the other day and came across XULMAKER
Havent tried it yet, dont know whether its anywhere near mature or not.
A couple more SA'04 trip reports from attendees:
Michael Mealling blogged the conference almost live over at RocketForge
Alan Boyle at MSNBC's Cosmic Log writes about both the conference and whats yet to come this summer. In a followup post he also mentions an X-Prize team that has has made some significant progress while remaining under the media radar.
Rand Simberg at Transterrestrial Musings also has a short post on SA'04 first and then some significant insights into legislative aspects.
New Dennis Titos and Mark Shuttleworths are lining up as we speak.
4 /News-2004-03.html#Mar.29.04
http://www.hobbyspace.com/AAdmin/archive/News/200
If rocketry will evolve anything like computing industry did after first Apples and PCs i can buy a ticket to orbit in ten years.
BTW, John Carmack is going to do a hover test of their full-scale X-Prize vehicle next week. Yay !
In a recent thread over at Beyond3D forums, we asked developer of Max Payne 2, how are the costs distributed in a project like this between middleware, code development and content development. He said:
- middleware 10%
- content 60%
- and the rest is code, i.e. only 30%
So, unless you wire up some really innovative procedural content generation routines, Open Source Software alone isnt going to get you far in game development.Btw, im quite certain that the trend is ever growing, i.e. content part is going to take up more and more of game budgets.