yes and no. Microsoft's licensing plans often allow you to downgrade a license for development work. I.E. you buy XP -- so you have a valid license -- then contact Microsoft about a downgrade to 98. They then (for a small fee) send you the media for 98se...
You answered your own question. Your machine is faster because you have the faster memory. Memory bus speed makes a dramatic difference in operability. If your friend puts in faster RAM, he'll be as fast as your machine.
HT only works for certain processes. It does give Intel chips an advantage in certain circumstances; as does the faster clock the core operates at. This is only part of the story and does not (by itself) necessarily make the Intel chip faster. There's code that would run faster on the AMD...
AMD "pulled a Cyrix" because consumers don't do their homework. If presented with a 1.8GHz Athlon and a 2.4GHz Pentium, They're likely to pick the Pentium because it's a bigger number (faster clock). Truth is, the 1.8GHz Athlon is faster.
Well sure, we have the knowledge & technology base to design and build one. It wouldn't have to be a from the ground up new technology. However, it's not something we could do in less than 3-4 years and it most likely wouldn't be much like a Saturn-5...
You are. The plans exist. The equipment to build them no longer does. We'd have to rebuild our infrastructure 1960's style to do it. It would be easier and cheaper to take cues from those designs and do a new set of drawings. Run a bunch of simulations. Improve the drawings. Then have modern machines using modern methods build it.
And now they know how to deal with a fire or oxygen failure or something going bump in the night. That's all part of the learning process. It'll happen on the ISS one day; and, hopefully there will be a Russian there to deal with it =)
I have to admit I'm still running my 750MHz Duron at home. At the time is was faster and cheaper than a similar speed Celeron. I've even managed to clock it to ~850MHz but don't run it there.
It does everything I need; when I crunch a big job that's gonna take a few minutes, I use it as an excuse to go get more coffee. It's good to see they're thrashing Intel performance wise. Now all they need is the sales.
ahhh, caught talking with my foot in my mouth again (ranting will do that to you...)
*Removes Foot*
We do produce around two orders of magnitude more CO2 than volcanic activity each year. Damn. That is a sobering number.
The ash and aerosols from St. Helens and Pinatubo each caused a 2-3 year long 1-2C drop in global temperature.
And you use this as a reason to continue a vast, uncontrolled experiment with possibly dire consequences.
This argument is no stronger than mine, actually. You're proposing that, based on someone's unsubstantiated analysis, we expend Trillions of dollars to make changes that may be unnecessary.
I've seen the models. They do indicate there's going to be a long term affect. I'm not proposing we drop the efforts to reduce CO2 emissions. What my response was trying to do was point out that the effects seen in Switzerland by the parent poster were not necessarily caused by humans.
Wellllll, we are at the end of a mini-iceage. Things are naturally warming up.
The data analysis is varied (depends on who you read); but, if you read some of the historical evidence (which is often anecdotal, I admit) you'll see that about 800 years ago, there were successful vinyards in England. They were growing grapes. This implies hotter & dryer weather than they have even now... Then it got cold. Really, really cold. That was around the 1500-1600 time frame. Now it's warm(er) again...
Over the past few decades of observation, we've seen a 3% variation in solar output. We don't know for certain if that's normal; but, we suspect it is. It's possible there are times when the swing is more dramatic. We just don't know.
We know (we've seen) that large volcanic eruptions can cause the global temperature to drop several degrees. We also know a single volcano can spew out more CO2 during an eruption than all of industry for the past 200 years.
My point is: Although we have some data, it's inconclusive. I'm not ruling out human influence; but, we just don't know what's causing the current warming trend. It could be natural. It however isn't (yet) outside the range of the data we have for the past millenium or so, either in magnitude or rate of change.
it could be that in 100 years, we'll be in another ice age...
You can get similar passes from Amtrack in the U.S. Travel to anywhere at any time on any (amtrack) train for a month. Possibly a good way to spend a vacation; hopping around the country.
The neutrons are going to be (eventually) absorbed in a liquid lithium metal jacket. The lithium absorbs the neutrons to create tritium and or deuterium which can be extracted and recycled back into the reactor as fuel
Slashdot Mirror
And a scream is heard for about 1/2 mile in all directions from where I'm sitting...
They also use accelerators for radiation therapy. The regional hospital here has one, for targeted irradiation of tumors.
HT only works for certain processes. It does give Intel chips an advantage in certain circumstances; as does the faster clock the core operates at. This is only part of the story and does not (by itself) necessarily make the Intel chip faster. There's code that would run faster on the AMD...
AMD "pulled a Cyrix" because consumers don't do their homework. If presented with a 1.8GHz Athlon and a 2.4GHz Pentium, They're likely to pick the Pentium because it's a bigger number (faster clock). Truth is, the 1.8GHz Athlon is faster.
Well sure, we have the knowledge & technology base to design and build one. It wouldn't have to be a from the ground up new technology. However, it's not something we could do in less than 3-4 years and it most likely wouldn't be much like a Saturn-5...
Many hospitals already have particle accelerators in them. It's just a matter of scaling them up...
I don't mind paying taxes for things that are worthwhile. To me, space is worthy.
You are. The plans exist. The equipment to build them no longer does. We'd have to rebuild our infrastructure 1960's style to do it. It would be easier and cheaper to take cues from those designs and do a new set of drawings. Run a bunch of simulations. Improve the drawings. Then have modern machines using modern methods build it.
And now they know how to deal with a fire or oxygen failure or something going bump in the night. That's all part of the learning process. It'll happen on the ISS one day; and, hopefully there will be a Russian there to deal with it =)
It does everything I need; when I crunch a big job that's gonna take a few minutes, I use it as an excuse to go get more coffee. It's good to see they're thrashing Intel performance wise. Now all they need is the sales.
*Removes Foot*
We do produce around two orders of magnitude more CO2 than volcanic activity each year. Damn. That is a sobering number.
The ash and aerosols from St. Helens and Pinatubo each caused a 2-3 year long 1-2C drop in global temperature. And you use this as a reason to continue a vast, uncontrolled experiment with possibly dire consequences.
This argument is no stronger than mine, actually. You're proposing that, based on someone's unsubstantiated analysis, we expend Trillions of dollars to make changes that may be unnecessary.
I've seen the models. They do indicate there's going to be a long term affect. I'm not proposing we drop the efforts to reduce CO2 emissions. What my response was trying to do was point out that the effects seen in Switzerland by the parent poster were not necessarily caused by humans.
The data analysis is varied (depends on who you read); but, if you read some of the historical evidence (which is often anecdotal, I admit) you'll see that about 800 years ago, there were successful vinyards in England. They were growing grapes. This implies hotter & dryer weather than they have even now... Then it got cold. Really, really cold. That was around the 1500-1600 time frame. Now it's warm(er) again...
Over the past few decades of observation, we've seen a 3% variation in solar output. We don't know for certain if that's normal; but, we suspect it is. It's possible there are times when the swing is more dramatic. We just don't know.
We know (we've seen) that large volcanic eruptions can cause the global temperature to drop several degrees. We also know a single volcano can spew out more CO2 during an eruption than all of industry for the past 200 years.
My point is: Although we have some data, it's inconclusive. I'm not ruling out human influence; but, we just don't know what's causing the current warming trend. It could be natural. It however isn't (yet) outside the range of the data we have for the past millenium or so, either in magnitude or rate of change.
it could be that in 100 years, we'll be in another ice age...
A good camera with a fast shutter.
2. I would imagine there are health issues if you stick your head out of a window
there are health implications from just opening the window!
You can get similar passes from Amtrack in the U.S. Travel to anywhere at any time on any (amtrack) train for a month. Possibly a good way to spend a vacation; hopping around the country.
Good, more for me... Mwahahaha
The neutrons are going to be (eventually) absorbed in a liquid lithium metal jacket. The lithium absorbs the neutrons to create tritium and or deuterium which can be extracted and recycled back into the reactor as fuel
Only 8! We'd better get on it right away! That's not enough bandwidth to support my p2p connections...
I know. I originally read about the problem on theregister.co.uk
Yes I do. I'm also aware that there are numerous other cables already in place.
hard to imagine, ain't it.
lay some new cables... Why run one when two or three will obviously be better.
Actually, it's already been (in) development. DOE's been working on it for a decade and has working prototypes.
At least that's what it says on the schedule I've got.
how the Borg got there start...