Normally, I'd just sign that up to the fact that THG is a German site, and most of its authors I believe are German too. But I checked, and at least the names of the authors for this article sound like they could be native speakers of English. Otherwise, I would have guessed they called the consoles "domestic" since they are used in the home (as opposed to, I guess, at an arcade). *Shrug*. I'm not a native speaker of English myself, but I still find the headlines and other attempts at being witty/whatever at THG quite painful at times. Or just plain unintelligble--I still haven't figured out what they mean by "Joysticks For Flight Simulation- Using A Lever To Fly A Plane!". They sound as if the concept is somehow unique... Weird. Oh, and why have they made the text on the page unselectable? Probably just to annoy me, and cause more people to read their source. Mumble.
Geez, some people are just too ignorant to talk geeky hardware, it seems! If you'd taken the time to make the link clickable and read the goddamned specs for that device, you would have seen that it uses 10 Mbps Ethernet. Now, two things should have stricken you:
OMG, 10 Mbps is even less than the 12 Mbps of (theoretical) USB peak bandwidth!
OMG, 10 Mbps is 1/40:th of the (again, theoretical) FireWire/IEEE1394/i.Link peak bandwidth of 400 Mbps!!
Taken together, these two facts might make you think that ThinkGeek's device, while possibly cool, does not beat the iPod when it comes to bandwidth, and in fact doesn't even beat the Treo. Clear? With that said, I must say the TV output is kind of a cool feature.;^)
Well, I agree with what you're saying in principle, but some of those rules (I hesitate to call them definitions) are simply not accurate. A better meaning of "byte" is "the smallest addressable piece of memory on your computer". For most of today's microprocessors, that makes a byte 8 bits wide. Older machines had 9-bit bytes, and 36-bit words. For some bizarre processors, a byte is a single bit; you might want to disregard this rule in those cases to preserve your sanity.;^). Further, how wide would you make a "word" on a typical x86/Athlon system today? Hint: the memory bus has been 64 bits wide for a long time... I think the width of (integer) registers and/or execution units is a better measure of word width (aka the "bittyness" of a CPU), since that says more about the programming model of the CPU in question. Being primarily a software dude, that's more interesting to me than the width of the bus. Anyway, just my two cents.
Um, not that I'm an Apple fan or even close to being one, but I sure am a sucker for picking nits. So: you mean the Apple iPod. Not to be confused with the CompaqiPAQ. Clear?;-)
So, if you and your pals discuss the meaning of life shortly after covering pencils, that's about as interesting as if the lead developer and inventor of the Linux kernel discusses software design? Um. That's strange, you'd think an argument as powerful as that should convince easily, but still I find myself not quite over on your side yet.:)
You aren't allowing for compression.
True, because the thought of a compressed monitor connection is too bizarre for my brain to come up with on its own. I doubt you can compress 944 Mbps down to 6 Mbps (99.4% efficiency) without loss. And I really, really do think a monitor connection should be lossless. Also, as you say, "eating up" all available wireless bandwidth just for the monitor connection seems a bit stupid with today's technology.
How? This is an 18" screen, so let's assume (rather conservatively, IMO, and also without bothering to restart Mozilla in order to read the article again) a 1280x1024 resolution. At 24 bits per color packed, and a 30 Hz update frequency, you're looking at 943,718,400 bits per second to send to the monitor. That's 944 Mbps, which as far as I know is quite a bit more than any 802.11x standard is said to handle... Right?
I know. Embarassing for someone playing the C advocate, huh? Truth is, it's a bug in Slashcode that won't allow me to quote it correctly. I can correct it, but it gets mangled immediately. Haven't bothered to report it, either, since... Well, the update pace of Slash isn't exactly impressive, so it feels like too much trouble.
Bzzzt, but that's wrong too. Hint: #include <stdlib.h>, then take a look at CHAR_BIT. The number of bits per char (and "char" equals "byte" in C terminology; it's the smallest addressable piece of memory) is not specified in the language. CHAR_BIT is typically eight, but that's not certain. In practice, you can come a long way by assuming CHAR_BIT to be eight, but it's not generically true, which is why I feel the need to object a bit.
Well, at my last place of eployment, I used SourceForge quite heavily for my main project. Since the employer was (and is) in Sweden, the network latency to SF's servers was often clearly noticeable. Not painful, but noticeable enough to make me think about getting a local CVS mirror/proxy server or something. I guess SF On Site would work, although I'm unsure if it supports mirroring projects to the real thing.
I see. Thanks a lot for your reply, it was very informative and interesting. I'm thinking a bit about maybe getting into some corner of the embedded industry (I like having the hardware in sight), so I enjoy reading things like this. Thanks again.:)
I'm pretty sure the name was "SAM". I found this page about a C64 speech synthesis program named SAM, but I'm not sure if it's the same one. Sounds right though, I remember that running SAM added a SAY keyword to the C64's built-in BASIC... Aah, nostalgia!
Cool! But, er, why don't you just talk to Sony and license the PS One? I mean, it's around $100 retail, I bet that could come way down with a little bulk purchasing action. Sure, it's not top of the line anymore, but I'd guess the games available on it still might look interesting next to whatever you can get going on a 266MHz x86 system (no offense). Or?
So, what "Phillips" would that be, then? I guess the rest of us are more familiar with the Dutch company Philips. You might want to count the L:s in there.;^)
Good question, I was just going to post it. Very weird-sounding quote, that one... It made me suspect he (Hopkins) has heard the quote somewhere else, or something. Weird.
If you're just interested in connecting devices, not transferring data to/from them after connect, you might look into Plain Old String Technology. And what's the intermixing of Bluetooth and USB for? *Confused*.
...but I think the IEEE1394 (that's FireWire, or iLink if you're Sony) hubs are out now. I do wonder if the iLink hardware is accessible under Linux on the PS2. 400 Mbps should roll all over the broadband adapter, no?
This just in: by reading the article before posting comments, many redundant questions can be avoided... Anyway, just to prove that I did actually read it, here's a relevant quote: "the prototype boot generates about half a watt of power". But the director of the project "[...]hopes that by the end of January the boot's output could be raised to nearly two watts". There.
Slashdot Mirror
You might want to read up on your jargon, then. Here's a relevant entry. This is also linked to, btw, by the CCC page in the main article.
Normally, I'd just sign that up to the fact that THG is a German site, and most of its authors I believe are German too. But I checked, and at least the names of the authors for this article sound like they could be native speakers of English. Otherwise, I would have guessed they called the consoles "domestic" since they are used in the home (as opposed to, I guess, at an arcade). *Shrug*. I'm not a native speaker of English myself, but I still find the headlines and other attempts at being witty/whatever at THG quite painful at times. Or just plain unintelligble--I still haven't figured out what they mean by "Joysticks For Flight Simulation- Using A Lever To Fly A Plane!". They sound as if the concept is somehow unique... Weird. Oh, and why have they made the text on the page unselectable? Probably just to annoy me, and cause more people to read their source. Mumble.
- OMG, 10 Mbps is even less than the 12 Mbps of (theoretical) USB peak bandwidth!
- OMG, 10 Mbps is 1/40:th of the (again, theoretical) FireWire/IEEE1394/i.Link peak bandwidth of 400 Mbps!!
Taken together, these two facts might make you think that ThinkGeek's device, while possibly cool, does not beat the iPod when it comes to bandwidth, and in fact doesn't even beat the Treo. Clear? With that said, I must say the TV output is kind of a cool feature.Well, I agree with what you're saying in principle, but some of those rules (I hesitate to call them definitions) are simply not accurate. A better meaning of "byte" is "the smallest addressable piece of memory on your computer". For most of today's microprocessors, that makes a byte 8 bits wide. Older machines had 9-bit bytes, and 36-bit words. For some bizarre processors, a byte is a single bit; you might want to disregard this rule in those cases to preserve your sanity. ;^). Further, how wide would you make a "word" on a typical x86/Athlon system today? Hint: the memory bus has been 64 bits wide for a long time... I think the width of (integer) registers and/or execution units is a better measure of word width (aka the "bittyness" of a CPU), since that says more about the programming model of the CPU in question. Being primarily a software dude, that's more interesting to me than the width of the bus. Anyway, just my two cents.
The PS2 only has one actual CPU, the MIPS-based Emotion Engine. Far more detail is available in this nice ArsTechnica article.
Impressive! But, before some webmaster from a dying gaming site goes off and does it, someone should register planetsegway.com. It could be you... :)
Um, not that I'm an Apple fan or even close to being one, but I sure am a sucker for picking nits. So: you mean the Apple iPod. Not to be confused with the Compaq iPAQ. Clear? ;-)
So, if you and your pals discuss the meaning of life shortly after covering pencils, that's about as interesting as if the lead developer and inventor of the Linux kernel discusses software design? Um. That's strange, you'd think an argument as powerful as that should convince easily, but still I find myself not quite over on your side yet. :)
...it's also from October 29. Sizzlingly hot news, for sure.
You aren't allowing for compression.
True, because the thought of a compressed monitor connection is too bizarre for my brain to come up with on its own. I doubt you can compress 944 Mbps down to 6 Mbps (99.4% efficiency) without loss. And I really, really do think a monitor connection should be lossless. Also, as you say, "eating up" all available wireless bandwidth just for the monitor connection seems a bit stupid with today's technology.
How? This is an 18" screen, so let's assume (rather conservatively, IMO, and also without bothering to restart Mozilla in order to read the article again) a 1280x1024 resolution. At 24 bits per color packed, and a 30 Hz update frequency, you're looking at 943,718,400 bits per second to send to the monitor. That's 944 Mbps, which as far as I know is quite a bit more than any 802.11x standard is said to handle... Right?
I know. Embarassing for someone playing the C advocate, huh? Truth is, it's a bug in Slashcode that won't allow me to quote it correctly. I can correct it, but it gets mangled immediately. Haven't bothered to report it, either, since... Well, the update pace of Slash isn't exactly impressive, so it feels like too much trouble.
Bzzzt, but that's wrong too. Hint: #include <stdlib.h>, then take a look at CHAR_BIT. The number of bits per char (and "char" equals "byte" in C terminology; it's the smallest addressable piece of memory) is not specified in the language. CHAR_BIT is typically eight, but that's not certain. In practice, you can come a long way by assuming CHAR_BIT to be eight, but it's not generically true, which is why I feel the need to object a bit.
Mmmmm, more people should have stickers like that, that's for sure. Great idea. ;^)
Well, at my last place of eployment, I used SourceForge quite heavily for my main project. Since the employer was (and is) in Sweden, the network latency to SF's servers was often clearly noticeable. Not painful, but noticeable enough to make me think about getting a local CVS mirror/proxy server or something. I guess SF On Site would work, although I'm unsure if it supports mirroring projects to the real thing.
I see. Thanks a lot for your reply, it was very informative and interesting. I'm thinking a bit about maybe getting into some corner of the embedded industry (I like having the hardware in sight), so I enjoy reading things like this. Thanks again. :)
I'm pretty sure the name was "SAM". I found this page about a C64 speech synthesis program named SAM, but I'm not sure if it's the same one. Sounds right though, I remember that running SAM added a SAY keyword to the C64's built-in BASIC... Aah, nostalgia!
Cool! But, er, why don't you just talk to Sony and license the PS One? I mean, it's around $100 retail, I bet that could come way down with a little bulk purchasing action. Sure, it's not top of the line anymore, but I'd guess the games available on it still might look interesting next to whatever you can get going on a 266MHz x86 system (no offense). Or?
So, what "Phillips" would that be, then? I guess the rest of us are more familiar with the Dutch company Philips. You might want to count the L:s in there. ;^)
Good question, I was just going to post it. Very weird-sounding quote, that one... It made me suspect he (Hopkins) has heard the quote somewhere else, or something. Weird.
If you're just interested in connecting devices, not transferring data to/from them after connect, you might look into Plain Old String Technology. And what's the intermixing of Bluetooth and USB for? *Confused*.
...but I think the IEEE1394 (that's FireWire, or iLink if you're Sony) hubs are out now. I do wonder if the iLink hardware is accessible under Linux on the PS2. 400 Mbps should roll all over the broadband adapter, no?
Ah, I can symphatize with that, easily. Sorry if I sounded like (too much of) an asshole. ;^)
This just in: by reading the article before posting comments, many redundant questions can be avoided... Anyway, just to prove that I did actually read it, here's a relevant quote: "the prototype boot generates about half a watt of power". But the director of the project "[...]hopes that by the end of January the boot's output could be raised to nearly two watts". There.
Well then, I guess someone else had better luck. It was slightly confusingly titled, as I recall.