that sounds like a really boring hobby, you should try comparing apples with jet engines and oranges with elephants, it will make you a much more rounded individual who is happier about life in general.
As a typical Slashdotter I was immediately wary of the pear shape implications of "rounded individual". Would there be an alternative expression that is not comparable to pear or other fruit?
Bingo, young man! Exactly like 6 is a power of three. After reading dear GP's comment about "why trinary?" I've been trying large values of 3^1 and small values of 3^2, but still not quite comphrehending the comment...
DX10 to some extent and DX11 to a large extent are exposing anisotropic texture filtering and multisamples/anti-aliasing via the API, giving developers better contol over these previously fixed and chip-specific functions. This standardization would entail that the results are going to get more uniform across different cards.
Not that this product sounds terribly useful, as noted by others here... One the one hand a pair of dual-chip Radeon cards in Crossfire probably gets very close to the scalability without the extra hardware (expense), and on the other hand I can't imagine this product ending up priced for hobbyists willing to recycle old cards. (On the gripping hand I didn't RTFA though...)
A suppressor partially solves that problem. Even when you use standard (high power supersonic) ammo, the supersonic "crack" along the flight path doesn't pinpoint your location like the muzzle blast would. And a good suppressor can hide your muzzle flash which is crucial for night combat.
So the shot remains audible but the shooter's location is hard to identify.
I remember the backlash when XP became mainstream and MSFT was everyone's favorite whipping boy because "Windows 98SE had better performance" and "Windows 2000 doesn't have a playskool theme." Now everyone swears by XP.
I don't know what your "everyone" is (the business world or knowledged hackers) but for me 98SE never had solid performance and XP never stopped having a pervasive playskool theme. I'm still comfortably on 2000 for my Windows needs.
Not that Vista is a fantastic or even decent OS - but it's become everyone's favorite whipping boy, the George Bush of the technology industry, and it's more than a little retarded.
By "retarded", do you mean Vista or George Bush? It was ambiguous there.
Okay, seriously now... I see what you mean by "whipping boy". But I don't see a "smoke without a fire" here either. I haven't researched Vista's server-oriented features as I use FreeBSD for servers; but for desktop use I just haven't noticed anything compelling or even markedly beneficial over 2000. (While I have witnessed first-hand the improvements -- optimizations and features -- that Mac OS X has received in the same time-span.) You understand if I just can't help wondering where all Microsoft's time and resources have gone. (Vista's server version could be a different story, but it's simply outside my scope.)
Depends on whether you are a code monkey/sales drone or actually doing a creative production job. If you feel good about your tools, it can have an slight but persistent impact on your work. Conversely, if your desktop or laptop looks and feels like an ass to you, nevermind how performant it is, you probably rarely are at your 100% best using it.
I understand what you are saying, though. Like, if designers on Siligcon Graphics workstations felt better about their job due to the looks, then it was actually beneficial; but choosing a Cray to have an impressive bench in the lobby, now that's...
if you ever wondered where DDR6400 comes from, it's 8 banks of 800MHz and 8*800=6400
The "6400" comes from 800 MHz data clock (400 MHz base & DDR) and 64-bit (8-byte) bus width per DIMM or memory channel. Indeed it refers to 6400 MB/s, but banks have absolutely nothing to do with this.:)
Not any more. The GPUs since G80 and R600 are good at scheduling and running scalar math on the shader units. (Earlier they tended to be fixed 4-wide or 2-wide.) But branching is still costly, and the GPU needs to bundle many scalar ops together (a bigger batch of pixels even when the shader/program has a scalar op as such) for full performance.
One possible explanation is that games, contrary to expectations, continue to be limited by texture sampling (together with other old non-shader ops like stencil fill or alpha blending). While vertex processing is not enough to eat up the available shader unit horsepower. So while the shader unit pool indeed sees 100% peak times (especially when processing long special effects shaders for some parts of the screen), on average there is some percentage of pure shader unit power available for other tasks -- like physics processing.
Not for shipping them, but for integrating them, making them next to impossible to remove. That was the monopolistic anti-competition practice they got sued over. Ubuntu doesn't integrate (require) any of the apps it comes with; as such it wouldn't matter in court if they are free of charge or not.
People complained when Microsoft started shipping a browser, media player, etc in windows, and now it's a standard thing to do in most operating systems.
I thought people complained about Microsoft integrating those in the OS so that you couldn't remove them. If they had just shipped them with Windows as separate apps, there would have been no reason to complain (or for lawsuits).
Slightly off-topic but it's amusing how "Don't be evil" or "Do no evil" gets touted as Google Inc.'s "core philosophy" or company motto.
When in reality it's chapter 6 of their Corporate Philosophy page, titled "You can make money without doing evil" -- outlining what kind of advertising you should use.
They aren't even talking about themselves; let alone their business model.
So why not give them some slack, everybody. They never claimed they are saints. (Although IMHO they are one of the better behaved companies out there.)
Off-topic but... it's likely a bit more complex than that. Jef Raskin who started the Macintosh project at Apple (when Lisa was still firmly getting a CLI) published articles on ergonomic computer interfaces some years before Xerox PARC was even founded. Granted, he knew the guys at PARC and was a frequent visitor. But it's arguable that Mac wasn't just a quick copy of Star/Alto, there was original thinking behind it just as well. (And Steve Jobs was nothing but a liability to the project, contrary to official Apple history.)
how on earth would moving to Linux have made a difference?
Consider timing, though. In the 1990s Linux was free and open but far from an off-the-shelf commodity (from the end user's POV). Nobody was selling high-profile Linux PCs, let alone high-end Linux workstations. If they would have developed a kick-ass Intergraph workstation with a comphrehensive production grade software stack based on Linux, they could have taken a leadership position in Linux land and also made Wintel boxes of that time look like toys. (And they had the hardware and software expertise to make that happen or at least give a damn good try -- consider Wildcats and their own Unix distro.) Water under the bridge now, I know... just like Silicon Graphics. Such a sorry end for Intergraph to sell their best product line to 3Dlabs and have it end up fucked up by Creative Labs:-(
Slashdot Mirror
If it was Photo___ or some other common name, would we even remember it?
Adobe has this similar program but for the life of me I can't remember what it is called.
that sounds like a really boring hobby, you should try comparing apples with jet engines and oranges with elephants, it will make you a much more rounded individual who is happier about life in general.
As a typical Slashdotter I was immediately wary of the pear shape implications of "rounded individual". Would there be an alternative expression that is not comparable to pear or other fruit?
Why are they moving the memory controller off silicon? That in itself seems like a step backwards.
Obviously it's better to run it on air than on silicon.
Bingo, young man! Exactly like 6 is a power of three. After reading dear GP's comment about "why trinary?" I've been trying large values of 3^1 and small values of 3^2, but still not quite comphrehending the comment...
DX10 to some extent and DX11 to a large extent are exposing anisotropic texture filtering and multisamples/anti-aliasing via the API, giving developers better contol over these previously fixed and chip-specific functions. This standardization would entail that the results are going to get more uniform across different cards.
Not that this product sounds terribly useful, as noted by others here... One the one hand a pair of dual-chip Radeon cards in Crossfire probably gets very close to the scalability without the extra hardware (expense), and on the other hand I can't imagine this product ending up priced for hobbyists willing to recycle old cards. (On the gripping hand I didn't RTFA though...)
True, but still, if there's a Nano that bursts into flames you'd hope there's a Zune nearby to squirt at it.
A suppressor partially solves that problem. Even when you use standard (high power supersonic) ammo, the supersonic "crack" along the flight path doesn't pinpoint your location like the muzzle blast would. And a good suppressor can hide your muzzle flash which is crucial for night combat.
So the shot remains audible but the shooter's location is hard to identify.
Those cowards also use those damn UAVs and sentry robots and stuff.
Oh wait.
I remember the backlash when XP became mainstream and MSFT was everyone's favorite whipping boy because "Windows 98SE had better performance" and "Windows 2000 doesn't have a playskool theme." Now everyone swears by XP.
I don't know what your "everyone" is (the business world or knowledged hackers) but for me 98SE never had solid performance and XP never stopped having a pervasive playskool theme. I'm still comfortably on 2000 for my Windows needs.
Not that Vista is a fantastic or even decent OS - but it's become everyone's favorite whipping boy, the George Bush of the technology industry, and it's more than a little retarded.
By "retarded", do you mean Vista or George Bush? It was ambiguous there.
Okay, seriously now... I see what you mean by "whipping boy". But I don't see a "smoke without a fire" here either. I haven't researched Vista's server-oriented features as I use FreeBSD for servers; but for desktop use I just haven't noticed anything compelling or even markedly beneficial over 2000. (While I have witnessed first-hand the improvements -- optimizations and features -- that Mac OS X has received in the same time-span.) You understand if I just can't help wondering where all Microsoft's time and resources have gone. (Vista's server version could be a different story, but it's simply outside my scope.)
Many web 2.0 sites strive to be agile
:-)
Can I have that in English?
Depends on whether you are a code monkey/sales drone or actually doing a creative production job. If you feel good about your tools, it can have an slight but persistent impact on your work. Conversely, if your desktop or laptop looks and feels like an ass to you, nevermind how performant it is, you probably rarely are at your 100% best using it.
I understand what you are saying, though. Like, if designers on Siligcon Graphics workstations felt better about their job due to the looks, then it was actually beneficial; but choosing a Cray to have an impressive bench in the lobby, now that's...
if you ever wondered where DDR6400 comes from, it's 8 banks of 800MHz and 8*800=6400
:)
The "6400" comes from 800 MHz data clock (400 MHz base & DDR) and 64-bit (8-byte) bus width per DIMM or memory channel. Indeed it refers to 6400 MB/s, but banks have absolutely nothing to do with this.
Pardon me, but you sound like some Ikea shoppers I know. I've occasionally thought of forcing them to camp out on a garbage dump for a week.
GPUs are designed specifically to do vector math
Not any more. The GPUs since G80 and R600 are good at scheduling and running scalar math on the shader units. (Earlier they tended to be fixed 4-wide or 2-wide.) But branching is still costly, and the GPU needs to bundle many scalar ops together (a bigger batch of pixels even when the shader/program has a scalar op as such) for full performance.
One possible explanation is that games, contrary to expectations, continue to be limited by texture sampling (together with other old non-shader ops like stencil fill or alpha blending). While vertex processing is not enough to eat up the available shader unit horsepower. So while the shader unit pool indeed sees 100% peak times (especially when processing long special effects shaders for some parts of the screen), on average there is some percentage of pure shader unit power available for other tasks -- like physics processing.
Santa moved to Finland several millennia ago.
Why not try Finland on your next vacation?
Wait till Gillette adds "Pulsed Detonation" for an even smoother shave! "This goes to Mach 11!"
Not for shipping them, but for integrating them, making them next to impossible to remove. That was the monopolistic anti-competition practice they got sued over. Ubuntu doesn't integrate (require) any of the apps it comes with; as such it wouldn't matter in court if they are free of charge or not.
People complained when Microsoft started shipping a browser, media player, etc in windows, and now it's a standard thing to do in most operating systems.
I thought people complained about Microsoft integrating those in the OS so that you couldn't remove them. If they had just shipped them with Windows as separate apps, there would have been no reason to complain (or for lawsuits).
Big difference.
Slightly off-topic but it's amusing how "Don't be evil" or "Do no evil" gets touted as Google Inc.'s "core philosophy" or company motto.
When in reality it's chapter 6 of their Corporate Philosophy page, titled "You can make money without doing evil" -- outlining what kind of advertising you should use.
They aren't even talking about themselves; let alone their business model.
So why not give them some slack, everybody. They never claimed they are saints. (Although IMHO they are one of the better behaved companies out there.)
Apple Macintosh which is a copy of Xerox Alto
Off-topic but... it's likely a bit more complex than that. Jef Raskin who started the Macintosh project at Apple (when Lisa was still firmly getting a CLI) published articles on ergonomic computer interfaces some years before Xerox PARC was even founded. Granted, he knew the guys at PARC and was a frequent visitor. But it's arguable that Mac wasn't just a quick copy of Star/Alto, there was original thinking behind it just as well. (And Steve Jobs was nothing but a liability to the project, contrary to official Apple history.)
how on earth would moving to Linux have made a difference?
:-(
Consider timing, though. In the 1990s Linux was free and open but far from an off-the-shelf commodity (from the end user's POV). Nobody was selling high-profile Linux PCs, let alone high-end Linux workstations. If they would have developed a kick-ass Intergraph workstation with a comphrehensive production grade software stack based on Linux, they could have taken a leadership position in Linux land and also made Wintel boxes of that time look like toys. (And they had the hardware and software expertise to make that happen or at least give a damn good try -- consider Wildcats and their own Unix distro.) Water under the bridge now, I know... just like Silicon Graphics. Such a sorry end for Intergraph to sell their best product line to 3Dlabs and have it end up fucked up by Creative Labs
The GNU ;-)
Um, did you mean "a fuckload of" difference or "fuck all" difference? There's a fuckload of difference.
Welcome to Slashdot.