in their market share.
True enough, some problems can be parallelized, some can't, but before clusters were feasable they all had to be solved with supercomputers.
Now, the problems that CAN be solved by a cluster will surely be solved be one (it's cheaper). So perhaps they won't desapear... they will just loose some market share.
Well, it's just logic,
If p: "Exists evidence of life" and q:"Exists life"
p => q (If there exists evidence of life then there is life)
Does not mean that !p =>!q (If there isn't evidence of life, then there is no life).
It just means that !q=>!p (if there is no life then there is no evidence)
Perhaps they acknowledge that if a standard is desired, they should contribute to a popular JVM rather than keep working on one themselves.
I think that's a good way of thinking for OS.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple is dead!! Boy I missed the old days
Steve... is that you???!!!
Why would some one want to eat food that isn't food? I mean... I'll buy that if I can pay it with printed money!
To get laid???
Very interesting stuff because The Travelling Salesman Problem is NP-Hard. Perhaps, you were looking for http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/6/3/11/
in their market share. True enough, some problems can be parallelized, some can't, but before clusters were feasable they all had to be solved with supercomputers.
Now, the problems that CAN be solved by a cluster will surely be solved be one (it's cheaper).
So perhaps they won't desapear... they will just loose some market share.
Well, it's just logic,
If p: "Exists evidence of life" and q:"Exists life"
p => q (If there exists evidence of life then there is life)
Does not mean that !p =>!q (If there isn't evidence of life, then there is no life).
It just means that !q=>!p (if there is no life then there is no evidence)
Perhaps they acknowledge that if a standard is desired, they should contribute to a popular JVM rather than keep working on one themselves. I think that's a good way of thinking for OS.