I don't know how serious Lucas is with this prediction. Look at the hundred's of millions of dollars invested in his new digs near the Presidio. Sure games and TV producttion, but a lot of movie making capacity. Doubt he has buyer's remorse on all that.
Well you might be more credible if you got the name right, or were you just meaning to misrepresent it.
You are overlybroad in you swipe. Certainly Compaq workstations for Video Editing were not a ragtag collection of parts thrown together
Well yes and no. Dual cores have existed elsewhere for a number of years.. Under Unix systems from IBM and HP dual cores would give ordinary applications about a 10% boost at best. The second core takes on OS load and I/O tasks.
Desktop applications are primarily single threaded in their design. You will see that Windows applications typically will have at least 5 threads but they are tied to the OS, GUI, and UI. The core application itself is single threaded.
Once the appliations/games/etc that you run are threaded or threaded more thouroughly then you will see dual core more helpful if the applications are designed around shared resources like L2 cache. Hyperthreading too can help but the shared resources can be even more difficult to manage as L1 cache and the CPU pipelines are shared.
Thoughput of a system in which several "heavy" CPU loads are more interesting measures than typical benchmarks thrown out these days. However throughput is not typical of the usage pattern of desktops however.
The most interesting "core" design coming out is from Sun, Niagra. As I have read elsewhere 8 cores with 4 thread states per core. Sounds good for running Apache.
While multi core is the wave of the future it does not solve a fundamental problem of the current Intel and AMD implementations. They have a limit in the efficiencies of parallism in the pipelines and the limits of superscaling. While AMD has a great implementation in the 64bit architecture they have never come up with a new architecture. Intels/HPs Intanium may not be the answer either. In the meantime I will gladly look forward to more and better multicores especially when desktop apps/games are designed for them.
There were earlier attempts to edit the DVDS and redistribute them. That got whacked as it clearly should have. I will admit that this was part of what I was reacting to earlier.
On the controlling of the content there is the fear of creeping censorship. It is a well founded concern. In this case though who is censoring who.
Well contradiction are some times in the eye of the beholder. congress is giving away on one hand and taking away on the other hand. But I will go with the obvious point now, Congresses interests are completely base.
"You can do anything you want to a copy of a movie you own, as long as you don't redistribute it."
Which is at the center of that part of the controversy. ClearPlay which is creating the edits that play on a copy that has been rented/owned and that ClearPlay does not own. The renter is a passive receiver of the movie and the edits and now views the movie at home. The renter is not actively performing the edits nor are they knowledgable of the missing material or the intent of the owner of copyrighted material.
We could go and on in this area as the courts thrash it out. But the original contradiction still stands. Congress on the one hand stands by the copyright holder stated interests protecting the materials on line and the other ignores the copyright holders interest serving up a solution supported by their narrow political interests.
Interesting. On the one hand they stiffen the penalties for piracy of unreleased materials and the other hand they legalize the highjacking of materials by editing content against the copyright holders will.
Something tells me the whole bill will not pass judicial review. If the Christian right wants more to have material that meets there standards then they should have to create and find a market. Not "steal it" and push it into their market.
I just installed FireFox 9.1 yesterday and so yes there are couple of adjustements from Mozilla 1.5. One question is why, unlike every other extension I have installed, does not shellblock.xpi show up in the Extensions dialog after installing it? Are has it not intalled correctly.
Thanks,
Frank
Another aspect of this problem of admin privileges versus ordinary users is the fact that Norton Antivirus will not run update unless the user has Admin privilege or you have the Corporate edition. So I go off on business for two weeks and the kids and wife(they don't want to deal with Linux) use the computer and that key little piece of infrastructure doesn't get updated. That in itself is a securtiy hole.
On top of that Microsoft ships XP home edition with ownership and priveleges turned on but no way to mangage them. If you want "group" privileges assigned, sorry about that you should of bought professional. What!? Microsoft ships multiple users enabled and no valid way of managing them. That in itself is a securiy hole.
Of course within XP Professional privileges and ownership are horribly complex to ordinary users( and I don't want to deal with their garbage). So the path of least resistance is taken by users, run everybody as admin because Microsoft patched ownership/priveleges/securtiy into an incoherent morass. Yeah lots of security problems that on an everyday basis will not go away.
And by the way "Power Users" classification doesn't always work because of what doublem mentions. Some much for Power.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know how serious Lucas is with this prediction. Look at the hundred's of millions of dollars invested in his new digs near the Presidio. Sure games and TV producttion, but a lot of movie making capacity. Doubt he has buyer's remorse on all that.
Well you might be more credible if you got the name right, or were you just meaning to misrepresent it. You are overlybroad in you swipe. Certainly Compaq workstations for Video Editing were not a ragtag collection of parts thrown together
Well yes and no. Dual cores have existed elsewhere for a number of years.. Under Unix systems from IBM and HP dual cores would give ordinary applications about a 10% boost at best. The second core takes on OS load and I/O tasks. Desktop applications are primarily single threaded in their design. You will see that Windows applications typically will have at least 5 threads but they are tied to the OS, GUI, and UI. The core application itself is single threaded. Once the appliations/games/etc that you run are threaded or threaded more thouroughly then you will see dual core more helpful if the applications are designed around shared resources like L2 cache. Hyperthreading too can help but the shared resources can be even more difficult to manage as L1 cache and the CPU pipelines are shared. Thoughput of a system in which several "heavy" CPU loads are more interesting measures than typical benchmarks thrown out these days. However throughput is not typical of the usage pattern of desktops however. The most interesting "core" design coming out is from Sun, Niagra. As I have read elsewhere 8 cores with 4 thread states per core. Sounds good for running Apache. While multi core is the wave of the future it does not solve a fundamental problem of the current Intel and AMD implementations. They have a limit in the efficiencies of parallism in the pipelines and the limits of superscaling. While AMD has a great implementation in the 64bit architecture they have never come up with a new architecture. Intels/HPs Intanium may not be the answer either. In the meantime I will gladly look forward to more and better multicores especially when desktop apps/games are designed for them.
There were earlier attempts to edit the DVDS and redistribute them. That got whacked as it clearly should have. I will admit that this was part of what I was reacting to earlier. On the controlling of the content there is the fear of creeping censorship. It is a well founded concern. In this case though who is censoring who. Well contradiction are some times in the eye of the beholder. congress is giving away on one hand and taking away on the other hand. But I will go with the obvious point now, Congresses interests are completely base.
"You can do anything you want to a copy of a movie you own, as long as you don't redistribute it." Which is at the center of that part of the controversy. ClearPlay which is creating the edits that play on a copy that has been rented/owned and that ClearPlay does not own. The renter is a passive receiver of the movie and the edits and now views the movie at home. The renter is not actively performing the edits nor are they knowledgable of the missing material or the intent of the owner of copyrighted material. We could go and on in this area as the courts thrash it out. But the original contradiction still stands. Congress on the one hand stands by the copyright holder stated interests protecting the materials on line and the other ignores the copyright holders interest serving up a solution supported by their narrow political interests.
Interesting. On the one hand they stiffen the penalties for piracy of unreleased materials and the other hand they legalize the highjacking of materials by editing content against the copyright holders will. Something tells me the whole bill will not pass judicial review. If the Christian right wants more to have material that meets there standards then they should have to create and find a market. Not "steal it" and push it into their market.
I just installed FireFox 9.1 yesterday and so yes there are couple of adjustements from Mozilla 1.5. One question is why, unlike every other extension I have installed, does not shellblock.xpi show up in the Extensions dialog after installing it? Are has it not intalled correctly. Thanks, Frank
Another aspect of this problem of admin privileges versus ordinary users is the fact that Norton Antivirus will not run update unless the user has Admin privilege or you have the Corporate edition. So I go off on business for two weeks and the kids and wife(they don't want to deal with Linux) use the computer and that key little piece of infrastructure doesn't get updated. That in itself is a securtiy hole. On top of that Microsoft ships XP home edition with ownership and priveleges turned on but no way to mangage them. If you want "group" privileges assigned, sorry about that you should of bought professional. What!? Microsoft ships multiple users enabled and no valid way of managing them. That in itself is a securiy hole. Of course within XP Professional privileges and ownership are horribly complex to ordinary users( and I don't want to deal with their garbage). So the path of least resistance is taken by users, run everybody as admin because Microsoft patched ownership/priveleges/securtiy into an incoherent morass. Yeah lots of security problems that on an everyday basis will not go away. And by the way "Power Users" classification doesn't always work because of what doublem mentions. Some much for Power.