I already sold several dual quad-core systems the last couple of months, build to order. This week I sold a similar system (with this exact same motherboard) but with 16GB of memory instead of 4. Luckily it's not going to run Vista;-)
But it appears to be one of the few machines that supports the minimum hardware requirements of Vista.
Figuring out how to redesign a program to run in parallel is a terribly difficult thing to do, for the most part. There are sometimes linear algebra problems that appear in science applications that lend themselves to parallel coding, but those aren't things that most users are trying to implement. *They cannot give up on making sequential processing faster.* Making a platform as massively parallel as this is (for a personal computer) will never accomplish what improving other facets of the architecture like memory latency, cache size, and of course the chip frequency. So we have been using machines with four processors for 11 years, and for the most part only one processor gets utilized even after extensive efforts to make our applications run in parallel. The overhead for farming out work is worthwhile only when you have very large chunks of computing that doesn't have to be sequentially processed. I really see this multicore processing stuff as a bit of a cop out.
Dear Angry guy,
it's all about the available capital and the assumption of risk... most of the large investments in real estate are funded through entities that obfuscate the risk involved in their ventures. As HomelessinLaJolla was saying, the market place is responding to artificial demand that has been induced by what amounts to fraudulently obtained capital. But it isn't normally fraudulent by legal standards, and in any event, the providers of the capital are often foreign and our laws aren't always in tune with their interests.
Nowadays, you've got everybody and their dog, from Microsoft to Sun to Amazon applying for patents.
Dear patent office,
My dog would like to withdraw his patent application for a method of peeing on a fire hydrant. After properly smelling the fire hydrant he discovered that some other dogs had apparently already discovered the method. We will also withdraw all tort against users of the peeing on the fire hydrant method. Our lawyers had previously counseled my dog on the probably illegitimacy of the application. But for whatever reason, he was unable to comprehend the advice of his attorneys when they said that the method may not qualify as non-obvious to those skilled in the art of peeing. I thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Dog Owner
Dearest Richard,
I have a medical requirement to get worked up about something everyday at work. If I do not, my narcolepsy will kick in and I'll go head first into my keyboard. So really, I think Microsoft's patent trolling is really doing me the service of getting my blood pressure up when the day to day work of science really has me dozing off.
Thanks,
Andy
It's important to remember that courts, most often, have the right to bring common sense into the process. If your congressman writes legislation that oppress his constituents, then the process will chuck him out of congress and the courts will throw out the law. Our forefathers had more sense than you think they did!
That's really the key.. the "intellectual property" that they are would bring to court is probably pretty slim on what is actually patentable. Any patents for things like "tabbed browsing" will get thrown out. Other patents they have might be equivalent to just what turned up when they coded features, so that an argument can be made that it's actually the language standard that produced the "intellectual property." That is to say, there was an obvious way within a language to accomplish something and just having done that isn't in and of itself an innovation. So you could argue that this will be really good for open source software, when the process shows that MS has very little intellectual property that actually meet the criteria of patentable.
Look at the bottom of this link. Dark matter and antimatter are two separate issues. Antimatter was verified with the observation of the positron that you mention in the 1930's and the existence of antimatter hasn't really been debated since then. Dark matter is something totally different... it's existence is suggested by astrophysical data and not by experimental particle physics. There is no theoretical understanding of dark matter. It's all suggested by observation. Of course, that's the way science is supposed to work, but in a few cases theoretical understanding preceded observation, as was the case with antimatter.
There isn't anything to preclude a CEO from implementing cuts that essentially stop the operation of a company while it restructures. Sometimes they don't come out of restructuring. A few years ago Tellabs cut its operations so far down that it has never returned to being a competitor. This happens because a CEO wants to save his ass, and he stops operations and sells corporate property for short term financial stability. While ending US operations isn't going to happen, cutting it down to 50% would fit right in to what IT companies have done in the past, although usually while under more duress than IBM is now.
As you know, quantum computers require a recoding of applications to take advantage of the qubits. As an example, our research group has beeen working feverishly on porting Q-Bert to Qubits.
WHOIS(1) BSD General Commands Manual WHOIS(1)
NAME
whois -- Internet domain name and network number directory service
DESCRIPTION
The whois utility looks up records in the databases maintained by several
Network Information Centers (NICs).
Yahoo could just respond to requests to provide names of people who use online forums for political dissent with a standard response like, "The culprit you are looking for is a Mr. Chin."
' One of the largest barriers to recruiting women to the field is the nerd factor. To attract women students to the CS field, 'Moving emphasis away from programming proficiency was a key to the success of programs Dr. Blum and her colleagues at Carnegie Mellon instituted to draw more women into computer science.'
Does she not see how this might be considered offensive to male students (i.e. 'guys in CS are nerds') and women (i.e. 'we have to dumb down the curriculum.') What are these people thinking?
Slashdot Mirror
Figuring out how to redesign a program to run in parallel is a terribly difficult thing to do, for the most part. There are sometimes linear algebra problems that appear in science applications that lend themselves to parallel coding, but those aren't things that most users are trying to implement. *They cannot give up on making sequential processing faster.* Making a platform as massively parallel as this is (for a personal computer) will never accomplish what improving other facets of the architecture like memory latency, cache size, and of course the chip frequency. So we have been using machines with four processors for 11 years, and for the most part only one processor gets utilized even after extensive efforts to make our applications run in parallel. The overhead for farming out work is worthwhile only when you have very large chunks of computing that doesn't have to be sequentially processed. I really see this multicore processing stuff as a bit of a cop out.
The compromise is to use a TeX based wysiwig like TeXmacs. It's pretty slick and has really nice typesetting.
it's all about the available capital and the assumption of risk... most of the large investments in real estate are funded through entities that obfuscate the risk involved in their ventures. As HomelessinLaJolla was saying, the market place is responding to artificial demand that has been induced by what amounts to fraudulently obtained capital. But it isn't normally fraudulent by legal standards, and in any event, the providers of the capital are often foreign and our laws aren't always in tune with their interests.
awww, but I followed the 125 years until it's funny rule!
Besides that Mrs. Lincoln... how was the play?
My dog would like to withdraw his patent application for a method of peeing on a fire hydrant. After properly smelling the fire hydrant he discovered that some other dogs had apparently already discovered the method. We will also withdraw all tort against users of the peeing on the fire hydrant method. Our lawyers had previously counseled my dog on the probably illegitimacy of the application. But for whatever reason, he was unable to comprehend the advice of his attorneys when they said that the method may not qualify as non-obvious to those skilled in the art of peeing. I thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Dog Owner
You forgot Red Hat which now has some resources.
Dearest Richard, I have a medical requirement to get worked up about something everyday at work. If I do not, my narcolepsy will kick in and I'll go head first into my keyboard. So really, I think Microsoft's patent trolling is really doing me the service of getting my blood pressure up when the day to day work of science really has me dozing off. Thanks, Andy
It's important to remember that courts, most often, have the right to bring common sense into the process. If your congressman writes legislation that oppress his constituents, then the process will chuck him out of congress and the courts will throw out the law. Our forefathers had more sense than you think they did!
that was one of the funniest posts I've ever read on slashdot.
If you are proficient at any programming language then you won't need excel.
Sending TV shows through the inner tubes has been patented by MS or possibly Daryl McBride. User beware!
That's really the key.. the "intellectual property" that they are would bring to court is probably pretty slim on what is actually patentable. Any patents for things like "tabbed browsing" will get thrown out. Other patents they have might be equivalent to just what turned up when they coded features, so that an argument can be made that it's actually the language standard that produced the "intellectual property." That is to say, there was an obvious way within a language to accomplish something and just having done that isn't in and of itself an innovation. So you could argue that this will be really good for open source software, when the process shows that MS has very little intellectual property that actually meet the criteria of patentable.
Look at the bottom of this link. Dark matter and antimatter are two separate issues. Antimatter was verified with the observation of the positron that you mention in the 1930's and the existence of antimatter hasn't really been debated since then. Dark matter is something totally different... it's existence is suggested by astrophysical data and not by experimental particle physics. There is no theoretical understanding of dark matter. It's all suggested by observation. Of course, that's the way science is supposed to work, but in a few cases theoretical understanding preceded observation, as was the case with antimatter.
There isn't anything to preclude a CEO from implementing cuts that essentially stop the operation of a company while it restructures. Sometimes they don't come out of restructuring. A few years ago Tellabs cut its operations so far down that it has never returned to being a competitor. This happens because a CEO wants to save his ass, and he stops operations and sells corporate property for short term financial stability. While ending US operations isn't going to happen, cutting it down to 50% would fit right in to what IT companies have done in the past, although usually while under more duress than IBM is now.
As you know, quantum computers require a recoding of applications to take advantage of the qubits.
As an example, our research group has beeen working feverishly on porting Q-Bert to Qubits.
WHOIS(1) BSD General Commands Manual WHOIS(1) NAME whois -- Internet domain name and network number directory service DESCRIPTION The whois utility looks up records in the databases maintained by several Network Information Centers (NICs).
Maybe it's time for me to up grade from my 300 baud modem on my C64.
syntax error
Can they root kit my linux box to make sure that I'm not paying them any money for their software?
So what you're saying is that I'm not actually "straight out of Compton" ?
Yahoo could just respond to requests to provide names of people who use online forums for political dissent with a standard response like, "The culprit you are looking for is a Mr. Chin."