MacOS X is not currently what you would call a full 64bit OS. In fact it could be completely 32bit and still run on the G5. The PowerPC platform was thought out in advance for this very transition.
MacOS X 10.3.x is a mostly 32bit OS with some 64bit extensions, and this will likely be the state of things for a good while. Most things do not in any way benefit from being 64 bit. Those bits that do (databases and simulations requiring large blocks of memory) will see the parts of the OS required moved to 64bit aware. This will probably be a slow transition. And to be honest, there are not many people who are pushing for it.
Actually, a G5 starts out at $1799. You are thinking of the Cluster Server XServe, at $2999. If you actually were to do even a little bit of research you will start to notice that in order to match the performance of these machines you will have to spend a lot more than the $1000 you quoted.
Remember you have to have: Gigabit Ethernet (the XServe has 2 ports built in).. I think this will probably account for $300-$500 of that thousand right there SATA Very high performance memory systems (with ECC on the XServe) FireWire800 (drives and networking) PCI-X (can you say Infiniband?)
And if we are focusing on the XServe: Hardware fault notification (very well implemented) 1U rack space (slide out drawer, including cable management) MacOS X Server (so nice to admin)
I don't think you know what you are talking about. After all, Virginia Tech just hit #3 on the supercomputing list with a cluster of G5's, and everyone is talking about how cheap they did it. The guy behind the project did a lot of research and discovered that this was the best price, Dell didn't even come close (they gave them 3 tries to do so).
Pay for being a developer? I am not sure I know exactly what you mean, but if you are asking if you have to do something to make your own shortcuts (what Omni calls the google-bar thing), then no. You just have to go into your preferences and define your own shortcuts.
Highlighting might be nice, but is not something that has been implemented. But there is always the text-search in the page available.
Actually one of the developers has been saying that he bas been working a lot on the program on his 12" iBook, and has been saying that both the tabs and the workspaces help him better manage his screen real-estate. Of course that means he was also using XCode on a 12" iBook, and you have to be a contortionist to do that well....
1) OmniWeb has had this for a long time... it just doesn't proclaim itself (and is a lot more configurable). Just type "google this and that" and it will return the results page of a google search for "this and that". You can make your own queries for any site you would like. In 4.5 this can only be a get query, but in 5 it can be a POST one as well. From the screenshots 5 will also have the option of having a separate field for this.
2) OmniWeb has had this since version 3. By size, not from same domain, or by a regular expression. I am not sure if Omni or iCab was the first to have it, but it was one of those two.
3) see 2...
Bookmark management has been one of OmniWeb's strengths, and it looks like they are running that ball again in 5. Having bookmarks check themselves at user definable intervals is really nice.
Cookie management is also a strong point, and the per-site preference mechanism will make this easier to use.
Take a look at OmniWeb. You can use it for free without restriction. It just asks you to register it on startup, and if you leave a window untouched for long enough it gets an "unregistered" banner cross it until you touch it again. And if you are really interested, check out the OmniWeb-l list, the developers are really responsive.
2.1 GB/s is very nice, but it only refers to transfers in one direction: to the card. There is a (much) smaller bandwidth back to the motherboard. This is because for their designed purpose, graphics cards do not need to talk back to the system much, they just crunch the numbers and spit out the results to a monitor.
With encryption you are usually looking at processing streams of data. If your encryption method involves a lot of floating point math (almost never) on every bit of information, then it would be nice. But encryption is almost always integer based (GPUs don't' shine in integer like they do in floating point), and involves just as much data going in as coming back.
If you are looking for a great (co) processor for integers, look at the Altivec section of the G4 (and the similar one in the G5.. I forget the IBM name).
The idea of marriage is used in Christianity, but it is used in many religions and cultures. Most of the concepts in Christian marriage come from Christianity's parent religion: Judaism. It, like so many other "Cristian Values" are not in any way unique to Christianity. They tend to be general societal norms.
And I would also argue with your "Marriage, by definition, can only be between a man and a woman" statement. This is your definition.
And finally, I can see that you simply do not understand how children are raised across this country. There are so many children that are being raised by single parents. I would agree that an ideal environment for children would have multiple caregivers, but I disagree strongly that this environment must be only one man and one woman.
If you look at the societies with the healthiest families they most often have extended families. Most often this is associated with the phrase "It takes a village to raise a child". I would argue that two women or two men who love each other raising a child together are going to be far better role models than most (but not all) single parent situations.
I think you are simply too blinded by the way you were raised/indoctrinated to be able to see what really makes a family work. But I respect your right to disagree with me.
Ummm.... every hear of Green Cards? H-11B visas? The US is just as protective about foreigner's working here as other countries. You can argue about the number of foreigners working in the US vs. others, or what the specific requirements are, but everyone does it.
I was looking into trying to work in Europe, but there was no chance that I could.
Also remember there are a lot of countries that have unemployment rates > 10%, and India is defiantly on this list. Why should they give jobs to foreigners when there are already not enough jobs to go around.
Actually, if there had been more controls on Goddards work, he might not have almost burned down one of the halls a my alma matter... And yes, I was an aerospace engineering student at the same school where Goddard graduated.
For the vast majority of massively-parallel super-computing tasks 64MB is more than enough. All you are doing is giving the processor a chunk of data, and the small program that you want it to run that chunk through. Only the super-nodes (the ones that control the flow of information) actually have to do anything complicated.
More memory would be a waste most of the time.
Most of the challenge in super-computing is now in figuring out how to chop up the workload, and to efficiently deliver it to the processors (and get back the results). It is a very different process from the days of the Cray's (1-3).
Yes, the US was the 32nd signatory to the Geneva Convention. Here is a quick blurb from ask.yahoo:
In 1882, U.S. President Chester Arthur signed the treaty, making the U.S. the 32nd nation to do so. The U.S. Senate ratified it shortly thereafter. At the same time, the American Association of the Red Cross was formed (many nations had begun to create their own Red Cross organizations in concert with the first Geneva Convention).
According to the Red Cross/Red Crescent, the U.S. has signed each of these international agreements. However, a signature does not bind a nation to the treaty unless the document has also been ratified by that nation (in the U.S., Congress ratifies such treaties). Generally, these treaties are open for signature for a limited time period after they're written. The U.S. ratified all the Geneva Conventions with the exception of the two protocols of 1977.
The whole point of the machines drilling was to avoid the network of defense that Zion had in place, presumably involving a lot of EMP devices.
I also felt that they should have had more EMP weapons in reserve that they could have flown against the machines just as they broke through, but arguments could be made that they all went into the final stand that was supposed to happen at the end of the second movie.
Actually, the second Macintosh shipped (the Macintosh Plus) had a "Processor Direct Slot" (PDS) that allowed for things like a second monitor, token ring cards, or some fancy printing (RIPing) systems.
There were versions of the PDS for the next few versions of Mac's. Then NuBus started with the Mac II, and at about the same time Apple introduced the LC Expansion slot for that series of computers.
Now you could argue that these were not "expandable" computers... but we are both splitting hairs...
Not many people claim that Macs are generically cheaper than PC's... only that when you compare similar machines Apple's tend to do very well in price. They are arguing against the "Macs are always more expensive" mindset.
And the main reasons that Windows has the largest portion of the market has nothing to do with quality or price. If you go back and take a realistic look at history it was because IBM computers tied into IBM mainframes (which all the big companies had), and were easily added to IBM consulting/maintenance contracts. People then bought PC's because "it is what we have at work".
It is because of history, not quality that PC's are where they are now.
I don't think that this is the issue. There really is a cultural difference between the film styles. Americans (and Europeans for the most part) have a great distrust for the "because it is" argument that is very common in Anime. Japanese stories have an almost superstitious feel to many Americans.
A prime example of this would be the Final Fantasy movie that came out a few years ago. All of the characters were stock Anime characters (older male scientist/wizzard, disbelieving male action hero, lead female character who is the apprentice to the scientist/wizzard). And the whole story line was centered around a fight between the spiritual and the physical. Add in a character who has unexplained mystical powers, stir and bake for 30 minutes.
There was little storyline in that film, and the mysticism made it very unpopular here. It is a bit of an extreme case in many ways, but is classic of Anime in almost every way.
Ironically with all of the semi-Anime cartoons on american TV nowadays (most of the ones based on trading cards) I think that younger American are becoming conditioned to typical Japanese story customs.
I like Anime, but you can't seriously say that their characters are more complex than those of all American films. There are a whole slew of US films (think of Denzel Washington films) that have fully fleshed out characters. There are an awful lot of one-dimensional characters in Anime... the best of each genre have fully developed characters. I will agree that one of the Japanese stock characters is the Honerable bad guy, but that does not make them deep characters.
You do realize that you are implying that Apple fix a problem with a protocol (AppleShare over AppleTalk) that they have marked as depreciated for nearly 5 years (I remember the cries when MacOS X Server 1.0 beta came out without AppleTalk...), and the problem is probably with your Server software, which is from a third party, and badly out of date...
Apple does "support" AppleShare over AppleTalk on MacOS X Server, while encouraging people to migrate to Appletalk over TCP/IP (faster... more reliable... routable... etc..). They are simply not going to bend over backwards to cover your corner case.
I would be careful about making the assumption that many commercial OS's are compiled with GCC. MacOS X includes CGG as their developer complier, but much of the OS is still compiled on Metroworks compilers (they are faster... and much of the Finder was built with PowerPlant... this is what I have been hearing all along). And there is IBM's compilers that are significantly faster, but cost a few thousand dollars. Since they are mostly swappable with GCC I expect to see them as a second compiler for Apples XCode, with bigger houses choosing between Metroworks and the XCode/IBM combinations, and the small fries like me going with GCC.
GCC is a wonderful project, but don't mistake it for a performance competitor to the commercial compilers like IBM's, Intel's, or Metrowork's.
I run several FreeBSD servers, and am very happy with them. Install was simpler, and adding software (that is in ports) is a snap. So is keeping up with patches. I am not sure that I would want to run it as a desktop OS (MacOS X), but as a server I am very happy with it.
There is a reason that a lot of the big servers run BSD's...
Everything that I have seen break has been a hack, most of them rely on a single third party tool (Unsanitie's APE) that has been provided that was explicitly a hack. When this tool is updated, most of the broken apps will work again.
Apple does provide documentation about some internal structures, with the explicit instructions that this should never be relied upon, but are for clarification only. This sort of information has helped people build quick-and-dirty hacks that have been important in the past. But none-the-less hacks (Norton Utilities would be the biggest example of this).
What do you call Windows98 SE? The Microsoft Plus Packs? The differences between 10.2.x and 10.3.x are much larger than either of these. This is not a "patch" but a mid-sized upgrade. I will be buying the upgrade as it is worth the money.
And as someone who supports both MacOS (9/X) and Windows, there was for more apps that broke (or needed major playing with the compatibility settings) than have broken on me going to the 10.3 beta I am running. And the only apps that I have seen break are ones that do nasty things and use non-documented API's. These are expected to break anytime something breaks, and were hacks to begin with.
Considering that I have tried 12 year old games on MacOS X 10.3 (betas) and they have worked.. I think Apple has done an exemplary job of keeping compatibility.
On your second question, the standard way of protecting intellectual property is to sue the vendor that is violating your IP, not their customer. In the SCO case there are some complications (there being no "true" vendor of linux), and SCO is ignoring this basic tenant of IP lawsuits.
There does not seem to be any legal precedent about suing the users of IP that is in dispute. So even if SCO's case stands on merits (I am skeptical that it has merit), then any lawsuits against linux users (not vendors) may fail on this point of law. It has never been tried in the courts, so we just don't know.
Slashdot Mirror
MacOS X is not currently what you would call a full 64bit OS. In fact it could be completely 32bit and still run on the G5. The PowerPC platform was thought out in advance for this very transition.
MacOS X 10.3.x is a mostly 32bit OS with some 64bit extensions, and this will likely be the state of things for a good while. Most things do not in any way benefit from being 64 bit. Those bits that do (databases and simulations requiring large blocks of memory) will see the parts of the OS required moved to 64bit aware. This will probably be a slow transition. And to be honest, there are not many people who are pushing for it.
Actually, a G5 starts out at $1799. You are thinking of the Cluster Server XServe, at $2999. If you actually were to do even a little bit of research you will start to notice that in order to match the performance of these machines you will have to spend a lot more than the $1000 you quoted.
Remember you have to have:
Gigabit Ethernet (the XServe has 2 ports built in).. I think this will probably account for $300-$500 of that thousand right there
SATA
Very high performance memory systems (with ECC on the XServe)
FireWire800 (drives and networking)
PCI-X (can you say Infiniband?)
And if we are focusing on the XServe:
Hardware fault notification (very well implemented)
1U rack space (slide out drawer, including cable management)
MacOS X Server (so nice to admin)
I don't think you know what you are talking about. After all, Virginia Tech just hit #3 on the supercomputing list with a cluster of G5's, and everyone is talking about how cheap they did it. The guy behind the project did a lot of research and discovered that this was the best price, Dell didn't even come close (they gave them 3 tries to do so).
Pay for being a developer? I am not sure I know exactly what you mean, but if you are asking if you have to do something to make your own shortcuts (what Omni calls the google-bar thing), then no. You just have to go into your preferences and define your own shortcuts.
Highlighting might be nice, but is not something that has been implemented. But there is always the text-search in the page available.
Actually one of the developers has been saying that he bas been working a lot on the program on his 12" iBook, and has been saying that both the tabs and the workspaces help him better manage his screen real-estate. Of course that means he was also using XCode on a 12" iBook, and you have to be a contortionist to do that well....
1) OmniWeb has had this for a long time... it just doesn't proclaim itself (and is a lot more configurable). Just type "google this and that" and it will return the results page of a google search for "this and that". You can make your own queries for any site you would like. In 4.5 this can only be a get query, but in 5 it can be a POST one as well. From the screenshots 5 will also have the option of having a separate field for this.
2) OmniWeb has had this since version 3. By size, not from same domain, or by a regular expression. I am not sure if Omni or iCab was the first to have it, but it was one of those two.
3) see 2...
Bookmark management has been one of OmniWeb's strengths, and it looks like they are running that ball again in 5. Having bookmarks check themselves at user definable intervals is really nice.
Cookie management is also a strong point, and the per-site preference mechanism will make this easier to use.
Take a look at OmniWeb. You can use it for free without restriction. It just asks you to register it on startup, and if you leave a window untouched for long enough it gets an "unregistered" banner cross it until you touch it again. And if you are really interested, check out the OmniWeb-l list, the developers are really responsive.
2.1 GB/s is very nice, but it only refers to transfers in one direction: to the card. There is a (much) smaller bandwidth back to the motherboard. This is because for their designed purpose, graphics cards do not need to talk back to the system much, they just crunch the numbers and spit out the results to a monitor.
With encryption you are usually looking at processing streams of data. If your encryption method involves a lot of floating point math (almost never) on every bit of information, then it would be nice. But encryption is almost always integer based (GPUs don't' shine in integer like they do in floating point), and involves just as much data going in as coming back.
If you are looking for a great (co) processor for integers, look at the Altivec section of the G4 (and the similar one in the G5.. I forget the IBM name).
*arrrg*!!
PowerPoint-like presentation... going dumb... noooooo...
I disagree with you on three points:
The idea of marriage is used in Christianity, but it is used in many religions and cultures. Most of the concepts in Christian marriage come from Christianity's parent religion: Judaism. It, like so many other "Cristian Values" are not in any way unique to Christianity. They tend to be general societal norms.
And I would also argue with your "Marriage, by definition, can only be between a man and a woman" statement. This is your definition.
And finally, I can see that you simply do not understand how children are raised across this country. There are so many children that are being raised by single parents. I would agree that an ideal environment for children would have multiple caregivers, but I disagree strongly that this environment must be only one man and one woman.
If you look at the societies with the healthiest families they most often have extended families. Most often this is associated with the phrase "It takes a village to raise a child". I would argue that two women or two men who love each other raising a child together are going to be far better role models than most (but not all) single parent situations.
I think you are simply too blinded by the way you were raised/indoctrinated to be able to see what really makes a family work. But I respect your right to disagree with me.
Ummm.... every hear of Green Cards? H-11B visas? The US is just as protective about foreigner's working here as other countries. You can argue about the number of foreigners working in the US vs. others, or what the specific requirements are, but everyone does it.
I was looking into trying to work in Europe, but there was no chance that I could.
Also remember there are a lot of countries that have unemployment rates > 10%, and India is defiantly on this list. Why should they give jobs to foreigners when there are already not enough jobs to go around.
Actually, if there had been more controls on Goddards work, he might not have almost burned down one of the halls a my alma matter... And yes, I was an aerospace engineering student at the same school where Goddard graduated.
Are you commenting on the condition of that gentleman's (presuming) posterior? I for one cannot see a single dent from here....
For the vast majority of massively-parallel super-computing tasks 64MB is more than enough. All you are doing is giving the processor a chunk of data, and the small program that you want it to run that chunk through. Only the super-nodes (the ones that control the flow of information) actually have to do anything complicated.
More memory would be a waste most of the time.
Most of the challenge in super-computing is now in figuring out how to chop up the workload, and to efficiently deliver it to the processors (and get back the results). It is a very different process from the days of the Cray's (1-3).
Yes, the US was the 32nd signatory to the Geneva Convention. Here is a quick blurb from ask.yahoo:
In 1882, U.S. President Chester Arthur signed the treaty, making the U.S. the 32nd nation to do so. The U.S. Senate ratified it shortly thereafter. At the same time, the American Association of the Red Cross was formed (many nations had begun to create their own Red Cross organizations in concert with the first Geneva Convention).
According to the Red Cross/Red Crescent, the U.S. has signed each of these international agreements. However, a signature does not bind a nation to the treaty unless the document has also been ratified by that nation (in the U.S., Congress ratifies such treaties). Generally, these treaties are open for signature for a limited time period after they're written. The U.S. ratified all the Geneva Conventions with the exception of the two protocols of 1977.
The whole point of the machines drilling was to avoid the network of defense that Zion had in place, presumably involving a lot of EMP devices.
I also felt that they should have had more EMP weapons in reserve that they could have flown against the machines just as they broke through, but arguments could be made that they all went into the final stand that was supposed to happen at the end of the second movie.
Actually, the second Macintosh shipped (the Macintosh Plus) had a "Processor Direct Slot" (PDS) that allowed for things like a second monitor, token ring cards, or some fancy printing (RIPing) systems.
There were versions of the PDS for the next few versions of Mac's. Then NuBus started with the Mac II, and at about the same time Apple introduced the LC Expansion slot for that series of computers.
Now you could argue that these were not "expandable" computers... but we are both splitting hairs...
Two comments:
Not many people claim that Macs are generically cheaper than PC's... only that when you compare similar machines Apple's tend to do very well in price. They are arguing against the "Macs are always more expensive" mindset.
And the main reasons that Windows has the largest portion of the market has nothing to do with quality or price. If you go back and take a realistic look at history it was because IBM computers tied into IBM mainframes (which all the big companies had), and were easily added to IBM consulting/maintenance contracts. People then bought PC's because "it is what we have at work".
It is because of history, not quality that PC's are where they are now.
I don't think that this is the issue. There really is a cultural difference between the film styles. Americans (and Europeans for the most part) have a great distrust for the "because it is" argument that is very common in Anime. Japanese stories have an almost superstitious feel to many Americans.
A prime example of this would be the Final Fantasy movie that came out a few years ago. All of the characters were stock Anime characters (older male scientist/wizzard, disbelieving male action hero, lead female character who is the apprentice to the scientist/wizzard). And the whole story line was centered around a fight between the spiritual and the physical. Add in a character who has unexplained mystical powers, stir and bake for 30 minutes.
There was little storyline in that film, and the mysticism made it very unpopular here. It is a bit of an extreme case in many ways, but is classic of Anime in almost every way.
Ironically with all of the semi-Anime cartoons on american TV nowadays (most of the ones based on trading cards) I think that younger American are becoming conditioned to typical Japanese story customs.
I like Anime, but you can't seriously say that their characters are more complex than those of all American films. There are a whole slew of US films (think of Denzel Washington films) that have fully fleshed out characters. There are an awful lot of one-dimensional characters in Anime... the best of each genre have fully developed characters. I will agree that one of the Japanese stock characters is the Honerable bad guy, but that does not make them deep characters.
I don't think you can call it a MicroKernel when your web browser lives in kernel space....
You do realize that you are implying that Apple fix a problem with a protocol (AppleShare over AppleTalk) that they have marked as depreciated for nearly 5 years (I remember the cries when MacOS X Server 1.0 beta came out without AppleTalk...), and the problem is probably with your Server software, which is from a third party, and badly out of date...
Apple does "support" AppleShare over AppleTalk on MacOS X Server, while encouraging people to migrate to Appletalk over TCP/IP (faster... more reliable... routable... etc..). They are simply not going to bend over backwards to cover your corner case.
I would be careful about making the assumption that many commercial OS's are compiled with GCC. MacOS X includes CGG as their developer complier, but much of the OS is still compiled on Metroworks compilers (they are faster... and much of the Finder was built with PowerPlant... this is what I have been hearing all along). And there is IBM's compilers that are significantly faster, but cost a few thousand dollars. Since they are mostly swappable with GCC I expect to see them as a second compiler for Apples XCode, with bigger houses choosing between Metroworks and the XCode/IBM combinations, and the small fries like me going with GCC.
GCC is a wonderful project, but don't mistake it for a performance competitor to the commercial compilers like IBM's, Intel's, or Metrowork's.
I run several FreeBSD servers, and am very happy with them. Install was simpler, and adding software (that is in ports) is a snap. So is keeping up with patches. I am not sure that I would want to run it as a desktop OS (MacOS X), but as a server I am very happy with it.
There is a reason that a lot of the big servers run BSD's...
Two notes:
Everything that I have seen break has been a hack, most of them rely on a single third party tool (Unsanitie's APE) that has been provided that was explicitly a hack. When this tool is updated, most of the broken apps will work again.
Apple does provide documentation about some internal structures, with the explicit instructions that this should never be relied upon, but are for clarification only. This sort of information has helped people build quick-and-dirty hacks that have been important in the past. But none-the-less hacks (Norton Utilities would be the biggest example of this).
And at least MS doesn't charge $129 for patches.
What do you call Windows98 SE? The Microsoft Plus Packs? The differences between 10.2.x and 10.3.x are much larger than either of these. This is not a "patch" but a mid-sized upgrade. I will be buying the upgrade as it is worth the money.
And as someone who supports both MacOS (9/X) and Windows, there was for more apps that broke (or needed major playing with the compatibility settings) than have broken on me going to the 10.3 beta I am running. And the only apps that I have seen break are ones that do nasty things and use non-documented API's. These are expected to break anytime something breaks, and were hacks to begin with.
Considering that I have tried 12 year old games on MacOS X 10.3 (betas) and they have worked.. I think Apple has done an exemplary job of keeping compatibility.
Well.. sure, if you round to the nearest dime....
and yes, I know the HHTTG reference...
On your second question, the standard way of protecting intellectual property is to sue the vendor that is violating your IP, not their customer. In the SCO case there are some complications (there being no "true" vendor of linux), and SCO is ignoring this basic tenant of IP lawsuits.
There does not seem to be any legal precedent about suing the users of IP that is in dispute. So even if SCO's case stands on merits (I am skeptical that it has merit), then any lawsuits against linux users (not vendors) may fail on this point of law. It has never been tried in the courts, so we just don't know.