``Selling points for the general public are more along the lines of long-term availability of the software, a better record on fixing bugs and a culture that encourages interoperability.''
Yes, and open source generally does well here. So why are you arguing against it and why did you get modded up for it?
He wasn't arguing against that. He was stating that we should advertise THOSE parts more than the "anyone can hack it" part.
Wow, firewalling everything is really hard. This Cisco on my desk here, I think I need to type maybe 2 lines into an access list, and type one more command to assign that list to the WAN interface.
I think 'whacking at something with a sharp implement' was part of the intention of using it to describe coding was apt...
But it does piss me off when I need to describe what I do. "Hacker" gives you dirty looks, etc... and nothing else quite fits. I'm not a classical nerd or geek.
Move where? Where can I live where I have basic needs + electricity + good internet + personal freedoms, without dumbass politicians or shithead warlords running around?
These three sections will give you everything you should need to configure that FX5200. Note the selection on the bottom of each chapter has a link to the index... lots of good info I would suggest reviewing regardless of your usage of those features.
Some people will just do it. I can't stand being idle, myself, and most of what I do I go unrewarded for. The only thing that rewards me is work, and incidentally, I hate it.
You might try contacting them directly rather than posting, especially this deep in the thread. Your chances of being noticed are low, I would imagine.
Try "help@slashdot.org" (referenced in the reply page)
I've also seen "pater@slashdot.org" but I think that's taco - wouldn't bother him directly for something like this.
Then don't call it GIMP. Call it "GNU Image Manipulation Program" - of which is the actual name, of which gimp.org actually TELLS you.
I quote:
GIMP is the GNU Image Manipulation Program. It is a freely distributed piece of software for such tasks as photo retouching, image composition and image authoring. It works on many operating systems, in many languages. (more...)
Hrm, the numbers i was throwing around are bits/second, but i was - incorrectly - under the assumption that memory bandwidth was measured that way as it isn't built on 8-bit bytes, rather usually 64 or some other large amount as it transfers whole rows of data at once.
Whats your system RAM bandwidth? Usually around 3gb/s... 1024x768 at 32-bit 60hz is about 1.5 gb/s - roughly half of your available memory bandwidth. Lets bring that up to 75hz, and you get just shy of 1.9 gb/s.... 1280x1024x32@75hz: about 3.1 gb/s.
System RAM bandwidth is shared by the CPU, and all the DMA I/O - so that resource can be quickly extinguished.
Moral of the story: shared RAM sucks for all but entry-level use.
Quoted from the paper "What Every Programmer Should Know About Memory", version 1.0, by Ulrich Drepper (red hat developer), page 13.
Finally it should be mentioned that some cheap systems have graphics systems without separate, dedicated video RAM. Those systems use parts of the main memory as video RAM. Since access to the video RAM is frequent (for a 1024x768 display with 16 bpp at 60Hz we are talking 94MB/s) and system memory, unlike RAM on graphics cards, does not have two ports this can substantially influence the systems performance and especially the latency. It is best to ignore such systems when performance is a priority. They are more trouble than they are worth. People buying those machines know they will not get the best performance.
I would reconsider your argument that shared video ram might resolve this 3.2gb issue, considering the harm it presents.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, it would be my fault (i think i was the first to tag it as such)
My first reaction was "Those fucking idiots!" and that they need to be punished for further fouling up orbit.
My reaction to watching someone dump crap in a lake would be to break their face, so I am just that way.
Bluetooth is too low-range for that kind of thing. Too much energy use also, there is no point to using > 2ghz when the 900mhz band would work fine.
Just make sure you use SOME kind of cipher to keep, if not people out, random radio noise from telling your house to set fire to itself...
Something needs to be done about all this racist bullshit trolling. This is getting ridiculous.
At the bottom of the page:
If you have any questions or would like to suggest additional
projects to be added, please email [SNIP]
To get the snipped email, ROT-13 this: fpna-nqzva@pbirevgl.pbz
The seeds do, when you are allowed to grow a decent amount of it.
``Selling points for the general public are more along the lines of long-term availability of the software, a better record on fixing bugs and a culture that encourages interoperability.''
Yes, and open source generally does well here. So why are you arguing against it and why did you get modded up for it?
He wasn't arguing against that. He was stating that we should advertise THOSE parts more than the "anyone can hack it" part.
Makes one wonder why Seagate purchased them. A bit like stabbing one's self in the eye on purpose.
<defense style="chewbacca">But that does not make sense! </defense>
Yes, dammit, give me my freakin' cookies!
:P )
( but give me the recipe too, please
I do not use Mac, and will not. I don't like how it looks, I don't like how it feels, and I don't like the company that does it.
I use Windows, but dislike it strongly and wish I didn't. I don't need to explain this one.
I use Linux whenever I can, and enjoy it.
Users will ALWAYS be users - that'll never change.
Oh, it will change. When the "users" have no money left and are all afraid to touch computers.
(7.1 + DRM) = (-1 * (infinity))
Wow, firewalling everything is really hard. This Cisco on my desk here, I think I need to type maybe 2 lines into an access list, and type one more command to assign that list to the WAN interface.
Jeez, that was so hard. NAT is often more work!
I think 'whacking at something with a sharp implement' was part of the intention of using it to describe coding was apt...
But it does piss me off when I need to describe what I do. "Hacker" gives you dirty looks, etc... and nothing else quite fits. I'm not a classical nerd or geek.
Move where? Where can I live where I have basic needs + electricity + good internet + personal freedoms, without dumbass politicians or shithead warlords running around?
No, he's full of crap.
The BIG ones (excepting debian) have company help, but that is more of an exception than the rule when you look at all the distros as a whole.
http://us.download.nvidia.com/XFree86/Linux-x86_64/169.07/README/chapter-13.html
http://us.download.nvidia.com/XFree86/Linux-x86_64/169.07/README/chapter-14.html
http://us.download.nvidia.com/XFree86/Linux-x86_64/169.07/README/chapter-15.html
These three sections will give you everything you should need to configure that FX5200. Note the selection on the bottom of each chapter has a link to the index... lots of good info I would suggest reviewing regardless of your usage of those features.
Some people will just do it. I can't stand being idle, myself, and most of what I do I go unrewarded for. The only thing that rewards me is work, and incidentally, I hate it.
You might try contacting them directly rather than posting, especially this deep in the thread. Your chances of being noticed are low, I would imagine.
Try "help@slashdot.org" (referenced in the reply page)
I've also seen "pater@slashdot.org" but I think that's taco - wouldn't bother him directly for something like this.
I quote:
Then perhaps they should work on the fire suppression systems rather than avoid the problem.
Sure, if your plane can carry around several HUNDRED BlueGene/L supercomputers...
Did you even read the damn summary before spouting off?
Pointless anyways, simple mechanics and a classic computer, or hell even a simple (well, not a simple circuit) can do it!
Hrm, the numbers i was throwing around are bits/second, but i was - incorrectly - under the assumption that memory bandwidth was measured that way as it isn't built on 8-bit bytes, rather usually 64 or some other large amount as it transfers whole rows of data at once.
It's more than you think.
Whats your system RAM bandwidth? Usually around 3gb/s...
1024x768 at 32-bit 60hz is about 1.5 gb/s - roughly half of your available memory bandwidth.
Lets bring that up to 75hz, and you get just shy of 1.9 gb/s....
1280x1024x32@75hz: about 3.1 gb/s.
System RAM bandwidth is shared by the CPU, and all the DMA I/O - so that resource can be quickly extinguished.
Moral of the story: shared RAM sucks for all but entry-level use.
I would reconsider your argument that shared video ram might resolve this 3.2gb issue, considering the harm it presents.