Parent is just confused. If iTMS disappears, I can't authorize computers to play my music... i.e. I get screwed if anything happens to an existing authorized computer.
Hurting the chances? Why? Because the corporate fat cats and megalomaniacs don't get their chance to screw the customer and line their pockets in the progress?
I already JHymn my music, simply because I don't want to depend on the commercial viability of iTunes to simply liesten to my 'tunes. If Apple or iTMS goes belly up, I want to be able to listen to my music. If Apple chooses not to support Linux or eComStation, I want to be able to listen to my music. Since I paid real non-Monopoly money for it, that I earned with my own sweat, I think I deserve the right to PLAY my music without ridiculous restrictions imposed on me.
Heh, software is not radically different. Just like it takes a skilled craftsman to reverse-engineer a fridge and make another one, it takes a skilled programmer to reverse-engineer a piece of code and implement a work-a-like.
Besides... no one is stopping you from tearing apart other people's binaries on your computer...
But I am not sure where you're getting your PowerPC storyline from. AFAIK POWER1 grew out of the ROMP processor used in IBM RT-PC machines (precursor to RS/6000). PowerPC project spawned from the POWER project, AFAIK, but with the 970 whatever differences the two architectures had have apparently disappeared.
Re:Latest Fedora-development has gcc 4.0
on
GCC 4.0 Preview
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
GCC 2.96, FYI. And yeah, apparently no... they haven't learned a thing.
Could you just clarify your last paragraph? Did you mean that all but one girl and boy became uninterested, OR that everyone BUT the two students became uninterested? I'm confused because you follow that sentence with the phrase "...girl asking some fairly intelligent questions..." - so the girl was interested then?
How is NERO for Linux any better than K3B? At least when a burn fails under K3B, I stand a better chance figuring out why - it uses the the proven-good console cd/dvd-mastering tools AND DOESN'T HIDE the OUTPUT from the user, allowing me to see the logs. K3B is a friendly and versatile front end to many CLI cd/dvd/cd-xa/cd-da/udf/isofs tools under Linux - AND it's free.
Apparently being a PhD doesn't imply being able to RTFA. Pin-compatble? Not. Read the damn article. Hell, screw the article - READ THE/. SUMMARY, at least.
Obsolete architecture? No. Clearly not. Look up the meaning of the word 'obsolete.' Being a so-so architecture with a convoluted design (if you had to write a software opcode decoder for anything > 8086, you know what I am talking about) doesn't imply obsoleteness. Register spilling? What ISA, exactly, are you complaining about anyways - 8086? 80286? IA-32? IA-32 >= 80486? IA-32 >= Pentium? IA-32 >= Pentium Pro? x86-64?
You conmplain about the boot process.... likely about the non-integral 8086 compatibility mode found in all consumer IA-32 and x86-64 processors. I hope that a smart cookie like you can figure out that the existence of such support is purely market driven? You _do_ realize that Intel manufactures _purely_ 32-bit IA-32 processors, for embedded, industrial and military purposes, that do not support the 8086 ISA?
And another question. Are you complaining for the sake of complaining? Because I can tell you that from an average-joe, or even HLL programmer perspective, the ISA isn't particularly important, assuming you stick to good programming practices. (Yes, I am looking at you, morons who whine "SIGBUS" after running their broken code on a Sparc).
You're a PhD at freakin' Stanford. You tell me. Does there exist a motherboard and a matching set of different CPUs with the same pinouts? Wait, this is obvious. Of course not. You realize that the pin differences aren't due to some PHB thinking that having 123123 pins is better than 4242424? If someone DID come up with such a compatibility layer... say... allowing a PowerPC (with whatever bus), to operate on say... the Athlon/AlphaEV6 EV6 bus... then the performance overhead would be heinous.
Not sure where you're getting the 2GB. Setting the base of a GDT descriptor to 0, limit to 0xFFFFF, and granularity to page-wide yields a 4GB segment. YOu might be trying to consider things like.... memory-mapped devices or something... but that has nothing to do with the 4GB addressability.
In 80286 days, the bus was 24-bits wide, with the maximum addressable space being 16MB. There was not concept of "page-wide" granularity... so segments defined by GDT/LDT descriptors could have a maximum size of 64kb, correct. However, this was flat-out 16-bit PMODE, with priviledge levels et al. Very much different from real 8086 mode with its 'tarded address calculation - the segment registers contained selectors into the GDT/LDT.
Incorrect. Please read the Intel docs, specifically the sections on PSE/PAE, which both have been avaiable since the Pentium Pro. The virtual addressable space will still be 4GB, however the 36-bit address bus will allow for a theoretical limit of 64GB.
...Again? I swear, everytime I hear news about something launched in the space, there are follow up stories about YAMUF (Yet Another Measurement Unit Farkup).
NT is an achievement, but Cutler is the real jerk, considering that Digital's death partly rests on his shoulders (and Digital's shitty marketing practices, but I digress.)
Please point out a sentence in my original post where I lament by 'inability' to write papers. The fact that I complain about something, does not imply that my skills at that something are less than adequate. You just commited a logical equivalent of dereferencing a null pointer.
Why assume immediately that I have not tried? "Tried." What a stupid word. You don't "try." You do.... or you fail out and flip burgers. In my case I am obviously "doing" and "trying" my best, because no one wants to have anything less than 4.00/4.00 GPA. Hmm? However I think I reserve the right to bitch and moan because: a) I am paying for this. b) It doesn't take a genius to figure out that having to commit more time towards bullshit courses roughly implies having to commit less time towards 'real' courses. Every English paper I have to write means less time to study for my the Computational Theory midterm. The hours in a day are finite. The is only so much time I can juggle between an IT job, classes and research.
Why not go to a vocational school? Because the 'edumacation' is even more of a joke. Couple that with a certain... stigma associated to such places by the proles, and you get the idea.
Where do you see me "blaming everyone else?" If anything, I'm blaming a bloated and inefficient system that's churning out morons that no one wants to hire! So unless you're part of that system, I fail to see where you take offense.
If you need to find people in a need of growing up, I suggest looking in a mirror. If you can't handle my two cents without spouting of a cliched "grow up", then well... grow up:).
No, Linux is more like European higher education. You don't get in based on hand-outs, parental connections or a fat wallet - all you need is proof of your intelligence by way of examination, and if you get in... it's free.
Same with Linux. It's free, assuming you can grok it. As a CS major its' hardly a self-compliment to state that you can barely figure your way around it.(You mean you still can't listen to music, watch videos, browse the web, have a decent desktop?) There is really no excuse for it with the copious amount of documentation and support, especially for someone whose familiarity with computers extends past 'surfing the Internet Explorer.'
You are likely to reply back, smearing this as "elitism" or some related non-sense. Alas, you would have misunderstood.
Slashdot Mirror
I can "lend" a CD while keeping a copy of it too, you know.
Parent is just confused. If iTMS disappears, I can't authorize computers to play my music... i.e. I get screwed if anything happens to an existing authorized computer.
Hurting the chances? Why? Because the corporate fat cats and megalomaniacs don't get their chance to screw the customer and line their pockets in the progress?
I already JHymn my music, simply because I don't want to depend on the commercial viability of iTunes to simply liesten to my 'tunes. If Apple or iTMS goes belly up, I want to be able to listen to my music. If Apple chooses not to support Linux or eComStation, I want to be able to listen to my music. Since I paid real non-Monopoly money for it, that I earned with my own sweat, I think I deserve the right to PLAY my music without ridiculous restrictions imposed on me.
Heh, software is not radically different. Just like it takes a skilled craftsman to reverse-engineer a fridge and make another one, it takes a skilled programmer to reverse-engineer a piece of code and implement a work-a-like.
Besides... no one is stopping you from tearing apart other people's binaries on your computer...
"apt-get install packagename" hard to remember ;-)?
C + SEH. God I wish GCC had SEH support.
Sure... 4004->8008->8080(->8085??)->8086->80286->IA32
But I am not sure where you're getting your PowerPC storyline from. AFAIK POWER1 grew out of the ROMP processor used in IBM RT-PC machines (precursor to RS/6000). PowerPC project spawned from the POWER project, AFAIK, but with the 970 whatever differences the two architectures had have apparently disappeared.
GCC 2.96, FYI. And yeah, apparently no... they haven't learned a thing.
Could you just clarify your last paragraph? Did you mean that all but one girl and boy became uninterested, OR that everyone BUT the two students became uninterested? I'm confused because you follow that sentence with the phrase "...girl asking some fairly intelligent questions..." - so the girl was interested then?
How is NERO for Linux any better than K3B? At least when a burn fails under K3B, I stand a better chance figuring out why - it uses the the proven-good console cd/dvd-mastering tools AND DOESN'T HIDE the OUTPUT from the user, allowing me to see the logs. K3B is a friendly and versatile front end to many CLI cd/dvd/cd-xa/cd-da/udf/isofs tools under Linux - AND it's free.
Read up on EM wave propagation.
Apparently being a PhD doesn't imply being able to RTFA. Pin-compatble? Not. Read the damn article. Hell, screw the article - READ THE /. SUMMARY, at least.
Obsolete architecture? No. Clearly not. Look up the meaning of the word 'obsolete.' Being a so-so architecture with a convoluted design (if you had to write a software opcode decoder for anything > 8086, you know what I am talking about) doesn't imply obsoleteness. Register spilling? What ISA, exactly, are you complaining about anyways - 8086? 80286? IA-32? IA-32 >= 80486? IA-32 >= Pentium? IA-32 >= Pentium Pro? x86-64?
You conmplain about the boot process.... likely about the non-integral 8086 compatibility mode found in all consumer IA-32 and x86-64 processors. I hope that a smart cookie like you can figure out that the existence of such support is purely market driven? You _do_ realize that Intel manufactures _purely_ 32-bit IA-32 processors, for embedded, industrial and military purposes, that do not support the 8086 ISA?
And another question. Are you complaining for the sake of complaining? Because I can tell you that from an average-joe, or even HLL programmer perspective, the ISA isn't particularly important, assuming you stick to good programming practices. (Yes, I am looking at you, morons who whine "SIGBUS" after running their broken code on a Sparc).
You're a PhD at freakin' Stanford. You tell me. Does there exist a motherboard and a matching set of different CPUs with the same pinouts? Wait, this is obvious. Of course not. You realize that the pin differences aren't due to some PHB thinking that having 123123 pins is better than 4242424? If someone DID come up with such a compatibility layer... say... allowing a PowerPC (with whatever bus), to operate on say... the Athlon/AlphaEV6 EV6 bus... then the performance overhead would be heinous.
Heh, once having a sip from DJB's coolaid, I doubt he will go back to la-la land.
/some/ thought was put into it. It only knows the routing to its direct neighbors.
Besides, Freenet may suck, but at least
Not sure where you're getting the 2GB. Setting the base of a GDT descriptor to 0, limit to 0xFFFFF, and granularity to page-wide yields a 4GB segment. YOu might be trying to consider things like.... memory-mapped devices or something... but that has nothing to do with the 4GB addressability.
In 80286 days, the bus was 24-bits wide, with the maximum addressable space being 16MB. There was not concept of "page-wide" granularity... so segments defined by GDT/LDT descriptors could have a maximum size of 64kb, correct. However, this was flat-out 16-bit PMODE, with priviledge levels et al. Very much different from real 8086 mode with its 'tarded address calculation - the segment registers contained selectors into the GDT/LDT.
Incorrect. Please read the Intel docs, specifically the sections on PSE/PAE, which both have been avaiable since the Pentium Pro. The virtual addressable space will still be 4GB, however the 36-bit address bus will allow for a theoretical limit of 64GB.
See what you really should have asked him, is "Pounds? How many burning Libraries of Congress is that?"
...Again? I swear, everytime I hear news about something launched in the space, there are follow up stories about YAMUF (Yet Another Measurement Unit Farkup).
NT is an achievement, but Cutler is the real jerk, considering that Digital's death partly rests on his shoulders (and Digital's shitty marketing practices, but I digress.)
Didn't Xenix become only available with the XT. In either case... it's MSes, not IBMs.
....yeah I figured you weren't being serious when I saw "girlfriend" and "Counter-Strike" being mentioned in the same sentence... ;-)
Please point out a sentence in my original post where I lament by 'inability' to write papers. The fact that I complain about something, does not imply that my skills at that something are less than adequate. You just commited a logical equivalent of dereferencing a null pointer.
Why assume immediately that I have not tried? "Tried." What a stupid word. You don't "try." You do.... or you fail out and flip burgers. In my case I am obviously "doing" and "trying" my best, because no one wants to have anything less than 4.00/4.00 GPA. Hmm? However I think I reserve the right to bitch and moan because:
a) I am paying for this.
b) It doesn't take a genius to figure out that having to commit more time towards bullshit courses roughly implies having to commit less time towards 'real' courses. Every English paper I have to write means less time to study for my the Computational Theory midterm. The hours in a day are finite. The is only so much time I can juggle between an IT job, classes and research.
Why not go to a vocational school? Because the 'edumacation' is even more of a joke. Couple that with a certain... stigma associated to such places by the proles, and you get the idea.
Not bad at all. Finally something me and members of a major non-fringe political party can agree on.
Where do you see me "blaming everyone else?" If anything, I'm blaming a bloated and inefficient system that's churning out morons that no one wants to hire! So unless you're part of that system, I fail to see where you take offense.
:).
If you need to find people in a need of growing up, I suggest looking in a mirror. If you can't handle my two cents without spouting of a cliched "grow up", then well... grow up
A) Monitors don't have drivers. Period.
B) AMD never made PIIs. PIIs never clocked at 188Mhz.
C) That was more than half-a-decade ago!
No, Linux is more like European higher education. You don't get in based on hand-outs, parental connections or a fat wallet - all you need is proof of your intelligence by way of examination, and if you get in... it's free.
Same with Linux. It's free, assuming you can grok it. As a CS major its' hardly a self-compliment to state that you can barely figure your way around it.(You mean you still can't listen to music, watch videos, browse the web, have a decent desktop?) There is really no excuse for it with the copious amount of documentation and support, especially for someone whose familiarity with computers extends past 'surfing the Internet Explorer.'
You are likely to reply back, smearing this as "elitism" or some related non-sense. Alas, you would have misunderstood.