Well it's different. Itanium has likely failed as an architecture. Still given that Intel would prefer you had an Intel x86-64 than an AMD one. It also means Intel's x86-64 team will no longer be prevented from competing with IA64.
IA64 would have been a totally proprietary architecture so it was was worth a try getting it established. Sooner or later though the fact that it isn't getting established is going to have to be acknowledged.
What's interesting about all this is that the core x86 patents are likely to expire sooner or later and AMD have apparently said they will license AMD64 to anyone - they have done to Transmeta and Via (Intel already have a license agreement that lets them use AMD patents for free). So we could be entering an era where x86-64 is a an architecture that anyone can implement. Like NVidia for instance.
The interesting thing about Itanium is that you could write code which would work ok on pretty much any processor but fault on an Itanium. Then you need someone like Raymond Chen to work out why
Well my perspective is this. In another 50 or so years I'll likely be dead. I have no kids. Even the worst case IPCC predictions say the Earth will still be OK by then. Trolling environmentalists on the Internet brings me great satisfaction so I'll go for freedom thanks.
Look, if in 1930 America had passed an amendment requiring a Ph.D to vote, right now Soviet America would be digging itself out of the same mess Russia is. I'd rather trust the judgement of the uneducated masses, thankyouverymuch.
In Soviet America science is ignorant of the uneducated masses?
The BBC doesn't need to "convince people to pay for a TV license". Anyone who has a TV or any device capable of receiving live TV broadcasts (e.g. a PC that can run iPlayer) is required by law to have a license whether you watch BBC channels or not. If you buy a TV or video recorder in the UK the retailer is obliged to tell TV licensing that you have. If you don't buy a license they will harass you until you do
Whenever I see the word mebibyte I always hear it in Scots accent. "Don't touch the doggie, it mebibytes".
This sort of think is useful though, it sorts out the people who learned their computer knowledge from wikipedia thirty minutes ago from the ones who learned it from Byte and Doctor Dobb's Journal thirty years ago.
People that buy closed hardware just because it has open source Linux drivers are undermining the free hardware movement.
Before I fork out $50 to $100 for a video card I insist on (as a bare minimum)
* Source code for the drivers.
* Binaries for my favourite OSs - Linux, OpenBSD, PorterIx, HalOS. All supported architectures, particularly 6502 for HalOS.
* Verilog source code for the custom chips. A hard macro for the TSMC 40nm process. One engineer providing full time support moving to a cheaper process in China at the Shanghai Number 101 Rehabilitation Through Labour Camp's semiconductor plant.
* Patent licenses.
* Schematics and Gerber files for the PCB. One engineer providing full time support value engineering the PCB at Shanghai Number 101 RTLC's PCB factory.
* A pony. Sequenced genome for pony. An engineer to support cloning said pony.
In 1999, de Icaza, along with Nat Friedman, co-founded Helix Code, a GNOME-oriented free software company that employed a large number of other GNOME hackers. In 2001, Helix Code, later renamed Ximian, announced the Mono Project, to be led by de Icaza, with the goal to implement Microsoft's new.NET development platform on Linux and Unix-like platforms. In August 2003, Ximian was acquired by Novell, Inc. There, de Icaza is currently the Vice President of Developer Platform.
If you work for Novell, does that mean that Mono is a Novell product and thus covered by the Microsoft-Novell Patent cross license?
"The problem Microsoft has is they have a big market share, said Vreugdenhil, the hacker who attacked IE. "I use Opera, but that's basically because it has a tiny market share and as far as I know, nobody is really interested in creating a drive-by download for opera. The web at the moment is pretty scary, actually."
So the guy that hacked IE uses Opera because he thinks its market share is too low to make it worth hacking.
I said this further up. And, if you look at the Republic of China constitution, that's the way it is. Mind you I don't see the Republic of China ever ending up governing all of China, even if the People's Republic of China were to collapse USSR style because most Taiwanese people don't want anything to do with the mainland. If that happened it's much more likely that the Republic of China would rename itself the Republic of Taiwan and renounce its claims to China. In fact when Taiwan democratized there was a move to do exactly that which was only stopped by China threatening to invade if it happened.
Yeah, I have to agree that China could go completely hog wild, like Japan in the 1930's. The difference is that they're bigger, have nukes and also have a larger industrial base. In that scenario future archaeologists will probably be trying to reconstruct our civilisation by digging through the radioactive ash layer once the dark age following WWIII ends in a couple of thousand years.
My point is that looking at China now I'd forecast a series of anti government movements, all but the last one are crushed. The last one would lead to a more or less free society country which would have a much lower and possibly zero chance of deciding to fight WWIII against everyone else.
Taiwan, Hong Kong and even Singapore aren't particularly collectivist. China was collectivist back when the economy collectivised. That's not really true now. Essentially China now looks like a poor authoritarian (as opposed to totalitarian) country like Taiwan or South Korea in the 1970's. Both of those democratised once they had a middle class. For for first time since the communists came to power China is developing a middle class who will want property rights and the rule of law.
The difference between totalitarian countries where the government essentially crushes civil society and authoritarian ones where it merely gets rid of people that openly oppose it is an important one. Back in the 50's China was completely totalitarian and it was pretty much impossible for anyone to even think of opposing it 1984 style. Now people know that open dissent is still dangerous but the government isn't really able to control people's thoughts.
Slashdot Mirror
Java is the fat lady these days.
All the platforms that IE9 is supported on support Direct2D. Which is all that really matters.
Well it's different. Itanium has likely failed as an architecture. Still given that Intel would prefer you had an Intel x86-64 than an AMD one. It also means Intel's x86-64 team will no longer be prevented from competing with IA64.
IA64 would have been a totally proprietary architecture so it was was worth a try getting it established. Sooner or later though the fact that it isn't getting established is going to have to be acknowledged.
What's interesting about all this is that the core x86 patents are likely to expire sooner or later and AMD have apparently said they will license AMD64 to anyone - they have done to Transmeta and Via (Intel already have a license agreement that lets them use AMD patents for free). So we could be entering an era where x86-64 is a an architecture that anyone can implement. Like NVidia for instance.
The interesting thing about Itanium is that you could write code which would work ok on pretty much any processor but fault on an Itanium. Then you need someone like Raymond Chen to work out why
http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2004/01/19/60162.aspx
How else are you going to see the LEDs on the GPU fan?
Well my perspective is this. In another 50 or so years I'll likely be dead. I have no kids. Even the worst case IPCC predictions say the Earth will still be OK by then. Trolling environmentalists on the Internet brings me great satisfaction so I'll go for freedom thanks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_the_children_(politics)
Look, if in 1930 America had passed an amendment requiring a Ph.D to vote, right now Soviet America would be digging itself out of the same mess Russia is. I'd rather trust the judgement of the uneducated masses, thankyouverymuch.
In Soviet America science is ignorant of the uneducated masses?
There's still no excuse for being a fat fuck.
Cane Sugar didn't give me that weird slight withdrawal feeling [medicinenet.com] I got from HFCS.?
That feeling is to remind you that you need another hit.
There's HFCS in all the crap food. Get yourself some fresh fruit and vegetables.
The BBC doesn't need to "convince people to pay for a TV license". Anyone who has a TV or any device capable of receiving live TV broadcasts (e.g. a PC that can run iPlayer) is required by law to have a license whether you watch BBC channels or not. If you buy a TV or video recorder in the UK the retailer is obliged to tell TV licensing that you have. If you don't buy a license they will harass you until you do
http://www.bbctvlicence.com/Tips%20for%20avoidng%20TVL-BBC%20harassment.htm
You wouldn't actually do it, you'd just tell people you'd done it and hope some of them are gullible enough to fall for it.
Whenever I see the word mebibyte I always hear it in Scots accent. "Don't touch the doggie, it mebibytes".
This sort of think is useful though, it sorts out the people who learned their computer knowledge from wikipedia thirty minutes ago from the ones who learned it from Byte and Doctor Dobb's Journal thirty years ago.
Whenever anyone runs objective tests of browser functionality, Opera usually does very well. I'm amazed it doesn't have more market share.
People that buy closed hardware just because it has open source Linux drivers are undermining the free hardware movement.
Before I fork out $50 to $100 for a video card I insist on (as a bare minimum)
* Source code for the drivers.
* Binaries for my favourite OSs - Linux, OpenBSD, PorterIx, HalOS. All supported architectures, particularly 6502 for HalOS.
* Verilog source code for the custom chips. A hard macro for the TSMC 40nm process. One engineer providing full time support moving to a cheaper process in China at the Shanghai Number 101 Rehabilitation Through Labour Camp's semiconductor plant.
* Patent licenses.
* Schematics and Gerber files for the PCB. One engineer providing full time support value engineering the PCB at Shanghai Number 101 RTLC's PCB factory.
* A pony. Sequenced genome for pony. An engineer to support cloning said pony.
* An unlimited supply of hay and oats.
It's 80% fun for money, the other 20% is when clients are being a pain in the ass.
That's probably what a look of hookers say too.
Ahh but we can fix that if all the open source celebrities bad mouth them on Slashdot. I'm sure they'll crack in a week or so.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miguel_de_Icaza#GNOME.2C_Ximian.2C_and_Mono
In 1999, de Icaza, along with Nat Friedman, co-founded Helix Code, a GNOME-oriented free software company that employed a large number of other GNOME hackers. In 2001, Helix Code, later renamed Ximian, announced the Mono Project, to be led by de Icaza, with the goal to implement Microsoft's new .NET development platform on Linux and Unix-like platforms. In August 2003, Ximian was acquired by Novell, Inc. There, de Icaza is currently the Vice President of Developer Platform.
If you work for Novell, does that mean that Mono is a Novell product and thus covered by the Microsoft-Novell Patent cross license?
The car in front is still a Toyota
I hope the car behind isn't.
Isn't that a good thing?
"The problem Microsoft has is they have a big market share, said Vreugdenhil, the hacker who attacked IE. "I use Opera, but that's basically because it has a tiny market share and as far as I know, nobody is really interested in creating a drive-by download for opera. The web at the moment is pretty scary, actually."
So the guy that hacked IE uses Opera because he thinks its market share is too low to make it worth hacking.
I said this further up. And, if you look at the Republic of China constitution, that's the way it is. Mind you I don't see the Republic of China ever ending up governing all of China, even if the People's Republic of China were to collapse USSR style because most Taiwanese people don't want anything to do with the mainland. If that happened it's much more likely that the Republic of China would rename itself the Republic of Taiwan and renounce its claims to China. In fact when Taiwan democratized there was a move to do exactly that which was only stopped by China threatening to invade if it happened.
From the perspective of the Republic of China, the mainland is just a rebel held area, albeit a large one.
Yeah, I have to agree that China could go completely hog wild, like Japan in the 1930's. The difference is that they're bigger, have nukes and also have a larger industrial base. In that scenario future archaeologists will probably be trying to reconstruct our civilisation by digging through the radioactive ash layer once the dark age following WWIII ends in a couple of thousand years.
My point is that looking at China now I'd forecast a series of anti government movements, all but the last one are crushed. The last one would lead to a more or less free society country which would have a much lower and possibly zero chance of deciding to fight WWIII against everyone else.
Taiwan, Hong Kong and even Singapore aren't particularly collectivist. China was collectivist back when the economy collectivised. That's not really true now. Essentially China now looks like a poor authoritarian (as opposed to totalitarian) country like Taiwan or South Korea in the 1970's. Both of those democratised once they had a middle class. For for first time since the communists came to power China is developing a middle class who will want property rights and the rule of law.
The difference between totalitarian countries where the government essentially crushes civil society and authoritarian ones where it merely gets rid of people that openly oppose it is an important one. Back in the 50's China was completely totalitarian and it was pretty much impossible for anyone to even think of opposing it 1984 style. Now people know that open dissent is still dangerous but the government isn't really able to control people's thoughts.