The point singularity might just be a sign of an incomplete theory breaking down though. Maybe if we had a theory of quantum gravity some new effect might take over and convert the singularity into something else, like a large but finite density if some new force stops the collapse or a wormhole to the big bang, or another big bang.
The last one would be neat because it would mean there was some sort of cosmic 'mass cycle' - matter falls into black holes and emerges in new big bangs.
Having seen the media + added downloadable content as "value add" model on Xbox, it's a good idea in theory, but it appears Sony once again has questionable execution.
Unlike Microsoft, who are very skilled at numerous forms of execution.
that is more true than many realize. in my humble opinion 90% of users are nothing more than monkeys clicking keys in order to get the desired result. The same applies to cars. all they truly know is that you put a funny smelling liquid into it, turn a key, and wiggle the steering wheel around while pressing buttons on the floor to make it go and stop. It isn't complicated to understand the thing is they don't want to know.
it is the difference between memorizing a method and understanding the concept. you can set me down in front of any computer and I can learn the ins and outs of it in hours, (longer with more command line options). After a while some people stop learning, and everything after that point is a struggle.
It always strikes me as ironic that the more elitist comments here have the worst spelling and grammar.
Open Source is what is defined by the Open Source Definition.
A number of microsoft dweebs and/or campaigners would like to have it otherwise. But then Microsoft would like to have a lot of things. It's called corporate totalitarianism.
Bruce
Unlike the totalitarianism of redefining the meaning of common words like 'free' and 'open' and then insisting everyone else use your definition.
Open source means the source is publically available. Like Paint.net.
I think Snapdragon is interesting because it's the only example of an ARM licensee developing their own microarchitecture. Most people just take a hard macro and use that and a few tweak the layout.
It's actually good for the ARM architecture that competition is heating up like this. One of the drivers of x86 was AMD and Intel's duelin' microarchitectures. Hell, otherwise we'd all have 'upgraded' from a Netburst P4 to an Itanium and ended up losing vast amounts of performance. It's only due to competition from AMD Intel have produced the excellent and x64 compatible Core2 chips.
If QCT's gamble pays off they'll be a generation ahead of TI's tweaked A8. I hope it triggers an ARMs race with TI and the like puring cash into custom ARM microarchitectures. Maybe Intel will do one too. I'm skeptical though, Atom has quite a bit more performance than even a Snapdragon. I think they'll keep shrinking x86 rather than growing ARM.
Mind you, the fastest ARMs will probably always lag behind the fastest laptop x86, just because ARM tends to be used in phones where the software is smaller and faster than either Linux or Windows. The power budget and die size in an ARM is much less than an x86 too.
Basically x86 is desktop/server architecture and Arm is a phone/MID architecture. If you want performance at any price and power consumption, x86 will win.
The interesting question is, what are you planning to do with it that you can't already do fast enough with a multicore CPU, GPU or physics type add in card? Or do you just want this because it's there? I'm not meaning to criticize especially, I tend to waste a lot of money on gadgets myself..
We should replace -1 Flamebait with -1 Passive Aggressive
-in linux, no. only mpeg2 decoding -in any OS, not really. There is a brand new ENCODER for h.264, but reviews show it to be crap and limited
Windows does have full GPU decoding of h.264 with modern nvidia (not sure about ATI, but it is likely), but that's it.
Wouldn't it be better for Linux to get h.264 decoding working on GPUs rather than work on this card which will probably end up being low volume and thus high cost?
It's a bit like having Alzheimer's really. People come here to rant about the stuff that happened a long time ago that made them angry, groups they hate. Not so much the facts in the article which are mostly FUD anyway.
But like a stopped clock, sometimes slashdotters will be Insightful since the article is a dupe from a few years back when they still tried to at least skim the article.
Assuming FAT12, you just mark it as used in the allocation table but don't make any directory entry point to it. As long as nobody runs filesystem-checking software on it (along the lines of scandisk, but scandisk itself didn't exist back then, so it'd be a third-party utility), there shouldn't be a problem.
If you mark the sectors you want to hide as bad, chkdsk which did exist them will ignore them.
Slashdot Mirror
The point singularity might just be a sign of an incomplete theory breaking down though. Maybe if we had a theory of quantum gravity some new effect might take over and convert the singularity into something else, like a large but finite density if some new force stops the collapse or a wormhole to the big bang, or another big bang.
The last one would be neat because it would mean there was some sort of cosmic 'mass cycle' - matter falls into black holes and emerges in new big bangs.
There's that word again; "heavy". Why are things so heavy in the future? Is there a problem with the earth's gravitational pull?
Maybe Apple could set up some sort of succession plan where his son will take over should he die. Like North Korea did.
Maybe it was a male surprise, the worst sort...
Having seen the media + added downloadable content as "value add" model on Xbox, it's a good idea in theory, but it appears Sony once again has questionable execution.
Unlike Microsoft, who are very skilled at numerous forms of execution.
They could update the theatrical release with obnoxious product placement to increase sales of the director's cut / special edition too.
That's GNU/ICEwigga
that is more true than many realize. in my humble opinion 90% of users are nothing more than monkeys clicking keys in order to get the desired result. The same applies to cars. all they truly know is that you put a funny smelling liquid into it, turn a key, and wiggle the steering wheel around while pressing buttons on the floor to make it go and stop. It isn't complicated to understand the thing is they don't want to know.
it is the difference between memorizing a method and understanding the concept. you can set me down in front of any computer and I can learn the ins and outs of it in hours, (longer with more command line options). After a while some people stop learning, and everything after that point is a struggle.
It always strikes me as ironic that the more elitist comments here have the worst spelling and grammar.
I agree. Shouldn't the definition of open source be more open?
Open Source is what is defined by the Open Source Definition.
A number of microsoft dweebs and/or campaigners would like to have it otherwise. But then Microsoft would like to have a lot of things. It's called corporate totalitarianism.
Bruce
Unlike the totalitarianism of redefining the meaning of common words like 'free' and 'open' and then insisting everyone else use your definition.
Open source means the source is publically available. Like Paint.net.
Does that mean the spambot passed the Turing test or the moderator failed it?
They pay us to post here.
Memez are in our mindz, pollutin our lawyerin.
I think Snapdragon is interesting because it's the only example of an ARM licensee developing their own microarchitecture. Most people just take a hard macro and use that and a few tweak the layout.
It's actually good for the ARM architecture that competition is heating up like this. One of the drivers of x86 was AMD and Intel's duelin' microarchitectures. Hell, otherwise we'd all have 'upgraded' from a Netburst P4 to an Itanium and ended up losing vast amounts of performance. It's only due to competition from AMD Intel have produced the excellent and x64 compatible Core2 chips.
If QCT's gamble pays off they'll be a generation ahead of TI's tweaked A8. I hope it triggers an ARMs race with TI and the like puring cash into custom ARM microarchitectures. Maybe Intel will do one too. I'm skeptical though, Atom has quite a bit more performance than even a Snapdragon. I think they'll keep shrinking x86 rather than growing ARM.
There are quite a few acts that don't rely on RIAA marketing budgets That's why you haven't heard of them.
Fixed that for me.
Damnit.
There are quite a few acts that don't rely on MPAA marketing budgets That's why you haven't heard of them.
Fixed that for you.
QCT Snapdragon is even faster than a Cortex A8 now, and probably comparable to an A9. Of course, the successor to Snapdragon will compete with A9.
http://www.insidedsp.com/Articles/tabid/64/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/238/Qualcomm-Reveals-Details-on-Scorpion-Core.aspx
Mind you, the fastest ARMs will probably always lag behind the fastest laptop x86, just because ARM tends to be used in phones where the software is smaller and faster than either Linux or Windows. The power budget and die size in an ARM is much less than an x86 too.
Basically x86 is desktop/server architecture and Arm is a phone/MID architecture. If you want performance at any price and power consumption, x86 will win.
The interesting question is, what are you planning to do with it that you can't already do fast enough with a multicore CPU, GPU or physics type add in card? Or do you just want this because it's there? I'm not meaning to criticize especially, I tend to waste a lot of money on gadgets myself..
We should replace -1 Flamebait with -1 Passive Aggressive
-in linux, no. only mpeg2 decoding
-in any OS, not really. There is a brand new ENCODER for h.264, but reviews show it to be crap and limited
Windows does have full GPU decoding of h.264 with modern nvidia (not sure about ATI, but it is likely), but that's it.
Wouldn't it be better for Linux to get h.264 decoding working on GPUs rather than work on this card which will probably end up being low volume and thus high cost?
It's a bit like having Alzheimer's really. People come here to rant about the stuff that happened a long time ago that made them angry, groups they hate. Not so much the facts in the article which are mostly FUD anyway.
But like a stopped clock, sometimes slashdotters will be Insightful since the article is a dupe from a few years back when they still tried to at least skim the article.
There is a Prius in our parking lot with an "EARTH" sticker and an Apple logo stuck on the back.
Stick a McCain / Palin bumper sticker on it.
You have too much respect for C++?
LOL
C++ vtables are the foundation of COM, and COM is the foundation of OLE.
How can you not respect OLE? ;-)
vs the MPAA.
Nope, I give up. I can't decide which I want to lose.
I come here for comments like this.
Assuming FAT12, you just mark it as used in the allocation table but don't make any directory entry point to it. As long as nobody runs filesystem-checking software on it (along the lines of scandisk, but scandisk itself didn't exist back then, so it'd be a third-party utility), there shouldn't be a problem.
If you mark the sectors you want to hide as bad, chkdsk which did exist them will ignore them.