I work for a certain chip company too, and I know that we spent over $500 million on the R&D for a single new chip architecture. There's thousands of man-years involved in bew chip design and architecture, and these 'gouged' margins you speak of are the only way to recoup that cost.
Yes it is quite obvious you're not an accountant, no need to actually state that.
$67K? At NVIDIA? I always heard they had really high salaries (like 80K+)? Of course I also hear that they demand your soul. It seems like you could make $67K at a significantly less soul-demanding company in Silicon Valley.
Will the OS have a way of selectively writing to the flash? What about swap files, etc, which will change all the time?
This is great stuff though, swap files aside, most people could probably do everything they ever need from their laptop within 1Gig of flash, during a single work session.
I have a ECE/CS double-major at CMU, and am about to finish up a Masters in ECE. I can safely say, having been on both sides of the fence, that ECE is definately not 'easier'.
CS requires more of your time because of all the project courses, but the actual concepts taught in higher-level ECE (particularly grad-level) are more difficult than even the toughest CS courses (adv. graphics, OS, 312, maybe networks, etc.)
If you RTFA, it becomes evident that this display technology isn't the same as Sharp's 3D LCD. Sharp's display requires you to be in center of the display, and at a certain distance, and the 3D effect works by projecting steroscopic images at each eye. They direct two different screen images essentially, but it's still the same old trick, just without glasses, instead, a diffusion filter angles the output to each eye.
From this article, it seems as if each pixel is a microlens that redirects the display to your two eyes on a per-lightwave basis. This obviously allows a much wider viewing angle, and for multiple viewers, while still creating the illusion of depth.
Slashdot Mirror
You're kidding right?
I work for a certain chip company too, and I know that we spent over $500 million on the R&D for a single new chip architecture. There's thousands of man-years involved in bew chip design and architecture, and these 'gouged' margins you speak of are the only way to recoup that cost.
Yes it is quite obvious you're not an accountant, no need to actually state that.
$67K? At NVIDIA? I always heard they had really high salaries (like 80K+)? Of course I also hear that they demand your soul. It seems like you could make $67K at a significantly less soul-demanding company in Silicon Valley.
Will the OS have a way of selectively writing to the flash? What about swap files, etc, which will change all the time?
This is great stuff though, swap files aside, most people could probably do everything they ever need from their laptop within 1Gig of flash, during a single work session.
I have a ECE/CS double-major at CMU, and am about to finish up a Masters in ECE. I can safely say, having been on both sides of the fence, that ECE is definately not 'easier'.
CS requires more of your time because of all the project courses, but the actual concepts taught in higher-level ECE (particularly grad-level) are more difficult than even the toughest CS courses (adv. graphics, OS, 312, maybe networks, etc.)
If you RTFA, it becomes evident that this display technology isn't the same as Sharp's 3D LCD. Sharp's display requires you to be in center of the display, and at a certain distance, and the 3D effect works by projecting steroscopic images at each eye. They direct two different screen images essentially, but it's still the same old trick, just without glasses, instead, a diffusion filter angles the output to each eye.
From this article, it seems as if each pixel is a microlens that redirects the display to your two eyes on a per-lightwave basis. This obviously allows a much wider viewing angle, and for multiple viewers, while still creating the illusion of depth.