Integrating a cell phone and a PDA like this is really not a good idea. Many people get info through their cellphone and put it directly into their PDA (meetings, schedules, notes, quick calculations).
How are you going to hear someone on the phone and enter data when you have to keep the PDA on your ear?
The best solution I can think of is to have a hands-free, but even then you will have a cord to get tangled up in. The cellphone software and OS also have to support thredding/multitasking so you can use other PDA apps (calendar, etc.) while the cellphone conversation is uninterrupted.
I personally don't own a PalmOS device, so if someone can clarify these points for me I'd appreciate it.
Tenron claims that their product will also work as a standard X server to run _local_ binaries also. MacX, etc. have never been able to do this, because there was no UNIX underpinnings to run the apps with. Thus standalone running of X apps could (beforehand) never be done.
Basically when this does is give a complete Xwindows compatability to the Mac. Tenron is in an excellet position to do this to. They have produced some apazing UNIX and UNIX ports to Macintosh. MachTen, one of their products, was essentially UNIX inside MacOS. it had everything you would expect from the UNIX environment also.. threads, protected memory usage, etc....from an overlying OS that didn't. Plus MacTen included it's own TCP stack which was used when it was active to bypass MacTCP and early OT which had some problems of it's own. I am still amazed at what it could do without having much of the nessesairy structure needed by UNIX in MacOS. It was still affected when the MacOS crashed, but there isn't much one can do about that other than yelling at Apple:)
There are two central reasons why it is preferrable to have a plant making the pollution than a car.
a) A plant can be located away from residential areas. You probably notice there are no power stations anywhere near the cities they power (except maybe some of the older cities that grew towards plants). We can selectively place plants away from population centers and in places where the typical winds do not blow emission over cities. With cars the pollution is wherever the person is driving, and that is typically in population centers (since most people drive cars).
b) A plant can have better emissions control. Plants (can) have higher yet reasonable pollution control requirements than cars. In chemical engineering when you try to separate out two chemicals, to decrease the impurities in your product by half you must use x^2 more energy, equipment, etc. (i.e. money) in order to acheive this. At some point it becomes economically unjustifiable to continue purifying the product because the cost of the product production becomes higher than the average selling price of the product.
Cars have a minimum impurity amount that they have to achieve (where the impurity is the pollutants). However, we must multiply that by the number of cars.
If we have plants instead of cars producing pollution, we can reduce the impurities further. The plants are emitting more impurities so they can cut down on them further while still remaining profitable because each plant is producing the impurity amount equivelant to large amount of cars.
(Note that this is not valid if the plant is also producing the same amount of total waste gas (exhaust) as the number of large cars it represents, because the impuriy level is a ratio of impurity to everything rather than an amount. Under this circumstance that ratio is the same--I am assuming that it should be easy to cut back on the total waste gas when you are producing much more waste gas, thus giving a higher concentration of pollutants, which in turn makes it easier to separate them out).
I think the Vizualize workstations by HP are PA-RISC running HP-UX. We have a B180L (lowest end HP-UX box HP makes) with a 180MHz procesor and 64M RAM. Current cost is around $10K; so even if Linux was ported to PA-RISC (which it may have been by now, I don't know) you could probably save a bunch o money going with the x86 mobo's instead:).
If you read the post, it says that these cards will work inside a x86 on binaries that contain PPC binary from a cross compiler...
What would seem sweet...and maybe not to hard to do would be to have some thing capable of running 99.9% of the binaries in existence. While we can run many progs under x86 (WINE, vmware), the PPC will allow us to run LinuxPPC-native and even (if you so desire, but maybe not) MacOS binaries. Now we won't have the ROM (maybe the new-world ROM files will solve this), be we WILL have Darwin to work from for something in a more of a WINE like compatability. If the New-world ROM can be used, it may be possible to get something as complex as mol up on your x86 workstation. Imagine having one workstation where you, the HellDesk employee, could run *NIX ( Lin/BSD, natively), vmware (WinXX), and mol (MacOS 9+) from the same workstation... simoultaneously (ignoring the 512M RAM you'd probably need). In environments that have great OS diversity, this would be great (Universities come to mind).
It would be more beneficial to Mac owners to have the reverse for compatability (putting a PIII or K7 on a PCI in your Mac). There are several companies that do this (and probably have patents) such as OrangeMicro which are anally retaining the hardware specs last I heard. And they only develop drivers for MacOS. Plus I think they require special versions of the OS's that run under the hardware anyway.
You also have the possibility to now section off hardware to a virtual environment (similar to IBM's 390's) because you can easily quantize the resources allocated to each environment by PCI card...
Offspring is not chalk full of lower IQ people as some of the more stereotypical bands are. In fact, the lead singer (Dexter, I think) was working his way toward a PhD in biology in Decatur Georiga (Emory, I believe).
I'll bet this was the intent all along. Napster is currently in heat regarding trademark allegations, etc. as Miou pointed out. However, by sending a cease and desist they shot themselves in the foot from a logical point of view. This is why (though IANAL):
Napster deals in giving out (essentially) copyrighted materials. Napster is now in litigation over these issues and is pleading that it is not the entity that is actually stealing the music. This is (sorta) true, they are the transport by which it happens.
So what Offspring did that is so clever is to hit Napster with their own medicine. They take the napster name and logo and offer a means for it to be distributed. I bet they personally don't manufacture a single thing for sale on their site. However those items probably don't come directly from Napster either. This means they are mearly offering a means to distribute them. This is very similar to exactly what napster is doing to everyone else. The best part is how much it costs Offspring to do this. And the answer is not much... a hell of a lot less than a lawyer, that's for sure. They get the added bonus of ego points for blatently outsmarting the Napster board of trustees. Proving with intellegence instead of finance that the RIAA is actually doing a Good thing, because Napster just dropped their trow to show the world it's just another FUD corp betting on IPO.
As the owner of an Athlon mobo (Asus K7M) and GeForce, I figured I would be through hell regarding the AGP. For those of you who don't know, there is an additional known hardware conflict between AGP on AMD Irongate-based chipset moherboards and the GeForce video cards.
I have had RH 6.1 installed (since Feb) and I have not noticed anything. I have run XF86 3.3.5 and XF86 4.0 and only have seen one distoted artifact. It is a half inch strip of pixel coloration across the top of my screen, which probably is a result of the hardware nVidia driver for XF86. It goes away when the grey X background and mouse come onto the screen.
I _did_ have AGP problems when running Q3A. The problem occured after playing Q3A for a while. The game would freeze up and begin repeating sound. I would have to reboot by telneting in from another machine (killing q3a only made the sound stop playing)
Fortunately nVidia includes an option in XF86 4.0 that you can add to your XF86Config file to disable AGP: (put into your "Screen" section. this is also described in nVidia's FAQ for XF86 v4 installation)
Option "NvAgp" "0"
This will disable AGP under X at least for nvidia video cards running under XF86 v4.0. I would be anxious to know if this option helps/heleped out with any other AGP errors that might be presenting themselves to others...
It is not inconceviable that the internet services sections could go with IE. Think about it, there are lots of companies that have specific, special versions of IE for their ISP services (like RoadRunner). The custom programming is very likely not for free. Additionally, it is not unreasonable to throw up a case explaining why Hotmail and other MSN (all of MSN?) resources could go to the IE section. IE and MSN were built to be one (out of IE's non-conforming HTML implemented parts), just like everything else MS made. However some things are closer together than others...like IE specific HTML content in MSN, Exchange and MSOffice, Visual Studio(s), SQL SErver 7 and the OSes.
I would expect to see the companies shaped up like this, based on this principal:
#1 OS and hardware (kbds, mice, X-box, etc.)
#2 Applications and compilers (VBS, Office, MS Money, AOE, etc.)
#3 Internet services, (IE, MSN, WebTV, etc.)
this gives them all good product lines with reasonable revenue without giveing one something that it can truly make it a monopoly from day one (exept maybe slice #1--Xbox and OS, but Apple already does this...). Time will tell if this will hold, however.
Isn't there a max # of CPU's for Linux SMP?
on
New Mega Alphas
·
· Score: 1
I though there was a limit of either 4 or 8 processors on a board (no where near 32)... Could someone please tell me if this is wrong and what vers made me wrong:)?
The principal of the sails is to ride the solar wind. However without an equivelent of water to provide friction in space, it would seem impossible to "tac" (sp?), the manuever used by sailboats to advance in the direction the wind is blowing from (move opposite the direction the wind is blowing). Thus, it would seem you cannot approach a start system because the solar wind from that star would blow you out of the star system again.
Relational databases are big and complicated monsters (at least the ones for high end use). Many have hardware optimization code ala Quake(I/II/III)..except instead of optimizing for vector math and graphics card it's optimized for search queries and i/o hardware (I know Oracle even offers to use unformatted disks on it's own to avoid slowdows caused by having a filesystem to interact with). Plus it includes a command interpreter (SQL), etc. You could go on for a long time regarding all the libraries, drivers, etc. used by a full RDBMS, and I wouldn't be suprized if it approaches or exceedes the complexity of developing a feature rich OS.
Now, do you think there is one developer that knows every piece of code in WinXX? MacOS x.x? The xNIX kernel (including ALL modules)? No, not everything. . It is how well these teams work together to produce a cohesive product that really counts.
disclaimer: I am not a developer much less a development project leader, though if someone actually does (could) know all that information, I would be really impressed:) .
The primary reason is that they charge you out the wazoo. This is taken from a LinuxCare email referral for Yellow Dog Linux:
The cost of our phone support varies on the type of service you receive. If we are able to walk you through it over the phone, we charge $150/hour with a half hour minimum and then we bill in 15 minute increments. Most of our calls are finished within an hour, but the engineer will be able to quote you a better time when they learn more about your situation. If we need to dial into your network, or do research or work off-line, we charge $200/hour and with a half hour minimum and then we bill in 15 minute increments.
This is outrageous to a home user, espically when you consider that RHL with phone support for about month is about $100 with a box of software.
Granted, YellowDog and other some other linux-pmac distros (like LinuxPPC) offer no to slow service with poor software (like LinuxPPC2000 kernel source mising the/usr/src/linux/include/asm-m68k and incorrect tulip.c driver), but still this is outrageous price for consumers. Plus I know the emphasis in IT at the companies that I have worked with is "find someone who knows and fire the other guy" rather than "pay the other guy to learn how" or "pay for tech support" due to the high prices that hired help for corporations usually charge.
RAMBUS RAM also is not direct access, it uses a protocol based communication (as said on tomshardware) that works serially between RDRAM modules. This is why there is such a huge "adaptor" for i820 and i840 motherboards to enable them to use DRAM. To make DRAM in RDRAM, all components nessesairy to receive, interpreate, and act on the protocol commands would need to be added
Besides, I think if butting copper around a PC133 DIMM was all it'd took, Intel would have come up with something easier that the bus translation adaptor thing for DRAM in their chipsets.
--It's amazing what they can do with copper these days
Remember all the problems nasa is having with keeping their data from deteriorating ? The shelf life of a book outweighs that of a tape. Once all these books are digitized what happens in 10-30 years when all the tapes begin to "go bad" simoultaneously? I think that problem may be much worse then than it is now. Plus, keeping the data up and available would have higher cost, and that's not including the cost of digitizing the LoC's collection in the first place. I agree there may be a time when this is nessesairy, but until a more resilient mass storage media is found it just isn't really feasible IMHO.
Is temperature a macroscopic or quantum?
on
Cooling With Lasers
·
· Score: 1
This may be a slight bit off-topic, but it could make some interesting discussion about laser cooling theory...
I remember getting reamed for this in solid-state thermodynamics. We were discussing how diffusion of atoms occurs in solids and were working on how it could be possible that hotter items have faster diffusion rates than the same thing at cooler temperatures. I spoke of the greater vibrational frequency of an atom at high T would allow briefly greater size "hole" in a lattice if the touching atoms moved apart.
I was "Infomed" that temperature is actually a quantum phenomana and has no bearing on the vibrations of an atom. There was reasoning to support this, but the aftermath of having my entire conceptual view of temperature blown away just left me stunned (and mentally incapable) the rest of the day, and I forgot the reasoning I was given for that factoid.
Is this true, and if so what is the reasoning behind justifying that temp is quantum--and thus not controlling of the atomic vibrational ampletude?
I am curious what the state change rate is (how fast it can be changed from a 1 to a 0) and if I can change any of the bit storage locations on the device simoultaneously or one at a time...
The rate is important, for instance memory can chage 100*10^9 bits per second (theoretically) for PC100 RAM (100 MHz). Hard disks can change 66*10^9 bits per second (ATA66), but only the bit the hard disk head is over at that time.
This is very oversimplified (all throughputs are absolute theoretical maximums), and I probably mesed up the exponents, and someone more knowledgable can refine my question...but hopefully I got enough of a point across for someone to understand my question--is this tech really feasible as a memory replacement, and where is there more hard data about it?
If you read the article, you will notice that Mozilla has applications being developed for it. This implies that Mozilla is not just a program in and of itself, but a program that will run others from within itself (a host program so to speak). A good example of this is SAP (which runs modules built for it) or Photoshop (which runs plugins built for it as well).
Now even if Mozilla is bugless, there is a very real potential that someone may write a really poor program (plugin,module,etc.) which is pretty buggy in and of itself. Without a crash recovery section a bug in this plugin or whatever could take down your application also and all the other non-buggy plugins/apps that were also running. And remember, you have no control over the code of what gets written as a compatable module for your software because apps/plugins/modules are developed after your software is, and are written by someone else outside your own company .
Yes, but puting the filter for these sites in every filter grouping that exists is beyond what is nessesairy. it would be just as effective but more moral to create a new group of, say, "Cyper Patrol sercurity circumvention" and have a warning come up if you try to disable it (like you do when you format a disk).
They have options to filter out out morally, which they choose to ignore. Therefore, this is much worse than trying to protect the security of the product (IMHO)
Accroding the the Materials science classes I took. Glass does have a cold flow property and it can be scientifically proven by watching the shifting of raidoactive tracers of oxygen in glass. There are also other materials that have cold flow charachertistics, such as many carbon-flourine polymers (teflon derivatives--there was one that stuck out in my mind but I can't remember it's name--it ws used it ethylene oxide production as a filler/sealer for gaskets until pressure from the pipe cause it to flow out of the gasketing, which allowed the EO to leak, which cause a bit of a "boom")
Tempering the glass makes the glass harder (as is discussed in this thread) but also creates a much more tightly packed lattice structure which hinders cold flow. Tempering was unknown or not practiced 400 years ago, so the glasses we have from that time period (and before) exhibit more cold-flow than the (non el-cheapo) glass we have now.
Just what I remember from MatSci, let me know if I goofed:)
Because with a Mac there are _very few_ other choices in software out there, espically for OS.
BeOS is about the only other thing, and you used to have to pay for it. LinuxPPC could be installed for free and played with.
I know the reason I switched into looking at Linux from MacOS was:
I wanted it for compatable operating environment with the SPARc workstations we used for our engineering projects in college. For what I did I could at least have many term open in X than by opening multiple copies of NCSA Telnet, and have a much more compatable term.
I wanted to learn more about UNIX in general, and it offered me the best learning method for the least money.
MacX is a resource hog. Rather just run X natively when running X apps off of the server.
Linux has many more small cool programs than MacOS, it supports VM much better, and it does background processing many, many times better.
SheepShaver promised me that when finished I could go back to MacOS if i left it's partitions intact (or, now, MoL).
Powerbooks are LinuxPPC enabled: http://www.linuxppc.com/about/hardware/apple/
The new 2000 models are not yet supported but they will probably gain support within about 4 months or so).
Just recompile your apps and they shoud work on PPC unless they depend on something in hardware (or you have a prog with no source available). There are probably some other reasons out there but I don't think there are many
I would like to remind everyone that LinuxPPC, like RedHat, Debian, et. al. is downloadable via the web for free. Check out linuxppc.org and for help, most HOWTO's are accurate. Also there is a LinuxPPC listserv. Also for help try the FAQ OMatic for more info. LinuxPPC 1999 had an installer program that ran after you downloaded it For those of you people who own old PCI Mac's I highly recommend trying it. The TCP performance blows the doors off of OpenTransport 1.3 (MacOS 8.1) on my StarMax. It also lets me use slave IDE devices for bulking up on storage, which MacOS 8.1 does not:). The only sad part is LinuxPPC, like Linux x86 does not support HFS Extended yet, so if you want to save data you have to convert drives back to HFS (unless they updated this for Linux 2000).
Apple considers Notebooks high-end also
on
Darwin on Crusoe?
·
· Score: 1
Or at least the Powerbooks. I would look for it being in either the iBook (the high end Transmeta chip) and the new Apple-branded Palm, or just the new Palm handheld.
If they do use it in a Palm, this contradicts the story because the existing Apple portables used the ARM processors which I think was a company that was separate from Motorola. I guarntee they didn't have a G4 in them:). (G4 Newton...hehehe)
A Palm with the Transmeta chip would seriously get some drool factor and be serious lotion for stock motion on announcement though...
MacOS hardware and software problems and thoughts.
on
Darwin on Crusoe?
·
· Score: 3
While this Would Be A Good Thing, it's not quite this simple. The motherboard would have to include the Apple ROM, which is one of the primary keys to getting MacOS to run on other hardware archs. There is also the matter of the device support. MacOS MoBoards have so much on them: 16bit sound, Firewire, etc. old Macs has SCSI-1, video, etc. on the board also. Finally, the BIOS for MacOS is their own product called OpenFirmware, which they would have to either write around or release compatability info on.
Now don't get me wrong, the MacOS hardware software dependency is going towards something where this may be possible. For instance:
The ROM is slowly being moved into a system file which gets loaded into RAM. MacOSX doesn't (read: "shouldn't") access the ROM at all, I believe (Yay!)
Video and SCSI are now off the board. Video is going to be standard AGP (as in Sawtooth G4's) rather than on-board or in a special 66MHz yet 32 bit PCI slot.
MacOSX early versions/Rhapsody Dr's were released under certain x86 platforms already. MOSR had a report of someone seeing a Rhapsody DR at Cupertino(sp?) running on a Sun SPARc 4.
So there are hurdles to overcome, but Apple has been overcoming them slowly anyway. The most likely thing that I would see happening is Apple making motherboards based on their hardware for different CPU (AMD-Motorola alliance crossed with Apple-Moto-IBM's 'AIM' alliance may yield something interesting...K7's maybe?) would probably be the most likely outcome.
In this case, you will still have a premade system from Apple then build on it.
Slashdot Mirror
Integrating a cell phone and a PDA like this is really not a good idea. Many people get info through their cellphone and put it directly into their PDA (meetings, schedules, notes, quick calculations).
How are you going to hear someone on the phone and enter data when you have to keep the PDA on your ear?
The best solution I can think of is to have a hands-free, but even then you will have a cord to get tangled up in. The cellphone software and OS also have to support thredding/multitasking so you can use other PDA apps (calendar, etc.) while the cellphone conversation is uninterrupted.
I personally don't own a PalmOS device, so if someone can clarify these points for me I'd appreciate it.
Tenron claims that their product will also work as a standard X server to run _local_ binaries also. MacX, etc. have never been able to do this, because there was no UNIX underpinnings to run the apps with. Thus standalone running of X apps could (beforehand) never be done.
:)
Basically when this does is give a complete Xwindows compatability to the Mac. Tenron is in an excellet position to do this to. They have produced some apazing UNIX and UNIX ports to Macintosh. MachTen, one of their products, was essentially UNIX inside MacOS. it had everything you would expect from the UNIX environment also.. threads, protected memory usage, etc....from an overlying OS that didn't. Plus MacTen included it's own TCP stack which was used when it was active to bypass MacTCP and early OT which had some problems of it's own. I am still amazed at what it could do without having much of the nessesairy structure needed by UNIX in MacOS. It was still affected when the MacOS crashed, but there isn't much one can do about that other than yelling at Apple
There are two central reasons why it is preferrable to have a plant making the pollution than a car.
a) A plant can be located away from residential areas. You probably notice there are no power stations anywhere near the cities they power (except maybe some of the older cities that grew towards plants). We can selectively place plants away from population centers and in places where the typical winds do not blow emission over cities. With cars the pollution is wherever the person is driving, and that is typically in population centers (since most people drive cars).
b) A plant can have better emissions control. Plants (can) have higher yet reasonable pollution control requirements than cars. In chemical engineering when you try to separate out two chemicals, to decrease the impurities in your product by half you must use x^2 more energy, equipment, etc. (i.e. money) in order to acheive this. At some point it becomes economically unjustifiable to continue purifying the product because the cost of the product production becomes higher than the average selling price of the product.
Cars have a minimum impurity amount that they have to achieve (where the impurity is the pollutants). However, we must multiply that by the number of cars.
If we have plants instead of cars producing pollution, we can reduce the impurities further. The plants are emitting more impurities so they can cut down on them further while still remaining profitable because each plant is producing the impurity amount equivelant to large amount of cars.
(Note that this is not valid if the plant is also producing the same amount of total waste gas (exhaust) as the number of large cars it represents, because the impuriy level is a ratio of impurity to everything rather than an amount. Under this circumstance that ratio is the same--I am assuming that it should be easy to cut back on the total waste gas when you are producing much more waste gas, thus giving a higher concentration of pollutants, which in turn makes it easier to separate them out).
That's not the half of it. Think of whatt they'll do when they find out your doing cellular mitosis without extra genome licences!
I think the Vizualize workstations by HP are PA-RISC running HP-UX. We have a B180L (lowest end HP-UX box HP makes) with a 180MHz procesor and 64M RAM. Current cost is around $10K; so even if Linux was ported to PA-RISC (which it may have been by now, I don't know) you could probably save a bunch o money going with the x86 mobo's instead :).
If you read the post, it says that these cards will work inside a x86 on binaries that contain PPC binary from a cross compiler...
What would seem sweet...and maybe not to hard to do would be to have some thing capable of running 99.9% of the binaries in existence. While we can run many progs under x86 (WINE, vmware), the PPC will allow us to run LinuxPPC-native and even (if you so desire, but maybe not) MacOS binaries. Now we won't have the ROM (maybe the new-world ROM files will solve this), be we WILL have Darwin to work from for something in a more of a WINE like compatability. If the New-world ROM can be used, it may be possible to get something as complex as mol up on your x86 workstation. Imagine having one workstation where you, the HellDesk employee, could run *NIX ( Lin/BSD, natively), vmware (WinXX), and mol (MacOS 9+) from the same workstation... simoultaneously (ignoring the 512M RAM you'd probably need). In environments that have great OS diversity, this would be great (Universities come to mind).
It would be more beneficial to Mac owners to have the reverse for compatability (putting a PIII or K7 on a PCI in your Mac). There are several companies that do this (and probably have patents) such as OrangeMicro which are anally retaining the hardware specs last I heard. And they only develop drivers for MacOS. Plus I think they require special versions of the OS's that run under the hardware anyway.
You also have the possibility to now section off hardware to a virtual environment (similar to IBM's 390's) because you can easily quantize the resources allocated to each environment by PCI card...
Offspring is not chalk full of lower IQ people as some of the more stereotypical bands are. In fact, the lead singer (Dexter, I think) was working his way toward a PhD in biology in Decatur Georiga (Emory, I believe).
I'll bet this was the intent all along. Napster is currently in heat regarding trademark allegations, etc. as Miou pointed out. However, by sending a cease and desist they shot themselves in the foot from a logical point of view. This is why (though IANAL):
Napster deals in giving out (essentially) copyrighted materials. Napster is now in litigation over these issues and is pleading that it is not the entity that is actually stealing the music. This is (sorta) true, they are the transport by which it happens.
So what Offspring did that is so clever is to hit Napster with their own medicine. They take the napster name and logo and offer a means for it to be distributed. I bet they personally don't manufacture a single thing for sale on their site. However those items probably don't come directly from Napster either. This means they are mearly offering a means to distribute them. This is very similar to exactly what napster is doing to everyone else. The best part is how much it costs Offspring to do this. And the answer is not much... a hell of a lot less than a lawyer, that's for sure. They get the added bonus of ego points for blatently outsmarting the Napster board of trustees. Proving with intellegence instead of finance that the RIAA is actually doing a Good thing, because Napster just dropped their trow to show the world it's just another FUD corp betting on IPO.
And to think I just liked them for their music...
As the owner of an Athlon mobo (Asus K7M) and GeForce, I figured I would be through hell regarding the AGP. For those of you who don't know, there is an additional known hardware conflict between AGP on AMD Irongate-based chipset moherboards and the GeForce video cards.
I have had RH 6.1 installed (since Feb) and I have not noticed anything. I have run XF86 3.3.5 and XF86 4.0 and only have seen one distoted artifact. It is a half inch strip of pixel coloration across the top of my screen, which probably is a result of the hardware nVidia driver for XF86. It goes away when the grey X background and mouse come onto the screen.
I _did_ have AGP problems when running Q3A. The problem occured after playing Q3A for a while. The game would freeze up and begin repeating sound. I would have to reboot by telneting in from another machine (killing q3a only made the sound stop playing)
Fortunately nVidia includes an option in XF86 4.0 that you can add to your XF86Config file to disable AGP:
(put into your "Screen" section. this is also described in nVidia's FAQ for XF86 v4 installation)
Option "NvAgp" "0"
This will disable AGP under X at least for nvidia video cards running under XF86 v4.0. I would be anxious to know if this option helps/heleped out with any other AGP errors that might be presenting themselves to others...
It is not inconceviable that the internet services sections could go with IE. Think about it, there are lots of companies that have specific, special versions of IE for their ISP services (like RoadRunner). The custom programming is very likely not for free. Additionally, it is not unreasonable to throw up a case explaining why Hotmail and other MSN (all of MSN?) resources could go to the IE section. IE and MSN were built to be one (out of IE's non-conforming HTML implemented parts), just like everything else MS made. However some things are closer together than others...like IE specific HTML content in MSN, Exchange and MSOffice, Visual Studio(s), SQL SErver 7 and the OSes.
I would expect to see the companies shaped up like this, based on this principal:
#1 OS and hardware (kbds, mice, X-box, etc.)
#2 Applications and compilers (VBS, Office, MS Money, AOE, etc.)
#3 Internet services, (IE, MSN, WebTV, etc.)
this gives them all good product lines with reasonable revenue without giveing one something that it can truly make it a monopoly from day one (exept maybe slice #1--Xbox and OS, but Apple already does this...). Time will tell if this will hold, however.
I though there was a limit of either 4 or 8 processors on a board (no where near 32)... Could someone please tell me if this is wrong and what vers made me wrong :)?
The principal of the sails is to ride the solar wind. However without an equivelent of water to provide friction in space, it would seem impossible to "tac" (sp?), the manuever used by sailboats to advance in the direction the wind is blowing from (move opposite the direction the wind is blowing). Thus, it would seem you cannot approach a start system because the solar wind from that star would blow you out of the star system again.
Relational databases are big and complicated monsters (at least the ones for high end use). Many have hardware optimization code ala Quake(I/II/III)..except instead of optimizing for vector math and graphics card it's optimized for search queries and i/o hardware (I know Oracle even offers to use unformatted disks on it's own to avoid slowdows caused by having a filesystem to interact with). Plus it includes a command interpreter (SQL), etc. You could go on for a long time regarding all the libraries, drivers, etc. used by a full RDBMS, and I wouldn't be suprized if it approaches or exceedes the complexity of developing a feature rich OS.
:) .
Now, do you think there is one developer that knows every piece of code in WinXX? MacOS x.x? The xNIX kernel (including ALL modules)? No, not everything. . It is how well these teams work together to produce a cohesive product that really counts.
disclaimer: I am not a developer much less a development project leader, though if someone actually does (could) know all that information, I would be really impressed
The primary reason is that they charge you out the wazoo. This is taken from a LinuxCare email referral for Yellow Dog Linux:
/usr/src/linux/include/asm-m68k and incorrect tulip.c driver), but still this is outrageous price for consumers. Plus I know the emphasis in IT at the companies that I have worked with is "find someone who knows and fire the other guy" rather than "pay the other guy to learn how" or "pay for tech support" due to the high prices that hired help for corporations usually charge.
The cost of our phone support varies on the type of service you receive. If we are able
to walk you through it over the phone, we charge $150/hour with a half hour minimum and then we bill in 15 minute increments. Most of our calls are finished within an hour, but the engineer
will be able to quote you a better time when they learn more about your situation. If we need to dial into your network, or do research or work off-line, we charge $200/hour and with a half hour
minimum and then we bill in 15 minute increments.
This is outrageous to a home user, espically when you consider that RHL with phone support for about month is about $100 with a box of software.
Granted, YellowDog and other some other linux-pmac distros (like LinuxPPC) offer no to slow service with poor software (like LinuxPPC2000 kernel source mising the
RAMBUS RAM also is not direct access, it uses a protocol based communication (as said on tomshardware) that works serially between RDRAM modules. This is why there is such a huge "adaptor" for i820 and i840 motherboards to enable them to use DRAM. To make DRAM in RDRAM, all components nessesairy to receive, interpreate, and act on the protocol commands would need to be added
Besides, I think if butting copper around a PC133 DIMM was all it'd took, Intel would have come up with something easier that the bus translation adaptor thing for DRAM in their chipsets.
--It's amazing what they can do with copper these days
Remember all the problems nasa is having with keeping their data from deteriorating ? The shelf life of a book outweighs that of a tape. Once all these books are digitized what happens in 10-30 years when all the tapes begin to "go bad" simoultaneously? I think that problem may be much worse then than it is now. Plus, keeping the data up and available would have higher cost, and that's not including the cost of digitizing the LoC's collection in the first place. I agree there may be a time when this is nessesairy, but until a more resilient mass storage media is found it just isn't really feasible IMHO.
This may be a slight bit off-topic, but it could make some interesting discussion about laser cooling theory...
I remember getting reamed for this in solid-state thermodynamics. We were discussing how diffusion of atoms occurs in solids and were working on how it could be possible that hotter items have faster diffusion rates than the same thing at cooler temperatures. I spoke of the greater vibrational frequency of an atom at high T would allow briefly greater size "hole" in a lattice if the touching atoms moved apart.
I was "Infomed" that temperature is actually a quantum phenomana and has no bearing on the vibrations of an atom. There was reasoning to support this, but the aftermath of having my entire conceptual view of temperature blown away just left me stunned (and mentally incapable) the rest of the day, and I forgot the reasoning I was given for that factoid.
Is this true, and if so what is the reasoning behind justifying that temp is quantum--and thus not controlling of the atomic vibrational ampletude?
I am curious what the state change rate is (how fast it can be changed from a 1 to a 0) and if I can change any of the bit storage locations on the device simoultaneously or one at a time...
The rate is important, for instance memory can chage 100*10^9 bits per second (theoretically) for PC100 RAM (100 MHz). Hard disks can change 66*10^9 bits per second (ATA66), but only the bit the hard disk head is over at that time.
This is very oversimplified (all throughputs are absolute theoretical maximums), and I probably mesed up the exponents, and someone more knowledgable can refine my question...but hopefully I got enough of a point across for someone to understand my question--is this tech really feasible as a memory replacement, and where is there more hard data about it?
If you read the article, you will notice that Mozilla has applications being developed for it. This implies that Mozilla is not just a program in and of itself, but a program that will run others from within itself (a host program so to speak). A good example of this is SAP (which runs modules built for it) or Photoshop (which runs plugins built for it as well).
Now even if Mozilla is bugless, there is a very real potential that someone may write a really poor program (plugin,module,etc.) which is pretty buggy in and of itself. Without a crash recovery section a bug in this plugin or whatever could take down your application also and all the other non-buggy plugins/apps that were also running. And remember, you have no control over the code of what gets written as a compatable module for your software because apps/plugins/modules are developed after your software is, and are written by someone else outside your own company .
Yes, but puting the filter for these sites in every filter grouping that exists is beyond what is nessesairy. it would be just as effective but more moral to create a new group of, say, "Cyper Patrol sercurity circumvention" and have a warning come up if you try to disable it (like you do when you format a disk).
They have options to filter out out morally, which they choose to ignore. Therefore, this is much worse than trying to protect the security of the product (IMHO)
Accroding the the Materials science classes I took. Glass does have a cold flow property and it can be scientifically proven by watching the shifting of raidoactive tracers of oxygen in glass. There are also other materials that have cold flow charachertistics, such as many carbon-flourine polymers (teflon derivatives--there was one that stuck out in my mind but I can't remember it's name--it ws used it ethylene oxide production as a filler/sealer for gaskets until pressure from the pipe cause it to flow out of the gasketing, which allowed the EO to leak, which cause a bit of a "boom")
:)
Tempering the glass makes the glass harder (as is discussed in this thread) but also creates a much more tightly packed lattice structure which hinders cold flow. Tempering was unknown or not practiced 400 years ago, so the glasses we have from that time period (and before) exhibit more cold-flow than the (non el-cheapo) glass we have now.
Just what I remember from MatSci, let me know if I goofed
Because with a Mac there are _very few_ other choices in software out there, espically for OS.
BeOS is about the only other thing, and you used to have to pay for it. LinuxPPC could be installed for free and played with.
I know the reason I switched into looking at Linux from MacOS was:
I wanted it for compatable operating environment with the SPARc workstations we used for our engineering projects in college. For what I did I could at least have many term open in X than by opening multiple copies of NCSA Telnet, and have a much more compatable term.
I wanted to learn more about UNIX in general, and it offered me the best learning method for the least money.
MacX is a resource hog. Rather just run X natively when running X apps off of the server.
Linux has many more small cool programs than MacOS, it supports VM much better, and it does background processing many, many times better.
SheepShaver promised me that when finished I could go back to MacOS if i left it's partitions intact (or, now, MoL).
Virtual Windows rock
Powerbooks are LinuxPPC enabled:
http://www.linuxppc.com/about/hardware/apple/
The new 2000 models are not yet supported but they will probably gain support within about 4 months or so).
Just recompile your apps and they shoud work on PPC unless they depend on something in hardware (or you have a prog with no source available). There are probably some other reasons out there but I don't think there are many
I would like to remind everyone that LinuxPPC, like RedHat, Debian, et. al. is downloadable via the web for free. Check out linuxppc.org and for help, most HOWTO's are accurate. Also there is a LinuxPPC listserv. Also for help try the FAQ OMatic for more info. LinuxPPC 1999 had an installer program that ran after you downloaded it For those of you people who own old PCI Mac's I highly recommend trying it. The TCP performance blows the doors off of OpenTransport 1.3 (MacOS 8.1) on my StarMax. It also lets me use slave IDE devices for bulking up on storage, which MacOS 8.1 does not :). The only sad part is LinuxPPC, like Linux x86 does not support HFS Extended yet, so if you want to save data you have to convert drives back to HFS (unless they updated this for Linux 2000).
Or at least the Powerbooks. I would look for it being in either the iBook (the high end Transmeta chip) and the new Apple-branded Palm, or just the new Palm handheld.
:). (G4 Newton...hehehe)
If they do use it in a Palm, this contradicts the story because the existing Apple portables used the ARM processors which I think was a company that was separate from Motorola. I guarntee they didn't have a G4 in them
A Palm with the Transmeta chip would seriously get some drool factor and be serious lotion for stock motion on announcement though...
While this Would Be A Good Thing, it's not quite this simple. The motherboard would have to include the Apple ROM, which is one of the primary keys to getting MacOS to run on other hardware archs. There is also the matter of the device support. MacOS MoBoards have so much on them: 16bit sound, Firewire, etc. old Macs has SCSI-1, video, etc. on the board also. Finally, the BIOS for MacOS is their own product called OpenFirmware, which they would have to either write around or release compatability info on.
Now don't get me wrong, the MacOS hardware software dependency is going towards something where this may be possible. For instance:
The ROM is slowly being moved into a system file which gets loaded into RAM. MacOSX doesn't (read: "shouldn't") access the ROM at all, I believe (Yay!)
Video and SCSI are now off the board. Video is going to be standard AGP (as in Sawtooth G4's) rather than on-board or in a special 66MHz yet 32 bit PCI slot.
MacOSX early versions/Rhapsody Dr's were released under certain x86 platforms already. MOSR had a report of someone seeing a Rhapsody DR at Cupertino(sp?) running on a Sun SPARc 4.
So there are hurdles to overcome, but Apple has been overcoming them slowly anyway. The most likely thing that I would see happening is Apple making motherboards based on their hardware for different CPU (AMD-Motorola alliance crossed with Apple-Moto-IBM's 'AIM' alliance may yield something interesting...K7's maybe?) would probably be the most likely outcome.
In this case, you will still have a premade system from Apple then build on it.