I saw Tron when I was 10, and I thought it was amazing. I still think it is an amazing movie even today.
Why do people get hung up on stories having to have this amazing storyline to them. I love how vague parts of the story are AND how simple they are. Computers were much more simple then and to me it really reflects the kind of processing limitations and freedom of imagination at that time.
I can say that it completely influenced by desire to work with computers, work with animation, and more importably work with VR stuff while I was in college.
Are there movies with better visuals and better stories? Of course, but at 10 years old, I was blown away. I guess it really depends when you saw it as to how much it means to you.
And I agree, I think that is Chris Barrie (Arnold Rimmer from Red Dwarf) in the end of the segment. WAY TOO young looking to be David Warner AND the wrong color !:)
Smaller size means faster but at the expense of more power. As a chip designer I can tell you that the smaller you go, the more leakage you have to deal with in the gates, and it goes up FAST. Now, with the new Intel chips, they are employing some new techniques to limit the leakiness of the gates, these techniques are not standard across the industry so it will be interesting to see how they hold up.
I do not understand what you mean by signal-fixing/synchronization hardware. Design specific signal synchronization doesn't change over the different gate sizes. What changes is the techniques that are used as people find better ways to do these things. However, these are not technology specific and tend to find their way back into older technologies to improve performance their as well.
In addition, cost is NOT always cheaper because die yield is generally MUCH LESS at newer technologies. For those on the bleeding edge. In addition, development costs go up because design specific limitations, process variance, and physical limitations cause designs to be MUCH HARDER to physically implement than at larger sizes. Things like electromigration, leakage power, ESD, OPC, DRC, and foundry design rules are MUCH worse.
What is true is that these people want faster chips, and you can get that, as I said. Although the speed differences are not that amazing. Personally, I don't think the cost justifies the improvement in what I have worked on. Especially on power.
Now, going out a few years from now, as they solve these problems at these specific gate geometries, THEN we will start to see the benefits of the size overall.
This game is the first game since Half-Life I that REALLY got me into the game. HLI was AMAZING when it came out, way better than any FPS before it. The fact that someone could even surpass that is just awesome.
The one thing HFI had that I just haven't seen in ANY game since was the feeling of the AI. The way they'd hunt me as a team. Sure, lots of games have that, but none have ever felt so real!
:)
Bioshock so far I feel is just different in that regard, not that it is lacking. The residents are crazy so of course they aren't going to act in any sort of intelligent strategic fashion. Now I just want to go home and play some more!!!!
I know, I have to say, even I've had to search. Of course, on my mac I use a combination of Spotlight and Quicksilver so things are not generally lost for long! Muahahah! (sinister laugh directed towards hooligan lost files).
So I guess they can't be called Random Acts of Violence anymore!:) Hehe, I wonder who the spokesperson for the software is. "You don't know Crime, I know Crime" (Obligatory Tom Cruise reference twisted to the story since he did play in the movie about detecting crimes before they happen).
After watching my grandparents navigate their computer, I am wondering if 50% of the people that download it can't find where it saved the file and give up in frustration cause they just don't 'get' computers:)
Yes, they use AOL as well.
I wish I were kidding too, but I'm not. My family (in the past) has used me for tech support, and I was always getting the 'I saved this file but I cannot find it anywhere' and when I showed them, 'hey look, it's on your desktop' they were dumbfounded (as was I in how they lost it).
How I solved the problem? I bought macs and told them I didn't know how to use windows anymore:) Of course 'know how' and 'want' are fully interchangeable.
The average user does not upgrade their machines. We are not average users. I am tired of this old argument. And further, when anyone in my family takes their computers in for 'upgrades' it's typically more trouble for them in the end than it's worth.
Can I see my mom installing a new motherboard? No. She'd take one look at all the connectors from the case and give up.
Would I trust my dad trying to install a new HD and transfer everything over? No.
The average person would be just fine on a mini, iMac or macbook.
Where I will completely diverge from this statement is that if you play games (as do I as well) then a PC always seems to outperform for the same value at the lower end of the value spectrum. Not to mention, some games just don't appear for OSX. Now, if a game comes out for OSX, I am SURE my MacPro will scream with it:)
If people don't like the price on iTunes, they aren't going to buy the tracks, then the labels and Apple will have to make a decision to lower prices in the future. We can let our money talk for us.
Personally, I try to buy most of my music from the artist when they tour, so I buy on CD. It just seems the best solution overall.
This especially because burning an 128Kbps file to audio then re-ripping it just DESTROYS the quality of the audio even further.
...instead of having to be there and fall asleep in an uncomfortable chair, you can stay at your computer and fall asleep drooling on your keyboard:)
All joking aside, there are certainly a lot of people I'd like to listen to their speeches that I would not typically have access to.
You're not the only one. I saw it as "Getting High" "Quality music on a PC" I just had the visual of someone staring at Winamp with Milkdrop running and commented "Dude, this sounds AWESOME":)
1. I'd hate to see the word file with 6,000 pages in it, will that fit on a dual layer DVD?
2. I guess I kind of look at standards like the dictionary...just cause I don't know everything in there doesn't mean I can't speak at least at some meaningful level. I'd also take 6,000 well written, well thought out pages as opposed to 700 if they were missing content. Comparing page count to me is like comparing CPU Ghz....it's not the whole story. I've seen neither document, so I really don't know.
I had looked awhile ago but lost interest. I am not sure why the Atari 8-bits were so popular where I was, but they were. The guy that turned me on to them did a lot of ham radio suff, and he said, the atari 400/800 was very popular due to the well constructed fariday cage on the inside of the unit. Kept the noise WAY DOWN from his other equipment.
The first song recorded on a computer I ever heard was on the 800XL...it was a song by the Kinks. Also the first MIDI I ever played with was on the 800XL.
In 1998 someone gave me an ST and I gladly took it, as I always wanted one. I replaced the floppy drive and used it for a bit, but realized, it was more work than it was worth (I was going to do a little sequencing on it). I ended up giving it away. However, I could not believe the ST's were still bein sold overseas from me, I believe it was called the Falcon.
Oh how programming was so simple then...:)
I really used the Atari 130XE more than anything, so the 400 and 800 were a bit earlier. It could handle 16 colors at 320x192, but yeah, the 256 colors were a bit lame. Although I did play a lot of games that used them, it was bizarre. Most of those games had lots of silver stuff very well shaded:)
Also, the atari had 4 voices were-as the commodore had 3. My experience was the Atari had better sound ability, but the commodore did have better games overall. It's also not fair for me to compare the 130XE to th 64, although I was never impressed with the 128. It's just I had a 130XE and my friends had C64s...why did I always have to be different?:)
Did I mention I had a Timex Sinclair as well?
And yes, looking back...300 baud...one button joysticks...maybe I should stop here..
What makes me smile about todays computers is that the PC versus the MAC was very similar to the Commodore versus the Atari. I was an Atari user, both the 800XL and 130XE. I always felt that these machines were MUCH better than the equivalent Commodore machines of the time. Especially with sound voices and graphics capability.
Of course, looking back now, wow...I will NEVER enter another program into my computer from a magazine into a hex editor. Nothing describes disappointment like spending 7 days entering in hex code for a game I will refer to as Tekken 0.000321, only to discover you can't move forward or backward, only kick or punch...kind of like rock, paper, boredom.
So, for nostalgic purposes only...
Commodore sucks! Atari for life!
(And now I want to go find an emulator for either and play Bruce Lee)
I might be confused at what timing issues you are talking about? I don't see how having 6 cores is any different than 8 in terms of timing. It's still two separate chips.
Mostly my question derives from some of the other architectures as well, that have 3 cores, and even Intel's mention of 80 (or whatever the number was). Is the portion of the architecture that handles the thread distribution that robust?
(Of course, if you mean chip speed, and bus speed, I am assuming that they would have to match before it could work)
I felt the display they used looked very nice, especially for the size. However, for some reason all I can think of is Sony and their DRM issues with all their players and how that pretty much killed the market for them.
I see this happening with the Zune, at least from what I see so far.
Is if you need to replace them in pairs in a dual socket machine. I am about to purchase a MacPro and wonder if down the line, cost being the prohibitive part of the plan, if I could just upgrade one of the processors and then have 6 cores instead of 4.
I use Digital Performer, and the more cores the better:)
Regardless, it's not a PC, I can attest as I helped work on it. Everything is custom silicon as far as the processors go.
Not to say the SDK hasn't been unified as stated for both PC and Xbox, from a development standpoint, I can see why they'd do that, but hardware wise, I am actually really interested in getting my hands on one.
I worked on the graphics chip.
Slashdot Mirror
I saw Tron when I was 10, and I thought it was amazing. I still think it is an amazing movie even today. Why do people get hung up on stories having to have this amazing storyline to them. I love how vague parts of the story are AND how simple they are. Computers were much more simple then and to me it really reflects the kind of processing limitations and freedom of imagination at that time. I can say that it completely influenced by desire to work with computers, work with animation, and more importably work with VR stuff while I was in college. Are there movies with better visuals and better stories? Of course, but at 10 years old, I was blown away. I guess it really depends when you saw it as to how much it means to you. And I agree, I think that is Chris Barrie (Arnold Rimmer from Red Dwarf) in the end of the segment. WAY TOO young looking to be David Warner AND the wrong color ! :)
Smaller size means faster but at the expense of more power. As a chip designer I can tell you that the smaller you go, the more leakage you have to deal with in the gates, and it goes up FAST. Now, with the new Intel chips, they are employing some new techniques to limit the leakiness of the gates, these techniques are not standard across the industry so it will be interesting to see how they hold up. I do not understand what you mean by signal-fixing/synchronization hardware. Design specific signal synchronization doesn't change over the different gate sizes. What changes is the techniques that are used as people find better ways to do these things. However, these are not technology specific and tend to find their way back into older technologies to improve performance their as well. In addition, cost is NOT always cheaper because die yield is generally MUCH LESS at newer technologies. For those on the bleeding edge. In addition, development costs go up because design specific limitations, process variance, and physical limitations cause designs to be MUCH HARDER to physically implement than at larger sizes. Things like electromigration, leakage power, ESD, OPC, DRC, and foundry design rules are MUCH worse. What is true is that these people want faster chips, and you can get that, as I said. Although the speed differences are not that amazing. Personally, I don't think the cost justifies the improvement in what I have worked on. Especially on power. Now, going out a few years from now, as they solve these problems at these specific gate geometries, THEN we will start to see the benefits of the size overall.
This game is the first game since Half-Life I that REALLY got me into the game. HLI was AMAZING when it came out, way better than any FPS before it. The fact that someone could even surpass that is just awesome.
:)
The one thing HFI had that I just haven't seen in ANY game since was the feeling of the AI. The way they'd hunt me as a team. Sure, lots of games have that, but none have ever felt so real!
Bioshock so far I feel is just different in that regard, not that it is lacking. The residents are crazy so of course they aren't going to act in any sort of intelligent strategic fashion. Now I just want to go home and play some more!!!!
I know, I have to say, even I've had to search. Of course, on my mac I use a combination of Spotlight and Quicksilver so things are not generally lost for long! Muahahah! (sinister laugh directed towards hooligan lost files).
So I guess they can't be called Random Acts of Violence anymore! :) Hehe, I wonder who the spokesperson for the software is. "You don't know Crime, I know Crime" (Obligatory Tom Cruise reference twisted to the story since he did play in the movie about detecting crimes before they happen).
After watching my grandparents navigate their computer, I am wondering if 50% of the people that download it can't find where it saved the file and give up in frustration cause they just don't 'get' computers :)
Yes, they use AOL as well.
I wish I were kidding too, but I'm not. My family (in the past) has used me for tech support, and I was always getting the 'I saved this file but I cannot find it anywhere' and when I showed them, 'hey look, it's on your desktop' they were dumbfounded (as was I in how they lost it).
How I solved the problem? I bought macs and told them I didn't know how to use windows anymore :) Of course 'know how' and 'want' are fully interchangeable.
The average user does not upgrade their machines. We are not average users. I am tired of this old argument. And further, when anyone in my family takes their computers in for 'upgrades' it's typically more trouble for them in the end than it's worth. Can I see my mom installing a new motherboard? No. She'd take one look at all the connectors from the case and give up. Would I trust my dad trying to install a new HD and transfer everything over? No. The average person would be just fine on a mini, iMac or macbook. Where I will completely diverge from this statement is that if you play games (as do I as well) then a PC always seems to outperform for the same value at the lower end of the value spectrum. Not to mention, some games just don't appear for OSX. Now, if a game comes out for OSX, I am SURE my MacPro will scream with it :)
Especially with my 30" cinema display. I don't need to see a 1 foot in size zerg coming at me, that just ain't right :)
If people don't like the price on iTunes, they aren't going to buy the tracks, then the labels and Apple will have to make a decision to lower prices in the future. We can let our money talk for us. Personally, I try to buy most of my music from the artist when they tour, so I buy on CD. It just seems the best solution overall. This especially because burning an 128Kbps file to audio then re-ripping it just DESTROYS the quality of the audio even further.
...instead of having to be there and fall asleep in an uncomfortable chair, you can stay at your computer and fall asleep drooling on your keyboard :)
All joking aside, there are certainly a lot of people I'd like to listen to their speeches that I would not typically have access to.
You're not the only one. I saw it as "Getting High" "Quality music on a PC" I just had the visual of someone staring at Winamp with Milkdrop running and commented "Dude, this sounds AWESOME" :)
1. I'd hate to see the word file with 6,000 pages in it, will that fit on a dual layer DVD?
:)
2. I guess I kind of look at standards like the dictionary...just cause I don't know everything in there doesn't mean I can't speak at least at some meaningful level. I'd also take 6,000 well written, well thought out pages as opposed to 700 if they were missing content. Comparing page count to me is like comparing CPU Ghz....it's not the whole story. I've seen neither document, so I really don't know.
3. Now I understand why word.exe was so huge...
I had looked awhile ago but lost interest. I am not sure why the Atari 8-bits were so popular where I was, but they were. The guy that turned me on to them did a lot of ham radio suff, and he said, the atari 400/800 was very popular due to the well constructed fariday cage on the inside of the unit. Kept the noise WAY DOWN from his other equipment. The first song recorded on a computer I ever heard was on the 800XL...it was a song by the Kinks. Also the first MIDI I ever played with was on the 800XL. In 1998 someone gave me an ST and I gladly took it, as I always wanted one. I replaced the floppy drive and used it for a bit, but realized, it was more work than it was worth (I was going to do a little sequencing on it). I ended up giving it away. However, I could not believe the ST's were still bein sold overseas from me, I believe it was called the Falcon. Oh how programming was so simple then... :)
I really used the Atari 130XE more than anything, so the 400 and 800 were a bit earlier. It could handle 16 colors at 320x192, but yeah, the 256 colors were a bit lame. Although I did play a lot of games that used them, it was bizarre. Most of those games had lots of silver stuff very well shaded :)
:)
Also, the atari had 4 voices were-as the commodore had 3. My experience was the Atari had better sound ability, but the commodore did have better games overall. It's also not fair for me to compare the 130XE to th 64, although I was never impressed with the 128. It's just I had a 130XE and my friends had C64s...why did I always have to be different?
Did I mention I had a Timex Sinclair as well?
And yes, looking back...300 baud...one button joysticks...maybe I should stop here..
Here is a good spot to get the PC version you mention:
:)
http://www.planetflibble.com/blitz/
I don't see an OSX version available anywhere. But of course, I am sure it would run fine under parallels.
What makes me smile about todays computers is that the PC versus the MAC was very similar to the Commodore versus the Atari. I was an Atari user, both the 800XL and 130XE. I always felt that these machines were MUCH better than the equivalent Commodore machines of the time. Especially with sound voices and graphics capability. Of course, looking back now, wow...I will NEVER enter another program into my computer from a magazine into a hex editor. Nothing describes disappointment like spending 7 days entering in hex code for a game I will refer to as Tekken 0.000321, only to discover you can't move forward or backward, only kick or punch...kind of like rock, paper, boredom. So, for nostalgic purposes only... Commodore sucks! Atari for life! (And now I want to go find an emulator for either and play Bruce Lee)
...should read like this:
:)
All your browser market are belong to us!
-firefox team
I might be confused at what timing issues you are talking about? I don't see how having 6 cores is any different than 8 in terms of timing. It's still two separate chips. Mostly my question derives from some of the other architectures as well, that have 3 cores, and even Intel's mention of 80 (or whatever the number was). Is the portion of the architecture that handles the thread distribution that robust? (Of course, if you mean chip speed, and bus speed, I am assuming that they would have to match before it could work)
I felt the display they used looked very nice, especially for the size. However, for some reason all I can think of is Sony and their DRM issues with all their players and how that pretty much killed the market for them. I see this happening with the Zune, at least from what I see so far.
Is if you need to replace them in pairs in a dual socket machine. I am about to purchase a MacPro and wonder if down the line, cost being the prohibitive part of the plan, if I could just upgrade one of the processors and then have 6 cores instead of 4. I use Digital Performer, and the more cores the better :)
Not like anyone who uses AOL would get the jokes anyways ;)
Haha! Like I said, lack of sleep! :)
...you need more sleep when you glance at a Slashdot title and see: "MIT on Chronic and Micropayments" Skochie Bochies! :)
Regardless, it's not a PC, I can attest as I helped work on it. Everything is custom silicon as far as the processors go. Not to say the SDK hasn't been unified as stated for both PC and Xbox, from a development standpoint, I can see why they'd do that, but hardware wise, I am actually really interested in getting my hands on one. I worked on the graphics chip.
...has that happened yet? The ultimate hack! *dun dun dun* Wow, I just want to go watch Angelina Jolie talk about her coprocessor now :)