True and that's fine, but has ARM or IBM given any indication that they plan to go from dual/tri-core setups to "thousands-of-cores" setups? That's what I'm really referring to. I guess I'm just not convinced that it's the best way forward.
You're probably American, but you might be glad to know that there's a place in England where people could quite literally say "t' t-cells attack t' virus". Not quite what you're looking for, but close enough!
I'm all for newer, faster processors. Hell, I'm all for processors with lots of cores that can be used, but wouldn't completely redoing all of the software libraries and such that we've got used to cause a hell of a divide in developers? Sure, if you only develop on an x86 platform, you're fine, but what if you want to write software for ARM or PPC? Processors that might not adopt the "thousands of cores" model? Would it not be better to design a processor that can intelligently utilise single threads across multiple cores? (I know this isn't an easy task, but I don't see it being much harder than what Intel is proposing here). Or is this some long-time plan by intel to try to lock people into their platforms even more?
I'm actually in a similar situation as you, still on a ginger PAYG sim I've had for years and currently I just top up about £20 a month to get around 600 free text messages. I keep the credit and use the free messages, so they effectively cost me nothing and it's still PAYG. Still 10p per text is still pretty high when you factor in what it actually costs the operator. I believe I read in a different article that it costs them something like 0.01p to send a text message.
I think the article is still somewhat Valid, though, even if it does gloss over some of the details a bit. The short end of it is that a SSD will use less power when idle, but more power at full load than a typical hard drive will, which may be a real factor when deciding which to purchase.
Personally, though, I don't see the real benefits to them in 99% of situations. Their performance is only marginally better than standard HDD's and, as you pointed out, MOST people wont regularly thrash the HDD anyway. Plus, they're expensive - you could spend a little extra on a bigger and/or additional batter and some more RAM, get a massive regular hard drive and probably still come to less than half the price of a 32Gb SSD.
Hopefully when the technology matures a bit, they'll be to HDD's what the common DVD was to CD's.
In the UK, the Telecom Regulator OFCOM recently (as in a few days ago) started pushing our mobile operators to reduce the cost of sending and receiving text messages while abroad, where the price was often around 30p (60c!) or more just to send one. I hope this sets a precedent and they start to clamp down on the cost of sending regular, local messages as well.
What's versioning got to do with release dates? It even says in the summary that this is to be the first "fast-track" update, hence the relatively minor version jump. Firefox 3 was a huge leap over firefox 2, hence the major jump. 1.5 was more of an extension to FF1 than an entirely new version, so to me, at least, the inconsistent version numbers are consistent with the changes and additions to the browser.
If they keep hold of the spec and don't release it, you'll bitch about them not being very friendly.
If they release the spec to everyone and promise not to go after any Open Source projects that may take advantage of it, you'll bitch about them still trying to line their own pockets.
Really, Microsoft has no chance of pleasing you, do they? Just accept that it's good for everyone to have open standards, regardless of the possible ulterior motives involved.
I think it's because everyone loves to hate Microsoft, but apart from a few tinfoil hats claiming your privacy is in violation, not many people can think of anything bad to say about Google.
Instead of randomly generating pictures or something as someone suggested above, why not make it generate say a 64k program, keep iterating through this until you get an executable that will actually RUN (Without crashing) and see what happens.
Perhaps in days gone by it would have been shocking for browsers to use so much memory, but the memory being used is directly related to the content on the sites it browse. We recently seen studies indicating that the average website has tripled in size in the last couple of years alone, imagine how much bigger websites have got in the last 10-15 years? More images, higher resolution/dpi ones at that, flash, plus there's all the scripting engines and other plugins that have accumulated as well. While I comlpetely agree that software bloat shouldn't be accepted (Nero, I'm looking at you) and if anything, programs should become MORE efficient with age (in an ideal world), I think browsers could be one exception since the content they're handling has got so much bigger. So really, the best way to indicate progress here is to pit the fully featured browsers against each other and see who comes out on top. Probably still wont be firefox, but I bet the big three still use a lot of RAM compared to what was the norm a few years ago.
Since UIQ is based on Symbian, how will this affect Sony Ericsson phones? Technically they're in direct competition with Nokia, so if they sell their stake in Symbian, will they come to some sort of licensing agreement or do you think we'll see Sony either develop their own OS or switch to Android/Windows Mobile?
Slashdot Mirror
True and that's fine, but has ARM or IBM given any indication that they plan to go from dual/tri-core setups to "thousands-of-cores" setups? That's what I'm really referring to.
I guess I'm just not convinced that it's the best way forward.
You still got modded offtopic.
ULTRA FAIL1!!!!!!!!!!
Oh wait, so did I. Fuck.
The sound of one hand clapping.
You're probably American, but you might be glad to know that there's a place in England where people could quite literally say "t' t-cells attack t' virus". Not quite what you're looking for, but close enough!
Now, put t' kettle on!
I'm all for newer, faster processors. Hell, I'm all for processors with lots of cores that can be used, but wouldn't completely redoing all of the software libraries and such that we've got used to cause a hell of a divide in developers?
Sure, if you only develop on an x86 platform, you're fine, but what if you want to write software for ARM or PPC? Processors that might not adopt the "thousands of cores" model?
Would it not be better to design a processor that can intelligently utilise single threads across multiple cores? (I know this isn't an easy task, but I don't see it being much harder than what Intel is proposing here).
Or is this some long-time plan by intel to try to lock people into their platforms even more?
I think they'll do what's right.
For them.
I'm actually in a similar situation as you, still on a ginger PAYG sim I've had for years and currently I just top up about £20 a month to get around 600 free text messages. I keep the credit and use the free messages, so they effectively cost me nothing and it's still PAYG.
Still 10p per text is still pretty high when you factor in what it actually costs the operator. I believe I read in a different article that it costs them something like 0.01p to send a text message.
I think the article is still somewhat Valid, though, even if it does gloss over some of the details a bit.
The short end of it is that a SSD will use less power when idle, but more power at full load than a typical hard drive will, which may be a real factor when deciding which to purchase.
Personally, though, I don't see the real benefits to them in 99% of situations. Their performance is only marginally better than standard HDD's and, as you pointed out, MOST people wont regularly thrash the HDD anyway. Plus, they're expensive - you could spend a little extra on a bigger and/or additional batter and some more RAM, get a massive regular hard drive and probably still come to less than half the price of a 32Gb SSD.
Hopefully when the technology matures a bit, they'll be to HDD's what the common DVD was to CD's.
Shouldn't he be a philosopher?
In the UK, the Telecom Regulator OFCOM recently (as in a few days ago) started pushing our mobile operators to reduce the cost of sending and receiving text messages while abroad, where the price was often around 30p (60c!) or more just to send one.
I hope this sets a precedent and they start to clamp down on the cost of sending regular, local messages as well.
What's versioning got to do with release dates?
It even says in the summary that this is to be the first "fast-track" update, hence the relatively minor version jump.
Firefox 3 was a huge leap over firefox 2, hence the major jump. 1.5 was more of an extension to FF1 than an entirely new version, so to me, at least, the inconsistent version numbers are consistent with the changes and additions to the browser.
If they keep hold of the spec and don't release it, you'll bitch about them not being very friendly.
If they release the spec to everyone and promise not to go after any Open Source projects that may take advantage of it, you'll bitch about them still trying to line their own pockets.
Really, Microsoft has no chance of pleasing you, do they? Just accept that it's good for everyone to have open standards, regardless of the possible ulterior motives involved.
I think it's because everyone loves to hate Microsoft, but apart from a few tinfoil hats claiming your privacy is in violation, not many people can think of anything bad to say about Google.
Package a movie with a couple of hunks and babes as well as some explosions and dramatic music, and nobody is going to care about its accuracy.
Well, except sad bastards like us.
They are well known to science fiction readers, otherwise not so much
Excuse ME, I'm MORE than aware of what they are and I DON'T read science fiction.
.
.
.
.
.
Star trek ftw!
He's a technology teacher and he doesn't know what "WTF" stands for. Just what technology is he actually teaching about?
I don't care how geeky I look, if I lose my eyesight I'll wear whatever is required to see again.
Instead of randomly generating pictures or something as someone suggested above, why not make it generate say a 64k program, keep iterating through this until you get an executable that will actually RUN (Without crashing) and see what happens.
Someone already did, about 20 threads up from this one.
Well, as you say, it's slashdot after all...
Your name is intriguing.
(Off-topic, I know, but what the hell...)
Notices what?
Perhaps in days gone by it would have been shocking for browsers to use so much memory, but the memory being used is directly related to the content on the sites it browse.
We recently seen studies indicating that the average website has tripled in size in the last couple of years alone, imagine how much bigger websites have got in the last 10-15 years?
More images, higher resolution/dpi ones at that, flash, plus there's all the scripting engines and other plugins that have accumulated as well.
While I comlpetely agree that software bloat shouldn't be accepted (Nero, I'm looking at you) and if anything, programs should become MORE efficient with age (in an ideal world), I think browsers could be one exception since the content they're handling has got so much bigger.
So really, the best way to indicate progress here is to pit the fully featured browsers against each other and see who comes out on top. Probably still wont be firefox, but I bet the big three still use a lot of RAM compared to what was the norm a few years ago.
I'm more curious as to why nobody's noticed that his INTERNAL software incorrectly identifies the OS.
Is that what Android was meant to be?
Since UIQ is based on Symbian, how will this affect Sony Ericsson phones?
Technically they're in direct competition with Nokia, so if they sell their stake in Symbian, will they come to some sort of licensing agreement or do you think we'll see Sony either develop their own OS or switch to Android/Windows Mobile?