"...Sure they may have backups but screw it I'll live"
More than just backups. When you "delete" something your just setting a Is_Deleted flag on their database. As far as facebook is concerned, your information is just as easily available as if you were an active member.
I thought the point of WCF was that it supported standards so that Windows apps could interop with the outside world.
Why is it bad that a test project is using WCF? Maybe I'm wrong, but I would think that it would be good to test with realistic applications that might be coming from Windows shops.
"Really this is likely just another effect of the seating of the soon to be current US president. States like this, and thier white population, has been courted by the republicans for 40 years, rallied by the fear of the person who looks differnt. Times have changed, but the fear mongering has lasting effect."
I'd like to point out that Robert Ford is a Democrat and he's black.
Windows puts one application on one core (unless you tell it to).
Would be correct?!? Threading is a messy thing. You have 10 times more testing to do than in a single threaded application. And a multy-threaded application is slower than single threaded one when the CPU is powerful enough to run it in one core.
Maybe, but that's not what you said. You said "Windows isn't built for more than one core CPU," which is false.
You also misquoted me, I said "Windows does not put one application on one core (unless you tell it to)." Not that it does put one application on one core, which is what you said.
The fact that testing a multithreaded app being more difficult than a single threaded app is true; but that has nothing to do with Windows. Also, a multithreaded app will be slower on a single core machine, but it will not be slower on a multicore machine (all things being equal). Doing two things at once will always be faster than doing one thing at a time. Again, with all things being equal (processor speed, etc).
Considering that
1. In 2009 probably all cpus will be multicore, 2. Individual cores aren't getting much faster
I think that it would be foolish not to take advantage of the extra core in any future (cpu intensive) development.
The problem is the OS. Windows isn't built for more than one core CPU. It only can put one application to one core and that's it. And sharing the cores isn't really that fast. Therefor isn't the multi-core CPU-s very useful for such big applications like today's games. But buying a multi-core GPU is more useful because the threading model should be built-in in the cards or drivers. Of course 32-bit XP can't handle more than 3G ram.
Windows does not put one application on one core (unless you tell it to). Windows, like other modern OSes assigns threads to cores. If the game is written for a single CPU (or 1 core cpu), Windows cannot magically make the game scale out to multicore/multicpu.
Yes. The ISS is in a decaying orbit (a non-decaying orbit would be way-the-fuck-up-there and at blistering velocity), which means the toolbag is too. The difference? The toolbag won't be getting an orbit boost from a spacecraft later.
Yes, I know. I was actually wondering how long it would take before the bag reentered the atmosphere. Any clue?
Yeah. I do. I figured that was the problem. So, my question is this...
Is it better to have 2GB of dual-channeled RAM, or is it better to have 3GB of non-dual-channeled RAM (which is what I have if I leave all 4 sticks in)?
"The ambiguity in most of the benchmark results we saw today sends a very clear message: on todayâ(TM)s systems, the advantages of Dual Channel memory setups are negligible for average users.
While some memory specific benchmarks, those designed to saturate bus bandwidth, demonstrated the Dual Channel systemâ(TM)s superiority, very few real-life applications took advantage of it, and some games even managed to perform better on the Single Channel setup."
My logic is as follows: if the extra GB keeps you from paging out to disk even a small number of times, it probably more than compensates for the small performance disadvantage of one channel vs dual. Of course, YMMV.
Another 4 years of that Jew Puppet Bu$Hitler Chimpy McHaliburtin
I am sure her down syndrome kid will make a good ReThuglican. It is already smaller than Chimpy the Jew Boy.
Vote for Hope Vote for Change Vote for Obama.
Just so you know.... this kind of talk actually hurts your cause... or did you really think someone would read your comment and say "oh wow, she really is a jew puppet cunt; I'm going to vote for Obama now!" ?.
And when Vista came out, many new PCs were still shipping with 512M RAM. Particularly the bargin PCs that Mr. Sixpack tends to buy.
True, but the "Mohave" project seems to be geared toward PCs that people will be buying now, not a year or two ago. Even the cheapest PCs now should be able to run Vista adequately.
No censorship? Perhaps you are referring to some of the channels that host Howard Stern and such, but all of the music channels I listen to on XM still bleep out lyrics.
Only on the non XL channels. I see nothing wrong with that.
Good idea. Take two companies that can't pay the bills, and put them together. After a merger, all the suits stay, and they can half of the rest of the employees because they're redundant. So you get one company with twice the fat... and they'll be able to pay the bills *better* than the old companies?
While in some ways there will be fat; now they won't be competing (or killing) each other paying for talent and licensing fees... $500m for Stern, $300m for Oprah, something similar for baseball, etc.
These people and services were playing the two companies against each other.... now they can't do that.
"At least one neighborhood in Queens, NY just got broadband within the last year. "
Really? Which neighborhood (I'm from Queens)? From my understanding politics is keeping FIOS out, but I thought the rest of the borough was covered by Time Warner and Verizon DSL.
"...rest of my issues are just finding things because they've moved... well... when you have a new UI, things move to different places and such"
I've had Vista on one of my machines for a while now... to be honest I don't care where anything is, I just type what I'm looking for in the search box.
"LOW! Jebus H. Tap dancin' Christ that thing is slooooow!"
I keep hearing people say that (so I'm assuming that not everyone is lying), but Vista (SP1) ran well on a virtual machine allocated only 768MB of RAM. The host machine is an AMD 2.4GHZ x2 with a run of the mill hard drive, so nothing special); Its the most I could allocate it on my machine and it ran comparable to an XP VM running on 512MB.
"Anything less intensive, painful and stressful than chemotherapy is a good thing IMO, even if this new method isn't too effective on aggressive cancers there's still hope that it can be applied for more general cases and help people live normal lives instead of being stereotypical "cancer patients"."
Indeed; I think my father fared well because chemo didn't make him sick as it makes others, so he was able to take in more chemo for a longer time, allowing it to kill more of the cancer.
"If you are diagnosed with cancer today -- any kind of cancer, and remember the word "cancer" covers an enormous range of disease -- your chances of long-term survival are much, much better than they were five years ago. Five years ago your chances were much better than ten years ago."
This is exactly what I told my father when he was diagnosed 2 years ago w/ stage 3 lymphoma. He's still around and doing well thanks to the hard work of these researchers.
Slashdot Mirror
"...Sure they may have backups but screw it I'll live"
More than just backups. When you "delete" something your just setting a Is_Deleted flag on their database. As far as facebook is concerned, your information is just as easily available as if you were an active member.
I thought the point of WCF was that it supported standards so that Windows apps could interop with the outside world.
Why is it bad that a test project is using WCF? Maybe I'm wrong, but I would think that it would be good to test with realistic applications that might be coming from Windows shops.
"Really this is likely just another effect of the seating of the soon to be current US president. States like this, and thier white population, has been courted by the republicans for 40 years, rallied by the fear of the person who looks differnt. Times have changed, but the fear mongering has lasting effect."
I'd like to point out that Robert Ford is a Democrat and he's black.
Linky: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Ford_(politician)
Windows puts one application on one core (unless you tell it to).
Would be correct?!?
Threading is a messy thing. You have 10 times more testing to do than in a single threaded application.
And a multy-threaded application is slower than single threaded one when the CPU is powerful enough to run it in one core.
Maybe, but that's not what you said. You said "Windows isn't built for more than one core CPU," which is false.
You also misquoted me, I said "Windows does not put one application on one core (unless you tell it to)." Not that it does put one application on one core, which is what you said.
The fact that testing a multithreaded app being more difficult than a single threaded app is true; but that has nothing to do with Windows. Also, a multithreaded app will be slower on a single core machine, but it will not be slower on a multicore machine (all things being equal). Doing two things at once will always be faster than doing one thing at a time. Again, with all things being equal (processor speed, etc).
Considering that
1. In 2009 probably all cpus will be multicore,
2. Individual cores aren't getting much faster
I think that it would be foolish not to take advantage of the extra core in any future (cpu intensive) development.
The problem is the OS. Windows isn't built for more than one core CPU. It only can put one application to one core and that's it. And sharing the cores isn't really that fast. Therefor isn't the multi-core CPU-s very useful for such big applications like today's games. But buying a multi-core GPU is more useful because the threading model should be built-in in the cards or drivers. Of course 32-bit XP can't handle more than 3G ram.
Windows does not put one application on one core (unless you tell it to). Windows, like other modern OSes assigns threads to cores. If the game is written for a single CPU (or 1 core cpu), Windows cannot magically make the game scale out to multicore/multicpu.
Yes. The ISS is in a decaying orbit (a non-decaying orbit would be way-the-fuck-up-there and at blistering velocity), which means the toolbag is too. The difference? The toolbag won't be getting an orbit boost from a spacecraft later.
Yes, I know. I was actually wondering how long it would take before the bag reentered the atmosphere. Any clue?
I don't recall seeing this figure, but maybe someone has seen it.... When will the toolbag enter the atmosphere? Months? Days? Years?
... but not enough to pay $500 for it. I like it better than OOo, but not THAT much better.
Yeah. I do. I figured that was the problem. So, my question is this...
Is it better to have 2GB of dual-channeled RAM, or is it better to have 3GB of non-dual-channeled RAM (which is what I have if I leave all 4 sticks in)?
Thanks!
I'm not a hardware guy but....
This link (from 2005) has some benchmarks between dual and single: http://www.tcmagazine.com/articles.php?action=show&id=128
From the last page:
"The ambiguity in most of the benchmark results we saw today sends a very clear message: on todayâ(TM)s systems, the advantages of Dual Channel memory setups are negligible for average users.
While some memory specific benchmarks, those designed to saturate bus bandwidth, demonstrated the Dual Channel systemâ(TM)s superiority, very few real-life applications took advantage of it, and some games even managed to perform better on the Single Channel setup."
My logic is as follows: if the extra GB keeps you from paging out to disk even a small number of times, it probably more than compensates for the small performance disadvantage of one channel vs dual. Of course, YMMV.
It also gives me access to 4 gigs of ram with zero driver problems, unlike XP64, and the general OS responsiveness is improved over XP.
How did you manage to accomplish this? Vista only shows 3 and a little bit gigs of RAM, even though my BIOS sees 4. Any help would be appreciated.
Do you have Vista32 installed?
Palin is still a ReThuglican Jew Puppet cunt!
Another 4 years of that Jew Puppet Bu$Hitler Chimpy McHaliburtin
I am sure her down syndrome kid will make a good ReThuglican. It is already smaller than Chimpy the Jew Boy.
Vote for Hope
Vote for Change
Vote for Obama.
Just so you know.... this kind of talk actually hurts your cause... or did you really think someone would read your comment and say "oh wow, she really is a jew puppet cunt; I'm going to vote for Obama now!" ?.
"That relationship ended that night."
The look on her face must have been classic. Good for you man!
Why would you buy Linux support from MS? You would think you'd get better support buying it from, oh, a lemonade stand perhaps?
Because Microsoft is know for excellent support?
And when Vista came out, many new PCs were still shipping with 512M RAM. Particularly the bargin PCs that Mr. Sixpack tends to buy.
True, but the "Mohave" project seems to be geared toward PCs that people will be buying now, not a year or two ago. Even the cheapest PCs now should be able to run Vista adequately.
What's wrong with superfetch
Core Duo 1.8 GHZ, 2G Ram ... Something makes me think that this is still beefier than what most Joe SixPacks are running at home.
That may be true; but Joe Sixpack isn't going to the store to buy an OS, he's going to the store to buy a new PC...
No censorship? Perhaps you are referring to some of the channels that host Howard Stern and such, but all of the music channels I listen to on XM still bleep out lyrics.
Only on the non XL channels. I see nothing wrong with that.
Good idea. Take two companies that can't pay the bills, and put them together. After a merger, all the suits stay, and they can half of the rest of the employees because they're redundant. So you get one company with twice the fat... and they'll be able to pay the bills *better* than the old companies?
While in some ways there will be fat; now they won't be competing (or killing) each other paying for talent and licensing fees... $500m for Stern, $300m for Oprah, something similar for baseball, etc.
These people and services were playing the two companies against each other.... now they can't do that.
How could a single, monopolistic provider of a service, nationwide, be "a good thing for consumers and be in the public interest" ????
Has Orwellian doublespeak progressed so far??
Because Satellite Radio is not a monopoly; it is competing against FREE terrestrial radio, mp3 players, ipods, FREE internet radio, etc.
"At least one neighborhood in Queens, NY just got broadband within the last year. "
Really? Which neighborhood (I'm from Queens)? From my understanding politics is keeping FIOS out, but I thought the rest of the borough was covered by Time Warner and Verizon DSL.
"...rest of my issues are just finding things because they've moved... well... when you have a new UI, things move to different places and such"
I've had Vista on one of my machines for a while now... to be honest I don't care where anything is, I just type what I'm looking for in the search box.
"LOW! Jebus H. Tap dancin' Christ that thing is slooooow!"
I keep hearing people say that (so I'm assuming that not everyone is lying), but Vista (SP1) ran well on a virtual machine allocated only 768MB of RAM. The host machine is an AMD 2.4GHZ x2 with a run of the mill hard drive, so nothing special); Its the most I could allocate it on my machine and it ran comparable to an XP VM running on 512MB.
I guess my experience is just different.
"Anything less intensive, painful and stressful than chemotherapy is a good thing IMO, even if this new method isn't too effective on aggressive cancers there's still hope that it can be applied for more general cases and help people live normal lives instead of being stereotypical "cancer patients"."
Indeed; I think my father fared well because chemo didn't make him sick as it makes others, so he was able to take in more chemo for a longer time, allowing it to kill more of the cancer.
"If you are diagnosed with cancer today -- any kind of cancer, and remember the word "cancer" covers an enormous range of disease -- your chances of long-term survival are much, much better than they were five years ago. Five years ago your chances were much better than ten years ago."
This is exactly what I told my father when he was diagnosed 2 years ago w/ stage 3 lymphoma. He's still around and doing well thanks to the hard work of these researchers.
Some of these look great. Does anyone know where to get the high resolution version of any of the pictures from the article?