One more thing: Moore's law does not apply to EVERY processor, only the leading generation vs. the predecessor. There's no reason to believe the notebook will use the current processor generation, and in fact likely it will not. This has no impact at all on the validity of the law as other processors will exist that follow the law.
What always confused me about Moore's law, and continues to confuse me, is what kinda law is it anyway? Legal law, science law?
If it was a legal law, why aren't the cheap laptop makers in jail?
If it was a science law, I'd expect cheap laptop makers who try to break the law to create some sort of very ridiculously looking paradox as they implode upon themselves.
Apparently it's some third type of law, the kind that always gets mentioned in press at least twice every 24 hours, and every single damn time they get it wrong.
I find it hard to get any work done with just a kernel. Oh, perhaps what the poster is really talking about is Linux distributions. Ah!
Why do you have to post your thought process in written form for all of us to read? We all know distributions are meant in the context, we don't need your brain crutch for this one.
In that case, Ubuntu has made major major progress and I would say is "mother" ready. I, in fact, have my family of four and my parents doing their daily computing on Ubuntu.
Failed on the Desktop? Hardly.
I got my mommy, poppy and retarded sister on Amiga. Should I declare Amiga winner on the desktop?
Once the problem becomes well defined and stable, Linux will catch up and O/S will commoditize.
What won't commoditize is Linux support for the plethora of Windows apps. The current Wine-based efforts are not something enterprise would touch with a 20 foot pole in most cases.
And from what it seems, another thing that won't commoditize is the Windows experience onto Linux (out of principle or whatever have you). If even Linux users would be disgusted at the prospect of having to clone Windows in their free contributions.
The attack on Windows could come from only two placed currently: web apps crawling back to the desktop, and mobile apps crawling back to the desktop.
Both markets are relatively undeveloped (in the grand picture) to say if it'll have any effect on Windows' market share
BTW - How come their new, more secure OS lists EVERY USER NAME at login? (and you can't turn it off...) Lets play "Guess which user has a weak password"! The game is much easier if you start with all of the user names.
Nice rant there. You can turn it off (first), and second, the username is not supposed to be part of the secret, just the password is (I know for example your Slashdot username is Gription. Got weak password?). Ubuntu will also show (among other distros) list of users on startup.
I suppose you think when someone claims to be able to eat a horse, they actually have the capacity to devour an entire equine. Relax, it's a figure of speech.
My ancestors used to consume equine for subsistence, so if someone would say they can eat a horse I'll expect them to. If not, I'll kill them damn liars, and ceremonially drink wine from their skull (something my ancestors used to do a lot too).
My ancestors also didn't know the concept of hyperbole, much like readers of tech news.
Good point about GPL3, but I don't think many people will jump on that bandwagon. The Linux kernel itself won't. Some marginal projects moved to GPL3, and they have much more popular GPL2/BSD/Mozilla (or whatever) licensed and corporate supported alternatives.
The OSS world is already quite divided and I've the feeling Microsoft is consolidating them (in the face of a threat) rather than diving them. Some marginal folks will always think up something weird but that's not so important.
Why Microsoft went into these deals anyway? Sure: "FUD".. Whatever, that's not a good reason enough. You can't stop Linux with just some random deals with minor distros and some FUD.
Does anyone have a hint of what their actual strategy is? So far they are just eliminating some smaller distros on the market and making it easier for the bigger distros to gain further traction.
Is this the idea? Help consolidate the market, so you have only 2-3 major distros to sue eventually for patent infringement?
It's becoming increasingly clear that the most important use of virtualization is not to consolidate hardware boxes but to protect applications from the vagaries of the operating environments they run on. It's all about 'containerization,'
Don't trust "it's all about" or "it turns out that to the contrary" or "set to fully replace" statements, especially when there's lack of evidence of what is claimed.
Hosting services use virtualization to offer 10-20 virtual server per one physical machine, I and many people I know use virtual machines to test many configurations we can't afford to have separate physical machines for.
So even though it's also about "containerization" (is "isolation" a bad word all of a sudden?), it's not ALL about it.
Will have to reread this, but it doesnt come off as news but a rant. And no I wont install the toolbar.
"Rant" ?
CmdrTaco is being rebel, anti-establishment, rage against the machine, fuck the system! This is what he's done here, and he deserves *respect* old man.
Back in the days, when we were pissed about religion, wars and social injustice, we dressed like goths and sang bad rock and roll and emo music.
But today, thanks to the world wide web, we take the next level, and all this unrelenting energy in today's youth comes in the form of a rant against a toolbar that rates sites. And I say, bravo.
Just as demonstrated with morse code, you can have inifinite combinations.. with just one key. It doesn't make it practical, since it's hard to develop an industry around *one* morse code typer with 80 years of experience.
It's easier to develop an industry around millions of teens who don't want to learn a lot to use their gadget properly.
since all the rage now is dynamically changing input device, ala iPhone, but we can't exactly forget tactile feedback, a mobile version of this comes to mind.
Let's not forget that there's OS X underneath as well, which is certainly more patchable than most phone operating systems. Which is probably for the better, as it'll be one of the most-targeted phones given its initial popularity and notoriety. Plus, we can probably assume that any OS X exploits found, or at least for Safari, would exist on Macs and iPhones alike.
I dare you explain why would OSX be more patchable than other phone operating system.
And if you start explaining it's because they based it off of a full-blown desktop OS, I'll smack you in the head with a Windows Mobile brick.
iPhone patches will be delivered automatically through iTunes, the same way iPod ones are. So while you won't get them OTA, it is still better than most cellphones which require you to go out and find patch installers, and in some cases these can only be obtained from official servicing agents, not over the web.
Reminds me of the Flash 2004 fiasco - see, they didn't have time to actually finish the documentation. So they thought: we'd just spend less time on making it super easy to UPDATE the help after the fact, and we have all the time in the world to deliver updates!
Said, done. 2004 shipped with unfinished but update-able manuals. Then we waited for update... waited.. waited. A tiny updated was delivered at some point, but the never update never came. Instead, they shipped Flash 8 (next version), which came with equally crappy, but *updateable* manual.
Long live updates, for they mean we can shit in a box and deliver it as a complete product!
Brendan Eich is not only the original inventor of JavaScript, he's one of the smartest guys I've ever met. Calling him an "airhead" is really pretty sad.
Being smart != being right.
While JS is a nice scripting language, the choice of basing an entire platform on it is horrible and we see the disadvantages in every single XUL app out there.
Threads aren't nice, soft and warm from a programming point of view: yes, they are hard and error prone, if used poorly. No one sais decent applications should be easy to do. XUL is just "making it nice" from programmer's point of view while abandoning the point of view of the user.
While I'm all for transactional memory or whatever your threads-workaround favorite is, the matter of fact is this is still being researched and worked on, and threads are used in practice to deliver.
I'm not saying put threads in the userspace (i.e. web pages than run in 10 threads), but put it in the engine for XUL, so Firefox can perform decently. It's not that much to ask for a browser that claims to be the best in the world.
All existing Q6xx0 solutions are dual-dual core ie two dualcores sharing same FSB - and that is _NOT_ the same as true QC as Barcelona is claimed to be.
That difference is enough to make Barcelona the main choice for many core servers even if it were made with old K8 and not the new K10 cores.
Intel should have true QC chips in a year or so...
You're very convinced the difference will be drastic, that's very funny thing to be when you never saw a single benchmark.
According to Intel's engineers there's no identifiable bottleneckeck in a design that uses two 2-core dies on a single chip. And after all, if two dies was so terribly horrible, people would use multi-processor systems long before we saw multi-core systems.
Intel is moving to single die 4-core processors, sure, but their technology, design and process is better in all other respects, which COULD easily be enough to leave AMD in the dust.
People won't buy a 4-core processor to make an art statement, they'll get it to do work, so they can't care less if it's a "true" 4-core cpu or just.. well.. is a cpu that has 4-cores.
If you're smart you still recieve things like bills and bank statements via regular mail so that people can't steal them off your hard drive. Or worse, so they don't get lost when your email system goes down. You also need something by which to recieve physical objects like clothing, books, etc. which have been ordered online. At least, you will until the 3D printer takes off.
No actually I use e-banking and pay my bills online. The stealing argument is very weak. Anyone could steal them of my real mail just as well (would the hell someone be so interested in my bills).
no form of mass communication ever dies, it just moves out of the limelight. and then it's called "dead" by people wishing to make a melodrama out of the evolution of media
Well, the telegraph died, and mail (physical mail) is almost dead.
Though to think e-mail is dead is quite funny, since they apparently mean it's not used in socializing activities, which it's not used in principle. You could communicate with someone by email but you need other means to get that email.
Adobe currently ship 2 engines, only AS3 (ECMAScript 4) runs on tamarin. Since Tamarin is set to become the reference ECMAScript implementation (perhaps one of many justifications for contributing the code to Mozilla), I'd say Adobe do care.
It already is the reference implementation, of ECMAScript portable (no eval() ). There's no better. And still, it's a superset. It'll always be a superset, since Flash isn't a browser, and needs some things working differently, and some more things ECMA doesn't have.
If you mean the AS1/2 engine - it's frozen, just forget about it. It's there just for back-compat.
If things go to plan, Adobe and Mozilla will be both be using Tamarin to host the next major ECMAScript revision (Javascript 3).
I wonder what would've happened if Adobe didn't donate their engine.
I thought the article was clear, ECMAscript will not use threads to implement coroutines.
That's just the opinion of the Firefox tech airhead. Adobe won't exactly care what he things when it implements threading in Flash. Firefox could disable the feature if they're so scared.
Slashdot Mirror
Look at Vista...can you imagine trying to run that on a PII or PIII CPU?
Bad example since Vista is heavy on RAM requirements (and graphics card requirements if you use Glass). It would run fine on a PIII.
The High Energy Laser Technology Demonstrator project actually shoots stuff
Who wrote that summary, George Bush?
Exactly. What a frickin' retarded argument...
Since this is the norm when discussing Moore's "law", I'd rather see one of those mythical non-retarded arguments regarding it. There are none.
One more thing: Moore's law does not apply to EVERY processor, only the leading generation vs. the predecessor. There's no reason to believe the notebook will use the current processor generation, and in fact likely it will not. This has no impact at all on the validity of the law as other processors will exist that follow the law.
What always confused me about Moore's law, and continues to confuse me, is what kinda law is it anyway? Legal law, science law?
If it was a legal law, why aren't the cheap laptop makers in jail?
If it was a science law, I'd expect cheap laptop makers who try to break the law to create some sort of very ridiculously looking paradox as they implode upon themselves.
Apparently it's some third type of law, the kind that always gets mentioned in press at least twice every 24 hours, and every single damn time they get it wrong.
I find it hard to get any work done with just a kernel.
Oh, perhaps what the poster is really talking about is Linux distributions. Ah!
Why do you have to post your thought process in written form for all of us to read? We all know distributions are meant in the context, we don't need your brain crutch for this one.
In that case, Ubuntu has made major major progress and I would say is "mother" ready. I, in fact, have my family of four and my parents doing their daily computing on Ubuntu.
Failed on the Desktop? Hardly.
I got my mommy, poppy and retarded sister on Amiga. Should I declare Amiga winner on the desktop?
Once the problem becomes well defined and stable, Linux will catch up and O/S will commoditize.
What won't commoditize is Linux support for the plethora of Windows apps. The current Wine-based efforts are not something enterprise would touch with a 20 foot pole in most cases.
And from what it seems, another thing that won't commoditize is the Windows experience onto Linux (out of principle or whatever have you). If even Linux users would be disgusted at the prospect of having to clone Windows in their free contributions.
The attack on Windows could come from only two placed currently: web apps crawling back to the desktop, and mobile apps crawling back to the desktop.
Both markets are relatively undeveloped (in the grand picture) to say if it'll have any effect on Windows' market share
BTW - How come their new, more secure OS lists EVERY USER NAME at login? (and you can't turn it off...)
Lets play "Guess which user has a weak password"! The game is much easier if you start with all of the user names.
Nice rant there. You can turn it off (first), and second, the username is not supposed to be part of the secret, just the password is (I know for example your Slashdot username is Gription. Got weak password?). Ubuntu will also show (among other distros) list of users on startup.
I suppose you think when someone claims to be able to eat a horse, they actually have the capacity to devour an entire equine. Relax, it's a figure of speech.
My ancestors used to consume equine for subsistence, so if someone would say they can eat a horse I'll expect them to. If not, I'll kill them damn liars, and ceremonially drink wine from their skull (something my ancestors used to do a lot too).
My ancestors also didn't know the concept of hyperbole, much like readers of tech news.
Good point about GPL3, but I don't think many people will jump on that bandwagon. The Linux kernel itself won't. Some marginal projects moved to GPL3, and they have much more popular GPL2/BSD/Mozilla (or whatever) licensed and corporate supported alternatives.
The OSS world is already quite divided and I've the feeling Microsoft is consolidating them (in the face of a threat) rather than diving them. Some marginal folks will always think up something weird but that's not so important.
> Can someone explain it to me...why Microsoft went into these deals anyway?
Yes.
Winux
And it'll be free and released under GPL3, right.
Why Microsoft went into these deals anyway? Sure: "FUD".. Whatever, that's not a good reason enough. You can't stop Linux with just some random deals with minor distros and some FUD.
Does anyone have a hint of what their actual strategy is? So far they are just eliminating some smaller distros on the market and making it easier for the bigger distros to gain further traction.
Is this the idea? Help consolidate the market, so you have only 2-3 major distros to sue eventually for patent infringement?
It's becoming increasingly clear that the most important use of virtualization is not to consolidate hardware boxes but to protect applications from the vagaries of the operating environments they run on. It's all about 'containerization,'
Don't trust "it's all about" or "it turns out that to the contrary" or "set to fully replace" statements, especially when there's lack of evidence of what is claimed.
Hosting services use virtualization to offer 10-20 virtual server per one physical machine, I and many people I know use virtual machines to test many configurations we can't afford to have separate physical machines for.
So even though it's also about "containerization" (is "isolation" a bad word all of a sudden?), it's not ALL about it.
The bias is subtle, one of withholding information, and the people enforcing the bias are very good at making it look like they're in the right
Thanks for demonstrating this in your own opinion piece.
I already know who's going to sing the commercial ding - Marilyn Manson, you guys!
"That's not music,
And we are not a band,
We're five middle fingers,
on a motherf**king hand!"
Hmm, ok they may need to adapt the text a little.
Will have to reread this, but it doesnt come off as news but a rant. And no I wont install the toolbar.
"Rant" ?
CmdrTaco is being rebel, anti-establishment, rage against the machine, fuck the system! This is what he's done here, and he deserves *respect* old man.
Back in the days, when we were pissed about religion, wars and social injustice, we dressed like goths and sang bad rock and roll and emo music.
But today, thanks to the world wide web, we take the next level, and all this unrelenting energy in today's youth comes in the form of a rant against a toolbar that rates sites. And I say, bravo.
It stores the password in plane text
Shit, that's totally insecure! Way to go, Mozilla!
Just as demonstrated with morse code, you can have inifinite combinations.. with just one key. It doesn't make it practical, since it's hard to develop an industry around *one* morse code typer with 80 years of experience.
It's easier to develop an industry around millions of teens who don't want to learn a lot to use their gadget properly.
since all the rage now is dynamically changing input device, ala iPhone, but we can't exactly forget tactile feedback, a mobile version of this comes to mind.
Let's not forget that there's OS X underneath as well, which is certainly more patchable than most phone operating systems. Which is probably for the better, as it'll be one of the most-targeted phones given its initial popularity and notoriety. Plus, we can probably assume that any OS X exploits found, or at least for Safari, would exist on Macs and iPhones alike.
I dare you explain why would OSX be more patchable than other phone operating system.
And if you start explaining it's because they based it off of a full-blown desktop OS, I'll smack you in the head with a Windows Mobile brick.
iPhone patches will be delivered automatically through iTunes, the same way iPod ones are. So while you won't get them OTA, it is still better than most cellphones which require you to go out and find patch installers, and in some cases these can only be obtained from official servicing agents, not over the web.
Reminds me of the Flash 2004 fiasco - see, they didn't have time to actually finish the documentation. So they thought: we'd just spend less time on making it super easy to UPDATE the help after the fact, and we have all the time in the world to deliver updates!
Said, done. 2004 shipped with unfinished but update-able manuals. Then we waited for update... waited.. waited. A tiny updated was delivered at some point, but the never update never came. Instead, they shipped Flash 8 (next version), which came with equally crappy, but *updateable* manual.
Long live updates, for they mean we can shit in a box and deliver it as a complete product!
Brendan Eich is not only the original inventor of JavaScript, he's one of the smartest guys I've ever met. Calling him an "airhead" is really pretty sad.
Being smart != being right.
While JS is a nice scripting language, the choice of basing an entire platform on it is horrible and we see the disadvantages in every single XUL app out there.
Threads aren't nice, soft and warm from a programming point of view: yes, they are hard and error prone, if used poorly. No one sais decent applications should be easy to do. XUL is just "making it nice" from programmer's point of view while abandoning the point of view of the user.
While I'm all for transactional memory or whatever your threads-workaround favorite is, the matter of fact is this is still being researched and worked on, and threads are used in practice to deliver.
I'm not saying put threads in the userspace (i.e. web pages than run in 10 threads), but put it in the engine for XUL, so Firefox can perform decently. It's not that much to ask for a browser that claims to be the best in the world.
... it NEVER MADE _true_ QC CPU...
All existing Q6xx0 solutions are dual-dual core ie two dualcores sharing same FSB - and that is _NOT_ the same as true QC as Barcelona is claimed to be.
That difference is enough to make Barcelona the main choice for many core servers even if it were made with old K8 and not the new K10 cores.
Intel should have true QC chips in a year or so...
You're very convinced the difference will be drastic, that's very funny thing to be when you never saw a single benchmark.
According to Intel's engineers there's no identifiable bottleneckeck in a design that uses two 2-core dies on a single chip. And after all, if two dies was so terribly horrible, people would use multi-processor systems long before we saw multi-core systems.
Intel is moving to single die 4-core processors, sure, but their technology, design and process is better in all other respects, which COULD easily be enough to leave AMD in the dust.
People won't buy a 4-core processor to make an art statement, they'll get it to do work, so they can't care less if it's a "true" 4-core cpu or just.. well.. is a cpu that has 4-cores.
If you're smart you still recieve things like bills and bank statements via regular mail so that people can't steal them off your hard drive. Or worse, so they don't get lost when your email system goes down. You also need something by which to recieve physical objects like clothing, books, etc. which have been ordered online. At least, you will until the 3D printer takes off.
No actually I use e-banking and pay my bills online. The stealing argument is very weak. Anyone could steal them of my real mail just as well (would the hell someone be so interested in my bills).
no form of mass communication ever dies, it just moves out of the limelight. and then it's called "dead" by people wishing to make a melodrama out of the evolution of media
Well, the telegraph died, and mail (physical mail) is almost dead.
Though to think e-mail is dead is quite funny, since they apparently mean it's not used in socializing activities, which it's not used in principle. You could communicate with someone by email but you need other means to get that email.
Slashdot, non-news for geeks.
Adobe currently ship 2 engines, only AS3 (ECMAScript 4) runs on tamarin. Since Tamarin is set to become the reference ECMAScript implementation (perhaps one of many justifications for contributing the code to Mozilla), I'd say Adobe do care.
It already is the reference implementation, of ECMAScript portable (no eval() ). There's no better. And still, it's a superset. It'll always be a superset, since Flash isn't a browser, and needs some things working differently, and some more things ECMA doesn't have.
If you mean the AS1/2 engine - it's frozen, just forget about it. It's there just for back-compat.
So the guy who created javascript is clueless?
If things go to plan, Adobe and Mozilla will be both be using Tamarin to host the next major ECMAScript revision (Javascript 3).
I wonder what would've happened if Adobe didn't donate their engine.
I thought the article was clear, ECMAscript will not use threads to implement coroutines.
That's just the opinion of the Firefox tech airhead. Adobe won't exactly care what he things when it implements threading in Flash. Firefox could disable the feature if they're so scared.