So if anything, the Mac has shown that people are choosing x86.
They chose x86 not because it's particularly future-proof as architecture, you know the reasons were completely different. Likewise for energy efficiency, that's got nothing to do with x86 in particular.
x86 was just the pragmatical choice, but you never know for how long: PowerPC used to be the pragmatical choice before it as well.
The market resoundingly rejected that idea when Intel tried to hoist IA64 on it.
They did it in a very bad moment and had poor developer tools. Yet, Microsoft ported Windows to IA64 and it worked out fine.
If x86 chips keep getting buggier and buggier in time because of legacy support issues, trust me, a day will come and people *will* switch away from x86, if given a sound alternative.
If anything, Mac has shown that you can even retain compatibility across CPU architecture for user-grade applications.
Some of these bugs are along the lines of "buffer overflow"; where a write-protect or non-execute bit for a page table entry is ignored. Others are floating point instruction non-coherencies, or memory corruptions -- outside of the range of permitted writing for the process -- running common instruction sequences.
It will be interesting to see what Intel has to say about this.
Yea! Damn, where's the Intel Opinion Center exactly when you need it!
Hardware has had built-in firmware/software for as long as I remember. BIOS is software. Microcode for even consumer CPUs has been done for as long as I remember, Pentium II had it. Apparently, the 8086 had microcode-based instructions.
Don't confuse microcode with firmware. Two different things. Microsode isn't intrinsically updateable, and may be placed in a read-only memory block.
We're talking about a few hundred million transistors. I imagine that detecting and fixing bugs when there's that many components involved is really, really difficult. Are other comparably complex processors better? How do AMD, VIA, Motorola, IBM, etc. fare?
It's not about size, it's about messiness. The current x86 architecture is just hacks upon hacks. Various CPU modes slapped on top in each generation. Commands abstracted into other commands or translated to RISC commands. Certain commands running on parallel and other not, complex branch prediction techniques.
And what is x64 if not yet one more layer of hacks upon x86.
All of this creates a prospect of having buggier and buggier chips in time because we can't get rid of the x86 legacy. It's not unlike the struggles Microsoft is having while trying to retain backwards compatibility of its OS.
Just like biological organisms eventually age, leave offspring and die, the technology cycle proceeds in the same fashion. This means we'll be seeing virtualizations and translations and hacks that keep compatibility to one turning point where someone will come up with a simple fast stable and clean solution and overtake the old market leaders.
Well, in these days of fast-paced business, business at the blink of an eye, at the speed of light, at the speed of spooky action at distance kinda speed, it's normal that companies would release products prematurely and then patch later.
Thankfully, software is very easy to patch post-release.
Now, the only thing left to do, is someone tell Intel that they're selling hardware.
It's kind of sad that a company who powers its hundreds of thousands of computers [redhat.com] in clusters with a trimmed down RedHat puts Linux second on the list of operating systems to support with its software.
You assume they built Google Desktop to run it on their own clustered computers? Or is this one blatantly fallacious argument you pulled off there.
How about counting the OS numbers on the machines they're targeting.
There's something that just doesn't seem quite right about your post. Ah, there it is. Here, lemme fix that for you: *I paid Microsoft $100 to post this. That's better...
How about "Microsoft paid me $200 to pay them $100 and post this". That's the entire truth.
And my take is: need both kinds of people, basically. Turning everyone into the same kind of "normal" person might just deprive society of some valuable skills and inclination. Turning "nerds" into "normal" persons would be as useful as the reverse: turning all artist types into mathematicians. You'd just lose a bunch of skills, and make the world more boring as a whole too.
So we're basically differentiating slowly into multiple subspecies. Spooky, huh.
Unfortunatly, there's no much of a solution to that since we can't have people randomly ingesting chemical experiments just to see.
Or.. can we? Muahahahaha!
Regards, Dr. Mengele
Re:products did not end with a whimper
on
All Things iPhone
·
· Score: 1
Apple had put little effort into it because they wanted it to be a flop. Because then, they would be justified when they say "See? The cel phone guys can't do this right, we obviously have to make one ourselves."
Oh yea, they needed Motorolla to flop so they could be free to make iPhone. Wait, WTF?
Might I suggest that we all blog the term People Ready Business [ubuntu.com], and link it to www.ubuntu.com or our www.apple.com our our favourite decent provider of software, and someone who deserves the publicity. A bit like all the tags for VISTA on amazon marking it as DRM Filled, Buggy, Bad Vista etc..
This looks like your latest and greatest ploy to get a girlfriend, and let me tell you: it won't work.
Things I have learned about making my business people-ready:
- Running around naked is not good. - Shades are very important. - I can not kill or lethally wound people for no good reason. - If a human will not believe, peel off hand. - I can't say "negative" and "affirmative". I gotta say "no problemo" or "hasta la vista" or "chill out". Or randomly permutated combinations.
Looks like it worked - allready mentioned on slashdot!
Oh yea, it worked. I can totally imagine thousands of Slashdotters storming Microsoft with "damn, get me some of that people-ready business software!".
Truth is Microsoft marketing sucked for nearly 12 years now. They're totally clueless about how to advertise even their good products (such as Office 2007, which is a great piece of software*).
I pay 7.99 a month for dream host, and I have 246 GB of data storage. Ok, I haven't actually tried to upload that much.
Oh yea, those 246 GB on a shared host what a great example.
You get 246 GB of disk quota, and if you upload more than 5-6 GB, the FTP mystically gets slow. At ~10 GB, the support calls you to say "you seem to, uhh, be using too much resources on our server, get it? yea... resources. watch it".
At ~20GB they shut you down and mail you that you're a an effin abuser of their resources, and all the poor users on the same server had their sites down because of you. They forgot to mention that they managed to stuff 200 sites on a server with 100 GB disk and promise them all 246GB quota.
If you're a thick head and keep uploading, at around 40 GB upload they'll send a hitman in a black mercedes to circle your house and watch at you suggestively.
At around 60 GB, they call the hitman to hit you, your family and anyone who ever knew you hosted with them.
Truth is, most people upload their "page coming soon. LOL!" index, and forget about the rest, so get to live on.
I'm working with CSS for years and yes I'm sick of it. But I'm more sick of your short post, than my years of CSS.
That should speak volumes. There's basically almost nothing correct in there, and if there is, it's well hidden between a myriad of wrong assumptions, outright lies and poor understanding of web technology. Sucks for you.
You're wasting your time - every time this is discussed people submit great and/or obvious ideas for improving Slashdot. Not once have any of them been taken up.
Well, you know, actually I'm not kidding about making my own site, there's far too much noise on slashdot, it's killing me inside. I'm a Slashdot junkee, and junkees don't like garbage in their drugs.
This is the second time I'm saying I'm gonna make my news site, the first time I was pissed about noise on slashdot, I bought the domain (of course...:P ), this time I've setup the interface, layout and basic operation.
I guess the third time will be release time. But I'll just sit and see what happens for a bit more.
Who decides what is important? I generally avoid hardware stories like the plague but some electrical engineer might consider them gangbusters.
Who decides what's important? Who decided what's beautiful? Yes: there's no perfect way to do it.
But if you don't do it, it's even worse. Who'd argue that Apple's products are more elegant that your generic beige box? Do you know why? Because someone (Steve Jobs) stepped up and said "I'll tell you what's important and what's beautiful".
And with the beige box, they just sat there thinking how to be as generic as possible to cover all their bases.
People know about M$ because M$ has misbehaved not because M$ wants people to know things. M$ leaks like a sieve because their employees hate their company.
That's it. You're a dead man, honestly, watch your back.
I'm taking like a man all the discussions about "evil" and all the posts talking about "you're forgetting, they're convicted monopolists!!!" people repeat like damn parrots on these forums with the cool and non-chalante expression of a Marlboro man going for his 156-th smoke this afternoon.
But I'm not going to see four instances of "M$" in a single line of text and stand here taking it like a pussy.
Some better classification and filters on Slashdot, so we can reduce the noise levels. Give the articles:
a "credibility rating" (from "improbable rumor" to "we guarantee it's correct with our life".. ok pick better named)
an "importance" rating (from "something to read if you're bored with life" to "breaking effin news!!!")
and "time effect" rating (from "it was announced to happen in somewhere the next 100 years" to "it just happened now!")
Because, damn. I'm sick of all the noise on Slashdot. And that's gold I'm giving you here. If you don't use it, I'll be so pissed off, I'll start my own news site just to see it happen:P
However, a slow instruction that produces the correct results is infinitely better than a quick one that doesn't.
Yup, but do you know what's better than both. A fast instruction that produced the correct results. In other words, if Intel drops $30 from the Core 2's I won't complain.
Slashdot Mirror
So if anything, the Mac has shown that people are choosing x86.
They chose x86 not because it's particularly future-proof as architecture, you know the reasons were completely different.
Likewise for energy efficiency, that's got nothing to do with x86 in particular.
x86 was just the pragmatical choice, but you never know for how long: PowerPC used to be the pragmatical choice before it as well.
% uname -a
:(
FreeBSD myhost.grateful.net 6.2-STABLE FreeBSD 6.2-STABLE #0: Mon May 28 09:52:28 PDT 2007 me@myhost.grateful.net:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/AMD64 i386
Wait... this works in Slashdot's text area?
% uname -a
% uname -a
Damn it
The market resoundingly rejected that idea when Intel tried to hoist IA64 on it.
They did it in a very bad moment and had poor developer tools. Yet, Microsoft ported Windows to IA64 and it worked out fine.
If x86 chips keep getting buggier and buggier in time because of legacy support issues, trust me, a day will come and people *will* switch away from x86, if given a sound alternative.
If anything, Mac has shown that you can even retain compatibility across CPU architecture for user-grade applications.
Some of these bugs are along the lines of "buffer overflow"; where a write-protect or non-execute bit for a page table entry is ignored. Others are floating point instruction non-coherencies, or memory corruptions -- outside of the range of permitted writing for the process -- running common instruction sequences.
It will be interesting to see what Intel has to say about this.
Yea! Damn, where's the Intel Opinion Center exactly when you need it!
Hardware has had built-in firmware/software for as long as I remember. BIOS is software. Microcode for even consumer CPUs has been done for as long as I remember, Pentium II had it. Apparently, the 8086 had microcode-based instructions.
Don't confuse microcode with firmware. Two different things. Microsode isn't intrinsically updateable, and may be placed in a read-only memory block.
We're talking about a few hundred million transistors. I imagine that detecting and fixing bugs when there's that many components involved is really, really difficult. Are other comparably complex processors better? How do AMD, VIA, Motorola, IBM, etc. fare?
It's not about size, it's about messiness. The current x86 architecture is just hacks upon hacks. Various CPU modes slapped on top in each generation. Commands abstracted into other commands or translated to RISC commands. Certain commands running on parallel and other not, complex branch prediction techniques.
And what is x64 if not yet one more layer of hacks upon x86.
All of this creates a prospect of having buggier and buggier chips in time because we can't get rid of the x86 legacy. It's not unlike the struggles Microsoft is having while trying to retain backwards compatibility of its OS.
Just like biological organisms eventually age, leave offspring and die, the technology cycle proceeds in the same fashion. This means we'll be seeing virtualizations and translations and hacks that keep compatibility to one turning point where someone will come up with a simple fast stable and clean solution and overtake the old market leaders.
outstanding, fixed, and non-fixable Core 2 bugs
Well, in these days of fast-paced business, business at the blink of an eye, at the speed of light, at the speed of spooky action at distance kinda speed, it's normal that companies would release products prematurely and then patch later.
Thankfully, software is very easy to patch post-release.
Now, the only thing left to do, is someone tell Intel that they're selling hardware.
And notice the subtle and elegant interface the search is implemented with. That aged, oversized and messy look, a look that says "Linux desktop".
Disclaimer: yea, I totally mean what I said.
What, outside of an inbuilt level of paranoia, leads you to think that Google will know what's on your hard drive?
They have actually a somewhat poor track record of security in their desktop offerings (desktop and web accelerator).
My built-in level of paranoia says, the problem's more to do with this app being a generic attack vector for anyone willing to abuse your computer.
It's kind of sad that a company who powers its hundreds of thousands of computers [redhat.com] in clusters with a trimmed down RedHat puts Linux second on the list of operating systems to support with its software.
You assume they built Google Desktop to run it on their own clustered computers? Or is this one blatantly fallacious argument you pulled off there.
How about counting the OS numbers on the machines they're targeting.
There's something that just doesn't seem quite right about your post. Ah, there it is. Here, lemme fix that for you: *I paid Microsoft $100 to post this. That's better...
How about "Microsoft paid me $200 to pay them $100 and post this". That's the entire truth.
And my take is: need both kinds of people, basically. Turning everyone into the same kind of "normal" person might just deprive society of some valuable skills and inclination. Turning "nerds" into "normal" persons would be as useful as the reverse: turning all artist types into mathematicians. You'd just lose a bunch of skills, and make the world more boring as a whole too.
So we're basically differentiating slowly into multiple subspecies. Spooky, huh.
Unfortunatly, there's no much of a solution to that since we can't have people randomly ingesting chemical experiments just to see.
Or.. can we? Muahahahaha!
Regards, Dr. Mengele
Apple had put little effort into it because they wanted it to be a flop. Because then, they would be justified when they say "See? The cel phone guys can't do this right, we obviously have to make one ourselves."
Oh yea, they needed Motorolla to flop so they could be free to make iPhone. Wait, WTF?
Do you even read what you're writing?
Might I suggest that we all blog the term People Ready Business [ubuntu.com], and link it to www.ubuntu.com or our www.apple.com our our favourite decent provider of software, and someone who deserves the publicity. A bit like all the tags for VISTA on amazon marking it as DRM Filled, Buggy, Bad Vista etc..
This looks like your latest and greatest ploy to get a girlfriend, and let me tell you: it won't work.
Things I have learned about making my business people-ready:
- Running around naked is not good.
- Shades are very important.
- I can not kill or lethally wound people for no good reason.
- If a human will not believe, peel off hand.
- I can't say "negative" and "affirmative". I gotta say "no problemo" or "hasta la vista" or "chill out". Or randomly permutated combinations.
The Terminator
Looks like it worked - allready mentioned on slashdot!
Oh yea, it worked. I can totally imagine thousands of Slashdotters storming Microsoft with "damn, get me some of that people-ready business software!".
Truth is Microsoft marketing sucked for nearly 12 years now. They're totally clueless about how to advertise even their good products (such as Office 2007, which is a great piece of software*).
*Microsoft paid me $100 to post this.
I pay 7.99 a month for dream host, and I have 246 GB of data storage. Ok, I haven't actually tried to upload that much.
Oh yea, those 246 GB on a shared host what a great example.
You get 246 GB of disk quota, and if you upload more than 5-6 GB, the FTP mystically gets slow. At ~10 GB, the support calls you to say "you seem to, uhh, be using too much resources on our server, get it? yea... resources. watch it".
At ~20GB they shut you down and mail you that you're a an effin abuser of their resources, and all the poor users on the same server had their sites down because of you. They forgot to mention that they managed to stuff 200 sites on a server with 100 GB disk and promise them all 246GB quota.
If you're a thick head and keep uploading, at around 40 GB upload they'll send a hitman in a black mercedes to circle your house and watch at you suggestively.
At around 60 GB, they call the hitman to hit you, your family and anyone who ever knew you hosted with them.
Truth is, most people upload their "page coming soon. LOL!" index, and forget about the rest, so get to live on.
by the previous large corporation we all loved to hate
Rub it in, won't ya. Yes, we're losers that love to hate a damn software company. It what makes us wake up on the morning.
Am I the only one ...who's sick to death of CSS?
I'm working with CSS for years and yes I'm sick of it. But I'm more sick of your short post, than my years of CSS.
That should speak volumes. There's basically almost nothing correct in there, and if there is, it's well hidden between a myriad of wrong assumptions, outright lies and poor understanding of web technology. Sucks for you.
You're wasting your time - every time this is discussed people submit great and/or obvious ideas for improving Slashdot. Not once have any of them been taken up.
:P ), this time I've setup the interface, layout and basic operation.
Well, you know, actually I'm not kidding about making my own site, there's far too much noise on slashdot, it's killing me inside. I'm a Slashdot junkee, and junkees don't like garbage in their drugs.
This is the second time I'm saying I'm gonna make my news site, the first time I was pissed about noise on slashdot, I bought the domain (of course...
I guess the third time will be release time. But I'll just sit and see what happens for a bit more.
Who decides what is important? I generally avoid hardware stories like the plague but some electrical engineer might consider them gangbusters.
Who decides what's important? Who decided what's beautiful? Yes: there's no perfect way to do it.
But if you don't do it, it's even worse. Who'd argue that Apple's products are more elegant that your generic beige box? Do you know why? Because someone (Steve Jobs) stepped up and said "I'll tell you what's important and what's beautiful".
And with the beige box, they just sat there thinking how to be as generic as possible to cover all their bases.
People know about M$ because M$ has misbehaved not because M$ wants people to know things. M$ leaks like a sieve because their employees hate their company.
That's it. You're a dead man, honestly, watch your back.
I'm taking like a man all the discussions about "evil" and all the posts talking about "you're forgetting, they're convicted monopolists!!!" people repeat like damn parrots on these forums with the cool and non-chalante expression of a Marlboro man going for his 156-th smoke this afternoon.
But I'm not going to see four instances of "M$" in a single line of text and stand here taking it like a pussy.
I'm coming for ya! Aaaaaaaaaaaahhhh!
Some better classification and filters on Slashdot, so we can reduce the noise levels. Give the articles:
:P
a "credibility rating" (from "improbable rumor" to "we guarantee it's correct with our life".. ok pick better named)
an "importance" rating (from "something to read if you're bored with life" to "breaking effin news!!!")
and "time effect" rating (from "it was announced to happen in somewhere the next 100 years" to "it just happened now!")
Because, damn. I'm sick of all the noise on Slashdot. And that's gold I'm giving you here. If you don't use it, I'll be so pissed off, I'll start my own news site just to see it happen
However, a slow instruction that produces the correct results is infinitely better than a quick one that doesn't.
Yup, but do you know what's better than both. A fast instruction that produced the correct results. In other words, if Intel drops $30 from the Core 2's I won't complain.