I only know about that since it was mentioned in an article describing boot.ini. It was from an age before the web so I guess only those who bought certain dead tree magazines ever heard of it.
TI's 486dlc (which fit in a 386 socket) was one of the worst chips I ever used, it overheated, lacked full 486 compatibility.
What app did you run that needed full 486 compatibility? Being able to plug a 486 into an old 386 mobo seems like a neat idea, and any software that ran on that 386 would of course run on the nerfed 486 right?
If AMD hadn't rushed with their 64 bit version of the x86, about now, Itanium would be getting popular and hence cheap.
Market forces have so much to do with technology advancement. A lot of times, superior technology has to take a back seat...
Perhaps, but how superior is that superior technology?
The idea with Itanium was to make a CPU that could perform on the level of RISC and CISC CPUs with a relatively simple front end. In essence the Itanium executes a fixed number of instructions each cycle, then leaves it to the compiler to select which instructions are to be executed in parallel and make sure they don't read and write to the same registers and such (instead of having logic in the CPU figuring this stuff out).
It was a neat idea, but advantages in manufacturing technology favored CPUs with more complicated front ends. The Itanium advantage never materialized on the desktop, so had this "superior" technology taken off we'd might have had faster computers at the cost of making our software run on this bling architecture.
Making big ISA changes for a mere speed boost is not worth it, and it's not certain you'd get even that as the Itanium does not always outperform the x86.
AmigaOS does not strike me as particularly BeOS like... it's more like DOS/Windows with it's startup scripts, sudden deaths and odd idiosyncrasies like how it freeze up while holding down the right mouse button:-)
FUD + Preload is a big reason, but winos2 was amazing, and could have easily supplanted Windows had memories of the time been more prolific. That and cost... bundling did (and continues) to hide the cost of Windows.
I tried OS/2 for the first time about a month ago. I remember wanting it back in the day when Windows 95 was brand new, so just to see what I missed I spent a couple of hours or so getting Firefox, media players, games and such to work.
I noticed that the UI freezes when you open applications, I don't think Windows 95 did that. OS/2 also opens all apps that ran before a reboot automatically; even if doing so cause the OS to reboot. Installing software was a headache as almost every installer spat out an error that had to be resolved.
As far as user friendliness goes I have to rate it bellow both BeOS and Windows 95, but a smidgen above AmigaOS. This makes me wonder if I would have picked OS/2 over Windows 95 given an even playing field. Windows 95 had its faults but OS/2 was not without flaws either.
A system can indeed be "100% hack proof" from attacks originating from the Internet. The problem with desktop systems, servers, etc, is complexity. Get that complexity down to manageable levels and you can have your hack proof system.
For a system, for instance, that just reports power usage over the Internet the complexity is at so a low level that it's possible to validate all possible inputs and outputs. The biggest complexity in this example is actually the TCP/IP protocol.
Ultimately, what you can accomplish is a system that is secure enough that the effort required to break into it far exceeds any value that would be gained by doing so. The rest is damage control.
In theory everything is hackable through some means, even your brain... but no one is going to hack into your brain over the internet despite the fact that you are "connected" through your display and keyboard. The brain might indeed be hackable through this means though as it's way too complex for us to ever validate all inputs.
At some point finding a clueless or overly trusting user is much easier than directly attacking the machines.
True enough. Not disagreeing here. It's possible that you convince me to install some software on that 100% hack proof system and then send secret information over the Internet - which you would not have been able to do if there was no connection to the internet.
This is about what you would expect because such critical systems should not be Internet-accessible unless there were some incredibly strong overruling need for it that could not be addressed any other way.
(Emphasis mine). In my example there is "another way", even so they use the internet. If you had just said "critical systems should not be Internet-accessible unless it's impractical" I would have understood you better.
After that point I would know roughly where the monsters were going to be.
Make me think back to Resident Evil for the old Playstation. I remember my first play through making a game out guessing how the next monster would attack. Surprisingly I was almost always right; it's just that one tends to turn the brain off for such games:-)
F.E.A.R got it right IMHO. They didn't even try to scare you, instead banked on good AI and level design. Must have disappointed gamers that wanted a good scare, but even they got a good game for their money.
Are they also going to threaten Apple and all the other software vendors who supply this much-needed resource for the blind?
Technically Apple, and others, only supply software than can translate text to speech. It is the user who has to direct this towards copyrighted text.
Suing over that would be like suing Microsoft for implementing copy and paste. You can after all copy an ebook file.
I don't know anything about the FAA or their systems but this is simply common sense. Any administrator who doesn't understand this should not be trusted with such important networks.
You cannot rule out the cost factor. It's for instance not economically feasible to link up all power stations to a separate secure network, so they use the internet.
Facing the Internet is not necessarily insecure. It is possible to make 100% hack proof computers - not counting DOS and physical attacks. Similarly, a secure network can still be compromised so that is not always the best way for securing networked computers.
Then it's another one of those laws "everyone breaks". I hope that such laws are not enforceable otherwise you'd have a law system where "everyone" can be convicted for something.
Shes going to be pissed.
I have to warn you: young girls like to read aloud. You'd best educate her about copyright law before that happens.
Do you hear the sound of the words echo through your head as you read words, like me? Well, as the copyright owner of this comment, I forbid such usage- and deny you the ablity to read this comment out loud to your friends either.
Yeah, that $150 million realllllllly is what made the difference, at a time when Apple had $4 billion in the bank.
I believe it was more the commitment about bringing Office and IE to the mac + giving Apple some good news to spread around. Make investors happy ya know, so they won't demand those 4 bill paid out in cash.
It may be strange for those not in the networking field, but when things really go bad, the only place to be is physically in the data center.
Heh. I've heard that in the old day you could find broken Token ring hardware by listening after a high pitched whining noise. Guess one really has to be there for stuff like that.
Ubuntu decided that I would be best served if it installed "Citadel", a full groupware solution, rather then sendmail or postfix. This would be the equivlent of windows installing Exceed if an app had a dependency on an SSH client.
I bet it's for consistency. You should always get the same SSH client regardless of the order you activate features.
Would love an extension that made Firefox look like chrome - got it looking like ie7 right now (glass + hidemenu + hidestatus bar), but Chrome looks better still.
I refuse to have GoogleUpdate running all the time though. Man has his limits.
What if good enough really IS good enough? In a fast paced game, would you trade a tenfold increase in graphics speed for having a tiny percentage of pixels being barely noticable off the correct color?
We already do. All graphic cards today have a "performance - quality" slider.
Unfortunately it can also make it impossible to login if you are trying to login remotely from a foreign computer, for instance to check mail while traveling.
I once set my login password on a Unix account from Windows NT, I was then utterly unable to log on from Linux. At the time I was clueless about keyboard differences so it took some excessive head scratching to figure out.
Slashdot Mirror
Back in 1999
Back on 1991 you mean?
I only know about that since it was mentioned in an article describing boot.ini. It was from an age before the web so I guess only those who bought certain dead tree magazines ever heard of it.
TI's 486dlc (which fit in a 386 socket) was one of the worst chips I ever used, it overheated, lacked full 486 compatibility.
What app did you run that needed full 486 compatibility? Being able to plug a 486 into an old 386 mobo seems like a neat idea, and any software that ran on that 386 would of course run on the nerfed 486 right?
Too bad about the overheating though.
If AMD hadn't rushed with their 64 bit version of the x86, about now, Itanium would be getting popular and hence cheap. Market forces have so much to do with technology advancement. A lot of times, superior technology has to take a back seat ...
Perhaps, but how superior is that superior technology?
The idea with Itanium was to make a CPU that could perform on the level of RISC and CISC CPUs with a relatively simple front end. In essence the Itanium executes a fixed number of instructions each cycle, then leaves it to the compiler to select which instructions are to be executed in parallel and make sure they don't read and write to the same registers and such (instead of having logic in the CPU figuring this stuff out).
It was a neat idea, but advantages in manufacturing technology favored CPUs with more complicated front ends. The Itanium advantage never materialized on the desktop, so had this "superior" technology taken off we'd might have had faster computers at the cost of making our software run on this bling architecture.
Making big ISA changes for a mere speed boost is not worth it, and it's not certain you'd get even that as the Itanium does not always outperform the x86.
You should check out AmigaOS some time.
AmigaOS does not strike me as particularly BeOS like... it's more like DOS/Windows with it's startup scripts, sudden deaths and odd idiosyncrasies like how it freeze up while holding down the right mouse button :-)
FUD + Preload is a big reason, but winos2 was amazing, and could have easily supplanted Windows had memories of the time been more prolific. That and cost... bundling did (and continues) to hide the cost of Windows.
I tried OS/2 for the first time about a month ago. I remember wanting it back in the day when Windows 95 was brand new, so just to see what I missed I spent a couple of hours or so getting Firefox, media players, games and such to work.
I noticed that the UI freezes when you open applications, I don't think Windows 95 did that. OS/2 also opens all apps that ran before a reboot automatically; even if doing so cause the OS to reboot. Installing software was a headache as almost every installer spat out an error that had to be resolved.
As far as user friendliness goes I have to rate it bellow both BeOS and Windows 95, but a smidgen above AmigaOS. This makes me wonder if I would have picked OS/2 over Windows 95 given an even playing field. Windows 95 had its faults but OS/2 was not without flaws either.
For a system, for instance, that just reports power usage over the Internet the complexity is at so a low level that it's possible to validate all possible inputs and outputs. The biggest complexity in this example is actually the TCP/IP protocol.
Ultimately, what you can accomplish is a system that is secure enough that the effort required to break into it far exceeds any value that would be gained by doing so. The rest is damage control.
In theory everything is hackable through some means, even your brain... but no one is going to hack into your brain over the internet despite the fact that you are "connected" through your display and keyboard. The brain might indeed be hackable through this means though as it's way too complex for us to ever validate all inputs.
At some point finding a clueless or overly trusting user is much easier than directly attacking the machines.
True enough. Not disagreeing here. It's possible that you convince me to install some software on that 100% hack proof system and then send secret information over the Internet - which you would not have been able to do if there was no connection to the internet.
This is about what you would expect because such critical systems should not be Internet-accessible unless there were some incredibly strong overruling need for it that could not be addressed any other way.
(Emphasis mine). In my example there is "another way", even so they use the internet. If you had just said "critical systems should not be Internet-accessible unless it's impractical" I would have understood you better.
After that point I would know roughly where the monsters were going to be.
Make me think back to Resident Evil for the old Playstation. I remember my first play through making a game out guessing how the next monster would attack. Surprisingly I was almost always right; it's just that one tends to turn the brain off for such games :-)
F.E.A.R got it right IMHO. They didn't even try to scare you, instead banked on good AI and level design. Must have disappointed gamers that wanted a good scare, but even they got a good game for their money.
Are they also going to threaten Apple and all the other software vendors who supply this much-needed resource for the blind?
Technically Apple, and others, only supply software than can translate text to speech. It is the user who has to direct this towards copyrighted text.
Suing over that would be like suing Microsoft for implementing copy and paste. You can after all copy an ebook file.
I don't know anything about the FAA or their systems but this is simply common sense. Any administrator who doesn't understand this should not be trusted with such important networks.
You cannot rule out the cost factor. It's for instance not economically feasible to link up all power stations to a separate secure network, so they use the internet.
Facing the Internet is not necessarily insecure. It is possible to make 100% hack proof computers - not counting DOS and physical attacks. Similarly, a secure network can still be compromised so that is not always the best way for securing networked computers.
Shes going to be pissed.
I have to warn you: young girls like to read aloud. You'd best educate her about copyright law before that happens.
Do you hear the sound of the words echo through your head as you read words, like me? Well, as the copyright owner of this comment, I forbid such usage- and deny you the ablity to read this comment out loud to your friends either.
So no more bed time stories?
Yeah, that $150 million realllllllly is what made the difference, at a time when Apple had $4 billion in the bank.
I believe it was more the commitment about bringing Office and IE to the mac + giving Apple some good news to spread around. Make investors happy ya know, so they won't demand those 4 bill paid out in cash.
It may be strange for those not in the networking field, but when things really go bad, the only place to be is physically in the data center.
Heh. I've heard that in the old day you could find broken Token ring hardware by listening after a high pitched whining noise. Guess one really has to be there for stuff like that.
Those are stats from a site for web developers, they're hardly representative of the population as a whole.
Then look at http://marketshare.hitslink.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=0&qpmr=100&qpdt=1&qpct=3&qptimeframe=Q&qpsp=40. Still growing quickly.
Ubuntu decided that I would be best served if it installed "Citadel", a full groupware solution, rather then sendmail or postfix. This would be the equivlent of windows installing Exceed if an app had a dependency on an SSH client.
I bet it's for consistency. You should always get the same SSH client regardless of the order you activate features.
Chrome market share died fairly quickly
According to http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp, Chrome is growing quickly.
Would love an extension that made Firefox look like chrome - got it looking like ie7 right now (glass + hidemenu + hidestatus bar), but Chrome looks better still.
I refuse to have GoogleUpdate running all the time though. Man has his limits.
What if good enough really IS good enough? In a fast paced game, would you trade a tenfold increase in graphics speed for having a tiny percentage of pixels being barely noticable off the correct color?
We already do. All graphic cards today have a "performance - quality" slider.
Unfortunately it can also make it impossible to login if you are trying to login remotely from a foreign computer, for instance to check mail while traveling.
I once set my login password on a Unix account from Windows NT, I was then utterly unable to log on from Linux. At the time I was clueless about keyboard differences so it took some excessive head scratching to figure out.
If you ask me, with a pop of 300 mill, I'd expect atleast 400 mill TVs.
One for every man, woman, child + dog?
250 million DTV receivers - FAIL
There's 250 milion TVs in the US of A? With a pop of 300 mill that sounds like a lot.
Whops, I misread the grandparent
This is an old myth, the human eye can see a difference far higher that 25fps.
I got a 30 FPS vs 60 FPS program (FPS Compare v0.5 BETA (C) Andreas Gustafsson) and can easily see the difference, even on blind test.
Movies use motion compensation to smooth out frames but even then I see choppiness in movies during some scenes.
That you can't see above 25 FPS is the myth.
Ye fiddle with your LCDs.
Ha! My 24" BenQ TN panel has ghosting and low color fidelity. It can even display interlaced and 50Hz! Beat that!
:-(
So keep that high quality CRT. It probably takes all the desk anyway
I think I'm just going to say "no, thanks" and uninstall.
I'm running Google Earth in Virtual Box where it can install as much crap as it likes.
Sadly I can't stuff my Logitech drivers in there.