On Sat, 2007-02-17 at 02:43 -0500, Bill McGonigle wrote:
On Feb 17, 2007, at 01:22, Nigel Stewart wrote:
The Engineers I've worked with tend towards the
just make it work philosophy. Interpret the
spec as narrowly and specifically as possible,
and rely on nobody being
And don't forget that real Engineers (Professional Engineers) sign
their work and take responsibility for failures (reputation, money,
etc).
jeff
In the case of FOSS, so do programmers (well, their reputation at
least)
And it is interesting that in study after study, whether
From another forum, I got reminded of a fairly large Open Source
project - VISTA, the VA's medical records system. More at:
http://www.hardhats.org/
http://sourceforge.net/projects/worldvista
http://www.va.gov/vdl/
It's good enough to win awards - Harvard's Innovations Award
Unlike most of the folks that post here, I'm an end user. :) Except
that I'm a scientific end-user.
\rant on
Recently I was forced to run a simulation on a Win64 box remotely. The
simulation just was taking too long on my puny Win32 laptop. The
simulation needed more memory than Win32
Unlike most of the folks that post here, I'm an end user. :) Except
that I'm a scientific end-user.
Ham radio not withstanding - there is no way that EM (Electro-Magnetic)
simulation is in the end-user rather than scientific. EM simulations
require 64 bits for anything remotely
If end users are defined as home users and office users, then 64 bits
will never matter to them, just like 32 bits doesn't matter to them
today. For the majority of people, its just a yard stick, like 4
cylinder vs. 6 cylinder vs. 8. Most have some notion of what it means,
that more is
Jon 'maddog' Hall wrote:
Unlike most of the folks that post here, I'm an end user. :) Except
that I'm a scientific end-user.
Ham radio not withstanding - there is no way that EM (Electro-Magnetic)
simulation is in the end-user rather than scientific. EM simulations
require 64 bits
On 2/17/07, Jason Stephenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If end users are defined as home users and office users, then 64 bits
will never matter to them, just like 32 bits doesn't matter to them
today.
That's not really true. 16-bit machines are *very* limited. There
is not a whole lot you can
On 2/17/07, Jon 'maddog' Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
there is no way that EM (Electro-Magnetic)
simulation is in the commercial rather than scientific. EM simulations
~~
require 64 bits for anything remotely complicated.
since you had already established
On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 11:00:29 -0500
Jason Stephenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sixty-four bitness will never matter to end users, but it will become
ubiquitous over time, and sooner or later nearly everyone will have
computers and devices with 64 bit CPUs and operating systems and the
vast
On Feb 17, 2007, at 10:47, Bruce Labitt wrote:
I wanted to print out the graphics result. Guess what, our company
has Win32 print servers. No go. The ticket with MIS has been
outstanding for 6 months now.
Drifting slightly off-topic you could use PDFCreator:
On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 12:10:59 -0500
Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's not really true. 16-bit machines are *very* limited. There
is not a whole lot you can do in 64 kilobytes of RAM (all you can
directly address with a 16-bit address word). Anything running on an
8086 (i.e.,
Bill McGonigle wrote:
On Feb 17, 2007, at 10:47, Bruce Labitt wrote:
I wanted to print out the graphics result. Guess what, our company
has Win32 print servers. No go. The ticket with MIS has been
outstanding for 6 months now.
Drifting slightly off-topic you could use PDFCreator:
Ben's point about the advantages of more memory and the comparison to
the 16-bit to 32-bit transition is well taken, but I don't think that
changes my main point:
Typical end users as defined before don't really care about the
differences. As long as they can do more or less what they want to
Dang! teledildonics.com is already registered:
Registrant:
Riggs, Roy
1508 BOONE CT
MURFREESBORO, TN 37130-5032
US
Domain Name: TELEDILDONICS.COM
Administrative Contact:
Riggs, Roy[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
On Saturday 17 February 2007 12:10, Ben Scott wrote:
On 2/17/07, Jason Stephenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If end users are defined as home users and office users, then 64
bits will never matter to them, just like 32 bits doesn't matter to
them today.
That's not really true. 16-bit
On 2/17/07, Jason Stephenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Typical end users as defined before don't really care about the
differences. As long as they can do more or less what they want to do
with the computer, they won't really notice the difference.
I think you and I actually agree. I'm not
On 2/17/07, Jim Kuzdrall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's not really true. 16-bit machines are *very* limited. There
is not a whole lot you can do in 64 kilobytes of RAM ...
Not quite so. As a programmer of embedded systems, I would point
out that sales of microprocessors with address
On 2/17/07, Jim Kuzdrall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's not really true. 16-bit machines are *very* limited. There
is not a whole lot you can do in 64 kilobytes of RAM (all you can
directly address with a 16-bit address word).
Not quite so. As a programmer of embedded systems, I
On 2/17/07, Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
machine. They don't understand why, but they know they can play
digital music while writing a term paper on their new Dell, while
their old Apple ][ or IBM-PC Model 5150 couldn't handle that.
That has nothing to do with sized bits I'm afraid.
On Saturday 17 February 2007 14:30, Ben Scott wrote:
On 2/17/07, Jim Kuzdrall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's not really true. 16-bit machines are *very* limited.
There is not a whole lot you can do in 64 kilobytes of RAM ...
Not quite so. As a programmer of embedded systems, I
On 2/17/07, Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2/17/07, Jim Kuzdrall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not quite so. As a programmer of embedded systems, I would point
out that sales of microprocessors with address spaces of 16-bits (or
less) exceed those of the larger machines by orders of
On 2/17/07, Thomas Charron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
machine. They don't understand why, but they know they can play
digital music while writing a term paper on their new Dell, while
their old Apple ][ or IBM-PC Model 5150 couldn't handle that.
That has nothing to do with sized bits I'm
On 2/17/07, Jim Kuzdrall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If we stuck to the points you or others were driving at, the thread
would have ended long, long ago.
That might be considered a good thing!! :-)
-- Ben
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
On 2/17/07, Thomas Charron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But that's not really the point I was driving at in that thread, either. :)
As far as I can tell, your main point, as I've read it, is 64 bit
gives you access to more memory, and bigger files, more easily. :-P
Partially valid on both
On 2/17/07, Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2/17/07, Thomas Charron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
machine. They don't understand why, but they know they can play
digital music while writing a term paper on their new Dell, while
their old Apple ][ or IBM-PC Model 5150 couldn't handle that.
Remember, we're talking English, and where I come from, commercial
is anything that involves businesses making money.
Buildings cost millions of dollars and are sold commercially, but the
engineering of them is considered scientific computing for a lot of
the reasons we have discussed and
Yes, there are uses for 64 bit address space, just as a 128 bit address
space would enable use to tackle unthinkable problems.
I do not think a 128 bit address space computer will ever exist, at
least not in the silicon technologies that we are talking about.
Just to take advantage of a
On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 22:59:22 -0500
Bill Sconce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Feb 9, 2007
To All Radio Amateurs...
From the Hosstraders, Joe K1RQG, Bob W1GWU, and Norm W1ITT
I overlooked the real discussion! (I was working from an
announcement I saw in the ham radio press.) Maddog, who doesn't
On 2/17/07, Thomas Charron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
. The only limitation to a 16 bit processor is being limited to
64 KB of data per page at a time.
Right, just as the beggar's only limitation is that he has no money.
But it's [16-bit limitation workarounds] so slow, cumbersome,
and
And there is quite literally NOTHING you cannot do in 32 bit that
you can in 64.
Yes there is. You can mmap a single 5 GB virtual address space.
Now if you had said that there are no problems that you can not solve,
given enough time and processing power, with a 32 bit machine than you
On 2/17/07, Bill Sconce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since each message is a file in mh-land, this command:
grep -in hosstrad ~/Mail/...gnhlug.x/* | less
yields one line from each of the files (messages, headers included)
which have Hosstraders in them.
Shouldn't it yield *every* line which
Jon 'maddog' Hall wrote:
I think I read someplace that 128 bits would allow you to address
every Proton and neutron in the known universe, but I doubt that (a
little).
A quick Google search yielded 10^72 up to 10^87 for range of number of
particles in the universe.
(No idea if that
On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 17:01:19 -0500
Jon 'maddog' Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I do not think a 128 bit address space computer will ever exist, at
least not in the silicon technologies that we are talking about.
Probably not for a while, but I'm 100% certain, there will be a 128-bit
address
On 2/17/07, Jon 'maddog' Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And there is quite literally NOTHING you cannot do in 32 bit that
you can in 64.
Yes there is. You can mmap a single 5 GB virtual address space.
Now if you had said that there are no problems that you can not solve,
given enough time
On 2/17/07, Jerry Feldman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 17:01:19 -0500
Jon 'maddog' Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I do not think a 128 bit address space computer will ever exist, at
least not in the silicon technologies that we are talking about.
Probably not for a while, but
On 2/17/07, Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2/17/07, Thomas Charron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
. The only limitation to a 16 bit processor is being limited to
64 KB of data per page at a time.
Right, just as the beggar's only limitation is that he has no money.
... Not quite
On 2/17/07, Thomas Charron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
People may giggle, but the PS2 Emotion processing chip is 128 bit.
I believe it has 128-bit floating point/vector data processing
capabilities, but the integer registers are 64-bit, and the address
word is 32-bit. Right? If so, in the
On Sat, 2007-02-17 at 21:08 -0500, Thomas Charron wrote:
On 2/17/07, Jerry Feldman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 17:01:19 -0500
Jon 'maddog' Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I do not think a 128 bit address space computer will ever exist, at
least not in the silicon
On 2/17/07, Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If so, in the context of most of the discussion in this thread ...
s/thread/tangled ball of string/
-- Ben
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
It's that time again - time for the second meeting of the NH Ruby/Rails
User Group!
WHEN: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 from 7-9 PM.
WHERE: Portsmouth Public Library, MacLeod Board Room. Portsmouth, NH.
For a map and driving directions, see:
http://wiki.nhruby.org/index.php/Upcoming_meetings
WHAT:
On 2/17/07, Jon 'maddog' Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2007-02-17 at 21:08 -0500, Thomas Charron wrote:
On 2/17/07, Jerry Feldman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 17:01:19 -0500
Jon 'maddog' Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
People may giggle, but the PS2 Emotion
On 2/17/07, Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2/17/07, Thomas Charron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
People may giggle, but the PS2 Emotion processing chip is 128 bit.
I believe it has 128-bit floating point/vector data processing
capabilities, but the integer registers are 64-bit, and the
43 matches
Mail list logo
