The collected works of R-ten-K - Page 3

shadowless wrote: So what is between the nucleus and the electron shell? is it some other undiscovered matter?


Do not think in terms of "matter" think in terms of mass and energy, Mr. Einstein ties it all together with the whole E=mc^2. Something that may seem "empty" could be full of energy for example, and vice versa.

Also we humans are rather egocentric, so we associate not being able to see/touch/feel something with that space being "empty." You have to think as space being coupled with time, and both forming a fabric. In parts of that fabric, there may be some mass lodged, that mass creates a ripple in the space-time fabric which we call gravity. As I said, think of space-time as a piece of cloth being stretched (the surface of a trampoline if you will), and mass as a heavy ball dropped into that fabric. You will see the ball creates a small indentation on that fabric, or a ripple even... that is gravity.

The theory is that "information" about gravity is carried by infinitesimal particles called gravitrons. So a chunk of space that may seem empty, could very well be full of gravitrons.

A similar proposition can be make about the other major forces in nature: Electromagnetic forces are carried by photons, strong atomic forces use gluons, and weak atomic forces are associated with bossons.

The best way to think about these particles is as carriers of "information." So the reason why the earth for example rotates around the sun is due to the gravity interactions, using a very very simplified "overview" we can think of the gravitational interaction between the earth and the sun as it being due to the gravitons from the sun, meeting up with the gravitons from the earth... and once they finally interact with each other, they go out for dinner, the check each other out, and then they exchange their respective information. With the end result being the expected macroscopical physical behavior based upon a basic set of rules which dictate the universal behavior of gravity. In this case, earth being smaller in both size and mass... ends up being attracted and rotating around the body with larger mass, the sun. As I said this is a very simplified version, but is enough to get a bit of the intuition behind the behavior.

A similar case happens at the sub atomic level, but the interactions there are far weirder and there is where quantum effects come to play... some of them are so bizarre and counter intuitive that IMHO their discovery/understanding is one of the most important achievements of humanity. The reason why the interactions are strange, is that unlike general relativity which involves large distances, and as such can be easily understood by taking the speed of light as an universal limit to the speed of information transfer for those gravity particles. At the sub atomic level the distances are so small, that speed of light is no longer a good approximation (remember that physics at a very basic level is about creating models about physical behavior based on approximations, which the human brain can deal with). So very funny things happen at the subatomic level in the space-time fabric.

So even though we could think of the space between an electron and the nucleus as being "empty." An external electron shot into that space for example, will not "see" an empty area at all. It will se a force field of sorts (to use sci-fi jargon). So what looks "empty" to you, it looks like an actual wall to an atomic particle. But it is a probabilistic field, and that is where a lot of the "weirdness" comes to play. So indeed, given the correct conditions an electron or other particle could theoretically pass through that supposedly empty space. But since the probability is so small, and it has to be so for every single particle in your fist (for example)... the probability of your fist passing through a wall untouched is for all intents and purposes pretty much zero.

Once all the subatomic and fundamental particles are fully accounted for, our understanding of physics will be far more complete. That is why experiments like the LHC at CERN are so fundamentally important. Regardless of all the idiocy the mass media comes up about black holes and other idiotic concerns...

In resume, do not think as space being "empty," think of it being a four dimensional space-time fabric where fundamental particles carry and exchange information about the fundamental forces of nature.

Then for fun, there are things like string theory which adds more dimensions, or stuff like quantum entanglement which seems to allow for exchanges of state information at speeds which are orders of magnitude faster than light, for example.

In a sense, we are (as being the only sentient and self aware beings in our tiny corner of the galaxy) the way the universe came up with to understand itself. If people were aware of all the cool stuff that surrounds us, how much we still have to figure out, and how we are as integral part of this universe as any major celestial body is... I would like to think that as a species we would spend far less time and effort gracing at our navels destroying each other, and more time enjoying, exploring and understanding our infinite playground: the cosmos.

Oh well...
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
skywriter wrote: gone for six months and that's all you have to says?


Haroo Skywriter, I missed you too ;-)

I wish my absence was due to something more exciting than your typical Silly Valley burn out story:

[edited out rant]

I could go off on a rant which would make Hamei sound subdued, but that is neither here nor there...

Having finally some free time, as I ponder putting my two weeks in and move away from HW development as far as I can. What better way to waste time than getting lost on the interwebs? So I decided to check out nekochan... I hadn't realized how much time had past, since the last few months have been a blur.

I decided a thread about physics was a great place to check back on you guys. Well, it was that or the other thread about the end of the world. Seriously, I leave you peeps for a while and some of you get all apocalyptic on me. WTF.
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
Frapazoid wrote:
Seriously, I leave you peeps for a while and some of you get all apocalyptic on me. WTF.


We could only assume you were dead, and without the presence of your magnificent brain, this planet is surely doomed.


Never been particularly bright and after all the drug abuses I only have two neurons left, luckily for me I have always gotten by on my looks alone.

But there is no reason to worry dudes, there is no catastrophe that can't be averted by having Bruce Willis drill a big hole somewhere (or someone) and nuke the sh$t out of it. Just make sure you guys can get Aerosmith sober enough to play a couple of sets... and voila!
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
Interesting, maybe we can launch him into a submarine instead. And then he can turn that geiser of sweet Arabian licorice down in Louisiana into solid gold... thus saving both the environment and the economy.

The wild card here is the Aerosmith situation, are they back together? It is a well known fact that Bruce Willis's powers to save us are useless without Steven Tyler screeching in the background. Maybe a solo project will do. Why isn't FEMA pursuing this... we need answers damn it!
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
Ouch... I didn't know about that. Then yes, we're pretty much FUBAR.


OK, shut it down Jimmy!
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
SAQ wrote:
zmttoxics wrote: x86 doesn't have to be a disaster - its just a cpu. It is the platform that surrounds it that matters and the Mac platform is pretty fantastic.


x86 isn't pretty though. Architecturally it's pretty ugly (then again look at VAX - that was so ugly that they started modifying it with the second generation of CPUs - solid but ugly), but it does work, and hey - with compilers we're all Turing machines now, right?.



I would recommend people don't use qualitative arguments when dealing with something as quantitative in nature as computer architecture.

It is not about "ugly" or "pretty" it is about fast or slow, or power consumption, or price/performance... or any other sort of meaningful metric. I.e. things that can be easily objectively measured and demonstrated/modelled.


I would like to see a discussion with people who really know on what the best implementation architecturally is - no concerns about price/perfomance, just a discussion of how things were laid down and planned. Some things are interesting but difficult (AS/400's "everything is an address including the FS" and the intermediate code level), some things are on paper beautiful but wound up with a number of tweaks in practice (most 1st-gen RISC processors), some have too much baggage (Itanium - original spec had the x86 units tacked on. Not sure if the second gen would be a runner, as I don't know enough).

Alpha would probably be a contender - pretty clean, and PALcode was neat. What else?


To me it sounds as if you are still hung up in the 80s/70s and still think of ISA and microarchitecture as being the same thing. Instruction decoding and programming models for scalar machines stopped being a main limiter a while ago. At this point x86 induces a single digit overhead in terms of area/power and it seems that with current microarchictertures CISC decoding no longer induces any significant performance hit to a well balanced pipeline.

So when you get an almost unlimited backwards compatibility with the largest software catalog on earth, while offering far better price/performance points than competing architectures... MIPS/Alpha/et al stopped having much in terms of value proposition on the desktop and mid range segments. The main space where x86 will have a tough time competing is in the deeply embedded markets, where there are other more entrenched platforms (esp. ARM) whose main value proposition ironically is the same as x86's in the desktop: they have larger software base and more developer momentum than embedded x86.

Wether we like it or not, scalar processors are now a commodity. I.e. there is little room for truly disruptive developments in that space. It is well understood and the price/performance that is achieved is very very very hard to beat.

So we can croon about beauty all we want. But when you can get an Intel/AMD part which costs just a few hundred bucks, and gives you 80 GFlops and you can be almost guaranteed that just by waiting you will be able to double that performance at a similar price point in the future. There is little incentive to try to figure out how to reach the same level of performance with a large SGI system, which costs orders of magnitude more money, costs more to operate, and can be a PITA to program correctly to get the large level of parallelism needed to get large number of slower cores to match the performance of a small number of very fast cores.

At least for the very exciting high end of things, probably the whole GPGPU is where I would advice people start looking at if they like a challenge which is still being waged. And honestly, when you can get a 1 TFlop ASIC for a few hundred bucks under your desk. A lot of very challenging SW approaches can be investigated.

I think it is a rather exciting time. Once you get past the weird psychological hangup some people have regarding instruction sets which they are never likely to program in assembler for. There is no denying that nowadays you can get a system with a few very fast and aggressive out-of-order cores, with immensely fast data-parallel co-processors, gobs of memory bandwidth, and almost unlimited storage... all at very affordable price points. Imagine having a machine a few years back, which fit neatly under your desk, and allows you to explore MIMD, SIMD programming models, it is able to run different OSs, etc. I would have creamed my pants then, so there is no reason why I should not be very excited about it now.
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
Thanks guys, i feels good to have time again to get lost on the interwebs... ;-)

I understand where SAQ is coming from, I assume he is old school. So he has witnessed the growing pains of the computing field. And who can blame anyone for having a romantic ideal of the past. There are obviously, for us geeks at least, certain emotional attachments to some technologies, which defy logic and enter the realm of aesthetic preferences for example.

RISC was something born as a response to a very specific challenge under a very specific state of things regarding the technology of the time. The thing is that by now, what used to be open ended HW challenges and which deeply shaped this field, have been overcome by competent comoditized products. What I think it happened is that as far as the desktop/workstation/small server are concerned, RISC and CISC processors ended up offering similar execution performance levels. However x86 had a huge inertia due to its larger catalog of applications, and drastically smaller cost due to larger volume of production. Thus, RISC's original value proposition for the desktop et al... evaporated.

Now we are at a point in which personal computers have evolved into very powerful programmable machines, which can execute different programming models in parallel very fast, with very large storage and fast communications...

That the ISA those machines may be ugly, or that their organization may not be the most elegant, or that their OS may not be the most robust become irrelevant when the machine is fast enough and cheap enough. There will be markets which require higher levels of reliability, or higher levels of speed than what commodity stuff offers. But there are also new kids of applications enabled by very powerful cheap machines. So maybe more people can now concentrate on actual Computer Science than on figuring out what the best configuration for a programable machine should be. ;-) .

An old professor of mine used to be adamant about saying that Computer Science is not about computers, in the same sense that Astronomy is not about telescopes.

And if x86 is too ugly, there are cool stuff out there like LLVM. Maybe people can simply create their own ideal processor in software and abstract the x86 out of the equation ;-) Maybe a cool project would be to create an idealized ISA target with all the interesting features from other instruction sets.

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in
sort of sun-god robes on a pyramid with thousand
naked women screaming and throwing little pickles
at you?"
It makes sense, since Google is right now basically competing with Microsoft in almost all their product markets. So I assume they rather eat their own dog food than give business to Microsoft.

BTW, I don't think google was ever a big SUN shop. In fact, I think they have always ran commodity no-name HW + customized linux + gfs from the get go.

Security wise, I am sure Microsoft will also use several hacking incidents involving google.

I most certainly could not have seen Apple having a higher market cap than Microsoft at the beginning of the decade

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in
sort of sun-god robes on a pyramid with thousand
naked women screaming and throwing little pickles
at you?"
fu wrote:
(one of the most puzzling questions of mine still stands: how on earth do people go back to work after witnessing one of steve ballmer's "presentations"?)


Easy: microsoft's gives out very nice checks with lots of figures in them. :-)

Believe it or not Ballmer actually knows slightly of what he talks about, when compared to the rest of "luminaries" that make up a big chunk of the CEO rooster in corporate America (although I assume it is not a purely American phenomenon). Which is reaaaaaaaally scary if you think about it.

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in
sort of sun-god robes on a pyramid with thousand
naked women screaming and throwing little pickles
at you?"
Perl and Smalltalk are good now? ;-)

I kid, I kid.... although I wonder what was the author's criteria to define "good vs. bad" languages.

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in
sort of sun-god robes on a pyramid with thousand
naked women screaming and throwing little pickles
at you?"
I'll have to go with the motherland on this one. Although I am sure the refs will find another creative venue to screw Spain again :roll: I guess FIFA decided our players weren't make a good enough job f-cking up that they needed help.

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in
sort of sun-god robes on a pyramid with thousand
naked women screaming and throwing little pickles
at you?"
My motherland being one of the countries you listed then I should be OK ;-)

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in
sort of sun-god robes on a pyramid with thousand
naked women screaming and throwing little pickles
at you?"
I think what made "office" such a big seller in corporate environments was the whole backoffice (or was it backorifice) and then the whole exchange/lookout integration. Which almost none of the competitors either properly integrated, or missed completely. Also MS undercut almost every other major office suite out there.

I remember when knowing wordperfect commands was a requirement for many secretarial positions and at some point it ran on almost every platform from VMS, to NeXTStep to DOS. Ami ran in windows 2.x which means it may predate Word for windows. In fact the only time I used was when it came in a set of disks, which you ran from DOS and which bootstrapped its own version of windows 2.x to run the program. It sucked.

What I seem to remember from the old days, is that before the "powerpoint" culture there were packages like Harvard Graphics which dominated that sort of market. But the focus I think at that time was more in the generation of charts/graphs than in the production of automated slide shows. I think in the late 80s and early 90s a 3D pie chart with more than 3 colors was still something that caused awe among audiences.

The oldest presentation package I remember using was an odd thing produced by IBM named "IBM Storyboard" does anyone remember using that? The oldest word processors I remember seeing were: Wordstar, WordPerfect, and IBM Writing Assistant.

IMHO Other than the obvious font and WYSIWYG features, and maybe the whole real-time spelling.... most people really do not use more than that out of their word processors. At least I haven't really never needed anything more complex than that when writing letters.

What I despise out of the whole powerpoint culture is that it really limits the way information is presented and exposed. And as for office, I hate the fact that most internal corporate communications now involve people attaching word documents, when they could simply write a simple mail message.... and then those word documents themselves are nothing but a container for a whole excel spreadsheet where the people just dumped raw data. I can't tell you the number of 20+ MB e-mail messages I get per day, where the whole point is the sender telling me "look at this data" (this data being a couple of odd numbers) out of a spreadsheet of tens of megabytes of data. Multiply that by the number of employees involved in the mail thread, and the back and forth that ensues and soon.... you just generate some insane bandwidth requirements just to look at 10 f@#king numbers. It is awesome... ;-)

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in
sort of sun-god robes on a pyramid with thousand
naked women screaming and throwing little pickles
at you?"
dc_v01 wrote:
To some extent, that's true. OTOH, it helps get some people to document work - and that might otherwise not happen. The number of engineers who don't know how to use PowerPoint shocks me, and is only slightly less of a problem than those that won't - "Oh, I don't need to make any slides, I'm just going to hold the design review with the client via WebEx (or in person), pull up the CAD, and go over it directly with them". You know what happens if you let them get away with that, right? Client doesn't remember anything. Expectations magically aren't met. He said/she said.....


True, I know exactly what you mean. My beef with powerpoint is that mos people simply use the templates corporate comes up with. So most presentations end up being more focused on the formating that on the information itself. Some forms of information do not map well to the format pre-stablished, and then fun ensues ;-) Esp. when it comes to share technical information. I would love to see some sort of presentation package which allowed to "build" the information you are trying to convey. Most of the time among the engineering teams I work with, we have to share process information. And it would be great to see visually in a more natural fashion that what powerpoint allows to see the process come together.


Quote:
As per your other point, the only reason a Word file should ever be attached to an email is if its being sent to someone off-site for editing! If not, pdf! Those BS 20MB Word docs often print down to a half meg pdf.


The main reason for those files, is that those are "live" documents. People have to make changes and revisions. I think office is the spawn of the devil, because they focus on shitty incremental useless changes (I mean how many times do they have to move the items in the menu around?). While the real stuff they should be working on: centralized document repositories, for real time, organization-wide updates, and truly "transparent" collaborative workflows are such an afterthought. That people end up doing it the brute force way: via mass e-mail of attachments.

I think that people doing things like openoffice et al, may be focused a bit much in copying everything that is wrong with office and which office does very well, while neglecting what office does poorly and try to find their niche there. How many times does the same single-user word processor paradigm (lol I never thought I would use that word) have to be reinvented, honestly.

Anyhow, speaking of spreadsheets. Does anyone what ever happened to Lotus Improv? I remember reading back in the day when I was a kid, that it was supposed to be the bees knees replacement for 1-2-3. I think it ran on nextstep?

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in
sort of sun-god robes on a pyramid with thousand
naked women screaming and throwing little pickles
at you?"
dc_v01 wrote:
maxsleg wrote:
He is not even close - The Computer History Museum in Mountain View is something else.

Not to derail another thread, but - is it really? Maybe it's improved recently? I visited maybe 6-10 years ago and wasn't too impressed. Better than the one in Boston, though (now closed). The only thing I remember about the latter was they had a cool original Mac prototype, complete with wire-wrapped circuit boards! Would've thought maybe I'd be blown away by some DEC gear, given location.


I think it is the same museum, the packed up the one in Boston and moved it over to the West Coast.

Near where I live, there is a private "museum" I think it is called the digibarn or some such. They have some cool historical exhibits, lots of mac stuff, the people running it are a bit out there. But then again I have lived in hippie central to be used to it.

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in
sort of sun-god robes on a pyramid with thousand
naked women screaming and throwing little pickles
at you?"
(I only worked there for a brief period, so I could be wrong)

From what I know there was technically no "main entrance." There was a main parking lot, which is where they routed all the visitors, and the only somewhat official "entrance" was the reception area in Building 43, which was were the graphics group was. At least that is where I think visitors and day passes were issued.

I was at the MTI building in that campus, which was next to the one you were in, the only distinguishing feature besides the gaudy purple colors, was ironically the dumpster which was painted to resemble an Indigo box.

I forgot the exact numbering of the buildings in that campus, since every silicon valley outfit has a different arbitrary numbering/naming scheme for their buildings/rooms. So I stop paying attention a few companies back.

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in
sort of sun-god robes on a pyramid with thousand
naked women screaming and throwing little pickles
at you?"
hamei wrote:
sybrfreq wrote:
MS has to stay in business somehow ...

Why ?



*weakly raises hand*
Be..be..because I still have them in my portfolio? :cry:

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in
sort of sun-god robes on a pyramid with thousand
naked women screaming and throwing little pickles
at you?"
LOL. Fat chance Hamei: I hate capitalism, but I love retirement.

I am a man of many contradictions. :P

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in
sort of sun-god robes on a pyramid with thousand
naked women screaming and throwing little pickles
at you?"
It basically looks like they threw a few hundred small form factor computers, with a relatively slow interconnection, no ECC in the system whatsoever, all densely packaged with very limited cooling.

I imagine this thing is basically a very densely packed web serving fabric. Which may actually make sense, however from an architectural standpoint it is pretty boring.

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in
sort of sun-god robes on a pyramid with thousand
naked women screaming and throwing little pickles
at you?"
Given that Apple has passed Microsoft's market cap, I wager to say that it is working pretty well. ;-)

I think geeks (me included) need to understand that there is a difference between "we don't like it" from a technical standpoint, and "it does not work" as a commercial strategy.

Jobs, as much of an insane narcissistic megalomaniac he may be, understood that the key for his company to thrive was to focus on margins. Thus he can't compete with the same value propositions from the wintel generic boxes which are based around wafer thin margins. I guess the strategy for apple is that if you want customization: go to Windows or better yet go to Linux/BSD which are as customizable as it gets. If you want a well integrated, designer box which is intuitive and gets out of the way/just works out of the box then go to Apple.

One can't argue with success.

It is sad that technology is always hold hostage to marketing, but that is capitalism for you I guess.

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in
sort of sun-god robes on a pyramid with thousand
naked women screaming and throwing little pickles
at you?"
dc_v01: I think SGI only got right the "designer box" part of that strategy ;-)

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in
sort of sun-god robes on a pyramid with thousand
naked women screaming and throwing little pickles
at you?"
You people need to get laid... :lol:

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in
sort of sun-god robes on a pyramid with thousand
naked women screaming and throwing little pickles
at you?"
Neither. Please.

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in
sort of sun-god robes on a pyramid with thousand
naked women screaming and throwing little pickles
at you?"
:? Okayyyyyy...... let's just say we have very differing tastes then.

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in
sort of sun-god robes on a pyramid with thousand
naked women screaming and throwing little pickles
at you?"
dc_v01 wrote:
maxleg wrote: In fact, in general the Airbus family suck. The A340s used on the Munich => SFO root are horrible.

I haven't personally noted an issue with the A340 (Liked premium economy on Thai), but a colleague hates the 340 compared to the 747 for long haul flights simply because the cruising speed is so much slower, the flights are often an hour longer. Not sure about the 777.


I have flown both the 340 and 747-400s plenty of times in similar routes and I honestly did not notice much flight time differences in the same leg of the trip. Given that both planes have fairly close cruising speeds (the 747 is faster by 0.2 mach at best) maybe it is a placebo effect more than anything?

As some people pointed out, the difference in comfort simply comes down to airline configuration and their staff. To me there is far more difference between airlines, than the planes themselves. I tend to avoid American carriers for international flights as much as possible.

I have also noted a clear correlation between amount of booze I can get during the flight and the positive performance of the plane ;-)
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
Because obviously no commercial software package has ever sucked, under delivered, or become vaporware.
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
MisterDNA wrote: I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this one. They were amazing in their day and age, but there are still people out there developing dead-serious stuff for them. What am I missing here? Should I get one and find out for myself?


Well, you're on a website dedicated to a dead and outdated HW/SW platform... so you have the answer to your own question ;-)
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
Speaking of VMS. It seems the openvms hobbyist website is no longer available, does that mean that there are no more hobby licenses granted?

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
Alver wrote:
But... like I said before... if you buy a huge 18-wheeler Kenworth truck capable of pulling 80 tons of load... why would you put a 14 year old behind the wheel, and never get out of first gear? Use HPUX dammit! :P


I am trying to compute how that analogy is supposed to work, but I keep throwing an exception... :P Compared to modern processors, those PA chips are more like an old pick up truck trying to keep up with the commodity Kenworth truck ;-)

Linux in HP-PA works fine as long as you keep yourself to one PA-8800 or PA-8900 chips in your C8000. Apparently, there are no developers with access to multichip C8000s or PA Superdomes, so the main issue with Linux in this architecture is that the algorithm for SMP coherency is rather "brute force" and since the latest PAs had very large L2s (32MB and 64MB respectively) things like cache flushes can induce some serious overhead.

HP-UX is a pretty plain Sys V OS, however some of the stuff which makes it "interesting" comes in the form of add ons which require pretty penny licenses. So for people who want to have a much "nicer" experience with a Sys V, I'd recommend Solaris. But if you have access to the media, and maybe some of the layered products, HP-UX will support the HW much better than Linux obviously. HP-UX is rock solid albeit a tad old. Basically it really is a "no-frills" Unix, so probably not that "exciting" for the enthusiast. It's a pity because I thought a lot of the cool stuff from Tru64 (esp. the cluster technology) would have made it over to HP-UX. Alas...

The thing that annoyed me the most about HP-UX is that 3rd party products (esp. open source packages) are installed in individual subdirectories in /opt. I can see the original intention, but after you install a GNU tool chain for example, you end up with tens (if not well over a hundred) subdirectories under /opt which you need to add to the PATH. Ugh.

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
The concept of register windows ended up being a hinderance for SPARC when trying to scale the architecture for out-of-order operation (In a similar fashion as the branch delay slot was for MIPS).

The main highlight of SPARC IMHO is that it is a truly open architecture, i.e. the ISA is in the public domain as a IEEE standard. A pity that not that many vendors based their micros around it.

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
For what it is worth, the 101 is a trailing economic indicator. So if you're not stuck in traffic during expected rush hours be afraid, be very afraid, esp. if you're a tech worker.
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
It must be that time of the month.... :D
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
You need the HP-UX 11.11 Graphics Technical Computing Environment, which can be dowloaded for free from here:

https://h20392.www2.hp.com/portal/swdep ... er=B6268AA

As for HP-UX patches, unless you know or have access to anyone with a support contract, you're pretty much out of luck. Are you also sure you're using the correct parameters for the serial port of the computer acting as a console?

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
gkl wrote:
It's nice and quiet, so I have it out as my living room's UNIX workstation. I tried doing development work on it, but my understanding of HP-UX's libc and the HP compiler are still limited, and I can't get some of my code to compile correctly. It also pulls a lot of power and I've already got to worry about keeping the electric bill down though, so I'm afraid it doesn't see as much use as I'd like.


A few things about developing on HP-UX, you need to have the latest patches esp. for the linker and the c-library or trying to compile/port anything moderately modern will fail miserably. Esp. if you want to use a relatively recent version of GCC.

Also, in HP-UX stdarg.h has to be included before stdio.h , it took me ages to figure that one out. But it makes a lot of difference with gnuish code. It is 40 years after, and we're still living with some of the half assed issues induced by C (and later C++).

Quote:
Does anyone know anything about these input devices? I'd like to think that the C8000 shipped with a UNIX-style keyboard, but hell if I can find ANY such keyboards sold by anyone other than Sun (or the Happy Hacking Keyboard).


I assume by "Unix" keyboard, you mean one that the control and caps lock keys swapped, right? In that case, xmodmap is your friend. Shouldn't be too hard to get it working that on HP-UX. However the machine is rather picky about which USB keyboards it likes...

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
jimmer wrote:
turn Macs into high-priced, high-turnover commodity machines

Turn? surely Macs have been exactly that for quite a while now....




Psssst. Apple's business plan has revolved around the commoditization of computers, and to make as much money from that process as possible, from day 1. In fact that is the whole point of this industry, it is a very well kept secret so careful passing it on.

With no commodities, there are no products. With no products, there is no value added. Without continuous demand to pay more for the added value from the product than the sum of its commodities, there is no profit. And without profit, there are no shareholders. And without the shareholders, there are no corporations. And without corporations, there is no monetary system. And without a monetary system, we won't be able to trade baseball cards with pictures of death presidents on them. And without funny looking pictures of death presidents on them, the universe gets really mad and it ceases to exit.

So really, at the end of the day Apple is just a corporation who is doing us all a favor saving the universe by being so good at capitalism. Don't hate the player, hate the game... etc, etc.
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
Geek concerns aside, dying of pancreatic cancer is a horrible fate.

In the end, Steve Jobs ended up becoming the computing big brother he warned people about with that expensive TV ad in 1984. But perhaps that matters little, some people like the products of his company, and they decide Apple gets to be the one who parts them from their hard earned money.

As I said somewhere else, don't hate the player, hate the game... etc, etc.

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
Oskar45 wrote:
R-ten-K wrote:
[...] some people like the products of his company, and they decide Apple gets to be the one who parts them from their hard earned money.
And what alternatives do you recommend?



For pretty much every product apple sells there are alternatives. So I don't know what to recommend, since I have no clue what your requirements are.

I personally am not a big fan of walled gardens, but my wife loves her iOS devices. For tastes, there are colors...

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
There is a huge matrix of products and options in the marketplace. Just the MacBoo Pro vs Air are two very different product categories, for example.

It all depends on what you're looking for performance-wise, your own personal tastes to aesthetics/ergonomics, price range, battery options, etc, etc, etc, etc.

I have both a Macbook Air and a Thinkpad, neither of them are perfect, but they both get the job/tasks I need them for done.

_________________
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
Truly sad news, my condolences to his family and loved ones.

Many of us wouldn't be here without his contributions.
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
That is a bit of a chicken an egg problem, no? C was fundamental to the development of Unix. You could not have one without the other.

The whole "doing the right thing" is a highly subjective qualitative estimation, which can lead to catastrophic results sometimes. The motivation for C was a study in tradeoffs between portability/performance/expressivity for a systems language, to be used to design and implement a portable/multiuser operating system. What eventually became Unix.


It is kind of unfair to piggyback the "liberation from Von Neumann architectures" as a responsibility under the context C was developed and intended for, specially since Backus was as responsible (if not more) for their entrenchment.


Not saying that C or Unix are perfect. But I think your critique was a bit unfair.
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"