hog

[Rich Grise]

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 15:24:42 -0800, Winfield Hill wrote:

Rich Grise wrote...

... nobody gets paid to develop Linux stuff; it's a labor of love,
and I'm surmising there's a (an?) "I'm gonna do it _my_ way" kind
of vibe around it.

My hunch is most linux programmers these days are in fact paid
to do their programming. People at IBM, Novell, and elsewhere.
One of the fellows here at the Institute works on fixing Linux
USB problems. He does this mostly at work, while getting paid,
and is proud of his contributions now residing in the kernel.

Cool!

Thanks for this!
Rich

 

[keith]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 22:52:00 -0500, mc wrote:

32 CPUs on one chip?

That's one to run the OS, 1 to run the app, and 30 to run the spyware
processes...

If you got smart and dumped WinBlows and Outhouse Express, you
wouldn't need thirty of those. ;-)/2

--
Keith

 

[keith]

On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 17:14:29 +0000, Ken Smith wrote:

In article <pan.2005.01.22.16.43.47.743442@att.bizzzz>,
keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 22:52:00 -0500, mc wrote:

32 CPUs on one chip?

That's one to run the OS, 1 to run the app, and 30 to run the spyware
processes...

If you got smart and dumped WinBlows and Outhouse Express, you
wouldn't need thirty of those. ;-)/2

At work I use Windoze98 and Lookout. I don't have Word, Excel etc
installed and I've crippled the ability of Outlook to fire up external
programs etc. The result is a machine that is too dumb to catch most
viruses or worms. It still has all of the useful productivity
improving features of Windows ie: I can run more than one DOS prompt at a
time. The result is a machine that does what I need one to do.

Win9x?! Blech!!

If all I needed was a DOS launcher and Internet stuff, I'd still
dump WinBlows, but go back to OS/2. In any case there is no excuse to keep
LookOut Express, LookOut, and IE. You're asking for Malware. You may have
dumbed you system down, but M$ is indescribably dumb.

BTW: For a while I had an XP machine. I returned it to the IT guy by
placing it in garbage cans in front of his office door. I was spending
all of my time trying to make the darn thing work and none on doing what
I get paid for. It was a much faster machine in terms of clock speed
but everything took longer to run.

I turned down a laptop "upgrade" at work. I'll keep my old one and Win2K,
thanks. Of course the "upgrade" wasn't (replace a ThinkPad A21p with an
R50? I don't think so!).

--
Keith

 

[Ken Smith]

In article <pan.2005.01.22.17.42.01.888711@att.bizzzz>,
keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
[...]

If all I needed was a DOS launcher and Internet stuff, I'd still
dump WinBlows, but go back to OS/2.

I don't own a copy of OS/2

In any case there is no excuse to keep
LookOut Express, LookOut, and IE.

I don't use IE and LookOut (Non-express) is not there either.

You're asking for Malware. You may have
dumbed you system down, but M$ is indescribably dumb.

I haven't had any in quite a while. It all assumes things that aren't
true about my work machine. My home machine runs Linux and my laptop has
DOS on it.



--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge

 

[Greg Neff]

On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 11:52:53 -0500, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 08:43:53 -0500, Greg Neff wrote:

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:48:16 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote:


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/01/19/intel_smithfield_power/

John

Intel processors have always been power hogs. That's one big reason
why we opted to use PowerPCs running QNX/Linux/VxWorks for embedded
projects. We use the MPC8250 on a few projects. This device is
highly integrated. We use the part in configurations like this:

- 603e PowerPC processor core @ 265MHz
Do note: ^^^^^^

- RISC communications coprocessor @ 132MHz
- Memory management unit
- 64bit data bus interface @ 44MHz
- SDRAM controller
- Floating point unit
- 16KB instruction and data caches
- 2 UARTs
- 1 TDM serial interface
- 1 100Base-T Ethernet MAC
- 2 10Base-T Ethernet MACs
- 1 SPI interface
- 1 I2C interface

Total power dissipation running all of the above is about 2W. This
part comes in a 480 pin BGA package that incorporates a copper plate
for heat dissipation. Not only does this part not need a fan, at room
temperature it doesn't even need a heat sink. For operation over the
full industrial temperature range a heat sink is needed, but again
there is no fan required. There are newer PowerPCs that are even more
power efficient, and can run much faster.

There are newer and even more power-hungry PowerPCs too (I work on one;-).
265MHz is pretty damned slow. I'm sure a C3 or something from Transmeta
would be pretty miserly at that speed too.

The reason "Intel" uses so much power is to get the *frewuency*. To get
the frequency, advanced processes are used. Advanced processes leak like
sieves. Power goes through the roof. The limit on frequency is power.
The limit on power is the ability to cool the chip.

Your 265MHz PowerPC is in a way different market than the P4 space heater.

Clearly. I should have also said that at the time we did our
evaluation we found that a comparable Intel based solution used much
more power (I forget the exact multiple) than the PowerPC based
solution.

================================

Greg Neff
VP Engineering
*Microsym* Computers Inc.
greg@guesswhichwordgoeshere.com

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 12:26:38 -0500, Keith Williams <krw@att.bizzzz>
wrote:

In article <f4d2v0d7i7ov0rcscmc83rqj7t4flpkjh9@4ax.com>,
pb@notthisbit.osiris1.co.uk says...
[snip]

I may be nuts, but 125A draw for a microprocessor is just plain silly.
Why don't these chip manufacturers up the signal/supply voltages these
devices can handle and balance VA out a bit more evenly in the
interests of better overall efficiency?

Why not indeed...

1. Have you ever considered that P~CV^^2? That V^^2 part is a killer.
Indeed the voltage is being forced down to reduce power.

2. Now that we've gone into the deep-deep, sub-micron geometries,
leakage becomes significant. Again, the current is a high order
function of voltage. Indeed, the voltage is being forced down to
reduce power.

3. Gate oxides are only a few atoms thick (see leakage #2 above). At
higher voltages the gates will break down. ...not good.

3. You haven't invented a DC integrated transformer for us to "balance
VA out a bit more").

It's Burridge, what can you say beyond his already admitted, "I may be
nuts"?

For a gate driving a capacitance, C, I=CVf

Note how the current is proportional to V!

And with speeds going out of sight (even crufty processes are yielding
20ps propagation times), the current spikes are less with smaller VDD.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[Paul Burridge]

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 12:26:38 -0500, Keith Williams <krw@att.bizzzz>
wrote:

Why not indeed...

1. Have you ever considered that P~CV^^2? That V^^2 part is a killer.
Indeed the voltage is being forced down to reduce power.

2. Now that we've gone into the deep-deep, sub-micron geometries,
leakage becomes significant. Again, the current is a high order
function of voltage. Indeed, the voltage is being forced down to
reduce power.

3. Gate oxides are only a few atoms thick (see leakage #2 above). At
higher voltages the gates will break down. ...not good.

3. You haven't invented a DC integrated transformer for us to "balance
VA out a bit more").

Thanks for throwing me a bone.
I apologise to everyone for yet another stupid question and will crawl
back into my kennel like the mangy cur I am.

--

"What is now proved was once only imagin'd." - William Blake, 1793.

 

[Mark Jones]

Ken Smith wrote:

In article <pan.2005.01.21.01.01.47.970551@example.net>,
Rich Grise <richgrise@example.net> wrote:
[...]

Eek! PLEASE don't do it in 8051s. ;-) For this kind of app, I'd go with
something very much like a 6502, or maybe even 6805. But the 8051 sucks.


How much will you pay me not to use an 8051?
(If you don't give me your money that puppies get it)


Of course, the chorus will say, "Use a PIC!" and one or two dissidents
will say, "Use an AVR!".


Not a one of them will suggest the CD1802 or 1805. This is too bad
because I think I could get more money from you for not using the 1802.



What was "The Connection Machine" made of? I just did a quick search, and
apparently they're museum pieces:
http://mission.base.com/tamiko/cm/index.html


I was at a show where one was on display. I don't know if it was real or
a fake partly because the lady "manning the booth" was good looking.

Her: There are 16 thousand processors!

Me: What type of processors are they?

Her: Little bitty ones.

So now you know.

Was it one of these ladies?
http://mission.base.com/tamiko/cm/going/tadtbc.html