Comment Re:More smartphones than pc's ? (Score 1) 329
You buy a phone once a year vs a PC once every 3 years. I would expect 3x more smartphone shipments than PCs.
More to the point: we now spend more on each phone than we spend on a new desktop.
You buy a phone once a year vs a PC once every 3 years. I would expect 3x more smartphone shipments than PCs.
More to the point: we now spend more on each phone than we spend on a new desktop.
IA32 today is little more than an encoding for a sequence of RISC instructions, and the decoder takes up very little silicon.
Stated without proof. The decoder is per-core, so you can't immediately see the amount of real estate it takes up. To avoid decoding the same instructions multiple times Intel has the complex "loop stream detector" logic. I'm sure that's not the end of it, somebody whose business this is might comment. And besides the real estate this logic consumes (which on ARM would instead be devoted to more cores) this all eats energy. I doubt this in itself accounts for the power efficiency multiple Bruce claims, and I wonder where he got his numbers. But it certainly counts for something.
Anyway, power efficiency is far from Intel's biggest problem with ARM. The real issue is price. Intel just can't afford to sell power efficient processors at the price ARMS cost, that work well enough to compete with its big server and desktop iron. One word: margins.
Sony, on the other hand, is in serious trouble. If anyone's getting out of the console business, they'll be first to go.
Actually, Sony's console business is doing pretty well, making money on both hardware and software especially the latter. Sony's losses are due mainly to getting completely hammered in the tv market. (Koreans set took it upon themselves to drive Japan out of the TV market and by all appearances are now just mopping up.) What Sony can't afford is another disastrous specs war with Microsoft. I expect, next generation neither will be foolish enough to try to cram state of the art hardware into a space that just can't dissipate the heat. Next generation will be about leveraging bespoke game properties like Little Big Planet and Playstation at Home and not trying to take over the world. Basically, Big Console had its last hurrah and the torch is now passed to mobile and indie gaming.
Worse than the flag, that's an achievement.
It's lossless, duh. Transcode it.
The files are 24-bit and support for decoding 24-bit Apple lossless in Linux is lacking. Being lossless is nice only if it's in a usable format.
More whining, it's getting old. Transcode it on an Apple computer if you must. Feh, what kind of geek are you.
WRT the print edition quality, most world-class musicians prefer autograph scores.
Eh, no they don't. This is an autograph score.
Unfortunately, Musopen provided the content in Apple lossless format instead of a widely used, open, non-patent-encumbered format such as FLAC.
It's lossless, duh. Transcode it.
I've never had a problem with using urtext sheet music; by definition, untouched by an editor...
Not bad post, especially considering the nonsense you responded to, however... you're not right about the definition of urtext. Perhaps you have not heard of Wiener Urtext Edition? And by the way, I always play from urtext when I can get it. It is very definitely an edition.
The great weakness with this is that the value of sheet music is in the edition. Just as books benefit from a good editor, so does music. My girlfriend has a music degree, and blah blah blah drivel drivel [appeal to authority]...
Well I have a music degree and I just read through a good chunk of the Goldberg variations and I am pleased with the quality of it. I will print it out and enjoy playing it. As for your Slashdot post, I would respectfully ask you to refrain from further damaging your own credibility with respect to this subject, of which you are by all appearances completely ignorant.
I won't email Eben about this, because I'm not about to use either license in any code...
I will email Eben with a request to update the commentary with respect to GPL v3. I'm not sure why you won't, even though you are willing to comment publicly on the question.
the MS-PL is compatible with GPLv3, just not with GPLv2
It depends who you ask. The FSF states clearly that Ms-PL is incompatible with GPL, period, no version specified.
Yes... and that description hasn't changed since MS-PL first made headlines on Slashdot... which was before GPLv3 first made headliens on Slashdot. My guess is that nobody at FSF has bothered to update the MS-PL description since GPLv3 was created.
That's your opinion, or is it legal advice? And are you seriously suggesting that the FSF does not pay careful attention to the accuracy of information it posts on its license information page? Why don't you email Eben Moglen and ask?
Did you just say the ends justify the means?
I didn't, and I will thank you not to put words in my mouth, troll. Microsoft's reasons for design the MS-PL as it did are transparently obvious, apparently to all but you. Unlike MS-PL, the GPL v3 is a major success, clearly an improvement on v2.
the MS-PL is compatible with GPLv3, just not with GPLv2
It depends who you ask. The FSF states clearly that Ms-PL is incompatible with GPL, period, no version specified.
The GPL v3 accomplished the important goal of extending GPL compatibility to the Apache license among others. Losing compatibility with GPL v2 has been at most a minor annoyance while bringing Apache into the fold has proved to be of major importance.
As you say, a Youtube comment means nothing. Let's see what the resolution with Blender is, and let's see just what the patent grant is. The truth could range anywhere from cynical manipulation to awesome gift to humanity. Frankly I've seen too much cynical manipulation to be awfully hopeful about the latter though.
All great discoveries are made by mistake. -- Young
