Let's review, the servers the company had on-side got damaged, so they expedited their plans to move to off-site servers.
Oh, and the off-site server is called a "cloud" service in this article.
What's new? What am I missing here?
Will that work with different nvidia cards? Ie, one 4500 and one 5000?
I think I tried this and it did not, but I can't remember the details of everything I attempted.
I can relate to this.
Granted, I have seen it work just fine with different cards.
But with nvidia, I have two different cards and, yep, can't move a window from one screen to another.
debian linux on x86_64
From Wikipedia:
General writs of assistance played an important role in the increasing tensions that led to the American Revolution and the creation of the United States of America. In 1760, Great Britain began to enforce some of the provisions of the Navigation Acts by granting customs officers these writs. In New England, smuggling had become common. However, officers could not search a person's property without giving a reason. Colonists protested that the writs violated their rights as British subjects. The colonists had several problems with these writs. They were permanent and even transferable: the holder of a writ could assign it to another. Any place could be searched at the whim of the holder, and searchers were not responsible for any damage they caused. This put anyone who had such a writ above the law.
Does this not bear a resemblance to what is going on today?
Let us re-visit the 4th amendment:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Well how about this, I know this will be earth shattering to some, but the new Mac Pro might not be perfect for every application.
Personally, if I had to do some high-end computing, I would probably buy a rack of high-end PCs with linux on them.
I don't think I would bother trying to build the ultimate performance machine into a desktop. This computer Apple is selling is not intended to be the ultimate server or number cruncher. It's designed for high-end desktop publishing, audio and video editing. That's all.
If we're really switching to LEDs, why bother with these PWM-ish schemes anyway? Just use a transistor (collector) to drive the LED with a variable amount of current. This has got to be cleaner in terms of RFI, no possibility of flicker, etc.
Of course, this would not work equally well for every LED, some tuning woud be necessary... And probably a lot less efficient (but better power factor).
So then what, use encryption anyway and don't identify?
As much as I hate to say it, if you don't cause any problems or interference, you'll never even be noticed.
Ships in international waters do this all the time, sometimes with a license, mostly without.
By "some parts" you mean adding nice PCI expansion cards? Ram? Hard disk?
I think you can do all that with the new cylinder Mac. The cards will be external thunderbolt peripherals, but it's the same idea. Hard disk, even if it's not replaceable, with all that external bandwidth, you can probably find a port to stick one on. Ram is probably upgradable.
As for the CPU, if it's soldered down, all the better. Makes the machine smaller and simpler to engineer and probably more reliable. If you really think it's so important to get the next 10% higher clock speed CPU (of the same pin-compatible series), then this machine isn't for you -- go buy some blue LEDs at radioshack and a fan and put them in your PC, and then head over to egghead.com and waste your cash on a ever-so-slightly faster CPU.
You're comparing number of cores and ram. There are so many other factors.
But...
My advice to you is to go buy the machine with the most cores and most ram and be happy with it, since this new model is clearly identical to the previous model. You can also go join the so-called MHz war if you wish.
Folks,
I just read ten posts above about lack of upgradability.
Who cares!?
It's not a big deal. The days of upgrading your pc every few years are over. Two years after buying this machine, Apple will release a newer version. The newer version will be so much better (faster bus, etc), that the older one will be left in the dust and on ebay for $499.
Things have been headed this way for a long while now. Why upgrade when it's only a little more to get a new machine with the best and latest/greatest hardware inside? This argument didn't hold as much weight in the past when the computer ecosystem moved slower. These days though, we move faster.
I like upgrading because it's an interest of mine to spend/waste my time getting things as fast and cool as possible, but honestly, this is more for fun than anything. If my professional life depended on a few more GB/s, I would drop down the money and upgrade at every chance I have.
Max out the ram and other options when you buy it, and make the most of it until there's a new model.
I can relate. My username here comes from wanting to show that there are other open source alternatives to GNU.
But yes, I got fed up with Windows in the 3.11 days. I switched to Mac and Linux (and Solaris, Irix, and eventually BSD). These systems worked for me, they did what I told them to, and if they didn't, I had the time to figure it out and make it work. Eventually I became a mac user on the desktop and a debian linux fan on the server. I sort of wrote "desktop linux" off as a sort of neat but too experimental aspect of linux long ago.
These days, it's really quite amazing how much can be done with almost any mainstream platform (except maybe Windows 8, boy, that's a strange one). Computers no longer crash on a daily basis, windows has networking and multi-user support, etc.
So I do find the line is a lot grayer than it once was.
However...
At my new job, I was issued a PC with Windows 7. I have to tell you, I was impressed with how far Windows has gotten since Windows 3.11, Windows 98, etc. The thing actually was stable. I could plug in USB devices and not face the blue screen of death. I felt the UI was a bit dated, but I was willing to accept that for stability.
And this went on for a few weeks until I had a need to write a program. I mean, this was a simple program, but I felt so much resistance from the Windows platform itself towards my getting this done. Fiddled with Microsoft's compiler/IDE/VisualXYZ/MSDN/whatever it is, got fed up with the minutia. I tried Cygwin... Not really integrated enough, too different from the built-in system.
Got fed up with it, downloaded a debian linux net install cd. Haven't rebooted since. Desktop linux has also come a long way since the days of editing XF86Config and trying to get OpenGL running. The system practically caters towards developers. It's awesome. So many programs, compilers, editors, environments... And all the tools I was used to.
So yes, I agree, Windows is not the awfulness it was back in the day (except perhaps this make the desktop the tablet and make the tablet the desktop Windows 8 crap that I tried for five minutes at a computer store).
But I don't need it, I can do better.
The device is called a "firewall" and is set up by an "IT Professional"
You tell the IT guys when (or if) you want that company to be able to connect in remotely. That's it.
To restore a sense of reality, I think Walt Disney should have a Hardluckland. -- Jack Paar
