Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:100 times better, but 20% energy savings? (Score 1) 90 90

I would ass-u-me that this would mean that over a period of time X, a current generation chip would process Y commands consuming N units of energy.

The new chip would perform 2Y commands over X time while only consuming .8N units of energy.

Or that each command execution would take 80% of the energy of a current gen chip, but that it could complete twice as many of them in the same time period, meaning a net increase of ~60% energy consumption at sustained max load.

Tons of ways to play with the statistics on this one, and the 100% performance improvement and 20% energy efficiency improvement are not mutually exclusive. But the summary doesn't give any context or detail, so without RTFA, it should be considered nothing more than marketing speak.


Comment Why all the hate? (Score 1, Insightful) 257 257

I don't really get all the hate here towards Windows 10, often from people who haven't even tried it.

I've been running it since November and I love it. It was really flaky at first, especially with audio and video playing issues, but that's all been smoothed out and it's running great, faster than Windows 7 even, on my 6 year old desktop machine. And it worked fine and automatically installed all the drivers on my fairly new work laptop.

Just my opinion but I still don't get the outright hatred other than just the familiar slashdot anti-microsoft groupthink.

Comment Re:The argument is "leaky" at best too (Score 1) 195 195

I would correct that even further.

It isn't about the fittest or death risk, it's about being able to procreate and survive.

In your species example of the 4, 6, and 10 mph creature. If the live birth rate of the creature declines as their speed increases (musculature takes energy/hormones away from breeding, high speed movements cause more lost pregnancies, etc...) than the 4mph species may actually be the winner as they will out-bread the 6 and 10mph variants.

Now, throw a 5 mph predator into the mix and the picture may change. If the 4mph variant can still breed fast enough to offset the deaths to the predator and out populate the higher speed variants, then it could still be the winner.

More likely though, the 6mph critter would win out as it is able to out breed the 10mph critter and would suffer significantly less losses than the 4mph critter to 5mph predators.

It all comes down to procreation. Which is the basic of the movie Idiocracy.


Comment The bigger issue (Score 4, Interesting) 147 147

This bug is in the JIT optimizer of the 4.6 framework. For apps you are developing, it's absolutely no problem, you just go into the compiler settings and uncheck the 'optimize' setting.

The problem though, is that the 4.6 framework is an in-place replacement for the 4.5 framework, which was an in-place replacement for the 4.0 framework. And the JIT optimizer is on by default. So if you install the 4.6 framework, it could potentially introduce this bug into any application developed targeting the 4.0, 4.5, or 4.6 framework that is already distributed.

Luckily, it appears as though the issue is a combination of a nullable int that has a bug in the boxing/unboxing of it's operator when calling the .hasValue method. So the actual number of places where this will actually pop up is hopefully quite limited.

That said, MS better get this patch deployed ASAP. Or if you are in a critical hurry, the correction has already been committed to the .Net Git repo, so you can brave a build from that.


A fanatic is a person who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. - Winston Churchill