|
I am not sure what this device "really" offers. It is kind of odd device to me.
The Nexus 7 tablet, however, is a great deal.
|
|
|
|
|
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote: The Nexus 7 tablet, however, is a great deal.
Totally agree, Quad Core Cpu and 12 Core GPU it has to rock especially for 199usd
As for the Nexus Q, I think it could be summarised as a D-Link Boxee Box on Steroids!
|
|
|
|
|
Seriously ? a device WITH wires... ?
|
|
|
|
|
name a common electronic device that doesn't have wires?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pretty sure it still has wires. To start at the obvious one, a power cord. To go to the technical definition, even the metallic lines on a PCB are wires, so unless it manages to function without any circuits it still has wires.
Not to mention, in pretty much every situation wired network connection will outperform a wireless one, and I don't know of a better way to send picture and video to most TVs (yes some support WiFi, but they are the minority).
|
|
|
|
|
Using the APIs of Facebook and Foursquare, the website We Know What You're Doing mines the public status updates and check-ins of random strangers and republishes them, telling us who’s unhappy at work, been partying a bit too hard, or is a little too generous with their contact information. [ITworld]
|
|
|
|
|
For some of us, the issue isn't that someone could track us and what we do. The issue is the fact that it would reveal just how depressing our existance really is. 
|
|
|
|
|
The Death Star has cleared the moon, and the X Wings have all but been wiped out. Patent Wars looks to be stepping up as a US judge orders Samsung to stop selling Galaxy tables in the US. This order will go into effect as soon as Apple lodges a $2.6m bond to protect Samsung from damages should the ruling go their way. Source[^]
|
|
|
|
|
US Court/Justice system - so pathetically amateurish.
The EU bangs Microsoft and Intel for Euros-By-The-Billion (the new plan to help the Greek Economy).
I believe it's time for revolution: turn-about is fair play.
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
During TechEd 2012, Telerik announced their first commercial library for building Windows 8 Metro applications. This control library is a set of controls for XAML and HTML apps. User can chose the language of their own choice and deliver a high end Windows 8 enterprise and consumer applications using these controls.
In this blog post, I will describe more about the controls and guide you to kick start with your Metro application development using the Telerik RadControls. The controls set is neither yet released nor available publicly to download. In case you want a special early adopter access, this blog post will help you to get one too.
|
|
|
|
|
all you need to know is here[^]
Steve
_________________
I C(++) therefore I am
|
|
|
|
|
I invented/discovered/came-upon "Inverse Fizzbuzz" while mucking about with Scala & Partial Functions. While Fizzbuzz answers the question "Can Shipper code?", Inverse Fizzbuzz tells you "How well does Shipper code?" Given a list of strings, what's the nerdiest thing you can do?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Microbenchmarks are evil. Ya, I said it. Folks spend hours in tight loops measuring things trying to find out the "best way" to do something and forget that while they are changing 5ms between two techniques they've missed the 300ms Database Call or the looming N+1 selects issue that has their ORM quietly making even more database calls. Fun with Microbenchmarks!
|
|
|
|
|
Terrence Dorsey wrote: Folks spend hours in tight loops measuring things trying to find out the "best way" to do something
Really? I mean, really?
In my experience when anyone dares to wonder aloud if a pice of code could be done more efficiently, There's a barrage of an out-of-context "Premature Optimization is the Root of All Evil!" raining down on a poor guy wanting to learn.
They always claim "folks spend hours squeezing useless microseconds." Without even as much as anecdotical evidence. Optimization is the new goto.*
I think this mantra is an excuse to ignore performance questions - because the "first make it run, then make it fast" is based on an assumption that fails on modern hardware: that performance problems are isolated. Wondering if something can be made faster is the best way to demystify the compiler, especially for people who never used low-level languages.
[edit] Oh wait, Scott just had to pull a "I'm not a witch" defense before doing some microoptimizations.
*) which is appropriate only because of the original source of the quote.
|
|
|
|
|
|
There was a time where you could significantly improve the memcpy of the standard libraries. More than one, actually - and sometimes it even did matter.
With the move towards more-RISCiesque instruction timings, looping and unrolling would improve over REP MOVSD especially for large blocks.
With the move to better optimizers, an inlined loop could omit alignment arithmetics, and use SIMD instructions.
So it depends when and what for that guy did it
|
|
|
|
|
|
_beauw_ wrote: So are you saying that on the new Intel chips, REP MOVSx is
actually slower than an unrolled loop?
I honestly don't know for todays processors, but around the early Pentiums, indeed. Some mix of branch prediction, unrolling and instruction pairing I guess. Intel and AMD were throwing their resources on the most frequent instructions, pairing and branch prediction, so the more complex ones had to take a back seat. That's what I meant with the "more RISCIeque" instruction set: improving the throughput for simple instructions.
_beauw_ wrote: By SIMD I presume you mean MMX / SSE / SSE2 / 3DNow! instructions, right?
Yes. And no, REP MOVs is not one of them, though it could be. I got out of assembly stuff at the time SSE was gaining wide support, but - again, IIRC - using MMX to load and store 64 bits at once was like magic.
My point being that if the guy you know is *ahem* not 15 anymore, and he isn't doing that now without good reason, he's not as crazy as it might sound today.
And some habits die hard. I only recently gave up my "file header decorations" that are clearly from the time before source control.
|
|
|
|
|
peterchen wrote: I honestly don't know for todays processors
It still is, but the details have changed (non-temporal stores, prefetching hints)
|
|
|
|
|
Pretty soon we'll have people writing video encoders in C# (with LINQ of course), and much bawwwing about how it can't possibly be made any faster without violating the religion of the authors will ensue when people start complaining that it's two orders of magnitude slower than x264.
Or has this already happened?
Huh, optimize cash[sic] usage you say? What does switching the order of these loops have to do with my financials?
What is SSE? Some sort of utility company[^]?
There's also enough wrong with his benchmark that he's ironically right about one thing: some people should not be micro-optimizing.
|
|
|
|
|
One of the fundamental truths of software development is that you have to write code, but one of the biggest fallacies is the idea that writing code is your job. When I first started out as a software developer, I fell into that trap - writing code is a powerful thing, its empowering, you feel like you are productive and you are accomplishing things. However, what I have learned over the years is the real truth of the matter. The truth that the job of a software developer is to write as little code as possible. Other things being equal, a simpler program is better than a more complex one.
|
|
|
|
|
Terrence Dorsey wrote: The truth that the job of a software developer is to write as little code as possible
Is sounds like you need to get a Gov't grant to investigate this most obvious of statements. Where is the  icon.
Next they will be telling us that we need to create solution!
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
Terrence Dorsey wrote: Other things being equal, a simpler program is better than a more complex one.
That depends on the situation otherwise bubblesort would be the ultimate sorting algorithm. Of course software should be as simple as possible but also as complex as needed. If you need a faster, but more complex algorithm than you should follow the needs and implement it. If it isn't needed use the simplier one.
But before implementing the simplier one better ask: is the simplier one needed or can we use another tool we already have. 
------------------------------
Author of Primary ROleplaying SysTem
How do I take my coffee? Black as midnight on a moonless night.
War doesn't determine who's right. War determines who's left.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
