| ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340209] |
Sat, 25 March 2017 10:59  |
|
|
Originally posted by: Gareth's Downstairs Computer
(Slowly!) working through the documentation of this processor
for its 64 bit facility and am most impressed although it
seems that one would have to be a multiple graduate in
both electronics and computing to understand it fully.
So, the question I put is, has computing now come of age
now that such machines (RPi3) are available to the man
on the Clapham Omnibus, and all previous developments,
8, 12, 16, 18, 24, 32, 48 bit machines have been but mere
stepping stones onto a facility where neither
numerical accuracy nor memory limitations apply?
Thanks for the pointers to assembler examples; it is as I
feared that many extra instructions are needed to load
up registers from memory before being able to do anything.
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340221 is a reply to message #340209] |
Sat, 25 March 2017 16:23  |
Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Saturday, March 25, 2017 at 8:59:58 AM UTC-6, Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
> So, the question I put is, has computing now come of age
> now that such machines (RPi3) are available to the man
> on the Clapham Omnibus, and all previous developments,
> 8, 12, 16, 18, 24, 32, 48 bit machines have been but mere
> stepping stones onto a facility where neither
> numerical accuracy nor memory limitations apply?
Whilst it is true that having 64-bit integers to use as memory addresses and
array subscripts permits the addressing of about as much memory as is ever
going to be possible to stuff into a computer system for the foreseeable
future...
and the 64-bit double precision floating-point format provides more than
enough precision for almost all computations dealing with the physical world
(and, these days, most microprocessors have a facility for calculating with
128-bit floating-point numbers, should the desire to do so seize upon one)...
I cannot say that we have indeed reached a time when computers are no longer
capable of further improvement of any significance.
Even though, in recent years, due to the breakdown of Dennard scaling - and
the imminent eclipse of Moore's Law - we haven't had much in the way of
improvements of significance in computers.
The world is, after all, pregnant with breathless anticipation for the
emergence of the *quantum computer*!
Even if perfected, this type of machine will have certain limitations, but it
will approach the ideal of a computer that could behave as an almost
limitless number of conventional computers operating in parallel, searching
through vast numbers of possibilities for a desired answer.
Also, while progress in conventional non-quantum computers seems to have
slowed, it has not halted.
More processing power could indeed be put to good use. Already, you can speak
to your smartphone, not just when you are placing a telephone call, but to
ask questions of a "digital assistant". More processing power could improve
this to the point where computers could take dictation instead of one needing
to type - not that this hasn't already been done to an extent, the product
Dragon Dictate comes to mind.
Computer games are providing much more realistic animation than they did in
the early days of the microcomputer revolution. But they are not quite yet at
the point where a computer screen appears to be a window into another world
as real as the one in which we live. And yet, they seem not far short.
Again, more processing power - and the later steps are harder than the
earlier ones, so quite a bit more, not just a little more - would allow that
bridge to be crossed.
Strides have been made in artificial intelligence, now that more processing
power is available to let some problems be addressed through brute force. But
computers are not yet servants capable of allowing humanity to retire to a
life of ease, handling nearly all of our labours. This, too, may no longer be
far off, but it is definitely another thing that is not yet.
While computers, therefore, have not reached their ultimate limit, it is true
that the 64-bit address, and arithmetic on 64-bit quantities, are a practical
limit which there is no reason to outgrow. Thus, while there was an awkward
pause while 32-bit mainframes coexisted with 8-bit and 16-bit
microprocessors, when the 32-bit microprocessor with hardware floating point
came out, the old-fashioned mainframe and minicomputer did not reach for a
means of survival by going to calculating on 128-bit quantities, beyond the
reach of the monolithic processor, as there was nothing much useful to be
done at such a high precision - and that remains true today.
So the answer to your question is at once both yes and no. Computers have not
reached their peak, but word sizes have perhaps reached their limits. Even if
the data bus to memory might grow from 64 bits to 128, or even to 4,096 bits,
to increase bandwidth to slow external DRAM. (Indeed, several of today's
processors do have a 128 bit data bus to memory, or a pair of them, and 4,096
bits is just what HBM - usually connected to GPUs and not CPUs at the moment,
though - can provide.)
John Savard
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340228 is a reply to message #340221] |
Sat, 25 March 2017 16:54 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Gareth's Downstairs Computer
On 25/03/2017 20:23, Quadibloc wrote:
>
> The world is, after all, pregnant with breathless anticipation for the
> emergence of the *quantum computer*!
>
A very fair summary, thank-you.
But ISTR that Clive Sinclair brought out the first "Quantum"
computer in his "QL"? :-)
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340235 is a reply to message #340228] |
Sat, 25 March 2017 18:50 |
tutu
Messages: 111
Registered: April 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 20:54:09 +0000, Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
> On 25/03/2017 20:23, Quadibloc wrote:
>>
>> The world is, after all, pregnant with breathless anticipation for the
>> emergence of the *quantum computer*!
>>
>>
> A very fair summary, thank-you.
>
> But ISTR that Clive Sinclair brought out the first "Quantum"
> computer in his "QL"? :-)
That joak is every bit as limp as your cock, you demented old soak.
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340242 is a reply to message #340235] |
Sat, 25 March 2017 18:58 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Gareth's Downstairs Computer
On 25/03/2017 22:50, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 20:54:09 +0000, Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
>
>> On 25/03/2017 20:23, Quadibloc wrote:
>>>
>>> The world is, after all, pregnant with breathless anticipation for the
>>> emergence of the *quantum computer*!
>>>
>>>
>> A very fair summary, thank-you.
>>
>> But ISTR that Clive Sinclair brought out the first "Quantum"
>> computer in his "QL"? :-)
>
>
> That joak is every bit as limp as your cock, you demented old soak.
As to demented, I note your somewhat infantile undeclared FU ...
alt.wanker.gareth.evans.alt.homophobic.old.fool
It is unclear from the way in which you whinge endlessly as to
whether you are arguing for, or against, the motion that you
have a screw seriously loose in your obsession with me.
Grow up, Sonny.
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340243 is a reply to message #340242] |
Sat, 25 March 2017 19:08 |
tutu
Messages: 111
Registered: April 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 22:58:02 +0000, Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
> On 25/03/2017 22:50, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
>> On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 20:54:09 +0000, Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
>>
>>> On 25/03/2017 20:23, Quadibloc wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The world is, after all, pregnant with breathless anticipation for
>>>> the emergence of the *quantum computer*!
>>>>
>>>>
>>> A very fair summary, thank-you.
>>>
>>> But ISTR that Clive Sinclair brought out the first "Quantum"
>>> computer in his "QL"? :-)
>>
>>
>> That joak is every bit as limp as your cock, you demented old soak.
>
>
> As to demented, I note your somewhat infantile undeclared FU ...
>
> alt.wanker.gareth.evans.alt.homophobic.old.fool
>
> It is unclear from the way in which you whinge endlessly as to whether
> you are arguing for, or against, the motion that you have a screw
> seriously loose in your obsession with me.
>
> Grow up, Sonny.
You failed to address the 'limp as your cock' and 'old soak' points of
my post, though, you limp cocked, old soak.
Drop dead, Old Cock!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340269 is a reply to message #340262] |
Sun, 26 March 2017 05:07 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Brian Reay
On 26/03/2017 08:39, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
> En el artículo <ob6sgm$vlu$1@dont-email.me>, Gareth's Downstairs
> Computer <headstone255@yahoo.com> escribió:
>
> [hysterical rant elided]
>
> You're replying to the forger, you pathetic, incompetent old fool. I
> thought you said you knew something about computers?
>
It is obvious he is replying to himself- as the forger.
Note how he left this group in the follow up list- that ensured he, as a
supposed victim, would get maximum attention.
A variation on his technique, much used in ukra, of using a sock puppet
to argue with himself when others 'blank' him.
It is all attention seeking, he basks in it, until he bites off more
than he expected and, as he said to the Judge, he didn't expect 'all this'.
--
Suspect someone is claiming a benefit under false pretences? Incapacity
Benefit or Personal Independence Payment when they don't need it? They
are depriving those in real need!
https://www.gov.uk/report-benefit-fraud
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340273 is a reply to message #340269] |
Sun, 26 March 2017 06:02 |
Mike Tomlinson
Messages: 104
Registered: April 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
En el artículo <ob807l$de6$1@dont-email.me>, Brian Reay <no.sp@m.com>
escribió:
> It is obvious he is replying to himself- as the forger.
Aye. I've thought that for a while and now have proof.
He's probably using his "Upstairs Computer" to post anonymously (so he
thinks) as the forger, plus various sock puppets, through Aioe.org.
Followups set to the cesspit.
--
(\_/)
(='.'=) "Between two evils, I always pick
(")_(") the one I never tried before." - Mae West
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340275 is a reply to message #340221] |
Sat, 25 March 2017 18:08 |
Morten Reistad
Messages: 2108
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <107eb114-e3f4-4a39-b8e1-6236e13005ac@googlegroups.com>,
Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> On Saturday, March 25, 2017 at 8:59:58 AM UTC-6, Gareth's Downstairs
> Computer wrote:
>
>> So, the question I put is, has computing now come of age
>> now that such machines (RPi3) are available to the man
>> on the Clapham Omnibus, and all previous developments,
>> 8, 12, 16, 18, 24, 32, 48 bit machines have been but mere
>> stepping stones onto a facility where neither
>> numerical accuracy nor memory limitations apply?
>
> Whilst it is true that having 64-bit integers to use as memory addresses and
> array subscripts permits the addressing of about as much memory as is ever
> going to be possible to stuff into a computer system for the foreseeable
> future...
>
> and the 64-bit double precision floating-point format provides more than
> enough precision for almost all computations dealing with the physical world
> (and, these days, most microprocessors have a facility for calculating with
> 128-bit floating-point numbers, should the desire to do so seize upon one)...
I though so, but had to recant last year.
The size of the observable universe in planck lengths is around
8.8E26 / 1.6E-35 or 5.5E61; or representable in 205 bits. Well
within an 8 bit exponent. Or so I thought. Until someone showed
formulas where the volume squared appeared. That requires 6 times
so much exponent, or 2^1230.
So, with an exponent of 16 bits you have plenty. around 50x the largest
thinkable count in the universe. The mantissa is pretty short, otoh.
If we want to represent a galaxy down to small 100km objects you
would need close to 60 bits. And to model atoms in planck units
you would need ~75.
Both of these are the biggest scale manipulation exercises I can think
of, but they are not THAT esotheric.
But for all the other stuff, 48 bits of mantissa and 16 bits of
exponent is getting there. I would go for 51+1 and 11+1 (for sign)
if I were to model the world, though.
-- mrr
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340288 is a reply to message #340263] |
Sun, 26 March 2017 09:38 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Mike Tomlinson wrote:
> En el artículo <ob6sgm$vlu$1@dont-email.me>, Gareth's Downstairs
> Computer <headstone255@yahoo.com> escribió:
>
> [hysterical rant elided]
>
> You're replying to the forger, you pathetic, incompetent old fool. I
> thought you said you knew something about computers?
>
Children. THAT'S ENOUGH!!!! Take your pissing contests
else where.
And, Gareth? Ignore them unless they actually talk about something
real.
/BAH
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340293 is a reply to message #340269] |
Sun, 26 March 2017 10:27 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Gareth's Downstairs Computer
On 26/03/2017 10:07, Brian Reay wrote:
> On 26/03/2017 08:39, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
>> En el artículo <ob6sgm$vlu$1@dont-email.me>, Gareth's Downstairs
>> Computer <headstone255@yahoo.com> escribió:
>>
>> [hysterical rant elided]
>>
>> You're replying to the forger, you pathetic, incompetent old fool. I
>> thought you said you knew something about computers?
>>
>
> It is obvious he is replying to himself- as the forger.
>
> Note how he left this group in the follow up list- that ensured he, as a
> supposed victim, would get maximum attention.
>
> A variation on his technique, much used in ukra, of using a sock puppet
> to argue with himself when others 'blank' him.
>
> It is all attention seeking, he basks in it, until he bites off more
> than he expected and, as he said to the Judge, he didn't expect 'all this'.
How can you complain that Rambo is making false and malicious remarks when
all yours above are exactly that?
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340294 is a reply to message #340273] |
Sun, 26 March 2017 10:31 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Gareth's Downstairs Computer
On 26/03/2017 11:02, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
> En el artículo <ob807l$de6$1@dont-email.me>, Brian Reay <no.sp@m.com>
> escribió:
>> It is obvious he is replying to himself- as the forger.
> Aye. I've thought that for a while and now have proof.
> He's probably using his "Upstairs Computer" to post anonymously (so he
> thinks) as the forger, plus various sock puppets, through Aioe.org.
> Followups set to the cesspit.
Your depraved obsession with me is driving you to more and more
extremes of fantasy.
Once again you use an imaginary and infantil FU ...
"alt.malicious.old.cunts.gareth-anus-evans"
What is wrong with your socialisation? Why is your very
post marked by childish and malicious outbursts?
Grow up, Sonny.
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340295 is a reply to message #340288] |
Sun, 26 March 2017 10:36 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Gareth's Downstairs Computer
On 26/03/2017 14:38, jmfbahciv wrote:
> Mike Tomlinson wrote:
>> En el artículo <ob6sgm$vlu$1@dont-email.me>, Gareth's Downstairs
>> Computer <headstone255@yahoo.com> escribió:
>>
>> [hysterical rant elided]
>>
>> You're replying to the forger, you pathetic, incompetent old fool. I
>> thought you said you knew something about computers?
>>
> Children. THAT'S ENOUGH!!!! Take your pissing contests
> else where.
Theres no contest.
The onslaught is one sided and from tomlinson.
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340310 is a reply to message #340293] |
Sun, 26 March 2017 12:40 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Rambo
On Sun, 26 Mar 2017 15:27:57 +0100, Gareth's Downstairs Computer
<headstone255.but.not.these.five.words@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 26/03/2017 10:07, Brian Reay wrote:
>> On 26/03/2017 08:39, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
>>> En el artículo <ob6sgm$vlu$1@dont-email.me>, Gareth's Downstairs
>>> Computer <headstone255@yahoo.com> escribió:
>>>
>>> [hysterical rant elided]
>>>
>>> You're replying to the forger, you pathetic, incompetent old fool. I
>>> thought you said you knew something about computers?
>>>
>>
>> It is obvious he is replying to himself- as the forger.
>>
>> Note how he left this group in the follow up list- that ensured he, as a
>> supposed victim, would get maximum attention.
>>
>> A variation on his technique, much used in ukra, of using a sock puppet
>> to argue with himself when others 'blank' him.
>>
>> It is all attention seeking, he basks in it, until he bites off more
>> than he expected and, as he said to the Judge, he didn't expect 'all this'.
>
> How can you complain that Rambo is making false and malicious remarks when
> all yours above are exactly that?
>
I merely reflect his own allegations back at him and suddenly they
become false and malicious! It's a simple technique but Reay falls for
it every time. He's not that bright you know.
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340322 is a reply to message #340209] |
Sun, 26 March 2017 15:29 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2017-03-26, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> On 2017-03-25, Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote:
>
> [29 lines snipped]
>
>> So, with an exponent of 16 bits you have plenty. around 50x the largest
>> thinkable count in the universe. The mantissa is pretty short, otoh.
>>
>> If we want to represent a galaxy down to small 100km objects you
>> would need close to 60 bits. And to model atoms in planck units
>> you would need ~75.
>>
>> Both of these are the biggest scale manipulation exercises I can think
>> of, but they are not THAT esoteric.
I doubt there are enough people doing those sorts of calculations to
justify developing harware designed to handle them natively. On the
other hand, bignum packages are available that can do the job (albeit
somewhat less efficiently) on off-the-shelf hardware.
> There may be an infinite number of universes ...
Ah, but that's just another subscript in the (n+1 dimensional) array...
--
/~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340357 is a reply to message #340275] |
Sun, 26 March 2017 18:58 |
|
|
Originally posted by: antispam
Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote:
> In article <107eb114-e3f4-4a39-b8e1-6236e13005ac@googlegroups.com>,
> Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>> On Saturday, March 25, 2017 at 8:59:58 AM UTC-6, Gareth's Downstairs
>> Computer wrote:
>>
>>> So, the question I put is, has computing now come of age
>>> now that such machines (RPi3) are available to the man
>>> on the Clapham Omnibus, and all previous developments,
>>> 8, 12, 16, 18, 24, 32, 48 bit machines have been but mere
>>> stepping stones onto a facility where neither
>>> numerical accuracy nor memory limitations apply?
>>
>> Whilst it is true that having 64-bit integers to use as memory addresses and
>> array subscripts permits the addressing of about as much memory as is ever
>> going to be possible to stuff into a computer system for the foreseeable
>> future...
>>
>> and the 64-bit double precision floating-point format provides more than
>> enough precision for almost all computations dealing with the physical world
>> (and, these days, most microprocessors have a facility for calculating with
>> 128-bit floating-point numbers, should the desire to do so seize upon one)...
>
> I though so, but had to recant last year.
>
> The size of the observable universe in planck lengths is around
> 8.8E26 / 1.6E-35 or 5.5E61; or representable in 205 bits. Well
> within an 8 bit exponent. Or so I thought. Until someone showed
> formulas where the volume squared appeared. That requires 6 times
> so much exponent, or 2^1230.
When you started about Planck length I thought that you want
to find out limit of computation. AFAICS one fundamental
limit is uncertainity principle: to store or send one bit we need
to be able to distinguish between two energy levels. Anoter
is speed of light: to work fast computer has to be very small.
Next limit is general relativity: since we have nontrivial
energy in very small volume there is risk that out computer
will turn into a black hole. All that means that ultimate
computer should be of size comparable to Planck length unit
and work with clock period of order of Plack time unit.
It is hard to imagine how computer smaller than
elementary particles could work and we may discover
more fundamental obstacles. But clearly, we should
look at ways beyond limits of current silicon techonology.
If we could build memory cell out of few hundreds atoms
(say using properties of a special molecule), then
it should be possible to build memory way beyond 10^20
cells, so 64-bit addresses would be too short. In a sense
ultimate limit of current silicon trend would be ability
to place single atoms at desired place. But we may note
that such things in fact are routinely done in industry:
that happens in chemical engeneering. Of course, in
chemistry we are limited to configurations somewhat
preferred by nature. But if we could find molecules
with apropriate electrical properties in principle
we should be able to manufacture 3-D chips of very
fine (but regular) structure using relatively cheap
process. That could give memories and maybe FPGA-s
of enormous density. Working with eletrical signals
at molecular scale we may prefer slower clock frequencies
to limit power and instead exploit massive paralelizm
(like human brain seem to do). But there is some
hope to get superconducting wires (IIRC there were works
suggesting that one-dimensional structure may be
superconducting at much higher temperatures than
materials filling plane or a volume) and that potentially
could allow higher clock frequency at low power.
We know that it is possible to create interesting structures
smaller than normal atoms. They are created in accelerators
and are short living, so there are huge bariers to
practical use. OTOH computer with clock perid 10^(-20) s
living 10^(-6) s could do pretty large computation.
I do not expect anything like this soon, but AFAICS
saying that this is impossible currently has no
basis.
--
Waldek Hebisch
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340397 is a reply to message #340209] |
Mon, 27 March 2017 09:04 |
scott
Messages: 4237
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Gareth's Downstairs Computer <headstone255.but.not.these.five.words@yahoo.com> writes:
>
> Thanks for the pointers to assembler examples; it is as I
> feared that many extra instructions are needed to load
> up registers from memory before being able to do anything.
You do understand that it is a RISC architecture, correct?
And, with proper use of LDP/STP, you can load and store
128 scalar bits in a single go.
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340408 is a reply to message #340322] |
Mon, 27 March 2017 10:45 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2017-03-26, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 2017-03-25, Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> [29 lines snipped]
>>
>>> So, with an exponent of 16 bits you have plenty. around 50x the largest
>>> thinkable count in the universe. The mantissa is pretty short, otoh.
>>>
>>> If we want to represent a galaxy down to small 100km objects you
>>> would need close to 60 bits. And to model atoms in planck units
>>> you would need ~75.
>>>
>>> Both of these are the biggest scale manipulation exercises I can think
>>> of, but they are not THAT esoteric.
>
> I doubt there are enough people doing those sorts of calculations to
> justify developing harware designed to handle them natively. On the
> other hand, bignum packages are available that can do the job (albeit
> somewhat less efficiently) on off-the-shelf hardware.
>
>> There may be an infinite number of universes ...
>
> Ah, but that's just another subscript in the (n+1 dimensional) array...
>
Generation of body parts and new drug creations would need that kind of
math, wouldn't it? Anything which dealt with emulating new kinds of
molecules would need very small scaling w.r.t. math and the physical
sciences.
/BAH
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340409 is a reply to message #340295] |
Mon, 27 March 2017 10:45 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
> On 26/03/2017 14:38, jmfbahciv wrote:
>> Mike Tomlinson wrote:
>>> En el artículo <ob6sgm$vlu$1@dont-email.me>, Gareth's Downstairs
>>> Computer <headstone255@yahoo.com> escribió:
>>>
>>> [hysterical rant elided]
>>>
>>> You're replying to the forger, you pathetic, incompetent old fool. I
>>> thought you said you knew something about computers?
>>>
>> Children. THAT'S ENOUGH!!!! Take your pissing contests
>> else where.
>
>
> Theres no contest.
>
> The onslaught is one sided and from tomlinson.
It is not one-sided since you reply to each and every post.
If you didn't they would get bored and either go away or
get interested in the topics here. You are 1/2 of the problem.
/BAH
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340412 is a reply to message #340409] |
Mon, 27 March 2017 11:06 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Gareth's Downstairs Computer
On 27/03/2017 15:45, jmfbahciv wrote:
> Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
>> On 26/03/2017 14:38, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>> Mike Tomlinson wrote:
>>>> En el artículo <ob6sgm$vlu$1@dont-email.me>, Gareth's Downstairs
>>>> Computer <headstone255@yahoo.com> escribió:
>>>>
>>>> [hysterical rant elided]
>>>>
>>>> You're replying to the forger, you pathetic, incompetent old fool. I
>>>> thought you said you knew something about computers?
>>>>
>>> Children. THAT'S ENOUGH!!!! Take your pissing contests
>>> else where.
>>
>>
>> Theres no contest.
>>
>> The onslaught is one sided and from tomlinson.
>
> It is not one-sided since you reply to each and every post.
> If you didn't they would get bored and either go away or
> get interested in the topics here. You are 1/2 of the problem.
There is never any problem when standing up to antisocial behaviour.
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340439 is a reply to message #340409] |
Mon, 27 March 2017 15:52 |
tutu
Messages: 111
Registered: April 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:45:36 +0000, jmfbahciv wrote:
> Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
>> The onslaught is one sided and from tomlinson.
>
> It is not one-sided since you reply to each and every post.
> If you didn't they would get bored and either go away or get interested
> in the topics here. You are 1/2 of the problem.
Gareth is 1/2 of a wit.
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340516 is a reply to message #340439] |
Tue, 28 March 2017 09:48 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Mike Tomlinson wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:45:36 +0000, jmfbahciv wrote:
>
>> Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
>
>>> The onslaught is one sided and from tomlinson.
>>
>> It is not one-sided since you reply to each and every post.
>> If you didn't they would get bored and either go away or get interested
>> in the topics here. You are 1/2 of the problem.
>
>
> Gareth is 1/2 of a wit.
Do you have any interest in how computers work or how to make them
work?
/BAH
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340568 is a reply to message #340516] |
Tue, 28 March 2017 18:13 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Gareth's Downstairs Computer
On 28/03/2017 14:48, jmfbahciv wrote:
> Mike Tomlinson wrote:
>> On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:45:36 +0000, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>
>>> Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
>>
>>>> The onslaught is one sided and from tomlinson.
>>>
>>> It is not one-sided since you reply to each and every post.
>>> If you didn't they would get bored and either go away or get interested
>>> in the topics here. You are 1/2 of the problem.
>>
>>
>> Gareth is 1/2 of a wit.
>
> Do you have any interest in how computers work or how to make them
> work?
>
> /BAH
>
I regret that you in your turn have been taken in by the infantile
psyche of the forger.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340583 is a reply to message #340577] |
Wed, 29 March 2017 09:13 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Mike Tomlinson wrote:
> En el artículo <PM00054BCACC3E8C33@aca435f3.ipt.aol.com>, jmfbahciv
> <See.above@aol.com> escribió:
>
>> Do you have any interest in how computers work or how to make them
>> work?
>
> Yes. The post you just replied to is a forgery using my name.
Sorry. I didn't notice. I'm assuming the "yes" was an answer to
my question. What kind of hard/software rocks your boat?
> The real
> me doesn't post using Astraweb, and I post using my real email address,
> not me@privacy.net.
>
> If Gareth bothers you that much, killfile him. You won't miss anything.
He rarely bothers me and 60% of his posts generate disucssions which
probably wouldn't have appeared here. That's worth the 40% annoyances.
/BAH
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340584 is a reply to message #340568] |
Wed, 29 March 2017 09:13 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
> On 28/03/2017 14:48, jmfbahciv wrote:
>> Mike Tomlinson wrote:
>>> On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:45:36 +0000, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>>
>>>> Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
>>>
>>>> > The onslaught is one sided and from tomlinson.
>>>>
>>>> It is not one-sided since you reply to each and every post.
>>>> If you didn't they would get bored and either go away or get interested
>>>> in the topics here. You are 1/2 of the problem.
>>>
>>>
>>> Gareth is 1/2 of a wit.
>>
>> Do you have any interest in how computers work or how to make them
>> work?
>>
>> /BAH
>>
>
> I regret that you in your turn have been taken in by the infantile
> psyche of the forger.
>
Now reread my response. I'm trying to turn a silk purse into a sow's
ear.
/BAH
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340652 is a reply to message #340583] |
Thu, 30 March 2017 01:44 |
Mike Tomlinson
Messages: 104
Registered: April 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
En el artículo <PM00054BDE74FFBF50@aca42e95.ipt.aol.com>, jmfbahciv
<See.above@aol.com> escribió:
> Sorry. I didn't notice
No problem, that's exactly what the forger hopes.
> . I'm assuming the "yes" was an answer to
> my question. What kind of hard/software rocks your boat?
Been in the game 35 years, from learning programming on early 8-bit
barebones machines with hex keypads (AIM, MOS KIM-1, 6502 cpu), through
Commodore Pet, Acorn Atom, Spectrum, BBC Micro, Sinclair QL, right in at
the start of the PC explosion, worked for an IBM dealer servicing and
repairing PCs and ancillaries down to component level and progressed to
PC clones through to present day.
System manager for a mixed academic network of powerful DEC Alphas in a
cluster running OSF/1 then Tru64 UNIX, and Linux workstations for
astrophysical number crunching. Machines running VMS and QNX for
specific tasks.
Network design, installation and commissioning (Arcnet, Token Ring,
Econet, Ethernet of all types, DeviceNet, Canbus). TCP/IP, IPX/SPX,
SMB.
Software: 6502 and z80 assembly programming, CP/M, DOS, Windows, VMS,
QNX, Linux. I'm more interested in the hardware side of things,
particularly retro, but regularly try interesting projects like ReactOS,
RemixOS and the Raspberry Pi.
Linux distro of choice is CentOS or Scientific for real work, Knoppix
for testing. Windows 7 on my main home PC as it does what I need. Not
into OS advocacy willy-waving wars at all.
I've not had any Apple exposure except iThings. The 'walled garden'
approach doesn't appeal to me, but I admire them for making computers
fashionable, attractive and usable.
That's just scratched the surface, really.
--
(\_/)
(='.'=) "Between two evils, I always pick
(")_(") the one I never tried before." - Mae West
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340655 is a reply to message #340652] |
Thu, 30 March 2017 04:19 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Gareth's Downstairs Computer
On 30/03/2017 06:44, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
> En el artículo <PM00054BDE74FFBF50@aca42e95.ipt.aol.com>, jmfbahciv
> <See.above@aol.com> escribió:
>
>> Sorry. I didn't notice
>
> No problem, that's exactly what the forger hopes.
>
>> . I'm assuming the "yes" was an answer to
>> my question. What kind of hard/software rocks your boat?
>
> Been in the game 35 years, from learning programming on early 8-bit
> barebones machines with hex keypads (AIM, MOS KIM-1, 6502 cpu), through
> Commodore Pet, Acorn Atom, Spectrum, BBC Micro, Sinclair QL, right in at
> the start of the PC explosion, worked for an IBM dealer servicing and
> repairing PCs and ancillaries down to component level and progressed to
> PC clones through to present day.
>
> System manager for a mixed academic network of powerful DEC Alphas in a
> cluster running OSF/1 then Tru64 UNIX, and Linux workstations for
> astrophysical number crunching. Machines running VMS and QNX for
> specific tasks.
>
> Network design, installation and commissioning (Arcnet, Token Ring,
> Econet, Ethernet of all types, DeviceNet, Canbus). TCP/IP, IPX/SPX,
> SMB.
>
> Software: 6502 and z80 assembly programming, CP/M, DOS, Windows, VMS,
> QNX, Linux. I'm more interested in the hardware side of things,
> particularly retro, but regularly try interesting projects like ReactOS,
> RemixOS and the Raspberry Pi.
>
> Linux distro of choice is CentOS or Scientific for real work, Knoppix
> for testing. Windows 7 on my main home PC as it does what I need. Not
> into OS advocacy willy-waving wars at all.
>
> I've not had any Apple exposure except iThings. The 'walled garden'
> approach doesn't appeal to me, but I admire them for making computers
> fashionable, attractive and usable.
>
> That's just scratched the surface, really.
>
Mostly children's toys, and then mostly as a computer operator.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340659 is a reply to message #340655] |
Thu, 30 March 2017 09:06 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
> On 30/03/2017 06:44, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
>> En el artículo <PM00054BDE74FFBF50@aca42e95.ipt.aol.com>, jmfbahciv
>> <See.above@aol.com> escribió:
>>
>>> Sorry. I didn't notice
>>
>> No problem, that's exactly what the forger hopes.
>>
>>> . I'm assuming the "yes" was an answer to
>>> my question. What kind of hard/software rocks your boat?
>>
>> Been in the game 35 years, from learning programming on early 8-bit
>> barebones machines with hex keypads (AIM, MOS KIM-1, 6502 cpu), through
>> Commodore Pet, Acorn Atom, Spectrum, BBC Micro, Sinclair QL, right in at
>> the start of the PC explosion, worked for an IBM dealer servicing and
>> repairing PCs and ancillaries down to component level and progressed to
>> PC clones through to present day.
>>
>> System manager for a mixed academic network of powerful DEC Alphas in a
>> cluster running OSF/1 then Tru64 UNIX, and Linux workstations for
>> astrophysical number crunching. Machines running VMS and QNX for
>> specific tasks.
>>
>> Network design, installation and commissioning (Arcnet, Token Ring,
>> Econet, Ethernet of all types, DeviceNet, Canbus). TCP/IP, IPX/SPX,
>> SMB.
>>
>> Software: 6502 and z80 assembly programming, CP/M, DOS, Windows, VMS,
>> QNX, Linux. I'm more interested in the hardware side of things,
>> particularly retro, but regularly try interesting projects like ReactOS,
>> RemixOS and the Raspberry Pi.
>>
>> Linux distro of choice is CentOS or Scientific for real work, Knoppix
>> for testing. Windows 7 on my main home PC as it does what I need. Not
>> into OS advocacy willy-waving wars at all.
>>
>> I've not had any Apple exposure except iThings. The 'walled garden'
>> approach doesn't appeal to me, but I admire them for making computers
>> fashionable, attractive and usable.
>>
>> That's just scratched the surface, really.
>>
>
> Mostly children's toys, and then mostly as a computer operator.
Our operators were very important to us. They kept the system and,
most importantly, backups running so that we could get our work done.
Our operators were just as important as our secretaries.
/BAH
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340660 is a reply to message #340652] |
Thu, 30 March 2017 09:06 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Mike Tomlinson wrote:
> En el artículo <PM00054BDE74FFBF50@aca42e95.ipt.aol.com>, jmfbahciv
> <See.above@aol.com> escribió:
>
>> Sorry. I didn't notice
>
> No problem, that's exactly what the forger hopes.
I rarely check so it is my fault.
>
>> . I'm assuming the "yes" was an answer to
>> my question. What kind of hard/software rocks your boat?
>
> Been in the game 35 years, from learning programming on early 8-bit
> barebones machines with hex keypads (AIM, MOS KIM-1, 6502 cpu), through
> Commodore Pet, Acorn Atom, Spectrum, BBC Micro, Sinclair QL, right in at
> the start of the PC explosion, worked for an IBM dealer servicing and
> repairing PCs and ancillaries down to component level and progressed to
> PC clones through to present day.
Ah, no octal ;-)
>
> System manager for a mixed academic network of powerful DEC Alphas in a
> cluster running OSF/1 then Tru64 UNIX, and Linux workstations for
> astrophysical number crunching. Machines running VMS and QNX for
> specific tasks.
Did those work well for that kind of computing?
>
> Network design, installation and commissioning (Arcnet, Token Ring,
> Econet, Ethernet of all types, DeviceNet, Canbus). TCP/IP, IPX/SPX,
> SMB.
>
> Software: 6502 and z80 assembly programming, CP/M, DOS, Windows, VMS,
> QNX, Linux. I'm more interested in the hardware side of things,
> particularly retro, but regularly try interesting projects like ReactOS,
> RemixOS and the Raspberry Pi.
Is there a retro computing group where you live? There's a good one
in Rhode Island. I've heard the one in New Jersey (can't recall the town)
is pretty good, too. They all like to have volunteers.
>
> Linux distro of choice is CentOS or Scientific for real work, Knoppix
> for testing. Windows 7 on my main home PC as it does what I need. Not
> into OS advocacy willy-waving wars at all.
I rarely had problems with the Win 7 system I used for playing computer
games. I had to replace it and got Win 10. I'm not happy with this
system at all. I don't know enough about the OS to be able to tell
if the problems are just this particular system or the usual general anal
problem with Win development philosophy.
>
> I've not had any Apple exposure except iThings. The 'walled garden'
> approach doesn't appeal to me, but I admire them for making computers
> fashionable, attractive and usable.
>
> That's just scratched the surface, really.
Understood. Nice summary. Thank you.
/BAH
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340666 is a reply to message #340660] |
Thu, 30 March 2017 11:18 |
Mike Tomlinson
Messages: 104
Registered: April 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
En el artículo <PM00054BF275D1FDDC@aca408d0.ipt.aol.com>, jmfbahciv
<See.above@aol.com> escribió:
> Did those work well for that kind of computing?
Very well. A lot of software used by astrophysicists is written for
*nix - initially OSF/1 and Solaris, later ported to Tru64 and Linux. It
is reasonably portable.
A typical example is the Starlink Suite, initially developed by the UK
Starlink consortium of which I was a member, then when that disbanded,
maintained by the Uni of Hawai'i.
http://starlink.eao.hawaii.edu/starlink
Fortran77 was fairly widely used while I was working in astrophysics,
but moves were being made in the direction of C. Some mathematical
analysis packages, such as MATLAB, are also used in astrophysics.
Most of astrophysics computing is number crunching, so powerful machines
with good floating point processors and multi-threaded CPUs lend
themselves well to this sort of application, as do clusters. When the
DEC Alpha machines were launched, they wiped the floor with anything
else in a comparable price range. I miss the Alphas - they were
brilliant, typical top-notch DEC build quality.
I worked for a robotic telescope project:
http://telescope.livjm.ac.uk/
the Telescope Control System, which works out where in the sky the
'scope needs to point to find a given stellar object, runs on an Alpha
running OpenVMS. It's very hairy old code dating back to the 60's.
> Is there a retro computing group where you live?
I haven't looked to be honest, there are so many retro resources
available online. I split my time between my homes in Spain and the UK,
which doesn't help.
I get regular bulletins from this lot:
http://vcfed.org/wp/
> There's a good one
> in Rhode Island. I've heard the one in New Jersey (can't recall the town)
> is pretty good, too. They all like to have volunteers.
If you'll pay my air fares, I'll happily volunteer :)
> I rarely had problems with the Win 7 system I used for playing computer
> games. I had to replace it and got Win 10. I'm not happy with this
> system at all
I'm not surprised. Lipstick on a pig comes to mind. You may have
downgrade rights to Win7 - I suggest you look into this if you're really
unhappy.
I had all the shenanigans with Microsoft's GWX trying to trick me into
upgrading to Win10 last year. The 'GWX Control Panel' from
ultimateoutsider.com stopped all that nonsense.
> . I don't know enough about the OS to be able to tell
> if the problems are just this particular system or the usual general anal
> problem with Win development philosophy.
I'd hazard a guess it's the latter :)
> Understood. Nice summary. Thank you.
You're welcome.
--
(\_/)
(='.'=) "Between two evils, I always pick
(")_(") the one I never tried before." - Mae West
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340677 is a reply to message #340666] |
Thu, 30 March 2017 17:33 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Bob Eager
On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 16:18:13 +0100, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
> A typical example is the Starlink Suite, initially developed by the UK
> Starlink consortium of which I was a member, then when that disbanded,
> maintained by the Uni of Hawai'i.
I remember that. I was managing the university VAXCluster at the time.
And writing device drivers for it!
>> Is there a retro computing group where you live?
>
> I haven't looked to be honest, there are so many retro resources
> available online. I split my time between my homes in Spain and the UK,
> which doesn't help.
Have a look at real vintage:
http://www.computerconservationsociety.org/
I go to their meetings.
--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340682 is a reply to message #340677] |
Thu, 30 March 2017 21:12 |
Mike Tomlinson
Messages: 104
Registered: April 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
En el artículo <ek5btsFmi9rU25@mid.individual.net>, Bob Eager
<news0006@eager.cx> escribió:
> I remember that. I was managing the university VAXCluster at the time.
> And writing device drivers for it!
eep. :)
The Liv Starlink node originally ran off a VAX, maybe a 4000, running
VMS, with perhaps 8 X terminals. Patrick Moore came to 'cut the ribbon'
on it. I've got a photo somewhere.
The motherboard was a real work of DEC art, so when we moved to Alphas
and OSF/1, we had the motherboard of the VAX framed and hung on the
wall. It was still there when I left.
> Have a look at real vintage:
>
> http://www.computerconservationsociety.org/
Looking now (and bookmarked). Thanks.
--
(\_/)
(='.'=) "Between two evils, I always pick
(")_(") the one I never tried before." - Mae West
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340690 is a reply to message #340682] |
Fri, 31 March 2017 07:34 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Bob Eager
On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 02:12:05 +0100, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
> En el artículo <ek5btsFmi9rU25@mid.individual.net>, Bob Eager
> <news0006@eager.cx> escribió:
>
>> I remember that. I was managing the university VAXCluster at the time.
>> And writing device drivers for it!
>
> eep. :)
>
> The Liv Starlink node originally ran off a VAX, maybe a 4000, running
> VMS, with perhaps 8 X terminals. Patrick Moore came to 'cut the ribbon'
> on it. I've got a photo somewhere.
>
> The motherboard was a real work of DEC art, so when we moved to Alphas
> and OSF/1, we had the motherboard of the VAX framed and hung on the
> wall. It was still there when I left.
>
>> Have a look at real vintage:
>>
>> http://www.computerconservationsociety.org/
>
> Looking now (and bookmarked). Thanks.
Let me know if you're coming to a meeting.
--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340694 is a reply to message #340666] |
Fri, 31 March 2017 09:06 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Mike Tomlinson wrote:
> En el artículo <PM00054BF275D1FDDC@aca408d0.ipt.aol.com>, jmfbahciv
> <See.above@aol.com> escribió:
>
>> Did those work well for that kind of computing?
>
> Very well. A lot of software used by astrophysicists is written for
> *nix - initially OSF/1 and Solaris, later ported to Tru64 and Linux. It
> is reasonably portable.
Do you recall what was annoying or wrong with them? (Each flavor of
system has its quirks.)
>
> A typical example is the Starlink Suite, initially developed by the UK
> Starlink consortium of which I was a member, then when that disbanded,
> maintained by the Uni of Hawai'i.
>
> http://starlink.eao.hawaii.edu/starlink
>
> Fortran77 was fairly widely used while I was working in astrophysics,
> but moves were being made in the direction of C. Some mathematical
> analysis packages, such as MATLAB, are also used in astrophysics.
I do know that VMS' FORTRAN had the best math routines. The lady who
told the programmer how to make computers add better was brilliant; he
was not allowed to put all of her recommendations into the PDP-10
FORTRAN but he did manage to implement it all in the VMS FORTRAN. I do
not know if that FORTRAN was shipped to Unix'y customers.
>
> Most of astrophysics computing is number crunching, so powerful machines
> with good floating point processors and multi-threaded CPUs lend
> themselves well to this sort of application, as do clusters. When the
> DEC Alpha machines were launched, they wiped the floor with anything
> else in a comparable price range. I miss the Alphas - they were
> brilliant, typical top-notch DEC build quality.
The 'JMF' in my user name got the AXP Alpha monitor (kernal) to work.
I have a plaque presented to him for doing that work. I has the
distribution set of CDs plus text thanking him.
>
> I worked for a robotic telescope project:
>
> http://telescope.livjm.ac.uk/
>
> the Telescope Control System, which works out where in the sky the
> 'scope needs to point to find a given stellar object, runs on an Alpha
> running OpenVMS. It's very hairy old code dating back to the 60's.
oh, wow. Spaghetti code moved to new hardware which caused more
spaghetti code...rinse, repeat. I knew a guy who was given such
a package to convert to the new hardware platform (physics stuff).
It took him quite a while to convince his manager that it would be
better, easier, and more efficient to rewrite it than try to
unknot the spaghetti code (originally binary code).
Unknotting code is possible. Unknotting data, whose format was
originally designed/encoded to fit on IBM cards is not.
>
>> Is there a retro computing group where you live?
>
> I haven't looked to be honest, there are so many retro resources
> available online. I split my time between my homes in Spain and the UK,
> which doesn't help.
>
> I get regular bulletins from this lot:
>
> http://vcfed.org/wp/
>
>> There's a good one
>> in Rhode Island. I've heard the one in New Jersey (can't recall the town)
>> is pretty good, too. They all like to have volunteers.
>
> If you'll pay my air fares, I'll happily volunteer :)
<GRIN> I'll let you know when I win the gazillion dollar lottery.
>
>> I rarely had problems with the Win 7 system I used for playing computer
>> games. I had to replace it and got Win 10. I'm not happy with this
>> system at all
>
> I'm not surprised. Lipstick on a pig comes to mind. You may have
> downgrade rights to Win7 - I suggest you look into this if you're really
> unhappy.
Nah. First I don't know enough about using a Win system to downgrade and,
second, it's a more interesting game to figure out work-arounds. However,
tiling interfaces are very annoying but not as annoying as the UDFH,
a.k.a the mouse device. (UDFH==user device from hell)
>
> I had all the shenanigans with Microsoft's GWX trying to trick me into
> upgrading to Win10 last year. The 'GWX Control Panel' from
> ultimateoutsider.com stopped all that nonsense.
Well, I understand why a company would only wnat to support the latest
ship.
>
>> . I don't know enough about the OS to be able to tell
>> if the problems are just this particular system or the usual general anal
>> problem with Win development philosophy.
>
> I'd hazard a guess it's the latter :)
Very likely. However, it doesn't help that some outside electronic
interference is also affecting the system; I think it's the video
card but I'm not sure.
/BAH
|
|
|
|
| Re: ARM Cortex A53 64 bit [message #340697 is a reply to message #340694] |
Fri, 31 March 2017 09:35 |
pechter
Messages: 452
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <PM00054C068508E8A5@aca40fbf.ipt.aol.com>,
jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
> Mike Tomlinson wrote:
>> En el artículo <PM00054BF275D1FDDC@aca408d0.ipt.aol.com>, jmfbahciv
>> <See.above@aol.com> escribió:
>>
>>
>>> Is there a retro computing group where you live?
>>
>> I haven't looked to be honest, there are so many retro resources
>> available online. I split my time between my homes in Spain and the UK,
>> which doesn't help.
>>
>> I get regular bulletins from this lot:
>>
>> http://vcfed.org/wp/
>>
>>> There's a good one
>>> in Rhode Island. I've heard the one in New Jersey (can't recall the town)
>>> is pretty good, too. They all like to have volunteers.
>>
>> If you'll pay my air fares, I'll happily volunteer :)
>
> <GRIN> I'll let you know when I win the gazillion dollar lottery.
>
>>
>>> I rarely had problems with the Win 7 system I used for playing computer
>>> games. I had to replace it and got Win 10. I'm not happy with this
>>> system at all
>>
>> I'm not surprised. Lipstick on a pig comes to mind. You may have
>> downgrade rights to Win7 - I suggest you look into this if you're really
>> unhappy.
>
> Nah. First I don't know enough about using a Win system to downgrade and,
> second, it's a more interesting game to figure out work-arounds. However,
> tiling interfaces are very annoying but not as annoying as the UDFH,
> a.k.a the mouse device. (UDFH==user device from hell)
>
>>
>> I had all the shenanigans with Microsoft's GWX trying to trick me into
>> upgrading to Win10 last year. The 'GWX Control Panel' from
>> ultimateoutsider.com stopped all that nonsense.
>
> Well, I understand why a company would only wnat to support the latest
> ship.
Still doesn't excuse a "Forced Upgrade" without user consent.
>>> . I don't know enough about the OS to be able to tell
>>> if the problems are just this particular system or the usual general anal
>>> problem with Win development philosophy.
>>
>> I'd hazard a guess it's the latter :)
>
> Very likely. However, it doesn't help that some outside electronic
> interference is also affecting the system; I think it's the video
> card but I'm not sure.
>
> /BAH
The New Jersey one is in Wall Township at the old Evans Area (which was part
of Fort Monmouth. Old DEC customer when I was servicing their stuff
in Monmouth County.
The group was MARCH -- Mid Atlantic Retro Computing...
http://vcfed.org/wp/
http://vcfed.org/wp/vcf-museum/
Vintage Computing Festival East starts there today. Come on out this weekend.
http://vcfed.org/wp/festivals/vintage-computer-festival-east /
March 31-April 2, 2017 – Vintage Computer Festival East XII, InfoAge
Science Center, Wall, New Jersey
http://infoage.org/
Bill
--
--
Digital had it then. Don't you wish you could buy it now!
pechter-at-gmail.com http://xkcd.com/705/
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
