|
Not too many motherboards that you can put an SD card containing Ubuntu into the onboard SD slot, add a keyboard, plug a monitor into the HDMI port, supply 5v and the thing boots up and connects to your network via inbuilt wifi and you're away within half an hour.
Peter Wasser
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell
|
|
|
|
|
Putting everything except the power supply on the motherboard is hardly a revolutionary idea -- i.e. I could do pretty much what you say with my old 386 motherboards (well, similar, but with older tech than SD, HDMI, etc), but then everything went all modular, with separate cards for everything.
IMO, if it ain't in a box that also contains a power supply, it ain't a PC.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
So if the power supply is in a box separate from the motherboard in another box right next to it, it's still not a PC?
What if the motherboard site on a tray and the power supply is below that, none of which is in a box, such as this[^] ?
Your definition seems to be lacking.
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, mods don't count!
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Oh yes they do!  That one just doesn't have all the walls and the motherboard sits on the roof.
I just built a new machine. The motherboard sits on a removable tray in the main case and the power supply sits in its own case under the main case. The lower case supports two power supplies and still has enough room for water radiators and pumps. Is it still a PC?
Check out CaseLabs[^].
|
|
|
|
|
OK, I gotta ask why you should need your motherboard to be removable.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Easier to swap the motherboard.
Better question. Why would I need a case big enough to have a mini-bar in it?
|
|
|
|
|
Dave Kreskowiak wrote: Easier to swap the motherboard.
Ah, yes.
I only do that every second Thursday, so it didn't occur to me to make it 4.3% easier to do.
Dave Kreskowiak wrote: Why would I need a case big enough to have a mini-bar in it?
Bigger, shirley?
Because you also need room for the industrial-grade cooling, for the beer -- and space for the hoover, to take away all the dust attracted by the magnetic fields.
But if you just don't like big cases, Get a smaller one with the same power kit inside[^].
Or, even better, choose your own kit, and make a case for it.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
|
My last-but-one personal PC was an SFF.
I liked the fact that it didn't take up much room, but that was its only advantage, and I've got plenty of room for bigger boxes (I built the computer desk myself, so there's plenty of room for everything -- and I use a KVM switch to run four computers), so I never bothered with them again.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
It is a low-level API that provides maximum feature set of the GPU to the web applications. The API is designed for WebAssembly, modern GPUs, and multi-threaded environment in mind. When in doubt, create a new standard
Getting in with this before everyone else adds it: xkcd: Standards[^]
|
|
|
|
|
But at least we'll get 14 (incompatible) updates per year.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
To be fair, the whole problem here is that there is no existing standard, quite different from the situation in xkcd.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
A bigger problem will be when, as usual, some bunch of wallies gets together and sets up standards that are practically useless for almost everyone.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Listen closely. The sound you hear resembling giant strings of firecrackers going off in the distance is MS management heads exploding.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Russ Miller wants computer science students to think in parallel from the get-go Solving so in is because problems parallel easy
|
|
|
|
|
Because a programming paradigm that causes even experienced professionals headaches is a great way to teach fundamentals  He mentions it's more parallel theory and not so much implementation but why bother teaching something you explicitly know your students won't be able to use? Teach naming, IOC, design patterns, or a plethora of other more commonly used topics.
modified 21-Mar-17 18:38pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, and young children should be taught arithmetic only after they've learned calculus.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Multi threaded programming[^]
Zen and the art of software maintenance : rm -rf *
Maths is like love : a simple idea but it can get complicated.
|
|
|
|
|
LOL  This is an amazing pic, bookmarked, and surprisingly accurate 
|
|
|
|
|
That's bang on. Nice one.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Lol, yes, seen that one before.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting article. Teaching a mindset should not get mixed up with teaching (current) implementation details.
But on the other hand, when I see so many people writing software in C# lacking an object-oriented mindset... Well, with parallelism I think the probability of failure is even bigger.
|
|
|
|
|
The trouble with teaching students 70% theory, without teaching current implementation details is that you end up with what we've got now: 99% of graduates that are useless in the workplace for three years.
... And often worse than useless, as many of us (Marc most recently, in the Lounge) will testify.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
As far as I’m concerned, the one to watch here is NVIDIA. Their recent Tegra series sees them bringing massively parallel GPU processing to affordable embedded devices. The Tegra 4 had a quadcore CPU and 72 GPU cores. The TK1 has a quadcore CPU and 192 GPU cores, and the most recent TX1 has an octacore CPU and a 256 GPU cores that provide over 1 Teraflops of processing power. These existing devices are very impressive, but NVIDIA are not slowing down development, with the Xavier expected to appear at the end of 2017. Boasting 512 GPU cores and a custom octacore CPU architecture, the Xavier claims to deliver 20 trillion operations per second for only 20-W power consumption.
Someone's therapist knows all about you!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
