By: gallier2 (gallier2.delete@this.gmx.de), January 19, 2020 7:02 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
Ricardo B (ricardo.b.delete@this.xxxxx.xx) on January 18, 2020 7:42 am wrote:
> Anon (anon.delete@this.anon.com) on January 17, 2020 6:40 pm wrote:
> > Ricardo B (ricardo.b.delete@this.xxxxx.xx) on January 17, 2020 1:59 pm wrote:
> > > I see no evidence that MOS has a business master for the 6502 which only made
> > > because MOS has a crystal ball and the foresight to realize the 6502 would end
> > > up being used in million of personal computers, consoles, kit and caboodle.
> > >
> > > The 6502 was largely the brainchild of former 6800 designer Chuck Peddle.
> > > He though there was some kind of market for a cheaper 6800 and ended
> > > up leaving for MOS where the management was more receptive.
> >
> > 6502 was promoted by giving manuals to nerds, not just giving, allowing them to photocopy manuals to not
> > pay for it, chips was show in jars, they had a pretty good idea of what was coming, unlike most of the
> > industries, but to be honest, they didn't planned it all that well, adoption was slower than needed.
>
> MOS had no idea.
> MOS primary interest were ICs for calculators.
> And the company was almost bankrupt and bought by Commodore before
> any of 3rd party 6502 based personal computers hit the market.
>
> There was no great brilliant master plan at MOS.
>
>
> >
> > > As cheap as it was the IBM PC was sold at profit out of the gate.
> > > The off the shelf components were cheap enough for that because the suppliers
> > > of said components had volume and market to amortize their costs.
> > >
> > > If the PC was developed in house by IBM, IBM would have needed either to sell it at much higher
> > > price to make a profit OR sell it as a loss leader until volume enables lower production costs.
> >
> > I am saying this for weeks now, the PC project at IBM had a low budget, they tried to minimize
> > development costs, management didn't expect it to sell in high volumes, if they had such a
> > crystal ball, they would give the project a much higher budget and do it all in house.
>
> First let me remind you that IBM went from deciding to enter the
> personal computer market to shipping the IBM PC in about 1 year.
> This is not enough time to develop chips and the computer itself.
> So you're talking about an alternate universe where IBM foresaw this many years ahead and
> committed to the development of the platform in time for a 1981 release.
>
> Secondly you keep brushing aside production costs.
> Not only IBM would have had to invest much more money much earlier in the development
> of the platform but come the 1981 release IBM would also have had to commit to sell
> the IBM PC as a loss leader until volume allows for lower production costs.
>
> This is actually the business model of modern gaming consoles but this business
> model only came to be after the gaming console business was well established.
>
> >
> > > People cloned the IBM PC because there were lots of users and it was possible to clone it.
> > > And the PC had lots of users because soon the clone manufacturers started offering better deals than IBM.
> >
> > You stay in this chicken and egg paradox...
> >
> > The only reason to clone IBM PC was the software available to it, not the users,
> > events happen in such way that IBM PC was the most advanced architecture at the
> > time of software explosion, turning the IBM PC in the industry standard.
>
> There is no chicken and egg paradox.
> The first IBM PC clones reached the market a little over a year after the IBM PC.
> The value of being backed by IBM and the benefits of the clones
> were a self re-enforcing virtuous cycle almost from the get go.
> The growth of the IBM PC as industry standard platform is inseparable from the IBM PC clones.
>
> Yes, the IBM name was a big thing that pushed the cloning. The clout of the name should not be underestimated. After the introduction of the IBM-PC there were other PC, that were better PC's that did not move crowds. Best example is Chuck Peddle's Victor 9000/Sirius 1, which was so much better than the IBM-PC, didn't kickstart a new industry. It was so much superior to the PC it's really a pity it did not catch on (8088@5 Mhz, MS-DOS, RAM up to 896KiB, graphics at 800x400, cool keyboard, HD floppies from the get go, etc. It was btw my first contact with MS-DOS 2.0 in 1982).
A propos Z8000, Olivetti had the M20 at that time and it was also superior to the PC, but the uncompatibility and simple pathway from the 8 bit software doomed its success directly. The ease of porting CP/M software to the PC was a big point of its succes.
> Anon (anon.delete@this.anon.com) on January 17, 2020 6:40 pm wrote:
> > Ricardo B (ricardo.b.delete@this.xxxxx.xx) on January 17, 2020 1:59 pm wrote:
> > > I see no evidence that MOS has a business master for the 6502 which only made
> > > because MOS has a crystal ball and the foresight to realize the 6502 would end
> > > up being used in million of personal computers, consoles, kit and caboodle.
> > >
> > > The 6502 was largely the brainchild of former 6800 designer Chuck Peddle.
> > > He though there was some kind of market for a cheaper 6800 and ended
> > > up leaving for MOS where the management was more receptive.
> >
> > 6502 was promoted by giving manuals to nerds, not just giving, allowing them to photocopy manuals to not
> > pay for it, chips was show in jars, they had a pretty good idea of what was coming, unlike most of the
> > industries, but to be honest, they didn't planned it all that well, adoption was slower than needed.
>
> MOS had no idea.
> MOS primary interest were ICs for calculators.
> And the company was almost bankrupt and bought by Commodore before
> any of 3rd party 6502 based personal computers hit the market.
>
> There was no great brilliant master plan at MOS.
>
>
> >
> > > As cheap as it was the IBM PC was sold at profit out of the gate.
> > > The off the shelf components were cheap enough for that because the suppliers
> > > of said components had volume and market to amortize their costs.
> > >
> > > If the PC was developed in house by IBM, IBM would have needed either to sell it at much higher
> > > price to make a profit OR sell it as a loss leader until volume enables lower production costs.
> >
> > I am saying this for weeks now, the PC project at IBM had a low budget, they tried to minimize
> > development costs, management didn't expect it to sell in high volumes, if they had such a
> > crystal ball, they would give the project a much higher budget and do it all in house.
>
> First let me remind you that IBM went from deciding to enter the
> personal computer market to shipping the IBM PC in about 1 year.
> This is not enough time to develop chips and the computer itself.
> So you're talking about an alternate universe where IBM foresaw this many years ahead and
> committed to the development of the platform in time for a 1981 release.
>
> Secondly you keep brushing aside production costs.
> Not only IBM would have had to invest much more money much earlier in the development
> of the platform but come the 1981 release IBM would also have had to commit to sell
> the IBM PC as a loss leader until volume allows for lower production costs.
>
> This is actually the business model of modern gaming consoles but this business
> model only came to be after the gaming console business was well established.
>
> >
> > > People cloned the IBM PC because there were lots of users and it was possible to clone it.
> > > And the PC had lots of users because soon the clone manufacturers started offering better deals than IBM.
> >
> > You stay in this chicken and egg paradox...
> >
> > The only reason to clone IBM PC was the software available to it, not the users,
> > events happen in such way that IBM PC was the most advanced architecture at the
> > time of software explosion, turning the IBM PC in the industry standard.
>
> There is no chicken and egg paradox.
> The first IBM PC clones reached the market a little over a year after the IBM PC.
> The value of being backed by IBM and the benefits of the clones
> were a self re-enforcing virtuous cycle almost from the get go.
> The growth of the IBM PC as industry standard platform is inseparable from the IBM PC clones.
>
> Yes, the IBM name was a big thing that pushed the cloning. The clout of the name should not be underestimated. After the introduction of the IBM-PC there were other PC, that were better PC's that did not move crowds. Best example is Chuck Peddle's Victor 9000/Sirius 1, which was so much better than the IBM-PC, didn't kickstart a new industry. It was so much superior to the PC it's really a pity it did not catch on (8088@5 Mhz, MS-DOS, RAM up to 896KiB, graphics at 800x400, cool keyboard, HD floppies from the get go, etc. It was btw my first contact with MS-DOS 2.0 in 1982).
A propos Z8000, Olivetti had the M20 at that time and it was also superior to the PC, but the uncompatibility and simple pathway from the 8 bit software doomed its success directly. The ease of porting CP/M software to the PC was a big point of its succes.
Topic | Posted By | Date |
---|---|---|
Nuances related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler | Beastian | 2020/01/03 11:46 AM |
Nuances related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler | Montaray Jack | 2020/01/03 12:14 PM |
Nuances related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler | Montaray Jack | 2020/01/03 12:49 PM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | Linus Torvalds | 2020/01/03 06:05 PM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | Beastian | 2020/01/04 11:03 AM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | Malte Skarupke | 2020/01/04 11:22 AM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | Linus Torvalds | 2020/01/04 12:31 PM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | dmcq | 2020/01/05 06:33 AM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | smeuletz | 2020/01/06 01:05 AM |
Do not blame others for your unfinished job | smeuletz | 2020/01/06 01:08 AM |
Where did all the experts come from? Did Linus get linked? (NT) | anon | 2020/01/06 03:27 AM |
Phoronix | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/06 04:04 AM |
Phoronix | Salvatore De Dominicis | 2020/01/06 06:59 AM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | Chester | 2020/01/06 08:17 AM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | smeuletz | 2020/01/06 09:11 AM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | Chester | 2020/01/06 09:54 AM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | smeuletz | 2020/01/06 10:33 AM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | Linus Torvalds | 2020/01/06 11:58 AM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | Gionatan Danti | 2020/01/06 12:13 PM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | Linus Torvalds | 2020/01/06 12:28 PM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | Gionatan Danti | 2020/01/06 12:52 PM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | John Scott | 2020/01/10 07:48 AM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | supernovas | 2020/01/10 09:01 AM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | Linus Torvalds | 2020/01/10 11:45 AM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | GDan | 2020/04/06 02:10 AM |
Oracle | Anon3 | 2020/04/07 05:42 AM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | smeuletz | 2020/01/07 03:07 AM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | Simon Farnsworth | 2020/01/07 12:40 PM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | Etienne | 2020/01/08 01:08 AM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | smeuletz | 2020/01/08 01:18 AM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | Michael S | 2020/01/08 01:56 AM |
Not deprecating irrelevant API: sched_yield() on quantum computers? | smeuletz | 2020/01/07 03:34 AM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | magicalgoat | 2020/01/09 04:58 PM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | Linus Torvalds | 2020/01/09 09:37 PM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | Anon3 | 2020/01/10 03:40 PM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | rwessel | 2020/01/06 09:04 PM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | Linus Torvalds | 2020/01/06 11:11 AM |
Do not blame anyone. Please give polite, constructive criticism | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/06 01:36 PM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | Howard Chu | 2020/01/09 10:39 PM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | Linus Torvalds | 2020/01/10 11:30 AM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | president ltd | 2020/01/04 01:44 PM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | Jörn Engel | 2020/01/04 11:34 AM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | Emil Briggs | 2020/01/04 12:13 PM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | Jörn Engel | 2020/01/04 12:46 PM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | Linus Torvalds | 2020/01/04 01:24 PM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | Linus Torvalds | 2020/01/04 02:54 PM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | Jörn Engel | 2020/01/05 09:21 AM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | Linus Torvalds | 2020/01/05 11:42 AM |
FUTEX_LOCK_PI performance | Jörn Engel | 2020/01/05 01:45 PM |
FUTEX_LOCK_PI performance | Linus Torvalds | 2020/01/05 03:30 PM |
FUTEX_LOCK_PI performance | Jörn Engel | 2020/01/05 06:03 PM |
FUTEX_LOCK_PI performance | RichardC | 2020/01/06 06:11 AM |
FUTEX_LOCK_PI performance | Linus Torvalds | 2020/01/06 12:11 PM |
FUTEX_LOCK_PI performance | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/06 02:20 AM |
FUTEX_LOCK_PI performance | xilun | 2020/01/06 04:19 PM |
FUTEX_LOCK_PI performance | Konrad Schwarz | 2020/01/13 03:36 AM |
FUTEX_LOCK_PI performance | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/13 03:53 AM |
FUTEX_LOCK_PI performance | Simon Farnsworth | 2020/01/13 04:36 AM |
FUTEX_LOCK_PI performance | rwessel | 2020/01/13 05:22 AM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | rainstar | 2020/01/04 09:58 PM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | Charles Ellis | 2020/01/05 03:00 AM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | Richard | 2020/01/05 08:58 AM |
It's hard to separate | Michael S | 2020/01/05 10:17 AM |
It's hard to separate | rainstared | 2020/01/06 12:52 AM |
It's hard to separate | David Kanter | 2020/01/08 08:27 AM |
It's hard to separate | Anon | 2020/01/08 08:37 PM |
It's hard to separate | none | 2020/01/08 10:50 PM |
It's hard to separate | Anon | 2020/01/09 12:41 AM |
It's hard to separate | none | 2020/01/09 02:54 AM |
It's hard to separate | gallier2 | 2020/01/09 03:19 AM |
It's hard to separate | Anon | 2020/01/09 04:12 AM |
It's hard to separate | Adrian | 2020/01/09 04:24 AM |
It's hard to separate | gallier2 | 2020/01/09 04:58 AM |
It's hard to separate | Adrian | 2020/01/09 06:09 AM |
It's hard to separate | gallier2 | 2020/01/09 04:42 AM |
It's hard to separate | Adrian | 2020/01/09 03:41 AM |
It's hard to separate | Anon | 2020/01/09 04:24 AM |
It's hard to separate | gallier2 | 2020/01/09 05:07 AM |
It's hard to separate | David Hess | 2020/01/09 08:27 AM |
It's hard to separate | Adrian | 2020/01/09 09:15 AM |
It's hard to separate | David Hess | 2020/01/09 09:45 AM |
It's hard to separate | Anon | 2020/01/09 10:15 AM |
It's hard to separate | Adrian | 2020/01/09 10:51 AM |
It's hard to separate | Brett | 2020/01/09 12:49 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Brett | 2020/01/10 09:53 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | David Hess | 2020/01/11 06:06 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Adrian | 2020/01/11 06:29 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | David Hess | 2020/01/11 07:45 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Ricardo B | 2020/01/11 07:04 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Ronald Maas | 2020/01/12 09:47 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Ricardo B | 2020/01/12 11:15 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Anon | 2020/01/12 10:34 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Jose | 2020/01/13 12:23 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | gallier2 | 2020/01/13 12:42 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Jose | 2020/01/13 09:04 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | rwessel | 2020/01/13 09:40 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | David Hess | 2020/01/13 10:35 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Simon Farnsworth | 2020/01/14 02:56 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Michael S | 2020/01/14 03:09 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Simon Farnsworth | 2020/01/14 04:06 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | David Hess | 2020/01/14 09:22 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | David Hess | 2020/01/14 09:15 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | rwessel | 2020/01/14 03:12 PM |
286 16 bit I/O | Tim McCaffrey | 2020/01/15 10:25 AM |
286 16 bit I/O | David Hess | 2020/01/15 08:17 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Ricardo B | 2020/01/13 10:52 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Anon | 2020/01/13 11:25 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | David Hess | 2020/01/13 05:38 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | rwessel | 2020/01/13 06:16 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | David Hess | 2020/01/13 06:47 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | someone | 2020/01/14 06:54 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Anon | 2020/01/14 07:31 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Ricardo B | 2020/01/14 05:29 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Simon Farnsworth | 2020/01/15 02:26 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Tim McCaffrey | 2020/01/15 10:27 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Simon Farnsworth | 2020/01/15 01:32 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Ricardo B | 2020/01/15 02:47 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Anon | 2020/01/15 03:08 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Ricardo B | 2020/01/15 04:16 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Anon | 2020/01/15 04:31 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Ricardo B | 2020/01/15 05:46 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Anon | 2020/01/15 06:04 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | David Hess | 2020/01/15 08:53 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Ricardo B | 2020/01/16 06:27 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Anon | 2020/01/16 07:33 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Ronald Maas | 2020/01/16 11:05 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Anon | 2020/01/17 07:15 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Ricardo B | 2020/01/17 01:59 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Anon | 2020/01/17 06:40 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Ricardo B | 2020/01/18 07:42 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | gallier2 | 2020/01/19 07:02 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | David Hess | 2020/01/18 06:12 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | David Hess | 2020/01/15 08:49 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | gallier2 | 2020/01/15 11:57 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Simon Farnsworth | 2020/01/16 01:30 AM |
IBM PC success | Etienne | 2020/01/16 05:42 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Ricardo B | 2020/01/16 06:32 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Brett | 2020/01/17 12:38 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | David Hess | 2020/01/18 06:28 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | David Hess | 2020/01/18 06:22 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | David Hess | 2020/01/15 08:30 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Maxwell | 2020/01/11 08:07 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | David Hess | 2020/01/11 08:40 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Maxwell | 2020/01/11 09:08 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Ricardo B | 2020/01/11 07:42 PM |
8086 does NOT have those addressing modes | Devin | 2020/01/12 01:13 PM |
8086 does NOT have those addressing modes | Ricardo B | 2020/01/12 05:46 PM |
8086 does NOT have those addressing modes | Anon | 2020/01/13 04:10 AM |
8086 does NOT have those addressing modes | gallier2 | 2020/01/13 05:07 AM |
8086 does NOT have those addressing modes | Anon | 2020/01/13 06:09 AM |
8086 does NOT have those addressing modes | Ricardo B | 2020/01/13 10:48 AM |
8086 does NOT have those addressing modes | Michael S | 2020/01/13 06:40 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Ronald Maas | 2020/01/13 08:44 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Anon | 2020/01/13 03:32 PM |
8086 does NOT have those addressing modes | Ricardo B | 2020/01/13 10:24 AM |
8086 does NOT have those addressing modes | rwessel | 2020/01/13 02:59 PM |
8086 does NOT have those addressing modes | David Hess | 2020/01/13 06:12 PM |
8086 does NOT have those addressing modes | rwessel | 2020/01/13 06:28 PM |
8086 does NOT have those addressing modes | David Hess | 2020/01/13 06:51 PM |
8086 does NOT have those addressing modes | David Hess | 2020/01/13 05:55 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | rwessel | 2020/01/11 12:26 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Brett | 2020/01/11 02:16 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | rwessel | 2020/01/11 07:20 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Brett | 2020/01/12 12:02 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | rwessel | 2020/01/12 09:06 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | Brett | 2020/01/12 10:02 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | James | 2020/01/13 05:12 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Adrian | 2020/01/11 11:38 PM |
PDP-11 | Michael S | 2020/01/12 01:33 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | rwessel | 2020/01/12 06:01 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Ronald Maas | 2020/01/12 10:03 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Konrad Schwarz | 2020/01/13 03:49 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Adrian | 2020/01/13 11:38 PM |
Zilog Z8000 | konrad.schwarz | 2020/01/15 04:50 AM |
Zilog Z8000 | Adrian | 2020/01/15 10:24 PM |
It's hard to separate | David Hess | 2020/01/11 06:08 AM |
It's hard to separate | David Hess | 2020/01/11 06:11 AM |
It's hard to separate | Adrian | 2020/01/09 11:16 AM |
It's hard to separate | David Hess | 2020/01/11 06:17 AM |
It's hard to separate | gallier2 | 2020/01/10 12:11 AM |
It's hard to separate | none | 2020/01/10 01:58 AM |
It's hard to separate | rwessel | 2020/01/09 07:00 AM |
It's hard to separate | David Hess | 2020/01/09 08:10 AM |
It's hard to separate | rwessel | 2020/01/09 08:51 AM |
It's hard to separate | Adrian | 2020/01/08 10:58 PM |
It's hard to separate | rwessel | 2020/01/09 06:31 AM |
It's hard to separate | Adrian | 2020/01/09 06:44 AM |
It's hard to separate | David Hess | 2020/01/09 08:37 AM |
It's hard to separate | none | 2020/01/09 09:34 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Paul A. Clayton | 2020/01/09 02:15 PM |
Yes, they are terrible (NT) | Anon | 2020/01/09 02:20 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Adrian | 2020/01/09 11:49 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Etienne | 2020/01/10 01:28 AM |
Are segments so bad? | gallier2 | 2020/01/10 01:37 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Adrian | 2020/01/10 02:19 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Adrian | 2020/01/10 03:27 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Etienne | 2020/01/10 03:41 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Adrian | 2020/01/10 02:05 AM |
Are segments so bad? | gallier2 | 2020/01/10 02:13 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Anon3 | 2020/01/10 10:37 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Adrian | 2020/01/10 10:47 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/11 12:43 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Anon | 2020/01/10 05:51 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Adrian | 2020/01/11 12:05 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/11 07:20 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/11 09:14 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/11 08:15 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/11 10:15 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/12 03:18 AM |
Are segments so bad? | anon | 2020/01/12 11:30 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/12 09:19 PM |
the world sucks worse than you're aware of | Michael S | 2020/01/13 12:50 AM |
the world sucks worse than you're aware of | Brendan | 2020/01/13 02:56 AM |
the world sucks worse than you're aware of | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/13 03:46 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/13 06:41 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/13 07:21 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/13 08:43 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/13 12:02 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Anne O. Nymous | 2020/01/13 12:22 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/13 01:50 PM |
actor of around 200? | Michael S | 2020/01/14 02:58 AM |
Not overcomitting leads to more OOMs, not less | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/14 11:50 AM |
Not overcomitting leads to more OOMs, not less | Brendan | 2020/01/14 12:40 PM |
Not overcomitting leads to more OOMs, not less | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/15 02:17 AM |
Not overcomitting leads to more OOMs, not less | Anon | 2020/01/15 03:43 AM |
Not overcomitting leads to more OOMs, not less | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/15 04:09 AM |
Not overcomitting leads to more OOMs, not less | Anon | 2020/01/15 04:16 AM |
Not overcomitting leads to more OOMs, not less | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/15 05:58 AM |
Not overcomitting leads to more OOMs, not less | Anon | 2020/01/15 08:08 AM |
Not overcomitting leads to more OOMs, not less | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/16 03:05 AM |
Not overcomitting leads to more OOMs, not less | Michael S | 2020/01/15 03:48 AM |
Not overcomitting leads to more OOMs, not less | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/15 04:10 AM |
Not overcomitting leads to more OOMs, not less | Michael S | 2020/01/15 07:13 AM |
Not overcomitting leads to more OOMs, not less | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/15 07:46 AM |
Not overcomitting leads to more OOMs, not less | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/15 05:08 AM |
Thanks for the info (NT) | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/15 06:00 AM |
Not overcomitting leads to more OOMs, not less | Linus Torvalds | 2020/01/15 11:30 AM |
OOM killer complains | Anon | 2020/01/15 11:44 AM |
OOM killer complains | anon | 2020/01/15 03:26 PM |
Not overcomitting leads to more OOMs, not less | Brendan | 2020/01/16 06:26 AM |
Not overcomitting leads to more OOMs, not less | Linus Torvalds | 2020/01/16 09:17 AM |
Not overcomitting leads to more OOMs, not less | Linus Torvalds | 2020/01/16 09:48 AM |
Not overcomitting leads to more OOMs, not less | Doug S | 2020/01/16 02:41 PM |
Not overcomitting leads to more OOMs, not less | Doug S | 2020/01/16 02:44 PM |
Are segments so bad? | rwessel | 2020/01/13 03:11 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/14 06:37 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/14 07:48 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/14 10:13 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/14 01:30 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Brett | 2020/01/14 09:13 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/15 06:04 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/15 02:35 AM |
Specifying cost of dropping pages | Paul A. Clayton | 2020/01/13 02:00 PM |
Specifying cost of dropping pages | rwessel | 2020/01/13 03:19 PM |
Specifying cost of dropping pages | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/15 02:23 AM |
Are segments so bad? | anon | 2020/01/14 01:15 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/14 05:13 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/14 11:57 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/14 01:58 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/15 02:33 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Anon | 2020/01/15 04:24 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/15 05:20 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Etienne | 2020/01/15 04:56 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/15 07:53 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/16 05:12 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/16 09:56 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/15 05:20 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/15 05:56 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/16 06:16 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/16 10:08 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/17 12:52 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/17 09:08 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/18 11:40 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/18 09:13 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/19 11:25 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brett | 2020/01/19 02:18 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Brett | 2020/01/19 02:34 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/19 11:57 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/20 04:54 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/20 11:43 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/21 06:01 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/21 05:04 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/22 06:30 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/22 02:56 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/23 07:44 AM |
Are segments so bad? | rwessel | 2020/01/16 02:06 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/16 02:13 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/17 12:51 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/17 02:18 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Anon | 2020/01/17 07:01 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/20 12:06 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/18 02:15 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/19 11:55 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Michael S | 2020/01/20 04:30 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/20 07:02 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/20 07:41 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Michael S | 2020/01/20 07:45 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/20 08:36 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/20 10:04 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Michael S | 2020/01/20 12:22 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/20 01:38 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Simon Farnsworth | 2020/01/20 02:40 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Anon | 2020/01/20 03:35 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Simon Farnsworth | 2020/01/20 04:30 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Michael S | 2020/01/20 04:20 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/21 04:08 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/21 05:07 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/22 12:53 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/22 03:32 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/22 06:12 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/22 03:28 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/23 06:36 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/24 06:27 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/24 09:42 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/25 01:46 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/25 07:29 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/26 10:17 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/27 06:55 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/27 03:33 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/28 05:28 AM |
DDS assets and MipMap chains | Montaray Jack | 2020/01/29 02:26 AM |
Are segments so bad? | gallier2 | 2020/01/27 02:58 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/27 05:19 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Anne O. Nymous | 2020/01/25 02:23 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Anon | 2020/01/22 04:52 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Anne O. Nymous | 2020/01/23 12:24 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Anon | 2020/01/23 04:24 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Anne O. Nymous | 2020/01/23 11:43 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Anon | 2020/01/24 03:04 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Etienne | 2020/01/24 05:10 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/23 12:48 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Michael S | 2020/01/23 02:48 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/23 06:38 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/23 12:29 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Anon | 2020/01/23 05:08 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/24 08:51 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Anon | 2020/01/23 05:02 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/24 02:57 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Anon | 2020/01/24 03:17 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/01/24 08:23 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Anon | 2020/02/02 09:15 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/02/03 12:47 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Anon | 2020/02/03 01:34 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Gabriele Svelto | 2020/02/03 04:36 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Anon3 | 2020/02/03 07:47 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Anon | 2020/02/04 04:49 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/24 09:10 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/17 09:26 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Anne O. Nymous | 2020/01/12 03:18 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/12 07:41 AM |
Are segments so bad? | rwessel | 2020/01/11 12:31 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Anne O. Nymous | 2020/01/11 07:22 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Ricardo B | 2020/01/11 07:01 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Adrian | 2020/01/11 11:18 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Michael S | 2020/01/12 01:43 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Adrian | 2020/01/12 03:35 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Ricardo B | 2020/01/12 11:04 AM |
Are segments so bad? | Anon3 | 2020/01/12 04:52 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Brendan | 2020/01/12 08:58 PM |
Are segments so bad? | Paul A. Clayton | 2020/01/13 08:11 AM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | rainstared | 2020/01/06 12:43 AM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | Foo_ | 2020/01/06 04:33 AM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | dmcq | 2020/01/06 05:03 AM |
changes in context | Carlie Coats | 2020/01/09 08:06 AM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | rainstar | 2020/01/09 09:16 PM |
No nuances, just buggy code (was: related to Spinlock implementation and the Linux Scheduler) | Montaray Jack | 2020/01/09 10:11 PM |
Suggested reading for the author | anon | 2020/01/04 10:16 PM |
Suggested reading for the author | ab | 2020/01/05 04:15 AM |
Looking at the other side (frequency scaling) | Chester | 2020/01/06 09:19 AM |
Looking at the other side (frequency scaling) | Foo_ | 2020/01/06 10:00 AM |
Why spinlocks were used | Foo_ | 2020/01/06 10:06 AM |
Why spinlocks were used | Jukka Larja | 2020/01/06 11:59 AM |
Why spinlocks were used | Simon Cooke | 2020/01/06 02:16 PM |
Why spinlocks were used | Rizzo | 2020/01/07 12:18 AM |
Looking at the other side (frequency scaling) | ab | 2020/01/07 12:14 AM |
Cross-platform code | Gian-Carlo Pascutto | 2020/01/06 07:00 AM |
Cross-platform code | Michael S | 2020/01/06 08:11 AM |
Cross-platform code | Gian-Carlo Pascutto | 2020/01/06 11:33 AM |
Cross-platform code | Michael S | 2020/01/06 12:59 PM |
Cross-platform code | Nksingh | 2020/01/06 11:09 PM |
Cross-platform code | Michael S | 2020/01/07 01:00 AM |
SRW lock implementation | Michael S | 2020/01/07 01:35 AM |
SRW lock implementation | Nksingh | 2020/01/09 01:17 PM |
broken URL in Linux source code | Michael S | 2020/01/14 12:56 AM |
broken URL in Linux source code | Travis Downs | 2020/01/14 09:14 AM |
broken URL in Linux source code | Michael S | 2020/01/14 09:48 AM |
broken URL in Linux source code | Travis Downs | 2020/01/14 03:43 PM |
SRW lock implementation - url broken | Michael S | 2020/01/14 02:07 AM |
SRW lock implementation - url broken | Travis Downs | 2020/01/14 10:06 AM |
SRW lock implementation - url broken | gpderetta | 2020/01/15 03:28 AM |
SRW lock implementation - url broken | Travis Downs | 2020/01/15 10:16 AM |
SRW lock implementation - url broken | Linus Torvalds | 2020/01/15 10:20 AM |
SRW lock implementation - url broken | Travis Downs | 2020/01/15 10:35 AM |
SRW lock implementation - url broken | Linus Torvalds | 2020/01/16 10:24 AM |
SRW lock implementation - url broken | Konrad Schwarz | 2020/02/05 09:19 AM |
SRW lock implementation - url broken | nksingh | 2020/02/05 01:42 PM |
Cross-platform code | Linus Torvalds | 2020/01/06 12:57 PM |