Chatroom
 

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Bad Astronomy and Universe Today Forum > General > Off-Topic Babbling
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

   

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #31 (permalink)  
Old 03-December-2006, 09:39 PM
ASEI's Avatar
ASEI ASEI is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,413
Default

Quote:
I've configured XP to 98 style, unless I wanted a new option. Of course it's still heavier than 98, but also far more stable.
This was my experience with XP as well. It was the most stable thing around since Win3.11 as far as I know. XP Pro with McAfee's anti-virus and I've had no security problems whatsoever. And that's on a school network with all sorts of interesting things floating around.

What is going to suck, coming down the pike is the transfer to these 64-bit operating systems? Why do we need a 64-bit operating system? So that the floating point operations occur to an extra few decimals of accuracy? In any case, almose every 32 bit driver or piece of software will have serious problems. My brother was experimenting with some 64-bit version of WinXP, and none of his software would work.

About Linux... You know, I would honestly like to experiment with a linux computer. What prevents me from just out and using it is that you need to find common software that will run on it. Maybe when after I graduate and get enough money to play with more than one computer, I'll dabble in it.
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old 03-December-2006, 10:20 PM
publius's Avatar
publius publius is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 4,821
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ASEI View Post
This was my experience with XP as well. It was the most stable thing around since Win3.11 as far as I know. XP Pro with McAfee's anti-virus and I've had no security problems whatsoever. And that's on a school network with all sorts of interesting things floating around.

What is going to suck, coming down the pike is the transfer to these 64-bit operating systems? Why do we need a 64-bit operating system? So that the floating point operations occur to an extra few decimals of accuracy? In any case, almose every 32 bit driver or piece of software will have serious problems. My brother was experimenting with some 64-bit version of WinXP, and none of his software would work.

About Linux... You know, I would honestly like to experiment with a linux computer. What prevents me from just out and using it is that you need to find common software that will run on it. Maybe when after I graduate and get enough money to play with more than one computer, I'll dabble in it.
XP comes from the NT kernel line, not the 9x, which died with WinME. I've been an NT man since NT 4.0 Workstation. Win2K was actually NT 5.0 -- I got in on the "Corporate preview program" (CPP)for it, and played with the last beta and the release candidate versions before the final release. Marketing changed the name to Win 2000 during that CPP period, as the intent was for the NT kernel to take over the Windows line. Win 2000 was not quite ready to take over the "consumer" market, as NT's security and protection models weren't compatiable with the wide open Win9x. Many of us were afraid MS was going to ruin NT to make it be able to run all the consumer crap out there. But for the most part they didn't, although they did make it less secure by default, and everyone had to run with full adminstrator privileges to be able to do anything. With the "run as {user}" ability, you could run any process with reduced privileges, but there were problems, such as a plain user process account to run, say, IE couldn't access the necessary user files (which were own by an admininstrator account and so the reduced user tokens couldn't access them. *sigh*) I hear they tried to fix with that with Vista, and make a "reduce privilege" that can actually work without having to go through hoops. I played with running IE with reduced priveleges but it was a PITA.

Anyway, XP is technically NT 5.1. If you type "ver" at a (cmd.exe) command prompt, you'll see that, the version number at least. Vista is supposed to be NT 6.0, I think, but I'm not too enthused about trying it [and anyone with binary newsgroup access who knows where to look could download every beta and release candidate they put out in both 32 bit and
x64 versions.

64-bit: I'm a big 64-bit booster. I've got a 64-bit AMD x64 machine, which I built to play with the x64 XP betas, and I'm now running the release version, along with 32-bit installs on it.

Actually, the floating point registers offer no more bits than the 32-bit chips [for the x64 architecture -- Intel calls their version EM64T, which they had to come out with when they realized it was AMD's x64 chip that was going to take the 64-bit market, not their "Itanic" -- but apparently Itanium has some traction in the server market. MS still makes active IA-64 versions in the server OS line]. It's the same basic x86 floating point with MMX and the XMM, although they did extend the XMM register "pack" in some ways, but did not increase the bit precision.

Now, 64-bit integer registers are available, but the way AMD did it, was to make the default operand size still 32-bit even in 64-bit mode. The idea of 64-bits is to increase virtual *address* size. And while addresses are 64-bits wides, only 48 are actually usable at the virtual level. The top 16 bits must be set to all zeros or all ones. And at the actual physical address level, only 40 bits are available (and only 36 for EM64T).

The way the Win32 model worked, the system mapped the top 2GB of the virtual address space for itself, and gave "only" the lower 2GB to user processes. So most Win32 programs were limited to a piddling 2GB of usuable virtual memory. They added some 3GB extensions that gave an extra GB, but that required programs to know how to use it.

Anway, x64 gives programs tons more virtual address space, and that, not increased precision, floating point or integer, is the main reason behind
64-bits.

Drivers have to be 64-bit and that's been a problem for some older hardware, but there are drivers for all my stuff. The system has a rather elaborate 32-bit "WOW" subsystem to run 32-bit processes, and they mine run fine. The only hitch is programs with shell extensions and other plug-ins. The 64-bit version of explorer is the main shell, and it will not run those. But there is a 32-bit version of Explorer on the system, and one of the tricks is to run that one, where all the extensions will work.

In the "32-bit compatibility" submode of 64-bit mode, both 32-bit and 16-bit protected mode code can run. However, V86 mode is gone. And that means DOS boxes and the Win16 subsystem are gone. It doesn't mean the command prompt is gone, mind you, cmd.exe is there as always, and in both 32 and 64-bit versions.

-Richard
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old 04-December-2006, 01:19 AM
publius's Avatar
publius publius is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 4,821
Default

If anyone is interested, I thought I'd write a simple little C program, compile it for all three architectures, and post the asm output to illustrate the differences. Here is the C program:

Code:
// Test compile to compare x86 and x64 output
#include <stdio.h>

char *arch = 
#ifdef _M_X64

              "AMD 64-bit";
#elif defined(_M_IA64)

              "Itanic 64-bit";
#else
              "32-bit";
#endif

static double x = 2.0, y = 3.0, z;


int _cdecl main(int argc, char **argv)
{

	 int a = 2, b = 3, c;
              c = a * b;
	 z = x * y;

	 printf( "Hello, %s World. c, z = %i %f \n", arch, c, z );

	 return(0);


}
This just deterimines which architecture it is being compiled for and defines an appropriate string, then does a quick and dirty integer and floating point multiplication, then spits it out to standard output.

Now, here follows the regular Win32 32-bit version of this program:
Code:
; Listing generated by Microsoft (R) Optimizing Compiler Version 14.00.50727.42 

	TITLE	s:\Projects\NET2K5v8\Test3264\test3264.c
	.686P
	.XMM
	include listing.inc
	.model	flat

INCLUDELIB MSVCRTD
INCLUDELIB OLDNAMES

PUBLIC	??_C@_06BGIBKBII@32?9bit?$AA@			; `string'
PUBLIC	_arch
_DATA	SEGMENT
_arch	DD	FLAT:??_C@_06BGIBKBII@32?9bit?$AA@
	ORG $+4
_x	DQ	04000000000000000r		; 2
_y	DQ	04008000000000000r		; 3
_DATA	ENDS
;	COMDAT ??_C@_06BGIBKBII@32?9bit?$AA@
CONST	SEGMENT
??_C@_06BGIBKBII@32?9bit?$AA@ DB '32-bit', 00H		; `string'
CONST	ENDS
PUBLIC	??_C@_0CA@OLNJKCJK@Hello?0?5?$CFs?5World?4?5c?0?5z?5?$DN?5?$CFi?5?$CFf?5?6?$AA@ ; `string'
PUBLIC	_main
EXTRN	__imp__printf:PROC
EXTRN	__fltused:DWORD
EXTRN	__RTC_CheckEsp:PROC
EXTRN	__RTC_Shutdown:PROC
EXTRN	__RTC_InitBase:PROC
_BSS	SEGMENT
_z	DQ	01H DUP (?)
_BSS	ENDS
;	COMDAT ??_C@_0CA@OLNJKCJK@Hello?0?5?$CFs?5World?4?5c?0?5z?5?$DN?5?$CFi?5?$CFf?5?6?$AA@
; File s:\projects\net2k5v8\test3264\test3264.c
CONST	SEGMENT
??_C@_0CA@OLNJKCJK@Hello?0?5?$CFs?5World?4?5c?0?5z?5?$DN?5?$CFi?5?$CFf?5?6?$AA@ DB 'H'
	DB	'ello, %s World. c, z = %i %f ', 0aH, 00H	; `string'
CONST	ENDS
;	COMDAT rtc$TMZ
rtc$TMZ	SEGMENT
__RTC_Shutdown.rtc$TMZ DD FLAT:__RTC_Shutdown
rtc$TMZ	ENDS
;	COMDAT rtc$IMZ
rtc$IMZ	SEGMENT
__RTC_InitBase.rtc$IMZ DD FLAT:__RTC_InitBase
; Function compile flags: /Odtp /RTCsu /ZI
rtc$IMZ	ENDS
;	COMDAT _main
_TEXT	SEGMENT
_c$ = -32						; size = 4
_b$ = -20						; size = 4
_a$ = -8						; size = 4
_argc$ = 8						; size = 4
_argv$ = 12						; size = 4
_main	PROC						; COMDAT

; 19   : {

	push	ebp
	mov	ebp, esp
	sub	esp, 228				; 000000e4H
	push	ebx
	push	esi
	push	edi
	lea	edi, DWORD PTR [ebp-228]
	mov	ecx, 57					; 00000039H
	mov	eax, -858993460				; ccccccccH
	rep stosd

; 20   : 
; 21   : 	 int a = 2, b = 3, c;

	mov	DWORD PTR _a$[ebp], 2
	mov	DWORD PTR _b$[ebp], 3

; 22   :      c = a * b;

	mov	eax, DWORD PTR _a$[ebp]
	imul	eax, DWORD PTR _b$[ebp]
	mov	DWORD PTR _c$[ebp], eax

; 23   : 	 z = x * y;

	fld	QWORD PTR _x
	fmul	QWORD PTR _y
	fstp	QWORD PTR _z

; 24   : 
; 25   : 	 printf( "Hello, %s World. c, z = %i %f \n", arch, c, z );

	mov	esi, esp
	sub	esp, 8
	fld	QWORD PTR _z
	fstp	QWORD PTR [esp]
	mov	eax, DWORD PTR _c$[ebp]
	push	eax
	mov	ecx, DWORD PTR _arch
	push	ecx
	push	OFFSET ??_C@_0CA@OLNJKCJK@Hello?0?5?$CFs?5World?4?5c?0?5z?5?$DN?5?$CFi?5?$CFf?5?6?$AA@
	call	DWORD PTR __imp__printf
	add	esp, 20					; 00000014H
	cmp	esi, esp
	call	__RTC_CheckEsp

; 26   : 
; 27   : 	 return(0);

	xor	eax, eax

; 28   : 
; 29   : 
; 30   : }

	pop	edi
	pop	esi
	pop	ebx
	add	esp, 228				; 000000e4H
	cmp	ebp, esp
	call	__RTC_CheckEsp
	mov	esp, ebp
	pop	ebp
	ret	0
_main	ENDP
_TEXT	ENDS
END
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old 04-December-2006, 01:25 AM
publius's Avatar
publius publius is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 4,821
Default

Now, here is the AMD64 (x64) version of that program:

Code:
; Listing generated by Microsoft (R) Optimizing Compiler Version 14.00.50727.42 

include listing.inc

INCLUDELIB MSVCRTD
INCLUDELIB OLDNAMES

PUBLIC	arch
_DATA	SEGMENT
$SG2140	DB	'AMD 64-bit', 00H
	ORG $+5
arch	DQ	FLAT:$SG2140
x	DQ	04000000000000000r		; 2
y	DQ	04008000000000000r		; 3
$SG2153	DB	'Hello, %s World. c, z = %i %f ', 0aH, 00H
_DATA	ENDS
PUBLIC	main
EXTRN	__imp_printf:PROC
EXTRN	_fltused:DWORD
EXTRN	_RTC_Shutdown:PROC
EXTRN	_RTC_InitBase:PROC
_BSS	SEGMENT
z	DQ	01H DUP (?)
_BSS	ENDS
pdata	SEGMENT
$pdata$main DD	imagerel $LN3
	DD	imagerel $LN3+137
	DD	imagerel $unwind$main
pdata	ENDS
xdata	SEGMENT
$unwind$main DD	022601H
	DD	0700a520eH
xdata	ENDS
;	COMDAT rtc$TMZ
; File s:\projects\net2k5v8\test3264\test3264.c
rtc$TMZ	SEGMENT
_RTC_Shutdown.rtc$TMZ DQ FLAT:_RTC_Shutdown
rtc$TMZ	ENDS
;	COMDAT rtc$IMZ
rtc$IMZ	SEGMENT
_RTC_InitBase.rtc$IMZ DQ FLAT:_RTC_InitBase
; Function compile flags: /Odtp /RTCsu
rtc$IMZ	ENDS
_TEXT	SEGMENT
a$ = 32
b$ = 36
c$ = 40
argc$ = 64
argv$ = 72
main	PROC

; 19   : {

$LN3:
	mov	QWORD PTR [rsp+16], rdx
	mov	DWORD PTR [rsp+8], ecx
	push	rdi
	sub	rsp, 48					; 00000030H
	mov	rdi, rsp
	mov	rcx, 12
	mov	eax, -858993460				; ccccccccH
	rep stosd
	mov	ecx, DWORD PTR [rsp+64]

; 20   : 
; 21   : 	 int a = 2, b = 3, c;

	mov	DWORD PTR a$[rsp], 2
	mov	DWORD PTR b$[rsp], 3

; 22   :      c = a * b;

	mov	eax, DWORD PTR a$[rsp]
	imul	eax, DWORD PTR b$[rsp]
	mov	DWORD PTR c$[rsp], eax

; 23   : 	 z = x * y;

	movsdx	xmm0, QWORD PTR x
	mulsd	xmm0, QWORD PTR y
	movsdx	QWORD PTR z, xmm0

; 24   : 
; 25   : 	 printf( "Hello, %s World. c, z = %i %f \n", arch, c, z );

	movsdx	xmm3, QWORD PTR z
	movd	r9, xmm3
	mov	r8d, DWORD PTR c$[rsp]
	mov	rdx, QWORD PTR arch
	lea	rcx, OFFSET FLAT:$SG2153
	call	QWORD PTR __imp_printf

; 26   : 
; 27   : 	 return(0);

	xor	eax, eax

; 28   : 
; 29   : 
; 30   : }

	add	rsp, 48					; 00000030H
	pop	rdi
	ret	0
main	ENDP
_TEXT	ENDS
END
And finally the IA-64 (Itanium) version of this. Note this is radically different than the x86 architecture (and a heck of a lot more text):

Code:
// Listing generated by Microsoft (R) Optimizing Compiler Version 14.00.50727.42 

	.file	"s:/Projects/NET2K5v8/Test3264/test3264.c"
	.radix	D
	.section	.text,	"ax", "progbits"
	.align 32
	.section	.pdata,	"a", "progbits"
	.align 4
	.section	.xdata,	"a", "progbits"
	.align 8
	.section	.text$zz,	"ax", "progbits"
	.align 16
	.section	.pdata,	"a", "progbits"
	.align 4
	.section	.text$zy,	"ax", "progbits"
	.align 16
	.section	.pdata,	"a", "progbits"
	.align 4
	.section	.data,	"wa", "progbits"
	.align 16
	.section	.rdata,	"a", "progbits"
	.align 16
	.section	.bss,	"wa", "nobits"
	.align 16
	.section	.debug$S,	"ax", "progbits"
	.align 16
	.section	$$TYPES,	"ax", "progbits"
	.align 16
	.section	.tls$,	"was", "progbits"
	.align 16
	.section	.sdata,	"was", "progbits"
	.align 16
	.section	.sbss,	"was", "nobits"
	.align 16
	.section	.srdata,	"as", "progbits"
	.align 16
	.section	.rdata,	"a", "progbits"
	.align 16
	.section	.data,	"wa", "progbits"
	.align 16
        .global arch#
	.section	.data
$SG1892: string	"Hello, %s World. c, z = %i %f \n\000"
	.section	.sdata
y:	real8	3.000000000000000000e+000
x:	real8	2.000000000000000000e+000
arch:	data8	$SG1878#
	.section	.data
$SG1878: string	"Itanic 64-bit\000"
	.type	main#	,@function 
        .global main#
	.type	_RTC_Shutdown#	,@function 
        .global _RTC_Shutdown#
	.type	_RTC_InitBase#	,@function 
        .global _RTC_InitBase#
	.type	__imp_printf#	,@function 
        .global __imp_printf#
	.type	_fltused#	,@object 
        .global _fltused#
	.type	_RTC_CheckStackVars#	,@function 
        .global _RTC_CheckStackVars#
	.section	.sbss
z:	.skip	8
	.section	.pdata
$T1913:	data4	@imagerel($LN4@main#)
	data4	@imagerel($LN4@main#+464)
	data4	@imagerel($T1911#)
	.section	.xdata
$T1911:	data2	03H
	data2	00H
	data4	03H
	string	"\x17"		//R1:prologue size 23
	string	"\xe6\x00"	//P7:pfs_when time 0
	string	"\xb1\x23"	//P3:pfs_gr 35
	string	"\xe0\x03\x04"	//P7:mem_stack_f time 3 size 4
	string	"\xe4\x07"	//P7:rp_when time 7
	string	"\xb0\xa2"	//P3:rp_gr 34
	string	"\x61\x40"	//R3:body size 64
	string	"\x81"		//B1:label_state 1
	string	"\xc0\x05"	//B2:ecount 0 time 5
	string	"\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00" //padding
	.section 	??.rtc$TMZ =	"aY",	"comdat"
	.secalias	??.rtc$TMZ,	 ".rtc$TMZ" 
	.align 16
// File s:\projects\net2k5v8\test3264\test3264.c

_RTC_Shutdown.rtc$TMZ:
	data8	_RTC_Shutdown#
	.section 	??.rtc$IMZ =	"aY",	"comdat"
	.secalias	??.rtc$IMZ,	 ".rtc$IMZ" 
	.align 16

_RTC_InitBase.rtc$IMZ:
	data8	_RTC_InitBase#
// Function compile flags: /Odtp /RTCsu
	.section	.text

// Begin code for function: main:
	.proc	main#
	.align 32
a$	= 20
b$	= 32
c$	= 44
argc$	= 64
argv$	= 72
main: 
// argc$ = r32
// argv$ = r33
// Output regs: r37-r40
$LN4@main:

// 19   : {

 {   .mli  //R-Addr: 0X00 
	alloc	r35=2, 3, 4, 0				    //19 	cc:0
	movl	r27=-3689348814741910324		    //19 	cc:0, ccccccccccccccccH
 }
 {   .mmi  //R-Addr: 0X010 
	adds	sp=-64, sp				    //19 	cc:0, ffffffc0H
	mov	r36=gp					    //19 	cc:0
	mov	r28=5;;					    //19 	cc:0
 }
 {   .mii  //R-Addr: 0X020 
	ld8.nta	r2=[sp]					    //19 	cc:1
	mov	r34=b0					    //19 	cc:1
	adds	r3=8, sp;;				    //19 	cc:1
 }
 {   .mmb  //R-Addr: 0X030 
	mov	r2=sp					    //19 	cc:2
	nop.m	 0
	nop.b	 0;;
 }
$LN3@main:

// 19   : {

 {   .mmi  //R-Addr: 0X040 
	st8	[r2]=r27, 16				    //19 	cc:0
	st8	[r3]=r27, 16				    //19 	cc:0
	cmp.ne.unc p14,p15=1, r28			    //19 	cc:0
 }
 {   .mmb  //R-Addr: 0X050 
	adds	r28=-1, r28				    //19 	cc:0
	nop.m	 0
  (p14)	br.cond.dptk.many $LN3@main#;;			    //19 	cc:0
 }

// 20   : 
// 21   : 	 int a = 2, b = 3, c;
// 22   :      c = a * b;
// 23   : 	 z = x * y;
// 24   : 
// 25   : 	 printf( "Hello, %s World. c, z = %i %f \n", arch, c, z );
// 26   : 
// 27   : 	 return(0);
// 28   : 
// 29   : 
// 30   : }

 {   .mib  //R-Addr: 0X060 
	adds	r31=argc$, sp
	adds	r30=argv$, sp
	nop.b	 0;;
 }
 {   .mmb  //R-Addr: 0X070 
	st4	[r31]=r32
	st8	[r30]=r33
	nop.b	 0;;
 }
 {   .mmi  //R-Addr: 0X080 
	mov	r29=2					    //21 	cc:0
	adds	r28=a$, sp				    //21 	cc:0
	mov	r27=3					    //21 	cc:0
 }
 {   .mmi  //R-Addr: 0X090 
	adds	r26=b$, sp;;				    //21 	cc:0
	st4	[r28]=r29				    //21 	cc:1
	nop.i	 0
 }
 {   .mmi  //R-Addr: 0X0a0 
	st4	[r26]=r27;;				    //21 	cc:1
	adds	r25=a$, sp				    //22 	cc:0
	adds	r21=b$, sp				    //22 	cc:0
 }
 {   .mmi  //R-Addr: 0X0b0 
	adds	r18=c$, sp;;				    //22 	cc:0
	ld4	r22=[r25]				    //22 	cc:1
	nop.i	 0
 }
 {   .mmi  //R-Addr: 0X0c0 
	ld4	r20=[r21];;				    //22 	cc:1
	setf.sig f6=r22					    //22 	cc:2
	nop.i	 0
 }
 {   .mmb  //R-Addr: 0X0d0 
	setf.sig f7=r20					    //22 	cc:2
	nop.m	 0
	nop.b	 0;;
 }
 {   .mfb  //R-Addr: 0X0e0 
	nop.m	 0
	xma.l	f8=f6, f7, f0				    //22 	cc:8
	nop.b	 0;;
 }
 {   .mmi  //R-Addr: 0X0f0 
	getf.sig r19=f8;;				    //22 	cc:12
	st4	[r18]=r19				    //22 	cc:17
	nop.i	 0;;
 }
 {   .mmi  //R-Addr: 0X0100 
	addl	r17=@gprel(x#),gp			    //23 	cc:0
	addl	r16=@gprel(y#),gp			    //23 	cc:0
	addl	r15=@gprel(z#),gp;;			    //23 	cc:0
 }
 {   .mmb  //R-Addr: 0X0110 
	ldfd	f9=[r17]				    //23 	cc:1
	ldfd	f10=[r16]				    //23 	cc:1
	nop.b	 0;;
 }
 {   .mfb  //R-Addr: 0X0120 
	nop.m	 0
	fmpy.d.s0 f11=f9, f10				    //23 	cc:7
	nop.b	 0;;
 }
 {   .mmi  //R-Addr: 0X0130 
	stfd	[r15]=f11;;				    //23 	cc:11
	addl	r11=@gprel(z#),gp			    //25 	cc:0
	addl	r31=@gprel(__imp_printf#),gp		    //25 	cc:0
 }
 {   .mmi  //R-Addr: 0X0140 
	addl	r9=@gprel(arch#),gp			    //25 	cc:0
	addl	r8=@ltoff($SG1892#),gp			    //25 	cc:0
	adds	r10=c$, sp;;				    //25 	cc:0
 }
 {   .mmb  //R-Addr: 0X0150 
	ld8	r30=[r31]				    //25 	cc:1
	ldfd	f8=[r11]				    //25 	cc:1
	nop.b	 0;;
 }
 {   .mmb  //R-Addr: 0X0160 
	ld4	r39=[r10]				    //25 	cc:2
	ld8	r38=[r9]				    //25 	cc:2
	nop.b	 0;;
 }
 {   .mmb  //R-Addr: 0X0170 
	ld8	r29=[r30], 8				    //25 	cc:3
	ld8	r37=[r8]				    //25 	cc:3
	nop.b	 0;;
 }
 {   .mib  //R-Addr: 0X0180 
	ld8	gp=[r30]				    //25 	cc:4
	mov	b6=r29					    //25 	cc:4
	nop.b	 0;;
 }
 {   .mmb  //R-Addr: 0X0190 
	getf.d	r40=f8					    //25 	cc:7
	nop.m	 0
	br.call.dptk.many b0=b6;;			    //25 	cc:7
 }
 {   .mmi  //R-Addr: 0X01a0 
	mov	gp=r36;;				    //25 	cc:18
	mov	gp=r36					    //27 	cc:0
	mov	r8=r0;;					    //27 	cc:0
 }
 {   .mii  //R-Addr: 0X01b0 
	adds	sp=64, sp				    //30 	cc:0, 00000040H
	mov.ret	b0=r34;;				    //30 	cc:0
	mov.i	ar.pfs=r35				    //30 	cc:1
 }
 {   .mmb  //R-Addr: 0X01c0 
	nop.m	 0
	nop.m	 0
	br.ret.sptk.many b0;;				    //30 	cc:1
 }
// End code for function:
	.endp	main#

// Total code size for all functions: 0X01d0 bytes (29 bundles)

// END
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old 04-December-2006, 08:08 AM
Nicolas's Avatar
Nicolas Nicolas is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Belgium
Posts: 11,546
Default

Whatever they do with a new Windows, they must do something about the all users/admin/this user random file jungle on PC's used by a single user. Many PC's still are being used by a single user, support it!
__________________
To the regular visitor of internet bulletin boards it is clear that it's an excellent idea your parents get to choose your real name.
Reply With Quote
  #36 (permalink)  
Old 24-December-2006, 11:22 PM
sarongsong's Avatar
sarongsong sarongsong is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,554
Default

"Oh, no, Mr. Bill!"
Quote:
December 24, 2006
MSFT facing early crisis of confidence in quality of VISTA; security researchers, hackers find potentially serious flaws in system... New York Times

Last edited by sarongsong; 25-December-2006 at 03:53 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old 25-December-2006, 02:50 AM
sidmel's Avatar
sidmel sidmel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Henderson, KY
Posts: 393
Send a message via Yahoo to sidmel
Default

That was my problem with XP when it first came. MS toted its improved security and network sharing capabilities (possible oxymoron). Unfortunately the improved sharing capabilities opened up a number of new potential security hacks. It also created easier access (and no or little explanation) to a number of security and network settings that most home users don’t have a clue how to properly use, once again leading to potential hacks.

I recently had an IT person once tell me XP should under no circumstance never, ever need to be reinstalled, that’s why MS figured they could limit the installs. All I said was …. right….

I’ve too many nasty viruses where even professionals couldn’t totally remove and could only partially isolate, a re-install was the only 100% solution.
__________________
Photons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic.
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old 25-December-2006, 06:20 AM
Celestial Mechanic's Avatar
Celestial Mechanic Celestial Mechanic is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 4,156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by publius View Post
So you actually like eCS? I've read some of the most virtriolic attacks I've ever seen from the OS/2 enthusiasts against eCS and the company that licensed it from IBM. They absolutely hated it.

-Richard
There is a particularly obnoxious troll who calls himself "The OS/2 Guy" who trashes eCS every chance he gets in every OS/2 / eCS forum he can find. Probably 80 percent of the vitriol drips from his keyboard.

There are a few things I don't like: eCS insists on installing logical volume management (LVM) whether you want it or not. This means that if your system has multiple operating systems on it (such as my secondary desktop computer and my laptop) those other operating systems have to be installed first. Other partitioning utilities haven't got a clue what IBM's LVM is doing, nor do many live CD-ROMs.

My laptop has eCS 1.0 on it in addition to OS/2 Warp 4 (fixpack 11), Red Hat 7.0, and BeOS 4.5. My secondary desktop does not have eCS on it. My main computer has eCS 1.2 on it exclusively and it has been nice.

I'm sorry that I didn't see this and respond earlier.
__________________
Microsoft is over if you want it.

The bar has been lowered for the promotion of ATM ideas; the bar for the acceptance of ATM ideas must remain high.
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old 26-December-2006, 02:55 AM
Bearded One Bearded One is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Illinois, USA
Posts: 419
Default

Some interesting comments in this article. If half of what is claimed in the article is true I think I will be holding off on Vista for as long as possible. Sounds like a resource hog, spends most of it's resources making sure you can't use it for what you want to use it for.

I can see some very good reasons for businesses to not use it, they have less interest in the so called "premium content" and they will just be limiting themselves and increasing their hardware costs to use it. Windows Vista seems to be geared towards focusing on being a consumer "media PC" and not a serious business/commercial.scientific platform.
Reply With Quote
  #40 (permalink)  
Old 26-December-2006, 03:46 AM
publius's Avatar
publius publius is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 4,821
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bearded One View Post
Some interesting comments in this article. If half of what is claimed in the article is true I think I will be holding off on Vista for as long as possible. Sounds like a resource hog, spends most of it's resources making sure you can't use it for what you want to use it for.

I can see some very good reasons for businesses to not use it, they have less interest in the so called "premium content" and they will just be limiting themselves and increasing their hardware costs to use it. Windows Vista seems to be geared towards focusing on being a consumer "media PC" and not a serious business/commercial.scientific platform.
This DRM and content protection crap makes me sick. I've had enough of it. That Digital Millenium Copyright Act was the last straw for me; it's an outright violation of the First Amendment. I mean, according to the wording, it's a crime to actually discuss anything that could be used to circumvent copyright protection.

The "content industry" has the clout to get this crap passed because they have tons of money. And where do they get that money? From the millions of people who buy their crap. If people would just stop buying their crap, they'd go belly up and that would be the end of their crap.

I haven't bought any music or videos in several years. The recording industry and "content providers" aren't getting one more red cent out of me. I only wish all the rest of the millions of people would do that. Just for one month. One little month of not buying would send a shock wave through that would blow them away.

-Richard
Reply With Quote
  #41 (permalink)  
Old 26-December-2006, 03:48 AM
Dragon Star's Avatar
Dragon Star Dragon Star is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Lake Mary, FL
Posts: 3,744
Send a message via MSN to Dragon Star
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by publius View Post
I haven't bought any music or videos in several years.
Me either. And now that I've found YouTube...
__________________
Life is full of choices. Sometimes you make the good ones, and sometimes you have to kill all the witnesses.

Lurker
- "This is baut... we can't decide on the safety of pbj sandwiches in less than 9 pages..."
Reply With Quote
  #42 (permalink)  
Old 26-December-2006, 04:45 AM
Delvo Delvo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,251
Default

Just exactly what is supposed to be GOOD about this thing that isn't good about XP? Why WOULD anybody want it?

Making windows appear to fade into and out of the distance when the user switches to and from them (or whatever it is that makes them do that) just doesn't matter... and if it did we could make or find a program that would do it for us in 2D processing by just altering with the window's size and shading anyway.

Last edited by Delvo; 26-December-2006 at 05:43 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #43 (permalink)  
Old 26-December-2006, 05:38 AM
cjl's Avatar
cjl cjl is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: University of Colorado - Boulder
Posts: 2,368
Default

Well, so far, I have to say I really like Vista. It seems to run faster than XP, boot faster (on the same computer), and be just as stable.

I like it. Yeah, there are a couple of bugs, but that's to be expected.
Reply With Quote
  #44 (permalink)  
Old 26-December-2006, 05:47 AM
publius's Avatar
publius publius is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 4,821
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Celestial Mechanic View Post
There is a particularly obnoxious troll who calls himself "The OS/2 Guy" who trashes eCS every chance he gets in every OS/2 / eCS forum he can find. Probably 80 percent of the vitriol drips from his keyboard.

There are a few things I don't like: eCS insists on installing logical volume management (LVM) whether you want it or not. This means that if your system has multiple operating systems on it (such as my secondary desktop computer and my laptop) those other operating systems have to be installed first. Other partitioning utilities haven't got a clue what IBM's LVM is doing, nor do many live CD-ROMs.

My laptop has eCS 1.0 on it in addition to OS/2 Warp 4 (fixpack 11), Red Hat 7.0, and BeOS 4.5. My secondary desktop does not have eCS on it. My main computer has eCS 1.2 on it exclusively and it has been nice.

I'm sorry that I didn't see this and respond earlier.

Hmmm. "The OS/2 Guy" sounds vaguely familiar.

Playing around, I've got OS/2 Warp 4 (what fixpack level, I don't recall -- I had to install several) set up in a virtual machine under Virtual PC here just to play. I haven't (virtually) booted it in a while, but I did enjoy playing around. The way Virtual PC works, you can network with the host machine -- the guest OS thinks its on a network with the host machine, and I was able to access files. XP still has NT's roots in it's, which includes extended attribute support for FAT16 and NTFS volumes (but it didn't bother for FAT32), and I noticed that OS/2 over the network, created various EAs on the drives it accessed over the network.


Can you recommend a good web browser for OS/2? Well, wait a minute, did Firefox make one? Anyway, next time I play with OS/2 I'd like a decent browser to see how that feels.

-Richard
Reply With Quote
  #45 (permalink)  
Old 26-December-2006, 06:03 AM
publius's Avatar
publius publius is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 4,821
Default

CM,

Nevermind, I'm posting this via Warp4 in the VM using a version of Firefox I installed. Heck, I set this up quitenicely here, but forgot all about it. Only problem is the onscreen fonts stink, and typing here is slow as heck. Don't know if that's the VM's fault or what.

-Richard
Reply With Quote
  #46 (permalink)  
Old 26-December-2006, 06:13 PM
Kennewick_man's Avatar
Kennewick_man Kennewick_man is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 23
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Jacks View Post
I know of some businesses that won't upgrade to a new OS until service pack 1 is released. SP1 usually corrects many flaws that got past beta testing.
I'm on this team ... I am a sysadmin at a health center, and have ~300 users. I wouldn't touch Vista with a barge pole until at *least* sp1. I'll let others be the guinea pigs. XP is running fine ... and we still have a few Win2K systems kicking around. You know, it's working ... I see no reason to purposely give myself headaches.

That being said, I am going to get a few of the free Vista upgrades sent to us to see how many things break in our little "test lab."
__________________
You just said "nuclear". It's "nukular", dummy, the "s" is silent! -Peter Griffin
Reply With Quote