James Bannan 03 November 2008, 8:51 AM
No more trawling the web for the latest media codecs. Windows 7 comes ready to play all your favourite "downloaded" videos.
One of the new features announced at the recent Windows 7 Reviewer’s Workshop in LA is that Windows 7 will natively support a number of popular media formats, so that users don’t have to worry about finding, installing and downloading third-party codecs.
This is an evolution in media support which is similar to the inclusion of native MPEG-2 playback in Windows Vista, providing the DVD playback functionality which was missing in Windows XP.
It's an interesting change by Microsoft, which, in the past, has doggedly clung to the hope that Windows Media Video will end up as the prevailing video format for the internet. It appears to have finally conceded that the vast majority of people are watching downloaded stuff in DivX or Xvid -- possibly a realisation driven by the enormous amount of telemetry data it has collected from users of Vista that it never had access to through XP. It has stopped short of bundling Adobe Flash support into Windows, though, as it develops its own Silverlight technology.
Windows 7 will also support H.264 video and AAC audio. The support for AAC will be welcome news for people with music and video that has been encoded in Apple iTunes, as Windows 7 will be able to play all iTunes media through Windows Media Player.Unfortunately, this won't apply to media that has been purchased from Apple's iTunes store, because Windows 7 can't decode the Apple FairPlay DRM, which Apple refuses to license to anyone else.
The ability to play back these additional formats has implications for new Windows 7 services like libraries and networked media player support, as Windows 7 users can index and search across their iTunes media without needing to use iTunes as the default player, and can send a wider variety of media content to a centralized location.
A more subtle user benefit is that by not having to download third-party codec bundles (which is convenient in itself), users can minimise the inevitable build-up of unverified software running on their systems. Most major codecs are freely available, but you often need to install multiple disparate packages to get the widest possible support for digital media -- or run an 'all in one' CODEC installer which may also come bundled with hidden malware inside. Additionally, these CODEC packages can interfere with other, and the codecs are not necessarily optimised to run efficiently.
By bundling a wide variety of media formats into Windows 7, Microsoft has created an operating environment which negates the need for third-party codecs and should therefore run more stably and reliably. It also brings blanket support for the most popular online media formats, providing an environment in which users can start playing their favourite content immediately.
source : apcmag.com
Custom Search
Tampilkan postingan dengan label Operating System. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label Operating System. Tampilkan semua postingan
Selasa, 06 Januari 2009
VeriSign addresses SSL certificate flaw
Written by Phil Muncaster
vnunet.com, 05 Jan 2009
VeriSign has moved to address a flaw in its Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) certification technology, which could have allowed hackers to create false certificates.
SSL certificates are one of the most common ways for firms to prove that their web sites are secure and authentic. By creating false certificates, hackers could deter online shoppers and possibly undermine consumer faith in e-commerce.
The so-called 'collision attack' flaw, first published by researchers at the Chaos Communication Congress last week, was aimed at the MD5 hashing algorithm of certificates issued by the RapidSSL authority, according to VeriSign.
"This presentation showed how to combine MD5 collision attacks with some other clever bits of hacking to create a false certificate," Tim Callan, VeriSign's vice president of SSL product marketing, said in a blog posting.
"We have discontinued using MD5 when we issue RapidSSL certificates, and we've confirmed that all other SSL certificates we sell are not vulnerable to this attack."
VeriSign has now transitioned to the SHA-1 algorithm on new RapidSSL brand certificates, and said that it will replace MD5 certificates for existing customers free of charge.
Callan added that the company aims to discontinue MD5 in "all end entity certificates" by the end of this month.
Matthew Tyler, director of consultancy firm Evolution Security Systems, explained that the MD5 flaw highlights why certificate authorities must "keep up to speed" with the latest security threats.
"As computing power increases there is a need to keep algorithms in pace with this change. MD5 was created over 18 years ago and had issues even before it went live in 1996 over 12 years ago," he said.
"MD5 is an old and debunked hashing algorithm and should have been phased out by the slightly more secure SHA-1/2, with SHA-3 due for 2012."
Extended Validation SSL Certificates, which VeriSign has been promoting vigorously since their launch in late 2006, are not affected by the flaw.
source : www.vnunet.com
vnunet.com, 05 Jan 2009
VeriSign has moved to address a flaw in its Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) certification technology, which could have allowed hackers to create false certificates.
SSL certificates are one of the most common ways for firms to prove that their web sites are secure and authentic. By creating false certificates, hackers could deter online shoppers and possibly undermine consumer faith in e-commerce.
The so-called 'collision attack' flaw, first published by researchers at the Chaos Communication Congress last week, was aimed at the MD5 hashing algorithm of certificates issued by the RapidSSL authority, according to VeriSign.
"This presentation showed how to combine MD5 collision attacks with some other clever bits of hacking to create a false certificate," Tim Callan, VeriSign's vice president of SSL product marketing, said in a blog posting.
"We have discontinued using MD5 when we issue RapidSSL certificates, and we've confirmed that all other SSL certificates we sell are not vulnerable to this attack."
VeriSign has now transitioned to the SHA-1 algorithm on new RapidSSL brand certificates, and said that it will replace MD5 certificates for existing customers free of charge.
Callan added that the company aims to discontinue MD5 in "all end entity certificates" by the end of this month.
Matthew Tyler, director of consultancy firm Evolution Security Systems, explained that the MD5 flaw highlights why certificate authorities must "keep up to speed" with the latest security threats.
"As computing power increases there is a need to keep algorithms in pace with this change. MD5 was created over 18 years ago and had issues even before it went live in 1996 over 12 years ago," he said.
"MD5 is an old and debunked hashing algorithm and should have been phased out by the slightly more secure SHA-1/2, with SHA-3 due for 2012."
Extended Validation SSL Certificates, which VeriSign has been promoting vigorously since their launch in late 2006, are not affected by the flaw.
source : www.vnunet.com
Lenovo Brings Wii Functionality to PCs (PC World)
Posted on Mon Jan 5, 2009 12:30AM EST
Taking a page from Nintendo's Wii gaming console, Lenovo on Monday announced an all-in-one PC with a remote control that doubles as a motion-based gaming controller.
Like the iMac, the all-in-one IdeaCentre A600 combines a monitor and CPU in a thin system. It will be on display at the Consumer Electronics Show from January 8 to 11 in Las Vegas.
Its wireless remote control is similar to Nintendo Wii's Wii Remote, which allows users to interact with a video game by waving or pointing the game controller. Using motion-sensing technology, the Wii Remote becomes a racket when swinging during a tennis game, or a weapon when playing a fighting game.
Lenovo's gadget mimics the Wii's approach.
"We have an example of a bowling game [where] you can wave the remote and that actually controls your game," said Ninis Samuel, director of marketing strategy and programs.
The company is bundling some motion-based games with the PC to use with the remote-based gaming controller. Titles of the games weren't immediately available.
Lenovo is trying to capitalize on the trend of entertainment options merging into the PC. Few are able to play motion-based games, which could make this motion-based game controller a pioneer.
In addition to controlling TV functions and video recordings on the PC, the remote control can also be used as an air mouse that moves the mouse pointer when waved. It has some advantages over a conventional mouse -- it can function without being on a surface and be used at a distance -- when sitting on a couch, for example.
If the air mouse wasn't enough, the remote also works as a VOIP (voice over Internet protocol) handset. "If you have telephony software on your PC like Windows Live or Skype, you can use your remote to make those phone calls because it essentially can act as a phone," Samuel said.
The IdeaCentre A600 starts at a price of US$999. The desktop has a 21.5-inch screen that supports 1920 by 1280-pixel resolution for high-definition video playback. It runs on Intel Pentium Dual Core or Core 2 Duo mobile processors, supports up to 4GB of RAM and up to 1TB of storage. It includes Wi-Fi wireless networking and runs on the Windows Vista OS.
Options include the remote control, Blu-ray DVD player, a TV tuner and a Advanced Micro Devices' ATI graphics card. The desktop will be available worldwide by the beginning of March.
The desktop is part of a new portfolio of entertainment PCs that Lenovo plans to show at CES. The company is also rolling out a new laptop line, the IdeaPad Y series, which is targeted at mainstream users looking to create and view multimedia content. Lenovo has added features that can make watching movies an easier and enjoyable experience.
For example, the laptops have the "OneKey" feature, in which pressing one button "optimizes" the experience of watching movies by enhancing the sound and visuals, according to the company.
Another feature includes ambient light sensors that adjusts screen brightness based on the user's surroundings. "[It] uses a sensor on the actual lid of the laptop that senses whether or not you are in a darker or lighter room. Then it adjusts the brightness and the graphics to your environment," Samuel said. The feature is available only in the IdeaPad Y650 laptop, which has a 16-inch screen.
The IdeaPad Y series laptops come with screens ranging from 14 to 16 inches, run on Intel Core 2 Duo processors and include Windows Vista. The weight of the laptops ranges from 4.6 pounds (2.09 kilograms) to 6 pounds. The laptops will become available worldwide by the beginning of March, Lenovo said. Pricing was not immediately available.
source : tech.yahoo.com
Taking a page from Nintendo's Wii gaming console, Lenovo on Monday announced an all-in-one PC with a remote control that doubles as a motion-based gaming controller.
Like the iMac, the all-in-one IdeaCentre A600 combines a monitor and CPU in a thin system. It will be on display at the Consumer Electronics Show from January 8 to 11 in Las Vegas.
Its wireless remote control is similar to Nintendo Wii's Wii Remote, which allows users to interact with a video game by waving or pointing the game controller. Using motion-sensing technology, the Wii Remote becomes a racket when swinging during a tennis game, or a weapon when playing a fighting game.
Lenovo's gadget mimics the Wii's approach.
"We have an example of a bowling game [where] you can wave the remote and that actually controls your game," said Ninis Samuel, director of marketing strategy and programs.
The company is bundling some motion-based games with the PC to use with the remote-based gaming controller. Titles of the games weren't immediately available.
Lenovo is trying to capitalize on the trend of entertainment options merging into the PC. Few are able to play motion-based games, which could make this motion-based game controller a pioneer.
In addition to controlling TV functions and video recordings on the PC, the remote control can also be used as an air mouse that moves the mouse pointer when waved. It has some advantages over a conventional mouse -- it can function without being on a surface and be used at a distance -- when sitting on a couch, for example.
If the air mouse wasn't enough, the remote also works as a VOIP (voice over Internet protocol) handset. "If you have telephony software on your PC like Windows Live or Skype, you can use your remote to make those phone calls because it essentially can act as a phone," Samuel said.
The IdeaCentre A600 starts at a price of US$999. The desktop has a 21.5-inch screen that supports 1920 by 1280-pixel resolution for high-definition video playback. It runs on Intel Pentium Dual Core or Core 2 Duo mobile processors, supports up to 4GB of RAM and up to 1TB of storage. It includes Wi-Fi wireless networking and runs on the Windows Vista OS.
Options include the remote control, Blu-ray DVD player, a TV tuner and a Advanced Micro Devices' ATI graphics card. The desktop will be available worldwide by the beginning of March.
The desktop is part of a new portfolio of entertainment PCs that Lenovo plans to show at CES. The company is also rolling out a new laptop line, the IdeaPad Y series, which is targeted at mainstream users looking to create and view multimedia content. Lenovo has added features that can make watching movies an easier and enjoyable experience.
For example, the laptops have the "OneKey" feature, in which pressing one button "optimizes" the experience of watching movies by enhancing the sound and visuals, according to the company.
Another feature includes ambient light sensors that adjusts screen brightness based on the user's surroundings. "[It] uses a sensor on the actual lid of the laptop that senses whether or not you are in a darker or lighter room. Then it adjusts the brightness and the graphics to your environment," Samuel said. The feature is available only in the IdeaPad Y650 laptop, which has a 16-inch screen.
The IdeaPad Y series laptops come with screens ranging from 14 to 16 inches, run on Intel Core 2 Duo processors and include Windows Vista. The weight of the laptops ranges from 4.6 pounds (2.09 kilograms) to 6 pounds. The laptops will become available worldwide by the beginning of March, Lenovo said. Pricing was not immediately available.
source : tech.yahoo.com
Review: Windows 7 Beta
posted by Thom Holwerda on Sun 4th Jan 2009 21:47 UTC
Reviewing the first beta of an important release like Windows 7 is never an easy job to do. A confouding factor is that many people have already made up their mind about Windows 7; not because they have tried it, but because it's a Microsoft product, and therefore it sucks. At OSNews we try to judge products by their own merits, not by the parent company that created it. Read on for a set of impressions regarding the Windows 7 beta.
Hardware
* Intel Pentium 4 2.8Ghz with HyperThreading
* 2GB DDR RAM
* NVIDIA GeForce 6200 128MB RAM
* IDE 125GB HDD
* CMI-8738 sound chip
Introduction
Two years ago, Microsoft released Windows Vista, as the successor to Windows XP, the much-maligned, but in the end quite popular operating system. Windows Vista wasn't a very pleasant operating system to use early on its lifetime. It was slow, full of bugs, and had various software and hardware compatibility issues. To make matters worse, Microsoft decided to offer 239472398 different versions, with ever such descriptive names. The cheaper versions had features removed on a seemingly arbitrary basis, and the full monty version was far too expensive for most people.
Under the landslide of problems, it was easy to miss the immense changes Microsoft had made to Windows' inner workings. Vista delivered a completely new network stack, a shiny new audio stack, a new graphics subsystem, system-wide search, a vast list of security features, and many, many other improvements. So many, in fact, that it became painfully obvious that Microsoft had bitten off more than it could chew.
However, as time went on, Microsoft worked hard to improve Vista. The Redmond software giant delivered performance improvements, bug fixes, and fixed all sorts of little niggles. In addition, they tweaked the hated (but very successful) User Account Control to show less prompts, which made the first few days after a new Vista installation a little less clickety-clickety. Many people concluded that Vista was an infrastructure release, on which Microsoft would build future versions of Windows. Vista was the cut-off point, the sour apple they had to bite through in order to modernise the Windows platform.
Details regarding Vista's successor soon emerged, but they were few and far in between. The new Windows chief, Sinofsky, kept a very tight lid on what information came out of Redmond regarding the next Windows release, having learned from the Vista debacle where the company promised more than it could deliver. No more promises, no more disappointments. The few details that did make it out made it clear that Microsoft wasn't planning yet another massive restructuring of Windows: Windows 7, as it would be called, would build on top of Vista, and offer various refinements all across the board.
Since then, the Engineering 7 weblog has kept us up to date on Windows 7's development, and offered various insights into why certain decisions were made during its development. The first public demonstrations of Windows 7 were met with fairly positive reviews all over the technology media, and the enthusiast crowd was eager to get their hands on the first Windows beta.
And now it's here.
Table of contents
1. Introduction
2. Setup; Applications
3. Libraries & Explorer; Taskbar
4. HomeGroup; Misc; Performance; Conclusion
source : www.osnews.com
Reviewing the first beta of an important release like Windows 7 is never an easy job to do. A confouding factor is that many people have already made up their mind about Windows 7; not because they have tried it, but because it's a Microsoft product, and therefore it sucks. At OSNews we try to judge products by their own merits, not by the parent company that created it. Read on for a set of impressions regarding the Windows 7 beta.
Hardware
* Intel Pentium 4 2.8Ghz with HyperThreading
* 2GB DDR RAM
* NVIDIA GeForce 6200 128MB RAM
* IDE 125GB HDD
* CMI-8738 sound chip
Introduction
Two years ago, Microsoft released Windows Vista, as the successor to Windows XP, the much-maligned, but in the end quite popular operating system. Windows Vista wasn't a very pleasant operating system to use early on its lifetime. It was slow, full of bugs, and had various software and hardware compatibility issues. To make matters worse, Microsoft decided to offer 239472398 different versions, with ever such descriptive names. The cheaper versions had features removed on a seemingly arbitrary basis, and the full monty version was far too expensive for most people.
Under the landslide of problems, it was easy to miss the immense changes Microsoft had made to Windows' inner workings. Vista delivered a completely new network stack, a shiny new audio stack, a new graphics subsystem, system-wide search, a vast list of security features, and many, many other improvements. So many, in fact, that it became painfully obvious that Microsoft had bitten off more than it could chew.
However, as time went on, Microsoft worked hard to improve Vista. The Redmond software giant delivered performance improvements, bug fixes, and fixed all sorts of little niggles. In addition, they tweaked the hated (but very successful) User Account Control to show less prompts, which made the first few days after a new Vista installation a little less clickety-clickety. Many people concluded that Vista was an infrastructure release, on which Microsoft would build future versions of Windows. Vista was the cut-off point, the sour apple they had to bite through in order to modernise the Windows platform.
Details regarding Vista's successor soon emerged, but they were few and far in between. The new Windows chief, Sinofsky, kept a very tight lid on what information came out of Redmond regarding the next Windows release, having learned from the Vista debacle where the company promised more than it could deliver. No more promises, no more disappointments. The few details that did make it out made it clear that Microsoft wasn't planning yet another massive restructuring of Windows: Windows 7, as it would be called, would build on top of Vista, and offer various refinements all across the board.
Since then, the Engineering 7 weblog has kept us up to date on Windows 7's development, and offered various insights into why certain decisions were made during its development. The first public demonstrations of Windows 7 were met with fairly positive reviews all over the technology media, and the enthusiast crowd was eager to get their hands on the first Windows beta.
And now it's here.
Table of contents
1. Introduction
2. Setup; Applications
3. Libraries & Explorer; Taskbar
4. HomeGroup; Misc; Performance; Conclusion
source : www.osnews.com
Android-Based Netbooks in 2010?
posted by Thom Holwerda on Fri 2nd Jan 2009 22:06 UTC
Netbooks run either Windows or Linux, and both are readily available in shops all over the world. The Linux variants chosen by several netbook manufacturers are usually derived from desktop distributions, and obviously, Windows is a desktop operating system as well. However, netbooks have small displays, and both Windows and GNOME/KDE and some of their applications aren't always suited well for such an environment. Enter Android, Google's Linux-based phone operating system. It is suggested that Android-based netbooks will appear on the market in 2010, maybe even sooner.
The hard work seems to be mostly done. As a new year's present, the boys and girls from VentureBeat ported Google's Android to an Asus EEE PC 1000H - although recompiled might be a better description, since they didn't have to do much actual porting. Google's Dima Zavin claimed he had ported Android to the Asus EEE PC 701, and as it turns out, the 1000H didn't pose much trouble. Linux support for the EEE line is obviously pretty good, so the drivers were readily available as well. The 1000H is almost entirely supported, including graphics, wireless, and sound.
Android seems to be pretty well prepared for devices with larger screens than phones, as the operating system and its user interface adapted itself seamlessly to the larger dimensions. VentureBeat found out that Android has two product categories in its code: phones and mobile internet devices (MIDs). The default webkit browser and the music player worked just fine on the 1000H.
It is not exactly surprising that it took little effort to port Android to the EEE; after all, it's "just" a Linux distribution aimed at phones, and Linux' hardware support and open source nature allow for easy porting. It obviously helps that the EEE line is very well supported already by Linux.
However, it remains to be seen if Android on a netbook makes sense. The operating system is first and foremost aimed at phones, and this means that concessions have most likely been made in the interface to better accommodate smaller screen sizes. The same probably goes for various applications written for Android. This means that if Google is serious about pursuing the netbook market with Android, developers will have to make sure their applications work well not only on phones, but also on devices with larger screens.
In the end, I think it takes less effort to retrofit, say, Ubuntu or OpenSUSE on a netbook than to stretch Android to run on them. Various netbook-specific variants of popular Linux distributions are readily available, so why put time, money, and effort into Android?
source : www.osnews.com
Netbooks run either Windows or Linux, and both are readily available in shops all over the world. The Linux variants chosen by several netbook manufacturers are usually derived from desktop distributions, and obviously, Windows is a desktop operating system as well. However, netbooks have small displays, and both Windows and GNOME/KDE and some of their applications aren't always suited well for such an environment. Enter Android, Google's Linux-based phone operating system. It is suggested that Android-based netbooks will appear on the market in 2010, maybe even sooner.
The hard work seems to be mostly done. As a new year's present, the boys and girls from VentureBeat ported Google's Android to an Asus EEE PC 1000H - although recompiled might be a better description, since they didn't have to do much actual porting. Google's Dima Zavin claimed he had ported Android to the Asus EEE PC 701, and as it turns out, the 1000H didn't pose much trouble. Linux support for the EEE line is obviously pretty good, so the drivers were readily available as well. The 1000H is almost entirely supported, including graphics, wireless, and sound.
Android seems to be pretty well prepared for devices with larger screens than phones, as the operating system and its user interface adapted itself seamlessly to the larger dimensions. VentureBeat found out that Android has two product categories in its code: phones and mobile internet devices (MIDs). The default webkit browser and the music player worked just fine on the 1000H.
It is not exactly surprising that it took little effort to port Android to the EEE; after all, it's "just" a Linux distribution aimed at phones, and Linux' hardware support and open source nature allow for easy porting. It obviously helps that the EEE line is very well supported already by Linux.
However, it remains to be seen if Android on a netbook makes sense. The operating system is first and foremost aimed at phones, and this means that concessions have most likely been made in the interface to better accommodate smaller screen sizes. The same probably goes for various applications written for Android. This means that if Google is serious about pursuing the netbook market with Android, developers will have to make sure their applications work well not only on phones, but also on devices with larger screens.
In the end, I think it takes less effort to retrofit, say, Ubuntu or OpenSUSE on a netbook than to stretch Android to run on them. Various netbook-specific variants of popular Linux distributions are readily available, so why put time, money, and effort into Android?
source : www.osnews.com
A Look at newLISP
posted by Alexandru Lazar on Mon 5th Jan 2009 19:13 UTC
In the age of dynamic languages and closures, most of you have probably heard of a mighty dragon called Lisp (which stands for LISt Processing), whose fans look almost with despise at other languages rediscovering it. Invented half a century ago, Lisp went on to become a de facto standard in the world of AI research, and has stood behind a handful of very neat inventions in the 1980s. Nevertheless, the long AI winter and the drift of technology towards other paradigms have almost lead to forgetting Lisp alltogether; IT has only recently started to rediscover parts of what made Lisp so cool back then.
NewLisp is a Lisp dialect which tries to build a modern platform based on the Lisp heritage, in order to answer modern computing needs a lot better than other dialects do. According to its developers, newLisp is a Lisp-like, general-purpose scripting language. The official description is somewhat misleading though, because it implies newLisp is a kind of Bash with more parenthesis than code -- which, as it turns out, it is not. newLisp can competently handle application programming, statistical computation and web development, so it's actually closer to Python and Ruby than it is to command.com.
For those of you who are not familiar with Lisp, the entire story in a hundred words of more can be boiled down to a very expressive, dynamic, extensible language which can be used in a functional manner if you carry a picture of Haskell Curry in your pocket. Most Lisp programmers cite its powerful meta-programming features, its expressiveness and very concise style as being Lisp's greatest features. From this description, it would seem that almost everybody would want to use Lisp, which is in fact true. What is also true is that very few people use Lisp though, and for a handful of otherwise fair reasons, some of which we will discuss immediately.
Those readers who are familiar with Lisp are cautioned that, given our favorite programming tool's extreme popularity, this article is aimed at a very wide audience. As a consequence, some explanations are not exact or complete, but are nevertheless comprehensible for people who haven't used Lisp before. It's a small price to pay when you're famous.
A tale of more Lisps: from Common LISP to Scheme and newLISP
The first thing I mentioned about newLisp is that it's a Lisp dialect. As you may have guessed if you did not already know, Lisp is actually the name given to an entire family of languages (which can be equally well characterized by the description above). However, even today, most people refer to ANSI Common LISP when they talk about Lisp. ANSI Common LISP is, as its name implies, a standardized version agreed upon in the 1980s. Several implementations are available today, of which SBCL, GNU Common LISP, CMUCL, Clozure, Allegro Common Lisp and LispWorks are only a few of the more commonly used.
ANSI Common Lisp is an extremely powerful language. Its standard includes not only the kitchen sink, but very detailed provisions about the entire civil infrastructure of a small town. ANSI CL also includes a remarkably portable API, which is unsurprising given that it was designed in the days when there must have been fifty ways to leave your lover and equally many platforms to write your letter of adieu on. However, some of its features are really anachronic, and the large number of features makes the documentation very cumbersome to work with. To this date, the main reference is a document called Hyperspec, which is a very detailed and complete specification; while being thorough and reliable, the Hyperspec is also famous for being extremely cluttered and for making it very hard to actually find anything, partly due to its nature, partly due to the sheer size of the CommonLisp standard.
By contrast, newLisp is very lean and quite minimal. It does away with many of the implementation details in Common Lisp, in favor of a simpler subset that can be used to compensate for any features that are missing out of the box. In this respect, newLISP feels a lot more like a language from the 21st century, even without being as complete as Common LISP.
newLISP also sports a couple of significant differences, both in terms of syntax-related details and in terms of architecture. In fact, there are several notable language-related differences which bring newLISP much closer to Scheme than Common LISP. However, even in comparison to Scheme, the dominating aspect of newLISP is simplification. Just one example: newLISP replaces the various equality operators in Common LISP and Scheme with a single one. Therefore, you no longer need to remember the difference between equal, eql, eq, equalp, =, string=, string-equal, char= and char-eq -- which is really how things should be.
source : www.osnews.com
In the age of dynamic languages and closures, most of you have probably heard of a mighty dragon called Lisp (which stands for LISt Processing), whose fans look almost with despise at other languages rediscovering it. Invented half a century ago, Lisp went on to become a de facto standard in the world of AI research, and has stood behind a handful of very neat inventions in the 1980s. Nevertheless, the long AI winter and the drift of technology towards other paradigms have almost lead to forgetting Lisp alltogether; IT has only recently started to rediscover parts of what made Lisp so cool back then.
NewLisp is a Lisp dialect which tries to build a modern platform based on the Lisp heritage, in order to answer modern computing needs a lot better than other dialects do. According to its developers, newLisp is a Lisp-like, general-purpose scripting language. The official description is somewhat misleading though, because it implies newLisp is a kind of Bash with more parenthesis than code -- which, as it turns out, it is not. newLisp can competently handle application programming, statistical computation and web development, so it's actually closer to Python and Ruby than it is to command.com.
For those of you who are not familiar with Lisp, the entire story in a hundred words of more can be boiled down to a very expressive, dynamic, extensible language which can be used in a functional manner if you carry a picture of Haskell Curry in your pocket. Most Lisp programmers cite its powerful meta-programming features, its expressiveness and very concise style as being Lisp's greatest features. From this description, it would seem that almost everybody would want to use Lisp, which is in fact true. What is also true is that very few people use Lisp though, and for a handful of otherwise fair reasons, some of which we will discuss immediately.
Those readers who are familiar with Lisp are cautioned that, given our favorite programming tool's extreme popularity, this article is aimed at a very wide audience. As a consequence, some explanations are not exact or complete, but are nevertheless comprehensible for people who haven't used Lisp before. It's a small price to pay when you're famous.
A tale of more Lisps: from Common LISP to Scheme and newLISP
The first thing I mentioned about newLisp is that it's a Lisp dialect. As you may have guessed if you did not already know, Lisp is actually the name given to an entire family of languages (which can be equally well characterized by the description above). However, even today, most people refer to ANSI Common LISP when they talk about Lisp. ANSI Common LISP is, as its name implies, a standardized version agreed upon in the 1980s. Several implementations are available today, of which SBCL, GNU Common LISP, CMUCL, Clozure, Allegro Common Lisp and LispWorks are only a few of the more commonly used.
ANSI Common Lisp is an extremely powerful language. Its standard includes not only the kitchen sink, but very detailed provisions about the entire civil infrastructure of a small town. ANSI CL also includes a remarkably portable API, which is unsurprising given that it was designed in the days when there must have been fifty ways to leave your lover and equally many platforms to write your letter of adieu on. However, some of its features are really anachronic, and the large number of features makes the documentation very cumbersome to work with. To this date, the main reference is a document called Hyperspec, which is a very detailed and complete specification; while being thorough and reliable, the Hyperspec is also famous for being extremely cluttered and for making it very hard to actually find anything, partly due to its nature, partly due to the sheer size of the CommonLisp standard.
By contrast, newLisp is very lean and quite minimal. It does away with many of the implementation details in Common Lisp, in favor of a simpler subset that can be used to compensate for any features that are missing out of the box. In this respect, newLISP feels a lot more like a language from the 21st century, even without being as complete as Common LISP.
newLISP also sports a couple of significant differences, both in terms of syntax-related details and in terms of architecture. In fact, there are several notable language-related differences which bring newLISP much closer to Scheme than Common LISP. However, even in comparison to Scheme, the dominating aspect of newLISP is simplification. Just one example: newLISP replaces the various equality operators in Common LISP and Scheme with a single one. Therefore, you no longer need to remember the difference between equal, eql, eq, equalp, =, string=, string-equal, char= and char-eq -- which is really how things should be.
source : www.osnews.com
Windows 7 Outperforms XP, Vista
posted by Thom Holwerda on Sat 3rd Jan 2009 12:58 UTC
Even though the EULA accompanying the beta build of Windows 7 prohibits the publication of benchmark results (good luck enforcing that one, Redmond), everybody and their dog will still compare the Windows 7 beta to Vista and Windows XP. Adrian Kingsley-Hughes is one of those benchmarking the beta, and according to his results, the Windows 7 beta beats both Vista and XP in just about every scenario.
Instead of running Crysis or benchmark suites, Kingsley-Hughes decided to go a different route and perform 23 common tasks on each of the three Windows versions (all 32bit), and then simply mark the winner, the runner-up, and number three. He performed the same 23 tests on these Windows versions on two different machines: an AMD Phenom 9700 2.4GHz system fitted with an ATI Radeon 3850 and 4GB of RAM, and an Intel Pentium Dual Core E2200 2.2GHz fitted with an NVIDIA GeForce 8400 GS and 1GB of RAM. While I personally don't have a system nearly as fast as either of those, they are hardly top-of-the-line configurations.
The results are telling. On the AMD machine, the Windows 7 beta beat both XP and Vista SP1 on 21 out of the 23 tests. The results were the same for the Intel box: 21 out of 23 tests went to Windows 7. While Windows 7 tripped on the installation of Office 2007 and DVD burning on the AMD box, it tripped over two file moving operations on the Intel machine.
There are, as always, issues with these tests and the data they produced. First of all, there are no absolute figures for any of the 23 tests; we don't know if Windows 7 beat its predecessors by a huge margin, or only by a barely statistically significant one. In addition, I found the tests to be a little vague, as the author doesn't supply the files he used for his tests - in other words, we can't reproduce his exact steps.
Despite these obvious deficiencies, these results confirm the general feeling you're getting from those who have already tested Windows 7: it seems like Microsoft is delivering on its promise to make Windows 7 no more resource demanding than Windows Vista - in fact, it seems to have overshot its goal by making Windows 7 perform better than its illustrious predecessor, which is nothing short of a miracle in Windows land.
Remember, though, that your mileage may vary.
source : www.osnews.com
Even though the EULA accompanying the beta build of Windows 7 prohibits the publication of benchmark results (good luck enforcing that one, Redmond), everybody and their dog will still compare the Windows 7 beta to Vista and Windows XP. Adrian Kingsley-Hughes is one of those benchmarking the beta, and according to his results, the Windows 7 beta beats both Vista and XP in just about every scenario.
Instead of running Crysis or benchmark suites, Kingsley-Hughes decided to go a different route and perform 23 common tasks on each of the three Windows versions (all 32bit), and then simply mark the winner, the runner-up, and number three. He performed the same 23 tests on these Windows versions on two different machines: an AMD Phenom 9700 2.4GHz system fitted with an ATI Radeon 3850 and 4GB of RAM, and an Intel Pentium Dual Core E2200 2.2GHz fitted with an NVIDIA GeForce 8400 GS and 1GB of RAM. While I personally don't have a system nearly as fast as either of those, they are hardly top-of-the-line configurations.
The results are telling. On the AMD machine, the Windows 7 beta beat both XP and Vista SP1 on 21 out of the 23 tests. The results were the same for the Intel box: 21 out of 23 tests went to Windows 7. While Windows 7 tripped on the installation of Office 2007 and DVD burning on the AMD box, it tripped over two file moving operations on the Intel machine.
There are, as always, issues with these tests and the data they produced. First of all, there are no absolute figures for any of the 23 tests; we don't know if Windows 7 beat its predecessors by a huge margin, or only by a barely statistically significant one. In addition, I found the tests to be a little vague, as the author doesn't supply the files he used for his tests - in other words, we can't reproduce his exact steps.
Despite these obvious deficiencies, these results confirm the general feeling you're getting from those who have already tested Windows 7: it seems like Microsoft is delivering on its promise to make Windows 7 no more resource demanding than Windows Vista - in fact, it seems to have overshot its goal by making Windows 7 perform better than its illustrious predecessor, which is nothing short of a miracle in Windows land.
Remember, though, that your mileage may vary.
source : www.osnews.com
Minggu, 04 Januari 2009
Windows 7 beta 1 performance - How does the OS compare to Vista and XP?
How does Windows 7 beta 1 compare to Vista and XP in terms of performance? That’s a question that’s been hitting my inbox regularly over the past few weeks. Let’s see if we can’t answer it!
Important note: Before I go any further I feel I need to make a point, and make it clear. The build I’m testing of Windows 7 (build 6.1.7000.0.081212-1400) is a beta build, and as a rule beta builds are usually more geared towards stability than performance. That said, the performance of this build should give us a clue as to how the OS is coming along.
Rather than publish a series of benchmark results for the three operating systems (something which Microsoft frowns upon for beta builds, not to mention the fact that the final numbers only really matter for the release candidate and RTM builds), I’ve decided to put Windows 7, Vista and XP head-to-head in a series of real-world tests to find out which OS comes out top.
The tests
There are 23 tests in all, most of which are self explanatory:
1. Install OS - Time it takes to install the OS
2. Boot up - Average boot time to usable desktop
3. Shut down - Average shut down time
4. Move 100MB files - Move 100MB of JPEG files from one hard drive to another
5. Move 2.5GB files - Move 2.5GB of mixed size files (ranging from 1MB to 100MB)
from one hard drive to another
6. Network transfer 100MB files - Move 100MB of JPEG files from test machine to
NAS device
7. Network transfer 2.5GB files - Move 2.5GB of mixed size files (ranging from 1MB
to 100MB) from test machine to NAS device
8. Move 100MB files under load - Move 100MB of JPEG files from one hard drive to
another while ripping DVD to .ISO file
9. Move 2.5GB files under load - Move 2.5GB of mixed size files (ranging from 1MB
to 100MB) from one hard drive to another while ripping DVD to .ISO file
10. Network transfer 100MB files under load - Move 100MB of JPEG files from test
machine to NAS device while ripping DVD to .ISO file
11. Network transfer 2.5GB files under load - Move 2.5GB of mixed size files
(ranging from 1MB to 100MB) from test machine to NAS device while ripping DVD
to .ISO file
12. Compress 100MB files - Using built-in ZIP compression
13. Compress 1GB files - Using built-in ZIP compression
14. Extract 100MB files - Using built-in ZIP compression
15. Extract 1GB files - Using built-in ZIP compression
16. Install Office 2007 - Ultimate version, from DVD
17. Open 10 page Word doc - Text only
18. Open 100 page Word doc - Text and images only
19. Open simple Excel doc - Basic formatting
20. Open complex Excel doc - Including formula and charts
21. Burn DVD - Win 7 beta 1 .ISO to disc using CDBurnerXP
22. Open 10 page PDF - Text only, using latest Adobe Reader 8
23. Open 100 page PDF - Text and images, using latest Adobe Reader 8
These series of tests will pitch Windows 7 build 7000 32-bit against Windows Vista SP1 32-bit and Windows XP SP3 32-bit. The scoring for each of the tests is simple. The winning OS scores 1, the runner up 2 and the loser scores a 3. The scores are added up and the OS with the lowest score at the end wins.
source : blogs.zdnet.com
Important note: Before I go any further I feel I need to make a point, and make it clear. The build I’m testing of Windows 7 (build 6.1.7000.0.081212-1400) is a beta build, and as a rule beta builds are usually more geared towards stability than performance. That said, the performance of this build should give us a clue as to how the OS is coming along.
Rather than publish a series of benchmark results for the three operating systems (something which Microsoft frowns upon for beta builds, not to mention the fact that the final numbers only really matter for the release candidate and RTM builds), I’ve decided to put Windows 7, Vista and XP head-to-head in a series of real-world tests to find out which OS comes out top.
The tests
There are 23 tests in all, most of which are self explanatory:
1. Install OS - Time it takes to install the OS
2. Boot up - Average boot time to usable desktop
3. Shut down - Average shut down time
4. Move 100MB files - Move 100MB of JPEG files from one hard drive to another
5. Move 2.5GB files - Move 2.5GB of mixed size files (ranging from 1MB to 100MB)
from one hard drive to another
6. Network transfer 100MB files - Move 100MB of JPEG files from test machine to
NAS device
7. Network transfer 2.5GB files - Move 2.5GB of mixed size files (ranging from 1MB
to 100MB) from test machine to NAS device
8. Move 100MB files under load - Move 100MB of JPEG files from one hard drive to
another while ripping DVD to .ISO file
9. Move 2.5GB files under load - Move 2.5GB of mixed size files (ranging from 1MB
to 100MB) from one hard drive to another while ripping DVD to .ISO file
10. Network transfer 100MB files under load - Move 100MB of JPEG files from test
machine to NAS device while ripping DVD to .ISO file
11. Network transfer 2.5GB files under load - Move 2.5GB of mixed size files
(ranging from 1MB to 100MB) from test machine to NAS device while ripping DVD
to .ISO file
12. Compress 100MB files - Using built-in ZIP compression
13. Compress 1GB files - Using built-in ZIP compression
14. Extract 100MB files - Using built-in ZIP compression
15. Extract 1GB files - Using built-in ZIP compression
16. Install Office 2007 - Ultimate version, from DVD
17. Open 10 page Word doc - Text only
18. Open 100 page Word doc - Text and images only
19. Open simple Excel doc - Basic formatting
20. Open complex Excel doc - Including formula and charts
21. Burn DVD - Win 7 beta 1 .ISO to disc using CDBurnerXP
22. Open 10 page PDF - Text only, using latest Adobe Reader 8
23. Open 100 page PDF - Text and images, using latest Adobe Reader 8
These series of tests will pitch Windows 7 build 7000 32-bit against Windows Vista SP1 32-bit and Windows XP SP3 32-bit. The scoring for each of the tests is simple. The winning OS scores 1, the runner up 2 and the loser scores a 3. The scores are added up and the OS with the lowest score at the end wins.
source : blogs.zdnet.com
Minggu, 21 Desember 2008
Windows XP: The OS That Won't Quit
Shane O'Neill , CIO.com
Phasing out an old operating system is nothing new for Microsoft, but Windows XP is unique in that it may be too good to die.
This week, Dell announced it will offer systems with the aging Windows XP for a surcharge of US$150 over the newer Windows Vista--this only five months after it stopped offering XP on its Inspiron consumer desktop and laptop PCs.
The deadline for Windows XP downgrades has been pushed back twice now, remaining in effect until July 31, 2009-a strong indication that enough users want to stay with the aging XP rather than give Vista a chance.
Though market share for Windows XP dropped nearly 10 percent in 2008 as Vista slowly made gains, XP still has a market share of 66 percent, according to Web metrics company Net Applications.
XP downgrade fees from Dell and other OEMs will no doubt continue to irk customers in 2009, while businesses that want to stay with Windows XP will do the downgrades themselves. Industry analysts agree that Microsoft's downgrade fees are a minor problem compared to the bigger problem of so many users still wanting an older, now discontinued OS on hardware that it wasn't designed for.
Don't Penalize XP, Incentivize Vista
Industry analyst Rob Enderle, president of tech consulting firm the Enderle Group, says the XP downgrade fees will ultimately be counter-productive and possibly disastrous for Microsoft because they trade off short-term revenue for long-term customer loyalty.
"The fix for this should be to focus like lasers on demand generation for Vista but instead Microsoft is focusing aggressively on financial penalties," Enderle says. "Forcing customers to go someplace they don't want to go by raising prices is a Christmas present for Apple and those that are positioning Linux on the desktop."
As the economic recession deepens in 2009, the price of laptops and desktops, as with all retail items, will be closely watched by consumers and businesses. A recent IDC report predicts that the price of PCs will drop by close to 10 percent in 2009.
Enderle said the XP downgrade charge and the resulting pressure to move to Vista will put a magnifying glass on Microsoft in the coming year. "Instead of charging a penalty for XP, Microsoft should provide incentives for Vista," he says. "They are too focused on margins for one product and are forgetting the damage they are doing to their brand."
Worse than the downgrade fees is taking away a buyer's freedom of choice, says Roger Kay, president of consulting and research firm Endpoint Technologies. "People never like being 'forced' to do anything. They tend to resent it," he says.
Is Windows 7 the Solution?
Vista's successor, Windows 7, has been regarded as a solution to the Vista stigma, although whether or not users choosing XP over Vista is enough to move up the Windows 7 ship is still anyone's guess. Enderle predicts that Microsoft will change its estimated Windows 7 ship date of January 2010 and drop it sometime next year.
"Windows 7 is designed to fix this problem [the Vista stigma], but it will need stronger demand generation marketing than Microsoft has yet proven it can provide," Enderle says.
Kay, on the other hand, is not convinced that customer reliance on XP and the shunning of Vista affects Microsoft's OS release schedule. "Sinofsky [Windows senior VP Steven Sinofsky] is pretty clear about how his process works. Windows 7 code won't ship until it's ready."
Charging users for Windows XP downgrades may be Microsoft's short-term solution to drive users to Vista and Windows 7, but what else should the software giant do to get its customers to move forward?
Enderle says it's mostly a matter of better marketing. "They have to step up to Apple-level demand generation marketing and work to remove the stigma from Vista more aggressively," he says. "They had an interesting start earlier this year with the Mojave project but it seems to have tailed off of late and Apple continues to out execute them sharply."
As Windows XP fees add up and the OS continues to get pulled from OEMs, the desire to keep using the OS will likely wane in 2009. But that the desire is there at all should be disconcerting for Microsoft, says Enderle.
"Were this Apple, you wouldn't have the option to use an old OS at all. Granted you probably wouldn't want to, which speaks to the problem here."
Source : www.pcworld.com
Kamis, 18 Desember 2008
Booting process
Booting process
Booting is the general term for the computer. Booting can be defined as the process of the computer operating system to take over the process.
BIOS (Basic Input Output System) is a software code that is planted in a computer system that has a primary function to provide visual information on the computer when switched on. BIOS program is a program standard controller installed in the motherboard. The program is stored in the IC chip is called the ROM (Read Only Memory), and always work to control the hardware installed on the motherboard does not even use the computer (turned off). This is made possible by the small batere installed on the motherboard.
Usually to enter the BIOS setup mode, such as CMOS BIOS, AMI BIOS, and some other mode BIOS, so when the computer is the first time we can press the button del. For IBM BIOS setup mode we have to press F1 or F10, while for the BIOS Setup mainboad with Intel Chip using the F2 key, while for Compaq machine mode setup time, the user must first enter the BIOS setup floppy it, so can do the settings as desired.
Booting process sequence:
1.When computer is turned on, the BIOS processor running, and then perform the BIOS POST (power-on self-test), the check or check all the existing hardware. When the CPU BIOS, POST program in the run. The first review by POST is the integrity of the CPU and the program itself POST. The rest, the program will check the POST disk drives, monitors, RAM, and a keyboard. At the time of the BIOS POST is active and has not been done, you can menginterupsi the process of booting and CMOS configuration.
2.BIOS will find boot disk to run the operating system. Boot disk media is a place to save a system that will initiate early combine all functions into one computer and ready for use. Boot disk needed after POST finished because the computer is ready to run the operating system which is very useful to connect the user with a computer.
3.After two processes are the beginning, the computer will be using the operating system. Operating system is running and ready for use.
Booting is the general term for the computer. Booting can be defined as the process of the computer operating system to take over the process.
BIOS (Basic Input Output System) is a software code that is planted in a computer system that has a primary function to provide visual information on the computer when switched on. BIOS program is a program standard controller installed in the motherboard. The program is stored in the IC chip is called the ROM (Read Only Memory), and always work to control the hardware installed on the motherboard does not even use the computer (turned off). This is made possible by the small batere installed on the motherboard.
Usually to enter the BIOS setup mode, such as CMOS BIOS, AMI BIOS, and some other mode BIOS, so when the computer is the first time we can press the button del. For IBM BIOS setup mode we have to press F1 or F10, while for the BIOS Setup mainboad with Intel Chip using the F2 key, while for Compaq machine mode setup time, the user must first enter the BIOS setup floppy it, so can do the settings as desired.
Booting process sequence:
1.When computer is turned on, the BIOS processor running, and then perform the BIOS POST (power-on self-test), the check or check all the existing hardware. When the CPU BIOS, POST program in the run. The first review by POST is the integrity of the CPU and the program itself POST. The rest, the program will check the POST disk drives, monitors, RAM, and a keyboard. At the time of the BIOS POST is active and has not been done, you can menginterupsi the process of booting and CMOS configuration.
2.BIOS will find boot disk to run the operating system. Boot disk media is a place to save a system that will initiate early combine all functions into one computer and ready for use. Boot disk needed after POST finished because the computer is ready to run the operating system which is very useful to connect the user with a computer.
3.After two processes are the beginning, the computer will be using the operating system. Operating system is running and ready for use.
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)
