Re: Ouch: China's IT Scandals
Albert K. Fung
> Two chip scandals set back China's IT industry
> By Wu Zhong, China Editor
> July 4, 2006
> http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China_Business/HG04Cb06.html
The number one and universal dread ....
Among China's inventors, writers and movie producers is privacy.
All TV and movie producers have horrific tales of their works pop-
ing up all over China the moment they are debuted. No one wants
to make heavy investments in time or money into anything. When
asked, they are only interested in one thing:
How long will it take to get back their investment ....
Regards,
Albert K. Fung
Monticito/Santa Ysabel, California, USA.
rst0...@yahoo.com
Albert K. Fung wrote:
> ppp:
>
> > Two chip scandals set back China's IT industry
> > By Wu Zhong, China Editor
> > July 4, 2006
> > http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China_Business/HG04Cb06.html
>
> The number one and universal dread ....
>
> Among China's inventors, writers and movie producers is privacy.
> All TV and movie producers have horrific tales of their works pop-
> ing up all over China the moment they are debuted. No one wants
> to make heavy investments in time or money into anything. When
> asked, they are only interested in one thing:
>
> How long will it take to get back their investment ....
Computer chip is not musical song or software where anyone with a blank
disk can copy. Even highly trained scientists can not reverse
engineered computer chips so there is no way to copy very very fine
electrical circuitry.
Albert K. Fung
> Computer chip is not musical song or software where anyone with a blank
> disk can copy. Even highly trained scientists can not reverse
> engineered computer chips so there is no way to copy very very fine
> electrical circuitry.
The "inventor" of the Hanxin chip set .... :)
Quite respectfully disagrees with the that assertion. He simply
took the TI design, copied it, erased the TI logo, and, replaced
it with the Hanxin one.
An advanced, all Chinese, DSP chip was born ....
Albert K. Fung
> took the TI design, copied it, erased the TI logo, and, replaced
> it with the Hanxin one.
ppp:
> He didn't go that route - deconstruct a Motorola signal processing
> chip (not TI) and then reverse engineer it. All our fraudster did was
> to buy a batch of chips, got his technicians to scrape off the
> Motorola logo and chip specs, then printed his Hanxin logo and specs
> on the chip.
>
> Its very likely that he did try to design his own chip but failed.
> Without anything to show he cheated. He has a PhD from a US
> university. What made him think he could get away with such a
> ridiculous scheme.
A most sincere apology ....
That episode is also known as the "sandpaper fraud". And the
gentleman from China was, indeed, employed by Motorola in
their Freescale DSP chip project.
Reverse-engineering, however, is not a crime nor a fraud.
For it is a fairly involved and highly complicated process. In it,
corporate lawyers are, by necessity, involved. It is their job to
ensure straight adherence to the "cleanroom" doctrine. When
challenged, they must present documented proof that none of
the team members had seen or was worked on the chip set to
be reverse-engineered. Using that process, AMD successfully
reverse-engineered Intel's Pentium processor. But it took them
many years, and its validity withstood Intel's court challenges.
The exact nature of the gentleman's offense is not clear. How-
ever, his work was declared frudulent by the PRC government.
It must be sufficiently clear to the authority that Hanxin chipset
was not reverse-engineered. Sandpaper, was the hearsay. :)
http://www.whatpc.co.uk/vnunet/news/2156106/china-shocked-chip-fraud
Which is consistent with the prevailing ideology of the PRC: To
get rich is glorious. The faster, the better.
And, the end justifies the means .... :)
rst0
AMD had no need to reverse-engineered the Pentium chip as the Pentium
is a piece of junk from the beginning. AMD hired a team of chip
designers from ex-DEC employees who worked on the DEC Alpha chip. The
Alpha is the most advanced chip around, but had the misfortune of being
non-compatible to the Intel 8086 instruction set used on the PC.
In a way, DEC (Digital Equipment Corporation) was a victim of
non-compatibility. DEC's VAX mainframe computers were the best
mainframe ever built, but was not compatible to the IBM Mainframe.
Defense Contractors like Lockheed has thousands of VAXs, but the
business sectors wouldn't use them. The VAX VMS was the best operating
system around. Microsoft stole VAX VMS to start its Windows operating
system. We in the know called Microsoft's Windows Operating System the
"the better VMS".
Albert K. Fung
> AMD had no need to reverse-engineered the Pentium chip as the Pentium
> is a piece of junk from the beginning. AMD hired a team of chip
> designers from ex-DEC employees who worked on the DEC Alpha chip. The
> Alpha is the most advanced chip around, but had the misfortune of being
> non-compatible to the Intel 8086 instruction set used on the PC.
>
> In a way, DEC (Digital Equipment Corporation) was a victim of
> non-compatibility. DEC's VAX mainframe computers were the best
> mainframe ever built, but was not compatible to the IBM Mainframe.
> Defense Contractors like Lockheed has thousands of VAXs, but the
> business sectors wouldn't use them. The VAX VMS was the best operating
> system around. Microsoft stole VAX VMS to start its Windows operating
> system. We in the know called Microsoft's Windows Operating System the
> "the better VMS".
Perhaps ....
But DEC, like Wang, Sun, etc. lacked the "vision thing". And failed
to adapt, thus became road-kills of a galatic paradigm shift in the
field of computer.
Even the once mighty IBM failed to lead with the Moore's law.
And became its victim. Now Microsoft the empire is trying to strike
back at the likes of Google and Yahoo. However, after spactacular
failure to forsee the netage, even Microsoft's cagey founder's fully
aware of opportunity lost and his own failing intellect.
As to Alpha, it was an admirable but futile effort on the part of DEC
to reclaim its past glory. But they failed the Darwinian selection and
the market moved on.
AMD persisted. They've been reversed engineering processor after
processor from Intel. It is on the verge of paying off. Unfortunately,
another galatic paradigm shift will soon be upon us. And the tsuami
will certainly sweep away the two worthy protagonists.
沉舟側畔千帆過, 病樹前頭萬木春 ....
rst0
> rst0:
>
> > AMD had no need to reverse-engineered the Pentium chip as the Pentium
> > is a piece of junk from the beginning. AMD hired a team of chip
> > designers from ex-DEC employees who worked on the DEC Alpha chip. The
> > Alpha is the most advanced chip around, but had the misfortune of being
> > non-compatible to the Intel 8086 instruction set used on the PC.
> >
> > In a way, DEC (Digital Equipment Corporation) was a victim of
> > non-compatibility. DEC's VAX mainframe computers were the best
> > mainframe ever built, but was not compatible to the IBM Mainframe.
> > Defense Contractors like Lockheed has thousands of VAXs, but the
> > business sectors wouldn't use them. The VAX VMS was the best operating
> > system around. Microsoft stole VAX VMS to start its Windows operating
> > system. We in the know called Microsoft's Windows Operating System the
> > "the better VMS".
>
> Perhaps ....
>
> But DEC, like Wang, Sun, etc. lacked the "vision thing". And failed
> to adapt, thus became road-kills of a galatic paradigm shift in the
> field of computer.
A million mind is better than one. When a "computer" is cheap enough
where the average programmer can get one for his own personal use,
software programs become a cheap commodity. More software usage means
more sales of PC, and this cycle spins itself into a big industry. Is
it someone's vision or are we all riding on the tail-wind? Had the IBM
team using the Motorola 6800 processor came out first, Motorola would
be today's king of processors instead of Intel. Or if Dr. Gary Kildall
was at the office when the IBM representatives arrived at Digital
Research in Monterey, there wouldn't be a Microsoft today.
>
> Even the once mighty IBM failed to lead with the Moore's law.
IBM didn't fail in Moore's Law. IBM failed to see the potential of the
PC and they gave it away.
>
> And became its victim. Now Microsoft the empire is trying to strike
> back at the likes of Google and Yahoo. However, after spactacular
> failure to forsee the netage, even Microsoft's cagey founder's fully
> aware of opportunity lost and his own failing intellect.
We shall find out in 10 years or 15.
>
> As to Alpha, it was an admirable but futile effort on the part of DEC
> to reclaim its past glory. But they failed the Darwinian selection and
> the market moved on.
>
> AMD persisted. They've been reversed engineering processor after
> processor from Intel.
AMD did not reverse-engineered any Intel chip. AMD chips are far
superior to Intel chips today. Even the industry is believing in AMD
now. The coming generation of Intel chips will tell whether Intel will
around or not. If they can not beat out AMD's Opteron, good-bye,
Intel.
> It is on the verge of paying off. Unfortunately,
> another galatic paradigm shift will soon be upon us. And the tsuami
> will certainly sweep away the two worthy protagonists.
At least one of them. Guess which one?
Albert K. Fung
> another galatic paradigm shift will soon be upon us. And the tsuami
> will certainly sweep away the two worthy protagonists.
rst0:
> At least one of them. Guess which one?
The market has already voted ....
Both, are fighting each other going down, bring with them
the likes of Dell and HP. Lenovo buying IBM's PC division is
a telling sign.
PC will extinct within the next decade ....
rst0
Albert K. Fung wrote:
> > It is on the verge of paying off. Unfortunately,
> > another galatic paradigm shift will soon be upon us. And the tsuami
> > will certainly sweep away the two worthy protagonists.
>
> rst0:
>
> > At least one of them. Guess which one?
>
> The market has already voted ....
>
> Both, are fighting each other going down, bring with them
> the likes of Dell and HP. Lenovo buying IBM's PC division is
> a telling sign.
The interest rate is up, the price of a barrel of oil is up, North
Korea is testing missiles,... It's not surprising the market is down.
I also notice qcom is down to 38.17 with a p/e of 28 now. Does it also
indicate that your "best and the brightest" are not doing so great?
Well, anyway, the PC will not die. It will only become more powerful
and versatile and more widely used.
>
> PC will extinct within the next decade ....
I disagree. PC will become smaller and more powerful and versatile
with huge storage.
lechergod
this rst0 is just like a lunatic dreamer!
how do he know 10 years ?
how do he know to write programs ?
roman is not built in a day,
this maniac speaks as it is a simple toy !!!
typically as a quarrelsome bitch !!!
rst0 wrote:
---
Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net
Complaints to ne...@netfront.net
Tak To
> Reverse-engineering, however, is not a crime nor a fraud.
>
> For it is a fairly involved and highly complicated process. In it,
> corporate lawyers are, by necessity, involved. It is their job to
> ensure straight adherence to the "cleanroom" doctrine. When
> challenged, they must present documented proof that none of
> the team members had seen or was worked on the chip set to
> be reverse-engineered. Using that process, AMD successfully
> reverse-engineered Intel's Pentium processor. But it took them
> many years, and its validity withstood Intel's court challenges.
In reality, AMD did not "reverse-engineer" the Intel chip -- it
just made one that matches the external behavior of the Intel chip.
There is a huge difference, even though it was to the advantage
of Intel that people conflate the two.
Note that Intel did not copyright/patent the design of the
instruction set itself. Had it done that, AMD would not be able
to market a replacement for the Intel chip. Thus, in this
particular case, the lack of legal exclusion (via copyright/
patent) forster innovation and competition.
Tak
Tak
--
----------------------------------------------------------------+-----
Tak To ta...@alum.mit.eduxx
--------------------------------------------------------------------^^
[taode takto ~{LU5B~}] NB: trim the xx to get my real email addr
Albert K. Fung
> In reality, AMD did not "reverse-engineer" the Intel chip -- it
> just made one that matches the external behavior of the Intel chip.
> There is a huge difference, even though it was to the advantage
> of Intel that people conflate the two.
External interfaces ....
Are integral part of the design of a system or subsystem.
It is the functional specification of a chipset. Therefore, if
one uses a part of someone else's design, instruction set
in the case of the Intel family of CPU's, it is bona fide R/E.
Even if AMD were to use seaweeds for the purpose .... :)
Albert K. Fung
> AMD did not reverse-engineered any Intel chip. AMD chips are far
> superior to Intel chips today. Even the industry is believing in AMD
> now. The coming generation of Intel chips will tell whether Intel will
> around or not. If they can not beat out AMD's Opteron, good-bye,
> Intel.
Here's the formal definition of RE ....
Reverse engineering (RE) is the process of discovering the tech-
nological principles of a mechanical application through analysis
of its structure, function and operation. It often involves taking
something (e.g., a mechanical device, an electronic component,
a software program) apart and analyzing its workings in detail,
usually with the intention to construct a new device or program
that does the same thing without actually copying anything from
the original. The verb form is to reverse-engineer.
A telling analogy of RE is that the research of physical laws can
be seen as reverse-engineering the world itself.
Under United States law, reverse engineering a patented item can
be infringement;however, if the artifact or process is protected by
trade secrets instead of by a patent, then reverse-engineering the
artifact or process is lawful as long as the artifact or process is ob-
tained legitimately. In fact, one common motivation of reverse en-
gineering is to determine whether a competitor's product infringes
on your patents.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A CPU chip's instruction set is the device's specification of function
and operation. Had AMD used the M68000's instruction set, it would
be considered a reverse engineered product from Motorola. Unless
the latter patented the CPU.
In that case, AMD must observe the exclusive injunction ....
Albert K. Fung
> On Thu, 06 Jul 2006 02:25:58 -0400, Tak To <ta...@alum.mit.edu.->
> wrote:
>
> >In reality, AMD did not "reverse-engineer" the Intel chip -- it
> >just made one that matches the external behavior of the Intel chip.
> >There is a huge difference, even though it was to the advantage
> >of Intel that people conflate the two.
>
>
> technology world. A lot of famous and once mighty companies failed
> and even IBM had a near death experience not because of Moores Law or
> because they didn't move fast enough or any of the other pat answers
> about dinosaur-minded management. These companies, WANG, DEC, and
> many others I can't recall now, had legions of the best and brightest
> brains in the industry. They knew very well the competition, the
> industry trends and they had the latest in any technolgies to jump in
> with an equivalent product. They failed because entirely new ideas of
> doing things were made possible with the advent of cheap computing
> power. Power available to everyone for just a thousand or two
> dollars, cheaper than a fancy stereo system.
Here's Moore's law:
The complexity for minimum component costs has increased at a rate
of roughly a factor of two per year.
It governs cost and function (complexity) ....
abia...@my-deja.com
only showed your bitterness. Did he really beat you that bad? Ok,
let's see if you can write a witty follow-up not your usual meaningless
and filty ones.
abia...@my-deja.com
run word, spreadsheet, store their [confidential] data, etc? I can
imagine functionality of PC will be part of big intelligent box but can
not imagine PC will exitinct in 10 yeas.
lechergod
really idiotic moron !!!!!
everything is to fuck you communists' dogs !!!
this communists' dog still put up a 'thick face' to beg for mercy !!!!
ha ha ha ha
lechergod
rst0 !!!!!!
that is communists' dog's trick to lay sin on Albert Fung,
by not replying to rst0's post but Albert Fung's !!!!
that is communists' dog !!!!!
abia...@my-deja.com wrote:
---
rst0
lechergod wrote:
> throughout the passage,
> this rst0 is just like a lunatic dreamer!
> how do he know 10 years ?
> how do he know to write programs ?
I have worked with computers for the past 50 years. I have designed
and developed software to design guided missiles, tracked Gemini
Spacecraft. On one particular mission, the spacecraft was tumbling in
space, and my station was the only one tracking it (I was on a tracking
ship in the Pacific Ocean). Even land radar stations could not track
it. I have worked on IBM Mainframe computers to military computers,
very specialized computers, to today's PC. Don't tell me I can not
write programs. I can probably design a better computer chip than Dr.
Chen Jin of Hanxin Corp fame, who did not design one, but stole one.
> roman is not built in a day,
You're wrong as usual, lecher dog. Rome was built in a day. Rome was
built before there were Roman Empire.
> this maniac speaks as it is a simple toy !!!
When you know it, it is a simple toy, lecher dog. To you, it's a
complex box.
> typically as a quarrelsome bitch !!!
For a lonely son of a bitch you are, you certainly have no right to say
anything about sex as you have never had any. You can not fuck, lecher
dog. You got drooping wet noodle penis, no balls, and no sperm. You
can not even masturbate. Your drooping wet noodle penis can not
penetrate water. You can only write about sex. You can not perform.
You are old 60+ Chinaman pig with big potbelly. Your wife left you for
someone else. You are going to die in your sleep soon. No one is a
bigger son of a bitch than you are, lecher dog. You are going to die
in your sleep soon. No one is a bigger asshole rice licking jackass
than you are. You are going to die in your sleep soon. You have no
social skills, no manners, no friend. You are going to die in your
sleep soon. You are a psycho case. Go see a psychiatrist or you
surely will die in your sleep soon.
rst0
lechergod wrote:
> what a bug you are to write for you ?????
> really idiotic moron !!!!!
> everything is to fuck you communists' dogs !!!
For a lonely son of a bitch you are, you certainly have no right to say
anything about sex as you have never had any. You can not fuck, lecher
dog. You got drooping wet noodle penis, no balls, and no sperm. You
can not even masturbate. Your drooping wet noodle penis can not
penetrate water. You can only write about sex. You can not perform.
You are old 60+ Chinaman pig with big potbelly. Your wife left you for
someone else. You are going to die in your sleep soon. No one is a
bigger son of a bitch than you are, lecher dog. You are going to die
in your sleep soon. No one is a bigger asshole rice licking jackass
than you are. You are going to die in your sleep soon. You have no
social skills, no manners, no friend. You are going to die in your
sleep soon. You are a psycho case. Go see a psychiatrist or you
surely will die in your sleep soon.
> this communists' dog still put up a 'thick face' to beg for mercy !!!!
> ha ha ha ha
lecher dog, you can not even put a sentence together properly.
rst0
In the case of the government vs A.T. & T. (the old A.T. & T.)...
led to an antitrust suit by the U.S. government against AT&T. The suit
began in 1974 and was settled in January 1982 when AT&T agreed to
divest itself of the wholly owned Bell operating companies that
provided local exchange service. This would, the government believed,
separate those parts of AT&T (the local exchanges) where the natural
monopoly argument was still seen as valid from those parts (long
distance, manufacturing, research and development), where competition
was appropriate. In return, the U.S. Department of Justice agreed to
lift the constraints of the 1956 decree. Divestiture took place on
January 1, 1984, and the Bell System was dead. In its place was a new
AT&T and seven regional Bell operating companies
If Intel had patented the instruction set, it would probably led to the
same conclusion.
lechergod
computer didn't have a history of 50 years !!!!
that is the habit of a bitch-woman's talking behaviour !!!
[rome is not built in a day] is an english idiom,
how poor the english is this bitch-woman and the quarrelsome manner !!!
this bitch-woman dare to say [just know it] by dreaming !!!
ha ha ha
really this bitch-woman knows not she is speaking to someone who had been
compiling computer programs since it is still in DOS era !!!
bitch-woman is always like this !!!!
Albert K. Fung
rst0:
> In the case of the government vs A.T. & T. (the old A.T. & T.)...
>
> led to an antitrust suit by the U.S. government against AT&T. The suit
> began in 1974 and was settled in January 1982 when AT&T agreed to
> divest itself of the wholly owned Bell operating companies that
> provided local exchange service. This would, the government believed,
> separate those parts of AT&T (the local exchanges) where the natural
> monopoly argument was still seen as valid from those parts (long
> distance, manufacturing, research and development), where competition
> was appropriate. In return, the U.S. Department of Justice agreed to
> lift the constraints of the 1956 decree. Divestiture took place on
> January 1, 1984, and the Bell System was dead. In its place was a new
> AT&T and seven regional Bell operating companies
>
> If Intel had patented the instruction set, it would probably led to the
> same conclusion.
Not at all ....
One must not confuse patent law with the anti-monopololy one.
Some founders of the USA were inventors themselves and un-
derstood the importance of protecting the works of intellect of
talented individuals. Via the constitution, they gave very broad
instruction to US federal government to establish patent office.
Which grants temporally exclusive right to worthy invention.
The current time limit is 17 years. After which, it will become a
public property. Generic drugs are the beneficiaries of the law.
Note that R/E is not the only means to compete. Many did have
their own designs, Motorola's M68000, DEC's Alpha, and IBM's
RISC were a few notable ones. Even if Intel were to patent the
design, all were not lost.
Post patent expiration, AMD could make generic CPU's .... :)
rst0
lechergod wrote:
> ha ha ha ha
> computer didn't have a history of 50 years !!!!
That just tell how much you know, lecher dog, which is nothing. I used
IBM mainframe computer in the 1950s in college.
> that is the habit of a bitch-woman's talking behaviour !!!
For a lonely son of a bitch you are, you certainly have no right to say
anything about sex as you have never had any. You can not fuck, lecher
dog. You got drooping wet noodle penis, no balls, and no sperm. You
can not even masturbate. Your drooping wet noodle penis can not
penetrate water. You can only write about sex. You can not perform.
You are old 60+ Chinaman pig with big potbelly. Your wife left you for
someone else. You are going to die in your sleep soon. No one is a
bigger son of a bitch than you are, lecher dog. You are going to die
in your sleep soon. No one is a bigger asshole rice licking jackass
than you are. You are going to die in your sleep soon. You have no
social skills, no manners, no friend. You are going to die in your
sleep soon. You are a psycho case. Go see a psychiatrist or you
surely will die in your sleep soon.
>
> [rome is not built in a day] is an english idiom,
> how poor the english is this bitch-woman and the quarrelsome manner !!!
>
> this bitch-woman dare to say [just know it] by dreaming !!!
For a lonely son of a bitch you are, you certainly have no right to say
anything about sex as you have never had any. You can not fuck, lecher
dog. You got drooping wet noodle penis, no balls, and no sperm. You
can not even masturbate. Your drooping wet noodle penis can not
penetrate water. You can only write about sex. You can not perform.
You are old 60+ Chinaman pig with big potbelly. Your wife left you for
someone else. You are going to die in your sleep soon. No one is a
bigger son of a bitch than you are, lecher dog. You are going to die
in your sleep soon. No one is a bigger asshole rice licking jackass
than you are. You are going to die in your sleep soon. You have no
social skills, no manners, no friend. You are going to die in your
sleep soon. You are a psycho case. Go see a psychiatrist or you
surely will die in your sleep soon.
> ha ha ha
> really this bitch-woman knows not she is speaking to someone who had been
> compiling computer programs since it is still in DOS era !!!
DOS era is very recent, lecher dog. That shows how much you know of
computers, nothing. DOS stands for Disk Operating System. Operating
systems are very new.
> bitch-woman is always like this !!!!
lechergod
that is bith-woman, knowing not when IBM is establish !!!
tell the netter what 00100101 function,
what is SI, DI, what means jnb !!
let you to find from books !!!!
this bitch-woman can only describe her old-wanton-bug's penis well,
ha ha ha ha ha
abia...@my-deja.com
in 1950s.
1950: Remington-Rand acquires Eckert-Mauchly Computer Corp.
1950: SEAC (Standards Eastern Automatic Computer) is delivered to the
National Bureau of Standards.
1951: First Joint Computer Conference is held.
1951: Maurice V. Wilkes introduces the concept of microprogramming.
1951: IEEE Computer Society is formed.
1951: UNIVAC I is installed at the Bureau of Census using a magnetic
tape unit as a buffer memory.
1951: Wang Laboratories, Inc. is founded by An Wang in Boston.
1951: Whirlwind computer becomes operational at MIT. It was the first
real-time computer and was designed by Jay Forrester and Ken Olsen.
1952: First computer manual is written by Fred Gruenberger.
1952: IBM introduces the 701, its first electronic stored-program
computer.
1952: Nixdorf Computer is founded in Germany.
1952: Remington-Rand acquires Engineering Research Associates (ERA).
1952: RCA develops Bizmac with iron-core memory and a magnetic drum
supporting the first database.
1952: UNIVAC I predicts an Eisenhower landslide with 7% of the votes,
just one hour after the polls close.
1952: U.S. Department of Justice sues IBM for monopolizing the
punched-card accounting machine industry.
1953: Burroughs Corp. installs the Universal Digital Electronic
Computer (UDEC) at Wayne State University.
1953: First high-speed printer is developed by Remington-Rand for use
on the Univac.
1953: First magnetic tape device, the IBM 726, is introduced with 100
character-per-inch density and 75 inches-per-second speed.
1953: IBM ships its first stored-program computer, the 701. It is a
vacuum tube, or first generation, computer.
1954: FORTRAN is created by John Backus at IBM. Harlan Herrick runs the
first successful FORTRAN program.
1954: Gene Amdahl develops the first operating system, used on IBM 704.
1955: First SHARE users group meeting is held.
1955: Remington-Rand merges with Sperry Gyroscope to form Sperry-Rand.
1956: APT (Automatic Programmed Tool) is developed by D.T. Ross.
1956: Burroughs acquires Electrodata and the Datatron computer, which
becomes the Burroughs 205.
1956: Government antitrust suit against IBM is settled; consent decree
requires IBM to sell as well as lease machines.
1956: A. Newell, D. Shaw and F. Simon invent IPL (Information
Processing Language.)
1956: RCA ships the Bizmac.
1956: T.J. Watson, Jr. assumes presidency of IBM.
1956: The acronym artificial intelligence is coined by John McCarthy.
...
And in 1956, IBM introduced its 305 RAMAC computer.
http://www.cedmagic.com/history/ibm-305-ramac.html
rst0
lechergod wrote:
> ha ha ha
> tell the netter what 00100101 function,
> what is SI, DI, what means jnb !!
> let you to find from books !!!!
An ignorant fool can only say ignorant words.
lecher dog, I invited you for dim sum in Hong Kong this September, and
you didn't even respond to my email. What is the matter? Are you
afraid to show your face?
>
> this bitch-woman can only describe her old-wanton-bug's penis well,
For a lonely son of a bitch you are, you certainly have no right to say
anything about sex as you have never had any. You can not fuck, lecher
dog. You got drooping wet noodle penis, no balls, and no sperm. You
can not even masturbate. Your drooping wet noodle penis can not
penetrate water. You can only write about sex. You can not perform.
You are old 60+ Chinaman pig with big potbelly. Your wife left you for
someone else. You are going to die in your sleep soon. No one is a
bigger son of a bitch than you are, lecher dog. You are going to die
in your sleep soon. No one is a bigger asshole rice licking jackass
than you are. You are going to die in your sleep soon. You have no
social skills, no manners, no friend. You are going to die in your
sleep soon. You are a psycho case. Go see a psychiatrist or you
surely will die in your sleep soon.
> ha ha ha ha ha
Tak To
> AMD had no need to reverse-engineered the Pentium chip as the Pentium
> is a piece of junk from the beginning. AMD hired a team of chip
> designers from ex-DEC employees who worked on the DEC Alpha chip. The
> Alpha is the most advanced chip around, but had the misfortune of being
> non-compatible to the Intel 8086 instruction set used on the PC.
>
> In a way, DEC (Digital Equipment Corporation) was a victim of
> non-compatibility. DEC's VAX mainframe computers were the best
> mainframe ever built, but was not compatible to the IBM Mainframe.
> Defense Contractors like Lockheed has thousands of VAXs, but the
> business sectors wouldn't use them.
A minor point perhaps, but DEC's VAX was a series of machines with
a wide spectrum of speed/size that span several order of magnitude.
Except for the (late) top models such as the 9000, it was never
considered a "mainframe". The VAX was a "mini", and later a
"super-mini" or a "midi". The mini's, like the micro's a couple of
decades later, essentially created their own market sector, providing
interactive computing capabilities to a large number of users at the
fraction of the cost of the mainframe. To blame DEC's demise on
the fact that VAX is not like an IBM mainframe is rather misleading.
To address just one of the many issues: merely compatibility would
not have sold a DEC machine to the business crowd at that time.
As IBM used to say (and is still saying), they provide solutions, not
machines, and DEC was not organized like IBM.
> The VAX VMS was the best operating system around.
Debatable. Many would claim that Multics is far more advanced.
> Microsoft stole VAX VMS to start its Windows operating
> system. We in the know called Microsoft's Windows Operating System the
> "the better VMS".
Microsoft hire ex-DEC employees to write a new operating system.
It was hardly "stealing". Yes, we all know that WNT stands for
VMS, just as HAL (in "2001, A Space Odyssey") stands for IBM;
and we all notice that neither WNT nor VMS support Unix style
symbolic links.
rst0...@yahoo.com
Tak To wrote:
> rst0 wrote:
> > AMD had no need to reverse-engineered the Pentium chip as the Pentium
> > is a piece of junk from the beginning. AMD hired a team of chip
> > designers from ex-DEC employees who worked on the DEC Alpha chip. The
> > Alpha is the most advanced chip around, but had the misfortune of being
> > non-compatible to the Intel 8086 instruction set used on the PC.
> >
> > In a way, DEC (Digital Equipment Corporation) was a victim of
> > non-compatibility. DEC's VAX mainframe computers were the best
> > mainframe ever built, but was not compatible to the IBM Mainframe.
> > Defense Contractors like Lockheed has thousands of VAXs, but the
> > business sectors wouldn't use them.
>
> A minor point perhaps, but DEC's VAX was a series of machines with
> a wide spectrum of speed/size that span several order of magnitude.
You are right. VAXs come as desk-top mini-VAX to super-mini 8800,
which was the top of the line.
> Except for the (late) top models such as the 9000,
The last VAX was the 10,000, not 9000, which was supposed to be a
Mainframe to compete with IBM Mainframes. Unfortunately, the PC took
over the world before DEC sold any 10,000 machine.
> it was never
> considered a "mainframe". The VAX was a "mini", and later a
> "super-mini" or a "midi". The mini's, like the micro's a couple of
> decades later, essentially created their own market sector, providing
> interactive computing capabilities to a large number of users at the
> fraction of the cost of the mainframe. To blame DEC's demise on
> the fact that VAX is not like an IBM mainframe is rather misleading.
> To address just one of the many issues: merely compatibility would
> not have sold a DEC machine to the business crowd at that time.
I wasn't talking about compatibility with IBM mainframe. The VAXs are
a fine line of computers which could provide any size company to allow
growth without sacrificing time (compatible within the VAX family) if
the company's growth requires moving to bigger computing power.
> As IBM used to say (and is still saying), they provide solutions, not
> machines, and DEC was not organized like IBM.
As I have said, I thought DEC had a better solution than IBM. I worked
with both machines, and I prefer the VAX. Unfortunately, customers
don't feel the same as IBM mainframes still are being used.
Tak To
> Tak To:
>
>>In reality, AMD did not "reverse-engineer" the Intel chip -- it
>>just made one that matches the external behavior of the Intel chip.
>>There is a huge difference, even though it was to the advantage
>>of Intel that people conflate the two.
>
> External interfaces ....
>
> Are integral part of the design of a system or subsystem.
> It is the functional specification of a chipset. Therefore, if
> one uses a part of someone else's design, instruction set
> in the case of the Intel family of CPU's, it is bona fide R/E.
>
> Even if AMD were to use seaweeds for the purpose .... :)
If a carpenter is given the exact dimensions of a table to be
built, would you say that he is doing reverse engineering?
The Intel chip's spec is published and freely available(*), the
AMD team simply build to spec.
(*) Certain features of the Intel chip is not published. Intel
disclosed them only to trusted strategic partners and put them
under very strict nondisclosure agreements. I am not sure if
the AMD team has actually implemented them. If so, then the
AMD team has probably done some reverse engineering to discover
the undocumented features.
Tak To
> Under United States law, reverse engineering a patented item can
> be infringement
If something is patented, then the principle involved is fully
disclosed to the public. No reverse engineering is necessary.
Tak To
> ha ha ha ha
> computer didn't have a history of 50 years !!!!
> that is the habit of a bitch-woman's talking behaviour !!!
The ENIAC was in full operation in 1945.
bakyimsing
> Albert K. Fung wrote:
>
> > Tak To:
> >
> >>In reality, AMD did not "reverse-engineer" the Intel chip -- it
> >>just made one that matches the external behavior of the Intel chip.
> >>There is a huge difference, even though it was to the advantage
> >>of Intel that people conflate the two.
> >
> > External interfaces ....
> >
> > Are integral part of the design of a system or subsystem.
> > It is the functional specification of a chipset. Therefore, if
> > one uses a part of someone else's design, instruction set
> > in the case of the Intel family of CPU's, it is bona fide R/E.
> >
> > Even if AMD were to use seaweeds for the purpose .... :)
>
> If a carpenter is given the exact dimensions of a table to be
> built, would you say that he is doing reverse engineering?
>
> The Intel chip's spec is published and freely available(*), the
> AMD team simply build to spec.
>
> (*) Certain features of the Intel chip is not published. Intel
> disclosed them only to trusted strategic partners and put them
> under very strict nondisclosure agreements. I am not sure if
> the AMD team has actually implemented them. If so, then the
> AMD team has probably done some reverse engineering to discover
> the undocumented features.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amd
The company started as a producer of logic chips in
1969, then entered the RAM chip business in 1975.
That same year, it introduced a reverse-engineered
clone of the Intel 8080 microprocessor. During this
period, AMD also designed and produced a series
of bit-slice processor elements (Am2900, Am29116,
Am293xx) which were used in various minicomputer
designs.
During this time, AMD attempted to embrace the
perceived shift towards RISC with their own AMD
29K processor, and they attempted to diversify into
graphics and audio devices as well as flash memory.
While the AMD 29K survived as an embedded
processor and AMD continues to make industry
leading flash memory, AMD was not as successful
with its other endeavors. AMD decided to switch
gears and concentrate solely on Intel-compatible
microprocessors and flash memory. This put them
in direct competition with Intel for x86 compatible
processors and their flash memory secondary markets.
AMD 80286 1982 In February 1982, AMD
signed a contract with Intel, becoming a licensed
second-source manufacturer of 8086 and 8088
processors. IBM wanted to use the Intel 8088 in
its IBM PC, but IBM's policy at the time was to
require at least two sources for its chips. AMD
later produced the 80286, or 286, under the
same arrangement, but Intel cancelled the
agreement in 1986, and refused to hand over
technical details of the i386 part. The growing
popularity of the PC clone market meant Intel
could produce CPUs on its own terms, rather
than IBM's.
AMD challenged this decision, and subsequently
won under arbitration. A long legal dispute
followed, ending in 1991 when the Supreme
Court of California sided with AMD and forced
Intel to pay over $1 billion in compensation for
violation of contract. Subsequent legal disputes
centered on whether AMD had legal rights to use
derivatives of Intel's microcode. Rulings were
made in both directions. In the face of uncertainty,
AMD was forced to develop "clean room" versions
of Intel code. In this fashion, one engineering team
described the function of the code, and a second
team without access to the source code itself had
to develop microcode that performed the same
functionality.
In 1991 AMD released the Am386, its clone of
the later Intel 80386 processor. It took less than
a year for AMD to sell a million units. AMD's 386
DX-40 was very popular with smaller, independent
clone manufacturers. AMD followed in 1993 with
the Am486. Both sold at a significantly lower price
than the Intel versions. The Am486 was used by a
number of large OEMs, including Compaq, and
proved popular, but again was just a clone of Intel's
processor technology. But as product cycles shortened
in the PC industry, cloning Intel's products became an
ever less viable strategy for AMD, as it meant their
technology would always be behind Intel.
On December 30, 1994 the Supreme Court of California
finally formally denied AMD rights to use the i386's
microcode. Afterwards AMD and Intel concluded an
agreement, the details of which remain largely secret,
which gave AMD the right to produce and sell
microprocessors containing the microcodes of Intel
286, 386, and 486. The agreement appears to allow
for full cross-licensing of patents and some copyrights,
allowing each partner to use the other's technological
innovations without charge. Whatever the details, no
significant legal action had resulted between AMD
and Intel (until the 2005 antitrust suits in Japan and
the U.S.), and the agreement evidently provided a
"clean break".
rst0...@yahoo.com
Thank you for the reminder. Yes, the IBM 704 was the first computer I
used starting in 1956.
rst0...@yahoo.com
The agreement covers all computer chips with X86 ID. Hence Intel
changed the name to Pentium for 80585 version of chips and all chip
names afterward. AMD bought NexGen, a compatible chip designing
company to design their own version, and from this point, the race was
on for a better and more powerful chip to outperform the other.
Albert K. Fung
> If a carpenter is given the exact dimensions of a table to be
> built, would you say that he is doing reverse engineering?
>
> The Intel chip's spec is published and freely available(*), the
> AMD team simply build to spec.
But without Intel's authorization ....
Fashion designer Vera Wang's cloths are shown in magazines all
over the world. That, however, does not give Shanghai tailors the
right to copy her design for commercial gains. Making a dress or
for personal use, on the other hand is allowed.
Under the fair use doctrine ....
rst0...@yahoo.com
Albert K. Fung
Tak To:
> If something is patented, then the principle involved is fully
> disclosed to the public. No reverse engineering is necessary.
A patent office disclosure ....
Is deemed government properties. Using them to implement, with-
out the consent and explicit authorization of the patent holder, the
underlying device or system for commercial gain is illegal. Once a
patent is granted.
No court will accept any claim of intellectual non-contemination.
Therefore, even clean room doctrine will not shield the defendant
from legal liabilities. The court will presume intellectual contemin-
ation and side with the patent holder.
For all practical purposes, it is impossible to prove otherwise ....
Khitanian
I suppose coke has a longer history than 17 years ?
So why jail the poor chaps who tried to sell the fomula to Papsi ?
--
Oderient dum Metuant
lechergod
that is bith-woman, knowing not when IBM is establish !!!
tell the netter what 00100101 function,
what is SI, DI, what means jnb !!
let you to find from books !!!!
this bitch-woman can only describe her old-wanton-bug's penis well,
ha ha ha ha ha
lechergod
this communists' dog can only cut & paste passage,
and not knowing what that 'computer' means at such years !!!!
ha ha ha ha
before 1977, such machine is just adding apparatus !!!!
ha ha ha ha
Albert K. Fung
> I suppose coke has a longer history than 17 years ?
> So why jail the poor chaps who tried to sell the fomula to Papsi ?
Coca Cola elected not to apply for a patent ....
But to protect their formula as a trade secret. The people in
question were charged for stealing the company's propriet-
ary information and selling it for monetary gain. It was wise
for Pepsi to return the envelope unopen. Had they not done
that, they would also be charged for being abetor of crime.
Knowingly recieving stolen property is a crime.
Whether the property is intellectual or physical ....
Regards,
Albert K. Fung
Monticito/Sanat Ysabel, California, USA.
rst0...@yahoo.com
lechergod wrote:
> ha ha ha
> tell the netter what 00100101 function,
> what is SI, DI, what means jnb !!
> let you to find from books !!!!
>
> this bitch-woman can only describe her old-wanton-bug's penis well,
Albert K. Fung
rst0:
> I disagree. PC will become smaller and more powerful and versatile
> with huge storage.
AMD just announced results ....
Business declined by nearly 10% due to global decrease in PC
demands. This trend will continue in the next decade. Intel just
announced plan for wireless alliance.
PC, afterall, is a 30-year old technology ....
abia...@my-deja.com
lechergod
ha ha ha ha ha
coed, masm language !!!!!
ha ha ha ha ha
this bitch-woman is going mad !!!
i appear here just last november, when get september the email,
now is only July, this bitch-woman is talking about Sepember !!!!!
ha ha ha ha ha
this bitch-woman is going mad !!!
can only describe her old wanton-bug very well !!!!
ha ha ha ha ha ha
lechergod
and know not a bit the real history.
computer to-day means electronic computer, not such vacuum tube/core
computer. since it is too daily used, the word electronic is off.
therefore boys born after 1970/1965 knows not a bit the difference between
the two kind of computers.
Tak To wrote:
---
lechergod
October 15th !!!
now is only July, when get september the email, ????
this wanton family is talking about Sepember !!!!!
this communists' dog is really going mad !!!!
communists' dog can really tell lies all the day !!!!!!
beware, netters !!!
newsgroup with politics is absolutely nowhere to make friends.
some of my friends had been asked in hk.politics to keep face to face
contact, and were all beated, without knowing who did that.
They are so afraid to join hk.politics again,
That is why the hk.politics is almost dead !!!
to make friend, i use a completely different name to those entertainment
groups, where absolutely no politics are there !!!!
your colleaque camy had exposed your communists' dogs' evil behaviour,
still this communists' dog is going too mad !!!!
ha ha ha ha ha ha
rst9...@yahoo.com wrote:
---
rst0...@yahoo.com
Albert K. Fung wrote:
> > PC will extinct within the next decade ....
>
> rst0:
>
> > I disagree. PC will become smaller and more powerful and versatile
> > with huge storage.
>
> AMD just announced results ....
>
> Business declined by nearly 10% due to global decrease in PC
> demands. This trend will continue in the next decade. Intel just
> announced plan for wireless alliance.
I think there are two reasons why AMD missed sales forecast:
1: The biggest reason is Intel's price cutting to get rid of the
old inventories to bring out the new processors.
2: Customers reluctance to buy new PC when they know next year,
there will be a new operating system coming out from Microsoft, the
Vista version for 64-bit PC.
The state of New York would not put out one billion dollars for AMD to
build a new fab in upstate New York if there is any chance of the PC
going away. AMD has built two new fabs the last two years. Intel has
also spent billions upgrading their fabs to the latest technologies.
The PC will not go away. It still has a long way to go.
Albert K. Fung
> demands. This trend will continue in the next decade. Intel just
> announced plan for wireless alliance.
rst9wxyz:
> I think there are two reasons why AMD missed sales forecast:
>
> 1: The biggest reason is Intel's price cutting to get rid of the
> old inventories to bring out the new processors.
> 2: Customers reluctance to buy new PC when they know next year,
> there will be a new operating system coming out from Microsoft, the
> Vista version for 64-bit PC.
>
> The state of New York would not put out one billion dollars for AMD to
> build a new fab in upstate New York if there is any chance of the PC
> going away. AMD has built two new fabs the last two years. Intel has
> also spent billions upgrading their fabs to the latest technologies.
> The PC will not go away. It still has a long way to go.
If governments ....
Are good business entities, then certainly, the PRC would've
long been the unmatched global powerhouse of trade, mer-
cantile and commerce.
NY state government is not known for its business acument.
As to AMD, an esteemed netter in this NG repeatedly pointed
out: one can never teach an old dog new tricks. When one's
entire life has been spent on the art of using hammer, one's
natural tendency is instinctively to throw good money to buy
more nails. Competely blivious to the fact that the world has
made tremendous progress towards all-purpose glues of all
imaginable kind.
On Vista and 64-bit, this humble netter is willing to contribute
a dime for the esteemed netter to call anybody he wishes to
get them excited about Microsoft's latest and greatest. Even
its founder decided to retire and the current CEO wants to go
after Apple's iPod.
Those, are hardly votes of resounding confidence .... :)
abia...@my-deja.com
many years, eg, XBox and now MP3 player. With your reasoning, they did
not have confidence on PC long time ago? And we all know Microsoft
will release new version of Windows OS soon so many companies would
rather wait for the release to replace their current PCs, this has
happened before.
I have rarely read your stuff but found your reasoning is really
weird!!!
Tak To
> Tak To:
>
>>If a carpenter is given the exact dimensions of a table to be
>>built, would you say that he is doing reverse engineering?
>>
>>The Intel chip's spec is published and freely available(*), the
>>AMD team simply build to spec.
>
> But without Intel's authorization ....
>
> Fashion designer Vera Wang's cloths are shown in magazines all
> over the world. That, however, does not give Shanghai tailors the
> right to copy her design for commercial gains. Making a dress or
> for personal use, on the other hand is allowed.
>
> Under the fair use doctrine ....
The point that I was trying to make was that what AMD did was
_not_ reverse-engineering. As per your own definition, r/e
is about uncovering _unobvious_ working principles. Since the
Intel spec is published, there is nothing unobvious to uncover,
as in my hypothetical case of the carpenter.
The legality is a different issue. As I have pointed out in
another post of the same thread, Intel has no coyright/patent
for the instruction set itself, whereas Vera Wang has copyright
of her dress.
It is arguable, and in fact frequently argued, whether the
external inferface of a device/program is an integral part
of the whole design. Unfortunately, there is no consistent
result in the court. The convention-or-invention issue has
to be determined in a case by case fashion.
lechergod
there can seen no relation of Albert Fung's reasoning to Microsoft's all
kind of business !!!!
this communists' dog can only drag away and lay sin on others.
communists' dogs usually have very poor understanding to english,
especially to Albert Fung's high-grade english.
it is no good for abianchen to read that !!!!
abia...@my-deja.com wrote:
---
Tak To
I have never said it was legal to use the published information of
a patent for commercial gains.
What I said was that reading the published information is _not_
reverse engineering. Thus, your phrase "reverse engineering
a patented item" is an oxymoron in the context.
Tak To
>
> Tak To wrote:
>
>> lechergod wrote:
>>
>>> ha ha ha ha
>>> computer didn't have a history of 50 years !!!!
>>> that is the habit of a bitch-woman's talking behaviour !!!
>>
>> The ENIAC was in full operation in 1945.
>>
> and know not a bit the real history.
> computer to-day means electronic computer, not such vacuum tube/core
> computer.
Only lechergod would think that vacuum tubes and core are not
electronic devices.
Tak To
> The agreement covers all computer chips with X86 ID. Hence Intel
> changed the name to Pentium for 80585 version of chips and all chip
> names afterward. AMD bought NexGen, a compatible chip designing
> company to design their own version, and from this point, the race was
> on for a better and more powerful chip to outperform the other.
It is not clear to me that is a fair "race". In my opinion, Intel has
far more leeway in introducing new instructions. co-processors, etc.
lechergod
Tak To wrote:
> lechergod wrote:
>
>>
>> Tak To wrote:
>>
>>> lechergod wrote:
>>>
>>>> ha ha ha ha
>>>> computer didn't have a history of 50 years !!!!
>>>> that is the habit of a bitch-woman's talking behaviour !!!
>>>
>>>
>>> The ENIAC was in full operation in 1945.
>>>
>> small boys can only cut & paste from home-pages as to 'computer'
>> and know not a bit the real history.
>> computer to-day means electronic computer, not such vacuum tube/core
>> computer.
>
>
> Only lechergod would think that vacuum tubes and core are not
> electronic devices.
>
> Tak
---
rst0...@yahoo.com
lechergod wrote:
> your rst* group just first appear in 19/2/2006, i appear here just last
> October 15th !!!
> now is only July, when get september the email, ????
> this wanton family is talking about Sepember !!!!!
lecher dog, you certainly have no brain. To make an appointment with
someone, you must set the date ahead of your current time, not the
past. "This September" means September, 2006, which is two months
ahead. Who's talking about the past? I sent the email to you about 2
weeks ago, at the end of June.
> this communists' dog is really going mad !!!!
> communists' dog can really tell lies all the day !!!!!!
If you stop insulting people, you might have some friends. As the way
you are today, you'll die a lonely death without a single soul who
care.
>
> beware, netters !!!
> newsgroup with politics is absolutely nowhere to make friends.
This is why you have no friend, lecher dog.
> some of my friends had been asked in hk.politics to keep face to face
> contact, and were all beated, without knowing who did that.
As I have said, I went to Tucson to meet J. Venning. J. Venning and I
are still friends.
> They are so afraid to join hk.politics again,
> That is why the hk.politics is almost dead !!!
I see a lot of activities in hk.politics today. Some of the posts
within SCC are also posted in hk.politics.
>
> to make friend, i use a completely different name to those entertainment
> groups, where absolutely no politics are there !!!!
>
> your colleaque camy had exposed your communists' dogs' evil behaviour,
> still this communists' dog is going too mad !!!!
> ha ha ha ha ha ha
I repeat my invitation:
lecher dog, I invite you for dim sum in Hong Kong this September. Just
tell me how to contact you in Hong Kong. I will only be in Hong Kong
for 5 days. Then, I'll be going to China.
lechergod
camy
in newsgroups,untermensch!
abia...@my-deja.com
:^))
Anyway, what was lecherdog doing before 1977? A coolie in HK harbor?
Never mind, I am not going to mention PDP-11 or VAX-780 to lecherdog,
he has no clue.
Oh, lecherdog, some of today's high-end Hi-Fi systems are still made by
vacuum tubes due to the warm sound. Here's a link:
And I bet lecherdog would say that's not Amplifier. :^))
lecherdog = ignorance + stubborness
rst0...@yahoo.com
The issue of external interface has been determined by U.S. Court. By
law, the external interface must be disclosed for all vendors so
everyone can and should be able to connect all types of devices to it.
rst0...@yahoo.com
lechergod wrote:
> ha ha ha ha ha
> no matter how you curse, all communists' dogs are rubbish !!!!
This is what you get trying to be decent to him.
rst0...@yahoo.com
They may not get excited about Vista, but Vista is all they will get
for at least the next 3 or 4 years. Whether they like it or not, they
have no other choice, but to use Vista and Microsoft knows it.
Microsoft is a monopoly and Bill Gates got the money to prove it. Bill
Gates got enough money to last a thousand lifetime. His retirement has
nothing to do with Vista. With Warren Buffet's added billions, Bill
Gates can do the world much, much more good than sitting in a small
world of Microsoft. Bill Gates will be remembered as a man who help
the poor and set the world right when no one else care.
J.Venning
> They may not get excited about Vista, but Vista is all they will get
> for at least the next 3 or 4 years. Whether they like it or not, they
> have no other choice, but to use Vista and Microsoft knows it.
> Microsoft is a monopoly and Bill Gates got the money to prove it. Bill
> Gates got enough money to last a thousand lifetime. His retirement has
> nothing to do with Vista. With Warren Buffet's added billions, Bill
> Gates can do the world much, much more good than sitting in a small
> world of Microsoft. Bill Gates will be remembered as a man who help
> the poor and set the world right when no one else care.
>
J.
rst0...@yahoo.com
Be like everybody else, why buy Vista when next year, the PCs will come
with Vista with all the peripheral devices working with the PC itself
and you don't need to do anything.
> J.
J.Venning
> Be like everybody else, why buy Vista when next year, the PCs will come
> with Vista with all the peripheral devices working with the PC itself
> and you don't need to do anything.
>
J.
lechergod
who is 'him' ???
rst9...@yahoo.com being replied previously ???
really i do detect that all 3, old wanton-bug;bitch-bedmaid;oil-bottle son
are all mixed up together in organs !!!!!
lechergod
fantastic to date me, is suitable for me to say them rubbish !!!!
camy wrote:
---
lechergod
perfect !!!
vacuum tube computer is not electronic computer
was equivalent to be vacuum tube radio not electronic radio.
communists' dog is just so moron,
can only cut & paste something he does know what it is.
that is why this communists' dog abianchen can only be communists' dog.
abia...@my-deja.com
idiot. Here's the link to explain Vacuum tube as electronic device:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_tube
"In electronics, a vacuum tube (U.S. and Canadian English) or
(thermionic) valve (outside North America) is a device generally used
to amplify, or otherwise modify, a signal by controlling the movement
of electrons in an evacuated space."
rst0...@yahoo.com
lechergod wrote:
> to those communists' dogs as camy and rst9wxyz-bitch-bedmaid, who are so
> fantastic to date me,
lecher dog, don't hold yourself up too highly. An invitation for dim
sum is not a date. It's an invitation to meet face to face to evaluate
each other. You can evaluate me while I evaluate you. Fair enough?
camy
lechergod
every idiot can post a lot of rubbish there !!!
it is more dirty than those licking arsehole articles !!!!
lechergod
the time to evaluate such rubbish dogs !!!!
i come here to fuck communists' dogs just for the silent majority(jury),
idiotic moron !!!!!
lechergod
no matter what it is, this bitch forgot what she had said to come to
hongkong for what what what !!!
really communists' dogs are liars,
so they always deny what they had said,
but newsgroup had the record throught google !!!!!
it is so pity to communists' dogs !!!!
rst0...@yahoo.com
lechergod wrote:
> that is communists' dog's dictatorship concept, oppressing other to waste
> the time to evaluate such rubbish dogs !!!!
> i come here to fuck communists' dogs just for the silent majority(jury),
> idiotic moron !!!!!
Ah!! lecher dog, you know you are too old to fuck. You can only talk
about it. You are a silent majority of one.
For a lonely son of a bitch you are, you certainly have no right to say
anything about sex as you have never had any. You can not fuck, lecher
dog. You got drooping wet noodle penis, no balls, and no sperm. You
can not even masturbate. Your drooping wet noodle penis can not
penetrate water. You can only write about sex. You can not perform.
You are old 60+ Chinaman pig with big potbelly. Your wife left you for
someone else. You are going to die in your sleep soon. No one is a
bigger son of a bitch than you are, lecher dog. You are going to die
in your sleep soon. No one is a bigger asshole rice licking jackass
than you are. You are going to die in your sleep soon. You have no
social skills, no manners, no friend. You are going to die in your
sleep soon. You are a psycho case. Go see a psychiatrist or you
surely will die in your sleep soon.
rst0...@yahoo.com
lechergod wrote:
> that is communists' dog's poor english > untermenschen.
> no matter what it is, this bitch forgot what she had said to come to
> hongkong for what what what !!!
> really communists' dogs are liars,
> so they always deny what they had said,
> but newsgroup had the record throught google !!!!!
> it is so pity to communists' dogs !!!!
What did you say with all these words, lecher dog? The whole post has
no meaning.
camy
kong,untermensch doggie!like you said,the newsgroup has that record,so
show me.
abia...@my-deja.com
vacuum tube is part of the history of electronics.
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-34362
"The history of electronics > The vacuum tube era
Theoretical and experimental studies of electricity during the 18th and
19th centuries led to the development of the first electrical machines
and the beginning of the widespread use of electricity. The history of
electronics began to evolve separately from that of electricity late in
the 19th century with the identification of the electron by the English
physicist...
electronics... (75 of 9422 words)
lechergod
that is a communists' dog-bitch's ugliness !!!!!
--------------------
Human right in the US
76
寄件人： camy - 檢視個人簡介
日期： 2006年3月7日(星期二) 下午9時31分
電郵地址： "camy" <cami1...@hotmail.com>
群組： soc.culture.china, soc.culture.hongkong, soc.culture.taiwan
........ i think you are genius with unique
observation.my friends und classmates want to meet you when we travel
to china in may.we think we will have 3 days in hong kong,so we can
visit you,ja?
lechergod schrieb:
----------------------
camy
instead.my classmates think you are psychopath and did not want to have
anything to do with you.
lechergod
too shameful !!!
why to delete your doggie yelling, which is to be replied ????
-----------------------------------
show me the text and url where i said i was coming to hong
kong,untermensch doggie!like you said,the newsgroup has that record,so
show me.
just you said to visit,
who on earth accept you communists' dog-bitch's dating ????
idiotic moron !!!!!
camy wrote:
---
Albert K. Fung
> The point that I was trying to make was that what AMD did was
> _not_ reverse-engineering. As per your own definition, r/e
> is about uncovering _unobvious_ working principles. Since the
> Intel spec is published, there is nothing unobvious to uncover,
> as in my hypothetical case of the carpenter.
>
> The legality is a different issue. As I have pointed out in
> another post of the same thread, Intel has no coyright/patent
> for the instruction set itself, whereas Vera Wang has copyright
> of her dress.
>
> It is arguable, and in fact frequently argued, whether the
> external inferface of a device/program is an integral part
> of the whole design. Unfortunately, there is no consistent
> result in the court. The convention-or-invention issue has
> to be determined in a case by case fashion.
rst9...@yahoo.com wrote:
> The issue of external interface has been determined by U.S. Court. By
> law, the external interface must be disclosed for all vendors so
> everyone can and should be able to connect all types of devices to it.
In a landmark court decision ....
The instruction set is where the software meets the hard-
ware. It is the functional specification of a CPU. Published
materials related to such interface are entitled to protect-
ions under copyright laws.
But its use for reverse engineering is deemed a fair use.
Which is therefore excempted under the fair use doctrine.
That court decision, is the legal foundation for the cloning
industry.
Had Intel decided to patent their family of chips, then they
would have been protected by US patent laws which don't
have such excemption. While all external interfaces would
still be available for references. Their use for reverse eng-
ineering wouldn't be permitted because the exclusive right
of the patent holder prevails.
In the latter situation, all users of the device must secure a
license from the patent holder. Which is the permit to inter-
face. Very often, it also has clauses of indemnification.
For quite sometime, many in the IP community have been
advocating equal treatments for both, thereby opening the
door for reverse engineering patented items. The claim of
its proponents is that it encourages competitions, thereby,
benefiting consumers. Opponents, however, think that is a
bad idea. Which will discourage invention.
BTW: it is understandable that most novices of computer
technologies do not understand the importance of
the instruction set to a CPU. But it respresents very
sizable investments, intellectually and monetarily,
by a company. It's a non-trivial endeavour to come
up with an optimal instruction set for a CPU. Such a
task is typically done by a tean of senior architects.
Contrary to popular belief, Intel and Vera Wang can
but do not have to explicitly apply for copyrights for
their works of intellect. They are still proteced under
implicit copyrights.
Hopefully, this free lecture will settle all disputes ....
rst0...@yahoo.com
lechergod wrote:
> rediculous !!!
> who is 'him' ???
> rst9...@yahoo.com being replied previously ???
> really i do detect that all 3, old wanton-bug;bitch-bedmaid;oil-bottle son
> are all mixed up together in organs !!!!!
For a lonely son of a bitch you are, you certainly have no right to say
anything about sex as you have never had any. You can not fuck, lecher
dog. You got drooping wet noodle penis, no balls, and no sperm. You
can not even masturbate. Your drooping wet noodle penis can not
penetrate water. You can only write about sex. You can not perform.
You are old 60+ Chinaman pig with big potbelly. Your wife left you for
someone else. You are going to die in your sleep soon. No one is a
bigger son of a bitch than you are, lecher dog. You are going to die
in your sleep soon. No one is a bigger asshole rice licking jackass
than you are. You are going to die in your sleep soon. You have no
social skills, no manners, no friend. You are going to die in your
sleep soon. You are a psycho case. Go see a psychiatrist or you
surely will die in your sleep soon.
>
>
camy
you are a psychopath,but since we all now know better,we won't.
Tak To
? What law are you referring to? Who decides what is "external"
or "internal"?
I think only in specific cases in which the government took
interest in the market of some <X>-compatible devices that they
decreed the manufacturer of <x> must make the interface public
(in the name of anti-trust).
Tak To
> In a landmark court decision ....
>
> The instruction set is where the software meets the hard-
> ware. It is the functional specification of a CPU. Published
> materials related to such interface are entitled to protect-
> ions under copyright laws.
Which landmark court decision is that?
It seems to me you are confusing "instruction set" with "microcode
instruction set" with "microcode program (that implements the
instruction set".
> But its use for reverse engineering is deemed a fair use.
Reverse engineering per se is always legal. What the IP laws
_may_ forbid is distributing the fruits of such endeavors.
You keep conflating the two.
After you bought a book, you can xerox ten thousand copies of
it and store in your own home. That is entirely legal. What
you cannot do is sell these copies or give them away.
> Which is therefore excempted under the fair use doctrine.
This should read: using copyrighted material for r/e is considered
of fair use.
> That court decision, is the legal foundation for the cloning
> industry.
>
> Had Intel decided to patent their family of chips, then they
> would have been protected by US patent laws which don't
> have such excemption. While all external interfaces would
> still be available for references. Their use for reverse eng-
> ineering wouldn't be permitted because the exclusive right
> of the patent holder prevails.
?uh? You are quite confused.
> In the latter situation, all users of the device must secure a
> license from the patent holder. Which is the permit to inter-
> face. Very often, it also has clauses of indemnification.
Nonsense. The main purpose of copyright and patent laws is to
simplify the legal issue so that there is no need to have a
separate license for each _end user_. Thus, the end user has a
set of implicit rights -- i.e., "fair use".
Again, you are conflating end users with manufacturers.
Tak To
> Tak To wrote:
>
>> lechergod wrote:
>>
>>> Tak To wrote:
>>>
>>>> lechergod wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> ha ha ha ha
>>>>> computer didn't have a history of 50 years !!!!
>>>>> that is the habit of a bitch-woman's talking behaviour !!!
>>>>
>>>> The ENIAC was in full operation in 1945.
>>>>
>>> small boys can only cut & paste from home-pages as to 'computer'
>>> and know not a bit the real history.
>>> computer to-day means electronic computer, not such vacuum tube/core
>>> computer.
>>
>> Only lechergod would think that vacuum tubes and core are not
>> electronic devices.
>>
> are you going to say : magnets and electric bulbs are electronic device
> ????
No.
Why, just because you don't know the meaning of "electronic" do
you think everybody is as confused as you?
Albert K. Fung
> license from the patent holder. Which is the permit to inter-
> face. Very often, it also has clauses of indemnification.
Tak To:
> Nonsense. The main purpose of copyright and patent laws is to
> simplify the legal issue so that there is no need to have a
> separate license for each _end user_. Thus, the end user has a
> set of implicit rights -- i.e., "fair use".
>
> Again, you are conflating end users with manufacturers.
A common confusion ....
But is an entirely understandable misreading of the law. The
purpose of both the copyright and the patent laws are there
to protect the rights of the IP holder.
They are not designed to protect the rights of the IP users.
The "set of implicit rights" that the esteemed netter alludes
to are derived from consumer protection laws, local, state,
and federal, not from copyright or patent laws. The author
of a book or the inventor of a device have exclusive rights
to their respective IP.
A book publisher who is interested in publishing the work of
an author is a potential user of his/her IP. A movie producer
is another. They must secure explicit agreements from the
author and be abide by his/her terms. Other than monetary
terms, there may be additional ones, such the selection of
screen witers, actors, directors, etc.
Book buyers or movie goers, on the other hand, are deem-
ed the public whose rights are protected by consumer laws
at all levels. And, is not typical for the author to made legal
demands on them, nor is it practical.
The situation is more or less the same with patents. But the
users are typically manufacturers of goods. And therefore,
it is not unusual for patent holder to demand a blanket pro-
tection from legal liabilities from the public. Users of patent,
indeed, are typically manufacturers.
Not the general public ....
BTW: Microcode is deemed the internal workings of a CPU.
Producers of S/W do not need to have access to in-
terface at such low level. Therefore, the manufact-
urer doesn't have the need or the legal obligation to
publish micro instruction set. Typically, they are pro-
tected as trade secrets.
lechergod
the visit is refused immediately.
------------------------------------
lechergod wrote:
> I 'will' never meet you !
> 1. you are communist dog.
> 2. lechergod is supposed to be nobody knows who he is, so is to speak
> freely.
> 3. my manner in private life is completely different to any of the
> speech in newsgroup. it is no use to have any conversion face to face !!!!
> camy wrote:
>> .....i think you are genius with unique
>> observation.my friends und classmates want to meet you when we travel
>> to china in may.we think we will have 3 days in hong kong,so we can
>> visit you,ja?
>> lechergod schrieb:
the problem in question is that this dog-bitch is tell lies to deny the
words she had said !!!!!
lechergod
confused, as we had that debate before.
as a common people, everyone sees it is a clear breakthrough since 197? in
the introduction of family computer or personal computer !!!
it is hardly to link such vacuum tube to electronic !!
thanks !!!!
Tak To wrote:
---
Jane
old? Pretty as a picture though. I don't agree with her reasons for
wanting to study Chinese, but that's her own business. I think she
should be a movie star. Anyway, pick on someone your own age and size,
Lecher.
lechergod wrote:
> that is a communists' dog-bitch's lyeing !!!
> the visit is refused immediately.
> ------------------------------------
lechergod
really she should be as prostitute as AV star !!!
so
>>the visit is refused immediately.
you have to show your wit as smart as ira !!!!
I prefer wit to appearance !!!
Jane wrote:
---
lechergod
debate/discuss in newsgroup.
the communists' dogs can only be quarrelsome !!!!
Albert K. Fung wrote:
---
Jane
everyone. Have you nothing better to do? Are you suggesting that Ira is
smart? Since you prefer wit to apperance, how many women have you met
and befriended who have wit?
lechergod
debate/discuss in newsgroup.
the communists' dogs can only be quarrelsome !!!!
Albert K. Fung wrote:
---
abia...@my-deja.com
electronic device. And let's see if lecherdog has courage admit his
mistake before the CCP admits 64 TAM tragedy.
http://www.computermuseum.li/Testpage/Evolution-of-Vacuum-Tubes.htm
"The vacuum tube was the heart of many electronic devices, including
computers, until the late 1950's..."
ltlee1
abia...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Hey, stupid dog, another link for you to learn that vacuum tube is
> electronic device. And let's see if lecherdog has courage admit his
> mistake before the CCP admits 64 TAM tragedy.
>
> http://www.computermuseum.li/Testpage/Evolution-of-Vacuum-Tubes.htm
>
> "The vacuum tube was the heart of many electronic devices, including
> computers, until the late 1950's..."
Yeah. Eniac was made up of vacuum tubes. A whole roomful of them.
It was also believed that once Eniac was found malfunctioning and the
problem was traced to a moth (attracted by all the lights from the
tubes) and hence the term computer bug.
lechergod
Ira showed his wit, i see from her posts. (i believe she is a female.)
women with wit is scarce.
i had met some, but too late !!!!
Jane wrote:
---