I invented the idea of dual core / quad core Computers.
Sanny
I invented/suggested the idea of dual core / quad core Computers.
Seven years back On Sun Oct 13 2002 When the world was not aware of
Dual Core & Quad Core processor technology.
I advised That instead of increasing frequency (Mhz) of Computers to
speedup We should increase the number of processors.
My Idea worked and adopted by AMD & INTEL. and they earned Billions of
Dollars using my idea.
I was never given any credit for my advice. Since these companies
earned Billions with my advice I suggest them to award me something as
my suggestion helped in development of fast Computers.
Here is what I wrote On "Sun Oct 13 2002" to all geeks.
url: http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/chipgeek-feature-revolutionizing-x86-performance-20021010/
<<<<<<<<<=================COPY PASTE START
You will understand my point now. (3:50am EST Sun Oct 13 2002)
Hello friends,
I respect your ideas but what I am saying are words of practicality.
Today you all are talking for faster and efficient computers. I belive
that best computers available todays are Super Computers. They just
use 1000's of simmilar computers to form a large array of computers
which give out tera-flops and some in future like the deep blue will
give peta-flop of computing speed.
So you can see getting a faster machine does not essentially require a
better design reengineering. Since our Pentium – IV are already well
advanced instead of wasting a lot of research energy to increase the
efficiency of our chips by 20% it is better to use simple modules and
focus on the simple modules. If we can increase the speed of a single
transistor just 50% Our whole chip will be 50% faster.
Reseach should now be diverted to parallel processing and nano scale
transister development instead of wasting money in already advanced
circuit design which is a result of 30 years of experience.
And since todays circuits are a result of 100's of past research it
would be very difficult to know whether a change in small design may
lead to unreliability of the system. Today the systems are more prone
to hackers. And developing non standard chips will raise questions
about the security and reliability of chips.
Regards
Sanjay
- by softtanks
<<<<<<<<<=================COPY PASTE END
Since my idea was implemented by Biggest chip making companies and
they made Billion of Dollars with my idea they should award me some
compensation for my idea.
If they award me $25 million I will suggest them more ideas in future.
If AMD / INTEL want my consulting they should pay me $25 million for
my succesful ideas and I will tell them how to earn Billions.
Lets see if the Big companies listen my pleadge or not.
Bye
Sanny
Uncle Al
>
> Friends,
>
> I invented/suggested the idea of dual core / quad core Computers.
<http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/248855-28-native-core>
<http://www.legitreviews.com/article/521/1/>
<http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/42125/135/>
16-core for 2011
You "invented" the limp pasta buggy whip. Development of juvenile
intelligence requires repeated ingestion of grilled ground beef
patties.
idiot
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm
Michael Moroney
>Friends,
>I invented/suggested the idea of dual core / quad core Computers.
>Seven years back On Sun Oct 13 2002 When the world was not aware of
>Dual Core & Quad Core processor technology.
>I advised That instead of increasing frequency (Mhz) of Computers to
>speedup We should increase the number of processors.
Idiot. I was working on symmetric multiprocessing (SMP) systems
which had multiple processors running a single instance of an operating
system in the 1980's. They probably existed before then.
Wikipedia states the first duo core processor chip was the POWER4,
released in 2001.
Taylor Kingston
> Friends,
>
> I invented/suggested the idea of dual core / quad core Computers.
>
> Seven years back On Sun Oct 13 2002 When the world was not aware of
> Dual Core & Quad Core processor technology.
>
> I advised That instead of increasing frequency (Mhz) of Computers to
> speedup We should increase the number of processors.
>
> My Idea worked and adopted by AMD & INTEL. and they earned Billions of
> Dollars using my idea.
>
> I was never given any credit for my advice. Since these companies
> earned Billions with my advice I suggest them to award me something as
> my suggestion helped in development of fast Computers.
>
> Here is what I wrote On "Sun Oct 13 2002" to all geeks.
>
Sanny, I sympathize. I invented the wheel. I set the royalty for
this mercifully low, a mere thousandth of a cent per wheel, but has
anybody paid me? Nooooo!
hari....@indero.com
of 40 years ago were using multiple processing chips. I don't recall
the number, but there were scores of them in one unit acting as one
which led to the development of threading in software.
BobR
You need to go back just a bit farther to the Control Data computers
of the mid 60's but you did get the name correct, it was Seymor Cray
and he was one of the founders of Control Data that developed them.
BobR
> Friends,
>
> I invented/suggested the idea of dual core / quad core Computers.
>
> Seven years back On Sun Oct 13 2002 When the world was not aware of
> Dual Core & Quad Core processor technology.
>
> I advised That instead of increasing frequency (Mhz) of Computers to
> speedup We should increase the number of processors.
>
> My Idea worked and adopted by AMD & INTEL. and they earned Billions of
> Dollars using my idea.
>
> I was never given any credit for my advice. Since these companies
> earned Billions with my advice I suggest them to award me something as
> my suggestion helped in development of fast Computers.
>
> Here is what I wrote On "Sun Oct 13 2002" to all geeks.
>
Don't hold your breath, your idea wasn't new and they don't owe you a
thing.
Androcles
"Taylor Kingston" <taylor....@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:09d7dfdc-55a3-4758...@z4g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
===========================================
Yep, I understand. I invented the dagger by making a sword
shorter and easier to carry and I didn't get a penny. Then I made
it sharper so that I could shave with it. Again, not one red cent
was I paid.
I wonder if Sanny has ever heard of a math coprocessor being
combined with Intel's 80486 to become the Pentium.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coprocessor
Coprocessors for floating-point arithmetic became common in desktop
computers throughout the 1980s and into the early 1990s. Early 8-bit and
16-bit processors used software to carry out floating-point arithmetic
operations (though some modern processors on unusual architectures still
employ this technique). Where a hardware math co-processor was supported by
the computer hardware and software, floating-point calculations could be
carried out many times faster. Math co-processors were popular purchases for
users of computer-aided design (CAD) software and scientific and engineering
calculations.
Another form of co-processor that became common during this era were the
simple Video Display coprocessors, as used in the Atari 8-bit family, the
Texas Instruments TI-99/4A and MSX home-computers, which were called "Video
Display Controllers". The graphics processor chip in the Commodore Amiga
series was known as the "Copper".
Androcles
"BobR" <re...@r-a-reed-assoc.com> wrote in message
news:e6b48060-6600-4240...@f20g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
=================================================
The whole issue of multi-tasking versus parallel processing is still wide
open. For a general purpose computer multi-tasking wins, but when
a system has a dedicated task, parallel processing has the speed and
the advantage.
John Stafford
<7e0e7180-ebc2-4e12...@13g2000prl.googlegroups.com>,
Sanny <softt...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Friends,
>
> I invented/suggested the idea of dual core / quad core Computers.
>
> Seven years back On Sun Oct 13 2002 When the world was not aware of
> Dual Core & Quad Core processor technology.
Sorry, but even I was using multiple processors in 1986.
John Stafford
hari....@indero.com wrote:
Early XMP used 16 processors and 255 RAM modules.
Cwatters
"Sanny" <softt...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7e0e7180-ebc2-4e12...@13g2000prl.googlegroups.com...
Friends,
>
>I invented/suggested the idea of dual core / quad core Computers.
>
>Seven years back On Sun Oct 13 2002 When the world was not aware of
>Dual Core & Quad Core processor technology.
1983. The transputer was the first general purpose microprocessor designed
specifically to be used in parallel computing systems...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transputer
Paul Cardinale
wrote:
> "Taylor Kingston" <taylor.kings...@comcast.net> wrote in message
Actually, the 80486 came in two versions: the SX without a built-in
math co-processor, and the DX with one.
Paul Cardinale
P. Rajah
> Friends,
>
> I invented/suggested the idea of dual core / quad core Computers.
>
> Seven years back On Sun Oct 13 2002 When the world was not aware of
> Dual Core & Quad Core processor technology.
Peter Hill
In the 80's many systems would have more than one CPU, even if one was
just to drive the built in terminal. A CNC machine tool I used had 3,
one for user interface, one for program store and control and the last
for motion control. BBC Micro and Master could be had with
co-processors including the Acorn ARM. The Apple II could be fitted
with the Microsoft CPM card. The DEC Rainbow was fitted with Z80 and
8088.
Before that Mainframe's had clusters of mini computers to serve data
to them.
The idea of putting more than one core on a chip is just the logical
result of applying the idea of putting more than one transistor on a
piece of silicon to make an IC.
--
Peter Hill
Spamtrap reply domain as per NNTP-Posting-Host in header
Can of worms - what every fisherman wants.
Can of worms - what every PC owner gets!
tadchem
>
> I invented/suggested the idea of dual core / quad core Computers.
No, you "reinvented" something.
There is no prize for coming in second.
Richmond, VA (where I currently live) has a street called "Monument
Avenue" which features a host of statues to heroes of the Confederacy.
Northerners call this display the world's largest collection of second-
place trophies.
Your claims to the invention of dual processors are as dead as the
Confederacy.
Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA
Benj
>
> I invented/suggested the idea of dual core / quad core Computers.
> Lets see if the Big companies listen my pleadge or not.
Thanks for the Laughs, "Sanny". And I "invented" the burger with two
patties instead of one ugly thick one. Now all the burgher companies
are making millions on their double stackers while I get nothing for
my "idea". Oh, wait, that would be because I'm a total idiot, just as
you are.
Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)
> speedup We should increase the number of processors.
Sanny, run for the post of the US Vice-president (:-),
say hello to Gore, and call yourself Gore-Sanny.
Also, stick to GetClub. One grand idea is
more than enough.
Wlod
_...@jeff_relf.seattle.invalid
I invented water, snow·capped mountains and sunshine.
BobR
> I invented water, snow·capped mountains and sunshine.
You are lying, I invented sunshine and I am old enough to prove it.
Dr. Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF
Does it still shine out of your arse?
--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ipvdBnU8F8
- KRudd at his finest.
"The Labour Party is corrupt beyond redemption!"
- Labour hasbeen Mark Latham in a moment of honest clarity.
"This is the recession we had to have!"
- Paul Keating explaining why he gave Australia another Labour recession.
"Silly old bugger!"
- Well known ACTU pisspot and sometime Labour prime minister Bob Hawke
responding to a pensioner who dared ask for more.
"By 1990, no child will live in poverty"
- Bob Hawke again, desperate to win another election.
"A billion trees ..."
- Borke, pissed as a newt again.
"Well may we say 'God save the Queen' because nothing will save the governor
general!"
- Egotistical shithead and pompous fuckwit E.G. Whitlam whining about his
appointee for Governor General John Kerr.
"SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU DUMB CUNT!"
- FlangesBum on learning the truth about Labour's economic capabilities.
"I don't care what you fuckers think!"
- KRudd the KRude at his finest again.
"We'll just change it all when we get in."
- Garrett the carrott
Sanny
said that parallel processing technology was invented by me.
You can see I gave examples of parallel computers 7 years back. I gave
example of Blue Gene parallel super computer.
I gave the idea that small PCs should also use parallel computers and
that will reduce the cost of increasing computer speed.
Before I talked about it Dual Core/ Quad Core computers were not
presennt.
I said that implementing multi-core processors will speedup comman
CPUs without much research burden.
Before that the chip makers were investing heavily in increasing Mhz/
Ghz of computers.
I suggested them to use multiple processors to speedup computers.
They did it and they earned alots of Billion $$$.
The people who are saying Parallel processors were already present. I
do not deny that but main stream Dual Core and Quad Core processors
were not made before I suggested the idea. My idea was to implement
parallel processing in ordinary CPUs to speed them up.
After my suggestions Intel / Amd created Dual Core processors. So they
should reward me on giving a great idea of Dual Core and Quad core
processors.
Bye
Sanny
Benj
> The people who are saying Parallel processors were already present. I
> do not deny that but main stream Dual Core and Quad Core processors
> were not made before I suggested the idea. My idea was to implement
> parallel processing in ordinary CPUs to speed them up.
And I suggested using two Z80s before you were born. There is a
computer box I built in my basement that has the two places in it fo
them. WOW, was that ever HARD to think up!
> After my suggestions Intel / Amd created Dual Core processors. So they
> should reward me on giving a great idea of Dual Core and Quad core
> processors.
And of course you can provide us with the copies of your
communications to Intel proving that you sent the information to them
and not the other way round. And don't forget to give us references to
your current copyright on the terms "Dual Core" and "Quad Core".
You really do enjoy entertaining the entire world by show us what a
buffoon you are.
Sanny
> On Oct 28, 12:17 am, Sanny <softtank...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The people who are saying Parallel processors were already present. I
> > do not deny that but main stream Dual Core and Quad Core processors
> > were not made before I suggested the idea. My idea was to implement
> > parallel processing in ordinary CPUs to speed them up.
>
> And I suggested using two Z80s before you were born. There is a
> computer box I built in my basement that has the two places in it fo
> them. WOW, was that ever HARD to think up!
If you have done something great that does not mean others too cant do
it.
If you have done something great 50 years back then tell the world. No
one stopping you from that.
> > After my suggestions Intel / Amd created Dual Core processors. So they
> > should reward me on giving a great idea of Dual Core and Quad core
> > processors.
>
> And of course you can provide us with the copies of your
> communications to Intel proving that you sent the information to them
> and not the other way round. And don't forget to give us references to
> your current copyright on the terms "Dual Core" and "Quad Core".
I didnt contacted any of the companies. I gave my idea to everyone who
wishes to take my idea.
Did Newton communicated his laws of motions to all companies in the
world?
I gave my idea to all chip makers for them to speed up the CPUs
without high research costs.
> You really do enjoy entertaining the entire world by show us what a
> buffoon you are.
Ofcourse I am entertaining myself. I am happy that my ideas are being
used to develop faster Chips. I will keep suggesting new technologies
to the world So that We get more faster next generations Chips.
Bye
Sanny
Shrikeback
> Friends,
>
> I invented/suggested the idea of dual core / quad core Computers.
All your base are belong to us.
Let us set up the bomb.
Androcles
"Paul Cardinale" <pcard...@volcanomail.com> wrote in message
news:a0b1c299-ae23-444d...@k17g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
Paul Cardinale
==========================================
Sheesh, you are thick, Cardinale.
SX and DX were single and double what?
Hint: The maximum linear address space were limited simply because internal
registers were only 16 bits wide on '286s. Programming over 64 KB boundaries
involved adjusting segment registers and were therefore fairly awkward (and
remained so until the 80386).
The 32-bit flat memory model of the 386 would arguably be the most important
feature change for the x86 processor family
In 1988, Intel introduced the i386SX, a low cost version of the 80386 with a
16-bit data bus. The CPU remained fully 32-bit internally, but the 16-bit
bus was intended to simplify circuit board layout and reduce total cost.
So an SX was a crippled DX.
The i387 math coprocessor was not ready in time for the introduction of the
80386, and so many of the early 80386 motherboards instead provided a socket
and hardware logic to make use of an 80287.
Errol
>
> I gave my idea to all chip makers for them to speed up the CPUs
> without high research costs.
>
You never gave any actual ideas. You flapped your gums generically
about parallel computers and reducing transistor speed.
You never suggested whether they should be tightly or loosely coupled,
share cache, share memory, implement networking on a chip,
multithreading operating systems etc. Now you (jokingly I hope)
suggest you shuld be paid.
Try claiming that ou invented the cheeseburger. You might have more
success.
jmfbahciv
> On Oct 28, 12:17 am, Sanny <softtank...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The people who are saying Parallel processors were already present. I
>> do not deny that but main stream Dual Core and Quad Core processors
>> were not made before I suggested the idea. My idea was to implement
>> parallel processing in ordinary CPUs to speed them up.
>
> And I suggested using two Z80s before you were born.
ah, you're a young whippersnapper :-)). I was part of the load
testing of our first dual-processor implementation in 1972.
<snip>
/BAH
jmfbahciv
> On Oct 28, 9:59 am, Benj <bjac...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
>> On Oct 28, 12:17 am, Sanny <softtank...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The people who are saying Parallel processors were already present. I
>>> do not deny that but main stream Dual Core and Quad Core processors
>>> were not made before I suggested the idea. My idea was to implement
>>> parallel processing in ordinary CPUs to speed them up.
>> And I suggested using two Z80s before you were born. There is a
>> computer box I built in my basement that has the two places in it fo
>> them. WOW, was that ever HARD to think up!
>
> If you have done something great that does not mean others too cant do
> it.
>
> If you have done something great 50 years back then tell the world. No
> one stopping you from that.
Not only did we tell the world, we sold it and people bought it 40 years
ago.
>
>>> After my suggestions Intel / Amd created Dual Core processors. So they
>>> should reward me on giving a great idea of Dual Core and Quad core
>>> processors.
>> And of course you can provide us with the copies of your
>> communications to Intel proving that you sent the information to them
>> and not the other way round. And don't forget to give us references to
>> your current copyright on the terms "Dual Core" and "Quad Core".
>
> I didnt contacted any of the companies. I gave my idea to everyone who
> wishes to take my idea.
>
> Did Newton communicated his laws of motions to all companies in the
> world?
>
> I gave my idea to all chip makers for them to speed up the CPUs
> without high research costs.
You were too late. The computer biz is simply repeating a
hardware development cycle. In the aulden days, the term
core was used for memory, not CPUs.
>
>> You really do enjoy entertaining the entire world by show us what a
>> buffoon you are.
>
> Ofcourse I am entertaining myself. I am happy that my ideas are being
> used to develop faster Chips. I will keep suggesting new technologies
> to the world So that We get more faster next generations Chips.
Sigh! Putting more CPUs in a system to "speed up" processing has
more to do with software implementations than hardware implementations.
If the OS isn't coded correctly, a multi-core system can run slower
than a single CPU system. Old measurements had a 2 processor system
doing .8 of the work a single processor could.
/BAH
jmfbahciv
> On Oct 28, 7:10 am, Sanny <softtank...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I gave my idea to all chip makers for them to speed up the CPUs
>> without high research costs.
>>
>
> You never gave any actual ideas. You flapped your gums generically
> about parallel computers and reducing transistor speed.
>
> You never suggested whether they should be tightly or loosely coupled,
> share cache, share memory, implement networking on a chip,
> multithreading operating systems etc. Now you (jokingly I hope)
> suggest you shuld be paid.
<grin> Do you really think he knows what those terms mean?
/BAH
jmfbahciv
> Those who are saying parallel computers were already present. I never
> said that parallel processing technology was invented by me.
>
> You can see I gave examples of parallel computers 7 years back. I gave
> example of Blue Gene parallel super computer.
>
> I gave the idea that small PCs should also use parallel computers and
> that will reduce the cost of increasing computer speed.
>
> Before I talked about it Dual Core/ Quad Core computers were not
> presennt.
>
> I said that implementing multi-core processors will speedup comman
> CPUs without much research burden.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
>
> Before that the chip makers were investing heavily in increasing Mhz/
> Ghz of computers.
>
> I suggested them to use multiple processors to speedup computers.
Won't happen unless the OS software changes drastically.
>
> They did it and they earned alots of Billion $$$.
>
> The people who are saying Parallel processors were already present. I
> do not deny that but main stream Dual Core and Quad Core processors
> were not made before I suggested the idea.
Wrong. I saw my first one in 1972. I saw a five-cpu system in
1982. There were lots of dual processor systems running in the
70s.
>My idea was to implement
> parallel processing in ordinary CPUs to speed them up.
>
Can't happen unless you do the software to take advantage of
it.
> After my suggestions Intel / Amd created Dual Core processors. So they
> should reward me on giving a great idea of Dual Core and Quad core
> processors.
It wasn't your idea. One of our OS support guys became a physicist
and started working for a lab. He took JMF's and TW's ideas
and created a 1500?-CPU system...or perhaps that was his spec.
Haven't heard from him in a long time.
/BAH
jmfbahciv
> Sanny <softt...@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>> Friends,
>
>> I invented/suggested the idea of dual core / quad core Computers.
>
>> Seven years back On Sun Oct 13 2002 When the world was not aware of
>> Dual Core & Quad Core processor technology.
>
>> I advised That instead of increasing frequency (Mhz) of Computers to
>> speedup We should increase the number of processors.
>
> which had multiple processors running a single instance of an operating
> system in the 1980's. They probably existed before then.
Which one?
Note that Sanny isn't talking about SMP. He's still thinking
inside the box.
>
> Wikipedia states the first duo core processor chip was the POWER4,
> released in 2001.
/BAH
zzbu...@netscape.net
Well, that's also why the people who understand network virus
invented Flash Memory, Not-Magentic Disk Technolgy, Blue Ray,
mp3, mpeg, Distributed Processing Software, Flat Screen Debugging
Technolgy,
Digital Books, Reverse Compilers, HDTV, Homebroad, Multiplexed
Fiber Optics,
Cyber Batteries, USB, Atomic Clock Wristwatches, Lights,
Data Fusion, Digital Terrain Mapping, CD+rw, DVD-rom,
Post Lisp Editors, PGP, Desktop Publishing, All-In-One Printers,
USB,
4D Holographics, On-Line Publishing, Post GE Breakpoints,
Compact Flourescent Lighting, Microwave Cooling, Thermo-Electric
Cooling,
and Laser-Guided Phasors. And just for good mearure also
invented GPS, Self-Assembling Robots, UAVs, AAVs, Drones,
On-Line Banking, External Mini Computer Disks, Post ACME
Screwthread Interrupt Handlers,
Bi-Optical Computers, Phalanx, non MGM Self-Replicating Machines,
Post GM nomics, Post Watt Turbine Engines, Post TI Calcultors,
Extended Precision,
Post Motorola Texting and the 21st Century.
>
>
>
> >> You really do enjoy entertaining the entire world by show us what a
> >> buffoon you are.
>
> > Ofcourse I am entertaining myself. I am happy that my ideas are being
> > used to develop faster Chips. I will keep suggesting new technologies
> > to the world So that We get more faster next generations Chips.
>
> Sigh! Putting more CPUs in a system to "speed up" processing has
> more to do with software implementations than hardware implementations.
> If the OS isn't coded correctly, a multi-core system can run slower
> than a single CPU system. Old measurements had a 2 processor system
> doing .8 of the work a single processor could.
>
> /BAH- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Me
(quoted original post below)
It is really sad when claims like below get plastered all over the
internet.
"Sanny" _should_ have been smart enough to find out how patenting works
and what the patent background was in this area: "dual core, quad core
Computers," etc.
You cannot be working for a company (which owns your IP) or make a casual
suggestion and expect them to reward you with money just because YOU think
it is a nice idea and you think the company will be "nice" about this. It
is also a big mistake to think YOU are the only inventor of some idea that
benefits computing.
Then, if you do have an original idea, then you have to get your patent
claims in, and awarded. Then, if you have infringement, then you have to
go through the courts (or at least notify an infringer that they may be
infringing and you offer a license in exchange for a licensing fee and/or
royalty) and the only people who can afford this are the people with money
(either rich or corporations with deep pockets or legal firms which fund
patent litigation).
It is pretty clear from the other followup responses that "Sanny's" idea
was, technically, neither very unique nor very new. And, in "Sanny's"
first post, he certainly did not include any patent search results to cite
for any relevant prior art or otherwise build a case for his claim that
his "idea" really was novel and new. It is a fact that when you submit an
invention for patent protection that you do need to cite relevant prior art
and I know this because I have done this and have two patents to my name
(obtained in mid 1980s).
Perhaps what any/all of you have a better right to is "copyright" which US
law grants to authors without any limitation, fees, or review process. You
as author get instant copyright as soon as you write something. Beyond
that, inventions need patenting and its a very different universe. Even if
your idea is new, novel and it gets out into the public, its lost except
to the historians.
----------------------------
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009, Sanny wrote:
> Friends,
>
> I invented/suggested the idea of dual core / quad core Computers.
>
> Seven years back On Sun Oct 13 2002 When the world was not aware of
> Dual Core & Quad Core processor technology.
>
> I advised That instead of increasing frequency (Mhz) of Computers to
> speedup We should increase the number of processors.
>
> My Idea worked and adopted by AMD & INTEL. and they earned Billions of
> Dollars using my idea.
>
> I was never given any credit for my advice. Since these companies
> earned Billions with my advice I suggest them to award me something as
> my suggestion helped in development of fast Computers.
>
> Here is what I wrote On "Sun Oct 13 2002" to all geeks.
>
> url: http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/chipgeek-feature-revolutionizing-x86-performance-20021010/
Taylor Kingston
Sanny, we're all used to you lying about your silly chess program
GetClub. Now you're lying about a matter of historical fact where the
relevant records can easily be checked by informed people. And you
post this lie to groups frequented by just such people.
You make a fool of yourself in a way that's not even remotely
clever. You may as well walk into a synagogue wearing an SS uniform
and eating pork ribs and proclaim that you are an Orthodox Jew. Or
shove a feather duster up your ass and call yourself a peacock. You
look that silly.
On Oct 27, 1:11 pm, Sanny <softtank...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Friends,
>
> I invented/suggested the idea of dual core / quad core Computers.
>
> Seven years back On Sun Oct 13 2002 When the world was not aware of
> Dual Core & Quad Core processor technology.
>
> I advised That instead of increasing frequency (Mhz) of Computers to
> speedup We should increase the number of processors.
>
> My Idea worked and adopted by AMD & INTEL. and they earned Billions of
> Dollars using my idea.
>
> I was never given any credit for my advice. Since these companies
> earned Billions with my advice I suggest them to award me something as
> my suggestion helped in development of fast Computers.
>
> Here is what I wrote On "Sun Oct 13 2002" to all geeks.
>
> url:http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/chipgeek-feature-revolutionizing-x...
Androcles
Just laugh, the only thing sad about it is the range of
newsgroups the dingbat chose to post to.
"Me" <arth...@mv.com> wrote in message
news:Pine.BSF.4.61.09...@osmium.mv.net...
Errol
Until today I thought he was a spambot. hehe! but a spambot would
never have made those claims
ZerkonXXXX
> Seven years back On Sun Oct 13 2002 When the world was not aware of Dual
> Core & Quad Core processor technology.
Revisit: Parallel processing 20 years back on the Amiga. Dual? Quad? Baby
toys.
Uncle Al
>
> Those who are saying parallel computers were already present.
Hey fucking stooopid - Industrial Revolution, floor of Jacquard looms,
1801
Hey fucking stooopid - housewives, Richard Feynman, Manhattan Project
Hey fucking stooopid - Bletchley Park, Colossus
Hey fucking stooopid - housewives, beam pipe fabrication, SLAC
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm
hari....@indero.com
knowledge it is often the case that we reinvent the wheel without
knowing what has gone before.
This has happened to me again and again. There are problems in common
and a history in common and the deductions that often develope are in
common and often independently derived.
Michael Moroney
>Those who are saying parallel computers were already present. I never
>said that parallel processing technology was invented by me.
>You can see I gave examples of parallel computers 7 years back. I gave
>example of Blue Gene parallel super computer.
>I gave the idea that small PCs should also use parallel computers and
>that will reduce the cost of increasing computer speed.
>Before I talked about it Dual Core/ Quad Core computers were not
>presennt.
But they were. As I and others mentioned, the POWER4 chip was already
a dual core processor that you could buy at the time you claimed to have
come up with your so-called invention.
Given the lead time from concept to a saleable CPU product, I'm sure Intel
engineers were busy, with their development of multi-core processors well
under way at the time of your so-called invention. And, if Intel stole the
idea, they stole it from IBM (POWER4), not you.
>I said that implementing multi-core processors will speedup comman
>CPUs without much research burden.
A concept already well understood.
>I suggested them to use multiple processors to speedup computers.
A concept decades old at the time. The best you can do is claim to come
up with multiprocessors on a single chip, but as I said, the POWER4 was
already out. Also, I see no mention of all the issues involved with
multiprocessing esp. on a single chip, cache consistency, interprocessor
communication, etc. etc.
Mike Murray
<taylor....@comcast.net> wrote:
>shove a feather duster up your ass and call yourself a peacock. You
>look that silly.
But... it's almost Halloween ?
Michael Moroney
>Michael Moroney wrote:
>>
>> Idiot. I was working on symmetric multiprocessing (SMP) systems
>> which had multiple processors running a single instance of an operating
>> system in the 1980's. They probably existed before then.
>Which one?
VAX 6200 and followon systems running VMS V6, which could have up to 6
processors in the late 80s. (They also had shared-everything clustering
where multiple computers could share a common environment, invented in
1984, and not quite matched even now)
>Note that Sanny isn't talking about SMP. He's still thinking
>inside the box.
Probably doesn't even know what it means.
Paul Cardinale
wrote:
> "Paul Cardinale" <pcardin...@volcanomail.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
The 80386 is not the 80486 and the suffix designations do not mean the
same thing.
With the 386, the SX & DX suffixes did indeed designate a 16-bit vs 32-
bit bus;
however with the 486, the SX & DX suffixes designated whether or not a
math coprocessor was built in.
Paul Cardinale
Androcles
Paul Cardinale
-----------------------------------
Hmm... I think you are right.
I didn't own a 486, I went from 386DX + 387 to Pentium,
which included faulty floating point.
http://www.chillarege.com/fastabstracts/ftcs98/396.html
http://www.phenix.bnl.gov/WWW/lists/phenix-comp-l/msg00580.html
I recall the problem was picked up by the popular press,
although I don't recall the specifics.
That was when Microsoft made a huge leap from version 3.0 to
version 3.1 in '93, the foundation for Win 95.
My 386DX would manage 3.1 but needed another 3 Mbyte of RAM
to do anything, as new software was written to use all the available
RAM.
Me
I am glad you noticed this. Even in history, lots of people have gotten
the credit for inventing/discovering something and in fact if you dig hard
enough you will often find that there are earlier workers.
I think, recently, there were historical works that showed that Darwin
really was preceeded, significantly, by Wallace in the notions of
biological evolution.
I recall seeing a series of books on the inventor of the telephone. It was
not Bell (an American) but Swan (a German). I did not read the books, but
someone did a large amount of research. There may be other people here who
know more about this.
Even if you get a patent on something, someone else can come up with a
case that invalidates your patent. Poof...your "baby" becomes dust.
Androcles
Right in principle, wrong in fact.
Swan (an Englishman) sold out his patent rights to Edison for the light
bulb.
Bell (a Scot) stole his idea from an American, Elisha Gray.
On 14 February 1876, Elisha Gray filed a patent caveat for a telephone
on the very same day in 1876 as did Bell's lawyer. The water transmitter
described in Gray's caveat was strikingly similar to the experimental
telephone transmitter tested by Bell on March 10, 1876, a fact which
raised questions about whether Bell (who knew of Gray) was inspired
by Gray's design, even to a exact copy of a man using it in a sketch
gray had drawn and Bell copied. Bribery made Bell's patent the earlier.
Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)
>
>
> I gave the idea that small PCs should also
I was paid for doing so back in 1985.
The idea, stated in such a generality,
was not new even then. It's as old as
computers.
Wlod
jmfbahciv
/BAH
jmfbahciv
sure. Now reread the post. He wanted to get paid for posting an
idea that was already getting done and had existed for decades.
That's why I'm stomping the post.
/BAH
jmfbahciv
> jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> writes:
>
>> Michael Moroney wrote:
>>> Idiot. I was working on symmetric multiprocessing (SMP) systems
>>> which had multiple processors running a single instance of an operating
>>> system in the 1980's. They probably existed before then.
>
>> Which one?
>
> VAX 6200 and followon systems running VMS V6, which could have up to 6
> processors in the late 80s.
ah, you're a youngster :-).
> (They also had shared-everything clustering
> where multiple computers could share a common environment, invented in
> 1984, and not quite matched even now)
Actually implemented by TOPS-20 before VMS. TOPS-10 did the SMP
implementation first, after running master/slave for ~10 years.
Google TOPS-10 V7.01. You can even find the listings and sources
which did the SMP work. filename is CPNSER.MAC. The JMF in
my username is the guy who did CPU pieces of that implementation.
>
>> Note that Sanny isn't talking about SMP. He's still thinking
>> inside the box.
>
> Probably doesn't even know what it means.
Well, that, too.
/BAH
jmfbahciv
> "Paul Cardinale" <pcard...@volcanomail.com> wrote in message
> news:a26213db-5f55-47e8...@r24g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
<snip>
> The 80386 is not the 80486 and the suffix designations do not mean the
> same thing.
> With the 386, the SX & DX suffixes did indeed designate a 16-bit vs 32-
> bit bus;
> however with the 486, the SX & DX suffixes designated whether or not a
> math coprocessor was built in.
>
> Paul Cardinale
> -----------------------------------
> Hmm... I think you are right.
> I didn't own a 486, I went from 386DX + 387 to Pentium,
> which included faulty floating point.
<snip>
Yup. He is about the math coprocessor. I have one but didn't
get around to playing with it.
/BAH
/BAH
Errol
> Right in principle, wrong in fact.
> Bell (a Scot) stole his idea from an American, Elisha Gray.
Wrong in principle, wrong in fact
> On 14 February 1876, Elisha Gray filed a patent caveat for a telephone
> on the very same day in 1876 as did Bell's lawyer. The water transmitter
> described in Gray's caveat was strikingly similar to the experimental
> telephone transmitter tested by Bell on March 10, 1876, a fact which
> raised questions about whether Bell (who knew of Gray) was inspired
> by Gray's design, even to a exact copy of a man using it in a sketch
> gray had drawn and Bell copied. Bribery made Bell's patent the earlier.-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elisha_Gray_and_Alexander_Bell_telephone_controversy
Although Bell was accused, and is still accused, of stealing the
telephone from Gray,
Bell tested Gray's water transmitter design only after Bell's patent
was granted and only as a proof of concept scientific experiment to
prove to his own satisfaction that intelligible "articulate
speech" (Bell's words) could be electrically transmitted.
After March 1876, Bell focused on improving the electromagnetic
telephone and never used Gray's liquid transmitter in public
demonstrations or commercial use
Sanny
wrote:
> Sanny, we're all used to you lying about your silly chess program
> GetClub. Now you're lying about a matter of historical fact where the
> relevant records can easily be checked by informed people. And you
> post this lie to groups frequented by just such people.
I do not read historical books before giving a new idea. Else writing
one sentence will take me a month time. I just think 5 sec before
writing a sentence.
I am not dumb and in future I am going to design many things even
better than GetClub Chess, GetClub Boxing, GetClub Dogs & Fishes Game.
I am sure one day my inventions will give me a lots of fame and
prosperity.
I gave an idea 7 years back when Intel/ AMD were not having any dual
core/ quad core processors.
The companies were crying what they should do to improve efficiency of
procesors. They were claiming moores law will stop. You can see old
articles where the Chip companies were worried on how to improve
computer speed. As it was very difficult to go beyond 3.0 Ghz barrier.
Even now they have not able to cross the 3-5 Ghz barrier.
I being a good person gave my valuable suggestion to combine more
processors instead of investing heavily on increasing Ghz/ Mhz which
made computers power hungry.
If the Intel/ AMD already knew about dual core / quad core processors.
Why didnt they implement it in 8086/ 286/ 386/ Pentium 100 processors?
They could have used 100 core processor back in 1990s?
Once a mystry is solved anyone can solve it in seconds.
Next time when Moores Law will be stopped I will ask the companies to
pay me in advance before I give them my suggestions on how to improve
the chips speed.
I am sure within 5 years again the INTEL / AMD will again cry how to
improve the speed of computers. Then I will not give any suggestion
till they pay me $ 25 million.
Bye
Sanny
Benj
> I am not dumb and in future I am going to design many things even
> better than GetClub Chess, GetClub Boxing, GetClub Dogs & Fishes Game.
Wwe sure hope so!
> Next time when Moores Law will be stopped I will ask the companies to
> pay me in advance before I give them my suggestions on how to improve
> the chips speed.
Well, Sanny, this sure disproves statement one about not being dumb.
Bwahahaha!
Hey STOOOPID, giving out "ideas" first and asking for pay after they
are a success sure IS dumb.
When were you born? Yesterday?
> I am sure within 5 years again the INTEL / AMD will again cry how to
> improve the speed of computers. Then I will not give any suggestion
> till they pay me $ 25 million.
Right. Just keep waiting until they call you up! Idiot.
eric gisse
[...]
Such overwhelming arrogance and cluelessness continues to be amusing.
jmfbahciv
Not many people could have used it. Any system with 100 processors
running DOS would have had one CPU doing polling 100% of the time
and 99 processors sitting idle waiting for an interrupt.
>
> Once a mystry is solved anyone can solve it in seconds.
no. It takes ~1000 manweeks to implement, test, fix, field test,
package and ship the software; this assumes that no problems were
found with the hardware handshaking and that the documentation
can be done without impacting the software shipping process and no
old user code stops working.
>
> Next time when Moores Law will be stopped I will ask the companies to
> pay me in advance before I give them my suggestions on how to improve
> the chips speed.
>
> I am sure within 5 years again the INTEL / AMD will again cry how to
> improve the speed of computers. Then I will not give any suggestion
> till they pay me $ 25 million.
Show your cost analysis which made you come up with that $25 million
price tag.
/BAH
None
I am not dumb and in future I am going to design many things even
better than GetClub Chess...Bye...Sanny
That sure won't be hard to do. GetCrap is awful and the plethora of
spam one has to endure.
Buy Sanny
Uncle Al
[snip crap]
> I do not read historical books before giving a new idea.
[snip rest of crap]
idiot
Sam Wormley
Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)
We will have to take your word for this
(and turn away from evidence).
>
> I will not give any suggestion
> till they pay me $ 25 million.
Indeed, Sanny, in 5 years from now
you may stand on a corner with your
hand outstretched, and you will get
a quarter (i.e. $25M) from one of the
first 10 pedestrians passing by.
Indeed, thanks to the socialist (read
anti-human) economic policies, $25M
will be then like 25 cents today.
Wlod
T. Keating
<softt...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Those who are saying parallel computers were already present. I never
>said that parallel processing technology was invented by me.
>
>You can see I gave examples of parallel computers 7 years back. I gave
>example of Blue Gene parallel super computer.
>
>I gave the idea that small PCs should also use parallel computers and
>that will reduce the cost of increasing computer speed.
>
>Before I talked about it Dual Core/ Quad Core computers were not
>presennt.
>
Bzzt... (SMP and multi core is very OLD idea.)
Att's 3b20 was the first unix multiprocessor system.
But AT&T's Unix that ran on it wasn't designed for true fine grain
multi threading. (Same goes for MS-DOS in PC land. ))
Real/ix (Modcomp) was the first true fine grain SMP/real time SVR3
Unix OS (~1979). It was ported to run on i86, m68k, m88K(4 cpus
~1990) tech.
---
Besides numeric coprocessors.. (68881/2 for 68020/30, 80387 for
80386, 80287 for 80286)..
Intel (1994) started making socket 7 Pentium's with SMP
capabilities. I have several working p90-p133 dual processor MB's
from that era. Pentium pro, socket 8(1995), were also dual processor
capable, and I have couple of those dual uP MB's laying about as well.
Some of the AMD's socket 7 K6 CPU's series were supposed to have
multiprocessor support, but I never observed them operating in that
configuration.
---
Your idea wasn't new, people were working on these core issues/ideas
long before you graduated from high school.
zzbu...@netscape.net
Since everything those people do to increase speed is the rather
idiotic single-mined objective
to increase register speed, that's why the engineering integration
people long ago
switched to Fiber Optics Signal and Control, Digital Books, Laser
Disks, USB, Cyber Batteries,
Flat Sceen Debuggers, Holographics Intregration, Reverse Compilers,
Content Addressable Memory,
Spam Blocking, External Memory, Advanced Harddisks, Desktop
Publishing, Network Publishing,
Post Vax Data Entry, mp3, mpeg, Compact Flourescent Lighting, Self-
Replicating Machines,
All-In-One Printers, HDTV, Home Broadband, Weather Satellites, On-
Screen Instrumentation,
neo Solar Energy, Data Fusion, Post GM-nomics, Digital Terrain
Mapping,
Microwave Cooling, Biodiesel, Pv Cell Energy, neo Wind Energy,
Thermo-Electric Cooling,
Post Radio Repair Shops, Post McDonald's USB Code Operations,
Distributed Processing Software,
Post 1960 Cell Phones, Atomic Clock Wristwatches, Light Sticks,
Post C++ Air Force Drafting,
Blue Ray, UAVs, Drones, Phalanx, On-Line Banking, and The 21st
Century.
>
> Bye
> Sanny
Surfer
<softt...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>If the Intel/ AMD already knew about dual core / quad core processors.
>Why didnt they implement it in 8086/ 286/ 386/ Pentium 100 processors?
>They could have used 100 core processor back in 1990s?
>
They probably doubted the willingness of software companies to port
applications to such an architecture.
However, this may be similar to what you have in mind.
http://www.xmos.com/technology/architecture
<Start extract>
The XMOS architecture combines a number of processing cores (called
XCores) each with its own memory and I/O system, on a single chip. The
processing cores are general-purpose in the sense that they can
execute languages such as C; they also have direct support for
concurrent processing (multi-threading), communication and I/O.
A high-performance switch supports communication between the
processors, and inter-chip Links are provided so that systems can
easily be constructed from multiple chips. Any thread can communicate
with any other thread in the system using single-cycle communication
instructions. The system switches can efficiently route short packets
or streamed data.
<End extract>
zzbu...@netscape.net
wrote:
Or since this moron GM answer is always: "It's the ECONOMY,
Stupid!!"
The only answer to that is "It's not the ECONONY MORON,
it's idiot Derivatives Traders.
That's the why the people who undestand science work on
Holographics Intregration, rather than imbecile Turing Machines!!!
That's why the people who understand Chemistry, work on Atomic
Clock Wristwatches,
and Bi-Optical Computers, rather than with AT&T idiots.
That's why the people who understand Quantum Mechanics,
work on HDTV, Blue Ray, Reverse Compilers, Digital Books, GPS,
Digital Terrain Mapping,
Data Fusion, Laser-Guided Phaosrs, UAVS, 21st Century, and
Phalanx rather than with
Relatiity idiots.
Digital Books, Laser
> Disks, USB, Cyber Batteries,
> Flat Sceen Debuggers, Holographics Intregration, Reverse Compilers,
> Content Addressable Memory,
> Spam Blocking, External Memory, Advanced Harddisks, Desktop
> Publishing, Network Publishing,
> Post Vax Data Entry, mp3, mpeg, Compact Flourescent Lighting, Self-
> Replicating Machines,
> All-In-One Printers, HDTV, Home Broadband, Weather Satellites, On-
> Screen Instrumentation,
> neo Solar Energy, Data Fusion, Post GM-nomics, Digital Terrain
> Mapping,
> Microwave Cooling, Biodiesel, Pv Cell Energy, neo Wind Energy,
> Thermo-Electric Cooling,
> Post Radio Repair Shops, Post McDonald's USB Code Operations,
> Distributed Processing Software,
> Post 1960 Cell Phones, Atomic Clock Wristwatches, Light Sticks,
> Post C++ Air Force Drafting,
> Blue Ray, UAVs, Drones, Phalanx, On-Line Banking, and The 21st
> Century.
>
>
>
>
>
> > Bye
> > Sanny- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Tom Potter
<_@Jeff_Relf.Seattle.inValid> wrote in message
news:_@Jeff_Relf.Seattle.2009_Oct27.7.34pm.Uu...
>
> I invented water, snow·capped mountains and sunshine.
Jeff's post reminded me of an old joke.
A guy named Joshua was hauled into court
by the BATF for operating a still.
The judge teased him by saying:
"Are you the Joshua that made the sun stand still?"
and the guy replied:
"No, I'm the Joshua that made the moon shine."
--
Tom Potter
http://tdp1001.spaces.live.com
http://www.tompotter.us/misc.html
http://webspace.webring.com/people/st/tdp1001
http://notsocrazyideas.blogspot.com
http://tdp1001.wiki.zoho.com
-----------------------------------------------
_...@jeff_relf.seattle.invalid
Sam Wormley and Uncle Al were in a bar talking when Sam asked Al:
“ You ever notice how, after sex,
your eyes burnand you get all teary-eyed ? ”.
Al replies, “ Yeah, all the time. ”.
Sam askes, “ I wonder why that is ? ”.
Al replies, “ I think it's the pepper spray. ”.
Huang
their car breaks down. Each of them agrees to take one item as they
have to continue through the desert on foot.
Einstein and Uncle Al ask Wormley what he is going to take.
He said, "the water in case I get thirsty."
They said that's cool.
Wormley and Uncle Al ask Einstein what he is going to take.
He said, "the food in case I get hungry."
They said that's cool.
Einstein and Wormley ask Uncle Al what he is going to take.
He said, "the car door in case I get hot all I have to do is roll down
the window."
Michael Moroney
>Michael Moroney wrote:
>> jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> writes:
>>
>>> Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>> Idiot. I was working on symmetric multiprocessing (SMP) systems
>>>> which had multiple processors running a single instance of an operating
>>>> system in the 1980's. They probably existed before then.
>>
>>> Which one?
>>
>> VAX 6200 and followon systems running VMS V6, which could have up to 6
>> processors in the late 80s.
>ah, you're a youngster :-).
>> (They also had shared-everything clustering
>> where multiple computers could share a common environment, invented in
>> 1984, and not quite matched even now)
>Actually implemented by TOPS-20 before VMS. TOPS-10 did the SMP
>implementation first, after running master/slave for ~10 years.
>Google TOPS-10 V7.01. You can even find the listings and sources
>which did the SMP work. filename is CPNSER.MAC. The JMF in
>my username is the guy who did CPU pieces of that implementation.
Cool.
I worked for Digital for a while, but I never got involved with any of
the TOPS stuff. I do know they had lots of cool features, some of which
made it into VMS, some which didn't.
Tom Potter
<_@Jeff_Relf.Seattle.inValid> wrote in message
news:_@Jeff_Relf.Seattle.2009_Nov3.8.22pm.C0...
>
> Sam Wormley and Uncle Al were in a bar talking when Sam asked Al:
> your eyes burnand you get all teary-eyed ? �?�.
>
> Al replies, �?o Yeah, all the time. �?�.
>
> Sam askes, �?o I wonder why that is ? �?�.
>
> Al replies, �?o I think it's the pepper spray. �?�.
Very funny!!
_...@jeff_relf.seattle.invalid
I'm glad you liked my "pepper spray" joke Tom, but
I felt bad about making Sam Wormley look so evil... he isn't evil.
Sci.Physics is a "dive bar" of sorts.
―――― To Whom it May Concern ―――――――
Outlook Express 6 isn't smart enough to properly >quote lines
from Google·Groups posts.
Please download Windows Live Mail ( a.k.a. Outlook Express 7 ) here:
www.downLoad.Live.COM/wlMail
[ Run as: “ wlMail.EXE /newsonly ” ]
If Windows Live Mail doesn't float your boat...
Consider ThunderBird 3 ( Shredder ):
http://download.mozilla.org/?product=thunderbird-3.0b2&os=win&lang=en-US