Can extra processing threads help in this case?
in [MFC]
|
From: Peter Olcott on 26 Mar 2010 12:04 I do not have the time to learn inessential new things. "Mikel" <mikel.luri(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:660535d2-bd6e-40f1-b1ae-aa07165a97dd(a)q21g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... On 26 mar, 15:47, "Peter Olcott" <NoS...(a)OCR4Screen.com> wrote: > "Hector Santos" <sant9...(a)nospam.gmail.com> wrote in > message > I know for a fact that belief and disbelief are both > errors > of reasoning known as fallacies. Only comprehension of > reasoning is a reliable means of discerning truth from > falsehood. I apologize for not showing enough deference > for > the excellent free advice that you are providing. The > advice > that I could verify with reasoning was verifiably superb. You could also verify by testing, then try to learn and understand why is it like that. Besides, aren't "learn" and "comprehend" synonims (or near synonims)? You've stated several times that you don't wish to (or don't have time to) learn new things, so if you are given the pointers but don't even try to learn from them, you either have to believe or stay ignorant, but you can't say you didn't get the reasoning. You just ignored it.
From: Tom Serface on 26 Mar 2010 12:30 Hi Peter, I don't think the proximity is the only gating factor. Bandwidth for connected servers, the path of the data, etc. all matter. If your users are directly connecting to your server it may make a difference. It must make some sort of difference because every professional download site I know of has multiple "mirror" sites so that you can select one closest to you. If nothing else, distributing it may make some people use other servers and spread the cycles needed to read and send the data off a little less arduous. Tom "Peter Olcott" <NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> wrote in message news:3eOdnXDjM8dMWzHWnZ2dnUVZ_tednZ2d(a)giganews.com... > It is not naivet�. I know that the greater the physical proximity of a > server to a customer the fewer the hops that the customer's request will > make to this server. Is this not correct? If I geographically disperse the > servers such that at least one server is in much closer physical proximity > to a specific set of customers, then these customers will most likely > enjoy faster response time, right? >
From: Tom Serface on 26 Mar 2010 12:31 I believe you are right, but I'm not expert on that subject. Tom "Peter Olcott" <NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> wrote in message news:_7KdnRoDBdxfRzHWnZ2dnUVZ_oSdnZ2d(a)giganews.com... > Yes, but, also the closer you are the higher the tendency for fewer hops. >
From: Tom Serface on 26 Mar 2010 12:36 Or synonyms... :o) But, no they are not. I know a lot of people who "learned" things in college and did great on tests, but they did not "comprehend" what they learned. Parrots can learn to speak, but they don't always know what they are saying. To be honest, one of the things I really enjoy about these groups is that, at least most of the time, we don't have to pretend we know everything to participate. Most of us get more out of being here than we give (even when we give a lot). I also think people who take any kind of advice or direction without trying to prove it out or understand it are fools. I seen so many times where people simply cut and paste into their program then release only to find out there was "this one instance" that "everyone knows about" where that code doesn't work. Better to continue questioning and trying to understand more about the technique imo. Tom "Mikel" <mikel.luri(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:660535d2-bd6e-40f1-b1ae-aa07165a97dd(a)q21g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... > You could also verify by testing, then try to learn and understand why > is it like that. > Besides, aren't "learn" and "comprehend" synonims (or near synonims)? > You've stated several times that you don't wish to (or don't have time > to) learn new things, so if you are given the pointers but don't even > try to learn from them, you either have to believe or stay ignorant, > but you can't say you didn't get the reasoning. You just ignored it.
From: Tom Serface on 26 Mar 2010 12:38
I'm not even sure I could work without Google anymore. What used to take me hours to divine on my own I can usually find, or get a nice head start on, by looking for someone else who already did it. Once you read past the seemingly endless repeats because lots of sites seem to exist by copying text from other sites so you just end up with links to the same old texts over and over, you can eventually find something interesting. I think sites that collect info from other sites and newsgroups are worse than spam. Tom "Oliver Regenfelder" <oliver.regenfelder(a)gmx.at> wrote in message news:cf555$4bac7407$547743c7$23143(a)news.inode.at... > Hello, > > Peter Olcott wrote: >> I am trying to derive a new business model for commercializing software. >> I want to make it so that people can rent software for a tiny cost per >> use. > > I wouldn't call that itself a _new_ businessmodell. There is > all that google stuff that comes for free, there is online > photoshop, I think sometime ago there were rumors about an online > office from microsoft. > > But maybe your approach is different. > > Best regards, > > Oliver |