Can extra processing threads help in this case?
in [MFC]
|
From: Hector Santos on 26 Mar 2010 15:08 Peter Olcott wrote: > "Tom Serface" <tom(a)camaswood.com> wrote in message > news:Ox4vsMQzKHA.4752(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >> Hi Peter, >> >> You're going to have to set up some pretty significant >> tests. I would suggest you test with multiple servers, >> multiple times of day, multiple locations, multiple >> clients, etc. This will be a drag, but your application >> is going to require this kind of work out to be validated. >> >> The business model sounds interesting. For example, the >> other day I wanted to use WinZip for a week while testing >> a program. I didn't care about buying it, but I hate the >> evaluation pop up message. I would have paid $5 to use it >> for a week then I could go back to the Explorer and use >> the more easily integrated, but less featured, zip. >> >> Tom > > I was going for something more like a dime per use, pay at > least a buck in advance, your account remains open > indefinitely. I hope you both understand this business model and variations of it has been around since at least the 60s. The only thing new here is you discovering thinking you invented it. I waste time of the details of the history of rented and/or subscription based software business models. -- HLS
From: BobF on 26 Mar 2010 15:11 Hector Santos wrote: > Peter Olcott wrote: > >> The experts are telling me that my real-time process does not need to >> be memory resident. > > Once again, you are lying to suit your needs. You really don't > understand how the Intel chip and Preemptive and Protected Mode > operating systems works which you explained over and over again, and > even provided LINKS for your reading and verification. > > If I had to guess, the reason why you don't understand any of this is > because you are clueless of the history of the INTEL chip starting with > its Memory Segmentation Model to the introduction of Real Mode vs > Protected Model hardware and operating systems, starting with DMPI. > Start reading about the Intel Chip, Memory Segmentation, Protected Mode > Operating Systems and then maybe, just maybe, but I extremely doubt it, > you will get some inkling of whats going on. > .... and then write everything in ASM since you will have defeated the purpose of higher level languages!!!! B-)
From: Peter Olcott on 26 Mar 2010 15:13 "Liviu" <lab2k1(a)gmail.c0m> wrote in message news:OLIk1SRzKHA.2644(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > "Peter Olcott" <NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> wrote... >> "Liviu" <lab2k1(a)gmail.c0m> wrote... >>> "Hector Santos" <sant9442(a)nospam.gmail.com> wrote... >>>> >>>> You're not going to get anything done because you don't >>>> have >>>> the capacity to do so. You haven't yet in what 2-3 >>>> years? >>> >>> "I filed a provisional patent last August" - Peter >>> Olcott, 12/14/2001 >>> >>> (message #584 in thread of 881 at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.c++/msg/f8161ee71a584326?hl=en) >> >> This patent issued in 2005. The task that I am >> undertaking is very >> large. > > I am not even trying to argue that now. But you are > talking _years_ in > the works, yet demonstrated deep confusion over elementary > matters > and ignored most of the sound advice volunteered here. > Then you say > "I do not have the time to learn inessential new things". > Nothing > personal, of course, and don't know that you even realize > it, but that > paints you somewhere between utterly arrogant and a > complete kook. > > Liviu > > Ad hominem? How professional! The confusion is not mine when experts agree that a real-time process does not need to be memory resident.
From: BobF on 26 Mar 2010 15:12 Hector Santos wrote: > Peter Olcott wrote: > >> "Tom Serface" <tom(a)camaswood.com> wrote in message >> news:Ox4vsMQzKHA.4752(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>> Hi Peter, >>> >>> You're going to have to set up some pretty significant tests. I >>> would suggest you test with multiple servers, multiple times of day, >>> multiple locations, multiple clients, etc. This will be a drag, but >>> your application is going to require this kind of work out to be >>> validated. >>> >>> The business model sounds interesting. For example, the other day I >>> wanted to use WinZip for a week while testing a program. I didn't >>> care about buying it, but I hate the evaluation pop up message. I >>> would have paid $5 to use it for a week then I could go back to the >>> Explorer and use the more easily integrated, but less featured, zip. >>> >>> Tom >> >> I was going for something more like a dime per use, pay at least a >> buck in advance, your account remains open indefinitely. > > > I hope you both understand this business model and variations of it has > been around since at least the 60s. The only thing new here is you > discovering thinking you invented it. > > I waste time of the details of the history of rented and/or subscription > based software business models. > .... and yet MS continues to move that very direction!
From: Hector Santos on 26 Mar 2010 15:14
Oh brother. A patent troll then, a patent troll today! Its all vapor! Liviu wrote: > "Hector Santos" <sant9442(a)nospam.gmail.com> wrote... >> You're not going to get anything done because you don't have >> the capacity to do so. You haven't yet in what 2-3 years? > > "I filed a provisional patent last August" - Peter Olcott, 12/14/2001 > > (message #584 in thread of 881 at > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.c++/msg/f8161ee71a584326?hl=en) > > >> Peter Olcott wrote: >>> "Hector Santos" <sant9442(a)nospam.gmail.com> wrote... >>>> Of course, the real ultimate question is if you will finished by the >>>> time your patent expires. >>> The latest improvements would likely qualify for another patent, thus >>> extending the term, plus there is a whole other invention of using >>> this technology to provide an easy to use universal graphical user >>> interface scripting language. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- HLS |