Vista bad!

Ishmael said:
Well, qubits are related to atomic shell states. And more precisely to atom count. All of which is related to performance.

Ishmael

Right, QC is supposed to be the theoretical "stopping point" for moores law, as you simply cant get any smaller.

The way you were talking about it before was from a performance aspect though, and if you look at it that way moore has been wrong for a few years now.
 
considering the amount we have shrunk computer technology as we use it currently from the 1950's until now, it will be interesting to see how the progression with Quantum machines goes.
 
Oh mighty linux loving dude.. The Government is buying me a vista computer what can I do to better the situation?
 
Hikari said:
Oh mighty linux loving dude.. The Government is buying me a vista computer what can I do to better the situation?

Most linux installs will set you up so you can dual boot the machine. That way you only have to infect yourself with vista when you actually need some M$ functionality.
 
linuxgeek said:
Most linux installs will set you up so you can dual boot the machine. That way you only have to infect yourself with vista when you actually need some M$ functionality.

I've never used linux before.. Where can I go to learn more about this system.. ?Seeing as my boyfriend is already such a fan of it..
 
Acanthus said:
Right, QC is supposed to be the theoretical "stopping point" for moores law, as you simply cant get any smaller.

The way you were talking about it before was from a performance aspect though, and if you look at it that way moore has been wrong for a few years now.

How is performance measured?

Ishmael
 
Moore's Law is the empirical observation made in 1965 that the number of transistors on an integrated circuit for minimum component cost doubles every 18 months. It is attributed to Gordon E. Moore (born 1929), a co-founder of Intel.

The basic explination doesn't seem to have anything to do with proformance.
 
linuxgeek said:
Moore's Law is the empirical observation made in 1965 that the number of transistors on an integrated circuit for minimum component cost doubles every 18 months. It is attributed to Gordon E. Moore (born 1929), a co-founder of Intel.

The basic explination doesn't seem to have anything to do with proformance.

Performance is implied but not explicitly stated.

If performance is merely measured in terms of the processing of a problem, then the two are roughly equivalent. If one takes into consideration the time required to introduce the problem and the necessary steps, and then the outward expression of the problem (I/O), then Moores Law falls on it's ass.

Ishmael
 
I kinda figure when it comes to measuring proformance of transister machines and quantum machines, we will end up having vastly different theories on the method.. akin to talking about physics in most of the universe and physics for when describing how things work within a blackhole.
 
linuxgeek said:
I kinda figure when it comes to measuring proformance of transister machines and quantum machines, we will end up having vastly different theories on the method.. akin to talking about physics in most of the universe and physics for when describing how things work within a blackhole.

No matter which path you chose to follow, you still arrive at the same decision point linux. Machines work best, and fastest, when not hindered by human judgement.

The point in time is quickly arriving.

Ishmael
 
Back
Top