User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 10:26:16 AM EDT
[#1]
What do we get with all this processing power? Bloated, inefficient software.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 10:26:22 AM EDT
[#2]
We weren't limited in distance by computing power.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 10:27:24 AM EDT
[#3]
Quoted: What do we get with all this processing power? Bloated, inefficient software. And bloated, inefficient idiots using them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 10:27:41 AM EDT
[#4]
Did the Apollo 11 Lunar Lander need to remove the battery and reboot it daily....
My BB does...  |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 10:28:25 AM EDT
[#5]
Quoted:
Did the Apollo 11 Lunar Lander need to remove the battery and reboot it daily.... My BB does...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 10:28:44 AM EDT
[#6]
Quoted: Quoted: What do we get with all this processing power? Bloated, inefficient software. And bloated, inefficient idiots using them. That's true too. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 10:30:08 AM EDT
[#7]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 10:30:10 AM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:
What do we get with all this processing power? Bloated, inefficient software. Ding. Ding. Ding. Just because you can write an infinite amount of shit code and maybe accomplish something doesn't mean you should. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 10:32:33 AM EDT
[#9]
I read somewhere that the Space Shuttle's computer was roughly equivalent to a Commodore 64. Hopefully the next NASA craft will be a step up in computing power.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 10:33:26 AM EDT
[#10]
are the real issues more in dealing with hardware? A reliable artificial gravity generator for starters?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 10:33:48 AM EDT
[#11]
Not me I don't have a smart phone
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 10:33:58 AM EDT
[#12]
So how many teraflops does it take to lift a 1kg object into orbit?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 10:37:09 AM EDT
[#13]
Quoted:
Did the Apollo 11 Lunar Lander need to remove the battery and reboot it daily.... My BB does...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 10:38:23 AM EDT
[#14]
Quoted: IIRC they had to keep resetting the lunar lander computer because it was asked to exceed its capabilitiesQuoted: Did the Apollo 11 Lunar Lander need to remove the battery and reboot it daily.... My BB does... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 10:38:24 AM EDT
[#15]
Seems I heard it explained by some NASA type that they are and have been aware of the huge difference in computational power and did it on purpose.
The reason being that the simpler the computer, the less chance of it having a bug or crashing and shutting everything down. It needs to work flawless all the time every time. The same applies to the computers in modern military jets too, I believe. Before the F-22 everything was pretty basic because simple was reliable. Could be wrong though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 10:40:23 AM EDT
[#16]
Quoted: Quoted: What do we get with all this processing power? Bloated, inefficient software. Ding. Ding. Ding. Just because you can write an infinite amount of shit code and maybe accomplish something doesn't mean you should. I was thinking more along the lines of "just because you have an infinite amount of computing power it doesn't mean your shit code is going to be high speed, low drag" 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 10:40:30 AM EDT
[#17]
Just remember, while early rockets/space vehicles and only a small mount of digital computing power, they had a lot of what could be considered analog computing/decision making power. Both, mechanical and electrical/electronic controllers made then operational ––and arguably even safer.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 10:40:52 AM EDT
[#18]
Quoted:
are the real issues more in dealing with hardware? A reliable artificial gravity generator for starters? As opposed to the plethora of unrelaible artificial gravity generators? Nick |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 10:45:27 AM EDT
[#19]
What is left of NASA is focused on makin' relations with the sand people. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 10:54:04 AM EDT
[#20]
Quoted:
Seems I heard it explained by some NASA type that they are and have been aware of the huge difference in computational power and did it on purpose. The reason being that the simpler the computer, the less chance of it having a bug or crashing and shutting everything down. It needs to work flawless all the time every time. The same applies to the computers in modern military jets too, I believe. Before the F-22 everything was pretty basic because simple was reliable. Could be wrong though. Critical system developers spend an insane amount of time doing what computer scientists call formal verification. This involves analyzing every function for logical correctness both on paper at a design level and also writing more code to model the conditions of of the code you're really writing. A buddy did this kind of work several years back. Three teams had to independently come up with the same answer to be considered right. I'd go insane. The hardware only needs to be "fast enough" to come up with the outputs you need on a regular interval. This is rarely done for most software products where acceptance is based primarily on functional testing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 12:13:51 PM EDT
[#21]
And yet we didn't even save the blueprints for the Saturn V rocket, Apollo command mod and LIM that got us there.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 12:15:18 PM EDT
[#22]
Shit, my phone has more processing power than the Shuttle originally rolled out with, and that setup stayed with the poor old bird for a lot longer than you'd imagine.
8088 IIRC. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 12:18:06 PM EDT
[#23]
Quoted:
And yet we didn't even save the blueprints for the Saturn V rocket, Apollo command mod and LIM that got us there. ? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 12:18:07 PM EDT
[#24]
Quoted:
Quoted:
What do we get with all this processing power? Bloated, inefficient software. And bloated, inefficient idiots using them. LOL!!  
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 12:19:22 PM EDT
[#25]
Quoted:
I read somewhere that the Space Shuttle's computer was roughly equivalent to a Commodore 64. Hopefully the next NASA craft will be a step up in computing power. They'll be using the "New" Intel x486 models!! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 12:20:59 PM EDT
[#26]
Quoted: Quoted: What do we get with all this processing power? Bloated, inefficient software. And bloated, inefficient idiots using them. You said that you wouldn't make fun of me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2011 12:27:52 PM EDT
[#27]
Quoted:
The computer in your cell phone has more processing power than all the combined computers in the Apollo 11 Lunar Lander that put 2 men on the moon.
And to think we havent gone further... Yeah, but they didn't have annoying ring tones on Apollo 11. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
