nessuno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <nessuno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
><Quote>
> REDMOND, Wash. -- [Groves and "software spiral". Challenge of
> multicore chips....]
>
> The challenges have not dented the enthusiasm for the potential of the
> new parallel chips at Microsoft, where executives are betting that the
> arrival of manycore chips -- processors with more than eight cores,
> possible as soon as 2010 -- will transform the world of personal
> computing.
>
> [Yes, that way the chips will barely be able to keep up with the bloat
> in Windows 2010.]
>
> [Microsoft investing in parallel processing...]
>
> "Microsoft is doing the right thing in trying to develop parallel
> software," said Andrew Singer, a veteran software designer who is the
> co-founder of Rapport Inc., a parallel computing company based in
> Redwood City, Calif. "They could be roadkill if somebody else figures
> out how to do this first."
>
> Mr. Grove's software spiral started to break down two years ago.
> Intel's microprocessors were generating so much heat that they were
> melting, forcing Intel to change direction and try to add computing
> power by placing multiple smaller processors on a single chip....
>
> [Tough software problem...]
>
> Indeed, a leading computer scientist has warned that an easy solution
> to programming chips with dozens of processors has not yet been
> discovered.
>
> "Industry has basically thrown a Hail Mary," said David Patterson, a
> pioneering computer scientist at the University of California,
> Berkeley, referring to the hardware shift during a recent lecture.
> "The whole industry is betting on parallel computing. They've thrown
> it, but the big problem is catching it."
>
> To accelerate its parallel computing efforts, Microsoft has hired some
> of the best minds in the field and has set up teams to explore
> approaches to rewriting the company's software.
>
> [MS people think maybe 100x increase in processing speed possible...]
>
> [Microsoft executives talk about hand-held devices...]
>
> [MS hiring experts from academia, industry...]
>
> In the future, Mr. Mundie said, parallel software will take on tasks
> that make the computer increasingly act as an intelligent personal
> assistant.
>
> "My machine overnight could process my in-box, analyze which ones were
> probably the most important, but it could go a step further," he said.
> "It could interpret some of them, it could look at whether I've ever
> corresponded with these people, it could determine the semantic
> context, it could draft three possible replies. [Right before it
> crashes.] And when I came in in the morning, it would say, hey, I
> looked at these messages, these are the ones you probably care about,
> you probably want to do this for these guys, and just click yes and
> I'll finish the appointment." ...
If Mr Mundie cannot see the fundamental flaw in this whole analysis,
then I suspect that Microsoft have even bigger problems than I'd
anticipated. If email is truly only worth an automatic response, then
it was worthless, but worse, it will be sent to another machine which
will also automatically respond, the responses will be gradually
prioritised down since no creative content will be added, so the system
will contribute to stagnation and ineffectuality in environments where
people think handling lots of emails makes one important.
>From Microsoft's perspective, though, they could charge a licence-fee
payment for every suggested response, every stored email, every
electronic exchange and so on. In the end, they could have thousands of
machines emailing each other constantly, with no input from people, and
charging the owners millions for the privilege.
>
> "I'm skeptical until I see something that gives me some hope," said
> Gordon Bell, one of the nation's pioneering computer designers, who is
> now a fellow at Microsoft Research.
>
> Mr. Bell said that during the 1980s, he tried to persuade the computer
> industry to take on the problem of parallel computing while he was a
> program director at the National Science Foundation, but found little
> interest.
>
> [Straight from NSF to Microsoft---how convenient.]
The hope is that electronic responses to email will be seen as, err,
daft?
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |
|
|
