 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> How do you define "embedded system"?
I've been thinking about that.
One could say it's a computer with no user-visible UI, like a chip running
you car's engine. Now, what happens when you're talking about (say) a
missile launcher? Clearly that's going to have a UI, and just as clearly
that's an embedded system. However, looking at the chip running your car's
engine, I imagine it's talking to a lot more "outside world" than a google
server is, just in terms of having to be able to do byte-level hardware
programming.
Or one could say it's a computer with no ability for the user to decide what
code runs on it, which would make something like a "dumb phone" an embedded
system. I.e., if in coding it up you don't have to worry about any sort of
security, I'd say it's an embedded system. Not perfect, but close.
Right now, I'm working on a box with built in hardware decoding for various
media types, DMA channels that have to get programmed, etc. I'm porting
webkit to it, and it's running Linux. It's a lump of black plastic whose
only feedback to the user is an LED on the front I can turn different
colors. Is that "embedded"?
> I'd say the iPhone is more a portable
> computer. It's very small in physical size, but that alone doesn't make it
> "embedded".
Nevertheless, the code there talks to the "outside world" far more than
something like google's servers, in terms of finicky technology.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 04 Sep 2009 17:00:06 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> On 4 Sep 2009 10:45:51 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospam com> wrote:
>
>
>>Just need one thing - a plane ticket. :-)
>
> :)
Well, and the money for a plane ticket. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> It did end poorly. Indeed, it probably would have been more satisfying to
> just end it with "My god, it's full of stars", and cut out the bits after
> the pyrotechnics reflected in the helmet entirely.
That line was actually not in the first movie at all. It was in the book,
and it was put in the sequel movie.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> What I dislike about the movie is that it's a very good story and it makes
> a lot of sense, up until that craziness at the end. What I dislike about it
> is that the craziness at the end has *no* meaning at all. It's not like the
> writers came up with some kind of deep message and a highly abstract way of
What about the intro? That was, IIRC the only reference to the monolith
in the entire movie ...
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> scott wrote:
>> pit-lane refuelling fires must have been fun!
>
> Yes. THe official hand signal a driver uses to indicate he's on fire is
> to run around in circles waving his hands up and down over his head. :-)
>
No, that's called panicking :-D
John
--
"Eppur si muove" - Galileo Galilei
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> > What I dislike about the movie is that it's a very good story and it makes
> > a lot of sense, up until that craziness at the end. What I dislike about it
> > is that the craziness at the end has *no* meaning at all. It's not like the
> > writers came up with some kind of deep message and a highly abstract way of
> What about the intro? That was, IIRC the only reference to the monolith
> in the entire movie ...
Some people say that they find the intro incomprehensible, or at least
very hard to understand. I don't know why. I find it quite easy to
understand.
Two tribes of some pre-human species are having a squirmish about a pond
of water. Then the loser tribe is hanging around when the weird monolith
appears, and after touching it they start realizing that they could use
bones as weapons, and they take the pond back. Cue a transition from a
bone thrown into the air to a spaceship. Both tools of some kind. The
inference is rather clear.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> It did end poorly. Indeed, it probably would have been more satisfying to
>> just end it with "My god, it's full of stars", and cut out the bits after
>> the pyrotechnics reflected in the helmet entirely.
>
> That line was actually not in the first movie at all. It was in the book,
> and it was put in the sequel movie.
I did not know that. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Raiford wrote:
> What about the intro? That was, IIRC the only reference to the monolith
> in the entire movie ...
Huh? No. There's a monolith on the moon, and one on one of saturn's moons.
Maybe I'm just projecting the book into the movie, tho.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Doctor John wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> scott wrote:
>>> pit-lane refuelling fires must have been fun!
>> Yes. THe official hand signal a driver uses to indicate he's on fire is
>> to run around in circles waving his hands up and down over his head. :-)
>>
> No, that's called panicking :-D
I'm completely serious. Just like the official sign for a scuba diver
having trouble on the surface is to rip off your mask, wave your hands
around, and splash a bunch, screaming.
Just because it's official doesn't mean it has to be illogical. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 04 Sep 2009 11:26:21 -0700, Darren New wrote:
> Warp wrote:
>> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>>> It did end poorly. Indeed, it probably would have been more satisfying
>>> to just end it with "My god, it's full of stars", and cut out the bits
>>> after the pyrotechnics reflected in the helmet entirely.
>>
>> That line was actually not in the first movie at all. It was in the
>> book,
>> and it was put in the sequel movie.
>
> I did not know that. :-)
My recollection had been different as well, but Wikipedia confirms this
(useful list of differences between the film and the book).
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
