Linked by David Adams on Thu 1st Jul 2010 08:52 UTC
Permalink for comment 432474
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/16/13 9:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/15/13 22:44 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2009-12-05
I'm sure that both parties eventually iterate to the same solution, so why not work togheter. What is good is good. And btw, did anyone think of this: To recuce jitter, which is so important for media/games, why not introduce the concept of "minimal cpu tasks". That means tasks, that does not require immediate response, are run as a limited resource task, which in turn means that multitasking, when these tasks are running, is completely transparent. And a programming rule of, if you can make it a minimal cpu task, do so. I'm sure that would get rid of a whole lot of stalls, and buffer gaps, that is (still) bothering various operating systems, to a (lesser) degree. (these days.).
Peace Be With You.