http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/ Engadget Comments for Sun looses 'world's fastest chip' -- the 1.4GHz Niagara 2 http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/
yeah.

Take that 8.18GHz pentium and stick it in a supercomputer.]]>Aug 7th 2007 8:42AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/Aug 7th 2007 6:35AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/
Probably the most painful mistake to read online. Thank you Engadget for using it correctly.]]>Aug 7th 2007 6:57PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/
(Java FTL)]]>Aug 7th 2007 6:37AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/Aug 7th 2007 6:58AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/Aug 7th 2007 12:17PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/
Will be more excited when Sun details some distribution contracts and has some manufacturers actually USING the world's fastest multi-core commodity chip.]]>Aug 7th 2007 6:47AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/Aug 7th 2007 7:29AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/Aug 7th 2007 8:59AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/]]>Aug 7th 2007 8:32AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/Aug 7th 2007 1:33PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/
It isn't about servicing the machine if it fails, it is about maintaining the environment in which the machine sits.

In short, chips that can do more on less electricity and generate less heat doing it can save companies with huge datacenter footprints lots of money.]]>Aug 7th 2007 1:44PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/
No, you missed my point. Google does not, nor will they use Sun servers. Therefore this chip will actually have zero impact on Google. Other large companies that DO use traditional servers may be impacted, just not Google.]]>Aug 7th 2007 1:56PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/
*sigh* No, I got your point, and discarded it. Your point is that Google does not use Sun chips now, therefore they never will, therefore I am wrong.

My point: Google and Sun have been working together on various technologies (Google for the press releases). Sun has specifically been working on improved datacenter technologies targeting lower utility costs (more utility computing such as its "datacenter in a box" announcement last). If Sun is targeting datacenters, there's no better partner to have than Google. Further, Linux, which Google uses, can run on Sun chips. Imagine, then, Google figuring out that they could save 10%, or 20%, or whatever on their power costs by using new lower power chips.

You're saying Google doesn't use Sun chips now and therefore would not be interested in Sun chips later, and that Google would not be interested in a chip that could save them money on fixed infrastructure costs.

I'm saying that Sun and Google agreed to work with each other (previously announced), Sun is targeting the datacenter market and always has, and that Google would jump at the chance to use a more frugal chip if it meant they could save a few tens or hundreds of millions of dollars in infrastructure costs every year. At the very least, using less energy fits their general "green-ness" as a company as well as their fiduciary duty to stockholders.

]]>Aug 7th 2007 2:10PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/
While the sarcasm is much appreciated, I was not saying that large datacenters wouldn't be interested in this chip - just that Google is a bad example because it would be non-trivial for them to migrate their skunkworks server clusters to a traditional architecture, especially considering they are already leveraging their current system for its much lower infrastructure costs. So the presumed 10, 20, or whatever % you speculate for cost savings would be much more appropriately attributed to a company like MS, Yahoo, NYSE, etc. that DOES use traditional architecture.

Also, Google and Sun's partnership doesn't extend to hardware, especially Project Blackbox, which is a Sun-only project. The purpose of the Sun-Google handshake was so they can pimp eachothers' Java and Google Toolbar. http://www.sun.com/2005-1004/feature/]]>Aug 7th 2007 2:32PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/
Oh, and stop using 'looses' as a synonym to releases or lets loose.]]>Aug 7th 2007 9:10AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): loosed; loos·ing
transitive verb
1 a : to let loose : RELEASE b : to free from restraint
2 : to make loose : UNTIE

Loose is fine. Dictionaries can be fun.]]>Aug 7th 2007 8:29AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/Aug 7th 2007 8:32AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/
As written, it is incorrect -- what should be written is "lets loose." You can't take out "lets" and expect it to mean the same thing. As written, it does mean "loss" is occurring.

It's annoying that there isn't someone on engadget's editorial staff who understands verb conjugation as this is one of many headlines that uses "loose" incorrectly.]]>Aug 7th 2007 10:48AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/
OED FTW.]]>Aug 9th 2007 2:48AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=looses]]>Aug 7th 2007 3:50PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/Aug 7th 2007 8:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/
google search returned: "Did you mean: loses"

dictionary.com has no examples
thefreedictionary.com has no examples
Cambridge Dictionary of American English has no references

I think my main problem with using it in a headline, is the fact that lots of people misspell loses as looses. My brain tries to correct for that by automatically telling me 'loses'. It's the second post on engadget where I thought someone lost something!

Headlines should be aesthetically pleasing/easy to read and to the point. I can't be the only one with a problem with this. Maybe it's cause I speak real English and not British English ;] (joking joking, don't get your knickers in a twist)]]>Aug 7th 2007 9:12AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/
Just repeat to yourself,
"It's just a show, I should really just relax"

-for Mystery Science Theater Three Thousaaaand!
(jaaaaanggg!)


]]>Aug 7th 2007 9:22AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/
...from Dictionary.com:

v. loosed, loos·ing, loos·es

v. tr.

1. To let loose; release: loosed the dogs.
2. To make loose; undo: loosed his belt.
3. To cast loose; detach: hikers loosing their packs at camp.
4. To let fly; discharge: loosed an arrow.
5. To release pressure or obligation from; absolve: loosed her from the responsibility.
6. To make less strict; relax: a leader's strong authority that was loosed by easy times.


v. intr.

1. To become loose.
2. To discharge a missile; fire.
]]>Aug 7th 2007 4:02PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/Aug 7th 2007 10:04AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/Aug 7th 2007 10:36AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/Aug 7th 2007 12:38PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/
i beg to differ, friend. there are many examples of "loosed" there used as a transitive verb. so "loosed" in those examples could be exchanged for "loosing" or "looses."]]>Aug 7th 2007 4:06PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/
I never said it wasn't listed. I just said there were no examples of its use.
See fo yoself:

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=looses]]>Aug 7th 2007 3:57PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/07/sun-looses-worlds-fastest-chip-the-1-4ghz-niagara-2/Aug 7th 2007 9:02PM