French censored answer to Google Earth.
in [Europe]
|
From: Mxsmanic on 29 Jul 2006 03:49 Martin writes: > The great majority of computers worldwide are general-purpose desktop > computers. No. More than 99% of all computers are embedded systems. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
From: Mxsmanic on 29 Jul 2006 03:50 Jim Ley writes: > I think you'll find they have very strong virus protection, only > executing trusted code. That is not virus protection. By their nature they resist virus infection, but no explicit provision for virus protection is made. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
From: Terry Richards on 29 Jul 2006 04:16 "Martin" <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message news:gl3lc2pcfkjmroes3n4v7r6bghdk6e3bak(a)4ax.com... > On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 21:55:25 +0200, Mxsmanic <mxsmanic(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > The great majority of computers worldwide are general-purpose desktop > computers. Seems unlikely. 1) The "average" person owns more cars than they do computers. 2) Modern cars can have up to 7-8 embedded computers. 3) Now add in the computers in microwaves, ovens, rice makers, etc. 4) And the ones in routers, printers etc. which are not "general-purpose desktop computers". I probably have more GP computers than most people and my CPU counts are: GP comp - 5 (in 4 computers) Routers/hubs - 2 Printer - 1 Car - At least 1, probably more Washing machine - 1 Satellite box - 1 Digital TV box - 1 TV - probably has 1 in it T.
From: Mxsmanic on 29 Jul 2006 04:39 Terry Richards writes: > Seems unlikely. > > 1) The "average" person owns more cars than they do computers. > 2) Modern cars can have up to 7-8 embedded computers. > 3) Now add in the computers in microwaves, ovens, rice makers, etc. > 4) And the ones in routers, printers etc. which are not "general-purpose > desktop computers". Exactly. More than 99% of all computers are embedded computers. Even wristwatches contain computers today. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
From: Jim Ley on 29 Jul 2006 05:14
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 09:50:34 +0200, Mxsmanic <mxsmanic(a)gmail.com> wrote: >Jim Ley writes: > >> I think you'll find they have very strong virus protection, only >> executing trusted code. > >That is not virus protection. Of course it is, designing the system so it cannot run untrusted code is absolutely virus protection, it was part of the design constraints. Jim. |