| ▲ | IndrekR 2 days ago |
| Major confusion for me, as SPICE is well known circuit simulator:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPICE Using it often. Mostly via ngspice nowadays:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ngspice |
|
| ▲ | kazinator 2 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| I would never call a software project SPICE; I use a fucking search engine when naming things to avoid the cringe of ignorantly landing on a dupe. (And also use SPICE in the LTSpice incarnation; I should give ngspice a spin one of these days.) |
| |
| ▲ | Animats 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Agreed. The SPICE electronics simulator is over fifty years old, and is still very important to people who have to design electronics. It's inside many other electronics design tools. It's standard enough that when a manufacturer comes out with a new analog IC, they often provide a SPICE model for it. Otherwise nobody wants to design it into their circuit. Reusing the name for another program is like calling something new FORTRAN. (I had nothing to do with SPICE, other than as a user. It's by Laurence Nagel, and I'm John Nagle. Not related.) | |
| ▲ | rjsw 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | We could speedrun this and just call every product "the thing". | | | |
| ▲ | kragen 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | You're absolutely fucking right. Ngspice is okay but it's a bit clumsy switching between it and xschem. | |
| ▲ | lloydatkinson 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | bayindirh a day ago | parent | next [-] | | I know what SPICE is, but for anyone not knowing it, the first SPICE text is also a hyperlink. Clicking it brings the clicker to the homepage instantly. This is how it should be done: Hyperlinking pages to prevent information duplication and inconsistencies, using libraries to not rewrite every piece of code when it's required. It passes the sniff test, and a low-color palette of a pony reading a Red Hat checks out pretty nicely. Maybe we should entertain ourselves sometimes. I don't care about people's choices as long as it's universally unethical or offending or... you get the idea. Edit: BTW, That pony is the user's general avatar, it seems. Fun. | |
| ▲ | Nefarius 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Seeing a fetish in random cartoon characters ironically tells all of us way more about you than it says about me ;D | | |
| ▲ | lloydatkinson a day ago | parent [-] | | This is a poor retort considering how well known and infamous "MLP" and "bronies" are on the internet. |
| |
| ▲ | tzs 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Any you spent more time writing that comment than it would have taken to click the "SPICE" link next to that pony image logo, wait the ~1 second it takes to load, and read the first sentence which would have told you what it is. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | weinzierl 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Once interviewed for an automotive embedded software position and they asked me if I was familiar with SPICE. Naturally assumed they meant the circuit simulator, answered yes and they did not dig deeper Only later in the job I realized that they had meant Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination. |
| |
| ▲ | hulitu a day ago | parent | next [-] | | It is called ASPICE. | | |
| ▲ | weinzierl 16 hours ago | parent [-] | | "The abbreviation SPICE stands for Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination. Automotive SPICE (also commonly abbreviated as ASPICE) combines a process reference model and a process assessment model in one standard" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automotive_SPICE In automotive it's known as SPICE, because the automotive is obvious. |
| |
| ▲ | classified 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | dEtermination. Also quite confusing. | | |
| ▲ | F3nd0 2 days ago | parent [-] | | They’re only concerned with capability determination, not name determination. Some people just have no SPINE when it comes to naming things. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | chrisandchris 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| People who work with virtualization on Linux will (hopefully) all know what SPICE is. Edit: typo |
| |
| ▲ | IndrekR 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | > with visualization on Linux You mean ‘virtualization’ here, I guess. | |
| ▲ | nocman 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Nope. I work with virtualization on Linux every day, and have done so for many years (and many varieties of virtualization). I didn't recognize it by the name, and I don't remember hearing about it before. | |
| ▲ | Hizonner 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | People who know what both of them are (hello) still won't know which one the headline is talking about. The circuit one is definitely older, probably has more users, and is just as relevant in this forum. | |
| ▲ | hulitu a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Yes, a circuit simulator. |
|
|
| ▲ | pjmlp 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Indeed, it was what we used in digital circuits lab exercises back in the 90's. |
|
| ▲ | RobRivera 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I am happy I am not alone in this |
