Welcome to Our Website

Activity code 10 strike software crack

Crack 10-Strike LANState: : Network Mapping: : Software

It was initially added to our database on 07/22/2020. The most popular versions of the software 9.5, 9.4 and. View photos and EXIF tags with Free Photo Viewer! StrikeMax Software Download – StrikeMax Software is Legacy software that is no longer supported.

  • Download Networking Software: Inventory ...
  • 10 Strike Network Diagram Keygenl - Eastview Scholars
  • User Manuals for 10-Strike Software Products
  • Download 10-Strike LANState 9.42 for free
  • Crack 10 Strike Network Diagram 2 3 17
  • Cracked Version CobaltStrike 4.0 Now Available to Threat
  • Counter Strike 1.6 Patch V44 - CNET Download
  • Counter-Strike patches - Liquipedia Counter-Strike Wiki
  • 10-Strike Network Scanner 4.0 Free Download

10 Amazing FREE Drum Software Instrument Plugins to

Our website provides a free download of Counter-Strike: Condition Zero As users mention, you can notice such a disadvantage of this game as it is not free. Cobalt Strike exploits network vulnerabilities, launches spear phishing campaigns, hosts web drive-by attacks, and generates malware infected files from a powerful graphical user interface that encourages collaboration and. LANState Pro is the advanced version of the program, which contains built-in web server. CleanMyPC downoad from cracksmind.

Steam Support - Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

10-Strike Network Scanner 2.0 Free Download. 10-Strike. You may want to check out more software, such as Network Diagram Maker, AirTies Network Assistant or DEKSI Network Administrator, which might be related to 10-Strike Network Diagram. 10-Strike Software - Software Publisher. LANState is a visual network mapping, monitoring and managing software specially designed for network manager or administrator, developed by 10-Strike Software from Russia.

Keygen counter-Strike Global Offensive No Steam - WaRzOnE Free

We understand that we would have to disclose the structural damage and that it is a salvaged boat when/if we. The program uses a built-in multi-threaded IP address and TCP port scanner, ensuring that device scanning is rapid. This light-weight free image viewer allows you to browse and view photos (JPEG images and RAW files). Newer Post Older Post Home.

10-Strike LANState Vista download - Monitor hosts on

Follow the sections below to get started. All trademarks, registered trademarks, product names and company names or logos mentioned herein are the property of their respective owners. These updates are released periodically, and typically include new sounds, kits, and optimizations to the modules internal software. Download 10-Strike LANState 9.53 have a peek at this website.

  • MacPaw CleanMyPC with Patch Download
  • Strike Pack Software Download
  • Download 10-Strike LANState
  • CompatDB - 10-Strike Software
  • 10-Strike Network Scanner 3.0 free download
  • Microsoft Sidewinder Dual Strike Gaming Controller Driver

Key generator what you need to know about the Microsoft Windows 10 patch

More Nsm Firebird Jukebox Manual software - TouchJams, The. This image can be a picture from a mobile phone camera, screenshot of an e-receipt, or scan of a physical receipt. Check the version and download; Launch the firmware updater; Update the firmware. The following is a list containing all software produced by Strike Software.

Serial number patch 9.0.1 Hotfixes for October 20 - Class Fixes, Sun

The strike pack fps dominator software is developing at a frantic pace. CleanMyPC includes a suite of cleaning tools for Windows computers. Disclaimer The text above is not a piece of advice to uninstall Strike Network Diagram by Strike Software from your computer, nor are we saying that Strike Network Diagram by Strike Software is not a good application. By 10-Strike Software Remove.

Download 10-Strike Log-Analyzer

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter. 10 strike software crack. Starting Price: $9.00/month. Cs 1.6 last version download, Counter-strike 1.6 download.

Alesis Strike Firmware Update

And thanks to its strong aluminum top case you will enjoy a long lasting and resistant keyboard, a weapon built for battle. This download was checked by our built-in antivirus and was rated as safe. Top 10 Free Hard Drive/Disk Data Wipe Software for Windows. The most popular versions of the software, and /5(3).

LANState and LANState Pro Comparison

10 Strike Network Diagram Keygen

Now I have my internet back, and went through hell getting my house networked, lol. Download Strike LANState Pro Crack + Serial. It is published by 10-Strike Software. Update for strike pack fps dominator software.

Download free 10-Strike FTPrint 3.45

Download 10-Strike Network Inventory Explorer 9.03. LANState Vista download - Monitor hosts on visual network map - Best Free Vista Downloads - Free Vista software download - freeware, shareware and trialware downloads. Select Open with and choose your preferred DVD burning software.

  • Download FL STUDIO 10 Full Version - Music Production Software
  • Download Counter-Strike for Windows 10, 7, 8.1/8 (64/32 bits
  • 10-Strike Software Downloads
  • S.T.R.I.K.E. 7 Working on Windows 10 v1809: MadCatz
  • StrikeMax Software Download - Collective Minds Gaming Co. Ltd
  • Counter Strike Patch - Free downloads and reviews
  • ElitSoftware Download: 10 -Strike LANState 8.0
  • StrikeMax (free) download Windows version

Timeline of Hololive V2.0

This timeline will repost every 1 Month Had Passed, with updates and new things that will appear as well as editing old updates.
The following timeline is (messy and) based on Hololive (including Holostar) Vtubers (along with other characters) debut date (and even retirement date, yes, sadly), instances and marks but if there is no YouTube channel then I can only rely on other media such as Bilibili based on its debut date.
I would like to ask everyone's support to make this post appeal to everyone so that they knew atleast how the Hololive we come to love so much had began. Thank you.
Welcome to...
{Date first posted: September 17, 2020}
{Updates: *September 17, 2020 --- September 27, 2020 --- Oct. 12, 2020 --- Oct. 13, 2020 --- Oct. 14, 2020 --- Oct. 15, 2020 --- Oct. 21, 2020 --- Oct. 23, 2020 --- Oct. 24, 2020 --- Oct. 27, 2020 --- Oct. 29, 2020 --- Nov. 7, 2020 --- Nov. 10, 2020 --- Nov. 12, 2020 --- Nov. 13, 2020 --- Nov. 14, 2020 --- Nov. 17, 2020 --- Nov. 19, 2020 --- *...}
[The Timeline of Hololive]
ARC 0: "The Glimpse of a Blue Play Button"
0) "Cover Corp" was founded in 13th of June, 2016 by none other than Motoaki "YAGOO" Tanigo
1) Cover Corp is a company develops and manages virtual reality and augmented reality software application products. It will soon be the parent company of the soon-to-be "Hololive Production"
ARC 1: "The Morning Sunrise"
2) Cover Corp launched the "Hololive Production" project. At this point in time, Hololive was not yet officially a thing, it always refer to an app in development called "Hololy."
3) "Yuujin A" - or A-chan, was a high school girl at this time. She was not a former employee of Cover (though Cover tried to hire her but she declined). At this time, she was just behind Sora - the two were best friends. She was just supporting Sora at this point of time.
4) "Tokino Sora" - the first ever Virtual YouTuber of Cover Corps and the first ever member of Hololive, first member of a soon-to-be "0th Gen", she debuted September 7, 2017
4.5) In the first ever stream made by Tokino Sora, in NicoNicoDouga, she only has 50 viewers. Excluding the staffs, there are 13 unknown viewers watching Tokino Sora's first ever stream. Ever since then, these 13 people where called as "The 13 Knights of the Round Table" - now, regard as the 13 National Heroes.
5) "Ankimo" and "Yuujin A" joined in with Sora with the streams, well, sometimes. At this time, A-chan became Sora's full pledge support. And then soon will apply as a staff in Hololive.
ARC 2: "The First Fledglings"
6) "Robocco" - once a demonstrator for the technology of Hololive App joined Hololive Vtuber group, and will be member of a soon-to-be "0th Gen", debuted March 4, 2018
7) "Hoshimachi Suisei" - a once independent Vtuber that soon joined Hololive, and will be a member of a soon-to-be "0th Gen" debuted March 22, 2018
8) Cover Corp turned "Hololive" into a Vtuber Group and thus the said Virtual Agency was officially founded. Thus, Hololive will begin its female-only Vtubers recruitment.
8.5) An audition was made (privately) and will begin the first Generational group of Hololive called "1st Gen"
9) "Yozora Mel" - is the first member of 1st Gen for Hololive to appear, debuted May 13, 2018
10) "Natsuiro Matsuri(?) AND Shirakami Fubuki - both are members of 1st Gen of Hololive, they debuted June 1, 2018
11) "Akai Haato" - (or will be known in 2020 as Haachama) is another member of the 1st Gen of Hololive, she debuted June 2, 2018
12) "H▌│█║▌║▌║ C║▌║▌║█│▌" - another member of the 1st Gen of Hololive, she debuted(?) June 3, 2018
13) "Aki Rosenthal" - is the last member of the 1st Gen of Hololive, she debuted June 7, 2018
14) The "1st Generation of Hololive" was (unofficially (?)) formed, with its members are: Yozora Mel, Natsuiro Matsuri, Shirakami Fubuki, Akai Haato, H▌│█║▌║▌║ C║▌║▌║█│▌ and Aki Rosethal.
15) "H▌│█║▌║▌║ C║▌║▌║█│▌" - a member of 1st Gen of Hololive, she was officially terminated for violating a contract and thus was sacked by Hololive, she was the first ever Vtuber in the Virtual World who was wiped out from the face of the world. A controversial figure. She was terminated by June 25th, 2018, leaving behind a dark spot in the face of Hololive
16) "Hololive Production" was officially founded by Cover Corp and established its building agency
17) "Sakura Miko" - she debuted at August 1, 2018. However, she was not yet a member of Hololive. She was once placed in a "Sakura Miko Project", however, from the looks of it, the project failed.
18) "1st Generation of Hololive" was officially updated, members composed of: Yozora Mel, Natsuiro Matsuri, Shirakami Fubuki, Akai Haato, and Aki Rosethal.
19) Another batch (private) was made and was introduced as "2nd Gen" of Hololive by late 2018
20) "Minato Aqua" - is the first member of 2nd Gen of Hololive to appear, debuted August 8, 2018
21) "Murasaki Shion" - another member of 2nd Gen of Hololive, she debuted August 17, 2018
22) "Nakiri Ayame" - another member of 2nd Gen of Hololive, she debuted September 3, 2018
23) "Yuzuki Choco" - or Choco-sensei, is another member of 2nd Gen of Hololive, she debuted September 5, 2018
24) "Oozaru Subaru" - the last member of 2nd Gen, she debuted September 16, 2018
25) "2nd Generation of Hololive" was officially established, with its members as: Minato Aqua, Murasaki Shion, Nakiri Ayame, Yuzuki Choco, and Oozaru Subaru.
26) "AZKi" - is Vtuber Diva for the joint project between Upd8 and Cover Corp. At this point, she was not a member of Hololive yet, she debuted November 11, 2018
27) "Ookami Mio" - is a first member to appear in Hololive for a new engaging platform, and will be the first member to be part of a soon-to-be "Hololive GAMERS", she debuted December 7, 2018
28) Sakura Miko officially joined/placed to Hololive alongside the soon-to-be "0th Gen", she officially debuted under Hololive by December 25th of 2018
29) A "Non-Generational (or 0th Gen) of Hololive" was officially established with members (these people already exist in Hololive and even before then, with Sora as exception(?)) as: Tokino Sora, Robocco, Hoshimachi Suisei and Sakura Miko.
ARC 3: "The Unique Moments"
29) An audition was made for a new branch called "Gamers of Hololive"
30) Shirakami Fubuki, a member of the 1st Gen of Hololive, joined the Hololive GAMERS by March 22(?), 2019
31) "Nekomata Okayu" - is another member of the soon-to-be "Hololive GAMERS", she debuted April 6, 2019
32) "Inugami Korone" - is the last(?) member of the soon-to-be "Hololive GAMERS", she debuted April 13, 2019
33) Officially established a "Hololive GAMERS", a branch of Hololive, members composed of: Ookami Mio, Shirakami Fubuki, Nekomata Okayu, and Inugami Korone.
34) Due to the success of Hololive, new agency(?) was established(?) by Cover Corps called "Holostar", another Virtual YouTuber Agency for the male-only Vtubers as idols.
35) An audition was made in May 17, 2019 for Holostar was formed that will be called "1st Gen" of Holostar as well, initially, there were only supposed to be 3 members
36) May 19, 2019, "INoNaKa Music (INNK MUSIC)" was established by Cover Corps and is the music label under Hololive - basically they're the creators of Music and BGMs of/for our favorites Hololive (and Holostar(?)) Vtubers. It was announced that AZKi will be running the music label.
37) "Hanasaki Miyabi" - the first ever (male) Virtual YouTuber of Cover Corps, first ever member of Holostar and first member of its 1st Gen, he debuted June 8, 2019
38) "Kagami Kira" - another member of 1st Gen of Holostar, he debuted June 9, 2019
39) An audition for a new group (public announcement) of "3rd Gen" in Hololive had began by June 13, 2019
40) "Kanade Izuru" - another member of the 1st Gen of Holostar, he debuted June 22, 2019
41) By July 7th of 2019, the first two members of the 3rd Gen of Hololive was announced and they're: Usada Pekora and Uruha Rushia
42) "Usada Pekora" - is the first member of 3rd Gen of Hololive to appear, debuted July 17, 2019
43) "Uruha Rushia" - a member of the 3rd Gen of Hololive, she debuted July 18, 2019
44) "Daidou Shinove" - is the first ever Virtual Manager of Holostar, do not have YouTube account but based on his Twitter account he joined around August of 2019
45) "Shiranui Flare" - another member of 3rd Gen of Hololive, she debuted August 7, 2019
46) "Shirogane Noel" - another member of 3rd Gen of Hololive, she debuted August 8, 2019
47) "Honshou Marine" - the last member of 3rd Gen of Hololive, she debuted August 11, 2019
48) The "3rd Generation of Hololive" was formed and will be known as "Hololive Fantasy", the members are: Usada Pekora, Uruha Rushia, Shiranui Flare, Shirogane Noel, and Honshou Marine
49) An announcement that Hololive will launch a first ever overseas branch line; "Hololive China" or Hololive CH. In a site known as Bilibili, an audition was created for the first ever China's "1st Gen" of Hololive in China
50) "Yakushiji Suzaku" - another member of the 1st Gen of Holostar, he debuted September 7, 2019
51) "Arurandeisu" - is another member of the 1st Gen of Holostar, he debuted September 9, 2019
52) "Yogiri" - is the first ever overseas member of Hololive, first ever member that is from China, and first member of the 1st Gen of Hololive in China, she debuted September 28, 2019 (in Bilibili)
52.5) Around October, a nobody anti managed to inflict social & mental damage upon Yozora Mel, at this moment, it started to get her barrier.
53) "Rikka" - is the last member of the 1st Gen of Holostar, he debuted October 20, 2019
54) The "1st Generation of Holostar" was officially established, the members are: Hanasaki Miyabi, Kagami Kira, Kanade Izuru, Yakushiji Suzaku, Arurandeisu and Rikka.
55) "Civia" - debuted in Bilibili at November 1, 2019
55.5) In date November 26th of 2019, the first ever Hololive x Azur Lane collabed - bringing in our the girls in a game, first to be recognized.
56) An audition was made for the "2nd Gen" of Holostar
56.5) Around November inbetween 25-30, Suisei joined the music label INNK along side AZKi.
57) In December 1st and 2nd of 2019, the agency of Holostar was scrapped(?) and instead merged together with the main branch that is Hololive and INoNaKa Music, and Holostar became one of Hololive's branch, thus establishing the "Hololive Production"
58) "Astel Leda" - is the first member of the 2nd Gen of Holostar, he debuted December 7, 2019
58.5) As of December 11th of 2019, the collab between Hololive and Azur Lane ended.
59) "Kishido Temma" - is a member of the 2nd Gen of Holostar, debuted December 14, 2019
60) [ERROR] - information had possibly moved to a different number of the timeline
61) An audition was announced for the "4th Gen" of Hololive
62) "Amane Kanata" - is the first member of 4th Gen of Hololive to appear, she debuted December 17, 2019
63) "Kiryuu Coco" - is another member of 4th Gen of Hololive to appear, she debuted December 18, 2019
63.4) "Yukoku Roberu" - is the last member of 2nd Gen of Holostar to appear, debuted December 24, 2019
63.8) The "2nd Generation of Holostar" was established with members which are: Astel Leda, Kishido Temma and Yukoku Roberu
64) "Tsunomaki Watame" - is another member of 4th Gen of Hololive to appear, she debuted December 29, 2019
ARC 4: "The Silver and Grey Periods of Hololive"
65) "Tokoyami Towa" - is another member of 4th Gen of Hololive, she debuted January 3, 2020
66) "Himemori Luna" - is the last member of 4th Gen of Hololive, she debuted January 4, 2020
67) The "4th Generation of Hololive" was officially formed with members are: Amane Kanata, Kiryuu Coco, Tsunomaki Watame, Tokoyami Towa and Himemori Luna.
68) "Spade Echo" - is the last member of the 1st Gen of Hololive CH, she debuted in Bilibili at January 30, 2020
69) The "1st Generation of Hololive CH" was formed in Bilibili, with members are: Yogiri, Civia and Spade Echo
70) At the month of March, on the day of 6th, Hololive announced the retirement of, Yakushiji Suzaku. He's the first ever Virtual YouTuber of Cover Corps to graduate in Holostar - the first Holo-Retirement, leaving behind this scent of sadness
71) The "1st Generation of Holostar" was updated, members now are: Hanasaki Miyabi, Kagami Kira, Kanade Izuru, Arurandeisu and Rikka
72) Somewhen in March or April, marked the beginning of "The Silver Age of Vtubers", with Hololive (alongside Nijisanji) rising in popularity immensely.
72.5) The first ever collab stream between Hololive and Holostar happened in Feb 2, 2020: hosted by Miyabi, Temma, Suzaki, Fubuki, & Matsuri.
73) An announcement of Hololive for the "2nd Gen" of Hololive in China, an audition has began around late February(?) or early March(?)
74) "Doris AND Rosalyn" - the first two members who appeared first in 2nd Gen of Hololive CH, debuted in Bilibili March 6, 2020
74.4) Tokoyami Towa took 2 weeks of break because of hearing opposite gender's voice in the stream. This led for the Purist Fans to be angry - though fortunately enough, they're not that hyper aggressive.
74.8) After 2 weeks of break, Tokoyami Towa resumed her usual activities.
75) Hololive announced its second overseas branch; "Hololive Indonesia" or Hololive ID. And audition was launched in late March(?) or early April(?) for the "1st Gen" of Hololive in Indonesia
75.5) Yozora Mel had taken a two months hiatus due to the harrassment and black mailed of a nobody's-friend anti. [Not Important Note: I personally hate what happened in this one]
76) "Ayunda Risu" - is the first ever member of Hololive ID and first member of the 1st Gen of Hololive to appear in Indonesia, she debuted April 10, 2020
77) "Artia" - is the last member of 2nd Gen of Hololive CN, she debuted in Bilibili April 11, 2020
78) The "2nd Generation of Hololive CH" was established, with members are: Doris, Rosalyn and Artia
79) "Moona Hoshinova" - is a member of the 1st Gen ID, she debuted April 11, 2020
80) "Airani Iofifteen" - is a member of the 1st Gen ID, she debuted April 12, 2020
81) The "1st Generation of Hololive ID" was formed and its members are: Ayunda Risu, Moona Hoshinova and Airani Iofifteen
82) An announcement by Hololive in twitter that there will be an audition for an English Speaking Vtubers starting by April 23, 2020
83) Hololive announced and introduced the "3rd Gen" of Holostar
84) "Tsukishita Kaoru" - is the first member of the 3rd Gen of Holostar to appear, he debuted April 29, 2020
85) "Kageyama Shien" - is a member of the 3rd Gen of Holostar, he debuted April 30, 2020
86) "Aragami Oga" - is the last member of the 3rd Gen of Holostar, he debuted May 1, 2020
87) The "3rd Generation of Holostar" was formed and was known as "TriNero" with members are: Tsukishita Kaoru, Kageyama Shien, and Aragami Oga
87.5) June 23rd of 2020, Yozora Mel resumed back her activities, thankfully, she's back the same as ever and healthier even.
88) By June 28th of 2020, the 2nd Generation of Holostar named their group as "SunTempo"
88.5) July 3rd of 2020, Hololive ID, a second overseas branch of Hololive that is in Indonesia, announced an audition its Twitter for its "2nd Gen"
89) However, a sudden and sad news has arrived. By July 28th of 2020, Hololive announced that a member of the TriNero squad, Tsukishita Kaoru, had officially retired, leaving behind a mystery trail of his retirement
89.5) By mid June, marked the highest peak of Hololive's popularity, influenced greatly because of "The Silver Age of Vtuber"
90) In the months of late June, July and early August, will be marked as the "Vidapocalypse" of "Holopocalypse", the Privatization/Deletion of the Holo-members streaming video games that they played prior
90.5) In July 30th of year 2020, Artia, a member of the 2nd Gen Hololive CN, have made her debut in Twitch
91) On the day 31st of July in 2020 marked the beginning of visible struggles in Hololive. This day is the day when Sakura Miko was announced to be having a hiatus for one or two months by Cover Corps due to her illness
92) In August 5th of 2020, Ookami Mio was suspended of her activities. Two strikes were filed against her YouTube account and in danger of getting ban completely
93) By August 6th of 2020, Hololive announced in Twitter and introduced the "5th Gen of Hololive"
94) "Yukihana Lamy" - is the first member of 5th Gen of Hololive to appear, she debuted August 12, 2020
95) "Momosuzu Nene" - a member of 5th Gen of Hololive, she debuted August 13, 2020
96) "Shishiro Botan" - a member of 5th Gen of Hololive, she debuted August 14, 2020
97) "Mano Aloe" - a member of 5th Gen of Hololive, she debuted August 15, 2020
98) "Omaru Polka" - the last member of 5th Gen of Hololive, she debuted August 16, 2020
99) The "5th Generation of Hololive" was established, also known as "Holofive" with members such as: Yukihana Lamy, Momosuzu Nene, Shishiro Botan, Mano Aloe, and Omaru Polka
100) At August 17th of 2020, Mano Aloe got into trouble about her Live2D model and personal life suddenly got involved. The agency gave her 2 weeks of break to deal with this error, leaving behind the masses with worry but with support and expectations of her return
101) Unfortunately, in August 30th of 2020, a new member from the 5th Gen of Hololive, Mano Aloe, just after 2 weeks of her debut, soon retired due to stress. This caused an uproar in the community, the first every uproar, and created minor setbacks and so the terms of "Doxxing" and "Antis" was now well-known to hate. Mano Aloe's retirement left a deep scar in the community
102) By September 4th of 2020, Cover Corp announced that Ookami Mio's suspension was lifted and will return to her usual activities
103) "Civia" - is the first China-member Hololive to debuted in YouTube at September 5, 2020
104) In response to the massive uproar caused by Mano Aloe's retirement, a Legal Team from Cover Corp was made and announced as anti-harrassment and anti-bullying. An official statement of this was made in early September.
105) By September 8th of 2020, Hololive Twitter account introduced its first ever English branch, "Hololive EN"
106) "Mori Calliope AND Takanashi Kiara" - both debuted September 12, 2020
107) "Gawr Gura, Ninomae Ina'nis AND Watson Amelias", they are the first ever English (Global) Vtubers under Hololive - both debuted September 13, 2020
108) The "1st Generation of Hololive EN" was formed with its members are: Mori Calliope, Takanashi Kiara, Gawr Gura, Ninomae Ina'nis, and Watson Amelia.
108.4) By mid September of 2020, just after all the HololiveEN had their debut, a popular female streamer in Twitch had caused the Vtuber Community into an uproar never seen before - it's the first uproat involving internal communities. This time led to the end of "The Silver Age of Vtuber"
108.8) Somewhen in September of 2020, Kiryuu Coco becomes the first ever Vtuber to reach number 1 in Superchat Earners - closely followed by Minato Aqua and Uruha Rushia
109) By late September of 2020, an unfortunate (yet stupid) thing happened in Hololive: a Civil War. Backed by antis and haters, the nationalist radicals attacked the Hololive community because of Coco saying the T-word and sparked the Among Us incidents. This, in turn, was counterattacked by the Global Fans.
110) Hololive Moment, the gatekeeper who introduced Hololive, had fallen from grace.
110.4) Early October of 2020, Amane Kanata was accidentally (?) bumped by car, which resulted in her head getting hit on the ground. She was put to rest in the hospital afterwards and will need to recovery. She can still stream, albeit no too much as to not disturb her recovering.
110.8) By October 18th of 2020, Amane Kanata was released from the hospital to resumed her Vtuber activities.
111) Coco and Haachama returned back to Hololive by Oct. 19 of 2020 - the battle was won by the Global Fans, though the war is still far from over.
112) After months of hiatus, the legendary elite that is Miko Sakura herself returned by Oct. 21, 2020
113) Gawr Gura has officially overcome Korone and Fubuki in the sub counts (not a race, just something to point out) and had reached "1 Million Subscribers" by late night in Oct. 22 - she is the 3RD official Vtuber to have reached the milestone in the Virtual World, and the 1ST Vtuber under Hololive to reach 1 Million Subs
114) Oct. 22, 2020 - Mori Calliope had triumphantly reach Top 1 in iTunes
115) However, a sad yet fortunate fate had befallen upon HoloCN - in Oct. 23, 2020. Due to the actions done by the radical nationalists backed by antis, HoloCN will officially broke off. The Cover Corps had given the six girls under HoloCN to choose their path. So far, as of today, every girl except "Doris" (no news about her as of yet), had chose to go independent - though the date is still unclear and no official statement about these from Cover Corp has yet to release.
116) By the 1st Day of November, Inugami Korone had officially reached 1 Mil Subs! Congrats to being the 4TH Vtuber in the Virtual World to ever reach such a milestone, and 2ND Vtuber to reach said subs under Hololive.
117) In the morning light of November 6 of 2020, Shirakami Fubuki had officially reached "1 Million Subscribers"! Congrats to being the 5TH Vtuber in the Virtual World to ever reach such milestone, and 3RD Vtuber to reach said subs under Hololive.
118) As of November 12th in 2020, after weeks of silence about the HoloCN's fate - Cover Corp finally made an official announcement. Unfortunately, the girls: Civia, Artia, Yogiri, Doris and Rosalyn - are all going to graduate despite previous statements of becoming an indie (although the following days, through hints, that they're going graduation)
  • Civia: Wednesday, Nov. 18, 2020
  • Artia: Saturday, Dec. 19, 2020
  • Yogiri: Sunday, Dec. 20, 2020
  • Doris: Saturday, Dec. 26, 2020
  • Rosalyn: Sunday, Dec. 27, 2020
As for the others, no news as of yet.
119) November 14th of 2020 - the first ever collaboration with a non-Vtuber. Featuring Mori Calliope and the Trash Taste Podcast. It first hinted in the emergence of their tweets.
120) November 17th of 2020 - Kagami Kira of the 1st Generation of Holostar, formally graduate due to weak constitution and frail body. It left an air of sudden sadness within the Holostar fans.
121) November 19th of 2020 - Civia of HoloCN officially made her final stream as her graduation, and wholeheartedly thanked the Dum Dum Knights one last time.
The "(?)" you see indicates that I am either unsure or lack of information about what a certain time point. Please help me correct this one.
And if there's a correction that needs to be addressed, just type it down below and I will edit the post.
A] https://virtualyoutuber.fandom.com/wiki/Hololive
B] https://hololive.wiki/wiki/Main_Page
C] Cover Corp main site (though I rarely check the page)
D] Fans correction
Questions That Needs Answer:
1) When did "A-Chan" join as an EMPLOYEE in Hololive? (If exact day is unknown, at least the month/year is okay)
2) When did the VERY FIRST (which is a collab cover, if anyone who remembers) collaboration between Hololive and Holostar happened? According to a comment, the very first collab between the two happened somewhen in 2019 but due to privatization, the said stream was lost and so its date.
• Due to this unprecedented circumstances, we decided to choose the first collab stream between the two that happened in Feb 2, 2020.
3) In lights of the recent fall of Mano Aloe, we slowly found out that other members before her also experienced the same thing. They are Towa, Mel and Pekora. Now, we have Towa' and Mel' information regarding said grey moment, we just need Pekora's. We would like to say to everyone reading this that we only need the Date and little bit of information regarding what happened to that said day.
• Disclaimer: We are not opening old wounds - but rather to let everyone knew that this happened.
4) Can someone tell me why did "Yakushiji Suzaku" graduated?
Potential Addition to the Timeline:
1) 3D debut dates (30% will try)
New Numbes (or Additional) Timeline was added:
• 121 - about Civia

submitted by Khantlerpartesar to Hololive

The fallacy of ‘synthetic benchmarks’


Apple's M1 has caused a lot of people to start talking about and questioning the value of synthetic benchmarks, as well other (often indirect or badly controlled) information we have about the chip and its predecessors.
I recently got in a Twitter argument with Hardware Unboxed about this very topic, and given it was Twitter you can imagine why I feel I didn't do a great job explaining my point. This is a genuinely interesting topic with quite a lot of nuance, and the answer is neither ‘Geekbench bad’ nor ‘Geekbench good’.
Note that people have M1s in hand now, so this isn't a post about the M1 per se (you'll have whatever metric you want soon enough), it's just using this announcement to talk about the relative qualities of benchmarks, in the context of that discussion.

What makes a benchmark good?

A benchmark is a measure of a system, the purpose of which is to correlate reliably with actual or perceived performance. That's it. Any benchmark which correlates well is Good. Any benchmark that doesn't is Bad.
There a common conception that ‘real world’ benchmarks are Good and ‘synthetic’ benchmarks are Bad. While there is certainly a grain of truth to this, as a general rule it is wrong. In many aspects, as we'll discuss, the dividing line between ‘real world’ and ‘synthetic’ is entirely illusionary, and good synthetic benchmarks are specifically designed to tease out precisely those factors that correlate with general performance, whereas naïve benchmarking can produce misleading or unrepresentative results even if you are only benchmarking real programs. Most synthetic benchmarks even include what are traditionally considered real-world workloads, like SPEC 2017 including the time it takes for Blender to render a scene.
As an extreme example, large file copies are a real-world test, but a ‘real world’ benchmark that consists only of file copies would tell you almost nothing general about CPU performance. Alternatively, a company might know that 90% of their cycles are in a specific 100-line software routine; testing that routine in isolation would be a synthetic test, but it would correlate almost perfectly for them with actual performance.
On the other hand, it is absolutely true there are well-known and less-well-known issues with many major synthetic benchmarks.

Boost vs. sustained performance

Lots of people seem to harbour misunderstandings about instantaneous versus sustained performance.
Short workloads capture instantaneous performance, where the CPU has opportunity to boost up to frequencies higher than the cooling can sustain. This is a measure of peak performance or burst performance, and affected by boost clocks. In this regime you are measuring the CPU at the absolute fastest it is able to run.
Peak performance is important for making computers feel ‘snappy’. When you click an element or open a web page, the workload takes place over a few seconds or less, and the higher the peak performance, the faster the response.
Long workloads capture sustained performance, where the CPU is limited by the ability of the cooling to extract and remove the heat that it is generating. Almost all the power a CPU uses ends up as heat, so the cooling determines an almost completely fixed power limit. Given a sustained load, and two CPUs using the same cooling, where both of which are hitting the power limit defined by the quality of the cooling, you are measuring performance per watt at that wattage.
Sustained performance is important for demanding tasks like video games, rendering, or compilation, where the computer is busy over long periods of time.
Consider two imaginary CPUs, let's call them Biggun and Littlun, you might have Biggun faster than Littlun in short workloads, because Biggun has a higher peak performance, but then Littlun might be faster in sustained performance, because Littlun has better performance per watt. Remember, though, that performance per watt is a curve, and peak power draw also varies by CPU. Maybe Littlun uses only 1 Watt and Biggun uses 100 Watt, so Biggun still wins at 10 Watts of sustained power draw, or maybe Littlun can boost all the way up to 10 Watts, but is especially inefficient when doing so.
In general, architectures designed for lower base power draw (eg. most Arm CPUs) do better under power-limited scenarios, and therefore do relatively better on sustained performance than they do on short workloads.

On the Good and Bad of SPEC

SPEC is an ‘industry standard’ benchmark. If you're anything like me, you'll notice pretty quickly that this term fits both the ‘good’ and the ‘bad’. On the good, SPEC is an attempt to satisfy a number of major stakeholders, who have a vested interest in a benchmark that is something they, and researchers generally, can optimized towards. The selection of benchmarks was not arbitrary, and the variety captures a lot of interesting and relevant facets of program execution. Industry still uses the benchmark (and not just for marketing!), as does a lot of unaffiliated research. As such, SPEC has also been well studied.
SPEC includes many real programs, run over extended periods of time. For example, 400.perlbench runs multiple real Perl programs, 401.bzip2 runs a very popular compression and decompression program, 403.gcc tests compilation speed with a very popular compiler, and 464.h264ref tests a video encoder. Despite being somewhat aged and a bit light, the performance characteristics are roughly consistent with the updated SPEC2017, so it is not generally valid to call the results irrelevant from age, which is a common criticism.
One major catch from SPEC is that official benchmarks often play shenanigans, as compilers have found ways, often very much targeted towards gaming the benchmark, to compile the programs in a way that makes execution significantly easier, at times even because of improperly written programs. 462.libquantum is a particularly broken benchmark. Fortunately, this behaviour can be controlled for, and it does not particularly endanger results from AnandTech, though one should be on the lookout for anomalous jumps in single benchmarks.
A more concerning catch, in this circumstance, is that some benchmarks are very specific, with most of their runtime in very small loops. The paper Performance Characterization of SPEC CPU2006 Integer Benchmarks on x86-64 Architecture (as one of many) goes over some of these in section IV. For example, most of the time in 456.hmmer is in one function, and 464.h264ref's hottest loop contains many repetitions of the same line. While, certainly, a lot of code contains hot loops, the performance characteristics of those loops is rarely precisely the same as for those in some of the SPEC 2006 benchmarks. A good benchmark should aim for general validity, not specific hotspots, which are liable to be overtuned.
SPEC2006 includes a lot of workloads that make more sense for supercomputers than personal computers, such as including lots of Fortran code and many simulation programs. Because of this, I largely ignore the SPEC floating point; there are users for whom it may be relevant, but not me, and probably not you. As another example, SPECfp2006 includes the old rendering program POV-Ray, which is no longer particularly relevant. The integer benchmarks are not immune to this overspecificity; 473.astar is a fairly dated program, IMO. Particularly unfortunate is that many of these workloads are now unrealistically small, and so can almost fit in some of the larger caches.
SPEC2017 makes the great decision to add Blender, as well as updating several other programs to more relevant modern variants. Again, the two benchmarks still roughly coincide with each other, so SPEC2006 should not be altogether dismissed, but SPEC2017 is certainly better.
Because SPEC benchmarks include disaggregated scores (as in, scores for individual sub-benchmarks), it is easy to check which scores are favourable. For SPEC2006, I am particularly favourable to 403.gcc, with some appreciation also for 400.perlbench. The M1 results are largely consistent across the board; 456.hmmer is the exception, but the commentary discusses that quirk.

(and the multicore metric)

SPEC has a ‘multicore’ variant, which literally just runs many copies of the single-core test in parallel. How workloads scale to multiple cores is highly test-dependent, and depends a lot on locks, context switching, and cross-core communication, so SPEC's multi-core score should only be taken as a test of how much the chip throttles down in multicore workloads, rather than a true test of multicore performance. However, a test like this can still be useful for some datacentres, where every core is in fact running independently.
I don't recall AnandTech ever using multicore SPEC for anything, so it's not particularly relevant. whups

On the Good and Bad of Geekbench

Geekbench does some things debatably, some things fairly well, and some things awfully. Let's start with the bad.
To produce the aggregate scores (the final score at the end), Geekbench does a geometric mean of each of the two benchmark groups, integer and FP, and then does a weighted arithmetic mean of the crypto score with the integer and FP geometric means, with weights 0.05, 0.65, and 0.30. This is mathematical nonsense, and has some really bad ramifications, like hugely exaggerating the weight of the crypto benchmark.
Secondly, the crypto benchmark is garbage. I don't always agree with his rants, but Linus Torvald's rant is spot on here: https://www.realworldtech.com/forum/?threadid=196293&curpostid=196506. It matters that CPUs offer AES acceleration, but not whether it's X% faster than someone else's, and this benchmark ignores that Apple has dedicated hardware for IO, which handles crypto anyway. This benchmark is mostly useless, but can be weighted extremely high due to the score aggregation issue.
Consider the effect on these two benchmarks. They are not carefully chosen to be perfectly representative of their classes.
M1 vs 5900X: single core score 1742 vs 1752
Note that the M1 has crypto/int/fp subscores of 2777/1591/1895, and the 5900X has subscores of 4219/1493/1903. That's a different picture! The M1 actually looks ahead in general integer workloads, and about par in floating point! If you use a mathematically valid geometric mean (a harmonic mean would also be appropriate for crypto), you get scores of 1724 and 1691; now the M1 is better. If you remove crypto altogether, you get scores of 1681 and 1612, a solid 4% lead for the M1.
Unfortunately, many of the workloads beyond just AES are pretty questionable, as many are unnaturally simple. It's also hard to characterize what they do well; the SQLite benchmark could be really good, if it was following realistic usage patterns, but I don't think it is. Lots of workloads, like the ray tracing one, are good ideas, but the execution doesn't match what you'd expect of real programs that do that work.
Note that this is not a criticism of benchmark intensity or length. Geekbench makes a reasonable choice to only benchmark peak performance, by only running quick workloads, with gaps between each bench. This makes sense if you're interested in the performance of the chip, independent of cooling. This is likely why the fanless Macbook Air performs about the same as the 13" Macbook Pro with a fan. Peak performance is just a different measure, not more or less ‘correct’ than sustained.
On the good side, Geekbench contains some very sensible workloads, like LZMA compression, JPEG compression, HTML5 parsing, PDF rendering, and compilation with Clang. Because it's a benchmark over a good breadth of programs, many of which are realistic workloads, it tends to capture many of the underlying facets of performance in spite of its flaws. This means it correlates will with, eg., SPEC 2017, even though SPEC 2017 is a sustained benchmark including big ‘real world’ programs like Blender.
To make things even better, Geekbench is disaggregated, so you can get past the bad score aggregation and questionable benchmarks just by looking at the disaggregated scores. In the comparison before, if you scroll down you can see individual scores. M1 wins the majority, including Clang and Ray Tracing, but loses some others like LZMA and JPEG compression. This is what you'd expect given the M1 has the advantage of better speculation (eg. larger ROB) whereas the 5900X has a faster clock.

(and under Rosetta)

We also have Geekbench scores under Rosetta. There, one needs to take a little more caution, because translation can sometimes behave worse on larger programs, due to certain inefficiencies, or better when certain APIs are used, or worse if the benchmark includes certain routines (like machine learning) that are hard to translate well. However, I imagine the impact is relatively small overall, given Rosetta uses ahead-of-time translation.

(and the multicore metric)

Geekbench doesn't clarify this much, so I can't say much about this. I don't give it much attention.

(and the GPU compute tests)

GPU benchmarks are hugely dependent on APIs and OSs, to a degree much larger than for CPUs. Geekbench's GPU scores don't have the mathematical error that the CPU benchmarks do, but that doesn't mean it's easy to compare them. This is especially true given there are only a very limited selection of GPUs with 1st party support on iOS.
None of the GPU benchmarks strike me as particularly good, in the way that benchmarking Clang is easily considered good. Generally, I don't think you should have much stock in Geekbench GPU.

On the Good and Bad of microarchitectural measures

AnandTech's article includes some of Andrei's traditional microarchitectural measures, as well as some new ones I helped introduce. Microarchitecture is a bit of an odd point here, in that if you understand how CPUs work well enough, then they can tell you quite a lot about how the CPU will perform, and in what circumstances it will do well. For example, Apple's large ROB but lower clock speed is good for programs with a lot of latent but hard to reach parallelism, but would fair less well on loops with a single critical path of back-to-back instructions. Andrei has also provided branch prediction numbers for the A12, and again this is useful and interesting for a rough idea.
However, naturally this cannot tell you performance specifics, and many things can prevent an architecture living up to its theoretical specifications. It is also difficult for non-experts to make good use of this information. The most clear-cut thing you can do with the information is to use it as a means of explanation and sanity-checking. It would be concerning if the M1 was performing well on benchmarks with a microarchitecture that did not suggest that level of general performance. However, at every turn the M1 does, so the performance numbers are more believable for knowing the workings of the core.

On the Good and Bad of Cinebench

Cinebench is a real-world workload, in that it's just the time it takes for a program in active use to render a realistic scene. In many ways, this makes the benchmark fairly strong. Cinebench is also sustained, and optimized well for using a huge number of cores.
However, recall what makes a benchmark good: to correlate reliably with actual or perceived performance. Offline CPU ray tracing (which is very different to the realtime GPU-based ray tracing you see in games) is an extremely important workload for many people doing 3D rendering on the CPU, but is otherwise a very unusual workload in many regards. It has a tight rendering loop with very particular memory requirements, and it is almost perfectly parallel, to a degree that many workloads are not.
This would still be fine, if not for one major downside: it's only one workload. SPEC2017 contains a Blender run, which is conceptually very similar to Cinebench, but it is not just a Blender run. Unless the work you do is actually offline, CPU based rendering, which for the M1 it probably isn't, Cinebench is not a great general-purpose benchmark.
(Note that at the time of the Twitter argument, we only had Cinebench results for the A12X.)

On the Good and Bad of GFXBench

GFXBench, as far as I can tell, makes very little sense as a benchmark nowadays. Like I said for Geekbench's GPU compute benchmarks, these sort of tests are hugely dependent on APIs and OSs, to a degree much larger than for CPUs. Again, none of the GPU benchmarks strike me as particularly good, and most tests look... not great. This is bad for a benchmark, because they are trying to represent the performance you will see in games, which are clearly optimized to a different degree.
This is doubly true when Apple GPUs use a significantly different GPU architecture, Tile Based Deferred Rendering, which must be optimized for separately. EDIT: It has been pointed out that as a mobile-first benchmark, GFXBench is already properly optimized for tiled architectures.

On the Good and Bad of browser benchmarks

If you look at older phone reviews, you can see runs of the A13 with browser benchmarks.
Browser benchmark performance is hugely dependent on the browser, and to an extent even the OS. Browser benchmarks in general suck pretty bad, in that they don't capture the main slowness of browser activity. The only thing you can realistically conclude from these browser benchmarks is that browser performance on the M1, when using Safari, will probably be fine. They tell you very little about whether the chip itself is good.

On the Good and Bad of random application benchmarks

The Affinity Photo beta comes with a new benchmark, which the M1 does exceptionally well in. We also have a particularly cryptic comment from Blackmagicdesign, about DaVinci Resolve, that the “combination of M1, Metal processing and DaVinci Resolve 17.1 offers up to 5 times better performance”.
Generally speaking, you should be very wary of these sorts of benchmarks. To an extent, these benchmarks are built for the M1, and the generalizability is almost impossible to verify. There's almost no guarantee that Affinity Photo is testing more than a small microbenchmark.
This is the same for, eg., Intel's ‘real-world’ application benchmarks. Although it is correct that people care a lot about the responsiveness of Microsoft Word and such, a benchmark that runs a specific subroutine in Word (such as conversion to PDF) can easily be cherry-picked, and is not actually a relevant measure of the slowness felt when using Word!
This is a case of what are seemingly ‘real world’ benchmarks being much less reliable than synthetic ones!

On the Good and Bad of first-party benchmarks

Of course, then there are Apple's first-party benchmarks. This includes real applications (Final Cut Pro, Adobe Lightroom, Pixelmator Pro and Logic Pro) and various undisclosed benchmark suites (select industry-standard benchmarks, commercial applications, and open source applications).
I also measured Baldur's Gate 3 in a talk running at ~23-24 FPS at 1080 Ultra, at the segment starting 7:05. https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/tech-talks/10859
Generally speaking, companies don't just lie in benchmarks. I remember a similar response to NVIDIA's 30 series benchmarks. It turned out they didn't lie. They did, however, cherry-pick, specifically including benchmarks that most favoured the new cards. That's very likely the same here. Apple's numbers are very likely true and real, and what I measured from Baldur's Gate 3 will be too, but that's not to say other, relevant things won't be worse.
Again, recall what makes a benchmark good: to correlate reliably with actual or perceived performance. A biased benchmark might be both real-world and honest, but if it's also likely biased, it isn't a good benchmark.

On the Good and Bad of the Hardware Unboxed benchmark suite

This isn't about Hardware Unboxed per se, but it did arise from a disagreement I had, so I don't feel it's unfair to illustrate with the issues in Hardware Unboxed's benchmarking. Consider their 3600 review.
Here are the benchmarks they gave for the 3600, excluding the gaming benchmarks which I take no issue with.
3D rendering
  • Cinebench (MT+ST)
  • V-Ray Benchmark (MT)
  • Corona 1.3 Benchmark (MT)
  • Blender Open Data (MT)
Compression and decompression
  • WinRAR (MT)
  • 7Zip File Manager (MT)
  • 7Zip File Manager (MT)
  • Adobe Premiere Pro video encode (MT)
(NB: Initially I was going to talk about the 5900X review, which has a few more Adobe apps, as well as a crypto benchmark for whatever reason, but I was worried that people would get distracted with the idea that “of course he's running four rendering workloads, it's a 5900X”, rather than seeing that this is what happens every time.)
To have a lineup like this and then complain about the synthetic benchmarks for M1 and the A14 betrays a total misunderstanding about what benchmarking is. There are a total of three real workloads here, one of which is single threaded. Further, that one single threaded workload is one you'll never realistically run single threaded. As discussed, offline CPU rendering is an atypical and hard to generalize workload. Compression and decompression are also very specific sorts of benchmarks, though more readily generalizable. Video encoding is nice, but this still makes for a very thin picking.
Thus, this lineup does not characterize any realistic single-threaded workloads, nor does it characterize multi-core workloads that aren't massively parallel.
Contrast this to SPEC2017, which is a ‘synthetic benchmark’ of the sort Hardware Unboxed was criticizing. SPEC2017 contains a rendering benchmark (526.blender) and a compression benchmark (557.xz), and a video encode benchmark (525.x264), but it also contains a suite of other benchmarks, chosen specifically so that all the benchmarks measure different aspects of the architecture. It includes workloads like Perl, GCC, workloads that stress different aspects of memory, plus extremely branchy searches (eg. a chess engine), image manipulation routines, etc. Geekbench is worse, but as mentioned before, it still correlates with SPEC2017, by virtue of being a general benchmark that captures most aspects of the microarchitecture.
So then, when SPEC2017 contains your workloads, but also more, and with more balance, how can one realistically dismiss it so easily? And if Geekbench correlates with SPEC2017, then how can you dismiss that, at least given disaggregated metrics?

In conclusion

The bias against ‘synthetic benchmarks’ is understandable, but misplaced. Any benchmark is synthetic, by nature of abstracting speed to a number, and any benchmark is real world, by being a workload you might actually run. What really matters is knowing how each workload is represents your use-case (I care a lot more about compilation, for example), and knowing the issues with each benchmark (eg. Geekbench's bad score aggregation).
Skepticism is healthy, but skepticism is not about rejecting evidence, it is about finding out the truth. The goal is not to have the benchmarks which get labelled the most Real World™, but about genuinely understanding the performance characteristics of these devices—especially if you're a CPU reviewer. If you're a reviewer who dismisses Geekbench, but you haven't read the Geekbench PDF characterizing the workload, or your explanation stops at ‘it's short’, or ‘it's synthetic’, you can do better. The topics I've discussed here are things I would consider foundational, if you want to characterize a CPU's performance. Stretch goals would be to actually read the literature on SPEC, for example, or doing performance counter-aided analysis of the benchmarks you run.
Normally I do a reread before publishing something like this to clean it up, but I can't be bothered right now, so I hope this is good enough. If I've made glaring mistakes (I might've, I haven't done a second pass), please do point them out.
submitted by Veedrac to hardware

0 thoughts on “Cyberlink power dvd 5.0 cd key

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *