Slashdot Mirror

An EeePC is not an Eee Box

Asus Eee Box

My eee gets "hot" in an hour and approaches boiling water temperature in two or so...

Good thing that's not what he's talking about

Google has patents on the built-in battery design, "but I think we'd be willing to license them to vendors," Hoelzle said.

Oh, so it's $FOO, but in a server.

Running computers on batteries? It got a patent?

I think there is a good bit of prior art if only one knows where to look.

I mean, really. This is a good idea, and it's about darn time a large-form-factor motherboard running on low voltage is available, but IMHO this should not be patentable. It's simply designing around a low-voltage input.

Are you kidding? I've paid less than $100 for motherboards that came with DVI->HDMI adapters. I have both DVI(M)->HDMI(F) and HDMI(M)->DVI(F), and as far as I recall they came in the same package. Try looking for motherboards that come with them - and if you don't want the motherboard, you can sell it and get some of your money back. http://www.asus.com/product.aspx?P_ID=hR9xA49ZHyU31AeA

Except for, you know, the Linux based phone they partnered with Garmin on and have a giant splash ad for on their website.

Wow, you're clearly misinformed. Most netbooks come with Windows XP OEM preinstalled or Linux. There's no downgrade trick. Here...

Dell
Asus
Acer
Samsung
Toshiba
Sony

I'm running a P4 and an ATI x1300 adapter. After using the Asus PSU calculator http://support.asus.com/PowerSupplyCalculator/PSCalculator.aspx?SLanguage=en-us, I found out that will all my extras connected, I'm not providing enough juice! What's interesting is that after selecting my mobo, cpu and ram, the 200w juice requirements don't change when I add my video adapter. It's when I tack on all the case fans, hard drives and usb stuff that it spikes to 500w. If I wanted to trim my power consumption, I' be better off buying a multi drive, and picking up a wireless keyboard and mouse.

and observe how, unfortunately, XP consistently outperforms Linux :(

I went through the first 10 entries which support both OS's and found 8 were exactly the same and two were longer under Windows XP. Is that what you call "Consistently outperforming"?

I take you know what they say about half truths. But just in case you're interested in the whole truth, then here it is:

Out of the 28 machines that are listed in http://event.asus.com/eeepc/comparison/eeepc_comparison.htm, there are exactly 22 that have both a Linux and XP configuration; the remaining 6 machines are either exclusively Linux, or exclusively XP, which means their battery life under the two OSes can't be compared.

From within the 22 machines that can be compared, 11 (=50%) have longer battery life under XP, and 11 have exactly the same battery life under both OSes.

So yes. This is what I call consistently outperforming.

http://eeepc.asus.com/global/computing.html
http://event.asus.com/eeepc/comparison/eeepc_comparison.htm

The manufacturer's comparisons, and the explanation of those comparisons, do not seem to support your statement. Both operating systems are shutting down background services, including WIFI, dimming the display, etc, in a similar manner. The battery life charts don't show that XP gets as much extra battery life as suggested in TFA.

Apparently, ASUS is failing to configure something properly. One of the GP posts asks if the OS is using a tickless kernel. It's not clear to me yet whether ASUS is doing so. This is an issue to be taken up with the manufacturer, not with Linux.

http://eeepc.asus.com/global/computing.html
http://event.asus.com/eeepc/comparison/eeepc_comparison.htm

The manufacturer's comparisons, and the explanation of those comparisons, do not seem to support your statement. Both operating systems are shutting down background services, including WIFI, dimming the display, etc, in a similar manner. The battery life charts don't show that XP gets as much extra battery life as suggested in TFA.

Apparently, ASUS is failing to configure something properly. One of the GP posts asks if the OS is using a tickless kernel. It's not clear to me yet whether ASUS is doing so. This is an issue to be taken up with the manufacturer, not with Linux.

That charts do some explanation on how they get that numbers, linking to http://eeepc.asus.com/global/computing.html, where they explain that they use one test (Battery Mark 4.0.1) for measuring battery life in Windows, and a different one in Linux (JEITA Battery Run Time Measuring Method). Essentially, there you are comparing apples with oranges.

Here's some concrete evidence. Take a look at http://event.asus.com/eeepc/comparison/eeepc_comparison.htm in which Asus compares their different eee netbooks. Go to the battery life column and observe how, unfortunately, XP consistently outperforms Linux :(

Asus 1101 HA gets 11+ hours, but the Atom processor included is one of the Z series (that can be overclocked to get an N series speed, but reducing battery life). Playing creatively with conditions on which you get that runtime you could get up to 12hs, i suppose.

From the review:

Many PC manufacturers, including netbook makers, are offering a free upgrade voucher for Microsoft's Windows 7 and ...

But from what I can tell, Asus & Dell do not.

I think netbook customers will have to wait until 10/22 since the valid upgrade path is for Vista OEM'd products.

On Windows, you just throw in the disk, click ok, and your hardware is working.

Unless you're running Vista x64, have 4GB or more of memory, and are trying to install the drivers for a TV tuner. Doesn't matter which manufacturer, they all would tend to fuck up under such conditions. I gave up trying to get TV tuners to work on my rig after wasting close to $250 on various models cuz I found only one commonality amongst them: they don't fucking work.

FWIW, I've had no problem with this tuner under Windows 7 RC1 x64 and 6GB, although I didn't try using the driver from Asus, the one bundled with Windows just works.

That's true.. I'm looking right now at a 17" Dell monitor and it says Dimensions (HxWxD) 16.4" x 15.9" x 16.5"

You can get now a 19" Asus VW198T LCD running natively at 1680x1050 that has the dimensions Phys.Dimension(WxHxD): 444x368x210 which in inches means roughly 17.48" x 14.48" x 8.26". So, you get higher resolution, you don't damage your eyes so much, only for an extra inch in width, but I guarantee you when you see the space that was once lost because of the CRT's depth, you won't regret it.

The only downside I see is you get about one less inch in height. If this bothers you, you can opt for benq E2200HDA which has the following dimensions: 20.5" x 16.05" x 7.35" but packs a resolution of 1920x1080 inside those 22 inches.

I don't endorse any of the LCD displays above, I just browsed my local IT store's site right now and picked these as having cheap price and high res / diagonal inches

ASUS are about to release a tablet netbook, the Eee PC T91. I have an ordinary tablet PC and have read dozens of books on it but it is far too heavy to satisfy the hammock requirement.

Right Mister investigative journalist, how do you disprove the following:

• Go to http://uk.asus.com/news_show.aspx?id=15908
• On the left side there's an advertisement for the Eee pc which links to http://www.asus-uk.com/eeepc/about/

Ok so by your own admittance we've proven that asus-uk.com at the very least is in fact an official Asus website. Right now let's take it one step further, here's a link to another page on that same domain:

• http://www.asus-uk.com/eeepc/1008HA/

Still asus-uk.com right? Read the page and see that it states: "It's better with Windows®" and links to http://www.itsbetterwithwindows.com/

I'd like to hear how you're going to wiggle your way out of this one. Oh it was just the UK branch, you say? Oh, it was just a lone mad sales guy? Asus was never serious about putting Linux on their netbooks, laptops or whatever from the get go. If you've ever used an Eee pc you'd know that the custom Xandros distro stuff was a disaster and anyone worth their salt would immediately replace it a properly configured distro (in a lot of cases Ubuntu). Asus well never get any money from me again.

Well, check out this site: http://www.asus-uk.com/eeepc/1008HA/. Here's the whois for this domain:

Registrars.Registrant:
ASUSTeK (UK) Ltd.
Focus31, Westwing First floor, Mark Road
Hemel Hempstead, Herts HP2 7BW
GB

Domain name: ASUS-UK.COM

Administrative Contact:
Lee, Rex marketing_uk@asus.com
Focus31, Westwing First floor, Mark Road
Hemel Hempstead, Herts HP2 7BW
GB
+44.1442202700
Technical Contact:
Lee, Rex marketing_uk@asus.com
Focus31, Westwing First floor, Mark Road
Hemel Hempstead, Herts HP2 7BW
GB
+44.1442202700

Also if you go to http://uk.asus.com/ there's sometimes an ad on the right about EEEpc's (probably will have to refresh multiple times to see it). Clicking on that ad will redirect you to the asus.co.uk site.

It clearly advertises GNU/Linux as an option.

Copy & paste:
Go Anywhere in Style with Eee PCâ Seashell 1008HA
Display 10" LED-backlit WSVGA Screen (1024x600 pixels) with Color-Shine (Glare-type)
Operating System Genuine Windows® XPâ Home GNU Linux Processor Intel® Atomâ N280 Default Memory 1GB DDR2 SO-DIMM

http://www.asus.co.uk/ is not Asus UK website. Check out http://uk.asus.com./ Also check whois info for both.

For asus.com:

Registrar: NETWORK SOLUTIONS, LLC.
Whois Server: whois.networksolutions.com
Referral URL: http://www.networksolutions.com/
Status: clientTransferProhibited

Expiration Date: 2011-10-24
Creation Date: 1995-10-25
Last Update Date: 2007-03-29

Name Servers:
        dns3.asus.com
        dns7.asus.com

For asus.co.uk:

Domain name:
                asus.co.uk

        Registrant:
                Asustek Computer Inc

        Trading as:
                Asus

        Registrant type:
                UK Individual

        Registrant's address:
                The registrant is a non-trading individual who has opted to have their
                address omitted from the WHOIS service.

        Registrar:
                1 & 1 Internet AG [Tag = SCHLUND]
                URL: http://registrar.1und1.info/

        Relevant dates:
                Registered on: 23-May-1997
                Renewal date: 23-May-2011
                Last updated: 22-May-2009

        Registration status:
                Renewal request being processed.

        Name servers:
                ns59.1and1.co.uk
                ns60.1and1.co.uk

Furthermore, if you look around the fake site, you'll see that it redirects to uk.asus.com for all URLs that you feed to it (thus creating the illusion that it is indeed an official Asus site), except for that one URL which opens the webpage linking to the site in TFA.

Yep, Asus had absolutely nothing to do with the creation of this website and that's why they link to it from their own site.

http://www.asus.co.uk/ is not the web site of Asus UK. The latter is http://uk.asus.com./ Site that you've linked to is set up to redirect to the official Asus site for any URL, except for the one that you've linked to - it is clearly a hoax to promote the linked site.

The site does seem rather amateur. A link to the the site at http://www.asus.co.uk/eeepc/1008HA/features.html points to Asus UK's involvement. There is however no such reference on the international version at http://eeepc.asus.com/global/product1008ha.html

Do a whois on that site and compare to uk.asus.com.

Also compare the sites

http://uk.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=24&l2=164&l3=0&l4=0&model=2912&modelmenu=1. Notice the complete lack of that link?

Which has been pointed out numerous times before to be fake. Unless ASUS lets private individuals register their domains for them and host them on non-corporate servers.

http://uk.asus.com/ is the correct UK corporate page.

Fake marketing page

Fake UK Asus website you linked to

Real UK Asus website

asus.co.uk is not Asus's offical website. The offical website is uk.asus.com as linked by asus.com.

Also see my other post about the registration status of the co.uk site.

The GGP poster is right, Slashdot has been had.

Fail.

While I agree that it's too soon to say that this is indeed a hoax, it's a bit presumptuous to say that it's not.

There has been no official press release about a "It's Better With Windows" campaign from either company (and you can bet Microsoft would be all over something like that). It also does not appear to be an organized effort from Asus in any sense of the term. The website is amateurish at best, and only one division of the company seems to link to this site. I also checked the French, German, and Spanish sites and found no reference to It's Better With Windows on their 1008HA "seashell" product pages. Presumably, it could just be an English language campaign, however neither the US nor Australian sites mention it. Additionally, it seems to be absent from this promotional flash application which I arrived at from the Australian site.

So pardon us if we're a bit skeptical but this does not have any of the normal signs of an officially endorsed advertising campaign partnership. It smells more of a web designer who thought it would be funny to pull a prank (which we've all seen in other media like porn hidden in posters or easter eggs in applications). I may yet be proven to be wrong but even being a Linux supporter, I'd rather err on the side of rationality.

What really pisses me off is on my new motherboard... This "Express Gate" feature that is supposed to provide me with a Linux environment that takes 5 seconds to boot. Apparently the only way to install this Linux environment is to install Windows first so I can run the installer.

You probably installed XP, which is damn old, and can't be expected to have all the latest drivers.

Latest drivers? It's not a brand new mobo, its a hand-me-down that is left over from upgrading my system. The Asus A8V-MX is not exactly cutting edge, and neither is the Nvidia graphics card. The Ethernet card is older than XP as well.

My favourite part of the install was locating a floppy disk that still works so I could make a SATA boot disk. Honest to God, a floppy disk.

64GB of memory has been supported for a LONG time, especially with server class hardware. Usually requires a Xeon or Opteron processor.

From 2005: Opteron based: http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20050729PR208.html

Xeon based: http://usa.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=9&l2=39&l3=712&l4=0&model=2147&modelmenu=2

How about 256gb? http://www.supermicro.com/Aplus/motherboard/Opteron8000/MCP55/H8QMi-2+.cfm

I don't think that he did sociological studies, but this and this, might indicate that he's right. Not exactly sports teams, but close enough.

Apple already offers significantly more models than some computer makers with a larger market share than they have (like Asus).

I have an iphone and a mac mini and I love Apple, but why do you feel the need to make shit up like this? ASUS has over 150 laptop models currently available and Apple has less than a dozen. You're off by an order of fucking magnitude!

Well, I'm waiting for the Asus eeebox b204 and b206 to come. They have an ATI Radeon HD 3450 series with 256 MB DDR2 memory and HDMI output.
  The link.

Seems to be true.

Here: http://promos.asus.com/US/1000HE/ASUS/index.html

And pre-order on Amazon, for $374, this spec:

ASUS Eee PC 1000HE 10-Inch Netbook (1.66 GHz Intel Atom N280 Processor, 1 GB RAM, 160 GB Hard Drive, Bluetooth, XP Home, 6 Cell Battery) Black

Link here:

http://www.amazon.com/10-Inch-Netbook-Processor-Bluetooth-Battery/dp/B001QTXL82/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1233608330&sr=8-3

Might get (another) one - very happy with the various Eee PCs that litter the house. But get Eeebuntu. XP also runs fine on all of 'em, even the really low-end ones.
(http://www.eeebuntu.org/index.php?page=download)

Bios do decompress themselves, at least for the menus. Maybe the SATA locking code would be uncompressed, I'm not sure.

I still think you're underestimating the complexity of finding the code in the Bios and patching it. A human could do it, automating the process is not so trivial. There are after all a lot of ways to send a command to a drive, even a drive one one interface (there are two at the moment, AHCI for native SATA and ATA for IDE and SATA in emulation mode). If you asked two people to do it, they would each produce slightly different code and hacking it out would require a different set of bytes being patched.

If you just scan for the command byte, you'd probably get a lot of hits. Change 'em all and you'll brick the machine.

Awdflash is updated regularly, according to this guy

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/jefn/bootblock.html
Always ensure that you use the correct version of Awdflash.exe! Phoenix/Award regularly updates Awdflash.exe program to support ever-changing hardware.

See, all boards with an Award Bios can't be flashed in the exact same way.

You couldn't use this in malware since you need to boot into Dos.

Asus have a Bios update tool which runs unders Windows which they make sure works on all their boards

http://support.asus.com/technicaldocuments/technicaldocuments_content.aspx?no=714

It's not like all of their boards use the same instructions to do the update though. An update tool needs to have a driver, essentially for each board it supports. That's the reason awdflash and the Windows Bios flash tools often have to be updated when they launch a new board.

And you have to support AMI Bioses too.

Actually someone tried this before

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIH#Virus_specifics

CIH spreads under the Portable Executable file format under Windows 95, Windows 98, and Windows ME. CIH does not spread under Windows NT, Windows 2000, Windows XP or Windows Vista. Non Microsoft operating systems are not affected. CIH infects Portable Executable files by splitting the bulk of its code into small slivers inserted into the inter-section gaps commonly seen in PE files, and writing a small re-assembly routine and table of its own code segments' locations into unused space in the tail of the PE header. This earned CIH another name, "Spacefiller". The size of the virus is around 1 kilobyte, but due to its novel multiple-cavity infection method, infected files do not grow at all. It uses methods of jumping from processor ring 3 to 0 to hook system calls.

The payload, which is considered extremely dangerous, first involves the virus overwriting the first megabyte (1024KB) of the hard drive with zeroes, beginning at sector 0. This deletes the contents of the partition table, and may cause the machine to hang.

The second payload tries to write to the Flash BIOS. Due to what may be an unintended feature of this code, BIOSes that can be successfully written to by the virus have critical boot-time code replaced with junk. This routine only works on some machines. Much emphasis has been put on machines with motherboards based on the Intel 430TX chipset, but by far the most important variable in CIH's success in writing to a machine's BIOS is the type of Flash ROM chip in the machine. Different Flash ROM chips (or chip families) have different write-enable routines specific to those chips. CIH makes no attempt to test for the Flash ROM type in its victim machines, and has only one write-enable sequence.

Note it only worked in 16 bit Windows. Now the 430TX chipset looks like it has the Bios connected to the ISA bus.

http://www.intel.com/Assets/PDF/datasheet/290562.pdf

It mentions a hardware write

However I don't think i've seen a desktop board that could go over 8 gigabytes and most top out at four.

Maybe this was true a year ago, but not now. I recently got a PC with an Asus P5Qpro motherboard - it supports up to 16GB. http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=11&l3=709&l4=0&model=2269&modelmenu=2

AI BIOS
ASUS POST Reporter
During the computer POST (Power On Self-Test), ASUS POST Reporter provides friendly voice warnings through external speaker, clearly explaining system errors for quick and easy optimization. The bundled Winbond Voice Editor software allows users to add customized system voice warnings and multi-language support.

K8V Deluxe

Ok, this will be off-topic for this thread but whatever, maybe it can interest someone :D

His motherboard is an ASUS P5Q-E (1) running stock BIOS I guess, there is a newer one out (2) version 1703 which mentions "Enhance the compatibility with certain memory." so I guess that may help to, can be upgraded with ASUS update utility (3) from within Windows so he should be able to do it. The motherboard runs Intel P45 (4) chipset which spec page mentions 1333 MHz FSB although Asus webpage (1) says 1600 MHz, guess they have tested it.

I think he was supposed to get Corsair CL5 PC8500 TWIN2X4096-8500C5D (5) but since he has a fan I guess he got the TWIN2X4096-8500C5DHX or something such. Modules spec sheet mentions:
JEDEC standard 5-5-5-18 values at 800MHz.
EPP standard 5-5-5-15-2T, 2.1V values.

Processor is Intel E8500 (6) 1333 MHz bus speed, 9.5 ratio, 6 MB cache, 3.16 GHz clock.

Anyway, I checked the manual (available at (2)) and told him to do the following:
* Turn Ai Overclock Tuner from Auto to Manual.
* Change FSB Frequency to 400.
* Change CPU ratio setting to 08.0
* Change DRAM Frequency to DDR2-800 MHz.
* Let DRAM Timing Control remain at auto (assuming it reads correct values) and same on DRAM Voltage unless Corsair EPP doesn't change that to 2.1 as default.

Which would run his CPU at 3.2 GHz but with 1:1 CPU to RAM clock divider at atleast run the RAMs faster than 333 MHz.

If the RAM remains on 2.1 volt I guess one can go in and drop it down to 1.8, and eventually fill in the timings manually from the JEDEC part of the spec sheet.

If he runs into problem I'll tell him to:
* Change Ai Clock Twister from Auto to Light or Lighter which is supposed to raise compatibility.
* Update to latest motherboard BIOS since it's supposed to raise memory compatibility.
* And finally if nothing else helps change RAM speed to DDR2-667 MHz, FSB down to 333 MHz and CPU ratio to 9.5.

And if everything works as it should and he really want to overclock I assume he can start with:
* Either change his CPU multiplier back to 9.5, eventually increasing CPU voltage if needed.
* Or shoot for increasing his FSB beyond 400 MHz by increasing RAM voltage again and eventually NB voltage to.
* Or a combination of both.
Since I'd prefer as high FSB as possible without no errors I'd start there but then chipset and RAM is more likely to fail. The CPU probably got higher margins since they usually overclock so good so maybe that's a more fail-safe option =P, he do run stock cooling however.

Looks ok?

1) ASUS P5Q-E http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?modelmenu=1&model=2267&l1=3&l2=11&l3=709&l4=0
2) P5Q-E BIOS 1703 http://support.asus.com/download/download.aspx?SLanguage=en-us&model=P5Q-E
3) ASUS Update Utility http://support.asus.com/technicaldocuments/technicaldocuments_content.aspx?no=714
4) Intel® P45 Express Chipset http://www.intel.com/products/desktop/chipsets/p45/p45-overview.htm
5) Corsair TWIN2X4096-8500C5D http://www.corsair.com/_datasheets/TWIN2X4096-8500C5D.pdf
6) Intel® Coreâ2 Duo Desktop Processor E8500 http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLAPK#

Ok, this will be off-topic for this thread but whatever, maybe it can interest someone :D

His motherboard is an ASUS P5Q-E (1) running stock BIOS I guess, there is a newer one out (2) version 1703 which mentions "Enhance the compatibility with certain memory." so I guess that may help to, can be upgraded with ASUS update utility (3) from within Windows so he should be able to do it. The motherboard runs Intel P45 (4) chipset which spec page mentions 1333 MHz FSB although Asus webpage (1) says 1600 MHz, guess they have tested it.

I think he was supposed to get Corsair CL5 PC8500 TWIN2X4096-8500C5D (5) but since he has a fan I guess he got the TWIN2X4096-8500C5DHX or something such. Modules spec sheet mentions:
JEDEC standard 5-5-5-18 values at 800MHz.
EPP standard 5-5-5-15-2T, 2.1V values.

Processor is Intel E8500 (6) 1333 MHz bus speed, 9.5 ratio, 6 MB cache, 3.16 GHz clock.

Anyway, I checked the manual (available at (2)) and told him to do the following:
* Turn Ai Overclock Tuner from Auto to Manual.
* Change FSB Frequency to 400.
* Change CPU ratio setting to 08.0
* Change DRAM Frequency to DDR2-800 MHz.
* Let DRAM Timing Control remain at auto (assuming it reads correct values) and same on DRAM Voltage unless Corsair EPP doesn't change that to 2.1 as default.

Which would run his CPU at 3.2 GHz but with 1:1 CPU to RAM clock divider at atleast run the RAMs faster than 333 MHz.

If the RAM remains on 2.1 volt I guess one can go in and drop it down to 1.8, and eventually fill in the timings manually from the JEDEC part of the spec sheet.

If he runs into problem I'll tell him to:
* Change Ai Clock Twister from Auto to Light or Lighter which is supposed to raise compatibility.
* Update to latest motherboard BIOS since it's supposed to raise memory compatibility.
* And finally if nothing else helps change RAM speed to DDR2-667 MHz, FSB down to 333 MHz and CPU ratio to 9.5.

And if everything works as it should and he really want to overclock I assume he can start with:
* Either change his CPU multiplier back to 9.5, eventually increasing CPU voltage if needed.
* Or shoot for increasing his FSB beyond 400 MHz by increasing RAM voltage again and eventually NB voltage to.
* Or a combination of both.
Since I'd prefer as high FSB as possible without no errors I'd start there but then chipset and RAM is more likely to fail. The CPU probably got higher margins since they usually overclock so good so maybe that's a more fail-safe option =P, he do run stock cooling however.

Looks ok?

1) ASUS P5Q-E http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?modelmenu=1&model=2267&l1=3&l2=11&l3=709&l4=0
2) P5Q-E BIOS 1703 http://support.asus.com/download/download.aspx?SLanguage=en-us&model=P5Q-E
3) ASUS Update Utility http://support.asus.com/technicaldocuments/technicaldocuments_content.aspx?no=714
4) Intel® P45 Express Chipset http://www.intel.com/products/desktop/chipsets/p45/p45-overview.htm
5) Corsair TWIN2X4096-8500C5D http://www.corsair.com/_datasheets/TWIN2X4096-8500C5D.pdf
6) Intel® Coreâ2 Duo Desktop Processor E8500 http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLAPK#

Ok, this will be off-topic for this thread but whatever, maybe it can interest someone :D

His motherboard is an ASUS P5Q-E (1) running stock BIOS I guess, there is a newer one out (2) version 1703 which mentions "Enhance the compatibility with certain memory." so I guess that may help to, can be upgraded with ASUS update utility (3) from within Windows so he should be able to do it. The motherboard runs Intel P45 (4) chipset which spec page mentions 1333 MHz FSB although Asus webpage (1) says 1600 MHz, guess they have tested it.

I think he was supposed to get Corsair CL5 PC8500 TWIN2X4096-8500C5D (5) but since he has a fan I guess he got the TWIN2X4096-8500C5DHX or something such. Modules spec sheet mentions:
JEDEC standard 5-5-5-18 values at 800MHz.
EPP standard 5-5-5-15-2T, 2.1V values.

Processor is Intel E8500 (6) 1333 MHz bus speed, 9.5 ratio, 6 MB cache, 3.16 GHz clock.

Anyway, I checked the manual (available at (2)) and told him to do the following:
* Turn Ai Overclock Tuner from Auto to Manual.
* Change FSB Frequency to 400.
* Change CPU ratio setting to 08.0
* Change DRAM Frequency to DDR2-800 MHz.
* Let DRAM Timing Control remain at auto (assuming it reads correct values) and same on DRAM Voltage unless Corsair EPP doesn't change that to 2.1 as default.

Which would run his CPU at 3.2 GHz but with 1:1 CPU to RAM clock divider at atleast run the RAMs faster than 333 MHz.

If the RAM remains on 2.1 volt I guess one can go in and drop it down to 1.8, and eventually fill in the timings manually from the JEDEC part of the spec sheet.

If he runs into problem I'll tell him to:
* Change Ai Clock Twister from Auto to Light or Lighter which is supposed to raise compatibility.
* Update to latest motherboard BIOS since it's supposed to raise memory compatibility.
* And finally if nothing else helps change RAM speed to DDR2-667 MHz, FSB down to 333 MHz and CPU ratio to 9.5.

And if everything works as it should and he really want to overclock I assume he can start with:
* Either change his CPU multiplier back to 9.5, eventually increasing CPU voltage if needed.
* Or shoot for increasing his FSB beyond 400 MHz by increasing RAM voltage again and eventually NB voltage to.
* Or a combination of both.
Since I'd prefer as high FSB as possible without no errors I'd start there but then chipset and RAM is more likely to fail. The CPU probably got higher margins since they usually overclock so good so maybe that's a more fail-safe option =P, he do run stock cooling however.

Looks ok?

1) ASUS P5Q-E http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?modelmenu=1&model=2267&l1=3&l2=11&l3=709&l4=0
2) P5Q-E BIOS 1703 http://support.asus.com/download/download.aspx?SLanguage=en-us&model=P5Q-E
3) ASUS Update Utility http://support.asus.com/technicaldocuments/technicaldocuments_content.aspx?no=714
4) Intel® P45 Express Chipset http://www.intel.com/products/desktop/chipsets/p45/p45-overview.htm
5) Corsair TWIN2X4096-8500C5D http://www.corsair.com/_datasheets/TWIN2X4096-8500C5D.pdf
6) Intel® Coreâ2 Duo Desktop Processor E8500 http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLAPK#

My Eee PC feels like it could take much more of a beating than my full-size Laptop.

Small is good when it comes to rigidity. I don't like to stand anything heavy on the laptop with the lid closed - it doesn't take much weight to flex the lid downwards into the screen. My EEE PC's lid is a lot stronger.

ASUS also makes it very easy to get spare parts - http://estore.asus.com/ in the USA and http://www.asusparts.eu/ in Europe.

Netbooks are defintely the way to go for traveling.

The advertisements all over the Economist page (top and bottom banners and embedded in the article itself) are for the Asus N series notebooks. Which make a point of promoting the Express Gate instant-on linux environment built into the motherboard.

So even if they buy one with Windows XP or Vista installed, the first thing to run when they switch it on will be Linux with FireFox.

...Don't think any of the SSD based netbooks use swap at all and they get along just fine...

What is the best way to configure Linux on a sub 512MB RAM box, sub notebook, etc..., so that no matter how much you load (application wise) it will not die, although it might run slower should swapping occur? (The system seems to stop swapping as well when Free Memory falls below 10MB and really poorly when it falls below 5 MB. Ideally I would like to maintain 10 - 15 MB of Free RAM Memory available at all times.)

I know Linux can be configured to run in 128MB of RAM and love that...actually have a PC that I would like to configure and use with that low of RAM. (Intuitively I understand that if I can run with less RAM, when I purchase newer boxes with more RAM I should be able to run, much, much faster...the idea that a system for a normal Power user would ever get sluggish with over 1 GB of RAM is ridiculous in my opinion. If I purchase more RAM, I want my apps to benefit from that, not be required to have it just to function, but than my first work computer was an IBM mainframe with 32KB of RAM, an IBM 360.

My first desktop was the Radio Shack Model III, (4K RAM, Floppy drives, 12 inch B/W Monitor, keyboard, BASIC in ROM, TRS-DOS on disk, between $700 - $2,500 depending on config)my first IBM PC had either 16kB of RAM, 4.77 MHz Intel 8088, Floppy Disk Drive (credited with its business success per the wiki, aah the power of the floppy), 5 Bus slots (w/Expander in 1 of 5 - 8 more Bus Slots, slots used by Monitor, Hard Disk (if you had one, my first did not), I/O adapters, 3278/3279 Adapter - for moving up to 2 MB files to/from mainframe.), No hard disk for around $3,000. My first lug gable the IBM P70, OS/2 1.2 Extended Edition, MSDOS, Windows 3.1, Microsoft Word, Intel 9600 EX Modem, Hyper Access software, Token Ring Built in, slot for Ethernet, external monitor port (dual monitor mode), 8512 Color Monitor, floppy drive and hard disk (120 MB I believe) cost over $5,000. Made well over $15,000 working out of a hotel room on a consulting contract in a few weeks with that sexy heavy beast which was state of the art at the time. so was well worth the purchase.

A Intel Celeron M running at 900 MHz sub notebook, 512MB of RAM, 4GB SSD drive, 10/100 & WiFi built in; Web Cam, Audio and Mic ports, 3 USB ports, MMC.SD slot, external monitor port for $300 - $400 is something else... warning...slow loading flash; wiki page.

I could probably fit 9+ sub Notebooks the size of the Asus Eee PC in the IBM P70 leather carrying case, lol.

Thanks to the many great posts here I am learning this is a bit art as it is science and I do not mind experimenting with different configurations...

Read on if you need specifics about my configurations and PCs to help me...honestly looking for the right answers. I too would love to be able to set a MIN and MAX memory point (as another poster mentioned above) to begin swapping IN/OUT only allowing the swap if it is honestly required. Sounds like that is NOT possible at this time, though I sneakingly expect there might be a way...one day as I learn more...might be time to pick up programming in C again.

On my Asus EeePC I have noticed that my free memory continues to shrink, down to around 4 - 6KB free, at which point my performance suffers greatly. If an app fails or my Network Adapter hic ups when it is this low it can cause a lockup situation for me. I thought about swap space, but based on reading about hard disk performance issues, that does not sound like a good solution. ( Or is it?)

Now I do this to myself, I will often have

They're called 'nettops' -- MSI and Asus both make them, as well as Koolu, CompuLab, and Everex.

I refer you to the Asus ExpressGate technology - an embedded linux system on their newer mobos.

Look at what they are afraid of:

http://eeepc.asus.com/global/

See that category list with links? It will keep growing and growing and the only thing you DON'T need to run cloud based client computing is the bulky XP or Vista. Launching "Office" on a EeePC is going to Google Docs site for example. It is all WWW standards and other standard networking products.

They figure there is no place for them with current offers. Back in 1995, Marc Andreessen made the biggest mistake by openly saying "Netscape will soon reduce Windows to] a poorly debugged set of device drivers.", the windows of 1995 he talks about is not existent anymore, it is full of hacks on hacks, patches on patches, 5-6 frameworks doing same job. So people look to a system which will do everything on Web with least overhead. It is Linux.

All they now need is some "DirectCloud" with the usual suspect coding some Linux non working backwards clone. You get what I mean.

The extremely-high-end Pro

Dell XPS

the tiny Mini

Dell Studio Hybrid
Asus EeeBox

the sleek, integrated iMac.

Dell XPS One
HP Touchsmart

Not the EEE laptop, the EEE Box It can do 720p, but not 1080p.

I have one of the Veriozon windows mobile phones, it has .net compact framework, and even compact sql server.

I got it mainly because I could write my own c# apps for the thing. Visual studio even has a nice emulator built in.

I can't quite get over Windows Mobile's horrific interface design. I mean, if I wanted a small desktop, I think I could just buy one. It's not really designed to be controlled with fingers (opting instead for a stylus), and is a pretty huge pain to use. Not that some of the other entries in the mobile phone OS market aren't horrible ... Nokia managed to get around the finger problem recently with their menu system in Maemo, even though that's not really available for phones.

Here's to hoping Android works better in "real life". Running it under Windows Mobile is painful at best.