Slashdot Mirror

There's a substantial thread on Ars Technica's forums that contains a ton of benchmark results. What it boils down to is that if you have a decent processor (Athlon XP 1600+ or better) and an NVidia GF4 Ti4600, you'll end up with something like 1500-1700 3DMarks. If you pull the GF4 out and slap in a Radeon 9700 Pro (and get the appropriate drivers installed, of course), your score would shoot up to over 4000 3DMarks.

I've got a Ti4600, and 3DMark 2003 runs like ass. Fortunately, Splinter Cell plays just fine, so I'll ignore the benchmark and get on with actually using the computer.

Here's the Slashdot article and the original at Ars Technica.

...In the NT admin forum. Article is here.

I thought engineering was something you had to go to college for, not some 'school' in a strip mall that does computer 'certs'

When it comes to network engineering (as opposed to chip design and things of that nature) not really. Witness this post over on ArsTechnica. I don't think there are any schools out there that teach you what is required to answer that question.

These systems have everything going for them in terms of speed EXCEPT the processors. A two-processor system should go like a bat out of hell, but the current crop matches, not excels, in speed tests with single-processor Macs of a comparable speed. The processors are bottlenecked. These new desktops were designed with faster or more efficient processors in mind, and they didn't come.

Well, I think the dual-processor bottleneck is more of an issue with the poor system controllers and DDR implementation on the current PowerMacs. The processor is definitely the biggest problem, but, speaking as somebody who used to work at a semiconductor company that made system controllers and 'northbridge' chips, I can tell you that Apple's system controllers leave something to be desired. It's not all Motorolla's fault.

There have been a slew of comments about the topic of new Motorola processors and Apple's DDR/controller implementation at Ars Technica if you're interested.

- j

We're not buying them because there's nothing compelling. An eMac is nice, but it's an all-in-one. This may work well for a school, but everybody around here realizes that monitors almost always out-live just about every other component. The iBook is a great laptop (and the 12" PowerBook is an excellent option for those that want a G4), but not everybody wants a laptop.

The type of people who read slashdot have different requirements than most computer users. I'd be willing to bet that what most people here want is an eMac at a similar cost-effective price-point without the monitor, or a G4 with a decent processor. I've personally decided to get a G4 upgrade for my B&W G3 because there's simply nothing worthwhile coming out of Apple that isn't a laptop.

Need some numbers? How about these:
(Stolen from Nevyn in this thread at Ars).

PowerMac (tower) Sales:
Q1 2003: 158,000 units
Q4 2002: 176,000 units
Q3 2002: 169,000 units
Q1 2002: 212,000 units

That's a staggering downward trend that proves what we all know -- when it comes to anything besides laptops, Apple can't deliver.

- j

at first i (like many slashdotters, from the looks of some of the comments) thought apple had come up with some new technology for changing the color of the computer itself.

however, after seeing this picture posted on ars technica, it looks like what they're really doing is patenting a method of lighting. the picture suggests a light inside the monitor and the computer that illuminates the device. sounds like mod kiddes putting cold cathode lights and windows in their cases, doesn't it?

People are discussing this over at Ars Technica, here.

There was a fix for this posted a while back. Basically, it boils down to the WiFi antenna being out of place a little bit. Here's the thread at Ars about it.

1. Ars should have put a medical warning up front. They give all sorts of disclaimers when they discuss overclocking and hardware modifications. Splinting is a physical modification and should be taken as seriously.

2. The review treated the splints like a new MS mouse, video card, or other general use computing accessory, which they are not. The reviewer didn't offer much context for his medical condition, and his method of testing them (12 hours+ for over 3 weeks?) could be damaging. They're medical devices and don't need burn-in.

3. Their treatment/resource section at the end was heavily biased toward surgery. There was very little on the proper techniques to prevent RSI. Ars has done incredibly detailed and informative reviews of new technology (OSX, CPUs) and this was really weak, given the serious nature of the topic.

4. They lump hand conditions together as "Carpal Tunnel", which is outdated and misleading. There are a number of hand injuries that can be caused by overcomputing. Carpal Tunnel Syndrome is only one of them.

5. The Ars forum has a couple bad suggestions, which could cause additional damage to an injured person. Ars should have consulted a medical expert to dispel some myths up front.

To clarify, my 15 point "treatment plan" isn't really treatment, and I hope nobody takes it as medical advice. I'm not a doctor, and the points I listed are preventative measures that I've informally discovered through my own research and discussion with my doctor.

Check out the Ars forum and give them the hits they deserve for at least addressing the subject. I'd like to see them do a an in-depth follow-up with their usual thoroughness.

1. Over in Ars Technica's forum someone named Figa made an excellent point:

Ars Technica shouldn't be recommending medical devices to its readership, even if they're over-the-counter. I hate to think how many people will go out and buy the things instead of seeking medical advice, hoping that their pain will go away.

My doctor warned me to avoid splints specifically because they can weaken your wrists, especially if they're worn 24-7 as the author recommends. Think about what happens to muscles when you wear a cast. They atrophy!

There was a lot of lousy advice in the forum as well, which I can attest to firsthand...

Figa (quoted above) then proceeded to explain why other people's advice was bad and then gave a 15 point treatment plan :)

That said, if you're going to self-medicate with gadgetry, my vote would be to check out Kinesis's Contoured Keyboards

The keys are arranged in lines in pits in the shell of the key board. Your fingers naturally droop into the pits and then move forward and backward (rarely to the sides) to depress the appropriate key.

Claimed to make the activity of typing simulate CTS reducing exercises. I have a co-worker who has one and loves it.

dunno who else saw this, but in related news fatwallet 'protector of price and purveyor of outstanding offers' is fighting back at the same stores that went after then. especially walmart. got this newsbit over at arstechnica.

Read this comment

.. have a thread going on this, too. Link here

I'd hit it.

ArsTechnica has a discussion with the full article as well as a candid photo of Ellen for those of you who just can't get enough.

I'd hit it! (And no, its not a goatse.cx link or anything...)

Well Quantum Fireball drives are well...burning up. But then again what would you expect from a drive called a Fireball.

Linkage

Pah-leeze... when they can compete with my basement, then maybe they can be linked to on slashdot... :-)

Pah-leeze... when they can compete with my basement, then maybe they can be linked to on slashdot... :-)

Here it is.

Purchase some of the servers used to render the CGI in the first LOTR movie here .

Own a geeky piece of history!


Damn you to the pits of Mordor!

I just bought 4 (more!) TTT action figures this evening, and thought that my geek-collector mania had hit a new low - and now I see this... this server... this precious server, yes... yes, yes my precious... precious, yes, mine, all of it, mine!...

Purchase some of the servers used to render the CGI in the first LOTR movie here.

Own a geeky piece of history!

A timely article for me, this might explain the problems many others have been having with Gainward cards, claimed by an apparent Gainward rep to be due to a capacitor. Cards which under the "Golden Sample" label, tout their "quality" and thus potential for overclocking.

The problem is not "bringing more machines to bear". A big issue has to do with those purposely re-submitting the same, already-processed results, over and over again, without ever having or needing to download a new WU.

Read this thread and this one and do try to follow the links to the graphs showing the suspicious results.

And do sign the petition against cheating here.

The problem is not "bringing more machines to bear". A big issue has to do with those purposely re-submitting the same, already-processed results, over and over again, without ever having or needing to download a new WU.

Read this thread and this one and do try to follow the links to the graphs showing the suspicious results.

And do sign the petition against cheating here.

The main problem building a Mac PPC using a refurbished motherboard seemed to be the power supply, IIRC. Needs a 28v trickle feed.

Anyway, worth a read.

Build your own G4

Personally, I would only consider the Dell 1702FP (a beaufiful 17" DVI panel) or the Dell 2000FP (a huge 20" panel that can be had for $1300 if you apply some Dell discounts). Samsungs are OK but I don't like their panels' piss poor black reproduction. If you want your computer to look hip go get a Samsung, but if you want a screen that delivers beautiful images then Dell is the better vendor even if their case styling isn't as nice.

Search the forums on Ars and you will see that a large problem with the TiBooks is that the antenna inside often shifts during transport. There is a simple fix where you find the antenna and simply push it back into the proper place and the range suddenly increases to almost iBook like quality.

Wait even better, here is the thread:

http://arstechnica.infopop.net/OpenTopic/page?a=tp c&s=50009562&f=8300945231&m=3480972435

Ok, maybe I need a detailed explanation.

I'll be over here reading while you write:

P4 and G4

Macintoshian Achaia

Thanks...

I've seen this reported on other sites, and if I recall this is not a demo of production silicon at 4.7Ghz, but rather this is Intel overclocking their own hardware till it crashed to show that with some improvements the chip design is capable of these speeds, if not in consumer quantities at present.

Anand Tech has more information from their IDF report.

The picture here just about sums it up.

Consoles these days are upgradeable, have hard drives, modems, ethernet, DVD-ROM drives, keyboards, mice, external speakers, and monitor hookups. They seem to be slowly becoming PC's. Highly standardized and specialized PC's, but PC's all the same.

I'd suggest Ars technica...it's a great place to ask questions and the search gives you access to a bunch of older questions.

Google is another good one of course.

You can follow other people's progress here:

http://arstechnica.infopop.net/OpenTopic/page?a=tp c&s=50009562&f=8300945231&m=4820959925

Speaking of Tom's... After following the BIOS article (which is a very good read), the first forum I stumbled across was:

http://arstechnica.infopop.net/OpenTopic/page?a=tp c&s=50009562&f=77909774&m=8400979235

In this forum the poster makes a pretty convincing case that the photo of the P4 3.3GHz chip in the "Hot Contraband: P4 With 3.6 GHz" article was forged. A subtraction analysis (described in detail in the forum) shows a nice little black box indicating they just copied a "3" to make the 3.3GHz photo.

In my mind, this throws a lot of doubt on anything posted on Tom's hardware. Which is really too bad-- I liked that site a lot.

Tim

You're too fucking serious dude. Its called scroll down the page, and it works wonders for whiny fucks like you.

If slashdot's quality is waning, why not go somewhere else?.

Actions speak louder than words.

Ars Technica is stating that the P4 2.8 GHz will launch on Monday. Its looking a little pricy though.

discussion at ArsTechnica

• Explanation needed: XServe DDR really that bad?
• Up-shot of new crappy PowerMacs is ...

before drawing any conclusions from this article.

• Explanation needed: XServe DDR really that bad?
• Up-shot of new crappy PowerMacs is ...

before drawing any conclusions from this article.

Arguably, yes. Those ads help pay for the programs you enjoy. The only reason TV ads are worth anything at all is that enough people will actually sit there and watch them, instead of changing the channel, to make them worthwhile. This is also why ad-skipping in PVRs is, justifiably, being attacked. If you know anything about the TV industry, you know that ads are essential to any channel's survival, except for taxpayer-funded public access, where the money is extorted from you.

Here's a real-world example of the importance of ads, and the lengths to which an admin will go to ensure that revenue stream. If you try to evade a site's revenue stream while still trying to use that site, don't be surprised if the admin justifiably takes action against you.

In regards to your question, someone in one of the above threads posted a quote from John McCalpin at IBM that neatly answers your question:

"Please note that the old distinction between "POWER" and "PowerPC" is no longer operative. IBM's POWER3, RS64, POWER4,and subsequent processors all implement the 64-bit PowerPC architecture (of which the 32-bit PowerPC architecture is a subset). The RS64 and POWER4 (and following) processors also support the 64-bit PowerPC AS architecture, which includes some additional stuff to make the processor work in iSeries (formerly AS/400) systems."

In regards to your question, someone in one of the above threads posted a quote from John McCalpin at IBM that neatly answers your question:

"Please note that the old distinction between "POWER" and "PowerPC" is no longer operative. IBM's POWER3, RS64, POWER4,and subsequent processors all implement the 64-bit PowerPC architecture (of which the 32-bit PowerPC architecture is a subset). The RS64 and POWER4 (and following) processors also support the 64-bit PowerPC AS architecture, which includes some additional stuff to make the processor work in iSeries (formerly AS/400) systems."

Head over to Ars where there's a good discussion running about this new processor, its intended market and the differences and similarities it has with existing the POWER and PowerPC ISA's including 32 bit code execution, AltiVec/SIMD implementation and such like :-)

There are a few pages of good discussion here.

I'm not sure how many of you checked out the ARS forum for the review but I came across this comment by one of the authors(Kurt) of this article. Direct quote, "I don't particularly like banner blocking features, which is why I didn't mention them at all."

I don't think it helps the credibility of a reviewer when he openly admits to "not liking" a feature and thus refusing to mention it at all.

This review was thorougly tainted and seemed more like a, "In Defense of IE", piece rather than an objective unbiased look at Mozilla.

Ah, now that supports my theory. Page of the author:

http://arstechnica.infopop.net/OpenTopic/page?a=mp rf&s=50009562&ignore=&u=422098605



Gender: Male
Location: Where the Boys Are


heh ;-)

Like everyone says, cygwin is the winner.

You might want to check here for some hints on installation. (In addition to the user guide and readmes of course).