I have a bunch of 939/940 systems around from back when there were actually decent chipsets to be had for the platform. With decent I mean "stable" and "also runs under Linux". AM2 has just continued a trend that's started in 939s prime.
- VIA's K8Xnnn series worked great for me but now it's even
more outdated then your proverbial Debian release. Even
that I could live with if a selection of boards were
actually available. The local equivalent of pricewatch
lists a whopping 3 boards, all with the antique south bridge.
- ATIs chipsets look good on paper but there have reportedly
been some Linux compatibility issues. I'd rather let that
fruit ripen a bit more. Then there's the ATI-AMD merger
which might end the life of and support for the current
chipsests very apruptly and prematurely.
- had mixed but generally good experiences with ALi products,
but since nVidia has bought them the compile-yourself driver
sources have become progrssively harder to find.
- Leaves nVidia, and a choice between binary blob drivers that
intermittently refuse to see the onboard LAN or
reverse-engineered open ones that have the same problem. Add
to that the less-than-stellar SATA and the never-dieing
accusations of data corruption.
When my server died a few months back I borrowed a nice nVidia- based board from a friend and did a test installation: the onboard LAN could not be convinced to stay up even a day... what fun on a headless machine. At which point I switched to Intel.
What about the iBooks and PowerBooks? The PowerPC CPUs comsume a fraction of the power of their Intel equivalents, which means longer runtime. For me, one of the main points in a notebook.
Also, it's pretty damn hard to find integrated ethernet on Intel notebooks.
Firstly, this post is pro-MS - if you don't like that, don't read on:)
The difference between the computing industry and most others is that a monopoly of sorts may be necessary to avoid, yes, even greater evils,
Just imagine we had 10 OSs in the consumer/desktop market and 5 others for small businesses...
If they were all really different you'd have to retrain people for each one and couldn't rely on the fact that most of them can use Word because they use it at home.
On a related note, all non-techies I know don't give a damn about how well or badly designed their OS is - they want to work and play games on it and not have to care about compatibility. Win98 does all this really well
Even more important, the software industry. In such a scenario each app, each game would have to be ported to all OSs which would make it impossible for small companies to exist and hinder software development because more time'd have to be invested in porting and multi-plattform support that in actually developing a product
The other big players, which are remarkably inconspicous lately, would like to see MS split but only to take its position. (Sun) I doubt that you'd find fewer skeletons in their closets, were they searched.
Computers aren't at their full mass-market potential before they are ALL fully compatible with each other, but you can only have that with a standard (that nobody can agree about) or a de-facto standard (Windows) As a closing comment - I find it highly peculiar that in an allegedly free country like the US *one* judge who doesn't know f*** about the special requirements of the computer industry can rule on the subject. To me it stinks of a few more important companies/lobbies grudges' - all political. Good of the country? No way... A computer is just a computer for them and it really helps if they don't have to get into technical considerations
Slashdot Mirror
I have a bunch of 939/940 systems around from back when
... what fun on a
...
there were actually decent chipsets to be had for the platform.
With decent I mean "stable" and "also runs under Linux". AM2
has just continued a trend that's started in 939s prime.
- VIA's K8Xnnn series worked great for me but now it's even
more outdated then your proverbial Debian release. Even
that I could live with if a selection of boards were
actually available. The local equivalent of pricewatch
lists a whopping 3 boards, all with the antique south bridge.
- ATIs chipsets look good on paper but there have reportedly
been some Linux compatibility issues. I'd rather let that
fruit ripen a bit more. Then there's the ATI-AMD merger
which might end the life of and support for the current
chipsests very apruptly and prematurely.
- had mixed but generally good experiences with ALi products,
but since nVidia has bought them the compile-yourself driver
sources have become progrssively harder to find.
- Leaves nVidia, and a choice between binary blob drivers that
intermittently refuse to see the onboard LAN or
reverse-engineered open ones that have the same problem. Add
to that the less-than-stellar SATA and the never-dieing
accusations of data corruption.
When my server died a few months back I borrowed a nice nVidia-
based board from a friend and did a test installation: the onboard
LAN could not be convinced to stay up even a day
headless machine. At which point I switched to Intel.
AMC CPUs and Intel chipsets, now that
What about the iBooks and PowerBooks? The PowerPC CPUs comsume a fraction of the power of their Intel equivalents, which means longer runtime. For me, one of the main points in a notebook.
Also, it's pretty damn hard to find integrated ethernet on Intel notebooks.
Those cat-scans on "the girlfriend"s site seem to be coming from CliffyB's cat-scan page. Hardly very original :) Imzadi
So you won't be able to use it in another drive, particularly consumer DVD players... Christian
Strike the last sentence, I accidentally didn't delete it when rephrasing (should've checked the preview more carefully - sorry)
Firstly, this post is pro-MS - if you don't like that, don't read on :)
The difference between the computing industry and most others is that a monopoly of sorts may be necessary to avoid, yes, even greater evils,
Just imagine we had 10 OSs in the consumer/desktop market and 5 others for small businesses...
If they were all really different you'd have to retrain people for each one and couldn't rely on the fact that most of them can use Word because they use it at home.
On a related note, all non-techies I know don't give a damn about how well or badly designed their OS is - they want to work and play games on it and not have to care about compatibility. Win98 does all this really well
Even more important, the software industry. In such a scenario each app, each game would have to be ported to all OSs which would make it impossible for small companies to exist and hinder software development because more time'd have to be invested in porting and multi-plattform support that in actually developing a product
The other big players, which are remarkably inconspicous lately, would like to see MS split but only to take its position. (Sun) I doubt that you'd find fewer skeletons in their closets, were they searched.
Computers aren't at their full mass-market potential before they are ALL fully compatible with each other, but you can only have that with a standard (that nobody can agree about) or a de-facto standard (Windows) As a closing comment - I find it highly peculiar that in an allegedly free country like the US *one* judge who doesn't know f*** about the special requirements of the computer industry can rule on the subject. To me it stinks of a few more important companies/lobbies grudges' - all political. Good of the country? No way... A computer is just a computer for them and it really helps if they don't have to get into technical considerations