Life is too boring with only one computer. If you have two you can afford to screw around and have fun, 'cause no matter how bad you fuck things up, you can always google up a solution on the other machine. You really ought to get a second. Even an old machine is good enough. Mine is a socket 478 Pentium 4. I got the mobo and CPU for $15 on Craigslist.
Also, with only one computer, how would you download and burn an OS disc?
The iMac is actually reasonably priced, considering that it is a $1000 monitor with $600 of laptop parts crammed around the back. It actually looks pretty good until you notice that most of the cost is a display good for at least 10 years of operation, and it's permanently attached to proprietary hardware that'll be obsolete in 3.
If a machine is so old that it cannot boot from USB or DVD, then it is highly unlikely that the machine has enough RAM or GPU power to run Ubuntu anyway.
Because 64 bit binaries have better performance. AMD64 doubles the number of addressable registers and gets rid of a lot of legacy cruft. Furthermore, nobody compiles 64 bit binaries with -march=i386. x86-64 CPUs support a minimum of SSE2.
Slashdot Mirror
Life is too boring with only one computer. If you have two you can afford to screw around and have fun, 'cause no matter how bad you fuck things up, you can always google up a solution on the other machine. You really ought to get a second. Even an old machine is good enough. Mine is a socket 478 Pentium 4. I got the mobo and CPU for $15 on Craigslist.
Also, with only one computer, how would you download and burn an OS disc?
People with legacy software on optical discs also tend to be in possession of legacy computers with optical drives.
How are you liking the global menu? The broken mouse acceleration curve? The lack of configurable font rendering?
Macs have laptop-class GPUs at best...
Portable Tor for the young'uns. It is invalueble for punching through school web filters.
A photon is neither a particle nor a wave. A photon is a photon.
The iMac is actually reasonably priced, considering that it is a $1000 monitor with $600 of laptop parts crammed around the back. It actually looks pretty good until you notice that most of the cost is a display good for at least 10 years of operation, and it's permanently attached to proprietary hardware that'll be obsolete in 3.
Whom is deprecated, sugar britches.
Foobar2000 works fine in WINE. CPU usage is a little high, but it seems to consume less memory than Rhythmbox.
That machine cannot boot from CD either. A workaround would have been needed no matter how big the install image was.
Why haven't you RMA'd your motherboard yet?
You only install Linux on old systems without x86-64 CPUs?
If a machine is so old that it cannot boot from USB or DVD, then it is highly unlikely that the machine has enough RAM or GPU power to run Ubuntu anyway.
Because DVDs read and burn faster, and they cost the same.
So you're one of those doofuses who dumps all their files in C:\ then?
Because 64 bit binaries have better performance. AMD64 doubles the number of addressable registers and gets rid of a lot of legacy cruft. Furthermore, nobody compiles 64 bit binaries with -march=i386. x86-64 CPUs support a minimum of SSE2.
â(TM)est lâ(TM)homme â"
Please stop typing your posts in MS Word.
No. The global menu on OSX sucks donkey balls too.
Wait till you see how it performs when it actually is on a netbook. Only the newer AMD Brazos platform comes close to having enough GPU grunt for it.
>1366x768
>windows
You never go aptitude full-upgrade!
Protip: Any sort of sawing on a large rigid panel (especially sheetmetal!) makes an unholy racket.
So I just have to keep tablet users out of my house?
imokaywiththis.jpg
If you want truer blacks, you stay far far away from backlit displays. If you want black that is black you get a CRT or plasma.
All else equal, a 17'' laptop is much worse than a 13'' laptop. Trust me. I have a 1366x768 17'' laptop. It's a piece of shit.