IBM and Intel have very large open source interests of their own, and IBM, if they could help it, would move entirely to an open-source model. Intel just works with whoever makes them the most money, and therefore they have agreements with both Microsoft and Linux companies. This is why I don't buy Intel.
VA exited the hardware market, thereby committing suicide. It's become obvious over the past years that the money is to be made selling hardware, not software. If VA was more successful selling hardware, they'd probably be a big name (or be acquired by one) by 2005.
Corel is not selling their Linux arm, they're licensing it. After about 2 years, they have the option to renegotiate the licensing, sell it outright, or keep it for themself (AFAIK).
Ebiz has no real product, and if they do it's nothing special (ThinkGeek is bigger than LinuxMall, and both of them are so insanely small it's not even funny).
The only thing making Red Hat "by far the most successful of the group" is their preloading deals with Dell et al. Mandrake's stock price is actually pretty stable; it's been around 6 euros for the past month. I expect it to stay around for a while longer.
Alternatively this could be seen as a good indicator that companies involvement in open source has to be all or nothing. Look at all the Linux companies around; how come Caldera's doing worst out of everybody, and they're the most-proprietary ones?
On a different note, what happens to SCO Unix once Caldera dies?
You're calling these Symbian products, though AFAIK Psion used to make these. However, Psion recently ditched their handheld business. Is Symbian picking up where Psion left off, or will someone need to create a new competitor to Palm and MS?
AMD and Intel are both trying to make fast chips. Why should AMD need to advertise their chips in a way favorable to Intel? AMD's advertising their chips based on a consistent formula that takes into account megahertz and instructions per clock cycle. Anyone who wants can find out exactly what that formula is (when they start releasing processors according to the new numbers, at least). There's nothing dishonest about emphasizing a spec that makes their processor look better. For example, you could say it's just as dishonest that Intel doesn't advertise their processors' performance on Photoshop, or that Apple/IBM/Motorola don't emphasize their processors' integer performance. The manufacturers choose to emphasize whatever makes them look best; the only thing barely significant about what AMD is doing is that they're creating their own spec, albeit one that fairly compares their processor against the competition. Consumers deserve to know which processor is actually better, and if they won't listen to articles debuking the "Megahertz Myth", then hopefully they'll at least listen to bigger numbers.
Though I agree with you completely, I don't know of any better news sites that don't have biases of their own (TheRegister towards Linux, ActiveWin and BetaNews towards Windows, etc.) Any sites you'd care to recommend?
It seems more dishonest to make your pipeline longer, because at least when you get an AMD Athlon 1600 you can check the BIOS clock-frequency listing and see how fast it's really running, whereas when you get an Intel Pentium 4 1600, even the BIOS says it's running at 1600, though the chip in Athlon terms is running at around 1200 (correct me if I'm wrong on that number, but I know it's nowhere near 1600). The most honest thing to do is to have a 4 stage pipeline and tell the true megahertz (what Apple did with the original g4), but looking to Apple as an example, this doesn't generate sales. This is why Apple, on the G4e, made the pipeline 7 stages long, and on the G5 may be making it even longer. No matter what, if the number you're telling consumers is higher than the MHz of the processor would be if it had been designed with a 4-stage pipeline, it's deception. I don't think it's a bad thing, because in general AMD has been a better company in other ways than Intel (and with better processors), and I'd rather see them get more market share than Intel.
For the record, the Intel processor is inflated in the way I was implying, which was that any method of making the number look better than the performance is inflation. Both Intel and AMD are guilty of this (Athlons do have a 14-stage pipeline), and AMD's move to use performance ratings instead of megahertz is practically an easier-to-implement version of increasing their processors to 20-stage pipelines.
For anybody who thinks AMD should try to disprove the Megahertz Myth, see this site: http://www.apple.com/g4/myth/ . Yes, it is at Apple. Yes, this is the same Apple that has been trying to get people to understand that megahertz isn't everything since 1999 (or whatever year they got stuck at 500mhz). Clearly, it hasn't worked for Apple.
While Slashdotters seem quick to point out that performance ratings didn't work for Cyrix, remember that Cyrix used them since the beginning. AMD has become an established competitor to Intel without using performance ratings, so when consumers see the AMD brand combined with a 1600/1.6 or 2000/2.0 number, they'll say, "This is a bigger number than the Intel chip, I'll get this."
If Intel tries to prove that AMD's numbers are fake, AMD has just as many arguments showing how Intel, by having a 20 stage pipeline, greatly inflated their MHz too. The only processor not guilty of inflating the MHz this way, in fact, is the G4 (even the G4e inflates it a bit, with a 7 stage pipeline, though this is arguably acceptable). Therefore, if you don't want to buy a MHz-inflated system, get a Mac.
> Naturally, the teacher would answer (except
> in the cases of 18-year-olds or whatever).
Why are you making such a big distinction between 18-year-olds and younger students? Do people magically gain the ability to take care of all of this themselves on their 18th birthday? Yes, it may just be "a parent and teacher both doing their jobs", but somehow you believe that they should no longer be able to complete this job once the kid turned 18.
IMHO, any kid who can demonstrate competency (regardless of age) in areas such as schoolwork, attendance, and other related issues should be allowed to sign a waiver similar to the one 18-year-olds do now, giving them control over their school lives instead of their parents.
How'd you sell your collection? I'm trying to do that; I have the problem that most of my cards are newer (Urza's Saga, 6th Edition and on), so there's not too much antique value. The best I can do now is to list it on eBay, but do you have any better advice?
I'm a left-libertarian; I think that government should be nonexistent except for a court system, and everything else should be left to the people. I am fully in favor of a voluntary rating system, as long as it's industry-created and stores choose on their own what to do with certain rated games; however, the minute government touches it, I'm out. When we start restricting games to people at certain ages, it only makes the people who can't play these games want to play them games more (and possibly get them illegally), and just leads the way to restriction to older and older ages until we have total censorship.
1: Pretty soon, wireless Net access will be a reality. Already there's working 802.11 implementations, especially AirPort, and there's definitely room for expansion.
2: Laptops and other portables could theoretically be embedded devices. What if your laptop was running that same OS as your.NET-enabled desktop, but had the 1 or 2 applications that you were planning on using on a CompactFlash card or similar? You could store your work on the same card and just stick it in your computer when you got home, which would hopefully update all documents on the server to their most current versions, and clear the Flash card. (Note: this probably won't happen anytime soon.:)
3: Require a username for using.NET, which would also be your email name (this works well with M$'s and Apple's multi-user feature on XP and OS9, respectively, although for single users you could use auto-login on your own computer). On shared computers, you could just log in and instantly access all your documents; this way you don't even need to be carrying around this laptop everywhere you go. Obviously the downside is that you couldn't work in parks, but possibly that's a good thing for park-viewers without computers?
I personally think #3 is the best solution.
This is good even from Microsoft's perspective. They no longer have to support people using older programs or operating systems (because they don't exist), fix any install problems (or if they do they only have to fix them once) or distribute ANY updates and/or service packs. Theoretically, they don't even have to report bugs (because they can fix them transparently), and avoid both hackers and excessive media attention. The only problems Microsoft could have is keeping all the NT servers running, and they can outsource that to dedicated ASPs, making Microsoft (and Sun, and Oracle, etc.) application developers and multiple other companies (Dell, IBM, maybe some startups) service providers. The percentage of people who would no longer have problems with install or repair FAR outweighs the percentage of people who would have problems learning the (barely changed) new system, even including the people who get cut off when they didn't pay their renewal fee.
Subscription-based software is much different than auto-updating software, or updates in general. When you turn on your computer with.NET installed on it, it would load up a copy of some embedded MS OS, and then present you with a desktop, possibly a web browser, possibly a Neptune-esque interface, with a list of programs that you're currently subscribed to. None of these programs would actually be on your computer, you'd be running them off of the server. Very likely, this computer wouldn't even have a hard drive, so updating software would be completely server-based. No client steps would be necessary.
A good comparison is with television. Most people buy a TV and/or speaker system, but rent a set-top box, remote control, and pay a monthly fee for their cable. You get a basic set of channels, and then you can pick additional sets that you want, which cost an extra fee to get. Some services are also available at a pay-per-use charge, and most services let you order the pay-per-uses straight from your TV.
Now imagine that your computer used.NET or comparable subscription-ware. You might buy your monitor but rent the "set-top box" (the computer itself), and the "remote control" (the keyboard and mouse). Depending on your service provider, you would get a different set of base "channels" (software) and have different optional packages and/or pay-per-use services.
To all those people who don't think that Joe Sixpack would pay a monthly fee for software: Imagine if, instead of getting cable, Joe bought one (or many) DVDs that had everything that was going to be on TV on a certain channel for two years. He had to buy each channel separately, although they were sometimes available as bundled packs. Some of the better channels required that you left the DVD in while you watched it, while others just let you "install" them to the TV and watch them whenever you felt like it. How much do you think he'd like that?
For a good non-Microsoft example of subscription-ware, check out the New Internet Computer at http://www.newinternetcomputer.com/. This computer has a version of Linux with a base set of installed software on a CD, and you update the software by putting in a new CD. The device costs about $325 with monitor. However, the most promising use of this is with Citrix MetaFrame software, which lets you run Windows or UNIX software from a server, without installing it. Obviously, it can be auto-updated.
Subscription-ware is definitely the future, if not just because Microsoft is soon going to make that the only thing they offer. However, there's always non-M$ alternatives, even ones that take advantage of subscription-ware. Use them while you can.
Actually, I'm in a position much like the interviewee, only 2+ yrs younger, and actively looking for a better 8-12 magnet school (I currently attend our public school, pretty small due to our town's hating to spend money on schools and being small to begin with). Do you know anything about Massachusetts's magnet school program, or just Mississippi's?
They made that X-shaped demo box, and if worst comes to worst they can sell that thing for $500 below cost. It'll cancel out with the money falling out of the holes from Bill Gates' pocket.
First, I haven't yet seen a single incoming port that we block (I'm a student, not faculty).
Your first meaning is more like the kind of standard that IEEE makes, which are simply documents that tell exactly how a given item works. This use is approximately the opposite of proprietary, in the sense that it's open for multiple uses by multiple vendors (or users).
The other meaning is what I was referring to, a de facto standard. In this sense, WinNT and Telnet are both standards, just because you know that if you make an application compatible with WinNT (or, more precisely, Win9X), or Telnet, then it will work with the majority of PCs. Yes, you can make apps for Linux, and SSH-compatible servers, but a lot of people won't be able to use them.
Why are all web pages programmed in HTML, and why do people get so mad when you use extensions or stuff like Flash? Because it's non-standard, by the latter definition. Sometimes you're stuck on a computer without Flash, or without the latest IE. If people just used the STANDARD, then you could see it from anywhere, but instead you have to boot up into Windows just to look at the page. I've heard of cases when people have this problem with web pages they've made themself. Using SSH isn't going to help as per this kind of standard problem, which is why I use Telnet.
Also, see my reply to the other guy for why I don't care about the security factor.
The smiley meant that I intended it as a joke. I know for a fact that no matter what I do, nothing can make my connection secure. That's why I don't care. Anything that I really need secured, normally web-based transactions with an SSN or something, I do with IE5, 128-bit encryption. Obviously not perfect, but it's secure enough against your amateur hacker with a used 486 or Pentium they got from freeboxen or something. Beyond that, I just assume anything I do is insecure, and I don't care. My box at home has no services open, and no important documents; if someone hacks it, I just reinstall.
I recognize that sometimes you really need security. The best solution to that: disconnect all important computers from the Internet; use your own private (and proprietary) network.
I still think that all computers should start coming with CompactFlash drives, and we should use those instead of these online file-storing services. Why can't anyone realize that the most secure place for stuff is under the mattress (essentially)?
More and more people every day are using the Internet on cell phones instead of computers. If this continues at the same pace, eventually no one will have anything that could possibly have ports open. Servers will need to be secure, but most servers are running BSD instead...
Why is everyone forgetting that SSH is nonstandard? At my school we have NCSA Telnet installed on every computer, and not SSH. If I had SSH instead of telnet on my home computer, it would be more secure but I couldn't get in.
Anyway, I have root access disabled remotely, so now they have to guess two passwords and a username.:)
1. Sega makes this card with a proprietary GD-ROM drive, but the drive can also be used as a CD-ROM drive. They sell it to OEMs who make "gaming workstations":). They also make a stand-alone kit so people don't have to buy brand-new computers.
2. Sega converts their games to DVD-ROMs, and includes DreamCast emulation. Eventually, most/all of the games get ported to PC native.
3. Microsoft makes a big partnership with Sega where Sega sells them the hardware assets for a large sum of money and becomes an X-Box developer.
4. Microsoft buys Sega and merges Sega's assets with their other games into Microsoft Games Division.
Buy a 64MB memory module. It's still cheaper than buying one of these cards and a motherboard to plug it into, and anything that doesn't come built in (most 810e mbd's have a LOT of stuff integrated)
Buy an 810e motherboard. It has integrated video, and you can pick one up (sometimes) for less then or equal to $150. A whole motherboard for the price of these "budget" video cards.
Slashdot Mirror
IBM and Intel have very large open source interests of their own, and IBM, if they could help it, would move entirely to an open-source model. Intel just works with whoever makes them the most money, and therefore they have agreements with both Microsoft and Linux companies. This is why I don't buy Intel.
VA exited the hardware market, thereby committing suicide. It's become obvious over the past years that the money is to be made selling hardware, not software. If VA was more successful selling hardware, they'd probably be a big name (or be acquired by one) by 2005.
Corel is not selling their Linux arm, they're licensing it. After about 2 years, they have the option to renegotiate the licensing, sell it outright, or keep it for themself (AFAIK).
Ebiz has no real product, and if they do it's nothing special (ThinkGeek is bigger than LinuxMall, and both of them are so insanely small it's not even funny).
The only thing making Red Hat "by far the most successful of the group" is their preloading deals with Dell et al. Mandrake's stock price is actually pretty stable; it's been around 6 euros for the past month. I expect it to stay around for a while longer.
Alternatively this could be seen as a good indicator that companies involvement in open source has to be all or nothing. Look at all the Linux companies around; how come Caldera's doing worst out of everybody, and they're the most-proprietary ones?
On a different note, what happens to SCO Unix once Caldera dies?
You're calling these Symbian products, though AFAIK Psion used to make these. However, Psion recently ditched their handheld business. Is Symbian picking up where Psion left off, or will someone need to create a new competitor to Palm and MS?
AMD and Intel are both trying to make fast chips. Why should AMD need to advertise their chips in a way favorable to Intel? AMD's advertising their chips based on a consistent formula that takes into account megahertz and instructions per clock cycle. Anyone who wants can find out exactly what that formula is (when they start releasing processors according to the new numbers, at least). There's nothing dishonest about emphasizing a spec that makes their processor look better. For example, you could say it's just as dishonest that Intel doesn't advertise their processors' performance on Photoshop, or that Apple/IBM/Motorola don't emphasize their processors' integer performance. The manufacturers choose to emphasize whatever makes them look best; the only thing barely significant about what AMD is doing is that they're creating their own spec, albeit one that fairly compares their processor against the competition. Consumers deserve to know which processor is actually better, and if they won't listen to articles debuking the "Megahertz Myth", then hopefully they'll at least listen to bigger numbers.
Though I agree with you completely, I don't know of any better news sites that don't have biases of their own (TheRegister towards Linux, ActiveWin and BetaNews towards Windows, etc.) Any sites you'd care to recommend?
For the record, the Intel processor is inflated in the way I was implying, which was that any method of making the number look better than the performance is inflation. Both Intel and AMD are guilty of this (Athlons do have a 14-stage pipeline), and AMD's move to use performance ratings instead of megahertz is practically an easier-to-implement version of increasing their processors to 20-stage pipelines.
For anybody who thinks AMD should try to disprove the Megahertz Myth, see this site: http://www.apple.com/g4/myth/ . Yes, it is at Apple. Yes, this is the same Apple that has been trying to get people to understand that megahertz isn't everything since 1999 (or whatever year they got stuck at 500mhz). Clearly, it hasn't worked for Apple.
While Slashdotters seem quick to point out that performance ratings didn't work for Cyrix, remember that Cyrix used them since the beginning. AMD has become an established competitor to Intel without using performance ratings, so when consumers see the AMD brand combined with a 1600/1.6 or 2000/2.0 number, they'll say, "This is a bigger number than the Intel chip, I'll get this."
If Intel tries to prove that AMD's numbers are fake, AMD has just as many arguments showing how Intel, by having a 20 stage pipeline, greatly inflated their MHz too. The only processor not guilty of inflating the MHz this way, in fact, is the G4 (even the G4e inflates it a bit, with a 7 stage pipeline, though this is arguably acceptable). Therefore, if you don't want to buy a MHz-inflated system, get a Mac.
this is slightly disturbing.
:)
not that there's an oligopoly in the cable ISP market or anything...
> Naturally, the teacher would answer (except
> in the cases of 18-year-olds or whatever).
Why are you making such a big distinction between 18-year-olds and younger students? Do people magically gain the ability to take care of all of this themselves on their 18th birthday? Yes, it may just be "a parent and teacher both doing their jobs", but somehow you believe that they should no longer be able to complete this job once the kid turned 18.
IMHO, any kid who can demonstrate competency (regardless of age) in areas such as schoolwork, attendance, and other related issues should be allowed to sign a waiver similar to the one 18-year-olds do now, giving them control over their school lives instead of their parents.
How'd you sell your collection? I'm trying to do that; I have the problem that most of my cards are newer (Urza's Saga, 6th Edition and on), so there's not too much antique value. The best I can do now is to list it on eBay, but do you have any better advice?
I'm a left-libertarian; I think that government should be nonexistent except for a court system, and everything else should be left to the people. I am fully in favor of a voluntary rating system, as long as it's industry-created and stores choose on their own what to do with certain rated games; however, the minute government touches it, I'm out. When we start restricting games to people at certain ages, it only makes the people who can't play these games want to play them games more (and possibly get them illegally), and just leads the way to restriction to older and older ages until we have total censorship.
There's three solutions to your problem.
.NET-enabled desktop, but had the 1 or 2 applications that you were planning on using on a CompactFlash card or similar? You could store your work on the same card and just stick it in your computer when you got home, which would hopefully update all documents on the server to their most current versions, and clear the Flash card. (Note: this probably won't happen anytime soon. :)
.NET, which would also be your email name (this works well with M$'s and Apple's multi-user feature on XP and OS9, respectively, although for single users you could use auto-login on your own computer). On shared computers, you could just log in and instantly access all your documents; this way you don't even need to be carrying around this laptop everywhere you go. Obviously the downside is that you couldn't work in parks, but possibly that's a good thing for park-viewers without computers?
1: Pretty soon, wireless Net access will be a reality. Already there's working 802.11 implementations, especially AirPort, and there's definitely room for expansion.
2: Laptops and other portables could theoretically be embedded devices. What if your laptop was running that same OS as your
3: Require a username for using
I personally think #3 is the best solution.
This is good even from Microsoft's perspective. They no longer have to support people using older programs or operating systems (because they don't exist), fix any install problems (or if they do they only have to fix them once) or distribute ANY updates and/or service packs. Theoretically, they don't even have to report bugs (because they can fix them transparently), and avoid both hackers and excessive media attention. The only problems Microsoft could have is keeping all the NT servers running, and they can outsource that to dedicated ASPs, making Microsoft (and Sun, and Oracle, etc.) application developers and multiple other companies (Dell, IBM, maybe some startups) service providers. The percentage of people who would no longer have problems with install or repair FAR outweighs the percentage of people who would have problems learning the (barely changed) new system, even including the people who get cut off when they didn't pay their renewal fee.
A good comparison is with television. Most people buy a TV and/or speaker system, but rent a set-top box, remote control, and pay a monthly fee for their cable. You get a basic set of channels, and then you can pick additional sets that you want, which cost an extra fee to get. Some services are also available at a pay-per-use charge, and most services let you order the pay-per-uses straight from your TV.
Now imagine that your computer used .NET or comparable subscription-ware. You might buy your monitor but rent the "set-top box" (the computer itself), and the "remote control" (the keyboard and mouse). Depending on your service provider, you would get a different set of base "channels" (software) and have different optional packages and/or pay-per-use services.
To all those people who don't think that Joe Sixpack would pay a monthly fee for software: Imagine if, instead of getting cable, Joe bought one (or many) DVDs that had everything that was going to be on TV on a certain channel for two years. He had to buy each channel separately, although they were sometimes available as bundled packs. Some of the better channels required that you left the DVD in while you watched it, while others just let you "install" them to the TV and watch them whenever you felt like it. How much do you think he'd like that?
For a good non-Microsoft example of subscription-ware, check out the New Internet Computer at http://www.newinternetcomputer.com/. This computer has a version of Linux with a base set of installed software on a CD, and you update the software by putting in a new CD. The device costs about $325 with monitor. However, the most promising use of this is with Citrix MetaFrame software, which lets you run Windows or UNIX software from a server, without installing it. Obviously, it can be auto-updated.
Subscription-ware is definitely the future, if not just because Microsoft is soon going to make that the only thing they offer. However, there's always non-M$ alternatives, even ones that take advantage of subscription-ware. Use them while you can.
Actually, I'm in a position much like the interviewee, only 2+ yrs younger, and actively looking for a better 8-12 magnet school (I currently attend our public school, pretty small due to our town's hating to spend money on schools and being small to begin with). Do you know anything about Massachusetts's magnet school program, or just Mississippi's?
But there's no 's' in Burt Bacharach!
And it would be even funnier than that to see eBay put itself up for sale on itself.
You know, if we were all running the GNU Hurd and this was just another server, it would actually be pretty useful. :)
They made that X-shaped demo box, and if worst comes to worst they can sell that thing for $500 below cost. It'll cancel out with the money falling out of the holes from Bill Gates' pocket.
First, I haven't yet seen a single incoming port that we block (I'm a student, not faculty).
Your first meaning is more like the kind of standard that IEEE makes, which are simply documents that tell exactly how a given item works. This use is approximately the opposite of proprietary, in the sense that it's open for multiple uses by multiple vendors (or users).
The other meaning is what I was referring to, a de facto standard. In this sense, WinNT and Telnet are both standards, just because you know that if you make an application compatible with WinNT (or, more precisely, Win9X), or Telnet, then it will work with the majority of PCs. Yes, you can make apps for Linux, and SSH-compatible servers, but a lot of people won't be able to use them.
Why are all web pages programmed in HTML, and why do people get so mad when you use extensions or stuff like Flash? Because it's non-standard, by the latter definition. Sometimes you're stuck on a computer without Flash, or without the latest IE. If people just used the STANDARD, then you could see it from anywhere, but instead you have to boot up into Windows just to look at the page. I've heard of cases when people have this problem with web pages they've made themself. Using SSH isn't going to help as per this kind of standard problem, which is why I use Telnet.
Also, see my reply to the other guy for why I don't care about the security factor.
The smiley meant that I intended it as a joke. I know for a fact that no matter what I do, nothing can make my connection secure. That's why I don't care. Anything that I really need secured, normally web-based transactions with an SSN or something, I do with IE5, 128-bit encryption. Obviously not perfect, but it's secure enough against your amateur hacker with a used 486 or Pentium they got from freeboxen or something. Beyond that, I just assume anything I do is insecure, and I don't care. My box at home has no services open, and no important documents; if someone hacks it, I just reinstall.
I recognize that sometimes you really need security. The best solution to that: disconnect all important computers from the Internet; use your own private (and proprietary) network.
I still think that all computers should start coming with CompactFlash drives, and we should use those instead of these online file-storing services. Why can't anyone realize that the most secure place for stuff is under the mattress (essentially)?
Don't tell me that this is repetitive, I know.
More and more people every day are using the Internet on cell phones instead of computers. If this continues at the same pace, eventually no one will have anything that could possibly have ports open. Servers will need to be secure, but most servers are running BSD instead...
:)
Why is everyone forgetting that SSH is nonstandard? At my school we have NCSA Telnet installed on every computer, and not SSH. If I had SSH instead of telnet on my home computer, it would be more secure but I couldn't get in.
Anyway, I have root access disabled remotely, so now they have to guess two passwords and a username.
Stages of Sega's demise:
:). They also make a stand-alone kit so people don't have to buy brand-new computers.
1. Sega makes this card with a proprietary GD-ROM drive, but the drive can also be used as a CD-ROM drive. They sell it to OEMs who make "gaming workstations"
2. Sega converts their games to DVD-ROMs, and includes DreamCast emulation. Eventually, most/all of the games get ported to PC native.
3. Microsoft makes a big partnership with Sega where Sega sells them the hardware assets for a large sum of money and becomes an X-Box developer.
4. Microsoft buys Sega and merges Sega's assets with their other games into Microsoft Games Division.
...
Buy a 64MB memory module. It's still cheaper than buying one of these cards and a motherboard to plug it into, and anything that doesn't come built in (most 810e mbd's have a LOT of stuff integrated)
Buy an 810e motherboard. It has integrated video, and you can pick one up (sometimes) for less then or equal to $150. A whole motherboard for the price of these "budget" video cards.
Hell, Mandrake 7.0 uses XFree86 3.6 and 7.1 uses 4.0, so X isn't a big enough change...