yeah, they had to increase the engine capacity to 5.8l (stroker crank or rebore?) to provide enough power for the Pentiums;-) I wonder if the 170mph top speed is with the damn peecees turned off?
All a MCSE "qualifies" you for is to know how to "rebuild" a system i.e. format the hard disk and sit there with a bunch of CDROMs and reinstall everything. At least, this is what I have gathered so-called MCSE professionals do. On a number of occasions I have had problems with NT4.0 and the company ends up paying $100/hr for some clown to come in to format my hard disk and reinstall NT.
Yeah, I probably could do better but "system administration" is what I leave to the sysadmin in deference to his self-esteem. A programmer like myself should not need to soil his hands on such grubby affairs.
I talk the talk, I walk the walk. I push Linux hard at work - I must be the biggest anti-M$ fanatic at work (which I shall be leaving in exactly two weeks). I do use Linux at work (Debian 2.0), but at the end of the day I come home to my Win95 box. Sure, I have a FreeBSD 2.1 server and a Mac Classic (in my bedroom, my Write Now 3.0 retreat) but at the end of the day I fire up my trusty P166 with Windows 95 and spend most of my time using it. Why is it so? I guess, the software I primarily use for work, ArcView GIS, that which the monthly deposit into my bank account depends on runs on Windows. Sure, there are versions for Sun and DEC boxes but I am hardly able to afford those. And over time, my peecee has become more than an operating system with its many technical failings - there's a lot of me here. There's a picture of an ex-girlfriend that's my background, there's the directory with all my pithy love letters and self-exploration crud. There's the directory with my Java musings. Over here are my favourite MIDI files played through the Yamaha XG synthesizer.
Yeah, time for a clean break. No, I don't love Windows. I don't even like it. As a matter of fact I hate it for the badly engineered piece of rubbish that it is (I am a systems analyst by trade and a hacker by background - homebrewed a Nat Semi Series 32000 sound and light machine years back). But there is a momentum to these things. There's the emotional baggage, the directories and mail spools full of momentos.
One thing I find weird about the author's sentiment is that he finds more friends amongst the Windows community. This is bizarre. Most Windows users don't care for the technology, the computing experience. They aren't passionate. For them, computing is swapping pirated games and buying the latest motherboard and 3D card. This is very, very sad. Uncritical acceptance of the Microsoft party line. They will guide your future. The truest believers I have found, those passionate about their computing experience, those who value _deep_ quality in software as opposed to superficial user interfaces. I have found those in the Linux/Java community.
What the fuck am I doing here? I love you, Cherie. I'm sure I can port your JPEG to Gnome...
"Microsoft exec dissects Linux's 'weak value proposition'"
Hardly english. I don't even know where to begin...
"Microsoft anatomizes Linux"
No such word as "anatomizes".
Consider the leading sentence - "Think of it as a burst of cold Redmond rain on the Linux parade." Think of what? This sentence should follow one that establishes what "it" is.
In the next paragraph, "far-reaching" and "sounded off" (both terms used inappropriately) are used to inconsistently refer to Muth's views on Linux.
"'... the weaker I think the value proposition is to consumers'". What kind of pseudo-authoritative gobbledy-gook is this? Muth is hardly better than the journalist.
"Muth delineated two main technical reasons".
"delineated" and "main" are used inappropriately.
I won't even go into the over use of emotive language, jargon and the overall lack of logical flow in the article. It is poorly researched, poorly presented and fails to have a point.
My high school English teacher would give it an F.
Cautionary tale for the young 'uns. Read fewer articles like these and if you must, examine them critically. If I catch you writing drivel like this for a technical report I have anything to do with - yer out on yer bum.
The PSX2 is probably fast enough to _emulate_ a PSX in software. I'd doubt if the hardware architecture is even remotely compatible to the PSX and to make it so would warrant unnecessary cost (ok, the I/O coprocessor has the same R3000 core - big deal). What would make my day if it were powerful enough to emulate a Dreamcast...
I used to work in an industry that pushed computers to their limits- - Geographical Information Systems. The demands of processing spatial datasets are incredible in terms of memory, disk and CPU usage. We're talking about trying to analyse datasets in the order of 100MB+.
My experiences with NT4 sp3 have been largely negative. While the Intel CPUs make light work of computation, if the application uses too much virtual memory the operating system goes into a kind of "seizure mode", even when the application is closed. It seldom recovers necessitating a reboot. I've observed this phenomenon with quite a few NT4 machines. On occasion, running out of VM will crash the machine entirely. I don't understand why closing an application shouldn't cause it's resources to be realeased fairly quickly in NT. I certainly never had this sort of problem running the same software, doing the same sorts of tasks on Solaris and Digital UNIX boxes.
The machines were (in those days, top-spec) IBM things with Pentium Pro 200, 128MB RAM and SCSI hard disks.
And another thing, try running a few Notepad, Calculator or Wordpad processes (say, 2 of each). These are seemingly light weight apps. Now, look at the task manager.
These are just a user's observations who hasn't looked at the technical design of NT's memory manager - just used it, hard. And, yes, the cost advantage of choosing Wintel for our new machines was hard to argue especially as the rest of the office was a Wintel environment with a peanut sys admin. Sad, really.
I wouldn't call anything capable of running Linux, let alone a full 32-bit CPU, "low end". This is quite a decent processor in any of its iterations.
But, CPUs like these hit a sweet spot for embedded developers who look for:
low power consumption low part price - enough MIPs for a specific app low price to build a system using said part high reliability (would you really use something with the Pentium's instruction set and architecture in a medical application?)
I guess if you're a rich man, go for the K6-3 and maybe get a few percentage real world difference over your K6-2. But I'm waiting for K7 - will be a big jump over my P166:-) Which will be relagated to firewall/web server/file server duties to replace my 486DX2/66 which will probably become an X-terminal (like I need another one?)...
Slashdot Mirror
yeah, they had to increase the engine capacity to 5.8l (stroker crank or rebore?) to provide enough power for the Pentiums ;-) I wonder if the 170mph top speed is with the damn peecees turned off?
-t.
Boring. Like, is this guy some kind of authority or what? Waste of bandwidth.
All a MCSE "qualifies" you for is to know how to "rebuild" a system i.e. format the hard disk and sit there with a bunch of CDROMs and reinstall everything. At least, this is what I have gathered so-called MCSE professionals do. On a number of occasions I have had problems with NT4.0 and the company ends up paying $100/hr for some clown to come in to format my hard disk and reinstall NT.
Yeah, I probably could do better but "system administration" is what I leave to the sysadmin in deference to his self-esteem. A programmer like myself should not need to soil his hands on such grubby affairs.
-t.
I talk the talk, I walk the walk. I push Linux hard at work - I must be the biggest anti-M$ fanatic at work (which I shall be leaving in exactly two weeks). I do use Linux at work (Debian 2.0), but at the end of the day I come home to my Win95 box. Sure, I have a FreeBSD 2.1 server and a Mac Classic (in my bedroom, my Write Now 3.0 retreat) but at the end of the day I fire up my trusty P166 with Windows 95 and spend most of my time using it. Why is it so? I guess, the software I primarily use for work, ArcView GIS, that which the monthly deposit into my bank account depends on runs on Windows. Sure, there are versions for Sun and DEC boxes but I am hardly able to afford those. And over time, my peecee has become more than an operating system with its many technical failings - there's a lot of me here. There's a picture of an ex-girlfriend that's my background, there's the directory with all my pithy love letters and self-exploration crud. There's the directory with my Java musings. Over here are my favourite MIDI files played through the Yamaha XG synthesizer.
Yeah, time for a clean break. No, I don't love Windows. I don't even like it. As a matter of fact I hate it for the badly engineered piece of rubbish that it is (I am a systems analyst by trade and a hacker by background - homebrewed a Nat Semi Series 32000 sound and light machine years back). But there is a momentum to these things. There's the emotional baggage, the directories and mail spools full of momentos.
One thing I find weird about the author's sentiment is that he finds more friends amongst the Windows community. This is bizarre. Most Windows users don't care for the technology, the computing experience. They aren't passionate. For them, computing is swapping pirated games and buying the latest motherboard and 3D card. This is very, very sad. Uncritical acceptance of the Microsoft party line. They will guide your future. The truest believers I have found, those passionate about their computing experience, those who value _deep_ quality in software as opposed to superficial user interfaces. I have found those in the Linux/Java community.
What the fuck am I doing here? I love you, Cherie. I'm sure I can port your JPEG to Gnome...
-t.
Where do they get 'journalists' like that?
"Microsoft exec dissects Linux's 'weak value proposition'"
Hardly english. I don't even know where to begin...
"Microsoft anatomizes Linux"
No such word as "anatomizes".
Consider the leading sentence - "Think of it as a burst of cold Redmond rain on the Linux parade." Think of what? This sentence should follow one that establishes what "it" is.
In the next paragraph, "far-reaching" and "sounded off" (both terms used inappropriately) are used to inconsistently refer to Muth's views on Linux.
"'... the weaker I think the value proposition is to consumers'". What kind of pseudo-authoritative gobbledy-gook is this? Muth is hardly better than the journalist.
"Muth delineated two main technical reasons".
"delineated" and "main" are used inappropriately.
I won't even go into the over use of emotive language, jargon and the overall lack of logical flow in the article. It is poorly researched, poorly presented and fails to have a point.
My high school English teacher would give it an F.
Cautionary tale for the young 'uns. Read fewer articles like these and if you must, examine them critically. If I catch you writing drivel like this for a technical report I have anything to do with - yer out on yer bum.
-t.
The PSX2 is probably fast enough to _emulate_ a PSX in software. I'd doubt if the hardware architecture is even remotely compatible to the PSX and to make it so would warrant unnecessary cost (ok, the I/O coprocessor has the same R3000 core - big deal). What would make my day if it were powerful enough to emulate a Dreamcast...
-t.
I used to work in an industry that pushed computers to their limits- - Geographical Information Systems. The demands of processing spatial datasets are incredible in terms of memory, disk and CPU usage. We're talking about trying to analyse datasets in the order of 100MB+.
My experiences with NT4 sp3 have been largely negative. While the Intel CPUs make light work of computation, if the application uses too much virtual memory the operating system goes into a kind of "seizure mode", even when the application is closed. It seldom recovers necessitating a reboot. I've observed this phenomenon with quite a few NT4 machines. On occasion, running out of VM will crash the machine entirely. I don't understand why closing an application shouldn't cause it's resources to be realeased fairly quickly in NT. I certainly never had this sort of problem running the same software, doing the same sorts of tasks on Solaris and Digital UNIX boxes.
The machines were (in those days, top-spec) IBM things with Pentium Pro 200, 128MB RAM and SCSI hard disks.
And another thing, try running a few Notepad, Calculator or Wordpad processes (say, 2 of each). These are seemingly light weight apps. Now, look at the task manager.
These are just a user's observations who hasn't looked at the technical design of NT's memory manager - just used it, hard. And, yes, the cost advantage of choosing Wintel for our new machines was hard to argue especially as the rest of the office was a Wintel environment with a peanut sys admin. Sad, really.
-t.
I wouldn't call anything capable of running Linux, let alone a full 32-bit CPU, "low end". This is quite a decent processor in any of its iterations.
But, CPUs like these hit a sweet spot for embedded developers who look for:
low power consumption
low part price - enough MIPs for a specific app
low price to build a system using said part
high reliability (would you really use something with the Pentium's instruction set and architecture in a medical application?)
-t.
> "There was no way to do this kind of operation reasonably before the PIII," Staiger said.
So an extra 10-33% makes it "reasonable"? C'mon.
> Graphics programs are clearly the biggest beneficiaries of the PIII's prowess, analysts said.
Choice word "prowess". Which analysts said what?
> The added speed and 70 new instructions make 3D games come alive and voice recognition sing.
Now this hyperbole is getting ridiculous.
Intel must put out pretty good lunches and drinks sessions to attract this sort of "objectivity" in journalism.
-t. (should've become a tech journo)
I guess if you're a rich man, go for the K6-3 and maybe get a few percentage real world difference over your K6-2. But I'm waiting for K7 - will be a big jump over my P166 :-) Which will be relagated to firewall/web server/file server duties to replace my 486DX2/66 which will probably become an X-terminal (like I need another one?)...
-t.
hmm... and a random number generator? Must be yet another bug in the manufacturing or design process.
-t.