I don't know about the ISPs, but most web hosting companies would - unless you're paying for a VPS or dedicated server.
Shared hosting = Removed + notification sent.
VPS/Dedicated = Contacted with request for removal or proof within 48 hours.
A lot of these companies also have farms in the US, so pissing off US companies isn't a great strategy. And actually ending up in court would be costly, so sometimes it's easier to just comply.
ISPs like Telus and Shaw tend to pass along copyright infringement notices for torrenting, so they'd likely comply with DMCA takedown notices too, if they were heavily into web hosting.
That's pretty bad, because it doesn't factor in two other situations.
1) Copyrighted works protected by fair use, but taken down anyway. 2) Other countries that don't recognize the DMCA yet.
As a Canadian, I still have more rights than the USA's fair use permits. Every time the DMCA is used to remove content uploaded by a Canadian to a Canadian site, that sways the false usage numbers a bit.
Unfortunately, those numbers aren't tracked - but consider how many countries don't yet follow in the USA's footsteps, and how often the DMCA is used.
Right now very few DMCA takedown notices are legit. I can't remember the exact numbers, but it was appalling. Something like 20-40% would be lawful if taken to court. The rest are just to get something a company doesn't like taken off the web. It's rather like sending thugs to a business to ruff up the owner and get him to comply.
I don't know, but you're right. Any increased competition from another manufacturer will hurt AMD much more than Intel. AMD already has the bulk of the business from those willing to purchase non-Intel chips and an additional competitor will draw its customers from that group, not from Intel (who enjoys a large loyal following of customers who won't even consider anything else).
Nonsense. I'd bet less than half of Intel's customers are loyal. Most just want the most performance.
If AMD starts pumping out x86 quad-core CPUs with 64 GPU shaders inside, I can see them taking over the HTPC, high end laptop, and low end gaming machine markets.
They might even be popular for business machines, if the price is right. It all depends on where they get the power consumption to.
Really? I've seen lots of Acer computers die, but it was always the HDDs.
I'm told that they have a lower failure rate than many other manufacturers. A recent article on/. said they were below HP and some other companies, though obviously behind Asus and Dell.
The most interesting benchmark in the article is the effect that the Ion GPU has. There's another netbook review that is linked in the article to an $800 machine with a beefier CPU, the ASUS CLUV. That machine is unable to play 1080p video clips without stuttering.
Yet this beast of a netbook can do it easily, using no more than 50% CPU in windows media player. That ION GPU must be doing a heck of a lot of the calculations in order to make this possible.
Two points.
1) Average ~20% CPU usage. 2) This also has implications for games. Look at those 3Dmark scores. The ION easily has 3-4x the GPU scores. GMA 4500 CULV laptops also offload some calculations in 3Dmark to the CPU, which doesn't take place in most games. If I had to guess, I'd bet on this ION lappy getting 5-6x the framerate, which means playable games on low.
Only problem : not all video codecs are accelerated this well. Do any players/codecs out there let you watch the usual x264 video clips that pirates put up on the net with Ion GPU acceleration? Historically, Windows Media Player generally doesn't natively play anything but WMV and old codec files.
Klite mega codec pack works. It comes with all the required codecs, and MPC-HC. Search google for how to set it to use the GPU to decode it. Don't forget to have.net 3.5 installed to gain access to the EVR renderer if you choose to run XP.
The biggest problem with the machine is that it still uses a mechanical hard drive. It would be a heck of a lot faster and more responsive if it had a clean bare-bones install of Win 7 and an SSD. (no, not Linux...Linux might boot and run faster but it takes more time to tinker with it and fight to get things to run than you save, unless you are a Linux expert)
Totally agree.
Problem is, you gotta pay for the cost of that useless 5400 rpm drive when you buy this thing. Maybe you could pick up an external enclosure off newegg along with an SSD, and put the mechanical drive to use as a backup disk. Put in an OCZ vertex SSD, and make this machine scream.
I agree. I'd want to replace the drive - it wouldn't be fair to run this beast off gimped spinning platters.
The 2GB ram limitation is also a problem, though...For long term use, you really want at least 4-8 GB....
It's a netbook, mate. I don't think the N330 has virtualization acceleration. If you're doing other RAM-heavy stuff like video or photo editing, shouldn't you buy a full-sized laptop with a better screen, GPU, etc.?
Netbooks lack a DVD drive. However, to humour you I shall avoid calling it a netbook.
My parents currently have two 15.4 inch laptops. They are seeking out two slightly smaller 12 inch tiny-laptops and don't care if these tiny-laptops have a DVD drive. Why? Portability.
10 inch is too small to type properly. Also keep in mind their eyesight. This would be used as a main computer for both of them, so it has to be comfortable to use. This looks like an adequately powerful tiny laptop.
Now that said... why go for a large anything? I've got a nice 23" TV that suits my needs. I sit back on the couch and watch it from across the room. The answer, in case you missed it, is that we all have different requirements.
Attractive frontends - this will probably start yet another flamewar, but many of the java frontends are HIDEOUS
Haha!...no kidding.:D
Performance when doing large dataset manipulations - for example, determining which server had the least free space, or which one had the most obsolete users. These are fairly trivial sorting tasks, but the java version took probably twice as long and more memory (in my implementation, which may well have sucked to be frank).
This is strange. I recall reading a lengthy article about how Java got list sorting to use roughly the same number of cycles as C. My guess is either you used the wrong algorithm, used a poorly optimized JVM, or had some other setting set wrong. If Java was consuming more memory, you could be losing all your performance to garbage collection. But my experience with Java, sorting lists several hundred thousand items long, was that it worked perfectly fine and was very quick.
Support for dumping data into Excel and Word - this was a killer feature. I was able to generate SOX and sizing reports on the fly with C#. Java? No such luck. I never did get it working quickly and properly.
I just dump the data into XML files. There's lots of viewers for those. You could even whip up an AJAX frontend to prettify it.
It's subjective whether this is more difficult. I started out a web developer - my first language was javascript - so to me it's pretty easy. The kind of thing I'd spend an afternoon or two on.
So theoretically you can get easily the same quality at say 5 Mbps with a 15 fps as you can at 10 Mbps with 30 fps. I don't have specific numbers but subjectively (and empirically) it's quite possible.
In my tests of 15fps vs 30fps - TF2/L4D footage recorded with FRAPS - the 30fps got the same quality with 15-20% more bitrate.
I'm more interested in 30fps vs 60fps - but since most hardware can't handle 60fps H.264, I guess that's moot.
typically a few hundred $$$ per month... If I can recoup that cost (which I do), than I am happy. Is that such a bad thing? I'm not talking about a lot of money here either, I average around $500 per year above my raw expenses.
So lets say it costs you $2500/yr, and you pull in $3000/yr.
That's 20% profit, right? I wonder what Google's profit margins are vs revenue...
If you have.net 3.5 installed on XP, something called EVR is available. It's some sort of advanced rendering thingy. Faster than VMR9/null/etc., but with more accurate colour reproduction and GPU shaders.
You can set the number of frames buffered up to 60. I have tested it on H.264 and recorded FRAPS video. H.264 uses almost 50MB during playback, and fullscreen FRAPS used about 500-600MB. Boatloads of memory, but no dropped frames ever.
I realize what you actually want is the option to raise the disk buffer. If I could tell MPC to assume a 32MB buffer (raising the mem usage about 30MB for every video) I would, because it'd make those huge multi-gigabyte FRAPS vids start quicker. Unfortunately, I can't - I'm stuck with buffering 60 frames before beginning playback.
Why on earth would AMD use Intel's compiler for benchmarks, it just seems like common-sense that they would want to control the compiler to ensure that it's output is properly optimized for their processor.
They don't. Well, except to collect performance data I suspect.
Companies like Adobe use ICC for all their products. Maya is compiled with ICC. Many of the top programs used in benchmarking(office/productivity software) are compiled with ICC. When used as benchmarks these programs always conclude that Intel CPUs are faster.
But that's not where the antitrust comes in. Optimizing your compiler for your CPU better than a competitor's CPU is completely acceptable. What isn't is a secret handshake wink wink that shunts off 100% compatible CPUs from your competitor to a slower code path.
You can defend it by saying you planned to add new features/instructions that only your CPUs would support, but it won't hold up in court. AMD was able to prove their CPUs were 100% compatible at the time. That means if you run the faster code path, it always works fine. That's why they had grounds for an antitrust suit.
P.S. If you compile these programs with GCC, AMD usually wins the benchmarks. However, scores will be lower for both AMD and Intel CPUs. ICC just does a better job...
You could say that AMD CPUs do better with garbage code. I wonder if that'll have implications for JIT'd languages?
What I personally do to determine which CPU is fastest is look at gaming benchmarks. I like games, so why not? I pick some low resolution benchies, testing fast videocards, and for a game/engine that hits the CPU hard. Then I look at the numbers. Ex:
Athlon II X 245 (2.9ghz) - 153fps Athlon II X4 620 (2.6ghz) - 171fps Core i7 920 (2.66ghz) - 174fps Athlon II X4 630 (2.8ghz) - 175fps
Since I'll be running at high detail levels, this lets me conclude that any quad-core will work and I should go for the cheapest.
Of course, some games are compiled with ICC too... there's no perfect way to read benchmarks.
I don't buy garbage games from garbage publishers. Boycotting does work for me. It's the power that I have. I'm not required to buy the latest whiz-bang game. I'm not required to buy every game I see a commercial for. I'm not even required to buy a game RIGHT AWAY! I know. madness, huh?
I was looking at a "new" game on Steam from 2005. The trailer looked good, so I started reading up on it. High 80% reviews - great voice acting, packed with humour, okayish graphics, great quests, and repetitive combat. Then I checked the Steam forums - it doesn't run on XP 64. It doesn't work properly with VSYNC on. With new videocard drivers it has crash problems.
A game is hard to define as crap - in this case the engine is crap, yet the game could've come out in 2008 and been lauded for its great humour and voice acting.
Then I noticed more threads about people complaining that refunds weren't available. They can't even get the game to start - and unlike other services, Steam can track if you've played it - and yet there's no refund option.
I wholeheartedly support mandatory refunds if the game won't start. Being sold digital paperweights under the guise of being a playable game just isn't acceptable.
And since I've done some game programming as a hobby, I know how easy some of these issues are to correct. If large companies can't figure it out, then it's okay if heads roll and programmers get replaced. What isn't okay is selling paperweights ("crap") to your customers.
We're standing on the shoulders of giants. We have many ways to communicate concepts and preserve knowledge.
I'm guessing Octopi are suck with "word of mouth". Looking back in history, passing stuff on from parents to children didn't teach much except how to survive. Took a long time to get to where we are today.
Then again, in a relatively short period we went from surviving to flourishing. In theory, if we don't interfere with Octopi, they could have a tribal civilization in a couple thousand years!...
Troll? Seriously? Has anyone seen the way younger Chinese react to anything even resembling the mildest criticism of China or Chinese people or the Chinese government? Dude! They're pricklier than a porcupine.
Reminds me of Americans. And Linux fanboys. And Windows fanboys. And mac fanboys. And AMD/Intel fanboys. And console fanboys. And PC fanboys. And...
Slashdot Mirror
Canadian ISPs honor DMCA takedown notices? Wow.
I don't know about the ISPs, but most web hosting companies would - unless you're paying for a VPS or dedicated server.
Shared hosting = Removed + notification sent.
VPS/Dedicated = Contacted with request for removal or proof within 48 hours.
A lot of these companies also have farms in the US, so pissing off US companies isn't a great strategy. And actually ending up in court would be costly, so sometimes it's easier to just comply.
Ex: http://vpsville.ca/
ISPs like Telus and Shaw tend to pass along copyright infringement notices for torrenting, so they'd likely comply with DMCA takedown notices too, if they were heavily into web hosting.
Insightful? Ignorant.
Go look up XP torrents. Most come slipstreamed with IE7.
Much more likely to be corporate users, or people that ignore the little yellow shield.
I've been looking for something to substantiate your numbers. I'm not accusing you of being wrong, but the best number I saw was "more than a third aren't legit" from a briefing by Google to the NZ gov't ( http://www.newmediarights.org/copyright/digital_millennium_copyright_act_dmca/google_many_takedown_notices_are_baloney [newmediarights.org] )
That's pretty bad, because it doesn't factor in two other situations.
1) Copyrighted works protected by fair use, but taken down anyway.
2) Other countries that don't recognize the DMCA yet.
As a Canadian, I still have more rights than the USA's fair use permits. Every time the DMCA is used to remove content uploaded by a Canadian to a Canadian site, that sways the false usage numbers a bit.
Unfortunately, those numbers aren't tracked - but consider how many countries don't yet follow in the USA's footsteps, and how often the DMCA is used.
Right now very few DMCA takedown notices are legit. I can't remember the exact numbers, but it was appalling. Something like 20-40% would be lawful if taken to court. The rest are just to get something a company doesn't like taken off the web. It's rather like sending thugs to a business to ruff up the owner and get him to comply.
Good use of our legal system.
Clarification: Porting their OS, .net platform, and Office software would cost that much, and a lot of time.
Do you know how much Microsoft has invested in .net?
Platforms that huge don't just rewrite themselves to run on ARM or another architecture.
Switching would probably cost Microsoft 100 billion or more.
I don't know, but you're right. Any increased competition from another manufacturer will hurt AMD much more than Intel. AMD already has the bulk of the business from those willing to purchase non-Intel chips and an additional competitor will draw its customers from that group, not from Intel (who enjoys a large loyal following of customers who won't even consider anything else).
Nonsense. I'd bet less than half of Intel's customers are loyal. Most just want the most performance.
If AMD starts pumping out x86 quad-core CPUs with 64 GPU shaders inside, I can see them taking over the HTPC, high end laptop, and low end gaming machine markets.
They might even be popular for business machines, if the price is right. It all depends on where they get the power consumption to.
It'll hurt both AMD and Intel.
(which I hate, particularly when conversation threading and search is not available in e-mail).
It is in gmail.
So Google's main competition to Wave is Google (Etherpad) and Google (Gmail) ?
I love companies that never stop innovating.
Really? I've seen lots of Acer computers die, but it was always the HDDs.
I'm told that they have a lower failure rate than many other manufacturers. A recent article on /. said they were below HP and some other companies, though obviously behind Asus and Dell.
I saw a Mini-Note 2133 (Via C7) which had the buttons on the left and right.
Luckily HP's bigger laptops don't. Just saw a 15.4 inch AMD one that had them in the right place.
ampersand gt semicolon!
The most interesting benchmark in the article is the effect that the Ion GPU has. There's another netbook review that is linked in the article to an $800 machine with a beefier CPU, the ASUS CLUV. That machine is unable to play 1080p video clips without stuttering.
Yet this beast of a netbook can do it easily, using no more than 50% CPU in windows media player. That ION GPU must be doing a heck of a lot of the calculations in order to make this possible.
Two points.
1) Average ~20% CPU usage.
2) This also has implications for games. Look at those 3Dmark scores. The ION easily has 3-4x the GPU scores. GMA 4500 CULV laptops also offload some calculations in 3Dmark to the CPU, which doesn't take place in most games. If I had to guess, I'd bet on this ION lappy getting 5-6x the framerate, which means playable games on low.
Only problem : not all video codecs are accelerated this well. Do any players/codecs out there let you watch the usual x264 video clips that pirates put up on the net with Ion GPU acceleration? Historically, Windows Media Player generally doesn't natively play anything but WMV and old codec files.
Klite mega codec pack works. It comes with all the required codecs, and MPC-HC. Search google for how to set it to use the GPU to decode it. Don't forget to have .net 3.5 installed to gain access to the EVR renderer if you choose to run XP.
The biggest problem with the machine is that it still uses a mechanical hard drive. It would be a heck of a lot faster and more responsive if it had a clean bare-bones install of Win 7 and an SSD. (no, not Linux...Linux might boot and run faster but it takes more time to tinker with it and fight to get things to run than you save, unless you are a Linux expert)
Totally agree.
Problem is, you gotta pay for the cost of that useless 5400 rpm drive when you buy this thing. Maybe you could pick up an external enclosure off newegg along with an SSD, and put the mechanical drive to use as a backup disk. Put in an OCZ vertex SSD, and make this machine scream.
I agree. I'd want to replace the drive - it wouldn't be fair to run this beast off gimped spinning platters.
The 2GB ram limitation is also a problem, though...For long term use, you really want at least 4-8 GB....
It's a netbook, mate. I don't think the N330 has virtualization acceleration. If you're doing other RAM-heavy stuff like video or photo editing, shouldn't you buy a full-sized laptop with a better screen, GPU, etc.?
Netbooks lack a DVD drive. However, to humour you I shall avoid calling it a netbook.
My parents currently have two 15.4 inch laptops. They are seeking out two slightly smaller 12 inch tiny-laptops and don't care if these tiny-laptops have a DVD drive. Why? Portability.
10 inch is too small to type properly. Also keep in mind their eyesight. This would be used as a main computer for both of them, so it has to be comfortable to use. This looks like an adequately powerful tiny laptop.
Now that said... why go for a large anything? I've got a nice 23" TV that suits my needs. I sit back on the couch and watch it from across the room. The answer, in case you missed it, is that we all have different requirements.
Attractive frontends - this will probably start yet another flamewar, but many of the java frontends are HIDEOUS
Haha!...no kidding. :D
Performance when doing large dataset manipulations - for example, determining which server had the least free space, or which one had the most obsolete users. These are fairly trivial sorting tasks, but the java version took probably twice as long and more memory (in my implementation, which may well have sucked to be frank).
This is strange. I recall reading a lengthy article about how Java got list sorting to use roughly the same number of cycles as C. My guess is either you used the wrong algorithm, used a poorly optimized JVM, or had some other setting set wrong. If Java was consuming more memory, you could be losing all your performance to garbage collection. But my experience with Java, sorting lists several hundred thousand items long, was that it worked perfectly fine and was very quick.
Support for dumping data into Excel and Word - this was a killer feature. I was able to generate SOX and sizing reports on the fly with C#. Java? No such luck. I never did get it working quickly and properly.
I just dump the data into XML files. There's lots of viewers for those. You could even whip up an AJAX frontend to prettify it.
It's subjective whether this is more difficult. I started out a web developer - my first language was javascript - so to me it's pretty easy. The kind of thing I'd spend an afternoon or two on.
So theoretically you can get easily the same quality at say 5 Mbps with a 15 fps as you can at 10 Mbps with 30 fps. I don't have specific numbers but subjectively (and empirically) it's quite possible.
In my tests of 15fps vs 30fps - TF2/L4D footage recorded with FRAPS - the 30fps got the same quality with 15-20% more bitrate.
I'm more interested in 30fps vs 60fps - but since most hardware can't handle 60fps H.264, I guess that's moot.
typically a few hundred $$$ per month... If I can recoup that cost (which I do), than I am happy. Is that such a bad thing? I'm not talking about a lot of money here either, I average around $500 per year above my raw expenses.
So lets say it costs you $2500/yr, and you pull in $3000/yr.
That's 20% profit, right? I wonder what Google's profit margins are vs revenue...
You can get a 720p camera for $150. If you're uploading to Youtube, it'll work fine.
However, I agree he didn't include equipment costs.
Look up Media Player Classic Home Cinema.
If you have .net 3.5 installed on XP, something called EVR is available. It's some sort of advanced rendering thingy. Faster than VMR9/null/etc., but with more accurate colour reproduction and GPU shaders.
You can set the number of frames buffered up to 60. I have tested it on H.264 and recorded FRAPS video. H.264 uses almost 50MB during playback, and fullscreen FRAPS used about 500-600MB. Boatloads of memory, but no dropped frames ever.
I realize what you actually want is the option to raise the disk buffer. If I could tell MPC to assume a 32MB buffer (raising the mem usage about 30MB for every video) I would, because it'd make those huge multi-gigabyte FRAPS vids start quicker. Unfortunately, I can't - I'm stuck with buffering 60 frames before beginning playback.
Why on earth would AMD use Intel's compiler for benchmarks, it just seems like common-sense that they would want to control the compiler to ensure that it's output is properly optimized for their processor.
They don't. Well, except to collect performance data I suspect.
Companies like Adobe use ICC for all their products. Maya is compiled with ICC. Many of the top programs used in benchmarking(office/productivity software) are compiled with ICC. When used as benchmarks these programs always conclude that Intel CPUs are faster.
But that's not where the antitrust comes in. Optimizing your compiler for your CPU better than a competitor's CPU is completely acceptable. What isn't is a secret handshake wink wink that shunts off 100% compatible CPUs from your competitor to a slower code path.
You can defend it by saying you planned to add new features/instructions that only your CPUs would support, but it won't hold up in court. AMD was able to prove their CPUs were 100% compatible at the time. That means if you run the faster code path, it always works fine. That's why they had grounds for an antitrust suit.
P.S. If you compile these programs with GCC, AMD usually wins the benchmarks. However, scores will be lower for both AMD and Intel CPUs. ICC just does a better job...
You could say that AMD CPUs do better with garbage code. I wonder if that'll have implications for JIT'd languages?
What I personally do to determine which CPU is fastest is look at gaming benchmarks. I like games, so why not? I pick some low resolution benchies, testing fast videocards, and for a game/engine that hits the CPU hard. Then I look at the numbers. Ex:
Athlon II X 245 (2.9ghz) - 153fps
Athlon II X4 620 (2.6ghz) - 171fps
Core i7 920 (2.66ghz) - 174fps
Athlon II X4 630 (2.8ghz) - 175fps
Since I'll be running at high detail levels, this lets me conclude that any quad-core will work and I should go for the cheapest.
Of course, some games are compiled with ICC too... there's no perfect way to read benchmarks.
I don't buy garbage games from garbage publishers. Boycotting does work for me. It's the power that I have. I'm not required to buy the latest whiz-bang game. I'm not required to buy every game I see a commercial for. I'm not even required to buy a game RIGHT AWAY! I know. madness, huh?
I was looking at a "new" game on Steam from 2005. The trailer looked good, so I started reading up on it. High 80% reviews - great voice acting, packed with humour, okayish graphics, great quests, and repetitive combat. Then I checked the Steam forums - it doesn't run on XP 64. It doesn't work properly with VSYNC on. With new videocard drivers it has crash problems.
A game is hard to define as crap - in this case the engine is crap, yet the game could've come out in 2008 and been lauded for its great humour and voice acting.
Then I noticed more threads about people complaining that refunds weren't available. They can't even get the game to start - and unlike other services, Steam can track if you've played it - and yet there's no refund option.
I wholeheartedly support mandatory refunds if the game won't start. Being sold digital paperweights under the guise of being a playable game just isn't acceptable.
And since I've done some game programming as a hobby, I know how easy some of these issues are to correct. If large companies can't figure it out, then it's okay if heads roll and programmers get replaced. What isn't okay is selling paperweights ("crap") to your customers.
We're standing on the shoulders of giants. We have many ways to communicate concepts and preserve knowledge.
I'm guessing Octopi are suck with "word of mouth". Looking back in history, passing stuff on from parents to children didn't teach much except how to survive. Took a long time to get to where we are today.
Then again, in a relatively short period we went from surviving to flourishing. In theory, if we don't interfere with Octopi, they could have a tribal civilization in a couple thousand years!...
Troll? Seriously? Has anyone seen the way younger Chinese react to anything even resembling the mildest criticism of China or Chinese people or the Chinese government? Dude! They're pricklier than a porcupine.
Reminds me of Americans. And Linux fanboys. And Windows fanboys. And mac fanboys. And AMD/Intel fanboys. And console fanboys. And PC fanboys. And...
Okay, I know Adobe, Amazon, Apple, eBay, and Microsoft like to wield their patents like hammers - but has Google ever done it?
Not to mention all the small startups that could be harmed by a patent troll if these guys win.
Pebbles hurt at lightspeed.
Free laptops and cellphones huh? Any malware/spyware installed on those?
I wouldn't trust it unless I could wipe it.