The flight control computers are 7x redundant and distributed throughout the airframe. It's the new radar and v3.0 combat avionics that need "rebooting"
The requirements for the F-22's avionics system are derived from the F-22 Weapon System Concept, the guiding design principles for the aircraft's overall design. The integrated avionics system is one of the essential elements, along with stealth, maneuverability and supercruise, which will give the F-22 the tactical advantage against the threats of the future.
The F-22's avionics suite features extensive use of very high-speed integrated circuit technology, common modules and high-speed data buses. The avionics suite is an advanced integrated system that allows the pilot to concentrate fully on the mission, rather than on managing the sensors.
The avionics system is now flying on the F-22, and the advanced Block 3.0 software, which provides nearly full sensor and avionics functionality, began testing on the Raptor in early 2001.
Technologies incorporated in the F-22 include:
A common integrated processor (CIP), a central "brain" with the equivalent computing throughput of two Cray supercomputers
Shared low-observable antennas
Ada software
Expert systems
Advanced data fusion cockpit displays
Integrated electronic warfare system (INEWS) technology
Integrated communications, navigation and identification (CNI) avionics technology
Boeing, responsible for integrating the F-22 Raptor's advanced avionics, has been testing software packages in both its avionics integration lab, or AIL, since 1998, and on its 757 Flying Test Bed, or FTB, since March 1999. Both the AIL and FTB are helping reduce avionics risks and contain development costs by enabling extensive evaluation and troubleshooting before full avionics are ever installed on the F-22. Testing in the AIL and aboard the 757 FTB has allowed for early delivery of avionics Operational Flight Packages, or OFPs, to the F-22 test aircraft.
To date, Boeing has completed more than 21,000 hours of avionics testing in the AIL and 800 hours on the FTB.
Despite an accelerated delivery schedule for the year 2000 to support the Defense Acquisition Board, or DAB, requirements, the Boeing Avionics Integration team was able to integrate, test and deliver all Operational Flight Programs, or OFP's, ahead of plan. This included delivery of the Block 1.2 OFP on July 5, 2000, and Block 2/3S OFP on July 20, 2000. The AIL was also able to deliver the Block 3.0 OFP Engineering version to the Avionics Flying Test Bed aircraft a month ahead of schedule (Sept. 4, 2000) to allow for early testing and maturing of the OFP, which resulted in the first demonstration of multi-sensor fusion (Sept. 13, 2000).
The most significant accomplishment of the AIL for 2000 was the delivery of the Block 3.0 OFP, the first fully integrated avionics package, to F-22 aircraft 4005 on Nov. 21. This was a critical milestone since the Block 3.0 OFP was the first complete avionics software package to be flown on the F-22 aircraft, one of the most challenging DAB milestones accomplished to date.
The Boeing Avionics' Systems Engineering team's performance testing on the radar has resulted in all Test Performance Measurements, or TPMs, meeting or exceeding specification requirements. A significant milestone was reached on Nov. 15, 2000, when Raptor 4004 conducted its first flight, and targets were successfully detected and tracked in the air. Performance of the radar system was described as "eye-watering" by the pilot who flew the mission. A second major milestone occurred on Jan. 5, 2001, when Raptor 4005 flew for the first time utilizing Avionics Block 3.0 with the full complement of Radar Modes incorporated. Once again, targets were detected and tracked at long range, and the radar performance was outstanding.
Avionics Radar and Power Supplies Production activities continue to be a high priority. All shipments for PRTV I have been completed, PRTV II shipments are well under way, and hardware manufacturing for Lot 1 has begun. In the area of affordability, the implementation of Boeing-funded process improvements on several components of the radar/power supply systems, to include the T/R module and circulators, have been a tremendous success. The predicted cost savings have been substantiated in the first three production contracts and the targeted cost savings of $350 million dollars over the production life have been legitimized.
The next critical avionics milestone is delivery of Block 3.1 avionics. Block 3.1 will provide additional functionality to the F-22 Raptor and allow it to accomplish a significant amount of flight testing. Block 3.1 is scheduled to be delivered to Lockheed Martin this fall.
Overall, the F-22 avionics program is very much on target in the areas of performance, cost and schedule. The avionics packages have been performing exceptionally well, and all major milestones have been met on or ahead of schedule.
66mhz/64bit PCI bus = 533 MB/s You can support up to 4 gigabit ethernet channels.
33/64 or 66/32 = 266 MB/s
PCI/X (133mhz/64bit)= 1066 MB/s
10baseT = 10 Mb/s = 1.25 MB/s max Faster than an 8X cd drive
10/100 = 100 Mb/s = 12.5 MB/s You can burn across this network if the network is unloaded
Gigabit Ethernet 1000 Mb/s or 125 MB/s or just under the top speed of 33/32 PCI bus
Firewire = 400 Mb/s or 50 MB/s, Slower than the fastest IDE hard drives
USB 2.0 = 480 Mb/s or 60 MB/s, Faster than the fastest IDE hard drives
Western Digital wd1200JB 120GB w/8MB buffer Peaks at 100 MB/s with 52 MB/s continuous throughput.
Meaning You could use a 346x drive burner with a WD1200JB except your CD disk would have to spin at 70,000 rpm -or- be in a drive with 8 write heads and spinning at a more moderate 8750 rpm -or- Send data to 8 40x CD Burners simultaniously
52x = 10500 rpm @ 7.8 MB/s
Everything can keep up with the data transfer speeds of a 40x drive
How secure were your Windows 2000 machines for the two months that Microsoft knew universal plug and play was a huge hole but were unwilling to tell the public about? They were launching XP at the same time, with the same vulnerability and did not want to have to have to immediatly issue a patch for "the most secure OS ever".
Your security was compromised by Microsofts marketing for god's sake. Oh, I'm sure you had a firewall on port 1900/UDP and port 5000/UDP right?
The timing:
"On December 20, 2001, eEye Digital Security, the security firm that gave the Code Red worm its name, announced the discovery of "major security vulnerabilities"[1] in Microsoft's flagship operating system, Windows XP. Specifically, the vulnerabilities were discovered in Microsoft's Universal Plug and Play feature, which ships by default with XP. On that same day Microsoft released a patch [2] that resolved the issue; however, it was a dismal ending to a year that saw security flaws in Microsoft products announced in the press on a weekly basis [3] and exploited in hundreds of thousands of computers worldwide."
The vulnerability:
"When eEye announced the discovery of the UPNP vulnerability [9], they described three attack scenarios; a remotely exploitable buffer overflow, a Denial of Service attack and a Distributed Denial of Service attack. Of these three, the buffer overflow is by far the most serious. It could lead to a remote compromise of a machine, surrendering complete control of the machine (and possibly an entire network) to its attacker."
Microsoft knew about this hole on the launch date. The XP Cd had gone gold so they could not change it before it reached consumers. They waited until a third party discovered the hole and published before releasing the patch.
The disgust this decision generated caused such a backlash, Bill announced the "Trustworthy Computing" initiative.
There have been 7 exploits found since then.
There will be 7 more found before the end of this year.
Your Windows network is vulnerable no matter how good your admins (1 per 50 machines) are because only Microsoft can issue patches and they have proven to be criminally irresponsible where security is concerned.
I make a hell of a lot of money off viruses. Stupid users are my bread and butter. Virus wipes out their system, I bring it back.
Norton's makes a killing on viruses. It would not suprise me to find out that they write them too... or hire people that have written them.
As long as Microsoft can't make a secure system and corporations keep buying into their line of FUD and crap products, they create thousands of jobs that are nothing but leaches on the system.
The beauty of linux is you only have to pay your administrators to make your systems better, and not hire extras just to do disaster recovery.
One full time admin for every 50 windows machines just because of security holes and viruses compared to 1 admin for every 150 Mac/Linux/FreeBSD boxes.
Do the math: Windows initial price is higher, and upkeep is higher even if you have to pay twice as much to hire a good unix admin than you have to pay for a dime a dozen MCSE
Execs must get some great kickbacks from Microsoft.
Um... DDR 266 was introduced in september of 2000. That is over a year and a half ago. We are at DDR 400 now. The 100 mhz fsb g4 appears in the imac and emac are the celerons of apple.
So, you have 100mhz and 133 mhz fsb processors using a 266mhz memory bus... what is the point? The bottleneck is the processor not the memory sub-system. They need a new processor architecture! something from this decade might be nice.
latealy ive bean warking on teh secarity of teh few windows boxes i administar liek expee and zk stations i have had much of a problem finding decant solutions far file emale disk ancryption stuped suck pgp si no longar sealling tehlr products, ar far stupiedcard ar smartypantcardtbiomealctrric solutions besides teh limitations on key sise zoa8-bit rsaa maximum and flexability wehn it comes too ssh services far remot administration stuped windows filesharing and sfptp far file transfers i have hit a prox mine i have looked into sshhh but tehlr ssshh far winblows servers only runs on 2000 and costs ssgs and si hard too fing on kasaa i ask what solutions have/.er's fuond in teh realm of ssh netwark ancryption, and also in integrating all tehse componants simply and effectivealy
http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/cgi-bin/getfr am eletter.cgi?%2F2002%2F05_may%2Ffeatures%2Fcw_aesho wdown.htm
cut-n-paste
The first article tests a brand new mac against a number of x86 machines. The 1Ghz mac compares closest to the 1 Ghz PIII. Please note that the PIII is available at 1.4 Ghz now.
The second article compares a dual 1 Ghz mac to a dual 1800MP Athlon at Apple's favorite game: Digital Video Editing. The Apple gets flat smoked.
A non overclocked XP1900+ completes a seti workunit in 3:34 hours per processor while a dual 1Ghz mac completes a workunit in 7:07 hours per processor. The XP1900+ is clocked at 1600mhz but that is immaterial. It's clock speed is only 60% higher but it performs 100% faster. The G4 does not have the best performance clock for clock AND is clocked slower.
Apple has stagnated for two years on their hardware. It has cost them dearly. I would prefer them to optimize their HARDWARE for speed. even if Jaguar shows a 100% performance improvement, that will only bring Apple's performance on par with competitors now. Factor in the price and you will realize that they need to increase performance by 600% to compete on price/performace.
Job's had better show a G5 soon or all the gains they have made bringing unix to the desktop will be for nothing. Linux breaths new life into old machines. But no one goes out and spends $2000 for an old 800mhz PIII with a flat panel just because Linux is nice. That is what Apple is trying to convince us to do.
Doesn't "2Ghz G5" have a nice ring to it? Hold out for better hardware or Apple will never deliver it.
Mac Fanboys not holding Apple to a higher standard, willing to shell out vast cash for sub-par performance, will be the death of apple.
Make Apple produce faster hardware by proveing to them that their marketing deception will not work on you.
Doesn't a demonstration of such slow processors (especially the 100mhz fsb G4 stuff) realised today for the consumer show just how many streets behind Apple are?
Faster processors should exist on Macs, but doen't. Apple has, after so many years, arrived at the point of One and a half years behind everything else in the market - they can only produce better and better products because they are at the bottom now.
Was purchased by a company that eventually changed their name to "X10". Talk about a company that grew up to be a bunch of assholes.
If you want another Pinball Construction Set, talk to Bill Budge. He created the first computer sim construction set of any kind. I still have a few Apple binaries I created using his tool set. He has an interview here.
I've dealt with "Coast to Coast Memory" (http://www.18004memory.com/). They seem to have pretty good prices and good compatibility. I ordered 240 64meg moduals for a lab of 30 7500s. Seems to me I paid $11 a pop for them. 8 in the lot were bad, that I had no trouble RMA'ing. I did not get a bulk discount. $11 was the web price back in september.
OS X on a dual G4 1 Ghz feels like 8.6 on a 7500/100. Their hardware is obsolete when you buy it new for insane prices.
Speculate 10 different things you expect Apple to do and 7 of them will be spot on. They can't tout innovative or revolutionary products because their "innovations" are obvious.
The flat panel iMac was not revolutionary. Hell, we were all expecting them to build one the year after the bondi arrived. The fact is they could have done it then. The were very late with that "revolution".
DDR support on the desktop. Obvious. They'll say it's a revolutionary new step to insure their voracious G4 gets fed data. Sorry, 2 years late is not a revolution, it's joining a crowd that has already passed you by. With a 133 non DDR fsb, the G4 can't take advantage of the bandwidth anyway, except in pairs, which is required to keep up with a plain old single processor x86 machines anyway.
Basicly, rumors prevent Apple from spinning their mediocre hardware into revolutionary and inovative crap. Since Apple's performance figures are all about spin without substance, the journos catch it in the teeth.
Apple will never deliver what we expect them to. Unless we expect crap hardware. I predict there will be more crap hardware announced at mac expo. They will not let me down.
OS X is not slow. OS X is great, it's just running on crap hardware!
It becomes a serious threat to their market share when a company decides to start producing clones... OS X on x86. Dream OS on faster cheaper hardware than Apple offers.
Dual AMD 1U Servers with identical specs to Apple's Xserve can be had sub-$1000 Xserve costs $5000. Compare the performance of FIVE AMD machines to the Xserve.
Slashdot Mirror
The flight control computers are 7x redundant and distributed throughout the airframe. It's the new radar and v3.0 combat avionics that need "rebooting"
The requirements for the F-22's avionics system are derived from the F-22 Weapon System Concept, the guiding design principles for the aircraft's overall design. The integrated avionics system is one of the essential elements, along with stealth, maneuverability and supercruise, which will give the F-22 the tactical advantage against the threats of the future.
The F-22's avionics suite features extensive use of very high-speed integrated circuit technology, common modules and high-speed data buses. The avionics suite is an advanced integrated system that allows the pilot to concentrate fully on the mission, rather than on managing the sensors.
The avionics system is now flying on the F-22, and the advanced Block 3.0 software, which provides nearly full sensor and avionics functionality, began testing on the Raptor in early 2001.
Technologies incorporated in the F-22 include:
A common integrated processor (CIP), a central "brain" with the equivalent computing throughput of two Cray supercomputers
Shared low-observable antennas
Ada software
Expert systems
Advanced data fusion cockpit displays
Integrated electronic warfare system (INEWS) technology
Integrated communications, navigation and identification (CNI) avionics technology
Fiber optic data transmission.
Boeing, responsible for integrating the F-22 Raptor's advanced avionics, has been testing software packages in both its avionics integration lab, or AIL, since 1998, and on its 757 Flying Test Bed, or FTB, since March 1999.
Both the AIL and FTB are helping reduce avionics risks and contain development costs by enabling extensive evaluation and troubleshooting before full avionics are ever installed on the F-22. Testing in the AIL and aboard the 757 FTB has allowed for early delivery of avionics Operational Flight Packages, or OFPs, to the F-22 test aircraft.
To date, Boeing has completed more than 21,000 hours of avionics testing in the AIL and 800 hours on the FTB.
Despite an accelerated delivery schedule for the year 2000 to support the Defense Acquisition Board, or DAB, requirements, the Boeing Avionics Integration team was able to integrate, test and deliver all Operational Flight Programs, or OFP's, ahead of plan. This included delivery of the Block 1.2 OFP on July 5, 2000, and Block 2/3S OFP on July 20, 2000. The AIL was also able to deliver the Block 3.0 OFP Engineering version to the Avionics Flying Test Bed aircraft a month ahead of schedule (Sept. 4, 2000) to allow for early testing and maturing of the OFP, which resulted in the first demonstration of multi-sensor fusion (Sept. 13, 2000).
The most significant accomplishment of the AIL for 2000 was the delivery of the Block 3.0 OFP, the first fully integrated avionics package, to F-22 aircraft 4005 on Nov. 21. This was a critical milestone since the Block 3.0 OFP was the first complete avionics software package to be flown on the F-22 aircraft, one of the most challenging DAB milestones accomplished to date.
The Boeing Avionics' Systems Engineering team's performance testing on the radar has resulted in all Test Performance Measurements, or TPMs, meeting or exceeding specification requirements. A significant milestone was reached on Nov. 15, 2000, when Raptor 4004 conducted its first flight, and targets were successfully detected and tracked in the air. Performance of the radar system was described as "eye-watering" by the pilot who flew the mission. A second major milestone occurred on Jan. 5, 2001, when Raptor 4005 flew for the first time utilizing Avionics Block 3.0 with the full complement of Radar Modes incorporated. Once again, targets were detected and tracked at long range, and the radar performance was outstanding.
Avionics Radar and Power Supplies Production activities continue to be a high priority. All shipments for PRTV I have been completed, PRTV II shipments are well under way, and hardware manufacturing for Lot 1 has begun. In the area of affordability, the implementation of Boeing-funded process improvements on several components of the radar/power supply systems, to include the T/R module and circulators, have been a tremendous success. The predicted cost savings have been substantiated in the first three production contracts and the targeted cost savings of $350 million dollars over the production life have been legitimized.
The next critical avionics milestone is delivery of Block 3.1 avionics. Block 3.1 will provide additional functionality to the F-22 Raptor and allow it to accomplish a significant amount of flight testing. Block 3.1 is scheduled to be delivered to Lockheed Martin this fall.
Overall, the F-22 avionics program is very much on target in the areas of performance, cost and schedule. The avionics packages have been performing exceptionally well, and all major milestones have been met on or ahead of schedule.
That's right...
Interaction is the key.
Then again what had you learned 70 minutes after the first time naked and alone with girl
I have a dead 50x sitting on my workbench that I pulled out of a client's machine..
Inside is a telefragged copy of printshop.
The disk disentigrated at 10,000 rpm.
The Printshop disk is naturally out of balance because the labels are printed off center.
Not an urban legend.
look what happens to your car engine at 10,000 rpm if it is out of balance. Engines are made of steel. Disks are made of cheap plastic.
Hey Dude...
.15 MB/s
1x = 150 KB/s =
40x = 6000 KB/s = 6 MB/s
ATA66 Spec = 66 MB/s
ATA100 Spec = 100 MB/s
ATA133 Spec = 133 MB/s
Serial ATA Spec = 150 MB/s
SCSI 160 Spec = 150 MB/s
SCSI 320 Spec = 320 MB/s
33mhz/32bit PCI bus = 133 MB/s
66mhz/64bit PCI bus = 533 MB/s You can support up to 4 gigabit ethernet channels.
33/64 or 66/32 = 266 MB/s
PCI/X (133mhz/64bit)= 1066 MB/s
10baseT = 10 Mb/s = 1.25 MB/s max Faster than an 8X cd drive
10/100 = 100 Mb/s = 12.5 MB/s You can burn across this network if the network is unloaded
Gigabit Ethernet 1000 Mb/s or 125 MB/s or just under the top speed of 33/32 PCI bus
Firewire = 400 Mb/s or 50 MB/s, Slower than the fastest IDE hard drives
USB 2.0 = 480 Mb/s or 60 MB/s, Faster than the fastest IDE hard drives
Western Digital wd1200JB 120GB w/8MB buffer Peaks at 100 MB/s with 52 MB/s continuous throughput.
Meaning You could use a 346x drive burner with a WD1200JB except your CD disk would have to spin at 70,000 rpm -or- be in a drive with 8 write heads and spinning at a more moderate 8750 rpm -or- Send data to 8 40x CD Burners simultaniously
52x = 10500 rpm @ 7.8 MB/s
Everything can keep up with the data transfer speeds of a 40x drive
How secure were your Windows 2000 machines for the two months that Microsoft knew universal plug and play was a huge hole but were unwilling to tell the public about? They were launching XP at the same time, with the same vulnerability and did not want to have to have to immediatly issue a patch for "the most secure OS ever".
Your security was compromised by Microsofts marketing for god's sake. Oh, I'm sure you had a firewall on port 1900/UDP and port 5000/UDP right?
The timing:
"On December 20, 2001, eEye Digital Security, the security firm that gave the Code Red worm its name, announced the discovery of "major security vulnerabilities"[1] in Microsoft's flagship operating system, Windows XP. Specifically, the vulnerabilities were discovered in Microsoft's Universal Plug and Play feature, which ships by default with XP. On that same day Microsoft released a patch [2] that resolved the issue; however, it was a dismal ending to a year that saw security flaws in Microsoft products announced in the press on a weekly basis [3] and exploited in hundreds of thousands of computers worldwide."
The vulnerability:
"When eEye announced the discovery of the UPNP vulnerability [9], they described three attack scenarios; a remotely exploitable buffer overflow, a Denial of Service attack and a Distributed Denial of Service attack. Of these three, the buffer overflow is by far the most serious. It could lead to a remote compromise of a machine, surrendering complete control of the machine (and possibly an entire network) to its attacker."
Microsoft knew about this hole on the launch date. The XP Cd had gone gold so they could not change it before it reached consumers. They waited until a third party discovered the hole and published before releasing the patch.
The disgust this decision generated caused such a backlash, Bill announced the "Trustworthy Computing" initiative.
There have been 7 exploits found since then.
There will be 7 more found before the end of this year.
Your Windows network is vulnerable no matter how good your admins (1 per 50 machines) are because only Microsoft can issue patches and they have proven to be criminally irresponsible where security is concerned.
I make a hell of a lot of money off viruses. Stupid users are my bread and butter. Virus wipes out their system, I bring it back.
Norton's makes a killing on viruses. It would not suprise me to find out that they write them too... or hire people that have written them.
As long as Microsoft can't make a secure system and corporations keep buying into their line of FUD and crap products, they create thousands of jobs that are nothing but leaches on the system.
The beauty of linux is you only have to pay your administrators to make your systems better, and not hire extras just to do disaster recovery.
One full time admin for every 50 windows machines just because of security holes and viruses compared to 1 admin for every 150 Mac/Linux/FreeBSD boxes.
Do the math: Windows initial price is higher, and upkeep is higher even if you have to pay twice as much to hire a good unix admin than you have to pay for a dime a dozen MCSE
Execs must get some great kickbacks from Microsoft.
Um... DDR 266 was introduced in september of 2000. That is over a year and a half ago. We are at DDR 400 now. The 100 mhz fsb g4 appears in the imac and emac are the celerons of apple.
So, you have 100mhz and 133 mhz fsb processors using a 266mhz memory bus... what is the point? The bottleneck is the processor not the memory sub-system. They need a new processor architecture! something from this decade might be nice.
latealy ive bean warking on teh secarity of teh few windows boxes i administar liek expee and zk stations i have had much of a problem finding decant solutions far file emale disk ancryption stuped suck pgp si no longar sealling tehlr products, ar far stupiedcard ar smartypantcardtbiomealctrric solutions besides teh limitations on key sise zoa8-bit rsaa maximum and flexability wehn it comes too ssh services far remot administration stuped windows filesharing and sfptp far file transfers i have hit a prox mine i have looked into sshhh but tehlr ssshh far winblows servers only runs on 2000 and costs ssgs and si hard too fing on kasaa i ask what solutions have /.er's fuond in teh realm of ssh netwark ancryption, and also in integrating all tehse componants simply and effectivealy
He's running an fserv on irc.. His problem is he can't download pr0n fast enough while sending enough to meet his quota.
Be happy spending $129 and if you are not going to pay, be happy stealing from Apple.
http://www.heise.de/ct/english/02/05/182/
r am eletter.cgi?%2F2002%2F05_may%2Ffeatures%2Fcw_aesho wdown.htm
http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/cgi-bin/getf
cut-n-paste
The first article tests a brand new mac against a number of x86 machines. The 1Ghz mac compares closest to the 1 Ghz PIII. Please note that the PIII is available at 1.4 Ghz now.
The second article compares a dual 1 Ghz mac to a dual 1800MP Athlon at Apple's favorite game: Digital Video Editing. The Apple gets flat smoked.
A non overclocked XP1900+ completes a seti workunit in 3:34 hours per processor while a dual 1Ghz mac completes a workunit in 7:07 hours per processor. The XP1900+ is clocked at 1600mhz but that is immaterial. It's clock speed is only 60% higher but it performs 100% faster. The G4 does not have the best performance clock for clock AND is clocked slower.
Apple has stagnated for two years on their hardware. It has cost them dearly. I would prefer them to optimize their HARDWARE for speed. even if Jaguar shows a 100% performance improvement, that will only bring Apple's performance on par with competitors now. Factor in the price and you will realize that they need to increase performance by 600% to compete on price/performace.
Job's had better show a G5 soon or all the gains they have made bringing unix to the desktop will be for nothing. Linux breaths new life into old machines. But no one goes out and spends $2000 for an old 800mhz PIII with a flat panel just because Linux is nice. That is what Apple is trying to convince us to do.
Doesn't "2Ghz G5" have a nice ring to it? Hold out for better hardware or Apple will never deliver it.
Mac Fanboys not holding Apple to a higher standard, willing to shell out vast cash for sub-par performance, will be the death of apple.
Make Apple produce faster hardware by proveing to them that their marketing deception will not work on you.
The Apple Tax went up again.
Looks like there are going to be some pissed off graphic artists. None of them are working and the price of their tools just went up.
Jobs is taking lessons from Gates. Piss on your user base and watch your market share climb.
(That means that Mac and Windows users are fools)
Doesn't a demonstration of such slow processors (especially the 100mhz fsb G4 stuff) realised today for the consumer show just how many streets behind Apple are?
Faster processors should exist on Macs, but doen't. Apple has, after so many years, arrived at the point of One and a half years behind everything else in the market - they can only produce better and better products because they are at the bottom now.
Boo.
Was purchased by a company that eventually changed their name to "X10". Talk about a company that grew up to be a bunch of assholes.
If you want another Pinball Construction Set, talk to Bill Budge. He created the first computer sim construction set of any kind. I still have a few Apple binaries I created using his tool set. He has an interview here.
Just like you and me.
Ah, OK.
Like Rambus now...
I've dealt with "Coast to Coast Memory" (http://www.18004memory.com/). They seem to have pretty good prices and good compatibility. I ordered 240 64meg moduals for a lab of 30 7500s. Seems to me I paid $11 a pop for them. 8 in the lot were bad, that I had no trouble RMA'ing. I did not get a bulk discount. $11 was the web price back in september.
OS X on a dual G4 1 Ghz feels like 8.6 on a 7500/100. Their hardware is obsolete when you buy it new for insane prices.
Speculate 10 different things you expect Apple to do and 7 of them will be spot on. They can't tout innovative or revolutionary products because their "innovations" are obvious.
The flat panel iMac was not revolutionary. Hell, we were all expecting them to build one the year after the bondi arrived. The fact is they could have done it then. The were very late with that "revolution".
DDR support on the desktop. Obvious. They'll say it's a revolutionary new step to insure their voracious G4 gets fed data. Sorry, 2 years late is not a revolution, it's joining a crowd that has already passed you by. With a 133 non DDR fsb, the G4 can't take advantage of the bandwidth anyway, except in pairs, which is required to keep up with a plain old single processor x86 machines anyway.
Basicly, rumors prevent Apple from spinning their mediocre hardware into revolutionary and inovative crap. Since Apple's performance figures are all about spin without substance, the journos catch it in the teeth.
Apple will never deliver what we expect them to. Unless we expect crap hardware. I predict there will be more crap hardware announced at mac expo. They will not let me down.
OS X is not slow. OS X is great, it's just running on crap hardware!
You've cracked lad..
A complete chatsworth doesn't cost that much.
Their Zero U vented slider shelves with cable management don't cost that much.
Pay $2,500 too much for the server then chime in about how you save $129 on the rails.
Saved on brainpower that time Lad... Are you posting drunk again?
Um.. Duh.. Serve with Linux.
Even has Dell's support.
Lower Still
It becomes a serious threat to their market share when a company decides to start producing clones... OS X on x86. Dream OS on faster cheaper hardware than Apple offers.
Then compare the performance of the xserve with TWO of the dells from the same chart. Major brand price/performance comparison.
Price out a Dell 1650 here (make sure you add a second processor)
Price an Xserve here (dual model)
Dual AMD 1U Servers with identical specs to Apple's Xserve can be had sub-$1000 Xserve costs $5000. Compare the performance of FIVE AMD machines to the Xserve.