Since my one of my schools has been using 3 airport base stations and numerous airport cards to exctend the lan into portable classrooms, I guess we are in violation of this patent. All the airport equipment cost under $3000 compared to over $10000 for the lowest bid to cable these classrooms that will be moved or ripped out by next summer because of permenant construction. Frankly, this company can go fork themselves.
This is potentially a direct attack on Apple since they have the greatest marketshare in schools and certainly pioneered 802.11b in the classroom.
"Are you worrying about security on the Lan at Kent State."
Any school admin will tell you, the internet is untrusted and any lan with a student machine attached is also untrusted. Is a firewall to protect you from the blackhats on the big www, or is it to protect you from the blackhats on your own lan?
Always make the assumtion that somewhere on campus, someone has booted a computer to a floppy that uses VPN to tunnel straight through any firewall. A properly set up LRP disk has interesting uses on I^2
Archimedes prophetically predicted the fall of the roman empire because they only funded practical mathematics research. The Romans, lacking any theoretical mathematics to base new ideas on, did in fact decline. Their technology had hit a wall, much the same way that we have with unification. The mathematical underpinnings of chaos theory languished as an oddity 50 years after being discovered in a dead mathematician's mother's attic, before being used.
If you think about it, the romans had everything they needed to build steam locomotives. They had advanced road building, knowledge of steam dynamics, the ability to forge pressure vessels and an unrivaled industrial base. What they lacked was vision and the will to do anything that might seem impractical.
I have an 1800xp underclocked from 11.5*133 @ 1533mhz to 7.5*133 @ 1000mhz. With an MC462 heatsink and a tube fixed to the heatsink an exiting the top of the case and no fan, the CPU never exceeds 32 degrees celsius. The real test is to see how far you can drop the CPU voltage before instability arises. Mine is running at 1.65. Lower voltage plus lower frequency means less heat but remember I am using one of the highest rated heatsinks available. At 789 grams, this heatsink weighs almost 300 grams more than any other heatsink you can buy.
And yes, the chimney effect of the tube makes it feel like there is a fan blowing hot air, just like the G4 cube.
"Intel could easily release those 2.6GHz chips today, but they aren't doing it for marketing reasons."
And exactly why is this OK to you? Do you like being marketed at? Do you like being fed shite and being told it's ice cream?
And before you talk about scaling, you should know that a processor "scales" well if you can run it at higher frequencies without increasing voltage or supercooling. At frequencies that AMD and Intel ship at, the processors benchmark similarly.
If you were not so busy singing the praises of P4 you might also notice that the Tualatin core is overclocking as well as the Athlon, and surpasses them both in some benchmarks.
Do some damn research before you post or start on about "fanboy blah blah fanboy" while being a fanboy.
I cannot belive you were modded up for that flamebait.
Your link to anantech's "Intel 845 DDR Motherboard Roundup - December 2001" is JUST i845 boards. They were not compared to the P4X266 at all.
You must have meant to show this article, where it is clearly shown that the VIA P4X266 has twice the memory bandwidth of the crippled i845. Or this page, that clearly shows the P4X266 outperforming the crippled i845 by 12%, on par with the Intel's RDRAM solution.
This article shows Intel stands to gain considerably from every rimm sold.
You said it yourself, Intel had an existing chipset in june of last year supporting DDR but would not allow motherboard manufacturers to use DDR with it. That means they crippled it themselves to make RDRAM look better.
Their deal did not end, it's just that Rambus's stock price dropped to less than $6 a share making Intel's options to buy Rambus at $10 a share look a little weak:)
Since Rambus's stock at one time traded at over $100 they could have seen a ten fold increase in their investment. But since rambus stayed so expencive, and offered no performance advantage over the Athlon, their GREED caused their own loss of market share.
You may also note I am keeping tabs on IDF and also mentioned Intel's DDR chipset but I am begining to think you don't read. Take note: "The fact is, a dual channel DDR chipset from Intel may be available for the Pentuim 4, but only for the Xeon, a processor not available except from Intel's favored OEM Parteners, such as Dell.
"Your entire post is full of inaccurate information and typical anti-Intel garbage. Don't take me as pro-Intel, but anyone can see right through your crap if they looked at it."
Why do you waffle here? We can certainly see through your crap, why be such a fence sitter about it? I take you as pro-intel with no spine. If you could stand up for them with a spine I would at least respect you, but as it is you post a few incorrect links and restate my point for me then roll around about what you like.
You are certainly right that the primary cost of fiber to the home being putting the fiber in the ground. A $100 Nic card or even $2000 for a full PC with Gigabit Ethernet over fiber is nothing compared to holes that have to be dug to put fiber in the ground. Think of the additional expense of splicing for every house. Every house must have its own connection. If you run a 100 pair bundle up a street, you must make a splice for every house or put a piece of splitting equipment at every house. Phenomenally impractical even if it is absolutely necessary.
99% of houses not having fiber means that 1% do, or 700,000 houses already wired for fiber. A better way to say it might be 7,000 houses in a test community and about 3% of all $3,000,000 homes have fiber run to them.
I have fiber to the desktop, but I run fiber to desktops for a living. Terminating fiber is cheap when you do it yourself. My last mile is certainly not fiber though, it's Hi Cap DSL.
"Our detailed tests show that forthcoming P4 CPUs with 133 MHz FSB clock used in conjunction with the 845E chipset (DDR SDRAM support) will effectively be castrated."
Intel castrated it their selves. Compare its performance to VIA's P4X266 Chipset's performance and you will see that Intel crippled it to prevent it from competing with Intel's Rambus chipset. Notice that Intel is suing VIA for that chipset because it ruins the facade that RDRAM is better than DDR. Also note that Intel has refused nVidia's request for an Intel license for a DDR chipset. Intel knows that a dual channel DDR chipset would show RDRAM for what it is: A fraudulent attempt to maintain a high performance monopoly. Whatever company "causes to be sold" the most RDRAM gets to own a controlling interest in Rambus Inc. At this point, Intel is the clear winner even though Sony made a race out of it by packaging Rambus with the Playstation 2. Intel suppresses their own DDR performance to make people believe that RDRAM is the fastest stuff out there. AMD would be committing suicide by using RDRAM to capitalize on Intel's marketing hype because that would place them directly under Intel's thumb.
"This is because the Pentium 4 has a problem: the increase in clock speed (e.g. P4/2533 or P4/2666) will be rendered useless by the slow DDR SDRAM memory bus of the 845 platform".
Again, this is Intel's doing for product placement purposes as was done with the Celeron when it competed with the Pentium III and was done by Apple on the new iMac's 100fsb 800mhz G4. A 133fsb does not cost any money, it is just an easily achievable clock frequency with available current chipsets.
"And one shouldn't forget that even a dual DDR platform for P4 should be priced at a level that is similar to a Rambus system, considering that it's from Intel."
Rephrased: "And one shouldn't forget that even a dual DDR platform for P4 will be priced as high as an RDRAM system because Intel will not license the platform to nVidia and Intel KNOWS it will outperform a Rambus system, ruining 2 years of carefully crafted marketing and gamesmanship" The fact is, a dual channel DDR chipset from Intel may be available for the Pentuim 4, but only for the Xeon, a processor not available except from Intel's favored OEM Parteners, such as Dell.
Before you defend Intel remember that Craig Barrett, after AMD went from 10% market share to 40% in a year, said "the market is dropping" to justify Intel's reduced profits. Well, Intel is a bellwether stock and the market believed everything Craig said. The market did drop. We all lost our jobs. We can now say in hindsight that at least a part of the market was due to drop. But because of Craig's statement, it was the tech sector that was hit first, and hardest. Instead of simply saying, "Intel has reduced profits because of competitive pressure", he brought the entire tech sector down with him. The recession that was due could have been placed entirely on Enron's shoulders. The energy sector was in fact dropping. Enron's insiders were cashing out at the same time Craig made his statement. People got scared and pulled their money out of the market. There was less money in the market than there had been and it came out of the tech sector when it should have come out of energy.
Go ahead and defend Intel. They have made poor greedy choices, sold inferior products at exorbitant prices and done it at the expense of all our livelihoods. Shame on them.
Intel's 1.7 trillion dollar market cap has been cut by Tom Pabst on more than one occasion. A series of articles he has had deriding Rambus, causing the 1.13 Ghz recall, and showing the Pentium 4 for the paper tiger it is has seriously hurt Intel. But Tom, like all hardware websites is cash poor. Tom's hardware has resorted to doing marketing research among their readership for Socratic Technologies. Sometimes they have been overt, sometimes they have sent readers to secure servers just for simple popularity polls. Tom's latest revenue generation technique is the introduction of "Editorial Content Sponsorships" which I'm going to guess prompted the recent editorial change of heart toward Rambus. Please notice that in the most recent article no AMD processors were over clocked according to their projected roadmaps and the test is presented as if it was fiction. Unfortunately, it seems we have lost another fair and unbiased journalist. Another because Sharky's Extreme was the first to go into Intel's pocket, prompting Sharky himself to leave the website. Sharky's is owned by INT Media Group. Noteable investors in INT media include Dell Computer Corporation, International Business Machines Corporation, Lucent Technologies Inc., Macromedia Inc., Microsoft Corporation, Nortel Networks Corporation and Oracle Corporation.
Expect wonderful reviews of Intel hardware on Sharky's and unfortunately now, Tom's. Look to [H]ard OCP, The Inquirer, The register, Anandtech and Ars Technica for relatively unbiased hardware news.
Really, what platform are these emulators being written for? Do they call x86 functions directly and reveal ppc instructions to the mac os or do they call direct x and windows apis and expose PPC to mac OS. Or,(pant-pant)does this run on linux/FreeBSD/*nix on x86? How hard to port OS X directly instead of emulating PPC?
It's fast as the current G3. Measure how fast a G3 will emulate x86 and we might be able to get some comparison benchmarks out. Trying several processors on each side of the house would would help isolate emulator overhead.
I kept looking because the best price I could find seemed so absurd. This somewhat discounts my rant at you -but- you were the one that paid $180 for $60 dollars worth of ram:)
The spinward edge of the Western Digital Caviar WD1200BB (120GB capacity) has a sustained transfer rate of 49MB/s. It slows to About 29MB/s when reading near the hub. Two of these drives are far more than capable of saturating the ATA100 spec especially when you consider they have 8Mb of cache that allows them to burst (reading data prefetched from the drive) to fill the ATA100 bandwidth spec. The cache is much more usefull for writing small files because there is no chance of cache miss (having cached data that the OS never asks for).
Generally Platter size tends to be incremental. The WD1200BB has 40GB platters and it's predecessor had 30GB platters. The density difference was worth about 10MB/s at 7200rpm. 10000rpm at the same platter size will add about 10% and the 20% for the next platter size. I can guess that drives will hit 60+ MB/s by the end of this year. The rock bottom model will be 60Gb and the top end could be as high as 240Gb on a single drive.
This makes a great reason to finalize the ATA133 spec because Intel is not going to finish serial ATA anytime soon.
Sounds like we can have pure DVD disk images of every movie we rent on our desktops. Even now a Terrabyte of storage is within the grasp of power users. For under $2000. The cost of my first 2mb hardrive. For my apple 2. I can't wait to see what happens in the next twenty years.
Never happen. Apple will never go back to generic looking cases. The beige cases almost killed them and the flavored macs (and microsoft) saved their butter.
you recall correctly which means it laste a little less than two years. It would have been nice if they had thought of a platform upgrade cycle without selling you an entirely new machine. The memory became obsolete, Almost forcing an upgrade for a platform that claims to have a 5 year life cycle. Even hated RDRAM has lasted longer than 2 years. SDRAM has lasted 4 and will make 6. DDR started just last year so who can say, except its adoption is so widespread and DDR platforms are planned into next year, It will have a longer life cycle too. Apple jumped on an interim solution that trapped their users without a clear upgrade path.
Much like the real topic, The latest iMac with no shot of getting a pci solution, stuck with a max hardrive size that will be obsolete in a year and not even made in two. Current ATA drives already exceed the firewire specs 50 Megabytes per second (400 Megabits) Meaning the new iMac is in an upgrade dead end before it even starts. Compare to the Original Bondi: Same max hardrive size and uses a memory spec that will continue to be used for at least 2 years. That is 6 solid years of platform life for the Bondi compared to the new iMac with 2 years of platform life and a flatscreen with maybe 2 years of life if used in a school enviroment (the iMacs traditional forte).
Not to mention they raised the Apple barrier to entry 500 dollars. They have certainly shown they know how to shoot themselves in the foot as far as hardware is concerned to the same level that Microsoft does on security, Linux does on usability, sun does on getting platform support, and IBM fails to capitalize on their intellectual property, Intel trips trying to keep up with AMD and AMD cannot market their superior products.
All companies drop the ball. The only difference is, with the image they are cultivating, and their position in the market (declining), they absolutly cannot afford to.
My objective is not to flame apple but to provide apple a wake up call. They have made mistakes but they have also had some AMAZING successes. I want to see them continue to make the ferraris of the computer world but ATA66, 100Mhz Front side buses and computers with no upgrade path without flat out buying new hardware ARE NOT FERRARIS
Ok, I concede. And added you to my friends list, which I guess makes me a fan of yours, well argued. I'm a hardware guy, as you may have guessed. I can see you are a programmer. Well, happy developing.. or.. something..;)
Under hardware competition from Power computing, The 8600/300 was a nice machine. You can stuff a Sonnet G4/450MHz into it to bring it up to speed but with a 50Mhz fsb and its use of 168pin fast page memory (now there is a great example of apple foisting off a dead end technology on their faithful users). Upgrade is not much of an option.
The DivX 4.xx codec was originally Microsoft's but was extended by Intel for SSE. I know you will not claim Macs have SSE tucked inside the Velocity engine. DivX 4.11 allows the conversion of DVDs to MPEG 4 in real time. Meaning as you watch it, it's recording. You see, PC users are cheap bastards (or just not suckers) and are not willing to pay an extra 1000 bucks for a super drive to copy DVDs when they can do it for free.
The problem is, right now, 95% of the people ripping movies are using this fast codec. And DivX Networks, the makers of "the playa" and the codec, does not support Apple because of the aforementioned help they got from Intel. SO, Apple is ass out and must use the $1000 solution. And sure the drive is not $1000 but the machine that carries the drive starts at a price point $1000 higher than a PC capable of ripping DVDs in real time and burning said movies to CD a MUCH cheaper medium because it avoids the MPAA's tariff on DVDs.
As for picture quality, it's good enough that I cannot tell the difference between DVD and MPEG4 at 1600x1200 @ 32bit on my DP2040u 22 inch monitor, where I chose to spend the thousand dollars I saved by buying a PC instead of another Mac. What is the price point for 22" on the Apple side of the house? $2,499.00, more than an entire PC with a 22 inch monitor.
And for playback, because Apple cannot seem to understand the relevance of file extensions and thinks all MPEG4s are created equal, you can see the picture when you play back a DivX 4.11 MPEG4 but you cannot hear the sound.
Of course there is always iMovie. Not iMovie2 unfortunately. The original iMovie was a great application. It's a shame they had to change it. But like you said it doesn't matter because you are, luckily, abandoning the platform anyway and your current machine would take $344 to buy 256 megs of a dead end ram spec (256 megs of ram for PC costs about $80) and a $300 processor upgrade. $80 for an ATA/66 card and $100 for usb/firewire support. For $830 you can build yourself an extremely fast PC, comparable in performance to a G4 933.
Nice of you to come over from macslash. krevinek@mac.com I presume? You stated the same thing over there very nicely.
"Oi, should I mention again that MPEG-4 (the video codec) isn't MPEG-4 (the actual standard)? The MPEG-4 Apple is going to support is the MPEG-4 file format. What MPEG-4 compliant codecs will be available, we shall see (DivX, MPEG4v3 or whatever IS NOT MPEG-4). Sorry for the rant, just a little annoyed."
Osama is evil, evil is a state of mind, Osama lost his. So if he lost his mind, and evil is a state of mind, how can he be evil?
I'm sure your head is strained keeping your stories straight.
Oh, and welcome to/.
I've been trolled and lost an hour responding.. crap.
The 733 G4 is a nice machine. The older ones had more cache and so processed more instructions per clock cycle (less waiting on slow memory) than later G4s. The old 733s were not passed for performance until the latest 933 and 1000 machines. I really like OS X and even 9.0.4, 9.1, and 8.1 so it is really aggrevating for me that Apple's hardware is so far behind state of the art. I get the feeling that it is not entirely their fault because they subcontract so many parts. Video from ATI and Nvidia, chips from IBM, Motorola, Toshiba, AMD, different drive vendors, assembled in Mexico, here, Malasia. The list goes on and on for a company that is basicly a software vendor and intellectual property holding company. Rambus doesn't make Rambus memory and Apple doesn't make Apples. If the vendors say they can only make PC600 Rdram and The Spec calls for PC800, it's back to the drawingboard or find a new manufacturer except the clock is running so you settle for the slower solution.
"Janski writes "Looks like Slashdot.org now has an Apple section. It features a kind of ugly Aqua-inspired look, which makes things kind of hard to read. Check it out here." I dunno. The Green Aqua look is growing on me. I think they should call it algae. And, to everyone who's been submitting the "Oh my God! What will macSlash do? Slashdot is trying to kill you?" C'mon. There are already hundreds of Mac sites out there. One more isn't going to hurt us. In fact, I think it's a great opportunity, and I hope we can work with the Slashdot gang, like we've worked with others in the "Mac Web" before."
Somehow that sounds sinister. Like they're going to send some mac addicts with violin cases to Taco's wedding.
Slashdot Mirror
Since my one of my schools has been using 3 airport base stations and numerous airport cards to exctend the lan into portable classrooms, I guess we are in violation of this patent. All the airport equipment cost under $3000 compared to over $10000 for the lowest bid to cable these classrooms that will be moved or ripped out by next summer because of permenant construction. Frankly, this company can go fork themselves.
This is potentially a direct attack on Apple since they have the greatest marketshare in schools and certainly pioneered 802.11b in the classroom.
"Are you worrying about security on the Lan at Kent State."
Any school admin will tell you, the internet is untrusted and any lan with a student machine attached is also untrusted. Is a firewall to protect you from the blackhats on the big www, or is it to protect you from the blackhats on your own lan?
Always make the assumtion that somewhere on campus, someone has booted a computer to a floppy that uses VPN to tunnel straight through any firewall. A properly set up LRP disk has interesting uses on I^2
Archimedes prophetically predicted the fall of the roman empire because they only funded practical mathematics research. The Romans, lacking any theoretical mathematics to base new ideas on, did in fact decline. Their technology had hit a wall, much the same way that we have with unification. The mathematical underpinnings of chaos theory languished as an oddity 50 years after being discovered in a dead mathematician's mother's attic, before being used.
If you think about it, the romans had everything they needed to build steam locomotives. They had advanced road building, knowledge of steam dynamics, the ability to forge pressure vessels and an unrivaled industrial base. What they lacked was vision and the will to do anything that might seem impractical.
Hats off to you and godspeed.
I have an 1800xp underclocked from 11.5*133 @ 1533mhz to 7.5*133 @ 1000mhz. With an MC462 heatsink and a tube fixed to the heatsink an exiting the top of the case and no fan, the CPU never exceeds 32 degrees celsius. The real test is to see how far you can drop the CPU voltage before instability arises. Mine is running at 1.65. Lower voltage plus lower frequency means less heat but remember I am using one of the highest rated heatsinks available. At 789 grams, this heatsink weighs almost 300 grams more than any other heatsink you can buy.
And yes, the chimney effect of the tube makes it feel like there is a fan blowing hot air, just like the G4 cube.
"Intel could easily release those 2.6GHz chips today, but they aren't doing it for marketing reasons."
And exactly why is this OK to you? Do you like being marketed at? Do you like being fed shite and being told it's ice cream?
And before you talk about scaling, you should know that a processor "scales" well if you can run it at higher frequencies without increasing voltage or supercooling. At frequencies that AMD and Intel ship at, the processors benchmark similarly.
If you were not so busy singing the praises of P4 you might also notice that the Tualatin core is overclocking as well as the Athlon, and surpasses them both in some benchmarks.
Do some damn research before you post or start on about "fanboy blah blah fanboy" while being a fanboy.
I cannot belive you were modded up for that flamebait.
Your link to anantech's "Intel 845 DDR Motherboard Roundup - December 2001" is JUST i845 boards. They were not compared to the P4X266 at all.
:)
You must have meant to show this article, where it is clearly shown that the VIA P4X266 has twice the memory bandwidth of the crippled i845. Or this page, that clearly shows the P4X266 outperforming the crippled i845 by 12%, on par with the Intel's RDRAM solution.
This article shows Intel stands to gain considerably from every rimm sold.
You said it yourself, Intel had an existing chipset in june of last year supporting DDR but would not allow motherboard manufacturers to use DDR with it. That means they crippled it themselves to make RDRAM look better.
Their deal did not end, it's just that Rambus's stock price dropped to less than $6 a share making Intel's options to buy Rambus at $10 a share look a little weak
Since Rambus's stock at one time traded at over $100 they could have seen a ten fold increase in their investment. But since rambus stayed so expencive, and offered no performance advantage over the Athlon, their GREED caused their own loss of market share.
You may also note I am keeping tabs on IDF and also mentioned Intel's DDR chipset but I am begining to think you don't read. Take note: "The fact is, a dual channel DDR chipset from Intel may be available for the Pentuim 4, but only for the Xeon, a processor not available except from Intel's favored OEM Parteners, such as Dell.
"Your entire post is full of inaccurate information and typical anti-Intel garbage. Don't take me as pro-Intel, but anyone can see right through your crap if they looked at it."
Why do you waffle here? We can certainly see through your crap, why be such a fence sitter about it? I take you as pro-intel with no spine. If you could stand up for them with a spine I would at least respect you, but as it is you post a few incorrect links and restate my point for me then roll around about what you like.
Dammit I told you to post Intelligently.
You are certainly right that the primary cost of fiber to the home being putting the fiber in the ground. A $100 Nic card or even $2000 for a full PC with Gigabit Ethernet over fiber is nothing compared to holes that have to be dug to put fiber in the ground. Think of the additional expense of splicing for every house. Every house must have its own connection. If you run a 100 pair bundle up a street, you must make a splice for every house or put a piece of splitting equipment at every house. Phenomenally impractical even if it is absolutely necessary.
99% of houses not having fiber means that 1% do, or 700,000 houses already wired for fiber. A better way to say it might be 7,000 houses in a test community and about 3% of all $3,000,000 homes have fiber run to them.
I have fiber to the desktop, but I run fiber to desktops for a living. Terminating fiber is cheap when you do it yourself. My last mile is certainly not fiber though, it's Hi Cap DSL.
As the article states, The 2666 P4 is an overclocked P4 2.2
His entire conclusion is absurd. Piece by piece:
:)
"Our detailed tests show that forthcoming P4 CPUs with 133 MHz FSB clock used in conjunction with the 845E chipset (DDR SDRAM support) will effectively be castrated."
Intel castrated it their selves. Compare its performance to VIA's P4X266 Chipset's performance and you will see that Intel crippled it to prevent it from competing with Intel's Rambus chipset. Notice that Intel is suing VIA for that chipset because it ruins the facade that RDRAM is better than DDR. Also note that Intel has refused nVidia's request for an Intel license for a DDR chipset. Intel knows that a dual channel DDR chipset would show RDRAM for what it is: A fraudulent attempt to maintain a high performance monopoly. Whatever company "causes to be sold" the most RDRAM gets to own a controlling interest in Rambus Inc. At this point, Intel is the clear winner even though Sony made a race out of it by packaging Rambus with the Playstation 2. Intel suppresses their own DDR performance to make people believe that RDRAM is the fastest stuff out there. AMD would be committing suicide by using RDRAM to capitalize on Intel's marketing hype because that would place them directly under Intel's thumb.
"This is because the Pentium 4 has a problem: the increase in clock speed (e.g. P4/2533 or P4/2666) will be rendered useless by the slow DDR SDRAM memory bus of the 845 platform".
Again, this is Intel's doing for product placement purposes as was done with the Celeron when it competed with the Pentium III and was done by Apple on the new iMac's 100fsb 800mhz G4. A 133fsb does not cost any money, it is just an easily achievable clock frequency with available current chipsets.
"And one shouldn't forget that even a dual DDR platform for P4 should be priced at a level that is similar to a Rambus system, considering that it's from Intel."
Rephrased: "And one shouldn't forget that even a dual DDR platform for P4 will be priced as high as an RDRAM system because Intel will not license the platform to nVidia and Intel KNOWS it will outperform a Rambus system, ruining 2 years of carefully crafted marketing and gamesmanship" The fact is, a dual channel DDR chipset from Intel may be available for the Pentuim 4, but only for the Xeon, a processor not available except from Intel's favored OEM Parteners, such as Dell.
Before you defend Intel remember that Craig Barrett, after AMD went from 10% market share to 40% in a year, said "the market is dropping" to justify Intel's reduced profits. Well, Intel is a bellwether stock and the market believed everything Craig said. The market did drop. We all lost our jobs. We can now say in hindsight that at least a part of the market was due to drop. But because of Craig's statement, it was the tech sector that was hit first, and hardest. Instead of simply saying, "Intel has reduced profits because of competitive pressure", he brought the entire tech sector down with him. The recession that was due could have been placed entirely on Enron's shoulders. The energy sector was in fact dropping. Enron's insiders were cashing out at the same time Craig made his statement. People got scared and pulled their money out of the market. There was less money in the market than there had been and it came out of the tech sector when it should have come out of energy.
Go ahead and defend Intel. They have made poor greedy choices, sold inferior products at exorbitant prices and done it at the expense of all our livelihoods. Shame on them.
Intel's 1.7 trillion dollar market cap has been cut by Tom Pabst on more than one occasion. A series of articles he has had deriding Rambus, causing the 1.13 Ghz recall, and showing the Pentium 4 for the paper tiger it is has seriously hurt Intel. But Tom, like all hardware websites is cash poor. Tom's hardware has resorted to doing marketing research among their readership for Socratic Technologies. Sometimes they have been overt, sometimes they have sent readers to secure servers just for simple popularity polls. Tom's latest revenue generation technique is the introduction of "Editorial Content Sponsorships" which I'm going to guess prompted the recent editorial change of heart toward Rambus. Please notice that in the most recent article no AMD processors were over clocked according to their projected roadmaps and the test is presented as if it was fiction. Unfortunately, it seems we have lost another fair and unbiased journalist. Another because Sharky's Extreme was the first to go into Intel's pocket, prompting Sharky himself to leave the website. Sharky's is owned by INT Media Group. Noteable investors in INT media include Dell Computer Corporation, International Business Machines Corporation, Lucent Technologies Inc., Macromedia Inc., Microsoft Corporation, Nortel Networks Corporation and Oracle Corporation.
Expect wonderful reviews of Intel hardware on Sharky's and unfortunately now, Tom's. Look to [H]ard OCP, The Inquirer, The register, Anandtech and Ars Technica for relatively unbiased hardware news.
Post Intelligently, Thanks
read apple spec online. end of discussion. COWARD
Really, what platform are these emulators being written for? Do they call x86 functions directly and reveal ppc instructions to the mac os or do they call direct x and windows apis and expose PPC to mac OS. Or,(pant-pant)does this run on linux/FreeBSD/*nix on x86? How hard to port OS X directly instead of emulating PPC?
It's fast as the current G3. Measure how fast a G3 will emulate x86 and we might be able to get some comparison benchmarks out. Trying several processors on each side of the house would would help isolate emulator overhead.
Absolute minimum price for system you describe:
$3,657.00
$1000 for final cut pro
$4,657 minimum now
And apple recomends you buy:
$2000 for after effects
$1000 for Commotion 4
$700 Hollywood FX
And their best system is 12 grand
plus 5 grand for software.
3.5 grand for Canon's XL1S
How much crack do you smoke?
I could make a cluster that would make the top 500 list for that much money.
$30.00 for 128Mb 168pin EDO
:)
I kept looking because the best price I could find seemed so absurd. This somewhat discounts my rant at you -but- you were the one that paid $180 for $60 dollars worth of ram
Short Biography
mkay...
Do you have any idea how absurd you sound?
$720 for a gig of crap ram? Your position is indefenceable.
check ebay Item:
# 2002994436
# 2002609802
# 2002659737
You are going to pay that much for crap ram on ebay, you might as well get a G4-400 with 512 mb of ram included.
The deapth of your ignorance astounds me.
pathetic troll.
The spinward edge of the Western Digital Caviar WD1200BB (120GB capacity) has a sustained transfer rate of 49MB/s. It slows to About 29MB/s when reading near the hub. Two of these drives are far more than capable of saturating the ATA100 spec especially when you consider they have 8Mb of cache that allows them to burst (reading data prefetched from the drive) to fill the ATA100 bandwidth spec. The cache is much more usefull for writing small files because there is no chance of cache miss (having cached data that the OS never asks for).
Generally Platter size tends to be incremental. The WD1200BB has 40GB platters and it's predecessor had 30GB platters. The density difference was worth about 10MB/s at 7200rpm. 10000rpm at the same platter size will add about 10% and the 20% for the next platter size. I can guess that drives will hit 60+ MB/s by the end of this year. The rock bottom model will be 60Gb and the top end could be as high as 240Gb on a single drive.
This makes a great reason to finalize the ATA133 spec because Intel is not going to finish serial ATA anytime soon.
Sounds like we can have pure DVD disk images of every movie we rent on our desktops. Even now a Terrabyte of storage is within the grasp of power users. For under $2000. The cost of my first 2mb hardrive. For my apple 2. I can't wait to see what happens in the next twenty years.
Never happen. Apple will never go back to generic looking cases. The beige cases almost killed them and the flavored macs (and microsoft) saved their butter.
you recall correctly which means it laste a little less than two years. It would have been nice if they had thought of a platform upgrade cycle without selling you an entirely new machine. The memory became obsolete, Almost forcing an upgrade for a platform that claims to have a 5 year life cycle. Even hated RDRAM has lasted longer than 2 years. SDRAM has lasted 4 and will make 6. DDR started just last year so who can say, except its adoption is so widespread and DDR platforms are planned into next year, It will have a longer life cycle too. Apple jumped on an interim solution that trapped their users without a clear upgrade path.
Much like the real topic, The latest iMac with no shot of getting a pci solution, stuck with a max hardrive size that will be obsolete in a year and not even made in two. Current ATA drives already exceed the firewire specs 50 Megabytes per second (400 Megabits) Meaning the new iMac is in an upgrade dead end before it even starts. Compare to the Original Bondi: Same max hardrive size and uses a memory spec that will continue to be used for at least 2 years. That is 6 solid years of platform life for the Bondi compared to the new iMac with 2 years of platform life and a flatscreen with maybe 2 years of life if used in a school enviroment (the iMacs traditional forte).
Not to mention they raised the Apple barrier to entry 500 dollars. They have certainly shown they know how to shoot themselves in the foot as far as hardware is concerned to the same level that Microsoft does on security, Linux does on usability, sun does on getting platform support, and IBM fails to capitalize on their intellectual property, Intel trips trying to keep up with AMD and AMD cannot market their superior products.
All companies drop the ball. The only difference is, with the image they are cultivating, and their position in the market (declining), they absolutly cannot afford to.
My objective is not to flame apple but to provide apple a wake up call. They have made mistakes but they have also had some AMAZING successes. I want to see them continue to make the ferraris of the computer world but ATA66, 100Mhz Front side buses and computers with no upgrade path without flat out buying new hardware ARE NOT FERRARIS
Ok, I concede. And added you to my friends list, which I guess makes me a fan of yours, well argued. I'm a hardware guy, as you may have guessed. I can see you are a programmer. Well, happy developing.. or.. something.. ;)
Games driving the market? Nearly 100%
Under hardware competition from Power computing, The 8600/300 was a nice machine. You can stuff a Sonnet G4/450MHz into it to bring it up to speed but with a 50Mhz fsb and its use of 168pin fast page memory (now there is a great example of apple foisting off a dead end technology on their faithful users). Upgrade is not much of an option.
/.
The DivX 4.xx codec was originally Microsoft's but was extended by Intel for SSE. I know you will not claim Macs have SSE tucked inside the Velocity engine. DivX 4.11 allows the conversion of DVDs to MPEG 4 in real time. Meaning as you watch it, it's recording. You see, PC users are cheap bastards (or just not suckers) and are not willing to pay an extra 1000 bucks for a super drive to copy DVDs when they can do it for free.
The problem is, right now, 95% of the people ripping movies are using this fast codec. And DivX Networks, the makers of "the playa" and the codec, does not support Apple because of the aforementioned help they got from Intel. SO, Apple is ass out and must use the $1000 solution. And sure the drive is not $1000 but the machine that carries the drive starts at a price point $1000 higher than a PC capable of ripping DVDs in real time and burning said movies to CD a MUCH cheaper medium because it avoids the MPAA's tariff on DVDs.
As for picture quality, it's good enough that I cannot tell the difference between DVD and MPEG4 at 1600x1200 @ 32bit on my DP2040u 22 inch monitor, where I chose to spend the thousand dollars I saved by buying a PC instead of another Mac. What is the price point for 22" on the Apple side of the house? $2,499.00, more than an entire PC with a 22 inch monitor.
And for playback, because Apple cannot seem to understand the relevance of file extensions and thinks all MPEG4s are created equal, you can see the picture when you play back a DivX 4.11 MPEG4 but you cannot hear the sound.
Of course there is always iMovie. Not iMovie2 unfortunately. The original iMovie was a great application. It's a shame they had to change it. But like you said it doesn't matter because you are, luckily, abandoning the platform anyway and your current machine would take $344 to buy 256 megs of a dead end ram spec (256 megs of ram for PC costs about $80) and a $300 processor upgrade. $80 for an ATA/66 card and $100 for usb/firewire support. For $830 you can build yourself an extremely fast PC, comparable in performance to a G4 933.
Nice of you to come over from macslash. krevinek@mac.com I presume? You stated the same thing over there very nicely.
"Oi, should I mention again that MPEG-4 (the video codec) isn't MPEG-4 (the actual standard)? The MPEG-4 Apple is going to support is the MPEG-4 file format. What MPEG-4 compliant codecs will be available, we shall see (DivX, MPEG4v3 or whatever IS NOT MPEG-4). Sorry for the rant, just a little annoyed."
Osama is evil, evil is a state of mind, Osama lost his. So if he lost his mind, and evil is a state of mind, how can he be evil?
I'm sure your head is strained keeping your stories straight.
Oh, and welcome to
I've been trolled and lost an hour responding.. crap.
The 733 G4 is a nice machine. The older ones had more cache and so processed more instructions per clock cycle (less waiting on slow memory) than later G4s. The old 733s were not passed for performance until the latest 933 and 1000 machines. I really like OS X and even 9.0.4, 9.1, and 8.1 so it is really aggrevating for me that Apple's hardware is so far behind state of the art. I get the feeling that it is not entirely their fault because they subcontract so many parts. Video from ATI and Nvidia, chips from IBM, Motorola, Toshiba, AMD, different drive vendors, assembled in Mexico, here, Malasia. The list goes on and on for a company that is basicly a software vendor and intellectual property holding company. Rambus doesn't make Rambus memory and Apple doesn't make Apples. If the vendors say they can only make PC600 Rdram and The Spec calls for PC800, it's back to the drawingboard or find a new manufacturer except the clock is running so you settle for the slower solution.
Competeing with macslash
"Janski writes "Looks like Slashdot.org now has an Apple section. It features a kind of ugly Aqua-inspired look, which makes things kind of hard to read. Check it out here." I dunno. The Green Aqua look is growing on me. I think they should call it algae. And, to everyone who's been submitting the "Oh my God! What will macSlash do? Slashdot is trying to kill you?" C'mon. There are already hundreds of Mac sites out there. One more isn't going to hurt us. In fact, I think it's a great opportunity, and I hope we can work with the Slashdot gang, like we've worked with others in the "Mac Web" before."
Somehow that sounds sinister. Like they're going to send some mac addicts with violin cases to Taco's wedding.
Check their comments.
GNU Tools.
My bad, 215MBps (apples spec) on the newest models that have not shipped yet, 133MBs on the "old" ones that you can actually buy.