>Motion control hardware, if designed for duty in extreme environments (i.e. the hot and cold of an engine compartment) isn't the same as the potentiometer you buy at Radio Shack.
Yes, but for the price of the Radio Shack potentiometer, you can probably buy the Mil-Spec part, which will beat the pants off the auto-grade part.
BTW: I thought Nat-Semi was out of the business of making TTL parts...;-)
>he's talking about the Internet being accessible by the common man.
I bought my account at a computer store, and they sold accounts to anyone. They even advertised that they exist, and they included a thin manual on suggested ways to use the internet.
How much more accessible does it need to be? Does it need to come with flashing lights and dudes in radiation suits before its "accessible"?:-)
>Just because you can't run Lunix under 64k doesn't mean Bill Gates is wrong.
You are lying.
Lunix is designed to run on the Commodore 64, which has only 64k of RAM memory (and only about 30-40k free at that).
Posting as non-anonymous because I'm amazed that trolls keep using a misspelling of Linux as some kind of insult when its actually a totally different piece of software...
>If you couldn't justify what was happening, you'd most likely be suspended and possibly terminated by the end of the business day.
It would be for the best, really (for the worker, not really your company). I've worked under the thumb before, and the best thing that ever happened was when the thumb tried to squash me. You see, myself, just like a lot of workers, I have a hard time dealing with being unable to do anything personal at work. To me, being unable to ssh to home (for example) would be like asking the secretary to rid her desk of personal items. It leaves you feeling like you're working for a hospital, but not for a hospital worker's wages.
TTYL, and might I reccomend you look for another job? I'll best dimes to dollars that you'd be far happier in it!
Wow, a lot of people not reading the title to this thread, I can see.
This is a configuration for a $450 Dell machine. Perhaps a $1000 machine would have far better components, but who cares? At that point building it yourself really outpaces anything Dell can do.
>I've got a Dell laptop (Inspiron 2100, 3.4lb, 1", the small one). I've had to send it in for repair 4 times, all of which were my fault (I dropped it).
Dell doesn't sell new laptops for anywhere withing even 2x the $450 price tag on this thread.
>those Tulip based cards having nothing on it.
Those Tulip cards that you think are so cheap can do direct card-to-card switching. Can 3com cards do that? Linux says no... Maybe in windows, but I doubt windows would even support a feature like that.
>This guy doesn't sound like he's in the market for a 15" monitor.
Then he isn't in the sub $500 dollar market at all.
>And, by the way, which $70 Microsoft OS are you putting on this computer?
The OEM one like Dell uses that only costs $50.
>Your prices are totally unrealistic for a single build
I can point you out to a motherboard, right now, that costs $79. It include a 666 Mhz CPU, 8 MB video, Sound, NIC, and 4 usb ports. This is retail. A PC-Chips M787 would be it (and, before you laugh, PC-Chips is one of the number one suppliers for Brand Name computer shops).
Why do people think that you can't buy a monitor for $100, or a video card for $30. Have nVidia and Sony brainwashed you all or something? I just got a cheapo 4 MB AGP video card for $10 a couple of months ago, and passed up a $75 deal on a 20" (used) monitor at the same time because the price was too high. No, these aren't dealer prices, anyone off the street could walk in and buy at these prices, single quantity.
>I'm sure you'll have some smartass reply to this.
Yup, its this:
Cheap, low-cost computer parts like low-end audio, video, and network cards and clearance / small monitors are commodities now, selling for nearly no profit at all.
And, if you don't believe me, I have access to video cards, a business license, I'm _very_ willing to sell them for $30 each, single quantity, retail sale, and I wish you'd said that $100 monitors don't exist earlier -- I just dumped a bunch I wasn't happy with last week.
>Please tell me where you can get a decent monitor for $100
I didn't say decent.
Read the title of your post -- "Re: $450 from Dell". Any machine Dell sells for $450 will be full of the shittiest parts on earth. Ergo, it will come with the shittiest monitor on earth, probably a 15" SuperTaiwanClone monitor.
>Sure, I've bought copies of XP for 20 and 50, but they are one time only NFR copies.
And Dell includes something different now? Wow, I think I'll email piracy@microsoft.com and inform them of Dell's new activities...
>And as far as getting the case out of the box and setting up the standoffs in 3 minutes? What? It takes 3 minutes to wrestle the case from its plastic bag!
You have to be kidding me. Fine, I'll break that down too:
- Pocket knife, removed from pocket and opened: 5 seconds
- Tape cut: 3 seconds.
- Turn box over, ensuring flaps point outwards: 10 seconds.
- Pull box upwards: 5 seconds.
- Remove top styrofoam: 2 seconds.
- Pull plastic bag upwards while securing bottom styrofoam with feet: 5 seconds.
- Put the computer on the table, grab your screwdriver, open the case: 15 seconds.
- Find items inside and remove them. Open bag of screws. Pour them into a cup: 20 seconds.
- Using a 3/16" nut driver, screw in standoffs to all A/ATX marked holes: 1 1/2 minutes.
Done.
I suppose I neglected to mention that prior to building the computer, a cup, 3/16" nut driver, #2 phillips and medium flat-head screwdrivers would be handy.
I suppose if you've had less experience unboxing stuff it'd take longer (If you were to miss critical steps, like unflapping the flaps, or cutting the wrong side, it slows you down tremendously. Unfortunately, I've had a lot of experience unboxing things so it pretty much comes natural to me now.) However, if its taking you 3 minutes to remove the computer from the box, can I suggest you use a box cutter?:-)
Yup. Cheap brand name stuff == cheap parts. I've seen it for my own eyes on various systems, including Dell's, but most especially IBMs (their el-cheapo 17" monitor stands are cracked and destroyed when you turn the monitor too far because they were too cheap to design any limits into them).
>And I'd be shocked to see you put together the entire computer, including software and drivers together in
Then prepare to be shocked. Software & Drivers would be ghosted onto the machine in most stores, takes 2-5 minutes. Otherwise, installing Win XP (for example) takes only a few minutes of sitting in front of the machine. Past that you install a couple of drivers for hardware Win XP doesn't detect (dead simple) and install the software that comes with the drivers (on a new system this shouldn't take more than a minute a driver + reboot time).
Past that, any extra software you install is your own extra trouble. I suppose if you really like MS Works or any of the other trashy software that Dell/Brand Name manf. usually include with their el-cheapo systems you do lose time. Personally, I have to spend 20 minutes with a new Brand Name System removing garbage they installed that I don't want, or that's just plain offensive (such as a registration nag).
>Dell actually tests their stuff before they ship it out (although not as well as HP or Compaq).
Well, they'll do a proper test for any of their standard systems once to check for incompatible components. Past that I'd be surprised if they did much more than a "it posts" sort of check.
>You're also discounting issues such as incompatibilities between software, drivers, etc.
Cough...IBM Mwave... Cough (no, its not Dell, but its an example of how little testing Big Name corps really do before they sell a computer).
>However, I want the system to have a high level of quality. Every minute I have to fuck around with the computer costs me real dollars, and it adds up fast.
Well, that's why you buy it yourself! You can ensure everything is what you want in a computer, rather than giving into whatever they want to sell you (perhaps you would like an AMD system? Not from Dell you won't get it).
>Then add in the likelyhood of a beta driver or something being flakey (say like the driver for your $10 sound card)
That's never been a problem for me in the last few years. It was once, but nowadays I think you'll find that because the cheap hardware all uses standardized chips from huge mega-corps (Motorola, Rockwell, Conexant, C-Media, for example) that drivers are a non-issue nowadays.
I actually had a harder time making my SB-Live not crash my computer than my $30 Zoltrix Nightingale soundcard because the SB-Live drivers insisted I use their DOS-Mode driver (which, of course, crashes Win2k).
>If you're a professional (that perhaps used to build/support computers) that simply uses computers to build other products/services (think developer, etc.), it is not cost effective.
If you are only ever going to buy a single computer in your lifetime, you are correct.
However, since most professionals are looking at serious upgrades/new computers every year or two, the knowledge gained from the very short learning curve that comes with building your first computer will be very handy, and will save you time and money in the future. [Most repair shops charge absolute full price for upgrading Brand Name Boxes due to being burned so many times on the problems that come with chaging these systems about -- ask me and I can point some out].
We didn't, and none of the many shops I've been in watched 'em either (if they did them).
Besides, Dell doesn't run a bunch of tests like that.
If you want a machine identical to Dell's your only testing is to see if it boots.
>I work in a "truthful" repair shop, and there's no way you can get a machine ready in an hour.
Where I worked you'd have been fired. Quite simply, if you can't build a machine in well under an hour, especially when they're imaged (its nice when you can do that) you are either a poor builder, or you're spending too much time testing the box (unless you're getting paid extra for the testing, such as when building an overclocked box, in which case the boss will have you work on the machine until the customer's money runs out).
>setting up extra shit that people want (DVD programs, CDRW programs, running the speed tests on CDRW programs, AOL).
Yeah, that would slow you down and make it longer than an hour (except the DVD and CDRW programs -- those are simple!). Extra stuff, like AOL, though, isn't set up on a Dell, and that's what I'm comparing to.
>running the speed tests on CDRW programs
Why? If it doesn't work at full speed, it doesn't work at all. Not to mention the fact that Dell doesn't do this...
>NPU
Uhhh, you really aren't selling 386's with the 387 addon, are you?
>RTC
Huh? I've seen these fail once, ever, in new systems, and I've seen hundreds, maybe a thousand go by.
>Timer
You mean the standard IBM timer chip now built into chipsets? That's a waste of time - if its broke you'll know the moment you try to do anything that requires the timer (like booting the machine, for example)
>Base memory >Extended Memory
All one test with memtest86. You can't seriously be testing these things in DOS, are you? Because that's the only OS that makes a particular distinction between these that I know of.
Either way, all these tests are fully automated, and the only time I consider actual work time is when you have to be infront of the machine. None of these tests require that. A painter doesn't charge you for how long it takes the paint to dry, does he?
Why such low prices? The physical components on cheap brand name computers are total crap.
Now, why such low tech support? Well, if you ask me, telling me to re-install and/or run scandisk/defrag is worth $NOTHING. If you want anything past that you'll have to buy one freakin' expensive support contract. But that's just my experience.
Warranty? Oh, now you really must be shitting me!
Most separate components that are quality (as opposed to the crap put in a cheap brand name system) come with warranties of up to 3 years. Examples: Both my Asus motherboard and Maxtor hard drive are covered by 3 year warranties.
Parts that aren't covered by warranties are of such low cost (for example, the $2 mouse) that the cost in your time to return them isn't worth it.
>And, of course, if you get the Dell you don't have to dick around for five hours selecting and ordering the parts, finding drivers, putting everything together, and installing the OS.
As someone once employed to build computers, here's how long it takes someone with any experience to put one together:
- Open the case, whip out the bag of screws and standoffs. Put the standoffs in place, ensure the ATX coverplate is the right one. 3 minutes.
- Put CPU on motherboard, put the fan on, make sure the jumpers / dips are correct, and add memory. 5 minutes.
- Put the motherboard on the standoffs, screw it in. Connect the PSU cable to the motherboard. 2 minutes.
- Put the hard drive, floppy drive, CDROM in position and screw them down. 5 minutes.
- Add expansion cards, set any jumpers on them (virtually none nowadays). 5 minutes.
- Plug cables from CDROM, etc into the motherboard. 1 minute.
- Play with the BIOS and get it set nicely. 2-4 minutes.
- Install operating system (doesn't matter if its WinXP / Linux / Whatever): 10 minutes to get it going. You aren't going to sit there and watch it copy stuff to the hard drive, are you? Boring!
- Throw on drivers, etc. 5-10 minutes.
Total time to build a system, if done in the above order: A little over 30 minutes. Well under an hour.
And those times are accurate -- ask any (truthful) computer repair shop. The administration actually takes most of the time, and its the reason why most repair shops have a 30 minute - 1 hour minimum charge policy.
Unless you're being paid $500/hr. 24/7 I remain unconvinced that anyone with just a bit of experience can't economically justify the amount of time it takes to build a computer, espcially with today's standardized, keyed, idiot proof hardware!
Companies like Dell use simpler BIOSes. The ensure all the settings in the BIOS that you can't access are at their poorest performance possible.
Had you done the same with your homebuilt PC it almost certainly would have worked fine.
As far as noise goes, simply select the right components. If you want to keep noise down, you'll need to avoid a cheap power supply. Spend an extra $10 and get one with a variable speed fan. Same thing with the CPU, you must have a variable speed fan on it to keep noise down in a homebuilt system (that is, assuming you want to keep it standard -- more on that later).
By going with a big name computer, you lose any hope in hell of upgrading (in any major way) successfully. Riveted together cases (as in rivets where screws would usually go), one fan systems (ie: power supply fan does everything), proprietary cases, 120 watt power supplies, built on everything, BIOSes with only one screen, BIOSes that only exist on the hard drive (isn't it fun when you screw up your system if you have one of these machines), special drive rails, non-standard physical drive sizes, inability to disable onboard stuff, specialty video cards, expensive riser cards, special power supply connectors, oh God this list could go on forever.
The most fun part about a non-homebuilt machine is when you've got to get something proprietary replaced: IBM once quoted me $250 for a 200 watt desktop ATX sized but with special cable power end supply. In the end I got paid to cut the end off the old power supply, figure out how it was wired (not too hard) and wire their proprietary end on to a new "generic" 300 watt $50 ATX power supply. It was cheaper for me to spend an hour dicking about with the old supply than to replace it with an IBM part.
Not to even mention the fact that I got it fixed that night. Are you prepared to wait a week while their proprietary parts arrive at your house?
>Once again, another person assumes that a company is selling Windows because they are somehow FORCED to sell Windows, rather than because it's what the customers are asking for.
I have it on good authority that one of the longest, biggest lawsuits this decade (and the last) proves that you're wrong.
Perhaps by Microsoft he actually meant "Proprietary Software"?
This is really what companies are moving away from: Being locked into one solution, especially when the solution is bad.
Unfortunately, Apple is far worse than Microsoft in the "locked in solution" department and that is the #2 reason why no business wants to deal with them. #3 being that their proprietary solutions end up costing outrageous fees for new parts ($300 for a CD-ROM for an an old PowerMac? Give me a break). #1 being that their machines have a name (which may or may not be true anymore) for being purposely incompatible with Microsoft software and popular hardware/network standards out of the box.
Stay the hell away from Apple unless your entire shop uses it. It works well with its own kind. Past that, you're very much on your own. And when you're not #1, this is not the right attitude if you want to get anywhere.
>The parent was complaining about WINDOWS stability issues, and you throw a Linux assault at me.
I suppose we're even then, since you've thrown a double comment assault at me.
>I never said YOU can't run Linux.
In fact, you didn't mention Linux at all.
However, you did strongly imply that the majority of windows stability problems are due to hardware malfunctions. I think common experience would say you are wrong. My co-workers machine, for example, runs a completely Intel system with good quality components, but eventually internet explorer got itself in such a bad state that it couldn't even open up a new window without crashing. This was clearly an O/S bug because nothing else (excepting applications using internet explorer) would crash, and the cause of the crash was definately repeatable, unlike many hardware failures.
AMD "crap" is perfectly fine. Its only when you mix AMD stuff with non-AMD stuff, like VIA chipsets you have trouble. The errata for AMD processors is short. Likely shorter than many intel processors.
The reason intel's processors appear more stable is that people usually buy motherboards with intel chipsets when they buy an intel CPU. Ask anyone who has owned a VIA/PcChips/Sis based intel board what they think of intel and you'll quickly see a pattern: Crappy chipsets are often the source hardware malfunctions, not CPUs.
Try out an AMD processor on an AMD chipset and come back to us with your AMD stability gripes, if you have any. I think you'll find it really is windows that's the problem all along.
>So your ONLY two options are old AMD 486 hardware or a new $2500 Intel computer?!
Read my comment a little closer...
I said:
Instead my computers cost an average of $400 each (a couple are quite decent)
There you go. 2 decent $1000 machines, the rest ranges from a Cel 566 down to a 486 to be specific. It just so happens that the 486 is the most used machine of the bunch, since its the gateway.
>Do you want to punish me for what my government does?
Not really.
However, I wonder how quickly your government would reconsider its decision when half the internet goes offline.
Or, repharased, I wonder how quickly most all Australians would be pounding the streets outside their minister's offices to get this bill repealed when their internet becomes a shell of what it once was.
Unfortunately, I think something like this will never go away for you unless you all stand up and tell your government no.
In North America and Europe not enough of us shouted no at increasing copyright restrictions, and look where our silence has led us. Don't let 'em run you over like they're doing to us!
>So...you've not really run any web site bigger than the one you run with pictures of your cat, eh?
Actually, I don't run a website at all...
>Seriously, "ideals" are fine, but given the realities of the world, this would get you laughed out on your ass in most companies.
I didn't say it would be easy. But sysadmins of the world were successful in in turning their webpage black for a few days a while back in support of the EFF...
Why not something similar now? If everyone refuses to act problems like this will simply get worse and worse. I wonder what Martin Niemoller would have had to say about the growing number of countries and people willing to censor the internet.
Its not like these countries are so big cutting their stats out from a US-based site (for example) is likely to make a hill of beans of difference to the money in the coffers of a company.
As we all know, censorship is probably in the top three major internet offences.
So, I propose that any country censoring its citizens internet (Australia, Singapore, China, Zimbabwe, listen up) should be denied access to your machines.
You job, as a sysadmin who cares for the internet, is to block these countries from accessing your servers.
When they get tired of being stuck in their own sandbox and choose to fix their broken laws, unblock them. If they decide they don't want to do anything about it, fine, its their bed, let them lie in it.
Microsoft, the company, perhaps not. However, the largest shareholder (AFAIK), who has control of the company, Bill Gates, has reportedly driven without a license, and for some "unknown" reason, has a convict's mugshot (mostly used for people involved in criminal wrongdoings), taken at a police department. If I know my US law well enough, driving without a license is a criminal offense.
I think it would be next to impossible for a corporation to do something criminal unless that's their main intent, rather than their legally obliged intent to make money at all costs...
So, what you're saying is that if you pay for an expensive OS you have to buy expensive hardware?
Whoopie! So you really *do* get fucked comingandgoing.
I'll stick with Linux running on an underclocked-to-be-stable AMD 486 from hell for my firewall rather than spend $2500 on hardware and another $250 on XP Professional for a machine I rarely touch as it is, TYVM. Same thing for my CD burner, print server, DVD player, SANE Networked Scanner server, MP3 machine, my machine, my parents machine, and the other gateway at a friend's house, and my machine at work.
Had I chosen windows XP professional, I'd be looking at:
$2500 x 8 (work machine doesn't count) + $250 x 8 = $22,000.
Instead my computers cost an average of $400 each (a couple are quite decent), meaning I've saved enough money to buy a new car, which is far more attractive to the ladies than my any computer anyone could build at all...
(No, I don't pay the electricity bills around here!)
>Not being able to spell does not make someone stupid you fucking dumbfuck.
No, but it usually makes you ineligible to participate in Mensa as many of the tests require a (supposedly) high mental capacity for manipulating the english lanuguage.
And, while not being able to spell isn't directly related to stupidity, it is a strong indicator of it. Most people who cannot spell in a well practised tongue, especially when using that tongue in a supercilious manner, are viewed as unintelligent and impertinent.
>I'm glad to know that some dictionaries have taken it under their purview to define what words mean for us rather than recording their usage. We certainly don't have enough people telling us how to do things.
Yes, I'm sure we need another word that's so overused it means almost nothing, like set.
If the word steal is to be as overused as you suggest, then I suggest it means nothing. And if it means nothing, then I don't care if you call it that.
But if you think it actually means something, then I do care how you use it.
This isn't a useless word such as "like" or "uh" or "err", steal should remain a word that's useful in our language. Anyone who wants to lower the precision of our language is a, uh, um, well, sorta, huh, well, you know, like, not good?
>People who steal research data or excerpts from works of literature are usually reffered to as plagiarists, not thieves, possibly because the original remains in the owners possesion.
I totally agree, plagarizing is stealing, because the owner is deprived of whatever benefits the plagarized material receives.
However, we are discussing piracy, not plagarizing. Normally pirated goods remain untouched, execpt when features are removed, or copy protection broken. I've never seen pirated software that didn't include the author's name. Perhaps you have?
>Regardless, by your argument if i copy your plans for an invention, patent them, and sell the devices for millions of dollars, can i claim that you can not prove that you have lost money since you can not prove that those same people would have bought the device if you were the one marketing it?
No, because I would have hired you to market the goods. However, without a job I cannot purchase goods. The only defence to this is to say you would give me a job, or give me money to pay for the goods. In either case you do not benefit (you hired an employee to do nothing, or you paid me to do nothing, you still receive no benefits).
>If you steal information that belongs to someone else then you are denying them the ability to sell it to you, regardless of whether or not you would have bought it otherwise.
In general, denying someone the ability to sell something is not a crime in my country. Is it in yours?
If I deny a child his allowance in punishment, have I stolen that allowance from him?
Stealing requires the loss of a posession that you are legally entitled to. There is no legal entitlement to profit, sorry to say.
>You may decide to pay for those rights later, but if you go back two weeks later to the dealership you stole the porsche from and try to pay them for it, does that somehow mean you never stole in the first place?
I don't remember saying to go and pay for pirated goods after you've pirated them. This is getting off-topic...
>Once having stolen it, your intent or ability to pay or not pay are irrelevant, just as when you steal a car it doesn't matter if you could or would pay for it under other circumstances
I repeat: When a car is stolen, you are deprived the use of the car. When your data is "pirated" you are not deprived the use of it. When there is no deprivation of use, you must fall back on loss of something caused by the act. If the pirateer is unable to pay for anything they pirate there can be no stealing.
This argument comes down to this absurdity: Someone at a museum puts up a piece of art. They put a price tag of $5000 on it. I, being unable to afford the art, take a picture of it instead.
By your definition I have now stolen the art. The question I put to you is this: Prove the losses of the author. These losses cannot include the increased distrubution of the material to the public, since all copyrighted material is intended to be in the public domain (and will be so legally whether the author wants it to be or not).
The definition of stealing clearly requires the owner to suffer a loss. Your favourite dictionary, websters, actually requires a physical component, which I am ignoring in your favour. I quote:
"To take and carry away, feloniously; to take without right or leave, and with intent to keep wrongfully; as, to steal the personal goods of another."
Stripping that apart, we have:
"To take and carry away" - Carrying something away would require a physical removal of a physical item. There is no way to disagree with this, IMHO.
"feloniously" - Stealing requires a violation of the law.
"to take without right or leave" - This is the only half-sentence that could possibly be argued to have a non-physical loophole.
"and with intent to keep wrongfully" - This is clear, and your example of returning the "stolen" the Porsche is actually invalidated by this, not that I totally agree with Webster's on this.
"as, to steal the personal goods of another." - Ugh, they used the word to define the word. Personal goods are clearly defined as commodities (physical), wares (physical), Portable personal property (portable requires physicality), fabric (physical), or material (physical).
Now, why would Webster's be as accurate as Oxford? Is there a dictionary conspiracy afoot? I strongly doubt it.
>Just because the amount i still have has not decreased does not mean that you did not take it from me or that i am undamaged.
Infinity cannot exist in money, or any other thing we can conceive as a tradable good. An infinite amount of money would fill the universe, even if it were just bits on memory.
So yes, you do lose something. You lose control of the universe.
>but taking it without permision is still stealing, because you are taking something you have no right to, no matter how much of the original is left behind
You still have not answered my person taking a picture without permission quandary.
Until you can explain to me how that is stealing, I put it to you that you are incorrect.
>Maybe that concept is a bit hard to wrap your mind around
Why is the concept that taking a picture without permission is not stealing too complex for your mind?
Simple: You know that if you were to say that taking a picture of art is stealing, you would be wrong. Your friends would look at you in astonishment as you abuse their language.
I put it to you to describe the illegal picture taking quandry using only the Webster's definition of stealing.
>but the world changes, technology changes, and our views of the world and our lanaguage need to change to adapt.
Perhaps, but language should not become less accurate when there is a perfectly good word for the action: Piracy. And I think any decent english teacher would agree on this...
Slashdot Mirror
>Motion control hardware, if designed for duty in extreme environments (i.e. the hot and cold of an engine compartment) isn't the same as the potentiometer you buy at Radio Shack.
;-)
Yes, but for the price of the Radio Shack potentiometer, you can probably buy the Mil-Spec part, which will beat the pants off the auto-grade part.
BTW: I thought Nat-Semi was out of the business of making TTL parts...
>he's talking about the Internet being accessible by the common man.
:-)
I bought my account at a computer store, and they sold accounts to anyone. They even advertised that they exist, and they included a thin manual on suggested ways to use the internet.
How much more accessible does it need to be? Does it need to come with flashing lights and dudes in radiation suits before its "accessible"?
>Just because you can't run Lunix under 64k doesn't mean Bill Gates is wrong.
You are lying.
Lunix is designed to run on the Commodore 64, which has only 64k of RAM memory (and only about 30-40k free at that).
Posting as non-anonymous because I'm amazed that trolls keep using a misspelling of Linux as some kind of insult when its actually a totally different piece of software...
That's strange, considering the first company I ever bought internet from was a co-operative.
Seems to me the big-business internet was either developed on the backs of smaller companies, or was developed as smaller companies grew up.
>If you couldn't justify what was happening, you'd most likely be suspended and possibly terminated by the end of the business day.
It would be for the best, really (for the worker, not really your company). I've worked under the thumb before, and the best thing that ever happened was when the thumb tried to squash me. You see, myself, just like a lot of workers, I have a hard time dealing with being unable to do anything personal at work. To me, being unable to ssh to home (for example) would be like asking the secretary to rid her desk of personal items. It leaves you feeling like you're working for a hospital, but not for a hospital worker's wages.
TTYL, and might I reccomend you look for another job? I'll best dimes to dollars that you'd be far happier in it!
Wow, a lot of people not reading the title to this thread, I can see.
This is a configuration for a $450 Dell machine. Perhaps a $1000 machine would have far better components, but who cares? At that point building it yourself really outpaces anything Dell can do.
>I've got a Dell laptop (Inspiron 2100, 3.4lb, 1", the small one). I've had to send it in for repair 4 times, all of which were my fault (I dropped it).
Dell doesn't sell new laptops for anywhere withing even 2x the $450 price tag on this thread.
>those Tulip based cards having nothing on it.
Those Tulip cards that you think are so cheap can do direct card-to-card switching. Can 3com cards do that? Linux says no... Maybe in windows, but I doubt windows would even support a feature like that.
>This guy doesn't sound like he's in the market for a 15" monitor.
Then he isn't in the sub $500 dollar market at all.
>And, by the way, which $70 Microsoft OS are you putting on this computer?
The OEM one like Dell uses that only costs $50.
>Your prices are totally unrealistic for a single build
I can point you out to a motherboard, right now, that costs $79. It include a 666 Mhz CPU, 8 MB video, Sound, NIC, and 4 usb ports. This is retail. A PC-Chips M787 would be it (and, before you laugh, PC-Chips is one of the number one suppliers for Brand Name computer shops).
Why do people think that you can't buy a monitor for $100, or a video card for $30. Have nVidia and Sony brainwashed you all or something? I just got a cheapo 4 MB AGP video card for $10 a couple of months ago, and passed up a $75 deal on a 20" (used) monitor at the same time because the price was too high. No, these aren't dealer prices, anyone off the street could walk in and buy at these prices, single quantity.
>I'm sure you'll have some smartass reply to this.
Yup, its this:
Cheap, low-cost computer parts like low-end audio, video, and network cards and clearance / small monitors are commodities now, selling for nearly no profit at all.
And, if you don't believe me, I have access to video cards, a business license, I'm _very_ willing to sell them for $30 each, single quantity, retail sale, and I wish you'd said that $100 monitors don't exist earlier -- I just dumped a bunch I wasn't happy with last week.
>Please tell me where you can get a decent monitor for $100
:-)
I didn't say decent.
Read the title of your post -- "Re: $450 from Dell". Any machine Dell sells for $450 will be full of the shittiest parts on earth. Ergo, it will come with the shittiest monitor on earth, probably a 15" SuperTaiwanClone monitor.
>Sure, I've bought copies of XP for 20 and 50, but they are one time only NFR copies.
And Dell includes something different now? Wow, I think I'll email piracy@microsoft.com and inform them of Dell's new activities...
>And as far as getting the case out of the box and setting up the standoffs in 3 minutes? What? It takes 3 minutes to wrestle the case from its plastic bag!
You have to be kidding me. Fine, I'll break that down too:
- Pocket knife, removed from pocket and opened: 5 seconds
- Tape cut: 3 seconds.
- Turn box over, ensuring flaps point outwards: 10 seconds.
- Pull box upwards: 5 seconds.
- Remove top styrofoam: 2 seconds.
- Pull plastic bag upwards while securing bottom styrofoam with feet: 5 seconds.
- Put the computer on the table, grab your screwdriver, open the case: 15 seconds.
- Find items inside and remove them. Open bag of screws. Pour them into a cup: 20 seconds.
- Using a 3/16" nut driver, screw in standoffs to all A/ATX marked holes: 1 1/2 minutes.
Done.
I suppose I neglected to mention that prior to building the computer, a cup, 3/16" nut driver, #2 phillips and medium flat-head screwdrivers would be handy.
I suppose if you've had less experience unboxing stuff it'd take longer (If you were to miss critical steps, like unflapping the flaps, or cutting the wrong side, it slows you down tremendously. Unfortunately, I've had a lot of experience unboxing things so it pretty much comes natural to me now.) However, if its taking you 3 minutes to remove the computer from the box, can I suggest you use a box cutter?
>$100 monitor?
...IBM Mwave... Cough (no, its not Dell, but its an example of how little testing Big Name corps really do before they sell a computer).
Yup. Cheap brand name stuff == cheap parts. I've seen it for my own eyes on various systems, including Dell's, but most especially IBMs (their el-cheapo 17" monitor stands are cracked and destroyed when you turn the monitor too far because they were too cheap to design any limits into them).
>And I'd be shocked to see you put together the entire computer, including software and drivers together in
Then prepare to be shocked. Software & Drivers would be ghosted onto the machine in most stores, takes 2-5 minutes. Otherwise, installing Win XP (for example) takes only a few minutes of sitting in front of the machine. Past that you install a couple of drivers for hardware Win XP doesn't detect (dead simple) and install the software that comes with the drivers (on a new system this shouldn't take more than a minute a driver + reboot time).
Past that, any extra software you install is your own extra trouble. I suppose if you really like MS Works or any of the other trashy software that Dell/Brand Name manf. usually include with their el-cheapo systems you do lose time. Personally, I have to spend 20 minutes with a new Brand Name System removing garbage they installed that I don't want, or that's just plain offensive (such as a registration nag).
>Dell actually tests their stuff before they ship it out (although not as well as HP or Compaq).
Well, they'll do a proper test for any of their standard systems once to check for incompatible components. Past that I'd be surprised if they did much more than a "it posts" sort of check.
>You're also discounting issues such as incompatibilities between software, drivers, etc.
Cough
>However, I want the system to have a high level of quality. Every minute I have to fuck around with the computer costs me real dollars, and it adds up fast.
Well, that's why you buy it yourself! You can ensure everything is what you want in a computer, rather than giving into whatever they want to sell you (perhaps you would like an AMD system? Not from Dell you won't get it).
>Then add in the likelyhood of a beta driver or something being flakey (say like the driver for your $10 sound card)
That's never been a problem for me in the last few years. It was once, but nowadays I think you'll find that because the cheap hardware all uses standardized chips from huge mega-corps (Motorola, Rockwell, Conexant, C-Media, for example) that drivers are a non-issue nowadays.
I actually had a harder time making my SB-Live not crash my computer than my $30 Zoltrix Nightingale soundcard because the SB-Live drivers insisted I use their DOS-Mode driver (which, of course, crashes Win2k).
>If you're a professional (that perhaps used to build/support computers) that simply uses computers to build other products/services (think developer, etc.), it is not cost effective.
If you are only ever going to buy a single computer in your lifetime, you are correct.
However, since most professionals are looking at serious upgrades/new computers every year or two, the knowledge gained from the very short learning curve that comes with building your first computer will be very handy, and will save you time and money in the future. [Most repair shops charge absolute full price for upgrading Brand Name Boxes due to being burned so many times on the problems that come with chaging these systems about -- ask me and I can point some out].
>You're forgetting TESTING the components
Do you sit there watching the tests?
We didn't, and none of the many shops I've been in watched 'em either (if they did them).
Besides, Dell doesn't run a bunch of tests like that.
If you want a machine identical to Dell's your only testing is to see if it boots.
>I work in a "truthful" repair shop, and there's no way you can get a machine ready in an hour.
Where I worked you'd have been fired. Quite simply, if you can't build a machine in well under an hour, especially when they're imaged (its nice when you can do that) you are either a poor builder, or you're spending too much time testing the box (unless you're getting paid extra for the testing, such as when building an overclocked box, in which case the boss will have you work on the machine until the customer's money runs out).
>setting up extra shit that people want (DVD programs, CDRW programs, running the speed tests on CDRW programs, AOL).
Yeah, that would slow you down and make it longer than an hour (except the DVD and CDRW programs -- those are simple!). Extra stuff, like AOL, though, isn't set up on a Dell, and that's what I'm comparing to.
>running the speed tests on CDRW programs
Why? If it doesn't work at full speed, it doesn't work at all. Not to mention the fact that Dell doesn't do this...
>NPU
Uhhh, you really aren't selling 386's with the 387 addon, are you?
>RTC
Huh? I've seen these fail once, ever, in new systems, and I've seen hundreds, maybe a thousand go by.
>Timer
You mean the standard IBM timer chip now built into chipsets? That's a waste of time - if its broke you'll know the moment you try to do anything that requires the timer (like booting the machine, for example)
>Base memory
>Extended Memory
All one test with memtest86. You can't seriously be testing these things in DOS, are you? Because that's the only OS that makes a particular distinction between these that I know of.
Either way, all these tests are fully automated, and the only time I consider actual work time is when you have to be infront of the machine. None of these tests require that. A painter doesn't charge you for how long it takes the paint to dry, does he?
>Yeah, except the dell comes with ethernet, sound card, video card, speakers, keyboard, mouse, monitor, operating system, tech support, and warranty.
$10, $10, $30, $5, $5, $2, $100, $70, $NOTHING, $HAHA.
Why such low prices? The physical components on cheap brand name computers are total crap.
Now, why such low tech support? Well, if you ask me, telling me to re-install and/or run scandisk/defrag is worth $NOTHING. If you want anything past that you'll have to buy one freakin' expensive support contract. But that's just my experience.
Warranty? Oh, now you really must be shitting me!
Most separate components that are quality (as opposed to the crap put in a cheap brand name system) come with warranties of up to 3 years. Examples: Both my Asus motherboard and Maxtor hard drive are covered by 3 year warranties.
Parts that aren't covered by warranties are of such low cost (for example, the $2 mouse) that the cost in your time to return them isn't worth it.
>And, of course, if you get the Dell you don't have to dick around for five hours selecting and ordering the parts, finding drivers, putting everything together, and installing the OS.
As someone once employed to build computers, here's how long it takes someone with any experience to put one together:
- Open the case, whip out the bag of screws and standoffs. Put the standoffs in place, ensure the ATX coverplate is the right one. 3 minutes.
- Put CPU on motherboard, put the fan on, make sure the jumpers / dips are correct, and add memory. 5 minutes.
- Put the motherboard on the standoffs, screw it in. Connect the PSU cable to the motherboard. 2 minutes.
- Put the hard drive, floppy drive, CDROM in position and screw them down. 5 minutes.
- Add expansion cards, set any jumpers on them (virtually none nowadays). 5 minutes.
- Plug cables from CDROM, etc into the motherboard. 1 minute.
- Play with the BIOS and get it set nicely. 2-4 minutes.
- Install operating system (doesn't matter if its WinXP / Linux / Whatever): 10 minutes to get it going. You aren't going to sit there and watch it copy stuff to the hard drive, are you? Boring!
- Throw on drivers, etc. 5-10 minutes.
Total time to build a system, if done in the above order: A little over 30 minutes. Well under an hour.
And those times are accurate -- ask any (truthful) computer repair shop. The administration actually takes most of the time, and its the reason why most repair shops have a 30 minute - 1 hour minimum charge policy.
Unless you're being paid $500/hr. 24/7 I remain unconvinced that anyone with just a bit of experience can't economically justify the amount of time it takes to build a computer, espcially with today's standardized, keyed, idiot proof hardware!
Just my 2 cents.
Here's why your Dell experience was beter:
Companies like Dell use simpler BIOSes. The ensure all the settings in the BIOS that you can't access are at their poorest performance possible.
Had you done the same with your homebuilt PC it almost certainly would have worked fine.
As far as noise goes, simply select the right components. If you want to keep noise down, you'll need to avoid a cheap power supply. Spend an extra $10 and get one with a variable speed fan. Same thing with the CPU, you must have a variable speed fan on it to keep noise down in a homebuilt system (that is, assuming you want to keep it standard -- more on that later).
By going with a big name computer, you lose any hope in hell of upgrading (in any major way) successfully. Riveted together cases (as in rivets where screws would usually go), one fan systems (ie: power supply fan does everything), proprietary cases, 120 watt power supplies, built on everything, BIOSes with only one screen, BIOSes that only exist on the hard drive (isn't it fun when you screw up your system if you have one of these machines), special drive rails, non-standard physical drive sizes, inability to disable onboard stuff, specialty video cards, expensive riser cards, special power supply connectors, oh God this list could go on forever.
The most fun part about a non-homebuilt machine is when you've got to get something proprietary replaced: IBM once quoted me $250 for a 200 watt desktop ATX sized but with special cable power end supply. In the end I got paid to cut the end off the old power supply, figure out how it was wired (not too hard) and wire their proprietary end on to a new "generic" 300 watt $50 ATX power supply. It was cheaper for me to spend an hour dicking about with the old supply than to replace it with an IBM part.
Not to even mention the fact that I got it fixed that night. Are you prepared to wait a week while their proprietary parts arrive at your house?
I thought not.
>Once again, another person assumes that a company is selling Windows because they are somehow FORCED to sell Windows, rather than because it's what the customers are asking for.
I have it on good authority that one of the longest, biggest lawsuits this decade (and the last) proves that you're wrong.
Would you like to guess what the title of it is?
Perhaps by Microsoft he actually meant "Proprietary Software"?
This is really what companies are moving away from: Being locked into one solution, especially when the solution is bad.
Unfortunately, Apple is far worse than Microsoft in the "locked in solution" department and that is the #2 reason why no business wants to deal with them. #3 being that their proprietary solutions end up costing outrageous fees for new parts ($300 for a CD-ROM for an an old PowerMac? Give me a break). #1 being that their machines have a name (which may or may not be true anymore) for being purposely incompatible with Microsoft software and popular hardware/network standards out of the box.
Stay the hell away from Apple unless your entire shop uses it. It works well with its own kind. Past that, you're very much on your own. And when you're not #1, this is not the right attitude if you want to get anywhere.
Just my 2 cents.
>The parent was complaining about WINDOWS stability issues, and you throw a Linux assault at me.
I suppose we're even then, since you've thrown a double comment assault at me.
>I never said YOU can't run Linux.
In fact, you didn't mention Linux at all.
However, you did strongly imply that the majority of windows stability problems are due to hardware malfunctions. I think common experience would say you are wrong. My co-workers machine, for example, runs a completely Intel system with good quality components, but eventually internet explorer got itself in such a bad state that it couldn't even open up a new window without crashing. This was clearly an O/S bug because nothing else (excepting applications using internet explorer) would crash, and the cause of the crash was definately repeatable, unlike many hardware failures.
AMD "crap" is perfectly fine. Its only when you mix AMD stuff with non-AMD stuff, like VIA chipsets you have trouble. The errata for AMD processors is short. Likely shorter than many intel processors.
The reason intel's processors appear more stable is that people usually buy motherboards with intel chipsets when they buy an intel CPU. Ask anyone who has owned a VIA/PcChips/Sis based intel board what they think of intel and you'll quickly see a pattern: Crappy chipsets are often the source hardware malfunctions, not CPUs.
Try out an AMD processor on an AMD chipset and come back to us with your AMD stability gripes, if you have any. I think you'll find it really is windows that's the problem all along.
>So your ONLY two options are old AMD 486 hardware or a new $2500 Intel computer?!
Read my comment a little closer...
I said:
Instead my computers cost an average of $400 each (a couple are quite decent)
There you go. 2 decent $1000 machines, the rest ranges from a Cel 566 down to a 486 to be specific. It just so happens that the 486 is the most used machine of the bunch, since its the gateway.
>Do you want to punish me for what my government does?
Not really.
However, I wonder how quickly your government would reconsider its decision when half the internet goes offline.
Or, repharased, I wonder how quickly most all Australians would be pounding the streets outside their minister's offices to get this bill repealed when their internet becomes a shell of what it once was.
Unfortunately, I think something like this will never go away for you unless you all stand up and tell your government no.
In North America and Europe not enough of us shouted no at increasing copyright restrictions, and look where our silence has led us. Don't let 'em run you over like they're doing to us!
>So...you've not really run any web site bigger than the one you run with pictures of your cat, eh?
Actually, I don't run a website at all...
>Seriously, "ideals" are fine, but given the realities of the world, this would get you laughed out on your ass in most companies.
I didn't say it would be easy. But sysadmins of the world were successful in in turning their webpage black for a few days a while back in support of the EFF...
Why not something similar now? If everyone refuses to act problems like this will simply get worse and worse. I wonder what Martin Niemoller would have had to say about the growing number of countries and people willing to censor the internet.
Its not like these countries are so big cutting their stats out from a US-based site (for example) is likely to make a hill of beans of difference to the money in the coffers of a company.
As we all know, censorship is probably in the top three major internet offences.
So, I propose that any country censoring its citizens internet (Australia, Singapore, China, Zimbabwe, listen up) should be denied access to your machines.
You job, as a sysadmin who cares for the internet, is to block these countries from accessing your servers.
When they get tired of being stuck in their own sandbox and choose to fix their broken laws, unblock them. If they decide they don't want to do anything about it, fine, its their bed, let them lie in it.
>Neither Microsoft or Sun are convicted felons.
Microsoft, the company, perhaps not. However, the largest shareholder (AFAIK), who has control of the company, Bill Gates, has reportedly driven without a license, and for some "unknown" reason, has a convict's mugshot (mostly used for people involved in criminal wrongdoings), taken at a police department. If I know my US law well enough, driving without a license is a criminal offense.
I think it would be next to impossible for a corporation to do something criminal unless that's their main intent, rather than their legally obliged intent to make money at all costs...
So, what you're saying is that if you pay for an expensive OS you have to buy expensive hardware?
Whoopie! So you really *do* get fucked coming and going.
I'll stick with Linux running on an underclocked-to-be-stable AMD 486 from hell for my firewall rather than spend $2500 on hardware and another $250 on XP Professional for a machine I rarely touch as it is, TYVM. Same thing for my CD burner, print server, DVD player, SANE Networked Scanner server, MP3 machine, my machine, my parents machine, and the other gateway at a friend's house, and my machine at work.
Had I chosen windows XP professional, I'd be looking at:
$2500 x 8 (work machine doesn't count) + $250 x 8 = $22,000.
Instead my computers cost an average of $400 each (a couple are quite decent), meaning I've saved enough money to buy a new car, which is far more attractive to the ladies than my any computer anyone could build at all...
(No, I don't pay the electricity bills around here!)
Search smarter, not harder! :-)
>Not being able to spell does not make someone stupid you fucking dumbfuck.
No, but it usually makes you ineligible to participate in Mensa as many of the tests require a (supposedly) high mental capacity for manipulating the english lanuguage.
And, while not being able to spell isn't directly related to stupidity, it is a strong indicator of it. Most people who cannot spell in a well practised tongue, especially when using that tongue in a supercilious manner, are viewed as unintelligent and impertinent.
>Cayman GatorBox CS.
:-(
:-)
I've got one of these (althout I'm not sure its the CS model)...
Can you provide any links, software, or help in using it? Last time I checked out Cayman's site (a while ago, admittedly) they weren't much help.
I'd just be interested to see what I can do with it... Its my last bit of fully functioning never-used possibly useful hardware.
>I can't get Linux to install.
:-)
HTH!
>I'm glad to know that some dictionaries have taken it under their purview to define what words mean for us rather than recording their usage. We certainly don't have enough people telling us how to do things.
Yes, I'm sure we need another word that's so overused it means almost nothing, like set.
If the word steal is to be as overused as you suggest, then I suggest it means nothing. And if it means nothing, then I don't care if you call it that.
But if you think it actually means something, then I do care how you use it.
This isn't a useless word such as "like" or "uh" or "err", steal should remain a word that's useful in our language. Anyone who wants to lower the precision of our language is a, uh, um, well, sorta, huh, well, you know, like, not good?
>People who steal research data or excerpts from works of literature are usually reffered to as plagiarists, not thieves, possibly because the original remains in the owners possesion.
I totally agree, plagarizing is stealing, because the owner is deprived of whatever benefits the plagarized material receives.
However, we are discussing piracy, not plagarizing. Normally pirated goods remain untouched, execpt when features are removed, or copy protection broken. I've never seen pirated software that didn't include the author's name. Perhaps you have?
>Regardless, by your argument if i copy your plans for an invention, patent them, and sell the devices for millions of dollars, can i claim that you can not prove that you have lost money since you can not prove that those same people would have bought the device if you were the one marketing it?
No, because I would have hired you to market the goods. However, without a job I cannot purchase goods. The only defence to this is to say you would give me a job, or give me money to pay for the goods. In either case you do not benefit (you hired an employee to do nothing, or you paid me to do nothing, you still receive no benefits).
>If you steal information that belongs to someone else then you are denying them the ability to sell it to you, regardless of whether or not you would have bought it otherwise.
In general, denying someone the ability to sell something is not a crime in my country. Is it in yours?
If I deny a child his allowance in punishment, have I stolen that allowance from him?
Stealing requires the loss of a posession that you are legally entitled to. There is no legal entitlement to profit, sorry to say.
>You may decide to pay for those rights later, but if you go back two weeks later to the dealership you stole the porsche from and try to pay them for it, does that somehow mean you never stole in the first place?
I don't remember saying to go and pay for pirated goods after you've pirated them. This is getting off-topic...
>Once having stolen it, your intent or ability to pay or not pay are irrelevant, just as when you steal a car it doesn't matter if you could or would pay for it under other circumstances
I repeat: When a car is stolen, you are deprived the use of the car. When your data is "pirated" you are not deprived the use of it. When there is no deprivation of use, you must fall back on loss of something caused by the act. If the pirateer is unable to pay for anything they pirate there can be no stealing.
This argument comes down to this absurdity: Someone at a museum puts up a piece of art. They put a price tag of $5000 on it. I, being unable to afford the art, take a picture of it instead.
By your definition I have now stolen the art. The question I put to you is this: Prove the losses of the author. These losses cannot include the increased distrubution of the material to the public, since all copyrighted material is intended to be in the public domain (and will be so legally whether the author wants it to be or not).
The definition of stealing clearly requires the owner to suffer a loss. Your favourite dictionary, websters, actually requires a physical component, which I am ignoring in your favour. I quote:
"To take and carry away, feloniously; to take without right or leave, and with intent to keep wrongfully; as, to steal the personal goods of another."
Stripping that apart, we have:
"To take and carry away" - Carrying something away would require a physical removal of a physical item. There is no way to disagree with this, IMHO.
"feloniously" - Stealing requires a violation of the law.
"to take without right or leave" - This is the only half-sentence that could possibly be argued to have a non-physical loophole.
"and with intent to keep wrongfully" - This is clear, and your example of returning the "stolen" the Porsche is actually invalidated by this, not that I totally agree with Webster's on this.
"as, to steal the personal goods of another." - Ugh, they used the word to define the word. Personal goods are clearly defined as commodities (physical), wares (physical), Portable personal property (portable requires physicality), fabric (physical), or material (physical).
Now, why would Webster's be as accurate as Oxford? Is there a dictionary conspiracy afoot? I strongly doubt it.
>Just because the amount i still have has not decreased does not mean that you did not take it from me or that i am undamaged.
Infinity cannot exist in money, or any other thing we can conceive as a tradable good. An infinite amount of money would fill the universe, even if it were just bits on memory.
So yes, you do lose something. You lose control of the universe.
>but taking it without permision is still stealing, because you are taking something you have no right to, no matter how much of the original is left behind
You still have not answered my person taking a picture without permission quandary.
Until you can explain to me how that is stealing, I put it to you that you are incorrect.
>Maybe that concept is a bit hard to wrap your mind around
Why is the concept that taking a picture without permission is not stealing too complex for your mind?
Simple: You know that if you were to say that taking a picture of art is stealing, you would be wrong. Your friends would look at you in astonishment as you abuse their language.
I put it to you to describe the illegal picture taking quandry using only the Webster's definition of stealing.
>but the world changes, technology changes, and our views of the world and our lanaguage need to change to adapt.
Perhaps, but language should not become less accurate when there is a perfectly good word for the action: Piracy. And I think any decent english teacher would agree on this...