Okay, yes, you are quite right, I wasn't too nice in the original posting. And I was too overbearing. Sorry for any bruised feelings. I'll lower my attitude a little.:-)
And, I do need to allow more leeway in the use of grammar in articles. I can be a little down the the letter sometimes when it comes to the quality of articles, but that is only because slashdot has progressed from being a "club/hangout" to, by internet standards, a well known news service.
I also agree that the use of double negatives can have impact, especially the (unfortunately overused) phrase "You ain't seen nothing yet". But I suspect that negating negative numbers doesn't count for impact. I finished English in Grade 13 so I am by no means an expert. I am simply going by the standard I was taught (and double negatives were something I was strongly cautioned to aviod).
But what I was trying to do was to show that double negatives are not a good use of English, in most instances. I wouldn't have said anything, if it wasn't for the outcry of many other slashdot users that there was nothing wrong with the article's wording, with the implicit suggestion that double negatives are just fine. Modern slang is already redefining English at an alarming pace, slashdot doesn't need to add to it. Now please, don't take this as a reason to label me as someone who wants to stop the growth of English, though, because that isn't what I meant by the above.
The article needs work (IMHO) - it is awkwardly worded to me. Now, I have no problem with replies to articles/stories being badly worded; they are from the general public and just a quick expression of how that person feels, or a repetition of what someone knows. I don't flame people about their spelling/grammar unless they are trolls (in which case they get what they deserve).
But, in my opinion, if you are going to post an article, try to make it well polished. You should consider each article you post as a jewel of your intelligence. Craft it as you would anything else you might put on public display. If you feel there is a slight ambiguity, somebody else will notice that as a major problem. And those that noticed the ugliness in the wording of the article spoke out, and were squashed by the rantings of people thinking that there was no problem whatsoever with the article. Any decent English teacher would agree that there was a problem (or, would at least have pointed out that general use of multiple negatives in sentences is a sign of a poorly structured sentence).
I'm being too anal, I suppose. Oh well. I just hope I haven't trodden on too many toes.
I really didn't expect this many replies to my post. Wow! Good conversation, minus the trolls. As a long time -1 level surfer, I'd say this has to be a first in a while for slashdot. In this thread, I'm impressed with the quality of the arguments presented to keep the double negatives, although I might be a bit vehement in my responses.
I do realise this post is getting too long, but I don't think I've fully addressed your post yet. It was funny to think of piracy as benefiting the RIAA, but I feel that idea could have been presented more clearly. And, of course, the intention of the article writer was to add rhetorical effect to their article with the double negatives. I just don't think he was too successful.
>You can feel free to state your opinions, but stating afterwards "and if anyone disagrees, I'll prove you wrong" sounds belligerent and is unnecessary.
Quite right. I have no problem with this. I should have just stuck with telling others that comments about my grammar/spelling would be ignored. My emphasis obviously wasn't well received. "You gotta be so careful what ya type these days." Sorry.:-(
I wonder if you wanted me to type this, or if you assumed that because I can speak english properly, I cannot program. If you thought the latter, that is quite stereotypical of you. Stereotypes belittle the average man.
Well, here you are, and it compiles without errors on GCC:
#include
int main() { int a = 2; a == !!a; printf("The value of a, which was 2, is now: %d", a); return(0); }
Or, if you prefer, some "generic" intel assembly (actually, this is easier to read!):
MOV A, 2 CMP A CMP A
And, yes, a == !!a is, of course, 2.
>How about we just flame you for being clueless? Ever notice the "News for Nerds" thing at the top of the page?
>Does the expression "a == !!a" evaluate to true or false (assuming "a" contains a canonical true or false for the language in question to begin with)? If you can't answer this question correctly, you're not one of the people this website is designed for, and are therefore not qualified to commment on what's appropriate.
Now, what does that have to do with "News for nerds"? I don't see a "No english students" sign. Maybe slashdot should have a "No Blacks" or "No Jews" sign as well? Of course not. We are over this silly bickering in today's society, we are all equals regardless of race, profession, or virtually anything else (barring criminal or unethical activities). Because this has been hashed out so many times in the past, I will not even give any examples of why what you said was so offensive.
What qualifies me to comment on the double negatives present article is my high school level english.
Now, back on topic, these articles are targeted at the high tech industry in general, not just you. This includes Programmers, HARDWARE ENGINEERS (you missed this), NETWORK ENGINEERS (you missed this too), COMPUTER REPAIRMEN (you missed this also), STUDENTS (another miss), COMPUTER STOCKHOLDERS (again, you missed this), and MUCH MUCH MORE.
>No actual nerds or geeks were confused by the story. If a bunch of wannabees were, who cares?
Did I ever say anyone was confused? I reminded everyone what proper english looks like. I reminded people not to use double negatves, only because a lot of posters don't understand how poor they make your grammar look. The poster of this article made himself look like a grade four student. I certainly wouldn't take second notice of the ideas of a fourth grader on an issue like this, because fourth granders simply don't have the necessary experience to understand the issues behind piracy.
Your words are very important when they are all you have to convey your message. If your words are written as a four year old would have them, then you simply are a four year old, virtually.
Tell me what you understood first:
#1. I am not not going to not buy nothing not tomorrow.
#2. !(!(!buy(!tomorrow)
#3. I may buy something tomorrow, but never at any other time.
If you didn't say 3, then you need to go back to high school, or take english courses.
>If you can answer this question correctly, you've just proven your previous post to be wrong.
That's where you are most incorrect - I was only able to comment on the article because I understand English. C and C++ programming simply isn't English. Infact, it isn't even slightly close.
Yep... that type of story (with so much opinion in it) should be separated from the rest.
I was infact confused when I read the real artile the poster linked too... I could understand what was meant, but it just seemed a little silly to me, also.
Who knows, maybe sometime CmdrTaco will get around to making a soapbox category...:-)
No way man. Pirating music is "bad". MP3s aren't.:-)
Sorry to point that out, but nowadays, EVERYBODY thinks MP3 == pirated music. 'Fraid it ain't so...
1/2 my library of 60 Audio CDs are in MP3 format now, and counting. Much more convenient, to have 5 albums (compressed at something decent, like 192 kbps VBR) on a CD, rather than just one.
I agree with the rest of your points though. The ability to pirate music off of the internet has allowed people to sample music from groups that would have never been considered in the Music Store. The internet and MP3 compression has really opened up the amout of quality music availiable to people, simply by making the "try before you by" scenario reasonably possible.
Double negatives were neither necessary for impact, nor added to the readability of the story.
The story should have read: "Pirates cause $1.4 billion gain in CD Sales. Also, 90 million more CDs are shipped.".
Or, better yet, (but without the intended effect, yet more accurate):
"Despite pirates, the RIAA sees a $1.4 billion gain in CD Sales with 90 million more CDs shipped".
I wouldn't have posted this, but there are _way_ too many people bitching on slashdot, supporting the use of double negatives in english language for "impact" in this story. Readability adds impact, double negatives detract from it. That is why "Yo English teecha neva told ya's to use da sentence 'I ain't never gonna come back'".:-)
Flame me on the fact that double negatives are wrong, and I'll/prove/ I'm right.
Flame me for bad grammar, and you will be ignored.
>Well, first of all it's not clock locked, it's multiplyer lock and so what??
Quit nitpicking - you say tomaato, I say tomatoe. Tell anyone that the Celeron is clock locked and they will know what you mean.
And YES being multiplier locked IS clocklocked. By running the chip out of spec (which you must do to get a faster bus) you:
- Void your warranty - Risk damaging the processor or motherboard - Need a decent heatsink
>I have a dual celeron 366 @ 550 on a abit BP6 and I have absolutely NO problems.... actualy, I have more then one month uptime.
Me too. Not a month uptime, but I run a windows box, with a 300A @ 450 Mhz. I need to use the windows, since this box is used for heavy video editing and capture. It works as well as any other windows box.
Now, 366 Mhz celerons are bottom of the barrel these days. Look 6 months into the future - there won't be 366 Mhz celerons. You'll probably be "stuck" getting a celeron 466.
466 = 66 * 7 = 462 Mhz 100 * 7 = 700 Mhz
700 - 462 = 238 Mhz overclock.
Now compare that with your 134 Mhz, and I'm sure you'll see - this celeron overclocking isn't going to last forever. The gap will only widen as base speeds increase.
>If you really did some reshearch you must have sean that the celeron is an overclocker dream.
I did do the research, that is why I own a 300A! I could have gotten a 466 Mhz celeron at the time, but I didn't because I'm not an idiot! I know the limits of processors! And asking a processor for 200 Mhz more than what it was designed to do is asking for a LOT. And asking for 50% overclocking is a LOT as well.
Why didn't you mention these things? Ahhh, because you didn't do any research, and didn't use any common sense AND prefer to flame rather than explain...
And now for the final statement: You don't overclock for stability. Ask anyone who runs a real server. Ask anyone who runs a real server what they want in a processor - they will tell you a fast bus speed. Now to get that fast bus speed with a celeron, you need to overclock it. BAD. To get that fast bus speed with a K6 (last time I checked, which was a while ago) you simply used a lower multiplier, and higher bus speed. GOOD.
It's really that simple - Celeron == clock locked == bad. Most other chips != clock locked == good.
If you think having a clock locked processor (or multiplier locked for you tomaato people) is better than having one without those restrictions then I won't bother discussing this with you anymore.
>PIIIs are clock locked too, and Athlons even more so. So I'd steer well clear of those too.
Yeah, but these chips actually take advantage of the faster bus speeds today's PC offers, like 100 Mhz.
And the Athlon is not truly clocklocked. You just need to put some effort into changing it... Buy a "goldfingers" adapter. Or better yet, save your money and build one.:-)
I will be steering away from the PIII though. For lots of reasons...:-)
>Besides, given that the older Celerons could actually take going all the way to 100 FSB, its not a problem.
True - but they don't make them anymore, so that point doesn't count (unless you have a really kickass used parts supplier).
I know that 100 Mhz bus WAS possible on the older celerons. I have a 300A, and it goes at 100 Mhz just fine, but even pushing it to 103 Mhz is too much. I got lucky. Otherwise, I'd be stuck at 83, or less bus speed.
New celerons have multipliers of 7, or even higher. That is getting ridiculous considering 100 Mhz is availiable now!
Well, you are right, the FPU on a Cryix does suck.
The unreliability is caused by heat and power consumption though. These processors use almost 2x the power of an equivalent intel processor, so you MUST get a top-notch quality mainboard to run it in. And you must buy the biggest, baddest, heatsink to keep it at bay.
>Buy an M2 and an S3. You can laugh about it all the way to the bank.
Best advice of the week! The S3 based cards rock for thier performance, considering they cost so very little.
And the M2 is a very good processor, and the price (when I bought one, a while ago) is amazing! 1/2 the price of a similar intel chip, 7/10 the price of a similar AMD chip!
And what can beat a processor fabbed by IBM?
If only more people thought like this, then the $400 computer would be within grasp...
I did some research for him.:-) You know what I found out? The celeron is CLOCK LOCKED.
That seems like one hell of a hangup to me. Being forced to use a 66 Mhz bus, when 100 Mhz is avaliable (unless you want to terribly overclock the chip).
Is that what you have? I'm typing this on one right now, 233 Mhz Cyrix MediaGX processor.
The cyrix chip in it has been good to me. Memory design problems on this laptop caused me to remove the NMI interrupt message from the linux kernel, but after that, things went fine. Other's don't seem to have the same problem, but oh well... such is life.
I'm even happier, since the MediaGX uses SB16 full emulation, so sound in Linux is very easy to setup. And the NeoMagic video on the laptop is fully supported.
Only the modem is not going to work well (LT winmodem).
What makes this laptop a dog slow one, though, is the lack of cache on the HDD. There is a total of 0k cache on it. That is why it feels like the laptop just dropped to a 486 in performance whenever it uses the hard drive.:-(
Just a note: Get the keyboard upgrade patch - it will fix the mouse hangup problems too...
Games do suck on this laptop though. But that isn't what it is for... it is for business apps. And they run beatifully...:-)
Slashdot a way of bringing out the worst in people:
I post something innocent like:
Fast spin time is nice... But how fast do the HEADS move? That's the other most important side of the equation...
And it becomes a pissing contest. See the replies:
>Try reading the article instead of trying to get a fast post (#6 in your case)
then I say (stupidly joining in the pissing contest):
>might I reccomend a speed reading course?\
and the contest continues:
>That's Alt-F. Oh, wait. You were using Windows, right?
Of course, I would be having a bad day, and drivers' reply to my remark about speed reading was reasonable in hindsight:
>Maybe speed reading is your problem. You don't go for comprehension.
But I disagree that average seek time is a realistic way to measure HD armature movement, and since that is all the article uses to measure the head speed, I don't find a lot in there useful.
Of course, I would have to shoot off my mouth and make my post nasty by quoting every fact in the article. Again, if I had realised just how friggin' vigilant slashdot users can be about what they think is right, I wouldn't damn well speak here at all. Usenet is less forboding, for chrissakes.
Yeah, and I ignored the nice reply (#177) to my comprehension flame, which was sticking to the topic. Although they still use seek time for a comparison, which as is admitted by all here, a combination of both rotation speed and seeking speed (which, as I said, I don't think mix for a good stat).
Yeah, and I did say vaguely defined things like seek times. So I got a nice post explaining it to me. No problem, and I figured that their post seems like a reasonable explanation. As I figured, the rotational speed is part of the equation, messing up true head seek time.
A reply to this also explains how new smaller diameter platters are increasing seek times.
But then someone with a bad attitude has to get the math absolutely perfect, never mind the fact that we are all settled on the fact that seek time != head speed. That is like spell checking someone's post and pointing out every error. That's being a jerk. Then they turn into an asshole by saying:
>Clear enough?
What, do you think I'm an idiot? If someone said that to me, and I was their boss, I'd fire their ass.
>Well how would you know? You couldn't even do the simple calculations above, so why do you think you can predict what difference it would do to Q3/UT loading time?
I'd offer to give them their job back if they could prove that a 10 ms drive is going to load Q3/UT faster/same speed as a 4 ms drive. Needless to say, that comment wasn't at all thought through.
By this time, I am pissed off, so I make that asshole eat his own words.
Then you, dickwad, say:
>You are being an idiot. >You may have "PROVED" you read the article, but you certainly didn't *understand* it >Despite your whining >The very quote you mocked with your ignorant "sarcastic" comment >A final clue... >they don't design these high end drives so you can load a fucking UT level fast. >I think they just might have a better idea of what to do to fulfill that need than you do
If you think any of those comments were necessary, say so now. Otherwise, realise that saying things like that means war.
If you were to make sure that when someone makes a mistake, you were to always one up them in life by being sure to point out at every chance you get that they are an asshole, you'd eventually find someone that would put their fist in your face.
Well, here it is, virtually. I've picked apart all the replies to my post, and commented on my mistakes, and looked at all the nasty replies, and boy oh boy, you certainly have won. Yours is the nastiest yet.
I had a big long flame ready (your last comment pissed me off so much), but instead, I'll just make you look foolish:
My previous statement:
>That would shorten the quake 3/unreal tournament loading times by 1/2, at least! And fscking a hard drive wouldn't take such an unweidly amount of time!
Question:
>Well how would you know? You couldn't even do the simple calculations above, so why do you think you can predict what difference it would do to Q3/UT loading time?
Answer: Because, while my math abilities are not ubercool, I use common sense. While 1/2 isn't correct by a mile, it is used in this case as slang for "faster". Is english your mother tongue? If it isn't, I'll forgive you for that slip up. And I'll assume you agree fscking a hard drive is affected by seek time (so somehow I can be right on that but not the other? huh?)
Do you think that head seek time makes no difference to loading software? If you do, well, time to stop taking math, and get back to reality (try some technical courses).
if only that worked with my controller. It was one of the "newer" 16-bit ones, so that function wasn't supported. I had to search for MS-DOS software that still worked that would allow me to low level format the drive (no fun). These new-fangled graphical AMI BIOSes don't offer the services they used to...:-(
>St252ax, so big you had to create 2 partitions, because of the 32MB partition limit imposed by, (you guessed it), Microsoft.
I was one of the lucky ones. Didn't stop using my C64 until DOS 4.01 was out.:-)
>In disk drive lingo, "average seek time" means a 1/3-stroke seek.
Sounds reasonable so I'll take your word for the definition of it. But I do remember reading a few reviews about hard drives which mentioned how hard HD manufacturers would try to make this number the best they could (ie - that the average seek time could be more than a little different depending on their testing method).
Now, back on track, 6 ms isn't a bad seek time in that case, but I do beleive they quoted 3.9 ms in the article, or, 11.7 ms.
That might be good (by my memory, it is), but that still isn't the sort of improvement I'd like to see. Get it down to 2 or 3 ms, then I'll be real happy. That would shorten the quake 3/unreal tournament loading times by 1/2, at least! And fscking a hard drive wouldn't take such an unweidly amount of time!
But alas, bigger numbers sell. Smaller ones don't.
Yeah, the magnets were a lot of fun. Problem is, in this drive they are attached to steel with glue, so they are damn hard to remove. I had to break them in half:-(
But yeah, 5 feet away from my monitor and they could STILL change the colours!
BTW: I have a feeling you were joking... I tend to take things a little literally, so don't mind my silly post. Now, I'm getting a little tired of posting, so I think I'll take a break. 10 comments a day should be my limit.
Slashdot Mirror
Okay, yes, you are quite right, I wasn't too nice in the original posting. And I was too overbearing. Sorry for any bruised feelings. I'll lower my attitude a little. :-)
:-(
And, I do need to allow more leeway in the use of grammar in articles. I can be a little down the the letter sometimes when it comes to the quality of articles, but that is only because slashdot has progressed from being a "club/hangout" to, by internet standards, a well known news service.
I also agree that the use of double negatives can have impact, especially the (unfortunately overused) phrase "You ain't seen nothing yet". But I suspect that negating negative numbers doesn't count for impact. I finished English in Grade 13 so I am by no means an expert. I am simply going by the standard I was taught (and double negatives were something I was strongly cautioned to aviod).
But what I was trying to do was to show that double negatives are not a good use of English, in most instances. I wouldn't have said anything, if it wasn't for the outcry of many other slashdot users that there was nothing wrong with the article's wording, with the implicit suggestion that double negatives are just fine. Modern slang is already redefining English at an alarming pace, slashdot doesn't need to add to it. Now please, don't take this as a reason to label me as someone who wants to stop the growth of English, though, because that isn't what I meant by the above.
The article needs work (IMHO) - it is awkwardly worded to me. Now, I have no problem with replies to articles/stories being badly worded; they are from the general public and just a quick expression of how that person feels, or a repetition of what someone knows. I don't flame people about their spelling/grammar unless they are trolls (in which case they get what they deserve).
But, in my opinion, if you are going to post an article, try to make it well polished. You should consider each article you post as a jewel of your intelligence. Craft it as you would anything else you might put on public display. If you feel there is a slight ambiguity, somebody else will notice that as a major problem. And those that noticed the ugliness in the wording of the article spoke out, and were squashed by the rantings of people thinking that there was no problem whatsoever with the article. Any decent English teacher would agree that there was a problem (or, would at least have pointed out that general use of multiple negatives in sentences is a sign of a poorly structured sentence).
I'm being too anal, I suppose. Oh well. I just hope I haven't trodden on too many toes.
I really didn't expect this many replies to my post. Wow! Good conversation, minus the trolls. As a long time -1 level surfer, I'd say this has to be a first in a while for slashdot. In this thread, I'm impressed with the quality of the arguments presented to keep the double negatives, although I might be a bit vehement in my responses.
I do realise this post is getting too long, but I don't think I've fully addressed your post yet. It was funny to think of piracy as benefiting the RIAA, but I feel that idea could have been presented more clearly. And, of course, the intention of the article writer was to add rhetorical effect to their article with the double negatives. I just don't think he was too successful.
>You can feel free to state your opinions, but stating afterwards "and if anyone disagrees, I'll prove you wrong" sounds belligerent and is unnecessary.
Quite right. I have no problem with this. I should have just stuck with telling others that comments about my grammar/spelling would be ignored. My emphasis obviously wasn't well received. "You gotta be so careful what ya type these days." Sorry.
I wonder if you wanted me to type this, or if you assumed that because I can speak english properly, I cannot program. If you thought the latter, that is quite stereotypical of you. Stereotypes belittle the average man.
Well, here you are, and it compiles without errors on GCC:
#include
int main()
{
int a = 2;
a == !!a;
printf("The value of a, which was 2, is now: %d", a);
return(0);
}
Or, if you prefer, some "generic" intel assembly (actually, this is easier to read!):
MOV A, 2
CMP A
CMP A
And, yes, a == !!a is, of course, 2.
>How about we just flame you for being clueless? Ever notice the "News for Nerds" thing at the top of the page?
>Does the expression "a == !!a" evaluate to true or false (assuming "a" contains a canonical true or false for the language in question to begin with)? If you can't answer this question correctly, you're not one of the people this website is designed for, and are therefore not qualified to commment on what's appropriate.
Now, what does that have to do with "News for nerds"? I don't see a "No english students" sign. Maybe slashdot should have a "No Blacks" or "No Jews" sign as well? Of course not. We are over this silly bickering in today's society, we are all equals regardless of race, profession, or virtually anything else (barring criminal or unethical activities). Because this has been hashed out so many times in the past, I will not even give any examples of why what you said was so offensive.
What qualifies me to comment on the double negatives present article is my high school level english.
Now, back on topic, these articles are targeted at the high tech industry in general, not just you. This includes Programmers, HARDWARE ENGINEERS (you missed this), NETWORK ENGINEERS (you missed this too), COMPUTER REPAIRMEN (you missed this also), STUDENTS (another miss), COMPUTER STOCKHOLDERS (again, you missed this), and MUCH MUCH MORE.
>No actual nerds or geeks were confused by the story. If a bunch of wannabees were, who cares?
Did I ever say anyone was confused? I reminded everyone what proper english looks like. I reminded people not to use double negatves, only because a lot of posters don't understand how poor they make your grammar look. The poster of this article made himself look like a grade four student. I certainly wouldn't take second notice of the ideas of a fourth grader on an issue like this, because fourth granders simply don't have the necessary experience to understand the issues behind piracy.
Your words are very important when they are all you have to convey your message. If your words are written as a four year old would have them, then you simply are a four year old, virtually.
Tell me what you understood first:
#1. I am not not going to not buy nothing not tomorrow.
#2. !(!(!buy(!tomorrow)
#3. I may buy something tomorrow, but never at any other time.
If you didn't say 3, then you need to go back to high school, or take english courses.
>If you can answer this question correctly, you've just proven your previous post to be wrong.
That's where you are most incorrect - I was only able to comment on the article because I understand English. C and C++ programming simply isn't English. Infact, it isn't even slightly close.
Yep... that type of story (with so much opinion in it) should be separated from the rest.
:-)
I was infact confused when I read the real artile the poster linked too... I could understand what was meant, but it just seemed a little silly to me, also.
Who knows, maybe sometime CmdrTaco will get around to making a soapbox category...
>No way! Is that true? What a rip-off!
30.00 Australia Dollars = 18.4500 US Dollars
At today's exchange rates, that is...
Other than the fact that the links aren't my browser's default colour, I find the newly coloured slashdot perfectly useable.
Just my 2 cents...
>Mp3's are illegal and wrong and bad
:-)
No way man. Pirating music is "bad". MP3s aren't.
Sorry to point that out, but nowadays, EVERYBODY thinks MP3 == pirated music. 'Fraid it ain't so...
1/2 my library of 60 Audio CDs are in MP3 format now, and counting. Much more convenient, to have 5 albums (compressed at something decent, like 192 kbps VBR) on a CD, rather than just one.
I agree with the rest of your points though. The ability to pirate music off of the internet has allowed people to sample music from groups that would have never been considered in the Music Store. The internet and MP3 compression has really opened up the amout of quality music availiable to people, simply by making the "try before you by" scenario reasonably possible.
Double negatives were neither necessary for impact, nor added to the readability of the story.
:-)
/prove/ I'm right.
The story should have read: "Pirates cause $1.4 billion gain in CD Sales. Also, 90 million more CDs are shipped.".
Or, better yet, (but without the intended effect, yet more accurate):
"Despite pirates, the RIAA sees a $1.4 billion gain in CD Sales with 90 million more CDs shipped".
I wouldn't have posted this, but there are _way_ too many people bitching on slashdot, supporting the use of double negatives in english language for "impact" in this story. Readability adds impact, double negatives detract from it. That is why "Yo English teecha neva told ya's to use da sentence 'I ain't never gonna come back'".
Flame me on the fact that double negatives are wrong, and I'll
Flame me for bad grammar, and you will be ignored.
What's a DVX player? Is this new, or did you mean the dead DIVX standard?
:-)
(I'm not trying to point out a typo, but I am not sure...
>Well, first of all it's not clock locked, it's multiplyer lock and so what??
Quit nitpicking - you say tomaato, I say tomatoe. Tell anyone that the Celeron is clock locked and they will know what you mean.
And YES being multiplier locked IS clocklocked. By running the chip out of spec (which you must do to get a faster bus) you:
- Void your warranty
- Risk damaging the processor or motherboard
- Need a decent heatsink
>I have a dual celeron 366 @ 550 on a abit BP6 and I have absolutely NO problems.... actualy, I have more then one month uptime.
Me too. Not a month uptime, but I run a windows box, with a 300A @ 450 Mhz. I need to use the windows, since this box is used for heavy video editing and capture. It works as well as any other windows box.
Now, 366 Mhz celerons are bottom of the barrel these days. Look 6 months into the future - there won't be 366 Mhz celerons. You'll probably be "stuck" getting a celeron 466.
466 = 66 * 7 = 462 Mhz
100 * 7 = 700 Mhz
700 - 462 = 238 Mhz overclock.
Now compare that with your 134 Mhz, and I'm sure you'll see - this celeron overclocking isn't going to last forever. The gap will only widen as base speeds increase.
>If you really did some reshearch you must have sean that the celeron is an overclocker dream.
I did do the research, that is why I own a 300A! I could have gotten a 466 Mhz celeron at the time, but I didn't because I'm not an idiot! I know the limits of processors! And asking a processor for 200 Mhz more than what it was designed to do is asking for a LOT. And asking for 50% overclocking is a LOT as well.
Why didn't you mention these things? Ahhh, because you didn't do any research, and didn't use any common sense AND prefer to flame rather than explain...
And now for the final statement: You don't overclock for stability. Ask anyone who runs a real server. Ask anyone who runs a real server what they want in a processor - they will tell you a fast bus speed. Now to get that fast bus speed with a celeron, you need to overclock it. BAD. To get that fast bus speed with a K6 (last time I checked, which was a while ago) you simply used a lower multiplier, and higher bus speed. GOOD.
It's really that simple - Celeron == clock locked == bad. Most other chips != clock locked == good.
If you think having a clock locked processor (or multiplier locked for you tomaato people) is better than having one without those restrictions then I won't bother discussing this with you anymore.
>PIIIs are clock locked too, and Athlons even more so. So I'd steer well clear of those too.
:-)
:-)
Yeah, but these chips actually take advantage of the faster bus speeds today's PC offers, like 100 Mhz.
And the Athlon is not truly clocklocked. You just need to put some effort into changing it... Buy a "goldfingers" adapter. Or better yet, save your money and build one.
I will be steering away from the PIII though. For lots of reasons...
>Besides, given that the older Celerons could actually take going all the way to 100 FSB, its not a problem.
True - but they don't make them anymore, so that point doesn't count (unless you have a really kickass used parts supplier).
I know that 100 Mhz bus WAS possible on the older celerons. I have a 300A, and it goes at 100 Mhz just fine, but even pushing it to 103 Mhz is too much. I got lucky. Otherwise, I'd be stuck at 83, or less bus speed.
New celerons have multipliers of 7, or even higher. That is getting ridiculous considering 100 Mhz is availiable now!
>Yes they are clock locked. You you know what that means?
That if I buy a decent celeron chip, and not what is now the slowest availiable (366 Mhz where I am) I'll NEVER be able to run it at 100 Mhz bus.
I know - A friend of mine has a celeron 466. Running that at a 100 Mhz bus == 700 Mhz == WAY TOO MUCH OVERCLOCKING!
The days of overclocking celerons will very soon end. The 366 was the last chip you could reasonably have a hope of getting 100 Mhz bus out of.
>some cheap motherboard that surports 133mhz bus and has intergrated motherboard.
:-)
Two for the price of one! Now that is a deal I can handle!
(I couldn't help myself)
Well, you are right, the FPU on a Cryix does suck.
The unreliability is caused by heat and power consumption though. These processors use almost 2x the power of an equivalent intel processor, so you MUST get a top-notch quality mainboard to run it in. And you must buy the biggest, baddest, heatsink to keep it at bay.
Do those, and they Cyrix will run fine.
>Buy an M2 and an S3. You can laugh about it all the way to the bank.
Best advice of the week! The S3 based cards rock for thier performance, considering they cost so very little.
And the M2 is a very good processor, and the price (when I bought one, a while ago) is amazing! 1/2 the price of a similar intel chip, 7/10 the price of a similar AMD chip!
And what can beat a processor fabbed by IBM?
If only more people thought like this, then the $400 computer would be within grasp...
I did some research for him. :-) You know what I found out? The celeron is CLOCK LOCKED.
That seems like one hell of a hangup to me. Being forced to use a 66 Mhz bus, when 100 Mhz is avaliable (unless you want to terribly overclock the chip).
Is that what you have? I'm typing this on one right now, 233 Mhz Cyrix MediaGX processor.
:-(
:-)
The cyrix chip in it has been good to me. Memory design problems on this laptop caused me to remove the NMI interrupt message from the linux kernel, but after that, things went fine. Other's don't seem to have the same problem, but oh well... such is life.
I'm even happier, since the MediaGX uses SB16 full emulation, so sound in Linux is very easy to setup. And the NeoMagic video on the laptop is fully supported.
Only the modem is not going to work well (LT winmodem).
What makes this laptop a dog slow one, though, is the lack of cache on the HDD. There is a total of 0k cache on it. That is why it feels like the laptop just dropped to a 486 in performance whenever it uses the hard drive.
Just a note: Get the keyboard upgrade patch - it will fix the mouse hangup problems too...
Games do suck on this laptop though. But that isn't what it is for... it is for business apps. And they run beatifully...
Slashdot a way of bringing out the worst in people:
I post something innocent like:
Fast spin time is nice... But how fast do the HEADS move? That's the other most important side of the equation...
And it becomes a pissing contest. See the replies:
>Try reading the article instead of trying to get a fast post (#6 in your case)
then I say (stupidly joining in the pissing contest):
>might I reccomend a speed reading course?\
and the contest continues:
>That's Alt-F. Oh, wait. You were using Windows, right?
Of course, I would be having a bad day, and drivers' reply to my remark about speed reading was reasonable in hindsight:
>Maybe speed reading is your problem. You don't go for comprehension.
But I disagree that average seek time is a realistic way to measure HD armature movement, and since that is all the article uses to measure the head speed, I don't find a lot in there useful.
Of course, I would have to shoot off my mouth and make my post nasty by quoting every fact in the article. Again, if I had realised just how friggin' vigilant slashdot users can be about what they think is right, I wouldn't damn well speak here at all. Usenet is less forboding, for chrissakes.
Yeah, and I ignored the nice reply (#177) to my comprehension flame, which was sticking to the topic. Although they still use seek time for a comparison, which as is admitted by all here, a combination of both rotation speed and seeking speed (which, as I said, I don't think mix for a good stat).
Yeah, and I did say vaguely defined things like seek times. So I got a nice post explaining it to me. No problem, and I figured that their post seems like a reasonable explanation. As I figured, the rotational speed is part of the equation, messing up true head seek time.
A reply to this also explains how new smaller diameter platters are increasing seek times.
But then someone with a bad attitude has to get the math absolutely perfect, never mind the fact that we are all settled on the fact that seek time != head speed. That is like spell checking someone's post and pointing out every error. That's being a jerk. Then they turn into an asshole by saying:
>Clear enough?
What, do you think I'm an idiot? If someone said that to me, and I was their boss, I'd fire their ass.
>Well how would you know? You couldn't even do the simple calculations above, so why do you think you can predict what difference it would do to Q3/UT loading time?
I'd offer to give them their job back if they could prove that a 10 ms drive is going to load Q3/UT faster/same speed as a 4 ms drive. Needless to say, that comment wasn't at all thought through.
By this time, I am pissed off, so I make that asshole eat his own words.
Then you, dickwad, say:
>You are being an idiot.
>You may have "PROVED" you read the article, but you certainly didn't *understand* it
>Despite your whining
>The very quote you mocked with your ignorant "sarcastic" comment
>A final clue...
>they don't design these high end drives so you can load a fucking UT level fast.
>I think they just might have a better idea of what to do to fulfill that need than you do
If you think any of those comments were necessary, say so now. Otherwise, realise that saying things like that means war.
If you were to make sure that when someone makes a mistake, you were to always one up them in life by being sure to point out at every chance you get that they are an asshole, you'd eventually find someone that would put their fist in your face.
Well, here it is, virtually. I've picked apart all the replies to my post, and commented on my mistakes, and looked at all the nasty replies, and boy oh boy, you certainly have won. Yours is the nastiest yet.
Do you think you can do even better next time?
I had a big long flame ready (your last comment pissed me off so much), but instead, I'll just make you look foolish:
My previous statement:
>That would shorten the quake 3/unreal tournament loading times by 1/2, at least! And fscking a hard drive wouldn't take such an unweidly amount of time!
Question:
>Well how would you know? You couldn't even do the simple calculations above, so why do you think you can predict what difference it would do to Q3/UT loading time?
Answer: Because, while my math abilities are not ubercool, I use common sense. While 1/2 isn't correct by a mile, it is used in this case as slang for "faster". Is english your mother tongue? If it isn't, I'll forgive you for that slip up. And I'll assume you agree fscking a hard drive is affected by seek time (so somehow I can be right on that but not the other? huh?)
Do you think that head seek time makes no difference to loading software? If you do, well, time to stop taking math, and get back to reality (try some technical courses).
How many posts?
How many posted stories (including those that didn't make it)?
Just for fun...
>debug g=c800:5
:-(
:-)
if only that worked with my controller. It was one of the "newer" 16-bit ones, so that function wasn't supported. I had to search for MS-DOS software that still worked that would allow me to low level format the drive (no fun). These new-fangled graphical AMI BIOSes don't offer the services they used to...
>St252ax, so big you had to create 2 partitions, because of the 32MB partition limit imposed by, (you guessed it), Microsoft.
I was one of the lucky ones. Didn't stop using my C64 until DOS 4.01 was out.
>In disk drive lingo, "average seek time" means a 1/3-stroke seek.
Sounds reasonable so I'll take your word for the definition of it. But I do remember reading a few reviews about hard drives which mentioned how hard HD manufacturers would try to make this number the best they could (ie - that the average seek time could be more than a little different depending on their testing method).
Now, back on track, 6 ms isn't a bad seek time in that case, but I do beleive they quoted 3.9 ms in the article, or, 11.7 ms.
That might be good (by my memory, it is), but that still isn't the sort of improvement I'd like to see. Get it down to 2 or 3 ms, then I'll be real happy. That would shorten the quake 3/unreal tournament loading times by 1/2, at least! And fscking a hard drive wouldn't take such an unweidly amount of time!
But alas, bigger numbers sell. Smaller ones don't.
By reading this you give up your right to free speech.
If I beleived what Slade is saying, the above sentence would mean something. What Slade is doing cannot be legal. If so, then how about this:
By reading this, you agree not to hold me responsible for the pirated software you are about to download from me.
Pheh, right...
He never said the Radio Song was first.
And his opinions are his, and are just as valid as yours (even though you post like a jerk).
Yeah, the magnets were a lot of fun. Problem is, in this drive they are attached to steel with glue, so they are damn hard to remove. I had to break them in half :-(
But yeah, 5 feet away from my monitor and they could STILL change the colours!
BTW: I have a feeling you were joking... I tend to take things a little literally, so don't mind my silly post. Now, I'm getting a little tired of posting, so I think I'll take a break. 10 comments a day should be my limit.
May I humbly suggest pricewatch? (Prices under $300!)
here
Not that I trust all these dealers, but that is their advertised price.