I have a dual Athlon (Tyan's mobo) with two Athlon XP 1600+ CPUs.
They work quite fine: my current uptime is 47 days.
There are two differences between XPs and MPs: the price and the guarantee that MP will do SMP. As far as the latter one goes, I've never heard of an XP that won't run in an SMP configuration
you now owe them the sun the world and the stars in support.
Good point. I've been burnt by these nutcases.
I still sell stuff on the net, though. I do, however, use a disclaimer that basically says that I will sell the stuff as it is and will not not provide any support because I am not the manufacturer or a retail seller. I remind the potential buyer of this once in a while. So far no problems.
The damn thing sounded like a jet engine and I reasoned that if I put it in a closet I could keep it running 24 h/day and still get some sleep. I ran some network cable from the closet to my desk where I had a diskless 60 MHz Pentium Classic (no CPU fan either) as a terminal. It was a nice exercise in building a machine that boots over the network. In the end, however, there were a few problems.
Firstly, in the summer the air got too hot in the closet and the computer crashed regularly. Opening the closet door and/or installing a fan would have defeated the purpose of the whole exercise. Secondly, running X over a 100 Mbit network was annoyingly slow. The slowness of the terminal computer didn't help either.
But I guess you can't both have the cake and eat it? If you want reasonable performance you must be prepared to accept the noise.
Well, lucky you. I guess you're just not sensitive to noise.
I bought a dual AMD for a while ago. I thought I could make it silent enough, but I'll probably have to sell it now. The noise, although only moderate due to the slowly rotating fans, is still too much even for a daytime working. The hum of two Miprocool CPU fans (80 mm, 1300-3000 rpm and huge heat sink) and a power source was too much even after I padded the case with carpet and soft foam.
The problem is the huge 60+ W power consumption of the processor. Intel's new Tualatin PIII line has only is rated at only 27 W and I've been thinking about building a new machine based on those and Zalman's passive heat sinks. If the passive cooling isn't enough, I'll get a large, slow and silent fan to move the air around a bit.
I used to keep my computer running all the time, but stopped after I was discovered what a difference having a totally silent room at night made in my sleep quality.
I've got DSL but I don't run web, ftp or other kind of servers. Then why should the computer be on 24 h/day? It just sits there producing heat and noise and wasting electricity I've got to pay for.
I recommend you try sleeping with your computer off for a week or two and you'll see what a difference it makes.
Not to mention that the font handling is horrific.
I still haven't figured out how to change the system fonts so that I'd get ISO8859-15 fonts in every application by default. All howtos seem to be telling me that I've got to edit the Xresources for each separate application like xterm, emacs and so on. That's simply unacceptable.
Sounds fine, but how do you quantify work in a fair way?
Is an hour of work by a manual labourer more valuable than an hour of work by an engineer planning the production? Counting hours or even the number of whatever you're producing is not fair.
If you were thinking logically
Please refrain from unnecessary ad hominem attacks and this would be much more pleasant. I am thinking logically but apparently we can't reach a common understanding. Yet again, the three truths.
ME: However, forcing the able to underperform and prosper at the level of the weak is also wrong That former view is inconsistent with this problem you have here.
Uh. No, not really. The people who are well off should contribute more to the society financially. The only thing that's unfair with the Nordic taxation is that the tax percentage is progressive. That's what hurting the right to prosper, but as long as the income tax stays below 50% (as it does in my country) it's not urgently excessive.
Yeah, and the starting point in making such a society is to address the faults in the current society in a way that can be resolved without resorting to violence. The most glaring faults at the moment are the public healthcare, schooling and welfare. Why don't you work on those? Babysteps.
But as I said, I am not a socialist. I am sympathetic to some of the practical goals mentioned above.
Workers would not need rich men to employ them.
What rich men?
The "rich men" who take a bank loan to start a private business and use that to pay the salaries of their (often ungrateful) employees? Oh, now I get it. The bankers are evil? Well, how do you set up a company in a socialist dream economy, then? The hardware and reward for the workers does not appear from nowhere, you know.
As far as your "single risk" argument goes, I don't see any point in it. Everybody is allowed to take that risk. Some succeed some don't. What's wrong with that?
I can not say exactly how things would be as all Socialism supposes is that workers control production, and nothing else.
Ah, the egalitarian dream: everybody is equal no matter how smart/stupid or predisposed to a particular task they are. But human beings are different. Men can't give birth. There are smart and stupid people. Does not an above average worker deserve more reward?
I do not understand why you bring Post Modernist arguments into the foray.
Because I do not believe in human claimed truths whether those are political or religious or both.
As far as I can know the truth, it is my conscience and it's telling me that abandoning the weak of the society is wrong and that the task of the society is to help these people. That's where the ultracapitalism or darwinian sociology goes wrong. However, forcing the able to underperform and prosper at the level of the weak is also wrong. That's where a society aiming at radical socialism (unrealistic egalitarianism) is wrong.
I am sympathetic to the socialist cause as far as guaranteeing the basic free education, transportation, healthcare and social security goes. Beyond that I believe that a man or a woman who sets up a business and takes the responsibility for the financial risks deserves a higher reward than a worker who just shows up at work because "he/she has to". Anything other takes away the incentive to achieve something for the most people.
I guess you haven't realise that those social benefits are being stripped away by the ultracapitalists? Concentrate on preserving what we already have got before embarking on your revolution!
Germany: Prime Minister from Social Democratic Party or SPD [Gerhard SCHROEDER, chairman]
UK: Labor Party [Anthony (Tony) Blair]
Finland:
Tarja HALONEN elected president (Social Democratic Party), Prime Minister Paavo LIPPONEN prime minister (Social Democratic Party)
If you knew the truth you could answer this simple question
I never claimed I know the truth. That was the point. There is no single truth and I will not bow to political or religious dogma -- I will only serve my own conscience and that does not include "pure" socialism or capitalism.
Since you have apparently trademarked socialism to mean only a one, narrow definition I won't bother either. But let me tell you that you're only pushing sympathetic people who could help you to make a real difference away.
I can not tell you what Socialism is, you must read for yourself.
Oh yeah, I've run into that attitude before. If you don't agree with us, you don't understand us. There can be nothing wrong with our ideology. It's all the fault of the nasty capitalist fat cats, right?
Face the mirror and accept the fact that there are two truths: your truth, their truth and the real truth. Your ideology, just as ultracapitalism, is just the other extreme.
making so much money off of our sweat and our blood and our work
Answer me this: would you have a workplace without these guys? Would you have the courage to risk your own welfare and start your own business? Give some respect to those who deserve it.
Well, to me maintaining the social security, healthcare and other social programs prevalent in, for instance, the nordic countries is the primary objective.
If you're after the "workers must own everything" in a militant way you'll get nowhere. In fact, I'm supporting you socialists only because the alternative is even worse. Once you get as zealous and powerful as the globalist capitalist movement these days, I'll fight you too.
Perhaps the luddites like the ones who want to prohibit experiments with stem cells and embryos that consist mostly of unspecified cells based on silly Bible-thumping arguments are the reason for this?
Slashdot Mirror
I have a dual Athlon (Tyan's mobo) with two Athlon XP 1600+ CPUs.
They work quite fine: my current uptime is 47 days.
There are two differences between XPs and MPs: the price and the guarantee that MP will do SMP. As far as the latter one goes, I've never heard of an XP that won't run in an SMP configuration
Not very far, I think. Most technologically advanced nations are signatories to international copyright agreements that frown upon file sharing.
The time to 'purge' the hard left 'entryism' of /. is long overdue.
I suggest you seek an appointment in the future Ministry of Truth.
Good point. I've been burnt by these nutcases.
I still sell stuff on the net, though. I do, however, use a disclaimer that basically says that I will sell the stuff as it is and will not not provide any support because I am not the manufacturer or a retail seller. I remind the potential buyer of this once in a while. So far no problems.
Microsoft and Intel have been squabbling over this very issue recently.
"Somebody set up us the bomb"
The damn thing sounded like a jet engine and I reasoned that if I put it in a closet I could keep it running 24 h/day and still get some sleep. I ran some network cable from the closet to my desk where I had a diskless 60 MHz Pentium Classic (no CPU fan either) as a terminal. It was a nice exercise in building a machine that boots over the network. In the end, however, there were a few problems.
Firstly, in the summer the air got too hot in the closet and the computer crashed regularly. Opening the closet door and/or installing a fan would have defeated the purpose of the whole exercise. Secondly, running X over a 100 Mbit network was annoyingly slow. The slowness of the terminal computer didn't help either.
But I guess you can't both have the cake and eat it? If you want reasonable performance you must be prepared to accept the noise.
I bought a dual AMD for a while ago. I thought I could make it silent enough, but I'll probably have to sell it now. The noise, although only moderate due to the slowly rotating fans, is still too much even for a daytime working. The hum of two Miprocool CPU fans (80 mm, 1300-3000 rpm and huge heat sink) and a power source was too much even after I padded the case with carpet and soft foam.
The problem is the huge 60+ W power consumption of the processor. Intel's new Tualatin PIII line has only is rated at only 27 W and I've been thinking about building a new machine based on those and Zalman's passive heat sinks. If the passive cooling isn't enough, I'll get a large, slow and silent fan to move the air around a bit.
It's got fans and a pump: lots of noise and noise is bad.
I bet you're a huge hit with the women in your company...
I've got DSL but I don't run web, ftp or other kind of servers. Then why should the computer be on 24 h/day? It just sits there producing heat and noise and wasting electricity I've got to pay for.
I recommend you try sleeping with your computer off for a week or two and you'll see what a difference it makes.
To be able to concentrate on your work or getting a good nights sleep perhaps?
What's supposed to happen? I'm moving a Galeon window while xterm is showing "find /" output without freezing. I've got two CPUs, though.
I still haven't figured out how to change the system fonts so that I'd get ISO8859-15 fonts in every application by default. All howtos seem to be telling me that I've got to edit the Xresources for each separate application like xterm, emacs and so on. That's simply unacceptable.
Sounds fine, but how do you quantify work in a fair way?
Is an hour of work by a manual labourer more valuable than an hour of work by an engineer planning the production? Counting hours or even the number of whatever you're producing is not fair.
If you were thinking logically
Please refrain from unnecessary ad hominem attacks and this would be much more pleasant. I am thinking logically but apparently we can't reach a common understanding. Yet again, the three truths.
ME: However, forcing the able to underperform and prosper at the level of the weak is also wrong
That former view is inconsistent with this problem you have here.
Uh. No, not really. The people who are well off should contribute more to the society financially. The only thing that's unfair with the Nordic taxation is that the tax percentage is progressive. That's what hurting the right to prosper, but as long as the income tax stays below 50% (as it does in my country) it's not urgently excessive.
Yeah, and the starting point in making such a society is to address the faults in the current society in a way that can be resolved without resorting to violence. The most glaring faults at the moment are the public healthcare, schooling and welfare. Why don't you work on those? Babysteps.
But as I said, I am not a socialist. I am sympathetic to some of the practical goals mentioned above.
Workers would not need rich men to employ them.
What rich men?
The "rich men" who take a bank loan to start a private business and use that to pay the salaries of their (often ungrateful) employees? Oh, now I get it. The bankers are evil? Well, how do you set up a company in a socialist dream economy, then? The hardware and reward for the workers does not appear from nowhere, you know.
As far as your "single risk" argument goes, I don't see any point in it. Everybody is allowed to take that risk. Some succeed some don't. What's wrong with that?
I can not say exactly how things would be as all Socialism supposes is that workers control production, and nothing else.
Ah, the egalitarian dream: everybody is equal no matter how smart/stupid or predisposed to a particular task they are. But human beings are different. Men can't give birth. There are smart and stupid people. Does not an above average worker deserve more reward?
Because I do not believe in human claimed truths whether those are political or religious or both.
As far as I can know the truth, it is my conscience and it's telling me that abandoning the weak of the society is wrong and that the task of the society is to help these people. That's where the ultracapitalism or darwinian sociology goes wrong. However, forcing the able to underperform and prosper at the level of the weak is also wrong. That's where a society aiming at radical socialism (unrealistic egalitarianism) is wrong.
Would the workers be better off without the people who actually employ them?
And I never claimed I am.
I am sympathetic to the socialist cause as far as guaranteeing the basic free education, transportation, healthcare and social security goes. Beyond that I believe that a man or a woman who sets up a business and takes the responsibility for the financial risks deserves a higher reward than a worker who just shows up at work because "he/she has to". Anything other takes away the incentive to achieve something for the most people.
I guess you haven't realise that those social benefits are being stripped away by the ultracapitalists? Concentrate on preserving what we already have got before embarking on your revolution!
Germany: Prime Minister from Social Democratic Party or SPD [Gerhard SCHROEDER, chairman]
UK: Labor Party [Anthony (Tony) Blair]
Finland: Tarja HALONEN elected president (Social Democratic Party), Prime Minister Paavo LIPPONEN prime minister (Social Democratic Party)
I never claimed I know the truth. That was the point. There is no single truth and I will not bow to political or religious dogma -- I will only serve my own conscience and that does not include "pure" socialism or capitalism.
Since you have apparently trademarked socialism to mean only a one, narrow definition I won't bother either. But let me tell you that you're only pushing sympathetic people who could help you to make a real difference away.
Oh yeah, I've run into that attitude before. If you don't agree with us, you don't understand us. There can be nothing wrong with our ideology. It's all the fault of the nasty capitalist fat cats, right?
Face the mirror and accept the fact that there are two truths: your truth, their truth and the real truth. Your ideology, just as ultracapitalism, is just the other extreme.
making so much money off of our sweat and our blood and our work
Answer me this: would you have a workplace without these guys? Would you have the courage to risk your own welfare and start your own business? Give some respect to those who deserve it.
If you're after the "workers must own everything" in a militant way you'll get nowhere. In fact, I'm supporting you socialists only because the alternative is even worse. Once you get as zealous and powerful as the globalist capitalist movement these days, I'll fight you too.
It's hysterics to call that a declaration of war. It's common business sense.
Perhaps the luddites like the ones who want to prohibit experiments with stem cells and embryos that consist mostly of unspecified cells based on silly Bible-thumping arguments are the reason for this?