If you want a good explanation for the Itanic drop-off, look to the funding side of things. Follow the money, and all will be explained. Read a lot into this.
No. Icky. Bad. You don't take the fastest changing part of a system and put it in a component that changes the slowest. Also, strapping a 110W GPU to a 60W CPU is not a smart thing.
Ok, we start out with 'protection', then we move to 'a heap' of protection, most assuredly to be followed by 'a whole heap' of protection. I can only see this spiral continuing until Bill Gates himself gets up on stage at CES in an Elvis suit promising 'a hunka- hunka- burnin protection'. *SHUDDER* Time to take a cold shower.
The new architecture is the Merom family of chips, the replacement for the P4. It is an all new architecture, don't let reports of PM based chips fool you. It is the same philosophy as PM, short pipes, lower clocks, but only tangentially related, and about as ground up new as is possible with modern chips.
Now, can someone tell me why this is news again? I realize Slashdot is behind Anandtech, but dear ghod, AMD even announced this a while back. Listen to the last analyst day broadcast, when a company anounces something, 2 months later it is not really hot news anymore.
For the people out there complaining about pin counts, look at Intel. They went from 423 to 478 to 775 in the life of the P4. AMD has only had two sockets, 754 and 939 in this span. If you want to drag servers in to it, add 940 on the AMD side, and 603, 604 and 772 on the Intel side. Since we are bringing in other chips, Intel also has 479 and 480 on mobile, AMD has the same 754 there.
AMD has a lot more stability on the socket side, and the move to the new sockets is strictly due to added functionality, DDR2 in this case, PCIe and FBD on the server side, eventually.
-Charlie
P.S. The person who approved this topic/story should be slapped with a half-thawed cod fish until they get a clue.
They missed the point entirely, and would have been better off making two distinct versions sold as a bundle. They both would resemble the current periodic table, but one would have a naked woman ghosted in the background, the other a naked man.
Using my new patented (R), (C) and (CC), method, I guarantee that high school age kids would stare at it for hours during class, and the learning would flow from that. It can't be any dumber than the current US educationals standards, and adults can enjoy it too.
As a side benefit, it may end up in garages and truckstops world-wide. Educate the masses I say!
Yes, but Apple controls a percentage of the desktop that you can count to on one hand after an industrial accident. MS controls a little over 40 times that, Intel a little less than 40 times.
If you were worried about one group ramming standards down your throat, would you put money on the guys controlling 2% or the two controlling ~85% each?
Intel tried to go with Apple, but from what I was told, Apple told them where to stuff it. Originally, Intel wanted to make a big happy prison for us all, to consolidate the little less happy prisons the others were making.
THe wardens did not play nice, and MS stepped in with currency by the cubic meter, and a match made in hell was born.
Sort answer, no, no Apple for now, they have no reason to dilute their brand. From the Apple side of things, they are right.
There are several problems with that, and it is being slightly disingenuous to say what you did. Intel's official position is that they are putting out roughly a framework, and you can do with it what you want. www.dlna.org is the vehicle for this, as I am sure you know.
The thing that you don't address is, is Intel going to put out a free (beer) or free (speech) version of the DRM'd WMV codecs? Not on your life. Since they are only officially blessing the MS DRM scheme, that is a heavy bias as to what people should encode in, and if history is any guide, they will. MS will quickly become the defacto standard.
Now, Intel very well may release the framework for Linux, and if you can comment, will they spend the time and effort to port the proprietary codecs? If not, you can be pretty sure that MS will not. So, you end up with something about as usefull as an uncustomised CRM package, IE pointless.
Also, can you care to explain to me how the MS and Intel co-marketing scheme will not lead to a pro-MS bias?
It is a really subtle sort of alienation the kind that MS is _SO_ good at, and I mean this in the most respectful way, they are good. Intel could have fixed this problem, a $300 mil campaign for a media PC without DRM would have been just as effective. I have debated this with several Intel people in positions of power to do things about this, and they repeatedly show an unwillingness to display any sort of backbone here.
There are two companies that are in a position of stop this DRM evil, Intel and MS. We can pretty safely assume MS will not go there, but I was honestly hoping Intel would. My bad.
If they had stood up and planted a stake in the sand, used their massive (really) software engineering team to build a better mousetrap without DRM, they would have won the day. They are cowards and money grubbers, and they sold us all out.
"Since his stuff is Free (if it is) you can look at it as who cares?"
Funny you should mention that, while he is a two faced sleazeball, at least according to several friends who know him and some who used to work for him, he does indeed keep his work truly open. That is the beginning though, not the end. It was also built on the backs of free authors, at least one of which was a good friend.
Now, the trick they use is to purposely not document their work, it is free indeed, but just try to use it. Oh, you want support? Write a check to.....
Now, you have to remember this is the same guy who called Jonathan Schwartz "a ponytailed clown from McKinley". Now, good old JS does sport a ponytail, but the last time I saw him, the clown makeup was notably absent. Not sure about the McKinley bit though.
All this is second hand, but it comes from people who were starry-eyed groupies until they realized the intracicies of his 'management' style and told him where to cram his philosophy.
-Charlie
P.S. If you want stories about him, ask at TheServerSide.com, especially about posting under multiple pseudonyms to back up a failing arguement.
P.P.S In case you don't notice, I don't think highly of him, but I am one of the smiling happy people compared to those who know him.
"I love it. It seems every time rumor mongers throw out a silly rumor about Apple, and then it doesn't happen, the excuse is that Steve Jobs threw a hissy fit."
I didn't say that, I said the anouncement could be delayed, not the product.
"Have you ever seen Jobs throw a hissy fit? Certainly nobody's managed to catch one on camera."
Yeah, go to an Apple store and try to buy a 'For Dummies' book.
"Apple could be talking to Intel about a wide variety of things.... but that never stops you guys from making this claim every 2 years or so that Apple is going to switch."
Nope, this was my first crack at it, and looks like I was right. Also, looks like you were dead wrong.
"Why would Apple want to pay MORE MONEY and have MORE HEAT ISSUES to deal with in its processors?"
Because the G5 is overpriced, underperforming, and totally unsuitable for a laptop. Getting your ass kicked in every performance metric is only bad until your anemic CPU won't even fit in a laptop anymore.
"If you really were at Computex, maybe you saw the AOpen Mac Mini "competitor" that was bigger, and costs $200 more than the Mac Mini when you include OS.... IF PCs are so cheap, why couldn't they compete on price with the mini?"
Yeah, I did, and it was really mediocre, enough so that I didn't write it up. The Intel one, 'Golden Gate' was much better, as was the Japanese companies one that I forget the name on. Both should be written up on the Inq in a day or three, I have to spend the next 30 hours on a plane.
Seriously though, I wrote the Inq piece, and I do have it from an independant source, and I had the info before CNet broke theirs, so it isn't a case of someone seeing CNet and running to me. I didn't get times though, which is why I was waiting.
On a related note, it would not surprise me if the be-turtlenecked megalomaniac had a hissy fit (a given), and put off the announcement. He can't cancel it, but putting it off to screw the journos would not be out of character.
There is more to this story though, and I will put some up as soon as I get bac from Computex, plane in 6 hours. Aargh.
"Well, yeah. I mean, how else do you describe a company that does a cost/benefit analysis on the number of people they expect their car to kill each year?"
Prudent? (ducks).:)
Seriously, I agree, but I was just pointing out that suits do not correleate with evil, they can, but they do not have to.
A good example of this is a friend of my father's who was a neurosurgeon. He had a few specialties that meant he was doing some ticky operations that had a 20% chance of success, and he got sued a lot when they failed, even though the people knew that there was only a 1 in 5 chance it would work. He had a segment on 60 minutes or something about the 19 (I think) lawsuits running against him at the time, and I am pretty sure he won every one. Not that it stopped people from trying.
On the other hand, if you are a doctor that specializes in diseases like burning warts off toes, you could be very bad at what you do, cause unnecessary discomfort and have recovery times 3x as long as the next guy, but how many times do you think he will get sued?
So, good guy in high risk position gets sued a lot for false pretenses. Bad guy in low risk position never gets sued even though he is bad at what he does.
The conclusion you draw is wrong, but you are right about the companies being evil.
Slashdot Mirror
If you want a good explanation for the Itanic drop-off, look to the funding side of things. Follow the money, and all will be explained. Read a lot into this.
-Charlie
Thanks, we try. We even succeed on rare occasions.
-Charlie
No. Icky. Bad. You don't take the fastest changing part of a system and put it in a component that changes the slowest. Also, strapping a 110W GPU to a 60W CPU is not a smart thing.
-Charlie
P.S. Bad, bad, bad. No cookie.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=17617
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=17652
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=17681
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=17709
More than you would care to know about LGA.
-Charlie
How much is a bittorrent client again?
-Charlie
P.S. If you think the current rootkitting DRM schemes are bad, wait till you see the next gen ones, like the ones for HD movies. Yikes.
The Inq is mainstream? I am press? Wow, thanks. :)
-Charlie
Ok, we start out with 'protection', then we move to 'a heap' of protection, most assuredly to be followed by 'a whole heap' of protection. I can only see this spiral continuing until Bill Gates himself gets up on stage at CES in an Elvis suit promising 'a hunka- hunka- burnin protection'. *SHUDDER* Time to take a cold shower.
-Charlie
Two for the price of one, and it answered THE burning question with regards to Lord British.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=23377
Strangely, after that fateful day by the pool last May, neither Garriot or Spector will get within 100 yards of me, restraining order or no.
-Charlie
The new architecture is the Merom family of chips, the replacement for the P4. It is an all new architecture, don't let reports of PM based chips fool you. It is the same philosophy as PM, short pipes, lower clocks, but only tangentially related, and about as ground up new as is possible with modern chips.
If you want more, I put some more details here:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25349
-Charlie
I would say I told you so, but I did.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=20749
Please notice the similarities between the 7+ month old article and the current one. *YAWN*
-Charlie
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24756
:)
I agree with the author's views 100% here, mainly because I wrote it.
-Charlie
Now, can someone tell me why this is news again? I realize Slashdot is behind Anandtech, but dear ghod, AMD even announced this a while back. Listen to the last analyst day broadcast, when a company anounces something, 2 months later it is not really hot news anymore.
For the people out there complaining about pin counts, look at Intel. They went from 423 to 478 to 775 in the life of the P4. AMD has only had two sockets, 754 and 939 in this span. If you want to drag servers in to it, add 940 on the AMD side, and 603, 604 and 772 on the Intel side. Since we are bringing in other chips, Intel also has 479 and 480 on mobile, AMD has the same 754 there.
AMD has a lot more stability on the socket side, and the move to the new sockets is strictly due to added functionality, DDR2 in this case, PCIe and FBD on the server side, eventually.
-Charlie
P.S. The person who approved this topic/story should be slapped with a half-thawed cod fish until they get a clue.
They missed the point entirely, and would have been better off making two distinct versions sold as a bundle. They both would resemble the current periodic table, but one would have a naked woman ghosted in the background, the other a naked man.
Using my new patented (R), (C) and (CC), method, I guarantee that high school age kids would stare at it for hours during class, and the learning would flow from that. It can't be any dumber than the current US educationals standards, and adults can enjoy it too.
As a side benefit, it may end up in garages and truckstops world-wide. Educate the masses I say!
-Charlie
I agree with this completely, and had you not written it, I was about to write the exact same thing.
-Charlie
Yes, but Apple controls a percentage of the desktop that you can count to on one hand after an industrial accident. MS controls a little over 40 times that, Intel a little less than 40 times.
If you were worried about one group ramming standards down your throat, would you put money on the guys controlling 2% or the two controlling ~85% each?
-Charlie
Intel tried to go with Apple, but from what I was told, Apple told them where to stuff it. Originally, Intel wanted to make a big happy prison for us all, to consolidate the little less happy prisons the others were making.
THe wardens did not play nice, and MS stepped in with currency by the cubic meter, and a match made in hell was born.
Sort answer, no, no Apple for now, they have no reason to dilute their brand. From the Apple side of things, they are right.
-Charlie
"Article was crap. I'd mod parent troll if I had mod points."
:)
And who says the community moderation system and points allocation system doesn't work?
-Charlie
There are several problems with that, and it is being slightly disingenuous to say what you did. Intel's official position is that they are putting out roughly a framework, and you can do with it what you want. www.dlna.org is the vehicle for this, as I am sure you know.
The thing that you don't address is, is Intel going to put out a free (beer) or free (speech) version of the DRM'd WMV codecs? Not on your life. Since they are only officially blessing the MS DRM scheme, that is a heavy bias as to what people should encode in, and if history is any guide, they will. MS will quickly become the defacto standard.
Now, Intel very well may release the framework for Linux, and if you can comment, will they spend the time and effort to port the proprietary codecs? If not, you can be pretty sure that MS will not. So, you end up with something about as usefull as an uncustomised CRM package, IE pointless.
Also, can you care to explain to me how the MS and Intel co-marketing scheme will not lead to a pro-MS bias?
It is a really subtle sort of alienation the kind that MS is _SO_ good at, and I mean this in the most respectful way, they are good. Intel could have fixed this problem, a $300 mil campaign for a media PC without DRM would have been just as effective. I have debated this with several Intel people in positions of power to do things about this, and they repeatedly show an unwillingness to display any sort of backbone here.
There are two companies that are in a position of stop this DRM evil, Intel and MS. We can pretty safely assume MS will not go there, but I was honestly hoping Intel would. My bad.
If they had stood up and planted a stake in the sand, used their massive (really) software engineering team to build a better mousetrap without DRM, they would have won the day. They are cowards and money grubbers, and they sold us all out.
-Charlie
If you have any questions, mail me, or post em here and I will try to get them all.
-Charlie
"Since his stuff is Free (if it is) you can look at it as who cares?"
Funny you should mention that, while he is a two faced sleazeball, at least according to several friends who know him and some who used to work for him, he does indeed keep his work truly open. That is the beginning though, not the end. It was also built on the backs of free authors, at least one of which was a good friend.
Now, the trick they use is to purposely not document their work, it is free indeed, but just try to use it. Oh, you want support? Write a check to.....
Now, you have to remember this is the same guy who called Jonathan Schwartz "a ponytailed clown from McKinley". Now, good old JS does sport a ponytail, but the last time I saw him, the clown makeup was notably absent. Not sure about the McKinley bit though.
All this is second hand, but it comes from people who were starry-eyed groupies until they realized the intracicies of his 'management' style and told him where to cram his philosophy.
-Charlie
P.S. If you want stories about him, ask at TheServerSide.com, especially about posting under multiple pseudonyms to back up a failing arguement.
P.P.S In case you don't notice, I don't think highly of him, but I am one of the smiling happy people compared to those who know him.
Suicide is preferable to talking to Cletus and Jerlene at lunch for a week, much less a career.
-Charlie
Call it a hobby for me. :)
-Charlie
"I love it. It seems every time rumor mongers throw out a silly rumor about Apple, and then it doesn't happen, the excuse is that Steve Jobs threw a hissy fit."
I didn't say that, I said the anouncement could be delayed, not the product.
"Have you ever seen Jobs throw a hissy fit? Certainly nobody's managed to catch one on camera."
Yeah, go to an Apple store and try to buy a 'For Dummies' book.
"Apple could be talking to Intel about a wide variety of things.... but that never stops you guys from making this claim every 2 years or so that Apple is going to switch."
Nope, this was my first crack at it, and looks like I was right. Also, looks like you were dead wrong.
"Why would Apple want to pay MORE MONEY and have MORE HEAT ISSUES to deal with in its processors?"
Because the G5 is overpriced, underperforming, and totally unsuitable for a laptop. Getting your ass kicked in every performance metric is only bad until your anemic CPU won't even fit in a laptop anymore.
"If you really were at Computex, maybe you saw the AOpen Mac Mini "competitor" that was bigger, and costs $200 more than the Mac Mini when you include OS.... IF PCs are so cheap, why couldn't they compete on price with the mini?"
Yeah, I did, and it was really mediocre, enough so that I didn't write it up. The Intel one, 'Golden Gate' was much better, as was the Japanese companies one that I forget the name on. Both should be written up on the Inq in a day or three, I have to spend the next 30 hours on a plane.
-Charlie
....gossip rag.
Seriously though, I wrote the Inq piece, and I do have it from an independant source, and I had the info before CNet broke theirs, so it isn't a case of someone seeing CNet and running to me. I didn't get times though, which is why I was waiting.
On a related note, it would not surprise me if the be-turtlenecked megalomaniac had a hissy fit (a given), and put off the announcement. He can't cancel it, but putting it off to screw the journos would not be out of character.
There is more to this story though, and I will put some up as soon as I get bac from Computex, plane in 6 hours. Aargh.
-Charlie
"Well, yeah. I mean, how else do you describe a company that does a cost/benefit analysis on the number of people they expect their car to kill each year?"
:)
Prudent? (ducks).
Seriously, I agree, but I was just pointing out that suits do not correleate with evil, they can, but they do not have to.
A good example of this is a friend of my father's who was a neurosurgeon. He had a few specialties that meant he was doing some ticky operations that had a 20% chance of success, and he got sued a lot when they failed, even though the people knew that there was only a 1 in 5 chance it would work. He had a segment on 60 minutes or something about the 19 (I think) lawsuits running against him at the time, and I am pretty sure he won every one. Not that it stopped people from trying.
On the other hand, if you are a doctor that specializes in diseases like burning warts off toes, you could be very bad at what you do, cause unnecessary discomfort and have recovery times 3x as long as the next guy, but how many times do you think he will get sued?
So, good guy in high risk position gets sued a lot for false pretenses. Bad guy in low risk position never gets sued even though he is bad at what he does.
The conclusion you draw is wrong, but you are right about the companies being evil.
-Charlie