Oh, I was reading it. Trying to figure out how they could do that. Turns out it's the nForce 200 chipset, which has a x16 connection to the boards, but the outgoing connection to the chip is still stuck at the speed of the DMI. So, really, it's just faking the available bandwidth and multiplexing the uneven split out to the cards. The available bandwidth to the cards is still 16+4 in terms of PCIe lanes.
A 2.0 PCIe slot is what, 8 gig/sec? Seems like AMD's HT link is about the same. I guess the deal is that without more HT/PCIe links on AMD/Intel chips (which would be FX/opteron chips with three links and socket 1366 chips) you're right, you won't see squat.
Looks like it's 16+4. The +4 is channeled out of the PCH (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_P55). Therefore when you're using anything on the PCH (like USB and SATA), you're stealing bandwidth from the non-video PCIe slots, because it shares the same connection to the CPU. So he was a little off on his point about other interfaces stealing bandwidth from the video card. Turns out it only steals bandwidth from whatever you have in the third x16 slot or the x1 slot.
The Asus M4N98TD EVO can do 16+16+2 with an AMD chip. I think the point was that for the segment that this chip is targeting, it is severely hobbled in terms of PCIe bandwidth. These chips can only do x8/x8 SLI and AMD chips can do x16/x16 SLI.
I'd like to see a board that disputes that the 1156 socket can only handle 16+4 lanes.
Just because there's a x16 slot doesn't mean all the lanes get hooked up. I looked at the manual for the motherboard you listed. This is the relevant section:
3 PCI Express 2.0 x16 slots * if you intend to install two expanson cards into both PCI_E2 & PCI_E4 slots, these two PCIE x16 lanes wll auto arrange from x16/ x0 to x8/ x8 * the PCI_E5 supports up to PCIE 2.0 x4 speed * all PCIE x1 slots will unavalable when an expanson card was installed into PCI_E5 slot.
2 PCI Express 2.0 x1 slots * all PCIE x1 slots will unavalable when an expanson card was installed into PCI_E5 slot.
The only thing that is not clear is that if the PCI_E5 slot (the lower one) is disabled when the upper two (E2, E4) have two x16 cards in them. Taking the most optimistic view of the manual specifications, at maximum, there are only 16 + 4 lanes available. As to if eSATA and USB 3 eat up the lanes... that's another story.
On the flip side, if you are used to messing with the config files and get agitated when you want to do something not supported by the GUI, that will be the last time you see it. Server Admin has a nasty habit of undoing your clever configurations and not reading unset "defaults" (ie: DAV not defined, so off, right? Wrong. GUI defaults to on). If you don't know any better, and what's exposed via the interface is enough for you, then sure, it's great. If you do know better about the capabilities of the software.... look elsewhere.
I'm convinced Wii Connect 24 is the culprit. Turn it on, the system heats up while asleep, eventually you get the snow issue and have to call it in. Good thing it was within warranty. It's kind of annoying to not be able to use that feature.
If you've ever dealt with an overheating video card, the symptoms are the same.
Some of use prefer the over protective parents because we can get more important stuff done when we're not forced to waste time fending off bears and skunks in the scary wilds.
So, basically, by twisting the story to the pro and anti Apple stances, this discussion has essentially proved that applied metaphors are useless for predicting future performance.
The only way to figure out who is correct is by waiting an arbitrary amount of time (another issue to quibble over endlessly: how long) and by then, nobody cares.
I suppose the discussion is over in a stalemate when both sides are satisfied that the other is stupid and posting more won't change that.
This passport must not be altered or mutilated in any way. Alteration could make the passport invalid, and if willful , may subject you to prosecution (Title 18, U.S. Code, Section 1543.
This is going to get buried and I'm not sure what to search on to see if it's already been said, but....
The "problem" is that 2.0 is still out there, right? Well the *reason* is because when you hit Check For Updates on 2.0:
"No Updates Found. There are no new updates available. Firefox may check periodically for new updates"
Is 3.0 not an update? If it doesn't want to auto-update to 3.0, shouldn't it at least say "3.0 is available" or "3.0 is available, but you can not be automatically updated from your version. Click here to download 3.0"
Seems like they should push out that update instead of phishing removal...
No, actually the $99 is to put a leash on developers, limiting them to developing applications that only do what Apple wants them to do. The SDKs for the Macintosh are free with the exact same IDE you use for the iPhone SDK.
The iPhone is apparently not a computer, because on Real Computers, developers aren't prohibited and punished for developing "bad" applications, require permission from the OS vendor to make a program, and generally aren't treated like thieves & vandals.
Just because everybody else charges stupid amounts for handheld SDKs, software signing, and other crap doesn't mean it's the be-all-end-all to charge less. Maybe they should just not have such restrictive development rules in the first place.
This crap about "what if people abuse the phone network" is just that. The iPod Touch has the exact same SDK and is still restricted. There's no potential for abuse there. If people abuse the network, cut off their access. That's the network's problem. "Oh no it will get viruses".... yeah, about as much as the Mac does now. Sheesh, grow up. Software signing of applications only empowers the OS vendor to make you bend to their will. It has only a little to do with virus and malware protection.
They're ripping out the copper (regulated) to put in (unregulated) fiber, so they can build a network like the cable company and do whatever the hell they feel like, not unlike Comcast.
Hm, well if that's the case, then nobody should run out and buy this card.
WRT Crossfire... I had a friend who wanted to buy Intel because they're "the fastest." Hence, he was stuck with ATi for video cards. Except the latest driver bugged Crossfire and he spent a couple hours uninstalling the driver to reinstall the older one. Doesn't that sound like fun?
nVidia's drivers aren't better because they're used for development, they're better because nVidia knows "IT'S ALL ABOUT THE DRIVERS, STUPID". ATi still has not learned this lesson. They need to just die and maybe somebody who knows a thing or two about driver development will pick up their charred remains.
They had this program in fifth grade that was training kids to be hams. I still have the ARRL book. The electronics made it very exciting to me at the time, but the morse code eventually drove me away. I was willing to memorize signal patterns, acronyms, and other transferrable electronics knowledge, but to know CW for no other purpose other than "just in case" turned me off. I could have put up with the low WPM for the Novice, but I wanted in on the other frequencies with the bigger licenses (and more radio know-how) with more complicated equipment, but that required faster CW, so the carrot kind of disappeared and I quit studying.
By the time the morse requirement dropped, I was already big on computer programming and it just wasn't as exciting anymore. Who know, maybe I would have been an electrical engineer instead of a CS major.
So yeah, from this side of the fence, big mistake.:-( Maybe you should start that grade-school program up again.
Fortunately for Apple, the instructions don't read like: 1. Run this program against your leopard disc 2. Burn the resulting image 3. Boot into the leopard installer
It requires you to already have illegally downloaded a version of OS X. I'd be interested in trying it out, but I have a Mac. Following those "guides" for half the day while I try and figure out if I can get it to run is not my idea of a fun time.
Yes I remembered that part right after I hit submit. It's apparently $118 million on what they estimate to be 850,000 iPhones, making it.... $34.7 million in unrealized revenue? This oversimplifies the obviously hidden math that goes into the AT&T payments, but that's about 3.8% of their total profit, assuming that the AT&T payments are pure profit.
The next part of the question would be how much the blue box affected AT&T's profits.:-)
This is Microsoft's attempt to block access from other manufacturers who want to make computers that go in your car. They are slowly going in this direction with things like BMW's iDrive.
Patents on the basic application of this technology in a car will keep out any upstarts who are faster and smarter than Microsoft. It might not be valid, but any challenger (Apple, probably) will have to spend some time and cash in order to compete.
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't there a key to decrypting that lying about somewhere... ?
I mean 2.0 x16 PCIe slot.
Oh, I was reading it. Trying to figure out how they could do that. Turns out it's the nForce 200 chipset, which has a x16 connection to the boards, but the outgoing connection to the chip is still stuck at the speed of the DMI. So, really, it's just faking the available bandwidth and multiplexing the uneven split out to the cards. The available bandwidth to the cards is still 16+4 in terms of PCIe lanes.
A 2.0 PCIe slot is what, 8 gig/sec? Seems like AMD's HT link is about the same. I guess the deal is that without more HT/PCIe links on AMD/Intel chips (which would be FX/opteron chips with three links and socket 1366 chips) you're right, you won't see squat.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGA_1156
Looks like it's 16+4. The +4 is channeled out of the PCH (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_P55). Therefore when you're using anything on the PCH (like USB and SATA), you're stealing bandwidth from the non-video PCIe slots, because it shares the same connection to the CPU. So he was a little off on his point about other interfaces stealing bandwidth from the video card. Turns out it only steals bandwidth from whatever you have in the third x16 slot or the x1 slot.
The Asus M4N98TD EVO can do 16+16+2 with an AMD chip. I think the point was that for the segment that this chip is targeting, it is severely hobbled in terms of PCIe bandwidth. These chips can only do x8/x8 SLI and AMD chips can do x16/x16 SLI.
I'd like to see a board that disputes that the 1156 socket can only handle 16+4 lanes.
Just because there's a x16 slot doesn't mean all the lanes get hooked up. I looked at the manual for the motherboard you listed. This is the relevant section:
3 PCI Express 2.0 x16 slots
* if you intend to install two expanson cards into both PCI_E2 & PCI_E4 slots, these two PCIE x16 lanes wll auto arrange from x16/ x0 to x8/ x8
* the PCI_E5 supports up to PCIE 2.0 x4 speed
* all PCIE x1 slots will unavalable when an expanson card was installed into PCI_E5 slot.
2 PCI Express 2.0 x1 slots
* all PCIE x1 slots will unavalable when an expanson card was installed into PCI_E5 slot.
The only thing that is not clear is that if the PCI_E5 slot (the lower one) is disabled when the upper two (E2, E4) have two x16 cards in them. Taking the most optimistic view of the manual specifications, at maximum, there are only 16 + 4 lanes available. As to if eSATA and USB 3 eat up the lanes... that's another story.
On the flip side, if you are used to messing with the config files and get agitated when you want to do something not supported by the GUI, that will be the last time you see it. Server Admin has a nasty habit of undoing your clever configurations and not reading unset "defaults" (ie: DAV not defined, so off, right? Wrong. GUI defaults to on). If you don't know any better, and what's exposed via the interface is enough for you, then sure, it's great. If you do know better about the capabilities of the software.... look elsewhere.
I'm convinced Wii Connect 24 is the culprit. Turn it on, the system heats up while asleep, eventually you get the snow issue and have to call it in. Good thing it was within warranty. It's kind of annoying to not be able to use that feature.
If you've ever dealt with an overheating video card, the symptoms are the same.
Some of use prefer the over protective parents because we can get more important stuff done when we're not forced to waste time fending off bears and skunks in the scary wilds.
Pretty good analogy there.
So, basically, by twisting the story to the pro and anti Apple stances, this discussion has essentially proved that applied metaphors are useless for predicting future performance.
The only way to figure out who is correct is by waiting an arbitrary amount of time (another issue to quibble over endlessly: how long) and by then, nobody cares.
I suppose the discussion is over in a stalemate when both sides are satisfied that the other is stupid and posting more won't change that.
I have a RFID passport right here.
Here on page five:
This passport must not be altered or mutilated in any way. Alteration could make the passport invalid, and if willful , may subject you to prosecution (Title 18, U.S. Code, Section 1543.
Actually, unless I'm moderating, I simply don't have time to look at the dregs. I do know what I'm missing. I don't really care.
This is going to get buried and I'm not sure what to search on to see if it's already been said, but....
The "problem" is that 2.0 is still out there, right? Well the *reason* is because when you hit Check For Updates on 2.0:
"No Updates Found. There are no new updates available. Firefox may check periodically for new updates"
Is 3.0 not an update? If it doesn't want to auto-update to 3.0, shouldn't it at least say "3.0 is available" or "3.0 is available, but you can not be automatically updated from your version. Click here to download 3.0"
Seems like they should push out that update instead of phishing removal...
No, actually the $99 is to put a leash on developers, limiting them to developing applications that only do what Apple wants them to do. The SDKs for the Macintosh are free with the exact same IDE you use for the iPhone SDK.
The iPhone is apparently not a computer, because on Real Computers, developers aren't prohibited and punished for developing "bad" applications, require permission from the OS vendor to make a program, and generally aren't treated like thieves & vandals.
Just because everybody else charges stupid amounts for handheld SDKs, software signing, and other crap doesn't mean it's the be-all-end-all to charge less. Maybe they should just not have such restrictive development rules in the first place.
This crap about "what if people abuse the phone network" is just that. The iPod Touch has the exact same SDK and is still restricted. There's no potential for abuse there. If people abuse the network, cut off their access. That's the network's problem. "Oh no it will get viruses".... yeah, about as much as the Mac does now. Sheesh, grow up. Software signing of applications only empowers the OS vendor to make you bend to their will. It has only a little to do with virus and malware protection.
Doesn't change the fact that it's unregulated.
They're ripping out the copper (regulated) to put in (unregulated) fiber, so they can build a network like the cable company and do whatever the hell they feel like, not unlike Comcast.
Hm, well if that's the case, then nobody should run out and buy this card.
WRT Crossfire... I had a friend who wanted to buy Intel because they're "the fastest." Hence, he was stuck with ATi for video cards. Except the latest driver bugged Crossfire and he spent a couple hours uninstalling the driver to reinstall the older one. Doesn't that sound like fun?
nVidia's drivers aren't better because they're used for development, they're better because nVidia knows "IT'S ALL ABOUT THE DRIVERS, STUPID". ATi still has not learned this lesson. They need to just die and maybe somebody who knows a thing or two about driver development will pick up their charred remains.
Pay close attention to the floorboard on the right side, under the pipe. You can see the sodium taper up as a mound against the black.
They had this program in fifth grade that was training kids to be hams. I still have the ARRL book. The electronics made it very exciting to me at the time, but the morse code eventually drove me away. I was willing to memorize signal patterns, acronyms, and other transferrable electronics knowledge, but to know CW for no other purpose other than "just in case" turned me off. I could have put up with the low WPM for the Novice, but I wanted in on the other frequencies with the bigger licenses (and more radio know-how) with more complicated equipment, but that required faster CW, so the carrot kind of disappeared and I quit studying.
:-( Maybe you should start that grade-school program up again.
By the time the morse requirement dropped, I was already big on computer programming and it just wasn't as exciting anymore. Who know, maybe I would have been an electrical engineer instead of a CS major.
So yeah, from this side of the fence, big mistake.
Obviously people have forgotten the nightmare that was 10.4.0. Leopard is positively awesome in comparison. In terms of stability, right behind 10.3.
Fortunately for Apple, the instructions don't read like:
1. Run this program against your leopard disc
2. Burn the resulting image
3. Boot into the leopard installer
It requires you to already have illegally downloaded a version of OS X. I'd be interested in trying it out, but I have a Mac. Following those "guides" for half the day while I try and figure out if I can get it to run is not my idea of a fun time.
Yes I remembered that part right after I hit submit. It's apparently $118 million on what they estimate to be 850,000 iPhones, making it.... $34.7 million in unrealized revenue? This oversimplifies the obviously hidden math that goes into the AT&T payments, but that's about 3.8% of their total profit, assuming that the AT&T payments are pure profit.
:-)
The next part of the question would be how much the blue box affected AT&T's profits.
Exactly how is this a "problem" for Apple? The phones were sold. If anything, this is a repeat performance....
Good old Desert Falcon.... although I think your sequence isn't Hold Sphinx & Warp.
If there was a press release, they buried it. I don't see a thing (official) about it searching Google for "idrive linux bmw".
This is Microsoft's attempt to block access from other manufacturers who want to make computers that go in your car. They are slowly going in this direction with things like BMW's iDrive.
Patents on the basic application of this technology in a car will keep out any upstarts who are faster and smarter than Microsoft. It might not be valid, but any challenger (Apple, probably) will have to spend some time and cash in order to compete.
Kind of like spreading tacks on the road...