Well sure, having background pictures on the desktop is nice but it's not exactly groundbreaking technology. And by the sound of it, this desktop environment does not feature live video, Sun's just saying it would be a neat feature to have.
Eh, I think the video was one of those MS "HD" videos or something. At least, it was a MS disc (provided by the sales clerk). Still a 2+ GHz processor should have no difficulty playing back fricking video, HD or no..
Took it about 48 hours to grind through the thing
Heh, reminds me of the time I was Divx encoding on my spare K6-3 450, and after letting it crunch overnight, realized it would be faster to just start over on my other machine with an Athlon 1.2 GHz..
Your Celeron 600 is based on a P6 core, and thus completely different from the PIV based Celerons. The PIV arch. will suffer severly from a cache miss, eg that's why the P4 chip has 1MB of L2 cache on it. With a measly 128 KB of L2 cache, the PIV-based Celeron is continually having to flush and reload the cache as a miss is much more likely. (especially as another poster pointed out, the machine likely was loaded down running unnecessary preloaded crap)
So, to recap: all Celerons are not created equal:) This new chip sounds ok, however.
Hmm, good point. I tend to build my own systems, and that possibility didn't occur to me. Pretty sorry state of affairs that a fresh-from-the-store PC is loaded with junk already!
It was a CompUSA "special" de jour and I'm sure it either had a crummy graphics board, driver issue, or both.. We were looking for a notebook to replace my sister's ailing Acer, and I hastily steered her away from this lemon. It's good to try before you buy.:)
I find Sun's choice of pretty background pictures very distracting when attempting to evaluate the merits of this desktop system, and I'm sure this was intended as a marketing trick. I would have preferred shots with a plain background to really see the features of the desktop.
In fact, this shot is nothing more than the background! (and the 3d version of a standard 2d taskbar) They say, "Just imagine what is possible if it were live video." -- It's more like, "Imagine a pratical use for this '3D' desktop".
Last fall I was checking out a notebook with a Celery 2.x GHz chip in it. The damn thing couldn't even play a Divx-encoded movie fullscreen without stuttering like crazy. Pretty pathetic for any chip over 1 GHz. (Hell, even my P3 650 does better)
The disk *IS* copy controlled in Europe - which is standard policy
Ah, well that's OK then. As long as it's a standard policy, right? By the way, I like to return CDs that don't meet my needs. That's my policy. Hope the labels don't mind!
Any rap group that includes a lyric like, "We're the scientists of sound; we're mathematically puttin' it down", is alright in my book!
However, copy protection is lame, in any format. I realize that this is from the label, not the Beasties themselves, but surely the negative press they're receiving from this incident more than offsets any greater profits from the DRM technology?
Re:Whoa there with the brainwashing
on
P2P Bits
·
· Score: 1
I see a lot of posts here lately which are supportive of the record industry's claims, but I wonder how much of that is just astroturfing.
Well so did I, up to a point. Try dealing with 10+ telemarketing calls per day, every day, for several years. It got to the point where I would just unplug the phone line for the evening to avoid the distraction.
I am very grateful for the national no-not-call registry. After playing the "put me on your do not call list" list for months with various phone spammers to little effect, the national registry has finally stopped the incessant unwanted telemarketing calls to my (unlisted!) number. No longer is my ringing telephone a source of stress and dread.
Obviously it would be nice if each version (Windows/Linux/Macintosh) version of Mozilla/Firefox stored their bookmarks in an abstracted format accessible to any app on the host OS, but I think it would be non-trivial to accomplish. I can't speak for Windows or Mac global bookmarks settings, but on Linux it could be as simple as getting browser developers to standardize on a ~/.bookmarksrc file format. (easier said than done, of course)
Of course, but considering that most of the unwashed masses think "Internet Explorer" == "The Internet", it's not really a lie is it? I haven't done this myself, but have seriously considered it. It's all about the icon, and if there's anything Micros~1 has ever gotten right, it's that ubiquitous blue 'e'.
Somehow, 1-3 millibits/second doesn't seem like a great connection speed.. not that you could have a fractional part of a bit, but anyway yeah, I wish people would use the proper contractions.
Not to pick on you specifically, but OS means Operating System. If you want to abbreviate "Open Source", the preferred acronym is OSS (Open Source Software).
WinXP is Win2K with a few bells and whistles, which was an upgraded version of NT4, which was basically NT3.5 with the Win95 interface, which was based on earlier code, etc. This is evolutionary progress, not a "giant leap".
Certainly, from the proper perspective it *appears* to be a giant leap, but in actuality it's no more of a leap than say, upgrading from Red Hat 7.3 to Fedora Core 2. Wow, a giant leap in computing!
However, standard pratice is not to round up when labelling speeds. Witness the P2 266, DDR266, etc. Shying away from DDR666 is no more logical than skipping the 13th floor in tall buildings.
It's amusing that Intel is afraid of using the number 666 (evidenced by the Pentium 3 667, and now the DDR667 memory). Not that I blame them, the fundies would probably call for a boycott of their products if they labeled them correctly in this circumstance.
Whenever I see someone claiming how XP is a "giant leap in computing", it's a clear indication that their previous experience was probably limited to Win98 at most. Truly, WinXP is a giant leap from Win98. But for computing in general? Nah.
Slashdot Mirror
Well sure, having background pictures on the desktop is nice but it's not exactly groundbreaking technology. And by the sound of it, this desktop environment does not feature live video, Sun's just saying it would be a neat feature to have.
Eh, I think the video was one of those MS "HD" videos or something. At least, it was a MS disc (provided by the sales clerk). Still a 2+ GHz processor should have no difficulty playing back fricking video, HD or no..
Took it about 48 hours to grind through the thing
Heh, reminds me of the time I was Divx encoding on my spare K6-3 450, and after letting it crunch overnight, realized it would be faster to just start over on my other machine with an Athlon 1.2 GHz..
Your Celeron 600 is based on a P6 core, and thus completely different from the PIV based Celerons. The PIV arch. will suffer severly from a cache miss, eg that's why the P4 chip has 1MB of L2 cache on it. With a measly 128 KB of L2 cache, the PIV-based Celeron is continually having to flush and reload the cache as a miss is much more likely. (especially as another poster pointed out, the machine likely was loaded down running unnecessary preloaded crap)
So, to recap: all Celerons are not created equal :) This new chip sounds ok, however.
Hmm, good point. I tend to build my own systems, and that possibility didn't occur to me. Pretty sorry state of affairs that a fresh-from-the-store PC is loaded with junk already!
It was a CompUSA "special" de jour and I'm sure it either had a crummy graphics board, driver issue, or both.. We were looking for a notebook to replace my sister's ailing Acer, and I hastily steered her away from this lemon. It's good to try before you buy. :)
I find Sun's choice of pretty background pictures very distracting when attempting to evaluate the merits of this desktop system, and I'm sure this was intended as a marketing trick. I would have preferred shots with a plain background to really see the features of the desktop.
In fact, this shot is nothing more than the background! (and the 3d version of a standard 2d taskbar) They say, "Just imagine what is possible if it were live video." -- It's more like, "Imagine a pratical use for this '3D' desktop".
Last fall I was checking out a notebook with a Celery 2.x GHz chip in it. The damn thing couldn't even play a Divx-encoded movie fullscreen without stuttering like crazy. Pretty pathetic for any chip over 1 GHz. (Hell, even my P3 650 does better)
The disk *IS* copy controlled in Europe - which is standard policy
Ah, well that's OK then. As long as it's a standard policy, right? By the way, I like to return CDs that don't meet my needs. That's my policy. Hope the labels don't mind!
Any rap group that includes a lyric like, "We're the scientists of sound; we're mathematically puttin' it down", is alright in my book!
However, copy protection is lame, in any format. I realize that this is from the label, not the Beasties themselves, but surely the negative press they're receiving from this incident more than offsets any greater profits from the DRM technology?
I see a lot of posts here lately which are supportive of the record industry's claims, but I wonder how much of that is just astroturfing.
Well so did I, up to a point. Try dealing with 10+ telemarketing calls per day, every day, for several years. It got to the point where I would just unplug the phone line for the evening to avoid the distraction.
I am very grateful for the national no-not-call registry. After playing the "put me on your do not call list" list for months with various phone spammers to little effect, the national registry has finally stopped the incessant unwanted telemarketing calls to my (unlisted!) number. No longer is my ringing telephone a source of stress and dread.
Say, what kind of music do you play at this bar?
Oh, we have both kinds, Country and Western!
It's a symptom of having w3schools.com graduates
W3Schools really isn't affiliated with the W3C, are they? I bet the W3C group would have a strong legal case against them for dilution of trademark.
Obviously it would be nice if each version (Windows/Linux/Macintosh) version of Mozilla/Firefox stored their bookmarks in an abstracted format accessible to any app on the host OS, but I think it would be non-trivial to accomplish. I can't speak for Windows or Mac global bookmarks settings, but on Linux it could be as simple as getting browser developers to standardize on a ~/.bookmarksrc file format. (easier said than done, of course)
Of course, but considering that most of the unwashed masses think "Internet Explorer" == "The Internet", it's not really a lie is it? I haven't done this myself, but have seriously considered it. It's all about the icon, and if there's anything Micros~1 has ever gotten right, it's that ubiquitous blue 'e'.
Court Jester, perhaps..
Somehow, 1-3 millibits/second doesn't seem like a great connection speed.. not that you could have a fractional part of a bit, but anyway yeah, I wish people would use the proper contractions.
Not to pick on you specifically, but OS means Operating System. If you want to abbreviate "Open Source", the preferred acronym is OSS (Open Source Software).
WinXP is Win2K with a few bells and whistles, which was an upgraded version of NT4, which was basically NT3.5 with the Win95 interface, which was based on earlier code, etc. This is evolutionary progress, not a "giant leap".
Certainly, from the proper perspective it *appears* to be a giant leap, but in actuality it's no more of a leap than say, upgrading from Red Hat 7.3 to Fedora Core 2. Wow, a giant leap in computing!
However, standard pratice is not to round up when labelling speeds. Witness the P2 266, DDR266, etc. Shying away from DDR666 is no more logical than skipping the 13th floor in tall buildings.
And P4 CPUs don't require a monster HSF? I guess both brands have their "fanboys", eh?
It's amusing that Intel is afraid of using the number 666 (evidenced by the Pentium 3 667, and now the DDR667 memory). Not that I blame them, the fundies would probably call for a boycott of their products if they labeled them correctly in this circumstance.
Whenever I see someone claiming how XP is a "giant leap in computing", it's a clear indication that their previous experience was probably limited to Win98 at most. Truly, WinXP is a giant leap from Win98. But for computing in general? Nah.