Whoops... It does say that "Apple Macintosh" is a qualifying operating system. That's the weirdest exception I've ever seen. (But understandable, isn't it?)
If they truly do this, they are in breach of their volume licensing contract. My manager doesn't want to understand it either, but volume licenses are UPGRADES to preinstalled OEM PRO versions of Windows. You may not install a volume licensed Windows on a bare PC, or a PC featuring Windows Home. By that logic, installing a volume licensed Windows on a Mac is not allowed.
Please inform your company IT department about this. I'm not making this up: About Licensing
Yes, exactly.... That is what so many people here on slashdot fail to see: it works, it does the job, replacing it costs money and for the majority of people it isn't a high priority thing to do, or even totally necessary. I have one laptop running XP and it works perfectly fine. If you are moderately knowledgable about Windows XP, it is pretty easy to run a Limited User account for day to day operations and only log in as Admin when necessary for maintenance. Making it nearly as secure as Vista/7/8, in some senses more secure, because UAC won't ask you permission. You'll be denied permission and either will have to use the Run-As feature or log in as Admin. I never needed to reinstall that machine, it's still in very good condition (Machine was bought in January 2007)
My only concern is indeed the lack of support, but then, I'm not even all that worried.
The term you're looking for is the "Sleekbook". Well, HP came up with that name, but it's basically an AMD based Ultrabook. HP are not the only ones having them, but you can start with the HP ENVY Sleekbook 6-1010us. A quick search also gave me Samsung Series 5 NP535 (NP535U3C).
Just a few Google taking me next to no time. Wasn't all that difficult, now was it? I'm sure now you got a lead, you can continue your own research.
Personally, I recently saw an Acer "Netbook" on sale with a Celeron 867/4GB RAM for 495€ Sure, it's Intel, but it's not an Ultrabook (misses the Core iN CPU), but kicks the crap out of anything that passes as an Atom-based Netbook. Heck, i could see myself do most of my work on it, if it had better resolution, but the resolution it offers is the "standard" in Ultrabooks too. I didn't buy it, because I couldn't justify a 3rd laptop...
Predictive keyboard apps: Totally useless in a multi-language environment. Even worse if one of the main languages you use isn't supported. In the country where I live both conditions are applicable, and from what I see, most people turn off predictive typing off (at least on their cellphones, haven't seen them used anywhere else)
Currently, I have started seeing Celeron 867 based laptops advertised as "netbooks". They do have 1366x768, come with 4GB RAM, a hard disk (typically 500GB) and Windows 8... They cost just short under 400€ (Remember in the tech world 1$=1€, at least in the current exchange rate situation). They don't have an optical disk and are not Core iN based. So they have everything Netbooks have, except for an Atom CPU, but everything Ultrabooks have, except for an iN CPU. If I needed a new laptop right now, I'd get myself one.
On a sidenote: I seriously hope resolutions will get better.. 1366x768 is at the very low end of my tolerance.
Yes, perhaps over that timespan. I was on my cellphone (old skool, using Opera Mini) and researching more would be too much work. For the last few years, all desktop/netbook Atom machines sold are 64-bit. Perhaps not since 6 years. You also forgot the Core CPUs, (not Core 2), which are 32-bit only and some don't even support PAE. That's 2008, so... not even 5 years. So, yes, there are quite a lot of 32-bit CPUs out there.
My main problem is, though that still today people say "Atoms are 32-bit". No they're not, at least not those accessible to end-users and running normal operating systems. That Asus chose to ignore the intended use (Intel positions the Z series as "Internet Devices", which was -in their idea- tablets, set-top boxes, etc...) I'm just tired of hearing "Atoms don't support 64-bit", even though that's completely untrue for any Atom sold today in consumer space.
I fully agree that 32-bit should not be dropped, because way too many useful machines are still 32-bit. The Atom can be bashed in many ways: from my experience it's mainly the chipset and/or integrated graphics that suck, but lack of 64-bit support ain't a problem. (Running a D510 as my parents server just fine with 4GB RAM)
Wrong, in the segment that matters, being the models starting with D or N are 64-bit. (D and N stand for Desktop, respectively Netbook) The exception is the N270, one of the first Atoms. Both the 230 and the 330, which don't fit in the current naming scheme, also support 64-bit. Now granted, the Z and E series Atoms do not all support 64-bit, but they are not intended for 'regular' computers. For example the Soekris net6501 has such an Atom, but that's hardly a machine to be used as a desktop.
Linux is luckily very flexible. I prefer generating a locale to setting vars, it's cleaner. However my point is that you need to do stuff manually to get it how you want. This indicates that the current "locale" system if faulty by design.
It gets doubly apparent on systems like Windows, where you operating system has a certain predefined language and the application "guess" the language based on region. Interesting, you mention CH. I'm in LU where the set of linguistic problems is similar. That is why we use the same keyboard layout.
No, please... Don't do that unless you're also culturally involved in your target market and actually understand the countries you write software for. Look at the whole "locales" mess. It works fine, if you have a single region with a single language, beyond that, it becomes very fishy... and $DIETY help you if you actually want an English system with date and time set to your geographical location. Language and regional settings should be entirely independent, but they aren't. On Linux, I found a workaround by just generating my own locales, but still.
I have worked on many multilingual projects, and I assure you: localization is not mere translation and translation is not merely swapping out strings with language. I would say, I can help on projects that to language for a sizeable part of Europe, but I am not good enough to include Asian languages, the Cyrillic typeset or even plain Greek.
While it's very interesting... I just wanted to warn you: you don't just walk into Localization.
Well, it probably depends on locality. I have to assume X2's and Core machines showing up at the recycling centre (we're not talking business-writeoff-machines like you, stuff that normal people throw away!) does indicate that I simply live in a too rich neighborhood. I probably do. The last time I gave away an old computer, that's while ago (Athlon XP/2GB), it was for a the daughter of a single mom. Later that year, daddy obviously bought her a new laptop.
I won't say there is no absolute poverty, but if, then it's hidden damn well. At gas rates here, I'm not willing to drive 200km to a charity, especially, I don't have a truck but a two-seater;-) Now, I'll refurb them and they can come and pick them up, but those gas prices are high for charities too.
I did the same, as I had not much time when I saw the initial article, but forgot about it. Seeing this article made me go "Ooops, I wanted to give something... which I promptly did"
Yes, from that point of view the times are excellent. However, then I have the following question for you: Do you manage to actually give those machines you find a useful home? I don't mean the 7th server in your own house, I mean, "someone who truly can use it and can't spend the 300€ for a netbook". I'm asking, because I sure as hell have trouble finding people who want the gear I have found. I don't ask any money for my time, just "Here, take a free machine!"
Oh, your last phrase actually describes the problem: "hardware that I don't know what to do with it all.". Let me summarize it as this: "Tell me, Mr. Anderson... what good is a phone call... if you're unable to speak?". That is exactly what I mean with "dumpster diving has become unviable", because it doesn't make much more sense, not that you can't get good gear.
As a dumpster diver, I stopped bothering with anything below 2.0GHz. Even those, I cannot give away... Nobody wants them. I mean, look, I got a ZOTAC ZBOX nano ID61 for 155€ on sale, add in one 8GB stick for 28€ and a disk for 39€ and you've got yourself a 222€ (tax included) machine that is insanely powerful, small and efficient.
Dumpster diving has become pretty much unviable in the last 3 years... I still have a lot of gear, but try not to stock up any more. What remains is for eventual repairs. In a few years, I'll all trash it, I'm sure.
Perhaps your customer base doesn't really intersect with the people I had in mind. I actually think of the people that get their computer at a big box store and wouldn't see the difference between Vista and 7 (at least superficially). They don't go for advice to the shop where they bought it. Yes, they might have a nerd/geek which they could ask, but often they don't because they really do think it's "normal" and don't want the deluge of explanations given. I recently just met a whole family (with PCs, a couple of iPhones and iPods) that has access to no geek whatsoever. Heck, they were using POP3 on both the iPhone and the computer to check their ISPs email. You obviously know what effects that has, and it came up one day, just by the remark "Say, couldn't you look at our email, we keep losing it...". That's the people...
Then there are also those, as you correctly identified, that know 7 is there but really don't want to throw money at a problem that should not exist (and they're right no?) I basically have had one, falling in that category, tell me "Reward Microsoft for giving me something that doesn't work well? Never!". That's the sentiment Microsoft got from putting out Vista as it was. Do keep in mind that man is a computer power user, but he also knows that upgrading is best done by reinstalling. You say upgrading Vista to 7 is a cakewalk, but I personally wouldn't trust it. It's called experience. Since he's a business owner, and his laptop is a very important working tool, upgrading is a guaranteed way to have it "down" for a day or two. The risk remains that there are unforeseen consequences. The best option for these people is to buy a new machine and migrate slowly. However, again, he's a business owner: I don't know how he amortizes his machine, but that's probably 3 years. I guess, he's bound to get a new one soon, but that's going to be Windows 8. That's going to be fun....
All in all, I think you underestimate the willingness of "normal" people to stick with what they have until it's time for replacement. Heck, look at me: I still use my 83cm 16:9 CRT TV bought in 2003. It works fine, I ain't gonna replace it. Is there better? Sure, but the CRT has good image quality, works fine and cost a lot of money back in the day. Unless it breaks, I'm not getting a new TV. (The difference with Vista, being that my CRT TV is actually *good*)
Oh, and if I said "I know you", it just means that when I read comments I never look at the username, but by now, I recognise you by writing style. I say, "Oh, that's surely hairyfeet", scroll up a bit, and I'm pretty much always correct.
Although I am pretty shocked that Vista seems to be locked at 5%, it looks like there are some die hard Vista fans that just aren't gonna let go of it.
No, it's much simpler than that. There was a time where the only thing you could get from OEMs was Vista. Well, sure the "Business" version has downgrade (to XP) rights, but the others don't. Ever for the downgrade rights, you need a XP OEM CD and if you don't happen to have one, you're not good. Microsoft does not let you download ISOs where you can re-use your key (a grave mistake in my eyes). So, normal people, who bought a PC in the period from about January 2007 to July 2009, got Vista. The exception being netbooks, as Vista couldn't cope with that emerging market. I know you hairfeet, I know you sell computers. I'm sure, you have customers that are not nerds. You know as well as me that many people will buy a laptop (usually, it's a laptop) as an investment and use it as long as possible. With laptops that three to five years, but it might become longer because the power-requirements of normal users have plateaued. Now, funnily enough, these are also people who don't upgrade operating systems and keep what's on their machines. That 5% will go down, very very very slowly, as these machines die of old age.
That's what you're looking at... That's the 5%. People who have a computer, think it was too much of an investment to replace, swallow down the problems they have and will replace the machine when the time comes. Then, they will get a new computer with whatever operating system is current then.
These are also the users that, upon seeing my desktop, ask me with a puzzled face: "Hey, what kind of Windows is that?".
If technology isn't the center of your life, operating systems are not interesting, and they probably simply consider their Vista laptop a lemon...
The French is "bouc émissaire". "Bouc", being the goat and "émissaire", meaning "to send away", or "emit". The fact that "escaping" and "emitting" are fundamentally different, you could have had a little red flag popping up. Still, the error is understandable and pretty funny. Neither French nor English are my first languages, so, I often tend to think about words and their meaning. Comes with the polyglot package.
Why is the upgradeability your concern? You state that you use used stuff from work, so in a few years there will be better used stuff.
Anyway, with all due respect. I think you are doing things you shouldn't be doing. If I understand it correctly, you are somehow creating RAM disks, and moving all data there upon boot in order to speed up access times, correct? It's the ancient way of doing it from the days yonder where operating systems didn't know about caching. Well, modern operating systems, all of them, including Windows XP, have adequate to very good caching. It's only the first time you load an application that the data is transferred from disk to RAM, close the application, and restart it, it will be next to instant. Why? It's been loaded to RAM, and the machine "knows" that and isn't going to bother to redo all the I/O it required.
Now, I'm not familiar with Windows, but on a Linux machine, a default desktop with some applications will use 1 to 1.5GB truly used memory ("active"+"wired", read up on the terms here). All the rest is available for caching ("buffers" in Linux lingo). Even then, the RAM is often not used, if you're not actually taxing the machine much, which normal users like my mom won't do.
Personally, I am very skeptical about having such huge speed differences. Have you actually measured application startup times with 8GB versus 4GB RAM? You're initial move from platter to RAM-disk must be counted in, keep that in mind. Sure, it's at bootup, but it still is time doing I/O. You're right that the market segmentation Intel does with the Atoms is pretty stupid, but then, with Intel you get what you pay for. Don't pay much... Don't get much.
I'm not disagreeing, as you can get 16GB for very cheap in laptops and desktops. However, there is a diminishing point of return, which is - granted- dependant on the workload. As a matter of fact, my mom has 16GB in her Ubuntu machine. From what I see, it rarely uses more than 4GB, including the caching (there are only so many files you'll open) and she's got an SSD, so on loading time, she's fine. My wifes iMac: 16GB too, same deal: rarely uses anything over 4GB including cache.
Even my i7 laptop, which originally came with 4GB RAM. I upped it to 16GB as it's dirt cheap. I personally wouldn't dare to say it feel speedier. My workload is obviously higher.
My home server, one of those D510 machines, has 4GB RAM. It runs OpenBSD, and current memory usage is: "Memory: Real: 87M/769M act/tot Free: 3187M Cache: 597M Swap: 0K/8197M". This machine does much much more than just fileserver.
So, while I do agree with the premise: dump as much RAM into your machine as you can afford (eg my moms motherboard supports 64GB, but that is cost prohibitive). However, you can actually measure a bit and decide whether it's worth it. 4GB is fine for a small file server and average desktop usage. Do you buy longevity? Perhaps, depending on the use-case. That file server isn't going to do much much more in the future, is it?
I'm sure, *you* can use more, but I doubt that's the case for most people. If you build machines for other people and you need to take into account that they have to pay for the parts (even if you build for free), going 8GB over 4GB for a barely noticeable effect (to them), is probably not the best idea.
I like AMD as much as you (I pretty much expect posts about CPUs to be filled by your posts, hairyfeet.), but the Atoms support 4GB, at least the D525 and D510 do and those already are on the market quite a while... (By extension: also the single core equivalents of those chips). If you see support listed as less, it means that the motherboard doesn't support more. The chipset is or physical layout is what determines what you can put in the machine. Example: I just bought a Zotac ZBox Nano ID61 with a Celeron 867. Accordin to ark.intel.com, that CPU supports 16Gb, but there is only one SO-DIMM slot and the documentation say 8GB. Well, if it becomes cheap, I can obviously try a 16GB module (if they come out). Sometimes that works, as my experience tells, but it remains a gamble.
I've been coming back from my Atom craze. The above Celeron CPU is one reason: pretty conservative on the power use and more oompha than an Atom at about the same price-point. The main reason, though, is that many Atoms come with proprietary graphic chipsets that are not the Intel HD nnnn that have excellent open source driver support. They're PowerVR and suck under Linux. I've looked at E-350 based solutions, but where I am, motherboards for those start at 100€. For that price, with Atoms I can have the motherboard (obviously with CPU) and RAM and perhaps even a small disk or SSD. Sure the E-350 is better, but it's often irrelevant given the application these machines are used for.
I loved the AMD A4/6/8/10 APUs. Those give a quite nice bang for the buck. Yes, an i3 will beat them, but the motherboard for the i3 will cost more and support less RAM. I think they wanted to get the A-series sold by OEMs, but somehow that didn't work. A shame, they make nice low-cost machines that barely make any noise.
Slashdot Mirror
Whoops... It does say that "Apple Macintosh" is a qualifying operating system. That's the weirdest exception I've ever seen. (But understandable, isn't it?)
Please inform your company IT department about this. I'm not making this up: About Licensing
My only concern is indeed the lack of support, but then, I'm not even all that worried.
Just a few Google taking me next to no time. Wasn't all that difficult, now was it? I'm sure now you got a lead, you can continue your own research.
Personally, I recently saw an Acer "Netbook" on sale with a Celeron 867/4GB RAM for 495€ Sure, it's Intel, but it's not an Ultrabook (misses the Core iN CPU), but kicks the crap out of anything that passes as an Atom-based Netbook. Heck, i could see myself do most of my work on it, if it had better resolution, but the resolution it offers is the "standard" in Ultrabooks too. I didn't buy it, because I couldn't justify a 3rd laptop...
Predictive keyboard apps: Totally useless in a multi-language environment. Even worse if one of the main languages you use isn't supported. In the country where I live both conditions are applicable, and from what I see, most people turn off predictive typing off (at least on their cellphones, haven't seen them used anywhere else)
On a sidenote: I seriously hope resolutions will get better.. 1366x768 is at the very low end of my tolerance.
Yes, that's why you nuke from orbit immediately when you have an uneasy feeling, without wasting so much time.
You'd be surprised about that. Recently I was at an acquaintance and his BlueRay was connected via composite. I wish I was kidding
My main problem is, though that still today people say "Atoms are 32-bit". No they're not, at least not those accessible to end-users and running normal operating systems. That Asus chose to ignore the intended use (Intel positions the Z series as "Internet Devices", which was -in their idea- tablets, set-top boxes, etc...) I'm just tired of hearing "Atoms don't support 64-bit", even though that's completely untrue for any Atom sold today in consumer space.
I fully agree that 32-bit should not be dropped, because way too many useful machines are still 32-bit. The Atom can be bashed in many ways: from my experience it's mainly the chipset and/or integrated graphics that suck, but lack of 64-bit support ain't a problem. (Running a D510 as my parents server just fine with 4GB RAM)
Wrong, in the segment that matters, being the models starting with D or N are 64-bit. (D and N stand for Desktop, respectively Netbook) The exception is the N270, one of the first Atoms. Both the 230 and the 330, which don't fit in the current naming scheme, also support 64-bit.
Now granted, the Z and E series Atoms do not all support 64-bit, but they are not intended for 'regular' computers. For example the Soekris net6501 has such an Atom, but that's hardly a machine to be used as a desktop.
Linux is luckily very flexible. I prefer generating a locale to setting vars, it's cleaner. However my point is that you need to do stuff manually to get it how you want. This indicates that the current "locale" system if faulty by design. It gets doubly apparent on systems like Windows, where you operating system has a certain predefined language and the application "guess" the language based on region. Interesting, you mention CH. I'm in LU where the set of linguistic problems is similar. That is why we use the same keyboard layout.
No, please... Don't do that unless you're also culturally involved in your target market and actually understand the countries you write software for. Look at the whole "locales" mess. It works fine, if you have a single region with a single language, beyond that, it becomes very fishy... and $DIETY help you if you actually want an English system with date and time set to your geographical location. Language and regional settings should be entirely independent, but they aren't. On Linux, I found a workaround by just generating my own locales, but still.
I have worked on many multilingual projects, and I assure you: localization is not mere translation and translation is not merely swapping out strings with language. I would say, I can help on projects that to language for a sizeable part of Europe, but I am not good enough to include Asian languages, the Cyrillic typeset or even plain Greek.
While it's very interesting... I just wanted to warn you: you don't just walk into Localization.
I won't say there is no absolute poverty, but if, then it's hidden damn well. At gas rates here, I'm not willing to drive 200km to a charity, especially, I don't have a truck but a two-seater ;-) Now, I'll refurb them and they can come and pick them up, but those gas prices are high for charities too.
I did the same, as I had not much time when I saw the initial article, but forgot about it. Seeing this article made me go "Ooops, I wanted to give something... which I promptly did"
Oh, your last phrase actually describes the problem: "hardware that I don't know what to do with it all.". Let me summarize it as this: "Tell me, Mr. Anderson... what good is a phone call... if you're unable to speak?". That is exactly what I mean with "dumpster diving has become unviable", because it doesn't make much more sense, not that you can't get good gear.
Belgium, eh? ;-)
Dumpster diving has become pretty much unviable in the last 3 years... I still have a lot of gear, but try not to stock up any more. What remains is for eventual repairs. In a few years, I'll all trash it, I'm sure.
Then there are also those, as you correctly identified, that know 7 is there but really don't want to throw money at a problem that should not exist (and they're right no?) I basically have had one, falling in that category, tell me "Reward Microsoft for giving me something that doesn't work well? Never!". That's the sentiment Microsoft got from putting out Vista as it was. Do keep in mind that man is a computer power user, but he also knows that upgrading is best done by reinstalling. You say upgrading Vista to 7 is a cakewalk, but I personally wouldn't trust it. It's called experience. Since he's a business owner, and his laptop is a very important working tool, upgrading is a guaranteed way to have it "down" for a day or two. The risk remains that there are unforeseen consequences. The best option for these people is to buy a new machine and migrate slowly. However, again, he's a business owner: I don't know how he amortizes his machine, but that's probably 3 years. I guess, he's bound to get a new one soon, but that's going to be Windows 8. That's going to be fun....
All in all, I think you underestimate the willingness of "normal" people to stick with what they have until it's time for replacement. Heck, look at me: I still use my 83cm 16:9 CRT TV bought in 2003. It works fine, I ain't gonna replace it. Is there better? Sure, but the CRT has good image quality, works fine and cost a lot of money back in the day. Unless it breaks, I'm not getting a new TV. (The difference with Vista, being that my CRT TV is actually *good*)
Oh, and if I said "I know you", it just means that when I read comments I never look at the username, but by now, I recognise you by writing style. I say, "Oh, that's surely hairyfeet", scroll up a bit, and I'm pretty much always correct.
No, it's much simpler than that. There was a time where the only thing you could get from OEMs was Vista. Well, sure the "Business" version has downgrade (to XP) rights, but the others don't. Ever for the downgrade rights, you need a XP OEM CD and if you don't happen to have one, you're not good. Microsoft does not let you download ISOs where you can re-use your key (a grave mistake in my eyes). So, normal people, who bought a PC in the period from about January 2007 to July 2009, got Vista. The exception being netbooks, as Vista couldn't cope with that emerging market. I know you hairfeet, I know you sell computers. I'm sure, you have customers that are not nerds. You know as well as me that many people will buy a laptop (usually, it's a laptop) as an investment and use it as long as possible. With laptops that three to five years, but it might become longer because the power-requirements of normal users have plateaued. Now, funnily enough, these are also people who don't upgrade operating systems and keep what's on their machines. That 5% will go down, very very very slowly, as these machines die of old age.
That's what you're looking at... That's the 5%. People who have a computer, think it was too much of an investment to replace, swallow down the problems they have and will replace the machine when the time comes. Then, they will get a new computer with whatever operating system is current then.
These are also the users that, upon seeing my desktop, ask me with a puzzled face: "Hey, what kind of Windows is that?".
If technology isn't the center of your life, operating systems are not interesting, and they probably simply consider their Vista laptop a lemon...
The French is "bouc émissaire". "Bouc", being the goat and "émissaire", meaning "to send away", or "emit". The fact that "escaping" and "emitting" are fundamentally different, you could have had a little red flag popping up. Still, the error is understandable and pretty funny. Neither French nor English are my first languages, so, I often tend to think about words and their meaning. Comes with the polyglot package.
You cam get Windows-free OEM machines in Germany.(e.g. www.alternate.de has a selection) I think that qualifies as 1st world.
Check out the Zotac ZBox Nano. Sure, the lineup's best seems to be a Celeron 867, but I don't see a reason why you couldn't put an i3 in it.
Anyway, with all due respect. I think you are doing things you shouldn't be doing. If I understand it correctly, you are somehow creating RAM disks, and moving all data there upon boot in order to speed up access times, correct? It's the ancient way of doing it from the days yonder where operating systems didn't know about caching. Well, modern operating systems, all of them, including Windows XP, have adequate to very good caching. It's only the first time you load an application that the data is transferred from disk to RAM, close the application, and restart it, it will be next to instant. Why? It's been loaded to RAM, and the machine "knows" that and isn't going to bother to redo all the I/O it required.
Now, I'm not familiar with Windows, but on a Linux machine, a default desktop with some applications will use 1 to 1.5GB truly used memory ("active"+"wired", read up on the terms here). All the rest is available for caching ("buffers" in Linux lingo). Even then, the RAM is often not used, if you're not actually taxing the machine much, which normal users like my mom won't do.
Personally, I am very skeptical about having such huge speed differences. Have you actually measured application startup times with 8GB versus 4GB RAM? You're initial move from platter to RAM-disk must be counted in, keep that in mind. Sure, it's at bootup, but it still is time doing I/O. You're right that the market segmentation Intel does with the Atoms is pretty stupid, but then, with Intel you get what you pay for. Don't pay much... Don't get much.
I'm not disagreeing, as you can get 16GB for very cheap in laptops and desktops. However, there is a diminishing point of return, which is - granted- dependant on the workload. As a matter of fact, my mom has 16GB in her Ubuntu machine. From what I see, it rarely uses more than 4GB, including the caching (there are only so many files you'll open) and she's got an SSD, so on loading time, she's fine. My wifes iMac: 16GB too, same deal: rarely uses anything over 4GB including cache.
Even my i7 laptop, which originally came with 4GB RAM. I upped it to 16GB as it's dirt cheap. I personally wouldn't dare to say it feel speedier. My workload is obviously higher.
My home server, one of those D510 machines, has 4GB RAM. It runs OpenBSD, and current memory usage is: "Memory: Real: 87M/769M act/tot Free: 3187M Cache: 597M Swap: 0K/8197M". This machine does much much more than just fileserver.
So, while I do agree with the premise: dump as much RAM into your machine as you can afford (eg my moms motherboard supports 64GB, but that is cost prohibitive). However, you can actually measure a bit and decide whether it's worth it. 4GB is fine for a small file server and average desktop usage. Do you buy longevity? Perhaps, depending on the use-case. That file server isn't going to do much much more in the future, is it?
I'm sure, *you* can use more, but I doubt that's the case for most people. If you build machines for other people and you need to take into account that they have to pay for the parts (even if you build for free), going 8GB over 4GB for a barely noticeable effect (to them), is probably not the best idea.
I like AMD as much as you (I pretty much expect posts about CPUs to be filled by your posts, hairyfeet.), but the Atoms support 4GB, at least the D525 and D510 do and those already are on the market quite a while... (By extension: also the single core equivalents of those chips). If you see support listed as less, it means that the motherboard doesn't support more. The chipset is or physical layout is what determines what you can put in the machine. Example: I just bought a Zotac ZBox Nano ID61 with a Celeron 867. Accordin to ark.intel.com, that CPU supports 16Gb, but there is only one SO-DIMM slot and the documentation say 8GB. Well, if it becomes cheap, I can obviously try a 16GB module (if they come out). Sometimes that works, as my experience tells, but it remains a gamble.
I've been coming back from my Atom craze. The above Celeron CPU is one reason: pretty conservative on the power use and more oompha than an Atom at about the same price-point. The main reason, though, is that many Atoms come with proprietary graphic chipsets that are not the Intel HD nnnn that have excellent open source driver support. They're PowerVR and suck under Linux. I've looked at E-350 based solutions, but where I am, motherboards for those start at 100€. For that price, with Atoms I can have the motherboard (obviously with CPU) and RAM and perhaps even a small disk or SSD. Sure the E-350 is better, but it's often irrelevant given the application these machines are used for.
I loved the AMD A4/6/8/10 APUs. Those give a quite nice bang for the buck. Yes, an i3 will beat them, but the motherboard for the i3 will cost more and support less RAM. I think they wanted to get the A-series sold by OEMs, but somehow that didn't work. A shame, they make nice low-cost machines that barely make any noise.