... And the XPress 200M was still being sold in January 2007. I count that as 6 years old, and give it was still being sold, I could at least expect 3 years support no? That's 2010 and Windows 7 was out by then...
I can confirm. I'm typing this right now (as chance would have) on my old laptop with a Radeon Xpress 1100 (which is technically a 200M). I don't know for Windows, but on Linux, the support is abysmal. Don't count on running any modern desktop. So, I reverted back to XP Media Center Edition, which is the version this laptop came with. (Running it off an SSD, seems to work fine) XP runs just fine and is modern enough for me. (I run Limited User for my day-to-day account, I know what I'm doing)
Yeah, as the AC mentioned, I oversaw the "workstation" in your post. My apologies for that. Oh, and Quad Core i7 laptops can be had for less than 600€, if you're lucky... As I was. Yes, it a Quad, it shows up a 8 CPUs on Linux, due to hyperthreading. Just excuse me for jumping, in I've seen way too many posts, even on slashdot, about people thinking they have N cores, when in reality they have N/2 cores because they are not familiar with the hyperthreading concept.
Just a question: what CPU is that? I've got a nice Core i7 (which I rarely use, it was cheap) that sports four cores. The task manager shows 8 cores, but that's because of hyperthreading. I haven't keeping up to date, I might have missed some leaps in the amount of cores on the desktop market.
I built my mom a AMD-A6 3650 with 16GB RAM. Given, I had all the other stuff (nice case, etc..) already since it was the motherboard of her machine that started to get flaky, the upgrade was only 250€ or so... The price difference for "classical" 4GB was negligent. Sure, it's not octo-core, but quad-core. Sure, she has no use for it, but why not? Incidentally: that was a CPU/Motherboard combo on sale too.
I just ordered a Celeron 867 based machine: Zotac ZBox-Nano-ID61-E. It was on sale -20% at my favourite online shop. Got it for 154,53€. Barebones, so it lacks RAM: 27,53€ and a harddisk/SSD, of which I happen to have one lying around. Still, even if I had not: 2.5" 500GB HDD it's 46,99€. Grand total of: 229,05€, which includes VAT. Round up to 240€ for shipping and you have a nifty power-sipping machine that is most likely better than your average Athlon.
As you will notice in my sig, I am a dumpster diver. I do (did, I toned down quite a lot) what you do and I have saved quite some money as you did by mixing, matching, maximizing machines. The thing is, you do put a lot of time in it and you're lying to yourself that you do it to save money. You do it because you enjoy it. If you factor in your time, you're not saving money. I realized that when I have perfectly fine Athlon 64 machines with 2GB RAM that nobody would take. I still can't help myself to pick up an old computer, but it really really really has to be something extremely good (Core 2 Duo for example is still hard to find in the dumpster, but I have gotten a Core Duo a time ago... as a laptop no less)
Anyway, what I try to say is that you're better off specifying your needs and looking for deals and things on sale. That Celeron, will do just fine as a nettop for surfing, youtube etc... Especially if the drivers are ok (I have a Atom D525, which I stopped using because it really was too slow, but another Atom 330 performed better and the difference was the chipset... Go figure. All on Linux. I found out that the D525 chipset I had sucked under Linux. Bad buy.. Should have researched beforehand). In a similar vein, I got myself a Core i7 laptop with FullHD for a mere 525€. Did I get, lucky? Hell yes! It now even has 16GB RAM because it has become so cheap.
You already realized that you don't need the top of the line. So did I. Now realize that your time is worth a lot more than the old hardware. Well, if it's a hobby... fine, but then call it a hobby stops you from spending.
I'm not so sure, I'd want that either. After 9/11, I noticed an increase of ugly male flight attendants. The hot female flight attendants, seem to be a thing of the past.
So you're saying you'd rather have everyone who wants to get on a plane have their privacy violated because you're afraid of the minuscule chance that a terrorist might attack? I guess privacy isn't important at all as long as you can have your security theater.
Hey, I have an idea: why not just force everyone to fly naked!
Question: Why does it need your Windows Live credentials? That doesn't make any sense to me. Installing an application shouldn't require me to have a Windows Live account. I don't call that "unrestricted sideloading".
According to the Republicans involved, it was an accident. Is the same thing going on across the country all accidents? When does that excuse become non-credible.
Does it really matter if both existing parties are essentially the same thing and obeying the hand(s) that feel them?
Shiming in because my mom is a long time Ubuntu LTS user and I was really worried the paradigm shift would confuse her. When I upgraded her installation, I expected a few support calls. In reality, I got none and my view on Unity changed due to that.
For the record, I use it too now and while I did need some adaption time, it's just fine for daily usage. The versions prior to 12.04 were horrible though.
I got them on the phone once, and I let them loose on a VM. If I had a bit more time, I'm sure I could have had much more fun with them. I know someone who fell for it, and I asked them (the victim) one question: "Why in the world would Microsoft call you? They already have your money, they don't care from that point on." It baffles me totally that anyone would fall for it.
Yes... That's the whole point of wanting to have a subscription: keeping it alive because it's good enough and 7 really is just Vista++. I don't like it.
Most likely. Debian sid with LXDE works, but I'm going to put it mildly: it's not exactly polished. I guess Mint is going to be more polished. It's just an experimental machine anyway. I use it for when I go on vacation and similar. If it gets stolen, I'm not going to cry over it. (Still not bad: Dual Core, 2GB RAM, 320GB HDD... I mean, it works perfectly fine on XP MCE)
Considering the laptop, are you running Catalyst or the Open Source driver (Radeon)? Catalyst is fast but much cursed for unreliability. The Open Source driver is slow, but reportedly much more stable.
I'm forced to use the open source drivers. Catalyst doesn't support the Radeon XPress 1100 any more. Linux has become a pain to use on it. When the card was still supported, Ubuntu ran snappy.
You'd think so.... However, you'd be mistaken. The main reason for this is that XP is used by two types of "customers":
Business users, that are locked to a certain platform that only support IE6. I know, the vendor of that platform should adapt its code. Business software release cycles are glacial. It will eventually happen, but slowly. Also, replacing computers costs money. Many businesses won't spend money on (perceived) non-core business.
"Good enough" users. The power of modern computers, even lower end ones, is more than most users can throw at. Let's be honest: is a P-IV 2.0GHz with 1GB or 2GB RAM not enough to run Windows XP and the few applications most normal users run? Yep, I thought so. Unlike most slashdotters, normal people keep their computers for a long time and replacing them is a hassle for them. Given replacing a computer is not only a hassle, but also costs money... money that can be used for more fun things, they won't do it. Note also, that people in this category are also very likely to stick with the software they own. They won't stand in a line for the latest Photoshop and are most likely still happily using the Microsoft Word that came bundles with the pre-installed Works package.
Those people will not switch until they get new computers and that simply is the way it works and should work. Finally! Stupid upgrade treadmill.
From an administrator point of view, Windows XP is well known and mature. Which means, you can anticipate problems and make sure everything works like expected. With 7 (let's ignore Vista) a whole slew of new problems got exposed (not necessarily for the users, but for the admins... Try partitioning a 7 machine in two parts: one drive OS/Apps, on drive Data... Results must be seamless for newly created users. Another example is to copy a user profile as a default template. 7 is a true bitch for these things)
What 7 brings to the table, and the only reason I recommend it, is 64-bit. If you need more than 4GB RAM, get 7. I think Microsoft should do a "Windows Classic" which is XP re-branded, and sell it as a subscription to finance future patches. Let's say 5€/month. I think it would sell like hotcakes. I think I'd take it for the few remaining XP machines, I haven't converted to Linux yet. (I'll probably convert one back to XP as the ATI drivers for that laptop suck donkeys balls)
sure it might be 64bit capable but with less then 1GB of memory, is it even possible to run a 64bit OS on it?
Yes, absolutely... Works perfectly fine. Now, you might argue it doesn't make much sense as you only have 1GB RAM to address, but it will work. I have a Fujitsu Siemens Amilo Pa1510 that originally came with 1GB RAM and it does run a 64-bit OS just fine. [*] It support 2GB RAM (which I have installed), but not more. It seems to be a BIOS issue. Dropping in 2x2GB ram resultsin 2.4GB memory addressable. Weird stuff.
[*] That's not 100% true, because the graphic chipset has no more support in proprietary drivers and as such a modern GUI is basically unusable, but that's hardly the CPU's fault.
For the record, the P-III machine won't be 64-bit. How old are those again? From wikipedia, the last released P-IIIs were in 2002. That's pretty much a decade. In the dumpsters around where I live, you can find socket 754 and socket 939 AMD64 machines, and I've seen the first few 775 socket machines showing up.
Now, the most popular 32-bit machine in recent times, I can think of is the original Asus EEE 701. Celeron CPU at 900MHz, released mid 2007.
Slashdot Mirror
... And the XPress 200M was still being sold in January 2007. I count that as 6 years old, and give it was still being sold, I could at least expect 3 years support no? That's 2010 and Windows 7 was out by then...
I can confirm. I'm typing this right now (as chance would have) on my old laptop with a Radeon Xpress 1100 (which is technically a 200M). I don't know for Windows, but on Linux, the support is abysmal. Don't count on running any modern desktop. So, I reverted back to XP Media Center Edition, which is the version this laptop came with. (Running it off an SSD, seems to work fine) XP runs just fine and is modern enough for me. (I run Limited User for my day-to-day account, I know what I'm doing)
Yeah, as the AC mentioned, I oversaw the "workstation" in your post. My apologies for that. Oh, and Quad Core i7 laptops can be had for less than 600€, if you're lucky... As I was. Yes, it a Quad, it shows up a 8 CPUs on Linux, due to hyperthreading. Just excuse me for jumping, in I've seen way too many posts, even on slashdot, about people thinking they have N cores, when in reality they have N/2 cores because they are not familiar with the hyperthreading concept.
Just a question: what CPU is that? I've got a nice Core i7 (which I rarely use, it was cheap) that sports four cores. The task manager shows 8 cores, but that's because of hyperthreading. I haven't keeping up to date, I might have missed some leaps in the amount of cores on the desktop market.
I built my mom a AMD-A6 3650 with 16GB RAM. Given, I had all the other stuff (nice case, etc..) already since it was the motherboard of her machine that started to get flaky, the upgrade was only 250€ or so... The price difference for "classical" 4GB was negligent. Sure, it's not octo-core, but quad-core. Sure, she has no use for it, but why not? Incidentally: that was a CPU/Motherboard combo on sale too.
As you will notice in my sig, I am a dumpster diver. I do (did, I toned down quite a lot) what you do and I have saved quite some money as you did by mixing, matching, maximizing machines. The thing is, you do put a lot of time in it and you're lying to yourself that you do it to save money. You do it because you enjoy it. If you factor in your time, you're not saving money. I realized that when I have perfectly fine Athlon 64 machines with 2GB RAM that nobody would take. I still can't help myself to pick up an old computer, but it really really really has to be something extremely good (Core 2 Duo for example is still hard to find in the dumpster, but I have gotten a Core Duo a time ago... as a laptop no less)
Anyway, what I try to say is that you're better off specifying your needs and looking for deals and things on sale. That Celeron, will do just fine as a nettop for surfing, youtube etc... Especially if the drivers are ok (I have a Atom D525, which I stopped using because it really was too slow, but another Atom 330 performed better and the difference was the chipset... Go figure. All on Linux. I found out that the D525 chipset I had sucked under Linux. Bad buy.. Should have researched beforehand). In a similar vein, I got myself a Core i7 laptop with FullHD for a mere 525€. Did I get, lucky? Hell yes! It now even has 16GB RAM because it has become so cheap.
You already realized that you don't need the top of the line. So did I. Now realize that your time is worth a lot more than the old hardware. Well, if it's a hobby... fine, but then call it a hobby stops you from spending.
Really? Kahlon. I've bought with them occasionally for really hard to find stuff. They still have EDO RAM, if you really need.
I'm not so sure, I'd want that either. After 9/11, I noticed an increase of ugly male flight attendants. The hot female flight attendants, seem to be a thing of the past.
Hey, I have an idea: why not just force everyone to fly naked!
Aren't you mixing up with MariaDB? This looks more like a DNS implementation that a database.
Question: Why does it need your Windows Live credentials? That doesn't make any sense to me. Installing an application shouldn't require me to have a Windows Live account. I don't call that "unrestricted sideloading".
Nah, it was an accident that they got caught ;-)
Does it really matter if both existing parties are essentially the same thing and obeying the hand(s) that feel them?
For the record, I use it too now and while I did need some adaption time, it's just fine for daily usage. The versions prior to 12.04 were horrible though.
Yes, but I still got the reactions covered in my Chemistry classes... We actually made wine with our Chem teacher. Ah, that guy was awesome.
He is insulting the education (and probably passion) of his own mother. He should simply shut up.
Besides, ADHD is overdiagnosed. He probably just has a spoiled kid that never learned to sit still for half a minute.
Ever read "The Handmaid's Tale" by Atwood? That's pretty much that world depicted.
I got them on the phone once, and I let them loose on a VM. If I had a bit more time, I'm sure I could have had much more fun with them. I know someone who fell for it, and I asked them (the victim) one question: "Why in the world would Microsoft call you? They already have your money, they don't care from that point on." It baffles me totally that anyone would fall for it.
Yes... That's the whole point of wanting to have a subscription: keeping it alive because it's good enough and 7 really is just Vista++. I don't like it.
Offer me a 12€/year subscription for continued support of Windows XP and I'll sign.
Most likely. Debian sid with LXDE works, but I'm going to put it mildly: it's not exactly polished. I guess Mint is going to be more polished. It's just an experimental machine anyway. I use it for when I go on vacation and similar. If it gets stolen, I'm not going to cry over it. (Still not bad: Dual Core, 2GB RAM, 320GB HDD... I mean, it works perfectly fine on XP MCE)
I'm forced to use the open source drivers. Catalyst doesn't support the Radeon XPress 1100 any more. Linux has become a pain to use on it. When the card was still supported, Ubuntu ran snappy.
You'd think so.... However, you'd be mistaken. The main reason for this is that XP is used by two types of "customers":
Those people will not switch until they get new computers and that simply is the way it works and should work. Finally! Stupid upgrade treadmill.
From an administrator point of view, Windows XP is well known and mature. Which means, you can anticipate problems and make sure everything works like expected. With 7 (let's ignore Vista) a whole slew of new problems got exposed (not necessarily for the users, but for the admins... Try partitioning a 7 machine in two parts: one drive OS/Apps, on drive Data... Results must be seamless for newly created users. Another example is to copy a user profile as a default template. 7 is a true bitch for these things)
What 7 brings to the table, and the only reason I recommend it, is 64-bit. If you need more than 4GB RAM, get 7. I think Microsoft should do a "Windows Classic" which is XP re-branded, and sell it as a subscription to finance future patches. Let's say 5€/month. I think it would sell like hotcakes. I think I'd take it for the few remaining XP machines, I haven't converted to Linux yet. (I'll probably convert one back to XP as the ATI drivers for that laptop suck donkeys balls)
Operating systems don't like it when you anthropomorphize them? ;-)
Yes, absolutely... Works perfectly fine. Now, you might argue it doesn't make much sense as you only have 1GB RAM to address, but it will work. I have a Fujitsu Siemens Amilo Pa1510 that originally came with 1GB RAM and it does run a 64-bit OS just fine. [*] It support 2GB RAM (which I have installed), but not more. It seems to be a BIOS issue. Dropping in 2x2GB ram resultsin 2.4GB memory addressable. Weird stuff.
[*] That's not 100% true, because the graphic chipset has no more support in proprietary drivers and as such a modern GUI is basically unusable, but that's hardly the CPU's fault.
For the record, the P-III machine won't be 64-bit. How old are those again? From wikipedia, the last released P-IIIs were in 2002. That's pretty much a decade. In the dumpsters around where I live, you can find socket 754 and socket 939 AMD64 machines, and I've seen the first few 775 socket machines showing up.
Now, the most popular 32-bit machine in recent times, I can think of is the original Asus EEE 701. Celeron CPU at 900MHz, released mid 2007.