I thought Dell was locked into some deal with Intel that prevented them from selling AMD chips?
Surely this must be the case, even the biggest Intel zealots at Dell could not say no to at least trialing some AMD systems on the market..
Dell have stated they have considered AMD a few times, but stuck with Intel because "that's what theire customers wanted".
I expect a turnabout as demand for AMD processors increases, since clearly every AMD powered PC is one less Customer for Dell as long as they are exclusive.
As for pricing, I don't believe for a minute that Dell gets a better price deal from Intel for remaining loyal. Being able to pit one vendor against another is how you drive prices down.
The reason for scrapping clock speeds in favour of these 'strange' naming conventions is not confusion, it is to help people realise that clock speed does NOT indicate how fast a processor is.
Yes. And whenever I receive a Dell brochure, what is prominently displayed?
Clock speed.
BTW, notice Dell
tanking a bit. Think they're considering AMD a little more seriously now?
If you are behind in GHz, avoid discussing it.
If you are behind in benchmarks, avoid discussing it. (Look! GHz!)
If you are behind in low-power, avoid discussing it.
"You've got to accentuate the positive,
Eliminate the negative,
Latch on to the affirmative,
Don't mess with Mister In-Between."
Seems some people take those old standards literally.
Proactive parties, who shall remain nameless, within the gates at Intel inform the Dredge Report IT
Nooseletter that
at the first sign of a superiour emerging processor technology from AMD will not be met with a hurried-up half-arsed
cobbled together offering just to save face. Instead Intel plan to have ready several marketing campaigns
to choose from which will proclaim something to the effect 'We've already got one, oh yes, it's very nice' while
a fresh box of whips is sent off to R & D to move things along.
"think of BMW. Just like BMW has a series 3, 5, 6, and 7" except it'll be more like Fiat with a heatsink..."
Yes, my former company used drag and drop to let users design office interiors (cubicles, racks, shelves, etc) before ordering online. It was very useful!
Sounds like something we used to use from Herman Miller, but in that case it was an actual application. This would probably be better accomplished in something like Flash.
I can't recall, in almost 10 years of using browsers, ever comming across a website which used 'Drag and Drop' Other than as a Toy, have there been any?
I want my kids to abide by my wishes - and it is my job to ensure that they are doing so.
And when your clever kids figure out how to get around you, while you're off at work or not watching them 24/7, then what?
I really get a kick out of all the news articles I've read over the past 30 years, how decent families with well behaved children, often exemplary students, suddenly find their children had kept a secret from them. You can do the best you can to raise them, but as with free-will, they are also raising themselves and making their own decisions.
But it seems you ain't so that dimension of thinking isn't open to you, all subsequent rant is pure conjecture.
I wouldn't need a LAW to teach my kids right from wrong, nor would I need one to set parameters for their activities and behavior. That's a PARENT'S job, not the government's!
Here's a clue, dingbat, if you're a parent you want businesses to abide your wishes not to sell things to your kids, not to show things to your kids, not to get your kids hooked on things when your kids are away from home. Even the best parents in the world aren't going to be able to expect their well trained progeny to resist peer pressure or temptation 100% of the time so there's the matter of having statutes which require business to behave.
You seem to believe that anyone who wants government to stop interfering with how we raise our kids advocates anarchy and debauchery.
"We the people", "Government of the people, by the people and for the people", ever heard those before? People elect the legislatures. People write the petitions and sign them. These measures are not the work of devious government leaders working in isolation, but with parents groups, concerned citizens and even slashdot readers. Rather than piss and moan on slashdot about "government interference in your [theoretical] parental right", take part.
So why don't we just drop all the age restrictions on pr0n, alcohol, smoking, marriage, etc and have a totally free and open state? Because there are people who are parents. If you don't have kids then don't even bother trying to rationalize past that point. If you have kids and are fine with the concept of a totally free and open state then try finding one in the world which isn't a complete hell-hole.
How many cows do they have tied up to the booster housing?.....Time to chuck the abacus and get some computers in those hands.
The sad thing is, such ignorance and nearly racist stereotyping will probably attract some 'insightful' mod points.
I suffer no illusions the number of engineers China is educating and getting educated at foreign universities. They have 7th? largest economy already and will have the largest in a few years. They won't need cows to jump over the moon. I expect they will achieve moon landing far sooner than they state.
Not quite but it's the next best (?) thing. China is a country full of poor people. These space missions are rah-rah points for the leadership to show how great the country is on the world scene so the sustinence farmers making do on $800/year will feel as if their sacrifices are not in vain.
China had 3 billionaires in 2004, this year they've got 10.
Adjusting income for cost of living, there's plenty poor people in the USA.
US knows how to do it with 1960's technology, making the moon viable as a platform for other activities, requires almost repeating the Apollo program all over again. Why? Because all moon activity was stopped in 1972 when the last 2 Apollo flights were scrapped.
Some parts will scarcely change, while others which may take advantage of advances in materials and computers shouldn't lag much as we've still got active launch programs for shuttles and satellites. It's not like the people who did it all suddenly died and their knowledge was lost.
Plus maybe the most imporant factor: money. I guess China needs 10 year to spread the cost.
You've obviously mistaken China for a poor country.
Watch the perjoratives, already. For a nation which is just barely emerging from third-world status, that is a very admirable feat.
These aren't cavemen. Their economy is growing at a blistering rate and they're graduating plenty of engineers through domestic and foreign universities. They don't need to get a bunch of old V2 rockets and figure out how it's done.
Moreover, the fact that "we already know how to do it" doesn't mean we don't have to design and build entirely new vehicles. After all, engineering and software are light-years ahead of where they were when we first landed on the moon; are you suggesting we take the old 16-bit Apollo computers out of mothballs and re-use them?
Haven't you seen that these are exactly the plans NASA are considering? Going back to the Saturn V as a basis for all space missions. The Russians have it running so regular it's becoming a bus service for rich tourists. You don't advance one item of technology at a time, such as the old computers, but have all the bits worked on by various companies or universities or even at NASA. This isn't new stuff and much has been gleened from experience.
"China has announced that it plans to land on the moon around the year 2017....
China's first lunar orbiter could blast off as early as 2007..."
10 years to landon the moon?!?!? How many cows do they have tied up to the booster housing?
I could see 3 to 5 years, but this isn't exactly newrocket science, is it? Is
there some matter of the Russians and Americans not sharing with them, or are the Chinese just
so proud they want to do it all themselves?
The United States unveiled a $104 billion plan in September to return Americans to the moon by 2018.
I fully don't understand that. NASA already knows how to do it. Why the foot dragging? They got to the Moon
practically at Warp Speed compared to this mission. It's a sad day to learn all my Sci-Fi books will be further wrong on
projections of lunar colonies, etc.
China was designing a rocket that could carry a payload of 25 tons, up from a present limit of eight tons, the Beijing News reported this week, though it would unlikely be ready for another six-and-a-half years.
Time to chuck the abacus and get some computers in those hands.
They should land just in time for the 100th Starbucks opening.
The easiest thing to do would be to go back to the Founding Father's intentions, and have no concept of the political party. Each rep either votes their concience, or votes the will of their electorate (gasp) rather than voting the will of their party, or voting to frustrate the other party.
That, dear friend and patriot, would require a revolution, which the current office-holders would have you rounded up and sent to Gitmo for. Funny how that works. As soon as you recognize your government is corrupt and serves interests other than the people they, the government, would label you subversive and imprison you or have you executed.
Which still makes it odd for Democrats to oppose it as far as I can tell. In my state the best funded 527 groups are liberal groups.
Go back to 1999. A little known and not largely respected son of a former president is considering a run for the Whitehouse. He really hasn't done anything of note in his tenure as a governor and the nation's attention is on other things. I was astounded to hear that George W. Bush already had $70 million in his war chest, months before he actually appeared on the GOP Predidential Candidate RADAR. He was a made man, as the Mafia might put it. Some people weren't happy with McCain, who had broad popular support and was a distinguished veteran, but he didn't have deep support in his own party. Where do you suppose that $70 million came from? It certainly didn't come from public donations, nobody knew he was even going to run at that point, outside the kingmakers that is.
Why does our Congress allow for bills to have riders, etc? Why can't we say "there must be one and only one agenda" on a bill?
It's the "Old Game"
Like the Fillibuster, both parties have benefited from it over the years and are unlikely to put a stop to it, lest it come back to haunt them. Interestingly the GOP moved to end Judicial Fillibustering, which many old party members were loathe to do, even as the Dems frustrated them. They could find, in a decade, a reversal of political fortunes and find they can't stall appointments of judicial candidates far to liberal for their tastes.
Sites like the Daily Kos can now be subject to campaign finance laws. Which means, essentially, their speech can be regulated during election seasons.
Under campaign finance laws they would only be required to divulge sources of funding.
Even that could be well hidden, say, a voting machine vendor who heavily favors a certain presidential candidate could take out a lot of lucrative ad-space on a site, so long as the views expressed on the site coincide with those of the company.
of course with the global-ness of the web, isn't it nuts to think that the Us can somehow enforce our laws there? If I really want to, can't I just blog to a uk site and get around all this? So opening the loop hole just formalize what's already the de facto law?
Oh, no doubt about it. You could have your site with.tv tld and most people wouldn't even assotiate it with Tuvalu and you could put whatever you like on it and host it in China or Cuba or Venezuela.
Ok, so I'm dusted. I see that the most liberal of parties opposes what is effectively Free Speech and the
party which brought us the Patriot Act is advocating the it.
This means there's some reason other than what this post appears to say 'Hey, Democrats hate free speech!', like something has been attached
which allows oil drilling in Yosemite National Park. From TFA:
The Federal Election Commission is under court order to finalize rules extending a controversial 2002 campaign finance law to the Internet. Unless Congress acts, the final regulations are expected to be announced by the end of the year. (They could cover everything from regulating hyperlinks to politicians' Web sites to forcing disclosure of affiliations with campaigns.)
Opponents of the reform plan mounted a last-minute effort to derail the bill before the vote on Wednesday evening. Liberal advocacy groups circulated letters warning the measure was too broad and would invite "corrupt" activities online, and The New York Times wrote in an editorial this week that "the Internet would become a free-fire zone without any limits on spending."
Ah, there's the Why, a loophole for Campaign Finance law.
The heading Democrats Defeat Online FOS Act and omission of the Why certainly colours this
article. Why the omission? It appears the article poster favours websites/blogs which are covert mouthpieces of a particular interest group spouting dubious facts and leaving out highly relevant facts. Slashdot has effectively been trolled. Was this intentional, Zonk?
When black apears white or pigs appear to have sprouted wings, there's usually politics behind it, that's where Critical Thinking separates the herd.
The Fine Print: We're probably not responsible for content, but in any event we are, we'll deny it.
I think the salt in more in the ocean than in the air. The solubility of NaCl in air is, well, kinda low. Unless you drive right on the beach a lot, I think you're imagining those ions on your battery. It's more likely corrosion due to water and oxygen. What would salt due to your battery anyway?
It's not Chloride ions (from aquaeous solution of NaCl) but many other ions present in sea water which become air-borne. Michigan, where my sister lives, salts the roads, but it isn't just NaCl either. Exposed metals near the ocean often show corrosion, depending upon which ions they react most readily with. Electrical wiring often becomes noisy thanks to the presence of the ions. They also settle all over my pickup overnight, even though it's parked in a car port.
Slashdot Mirror
Dell have stated they have considered AMD a few times, but stuck with Intel because "that's what theire customers wanted".
I expect a turnabout as demand for AMD processors increases, since clearly every AMD powered PC is one less Customer for Dell as long as they are exclusive.
As for pricing, I don't believe for a minute that Dell gets a better price deal from Intel for remaining loyal. Being able to pit one vendor against another is how you drive prices down.
Yes. And whenever I receive a Dell brochure, what is prominently displayed?
Clock speed.
BTW, notice Dell tanking a bit. Think they're considering AMD a little more seriously now?
If you are behind in benchmarks, avoid discussing it. (Look! GHz!)
If you are behind in low-power, avoid discussing it.
"You've got to accentuate the positive,
Eliminate the negative,
Latch on to the affirmative,
Don't mess with Mister In-Between."
Seems some people take those old standards literally.
*thunk* - "Williamette"
*thunk* - "Tillamook"
Maybe they should consider something more suitable to their latest offering and switch to the names of cheeses.
*thunk* - "Vieux Boulogne"
*thunk* - "Stinking Bishop"
*thunk* - "Limburger"
Proactive parties, who shall remain nameless, within the gates at Intel inform the Dredge Report IT Nooseletter that at the first sign of a superiour emerging processor technology from AMD will not be met with a hurried-up half-arsed cobbled together offering just to save face. Instead Intel plan to have ready several marketing campaigns to choose from which will proclaim something to the effect 'We've already got one, oh yes, it's very nice' while a fresh box of whips is sent off to R & D to move things along.
"think of BMW. Just like BMW has a series 3, 5, 6, and 7" except it'll be more like Fiat with a heatsink..."
Sounds like something we used to use from Herman Miller, but in that case it was an actual application. This would probably be better accomplished in something like Flash.
I can't recall, in almost 10 years of using browsers, ever comming across a website which used 'Drag and Drop' Other than as a Toy, have there been any?
And when your clever kids figure out how to get around you, while you're off at work or not watching them 24/7, then what?
I really get a kick out of all the news articles I've read over the past 30 years, how decent families with well behaved children, often exemplary students, suddenly find their children had kept a secret from them. You can do the best you can to raise them, but as with free-will, they are also raising themselves and making their own decisions.
Got it?
Have you?
As a member of a community you do.
All societies place restrictions on businesses for the good of the community.
But it seems you ain't so that dimension of thinking isn't open to you, all subsequent rant is pure conjecture.
I wouldn't need a LAW to teach my kids right from wrong, nor would I need one to set parameters for their activities and behavior. That's a PARENT'S job, not the government's!
Here's a clue, dingbat, if you're a parent you want businesses to abide your wishes not to sell things to your kids, not to show things to your kids, not to get your kids hooked on things when your kids are away from home. Even the best parents in the world aren't going to be able to expect their well trained progeny to resist peer pressure or temptation 100% of the time so there's the matter of having statutes which require business to behave.
You seem to believe that anyone who wants government to stop interfering with how we raise our kids advocates anarchy and debauchery.
"We the people", "Government of the people, by the people and for the people", ever heard those before? People elect the legislatures. People write the petitions and sign them. These measures are not the work of devious government leaders working in isolation, but with parents groups, concerned citizens and even slashdot readers. Rather than piss and moan on slashdot about "government interference in your [theoretical] parental right", take part.
I'm calling you out on that strawman.
You don't even know what a strawman.
I get suck a kick out of these kinds of responses, they're no less knee-jerk than the ones that press for Age Limits, Ratings and so forth.
Here's some more interesting reading:
Malaysia gamers face night curfew
S Korean dies after games session
So why don't we just drop all the age restrictions on pr0n, alcohol, smoking, marriage, etc and have a totally free and open state? Because there are people who are parents. If you don't have kids then don't even bother trying to rationalize past that point. If you have kids and are fine with the concept of a totally free and open state then try finding one in the world which isn't a complete hell-hole.
The sad thing is, such ignorance and nearly racist stereotyping will probably attract some 'insightful' mod points.
I suffer no illusions the number of engineers China is educating and getting educated at foreign universities. They have 7th? largest economy already and will have the largest in a few years. They won't need cows to jump over the moon. I expect they will achieve moon landing far sooner than they state.
China had 3 billionaires in 2004, this year they've got 10.
Adjusting income for cost of living, there's plenty poor people in the USA.
still can't get the EPL matches I want though, dammit
Some parts will scarcely change, while others which may take advantage of advances in materials and computers shouldn't lag much as we've still got active launch programs for shuttles and satellites. It's not like the people who did it all suddenly died and their knowledge was lost.
Plus maybe the most imporant factor: money. I guess China needs 10 year to spread the cost.
You've obviously mistaken China for a poor country.
These aren't cavemen. Their economy is growing at a blistering rate and they're graduating plenty of engineers through domestic and foreign universities. They don't need to get a bunch of old V2 rockets and figure out how it's done.
Moreover, the fact that "we already know how to do it" doesn't mean we don't have to design and build entirely new vehicles. After all, engineering and software are light-years ahead of where they were when we first landed on the moon; are you suggesting we take the old 16-bit Apollo computers out of mothballs and re-use them?
Haven't you seen that these are exactly the plans NASA are considering? Going back to the Saturn V as a basis for all space missions. The Russians have it running so regular it's becoming a bus service for rich tourists. You don't advance one item of technology at a time, such as the old computers, but have all the bits worked on by various companies or universities or even at NASA. This isn't new stuff and much has been gleened from experience.
"China has announced that it plans to land on the moon around the year 2017.
10 years to landon the moon?!?!? How many cows do they have tied up to the booster housing?
I could see 3 to 5 years, but this isn't exactly new rocket science, is it? Is there some matter of the Russians and Americans not sharing with them, or are the Chinese just so proud they want to do it all themselves?
The United States unveiled a $104 billion plan in September to return Americans to the moon by 2018.
I fully don't understand that. NASA already knows how to do it. Why the foot dragging? They got to the Moon practically at Warp Speed compared to this mission. It's a sad day to learn all my Sci-Fi books will be further wrong on projections of lunar colonies, etc.
China was designing a rocket that could carry a payload of 25 tons, up from a present limit of eight tons, the Beijing News reported this week, though it would unlikely be ready for another six-and-a-half years.
Time to chuck the abacus and get some computers in those hands.
They should land just in time for the 100th Starbucks opening.
That, dear friend and patriot, would require a revolution, which the current office-holders would have you rounded up and sent to Gitmo for. Funny how that works. As soon as you recognize your government is corrupt and serves interests other than the people they, the government, would label you subversive and imprison you or have you executed.
Just another state which is unlikely to bend to the will of America.
There was some good analysis of Venezuela and South American politics in general on the BBC World Service this morning.
Go back to 1999. A little known and not largely respected son of a former president is considering a run for the Whitehouse. He really hasn't done anything of note in his tenure as a governor and the nation's attention is on other things. I was astounded to hear that George W. Bush already had $70 million in his war chest, months before he actually appeared on the GOP Predidential Candidate RADAR. He was a made man, as the Mafia might put it. Some people weren't happy with McCain, who had broad popular support and was a distinguished veteran, but he didn't have deep support in his own party. Where do you suppose that $70 million came from? It certainly didn't come from public donations, nobody knew he was even going to run at that point, outside the kingmakers that is.
It's the "Old Game"
Like the Fillibuster, both parties have benefited from it over the years and are unlikely to put a stop to it, lest it come back to haunt them. Interestingly the GOP moved to end Judicial Fillibustering, which many old party members were loathe to do, even as the Dems frustrated them. They could find, in a decade, a reversal of political fortunes and find they can't stall appointments of judicial candidates far to liberal for their tastes.
Under campaign finance laws they would only be required to divulge sources of funding.
Even that could be well hidden, say, a voting machine vendor who heavily favors a certain presidential candidate could take out a lot of lucrative ad-space on a site, so long as the views expressed on the site coincide with those of the company.
*wink* *wink* *nudge* *nudge*
Right?
Oh, no doubt about it. You could have your site with .tv tld and most people wouldn't even assotiate it with Tuvalu and you could put whatever you like on it and host it in China or Cuba or Venezuela.
Ok, so I'm dusted. I see that the most liberal of parties opposes what is effectively Free Speech and the party which brought us the Patriot Act is advocating the it.
This means there's some reason other than what this post appears to say 'Hey, Democrats hate free speech!', like something has been attached which allows oil drilling in Yosemite National Park. From TFA:
Ah, there's the Why, a loophole for Campaign Finance law.The heading Democrats Defeat Online FOS Act and omission of the Why certainly colours this article. Why the omission? It appears the article poster favours websites/blogs which are covert mouthpieces of a particular interest group spouting dubious facts and leaving out highly relevant facts. Slashdot has effectively been trolled. Was this intentional, Zonk?
When black apears white or pigs appear to have sprouted wings, there's usually politics behind it, that's where Critical Thinking separates the herd. The Fine Print: We're probably not responsible for content, but in any event we are, we'll deny it.
It's not Chloride ions (from aquaeous solution of NaCl) but many other ions present in sea water which become air-borne. Michigan, where my sister lives, salts the roads, but it isn't just NaCl either. Exposed metals near the ocean often show corrosion, depending upon which ions they react most readily with. Electrical wiring often becomes noisy thanks to the presence of the ions. They also settle all over my pickup overnight, even though it's parked in a car port.