You're on the right track, but the S-Wing nose, wing, body structure, double main engine and double height cockpit configuration are actually an exact replica of the 487 Space Cruiser which was the bigger brother of the 918 in the same classic series.
Yes, this is nitpicking. Bite me Slashdot crowd. I care is because I used to have one of those:)
Simply put, everything you said has no supporting evidence.
Well, feel free to go beyond providing your opinions in further postings and supplying said evidence yourself.
Los-Less linking takes more precision from the beam, and therefore more complex device. This raises cost. 32K (at its maximum) is certaintly a good price for the simplicity of the device. Saying that loss-less linking coming standard on DVD+R is just uplain "better" shows that you have no idea the technical limitations of such devices.
Do I really need to argue that not having loss is better than having loss, even when it is small? Just compare prices on -R and +R burners and you'll see that this added cost completely dissipates in the overall price of the units.
"This [96MB/32MB maximum multisession waste] is NOT negligable."
Yes it is. In fact, it is on the same order of magnitude as DVD+R waste (4MB). When you are talking about any type of storage media, 2% waste and.5% waste are practically the same thing.
Surely you can see that +R provides the more elegant solution. Whether you personally consider that 1.5% for every session a worthwhile difference is another matter.
Way to know the industry. and way to present evidence to your rants.
Well, from a technical point of view all you've really been saying is that yes, +R does have some slight advantages, but you don't consider them important. That I can understand.
For someone who claims advanced industry knowledge however you seem to be quite adept at conveniently ignoring the fact that everyone who is anyone is lining up behind +R.
Until there is proven technology in DVD+R that proves its superior burning speed, any point against the DVD-R pre-pit method is invalid.
Nothing wrong with looking at limitations of the technology that may well come back to bite -R when drives go beyond 4-speed, which they certainly will.
Why use more expensive media (DVD+MRW) and drives to accomplish something that software can accomplish for far, far cheaper and much more robust(if desired)?
+R media is not in fact more expensive than -R, and as economies of scale kick in it will become cheaper, even.
Nothing in this article explains why using loss-less linking (used for things such as buffer-underrun protected recording) has any advantage over 32k wide linking. In fact, there is a very good and useful reason for this DVD-R method. Why on earth would you need perfect exact loss-less linking when your media is 4.7GB long and you are going to waste a measly 32k? Who cares?
Just listen to yourself here. The +R solution is simply the better technology, no way around it. You may try to marginalise it but that's the fact.
Point 5 for DVD+R: Multiple recording sessions waste less space for DVD+R. Big deal. you are working with 4.7GB Disks. 96MB for the first session is the maximum wasted, and 32MB per zone after that. This is negligable and certaintly nothing to be worried about on media that is a full order of magnitude larger than this maximum.
This is NOT negligable. It is a clear disadvantage which has been solved much more elegantly in the +R spec. As I daresay is typical.
That is why DVD-R is here to stay. It was first. It has had time to improve. It is not slower. It has been adopted by more users and computer manufacturers (apple and gateway to name a few)
Not it hasn't. It's slowly on the way out. Apple's your big OEM, huh. Up shit creek is what -R is.
When Joe Schmoe buys a dell with DVD+R and finds out he isn't compatible with the rest of the world, he isn't going to be too happy.
He will in fact be compatible with most existing DVD devices. Even your Apple can read +R media. Of course, in the not too distant future your Apple customer is gonna have to mail order his -R discs while Joe Schmoe is gonna get his around the corner.
Actually, from what I've been reading there isn't a big difference in the level of compatibility with other DVD devices between the two standards.
Some older devices are supposed to have problems with either or both of them. I can't say I can personally confirm that. Between the 7 different DVD devices I've been trying my recordables in since I got a burner about 3 weeks a go (including 2 DVD-players, XBox, Apple SuperDrive, laptop etc) all of them were able to read both types perfectly.
In the end, DVD-R/RW is the standard format, and the format of choice for most of the industry.,/i>
Sorry, you are mistaken. The DVD+RW Alliance contains some of the industry's biggest heavyweights, including Philips and Sony who only invented the compact disc to begin with, as well as Microsoft, Dell and numerous others. The DVD Forum has the support of Pioneer and.. ?
DVD-R media is cheaper than DVD+R. DVD-R media is carried in every computer shop in town whilst DVD+R media is hard to find anywhere in more than a 3pack or single pack.
Statements like these don't do a lot for your credibility. Which year did you last visit a computer store? I mean, seriously?
I do see your point and I can understand that some people are going to be sitting on the fence for a while still.
However, the fact that there is no single DVD-recordable standard is not an argument in favor of this Plextor drive, which doesn't adhere to any standard. Unlike Plextor's format, either DVD-recordable standard is already readable by the vast majority of DVD-ROM drives and players out there. So no matter which standard may eventually win out, any DVD recorder you buy now will remain useful in the future.
DVDs have no clear standards at this point. I think I remember someone saying that DVD-RW is the one standard reaching the critical mass market, but is it *there* yet?
Actually, I'm pretty sure DVD+R(W), not DVD-R(W), is going to end up being the standard eventually. It's already leading -R(W) in the retail market. And more importantly the format has the backing of all the companies that matter; Philips, Sony and Microsoft - and many others. DVD-RW has Pioneer and that's about it.
That's not to say DVD-RW is dead or will be soon. Just that + is gonna be the OEM and retail standard of choice in the present and near future.
The Plextor's GigaRec feature uses shorter pit lengths to squeeze more data onto a disc. I guess in a way it is indeed a literal kind of compression. Still, the topic title seems somewhat misleading considering that the usual kind of compression people talk is about is something quite different.
A nice feature certainly, but of limited use. Those discs can only be read in that drive (and 1 or 2 older Plextor models). With current DVD-writer pricing who is gonna settle for a CD writer no matter how premium it is?
I'm assuming you're talking about Chicago Meigs airfield, which lies within walking distance of the Sears tower - supposedly an attractive target. Unfortunately, that airport was recently shut down in an overnight guerrilla action by Chicago mayor Daley, quoting terrorist concerns. A further tragedy in the wake of Sep 11 that this historical airfield was shut down without any consideration for the interests of aviation enthusiasts.
Yeah, I agree. The only way for it to discourage terrorist activity would be if there was absolutely no way to override it. And if there were no way to override it it is possible to imagine other situations where this system might actually endanger lives.
Suppose for instance that an aircraft happens to suffer from a problem like multiple engine failure and the only way to avoid crashing into a densely populated urban area would be to trespass an area of protected airspace. Or the only possible landing opportunity might be an abandoned or smaller private runway or even a stretch of highway which would happen to fall under or near the shield, and this system would prevent the aircraft from maintaining an optimal course. Imagine the public outcry if there were ever a major accident due to the robot taking over. I guess the benefits of this system might outweigh such uncommon occurrences but I can imagine pilots are terrified of relinquishing such an amount of control.
Well, this article confirms that the Linux version is indeed dead, just as many people predicted.
GeCAD's line of antivirus software is well-rounded and supports most popular platforms in use today, including Windows and Microsoft Exchange Server. GeCAD antivirus software also runs on servers such as Groupwise; Linux-based mail servers; file servers such as Samba and Novell Netware, and Instant Messaging (IM) clients including ICQ, MSN Messenger, Yahoo Messenger, AOL IM, and Trillian. However, a Microsoft spokesperson said the company will discontinue cross-platform support.
I know several people who have actually forked out the $300 for RAV AntiVirus. Our company was one of them. I believe RAV was rapidly becoming one of the most popular commercial antivirus solutions for Unix platforms.
I'm guessing Microsoft would prefer to see the myth that Linux users are unwilling to pay for functional software at a reasonable price perpetuated than risk making additional profit from continuing the cross-platform strategy.
Re:Some more 64 and 128 Kbit/s AAC listening resul
on
AAC Put To The Test
·
· Score: 1
First of all there are many different AAC codecs. Second, the AAC codec tested in c't produced slightly lower gain (volume) than other codecs.
That's interesting, would you happen to know if there are any further details that I might read about that claim on the net or perhaps in another issue of the magazine?
It's a known fact that "louder sounds better" in a test situation like this. It should be made sure that the volume of the samples are the same, something they didn't do in the c't test especially when there are lots of unexperienced testers.
I'd agree. Although I should point out that the parallel testing that they published where they asked various professional musicians, producers and audio technicians to do a similar test but including some music of their own choice and additional a 160 Kbit/s run did provide results that were quite similar.
Third, the c't test is old already.
Well, it seemed a relevant article for this topic nonetheless. And hey, it was hardly 10 months ago, it's not completely prehistoric.
Some more 64 and 128 Kbit/s AAC listening results
on
AAC Put To The Test
·
· Score: 4, Informative
As was previously mentioned on Slashdot, a highly regarded German magazine called C'T dedicated an article to a similar comparison of various audio compression codecs last year.
They created fourteen different.WAV recordings containing 3 short excerpts from various CD music tracks (pop, classical and jazz) that had previously been encoded by 6 popular codecs, each at both 64 Kbit/s and 128 Kbit/s (or as close as possible for VBR-only encoders). For verification of the results, 2 of the recordings came directly from CD and had not gone through any encoding process. Because the.WAV files were all the same size, there was no way for the listener to know which encoder had been used on a particular file. Participants were asked to rank their preferences among these files. The encoders included MP3, MP3PRO, Ogg Vorbis, WMA, RealAudio and AAC.
Over 6000 people downloaded those tracks and submitted their preferences. Unfortunately, the results of that test were only published in print and I haven't been able to find an online version of it. A few noteworthy results are below however.
The percentages indicate how many people put a particular codec at a particular ranking: MP3 64 KBit/s 1st place: 1 % 2: 1% 3: 1% 4: 1% 5: 2% 6: 4% 7th place: 90%
As might be expected for the oldest codec, almost everyone agreed that the file that had been run through MP3 at 64 Kbit was the worst sounding of all. At 128 KBit however, listeners were clearly divided on whether MP3 sounded worse or better than others:
Now the AAC results. At 64 Kbit, it was ranked a slightly below average performer: AAC 64 KBit/s 1: 7% 2: 12% 3: 17% 4: 26% 5: 22% 6: 14% 7: 2%
What's interesting is that at 128 Kbit/s, more people ranked AAC the worst sounding encoder than any other codec in the test including MP3! AAC 128 KBit/s 1: 11% 2: 11% 3: 13% 4: 12% 5: 14% 6: 14% 7: 26%
Not surprisingly, the files that had been read directly from CD without any encoding steps done in between got the best rankings of all. Ogg Vorbis did very well indeed and came in second overall.
Very helpful that all their URLs point out that the site is in fact supposed to be in english, considering choice tidbits such as these:
Making background freely - You can do it using the Wallpaper program or the Painter easily for yourself. Screen Protection from scratch or break. In France and Austria and UK, you can not get the order. Please contact to the site.
Come on guys you really oughta start by cleaning up the way you present your product if your ambitions include ever being more than just a niche gadget for geeks.
Love the eighties style Knight Rider moving LED though, a real touch of class that.
If the Inquirer link is correct then there will indeed be boards that have PCI-X, and I agree it will certainly be a big thing in the future.
But AGP is likely to be around for a while still (all current and up and coming chipsets support it), and I already own a great dual DVI card which I'd like to use with the new board.
Unfortunately, the Opteron boards in the pictures on amdboard all have one thing in common; the lack of an AGP interface. If this this story is correct, that's not an inherent limitation of the 8200 chipset. The Gigabyte board for instance is supposed to come with an AGP8x slot.
While I realise that AGP is not a requirement for AMD's envisioned Opteron target market, I can't imagine I'm the only one who is toying with the idea of getting an Opteron setup as a personal workstation, what with the earlier availability as well as the larger cache (and the resulting higher performance compared to the consumer CPU, presumably).
Anybody have any clues if there will be Opteron boards with AGP at launch?
Well, I agree on the last point. They should've gone with the name 'florin'. Because it is obviously much cooler than Euro and its a historical currency in more than one country.
It doesn't matter that Stinger has 0 percent market penetration right now. With the promise of the best interoperability with other devices, Microsoft's reign in the next 5 years is practically certain. Sure, MS' first attempt will fail as usual. But their war chest is filled and they'll keep at it until Symbian is just a distant memory (hello OS/2, Wordperfect, Palm, Nintendo)
Microsoft's licensing agreement for its phone OS is like an echo from a past 5 years before the US found MS guilty of abusing its monopoly. Manufacturers and operators are allowed exactly zero options in changing the look and feel of the phones they sell. No logoes, no additional programs, it's their OEM desktop OS with mandatory Internet Explorer and MSN icon routine all over again.
Apropos Internet Explorer, the dingy browser that MS ships on their phones has nothing but the name in common. It doesn't even support frames. Why anyone would want precious phone memory wasted on that is beyond me.
I'm not sure which settlement you're refering to, but Microsoft's business practices are currently still under investigation by the European Commission. And let's not forget Japan, who are conducting their own investigations in these matters.
Similarly to the US, the EU has brought an antitrust case against Microsoft, with a preliminary ruling expected later this year. It is not unthinkable that the failure of the United States to take decisive measures against Microsoft may prompt harsher action from the EU.
I can't even carry a floppy halfways across a room between two drives that are supposed to work with the same filesystem without seeing my data eaten by bad sectors, and now my PC can ruin my old 8-bit collection too. What a deal.
Slashdot Mirror
You're on the right track, but the S-Wing nose, wing, body structure, double main engine and double height cockpit configuration are actually an exact replica of the 487 Space Cruiser which was the bigger brother of the 918 in the same classic series.
:)
Yes, this is nitpicking. Bite me Slashdot crowd. I care is because I used to have one of those
Simply put, everything you said has no supporting evidence.
.5% waste are practically the same thing.
Well, feel free to go beyond providing your opinions in further postings and supplying said evidence yourself.
Los-Less linking takes more precision from the beam, and therefore more complex device. This raises cost. 32K (at its maximum) is certaintly a good price for the simplicity of the device. Saying that loss-less linking coming standard on DVD+R is just uplain "better" shows that you have no idea the technical limitations of such devices.
Do I really need to argue that not having loss is better than having loss, even when it is small? Just compare prices on -R and +R burners and you'll see that this added cost completely dissipates in the overall price of the units.
"This [96MB/32MB maximum multisession waste] is NOT negligable."
Yes it is. In fact, it is on the same order of magnitude as DVD+R waste (4MB). When you are talking about any type of storage media, 2% waste and
Surely you can see that +R provides the more elegant solution. Whether you personally consider that 1.5% for every session a worthwhile difference is another matter.
Way to know the industry. and way to present evidence to your rants.
Well, from a technical point of view all you've really been saying is that yes, +R does have some slight advantages, but you don't consider them important. That I can understand.
For someone who claims advanced industry knowledge however you seem to be quite adept at conveniently ignoring the fact that everyone who is anyone is lining up behind +R.
Until there is proven technology in DVD+R that proves its superior burning speed, any point against the DVD-R pre-pit method is invalid.
Nothing wrong with looking at limitations of the technology that may well come back to bite -R when drives go beyond 4-speed, which they certainly will.
Why use more expensive media (DVD+MRW) and drives to accomplish something that software can accomplish for far, far cheaper and much more robust(if desired)?
+R media is not in fact more expensive than -R, and as economies of scale kick in it will become cheaper, even.
Nothing in this article explains why using loss-less linking (used for things such as buffer-underrun protected recording) has any advantage over 32k wide linking. In fact, there is a very good and useful reason for this DVD-R method. Why on earth would you need perfect exact loss-less linking when your media is 4.7GB long and you are going to waste a measly 32k? Who cares?
Just listen to yourself here. The +R solution is simply the better technology, no way around it. You may try to marginalise it but that's the fact.
Point 5 for DVD+R: Multiple recording sessions waste less space for DVD+R. Big deal. you are working with 4.7GB Disks. 96MB for the first session is the maximum wasted, and 32MB per zone after that. This is negligable and certaintly nothing to be worried about on media that is a full order of magnitude larger than this maximum.
This is NOT negligable. It is a clear disadvantage which has been solved much more elegantly in the +R spec. As I daresay is typical.
That is why DVD-R is here to stay. It was first. It has had time to improve. It is not slower. It has been adopted by more users and computer manufacturers (apple and gateway to name a few)
Not it hasn't. It's slowly on the way out. Apple's your big OEM, huh. Up shit creek is what -R is.
When Joe Schmoe buys a dell with DVD+R and finds out he isn't compatible with the rest of the world, he isn't going to be too happy.
He will in fact be compatible with most existing DVD devices. Even your Apple can read +R media. Of course, in the not too distant future your Apple customer is gonna have to mail order his -R discs while Joe Schmoe is gonna get his around the corner.
Actually, from what I've been reading there isn't a big difference in the level of compatibility with other DVD devices between the two standards.
Some older devices are supposed to have problems with either or both of them. I can't say I can personally confirm that. Between the 7 different DVD devices I've been trying my recordables in since I got a burner about 3 weeks a go (including 2 DVD-players, XBox, Apple SuperDrive, laptop etc) all of them were able to read both types perfectly.
There's an upcoming model from Iomega which will be the first burner that handles all three standards.
In the end, DVD-R/RW is the standard format, and the format of choice for most of the industry.,/i>
Sorry, you are mistaken. The DVD+RW Alliance contains some of the industry's biggest heavyweights, including Philips and Sony who only invented the compact disc to begin with, as well as Microsoft, Dell and numerous others. The DVD Forum has the support of Pioneer and.. ?
DVD-R media is cheaper than DVD+R. DVD-R media is carried in every computer shop in town whilst DVD+R media is hard to find anywhere in more than a 3pack or single pack.
Statements like these don't do a lot for your credibility. Which year did you last visit a computer store? I mean, seriously?
See my point? No clear standards.
I do see your point and I can understand that some people are going to be sitting on the fence for a while still.
However, the fact that there is no single DVD-recordable standard is not an argument in favor of this Plextor drive, which doesn't adhere to any standard. Unlike Plextor's format, either DVD-recordable standard is already readable by the vast majority of DVD-ROM drives and players out there. So no matter which standard may eventually win out, any DVD recorder you buy now will remain useful in the future.
DVDs have no clear standards at this point. I think I remember someone saying that DVD-RW is the one standard reaching the critical mass market, but is it *there* yet?
Actually, I'm pretty sure DVD+R(W), not DVD-R(W), is going to end up being the standard eventually. It's already leading -R(W) in the retail market. And more importantly the format has the backing of all the companies that matter; Philips, Sony and Microsoft - and many others. DVD-RW has Pioneer and that's about it.
That's not to say DVD-RW is dead or will be soon. Just that + is gonna be the OEM and retail standard of choice in the present and near future.
The Plextor's GigaRec feature uses shorter pit lengths to squeeze more data onto a disc. I guess in a way it is indeed a literal kind of compression. Still, the topic title seems somewhat misleading considering that the usual kind of compression people talk is about is something quite different.
A nice feature certainly, but of limited use. Those discs can only be read in that drive (and 1 or 2 older Plextor models). With current DVD-writer pricing who is gonna settle for a CD writer no matter how premium it is?
I'm assuming you're talking about Chicago Meigs airfield, which lies within walking distance of the Sears tower - supposedly an attractive target. Unfortunately, that airport was recently shut down in an overnight guerrilla action by Chicago mayor Daley, quoting terrorist concerns. A further tragedy in the wake of Sep 11 that this historical airfield was shut down without any consideration for the interests of aviation enthusiasts.
Yeah, I agree. The only way for it to discourage terrorist activity would be if there was absolutely no way to override it. And if there were no way to override it it is possible to imagine other situations where this system might actually endanger lives.
Suppose for instance that an aircraft happens to suffer from a problem like multiple engine failure and the only way to avoid crashing into a densely populated urban area would be to trespass an area of protected airspace. Or the only possible landing opportunity might be an abandoned or smaller private runway or even a stretch of highway which would happen to fall under or near the shield, and this system would prevent the aircraft from maintaining an optimal course. Imagine the public outcry if there were ever a major accident due to the robot taking over. I guess the benefits of this system might outweigh such uncommon occurrences but I can imagine pilots are terrified of relinquishing such an amount of control.
Well, this article confirms that the Linux version is indeed dead, just as many people predicted.
GeCAD's line of antivirus software is well-rounded and supports most popular platforms in use today, including Windows and Microsoft Exchange Server. GeCAD antivirus software also runs on servers such as Groupwise; Linux-based mail servers; file servers such as Samba and Novell Netware, and Instant Messaging (IM) clients including ICQ, MSN Messenger, Yahoo Messenger, AOL IM, and Trillian. However, a Microsoft spokesperson said the company will discontinue cross-platform support.
I know several people who have actually forked out the $300 for RAV AntiVirus. Our company was one of them. I believe RAV was rapidly becoming one of the most popular commercial antivirus solutions for Unix platforms.
I'm guessing Microsoft would prefer to see the myth that Linux users are unwilling to pay for functional software at a reasonable price perpetuated than risk making additional profit from continuing the cross-platform strategy.
First of all there are many different AAC codecs. Second, the AAC codec tested in c't produced slightly lower gain (volume) than other codecs.
That's interesting, would you happen to know if there are any further details that I might read about that claim on the net or perhaps in another issue of the magazine?
It's a known fact that "louder sounds better" in a test situation like this. It should be made sure that the volume of the samples are the same, something they didn't do in the c't test especially when there are lots of unexperienced testers.
I'd agree. Although I should point out that the parallel testing that they published where they asked various professional musicians, producers and audio technicians to do a similar test but including some music of their own choice and additional a 160 Kbit/s run did provide results that were quite similar.
Third, the c't test is old already.
Well, it seemed a relevant article for this topic nonetheless. And hey, it was hardly 10 months ago, it's not completely prehistoric.
As was previously mentioned on Slashdot, a highly regarded German magazine called C'T dedicated an article to a similar comparison of various audio compression codecs last year.
.WAV recordings containing 3 short excerpts from various CD music tracks (pop, classical and jazz) that had previously been encoded by 6 popular codecs, each at both 64 Kbit/s and 128 Kbit/s (or as close as possible for VBR-only encoders). For verification of the results, 2 of the recordings came directly from CD and had not gone through any encoding process. Because the .WAV files were all the same size, there was no way for the listener to know which encoder had been used on a particular file. Participants were asked to rank their preferences among these files. The encoders included MP3, MP3PRO, Ogg Vorbis, WMA, RealAudio and AAC.
They created fourteen different
Over 6000 people downloaded those tracks and submitted their preferences. Unfortunately, the results of that test were only published in print and I haven't been able to find an online version of it. A few noteworthy results are below however.
The percentages indicate how many people put a particular codec at a particular ranking:
MP3 64 KBit/s
1st place: 1 %
2: 1%
3: 1%
4: 1%
5: 2%
6: 4%
7th place: 90%
As might be expected for the oldest codec, almost everyone agreed that the file that had been run through MP3 at 64 Kbit was the worst sounding of all. At 128 KBit however, listeners were clearly divided on whether MP3 sounded worse or better than others:
MP3 128 Kbit/s
1: 11%
2: 14%
3: 15%
4: 15%
5: 16%
6: 16%
7: 14%
Now the AAC results. At 64 Kbit, it was ranked a slightly below average performer:
AAC 64 KBit/s
1: 7%
2: 12%
3: 17%
4: 26%
5: 22%
6: 14%
7: 2%
What's interesting is that at 128 Kbit/s, more people ranked AAC the worst sounding encoder than any other codec in the test including MP3!
AAC 128 KBit/s
1: 11%
2: 11%
3: 13%
4: 12%
5: 14%
6: 14%
7: 26%
Not surprisingly, the files that had been read directly from CD without any encoding steps done in between got the best rankings of all. Ogg Vorbis did very well indeed and came in second overall.
I've no idea about the RH 7.3 but I like your sig.. cool to see a fellow Ancient Anguish player here
Very helpful that all their URLs point out that the site is in fact supposed to be in english, considering choice tidbits such as these:
Making background freely - You can do it using the Wallpaper program or the Painter easily for yourself.
Screen Protection from scratch or break.
In France and Austria and UK, you can not get the order. Please contact to the site.
Come on guys you really oughta start by cleaning up the way you present your product if your ambitions include ever being more than just a niche gadget for geeks.
Love the eighties style Knight Rider moving LED though, a real touch of class that.
Uhm.. borrowing? Interest rate? *think* Are you sure you're talking about M.U.L.E.?
It's a fan site which got a mention in the Salon article and got linked by some posters here..
http://www.eidolons-inn.de/mule/muledown.htm
I was just curious cause I originally made the ringtune they have on there.. also used it for ages myself, not that anyone ever recognised it either.
Would that happen to be the Nokia one that is up for download from World of M.U.L.E?
If the Inquirer link is correct then there will indeed be boards that have PCI-X, and I agree it will certainly be a big thing in the future.
But AGP is likely to be around for a while still (all current and up and coming chipsets support it), and I already own a great dual DVI card which I'd like to use with the new board.
Unfortunately, the Opteron boards in the pictures on amdboard all have one thing in common; the lack of an AGP interface. If this this story is correct, that's not an inherent limitation of the 8200 chipset. The Gigabyte board for instance is supposed to come with an AGP8x slot.
While I realise that AGP is not a requirement for AMD's envisioned Opteron target market, I can't imagine I'm the only one who is toying with the idea of getting an Opteron setup as a personal workstation, what with the earlier availability as well as the larger cache (and the resulting higher performance compared to the consumer CPU, presumably).
Anybody have any clues if there will be Opteron boards with AGP at launch?
Well, I agree on the last point. They should've gone with the name 'florin'. Because it is obviously much cooler than Euro and its a historical currency in more than one country.
It doesn't matter that Stinger has 0 percent market penetration right now. With the promise of the best interoperability with other devices, Microsoft's reign in the next 5 years is practically certain. Sure, MS' first attempt will fail as usual. But their war chest is filled and they'll keep at it until Symbian is just a distant memory (hello OS/2, Wordperfect, Palm, Nintendo)
Microsoft's licensing agreement for its phone OS is like an echo from a past 5 years before the US found MS guilty of abusing its monopoly. Manufacturers and operators are allowed exactly zero options in changing the look and feel of the phones they sell. No logoes, no additional programs, it's their OEM desktop OS with mandatory Internet Explorer and MSN icon routine all over again.
Apropos Internet Explorer, the dingy browser that MS ships on their phones has nothing but the name in common. It doesn't even support frames. Why anyone would want precious phone memory wasted on that is beyond me.
I'm not sure which settlement you're refering to, but Microsoft's business practices are currently still under investigation by the European Commission. And let's not forget Japan, who are conducting their own investigations in these matters.
Similarly to the US, the EU has brought an antitrust case against Microsoft, with a preliminary ruling expected later this year. It is not unthinkable that the failure of the United States to take decisive measures against Microsoft may prompt harsher action from the EU.
The EC is particularly concerned that Microsoft may extend its monopoly to include server software and media services. Aside from that, the EU has a separate investigation into Microsoft's Passport service
I can't even carry a floppy halfways across a room between two drives that are supposed to work with the same filesystem without seeing my data eaten by bad sectors, and now my PC can ruin my old 8-bit collection too. What a deal.