Actually, now that you've mentioned that, I remember the AV series.
My high school had a couple PowerPC/6100AV's - out of the three we owned, two of the monitor connectors went bad after a couple of years.
Also, for a while there was MAC/PC monitor interoperability. This will kill that if the 'all-in-one' connector is the only connector on the new macs. It locks people into buying Apple monitors.
I'm with you... I switched from BellAtlantic Mobile to SprintPCS due to BAM's poor customer service. The reps at the physical stores can't cancel service, and can't access records you have with the 1-800 customer service. At BAM stores, if you ask for a manager, they actually tell you to go home and call the 1-800 number. Not only SprintPCS customer service been great, but I bought a Samsung SCH-3500. I can check my Yahoo! mail, use the $99 Data connection kit and get a slow but reliable 14.4 connection to the net. BAM did have better local coverage in the Pittsburgh, PA area, but Sprint's coverage is definetly acceptable. I recently traveled from Pittsburgh to NY, NY. On the way, I found my phone was in full digital (non-roaming) service in areas that weren't even on Sprint's roaming map. And even people using AT&T and BAM have trouble on the PA Turnpike (the world's worst highway). Another unique Sprint concept is that you're not charged roaming as long as you're on their network - you're only charged long distance (unless you're on a Free & Clear plan as mentioned above). If you travel or need Wireless Web access, Sprint is the way to go.
He went about saying it wrong, but Apache's configuration setup is not impressive.
It is so much easier to install and setup IIS / Netscape Enterprise Server / O'Riley WebSite than Apache on a Windows NT. IIS's security tied directly into NT's user manager is nice too.
Although I can edit text files to do the same things, I'd much rather use a web based configuration tool like Netscape's Administration server.
Even though Apache/Linux is probably a better web server than NT/IIS, many small businesses are turned off from Apache/Linux because it is so difficult (for a 'normal' user) to set-up and maintain. A real effort should be made to add web-based management to apache.
Don't shoot down someone just because he is a little pro-MS.
I agree. I still think it has something to do with the graphics being drawn on the PC version (i'm assuming the linux version really doesnt draw the graphics)
I'd rather have a fast time than pretty graphics...
I wonder if the slowdown is in the OS itself or the client.
I have a lab of six iMacs at school, and before i upgraded to OS 8.6, they averaged about 60 hours, after upgrading to 8.6, they jumped to 36 hours, but that is still nowhere near your 11 hours, even our 300mhz G3 takes about 24.
My Pentium-II 300 takes an average of 40 hours of CPU time to process a block running NT. I noticed that i686-pc-linux, the average time is about 11 hours. All of the average linux times are faster.
Is the linux client faster? Or are linux users just running faster computers? Maybe it's all the graphics the Win/Mac versions draw that slow them down.
i had trouble with the mac client on a iMac 233 w/32MB ram - I noticed an identical iMac upgraded to OS 8.6 was processing 20 times faster - i upgraded the 'slow' iMac to OS 8.6, and that did the trick...
Slashdot Mirror
My guess is that Amazon doesn't want to be left out of the loop just like the publishers if the King/Street Performer method works...
On the very lowest end, we have ASP...
Why do you immediately dismiss ASP as a low end solution?
Many large sites use ASP: I don't think that BUY.COM is a 'low-end' website.
You may not like ASP, but please don't make a blanket statement like that. ASP is very useful for many people.
Actually, now that you've mentioned that, I remember the AV series.
My high school had a couple PowerPC/6100AV's - out of the three we owned, two of the monitor connectors went bad after a couple of years.
Also, for a while there was MAC/PC monitor interoperability. This will kill that if the 'all-in-one' connector is the only connector on the new macs. It locks people into buying Apple monitors.
$1799 Available in Early August
400Mhz G4
64 MB RAM
20GB HD
Firwire/iMovie
$2299 Available in Early August
500Mhz G4
128 MB RAM
30GB HD
Firwire/iMovie
Steve said they were capable of 1.5GB ram, and 40GB HD.
Amazing.
Three new monitors as well. One connector cable for the monitors carrying power/video/usb. That's strange.
I'm with you... I switched from BellAtlantic Mobile to SprintPCS due to BAM's poor customer service. The reps at the physical stores can't cancel service, and can't access records you have with the 1-800 customer service. At BAM stores, if you ask for a manager, they actually tell you to go home and call the 1-800 number. Not only SprintPCS customer service been great, but I bought a Samsung SCH-3500. I can check my Yahoo! mail, use the $99 Data connection kit and get a slow but reliable 14.4 connection to the net. BAM did have better local coverage in the Pittsburgh, PA area, but Sprint's coverage is definetly acceptable. I recently traveled from Pittsburgh to NY, NY. On the way, I found my phone was in full digital (non-roaming) service in areas that weren't even on Sprint's roaming map. And even people using AT&T and BAM have trouble on the PA Turnpike (the world's worst highway). Another unique Sprint concept is that you're not charged roaming as long as you're on their network - you're only charged long distance (unless you're on a Free & Clear plan as mentioned above). If you travel or need Wireless Web access, Sprint is the way to go.
not to be technical, but actually it's Sysco - they have a warehouse on I79 outside of Pittsburgh...
eMates were palmtop style computers apple marketed to schools. they were based on the newton, had a keyboard and stylus.
they were intended to be docked to a localtalk network every now and then to exchange data with the 'teacher.'
they came out a long time before imacs, but they are green and curvy.
my school bought two of them, at $800 a piece. they are pretty much useless. they are only good for typing occasional notes.
i have one of the two sitting in a box on a shelf. they are handy for the occasional note taking session - a good idea, but a poor implementation.
There was an article in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette earlier this week. Here is an online version:
7 12solar1.asp
http://www.post-gazette.com/healthscience/19990
It's much longer and more informative than the one on the CMU site...
He went about saying it wrong, but Apache's configuration setup is not impressive.
It is so much easier to install and setup IIS / Netscape Enterprise Server / O'Riley WebSite than Apache on a Windows NT. IIS's security tied directly into NT's user manager is nice too.
Although I can edit text files to do the same things, I'd much rather use a web based configuration tool like Netscape's Administration server.
Even though Apache/Linux is probably a better web server than NT/IIS, many small businesses are turned off from Apache/Linux because it is so difficult (for a 'normal' user) to set-up and maintain. A real effort should be made to add web-based management to apache.
Don't shoot down someone just because he is a little pro-MS.
According the the threads @yahoo, you're right, blanking the screen saver does the trick. I wish I would have realized this a week ago...
I agree. I still think it has something to do with the graphics being drawn on the PC version (i'm assuming the linux version really doesnt draw the graphics)
I'd rather have a fast time than pretty graphics...
I wonder if the slowdown is in the OS itself or the client.
I have a lab of six iMacs at school, and before i upgraded to OS 8.6, they averaged about 60 hours, after upgrading to 8.6, they jumped to 36 hours, but that is still nowhere near your 11 hours, even our 300mhz G3 takes about 24.
Do you run the screen blank or with the graphs?
My Pentium-II 300 takes an average of 40 hours of CPU time to process a block running NT. I noticed that i686-pc-linux, the average time is about 11 hours. All of the average linux times are faster.
Is the linux client faster? Or are linux users just running faster computers? Maybe it's all the graphics the Win/Mac versions draw that slow them down.
i had trouble with the mac client on a iMac 233 w/32MB ram - I noticed an identical iMac upgraded to OS 8.6 was processing 20 times faster - i upgraded the 'slow' iMac to OS 8.6, and that did the trick...