My advice, Don't wait. The current DVD standard is widespread at this point. The industry is not going to drop DVD any time soon and you will probably find few movies done specifically done for higher capacity drives. Any transition will be very slow, especially since most people will be perfectly happy with a standard DVD.
Re:Zero-G likely matters not
on
RAID for Zero-G?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I don't think hard drives are vacuum sealed. Most of the hard drives I have taken apart have an airhole. I have been told it is for pressure equalization. Some of the old IBM Deskstars have a warning to not cover the hole. So at the very least I would not assume that a hard drive is sealed.
The post I replied to said they used the same version of GCC. They did not. He said there are no special optimizations. There are see this from the section of Appendix E.
-fast This flag is used with C and C++ and specifically targeted to the G5 and enables G5 specific instruction usage, tuning and 64 bit arithmetic. In addition to enabling the -O3 optimization level, it also enables the use of C99 aliasing rules and relaxed IEEE math operations.
He makes it sound like they downloaded the same version of GCC 3.3 compiled the program and ran the test. That isn't true. If you read the white paper, you would see this...
â Installed a high performance, single threaded malloc library. This library implementation is geared for speed rather than memory efficiency and is single-threaded which makes it unsuitable for many uses. Special provisions are made for very small allocations (less than 4 bytes). This library is accessed through use of the â"lstmalloc flag during program linking.
They didn't do the same for the Dell.
Now if you had actually read the whitepaper, you would have seen that in all the tests where Veritest had removed or disabled the second processor, they made sure first thing that Hyperthreading was enabled. So for some reason when they wanted only one processor from the dually systems running, they enabled Hyperthreading. Then when they reenabled the extra processor on the dually machines, they disable Hyperthreading on both the single processor machine and the dually P4. So in the one test where it could have helped, they disable it.
My guess is the did use Altivec optimizations. See this section
For the Mac
â Installed theTachyon development environment version 6K452. This provides the appropriate development tools for generating the SPEC binaries and installs Appleâ(TM)s version of the GCC compiler ( version 3.3 build 1379 ) on the test system
For the Dell
â Downloaded GCC version 3.3 ( gcc-3.3.tar.gz ) from http://gcc.gnu.org. â Followed the documented steps to build and installed GCC v 3.3 on the system.
And here from the appendix
-fast This flag is used with C and C++ and specifically targeted to the G5 and enables G5 specific instruction usage, tuning and 64 bit arithmetic. In addition to enabling the -O3 optimization level, it also enables the use of C99 aliasing rules and relaxed IEEE math operations.
G5 Specific instruction usage sounds suspicious. I really like the relaxed IEEE math operations.
I also like this part
â Installed a high performance, single threaded malloc library. This library implementation is geared for speed rather than memory efficiency and is single-threaded which makes it unsuitable for many uses. Special provisions are made for very small allocations (less than 4 bytes). This library is accessed through use of the â"lstmalloc flag during program linking.
Doesn't say anywhere that they did the same for the Dell.
I don't think Apple was looking for to even of a field for this test.
That is patently false. It specifically says all configurations files for SPEC CPU2000 testing on the Mac were provided by Apple. It also says that they used Apples version of GCC for the apple testing, and downloaded GCC for the intel machine. They also state that a trial version of NAGware Fortran was used on the Dell, full version on the Mac. They then go on to discuss platform specific features they turned on for the Mac and then tell us they turned off hyperthreading on the Dell. So no they did not use the same compilers for this test.
What he implies is that the numbers given for the intel machines by Apple are not accurate. In no way does he question the numbers given by Apple as their top numbers. What he did was discredit the numbers he knew were not accurate. He then accepted each vendors top numbers for their own products. So the only flaw exists if one of those vendors provides numbers they didn't actually achieve. My guess is the numbers were actually achieved by all, running their own optimized tests.
I guess you won't buy an ATI either since they did the degrade image quality under quake.exe cheat. Remember the guys that renamed the quake.exe to quack.exe and ATIs framerates dropped and in screenshots you could see where the image quality was reduced.
For my personal MP3s, I encode all my music at 384Kbps. They sound excellent and you can tell a difference. If I was so inclined, I could use one of the lossless audio compression formats. All this can be fed digitally directly into the stereo receiver.
The quality of a 128Kbps audio stream is not far off from FM. For me the point is moot anyhow. Local radio does not play what I am interested in listening. Why not give yourself some options.
I believe most of the 'linking' using Cat5 and WiFi will be sending digital information there won't be any loss of quality, that isn't already present in the data. If you mean using Cat5 between my Receiver and the speakers, then yeah, use speaker wire.
Lastly with a good Home Entertainment PC, there are alot of other uses.
You only have unshared 100Mbps to each machine if you use a switch. Hubs share the 100Mbps. Then if all your devices are hitting a single media server then you are sharing the media servers 100Mbps. Not a big deal since the server will have more bandwidth when wire.
My personal Tivo replacement cost me a total of $70 and no monthly fees. I got a WinTV PCI for $20 and Snapstream for $50. Already have a computer or two sitting around that can handle it. No monthly fees or bulk payment. Even if I paid myself $100 an hour I would still have come out ahead with my current system.
A lot of Satellite boxes have a serial port. Probably called a low speed data jack. A simple 4 to 6 byte command will change the channel. Depending on what software you end up using, it shouldn't be hard to add support for the receiver. I did for the newer RCA codes and Snapstream.
The article does say that the shunt increases CSF production, by filtering out the offending proteins and sending them to the peritoneum. Obviously the article lacks some details of the process. For one it starts off saying that the shunt drains CSF from the brain a drop every minute. It then mentions how this process will increase CSF replenishment. My guess is that these drips are less than the increased CSF that removing the proteins provide.
Definitely get more RAM, but don't believe it will give you double your current performance. For the most part unless you have a single application that consumes more Memory than your computer has, more RAM will only make task switching faster.
Would he be happy to roto-root your drain every month? Or how bout if every time he came he fished out a stuffed animal you flushed down the toilet. The problem isn't doing the work, it is doing the work again and again when you have told them better. Quite frequently family members have unrealistic ideas on what it should take to fix a computer. Recently my mother dropped here computer. Some how this managed to destroy the CPU, I wasn't able to figure this out of course until I happened to have a socket 478 P4 on hand.
As I have read the EULA what he wants to do is not legal here is the relevant piece of the EULA.
Storage/Network Use.
You may also store or install a copy of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT on a storage device, such as a network server, used only to install or run the SOFTWARE PRODUCT on your other COMPUTERS over an internal network; however, you must acquire and dedicate a license for each separate COMPUTER on or from which the SOFTWARE PRODUCT is installed, used, accessed, displayed or run. A license for the SOFTWARE PRODUCT may not be shared or used concurrently on different COMPUTERS. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any number of COMPUTERS may access or otherwise utilize the file and print services and peer web services of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT. In addition, you may use the "Multiple Display" feature of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT to expand your desktop as described in the on-line Help file, without obtaining a license for each display.
So if you are trying to abide by the EULA, they will need to but a license for each machine.
What is really sad here, isn't that they are spidering ftp sites, but that evidently when their script gets a keyword hit, the legal team just gets the sites address and sends them a nastygram. You would think that there would be some verification that the file they found was what they claimed it to be.
Lies??? 3DFX didn't listen to the market. Sure, I didn't use 32 bit when I was gaming first person shooters, but I would on the less intensive 3d games. This is how I see the 3d video card market... Card X comes out with feature Y. No games are supporting feature Y, because the feature doesn't have wide market penetration. However lots of people buy the card that has feature Y, because it is a good fast card. Now next gen games are supporting feature Y even though the card X isn't that fast when running feature Y. Do you remember when the GeForce came out with hardware T&L? A lot of people used synthetic benchmarks to show that on a system with a good processor you were better off with software T&L. Didn't stop Nvidia from implementing it and now I doubt many people would be willing to turn it off on newer cards. That is what is important not the we won't implement a feature till we can have it run at 60fps, maybe some people would have been happy at 30fps or whatever, but we weren't being given choices. Nvidia isn't in the same boat as 3Dfx by a long shot. I mean lets see you are building a linux box, so what 3d card do you put in??? Well probably a Nvidia card, because they bothered to support it decently. To me Nvidia is the 3d market innovator. And for the record... Voodoo -> Voodoo/Riva -> TNT -> Geforce 1 -> Geforce 2 -> Ti4200
This isn't the same problem 3DFx had. 3DFx got cocky and decided they could tell us what we needed. Take their refusal to support 32bit color for so long saying that it wasn't important. They refused to innovate after they came up with the first voodoo. Nvidia has always strived to innovate even when they are on the top. I think this is just a stumble for Nvidia, they tried a bunch of new stuff and are having issues obviously with fabrication. As production goes on they will have better yields. I'm not ready to switch camps yet.
But this is different. It's an apples to oranges situation. Essentially what Carmack has said is that when the NV30 runs in ARB2 mode it is doing 32 bit calculations and the ATI is running 24 bit calculations. Bandwidth alone will seriously affect the benchmarks and theoretically the NV30 has a more accurate picture. Now switch the NV30 to the NV30 path which runs at 16 bit and it beats the ATI, but now the ATI probably has better image quality. The problem with this 'neutral' isn't meaningful since both cards run different settings. Now when quoting 3dmark scores for ATI and NVidia we don't know that image quality maybe be lower on one card or that if you were ok with lower quality the lower 3dmark score card is actually faster. In other words no kidding the ATI runs faster when it has less data to shuffle and then the NV30 runs faster when it has less date to shuffle.
Slashdot Mirror
SPECfp base2000
2Ghz G5 - 840
Opteron 146 (2Ghz) - 1291
SPECint base2000
2Ghz G5 - 800
Opteron 146 (2Ghz) - 1170
SPECfp rate2000
Dual 2Ghz G5 - 15.7
RackSaver RSN-1164/op (1.8 GHz Opteron) - 22.5
SPECint rate2000
Dual 2Ghz G5 - 17.2
RackSaver RSN-1164/op (1.8 GHz Opteron) - 24.0
These numbers seem to back up the PCWorld tests.
My advice, Don't wait. The current DVD standard is widespread at this point. The industry is not going to drop DVD any time soon and you will probably find few movies done specifically done for higher capacity drives. Any transition will be very slow, especially since most people will be perfectly happy with a standard DVD.
I don't think hard drives are vacuum sealed. Most of the hard drives I have taken apart have an airhole. I have been told it is for pressure equalization. Some of the old IBM Deskstars have a warning to not cover the hole. So at the very least I would not assume that a hard drive is sealed.
Very brave of you, AC.
The post I replied to said they used the same version of GCC. They did not. He said there are no special optimizations. There are see this from the section of Appendix E.
-fast
This flag is used with C and C++ and specifically targeted to the G5 and enables G5 specific instruction usage, tuning and 64 bit arithmetic. In addition to enabling the -O3 optimization level, it also enables the use of C99 aliasing rules and relaxed IEEE math operations.
He makes it sound like they downloaded the same version of GCC 3.3 compiled the program and ran the test. That isn't true. If you read the white paper, you would see this...
â Installed a high performance, single threaded malloc library. This library implementation is geared for speed rather than memory efficiency and is single-threaded which makes it unsuitable for many uses. Special provisions are made for very small allocations (less than 4 bytes). This library is accessed through use of the â"lstmalloc flag during program linking.
They didn't do the same for the Dell.
Now if you had actually read the whitepaper, you would have seen that in all the tests where Veritest had removed or disabled the second processor, they made sure first thing that Hyperthreading was enabled. So for some reason when they wanted only one processor from the dually systems running, they enabled Hyperthreading. Then when they reenabled the extra processor on the dually machines, they disable Hyperthreading on both the single processor machine and the dually P4. So in the one test where it could have helped, they disable it.
My guess is the did use Altivec optimizations. See this section
For the Mac
â Installed theTachyon development environment version 6K452. This provides the appropriate development tools for generating the SPEC binaries and installs Appleâ(TM)s version of the GCC compiler ( version 3.3 build 1379 ) on the test system
For the Dell
â Downloaded GCC version 3.3 ( gcc-3.3.tar.gz ) from http://gcc.gnu.org.
â Followed the documented steps to build and installed GCC v 3.3 on the system.
And here from the appendix
-fast
This flag is used with C and C++ and specifically targeted to the G5 and enables G5 specific instruction usage, tuning and 64 bit arithmetic. In addition to enabling the -O3 optimization level, it also enables the use of C99 aliasing rules and relaxed IEEE math operations.
G5 Specific instruction usage sounds suspicious. I really like the relaxed IEEE math operations.
I also like this part
â Installed a high performance, single threaded malloc library. This library implementation is geared for speed rather than memory efficiency and is single-threaded which makes it unsuitable for many uses. Special provisions are made for very small allocations (less than 4 bytes). This library is accessed through use of the â"lstmalloc flag during program linking.
Doesn't say anywhere that they did the same for the Dell.
I don't think Apple was looking for to even of a field for this test.
That is patently false. It specifically says all configurations files for SPEC CPU2000 testing on the Mac were provided by Apple. It also says that they used Apples version of GCC for the apple testing, and downloaded GCC for the intel machine. They also state that a trial version of NAGware Fortran was used on the Dell, full version on the Mac. They then go on to discuss platform specific features they turned on for the Mac and then tell us they turned off hyperthreading on the Dell. So no they did not use the same compilers for this test.
What he implies is that the numbers given for the intel machines by Apple are not accurate. In no way does he question the numbers given by Apple as their top numbers. What he did was discredit the numbers he knew were not accurate. He then accepted each vendors top numbers for their own products. So the only flaw exists if one of those vendors provides numbers they didn't actually achieve. My guess is the numbers were actually achieved by all, running their own optimized tests.
For what it is worth, they do say that ATI is also guilty in certain driver versions of cheating.
I guess you won't buy an ATI either since they did the degrade image quality under quake.exe cheat. Remember the guys that renamed the quake.exe to quack.exe and ATIs framerates dropped and in screenshots you could see where the image quality was reduced.
For my personal MP3s, I encode all my music at 384Kbps. They sound excellent and you can tell a difference. If I was so inclined, I could use one of the lossless audio compression formats. All this can be fed digitally directly into the stereo receiver.
The quality of a 128Kbps audio stream is not far off from FM. For me the point is moot anyhow. Local radio does not play what I am interested in listening. Why not give yourself some options.
I believe most of the 'linking' using Cat5 and WiFi will be sending digital information there won't be any loss of quality, that isn't already present in the data. If you mean using Cat5 between my Receiver and the speakers, then yeah, use speaker wire.
Lastly with a good Home Entertainment PC, there are alot of other uses.
You only have unshared 100Mbps to each machine if you use a switch. Hubs share the 100Mbps. Then if all your devices are hitting a single media server then you are sharing the media servers 100Mbps. Not a big deal since the server will have more bandwidth when wire.
The new RCA rear projection TVs (CRT I believe) have some pretty impressive connection features.
Tuning Capability: NTSC/ATSC
Digital Cable Capatibility: IEEE1394DTV-LINK/DVI/YPrPb
That is for the HD65W140.
Do the gui users have to point and click? It should be a pretty trivial task to make the gui useable point and click and keyboard navigable.
This is almost what you describe.
http://www.plycon.com/cases/diycase.htm
My personal Tivo replacement cost me a total of $70 and no monthly fees. I got a WinTV PCI for $20 and Snapstream for $50. Already have a computer or two sitting around that can handle it. No monthly fees or bulk payment. Even if I paid myself $100 an hour I would still have come out ahead with my current system.
A lot of Satellite boxes have a serial port. Probably called a low speed data jack. A simple 4 to 6 byte command will change the channel. Depending on what software you end up using, it shouldn't be hard to add support for the receiver. I did for the newer RCA codes and Snapstream.
The article does say that the shunt increases CSF production, by filtering out the offending proteins and sending them to the peritoneum. Obviously the article lacks some details of the process. For one it starts off saying that the shunt drains CSF from the brain a drop every minute. It then mentions how this process will increase CSF replenishment. My guess is that these drips are less than the increased CSF that removing the proteins provide.
Definitely get more RAM, but don't believe it will give you double your current performance. For the most part unless you have a single application that consumes more Memory than your computer has, more RAM will only make task switching faster.
I think it would make more sense to take the fan out and use ducting to put the fan in a quieter spot.
Would he be happy to roto-root your drain every month? Or how bout if every time he came he fished out a stuffed animal you flushed down the toilet. The problem isn't doing the work, it is doing the work again and again when you have told them better. Quite frequently family members have unrealistic ideas on what it should take to fix a computer. Recently my mother dropped here computer. Some how this managed to destroy the CPU, I wasn't able to figure this out of course until I happened to have a socket 478 P4 on hand.
As I have read the EULA what he wants to do is not legal here is the relevant piece of the EULA. Storage/Network Use. You may also store or install a copy of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT on a storage device, such as a network server, used only to install or run the SOFTWARE PRODUCT on your other COMPUTERS over an internal network; however, you must acquire and dedicate a license for each separate COMPUTER on or from which the SOFTWARE PRODUCT is installed, used, accessed, displayed or run. A license for the SOFTWARE PRODUCT may not be shared or used concurrently on different COMPUTERS. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any number of COMPUTERS may access or otherwise utilize the file and print services and peer web services of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT. In addition, you may use the "Multiple Display" feature of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT to expand your desktop as described in the on-line Help file, without obtaining a license for each display. So if you are trying to abide by the EULA, they will need to but a license for each machine.
What is really sad here, isn't that they are spidering ftp sites, but that evidently when their script gets a keyword hit, the legal team just gets the sites address and sends them a nastygram. You would think that there would be some verification that the file they found was what they claimed it to be.
Lies??? 3DFX didn't listen to the market. Sure, I didn't use 32 bit when I was gaming first person shooters, but I would on the less intensive 3d games. This is how I see the 3d video card market... Card X comes out with feature Y. No games are supporting feature Y, because the feature doesn't have wide market penetration. However lots of people buy the card that has feature Y, because it is a good fast card. Now next gen games are supporting feature Y even though the card X isn't that fast when running feature Y. Do you remember when the GeForce came out with hardware T&L? A lot of people used synthetic benchmarks to show that on a system with a good processor you were better off with software T&L. Didn't stop Nvidia from implementing it and now I doubt many people would be willing to turn it off on newer cards. That is what is important not the we won't implement a feature till we can have it run at 60fps, maybe some people would have been happy at 30fps or whatever, but we weren't being given choices. Nvidia isn't in the same boat as 3Dfx by a long shot. I mean lets see you are building a linux box, so what 3d card do you put in??? Well probably a Nvidia card, because they bothered to support it decently. To me Nvidia is the 3d market innovator. And for the record...
Voodoo -> Voodoo/Riva -> TNT -> Geforce 1 -> Geforce 2 -> Ti4200
This isn't the same problem 3DFx had. 3DFx got cocky and decided they could tell us what we needed. Take their refusal to support 32bit color for so long saying that it wasn't important. They refused to innovate after they came up with the first voodoo. Nvidia has always strived to innovate even when they are on the top. I think this is just a stumble for Nvidia, they tried a bunch of new stuff and are having issues obviously with fabrication. As production goes on they will have better yields. I'm not ready to switch camps yet.
But this is different. It's an apples to oranges situation. Essentially what Carmack has said is that when the NV30 runs in ARB2 mode it is doing 32 bit calculations and the ATI is running 24 bit calculations. Bandwidth alone will seriously affect the benchmarks and theoretically the NV30 has a more accurate picture. Now switch the NV30 to the NV30 path which runs at 16 bit and it beats the ATI, but now the ATI probably has better image quality. The problem with this 'neutral' isn't meaningful since both cards run different settings. Now when quoting 3dmark scores for ATI and NVidia we don't know that image quality maybe be lower on one card or that if you were ok with lower quality the lower 3dmark score card is actually faster. In other words no kidding the ATI runs faster when it has less data to shuffle and then the NV30 runs faster when it has less date to shuffle.