Voodoo 3 was the last card I saw that only had heatsink. Of course, I then went to ATi, just because of spite. (I didn't really like nvidia putting my voodoo out of buisiness...) I have been satisfied with ATi, though. It works under linux well enough for me. (quake 3)
I don't see why NForce would make a difference, but if I didn't buy a better heatsink, at least one case fan was needed to get hot air out of there.
I had the (mis)fortune of assembling like 5 athlon systems very recently. (Me being the residential computer guy) and with a better heatsink, it was usuable. With the original retail heatsink, (if one insisted not to buy a heatsink) case fans were necessary to keep temperature in reasonably cool parameters. (Nothing too radical, but say 130 fareheit max)
That's stupid. The biggest plus for water cooling is noise.
Back in my days, (heh) CPU didn't need a fan. A reasonable sized heatsink was more than enough. 250 watt power supply was good and anything more was an overkill. Fan on video card was ridiculous and I would have laughed at you if you needed to have a fan on the motherboard.
Fast forward to today.
400 watt powersupply is standardish (exacerbated by that freakish AMD's "approved list") and _all_ video cards (reputable ones) have fans. Radeon 9700 Pro has a separate hookup directly to the power supply for more juice. The heatsink/fan included with retail AMD is not usuable and too wimpy (I know at least MSI officially recommends a new heatsink and fan). Some motherboards have fan on their chipsets (MSI KT3 pro or something at least), and a heatsink is standard.
Your "PC" (meaning "IBM compatible" PC) has turned into some kind of a monstrosity that started with AMD's "more heat, more power, more performance, ARR ARR ARR" trend. (said in Tim Allen voice) A stark contrast to my pentium 166Mhz with one fan only in power supply. Fitted with a quiet power supply, the only noise making component of the pentium is the hard drive. Don't get me started on that new Athlon XP I got.
The point is, water cooling alleviates the situation a little bit by making things quiter.
Well, just to reply quickly, until just recently, I have been using pentium 3 450Mhz with original Radeon 64MB DDR. (Just got a new CPU)
I played quake 3 and RtCW; rock solid on the computer on linux. Quake 3 performance was most times slightly better than windows version. RtCW didn't run to well (in both OSes) but with new CPU, RtCW is working great. Though sound in Linux leaves something to be desired.
I have a question, does anybody know how FreeBSD behaves in respect to cruft? I say this under this thread because of what's been said about Debian, and as I understand it, FreeBSD ports system is a cool source based system too.
You can't access the primary partition, because you cannot even access the disk. You cannot access the disk, because the BIOS won't work correctly with the disk because, well, that's why it's called a BIOS limitation.
And the correct wording would be: lilo uses the BIOS only to load the kernel (you don't _load_ "/boot." wtf does that mean anyways?), which should be easily accessable by the BIOS as long as it is a small primary partition in the first cylinders of the drive. Remember, it's lilo that loads the kernel, and it's lilo which is under the limitation of BIOS. and BIOS can't get to lilo. I sound like a parrot. Why do I have to repeat myself?
Re:There's a special boot loader, er disk overlay
on
Finding BIOS Upgrades?
·
· Score: 1
Unless you have a BIOS limitation on your hands, it is not at all recommended that you use EZ-BIOS (which is the correct name).
I have bunch of horrible experiences with it, which unbelievably enough, I can't remember fully.
Numero Uno biggy is if you _ever_ boot from floppy (from motherboard BIOS). If you boot from floppy, you are _bypassing_ the ez-bios loader, and the disk becomes unusable.
Hmm, actually, I believe EZ-BIOS gives you an option to boot from floppy _after_ it loads itself, but you are still out of luck if you try to boot from CD (or zip, or scsi, or any other boot option from the motherboard).
Like I said, I can't remember all the bad things with it; my mind must be blocking out the traumatic events or something.:-P
It's actually pretty transparent and It Just Works (tm) for the most of the times. I remember using it because I simply didn't know what it was in the beginning. But when I tried to mangle drives and switch OS's and other stuff like that, it was damn hard to get by.
It is my understanding that a separate/boot partition will force the kernel down into the part of the disk that the ROM-BIOS can handle. The first 10 MB should give room for multiple kernels, etc.
It is my understanding that you are wrong.
The problem at hand is that the BIOS cannot be configured to correctly acknowledge the drive in the first place.
If your solution held, we could have >500MB HD work in DOS by keeping the size of the partitions below 500MB. (Because it would boot off the first partition fine.) But it doesn't work like that. We are not looking at the size of _partition_, but the size of the _hard drive_. As in BIOS cannot even get to master boot record.
What you are referring to is how far in the drive the boot records can read. You are thinking of LILO and stuff.
The limit was that the BIOS could read till so many cylinders to load the real OS. Thus LILO (in the boot record) could not read past 512 cylinders (not sure about the exact number). It can be solved by using some kind of lba option in lilo.conf. (by using the logical block address instead of CHS)
Your problem is that you can't _boot_ from a HD larger than 500MB -- because as soon as Linux kernel is loaded, BIOS isn't needed any more anyways. All you need to to is load the kernel somehow and all the limitations of BIOS doesn't exist anymore.
Then whatever you've got connected to IDE (zip, cdrom, any HD) will work because Linux kernel is up-to-date with things.
To repeat myself, after Linux kernel is loaded, the kernel takes over. BIOS simply isn't consulted again.
Of course, some other OS's like DOS still accesses disk through BIOS, so DOS wouldn't work.
You, sir, are either a lier or incompetent. I have installed windows XP on 266Mhz dell machine and it flies using "classic theme". I've gotten windows 2000 running on 200Mhz Pentium 2 which is usuable for all except GTA3. (Heh, imagine that.)
Actually, Fry's matches prices on local advirtisements. That means I get to pick up my local ComputerEdge and head down to fries. I look up the cheapest parts on the components and Fry's matches the [very very cheap] price. It's a win-win situation, because Fry's gets a sale and I get a cheap priced components that I can return without worrying about any return policy (no restocking fee, 30 days return perios). And also Fry's accept credit cards, unlike some warehouse offerings.
Now, how the heck are they gonna log my web browsing history? Just log all the hosts I connect with destination port 80? Or are they actually gonna peak in to individual packet content and reconstruct the GET message?
The latter sounds expensive to me. But then the former would be worthless, if I were to connect to vague topiced sites such as geocities or mail.yahoo.com (no way to track which user I was logged in as) or even cdrom.com.
www.IwannaBlowUpAmericaBecauseIamATerrorist.org is a different story though...
" Decent keyboard nav makes this process much, much faster." Well, like I mentioned, Opera touts its keyboard navigation.
"Typing in a URL?" That's why I have the most frequently visited sites on the bookmark bar. And for frontpages like slashdot and lwn are loaded by default. My default window files open lwn and slashdot on background and a blank page on foreground. You would admit, clicking a button is faster than typing an address at any rate. I also don't remember last time I typed in a URL. (On my linux box anyways)
One of cool things on Linux is that whatever you highlight is copied into clipboard, and in conjunture with a neat feature in Opera/Linux, if you press the middle button, you go to the site specified by the clipboard.
For example, I used to be irritated when people gives me the URL without making it a link. One would have to copy the URL, make a new window and paste it in, and press "enter". With Opera, I highlight, move mouse down (pressing the right button, (making a new window)), and press the middle button. Takes me less than a second.
I use slackware. I use windowmaker. Needlessly, I spend alot of time on bash. I find that it's faster most of the times. I don't have to scroll through the window to find what I want, I know the name of the file. Combined with name completion, it's good, to say the least.
But, in webbrowsing, you don't need a keyboard at all. In Opera, I never need keyboard. Of course, other browsers don't need keyboard either. But the difference is, I can do it amazingly fast, with style. (Not to mention, Opera has very thorough keyboard navigation scheme; it's one of those things they advirtise!) I never have to move my mouse down to the tabs, I can do that with the mouse/wheel. (It's like alt-tab for mouse!) With linux, I never have to even reach for CTRL-C or CTRL-V!
You might say that keyboard navigation is fast. You might say (in windows) right-clicking and going through menu to click "copy" is bad. Others might say that mouse is easier to use. The mouse is certainly more comfortable, as you can lean back, have a cup of coffee in one hand and mouse in the other.
With Opera mouse gestures, it's as fast as anything you can do in keyboard. I dare you to come up with an example where keyboard is needed. (Aside from filling out forms.)
And the gestures closely resemble those of Opera as well. But I will have you know, sir, Opera's mouse gestures are much more feature rich. I know now that Mozilla has mouse gestures, and I knew mozilla had tabbed browsing. However, Opera had both for long time now, and those two gems just integrate a lot better in Opera.
I never have to right click a link to do anything useful. I can switch from window to another. I can go back and forward. I never have to deviate my mouse more than two inches from where it was to do anything. And I do these with even less wrist movement than I would in Mozilla.
when there is mouse gesture in Mozilla. Everytime I go on any other computer, I use the mouse gestures and am frustrated because it doesn't work. Crips, I sometimes even try mouse gestures on Explorer.exe.
Here is maybe another. These are from the manual of OMF 2097, a kickass fighting game from 1994. Decidely, this isn't the same thing as a manual to a productivity product, but these are funny.
"Just don't forget the part I played in all this!" - What's his name
Rob Elem "Those aren't compiler warnings, they're _suggestion_." "I fixed that at 4:30 this morning"
What? GeForce 4's got some feature that has to be _utilized_? Man, Nvidia sucks...
What? There's a new fancy-ass features in 386? What? Altivec? What? T&L?
Progress needs change.
Fortune says: ----- Imagine that Cray computer decides to make a personal computer. It has a 150 MHz processor, 200 megabytes of RAM, 1500 megabytes of disk storage, a screen resolution of 4096 x 4096 pixels, relies entirely on voice recognition for input, fits in your shirt pocket and costs $300. What's the first question that the computer community asks?
"Is it PC compatible?" -----
It's because of people like you that we are stuck in x86 in the very first place.
Actually, I did the calculations a few days ago. So I can say with confidence. For the record, I have P-III 450Mhz the slowest ever manufactured. It's of course, slot 1.
There is actually an adapter from flipchip->slot 1 (http://www.pricewatch.com/1/239/2143-1.htm)($14), so you can upgrade your computer to around a gig. If you have slot 1, you most likely have 100Mhz FBS. These new pentium III have 133mhz, so you will either underclock or look for the rare 100Mhz chips. If you insist on slot one, the Pentium III 1000Ghz 100Mhz slot 1 can be attained for around $183.
The catch is, you can't use the most recent P-III called "taulatine," I believe featuring flipchip 2 or something or the other. Taulatines include some 1.0 Ghz and all 1.13 Ghz and above.
Now the _real_ catch is, a decent motherboard + recent AMD Athlon XP costs just as much.
For example, this ECS-K7S5A (which is nice, because it still can use non-DDR DIMM's) costs under $60 and ATHLON 1700+ costs $110. Good deal, if you ask me.
Slashdot Mirror
Not even a wide eyed and innocent child who loves you unconditionally?
Not to dispute, but also as FYI:
Voodoo 3 was the last card I saw that only had heatsink. Of course, I then went to ATi, just because of spite. (I didn't really like nvidia putting my voodoo out of buisiness...) I have been satisfied with ATi, though. It works under linux well enough for me. (quake 3)
I don't see why NForce would make a difference, but if I didn't buy a better heatsink, at least one case fan was needed to get hot air out of there.
I had the (mis)fortune of assembling like 5 athlon systems very recently. (Me being the residential computer guy) and with a better heatsink, it was usuable. With the original retail heatsink, (if one insisted not to buy a heatsink) case fans were necessary to keep temperature in reasonably cool parameters. (Nothing too radical, but say 130 fareheit max)
That's stupid. The biggest plus for water cooling is noise.
Back in my days, (heh) CPU didn't need a fan. A reasonable sized heatsink was more than enough. 250 watt power supply was good and anything more was an overkill. Fan on video card was ridiculous and I would have laughed at you if you needed to have a fan on the motherboard.
Fast forward to today.
400 watt powersupply is standardish (exacerbated by that freakish AMD's "approved list") and _all_ video cards (reputable ones) have fans. Radeon 9700 Pro has a separate hookup directly to the power supply for more juice. The heatsink/fan included with retail AMD is not usuable and too wimpy (I know at least MSI officially recommends a new heatsink and fan). Some motherboards have fan on their chipsets (MSI KT3 pro or something at least), and a heatsink is standard.
Your "PC" (meaning "IBM compatible" PC) has turned into some kind of a monstrosity that started with AMD's "more heat, more power, more performance, ARR ARR ARR" trend. (said in Tim Allen voice) A stark contrast to my pentium 166Mhz with one fan only in power supply. Fitted with a quiet power supply, the only noise making component of the pentium is the hard drive. Don't get me started on that new Athlon XP I got.
The point is, water cooling alleviates the situation a little bit by making things quiter.
Well, just to reply quickly, until just recently, I have been using pentium 3 450Mhz with original Radeon 64MB DDR. (Just got a new CPU)
I played quake 3 and RtCW; rock solid on the computer on linux. Quake 3 performance was most times slightly better than windows version. RtCW didn't run to well (in both OSes) but with new CPU, RtCW is working great. Though sound in Linux leaves something to be desired.
I don't know about the new fangled Radeons.
Jonny Five is alive!
Another mirror
Brought to you in 2 seconds flat by the beutiful cooperation among Linux webserver, Samba, Windows XP, and Opera's "Save with images" feature.
Life _is_ getting better.
I have a question, does anybody know how FreeBSD behaves in respect to cruft? I say this under this thread because of what's been said about Debian, and as I understand it, FreeBSD ports system is a cool source based system too.
Sigh.
No, I'm doing nothing of the sort.
You can't access the primary partition, because you cannot even access the disk. You cannot access the disk, because the BIOS won't work correctly with the disk because, well, that's why it's called a BIOS limitation.
And the correct wording would be: lilo uses the BIOS only to load the kernel (you don't _load_ "/boot." wtf does that mean anyways?), which should be easily accessable by the BIOS as long as it is a small primary partition in the first cylinders of the drive. Remember, it's lilo that loads the kernel, and it's lilo which is under the limitation of BIOS. and BIOS can't get to lilo. I sound like a parrot. Why do I have to repeat myself?
Unless you have a BIOS limitation on your hands, it is not at all recommended that you use EZ-BIOS (which is the correct name).
:-P
I have bunch of horrible experiences with it, which unbelievably enough, I can't remember fully.
Numero Uno biggy is if you _ever_ boot from floppy (from motherboard BIOS). If you boot from floppy, you are _bypassing_ the ez-bios loader, and the disk becomes unusable.
Hmm, actually, I believe EZ-BIOS gives you an option to boot from floppy _after_ it loads itself, but you are still out of luck if you try to boot from CD (or zip, or scsi, or any other boot option from the motherboard).
Like I said, I can't remember all the bad things with it; my mind must be blocking out the traumatic events or something.
It's actually pretty transparent and It Just Works (tm) for the most of the times. I remember using it because I simply didn't know what it was in the beginning. But when I tried to mangle drives and switch OS's and other stuff like that, it was damn hard to get by.
It is my understanding that a separate /boot partition will force the kernel down into the part of the disk that the ROM-BIOS can handle. The first 10 MB should give room for multiple kernels, etc.
It is my understanding that you are wrong.
The problem at hand is that the BIOS cannot be configured to correctly acknowledge the drive in the first place.
If your solution held, we could have >500MB HD work in DOS by keeping the size of the partitions below 500MB. (Because it would boot off the first partition fine.) But it doesn't work like that. We are not looking at the size of _partition_, but the size of the _hard drive_. As in BIOS cannot even get to master boot record.
What you are referring to is how far in the drive the boot records can read. You are thinking of LILO and stuff.
The limit was that the BIOS could read till so many cylinders to load the real OS. Thus LILO (in the boot record) could not read past 512 cylinders (not sure about the exact number). It can be solved by using some kind of lba option in lilo.conf. (by using the logical block address instead of CHS)
Boot from floppy.
Your problem is that you can't _boot_ from a HD larger than 500MB -- because as soon as Linux kernel is loaded, BIOS isn't needed any more anyways. All you need to to is load the kernel somehow and all the limitations of BIOS doesn't exist anymore.
Then whatever you've got connected to IDE (zip, cdrom, any HD) will work because Linux kernel is up-to-date with things.
To repeat myself, after Linux kernel is loaded, the kernel takes over. BIOS simply isn't consulted again.
Of course, some other OS's like DOS still accesses disk through BIOS, so DOS wouldn't work.
You, sir, are either a lier or incompetent. I have installed windows XP on 266Mhz dell machine and it flies using "classic theme". I've gotten windows 2000 running on 200Mhz Pentium 2 which is usuable for all except GTA3. (Heh, imagine that.)
at: Here
This whole thing is just a one big troll. I wouldn't be surprised if slashdot isn't being paid for advirtising from Apple.
Thank you. I will take Insightful if you got some, but no Intersting, please.
Actually, Fry's matches prices on local advirtisements. That means I get to pick up my local ComputerEdge and head down to fries. I look up the cheapest parts on the components and Fry's matches the [very very cheap] price. It's a win-win situation, because Fry's gets a sale and I get a cheap priced components that I can return without worrying about any return policy (no restocking fee, 30 days return perios). And also Fry's accept credit cards, unlike some warehouse offerings.
Now, how the heck are they gonna log my web browsing history? Just log all the hosts I connect with destination port 80? Or are they actually gonna peak in to individual packet content and reconstruct the GET message?
The latter sounds expensive to me. But then the former would be worthless, if I were to connect to vague topiced sites such as geocities or mail.yahoo.com (no way to track which user I was logged in as) or even cdrom.com.
www.IwannaBlowUpAmericaBecauseIamATerrorist.org is a different story though...
" Decent keyboard nav makes this process much, much faster."
Well, like I mentioned, Opera touts its keyboard navigation.
"Typing in a URL?"
That's why I have the most frequently visited sites on the bookmark bar. And for frontpages like slashdot and lwn are loaded by default. My default window files open lwn and slashdot on background and a blank page on foreground. You would admit, clicking a button is faster than typing an address at any rate. I also don't remember last time I typed in a URL. (On my linux box anyways)
One of cool things on Linux is that whatever you highlight is copied into clipboard, and in conjunture with a neat feature in Opera/Linux, if you press the middle button, you go to the site specified by the clipboard.
For example, I used to be irritated when people gives me the URL without making it a link. One would have to copy the URL, make a new window and paste it in, and press "enter". With Opera, I highlight, move mouse down (pressing the right button, (making a new window)), and press the middle button. Takes me less than a second.
I use slackware. I use windowmaker. Needlessly, I spend alot of time on bash. I find that it's faster most of the times. I don't have to scroll through the window to find what I want, I know the name of the file. Combined with name completion, it's good, to say the least.
But, in webbrowsing, you don't need a keyboard at all. In Opera, I never need keyboard. Of course, other browsers don't need keyboard either. But the difference is, I can do it amazingly fast, with style. (Not to mention, Opera has very thorough keyboard navigation scheme; it's one of those things they advirtise!) I never have to move my mouse down to the tabs, I can do that with the mouse/wheel. (It's like alt-tab for mouse!) With linux, I never have to even reach for CTRL-C or CTRL-V!
You might say that keyboard navigation is fast. You might say (in windows) right-clicking and going through menu to click "copy" is bad.
Others might say that mouse is easier to use. The mouse is certainly more comfortable, as you can lean back, have a cup of coffee in one hand and mouse in the other.
With Opera mouse gestures, it's as fast as anything you can do in keyboard. I dare you to come up with an example where keyboard is needed. (Aside from filling out forms.)
And the gestures closely resemble those of Opera as well. But I will have you know, sir, Opera's mouse gestures are much more feature rich. I know now that Mozilla has mouse gestures, and I knew mozilla had tabbed browsing. However, Opera had both for long time now, and those two gems just integrate a lot better in Opera.
I never have to right click a link to do anything useful. I can switch from window to another. I can go back and forward. I never have to deviate my mouse more than two inches from where it was to do anything. And I do these with even less wrist movement than I would in Mozilla.
when there is mouse gesture in Mozilla. Everytime I go on any other computer, I use the mouse gestures and am frustrated because it doesn't work. Crips, I sometimes even try mouse gestures on Explorer.exe.
Here is maybe another.
These are from the manual of OMF 2097, a kickass fighting game from 1994. Decidely, this isn't the same thing as a manual to a productivity product, but these are funny.
"Just don't forget the part I played in all this!" - What's his name
Rob Elem
"Those aren't compiler warnings, they're _suggestion_."
"I fixed that at 4:30 this morning"
What? GeForce 4's got some feature that has to be _utilized_? Man, Nvidia sucks...
What? There's a new fancy-ass features in 386? What? Altivec? What? T&L?
Progress needs change.
Fortune says:
-----
Imagine that Cray computer decides to make a personal computer. It has a 150 MHz processor, 200 megabytes of RAM, 1500 megabytes of disk storage, a screen resolution of 4096 x 4096 pixels, relies entirely on voice recognition for input, fits in your shirt pocket and costs $300. What's the first question that the computer community asks?
"Is it PC compatible?"
-----
It's because of people like you that we are stuck in x86 in the very first place.
I assume you mean slot 1.
, so you can upgrade your computer to around a gig. If you have slot 1, you most likely have 100Mhz FBS. These new pentium III have 133mhz, so you will either underclock or look for the rare 100Mhz chips. If you insist on slot one, the Pentium III 1000Ghz 100Mhz slot 1 can be attained for around $183.
Actually, I did the calculations a few days ago. So I can say with confidence.
For the record, I have P-III 450Mhz the slowest ever manufactured. It's of course, slot 1.
There is actually an adapter from flipchip->slot 1 (http://www.pricewatch.com/1/239/2143-1.htm)($14)
The catch is, you can't use the most recent P-III called "taulatine," I believe featuring flipchip 2 or something or the other. Taulatines include some 1.0 Ghz and all 1.13 Ghz and above.
Now the _real_ catch is, a decent motherboard + recent AMD Athlon XP costs just as much.
For example, this ECS-K7S5A (which is nice, because it still can use non-DDR DIMM's) costs under $60 and ATHLON 1700+ costs $110. Good deal, if you ask me.
Alright. So it isn't...
Not yet anyways...
5...4...3...2...1
alright now it is.
Am I alright if that read "scared <a variable named hitless>"?
I was scratching for full 10 seconds before I realized '$'=='s'