This has actually been going on for a few weeks now for New York area customers. However, there is an opt-out option that comes up on the page that comes up. I'm not quite sure how it tracks those opt-outs (by ip address perhaps?), as I didn't delve into it too deeply.
While the parent is joking, I do wonder how much angular velocity the Earth would lose if we switched an entire country (or say the entire world) lights to being powered by such devices. Eventually the earth would stop spinning.. Has the inventor taken this into account? Perhaps he'll be to blame for the end of world!
Even if they are doing this because of poor yields on the quad core processors, I doubt they're seeing such poor yields that every single tri-core processor would have a defective 4th core. And over time yield is likely to improve and we'll see even more tri-cores w/ a functional, yet disabled, 4th core.
Actually, according to a quote in the CNN article on this:
Shepperd said the United States had agreed in a Cold War-era treaty not to fly nuclear weapons. "It appears that what happened was this treaty agreement was violated," he said.
So, apparently this isn't something we do everyday. I don't know which treaty it's referring to, or if it's still in effect (the article didn't contain any of this information).
Also, it would be interesting to know if we're talking about the newer 410AS or the older 620AS (Though, I guess that's only available in the 250gb model).
410AS is a single platter, vs 2 platters. It's also a much thinner drive.
I just recently purchased 2 of the 410AS drives to add to my RAID5 set (which has mainly older 250gb 7200.8's). Firmware on these is AAA. Performance seems to be great, though I didn't benchmark them separately.
Um, you might want to check your facts on that. Seagate doesn't sell any 10k RPM SATA drives. They do sell 10k RPM SCSI/SAS drives, but I doubt they are worried about cannibalizing the sales of these drives, as they are server class hardware, not desktop class.
Whereas, I'm sure they are happy to cannibalize Western Digital's sales of 10k RPM SATA drives.
This is definitely not a disk io issue. I had this same issue w/ Vista. Same exact machine, works fine in XP and Linux, but Vista, while playing anything w/ audio would kill the throughput. Nothing like trying to burn a dvd and then trying to watch a video clip and then noticing that you're getting buffer underruns.
Some of the testing I did was to copy files locally on the RAID0 array while watching a video clip, which would perform fine, but as soon as the network is brought into the picture, the network performance would cap at about 10% of maximum.
This is one of the reasons I got rid of Vista (this was back during the public betas) and again switched my desktop to Linux.
If he's not a native English speaker (I don't know if he is or not, just trying to head off possible replies) then instead of trying to make himself sound more knowledgeable than he really is by using a word like "concluded", he should stick with words he actually knows. Or perhaps the quote was translated from his original language by someone else?
There is no way any of the VIA EPIA boards would handle HDTV, they are much too underpowered. Heck, I doubt it could handle standard def recording and playback simultaneously.
Not to say, wikipedia isn't flawed at times, but a FLOPS is definitely an acronym of FLoating point Operation Per Second.
heck one floating point operation per second is 1 FLOPS, not 1 FLOP, since we're measuring a speed over time. 1 FLOP would be a useless measurement. How long did that FLOP take?
You are confused. There was a native version of NT 4.0 (not sure about 3.5) for Alpha. Digital released a third party utility called FX!32 that allowed x86 applications to run on the Alpha version of NT (otherwise you'd need the alpha binaries).
It seems odd that they didn't include executables/dlls in the comparison (where maxmumcompression.com does). I also find it odd that they are compressing items that normally don't compress very well with most data compression programs (divx/mpegs/jpegs/etc). I'm guessing this is why 7-zip ranked a bit lower than most.
I did some comparison last year, and found 7-zip to do the best job for what I needed (great compression ratio without requiring days to complete). It also doesn't take into account the network speed at which the file is going to be transmitted. I use 7-zipfor pushing application updates and such to remote offices (most over 384k/768k WAN links). Compressing w/ 7-zip has saved users quite a bit of time compared to winrar or winzip.
I would definitely recommend checking out maximumcompression.com (As others have, as well) over this article. It goes into a lot greater detail.
On a similar note, when using RC2, I had an issue w/ playing videos and copying over gigabit ethernet at the same time. It'd basically limit the connection to 100Mbit (on a 1000Gbit network). Stop the video, and the throughput would skyrocket. This was a real pain when trying to burn DVD's @ 16x and watching a video clip at the same time. I dunno if it's been fixed, as I switched to FC6 rather than put up w/ that garbage.
Re:So...Is The QT Flaw the Only Notable Bug?
on
Apple Responds to MOAB
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Of course they didn't release an update for the Windows version of QT.
You make a very interesting point. I've read letters that are hundreds of years old from long dead ancestors of mine. I doubt the same will be said of my decendents reading my own letters, since most will have been emailed and are probably long lost.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean Clear Channel doesn't own them all already?
This has actually been going on for a few weeks now for New York area customers. However, there is an opt-out option that comes up on the page that comes up. I'm not quite sure how it tracks those opt-outs (by ip address perhaps?), as I didn't delve into it too deeply.
While the parent is joking, I do wonder how much angular velocity the Earth would lose if we switched an entire country (or say the entire world) lights to being powered by such devices. Eventually the earth would stop spinning.. Has the inventor taken this into account? Perhaps he'll be to blame for the end of world!
Ah, but the 500gb drive's bits are much more massive!
I thought that was Motorola, or Gillette?
Mod parent down. He's replying to his own posts trying to look insightful.
I was thinking more along the lines of the socket A multiplier unlocking :)
Even if they are doing this because of poor yields on the quad core processors, I doubt they're seeing such poor yields that every single tri-core processor would have a defective 4th core. And over time yield is likely to improve and we'll see even more tri-cores w/ a functional, yet disabled, 4th core.
Actually, according to a quote in the CNN article on this:
Shepperd said the United States had agreed in a Cold War-era treaty not to fly nuclear weapons. "It appears that what happened was this treaty
agreement was violated," he said.
So, apparently this isn't something we do everyday. I don't know which treaty it's referring to, or if it's still in effect (the article didn't contain any of this information).
I think you're misunderstanding this (or perhaps I am), but this is referring to a fee the author MUST pay (or provide a fee waiver).
Also, it would be interesting to know if we're talking about the newer 410AS or the older 620AS (Though, I guess that's only available in the 250gb model).
410AS is a single platter, vs 2 platters. It's also a much thinner drive.
I just recently purchased 2 of the 410AS drives to add to my RAID5 set (which has mainly older 250gb 7200.8's). Firmware on these is AAA. Performance seems to be great, though I didn't benchmark them separately.
Um, you might want to check your facts on that. Seagate doesn't sell any 10k RPM SATA drives. They do sell 10k RPM SCSI/SAS drives, but I doubt they are worried about cannibalizing the sales of these drives, as they are server class hardware, not desktop class.
Whereas, I'm sure they are happy to cannibalize Western Digital's sales of 10k RPM SATA drives.
It does, however, the amount of network bandwidth used by most games is nominal compared with even the reduced amount of available bandwidth.
This is definitely not a disk io issue. I had this same issue w/ Vista. Same exact machine, works fine in XP and Linux, but Vista, while playing anything w/ audio would kill the throughput. Nothing like trying to burn a dvd and then trying to watch a video clip and then noticing that you're getting buffer underruns.
Some of the testing I did was to copy files locally on the RAID0 array while watching a video clip, which would perform fine, but as soon as the network is brought into the picture, the network performance would cap at about 10% of maximum.
This is one of the reasons I got rid of Vista (this was back during the public betas) and again switched my desktop to Linux.
Good luck getting it to play h.264 content, though. Here's a fairly recent article regarding that.. http://www.theinq.com/default.aspx?article=39717
There is no way any of the VIA EPIA boards would handle HDTV, they are much too underpowered. Heck, I doubt it could handle standard def recording and playback simultaneously.
I point you to the wiki article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flops
Not to say, wikipedia isn't flawed at times, but a FLOPS is definitely an acronym of FLoating point Operation Per Second.
heck one floating point operation per second is 1 FLOPS, not 1 FLOP, since we're measuring a speed over time. 1 FLOP would be a useless measurement. How long did that FLOP take?
Funny how you capitalized FPOPS and not FLOPS. It's really FLoating Point Operations Per Second
You are confused. There was a native version of NT 4.0 (not sure about 3.5) for Alpha. Digital released a third party utility called FX!32 that allowed x86 applications to run on the Alpha version of NT (otherwise you'd need the alpha binaries).
Not only that, but why are they continuously modded +5 Informative/Insightful? It boggles the mind, really.
It seems odd that they didn't include executables/dlls in the comparison (where maxmumcompression.com does). I also find it odd that they are compressing items that normally don't compress very well with most data compression programs (divx/mpegs/jpegs/etc). I'm guessing this is why 7-zip ranked a bit lower than most.
I did some comparison last year, and found 7-zip to do the best job for what I needed (great compression ratio without requiring days to complete). It also doesn't take into account the network speed at which the file is going to be transmitted. I use 7-zipfor pushing application updates and such to remote offices (most over 384k/768k WAN links). Compressing w/ 7-zip has saved users quite a bit of time compared to winrar or winzip.
I would definitely recommend checking out maximumcompression.com (As others have, as well) over this article. It goes into a lot greater detail.
On a similar note, when using RC2, I had an issue w/ playing videos and copying over gigabit ethernet at the same time. It'd basically limit the connection to 100Mbit (on a 1000Gbit network). Stop the video, and the throughput would skyrocket. This was a real pain when trying to burn DVD's @ 16x and watching a video clip at the same time. I dunno if it's been fixed, as I switched to FC6 rather than put up w/ that garbage.
Of course they didn't release an update for the Windows version of QT.
You make a very interesting point. I've read letters that are hundreds of years old from long dead ancestors of mine. I doubt the same will be said of my decendents reading my own letters, since most will have been emailed and are probably long lost.