I'm not trying to start flames so don't consider this an invitation, but my IMPRESSION of Slackware, which I've gotten only second-hand from Slashdot and a few distrib comparison reviews, is that Slackware is a dusty old distribution with a fanatical following but it's not relevant any longer. (If that's not true - they certainly have a perception problem, but if there's something truly great about Slackware they might not give a damn about 'image'...) So what would Slackware's target audience be interested in that isn't served by Mandrake6, Caldera, SuSE or Debian -- name say 3 things that are exclusive to this distrib? What's the most recent review of the currently-shipping Slackware?
Steven didn't verify his notes... Star Office is NOT available for the MacOS. Unless you count "Java" as MacOS support, in which case it probably runs on a toaster, right?:-/
Most of the companies I worked for were Windows-based on the desktop, but always had a few diehards running old Macs (albiet one that hadn't been upgraded by anal, hostile IT department in years..).
Thanks to Star Office not supporting the Mac, those users will continue running Microsoft Office, as will I. I had to throw 196 MEGABYTES of RAM into my G3 to get any appreciable performance running MS Word 98, but it's the only word processor I could realistically use on the Mac (Word Perfect on the Mac isn't well supported and runs poorly under System 8.6). If Star Office even ran on PowerPC Linux I'd consider it...
Someone made a good point that, as much as PowerPC has advantages over x86 -- less heat production & energy consumption, greater integer floating point and soon vector processing, etc. -- PowerPC still lacks a good optomizing compiler (at least on Linux).
I don't think Motorola would be buying Metrowerks if PowerPC were going to remain an "embedded chip" or a "Mac chip" provider. Now, lets see them bring back the StarMax (my first Mac after years of PC).
Has there been any work on WINE and non-x86 processors?
I understand this is beyond the stated goals of WINE, but...
I'm dying for SheepShaver PPC/Linux, so I can do on PowerPC what can be done with VMWare... run the native OS inside of Linux so you never need to reboot.
Sorry. Not woo-hooing about the article - I'm just still excited bout the IBM announcement.
I hope this blossoms, and we have a REAL price and performance war between x86 and PowerPC so we'll all benefit from better execution not just cheap hot running Intel processors.
I really don't think Compaq will pull it off with Alpha Linux... their leaders needed vision on this a LONG time ago, and there's too much internal bickering and backstabbing. SGI was SMART when they ditched their NT division... when you make and sell an OS or OS' who wants departments with loyalties divided with the competition?
Some folks I know did a "R.I.P" on SGI when they cutoff their NT division, but I think this was smart.
You can say you think I'm smoking crack, but I think Jobs has already laid down some groundwork for Apple to become a Linux company whenever it becomes necessary. (If you doubt this is possible, think about how difficult it would be for OS X Server/Consumer... not at all, and it would be one giant fsck you to Bill Gates in the history books...:)
Anyways, more CPU support in Linux is better. I agree Motorola and IBM better commit some resources to GCC if they want to be taken seriously - it's a relatively small problem to solve.
I'm still completely blown away that Loki's supporting all the Linux games on PowerPC. This is something I hoped for and banked on happening about 1 or 2 years after Linux became viable for Commercial games... not MONTHS as it has turned out. Linux is looking more and more unstopable.
>If I recall, Be left the PowerPC platform citing problems getting access to specs for the G3 processor itself.
That's incorrect - BeOS ability to run is tied to the chipset - not the CPU. A Mac 9600 upgraded with a G3 processor will continue to run BeOS - although Be will not provide support for systems upgraded in this manner (strange, they support Intel systems upgraded this way...;)
I noticed a quite a few people just fired off closedminded anti-Apple comments and don't quite understand the significance of this. Yes, I'm an "Apple guy" but I'm also a "Linux guy"; please bear with me through a few points:
1) There is competition on the x86 architecture (with AMD recently beating the PANTS off Intel:), but that doesn't mean the platform is open. AMD and Cyrix probably spends as great a percentage of their income reverse-engineering Intel, and defending themselves from lawsuits, as Intel spends on actual R&D. I'm guessing numbers here - who cares - but my point is *AMD wastes money playing catch up games with Intel* and trying to innovate while not diverging of the ancient x86 architecture. I'm glad AMD pulled ahead... hopefully they won't stay chained to Intel's designs forever, unless they want to spend a fourtune reverse-engineering Merced.
2) Costs - largely a factor of manufacturing scale, aside, the PowerPC is an AWESOME chip family that is in every other respect superior to x86. Don't believe me - lookup Spec scores, MMX vs. Altivec (what do you mean Intel can't multitask MMX and floating point data at the same time??:), scalability (Intel has the higher MHz for now... but word is on Tom's Intel's new CPU's were released early and may suffer from heat failure), optimization advantages and so on. Oh, did I mention new G3's ship with only a small heat sink and NO CPU FAN? Since Linux is capable of running just as well on PPC -- or better, if you believe the above -- wouldn't you want to run Linux on one? (I run Linux on my G3 now... ).
3) Good, honest competition between different architectures means great things for all of us. I always wished Apple would open up and distrubute $700 computers with Linux, but their business model doesn't support it right now. Lighten up and accept it. PowerPC is not Apple. Think PPC is only good for embedded applications? Think "MP3 Linux Player" for your home stereo -- *without* noisy fans and overheat issues.
4) What's with the fudders here saying there'll never be games for Linux PowerPC?? LOKISOFT? "Hello..??" Didn't people say the same about Linux? That arguement is as dumb as the one where people said 'iMac will fail without a floppy drive'. If the libraries are there, it's trivial to port from one Linux to another. Even if a PowerPC isn't in your plans for your next system, you'll still benefit from it competing with Merced.
5) The fact that Linux IS truly portable to competing CPU's is exactly why I distrust Intel's "Linux initiatives"... why would Intel push an OS that is portable over an OS that is TIED to Intel? My answer is they don't know what to do for now so they're just playing along.
6) BeOS =does= run on PowerPC G3's. It just doesn't run on Apple motherboards. There's he-said/she-said between Be and Apple, and I don't entirely blame Apple. Want to see if Be's decision to ditch PowerPC support was because of Apple or because of Intel's investment? Ask them to announce support for this design when it becomes available. Surely Intel would not mind seeing their children play with PowerPC's... >:-D
Northeast's too conservative for me... think I want to move west coast where everyone's younger and not so inbred. Too many guilt-inflicting finger-pointing Puritans here..
Sigh. My company's migrating from Sendmail to Exchange. The server's been acting up, no wonder with all the 30 meg files being emailed on the old 200 MHz FreeBSD UNIX box. The new outsourced IT guys who scorn "shareware operating systems" can't wait to install Exchange on *different* hardware and reflect on the old days (where we could just Telnet in from offsite to get the friggin email):-/
Microsoft and Intel may not have voting shares, but they carry considerable influence within Avid.... witness the attempted retreat by Avid to NT-only post NAB 99.
Reflexive Mac-bashers hold your tongue please. The majority of non-linear video editing (read: Avid's customer base) is "still" Mac based.
After the customer base revolted Avid has been falling head over heels - following a 30% stock drop! - to make up and reverse that decision somewhat.
In my humble opinion SI is a piece of shit. I use the software quite often, and on NT even...:(
Microsoft ditched SI because their customer base was switching to Maya anyhow. You see, as part of Microsoft's "war against open 3D stardards", they had to buy smart people to help develop their closed 3D API "DirectX". To do this they diverted considerable resources from the SGI flavor, and poured resources into the fledgeling NT port.
Once all the SI customer base was screaming "I knew it [ms would hose them]" they had to get rid of the product or watch it wither. SI on NT was a tremendous HACK even as far as NT standards go. Microsoft never bought SI to make a direct profit off of... they just wanted to embrace and extend OpenGL and capture one of the leading IRIX applications (giving the customer base the shaft if they stayed on SGI).
SGI was very smart when they brought down the price of Maya to within reach of SI, MAX, etc.. and one more thing you'll NEVER see MAX on Linux. It's way too tied to NT code-wise and uses a lot of licensed code too (maybe you'll see the MAX distributed render client...). Given SGI's healthy attitude towards Linux I think it's a matter of months before it's announced for Linux. This makes me very happy:)
I hear some people near me talking about Exchange [shudder... been through 2 migrations at companies before].
Knowing MS Exchange is a "Bad Thing", and I'd like to save the company money where possible, I decided to search the web for a collection of "horror stories and MS Exchange"... to my surprise I couldn't find ANYTHING!
Now I've seen articles here and there (InfoWorld, news.com etc.) about Exchange bugs, but I would have thought SOMEONE had collected URL's and posted them. Nothing. I'd have to do a lot of research to get this info, and given my workload it would be an unwise distraction.
The second thing I'd like to know, is how much does MS Exchange COST? I know the price varies, and larger companies get breaks if they "cozy" up to MS, but that doesn't help me much. Say a company has 50-150 employees... what does that translate into just for the software licensing?
You need something that plays CD-R *and* VideoCD, because of the media and the format.
For the original question: I don't know what burns VCD in Linux, but Toast on the Mac does nicely. This is marginally on-topic, because Executor will run many non-PowerPC Mac apps under Linux, and MAY run Toast. I know Toast is a FAT binary... works on either 68k or PPC CPU's.
For your question: Best thing is to burn a VideoCD in Toast (MacOS) or whatever is used in Windows, and take that to the store and ask to play it. Bring different CD media as well... some players handle silver CD-R but choke on blue disks, and so on.
About 2 weeks ago, I bought a Sony 3xx-something DVD player... it would not play CD-R, of which I have an EXTENSIVE collection, so back to the store I went. This is backwards... the new Sony's do NOT play CD-R, except for the top model. To save costs, see...:-/
The Panasonic 414 does play CD-R (not sure about VCD), but it has a nasty audio/video synch problem (as does the Sony) when the layers change... during Blade Runner, audio fell 1 full second behind the video. This is common to many DVD players (pause or synch), which is why I've given up until after all the holiday sales...
What I want in a DVD player is: * "codefree"... so I can play Japanese Anime, some of which is ONLY available as imports, without buying a new "Japanese code" player. Some players are easily hacked, but as I mentioned above there are many other things that could be wrong (like no CD-R support). * Macrovision-free. Sure, it's an anti-piracy tool, but it also prevents any decent capture through my video board. The real pirates on IRC have ripping all figured out anyhow... (I just want to make digital samples) * Plays CD-R * Plays VideoCD. I think VCD sucks, BUT one usefull thing is taking a homemade presentation with you on disc. At the data rates VCD affords, you can get real good quality for a video slideshow, and the media's more reliable than VHS (oops the tape got eaten, boss...)
This kind of experiment can and will work eventually. All the people yapping about Jurrasic Park can just shut up already... it's difficult enough to reintroduce wolves to the wild without people spreading nonsense FUD!
These animals did not die out for natural reasons; we slaughtered every last one of them. One could argue this is still Darwinism, and because the remaining Huia's couldn't shoot back or breed fast enough they deserve to die, but this arguement is flawed. That kind of environmentalism means there's no room on the planet for anything but humans, cockroaches, rats, ants, and e-coli.. not very good company.
We can also bring back the dodo, and the whooly mammouth, and there's talk about that too. Restoring parts of the ecosystem we unbalanced is good overall, the problem is we're only going to restore prey not predators, so we'll still be tipping the balance.
Taking this restoration a step further there is evidence that Neanderthal man died out not by natural means but by homo sapiens moving in and killing for territory. If that evidence is true, should we restore neanderthals? I'm not suggesting a yes or a no...
Lastly, what's the point if the boundless appetite of the world just chews them up again?
I live north of Boston, MA... a lot of towns *mandate* new homes built must consume 2 acres of land, presumably to "preserve open space" but really to exclude economic undesirables (they don't say "darkies" in New Hampshire anymore). As a result of the home building boom, most of the land in this area is gone... mile after mile of suburban sprawl. Where's the habitat? How about the environmental damage every time people take their SUV 4 miles to the nearest convenience store .
Save the animals? There's a bigger issue people miss. Like a virus, we consume the planet and slowly kill it.
I'm not heading to the hills like some hermit or advocating anyone else do this (but we could reproduce a little less often - PLEASE). I am saddened that it will take several MAJOR ecological disasters to catch our attention for longer than the average commercial.
I'm just thinking this is so much waste given our habits. Of course, some insensitive redneck will just accuse me of being an unpatriotic anti-capitalist treehugger with no values.:-/
I don't know too much about this subject but I will be following along. My network is much like yours, except the server is my G3 Mac. I know... building Linux PC for that task so I don't have to reboot my Win98/Linux box every now and then.
Unfortunately for the Mac there is no free UNIX-like shell, like CygWin on the PC, so you miss some scripting tools.
Have you set up Netatalk and the piece that lets Linux talk back to the Mac? You might be able to use Retrospect on the Mac, then AppleScript midnight copies to the "Appleshare" running on Linux.
I odn't have a solution, but maybe some of this helps. Cheers,
How about getting rid of their Marcos-cronyism gov
on
UN Proposes Email Tax
·
· Score: 1
A lot of countries are poor, and the Internet won't change that.. but at least their collective goventments could build some infrastructure if they were not blowing all their money on corrupt projects.
How much money did you say the World Bank has lent these governments for "modernization" so far. Oh, you didn't. Much of this money is wasted but only the local government has direct control of how it's spent. Instead a lot of these loans are wasted on things like the Malaysian MultiMedia Corridor, then to prop up their economy they engage in large-scale deforestation, dragnet fish harvests, or other very short-term economic plans.
For what it's worth, a large part of these loans are guaranteed by the US Government (they WILL be paid back, right?:), so we're in a sense already funding plenty of economic development. Not to mention the fact every time a US citizen buys a bag of mother nature they're contributing to economic devlopment..
Apologies if I sound conservative.. I offend conservatives too because I think for myself..
Feh! We're exporting ENOUGH servers there... read
on
UN Proposes Email Tax
·
· Score: 1
Ah, the brave new world of the Internet, where post-industrial powers like the USA arm-twist emerging countries indo adopting our ridiculously extended copyright and patent laws (heck, even Microsoft has a patent on "style sheets"... which existed before Microsoft).
As the USA passes more and more laws against online "evils" like online gambling, porn, and CRYPTO, and demand goes UP, we'll see a lot of development moving offshore. Lots of internet gambling sites relocated from the USA to the Carribean for this very reason.
The world is going *broadband*, big time. The next big thing will be broadcasting over IP, and the net offers unlimited freedom. People WANT trash for television... look at all the daytime talk shows or the nighttime "COPS" type offerings. People order extra-explicit versions of these tapes because you can't get it on TV. I went to see the South Park movie (died laughing:) and I really wish it were like this on TV (it *is* cable).
All this stuff and more will be streaming at viewing quality in just a couple more years. The US might have one of the best technology infrastructures in the world, but this is a capitalist world and services will move to make the highest profit, so the third-world will get their Internet.
There's no shortage of clueless breeder drones in the US who want the government and television to work as their babysitter. That alone will export all the Internet the 3rd world needs...
This EXPOSES what's wrong with Microsoft
on
All Hail Bloatware
·
· Score: 1
I can't believe Microsoft would allow one of their minions to shine a spotlight on their most criminal behavior. No, I'm not talking about bloatware specifically - I'm talking about users being FORCED into buying - thus "demanding" - the latest bloatware, just to read a.doc file.
It's like saying "life" prisoners ASKED to be used in government sponsored medical testing. After all, they chose to go to jail right?
Didn't you ask for a local cable monopoly too? I get cable TV from my only provider, so I must be demanding less choice... [/sarcasm]
Mcarthism is sickening; ESR=Al Gore
on
RMS Responds
·
· Score: 1
ESR taking credit for recent press favorable to Linux is like... Al Gore claiming to have helped create the internet because he was somehow involved [with some funding measures].
The "Communism" stab is the most offensive. I guess that kind of politics is still OK with gun toteing tobacco chewing rednecks...
Maybe I'm biased, but I always thought Linux and Mac users - on average - were a TAD smarter than the average Windows user. I rationalize this because some thought process went into choosing your OS, rather than the blank stare you get when you ask a Windows biggot how or why they "chose" MS Windows as their primary OS. Still, there's enough idiots to go around to every group and association on the planet.
Given Microsoft's past of paying people for "stuffing" pro-Microsoft Letters To The Editor and to various "community" talkback forums, I WOULD NOT put it past them to have creatively put together a few embarrasing emails which then can be linked to us.
Microsoft HAS used tactics like this and EVEN when they get caught, what's the fallout?? Did CNN even report when Microsoft paid workers to email and write letters regarding USDOJ vs. MS? i know it got mention in some newspapers, but the media doesn't seem to get offended when manipulated by someone with large advertising pockets...
Actually, the Apple 1 came *without* case - you were expected to supply your own.
Some of the computer history sites show the same wood photo over and over, but that's just chance and distribution of the same photo.
And at 1ish MHz, the thing didn't throw out much heat or (guessing here...) interference. Heck, my G3 300 MHz doesn't even need a CPU fan - just a tiny heat sink. By contrast my AMD K2/450 has a heat sink the size of a coffee mug, and a fan atop to boot...
When someone turns something on, and your monitor goes flakey like that it's because your POWER system's stretched. Plug into another circuit, or MAYBE add a UPS, and tell me if it still happens.
I'll ignore the rest of your comments since you knew they were unprofessional... but you probably think Mac users are people not "smart enough" to use Linux shouldn't use computers, riiight?
A little tip - when you use the linux.com URL and reply-to address in stupid posts, it's no different than using company letterhead to for dumb faxes or snailmail. You'll figure it out soon enough...
Each part DOES need to be certified individually, but if you assemble them it changes the picture: how well do they work TOGETHER.
If you assemble a system from parts and want to sell it, it needs FCC testing. JUST because the parts passed muster does not mean they will assembled.
How do I know? We sell workstations with custom hardware and software, currently based off Intergraph GT1 TZ2000's. Even if we make no modifications we would need retesting, but once you add in custom PCI cards with additional processors there's some work to be done.
I read your assessment of "Linux vs. NT". While reading through, I thought you had some reasonable points up until the concluding paragraph. Oh, and I hope you can believe not ALL the the rude flaming are really from Linux users (we have our bad apples in the bunch, but we don't pay them to flood ZDnet and newpaper colums like Microsoft's failed "astro turf" campaign)... apologies for the bad apples.
OTOH, you really did not give justice to Linux, but perhaps that is in backlash of all the good press Linux is recieving? Here's what I noticed:
>Companies that add features they need, but that are not accepted into the core distribution, may find themselves in a redevelopment and retesting cycle every time a new version of Linux is released.
Are you serious? People are still using 2.0.36, and even 1.x, and support for them will far outlast Microsoft support of Windows 3.11, but I don't see how this fits into your comparison, since you can't modify the Windows at ALL. You can "modify Windows" by writing a driver and you can also modify Linux with a kernel module. It's very unlikely the kernel team would reject something that belongs in the kernel especially if it's an conditional compile and not harmful to the mainstream users. You state this as if it has happened but do not provide an example, and this reduces your credibility. As a counter example, they've allowed kernel support for offbeat projects like Amiga/Atari/Mac68k, MIPS, etc. even though Linus said on day one it would never be portable to other platforms. Implying people have to reengineer their software for the "latest" kernel is pure FUD.
>Windows NT Server Enterprise Edition ships with a full complement of Internet services
True, and they also force a web browser into the NT kernel - security, stability and user's wishes be damned. Transaction processing is not supposed to be in the kernel anyhow, and for the price of the NT EES you describe you could well buy one for Linux and plow the rest into additional system RAM. IMHO, BSD UNIX like Yahoo uses makes for a much better free unix if you want a server platform.
>Whereas Microsoft's products are designed to work with one another and the operating system's services, users may spend a significant amount of time trying to integrate these components under Linux.
Linux CAN be time-consuming to configure, but so can NT. You do need to look before you leap with NT.. know what you want before you commit and don't jump on one or the other without research. Your point about integration however is laughable - Linux prides itself on adherence to established standards, and since the source code is open it's a heck of a lot easier to integrate custom apps on Linux. Microsoft products only work well together if you commit to an ENDLESS cycle of pay-upgrades, as BackOffice and Exchange users have found.
>Without robust SMP, Linux servers can support only small companies
You neglect to mention that Linux requires significantly less horsepower than NT, which means it runs faster on the same hardware. Exotic configurations like Mindcraft's studies are good for focusing on problems like this. You did not mention it only took a few days to fix some of the SMP bugs that hampered Linux SMP.
>Linux is a college student's project gone astray.
Nice FUDDY sound bite, but if you did your research you'd know Linux wasn't a school project.
>The version that will be supported by Sun Microsystems and IBM on its hardware will fall far short of each of these company's own Unix operating systems in features and capabilities.
On what evidence do you base these charges? If you can't think beyond the cynical world of closed software, sure, maybe they would hope for this. There's no way for Sun/IBM to hold back Linux however, and the reality is Linux is improving much faster than NT, by Microsoft's OWN admission. This isn't "Java" or browser standards... Microsoft can't kill Linux.
Sun and IBM might be just hedging their bets, but the OS will "get there" on their hardware, or no one will buy those systems. It's harder and harder to justify thousands for a UNIX system upgrade - they know this - and they also know their real business in the future will be hardware and consulting. IBM stands to make a killing at this and doesn't consider Linux eating their lunch. SGI also understands this. The OS has gotten this far without ANY help from Intel.
I don't have all the specs here, and I'm to lazy to reread them anyways. But there's an apples and oranges difference between AltiVec and FPU.
You might be confising them, because in the Intel world the FPU must be turned OFF when MMX is in use. How is it Intel says MMX is great for 3D is BEYOND me... as far as I am concerned MMX was good for a few PhotoShop extensions. AltiVec does not have this crippling design flaw - with PowerPC the Integer, Floating Point AND "vector processor" (AltiVec) can all run simultaniously.
Another huge advantage of AltiVec is preexisting applications already support it by way of QuickTime. It wasn't until recently that Microsoft started writing multimedia layers into their OS (although they change name every month...). QuickTime's been around for AGES, and if you accelerate QT with AltiVec everything is going to require much less CPU or simply run faster.
One last difference between AltiVec and MMX is when you want MMX you must write that code in assembly - x86 Assembly SUCKS compared to just about anything else. Provided compiler support is there, you can use any damn language you want with AltiVec. This is great for quick everything, but it helps those kind souls doing Mac ports of popular open source utilities.
I didn't even get into benchmarking, because I don't care. Simply because of the bad design of MMX you'll never see large parts of Windows taking advantage of it. Now I wish I had waited on buying my B&W G3 because AltiVec is almost here, but this is the way things work...
When I see Intel expanding their reach into other parts of the system I see them closing doors on competition... basically ripping pages right out of the Microsoft Tactics handbook.
It's great that Red Hat is just giving away money to BeOS, VA Research, Red Hat and all the rest. And Intel can only build better CPU's if they integrate the FPU (remember superior non-Intel 386 FPU's?), bully their way into the networking biz, hijack the OPEN VBL2.0 spec with PCI, bully Intergraph and other chipmakers into "license your stuff to us or no early access to our next CPU + motherboard. *Deliberately* build more expensive "Slot One" CPU's if that's the ONLY way to isolate AMD and Cyrix (it worked).
Intel doesn't even have good technology. They just produced Yugo's on a much higher scale than PowerPC, MIPS, and Alpha. Big deal - Intel's entitled to their success... BUT when they start acting like Microsoft and actually SUPPRESS innovation that really rankles me.
People talk about Microsoft this and that, well, the difference between INTEL and MICROSOFT cannot be summed up as simply as "Intel has clones therefore they are not as bad [as MS]". AMD builds its ENTIRE business on reverse-engineering... everything from scratch and twice documented to cover your ass from lawsuits. If you think about it, AMD could sell their chips CHEAPER if it weren't for Intel's strong-arm (no pun intended..:) antics. I wonder how favorably AMD and Cyrix's reverse-engineering expenses compare against Intel's basic R&D expenses?
Intel can do all sorts of nasty things to Linux too. Sure Linux is GPL but how many people care? To reshape the question, how many people refuse to use Microsoft Internet Explorer or Hotmail because it is Microsoft??
Linux has a lot of shortcomings that could be exploited without violating the GPL... just offer enticements seperately via downloads. If Linux achieves world domination *without* open source fixing the shortcomings of the Linux platform it will be vulnerable. A lot of folks would take closed-source binaries from Intel, particularly if they perform better than open source initiatives. Want consistent printer support (especially for non-Postscript models), X displays hand-tuned with MMX assembly language tailored only for Intel display chipsets, co-porting Microsoft Media Player along with the Indio and i268 multimedia codecs, maybe even Linux drivers for WinModems, WinPrinters, and the eventual WinMotherboard.
A few years ago, did anyone think Microsoft could stitch things up so quickly? I still remember running DooM on a Windows-less computer running IBM PC DOS..:-/
We need robust support for Linux on non-Intel CPU's if there's ever to be any real competition, as opposed to AMD playing catch up. AMD might someday exceed Intel's best performing CPU, but it looks like they will ALWAYS be playing by Intel's book of rules.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not trying to start flames so don't consider this an invitation, but my IMPRESSION of Slackware, which I've gotten only second-hand from Slashdot and a few distrib comparison reviews, is that Slackware is a dusty old distribution with a fanatical following but it's not relevant any longer. (If that's not true - they certainly have a perception problem, but if there's something truly great about Slackware they might not give a damn about 'image'...) So what would Slackware's target audience be interested in that isn't served by Mandrake6, Caldera, SuSE or Debian -- name say 3 things that are exclusive to this distrib? What's the most recent review of the currently-shipping Slackware?
Steven didn't verify his notes... Star Office is NOT available for the MacOS. Unless you count "Java" as MacOS support, in which case it probably runs on a toaster, right? :-/
Most of the companies I worked for were Windows-based on the desktop, but always had a few diehards running old Macs (albiet one that hadn't been upgraded by anal, hostile IT department in years..).
Thanks to Star Office not supporting the Mac, those users will continue running Microsoft Office, as will I. I had to throw 196 MEGABYTES of RAM into my G3 to get any appreciable performance running MS Word 98, but it's the only word processor I could realistically use on the Mac (Word Perfect on the Mac isn't well supported and runs poorly under System 8.6). If Star Office even ran on PowerPC Linux I'd consider it...
This fits *perfectly* with last week's IBM's PowerPC announcement last week.
Someone made a good point that, as much as PowerPC has advantages over x86 -- less heat production & energy consumption, greater integer floating point and soon vector processing, etc. -- PowerPC still lacks a good optomizing compiler (at least on Linux).
I don't think Motorola would be buying Metrowerks if PowerPC were going to remain an "embedded chip" or a "Mac chip" provider. Now, lets see them bring back the StarMax (my first Mac after years of PC).
Has there been any work on WINE and non-x86 processors?
I understand this is beyond the stated goals of WINE, but...
I'm dying for SheepShaver PPC/Linux, so I can do on PowerPC what can be done with VMWare... run the native OS inside of Linux so you never need to reboot.
Sorry. Not woo-hooing about the article - I'm just still excited bout the IBM announcement.
:)
I hope this blossoms, and we have a REAL price and performance war between x86 and PowerPC so we'll all benefit from better execution not just cheap hot running Intel processors.
I really don't think Compaq will pull it off with Alpha Linux... their leaders needed vision on this a LONG time ago, and there's too much internal bickering and backstabbing. SGI was SMART when they ditched their NT division... when you make and sell an OS or OS' who wants departments with loyalties divided with the competition?
Some folks I know did a "R.I.P" on SGI when they cutoff their NT division, but I think this was smart.
You can say you think I'm smoking crack, but I think Jobs has already laid down some groundwork for Apple to become a Linux company whenever it becomes necessary. (If you doubt this is possible, think about how difficult it would be for OS X Server/Consumer... not at all, and it would be one giant fsck you to Bill Gates in the history books...
Anyways, more CPU support in Linux is better. I agree Motorola and IBM better commit some resources to GCC if they want to be taken seriously - it's a relatively small problem to solve.
I'm still completely blown away that Loki's supporting all the Linux games on PowerPC. This is something I hoped for and banked on happening about 1 or 2 years after Linux became viable for Commercial games... not MONTHS as it has turned out. Linux is looking more and more unstopable.
Before the flame replies pile up, I now realize this person has nothing to do with the Linux-Mandrake project.
:-D
I apologize profusely from every pore...
>If I recall, Be left the PowerPC platform citing problems getting access to specs for the G3 processor itself.
;)
That's incorrect - BeOS ability to run is tied to the chipset - not the CPU. A Mac 9600 upgraded with a G3 processor will continue to run BeOS - although Be will not provide support for systems upgraded in this manner (strange, they support Intel systems upgraded this way...
I noticed a quite a few people just fired off closedminded anti-Apple comments and don't quite understand the significance of this. Yes, I'm an "Apple guy" but I'm also a "Linux guy"; please bear with me through a few points:
:), but that doesn't mean the platform is open. AMD and Cyrix probably spends as great a percentage of their income reverse-engineering Intel, and defending themselves from lawsuits, as Intel spends on actual R&D. I'm guessing numbers here - who cares - but my point is *AMD wastes money playing catch up games with Intel* and trying to innovate while not diverging of the ancient x86 architecture. I'm glad AMD pulled ahead... hopefully they won't stay chained to Intel's designs forever, unless they want to spend a fourtune reverse-engineering Merced.
:), scalability (Intel has the higher MHz for now... but word is on Tom's Intel's new CPU's were released early and may suffer from heat failure), optimization advantages and so on. Oh, did I mention new G3's ship with only a small heat sink and NO CPU FAN? Since Linux is capable of running just as well on PPC -- or better, if you believe the above -- wouldn't you want to run Linux on one? (I run Linux on my G3 now... ).
1) There is competition on the x86 architecture (with AMD recently beating the PANTS off Intel
2) Costs - largely a factor of manufacturing scale, aside, the PowerPC is an AWESOME chip family that is in every other respect superior to x86. Don't believe me - lookup Spec scores, MMX vs. Altivec (what do you mean Intel can't multitask MMX and floating point data at the same time??
3) Good, honest competition between different architectures means great things for all of us. I always wished Apple would open up and distrubute $700 computers with Linux, but their business model doesn't support it right now. Lighten up and accept it. PowerPC is not Apple. Think PPC is only good for embedded applications? Think "MP3 Linux Player" for your home stereo -- *without* noisy fans and overheat issues.
4) What's with the fudders here saying there'll never be games for Linux PowerPC?? LOKISOFT? "Hello..??" Didn't people say the same about Linux? That arguement is as dumb as the one where people said 'iMac will fail without a floppy drive'. If the libraries are there, it's trivial to port from one Linux to another. Even if a PowerPC isn't in your plans for your next system, you'll still benefit from it competing with Merced.
5) The fact that Linux IS truly portable to competing CPU's is exactly why I distrust Intel's "Linux initiatives"... why would Intel push an OS that is portable over an OS that is TIED to Intel? My answer is they don't know what to do for now so they're just playing along.
6) BeOS =does= run on PowerPC G3's. It just doesn't run on Apple motherboards. There's he-said/she-said between Be and Apple, and I don't entirely blame Apple. Want to see if Be's decision to ditch PowerPC support was because of Apple or because of Intel's investment? Ask them to announce support for this design when it becomes available. Surely Intel would not mind seeing their children play with PowerPC's... >:-D
We don't even get MacWorld anymore, just Seybold.
Feh!
Northeast's too conservative for me... think I want to move west coast where everyone's younger and not so inbred. Too many guilt-inflicting finger-pointing Puritans here..
Sigh. My company's migrating from Sendmail to Exchange. The server's been acting up, no wonder with all the 30 meg files being emailed on the old 200 MHz FreeBSD UNIX box. The new outsourced IT guys who scorn "shareware operating systems" can't wait to install Exchange on *different* hardware and reflect on the old days (where we could just Telnet in from offsite to get the friggin email):-/
Microsoft and Intel may not have voting shares, but they carry considerable influence within Avid.... witness the attempted retreat by Avid to NT-only post NAB 99.
:(
:)
Reflexive Mac-bashers hold your tongue please. The majority of non-linear video editing (read: Avid's customer base) is "still" Mac based.
After the customer base revolted Avid has been falling head over heels - following a 30% stock drop! - to make up and reverse that decision somewhat.
In my humble opinion SI is a piece of shit. I use the software quite often, and on NT even...
Microsoft ditched SI because their customer base was switching to Maya anyhow. You see, as part of Microsoft's "war against open 3D stardards", they had to buy smart people to help develop their closed 3D API "DirectX". To do this they diverted considerable resources from the SGI flavor, and poured resources into the fledgeling NT port.
Once all the SI customer base was screaming "I knew it [ms would hose them]" they had to get rid of the product or watch it wither. SI on NT was a tremendous HACK even as far as NT standards go. Microsoft never bought SI to make a direct profit off of... they just wanted to embrace and extend OpenGL and capture one of the leading IRIX applications (giving the customer base the shaft if they stayed on SGI).
SGI was very smart when they brought down the price of Maya to within reach of SI, MAX, etc.. and one more thing you'll NEVER see MAX on Linux. It's way too tied to NT code-wise and uses a lot of licensed code too (maybe you'll see the MAX distributed render client...). Given SGI's healthy attitude towards Linux I think it's a matter of months before it's announced for Linux. This makes me very happy
I hear some people near me talking about Exchange [shudder... been through 2 migrations at companies before].
Knowing MS Exchange is a "Bad Thing", and I'd like to save the company money where possible, I decided to search the web for a collection of "horror stories and MS Exchange"... to my surprise I couldn't find ANYTHING!
Now I've seen articles here and there (InfoWorld, news.com etc.) about Exchange bugs, but I would have thought SOMEONE had collected URL's and posted them. Nothing. I'd have to do a lot of research to get this info, and given my workload it would be an unwise distraction.
The second thing I'd like to know, is how much does MS Exchange COST? I know the price varies, and larger companies get breaks if they "cozy" up to MS, but that doesn't help me much. Say a company has 50-150 employees... what does that translate into just for the software licensing?
You need something that plays CD-R *and* VideoCD, because of the media and the format.
:-/
For the original question:
I don't know what burns VCD in Linux, but Toast on the Mac does nicely. This is marginally on-topic, because Executor will run many non-PowerPC Mac apps under Linux, and MAY run Toast. I know Toast is a FAT binary... works on either 68k or PPC CPU's.
For your question:
Best thing is to burn a VideoCD in Toast (MacOS) or whatever is used in Windows, and take that to the store and ask to play it. Bring different CD media as well... some players handle silver CD-R but choke on blue disks, and so on.
About 2 weeks ago, I bought a Sony 3xx-something DVD player... it would not play CD-R, of which I have an EXTENSIVE collection, so back to the store I went. This is backwards... the new Sony's do NOT play CD-R, except for the top model. To save costs, see...
The Panasonic 414 does play CD-R (not sure about VCD), but it has a nasty audio/video synch problem (as does the Sony) when the layers change... during Blade Runner, audio fell 1 full second behind the video. This is common to many DVD players (pause or synch), which is why I've given up until after all the holiday sales...
What I want in a DVD player is:
* "codefree"... so I can play Japanese Anime, some of which is ONLY available as imports, without buying a new "Japanese code" player. Some players are easily hacked, but as I mentioned above there are many other things that could be wrong (like no CD-R support).
* Macrovision-free. Sure, it's an anti-piracy tool, but it also prevents any decent capture through my video board. The real pirates on IRC have ripping all figured out anyhow... (I just want to make digital samples)
* Plays CD-R
* Plays VideoCD. I think VCD sucks, BUT one usefull thing is taking a homemade presentation with you on disc. At the data rates VCD affords, you can get real good quality for a video slideshow, and the media's more reliable than VHS (oops the tape got eaten, boss...)
This kind of experiment can and will work eventually. All the people yapping about Jurrasic Park can just shut up already... it's difficult enough to reintroduce wolves to the wild without people spreading nonsense FUD!
:-/
These animals did not die out for natural reasons; we slaughtered every last one of them. One could argue this is still Darwinism, and because the remaining Huia's couldn't shoot back or breed fast enough they deserve to die, but this arguement is flawed. That kind of environmentalism means there's no room on the planet for anything but humans, cockroaches, rats, ants, and e-coli.. not very good company.
We can also bring back the dodo, and the whooly mammouth, and there's talk about that too. Restoring parts of the ecosystem we unbalanced is good overall, the problem is we're only going to restore prey not predators, so we'll still be tipping the balance.
Taking this restoration a step further there is evidence that Neanderthal man died out not by natural means but by homo sapiens moving in and killing for territory. If that evidence is true, should we restore neanderthals? I'm not suggesting a yes or a no...
Lastly, what's the point if the boundless appetite of the world just chews them up again?
I live north of Boston, MA... a lot of towns *mandate* new homes built must consume 2 acres of land, presumably to "preserve open space" but really to exclude economic undesirables (they don't say "darkies" in New Hampshire anymore). As a result of the home building boom, most of the land in this area is gone... mile after mile of suburban sprawl. Where's the habitat? How about the environmental damage every time people take their SUV 4 miles to the nearest convenience store .
Save the animals? There's a bigger issue people miss. Like a virus, we consume the planet and slowly kill it.
I'm not heading to the hills like some hermit or advocating anyone else do this (but we could reproduce a little less often - PLEASE). I am saddened that it will take several MAJOR ecological disasters to catch our attention for longer than the average commercial.
I'm just thinking this is so much waste given our habits. Of course, some insensitive redneck will just accuse me of being an unpatriotic anti-capitalist treehugger with no values.
I don't know too much about this subject but I will be following along. My network is much like yours, except the server is my G3 Mac. I know... building Linux PC for that task so I don't have to reboot my Win98/Linux box every now and then.
Unfortunately for the Mac there is no free UNIX-like shell, like CygWin on the PC, so you miss some scripting tools.
Have you set up Netatalk and the piece that lets Linux talk back to the Mac? You might be able to use Retrospect on the Mac, then AppleScript midnight copies to the "Appleshare" running on Linux.
I odn't have a solution, but maybe some of this helps. Cheers,
A lot of countries are poor, and the Internet won't change that.. but at least their collective goventments could build some infrastructure if they were not blowing all their money on corrupt projects.
:), so we're in a sense already funding plenty of economic development. Not to mention the fact every time a US citizen buys a bag of mother nature they're contributing to economic devlopment..
How much money did you say the World Bank has lent these governments for "modernization" so far. Oh, you didn't. Much of this money is wasted but only the local government has direct control of how it's spent. Instead a lot of these loans are wasted on things like the Malaysian MultiMedia Corridor, then to prop up their economy they engage in large-scale deforestation, dragnet fish harvests, or other very short-term economic plans.
For what it's worth, a large part of these loans are guaranteed by the US Government (they WILL be paid back, right?
Apologies if I sound conservative.. I offend conservatives too because I think for myself..
Ah, the brave new world of the Internet, where post-industrial powers like the USA arm-twist emerging countries indo adopting our ridiculously extended copyright and patent laws (heck, even Microsoft has a patent on "style sheets"... which existed before Microsoft).
:) and I really wish it were like this on TV (it *is* cable).
As the USA passes more and more laws against online "evils" like online gambling, porn, and CRYPTO, and demand goes UP, we'll see a lot of development moving offshore. Lots of internet gambling sites relocated from the USA to the Carribean for this very reason.
The world is going *broadband*, big time. The next big thing will be broadcasting over IP, and the net offers unlimited freedom. People WANT trash for television... look at all the daytime talk shows or the nighttime "COPS" type offerings. People order extra-explicit versions of these tapes because you can't get it on TV. I went to see the South Park movie (died laughing
All this stuff and more will be streaming at viewing quality in just a couple more years. The US might have one of the best technology infrastructures in the world, but this is a capitalist world and services will move to make the highest profit, so the third-world will get their Internet.
There's no shortage of clueless breeder drones in the US who want the government and television to work as their babysitter. That alone will export all the Internet the 3rd world needs...
I can't believe Microsoft would allow one of their minions to shine a spotlight on their most criminal behavior. No, I'm not talking about bloatware specifically - I'm talking about users being FORCED into buying - thus "demanding" - the latest bloatware, just to read a .doc file.
It's like saying "life" prisoners ASKED to be used in government sponsored medical testing. After all, they chose to go to jail right?
Didn't you ask for a local cable monopoly too? I get cable TV from my only provider, so I must be demanding less choice... [/sarcasm]
ESR taking credit for recent press favorable to Linux is like... Al Gore claiming to have helped create the internet because he was somehow involved [with some funding measures].
The "Communism" stab is the most offensive. I guess that kind of politics is still OK with gun toteing tobacco chewing rednecks...
Maybe I'm biased, but I always thought Linux and Mac users - on average - were a TAD smarter than the average Windows user. I rationalize this because some thought process went into choosing your OS, rather than the blank stare you get when you ask a Windows biggot how or why they "chose" MS Windows as their primary OS. Still, there's enough idiots to go around to every group and association on the planet.
Given Microsoft's past of paying people for "stuffing" pro-Microsoft Letters To The Editor and to various "community" talkback forums, I WOULD NOT put it past them to have creatively put together a few embarrasing emails which then can be linked to us.
Microsoft HAS used tactics like this and EVEN when they get caught, what's the fallout?? Did CNN even report when Microsoft paid workers to email and write letters regarding USDOJ vs. MS? i know it got mention in some newspapers, but the media doesn't seem to get offended when manipulated by someone with large advertising pockets...
Actually, the Apple 1 came *without* case - you were expected to supply your own.
Some of the computer history sites show the same wood photo over and over, but that's just chance and distribution of the same photo.
And at 1ish MHz, the thing didn't throw out much heat or (guessing here...) interference. Heck, my G3 300 MHz doesn't even need a CPU fan - just a tiny heat sink. By contrast my AMD K2/450 has a heat sink the size of a coffee mug, and a fan atop to boot...
When someone turns something on, and your monitor goes flakey like that it's because your POWER system's stretched. Plug into another circuit, or MAYBE add a UPS, and tell me if it still happens.
I'll ignore the rest of your comments since you knew they were unprofessional... but you probably think Mac users are people not "smart enough" to use Linux shouldn't use computers, riiight?
A little tip - when you use the linux.com URL and reply-to address in stupid posts, it's no different than using company letterhead to for dumb faxes or snailmail. You'll figure it out soon enough...
Each part DOES need to be certified individually, but if you assemble them it changes the picture: how well do they work TOGETHER.
If you assemble a system from parts and want to sell it, it needs FCC testing. JUST because the parts passed muster does not mean they will assembled.
How do I know? We sell workstations with custom hardware and software, currently based off Intergraph GT1 TZ2000's. Even if we make no modifications we would need retesting, but once you add in custom PCI cards with additional processors there's some work to be done.
I read your assessment of "Linux vs. NT". While reading through, I thought you had some reasonable points up until the concluding paragraph. Oh, and I hope you can believe not ALL the the rude flaming are really from Linux users (we have our bad apples in the bunch, but we don't pay them to flood ZDnet and newpaper colums like Microsoft's failed "astro turf" campaign)... apologies for the bad apples.
OTOH, you really did not give justice to Linux, but perhaps that is in backlash of all the good press Linux is recieving? Here's what I noticed:
>Companies that add features they need, but that are not accepted into
the core distribution, may find themselves in a redevelopment and retesting cycle every time a new version of Linux is released.
Are you serious? People are still using 2.0.36, and even 1.x, and support for them will far outlast Microsoft support of Windows 3.11, but I don't see how this fits into your comparison, since you can't modify the Windows at ALL. You can "modify Windows" by writing a driver and you can also modify Linux with a kernel module. It's very unlikely the kernel team would reject something that belongs in the kernel especially if it's an conditional compile and not harmful to the mainstream users. You state this as if it has happened but do not provide an example, and this reduces your credibility. As a counter example, they've allowed kernel support for offbeat projects like Amiga/Atari/Mac68k, MIPS, etc. even though Linus said on day one it would never be portable to other platforms. Implying people have to reengineer their software for the "latest" kernel is pure FUD.
>Windows NT Server Enterprise Edition ships with a full complement of Internet services
True, and they also force a web browser into the NT kernel - security, stability and user's wishes be damned. Transaction processing is not supposed to be in the kernel anyhow, and for the price of the NT EES you describe you could well buy one for Linux and plow the rest into additional system RAM. IMHO, BSD UNIX like Yahoo uses makes for a much better free unix if you want a server platform.
>Whereas Microsoft's products are designed to work with one another and the operating system's services, users may spend a significant amount of time trying to integrate these components under Linux.
Linux CAN be time-consuming to configure, but so can NT. You do need to look before you leap with NT.. know what you want before you commit and don't jump on one or the other without research. Your point about integration however is laughable - Linux prides itself on adherence to established standards, and since the source code is open it's a heck of a lot easier to integrate custom apps on Linux. Microsoft products only work well together if you commit to an ENDLESS cycle of pay-upgrades, as BackOffice and Exchange users have found.
>Without robust SMP, Linux servers can support only small companies
You neglect to mention that Linux requires significantly less horsepower than NT, which means it runs faster on the same hardware. Exotic configurations like Mindcraft's studies are good for focusing on problems like this. You did not mention it only took a few days to fix some of the SMP bugs that hampered Linux SMP.
>Linux is a college student's project gone astray.
Nice FUDDY sound bite, but if you did your research you'd know Linux wasn't a school project.
>The version that will be supported by Sun Microsystems and IBM on its hardware will fall far short of each of these company's own Unix operating systems in features and capabilities.
On what evidence do you base these charges? If you can't think beyond the cynical world of closed software, sure, maybe they would hope for this. There's no way for Sun/IBM to hold back Linux however, and the reality is Linux is improving much faster than NT, by Microsoft's OWN admission. This isn't "Java" or browser standards... Microsoft can't kill Linux.
Sun and IBM might be just hedging their bets, but the OS will "get there" on their hardware, or no one will buy those systems. It's harder and harder to justify thousands for a UNIX system upgrade - they know this - and they also know their real business in the future will be hardware and consulting. IBM stands to make a killing at this and doesn't consider Linux eating their lunch. SGI also understands this. The OS has gotten this far without ANY help from Intel.
Scott Prive
I don't have all the specs here, and I'm to lazy to reread them anyways. But there's an apples and oranges difference between AltiVec and FPU.
You might be confising them, because in the Intel world the FPU must be turned OFF when MMX is in use. How is it Intel says MMX is great for 3D is BEYOND me... as far as I am concerned MMX was good for a few PhotoShop extensions. AltiVec does not have this crippling design flaw - with PowerPC the Integer, Floating Point AND "vector processor" (AltiVec) can all run simultaniously.
Another huge advantage of AltiVec is preexisting applications already support it by way of QuickTime. It wasn't until recently that Microsoft started writing multimedia layers into their OS (although they change name every month...). QuickTime's been around for AGES, and if you accelerate QT with AltiVec everything is going to require much less CPU or simply run faster.
One last difference between AltiVec and MMX is when you want MMX you must write that code in assembly - x86 Assembly SUCKS compared to just about anything else. Provided compiler support is there, you can use any damn language you want with AltiVec. This is great for quick everything, but it helps those kind souls doing Mac ports of popular open source utilities.
I didn't even get into benchmarking, because I don't care. Simply because of the bad design of MMX you'll never see large parts of Windows taking advantage of it. Now I wish I had waited on buying my B&W G3 because AltiVec is almost here, but this is the way things work...
When I see Intel expanding their reach into other parts of the system I see them closing doors on competition... basically ripping pages right out of the Microsoft Tactics handbook.
:) antics. I wonder how favorably AMD and Cyrix's reverse-engineering expenses compare against Intel's basic R&D expenses?
:-/
It's great that Red Hat is just giving away money to BeOS, VA Research, Red Hat and all the rest. And Intel can only build better CPU's if they integrate the FPU (remember superior non-Intel 386 FPU's?), bully their way into the networking biz, hijack the OPEN VBL2.0 spec with PCI, bully Intergraph and other chipmakers into "license your stuff to us or no early access to our next CPU + motherboard. *Deliberately* build more expensive "Slot One" CPU's if that's the ONLY way to isolate AMD and Cyrix (it worked).
Intel doesn't even have good technology. They just produced Yugo's on a much higher scale than PowerPC, MIPS, and Alpha. Big deal - Intel's entitled to their success... BUT when they start acting like Microsoft and actually SUPPRESS innovation that really rankles me.
People talk about Microsoft this and that, well, the difference between INTEL and MICROSOFT cannot be summed up as simply as "Intel has clones therefore they are not as bad [as MS]". AMD builds its ENTIRE business on reverse-engineering... everything from scratch and twice documented to cover your ass from lawsuits. If you think about it, AMD could sell their chips CHEAPER if it weren't for Intel's strong-arm (no pun intended..
Intel can do all sorts of nasty things to Linux too. Sure Linux is GPL but how many people care? To reshape the question, how many people refuse to use Microsoft Internet Explorer or Hotmail because it is Microsoft??
Linux has a lot of shortcomings that could be exploited without violating the GPL... just offer enticements seperately via downloads. If Linux achieves world domination *without* open source fixing the shortcomings of the Linux platform it will be vulnerable. A lot of folks would take closed-source binaries from Intel, particularly if they perform better than open source initiatives. Want consistent printer support (especially for non-Postscript models), X displays hand-tuned with MMX assembly language tailored only for Intel display chipsets, co-porting Microsoft Media Player along with the Indio and i268 multimedia codecs, maybe even Linux drivers for WinModems, WinPrinters, and the eventual WinMotherboard.
A few years ago, did anyone think Microsoft could stitch things up so quickly? I still remember running DooM on a Windows-less computer running IBM PC DOS..
We need robust support for Linux on non-Intel CPU's if there's ever to be any real competition, as opposed to AMD playing catch up. AMD might someday exceed Intel's best performing CPU, but it looks like they will ALWAYS be playing by Intel's book of rules.