well, I'm not going to flame you. But I will say this: your post breaks down if read by someone who doesn't believe in the Bible. I understand what you're saying, I'm familiar with this whole mark of the beast business, but I personally do not subscribe to any organized religion. Brought up Jewish, exposed to catholicism by my mother's side, I quickly discovered that modern day religions didn't fit the bill for me. I prefer to make up my own ideas. And why not? There's absolutely NO reason why one religion is any more "valid" than any other. The Christians have the Bible, big deal. The Jews have the Torah and the Muslims have the Koran. Each one can equally claim that the existance of said text proves that their relgion is the correct one. Partially the reason why we've got all these idiotic wars in the middle east over a tiny piece of land. Now, I'm not saying I don't like your post (I do), I'm just saying be aware that there are tons of people with different religions out there, and like I said, each one is equally as valid, so I think that using religion as a way to back up claims isn't the best idea. If one religion could somehow prove that *it* is truly the one to be followed, using factual evidence and none of this "just believe" business, then we'd all be most likely that religion. But obviously, that hasn't happened, and we are not. I don't know which one is "right", so I figure to be safe, I'll just form my own opinions, because I figure the one person I can trust the most is myself and my intuition. Flame that.
Re:IA64 is the "heir apparent"
on
Itanium Update
·
· Score: 0
>AMD has a good product, I just wish they were a >little less mum, and had a better response than >warmed-over P-numbers. I also wish we could hear >a bit more noise about the Hammers.
Being an employee of AMD, I know that we are rather tight lipped for obvious reasons about future processors. I'm not sure what kind of information you're looking for...release dates are certainly out of the question though =). If you were at Linuxworld in SF, we were giving presentations on the architecture of the hammer chips (yes, by a techy guy, not marketing). For those that know nothing about the hammer chip, here's a *super quick and dirty* nutshell overview:
* extension of x86 architecture - only a couple new instructions added.
* natively runs all x86-32/16 bit code, only requiring 60 clock cycles to switch from the 64 bit operating mode to 32 bit mode
* addition of 8 general purpose registers, which really are general purpose (unlike the EAX/etc registers which can have side effects)
* we had a fully working 64 bit version of SuSE linux running in an emulator by Simics at Linuxworld
* you will not have to upgrade any software. You can take every single program (including OS) and run it just fine on the hammer chips. When you feel like it, and have the cash to burn, go buy the 64 bit versions. The hammer chips are expected to run 32 bit code better than the Athlons. Now please note: that's of course "expected", legal speak for I'm not guaranteeing shit, it's what we're hoping for =)
* desktop model to be 1-2P, server model to be 4-8P.
Want an overview on the 64 bit chips? Click here. There will probably be more than you want to know here, but the first few pages present a good overview. There is also more located here.
Basically all this crap is Intel trying to put AMD out of business. They are busting their asses to up those CPU speeds, which is just a marketing scheme so they can say on TV: "We have the fastest chip out there". That, combined with the price wars, is Intel's way of trying to bully AMD out of the competition.
I can understand why people are concerned about piracy of their work. After all, they made the stuff and deserve to get paid for it. But I don't think that they're ever going to find a way to prevent the illegal distribution of material without seriously annoying the hell out of rightful users, or without infringing on people's rights in some way. Also, piracy isn't all that bad. What do I mean? For example, on Napster, I'd grab a shitload of techno mix sets, a lot bootlegged from clubs and parties, as well as rips from CDs of techno records. Some of the records I'd then go out and buy (I never would have before since I had never had a chance to hear the song and get teh artist/title). Also, the mix sets got me even more interested in the DJ playing them, and made me not only want to go out and see them, but get my hands on their material as well. Had I not had access to that kind of distribution system, I wouldn't have been able to do that.
I think that it's interesting that in the techno music world, piracy seems to be viewed totally differently. You've got DJ's (not all of course) who would love if their shit got mass produced and distributed: it gets their name out, gets people to go pay to see them and pick up more of their material. That's advertising that's *expensive* to pay for. And while they may lose some profit over the piracy of their work, in the end most are making more than that back over a larger and more religious fan base. And for the guys producing records: they are usually anonymous as it is. The only time they really get mentioned is if their stuff winds up on a compilation. So having their tracks ripped and pirated again gets their name out and increases sales. In short: piracy can be good, in the sense that it can get the artist more visibility and build a larger fan base. Ya, it can be bad too, this thing can be argued either way until we're all dead. YMMV.
nvidia.com comes up all fux0red when I try and view it in netscape or moz 0.9.3 on my linux box. I've had it happen with several other sites. Plus, moz 0.9.3 will randomly just stop working for me. Not crash, but stop downloading webpages, forcing me to revert back to Netscape 4.71.
Re:Why people use Netscape instead of IE or Mozill
on
Netscape 6.1
·
· Score: 0
The only reason I use Netscape 4.78 is because I'm still having ridiculously annoying basic browser problems with mozilla, yes, even 0.93 (like the lovely randomly stop working issue I'm having). I played around with mozilla for a while, and had some big time stability issues. I could use Konqueror or Galeon I suppose, but I like the mozilla interface better. Plus, I don't want to have to install KDE to get a web broswer (nothign wrong w/ KDE, I just don't want it). On my windoze box, I use IE, cause I'm tired of things randomly crashing. I don't care who the hell makes my damn browser, but it better *work*. I'm hoping the mozilla effort pays off though, when it finally reaches 1.0 I think I'll have my new broswer of choice.
First of all, if you want a quick overview of what Hypertransport is, go read:
http://www.amd.com/news/prodpr/21069.html
If you're lazy, here's a rather interesting chunk:
Compared with existing system interconnects that provide bandwidth up to 266MB/sec, HyperTransport technology's potential peak bandwidth of 12.8GB/sec represents better than a 40-fold increase in data throughput. HyperTransport technology provides an extremely fast connection that complements externally visible bus standards like the Peripheral Component Interconnect (PCI), as well as emerging technologies like InfiniBand
Compare that with the article saying:
"32-wire version could carry 6.6 gigabytes per second". Now, I'm assuming that on AMD's webpage, they were referring to plain old PCI, not the PCI-X that the article refers to, so to be fair, ignore the "40 times faster..." bit. But 12.8 vs 6.6 seems pretty big...
Hypertransport is bascially meant to replace the PCI buses running between the computer components, it's not replacing those PCI slots/cards you've got in your current system.
ahh, but then I can't play Alice, Max Payne, Dune Emperor, or Diablo 2 expansion. Nor can I use Cubase/Soundforge/Cool Edit Pro. Or make sure the code I'm writing on my linux box is really platform independant. So it's not so simple of a solution for everyone. Linux is rad, in all sorts of ways everyone already knows, but until I can get Cubase for it (I do a lot of techno producing, the MIDI apps I've seen for linux...suck in comparison), or until I can play the games that I really enjoy on it, it's not quite a simple solution. Sure, reject these reasons as useless, but it's the only reason why I keep windoze around, and they're the same reasons I keep hearing my friends and others cite when I try to convince them to start playing w/ linux and give up MS: "Where's my music composition tools, and where's my games?". That's a key point for a large amount of people. Kudos to Loki for at least porting some bad ass games to Linux, but with such a tiny market share, I'm not expecting to see a Linux Cubase, or D2, or Alice/etc. I suppose you could just run Mozilla and that'd be the end of that, or do what I do and just use your windoze box for the games/music tools.
Well, I do quite a bit of development, so a speed up in compilation times is always appreciated. Plus, I like being able to play games on my box. And seeing as how it only cost me $130 for a 1.33GHz AMD Athlon...how the heck can I pass that up? I built a 1.33 Athlon system, 256MB DDR RAM, UDMA 100/7200rpm 30GB drive for under $600...granted I already had a burner and a GeForce 2 card, but still...
These questions are kind of useless, cause it's going to be different for every person. If you really want to play games, or you do some intensive stuff like lots of compilation, or database access, etc, then more horsepower is certainly useful. BUT you've also got to make that decision in comparison to what you've got. If you have a 1 GHz system, a 1.2 or 1.33 isn't going to be that much of a difference, you're bottleneck will more likely be that of your hard drive and RAM. But if you're like me, going from a P2 400...ya, that 1.33AMD is quite nice.
There's a lot of talk about moving to Linux or rather any other open sourced O/S, and saying f* MS. I'm all for it, but I think there's a couple major things that need to be done before anyone but the hackers/coders/similar geeks (used in a loving way =) ditch Windoze. For most "regular" users, they use either office type apps (which do exist on Linux), or...they play games. Games especially. You can play way more cooler games in Windows than in Linux. Yes, some are ported to Linux, and I suppose there's a handful of cool Linux only games, but in reality, there's a short supply of bad ass games like we see in windows. The reason is obvious, there's not nearly as much market share to release a Linux game over a windows game. Currently, the only thing I use my windows box for is to play Alice, Diablo 2, and Dune Emperor. And to recompile OpenGL apps that I develop in Linux, just to make sure they work in windows too.
But the other, more important thing, is the learning curve of Linux. Just installing it is difficult for most users. Admittedly, things are getting better, like SuSE's YAST2 and SAX2, which make plug and play and auto configuration way better. But for even such simple things like downloading a program...in windows everyone's used to downloading a zip or exe file, and uncompressing/running it with no problems. Most aren't used to downloading a tarball and compiling the source. I think the first thing that would need to be done is to ease the installation process and come up with some apps or different mechanisms for doing such simple things like downloading and installing a program, or doing some basic system maintenance. debs and rpms do a pretty good job, but there's still quite a bit of source only tarballs out there. But I think that if Linux, or any other open sourced O/S for that matter, is *really* interested in truly competing with windows for market share, these are 2 major things that need to be addressed. Don't ask me how, I'm just an intern =) But I think things start with lowering the learning curve. That doesn't mean dumbing it down, or changing the things about it that power users like. You can add stuff on top of it or just write applications to help out with this.
Slashdot Mirror
well, I'm not going to flame you. But I will say this: your post breaks down if read by someone who doesn't believe in the Bible. I understand what you're saying, I'm familiar with this whole mark of the beast business, but I personally do not subscribe to any organized religion. Brought up Jewish, exposed to catholicism by my mother's side, I quickly discovered that modern day religions didn't fit the bill for me. I prefer to make up my own ideas. And why not? There's absolutely NO reason why one religion is any more "valid" than any other. The Christians have the Bible, big deal. The Jews have the Torah and the Muslims have the Koran. Each one can equally claim that the existance of said text proves that their relgion is the correct one. Partially the reason why we've got all these idiotic wars in the middle east over a tiny piece of land. Now, I'm not saying I don't like your post (I do), I'm just saying be aware that there are tons of people with different religions out there, and like I said, each one is equally as valid, so I think that using religion as a way to back up claims isn't the best idea. If one religion could somehow prove that *it* is truly the one to be followed, using factual evidence and none of this "just believe" business, then we'd all be most likely that religion. But obviously, that hasn't happened, and we are not. I don't know which one is "right", so I figure to be safe, I'll just form my own opinions, because I figure the one person I can trust the most is myself and my intuition. Flame that.
Being an employee of AMD, I know that we are rather tight lipped for obvious reasons about future processors. I'm not sure what kind of information you're looking for...release dates are certainly out of the question though =). If you were at Linuxworld in SF, we were giving presentations on the architecture of the hammer chips (yes, by a techy guy, not marketing). For those that know nothing about the hammer chip, here's a *super quick and dirty* nutshell overview:
* extension of x86 architecture - only a couple new instructions added.
* natively runs all x86-32/16 bit code, only requiring 60 clock cycles to switch from the 64 bit operating mode to 32 bit mode
* addition of 8 general purpose registers, which really are general purpose (unlike the EAX/etc registers which can have side effects)
* we had a fully working 64 bit version of SuSE linux running in an emulator by Simics at Linuxworld
* you will not have to upgrade any software. You can take every single program (including OS) and run it just fine on the hammer chips. When you feel like it, and have the cash to burn, go buy the 64 bit versions. The hammer chips are expected to run 32 bit code better than the Athlons. Now please note: that's of course "expected", legal speak for I'm not guaranteeing shit, it's what we're hoping for =)
* desktop model to be 1-2P, server model to be 4-8P.
Want an overview on the 64 bit chips? Click here. There will probably be more than you want to know here, but the first few pages present a good overview. There is also more located here.
Basically all this crap is Intel trying to put AMD out of business. They are busting their asses to up those CPU speeds, which is just a marketing scheme so they can say on TV: "We have the fastest chip out there". That, combined with the price wars, is Intel's way of trying to bully AMD out of the competition.
I think that it's interesting that in the techno music world, piracy seems to be viewed totally differently. You've got DJ's (not all of course) who would love if their shit got mass produced and distributed: it gets their name out, gets people to go pay to see them and pick up more of their material. That's advertising that's *expensive* to pay for. And while they may lose some profit over the piracy of their work, in the end most are making more than that back over a larger and more religious fan base. And for the guys producing records: they are usually anonymous as it is. The only time they really get mentioned is if their stuff winds up on a compilation. So having their tracks ripped and pirated again gets their name out and increases sales. In short: piracy can be good, in the sense that it can get the artist more visibility and build a larger fan base. Ya, it can be bad too, this thing can be argued either way until we're all dead. YMMV.
nvidia.com comes up all fux0red when I try and view it in netscape or moz 0.9.3 on my linux box. I've had it happen with several other sites. Plus, moz 0.9.3 will randomly just stop working for me. Not crash, but stop downloading webpages, forcing me to revert back to Netscape 4.71.
The only reason I use Netscape 4.78 is because I'm still having ridiculously annoying basic browser problems with mozilla, yes, even 0.93 (like the lovely randomly stop working issue I'm having). I played around with mozilla for a while, and had some big time stability issues. I could use Konqueror or Galeon I suppose, but I like the mozilla interface better. Plus, I don't want to have to install KDE to get a web broswer (nothign wrong w/ KDE, I just don't want it). On my windoze box, I use IE, cause I'm tired of things randomly crashing. I don't care who the hell makes my damn browser, but it better *work*. I'm hoping the mozilla effort pays off though, when it finally reaches 1.0 I think I'll have my new broswer of choice.
http://www.amd.com/news/prodpr/21069.html
If you're lazy, here's a rather interesting chunk:
Compared with existing system interconnects that provide bandwidth up to 266MB/sec, HyperTransport technology's potential peak bandwidth of 12.8GB/sec represents better than a 40-fold increase in data throughput. HyperTransport technology provides an extremely fast connection that complements externally visible bus standards like the Peripheral Component Interconnect (PCI), as well as emerging technologies like InfiniBand
Compare that with the article saying:
"32-wire version could carry 6.6 gigabytes per second". Now, I'm assuming that on AMD's webpage, they were referring to plain old PCI, not the PCI-X that the article refers to, so to be fair, ignore the "40 times faster..." bit. But 12.8 vs 6.6 seems pretty big...
Hypertransport is bascially meant to replace the PCI buses running between the computer components, it's not replacing those PCI slots/cards you've got in your current system.
ahh, but then I can't play Alice, Max Payne, Dune Emperor, or Diablo 2 expansion. Nor can I use Cubase/Soundforge/Cool Edit Pro. Or make sure the code I'm writing on my linux box is really platform independant. So it's not so simple of a solution for everyone. Linux is rad, in all sorts of ways everyone already knows, but until I can get Cubase for it (I do a lot of techno producing, the MIDI apps I've seen for linux...suck in comparison), or until I can play the games that I really enjoy on it, it's not quite a simple solution. Sure, reject these reasons as useless, but it's the only reason why I keep windoze around, and they're the same reasons I keep hearing my friends and others cite when I try to convince them to start playing w/ linux and give up MS: "Where's my music composition tools, and where's my games?". That's a key point for a large amount of people. Kudos to Loki for at least porting some bad ass games to Linux, but with such a tiny market share, I'm not expecting to see a Linux Cubase, or D2, or Alice/etc. I suppose you could just run Mozilla and that'd be the end of that, or do what I do and just use your windoze box for the games/music tools.
For the linux10 thing I would assume Pacific time, since it says it's being held in Sunnyvale, CA.
Well, I do quite a bit of development, so a speed up in compilation times is always appreciated. Plus, I like being able to play games on my box. And seeing as how it only cost me $130 for a 1.33GHz AMD Athlon...how the heck can I pass that up? I built a 1.33 Athlon system, 256MB DDR RAM, UDMA 100/7200rpm 30GB drive for under $600...granted I already had a burner and a GeForce 2 card, but still... These questions are kind of useless, cause it's going to be different for every person. If you really want to play games, or you do some intensive stuff like lots of compilation, or database access, etc, then more horsepower is certainly useful. BUT you've also got to make that decision in comparison to what you've got. If you have a 1 GHz system, a 1.2 or 1.33 isn't going to be that much of a difference, you're bottleneck will more likely be that of your hard drive and RAM. But if you're like me, going from a P2 400...ya, that 1.33AMD is quite nice.
There's a lot of talk about moving to Linux or rather any other open sourced O/S, and saying f* MS. I'm all for it, but I think there's a couple major things that need to be done before anyone but the hackers/coders/similar geeks (used in a loving way =) ditch Windoze. For most "regular" users, they use either office type apps (which do exist on Linux), or...they play games. Games especially. You can play way more cooler games in Windows than in Linux. Yes, some are ported to Linux, and I suppose there's a handful of cool Linux only games, but in reality, there's a short supply of bad ass games like we see in windows.
The reason is obvious, there's not nearly as much market share to release a Linux game over a windows game. Currently, the only thing I use my windows box for is to play Alice, Diablo 2, and Dune Emperor. And to recompile OpenGL apps that I develop in Linux, just to make sure they work in windows too.
But the other, more important thing, is the learning curve of Linux. Just installing it is difficult for most users. Admittedly, things are getting better, like SuSE's YAST2 and SAX2, which make plug and play and auto configuration way better. But for even such simple things like downloading a program...in windows everyone's used to downloading a zip or exe file, and uncompressing/running it with no problems. Most aren't used to downloading a tarball and compiling the source. I think the first thing that would need to be done is to ease the installation process and come up with some apps or different mechanisms for doing such simple things like downloading and installing a program, or doing some basic system maintenance. debs and rpms do a pretty good job, but there's still quite a bit of source only tarballs out there. But I think that if Linux, or any other open sourced O/S for that matter, is *really* interested in truly competing with windows for market share, these are 2 major things that need to be addressed. Don't ask me how, I'm just an intern =) But I think things start with lowering the learning curve. That doesn't mean dumbing it down, or changing the things about it that power users like. You can add stuff on top of it or just write applications to help out with this.
http://www.amd.com/news/prodpr/21034.html Dual processor AMD chips are out at 1 and 1.2 GHz.