Astro is more likely to do this than Crusoe...there really isnt much incentive for TransMeta to port Crusoe to a new socket when they can just ramp up for it with their newer chips to come when it actually happens.
You do make a decent point, though my experience with P4 ended with my 1.7 P4 at work. It's a piece of crap. We also have several of our communal machines on other P4s and they are also terrible. Perhaps the latest and greatest P4 chips arent that bad, but if the performance is somewhere similar and the price difference is moot, i would rather support AMD than Intel. They have been more consistent in their quality in the past couple years for me than Intel, so I am more inclined to trust them. Besides. They need the money more, and if they go out of business Intel would go right back to their old shenannigans.
I agree with you to a point, but i feel i should clarify. I have a pentium 4 and a pentium 4 Xeon at work. Both are sluggish and fail to meet my expectations consistently when I multitask heavily. However, before my wife switched to linux, her AMD with half the megahertz and half the RAM of my box at work ran considerably smoother, froze up less mid-task (not critical stopping freeze, several seconds of pause), and was over all a more pleasing computer. This may be due to the motherboard chipsets, but overall it has given me a very bad impression of the capability of the respective chips. Perhaps it is the motherboard chipsets, i know not. What I do know is that if my car, regardless of engine, cannot continually run as long as the engine is in order with fuel (or electricity), I will likely not buy another of that car.
Yes, i do think Intel plays the market. They play the market like a chump. And the market falls for it every time. I recall building my friend's box for her, and her mom was initially rather insistent upon a P4 until she found out that AMD was considerably cheaper and that the features of the P4 were not going to make enough of a difference for a box to write reports on for college. She ended up with rather than the $2000 machine that she had initially intended to buy her daughter, but a $1200 computer that surpassed the Pentium 4 she had been eyeing in every way for what she needed it for (more mhz, more ram, a few options she didnt even think of like a NIC, a modem, a cd burner, etc. all of which would have cost more than her initial 2k base price). So its not that the market doesnt care, its just that they dont know any better.
i saw them just the other day in a store, and for pennies on the dollar to current P4 chips (lets see you find a brand new 1GHz pentium anything in an average retail store these days)
because you are correct. Pentium 4 is a lousy chip, the pentium 3 not much better. Pentium II was the last truly respectable chip I have seen coming out of Intel. AMDs may run a bit hot, but their performance IMO is superior. Transmeta should make motherboards for "build yer own" types who want them. VIA has increasingly made more and more respectable chips as time goes on, and for cents on the dollar to the Intel CPU. The only thing keeping Pentium-line procs afloat is marketing at this point.
just as I was saying the other night that i wished VIA would make C3s that go in AMD-socket boards...
Re:We can have a PC not based on twenty year old t
on
Legacy-Free PCs
·
· Score: 1
I agree entirely. It reminds me of Vietnam. We would give the south vietnamese boats, but they had no concept of preventative maintenance so they were unreliable at best. Same goes for computers. I have 486SX processors that still do their job admiarably, up to my highest box (athlon 1800+) that does well where it is stationed at the primary wife desktop position. I to this day have a Pentium 133 alongside my main desktop for dos gaming. It may not be the fastest runner at the track, but last time I checked, Monkey Island didn't run any better on my Pentium II than it did on that pentium 133.
Re:We can have a PC not based on twenty year old t
on
Legacy-Free PCs
·
· Score: 1
well put. And I figured from the start that we were in the same vein of thought on this. it's like all the posts complaining about how anything running on a 486 running DOS should be upgraded, when in fact it already does its job quite well. Just because USB and FireWire are faster than my serial port does not make it better for its task. I dont recall the last time I cursed my dumb terminal for being too slow, and oh yeah...now I remember...I dont need my text terminal to go at several hundred megabytes per second.
Re:We can have a PC not based on twenty year old t
on
Legacy-Free PCs
·
· Score: 1
yes...i also hate how my car still uses rubber tires to drive over "roads"...so primitive.
just because a technology is old and/or looks similar to how it used to a couple decades ago doesn't make it invalid. IMO the biggest culprit in computers is reusers. Companies know that a hard drive that can be an easy upgrade in a current PC is going to sell better than one in a magic new format. I know I dont have any slots in my case for a 4 inch wide hard drive or a place to plug in a 100-pin IDE2000 or whatever the hell they might develop. It would take far too much teamwork to change it all overnight, and i guarantee a lot of people would get angry as a result. Theres also the software factor...x86 has lots of software. True 64 doesnt have nearly that array. While I wouldnt mind swapping over (as a linux user) to a new chip such as a Dragon II or a PPC, there are a lot of people who cannot handle that change without an ordeal of large sizes.
it seems to me that IBM could countersue SCO into oblivion should they lose...it seems to me that rather than settle monetarily SCO would stand to benefit if that happened by offering a settlement of absorbtion instead, which seems to me to be a potential reason for this whole lawsuit to begin with. They have no chance in hell of surviving outside of absorbtion.
it read like a bad history paper...i couldnt make it through. any body want to paraphrase it accurately?
Re:The encryption IS wanted.
on
Open Source DRM
·
· Score: 1
well then to clarify my position stated in the initial post i made, this development is bad and I will not use it. That is my decision, you are free to choose as you will.
Re:The encryption IS wanted.
on
Open Source DRM
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
what you say contains truth, however if I recieve a PGP encoded email, I can decrypt it and leave it that way. A DRM system has the undesired effect of not allowing me to do this. That is my problem with DRM.
i am not saying that the whole system would break but rather the program itself. take my server for example. if i switch to a new box as a server, how do i get the files over there? if i can move them that easily how is this going to protect files to begin with? either way DRM is a pain in the ass.
not really...protecting ones files with unix permissions is you keeping your files to yourself. once you start sharing in the digital world, you're on your own and it may spread like wildfire, which if i let it out of my protected directory, then that is the fate of that file which i am fine with.
because the only good songs if there are any on an album these days with a scant few exceptions in the past decade were the ones they already played. The point of swapping to taste test is to check out the rest of the album before dropping the cash.
yes, theoretically. I have enough breakage when i try to run windows at work without introducing things to suddenly break to the linux network at home due to permissions errors stemming from who knows what. I do not believe this to be aas straightfowards as you do.
yes, but what if i tear down that server or replace the hard drive? seems to me that either i can tote the pair wherever i like, copying it freely, or i cannot when i reinstall move it from one system to the next. Also, if i want to burn this to CD and play it on my MP3 player in my car, how is this taken into account?
Slashdot Mirror
it stopped freezing to begin with, making it an irrelevant comparison with a win2k box at work.
re: 100 pin IDE2000: it was a fake example. created a better picture than "foo drive" or "bar device"
Astro is more likely to do this than Crusoe...there really isnt much incentive for TransMeta to port Crusoe to a new socket when they can just ramp up for it with their newer chips to come when it actually happens.
You do make a decent point, though my experience with P4 ended with my 1.7 P4 at work. It's a piece of crap. We also have several of our communal machines on other P4s and they are also terrible. Perhaps the latest and greatest P4 chips arent that bad, but if the performance is somewhere similar and the price difference is moot, i would rather support AMD than Intel. They have been more consistent in their quality in the past couple years for me than Intel, so I am more inclined to trust them. Besides. They need the money more, and if they go out of business Intel would go right back to their old shenannigans.
I agree with you to a point, but i feel i should clarify. I have a pentium 4 and a pentium 4 Xeon at work. Both are sluggish and fail to meet my expectations consistently when I multitask heavily. However, before my wife switched to linux, her AMD with half the megahertz and half the RAM of my box at work ran considerably smoother, froze up less mid-task (not critical stopping freeze, several seconds of pause), and was over all a more pleasing computer. This may be due to the motherboard chipsets, but overall it has given me a very bad impression of the capability of the respective chips. Perhaps it is the motherboard chipsets, i know not. What I do know is that if my car, regardless of engine, cannot continually run as long as the engine is in order with fuel (or electricity), I will likely not buy another of that car.
Yes, i do think Intel plays the market. They play the market like a chump. And the market falls for it every time. I recall building my friend's box for her, and her mom was initially rather insistent upon a P4 until she found out that AMD was considerably cheaper and that the features of the P4 were not going to make enough of a difference for a box to write reports on for college. She ended up with rather than the $2000 machine that she had initially intended to buy her daughter, but a $1200 computer that surpassed the Pentium 4 she had been eyeing in every way for what she needed it for (more mhz, more ram, a few options she didnt even think of like a NIC, a modem, a cd burner, etc. all of which would have cost more than her initial 2k base price). So its not that the market doesnt care, its just that they dont know any better.
i saw them just the other day in a store, and for pennies on the dollar to current P4 chips (lets see you find a brand new 1GHz pentium anything in an average retail store these days)
absolutely. There are a number of the inexpensive Linux boxes sold at walmart.com that run C3 processors
because you are correct. Pentium 4 is a lousy chip, the pentium 3 not much better. Pentium II was the last truly respectable chip I have seen coming out of Intel. AMDs may run a bit hot, but their performance IMO is superior. Transmeta should make motherboards for "build yer own" types who want them. VIA has increasingly made more and more respectable chips as time goes on, and for cents on the dollar to the Intel CPU. The only thing keeping Pentium-line procs afloat is marketing at this point.
just as I was saying the other night that i wished VIA would make C3s that go in AMD-socket boards...
I agree entirely. It reminds me of Vietnam. We would give the south vietnamese boats, but they had no concept of preventative maintenance so they were unreliable at best. Same goes for computers. I have 486SX processors that still do their job admiarably, up to my highest box (athlon 1800+) that does well where it is stationed at the primary wife desktop position. I to this day have a Pentium 133 alongside my main desktop for dos gaming. It may not be the fastest runner at the track, but last time I checked, Monkey Island didn't run any better on my Pentium II than it did on that pentium 133.
well put. And I figured from the start that we were in the same vein of thought on this. it's like all the posts complaining about how anything running on a 486 running DOS should be upgraded, when in fact it already does its job quite well. Just because USB and FireWire are faster than my serial port does not make it better for its task. I dont recall the last time I cursed my dumb terminal for being too slow, and oh yeah...now I remember...I dont need my text terminal to go at several hundred megabytes per second.
yes...i also hate how my car still uses rubber tires to drive over "roads"...so primitive.
just because a technology is old and/or looks similar to how it used to a couple decades ago doesn't make it invalid. IMO the biggest culprit in computers is reusers. Companies know that a hard drive that can be an easy upgrade in a current PC is going to sell better than one in a magic new format. I know I dont have any slots in my case for a 4 inch wide hard drive or a place to plug in a 100-pin IDE2000 or whatever the hell they might develop. It would take far too much teamwork to change it all overnight, and i guarantee a lot of people would get angry as a result. Theres also the software factor...x86 has lots of software. True 64 doesnt have nearly that array. While I wouldnt mind swapping over (as a linux user) to a new chip such as a Dragon II or a PPC, there are a lot of people who cannot handle that change without an ordeal of large sizes.
it seems to me that IBM could countersue SCO into oblivion should they lose...it seems to me that rather than settle monetarily SCO would stand to benefit if that happened by offering a settlement of absorbtion instead, which seems to me to be a potential reason for this whole lawsuit to begin with. They have no chance in hell of surviving outside of absorbtion.
no, i think we should nuke france.
Ford makes the Crown Victoria, not chevy
its not my fault your sister is a filthy whore. dont take it out on me.
it read like a bad history paper...i couldnt make it through. any body want to paraphrase it accurately?
well then to clarify my position stated in the initial post i made, this development is bad and I will not use it. That is my decision, you are free to choose as you will.
what you say contains truth, however if I recieve a PGP encoded email, I can decrypt it and leave it that way. A DRM system has the undesired effect of not allowing me to do this. That is my problem with DRM.
works for me ^_^
i am not saying that the whole system would break but rather the program itself. take my server for example. if i switch to a new box as a server, how do i get the files over there? if i can move them that easily how is this going to protect files to begin with? either way DRM is a pain in the ass.
not really...protecting ones files with unix permissions is you keeping your files to yourself. once you start sharing in the digital world, you're on your own and it may spread like wildfire, which if i let it out of my protected directory, then that is the fate of that file which i am fine with.
because the only good songs if there are any on an album these days with a scant few exceptions in the past decade were the ones they already played. The point of swapping to taste test is to check out the rest of the album before dropping the cash.
yes, theoretically. I have enough breakage when i try to run windows at work without introducing things to suddenly break to the linux network at home due to permissions errors stemming from who knows what. I do not believe this to be aas straightfowards as you do.
yes, but what if i tear down that server or replace the hard drive? seems to me that either i can tote the pair wherever i like, copying it freely, or i cannot when i reinstall move it from one system to the next. Also, if i want to burn this to CD and play it on my MP3 player in my car, how is this taken into account?