That's rich man. The offtopic mod was unwarranted. Still, you could have lied and said all 15 screens were arranged into one big 3x3 or something to demo some Matrox cards... heh. Plasma's got nothing on that.
CompUSA - run by idiots, all machines hooked up to the public internet so you can comparison shop IN THE STORE!
The reason why they keep introducing new sockets is precisely because the processors are changing design so rapidly (power requirements, location of the memory controller, address/data line widths, # of hypertransport hookups).
The AthlonXP is radically different from AMD64 (using hypertransport) which is configured differently than the Opterons.
If the nextgen XPs get a builtin memory controller, OF COURSE THE SOCKETS GOING TO CHANGE.
The only design decision I'm wondering why they couldn't just use the 939 connector for the nextgen Athlons and just ground the unused pins.
Probably the answer is that the extra unit cost made the difference: they wouldn't be able to sell the XPs at a decent price point because the 939 sockets are not cheap.
Not unless anyone can develop and license the patented parts of the encoder/decoder, rather than having to get it from them. It's like the Sorenson codec. It may be great technically, but I don't want to deal with it, especially as a developer or system integrator. I'd rather use the open standard, even if the quality is inferior at rate. Besides, the difference isn't that great. And "proper" MPEG4 support means a lot more than video too, which is nice for the DVD making folks (interactive stuff, menus, metadata).
You know, so that 1000 dpi optical mouse will actually improve your shot... You know, so that you can still run limewire in the background while using a game with DirectPlay without compromising download speed/ping.
You know, to have SUPPORT FOR HYPERTHREADING.
No, no, no one would ever need stuff like that on a gaming system.
Also, I've found that 98 (especially in memory constrained situations) is ASS SLOW compared to an XP system with proper drivers.
I bet all those games based on the Quake ]|[ engine run real fast with the kernel emulation mode required for 98 support (bypassed in XP). Keep pushing the limits of your system with Counterstrike.
What did you think you were buying when you bought a retail copy of RedHat anyway? I mean, all the packages could be updated for free independantly anyway. IT WAS ALWAYS DONE BY VOLUNTEERS No, I think RedHat WOKE UP. Buy Workstation 3.0 ($99) if you want 1+ year support. I've used it all along on some desktops for free. We pay for the Enterprise Server on the db server.::shrugs:: more power to them.
You too can run XP on a PII/400 with the same performance characteristic of 2000. you just need to turn off themes, extra visuals, and a few of the other unneccessary background services. They even made a control panel out of most of the performance-related settings, which means you don't need to registry hack.
The only downside is Activation (hence my recommendation of finding a CVE install CD)
Start off with a base Win98 operating system (Gold release). Add 1998-era virus check, Office 97, etc.
Now, install all the service packs, IE 6, OfficeXP SP1. Upgrade your virus scanner using LiveUpdate.
Same software suites, but most of it jumped a few minor versions, and some of it a few major versions.
Now consider RedHat 9 (shrike). Notice they "pick" a whole bunch a software known to work well together. Note that whenever you apply updates, not even the minor version of any package changes. Never mind that any of these updates had to be backported by RedHat themselves, because the individual projects themselves probably only patched the few head releases they maintain, possible upgrading the version number.
If you install whatever the latest release of Fedora on top of RedHat, you will squash bugs, and upgrade your product through a few versions. You will always have support in the form of updates against the most recent Fedora, or newly packaged RPMs of new versions of components.
You are accomplish the same thing that you would with your Win98 box. Only thing is Windows 98 doesn't tell you exactly what version each constituent component is during the upgrade progress. You could check this yourself by dumping the version info in various system DLLs, which is a little less friendly than rpm -q.
So what is RedHat doing "wrong" or differently, other than choosing to not make itself responsible in a financial sense for software packages that most of the teams who develop them have moved beyond? Microsoft doesn't even do this. Do you see patches for Windows Media Player 7? No! They tell you to upgrade to version 9!
So, you're saying all of your big investors in businesses, real estate, etc. are only concerned about short-term deals? I think you're off your rocker. They're looking at the big picture, and you'd better believe they'd KILL to get that kind of advance knowledge if they're developing in quake-prone areas.
If you knew that a quake was hitting an area in 60 days that you were planning on developing, wouldn't you be GLAD so you could tell the general contractor to just wait it out?
If I was told that, my reaction would be: Ahh! Oil! A big bomb! Or something like that.
But predicting the future (which is what you are suggseting)? If that ever happened, all information theory goes right out the window. Worlds would be destroyed on the conflict of interests versus availability of said knowledge.
However, as it turns out, when you do turn up the bitrate to a significant fraction of MPEG2, MPEG4 (well, H.263) starting looking BETTER than MPEG2. This was completely unplanned.
Thus we have the newer profile, H.264, which helps close the loop and focuses on maintaining quality with a marginal gain in bitrate.
When they were trying to come up with the new HD-compatible DVD replacement, MPEG4 was one of the things many players wanted to use. You could increase the resolution and peg the bitrate.
but I never heard of anyone going after anyone who has informally used the technologies for her own purposes.
This is mainly because the people the members of the MPEG4 working group want to pay for the privledge to use the tech are companies who make set top boxes and sell telecom software packages.
Any other uses just spread the technology, and increase demand.
I guess depending on the scale of your commercial operation, you may stick with WMA, or choose between the two if you can afford it.
I can't afford to pay for WMA information, however, so having support for it in my iPod (or whatever else) is irrelevant to me.
The coding is too "loose". The model is simplistic, which is good for home theatre because you want to have as much clarity as possible, even for non musical things, and to carry information like reverberations properly. It's probably a good alternative to FLAC if you're not anal retentive. Personally, I would like smaller files so that my battery-powered players get longer life. Besides, getting an encoder is hard. You can find implementations of the spec, but they are slow, and you're still technically supposed to pay Dolby for the privledge. I'm not...
I have found OGG to be a competent middle ground. Competetive with AAC, but on solid legal footing for me to do whatever I want with it. Also, picking encoding settings is very unfussy. I pay upfront for a portable, and use a digital connection to my stereo. No problem there.:-)
1) ATRAC is not really a good compression format... not ambitious or flexible enough. It reminds me of AC3, but with less features. 2) Properitary media. THIS IS REALLY RETARDED.
If 1) was fixed, you could fit more music on the same media. If 2) were fixed, you would see support for the formats all over.
Neither of these choices would help improve Sony's marketshare. I think they should just stick to making consumer devices that integrate well, as opposed to trying to lock you in with non-competetive, brand-name abusing stuff.
Using dd or standard inferfaces will only get you the standard data session, error corrected. You need to use this lower level tool to get at the more esoteric features, or to make a working copy if the system uses copy protection.
Also, you're right about the 192... I haven't had my coffee. I guess what I meant to say was that you won't find a class-a starting with 192. Nor 172. (174->172).
Gak.
240-254 for future extensions, eh? Well I wonder if those counterpredictions claiming we can last to 2020 (mentioned later in these threads) are predicated on the fact that we will start handing those out too.
I think the 255 class A is used to indicate you wish to broadcast on all subnets you're attached to (255.255.255.255). It's the all-networks network.
Solaris has it front to back since 5.8, so does OSX. Oh and Irix. Hmmm, all the BSDs and Linux. Yup. Oh, and HP-UX. And AIX 4.3... hmmm, what else... oh yeah, Symbian 7.0 for phones and WinCE. VxWorks and QNX seem to fully support it too.
And Cisco IOS. And gee willy, aren't a lot of Linksys home networking boxes one flash update away from supporting it, you know, being based on embedded linux and all?
Well gee whiz, that's like, NOBODY. Microsoft must really be on the ball here.
Slashdot Mirror
That's rich man. The offtopic mod was unwarranted. Still, you could have lied and said all 15 screens were arranged into one big 3x3 or something to demo some Matrox cards... heh. Plasma's got nothing on that.
:-)
CompUSA - run by idiots, all machines hooked up to the public internet so you can comparison shop IN THE STORE!
Idiots.
n/t
You'd be a fool not to spend a paltry $90 on a 2500 and then a trivial overclock to 3200 (2.4GHz, IIRC).
RIGHT NOW.
You're lucky if you can get an PIV 2.4GHz for $90. And it won't be using the 400MHz FSB. (266, probably).
The reason why they keep introducing new sockets is precisely because the processors are changing design so rapidly (power requirements, location of the memory controller, address/data line widths, # of hypertransport hookups).
The AthlonXP is radically different from AMD64 (using hypertransport) which is configured differently than the Opterons.
If the nextgen XPs get a builtin memory controller, OF COURSE THE SOCKETS GOING TO CHANGE.
The only design decision I'm wondering why they couldn't just use the 939 connector for the nextgen Athlons and just ground the unused pins.
Probably the answer is that the extra unit cost made the difference: they wouldn't be able to sell the XPs at a decent price point because the 939 sockets are not cheap.
Not unless anyone can develop and license the patented parts of the encoder/decoder, rather than having to get it from them. It's like the Sorenson codec. It may be great technically, but I don't want to deal with it, especially as a developer or system integrator.
I'd rather use the open standard, even if the quality is inferior at rate.
Besides, the difference isn't that great. And "proper" MPEG4 support means a lot more than video too, which is nice for the DVD making folks (interactive stuff, menus, metadata).
Am I wrong about the licensing on VP6?
If Tycho and Gabe make fun of it, it must be true... I don't know what to think anymore... ARRRGH!
You can get a 4-way 846 Opteron with 16gigs already stuffed IN IT for that price, and a few 143GB SCSI drives.
Unless you meant to be funny. But really, they're not THAT expensive. Look to spend about $600-$1000 on a board that can support 8+ GB ram.
n/t
You know, so that 1000 dpi optical mouse will actually improve your shot...
You know, so that you can still run limewire in the background while using a game with DirectPlay without compromising download speed/ping.
You know, to have SUPPORT FOR HYPERTHREADING.
No, no, no one would ever need stuff like that on a gaming system.
Also, I've found that 98 (especially in memory constrained situations) is ASS SLOW compared to an XP system with proper drivers.
I bet all those games based on the Quake ]|[ engine run real fast with the kernel emulation mode required for 98 support (bypassed in XP).
Keep pushing the limits of your system with Counterstrike.
What did you think you were buying when you bought a retail copy of RedHat anyway? I mean, all the packages could be updated for free independantly anyway. IT WAS ALWAYS DONE BY VOLUNTEERS ::shrugs:: more power to them.
No, I think RedHat WOKE UP. Buy Workstation 3.0 ($99) if you want 1+ year support.
I've used it all along on some desktops for free. We pay for the Enterprise Server on the db server.
a land-buying, building frenzy. You'd have all your resources piled up prior to POUNCE at the oppurtunity presented afterwards.
I don't think the larger economy would be affected at all. It'd be a dip and spike.
You too can run XP on a PII/400 with the same performance characteristic of 2000. you just need to turn off themes, extra visuals, and a few of the other unneccessary background services. They even made a control panel out of most of the performance-related settings, which means you don't need to registry hack.
The only downside is Activation (hence my recommendation of finding a CVE install CD)
Start off with a base Win98 operating system (Gold release). Add 1998-era virus check, Office 97, etc.
Now, install all the service packs, IE 6, OfficeXP SP1. Upgrade your virus scanner using LiveUpdate.
Same software suites, but most of it jumped a few minor versions, and some of it a few major versions.
Now consider RedHat 9 (shrike). Notice they "pick" a whole bunch a software known to work well together. Note that whenever you apply updates, not even the minor version of any package changes. Never mind that any of these updates had to be backported by RedHat themselves, because the individual projects themselves probably only patched the few head releases they maintain, possible upgrading the version number.
If you install whatever the latest release of Fedora on top of RedHat, you will squash bugs, and upgrade your product through a few versions. You will always have support in the form of updates against the most recent Fedora, or newly packaged RPMs of new versions of components.
You are accomplish the same thing that you would with your Win98 box. Only thing is Windows 98 doesn't tell you exactly what version each constituent component is during the upgrade progress. You could check this yourself by dumping the version info in various system DLLs, which is a little less friendly than rpm -q.
So what is RedHat doing "wrong" or differently, other than choosing to not make itself responsible in a financial sense for software packages that most of the teams who develop them have moved beyond? Microsoft doesn't even do this. Do you see patches for Windows Media Player 7? No! They tell you to upgrade to version 9!
So, you're saying all of your big investors in businesses, real estate, etc. are only concerned about short-term deals? I think you're off your rocker. They're looking at the big picture, and you'd better believe they'd KILL to get that kind of advance knowledge if they're developing in quake-prone areas.
If you knew that a quake was hitting an area in 60 days that you were planning on developing, wouldn't you be GLAD so you could tell the general contractor to just wait it out?
If I was told that, my reaction would be: Ahh! Oil! A big bomb! Or something like that.
But predicting the future (which is what you are suggseting)? If that ever happened, all information theory goes right out the window. Worlds would be destroyed on the conflict of interests versus availability of said knowledge.
Didn't you see/read "Paycheck" yet?
that whatever methods used are not specific to trends of the seismic regions they studied (i.e. California).
However, as it turns out, when you do turn up the bitrate to a significant fraction of MPEG2, MPEG4 (well, H.263) starting looking BETTER than MPEG2. This was completely unplanned.
Thus we have the newer profile, H.264, which helps close the loop and focuses on maintaining quality with a marginal gain in bitrate.
When they were trying to come up with the new HD-compatible DVD replacement, MPEG4 was one of the things many players wanted to use. You could increase the resolution and peg the bitrate.
Heh, I think faad2 works juuuuuuuust fine. Plus there's always the mplayer+quicktime libs combo if I need to bypass DRM.
Sigh, so unsophisticated...
but I never heard of anyone going after anyone who has informally used the technologies for her own purposes.
This is mainly because the people the members of the MPEG4 working group want to pay for the privledge to use the tech are companies who make set top boxes and sell telecom software packages.
Any other uses just spread the technology, and increase demand.
I guess depending on the scale of your commercial operation, you may stick with WMA, or choose between the two if you can afford it.
I can't afford to pay for WMA information, however, so having support for it in my iPod (or whatever else) is irrelevant to me.
The coding is too "loose". The model is simplistic, which is good for home theatre because you want to have as much clarity as possible, even for non musical things, and to carry information like reverberations properly.
:-)
It's probably a good alternative to FLAC if you're not anal retentive. Personally, I would like smaller files so that my battery-powered players get longer life.
Besides, getting an encoder is hard. You can find implementations of the spec, but they are slow, and you're still technically supposed to pay Dolby for the privledge.
I'm not...
I have found OGG to be a competent middle ground. Competetive with AAC, but on solid legal footing for me to do whatever I want with it. Also, picking encoding settings is very unfussy.
I pay upfront for a portable, and use a digital connection to my stereo. No problem there.
Haha!!
No. Far from it.
Claims to be about 30% better than MP3 at 128k. That's nowhere near lossless (and the algorithm does not intend to be either).
1) ATRAC is not really a good compression format... not ambitious or flexible enough. It reminds me of AC3, but with less features.
2) Properitary media. THIS IS REALLY RETARDED.
If 1) was fixed, you could fit more music on the same media. If 2) were fixed, you would see support for the formats all over.
Neither of these choices would help improve Sony's marketshare. I think they should just stick to making consumer devices that integrate well, as opposed to trying to lock you in with non-competetive, brand-name abusing stuff.
For example... copy a disc
Using dd or standard inferfaces will only get you the standard data session, error corrected. You need to use this lower level tool to get at the more esoteric features, or to make a working copy if the system uses copy protection.
that is 15 too many.
Also, you're right about the 192... I haven't had my coffee. I guess what I meant to say was that you won't find a class-a starting with 192. Nor 172. (174->172).
Gak.
240-254 for future extensions, eh? Well I wonder if those counterpredictions claiming we can last to 2020 (mentioned later in these threads) are predicated on the fact that we will start handing those out too.
I think the 255 class A is used to indicate you wish to broadcast on all subnets you're attached to (255.255.255.255). It's the all-networks network.
Solaris has it front to back since 5.8, so does OSX. Oh and Irix. Hmmm, all the BSDs and Linux. Yup. Oh, and HP-UX. And AIX 4.3... hmmm, what else... oh yeah, Symbian 7.0 for phones and WinCE. VxWorks and QNX seem to fully support it too.
And Cisco IOS. And gee willy, aren't a lot of Linksys home networking boxes one flash update away from supporting it, you know, being based on embedded linux and all?
Well gee whiz, that's like, NOBODY. Microsoft must really be on the ball here.