OK, how about drivers for, say, RedHat 6.0 (or, rather, the kernel and XFree86 versions included in that ancient version of RedHat)?
And that's newer than Windows 3.1 by quite a lot.
The reason why older OSes are poorly supported is that they're older, and nobody uses them any more. The strongest exceptions I can think of are actually in the closed source realm - mainframe software, which gets virtualized, and Windows XP.
More wheels having power is correct. This means that you're less likely to get stuck.
However, AWD/4WD doesn't give any more CONTROL than FWD or RWD.
Think about it. All AWD/4WD does is provide power to more wheels. It doesn't magically make the tire contact patch any different, and you're usually not using the driveline much or at all when stopping or turning.
So, given the same tires, and otherwise identical cars, the AWD/4WD vehicle won't get stuck as easily, but it will lose grip when braking or turning just as easily as the FWD or RWD vehicle.
Give me a RWD car with snow tires any day before AWD/4WD on "all"-seasons.
They're getting Chinese defective units and selling them for $100, whatever they are, and adding an OS.
Most of what they'll sell, I suspect, will be ARM and MIPS, but the 10.2" screen that I've seen mentioned before tells me that they're shipping scratch and dent S40 (a standard Atom netbook architecture that everyone copies in China) machines, at least as of that blog entry.
They said it was theoretically possible, but considering the Chinese machines they're using for most of the stuff, there's only a few different chipsets in play - one Chinese MIPS chipset, one VIA ARM chipset, and a couple Samsung ARM chipsets. Of course, there is also the x86 stuff, wonder what they're using there - probably Xcore86 and AMD Geode.
The Chinese manufacturers at the very least make ARM and MIPS 7" laptops in the same case design they've ripped off from each other, with varying designs.
To be fair, Nuerburgring times are usually run from "bridge to gantry" - not quite a full lap, and at a running start. This is because, if you go to the Nuerburgring, you get onto the track, and have to merge into traffic. Therefore, you're up to speed at the bridge. And, you have to exit after the gantry.
Except the LS engine is rather well known for its reliability, the Corvette is known for overall reliability and low-cost maintenance, and that GT-R is known for eating transmissions, and maintenance costs that are as bad as cars with much, much better performance, styling, driver feedback, and badges.
LS7 is 428 cubic inches, and is used in the Corvette.
The biggest big-block sold in a road vehicle was 502 ci, for fleet vehicles. The engine in this article, the Vortec 8100, was 496 ci.
Also, GM sold a 572 ci crate motor for off-road applications. Of course, the LS architecture scales to 511 cubic inches in off-road applications, and is lighter weight and I believe higher revving.
And the only passenger vehicle this engine came in for the last few years was the TopKick/Kodiak, which is a medium-duty truck (think the biggest UHauls, delivery trucks, school buses, tow-trucks, that sort of thing,) for markets that for whatever reason didn't want to deal with diesels, but needed something with a ton of torque.
This thing was often sold as an engine, no car, to markets that directly wanted it, and wanted to tinker.
Widescreen makes sense for form factor reasons, too, so don't expect 1024x768 any time soon. 1280x720 and 1366x768, that's slowly starting to appear.
As for glossy screens, they're cheaper, and the margins are so slim on these things that I doubt you're going to see matte unless it's a "high-end" netbook (or just a straight-up CULV machine.)
Even the original Atoms used less power than the most power-efficient single-core AMD platform.
Platform TDP for the Yukon platform (RS690E northbridge, SB600 southbridge) ranges from 19 watts with a 1 GHz Sempron, to 26 for a 1.6 GHz Athlon. (29 for a dual-core 1.6 GHz Turion.) The most efficient Athlon-based Yukon is 1.2 GHz, and platform power consumption is 24 watts.
Platform TDP for the typical N270+945GSE+ICH7M is 11.8 watts, N450+NM10 is 7 watts. Granted, the Yukon stuff doesn't really compete with the Atom, it competes with Intel CULV.
CULV has a 14.5 watt chipset (GS45, ICH9M) TDP, add 5.5 watts for single-core, 10 watts for dual-core CPUs.
Oh, and I'll toss the VIA Nano in, it fits somewhere between the Atom and the CULV and Yukon platforms in performance.
The fastest current Nanos for netbooks are the U2225 and U2250, both at 1.3 GHz (the U2250 is at "1.3+ GHz") and 8 W TDP. (IIRC, though, the Nano is significantly faster than Atom.) The matching VX800U chipset has a 3.5 W TDP, so 11.5 W total platform TDP - less than the old Atom platform.
The upcoming U3200 is at 1.4 GHz (and even faster than the clockspeed implies, apparently,) possibly 5 W TDP, and 2.3 W for the VX855, so 7.3 W platform TDP.
Because they probably get a discount for some of the stickers. (That's certainly why they put bloatware on there - the bloat developers pay the computer manufacturers to bundle it.)
Except they're going after the netbook market, which didn't take off until it got Windows.
And, back when the first netbooks came out, they didn't have Windows netbooks to compete against.
ARM is going to have one hell of a fight on their hands, for Joe Sixpack, when $50 gets you a faster CPU, faster graphics (even the GMA500, which is worse than the GMA950, is (slightly) faster than the fastest stuff strapped to an ARM,) Windows, twice the RAM, 18.6-37.3 times the storage, albeit a fan and 3 hours battery life instead of 10-15 hours.
That.NET crap nowadays, unfortunately, is often a mix of x86 and.NET code, with CPU intensive code compiled for x86 rather than the.NET CLR.
Better performance that way, and when the application isn't suited for ARM-based WinCE devices, or Itanium servers,.NET doesn't make sense for developers right now.
A PAE-like scheme would be a rather effective bandaid to that particular problem, though.
Re:numb driving experience
on
A Requiem For Saab
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Quite a lot of roads in the US are poor quality, and straight.
So, you don't care about handling, and you want something that soaks up the bumps.
Re:Let's just be clear on what they mean here
on
A Requiem For Saab
·
· Score: 1
Front-wheel drive arrangement: Predated Saab by a lot, and Saab's first front wheel drive drivetrains were a 1930s DKW design. (That DKW design's successors evolved into the current Audi lineup, BTW, and I believe that 1930s DKW design may have been exhumed as the (very loose) basis of the original 1974 VW Golf's drivetrain.)
Hatchback: Arguably, the first hatchbacks were in the 1930s. Saab's first hatchbacks were in the late 60s.
Standard production turbocharger: 1978 for the Saab 99, 1962 for the Oldsmobile Turbo Jetfire.
ARM's problem is, quite simply, they don't have Windows, and to get the desktop, they either have to wait 10 years (and pay Microsoft to maintain a Windows port for that entire time) for a Windows port to take root, or displace Windows, too.
VIA is still at it, they're just attacking the Atom end of the market, now. This is where they were before Atom came along, but they have been developing newer processors.
Of course, there was a stable chipset option for the earlier K6s... the Intel 430TX. But, anything needing faster than a 75 MHz FSB (and even then, the 430TX was overclocked,) or anything that was Super Socket 7, couldn't use it.
Slashdot Mirror
OK, how about drivers for, say, RedHat 6.0 (or, rather, the kernel and XFree86 versions included in that ancient version of RedHat)?
And that's newer than Windows 3.1 by quite a lot.
The reason why older OSes are poorly supported is that they're older, and nobody uses them any more. The strongest exceptions I can think of are actually in the closed source realm - mainframe software, which gets virtualized, and Windows XP.
I was doing a temp job at a company where company policy was actually that nobody was allowed to shake hands, because of H1N1.
Yeah, really.
That's one thing about AWD/4WD.
More wheels having power is correct. This means that you're less likely to get stuck.
However, AWD/4WD doesn't give any more CONTROL than FWD or RWD.
Think about it. All AWD/4WD does is provide power to more wheels. It doesn't magically make the tire contact patch any different, and you're usually not using the driveline much or at all when stopping or turning.
So, given the same tires, and otherwise identical cars, the AWD/4WD vehicle won't get stuck as easily, but it will lose grip when braking or turning just as easily as the FWD or RWD vehicle.
Give me a RWD car with snow tires any day before AWD/4WD on "all"-seasons.
They're getting Chinese defective units and selling them for $100, whatever they are, and adding an OS.
Most of what they'll sell, I suspect, will be ARM and MIPS, but the 10.2" screen that I've seen mentioned before tells me that they're shipping scratch and dent S40 (a standard Atom netbook architecture that everyone copies in China) machines, at least as of that blog entry.
They said it was theoretically possible, but considering the Chinese machines they're using for most of the stuff, there's only a few different chipsets in play - one Chinese MIPS chipset, one VIA ARM chipset, and a couple Samsung ARM chipsets. Of course, there is also the x86 stuff, wonder what they're using there - probably Xcore86 and AMD Geode.
Having the bin to sort your request into takes infrastructure, though.
If they don't have that capability, they can just ship whatever comes in, and worry about what it is if there's a support request.
At quantity 100, though, you could get better machines for less money directly from China.
Just look on alibaba for ARM or MIPS, you'll find stuff.
The Chinese manufacturers at the very least make ARM and MIPS 7" laptops in the same case design they've ripped off from each other, with varying designs.
To be fair, Nuerburgring times are usually run from "bridge to gantry" - not quite a full lap, and at a running start. This is because, if you go to the Nuerburgring, you get onto the track, and have to merge into traffic. Therefore, you're up to speed at the bridge. And, you have to exit after the gantry.
The rest of your post, however, I'll agree with.
Except the LS engine is rather well known for its reliability, the Corvette is known for overall reliability and low-cost maintenance, and that GT-R is known for eating transmissions, and maintenance costs that are as bad as cars with much, much better performance, styling, driver feedback, and badges.
LS7 is 428 cubic inches, and is used in the Corvette.
The biggest big-block sold in a road vehicle was 502 ci, for fleet vehicles. The engine in this article, the Vortec 8100, was 496 ci.
Also, GM sold a 572 ci crate motor for off-road applications. Of course, the LS architecture scales to 511 cubic inches in off-road applications, and is lighter weight and I believe higher revving.
And the only passenger vehicle this engine came in for the last few years was the TopKick/Kodiak, which is a medium-duty truck (think the biggest UHauls, delivery trucks, school buses, tow-trucks, that sort of thing,) for markets that for whatever reason didn't want to deal with diesels, but needed something with a ton of torque.
This thing was often sold as an engine, no car, to markets that directly wanted it, and wanted to tinker.
And, Volkswagen also has a W engine (two VR engines mated at the crank,) up to 16 cylinders - meaning they do have the ability to make an inline V8.
(Oh, and VR is short for Veereihen - or V inline.)
Widescreen makes sense for form factor reasons, too, so don't expect 1024x768 any time soon. 1280x720 and 1366x768, that's slowly starting to appear.
As for glossy screens, they're cheaper, and the margins are so slim on these things that I doubt you're going to see matte unless it's a "high-end" netbook (or just a straight-up CULV machine.)
Even the original Atoms used less power than the most power-efficient single-core AMD platform.
Platform TDP for the Yukon platform (RS690E northbridge, SB600 southbridge) ranges from 19 watts with a 1 GHz Sempron, to 26 for a 1.6 GHz Athlon. (29 for a dual-core 1.6 GHz Turion.) The most efficient Athlon-based Yukon is 1.2 GHz, and platform power consumption is 24 watts.
Platform TDP for the typical N270+945GSE+ICH7M is 11.8 watts, N450+NM10 is 7 watts. Granted, the Yukon stuff doesn't really compete with the Atom, it competes with Intel CULV.
CULV has a 14.5 watt chipset (GS45, ICH9M) TDP, add 5.5 watts for single-core, 10 watts for dual-core CPUs.
Oh, and I'll toss the VIA Nano in, it fits somewhere between the Atom and the CULV and Yukon platforms in performance.
The fastest current Nanos for netbooks are the U2225 and U2250, both at 1.3 GHz (the U2250 is at "1.3+ GHz") and 8 W TDP. (IIRC, though, the Nano is significantly faster than Atom.) The matching VX800U chipset has a 3.5 W TDP, so 11.5 W total platform TDP - less than the old Atom platform.
The upcoming U3200 is at 1.4 GHz (and even faster than the clockspeed implies, apparently,) possibly 5 W TDP, and 2.3 W for the VX855, so 7.3 W platform TDP.
The only way I can see Ion working is if it's treated like any other discrete GPU - attached via PCIe, and overriding the integrated graphics.
That's not exactly cheap.
Because they probably get a discount for some of the stickers. (That's certainly why they put bloatware on there - the bloat developers pay the computer manufacturers to bundle it.)
Except they're going after the netbook market, which didn't take off until it got Windows.
And, back when the first netbooks came out, they didn't have Windows netbooks to compete against.
ARM is going to have one hell of a fight on their hands, for Joe Sixpack, when $50 gets you a faster CPU, faster graphics (even the GMA500, which is worse than the GMA950, is (slightly) faster than the fastest stuff strapped to an ARM,) Windows, twice the RAM, 18.6-37.3 times the storage, albeit a fan and 3 hours battery life instead of 10-15 hours.
That .NET crap nowadays, unfortunately, is often a mix of x86 and .NET code, with CPU intensive code compiled for x86 rather than the .NET CLR.
Better performance that way, and when the application isn't suited for ARM-based WinCE devices, or Itanium servers, .NET doesn't make sense for developers right now.
A PAE-like scheme would be a rather effective bandaid to that particular problem, though.
Quite a lot of roads in the US are poor quality, and straight.
So, you don't care about handling, and you want something that soaks up the bumps.
Front-wheel drive arrangement: Predated Saab by a lot, and Saab's first front wheel drive drivetrains were a 1930s DKW design. (That DKW design's successors evolved into the current Audi lineup, BTW, and I believe that 1930s DKW design may have been exhumed as the (very loose) basis of the original 1974 VW Golf's drivetrain.)
Hatchback: Arguably, the first hatchbacks were in the 1930s. Saab's first hatchbacks were in the late 60s.
Standard production turbocharger: 1978 for the Saab 99, 1962 for the Oldsmobile Turbo Jetfire.
Not sure about the others, though.
ARM's problem is, quite simply, they don't have Windows, and to get the desktop, they either have to wait 10 years (and pay Microsoft to maintain a Windows port for that entire time) for a Windows port to take root, or displace Windows, too.
I don't see the latter happening.
VIA is still at it, they're just attacking the Atom end of the market, now. This is where they were before Atom came along, but they have been developing newer processors.
Of course, there was a stable chipset option for the earlier K6s... the Intel 430TX. But, anything needing faster than a 75 MHz FSB (and even then, the 430TX was overclocked,) or anything that was Super Socket 7, couldn't use it.