"and then my entire commute will be emission free" Said the guy driving an electric car. *sigh*. Electric cars cause emissions- they're just externalized at the generating station.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_Norway Installed capacity (2007) 30.46 GW Share of fossil energy 2% Share of renewable energy 98% GHG emissions from electricity generation (2007) 0.8 Mt CO2 Average electricity use (2008) 27 MWh annually per capita
"Norway has imported up to 10% of its electricity production during 2004-2009.[6] According to IEA the net electricity export was 14 TWh and the hydro power production 141 TWh in 2008.[22] Norway and Sweden's grids have long been connected. A new 1 GW[31] 420kV high-voltage link between Nea in Norway and JÃrpstrÃmmen in Sweden was commissioned in 2009.[32] Beginning in 1977 the Norwegian and Danish grids were connected with 500 MW, growing to 1,700 MW in 2015.[33] Norway's grid is connected with the 700 MW NorNed-cable to the Netherlands. There are plans for cables with Germany (NordLink or NorGer) and the UK (HVDC Norwayâ"Great Britain or Scotlandâ"Norway interconnector)."
"Majority of electricity production in Sweden relies on hydro power and nuclear power. In 2008 the consumption of electricity in Sweden was 16 018 kWh per capita, compared to EU average 7 409 kWh per capita.[1] A specialty of the Nordic energy market is the existence of so-called electricity price areas which complicate the wholesale commodity market. The electricity supply and consumption were about equal in 2006â"2009: 124â"146 TWh/year (14â"17 GW). Year 2009 the electricity supply included hydro power 65 TWh (53%), nuclear power 50 TWh (40%) and net import 5 TWh (3%). The Swedish use of electricity declined by 14% in 2009. Potential factors may include recession and the forest and automobile industry changes."
2016: Produce 149 TWh, use 139, export 12 (don't ask). Hydro 61 TWh Nuclear 61 TWh Wind 15 TWh Other 13 TWh
They could have but then they would be artificially handicapping the Ryzen platform which supports out of the box 3400 officially with several modes on the 1800x.
Feel free to go with either the maximum or equal (or even standard), everything else is just weird. I don't know if the i7 5960X can do 3400 MHz. Ryzen only really want to do the higher speeds with max 2x8 Samsung B-die.
All that video show is that Windows 7 run the game faster for whatever reason.
If AMD doesn't think there will be a scheduler fix which improves things and that end up being the case then that's how it is and there won't be any changes and fix with improved performance.
The key difference being potentially unstable system. The processor and architecture is only capable of the slower speed. Anything else is tantamount to overclocking and kind of defeats the purpose of testing two systems against each other.
The Ryzen processor use overclocked memory. They could had used 2133 MHz CL15 on both systems.
Per Intel's ARK, the i7 5960X supports up to 2133 MHz DDR4. It has four memory channels, though, giving it more memory bandwidth on paper. The 1800X still makes do with only two memory channels, so the fact that it matches the i7 in speed is quite impressive.
I'm very aware of both but that doesn't mean the 5960X can't run faster RAM. https://www.msi.com/Motherboar... "DDR4 Steel Armor with Best signal stability , Quad Channel DDR4-3466+(OC)".. and the memory channel is a feature of the Intel HEDT platform.
You can get stable 3200 MHz out of Ryzen 7 at-least and since that motherboard mention 3466+ I assume you can get stable 3466 out of the latest Intel HEDT platform at-least, as for whatever 5960X is somewhat less capable I don't know.
I go with an expensive one from a brand which have fast memory support for Ryzen: https://www.msi.com/Motherboar... "DDR4 Steel Armor with Best signal stability , Quad Channel DDR4-3466+(OC)"
As for the 5960X I don't know. I totally doubt the 5960X couldn't use faster RAM than 2133. 2133 MHz is stock though. There's a difference. For Broadwell-E the stock is 2400 MHz but as you can see above you can use at-least 3466 MHz DDR4 with it. Stock for Ryzen 7 is 2400 MHz but multiple boards support 3200 MHz now and likely more than one person have 3600 MHz running and AMD will release an update for whatever they called their BIOS foundation in early April which will likely help with memory support further.
I didn't answered it; I made a question because I wasn't 100% sure but I'm as far as sure about it being able to run faster RAM as I can be without knowing.. sorta.
I follow all this stuff very actively and I know about the Pcper speculation and possible indication that's not the case.
AMD have even gone out themselves and said they don't think there is an issue with the Windows scheduler. But you feel free to keep on believing that. If you want to test against it get the Insider preview / edition and run in game mode which lock the game down to 6 cores instead.
Of course Microsoft would fix it if they could. There has been speculation a recent update had some quiet / unmentioned Ryzen fixes.
I could speculate that the Infinity fabric may be wider on the server chips rendering the lack of bandwidth in the consumer 2 CCX version less relevant. It also increase clock with faster RAM so it become less of an issue. It already likely is less on an issue on the Intel chip because it's got quad-channel memory and the fully shared cache (which can also hold more data if one consider the size of the whole space of it.)
To begin with the Ryzen 7 1800X doesn't end up giving the same performance as the i7 5960X even with this update as shown in the article. It's completely fair to to deal with them having different spec, 3.0-3.5 GHz vs 3.6-4.1 ghz on the Ryzen 7 1800X processor, but the 5960X is also one generation old, the 6900K would be the current top of the line 8 core one and the 6950X the best one. So if one is going to do a best 8 core vs best 8 core or best consumer line processor vs consumer/enthusiast one this test fail, the prices aren't the same though.
However what really disturb me from a comparison stand-point is that they gave the i7 5960X 2133 MHz DDR4 vs 2933 MHz DDR4 for the Ryzen 7 1800X, that give the 1800X another opportunity to shine since infinity fabric run at the same clock as RAM but why wasn't the 5960X also given the same speed RAM? It can't run it?
But it would be more honest with same speed ram and the 6900K or even 6950X it that's what they want to show, or for a similar price point just the 6800K even though that's just a 6 core processor. Which is the most relevant? Up to the reader I guess.
If we go with OC RAM there would of course exist the opportunity to overclock the 5960X from the 3.0-3.5 GHz range up beyond 4.5 close to 5.0 GHz whereas the Ryzen 7 chip will do 4.0-4.1 GHz on OC... and as for gamers what most would rather compare it against is the i7 7700K anyway with just four cores but 4.2-5+ GHz clock-rate and a lower price.
Anyway, the test manage to show the increase in FPS with the patch and also compare it against whatever other development could had happened to the game (the i7 run the game even slower than before now, the patch affecting it negatively or the game just having become more complex?), so if that was all that would be shown that could had been shown alone but since it's compared to an Intel processor and that Intel processor is a generation old and with slower RAM I don't really feel the test is honest. Also more relevant models would be the i7 7700K, the i7 6800K and the i7 6950X to compare against the "gaming king", the "same price Intel enthusiast processor" and "the best processor of the Intel enthusiast line."
To begin with one reason; They can make any progress in Zelda to save on their console to begin with...
* It's also portable. * If may offer more opportunity of local multiplayer gaming. * Nintendo titles.
If I had one we could make a test.. I go out and try to find someone to play games with and you take your Xbox One and do the same thing and we see who would have had the best success?
I find it hard to agree to my own post since it's so full of weird sentences, grammar, the wrong words...
English isn't my native language or grammar and I type how I think and I may also have been tired and sometimes I simply type the wrong word:D
Ubuntu was actually a complete pain to install for me because it used some shitty graphical installer likely reliable on Noveau which didn't worked so it simply failed all the time over multiple versions. Debian worked just fine because it used a text installer...
Also the Fedora installer too is complete garbage because it basically just copy its own environment into the harddrive. So no credits to either.
Now the OpenBSD installer is a different thing. One floppy and you get too choose what to install and it's fetched over the Internet. That's an excellent installer!
Windows install super-easy. I assume Windows may do the same stupid "I think this is best for you"-BS too though.
OpenSUSE let you choose what to install and you can even visit OpenSUSE Studio and create your own installer / distribution. I prefer OpenSUSE but it's not like the others is likely to cause trouble either. Since they are so large for common problems you'll find solutions. I assume the solution to the Ubuntu installer may be to do all you can to force it to just use basic VESA instead. I don't want "clever tricks which doesn't work", if they work then fine. But obviously they didn't. I ran ArchLinux before it was up to 1.0 and they changed device system, possibly USB stopped working or whatever and they broke the AlsaMixer. I'm ok with ME breaking things but I don't want the distribution to break them thank you.. At-least if I break them I may have any idea what I actually did.. If someone else break them not so much. I really had no problem with Gentoo either as long as staying away from the ~packages (and too high optimization flags I guess.) I think Ports could end up being somewhat of a chore in FreeBSD but I don't know how much of that was my fault or not (with portsupgrade or so.) Debian stable in 2.0 days was fixed that I assume that had very few issues too, that of course meant that one could want to go with some more unstable branch or use packages from one leading to trouble too..
The least problem one likely have to when going with the stable stuff and doing a full reinstall for each new version, but it may also feel like the least optimal solution one would had wanted as long as they actually worked:D
Ubuntu and Mint both try to be newbie friendly and are large enough. Normal Debian which they are off-spring of (Mint grand-children) would likely do too though I know..well, back in 2.x days you used to get a question how you wanted to merge configuration files and stick with what you had or get the new one or whatever and that kinda felt like a pain. I don't know how it handles if you've done any changes and that's likely when you get the most problem with it (which may still not be a problem.)
OpenSUSE work just fine.
Fedora likely work just fine too.
Where they separate is how you upgrade, Debian can update from one version to the next from within the running system, I think Linux Mint used to suggest that you simply reinstall the new version but by doing that you of course need to keep your/home and any other files you want to keep separate or backed up. The advantage with the later approach is that you can introduce any changes whatsoever, including really large ones and the system will still work and it won't be a problem. If you keep some old stuff around you need to know how to migrate it to the new. There also exist rolling distributions or releases from those who use numbered ones where the OS constantly evolve and you just upgrade all the time. Then you likely get more upgrades and in the case of trying to decide what to do with old configurations and such maybe you'll get more work there but you will never have to deal with going from one version to the next of the whole OS instead.
Multiple of them also don't want to include non-free software by default but remain clean/more clean from that and as such you may not get the proprietary video drivers, Adobe Flash, video and sound codecs and such installed from the beginning but information about how to get that software installed too is readily available so it won't be a problem to install it.
There's some other distributions why try to be the most friendly and easiest and would include such stuff too but the problem with those is that they will be smaller than the ones mentioned above and maybe they just die off or get updates slower than the large ones or will lack the documentation you want at some time or what you find isn't exactly matching the system you've got and so on.
Someone mentioned FreeBSD too before but FreeBSD isn't Linux, FreeBSD/Linux to some degree would be but you likely meant GNU/Linux. There's step by step guides for how to upgrade one version of FreeBSD to the next to there shouldn't be a problem as long as you follow that to do that either. Maybe a few more commands but you're unlikely to run into an issue doing it so it will likely carry on very smoothly anyway. Someone also mentioned ChromeOS but if so then why not go full-blown Android instead? Though I think they was supposed to merge. Running Android wouldn't be the worst choice. Valve should just release a version which adds upon Android if necessary to make the Linux games run on it too.
And refusing to give you a platform is now genocide.
Maybe complicity / not allow people to talk against it. It depends on the purpose I guess.
The politics which bring others here and deny our people and culture however IS genocide. But even if we were allowed to speak out about it it would still be. So it's not like that chances anything. Even if the majority of the voters voted for it it would still be it. Heck, here in Sweden the normal word for suicide would be "sjlvmord" as in self-murder.
Norwegians use Swedes. Swedes use Poles. Poles use... Romanians? Romanians use animals.
I never really see what's the problem with such an outcome except in the case of the animals because they haven't chosen to agree upon it. But I know some have a problem with it.
The Norwegians are always taking advantage of the Swedes (because it's so easy). The Norwegians recently sold Sweden 500 used septic tanks. After they finish refurbishing them, Sweden plans to invade Finland.
... just the first BIG ship tunnel as stated in TFA. For the first ship tunnel in Europe, they are a few centuries late: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Slashdot Mirror
Unless AMD is very quick with implementing DDR5... But it seem weird and I assume they mean GDDR 5 too.
A lower clocked Ryzen 7 1700 with RX 480 would cost ~$500 right now and then there's everything else so a good deal.
Weird PCs doesn't do better with multi-core designs considering how the consoles are speced.
"and then my entire commute will be emission free"
Said the guy driving an electric car.
*sigh*. Electric cars cause emissions- they're just externalized at the generating station.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_Norway
Installed capacity (2007) 30.46 GW
Share of fossil energy 2%
Share of renewable energy 98%
GHG emissions from electricity generation (2007) 0.8 Mt CO2
Average electricity use (2008) 27 MWh annually per capita
"Norway has imported up to 10% of its electricity production during 2004-2009.[6] According to IEA the net electricity export was 14 TWh and the hydro power production 141 TWh in 2008.[22]
Norway and Sweden's grids have long been connected. A new 1 GW[31] 420kV high-voltage link between Nea in Norway and JÃrpstrÃmmen in Sweden was commissioned in 2009.[32] Beginning in 1977 the Norwegian and Danish grids were connected with 500 MW, growing to 1,700 MW in 2015.[33] Norway's grid is connected with the 700 MW NorNed-cable to the Netherlands. There are plans for cables with Germany (NordLink or NorGer) and the UK (HVDC Norwayâ"Great Britain or Scotlandâ"Norway interconnector)."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"Majority of electricity production in Sweden relies on hydro power and nuclear power. In 2008 the consumption of electricity in Sweden was 16 018 kWh per capita, compared to EU average 7 409 kWh per capita.[1] A specialty of the Nordic energy market is the existence of so-called electricity price areas which complicate the wholesale commodity market.
The electricity supply and consumption were about equal in 2006â"2009: 124â"146 TWh/year (14â"17 GW). Year 2009 the electricity supply included hydro power 65 TWh (53%), nuclear power 50 TWh (40%) and net import 5 TWh (3%). The Swedish use of electricity declined by 14% in 2009. Potential factors may include recession and the forest and automobile industry changes."
2016:
Produce 149 TWh, use 139, export 12 (don't ask).
Hydro 61 TWh
Nuclear 61 TWh
Wind 15 TWh
Other 13 TWh
2008: Oil 1 TWh, natural gas 1 TWh, coal 3 TWh (Peat <1)
Biofuels likely over 13 TWh so don't ask me how it all adds up.
They could have but then they would be artificially handicapping the Ryzen platform which supports out of the box 3400 officially with several modes on the 1800x.
Feel free to go with either the maximum or equal (or even standard), everything else is just weird.
I don't know if the i7 5960X can do 3400 MHz. Ryzen only really want to do the higher speeds with max 2x8 Samsung B-die.
The problem is ddr3 vs ddr4.
Why cripple your ddr4 system to make it identical to the max ddr3 system?
No, both systems use DDR4.
All X99 systems use DDR4:
https://ark.intel.com/sv/produ...
And you can use overclocked RAM on their motherboards too:
https://www.msi.com/Motherboar...
All that video show is that Windows 7 run the game faster for whatever reason.
If AMD doesn't think there will be a scheduler fix which improves things and that end up being the case then that's how it is and there won't be any changes and fix with improved performance.
The key difference being potentially unstable system. The processor and architecture is only capable of the slower speed. Anything else is tantamount to overclocking and kind of defeats the purpose of testing two systems against each other.
The Ryzen processor use overclocked memory.
They could had used 2133 MHz CL15 on both systems.
Per Intel's ARK, the i7 5960X supports up to 2133 MHz DDR4. It has four memory channels, though, giving it more memory bandwidth on paper. The 1800X still makes do with only two memory channels, so the fact that it matches the i7 in speed is quite impressive.
I'm very aware of both but that doesn't mean the 5960X can't run faster RAM. .. and the memory channel is a feature of the Intel HEDT platform.
https://www.msi.com/Motherboar...
"DDR4 Steel Armor with Best signal stability , Quad Channel DDR4-3466+(OC)"
You can get stable 3200 MHz out of Ryzen 7 at-least and since that motherboard mention 3466+ I assume you can get stable 3466 out of the latest Intel HEDT platform at-least, as for whatever 5960X is somewhat less capable I don't know.
I go with an expensive one from a brand which have fast memory support for Ryzen:
https://www.msi.com/Motherboar...
"DDR4 Steel Armor with Best signal stability , Quad Channel DDR4-3466+(OC)"
As for the 5960X I don't know.
I totally doubt the 5960X couldn't use faster RAM than 2133. 2133 MHz is stock though. There's a difference.
For Broadwell-E the stock is 2400 MHz but as you can see above you can use at-least 3466 MHz DDR4 with it.
Stock for Ryzen 7 is 2400 MHz but multiple boards support 3200 MHz now and likely more than one person have 3600 MHz running and AMD will release an update for whatever they called their BIOS foundation in early April which will likely help with memory support further.
I didn't answered it; I made a question because I wasn't 100% sure but I'm as far as sure about it being able to run faster RAM as I can be without knowing .. sorta.
I follow all this stuff very actively and I know about the Pcper speculation and possible indication that's not the case.
AMD have even gone out themselves and said they don't think there is an issue with the Windows scheduler. But you feel free to keep on believing that. If you want to test against it get the Insider preview / edition and run in game mode which lock the game down to 6 cores instead.
Of course Microsoft would fix it if they could. There has been speculation a recent update had some quiet / unmentioned Ryzen fixes.
I could speculate that the Infinity fabric may be wider on the server chips rendering the lack of bandwidth in the consumer 2 CCX version less relevant. It also increase clock with faster RAM so it become less of an issue. It already likely is less on an issue on the Intel chip because it's got quad-channel memory and the fully shared cache (which can also hold more data if one consider the size of the whole space of it.)
More than double the price for a 3.6% performance increase? Face it, Intel loses that comparison.
It was never about who win.
It was about them using slow 2133 MHz memory on generation old Intel platform.
For games Intel have the i7 7700K which is cheaper and can compete.
I'd recommend Ryzen 5 1600X and Ryzen 7 1700X over both the i5 7600K and i7 7700K but that doesn't change that they used slow RAM for the Intel CPU.
Will the faster memories for the 6950X erase the $1200 difference in price?
I'm just saying it's ~dishonest.
I'm not saying the 6900K is a better buy than the 1700X.
To begin with the Ryzen 7 1800X doesn't end up giving the same performance as the i7 5960X even with this update as shown in the article.
It's completely fair to to deal with them having different spec, 3.0-3.5 GHz vs 3.6-4.1 ghz on the Ryzen 7 1800X processor, but the 5960X is also one generation old, the 6900K would be the current top of the line 8 core one and the 6950X the best one. So if one is going to do a best 8 core vs best 8 core or best consumer line processor vs consumer/enthusiast one this test fail, the prices aren't the same though.
However what really disturb me from a comparison stand-point is that they gave the i7 5960X 2133 MHz DDR4 vs 2933 MHz DDR4 for the Ryzen 7 1800X, that give the 1800X another opportunity to shine since infinity fabric run at the same clock as RAM but why wasn't the 5960X also given the same speed RAM? It can't run it?
But it would be more honest with same speed ram and the 6900K or even 6950X it that's what they want to show, or for a similar price point just the 6800K even though that's just a 6 core processor. Which is the most relevant? Up to the reader I guess.
If we go with OC RAM there would of course exist the opportunity to overclock the 5960X from the 3.0-3.5 GHz range up beyond 4.5 close to 5.0 GHz whereas the Ryzen 7 chip will do 4.0-4.1 GHz on OC. .. and as for gamers what most would rather compare it against is the i7 7700K anyway with just four cores but 4.2-5+ GHz clock-rate and a lower price.
Anyway, the test manage to show the increase in FPS with the patch and also compare it against whatever other development could had happened to the game (the i7 run the game even slower than before now, the patch affecting it negatively or the game just having become more complex?), so if that was all that would be shown that could had been shown alone but since it's compared to an Intel processor and that Intel processor is a generation old and with slower RAM I don't really feel the test is honest. Also more relevant models would be the i7 7700K, the i7 6800K and the i7 6950X to compare against the "gaming king", the "same price Intel enthusiast processor" and "the best processor of the Intel enthusiast line."
They have already said they may do cloud saves with it.
But if you want to be screwed the least then I guess open-source games should be your thing ..
Or the stuff where you run your own stuff anyway.
Or at-least DRM-free stuff you your own copy without online verification.
Or at-least on PC.
As for cloud-saves I used to think I had a massive inbox, now it's around half full..
To begin with one reason; ...
They can make any progress in Zelda to save on their console to begin with
* It's also portable.
* If may offer more opportunity of local multiplayer gaming.
* Nintendo titles.
If I had one we could make a test .. I go out and try to find someone to play games with and you take your Xbox One and do the same thing and we see who would have had the best success?
It's a trick. .. break copyright. ..
The idea is that to look it up you'd either have to spend the $1200 or
So the poor person trying to find out
I find it hard to agree to my own post since it's so full of weird sentences, grammar, the wrong words...
English isn't my native language or grammar and I type how I think and I may also have been tired and sometimes I simply type the wrong word :D
Ubuntu was actually a complete pain to install for me because it used some shitty graphical installer likely reliable on Noveau which didn't worked so it simply failed all the time over multiple versions. Debian worked just fine because it used a text installer...
Also the Fedora installer too is complete garbage because it basically just copy its own environment into the harddrive. So no credits to either.
Now the OpenBSD installer is a different thing. One floppy and you get too choose what to install and it's fetched over the Internet. That's an excellent installer!
Windows install super-easy. I assume Windows may do the same stupid "I think this is best for you"-BS too though.
OpenSUSE let you choose what to install and you can even visit OpenSUSE Studio and create your own installer / distribution. I prefer OpenSUSE but it's not like the others is likely to cause trouble either. Since they are so large for common problems you'll find solutions. I assume the solution to the Ubuntu installer may be to do all you can to force it to just use basic VESA instead. I don't want "clever tricks which doesn't work", if they work then fine. But obviously they didn't. .. At-least if I break them I may have any idea what I actually did.. If someone else break them not so much. I really had no problem with Gentoo either as long as staying away from the ~packages (and too high optimization flags I guess.) I think Ports could end up being somewhat of a chore in FreeBSD but I don't know how much of that was my fault or not (with portsupgrade or so.) Debian stable in 2.0 days was fixed that I assume that had very few issues too, that of course meant that one could want to go with some more unstable branch or use packages from one leading to trouble too ..
I ran ArchLinux before it was up to 1.0 and they changed device system, possibly USB stopped working or whatever and they broke the AlsaMixer. I'm ok with ME breaking things but I don't want the distribution to break them thank you
The least problem one likely have to when going with the stable stuff and doing a full reinstall for each new version, but it may also feel like the least optimal solution one would had wanted as long as they actually worked :D
They added support for it.
Whatever it was to replace HFS I don't know. Also not why they didn't continue with it.
ZFS have checksums.
Sadly we don't use ZFS for some stupid reason (maybe RAM for instance but I'd just get more RAM if needed.)
Ubuntu and Mint both try to be newbie friendly and are large enough. ..well, back in 2.x days you used to get a question how you wanted to merge configuration files and stick with what you had or get the new one or whatever and that kinda felt like a pain. I don't know how it handles if you've done any changes and that's likely when you get the most problem with it (which may still not be a problem.)
Normal Debian which they are off-spring of (Mint grand-children) would likely do too though I know
OpenSUSE work just fine.
Fedora likely work just fine too.
Where they separate is how you upgrade, Debian can update from one version to the next from within the running system, I think Linux Mint used to suggest that you simply reinstall the new version but by doing that you of course need to keep your /home and any other files you want to keep separate or backed up. The advantage with the later approach is that you can introduce any changes whatsoever, including really large ones and the system will still work and it won't be a problem. If you keep some old stuff around you need to know how to migrate it to the new.
There also exist rolling distributions or releases from those who use numbered ones where the OS constantly evolve and you just upgrade all the time. Then you likely get more upgrades and in the case of trying to decide what to do with old configurations and such maybe you'll get more work there but you will never have to deal with going from one version to the next of the whole OS instead.
Multiple of them also don't want to include non-free software by default but remain clean/more clean from that and as such you may not get the proprietary video drivers, Adobe Flash, video and sound codecs and such installed from the beginning but information about how to get that software installed too is readily available so it won't be a problem to install it.
There's some other distributions why try to be the most friendly and easiest and would include such stuff too but the problem with those is that they will be smaller than the ones mentioned above and maybe they just die off or get updates slower than the large ones or will lack the documentation you want at some time or what you find isn't exactly matching the system you've got and so on.
Someone mentioned FreeBSD too before but FreeBSD isn't Linux, FreeBSD/Linux to some degree would be but you likely meant GNU/Linux. There's step by step guides for how to upgrade one version of FreeBSD to the next to there shouldn't be a problem as long as you follow that to do that either. Maybe a few more commands but you're unlikely to run into an issue doing it so it will likely carry on very smoothly anyway.
Someone also mentioned ChromeOS but if so then why not go full-blown Android instead? Though I think they was supposed to merge. Running Android wouldn't be the worst choice. Valve should just release a version which adds upon Android if necessary to make the Linux games run on it too.
And refusing to give you a platform is now genocide.
Maybe complicity / not allow people to talk against it. It depends on the purpose I guess.
The politics which bring others here and deny our people and culture however IS genocide. But even if we were allowed to speak out about it it would still be. So it's not like that chances anything. Even if the majority of the voters voted for it it would still be it. Heck, here in Sweden the normal word for suicide would be "sjlvmord" as in self-murder.
Speculative chain who does what for whom:
Norwegians use Swedes. ... Romanians?
Swedes use Poles.
Poles use
Romanians use animals.
I never really see what's the problem with such an outcome except in the case of the animals because they haven't chosen to agree upon it. But I know some have a problem with it.
£5 tablet?
Where?
I don't know what the devices cost so .. Can't comment, you two seem to disagree on which device have the most profit? No?
How does it compare to Galaxy S tab 2, 3 and Asus Zenpad 3S? Lenovo Yoga 3? Sony had one too whatever that one was called ..
The cheaper ... TrekStor? and C... 12-13" Chinese ones?
The Norwegians are always taking advantage of the Swedes (because it's so easy). The Norwegians recently sold Sweden 500 used septic tanks. After they finish refurbishing them, Sweden plans to invade Finland.
Maybe we could use them for mass-deportations.
"We come in/with peace!" .. ;D
... just the first BIG ship tunnel as stated in TFA. For the first ship tunnel in Europe, they are a few centuries late: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Mean-while in Sweden:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...