Did you try hard to miss "from what I experience" in my post? Do you really suggest that, somehow, my experiences are ignorant?
Experiences as a passenger; so quite a lot of them over the years. And you, while calling me ignorant, relied on just...one counterexample, kudos to you!
(have you heard about fun facts that 50 vs. 80 makes for a much longer breaking distance (if one even notices any possible obstruction in time - again from my experiences, common speeders do it just as often, if not more, during the night..."there's less traffic" after all), shortens the time of reaction considerably and makes for a much more dangerous situation if you need to perform sudden manouver?)
Will drivers incapable of being safe on the road pay for major roadworks plus new ridiculously safe and ridiculously overpiced cars for those who drive responsibly? (but might still be hit by somebody else) Heck, will they finance such cars for everybody? (since safer roads will consume even more space in the cities than they already do; not only being a pedestrian would not fit in your "safe at any speed" fantasy...there would be no real way to move around on foot or bike)
(and yeah, who will raise a hand as an unsafe driver?)
Notice how the benchmark you linked to tests only JS; not performance in actual usage, which "a side-by-side comparison of Chrome and a few other browsers rendering in slow motion for comparison" would be about. Also, that 30% number is in relation just to previous version of Chrome.
Though what CRT TVs (!!!; they had different phosphorus from monitors and were interlaced) were doing with legacy console video output is, in practice, a kind of free hardware antialiasing and a bit of motion blur. Those legacy consoles looked worse, for example, when viewed on a very small CRT monitor, even when that monitor was set close to their native resolution. Those properties were mostly carried to all LCDs...
It's definatelly not only a matter of resolution, because you can make it much better via specific filters in dscaler, when viewed on a CRT or LCD monitor.
Actually one can still find PS/2 keyboards, very cheaply and...some are surprisingly good, as far as keyboards built around rubber suppositories go (for example A4Tech (yes!) Stilo...for some reason built like a tankette and with very nice feel, again as far using rubber suppositories in keyboard constructions goes; not quite in the league of Model M of course...but I might still stash a few - for less than 9 bucks...)
Speed limits are useless because they create irritatingly "slow" moving obstructions, from which your speeding car migh bump off
Got it.
Oh, and you provide great example why cameras are fine - eventually those "many not slowing down" get the idea (or get their license suspended, whatever). Hey, one might catch semis racing to the merge...
You know you just basically said "there's no point in speed limits anywhere because you then get a mix of speeds, since some people are speeding"? What, you want to tell me you really mean it?...
If your freedom relies on, perceived by you (and seemingly valued), small hardships in tracking you...then you don't have much freedom to speak of anyway.
Since K7 times. SiS 735, 745, 746, 748...negligibly slower in memory & cpu benchmarks than the fastest available chipsets, but very trouble-free and with fabulous PCI implementation, rivalling Intel - that was the reason why many videographers lowed them and bought en masse; and great value for the performance (chiefly because the only other working choice was...Intel chipset)
They worked like a champ, no real problems (especially MSI built on 745 was popular - it wasn't the bottom of the line motherboard, it was build to solid standards) - one would think we would notice if there were any, considering how much we pushed those machines.
There was also quite nice chipset in early K8 times, but by then hardly nobody noticing them took its toll. But every X360 ships with SiS southbridge...
Intel started doing a bit more than "cut prices, but also released a huge speed bump" (BTW, remember P3 Coppermine 1.13GHz?;p ), as shown by recent record-breaking fine from the EU and settlement with AMD (both almost $3 billion total? Supposedly Intel cheated the market for at least that much...imagine what AMD could've done with R&D and fabs if they would have the funds which were otherwise illegally funelled to Intel). The company for which you presumably do care about doesn't really share your enthusiasm for competition...the way they fought, it kept costs higher and quality lower on AMD side.
BTW, "Ok but they were still plenty good chips, they performed well enough for what most people used" in regards to P4 wasn't quite the case with first versions, which were much more expensive and slower than P3s they replaced. Plus lots of unsuspecting people of "CPU must be from Intel" type got Willamette Celerons, which were very castrated, cache-starved (as far as Netburst was concerned)...making them very slow, and a horrible deal.
LGA775 was really two sockets though, with clear compatibility break around the middle. Also, wasn't there a recent story on/. that 1156 will be quite soon replaced?
BTW, for the part with leaving browser (+badly behaving JS) in the background, suspending its process works sensibly to unclog the machine / give you one more free core.
It's hard not to get "good performance at a decent price" these days, at least if you're paying the tiniest bit of attention. Certainly works for AMD pretty much across their product spectrum.
Hell, I wish SiS were actually available - from K7 times they were a very solid, trouble-free chipsets (and with PCI implementation rivalling Intel). Of course with the problem of usually being put on the cheapest motherboards... (and this is the real reason for higher failure rates from GP poster)
You said yourself that if you go for AMD then you go for "cheap", meaning the cheap, crappy motherboards (and PSU most likely). You self select for higher failure rates of them.
Intel will sell lots of CPUs regardless; it was just about this group waiting specifically for price decreases "forced" by potential attractiveness of a nice product from smaller competing vendor, a situation which GP basically subscribed to.
Plus the integrated GFX on most AMD boards is a bit more sensible than Intel one, meaning separate card can be more often ignored (or at the least the initial configuration not including it, and the machine will be still sensibly nice)
(yes, there's integrated Nvidia - not with latest Intel arch though; previously not so readily available...and for some reason motherboards for Intel with Nv GFX were consistently more expensive than for AMP CPUs with Nv GFX, at least where I am)
BTW, using the better at the time (implies the second is just stacked somewhere) device strikes me as incredibly wastefull TBH. There is no real reason why a netbook can't convert, with appropriate UI modification in the process, to a nice tablet (some do, just the UI/software part is partly missing); it won't be that much larger, and essentially equally good...plus the possibility of acting as "creative" on-the-go machine, too.
But somehow one major market decides it's actually a good idea to waste resources on, heck, mostly replication? Well, we shouldn't be surprised really; society with way too much of its members quite readily buying in the past ridiculously oversized and typically unneeded cars needs its new bling...
Slashdot Mirror
Did you try hard to miss "from what I experience" in my post? Do you really suggest that, somehow, my experiences are ignorant?
Experiences as a passenger; so quite a lot of them over the years. And you, while calling me ignorant, relied on just...one counterexample, kudos to you!
(have you heard about fun facts that 50 vs. 80 makes for a much longer breaking distance (if one even notices any possible obstruction in time - again from my experiences, common speeders do it just as often, if not more, during the night..."there's less traffic" after all), shortens the time of reaction considerably and makes for a much more dangerous situation if you need to perform sudden manouver?)
Will drivers incapable of being safe on the road pay for major roadworks plus new ridiculously safe and ridiculously overpiced cars for those who drive responsibly? (but might still be hit by somebody else) Heck, will they finance such cars for everybody? (since safer roads will consume even more space in the cities than they already do; not only being a pedestrian would not fit in your "safe at any speed" fantasy...there would be no real way to move around on foot or bike)
(and yeah, who will raise a hand as an unsafe driver?)
But still the browser really dedicated to overall snappiness (and for quite some time now) will yet again be forgotten.
Notice how the benchmark you linked to tests only JS; not performance in actual usage, which "a side-by-side comparison of Chrome and a few other browsers rendering in slow motion for comparison" would be about. Also, that 30% number is in relation just to previous version of Chrome.
...plus one has to keep CRT for those great (basically per-pixel accuracy with G-Con) lightgun games to work ;/
(and it's not only about resolution really, see my other response nearby)
Though what CRT TVs (!!!; they had different phosphorus from monitors and were interlaced) were doing with legacy console video output is, in practice, a kind of free hardware antialiasing and a bit of motion blur. Those legacy consoles looked worse, for example, when viewed on a very small CRT monitor, even when that monitor was set close to their native resolution. Those properties were mostly carried to all LCDs...
It's definatelly not only a matter of resolution, because you can make it much better via specific filters in dscaler, when viewed on a CRT or LCD monitor.
Actually one can still find PS/2 keyboards, very cheaply and...some are surprisingly good, as far as keyboards built around rubber suppositories go (for example A4Tech (yes!) Stilo...for some reason built like a tankette and with very nice feel, again as far using rubber suppositories in keyboard constructions goes; not quite in the league of Model M of course...but I might still stash a few - for less than 9 bucks...)
Not a problem, Apple will just supplant them...
Speed limits are useless because they create irritatingly "slow" moving obstructions, from which your speeding car migh bump off
Got it.
Oh, and you provide great example why cameras are fine - eventually those "many not slowing down" get the idea (or get their license suspended, whatever). Hey, one might catch semis racing to the merge...
You know you just basically said "there's no point in speed limits anywhere because you then get a mix of speeds, since some people are speeding"? What, you want to tell me you really mean it?...
Somehow, from what I experience, if somebody speeds away from residential areas...he is also quite likely to speed in them.
And such low limits on highways might be just as well because of traffic flow and noise control
If your freedom relies on, perceived by you (and seemingly valued), small hardships in tracking you...then you don't have much freedom to speak of anyway.
Since K7 times. SiS 735, 745, 746, 748...negligibly slower in memory & cpu benchmarks than the fastest available chipsets, but very trouble-free and with fabulous PCI implementation, rivalling Intel - that was the reason why many videographers lowed them and bought en masse; and great value for the performance (chiefly because the only other working choice was...Intel chipset)
They worked like a champ, no real problems (especially MSI built on 745 was popular - it wasn't the bottom of the line motherboard, it was build to solid standards) - one would think we would notice if there were any, considering how much we pushed those machines.
There was also quite nice chipset in early K8 times, but by then hardly nobody noticing them took its toll. But every X360 ships with SiS southbridge...
Though that doesn't explain eating the CPU while the app just sits there, as the parent poster described.
Intel started doing a bit more than "cut prices, but also released a huge speed bump" (BTW, remember P3 Coppermine 1.13GHz? ;p ), as shown by recent record-breaking fine from the EU and settlement with AMD (both almost $3 billion total? Supposedly Intel cheated the market for at least that much...imagine what AMD could've done with R&D and fabs if they would have the funds which were otherwise illegally funelled to Intel). The company for which you presumably do care about doesn't really share your enthusiasm for competition...the way they fought, it kept costs higher and quality lower on AMD side.
BTW, "Ok but they were still plenty good chips, they performed well enough for what most people used" in regards to P4 wasn't quite the case with first versions, which were much more expensive and slower than P3s they replaced. Plus lots of unsuspecting people of "CPU must be from Intel" type got Willamette Celerons, which were very castrated, cache-starved (as far as Netburst was concerned)...making them very slow, and a horrible deal.
LGA775 was really two sockets though, with clear compatibility break around the middle. Also, wasn't there a recent story on /. that 1156 will be quite soon replaced?
It's a sad world we're living in if IDEs, of all things, are poorly written...
BTW, for the part with leaving browser (+badly behaving JS) in the background, suspending its process works sensibly to unclog the machine / give you one more free core.
It's hard not to get "good performance at a decent price" these days, at least if you're paying the tiniest bit of attention. Certainly works for AMD pretty much across their product spectrum.
Hell, I wish SiS were actually available - from K7 times they were a very solid, trouble-free chipsets (and with PCI implementation rivalling Intel). Of course with the problem of usually being put on the cheapest motherboards... (and this is the real reason for higher failure rates from GP poster)
You said yourself that if you go for AMD then you go for "cheap", meaning the cheap, crappy motherboards (and PSU most likely). You self select for higher failure rates of them.
Intel will sell lots of CPUs regardless; it was just about this group waiting specifically for price decreases "forced" by potential attractiveness of a nice product from smaller competing vendor, a situation which GP basically subscribed to.
Plus the integrated GFX on most AMD boards is a bit more sensible than Intel one, meaning separate card can be more often ignored (or at the least the initial configuration not including it, and the machine will be still sensibly nice)
(yes, there's integrated Nvidia - not with latest Intel arch though; previously not so readily available...and for some reason motherboards for Intel with Nv GFX were consistently more expensive than for AMP CPUs with Nv GFX, at least where I am)
Yeah, a lot of people waiting for i7 price to drop instead of actually buying nice AMD product will surely result in drops of Intel CPU prices, right?
BTW, using the better at the time (implies the second is just stacked somewhere) device strikes me as incredibly wastefull TBH. There is no real reason why a netbook can't convert, with appropriate UI modification in the process, to a nice tablet (some do, just the UI/software part is partly missing); it won't be that much larger, and essentially equally good...plus the possibility of acting as "creative" on-the-go machine, too.
But somehow one major market decides it's actually a good idea to waste resources on, heck, mostly replication? Well, we shouldn't be surprised really; society with way too much of its members quite readily buying in the past ridiculously oversized and typically unneeded cars needs its new bling...