There's two problems with your reasoning, both detail dependent.
The newest thing normally has a terrible performance per dollar ratio, because some people want to have the best, and will pay an egregious amount. Many of the people saying "we'll never need that" are being realistic, and REALLY mean, "by the time we need this, it will be cheap".
The second thing is that in THIS case, the broadwell-e seems to be mostly a tie with the haswell-e, which is quite a bit older. The base performance per comparable part is pretty similar, and the haswell-e seems to be overclocking better. The new part, the ten core, is the piece with no direct comparison, and it is seriously massively expensive. If you're looking for an 8 core desktop processor and want to spend around a grand, you could well be better off with the Haswell-E even if it wasn't cheaper, depending on your use case.
> The important news is that the mainstream i7 now has 6 cores.
The mainstream i7 is the Skylake 6700, and that has four cores. Desktop (non-enthusiast) Kabylake going to six cores is, I think, still a rumor- and one I don't find too credible, but hey, who knows.
> Most consumer level computers don't have the best ways to keep a CPU from over-heating
Most consumer level computers don't have an enthusiast chip that costs 1700 bucks and has no integrated graphics either. These aren't consumer level computers, these are enthusiast level, and they literally support overclocking. Heat limitations are real, but they aren't the only things holding back multicore stuff.
And while these are probably reject Xeons, they are also clocked higher than the Xeons, and probably binned to be at least mostly oveclockable above that some.
I am *absolutely* convinced that Intel's apparently fuckdiculous pricing is primarily to create a hole where AMD can actually live. Intel will move way less of these processors than if they were competitively priced, which they mostly appear not to be (the deca-core is totally absurd, and the octa-core seems to bench almost identical with the slightly cheaper Haswell-E octa-core, the 5960). If Intel moved aggressively, it probably would crush AMD. If AMD puts the Zen in too low, then they can lower their Broadwell-E a tad. Intel needs very badly to not be a chip monopoly, and to do this they simply have to be bending over backwards to give AMD the time needed to make a good core and the marketing space necessary to actually sell those cores. Everyone constantly talks about how AMD screwed up badly and the Zen will redeem them. Well, probably- but both AMD and Intel sort of need that to happen.
I think this is more likely than simply trying to milk as much dollar out of each possible customer, because at the prices these are placed at, they are simply not priced to move in enthusiast circles in the way that previous offerings were.
> That's interesting that your software takes 100 times as long as the Linux kernel does.
I don't think so at all. If your standard for production software quality is "the Linux kernel", then you must really look down on almost every software project! Add in that many languages are going to build way slower, and you'll really end up disappointed.
Deca-core is the correct name, whether Intel calls it that or not. Everyone knows that deca means ten, and the strange stuff I see proposed in this thread (among bodybuilders it is slang for a certain anabolic...) is just not the reason they aren't going with it. They probably found that "ten core" markets better than "deca-core", and they may not even have a reason beyond that.
When development of the 286 started, it was still arguable that most software would be rewritten to accommodate it, because that had happened every other time previous. Obviously, that didn't happen- there was already a huge boom in software for companies that previously didn't even use computers, and for families as well. In hindsight it was a monumentally stupid decision, but at the time you could still make the point and not be openly mocked.
I think the real problem was in asking "Is anyone working on protected mode DOS?"- and when the answer is "nope, no real plans", that should have been the signal.
Because the Windows fixes are never ending. And you can't be positive that they work now, and you definitely can't be positive that they work then. Also lol@5 minutes. If you "fixed" your Windows 10 in 5 minutes, pop open a wireshark and then do stuff locally, like search bar locally and run programs locally. Did you fix it? Hrm...
Windows users have been waiting for an update to Windows 7 for years. Waiting for more years makes some sense. In the next several years, any of these could happen:
1- Microsoft could temporarily de-evil long enough to make a version of Windows 10 worth using, or a Windows 11. 2- Apple could come out with a Mac, and that could be your next upgrade. 3- You could always Linux
Running 7 until one of these transpires is entirely rational. Microsoft is pushing hard by producing products that don't work under Windows 7, but the rest of the industry will probably not make that leap for years.
Which is a fair assessment. The Hindenberg was supposed to use Helium- at its core, it was a good design. It was a business decision to use Hydrogen, just as it was a business decision to attach malicious behavior to many points of Windows 10. The core design wasn't incompetent, just the results.
First, ABRT doesn't send crash data by default in Fedora. You can configure it to do so, I think, if you really want. Second, even if it did, you would be able to turn it off trivially, instead of Microsoft fighting you with a GUI option that can't even be set to off.
Ubuntu has been covered by the other posters.
Third, yes, if you ask dnf or yum or whatever for a program, it will then ask the server. That's not privacy invasive- that is absolutely necessary. If you want to get product A from vendor 1, you must ask vendor 1 for product A. Microsoft sending stuff to itself that it has no business knowing about, such as non-Microsoft programs, and when you use notepad, and other usage data, is a huge issue. Open any utility or program, send a packet to Microsoft. I don't know of any Linux that does anything like that at all.
Whatever works for them. There's plenty of big ones to choose from.
> How do I get a driver for my sound, network, etc.
For sound and network, this is a pretty 2003 problem. Those work without drama. For less universal hardware you can still have to download it from a manufacturer's website, but the same is true with Windows. I haven't seen Linux fail to instantly understand graphics, sound, networking, memory, hard drives, solid state drives, or optical drives in over a decade.
> It simply does not work across the board on every system. Neither does Windows.
Using Linux does require more effort than using Windows. But when it comes to the basics, it is absolutely solid. The bigger issue a Windows user faces is that some programs will inevitable not have Linux versions, or the Linux replacements will be a lot less functional.
But if the alternative is windows 10, lets be real here, that's some creepy nonsense.
Java is kill. Once the APIs were found to be copyrightable, that was the case. Going forward, no API is totally trustworthy unless it is public domain or copy left or something. In practice, this means you have to choose APIs where you believe there's no possibly way of the prior idiotic technically incompetent ruling destroying all your work. But one thing you know for sure: anything Oracle owns is fucking poison.
Hardware RNGs are like 50 bucks. Wikipedia even has a compare page, and you can go higher if you need to. It is unusual to need a shockingly large amount of random bits to begin with, after all.
So this TOR thing is nice, especially because computers baseline can generate psuedorandom numbers pretty darned quickly, and merging them is better than not merging them. But if you, personally, care, using a hardware RNG and having it seed and combine with your prng (such as Linux will do) seems like it is ideal.
> On the other hand, it will not be stronger than the strongest single source of pseudo-randomness.
This seems very unintuitive. If I have a stream where every 5th bit is predictably zero, and a stream where every 7th bit is predictably one, then the second stream is the more random of the two. If I xor them together, then every 35th bit is predictably zero, but my resultant stream seems much more random than either of the two originally, right? I could predict 1/7th of the data originally, and now I can only predict 1/35th.
If you bought 7 or 8, you're a paying customer. Those versions both cost money. You didn't pay ME anything this month either, should I feel free to come fuck up your property? After all, you didn't pay me NOT to fuck up your property this month....
Dude, there are others who don't like systemd, and eventually more distros will exist without it. Contrarily, it is possible that systemd will improve to the point where it no longer has issues and you would not mind it on your box. You can always install a slightly older Linux version, sans systemd, and then simply not upgrade further until either systemd is good, or a sans-d fork exists and is well maintained for you (such as Devuan meeting whatever your standards are).
Correct. Copypasta from the reddit link, user/u/qua-z: (so a copy is here) ------- KB3068708 Update for customer experience and diagnostic telemetry KB3022345 Update for customer experience and diagnostic telemetry KB2952664 Compatibility update for upgrading Windows 7 KB2990214 Update that enables you to upgrade from Windows 7 to a later version of Windows KB3035583 Update installs Get Windows 10 app in Windows 8.1 and Windows 7 SP1 KB971033 Description of the update for Windows Activation Technologies KB3021917 Update to Windows 7 SP1 for performance improvements KB3044374 Update that enables you to upgrade from Windows 8.1 to a later version of Windows *cmd:
sc stop Diagtrack
sc delete Diagtrack *Task Scheduler Library:
Everything under "Application Experience"
Everything under "Autochk"
Everything under "Customer Experience Improvement Program"
Under "Disk Diagnostic" only the "Microsoft-Windows-DiskDiagnosticDataCollector"
Under "Maintenance" "WinSAT"
"Media Center" and click the "status" column, then select all non-disabled entries and disable them. *services.msc:
"Remote Registry" to "Disabled" instead of "Manual". ----end copypasta---
In general, this is current for how to make 7 and 8 safe for now. Remember that future kbs may bundle these or otherwise list then as required, or may have different telemetry. You must manually vet every kb to some extent that you install onto Windows from here on out, to make sure it doesn't add telemetry.
Slashdot Mirror
You really think RedHat would let that happen? I get not liking systemD, but there's no need for conspiracies.
"Yeah, but whey do we need it? "
There's two problems with your reasoning, both detail dependent.
The newest thing normally has a terrible performance per dollar ratio, because some people want to have the best, and will pay an egregious amount. Many of the people saying "we'll never need that" are being realistic, and REALLY mean, "by the time we need this, it will be cheap".
The second thing is that in THIS case, the broadwell-e seems to be mostly a tie with the haswell-e, which is quite a bit older. The base performance per comparable part is pretty similar, and the haswell-e seems to be overclocking better. The new part, the ten core, is the piece with no direct comparison, and it is seriously massively expensive. If you're looking for an 8 core desktop processor and want to spend around a grand, you could well be better off with the Haswell-E even if it wasn't cheaper, depending on your use case.
> The important news is that the mainstream i7 now has 6 cores.
The mainstream i7 is the Skylake 6700, and that has four cores. Desktop (non-enthusiast) Kabylake going to six cores is, I think, still a rumor- and one I don't find too credible, but hey, who knows.
> Most consumer level computers don't have the best ways to keep a CPU from over-heating
Most consumer level computers don't have an enthusiast chip that costs 1700 bucks and has no integrated graphics either. These aren't consumer level computers, these are enthusiast level, and they literally support overclocking. Heat limitations are real, but they aren't the only things holding back multicore stuff.
And while these are probably reject Xeons, they are also clocked higher than the Xeons, and probably binned to be at least mostly oveclockable above that some.
I am *absolutely* convinced that Intel's apparently fuckdiculous pricing is primarily to create a hole where AMD can actually live. Intel will move way less of these processors than if they were competitively priced, which they mostly appear not to be (the deca-core is totally absurd, and the octa-core seems to bench almost identical with the slightly cheaper Haswell-E octa-core, the 5960). If Intel moved aggressively, it probably would crush AMD. If AMD puts the Zen in too low, then they can lower their Broadwell-E a tad. Intel needs very badly to not be a chip monopoly, and to do this they simply have to be bending over backwards to give AMD the time needed to make a good core and the marketing space necessary to actually sell those cores. Everyone constantly talks about how AMD screwed up badly and the Zen will redeem them. Well, probably- but both AMD and Intel sort of need that to happen.
I think this is more likely than simply trying to milk as much dollar out of each possible customer, because at the prices these are placed at, they are simply not priced to move in enthusiast circles in the way that previous offerings were.
> You are essentially destroying the job of the offline seller here.
If they can't offer value, why should we continue to support them?
> That's interesting that your software takes 100 times as long as the Linux kernel does.
I don't think so at all. If your standard for production software quality is "the Linux kernel", then you must really look down on almost every software project! Add in that many languages are going to build way slower, and you'll really end up disappointed.
That's just rounding man, you round, you don't truncate.
Oh, it is FAR too late for that...
https://www.amazon.com/Intel-X...
Heptapentaconta-core!
Deca-core is the correct name, whether Intel calls it that or not. Everyone knows that deca means ten, and the strange stuff I see proposed in this thread (among bodybuilders it is slang for a certain anabolic...) is just not the reason they aren't going with it. They probably found that "ten core" markets better than "deca-core", and they may not even have a reason beyond that.
It brings the most computing power to a desktop CPU, but yea, as written it is incorrect.
When development of the 286 started, it was still arguable that most software would be rewritten to accommodate it, because that had happened every other time previous. Obviously, that didn't happen- there was already a huge boom in software for companies that previously didn't even use computers, and for families as well. In hindsight it was a monumentally stupid decision, but at the time you could still make the point and not be openly mocked.
I think the real problem was in asking "Is anyone working on protected mode DOS?"- and when the answer is "nope, no real plans", that should have been the signal.
I mean, you could still get real modem cards even post-winmodem. But the existence of them meant that you had to be really careful.
Because the Windows fixes are never ending. And you can't be positive that they work now, and you definitely can't be positive that they work then. Also lol@5 minutes. If you "fixed" your Windows 10 in 5 minutes, pop open a wireshark and then do stuff locally, like search bar locally and run programs locally. Did you fix it? Hrm...
> Are people planning to never upgrade?
Possibly.
Windows users have been waiting for an update to Windows 7 for years. Waiting for more years makes some sense. In the next several years, any of these could happen:
1- Microsoft could temporarily de-evil long enough to make a version of Windows 10 worth using, or a Windows 11.
2- Apple could come out with a Mac, and that could be your next upgrade.
3- You could always Linux
Running 7 until one of these transpires is entirely rational. Microsoft is pushing hard by producing products that don't work under Windows 7, but the rest of the industry will probably not make that leap for years.
Which is a fair assessment. The Hindenberg was supposed to use Helium- at its core, it was a good design. It was a business decision to use Hydrogen, just as it was a business decision to attach malicious behavior to many points of Windows 10. The core design wasn't incompetent, just the results.
You're full of shit.
First, ABRT doesn't send crash data by default in Fedora. You can configure it to do so, I think, if you really want. Second, even if it did, you would be able to turn it off trivially, instead of Microsoft fighting you with a GUI option that can't even be set to off.
Ubuntu has been covered by the other posters.
Third, yes, if you ask dnf or yum or whatever for a program, it will then ask the server. That's not privacy invasive- that is absolutely necessary. If you want to get product A from vendor 1, you must ask vendor 1 for product A. Microsoft sending stuff to itself that it has no business knowing about, such as non-Microsoft programs, and when you use notepad, and other usage data, is a huge issue. Open any utility or program, send a packet to Microsoft. I don't know of any Linux that does anything like that at all.
Comparing Microsoft to Linux here is LUDICROUS.
> Which distro?
Whatever works for them. There's plenty of big ones to choose from.
> How do I get a driver for my sound, network, etc.
For sound and network, this is a pretty 2003 problem. Those work without drama. For less universal hardware you can still have to download it from a manufacturer's website, but the same is true with Windows. I haven't seen Linux fail to instantly understand graphics, sound, networking, memory, hard drives, solid state drives, or optical drives in over a decade.
> It simply does not work across the board on every system.
Neither does Windows.
Using Linux does require more effort than using Windows. But when it comes to the basics, it is absolutely solid. The bigger issue a Windows user faces is that some programs will inevitable not have Linux versions, or the Linux replacements will be a lot less functional.
But if the alternative is windows 10, lets be real here, that's some creepy nonsense.
Install Linux, problem solved.
C doesn't have quotes around it.
Java is kill. Once the APIs were found to be copyrightable, that was the case. Going forward, no API is totally trustworthy unless it is public domain or copy left or something. In practice, this means you have to choose APIs where you believe there's no possibly way of the prior idiotic technically incompetent ruling destroying all your work. But one thing you know for sure: anything Oracle owns is fucking poison.
Hold on, where is the link to pledge allegiance to the superbrain?
Hardware RNGs are like 50 bucks. Wikipedia even has a compare page, and you can go higher if you need to. It is unusual to need a shockingly large amount of random bits to begin with, after all.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
So this TOR thing is nice, especially because computers baseline can generate psuedorandom numbers pretty darned quickly, and merging them is better than not merging them. But if you, personally, care, using a hardware RNG and having it seed and combine with your prng (such as Linux will do) seems like it is ideal.
> On the other hand, it will not be stronger than the strongest single source of pseudo-randomness.
This seems very unintuitive. If I have a stream where every 5th bit is predictably zero, and a stream where every 7th bit is predictably one, then the second stream is the more random of the two. If I xor them together, then every 35th bit is predictably zero, but my resultant stream seems much more random than either of the two originally, right? I could predict 1/7th of the data originally, and now I can only predict 1/35th.
If you bought 7 or 8, you're a paying customer. Those versions both cost money. You didn't pay ME anything this month either, should I feel free to come fuck up your property? After all, you didn't pay me NOT to fuck up your property this month....
Dude, there are others who don't like systemd, and eventually more distros will exist without it. Contrarily, it is possible that systemd will improve to the point where it no longer has issues and you would not mind it on your box. You can always install a slightly older Linux version, sans systemd, and then simply not upgrade further until either systemd is good, or a sans-d fork exists and is well maintained for you (such as Devuan meeting whatever your standards are).
Correct. Copypasta from the reddit link, user /u/qua-z:
(so a copy is here)
-------
KB3068708 Update for customer experience and diagnostic telemetry
KB3022345 Update for customer experience and diagnostic telemetry
KB2952664 Compatibility update for upgrading Windows 7
KB2990214 Update that enables you to upgrade from Windows 7 to a later version of Windows
KB3035583 Update installs Get Windows 10 app in Windows 8.1 and Windows 7 SP1
KB971033 Description of the update for Windows Activation Technologies
KB3021917 Update to Windows 7 SP1 for performance improvements
KB3044374 Update that enables you to upgrade from Windows 8.1 to a later version of Windows
*cmd:
sc stop Diagtrack
sc delete Diagtrack
*Task Scheduler Library:
Everything under "Application Experience"
Everything under "Autochk"
Everything under "Customer Experience Improvement Program"
Under "Disk Diagnostic" only the "Microsoft-Windows-DiskDiagnosticDataCollector"
Under "Maintenance" "WinSAT"
"Media Center" and click the "status" column, then select all non-disabled entries and disable them.
*services.msc:
"Remote Registry" to "Disabled" instead of "Manual".
----end copypasta---
In general, this is current for how to make 7 and 8 safe for now. Remember that future kbs may bundle these or otherwise list then as required, or may have different telemetry. You must manually vet every kb to some extent that you install onto Windows from here on out, to make sure it doesn't add telemetry.