well, the processor is sold as being good for speed X. By setting the bus 2 MHz faster, you're doing 1.01 * X processor speed. So, the manufacturer of one piece is making the other piece go over it's nominal speed. Sure, it's not by much, but I do think it is foul play when you consider that 99.9% of the readers will accept that the actual working speeds are the ones set on the BIOS, versus some other, unknown, value. So the motherboard supposedly works "better" (read: faster) at the same speed as the other ones, when, in reality, that extra performance comes from working the memory and processor at speeds beyond their supposed working speeds, rather than actual motherboard design.
I only have one thing to say to that: branch prediction. Apparently, both the X-Box and the PS3 feature processors seriously crippled in that aspect. That would make them crippled for general-purposed computing -- including running a modern operating system
make sure you set your client to do its utmost to get the first few chunks first. That'll allow you to preview the file if it is a film or song. Also, an increasingly large number of music torrents is becoming multi-file torrents rather than 1 0-compression rar file to encapsulate all the discrete songs in the album. This'll allow you to preview all files. Also works on PDFs (gotta love eBooks).
This said, I'm not aware it works on CD images (gotta check if that Linux CD is real, heh).
linux shouldn't work towards supporting games. Linux shouldn't go towards being transparently windows compatible. It should do its thing. Apparently, "its thing" is an organic, each person pulls to his own side, process. But it's working. Linux won't die out all of a sudden because you can't play battlefield 2. It won't die out because program x or y won't run. It was meant as an experiment, as a learning process for the brand new Intel 80386. Just because everybody seems to want to use linux nowadays doesn't mean that linux should fit everybody's uses. Those people should adapt it to their own uses, which is what the source is there for.
more simply, he could middle click to open some random link in a new tab. But what of the links that target _newwindow? those are bitches. They still spawn a new window needlessly, when they could just pop up in a new tab. I myself have never gotten around this problem. And before you ask, I think that in this day and age, copying the URL and pasting it in the ctrl+T spawned tab at all acceptable.
Screw handholding, users want something that works, and works the way any sane person expects it to. From all the years of MS abuse I suffered, I was greatly surprised when middle clicking in the bookmark menu in FF actually did the right thing and opened the bookmark in a new window. This is the stuff he's talking about, and anybody who uses a computer with some purpose other than using a computer should be allowed this. Even those who do use the computer just because, me included, should demand that such things work.
Hmmm... lets pick this post apart.
How much does multimedia have to "just work"? how much multimedia does your average worker need, beyond an mp3 player?
I'm afraid you are confusing the linux people with the/. people there. The "linux people" in actual "linux forums" are pretty friendly, and will help you with the most ridiculous of questions. It's the/. crowd that seems to think that every person should have the knowledge of an experienced sysadmin before even touching a computer.
Regarding access to information, try getting a decent support forum for windows. Just about every distribution I know has one, and like I commented the general attitude towards newbies is preety good. They are also filled with people known to point you in the right direction, be it regarding TCP/IP programming, be it getting those pesty NTFS partitions to work, be it playing MP3s.
RMS seems to me to be "some genius CS idiot with their pet project or ideology" -- and he made GNU. that, with linux, is actually something that works remarkably well. It has its flaws, other systems have theirs. That doesn't mean that his work was pointless. In fact, much was spawned from his movement, and much improvement in closed source software can probably be attributed to his work.
microsoft's kingdom was judged illegal, and it's big head judged as predatory practices. It is therefore not "a decent business to buy from", and people might like "mixing and matching the way they have always done", but that doesn't happen if microsoft has a say about it.
I won't argue the driver issue. No, it's not Linux's fault, but that doesn't really make it any better.
However, on the software side, you don't really get the situation you paint.
On the availability side of things, I admit there are problems. However, you demand something unreasonable: that you don't need to look for replacement programs. You're already replacing the operating system. Even if the same programs were available, you'd likelier than not have to re-buy those products, this time around in the linux version (where available). Plus, if you really really must run the usual ones, wine might get you to run the original programs. Don't bitch -- vice-versa doesn't work at all, and as a mostly complete switcher, I feel some pains using default windows apps for a load of chores.
Sure, many gnome applications have internal names that play off the G theme (and KDE greatly overdoes the thing, IMO). However, you look at the foot menu in gnome (that, at least in my ubuntu install, came clearly labeled as "applications", rather than a more cryptic "start"), you will find applications called by their generic names, not some weird, unintuitive selling name. You have a quite clearly labeled "text editor", "openoffice word processor", "OO.o Spreadsheet", "OO.o presentation" and "Evolution mail" rather than odd names like Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Outlook. Sure, Word is pretty self explaining. But the rest? Just because people have gotten used to them doesn't mean they're good.
Regarding installing programs, you just have to be joking. Either that, or you're ignorant (or plain malicious). You have (possibly literally) hundreds of distributions around. Sure, some might require you to hack up config files, use the command line, the works. However, you also have SuSE, which is a major player, debian, a classic, and Ubuntu, a debian-based comparative newcomer that's packing a punch. On those, you have either YaST or Synaptic to serve your installing needs. On Synaptic, you just search for whatever it is you want (not just for name, but for description as well, when you know what you want, but not what program to use), and click to install. That easy. The program downloads itself, transparently handles any requirements it might have, only complaining if anything untowards happens. Though I've never tried SuSE, YaST reportedly works mostly the same. Both of those systems put the windows installers to shame.
And I'm running firefox 1.0.4 (stable) on gnome 2.10 (stable) running atop linux 2.6.10 (stable). What software I have that could be called beta, like Rhythmbox 0.8.8, runs perfectly stable, quite unlike some pushed-to-release products you get in windows -- essentially paid betas. But that's the third party stuff, right? don't blame the permanent beta state of third party software on "linux" either, even if permanent beta just means that people are perfectionists and will only stop calling it beta when it's actually done.
Are the people in the USA that control these things accountable to anyone OUTSIDE the USA?
Accountability is all nice and fine, but don't use it as an argument when you can't offer it yourself.
Hate to burst your bubble, but the first page ever in the www (and the web's invention) was set in CERN, which is somewhere over the french/swiss border. Europe, for the slower on the uptake.
Therefore, while the internet itself might be an american invention, its most visible layer is an european one.
This said, since Alan Turing is british, the brits have the undisputed rights to everything that computes. Either that or perhaps sticking to things that happened over 40 years ago (70 in the case of turing) is complete bullshit.
Anyway, the internet is itself spread around most of the world, by now. By design, should every bloody computer in the USA shut down, the net itself would survive, and continue to work. The USA have, therefore, no control over the internet, other than over the content posted there, which is about as much as any old country can say on the subject. Therefore, passing the theoretical control to some internationally recognized entity is the Right Thing to do, as it would show some good faith towards what is in reality a worldwide phenomenom.
Surprising as it may seem to you, AMD isn't really doing all that well in the PC market. Or at least they argue they're not. Given the panorama when I enter any retailer that sells computers, I agree.
Not one single AMD machine in sight. Sure, I bought the pieces and assembled myself an athlon 64 machine. But the question is: how many more people would do that?/.ers might, some non-slashdotting hard-core gamers might. But not that many more people. And Intel's market share is still WAY WAY too big for everybody's sake. A much more balanced situation is not only possible (ATi and nVidia seem pretty balanced to me), it'also advisable. At least, the perceived improvements in graphics cards technology, and the clear standards built around them (OpenGL and DirectX, like it or not) make for a much much nicer user experience.
Sure, Microsoft is a pretty powerful monopoly as well. But the question should never be "hey, he's infringing too, why is it that I'm punished and he's not?". Punishment should eventually reach all. But since AMD processors, are fully transparent drop-in replacements for Intel processors, and that makes Intel's supposed monopoly that much more susceptible to attack.
On a related note, when a full-fledged corporate migration to AMD is perfectly feasible without any significative bumps, but vendor limitations prevent it because of Intel's purported pressure, that is a much, much clearer indication of foul play than an already complicated switch from Windows to *BSD or Linux not happening supposedly because of Microsoft's pressure.
Besides, it's not a matter of "They're doing well", it's a matter of "they'd arguably be doing much better if Intel didn't repeatedly screw them over in illegal ways"
And you kno what the sad part is? the violent games that appear are the ones your three year old son would understand, not the ones anyone below the age of 20 would find boring and lacking in action, despite being profoundly unsettling to somebody with an ounce of maturity. I mean, you get doom, you get unreal, you get some command and conquer knock-off, yet another gta iteration, and all of those get all sorts of complaints from all the worried parent associations, yada yada. However, those still sell, much like the likes of stallone, schwarzenegger or vin diesel will always sell.
Gaming hasn't yet evolved into a state where games such as planescape: torment or essentially anything by Peter Molyneux or Sid Meier can make it to prime time. Sure, Molyneux and Meier sell, but nothing compared to John Carmack. Planescape, despite having possibly the best plot I've seen in a computer game thus far, being quite well written and allowing for a pretty large number of variations on gameplay based on morals and ethics, is seen throughout most of the gaming comunity as a weak thing compared to almighty yet-another-copy-of-the-same-story-and-gameplay Final Fantasy 7. I learnt of the existence of Vampire: Bloodlines by accident, which is just fine, because that means I can play it without anybody seeing it in the next teenager-gone-berserk's home, and blaming it for his behaviour. I can freely go through a thoroughly violent world where you can pay hookers to go with you to a dark alley so you can suck her (blood) nearly dry, but where actually killing her unnecessarily exacts a toll on the little humanity you have left. A violent game with morals! How refreshing! Yet any of the usual "violent games are evil" suspects would look at it and say "you get rewarded for paying for hookers' services! You play a devilish creature! You murder people! Evil! Evil!" And the real violence of the game would be lost upon them. The violence that truly impresses me, the violence that I never get used to and makes me think about what morals are about is there. The breaking of trust, the manipulating of feelings, the toying with people as if they were puppets are all there. Yet all those fools would see is vampires, guns and sex.
As a sidenote, an epically violent game perfectly suited for children 12 and below is any game of the Worms series. Really.
no. but if I want to google, I do www.google.com
likewise, if "the new msn" is meant to be a great search engine, I expect the engine to be found in www.msn.com in its unadultered form.
It's the difference between a search engine that has news, and a news site that has a search engine. The focus change will make or break the thing
well, there's always a first. And a company KNOWN to do the spyware thing is a perfectly reasonable candidate for being the first. This said, I'm under the impression that skype is spyware-less, independently of the platform.
U.are.U Pro by www.digitalpersona.com
It's my dad's, but I have it right next to me (went to get the box to check the name). I think this is in the open market
and he won't also answer the question straight, dodging the bullet three times.
Re:Is this REALLY launched this time?
on
MSN Search Has Arrived
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Well, besides being incosistant, I wouldn't have noticed it if it weren't for/. -- how many more googlers will actually not find out about the "new msn" for a while?
Either way, it still doesn't cut it for me. I'm partial to the 1 image, one text input line and the barest of text around it look of google.
The look of MSN is still too filled with "stuff". Too much of the news and added content thing, plus you get two ads for free on the first page, at about the same height as the google search bar, whereas the msn search bar is located quite near the top of the page, on a much less convenient place to look at. That difference of focus on the page design also doesn't work for me -- it immediatly says "we're after your money".
the shop where I ordered my computer (just 5 more days!) has plenty of X800 Pro/XT/XT platinum and 6800 GT/Ultra (mostly AGP, only the 6800 GT ones are available on PCI-E) on stock. so...
not meaning to flame, but isn't putting ASUS on such a pedestal and guarantee of quality a bit of fanboyism in and of itself? I do agree that their products do give an impression of quality.
Many here could simply state that quality being equal, nVidia is quite simply the way to go because of Linux driver support, which I wouldn't qualify as fanboyism AT ALL.
well, the fact is that for Joe Random User, the existence of a non-administrator account in Win XP is something he's not even aware of. He doesn't even know what it means. And linux distros are proactive in the "create a different user" dept.
given the linux development model, how do you define a 3rd party application? is the GNU toolchain 3rd party? is X 3rd party? Is KDE? Gnome? Or perhaps you'll cut it down to whatever's not in the distro CDs. But what if they are in another distro's default package list? clearly, this is a problem
yeah, the asus sli motherboard has 8 SATA ports...
anyway, the x16 slots are compatible with the x1 ones, so no hard done there. In fact you can turn a x16 card into a x1 one by taping the extrac connectors. Saw it done somewhere on grapics cards, to assess exactly how much bandwidth they ACTUALLY used from those x16 lanes:)
Slashdot Mirror
Screw FPSs. I want a tennis game. A golf game. Lightsaber duels. Forget all those tried and true games. Think of the possibilities!
well, the processor is sold as being good for speed X. By setting the bus 2 MHz faster, you're doing 1.01 * X processor speed. So, the manufacturer of one piece is making the other piece go over it's nominal speed. Sure, it's not by much, but I do think it is foul play when you consider that 99.9% of the readers will accept that the actual working speeds are the ones set on the BIOS, versus some other, unknown, value. So the motherboard supposedly works "better" (read: faster) at the same speed as the other ones, when, in reality, that extra performance comes from working the memory and processor at speeds beyond their supposed working speeds, rather than actual motherboard design.
Because they're from Stanford rather than Berkley?
I only have one thing to say to that: branch prediction. Apparently, both the X-Box and the PS3 feature processors seriously crippled in that aspect. That would make them crippled for general-purposed computing -- including running a modern operating system
make sure you set your client to do its utmost to get the first few chunks first. That'll allow you to preview the file if it is a film or song. Also, an increasingly large number of music torrents is becoming multi-file torrents rather than 1 0-compression rar file to encapsulate all the discrete songs in the album. This'll allow you to preview all files. Also works on PDFs (gotta love eBooks). This said, I'm not aware it works on CD images (gotta check if that Linux CD is real, heh).
linux shouldn't work towards supporting games. Linux shouldn't go towards being transparently windows compatible. It should do its thing. Apparently, "its thing" is an organic, each person pulls to his own side, process. But it's working. Linux won't die out all of a sudden because you can't play battlefield 2. It won't die out because program x or y won't run. It was meant as an experiment, as a learning process for the brand new Intel 80386. Just because everybody seems to want to use linux nowadays doesn't mean that linux should fit everybody's uses. Those people should adapt it to their own uses, which is what the source is there for.
I do think you hit the jackpot. The Airport Express has the combo jack. The Mini is wifi-enabled. Think about it.
more simply, he could middle click to open some random link in a new tab. But what of the links that target _newwindow? those are bitches. They still spawn a new window needlessly, when they could just pop up in a new tab. I myself have never gotten around this problem. And before you ask, I think that in this day and age, copying the URL and pasting it in the ctrl+T spawned tab at all acceptable. Screw handholding, users want something that works, and works the way any sane person expects it to. From all the years of MS abuse I suffered, I was greatly surprised when middle clicking in the bookmark menu in FF actually did the right thing and opened the bookmark in a new window. This is the stuff he's talking about, and anybody who uses a computer with some purpose other than using a computer should be allowed this. Even those who do use the computer just because, me included, should demand that such things work.
Hmmm... lets pick this post apart. /. people there. The "linux people" in actual "linux forums" are pretty friendly, and will help you with the most ridiculous of questions. It's the /. crowd that seems to think that every person should have the knowledge of an experienced sysadmin before even touching a computer.
How much does multimedia have to "just work"? how much multimedia does your average worker need, beyond an mp3 player?
I'm afraid you are confusing the linux people with the
Regarding access to information, try getting a decent support forum for windows. Just about every distribution I know has one, and like I commented the general attitude towards newbies is preety good. They are also filled with people known to point you in the right direction, be it regarding TCP/IP programming, be it getting those pesty NTFS partitions to work, be it playing MP3s.
RMS seems to me to be "some genius CS idiot with their pet project or ideology" -- and he made GNU. that, with linux, is actually something that works remarkably well. It has its flaws, other systems have theirs. That doesn't mean that his work was pointless. In fact, much was spawned from his movement, and much improvement in closed source software can probably be attributed to his work.
microsoft's kingdom was judged illegal, and it's big head judged as predatory practices. It is therefore not "a decent business to buy from", and people might like "mixing and matching the way they have always done", but that doesn't happen if microsoft has a say about it.
I won't argue the driver issue. No, it's not Linux's fault, but that doesn't really make it any better. However, on the software side, you don't really get the situation you paint. On the availability side of things, I admit there are problems. However, you demand something unreasonable: that you don't need to look for replacement programs. You're already replacing the operating system. Even if the same programs were available, you'd likelier than not have to re-buy those products, this time around in the linux version (where available). Plus, if you really really must run the usual ones, wine might get you to run the original programs. Don't bitch -- vice-versa doesn't work at all, and as a mostly complete switcher, I feel some pains using default windows apps for a load of chores.
Sure, many gnome applications have internal names that play off the G theme (and KDE greatly overdoes the thing, IMO). However, you look at the foot menu in gnome (that, at least in my ubuntu install, came clearly labeled as "applications", rather than a more cryptic "start"), you will find applications called by their generic names, not some weird, unintuitive selling name. You have a quite clearly labeled "text editor", "openoffice word processor", "OO.o Spreadsheet", "OO.o presentation" and "Evolution mail" rather than odd names like Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Outlook. Sure, Word is pretty self explaining. But the rest? Just because people have gotten used to them doesn't mean they're good.
Regarding installing programs, you just have to be joking. Either that, or you're ignorant (or plain malicious). You have (possibly literally) hundreds of distributions around. Sure, some might require you to hack up config files, use the command line, the works. However, you also have SuSE, which is a major player, debian, a classic, and Ubuntu, a debian-based comparative newcomer that's packing a punch. On those, you have either YaST or Synaptic to serve your installing needs. On Synaptic, you just search for whatever it is you want (not just for name, but for description as well, when you know what you want, but not what program to use), and click to install. That easy. The program downloads itself, transparently handles any requirements it might have, only complaining if anything untowards happens. Though I've never tried SuSE, YaST reportedly works mostly the same. Both of those systems put the windows installers to shame. And I'm running firefox 1.0.4 (stable) on gnome 2.10 (stable) running atop linux 2.6.10 (stable). What software I have that could be called beta, like Rhythmbox 0.8.8, runs perfectly stable, quite unlike some pushed-to-release products you get in windows -- essentially paid betas. But that's the third party stuff, right? don't blame the permanent beta state of third party software on "linux" either, even if permanent beta just means that people are perfectionists and will only stop calling it beta when it's actually done.
Are the people in the USA that control these things accountable to anyone OUTSIDE the USA? Accountability is all nice and fine, but don't use it as an argument when you can't offer it yourself.
Hate to burst your bubble, but the first page ever in the www (and the web's invention) was set in CERN, which is somewhere over the french/swiss border. Europe, for the slower on the uptake. Therefore, while the internet itself might be an american invention, its most visible layer is an european one. This said, since Alan Turing is british, the brits have the undisputed rights to everything that computes. Either that or perhaps sticking to things that happened over 40 years ago (70 in the case of turing) is complete bullshit. Anyway, the internet is itself spread around most of the world, by now. By design, should every bloody computer in the USA shut down, the net itself would survive, and continue to work. The USA have, therefore, no control over the internet, other than over the content posted there, which is about as much as any old country can say on the subject. Therefore, passing the theoretical control to some internationally recognized entity is the Right Thing to do, as it would show some good faith towards what is in reality a worldwide phenomenom.
Surprising as it may seem to you, AMD isn't really doing all that well in the PC market. Or at least they argue they're not. Given the panorama when I enter any retailer that sells computers, I agree. Not one single AMD machine in sight. Sure, I bought the pieces and assembled myself an athlon 64 machine. But the question is: how many more people would do that? /.ers might, some non-slashdotting hard-core gamers might. But not that many more people. And Intel's market share is still WAY WAY too big for everybody's sake. A much more balanced situation is not only possible (ATi and nVidia seem pretty balanced to me), it'also advisable. At least, the perceived improvements in graphics cards technology, and the clear standards built around them (OpenGL and DirectX, like it or not) make for a much much nicer user experience.
Sure, Microsoft is a pretty powerful monopoly as well. But the question should never be "hey, he's infringing too, why is it that I'm punished and he's not?". Punishment should eventually reach all. But since AMD processors, are fully transparent drop-in replacements for Intel processors, and that makes Intel's supposed monopoly that much more susceptible to attack.
On a related note, when a full-fledged corporate migration to AMD is perfectly feasible without any significative bumps, but vendor limitations prevent it because of Intel's purported pressure, that is a much, much clearer indication of foul play than an already complicated switch from Windows to *BSD or Linux not happening supposedly because of Microsoft's pressure.
Besides, it's not a matter of "They're doing well", it's a matter of "they'd arguably be doing much better if Intel didn't repeatedly screw them over in illegal ways"
And you kno what the sad part is? the violent games that appear are the ones your three year old son would understand, not the ones anyone below the age of 20 would find boring and lacking in action, despite being profoundly unsettling to somebody with an ounce of maturity.
I mean, you get doom, you get unreal, you get some command and conquer knock-off, yet another gta iteration, and all of those get all sorts of complaints from all the worried parent associations, yada yada. However, those still sell, much like the likes of stallone, schwarzenegger or vin diesel will always sell.
Gaming hasn't yet evolved into a state where games such as planescape: torment or essentially anything by Peter Molyneux or Sid Meier can make it to prime time. Sure, Molyneux and Meier sell, but nothing compared to John Carmack. Planescape, despite having possibly the best plot I've seen in a computer game thus far, being quite well written and allowing for a pretty large number of variations on gameplay based on morals and ethics, is seen throughout most of the gaming comunity as a weak thing compared to almighty yet-another-copy-of-the-same-story-and-gameplay Final Fantasy 7.
I learnt of the existence of Vampire: Bloodlines by accident, which is just fine, because that means I can play it without anybody seeing it in the next teenager-gone-berserk's home, and blaming it for his behaviour. I can freely go through a thoroughly violent world where you can pay hookers to go with you to a dark alley so you can suck her (blood) nearly dry, but where actually killing her unnecessarily exacts a toll on the little humanity you have left. A violent game with morals! How refreshing! Yet any of the usual "violent games are evil" suspects would look at it and say "you get rewarded for paying for hookers' services! You play a devilish creature! You murder people! Evil! Evil!" And the real violence of the game would be lost upon them. The violence that truly impresses me, the violence that I never get used to and makes me think about what morals are about is there. The breaking of trust, the manipulating of feelings, the toying with people as if they were puppets are all there. Yet all those fools would see is vampires, guns and sex.
As a sidenote, an epically violent game perfectly suited for children 12 and below is any game of the Worms series. Really.
no. but if I want to google, I do www.google.com likewise, if "the new msn" is meant to be a great search engine, I expect the engine to be found in www.msn.com in its unadultered form. It's the difference between a search engine that has news, and a news site that has a search engine. The focus change will make or break the thing
well, there's always a first. And a company KNOWN to do the spyware thing is a perfectly reasonable candidate for being the first. This said, I'm under the impression that skype is spyware-less, independently of the platform.
U.are.U Pro by www.digitalpersona.com It's my dad's, but I have it right next to me (went to get the box to check the name). I think this is in the open market
and he won't also answer the question straight, dodging the bullet three times.
Well, besides being incosistant, I wouldn't have noticed it if it weren't for /. -- how many more googlers will actually not find out about the "new msn" for a while?
Either way, it still doesn't cut it for me. I'm partial to the 1 image, one text input line and the barest of text around it look of google.
The look of MSN is still too filled with "stuff". Too much of the news and added content thing, plus you get two ads for free on the first page, at about the same height as the google search bar, whereas the msn search bar is located quite near the top of the page, on a much less convenient place to look at. That difference of focus on the page design also doesn't work for me -- it immediatly says "we're after your money".
the shop where I ordered my computer (just 5 more days!) has plenty of X800 Pro/XT/XT platinum and 6800 GT/Ultra (mostly AGP, only the 6800 GT ones are available on PCI-E) on stock. so...
not meaning to flame, but isn't putting ASUS on such a pedestal and guarantee of quality a bit of fanboyism in and of itself? I do agree that their products do give an impression of quality. Many here could simply state that quality being equal, nVidia is quite simply the way to go because of Linux driver support, which I wouldn't qualify as fanboyism AT ALL.
well, the fact is that for Joe Random User, the existence of a non-administrator account in Win XP is something he's not even aware of. He doesn't even know what it means. And linux distros are proactive in the "create a different user" dept.
given the linux development model, how do you define a 3rd party application? is the GNU toolchain 3rd party? is X 3rd party? Is KDE? Gnome? Or perhaps you'll cut it down to whatever's not in the distro CDs. But what if they are in another distro's default package list? clearly, this is a problem
or perhaps less attacked
yeah, the asus sli motherboard has 8 SATA ports... anyway, the x16 slots are compatible with the x1 ones, so no hard done there. In fact you can turn a x16 card into a x1 one by taping the extrac connectors. Saw it done somewhere on grapics cards, to assess exactly how much bandwidth they ACTUALLY used from those x16 lanes :)