I'd be livid if something I bought for $500 broke after only 5 months use, and if I then found out that because I was living in a country with barely any consumer rights I had no way to get this sorted out in a fair manner. I'd rip someone's guts out if they were in any way associated with that purchase.
You have a reasonable expectation at purchase that the goods will last a certain minimum amount of time. One year should be a legal minimum for home electronics purchases. Full stop. It would stop some companies releasing utter crap onto the market as well, and thus the situation would improve for everyone.
Only people in marketing could come up with the term "guru" to mean "someone who can't help, and exists to market to you until you give in".
And Microsoft misses one of the myriad small points in why Apple is seen positively by so many people despite having software release management run by a Crurotarsan.
The Atom does have a 64-bit mode, but it increases the power consumption to 4W and is only available on the desktop N270 variant (I think that's the model number, might be wrong there).
Indeed it could be that a single Godson-3 core outperforms Atom and thus the chip is actually going to end up in a thousand Chinese-designed nettops next year!
Re:Firefox Damage Control Is More Than Enough
on
Chrome Vs. IE 8
·
· Score: 2, Informative
WebKit is a parser and layout engine. It will call underneath to code that actually renders text onto the canvas, much like Gecko calls Cairo.
Re:Chrome iPhone
on
Chrome Vs. IE 8
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
"Now I upped the ante to 9 tabs, which for brevity, I won't list. IE8 with 6 processes was using 958524 KB and Chrome with 11 processes was using 783840 KB."
What's wrong with your computer? Why is it using so much memory for just a few tabs? What does Chrome report in about:memory?
Re:Firefox Damage Control Is More Than Enough
on
Chrome Vs. IE 8
·
· Score: 1
Google had to develop their own middleware rendering API (like Cairo or the equivalent in Apple's libraries) and it doesn't do anti-aliased curves or text-shadows yet, and alpha-channels aren't completed either it appears.
Re:Firefox Damage Control Is More Than Enough
on
Chrome Vs. IE 8
·
· Score: 1
Safari uses 1GB of memory after a week and doesn't fit into Windows UI. I have used it a lot, and it is quite nice (especially RSS, the feature I miss most in Chrome). Safari also has infuriating moments where it hangs for several seconds at a time.
Chrome's UI simply beats Safari, Firefox and IE. Its operation is far faster as well. Its featureset isn't, but it is a beta. I'm certain that an RSS feed function will be added.
Re:Firefox Damage Control Is More Than Enough
on
Chrome Vs. IE 8
·
· Score: 1
You're right.
Firefox has got stuck in a mire of "design by committee" recently, like IE.
It means it can't do really basic features, like EV SSL Certificates. Chrome does them.
On the other hand, Google had an advantage in coming into the game now, and utilising an existing rendering component (sadly not the most up to date version of it, but I bet that there are frequent software updates) which is what took such a long time for Mozilla to develop initially.
However that doesn't negate the good design work that Chrome has in its UI. Its location bar makes Mozilla's AwesomeBar look amateurish. Its speed is amazing - new tab opens *instantly* with complex content, despite having to spawn a new process. Firefox has a lag of about a second. IE7 has a lag of up to 5 seconds!
I'm hoping that either the plug-in API can be used to develop ad-blockers, mouse gestures and flash-block, or that an extension API is added on for these functions. It's an early beta still, yet still good enough that I don't want to go back to Firefox (or Safari).
Were the test websites were pretty resource heavy?
on
Chrome Vs. IE 8
·
· Score: 1
I ran Chrome for 8 hours yesterday, with up to 8 tabs open, and only got memory consumption up to around 150MB at most. Not even 10% of the memory available in this computer. I imagine that Chrome would run very well on an Atom based NetBook, even if it only had 512MB RAM.
I closed them all, and Chrome went back down to 50MB.
Safari was eating 1GB of memory beforehand though!
Intel don't allow anyone else to use their latest fabrication technology.
That's why it is being made on a 65nm process.
Presumably that means the cores themselves are quite small (compared to a desktop x86 core from Intel or AMD) and don't have a boat-load of per-core cache (but maybe a shared cache is present).
Thanks for the correction, 10 hours at work had frazzled my brain and I right shifted by one bit instead of 2 bits.
For a 65nm CPU at 1GHz, 2.5W a core seems pretty good. Sure, Atom can reach 1.6GHz on a 45nm process at the same power consumption, so taking all those factors into consideration I imagine that the IPC of Godson-3 is roughly the same as Atom. In which case I imagine their next step for Godson-4 would be to implement some form of SMT.
AMD thought that about Intel before Intel tarted up the P3 and released it as the Core Duo. Godson-3 has 4 cores, they're jumping straight to the Core Quad level. At 2.5W per core at 1GHz though, I wouldn't expect much. Might be good competition for Atom and Nano though, and those Netbooks don't *need* x86 to run Linux.
And it has accelerated translation of x86 instructions AFAICT - presumably a native application will use these to run x86 VMs.
This is the third major redesign of the Dragon chip. If you had read the article (haha, slashdot joke etc) you would have seen that apparently with each update they've tripled the performance, or so they say. There's been about 8 updates for the second major design of the chip, they're on 2G or 2H now, with integrated GPUs, and even integrated chipsets (System on Chip).
Godson-3 / Dragon-3 chip will have 4 cores at 5W/core (allegedly) and interface using HyperTransport to a chipset (so they can probably use any compatible chipset from the PC world).
Plug-ins will come, use a proxying ad-blocker that works for all your browsers instead of configuring per-browser, etc. Configuration options do need work however. Install location needs work. It's a Beta, they'll sort it out eventually.
To be honest, using Chrome is a far better experience than using Firefox.
But it is a beta still, and it is lacking features - you have to use a proxying ad blocker at the moment, for example.
However I am sure that it won't take a long time for FlashBlock, AdBlock, Mouse Gestures to arrive.
At the moment Chrome is great for casual users who currently use IE, and for browsing JavaScript heavy sites. It also has Safari's lovely text box resizing.
I think that your best bet for a HTPC would be something based upon AMD's 780G platform, with an SSD and a decent fanless cooler on one of AMD's 45W CPUs (maybe underclocked / undervolted a bit - use a motherboard with AMD's SB750 which provides excellent assistance for over/underclocking and voltage changes.
That would destroy the entire rate-for-risk loan and mortgage market.
Which means that everyone would get the worst possible deal because there would be no way to see if someone has a good credit report. See how many places will give you a mortgage today if you don't agree to a credit check.
If you don't want a bad credit report, then pay your bills on time.
You can develop good credit by having a credit card (which I'd recommend for all online purchases because of the protection they give you, don't use debit cards) and paying off the bill monthly, in full. Or just by having a credit card! If they make mistakes, then issue a Notice of Correction.
Of course it might work differently in the US from the UK...
Maybe they got a CSI interconnect license from Intel in return for the SLI technology.
Or the days of proprietary GPU ganging technology are coming to an end. Intel already does Crossfire in their chipsets, and AMD's GPUs are best right now so that's two hits against NVIDIA for their GPUs for the people that buy Intel-based computers.
Apparently the IE private mode has that, and in addition tries to intercept cross-site tracking via third parties (the single-pixel trick, amongst others).
It won't stop things that happen off of the clients computer - ISP logs, server-side-implemented cross-site tracking, etc.
There is the concept of consumer rights, and there is a large bunch of regulations and laws regarding trading.
However when it comes to banks there really aren't any. It's taken years for the banks to be told that their 'fines' for going overdrawn and similar penalties are unreasonably large and aren't a true reflection of the cost to the bank.
I guess that because there are web interfaces to a lot of other internet protocols, that the iPhone can support them. Google provides a usenet interface, for example. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a Gopher web interface either, like Floodgate.
However the stupid brainless advertising execs decided that "internet" == "www" in this case. I'd argue that flash and Java aren't part of the internet themselves, just files that are transferred over the internet. The iPhone does HTTP (so it does the web, even if it doesn't show everything), it does SMTP, it probably does some other protocols, even if you need to install something from the AppStore like a SSH Client.
My phone has a USB port and cable, but doesn't charge off it, stupid Nokia. On the other hand they've kept the chargers reasonably stable in the past.
What I want is:
* A single standard mini-USB port definition * All mobile devices to be able to charge from USB * The plug-charger should be a USB port providing wall wart.
Indeed, I pay £2.50 for 10MB of data at 3.5G speed (although actually getting that would be something), but could choose to pay £15 for 15GB with a free PC dongle (at the half price rate for phone contract holders). The dongle might even work at 3.75G speeds...
I'm kinda considering it, because the internet service via DSL I get is so poor!
I am using Safari on Windows at the moment, it's nice.
Apart from random pauses in its operation for up to 10 seconds at a time. I think the Javascript JIT or something causes the application to lock up whilst it is doing its thing. Some work needed there.
I also ran into the Firefox self-signed certificate issue and found the 4 stage process to be rather ridiculous myself. A self-signed certificate is not bad, it still allows secure data transfer between the client and the server, however it loses the verification of the server aspect - which you may not even care about. I found the wording on the Firefox SSL certificate warning page to be rather over the top, and rather vague at the same time.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd be livid if something I bought for $500 broke after only 5 months use, and if I then found out that because I was living in a country with barely any consumer rights I had no way to get this sorted out in a fair manner. I'd rip someone's guts out if they were in any way associated with that purchase.
You have a reasonable expectation at purchase that the goods will last a certain minimum amount of time. One year should be a legal minimum for home electronics purchases. Full stop. It would stop some companies releasing utter crap onto the market as well, and thus the situation would improve for everyone.
Only people in marketing could come up with the term "guru" to mean "someone who can't help, and exists to market to you until you give in".
And Microsoft misses one of the myriad small points in why Apple is seen positively by so many people despite having software release management run by a Crurotarsan.
The Atom does have a 64-bit mode, but it increases the power consumption to 4W and is only available on the desktop N270 variant (I think that's the model number, might be wrong there).
Indeed it could be that a single Godson-3 core outperforms Atom and thus the chip is actually going to end up in a thousand Chinese-designed nettops next year!
WebKit is a parser and layout engine. It will call underneath to code that actually renders text onto the canvas, much like Gecko calls Cairo.
"Now I upped the ante to 9 tabs, which for brevity, I won't list. IE8 with 6 processes was using 958524 KB and Chrome with 11 processes was using 783840 KB."
What's wrong with your computer? Why is it using so much memory for just a few tabs? What does Chrome report in about:memory?
Google had to develop their own middleware rendering API (like Cairo or the equivalent in Apple's libraries) and it doesn't do anti-aliased curves or text-shadows yet, and alpha-channels aren't completed either it appears.
Safari uses 1GB of memory after a week and doesn't fit into Windows UI. I have used it a lot, and it is quite nice (especially RSS, the feature I miss most in Chrome). Safari also has infuriating moments where it hangs for several seconds at a time.
Chrome's UI simply beats Safari, Firefox and IE. Its operation is far faster as well. Its featureset isn't, but it is a beta. I'm certain that an RSS feed function will be added.
You're right.
Firefox has got stuck in a mire of "design by committee" recently, like IE.
It means it can't do really basic features, like EV SSL Certificates. Chrome does them.
On the other hand, Google had an advantage in coming into the game now, and utilising an existing rendering component (sadly not the most up to date version of it, but I bet that there are frequent software updates) which is what took such a long time for Mozilla to develop initially.
However that doesn't negate the good design work that Chrome has in its UI. Its location bar makes Mozilla's AwesomeBar look amateurish. Its speed is amazing - new tab opens *instantly* with complex content, despite having to spawn a new process. Firefox has a lag of about a second. IE7 has a lag of up to 5 seconds!
I'm hoping that either the plug-in API can be used to develop ad-blockers, mouse gestures and flash-block, or that an extension API is added on for these functions. It's an early beta still, yet still good enough that I don't want to go back to Firefox (or Safari).
I ran Chrome for 8 hours yesterday, with up to 8 tabs open, and only got memory consumption up to around 150MB at most. Not even 10% of the memory available in this computer. I imagine that Chrome would run very well on an Atom based NetBook, even if it only had 512MB RAM.
I closed them all, and Chrome went back down to 50MB.
Safari was eating 1GB of memory beforehand though!
Intel don't allow anyone else to use their latest fabrication technology.
That's why it is being made on a 65nm process.
Presumably that means the cores themselves are quite small (compared to a desktop x86 core from Intel or AMD) and don't have a boat-load of per-core cache (but maybe a shared cache is present).
Thanks for the correction, 10 hours at work had frazzled my brain and I right shifted by one bit instead of 2 bits.
For a 65nm CPU at 1GHz, 2.5W a core seems pretty good. Sure, Atom can reach 1.6GHz on a 45nm process at the same power consumption, so taking all those factors into consideration I imagine that the IPC of Godson-3 is roughly the same as Atom. In which case I imagine their next step for Godson-4 would be to implement some form of SMT.
AMD thought that about Intel before Intel tarted up the P3 and released it as the Core Duo. Godson-3 has 4 cores, they're jumping straight to the Core Quad level. At 2.5W per core at 1GHz though, I wouldn't expect much. Might be good competition for Atom and Nano though, and those Netbooks don't *need* x86 to run Linux.
And it has accelerated translation of x86 instructions AFAICT - presumably a native application will use these to run x86 VMs.
This is the third major redesign of the Dragon chip. If you had read the article (haha, slashdot joke etc) you would have seen that apparently with each update they've tripled the performance, or so they say. There's been about 8 updates for the second major design of the chip, they're on 2G or 2H now, with integrated GPUs, and even integrated chipsets (System on Chip).
Godson-3 / Dragon-3 chip will have 4 cores at 5W/core (allegedly) and interface using HyperTransport to a chipset (so they can probably use any compatible chipset from the PC world).
That's the Dragon-1 chip.
The Dragon-3 will have 4 cores. It uses MIPS64 but has additional hardware-aided x86 translation instructions.
Shame you didn't actually use it, eh?
Plug-ins will come, use a proxying ad-blocker that works for all your browsers instead of configuring per-browser, etc. Configuration options do need work however. Install location needs work. It's a Beta, they'll sort it out eventually.
To be honest, using Chrome is a far better experience than using Firefox.
But it is a beta still, and it is lacking features - you have to use a proxying ad blocker at the moment, for example.
However I am sure that it won't take a long time for FlashBlock, AdBlock, Mouse Gestures to arrive.
At the moment Chrome is great for casual users who currently use IE, and for browsing JavaScript heavy sites. It also has Safari's lovely text box resizing.
I think that your best bet for a HTPC would be something based upon AMD's 780G platform, with an SSD and a decent fanless cooler on one of AMD's 45W CPUs (maybe underclocked / undervolted a bit - use a motherboard with AMD's SB750 which provides excellent assistance for over/underclocking and voltage changes.
That would destroy the entire rate-for-risk loan and mortgage market.
Which means that everyone would get the worst possible deal because there would be no way to see if someone has a good credit report. See how many places will give you a mortgage today if you don't agree to a credit check.
If you don't want a bad credit report, then pay your bills on time.
You can develop good credit by having a credit card (which I'd recommend for all online purchases because of the protection they give you, don't use debit cards) and paying off the bill monthly, in full. Or just by having a credit card! If they make mistakes, then issue a Notice of Correction.
Of course it might work differently in the US from the UK...
Maybe they got a CSI interconnect license from Intel in return for the SLI technology.
Or the days of proprietary GPU ganging technology are coming to an end. Intel already does Crossfire in their chipsets, and AMD's GPUs are best right now so that's two hits against NVIDIA for their GPUs for the people that buy Intel-based computers.
Apparently the IE private mode has that, and in addition tries to intercept cross-site tracking via third parties (the single-pixel trick, amongst others).
It won't stop things that happen off of the clients computer - ISP logs, server-side-implemented cross-site tracking, etc.
There is the concept of consumer rights, and there is a large bunch of regulations and laws regarding trading.
However when it comes to banks there really aren't any. It's taken years for the banks to be told that their 'fines' for going overdrawn and similar penalties are unreasonably large and aren't a true reflection of the cost to the bank.
I guess that because there are web interfaces to a lot of other internet protocols, that the iPhone can support them. Google provides a usenet interface, for example. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a Gopher web interface either, like Floodgate.
However the stupid brainless advertising execs decided that "internet" == "www" in this case. I'd argue that flash and Java aren't part of the internet themselves, just files that are transferred over the internet. The iPhone does HTTP (so it does the web, even if it doesn't show everything), it does SMTP, it probably does some other protocols, even if you need to install something from the AppStore like a SSH Client.
My phone has a USB port and cable, but doesn't charge off it, stupid Nokia. On the other hand they've kept the chargers reasonably stable in the past.
What I want is:
* A single standard mini-USB port definition
* All mobile devices to be able to charge from USB
* The plug-charger should be a USB port providing wall wart.
It's not that difficult is it!?
Indeed, I pay £2.50 for 10MB of data at 3.5G speed (although actually getting that would be something), but could choose to pay £15 for 15GB with a free PC dongle (at the half price rate for phone contract holders). The dongle might even work at 3.75G speeds...
I'm kinda considering it, because the internet service via DSL I get is so poor!
I am using Safari on Windows at the moment, it's nice.
Apart from random pauses in its operation for up to 10 seconds at a time. I think the Javascript JIT or something causes the application to lock up whilst it is doing its thing. Some work needed there.
I also ran into the Firefox self-signed certificate issue and found the 4 stage process to be rather ridiculous myself. A self-signed certificate is not bad, it still allows secure data transfer between the client and the server, however it loses the verification of the server aspect - which you may not even care about. I found the wording on the Firefox SSL certificate warning page to be rather over the top, and rather vague at the same time.