You could have bought a Commodore One, which is a variety of 8-bit computers implemented in FPGAs... several years ago. Even the C64 gaming joystick a few years ago could have sufficed if you modded it.
And there's a reason I've kept a lot of old magazines (either scanned, or physically)... apart from the lacking the female necessary to create a child aspect anyway, heh.
Surely the answer isn't to reimplement the Apple II, but to use something like an off-the-shelf ARM based SoC (an older, now cheap one with a display controller) with a cut down Linux (or indeed, RISCOS, as that was an ARM based OS with built-in BASIC and desktop which seems ideal).
The alternative is far more expensive - either using FPGAs to reimplement the Apple II hardware (and this is nothing new anyway, other 8-bit systems have been reimplemented in FPGAs already, from the Amstrad CPC to the C64 and beyond), or designing your own ASIC which would increase up front costs dramatically.
VIA's is "CentaurHauls" AMD's is "AuthenticAMD" Intel's is "GenuineIntel"
There's no "VIA" nor is there "GenuineAMD".
Clearly PCMark2005 is buggy (at the best) and cannot be used to compare different CPU families in this test. At the worst it is intentionally flawed, and shouldn't be used at all.
It's a shame that not one VIA Nano review benchmarked the built-in Padlock functionality. Not one OpenSSL benchmark.
Someone's told you to do something that it is your job to do, and that job doesn't involve doing illegal actions.
I.e., this isn't being a cop and being told to beat up someone, which is illegal and the cop should say "no" to his superior. This is being told that a criminal is at XYZ and can you bring him in. The cops actions weren't illegal when it turns out there was no criminal at XYZ, although the police force is liable for any damage they do. The fault is higher up because the intelligence received was bad, and the required checks were not performed.
Dunno, the police people who were directly involved didn't know that it was dodgy information, so what they did was brave, they were doing their job. But they should have identified themselves earlier. The police did the same thing in Britain a couple of years back, raiding the wrong house and shooting someone innocent.
The orders were wrong. So blame the superiors who used dodgy unreliable information and then authorised deadly force upon the basis of that dodgy unreliable information.
And, of course, in mistaken cases, the minimum compensation for such a raid should be in the millions, and more if there is an injury or death. That is incentive to actually verify your sources, beyond actually having people being held responsible and punished.
On interesting thing is that VIA will offer a 1.6GHz Nano with a 17W TDP as compared to the 1.8GHz Nano with a 25W TDP.
Given the reviews, this will still outperform the 1.6GHz Atom in many areas.
However it will drastically reduce the difference in load power consumption.
It's a shame that Paulsbo, the low-power chipset for Atom, is designed for MIDs, something that no-one is actually interested in. It'll probably find a way into the 7" subnotebooks as well, but it's not enough for anything bigger.
And since when isn't the platform a required part of a computer?
A CPU on its own is completely and utterly useless - and even a Power6 will draw 0W sitting on a desk with no platform. It's Intel's fault that they're pairing a 4W CPU with a 22W chipset, and if VIA offer a (max) 25W CPU with an 8W chipset then since when is it fair to exclude the chipset from power consumption figures?
At idle the articles (all of them I've read) show that the Nano uses at worst the same amount of power as the Atom, a few had it a watt under. What matters now is the number of power usage steps the CPUs have for moderate use, e.g., 400MHz -> 800MHz -> 1200MHz -> 1600MHz vs 400MHz -> 1600MHz. Load power usage on many systems is a very rare occurrence in standard use, hence the more intermediary power steps, the better the power usage under normal use.
But it's been disabled on every shipping Atom so far. Some of the reviews have been pointing this out as a disadvantage limiting Atom boards to 3GB of memory - except that the shitty northbridge that they use with Atom only supports 2GB anyway.
Basically, for a home computer that will be plugged into a wall, don't get an Atom based system - the Nano should be the minimum to get because it supports 4GB in the chipset. The mini-ITX Nano boards will also support PCI-e as well, unlike the Atom boards (Intel specifically disallows this).
It also shows what the type of people who send spam are, if they would consider killing their own wife and daughter, presumably in order to keep their own freedom. Condolences to everyone except the spammer.
They probably just don't the internet covered in websites with out of date SDK information, so that 5 years down the line Google searches will still bring up incorrect changed API tutorials online.
This is a big problem sometimes with other platforms.
My point was that if a company could afford to sell a 250MHz PowerPC based system for £25 and make a profit, 3 years ago, then doing the modern equivalent with more RAM, wireless and a bit of flash memory surely shouldn't cost > £125 + VAT. However I guess the problem is low sales volume and the online storage.
The problem with this device is that it isn't that much cheaper than a full budget PC that will whack this into the ground.
$250 for what is essentially a DTV receiver (my ex had a £25 Sagem Freeview receiver that had an integrated 250MHz PowerPC) with 4GB flash... sure it comes with 50GB of online storage, but they haven't reduced the affordability.
Well in the US look and feel lawsuits will fail, due to the precedent set (I assume it was set at the time anyway) by the Apple vs. Microsoft case when Apple sued Microsoft for stealing the look and feel of their OS.
Given that there are a limited number of possible web page layouts for any given style of website, it is inevitable that some will start to look a bit similar to another one. We're not shocked that cars all look car-like are we? You never got Ford suing GM because GM also sold vehicles with 4 wheels, an outer shell and windows... (or maybe there were such cases!)
However as the case is in Germany the outcome could be different. However it is pretty obvious that it isn't Facebook, it isn't even called something similar like "GesichtBuche".
Why can someone sit down, drink, take drugs, have groupies and make money for 95 years from a few songs, whilst other people educate themselves, invent something, and only get the right to make money on their invention for 15-20 years afterwards?
Long copyright terms don't encourage the people with the skills to continually create artistic works of benefit to society and culture. Copyright doesn't exist to benefit the creator of a work of art, it exists to benefit society as a whole by giving incentive to create art.
The actual truth of the matter is that people would actually still create music, art, stories, etc if there was no copyright concept. In addition, the creators would still benefit a lot from creating - people still prefer to see Iron Maiden live rather than tribute bands like High On Maiden, for example. Performances are where the money is for full time bands as well.
All of these people who raked in money from when they were big should have put some aside for their retirement, like EVERYBODY ELSE has to.
A photo manager is to digital images what iTunes is to media files.
It manages them, including the files on disc.
This is desirable for many because the application takes the photos from the camera, and the user never needs to worry about what's going on on the file system.
It's not so good when you have to use that application to email a file because you don't know the filesystem location of said file. Having to go through export to file wizards is a hassle. Some photo managers will at least have a sensible folder layout once you find it, in the same way that iTunes' folder layout is actually quite sane.
Lots of business applications are about data collection and presentation. If there's anything the web is good at it is presentation of content in a very simple and easy manner that is (a) easy to code and (b) easy to use.
Even simple data acquisition applications are good for online applications, anything that can fit in a form based approach for example, and are just as simple to use as a VB application, but it'll run on the Macs and Unix boxes in use around the company as well, whilst not requiring local installation, it's just a link on the intranet.
Online replacements for Office? No, not going to happen, they're all crap at the moment, they're worse than Write for Windows 3.1 (mainly due to lacking fast native canvas elements). Outlook replacement? Yeah, that's far more limited in structure, is mostly about presentation, and Outlook is rather dire anyway.
Not really. I do agree that native applications are nicer than web applications, especially if you compare, e.g., Google Docs to Office, or even WordPad.
However what we have discovered is that (1) web applications are easier to write, and (2) it's nice having a consistent platform to develop to, even if that platform is mildly ridiculous (HTML + CSS + JavaScript + Browser-Workarounds + JavaScript canvas thing). Getting stuff to display and layout on this platform is easy, and simple to prettify, far easier than most native platforms have been in the past. There are also a dozen different ways to write the server side of things, and I think for many developers it is nice to be forced to split up the client interface from the meat of the system.
Of course, things are going too far. What should be happening is the simplification of native application programming, with a common platform, etc, without the overhead of having to run a Javascript or HTML rendering engine, and native full-speed canvases. I think that Apple is getting there, QT and KDE4 may be getting there but I haven't really looked into that platform. Java should have gotten there but early design mistakes (AWT, Swing) have killed that off, and SWT is a last-generation UI library. Maybe something like Fenggui on Java might help this platform, but I think Java's dead on the home desktop (and extremely alive and profitable on the server).
This will make Office more affordable for the average person, even if it is more expensive in the long term. Not so hard to plonk down $70 for a 3-computer license the first year. Cheaper than a mobile phone contract as well.
Shame that OneCare is supposed to be rather awful.
It's a Computer Science degree, not a "Programming degree". You are aware that Programming is but a small part of Computer Science, at least in any decent university?
The thing about the USB port location was a valid part of the review. That's where you have your mouse. It's already annoying that there is a keypad in the way of where you want the mouse, without adding another 5cm because of poorly located USB ports. So they might as well have not included them, and saved the money.
I've never used multimedia keys on a keyboard myself, I can't see the purpose. Exception: Fn+Volume on a Mac laptop, because it's simple and mapped onto the normal part of the keyboard, not a weird row of small buttons.
And the Mac can switch the Windows and Alt keys around for an external keyboard transparently.
It basically means the keyboard design is a no-go in the UK, because pretty much all our keyboards have decent sized return keys instead of the not-much-bigger-than-a-standard-key one that is on US keyboards.
Why? Because the big bit of such a key is on the row above where the slim return keys usually are, so that's where we hit instinctively. Annoying when it turns into a # key on some half-wit's keyboard design.
\ and | are a bit annoying though, being down by Z, although I guess the \ mirrors the / on the other side of the keyboard. Let's not talk about the useless ¦Â` key above tab, nor the useless Caps Lock key... nor any windows key.
Oh, open source development is great. You can look at their code by simply downloading it, and then you can ask them about the innards just to ensure that they did actually write it themselves. In addition they are likely to actually enjoy coding and not just do it as a job to bring in the money, so you may hopefully get higher quality work, quicker, from that person.
Slashdot Mirror
Gotta admit, owning the original hardware is much nicer if it is working. I will get myself a CPC 464 again one day...
You could have bought a Commodore One, which is a variety of 8-bit computers implemented in FPGAs ... several years ago. Even the C64 gaming joystick a few years ago could have sufficed if you modded it.
And there's a reason I've kept a lot of old magazines (either scanned, or physically) ... apart from the lacking the female necessary to create a child aspect anyway, heh.
Surely the answer isn't to reimplement the Apple II, but to use something like an off-the-shelf ARM based SoC (an older, now cheap one with a display controller) with a cut down Linux (or indeed, RISCOS, as that was an ARM based OS with built-in BASIC and desktop which seems ideal).
The alternative is far more expensive - either using FPGAs to reimplement the Apple II hardware (and this is nothing new anyway, other 8-bit systems have been reimplemented in FPGAs already, from the Amstrad CPC to the C64 and beyond), or designing your own ASIC which would increase up front costs dramatically.
Well you can have roads at any angle in this Wii Sim City game, looking at the screenshots:
http://kotaku.com/photogallery/simcitycreatorjuly/1002981495
Looks like the buildings arrange themselves at 45 degree angles in the spaces between the roads though.
Might get this if it gets good reviews.
VIA's is "CentaurHauls"
AMD's is "AuthenticAMD"
Intel's is "GenuineIntel"
There's no "VIA" nor is there "GenuineAMD".
Clearly PCMark2005 is buggy (at the best) and cannot be used to compare different CPU families in this test. At the worst it is intentionally flawed, and shouldn't be used at all.
It's a shame that not one VIA Nano review benchmarked the built-in Padlock functionality. Not one OpenSSL benchmark.
No.
Someone's told you to do something that it is your job to do, and that job doesn't involve doing illegal actions.
I.e., this isn't being a cop and being told to beat up someone, which is illegal and the cop should say "no" to his superior. This is being told that a criminal is at XYZ and can you bring him in. The cops actions weren't illegal when it turns out there was no criminal at XYZ, although the police force is liable for any damage they do. The fault is higher up because the intelligence received was bad, and the required checks were not performed.
Dunno, the police people who were directly involved didn't know that it was dodgy information, so what they did was brave, they were doing their job. But they should have identified themselves earlier. The police did the same thing in Britain a couple of years back, raiding the wrong house and shooting someone innocent.
The orders were wrong. So blame the superiors who used dodgy unreliable information and then authorised deadly force upon the basis of that dodgy unreliable information.
And, of course, in mistaken cases, the minimum compensation for such a raid should be in the millions, and more if there is an injury or death. That is incentive to actually verify your sources, beyond actually having people being held responsible and punished.
On interesting thing is that VIA will offer a 1.6GHz Nano with a 17W TDP as compared to the 1.8GHz Nano with a 25W TDP.
Given the reviews, this will still outperform the 1.6GHz Atom in many areas.
However it will drastically reduce the difference in load power consumption.
It's a shame that Paulsbo, the low-power chipset for Atom, is designed for MIDs, something that no-one is actually interested in. It'll probably find a way into the 7" subnotebooks as well, but it's not enough for anything bigger.
And since when isn't the platform a required part of a computer?
A CPU on its own is completely and utterly useless - and even a Power6 will draw 0W sitting on a desk with no platform. It's Intel's fault that they're pairing a 4W CPU with a 22W chipset, and if VIA offer a (max) 25W CPU with an 8W chipset then since when is it fair to exclude the chipset from power consumption figures?
At idle the articles (all of them I've read) show that the Nano uses at worst the same amount of power as the Atom, a few had it a watt under. What matters now is the number of power usage steps the CPUs have for moderate use, e.g., 400MHz -> 800MHz -> 1200MHz -> 1600MHz vs 400MHz -> 1600MHz. Load power usage on many systems is a very rare occurrence in standard use, hence the more intermediary power steps, the better the power usage under normal use.
Intel claim Atom has EM64T.
But it's been disabled on every shipping Atom so far. Some of the reviews have been pointing this out as a disadvantage limiting Atom boards to 3GB of memory - except that the shitty northbridge that they use with Atom only supports 2GB anyway.
Basically, for a home computer that will be plugged into a wall, don't get an Atom based system - the Nano should be the minimum to get because it supports 4GB in the chipset. The mini-ITX Nano boards will also support PCI-e as well, unlike the Atom boards (Intel specifically disallows this).
This is a terrible tragedy.
It also shows what the type of people who send spam are, if they would consider killing their own wife and daughter, presumably in order to keep their own freedom. Condolences to everyone except the spammer.
Is the SDK out of beta yet?
They probably just don't the internet covered in websites with out of date SDK information, so that 5 years down the line Google searches will still bring up incorrect changed API tutorials online.
This is a big problem sometimes with other platforms.
My point was that if a company could afford to sell a 250MHz PowerPC based system for £25 and make a profit, 3 years ago, then doing the modern equivalent with more RAM, wireless and a bit of flash memory surely shouldn't cost > £125 + VAT. However I guess the problem is low sales volume and the online storage.
The problem with this device is that it isn't that much cheaper than a full budget PC that will whack this into the ground.
$250 for what is essentially a DTV receiver (my ex had a £25 Sagem Freeview receiver that had an integrated 250MHz PowerPC) with 4GB flash... sure it comes with 50GB of online storage, but they haven't reduced the affordability.
Ta for the clarification.
Well in the US look and feel lawsuits will fail, due to the precedent set (I assume it was set at the time anyway) by the Apple vs. Microsoft case when Apple sued Microsoft for stealing the look and feel of their OS.
Given that there are a limited number of possible web page layouts for any given style of website, it is inevitable that some will start to look a bit similar to another one. We're not shocked that cars all look car-like are we? You never got Ford suing GM because GM also sold vehicles with 4 wheels, an outer shell and windows... (or maybe there were such cases!)
However as the case is in Germany the outcome could be different. However it is pretty obvious that it isn't Facebook, it isn't even called something similar like "GesichtBuche".
Why can someone sit down, drink, take drugs, have groupies and make money for 95 years from a few songs, whilst other people educate themselves, invent something, and only get the right to make money on their invention for 15-20 years afterwards?
Long copyright terms don't encourage the people with the skills to continually create artistic works of benefit to society and culture. Copyright doesn't exist to benefit the creator of a work of art, it exists to benefit society as a whole by giving incentive to create art.
The actual truth of the matter is that people would actually still create music, art, stories, etc if there was no copyright concept. In addition, the creators would still benefit a lot from creating - people still prefer to see Iron Maiden live rather than tribute bands like High On Maiden, for example. Performances are where the money is for full time bands as well.
All of these people who raked in money from when they were big should have put some aside for their retirement, like EVERYBODY ELSE has to.
A photo manager is to digital images what iTunes is to media files.
It manages them, including the files on disc.
This is desirable for many because the application takes the photos from the camera, and the user never needs to worry about what's going on on the file system.
It's not so good when you have to use that application to email a file because you don't know the filesystem location of said file. Having to go through export to file wizards is a hassle. Some photo managers will at least have a sensible folder layout once you find it, in the same way that iTunes' folder layout is actually quite sane.
Lots of business applications are about data collection and presentation. If there's anything the web is good at it is presentation of content in a very simple and easy manner that is (a) easy to code and (b) easy to use.
Even simple data acquisition applications are good for online applications, anything that can fit in a form based approach for example, and are just as simple to use as a VB application, but it'll run on the Macs and Unix boxes in use around the company as well, whilst not requiring local installation, it's just a link on the intranet.
Online replacements for Office? No, not going to happen, they're all crap at the moment, they're worse than Write for Windows 3.1 (mainly due to lacking fast native canvas elements). Outlook replacement? Yeah, that's far more limited in structure, is mostly about presentation, and Outlook is rather dire anyway.
Not really. I do agree that native applications are nicer than web applications, especially if you compare, e.g., Google Docs to Office, or even WordPad.
However what we have discovered is that (1) web applications are easier to write, and (2) it's nice having a consistent platform to develop to, even if that platform is mildly ridiculous (HTML + CSS + JavaScript + Browser-Workarounds + JavaScript canvas thing). Getting stuff to display and layout on this platform is easy, and simple to prettify, far easier than most native platforms have been in the past. There are also a dozen different ways to write the server side of things, and I think for many developers it is nice to be forced to split up the client interface from the meat of the system.
Of course, things are going too far. What should be happening is the simplification of native application programming, with a common platform, etc, without the overhead of having to run a Javascript or HTML rendering engine, and native full-speed canvases. I think that Apple is getting there, QT and KDE4 may be getting there but I haven't really looked into that platform. Java should have gotten there but early design mistakes (AWT, Swing) have killed that off, and SWT is a last-generation UI library. Maybe something like Fenggui on Java might help this platform, but I think Java's dead on the home desktop (and extremely alive and profitable on the server).
This will make Office more affordable for the average person, even if it is more expensive in the long term. Not so hard to plonk down $70 for a 3-computer license the first year. Cheaper than a mobile phone contract as well.
Shame that OneCare is supposed to be rather awful.
It's a Computer Science degree, not a "Programming degree". You are aware that Programming is but a small part of Computer Science, at least in any decent university?
The thing about the USB port location was a valid part of the review. That's where you have your mouse. It's already annoying that there is a keypad in the way of where you want the mouse, without adding another 5cm because of poorly located USB ports. So they might as well have not included them, and saved the money.
I've never used multimedia keys on a keyboard myself, I can't see the purpose. Exception: Fn+Volume on a Mac laptop, because it's simple and mapped onto the normal part of the keyboard, not a weird row of small buttons.
And the Mac can switch the Windows and Alt keys around for an external keyboard transparently.
It basically means the keyboard design is a no-go in the UK, because pretty much all our keyboards have decent sized return keys instead of the not-much-bigger-than-a-standard-key one that is on US keyboards.
Why? Because the big bit of such a key is on the row above where the slim return keys usually are, so that's where we hit instinctively. Annoying when it turns into a # key on some half-wit's keyboard design.
\ and | are a bit annoying though, being down by Z, although I guess the \ mirrors the / on the other side of the keyboard. Let's not talk about the useless ¦Â` key above tab, nor the useless Caps Lock key ... nor any windows key.
Oh, open source development is great. You can look at their code by simply downloading it, and then you can ask them about the innards just to ensure that they did actually write it themselves. In addition they are likely to actually enjoy coding and not just do it as a job to bring in the money, so you may hopefully get higher quality work, quicker, from that person.