LinuxQuestions.org
Page 136 of 249 « First 3686126134135 136 137138146186236 Last »
Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   General (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/general-10/)
-   -   Because Shiny Things Are Fun - The New New Windows v Linux Thread (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/general-10/because-shiny-things-are-fun-the-new-new-windows-v-linux-thread-848145/)

Germany_chris 06-02-2014 02:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Linux_Kidd (Post 5180881)
Intel will not likely want to compete in the "GPU" world. Intel has basic/integrated GPU's as a perk, but Intel's main market has little requirements for integrated GPU's that are hefty in stature. my new home PC is using one of the newer Xeon's w/o gpu, etc. Intel has also left the desktop market for many lines of their products.
Intels main market is portables and more and more ultrabooks. Iris Pro is pretty good comparable to mid-range mobile nVidia discreet at 1/3 the power. There hasn't been much improvement since Sandy but the exec has been replaced and has promised better things. AMD is virtually out of the desktop market but they promising a new FX line and said to be going back to traditional cores. Intel has defeated all comers and we are now paying the price for that.

smeezekitty 06-02-2014 05:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Germany_chris (Post 5181017)
MD is virtually out of the desktop market but they promising a new FX line and said to be going back to traditional cores.
They need to. It seems like their FX modules are sucking it
The Phenom 2 were "ok" and I think if the old Phenom2 arch was optimized it would be quite competitive

cascade9 06-03-2014 08:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Linux_Kidd (Post 5180881)
Intel will not likely want to compete in the "GPU" world. Intel has basic/integrated GPU's as a perk, but Intel's main market has little requirements for integrated GPU's that are hefty in stature.
Hardly. Intel wants a cut of everything in x86 world where there is serious money....why do you think they suddenly got into the video market in the mid/late 1990s? 3DFX + $250 3d cards. Before that intel didnt think it was worth getting into video chips.

*edit- more like US $299 for the 12MB voodoo2, and I forget how much for the 16MB versions. I do recall people paying AU $500 for 12MB versions here....

They did fail, big time, the i740 was slow and ignored. So they put it into the i810 chipset and within a few years intel had a majority share of the video chip market...because for most people basic video was enough.

These days 3d + acceleration + hardware video decoding matters more than it did in the 1990s. Sure, there are some market segments that dotn give 2 hangs about video past CLI or _very_ basic desktop use, but intel has never got over its 'x86 belongs to us, and so does most of the money in the market' point of view, and a few server users arent going to bother them much. Besides that, while its still pretty useless for most users, GPGPU is getting bigger, they do not want nVidia or AMD getting more of what they see as the mainstay of intel, compute performance.

That why they didnt really care about much more than basic video til about 2005 to 2007, but have actually pushed into making decent chips over the last few years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Linux_Kidd (Post 5180881)
my new home PC is using one of the newer Xeon's w/o gpu, etc.
A xeon with a disabled video chip, so? Its not like the xeons without video are faster, or in any way special, they are all coming off the same wafers....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Germany_chris (Post 5181017)
AMD is virtually out of the desktop market but they promising a new FX line and said to be going back to traditional cores. Intel has defeated all comers and we are now paying the price for that.
AMD isnt as dead as that, they still sell some chips.

Lets be honest, the only reasons why AMD ever caught intel at all in the CPU market was because they realy pulled a rabbit out of a at with the athlon (and the K6-3 as well, not that there were that many of them getting around) and because intel dropped the ball with the p4 architecture and stupid rambus memory.

AFAIK AMD will not be goign back to 'traditional' core counts, but they might increase the amount of logical core stuff per module.....

Germany_chris 06-03-2014 09:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cascade9 (Post 5181545)
Hardly. Intel wants a cut of everything in x86 world where there is serious money....why do you think they suddenly got into the video market in the mid/late 1990s? 3DFX + $250 3d cards. Before that intel didnt think it was worth getting into video chips.

*edit- more like US $299 for the 12MB voodoo2, and I forget how much for the 16MB versions. I do recall people paying AU $500 for 12MB versions here....

They did fail, big time, the i740 was slow and ignored. So they put it into the i810 chipset and within a few years intel had a majority share of the video chip market...because for most people basic video was enough.

These days 3d + acceleration + hardware video decoding matters more than it did in the 1990s. Sure, there are some market segments that dotn give 2 hangs about video past CLI or _very_ basic desktop use, but intel has never got over its 'x86 belongs to us, and so does most of the money in the market' point of view, and a few server users arent going to bother them much. Besides that, while its still pretty useless for most users, GPGPU is getting bigger, they do not want nVidia or AMD getting more of what they see as the mainstay of intel, compute performance.

That why they didnt really care about much more than basic video til about 2005 to 2007, but have actually pushed into making decent chips over the last few years.



A xeon with a disabled video chip, so? Its not like the xeons without video are faster, or in any way special, they are all coming off the same wafers....



AMD isnt as dead as that, they still sell some chips.

Lets be honest, the only reasons why AMD ever caught intel at all in the CPU market was because they realy pulled a rabbit out of a at with the athlon (and the K6-3 as well, not that there were that many of them getting around) and because intel dropped the ball with the p4 architecture and stupid rambus memory.

AFAIK AMD will not be goign back to 'traditional' core counts, but they might increase the amount of logical core stuff per module.....
Not traditional core counts,traditional cores without the current shared resources update to phenom not current bulldozer and family.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...15_Report.html

just one of the many links to possibility's

maples 06-05-2014 03:34 PM
I just had another one of those "I love Linux" moments. I was checking my battery on my laptop. I ran 'upower -d' like I usually do, then scrolled up just to see what all other stuff it outputs. I never expected this:

Code:
Device: /org/freedesktop/UPower/devices/mouse_0003o046DoC52Fx0003
  native-path:          /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1d.0/usb3/3-1/3-1.3/3-1.3:1.1/0003:046D:C52F.0003
  vendor:              Logitech, Inc.
  model:                M185/M225
  serial:              0320E001
  power supply:        no
  updated:              Thu 05 Jun 2014 04:28:18 PM EDT (28 seconds ago)
  has history:          yes
  has statistics:      no
  mouse
    present:            yes
    rechargeable:        yes
    state:              discharging
    warning-level:      none
    percentage:          90%
    icon-name:          'battery-full-symbolic'
In June(-ish) 2012, I bought a cheap Logitech wireless USB mouse. Apparently, it reports its battery level! I was surprised. For 2 years, I had just been plugging it in and using it. On the box, it said something about a program that you could download and install. I never did, Windows's generic USB mouse driver seemed to work just fine. And Linux's driver is just as well, and apparently better.

Of course, it doesn't seem 100% accurate. For example, it uses a standard AA battery, which isn't rechargeable. And I'm not sure if I completely trust the battery percentage, since it still has the battery that it came with, even after 2 years. But then again, I don't use it too often.

EDIT: I just checked the voltage on the battery, and it's at 1.2 volts. So either it uses a non-linear scale, or it's just not accurate. Oh, well. It was an interesting discovery.

moisespedro 06-06-2014 07:13 PM
Being completely honest I don't get what is so bad about Windows. I use it about every day and it is pretty stable and, to be really honest, often it works better as a full desktop than Linux. I do really like Linux, don't get me wrong on this one.

jamison20000e 06-06-2014 07:18 PM
http://manybooks.net/titles/williams...04freed10.html
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...4/#post5183580

moisespedro 06-06-2014 07:39 PM
I do like and prefer open source software but I do not think proprietary software is "evil" or whatever word you use for it.

jamison20000e 06-06-2014 07:53 PM
Quick reply to a lot of
Quote:
words
:confused::study::D

cwizardone 06-06-2014 08:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by moisespedro (Post 5183847)
I do like and prefer open source software but I do not think proprietary software is "evil" or whatever word you use for it.
It became a matter of principle to many of who were paying attention over the years to how mickeysoft built their empire without any regard to ethics or a sense of morality,

maples 06-06-2014 08:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by moisespedro (Post 5183832)
Being completely honest I don't get what is so bad about Windows. I use it about every day and it is pretty stable and, to be really honest, often it works better as a full desktop than Linux. I do really like Linux, don't get me wrong on this one.
I've had a fairly good experience with Win7. Then a friend introduced me to Linux. Then my uncle gave me this laptop, which came with Win8. Once I got all the manufacturer defects sorted out (mobo replaced 3 or 4 times) I installed Arch. I don't think I've booted into Win8 in over 2 weeks. When I first got into Linux, I thought I would be switching back and forth a lot. The only reason I kept 8 was for warranty reasons, and my dad would probably get really mad.

enine 06-07-2014 09:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by moisespedro (Post 5183847)
I do like and prefer open source software but I do not think proprietary software is "evil" or whatever word you use for it.
Proprietary software doesn't have to be evil, but the largest companies who make it tend to be evil. Doing things like taking ideas from the open source world, patenting them and then suing everyone over your patent is pretty evil.

Sumguy 06-07-2014 11:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by enine (Post 5184064)
Proprietary software doesn't have to be evil, but the largest companies who make it tend to be evil. Doing things like taking ideas from the open source world, patenting them and then suing everyone over your patent is pretty evil.
Exactly. I have no problem with the proprietary nature of proprietary software; it's just that more often than not, those companies engage in unethical and unfruitful practices, such as:

*Using marketing techniques which force their products on everyone.
*Offering products for free or cheap, which spy on you, because they are making their money by collecting your data.
*Putting crippling/invasive features in even expensive software, to control how/when/where you use it..and to spy on you.
*Using planned obsolescence to ensure that you will always upgrade or buy new software, as well as new hardware from those they partner with.
*Degrading the usability of their software & your hardware, because protecting their precious code is the #1 objective- as opposed to making an OS that works.
*Ensuring that6 their software always has security issues, for various reasons- some intended; some not.

Why would anyone knowingly want to use software which does all that? -Especially when there are FREE alternatives which not only don't contain those vices, but which actually perform better, and make your computing life much more pleasant?

I haven't touched anything Windows in four years, now. And I've never touched anything Apple.....I've never even had a desire to try WINE. If it won't run natively in Linux....I don't need it.

jamison20000e 06-07-2014 12:16 PM
1+1=2®
{♪ ♫ ♩
♬ ♭ ♮
♯ ° ø}®

smeezekitty 06-08-2014 11:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumguy (Post 5184122)
Exactly. I have no problem with the proprietary nature of proprietary software; it's just that more often than not, those companies engage in unethical and unfruitful practices, such as:

*Using marketing techniques which force their products on everyone.
*Offering products for free or cheap, which spy on you, because they are making their money by collecting your data.
*Putting crippling/invasive features in even expensive software, to control how/when/where you use it..and to spy on you.
*Using planned obsolescence to ensure that you will always upgrade or buy new software, as well as new hardware from those they partner with.
*Degrading the usability of their software & your hardware, because protecting their precious code is the #1 objective- as opposed to making an OS that works.
*Ensuring that6 their software always has security issues, for various reasons- some intended; some not.

Why would anyone knowingly want to use software which does all that? -Especially when there are FREE alternatives which not only don't contain those vices, but which actually perform better, and make your computing life much more pleasant?
Agreed. The problem is evil greedy monopolistic corporations.
I use a lot of open source software because well it is free and you can modify it if you want/need
but I need to use proprietary software for various reasons too


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:23 AM.
Page 136 of 249 « First 3686126134135 136 137138146186236 Last »
Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page