Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => General chat about Amiga topics => Topic started by: royalcrown on May 14, 2013, 10:15:17 PM
-
Just wondering what you folks think.
Do you think it'd be better to have a closed hardware platform as the majority, or are you on the side of the typical PC with a mish mash of parts ?
I'll go first by incessantly rambling on and on, thereby boring you all to no end.
I decided to get into Amiga after building my PC a few months ago. Typical PC with all the higher end crap, ended up costing a BUNCH. I always wanted to own such a ridiculous machine, but now that I own it, am totally bored with it.
There seems to be nothing really good to do (as a home user) on such a machine. Many games that would use it are just over hyped crap. Short of Arma 3, there seems to be NOTHING coming out that needs a massive machine. Thanks to CONSOLES, a lot of the stuff is also just crappy ports. Even what is coming out seems to be more just point and shoot crap.
I think that all this massive power is going to waste and crappy programming is tolerated. Going to a single unified hardware configuration has some advantages in this day and age:
1. BUG FIXES - We might all have bugs, but then everyone would get fixes sooner as 1 fix would work for everyone.
2. Programming could be made more efficient - More optimized compilers and dev tools.
3. Programmers could optimize apps like no ones business - If a C64 could pound an IBM 5150 into the ground @ 1mhz due to integration and optimization, what could we do with a Core I7 and GTX 680 or Radeon 7990 platform ?
Software developers could spend more time being creative with less platforms to have to master, and as the machines got pushed to their limits, things would have to be done more efficiently (see above).
4. Machines would be worth something when you sold them.
5. No more "My 'puter is better than yours.."
IMO old machines were more "fun" to use even taking into account the fact that that it wasn't all done before.
If it were up to me, I'd take whatever is a really high end platform and freeze it for 5 years as the standard pc. I owned an IMac till recently and IMO there are benefits to standardized hardware (now ppl should be free to know the inner workings however). I also owned a C64 and so I can see how programming efficiently can work.
IMO Jack Tramiel would have preferred the current PC ecosystem of cheap parts from everywhere.
-
I thought about this for awile, and I can honestly say I can't reach a conclusion.
Today there are no PCs that can not be customized.
The only thing that comes close to a fixed configuration is a console.
-
I thought about this for awile, and I can honestly say I can't reach a conclusion.
Today there are no PCs that can not be customized.
The only thing that comes close to a fixed configuration is a console.
I think we should go to one standard PC config is my point, not low end either, high end and squeeze the most out of it we can.
-
I think we should go to one standard PC config is my point, not low end either, high end and squeeze the most out of it we can.
But even Amigas vary, type of processor, amounts of memory, different hard drives (and interfaces), expansion buses (Zorro II, III, ISA, PCI), video (OCS, ECS, AGA, RTG). etc.
9
-
I think we should go to one standard PC config is my point, not low end either, high end and squeeze the most out of it we can.
Why? The present system allows everybody to buy as much or as little in the way of hardware horsepower as they need, instead of forcing low-end users to overspend and constraining high-end users to less than they could otherwise make use of. And who would set such a standard, and why should anybody listen to them? It's just idiotic.
What we could really use is for software developers to start coding efficiently again, so that low-end systems are more usable and high-end systems get the full benefit of their hardware might instead of wasting it on bloat.
-
Why? The present system allows everybody to buy as much or as little in the way of hardware horsepower as they need, instead of forcing low-end users to overspend and constraining high-end users to less than they could otherwise make use of. And who would set such a standard, and why should anybody listen to them? It's just idiotic.
What we could really use is for software developers to start coding efficiently again, so that low-end systems are more usable and high-end systems get the full benefit of their hardware might instead of wasting it on bloat.
IMO commodorejohn...and only my opinion here, if we standardized and dumped the lowest of the low, for instance, it would raise the minimum standards for software quality. Kinda like android when you buy the super cheap phone, it doesn't run the "good apps".
I actually think the price could drop some if there was only one platform manufactured. Instead of spending R&D and time on the NEXT thing, designs could be improved as well as manufacturing, thereby lowering the cost somewhat.
Yes, picking the standard would be difficult, and we should leave it to the engineers and not marketing...hehe.
-
But even Amigas vary, type of processor, amounts of memory, different hard drives (and interfaces), expansion buses (Zorro II, III, ISA, PCI), video (OCS, ECS, AGA, RTG). etc.
9
True, but the base model was pretty much the same so devs could code to a lowest common denominator. I mean an A1000 was an A1000 except PAL vs NTSC, same with the base A2000.
Might make it easier to make use of modern resources and raise the bar if we did not have millions of configurations.
-
IMO commodorejohn...and only my opinion here, if we standardized and dumped the lowest of the low, for instance, it would raise the minimum standards for software quality. Kinda like android when you buy the super cheap phone, it doesn't run the "good apps".
And, let's see, how has that worked out for the aforementioned Android devices? Oh, right, everybody who buys the cheap phones gets shafted, everybody who knows about this ahead of time winds up paying more than they otherwise would purely so they won't get shafted, and it doesn't make a damn bit of difference to the actual quality of software. Yeah, that sounds like an arrangement we need more of.
Yes, picking the standard would be difficult, and we should leave it to the engineers and not marketing...hehe.
Yeah, that's totally going to happen.
-
Yeah, that's totally going to happen.
Actually, I doubt it would be legal for all the PC companies to cooperate and reduce market competition.
While not a fully open system, PCs still represent a competitive market.
This type of collusion would likely result in an oligopoly.
-
And, let's see, how has that worked out for the aforementioned Android devices? Oh, right, everybody who buys the cheap phones gets shafted, everybody who knows about this ahead of time winds up paying more than they otherwise would purely so they won't get shafted, and it doesn't make a damn bit of difference to the actual quality of software. Yeah, that sounds like an arrangement we need more of.
Yeah, that's totally going to happen.
Um, you do know that the reason so much android software sucks is because devs have to cater to the lowest common denominator crap phones right ?!?!
-
Here you go, fixed hardware, open source development friendly and cheap too.
A very 'Amiga like' business model in fact.
Ouya (http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-10109_7-57489883/ouya-console-ends-kickstarter-campaign-$8.5-million-richer/)
-
Here you go, fixed hardware, open source development friendly and cheap too.
A very 'Amiga like' business model in fact.
Ouya (http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-10109_7-57489883/ouya-console-ends-kickstarter-campaign-$8.5-million-richer/)
If only it wasn't ...ack...android...
(I just prefer software written for the hardware vs a virtual environment. I'm not a programmer and still know what a resource hog java and dalvik (the android HAL ?) are.
-
And, let's see, how has that worked out for the aforementioned Android devices? Oh, right, everybody who buys the cheap phones gets shafted, everybody who knows about this ahead of time winds up paying more than they otherwise would purely so they won't get shafted, and it doesn't make a damn bit of difference to the actual quality of software. Yeah, that sounds like an arrangement we need more of.
Yeah, that's totally going to happen.
Okay, I volunteer to pick then, with you co-picking 50/50. I say we meet at the Duluth Grill and write the specs on the back of a napkin
-
Who am I to nail down fixed specs for every PC user in the world? Who are you?
And anyway the wait time to get into the Duluth Grill is long enough that anything we settled on would be obsolete by the time we got out...
-
Android is now the most common operating system.
-
The Ouya stinks. It's god awful, and I regret ever backing it. While some forgiveness can be given for a rev 1 product, it's beyond rough around the edges, bordering on unusable.
2-3 more generations and it might actually do something, but IMHO it's about as useful as a Nexus Q right now.
-
Who am I to nail down fixed specs for every PC user in the world? Who are you?
And anyway the wait time to get into the Duluth Grill is long enough that anything we settled on would be obsolete by the time we got out...
Every PC user in the world? No one was even suggesting that.
The only thing anyone can ever do is aim for a segment of the overall market.
What royalcrown is talking about is establishing a 'known quantity' platform. Apple has done it for decades and especially recently with iOS, Commodore used to do it, and at the big end of town Cisco and Oracle are doing it.
The concept is often referred to as "the liberating freedom of constraint". It's about freeing up the developer to think only about the things that matter.
I am a big fan if this approach. Yes, there will always be a market for DIY computing, but most people will favour things that just work and don't require all this messing around.
-
@commodorejohn
Are you saying that such a thing would not raise the QUALITY of software in general ? While fixed hardware may be bad, the payoff would be better apps I think.
AFAIK people buy a comp to run apps, so this good would outweigh the "forced" evil of standardization.
I think the price would drop enough to take away much of the sting of overspending.
It's not like were eating little kittens or anything :D
It might happen anyway as speed increases are starting to really hit a cost wall, and soon physics.
-
I think the point is that the PC isn't a platform like a C64, Amiga etc. A PC is a bunch of cards stuffed together which may or may not run Windows. You can't standardise the platform because there's no platform to standardise!
If you wanted to make everything use the same standard and the same hardware then you'd need one company to take over what it means to be a PC, and as the PC succeeded because of its open nature, that's just not going to happen.
Not only that but it would be a terrible thing. I know what you mean about how much more we could do with an i7 but if we didn't have an open platform, there would have been no competition. With no competition, progress would be far far slower... we'd probably be using Pentium 2s or something still!
Look at the speed of evolution of the Amiga from the 1000 to the 4000 and apply that to the IBM PC/XT.
Fierce competition in the open PC market is what defines the PC and the technology behind it. Take that away and watch it stagnate.
Just my 2p. :)
-
One fixed platform implies one use case -- which implies that this idea is stupid. Users aren't interested, not to mention hardware manufacturers and software developers (but hey, it will be fun rewriting every software package every five years).
-
Here you go, fixed hardware, open source development friendly and cheap too.
A very 'Amiga like' business model in fact.
Ouya (http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-10109_7-57489883/ouya-console-ends-kickstarter-campaign-$8.5-million-richer/)
Bought one of these in Jan. When will it turn up was promised April. Still nothing, there is a huge amount of lies coming from the Ouya team.
Would I recommend buying it, no.
Just check out the reviews, controller lag, buttons sticking. Incomplete store/OS/games, onboard NIC not working, weak wireless. The lying and hiding of shipping details and other things.
Maybe one day I'll receive it, I'll be rooting it and using it as an Amiga emulator.
http://www.reddit.com/r/ouya/
-
I think the point is that the PC isn't a platform like a C64, Amiga etc. A PC is a bunch of cards stuffed together which may or may not run Windows. You can't standardise the platform because there's no platform to standardise!
If you wanted to make everything use the same standard and the same hardware then you'd need one company to take over what it means to be a PC, and as the PC succeeded because of its open nature, that's just not going to happen.
Not only that but it would be a terrible thing. I know what you mean about how much more we could do with an i7 but if we didn't have an open platform, there would have been no competition. With no competition, progress would be far far slower... we'd probably be using Pentium 2s or something still!
Look at the speed of evolution of the Amiga from the 1000 to the 4000 and apply that to the IBM PC/XT.
Fierce competition in the open PC market is what defines the PC and the technology behind it. Take that away and watch it stagnate.
Just my 2p. :)
I guess it boils down to this for me personally:
I'd rather be using a P2 being pushed to the limit and good software vs a monster system and a ton of so-so software.
Right now I have an I7 with a GTX 680, dual SSD and 32 gigs. Never has a PC been so boring for lack of anything compelling or fun to run on it. Nothing fun really needs this much computer. At least older platforms were enjoyable (to me) to use.
-
I think you'd actually find a P2 with a Riva TNT set-up would be rather less fun than you think, no matter how far it was pushed.
Remember that although a lot of code is lazily written for the big games, the hardware has a very efficient design. That's why games still look so good.
I think you're absolutely bang on about modern games being boring - the only PC games I buy are ones with "Civilization" and "Red Alert" in the titles, these days - but I think you're misplacing the blame.
It's kind of like saying that modern chart music is rubbish because we have CDs now. It's not, it's because chart music (and PC games) have become commodity items rushed out by large corporations for as little time and money and as large a return as they can garner. The fact that PCs are very powerful is nothing to do with the quality of the game - there's nothing to stop a coder writing really efficient, powerful code on an i7 - but even if he did that he might get a few frames per second more.... and a few fps more does not a good game make. In other words, instead of rubbish running at 60fps, he'd have rubbish running at 63fps.
That's why I have a PS3 for the occasional bash of Warhawk or Skyrim, and I have Amigas, C64s, Sinclairs, the rest... for when I actually want to play something new (to me).
Luckily I have a really interesting PC. It's my bridgeboard in my Amiga. It plays UFO: Enemy Unknown and Ultima VII, and that's all that matters. :)
-
As always, it's the software which makes the difference; and today's software is mostly CRAP, light years behind the hardware. Starting from operating systems (Windows 8 anyone?) to applications (Microsoft Office.) I REFUSE to believe that I need 2Gb of RAM to run an operating system. I REFUSE to believe that to write a letter I need a program which requires 1Gb of RAM and takes 1Gb hard disk space. That's just sloppy, godawful programming.
I am routinely using a Macintosh SE/30 with 16Mb of RAM and a 250Mb hard disk; I write documents with Microsoft Word 5.1a (which can even be read by Office up to the 2000 version) or spreadsheets with Excel 4. I can even play a few decent games, and connect to the internet to check email or transfer files from my PC. I have A/UX installed on the same machine, with a full complement of development tools, and it also runs native Macintosh applications. This machine can boot its OS FROM A FLOPPY! The whole System 6.0.8 lives on a floppy disk! THAT was a feat.
I have never owned an Amiga, but soon (thanks to Petro Tymschenko!) I will get an Amiga 1200 so I will see what it can do.
-
@rabindranath72
The mac is much less efficient than the Amiga. If you're impressed by that, remember that an A1200 can usefully write letters and stuff using Final Writer using just a couple of MB of RAM.
If you like fast, efficient OSes, then you should love AmigaOS!
-
I think you'd actually find a P2 with a Riva TNT set-up would be rather less fun than you think, no matter how far it was pushed.
Remember that although a lot of code is lazily written for the big games, the hardware has a very efficient design. That's why games still look so good.
I think you're absolutely bang on about modern games being boring - the only PC games I buy are ones with "Civilization" and "Red Alert" in the titles, these days - but I think you're misplacing the blame.
It's kind of like saying that modern chart music is rubbish because we have CDs now. It's not, it's because chart music (and PC games) have become commodity items rushed out by large corporations for as little time and money and as large a return as they can garner. The fact that PCs are very powerful is nothing to do with the quality of the game - there's nothing to stop a coder writing really efficient, powerful code on an i7 - but even if he did that he might get a few frames per second more.... and a few fps more does not a good game make. In other words, instead of rubbish running at 60fps, he'd have rubbish running at 63fps.
That's why I have a PS3 for the occasional bash of Warhawk or Skyrim, and I have Amigas, C64s, Sinclairs, the rest... for when I actually want to play something new (to me).
Luckily I have a really interesting PC. It's my bridgeboard in my Amiga. It plays UFO: Enemy Unknown and Ultima VII, and that's all that matters. :)
That's my point. Software is being turned out as fast as possible instead of turned out as fast as possible while doing it well, or making any old crap to sell vs something interesting. That is what is making pc's boring as well. I think that if we froze the platform, devs could better learn to "use what we got, and instead of learning new api's and tools, use that time to make better programs.
Music is crap now because kids think video game noises from a sega are music nowadays and strippers = talent. Kids don't have a frame of reference to know talent vs crap.
-
Yeah, I think we're both thinking the same thing here, about modern games (and music :) ).
But honestly, if you were to freeze the platform all that would happen is the games would just get worse (because most of the really big games are supported by people like nvidia and AMD to show off their hardware - take the hardware away and take away the support) and also the PC platform would die completely as a gaming platform because the consoles would continue to evolve.
-
To the original question I have to say that I am very much undecided. One of the things I liked about my first Amiga was that everything worked. I'de buy a game, put in the floppy and voila. Awesome. However, as time moved on some stuff required, or at least would benefit from extra hardware. But still, it was a small enough amount of upgrades to understand all of the options in depth. I liked how all of that worked and continues to work.
I used to like my PC having loads of options too. My 486 had so many bays and slots it was silly. As times gone on I find I use less bays and slots, I simply don't need them. The average pc mobo these days has built in everything with the exception of graphics (sometimes). Add a graphics card if you need one and what else do you need? An SSD and an optical drive maybe? I hardly use my optical drive these days, just an SSD and a card reader would do. As for upgrading the CPU and RAM, how often does that end up with a mobo replacement? It's often cheaper to get a newer mobo and CPU than finding a faster CPU for an older socket.
Even that once huge hard disk, or even RAID that a true power might use is probably better inserted into a NAS enclosure for convenient network access.
I guess what I'm saying is that even though the pc platform is very open, market forces for the typical user make a lot of our choices for us. Often to the point that it might as well been a closed platform in the first place.
A extra smothering of irony can be found in the jailbreaking of consoles of course. Closed platform it may be but someone will always find a way of opening up a console.
As to whatever is the best or worse approach, I just don't know. I just look forward to whatever it is memristor will do to the market, that will be fun.
-
Just because a 20 year old Mac suits your needs doesn't make everyone on the bleeding edge "wrong" :) Those old machines boot the OS off a floppy - the OS from those days is far, far different than a modern OS.
Your usage case is simply different. That same machine wouldn't do a single task I require out of a daily driver machine, but as above - my needs are much different than yours. To each his own, with due respect - and all that jazz.
Use what you enjoy, I say. There's always going to be the types that scream from the rooftops "WELL IF I CAN'T DO IT ON MY PDP-8 IT ISN'T WORTH DOING AND IT IS NOT REAL COMPUTING!11!!1!1!1"
Simple fact is, when most of us got into computers, you had to be a computer enthusiast. You *had* to have technical skills. These days, modern machines are just an appliance to most people.
I've got a SAM 440 I just love. I know I overpaid for it by about 3x. I know it can't do half what my year old cell phone can do. I love it for what it is.
-
Just because a 20 year old Mac suits your needs doesn't make everyone on the bleeding edge "wrong" :) Those old machines boot the OS off a floppy - the OS from those days is far, far different than a modern OS.
Your usage case is simply different. That same machine wouldn't do a single task I require out of a daily driver machine, but as above - my needs are much different than yours. To each his own, with due respect - and all that jazz.
Use what you enjoy, I say. There's always going to be the types that scream from the rooftops "WELL IF I CAN'T DO IT ON MY PDP-8 IT ISN'T WORTH DOING AND IT IS NOT REAL COMPUTING!11!!1!1!1"
Simple fact is, when most of us got into computers, you had to be a computer enthusiast. You *had* to have technical skills. These days, modern machines are just an appliance to most people.
I've got a SAM 440 I just love. I know I overpaid for it by about 3x. I know it can't do half what my year old cell phone can do. I love it for what it is.
My point was that software has not evolved as fast (and well) as hardware. If I have to write a letter or document, I don't need a word processor which occupies 300Mb ram.
-
My point was that software has not evolved as fast (and well) as hardware. If I have to write a letter or document, I don't need a word processor which occupies 300Mb ram.
Quite agree.
But what I would say is don't blame the hardware- blame the software.
Of course if the hardware hadn't progressed so much then the software writers wouldn't be able to write such hogging software, but also a lot of really good applications wouldn't be able to exist either.
I'd rather have a machine that takes 300MB of RAM to write a letter, but also enables high speed video encoding, rendering and other stuff, than one which still works in 3MB of RAM but can't do other things I want.
It's not the hardware's fault that software writers are often lazy these days.
-
I am surprised noone has mentioned the steam box. This seems to take the advantages of consoles being fixed and PC's being open into a single platform. Sounds good to me. I'm thinking of buying one when they come out.
-
My point was that software has not evolved as fast (and well) as hardware. If I have to write a letter or document, I don't need a word processor which occupies 300Mb ram.
One thing to consider is that as you go from 16 bit to 32 bit to 64 bit software, the smallest that any information can be is 16 bit, 32 bit and 64 bit respectively. Even if you optimized it 100% the same software will always end up needing more ram and the executable will always be larger as you up the bits.
But I agree there is a lot of bloat, but no all is due to inefficient code Some of it is due to feature creep: adding more and more features which are less and less useful.
Its interesting that this also extends to even things like icons: do we really need 32 bit photo-realistic icons that take up more ram, more cpu cycles? I actually enjoy using Macos 7 for its simplicity. I also now have a 8 color Workbench with the stock Commodore icons.
And do we need animations of a page curling and turning when reading a document? Well actually Apple seems to now think the answer is "no", with Jon Ives heavily involved in the new Mac interface design, and he is dead against "photo-realism".
-
Simple evolution, really. Peg the blame on sloppy code or whatever you like, but the sheer fact is 300 megs is not a lot of memory for any system built in recent times. Office for me nowhere uses that amount, and it's a renowned memory pig. I've got Word, Outlook, and Visio fired up at the moment and they aren't using 200 megs between them. I haven't owned a PC in the last 5 years that didn't have a minimum of 4-6 gigs of RAM. CED is running on my SAM atm, editing/compiling some code, 2 megs usage. I do see your theoretical point.
I bought an 8 gig stick of DDR3 RAM (Corsair, overclock grade) for $25 last week.
If all else fails - there's always Wordpad or Notepad :)
-
My point was that software has not evolved as fast (and well) as hardware. If I have to write a letter or document, I don't need a word processor which occupies 300Mb ram.
This being said, there's people right now on some other God awful Luddite forums cursing and screaming about how "computers are ruining the world!!" while clutching quill pens and booklets of paper :)
-
My 2 cents:
We are just now hitting the point where hardware is finally slowing. Instead of doubling of transistors, we are getting more cores and other custom chipsets (GPU) on the same core. We can't rely on Moore's law to fix our slow code. We also have to learn to code for parallel in a good manner.
Which all means that I think that as more features get pushed onto the CPU die, the more potential to be back to integrated non-mix and match hardware, which will drive price down.
-
Yeah, I think we're both thinking the same thing here, about modern games (and music :) ).
But honestly, if you were to freeze the platform all that would happen is the games would just get worse (because most of the really big games are supported by people like nvidia and AMD to show off their hardware - take the hardware away and take away the support) and also the PC platform would die completely as a gaming platform because the consoles would continue to evolve.
I am not saying freeze forever, like 4 years or so, so consoles would still be far behind :)
On a side note I just went to amiga.com instead of org accidentally and saw the site...noooooooo, it burns !
-
To the original question I have to say that I am very much undecided. One of the things I liked about my first Amiga was that everything worked. I'de buy a game, put in the floppy and voila. Awesome. However, as time moved on some stuff required, or at least would benefit from extra hardware. But still, it was a small enough amount of upgrades to understand all of the options in depth. I liked how all of that worked and continues to work.
I used to like my PC having loads of options too. My 486 had so many bays and slots it was silly. As times gone on I find I use less bays and slots, I simply don't need them. The average pc mobo these days has built in everything with the exception of graphics (sometimes). Add a graphics card if you need one and what else do you need? An SSD and an optical drive maybe? I hardly use my optical drive these days, just an SSD and a card reader would do. As for upgrading the CPU and RAM, how often does that end up with a mobo replacement? It's often cheaper to get a newer mobo and CPU than finding a faster CPU for an older socket.
Even that once huge hard disk, or even RAID that a true power might use is probably better inserted into a NAS enclosure for convenient network access.
I guess what I'm saying is that even though the pc platform is very open, market forces for the typical user make a lot of our choices for us. Often to the point that it might as well been a closed platform in the first place.
A extra smothering of irony can be found in the jailbreaking of consoles of course. Closed platform it may be but someone will always find a way of opening up a console.
As to whatever is the best or worse approach, I just don't know. I just look forward to whatever it is memristor will do to the market, that will be fun.
Nice avatar my friend :)
-
I've interested in the tablet version of Ubuntu Linux, it looks like it might be a good way to get around Android's Javaness. But I really hope they don't fall prone to the two headed monster Windows has become. It should be possible to design an OS that works equally well in touch as it does in non-touch environments.
ARM devices may already outnumber X86 devices. The main problem with ARM is that they aren't yet powerful enough. Rumour has it iPhone 6 will have dual quad core ARM chips in it.
-
THe main question is has Android developed an insurmountable lead or could Ubuntu still play a role?
-
I am surprised noone has mentioned the steam box. This seems to take the advantages of consoles being fixed and PC's being open into a single platform. Sounds good to me. I'm thinking of buying one when they come out.
I think it is going to be more of another console vs a computer. Personally, I hate having to be online to play stuff, that and steam getting hacked, or wanting to embed itself in my os like symantec.
-
I like to build PCs, but I build them for quietness and efficiency rather than for performance. Also I prefer small systems to huge tower cases.
-
I built mine to be as quiet as my Imac, which raised the price to Imac territory...lol
-
Just wondering what you folks think.
Do you think it'd be better to have a closed hardware platform as the majority, or are you on the side of the typical PC with a mish mash of parts ?
I'll go first by incessantly rambling on and on, thereby boring you all to no end.
I decided to get into Amiga after building my PC a few months ago. Typical PC with all the higher end crap, ended up costing a BUNCH. I always wanted to own such a ridiculous machine, but now that I own it, am totally bored with it.
There seems to be nothing really good to do (as a home user) on such a machine. Many games that would use it are just over hyped crap. Short of Arma 3, there seems to be NOTHING coming out that needs a massive machine. Thanks to CONSOLES, a lot of the stuff is also just crappy ports. Even what is coming out seems to be more just point and shoot crap.
I think that all this massive power is going to waste and crappy programming is tolerated. Going to a single unified hardware configuration has some advantages in this day and age:
1. BUG FIXES - We might all have bugs, but then everyone would get fixes sooner as 1 fix would work for everyone.
2. Programming could be made more efficient - More optimized compilers and dev tools.
3. Programmers could optimize apps like no ones business - If a C64 could pound an IBM 5150 into the ground @ 1mhz due to integration and optimization, what could we do with a Core I7 and GTX 680 or Radeon 7990 platform ?
Software developers could spend more time being creative with less platforms to have to master, and as the machines got pushed to their limits, things would have to be done more efficiently (see above).
4. Machines would be worth something when you sold them.
5. No more "My 'puter is better than yours.."
IMO old machines were more "fun" to use even taking into account the fact that that it wasn't all done before.
If it were up to me, I'd take whatever is a really high end platform and freeze it for 5 years as the standard pc. I owned an IMac till recently and IMO there are benefits to standardized hardware (now ppl should be free to know the inner workings however). I also owned a C64 and so I can see how programming efficiently can work.
IMO Jack Tramiel would have preferred the current PC ecosystem of cheap parts from everywhere.
iOS ecosystem was highly benefited due to "somehow" standardized hardware.
Unfortunately, competition (and shareholders) force them to upgrade HW on a periodic basis.
BTW, sometime ago, I suggested to Amiga-like-OS developers, like AROS for example, to choose ONE (just one) configuration:
- Let's say:
* Intel Core i5-3570K (Ivy Bridge)
* Intel DZ77GA-70K, Intel Z77 Express, BIOS 0049
* Sapphire Radeon HD 7970
* (2 x 4 GB) Crucial PC3-12800 kit
All users here would be able to create their own AROS-Amiga y1000 with not a huge amount of money
They (developers) would be able to do things just one time, knowing exactly what to expect.
Of course, they would have to ignore any other request, like: "ohhh, but I have a nice i3 or this motherboard is prettier/cooler or whatever". At the end of the day, is a niche/hobbyist OS, not a competitor to Windows, Ubuntu or Android. Not even OSX tries to support several different HW...
It's a lost battle trying to support a lot of hardware.
Same goes for MorphOS. I would say, pick 1 (just one desktop) and just 1 notebook model:
* Powermac G4 Dual 1.42 with Radeon X and etc... and/or * Powerbook G4 1.67 15
but for those, give full support, like Wifi, Bluetooth and etc.
-
I know what you mean, I wished for a while that some manufacturer would just produce a full set that all goes together and is guaranteed to work properly, but you have to get a bit from here and a bit from there and hope for the best. Personally I don't even bother with graphics cards, onboard graphics is good enough for me since I don't play PC games so that takes one of the major headaches out of the equation.
It made sense to me that someone should just pick a configuration and tailor a Linux distribution to it and sell PCs with that Linux distro. There is just too much choice, it's bewildering.
Although personally I only buy AMD CPUs, I built an Intel system once, never again.
-
BTW, sometime ago, I suggested to Amiga-like-OS developers, like AROS for example, to choose ONE (just one) configuration:
- Let's say:
* Intel Core i5-3570K (Ivy Bridge)
* Intel DZ77GA-70K, Intel Z77 Express, BIOS 0049
* Sapphire Radeon HD 7970
* (2 x 4 GB) Crucial PC3-12800 kit
All users here would be able to create their own AROS-Amiga y1000 with not a huge amount of money
They (developers) would be able to do things just one time, knowing exactly what to expect.
Of course, they would have to ignore any other request, like: "ohhh, but I have a nice i3 or this motherboard is prettier/cooler or whatever". At the end of the day, is a niche/hobbyist OS, not a competitor to Windows, Ubuntu or Android. Not even OSX tries to support several different HW...
It's a lost battle trying to support a lot of hardware.
I always say the same thing. But nobody listens to me.
-
Personally I don't even bother with graphics cards, onboard graphics is good enough for me since I don't play PC games so that takes one of the major headaches out of the equation.
I am the same way!
I refuse to use a gfx card because they burn waaaaaaaaaay toooo much electricity and they heat up my apartment more than the whole rest of the computer. Plus they always have a supernoisy fan. I use onboard, cool, quiet low-electricty onboard gfx just like an Amiga.
Onboard gfx is plenty good enuff to run Chrome and write msgs on Amiga.org
-
I am routinely using a Macintosh SE/30 with 16Mb of RAM and a 250Mb hard disk; I write documents with Microsoft Word 5.1a (which can even be read by Office up to the 2000 version) or spreadsheets with Excel 4. I can even play a few decent games, and connect to the internet to check email or transfer files from my PC. I have A/UX installed on the same machine, with a full complement of development tools, and it also runs native Macintosh applications. This machine can boot its OS FROM A FLOPPY! The whole System 6.0.8 lives on a floppy disk! THAT was a feat.
Right on :D I need to get my SE/30 recapped...
The mac is much less efficient than the Amiga. If you're impressed by that, remember that an A1200 can usefully write letters and stuff using Final Writer using just a couple of MB of RAM.
If you like fast, efficient OSes, then you should love AmigaOS!
I've of course got no bad words for the Amiga OS, and classic Mac OS has its own issues, but I'll just note that 68k Mac software is perfectly capable of doing plenty in a couple MB as well. It didn't really start suffering from bloat until the later PowerPC years...
Just because a 20 year old Mac suits your needs doesn't make everyone on the bleeding edge "wrong" :) Those old machines boot the OS off a floppy - the OS from those days is far, far different than a modern OS.
Use what you enjoy, I say. There's always going to be the types that scream from the rooftops "WELL IF I CAN'T DO IT ON MY PDP-8 IT ISN'T WORTH DOING AND IT IS NOT REAL COMPUTING!11!!1!1!1"
Simple fact is, when most of us got into computers, you had to be a computer enthusiast. You *had* to have technical skills. These days, modern machines are just an appliance to most people.
You know what, I'm going to go ahead and be "that guy" here, and say that there really is nothing that can't be done in some form on a reasonably powerful 68k Mac or Amiga that is really vitally worth doing on a computer at all. Movies, sure, or playback of recorded music (as opposed to synthesized music,) but those can be done perfectly satisfactorily on dedicated devices (VCRs, CD players) anyway.
And the "appliance" view of computing, blindly treating the computer as a magic black-box that makes stuff happen when you press buttons but that can never be understood by mere mortals, is half the reason modern computing is in such a mess to begin with.
One thing to consider is that as you go from 16 bit to 32 bit to 64 bit software, the smallest that any information can be is 16 bit, 32 bit and 64 bit respectively. Even if you optimized it 100% the same software will always end up needing more ram and the executable will always be larger as you up the bits.
That's not true at all. Modern processors are perfectly capable of handling things at the byte level, and some architectures even support bit-field instructions. Some architectures do have a fixed instruction size, so code size can't always be reduced by much, but bloating of RAM usage for data is purely down to programmer laziness.
But I agree there is a lot of bloat, but no all is due to inefficient code Some of it is due to feature creep: adding more and more features which are less and less useful.
Its interesting that this also extends to even things like icons: do we really need 32 bit photo-realistic icons that take up more ram, more cpu cycles? I actually enjoy using Macos 7 for its simplicity. I also now have a 8 color Workbench with the stock Commodore icons.
And do we need animations of a page curling and turning when reading a document? Well actually Apple seems to now think the answer is "no", with Jon Ives heavily involved in the new Mac interface design, and he is dead against "photo-realism".
Indeed. Modern software is increasingly buried under a mountain of glitz...Windows 7 won't even let you roll back to the simple 95 look anymore.
Music is crap now because kids think video game noises from a sega are music nowadays and strippers = talent. Kids don't have a frame of reference to know talent vs crap.
Right on. As we all know, men in flower costumes, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCPRtKx9oH8) furry drag, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tYyqf0KJWY) and spangly vest/pants combos (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ro0FrMnCeIg) = talent.
-
I like to build PCs, but I build them for quietness and efficiency rather than for performance.
ur so awesome! I love your philosophy!
Also I prefer small systems to huge tower cases.
I don't care how big the case is but I would tend toward a larger case so it can have more drive bays.
My old firefox pc from 2004 broke down recently so I suddenly needed a new puter and I bought a random Acer computer from NewEgg thinking that modern computers would be super quiet.... well... it is totally silent. Except the hard drive makes this chirp sound sometimes, kind of like a click. Its really noticeable. Just some idiosyncracy of the 2TB hard drive.
If the computer had not made that chirpy noise then my friend would have bought the exact same model of computer. He is like me he wants something quiet.
I had absolutely no way to figure out how to buy a silent pc at a reasonable price. There were websites advertising silent pcs but they were really tremendously expensive and were lacking various features like VGA ports or PS/2 ports. I am certainly not paying top dollar for a computer that does not even have PS/2 ports!
So anyway I ended up getting this random Acer mass market puter and am having a "meh" experience with it.
I should have asked for your advice. There it went again, that loud chirpy noise.
-
is it a laptop? I got a laptop recently that is really annoying, the hard drive makes this noise like snipping of scissors. The worst bit is that when that happens the whole thing freezes up, like it keeps parking the head even though it has to access the disk to do anything at all such as typing some text.
I hate that laptop.
Oh it also reboots itself without asking, even while the lid is shut, somehow. I had applications open! Not anymore :(
-
ur so awesome! I love your philosophy!
I don't care how big the case is but I would tend toward a larger case so it can have more drive bays.
My old firefox pc from 2004 broke down recently so I suddenly needed a new puter and I bought a random Acer computer from NewEgg thinking that modern computers would be super quiet.... well... it is totally silent. Except the hard drive makes this chirp sound sometimes, kind of like a click. Its really noticeable. Just some idiosyncracy of the 2TB hard drive.
If the computer had not made that chirpy noise then my friend would have bought the exact same model of computer. He is like me he wants something quiet.
I had absolutely no way to figure out how to buy a silent pc at a reasonable price. There were websites advertising silent pcs but they were really tremendously expensive and were lacking various features like VGA ports or PS/2 ports. I am certainly not paying top dollar for a computer that does not even have PS/2 ports!
So anyway I ended up getting this random Acer mass market puter and am having a "meh" experience with it.
I should have asked for your advice. There it went again, that loud chirpy noise.
Really the way to fix that is get an SSD...no more noise.
-
is it a laptop?
No way. I never ever ever ever ever ever buy laptops. They are really bad for your eyeballs. Also my keyboard is a lot better than any laptop keyboard so its much healthier for my hands.
-
Really the way to fix that is get an SSD...no more noise.
I know that will work. But I also know that they make silent hard drives (or silent enuff). I have used computers that were super quiet back in 2005 and they were just randomly purchased at Best Buy. They used normal spinning hard disks.
-
I don't like them either but I needed it for work, unfortunately. That and I needed something with Windows on and there are already 3 PCs, an Xbox 360 and 2 Amiga 1200s in this room so it's getting kind of crowded.
Good luck finding a 2Tb SSD by the way. Samsung Spinpoint used to be the best quiet HDDs but they sold their hard drive department to Seagate so who knows anymore.
-
is it a laptop? I got a laptop recently that is really annoying, the hard drive makes this noise like snipping of scissors. The worst bit is that when that happens the whole thing freezes up, like it keeps parking the head even though it has to access the disk to do anything at all such as typing some text.
I hate that laptop.
Oh it also reboots itself without asking, even while the lid is shut, somehow. I had applications open! Not anymore :(
Sounds like the drive is trying to power down really aggressively to save juice, I have an Hitachi external that turns off every few seconds after I use it. Makes a lovely CLANK turning on.
-
Sounds like the drive is trying to power down really aggressively to save juice
I think so but I tried to turn off all the power saving features to no effect. It does it even when it's plugged into the mains. Stupid thing.
The screen is utterly dreadful as well. Don't buy a Lenovo Thinkpad that's my advice to everybody. They used to be good though.
-
Non solid state hard drives in a laptop? Why would you do that?
I find between my iPad and my MacBook Air I rarely use my desktop machine any more. It just feels right.
-
Non solid state hard drives in a laptop? Why would you do that?
Oh, gee, I dunno, maybe low-cost high-capacity storage?
Oh, right, I forgot, everything is The Cloud now and local storage is (*haughty sniff!*) obsolete.
-
Oh, gee, I dunno, maybe low-cost high-capacity storage?
Oh, right, I forgot, everything is The Cloud now and local storage is (*haughty sniff!*) obsolete.
Hey, if it abolishes seek time and platters and corruption when I bang the lappy, I'm all for it. Hard drives are freaking annoying. As for the cloud? Dropbox is the shizz.
-
That's not true at all. Modern processors are perfectly capable of handling things at the byte level, and some architectures even support bit-field instructions. Some architectures do have a fixed instruction size, so code size can't always be reduced by much, but bloating of RAM usage for data is purely down to programmer laziness.
Really? I did not know that. Every 64 bit executable I've seen has been larger than its 32 bit counterpart and ALWAYS used more RAM.
-
Crucial just came out with a 1TB for 500 bucks, a sequel to the M$, so it won't be long.
-
You can get a 3.2Tb SSD if you have 15 grand spare. But you can get 1Tb HDD for £40 ish so I wouldn't bother yet. Use SSD for the OS and frequently accessed files, and HDD for bulk storage.
As for HDD in the laptop, well I didn't want to pay very much for a work computer, that's the simple answer. You get what you pay for I guess but it still cost me more than I'd pay for a quiet desktop machine. I didn't expect that level of rubbish, at any rate.
-
You know what, I'm going to go ahead and be "that guy" here, and say that there really is nothing that can't be done in some form on a reasonably powerful 68k Mac or Amiga that is really vitally worth doing on a computer at all. Movies, sure, or playback of recorded music (as opposed to synthesized music,) but those can be done perfectly satisfactorily on dedicated devices (VCRs, CD players) anyway.
Have you tried live video streaming on such hardware? Have your tried to do live streaming while playing a game without it dropping a single frame?
Sure older hardware can still be used to do real work yet modern hardware is beyond what even super computers of the 1990's were capable of.
Indeed. Modern software is increasingly buried under a mountain of glitz...Windows 7 won't even let you roll back to the simple 95 look anymore.
There still is tons of text based software for Linux and BSD.
-
Have you tried live video streaming on such hardware? Have your tried to do live streaming while playing a game without it dropping a single frame?
Actually? Yes. Take the Sega CD - FMV on a 12MHz 68000, even while playing a game! And that's got nothing on a mid-range 68k Mac or a moderately upgraded Amiga. Even a stock 1200 needs only a PCMCIA CD-ROM to whoop its ass.
Sure older hardware can still be used to do real work yet modern hardware is beyond what even super computers of the 1990's were capable of.
Never claimed otherwise.
There still is tons of text based software for Linux and BSD.
And if either of those were good desktop OSes, I might care.
-
Sounds like the drive is trying to power down really aggressively to save juice, I have an Hitachi external that turns off every few seconds after I use it. Makes a lovely CLANK turning on.
hdparm -B255
Et voila! No more HDD Power Management shenanigans. :)
-
You can get a 3.2Tb SSD if you have 15 grand spare. But you can get 1Tb HDD for £40 ish so I wouldn't bother yet. Use SSD for the OS and frequently accessed files, and HDD for bulk storage.
I picked up a couple of 4TB Seagate hard drives from NewEgg for $170.00 each to reward NewEgg for fighting against Evil Patent Trolls. The drives seem nice and quiet so far but I haven't used them that much yet.
-
Rumour has it iPhone 6 will have dual quad core ARM chips in it.
This has probably already been mentioned (I didn't read the entire thread), but Samsung Galaxy S4 already has four cores - at 1.8 GHz.
-
This has probably already been mentioned (I didn't read the entire thread), but Samsung Galaxy S4 already has four cores - at 1.8 GHz.
Only in the States I think, rest of the world it has an 8-Core Exynos CPU.
-
And if either of those were good desktop OSes, I might care.
I've been using Linux for years, whenever I have to use Windows for work purposes, I think "Windows... it's not ready for the desktop."
Linux has its faults but there's plenty to hate about Windows and MacOS, too. You just notice the awful bits you haven't got used to so much more.
-
" Powermac Quicksilver 933 with Radeon 9600 XT (r300) LOUDLY running MorphOS 2.7 without 3D."
Hey you think that is loud?
II have two MDDs and one is a earlier model with a fan that sounds like a jet engine.
I don't even notice the fan on my 9800XT.
-
Actually? Yes. Take the Sega CD - FMV on a 12MHz 68000, even while playing a game! And that's got nothing on a mid-range 68k Mac or a moderately upgraded Amiga. Even a stock 1200 needs only a PCMCIA CD-ROM to whoop its ass.
The mega cd has two 68000's and it still can't manage transferring a full frame, which is why they skipped every other pixel. None of them had any real game play.
-
I could just use an Amiga with a Genlock and a VCR. Imagine that.
-
I could just use an Amiga with a Genlock and a VCR. Imagine that.
Or a Laserdisc. Golly, it's like we've had dedicated hardware for video playback since decades ago or something!
-
Only in the States I think, rest of the world it has an 8-Core Exynos CPU.
Damn!
That is hot!
I didn't know that.
How come we get shorted?
Oh, checked it out.
The four A15 cores run at 200MHz slower than the US model.
And the other four cores are A7s at 1.2 GHz (big/little combination for improved battery life).
I'll take the US market model.
Or the Galaxy Note 3 when it is introduced.
-
Actually? Yes. Take the Sega CD - FMV on a 12MHz 68000, even while playing a game! And that's got nothing on a mid-range 68k Mac or a moderately upgraded Amiga. Even a stock 1200 needs only a PCMCIA CD-ROM to whoop its ass.
I meant streaming video onto the Internet, and by also playing games I mean that the computer can stream the output of the graphics of the game to the Internet while you are playing it (thus also sending it to your monitor).
-
I meant streaming video onto the Internet, and by also playing games I mean that the computer can stream the output of the graphics of the game to the Internet while you are playing it (thus also sending it to your monitor).
Oh. Frankly that's actually pretty stupid.
-
The mega cd has two 68000's and it still can't manage transferring a full frame, which is why they skipped every other pixel. None of them had any real game play.
There are almost no games for it, but add the 32x to that and it finally has some horsepower.
-
Not according to the angry video game nerd!
[youtube]VvR_3OTxs8A[/youtube]
-
" Powermac Quicksilver 933 with Radeon 9600 XT (r300) LOUDLY running MorphOS 2.7 without 3D."
Hey you think that is loud?
II have two MDDs and one is a earlier model with a fan that sounds like a jet engine.
I don't even notice the fan on my 9800XT.
I heard that MDDs are even worst. I could handle that level of noise back in the late 90s when I had something like this running at full speed blowing air directly to an AMD K6-2-400 mhz inside an open case.
(http://www.magazineluiza.com.br/imagens2/produto/20/200299900.jpg)
It's easy to see why Apple changed the design so much for the G5.
BTW, is it true that the latest G5 (Quad-Water cooled) don't leak? (Black blocks)
-
Oh. Frankly that's actually pretty stupid.
It allows people to broadcast video from the PC over the Internet. There more practical applications i.e developers can stream video of builds of their program to other people in their team over the Internet or to people interested in the project.
-
I heard that MDDs are even worst. I could handle that level of noise back in the late 90s when I had something like this running at full speed blowing air directly to an AMD K6-2-400 mhz inside an open case.
(http://www.magazineluiza.com.br/imagens2/produto/20/200299900.jpg)
It's easy to see why Apple changed the design so much for the G5.
BTW, is it true that the latest G5 (Quad-Water cooled) don't leak? (Black blocks)
Actually, later MDDs are much quieter, but the early ones are REALLY loud.
And all water cooling stands a chance of leaking (besides the PCIe G5s are not currently planned for MorphOS support).
-
Where can I find the list of planned G5 models to be supported by MorphOS? Maybe I can try to get the exact model...
Those are quiet, right?
-
Where can I find the list of planned G5 models to be supported by MorphOS? Maybe I can try to get the exact model...
Those are quiet, right?
Right now, Bigfoot has a 2.0 GHz air cooled G5 and a 2.7 GHz water cooled G5, so we can assume these are cool.
I feel safe enough with the 2.5 to have gotten one of these (specs are really close to the 2.7).
I am not sure about the 2.3 GHz G5.
And these are all the older models with AGP slots.
BTW - The G5s are not that quiet either.
So far, the Quicksilver I first had MorphOS installed on (with a passively cooled Radeon 9000) was the quietest.
But I have promised this one (upgraded to a 1333 MHz CPU and a 9800 video card) to haywirepc in PA.
The later MDD isn't really all that bad. I have had noisier PCs.
The earlier MDD will be fixed up (I might even change out the fan) and it will be donated to a developer.
Considering the current good prices on the 2.0 GHz G5s (and their 'no water needed' cooling) I'd aim for one of those
-
Well, I can find 4 different G5 2.0 models @ everymac:
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g5/specs/powermac_g5_2.0_dp.html
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g5/specs/powermac_g5_2.0_dp_2.html
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g5/specs/powermac_g5_2.0_dp_pci.html
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g5/specs/powermac_g5_dual_2.0.html
Which one should be the safest bet?
Rgds,
-
Well, I can find 4 different G5 2.0 models @ everymac:
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g5/specs/powermac_g5_2.0_dp.html
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g5/specs/powermac_g5_2.0_dp_2.html
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g5/specs/powermac_g5_2.0_dp_pci.html
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g5/specs/powermac_g5_dual_2.0.html
Which one should be the safest bet?
Rgds,
Eliminate the last one as it uses PCIe slots.
The bounty calls for a port to this specific model:
" PowerMac G5: A1047 (7,3 - M9747LL/A)"
I believe that is the system in your third reference.
But...the bounty also specifies "Support of other PowerMac G5 models is not precluded, but is not required"
And..as I have mentioned Mark also has a 2.7 first generation water cooled G5.
The first two systems you have listed have PCI-X slots and may not be that different then the 2.7.
But second system is a redesign and uses an unsupported video card which would require a video card swap.
Then there is Frank Mariak/Pega-1's mention that he might be willing to help with iMac compatibility.
Confused yet?
Then just stick with an early G5 2.0 with PCI expansion slots (not PCI-X), an 8X AGP Pro video card slot, and an ATI video card.
That was the only machine mentioned in the bounty.
Oh, and while it is probably overkill for MorphOS, a Radeon 9800Pro or XT would definately perform better then the stock 9600.
-
It allows people to broadcast video from the PC over the Internet. There more practical applications i.e developers can stream video of builds of their program to other people in their team over the Internet or to people interested in the project.
No, that's still stupid, sorry. The only practical purpose for live-streaming of video over the Internet is for remote-desktop access, and framerate requirements are much lower on that.
-
No, that's still stupid, sorry. The only practical purpose for live-streaming of video over the Internet is for remote-desktop access, and framerate requirements are much lower on that.
And impractical things like video chatting.
-
Yeah, that's dumb too.
-
Yeah, that's dumb too.
Only if your girlfriend (or wife) isn't a hottie.
-
If you have a girlfriend/wife and you're not getting to appreciate said hottie in person, you need to reassess your priorities :P
-
If you have a girlfriend/wife and you're not getting to appreciate said hottie in person, you need to reassess your priorities :P
Point well taken.
Note to self: Spend more time at home.:laughing:
-
On the subject of loud or quiet fans, I've got an AMD 4850e (45W TDP) with a Scythe Ninja 2 on it. Which is kind of silly. At idle the fan spins at 400rpm. Sometimes. When it can be bothered. If I really push the CPU it goes up to a whisper.
The only other fan in the system is in the PSU, which was a pretty quiet Antec one even though it's only an 8cm fan. I swapped it for a Nexus one anyway. The HDD is in a Xilence silencer/cooler sitting on a sheet of foam on the bottom of the case.
Now I've gone and bought a Cherry G80 mechanical keyboard though. CLUNK CLUNK CLUNK!
-
Now I've gone and bought a Cherry G80 mechanical keyboard though. CLUNK CLUNK CLUNK!
I like the keyboard. As long as you don't use it late into the evening somewhere near the bedroom.
-
On the subject of loud or quiet fans, I've got an AMD 4850e (45W TDP) with a Scythe Ninja 2 on it. Which is kind of silly. At idle the fan spins at 400rpm. Sometimes. When it can be bothered. If I really push the CPU it goes up to a whisper.
The only other fan in the system is in the PSU, which was a pretty quiet Antec one even though it's only an 8cm fan. I swapped it for a Nexus one anyway. The HDD is in a Xilence silencer/cooler sitting on a sheet of foam on the bottom of the case.
Now I've gone and bought a Cherry G80 mechanical keyboard though. CLUNK CLUNK CLUNK!
There is no quietness with a Coolermaster Quickfire TM with blues either...click click..
-
What if she is hot, but a pain in your ____, maybe the priorities are okay :D
-
What if she is hot, but a pain in your ____, maybe the priorities are okay :D
Hot or not, sooner or later they are going to be a pain in the ___.
But I don't want to seem sexist, because this works both ways.
I guess its only with computers and burgers that you can always "have it your way".
-
I like the keyboard. As long as you don't use it late into the evening somewhere near the bedroom.
Yeah I think I'll stick to the old one for everyday typing. I actually got this one to take to bits. It's cheaper to buy the whole keyboard than just the Cherry MX Keyswitches. And a full set of keycaps to go with them will cost about the same again.
I've a plan to mod it into Amiga layout, will need to replace a few keycaps with custom jobs, and I'll build a new frame and circuit board. Next door neighbour has a CNC machine. There's also the laser cutter at the Edinburgh hacklab.
So what was the question again... do you like everything ready made or build your own? I guess that's that question answered. :P
Seriously though I think there should be all-in-one systems that are guaranteed to work with AROS or whatever. But maybe not just one model. There were always big box Amigas and low-end wedge case Amigas, I think that's not such a bad idea. Support essentially two different models, a basic one and a bells-and-whistles one, but the former can be upgraded into the latter if you want, one bit at a time, later on.
-
For AROS this would be an excellent idea.
Someone ought to pick it up and run with it.
No OS cost, not to demanding on the hardware specs.
And, of course, MorphOS only supports a few specific systems.
So you've convinced me on one point, NG OS' benefit from fewer choices.
In fact, you are never going to see an NG OS with as many drivers as Windows ships with.
-
Everyone should read this book:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Paradox-Choice-Why-More-Less/dp/0060005696
The Paradox of Choice: Why More is Less
The author of The Battle for Human Nature explains why too much choice has led to the ever increasing complexity of everyday decisions, why too much of a good thing has become detrimental to human psychological and emotional well-being, and how to focus our lives on making the right choices.
-
No, that's still stupid, sorry. The only practical purpose for live-streaming of video over the Internet is for remote-desktop access, and framerate requirements are much lower on that.
Steaming of desktop works fine for broadcasting TV through a capture card over the Internet. It it clear even the most modern television one could buy today is obsolete for anything other then a display for a PC as it is only a matter of time before streaming video replaces TV.
-
"Obsolete" is a silly word. It's just another way of saying something stopped being popular, but with a delusion of objectivity.
-
Steaming of desktop works fine for broadcasting TV through a capture card over the Internet. It it clear even the most modern television one could buy today is obsolete for anything other then a display for a PC as it is only a matter of time before streaming video replaces TV.
That's as may be; I still don't consider TV-watching to be an essential part of the computing experience when there's perfectly adequate dedicated hardware available.
And I have absolutely no idea what you propose to accomplish by broadcasting TV over the Internet through a capture card...?
(And anyway there hasn't been anything that worth watching on TV since The Red Green Show finale.)
"Obsolete" is a silly word. It's just another way of saying something stopped being popular, but with a delusion of objectivity.
Quoted for truth. But if there weren't a pretense of objectivity, how could self-described "futurists" imply that they were objectively better than the rest of us for fetishizing new technology?
-
We don't even have a TV in the house, we just watch DVDs on an Xbox for our entertainment.
Watching TV on your PC makes some kind of sense though. It saves space -- means you don't need two screens. Mind you I was using a TV as my Amiga monitor back in the day. It's only because PCs needed their own special monitors that it even became an issue. I have a Genlock too. If only I could have used the Amiga as a remote control, through software, it would have been perfect.
-
That's as may be; I still don't consider TV-watching to be an essential part of the computing experience when there's perfectly adequate dedicated hardware available.
And I have absolutely no idea what you propose to accomplish by broadcasting TV over the Internet through a capture card...?
(And anyway there hasn't been anything that worth watching on TV since The Red Green Show finale.)
The downside to television is that its quantity of programming pales in comparison to the Internet, even if you have 1,000 channels that a drop in the buck compared to video programming on the Internet. It also makes it easier for people to provide video content.
-
"We just watch DVDs on our XBOX360"?
Then you are kind of watching TV.
Its splitting hairs.
And I still value news access.
Primarily because no matter how biased broadcast journalism is, the internet is uniformly worse.
I don't watch TV, but I have a monitor.
Sorry, that just sounds dumb.
-
The downside to television is that its quantity of programming pales in comparison to the Internet, even if you have 1,000 channels that a drop in the buck compared to video programming on the Internet. It also makes it easier for people to provide video content.
These are both upsides of television.
-
"We just watch DVDs on our XBOX360"?
Then you are kind of watching TV.
Its splitting hairs.
And I still value news access.
Primarily because no matter how biased broadcast journalism is, the internet is uniformly worse.
I don't watch TV, but I have a monitor.
Sorry, that just sounds dumb.
Yeah I watch TV shows I guess (but not broadcast live so I don't need a TV license). I never said I didn't watch TV, I said we don't have a TV. Although lately we've been mostly watching Tom and Jerry, which is what the BBC customarily puts on when the schedule is cancelled at short notice.
-
The downside to television is that its quantity of programming pales in comparison to the Internet, even if you have 1,000 channels that a drop in the buck compared to video programming on the Internet. It also makes it easier for people to provide video content.
Quantity, sure - but good luck finding any broadcast-quality content outside subscription services.
Except this guy. (http://www.youtube.com/user/musictrackjp) I would watch this guy on TV religiously.
-
Now I've gone and bought a Cherry G80 mechanical keyboard though. CLUNK CLUNK CLUNK!
Install padding or O-rings and it will get much quieter. You can get thick 40A O-rings from WASDkeyboards.com
And if you want it to be really really quiet you can lube the switches too; that will quiet the upstroke quite a bit.
-
These are both upsides of television.
How so, everything on TV has to be green lighted by a programming executive then on top of that it has to pass government regulations (i.e the FCC), while there is zero regulations limiting content on the Internet and producers have no one to convince to get their show on the Internet.
Also the audience on the Internet is vastly larger, for example the recent My Little Pony phenomenon was only possible due to episodes being streamed on the Internet where Internet stream of My Little Pony draws many times the viewers then the Hub (the TV network that airs My Little Pony). This is also not a fluke the same is true for HBO's Game of Thrones where most fans of the show don't even have HBO.
-
How so, everything on TV has to be green lighted by a programming executive then on top of that it has to pass government regulations (i.e the FCC), while there is zero regulations limiting content on the Internet and producers have no one to convince to get their show on the Internet.
I think in the majority of cases TV wins that point. Most people don't have the time or motivation to sift through the dregs of the internet to track down programmes, while TV has less better quality programmes that are easier to find. The internet makes it much harder to have water cooler moments.
Also the audience on the Internet is vastly larger, for example the recent My Little Pony phenomenon was only possible due to episodes being streamed on the Internet where Internet stream of My Little Pony draws many times the viewers then the Hub (the TV network that airs My Little Pony). This is also not a fluke the same is true for HBO's Game of Thrones where most fans of the show don't even have HBO.
Game of Thrones is the most pirated TV show, that is another win for TV. Just that you're using the internet for an illegal method of receiving it.
TV programmes that are legitimately streamed by the TV channel don't count as internet programmes as most wouldn't likely exist without TV money in the first place.
There are a few instances of webisodes that have been good, if they are promotional material for TV programmes that used TV money to produce then again they wouldn't exist without the TV studio system.
I can also see that a cancelled TV show may be able to have a further life as an internet only show, but again without the audience base of the original TV show it wouldn't happen.
And yes this does all mean that sometimes there will be great programmes that never make it to air or programmes you enjoy that get cancelled. But overall TV is the best compromise for the majority of people. The surge of people watching TV online has been due to young people who are comfortable with technology and have a lot of time, however it will be interesting to see how that develops as they become older.
-
I think in the majority of cases TV wins that point. Most people don't have the time or motivation to sift through the dregs of the internet to track down programmes, while TV has less better quality programmes that are easier to find.
Exactly. I don't want to watch any old junk by Joe Nobody. I'd rather watch well-produced stuff with professional acting. Mostly I only watch films, and the occasional classic TV series. Currently going through a Buck Rogers box set in between the Tom and Jerry.
The internet makes it much harder to have water cooler moments.
Yeah but then you have to watch crap like Big Brother, soaps and talent shows, and all that celebrity rubbish. Well, depending where you work anyway.
The absolute worst thing about TV in my opinion is the advertisements. This is really putting me off YouTube lately as well.
-
I think in the majority of cases TV wins that point. Most people don't have the time or motivation to sift through the dregs of the internet to track down programmes, while TV has less better quality programmes that are easier to find. The internet makes it much harder to have water cooler moments.
Game of Thrones is the most pirated TV show, that is another win for TV. Just that you're using the internet for an illegal method of receiving it.
TV programmes that are legitimately streamed by the TV channel don't count as internet programmes as most wouldn't likely exist without TV money in the first place.
There are a few instances of webisodes that have been good, if they are promotional material for TV programmes that used TV money to produce then again they wouldn't exist without the TV studio system.
I can also see that a cancelled TV show may be able to have a further life as an internet only show, but again without the audience base of the original TV show it wouldn't happen.
And yes this does all mean that sometimes there will be great programmes that never make it to air or programmes you enjoy that get cancelled. But overall TV is the best compromise for the majority of people. The surge of people watching TV online has been due to young people who are comfortable with technology and have a lot of time, however it will be interesting to see how that develops as they become older.
Take the My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic popularity, its success has nothing to do with it being on the Hub, its popularity exploded because it became a Internet meme and was available on the Internet thus it was easier for Internet users to give the show a try as they were more likely to get curious and it was easier to view on the Internet then going through the trouble of watching it on the Hub on their TV.
This also show a huge stumbling block to TV, you have to pay extra for most TV stations, while services like Netflix is much cost effective as you pay less money for more content even ignoring the ability to watch it for free.
-
You know what I don't actually care how popular My Little Pony is, but if it's only popular because of hives of self-reference and in-jokes such as 4Chan and Reddit it would be no loss to humanity if no-one had heard of it.
I'd rather only pay for the content I actually wanted to watch. The problem with a subscription is you'd be tempted to try to "get your money's worth" and spend hours every day glued to the box, or have the TV on the whole time even when you're not watching it like some people do and you get so used to it that you can't do without. Which is also a disadvantage of streaming media. You can get addicted to it. I don't see the appeal of "more, more, more entertainment!" I treat myself to a 2nd-hand DVD once a week and I watch that and that's it. Even the inconvenience of having to go to a shop and pay for it with money makes life a fuller, more satisfying experience.
-
The absolute worst thing about TV in my opinion is the advertisements. This is really putting me off YouTube lately as well.
No kidding. The more ads show up on YouTube, the less I bother even going there.
You know what I don't actually care how popular My Little Pony is, but if it's only popular because of hives of self-reference and in-jokes such as 4Chan and Reddit it would be no loss to humanity if no-one had heard of it.
Heh :D By many accounts it actually is pretty good for a kids' show, but there's no denying that the Internet hype machine has far overblown its actual merits...
I'd rather only pay for the content I actually wanted to watch. The problem with a subscription is you'd be tempted to try to "get your money's worth" and spend hours every day glued to the box, or have the TV on the whole time even when you're not watching it like some people do and you get so used to it that you can't do without. Which is also a disadvantage of streaming media. You can get addicted to it. I don't see the appeal of "more, more, more entertainment!" I treat myself to a 2nd-hand DVD once a week and I watch that and that's it. Even the inconvenience of having to go to a shop and pay for it with money makes life a fuller, more satisfying experience.
Right on. I've found it pretty liberating to not think that I have to be watching something in my free time.
(And huzzah for second-hand buys! I've got a stack of great stuff from different thrift stores that cost me a fraction of what I would've paid to get them new...)