Sorry friend but you've been bamboozled as it would take SEVENTEEN YEARS to save enough power to make up the price difference between an AMD and an Intel and that is with picking the 125w on the AMD side. Now are you seriously gonna argue you are keeping your chip for nearly 20 years?
I can back this up using kill-a-watt and the excellent board monitoring in my Asus my FX8320 (a "95w" part which I have yet to see go above 60w) uses between 8w-16w on basic tasks like youtube and surfing and right now I'm slamming 3 cores to 100% converting a video to MP4, power usage Johnny? that would be...drumroll...37.19w. So
Remember to always look at the site you are getting your "news" from without adblock at least once to see where their bread is buttered, are they taking ad revenue from a certain company? This is why you can't believe a damned thing Tom's Hardware says for instance, as even when their own reviewer admitted that "for most games being released today quad cores are a minimum" they recommended an Intel dual core over a cheaper AMD hexacore and then you turn off adblock and wadda ya know, the page is filled with ads for Intel i5s. Hmmm, biased much?
A better choice for an HTPC would be the AMD Athlon 5350. Its only $49, has a max TDP of only 25w, and it has enough GPU power to run Battlefield 4 so it has more than enough GPU to perform any task you'd want an HTPC to do. The AMD drivers come with a set of codecs so pretty much any video will be hardware accelerated, great for HTPCs which is why I've been using these a LOT in the shop. Cheap, low heat, great graphics, whats not to like?
Linux support for the AMD APUs has been getting pretty damned good lately (thanks to AMD opening their docs and hiring devs) so the Linux guys can pair that chip with a copy of OpenELEC and make themselves an insanely cheap HTPC, we're talking sub $150 if you hit the sales. Personally I like to use Windows 8 on 'em, as IMNSHO the only place the Metro UI works really well is as a 10 foot UI, just pair it with this remote keyboard and voila! Badass HTPC that can even do light gaming for crazy cheap.
As for TFA? Costs $540 and is less powerful than cheaper previous releases.....sounds like a pass. Of course the elephant in the room for both AMD and Intel is their chips became too powerful years ago and with the exception of a teeny tiny niche that uses every cycle on their PC the chips are just too powerful compared with the work the average user has for 'em to do. To use a
Hell even the gamers don't have to buy like they once did, I used to have to buy every other year, now? The PC I replaced was over 6 years old and was still playing games just fine, only reason I replaced it was the oldest needed a PC so I figured I'd use it as an excuse to pass down my Phenom II X6 and grab myself an FX8320E...fricking kicks ass BTW, paired with an R9 280 it plays everything I want in glorious 1080P....but so does my X6, since the oldest has the exact same GPU and his games are just as smooth and look just as good as mine does!
You look at what the AVERAGE, not hardcore gamer, does with their PC? They play casual games like FB games, watch videos, check email....shit that a Pentium dual laptop from 2008 has NO problems doing. Hell even the Intel shrinks for power savings really aren't that big a draw for most because at the shop I've found the average user is away from the plug for a max of 3 hours, a feat my 2011 AMD netbook has zero problems pulling off with a 4 year old battery!
This is why I have no problems staying an AMD shop despite AMD staying at 28nm, because even at 28nm they are still vastly overpowered compared to what the average user does (especially when you look at non rigged benchmarks) because once we went multicore chips went from "good enough" to so insanely powerful it isn't even funny.
Hell if I could still get the boards cheap I would probably have no problem selling Phenom I quads, just as I have no problem selling those cheap Athlon quads now for everything from office boxes to HTPCs, they are just more powerful than anything the average person does by a pretty large measure.
Yeah....tell that to the owner of that sleek new phone when it dies after 30 minutes because H.26X sucked its battery like a fucking vampire why don't ya?
This is why I've been saying we do NOT need to kills flash for H.264, and sure as fuck not for H.265 because they both suck hairy nuts when it comes to how much power they waste for a given video! If you don't believe me? Encode the same video twice, do one in H.264 and the other in VP8 or VP9, run 'em both while having the PC on a kill-a-watt and look for yourself. the H.264 only APPEARS to work well to the end user because its crapping all over the GPU but all those GPU cycles don't grow on trees, they lead to lousy battery life, increased heat as well, and when so many are using phones and tablets that run on ever thinner batteries? I'm sorry but that shit just doesn't cut it! And try loading a page with HTML V5 H.264 vids and look at the power suckage, again worse in every way than Flash with VP8/9.
Lets face it folks, H.26X is just not a good format, its patent encumbered up the ass, sucks more CPU and GPU than competing formats, its just not the best choice when we have multiple free alternatives that if the resources were instead devoted to making them better would end up with a much better experience for everybody....but then we'd be ignoring the rotting elephant in the room, which is that Apple,Google, and MSFT all WANT a format that is encumbered up the ass, it makes a really nice high barrier for entry that gives them the market to themselves.
And I just fucking showed you that argument makes you and most Linux users hypocrites or did you not even bother reading my post before you shat yours out? "Yeah what is the GPU that every.fricking.Linux.article. advises people to use? Nvidia which don't give you the code, never will give you the code, yet its always the best driver of the lot!"
Your argument DOES NOT HOLD WATER on multiple levels, 1.- Most Linux advocates recommend Nvidia, which is a binary, and 2.- When you are at 1.6% nobody is gonna support you so you ain't getting shit anyway LOL!
BTW you DO realize that you just admitted your OS is NOT based on sound design principles but on religion, yes? Because that is EXACTLY what the argument you just put forth states, that when given a choice of having a functional OS or trying to push a failed driver model which you THINK might kinda sorta (but as Nvidia shows is bullshit) push your "philosophy"? The acceptable choice is a broken OS...and you wonder why Linux has been out for 22 fucking years and has YET to even get a shitastic 2%?
Isn't it sad that Linux is getting ROFLstomped by both Windows 8 (the most hated Windows since ME) and Windows 10 ( a fricking beta that isn't even RTM yet) as well as fricking "other"?
Of course shit like this is EXACTLY why the Hairyfeet challenge has lasted 8 years and why every other FOSS OS has a stable driver ABI including BSD and Android, because if you don't? You get shit drivers and updates break drivers, simple as that. I mean what did you THINK would happen? How many kernel devs are devoted full time to drivers? 30? 40? lets be generous as hell and say 200. So you have 200 devs and over 100,000 drivers with hundreds more coming every.single.quarter. and because there is no stable ABI all it takes is a pointer change in the right spot and thousands of those drivers are now worthless, they DO NOT WORK.
It don't take Hawking to do the math folks, Torvalds and his "let the devs handle it" is a classical mythical man month situation that will never ever improve, it just can't because you will NEVER 1.- Have enough devs with low level driver experience that are, 2.- intimately familiar enough with the hardware to make more than generic (at best) drivers even if you give them the code, 3.- Nor enough hours to go through the tens of thousands of drivers when a major change causes breakage and finally 4.- No way will they have access to all that hardware to test.
Of course all that goes away with an ABI, which is why Apple (OSX and iOS),BSD,Haiku, Windows, hell even OS/2 Warp has a fricking ABI folks! And the one argument they always bring up, the "they won't give us the code precious" BS? Yeah what is the GPU that every.fricking.Linux.article. advises people to use? Nvidia which don't give you the code, never will give you the code, yet its always the best driver of the lot!
Its been 22 damned years folks, and Linux is lower than "other"...doesn'ty that tell you something? And you can't even bring up android as Google fricking HAS an ABI for Android! If Torvalds model worked then others would have adopted it...they haven't, not even the other FOSS OSes. Its time to face the facts, which is the kernel devs should be focused on the kernel and the ones that actually make the hardware should be focused on the drivers! But that isn't gonna happen if they have to rewrite the damned things yearly because of Torvalds fiddling, not when a driver written for Vista will run in Windows 10. You can't dictate terms when your OS is at 1.6% and trying to has kept the OS dead last for 22 years, isn't it about time to stop sticking with a failed model?
The reason people hate the "new" Google is because they actually liked the OLD Google, that is pre IPO.
The old Google was like this mad scientist company full of engineers just throwing out all these cool ideas and seeing what people liked, the "new" Google cares only about the stock price and I have zero doubt is no longer being run by engineers but by MBAs (Masters of Being Assholes) who show each other PPTs and say things like "our data shows that the crucial 19-35 demographic currently enjoys X", see how they tried to ram G+ down our throats because their data showed kids like Facebook. The old Google would have never done that, hell you used to have to fight for an INVITE to get to play with the newest Google stuff and people did, because it was nearly always cool and innovative takes on some idea, now its just another Charmin, a large corp cranking out products based on marketing data and that makes a lot of us sad pandas
Oh please quit with that "artists" bullshit, it has been shown time and time again to be right up there with "job creators" on the horseshit meter!
Why not tell that to meatloaf who had to file bankruptcy in the 80s because the record company had the 50 foot brass balls to say Bat Out Of Hell I, an album that to this day holds the record for longest time on the top 200, didn't make a dime and so owed him NOTHING. Tell that to Cheap Trick who is STILL suing last I checked because the record company said "Hey downloads didn't exist when you recorded your albums...sucks to be you bitches!" and thus for every iTunes sale they get NOTHING. The exact same is true for movies and TV, which is where the phrase Hollywood Accounting comes from. Tell that to Don Dokken, whose first Dokken album (which he recorded on his own dime) sold nearly a quarter million only to get told by the record company "that's great now you only owe us half a million dollars for 'promotional expenses', tough break" and thus gave the band NOTHING.
The current copyright system HARMS the artist, as it allows rich old white fucks to become the eternal gatekeepers by making endless bank on back catalogs which the artists don't see a fucking cent of in a good 90% of the cases. Oh and you might want to ask the Stones how much they get on all their classic albums, which with current copyright laws won't go into public domain until after your grandkids are dead...did you say "not a single cent"? Then you are correct because according to Keith Richards they haven't gotten a penny from their 60s albums since the mid 70s...wanna guess where all those profits from all those classic albums went? If you said "the pockets of rich old white fucks that didn't have shit to do with actually creating it" then you are actually learning, congrats.
The vast majority don't use LO, they use MSO, and they don't call it "Wintel" for nothing. I really don't see MSFT adding this anytime soon, remember they fucked Windows Vista simply because Intel picked up the phone and said "Our shitty 9xx chipsets can't do DX9 and we have a warehouse full to move" which gave us "Vista Capable" so I have zero doubt if MSFT were to start talking up GPU acceleration on MSO Intel would pick up the phone and that would be that.
Of course the fact that they have been adding speed ups to LO since 2013 and it hasn't helped their sales any should be all the proof you need that LO isn't going to influence anybody's hardware choices. Don't get me wrong, I give it out to home users in my standard install, no point spending the $$$ on MSO when LO does the job just fine for the home users.....but the home users will never be doing enough to actually need GPU assistance so other than a "that's neat" factor it really isn't gonna help their bottom line any.
" I was amazed at the high level of service and the extent of the support structure as long as the Apple in question is no more than a couple years old" FTFY. Try getting a first or second gen Macbook Air serviced and see what you get told.
Say what you want about PCs but if you have say a Dell or HP and take it to a company backed service center they'll work on it, they don't care if its a dozen years old. You can sink $3k-$4k on a top of the line Apple and in 5 or 6 years give it up chuck, you're gonna have to find some dude that does nothing but buy dead Apple units off of ebay to service your system because Apple won't touch 'em. Found this out the hard way with a networking customer who had several very expensive Macbooks, after he had to drive halfway across the state a half a dozen times to get 'em serviced by some dude because Apple wouldn't support them anymore? I wish I could say I got him to switch to PC but no, now he just takes these very expensive units and tosses them in the garbage when they reach 5 years old and gets more. Never underestimate how much money rich people can waste.
Oh, wait, you didn't need to pass a test for that.
I'm just trying to think how that would have been possible. I think back then there was a medical exception you could plead for. I didn't. I passed the 20 WPM test fair and square and got K6BP as a vanity call, long before there was any way to get that call without passing a 20 WPM test.
Unfortunately, ARRL did fight to keep those code speeds in place, and to keep code requirements, for the last several decades that I know of and probably continuously since 1936. Of course there was all of the regulation around incentive licensing, where code speeds were given a primary role. Just a few years ago, they sent Rod Stafford to the final IARU meeting on the code issue with one mission: preventing an international vote for removal of S25.5 . They lost.
I am not blaming this on ARRL staff and officers. Many of them have privately told me of their support, including some directors and their First VP, now SK. It's the membership that has been the problem.
I am having a lot of trouble believing the government agency and NGO thing, as well. I talked with some corporate emergency managers as part of my opposition to the encryption proceeding (we won that too, by the way, and I dragged an unwilling ARRL, who had said they would not comment, into the fight). Big hospitals, etc.
What I got from the corporate folks was that their management was resistant to using Radio Amateurs regardless of what the law was. Not that they were chomping at the bit waiting to be able to carry HIPAA-protected emergency information via encrypted Amateur radio. Indeed, if you read the encryption proceeding, public agencies and corporations hardly commented at all. That point was made very clearly in FCC's statement - the agencies that were theorized by Amateurs to want encryption didn't show any interest in the proceeding.
So, I am having trouble believing that the federal agency and NGO thing is real because of that.
I think "on a shared workstation" means it was an electronic document and not a physical sealed envelope.
Fair point, and that sounds dicier. 'Round these parts (California), that employee might have a case for wrongful termination. But maybe not; snooping around corporate computer systems, even if the door is unlocked, just doesn't look good.
In the other case, though, now that I think about it, even if I had signed a contract that said my salary was confidential, surely that's only an agreement between me and the company? Would I really be violating such a clause if I disclosed my salary to another agent of the same company? It just doesn't seem like there's anything management can really do to prevent this sort of thing.
Seems like the only thing that keeps people from discussing this sort of thing more is the fear that someone's feeling are going to be hurt -- either theirs or yours -- if it turns out there's a big salary discrepancy.
We recently had someone canned because they opened someone else's offer letter (which was sitting on a shared workstation).
Well if a sealed letter had someone else's name on it I'd agree that's a firing offense.
Me voluntarily telling you how much I make, on the other hand, is our business. Management can cough and sputter all it wants, but unless I signed a contract that stipulates my salary is confidential information, there's nothing they can do about it.
The Technican Element 3 test wasn't more difficult than the Novice Element 1 and 2 together, so Technican became the lowest license class when they stopped having to take Element 1.
The change to 13 WPM was in 1936, and was specifically to reduce the number of Amateur applicants. It was 10 WPM before that. ARRL asked for 12.5 WPM in their filing, FCC rounded the number because they felt it would be difficult to set 12.5 on the Instructograph and other equipment available for code practice at the time.
It was meant to keep otherwise-worthy hams out of the hobby. And then we let that requirement keep going for 60 years.
The Indianapolis cop episode was back in 2009. It wasn't the first time we've had intruders, and won't be the last, and if you have to reach back that long for an example, the situation can't be that bad. It had nothing to do with code rules or NGOs getting their operators licenses.
A satphone is less expensive than a trained HF operator. Iridium costs $30 per month and $0.89 per minute to call another Iridium phone. That's the over-the-counter rate. Government agencies get a better rate than that. And the phone costs $1100, again that's retail not the government rate, less than an HF rig with antenna and tower will cost any public agency to install.
You think it's a big deal to lobby against paid operators because there will be objections? How difficult do you think it was to reform the code regulations? Don't you think there were lots of opposing comments?
And you don't care about young people getting into Amateur Radio. That's non-survival thinking.
Fortunately, when the real hams go to get something done, folks like you aren't hard to fight, because you don't really do much other than whine and send in the occassional FCC comment. Do you know I even spoke in Iceland when I was lobbying against the code rules? Their IARU vote had the same power as that of the U.S., and half of the hams in the country came to see me. That's how you make real change.