Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Three-month-old Continuum screenshot (Score 1) 370

by hairyfeet (#48922539) Attached to: Windows 10: Charms Bar Removed, No Start Screen For Desktops

You REALLY don't know anything about hardware, do you? the E350 is the first generation of bobcat, AMD's answer to Atom. And while it stomps the Atom that is pretty much ALL that it stomps, with performance around that of a 1.3GHz Celeron dual...and it still runs great!

And as I said I got the RAM stupid cheap, but just FYI just to test I popped it out and popped back in a 2GB stick I had lying in the RAM drawer. Now even though the 2GB ran at 1066 instead of the 1333 my 8GB runs on it STILL ran just fine, it just took a little longer to load. Honestly I don't even know if I can blame that on the memory as I had a little over a GB that was just being used for a cache and when dealing with a 5400 RPM drive instead of an SSD (I'd put in an SSD but this model requires major surgery to get at the drive, I dread the day I need to change it) but the only way to rule out the HDD would be to run a dozen boots and average the thing out and sorry Charlie, you ain't paying me so if it takes more than 10 minutes tough luck.

Comment: Re:Three-month-old Continuum screenshot (Score 5, Insightful) 370

by hairyfeet (#48907209) Attached to: Windows 10: Charms Bar Removed, No Start Screen For Desktops

I'm running it on the weakest system I have ATM, an AMD netbook with an E350 APU, 8GB of RAM (yes I know that is overkill, I scored the RAM on sale crazy cheap) and a 320Gb 5400 RPM drive. I figured that if it ran well on a system this weak it'll run good on anything...the verdict? Even with all the drivers running in compatibility mode it runs BETTER than Win 7 on the same hardware, it even has hardware acceleration for video that is smoother than the Win 7 that came with it!

Anybody whose followed my posts know that I don't talk nice about a version of Windows unless it deserves it, I HATE Windows 8, thought it was a frankentard of an OS, hated everything about Vista except for the cool black theme (which I still use on my Win 7 systems) and think Win 7 is the best OS they've made since XP X64 so when I say Win 10 looks like its gonna be a GREAT OS I don't say that lightly, in fact the only way I see them fucking it up is on the pricing side, the OS itself? its damned good. Takes just a couple minutes to get rid of the social crap (which I can't even get mad at that, lots of people like to be tweeting twits taking social shits) and once I added 8 gadgetpack to get back my CPUMeter and NetworkMeter? I was a happy camper.

And I would just like to say how happy I am to see the death of the "Charms" bar, that thing was retarded! But then again damned near everything about Ballmer's Folly was shit design from the start so the fact that charms was stupid really isn't a surprise. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Comment: Re:Avoiding responsibility? (Score 1) 158

by hairyfeet (#48900645) Attached to: Surface RT Devices Won't Get Windows 10
Blame Ballmer and his "Herpa de derp, gotta ape everything Apple does herpa derpa" bullshit. Its part of a pattern, along with MSFT Kin, rushing the 360 to market, Surface RT being released with no software and a half assed market....its really not surprising, history will judge Ballmer as the MSFT version of the Pepsi guy at Apple.

Comment: Re:fglrx sucks, but it sucks less in this case (Score 1) 108

by hairyfeet (#48900549) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: GPU of Choice For OpenCL On Linux?
Very much a troll as AMD has been paying for open source developers to speed the turn around of the FOSS drivers in the hope to get them to parity with the proprietary release and eventually replace it, and when it comes to GPGPU its not a secret Nvidia pushes CUDA while AMD pushes OpenCL (which this ask Slashdot is specifically asking for) so the choice seems to be pretty cut and dried.

Comment: Re:This reminds me... (Score 1) 145

by hairyfeet (#48896693) Attached to: NVIDIA Responds To GTX 970 Memory Bug

Sorry but while you are telling folks what it was called what you are NOT telling them is the bs marketing that Nvidia used back then, which was they would market them as "128GB cards" or 64GB cards" and then in teeny tiny print it would tell you that this was "the total memory including system cache". IIRC back then ATI wasn't doing that, they just sold them as 64Mb or 128Mb cards that could "go up to 256Mb".

Of course at the end of the day it didn't matter as both turbo and hyper blew ass so I told my customers if they wanted a discrete get the dedicated and avoid the crap cache like the plague, but I remember HP was bad about selling those crap cache Nvidias.

Comment: Re:Hey! I've been gypped! (Score 2) 145

by hairyfeet (#48896577) Attached to: NVIDIA Responds To GTX 970 Memory Bug

Because it can't actually USE all the RAM? Its like saying "Windows XP can have up to 4GB of RAM" which while TECHNICALLY true is bullshit because of the way 32bit Windows works the max you'll ever be able to get the OS to use is around 3.5GB, with most systems only hitting around 3.2GB-3.4GB.

If they were selling this as a 3.5GB card? I'd say fine and dandy, card makers often will disable parts that either don't work or to have different tiers at different price points but in this case they are advertising and selling it as a 4GB card when its really only a 3.5GB thanks to the way they gimped the chip.

Comment: Re:Not surprising (Score 1) 158

by hairyfeet (#48893921) Attached to: Surface RT Devices Won't Get Windows 10 DO know MSFT didn't actually WRITE that software, right? That all they did was stick their brand on it, yes? The Zune was nothing but the Toshiba Beat that MSFT licensed and just stuck their name on it. Its no different than how a "Korean Fender" is nothing but a Samick with a Fender sticker slapped on the neck.

Comment: Re:Amazing work.. (Score 1) 106

by hairyfeet (#48893867) Attached to: <em>Star Trek Continues</em> Kickstarter 2.0

They LIKED Phantom Menace? Really? Were they high? I don't see how even a kid could like all those boring as paint drying senate meetings or not cringe at the "Meesa steppin and fetchin, I step in the dookie!" bullshit! My two boys were kids when those came out and they thought they were absolute shite and its not like they hate sci-fi or are immune to nostalgia, the oldest loves anything related to Aliens and AVP and we know how much those stank, but even as kids they thought PM and AOTK were just painful.

At least somebody enjoyed them, one of the worst movie watching experiences I ever had, hell they weren't even "so bad its good" they were just "so bad its awful". Hell I even enjoy some bad sci-fi, I loved the fuck out of the cheese fest that was battleship (c'mon he drifted a WWII battleship like it was a 70 Mustang, how can you not enjoy that cheese whiz goodness?) but the first 2 prequels weren't cheese, they were just rotten, boring, and as racist as somebody's grandpa, just sad.

Comment: Re:Translation: (Score 1) 158

by hairyfeet (#48893803) Attached to: Surface RT Devices Won't Get Windows 10

Depends on what you require to move from your definition of "toy". if its IPS? Give it up Chuck, the simple fact is IPS screens are expensive to build and it doesn't look like they will ever get the economies of scale on their side. i have a feeling they will end up going the way of plasma and all you'll get sub $600 is TN.

But as far as performance goes? Hell my 2011 AMD 12 inch netbook does 1080P over HDMI and before MSFT stupidly killed the platform with Windows pricing I picked that up for like $230 and the nice thing about those are its trivial to upgrade them to 8GB which I did. I have also messed with ARM quads with 1GB of RAM in the $120 range that were great performers and there really is no reason they couldn't make the same thing with an Atom quad for the same price and have an Atom dual version sub $99. Frankly the only thing in the BOM that is keeping sub $99 tablets from being toys is the high cost of RAM ATM, the price of RAM falls again and that major bottleneck could disappear overnight. I've tried virtually identical tablets with 512mb and 1GB and it makes all the difference in the world but LDDR 3 ain't cheap.

Comment: Re:Not surprising (Score 1) 158

by hairyfeet (#48885953) Attached to: Surface RT Devices Won't Get Windows 10

Interesting? Really mods? Who was it that abandoned their not even 2 year old OS? Oh yeah that was GOOGLE, who still patches their 4 year old Windows 7 phones? MSFT. Maybe you are talking about Zune, whose software runs fine on Windows 10 even though they haven't sold Zunes in years?

Sorry but you got your companies wrong, its Google that drops support without warning, see the 970 million plus that are now vulnerable to exploit for just one of many examples.

Comment: Re:Translation: (Score 2, Insightful) 158

by hairyfeet (#48885399) Attached to: Surface RT Devices Won't Get Windows 10

Actually it was announced a few weeks back (sorry I can't find the article, maybe somebody with better Google Fu?) that Intel was stopping the Intel Atom subsidy because they were taking a bath on the things and their tablets just weren't moving. The simple fact is Intel faces the same problem Apple had with PPC on the desktop, so much of the code is written for Android ARM and too few are willing to port to X86 ARM that they just couldn't get any traction.

With Intel no longer dumping product in the channel I have a feeling sub 12 inch X86 tablets are gonna go the way of the 8 track, all you'll get is 12 inch convertibles. This is fine by me, the fact that so many 7 and 10 inch tablets still come with only 512Mb of RAM is retarded but the key is gonna be getting a decent Windows 10-12 inch convertible at a price point to really compete against the low end tablets, say $100-$150 with $100 being a Win 10 Atom dual with 2GB of RAM and $150 being the quad 2GB?

Comment: Re:Amazing work.. (Score 3, Interesting) 106

by hairyfeet (#48852979) Attached to: <em>Star Trek Continues</em> Kickstarter 2.0

It was enjoyable in that "its a brain dead boom fest" kinda way which frankly isn't what I go to a ST movies expecting or wanting. Hell the whole "Red Matter can send you back in time OR blow up a planet, just depending what the plot calls for" bullshit totally took me out of the story, not to mention the whole "alternate timeline" mess which made no fucking sense and doesn't behave anywhere near every. single. other. timeline. we have seen in the ST universe and we have seen plenty. I'll always remember what one reviewer said "It would be like you made a Batman reboot and out of the blue Batman could just burst into flames like Human Torch with NO explanation!"

I mean if you wanna suspend disbelief with the new actors looking almost nothing like the originals? that is fine and dandy, I have no problem doing that with Star Trek Continues so I'm not gonna fault 'em for that, some of the originals are sadly gone and for some damned reason they didn't feel like they could tell any other story in such a wealthy universe? Fine, okay, I'll go along with that....but the fucking Klingons man, WHAT THE FUCK! Why do the Klingons look like fucking WOW Orcs, tell me why? I mean we even had a perfect explanation as to why TOS Klingons didn't have the bumpy forehead thanks to them fucking around with the same Eugenics that made Khan, but even if you wanted to write that event out by saying Marcus fucked with the time line that still doesn't explain WTH is up with them looking like fricking Orcs? And even if you give them that why in the hell are they spending countless trillions on starships when you have transporters that can reach across the galaxy faster than a fucking Tardis?

I'm glad you found some enjoyment out of them because I found them to just be dreadful and I have a feeling history will NOT be kind to them, in a decade we'll look back at them and groan as much as we do at something like Attack Of The Clones (although to give them credit neither movie was as bad as Phantom Menace but I'd rather watch Ice Pirates than that snoozefest).

All theoretical chemistry is really physics; and all theoretical chemists know it. -- Richard P. Feynman