Bursar

Quote: Steve Larsen, who heads the attorney general's new Cyber consumer resource center, said in a message to Mangus: "It seems reasonable that a customer should not have to pay for service they can't get. If you can't watch your cable TV or your newspaper doesn't show up for days/weeks at a time, I assume you won't pay. I believe that is all your customers ask here regardless of fault." Yeah right. How many times have you been without cable (TV or Internet) and withheld part of your monthly payment? How many times did the cable company threaten to withdraw your service if you didn't pay the outstanding amount? And how many times have you read the agreement between yourselves and the cable provider? In most agreements (at least in the UK), you'll find things like "although you are paying for a service, we are not obliged to provide that service, and if it fails, then tough". I do think the idea of going after the DOTs for traffic jams is a good one though. Maybe you should try and get this Steve Larsen joker involved

Heh, it's ok, Bladey and I know each other. It's just harmless banter. Half the time we just do it to wind each other up

Why is it you never actually take any notice of what has been posted? You just reply and talk about whatever you happen to think is close enough to the topic to get by. Quote: I'm afraid you are living in a very false world if you honestly believe that AMD are going to make any major impact against Intel in the Server market. Where did I say major market share? Like everything, it takes time. Quote: AMD have been around for a very long time, as has the Athlon - why hasn't it made any major market penetration yet? The Athlon was aimed at a different market. It was a competitor to the P3. As the P3 was already well established on the corporate dekstop, it is not surprising that it did not make major in roads. The future is the Palomino which should make much better progress. Quote: If I must I'll pop off and grab some benchmark scores Good, I'll be waiting. Oh, and don't forget those ones where the P3 beats the P4 as well Quote: As for AMD being a company in dept, I stand by that statement, I don't see a 'Final Balance' on the link you've posted. I'm not a financial expert, but isn't operating income something close to this? I've looked it up and it says "The excess of revenues over expenses derived from normal business operations." This to me means 'the amount of money left at the end of the day'. $880 Million left in your bank sounds pretty healthy to me. Brian, the AMD chips do run hot, there's no denying it, but the fact you can get a dual Palomino in a 1u case with 4 SCSI drives means that AMD must be heading in the right direction to help cure that problem. All of these posts probably make me seem like an AMD zealot. That is not the case at all. All of my PCs are Intel, and I have only recently been buying kit to build my first AMD machine. I've had nothing but grief (not all down to the fault of the kit - some of it was me) trying to get the thing built. It just irks me when people post stuff that they haven't really done the research into. If Intel were fantastic and produced solid, high performance CPUs and chipsets, AMD wouldn't even get a look in. The fact that AMD are around must point to some kind of deficiancy in Intels pricing and or products. I really don't expect all of the major companies of the world to start using AMD servers, and let's be honest, even if the Palomino out performed the P4 by 2:1, a dual CPU machine just wouldn't be enough in a lot of cases. AMD have a lot of work to do to get anywhere near to threatening Intel in the big server market, but they will get there. Out of small acorns, do mighty oaks grow.

A share is a share. Doesn't matter if it's 1% or 90%. You can't launch a new product and expect to dominate the market overnight. So therefore as they sell servers, they will gain market share. The statement is not false. Take a look at: http://www.amd.com/about/operations.html and tell me where the red lines are. You'll notice they are in past. All fingures from 2000 onwards are firmly in the green. Your assumption that they are a company in debt is wrong. Your next point about performance is where your argument really starts to fall down. Check any number of independat review sites, and you will generally find the following benchmark results: Memory bandwidth - The P4 will walk all over the AMD chips due to RDRAM WinStone benchmarks - The Athlon 1.33 will be approx 10% ahead of a P4 1.7GHz. These are business related benchmarks 3D Rendering - These vary, but the 1.33 is always ahead of the P4, sometimes by 8 seconds, sometimes by 2 minutes or more depending on the scene. PhotoShop 6 - Again the 1.33 Athlon beats the P4 1.7GHz MP3 Encoding - Once more the Athlon beats the P4. Quake III OpenGL - OK, so it's not a business application, but it's one of the few areas where the P4 can outperform the Athlon, so I thought I'd include it for you Just about every DirectX Game - Oops, AMD is quicker again. Now lets look at the practical side. Athlon 1.33GHz CPU, £95 + VAT. P4 1.7GHz CPU £304 + VAT (or £390 + VAT to include 2x128MB RIMMS). So that's 3 times the price for around 90% of the performance. This doesn't even take into account the Palomino chip. A Palomino MP clocked at 1.2GHz (stock speed) will whip an Athlon right upto about 1.8GHz. So benchmarks between a Palomino and a P4 are likely to show an even larger difference between the two. So where does that leave your Intel performance claims? Laying on the ground in tatters I think you'll find. If you have some independant benchmarks that show the P4 to out perform an Athlon (or preferably the Palomino) then please post them.

You're completely missing the point I am trying to make. I wasn't saying that Intel are rubbish and AMD or great, or vice-versa. I was just trying to point out that Intel are not the great company that many people believe them to be. They have their own problems with their own products. The MTH issue may have been handled well by Intel, but the fact that the products had to be replaced in the first means that they weren't tested as throughly as they should have been. That was the point I was making. Maybe the reason that AMD haven't issued a recall on any of their products is that none of them have had problems serious enough to warrant it. AMD do run a list of problems with the CPUs and chipsets, saying otherwise is daft. You need to accept that AMD is starting to pick up sales not just in the home market but in the workplace too. With the Palomino CPU they have a viable workstation and low end server solution. Until AMD can produce 4/8/16 way servers they will be restrained to that section of the market. But with HP/Gateway/Compaq already supplying Athlon based machines, it's surely only a matter of time before they step up to offering the Palomino. For the case thing, it's not a matter of being able to fit the motherboard that's the problem, it's fitting the heatsink. The mobo has 4 holes around the CPU socket. The heatsink should have 4 bolts which fit through these holes and bolt into the motherboard tray. In order to fit into the motherbaord tray, you need to have a case that supports the P4. Not all cases do. No heastink support holes, no upgrade to a P4. Check your GW802 case. You'll likely find an abscence of the required holes meaning that you will in fact have to change your case should you fancy moving upto a P4.

have you tried it with a hyphen between virtual and hideout?

I not saying that AMDs chipsets are perfect, just that seeing as they developed the CPU, their chipsets should work without the flaws you might associate with a VIA chipset. It's not as if Intel can make a perfect chipset either. Look at the MTH problems they had in the not too distant past. Plenty of customers had to have the boards swapped out and replaced. If that was me looking for a stable system at that time, it would have seriously dented my faith in Intel being able to supply a fully working and tested product that I could run my business on. And as for cases, the P4 has 4 extra holes around the motherboard for mounting a heatsink onto the CPU. These must be secured into the motherboard tray. If your case does not have the required holes in the tray, good luck at running a P4 without the heatsink being properly attached.

Quote: AMD based servers will not get a foothold in the market. Unfortunately they still can't be trusted to be 100% reliable. Network Administrators don't necessarily want speed at all costs, most will settle for slower servers that they know will be reliable. Dual AMD systems is so very new that any organisation worth their salt wont touch one with a barge-pole until they have been out to market for at least 18 months - we all remember the early chipsets for Athlon CPU's. The current server boards out there do not use VIA chipsets. They use AMD chipsets. If anyone can deign a chipset that will work correctly with an AMD processor, it's AMD themselves. I don't expect large corporations to suddenly through away their Intel servers and replace them with AMD. That would be stupid. I do think that some of the large computer manufacturers such as DELL and Compaq may start producing servers and workstations based on the Palomino. Price/performance is better than Intel, and for these guys, margin is very important. They also have a lot weight to throw around, so if there are problems with chipsets and reliability, they will have the muscle and expertise to get the problems sorted. Quote: The argument about Intel CPU's and requiring a new motherboard is mirrored accross to AMD, but with one exception. Sure, the new Palomino will fit into quite a few existing motherboards, however you will get no advantage from doing so, you will be effectively crippling the new CPU because the older chipsets can't use the new CPU features. Not true. Current motherboards (and I mean new boards like the Epox 8K7A) will take the Palomino chip, and with a BIOS flash, hey presto, full functionality. But you're still missing the point. If you have an older board that won't recognise the benefits of a Palomino, you have 2 choices. 1 - upgrade the motherboard, and run your old CPU on it until you can afford to change the CPU as well. or 2 - upgrade the CPU and run it without new features until you can afford to upgrade the motherboard. In either case, you will get performance benefits. With Intel, everything has to be replaced in one go. Want to go to P4 from a P3? Ok sir, that'll be a new motherboard, CPU, RAM, power supply and probably a new case as well. Want to go to a Palomino from an Athlon, best scenario is that you only need the CPU. Worst case is you need a motherboard, CPU, RAM and power supply. Not hugely different, but at least you don't have to throw your case away. It would probably also be a couple of hundred pounds cheaper.

With the Palomino MP chips, I think we could start to see some AMD servers start to appear from some of the major companies fairly soon. The main problem (for home users) is that the only board that will take dual Pallys is from Tyan. It's a server class board with onboard SCSI and everything else that servers need. This puts the price waaay up. Once a few lower spec dual Palomino start appearing, it will become a viable option for home users as well. And as for buying a P3, are you not better off getting one of the new Tualtin (sp) P3s? They clock slightly higher at 1.2GHz and would give you slightly more future proofing. As to how long the P3 will hang around after this is anyones guess though. In order for Intel to start shifting P4s (which a lot of customers aren't currently buying) they could kill the P3 fairly quickly. This will then leave them with the P4 at the top end, and maybe a redesigned Celeron/P3 at the value end. Undoutedly these will all require new motherboards ;(

There's not too much more I can add to the above post, as it covers just about everything you asked. The only thing I will comment on is the AMD front. I've been a stalwart Intel man for years, but have recently bought kit to build an AMD system. It hasn't gone too wel to start with as the AMD chips are bit more fragile than the Intel ones. If you're careful though, you shouldn;t end up frying the CPU like I did The price/performance ratio is definately on AMDs side right now, and with both P3 and Athlon chips generally outperforming the P4, it would make sense to go that route. The new palomino chip is also something to consider, but its price will be high as it's new. If you're interested in clocking your PC, then again, AMD is the best buy. Intel chips are multiplier locked, so the best you can do is up the FSB a bit. All AMD chips from 1.2GHz upwards are multiplier unlocked. The 1GHz chips can be unlocked by joining the L1 bridges with a pencil. Depending on the stepping code of the CPU, you could get an extra 500MHz out the chip with careful clocking. There are alos plenty of alternatives to Creative Labs sound cards. I bought a Sonic Fury to put in mine.

http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/...SRCH&SPR=IE

Someone else posted this a few days ago, so I can't take any credit for finding it, but St Bernard have some software called UpdateExpert. It lets you check the status of your Windows servers and install hotfixes/service packs over the network. It supports NT/2000/IIS/SQL/Exchange/Office/Outlook so can be used to keep an eye ono your whole network. The demo runs for 15 days and will let you manage 5 machines (but you can remove machines and add new ones). On the trial version I have, for some reason the 15 day limit keeps reseting everyday Only problem is that they only sell a minimum of a 75 machine license. This is about £1100 + VAT for the software and a 3 year subscription to the update service.

So your basic argument is: I want software, don't wanna pay for it. No wonder companies have to keep coming up with new ways to try and protect their software.

The current arguments seem to be related to people wanting to try the software before they buy it. Fair enough, I can understand that. Do you know that MS offers a fully functioning 120 day evaluation copy of most of the their products? This will no doubt include XP when it is released. You can then have 3 months to decide on whether the OS is the right one for you or not. If it is, then go out and buy it. If not, delete it and re-install your previous OS. I know different companies have different stances on demo/trial software, but MS seem fairly reasonable about it, and we were meant to be discussing their software.

He didn't say it did. Just that the incorrect setting had caused the problems he was experiencing.

Quote: why do i want to crack it?? Easy. I change hardware out of my computer at least 2 or 3 times a week, especially when im working on a system it changes a lot, so that would require reactivation at least 2 or 3 times then you have to call. You do know you get 30 days of full use before you have to activate? That should be more than enough time to get your hardware installed and setup correctly. Once it's running, activate it then. And as has been reported in these forums in the past, a minor change here or there won't require a re-activation. I often mess about with my PC as well, but change hardware 2 or 3 times a week? You must spend more time with it in bits than you do with it actually working

Odd, as I have 2 Maxtor 20GB disks in my Intel based, and had no problems installing any of the service packs. The only disk related problem I've had is when I wasn't much attention to the motherboard IDE drivers, and installed the wrong ones for my mobo. Oops Still, nothing a quick re-format and re-install couldn't cure

Only played the demo, but it ran fine.

The PIVs have fantastic memory throughput, but there's too more to a performance PC that the RAM. At the moment there isn't anything available that is optimised for the PIV (as far as gamers are concerned). Until the OS and and software is re-written, you'll still get better overall performance from an AMD/P3 rig than you will from a PIV.

Your best bet is probably a GeForce III card. Brand doesn't matter too much as they all perform to a similar level. It will comes down to any extras you want. Some come with DVI, TV-Out, 3D glasees and so-on. This all adds to the cost but there's no point paying for features you won't use.

www.overclockers.co.uk have been selling that model for almost a month at £575 + VAT. Scans normal price is £579 + VAT. Not a huge difference, but Scan also load it with high delivery charges. I reckon there isn't going to be much uptake on them (except in spe[censored]t areas) until the price comes down to the £300 mark. Still, as you say, the technology is there and the price drops will come.

Most of the NICs you'll find will run perfectly well under Windows 95. Check the manufacturers website for driver details before buying them to be completely sure though. I doubt you'll have any problems with compatibility. Forcing them to upgrade to Windows 98 is just likely to cause you extra grief. If you're going to force an upgrade on them, you'd be better off making it to Windows 2000.

Have to agree with ThC there. It's the VIA components that are slightly dodgy. They are getting better though. There are also a few other sound cards around apart from Creative ones. AMD are learning about this though, and they are helping the motherbaord and chipset manufacturers much more than they used to. AMD are producing their own chipsets for reference boards which the other manufacturers are working from. Some production boards still have AMD chipsets on them in addition to a VIA one (the Epx board I mentioned is one example of this). If you get a mobo for an Intel CPU, the board will ship with a CD that contains all the relevant drivers for the IDE ports, onboard sound, onboard networking and so-on. AMD based boards are the same. Install Win2k Install drivers from mobo CD (or updated ones from the web) Job done. This procedure is the same regardless of the brand of mobo/CPU.

Isn't the ability to run out of the box based on the motherboards stability rather than any other component? There are plenty of duff boards out there that will accept Intel chips. It's like most things though. If you buy from a well known manufacturer, you'll have less problems, or the problems will be shorter lived. The better manufacturers have the resources to spend on R&D and tech support so BIOS problems or mobo drivers will be patched and re-released as problems are found.

A lot of the Win2k patches have been rolled into SP2, so you could either download the network version of that file (about 111MB) or get it from a magazine cover disk and keep it locally. You could do the same with IE and DX8. That would take care of most of the stuff. There'd still be a few bits and bobs, but it shouldn't be too bad. As for Win98, I'm not sure I'm afraid.