 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> But then again, computer to a layman is nothing but a gateway to games,
> music and video -- with some office software used to spellcheck emails
> to justify the price as opposed to a mere games console. Beautiful
> keyboard, mouse, monitor and casing are far more important than whatever
> is on the inside -- the computer itself...
I miss the days of the nondescript beige box.
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Raiford wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
>
>> But then again, computer to a layman is nothing but a gateway to
>> games, music and video -- with some office software used to spellcheck
>> emails to justify the price as opposed to a mere games console.
>> Beautiful keyboard, mouse, monitor and casing are far more important
>> than whatever is on the inside -- the computer itself...
Yeah, it does seem that way.
A bit like those people who buy a Vaxhaul Nova and then try to make it
look like a Ferrari.
> I miss the days of the nondescript beige box.
Well you needn't! Just work for your local council. I'm sure *they*
still have green-screen terminals aplenty! ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Invisible" <voi### [at] dev null> wrote in message
news:4976f242$1@news.povray.org...
> why don't they just make cases out of copper??)
Too heavy and very soft.
~Steve~
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:08:03 +0000, Invisible wrote:
>> Old Games. Programmers used to rely on the fact that the processor ran
>> at a brisk 4mhz, 12+mhz caused the game to run too fast to be playable.
>
> WTF? Why would they - oh, wait... CSS malfunctions if you play it on a
> dual-core CPU. (Something to do with directly accessing the CPU's
> realtime timer - which, obviously, is different on each core!)
Yeah, something like that. When nobody needed more than 640K, part of
the "reason" was there was no need to write code that ran at a constant
speed regardless of the processor speed. Until you had "turbo" machines
with 8-12 MHz, running a game like Pole Position at 3-4x normal speed
made it difficult to play.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:28:28 +0000, Invisible wrote:
>>> WTF? Why would they - oh, wait... CSS malfunctions if you play it on a
>>> dual-core CPU. (Something to do with directly accessing the CPU's
>>> realtime timer - which, obviously, is different on each core!)
>>
>> Well, way back in the dark ages, they didn't really expect the CPU
>> clock speed to change, so their timings were based on how fast the
>> processor executes instructions. Of course, when faster systems started
>> coming out, they had to change their timing strategy.
>
> Heh. Delay loops FTW! :-/
There were TSRs written for MS-DOS that did just that for machines that
had faster processors but no turbo button. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 10:37:15 -0600, Mike Raiford wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
>
>> But then again, computer to a layman is nothing but a gateway to games,
>> music and video -- with some office software used to spellcheck emails
>> to justify the price as opposed to a mere games console. Beautiful
>> keyboard, mouse, monitor and casing are far more important than
>> whatever is on the inside -- the computer itself...
>
> I miss the days of the nondescript beige box.
I've got two like that here. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> - It appears that "solid state harddrives" are now reaching useful sizes
> and sane pricing levels. (E.g., when I first looked at this it was
> something like £1,000 for 10 GB, which is obviously absurd. Now it's
> something like £2/GB with sizes up to 250GB.)
News today: an 8GB *RAM-based* solid-state drive:
http://tinyurl.com/8d64qv
Transfer rate 6GB/second, except SATA doesn't support that much! :D
(hmm that might be 6.4 giga *bits* per second and arstechnica got it wrong?)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> And other times you just have to select the
> biggest, baddest mutha you can, just to see what the hell the price tag
> comes out at.
A friend tried that on apple.com and got a $10k quote.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> A bit like those people who buy a Vaxhaul Nova and then try to make it
> look like a Ferrari.
The key word here is *look*. I prefer to get a car that looks like a
Vauxhall Nova and *goes* like a Ferrari :-) Well actually I'd prefer one
that looked and went like a Ferrari, but they're quite expensive.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> A bit like those people who buy a Vaxhaul Nova and then try to make it
>> look like a Ferrari.
>
> The key word here is *look*. I prefer to get a car that looks like a
> Vauxhall Nova and *goes* like a Ferrari :-) Well actually I'd prefer
> one that looked and went like a Ferrari, but they're quite expensive.
You forgot the exhaust system! Gotta take out the carefully designed
exhaust and replace it with a baked bean tin so it *sounds* like it has
a powerful engine too! ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
