PDA

View Full Version : OS future



Anonymous
07-30-2002, 02:37 PM
i know it early but whats next after XP?

how long till we get a 64bit color driving OS that eats up about about 256 mb of ram on its own?


well im all confused now that the nforce2 motherboard is looming - i was all intel baby - lets face it my 1.8 is clearly - faster agaist ? what the fastest amd on the market the xp2200 - which is gulp...1.8 - intel goes up to 2.53 baby with 3.0 by the end of the year

NOW I WONT BUY A 3.0 - THATS FOOLS MONEY - BUT I WAS LEANING TO A 2.26 W/512 CASHE TO GET AHOLD OF THE 533 FSB ACTION - AND REALLY 2.26 BY THE END OF 2002 IS REALLY MIGHTY

now theres the confusing part - it is my destiny to build a killer - possibly portable shuttle system - with a nforce2 - with a amd 1700 athlon xp right now till the k8's drop - with ddr400 support agp4x a 333fsb(how come they claim to be the first yet intels are 'higher'? sorry im dumb)usb 2.o 5.1 surround and a gforce4mx built in - seriously thats incredible stuff with a K8 and a around oh a GB of pc3200 ram

can anyone help me decide - or talk me in or out of the shuttle pc idea- im not into wasting money! besides my video card cost more than a damn xbox or ps2 so i want my games and apps to bleed of that fat 19' black cabinet flat display monitor

1600x1200x32 till we 1600x1200x64
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P4 1.8 w/256 L2 cache
D845bg w/512 mb DDR pc2100
Gforce4 Ti4400
Western Digital 100 Gb Hard Drive W/2mb Cache
Creative Audigy EAX / DD 5.1 - Inspire 5300 Surround Speakers
Twin View Enabled:
NEC 19' Flat display monitor + 15' Flat display monitor + tv out
windows xp professional




:cheers:

Wiggo
07-30-2002, 03:27 PM
Basically full on .NET (http://www.microsoft.com/net/) is next in various forms but very few are lookin' forward to this. :(
:beer: :beer: :beer:

Mr. C
07-30-2002, 07:27 PM
Or .NOT as us dial-up types like to call it :D

Wiggo
07-30-2002, 08:26 PM
.NOT just not by dailup users either. :(
Thankfully this is runnin' behind schedule anyway. :D
:beer: :beer: :beer:

aznx
07-30-2002, 11:08 PM
if i remember right doesn't a 64bit os mean that its just the commands sent to your cpu are 64bit and your cpu has to be 64bit? ...

when you think of speed, your 1.8 would get whooped by the xp 2200+ (both versions)...a fully tweaked xp 2200+ whoops *ss.. you also have to consider how much p4s cost..amazingly crazy prices. if you want 133 quad fsb, then get a 1.6A ghz northwood and o/c to 2.2ghz easy

on the part of 333fsb, its 166 x 2, see, intel p4s are 100 x 4 or 133 x 4, as you can see, they didn't increase the fsb by much, still 100 or 133 but all they did was quad pump it..somewhat like a "cpu multipler". in the amd case the 166 is the fsb, the fsb increased..not the multiplier, im pretty sure you know that the increase of fsb deals a lot greater performance increase than an increase in multiplier..

Wiggo
07-30-2002, 11:31 PM
If you're goin' to be using a 64bit os then you will need a CPU that can handle 64bit instructions of course but the latest findings are that it will be years yet before 64bit processing gets out of the server market and work its way thru business till it gets to the home market which is why Intel are working so frantically trying to get "Yamhill" ready to tackle AMD's "Hammer" family as they have realised that their Itanium isn't being accepted in the leaps and bounds that they had wished.
No 32bit processing is goin' to be with us for quite some time yet. ;)
:beer: :beer: :beer:

Anonymous
07-31-2002, 12:11 PM
if i remember right doesn't a 64bit os mean that its just the commands sent to your cpu are 64bit and your cpu has to be 64bit? ...

when you think of speed, your 1.8 would get whooped by the xp 2200+ (both versions)...a fully tweaked xp 2200+ whoops *ss.. you also have to consider how much p4s cost..amazingly crazy prices. if you want 133 quad fsb, then get a 1.6A ghz northwood and o/c to 2.2ghz easy

on the part of 333fsb, its 166 x 2, see, intel p4s are 100 x 4 or 133 x 4, as you can see, they didn't increase the fsb by much, still 100 or 133 but all they did was quad pump it..somewhat like a "cpu multipler". in the amd case the 166 is the fsb, the fsb increased..not the multiplier, im pretty sure you know that the increase of fsb deals a lot greater performance increase than an increase in multiplier..

THANKS FOR THE EXPLANATION IM CONFUSED NOW - I GUESS - BY WHERE THE BEST CHOICE IS? 4X133 0R 2X166?

MATT MARTIN

1600x1200x32 till we 1600x1200x64
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P4 1.8 w/256 L2 cache
D845bg w/512 mb DDR pc2100
Gforce4 Ti4400
Western Digital 100 Gb Hard Drive W/2mb Cache
Creative Audigy EAX / DD 5.1 - Inspire 5300 Surround Speakers
Twin View Enabled:
NEC 19' Flat display monitor + 15' Flat display monitor + tv out
windows xp professional

:cheers:

Wiggo
07-31-2002, 12:19 PM
Really we're at a confusing point of the year with so much just on the horizon like maybe this, http://forums.tweaktown.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3801 , but a lot of things should become clearer by Xmas. ;)
:beer: :beer: :beer:

aznx
07-31-2002, 12:20 PM
166 ofcourse

Mr. C
07-31-2002, 08:05 PM
geez - i still use a good amount of 16bit stuff:confused:

Webgraph
08-25-2002, 12:16 AM
Uh oh! This will be a big mistake for Microsoft. The reason being is that this will just give Linux more than enough time to come up with a Windows killer! But that would make my day anyway! :beer:

I'd bet that my system requirements right now would definitely not be supported, but first I better update my sig! :D Here's my predicted system requireents for Longhorn:

Intel Pentium 4 1.6 GHz or AMD Athlon XP 1600+
384 MB RAM (512 MB Recommended)
About 8 GB of disk space, considering the amount all the unnecessary crap Microsoft is going to implement in Longhorn.
64 MB 3D Accelerator
Cable/ADSL/T1/T3 connection

There will probably be other things to add to this proposed list I have in mind, but what I can see, Microsoft will have gone too far that Linux and Apple can simply take over. Real progress has been made over the years concerning Linux, but it will eventually take over Windows, LOL! :cheers::LOL:

drpeterbright
08-25-2002, 01:18 AM
It's time for MS to pull the old switcheroo on everyone and come out with an os that would really be two in one (shades of DOS & Windows 3.11) with real choices of a stripped down for specific applications os coupled with the I can do everything os. Bill G has never listened to me in the past however.

zeradul
08-25-2002, 01:13 PM
We'd be in a world of hurt without MS. And thats one hell of an understatement.

Wiggo
08-25-2002, 03:22 PM
It would be nicer though if the hurt didn't rebound as much into our wallets. ;)

:beer: :beer: :beer:

zeradul
08-25-2002, 04:06 PM
That sounds nice, but then MS wouldn't be able to hire the best and the brightest in the world, and then Windows wouldn't be as good. And then you'd REALLY complain.

This has been tried thousands of times in a system called Communism, and it has failed miserably EVERY time. In fact, MS software prices would be far under HALF what they are now, if the Socialist Democrats in our government didn't insist on taxing MS SO heavily. When you pay 300$ for XP Pro, 180$ of it goes straight to the US Government as income tax. Sadly, we have some powerful Socalists driving up taxes and the prices of goods, with them. So Wiggo, you have noone to blame more than those who have chosen to heavily tax the wealthy, who are in this case, Socialists.

But, Socialists or not, therein lies the absolute beauty of Capitalism. Anyone of us here can write our own OS, and then sell it for WHATEVER price we choose. With all the potential money to be made selling OS's surely the most brilliant of people are trying to write and market a better OS, but as it stands, noone can EVEN COME CLOSE to competing with MS. And until they do, MS will be in charge, making our lives easier by the minute.

drpeterbright
08-26-2002, 05:58 AM
Mr. z, exactly where did you get that $180 dollars out of the $300 sales price goes for taxes figure? What you been smokin'?

zeradul
08-27-2002, 02:47 AM
Nothing.

When you spend 300$ on XP, an additional 300$ is added to Microsoft's Income, and since MS employees are near or in the highest tax bracket, their salaries are taxes just over 50%

"In 1982, Congress passed President Reagan's plan to cut the highest rate on personal income tax from 70% to 50%"
http://www.factmonster.com/ce6/bus/A0825078.html

And 50% is roughly where it is today for the highest tax bracket. If you earn less than 20 Grand, you don't pay ANY income tax, and just to put this in perspective, the top 10% of wage earners pay 60% of the Nation's taxes. And despite that the poorest 10% of US citizens are STILL on average more wealthy than 70% of the world's population.

So, for the 300$ MS earned on your purchase of XP, 150$ of it went STRAIGHT to the US government as Income tax. If we had a flat tax, (everyone would be taxed 17% of every dollar they earn) Then to keep MS's TOP NOTCH employees, MS would need to make a NET profit of 150$ PER copy of XP, and to do so, we need to add the 17% that will be taxed, (150*1.17) which means XP would hit the market at $175.50. BUT we've elected too many socialist democrats who are too short sighted to realize that lower taxes and less government, means lower prices for everyone.

As soon as we realize that MS should not have to pay 5$ in tax for every $10 dollars they earn, a system which allows the poorest 50% to pay almost NO taxes.(less than 3% of the US's total tax) But instead make everyone pay $1.70 in tax for every $10 dollars they earn, and everything would be cheaper for everyone.

If you want to see the numbers I quote, they are wonderfully graphed right here: http://www.allegromedia.com/sugi/taxes/

And if you think a flat tax is Harsh, CONSIDER WHATS FAIR. The USA is like a giant Hotel. Everyone needs a room, and all rooms cost the same amount. Everyone has access to the shower and the pool and the sink. And in my analogy everyone has access to the best highway system in the world, the state and national parks, the court system, police, etc. Everyone has equal access. Now, ITS ONLY FAIR to charge everyone the SAME amount, just like in a hotel, everyone pays the same for the same room. So the FAIR taxation method would be to charge every person 8 thousand dollars a year just to live here!... No other taxes of any kind would occur. Thats as fair as you can get. Just like a hotel. Everyone has access to the SAME goods and services provited by the government (hotel) In THIS system, XP would only cost 151$.

Now a flat tax seems like a good compromise... ehh? ;) ;) ;)

drpeterbright
08-29-2002, 05:29 AM
Not sure how you connect Microsoft the company with what taxes their employees pay. The top tax bracket for individuals by the way is under 40% currently. When Microsoft sells something for $300 very little of that $300 is paid in taxes. Most of it pays expenses such as salaries, equipment etc. They get additional deductions for depreciation etc. If you compare their gross revenues with the actual tax paid to the government, it would be astonishing to you how little of that software sales price actually goes toward paying Microsoft's tax burden.

zeradul
08-29-2002, 05:48 AM
Not sure how you connect Microsoft the company with what taxes their employees pay Because for MS to be able to hire the people they employ, they must be able to pay top dollar for them, and therefore, the employees are only getting what isn't taxed. So in order to pay someone 50 Grand, you actually have to EARN 100 Grand, therefore the products of the company must also follow that ratio. What i mean is, if MS needs 150$ PER copy to pay the employees that created it, then given what their employees will be taxed, they need to charge 300$ per copy just to contend with Income tax.


The top tax bracket for individuals by the way is under 40% currently. Ah ha! You are correct, the Federal Tax is 39.5%, however then you also need to add in State taxes which varies from state to state.


When Microsoft sells something for 0 very little of that 0 is paid in taxes. Most of it pays expenses such as salaries Thats right! and Salaries are Taxed HARD. Just imagine if MS could hire the brilliant people they have with only HALF the money. The prices of their product would come down a BUNCH wouldn't they?

drpeterbright
08-29-2002, 06:16 AM
So the real point is the government ends up with most of the money from everything we buy. Correct. Let's not give them as much to misuse.

zeradul
08-29-2002, 06:43 AM
Yup, and there is only one way to not give them as much. Lower taxes. And there is only one way to do that. Less Government. And how do you get less Government? Vote for the political parties that support having less government.

drpeterbright
08-29-2002, 07:24 AM
We definately agree on this zeradul. Less is definately better when it comes to government.

zeradul
08-29-2002, 01:45 PM
Good. ;) :cheers:

Now keep that in mind when November rolls around. :cheers:

JealousMidget
08-29-2002, 04:09 PM
Hmmm...
I am no tax lawyer, but wouldn't M$ be able to right off the salary of its employees ( at least in part) as part of it's operating cost? :?: I thought that Profit$ were taxed, not simply income, as part of that would go to just keeping the business open. There is a difference. If you spend more money than you make, there is nothing to tax. So if it cost M$ 150 bucks to produce a copy of XP and they sold it for $175, they would only be taxed on $25, which would be the profit. :crazy:

zeradul
08-29-2002, 05:41 PM
Right, but just imagine if MS had employees who weren't charged income tax. They'd be able to pay their people half as much (the other half was going to taxes anyways) and therefore, XP would sell for half price, because it didn't cost as much to produce.

Thats all I'm saying.

Extortionate taxes on the upper class only drive up prices for everyone. Which means, a flat tax is good, still somewhat not fair to the upper class, but it is a good compromise. That and less government means huge tax cuts. Hmm now which major political party supports both of those aspects. :?:

drpeterbright
08-30-2002, 12:03 PM
Or eliminate income tax and use a flat sales tax. The more you spend, the more you pay.

zeradul
08-31-2002, 03:17 AM
That is an excellent suggestion, and it makes perfect sense. BUT it has one fatal flaw. At least in the world we live in now what THAT would promote is rampant black markets. And what black markets would promote is un-reliable sellers, and therefore crime. More Crime means more police, and therefore the need for more tax, which would push more people to black markets, and I think you get the idea.

drpeterbright
08-31-2002, 04:42 AM
The barter system would flourish unless you collect the tax when the manufacturer/producer makes the product.