- Status
-Fran-
Glorious
- May 3, 2007
- 9,267
- 2,661
- 44,640
[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]I never got why Vista was considered so terrible. Yeah, user account control was irritating, but if you disable it you're getting 99% of the Windows 7 experience. I never jumped on the 'I hate Vista!' bandwagon. I actually had it on my server until very recently.[/citation]
The hate was because of vendors selling it in computers with 512MB of RAM and Intel GMA video cards. You know how Aero worked in those? Well, adding hurt to injury, the broken Video and Audio support when it launched was horrible! I still remember my X1800 not having support in Vista; not MS faults really, but really annoying non the less.
Also, did you try running Office in Vista with 512MB of RAM? That's a big joke of performance, right there
Cheers!
The hate was because of vendors selling it in computers with 512MB of RAM and Intel GMA video cards. You know how Aero worked in those? Well, adding hurt to injury, the broken Video and Audio support when it launched was horrible! I still remember my X1800 not having support in Vista; not MS faults really, but really annoying non the less.
Also, did you try running Office in Vista with 512MB of RAM? That's a big joke of performance, right there
Cheers!
I don't know what's with all the complaints about ATI HD 2900. I bought the Pro version with 1GB DDR4 and I was using it until late 2010 when it physically died. Until then it was able to run games such as Mafia 2, GTA IV, COD:MW2, Battlefield Bad Company 2, Anno 1404, Dirt 2, Crysis Warhead, Stalker and even Metro 2033, all of them in 1680x1054 and most of them with high settings. Yes, it was loud as a hair dryer, yes, it could reach 90 C temperature, yes, I had to buy it a separate 250W 5.25" PSU but I still have to say it was worth every cent of the €300 I paid for it.
belardo
Splendid
- Nov 23, 2008
- 3,540
- 2
- 22,795
[citation][nom]TA152H[/nom] !RDRAM failed, not because of RDRAM, but because of the Pentium III. Which brings us to the Willamette too. The Williamette reached 2 GHz on the same process technology that the Pentium III/Coppermine reached 1.1 GHz, and outperformed it EASILY at virtually everything at that clock speed, and even when introduced at 1.5 GHz (compared to 1 GHz Pentium III) beat it in virtually all benchmarks. [/citation]
Er... no. RD-RAM failed because they screwed everyone. Intel had their hand in RD-RAM and pushed it down everyones throats. It caused production problems for SDR & DDR memory which resulted in overall price increases, but still far cheaper than RD-RAM.
The overall performance difference between RD-RAM and DDR was minimal for the earlier P4s. DDR2 only got faster as RD-RAM faded away. May RAMBUS die painfully.
And NO #2. The first P4s were SLOWER than P3s. Intel promoted the P4 as "they will get faster as clock rates ramp up" - the Netburst design was made for high clock-rates, not performance. Hence, unless the P4/Netburst was doing a single hard job - such as rendering or encoding video/audio (and nothing else) it was a Piece of sh** CPU that sold for very high prices. A buddy way back then had a P4 1.4 or 1.6Ghz, it was easily on par with my P3-900Mhz. And AMD beat the P4 up and down the street. Even in the later days of crapburst, a $250 AMD at 2.2Ghz was better for general/gaming than the $1000 P4 3.6~3.8Ghz Extreme Edition CPUs. Then lately, AMD took a page out of Intel and did netburst 2.0 on their latest CPUs... which is why many AMDers have jumped to Intel.
Then intel shoved RD-RAM into their P3 line, which was stupid since it offered NO performance improvement, so they tacked on the MTB onto the crappy 810 boards - which were unstable and performed slower than the BX-boards it was supposed to replace. Hence, VIA grew quickly to fill the void as intel was busy with law-suits and recalls until the i815 boards came out - the last great P3 board. RD-RAM offered nothing that DDR couldn't handle at 1/4 the price. At one of my offices, we still have a 2.4Ghz P4 Dell with RD-RAM I can't wait to toss. Its the slowest POS in the office.
Cyrix: actually made some good CPUs. They took care of the bottom-end market. Their 486DX chips were quite good. I sold hundreds of them in our little PC shop. Never had one fail / return. The Cyrix DX/4 100 could easily OC past the intel/AMD and were SUPER cool... ie: an intel would burn your finger, while the cyrix was barely warm. not bad. But Cyrix could NOT make anything to compete against the Pentiums and rightfully died. Man, they made various junk hybrid thingies.
Er... no. RD-RAM failed because they screwed everyone. Intel had their hand in RD-RAM and pushed it down everyones throats. It caused production problems for SDR & DDR memory which resulted in overall price increases, but still far cheaper than RD-RAM.
The overall performance difference between RD-RAM and DDR was minimal for the earlier P4s. DDR2 only got faster as RD-RAM faded away. May RAMBUS die painfully.
And NO #2. The first P4s were SLOWER than P3s. Intel promoted the P4 as "they will get faster as clock rates ramp up" - the Netburst design was made for high clock-rates, not performance. Hence, unless the P4/Netburst was doing a single hard job - such as rendering or encoding video/audio (and nothing else) it was a Piece of sh** CPU that sold for very high prices. A buddy way back then had a P4 1.4 or 1.6Ghz, it was easily on par with my P3-900Mhz. And AMD beat the P4 up and down the street. Even in the later days of crapburst, a $250 AMD at 2.2Ghz was better for general/gaming than the $1000 P4 3.6~3.8Ghz Extreme Edition CPUs. Then lately, AMD took a page out of Intel and did netburst 2.0 on their latest CPUs... which is why many AMDers have jumped to Intel.
Then intel shoved RD-RAM into their P3 line, which was stupid since it offered NO performance improvement, so they tacked on the MTB onto the crappy 810 boards - which were unstable and performed slower than the BX-boards it was supposed to replace. Hence, VIA grew quickly to fill the void as intel was busy with law-suits and recalls until the i815 boards came out - the last great P3 board. RD-RAM offered nothing that DDR couldn't handle at 1/4 the price. At one of my offices, we still have a 2.4Ghz P4 Dell with RD-RAM I can't wait to toss. Its the slowest POS in the office.
Cyrix: actually made some good CPUs. They took care of the bottom-end market. Their 486DX chips were quite good. I sold hundreds of them in our little PC shop. Never had one fail / return. The Cyrix DX/4 100 could easily OC past the intel/AMD and were SUPER cool... ie: an intel would burn your finger, while the cyrix was barely warm. not bad. But Cyrix could NOT make anything to compete against the Pentiums and rightfully died. Man, they made various junk hybrid thingies.
belardo
Splendid
- Nov 23, 2008
- 3,540
- 2
- 22,795
[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]I never got why Vista was considered so terrible. Yeah, user account control was irritating, but if you disable it you're getting 99% of the Windows 7 experience. I never jumped on the 'I hate Vista!' bandwagon.[/citation]
Shutting off the UAE does not equal the Win7 experience. Yes, MS did a better job with the UAE in Win. Because turning it OFF pretty much negates the point of even having vista to begin with, no? Its STILL stupid for Win7/Vista to bitch when renaming a Start-menu item, much less deleting it. But on Vista, the UAE nagged about every little thing... such as changing your desktop background?!
Vista sucks for other reasons, it *IS* a memory hog because of how MS tied the memory to the graphics. The bloat on vista made doing anything horrible... hence the NEED for a 4~8GB Vista setup vs a 2GB Win7 setup. I run Win7 with 2GB on my notebook, runs great. 4GB is more than enough for most people with Win7.
Shutting off the UAE does not equal the Win7 experience. Yes, MS did a better job with the UAE in Win. Because turning it OFF pretty much negates the point of even having vista to begin with, no? Its STILL stupid for Win7/Vista to bitch when renaming a Start-menu item, much less deleting it. But on Vista, the UAE nagged about every little thing... such as changing your desktop background?!
Vista sucks for other reasons, it *IS* a memory hog because of how MS tied the memory to the graphics. The bloat on vista made doing anything horrible... hence the NEED for a 4~8GB Vista setup vs a 2GB Win7 setup. I run Win7 with 2GB on my notebook, runs great. 4GB is more than enough for most people with Win7.
Good to see Logitech don't learn. I've had two of their Harmony remotes, the 2nd one was a free replacement for the first one where the legends wore off the keys... guess what... yeah, the legends are wearing off the replacement ones keys too...
CaedenV
Splendid
- Jun 14, 2011
- 4,829
- 3
- 23,465
LOL, great article! I love how most of the problems are 2000-2003, seems most companies got it right after that.
I remember building my first video editing rig and debating between a coppermine P3 or a P4. The P4 looked so good on paper, but when it came to benchmarks it just sucked; Especially for productivity work. Let us not forget also that you could not do pro audio work on AMD at the time due to stability issues with audio editing suites on their chipsets. It was truly a dark day in tech history.
I 2nd the laments about Windows ME and Vista did not make the list. They were both fine after a few service packs, but man... talk about an unfinished product being released! I love these 'modern' days where win7 and win8 are rock solid even at the dev build, it's just a matter of getting the interface and features right after that.
I really loved the vapor-ware like the iSmell and PhysX. I remember getting all 'hot and bothered' reading about the PhysX cards, and the realism that they would provide to games down the line. Sadly it is now completely proprietary, and while I have a beautiful 570 that ought to run PhysX quite well, I will likely never see wide-spread use of it in games.
@face-plants: BTX form factor is not dead. It did not take off like we all hoped it would, but it has a nice home in Dell based computers, and the BTX focus on airflow design (which was the main reason for moving over from ATX) has greatly influenced the case designs we now enjoy. Sure, it did not gain a wide acceptance, but it was also not a failure.
I remember building my first video editing rig and debating between a coppermine P3 or a P4. The P4 looked so good on paper, but when it came to benchmarks it just sucked; Especially for productivity work. Let us not forget also that you could not do pro audio work on AMD at the time due to stability issues with audio editing suites on their chipsets. It was truly a dark day in tech history.
I 2nd the laments about Windows ME and Vista did not make the list. They were both fine after a few service packs, but man... talk about an unfinished product being released! I love these 'modern' days where win7 and win8 are rock solid even at the dev build, it's just a matter of getting the interface and features right after that.
I really loved the vapor-ware like the iSmell and PhysX. I remember getting all 'hot and bothered' reading about the PhysX cards, and the realism that they would provide to games down the line. Sadly it is now completely proprietary, and while I have a beautiful 570 that ought to run PhysX quite well, I will likely never see wide-spread use of it in games.
@face-plants: BTX form factor is not dead. It did not take off like we all hoped it would, but it has a nice home in Dell based computers, and the BTX focus on airflow design (which was the main reason for moving over from ATX) has greatly influenced the case designs we now enjoy. Sure, it did not gain a wide acceptance, but it was also not a failure.
mayankleoboy1
Distinguished
- Aug 11, 2010
- 2,497
- 0
- 19,810
ubercake
Splendid
- Oct 28, 2009
- 7,270
- 5
- 29,815
[citation][nom]mayankleoboy1[/nom]is BD already an EPIC FAIL?[/citation]
Agree. Epic fail.
With HD and 5.1 streaming, I've had no use for my BD player in a while. Streaming is killing the proprietary format. It's better for us consumers as the BD prices have fallen as streaming is becoming more mainstream.
Agree. Epic fail.
With HD and 5.1 streaming, I've had no use for my BD player in a while. Streaming is killing the proprietary format. It's better for us consumers as the BD prices have fallen as streaming is becoming more mainstream.
hum i stil. have a logitech g15 first generation and its barely used and i play everyday on it. I guess playing with doritos or salsa on the hand doesnt help on the paint, but a moderate use doesnt get paint off unless logitech really had a batch with painting problem and have them recall..
belardo
Splendid
- Nov 23, 2008
- 3,540
- 2
- 22,795
[citation][nom]mayankleoboy1[/nom]is BD already an EPIC FAIL?[/citation]
I would say... yes. A friend bought an FX-3 core (er I mean "6 core") CPU / mobo / RAM a few days ago, I showed him how the FX8150 doesn't compare to any i5 CPU and is slower than some of AMD PII-X4 CPUs.
He's taking it back and getting the i5.
I've been waiting to upgrade back to AMD with the Bulldozer. It didn't HAVE to be faster than the I5-2500, but it needed to be competitive with good performance and price. It has neither. I'm not going sandy bridge as their replacement is due out in a few months. I'll use my Q6600 until then.
I would say... yes. A friend bought an FX-3 core (er I mean "6 core") CPU / mobo / RAM a few days ago, I showed him how the FX8150 doesn't compare to any i5 CPU and is slower than some of AMD PII-X4 CPUs.
He's taking it back and getting the i5.
I've been waiting to upgrade back to AMD with the Bulldozer. It didn't HAVE to be faster than the I5-2500, but it needed to be competitive with good performance and price. It has neither. I'm not going sandy bridge as their replacement is due out in a few months. I'll use my Q6600 until then.
jamesedgeuk2000
Distinguished
- Jul 21, 2009
- 174
- 1
- 18,680
1: Zip discs were not a failure they were a big success, back in the day most schools/university's had machines with them and everyone in my uni had at least one disk as they were the only way to transport your work unless you wanted to risk spanning zip files over multiple floppys or erase/burn a CDRW every hour (this is before the USB flash drives emerged remember), hell most of my friends had the drive.
2: LS-120 disks were a big failure!
3: No mention of the Voodoo 5?
2: LS-120 disks were a big failure!
3: No mention of the Voodoo 5?
belardo
Splendid
- Nov 23, 2008
- 3,540
- 2
- 22,795
BTX = fail. And no, Dell no longer uses BTX. BTX was more important for intel as they were planning on Netburst P4 CPUs running at 4~6Ghz. But they went Core2.
Anyone remember the bar-code reading mouse? It was supposed to be a quick way to information on the internet... read an article or an AD, scan it with this mouse-looking mouse. The mice were free... that stupid idea died quickly.
- Ageia PhysX Card - Good and bad. It never had much of a chance in the market. it costs too much, it was another add-on card for a gaming rig. Having it built into video-cards is great.... but since ONLY Nvidia cards have this feature, it keeps developers from counting on half their customer base from having access to such features.
Until / unless Nvidia allows AMD/ATI to have it on their cards and/or it or a generic Physics API is added to DirectX - we will NOT have wide-spread acceptance of such handy tech.
If MS adds their own generic Physics, then nVidia's PhysX dies anyway. So nVidia should offer a low-cost licence for AMD to use it. It will generate more games to use it.
Anyone remember the bar-code reading mouse? It was supposed to be a quick way to information on the internet... read an article or an AD, scan it with this mouse-looking mouse. The mice were free... that stupid idea died quickly.
- Ageia PhysX Card - Good and bad. It never had much of a chance in the market. it costs too much, it was another add-on card for a gaming rig. Having it built into video-cards is great.... but since ONLY Nvidia cards have this feature, it keeps developers from counting on half their customer base from having access to such features.
Until / unless Nvidia allows AMD/ATI to have it on their cards and/or it or a generic Physics API is added to DirectX - we will NOT have wide-spread acceptance of such handy tech.
If MS adds their own generic Physics, then nVidia's PhysX dies anyway. So nVidia should offer a low-cost licence for AMD to use it. It will generate more games to use it.
- Jul 27, 2011
- 42,718
- 855
- 104,940
I'm surprised to not see the slot-installing cartridge based Pentium 3 and K6-II CPUs of the mid 90's on here - that was a completely failed design and it didn't last very long before we switched back to what we have now.
michaelahess
Distinguished
- Jan 30, 2006
- 1,711
- 0
- 19,780
How about Number 9 video cards that were incompatible with a LARGE number of BIOS' back in the mid 90's?
dickcheney
Distinguished
- Aug 11, 2011
- 194
- 0
- 18,680
[citation][nom]belardo[/nom]I would say... yes. A friend bought an FX-3 core (er I mean "6 core") CPU / mobo / RAM a few days ago, I showed him how the FX8150 doesn't compare to any i5 CPU and is slower than some of AMD PII-X4 CPUs.He's taking it back and getting the i5.I've been waiting to upgrade back to AMD with the Bulldozer. It didn't HAVE to be faster than the I5-2500, but it needed to be competitive with good performance and price. It has neither. I'm not going sandy bridge as their replacement is due out in a few months. I'll use my Q6600 until then.[/citation]
How can you ''turn it back''? He bought it, man up and deal with it.
Dont buy shit BEFORE you research it. Crazy, I know.
How can you ''turn it back''? He bought it, man up and deal with it.
Dont buy shit BEFORE you research it. Crazy, I know.
dickcheney
Distinguished
- Aug 11, 2011
- 194
- 0
- 18,680
[citation][nom]jaquith[/nom]Hmm...you overlooked biggies like:Recall of Intel's P67/H67 chipset -- SATA2 Bug ; 2011Recall of Intel's P5 Pentium floating point unit (FPU) FDIV bug ; 1994Microsoft's - Windows ME and Windows Vista ; horrible OSesThere's a lot more.[/citation]
It was a manufacturing failure that only affected the Rev 2.0 of that chipset. P67 was a HUGE success that pulverized X58 for half the price.
It was a manufacturing failure that only affected the Rev 2.0 of that chipset. P67 was a HUGE success that pulverized X58 for half the price.
wishmaster12
Distinguished
- Jul 28, 2006
- 197
- 0
- 18,710
i thought in the first 3d card times (matrox) matrox would be the only 3d card, and ran direct x 14, internet 2 would be out, and windows would have 128bit color in 2012, geuss i was wrong. lol
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
News TSMC founder says Intel should focus on AI, not advanced process technologies- Started by Admin
- Replies: 27
-
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
-
News Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger retires, effective immediately — also steps down from BOD, two co-CEOs step in
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 124
Latest posts
-
Question Why does my PC have a black screen when I launch my games ?
- Latest: Edward Paradero
-
-
Question What GPUs do you want to see compared with the Arc B580?- Latest: JarredWaltonGPU
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram