-
If you really love AI, we have good news for you: RTX 5090 exhibits 27% higher CUDA performance than RTX 4090 — exceeds 500K points in Geekbench
- Status
blazorthon
Glorious
- Sep 24, 2010
- 14,022
- 21
- 43,265
[nom]de5_roy[/nom]fun article. looks like you guys focussed on pc hardware (cpu, ram, hdd etc..) this time.imo hd-dvd (competitor of blu-ray), coolermaster psus (low end), firewire are fails too.[/citation]
HD-DVD wasn't a fail it just didn't catch on. It worked well but Blu-Ray won out, like how betamax was beaten by VHS. Both were good products but only one could be the better seller.
Low end PSUs are definitely more failure prone than mid to high end PSUs so I'll give you that one. On the other hand, firewire is not a fail at all. It has advantages over USB that for a while were more important than they are today. Firewire was the connector used in digital cameras until they got buffers that allowed the bursty transfer rates of USB to be an option since before the buffers the cameras needed sustained trnasfer rates and firewire is very good at that whilst USB failed at it.
Firewire also had more bandwidth than USB for years and even with USB 2.0 having 80Mb/s more theoretical bandwidth, Firewire usually is faster because it can achieve about 97% of it's maximum theoretical transfer whilst USB tends to max out at around half it's maximum theoretical transfer rate unless there are multiple devices connected to the one port. Firewire also gave 400Mb networking speeds long before gigabit Ethernet became common so the savvy could get much faster networks than 100Mb Ethernet offered before gigabit became feasible.
The problem with Firewire is that it's old and hasn't been updated to new speeds since Firewire 800. If it were even at 3.2Gb as promised right now then it might be more common.
[citation][nom]Soma42[/nom]Why all the hate on Vista? It had it's issues, don't get me wrong, but it was an improvement over XP in a lot of ways. Windows 7 > Vista > XPDefinitely not face-palm worthy.[/citation]
Vista is such a resource hog and most computers that shipped with it shortly aafter it's launch and for a while didn't have nearly enough RAM for Vista. In my experience, 2Gb is the minimum that should be used with Vista and I saw Vista machines with 512MB or 1GB and laughed at them when my Vista desktop would average between 900 and 1300MBs of used RAm out of 2GB without programs running.
I had many[citation][nom]iam2thecrowe[/nom]vista was crap, in no way was it an improvement on XP. Thats why you see most businesses still using XP and very few, if any, stupid enough to use Vista.[/citation]
more stability problems in Vista than XP. Windows 7 fixed some of the stability problems, but until I got Server 2008r2 it wasn't perfect. Now I have a system with not too much more overhead than XP and it is even more stable than XP and 64 bit with decent driver support.
[citation][nom]iam2thecrowe[/nom]vista was crap, in no way was it an improvement on XP. Thats why you see most businesses still using XP and very few, if any, stupid enough to use Vista.[citation]
There were ways in which Vista was an improvement over XP but it seemed to be an incomplete OS. It was like using a beta or alpha version of a program instead of the finished product. Besides, businesses don't upgrade because of how bad Vista is but becuase it would be a waste of money. Most businesses still have many XP machines running instead of upgrading to 7 and probably will have XP machines up until Windows 8 becomes popular, maybe even after that.
Upgrading the OSes of a business can be very expensive and is an unneeded expense if the current machine still work. Not only is there the cost of the Os and possibly new parts or whole new computers but also any new software licenses and such. The cost of replacing the software can exceed the cost of upgrading or replacing the computers.
A lot of XP software isn't compatible with Vista/7/8 and probably won't ever be. XP mode is not a good enough solution to this. This incompatibility means new versions of the software or replacement software is necessary so there is little incentive to very expensively fix what isn't broken. Add in the possibility of breaking something and there's even less incentive. Sure, some businesses are fully up to date with Windows 7/Server 2008r2 systems but a lot of businesses still use older OSes because of the reasons I cited or other reasons.
HD-DVD wasn't a fail it just didn't catch on. It worked well but Blu-Ray won out, like how betamax was beaten by VHS. Both were good products but only one could be the better seller.
Low end PSUs are definitely more failure prone than mid to high end PSUs so I'll give you that one. On the other hand, firewire is not a fail at all. It has advantages over USB that for a while were more important than they are today. Firewire was the connector used in digital cameras until they got buffers that allowed the bursty transfer rates of USB to be an option since before the buffers the cameras needed sustained trnasfer rates and firewire is very good at that whilst USB failed at it.
Firewire also had more bandwidth than USB for years and even with USB 2.0 having 80Mb/s more theoretical bandwidth, Firewire usually is faster because it can achieve about 97% of it's maximum theoretical transfer whilst USB tends to max out at around half it's maximum theoretical transfer rate unless there are multiple devices connected to the one port. Firewire also gave 400Mb networking speeds long before gigabit Ethernet became common so the savvy could get much faster networks than 100Mb Ethernet offered before gigabit became feasible.
The problem with Firewire is that it's old and hasn't been updated to new speeds since Firewire 800. If it were even at 3.2Gb as promised right now then it might be more common.
[citation][nom]Soma42[/nom]Why all the hate on Vista? It had it's issues, don't get me wrong, but it was an improvement over XP in a lot of ways. Windows 7 > Vista > XPDefinitely not face-palm worthy.[/citation]
Vista is such a resource hog and most computers that shipped with it shortly aafter it's launch and for a while didn't have nearly enough RAM for Vista. In my experience, 2Gb is the minimum that should be used with Vista and I saw Vista machines with 512MB or 1GB and laughed at them when my Vista desktop would average between 900 and 1300MBs of used RAm out of 2GB without programs running.
I had many[citation][nom]iam2thecrowe[/nom]vista was crap, in no way was it an improvement on XP. Thats why you see most businesses still using XP and very few, if any, stupid enough to use Vista.[/citation]
more stability problems in Vista than XP. Windows 7 fixed some of the stability problems, but until I got Server 2008r2 it wasn't perfect. Now I have a system with not too much more overhead than XP and it is even more stable than XP and 64 bit with decent driver support.
[citation][nom]iam2thecrowe[/nom]vista was crap, in no way was it an improvement on XP. Thats why you see most businesses still using XP and very few, if any, stupid enough to use Vista.[citation]
There were ways in which Vista was an improvement over XP but it seemed to be an incomplete OS. It was like using a beta or alpha version of a program instead of the finished product. Besides, businesses don't upgrade because of how bad Vista is but becuase it would be a waste of money. Most businesses still have many XP machines running instead of upgrading to 7 and probably will have XP machines up until Windows 8 becomes popular, maybe even after that.
Upgrading the OSes of a business can be very expensive and is an unneeded expense if the current machine still work. Not only is there the cost of the Os and possibly new parts or whole new computers but also any new software licenses and such. The cost of replacing the software can exceed the cost of upgrading or replacing the computers.
A lot of XP software isn't compatible with Vista/7/8 and probably won't ever be. XP mode is not a good enough solution to this. This incompatibility means new versions of the software or replacement software is necessary so there is little incentive to very expensively fix what isn't broken. Add in the possibility of breaking something and there's even less incentive. Sure, some businesses are fully up to date with Windows 7/Server 2008r2 systems but a lot of businesses still use older OSes because of the reasons I cited or other reasons.
stonedatheist
Distinguished
- May 13, 2010
- 97
- 0
- 18,630
I agree with everything on this list. A great look at the tech failures of the past, thanks.
Luckily, I never owned any of these for personal use except the original Phenom and it was a 9850 without the TLB bug
Luckily, I never owned any of these for personal use except the original Phenom and it was a 9850 without the TLB bug
stonedatheist
Distinguished
- May 13, 2010
- 97
- 0
- 18,630
[citation][nom]mhumgood[/nom]Intel Pentium D should be on this list when it came out it's 3Ghz desktop chip was getting torn apart by Amd 1.6Ghz laptop Cpu[/citation]
The Pentium D's were essentially 2 Pentium 4's as MCM so it was basically covered but I definitely agree with you on that. I had a buddy in high school with one of those and I told him at the time that I would still rather have my single core Athlon
The Pentium D's were essentially 2 Pentium 4's as MCM so it was basically covered but I definitely agree with you on that. I had a buddy in high school with one of those and I told him at the time that I would still rather have my single core Athlon
jaquith
Glorious
- Feb 8, 2009
- 14,235
- 27
- 49,290
[citation][nom]dickcheney[/nom]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.[/citation]
Tell all the folks that received a B2 Chipset, Intel + stockholders, and the MOBO manufacturers that it was an 'EPIC' success; not to mention all the folks I charged to rebuild their systems.
The P67 vs X58 chipset, the X58 chipset was perfectly fine. Sure the next gen SB CPU is an improvement, but nothing like you suggest; see (i7-920 vs i7-2600K) -> http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/p67-gaming-3-way-sli-three-card-crossfire,2910.html In my case I have an i7-980X (32nm/6-core) and the OC clock-per-clock shows no discernible differences (Pros & Cons), so I've had a VERY LONG ride on performance. I skipped the consumer LGA 1155 platform and have both LGA 1366 & LGA 2011, but I've built plenty LGA 1155 -- so I KNOW.
Currently, the SB-E/LGA 2011 has a C2 VT-d bug, did it ever occur to you why there's no inventory?! Google PCN111178-00.pdf Intel over that past year has been a real PITA!!!
Tell all the folks that received a B2 Chipset, Intel + stockholders, and the MOBO manufacturers that it was an 'EPIC' success; not to mention all the folks I charged to rebuild their systems.
The P67 vs X58 chipset, the X58 chipset was perfectly fine. Sure the next gen SB CPU is an improvement, but nothing like you suggest; see (i7-920 vs i7-2600K) -> http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/p67-gaming-3-way-sli-three-card-crossfire,2910.html In my case I have an i7-980X (32nm/6-core) and the OC clock-per-clock shows no discernible differences (Pros & Cons), so I've had a VERY LONG ride on performance. I skipped the consumer LGA 1155 platform and have both LGA 1366 & LGA 2011, but I've built plenty LGA 1155 -- so I KNOW.
Currently, the SB-E/LGA 2011 has a C2 VT-d bug, did it ever occur to you why there's no inventory?! Google PCN111178-00.pdf Intel over that past year has been a real PITA!!!
[citation][nom]fordry06[/nom]First one is a little ridiculous. Especially the comments about Windows 8...... Seriously? All Vista and Windows 7 drivers will be compatible with it, where is this idea that Windows 8 will leave some drivers behind coming from?[/citation]
You have no idea how some manufacturers program their drivers. Some drivers can easily work with other OSes even if they officially don't support it, others will either refuse to work or cause a BSOD.
I'm lucky that my printer's Window xp only driver works with Window 7. A friend of mine has a paper weight printer because the driver will ONLY support Window 98/2000/xp, nothing else.
You have no idea how some manufacturers program their drivers. Some drivers can easily work with other OSes even if they officially don't support it, others will either refuse to work or cause a BSOD.
I'm lucky that my printer's Window xp only driver works with Window 7. A friend of mine has a paper weight printer because the driver will ONLY support Window 98/2000/xp, nothing else.
were are the infamous nvidia geforce go 7 and 8 series that plagued the industry,the SB bugs that were recalled....ok that one was not an epic failure but an epic fraud and scam....
,or the short live and unreliable psyquest disks and drives...
the sony branded floppy disks that were so unreliable(tdk and memorex just fine).
...
my usb zip drives and disks still work even today.
,or the short live and unreliable psyquest disks and drives...
the sony branded floppy disks that were so unreliable(tdk and memorex just fine).
...
my usb zip drives and disks still work even today.
jimmysmitty
Champion
- Oct 5, 2007
- 21,595
- 594
- 59,140
[citation][nom]phamhlam[/nom]Where is Windows Vista?[/citation]
Vista was not that bad. It was more the OEMs putting it with pretty crappy hardware. Millenium was horrible.
But I think the article should be PC Industries 16 most epic hardware fails, since it seems this is mainly based on just hardware.
Vista was not that bad. It was more the OEMs putting it with pretty crappy hardware. Millenium was horrible.
But I think the article should be PC Industries 16 most epic hardware fails, since it seems this is mainly based on just hardware.
mikenygmail
Distinguished
- Aug 29, 2009
- 362
- 0
- 18,780
AMD's FX CPU has no place on this list, and you should be ashamed of yourself for including it.
[citation][nom]jimmysmitty[/nom]Vista was not that bad. It was more the OEMs putting it with pretty crappy hardware. Millenium was horrible.But I think the article should be PC Industries 16 most epic hardware fails, since it seems this is mainly based on just hardware.[/citation]
Plus, Window Vista was a lot better now, if you have SP2 and Platform Upgrade installed.
If you want a terrible OS at launch, try using the vanilla Window xp, no updates or service packs. Much lols will ensue.
The most terrible OS would be Windows Mistake Edition. It was still plugged with problems since launch even when Microsoft dropped support for it.
Plus, Window Vista was a lot better now, if you have SP2 and Platform Upgrade installed.
If you want a terrible OS at launch, try using the vanilla Window xp, no updates or service packs. Much lols will ensue.
The most terrible OS would be Windows Mistake Edition. It was still plugged with problems since launch even when Microsoft dropped support for it.
blazorthon
Glorious
- Sep 24, 2010
- 14,022
- 21
- 43,265
[citation][nom]ice445[/nom]Sigh..The original Phenom's TLB bug was literally marketed by Intel and its partners against AMD, even when it relied on hitting a condition that was INCREDIBLY rare and almost never happened in general desktop usage. Hardly a big failure.[/citation]
The TLB bug meant that affected processors were hit with large performance penalties by the BIOSs to make the problem more rare and Phenoms were too slow to begin with.
[citation][nom]jerryc[/nom]In reality Vista is NOT a bad OS. Its not a great one, but its not bad either. If you want to display a bad OS turn your attention to a really bad OS, windows ME[/citation]
You have a point but Vista was preceded and succeeded by better OSs so it seems even worse than it already was by comparison. It seemed even worse than that because of it's ridiculous hardware requirements compared to XP and how it was put on many machines that didn't have the hardware to run it properly. For example, I had a Compaq that came with XP but was labeled "Vista Ready". Problem was it had a Pentium D 2.8GHz, only 1GB of RAM, and had only integrated video, some crappy Intel video.
It definitely wasn't ready for Vista and I switched it back to XP in a hurry after realizing the label wasn't very truthful and I didn't want to pay for better hardware to run Vista.
The TLB bug meant that affected processors were hit with large performance penalties by the BIOSs to make the problem more rare and Phenoms were too slow to begin with.
[citation][nom]jerryc[/nom]In reality Vista is NOT a bad OS. Its not a great one, but its not bad either. If you want to display a bad OS turn your attention to a really bad OS, windows ME[/citation]
You have a point but Vista was preceded and succeeded by better OSs so it seems even worse than it already was by comparison. It seemed even worse than that because of it's ridiculous hardware requirements compared to XP and how it was put on many machines that didn't have the hardware to run it properly. For example, I had a Compaq that came with XP but was labeled "Vista Ready". Problem was it had a Pentium D 2.8GHz, only 1GB of RAM, and had only integrated video, some crappy Intel video.
It definitely wasn't ready for Vista and I switched it back to XP in a hurry after realizing the label wasn't very truthful and I didn't want to pay for better hardware to run Vista.
blazorthon
Glorious
- Sep 24, 2010
- 14,022
- 21
- 43,265
[citation][nom]glob99[/nom]OS/2 was such an epic fail no one remembers it existed.[/citation]
I wouldn't call OS/2 a fail. It's "successor", workstation OS, was a fail. OS/2 didn't catch on in the consumer market well, but it did well in some businesses. For example, many computers for banks, ticket selling machines, and NPR stations used OS/2.
I wouldn't call OS/2 a fail. It's "successor", workstation OS, was a fail. OS/2 didn't catch on in the consumer market well, but it did well in some businesses. For example, many computers for banks, ticket selling machines, and NPR stations used OS/2.
+1 for not writing new drivers for updated OS's SHAMEFULL WASTE!! canon laser printer 🙁
And Vista thanks for taking forever to shutdown, start up, format and freeze while shutting down, anything else??
And Vista thanks for taking forever to shutdown, start up, format and freeze while shutting down, anything else??
Reynod
Administrator
- Mar 26, 2007
- 14,921
- 16
- 42,215
Cleeve ... by popular demand please add windows Millenium to the list mate !!!
I woudl also add the Number 9 Graphics card to the list ... but that is probably going too far back in history.
How about those EMS compliant ISA cards we used to max out our RAM on .... never mind.
I woudl also add the Number 9 Graphics card to the list ... but that is probably going too far back in history.
How about those EMS compliant ISA cards we used to max out our RAM on .... never mind.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Discussion PSU recommendations and power supply discussion thread - Tom's hardware- Started by Darkbreeze
- Replies: 2K
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
-
News AMD says Intel's 'horrible product' is causing Ryzen 9 9800X3D shortages- Started by Admin
- Replies: 89
-
News EA will shut down the Origin app on April 2025 — company asks users to migrate to the new EA app
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 18
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram