Linux-Hardware Digest #584, Volume #14 Sat, 7 Apr 01 17:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: MIDI driver / library in Linux Mandrake 7.2 (Andrey Vlassov)
Re: RH7.0 on A7M266, worth it? ("Stephen T Cripps")
Re: DLT and Linux (David Graham)
Re: RH7.0 on A7M266, worth it? ("Yozza")
Re: support for adaptec 2100s under RH7.0? (Trevor Hemsley)
Re: RH7.0 on A7M266, worth it? ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: RH7.0 on A7M266, worth it? ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: 2 network cards - 1 cannot ping (Vinz)
OR840 - "CMOS battery failure detected"? Any clues? ("Dr. Mueller")
Re: RH7.0 on A7M266, worth it? ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: Adding SCSI devices to an EIDE Linux Machine? (Marcelo Rodrigues)
Re: Linux on Intel Or Celeron? what is the best choice? ("Peter T. Breuer")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Andrey Vlassov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: MIDI driver / library in Linux Mandrake 7.2
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 19:17:47 GMT
Hi Rishabh,
Mandrake build on Redhat and use OSS drivers. OSS driver for sound
blaster live
do not have support for midi device. You have two options 1) use Alsa
drivers or
2) use timidity if my memory serve me well. Alsa has a program emulation
build in.
timidity make program emulation midi-wav if I understood right. I do not
know what
is the reason that midi do not supported by emu10k driver
ftp://opensource.creative.com/pub/doc/live_faq.html#NoSoftsynth
ftp://opensource.creative.com/pub/doc/live_faq.html
http://opensource.creative.com/docs.html
http://opensource.creative.com/
http://www.alsa-project.org/~goemon/
http://www.alsa-project.org/applications.php3
http://www.alsa-project.org/api.php3
http://www.goice.co.jp/member/mo/timidity/
Hope that it will help
Andrey
Rishabh Gupta wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> I am currently running a machine with Mandrake Linux 7.2 running on it.
> I need to develop some MIDI related software on it, the software is needs to
> read and analyse the MIDI File as well as be able to play it. I am confused
> as to what kind of support mandrake has for MIDI. There is audio support
> because my system is able to run wave/mp3 etc files. However, it is not able
> to play midi file, it gives me some error about /dev/sequencer (the file
> does exist though). I have a Sound Blaster Live Value card on the system.
> When I check the hardware configuration using HardDrake, it shows the sblive
> soundcard (emu101k) but there is no midi device.
> Can somebody tell me what sound library / driver does mandrake use (e.g.
> ALSA or OSS or something else) or how can I find out. I can not find any
> information in the mandrake documentation regarding the sound system. Any
> help would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Many Thanks
>
> Rishabh
--
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Stephen T Cripps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Stephen T Cripps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.comp.hardware.amd.thunderbird,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: RH7.0 on A7M266, worth it?
Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2001 20:13:12 +0100
Thanks Dave. I was trying to inform readers of information made available
to me by my memory supplier - which is industry 'insider' information that
general consumers may not be privy to. The industry as a whole has concerns
over the way Micron is marketing its chips. Micron is normally very good
memory and many of us use it. However, this issue relates specifically to
the PC2100 memory as sold by Crucial. Note that their PC1600 is CL2 (ie
PC1600A) and is a comparable market price to everywhere else. Crucial's
PC2100 is CL2.5 and is NOT the same product that Micron is selling to the
industry through its distributors. That is PC2100A (ie CL2) using a normal
chip configuration and performs very well. Crucial's PC2100B is unusually
cheap as far as the industry is concerned. This is not a matter of fear of
being undercut, but a worry that the market is being flooded with a poor
quality product that will make motherboards particularly, and systems in
general, appear unstable. If you saw 2 cars for sale that were both
supposedly exactly the same make, model, age, wear, etc, but one was one
third the price of the other, would you not ask yourself why it was so
cheap? It may be a genuine bargain; however, sad to say, people in this
world do not give away gifts without good reason.
I do not and cannot say do not buy Crucial memory; I simply would like
consumers to have as much fact about this new technology available as
possible. Many people are only just hearing about DDR RAM, let alone
understanding that there are different types and specifications. At the end
of the day, you may well wish to save a few bucks on a cheap product and
hope that it will work fine. I freely admit that my PC2100A product (which
often includes Micron originals) is at the market price and does not compete
with Crucial. But at least more people can now make an informed choice.
--
Stephen T Cripps
Proprietor
MFS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.m-f-solutions.mcmail.com
For the friendliest solutions ever...
"Colorado Dave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:DVHz6.571649$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: Is it possible for people to DISCUSS an issue without resorting to
: profanity, name-calling, and insults?
: Not everyone uses the same search engines for pricing, or has the time
: to check every statement made to verify prices are current. It was not
: very long ago (maybe 4 weeks??) that DDR RAM WAS 4X more expensive.
:
: And just because someone doesn't agree with you or has incorrect
: information doesn't call for this kind of language.
: Is this how you talk to everyone? Does it make you feel superior?
: Just correct the statement with "I can buy DDR RAM at x dollars here."
:
: Both of you sound rather...childish!
:
: CD
:
: "Yozza" <reply.to - [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:nrHz6.4673$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: > What a load of crap!
:
: "Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: > get your facts straight before you spew your semen all over the place
: boy.
:
:
:
:
------------------------------
From: David Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: DLT and Linux
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 19:47:51 GMT
It is a differential (HVD, 5 volt) model. Adaptec 2944W or 2944UW will
work, as Jurriaan mentioned, or any other HVD card. LVD will not work.
You could use a narrow differential card also, but will need a
wide-to-narrow cable and will lose the benefit of wide SCSI.
Termination is also trickier.
David Graham
> On Fri, 06 Apr 2001 09:34:05 +0200, didier roques
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > I've got an external DLT Tape device (DLT4000D HP PN:A3590A), it seems
> > to use a scsi interface (68 pins) fast & wide scsi (differential).
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Yozza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Yozza" <reply.to - [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.comp.hardware.amd.thunderbird,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: RH7.0 on A7M266, worth it?
Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2001 20:57:05 +0100
Yes, Crucial is releasing CL2 PC2100 RAM soon.
But their current PC2100 offering is perfectly stable at upto 160MHz FSB 2-2-2.
Can say that this is a poor quality product?
Crucial's RAM has always been cheap compared to, say, Mushkin; yet they offer
similar performance to these top quality products.
Why is PC2100 at CL2.5? Well, noone else sells them at CL2, except Corsiar's
very recent offerings.
These is nothing inherently wrong with products that operate with a CL of 2.5,
so why should you think that it is poor quality?
I suppose if you think CL2.5 is bad, then all PC2100 DDR RAM is bad [except
Corsiar's very expensive DIMM].
Crucial's is perfectly fine at CL2 anyway. Many people have confirmed this, and
say that it is very stable upto 160MHz DDR FSB.
I would say that Crucial is being conservative with it's claims.
Have you read www.gamepc.com 's review of Crucial's PC1600?
It is more stable then the other 2 P2100 DIMMs that they tested, and operated
flawlessly at 150MHz DDR 2-2-2. It was the most stable on the 2 DDR platforms
they tested - AMD760 and ALi MAGiK.
I think that all you are trying to do, is ward people away from Crucial's
PC2100, and into buying your company's RAM...
But believe me, PC2100 RAM is going to drop very quickly to remain competitive
with Crucial's pricing.
Yoz
--
����`����,,,,����`����,,,,����`����,,,,����`����,,,,����`����
"If the world didn't suck, We'd all fall off"
����`����,,,,����`����,,,,����`����,,,,����`����,,,,����`����
============
Website: www.i.am/yaoyaoliu
=========
PGP key available on the website
"Stephen T Cripps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:ZVJz6.4336$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
| Thanks Dave. I was trying to inform readers of information made available
| to me by my memory supplier - which is industry 'insider' information that
| general consumers may not be privy to. The industry as a whole has concerns
| over the way Micron is marketing its chips. Micron is normally very good
| memory and many of us use it. However, this issue relates specifically to
| the PC2100 memory as sold by Crucial. Note that their PC1600 is CL2 (ie
| PC1600A) and is a comparable market price to everywhere else. Crucial's
| PC2100 is CL2.5 and is NOT the same product that Micron is selling to the
| industry through its distributors. That is PC2100A (ie CL2) using a normal
| chip configuration and performs very well. Crucial's PC2100B is unusually
| cheap as far as the industry is concerned. This is not a matter of fear of
| being undercut, but a worry that the market is being flooded with a poor
| quality product that will make motherboards particularly, and systems in
| general, appear unstable. If you saw 2 cars for sale that were both
| supposedly exactly the same make, model, age, wear, etc, but one was one
| third the price of the other, would you not ask yourself why it was so
| cheap? It may be a genuine bargain; however, sad to say, people in this
| world do not give away gifts without good reason.
|
| I do not and cannot say do not buy Crucial memory; I simply would like
| consumers to have as much fact about this new technology available as
| possible. Many people are only just hearing about DDR RAM, let alone
| understanding that there are different types and specifications. At the end
| of the day, you may well wish to save a few bucks on a cheap product and
| hope that it will work fine. I freely admit that my PC2100A product (which
| often includes Micron originals) is at the market price and does not compete
| with Crucial. But at least more people can now make an informed choice.
|
| --
|
| Stephen T Cripps
| Proprietor
| MFS
|
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| www.m-f-solutions.mcmail.com
|
| For the friendliest solutions ever...
|
| "Colorado Dave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
| news:DVHz6.571649$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
| : Is it possible for people to DISCUSS an issue without resorting to
| : profanity, name-calling, and insults?
| : Not everyone uses the same search engines for pricing, or has the time
| : to check every statement made to verify prices are current. It was not
| : very long ago (maybe 4 weeks??) that DDR RAM WAS 4X more expensive.
| :
| : And just because someone doesn't agree with you or has incorrect
| : information doesn't call for this kind of language.
| : Is this how you talk to everyone? Does it make you feel superior?
| : Just correct the statement with "I can buy DDR RAM at x dollars here."
| :
| : Both of you sound rather...childish!
| :
| : CD
| :
| : "Yozza" <reply.to - [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
| : news:nrHz6.4673$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
| : > What a load of crap!
| :
| : "Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
| : news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
| : > get your facts straight before you spew your semen all over the place
| : boy.
| :
| :
| :
| :
|
|
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trevor Hemsley)
Crossposted-To: linux.dev.raid
Subject: Re: support for adaptec 2100s under RH7.0?
Date: 07 Apr 2001 20:00:02 GMT
On Sat, 7 Apr 2001 16:22:57, "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> The question is whether term-pwr does anything when the
> disk itself is the terminator (i.e. last on the line, and the physical
> end of bus too, and set to term).
I don't think *any* LVD disk has built in terminators. WD had some
duff documentation that said that their drives did but in fact they
didn't (the LVD spec actually requires that devices do not include
termination resistors).
You need a separate terminator for LVD devices.
Term power has nothing to do with termination BTW. It just controls
who or how many devices supply the power for termination to function.
Under normal circumstances the host adapter should supply term-pwr
without being asked. Some HA's have an option to provide/not provide
term-pwr - my DPT PM3334UW does for example - others don't mention it
at all or have undocumented jumpers that en/disable it (Adaptec 2940UW
f.e.). For most SCSI bus lengths it's usually sufficient that one
thing supplies term-pwr but for extra long cables it might be
necessary to enable term-pwr on a device near the far end of the cable
as well as on the HA.
Your symptoms sound suspiciously like lack of termination to me. With
only one or two devices on a bus you can often get away without it.
The more devices you have on the bus, the more likely it is to show up
as nasty errors wehn one end of a bus is unterminated.
--
Trevor Hemsley, Brighton, UK.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: RH7.0 on A7M266, worth it?
Crossposted-To:
alt.comp.hardware.amd.thunderbird,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus,comp.os.linux.setup
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 20:09:29 GMT
In comp.os.linux.setup Colorado Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is it possible for people to DISCUSS an issue without resorting to
> profanity, name-calling, and insults?
NO waay, dingbat! And please post after quoting! (and editing!).
> "Yozza" <reply.to - [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:nrHz6.4673$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> What a load of crap!
> "Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> get your facts straight before you spew your semen all over the place
> boy.
I believe he meant to insult him more politely. He forgot to say
"please".
Peter
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.comp.hardware.amd.thunderbird,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: RH7.0 on A7M266, worth it?
Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2001 22:02:34 +0200
In comp.os.linux.setup Yozza <reply.to - [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's better not to post, then to post misinformation.
> Saying that Micron/Crucial RAM uses 'compressed' memory chips is a load of crap.
Oh, I saw that! I was on the point of replying too! Compressed memory
chips, eh :-).
Peter
------------------------------
From: Vinz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 2 network cards - 1 cannot ping
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 22:16:55 +0200
You will have to configure samba for that. See below what lines you need
in your smb.conf file in order to have samba support two IP subnetworks
(192.168.3. and 192.168.1.):
# security. restrict samba for these hosts only
hosts allow = 192.168.1. 192.168.3. 127.
# have samba use different newtork interfaces
interfaces = 192.168.1.1/24 192.168.3.1/24
Restart smbd afterwards.
/Vinz
"ceddz@garage" wrote:
>
> Thanx, the subnet was my problem
> I used the same for both cards
> Now i setup 2 differnts subnets everything is okay except samba that won't
> see both subnets...
> bye
> ceddz
>
> Vincent Mombarg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Hi,
> >
> > What IP subnets did you define for the 10/100 mbit networks? Post the
> > output of 'route' as well.
> >
> > "ceddz@garage" wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi everyone
> > >
> > > I have a linux mandrake box with a 10mbits(eth0) etherface acting as a
> > > router on a hub and another 100mbit(eth1) etherface also on a hub...
> > > My linuxbox acts as a dhcp server and a lot of other stuff
> > >
> > > The Dhcp server is working very well on both networks, but the big
> problem
> > > is i can't ping at all on the 100mbit network (both directions) or do
> > > anything else...
> > >
> > > Both cards are working very well
> > >
> > > dhcp server logs match everything is okay on both netw...
> > >
> > > I've tried a lot of stuff with firewalling, ending with a 'accept all'
> btw
> > > both networks
> > >
> > > My problem IS NOT i can't link both networks, i just can't reach one of
> > > them, out of dhcp...\
> >
> > What do you mean here?
> >
> > >
> > > Maybe because it's eth2 ???
> > >
> > > Did i forget to enable something like dual networking....?
------------------------------
From: "Dr. Mueller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.misc,comp.sys.intel
Subject: OR840 - "CMOS battery failure detected"? Any clues?
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 20:30:03 GMT
I have the Intel OR840 mainboard and have a BIOS setup problem. When I move
the jumper (J1F2?) to pins 2-3 (in other words for setting the BIOS
configuration), my machine boots ok so far as loading the Adaptec SCSI BIOS
and detecting my SCSI drives, then the MS-DOS cursor moves to the bottom of
the screen and I get:
==========================
WARNING:
CMOS battery failure detected.
Press any key to continue
==========================
I press a key and nothing happens. Sometimes if I press a key it will go
into the BIOS, and if it does, it will at random remember the date/time.
The weird thing is if I put the jumper back again, the machine will boot
Windows 2000 with no problems or no strange BIOS errors.
Needless to say, I've changed the CMOS battery three times, all with a
different brand of new battery, still no luck. The problem is, I can't
configure the BIOS because of this. I *used* to be able to boot into the
BIOS setup ok, because earlier on when I had the machine it was BIOS version
229. Since I updated it to 248, I get this problem. Going back to 229
produces the same problem. I now want to change the settings but can't get
into the BIOS setup. At last count, I tried BIOS 244 to see what happens,
the same thing.
The details of my system/mainboard are:
Model : Intel OR840 mainboard
Mainboard AA# : 750780-701
BIOS Version : OR840703.86E.0244.P04.0008181100
RAM : 2 x 128MB RDRAM PC800 ECC
CPU : 2 x PIII 800EB 133FSB
Other : Adaptec 29160 Ultra160 SCSI
Things I've tried:
1) Changing the battery
2) Pulling out the ATX board power plug and putting it back
3) Taking out the PCI cards except the video card
None of this worked. I'd really appreciate some help with this, as I'm
completely out of ideas. I don't know if the mainboard is faulty or if I've
accidentally moved a cable or dislodged a jumper.
Many thanks.
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.comp.hardware.amd.thunderbird,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: RH7.0 on A7M266, worth it?
Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2001 22:13:29 +0200
In comp.os.linux.setup Stephen T Cripps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> over the way Micron is marketing its chips. Micron is normally very good
> memory and many of us use it. However, this issue relates specifically to
> the PC2100 memory as sold by Crucial. Note that their PC1600 is CL2 (ie
Incomprehensible. What's "PC2100"? I thought we were in the year 2001.
And what's PC1600? And what's CL2?
> PC1600A) and is a comparable market price to everywhere else. Crucial's
Oh, it's PC1600A, is it!
> PC2100 is CL2.5 and is NOT the same product that Micron is selling to the
Aha! So "PC2100" must be a brand name, and "CL2.5" must be a
specification. This leaves me puzzled .. if "PC1600" is also a brand name,
and it conforms to a specification "CL2", then how can you say that
it's "i.e. PC1600A", which must also be a brand name?
> industry through its distributors. That is PC2100A (ie CL2) using a normal
Now we have PC2100A, supposedly a brandname, being CL2, a spec. If I
recall rightly, we now have:
brand? spec?
PC2100A \__ CL2
PC1600 /
PC2100 --- CL2.5
Which is wonderful, but what are you on about?
> chip configuration and performs very well. Crucial's PC2100B is unusually
> cheap as far as the industry is concerned. This is not a matter of fear of
Oooooh, wooo hooo.
> I do not and cannot say do not buy Crucial memory; I simply would like
> consumers to have as much fact about this new technology available as
In that case, you'd better start making yourself clear, instead of
talking junk talk.
> possible. Many people are only just hearing about DDR RAM, let alone
Amen. What is it? Why should I care? I'm quite happy with 133MHz ECC
dimms.
> hope that it will work fine. I freely admit that my PC2100A product (which
Product? Are you seriously suggesting that you have tooled up a memory
chip fab plant in your garage? Or have you placed an order for some
daughter assemblies from a taiwanese maker, to your own specs?
> often includes Micron originals) is at the market price and does not compete
> with Crucial. But at least more people can now make an informed choice.
Exactly zero more people, I imagine, after that.
Peter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED](Marcelo Rodrigues)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.questions,alt.linux.storage.moderated
Subject: Re: Adding SCSI devices to an EIDE Linux Machine?
Date: 7 Apr 2001 20:30:35 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED](Marcelo Rodrigues)
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "The News" wrote:
> I have come across a disk array from Sun that has 4 hard drives adding up
to
> about 10 gigabytes of storage on them. At the same time, I was given an
> Exabyte 8202 - 8 mm tape drive, also SCSI. I have an Adaptec 1520 SCSI
> adapter in a PC that I can pull for this cause. How hard would it be to
get
> this hooked up to my Linux machine which already had an EIDE drive? I got
> this Linux box already set up and although I was able to upgrade it from RH
> 5.0 to RH 6.1, I'm not sure I'm up to this especially if it means I've got
> to compile the kernel and stuff like that. Any advice?
>
>
>
>
A few things:
The Exabyte is probably an 8205 or 8200 ( I don't know any 8202 .)
The Adaptec 1520, if I remember correctly, is a cheap PIO SCSI adaptor and
is probably going to be too slow to run the Exabyte streamer on it, let alone
the
fact that you will be wasting the capability of the hard disks on such a slow
controller.
If I were you, I'd just buy a used PCI DMA SCSI controller from eBay. The
Adaptec
2940, for example, can be had for a good price there. Besides, it has the
drivers already in the kernel that the installation gives you, so you don't
have to recompile. ( I am assuming, judging by your last remarks, that you
never recompiled that kernel. )
--
"NeXTMail" OK at this address only.
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux on Intel Or Celeron? what is the best choice?
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 20:59:47 GMT
Bastiaan Schaap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Celeron's are not often chosen in server systems, because they don't perform
> too well... So I'd say Pentium. Keep in mind however that Pentium II and III
They perform just fine! Are you a chump for marketing or what? Celerons
are the same (and better!) chip design than the P2 and P3 developemnt
of the ppro line. They're merely underclocked by intel to fill the
market gap. Clock them back up to the right speed and they match
the more expensive lines. (the C300A was the most famous and dramaric
example of this marketting strategy, since with its smaller die
and finer fabrication technolgy and full speed instead of half speed
cache, it outperformed the P2 at 50% more clock and something like $300
more price). Your only problem is undoing intels sabotage.
Mind you, if you aren't wanting SMP, AMD durons and athlons are the
best bargain nowadays. Keep them cool.
> are a done deal... (production is stopped for these processors). So either
> choose Pentium IV or AMD athlon. Personally I prefer AMD because the
Do NOT choose the P4! Are you crazy? That is a botched job rushed to
market by the marketing people over the howls of the engineers. It
will underperform by about 50% on its clock speed, merely by virtue of
having gone to market with a single instruction decoder instead of the
three parallel decoders that were planned. That bottleneck is on its
own sufficient to stall it dead. And no onchip optimization logic.
And it had to go to market with only 8K L1 cache (like a 386!) and
no L3 cache, as was originally planned.
It's dead. A disaster. Forget it. Intel are in trouble.
> price/performance ratio is nicer, however if your boss is willing to pay for
> the Pentium IV, I'd go with the Pentium IV. Celeron's are nice if you do a
Nonsense!
Please read before spouting. Check out the measurements and analysis
available on the web. I won't direct you to it .. oh, well, at least
check out tomshardware.com and anandtech.com, before going on to the
more acadmic analyses available.
Peter
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.hardware.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Hardware Digest
******************************
