Text 5760, 201 rader
Skriven 2005-07-07 22:18:54 av Rich (1:379/45)
Kommentar till text 5758 av Don Hills (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: Productivity
========================
From: "Rich" <@>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0168_01C58341.DCFE3F90
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I can't speak for everyone but I expect ordinary users value a CPU =
for its peak performance and responsiveness not the steady state and =
throughput. When you make a claim that some specific speed is all that = they
need you are making a claim on the value of that user's time. When = a user
clicks a button or similar, they want the computer respond = immediately. The
same is true of broadband or even dial-up speeds which = others claim that some
specific speed is enough. Sure some folks are = downloading large files and
care about continuous throughput but most = ordinary users have a connection
that is almost always idle and what = they perceive is how long it takes once
they click on a link to see the = result. A response time of one second
instead of two is very = perceptable even if the connection will then be idle
for a minute before = they click again. Now this isn't a measure of
productivity and I = mention it only because you made a claim that some
particular = performance is more than enough for many people I believe value
their = time more than you do and would disagree with you. This is simple =
cost/benefit decision and businesses may make different choices than = someone
for personal use.
I agree with you that power consumption is an issue and as far as I =
can see Intel, Microsoft (whom you named) and others are all trying to =
address this issue.
Rich
"Don Hills" <dmhills@attglobal.net> wrote in message =
news:anezCtgaXK9S092yn@attglobal.net...
In article <42cd45bb$1@w3.nls.net>, "Rich" <@> wrote:
> Good for you. At least your claim is that only you don't believe =
you
>would be more productive not what tony claimed which is that no =
ordinary
>user would be more productive.
I'm on his side on this one. "Ordinary" users have all the CPU speed =
and
"traditional" function that they need, though I accept a more =
realistic
cutoff point. For most businesses, this occurred about the time of 1 =
GHz
processors and Office 2000. That's more than enough for most home =
users too,
except for gaming and home video editing. Even there, the trend is =
going
away from fast CPUs to high-performance GPUs (highly parallel =
processors)
both for traditional graphics work and for new applications such as =
database
query processing.
All of which creates a bit of a problem for the CPU makers and =
Microsoft.
Intel stumbled and is seeing the GPU makers steal their lunch. =
Longhorn
requires a machine specification that will still be bleeding edge (and
extremely expensive) when it ships. Good luck persuading businesses =
that
it's a compelling upgrade...
There are other factors to consider, such as the power consumption of =
the
new machines. Intel's new dual-core processor consumes about 130 =
watts. Add
that to 100 to 200 watts for the new GPUs and you're starting to look =
at a
significant energy cost for businesses - both the electricity and the =
HVAC
required. (On the plus energy side, LCD panels are replacing CRTs.) I =
think
low-power pizza boxes using VIA or Pentium M processors and running an =
OS
and business app set that's happy in 512 MB to 1 GB memory will be the
popular upgrade round next time for businesses serious about TCO.
--=20
Don Hills (dmhills at attglobaldotnet) Wellington, New Zealand
------=_NextPart_000_0168_01C58341.DCFE3F90
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2668" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> I can't speak for everyone =
but I=20
expect ordinary users value a CPU for its peak performance and =
responsiveness=20
not the steady state and throughput. When you make a claim that = some=20
specific speed is all that they need you are making a claim on the value = of
that=20
user's time. When a user clicks a button or similar, they want the =
computer respond immediately. The same is true of broadband or = even=20
dial-up speeds which others claim that some specific speed is = enough.
Sure=20
some folks are downloading large files and care about continuous = throughput
but=20
most ordinary users have a connection that is almost always idle and = what
they=20
perceive is how long it takes once they click on a link to see the=20
result. A response time of one second instead of two is very=20
perceptable even if the connection will then be idle for a minute before =
they=20
click again. Now this isn't a measure of productivity and I = mention
it=20
only because you made a claim that some particular performance is more =
than=20
enough for many people I believe value their time more than you do and =
would=20
disagree with you. This is simple cost/benefit decision and = businesses
may=20
make different choices than someone for personal use.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> I agree with you that =
power=20
consumption is an issue and as far as I can see Intel, Microsoft (whom = you=20
named) and others are all trying to address this issue.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Don Hills" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:dmhills@attglobal.net">dmhills@attglobal.net</A>> =
wrote in=20
message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:anezCtgaXK9S092yn@attglobal.net">news:anezCtgaXK9S092yn@attg=
lobal.net</A>...</DIV>In=20
article <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:42cd45bb$1@w3.nls.net">42cd45bb$1@w3.nls.net</A>>, =
"Rich"=20
<@> wrote:<BR>> Good for you. At least your =
claim=20
is that only you don't believe you<BR>>would be more productive not =
what=20
tony claimed which is that no ordinary<BR>>user would be more=20
productive.<BR><BR>I'm on his side on this one. "Ordinary" users have =
all the=20
CPU speed and<BR>"traditional" function that they need, though I =
accept a more=20
realistic<BR>cutoff point. For most businesses, this occurred about =
the time=20
of 1 GHz<BR>processors and Office 2000. That's more than enough for =
most home=20
users too,<BR>except for gaming and home video editing. Even there, =
the trend=20
is going<BR>away from fast CPUs to high-performance GPUs (highly =
parallel=20
processors)<BR>both for traditional graphics work and for new =
applications=20
such as database<BR>query processing.<BR><BR>All of which creates a =
bit of a=20
problem for the CPU makers and Microsoft.<BR>Intel stumbled and is =
seeing the=20
GPU makers steal their lunch. Longhorn<BR>requires a machine =
specification=20
that will still be bleeding edge (and<BR>extremely expensive) when it =
ships.=20
Good luck persuading businesses that<BR>it's a compelling=20
upgrade...<BR><BR>There are other factors to consider, such as the =
power=20
consumption of the<BR>new machines. Intel's new dual-core processor =
consumes=20
about 130 watts. Add<BR>that to 100 to 200 watts for the new GPUs and =
you're=20
starting to look at a<BR>significant energy cost for businesses - both =
the=20
electricity and the HVAC<BR>required. (On the plus energy side, LCD =
panels are=20
replacing CRTs.) I think<BR>low-power pizza boxes using VIA or Pentium =
M=20
processors and running an OS<BR>and business app set that's happy in =
512 MB to=20
1 GB memory will be the<BR>popular upgrade round next time for =
businesses=20
serious about TCO.<BR><BR>-- <BR>Don Hills (dmhills =
at=20
attglobaldotnet) Wellington, New=20
Zealand<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0168_01C58341.DCFE3F90--
--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
* Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)
|