Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #60387 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2024-11-03 00:54 -0400 |
| Last post | 2024-11-04 18:53 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 77 — 10 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-11-03 00:54 -0400
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-11-03 08:48 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-11-03 19:15 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-11-03 15:25 -0500
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-03 22:58 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-11-03 15:24 -0500
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-03 22:56 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> - 2024-11-04 08:35 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2024-11-04 16:40 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-04 18:14 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2024-11-04 10:25 -0800
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2024-11-04 18:41 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-05 00:32 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-03 23:10 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-03 23:24 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-11-03 18:30 -0500
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-04 02:49 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-11-03 22:25 -0500
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-04 06:27 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-11-04 01:51 -0500
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-04 07:03 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-11-04 02:35 -0500
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-04 18:10 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-11-04 19:30 -0500
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-05 20:07 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2024-11-05 12:24 -0800
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-06 00:16 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Harold Stevens <wookie@aspen.localdomain> - 2024-11-04 02:02 -0600
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-04 17:47 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-04 19:00 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-05 00:02 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2024-11-04 16:46 -0500
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-04 18:59 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-05 00:17 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2024-11-05 07:33 -0500
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-05 20:15 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-11-04 13:01 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2024-11-04 10:20 -0800
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-11-04 18:30 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2024-11-04 10:45 -0800
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-11-04 19:57 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2024-11-04 13:15 -0800
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-11-04 19:57 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-11-04 20:08 -0500
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-05 20:18 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-11-05 20:31 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-11-05 23:38 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-06 00:26 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-11-06 01:29 -0500
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-11-06 11:12 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-11-06 11:24 -0500
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-11-06 11:11 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-06 17:49 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-11-06 18:38 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-11-06 16:46 -0500
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-11-07 10:37 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-11-07 17:12 -0500
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-08 01:13 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-11-08 02:43 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-11-06 16:41 -0500
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-11-07 10:36 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-06 00:19 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-05 21:46 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-04 18:58 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2024-11-04 11:29 -0800
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-04 19:40 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-05 00:25 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2024-11-05 07:47 -0800
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-04 18:56 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-04 05:05 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-03 20:50 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-03 22:58 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-03 23:25 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-11-04 04:57 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-04 05:06 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-11-04 13:09 +0000
Re: Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-04 18:53 +0000
Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 Next page →
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-11-04 07:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lor9usFdl7cU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #60481 |
On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 01:51:43 -0500, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote: > Anyway, Linux lets these boxes be all that they can be as opposed to > the obese pig Win - and you don't have to create an online M$ spy > account ! The Beelink came with Windows 11 Pro. I was a little skeptical of the license but Win11 didn't last long enough to bother. I've done dual boots in the past but lately I go scorched earth if there's anything on the drive.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-11-04 02:35 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <5PCcndaO0_vK5LX6nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #60482 |
On 11/4/24 2:03 AM, rbowman wrote: > On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 01:51:43 -0500, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote: > >> Anyway, Linux lets these boxes be all that they can be as opposed to >> the obese pig Win - and you don't have to create an online M$ spy >> account ! > > The Beelink came with Windows 11 Pro. I was a little skeptical of the > license but Win11 didn't last long enough to bother. I've done dual boots > in the past but lately I go scorched earth if there's anything on the > drive. I do NOT need M$ for anything whatsoever - so Win DIES immediately ! Made a VM of a recent FreeBSD so I could experiment with installation quirks and see how to install xorg and xfce desktop. The way it works the GUI stuff does NOT come up automagically, but you have to 'startx'. For my needs this is kinda exactly what I want. MOST access will be SSH. The GUIs *can* be very handy sometimes ... but you don't necessarily want them to start EVERY time. In any case, very happy with BeeLink/BMax. Alas do NOT have the Pi I/O pins, but different boards for different uses hey ........ Recently got an Ard Uno and the bits and pieces to build an electronic door lock. TWO-button switch. The idea is to enter a 7 or 8 digit BINARY combo using the buttons with maybe a 10-15 second time-out. Gotta decide on polling -vs- interrupt ... interrupt can use much less standby power if you do it right combined with the Ard low-power/sleep library. Amazing what can be done even with really weak/slow chips. For MOST Ard uses though I'd rec the Mega2560 - but you may have to tweak the libs for accessories as the pins are different. Built some good multi-channel solar-powered environmental monitors using those boards. Note the "RuggedDurino 2560" ... all pins zener protected. You CAN buy 3.3v logic-level MOSFETS now, which would be handier for PI applications that have to drive relays and such. However I tend to put optoisolators between boards and the outside world if extreme signal speed isn't required. This is both safe AND you can drive the optos with 3.3 but use 5v or more on the transistor side of things. Also great at rejecting high-volt/low-amp noise from motors, relays, ignition systems and such.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-11-04 18:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <losh11Fjbq4U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #60483 |
On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 02:35:50 -0500, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote: > Recently got an Ard Uno and the bits and pieces to build an > electronic door lock. TWO-button switch. The idea is to enter a 7 or > 8 digit BINARY combo using the buttons with maybe a 10-15 second > time-out. Gotta decide on polling -vs- interrupt ... interrupt can > use much less standby power if you do it right combined with the Ard > low-power/sleep library. Amazing what can be done even with really > weak/slow chips. For MOST Ard uses though I'd rec the Mega2560 - but > you may have to tweak the libs for accessories as the pins are > different. Built some good multi-channel solar-powered environmental > monitors using those boards. I've got a few Unos. My problem is figuring out what to do with them. I don't mean the coding/peripheral aspects but projects that are something I need. Right now I have a 4 wheel chassis with a primitive IR keypad controller. The long range plan is to incorporate the PWM ability of the L298Ns and go to the nfr240l01 for two way communication. The problem is the chassis has limitations. I've got a couple of the Nano 33 BLE Sense boards. A MIT course in TinyML used them. The nRF52840 is Arm. All of the onboard sensors make it more expensive but it's handier if you can make use of them. Right now I'm messing around with the Pico W. Too many choices, too little discipline...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-11-04 19:30 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <w86dncOsX_CC-rT6nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #60526 |
On 11/4/24 1:10 PM, rbowman wrote: > On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 02:35:50 -0500, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote: > >> Recently got an Ard Uno and the bits and pieces to build an >> electronic door lock. TWO-button switch. The idea is to enter a 7 or >> 8 digit BINARY combo using the buttons with maybe a 10-15 second >> time-out. Gotta decide on polling -vs- interrupt ... interrupt can >> use much less standby power if you do it right combined with the Ard >> low-power/sleep library. Amazing what can be done even with really >> weak/slow chips. For MOST Ard uses though I'd rec the Mega2560 - but >> you may have to tweak the libs for accessories as the pins are >> different. Built some good multi-channel solar-powered environmental >> monitors using those boards. > > I've got a few Unos. My problem is figuring out what to do with them. I > don't mean the coding/peripheral aspects but projects that are something I > need.o Know what you mean ... I've got tons of parts - for those "someday" projects :-) The executors of my estate are NOT gonna be happy. Hell, even have a ZX-81 in The Heap somewhere :-) > Right now I have a 4 wheel chassis with a primitive IR keypad > controller. The long range plan is to incorporate the PWM ability of the > L298Ns and go to the nfr240l01 for two way communication. The problem is > the chassis has limitations. PWM ... why not steppers ? Build a better chassis ? Of course that requires the right tools, which means off to the hardware store, which means bringing back a bunch of other stuff you didn't know you needed and ........ I come across robotics sites selling more-or-less finished chassis. Just bolt yer stuff on. Radio comms, esp with limited units like Ards, can be annoying. They DO make an Uno with built-in wifi now - so depending on your coverage you might be able to run it straight up from a laptop. There are various 900 MHz bi-di modules too. https://store.arduino.cc/products/arduino-uno-wifi-rev2 > I've got a couple of the Nano 33 BLE Sense boards. A MIT course in TinyML > used them. The nRF52840 is Arm. All of the onboard sensors make it more > expensive but it's handier if you can make use of them. > > Right now I'm messing around with the Pico W. Too many choices, too little > discipline... Again, I get it. My last job left me time and leeway to fool around with various projects that MIGHT, maybe, be useful someday some way. A few were. Fun, and I learned a lot. The Pico does interest me. Basically a hopped-up microcontroller and you can get wi-fi too. Looks easier than starting with a raw PIC or '51 and building up from there. In any case you can get surprisingly good computing power and peripherials for pretty cheap now. Outfits like Grove have whole fams of accessories kinda meant to go together. https://wiki.seeedstudio.com/Grove_System/ I don't build a UNIVAC to start any new computer project, so perhaps it's not "cheating" to take advantage of what the modern microcontroller/microcomputer catalog offers. Just glad a LOT of people are still into this sort of stuff - don't think a smartphone is the end-all of tech. The spirit of Radio Shack lives on. :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-11-05 20:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lovc7bF20b6U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #60580 |
On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 19:30:22 -0500, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote: > On 11/4/24 1:10 PM, rbowman wrote: >> On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 02:35:50 -0500, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote: > Know what you mean ... I've got tons of parts - for those "someday" > projects :-) > > The executors of my estate are NOT gonna be happy. > Hell, even have a ZX-81 in The Heap somewhere :-) Whoever cleans up after me would be best served with a 5 gallon can of gasoline and a match. There are several books about 'Swedish death cleaning'. Supposedly the Swedes have a word for getting rid of all your junk before dying. >> Right now I have a 4 wheel chassis with a primitive IR keypad >> controller. The long range plan is to incorporate the PWM ability of >> the L298Ns and go to the nfr240l01 for two way communication. The >> problem is the chassis has limitations. > > PWM ... why not steppers ? Path of least resistance. There are a lot of chassis available in the $20 range. They're a couple of pieces of plexiglas, standoffs, encoders and other hardware. Most include TT gearbox motors. https://www.adafruit.com/product/3777 I'd previously built a 3 wheel chassis with converted R/C servos but these seemed a little more, um, finished looking. A problem with 4WD is the motors don't have quite enough torque to skid steer for tight turns. You need to reverse the drive on one side rather than just bulling around. > Build a better chassis ? Of course that requires the right tools, > which means off to the hardware store, which means bringing back a > bunch of other stuff you didn't know you needed and ........ I'm pretty sure I read it about 30 years ago but I'm reading Neal Stephenson's 'Zodiac'. The protagonist goes to a hardware store to find some way to block the ports in a chemical plants underwater diffuser. He notes that young clerks try to be helpful while the older ones let you wander around without bothering you knowing that almost nothing that's bought in a hardware store is put to its intended use. I had to laugh having been there too many times over the years. > I come across robotics sites selling more-or-less finished chassis. > Just bolt yer stuff on. Yup. > Radio comms, esp with limited units like Ards, can be annoying. They > DO make an Uno with built-in wifi now - so depending on your coverage > you might be able to run it straight up from a laptop. There are > various 900 MHz bi-di modules too. > > https://store.arduino.cc/products/arduino-uno-wifi-rev2 The R4? I've been working with the Pico W but the Arduino format is attractive. I like the USB C rather than Micro USB. My eyes aren't what they were 50 years ago. That's the mice thing about the original Uno -- you can't confuse USB B with anything as you search through the cable collection. > The Pico does interest me. Basically a hopped-up microcontroller and > you can get wi-fi too. Looks easier than starting with a raw PIC or > '51 and building up from there. As everyone moves to Arm M cores it's a little less like the wild west. I never worked with the PICs, only the AVRs. Back then I was working with assembly and the AVRs were more like the Intel devices I was familiar with. > Just glad a LOT of people are still into this sort of stuff - don't > think a smartphone is the end-all of tech. The spirit of Radio Shack > lives on. :-) When they built the new library they incorporated a maker space rather than a few things stuffed into a meeting room. I don't think it's a formal class but someone is available Saturdays to help with Arduino projects.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-11-05 12:24 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <20241105122424.000060fb@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #60625 |
On 5 Nov 2024 20:07:07 GMT rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: > > Just glad a LOT of people are still into this sort of stuff - don't > > think a smartphone is the end-all of tech. The spirit of Radio > > Shack lives on. :-) > > When they built the new library they incorporated a maker space > rather than a few things stuffed into a meeting room. I don't think > it's a formal class but someone is available Saturdays to help with > Arduino projects. Really need more of these kinds of things outside of major metro areas, but yes, it's encouraging to see :) (Reminds me, I should do a writeup over in alt.music.makers.electronic and rec.music.makers.synth on the MFOS synthesizer I'm building...!)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-11-06 00:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lovqq5F40feU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #60632 |
On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 12:24:24 -0800, John Ames wrote: > On 5 Nov 2024 20:07:07 GMT rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: > >> > Just glad a LOT of people are still into this sort of stuff - don't >> > think a smartphone is the end-all of tech. The spirit of Radio Shack >> > lives on. >> >> When they built the new library they incorporated a maker space rather >> than a few things stuffed into a meeting room. I don't think it's a >> formal class but someone is available Saturdays to help with Arduino >> projects. > > Really need more of these kinds of things outside of major metro areas, > but yes, it's encouraging to see Nobody ever accused Missoula of being a major metro area :) I should cruise by more often to see what the utilization is. I'm guilty of using the libby app to borrow digital books delivered via Amazon without setting foot in the library. Times are changing. The new library does have physical books but a lot of floor space is devoted to a childrens' discovery area, the maker space, a video creation area, and even a demo kitchen.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Harold Stevens <wookie@aspen.localdomain> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-11-04 02:02 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <slrnvigvsu.6se.wookie@aspen.localdomain> |
| In reply to | #60482 |
(nudefroups trimmed to colm...) In <lor9usFdl7cU2@mid.individual.net> rbowman: [Snip...] > The Beelink came with Windows 11 Pro. I was a little skeptical of the > license but Win11 didn't last long enough to bother. I've done dual boots > in the past but lately I go scorched earth if there's anything on the > drive. +1 I have a wowe Mini PC (AMD Excavator) Here's the review I wrote about it for Amazon: <Quote> I don't use Microsoft, but the Linux version I received has outstanding value as a personal or SOHO PC. Runs very quietly, and onboard cooling seems very effective (personal or SOHO tasks). Additional 16GB RAM (separate order) installed easily and works flawlessly. Delivered with Ubuntu Linux. I prefer Debian, which installed flawlessly. Minor Linux nit: neither the Ubuntu nor the Debian install supports switching from X console to a non-X console (TTY command line), via the CNTL-ALT-F(1:6) keyboard toggles. </Quote> FWIW: installed Bookworm over (I think) Ubuntu 22.4 delivered. Caveat: The wowe does not get good reviews on Amazon (2.7 out of 5 stars, last I checked). I'm unsure what that's about (overclocker Winduds gamers?). -- Regards, Weird (Harold Stevens) * IMPORTANT EMAIL INFO FOLLOWS * Pardon any bogus email addresses (wookie) in place for spambots. Really, it's (wyrd) at att, dotted with net. * DO NOT SPAM IT. * I toss GoogleGroup (http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-11-04 17:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <losflnFj5plU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #60484 |
On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 02:02:38 -0600, Harold Stevens wrote: > Caveat: The wowe does not get good reviews on Amazon (2.7 out of 5 > stars, last I checked). I got interested in minis when the company bought a Mac mini to build a iPhone app, not the Mac part but the form factor. The Intel NUCs were overpriced for what they were and I prefer AMD. I won't say Beelink was the only offering a couple of years ago but they were one of the first. Now there's a whole raft of copycats. The Beelink has worked for me so I'd stick with them if I buy another although I'm sure some of the others are just as good.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-11-04 19:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vgb5kl$12umd$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #60519 |
On 4 Nov 2024 17:47:36 GMT, rbowman wrote: > The Intel NUCs were overpriced for what they were ... And Intel still couldn’t make money on them. That’s why it gave up.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-11-05 00:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lot5k1Fmbk3U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #60547 |
On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 19:00:37 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > On 4 Nov 2024 17:47:36 GMT, rbowman wrote: > >> The Intel NUCs were overpriced for what they were ... > > And Intel still couldn’t make money on them. That’s why it gave up. It will be interesting to see how ASUS does with the line. They're not going for the budget consumer market. I think the cheapest NUC 14 is $800 and it's up from there.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-11-04 16:46 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vgbbru$13rit$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #60519 |
rbowman wrote this post while blinking in Morse code: > On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 02:02:38 -0600, Harold Stevens wrote: > >> Caveat: The wowe does not get good reviews on Amazon (2.7 out of 5 >> stars, last I checked). > > I got interested in minis when the company bought a Mac mini to build a > iPhone app, not the Mac part but the form factor. The Intel NUCs were > overpriced for what they were and I prefer AMD. > > I won't say Beelink was the only offering a couple of years ago but they > were one of the first. Now there's a whole raft of copycats. The Beelink > has worked for me so I'd stick with them if I buy another although I'm > sure some of the others are just as good. So far I'm liking my Trycoo mini PC. (Dual boot Win 11 Pro / Debian) -- Used with permission.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-11-04 18:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vgb5hr$12umd$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #60482 |
On 4 Nov 2024 07:03:56 GMT, rbowman wrote: > The Beelink came with Windows 11 Pro. I was a little skeptical of the > license but Win11 didn't last long enough to bother. I've done dual > boots in the past but lately I go scorched earth if there's anything on > the drive. The trouble with that is, you are still paying the Microsoft tax.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-11-05 00:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lot6hnFmbk0U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #60545 |
On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 18:59:07 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > On 4 Nov 2024 07:03:56 GMT, rbowman wrote: > >> The Beelink came with Windows 11 Pro. I was a little skeptical of the >> license but Win11 didn't last long enough to bother. I've done dual >> boots in the past but lately I go scorched earth if there's anything on >> the drive. > > The trouble with that is, you are still paying the Microsoft tax. At $350 the tax must be bargained down. That's why I said I didn't have complete confidence in the 11 Pro it came with, not that a company in Shenzhen would cut corners. Maybe it's entirely legit. The Swift 3 was $679 with very similar hardware including the display, keyboard, laptop configuration. amazon.com/dp/B0D8NS7KSH/ When you get down to $165 that claims to come with Windows 11 Pro you've got to wonder what exactly the 'tax' is. Not the greatest processor and I doubt the other components are top shelf, but there still has to be some cost involved for the physical components and assembly.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-11-05 07:33 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vgcvr3$1gcv1$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #60578 |
rbowman wrote this post while blinking in Morse code: > On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 18:59:07 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > >> On 4 Nov 2024 07:03:56 GMT, rbowman wrote: >> >>> The Beelink came with Windows 11 Pro. I was a little skeptical of the >>> license but Win11 didn't last long enough to bother. I've done dual >>> boots in the past but lately I go scorched earth if there's anything on >>> the drive. >> >> The trouble with that is, you are still paying the Microsoft tax. > > At $350 the tax must be bargained down. That's why I said I didn't have > complete confidence in the 11 Pro it came with, not that a company in > Shenzhen would cut corners. > > Maybe it's entirely legit. The Swift 3 was $679 with very similar hardware > including the display, keyboard, laptop configuration. > > amazon.com/dp/B0D8NS7KSH/ > > When you get down to $165 that claims to come with Windows 11 Pro you've > got to wonder what exactly the 'tax' is. Not the greatest processor and I > doubt the other components are top shelf, but there still has to be some > cost involved for the physical components and assembly. I thought it well-known that Microsoft sells Windows dirt-cheap to OEMs. -- Cosmotronic Software Unlimited Inc. does not warrant that the functions contained in the program will meet your requirements or that the operation of the program will be uninterrupted or error-free. However, Cosmotronic Software Unlimited Inc. warrants the diskette(s) on which the program is furnished to be of black color and square shape under normal use for a period of ninety (90) days from the date of purchase. NOTE: IN NO EVENT WILL COSMOTRONIC SOFTWARE UNLIMITED OR ITS DISTRIBUTORS AND THEIR DEALERS BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DAMAGES, INCLUDING ANY LOST PROFIT, LOST SAVINGS, LOST PATIENCE OR OTHER INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES. -- Horstmann Software Design, the "ChiWriter" user manual
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-11-05 20:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lovcnnF20b6U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #60613 |
On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 07:33:29 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > I thought it well-known that Microsoft sells Windows dirt-cheap to OEMs. I wonder how cheap dirt is these days? OEM keys that fell off the back of a truck are cheap enough. Anyway I have no regrets when I overwrite Windows.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-11-04 13:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vgagid$ul44$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #60475 |
On 04/11/2024 03:25, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote: > My direct experience with Pi4 vs Pi5 is that the thing > seems mostly twice as fast. The 5 may have better power > management too - but at full tilt it can use more juice. I was having a chat yesterday with a man who was fairly involved with ACORN and ARM back in the day. He put it very simply: For a given clock speed, which is limited by the physical dimensions of the chip, the smaller the transistors the less power it takes to run the chips. However fabrication limits are getting stuck at 10nm and below, and clock speeds are stuck at a few GHz which means that the power-performance ratio is pretty much the same for Intel and ARM architectures. Only by having fewer transistors and implicitly doing less, can the power be reduced. I.e. Moore's law has basically stopped representing reality. And ARM is no longer fantastic power performance compared with Intel. Its one advantage is it doesn't have to support a legacy architecture. And so its probably cheaper and less buggy. So the price performance is probably still there, but not power. -- Civilization exists by geological consent, subject to change without notice. – Will Durant
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-11-04 10:20 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <20241104102013.0000358c@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #60493 |
On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 13:01:01 +0000 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > However fabrication limits are getting stuck at 10nm and below, and > clock speeds are stuck at a few GHz which means that the > power-performance ratio is pretty much the same for Intel and ARM > architectures. Only by having fewer transistors and implicitly doing > less, can the power be reduced. > > I.e. Moore's law has basically stopped representing reality. And ARM > is no longer fantastic power performance compared with Intel. Its one > advantage is it doesn't have to support a legacy architecture. And so > its probably cheaper and less buggy. I've long held that necessity will ultimately force a serious rethink of programming practices w.r.t. resource-efficiency once Moore's Law runs afoul of pesky real-world physics principles, i.e. "eighteen inches is a nanosecond" vs. "you can't cram an arbitrary amount of stuff into a finite space without creating a black hole." Gonna be real interesting when we finally hit the wall.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-11-04 18:30 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vgb3s3$1272b$8@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #60528 |
On 04/11/2024 18:20, John Ames wrote: > On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 13:01:01 +0000 > The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> However fabrication limits are getting stuck at 10nm and below, and >> clock speeds are stuck at a few GHz which means that the >> power-performance ratio is pretty much the same for Intel and ARM >> architectures. Only by having fewer transistors and implicitly doing >> less, can the power be reduced. >> >> I.e. Moore's law has basically stopped representing reality. And ARM >> is no longer fantastic power performance compared with Intel. Its one >> advantage is it doesn't have to support a legacy architecture. And so >> its probably cheaper and less buggy. > > I've long held that necessity will ultimately force a serious rethink of > programming practices w.r.t. resource-efficiency once Moore's Law runs > afoul of pesky real-world physics principles, i.e. "eighteen inches is a > nanosecond" vs. "you can't cram an arbitrary amount of stuff into a > finite space without creating a black hole." Gonna be real interesting > when we finally hit the wall. > It may be that computing as we understand it is simply a mature technology, and there isn't much more to actually do. -- There’s a mighty big difference between good, sound reasons and reasons that sound good. Burton Hillis (William Vaughn, American columnist)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-11-04 10:45 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <20241104104535.00006a33@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #60534 |
On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 18:30:27 +0000 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > It may be that computing as we understand it is simply a mature > technology, and there isn't much more to actually do. You have to wonder - but businesses accustomed to getting cheap-as-free upgrades of ~2^N in raw compute every few years will doubtless still expect to scale their capabilities upward accordingly. When they can't, it's gonna be real interesting to see what kind of renewed interest there'll be in maximizing efficient use of the available resources, vs. the "throw a beefier computer at it" approach that has very much been standard practice for the last ~30 yrs.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web