Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 25th Oct 2011 23:00 UTC
Windows Ten years ago today, Microsoft launched what would become the world's most popular desktop operating system - for better or worse. Its interface colours were... Interesting (trying hard to avoid bias here, folks, bear with me now). Its early performance was... Not always entirely up to par. Its security track record was... Well, it sucked hard in that department (I tried). We're ten years down the line, and thanks to Vista, way too many people are still using this relic.
Thread beginning with comment 494547
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[14]: A great OS
by BeamishBoy on Thu 27th Oct 2011 02:59 UTC in reply to "RE[13]: A great OS"
BeamishBoy
Member since:
2010-10-27

Speaking from personal experience, if a piece of digital electronics passess acceptance test with a certain performance, and it still passes all functional tests years later (i.e. the hardware components are not faulty), then it will also still pass all performance tests. Digital electronics either work, or fail. On or off. Go or No go. There is no "maybe".

This implies transmissions over a cable. Analogue.


Deary me. In spite of the criticism you've received in this thread, I was willing to assume in good faith that you knew at least a little bit about how computer hardware actually works. It turn out, however, that you clearly don't have the faintest fucking idea what you're talking about.

What's even more depressing is that you appear to have spent 6158 posts on OSNews to get to this stage...

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[15]: A great OS
by lemur2 on Thu 27th Oct 2011 05:02 in reply to "RE[14]: A great OS"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"Speaking from personal experience, if a piece of digital electronics passess acceptance test with a certain performance, and it still passes all functional tests years later (i.e. the hardware components are not faulty), then it will also still pass all performance tests. Digital electronics either work, or fail. On or off. Go or No go. There is no "maybe". This implies transmissions over a cable. Analogue.
Deary me. In spite of the criticism you've received in this thread, I was willing to assume in good faith that you knew at least a little bit about how computer hardware actually works. It turn out, however, that you clearly don't have the faintest f--king idea what you're talking about. What's even more depressing is that you appear to have spent 6158 posts on OSNews to get to this stage... "

Deary me.

Here you go, here is a description of an ethernet transceiver IC (warning, PDF).

http://isdl.snu.ac.kr/wkim/pdfs/ic/ic68.pdf

In this PDF you will see an overview of how the analogue signals on the ethernet wire are converted back and forth to digital data stream of whatever ethernet serial controller sits behind it.

VCOs. Line drivers and receivers. Voltage conditioning. DAC. Delay cell. Comparator. PLL. Rs, Cs and Ls. In other words ... Analogue. Subject to noise and degradation over time. Potential to increase error rates as components degrade over time.

The rest of the ethernet link is digital, and it will either work or not work.

So, in essence, it turns out that you are wrong, and you have embarrased yourself on a public forum. Sucks to be you.

Edited 2011-10-27 05:17 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[16]: A great OS
by lucas_maximus on Thu 27th Oct 2011 18:46 in reply to "RE[15]: A great OS"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

No it is you who are wrong.

Whichever way you spin it ... I/O is the major limiting factor and while SATA does have DAC which apparently degrade ... the computer can be as slow as the slowest memory (usually the hardisk) if it is accessing it.

So if the controller is having crappy performance the whole system will suffer since the I/O stream won't actually get there as quick.

So he is correct ... Shall I explain Pages and Frames to you next?

Edited 2011-10-27 18:51 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2