Softpanorama
(slightly skeptical)
Open Source Software Educational Society
May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Softpanorama Search
|
Softpanorama |
May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Softpanorama Search
|
| News | Recommended Books | Recommended Links | Choosing Your Computer Mouse | Dell | Sun Sparc |
| Architecture | History | Humor |
My students often ask me about buying budget laptop. It makes perfect sense not to buy upscale model as there chances that it can fell on the concrete floor or stolen. Here are some considerations.
First of all students generally should buy equipment used by corporation to get used to it. Dell in the most popular bland used in corporations and it is reasonably cheap. So buy Dell.
Old laptops that are used by corporation are often available on eBay with good discounts. There are several obsolete and semi-obsolete Dell laptops that are pretty reasonably priced on eBay and still has a lot of value in education. Dell C-series Latitude laptops (C600, C610, C810, C620/820) cost almost nothing ($50 or so) . They have a very good reliability records and while far from the cutting edge in performance are still adequate for running Windows XP for all but the most challenging tasks (512M of memory is OK, Windows XP actually still runs even on 128M albeit very slow). They also can be used as cheap DVD players: they have TV output.
Typical configuration of C620/820 is 1.2GHz Pentium III CPU (one of the best CPUs Intel produced), 512 RAM and 40G hard drive. That means that the speed of running XP on this antiquated laptops is not that dissimilar to Netbooks like Dell X10 and they have better/larger screen and keyboard. The problem is that C series offers became increasingly rare and laptop while adequate is nothing to be exited about.
The best strategy is to catch laptops returns from the lease from enterprises which leased it directly from Dell. Currently this is mainly D420/520/620/820 series and, starting from 2010, D630 series. Dell financial services are selling them on eBay like hot cakes. Usually such laptops were not abused. Dell also give 6 month warranty on all sold laptops which makes eBAy purchase far less risky but at the same time almost does not raise the price in comparison with regular sellers.
D620 is still a powerful laptop, despite the price of approximately $270 (slightly more if it has high speed 2.x GHz CPU and 2G of RAM). You can upgrade harddrive to solid state drive for $300. In this case for less then $600 you will have faster and quite reliable (if we assume that the reliability by-and-large depends of HD) laptop that can survive campus life better than many alternatives.
D630 which has Intel Core 2 Duo CPU are currently priced on eBay slightly higher (on warranty 2GHz, 3G of RAM and 250G harddrive is around $400). Savings are not breathtaking in comparison with new laptop.
I highly recommend to use solid state drives (like Intel X25M) for students. There is a superstition that solid state drives wear out. The main factor here is the total number of sectors written to the drive. Assuming heavy daily student-style usage the drive should last 7 years or more (for light usage double this figure). You can calculate this more precisely since the number of write cycles is tracked in the drive via the S.M.A.R.T attributes. Intel did a good job in write amplification and wear-leveling algorithm. For all practical purposes your laptop will be obsolete long before your solid state drive reaches the maximum write cycles. See also
| If you're shopping for a new laptop, forget the expensive CPU upgrades which can cost you $200-$300 for few hundred MHz which make almost no difference in speed in everyday use. Stick with the base CPU (Core 2 Duo preferably) as long as bus speed matches memory speed, upgrade memory to 4G (if using Windows 7) and buy Intel X25M SSD. The speed increase with this SSD will be much more dramatic. Removed harddrive can be used with UCB enclosure for backups and like. |
Netbooks are now increasingly popular and despite Spartan parameters (1.6GHz Atom CPU, 1G of RAM and 80G harddrive). They are slow but still usable with XP as student main computer (at home you need external monitor). But please note that higher end netbooks are indistinguishable from slim factor laptops such as from Toshiba so it does not make sense to buy a netbook when for almost the same proce you can buy slim notebook. Even Asus which recently increased parameters on it latest 12.1 inch netbook taking into account Windows 7 requirements( Eee PC 1201n has a dual-core Intel Atom N330, 2GB RAM, a 250GB harddrive, and a full-size keyboard with Chiclet keys) cannot compete with slim notebooks. As slim notebook is faster and thus can be used as a videoplayer. Look for example at MSI X340-021US Slim 13.4-Inch Laptop or Toshiba Satellite
On the other end of spectrum you can buy Inspirion Mini 10V (~$250) or Dell Vostro A90 for $184. Both use 1.6GHz Atom CPU and 1G of RAM, which is adequate for running XP. But this is approximately the same price as used low end D620 on eBay (1.6Ghz dual core, 1G of RAM and 60G harddrive) or Dell D420. Both have higher speed harddrive and dual core CPU. Like laptops those netbooks can be more usable with solid state drive (default 160 GB drive is 5400 RPM and somewhat low).
While student seldom need desktops those days, whose who want to run a Linux or Solaris server can get Vostro 220 Slim tower (Black Friday offer was $363 plus shipping and taxes) which is affordable for students and has decent technical parameters:
Intel® Pentium® Dual-Core E5300 w/VT (2.60GHz, 2MB L2, 800FSB
Genuine Windows® 7 Home Premium
2GB Memory*
160GB* Hard Drive
16x DVD-ROM Drive
Dell 21.5" Widescreen Flat Panel Monitor
Dell also sold has Inspirion Zino on same (Athol 2850, 1.8Ghz, 2G of RAM and 250G harddrive) for $199 the last Black Friday. As Black Friday is one of the few days when customers to can get a real price from retailers (abeit only for selected items), this is a price you should be shooting for (see Black Friday as a Price Discrimination Scheme). The last time I checked those prices is pretty competitive with prices for used Dell desktop computer offerings on eBay that have similar technical parameters. For example Dell Optiplex 755 Desktop PC Core2 Duo 2.3GHZ/4GB/250GB is around $300. Taking into account that 21.5" monitor price is around $120-160 Dell offer is pretty competitive with eBay used computers.
Similarly priced machine ($199) is Emachines EL1300G-01w
Processor Brand: |
AMD Athlon 64 2650e |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Processor Speed: |
1.60GHz |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Memory Type: |
DDR2 |
|
|
|
|
Memory Size: |
2 x 1GB |
|
|
|
|
Total Memory: |
2.0GB |
|
|
|
|
Memory Speed: |
DDR2 800 (PC2-6400) |
|
Hard Drive Types: |
Hard Disk Drive |
|
|
|
|
Interface: |
SATA II |
|
|
|
|
Capacity: |
160GB |
Another, less powerful, but still interesting small desktop for around $200 is Acer AspireRevo AR1600-U910H (Windows XP Home) Amazon used to see those for $204. Parameters:
|
|||||||
Frontier Photo "Ingerham" (New Mexico)
The Addonics portable RAID enclosure is an elegant solution for laptop users. I purchased it for use as a RAID 1 (mirrored storage) with my current model MacBook Pro while photographing in the field for long periods. The enclosure provides settings for several RAID levels (O-5) as well as JBOD. That said it's very difficult to set up and the documentation is minimal. I can't speak for PC users but with a Mac it's not currently possible to initialize drives according to the manufacturer instructions via a USB connection. That leaves users with two work around possibilities that I was able to figure out. 1. Initialize drives in a separate enclosure and install them into the Addonics enclosure. Drives will then mount and RAID selections will work properly. 2. Format with one drive installed at a time in the Addonics enclosure via eSATA connection (this was the work around I used). Once the drives are formatted the unit works as advertised. The formatting difficulty on Mac has to do with some incompatibility between the Addonics enclosure and the Apple Disk Utility. When attempting to initialize drives as per the instructions the Apple Disk Utility delivers an error message stating "resource busy" and aborts the initialization. To complicate matters further the utility (Steel Vine) that Addonics provides for setup will not install on a Mac ( I downloaded and installed successfully from the Silicon Image website). If you are willing to go to the trouble to set it up -it's worth it. If not wait a bit for Addonics to work out the bugs for Mac users. All that said it's the only portable solution that allows RAID 1 redundant storage which is very useful for people generating valuable data in the field.
November 2, 2008 | Amazon Update: I wrote this review before a firmware update was made available and my comments reflect the situation at the time. When the updates were made available, I flashed my 5 drives and they've been working fine ever since. I'd change the rating to a 4 star if the editor allowed.
I and many others have been experiencing serious problems with these drives including:
* dropping out of RAID configurations for no apparent reason
* being ejected from a RAID configuration due to read / write errors
* freezing for up to 30 seconds
These problems have been reported on Linux, Vista, XP, and OS X and appear to be related to how the drives flush their write cache. In many cases, the drives work fine for days or weeks before problems appear. In my case, I bought five of these for my Qnap TS-509 Pro and they worked great for about two weeks under various read / write loads. Since then, I've had all three of the problems mentioned above on different drives and they are growing progressively worse. The latest problem was three of the five drives disappearing from the RAID5 volume while I was attempting to copy the files to a different NAS.
A work-around that has been successful for some is to disable the disk write cache. Other than the obvious performance penalty and reduced lifespan this causes, some systems do not provide a means of disabling disk write cache (such as the Qnap).
References to these problems can be found on many forum threads:
Qnap: http://forum.qnap.com/viewtopic.php?f=142&t=8826
Netgear: http://www.readynas.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=20435&start=60&st=0&sk=t&sd=a
Synology: http://www.synology.com/enu/forum/viewtopic.php?f=26&p=47101
AVSForum: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1080005
macrumors: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=571843
Ubuntu: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=933053
Slashdot: http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1003109&cid=25458241
Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/review/product/B00066IJPQ/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?_encoding=UTF8&showViewpoints=1
The most informative thread may be found on Seagate's own support forum, where it appears Seagate is blaming everyone but themselves for the problem:
http://forums.seagate.com/stx/board/message?board.id=ata_drives&thread.id=2390&view=by_date_ascending&page=1
Several interesting for student bare bone kits. For example:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ComputerShopper.com
One concern with SSDs is longevity, since flash memory can only be written to a limited number of times. Intel’s wear-leveling technology spreads these writes out to aid longevity. The X-25M’s mean time-before-failure rating of 1.2 million hours is double that of many consumer laptop drives. Intel says the drive can handle a workload of more than 100GB per day for five years. Since it’s unlikely that you’ll still be using an 80GB drive in late 2013, longevity isn’t likely to be a concern.
The drive’s speed is rated at up to 250MB per second at sequential reads and 70MB per second for sequential writes. We found performance exemplary, with HDTach sequential read results of 121MB per second, compared to 40MB per second for a typical laptop hard drive. We copied the same drive image to a Seagate Momentus 5400.3 5,400rpm drive and to the 80GB X-25M, and saw dramatically higher speeds in every operation that used the SSD.
...Windows boot time decreased from 36.6 seconds to 25 seconds when we swapped in the SSD. Putting the laptop in Hibernate mode—saving memory to disk but without using power like you do when you put the laptop to sleep—dropped from 16.4 seconds to 12.3. The time it took to load Word for the first time after booting dropped from 9.2 seconds to just 2.8 seconds. The system also feels more responsive in general; you never have to wait for the drive to spin up, so seek time is almost infinitesimal, and multiple tasks accessing the drive at the same time (copying files while a virus check is in progress, for instance) don’t bog down the system like they do on a traditional drive.
Though its power consumption of 0.06 watts while idle is similar to that of a traditional laptop drive, to 1.8 to 2 watts for the Seagate Momentus drive we replaced) can result in up to a half-hour of additional battery life, depending on how much you access the drive.
... ... ...
Performance-wise, the X-25M noticeably improved responsiveness in both the budget netbook and the fast gaming notebook in which we tested it. It’s so fast, in fact, that you might consider using it with a mounting adapter as the boot drive in a desktop PC.
I fully agree that price discrimination schemes are far more prevalent than people realize (some are disguised as two-part pricing schemes, e.g. cell phone contracts where there is a fixed amount for usage up to some point, and then high fees for anyone who goes beyond the fixed allocation is way for producers to extract surplus from consumers):
Price Discrimination Explains Everything, by Arnold Kling: In my high school economics class, my students asked me to explain why there are sales on "Black Friday." The class period was over, so I only had time to blurt out "price discrimination" without getting into an explanation of what it is and why it explains sales.I think that price discrimination really deserves a lot more attention than it gets in the economics curriculum. A lot of "economic naturalist" sorts of questions are correctly answered by appealing to the concept of price discrimination. I think it explains airline pricing, credit card pricing, cable TV pricing, cell phone pricing, movie popcorn pricing, etc.Suppose that a new video game console comes out. BZ likes video games, but he is only willing to pay about $200 for the console. JS lives for video games, and he would pay $400 for the console. The manufacturer would like to charge $400 to JS and $200 to BZ. However, to do so blatantly would be illegal. It might also be impractical--what is to stop BZ from buying two consoles for $200 and selling one of them to JS for much less than $400?The console maker looks for ways to price discriminate. There might be a "standard" version of the console that sells for $200 and a "deluxe" version that sells for $400. If the features in the deluxe version appeal to JS but not to BZ, this will work. Or the maker might release the console initially at a price of $400, wait three months, and cut the price to $200. If BZ is willing to wait but JS is not, then this will work.Back to the original question, temporary sales are often a tool for price discrimination. If you need something now, you have to buy it whether or not it is "on sale." But if the purchase is discretionary, you may only buy it "on sale." The store keeps its prices high ordinarily, in order to pick up profits from the price-insensitive shoppers. The store puts items "on sale" on rare occasions, hoping to pick up profits from price-sensitive shoppers. Unfortunately, they lose profits from price-insensitive shoppers who happen to come in the day of the sale.The beauty of holding sales on "Black Friday" is that stores know that many price-insensitive shoppers will stay away in order to "avoid the crowds." So you can get revenue from price-sensitive shoppers without sacrificing profits from price-insensitive shoppers.[Ten previous posts on price discrimination.]
Farrar said... What frosts me is price discrimination between countries. A few blatant examples: DVD zoning, which means I must pay more for a DVD in Europe than in US.Refusal by Amazon.com to ship small appliances to France, which means I pay 40 Euros for an electric razor from amazon.fr, which would cost me only $30 in USA. It's the same thing with software.
Free trade for transnats, but consumers pay and pay.
For $20 a month, you can email and text to your heart's content with no limit and no contract. If you're willing to sign on for three months at a time, it's $50, or $16.67 a month, and for a full year, it's $180, or $15 a month. Unlimited lifetime usage of the device is $250 up front.
Asus chairman Jonney Shih sprang a surprise during Intel's Computex keynote today with the announcement of a $189 laptop.
The notebook measures roughly 120 x 100 x 30mm (WDH) and weighs only 900g. We saw the notebook boot in 15 seconds from its solid-state hard disk. The huge auditorium then burst into applause as Shih revealed the astounding price tag. Dubbed the 3ePC, Shih claimed the notebook is the 'lowest cost and easiest PC to use'. As the crowds rushed the stage, we sneaked off to the Asus stand to take a closer look.
The notebook uses a custom-written Linux operating system, much like the OLPC, though unlike the OLPC, Asus has chosen a more conventional interface. The desktop looked fairly similar to Windows and we saw Firefox running on one 3ePC. A spokesperson from Asus told us that the notebook would come with "an office suite that's compatible with MS Office", though he refused to confirm or deny whether that meant OpenOffice.
He claimed the 3ePC would be available in all areas of the world, not only developing nations.
The low price comes from some interesting design choices, primarily the flash-based hard disk. A disk of today's standard capacity would cost more than notebook itself as we saw with the 32GB Samsung disk, but Asus uses a 2GB disk. We were not allowed to touch the 3ePC so couldn't tell how much of this is left after the bespoke OS is installed.
The CPU also remains a mystery, though Shih said the version on show did have 512MB of RAM. Another version will be available for $299, but nobody could tell us what the difference between the two models is.
For all the latest news and developments from Computex 2007 see: www.pcpro.co.uk/html/computex2007
Well, Power architecture is increasingly going head-on against Itanium in many large deals, even sinking the good ship Itanic in some situations with - believe or not - lower prices!And improved performance with better compilers, more superdense high-bandwidth machine like the superb p655+, where two 8-way single MCM systems with 1.7+ GHz POWER4+ processors fit within a 4U space! So, 16 systems and some 880+ GFLOPs of peak 64-bit power get squeezed into a single rack - 4 times the density of HP Itanium2! Put a nice shared-memory interconnect like the increasingly popular Bristol product, Quadrics QsNet, and you got a nasty supercomputing monster.
And, these can run 64-bit Linux (almost) as well as their home OS, AIX.
The memory bandwidth of each eight-way box is 51.2 GB/s, or eight times that of a four-way Intel Itanium2, or 11 times that of a four-way Sun USIII box. Of course, Rmax (the obtainable percentage of FLOPS in Linpack FP bench) is right now far less on Power4 than on Itanium2 - 60% vs almost 90% - but the extra frequency and greater memory bandwidth more than make up for that in many apps.
Towards the end of the year, the multithreaded POWER5 will also dramatically improve the FP benchmark scores, not to mention twice the CPU density, a quarter larger cache, even higher memory bandwidth and lower latency. But don't expect major clock speed improvements, the focus was on real performance and reliability benefits - as if chip-kill memory, eLiza self-healing, and per-CPU logical partitioning was not enough...
Finally, the existing SuSE and coming RedHat Linux on POWER4 and its follow-ons, natively 64-bit of course, aim to give extra legitimacy to it being "an open platform" at least as much as Itanium is.
On the low-end, the PowerPC 970 - or POWER4 Lite, might (or pretty much will be now that Motorola G5 is down the drain) the basis of Apple's next generation Mac platform - it's 64-bit ticket to the future. With its low power - down to less than 16W in low-power mobile 1.2 GHz mode, it will also enable very dense server blades and of course POWERful 64-bit ThinkPads or PowerBooks running AIX, Linux or MacOS...
For IBM then, Opteron makes sense as an excellent tool to corner Intel, with POWER on high end and Opteron on low-end, both 64-bit and both soon manufactured by IBM Microelectronics? No, I didn't say both owned by IBM, even though that is a possibility: AMD does need a sugar daddy, not a sugar mommy. Got my hint who the feisty "sugar mommy" could be?
What about the other major vendor, from SUN-ny California? Well, UltraSPARCIIIi is finally out, no surprise there, it helps a bit but is still far behind all other major CPUs (except MIPS) in most benchmarks. Yes, Sun's mantra of something like "we don't care about speed, we focus on our brand etc" can continue, but what is computing if not about speed and performance?
Still no sign of US IV anyway, and even when it comes, don't expect much of extra per-thread performance over US III - When (and if) it really rolls out in volumes towards yearend, it will have to fight both POWER5 and Madison2, both very powerful beasts on the rise, backed by humungous ruthless megacompanies - each of which can eat Sun as an appetiser.
You can read hundreds of pages of Net discussions about the particular merits and demerits of SPARC vs other architectures, from all sides and viewpoints, but the fact remains - SPARC is the turtle of the 64-bit world, slow and maybe long-lived compared to, say, Alpha, but even turtles have to die at some point... and before they die, they become extremely slow...
64-bit Opteron is fast in some things compared to the rest of the gang, and not so fast in others, but whatever the case, current and future Opterons are vastly superior performance and feature wise to low-end and midrange SPARC offerings at umpteen times lower cost. Plus, they are as 64-bit as SPARC (or any other 64-bit CPU) is... so Sun taking Opteron would be simply common sense...
THIS ARTICLE hopes to cast some light on why 64-bit addressing, that is, the native mode of the Opteron or Itanium versus that of the Athlon or Pentium is important in 2003. It also attempts to address what the requirements are and - equally importantly - are not.Before we start, an easy one. Why 64-bit and not 48-bit? Because it costs little more to extend a 32-bit ISA to 64-bit than to only 48-bit, and most people like powers of two. In practice, many of the hardware and operating system interfaces will be less than 64 bits, sometimes as few as 40 bits, but the application interfaces (i.e. the ones the programmers and users will see) will all be 64-bit.
There are several non-reasons quoted on the Internet; one is as arithmetic performance. 64-bit addressing does not change floating-point, and is associated with 64-bit integer arithmetic; while it is easy to implement 32-bit addressing with 64-bit arithmetic or vice versa, current designs don't. Obviously 64-bit makes arithmetic on large integers faster, but who cares? Well, the answer turns out to be anyone who uses RSA-style public key cryptography, such as SSH/SSL, and almost nobody else.
On closer inspection, such use is dominated by one operation (NxN->2N multiplication), and that is embedded in a very small number of places, usually specialist library functions. While moving from 32 to 64 bits does speed this up, it doesn't help any more than adding a special instruction to SSE2 would. Or any less, for that matter. So faster arithmetic is a nice bonus, but not a reason for the change.
File pointers are integers, so you can access only 4GB files with 32 bits, right? Wrong. File pointers are structures on many systems, and files of more than than 4GB have been supported for years on a good many 32-bit systems. Operations on file pointers are usually well localized and are normally just addition, subtraction and comparison anyway. Yes, going to 64-bits makes handling large files in some programs a bit easier, but it isn't critical.
Let's consider the most common argument against 64-bit: compatibility.
Almost all RISC/Unix systems support old 32-bit applications on 64-bit systems, as did IBM on MVS/ESA, and there is a lot of experience on how to do it almost painlessly for users and even programmers.
Microsoft has a slightly harder time because of its less clean interfaces, but it is a solved problem and has been for several decades.
Now let's get onto some better arguments for 64-bit. One is that more than 4GB of physical memory is needed to support many active, large processes and memory map many, large files - without paging the system to death. This is true, but it is not a good argument for 64-bit addressing. The technique that Intel and Microsoft call PAE (Physical Address Extension) allows 64 GB of physical memory but each process can address only 4GB. For most sites in 2003, 64GB is enough to be getting on with.
IBM used this technique in MVS, and it worked very well indeed for transaction servers, interactive workloads, databases, file servers and so on. Most memory mapped file interfaces have the concept of a window on the file that is mapped into the process's address space - PAE can reduce the cost of a window remapping from that of a disk transfer (milliseconds) to that of a simple system call (microseconds). So this is a rather weak reason for going to 64-bit addressing, though it is a good one for getting away from simple 32-bit.
Now, let's consider the second most common argument against 64-bit: efficiency. Doubling the space needed for pointers increases the cache size and bandwidth requirements, but misses the point that efficiency is nowadays limited far more by latency than bandwidth, and the latency is the same. Yes, there was a time when the extra space needed for 64-bit addresses was a major matter, but that time is past, except perhaps for embedded systems.
So 64-bit addressing is unnecessary but harmless except on supercomputers? Well, not quite. There are some good reasons, but they are not the ones usually quoted on the Internet or in marketing blurb.
The first requirement is for supporting shared memory applications (using, say, OpenMP or POSIX threads) on medium or large shared memory systems. For example, a Web or database server might run 256 threads on 16 CPUs and 32GB. This wouldn't be a problem if each thread had its own memory, but the whole point of the shared memory programming model is that every thread can access all of the program's global data. So each thread needs to be able to access, say, 16GB - which means that 32-bit is just not enough.
A more subtle point concerns memory layout. An application that needs 3GB of workspace might need it on the stack, on the main heap (data segment), in a shared memory segment or in memory set aside for I/O buffers. The problem is that the location of those various areas is often fixed when the program is loaded, so the user will have to specify them carefully in 32-bit systems to ensure that there is enough free space in the right segment for when the program needs its 3GB.
Unfortunately, this choice of where to put the data is often made by the compiler or library, and it is not always easy to find out what they do. Also, consider the problem of an administrator tuning a system for multiple programs with different characteristics. Perhaps worst is the case of a large application that works in phases, each of which may want 2GB in a different place, though it never needs more than 3 GB at any one time. 64-bit eliminates this problem.
To put the above into a commercial perspective, almost all general purpose computer vendors make most of their profit (as distinct from turnover) by selling servers and not workstations. 64-bit addressing has been critical for some users of large servers for several years now, and has been beneficial to most of them. In 2003, 64-bit is needed by some users of medium sized servers and useful to most; by 2005, that statement could be changed to say `small' instead of 'medium sized'. That is why all of the mainframe and RISC/Unix vendors moved to 64-bit addressing some time ago, and that is why Intel and AMD are following.
On the other hand, if you are interested primarily in ordinary, single user workstations, what does 64-bit addressing give you today? The answer is precious little. The needs of workstations have nothing to do with the matter, and the move to 64-bit is being driven by server requirements. µ
Nick Maclaren has extensive experience of computing platforms
Linuxnewbie.org: Getting UDMA66 To Work(Jan 11, 2000)
Promise PDC20262 Ultra DMA/66 supported.(Apr 25, 1999)
WWW Computer Architecture Home Page[July 7, 1999]
Serial Communications -- from FreeBSD textbook
External Parallel Port devices and Linux - Links to External Parallel Port projects and documentation.
Copyright © 1996-2009 by Dr. Nikolai Bezroukov. www.softpanorama.org was created as a service to the UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) in the author free time. Submit comments This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is placed under the copyright of the Open Content License(OPL). Site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.
Disclaimer:
Last modified: December 24, 2009
