Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forcesLinux, Windows redesign

On Sat, 6 Jan 2018 14:00:27 +1300, Your Name
wrote:

On 2018-01-05 23:55:26 +0000, Doomsdrzej said:
On Sat, 6 Jan 2018 10:26:54 +1300, Your Name
wrote:
On 2018-01-05 15:09:49 +0000, Doomsdrzej said:
On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 11:32:52 +1300, Your Name
wrote:
On 2018-01-04 15:28:17 +0000, chrisv said:
Designed By India H1B Engineers wrote:

Crucially, these updates to both Linux and Windows will incur a
performance hit on Intel products. The effects are still being
benchmarked, however we're looking at a ballpark figure of five
to 30 per cent slow down, depending on the task and the
processor model.

This is ugly. Think of the large computing centers, for example
Google's data centers. Suddenly, they will need significantly more
CPU time, and thus electricity (and thus carbon), to get the job done?

It aint just Intel either. The three different CPU issues affect chips
from Intel, AMD, and ARM (no mention anywhere of PowerPC or Apple's own
A-series), and affect virtually all devices sold in the last 15 years -
computers, tablets, smartphones, etc.!

That's gonna be one heck of a clean up bill! :-(

The _only_ processors which will suffer a performance slowdown as a
result of these problems are Intel ones. Spectre affects all chips and
the fix does not affect performance. Meltdown affects processors built
since 1995 by *Intel* and the fix will slow them down up to around
65%.

There's actually THREE issues (at least), despite the fact that the
media is over-hyping just those two.

Very true. However, the ones affecting AMD had little to no chance of
affecting performance from the very beginning whereas the Intel one
was looking to be fairly disastrous. That Microsoft and Apple managed
to keep the performance hit at a bare minimum is a testament to their
ability.

That last line is sure to trigger Peter the Klöwn.

Microsoft simply waited for Apple to fix the issue, then copied them. ;-)

Because the operating systems are so similar and Apple's code is so
stellar, right?

On Sat, 06 Jan 2018 14:26:07 +0100, Peter Köhlmann
wrote:

Doomsdrzej wrote:

On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 17:13:12 +0100, Peter Köhlmann
wrote:

Doomsdrzej wrote:

On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 11:32:52 +1300, Your Name
wrote:

On 2018-01-04 15:28:17 +0000, chrisv said:
Designed By India H1B Engineers wrote:

Crucially, these updates to both Linux and Windows will incur a
performance hit on Intel products. The effects are still being
benchmarked, however we're looking at a ballpark figure of five
to 30 per cent slow down, depending on the task and the
processor model.

This is ugly. Think of the large computing centers, for example
Google's data centers. Suddenly, they will need significantly more
CPU time, and thus electricity (and thus carbon), to get the job done?

It aint just Intel either. The three different CPU issues affect chips
from Intel, AMD, and ARM (no mention anywhere of PowerPC or Apple's own
A-series), and affect virtually all devices sold in the last 15 years -
computers, tablets, smartphones, etc.!

That's gonna be one heck of a clean up bill! :-(

The _only_ processors which will suffer a performance slowdown as a
result of these problems are Intel ones. Spectre affects all chips and
the fix does not affect performance. Meltdown affects processors built
since 1995 by *Intel* and the fix will slow them down up to around
65%.

Bull****. I tested my system with Geekbench4 before and after the patch.
The single-test was slowed by around 1%, the multi-test by somewhat less
than 2%. This does not involve lots of I/O, but it indicates that
processor speed is very little affected. The measured values are barely
higher than differences due to background tasks in the single test. Both
values are not at all "being able to be felt" by the user.
Notice that my machine constantly runs 3 diffferent databases too

Either post a video of you doing the test of post some data proving
what you claim.

Idiot

You are even way too stupid to do such a simple benchmark yourself,
otherwise you would not make such ridiculous demands. But thats SlimeSnit
for us, the dumbest clown known to mankind

Says the emasculated German who allows migrants to rape the female
members of his society and who didn't bother to show his own
benchmarks out of an inability to "do such a simple benchmark
[himself]".

On 6 Jan 2018 11:35:56 -0500, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Doomsdrzej wrote:

I want power in my vehicle as well as the ability to drive as far as I
want to and that is something electric cars will never allow for.

You might want to try the Tesla. Range isn't there yet, but it's got more
low end torque than most V-8s, and it handles decently. Range is actually
better than some of those V-8s too, though of course it takes longer to fill
which is a problem.

It's getting there. What is cool about the electric car from both a
performance and conservation standard is that you're not paying a huge
overhead running with low power most of the time. With the gasoline engine,
you have to size the engine for peak power that you're only using very
occasionally, and you pay an efficiency penalty at low power. With the
electric motor you use only what you need; you get crazy high peak power
and good efficiency in cruise at the same time.

I'm not ready to buy an electric car yet, but I wouldn't discount them if
I were you. The Tesla is way too expensive for what it is, but that will
change given time.

And I might add, given that this is a computer architecture group, that
what made these cars possible was high density battery technology, and
what made that possible was smart charging. The lithium chemistry was
known for many years but it takes a lot of charge control technology to
keep them from destroying themselves. It's not something you can do with
an 8051 anymore. CPU makes it possible.
--scott

The biggest problem in even considering a Tesla is that I live in a
very cold climate which, since mid-December, has seen its temperature
go no lower than -25c. In such a climate, the already poor range of an
electric car is even worse and there are good reasons to believe that
it wouldn't even start. There's also the fact that the computers
within it, something which is essentially problematic for all cars,
tend to go crazy when the temperatures are too low so the car might
effectively become useless.

If I lived in a place like California or Texas, I'd be a lot more
willing to consider an electric car but not here.

In article , Doomsdrzej
wrote:


Because the operating systems are so similar and Apple's code is so
stellar, right?

they're not at all similar.

In article , Doomsdrzej
wrote:


The biggest problem in even considering a Tesla is that I live in a
very cold climate which, since mid-December, has seen its temperature
go no lower than -25c. In such a climate, the already poor range of an
electric car is even worse and there are good reasons to believe that
it wouldn't even start.

the batteries are heated in cold weather and the cars start just fine.

There's also the fact that the computers
within it, something which is essentially problematic for all cars,
tend to go crazy when the temperatures are too low so the car might
effectively become useless.

nonsense.

On Sat, 6 Jan 2018 09:35:50 -0800, Bob F wrote:

On 1/5/2018 10:46 AM, Doomsdrzej wrote:
On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 10:43:48 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2018-01-05 10:13, Doomsdrzej wrote:
On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 10:04:06 +0100, Peter Köhlmann
wrote:

Roger Blake wrote:

On 2018-01-04, chrisv wrote:
Might I say that was an awesome post, sir.

His post was sheer idiocy. CO2 is not a pollutant - period.

Human caused "climate change/global warming" is junk science at
its worst.

Idiot

Another thought-provoking and irrefutable post by Mainz's greatest
export, Peter the Klöwn.

A funny thing about your sort is you believe that putting down others
makes your point valid and that resonates in your little echo chambers
as some sort of truth.

Says the hypocrite who just defended someone calling another poster an
"idiot."

While there is wisdom in crowds...

... there is none in your posts.

*plonk*


Like the rest of the science deniers, go ahead and stick your head back
in the sand.

I'm not a science denier, but I do deny results which come from a
hand-picked set of scientists. If 1,000 scientists are asked about
climate and 100 of them say that humans are causing global warming, is
it honest to grab those 100 and then claim that 100% of scientists
believe in global warming?

I don't believe that it is and yet that's what happened.

On Sat, 06 Jan 2018 14:51:20 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Doomsdrzej
wrote:


Because the operating systems are so similar and Apple's code is so
stellar, right?

they're not at all similar.

No kidding. That comment was sarcastic.

On Sat, 06 Jan 2018 14:51:21 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Doomsdrzej
wrote:


The biggest problem in even considering a Tesla is that I live in a
very cold climate which, since mid-December, has seen its temperature
go no lower than -25c. In such a climate, the already poor range of an
electric car is even worse and there are good reasons to believe that
it wouldn't even start.

the batteries are heated in cold weather and the cars start just fine.

Are they heated through the use of a block heater or is there some
other solution I'm not aware of?

There's also the fact that the computers
within it, something which is essentially problematic for all cars,
tend to go crazy when the temperatures are too low so the car might
effectively become useless.

nonsense.

Do you live in a climate where -28c temperatures are normal? My
Infiniti started perfectly the other day at such a temperature but the
continued exposure to the freezing temperatures caused the computer to
go nuts and essentially all of the lights within the dashboard lit up
and the system disabled everything from the power steering to the 4WD.
Once things warmed up a few days later, all of the lights as well as
the annoying check engine light turned off. To say the least, I
wouldn't trust an electric car in such temperatures.

In article , Doomsdrzej
wrote:

The biggest problem in even considering a Tesla is that I live in a
very cold climate which, since mid-December, has seen its temperature
go no lower than -25c. In such a climate, the already poor range of an
electric car is even worse and there are good reasons to believe that
it wouldn't even start.

the batteries are heated in cold weather and the cars start just fine.

Are they heated through the use of a block heater or is there some
other solution I'm not aware of?

the batteries are heated and shortly before leaving, you can preheat
the cabin via a smartphone app.

There's also the fact that the computers
within it, something which is essentially problematic for all cars,
tend to go crazy when the temperatures are too low so the car might
effectively become useless.

nonsense.

Do you live in a climate where -28c temperatures are normal? My
Infiniti started perfectly the other day at such a temperature but the
continued exposure to the freezing temperatures caused the computer to
go nuts and essentially all of the lights within the dashboard lit up
and the system disabled everything from the power steering to the 4WD.
Once things warmed up a few days later, all of the lights as well as
the annoying check engine light turned off. To say the least, I
wouldn't trust an electric car in such temperatures.

based on that, you shouldn't trust a *gas* powered vehicle in such
temperatures.

many gas powered vehicles have engine block heaters because they won't
start in extreme weather.

On Sat, 06 Jan 2018 15:07:18 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Doomsdrzej
wrote:

The biggest problem in even considering a Tesla is that I live in a
very cold climate which, since mid-December, has seen its temperature
go no lower than -25c. In such a climate, the already poor range of an
electric car is even worse and there are good reasons to believe that
it wouldn't even start.

the batteries are heated in cold weather and the cars start just fine.

Are they heated through the use of a block heater or is there some
other solution I'm not aware of?

the batteries are heated and shortly before leaving, you can preheat
the cabin via a smartphone app.

_How_ are they heated?

Pre-heating the cabin essentially means that you've turned on the car
remotely. However, this is only possible if the car starts which, of
course, often requires the batteries to be heated.

There's also the fact that the computers
within it, something which is essentially problematic for all cars,
tend to go crazy when the temperatures are too low so the car might
effectively become useless.

nonsense.

Do you live in a climate where -28c temperatures are normal? My
Infiniti started perfectly the other day at such a temperature but the
continued exposure to the freezing temperatures caused the computer to
go nuts and essentially all of the lights within the dashboard lit up
and the system disabled everything from the power steering to the 4WD.
Once things warmed up a few days later, all of the lights as well as
the annoying check engine light turned off. To say the least, I
wouldn't trust an electric car in such temperatures.

based on that, you shouldn't trust a *gas* powered vehicle in such
temperatures.

many gas powered vehicles have engine block heaters because they won't
start in extreme weather.

My previous car, a Jeep Patriot, did. However, neither my BMW 428i nor
the Infiniti QX30 have one. The Patriot, funny enough, was a total
piece of poop in _warm_ temperatures.

In article , Doomsdrzej
wrote:

The biggest problem in even considering a Tesla is that I live in a
very cold climate which, since mid-December, has seen its temperature
go no lower than -25c. In such a climate, the already poor range of an
electric car is even worse and there are good reasons to believe that
it wouldn't even start.

the batteries are heated in cold weather and the cars start just fine.

Are they heated through the use of a block heater or is there some
other solution I'm not aware of?

the batteries are heated and shortly before leaving, you can preheat
the cabin via a smartphone app.

_How_ are they heated?

via a heater module on the batteries.

Pre-heating the cabin essentially means that you've turned on the car
remotely. However, this is only possible if the car starts which, of
course, often requires the batteries to be heated.

for a gas powered vehicle, the engine must be running.

not true for an electric vehicle.

Tim Streater wrote:
In article , nospam
range is only a problem for long road trips, and in those cases, rent a
vehicle. eventually, that won't be a problem, as more charging stations
are built.

I think some of you guys need to calculate the power rate needed to
charge the higher range cars in any sort of reasonable time. You'll
find it quite high. Then you have the problem of supplying that power
at a safe voltage, and without such a high current needed that even Mr
Muscles can't lift the charging cable, never mind plug it in.

It's not that bad, one or two cars at a time. These days it's not unusual
at all for houses to have 200A service and putting a 100A 240V outlet in
the garage for a charger does not require a major retrofit.

Where it gets bad is when you start thinking about doing that in every house
in the country and the degree to which the grid needs to be enlarged in order
to deal with that load on a constant basis.

It'll happen, and the money is there to make it happen because it's the same
money that is currently going into purchasing gasoline, but it's not going to
happen today and it's not going to happen tomorrow.

But you can go out right now and buy a BMW i3 at your dealer today,
get a charger installed on your existing service panel, and have a whole
lot of fun driving fast right now. It's not cheap, but that's how it goes.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Doomsdrzej wrote:
The biggest problem in even considering a Tesla is that I live in a
very cold climate which, since mid-December, has seen its temperature
go no lower than -25c. In such a climate, the already poor range of an
electric car is even worse and there are good reasons to believe that
it wouldn't even start. There's also the fact that the computers
within it, something which is essentially problematic for all cars,
tend to go crazy when the temperatures are too low so the car might
effectively become useless.

Hell, I remember when gasoline engines were effectively useless at -25C....
they got a lot better.... they keep getting better.... so will the electric.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

nospam wrote:
In article , Doomsdrzej
Are they heated through the use of a block heater or is there some
other solution I'm not aware of?

the batteries are heated and shortly before leaving, you can preheat
the cabin via a smartphone app.

What he is asking is whether the batteries are heated using their own power
(which would be limited) or external power (like the block heater used to
keep gasoline engines warm using the AC mains current).

based on that, you shouldn't trust a *gas* powered vehicle in such
temperatures.

many gas powered vehicles have engine block heaters because they won't
start in extreme weather.

This is all true, but modern oil technology combined with fuel injection
systems have made matters a whole hell of a lot better than they were back
in the eighties. But when you think the gasoline engine had been around
for ninety years before anyone managed to make one start consistently in
Alaska, you have to realize how quickly the electric technology is moving
in comparison.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 2018-01-06 19:56:58 +0000, Doomsdrzej said:
On Sat, 06 Jan 2018 14:51:20 -0500, nospam
wrote:
In article , Doomsdrzej
wrote:

Because the operating systems are so similar and Apple's code is so
stellar, right?

they're not at all similar.

No kidding. That comment was sarcastic.

People shouldn't be allowed to use the Internet until they pass the
"Emoticon / Emoji Recognition Test" ... among other tests to gain an
Internet Users Licence.