The Year Of The Small Cheap Tablet In UK

Chuckle. It must be a lot harder to sell a laptop/desktop legacy PC these days.“You can buy tablets for under £30, but for just over that (including shipping) you can get a 7” Quad Core device, and Amazon is now chock-a-block with cheap tablets. Even retail outlets, with brand name tablets, will do you a massive discount.” The tablets have matured, are mass-produced by a multitude of manufacturers and supply exceeds demand, apparently.

That should pretty well eliminate the digital divide in UK. With choices of smartphones/tablets/notebooks/desktops there’s something in every price/performance range with a choice of CPU and operating system. Now for the rest of the world… 2014 was a great year for */Linux and small cheap computers but at this rate, 2015 might be even better.

The more competitive the market for personal computing, the more innovative will be OEMs and retailers. I expect many more will ship GNU/Linux just to be different or to offer something new. 2015 could be the last year retail shelves exclude GNU/Linux anywhere. The monopoly is truly dead.

On that note, my Galaxy S antique smartphone came back to me and I had to “reset to factory defaults” to get rid of others’ personal accounts. So I started from scratch to repopulate my “apps”. It’s all good and rather neat to watch the Android environment “evolve” in my hand. Despite being old and slow this little gadget is plenty fast enough for everyday tasks. I expect in 2015 even more folks will give up the legacy PC for something smaller/cheaper/more portable.

See UK retailers in TABLET PRICE SLASH BONANZA.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

43 Responses to The Year Of The Small Cheap Tablet In UK

  1. olderman wrote, “In no0t a single case have you demonstrated that these are still present or unpatched in the current supported versions of windows (7, 8, 8.1) .”

    There are way too many cases to list all of them, but we’ve often seen “all versions of windows” connected to instances of malware/vulnerability. There is common code unless M$ specifies the vulnerabilities be built in.

  2. olderman says:

    “Of course, that blanket assertion crumbles in the face of…”

    So you answer Robert Pogson is to barf up a collection of 5 to 8 year old cite. In no0t a single case have you demonstrated that these are still present or unpatched in the current supported versions of windows (7, 8, 8.1) .

    ” believe in Occam’s razor. The simplest explanation is often the best. The only thing all those codes have in common is Lose 3.1.”

    Do you really? By your logic an Apple = Orange because both are fruits.

  3. ram says:

    Mr. Pogson said “Why not combine the cable box, the PVR, the PC/server/router/switch, everything into the TV and anchor the home over a network? The TV could hold it all. There must be some added value that Samsung and others can get from doing that. That would kill most other PCs in homes of consumers except for thin clients.”

    There is much to suggest that Samsung (and others) are going down that road. It is also worth taking a look at what Shuttle offers in terms of fanless Linux boxen that just “happen” to fit/latch/snap into the back of certain monitors from well known manufacturers. Coincidence? I think not 😉

  4. pogson wrote, “Even NT, which was supposedly a fresh start, copied the vulnerabilities of Lose 3.1.”

    To which, DrLoser wrote, “No it did not.”

    Of course, that blanket assertion crumbles in the face of “Determina Security Research has discovered a vulnerability in the USER32.DLL code responsible for loading animated cursor (.ANI) files. This vulnerability can be exploited by a malicious web page or HTML email message and results in remote code execution with the privileges of the logged-in user. The vulnerable code is present in all versions of Windows up to and including Windows Vista. All applications that use the standard Windows API for loading cursors and icons are affected. This includes Windows Explorer, Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox, Outlook and others.”

    You can read more about it here.

    When this vulnerability was found but not fixed a couple of years earlier, Lose ‘9x was listed as affected because it was still supported. “Other versions either no longer include security update support or may not be affected.” Maybe they didn’t test Lose 3.1…

    Chuckle, while I was writing this I came upon M$’s ftp site… I guess Hell has frozen because I was sure someone wrote here that only nutcases/incompetents and such used the_ftp protocol…

    Anyway, where does DrLoser believe such a common vuln came from since, “Although disabled by default, pointer trails have been an option in every version of Microsoft Windows since Windows 3.1.”?

    I believe in Occam’s razor. The simplest explanation is often the best. The only thing all those codes have in common is Lose 3.1.

  5. oiaohm says:

    Shellshock DrZealot is right on the correct path. Many cmd scripts under windows depend on windows define environmental vars.

    Historic dos attack was change %ComSpec% This can still work with cmd today.

    By the way all the attack vectors that let bash to be messed with also allow you to mess with a Windows system by altering ComSpec to cause like web pages running shell commands todo something unexpected. If you get really creative you can put a jsscript or vbscript in place.

    DrZealot this is why Shellshock is such a laugh. You just asked for me to state a Zero day fault in Windows that is not fixed. Yes Windows core shell + WSH has the same kind of problem as Bash had.

    “Windows Script Host” is windows nt real equal to bash. Fixing the Windows shell issues is way worse. Windows flaw is default command line shell define is stored in environmental vars where *nix store this in the password file.

    Anything that allowed remote attacker to mess with environmental vars brought hell to Windows and Linux.

    DrZealot do you now see why I was laughing shellshock off. Here is windows users making a big deal out of Shellshock but they are the ones standing in a glass house with the same type of flaw unpatched.

  6. DrLoser says:

    (For Heartbleed read Shellshock. My apologies to the excellent curators of Heartbleed.)

  7. DrLoser says:

    You really aren’t much of a security expert, are you, Robert? In fact, you clearly know nothing at all about the history of Microsoft OSes, do you?

    DOS had zero security and they just made layers of that everafter.

    Okey dokey. Here’s a challenge. I’m going to ignore the blatantly obvious fact that NT derives from Multics (just as Unix does).

    Name one single DOS-based security flaw still present in Windows.

    Entertainingly, I can name at least one equivalent *nix flaw — Heartbleed.

    Even NT, which was supposedly a fresh start, copied the vulnerabilities of Lose 3.1.

    No it did not.

    I’ll grant you the occasional bit of sloppy code, copied over. But they’re a pittance of a problem compared to dealing with equivalently ancient code like X.

    That “fresh start” thing, Robert? It really was a fresh start. NT has nothing in common with Win98, let alone Windows 3.1. And if you knew anything at all about operating systems, you’d understand why.

    None of which is to suggest that ancient mistakes do not linger. After all, there are still some people out there who are preposterous enough to claim that outward-facing FTP, used with due care, is a secure protocol suitable for the 21st Century.

  8. DrLoser says:

    Ah, the obvious differences between the GPLv3 and a Microsoft EULA. Endlessly fascinating, yet so little examined. Shall we proceed, then?

    The obvious difference is that M$’s EULA establishes a contractual relationship…

    Nope. Both GPLv3 and a Microsoft EULA establish a contractual relationship. There’d be no point in either, otherwise, would there?

    …and tries to eliminate the rules of contract law which require both parties to do something…

    That’s not “contract law” as I understand it, Robert. Contract law might require one or both parties to “do something.” Equally, it might simply forbid one or both parties from “doing something.”

    It would appear that you are oversimplifying things here, for your own purposes.

    …and the user actually pays M$ to enter into that contract.

    “Ooh, ooh, I’m a user, and I want to pay you to enter a contract!”

    Perhaps you’d consider paying M$ to use their products?

    “No, no, the contract’s the thing! Me want contract! Me pay for contract!”

    Absurd, isn’t it? You could substitute “Ford” or “Hoover” for “M$” and it would sound equally as absurd, Robert. But despite your feeble attempt to obfuscate what the user thinks he/she is actually paying for, you might have a point. Perhaps the M$ EULA is more “onerous” than the GPLv3?

    I’ve just trawled up the Windows 8 EULA.

    At no point does it “try to eliminate the rules of contract law.”

    You were inadvertently telling porkies, because you hadn’t read it, weren’t you, Robert?

  9. oiaohm says:

    Robert Pogson tizen has a lot more on common with standard Linux Distrobutions.

    Tizen is gnu libc + wayland at core.

    https://build.tizen.org/project/show?project=Tizen
    Its a nice read. Yes there are Tizen particular API/ABI.

    Really Tizen overlay more like the netbook overlay of old.

  10. ram wrote, “new giant “smart” TV’s are all going to be Linux and Open Source. So much for the “small screen” issue on mobile devices”

    Unfortunately that */Linux OS is Tizen rather than GNU/Linux. That’s another Android-like overlay rather than native code. We shall see whether they can get enough developers working with it to make a difference. A huge number of TVs should be attractive, but will anyone make the TV a thin/thick client or server running GNU/Linux? TVs are the last big boxes in many homes. Why not empower them with lots of IT-resources? As the cost of a PC goes down, the cost of integrating one into a TV should be affordable and if Samsung does it first, it could be a market-maker. Samsung hired ~20K developers. It will be interesting to see what they’ve developed. So far, they tout Tizen as a general-purpose platform for gadgets which any OEM can run with. I expect someone will get the idea that one huge screen is more useful if it can surf the net, play multimedia as well as stream video. It’s just too obvious an idea now that PC hardware is embedded in the TV. I could see that some Android-app compatibility might be easy. I could see that lots of GNU/Linux software could run on these without much effort. Why not combine the cable box, the PVR, the PC/server/router/switch, everything into the TV and anchor the home over a network? The TV could hold it all. There must be some added value that Samsung and others can get from doing that. That would kill most other PCs in homes of consumers except for thin clients.

  11. ram says:

    Samsung has just announced its new giant “smart” TV’s are all going to be Linux and Open Source. So much for the “small screen” issue on mobile devices 😀

  12. oiaohm wrote, “Microsoft has a huge number of remote execute code problems.”

    Amen! Software designed by salesmen works that way, feature-bloat leads to an epidemic of vulnerabilities because salesmen just want to make a sale and they don’t care whose system gets compromised in the process: auto-run, ActiveX, executable images, deep integration of apps with the OS, … DOS had zero security and they just made layers of that everafter. Even NT, which was supposedly a fresh start, copied the vulnerabilities of Lose 3.1. Sigh. I’m glad I’m over that. Now, if I encounter a vulnerability it affects relatively few systems and can be cut out, replaced or worked around unlike that other OS where you live with it or go without IT.

  13. oiaohm says:

    dougman its always more interesting to look at the cvedetails overview pages.

    http://www.cvedetails.com/vendor/26/Microsoft.html
    http://www.cvedetails.com/vendor/1224/Google.html

    Something DrZealot does not understand its not just the number of bugs its the type.

    Microsoft has a huge number of remote execute code problems. Windows 8.1 is following this tradition.

    Its like some people pointing out that Chrome has more CVE than Internet Explorer.

    http://www.cvedetails.com/product/15031/Google-Chrome.html?vendor_id=1224
    http://www.cvedetails.com/product/9900/Microsoft-Internet-Explorer.html?vendor_id=26

    Yes Chrome over particular time frames might have more but the majority are Denial of Service issues where the program crashes or causes a server crash and basically does not do anything that in fact risks privacy.

    Ok what is Internet Exploiters majority(yes well deserved rename) that is right allow remote code execution.

    What upsets us worried about security with Windows is how come after all these years why is the majority of Microsoft security flaws still remote code execution?

  14. oiaohm says:

    DrZealot
    What with Microsoft not using that vaunted paradigm of FLOSS, OpenSSL, in the first place.
    Problem here its not Microsoft that used OpenSSL on Windows that causes the problems. Its third party applications on Windows using OpenSSL this include games private servers.

    Heartbleed is no longer a concern. is no longer a concern.

    https://wiki.bitnami.com/security/2014-04_Heartbleed_Bug/Heartbleed_on_Windows
    http://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=content&id=KB29004
    Really how is Heartbleed no longer a concern unless you are a idiot who believes in sticking head up ass on Windows.

    Reality Heartbleed under Linux is a issue with docker and virtual machine images under Linux. Some of these may be old.

    http://www.computerweekly.com/news/2240234538/Microsoft-SSL-bug-could-be-worse-than-Heartbleed-say-researchers

    MS14-066 has the same problem third party applications such as games having server side parts. MS14-066 is fixed if you have applied Windows updates. Heartbleed on Windows is only fixed if you have been able to remove or update all openssl using applications.

    There is no detection tool on Windows that hunts down out of date openssl .dll files worse openssl by license can be statically linked in so may not be detectable by file scanning.

    Heartbleed is no longer a concern mostly for BSD, OS X or Linux users.

    The big problem is items like Heartbleed.com and media have focused on the Linux issue yes completely missing the OS X issue with heartbleed and the Windows issue with Heartbleed.

    SSL/TLS provides communication security and privacy over the Internet for applications such as web, email, instant messaging (IM) and some virtual private networks (VPNs).
    The list of application types on Heartbleed.com is useful to give you an idea what you have to audit on Windows.

    DrZealot you claim you are in the job of breaking Myths. There is a huge myth about Heartbleed and Windows. The myth is the problem does not effect Windows when it does. Heartbleed does not effect Microsoft software is correct. Heartbleed effects third party software on Windows. Large number of security flaws in Windows come from third party software.

  15. “There have been no less than 3 occurrences in the last 3 years where Microsoft has issued software and firmware updates to their Xbox platform which have “bricked” — or rendered useless — the consoles. And Windows updates that have bricked PCs? There’s this example from August 2014. Or this example from April 2013 which caused widespread BSODs (Blue Screens of Death.) Or this example which made Surface 2 Windows tablets unusable. And here’s a more comprehensive list of issues that Windows Update caused from just last year.”

    To the extent that Forbes is widely read, M$ has shot itself in the foot far too many times to hold mindshare. Be afraid. Be very afraid to run this stuff on your computers. I felt that personally before I returned to teaching and by then the world depended so much on IT that M$ and its stuff was a critical vulnerability to the world. I left them behind and never looked back. Today, if I have a problem with my IT, it’s not critical and I can fix it or find alternatives and carry on. Those locked into M$’s way of doing things can’t do that. Schools, in particular, don’t want to be in the business of slavery to M$ and don’t want to have to pay to have M$’s issues worked-around. They just want IT that works. GNU/Linux and FLOSS works for them.

  16. dougman says:

    EULA and GPL aside, anyone can edit a text file in Linux, then upload the fix for the rest of the world. With Windows, one must wait for the behemoth to act, if at all.

    Even when patches are provided, they break the existing system! Oooppps, our bad, here is this patch to remove the broken patch and another patch to fix your system, then a patch to reboot, then another patch then….you get the point.
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2014/12/13/new-windows-7-patch-is-effectively-malware-disables-graphics-driver-updates-and-windows-defender/

    2015, expect more of the same but on a larger scale: http://it-online.co.za/2014/12/08/expect-malware-2015/

  17. DrLoser wrote, “explain the “obvious” differences in “assumed responsibility” between a Microsoft EULA and the GPLv3.”

    The obvious difference is that M$’s EULA establishes a contractual relationship and tries to eliminate the rules of contract law which require both parties to do something and the user actually pays M$ to enter into that contract.

    The GPL is a licence permitting the recipient of the software to do stuff, a totally different kettle of fish.

    In contract law, for instance, there is no contract for an illegal purpose or between incompetent parties. The GPL has no such restrictions/limitations/legal structure. The GPL is just about giving a licence to run the software and for purposes of copyright. The GPL does not require indentured servitude forever to M$. The GPL does not restrict the number of connected devices, for instance.

  18. DrLoser says:

    I did appreciate the following, however. There may be a clause in the bog-standard Microsoft EULA that approximates to it, but I’ll leave it to you lot. (I’ve removed the caps, because unlike RMS I am not a shouty person.)

    Even if such holder or other party has been advised of the possibility of such damages.

    Nice little touch that, don’t you think?

  19. DrLoser says:

    I don’t wish to be unfair to a magnificent champion of the GPLv3 such as Dougie, so I’ll quote his entire post in full:

    According to Windows Malware 8.1 and any other Windows software, the EULA states that by accepting and using the software, consumers acknowledge that they cannot sue for M$’s faulty software.

    Malware?…suck it up…not our problem.

    Terrifying, isn’t it? Oh well, there’s always the GPLv3, Section 16:

    IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN WRITING WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY WHO MODIFIES AND/OR CONVEYS THE PROGRAM AS PERMITTED ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES, INCLUDING ANY GENERAL, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE PROGRAM (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED INACCURATE OR LOSSES SUSTAINED BY YOU OR THIRD PARTIES OR A FAILURE OF THE PROGRAM TO OPERATE WITH ANY OTHER PROGRAMS), EVEN IF SUCH HOLDER OR OTHER PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.

    (Swivel-eyed caps in the original, btw.)

    Go on, chaps. I would seriously be fascinated to hear you all explain the “obvious” differences in “assumed responsibility” between a Microsoft EULA and the GPLv3.

    And by “seriously,” I mean “I am going to laugh my head off.”

  20. dougman says:

    Re: Perhaps Dougie could enlighten us with the steps he took to deal with that particular bug?

    Ctrl-Alt-T, type “apt-get update && apt-get upgrade”

    *shrug*

  21. DrLoser says:

    Well, first of all, and courtesy of a small-town snake oil salesman in the Metro DC area, it’s nice to know that Heartbleed is no longer an issue worth considering.

    Gee, thanks, Dougie! But, what’s this?

    Heartbleed infected services is major-ally still on Windows. Heartbleed is not just a Linux issue.

    You’re not on-script here, are you, oiaohm?

    First of all, according to Dougie (and who would question Dougie’s security credentials? Not me. I know exactly what Dougie’s security credentials are worth), Heartbleed is no longer a concern.

    And secondly, um, I hate to tell you this, Fifi, my little furry friend … but Heartbleed was never an issue on Windows machines in the first place.

    What with Microsoft not using that vaunted paradigm of FLOSS, OpenSSL, in the first place.

  22. dougman says:

    According to Windows Malware 8.1 and any other Windows software, the EULA states that by accepting and using the software, consumers acknowledge that they cannot sue for M$’s faulty software.

    Malware?…suck it up…not our problem.

  23. DrLoser says:

    By the way DrZealot there is a far more serous issue than heartbleed in 2014 effecting SSL.

    Good to know, oiaohm. I appreciate your honesty.

    Perhaps Dougie could enlighten us with the steps he took to deal with that particular bug?

    He does seem to get a little over-excited when I mention Heartbleed and ShellShock.

  24. dougman wrote, “M$ crap been exploitable for 90-days.”

    Again, this is divide-and-conquer. An individual might think this matters, but consider the entire installed-base, hundreds of millions of potential victims. This is a crime on a massive scale, not a product-defect.

  25. dougman says:

    Losers spewing more BS. Both of these issues were fixed in days.

    Running this script on my box I get this.
    curl https://shellshocker.net/shellshock_test.sh | bash
    % Total % Received % Xferd Average Speed Time Time Time Current
    Dload Upload Total Spent Left Speed
    100 2632 100 2632 0 0 5400 0 –:–:– –:–:– –:–:– 5393
    CVE-2014-6271 (original shellshock): not vulnerable
    CVE-2014-6277 (segfault): not vulnerable
    CVE-2014-6278 (Florian’s patch): not vulnerable
    CVE-2014-7169 (taviso bug): not vulnerable
    CVE-2014-7186 (redir_stack bug): not vulnerable
    CVE-2014-7187 (nested loops off by one): not vulnerable
    CVE-2014-//// (exploit 3 on http://shellshocker.net/): not vulnerable

    https://shellshocker.net/

    http://heartbleed.com/

    Meanwhile, “A Google security researcher who goes by the name, Forshaw, has taken the bold step to publish a security vulnerability in Windows 8.1 that is still exploitable. Forshaw makes the defense that he/she waited 90 days after first publication of the vulnerability before letting the world know how to exploit it, and so far, Microsoft has not patched the issue.”

    http://www.neowin.net/news/google-researcher-publishes-unpatched-windows-81-security-vulnerability

    M$ crap been exploitable for 90-days.

    http://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-26/product_id-26434/Microsoft-Windows-8.1.html

    Looking at the big picture, you can see the rate of change is INCREASING.

    http://www.cvedetails.com/vendor/26/Microsoft.html

  26. oiaohm says:

    By the way the Dual EC one is even more funny when you follow it back and its Microsoft security personal who first raise the alarm bells yet Microsoft goes ahead and implements the functionality anyhow.

    When it comes to security the customer is not always right.

  27. oiaohm says:

    By the way DrZealot there is a far more serous issue than heartbleed in 2014 effecting SSL.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_EC_DRBG

    S. Checkoway, M. Fredrikson, R. Niederhagen, A. Everspaugh, M. Green, T. Lange, T. Ristenpart, D. J. Bernstein, J. Maskiewicz, H. Shacham (2014). “On the Practical Exploitability of Dual EC in TLS Implementations”. USENIX Security Symposium

    Intentional written into encryption standards flaws that allow man in the middle attacks. Yes majority of SSL traffic is not as protected as users would think it is.

    Yes conformation that valid attack vectors exist against any SSL using Duel_EC_DRBG interesting enough OpenSSL implementation has always been broken, gnutls never implemented because it was failing too many security reports and nss also never implemented.

    What platform has the biggest Duel_EC_DRBG issue none other than Microsoft implementation of SSL.

    2014 was a very bad year for SSL implementations.

  28. oiaohm says:

    DrZealot is just a moron I have pointed you to CVE reports before. Microsoft has huge numbers of brain farts every year.

    Reality DrZealot please present proper cites you will find its absolutely impossible to make a case that Windows is secure.

    Heartbleed infected services is major-ally still on Windows. Heartbleed is not just a Linux issue. The fact DrZealot wants to keep on saying its a Linux issue just proves how much of a stupid Zealot he is. I have give you cites to Windows only programs using openssl infected with Heart-bleed.

    Reality DrZealot you ask for cites all the time yet you keep on posting yourself without cites.

    Before you can even think about solving trivial little built-in brain-farts like Heartbleed or ShellShock, you have to commit those brain-farts first, don’t you?
    No understanding OS defeats in design is critical to being able to address Heartbleed issue completely.

    I’d recommend Zirconium, myself, but then again I am not an ignorant delusianal maniac stuck in the northern NSW bush.
    DrZealot where is your cite for this. I have a big problem I have never lived or worked NSW. How many more times are you going to post this deformation. The reality you are citeless as normal. Also where is the cite from a professional showing I am mentally ill does not exist. DrZealot keep it up these are direct offenses you can be done for. Nothing of that complete line is true.

  29. DrLoser says:

    Don’t care as long as the final result is secure. Linux has a long way to go on fixing up security but windows has even more distance to cover.

    Very true, that, oiaohm. Before you can even think about solving trivial little built-in brain-farts like Heartbleed or ShellShock, you have to commit those brain-farts first, don’t you?

    Good for Linux — it got there first!

    Incidentally, every single other claim you made in that post was completely devoid of citations. As usual.

  30. oiaohm says:

    DrZealot what scared to admit the truth. Search Windows 2008 intel video drivers issues as well as Windows 7, 8 and 8.1.

    There are a long list of Intel video card drivers issues crashing windows completely. Yes its annoying. Linux might not be able to get best performance out of Intel video card drivers but you don’t end up with deaths.

    Annoying part is identical intel drivers in different versions of Windows have caused crashes for a long time.

    Yes Intel the elephant in the room to anyone talking about binary drivers magically being universal.

  31. oiaohm says:

    gamer88 gtx970 is not an average gamer card you can go by steam survey to see this. Compared to the card I have gtx970 cheep junk. Gamer88 Nvidia telsas don’t overheat ever. Mind you I only have the cheaper one Tesla K20.

    GTX 970 puts you back about 600 dollars where a Telsa K20 puts you back about 1400 dollars. Different is Telsa K20 is rated to run 24/7 where the GTX970 are not.

    gamer88 do you know the difference between GTX970 and a GTX960 note the GTX960 is not released yet. GTX960 is a GTX970 with all the issues fixed so 24/7 running is possible.

    Yes for gamers a GTX970 is expensive junk that you will be lucky to get 14 months out of it before one of its hardware bugs catch up with you. Note GTX970 only has 12 months warranty no maker extended options. Tesla K20. is 3 year warranty Good non Tesla Nvidia cards come with 2 years warranty. Nvidia with 2 year warranties are less than half the price normally of something like a GTX970 and closer to the average gamer gpu. Risk of failing in a middle of a competition is not worth the extra frame rates. You cannot win if you are crashed.

    oiaohm so you’re not a gamer.
    DrZealot is not me. But he is right I am not a gamer as such I more need my video card for gpu processing of stuff.

    So do you want Windows and Linux coexisting or do you want Windows dead and a Linux monoculture?
    Don’t care as long as the final result is secure. Linux has a long way to go on fixing up security but windows has even more distance to cover.

  32. DrLoser says:

    “Gamer”? Really? How old are you?

    Be fair, Dougie. Unlike you, “Gamer” presumably has an HSE.

    Having pointed that out, what was your pathetic ad hominem attack all about?

    I’d assume you had some sort of ignorant point there. Darned if I can discern it.

  33. gamer88 says:

    oiaohm so you’re not a gamer.

  34. DrLoser says:

    oiaohm do you have a gtx970?

    Well, possibly, “Fifi” might have one of those. But why do you ask?

    oiaohm has a perfectly respectable tin-foil hat. It’s what he uses to prevent the inevitable idiocies leaking in.

    I’d recommend Zirconium, myself, but then again I am not an ignorant delusianal maniac stuck in the northern NSW bush.

    And I can’t even be bothered to deal with this especially cretinous “Intel drivers 8.1 fail” bollocks

    But to be fair to Fifi, why should he? I mean, I don’t have a “gtx970.” Why should Fifi?

    Oh dear. I’ve just stuffed Fifi’s opportunity to google “gtx970” and quote you a price from Walmart.

    Please accept my apologies, and allow Fifi to run riot!

  35. gamer88 says:

    oiaohm do you have a gtx970?

  36. gamer88 says:

    So do you want Windows and Linux coexisting or do you want Windows dead and a Linux monoculture?

  37. oiaohm says:

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel_windows7_2014&num=1

    Yep Doh is this. Yes Windows 8.1 intel drivers fail Windows 7 intel drivers work. You know that magical Windows Binary driver compatibility it is missing in action quite a lot.

  38. dougman says:

    Yep, Win-dohs…it’s that sound you make “Doh”, when it bluescreens at the worst possible time.

    “Gamer”? Really? How old are you?

  39. oiaohm says:

    gamer88 the Linux world dream is different.

    Jolla and Ubuntu both have included the idea of Docking for bigger screen access.

    Lets see how the long term turns out. There have been many attempts at docking phones to provide bigger screen and keyboards. With number attempts you can expect someone to get it right sooner or latter. Remember the early tablet computer were too heavy and complete product failures.

    Android I have used with keyboard and mouse. Android does come as a small box computer as well as phone. Also remember chromecast from android to TV screens/monitor. So wireless connect of screen/keyboard and mouse will become more possible. We have 60ghz wifi coming this does have the speed required to send video streams uncompressed.

    gamer88 so serous question is how many years until tech is good enough. All the prototype tech exists now for a wifi/bluetooth PC like thing using a phone as core.

  40. gamer88 says:

    At least I live in the real world.

    BTW, “Win-dohs”? Really? How old are you?

  41. gamer88 wrote, “a smartphone doesn’t even come close”.

    I like a big keyboard, monitor and mouse as much as the next guy, but today, with my smartphone, I walked for an hour, checked my heart-rate, checked the blog, installed a couple of new apps, checked my GPS, stuff you can’t do very well with a PC… It’s a different world, this mobile stuff. It does overlap with the legacy PC quite a bit but neither can do everything the other does. It’s perfectly possible to do without one or the other or both but most people would prefer at least one. I’m not sure most want to be slaves to M$ and all those malware-artists, re-re-reboots, licensing fees, EULAs etc.

  42. dougman says:

    Gammer, sounds like a fool that uses Win-dohs for one thing only…play games. Fortunately, PC gamers do not account for much in this world.

  43. gamer88 says:

    So you dream of a world where everybody would be restricted to using just cellphones running android with tiny 4 inch(10.16cm) screens and the IBM PC is dead? I’m a PC gamer and to me, a smartphone doesn’t even come close

Leave a Reply