From: Martin Dalecki <dalecki@evision-ventures.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>
Cc: Cort Dougan <cort@fsmlabs.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@redhat.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: latest linus-2.5 BK broken
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 00:41:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3D125A0C.3000802@evision-ventures.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Pine.LNX.4.44.0206201511300.872-100000@home.transmeta.com
Użytkownik Linus Torvalds napisał:
> At which point it doesn't _matter_ if you only get 70% or 30% or 12%
> improvement. If it's within "cheap enough", people will buy it. In fact,
> once it gets "too cheap", people will buy something more expensive just
> because a cheap PC obviously isn't good enough. That's _reality_.
>
> Your "efficiency" arguments have no basis in the real life of economics in
> a developing market. Only embedded people care about absolute cost and
> absolute efficiencies ("it's not worth it for us to go for a more powerful
> CPU, since we don't need it"). The rest of the world takes that 66MHz
> improvement (in a CPU that does multiple gigahertz) and is happy about it.
> Or takes the added 12%, and is happy about it.
You don't read economic papers. Don't you? Or what is it with this
plumbing server/pc market around us? Or increased notebook sales.
(Typical marked saturation symptom, like the second car for the
familiy :-).
I suggest it's precisely the end of the open invention curve out there:
1. Nowadays the CPUs are indeed good enough for most of the common tasks.
WindowsXP tries hard to help overcome this :-). But in reality Win2000
is just fine for office work.
2. The technology in question is starting to hit real physical barriers becouse
it appears more and more that not everything comming out of the labs
can be implemented at reasonable costs.
> Humans are not rational creatures. We're _rationalizing_ creatures, and we
> love rationalizing that big machine that just makes us feel better.
Perhaps it's just still too deep in to my brain that
the overwhelimg part of the PC market is still determined
by corporate buyers (70%). And they look for efficiency (well within
wide boundaries :-). There is for example not much of an uprush from
Win4.0 or Win2000 to WindowsXP. Not only due to "political" reasons,
but becouse a normal PC from few years ago still does the job
for office productivity. Quite away from the days of yearly upgrades
all around the office :-)... And finally the whole thing driving
the movement behind AS/390 boxen running Linux OS instancies is consolidation
and costs too...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-06-20 22:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 97+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-06-18 17:18 latest linus-2.5 BK broken James Simmons
2002-06-18 17:46 ` Robert Love
2002-06-18 18:51 ` Rusty Russell
2002-06-18 18:43 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2002-06-18 18:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-06-18 18:59 ` Robert Love
2002-06-18 20:05 ` Rusty Russell
2002-06-18 20:05 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-06-18 20:31 ` Rusty Russell
2002-06-18 20:41 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-06-18 21:12 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2002-06-18 21:08 ` Cort Dougan
2002-06-18 21:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-06-19 12:29 ` Eric W. Biederman
2002-06-19 17:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-06-20 3:57 ` Eric W. Biederman
2002-06-20 5:24 ` Larry McVoy
2002-06-20 7:26 ` Andreas Dilger
2002-06-20 14:54 ` Eric W. Biederman
2002-06-20 15:41 ` McVoy's Clusters (was Re: latest linus-2.5 BK broken) Sandy Harris
2002-06-20 17:10 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-06-20 20:42 ` Timothy D. Witham
2002-06-21 5:16 ` Eric W. Biederman
2002-06-22 14:14 ` Kai Henningsen
2002-06-20 16:30 ` latest linus-2.5 BK broken Cort Dougan
2002-06-20 17:15 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-06-21 6:15 ` Eric W. Biederman
2002-06-21 17:50 ` Larry McVoy
2002-06-21 17:55 ` Robert Love
2002-06-21 18:09 ` Linux, the microkernel (was Re: latest linus-2.5 BK broken) Jeff Garzik
2002-06-21 18:46 ` Cort Dougan
2002-06-21 20:25 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-06-22 1:07 ` Horst von Brand
2002-06-22 1:23 ` Larry McVoy
2002-06-22 12:41 ` Roman Zippel
2002-06-23 15:15 ` Sandy Harris
2002-06-23 17:29 ` Jakob Oestergaard
2002-06-24 6:27 ` Craig I. Hagan
2002-06-24 13:06 ` J.A. Magallon
2002-06-24 10:59 ` Eric W. Biederman
2002-06-21 19:34 ` Rob Landley
2002-06-22 15:31 ` Alan Cox
2002-06-22 12:24 ` Rob Landley
2002-06-22 19:00 ` Ruth Ivimey-Cook
2002-06-22 21:09 ` jdow
2002-06-23 17:56 ` John Alvord
2002-06-23 20:48 ` jdow
2002-06-23 21:40 ` [OT] " Xavier Bestel
2002-06-22 18:25 ` latest linus-2.5 BK broken Eric W. Biederman
2002-06-22 19:26 ` Larry McVoy
2002-06-22 22:25 ` Eric W. Biederman
2002-06-22 23:10 ` Larry McVoy
2002-06-23 6:34 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-06-23 22:56 ` Kai Henningsen
2002-06-20 17:16 ` RW Hawkins
2002-06-20 17:23 ` Cort Dougan
2002-06-20 20:40 ` Martin Dalecki
2002-06-20 20:53 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-06-20 21:27 ` Martin Dalecki
2002-06-20 21:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-06-20 21:59 ` Martin Dalecki
2002-06-20 22:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-06-20 22:41 ` Martin Dalecki [this message]
2002-06-21 0:09 ` Allen Campbell
2002-06-21 7:43 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2002-06-21 21:02 ` Rob Landley
2002-06-22 3:57 ` (RFC)i386 arch autodetect( was Re: latest linus-2.5 BK broken ) Matthew D. Pitts
2002-06-22 4:54 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-06-21 16:01 ` Re: latest linus-2.5 BK broken Sandy Harris
2002-06-21 20:38 ` Rob Landley
2002-06-20 21:13 ` Timothy D. Witham
2002-06-21 19:53 ` Rob Landley
2002-06-21 5:34 ` Eric W. Biederman
2002-06-19 10:21 ` Padraig Brady
2002-06-18 21:45 ` Bill Huey
2002-06-18 20:55 ` Robert Love
2002-06-19 13:31 ` Rusty Russell
2002-06-18 19:29 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2002-06-18 19:19 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2002-06-18 19:49 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2002-06-18 19:27 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2002-06-18 20:13 ` Rusty Russell
2002-06-18 20:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-06-18 22:03 ` Ingo Molnar
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-06-18 23:38 Michael Hohnbaum
2002-06-18 23:57 ` Ingo Molnar
2002-06-19 0:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2002-06-19 1:00 ` Matthew Dobson
2002-06-19 23:48 ` Michael Hohnbaum
[not found] <E17KSLb-0007Dj-00@wagner.rustcorp.com.au>
2002-06-19 0:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-06-19 15:23 ` Rusty Russell
2002-06-19 16:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-06-19 20:57 ` Rusty Russell
2002-06-20 23:48 Miles Lane
2002-06-21 7:31 Martin Knoblauch
2002-06-21 12:59 Jesse Pollard
2002-06-24 21:28 Paul McKenney
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3D125A0C.3000802@evision-ventures.com \
--to=dalecki@evision-ventures.com \
--cc=bcrl@redhat.com \
--cc=cort@fsmlabs.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rml@tech9.net \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox