On 2025-01-15 15:58, Paul wrote:
> On Wed, 1/15/2025 7:51 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2025-01-14 00:10, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>> MacOS machines have a shelf life of about seven years before Apple decides that your machine is no longer worth supporting with updates. As we've seen, Windows machines get about seven, so it's a fair amount of time. However, Linux has them both beat with unlimited support no matter how pathetic the machine you're running it on is.
>>
>> Hum. That is not completely true, either. Some distributions stopped supporting 32 bit machines.
>>
>> Each year you need more ram to run the same apps.
>>
>> Proprietary drivers like NVidia stop publishing drivers for what they think is old hardware, and the open source version doesn't have the full feature set.
>>
>> Modern videos use codecs that can not keep running fast enough on pathetic machines.
>
> As long as the videos are coded in something that VAAPI or NVENC/NVDEC has,
> the movie can be decoded for "almost free". For example, Intel Quicksync
> has sufficient horsepower, to decode five video streams at the same time,
> on the early instances of that hardware block.
>
> Old machines and their older video cards without NVidia driver support, might no
> longer have access to the built-in encoder/decoder hardware on the video card,
> in which case the fallback software method would be used instead.
>
> Another contributor to "pathetic", is the video decoding process can use a
> "scaler" which changes a 720x576 decoded video, to whatever box size the
> browser presents at the time (the wrapper frame). Doing a pixmap scaler
> in software, used at least 30% of a P4 core. Whereas the hardware scaler
> (driver support), could do a scaling operation "for free".
>
> And finally, insisting on compositing as a system-wide way of doing things,
> if the video card compositing is not working and the OS has to use fallback
> code for that, that could take buckets of horsepower to do.
>
> An old machine really needs the support. It isn't so much "pathetic" as it is
> everything working against it. "All the items are leaning the wrong way."
>
> The code path has had IDCT removed, so when an old machine has been
> stripped of all its goodness, the code doesn't even use the IDCT
> (Inverse Discrete Cosine transform for macroblocks). That is a method of
> providing a slight acceleration, when forced to do video decode in software.
> The older software used to use that, as it helped a bit with the decoding
> process.

Right.

I have a mini PC that I use as server and to display movies in my computer room.

Isengard:~ # inxi -GSaz --vs
inxi 3.3.23-00 (2022-10-31)
System:
Kernel: 5.14.21-150500.55.88-default arch: x86_64 bits: 64 compiler: gcc
v: 7.5.0 parameters: BOOT_IMAGE=/boot/vmlinuz-5.14.21-150500.55.88-default
root=UUID=0d457df1-b43d-4587-aa5a-6c919bcbedb8 showopts splash=verbose
resume=/dev/disk/by-label/Swap verbose mitigations=auto
Desktop: Xfce v: 4.18.1 tk: Gtk v: 3.24.34 info: xfce4-panel wm: xfwm
v: 4.18.0 dm: SDDM Distro: openSUSE Leap 15.5
Graphics:
Device-1: Intel Atom/Celeron/Pentium Processor x5-E8000/J3xxx/N3xxx
Integrated Graphics vendor: Micro-Star MSI driver: i915 v: kernel
arch: Gen-8 process: Intel 14nm built: 2014-15 ports: active: HDMI-A-3
empty: DP-1, DP-2, DP-3, HDMI-A-1, HDMI-A-2 bus-ID: 00:02.0
chip-ID: 8086:22b1 class-ID: 0300
Display: x11 server: X.Org v: 1.21.1.4 with: Xwayland v: 22.1.5
compositor: xfwm v: 4.18.0 driver: X: loaded: intel dri: iris gpu: i915
display-ID: localhost:11.0 screens: 1
Screen-1: 0 s-res: 1920x1080 s-dpi: 96 s-size: 508x285mm (20.00x11.22")
s-diag: 582mm (22.93")
Monitor-1: HDMI-A-3 mapped: DVI-D-0 model: Samsung T22C350 built: 2012
res: 1920x1080 hz: 60 dpi: 92 gamma: 1.2 size: 531x298mm (20.91x11.73")
diag: 547mm (21.5") ratio: 16:9 modes: max: 1920x1080 min: 720x400
API: OpenGL v: 4.5 Mesa 22.3.5 renderer: llvmpipe (LLVM 15.0.7 128 bits)
direct render: Yes
Isengard:~ #

Well, there are movies that simply block, display one photo then get stuck. Maybe the audio keeps playing. I had to recode with ffmpeg on another machine in order to view them here.

YouTube, I can no longer display in full screen, because the image stutters. I can see the CPU load at about 90%.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 03:09:43 +0000, Manu Raju wrote:
>
>> Linux gets bloats every two weeks
>> and some people like it! I don't and so I solved the dilemma by moving
>> to Windows.
>
>Windows is the one that needs regular defragging and running of dodgy
>hacks like CCleaner etc. Linux does not.

I never needed that with Windows, but reinstalling ended up happening,
from time to time.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
>> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
>
>macOS is free. Just needs a $600 mac to run it on.

Windows Home preinstalled on volume-produced gear is virtually free,
self-installed Linux completely free, but yes that "$600" you cite
isn't cheap for the device it buys. That OS upgrades are free is just
to incentivize buying/using an Apple device.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 1/15/25 10:46 AM, Joel wrote:
> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
>>> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
>>
>> macOS is free. Just needs a $600 mac to run it on.
>
> Windows Home preinstalled on volume-produced gear is virtually free,
> self-installed Linux completely free, but yes that "$600" you cite
> isn't cheap for the device it buys. That OS upgrades are free is just
> to incentivize buying/using an Apple device.
>

Where said "isn't cheap" $600 is ~half what Joel's already spent...

....or for when the Lady protests too much, after deducting off his
alleged $200 mistake of a second Windows OS license, roughly 50% less
($600 vs ($1150 - $200 = $950).

But don't let actual math get in one's way of a good narrative! /s

-hh

On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 11:33:48 -0500, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
wrote in <vm8o1d$313ov$1@dont-email.me>:

> On 1/15/25 10:46 AM, Joel wrote:
>> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
>>>> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
>>>
>>> macOS is free. Just needs a $600 mac to run it on.
>>
>> Windows Home preinstalled on volume-produced gear is virtually free,
>> self-installed Linux completely free, but yes that "$600" you cite
>> isn't cheap for the device it buys. That OS upgrades are free is just
>> to incentivize buying/using an Apple device.
>>
>>
> Where said "isn't cheap" $600 is ~half what Joel's already spent...
>
> ...or for when the Lady protests too much, after deducting off his
> alleged $200 mistake of a second Windows OS license, roughly 50% less
> ($600 vs ($1150 - $200 = $950).

Having played the "buy a mac mini to get MacOS" game, I can tell
you that I was very disappointed.

The Mac Studio we have now is a few steps up, but it's not worth
what we paid for it. It's clunky, and the security policies on
it are one-offs. It's a UNIX system, but they've bolted on extras
that are downright unfriendly.

Meanwhile Mrs. vallor's new workstation is still waiting in the wings;
turns out, she expanded the scope of "make a space on her desk"
into "re-organize her office". ;)

fu2: cola

--
-v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3090 Ti
OS: Linux 6.12.9 Release: Mint 21.3 Mem: 258G
"Linux is obsolete" -Andrew Tanenbaum

On 1/15/25 12:02 PM, vallor wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 11:33:48 -0500, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
> wrote in <vm8o1d$313ov$1@dont-email.me>:
>
>> On 1/15/25 10:46 AM, Joel wrote:
>>> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
>>>>> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
>>>>
>>>> macOS is free. Just needs a $600 mac to run it on.
>>>
>>> Windows Home preinstalled on volume-produced gear is virtually free,
>>> self-installed Linux completely free, but yes that "$600" you cite
>>> isn't cheap for the device it buys. That OS upgrades are free is just
>>> to incentivize buying/using an Apple device.
>>>
>>>
>> Where said "isn't cheap" $600 is ~half what Joel's already spent...
>>
>> ...or for when the Lady protests too much, after deducting off his
>> alleged $200 mistake of a second Windows OS license, roughly 50% less
>> ($600 vs ($1150 - $200 = $950).
>
> Having played the "buy a mac mini to get MacOS" game, I can tell
> you that I was very disappointed.

IMO the mini had historically been Apple's product to promote desktop
customers to migrate from Windows, but its shortcomings have centered
around how 90% of the market ignored it because it wasn't a laptop, and
the other 10% are tower fetish geeks who were offended because it
couldn't easily address every possible niche/corner use case.

> The Mac Studio we have now is a few steps up, but it's not worth
> what we paid for it.

The Studio's now two months from being 3 years old, and pretty much all
its gotten to date has been a CPU bump. It was envisioned as the being
a midpoint between the mini & Mac Pro, effectively a replacement for the
iMac Pro, whose MSRP started at $5K.

> It's clunky, and the security policies on
> it are one-offs. It's a UNIX system, but they've bolted on extras
> that are downright unfriendly.

Just which security policies are so constraining? Likewise, are these
so-called 'unfriendly' elements something which affects the Pareto
Principle 80% use case, or is it more akin to a niche/corner use case?

> Meanwhile Mrs. vallor's new workstation is still waiting in the wings;
> turns out, she expanded the scope of "make a space on her desk"
> into "re-organize her office". ;)
>
> fu2: cola

Good for her. Let me know if you're going to then be selling the
Studio, as I'd not mind picking up another one at the right specs/price.

-hh

CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
> On 2025-01-13 17:54, Joel wrote:
>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> On 2025-01-13 16:32, Joel wrote:
>>>> MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth
>>>>>> nothing.
>>>>>>
>>>>> So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?
>>>>
>>>> Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
>>>> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
>>>
>>> There's not much to pursue in MacOS. It works as it should and it is a
>>> fairly pleasant experience. However, I would agree that it's expensive.
>>> After a while, you'll need tools to do additional things and on MacOS,
>>> you're going to be paying money in most cases. Open-source is available
>>> for it too, mind you.
>>
>>
>> I just dislike Windows and macOS, it might be my own opinion but it's
>> right for me.
>
> MacOS machines have a shelf life of about seven years before Apple
> decides that your machine is no longer worth supporting with updates. As
> we've seen, Windows machines get about seven, so it's a fair amount of
> time. However, Linux has them both beat with unlimited support no matter
> how pathetic the machine you're running it on is.

Only if you're prepared to handroll backports etc. Realistically, linux is
also 5-7 years. Most LTS is 5 years.

The hardest thing is trying to keep gcc up to date. At some point too many
glibc dependencies break and you can't compile any new kernel updates.

Hank Rogers wrote on 1/14/25 7:05 PM:
> vallor wrote:
>> On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:52:05 -0600, Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid>
>> wrote in <vm48v6$23a1f$2@dont-email.me>:
>>
>>> Joel wrote:
>>>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>> On 2025-01-13 17:54, Joel wrote:
>>>>>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2025-01-13 16:32, Joel wrote:
>>>>>>>> MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth nothing.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Linux is the only option worth pursuing.  macOS is weird and
>>>>>>>> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There's not much to pursue in MacOS. It works as it should and it is
>>>>>>> a fairly pleasant experience. However, I would agree that it's
>>>>>>> expensive.
>>>>>>> After a while, you'll need tools to do additional things and on
>>>>>>> MacOS, you're going to be paying money in most cases. Open-source is
>>>>>>> available for it too, mind you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just dislike Windows and macOS, it might be my own opinion but it's
>>>>>> right for me.
>>>>>
>>>>> MacOS machines have a shelf life of about seven years before Apple
>>>>> decides that your machine is no longer worth supporting with updates.
>>>>> As we've seen, Windows machines get about seven, so it's a fair amount
>>>>> of time. However, Linux has them both beat with unlimited support no
>>>>> matter how pathetic the machine you're running it on is.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My machine is an interesting example - if I'd stayed with Win10, it'd
>>>> be slammin', but then support would end relatively early in its life.
>>>> So upgrade to 11, great, until the bloat overtakes it, as in my view it
>>>> already began to with 23H2.  Linux is the only way to solve this
>>>> dilemma.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Indeed, linux is the only way to salvation.
>>
>> I'm glad you see the light, Brother Hank!
>>
>> https://cultnix.org/
>>
>> (_Cult of Unix_ home page -- there's nothing there but
>> a title with an animated gif, perhaps I should add some
>> epistles? ;)   )
>>
>> ObWindows:
>>
>> Just navigated the backup mess in Windows 11 --
>
> I said the hell with windows backup long long ago. Even if it works
> perfectly What are the chances they'll change it? And once a month,
> updates can easily dork it. Microsoft constantly fiddles with everything,
> even if it's working perfectly. It's just what they do.
>
> I think people are better off to get some type of imaging software,
> written by people that are experts and specialize in that.  I use macrium
> reflect, but there are several others just as good or better and most
> have a free version. Backup software is too important to trust microsoft.
>
Windows backup in Windows 10 and 11 is old Windows 7 code.
- imo, it should be avoided. There are multiple free and fee version
backup and imaging programs much better for imaging and restoration.
Macrium Reflect Free
EaseUs ToDo Backup Free
AOMEI Backupper Standard Free
Paragon Backup and Recovery Community Edition - Free

--
....w¡ñ§±¤ñ

-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>On 1/15/25 10:46 AM, Joel wrote:
>> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
>>>> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
>>>
>>> macOS is free. Just needs a $600 mac to run it on.
>>
>> Windows Home preinstalled on volume-produced gear is virtually free,
>> self-installed Linux completely free, but yes that "$600" you cite
>> isn't cheap for the device it buys. That OS upgrades are free is just
>> to incentivize buying/using an Apple device.
>
>Where said "isn't cheap" $600 is ~half what Joel's already spent...
>
>...or for when the Lady protests too much, after deducting off his
>alleged $200 mistake of a second Windows OS license, roughly 50% less
>($600 vs ($1150 - $200 = $950).
>
>But don't let actual math get in one's way of a good narrative! /s

You keep including my monitor or video card or something, those were
choice add-ons that I could've trivially avoided with another HD
monitor.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 1/15/25 2:32 PM, Joel wrote:
> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>> On 1/15/25 10:46 AM, Joel wrote:
>>> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
>>>>> expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
>>>>
>>>> macOS is free. Just needs a $600 mac to run it on.
>>>
>>> Windows Home preinstalled on volume-produced gear is virtually free,
>>> self-installed Linux completely free, but yes that "$600" you cite
>>> isn't cheap for the device it buys. That OS upgrades are free is just
>>> to incentivize buying/using an Apple device.
>>
>> Where said "isn't cheap" $600 is ~half what Joel's already spent...
>>
>> ...or for when the Lady protests too much, after deducting off his
>> alleged $200 mistake of a second Windows OS license, roughly 50% less
>> ($600 vs ($1150 - $200 = $950).
>>
>> But don't let actual math get in one's way of a good narrative! /s
>
>
> You keep including my monitor or video card or something, those were
> choice add-ons that I could've trivially avoided with another HD
> monitor.
>

Monitor? Nope.

Video Card? Yup: because you said that even though you'd researched
your gear, you quickly realized that you screwed up as the i5's included
one was inadequate for your desires. But even if we subtract off the
$100 you spent here, its still $600 vs your $850 spent

But do feel free to provide a detailed cost list.

Because even the $100 you spent on the video card is subtracted off too,
your $850 spent is still higher than $600, but now its only by +30%.

-hh

On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 10:40:14 -0500, Joel wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 03:09:43 +0000, Manu Raju wrote:
>>
>>> Linux gets bloats every two weeks and some people like it! I don't
>>> and so I solved the dilemma by moving to Windows.
>>
>>Windows is the one that needs regular defragging and running of dodgy
>>hacks like CCleaner etc. Linux does not.
>
>
> I never needed that with Windows, but reinstalling ended up happening,
> from time to time.

I haven't bothered with dual boot in a long time but the problem with a
Windows install that had been running for any length of time was it left
pecker tracks all over the HDD. You had to defrag to get enough free
storage all in one place.

On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 13:51:08 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:

> Hum. That is not completely true, either. Some distributions stopped
> supporting 32 bit machines.

The only one I came across was Debian. The machine itself was 64-bit but
our legacy code was 32-bit, as was Esri's ArcObjects. I think Ubuntu 18.04
was the last release where you had a prayer of finding 32-bit Motif
libraries and others. It's all fine to pass the 32-bit flag to gcc but if
you can't link the libs you're done.