How to increase the lifespan of your PC.

If you have read this far, it is safe to assume you are the kind of person who feels comfortable tinkering with things. What I am going to describe is not exactly rocket science, but it involves a fair amount of technical fiddling about so please bear with me.

If you are like me you have probably seen those guys who tune up their automobiles and thought to yourself: "Well, they may have better performance, but what is their gas milage like ?"

It is the same with PCs. For some time now guys in the office where I work have been tweaking their PCs, making all sorts of modifications (in nerdspeak: "Overclocking their CPUs") in the name of performance. They are hell bent on squeezing every last MHz from their PC investment. This is to be admired. It is, in fact, the American way. They even have their own websites dedicated to extracting every last ounce of performance from their machines. However, like those guys with the customized Civics and Accords, we have to wonder what is the environmental impact of these modifications, and even more importantly how will it affect the lifespan of the PC ?

Before I explain how you can improve the longevity of your PC I need to explain what overclocking is, and the negative effects it can have. We can then see how my solution adresses these issues.

Overclocking in a nutshell is the illegal act of running a computer's CPU at a higher clock speed than that mandated by the manufacturer. By altering the settings on the BIOS of your motherboard, it is possible to fool your computer into running faster than the manufacturer's permitted speed limit. This results in a short term gain for the overclocker, but it is not without risk to the wallet, or the environment.

To quote the US Dept of Energy and the EPA: "Staying within the speed limit is not only a matter of safety and obeying the law, it can also save you money."

The sound advice above applies equally to Personal Computers as it does to automobiles, which is hardly surprising, since both are complex pieces of machinery requiring their users to behave in a responsible manner.

Anyway enough preaching, its time to get down to the technical nitty-gritty. For the purposes of this article, it is useful to draw an analogy between PCs and Automobiles. If you tune up an auto by adding a turbocharger, or remapping the fuel injection and timing, you may well get a small increase in performance. However it will be at the expense of wear and tear on your engine, more greenhouse gas emissions, increased insurance premiums, and ultimately the lifespan of your vehicle will be shortened. So it is with PCs.

The overclocked PC consumes more electricity than the unmodified PC (due to the higher clock speeds, and the additional cooling that is required). This causes higher running costs (just take a look at your electric bill if you don't believe me), more damage to the enviroment, due to the emission of more poisonous greenhouse gasses, and worst of all, reducing the lifespan of your CPU.

A CPU is a delicate piece of electronics. Illegally increasing the clock speed by just 2MHz can remove 6 months from its working lifespan.

Modify your PC to improve its longevity
OK, so we have seen the causal link between higher clock speeds and early CPU failure. But what can we do to improve the lifespan of our PC ? Its simple. The same equation that governs the process of "overclocking" can easily be reversed. It is the logical next step. If a faster CPU has a shorter lifespan, costs more to run and damages the environment, by the same token, an underclocked CPU will be proportionally cheaper to run, more environmentally friendly and will last longer. Follow the simple steps below to underclock your CPU and improve the lifespan of your PC

Basically there are three steps to underclocking your CPU. The first step is to get into the computer's BIOS. This can normally be done by pressing DEL as the machine boots up.

The second step is to locate the CPU clock multiplier in the BIOS menus, and modify it. Suppose you want to increase the lifespan of your CPU by a factor of two. The thing to do is to halve the clock multiplier in the BIOS.

The third step is to save your changes to the BIOS and reboot. VOILA - you are now the proud owner of a longer-lasting, greener, cheaper to run PC.

Now you might be wondering what the downside is to all this ? Good news. As it turns out, there is no downside. For years and years PC manufacturers have been telling us we needed faster and faster CPUS. This is simply not the case. I run Microsoft Word just as easily on my underclocked Dell machine, with the bonus of knowing my PC will probably outlast that of all my friends, and is saving me money to boot.

For any reasonably competent DIY enthusiast, underclocking is a no-brainer, and the sooner you do it, the sooner you can start saving money and join the ranks of those who are doing their bit to reduce global warming.

There is some evidence to suggest that if just 5% of America's PC-owning population underclocked their PCs by a miniscule 5% then the Californian power crisis would have been averted, and we would be able to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by a significant amount.

We have to start protecting our environment somewhere, so what better place to start protecting it than at home ?

	Interesting, but .. (5.00 / 2) (#6)
	by seventypercent on Mon Sep 3rd, 2001 at 09:28:21 PM PST

	.. I'm not sure what the point is. All decent PCs that a person can buy today have a "good enough" lifespan. They're designed to operate for the forseeable future, well beyond the point at which they become obsolete. Oh, sure .. there are some upgrades that you can do to an old PC in order to speed it up (such as adding extra RAM, ROM, or RIMM.) But the fact of the matter is that with today's technology, PCs become obsolete a year or so after they are purchased. They can continue to be used for (maybe) a couple of years past that. At that point, it's your duty to purchase another one. The advances in technology that we've seen in the past decade have not come for free. They've taken a lot of research and development (R&D) dollars. Hardware corporations are not going to be able to do this R&D if people purchase one PC from them and keep it for a decade. If you want to keep the industry and the economy moving in the proper direction, it is your obligation as a moral person to procure another computer from these companies on a regular basis (say, once every three years.) Personally, I think it's a bit irresponsible to suggest that people ought to "underclock" their computers to make them last longer and consume less power. If any modifications are to be made, it should be overclocking; furthermore, people should leave all of their overclocked computers turned on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The energy companies are a vital component of the modern economy, and ensuring that they get a steady cash flow is just good common sense. Furthermore, oil and gas CEOs need to feed their families just as much as you need to feed yours .. perhaps you're being selfish? At any rate, your article sounds like it's dangerously close to environmentalism. You might want to think twice before you advocate a full frontal assault on American business in the name of eco-terrorism. Reality check: A couple of thousand dollars to the computer companies every three years is not that much to ask. When the stability of the economy is at stake, it's the duty of all moral citizens to consume conspicuously. -- Red-blooded patriots do not use Linux.

	No, I must correct your fallacious arguments. (5.00 / 2) (#14)
	by dmg on Tue Sep 4th, 2001 at 05:03:50 AM PST

	PCs become obsolete a year or so after they are purchased. They can continue to be used for (maybe) a couple of years past that. You are incorrect. What happens is that the operating system becomes obsolete, and people are too lazy to go to the store and buy an upgrade, so they simply replace their machine. While you are correct in your assertion that "it's the duty of all moral citizens to consume conspicuously", there are other ways to spend money on your PC without replacing it. A well known American corporation exists which can take up the slack in terms of any reduced consumption were people to follow my underclocking guide. Simply sign up for a Microsoft subscription. This will ensure you have the very very latest in cutting edge computer science advancements right on your desktop, delivered straight to your door, and without the need to upgrade your PC. And the beauty of it is, you are helping America stay out of recession. time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration. -- MC Hawking

	GNU/Linux and processor life. (3.00 / 3) (#7)
	by Anonymous Reader on Mon Sep 3rd, 2001 at 09:33:18 PM PST

	Isn't it true that using GNU/Linux will result in a cooler CPU, less energy usage, and a longer computer life? As a matter of fact, it IS true, but since this site is extremely biased against GNU/Linux, I'll probably get moderated down for saying this. But I challenge anybody to prove me wrong. Most of the time, a system's CPU is running at between 2% and 20% of maximum capacity. Some CPU-intensive activities such as heavy number crunching, complex rendering, IDE disk access, loading large applications, etc., can cause the CPU usage to spike to 100%, but during a day of typical use, the CPU should average AT MOST 30% of maximum usage, with 10% being a more common average. Now, the interesting thing about CPUs is that normally, when they have nothing to do (70% or more of each second will be spent doing nothing), they continue spinning around aimlessly, generating heat, and consuming electricity. Thus, a completely idle computer system is using just as much CPU electricity and the CPU is working just as hard as an identical system doing rendering for Toy Story 3. The latter system will be using electricity for hard drive access, but that's a different issue. Now, Intel introduced a helpful CPU instruction called HLT. Each CPU cycle (a 1GHz system has 1 billion cycles per second, at least 70% of which are usually wasted because the system has nothing to do) consists of one instruction being executed. If a HLT instruction is executed during a CPU cycle, the CPU will actually shut itself off for the duration of that cycle. It's possible for a computer operating system to issue a HLT instruction on every CPU cycle that would otherwise have been wasted. If a 1GHz CPU was running at 10% of capacity, 900,000,000 HLTs would be issued per second, causing the CPU to use 10% as much electricty, do 10% as much work, release 10% as much heat, and greatly extending the life of the CPU. Linux does this. Windows does NOT. A HLT thread has been shown to lower a CPU's temperature by up to 30 degrees C, and a Linux system's CPU will generally be up to 30 degrees cooler than an identical machine running Windows. I know you're going to say "that's Communist and evil," but it looks like the "Communists" actually managed to out-fox the Capitalists this time. Suck on those lemons.

	communist propoganda... (5.00 / 2) (#8)
	by error27 on Mon Sep 3rd, 2001 at 10:29:41 PM PST

	This is simply untrue, even your own communist web sites will attest to this. All recent versions of windows are able to able to invoke the HLT command. With Microsoft Windows NT and Microsoft Windows 2000 this feature is turned on by default. Previous versions of Microsoft Windows did not have this feature because it was deemed too experimental. At Microsoft stability comes before fancy sounding but worthless features. The thing about Linux (and communism) is that it looks nice at first, but after you try it you find that it just doesn't work. The thing is that Microsoft has litterally billions of dollars to invest in usability testing, but communism is an economic failure and so has nothing to invest in research. Btw, at the top of the article it said that this was an article for Americans. I was therefore, measurably upset to see the number of .uk links. It is well known that the UK has not fully adopted American ideals of capitalism.

	They are getting there. Slowly. (4.00 / 2) (#9)
	by Anonymous Reader on Mon Sep 3rd, 2001 at 11:40:18 PM PST

	They have started exporting trashy TV just like us Americans. A country which can produce 'who wants to be a millionaire?', and 'the weakest link' does not sound like a touchy-feely socialist utopia to me. I have had the misfortune to visit the UK on several occasions on business, and I have to say things have changed a lot over there in recent years. There is a starbucks on every corner. There are homeless people sitting on the streets begging. The UK shows all the signs of becoming almost as capitalist as the USA. Of course, they have some work to do, (they need to get rid of the free healthcare for example) but on the whole I found London to be reasonably tolerable. Of course, some things have not changed at all. Their dental hygiene is appaling, as is their plumbing, and British automobiles still suck (and leak oil all over the place). London seems to have solved its fog problem (which was particularly bad earlier in the century). An American can visit the UK and feel at home. Apart from the strange accents (you have to get them to speak very very slowly) and the stupid convention of driving on the left of the road, and the fact that the male population seems to consist of 50% effete homosexuals and 50% psychopathic "football" hooligans.

	Certainly Communist. (5.00 / 3) (#10)
	by Craig McPherson on Tue Sep 4th, 2001 at 12:46:31 AM PST

	Microsoft's flagship operating system, Windows NT, and all following versions of it (Windows 2000 and Windows XP, including workstation and server versions of each operating system) do HLT threads. The Linuxer who started this thread was just spouting propoganda: all enterprise-grade operating systems, namely Windows NT, Windows 2000, and Windows XP, feature idle HLT threads, as well as some toy operating systems such as Linux, FreeBSD, and the Sony Playstation. It's true that the Windows 9x line doesn't use a HLT thread, but this is actually intentional on Microsoft's part. Unlike the Sociocommunist Linux philosophy, which spouts "everyone should get the same quality software, no matter how much they pay for it," Microsoft practices sound consumer principles like "you get what you pay for." The Windows 9x line is intentionally degraded in many ways to ensure that those customers who pay the additional fee for the Windows NT line receive a product that's greatly superior to the lower-priced offerings. The degraded Win9x line is available for low-end users with limited resources who therefore don't deserve top quality, such as low-income families, charitable organizations, and people on minimum wage (namely GNU programmers). These people can not pay as much as businesses and more affluent individuals, therefore it would be unfair to the people who CAN pay to give the poor people the same level of quality as the well-to-do. You mentioned Debian GNU/Linux, and that's one of my biggest peeves with the Lignux crowd: Debian has to be the most useless and Communistic of all the Freeware operating systems extant. Debian was originally created by the GNU/Linux principal developer Richard Stallman, who as I've already discussed in other threads is a self-avowed "democratic socialist," or if we're to use terms that more closely reflect reality, "Communist." Debian was the official distribution of the Freeware Software Foundation for a number of years, which should give you a preview of what Debian users might be like: dogmatic, filled with vitriol, and unquestionably intolerant of others. Technically, the distribution is a failure: it has no manual and hence is used mainly by self-proclaimed "leet hackers", it doesn't follow the official and superior "RPM" package management system (meaning that programs must be compiled by hand, requring fairly advanced programming skills and a lot of luck), the the distro is unwieldingly huge, filled with nearly 10,000 different useless Freeware programs. In short, although Debian fits the mold perfectly for insecure, immature hacker-types sitting in front of a computer in their parents' basement in cheeto-stained underwear, it's an even further step backward in terms of real-world usability than the other freeware Lignux operating systems. -- If you want to know why Lunix is so screwed up, just take a look at the people who use it. Idiocy.

	goodwins law (1.00 / 2) (#11)
	by Anonymous Reader on Tue Sep 4th, 2001 at 03:33:16 AM PST

	the term 'democratic socialist' is rather more similar to the Nazi party than anything Communist. are you saying the thread is finished?

	Yes, the FAQ is terribly difficult to read. (5.00 / 4) (#12)
	by Craig McPherson on Tue Sep 4th, 2001 at 03:49:25 AM PST

	Does this website support Godwin's law ? No. Absolutely not. we are pro-freedom of speech and view the invocation of Godwin's law as a barrier to the free and frank exchange of views which is one of the core aims of adequacy.org. Face facts, some behaviours simply are Nazi like, there is no reason to cut down a whole line of reasonable argument because of some stupid 'Usenet' rule. We trust our readership will argue responsibly. After all Godwin's law is only needed when the discussion is immature and unsophisticated. Neither of these is likely here at adequacy.org -- If you want to know why Lunix is so screwed up, just take a look at the people who use it. Idiocy.

	Good Lord....... (1.00 / 3) (#25)
	by Anonymous Reader on Tue Sep 4th, 2001 at 02:04:07 PM PST

	tell me something........ why would the average user need to purchase windows NT for their home box. They don't need the "rock solid" system that is supposedly NT. They don't need to spend that much money on something that THEY WONT USE. i frankly find this entire thread to be rediculous. if you're going to pull this "underclock" shit..... why the hell did you not just buy a SMALLER, LESS POWERFUL processor in the first place?? Or, how about this...... the people that do OC their computers know what they're doing, and why they're doing it. be it for compiling a large program, or running a Q3A server. they see the need, you all should butt out. And for the record..... i have an amd duron 750mhz which i plan to OC soon, it has 3 ide hdd, a high speed cdrom and a high speed burner, every PCI slot filled, 4 case fans, and i leave it on 90% of the time. Add to that the fact that i drive a car that gets 8 (countem 8) miles to the gallon, i feel you all can shove this right up your ass. Send all flames to x0001AThotmailDOTcom (don't worry, asbestos suit)

	Don't like it?? (1.00 / 4) (#26)
	by Anonymous Reader on Tue Sep 4th, 2001 at 02:21:57 PM PST

	DONT USE IT!!!!!!

	Meanwhile: Back at Rancho McPhearson... (2.20 / 5) (#28)
	by Anonymous Reader on Tue Sep 4th, 2001 at 11:05:38 PM PST

	By golly Martha them dangd ol' commies have gone and snuck The Debian Project History on to the world wide web. Jesus H. Christ! They've filled it full of decietful misinformation about some red named Ian Murdock founding that pack of heathens. And, would you get a load of this, the FSF's GNU project sponsored them for one year, fork tounged devils. Heh, everybody knows they are a bunch of idiots.. Why heck they don't even have a manual. How in the h-e-double-hockey-sticks are they supposed to indoctrinate us humble (and tolerant) Americans. They are so low, they've gone and infiltrated The Linux Standard Base. They say what's what in a Linux distro. Yup even the packaging format for LSB packages. Gee whiz, Martha, they've even slipped in a footnote saying that as long as there is a tool for installing these packages the distribution can use whatever packaging format they want. Those Free software people are lower than a snakes belly in a wagon rut. Heck, just because Debian has been around longer than Red Hat or the Linux Standard Base is no reason for them to go off and get uppity with their own packaging format. At least RPM's don't petrify our women, while dishing out all their useless Freeware Cletus, pass the strycnine, all this snake handling has got me a might parched.

	whatever... (1.00 / 3) (#30)
	by Anonymous Reader on Wed Sep 5th, 2001 at 12:06:19 AM PST

	I notice that you didn't bother to comment on the bit about RPM and it's "official and superior" nature. Could this be because it's neither? Could it be that Ian Murdock is listed as the creator of Debian, because it's the truth? I hope that we can atleast agree that it is named after he and his wife Debra. Coincidence, hmm? Could it be that Free software is such a good thing that even Microsoft use it for thier HotMail service? Could it be that you are confusing Slashdot's obsession with petrified models with some sort of free operating system? Could it be that you complain about the thousands of freeware programs included with Debian because you've been brainwashed. Could it be that even a UFO cult knows more about webservers than even you? Could it be that after you've collected a few "pro-linux" images that personally "interest" you there's a mess to wipe up with some toilet paper?

	surely you jest... (1.00 / 3) (#32)
	by Anonymous Reader on Wed Sep 5th, 2001 at 01:10:03 AM PST

	RPM is the packaging format for the LSB packages. That's saying nothing. Kinda like the UN resolutions you like to wax poetic about. Marketshare, what's that? We're commies. Maybe you could do something like a ratio of marketshare to marketing budgets? I'm certain Debian would trounce all the other distros, because they don't market anything. Erm. `me@mybox$grep "official" ch1.html The Debian Project was officially founded by Ian Murdock on August 16th, 1993. The official pronounciation of Debian is 'deb ee n'. The name comes from the` I didn't catch the part about the "official OS" could you provide a link? Actually all of the servers at hotmail that actually house any email are still FreeBSD because Win2k couldn't keep up.. and sorry, that was the first one I tried. la la la... it must be nice to live in fantasy land... where nobody buys free software. I hate to make you look like a moron, but you just said that Microsoft paid (a pretty penny to) for FreeBSD servers, kinda ironic. heh.. I didn't post that comment. I was actually laughing my ass off at the whole thread until I got to your horribly misguided diatribe about Debian. Why do you have all those funny little "Vim" icons on your Bootleg Pokey pages? Probably because you are one of the better trolls around. I like your style. Keep up the good work.

	Is Windows 9X communist? (2.00 / 1) (#55)
	by Anonymous Reader on Fri Sep 7th, 2001 at 02:11:18 PM PST

	An analogy to this, Open Unices, such as GnuLinux, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and Minix, are to Commercial Unices, AIX(IBM's Unix), HP_UX(HP), Irix(SGI), A/UX(Apple), and Solaris(Sun), as the Windows 9X(Microsoft) are to Windows NT and it's successors(Microsoft). This is to say, that each has it's uses, and while GnuLinux and the BSD's are not intentionally degraded, there are commercial Unices. The Open Unices, (I hate to use the term 'Free' as it is ambiguous, and usually construed as 'Free as in beer', as opposed to 'Free as in speach') came about as the result of a need for Unix on the Intel x86 platform. This is due to the fact that not everyone can/could afford the expensive hardware (PDP-7/11, Vax, Honeywell, 360/370, et cetera) required to run commercial Unices.

	About the Pro-Linux images on my webspace. (3.66 / 3) (#29)
	by Craig McPherson on Tue Sep 4th, 2001 at 11:23:10 PM PST

	First, I can't help the fact that my Internet Service Provider uses a UNIX OS. It used to be a decent Windows-only ISP, but then it got bought out by Earthlink, which also happens to be owned by a UFO cult. The ISP gives me 5MB of space and I use it to host images and documents that are of interest to me. Secondly, I put those pro-Linux images on my webspace for two reasons: I found them on the Internet and thought they displayed how dogmatic and fanatical Linux users are, and decided to display them on my website. I like collecting pictures of cute women, and this "genre" of image interests me on a personal level. If you find any other pro-Linux material on my webspace, then you can be assured that my ISP was hacked by vengeful 12-year-old Linux users who placed the material there. The fact that the ISP's webserver is running UNIX explains why it's so easy to hack. As for Debian history, "Ian Murdock" may be listed as the "official" creator of Debian, but Debian was originally the official operating system of the Free Software Foundation, which pretty much makes RMS the guy behind Debian. -- If you want to know why Lunix is so screwed up, just take a look at the people who use it. Idiocy.

	Get a haircut, get a real job... (4.00 / 3) (#31)
	by Craig McPherson on Wed Sep 5th, 2001 at 12:30:55 AM PST

	... use a real OS, don't be a slob. "I notice that you didn't bother to comment on the bit about RPM and it's "official and superior" nature. Could this be because it's neither?" The Linux Standards Base lists RPM as the interim official package format. If you want to interpret the LSB's statement a different way, that's your right. But you'll be wrong. Look at the market share of Redhat versus the market share of Debian, and I think you'll see what package format is superior. Not that any Linux package management is "superior." Microsoft brought us the world's first TRUE advanced package management system with Windows Update and the Windows Installer. it works a lot better than any of the Linux offerings, too. "Could it be that Ian Murdock is listed as the creator of Debian, because it's the truth? I hope that we can atleast agree that it is named after he and his wife Debra. Coincidence, hmm?" I won't deny that, but can YOU deny that Debian was once the official OS of the Free Software Foundation? Your own Debian history page says that. "Could it be that Free software is such a good thing that even Microsoft use it for thier HotMail service?" That's an absolute lie. Microsoft BOUGHT Hotmail which was using UNIX OS's at the time, but quickly upgraded it to the enterprise-grade Windows NT over the past couple of years. You posted statistics for "ad.law3.hotmail.com", but that's NOT Hotmail. Hotmail is "www.hotmail.com", which is running Windows 2000 and IIS. Some of the back-end servers like the one you listed may still be running legacy OS's, but it's impossible to upgrade thousands of servers in less than a year's time while still keeping the high-volume Hotmail service up and running the entire time. The fact that you probably searched through HUNDREDS of servers to find one still running a UNIX OS just proves that Linux users will do ANYTHING to make Microsoft look bad, but it's usually just themselves who wind up looking bad. "Could it be that you are confusing Slashdot's obsession with petrified models with some sort of free operating system?" Could you rephrase your question in the form of a question that makes sense? "Could it be that you complain about the thousands of freeware programs included with Debian because you've been brainwashed." Freeware software is free because it's not good enough to pay money for. If Debian were good enough for people to buy it, it wouldn't be free. Debian tried to sell a retail box (they even gave away a free Loki game with it), but, wonders of wonders, nobody bought it! "Could it be that even a UFO cult knows more about webservers than even you?" Oh, are you sad that I insulted your precious Xenu? This was SUPPOSED to be an article about the advantages of CPU underclocking, but you had to turn it off-topic with your "Linux uses less electricity than Windows" post which flies in the face of physics. The REAL way to underclock your CPU is to run a Freeware OS on it. -- If you want to know why Lunix is so screwed up, just take a look at the people who use it. Idiocy.

	I'm "JEST" about tired of you complainin (5.00 / 2) (#34)
	by Craig McPherson on Wed Sep 5th, 2001 at 02:48:48 AM PST

	RPM is the packaging format for the LSB packages. That's saying nothing. Kinda like the UN resolutions you like to wax poetic about. So you go and check my comment history on other stories to try to "dig up dirt" about me? That's mature. And I don't "wax poetic." I "rant like a drunken sailor." Please don't confuse the two. RPM is the official packaging format, and Debian does not use RPM. Is there something I'm missing? Debian is not in compliance with the official standard. The only distribution LESS in compliance is Slackware, which is boycotting the entire LSB. Marketshare, what's that? We're commies. Now you admit it. Even a Communist has to admit that in the real world, one of the ways to measure the success of an operating system is by the number of people who using it, right? The better it is, the more people will use it, right? Why, then, is Linux use at 0.5% of all PC usage, and why is Debian usage at 5% of all Linux usage. Check the statistics yourself if you don't believe me. Actually all of the servers at hotmail that actually house any email are still FreeBSD because Win2k couldn't keep up.. and sorry, that was the first one I tried. So you at random decided to guess that a machine called "ad.law3.hotmail.com" existed, and, wonder of wonders, it happend to be running a Freeware OS? Wonder of wonders. More likely, you read a +5 rated comment on Slashdot saying "I found one Hotmail server still running UNIX! I am so leet!" Wonder of wonders. At least a year ago, Microsoft issued an official response to the allegations that Hotmail servers ran UNIX operating systems, but I guess you can't be bothered to research the facts. Microsoft paid (a pretty penny to) for FreeBSD servers, kinda ironic. No, Microsoft bought Hotmail and all the servers it was currently running on. They bought it because they wanted to modernize it and turn it into a productive service. The OS the servers were running was one unfortunate aspect of the foetal Hotmail, which Microsoft quickly set about correcting. Microsoft didn't want the FreeBSD servers, it wanted Hotmail, which just happened to be running on UNIX boxes at the time because the original owner could not afford high-end hardware and high-end OS's. And Microsoft only paid money for the hardware itself and for the proprietary Hotmail software, they paid nothing for the hunderds of copies of FreeBSD. So much for "buying free software"! la la la... it must be nice to live in fantasy land... where nobody buys free software. Yes, freeware sales are doing very well. They look like a great investments. But since you're such an expert on successful businesses, maybe you can tell me what does the flat line at "zero" on this graph represent? Why do you have all those funny little "Vim" icons on your Bootleg Pokey pages? I don't know what you're talking about. CEASE YOUR UNERUDITE RANTINGS KNAVE OR YOU WILL THEREFORE BE VICTIM TO GUN!!!!!!!. Probably because you are one of the better trolls around. I like your style. Keep up the good work. This web site does *NOT* allow trolling, and you're informed of that fact every time you post a comment. The Editors and Trusted Users delete or hide upwards of 30 troll-posts per day, and they do it with great alacrity, so you can rest assured that anything you read on this site is *NOT* a troll, or else it would have been deleted. If you still doubt my true feelings towards Linux (especially towards Debian), a little bit of Google research and other fact-checking should make it absolutely clear what my opinion on Linux is. If you're still in doubt, e-mail me. I didn't catch the part about the "official OS" could you provide a link? Why of course, my friend! Search (or as you would say, "grep") for "official distribution" on that page. That IS your precious Slashdot, right? I know what you're going to say in your next reply, so I'm going to go ahead and quote your next post which you haven't made yet. But that's a quote from an Anonymous Coward! Why should I believe a so-called "fact" posted by some faceless, anonymous person on some message board! ahem -- If you want to know why Lunix is so screwed up, just take a look at the people who use it. Idiocy.

	Cat got your tongue? (5.00 / 2) (#56)
	by Craig McPherson on Fri Sep 7th, 2001 at 09:33:48 PM PST

	Or did you finally give up in defeat, oh Anonymous Reader? I noticed you haven't replied to this after several days; probably because you're ashamed at having been so wrong in your previous posts. -- If you want to know why Lunix is so screwed up, just take a look at the people who use it. Idiocy.

	Your wording makes you sound dumb (1.50 / 2) (#57)
	by Anonymous Reader on Sun Sep 9th, 2001 at 12:20:33 AM PST

	<<That's an absolute lie. Microsoft BOUGHT Hotmail which was using UNIX OS's at the time, but quickly upgraded it to the enterprise-grade Windows NT over the past couple of years. You posted statistics for "ad.law3.hotmail.com", but that's NOT Hotmail. Hotmail is "www.hotmail.com", which is running Windows 2000 and IIS.>> Yet they continued to use them for quite sometimes until they were found out. Also Hotmail was not using Unix OSs. Examples of these would be Hewlett-Packards HP-UX or IBM's AIX. I believe it should have read Unix-like OSs. For your information the hotmail servers in question ran FreeBSD. Also if open-source, freely distrinutable, "communist code" is such crap to that founf in Windows was does MS used code from FreeBSD in its TCP/IP stack? You can read the BSD license to find that it's perfectly OK to use BSD licensed code however you want as long as you give credit to those who actually did the work. Don't even get me started on the fact that TCP/IP was a protocol developed for UNIX by researchers at the University of Claifornia at Berkeley and NOT a MS innovation.

	Been doing this for years (5.00 / 3) (#13)
	by Anonymous Reader on Tue Sep 4th, 2001 at 04:54:01 AM PST

	I replaced the 2khz Z80A processor on my Sinclair ZX80 with the 1khz version and it has been serving all my web pages for the past 20 years without needing to be rebooted. And I use the heatsink as a heater for my room.... You guys are always on about Linux versus MS versus Apple. Use a real, proven operating system like CP/M...

	CP/M on the ZX80 (5.00 / 1) (#27)
	by localroger on Tue Sep 4th, 2001 at 07:54:37 PM PST

	d00d cp/m on the Sinclair ROCKS. I didn't know what I was missing until I got the controller that let it read 90k single side Osborne disks, man it is such a relief not to have to tab around the screen any more like on the Osborne in Wordstar (though the screen does blink whenever I hit a key, seems with the CPU handling the video you can't get around that). Oh, and you know you can now get all the info you need online now to write and burn your own Atari 2600 VCS carts! Technology is just busting loose all over the place. Do you know, they have modems now that plug straight in the wall and don't use acoustic couplers, and they actually do 1200 baud? Imagine cutting your long distance bill 75%, or getting 4x as much warez. What a wunnerful world, I can hardly imagine what they will think of next.

	Don't use fancy acoustic couplers (5.00 / 2) (#33)
	by Anonymous Reader on Wed Sep 5th, 2001 at 02:45:23 AM PST

	I just whistle the binary down the phone line as any real hacker should....

	I used to do that, but... (5.00 / 2) (#51)
	by localroger on Wed Sep 5th, 2001 at 04:29:37 PM PST

	...I lost the damn whistle and they aren't giving any more of them out in Cap'n Crunch boxes any more. And don't tell me about doing it without the whistle, I never could carry a tune.

	if I'm ont mistaken (none / 0) (#15)
	by motherfuckin spork on Tue Sep 4th, 2001 at 06:30:46 AM PST

	a lot of processors in our computers are already underclocked by default and/or design, so we should be thanking Intel, AMD, ,IBM, and Motorola for helping keep the world a cleaner place. I am not who you think I am.

	Well yes, but not enough. (5.00 / 2) (#16)
	by dmg on Tue Sep 4th, 2001 at 07:49:40 AM PST

	I mean, take the 1GHz thunderbird from AMD. I've heard reports that it can go as fast as 1.1 GHz, which means AMD appear to be doing their bit for the good old environment. However, as with all corporations, it is a case of too little, too late. If you care to read my instructions once more, you will see that I recommend halving the clock speed. Not reducing it by a paltry 100Mhz in order to seem 'green'. time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration. -- MC Hawking

	well then, why not pull the chip altogether? (none / 0) (#17)
	by motherfuckin spork on Tue Sep 4th, 2001 at 07:53:48 AM PST

	that way, you won't be consuming any power at all? God forbid we actually use our hands to write a letter, or pick up the phone to call someone, or for that matter, actually go and visit with someone in order to partake of conversation. By simply rendering your computer "useless", you can convert it from a source of heat for your room to a nice end table or lamp stand. I am not who you think I am.

	You are missing the point. (5.00 / 2) (#18)
	by dmg on Tue Sep 4th, 2001 at 08:21:47 AM PST

	It is pointless consumption of the Earth's resources which I am worried about. Of course we need to use our computers for useful things, like typing our resumes or reading an important email. What we don't need is an overclocked PC wasting electricity for no good reason. I am not a luddite, I am merely suggesting ways in which we could all do our bit to reduce global warming. Finally with regards to your sig. Who do you think I think you are. Unless you are a mind reader you are being a bit complacent there aren't you ? time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration. -- MC Hawking

	pointless consumption (none / 0) (#20)
	by motherfuckin spork on Tue Sep 4th, 2001 at 09:27:39 AM PST

	Ah, there's the magic phrase... sadly, it is a very subjective thing to determine what is needed and what is peripherial. I do indeed agree that overclocking can be wasteful, but underclocking can indeed be no better. Why not suggest that people dig out old 486 based computers for simple tasks like word processing and e-mail? I've got two old 486 based machines currently up and running, and they are fine, reliable machines that are still quite functional. Can't play Q3 on it, but I can write a letter just fine. As far as my sig goes, as it is something that I can shange quite easily, it is not something that I usually bother to discuss. It is not a matter of who I think you think I am. It is simply that people gain very little insight about me by reading on-line comments. I am not who you think I am.

	wouldn't it make more sense (5.00 / 3) (#22)
	by alprazolam on Tue Sep 4th, 2001 at 12:36:32 PM PST

	to prepare all your 'computer word' offline (on paper), and then run the computer at full speed for the shortest time possible? running a 500 MHz processor for 30 minutes consumes less power than say a 100 MHz for 5 hours.

	Thats another great idea. (5.00 / 2) (#24)
	by dmg on Tue Sep 4th, 2001 at 01:12:37 PM PST

	You see, thats what I like about adequacy, every comment is insightful, and there are no trolls! time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration. -- MC Hawking

	You mentioned God (none / 0) (#38)
	by Adam Rightmann on Wed Sep 5th, 2001 at 07:59:15 AM PST

	clearly, he gave us the Earth to use, but not to abuse, and if underclocking your PC uses less resources than running it at rated speed, we should all consider doing it. A. Rightmann

	underclocking using less power.... (none / 0) (#70)
	by DiaphramPlatypus on Sat Oct 27th, 2001 at 07:58:04 PM PST

	Actually, if you underclock your processor you still use the same amount of power resources, it is just not all allocated to the data and processing components of the computer. The power source pulls in X amps/volts for every Y seconds. It just sends it through a series or electrical routers and such to the motherboard, hard disks, flopy disks, etc. This is why they recommend you turn off your computer when pluging in new drives, as it is sending power through the cables even though there is nothing connected. There is no way for the power source to tell that there is actually a device on the end of the cable, it just knows that there is an on and an off state and that it needs to send power to all its output lines.

	Overclocking Illegal under DMCA!? (none / 0) (#19)
	by Ruri on Tue Sep 4th, 2001 at 09:04:07 AM PST

	If it is, perhaps I should move to another country where I still am allowed to do whatever I want with goods I buy in a store for my personal use. I payed money for it, didn't I? If I overclock my processor, it is my responsibility to pay my higher electric bill and deal with the problem if I ruin my chip. I don't need the government telling me that I can't overclock my chip just because some greedy companies bribed off Congress to pass an unconstitutional law. If overclocking is illegal, then I guess underclocking is too, under the DMCA.

	neither of the illegal (none / 0) (#23)
	by alprazolam on Tue Sep 4th, 2001 at 12:37:33 PM PST

	because neither is an attempt to circumvent copyright protection. both however will void the warranty of the computer.