Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft, Sony Clash Over Vista Turbo Memory

CmdrTaco posted more than 7 years ago | from the why-can't-we-just-get-along dept.

Microsoft 161

Anonymous writes "Sony is claiming that the current release of Vista does not support Intel's Turbo Memory technology, but Microsoft has dismissed the allegation. If Microsoft is telling the truth then all is well. But if Sony is right, Microsoft has opened itself to being sued for deceptive marketing practices."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Hmmm. (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457847)

"If Microsoft is telling the truth..."

Re:Hmmm. (5, Funny)

PoliTech (998983) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457959)

WinFS redux? PC-to-PC synchronization rehashed? Windows Vista scripting shell encore?

We used to play a (DOS) joke called "Turbo Copy"

Just press "ALT" then "E" then "A" ... then hit the Deliver key (DEL).

Turbo Copy! 100% data loss, but it sure is fast!

Maybe that's how MS saves their roadmap.txt file.

Re:Hmmm. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19458141)

That sounds like the Unix command to read mail, real fast: rm -rf

Re:Hmmm. (1)

8ball629 (963244) | more than 7 years ago | (#19459407)

Oh crap... I don't know what happened but everything on my web server is gone... And it didn't read my mail :(.

Re:Hmmm. (0)

mattcasters (67972) | more than 7 years ago | (#19459759)

Don't panic! [wikipedia.org] You can get all your files back using the fdisk [wikipedia.org] command.

So, sue me (3, Insightful)

mangu (126918) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457867)

if Sony is right, Microsoft has opened itself to being sued for deceptive marketing practices."


That wouldn't be the first time Microsoft was sued. What does Sony have that the US-DOJ doesn't?

Re:So, sue me (4, Funny)

Sunburnt (890890) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457875)

That wouldn't be the first time Microsoft was sued. What does Sony have that the US-DOJ doesn't?

Other than positive regard by a larger number of the American people, I have no idea.

Re:So, sue me (5, Insightful)

speaker of the truth (1112181) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457931)

Its pretty telling and sad when the company responsible for root-kits has a higher regard among us then the DoJ.

Re:So, sue me (2, Insightful)

Sunburnt (890890) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457967)

Its pretty telling and sad when the company responsible for root-kits has a higher regard among us then the DoJ.

True. I don't buy CDs, though, and all I know is that my Sony has, for years, provided clean, crisp images of such things as the incompetent lackey in charge of the DoJ, lying desperately in order to cover his political ass. In fact, when I first purchased the Sony, it provided great imagery of his predecessor explaining the need to ruthlessly prosecute pornographers and head shops.

There's no end to this sadness (4, Interesting)

EmbeddedJanitor (597831) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458889)

When presidential candidates are debating about evolution you really must wonder how enlightened the masses really are.

Re:So, sue me (1)

arashi no garou (699761) | more than 7 years ago | (#19459027)

Root-kits, as well as squashing the only reliable source for the GP2X (lik-sang.com).

Re:So, sue me (4, Insightful)

DMaster0 (26135) | more than 7 years ago | (#19460119)

wait, who's in positive regard?

Sony? The rootkit installing, graffiti sponsoring over priced pusher of mediocre quality products?

Microsoft? Of course not, we're on slashdot after all...

the US Department of Justice? After the media coverage of the Paris Hilton ordeal and the fact that millions of people now realize that convicted people in most cases only serve %10 of their time and even less if they're rich socialites... followed by the abrupt reversal of the status quo to put the rich socialite in jail to the fullest extent of her sentence rather than getting treated like any other common probation violator... I'd say the average American is rather unsure of where they stand with regards to the justice system in the US and I'd suspect that money would have a lot to do with it today in any case.

they're all pretty shady in their own respects if you ask me, and it all seems to come down to money.

Re:So, sue me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457879)

an interest in making money from lawsuits against microsoft?
no, wait....

Re:So, sue me (1, Offtopic)

BuhDuh (1102769) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457885)

He said, she said. Handbags at dawn. Ho-hum.

Re:So, sue me (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457965)

Bawls

Re:So, sue me (5, Informative)

arthurs_sidekick (41708) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458059)

In all likelihood, buckets of money. Compare MS' or Sony's ADVERTISING budget to the ENTIRE budget allocated to the DOJ's antitrust division:

  • MS [joystiq.com] : $945M (reportedly)
  • DOJ [usdoj.gov] : (2003) $140M

My google-fu on financial info breakdowns for publicly traded companies is obviously weak, but Nintendo said they were going to spend $200M on marketing the Wii *alone*, so it's likely that Sony's advertising budget for the PS3 ALONE is on the order of the entire allocation for the DOJ's antitrust division.

Re:So, sue me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19459331)

People who are technically savey to decifer the truth... for one!

Its all marketing... (1, Interesting)

click2005 (921437) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457893)

Sony is dying because of the way they've been treating their customers lately.

By attacking one of the few companies more hated than them, they're trying to re-direct some of their bad karma.

Sony is not dying .. (5, Informative)

rs232 (849320) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457985)

"Sony is dying because of the way they've been treating their customers lately"

"By attacking one of the few companies more hated than them, they're trying to re-direct some of their bad karma"

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=SNE&t=6m [yahoo.com]

was: Re:Its all marketing...

Re:Sony is not dying .. (3, Funny)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458363)

Yeah, if Sony is dying, then Apple must be dying faster

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=AAPL&t=6m [yahoo.com]

Re:Sony is not dying .. (1)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458929)

yeah, and microsoft losing money so fast they'll be out of business in a month

Re:Sony is not dying .. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19458381)

Nice job defaulting it to the last year. Try setting it to maximum view. That's right, sony has almost regained it's stock price of 1997! Wow they must feel awesome!

Re:Sony is not dying .. (1)

kaffiene (38781) | more than 7 years ago | (#19460255)

Stock price is not the same thing as profitability at all. EBIT is more a measure of health than what the stock market trading card game thinks of a company.

Re:Sony is not dying .. (2, Funny)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458863)

Sony's not dying..? You mean to tell Sony and Microsoft execs aren't sitting here whole day defending their "hated" companies from pissed off slashdotters?!

Outrageous claims.

Re:Its all marketing... (3, Interesting)

westlake (615356) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458241)

By attacking one of the few companies more hated than them, they're trying to re-direct some of their bad karma.

Bad karma? What bad karma?

Microsoft Corp. founder Bill Gates proved even more appealing than cuddly babies in the eighth-annual Harris Interactive/The Wall Street Journal ranking of the world's best and worst corporate reputations.
Top-ranked Microsoft managed to beat Johnson & Johnson, whose emotionally appealing baby-products business had kept it in first place for a remarkable seven consecutive years. In the Reputation Quotient survey conducted by market-research firm Harris Interactive Inc., respondents gave Microsoft very high marks for leadership and financial results. But Mr. Gates's personal philanthropy also boosted the public's opinion of Microsoft. How Boss's Deeds Buff A Firm's Reputation [wsj.com]

Apple ranked 22nd in the Harris poll.

Re:Its all marketing... (1)

Kierthos (225954) | more than 7 years ago | (#19459559)

Obviously, those cuddly babies were up to something.

Re:Its all marketing... (1)

Afrosheen (42464) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458759)

Insightful? The reply below yours pwns your assumption. Sony is way more than the PS3 or any nerd-focused rootkit debacle. The public at large is still in love with Sony regardless of what some internet crybabies would have them believe.

Re:Its all marketing... (1)

causality (777677) | more than 7 years ago | (#19459055)

Insightful? The reply below yours pwns your assumption. Sony is way more than the PS3 or any nerd-focused rootkit debacle. The public at large is still in love with Sony regardless of what some internet crybabies would have them believe.

So deciding that it is wrong for a company to try to deliberately install a rootkit on our computers makes one a crybaby? Unfortunately, like most other security issues this one is "nerd-focused," that is, until it's YOUR machine that is compromised.

Re:Its all marketing... (1, Troll)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458891)

"Sony is dying because of the way they've been treating their customers lately.
By attacking one of the few companies more hated than them, they're trying to re-direct some of their bad karma."


Shame. Looks like the end of your post got cut off, so I'll paste it here to avoid confusion:

"</sarcasm> LOLzers! Hahaha! I'm kidding rite, you don't real think I thought that sereously! OMGWTFBBQ hehehe! ROFLMAO"

Hmmm (1)

Superpants (930409) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457913)

Another niche tech product backfires on its creators. I wonder if they'll ever learn.

Re:Hmmm (1)

deftcoder (1090261) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458043)

Are you kidding? Some day, all this RDRAM is going to be worth a *fortune*!

Re:Hmmm (0, Redundant)

Goaway (82658) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458067)

Learn... to stop making tech products?

Re:Hmmm (1)

TheNetAvenger (624455) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458099)

Another niche tech product backfires on its creators. I wonder if they'll ever learn.


Ok it is no 360, but I wouldn't call the PS3 a niche product. :)

From TFA: (4, Informative)

Sunburnt (890890) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457915)

Sony's specific allegations:

[T]he omission of Vista support for Turbo Memory arose to avoid further delay of the OS released. Vista currently cannot recognize which kinds of processes and files need to be preloaded into Turbo Memory, [Sony's David] Spaeth said.

vs. Microsoft's vague assurances:

"Windows Vista supports Intel's Turbo Memory, and Microsoft and Intel have worked together to ensure that Turbo Memory works with Windows Vista technologies. There are no issues which we are aware of that would prevent [manufacturers] from adopting Turbo Memory for great performance results with Windows Vista."

Guess who seems more confident in their assertion?

Re:From TFA: (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457969)

If you don't know what Cmd-Shift-1 and Cmd-Shift-2 are for, GTFO.
If you think Firefox is a decent Mac application, GTFO.
If you're still looking for the "maximize" button, GTFO.
If the name "Clarus" means nothing to you, GTFO.

Bandwagon jumpers are not welcome among real [imageshack.us] Mac [imageshack.us] users [imageshack.us] . Keep your filthy, beige [imageshack.us] PC fingers to yourself.

Re:From TFA: (1)

PenGun (794213) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458983)

Ah .. you changed geeks to users. Wise.

Re:From TFA: (4, Insightful)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458093)

So are you trying to say one marketing droid is more credible than another? The whole turbo memory issue is dubious at the moment. Under certain load conditions and system configurations it does appear to offer decent performance improvements but can frequently degrade general performance. It's currently more attractive to the manufacturers than the end user though because it's a lot cheaper for them to put in flash memory rather than ram and let the user take the performance hit. I'm curious about what happens when the flash memory fails. Have you got a new paperweight or does the OS just ignore it and carry on with the ram available? HP have opted against it as well because they feel theres no substantial benefit from what is still quite immature technology.

Re:From TFA: (1)

diskis (221264) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458699)

It's an add-in card. If it breaks swap or remove it.

From TF Intel.com (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19458149)

Tests run on customer reference boards and preproduction latest generation Intel® Centrino® processor technology with optional Intel® Turbo Memory enabled against like systems without Intel Turbo Memory. Results may vary based on hardware, software and overall system configuration. All tests and ratings reflect the approximate performance of Intel® products as measured by those tests. All testing was done on Microsoft Windows Vista* Ultimate (build 6000). Application load and runtime acceleration depend on Vista's preference to pre-load those applications into the Microsoft ReadyBoost* cache. See www.intel.com/performance/mobile/intel_turbo_memor y.htm [intel.com] for more information.

Which in turn yields:

Performance measurements collected on pre-production Lenovo ThinkPad* T61 with pre-production BIOS. Detailed Notebook Configurations

  PCMark05 Test from FutureMark is an application-based benchmarking tool used to measure overall PC performance. By using portions of real applications, this benchmarking tool can assess PC performance. (+36% improvement)

  Google* Earth loading a fly through of a national park followed by Adobe Photoshop* Elements 5.0 creating a slideshow showing pictures from the same park. The input files for Adobe Photoshop Elements are 48 digital photos with a resolution of 10 MPel. (+127%)

Performance tests and ratings are measured using specific computer systems and/or components and reflect the approximate performance of Intel products as measured by those tests. Any difference in system hardware or software design or configuration may affect actual performance. Buyers should consult other sources of information to evaluate the performance of systems or components they are considering purchasing. For more information on performance tests and on the performance of Intel products, visit www.intel.com/performance/ or call (U.S.) 1-800-628-8686 or 1-916-356-3104.

But Sony is trustworthy, they'd never lie.

Re:From TF Intel.com (3, Interesting)

Zeinfeld (263942) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458689)

What appears to be going on here is that Microsoft is technically correct in stating that Turbo Memory is supported. Sony appears to be incorrect in claiming that it is not but may well be correct in stating that first generation support does not improve performance as it should.

Looks to me more like Sony overstating their case in explaining why they are not offering support now.

Why anyone would expect this to work 100% till the first service patch is beyond me.

Re:From TF Intel.com (2, Insightful)

Hektor_Troy (262592) | more than 7 years ago | (#19459255)

Why anyone would expect this to work 100% till the first service patch is beyond me.
Why anyone would expect brakes on cars to work 100% till the first service visit it beyond me.

Yes, I know the car analogy is always flawed, but why the hell should we always expect to have to wait $deity how long till the company decides that they'll finish getting things working?

If they say they support $techonology, I expect them to support it. Not halfway or a quarter way. Same with cars - if they advertise a car as having a feature, it bloody well has to have the feature, not just half of it or something like that.

Why should software be any different?

Re:From TF Intel.com (1)

cnettel (836611) | more than 7 years ago | (#19460063)

The thing in supporting Turbo Memory is that "proper" detection of what should be put there is no binary feature. It's obvious that it can be done in a more or less efficient way. It's kind of like regenerative braking in hybrid cars, to keep your analogy. You can have it, but think that the mileage advantage is too low, maybe even low enough to indicate that there is something wrong in the design of the system. As long as there is actual some juice coming from those breaks when the car slows down, it's hard to argue that the function would be missing, though.

Weasel word - (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19458555)

There are no issues which we are aware of...
Standard escape clause to provide plausible deniability.

Deceptive Marketing Practices... (5, Funny)

Organic Brain Damage (863655) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457937)

...must be one of most redundant statements in the English language.

Summary, if I understand it correctly: (5, Funny)

SmittyTheBold (14066) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457991)

Sony: Vista doesn't support TurboMemory.
Microsoft: It does too. See? It uses the flash memory for...things. Vroom.
Sony: You call that support? It doesn't do what it's supposed to.
Microsoft: Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it's not happening. It's integrated and magical.
Sony: Yeah, it'll half-work, as long as you micromanage what files are cached.
Microsoft: See? Integration.
Sony: Um...no. Not quite.

Re:Summary, if I understand it correctly: (1)

superpulpsicle (533373) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458137)


Microsoft:Well you are seeing the beta version. We will have version 600 next week and 601 the week after.

Sony:Joy!

Microsoft:We also have turbo memory SP1 lined up, followed by SP2 to SP4 and RC1 afterwards.

Sony:Can't wait.

Re:Summary, if I understand it correctly: (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19458229)

Sony: Vista doesn't support TurboMemory.
Microsoft: It does too. See? It uses the flash memory for...things. Vroom.
Sony: You call that support? It doesn't do what it's supposed to.
Microsoft: Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it's not happening. It's integrated and magical.
Sony: Yeah, it'll half-work, as long as you micromanage what files are cached.
Microsoft: See? Integration.
Sony: Um...no. Not quite.
Tune in next week folks where we'll have Hitler and Judas Iscariot arm wrestling, in more... Tales from the Ninth Circle !

Re:Summary, if I understand it correctly: (5, Funny)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458799)

Microsoft: What? We said we support it. As in, "We think it is a great technology. Go Intel."

Re:Summary, if I understand it correctly: (2, Funny)

nschubach (922175) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458975)

You give me bad pictures of Bill standing on stage in a cheerleader outfit shouting: "Give me an I! Give me an N! ..."

MOD PARENT DOWN (1)

6Yankee (597075) | more than 7 years ago | (#19460069)

...before any other poor bastard has their mind corrupted with such an horrific image.

I need to purge this filth from my brain. Someone post a goatse link, quick.

Re:Summary, if I understand it correctly: (1)

grcumb (781340) | more than 7 years ago | (#19460205)

Your cheer was incomplete. I've finished it for you below.

"Give me an I! Give me an N! ..."

"Give me a billion dollars a month or Steve will fucking crush you!"

It is likely that there is some support but it.... (3, Interesting)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458011)

does not work in the way that it was marketed as giving a nice speed up and M$ just pushed it back to vista sp1.

Sony is right... (4, Interesting)

gweihir (88907) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458113)

There was a test recently in the german gamers magazine Gamestar, and they found that ''turbo memory'' did nios speed things up at all in a number of different set-ups they tested.

Must be a day that ends in "y"... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19458139)

Microsoft? Using "deceptive marketing practices."

Huh.

Who'd of thunk it?

Must be a day that ends with "y".

(rolls eyes)

The real problem... (4, Interesting)

Eric Damron (553630) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458145)

"The issue is that the OS needs to learn what to load into the Robson memory in order to increase performance," Sony said."

It sounds to me like Microsoft may have implemented it poorly so it's a feature that doesn't really help.

How many people here are old enough to remember the transistor radio? I remember the big thing was to get a five transistor radio. That was a radio with five (5) transistors. And they had five too but if you looked you might see that one of the three leads on two of the transistors were cut.

Unscrupulous companies were putting five transistors into their radios so that they could advertise that feature but they were using two of them as simple diodes not as transistors. What you paid for was a five transistor radio but what you got was a in effect three transistor radio. You couldn't really sue because the unit had all five transistors, just some of them weren't being used as transistors.

Man you're older than I am... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19458201)

For me, tech history started with the 286, with XTs as rare dinosaurs. Transistor radios, OTOH...

Re:The real problem... (1)

r.muk (96998) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458307)

Could you have a superheterodyne radio receiver with just three transistors? Seems to me, even for a earphone radio you'd need at least four - oscillator, mixer, IF amp and audio amp.

Re:The real problem... (1)

xs650 (741277) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458425)

Some also had an rf stage and a 2nd IF as well as push pull audio for a legitimate count of 7 transistors.

really only need 1 transistor (1)

slew (2918) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458919)

FYI, if you are willing to forego superhet and are willing to go back in time to the "gennies" used by the hackers of the radio generation, you actually only need 1 transistor (for the oscillator) and a diode for a superregenerative for an earphone FM radio receiver.


Check out this site [somerset.net] for a few examples.


However, if you insist on a superhet design, though, you still can get by with only three...


P.S. I'm not actually old enought to remember this stuff, but hacking topics of any generation are is still pretty fascinating to read about...

Re:The real problem... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19459823)

You can use a reflex stage that amplifies both the IF and the audio.


Linky link. [techlib.com]

Re:The real problem... (3, Insightful)

MBCook (132727) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458327)

I remember seeing an article about that. The first had one transistor, then two, then three. Then people kept adding transistors and claiming it made their radio better. While some actually did that, the article had pictures of radios where off on a part of the circuit board that wasn't connected to anything there would be 3 or more transistors just soldered onto the board, no connections. They would buy bad transistors and just stick them in, not even using them as diodes, so they could call it a 5 transistor radio.

Frankly, I believe Sony in this case. Getting the algorythim right for this would be tough. It woudn't surprise me if the one MS made is currently ineffective. It will take time to find a better one.

I'm a bit confused... (3, Insightful)

keithjr (1091829) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458217)

Is Turbo Memory technology hardware that is designed and built around an OS (Vista)? That seems to be a very peculiar (read:bad) idea. What does it mean for other users who intend to utilize different operating systems? Is there a loss of performance or just an added feature that cannot be used?

Re:I'm a bit confused... (2, Informative)

dave420 (699308) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458347)

No, it's not Vista-only. It can be used by ANY operating system. It's designed as a way to allow parts of an OS, or indeed applications within an OS, to persist when the host computer is off, allowing, say, the OS to boot from that faster memory than a hard disk. If drivers were written for it in Linux, then Linux could use it.

Intel disagrees with you... (3, Interesting)

msauve (701917) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458637)

It's interesting that Intel themselves calls it an "entirely new system innovation for Windows Vista PCs..." [intel.com] and says that it "Works on Windows Vista only." [intel.com]

Perhaps you can point to the specification which would allow it to be used by other operating systems. If I have a dual-boot system, does the specification allow it to keep info for each? If so, how is it determined which OS gets use of how much of this memory?

Re:Intel disagrees with you... (1)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458785)

Yea, just like the "WinModem" was only for Windows..

Re:I'm a bit confused... (1)

wellingj (1030460) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458823)

Sounds like a security flaw to me... Is the Flashed memory CRC'd and stored on the HD for verification?

Re:I'm a bit confused... (1)

MMC Monster (602931) | more than 7 years ago | (#19459003)

While initial seek is definitely faster than hard drives, is data throughput better than a SATA hard drive? If not, it should probably be used only for small files that don't change often, as an extended cache.

Re:I'm a bit confused... (1)

dreamchaser (49529) | more than 7 years ago | (#19459387)

That's exactly how Readyboost works with Vista. Smaller files are cached, larger ones are generally not. In real world scenarios it really only gives a slight boost though, unless you're running it on a memory contrained system.

Deceptive marketing (4, Funny)

jmv (93421) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458239)

Microsoft has opened itself to being sued for deceptive marketing practices

Considering they got away claiming they were selling Operating Systems, I don't think this will be a problem.

Sony, psts! (5, Funny)

fluch (126140) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458269)

Sony, look, if Vista is not using the turbo memory technology you could use the free space there to load your root kits even faster....

The Death of "Turbo." (2, Insightful)

djmcmath (99313) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458317)

(rant)
Does anyone actually remember when "turbo" had a technical definition beyond "really fast?" Does anyone realize that, in the computing world, "turbo" is essentially meaningless? (Go ahead, demonstrate for me how you pressurize the incoming bitstream mix using the processor bitstream exhaust pressure...) Or has the influx of market-roids slapping a "turbo" badge on any slightly-faster-than-last-year's technology made this term utterly useless?
(/rant)

Re:The Death of "Turbo." (5, Insightful)

anno1602 (320047) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458473)

(rant)
Does anyone actually remember when "turbo" had a technical definition beyond "turbocharger"? Does anyone realize that, in the engineering world, all that "turbo" means is "involving turbines" (go ahead, demonstrate me how you pressurize the incoming steam mix using the turbogenerator exhaust pressure)? Or has the the influx of market-roids dropping the "charger" on any turbocharged piston engine made this term utterly useless?
(/rant)

SCNR.

Re:The Death of "Turbo." (1)

cnettel (836611) | more than 7 years ago | (#19460097)

I remember Turbo Pascal. Then C#. Anders is a great language guy, but the name-giving could certainly be improved.

Re:The Death of "Turbo." (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19458521)

Relax.

Turbo has come to mean fast ever since the days of the BMW 2002 Turbo and Porche 911 Turbo. Many outsiders who did not understand what a turbocharger was, were told it just makes the car fast. So natuarally, turbo became another euphemism for fast.

Re:The Death of "Turbo." (1)

The Clockwork Troll (655321) | more than 7 years ago | (#19460287)

In this case it's more informative to consult the literal definition of turbo, which is a mechanical device that harnesses otherwise wasted energy in order to enable a machine to suck a whole lot more.

Worse (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19458535)

If you are still a young active person in the prime of their live (and not, not just realizing that you are old but that you won't be getting much older *needs a drink*) then you might also remember that the turbo button actually made your computer SLOWER when you pressed it.

Another odd thing about it is that for a long time having a turbo-charger in your car meant you had a car that was extremely unpredictable and a bit of a beast to drive, and noisy. Why someone would want to apply this to a computer I have no idea.

Although I think turbo was used to just meant fast for far longer. After all the turbo-charger, what you are referring too, is pretty old tech, going back to the early 1900's or something. Then again, you use turbo, the name is turbo-charger. Unless a part broke off.

Re:Worse (1)

djmcmath (99313) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458895)

Don't forget exponentially more expensive than naturally aspirated cars. Turbo lag, funny noises, sleepless nights caused by "coking" of various bits of hardware that cost more than your kid's braces, and only marginally enhanced reliability.

As to people who think that "turbo" is simply another word for "fast," I submit that the English language is dying in bits and pieces. You're saying "Yeah, let's just use 'turbo' to mean 'fast,' because they're the same thing." I'm saying "But turbo implies a specific kind of automotive forced induction, and has nothing to do with computers anyway." So the answer: if you must describe a computer component as fast, then by all means, use the applicable term: "Fast." If the marketing types insist on quantifying how fast it is with respect to other blazingly fast technologies, fine: "This is our latest memory offering, capable of data retrieval at blazingly fast speeds. We call it 3GB/nanosecond Memory."

Re:Worse (1)

Jeremi (14640) | more than 7 years ago | (#19459277)

As to people who think that "turbo" is simply another word for "fast," I submit that the English language is dying in bits and pieces


s/dying/evolving


Actually, French is dying, specifically because there is Official Standard French and the French government won't allow people to use the language they way they want to. English, on the other hand, can be abused and mutated any way you like, and because of that flexibility it has become one of the world's most popular languages.


Not that this has anything to do with memory, "turbo" or otherwise.

The Turbo Button! (3, Insightful)

Man in Spandex (775950) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458693)

The death of "Turbo" was when the Turbo Button stopped appearing on computer cases :X Now wasn't that cool or what, you had TURBO and the speed of your procesor was indicated on a led display.

Time for Nitro Memory? (1)

argent (18001) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458861)

Or maybe Afterburner Powered... that would explain why your laptop gets so hot.

Re:The Death of "Turbo." (1)

photomonkey (987563) | more than 7 years ago | (#19459707)

Yeah. I remember [porsche.com] .

Have you heard the exhaust note on one of these?

But alas, I'm just a photographer.

Re:The Death of "Turbo." (1)

feepness (543479) | more than 7 years ago | (#19459883)

Does anyone actually remember when "turbo" had a technical definition beyond "really fast?"

I'm guessing you never used Turbo Pascal or had an XT PC with a Turbo button on it.

I'm guessing there was a gap of about 30 seconds between turbochargers being advertised for engines and marketing putting them into common usage as "really fast and neat and new".

Who cares? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19458385)

With the performance of Vista, what does it matter? 10% faster than slow as a snail? Give me a break.

What it does, and why it doesn't work (and does) (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19458437)

To keep it simple, it is flash memory (slower then ram (regular memory), cheaper then ram, not as long lasting as ram) that is added as an extra cache.

That is it, nothing more. Just a file cache. The OS controls it and has to tell it what to cache and what not.

Cacheing in itself is pretty simple and its speed increase is pretty damn obvious to all those of us who have lived through the age of the minimal/full setup for games. The game/data comes on the CD, with it being optional to "cache" it to the HD. The more you cache on the HD, the faster the game will load its data.

Now there are problems with cacheing. What to keep, and what to loose.

Take again a game. Say I a racing game. As I drive around the track new scenery comes up and has to be taken into memory. If it is full then old scenery needs to dropped out. Obviously the machine that has enough memory to take the ENTIRE track into memory will perform the best. Next will be the machine that can at least load it from something like an HD, preferrably a special cache file of the track that combines all the needed data in one handy arrangement, slowest will be the machine that is forced to read the track data from the CD as you drive around.

Turbo Memory(cache) is designed to load frequently used data(applications are data as well) into its memory, so that it can be loaded into main memory faster then if it had to be loaded from HD.

And there is its problem. HD's ain't slow, and it still got to be loaded from the cache into memory. The game engine itself barely benefits from this, it just might reduce the loading time IF your OS deems the game engine to be fit to be loaded. The game data itself will be too big to load. In a linear game you wouldn't even have much to cache, either stuff is needed constantly, and needs to be in main memory OR is used once, and there is no point in cacheing it.

This kind of tech ain't knew. Were it excells is in reducing the startup time of many small often run applications. Were it sucks donkey balls is when it comes to big run once, stay loaded type apps.

What is even worse, AI in OS'es generally just isn't very good and often gets it wrong. In trying to guess what you are doing it will often guess wrong and actually hurt performance.

Turbo Memory works with certain workflows were you would be better off with just more memory and or faster HD but can't have/afford that.

I am therefore not suprised at the Sony and MS reaction. Both are absolutly correct. Sony tested it with their set of tests, and found it not worth the cost. Very likely they just have a certain workflow they test for with memory setups that are designed for that. (Might Sony make more money from selling main memory, then turbo memory) MS will have tested for different circumstances, perhaps those that favor their cacheing system and with the knowledge that MS does NOT sell main memory?

So what does this mean to you? Make sure you check that any review of technology like this resembles what YOU do with your computer. Always run the same apps that stay active, handfull of large apps and can afford/have enough main memory, then don't bother. Are you someone who runs countless little apps, constantly closing them and reopening them and just don't have enough or can't enough main memory, then it might work for you. IF Vista properly regonizes what you are doing and can use the cache as it is intended.

So no Sony OR MS bashing needed here. Simply different views of how users us their computer.

Re:What it does, and why it doesn't work (and does (1)

l3mr (1070918) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458837)

Sounds to me it would be optimally used as a primary swap partition, with the normal hd-based one as backup once the turbo-space is full ?

Re:What it does, and why it doesn't work (and does (1)

causality (777677) | more than 7 years ago | (#19459767)

Sounds to me it would be optimally used as a primary swap partition, with the normal hd-based one as backup once the turbo-space is full ?

Yes, in Linux you could use flash memory in this way ever since flash memory has been around. With Linux there is nothing special about a swap partition; it's a partition like any other, so you could set this up easily enough. Let's say that your USB flash drive is called /dev/sda in Linux. Then simply use 'cfdisk' or equivalent to mark /dev/sda1 as a swap partition, format it using 'mkswap', then activate it using 'swapon' and you now have your swap space on flash memory.

Of course buying more RAM would be a better solution, but if you just wanted a faster swap device I would love to see some benchmarks to see if this would do the job.

Re:What it does, and why it doesn't work (and does (1)

Envy Life (993972) | more than 7 years ago | (#19459299)

It's nice that there still is someone with a chance to push Microsoft around (a little), while we see countless other articles of large companies caving in to them. Good luck proving the 20-200% improvements that Intel is claiming. Using NAND for a disk cache is interesting, especially if it's uses an intelligent and configurable algorithm. The value is questionnable at the existing 512k-1M sizes, but for notebook computer, what it's made for, I could see a definite "maybe."

However isn't this the same technology used in the new diskless disk drives that, by the specs I've seen, are slower than disk based drives?

Intel and Microsoft Marketing at it's best (5, Informative)

kungfoolery (1022787) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458523)

According to several articles regarding this subject, the questionable utility of Turbo Memory is not the fault of MS alone:

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/31976/135/ [tgdaily.com]

TG Daily reports that Intel's showcasing of Turbo Memory included benchmarks that's anything but real-world applicable: "The benchmark appeared to slam several pictures at lightning speed into Photoshop, something that would play to the strengths of flash memory because the pictures would already be stored in flash for fast opening by Photoshop. Realistically though, we think the average user wouldn't capture dozens of pictures and then open them all in Photoshop in one fell swoop."

Which leads to an Anandtech article showing that in many cases, performance suffered as a result of Turbo Memory implementation - particularly with boot and hibernation times. Now these are cases where users are MOST likely to notice performance differences.

Finally, in the cases where Turbo Memory would seem useful, it appears that HP discovered that using far more versatile, ubitquitous flash solutions such as SD and USB drives (not to mention just adding regular system memory (what a concept!)) yielded similar and more economically sensible results: http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-6188522.html [zdnet.com]

Maybe if Vista didn't need such obscene amounts of memory, this wouldn't be an issue; but I digress.

Re:Intel and Microsoft Marketing at it's best (1)

hxnwix (652290) | more than 7 years ago | (#19458615)

Mod parent informative.

Sony is less trustworthy than Microsoft... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19458845)

...as anyone who actually owns a VAIO computer can tell you.

Sony has a long and dishonorable history of making really compelling products at excessive prices and with hidden flaws that bite you after you buy it. Within the video industry, it is a long-standing joke that one should never buy any Sony product that does not have at least an "A" suffix to the model number.

The VAIO product line has excellent design, better than Apple. However, after you grit your teeth and pay the Sony Premium to buy one, you discover the other side.

The hardware performance is not great to begin with, and because of Sony's proprietary interfaces you find that your upgrade choices are limited or non-existent. Nor are they particularly rugged; you can crush the flimsy plastic case of a VAIO laptop by putting your mail on top of it.

Then there's the VAIO software.

Ever notice how a VAIO machine running Vista seems to be unusually slow even for Vista? Ever wonder why the battery life sucks so badly? Ever run any of the performance tools? You'll discover that the SmartWi software to switch wireless between WiFi and WWAN is continually consuming 15-20% of the CPU! The worst offender is the PowerManager.exe component. You can, of course, uninstall SmartWi, at the cost of losing your wireless capability since the hardware is physically incapable of having both interfaces powered up at the same time.

Do you hibernate your machine? Ever notice with a VAIO that your computer bag is getting hot and you discover that the VAIO has mysteriously powered itself back on? That's because Sony installs tasks that instruct the BIOS to power the machine up to run, because Sony thinks they are Really Important. They're well-hidden, too; you have to root through the registry, the task manager, and a few other places to find all of these. You're better off shutting down the VAIO and pulling the battery to be sure.

Oh, and be sure to run a good third-party spyware detector. Sony preinstalls a good deal of spyware and adware on your machine, including setting the default web page to a "Sony home" on ask.com that loads more.

As bad as Microsoft can be, Bill Gates' boys and girls are a piddling amateurs in evil compared to Sony. I don't believe Sony's story at all. More likely, some piece of Sony crapware doesn't work with Turbo Memory and Sony just wants an excuse. You can be sure that a few months from now there will be an "A" suffix model that has Turbo Memory.

Re:Sony is less trustworthy than Microsoft... (1)

laffer1 (701823) | more than 7 years ago | (#19459687)

How can you say sony has a better design than apple with all those defects? I've never had my iBook mysteriously power on, and I've accidentally dropped it before without issue. My iBook on a new battery gets 4-5 hours with wifi enabled. I have about a year old battery getting 3 hours with wifi. I would argue the appearance is better with most Apple products as well. Design is more than the outward appearance of a product. Its also the engineering behind it.

I would guess that both Sony and Microsoft are correct. Microsoft implemented a feature in vista and Sony tried to use it as it was described. We all know that Windows doesn't work as advertised. It never has regardless of service packs.

Turbo button? (3, Funny)

adnonsense (826530) | more than 7 years ago | (#19459031)

The case of the AT box under my table which I use as a router-cum-fileserver has a "TURBO" button on the front display.

The box usually runs OpenBSD, so I tried starting a Vista installation to see what all the fuss was about.

Unfortunately, it appears 64MB of "tradtional" RAM is not enough for Vista.

Who to root for? (1)

Count Porkula (1113741) | more than 7 years ago | (#19459141)

I have such vitriolic hatred for both companies that I don't know which side to pull for. Guess I'll pull for MS - Sony is the root(kit) of all evil. By the way, am I the only one around here with a fetish for veiny women?

Right. Call me when... (3, Insightful)

Tim Browse (9263) | more than 7 years ago | (#19459231)

...Sony have a fecking clue about software.

The day I trust Sony's views on what makes good software is the day I call up Satan for his advice on which Snow-Plough model gets you to work fastest.

Turbo? (2, Funny)

AJWM (19027) | more than 7 years ago | (#19459507)

That sounds so, so...eighties.

Or is it memory that can only be used by TurboPascal?

Re:Turbo? (1)

cnettel (836611) | more than 7 years ago | (#19460111)

EMS is back, and this time you can't load a driver in config.sys to emulate it!

oh just now? (1)

ILuvRamen (1026668) | more than 7 years ago | (#19459649)

Microsoft could get sued for saying software in general runs on Vista because that's deceptive lol. In fact, they could get sued for saying Vista runs. Half the features that dont/didn't work like sleeping and hibernating they could get sued over.

There was an article in one of the trade rags (1)

CPNABEND (742114) | more than 7 years ago | (#19459749)

That did a benchmark of the USB flavor of "ready whatever it is". Their tests showed almost NO benefit of the "feature". I would, as much as I hate to admit it, have to agree with Sony here.

Interesting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19460093)

To Sony, this is a horrible, terrible tragedy!

To Microsoft, this is Sunday.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?