• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Intels Rival for the Hammer!!!

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.


<<

<< << Hammer will bury the Pentium 4 and all the Celerons. Intel simply got no chance. >>


And on what basis is that?
>>



On the performance basis, my friend, not the Mhz numbers!

I see the future... Hammer sweeps through the CPU market, wiping the overpriced and underpowered P4 platfrom off the map, destroying Intel performance and price-wise! >>



Hmm dont be too sure .... the hammer looks great but no one can say sh*t untill the real world performace, SPEC and gaming benchmarks are out. So please stop spewing your non-sence ....

SSXeon
 


<<

<< << Hammer will bury the Pentium 4 and all the Celerons. Intel simply got no chance. >>


And on what basis is that?
>>



On the performance basis, my friend, not the Mhz numbers!

I see the future... Hammer sweeps through the CPU market, wiping the overpriced and underpowered P4 platfrom off the map, destroying Intel performance and price-wise! >>



well, i certainly hope the hammer outperforms a celeron.
rolleye.gif


as for pricing, it's been predicted that the hammer will debut at well over $400.

when degenerate asked "on what basis", he was asking why you think the hammer will "bury" the p4. (more than just amd zealot dribble, please). intel's p4 should be over 3.0ghz by the time hammer shows up in 2003. what specifically makes you think it will be "wiped off the map" by a 2.0ghz hammer?
 
You all seem to be missing the essential truth. If the Hammer is going to work, AMD need to sell it to the people that really matter. I sell 6-10 systems a week to the UK government. They are always Xeons. Sometimes quads, sometimes duals. Before anyone starts going on about uneducated corporate buyers, these people are military scentists. They make their own purchasing choices. To a man, not one will entertain the idea of anything AMD anywhere near what they do at work. Bear in mind that some use AMD for their home systems. I know because I recommended them, but no-one will go anywhere near AMD for anything that is really important with computers.

Bitch all you like, but VIA and SIS chipsets are a joke when it comes to real reliability. Until AMD gets this sorted they have no real chance no matter how good the Hammer turns out to be.

Please don't get me wrong, I am no Intel fan. I get constant crap with unreliable sourcing (Dell get first dibs), which upsets me a lot. I am glad AMD is there to keep Intel in line, but all this talk about AMD burying Intel is amusing to say the least. This may be so for the type of buyer who uses their dual system to surf the net with but it will not, in the forceable future be the case in the markets where the money is, i.e. the business sectors.
 
http://news.com.com/2100-1001-895652.html?tag=fd_top


<< Meanwhile, AMD's chairman, Jerry Sanders, told an audience at Merrill Lynch's Hardware Heaven conference in San Francisco that Hammer, the company's forthcoming chip for desktops and servers, will debut at 2GHz or higher.

Hammer will ship to PC makers in the fourth quarter and will be released to the public in the first quarter of 2003, Sanders added
 >>


I read this. that is interesting. 2Ghz... probably with a PR of 3400+. That seems to me like one hell of a CPU if that is true. based on the current PR comparisons to Intel's CPU's. I dunno why i brought this up. I guess i just get excited whenever something new comes out. (but never get a hold on any time soon)
 
If Barton is pre-ClawHAMMER then expect it to be set for the 2600+ to 3300+ speed ratings.

If Barton is ClawHAMMER then expect it to debut at only the 2400+ speed rating, rather than the big 3400+ rumour.
 


<< If Barton is pre-ClawHAMMER then expect it to be set for the 2600+ to 3300+ speed ratings.

If Barton is ClawHAMMER then expect it to debut at only the 2400+ speed rating, rather than the big 3400+ rumour. >>



Hmm yea i thought something like that too .... was barton a seperate chip .... or will it turn to be the clawhammer ...

SSXeon
 
VIVA AMD

If clock is so important as the intel guys claim i'll run this 1.6 ghz against any intel processor on any app at 1.6 ghz lets see how it stacks up. then i'll do you one better i'll run it against a P4 at 1.9ghz
 
the 64 bit thing isn't that big a deal as of now, it might be important in 2004 or so. intel has plenty of time to ready yamhill.


besides from what i've read the hammer modifications arent that much extra die space, since really its not that much different than what intel has been doing for years to get from 16 to 32bits from the 286 to the 386. they just took 2 16bit addresses in a row, and made them into one 32bit address with a larger addrses space. thats how the maintain backwards compatibility, but its a real kludge on the hardware which is why intel wanted to get rid of it. the confusing amount of registers and stuff.



really AMD is helping in the short term by allowing all this backwards compatibility and stuff, but you can thank them later, for making CPU design stay unstreamlined and not modern. Apple went through this with the power pc transition.


Personally i think intel should just roll out the alpha (which they own now) as its new 64bit sucessor and be done with it all. All the pieces are in place, MS already has internal builds of win XP running alpha, and alpha is already built. oh that would be sweet.
 
Barton is T- Bred with 512k of Cache, not SOI, as that has been reserved for Hammer. There are rumours of an increased pipeline from 10 to 12, not sure on this.

Check the AMD roadmap and think Athlon 'Northwood'. When you see the improvement the cache bump gave the anemic PIV, Imagine what it will do with Barton...

Then we have the hammer. You can talk about how fast the PIV will be going by 03/Q1 till your blue in the face, but these wimps will not be able to touch this advanced design, no matter the clock speed.

As for Yamhill, Intel don't have 'Plenty of time', they are going to be playing catch up for 18 months at the very least, as Yamhill is still 'Designware'

As for that Alpha bull$hit, M$ dropped support for it for a reason, PLUS I have used NT and SQL server on Alpha and it sucked nuts, compared to a weedy dual P2 setup. AND don't forget that AMD too use some Alpha tech in the Athlon (The EV6 bus) so don't get too excited about this point. next you'll be telling us that Intel are going to use some PA-RISC technology or something and think that will 'bury AMD' (ROTFLMAO)

The corporate market will sort itself out, when it sees the Itanic stacked up against the Opteron systems.

If MHz count more than IPC, tell me what the story is with a frickin 833Mhz 'advanced' 64 bit processor...

Intel have nothing to stack up against Hammer/Opteron. Go on, tell me otherwise...
 
dividebyzero... microsoft officially dropped alpha windows support after nt4. but at microsoft there are plenty of builds of windows 2000 and win xp pro that run it. they are used for development of all 64bit products , i.e. the itanium and the hammer. The hammer in terms of ISA is not as advanced as the 10 year old alpha architecture by a long shot, because its still x86. Intel was trying to fix this. x86-64 is actually very bad ISA wise because its a kludge, but for the sake of compatibility we do stupid things like this. That probably the one good thing about apple, they are ok with painful transitions i.e. 68000 series to powerpc and osx. the p4, will still probably scale better than the hammer especially with Intel having better fabs, they can probably pull out a 3 ghz+ p4 on .13 micron SOI copper or something. possibly .09 micron by the time hammer is actually out. Now the hammer is still 64bit. big whoop de doo for most consumers, that just means they can have more than 4 gigs of ram. Do you have 4 gigs of ram? no you dont. thank you. On large servers Intel can use the 36 bit addressing extension they have been using to have 64 gigs of ram anyways. This 64 bitness will be a great marketing tool, but its not gonna suddenly make AMD a billion times better than the p4. the most significant difference is the on board memory controller not the 64bit. 64bit has been around for a decade. i.e. mips , alpha, etc (the nintendo 64 is a 64bit mips r4000 if i'm not wrong, and it certainly doesnt blow the doors off a 32bit p4 does it?). the hammer will certainly be fast. But really its not gonna change the world, destroy the p4 , etc.



As for the alpha it was not a crappy processor at all , it is one of the best CPU ISAs that have been out recently, and reached high clock speeds and had good IPC. It has a clean an modern ISA that beats the pants of of the ancient x86 ISA. if the industry had standardized on a design like alpha, CPU and compiler design would be easier now. Also, until recently alpha CPUs topped the Spec INT and Spec FP. if intel wanted to push alpha and use its superior to samsung fabs to produce it they could probably build a 2+ ghz 21264 cpu that would kill basically every CPU out there. when the alpha first came out with the 21064 generation during the pentium II days, the alpha was already at 500mhz on .35 micron technology. They just dont have the resources anymore to keep the alpha modern, but the alpha would be clocking at least at athlon xp clocks, using a modern fab such as intel or AMDs. and at 833 mhz it still beats the pants off of most CPUs out there now, since you are talking about the 833mhz 21264 which is a very powerful cpu. Not to mention half the athlon design team i believe is from digital , and those precious FPUs on your athlon xp's and opterons were basically ripped out of the alpha. Anyways your total hatred of this great CPU and AMD fanboyism just disgusts me. Intel doesnt have to play catchup with AMD. Intel's fabs are 8 months ahead of AMD for one. And secondly yamhill didnt just start, its been ongoing, and my feeling is they could probably release it whenever they wanted just to spite AMD. It was a backup plan, not something they started last month. Intel is not stupid, but being an AMD fanboy i'm sure you wont believe that. they have yamhill and the next gen itanium. Either way they have a pretty decent solution, and no one knows what yamhill is, it could simply be an x86-64'd p4, and it'd still be close enough that they wouldnt get killed. most likely its much more than that.

Alpha's are still used with linux and compaq still is selling it including the 21364 generation, but they dont have the fabs or money to push this great CPU which will probably just die into oblivion once the HP merger is done. And if you couldnt get sql server and NT to run faster on an alpha than a pII well your IT staff or you are vastly underqualified for your jobs or the alpha had like 32mb of ram, and the pII had 256. And lastly servers are not automatically going to buy the hammer just because its fast. if that were true they'd be buying athlons, and they are not. Sun ultrasparc CPUs are not that fastest out there SPEC wise, but Sun does sell an awful lot of servers. AMD has a horrible rep for reliability , their chips still have a far greater RMA rate on OEM systems than intel's do. when i worked at HP this summer, an actual flakey chip was the cause of about 10% or so of the AMD returns. I"m not saying 10% of the AMD computers were returned, but 10% of the ones that were had CPU problems, and thats still a lot considering the volume HP does. with intel it was less than 1%. the other 90 - 99% were just hard drives and modems that kind of thing. These bad AMD cpu's werent even dead, they just didnt work very well at their rated speeds. THAT on its own is a cause for concern for IT staff and probably why AMD still hasnt really broken into that market.
 


<< Intel have nothing to stack up against Hammer/Opteron. Go on, tell me otherwise... >>


So you have seen benchmarks? wow, can you please share?

I am not saying that Hammer will be bad at all. Just try and base your "claims" a bit more.

As the thread described above. Whether the Industry will want the x86-64 over the pure 64 CPU's remains a question. It also might be very difficult for AMD to try and gain in the server market.
 
Hans00Nothing:-

You have the cheek to call ME a Fanboy, when it seems you are so far up Intels ass you can't see the light.

Let me begin:



<< Do you have 4 gigs of ram? no you dont. thank you. On large servers Intel can use the 36 bit addressing extension they have been using to have 64 gigs of ram anyways. This 64 bitness will be a great marketing tool, but its not gonna suddenly make AMD a billion times better than the p4. the most significant difference is the on board memory controller not the 64bit. 64bit has been around for a decade. i.e. mips , alpha, etc (the nintendo 64 is a 64bit mips r4000 if i'm not wrong, and it certainly doesnt blow the doors off a 32bit p4 does it?). the hammer will certainly be fast. But really its not gonna change the world, destroy the p4 , etc. >>



1 -You sad little boy. You cannot compare a Nintendo 64 with a multipurpose computer. Pullleeeeeeezz:disgust:

2 - 64 bit computing is not simply about addressing more memory.

3 - The 64bit extension gives current 32bit x86 users and corporates AN UPGRADE PATH to 64 bit computing, whilst ensuring a return on the investment made in 32bit software by the entire community(which is vast, lets face it). Itanic gives you a totaly different 64bit subsystem that, and I quote

<< isn't that big a deal as of now, it might be important in 2004 or so >>

- For an Intel Fanboy you sure do know how to put your foot in your mouth.

4 - Give it up about Alpha. I know the chips were good and if you re-read my post I actually stated that NT and SQL server sucked balls on it, not that the chip sucked. But it is now a dead chip and should not even be uttered in this thread, hence I shall leave this point at this juncture, except to say that the only reason Compaq have it is due to them swallowing DEC, not through them 'choosing' Alpha.

5 - Great ISA in Itanic??? read this, Fanboy: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/53/24973.html

6 -

<< well your IT staff or you are vastly underqualified for your jobs >>

- Do you feel safe?? I think a little gimp like you should put up or shut up. I work for BMC. Do you know them? I doubt it. I'd like to see the likes of you get a job here. Please don't assume I am some tinkerer here. You will be embarrased. You have 'Worked at HP' :Q ROTFLMAO :Q, yeah, as some kind of RMA monkey, very technical, can you spell 'Enterprise Computing'?????

7 -

<< 10% of the ones that were had CPU problems >>

- Prove it.
8 -

<< with intel it was less than 1%. >>

- Prove it, talk is cheap.

9 - Click on this, I am sure your Brain's Intel lobe will go ape: Dell hints at Plans for AMD Opteron Systems

Come back when you have a point, and I'll help you make it.
 
Degen:

I don't have benches, you know that, but I am talking about technology here.

- PIV Xeons are NorthWoods with HyperThreading, Check Annadtech benches on Xeon' with and without HT switched on
- Itanic is not competitive, I have spoken to businesses who would rather have a dual P3 than an Itanic.

But lets face it, this is all good for us. If yamhill is a good product, it may be worth the wait, but which product are ppl talking about, looking forward to and arguing about? Hammer. Not Itanic, not Yamhill. Hammer is the buzz, whether your a fanboy or not, and even Michael Dell, the biggest Intel Fanboy in the world, has got it.

 
dividebyzero, i just realized you are the typical IT guy who believes he suddenly is smart because he passed his ccna's and mcses.
i'm a compsci major i worked for an HP oem as a SUMMER job, at least i wont be an IT guy the rest of my life, since i am not actually educated. and yes i do feel very safe. now being a compsci major i study chips and software and how they run. i write in assembly, and study compilers and programming languages. thats what computer science is usually is, just how IT is usually a bunch of guys who think they are gods becuase they have MCSEs , CNEs and CCNAs. and i know 64bit doesnt matter much for the actual running of software outside of the address space. it lets you store 64bit large integers ONLY since the FPU already supports 64bit floats. yes we need integers in the 2^64 size. and the ability to add them. oh yes! i am creaming in my pants now at the ability to code with such large integers.

most of the improvement will be reduced register swapping since there are i believe 16 64bit general purpose registers instead of the 8 in 32bit x86. definitely an improvement, but not revolutionary. also i'm not an AMD fan boy. I use logic to determine what CPUs i buy. My last computer believe it or not was a nice athlon tbird 1ghz. My last like 4 computers have been amds. now all mylaptops have been intel. you know why? they run cooler and have longer batteries and tend to be lighter. so it makes sense to get an intel laptop. My new computer is a northwood 1.6A. why? it was only $15 more than an xp1700 and could overclock to 2.2 ghz when i am oc'ing. seemed logical.

Well i guess i'll stop typing now since i'm obviously too dumb too continue to argue with you oh mighty IT god.
 
I think some people here are a little confused about some of AMD's and Intel's codenames and such. Here we go:

Intel:

1. Pentium 4 "Willamette" Processor: .18-micron process, 8K L1 cache (roughly), 256K L2 cache, 400MHz FSB. Being phased out as we speak (except Celeron).
2. Pentium 4 "Northwood" Processor: .13-micron process, 8K L1 cache (roughly), 512K L2 cache, 400MHz and 533MHz FSB (533MHz not available yet). Northwood is Intel's flagship processor.
3. Pentium 4 "Prescott" Processor: .09-micron process, 16K L1 cache (unknown), 1024K L2 cache (unknown), 667 and/or 800MHz FSB (unknown). Prescott is due to be released in the 2nd Half of 2003 (between June-December 2003 sometime).

AMD:

1. Athlon XP "Palomino" Processor: .18-micron process, 128K L1 cache, 256K L2 cache, 266MHz FSB. AMD's flagship as of today.
2. Athlon XP "Thoroughbred" Processor: .13-micron process, 128K L1 cache, 256K L2 cache, 266MHz FSB. Will be AMD's flagship processor for only a short time along with Barton before being replaced by ClawHammer.
3. Athlon XP "Barton" Processor: .13-micron process, 128K L1 cache, 512K L2 cache, 266MHz FSB (maybe 333MHz). Will be AMD's flagship processor for only a short time along with Thoroughbred before being replaced by ClawHammer. Either Thoroughbred or Barton will become the next "Duron" processor.
4. Athlon XP "ClawHammer" Processor: .13-micron SOI (Silicon On Insulator) process, 128K L1 cache, 512K L2 cache, no FSB (due to integrated memory controller), x86-64 technology (can run 64-bit applications and 64-bit Operating Systems). Is due to ship during Q4 2002 with availability in Q1 2003.

Hope that cleared things up. 🙂
 


<< Itanic is not competitive, I have spoken to businesses who would rather have a dual P3 than an Itanic. >>

if you are consulting business on the decision between a P3 and an Itanium, then that's proof that you haven't a clue what you are talking about. they are completely different processors, with completely different application possibilities. it's comparing apples to oranges. would you compare a sun ultra sparc with an athlon?



<< You sad little boy. You cannot compare a Nintendo 64 with a multipurpose computer. Pullleeeeeeezz >>

see above


let me ask this... if an 1800mhz athlon is approx equal to a 2200mhz P4, and amd says that hammer is approx 25% faster than an athlon at equal clockspeeds, how is a 2000mhz hammer going to beat a 3000mhz P4?

i'm as excited about hammer as anyone... but i don't think it's going to live up to the hype.
 
let me ask this... if an 1800mhz athlon is approx equal to a 2200mhz P4, and amd says that hammer is approx 25% faster than an athlon at equal clockspeeds, how is a 2000mhz hammer going to beat a 3000mhz P4?

i'm as excited about hammer as anyone... but i don't think it's going to live up to the hype.

Well first, you should realize that a 1.7GHz Athlon XP (instead of 1.8GHz like you say) would be more or less equal to a 2.2GHz Northwood.

In addition, Jerry Sanders did not, I repeat, did not say ClawHammer will launch at frequency of 2GHz. He said at least 2GHz, meaning it could be 2.5GHz for all we know. My guess is 2.2GHz.

Go read some of what Paul Demone says on this issue.
 


<< let me ask this... if an 1800mhz athlon is approx equal to a 2200mhz P4, and amd says that hammer is approx 25% faster than an athlon at equal clockspeeds, how is a 2000mhz hammer going to beat a 3000mhz P4?

i'm as excited about hammer as anyone... but i don't think it's going to live up to the hype.

Well first, you should realize that a 1.7GHz Athlon XP (instead of 1.8GHz like you say) would be more or less equal to a 2.2GHz Northwood.

In addition, Jerry Sanders did not, I repeat, did not say ClawHammer will launch at frequency of 2GHz. He said at least 2GHz, meaning it could be 2.5GHz for all we know. My guess is 2.2GHz.

Go read some of what Paul Demone says on this issue. >>



Is this the same jerry that said hammer will be released about this time .... and that the athlon would have 1MB L2 LMFAO ..... jerry is such a stupid and ignorant and stupid man .... did i say man .... i ment LITTLE SCHOOL GIRL .... im glad hes leaving amd .....

And dividebyzero, hans007 defently punked you arse ... lol .... and the itanium is a brilliant design and idea ..... if you accually look at it as new tech .... finally AMD is doing that and dont be pissed when the P5 might beat it at some point ..... because new tech isnt always amazing right off the bat .... yet i still think amd MIGHT be able to pull it off .... but if jerry worked on it .... it will most defently be delayed ahahah

SSXeon
 
Is AMD's x86-64's 64-bit memory addressing compatible with the Intel 32-bit extended addressing? I assume both OS and chipset must be aware of the extended memory ranges.
 
SSXeon5 whats your problem?

you dont need to make personal attacks... to be honest i find it interesting that emotionally you have so much invested on intel being better then AMD
 


<< Barton is T- Bred with 512k of Cache, not SOI, as that has been reserved for Hammer. There are rumours of an increased pipeline from 10 to 12, not sure on this.

Check the AMD roadmap and think Athlon 'Northwood'. When you see the improvement the cache bump gave the anemic PIV, Imagine what it will do with Barton... >>



One of the more important things about the "Northwood" was the jump to .13 micron manufacturing process. That improved scalability a lot. The increase in cache helped some, but not a lot.



<< Then we have the hammer. You can talk about how fast the PIV will be going by 03/Q1 till your blue in the face, but these wimps will not be able to touch this advanced design, no matter the clock speed. >>



That's incredibly diluded. Do you have any idea what the 64-bit extensions will bring? 64-bit flat memory addressing and the ability to work on 64-bit integers. Unless you're doing scientific calculations such as weather simulation, there is absoluting nothing, now or in the next year or 2 that will use 64-bit integers. Know what you're talking about before you start going all fanboy on us. As for the other enhancements of Hammer. I'll agree it is pretty impressive and will probably bring about speed improvements. The integrated memory controller for one, the SOI technology, etc. However, without true benchmarks there can be no way of knowing exactly how much of a speed improvement this will bring. Again, stop with yer fanboy assumptions.



<< As for Yamhill, Intel don't have 'Plenty of time', they are going to be playing catch up for 18 months at the very least, as Yamhill is still 'Designware' >>



Read above. 64-bit will NOT bring anything useful in the next 2 years at least in the desktop market OR the workstation market for that matter. Only the server market has a need for 64-bit processors and that market already have plenty of choices, Sparc, Power, Itanium, McKinley, etc. So Intel does have plenty of time to release a 64-bit part. THat is what all the hype about Hammer is. As for the other improvements it brings, currently, there's been an overclocking report that suggests that even the T-Bred won't scale to the point where it'll match the Northwood's scalability (accounting for the difference in IPC). As far as modern software, the Hammer will be the one who turns the tide (hopefully), it won't be lightyears ahead like AMD fanboys like to believe.



<< As for that Alpha bull$hit, M$ dropped support for it for a reason, PLUS I have used NT and SQL server on Alpha and it sucked nuts, compared to a weedy dual P2 setup. AND don't forget that AMD too use some Alpha tech in the Athlon (The EV6 bus) so don't get too excited about this point. next you'll be telling us that Intel are going to use some PA-RISC technology or something and think that will 'bury AMD' (ROTFLMAO) >>



I'll agree Alpha won't really be that big an advantage. I also don't recall anybody ever saying anything will "bury AMD". I think that right has been reserved solely for fanboys like you.



<< The corporate market will sort itself out, when it sees the Itanic stacked up against the Opteron systems.

If MHz count more than IPC, tell me what the story is with a frickin 833Mhz 'advanced' 64 bit processor...

Intel have nothing to stack up against Hammer/Opteron. Go on, tell me otherwise... >>



As I mentioned, 64-bit computing does not offer ANY advantage for the workstation market for at least another 2 years. People in the corporate market will know this (unless they're like you). The server market has said goodbye to x86 long ago. Why would they ever go back?
 
<<...64-bit computing does not offer ANY advantage for the workstation market for at least another 2 years.>>

You must have forgotten what testosterone is all about.
 
"dividebyzero, i just realized you are the typical IT guy who believes he suddenly is smart because he passed his ccna's and mcses.
i'm a compsci major i worked for an HP oem as a SUMMER job, at least i wont be an IT guy the rest of my life, since i am not actually educated. and yes i do feel very safe. now being a compsci major i study chips and software and how they run. i write in assembly, and study compilers and programming languages. thats what computer science is usually is, just how IT is usually a bunch of guys who think they are gods becuase they have MCSEs , CNEs and CCNAs. "

"typical IT guy" lol
Boy are you naive.... STOP trying to bite the hand that feeds you

Unless you are going on to get your Engineering degree you wont be working on compilers, assembly languages or circuits when you graduate.In the major technology center/citys in the US(i've worked in both NYC, and San Francisco) many entry level IT jobs REQUIRE a BS in comp sci. Soon enough you'll realize that the theoretical infomation taught to you in school has LITTLE to due with what the business world is doing. The computer science field for the most part is not like other fields, where Acedamia is deciding the direction of the field. As of now business is deciding where the comp sci filed is going.

There are a tremendous amount of paper ccna and msce's out there. But for the most part they tell employers that they know enough of the basics of the IT industry to not destroy there investment. You have recieved no such experience from your schooling. Trust me, as I'm comp sci grad myself, i know. Ive written my share of compilers and designed my share of circuits while in acedamia, and very little of it(programming and logic) helped me become a Sr Unix Admin.

talk about looking a gift horse in the mouth...
 
Hans007,



<< i wont be an IT guy the rest of my life, since i am not actually educated. >>



I am well educated, you are not or else you would not be attacking the intellegence of people you know nothing about. Please use rational arguments, not abuse.

I have been in the IT industry for 10 years. I am sucessful (Two Houses, one of which is in southern Turkey, three cars, two motorbikes, etc ) and have more knowledge and experience of systems and the business than you. Do not underestimate the people you wish to emulate. Oh you can program? Wow you and everyone else (including me...LOL and I'm just a 'typical IT guy who believes he suddenly is smart' )

I'd pimp my experience here to, but to make you feel inadequate is unfair. just look up www.bmc.com. This is no dodgy sw company doping Win98 support, we support the Techies in Businesses you rely on. They are a pretty unforgiving bunch if you don't know your sh!t, but then you'd never know, cause all you know is what you have read so far, not what you have done.

Can you get an MCSE in Solaris 8, AIX 4.3 and HPUX? Can you get a CNE in System monitoring and management using Patrol Enterprise Manager? A CCNA in Homogenous systems message management?

SId03:

I am not consulting for these companies, these are my friends OWN comapanies and I listen to what they say. These are the people that buy servers and explains the lack of Itanic uptake, whether you like the reason or not. I am well aware of Ultra Sparcs, I'm using one right now....

SSXeon:
I've seen you gubbed so many times in this thread alone, don't talk to me about punking LOL 😀



As I said Before, Hammer is the Buzz. All this fuss proves my point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top