pas008

Summary
Microsoft announced that it is making Power Automate Desktop, its enterprise-level tool for creating automated desktop-centric workflows, available to all Windows 10 users for free. 
 
Quotes
 
My thoughts
That could be useful for some users stuck doing repetitive tasks, I'm probably going to have a look at it now that it's free and see what it's all about and if it can be useful for me, and if I find any utility to it, I might look at what uses it can have at work.
 
Sources
https://techcrunch.com/2021/03/02/microsofts-power-automate-desktop-is-now-free-for-all-windows-10-users
https://flow.microsoft.com/en-us/desktop/

this sounds about right
home schooling with drunken teachers I mean parents
 
but I kinda like the one my daughter has for school and they have it set up so she cant just screw it up with downloads/etc for most part
compared to her windows minecraft laptop that I have to constantly check on lol

this sounds about right
home schooling with drunken teachers I mean parents
 
but I kinda like the one my daughter has for school and they have it set up so she cant just screw it up with downloads/etc for most part
compared to her windows minecraft laptop that I have to constantly check on lol

That's not whats happening. They are literally demanding these companies pay them money for linking to them to drive traffic to their sites. They want money for doing nothing. It would be like me charging google maps to provide directions to my business.

I doubt a hardware block could be placed without it affecting performance for video rendering or machine learning tasks. I don't like that miners are buying up GPU's but locking down cards is definitely a bad thing to do, I can totally understand someone using the GPU to mine on when they aren't gaming, and Nvidia telling them they can't really sucks.
Also Nvidia splitting mining cards into another segment makes no sense at all when there is already a semiconductor shortage, Nvidia doesn't care what their cards are used for money is money to them.

this is just ridiculous
 
this makes me wonder what patents are on keyboards/mice button locations and how many buttons
or even the location of a power/reset/etc button on a computer case or smart phone or laptop  lol
 
 

If you think this patent is dumb.
 
Remember that rounded corners and "slide to unlock" are patented as well

Patents like this shouldn't exist in the first place. 

Keep in mind that while it may have the same core configuration as iGPUs in Intel CPU products it will have a higher power limit so will perform better, so even if it were paired with an Intel CPU with the same iGPU core it'll have greater performance. Also they have dedicated VRAM and higher effective bandwidth so that'll also increase performance.
 
Very much looking forward to reviews of these, no matter how underwhelming the raw performance they might have it'll be damn interesting to see.

Could you please stop being disingenuous? It's getting rather old and annoying. What he was OBVIOUSLY asking about ;
 
 
 
As the article said, and others have mentioned (me included) ; there were 1600 mining farms found by the authorities, so there's an obvious issue in Iran specifically. Iran is regulating mining farms, and it seems a LOT of people are mining illegally. That specific issue is a separate one for cryptocurencies themselves. If they would make more money by throwing sand in the ocean, then that's what they would be doing instead of mining.
 
Now, can we have an honest discussion, or are you going to claim a blackout will erase someone's crypto wallet again?

great....now that means TSMC controls pretty much all desktop grade CPU manufacturing...that's not good.

I don't get why people think having a technical background makes you better to run a company. 
It's not the CEO that comes up with new products or develops them. 
 
Paul Otellini had no technical background but ran Intel when they became the dominant player and launched things like the first i3, i5 and i7 lineups. 
 
Their previous CEO, Brian Krzanich, was an engineer and he ran Intel from when they were at top (took over after Sandy Bridge) to when AMD knocked Intel out with zen and zen2. 
 
Remember, Bob Swan has only been the Intel CEO for like a year and a half or something like that. 

And all this with intel still being a process node behind. AMD is killing it rn, but the fact that Intel is still competitive with a 6 year old node is bloody impressive.
 
That being said, I'm thinking this generation of Intel chips could well be a poor buy in the long run. If Alder Lake is still due to arrive at the end of the year with a new node and a new architecture (Gracemont Cove, the successor to Willow Cove, which itself was the successor to the Sunny Cove that has been backported for Rocket Lake), then Rocket lake could end up aging rather quickly (although it's probably still a better buy than Kaby Lake).

Isn't this business as usual? Mobile partners have always taken up the majority of this business. 

You make a gross misconception here. Apple is planing for the future, for M1-successors. If they continue their ARM path the way they started it, they will sell tons and tons of M1-successor chips, and they occupy much more wafer area than the mobile brothers.
They are not a strain, their volume is huge since they are in so many devices, not only phones but also tables. Putting it all together Apple will need a crapload of 5nm silicon next year. And if Covid showed us anything so far, it is a vastly increased demand for consumer electronics, not a decline at all.

New cards might have 21 gbps instead of 19?

Thank you for taking the time to respond. I want to clarify the point of empathy, as I believe there may be some miscommunication here. I do not believe Nvidia should be empathetic towards reviewers or vice versa. My point on empathy was that companies typically lack the level of empathy required to understand the needs of individual consumers, which is why it's up to reviewers to shoulder that burden and help put themselves in the shoes of Joe Everyman. Nvidia does not need the empathy of reviewers or customers because as a business, Nvidia should put the needs of their company above all else. This includes customers. I've been vocal on this forum that the notion that the customer always comes first is a false one, and that in business, companies should prioritize their own survival first and foremost in order to provide jobs and maintain the livelihoods of those under their employ. This also extends to their ability to provide products and services to consumers. If a company puts customers above themselves, they are either lying, or they simply aren't in it for the long term. At the end of the day, it's Nvidia's job to offer a compelling product to consumers and win them over with said product. If Nvidia cannot do that on their own merits, it's not up to reviewers to do that job for them, even if reviewers are getting product for "free". Reviewers are not working on behalf of the companies, they serve the consumers. Now there is still that symbiotic relationship where their critical feedback can be used to offer product improvements and that in turn benefits the companies, but that is simply an added benefit, not the primary goal in this context. I believe the main issue with this entire ordeal was Nvidia (or whomever the individual was that sent the email) missed the opportunity to use HWUB's survey to their benefit. HWUB did the legwork and determined 70% of his audience didn't care about raytracing. Nvidia could have offered to pay for a promotional ad spot specifically for those features in an attempt to reach that untapped/uninterested market. This would have benefited all parties involved, but hindsight is 20/20...
 
As for the car analogy, I don't disagree that reviewers should test more. Part of why I choose not to consume HWUB's content is that I find their testing methodology and product coverage to be lacking compared to those that I do watch (GamersNexus, Der8auer, Buildzoid, etc). That said, I will not fault them for their conscious decision not to test something if they firmly believe their audience has no interest in it, regardless of what the manufacturer claims. I touched upon it slightly before, when I said such an attitude may be considered shooting themselves in the foot, but it's still their decision to make, and the consumers decision to make as to whether or not the review offered enough insight to inform their purchase decision.
 
As for checking raytracing closely, I feel like this horse has been thoroughly beaten by pretty much everyone in this thread, though I'll give my brief feelings on the subject. Raytracing isn't a new concept, and we've had our mainstream introduction with last generations Turing cards. The performance has improved dramatically with the architectural redesign that allows concurrent graphics, RT and tensor operations simultaneously, but the actual technology itself is still very much the same. I didn't watch their RTX 3080 review, but if they covered this in said review, it's safe to assume this cards raytracing performance would see a similar uplift over the previous generation minus the scaling from it being cutdown compared to a 3080. Now I personally don't care about raytracing as I don't do a lot of work that would benefit from raytracing nor do I have the time for gaming much these days, but I do recognize that the technology itself is quite important and is likely going to be the future. His audience choosing to be more interested in rasterization performance isn't a bad thing either, nor would I fault a reviewer for giving his audience what they want. In fact, if given enough time, he would probably go back to test raytracing performance anyways because in this digital review age, content milking is how one survives. I don't think your feelings on this are wrong, nor do I disagree with the idea that more facets of a product should be covered if possible, but understand these are merely our personal opinions, and others may (and likely will) feel differently.
 
I can't really speak as to why reviewers review products differently, short of saying they are different people with potentially different audiences. It's possible other reviewers didn't survey their target audience prior to performing the review, or their audience is double-dipping with reviewers and would rather get their in-depth information from a different personality and trust this particular reviewer for their rasterized gaming results? I genuinely do not know the answer to this, though I am not certain if it matters all that much in the end. There is always going to be a difference in the quality of reviewers, the coverage of a product and production quality of the videos themselves. Take LMG for example. I consider their production quality to be the best in the industry, but I personally do not consume their content because I find their testing methodology to be limited and caters more to Joe Everyman rather than someone that is an enthusiast in this industry. That isn't a bad thing per se as it reaches a far broader audience, and I would recommend LMG's content to someone getting into tech over a hyper analytical reviewer like Steve at Gamers Nexus, or the lunacy that is Der8auer and his "modifications". There are times where reviewers get it wrong (take Linus' old videos on memory speed not mattering and my holy crusade on this forum to try to disprove that) but those are very few and far between. Luckily we've seen reviewers be far more open to public opinion and reviewing their old content and applying their improved testing methodologies to revisit those claims.
 
I'll end this by saying the piece of advice I offered you was not meant in a manner of disrespect, nor would I say you "need" to change here. You do have a manner of arrogance about you, but I do too, and I can respect that. It tends to come from those that are passionate about a topic and often finds themselves refusing to yield when they are firm in their resolve. My advice was offered as someone that has taken the time to look back and reflect on some of my older posts and cringe about the times I openly refused constructive feedback and information that could have better served me at the time. The people on this forum can be weird at times. You'll find some that have their quirks of irrationality when it comes to specific topics, yet they'll be extremely kind to you in a completely unrelated subject. You'll also find those that are far more interested in learning and will happily put their ego aside in pursuit of knowledge and others that have to win the e-debate by any means necessary. I am not asking you to back down when you are right or renege on your words when you feel you've conveyed honest information to the best of your abilities. I only ask that you consider alternative approaches when you reach a point of impasse. Use those aforementioned links to verified sources, ask for the opinions of others (as you did in this very thread) to determine if you're seeing the entire picture.
 
Oh, and one more thing. You will see the post directly above mine and get the strongest urge to respond in a defensive manner. My best advice would be to read everything, summon the empathy you spoke of before, then determine if how he interpreted your posts was accurate to how you intended them to be perceived. If the answer is no, perhaps offer an apology for the misunderstanding and re-explain from a more nuanced point of view. If you want to kill this man with kindness, I am down for the tag-team of a lifetime.

How do they propose to determine if something was bought by a bot and even enforce this?

If by W you mean wasteoftime that is.
 
There's no way they can enforce this, how could they ever prove you used a bot to purchase the item?

This is probably more in response to bots buying up PPE and cleaning supplies during COVID-19. If you really think the Government cares that you can't get your PS5 or RTX 3070, you're kidding yourself. This is for more important items. 

im not sure if that's what they're implying, or that's what you're thinking they're implying
 
yes they did, sort of
not directly afaik
 
it's about the 3080 POSCAPs thingy
but i think it's kind of fair, jayz shouldn't present rumors as facts (and potentially even caused MSRP cards like TUF to go up in price to high hell compared to other models, even to this day)
 
igorslab was speculating about the issue, it wasnt officially confirmed
and it turned out it wasnt the caps, so jayz did spread misinformation
 
i missed this
never seen this, not that i pay very close attention
 
i've seen him say good stuff and bad stuff about a product
but hearing more negative stuff is more important to me
 
sometimes u wanna know where the pitfalls are, not the benefits.
i'd rather be pleasantly surprised than disappointed.
 
nvidia simply stopped sending them stuff because they're harsh on products, which is what a proper review should sound like, tbh
praise when a product is good, bash on it if it's bad
 
i've seen positive and negative reviews from them
so far i dont think they did anything that's too far from reality, and it's something that i can see someone genuinely care about, not just complain about things people will literally not care about
 
 
 
 
now... im not agree-ing with them using a poll to decide on what to review and what to skimp on
relying on audience isnt a very good idea because people tend to be skewed, fanboy-ism and what not
they did a poll asking what platform should they test the new GPUs on, AMD or Intel.
the poll went AMD, even though intel performs better (before 5000 series), and they went AMD
that's kind of a dumb decision, given you're not putting the best foot ahead for the GPU to perform.
as a reviewer, you should do testing and present the best results, not relying on some polls to tell you what to do
 
they did a poll asking if people are interested in RT, majority of the people voted no
while sure, people arent interested in RT now, but it could be amazing and they would be none the wiser if they decided to skip on reviewing it because their audience isnt interested in it, this can be frustrating when a company is trying its best to push a technology forward but people would just ignore it.
part of a reviewer's job is to look at all aspects of a product, i don't agree with their method of "doing what the audience wants"
it's like stroking their audience's own ego, it's somewhat of a confirmation bias (might be the wrong term but eh)
 
i want to know more about RT and DLSS and watch it grow, not ignore it and hope it bears fruit one day
their short 2 minute segment in their gpu review doesn't do it justice, imo
but their cyberpunk 2077 DLSS and RT coverage is amazing

So why would i send a product out to be reviewed if they aren't going to focus on a feature I want included
Hence the blacklist
 
 

Memory also

Almost grabbed 10850k for 390 because of this
But I'll wait it out with my system longer

Memory also