PDA

View Full Version : Albee's "Athalon"?



LSlugger
04-10-2004, 11:15 AM
This is not intended as a flame.

I was eagerly thumbing through Tim Albee's CGI Filmmaking: The Creation of Ghost Warrior at Borders when I stumbled across a section on gear, in which he refers to an "American Micro-Dynamics" "Athalon." Call it a character flaw, but mistakes like these in a published book drive me crazy. (I have a love-hate relationship with O'Reilly for the same reason.)

Is the rest of the book going to drive me crazy, too?

theo
04-10-2004, 11:50 AM
Good grief- get a grip man. If this is worth your time to get crazy over do you have any friends? I'm guessing probably not.

cresshead
04-10-2004, 02:27 PM
i supose your a proof reader at your day job!....
not exactly going to put many people off buying the book is it though!

actually AMD means "arrogant media deception"....
try n find just how fast a amd is on their site....you know real "mhz" not some rubbish 3000+ ....

at least intel give you proper mhz of their products.

...:rolleyes:

dablan
04-10-2004, 02:29 PM
So what should it say?
I don't use AMD chips....

Just Jays or Lays.

cresshead
04-10-2004, 02:37 PM
just being picky...but LSlugger mis spelt "athlon"....he wrote
>>Athalon...Hmmm..maybe he should not be a proof reader after all!

Filmmaking: The Creation of Ghost Warrior at Borders when I stumbled across a section on gear, in which he refers to an "American Micro-Dynamics" "Athalon." Call it a


AMD....advanced micro devices

okay people...back to sleep..move along nothing to re spell here!

themaxx
04-10-2004, 03:02 PM
Originally posted by cresshead
just being picky...but LSlugger mis spelt "athlon"....he wrote
>>Athalon...Hmmm..maybe he should not be a proof reader after all!

isn't that what he said was bugging him? that they'd misspelled it and gotten the acronym wrong?


Originally posted by cresshead
i supose your a proof reader at your day job!....

if he is a proofreader, i bet you're driving him nuts, too.

theo
04-10-2004, 05:14 PM
Dan- I find AMD chips taste too processed :D

dablan
04-10-2004, 05:42 PM
And the little ones are kind of chewy.

DaveW
04-10-2004, 07:31 PM
The ghz is right there on the white papers (and every site I've ordered cpus from has the ghz listed), but as they state on their site the mhz/ghz is irrelevant. By giving the processor a speed rating you're better able to compare how fast the chip will perform vs. Intel.

private
04-10-2004, 07:53 PM
People are paid to proof read the books. The fact it was not detected reflects that the proofreader was doing a poor job.

Meaty
04-10-2004, 07:59 PM
i am guessing the proof reader was probably checking for grammer, they probably just assume that the content of the book was accurate.

would you blame the proof reader if the book gave bad directions on parenting in place?

private
04-10-2004, 08:46 PM
No, you would blame the technical editor.

dwburman
04-10-2004, 09:35 PM
I always seem to catch grammar and spelling problems in magazines and stuff. I can't say it bothers me very much though.

LSlugger, why don't you buy the book and send it to me. I'll read it and send it back to you with any potentially disturbing errata corrected.
:cool:

kurv
04-10-2004, 11:15 PM
We do not hire outside editors other than a technical check. I would out our editors up against any in the industry, we have some of the best!!

Books are not perfect, there will always be some mistakes.

I would say no the rest of the book will not drive you crazy... I rarely find mistakes in out books...

Verlon
04-10-2004, 11:28 PM
Advanced Micro Devices uses ratings on chips instead of MHz because they (correctly, it seems) believe the public will only look at MHz as a measure of how fast a chips is.

Given that they did not weigh the Athlon down with a 20 stage pipeline just to get the numbers up, a 2GHz Athlon is comparable to a much faster Intel chip. Those ratings are a pretty decent yardstick.

And before you start to flame, keep in mind that Intel is going to start doing the same thing because they can't keep scaling up the MHz speed as they have. Now intel will have to make the chip do more with each clock cycle and it would not do for Pentium V (Pentium Pentium?) to appear slower than P4.

Alliante
04-10-2004, 11:42 PM
try n find just how fast a amd is on their site....you know real "mhz" not some rubbish 3000+ ....

MHz is not an accurate comparison for two different CPU architectures. Yes, the AMD chips are x86 compatible, but they're still totally different architectures.

The new G5s are only about 2ghz, and I'd compare their sheer processing power to any 3 ghz. This has been known by both sides of the "PeeCee" war, and noone except for newbies ever complain that a Mac's Em-Ech-Zee is lower than a PC's (the only complaints I hear these days is that you can't build your own and the cost of a Mac).

I'm not a Mac person, and I'm not an AMD person... I'm a technologist that loves competition.