Why aren't computer clocks as accurate as cheap quartz watches?

[Mxsmanic]

Well, pencil and paper 'does the job' too but a text processor does it
better, and a WYSIWYG word processor does it even better, depending on how
one defines 'better'.

Yes, but those major leaps in functionality are mostly history now.
These days, the improvements usually involve multicolored transparent
menus, or larger and fancier 3-D icons, or other bells and whistles
that consume hardware and software resources but contribute nothing to
the basic purpose of the computer, for the average user.

Well, some people still have no computer at all and I'm building a tube
amplifier. Neither says much about the state of the broader market, or
people in general, as they're fringe/niche situations.

The broader market (and especially the worldwide market) is only
slightly beyond DOS today.

You're assuming there just isn't anything 'left to do' that can matter and
I'm not willing to make that assumption.

There may be plenty left to do; the problem is that nobody is doing
it. Software companies tend to content themselves with adding useless
bells and whistles--software bloat--to their products with each
upgrade, because adding truly new features and functionality requires
a lot of expensive development and involves taking serious risks. The
idea is to milk existing business for all the money one can, so
companies are unwilling to take risks with novelty. The bigger the
company, the more true this becomes.

You're losing track of the issue here, which was whether an O.S. 'upgrade'
can offer a significant enough improvement to warrant the 'upgrade', not
whether every last soul on the planet uses it. And I was pointing out that
the O.S. changes needed to take advantage of 32 bit technology, vs 16 bit
technology, was a significant enough performance increase.

Maybe. So what next? To justify an upgrade, I need something truly
interesting, and I just don't see that happening. The last upgrade I
found _interesting_ was from Windows 3.x to Windows NT (I never
bothered with Windows 95 and its ilk).

 

[Mxsmanic]

The Netscape matter is interesting because they began by giving their
browser away then, when they had 84% market share, began charging for it,
which would seem to be an exercise in monopolistic power... but maybe no
one sued. Then, when Microsoft gives away their browser, Netscape brings
suit against Microsoft for doing the same thing they had done to get an 84%
market share.

Amusing, eh?

Netscape wasn't seen as the bad guy; Microsoft was. The difference
between subjective perception and reality is sometimes enormous.

 

[Mxsmanic]

Well, they did, in fact, eventually tout that OS/2 would 'run Windows
software' which, in market terms, is tantamount to declaring Windows 'the
standard'. And then one asks, why not just get 'the real thing'?

Yup. I tell Linux users the same thing. And a lot of the older Linux
users were OS/2 fanatics before Linux came along. They can't _both_
be "the best operating system ever written."

 

[David Maynard]

David Maynard writes:




Yup. I tell Linux users the same thing. And a lot of the older Linux
users were OS/2 fanatics before Linux came along. They can't _both_
be "the best operating system ever written."

Hehe. Well, one could argue that OS/2 was "the best operating system ever
written" as of 1995 and Linux is "the best operating system ever written"
as of 2005

But the thing that confounds the 'technically superior' crowd is that
'ignorant users' don't give a whit about 'technical superiority', they just
want, as you put it, to get the job done (with the least pain, misery, and
cost). Now, if the 'technically superior' crowd could explain why the
nuances of intertask messaging and 'a real multitasking O.S.' (sic) will
make the spell checker more brilliant then they might have a recognizable
argument but, otherwise, it's just meaningless techno babble to the average
user.

What can it do? It can run your Windows software too. Yeah? Well, so can
Windows.

Its hard to sell that.

 

[David Maynard]

David Maynard writes:




Netscape wasn't seen as the bad guy; Microsoft was. The difference
between subjective perception and reality is sometimes enormous.

You betcha. So much for 'blind' justice

It gets even more interesting when you look at the 'ICON on the desktop'
issue. One could always install Netscape on a Windows machine, and sell it
that way, but what Netscape wanted was for OEMs, with, one imagines, a bit
of prodding from Netscape, the holder of monopoly power in the browser
market, to be able to *remove* I.E. from Microsoft's own product, not
simply coexist, and sell it with Netscape *only*.

One way of looking at it might be to say that Netscape was complaining
about Microsoft 'infringing' on their 'free use of monopoly power'

 

[John Doe]

Me neither. Yes Microsoft does develop personal computer software.
But so does thousands of other companies as well. So this rules out
Microsoft as a monopoly.

Your life must be constant bliss.

__________________________________________________
Bill (using a Toshiba 2595XDVD under Windows 2000)
-- written and edited within WordStar 5.0




Path: newsdbm04.news.prodigy.com!newsdst02.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr33.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!7c009807!not-for-mail
From: "BillW50" <BillW50 aol.kom>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.basics,sci.electronics.repair,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
References: <v429f.441$p37.342 newssvr17.news.prodigy.com> <qF59f.482$p37.367 newssvr17.news.prodigy.com> <iM69f.33654$Bf7.13203 tornado.texas.rr.com> <fa99f.528$p37.148 newssvr17.news.prodigy.com> <dxb9f.36934$Bf7.35070 tornado.texas.rr.com> <lNd9f.552$p37.38 newssvr17.news.prodigy.com> <oWe9f.40054$Bf7.37679 tornado.texas.rr.com> <360bm1li8v9spuh8uhv95dhi25qe0jad4v 4ax.com> <11mbajursouao13 corp.supernews.com> <26nbm159lankulsp18gidrvs0rg1vlmb9m 4ax.com> <11mdkabmj4vef5f corp.supernews.com> <Xns97012E0521CE5follydom 207.115.17.102> <kRI9f.4338$8W.1215 newssvr30.news.prodigy.com> <Xns970142579A709follydom 207.115.17.102> <FeK9f.4352$8W.3524 newssvr30.news.prodigy.com> <Xns9701B3D7F9290follydom 207.115.17.102> <TyT9f.4495$8W.3325 newssvr30.news.prodigy.com> <Xns9701BBB667D77follydom 207.115.17.102> <llU9f.4499$8W.2606 newssvr30.news.prodigy.com> <Xns9701C504D5F55follydom 207.115.17.102> <keW9f.4522$8W.3043 newssvr30.news.prodigy.com> <Xns9702802F98EB1follydom 207.115.17.102>
Subject: Re: The truth about OS/2!!! [Re: Why aren't computer clocks as accurate as cheap quartz watches?]
Lines: 105
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1506
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1506
Message-ID: <jV8af.4494$Y61.3339 newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.74.67.83
X-Complaints-To: abuse prodigy.net
X-Trace: newssvr33.news.prodigy.com 1130961615 ST000 68.74.67.83 (Wed, 02 Nov 2005 15:00:15 EST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 15:00:15 EST
Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com
X-UserInfo1: TSU[ I_A\S ]SQXXHRJB^QL AJT QDDMEPWXODMMHXMTWA]EPMVOPCWZBL[\YUWHANGYZEFNHFZPNLOBUNSS^_LGEVWEY\PHO YJSSWBBDT\PFD^ESBTXVCCMTD]JCJLE\_IJMFNRY]SWE[S[D_CNB__ZK^VGVCKHA[S COB^[ ZQSDFQ\BPMS DZVUKQTJL
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 20:00:15 GMT
Xref: newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com sci.electronics.basics:225861 sci.electronics.repair:427584 alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:448909

 

[John Doe]

Well, I agree it's silly of you to keep hounding me.

I'm hounding you? For an opinion? On USENET?

That's funny too.

Do you think Microsoft Office is one application? I'm impressed that
anybody (who is supposed to be high technology oriented) can muster
the courage to say something like that in public. And I'm looking
forward to you all plainly stating your (comedic) belief that
Microsoft does not hold monopoly power. I don't mean BillW50, he is
way past comedy.

That baseball bat analogy (in a prior post) was posed by one of the
appeals court judges when Microsoft plainly argued that because
because it is the rightful owner of Windows, it has the right to do
anything with Windows.

Some Microsoft defender arguments are pretty funny, even arguments
put forth by extremely well-paid attorneys in federal court.

Microsoft is in court every day forcing its will upon smaller
software publishers. One year, Microsoft poured $650 million into
our justice system. Microsoft constantly employs our government to
physically force smaller software companies into compliance. If it
weren't for our intellectual property law and our government to
physically enforce that law at the point of a gun, Microsoft would
fall apart like a playing card house.

Path: newssvr11.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm04.news.prodigy.com!newsdst02.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!news4.google.com!sn-xit-04!sn-xit-12!sn-xit-09!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail
From: David Maynard <nospam private.net>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.basics,sci.electronics.repair,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Subject: Re: The truth about OS/2!!! [Re: Why aren't computer clocks as accurate as cheap quartz watches?]
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 22:53:46 -0600
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Message-ID: <11mlqar206uplc2 corp.supernews.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v429f.441$p37.342 newssvr17.news.prodigy.com> <iM69f.33654$Bf7.13203 tornado.texas.rr.com> <fa99f.528$p37.148 newssvr17.news.prodigy.com> <dxb9f.36934$Bf7.35070 tornado.texas.rr.com> <lNd9f.552$p37.38 newssvr17.news.prodigy.com> <oWe9f.40054$Bf7.37679 tornado.texas.rr.com> <360bm1li8v9spuh8uhv95dhi25qe0jad4v 4ax.com> <11mbajursouao13 corp.supernews.com> <26nbm159lankulsp18gidrvs0rg1vlmb9m 4ax.com> <11mdkabmj4vef5f corp.supernews.com> <Xns97012E0521CE5follydom 207.115.17.102> <11mfu9hnkt97qd3 corp.supernews.com> <Xns9701BC3134EBBfollydom 207.115.17.102> <11mg4ua6p3i47ca corp.supernews.com> <Xns9701C6F44DDAfollydom 207.115.17.102> <11mgg8hrge7dq4d corp.supernews.com> <Xns970282479AA5Cfollydom 207.115.17.102> <11miobbo5ut4362 corp.supernews.com> <Xns9702E6342B453follydom 207.115.17.102> <11mj8gprjccted2 corp.supernews.com> <Xns9703CCBDFF2follydom 207.115.17.102> <11mjduenv5c4h42 corp.supernews.com> <Xns9703DB6DE5A37follydom 207.115.17.102>
In-Reply-To: <Xns9703DB6DE5A37follydom 207.115.17.102>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse supernews.com
Lines: 22
Xref: newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com sci.electronics.basics:225976 sci.electronics.repair:427746 alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:449038

 

[David Maynard]

I'm hounding you? For an opinion? On USENET?

That's probably the closest thing to an accurate summary I've ever seen
come out of you and this may come as a real shock but I am under no
'obligation' whatsoever to provide you with an opinion on ANYthing.

<snip>

 

[Mxsmanic]

Microsoft is in court every day forcing its will upon smaller
software publishers. One year, Microsoft poured $650 million into
our justice system. Microsoft constantly employs our government to
physically force smaller software companies into compliance.

It's the other way around. Thousands of smaller software companies
try to use the courts to compensate for their own inability to
compete, by accusing Microsoft of various misdeeds on a regular basis.

If it weren't for our intellectual property law and our government to
physically enforce that law at the point of a gun, Microsoft would
fall apart like a playing card house.

So would every other software company.

 

[BarryNL]

Why do the battery powered clocks in personal computers tend to keep
worse time than quartz watches, even the $1 ones?

The computer batteries measure fine, at least 3.15V.

I thought that the problem was temperature swings in the computers
(25-38C), but a couple of cheapo watches taped inside the computers
kept better time.

Maybe 'cos if you really care about accuracy on a PC you can just set it
to update from an NTP server.

 

[John Doe]

That's probably the closest thing to an accurate summary I've ever
seen come out of you and this may come as a real shock but I am
under no 'obligation' whatsoever to provide you with an opinion on
ANYthing.

You are too full of yourself to get my drift.

 

[David Maynard]

You are too full of yourself to get my drift.

I got your drift just fine. Now lets see if you got mine.

 

[marika]

Well I don't know if I would say that about pot head Kildall?

he's friend with Tommy Chong?

or do you mean his head is literally shaped that way?

mk5000.

"no that's every single day. I didn't realize it at the time, but
after the movie, I was like , uh oh I am Ed WOod yikes"--tim burton

 

[[email protected]]

Maybe 'cos if you really care about accuracy on a PC you can just set it
to update from an NTP server.

Do you honestly believe I'd be interested in accurate oscillators if I
could simply get the time from a network? Much of the equipment is
placed so even WWV isn't available.

 

[[email protected]]

Maybe 'cos if you really care about accuracy on a PC you can just set it
to update from an NTP server.

Do you honestly believe I'd be interested in accurate oscillators if I
could simply get the time from a network? Much of the equipment is
placed so even WWV isn't available.

 

[Brad Houser]

Do you honestly believe I'd be interested in accurate oscillators if I
could simply get the time from a network? Much of the equipment is
placed so even WWV isn't available.

OK, so we eliminated the obvious. The typical PC crystal costs $.25 and is
accurate to 20ppm, or 1.7 sec/day, at room temp. It gets worse at other
temps. You can buy a pci clock card with a tempurature compensated crystal
that is accurate to plus or minus 2ppm for $60, and make it your time
server for you network, or if stand alone systems, in each one if it is
that important. Here is one: http://www.beaglesoft.com/clcaspecs.htm

BH

 

[Blinky the Shark]

OK, so we eliminated the obvious. The typical PC crystal costs
$.25 and is accurate to 20ppm, or 1.7 sec/day, at room temp. It
gets worse at other temps.

Is there a simple relationship like slower-cooler and faster-hotter
(or the reverse) involved here, or is the relationship not that
simple?

 

[w_tom]

The crystal time function also gets worse when voltage to
that oscillator varies. And that voltage variation is part of
the CMOS date time clock design. Oscillator accuracy, which
addressed the OP's original question, was answered at the very
beginning of this thread. Variation of oscillator crystal is
why watches have a trimmer capacitor. But this too was
answered up top, at the beginning, maybe about 100 replies
ago. Worse still, something like 3 out of 4 responses still
post about external time sources - WWV, internet time,
Operating System response to a interrupts from a completely
different clock, etc. All those were obviously and totally
irrelevant to the question originally asked by do_not_spam_me.

His question was answered early on in the very first
responses. Following posts should deal with these - two
factors of oscillator variation - no trimmer capacitor and
voltage variations to that oscillator. So many reponses that
never once even considered these factors that cause CMOS RTC
timing variations.

BTW, John Popelish also provides good information on how
crystal cuts and other factors contribute to these
variations. Another post that answers the OP's original
question and a comment about many posts that don't.

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

IBM completely killed off Honeywell and Burroughs with good marketing
skills, not better hardware. The competition lay in salesmanship and
brainwashing, not making better stuff or even trying to be cost
competitive.

IBM killed off Burroughs? What are you talking about? Burroughs
merged with Sperry in 1986 and still operate under their new name,
Unisys.

http://www.unisys.com/about__unisys/history/

 

[Mxsmanic]

IBM killed off Burroughs? What are you talking about? Burroughs
merged with Sperry in 1986 and still operate under their new name,
Unisys.

IBM didn't kill off Honeywell, either. Honeywell bought GE's computer
division, then Bull SA (the French computer company) bought Honewell's
computer division. Today it survives as Bull SA (the unfortunate name
of the company comes from Fredrik Bull, the Norwegian founder of a
company that ultimately evolved to Bull SA today).