Having actually bothered to read through this silly argument I have to say that I mostly have to back Crashman up here.
Sure you could put them on a Micro-ATX board, but why? The Mini-ITX is smaller, and is guaranteed to run off less than 100 Watts.
Only barely smaller, and you say that as though it is impossible to just simply do a little research and design a micro-atx PC that runs off of less than 100 watts. (Or for that matter that it's completely impossible to find an absolute-silent power supply that provides more than 100W.) Not only <i>can</i> you build a micro-atx solution that uses that little power, but you also <i>can</i> find silent power supplies that deliver more than 100W. All that it takes is bothering to look.
No fans + smallest form factor available = smallest and quietest.
And again, you say this as though a micro-atx system couldn't possibly be built without fans, which they most certainly can.
So far your posts have contributed no constructive information.
Neither have yours, so now is hardly the time to get picky about these things.
Sure, it has only one PCI slot. Sure, its not very powerful. WE GET IT. But like I said in the first place, the solution to some problems is not always a bigger hammer.
And Crashman's point is that you can find a solution that is considerably more powerful but at the same time just as silent and low-power. You <i>can</i> build a micro-atx system <i>without</i> fans and with a <i>real</i> graphics solution. You can even give it more processing power if you want to spend the money. (Not that you have to though.) Crashman isn't saying to use a sledgehammer. He's simply saying that sometimes the absolute smallest hammer in the toolchest is just plain too small, and the VIA systems are <i>definately</i> the smallest of the hammers.
All I am hearing is that just because you dislike the Mini-ITX format, anyone else must be stupid for considering it.
It's funny how you can complain about him putting words in your mouth and put words into his mouth at the same time. He never said that. He merely said that you can build a system just as silent that runs on just as low power using micro-atx instead of mini-itx. The advantage is that it's much more expandible and upgradable. The disadvantage is a slightly larger size. <i>Most</i> people would be more than glad to trade that small size difference for the ability to actually upgrade the system later.
And we finally get to the heart of the matter. Your opinion that using ITX parts for the sake of size and power (which is directly related to silence) is ludicrous. Thats all we needed to know. Opinion noted, and duly ignored.
Actually Crashman has an excellent opinion there, and it's one that I've said before too. If you want a tiny size format (especially in something that can get banged around) that runs really cool then using laptop parts will get you a lot further than VIA's solutions. Hell, look at the tablet PCs. They rock. So it is kind of silly to suggest VIA for these reasons <b>unless</b> (and here is the big part where you casually ignore) <i>price</i> is also a notable concern. So Crashman's opinion is perfectly justified. As is yours <i>if</i> you count price as a significant consideration. You both have perfectly valid opinions here and price is really the <i>only</i> factor between them.
guess what, it uses zero fans, not even in the PSU. Of course, as you have already made clear, the pursuit of absolute silence is "ludicrous", so I would not expect you to understand the appeal.
Again, Crashman never said that the pursuit of absolute silence is ludicrous. He said that using mini-itx when a micro-atx or a laptop solution would work better is. So once again you've put words into his mouth and at the same time complained that he did so to you. You're a very hypocritical person, aren't you?
Personally I would rather not risk a laptop for the project you mentioned. However I would think nothing of throwing down a spare C-note for a Mini-ITX board.
This is one place where you show your true colors. You yourself said "sometimes a bigger hammer is not the best solution." and yet you <i>completely</i> throw out the idea of spending even less money on purchasing a used laptop that could just as easily have met the requirements for that project <i>and</i> have been smaller. So the truth is that you <i>really</i> don't care about what size hammer is being used, you're just a mini-itx zealot who thinks that nothing else could possibly meet people's needs any better.
Slow I'll give you, but you clearly don't seem to care about performance and for web surfing it's more than enough power. Loud though however is a bold-faced lie. I've seen plenty of Pentium 1s run off of a <i>passive</i> cooler. I've even seen a Pentium II 266 run off of a passive cooler. (Though that one was a pretty big heatsink for its time.) So loud <i>is</i> a lie.
Unlikely to get XP to work on it in any usable fashion.
Since when is XP all-important? Hell, use Win98SE or Linux. The VIA system won't run XP worth a darn anyway. Sure, it'll run, but only just barely.
Laptop, comparatively expensive. Next!
It's so nice to see you give laptops a fair consideration. Because it's not like you couldn't easily purchase a used laptop for a very affordable price.
OK better read this part slowly, I'd hate to confuse you. Putting a C3 on a socket 370 board may indeed use as little power as an ITX setup, then again it may not.
No offense, but who is the one sounding confused here, hmm? In case you were wanting to know, micro-atx <i>can</i> use as little power as a mini-itx setup. There's no need to wonder or pretend that this information just doesn't exist.
Unlike the Mini-ITX, the mATX specification does not require that the sum of the components consume less than 100 Watts. Why risk it?
That's like saying that because the USB specification doesn't specifically require the ability to run a webcam that it therefore can't do so or that it's even somehow a risk to use a USB webcam. Just because the specification doesn't explicitely require something doens't mean that it <i>can't</i> do it at all or that it is even a risk to do it. It just means that it wasn't required in the specification. Solutions <i>do</i> exist and <i>are</i> trustworthy.
What reason would you have for putting a C3 CPU on a mATX board, if the only benefit of doing so is the extra PCI slots?
First because you never know when you'll need the extra PCI slots. Second because you also get an AGP slot. Third because it also gives you the ability to upgrade your CPU should you ever desire to do so.
If you are not going to use them in the first place, then may as well stick with the smaller, guaranteed-to-work-without-fans ITX board.
As opposed to going with a more flexibke and only slightly larger guaranteed-to-work-without-fans micro-atx solution. Yeah, you're full of good advice.
Therefore if the part of the point of going with the C3 is silence, then it makes no sense to use one on an mATX board.
Again you use lies and spread FUD. You <i>can</i> configure a micro-atx PC that has <i>no</i> fans and therefore is <i>just</i> as silent.
Geezus, now you're just being ridiculously paranoid. But now I understand the source of all your strife towards Mini-ITX. The only problem is that its completely irrational. I am 100% certain that people can enjoy their tiny, silent ITX systems, while you can safely hold on to your misguided belief that every PC should be a monster able to do it all.
Crashman never said that every PC should be a monster. Micro-atx isn't <i>that</i> big and laptops certainly aren't. They however are both quite upgradable compared to mini-itx. That aside, he was sounding a bit paranoid there. I agree with you in that there is room for all of these solutions to peacefully co-exist.
So you just keep on recommending those bigger hammers to people who don't need them.
You're really not one who should be talking here since you already admitted yourself that you'd completely throw out any idea of using smaller, lower-heat, lower-power solutions just because they're laptop parts instead of mini-itx parts. You can't complain of someone suggesting big hammers when you yourself won't aknowledge that even smaller hammers than your own suggestions do exist and do work.
But thankfully, I got a little bit older and a little bit wiser, and learned to respect different viewpoints, no matter how opposed to my own they may be.
Right. That's why you completely flat-out refused Crashman's opinion that laptop parts are better suited for the fields that people are using mini-itx parts. As you said "<font color=red>Thats all we needed to know. Opinion noted, and duly ignored.</font color=red>" <sarcasm>I can see how you were wise and respected his viewpoint no matter how opposed to your own it may be.</sarcasm>
Resorting to false analogies when dealing directly with the topic at hand is non-beneficial to your argument, I see.
Actually, his analogy was quite relevant. Their only difference is size. Both use the exact same internal components. So one can't possibly be any quieter than the other.
And calling me a liar to boot (again), without ever clarifying what the lie was that I was allegedly proposing.
Actually, as an independant observer I have to say that he did rather clearly identify that your lies are that you keep saying that micro-atx can't possibly be completely silent like your mini-itx can be. For your information, micro-atx <i>can</i> be completely silent. It isn't a <i>requirement</i> in the micro-atx specs, but there <i>are</i> components for a micro-atx system that you could use which run fanless anyway.
And I spoke nothing of Pintos and Rangers. Those are your words, not mine.
For someone who sounded like you knew something of a debate, you erected a pretty tall strawman here.
Again, putting words in my mouth. I never claimed that a Mini-ITX would be good for anything.
Officially claimed, no. Again as an independant observer though, you did strongly imply it once.
Even if you were a genious, which I doubt, did you ever consider that you might be dealing with someone who might also be a genious, and who could possibly even have a higher IQ than your own?
No offense, but yet again as an independant third party, it's pretty clear to see from both of your posts which of you has the higher IQ, and in case you were wondering, it isn't you. You are clearly not stupid however. I'd definately put you above average.
<b>And now to both of you:</b>
The beautiful thing about the PC industry is that it is based on the ideal that no one solution fits all, even in extreme niche cases. Can we just agree that mini-itx has some uses (mostly when cost, wattage, and silence are primary concerns) but that there are also other solutions which may meet people's needs better, even sometimes when cost, wattage, and silence are involved?
"<i>Let's see what <b>Paragraph 84-B</b> has to say about it.</i>" - Thief from <A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/daily.php?date=030724" target="_new">8-Bit Theater</A>
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram