Slashdot Mirror

Seems many have migrated to using programs like absORB http://briandailey.googlepages.com/absorb

Or even a bit of both

And FSF, you've gained a contributor.

And hey, I believe in them. They're hardly about to do anything particularly evil, now are they?

In case it is down, and I haven't been temporarily banned from my own frickin' server for some bandwidth crap, the image is also now on my Google page.

See this link

Microsoft Corporation sponsored an international competition, titled Windows Embedded Student Challenge 2006. This contest was first organised in 2004 and has been held ever since. Due to the involvement of Microsoft, the competition attracts huge interest from the student community.

As part of the contest, the organizers (Microsoft Corporation) propose a theme for the competition and expects participating team to design and build projects in line with the theme. To help the design and implementation, it provides free hardware and software tools. The hardware platform is an x86 derived single board computer, called Ebox. The software tools includes the Windows CE RTOS development suite.

Participants are expected to design their projects around the Ebox and WinCE RTOS.

This year around 230 teams sent proposals to the organizers, out of which 200 teams were selected and were provided with the abovementioned tools.

Out of these 200 teams, about 185 teams sent final reports which were evaluated by a team of judges to select the top 30 projects. The list of these top 30 teams together with their reports is available here.

  This year, the theme for the contest was "Preserving, Protecting and Enhancing the ENvironment".

The teams are supposed to follow eligibility rules as listed on the WIndows Challenge website. One assumes that teams that do not meet the eligibility criterion, will be inelligible?

Also, since this is a Microsoft spondored project, it is obvious that Microsoft's motive is to try and popularize the use of WInCE RTOS amongst the student community. The choice of Ebox is only to allow the operation of WInCE RTOS. It could as well have been any other hardware platform.

It is therefore natural to expect that a participant would develop a project that would justify the use of Ebox and WinCE RTOS. Or am I too naive to assume that?

It is worthwhile to note that the Ebox is a serious piece of hardware. It is an Vortex86 200 Mhz processor based, small foorprint embedded system with a serial port, a parallel port, 3 USB ports, an ethernet port, AV'97 audio, PS2 mouse and keyboard ports, VGA port. The Ebox consumes about 10W of power in active mode.

  I was a mentor to a team from NSIT, which in my opinion implemented a wonderful project (which btw, is being patented now). Unfortunately, the judges did not deem the project as worthy of selection in the final 30 list.

My team brought to my notice that some of the teams did not meet the eligibility criterion. They also mentioned that many projects seemed very trivial for an Ebox. Many infact do not need any RTOS at all.

I then decided to read all the reports and make an assessment about such projects, which, in my opinion do not justify the use of an EBox and WinCE RTOS. My brief report about such projects is available here.

Read it for yourself and make your own judgement. If you would like to read my team's report for comparison sake or otherwise, send me a mail at dvgadre@gmail.com and I will be more than glad to mail you a copy.

I have brought this to the notice of the organizers of WESC'06 but they have decided to ignore my feedback and go ahead with the contest as per the schedule.

I guess its bye bye future Microsoft contests, as far as I am concerned.

Dhananjay V. Gadre

Props to GNAA

It's interesting that since I've been browsing this story google has started indexing .mobi sites:

http://kibosig.googlepages.com/googlemobisearch.ht m

It's interesting that since I've been browsing this story google has started indexing .mobi sites:

http://kibosig.googlepages.com/googlemobisearch.ht m

Is this a cunning advertising ploy to get more publicity for your Macbook crusade? If so, it worked on me! :)

Of course not! It's a cunning ploy to direct more ad-revenue-generating traffic to my website

What other platform? Apple? Yes they support Macs. But I can't personally attest to anything on mac because, quite frankly, OSX is inferior to both Linux and Windows on a technical level.

*Snort* You don't know what a platform is do you? You can run linux on Apples (PPC or whatever), as well as IA64, AMD64, etc etc.

Is nvidia supported on them?

And yes you can run AGP + fb and switch between X and console just fine with the current driver ... and you could a few years back (2002)...

People are reporting problems still. Nvidia is unresponsive.

I'm sorry if you can't configure an xorg.conf/XFree86.conf file.

Hahahaha Cute. And you actually accused me of trolling. xorg.conf/XFree86.conf files have nothing to do with framebuffers.

PS. Don't try to troll me with anti-osx jibes, I don't care at all

OS X can mount ISO's out of the box. Perhaps Nautilus should include the ISO mounting script with their distro.

1) Nautilus is not a distro.
2) All linux distros can mount ISOs out of the box
3) The Nautilus script is a pretty front end to mount, just like OS X (presumably) has a pretty front end to hdiutil (I'm not near a mac machine so I can't check)
4) Thanks for piping up about OS X in a discussion comparing linux to windows! Perhaps you deserve my username more then I do?

Research indicates that when people were asked to pick 'the odd on out' from a set of pictures of scenes and faces,

After all, how can they lose when the logo is basically two men staring at a pair of breasts.

Or am I the only one to see this?

During the discussions of market shares of the next-gen consoles, there's one thing people don't consider.

The Logo.

Thats right - the logo is going to decide who will win the next-gen console war. Have a look at the three logos side by side and it becomes apparant who is going to win.

And who says a PowerPoint presentation can't be an exciting, gory, vegetable-driven adventure story?

For a while I had them on my .Mac account until I crippled their servers and they asked me to remove them. I think I cost them thousands in burstable bandwidth charges.

After that I put up a plea for mirrors and I had the videos mirrored across a number of places and then a company offered to put them on a new data center they had just built as a stress test. We had almost 30Gbps sustained for 3 days straight. Moved over a petabyte in total is my best guess.

I'm the reason .Mac now has bandwidth limits. Sorry y'all!

I'm moving them over to Google Video slowly but surely, now that .Mac has actually started enforcing their bandwidth limits.

Here's the wsj article about me: http://jlgolson.googlepages.com/wsj.html

Then perhaps you'll like the Epiphany approach to generating hierarchies for tag-based bookmarks. We've been working on it for a while now, and it allows arbitrary depth, but is smarter about it. We'll integrate deli.cio.us stuff soon I believe.

http://peter.a.harvey.googlepages.com/epiphany

http://davidlita.googlepages.com/copyrights

This argument has been hashed out many times .... http://davidlita.googlepages.com/copyrights

There are a couple more links on this site

Straight Talk About Copyrights

Hope the messg gets thru.

Neither of em are done, but I'm making two websites in Googlepages.
http://taadinc.googlepages.com/
http://gquigs.googlepages.com/
Blah. Maybe I don't belong on slashdot.
I'm not a web developer so why should I focus on site design?

Neither of em are done, but I'm making two websites in Googlepages.
http://taadinc.googlepages.com/
http://gquigs.googlepages.com/
Blah. Maybe I don't belong on slashdot.
I'm not a web developer so why should I focus on site design?

and this...

As someone who's relatively web-savy (I've used Dreamweaver and Flash extensively in the past and I've grown to loathe Frontpage) I've got to say that I think GooglePages is a truly awesome innovation. Sure - there's no one thing about it that's really that great. But think about the fact that they've bundled the web-hosting, domain-name, and web-creation all into 1 package, made it simple, and made it free.

This isn't just for people who don't can't learn HTML. This is for anyone who wants to get a decent site on the itnernet but simply has better thaings to do than to learn to make attractive web pages from scratch. Face it - the GooglePages look pretty sweet (especially compared to Geocities, etc.)

There are a lot of people out there who would benefit from being able to create and maintain their own webpages who simply don't have the time to learn more tech stuff. I tried it out and was immediately convinced it would work perfectly for my dad (an English professor - http://terryl.givens.googlepages.com/ ). He doesn't need SQL, PHP, etc. No messageboards, no forums, no online-shopping, no registering. Just text, images, and some pdf/doc docs.

My dad's a smart man. He could learn all about web hosting, html, etc. if he wanted to. But he's got a PhD in Comparative Literature and he's a litle busy with doing his actual job to start learning how to do tech stuff. There are lot of professionals and other busy people out there like him. They would benefit from a very simple web site. Not just simple to design, but simple to order (try explaining domain names vs. web hosting to most non-techies) and maintain. Not to mention free.

GooglePages is not rocket science - but in my opinion it goes a long way towards hitting the sweet spot where convenience and function are optimized for people who want to be able to make web pages with no serious training.

I also think it's not a bad idea for techies either, if you're too busy with other stuff. I'm working full time, I do consulting part time, I have my own small company on top of that, and I'm about to start a masters program. I don't have time to mess with a web site, but it's important to keep a presence on the web (resume stuff). GooglePages is perfect for that.

-stormin

Don't be silly. We are free to upload whatever we want using the upload function. My mum would never be able to sus out how to embed a Google Video.

more pages like this

Hey dude! Dig my new photo:

http://macbeach.googlepages.com/snap2.jpg

I think though, that we are passing, or have passed, the point where Open Source advocates should be thought of as asking for any favors, with respect to dress code, or otherwise.

As a mainframe systems programmer in the 70s I, on occasion, wore pony tails and sandals to work. It was symbolic that I was important enough to the company that I could thumb my nose at any dress codes. Those days may be over (for me anyway) but that has nothing to do with Open Source.

Companies and government organizations that want to be lead around via a ring through their nose (or lower extremities) by Microsoft should feel free to do so. Microsoft is only so glad to oblige (substitute IBM, Apple, Dell, HP or your own favorite IT dinosaur). If Open Source doesn't represent a competitive advantage to companies that adopt it, then screw Open Source. Don't do us any favors please!

As to dress, I wore my hair long and wore jeans and sandals to work because it was comfortable, not because it was fashionable, and not really for the statement that it made. I wore suits when it was called for too. These days I'm sure there are many dot-net programmers dressing like pigs and still toeing the Microsoft party-line. The two issues are unrelated, and always will be.

Essay: Straight Talk about Copyrights

Speaking of their TOS, does anybody know if they'd allow lightly commercial content? I'd like to advertise for my local extracareercular (can I invent that word?) computer work, a la http://ronanian.googlepages.com/ -- and when will they offer gDNS for virtual hosting?

Since apparently not everyone can sign up right now, I put together Creating a GooglePage sampler with a few screenshots of the interface (WYSIWYG and HTML Editor) and some of the standard page layout templates. I figure that these servers can't be slashdotted, right?

The interface is actually quite easy and straightforward, although I have not found a template that I am completely happy with yet. A problem that I find a bit ironic is that I can't use the spellcheck option from the Google Toolbar in the WYSIWYG editor window, because it simply creates a mess. But this feature is not unique to googlepages - I have the same problem with the rich-text view of the wordpress.com blog editor as well.

...but there's no decent tools or page counters and such. The layouts are basic and you don't have a lot of options, but you can edit HTML very easily and I like the save and undo features. Very simple to add pages, make links in the text, add pictures. I give it an 8 out of 10.54976It saves your work if your browser dies or other such nonsense occurs. Great for beginners or lazy folks like me. I hope they make it more functional in the future. http://j4m3z.m1113r.googlepages.com/home Check it out! =]

I mean, I couldn't justify wasting bandwidth on something like a Freedonia Tourist Site, but now, the whole world can enjoy the follies of a small country run by a ruthless dictator with a grease-paint mustache ...

No script, no style, no files other than images. HTML is crappy too. I played around with it a little at http://niels.peen.googlepages.com/

FYI, the site is http://pages.google.com/ From the site, you will learn a few things. 1) No technical knowledge is required. You can build high-quality web pages without having to learn HTML or use complex software. 2) What you see is what you'll get. You can edit your pages right in your browser, seeing exactly how your finished product will look every step along the way. 3) You dont need to worry about hosting. Your web pages will live on your own site at http://yourgmailusername.googlepages.com/

When I had signed up for gmail I included periods in my username. This works fine for email where some can send an email to either first.last@gmail.com or firstlast@gmail.com and it will reach my inbox. I had signed up for the beta only to find out that it appends my login to the url: http://first.last.googlepages.com./ This url doesn't resolve thus rendering the service completely useless.

Thanks Goggle :/

If nothing else, it provides a way to store 100meg of files and links. http://bigfoot48.googlepages.com/home

http://iwashere.googlepages.com/

(no ads, spam or whatever on the site. just some infos about googlepages.)

bye bye

I got my account a couple days ago, and it actually pretty nice. Unlike Geocities/Angelfire, The Google Page Creator is fully wysiwyg (actually, I'm not certain you even can insert HTML), and your domain is slightly cooler. I much prefer: http://eric.redmond.googlepages.com/ to http://geocities.com/athena/eredmond

Yeah, same here. O_o I'm oh so confuzzled.
 
  But then again, I'm hardcore like that.

Google doesn't seem to be placing any ads yet: http://scruffles.googlepages.com/

None as far as I ca see. My page so far: http://bjmadsen.googlepages.com/

From my experience, many ISP's embed your username somewhere in the URL to their free webspace offerings. Is this any different?

According to this page, spammers hadn't caught on to this the last time the page was updated.

I run two of my own servers but I signed up because I was looking for a simple web hosting service to recommend to a few non-technical friends. The editing features are simple enough to use. I ended up putting a boring little rant on Spirituality and Responsibility on my free googlepages account - nothing that I would put on my professional web sites, and material that is probably too boring even for my blog :-)

PC World has a cople of screen shoots. Your domain will be a your Gmail address: http://gmailusername.googlepages.com/

Don't expect this to be like Office live for a good long time.

I just threw this up real fast...

http://beveryevil.googlepages.com/ ...just linked some images relating to google's censorship in China. I like the idea of having google host it with "googlepages.com" in the url. :)

The produced pages claim to be XHTML 1.0 Strict... but it isn't! The mistakes are pretty bad such as not closing <img> and <br> tags. Also there is so ugly HTML like empty <p></p> tags that you'd think would be easily removed. Also, I don't see any support for the semantic web such as annotating your page with rel="". The battle for web-standards will be won on the web-designer front: when the tools produce correct pages that'll give impetus for everyone to produce clean pages and for all other tools to get up to snuff. Frankly, I think the best way is to create an editor that only lets you create pages that pass from valid state to valid state by producing all the necessary tags every time you add an element so that you can't forget. It can be invasive but it can also be done well.

Please mod this up so that maybe somebody at Google will notice.

PS- What if /. required all post to be valid HTML (or plain-text) before posting them? That would definitely increase awareness and encourage good HTML habits! (After that, perhaps passing a spellchecker! :P)

At the moment it does.
I hotlinked Calabro's image to Fark's scratchpad page (lifespan=2 hours) and it seems to work.

Until Google notices someone doing this, then they'll probably put a stop to it.

...if Google is evil (censoring etc etc), the article summary would have read like this:

Google has finally published their own AJAX web-publishing application called Google Page Creator. The app is getting photos, information and files you want published ; it won't publish in the standardized blog format, however. The published site is only hosted at the google domain http://gmailuser.googlepages.com/. There are a few templates and page formats to work from, and it looks almost WYSIWYG. The published HTML does have leftover fragments from editing pages repeatedly, but it could be called clean if you could look over that. For technical diehards, you could edit the HTML by hand, but who does that nowadays. As usual, there is a Google Groups page available for the service. It could take 30 seconds to get a rudimentary page online, but this will ofcourse take much longer for any real stuff.

...

I don't know if it has any relation, but when I try to open http://gmailuser.googlepages.com/ I get "Not Found Error 404"