Slashdot Mirror

http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2000/HPL-BRIMS-2 000-02.html

From reading the original paper (circa 2000) the parent is correct.

They use CUE (the Circular Unitary Ensemble on, you guessed it, unitary NxN random matrices) to define an f(n) which is the product (from j=0 to n-1) of j!/(j+n)!.

Then a(n), which they call N, is the moment of the Riemann zeta.
Conveniently, a(n) = N = f(n)*(n^2)! So write a dozen line program, and you too can compute these values.

a(1) = 1
a(2) = 2
a(3) = 42
a(4) = 24024

and so on...

They show the theory is in excellent agreement with statistical results of the first 10^20th zeros of the Riemann zeta.

Hello!

Here is an article by Jon P. Keating and Nina C. Snaith

Random Matrix Theory and zeta(1/2+it)
http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2000/HPL-BRIMS-2 000-02.pdf

Roman

Go for a HP StorageWorks Ultrium 960 Tape Drive. It stores 800 MB compressed (2:1) data.

Not cheap ones like Linspire but good solid desktops without paying the MS TAX. I bought couple for my kids.

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF04a/1245 4-64287-89301-321860-f49.html

and here more poserful ones

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF04a/1245 4-64287-89301-321860-f56.html

Not cheap ones like Linspire but good solid desktops without paying the MS TAX. I bought couple for my kids.

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF04a/1245 4-64287-89301-321860-f49.html

and here more poserful ones

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF04a/1245 4-64287-89301-321860-f56.html

Forget about Dell, they are not serious and a copy-cat joke. You can find more desktop choices here

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF04a/1245 4-64287-89301-321860-f49.html

and here

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF04a/1245 4-64287-89301-321860-f56.html

Forget about Dell, they are not serious and a copy-cat joke. You can find more desktop choices here

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF04a/1245 4-64287-89301-321860-f49.html

and here

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF04a/1245 4-64287-89301-321860-f56.html

Forget Dell, they are not serious and just a copy-cat joke. You can have more desktop choices with Linux here

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF04a/1245 4-64287-89301-321860-f49.html

  and here

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF04a/1245 4-64287-89301-321860-f56.html

Forget Dell, they are not serious and just a copy-cat joke. You can have more desktop choices with Linux here

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF04a/1245 4-64287-89301-321860-f49.html

  and here

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF04a/1245 4-64287-89301-321860-f56.html

There are thousands of libraries out there that specifically deal with either mitgating the risk over buffer overflows or detecting them such as this one and this one . Anyhow my point was that you can accomplish adequet protection against buffer overflow in C++ with the right code, and a consistent approach. Buffer overflows needn't be a factor in your choice of development language. I'm sure those architecting Vista are well aware of these issues and would have some very sophisticated C++ libraries and tools that do the job alot better than any freeware product you'll find on the net.

My original point was that you actually have no clue as to the architectural choices that have been made, and the approach taken by the developers of Vista and that your original post was based on complete speculation.

This would fit fairly nicely with the "Evidence based security" that MS is talking about, and it would include not giving evidence of higher trust than is absolutely needed for each piece.

As for your imaginings about the suitability of using .NET Code Access Security to deal with your least privilege mantra. As I have been repeatedly trying to say with little success, I understand it quite well, and NO IT DOES NOT FIT NICELY at all.... It's evidence based security that MS talks about is specifically designed to deal with the problem of how to allow untrusted applications loaded FROM A LOCATION OTHER THAN YOUR LOCAL COMPUTER, to run in a partially trusted context. It simply doesn't do what you imagine it might do.... it has no constructs that could be utilised to accomplish what you're talking about, which is the segmentation of an OS's internal components.

I will pre-empt your reply, which most undoubtedly will be... oh well then... what a hopeless job of security they've done in .NET then....

It is simplistic for a very good reason, it's purpose is singular and that is to quote my original comment...

....its part of a larger strategy which aims to see a decline of a html based applications on the internet, in favour of Microsoft .NET applications, which is probably quite similiar to Sun's vision of client side Java, and Macromedia's vision of flash. I think it's only a few years away and you'll come across web sites which may at first glance look like like old school html with a bit of flash, but are in fact XAML... a windows application.

I can hear you all saying... but Java and Flash are cross platform. Like Java and Flash, .NET to some is going to increasingly become more cross platform, it's been designed that way from the outset. But at the end of the day you can bet it will always be more fully functioned on Windows than it will ever be on Linux or Mac or some other OS. For Microsoft I think they'll be hoping this will lead to a continuing dominance the desktop market.

So basically you should really avoid critizing someone for not using a tool that you have no understanding of to tackle an objective within an architecture that no-one except those who would be bound by non-disclosure agreements would have an authority to talk about.

In short... cut the crap.

I've used an older version of this, the HP Digital Sender. It fits the bill except it comes with a heafty bill. Maybe their lease option is acceptable. Not worth the cash in my estimation, but they have a niche.

Here you go, be sure to thank HP for them.

http://www.hp.com/products1/unix/java/hpjmeter/ind ex.html
http://www.hp.com/products1/unix/java/java2/hpjtun e/index.html

Here you go, be sure to thank HP for them.

http://www.hp.com/products1/unix/java/hpjmeter/ind ex.html
http://www.hp.com/products1/unix/java/java2/hpjtun e/index.html

I don't know off hand if you can set it up to send the documents to a default location though. We have it set up so that each person logs in and chooses to either send the digital document by email or to a SMB mounted drive. The touch screen is a little slow for input (I wish you could hook up a USB keyboard to the unit) but other than that it is a great machine.

http://h50025.www5.hp.com/hpcom/hk_en/16_53_164_36 45summary.html gives the specs of the device.

Merlin.

A couple of years ago I got to play with the first model line of the HP digital sender. Even back then they were quite easy to use and were designed with professional use in mind (read: designed to cope with hundreds of pages, not just fiddling around with one or two). They are not exactly cheap, though (starting around $3000 ), but should still be less expensive than a larger copier. They are also quite handy sizewise. More info here (no, I'm neither HP nor do I have any interests otherwise in them):

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF02a/1517 9-64175-64404.html

http://www.monarchcomputer.com/Merchant2/merchant. mv
http://www.ibexpc.com/linuxsystems.html
http://gnupc.com/
http://www.sunsetsystems.com/
http://h10018.www1.hp.com/wwsolutions/linux/produc ts/clients/workstationcert.html

"You must be on crack."
Must be. After all, I'm responding to your nut job comment.

"The BIOS on all Dell systems made in the past 4-5 years, maybe longer, can now be updated from Linux. You don't even need to reboot into DOS. Did others put that kind of effort in supporting customers?"
I have news for you. HP has been doing it for few years. I believe IBM as well. Matter of fact, every Linux embedded device manufactures has been.

"That crack must be really good."
Must be. Your rampant ignorance is starting to make me dazed.

"Dell has in my opinion been doing a decent job, given the constraints."
Huh? What constratins are you talking about? Oh you mean, like outsource call centers to India? If Dell doesn't want to support Linux, that's fine. Good for them. But if Dell is going to support Linux, at least do a half way decent job of doing it. It has been less than half ass device support and inadaquate engineers filling up Dell Linux department since 2001. For instance, getting Dell's onboard SATA chipset with kernel 2.4.x was pulling teeth. I was fraustrated up to my eye balls with their engineering staffs and ended up emailing the motherboard manufacture for support which emailed me within 10 minutes with module tarball attachment.

"Everything in my 600m is supported."
I'm happy for you. I really am.

"On my PowerEdge running Fedora, I can even tell which DIMM bank has been causing parity errors."
Yeah, that's great. So can you with memtest86+. http://www.memtest86.com/ I think, it's been around for several years now. It seems, you get amuzed a lot. Install memtest86 rpm package from Fedora distro CD and run memtest-setup from Fedora and grub will give you an option to boot you right into memtest86+.

"Their engineers have been more helpful than they were required to."
Really? Did they fix your car or something? Because they are supposed to resolve issues with every items they sell.

Alright, I don't mean to bash Dell fanboys out there, but this bs has to stop. Having low expectation from vendors and manufactures for supporting Linux makes you applaude for what they are "supposed" to do, then go right ahead. Just don't bitch about same type of support for Windows installed systems.

The system measures 4.375" W x 13.125" D x 9.75" H. Power supply is internal and no external peripherals are needed.

The hp nc6140 already has a 3G ev-do verizon cell modem in it.
http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF25a/3219 57-64295-89315-321838-f33-1809460.html

I have the same chipset in my HP S7320 slimline PC and it gets horrible framerates. Major chopfest with Doom3 ... even gets choppy with WoW

Isn't the HP s7300 supposed to be a low-end (Celeron M, integrated GPU), SFF Media Center PC? I don't think we should expect good results in Doom 3 or Far Cry on a low-end PC.

For what I think is its intended purpose, I think it's a very nice PC. If you replace that dial-up modem with a TV tuner card, I think it's a much better "media center PC" than the Mac mini with external tuner and 3rd party DVR software/remote.

most modern laptops offer hi-capacity double run time batteries that'll last 6+ hours on a charge. Here's a good example. They claim 7+ hours with the 12-cell battery which is double the capacity of the 6-cell battery that comes with the laptop.

Those laptops start at $629, easily affordable.

Also you might not need the laptop for the entire duration of every class, and when I was in college I rarely had a class schedule that spanned more than a 4-hour time frame anyway, usually I had at least one hour throughout the day to take a break before the next class.

I suspect you have a truemobile with the BCM4301 chipset? Bad news, sorry you got screwed with that:) Anyway, it appears ndiswrapper works with this assuming two things:

#1. You set post mode to thorough in the bios, otherwise modprobing the ndiswrapper causes freezes.
#2. Not using the dell supplied bcmwl5a.inf. Use the one from ftp://ftp.hp.com/pub/softlib/software3/COL3601/hb- 17787-3/SP23107.exe

If anything, I'd suggest the ndiswrapper wiki:

http://ndiswrapper.sourceforge.net/mediawiki/index .php/Ubuntu

Other than that, I don't have much advice, sorry.

The box itself is a little under $350, less if you already have mouse, keyboard, speakers etc.

It also has PCI-Express when many of the cheapest Dell and HPs I've seen don't have any way to upgrade the graphics.

Other differences at this price (good and bad):

• price includes Windows XP Home (vs no OS)
• Athlon 64 3200+ (instead of Sempron)
• Socket 939 (instead of Socket 754)
• 40GB hard drive (80GB is $30 extra)
• DVD-ROM or CD-burner (DVD-burner $50 extra)

Of course, I'd still choose to build my own and I'd rather not play the mail-in rebate game.

If that were true, then why bother with OS X, BSD, SCO :-), AIX, Linux, QNX, or any other software product not from Microsoft? Besides, my granny is heating her snuggery with an HP Integrity Superdome Server.

True, but if I buy a Mac mini, and it has a newer version of OS X, then I get someone's older G4 dual processor machine, I could easily install my newer OS X on the older dual-processor machine. If I buy a MacIntel tower and later through weird circimstances get my hands on a motherboard from a better-equiped more-processor version of a MacIntel, I'll be fairly certain I'd be able to stick that better motherboard in without having to upgrade my OS. ( A contrived example, but still... ) Again, you're talking about the fact that software is bundled with the machines. Really, I'm not quibbling with the idea of unbundling the software, it's just that you came up with a particularly henious "cheap crippled single-processor OS version, more expensive dual/quad processor version" scheme that's just... well, henious.

I'm totally down with suggesting that Apple sell OS X for Intel ( with a specific list of supported hardware ) but gack, don't suggest that the right thing for *any* software company to do is sell intentionally crippled versions of their stuff to spur extra sales... that's just anti-customer on the face of it. If I buy a copy of an OS, I don't want it to use only one of the processors on my dual-processor machine, that's just horrible. At least by bundling software Apple can claim it's helping smooth out any possible problems by selling a "complete package", even if you and I see right through that...

OK, I just went to HP's website, and found one for $300 before rebate with a 1.8 GHz Sempron and a Radeon X300 chipset on the motherboard. Applying the mail-in rebate to a RAM upgrade brought it up to 512M, though when I bought my mini that was extra price. That's a better system than my Windows "game machine" (all it runs is games... I don't trust Windows with anything that matters), and THAT has significantly better performance across the board than my mini.

It clearly doesn't matter to you, and I don't know why you can't be bothered to provide links when they're right there, but check the details. That's still a "shared memory" system. It's not vram, it's not indepentant from the system RAM, it's *shared memory*. Ugh. If you don't care, that's fine, but I'd rather have an independant bit of vram even on a *slightly* slower bus... and that X300 is just *slightly* faster than the 9200 in core clock, and without doing a benchmark I'm not going to have to wonder if using a shared memory system isn't going to slow it down a bit in real-life tasks. I just... gack... if it's for any real gaming use, I'm not going to be using that on-board video if I can help it.

True, but if I buy a Mac mini, and it has a newer version of OS X, then I get someone's older G4 dual processor machine, I could easily install my newer OS X on the older dual-processor machine. If I buy a MacIntel tower and later through weird circimstances get my hands on a motherboard from a better-equiped more-processor version of a MacIntel, I'll be fairly certain I'd be able to stick that better motherboard in without having to upgrade my OS. ( A contrived example, but still... ) Again, you're talking about the fact that software is bundled with the machines. Really, I'm not quibbling with the idea of unbundling the software, it's just that you came up with a particularly henious "cheap crippled single-processor OS version, more expensive dual/quad processor version" scheme that's just... well, henious.

I'm totally down with suggesting that Apple sell OS X for Intel ( with a specific list of supported hardware ) but gack, don't suggest that the right thing for *any* software company to do is sell intentionally crippled versions of their stuff to spur extra sales... that's just anti-customer on the face of it. If I buy a copy of an OS, I don't want it to use only one of the processors on my dual-processor machine, that's just horrible. At least by bundling software Apple can claim it's helping smooth out any possible problems by selling a "complete package", even if you and I see right through that...

OK, I just went to HP's website, and found one for $300 before rebate with a 1.8 GHz Sempron and a Radeon X300 chipset on the motherboard. Applying the mail-in rebate to a RAM upgrade brought it up to 512M, though when I bought my mini that was extra price. That's a better system than my Windows "game machine" (all it runs is games... I don't trust Windows with anything that matters), and THAT has significantly better performance across the board than my mini.

It clearly doesn't matter to you, and I don't know why you can't be bothered to provide links when they're right there, but check the details. That's still a "shared memory" system. It's not vram, it's not indepentant from the system RAM, it's *shared memory*. Ugh. If you don't care, that's fine, but I'd rather have an independant bit of vram even on a *slightly* slower bus... and that X300 is just *slightly* faster than the 9200 in core clock, and without doing a benchmark I'm not going to have to wonder if using a shared memory system isn't going to slow it down a bit in real-life tasks. I just... gack... if it's for any real gaming use, I'm not going to be using that on-board video if I can help it.

If iDefense (Verisign) can come up with $10K per critical Microsoft Windows flaw, why can't HP (or any other party interested in a secure environment) come up with money to support the development of applications for their own, very secure operating system: HP OpenVMS? Why does this industry focus so much on Microsoft Windows and totally ignore alternatives?

# RMS vs (MS) RMS

VMS Record Management Services
http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/731FINAL/4523/4523pr o_contents.html

Must be a Cal grad...

Yup.. and apparently you didn't graduate at all.

I wonder if the shareholders have a case for mismanagement?

If what you want is stability, you must replace the memory manager. This requires no change to your code; there are several plug-in replacements. You can use a conservative garbage collector to get rid of memory leaks. Another possibility -- in the self-plug department -- is to use DieHard, which eliminates a wide range of memory errors and even defends against heap overflows and other heap corruption. Pick whichever works best for your needs, but pick one. You will not get stability and reliability with C++ if you stick with the default memory manager.

No, it is not that simple. See this: http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Hans_Boehm/gc/issue s.html

You cannot write highly stable code in C++, due to design flaws in the language. For this reason, the FAA doesn't allow C++ for use in aircraft systems. You can improve the situation with the use of a garbage collector though, but if stability and safety is critical, then you should use ANSI C. See this: http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Hans_Boehm/gc/issue s.html

http://h20223.www2.hp.com/NonStopComputing/cache/7 6715-0-0-0-121.html

http://h20223.www2.hp.com/NonStopComputing/downloa ds/KernelOpSystem_datasheet.pdf

Is it Digital VMS? Is it Digital OSF/1-Tru64? [OSF/1 is mentioned on page 9 of the PDF document.] Is it some flavor of HPUX?

Or is it something else entirely?

And, parenthetically, I'd ask: Why do the droids in Sales-N-Marketing insist on publishing this crap that doesn't even begin to answer the most fundamental questions their customers might have?

http://h20223.www2.hp.com/NonStopComputing/cache/7 6715-0-0-0-121.html

http://h20223.www2.hp.com/NonStopComputing/downloa ds/KernelOpSystem_datasheet.pdf

Is it Digital VMS? Is it Digital OSF/1-Tru64? [OSF/1 is mentioned on page 9 of the PDF document.] Is it some flavor of HPUX?

Or is it something else entirely?

And, parenthetically, I'd ask: Why do the droids in Sales-N-Marketing insist on publishing this crap that doesn't even begin to answer the most fundamental questions their customers might have?

Two additional points:
1.) You don't need to replace all the python code.
2.) Use a garbage collector like http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Hans_Boehm/gc/ for your C++ code.

You can use the Boehm garbage collector to eliminate a huge class of typical memory errors:

http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Hans_Boehm/gc/

This isn't necessarily something you'd have to design around, either. You can add it later.

The problem with finding prior art is that you need to find one piece of prior art that covers all the aspects of a claim. You can't mosaic them. The prior art we used in trial was the following:

• A. Fox, E. Brewer, "GloMop: Global Mobile Computing By Proxy", Position paper, (Sep 1995), Used to be available from: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~fox/glomop.

• Joel Bartlett, Experience with a Wireless World Wide Web client, Digital WRL lab Technical Note TN46

• Stefan Gessler and Andreas Kotulla. PDAs as mobile WWW browsers. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, Vol. 28, No. 1-2, 1995, pp. 53-59.

• Joshi, Anupam, Weerasinghe, R., Mcdemott, S., Tan, B., Bernhardt, G. and Weerawarana, S., "Mowser: Mobile Platforms and Web Browsers'', Bulletin of the TCOS, IEEE Computer Society.

The general concept was clearly obvious back then. But the patent had some specific details that Inpro claimed were not obvious. I believe they were obvious to someone in the field in 1996. Clearly the judge agreed.

The people you know with 64 chips are idiots then. If you own a copy of Windows XP 64, you should have no problem finding 64 bit drivers for most modern hardware, with the exception of some older HP printers:

http://www.nvidia.com/object/winxp64_81.98.html

http://www.nvidia.com/object/nforce_nf4_winxp64_am d_6.69.html

https://support.ati.com/ics/support/default.asp?de ptID=894&task=knowledge&folderID=367

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/pscmisc/vac/us/en/s m/network_software/universalprintdriver_overview.h tml

And for the uneducated and/or ignorant, the 64 bit version of windows STILL RUNS 32 BIT APPS JUST FINE. The only time an app may not function is if it communicates to a hardware device like a printer or CD burner. Which, by the way, CD burning apps like Nero 6 & 7 support just fine. Also, McAfee has a 64 bit verison of their antivirus software, which is included in the SAME installer as the 32 bit version, so no need for 2 seperate installers. I won't even got into detail about all the 64 bit linux distributions which have been out for several years now.

If you have a 64 bit chip and you couldn't find drivers for modern based hardware, you didn't try hard enough, or at all for that matter. Windows Vista will be 64 bit by default, yet include a legacy 32 bit version as well that won't have all the features of the 64 bit version, such as requiring signed drivers. All you have to do is google for the info, and you will find it.

What is sorely missing, though, is the way to crop and do 90, 180, 270 degree rotation without decoding/encoding (and thus without additional loss of quality). The jpegtran part of the free JPEG-distribution can do this, but the library itself remains too low-level and all graphics applications I know use the lossy decoding/encoding method.

Hopefully, once the patent-limbo is resolved, the "reference implementation" currently used by almost everybody will get some innovation into it. And I don't mind the patents themselves -- it is just this one's "we might decide to enforce it," that irks me.

Just going through the features tour IE7 appears to have a preference pane for the search box, you can easily choose which search engine to use yourself. I think this is a great idea. I requested the same thing of Apple/Safari through their feedback mechanism, but nothing ever came of it - I'm british so I would rather use google.co.uk or uk.yahoo.com than the google.com that Safari defaults to.

I only use IE6 for compatibility testing at the moment (via Virtual PC) it has a really annoying habit of requiring the 'http://' prefix to urls in the address bar, or sending you to search.msn.com, while other browsers will accept 'www.slashdot.org' and add the prefix themselves. I hope this is changed in IE7 as my next machine will almost certainly be one of HP's Ubuntu laptops which will be set to dual boot with XP.

Camino still has the prettiest buttons :-)

"Google isn't fun anymore (tm). Unclear strategy. Bows for dictators. New pathetic services like Google Video.

What's next?"

Perhaps Google could hire Carly Fiorina as CEO and buy back Compaq?

Time to short Googles over priced stock!

Truth is Yellow Dog has always been a PowerPC distribution and that's where it is good at. On the x86 side of things there are plenty of distributions to choose from, including Suse and Redhat. Doing a search for "EFI Linux" with Google gives me the following links amongst others:

    - http://sourceforge.net/projects/elilo
    - http://docs.hp.com/en/5991-1247/ch05s21.html
    - Search for EFI at RedHat

From reading the above sites it would seem that if you are ready to diverge from a standard install, then it should already be possible to run Linux on EFI based Macs. Linux has the biggest advantage of having code which is easily modifiable by whoever has an itch to scratch, whereas MS-Windows depends on Microsoft having a business case for doing so.

In fact this Sunday I'll be off to Melbourne for another course of a week, the second admin course for HPOV Performance Insight. Without the training I can't imaigine being able to deploy and support this quite complex (and not overly intuitive) product, it would in fact be negligent to have me do so.

I'd reccommend taking your need for education to your managemnt quite firmly, and if they won't budge look elsewhere - not just because of this particular issue, but because such behaviour is indicative of a lack of management vision IMO. If they can't outlay some cash now to train for the future it doesn't sound like they'll have much of a future to worry about - at least not a very interesting high growth one.

It makes it tough if you don't know this ahead of time, but really with 802.11g, you just need to pick the right card and hope. Unfortunately none of this is really very well documented.

I know, what a shame no one has done any useful documentation!

You aparently didn't come across the biggest Linux wireless site that I know of.

http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Jean_Tourrilhes/Lin ux/

The only wireless device that I haven't managed to make work is the Broadcom BM4306 that came with my HP zv6000. That's not a failure of the Linux drivers. There is a stupid soft button to enable the antenna, and no one has figured it out for this particular zv6000 subrevision. All my other wireless cards work fine in the PCMCIA/PCCARD slot.

As I've found, if all else fails, get a wireless bridge (like a Linksys WET54G), and plug it into your ethernet port. Sticking on one extra device is a lot easier than switching to Windows. :)

You mean like this?

Nice to see some progress in the Linux arena. But neither the quoted article nor the OpenVZ web site list too many alternative solutions. Here is one from another world (non-unix): OpenVMS Galaxy by Digital (now HP). Galaxy is part of OpenVMS, since more than half a decade.

http://h71000.www7.hp.com/wizard/wiz_3191.html (check the date - 1999!)
http://www.s-and-b.ru/syshlp/vms_html/6512/6512pro .html (an early online documentation, hosted by on a non-Digital/HP system)
http://h71000.www7.hp.com/availability/index.html (Lots of information about High Availability/Disaster Tolerance)

"All the world's a stage" or was it "All the galaxy's a stage?"
http://scifi.about.com/library/weekly/aa022800b.ht m

Nice to see some progress in the Linux arena. But neither the quoted article nor the OpenVZ web site list too many alternative solutions. Here is one from another world (non-unix): OpenVMS Galaxy by Digital (now HP). Galaxy is part of OpenVMS, since more than half a decade.

http://h71000.www7.hp.com/wizard/wiz_3191.html (check the date - 1999!)
http://www.s-and-b.ru/syshlp/vms_html/6512/6512pro .html (an early online documentation, hosted by on a non-Digital/HP system)
http://h71000.www7.hp.com/availability/index.html (Lots of information about High Availability/Disaster Tolerance)

"All the world's a stage" or was it "All the galaxy's a stage?"
http://scifi.about.com/library/weekly/aa022800b.ht m

Nice to see some progress in the Linux arena. But neither the quoted article nor the OpenVZ web site list too many alternative solutions. Here is one from another world (non-unix): OpenVMS Galaxy by Digital (now HP). Galaxy is part of OpenVMS, since more than half a decade.

http://h71000.www7.hp.com/wizard/wiz_3191.html (check the date - 1999!)
http://www.s-and-b.ru/syshlp/vms_html/6512/6512pro .html (an early online documentation, hosted by on a non-Digital/HP system)
http://h71000.www7.hp.com/availability/index.html (Lots of information about High Availability/Disaster Tolerance)

"All the world's a stage" or was it "All the galaxy's a stage?"
http://scifi.about.com/library/weekly/aa022800b.ht m

The new MacTels are quite reasonably priced if you consider the fact that they are high-quality machines (more like Alienware or Sony than Dell or HP). The new iMac 2.0 GHz is a great deal, for example. For $1675, you get a Intel Core Duo T2500 along with a 250GB disk, 512MB of RAM, and a Radeon X1600 Pro 256MB graphics card. AnandTech's article showed the T2500 to be comparable to a X2 4400+ in integer and an X2 3800+ in floating-point. Let's compromise and choose the in-between model, the X2 4200+. So take an HP Pavillion, spec it out with comparable CPU, memory, disk, and GPU, you get this here. It's $1250, after a $150 mail-in-rebate. The cheapest price for a monitor comparable to the iMac 2.0 GHz's 20" LCD is for the 2005FPW, which can be had for $450 on Dell's site (though down to the upper $300's if you get a good deal). Even if you low-ball it and say you get the LCD for $350, you've already hit $1600 for the HP, and the iMac is likely a much more nicely-built machine. Yes, there is a tradeoff here between the iMac's sleek design and the HP's expandability, but given the two end up being the same price, its really hard to argue that the iMac is overpriced.

Apple PC's have been overpriced for awhile. My PowerMac G5 is quite overpriced --- its roughly the same in performance is the new iMac, but cost $1000 more without a monitor (and about $1000 more than the comparable X2 PC I have). This particular run of Apple computers, however, is quite reasonable. I don't know if that will last, but it just might.