Actually, there is such a thing. I believe Lucent made an ethernet to PCMCIA card adaptor specificaly for their Orinocco cards for adapting otherwise non-adaptable systems. Cisco also sells their Workgroup Bridge for such systems (it can actually support up to 8 devices off of a hub/switch).
This really depends on what you consider freedom. In most (if not all) European countries, you have to register if you want to move from one town/county to another. I don't really see that as being free.
Robert
Hmmm... I work at a company where VoIP is a major focus, and of our 40000 employees, approximatly 2/3rds currently use VoIP phones. When I first got mine (~1 year ago), the quality sucked, dropped calls, strange voice quality, no dialtone at times. But these problems are now gone. I don't even think about it anymore. And this is over a network where we don't yet have full QoS support (actually, we don't have any QoS support in most of the branches, but that is coming next). Still works just fine.
Robert
Correct you are, but for the fact that there are ways of sending back ACK's or NACK's, and then multicasting out the missing bits, (lather, rinse, repeat as necessary) until everyone has everything. The idea is that you move the bits almost only once to everyone. It actually works fairly well if you have a low loss network (Satellite on a clear day for example). There are a number of companies out there today that do this, and Microsoft WMT has the ability to do this as well. My favorite for file transmission is currently Digital Fountain. Wild technology that I am sure will find many many uses in the near future =]
Robert
PS - I don't work for them, but I do work with this tech.
I know, I am using broken software to begin with, but it is on my work supported computer, and I need to run Windoze to support certain apps that don't work under a real OS yet. So I try to keep the thing updated, and will usually apply "patches" to keep the system as stable as possible (even W2K bluescreens on me, less than NT4, but still....).
So, I installed the Outlook Security Patch. There is no uninstall for this. What I have now is the inability to send links from within IE, executables from my harddrive, and a bunch of other problems I haven't even un-earthed. The worst is that there is no way to back out, short of re-imaging my laptop!
Pretty amazing actually.....
Robert
I don't think this type of system is likely to hit the market in a consumer version any time soon. The process technology that can hit 60GHz is much more expensive than the standard CMOS technology that is being employed in Bluetooth, and some 802.11 (not 802.11b yet) radios, so the costs of a chipset are likely to be in the hundreds of dollars as opposed to the 20-40$ range for 802.11b or the targeted 5$ for Bluetooth in volume. Which means that your Firewireless link will likely cost a couple grand at first.
I would expect technology of this nature to drop over the next couple of years, especially as things such as SiGE chipsets, which can approach 30-40GHz drop in price. Perhaps we will see a 100Mbps firewire bridge at a reasonable price, and then 4 and 800 Mbps bridges later, especially as people get more advanced in how they handle high speed radio technology (there are some really cool advances that may help, such as software radios, and direct conversion chipsets).
Anyway, I wouldn't hold my breath for this. Just because it has been demonstrated doesn't mean that it is manufacturable.
The other announcement for a Firewire bridge on that site was for using 802.11b radios at 11MBps. If they stepped that up to 802.11a radios, then you could get 50Mbps at distances similar to the stuff NEC did a year ago with a (US) standards compliant device.
Robert
No, as I understand it, as long as you both aren't using the same resource at the same time, (ie, you aren't reading the book, and your friend is reading the copy) then that would be just like lending your friend the book. Kinda like how you are now allowed to use a copy of a computer program both at work and at home. The idea is that you are only using one copy at a time.
Robert
This has got to be closer to the fair use than services like Napster are. You have to somehow be invited to join in a share group (that invitation could be quite vague I guess), but still, you actually have to be invited at some point, which makes it more like a person letting you borrow a part of some content that they have. Now this doesn't mean that it is legal to give away copywrited works, or even that they aquired the content legally.
However, my understanding of fair use is that it is okay to make a copy, and to loan a copy, under the understanding that I am not using the copy and the original at the same time (that would be duplication).
So, if there was a way to lock the files that are in use in a share, then you could say that I am only using one version of the copy at a time. This wouldn't prevent you from using both the copy and the original, but it would be a lot closer to how this works in the non-digital world....
Robert
Actually Blockbuster and Hollywood video don't pay at all. They have profit sharing arrangements with all the studios, which is why they will get 10s of copies of new releases for free, rather than the couple that your mom & pop shops usually get.
I know I saw this before, but the article is certainly more indepth than the previous post seemed to be. It is however quite clever to have gone off and used bare die as the processor, although you can basically get the same effect if you are desparate by dropping a uC in an acid bath and eating away the plastic coating.
Robert
USB 1.0 took many years (like 4) to become commercially viable. 802.11 has taken even longer. Bluetooth is next.
When USB first became available, nothing supported it, even if it had USB on the motherboard, it didn't mean that the drivers were available, or that there was anything to plug into the port. In addition, it took a while before enough USB enabled devices became available to make it worthwhile, and the cost hit a point where people could build a mouse with it (the controller for a mouse has to be as cheap as absolutly possible). 802.11 is in the middle phase right now, where people are starting to adopt it, but the technology is still a bit expensive. But the costs there are dropping rapidly as more people deploy the technology. Bluetooth is in the beginning phase still. The silicon has just finally become available in any kind of quantity, and it is still very expensive (would you pay $400 for a Bluetooth enabled wireless mouse?). But the capabilities that the techonology will enable are imense, even though there are still some major hurdles to overcome (like the piconet overload problem). However, once the cost of the chips drops to something reasonable, I think you will see your stowaway keyboard become bluetooth enabled, and then it will work with any bluetooth enabled PDA, your cell phone, or even you PC. It is the little things like that that will really make the technology take off.
Robert
I used to work for a company that sold these devices (not at $0.01 yet, but still cheap anyway). They work by first transmitting an AC signal that charges a small capacitor. The devices then uses the stored power in the capacitor to transmit a response to the request that was modulated onto the AC power signal. These devices are able to transmit up to a couple feet if they are in a large reader (like a reader that you walk through on your way into and out of work). All new IBM laptops actually already have a chip inside that, in conjuction with a doorway reader, and the right control software, can read your badge for work, and the ID of the computer, and determine if you are allowed to take the computer through the door. If not, it flips a bit in the chip, and the computer won't boot! Great way to keep a computer from being "borrowed" from the work place. These tags might be slightly different, and the fact that they are claiming a 1cm range makes me think that the whole device including the antennae is done on chip, as opposed to the large coil antennas that the IBM solution uses. The basic radio protocols, etc. are likely the same though (HID developed it, ISO standardized it).
Robert
Did anyone ever run the default Window Manager for Domain OS (Was Apollo Computer, then HP bought them). The system had a cli at the bottom of the screen (with history, history substitutions, etc.) but the coolest feature was that you could select input from an open window, apply substitutions or even whole scripts from another window, and dump the results into yet another open window. All from a graphical UI that was similar to X, although it wasn't. I imagine something like this fits the requirements of most peoples CLI bashing (cat file | grep 'findme' > file.found) or something of the sort at least. It might be a model for further integration of more integrated GUI/CLI type functionality.
Robert
Check out http://www.aplio.com. They use the device, and were crucial in its development. Interesting application, but an expensive solution for now. Robert
Actually, 0.17um for a memory isn't that odd. Usually the feature size (like 0.18um or 0.12um) is defined as the minimum width of a transistor in a CMOS process, which is what is usually used as a benchmark. Most likely this odd size has to do with optimizations they were able to do because they are building something akin to a DRAM, which is not exactly CMOS. Robert
I'm sorry, but that is a crock of bull. We don't have microsoft to thank for faster hardware, we have one of two camps: 1) Business users. These people who work on spreadsheets all day have the never to want their calculations to get updated faster, so they push for faster processors, faster hard drives, faster memory, anything to make it run faster. I used to try to do the same thing for a reserach project I was working on, and would have loved to be able to recalculate my sheets faster, and to run my macros faster as well. Sure I was using MS-Excel, but even if they had made the software run as efficiently as possible, I would have still wanted a faster machine to run it on. 2) Game users: It seems that these users want faster machines so that they can look at 1280x1024 32bit versions of their virtual worlds, all at 30 fps with no loss of detail or glitches. All totally understandable, but it has little to nothing to do with Microsoft. Again, MS could improve the Direct-X drivers, or something along those lines, but the processing power of the machine is still key to making games go faster. Robert
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, there is such a thing. I believe Lucent made an ethernet to PCMCIA card adaptor specificaly for their Orinocco cards for adapting otherwise non-adaptable systems. Cisco also sells their Workgroup Bridge for such systems (it can actually support up to 8 devices off of a hub/switch).
Robert
What's even funnier is that the download page indicates that WindowsNT is required.
This really depends on what you consider freedom. In most (if not all) European countries, you have to register if you want to move from one town/county to another. I don't really see that as being free. Robert
Hmmm... I work at a company where VoIP is a major focus, and of our 40000 employees, approximatly 2/3rds currently use VoIP phones. When I first got mine (~1 year ago), the quality sucked, dropped calls, strange voice quality, no dialtone at times. But these problems are now gone. I don't even think about it anymore. And this is over a network where we don't yet have full QoS support (actually, we don't have any QoS support in most of the branches, but that is coming next). Still works just fine. Robert
Correct you are, but for the fact that there are ways of sending back ACK's or NACK's, and then multicasting out the missing bits, (lather, rinse, repeat as necessary) until everyone has everything. The idea is that you move the bits almost only once to everyone. It actually works fairly well if you have a low loss network (Satellite on a clear day for example). There are a number of companies out there today that do this, and Microsoft WMT has the ability to do this as well. My favorite for file transmission is currently Digital Fountain. Wild technology that I am sure will find many many uses in the near future =] Robert PS - I don't work for them, but I do work with this tech.
I know, I am using broken software to begin with, but it is on my work supported computer, and I need to run Windoze to support certain apps that don't work under a real OS yet. So I try to keep the thing updated, and will usually apply "patches" to keep the system as stable as possible (even W2K bluescreens on me, less than NT4, but still....). So, I installed the Outlook Security Patch. There is no uninstall for this. What I have now is the inability to send links from within IE, executables from my harddrive, and a bunch of other problems I haven't even un-earthed. The worst is that there is no way to back out, short of re-imaging my laptop! Pretty amazing actually..... Robert
I don't think this type of system is likely to hit the market in a consumer version any time soon. The process technology that can hit 60GHz is much more expensive than the standard CMOS technology that is being employed in Bluetooth, and some 802.11 (not 802.11b yet) radios, so the costs of a chipset are likely to be in the hundreds of dollars as opposed to the 20-40$ range for 802.11b or the targeted 5$ for Bluetooth in volume. Which means that your Firewireless link will likely cost a couple grand at first. I would expect technology of this nature to drop over the next couple of years, especially as things such as SiGE chipsets, which can approach 30-40GHz drop in price. Perhaps we will see a 100Mbps firewire bridge at a reasonable price, and then 4 and 800 Mbps bridges later, especially as people get more advanced in how they handle high speed radio technology (there are some really cool advances that may help, such as software radios, and direct conversion chipsets). Anyway, I wouldn't hold my breath for this. Just because it has been demonstrated doesn't mean that it is manufacturable. The other announcement for a Firewire bridge on that site was for using 802.11b radios at 11MBps. If they stepped that up to 802.11a radios, then you could get 50Mbps at distances similar to the stuff NEC did a year ago with a (US) standards compliant device. Robert
No, as I understand it, as long as you both aren't using the same resource at the same time, (ie, you aren't reading the book, and your friend is reading the copy) then that would be just like lending your friend the book. Kinda like how you are now allowed to use a copy of a computer program both at work and at home. The idea is that you are only using one copy at a time. Robert
This has got to be closer to the fair use than services like Napster are. You have to somehow be invited to join in a share group (that invitation could be quite vague I guess), but still, you actually have to be invited at some point, which makes it more like a person letting you borrow a part of some content that they have. Now this doesn't mean that it is legal to give away copywrited works, or even that they aquired the content legally. However, my understanding of fair use is that it is okay to make a copy, and to loan a copy, under the understanding that I am not using the copy and the original at the same time (that would be duplication). So, if there was a way to lock the files that are in use in a share, then you could say that I am only using one version of the copy at a time. This wouldn't prevent you from using both the copy and the original, but it would be a lot closer to how this works in the non-digital world.... Robert
Actually Blockbuster and Hollywood video don't pay at all. They have profit sharing arrangements with all the studios, which is why they will get 10s of copies of new releases for free, rather than the couple that your mom & pop shops usually get.
I know I saw this before, but the article is certainly more indepth than the previous post seemed to be. It is however quite clever to have gone off and used bare die as the processor, although you can basically get the same effect if you are desparate by dropping a uC in an acid bath and eating away the plastic coating. Robert
USB 1.0 took many years (like 4) to become commercially viable. 802.11 has taken even longer. Bluetooth is next. When USB first became available, nothing supported it, even if it had USB on the motherboard, it didn't mean that the drivers were available, or that there was anything to plug into the port. In addition, it took a while before enough USB enabled devices became available to make it worthwhile, and the cost hit a point where people could build a mouse with it (the controller for a mouse has to be as cheap as absolutly possible). 802.11 is in the middle phase right now, where people are starting to adopt it, but the technology is still a bit expensive. But the costs there are dropping rapidly as more people deploy the technology. Bluetooth is in the beginning phase still. The silicon has just finally become available in any kind of quantity, and it is still very expensive (would you pay $400 for a Bluetooth enabled wireless mouse?). But the capabilities that the techonology will enable are imense, even though there are still some major hurdles to overcome (like the piconet overload problem). However, once the cost of the chips drops to something reasonable, I think you will see your stowaway keyboard become bluetooth enabled, and then it will work with any bluetooth enabled PDA, your cell phone, or even you PC. It is the little things like that that will really make the technology take off. Robert
I used to work for a company that sold these devices (not at $0.01 yet, but still cheap anyway). They work by first transmitting an AC signal that charges a small capacitor. The devices then uses the stored power in the capacitor to transmit a response to the request that was modulated onto the AC power signal. These devices are able to transmit up to a couple feet if they are in a large reader (like a reader that you walk through on your way into and out of work). All new IBM laptops actually already have a chip inside that, in conjuction with a doorway reader, and the right control software, can read your badge for work, and the ID of the computer, and determine if you are allowed to take the computer through the door. If not, it flips a bit in the chip, and the computer won't boot! Great way to keep a computer from being "borrowed" from the work place. These tags might be slightly different, and the fact that they are claiming a 1cm range makes me think that the whole device including the antennae is done on chip, as opposed to the large coil antennas that the IBM solution uses. The basic radio protocols, etc. are likely the same though (HID developed it, ISO standardized it). Robert
Did anyone ever run the default Window Manager for Domain OS (Was Apollo Computer, then HP bought them). The system had a cli at the bottom of the screen (with history, history substitutions, etc.) but the coolest feature was that you could select input from an open window, apply substitutions or even whole scripts from another window, and dump the results into yet another open window. All from a graphical UI that was similar to X, although it wasn't. I imagine something like this fits the requirements of most peoples CLI bashing (cat file | grep 'findme' > file.found) or something of the sort at least. It might be a model for further integration of more integrated GUI/CLI type functionality. Robert
Check out http://www.aplio.com. They use the device, and were crucial in its development. Interesting application, but an expensive solution for now. Robert
Actually, 0.17um for a memory isn't that odd. Usually the feature size (like 0.18um or 0.12um) is defined as the minimum width of a transistor in a CMOS process, which is what is usually used as a benchmark. Most likely this odd size has to do with optimizations they were able to do because they are building something akin to a DRAM, which is not exactly CMOS. Robert
I'm sorry, but that is a crock of bull. We don't have microsoft to thank for faster hardware, we have one of two camps: 1) Business users. These people who work on spreadsheets all day have the never to want their calculations to get updated faster, so they push for faster processors, faster hard drives, faster memory, anything to make it run faster. I used to try to do the same thing for a reserach project I was working on, and would have loved to be able to recalculate my sheets faster, and to run my macros faster as well. Sure I was using MS-Excel, but even if they had made the software run as efficiently as possible, I would have still wanted a faster machine to run it on. 2) Game users: It seems that these users want faster machines so that they can look at 1280x1024 32bit versions of their virtual worlds, all at 30 fps with no loss of detail or glitches. All totally understandable, but it has little to nothing to do with Microsoft. Again, MS could improve the Direct-X drivers, or something along those lines, but the processing power of the machine is still key to making games go faster. Robert