Maybe not. H.264 gives good quality for 720x480/24p at 1.5Mbps, 1280x720/24p at 4Mbps, and 1920x1080/24p at about 7Mbps. This means that bitrate is roughly linear for pixel count.
Extrapolating to 3840x2160/24p, then you could get good quality at 25-30Mbps. This is about what 1920x1080/24p Blu-Ray movies currently use, and it's usually extreme overkill (because they generally use a fairly constant bitrate, instead of varying it as the picture needs it).
Although the disc authoring standard would have to change (as the resolutions available on Blu-Ray are fixed by the standard), you could still use the same 50GB Blu-Ray disc. This might lead to more titles with extras on a second disc, but would allow you to put a 2-1/2 hour movie on the disc at over 35Mbps average video bitrate.
Firefox, every time I try it and despite that it's memory management is "getting better", still eventually uses several GB of ram and requires that I completely exit and restart before it's freed.
This was a big problem for me as well, but around version 15 or so, it looks like Mozilla finally fixed it.
I can now do my normal browsing and after a week, Firefox is using about 500-700MB and works fine. Before, it would be up to 1GB in a day or so, and would become sluggish and even completely non-responsive at times. I do run with NoScript and AdBlock Plus, so Flash doesn't start unless I explicitly click on the object, so YMMV if you have different browsing habits.
Fragmented files take more space on the disk than contiguous ones and require more time to manage them.
Only a tiny amount more space (in the allocation table) is used, even for the most fragmented of files. The actual data doesn't take any more space regardless of fragmentation.
As for speed, again it is insignificant compared to disk access and data read times (even on SSDs). Even at 600MB/sec (pretty much the limit of SSDs today), a 4KB read takes about as long as executing 50 CPU instructions at 3GHz. If the allocation table is cached in RAM (which it very likely will be), then even requiring a lookup and block location calculation for every block could be done without slowing down the disk throughput. With even just some of the file being contiguous (so that you have 100-200 blocks in each extent), you'd have time for 5000-10000 CPU instructions (and double or triple that with even more real world disk speeds), which is far more than enough to do the job.
You don't need to defrag a filesystem on an SSD, because the purpose of defragging is to remove the need for random seeks, which are slow on a spinning magnetic disk.
Since the penalty for an extra random read on even a "slow" SSD is around 0.1ms (with fast drives around 0.03ms), even a horribly fragmented file wouldn't make much difference compared to "read X consecutive blocks". For example, if every block required a separate "read" command because the file was completely fragmented, it would take nearly 100 blocks before you'd hit the penalty for a single extra seek on a mechanical hard drive.
And, nearly all that penalty is for the OS and hardware, because every read on an SSD is really random with respect to where the data really resides (because of the wear-leveling algorithms). So, even if you read 20 consecutive disk blocks, you might be reading from 20 different areas in the flash memory.
Last thing I'd check is your jumbo frames setting.
Already said that it is on.
And it probably only buys you 5-10% more speed, anyway, assuming you are getting decent overall speeds.
If you are down less 20MB/sec (like these benchmarks), you can get a 20-50% boost. Without jumbo frames, I run a solid 40MB/sec copying from one Windows share to another on my network, and jumbo frames couldn't get me over 50MB/sec, while mis-matches between jumbo/non-jumbo config dropped me to less than 20MB/sec at times.
Note that if I eliminate the slowest hard drive in the transfer by reading from a very fast 8-drive RAID array across the network to RAM in another machine, the speeds jump to nearly 80MB/sec. Protocal makes a huge difference, as using ftp (which has less overhead than SMB) I get 95MB/sec (from a 4-disk array to the fast 8-drive array). Yes, that's still below the 125MB/sec theoretical max, but I'm still reading from spinning drives and this not a test environment where the machines are doing nothing but a benchmark test.
Anybody else experience stability issues with USB 3.0 or is just me.
I only had an issue when I plugged two USB 3.0 devices into the same controller. When they were plugged into separate "root hubs" (use "View devices by connection" in Windows device manager), they worked fine.
Basically, I was trying to copy files from one external drive to another, and it kept dying just as you experienced. Now, I get close to 100MB/sec transfer speeds.
Wikipedia has pictures, but basically says A is the same but B is larger and won't fit in older B slots.
This is one of those cases where Wikipedia hasn't kept up with the real world, because I haven't found any USB 3.0 device (which is where the B-connector resides) that uses anything but a micro-B connector, which is completely different from the old B connector.
On the other hand, the A connector/plug backward compatibility works perfectly, as I can plug a USB 2.0 cable into a 3.0 connector on my PC, or a 3.0 cable into a 2.0 connector.
I would rather not have power for 5 or more SATA drives running through my motherboard just to make a unified connector the standard. Same goes for RAID cards (especially the 8+ port ones).
Or SAS/SATA port expanders, which currently only need a very small amount of power (as they are just re-routing the low-power data signals), but with built-in power, you could even go beyond the 75W limit for graphic card draw from the slot, never mind the 35W "other" card limit.
The Asus Transformer line of tablets are great "mini-notebooks".
One of the big advantages is that you can buy the tablet, and if you don't need the keyboard, you don't pay for it. If you do, you can get the Asus dock version, or any bluetooth keyboard. With the dock, though, you get a full-size SD card slot and full-sized USB connectors, so you can easily move data (like photos mentioned in the summary) to/from other devices. The only real negative I have seen on the latest versions (which fix the poor GPS reception of earlier versions) is that they don't support 5GHz for 802.1n.
3) You didn't want to/need to spend $$ registering a domain
You only need to register a domain if you want it in the public DNS space.
For something completely in-house, you can set your DNS server to be authoritative for any domain. The only caveat is that if it is a domain in the public DNS space, you won't know it. You would use this to do split DNS, so hosts resolve to the private IP address for internal clients, while the outside world sees the public IPs. Throw in some sub-domains that are only available inside (*.dev.example.com, *.stage.example.com, etc.), and things just work.
The Police, when presented with the train of events, deduced that the drugs were in the milkshake.
And, ignoring what you think about the ethics of what the teenagers did, it really disturbs me that one of the charges against them was "willfully mingling a pharmaceutical into food". This kind of wording of laws is why we have last-minute attempts to fix the "fiscal cliff", and people getting charged for "hacking' when they don't read a website user agreement.
I have no problem with a charge of "assault" for what they did.
Nobody is sending a Petabyte to every theater in the country, and much less to every home. Once the movie is finished a final copy is compressed and sent to theaters and the disc authoring house.
Even for 48fps 3D, it would require less than 2TB/hour of uncompressed 4:2:2 video (at 1920x1080), so although nobody is shipping a petabyte around, it's possible that the uncompressed data is being shipped around.
If you think of Blu-Ray discs, they're not locked to 30/60 (or 25/50) either, like older generations of video.
Actually, they are, although 24fps is also an option. But, no other frame rate is legal, so no hardware player will support anything but the required rates, which means no one will produce content at any other frame rates for Blu-Ray.
It would be easy for some of the local sports channels (like NESN or YES) to do this. Others would probably insist on the same package deals that they push on the cable companies (so, perhaps, Viacom would let you stream all of their channels for $9.99/month).
The problem is that number would likely be $19.99/month, while regional sports channels would want around $10/month, and Disney would wan't $29.99/month for all it's content (ESPN, etc.).
Even with "low" prices like $10/month for all of Viacom, you'd end up at pretty much the same prices as today if you wanted just one channel from a content owner, since you'd have Universal, Disney, Discovery networks, etc., each wanting their $10. Although you might be able to get away with $40/month or so if you wanted stuff from mostly the same content owners, it's likely that a typical family would be at the $70-90/month price point, which is pretty much the same as today.
The other problem with this would be that you would need a box that every content provider would be happy with, which likely would mean no software choices, and possible restrictions on viewing (like "show only available live or 24-72 hours after live").
just like pitchers gain poor ERAs due to bad defense that allows easily defended ground balls to become runs scored
By definition, and "easily defended ground ball" that does not result in an out is an error, and thus the runs that result from it are likely unearned. Since "ERA" is the earned run average, that pitcher's statistic generally would not be hurt by such plays.
And, sabremetrics has plenty of stats that deal with such situations, like component ERA, defense-independent ERA, and even ERA+ (which adjusts for the ballpark).
My video is almost all 720p and 1080p and the audio mostly flac with a few mp3. BSPlayer on Android handles all of this fine (with the exception of 1080p on my wife's older Galaxy S), including connecting to the SMB share.
If you are connecting to the share, you aren't using any streaming server, and thus eliminate most of the issues. But, you still aren't using HD audio formats, and likely aren't using high bitrates for video.
Likewise, the sibling post mentioned ripped DVDs, which aren't a big deal today even if you keep the full DVD and don't recode. But, keeping HD quality that looks good on a 60" or larger TV and sounds good on a 7.1 speaker system while also being able to play the same file on a phone or tablet is not easy to do.
Um, the point is that you can't both make the files available to the backup job while making them not available to anyone who has the SSH key that the backup job uses.
Using chroot and mounting stuff can limit your exposure, but if you want to back up anything sensitive, it has to be visible to the login that the SSH key uses.
How does it decode DTS-HD and Dolby TrueHD? How does it handle multiple audio streams? Does it support subtitles (especially Blu-Ray PGS)?
My Blu-Ray rips only have video re-coded for reduced size...everything else is as it appeared on the disc, so without support for these things, it wouldn't work for me. As I said in another post, most on-the-fly transcoding solutions are fine as long as you only care about least common denominator quality. If you want high quality for your 60" HDTV and 7.1 surround system, then most of the DLNA solutions won't work.
Get a decent one and it'll stream media to your digital devices without configuration.
As long as you don't care about least common denominator quality, this is true. But, if you have Blu-Ray quality media as the source, it's unlikely that you can get full quality at devices that support it while also getting something that works on lesser devices. Transcoding on the fly sounds like a good idea, but decoding full HD video and audio and then re-encoding it (even at a much reduced resolution) requires a lot more processor than in the typical off-the-shelf NAS.
If you don't want to watch video on cell phones or tablets, just store it at full quality that works with your hardware media streamers, and PCs will be able to handle it (as will some tablets). For audio, store two copies...lossless (FLAC is best) and whatever MP3 quality you want. This doesn't waste much space, as the MP3s won't take up much room when you are talking about a multi-terabyte server. Then, just read files directly through shares, or configure your DLNA server to never transcode anything.
I'm sure it worked well when there were only a few people doing it, buying the collector's edition sets and selling them when they're no longer available, but once this kind of information about an imbalance in the market hits the news (as it just has) then you'll see a whole bunch of people pile into the market.
Then, too, if the copyrighted Lego bricks are not made in the US, soon it might not be possible to re-sell them, and thus they will be worthless as an investment.
And I had actually looked at them at full price earlier because CFLs die so quickly at the toilet and bathroom.
I have had 4 CFL globes in my bathroom for nearly 4 years, and have replaced only one bulb so far. In general, CFLs seem to have a worst case of about 5-6 times the life of an incandescent in the same fixture. I also like the fact that I can get more light when the fixture is wattage/heat limited.
Other than not being able to use dimmers, the biggest complaint I have with CFLs is that now it's tough to buy just one or two without paying a huge premium. The multi-bulb packs are sometimes so much cheaper per bulb that it's often worth it to just buy the pack. But, since they don't burn out very quickly, I end up with a fairly large collection of each type of bulb.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, we'll need better CODECS to handle 4k
Maybe not. H.264 gives good quality for 720x480/24p at 1.5Mbps, 1280x720/24p at 4Mbps, and 1920x1080/24p at about 7Mbps. This means that bitrate is roughly linear for pixel count.
Extrapolating to 3840x2160/24p, then you could get good quality at 25-30Mbps. This is about what 1920x1080/24p Blu-Ray movies currently use, and it's usually extreme overkill (because they generally use a fairly constant bitrate, instead of varying it as the picture needs it).
Although the disc authoring standard would have to change (as the resolutions available on Blu-Ray are fixed by the standard), you could still use the same 50GB Blu-Ray disc. This might lead to more titles with extras on a second disc, but would allow you to put a 2-1/2 hour movie on the disc at over 35Mbps average video bitrate.
Firefox, every time I try it and despite that it's memory management is "getting better", still eventually uses several GB of ram and requires that I completely exit and restart before it's freed.
This was a big problem for me as well, but around version 15 or so, it looks like Mozilla finally fixed it.
I can now do my normal browsing and after a week, Firefox is using about 500-700MB and works fine. Before, it would be up to 1GB in a day or so, and would become sluggish and even completely non-responsive at times. I do run with NoScript and AdBlock Plus, so Flash doesn't start unless I explicitly click on the object, so YMMV if you have different browsing habits.
Fragmented files take more space on the disk than contiguous ones and require more time to manage them.
Only a tiny amount more space (in the allocation table) is used, even for the most fragmented of files. The actual data doesn't take any more space regardless of fragmentation.
As for speed, again it is insignificant compared to disk access and data read times (even on SSDs). Even at 600MB/sec (pretty much the limit of SSDs today), a 4KB read takes about as long as executing 50 CPU instructions at 3GHz. If the allocation table is cached in RAM (which it very likely will be), then even requiring a lookup and block location calculation for every block could be done without slowing down the disk throughput. With even just some of the file being contiguous (so that you have 100-200 blocks in each extent), you'd have time for 5000-10000 CPU instructions (and double or triple that with even more real world disk speeds), which is far more than enough to do the job.
SSDs might not, but the filesystem does.
You don't need to defrag a filesystem on an SSD, because the purpose of defragging is to remove the need for random seeks, which are slow on a spinning magnetic disk.
Since the penalty for an extra random read on even a "slow" SSD is around 0.1ms (with fast drives around 0.03ms), even a horribly fragmented file wouldn't make much difference compared to "read X consecutive blocks". For example, if every block required a separate "read" command because the file was completely fragmented, it would take nearly 100 blocks before you'd hit the penalty for a single extra seek on a mechanical hard drive.
And, nearly all that penalty is for the OS and hardware, because every read on an SSD is really random with respect to where the data really resides (because of the wear-leveling algorithms). So, even if you read 20 consecutive disk blocks, you might be reading from 20 different areas in the flash memory.
I can't find cables with the new micro-B connector on monoprice.
Since the device should come with a cable with the micro-B, you can just use an extension with the original cable.
You can also get decent prices at Newegg for full replacement cables. Remember to change the sort to "Lowest Price".
Last thing I'd check is your jumbo frames setting.
Already said that it is on.
And it probably only buys you 5-10% more speed, anyway, assuming you are getting decent overall speeds.
If you are down less 20MB/sec (like these benchmarks), you can get a 20-50% boost. Without jumbo frames, I run a solid 40MB/sec copying from one Windows share to another on my network, and jumbo frames couldn't get me over 50MB/sec, while mis-matches between jumbo/non-jumbo config dropped me to less than 20MB/sec at times.
Note that if I eliminate the slowest hard drive in the transfer by reading from a very fast 8-drive RAID array across the network to RAM in another machine, the speeds jump to nearly 80MB/sec. Protocal makes a huge difference, as using ftp (which has less overhead than SMB) I get 95MB/sec (from a 4-disk array to the fast 8-drive array). Yes, that's still below the 125MB/sec theoretical max, but I'm still reading from spinning drives and this not a test environment where the machines are doing nothing but a benchmark test.
Anybody else experience stability issues with USB 3.0 or is just me.
I only had an issue when I plugged two USB 3.0 devices into the same controller. When they were plugged into separate "root hubs" (use "View devices by connection" in Windows device manager), they worked fine.
Basically, I was trying to copy files from one external drive to another, and it kept dying just as you experienced. Now, I get close to 100MB/sec transfer speeds.
Wikipedia has pictures, but basically says A is the same but B is larger and won't fit in older B slots.
This is one of those cases where Wikipedia hasn't kept up with the real world, because I haven't found any USB 3.0 device (which is where the B-connector resides) that uses anything but a micro-B connector, which is completely different from the old B connector.
On the other hand, the A connector/plug backward compatibility works perfectly, as I can plug a USB 2.0 cable into a 3.0 connector on my PC, or a 3.0 cable into a 2.0 connector.
I would rather not have power for 5 or more SATA drives running through my motherboard just to make a unified connector the standard. Same goes for RAID cards (especially the 8+ port ones).
Or SAS/SATA port expanders, which currently only need a very small amount of power (as they are just re-routing the low-power data signals), but with built-in power, you could even go beyond the 75W limit for graphic card draw from the slot, never mind the 35W "other" card limit.
The Asus Transformer line of tablets are great "mini-notebooks".
One of the big advantages is that you can buy the tablet, and if you don't need the keyboard, you don't pay for it. If you do, you can get the Asus dock version, or any bluetooth keyboard. With the dock, though, you get a full-size SD card slot and full-sized USB connectors, so you can easily move data (like photos mentioned in the summary) to/from other devices. The only real negative I have seen on the latest versions (which fix the poor GPS reception of earlier versions) is that they don't support 5GHz for 802.1n.
3) You didn't want to/need to spend $$ registering a domain
You only need to register a domain if you want it in the public DNS space.
For something completely in-house, you can set your DNS server to be authoritative for any domain. The only caveat is that if it is a domain in the public DNS space, you won't know it. You would use this to do split DNS, so hosts resolve to the private IP address for internal clients, while the outside world sees the public IPs. Throw in some sub-domains that are only available inside (*.dev.example.com, *.stage.example.com, etc.), and things just work.
The Police, when presented with the train of events, deduced that the drugs were in the milkshake.
And, ignoring what you think about the ethics of what the teenagers did, it really disturbs me that one of the charges against them was "willfully mingling a pharmaceutical into food". This kind of wording of laws is why we have last-minute attempts to fix the "fiscal cliff", and people getting charged for "hacking' when they don't read a website user agreement.
I have no problem with a charge of "assault" for what they did.
Nobody is sending a Petabyte to every theater in the country, and much less to every home. Once the movie is finished a final copy is compressed and sent to theaters and the disc authoring house.
Even for 48fps 3D, it would require less than 2TB/hour of uncompressed 4:2:2 video (at 1920x1080), so although nobody is shipping a petabyte around, it's possible that the uncompressed data is being shipped around.
If you think of Blu-Ray discs, they're not locked to 30/60 (or 25/50) either, like older generations of video.
Actually, they are, although 24fps is also an option. But, no other frame rate is legal, so no hardware player will support anything but the required rates, which means no one will produce content at any other frame rates for Blu-Ray.
It would be easy for some of the local sports channels (like NESN or YES) to do this. Others would probably insist on the same package deals that they push on the cable companies (so, perhaps, Viacom would let you stream all of their channels for $9.99/month).
The problem is that number would likely be $19.99/month, while regional sports channels would want around $10/month, and Disney would wan't $29.99/month for all it's content (ESPN, etc.).
Even with "low" prices like $10/month for all of Viacom, you'd end up at pretty much the same prices as today if you wanted just one channel from a content owner, since you'd have Universal, Disney, Discovery networks, etc., each wanting their $10. Although you might be able to get away with $40/month or so if you wanted stuff from mostly the same content owners, it's likely that a typical family would be at the $70-90/month price point, which is pretty much the same as today.
The other problem with this would be that you would need a box that every content provider would be happy with, which likely would mean no software choices, and possible restrictions on viewing (like "show only available live or 24-72 hours after live").
just like pitchers gain poor ERAs due to bad defense that allows easily defended ground balls to become runs scored
By definition, and "easily defended ground ball" that does not result in an out is an error, and thus the runs that result from it are likely unearned. Since "ERA" is the earned run average, that pitcher's statistic generally would not be hurt by such plays.
And, sabremetrics has plenty of stats that deal with such situations, like component ERA, defense-independent ERA, and even ERA+ (which adjusts for the ballpark).
BTW notice how you never see "wish lists" from iPad users.
Of course not, since:
Plex is an xbmc fork. The frontend is open source. It only transcodes for portable devices, which is a nice feature.
Which means it can't handle any of the HD audio formats without using the alpha that isn't quite ready for prime time.
Even so, it will take a lot of CPU power to transcode when the source is uncompressed Blu-Ray.
My video is almost all 720p and 1080p and the audio mostly flac with a few mp3. BSPlayer on Android handles all of this fine (with the exception of 1080p on my wife's older Galaxy S), including connecting to the SMB share.
If you are connecting to the share, you aren't using any streaming server, and thus eliminate most of the issues. But, you still aren't using HD audio formats, and likely aren't using high bitrates for video.
Likewise, the sibling post mentioned ripped DVDs, which aren't a big deal today even if you keep the full DVD and don't recode. But, keeping HD quality that looks good on a 60" or larger TV and sounds good on a 7.1 speaker system while also being able to play the same file on a phone or tablet is not easy to do.
Isn't that what mount --bind/rbind is for?
Um, the point is that you can't both make the files available to the backup job while making them not available to anyone who has the SSH key that the backup job uses.
Using chroot and mounting stuff can limit your exposure, but if you want to back up anything sensitive, it has to be visible to the login that the SSH key uses.
Find yourself a decent private tracker
Private trackers are far worse about losing older large (e.g., high quality HD) torrents, since share ratio is important.
Transcodes a Blue-Ray rip to my iPad.
How does it decode DTS-HD and Dolby TrueHD? How does it handle multiple audio streams? Does it support subtitles (especially Blu-Ray PGS)?
My Blu-Ray rips only have video re-coded for reduced size...everything else is as it appeared on the disc, so without support for these things, it wouldn't work for me. As I said in another post, most on-the-fly transcoding solutions are fine as long as you only care about least common denominator quality. If you want high quality for your 60" HDTV and 7.1 surround system, then most of the DLNA solutions won't work.
Get a decent one and it'll stream media to your digital devices without configuration.
As long as you don't care about least common denominator quality, this is true. But, if you have Blu-Ray quality media as the source, it's unlikely that you can get full quality at devices that support it while also getting something that works on lesser devices. Transcoding on the fly sounds like a good idea, but decoding full HD video and audio and then re-encoding it (even at a much reduced resolution) requires a lot more processor than in the typical off-the-shelf NAS.
If you don't want to watch video on cell phones or tablets, just store it at full quality that works with your hardware media streamers, and PCs will be able to handle it (as will some tablets). For audio, store two copies...lossless (FLAC is best) and whatever MP3 quality you want. This doesn't waste much space, as the MP3s won't take up much room when you are talking about a multi-terabyte server. Then, just read files directly through shares, or configure your DLNA server to never transcode anything.
I'm sure it worked well when there were only a few people doing it, buying the collector's edition sets and selling them when they're no longer available, but once this kind of information about an imbalance in the market hits the news (as it just has) then you'll see a whole bunch of people pile into the market.
Then, too, if the copyrighted Lego bricks are not made in the US, soon it might not be possible to re-sell them, and thus they will be worthless as an investment.
And I had actually looked at them at full price earlier because CFLs die so quickly at the toilet and bathroom.
I have had 4 CFL globes in my bathroom for nearly 4 years, and have replaced only one bulb so far. In general, CFLs seem to have a worst case of about 5-6 times the life of an incandescent in the same fixture. I also like the fact that I can get more light when the fixture is wattage/heat limited.
Other than not being able to use dimmers, the biggest complaint I have with CFLs is that now it's tough to buy just one or two without paying a huge premium. The multi-bulb packs are sometimes so much cheaper per bulb that it's often worth it to just buy the pack. But, since they don't burn out very quickly, I end up with a fairly large collection of each type of bulb.