Run the full test through a few times. On slow machines, this can take a day or three.
About a third of all the machines I've delt with have had memory errors at some point in thier lifespan. Most of those errors were only found after a day of tests.
Re:And now for a comment from someone who knows...
on
Speeding up Evolution
·
· Score: 1
The real stuff is approximately $25 000 (US) per gram, which will treat 25 mice for a month, or one human for a day.
Anyone want to bet that Bill Gates is now ready for the next pie attack? The horror, the horror, the...[drifts into dream mode]
Reporter #1: Mr. Gates...is it true that you're leaving Microsoft, and if so, what are your plans.
BG: [deep baratone voice...very wide chest] Well, me and my %itches is goin' to whoop some @$$. Nuff of this p#$$i software $#!t. Next stop, this Linus person...yeah...see what his his black belt wife can do now, dig it? I don' mess...
OK, not for everyone or every room. LED christmas lights, hidden behind a strip of molding near the ceiling. Done wrong, very tacky. Done right (maybe with a light defuser?), it would be no-fuss or maintenance for decades.
On sale, a string of 100 went for $6 USD at WalMart in January. Now...probably $20.
All the abilities you're describing (open in background, open multiple URLs) are just as feasible with real browser windows. The debate is only whether every major app ought to have its own half-assed window manager.
In theory, you're correct;
Are tabs absolutely required? Nope.
Are tabs for everyone? Nope.
Can you perform the basic tasks you mentioned above or in my examples without tabs? Yep.
Should tabs be in every application -- even ones that aren't browsers? Nope.
Since I didn't argue these points at all, there's no debate with me.
Tabs, as they are used in most of the current crop of browsers, improve browsing substantially.
With them it is simple to do the things I described above and much much more. Using seperate windows to perform these tasks quickly becomes awkward -- unless you focus on a limited number of web pages and links or read them like a book. Web browsing, while it can be linear, is rarely linear.
Perform all of the 4 tasks I've listed above with a tabbed browser...then go and do the same thing without them in the browser of your choice.
Re:Dave hit the nail on the head
on
Hyatt Discusses Tabs
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I thought the same thing about the mouse scroll wheel. Tabs make a browser so much more valuable, though -- like the mouse wheel -- you won't 'get it' unless you use it.
Here are just a few examples;
Less use of the back button and no page reloading caused by the use of that button . When in doubt, open another tab...and switch to it. Close tabs that are no longer needed.
Switch to different search engines with one click -- and keep your old search results for reference. If you use Google -- Google.com, news.google.com, and groups.google.com -- and want to see how your search works in different areas, load a new tab. Without tabs, it's just awkward.
Saving and reloading multiple tabs later. If you want to return to exactly the same set of web pages, bookmark the group of tabs. Later, select the bookmark and BAM! you're back. Very handy for news sites or checking on posts to forums.
Suggestion: If you have a 3 button mouse or a scroll mouse, change the default behavior to open a new tab on middle button click.
In Mozilla or Netscape, this can be done by going to Edit...Preferences and selecting Navigator...Tabbed_Browsing and checking off Open tabs for "Middle clidk or control-click of links in a web page".
Ah, the memories of OS/2...Galactic Civ. was one of the highlights. With recient news that Loki's port of Rune for Linux sold a mere 1,000 copies, I'd be curious how many copies of GC were sold.
If anyone knows...Brad from Stardock? Is he still at the helm? Speak!
Who with any sense and experience even attempts to be unsubscribed?
I never sign up for anything...so if I get spam it's because the company sending it is unethical. What chance do I have that, if I ask, they will all the sudden will say "Gee, we're sorry! We honestly don't know why we spamed you in the first place!".
Case in point: I did try to unsubscribe from Staples (yep, the office store) spam mailings (through Doubleclick's spam mail).
I bent over backward and gave them the benifit of the doubt that they were somehow justified in thinking that they could spam a specific test account. So, I asked -- on line and by phone -- to have my domain removed. I did this about once every month as new spam arrived.
After a while, I informed Staples that they would be reported to Spamcop and other anti-spam services if they did not cease sending the spam. After 8 months of giving them leeway, I gave up asking.
No surprise, a few weeks after sending thier spams to spam reporting services, they stopped. So, in total, it took most of a year to get them to stop and then only after turning the screws on them. Screw Stapes. Screw Doubleclick.
perhaps someone more familiar with coding can hack the mandrake installer so that i'ts sole function is to blow away hard disks?
dd is a bit copier and is found on most Unix-stype systems including boot floppies. This includes things such as Tomsrtbt (linux) and many of the bootable *BSD diskettes. Example;
dd if=/dev/null of=/dev/hda
The line above reads: take the input file (if) from the empty device (/dev/null) and copy it into the output file (of) of the first ide drive on the first ide channel (/dev/hda) ignorning any partitions. Since there is no limit, the command will execute till the whole drive is wiped.
To speed this up, you can limit the wipe to the boot sector only using the count= and bs= options.
For example, to wipe only the first 512 bytes (the boot sector including the partition table), add 'count=1 bs=512';
dd if=/dev/null of=/dev/hda count=1 bs=512
To save the boot sector, you could do this;
dd if=/dev/hda of=hda.bootsector count=1 bs=512
After wiping the disk or the boot sector, you can run any disk partitioning (Ex: fdisk) or installation program on it you want.
neither is imaging the hard drive with a properly tweaked distro (hardware variance).
A network card with a boot ROM would be a good replacement for yanking the drives. As for customizing the systems -- tweak, shmeak, that's what auto-configure is for! 8-}
Kudzu works well under Red Hat, and some of the mini distributions use that. If the hardware isn't detected or can't be configured remove or better yet ignore it. ISA software/Win modems are the most likely things to entirely fail. Everything else should work if not with all features enabled.
Here's a good rule for handling clutter -- and these charity systems are clutter;
What can't be given away should be thrown away.
In this case, the request was for a distribution to toss on the system to make them usable. Well, floppy-based distributions don't cut it.
If the system doesn't auto-configure to the point that is usable, dump it in the "you're on your own" pile and move on. Why waste $100 worth of effort on a $20 computer when you are having problems with it already? It's possible that the system was donated because the previous owner had problems with it...and figuring that out is a real time sucking P.I.T.A.
If you really see the need to scrape the last bit of use out of a system, put it to the side *now* and look at it again *later*. Maybe it would be a good parts machine?
Also, I've found that about 1/3 of systems over time develop memory errors. Get memtest86 and boot that first before wasting time on a charity machine. It takes no effort on your part and can be done while you install the image on other systems.
I have to second (third, fourth,...) the comments from others. Floppy-based distributions are a bad idea -- unless you're technically minded and want to repair or fix something.
Here's a better one;
Install a minimal distribution on a small machine, grab the image, and install the image on the hard drive of any new systems as needed.
When the system boots the first time, it will configure itself.
What to use as a base is up to you. Consider Peanut Linux, Knoppix (which can be installed to the hard disk), or a very promising distribution named RULE.
What makes RULE interesting is that it is not really a distribution by itself, but a set of packages and an installer that are added to Red Hat 8.0 that allow you to run Red Hat's distribution on more modest hardware. For example, a 486 with 32MB of RAM will use the same kernel with RULE as a stock Red Hat 8.0 system will.
The problem is when those who decide on things like that, don't use them. Like a Sales VP who never uses the companies CRM product so he doesn't know it sucks.
Agreed...and often the lower ranked won't complain to them either. Example;
On a US Fed. Government contract, I pleaded to to the govenment managers to get users into the loop. Instead, the managers insisted that since we (the contracting company) did this work, that we knew better. That is: Get to work, stop asking me these silly questions -- my people are busy!
Months went by, repeated requests for a user and/or one or two of the managers to simply comment on the design documents if not join the project as oversight, and the same mildly annoyed response was always returned.
Within weeks of the project's end, the managers finally sent 8 people from different regional offices. For 3 days, the users pointed out all the defects in what we (contracting company) produced. Many little and not so little problems in the design and implementation. Some comments were useless, though overall they were right. It was crap; it didn't handle the work that needed to be done.
At this point, I had to agree, and my sympathy was with the users. Plans were put in place to address the comments, and a new release schedule was drawn up so that the needed changes could be made. Thankfully, the back end was designed well and would not have to be gutted -- though the changes would take up to 1/2 a year to implement.
At the end of the 3 day flame fest one of those governement managers came in and asked what the regional users tought. Without hesitation, they all gushed over how wonderful it was and that they couldn't wait to see it in the field.
As pointed out in the previous comments, DV cameras are not designed for lossless data handling, they are designed for video. Video is lossy, and while the tape and recorders are capable of error free capture and transfer, the emphasis is on making it good enough.
The cameras will dump the tapes at normal recorded video speed. If an error occurs in transfer (record or dump), the camera will keep going. If either computer in the chain is slow, you have to increase the error correction -- decreasing the available storage -- to handle those errors.
So, you end up getting better quality tapes and/or loosing capacity and speed.
Additionally, to use the DV you have to have a firewire port on the computer or drag along a card. If you have the time to do the prep work to put in a firewire card, you might want to consider getting a firewire hard drive -- and move from 5-10 gigs a tape to 60-120 gigs a drive. The speed is much higher too.
With that much forsight, you may as well pick a case that has USB 2.0 on it to cover systems that don't have firewire already. That's what I did, and it's worked out well. As can be expected, USB 1.x works too, though very slowly.
Very glad to hear that. Most of the time, my group gets ignored by upper management and (to save whatever influence we have) I have to block protests before the execs get too defensive and calmly (privately) see if I can get any kind of compromise. It usually doesn't work, usually for political reasons.
If you have other tips on how you accomplished this, post em! Begging and pleading tend not to work here -- and are often counter productive.
I have seen very few end users even *THINK* about future compatability if it has the bells and whistles they want/need today. Quite frankly the typical customer does not see WHY there should be so much problem: I've never heard a good reason why the new software can't at least do what the old software did the same way it did it; pretty piss poor UI design in their opinion.
Agreed, till compatability issues bite them. Then, they are gun shy. For example, my brother-in-law refuses to archive his analog photos -- even though he wants to -- since he doesn't think he'll be able to get his photos back later. I've discussed ways to make sure it is not a problem and he remains unconvinced.
The reason? He ran into compatability problems when switching between different versions of a word processor. Then, it happened again with a different word processor. Importing and exporting Word docs into WordPerfect added other complications.
So, I agree, most people don't care -- initially. Later, once burned, they care and feel paralyzed over it.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't want the bad ram patch.
You realize it is a mistake.
That would be a mistake.
You have better things to do with your time...that are less risky. You will go home and reconsider your life.
Excuse me, I need to go home.
About a third of all the machines I've delt with have had memory errors at some point in thier lifespan. Most of those errors were only found after a day of tests.
Anyone want to bet that Bill Gates is now ready for the next pie attack? The horror, the horror, the...[drifts into dream mode]
BG: [deep baratone voice...very wide chest] Well, me and my %itches is goin' to whoop some @$$. Nuff of this p#$$i software $#!t. Next stop, this Linus person...yeah...see what his his black belt wife can do now, dig it? I don' mess...
Can anyone else see where this is going?
Er...another Sid Meyer's game?
Yeah, so folks at the Social Security Administration can sell it through the back door. The government is us. The government is them.
[growls]
It's a pack of gum!
On sale, a string of 100 went for $6 USD at WalMart in January. Now...probably $20.
Tabbed browsing in Mozilla is very practical...esp. when dealing with 5 windows with 10-20 tabs each...I don't care what WM is used.
Of course, my WMs do blow (default KDE 3 and Gnome 2), and I don't know what I'm doing, so...why bother with me? |}
I find tabs invaluable. Maybe having up 5 windows with 20~ tabs each, or simply using them on a regular basis, makes the difference?
To me it's not theory...it's practice.
OK...then use a seperate window per webpage.
Of the tab-capable browsers that I've used, none forced me to use tabs and none opened a new tab when using basic keyboard or mouse actions.
In theory, you're correct;
Are tabs absolutely required? Nope.
Are tabs for everyone? Nope.
Can you perform the basic tasks you mentioned above or in my examples without tabs? Yep.
Should tabs be in every application -- even ones that aren't browsers? Nope.
Since I didn't argue these points at all, there's no debate with me.
Tabs, as they are used in most of the current crop of browsers, improve browsing substantially.
With them it is simple to do the things I described above and much much more. Using seperate windows to perform these tasks quickly becomes awkward -- unless you focus on a limited number of web pages and links or read them like a book. Web browsing, while it can be linear, is rarely linear.
Perform all of the 4 tasks I've listed above with a tabbed browser...then go and do the same thing without them in the browser of your choice.
Here are just a few examples;
Suggestion: If you have a 3 button mouse or a scroll mouse, change the default behavior to open a new tab on middle button click.
In Mozilla or Netscape, this can be done by going to Edit...Preferences and selecting Navigator...Tabbed_Browsing and checking off Open tabs for "Middle clidk or control-click of links in a web page".
[Don't hurt me! I kid! I kid!]
If anyone knows...Brad from Stardock? Is he still at the helm? Speak!
I never sign up for anything...so if I get spam it's because the company sending it is unethical. What chance do I have that, if I ask, they will all the sudden will say "Gee, we're sorry! We honestly don't know why we spamed you in the first place!".
Case in point: I did try to unsubscribe from Staples (yep, the office store) spam mailings (through Doubleclick's spam mail).
I bent over backward and gave them the benifit of the doubt that they were somehow justified in thinking that they could spam a specific test account. So, I asked -- on line and by phone -- to have my domain removed. I did this about once every month as new spam arrived.
After a while, I informed Staples that they would be reported to Spamcop and other anti-spam services if they did not cease sending the spam. After 8 months of giving them leeway, I gave up asking.
No surprise, a few weeks after sending thier spams to spam reporting services, they stopped. So, in total, it took most of a year to get them to stop and then only after turning the screws on them. Screw Stapes. Screw Doubleclick.
I hope these guys have Microsoft's number on speed dial...
Speed dial? Aren't dasy cutters and black helicopters more appropriate in this case?
Damn, and I wrote that first. (mumbles to self: test everything, test everything...)
dd is a bit copier and is found on most Unix-stype systems including boot floppies. This includes things such as Tomsrtbt (linux) and many of the bootable *BSD diskettes. Example;
The line above reads: take the input file (if) from the empty device (/dev/null) and copy it into the output file (of) of the first ide drive on the first ide channel (/dev/hda) ignorning any partitions. Since there is no limit, the command will execute till the whole drive is wiped.
To speed this up, you can limit the wipe to the boot sector only using the count= and bs= options.
For example, to wipe only the first 512 bytes (the boot sector including the partition table), add 'count=1 bs=512';
To save the boot sector, you could do this;
After wiping the disk or the boot sector, you can run any disk partitioning (Ex: fdisk) or installation program on it you want.
Thanks! (Usually folks go out of thier way to tell me that I'm an ass.)
A network card with a boot ROM would be a good replacement for yanking the drives. As for customizing the systems -- tweak, shmeak, that's what auto-configure is for! 8-}
Kudzu works well under Red Hat, and some of the mini distributions use that. If the hardware isn't detected or can't be configured remove or better yet ignore it. ISA software/Win modems are the most likely things to entirely fail. Everything else should work if not with all features enabled.
Here's a good rule for handling clutter -- and these charity systems are clutter;
In this case, the request was for a distribution to toss on the system to make them usable. Well, floppy-based distributions don't cut it.
If the system doesn't auto-configure to the point that is usable, dump it in the "you're on your own" pile and move on. Why waste $100 worth of effort on a $20 computer when you are having problems with it already? It's possible that the system was donated because the previous owner had problems with it...and figuring that out is a real time sucking P.I.T.A.
If you really see the need to scrape the last bit of use out of a system, put it to the side *now* and look at it again *later*. Maybe it would be a good parts machine?
Also, I've found that about 1/3 of systems over time develop memory errors. Get memtest86 and boot that first before wasting time on a charity machine. It takes no effort on your part and can be done while you install the image on other systems.
Here's a better one;
Install a minimal distribution on a small machine, grab the image, and install the image on the hard drive of any new systems as needed.
When the system boots the first time, it will configure itself.
What to use as a base is up to you. Consider Peanut Linux, Knoppix (which can be installed to the hard disk), or a very promising distribution named RULE.
What makes RULE interesting is that it is not really a distribution by itself, but a set of packages and an installer that are added to Red Hat 8.0 that allow you to run Red Hat's distribution on more modest hardware. For example, a 486 with 32MB of RAM will use the same kernel with RULE as a stock Red Hat 8.0 system will.
Take a look at the screenshots showing RULE running on 486s with 16MB of RAM. If you want to add other packages, such as OpenOffice, you can just like a full Red Hat 8.0 installation.
Agreed...and often the lower ranked won't complain to them either. Example;
Months went by, repeated requests for a user and/or one or two of the managers to simply comment on the design documents if not join the project as oversight, and the same mildly annoyed response was always returned.
Within weeks of the project's end, the managers finally sent 8 people from different regional offices. For 3 days, the users pointed out all the defects in what we (contracting company) produced. Many little and not so little problems in the design and implementation. Some comments were useless, though overall they were right. It was crap; it didn't handle the work that needed to be done.
At this point, I had to agree, and my sympathy was with the users. Plans were put in place to address the comments, and a new release schedule was drawn up so that the needed changes could be made. Thankfully, the back end was designed well and would not have to be gutted -- though the changes would take up to 1/2 a year to implement.
At the end of the 3 day flame fest one of those governement managers came in and asked what the regional users tought. Without hesitation, they all gushed over how wonderful it was and that they couldn't wait to see it in the field.
I'm still trying to figure out that project.
As pointed out in the previous comments, DV cameras are not designed for lossless data handling, they are designed for video. Video is lossy, and while the tape and recorders are capable of error free capture and transfer, the emphasis is on making it good enough.
The cameras will dump the tapes at normal recorded video speed. If an error occurs in transfer (record or dump), the camera will keep going. If either computer in the chain is slow, you have to increase the error correction -- decreasing the available storage -- to handle those errors.
So, you end up getting better quality tapes and/or loosing capacity and speed.
Additionally, to use the DV you have to have a firewire port on the computer or drag along a card. If you have the time to do the prep work to put in a firewire card, you might want to consider getting a firewire hard drive -- and move from 5-10 gigs a tape to 60-120 gigs a drive. The speed is much higher too.
With that much forsight, you may as well pick a case that has USB 2.0 on it to cover systems that don't have firewire already. That's what I did, and it's worked out well. As can be expected, USB 1.x works too, though very slowly.
If you have other tips on how you accomplished this, post em! Begging and pleading tend not to work here -- and are often counter productive.
Agreed, till compatability issues bite them. Then, they are gun shy. For example, my brother-in-law refuses to archive his analog photos -- even though he wants to -- since he doesn't think he'll be able to get his photos back later. I've discussed ways to make sure it is not a problem and he remains unconvinced.
The reason? He ran into compatability problems when switching between different versions of a word processor. Then, it happened again with a different word processor. Importing and exporting Word docs into WordPerfect added other complications.
So, I agree, most people don't care -- initially. Later, once burned, they care and feel paralyzed over it.