For God's sake why is that relevant? I could've used any disease and any drug. You know what I was attemping to imply.
It's relevant in so many ways. You did it by accident but the effect is the same.
If your doctor decides to give you antibiotics to fight off a (potential) viral infection and you don't get viral infection, his drugs did absolutely nothing to help you. This is much the same thing with (most of) the hype with Y2K. Yeah there were some problems but none were as widespread or as deadly as some of these guys have predicted.
In the same vein, the same doctor could give you the proper medication and thus prevent a nasty week of the flu. This too is like what happened with Y2K. Some of the hype was warranted and fixed the problem. However all the fear mongering and flaming doomsayers did absolutely nothing to help.
Oops, Palm has updated their software to support IR Hotsync under W2K.
I'm not sure I understand... I hotsync my Vx through iRDA exclusively (static buggered up my laptop serial port) -- this is (was) under Win98 but now I use pilot-link since I now run Linux.
* The 8088 had an 8-bit bus, while the 8086 used a 16-bit bus. The 8088 had less pins, and was considerably cheaper.
I repeat again: The 8086 and 8088 were both 40-pin devices!
There was no savings of PINS or CHIP SIZE; perhaps a bit of die was saved since you didn't need bidirectional drivers on 8 more of the address lines but the chip size and pin counts were identical!
Pinouts were different, as was menitoned several times in this thread...
By the way, both companies did release a "1" version of each processor - the 80186 and 68010 - but these were minor enhancements and not widely used.
The 80186 was a highly integrated processor; hardly an "enhancement". It contained the 8086 core in addition to the functionality of Intel's 8253 (Programmable Interval Timer), 8248 (Clock Generator), 8259 (Programmable Interrupt Controller) and 8237 (DMA Controller). It also includes some chip select logic. Clearly this was intended to be an embedded processor/controller, not a general use microprocessor as the article states.
Both the 386 and 68030 ran at speeds ranging from 16 MHz to well above 40 MHz, easily bringing the speed of the chips to over 10 MIPS.
I don't ever recall seeing an 80386 past 40MHz. I could be wrong here though.
[after talking of the 80386 and Windows/386, then the 80486] The year is now 1990. Windows 3.0 and Macintosh System 7 are about to be released.
Were Windows 3.0 and 3.1 not around during the 80386? I know that Windows/386 is not Windows 3.0 but I seem to remember working with Windows 3.0 in high school on 80386s when they were new.
With technical errors like this and just plain bad proofreading (Protect mode? WTF is that? Protected mode perhaps) I really don't trust this guy to a technical discussion on the merits of a smaller cache,.13 micron process and why the P4 is bad.
Don't get me wrong, I think the P4 has merit but it's just not targetted right. Nobody wants to have their apps run slower and have to buy new ones just to get speed back. Nobody is going to use these chips properly for a few years, at which point there will be something new out.
... A lower cost and slower variant, the 8088, was also used in some early PCs, providing only an 8-bit bus externally to limit the number of pins on the chip.
If I'm not mistaken, the 8086 and 8088 were both manufactured in 40 pin ceramic (and later plastic) DIP packages. There was no reduction in pin count but rather in internal drivers.
That said, the reason SoftMac is fastest is because it's written in assembly (and even some machine code!).
OH MY GHOD! Machine Code!? Wowie-gee! Praytell how is this faster than assembly? I've been an x86 assembly programmer for over 10 years and also program in several embedded processor varieties. I'd love to meet the guy who can properly optimize* P6 code better than a halfway decent compiler. I mean the guy must have a brain the size of ENIAC.
* - I understand (and fully agree) with hand-coding tight loops and other potential sources of bottleneck in assembly, taking the time to do it right... but writing the entire thing in assembly is folly. This isn't an 8k PIC16C77 we're talking about.
While it is called the Advanced Graphics Port, I would imagine that any piece of hardware which required fast access to the system memory would fit into this port. I could think of some data acquisition equipment which may be able to utilize the features that AGP provides over PCI.
And it is quite possible to install video cards into PCI expansion slots if AGP is available. I've done so many times.
Then use Static RAM with 5ns (or lower) cycle times instead.
Yeah, and quintuple your memory costs. Try PSRAM (Pseudo-SRAM) which is really DRAM in SRAM's clothing (pinouts and timings). They contain a DRAM bank and the refresh circuitry needed to keep the DRAM alive but without bothering with an external controller.
The cost is more expensive than regular DRAM but WAAAAY cheaper than SRAM.
I can't remember the last time I've had DRAM-related hardware failure. This is across approximately 150 computers, from 80386s to the latest and greatest around. Hell I don't think I've even had trouble on the old XTs or even Commodore 64 unless I was specifically screwing with the controller.
The controller would initialize to the settings in the DRAM's SPD and stay there. What is so difficult about that? In the case of multiple DIMMs, initialize to the slowest/most conservative of the bunch. There's no need to synchronize to the host system if you use some sort of buffering or even extend the PCI access time until the end of the refresh.
Yeah you could go SRAM but that's VERY expensive. How about PSRAM which is used in the Palm series of handhelds? They're DRAM with SRAM timings and built-in refresh circuitry. Much cheaper but consume more power than SRAM.
As far as crashing for no known reason, why would you have the OS RELY on the controller? Do a mem check at start and perhaps during idle times/backup times. If the memory goes for a shit, you stop using it. Code your VFS around it being there but with sane timeouts so if it dies you can recover. This kind of design technique has been around for decades.
Christ, you make it sound like magic how this stuff works. The dynamic memory technology around has been proven over the years. I'd be more inclined to think that the battery or associated switchover circuitry would give you trouble before the DRAM ever would.
Tell ya what. Gimme yer address so that I can test your doors and windows whenever I feel like it. After all, no harm done, eh?
Actually portscanning is just observation. That's it. Trying to get in via telnet/ftp/whatever... now that's testing the locks. You're testing the authentication mechanism. Portscanning is just noticing that there are doors and windows and so on.
Last I checked, it wasn't possible, nor was it legal to prevent people from observing your house. Just because it involves a "connection" on the internet doesn't mean it's an invasion. The house analogy is somewhat flawed if you equate "connection" with "physical contact".
You can't compare a CRT to a light bulb. The electron-emitting cathode from a CRT doesn't really care how many times it's been on and off, it cares how many hours it's on, and that's what causes monitors to become dim and fuzzy after long use - the cathode wears out.
Which dies first -- the cathode or the heater fillament which is almost identical in construction to a light bulb fillament? The answer: Depends on whether the monitor is cycled or not.:-) Yes it is much lower voltage (6V I think?) but it can and does happen.
An aside -- I have seen many more monitors and TV die from thermal cycling (usually with the HOT or other high-stress component) than I have seen an actual cathode wear out.
Turning off the monitor, or at least using DPMS sleep mode to shut it down mostly after some period of inactivity, can increase its life quite significantly.
I agree with DPMS since in most cases and with most newer (<5 years) monitors, they don't actually completely power down the unit which helps battle thermal fatigue in a big way. Even running at 1/100 capacity keeps things running just enough to keep it healthy.
But monitors, even in sleep mode, are still using power- feel the tops of the monitors when you get into work and think of the power used and the lifetime reduction.
It's the thermal cycling from powering up and down which kills the lifetime of electronic equipment due to thermal expansion and contraction.... NOT leaving them on.
An aside: Which lasts longer? A light bulb left on 24/7 or one which is turned on and off once a day? I realize that light bulbs have an incredible inrush current but it's also the thermal expansion and contracting which weakens the fillament in the first place. Same with semiconductors, discretes and CRTs.
I am personally interested in getting kids interested in electronics. IMO high school is way too late because by then they get their Grade 9 "round robin" technical experience and that's it. You need to get their interest in grade 2 and up. I've had this discussion with many people and come up with some of my own ideas as well in getting youngsters curious about electronics... so much so that they ask for it by the time they hit high school. It's absoulely appauling <sp?> that the tech classes need to fight to get a measly 15 kids into the class to keep it open.
Here's a (short) list of ideas/projects I'd come up with on my own to try to get kids interested. Please add to it, criticize it, comment on it and email me if you want to bring some of these ideas or your own to life. (this list is from 1998)
Use BASIC Stamp or similar and cheap Rat Shack wired kid's R/C cars and make simple robots
age-old light flashers
"build/program your own" tamagochi
Bar code reader - create a simple reader w/ software, kids build the kit and make some kind of game around it, teaching them about how the computer sees the codes and so on
Melody generators? some kind of pseudocode which makes music
Voice changer
Binary clock - has the "secret code" appeal that young boys like
BEAM robots
Robot racing / path followers
Build metal detectors and teach about tuning for certain metals, have some kind of game)
simple TV/cordless phone jammers
I agree with a few other posters that today electronics is mainly held in opaque magic black boxes and that takes a lot of the fun out of it but there is still no reason why you can't use discretes.
I grew up with a Rat Shack 30-in-one kit. It was great. There was some explanation about how they circuits worked but mostly you were left on your own to modify them and experiment. With some guidance these kits (I think only the 200-in-one kit is available now) could be very useful.
The trick is to get the young boys and girls interested. That's when they're most curious and able to learn new things and more importantly remember playing with them so that later on they know that the TEL 1A0 class isn't just some room in the tech hall.
4h? What kernel version? Which gcc? I'm certain building 2.2.14 (with 2.95.2 iirc) took a stupidly long time on my system (at least 10h, though it seemd to still be building after 20h). That was the last time I built a kernel on anything other than my desktop box: I set up multiple kernel trees for each destination box and I now have <3m builds for all my machines:)
I will get to this point too shortly. Basically I'd like to get rid of GCC and all the development fluff for my OTHER boxen and keep a single box available to do all the compiles and other fun stuff.
On the topic of the 4h compile, though... I reran the compile last night. Here are the results:
# uname -a
Linux pokey 2.2.13 #2 Sun Jan 23 18:14:42 EST 2000 i386 unknown
# cat/proc/cpuinfo
processor : 0
vendor_id : unknown
cpu family : 3
model : 0
model name : unknown
stepping : unknown
fdiv_bug : no
hlt_bug : no
sep_bug : no
f00f_bug : no
coma_bug : no
fpu : yes
fpu_exception : no
cpuid level : -1
wp : no
flags:
bogomips : 6.53
# time make dep clean bzImage modules
real 221m50.261s
user 207m33.500s
sys 9m13.160s
I copied my.config file and did a make mrproper before copying the configuration file back and doing the compile. 221 minutes is 3.6 hours. Now I couldn't find a man page for time, so the compile either took 3.6h or 7.1h. I was in bed so I can't vouch for it personally.:-) Either way it's a good lot shorter than the 10-20h compile you had mentioned. This is a DTK 386DX33 from 1986 with a Weitek 80387 I finally found in a pile of old computers at a junk shop and a memory expansion riser card I found in the same shop. The motherboard takes SIPPs and the expander SIMMs. fun stuff.:-) Good old pokey is my firewall.
Has anyone had experience using Konqueror without the rest of KDE running?
I run a fairly Frankensteined setup. WindowMaker and kpanel, with esd to manage sound. I prefer many Gnome apps to the KDE equivalents but can't stand the amount of space the Gnome panel takes up (it seems to be built to be big: kpanel seems to be designed to be thin and simulate the Win9x taskbar as much as possible.)
I run KDE2 apps without issue. Konq is the main reasons I went and got KDE2. Now I'll be upgrading for more Konq stability (it already is pretty good and *fast*) and to try out a few more KDE bits and pieces.
One project on my list is a wharf app which eats KDE and Gnome panel items. (more KDE than Gnome though) -- I hate the panel along the bottom but absolutely love the systray-like features it provides. I figure storing 9 16x16 icons and using the wharf icon corners (upper left and lower right) to page between them would be best. And perhaps have the panel icons which changed status pop up to the top of the pile too.
Hmmm... I think I just wrote my spec.:-) And to think the only real reason I want it is a) to get rid of the panel and b) to put my kicq flower on all virtual destops.
I've got a comparable system: 80386DX/33 with 16M (8 on a proprietary riser card, doncha love the old way? heh) -- kernel compiles take about 4 hours on my system. (regular old IDE HDD)
Regards,
Andrew
I've got one of these too... My hands are fairly large (5'11" with very square palms) but the twiddler is just a shade too big to use comfortably. I'd love to redesign the case and get something with the buttons arranged in a more ergonomic fashion. The combination of mouse+keyboard in one device was a very cool idea, though.
Everyone except for me has problems with Netscape on Linux, while, ironically enough, Konquerer thrashes my hard disk EVERY SINGLE TIME I LOAD A PAGE (probably because I'm not running it in KDE) while Mozilla just lags behind in loading pages.
Interesting. I used Konq on a WindowMaker system (gotta love WM) and it is pretty damn good. No thrashing that you describe, although it crashes if you load big pix and is pretty verbose at times. If it worked with java/jscript I think I'd be in heaven. Faster than Moz, SMALLER and did I say fast?
I have been contemplating this (machine listening) for years and while I haven't written a lick of code yet I've got a few theories on how to do this stuff.
all of this is not to mention that alot of pieces have "stop times" as well (sections where the rythm section stops completley...
I'd make the computer do it the same way I do... a type of phase locked loop. When the music starts I can very quickly acquire the beat and when the beat is missing I go on what was in the past to "manufacture" beats in the absence of them. Of course if there are several bars of silence my internal PLL starts to waver, just as an electronic one would. Piece of cake.
Most all NAT/masquerading issues can be resolved with a little elbow grease.
Dude, you're just brilliant... Now I can fix this for my entire office (remember not just Napster is P2P or requires inbound connections) - gee a little elbow grease can get all 150 people in the firewall and with static ports and IPs... wheeee!
Next time don't give the first answer that comes to your head as if it were an expert answer. The fact of the matter is that your solution is an old well known hack, not a solution.
Now a link to a masq module similar to masq_icq or masq_ftp would have been a very cool solution and wouldn't have gotten a shitty reply like this one.
I just purchased a Sony ICD-R100 from OfficeMax yesterday. It doesn't store the data in MP3 but it DOES have link-up software and can transfer data to and from your PC. The software is Win32 only and works over the parallel port. (why? I don't know, serial would have been fast enough I'd estimate)
Features which drew me to it:
Small: about the size of 2 AAA batteries tall and almost one across
2.5hrs record time on LP, about 60 minutes SP
LP is clear
stereo (alright double mono) ear out -- why the fuck has monural earbuds anymore?
you can add more to a message or split messages as you go
external mic/line input if you so desire
USD$99. Not the cheapest, but in the higher end price range. (not exactly a feature but the unit works very well)
I haven't tried the link software yet but it will save to.wav which is easy enough to make into MP3s.
I also looked at Panasonic's units ($79 and $129 for 60 and 240min.) no link capability but they were a nice shape too and seemed to have the quality. RCA I believe had one which used SmartMedia cards (came with a 2MB one) but the unit was just to big and odd-shaped for me.
Um 100BaseTX full duplex. And like ethernet is a standard which can use a variety of Layer 1 mediums.
IIRC 100bTX is still only 4 wire. the full duplex means nothing because even 10bT uses a PAIR for TX and a PAIR for RX. 4 wires total. I believe 1000bT uses all four pair.
Ever check out Bynari's TradeMail server? Or Intrastore Server?
I've personally tried TradeServer. From what I've been able to gather it does nothing special. In fact it will obliterate any Apache, OpenLDAP, FTP and (pick your MTA + POP + IMAP) setup without warning in order to set up its own. The binaries it installs have no visible benefits over the ones I had and in fact don't have PHP or mcal or anything I had in my originals. TradeServer require X on the server (later on I was able to run their admin program with only the X libs and a DISPLAY variable set to my machine).
It definately has promise. They get calendar support by using the "publish free/busy information" feature in Outlook so it isn't truly an open format.vcal format, although this is planned for the future.
Other benefits: the people putting it together are very responsive and helpful, although they do seem a little new to some aspects of server setup and administration. I am watching this software closely because I feel it will probably be the one to "get there first."
PS - Their TradeClient will talk to exchange servers and use their calendar info.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
For God's sake why is that relevant? I could've used any disease and any drug. You know what I was attemping to imply.
It's relevant in so many ways. You did it by accident but the effect is the same.
If your doctor decides to give you antibiotics to fight off a (potential) viral infection and you don't get viral infection, his drugs did absolutely nothing to help you. This is much the same thing with (most of) the hype with Y2K. Yeah there were some problems but none were as widespread or as deadly as some of these guys have predicted.
In the same vein, the same doctor could give you the proper medication and thus prevent a nasty week of the flu. This too is like what happened with Y2K. Some of the hype was warranted and fixed the problem. However all the fear mongering and flaming doomsayers did absolutely nothing to help.
Oops, Palm has updated their software to support IR Hotsync under W2K.
I'm not sure I understand... I hotsync my Vx through iRDA exclusively (static buggered up my laptop serial port) -- this is (was) under Win98 but now I use pilot-link since I now run Linux.
* The 8088 had an 8-bit bus, while the 8086 used a 16-bit bus. The 8088 had less pins, and was considerably cheaper.
I repeat again: The 8086 and 8088 were both 40-pin devices!
There was no savings of PINS or CHIP SIZE; perhaps a bit of die was saved since you didn't need bidirectional drivers on 8 more of the address lines but the chip size and pin counts were identical!
Pinouts were different, as was menitoned several times in this thread...
There are other technical errors as well:
By the way, both companies did release a "1" version of each processor - the 80186 and 68010 - but these were minor enhancements and not widely used.
The 80186 was a highly integrated processor; hardly an "enhancement". It contained the 8086 core in addition to the functionality of Intel's 8253 (Programmable Interval Timer), 8248 (Clock Generator), 8259 (Programmable Interrupt Controller) and 8237 (DMA Controller). It also includes some chip select logic. Clearly this was intended to be an embedded processor/controller, not a general use microprocessor as the article states.
Both the 386 and 68030 ran at speeds ranging from 16 MHz to well above 40 MHz, easily bringing the speed of the chips to over 10 MIPS.
I don't ever recall seeing an 80386 past 40MHz. I could be wrong here though.
[after talking of the 80386 and Windows/386, then the 80486] The year is now 1990. Windows 3.0 and Macintosh System 7 are about to be released.
Were Windows 3.0 and 3.1 not around during the 80386? I know that Windows/386 is not Windows 3.0 but I seem to remember working with Windows 3.0 in high school on 80386s when they were new.
With technical errors like this and just plain bad proofreading (Protect mode? WTF is that? Protected mode perhaps) I really don't trust this guy to a technical discussion on the merits of a smaller cache, .13 micron process and why the P4 is bad.
Don't get me wrong, I think the P4 has merit but it's just not targetted right. Nobody wants to have their apps run slower and have to buy new ones just to get speed back. Nobody is going to use these chips properly for a few years, at which point there will be something new out.
If I'm not mistaken, the 8086 and 8088 were both manufactured in 40 pin ceramic (and later plastic) DIP packages. There was no reduction in pin count but rather in internal drivers.
That said, the reason SoftMac is fastest is because it's written in assembly (and even some machine code!).
OH MY GHOD! Machine Code!? Wowie-gee! Praytell how is this faster than assembly? I've been an x86 assembly programmer for over 10 years and also program in several embedded processor varieties. I'd love to meet the guy who can properly optimize* P6 code better than a halfway decent compiler. I mean the guy must have a brain the size of ENIAC.
* - I understand (and fully agree) with hand-coding tight loops and other potential sources of bottleneck in assembly, taking the time to do it right... but writing the entire thing in assembly is folly. This isn't an 8k PIC16C77 we're talking about.
you can only use the AGP slot for video.
While it is called the Advanced Graphics Port, I would imagine that any piece of hardware which required fast access to the system memory would fit into this port. I could think of some data acquisition equipment which may be able to utilize the features that AGP provides over PCI.
And it is quite possible to install video cards into PCI expansion slots if AGP is available. I've done so many times.
Then use Static RAM with 5ns (or lower) cycle times instead.
Yeah, and quintuple your memory costs. Try PSRAM (Pseudo-SRAM) which is really DRAM in SRAM's clothing (pinouts and timings). They contain a DRAM bank and the refresh circuitry needed to keep the DRAM alive but without bothering with an external controller.
The cost is more expensive than regular DRAM but WAAAAY cheaper than SRAM.
Puh-lease
I can't remember the last time I've had DRAM-related hardware failure. This is across approximately 150 computers, from 80386s to the latest and greatest around. Hell I don't think I've even had trouble on the old XTs or even Commodore 64 unless I was specifically screwing with the controller.
The controller would initialize to the settings in the DRAM's SPD and stay there. What is so difficult about that? In the case of multiple DIMMs, initialize to the slowest/most conservative of the bunch. There's no need to synchronize to the host system if you use some sort of buffering or even extend the PCI access time until the end of the refresh.
Yeah you could go SRAM but that's VERY expensive. How about PSRAM which is used in the Palm series of handhelds? They're DRAM with SRAM timings and built-in refresh circuitry. Much cheaper but consume more power than SRAM.
As far as crashing for no known reason, why would you have the OS RELY on the controller? Do a mem check at start and perhaps during idle times/backup times. If the memory goes for a shit, you stop using it. Code your VFS around it being there but with sane timeouts so if it dies you can recover. This kind of design technique has been around for decades.
Christ, you make it sound like magic how this stuff works. The dynamic memory technology around has been proven over the years. I'd be more inclined to think that the battery or associated switchover circuitry would give you trouble before the DRAM ever would.
Tell ya what. Gimme yer address so that I can test your doors and windows whenever I feel like it. After all, no harm done, eh?
Actually portscanning is just observation. That's it. Trying to get in via telnet/ftp/whatever... now that's testing the locks. You're testing the authentication mechanism. Portscanning is just noticing that there are doors and windows and so on.
Last I checked, it wasn't possible, nor was it legal to prevent people from observing your house. Just because it involves a "connection" on the internet doesn't mean it's an invasion. The house analogy is somewhat flawed if you equate "connection" with "physical contact".
You can't compare a CRT to a light bulb. The electron-emitting cathode from a CRT doesn't really care how many times it's been on and off, it cares how many hours it's on, and that's what causes monitors to become dim and fuzzy after long use - the cathode wears out.
Which dies first -- the cathode or the heater fillament which is almost identical in construction to a light bulb fillament? The answer: Depends on whether the monitor is cycled or not. :-) Yes it is much lower voltage (6V I think?) but it can and does happen.
An aside -- I have seen many more monitors and TV die from thermal cycling (usually with the HOT or other high-stress component) than I have seen an actual cathode wear out.
Turning off the monitor, or at least using DPMS sleep mode to shut it down mostly after some period of inactivity, can increase its life quite significantly.
I agree with DPMS since in most cases and with most newer (<5 years) monitors, they don't actually completely power down the unit which helps battle thermal fatigue in a big way. Even running at 1/100 capacity keeps things running just enough to keep it healthy.
But monitors, even in sleep mode, are still using power- feel the tops of the monitors when you get into work and think of the power used and the lifetime reduction.
It's the thermal cycling from powering up and down which kills the lifetime of electronic equipment due to thermal expansion and contraction.... NOT leaving them on.
An aside: Which lasts longer? A light bulb left on 24/7 or one which is turned on and off once a day? I realize that light bulbs have an incredible inrush current but it's also the thermal expansion and contracting which weakens the fillament in the first place. Same with semiconductors, discretes and CRTs.
I am personally interested in getting kids interested in electronics. IMO high school is way too late because by then they get their Grade 9 "round robin" technical experience and that's it. You need to get their interest in grade 2 and up. I've had this discussion with many people and come up with some of my own ideas as well in getting youngsters curious about electronics... so much so that they ask for it by the time they hit high school. It's absoulely appauling <sp?> that the tech classes need to fight to get a measly 15 kids into the class to keep it open.
Here's a (short) list of ideas/projects I'd come up with on my own to try to get kids interested. Please add to it, criticize it, comment on it and email me if you want to bring some of these ideas or your own to life. (this list is from 1998)
I agree with a few other posters that today electronics is mainly held in opaque magic black boxes and that takes a lot of the fun out of it but there is still no reason why you can't use discretes.
I grew up with a Rat Shack 30-in-one kit. It was great. There was some explanation about how they circuits worked but mostly you were left on your own to modify them and experiment. With some guidance these kits (I think only the 200-in-one kit is available now) could be very useful.
The trick is to get the young boys and girls interested. That's when they're most curious and able to learn new things and more importantly remember playing with them so that later on they know that the TEL 1A0 class isn't just some room in the tech hall.
4h? What kernel version? Which gcc? I'm certain building 2.2.14 (with 2.95.2 iirc) took a stupidly long time on my system (at least 10h, though it seemd to still be building after 20h). That was the last time I built a kernel on anything other than my desktop box: I set up multiple kernel trees for each destination box and I now have <3m builds for all my machines :)
I will get to this point too shortly. Basically I'd like to get rid of GCC and all the development fluff for my OTHER boxen and keep a single box available to do all the compiles and other fun stuff.
On the topic of the 4h compile, though... I reran the compile last night. Here are the results:
Linux pokey 2.2.13 #2 Sun Jan 23 18:14:42 EST 2000 i386 unknown
# cat
processor : 0
vendor_id : unknown
cpu family : 3
model : 0
model name : unknown
stepping : unknown
fdiv_bug : no
hlt_bug : no
sep_bug : no
f00f_bug : no
coma_bug : no
fpu : yes
fpu_exception : no
cpuid level : -1
wp : no
flags
bogomips : 6.53
# cat
total: used: free: shared: buffers: cached:
Mem: 15192064 14159872 1032192 4194304 5566464 4796416
Swap: 136208384 1245184 134963200
MemTotal: 14836 kB
MemFree: 1008 kB
MemShared: 4096 kB
Buffers: 5436 kB
Cached: 4684 kB
SwapTotal: 133016 kB
SwapFree: 131800 kB
# cat
QUANTUM FIREBALL1080A
# time make dep clean bzImage modules
real 221m50.261s
user 207m33.500s
sys 9m13.160s
I copied my .config file and did a make mrproper before copying the configuration file back and doing the compile. 221 minutes is 3.6 hours. Now I couldn't find a man page for time, so the compile either took 3.6h or 7.1h. I was in bed so I can't vouch for it personally. :-) Either way it's a good lot shorter than the 10-20h compile you had mentioned. This is a DTK 386DX33 from 1986 with a Weitek 80387 I finally found in a pile of old computers at a junk shop and a memory expansion riser card I found in the same shop. The motherboard takes SIPPs and the expander SIMMs. fun stuff. :-) Good old pokey is my firewall.
Has anyone had experience using Konqueror without the rest of KDE running?
I run a fairly Frankensteined setup. WindowMaker and kpanel, with esd to manage sound. I prefer many Gnome apps to the KDE equivalents but can't stand the amount of space the Gnome panel takes up (it seems to be built to be big: kpanel seems to be designed to be thin and simulate the Win9x taskbar as much as possible.)
I run KDE2 apps without issue. Konq is the main reasons I went and got KDE2. Now I'll be upgrading for more Konq stability (it already is pretty good and *fast*) and to try out a few more KDE bits and pieces.
One project on my list is a wharf app which eats KDE and Gnome panel items. (more KDE than Gnome though) -- I hate the panel along the bottom but absolutely love the systray-like features it provides. I figure storing 9 16x16 icons and using the wharf icon corners (upper left and lower right) to page between them would be best. And perhaps have the panel icons which changed status pop up to the top of the pile too.
Hmmm... I think I just wrote my spec. :-) And to think the only real reason I want it is a) to get rid of the panel and b) to put my kicq flower on all virtual destops.
6.54 bogomips, whee, 1 day kernel compiles
I've got a comparable system: 80386DX/33 with 16M (8 on a proprietary riser card, doncha love the old way? heh) -- kernel compiles take about 4 hours on my system. (regular old IDE HDD) Regards, Andrew
A twiddler, I can just drop into my laptop bag.
I've got one of these too... My hands are fairly large (5'11" with very square palms) but the twiddler is just a shade too big to use comfortably. I'd love to redesign the case and get something with the buttons arranged in a more ergonomic fashion. The combination of mouse+keyboard in one device was a very cool idea, though.
Everyone except for me has problems with Netscape on Linux, while, ironically enough, Konquerer thrashes my hard disk EVERY SINGLE TIME I LOAD A PAGE (probably because I'm not running it in KDE) while Mozilla just lags behind in loading pages.
Interesting. I used Konq on a WindowMaker system (gotta love WM) and it is pretty damn good. No thrashing that you describe, although it crashes if you load big pix and is pretty verbose at times. If it worked with java/jscript I think I'd be in heaven. Faster than Moz, SMALLER and did I say fast?
I have been contemplating this (machine listening) for years and while I haven't written a lick of code yet I've got a few theories on how to do this stuff.
all of this is not to mention that alot of pieces have "stop times" as well (sections where the rythm section stops completley ...
I'd make the computer do it the same way I do... a type of phase locked loop. When the music starts I can very quickly acquire the beat and when the beat is missing I go on what was in the past to "manufacture" beats in the absence of them. Of course if there are several bars of silence my internal PLL starts to waver, just as an electronic one would. Piece of cake.
2.3 kids
I've heard of 2.5 kids (one on the way) but what's 3/10 of a kid? Are you just being more precise on the EDD or? :-)
Most all NAT/masquerading issues can be resolved with a little elbow grease.
Dude, you're just brilliant... Now I can fix this for my entire office (remember not just Napster is P2P or requires inbound connections) - gee a little elbow grease can get all 150 people in the firewall and with static ports and IPs... wheeee!
Next time don't give the first answer that comes to your head as if it were an expert answer. The fact of the matter is that your solution is an old well known hack, not a solution.
Now a link to a masq module similar to masq_icq or masq_ftp would have been a very cool solution and wouldn't have gotten a shitty reply like this one.
That should be who the fuck has monaural earbuds anymore
The unit timestamps as well and has a VOX-style recording mode which I'd consider useless.
I just purchased a Sony ICD-R100 from OfficeMax yesterday. It doesn't store the data in MP3 but it DOES have link-up software and can transfer data to and from your PC. The software is Win32 only and works over the parallel port. (why? I don't know, serial would have been fast enough I'd estimate)
Features which drew me to it:
I haven't tried the link software yet but it will save to .wav which is easy enough to make into MP3s.
I also looked at Panasonic's units ($79 and $129 for 60 and 240min.) no link capability but they were a nice shape too and seemed to have the quality. RCA I believe had one which used SmartMedia cards (came with a 2MB one) but the unit was just to big and odd-shaped for me.
Um 100BaseTX full duplex. And like ethernet is a standard which can use a variety of Layer 1 mediums.
IIRC 100bTX is still only 4 wire. the full duplex means nothing because even 10bT uses a PAIR for TX and a PAIR for RX. 4 wires total. I believe 1000bT uses all four pair.
Ever check out Bynari's TradeMail server? Or Intrastore Server?
I've personally tried TradeServer. From what I've been able to gather it does nothing special. In fact it will obliterate any Apache, OpenLDAP, FTP and (pick your MTA + POP + IMAP) setup without warning in order to set up its own. The binaries it installs have no visible benefits over the ones I had and in fact don't have PHP or mcal or anything I had in my originals. TradeServer require X on the server (later on I was able to run their admin program with only the X libs and a DISPLAY variable set to my machine).
It definately has promise. They get calendar support by using the "publish free/busy information" feature in Outlook so it isn't truly an open format .vcal format, although this is planned for the future.
Other benefits: the people putting it together are very responsive and helpful, although they do seem a little new to some aspects of server setup and administration. I am watching this software closely because I feel it will probably be the one to "get there first."
PS - Their TradeClient will talk to exchange servers and use their calendar info. :-)