INDUSTRY STANDARD for notebooks...
on
Barebones Notebook
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
...would be kinda nice. I think this "barebones laptop" that you could assemble/have assembled to your specs is a fantastic idea, however an industry standard would be required for it to REALLY take off as it has for desktop PCs.
Desktop users are blessed with a standard form factor (ATX and variants) describing physical specs for motherboards, cases, power supplies, peripheral connectors and so on. Wouldn't it be tremendous if there was a widely recognised standard for laptop/notebooks? Being that the featured article is slashdotted, I cant say if that was the idea, but links posted in the comments included the "barebones" concept as offered by ECS, and I got the impression the components were ECS-specific...
Imagine if there was an "MPX" standard (Mobile...PC...X...whatever--just to pick a 3-letter designation as an example). You could buy a generic laptop caseand power supply and load it with an MPX mobo and your choice of keyboards, touchpads, trackballs, displays, etc. These could be obtained from most any source, form a multitude of manufacturers.
The MPX spec. would specify how these components interconnected--one could go so far as to include notebook variants of PCI or AGP (whereever PC Card devices couldn't fit the bill, such as video card upgrades--not sure but does Intel's new Mobile CPU/chipset architecture not touch on that?). Perhaps devices like keyboards and touchpads would use internal USB-based connections, and there would be a standard display connector and sizes (to correspond with a selection of standard laptop/notebook case sizes).
Mmmmmm... MPX would be nirvana, and as prices came down it couls supplant ATX and it's variants. Well, I suppose not TOTAL nirvana if having Apple iBook looks is really important to you. It wouldn't be UGLY, but an MPX form-factor laptop made from a mix of Taiwanese parts might very well be as sexy as the beige box in Dilbert's cubicle. HOWEVER, there is a big market out there for boring-but-practical, and I'm sure the uber-geek case-modders and companies like VooDoo would find ways to make cool cases within the constraints of a standard like "MPX"...
If I'm ignorant of something like this already in existence, please share info!
... you'd thing they would use it to host their web page har har!
Of course, the slashdotting it is starting to succomb to might be because they spent do much on developing the machine that they could only afford hosting off a single little DSL connection. After all, they certainly haven't spend much on PR either as they do not garner many search hits on the net or widespread press...
Enough has been said about the SQL comment--suffice it to say the 1st lesson in "Web Application Development 101" should be "Develop 3 layers: Data Acccess, Business Logic and Presentation". I think most web developers missed the 1st day of class. Not only is there too much SQL and related data access code embedded in ASP, PHP, etc--there is often a great reliance on embedding business logic (and yes, some presentation elements such as UCASE, padding, etc) into non-portable SQL statements and stored procedures. In simple situations (if you can GUARANTEE your small project will stay small, which is very rare) mashing everything together makes for faster development and more compact code. In the 99% of other cases you'll eventually end up with a big bowl of spaghetti. Perhaps it's because many web programmers are trained on syntax (the mehanics of Java, Perl, PHP, HTML and so on) and not on design.
As for assigning a "strategist"--that can be invaluable to a project. The end customer in most cases knows his business as it presently runs, and most often they are not a tech business. I have clients in manufacturing, distribution and food processing/agribusiness. Their business is knowing how to make wigits or food or chemicals or how to send stuff all over the continent--and all they want out of computers are ways to make these tasks work better--and more often than not they must rely on "strategists" to show them HOW and WHAT computers can do to achieve that. That's the case for ANY component of a client's business that is ancilliary to their primary goals.
I don't always use a strategist--but I will if the job is big enough and/or to establish a relationship with a new client. In my opinion (and experience), a good "strategist" should be the following:
1. The strategist should NOT be a past or present employee or long-standing affiliate of the client--that might seem counter-intuitive however someone with intimate knowledge of some or all of the processes in a business standa a chance of being blind to change. Viewing "from the outside in" is most often the best way to spot and change counter-productive practices.
2. If possible, a person with industry knowledge (if you're going a web project for Pepsi, then someone who knows the soft drink industry). This can be more important than having an advisor or strategist that knows technology...which brings us to:
3. The strategist should most certainly NOT be a programmer on the project (or indeed be involved in project development AT ALL beyond the requirements phase--or in XP, I suppose developing the tests). If there are questions about feasibility or time/resource requirements to achieve functionality, it is not the strategist's job to answer them--the answers should be provided as feedback from the developers upon receiving the specs/tests. Not only can programming be an iterative process--so can (and often should be) determining project specs. The last thing a client wants is to get mired in an alphabet soup discussion of SQL, ASP, PHP, etc. on what is required to satisfy a reporting requirement--all they want is to state a list of wants/needs--then they want you to think about it a bit and tell them how long and how much $ for them so they can prioritise. Having a non-programmer strategist as a go-between helps immensely in avoiding that trap.
It's great to see all the Linux coverage, especially from media sources that are general interest in nature rather than exclusively technical.
However, there is one interesting side effect that Linux advocates should keep a watchful eye for. With the increase in publicity also comes the increas in misinformation. It isn't always intentional (such as FUD from Microsoft that is so often complained about on Slashdot), but it can be annoying (or worde, damaging) nonetheless.
Take for example, the article from "The Age" mentioned above. This is a minor example, but illustrates my point well:
Rather than copyrighting the Linux code, Torvalds published it on the Internet and invited others to offer improvements.
Sure, Linus freely distribtued the code to his Linux project on the internet, however the code to Linus REMAINS COPYRIGHTED. This mis-statement was not meant to damage the Linux cause--but it doesn't help the general public understand the concept of "Free" software versus free (as in beer), and that Free Software doesn't mean anti-copyright.
In fact, copyright is the very thing that keeps the source to Linux truly Free. Without the power of copyright the owners of Free source code would have no way of defending the GPL. Conversely, developers couldn't choose to distribute their works in traditional closed-source fashion. Although copyright law has been perverted and abused in recent years, copyright in its truest sense is a fundamental right in the protection of "free speech" (not only should citizens enjoy reasonalbe protection to express their thoughts as they wish to--be it the spoken or written word, music, film or even computer programming--they should also have some right to control how that expression is used). It's a tough balancing act of course--the DMCA extends much to far into the realm or IP protection, allowing the owner of copyrighted work so much unchecked power that it stifles freedom of expression.
Such a simple mis-statement and it warrants an entire article on its own. To assist the press in accurate coverage, perhaps the organisers of Linux conferences should put together press kits that place a lot of emphasis on the concept of Free Software and background on Linux that extends beyond pure technical information. Of course one cannot be sure writers would read the material, however ditribution of such information would make it easier to respond to widely published factual errors
Perhaps some letters to the editor praising the positive coverage, and at the same time correcting misinformation would do a lot of good for the Linux community...
(moreso than the water used to make snow on certain ski slopes)
Hmm...seems some featured articles on Slashdot are like the human foetus--they must gestate for around 40 weeks before making an appearance. (Take a look at the article--last updated 12 APRIL 2002!? I watched a TV program on this EXACT CASE on the Discovery channel AGES ago.
Even before that--some YEARS ago--on (if I recall) the CBC about a site somewhere in the Northern US states or Canada about using snowmaking technology as a final stage in sewage disposal--spraying droplets of wastewater through snowmaker nozzels infused it with oxygen and caused flash-freezing which destroyed a great deal of the remaining bacterial contaminants. It wasn't donr on a ski slope, however, the additional nutrients and moisture made for a really good vegetable crop in the summer.
Mildly interesting as the subject is, recycling wastewater is not the latest, greatest groundbreaking in technology--and it's been happening implictly for ages. My city gets almost all it's drinking water from a river--which is downstream from a nomber of small towns. Our fair city drinks from the piss and crap of not only countless birds, fish, beavers and livestock--it drinks from that of tens of thousands of people as well. I pity those who live downstream of the city--they get to pull water from a river that is essentially the effluent from the waste of 1 MILLION people.
Novel and environmentally consious way of making snow? Sure. Hardly shocking or cutting edge though.
Yes, Germany is an industrial powerhouse, and the likes of BMW and Mercedes are world renowned for their quality of build and mechanical reliability. However, in my experience Germany has never been outstanding in the field of electronics (nor has much from anywhere else in Europe either). If BMW engineered this IDrive thing in Germany I'm not surprised it came out so quirky.
I've driven a few cars of European origin (or those that use Euopean components) and have found that the electrical/electronic systems in all cases were the weak points. It doesn't matter if the components--from the hall-effect sensors, MAPs, up to the ECM unit--has Bosch (Gremany) or Renix (France) or whatever, they have been a source of aggravation.
It seemed there were some exceptions. I owned a Renault awhile back that had a nifty little travel computer that did gas mileage, average speed, trip odometer, etc (sourced by Jager if I remember right) that always worked and was remarkably accurate--even when the car was over 10 years old. The same car was also equiped with a nice Blaupunkt radio. When I had to get behind the dash to fix other problems I had to pull out both componenets. Much to my dismay, both the Jager travel computer and the Blaupunkt radio were "made in Japan". Hmm...so much for the exceptions. On the other hand, things that DID go wrong (intermittent wipers, turn signal/horn/everything stalk Renalt was infamous for, intrument cluster illumination) all involved parts that were made in Germany or made in France.
I'd say as far as electrical and electronic engineering goes in may cases, Germany raks marginally better than France (which ranks marginally better than Britain). If you doubt me then look closely at a lot of the high-quality "german" electonic components (automotive or not)--and don't be surprised if the whole thing wasn't made in asia, or at least was made from mostly asian parts.
If it's "pure german" electronics, expect it to be overbuilt or overengineered and somewhat "rube-goldberg" in terms of design (it seems German electronics designers intinctively want to fly from Berlin to Paris by way of Beijing).
I'm sure eventually such quirks (like a crazy radio or brakes going on without brakelights and so on) will kill someone, and a lawsuit will be inevitable (perhaps sooner, especially if enough people in the Litigous States of America get pissed off--or hurt).
...beyond the obvious "just to show of your geekiness"
1. Already mentioned I think...mobile/automotive/outdoor applications. Ever tried to use a laptop when it's colder than 10C? I have (refrigerated warehouses, outside, etc for programming PLCs in isolated locations). It still works but the LCD screen sure looks like crap.
2. Got a bunch of servers without monitors (or that share one monitor)? It sure would be nice to see the CPU load, available drive space, network traffic and so on at a glance instead of pulling up to a console and switching the KVM sharing device (or SSH-ing or telnetting) all over the place and getting mixed up as to which machine you are observing.
3. Nice to have basic diagnosic info like that on a separate display...it doesn't add clutter to your desktop (mine can get cluttered enough as it is) and you don't have to go hunting to see what window it's buried under. It's also probably less resource intensive than putting it on a GUI window and more convenient than various command-line/text-based utilities out there.
4. The VFD vs. LCD is nice because it is bright and readable---more so than even backlit LCD. If I'm computing at night by the light of a desklamp (where I'm at, in December that means any time after 4PM), it would show up very nicely on the tower sitting on the floor by my desk (LCDs sure wouldn't).
There ya go...sounds pretty useful to me (beyond being a geek-toy). On the flip side I don't think I'd go for this particular VFD product. It takes up two drive bays--thanks but no thanks--that rules out use on low-profile desktops and rack-mounted PCs (and many compact and mid-tower cases if you have, say, a DVD and a CD-RW, some tape backup systems, or auxilliary cooling device or lots of other other stuff that fits in a 5.25 bay). Concept-wise it's a very good idea though...
I have to respectfully counter some of your statements--quite honestly I'm surprised they were modded up to the degree they were as they are as poorly thought out as you claim the featured article to be...
- Microsoft put little more than a CDDB lookup into their player. Since everyone freaked out they've made it very very obvious during the install what gets sent. Take a look at everyone else's player and you'll see they are not trying to take over the world in some sinister plot. And product activation sucks but so does having perhaps the most pirated piece of software in the world so you really can't blame them.
Kudos to MS for disclosing exactly what their player is doing--if they didn't we WOULD have reason to be concerned about ulterior motives and "sinister plots". However, the very fact that extensive means of monitoring usage are being integrated into software is itself disturbing. Sure it's done in the name of convenience and no ill will is intended...but what if the system is compromised by someone with malicious intent--either within MS or outside it(especially knowing MS's security record)?
And as for product activation being a response to rampant piracy--perhaps MS is putting too much into treating a symptom rather than finding a cure. Windows and Office aren't pirated so much just because they are there (although their universality in the market doesn't help). Consider that the ONLY profitable divisions of MS are the OS and Office groups, and that they achieve their profits through extreme mark-ups and draconian licensing policies. Combine that with very low hardware prices and it's no wonder nobody like buying Windows or Office--why spend less than $1000 on a very capable PC and more than that just for the basic software? Can you imagine what piracy would be like in the video industry if you paid $150 for your DVD player and a single movie cost $100 or more?
- Microsoft lobbies. Welcome to the united states of america....and all that is wrong with it. Exactly where is the point or thought in that statement? Is you point that since massive corprate lobbying happens all the time it is still good? RIAA, MPAA, Benson&Hedges, EXXON and other such corporate interests are stuffing the pockets of a lot of politicians too--most often in defence of coporate welfare and policies against the interests of democracy, individual rights and freedoms and the environment. I guess since MS shouldn't be held accountable for their lobbying practices neither should anyone else.
- Attacking microsoft because the PCs it donates aren't good enough? Come on! Donations are voluntary and should be welcomed no matter what they are. Don't forget Gates does some serious giving-back. Funny how he forgets to mention this..
Having had first hand experience with organisations on the receiving end of such so-called donations I have to say WHAT A PILE OF CRAP! Donations are voluntary and should be wecomed no matter what? So the food bank should accept donations of mouldy cheese? Distress shelters should accept ripped, tattered and soiled blankets, coats and clothing? They were "volunteered" by someone too so we should bend down and kiss their feet for ther generous offers?
Schools, churches and other charitable organisations are staffed by and large by volunteers and low-paid staff on meagre budgets--dealing with inappropriate donations wastes their time ans id more harmful than not giving at all. These 386, 486 and early Pentiums running Win 3.1 and 95 that MS "graciously" donates to schools are THEIR "mouldy blocks of cheese". Indeed, they can be put to as much good use in a typical school.
And as far as Bill and MS giving back a-plenty. If I remember correctly a good tithe to your church was traditionally 15% of your disposable income. MS and Bill personally come NO WHERE CLOSE to that. Furthermore, much of the charitable work Bill does is done with his own interest in mind. Bill can swoop down and provide a school with dozens of brand new P4s equipped with Windows XP (he doesn't even to that). Then in subsequent years he'll subject them to software audits and mandatory upgrades, to MS's benefit. Well--praise the lord Bill Gates was around to help us out.
As for me, I'll continue bashing Microsoft so long as they provide me with the wrecking ball with which I can do it.
In the areas of policy of most concern to the Slashdot community (Telecoms, IP rights and so on), McCain is probably the best person the US has for the job. Based strictly on his voting record and the policies he defends, we often wouldn't see eye to eye, however philisophically he is very much in the same camp.
McCain tends to take positions based on a populist stance--certainly the best way to do it in a democracy. Less so than most other politicians he listens to ALL voters--not just Republicans, or corporations, or lobby groups.
That's probably why the Post article is all wishy-washy. Normally you can count on a Democrat to bend over and take it in the butt from Jack (Valenti, or most others in the entertainment industry cartels) and for a Republican to bend over and take it from Bill (Gates, or the BSA or others trying to lock people into their tech IP).
McCain is going to be hard to pin down by the pundits because he'll be influenced by everyone and anyone, and the press in north America is very poor at correctly gauging what populist sentiment is--it tries to steer public opinion rather than follow it.
All in all, it is a promising move to have committees steered by those like McCain. The press AND government these days really have a problem listening to what the public wants...
This is very typical of Microsoft-based products--particularly when they see threatening competition on the horizon or must play catch-up(which is almost always). What is important for the Palm/Symbian camps is that they MUST NOT write off Microsoft because their offering is a big steaming pile of crap, or lose focus on their own products by fighting Microsoft's tactics.
History has shown that as long as MS can limp along until the third major release of any given product, it has a much better than even chance of squishing the competition. Where are Go Computing and Netscape today? They were leaders/innovators and now they essentially don't exist--killed off because MS stepped up the FUD machine (like with the Win3.1 based PenWindows 10 years ago) and/or taking a loss financially (taking IE off the extra-cost "plus pack" and giving it away in the Win95 install CDs, selling XBboxes for less than they cost to make, etc).
MS will be at the height of desperation if they start giving away the Smartphone OS to the phone makers (if they can get away with it--I think they'd acually pay phone makers to use Smartphone if the US DOJ lets them). There is little MS won't stoop to do if they really want a piece of the action in a given market--especially considering the scads of cash they are sitting on right now. If Smartphone isn't killed off quickly, look for MS to do something that drastic.
It'll happen in other markets that MS plays in too. Remember MS only makes money off its OS and Office licenses--it uses that money and influence to leverage other products. Watch for it--MS might find Linux becoming more of a threat than it is comfortable with in the corporate server and workstation space. Biggest reason? Huge up-front costs in purchasing licenses (look at Content Management Server - US$43,000 per processor!? OS NOT included? Holy Crap! Think I'll just use Slashcode, Scoop, OpenACS etc to manage my site). Solution? MS can use bags of cash to set up their own leasing program a la GE capital to spread out the big $ hurt, or otherwise accelerate their move towards selling their "software as a service". It'll be ammunition against the argument that Linux has a lower implementation costs. Anything to make it easier to "invest" in Microsoft rather than any competition.
If it all goes "right", MS will have it made--from the cellphone up to the big racks of servers, consumers and businesses will just get a monthly bill from Bill for anywhere from $100 or so up to thousands for corporations--just like the electric bill. Then Bill takes care (and control) of your gagets and computers to make sure all the ugrades and bugfixes are done, and that you aren't using any pesky little "non-authorised" apps and files. And the rest of us will have the honor and privlege to turn said devices on and "use as directed".
Hmmm... I guess it is all a matter of perspective. For an RDBMS to handle 50,000 records, particularly on todays hardware, is actually quite trivial. I've regularly run into apps that size (web based and otherwise) using (shudder) MS Access 2000. While Access is a real dog, it can handle it and "never have problem one" size wise.
In my experience with database applications, anything under 100,000 records is considered a small database. I have to admit in the last year or two my firsthand experience with mySQL has been limited, but from what I see in the current feature set there are situations where PostgreSQL is the definite superior choice.
Sure, MySQL can handle a lot of records and is quite stable and lightweight, however the lack of such basic features as foreign key constraints and restrictions such as table-level-only locking limit its usefulness as an "Oracle killer".
Yes, MySQL can do SELECTs from million-plus record tables, do lots of inserts per second etc etc in all the benchmarks, but what happens when you have 100,000s to millions of records and dozens to hunderds (maybe thousands?) of concurrent users who all frequently write to and delete from the database in addition to doing SELECTs. mySQL falls apart because all the users have to wait in line to write to a given table because the whole damn thing gets locked out until the first user to open a write transaction hasn't finished yet.
A large database also adds challenges to maintaining referential integrity. If foreign keys were so expendable that they could be eliminated (functionality put in the application) to boost performance, why does such functionality remain in Oracle MSSQL and others? Maybe because if it is done in the database (and done right--solid and stable) you don't have to trust your data integrity to application code. You don't want to deal with orphaned records when you have 45 tables and 2.5 million records to manage, just because some flunky Java programmer didn't cover all the bases in a class buried somewhere in a big enterprise web app. Foreign keys allow for an extra layer of protection for important data--if a database constraint is violated by an application bug it'll sure get noticed faster.
These are but two examples where PostgreSQL has the edge (even if it can't top out some arcane benchmark). Given that, mySQL is still very useful--and it doesn't have to be limited to "toy apps". Slashdot can use mySQL quite well, thank you very much. It is certainly NOT a "toy app", and mySQL's performance can handle all the slashdotting thrown at it, as far as retrieving data goes. Keep in mind though, that Slashdot data is fairly static. Its database is read far more often than it is updated/inserted/deleted (even given how many comments and articles are posted and with moderation). The relationships between tables are simple enough that referential integrity is manageable through application code, and above all, the data is not THAT mission critical (if a comment or 12 disappear from Slashdot, the lights will stay on and planes will not fall out of the sky). Speed and compactness are primary for Slashdot, the rest is secondary, and mySQL can fit the bill. If I need something to handle payroll, or health records or whatever--I thing PostgreSQL has reached the point where I find it the more trustworthy of the two with data of that nature.
While PostgreSQL vs mySQL can ignite a virtual Jihad, it should come down to this--pick the right tool for the right job (not just features and performance, but also personal preferences--what tools are you most comfortable with, etc etc).
That's even funnier than when I encountered an ad from ZeroAds on (if I recall correctly) a Yahoo/Geocities page--delivered in the higly ironic manner of a pop-up ad. Gotta wonder what kind of pinhead marketer figured advertising anti-pop-up software using pop-up ads would make a positive impression.
On the whole anti-leech thing, I figure it's tit-for-tat. They argue pop-ups, banners, etc, etc are means of funding hosting time and bandwith requirements of a given website. Well, I see the inclusion of excessive banner ads and pop-ups in the same light as spam emails--those who employ such tactics are stealing MY time and bandwith, and I am well within my rights to use tools like ad blockers and spam filters to prevent them from committing such "theft" (I'm allowed to have locks on my doors and such after all). I think these anti-leech people forget that a lot of people pay for internet access by the Gigabyte, and that not only are the ads intrusive, they can potentially add up and cost web surfers real money (money they would be involunatrily spending).
Pity the poor souls who have to endure such ads on screens of 800*600 or less, on dial-up or other such low-bandwidth connections (old laptops on the road, or even the newest mobile, wireless devices out there now)...
Yes--I agree that AMD is making a smart move. The only segments of the PC market that are going anywhere are the budget PC market (think under US$500), the mobile market (notebooks, tablet PCs, etc) and new form factors and "non-pc" consumer devices(ultra-compact desktops, set-top boxes like PVRs and game consoles). These all have a few common elements: the edge goes to the one who can produce low-cost, low-power, low-heat designs. The high-end desktop/workstation market is flat at best (and most likely in decline). Few in the market for a new PC are geeks who want to compile their Linux kernels faster than all their friends or render sophisticated 3D videogames at framerates higher than their eyes can perceive them (or most monitors can display them).
BUT---hold on a minute. Who said AMD was just going cheap. I got the idea that they were diversifying their market strategy. Until now, their marketing has been very unsophisticated to be polite. Hell, in an effort to win a petty pissing match over who is the king of the crap-pile they have gone so far as to give their processors "model numbers" instead of labelling them by clock speed. Joe blow on the street gets very confused when you try to explain what the 2100+ means on his "Athlon XP 2100+" (no it isn't REALLY a 2.1 GHz chip--it's only 1.733GHz but it's just as good...huh?). time to shape up.
Now, AMD is promising to get a bit smarter in selling their bleeding edge technology. Why languish in a stagnant high-end PC market with razor-thin profits against a giant comptetitor? Instead of trying to find, retain and support thousands (millions?) of geeks and "keep-up-with-the-joneses" types, each with 1 to maybe 8 processors each, perhaps it would be better for business to land a deal with hundreds of customres like Cray, or NASA, or JPL, or governments and big corporations, who each need thousands of processors to meet their needs?
Big customers don't need their hands held--they order in volume, making production runs easier to manage and cheaper and margins higher. They engineer and support their own products. These big guns are also much better at showcasing the latest technology. Think about it. What would be more impressive to the average person (and the mainstream press):
* If AMD powered supercomputers rendered the latest CG animated hit movie, an AMD-powered cluster of servers made Google search 500% faster, or predicted storm movements on Jupiter or repeatedly beat Kasparov at chess...etc
* AMD scored higher on some obscure benchmark on Andtech and Tom's Hardware, the pizza-faced kid next door got his 3D gam to go 120FPS at 32-bits and some insanely high resolution (ultimetely more a testament to his video card's performance anyways), and the computer salesman made and Athlon XP system boot faster than a similar but higher priced P4 system
I'd say the former would garner more respect and a higher profile than the latter.
Hmmm... I know a lot of "Joe Users" would install "everything" just to try everything out, but at least in the case of Mandrake for the longest time, even if you installed every package/service they are DISABLED by default, and turning them on at install time brings up a big warning screen listing services that will run when the system powers up, informing Joe that running these increases the risk of security breaches and to take extra precautions. Sure Joe can install it all at once, but if he is dumb enough to click through a screen boldly marked WARNING like it was a Microsoft EULA then he gets what he deserves...
Installing the equivalent in Win2000 Server does no such thing--if Joe were to install everything on the Win2000 CD he would be running open HTTP, HTTPS, FTP, SMTP, SQL server ports etc etc--no warnings about admin accounts with blank passwords, installing latest patches, vulnerability to exploits or so on.
Considering installing a server configuration of either OS is intended for capable server admins, perhaps MS figured warnings were unjustified. However it's nice that Mandrake went that extra mile to allow at least SOME hardening of the OS with a click of a button at install time and warnings of the consequences--and wise too considering their OS is free and accessible to a wide audience.
Why not fix it the old-fashioned way?
on
The Story of "Nadine"
·
· Score: 3, Informative
A bit OT but...
If you made a mistake in your contact info, you could've rectified the problem by voice phone and fax. That's what I did when the contact info for a domain I registered had to be updated because the email was an expired domain for a now-defunct company. Network Solutions had surprisingly good customer service and once they verify the credentials via fax (or even snail-mail) they will make any changed required without the use of email.
That way seems low-tech and backwards, but you don't need to register an otherwise useless domain and it costs nothing more than your time (certainly mot much more than the trouble of registering a domain and setting up the DNS).
Us techie types should be careful not to overlook the most simple solution because it is low tech...
OTOH, the useless domain could be useful to keep track of how many OTHER people make that typo...kinda like the Slashdor site...
You assume an artist will be willing to put their blockbuster song EXCLUSIVELY on this new format. "Hey, lets only sell our music on these neat little disks few people have heard of, no one asks about in the stores and no one has players for yet"... Artists and their agents cant be THAT stupid...
It was an uphill battle for CDs for the same reason--however CDs had advantages over tapes and records. CDs hold more music, are physically smaller, and somewhat more robust than records. Unlike tapes they are random access--no seeking for songs--and they dont wear out. To top it all off, CDs sound better than tapes and (to most people) records. Despite that, it took many years to become mainstream, and the backing of the GIANT SONY corporation.
So whats new here? We have a smaller disk, but less capacity than a CD (put MP3s on a data CD and they hold more hours of music), no better sound quality, 3 times the expense for players, and they are functionally cripled by content control "features". And as much as the potential for multimedia (video, etc) is played up...well DVD's, CD-R's, flash memory media, miniDV tapes, etc seem to do fine for any kind of digital content.
Recording executive's wet dream to be sure, but there is absolutely nothing here to lure a customer away from any existing choices...
Well...unless RIAA petitions successfully in the US to have those choices made illegal under the DMCA because the facilitate the illegal distribution of copyrighted music...
I think yyou mean NLX form factor and not NTX. In any case, you make a valid point. These flexATX boards are a nice idea, however they are a hack job of a standard (ATX) that wasn't designed with compactness in mind (in my opinion). Shrinking the ATX form factor comprimises expandability--typically a tiny ATX board has only one PCI slot and integrated everything. Also, the small flexATX cases strike me as not very serviceable (cramped, awkward layout, cooling issues and so on).
The NLX form factor was designed for compatness, serviceability and flexibility in mind. The mainboard itself is very small and has no expansion slots--rather it has a card edge that plugs into a special slot on a backplane. The backplane contains the mainboard slot plus one or more PCI slots (the only drawback I see is that I havent found an NLX backplane that has an AGP slot--other than that it would be an ideal form factor!). The typical mini-desktop might only have one or two PCI slots, but with this form factor largger cases or industrial racks could have a backplane with many more slots (expandability).
Also, since the mainboard plugs INTO a slot rather than having slots with cards in them it makes expandability/serviceability MUCH easier--it you need to expand memory, upgrade or replace the motherboard, etc. you simply unlatch the board and pull it out the back of the case, without removing any cards or disassembling the chassis. The prime drawback, as sachmet mentions, is the lack of mainboards and cases sold in this form factor. Consequently they fetch larger prices. Why this is is beyond me--I guess it's the inertia of maintaining a modicum of compatibilityh with the 20 year old PC form factor...
I agree what "distribution" is a more appropriate term, since large media companies add absolutely no value to the artist's works besides marketing and disseminating it. Whatever you call it, it is an obsolete industry.
What this faction is doing is following their preservation instincts. Executives want to keep their jobs and will try ALL avenues to do so. It seems to me that the biggest efforts put into mandated DRM benefit neither the actual content creator nor the consumer--the consumer suffers for not being allowed to take full advantage of technology, and the content creator (artist) cannot fully and freely distribute their works.
The alternate scenario to the one in the article would be that what happened to the typewriter industry is what will happen to the big media companies. With the advent of computers, the market for typewriters collapsed. Today, a relative handful of typewriters are made compared with 20 years ago--many companies went under and jobs were lost, but the additional benefits broght by the computer far exceeded the loss of the typewriter industry. THAT is what I hope happens with big media companies. They have become irrelevant because of technological progress. The government didn't legislate laser printers for PCs out of existence in order to protect typewriter companies and the thought of doing so would be considered ridiculous, so whay should the members of the MPAA be afforded such protection? The world didn't end because 90% of typewriter makers disappeared, and it wont if/when big media distributers do. In the LONG term, the vacuum will be filled with something better that works WITH and not against technology (so far history had always shown that to be the case if things are allowed to proceed naturally).
Good point made here...although Canada has it's share of bad ISPs (Bell), there are many broadband providers that are global pioneers in the business and provide very reliable service.
In my observations in Alberta (Edmonton and Calgary) broadband has generally been reliable and brodband adoption continues to increase despite the economic downturn. Videotron was introducing cable broadband service in Alberta (Edmonton) and Quebec as early as late 1996, and their cuustomers seems quite satisfied apart from the wait times when service is required.
In Calgary, Shaw cable has weathered the growing pains without TOO much difficulty, and service continues to improve. Shaw was wise enough to cut ties with @home when their difficulties affected Shaw's quality of service. This month, Shaw is pulling the plug on at-home completely and moving all their customers to Shaw's own infrastructure, which has been in tested for a few months now in parallel with @home. Perfect timing considering the complete mess @home is in right now.
I myself use DSL to brovde my internet needs. I work from home and run servers so I opted for TELUS-Cadvision "Basic Business" service. It provides me with 7168 (down)/1024 (up) kbps (although typical d/l is more like 2048), I get an 8-ip static subnet on which I can run servers or whatever else, free dial-up access, 1 year free DNS hosting and a lot of other goodies, all for approx. US$65 per month. "Home" or "starter" DSL or residential cable typically costs little more than US$25 per month.
No only is it cheap, it is reliable...in 2 full years of service, I've had less than 1 hour without internet access. It took a few weeks before I got it installed, but they got it dome the day they said it would be done when I first applied for the service. Tech support is quite good too---they don't even hang up on me when I tell them I run Linux!
Hmm...given the great steaming pile of crap produced by the US TV networks in recent years, I'd say it would be no great loss.
Really, decent programming is pretty thin on the ground, and most good TV originated from other sources (independent productions, cable TV, internationally...). If big bad ol' "commercial skip" and the ability to share programming with fellow Replay owners results in the death of a TV network or three I say let technology prevail!
If such a shakeup doesn't improve the quality of TV then at least maybe more people will extricate their fat asses from their chesterfields to go for a walk in the park, once "Survivor" is cancelled due to lack of advertising revenue...
Heh heh...and we got to see the the sexy vulcan chick and the engineer slather cold, wet, slippery de-contamination gel on each other 1st too...woo hoo! (judjing from T'Pol's umm..."thermometers"...it must've been cold...heh heh)...but I digress...
Interestingly enough, it seems to be a tradition to show Star Trek shows a day in advance in Canada...
When the original series was first played, the CBC received and broadcast their print of each episode one day prior to it's debut in the US. Subsequent series were syndicated and shown on various other independent networks and stations, sometimes a day in advance. I remember DS9 and Voyager in particular being shown here the day before it was on a US station.
You could hook up the winding mechanism to a treadmill, excercise bike, etc, and stay healthy with a daily 20 minute workout...at the same time recharging your servers!
<sarcasm>God knows a lot of us geeks could use the workout. Besides, having to "wind up" your servers daily might seem like a chore, but all those poor M$ Windows admins have to reboot daily anyways, so when you think about it there really wouldn't be that much extra work involved...</sarcasm>
OK, I admit it...I know Fortran and I'm proud of it. I Learned F77 and F90 in University (it was part of the Electrical Engineering program). No, I am not a dinosaur from the punch card days, I'm only 25.
I know of NO BETTER LANGUAGE to handle complex algebra arithmetic or matrices. I had to use both Fortran, C and MATLAB at various times during my schooling for numerical methods and digitital signal processing courses, and I think Fortran is the best suited by far--it is much faster than MATLAB and it is more suited to the task than C. Sure C is flexible, but in being flexible it makes a LOT of useful tasks difficult to accomplish. Yeah yeah, there are C libraries out there for complex numbers and matrices, but are they standardised and widely known? I wasn't aware of any when I was in school...and Fortran IS widely known amongst scientists and engineers at least.
Yeah, Fortran is old, weird (for some) and inflexible, but it was designed to tackle mathematical computations for scientists and engineers (FORmula TRANslation...think why they called it that?). It wasn't meant to program OSes in, or hook to relation database, or process text, or be compiled on-the-fly and embedded on a web page, or do e-commerce. It is a number-crunching tool, and a VERY WORTHY one at that.
I see C and C++ as jacks of all trades, masters of none...they can do everything, but make everything difficult, which makes them good to use when you need to develop a jack-of-all-trades program or where speed and size are critical and you need more portability than assembly language (I think a really good use for C is to use it to write other languages;-). For EVERYTHING ELSE there are other, often better tools...Fortran for numerical processing, Perl for text processing, Java for portable applets and servlets, etc etc...
*sigh* Why do people get caught up in language wars? Every language has its merits in certain areas...yes, I'm sure even Cobol and BASIC have some merits...I just have to think for awhile and I'll find them;-)
Slashdot Mirror
...would be kinda nice. I think this "barebones laptop" that you could assemble/have assembled to your specs is a fantastic idea, however an industry standard would be required for it to REALLY take off as it has for desktop PCs.
Desktop users are blessed with a standard form factor (ATX and variants) describing physical specs for motherboards, cases, power supplies, peripheral connectors and so on. Wouldn't it be tremendous if there was a widely recognised standard for laptop/notebooks? Being that the featured article is slashdotted, I cant say if that was the idea, but links posted in the comments included the "barebones" concept as offered by ECS, and I got the impression the components were ECS-specific...
Imagine if there was an "MPX" standard (Mobile...PC...X...whatever--just to pick a 3-letter designation as an example). You could buy a generic laptop caseand power supply and load it with an MPX mobo and your choice of keyboards, touchpads, trackballs, displays, etc. These could be obtained from most any source, form a multitude of manufacturers.
The MPX spec. would specify how these components interconnected--one could go so far as to include notebook variants of PCI or AGP (whereever PC Card devices couldn't fit the bill, such as video card upgrades--not sure but does Intel's new Mobile CPU/chipset architecture not touch on that?). Perhaps devices like keyboards and touchpads would use internal USB-based connections, and there would be a standard display connector and sizes (to correspond with a selection of standard laptop/notebook case sizes).
Mmmmmm... MPX would be nirvana, and as prices came down it couls supplant ATX and it's variants. Well, I suppose not TOTAL nirvana if having Apple iBook looks is really important to you. It wouldn't be UGLY, but an MPX form-factor laptop made from a mix of Taiwanese parts might very well be as sexy as the beige box in Dilbert's cubicle. HOWEVER, there is a big market out there for boring-but-practical, and I'm sure the uber-geek case-modders and companies like VooDoo would find ways to make cool cases within the constraints of a standard like "MPX"...
If I'm ignorant of something like this already in existence, please share info!
... you'd thing they would use it to host their web page har har!
Of course, the slashdotting it is starting to succomb to might be because they spent do much on developing the machine that they could only afford hosting off a single little DSL connection. After all, they certainly haven't spend much on PR either as they do not garner many search hits on the net or widespread press...
Enough has been said about the SQL comment--suffice it to say the 1st lesson in "Web Application Development 101" should be "Develop 3 layers: Data Acccess, Business Logic and Presentation". I think most web developers missed the 1st day of class. Not only is there too much SQL and related data access code embedded in ASP, PHP, etc--there is often a great reliance on embedding business logic (and yes, some presentation elements such as UCASE, padding, etc) into non-portable SQL statements and stored procedures. In simple situations (if you can GUARANTEE your small project will stay small, which is very rare) mashing everything together makes for faster development and more compact code. In the 99% of other cases you'll eventually end up with a big bowl of spaghetti. Perhaps it's because many web programmers are trained on syntax (the mehanics of Java, Perl, PHP, HTML and so on) and not on design.
As for assigning a "strategist"--that can be invaluable to a project. The end customer in most cases knows his business as it presently runs, and most often they are not a tech business. I have clients in manufacturing, distribution and food processing/agribusiness. Their business is knowing how to make wigits or food or chemicals or how to send stuff all over the continent--and all they want out of computers are ways to make these tasks work better--and more often than not they must rely on "strategists" to show them HOW and WHAT computers can do to achieve that. That's the case for ANY component of a client's business that is ancilliary to their primary goals.
I don't always use a strategist--but I will if the job is big enough and/or to establish a relationship with a new client. In my opinion (and experience), a good "strategist" should be the following:
1. The strategist should NOT be a past or present employee or long-standing affiliate of the client--that might seem counter-intuitive however someone with intimate knowledge of some or all of the processes in a business standa a chance of being blind to change. Viewing "from the outside in" is most often the best way to spot and change counter-productive practices.
2. If possible, a person with industry knowledge (if you're going a web project for Pepsi, then someone who knows the soft drink industry). This can be more important than having an advisor or strategist that knows technology...which brings us to:
3. The strategist should most certainly NOT be a programmer on the project (or indeed be involved in project development AT ALL beyond the requirements phase--or in XP, I suppose developing the tests). If there are questions about feasibility or time/resource requirements to achieve functionality, it is not the strategist's job to answer them--the answers should be provided as feedback from the developers upon receiving the specs/tests. Not only can programming be an iterative process--so can (and often should be) determining project specs. The last thing a client wants is to get mired in an alphabet soup discussion of SQL, ASP, PHP, etc. on what is required to satisfy a reporting requirement--all they want is to state a list of wants/needs--then they want you to think about it a bit and tell them how long and how much $ for them so they can prioritise. Having a non-programmer strategist as a go-between helps immensely in avoiding that trap.
It's great to see all the Linux coverage, especially from media sources that are general interest in nature rather than exclusively technical.
However, there is one interesting side effect that Linux advocates should keep a watchful eye for. With the increase in publicity also comes the increas in misinformation. It isn't always intentional (such as FUD from Microsoft that is so often complained about on Slashdot), but it can be annoying (or worde, damaging) nonetheless.
Take for example, the article from "The Age" mentioned above. This is a minor example, but illustrates my point well:
Rather than copyrighting the Linux code, Torvalds published it on the Internet and invited others to offer improvements.
Sure, Linus freely distribtued the code to his Linux project on the internet, however the code to Linus REMAINS COPYRIGHTED. This mis-statement was not meant to damage the Linux cause--but it doesn't help the general public understand the concept of "Free" software versus free (as in beer), and that Free Software doesn't mean anti-copyright.
In fact, copyright is the very thing that keeps the source to Linux truly Free. Without the power of copyright the owners of Free source code would have no way of defending the GPL. Conversely, developers couldn't choose to distribute their works in traditional closed-source fashion. Although copyright law has been perverted and abused in recent years, copyright in its truest sense is a fundamental right in the protection of "free speech" (not only should citizens enjoy reasonalbe protection to express their thoughts as they wish to--be it the spoken or written word, music, film or even computer programming--they should also have some right to control how that expression is used). It's a tough balancing act of course--the DMCA extends much to far into the realm or IP protection, allowing the owner of copyrighted work so much unchecked power that it stifles freedom of expression.
Such a simple mis-statement and it warrants an entire article on its own. To assist the press in accurate coverage, perhaps the organisers of Linux conferences should put together press kits that place a lot of emphasis on the concept of Free Software and background on Linux that extends beyond pure technical information. Of course one cannot be sure writers would read the material, however ditribution of such information would make it easier to respond to widely published factual errors
Perhaps some letters to the editor praising the positive coverage, and at the same time correcting misinformation would do a lot of good for the Linux community...
(moreso than the water used to make snow on certain ski slopes)
Hmm...seems some featured articles on Slashdot are like the human foetus--they must gestate for around 40 weeks before making an appearance. (Take a look at the article--last updated 12 APRIL 2002!? I watched a TV program on this EXACT CASE on the Discovery channel AGES ago.
Even before that--some YEARS ago--on (if I recall) the CBC about a site somewhere in the Northern US states or Canada about using snowmaking technology as a final stage in sewage disposal--spraying droplets of wastewater through snowmaker nozzels infused it with oxygen and caused flash-freezing which destroyed a great deal of the remaining bacterial contaminants. It wasn't donr on a ski slope, however, the additional nutrients and moisture made for a really good vegetable crop in the summer.
Mildly interesting as the subject is, recycling wastewater is not the latest, greatest groundbreaking in technology--and it's been happening implictly for ages. My city gets almost all it's drinking water from a river--which is downstream from a nomber of small towns. Our fair city drinks from the piss and crap of not only countless birds, fish, beavers and livestock--it drinks from that of tens of thousands of people as well. I pity those who live downstream of the city--they get to pull water from a river that is essentially the effluent from the waste of 1 MILLION people.
Novel and environmentally consious way of making snow? Sure. Hardly shocking or cutting edge though.
NEXT...
Yes, Germany is an industrial powerhouse, and the likes of BMW and Mercedes are world renowned for their quality of build and mechanical reliability. However, in my experience Germany has never been outstanding in the field of electronics (nor has much from anywhere else in Europe either). If BMW engineered this IDrive thing in Germany I'm not surprised it came out so quirky.
I've driven a few cars of European origin (or those that use Euopean components) and have found that the electrical/electronic systems in all cases were the weak points. It doesn't matter if the components--from the hall-effect sensors, MAPs, up to the ECM unit--has Bosch (Gremany) or Renix (France) or whatever, they have been a source of aggravation.
It seemed there were some exceptions. I owned a Renault awhile back that had a nifty little travel computer that did gas mileage, average speed, trip odometer, etc (sourced by Jager if I remember right) that always worked and was remarkably accurate--even when the car was over 10 years old. The same car was also equiped with a nice Blaupunkt radio. When I had to get behind the dash to fix other problems I had to pull out both componenets. Much to my dismay, both the Jager travel computer and the Blaupunkt radio were "made in Japan". Hmm...so much for the exceptions. On the other hand, things that DID go wrong (intermittent wipers, turn signal/horn/everything stalk Renalt was infamous for, intrument cluster illumination) all involved parts that were made in Germany or made in France.
I'd say as far as electrical and electronic engineering goes in may cases, Germany raks marginally better than France (which ranks marginally better than Britain). If you doubt me then look closely at a lot of the high-quality "german" electonic components (automotive or not)--and don't be surprised if the whole thing wasn't made in asia, or at least was made from mostly asian parts.
If it's "pure german" electronics, expect it to be overbuilt or overengineered and somewhat "rube-goldberg" in terms of design (it seems German electronics designers intinctively want to fly from Berlin to Paris by way of Beijing).
I'm sure eventually such quirks (like a crazy radio or brakes going on without brakelights and so on) will kill someone, and a lawsuit will be inevitable (perhaps sooner, especially if enough people in the Litigous States of America get pissed off--or hurt).
...beyond the obvious "just to show of your geekiness"
1. Already mentioned I think...mobile/automotive/outdoor applications. Ever tried to use a laptop when it's colder than 10C? I have (refrigerated warehouses, outside, etc for programming PLCs in isolated locations). It still works but the LCD screen sure looks like crap.
2. Got a bunch of servers without monitors (or that share one monitor)? It sure would be nice to see the CPU load, available drive space, network traffic and so on at a glance instead of pulling up to a console and switching the KVM sharing device (or SSH-ing or telnetting) all over the place and getting mixed up as to which machine you are observing.
3. Nice to have basic diagnosic info like that on a separate display...it doesn't add clutter to your desktop (mine can get cluttered enough as it is) and you don't have to go hunting to see what window it's buried under. It's also probably less resource intensive than putting it on a GUI window and more convenient than various command-line/text-based utilities out there.
4. The VFD vs. LCD is nice because it is bright and readable---more so than even backlit LCD. If I'm computing at night by the light of a desklamp (where I'm at, in December that means any time after 4PM), it would show up very nicely on the tower sitting on the floor by my desk (LCDs sure wouldn't).
There ya go...sounds pretty useful to me (beyond being a geek-toy). On the flip side I don't think I'd go for this particular VFD product. It takes up two drive bays--thanks but no thanks--that rules out use on low-profile desktops and rack-mounted PCs (and many compact and mid-tower cases if you have, say, a DVD and a CD-RW, some tape backup systems, or auxilliary cooling device or lots of other other stuff that fits in a 5.25 bay). Concept-wise it's a very good idea though...
I have to respectfully counter some of your statements--quite honestly I'm surprised they were modded up to the degree they were as they are as poorly thought out as you claim the featured article to be...
...and all that is wrong with it. Exactly where is the point or thought in that statement? Is you point that since massive corprate lobbying happens all the time it is still good? RIAA, MPAA, Benson&Hedges, EXXON and other such corporate interests are stuffing the pockets of a lot of politicians too--most often in defence of coporate welfare and policies against the interests of democracy, individual rights and freedoms and the environment. I guess since MS shouldn't be held accountable for their lobbying practices neither should anyone else.
- Microsoft put little more than a CDDB lookup into their player. Since everyone freaked out they've made it very very obvious during the install what gets sent. Take a look at everyone else's player and you'll see they are not trying to take over the world in some sinister plot. And product activation sucks but so does having perhaps the most pirated piece of software in the world so you really can't blame them.
Kudos to MS for disclosing exactly what their player is doing--if they didn't we WOULD have reason to be concerned about ulterior motives and "sinister plots". However, the very fact that extensive means of monitoring usage are being integrated into software is itself disturbing. Sure it's done in the name of convenience and no ill will is intended...but what if the system is compromised by someone with malicious intent--either within MS or outside it(especially knowing MS's security record)?
And as for product activation being a response to rampant piracy--perhaps MS is putting too much into treating a symptom rather than finding a cure. Windows and Office aren't pirated so much just because they are there (although their universality in the market doesn't help). Consider that the ONLY profitable divisions of MS are the OS and Office groups, and that they achieve their profits through extreme mark-ups and draconian licensing policies. Combine that with very low hardware prices and it's no wonder nobody like buying Windows or Office--why spend less than $1000 on a very capable PC and more than that just for the basic software? Can you imagine what piracy would be like in the video industry if you paid $150 for your DVD player and a single movie cost $100 or more?
- Microsoft lobbies. Welcome to the united states of america.
- Attacking microsoft because the PCs it donates aren't good enough? Come on! Donations are voluntary and should be welcomed no matter what they are. Don't forget Gates does some serious giving-back. Funny how he forgets to mention this..
Having had first hand experience with organisations on the receiving end of such so-called donations I have to say WHAT A PILE OF CRAP! Donations are voluntary and should be wecomed no matter what? So the food bank should accept donations of mouldy cheese? Distress shelters should accept ripped, tattered and soiled blankets, coats and clothing? They were "volunteered" by someone too so we should bend down and kiss their feet for ther generous offers?
Schools, churches and other charitable organisations are staffed by and large by volunteers and low-paid staff on meagre budgets--dealing with inappropriate donations wastes their time ans id more harmful than not giving at all. These 386, 486 and early Pentiums running Win 3.1 and 95 that MS "graciously" donates to schools are THEIR "mouldy blocks of cheese". Indeed, they can be put to as much good use in a typical school.
And as far as Bill and MS giving back a-plenty. If I remember correctly a good tithe to your church was traditionally 15% of your disposable income. MS and Bill personally come NO WHERE CLOSE to that. Furthermore, much of the charitable work Bill does is done with his own interest in mind. Bill can swoop down and provide a school with dozens of brand new P4s equipped with Windows XP (he doesn't even to that). Then in subsequent years he'll subject them to software audits and mandatory upgrades, to MS's benefit. Well--praise the lord Bill Gates was around to help us out.
As for me, I'll continue bashing Microsoft so long as they provide me with the wrecking ball with which I can do it.
In the areas of policy of most concern to the Slashdot community (Telecoms, IP rights and so on), McCain is probably the best person the US has for the job. Based strictly on his voting record and the policies he defends, we often wouldn't see eye to eye, however philisophically he is very much in the same camp.
McCain tends to take positions based on a populist stance--certainly the best way to do it in a democracy. Less so than most other politicians he listens to ALL voters--not just Republicans, or corporations, or lobby groups.
That's probably why the Post article is all wishy-washy. Normally you can count on a Democrat to bend over and take it in the butt from Jack (Valenti, or most others in the entertainment industry cartels) and for a Republican to bend over and take it from Bill (Gates, or the BSA or others trying to lock people into their tech IP).
McCain is going to be hard to pin down by the pundits because he'll be influenced by everyone and anyone, and the press in north America is very poor at correctly gauging what populist sentiment is--it tries to steer public opinion rather than follow it.
All in all, it is a promising move to have committees steered by those like McCain. The press AND government these days really have a problem listening to what the public wants...
This is very typical of Microsoft-based products--particularly when they see threatening competition on the horizon or must play catch-up(which is almost always). What is important for the Palm/Symbian camps is that they MUST NOT write off Microsoft because their offering is a big steaming pile of crap, or lose focus on their own products by fighting Microsoft's tactics.
History has shown that as long as MS can limp along until the third major release of any given product, it has a much better than even chance of squishing the competition. Where are Go Computing and Netscape today? They were leaders/innovators and now they essentially don't exist--killed off because MS stepped up the FUD machine (like with the Win3.1 based PenWindows 10 years ago) and/or taking a loss financially (taking IE off the extra-cost "plus pack" and giving it away in the Win95 install CDs, selling XBboxes for less than they cost to make, etc).
MS will be at the height of desperation if they start giving away the Smartphone OS to the phone makers (if they can get away with it--I think they'd acually pay phone makers to use Smartphone if the US DOJ lets them). There is little MS won't stoop to do if they really want a piece of the action in a given market--especially considering the scads of cash they are sitting on right now. If Smartphone isn't killed off quickly, look for MS to do something that drastic.
It'll happen in other markets that MS plays in too. Remember MS only makes money off its OS and Office licenses--it uses that money and influence to leverage other products. Watch for it--MS might find Linux becoming more of a threat than it is comfortable with in the corporate server and workstation space. Biggest reason? Huge up-front costs in purchasing licenses (look at Content Management Server - US$43,000 per processor!? OS NOT included? Holy Crap! Think I'll just use Slashcode, Scoop, OpenACS etc to manage my site). Solution? MS can use bags of cash to set up their own leasing program a la GE capital to spread out the big $ hurt, or otherwise accelerate their move towards selling their "software as a service". It'll be ammunition against the argument that Linux has a lower implementation costs. Anything to make it easier to "invest" in Microsoft rather than any competition.
If it all goes "right", MS will have it made--from the cellphone up to the big racks of servers, consumers and businesses will just get a monthly bill from Bill for anywhere from $100 or so up to thousands for corporations--just like the electric bill. Then Bill takes care (and control) of your gagets and computers to make sure all the ugrades and bugfixes are done, and that you aren't using any pesky little "non-authorised" apps and files. And the rest of us will have the honor and privlege to turn said devices on and "use as directed".
...mySQL had proper, full support for constraints Slashdot wouldn't post so damn many duplicate articles...
HAR HAR HAR...just jokin' around...pleeeeze don't kill me.....
Hmmm... I guess it is all a matter of perspective. For an RDBMS to handle 50,000 records, particularly on todays hardware, is actually quite trivial. I've regularly run into apps that size (web based and otherwise) using (shudder) MS Access 2000. While Access is a real dog, it can handle it and "never have problem one" size wise.
In my experience with database applications, anything under 100,000 records is considered a small database. I have to admit in the last year or two my firsthand experience with mySQL has been limited, but from what I see in the current feature set there are situations where PostgreSQL is the definite superior choice.
Sure, MySQL can handle a lot of records and is quite stable and lightweight, however the lack of such basic features as foreign key constraints and restrictions such as table-level-only locking limit its usefulness as an "Oracle killer".
Yes, MySQL can do SELECTs from million-plus record tables, do lots of inserts per second etc etc in all the benchmarks, but what happens when you have 100,000s to millions of records and dozens to hunderds (maybe thousands?) of concurrent users who all frequently write to and delete from the database in addition to doing SELECTs. mySQL falls apart because all the users have to wait in line to write to a given table because the whole damn thing gets locked out until the first user to open a write transaction hasn't finished yet.
A large database also adds challenges to maintaining referential integrity. If foreign keys were so expendable that they could be eliminated (functionality put in the application) to boost performance, why does such functionality remain in Oracle MSSQL and others? Maybe because if it is done in the database (and done right--solid and stable) you don't have to trust your data integrity to application code. You don't want to deal with orphaned records when you have 45 tables and 2.5 million records to manage, just because some flunky Java programmer didn't cover all the bases in a class buried somewhere in a big enterprise web app. Foreign keys allow for an extra layer of protection for important data--if a database constraint is violated by an application bug it'll sure get noticed faster.
These are but two examples where PostgreSQL has the edge (even if it can't top out some arcane benchmark). Given that, mySQL is still very useful--and it doesn't have to be limited to "toy apps". Slashdot can use mySQL quite well, thank you very much. It is certainly NOT a "toy app", and mySQL's performance can handle all the slashdotting thrown at it, as far as retrieving data goes. Keep in mind though, that Slashdot data is fairly static. Its database is read far more often than it is updated/inserted/deleted (even given how many comments and articles are posted and with moderation). The relationships between tables are simple enough that referential integrity is manageable through application code, and above all, the data is not THAT mission critical (if a comment or 12 disappear from Slashdot, the lights will stay on and planes will not fall out of the sky). Speed and compactness are primary for Slashdot, the rest is secondary, and mySQL can fit the bill. If I need something to handle payroll, or health records or whatever--I thing PostgreSQL has reached the point where I find it the more trustworthy of the two with data of that nature.
While PostgreSQL vs mySQL can ignite a virtual Jihad, it should come down to this--pick the right tool for the right job (not just features and performance, but also personal preferences--what tools are you most comfortable with, etc etc).
That's even funnier than when I encountered an ad from ZeroAds on (if I recall correctly) a Yahoo/Geocities page--delivered in the higly ironic manner of a pop-up ad. Gotta wonder what kind of pinhead marketer figured advertising anti-pop-up software using pop-up ads would make a positive impression.
On the whole anti-leech thing, I figure it's tit-for-tat. They argue pop-ups, banners, etc, etc are means of funding hosting time and bandwith requirements of a given website. Well, I see the inclusion of excessive banner ads and pop-ups in the same light as spam emails--those who employ such tactics are stealing MY time and bandwith, and I am well within my rights to use tools like ad blockers and spam filters to prevent them from committing such "theft" (I'm allowed to have locks on my doors and such after all). I think these anti-leech people forget that a lot of people pay for internet access by the Gigabyte, and that not only are the ads intrusive, they can potentially add up and cost web surfers real money (money they would be involunatrily spending).
Pity the poor souls who have to endure such ads on screens of 800*600 or less, on dial-up or other such low-bandwidth connections (old laptops on the road, or even the newest mobile, wireless devices out there now)...
Yes--I agree that AMD is making a smart move. The only segments of the PC market that are going anywhere are the budget PC market (think under US$500), the mobile market (notebooks, tablet PCs, etc) and new form factors and "non-pc" consumer devices(ultra-compact desktops, set-top boxes like PVRs and game consoles). These all have a few common elements: the edge goes to the one who can produce low-cost, low-power, low-heat designs. The high-end desktop/workstation market is flat at best (and most likely in decline). Few in the market for a new PC are geeks who want to compile their Linux kernels faster than all their friends or render sophisticated 3D videogames at framerates higher than their eyes can perceive them (or most monitors can display them).
BUT---hold on a minute. Who said AMD was just going cheap. I got the idea that they were diversifying their market strategy. Until now, their marketing has been very unsophisticated to be polite. Hell, in an effort to win a petty pissing match over who is the king of the crap-pile they have gone so far as to give their processors "model numbers" instead of labelling them by clock speed. Joe blow on the street gets very confused when you try to explain what the 2100+ means on his "Athlon XP 2100+" (no it isn't REALLY a 2.1 GHz chip--it's only 1.733GHz but it's just as good...huh?). time to shape up.
Now, AMD is promising to get a bit smarter in selling their bleeding edge technology. Why languish in a stagnant high-end PC market with razor-thin profits against a giant comptetitor? Instead of trying to find, retain and support thousands (millions?) of geeks and "keep-up-with-the-joneses" types, each with 1 to maybe 8 processors each, perhaps it would be better for business to land a deal with hundreds of customres like Cray, or NASA, or JPL, or governments and big corporations, who each need thousands of processors to meet their needs?
Big customers don't need their hands held--they order in volume, making production runs easier to manage and cheaper and margins higher. They engineer and support their own products. These big guns are also much better at showcasing the latest technology. Think about it. What would be more impressive to the average person (and the mainstream press):
* If AMD powered supercomputers rendered the latest CG animated hit movie, an AMD-powered cluster of servers made Google search 500% faster, or predicted storm movements on Jupiter or repeatedly beat Kasparov at chess...etc
* AMD scored higher on some obscure benchmark on Andtech and Tom's Hardware, the pizza-faced kid next door got his 3D gam to go 120FPS at 32-bits and some insanely high resolution (ultimetely more a testament to his video card's performance anyways), and the computer salesman made and Athlon XP system boot faster than a similar but higher priced P4 system
I'd say the former would garner more respect and a higher profile than the latter.
Hmmm... I know a lot of "Joe Users" would install "everything" just to try everything out, but at least in the case of Mandrake for the longest time, even if you installed every package/service they are DISABLED by default, and turning them on at install time brings up a big warning screen listing services that will run when the system powers up, informing Joe that running these increases the risk of security breaches and to take extra precautions. Sure Joe can install it all at once, but if he is dumb enough to click through a screen boldly marked WARNING like it was a Microsoft EULA then he gets what he deserves...
Installing the equivalent in Win2000 Server does no such thing--if Joe were to install everything on the Win2000 CD he would be running open HTTP, HTTPS, FTP, SMTP, SQL server ports etc etc--no warnings about admin accounts with blank passwords, installing latest patches, vulnerability to exploits or so on.
Considering installing a server configuration of either OS is intended for capable server admins, perhaps MS figured warnings were unjustified. However it's nice that Mandrake went that extra mile to allow at least SOME hardening of the OS with a click of a button at install time and warnings of the consequences--and wise too considering their OS is free and accessible to a wide audience.
A bit OT but...
If you made a mistake in your contact info, you could've rectified the problem by voice phone and fax. That's what I did when the contact info for a domain I registered had to be updated because the email was an expired domain for a now-defunct company. Network Solutions had surprisingly good customer service and once they verify the credentials via fax (or even snail-mail) they will make any changed required without the use of email.
That way seems low-tech and backwards, but you don't need to register an otherwise useless domain and it costs nothing more than your time (certainly mot much more than the trouble of registering a domain and setting up the DNS).
Us techie types should be careful not to overlook the most simple solution because it is low tech...
OTOH, the useless domain could be useful to keep track of how many OTHER people make that typo...kinda like the Slashdor site...
You assume an artist will be willing to put their blockbuster song EXCLUSIVELY on this new format. "Hey, lets only sell our music on these neat little disks few people have heard of, no one asks about in the stores and no one has players for yet"... Artists and their agents cant be THAT stupid...
It was an uphill battle for CDs for the same reason--however CDs had advantages over tapes and records. CDs hold more music, are physically smaller, and somewhat more robust than records. Unlike tapes they are random access--no seeking for songs--and they dont wear out. To top it all off, CDs sound better than tapes and (to most people) records. Despite that, it took many years to become mainstream, and the backing of the GIANT SONY corporation.
So whats new here? We have a smaller disk, but less capacity than a CD (put MP3s on a data CD and they hold more hours of music), no better sound quality, 3 times the expense for players, and they are functionally cripled by content control "features". And as much as the potential for multimedia (video, etc) is played up...well DVD's, CD-R's, flash memory media, miniDV tapes, etc seem to do fine for any kind of digital content.
Recording executive's wet dream to be sure, but there is absolutely nothing here to lure a customer away from any existing choices...
Well...unless RIAA petitions successfully in the US to have those choices made illegal under the DMCA because the facilitate the illegal distribution of copyrighted music...
I think yyou mean NLX form factor and not NTX. In any case, you make a valid point. These flexATX boards are a nice idea, however they are a hack job of a standard (ATX) that wasn't designed with compactness in mind (in my opinion). Shrinking the ATX form factor comprimises expandability--typically a tiny ATX board has only one PCI slot and integrated everything. Also, the small flexATX cases strike me as not very serviceable (cramped, awkward layout, cooling issues and so on).
The NLX form factor was designed for compatness, serviceability and flexibility in mind. The mainboard itself is very small and has no expansion slots--rather it has a card edge that plugs into a special slot on a backplane. The backplane contains the mainboard slot plus one or more PCI slots (the only drawback I see is that I havent found an NLX backplane that has an AGP slot--other than that it would be an ideal form factor!). The typical mini-desktop might only have one or two PCI slots, but with this form factor largger cases or industrial racks could have a backplane with many more slots (expandability).
Also, since the mainboard plugs INTO a slot rather than having slots with cards in them it makes expandability/serviceability MUCH easier--it you need to expand memory, upgrade or replace the motherboard, etc. you simply unlatch the board and pull it out the back of the case, without removing any cards or disassembling the chassis. The prime drawback, as sachmet mentions, is the lack of mainboards and cases sold in this form factor. Consequently they fetch larger prices. Why this is is beyond me--I guess it's the inertia of maintaining a modicum of compatibilityh with the 20 year old PC form factor...
I agree what "distribution" is a more appropriate term, since large media companies add absolutely no value to the artist's works besides marketing and disseminating it. Whatever you call it, it is an obsolete industry.
What this faction is doing is following their preservation instincts. Executives want to keep their jobs and will try ALL avenues to do so. It seems to me that the biggest efforts put into mandated DRM benefit neither the actual content creator nor the consumer--the consumer suffers for not being allowed to take full advantage of technology, and the content creator (artist) cannot fully and freely distribute their works.
The alternate scenario to the one in the article would be that what happened to the typewriter industry is what will happen to the big media companies. With the advent of computers, the market for typewriters collapsed. Today, a relative handful of typewriters are made compared with 20 years ago--many companies went under and jobs were lost, but the additional benefits broght by the computer far exceeded the loss of the typewriter industry. THAT is what I hope happens with big media companies. They have become irrelevant because of technological progress. The government didn't legislate laser printers for PCs out of existence in order to protect typewriter companies and the thought of doing so would be considered ridiculous, so whay should the members of the MPAA be afforded such protection? The world didn't end because 90% of typewriter makers disappeared, and it wont if/when big media distributers do. In the LONG term, the vacuum will be filled with something better that works WITH and not against technology (so far history had always shown that to be the case if things are allowed to proceed naturally).
Ummm...oh yeah, for our US readres those are CANADIAN dollers...multiply by 0.63 to get what it would cost with YOUR dollars....
Good point made here...although Canada has it's share of bad ISPs (Bell), there are many broadband providers that are global pioneers in the business and provide very reliable service.
In my observations in Alberta (Edmonton and Calgary) broadband has generally been reliable and brodband adoption continues to increase despite the economic downturn. Videotron was introducing cable broadband service in Alberta (Edmonton) and Quebec as early as late 1996, and their cuustomers seems quite satisfied apart from the wait times when service is required.
In Calgary, Shaw cable has weathered the growing pains without TOO much difficulty, and service continues to improve. Shaw was wise enough to cut ties with @home when their difficulties affected Shaw's quality of service. This month, Shaw is pulling the plug on at-home completely and moving all their customers to Shaw's own infrastructure, which has been in tested for a few months now in parallel with @home. Perfect timing considering the complete mess @home is in right now.
I myself use DSL to brovde my internet needs. I work from home and run servers so I opted for TELUS-Cadvision "Basic Business" service. It provides me with 7168 (down)/1024 (up) kbps (although typical d/l is more like 2048), I get an 8-ip static subnet on which I can run servers or whatever else, free dial-up access, 1 year free DNS hosting and a lot of other goodies, all for approx. US$65 per month. "Home" or "starter" DSL or residential cable typically costs little more than US$25 per month.
No only is it cheap, it is reliable...in 2 full years of service, I've had less than 1 hour without internet access. It took a few weeks before I got it installed, but they got it dome the day they said it would be done when I first applied for the service. Tech support is quite good too---they don't even hang up on me when I tell them I run Linux!
That's my US$0.0125...have a nice day!
Hmm...given the great steaming pile of crap produced by the US TV networks in recent years, I'd say it would be no great loss.
Really, decent programming is pretty thin on the ground, and most good TV originated from other sources (independent productions, cable TV, internationally...). If big bad ol' "commercial skip" and the ability to share programming with fellow Replay owners results in the death of a TV network or three I say let technology prevail!
If such a shakeup doesn't improve the quality of TV then at least maybe more people will extricate their fat asses from their chesterfields to go for a walk in the park, once "Survivor" is cancelled due to lack of advertising revenue...
Heh heh...and we got to see the the sexy vulcan chick and the engineer slather cold, wet, slippery de-contamination gel on each other 1st too...woo hoo! (judjing from T'Pol's umm..."thermometers"...it must've been cold...heh heh)...but I digress...
Interestingly enough, it seems to be a tradition to show Star Trek shows a day in advance in Canada...
When the original series was first played, the CBC received and broadcast their print of each episode one day prior to it's debut in the US. Subsequent series were syndicated and shown on various other independent networks and stations, sometimes a day in advance. I remember DS9 and Voyager in particular being shown here the day before it was on a US station.
You could hook up the winding mechanism to a treadmill, excercise bike, etc, and stay healthy with a daily 20 minute workout...at the same time recharging your servers!
<sarcasm>God knows a lot of us geeks could use the workout. Besides, having to "wind up" your servers daily might seem like a chore, but all those poor M$ Windows admins have to reboot daily anyways, so when you think about it there really wouldn't be that much extra work involved...</sarcasm>
Yes, Fortran...
;-). For EVERYTHING ELSE there are other, often better tools...Fortran for numerical processing, Perl for text processing, Java for portable applets and servlets, etc etc...
;-)
OK, I admit it...I know Fortran and I'm proud of it. I Learned F77 and F90 in University (it was part of the Electrical Engineering program). No, I am not a dinosaur from the punch card days, I'm only 25.
I know of NO BETTER LANGUAGE to handle complex algebra arithmetic or matrices. I had to use both Fortran, C and MATLAB at various times during my schooling for numerical methods and digitital signal processing courses, and I think Fortran is the best suited by far--it is much faster than MATLAB and it is more suited to the task than C. Sure C is flexible, but in being flexible it makes a LOT of useful tasks difficult to accomplish. Yeah yeah, there are C libraries out there for complex numbers and matrices, but are they standardised and widely known? I wasn't aware of any when I was in school...and Fortran IS widely known amongst scientists and engineers at least.
Yeah, Fortran is old, weird (for some) and inflexible, but it was designed to tackle mathematical computations for scientists and engineers (FORmula TRANslation...think why they called it that?). It wasn't meant to program OSes in, or hook to relation database, or process text, or be compiled on-the-fly and embedded on a web page, or do e-commerce. It is a number-crunching tool, and a VERY WORTHY one at that.
I see C and C++ as jacks of all trades, masters of none...they can do everything, but make everything difficult, which makes them good to use when you need to develop a jack-of-all-trades program or where speed and size are critical and you need more portability than assembly language (I think a really good use for C is to use it to write other languages
*sigh* Why do people get caught up in language wars? Every language has its merits in certain areas...yes, I'm sure even Cobol and BASIC have some merits...I just have to think for awhile and I'll find them