Still compression might be the way to go, except not compression of the single frames, but some way to only store each x'th frame, and between such a store, and the next xth, only store differences, and again compress the entire stream (stored frames +differences).
The efficiency of the differences storing should be improved by a preprocessing (to compression) step to try to reduce small variations in color,
iow to make two surfaces match
in color in the digitized picture, if they are equal in color
If one, while designing the difference-detection
algorithm, is able to differ between background and foreground, one could try to further increase
compression, while maintaining quality by using lossy compression for the
background only, while keeping the foreground (e.g. faces, important with security cams) sharp.
Since some security camera's send home nearly static, or a set of static images recurring after
a certain time (moving cams), this should increase compression.
I can't imagine that something like this is not already available, e.g. as a sideproduct of all
the research that went into the DVD/DivX/MPEG
standards.
The productivity loss and IT staff hours during the conversion (and the little gain) for each upgrade is the reason, at least for large and medium corporations. The license fees are peanuts compared to that.
I also have a PPC Performa (a 5200, and soon a 6100), but mklinux is making progress there.
The other ones are not usable anymore. I bought a 68030 (like IIci or LC III) for Euro 15.
Additional stuff (SCSI disks >1 GB and 30 pins memory >1 MB) are quite expensive though)
Apple had own hardware, VA Linux was box-loader itself, getting loaded onto big OEM boxes took an
awfully long while for Linux too.
And when it came, it had to be _more_ expensive than
Windows, otherwise the big OEM's would loose their
ability to get/sell cheap restore CDs. (which are three times cheaper than REAL Windows CDs, and
except for Dell always ME, not 98)
RestoreCDs are a burden to the customers, because
they have to reformat parts of the HD to do a real
reinstallation (quick restore always failes), but
it makes Microsoft happy. Sigh.
Most northern European countries (specially Scandinavia, Netherlands and Germany. Even Belgium is starting), have large amounts of regulations,
even about sky polution in rural area's.
Using Italies number might be better than the world,
it still sucks
I work at a major ISP helpdesk, and all these proxying programs are rapidly becoming the
second major problem most helpdesks are facing.
(First is, and remains firewalls, including
NAV 2001)
The reason is simple. They sometimes go haywire
and block IE traffic. (I can get pinged, even
ICQ etc, except IE goes dead).
Give this half a year to trickly through from
the unwashed massed to ISP-management, and you have yourselves a firm partner against
these programs. (Yes that is slow, I know)
Calling it GNU/Linux must be some recognition for a lot of developpers, not for RMS himself (even though I know he wrote quite a lot of code).
Even less it should be a mandate to push his agenda over the heads of hard working package maintainers, plus a lot of developpers that aren't interested in e.g. HURD.
Even the people that do care about GNU might not care about e.g. Hurd.
I use the GPL because it suits my ideals, it is not a vote for RMS and everything he is doing.
I think that that goes for quit a lot of people that even adhere to Free Software.
Removing the "later" clause as the glibc maintainer says, sounds awfully good at the moment.
The GPL doesn't protect you from that. If a later GPL version adds certain "responsibilities" for the developper, the user could try to take you up on that, since he can select. Even if you never
intended to.
Moreover, history proves that too much power in one hand is never sound.
- Decent typing
- C++ features minus full multiple inheritance/templates
- No more includefile system (Delphi/FPC import symbol tree like structures from.DCU)
- Good numeric support. (like Pascal)
Actually the sequel to Descent, Descent II was already retrofitted with some hardware 3D support
(for lesser cards like Virge, but later also for Monster)
The acceleration for Virge was before Quake I. I don't know if the acceleration for Monster was pre or post GLQuake. (I think before, but am not 100% sure)
I can vaguely remember that Hotmail doesn't use
standard Win2000, but a customised tool (with HTTP
daemon in the kernel).
Maybe the retail patch wasn't directly applicable
Re:Why people use Netscape instead of IE or Mozill
on
Netscape 6.1
·
· Score: 1
I work for an ISP, and the largest Netscaping group
is definitily still Macintosh. Netscape is simply
faster on older pmacs. But that might not necessarily mean that they will adapt 6.x, since
6.x is slower than 4.x
Of course, the *nix flock also uses Mozilla. But
they call helpdesks less, and therefore aren't
covered by above statistics:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Then use Free Pascal, it is GPL'ed, and can compile
nearly the entire Delphi syntax.
I heard mosttimes it is an easy port, but not simply
a recompile.
Depends on your app.
Also check out Lazarus (lazarus.freepascal.org)
Maybe it could be hacked in, but nothing could hack
in an ARM codegenerator.
There is something called pocketstudio though, and
for m68k palms you could use Free Pascal
www.freepascal.org
Maybe it could be hacked in, but nothing could hack
in an ARM codegenerator.
There is something called pocketstudio though, and
for m68k palms you could use Free Pascal
www.freepascal.org
That would be dangerous, since I wouldn't be surprised if Kylix is actually _older_ than klyx.
Since lyx is the original package, and klyx came only
lateron.
Is my experience also. Mozilla/NS6 feel faster on
Win2000 then on w9x.
I'm also FreeBSD user, and there Mozilla simply is
a blessing. No more ancient versions or Linux ones using emulation modes.
Under FreeBSD Moz is slower than under Windows tho. But that was also the case for the older netscapes
Have you ever seen the difference in Windows loading
when using e.g. 98lite (98lite.net)?
Then you know that IE doesn't load fast either
Sure, but I meant as a complete solution for security cams (and e.g. optimized for surveillance with the higher idle degree)
If you have to program and implement those algoritms yourself, you'll be occupied for a while
Still compression might be the way to go, except not compression of the single frames, but some way to only store each x'th frame, and between such a store, and the next xth, only store differences, and again compress the entire stream (stored frames +differences).
The efficiency of the differences storing should be improved by a preprocessing (to compression) step to try to reduce small variations in color,
iow to make two surfaces match
in color in the digitized picture, if they are equal in color
If one, while designing the difference-detection
algorithm, is able to differ between background and foreground, one could try to further increase
compression, while maintaining quality by using lossy compression for the
background only, while keeping the foreground (e.g. faces, important with security cams) sharp.
Since some security camera's send home nearly static, or a set of static images recurring after
a certain time (moving cams), this should increase compression.
I can't imagine that something like this is not already available, e.g. as a sideproduct of all
the research that went into the DVD/DivX/MPEG
standards.
The productivity loss and IT staff hours during the conversion (and the little gain) for each upgrade is the reason, at least for large and medium corporations. The license fees are peanuts compared to that.
I'd expect the military to see through "security through obscurity".
I also have a PPC Performa (a 5200, and soon a 6100), but mklinux is making progress there.
The other ones are not usable anymore. I bought a 68030 (like IIci or LC III) for Euro 15.
Additional stuff (SCSI disks >1 GB and 30 pins memory >1 MB) are quite expensive though)
>When I used a Mac, they laughed because I had no >command prompt. When I used Linux, they laughed >because I had no GUI.
Simple solution: install Netbsd on the mac.
Read the article again. X86 hardware.
Apple had own hardware, VA Linux was box-loader itself, getting loaded onto big OEM boxes took an
awfully long while for Linux too.
And when it came, it had to be _more_ expensive than
Windows, otherwise the big OEM's would loose their
ability to get/sell cheap restore CDs. (which are three times cheaper than REAL Windows CDs, and
except for Dell always ME, not 98)
RestoreCDs are a burden to the customers, because
they have to reformat parts of the HD to do a real
reinstallation (quick restore always failes), but
it makes Microsoft happy. Sigh.
Most northern European countries (specially Scandinavia, Netherlands and Germany. Even Belgium is starting), have large amounts of regulations,
even about sky polution in rural area's.
Using Italies number might be better than the world,
it still sucks
I work at a major ISP helpdesk, and all these proxying programs are rapidly becoming the
second major problem most helpdesks are facing.
(First is, and remains firewalls, including
NAV 2001)
The reason is simple. They sometimes go haywire
and block IE traffic. (I can get pinged, even
ICQ etc, except IE goes dead).
Give this half a year to trickly through from
the unwashed massed to ISP-management, and you have yourselves a firm partner against
these programs. (Yes that is slow, I know)
Calling it GNU/Linux must be some recognition for a lot of developpers, not for RMS himself (even though I know he wrote quite a lot of code).
Even less it should be a mandate to push his agenda over the heads of hard working package maintainers, plus a lot of developpers that aren't interested in e.g. HURD.
Even the people that do care about GNU might not care about e.g. Hurd.
I use the GPL because it suits my ideals, it is not a vote for RMS and everything he is doing.
I think that that goes for quit a lot of people that even adhere to Free Software.
Removing the "later" clause as the glibc maintainer says, sounds awfully good at the moment.
The GPL doesn't protect you from that. If a later GPL version adds certain "responsibilities" for the developper, the user could try to take you up on that, since he can select. Even if you never
intended to.
Moreover, history proves that too much power in one hand is never sound.
- Decent typing
- C++ features minus full multiple inheritance/templates
- No more includefile system (Delphi/FPC import symbol tree like structures from
- Good numeric support. (like Pascal)
Actually the sequel to Descent, Descent II was already retrofitted with some hardware 3D support
(for lesser cards like Virge, but later also for Monster)
The acceleration for Virge was before Quake I. I don't know if the acceleration for Monster was pre or post GLQuake. (I think before, but am not 100% sure)
Forgot the point:
It seems that they applied a world wide statistic (increase of light/year) to a non typical region (Europe). I don't think that is wise.
P.s. my region is also awfully bright (the very southern part of the Netherlands)
I also have certain doubts about Europe.
The pictures of Europe were taken at a later date, and they subtracted 20% to compensate for that.
Sounds like a lot for a region where building new houses, roads or anything is nearly impossible due to all the legislation.
Or it could be the deserts and the Rockies of course :-)
I can vaguely remember that Hotmail doesn't use
standard Win2000, but a customised tool (with HTTP
daemon in the kernel).
Maybe the retail patch wasn't directly applicable
I work for an ISP, and the largest Netscaping group
is definitily still Macintosh. Netscape is simply
faster on older pmacs. But that might not necessarily mean that they will adapt 6.x, since
6.x is slower than 4.x
Of course, the *nix flock also uses Mozilla. But
they call helpdesks less, and therefore aren't
covered by above statistics