Er. No, the Sony MD recorder that includes a serial interface does nothing more than turn your computer into a glorified remote control. What's more, in order to take advantage of the drag and drop 'features,' one must use a Sony CD player connected via toslink to the MD deck. No ripping occurs with the CD-ROM drive, and no direct reading or writing of MD data is possible (at least when using the included software).
Heh. Uh, I'll admit to being unfamiliar with the HanGo player you reference, but the Cool Factor of the Sharp MD-based MP3 player consists of the following:
1. The media holds 128mb. 2. It also plays (records?) minidiscs. Like it or not, modern revisions of the ATRAC codec are rather superior to MP3, even at like bitrates (256kbps). 3. The media is cheap. (Compare pricing of a blank MD to a 128meg flash card, and then consider the amount of music one could purchase with the change left over after buying a minidisc or three)
The only un-cool factor about it, compared to flash-based players, is that it can skip. Not that it won't take a high amount of abuse before skippage occurs, but it can happen. Flash doesn't suffer from that problem.
As for the Empeg unit, it's neat. However, (I've expounded upon this at length in the past) putting hard drives inside automobiles is asking for trouble. Witness the fact that the Empeg unit spins down the drive after loading a song into RAM, and you'll see that even the designers of it understand the insurmountable problems involved. Further, once the disc in spun down, one no longer has instant access to other songs, but rather must wait for the drive to come back to life, which tends to work against the instant access Cool Factor of mp3 in general.
All said, an MD-based MP3 portable is very close to the best of all worlds. Instant access to 144 minutes of music, ability to play minidiscs, durability, and low cost of ownership.
I'm sold. Where do I sign up?
(note to those paying attention to the Big Picture: it's likely that Sony will attempt to kill this device by any means possible, as it represents a threat to both their music publishing business and possible future uses of their beloved Memory Stick flash bullshit)
There's quite a few "serious" programmable hand-held remotes out there -- seems every audio company that's putting their fingers into the home theater market has one (Sony, H-K, Rotel, Onkyo, Marantz, B&K, Carver, and so forth). Some of these are all but incapable of reliably learning codes; others get them right most of the time; none of them get it right all of the time. That said, once the codes are learned, they'll always work. Rather, they'll always work, *if* they've got enough memory to store all of the codes for all of your gear (no good way of determining that without actually trying it).
Many of the more expensive ones use an LCD touch panel. Some of these emulate a hands-on remote (which is silly), while others allow placement and shapes of buttons to be minutely tuned. Still others only have an LCD for clock display, and others still have no LCD at all.
What to do? Depends on how much you like the the toys your equipment has. At the low end, Radio Shack has a learning remote that also has preprogrammed codes (which is a good thing, as it's only got enough memory for about one full keypad of codes - you'd be lucky to get two devices into it if neither worked out-of-the-box). It's around $20, and also works with X10 stuff such as the Firecracker kit that Slashdot is still in bed with.
On the other end of the price spectrum exists Crestron, who makes incredibly serious gear. You get to create your own interface (sadly, using Windows software) and write some code to run it that runs on a large, black, rack-mount box. Plugged into this box can be almost anything - a Matrix Orbital RS-232 keypad would not be out of the question. Or an RF reciever, snagging control codes out of the air from a wireless backlit 256 color LCD panel. And light control? It wouldn't take much doing in order to get it to talk DMX-512 over RS-485, such that you can plug in your choice of professional halogen light dimmers or pretty effects lighting for your next party or stadium gig. One word of caution, though - Crestron does not list prices on their site for a reason.
Xantech has a few serious remote control systems (mostly geared toward permanent installation), and is the behind-the-scenes manufacturer for a large percentage of IR equipment.
Me, I can't afford a Crestron system, Xantech is too inconveniently yuppie for my taste (though I do use a remote repeater system of theirs, and our host Rob has one of their ground loop eliminators hung off of his VCR), and the cheaper LCD panel remotes seem flaky and cheap. So, I use a couple of things (depending on my mood and/or how involved I want to be with button-pushing).
Firstly is a Rotel RR920 learning remote. They don't make it anymore:^), but it works wonders. A large, geekish array of buttons with equally geekish labels (what did they intend the BEQ button to do, anyway? I've got it running the TV's sleep timer), and I've never come close to running out of memory with it. It supports lengthy macros, and has an LCD clock (which can also trigger said macros). List price was $150, iirc. No pre-programmed codes, so you're on your own if you've lost the original remote.
I've also got the aforementioned Radio Shack remote. It doesn't do as much, but does have a glow in the dark button you can push to light up the keypad. I keep it by the bed to turn the lights on and off with X10. For each bank of buttons, there's a few (usually) unassigned keys that you can learn arbitrary commands into. And, the pre-programmed codes aren't complete shit - it does every feature of my DSS equipment, and formerly did the Primestar boxen without complaint. But, it has no codes for my Carver CD player or Rotel preamp, and its poor little memory got filled up rather quickly because of that.
Whatever you get, it'd serve you well to buy from a place with a liberal return policy. Some of these things will not do what you expect (never trust the packaging), and there's some devices (such as a Samsung TV that I have) which no third-party remote can control (except a Crestron system, which just doesn't care how funky the remote's signal is; it will duplicate it).
Er. What US-owned TV companies are there, anyway? Which US company makes a VCR? I've got a Sony TV, a JVC, and a couple of RCAs. None are American.
What's that you say, doesn't RCA stand for "Radio Corporation of America"? Yes, it does. However, it's been the property of the Japanese Victor Corporation (JVC) for some decades.
None of the big-name TVs are American. Mitsubishi, Hitachi, Panasonic, Sharp; nothing you'll find at the local Wal-Mart or discount electronics whore. Nor are any of the possibly lesser-known TV manufacturers, such as Proton or Fisher or...
Now, none of this is to say that TVs aren't made here in the states - Philips has a nice little fab near here which cranks out CRTs 24/7.
But it leads me to ask, when someone mentions American companies in the context of TV and VCR manufacture, to whom they refer.
Indeed. Best of luck getting the Dreamcast modem to ignore dialtone, though, even if it is willing to work across an unpowered line (which is troublesome, in my experience...).
It's not too hard to make the Dreamcast talk TCP/IP over the network of your choice.
Items required: 1 Dreamcast 1 Linux box with reasonably quick modem 2 RJ-11 telephone patch cords 1 network 1 phone line simulator from Viking
Make PPP dialins work on linux box. Make PPP dialouts work on Dreamcast. Connect linux box to line simulator, connect line simulator to Dreamcast. Execute whatever sequence of button-pushage and disc-swappage required to initiate a call to the remote (several feet away) linux box. Enjoy.
Wouldn't decreasing mass tend to increase the radius of an orbit, by decreasing the effects of gravity and allowing centrifugal force to spin it further outward?
If said hypothetical author wanted assurance that his software remain "free", he would have chosen something different to develop under.
There are a great many "free" software licenses (not to mention the roll-your-own variety) which do slap restrictions on what restrictions you can place on redistribution of code you've modified. BSD is not one of them, as it takes the freedom of the recipient's use of thus-licensed software one step closer to being absolute.
While I don't see it as an issue of respect, as you seem to, I do believe this: If, given the myriad of prefab licensing options available and the option of creating your own you are yet unable to devine a set of terms which fits your personal taste, you henceforth command precisely zero respect in such matters.
However, the page describing said webserver places the cost at $1. For simplicity, let us assume it is exactly one dollar. 90 * 4 = 360MHz. The tiny webserver wins hands-down, at least in terms of aggregate clock speed.
I've used Exceed with success under both Windows and OS/2. It's got a few (mostly forgivable) quirks, but otherwise works fine with all X apps I tried to use it with.
It costs real-live money, but free evaluation copies are available. It's much faster than vnc on my 100mbit half-duplex lan, and integrates X stuffs nearly seamlessly with Windows once set up.
Versions have also existed for Win16 and DOS, iirc.
Where X and the other "GUIs" you mentioned is that X is not an operating system, while the rest of them are.
Most (all?) Linux distributions (operating systems based on the Linux kernel) and other free unices (*BSD) include network-transparent Postscript-compatible printing in the form of lpr/lpd and ghostscript.
Printer support is independant of the GUI, as it should be.
From this abstract, I'd say it's a very narrow patent. One must remember that the patent covers an entire system, from raw audio to the end result of someone downloading and playing it. If any one of those claims is varied in a given product, the patent does not apply to it. That said, it doesn't seem any more valid than, say, a modern-day patent on cheesecloth:
Before 1995, had noone ripped an audio CD using a fast SCSI drive (faster than real-time), compressed it by some means (MPEG layer I? gzip? pkzip? they'd be fools not to...) and offered it via FTP? FTP is tailored, streamlined, simple, and automatic, and has a seamless interface for selecting audio program material (ls or dir), ordering that program (get), acknowledgement (data connection opens on seperate port), and automatic download to non-volatile media. If the download was accomplished using a web browser, anything from Lynx to Netscape has the ability to execute arbitrary commands immediately upon download of a file - such as "cat audio.au >/dev/audio".
Depending on interpretation, it may not even be as complex as that. Copying a file from one physical medium to another may satisfy the "digital replacement for an analog tape recorder" statement, as replication is one of the most common uses of cassette tape. This copying was accomplished by automatic, streamlined means and posted for public consumption by many early 90's BBS systems, much faster than realtime (1/3 second to move that 5-minute 50kb MOD file from CD-ROM to hard drive so that the user can download it, and it's compressed by a variety of means). The download stipulations describe fairly accurately the process of starting a z-modem download from a BBS. If this isn't prior art, I don't know what is.
Additionally, the patent has a technical inaccuracy in that it claims that hard disk storage is solid state. Solid state (IIRC) refers to the ability of a given component to operate without the use of gaseous material. Hard drives rely on the Bernouli effect, which in this context relies on air. Take away the air, and the heads will scrape violently across the platter until every last bit of ferrite is gone and you're left with a wonderously polished alluminum or glass material, perfect for recycling.
Thus, either hard drive storage is exempted, or all other forms of solid state media aside from flash EPROM.
The UN is examples of how email would be taxed in an attempt to justify their position to the public.
The proposed unconstitutional tax is on bandwidth, not 'substantial email'.
There is an urgent need to find the resources to fund the global communications revolution -- to ensure that it is truly global. One proposal is a "bit tax" -- a very small tax on the amount of data sent through the Internet. The costs for users would be negligible: sending 100 emails a day, each containing a 10-kilobyte document (a very long one), would raise a tax of just 1 cent. Yet with email booming worldwide, the total would be substantial. In Belgium in 1998, such a tax would have yielded $10 billion. Globally in 1996, it would have yielded $70 billion -- more than total official development assistance that year.
Given a tax rate of $10/gig as shown above, would you consider 7,000,000,000 gigabytes of information too high for the world to have transferred in 1998 (including Quake, ftp.cdrom.com, and all else that comprises the network)? It doesn't sound unreasonable to me...
From each according to ability, to each according to need.
For starters, it is not my belief that the UN is the sort of organization which should impose taxes. It would also be somewhat problematic for them to tax US citizens - I seem to recall something about taxation without representation in the Constitution.
Additionally, if we assume that the going rate for bandwidth is $10/gig, the tax would amount to 100% of that.
Would you accept an increase of 100% in toll charges on your nearest non-free limited access highway so that people in South Africa can drive on one for free? A tax of 100% on your next car, so that someone in Equador can be given one at your expense?
The examples above may sound extreme, but are exactly what a bandwidth tax amounts to.
Now then, I'm certainly not saying that these nations should not have help, by way of charity of other voluntary effort. It's not the dollars I'm opposed to, but the general principle. I simply do not believe that the proper way to make things happen is by taxing industrialized countries and passing the funds along to the less fortunate, from each according to ability and to each according to need.
Using a Diamond Fireport 40 (single channel), two ultra-wide 9.1 gig IBM Ultrastars and one ultra-narrow 4.5 gig of the same family (all 7200 rpm), a reasonably quick Conner tape drive, 32x Plextor CD-ROM, and an 8x Plextor burner (all at 10MHz due to cabling issues), I have done the following, concurrently:
Run a tar backup of part of an UW drive, while cdparanoia rips an audio disc in the CD-ROM and bonnie is repeatedly stomping out a 700meg file on the narrow drive, and cdrecord burns through a CD-R at 8x from the other UW drive.
I let it sit for a bit, and noticed that cdrecord was showing no signs of its buffer beginning to empty, so I fired off updatedb and a few fscks on unmounted partitions.
After a few more minutes of horrid thrashing sounds as the hardware struggled to keep up, cdrecord ejected a perfect CD-R.
Can IDE do this, let alone on a P-133 such as that which I was using at the time? I suspect not, but I welcome any reports to the contrary.
It might also be worth mentioning that Netscape (the most cpu-intensive application I regularly use) was very responsive during all of this, probably due to the near-zero CPU time required to tend to a decent SCSI adapter.
(and for those of you who are thinking of flaming me for using a battery which is highly unlikely to occur in the real world, consider this: he who wants to have a computer which is capable of doing only one difficult task at a time is probably better off with the simplicity of ms-dos. it's faster, too - just imagine wordperfect 4.2 on a PIII/500!)
(I hope it will/can be portable, I'm sick of windows, I don't have the time to learn Linux (no flames please), and BeOS isn't maintream)
I hate to break this to you, but the Amiga isn't exactly 'mainstream' either.
This may be a silly question either yes or no, but, since the "Amiga OE" is based on the Linux kernel, can it be ported to x86 and the rest? Or is it Amiga OS, and just that, an OS...?
If Amiga makes any significant changes to the Linux kernel, they will probably be to support specialty hardware (sound, graphics, something like the BeBox's GeekPort - who knows) or a custom CPU (Transmeta?).
In any event, even if these changes are portable to say, x86 the hardware probably won't exist in a form which you can use on that architecture. Additionally, any userland programs included to make AmigaOS unique (which could very well be the whole OS) will be compiled specifically for whatever CPU they choose for their machines.
So, you'll almost certainly be able to throw out AmigaOS and run your favorite Linux distribution on a new Amiga, but running AmigaOS natively on an x86 CPU will probably never happen...unless they release the source.
You limeys with your 220VAC 50Hz power can't use our X10 stuff (and we can't use yours on our 110/60 power). Why not find someone on your side of the pond to buy it from?
I've actually done this, and it works nicely with around 75M of cat5 strung above a parking lot between two buildings.
However, within the first week the hub at the far end died. Could've been lightning, or just a fluke (wasn't a very good hub to begin with, but the ethernet card on this end survived that round). Replaced the hub with a 3com and installed an APC surge arrest at either end.
Since that time (more than a year ago), the thing had been working flawlessly until a very recent lightning strike happened nearby and the resultant EMP destroyed lots of equipment in both buildings.
All modems died along with all other phone-related items such as a PBX and alarm system, the far-away Ascend bit the dust, UPSs suddenly stopped working, video cards smoked, soundcards blackened, motherboards fried; you get the idea.
What's interesting is that the linux box we have parked over there (connected to the same hub as the Ascend and the lengthy above-ground wire, via a $20 NE2000 clone) survived unscathed. That hub, AFAIK, also lived through it - without losing a port. And though the box on the near end of the network did suffer damage, all indications are that it happened through the modem - the 3c509 which drives the long line is still in service as I write this.
While lightning hits across the cat5 are certainly a real concern, the above experience shows me that Bad Things are more likely to happen through the phone and electrical systems, and/or an EMP inducted by long cables (RS-232, parallel and similarly single-ended things -- properly installed cat5 wire is highly non-inductive by nature, at least in the *baseT sense).
Ground loops should be a problem with neither 10/100base-T (cat5) or 10base2 (rg-58 coax). The former has no ground lines at all. The latter is supposed to be grounded only at one end. (side note: if coax is *not* grounded at one end, you are not reaping any of the benefits of the expensive shielded wire.)
So, if you're close enough to legally string ethernet between the two points in questions, it'd probably work fine, and inexpensively. Fiber would certainly be a better choice, but even if the cable is as inexpensive as the above poster claims, terminating the line is a bitch, the hardware is difficult to find / expensive, and it's nowhere near as flexible as cat5. (I know I'm wrong here, but I'd like to see an ethernet hub with stock fiber ports for less than $2k).
Having said all this, I should probably also say that although everything here is entirely factual, I don't recommend using any product in a manner inconsistant with the instructions of its maker. However, if you do make the choice to go down this dark path, please use a condom^H^H^H^H^H^H^H surge protector. And be sure to arrange for a trip sitt^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H 'qualified technician' to prevent you from doing anything stupid.
If the iToaster claims to be some combination of BeOS and Linux, yet is only capable of running BeOS apps and contains no part of the Linux kernel, it is at least misleading advertising (illegal in the US).
I don't know anything about Linus's rules for the Linux trademark, which may also apply; anyone have a URL for them?
Sure. If there's any other people in your building who use X10 control for anything, you have as much control over their stuff as they do.:)
Me, I picked up a kit to use as a light dimmer that I don't have to walk across the room to fiddle with, thanks to the RF remote. Everything else has a remote control to allow me to be lazy; why should lighting be any different?
That it includes a (wireless!) serial interface certainly improves the geek factor, but I have yet to come up with any ideas to make it more useful than the remote.
Any way you look at it, $5.95 to have a remote controlled lamp and coffee pot is money well spent.
The point is to have a serial console, such that all kernel startup messages (and queries when fsck twitches and dies after an inoppertune reboot) go to the serial port. This is a Good Thing if you never intend to have a monitor or a keyboard connected (which is entirely possible with SCSI).
The reason you don't want a getty running on/dev/ttyX in this situation is that/dev/ttyX doesn't exist. You've removed VGA support from the kernel, and leaving init to try to run all of those gettys will result in much spewage on one's (serial) console as they race to their death.
Seems Seagate drives have been giving the rest of the fast bunch a bad rep.
I've got a couple of 2.5gig Seagate Medalists at 5400rpm, which have always run hot enough that it's uncomfortable to place my hand on them for any length of time.
On the other hand, I've also got three IBM 9ES drives (two 9.1's, one 4.5gig) at 7200rpm. None of them ever get anywhere beyond mildly warm, even when mounted in the same places as the aforementioned Seagates, under similar ambient conditions. (by mildly warm, I mean about the same temperature that an electric blanket might be comfortable at.)
Methinks Seagate hasn't been doing many things right as of late if they can't make a fast drive which doesn't require supplemental cooling.
Slashdot Mirror
30 kiloWatt-hours per hour?
More like 30kW. Plain and simple. Sheesh...
Er. No, the Sony MD recorder that includes a serial interface does nothing more than turn your computer into a glorified remote control. What's more, in order to take advantage of the drag and drop 'features,' one must use a Sony CD player connected via toslink to the MD deck. No ripping occurs with the CD-ROM drive, and no direct reading or writing of MD data is possible (at least when using the included software).
Misinformation abounds.
Heh. Uh, I'll admit to being unfamiliar with the HanGo player you reference, but the Cool Factor of the Sharp MD-based MP3 player consists of the following:
1. The media holds 128mb.
2. It also plays (records?) minidiscs. Like it or not, modern revisions of the ATRAC codec are rather superior to MP3, even at like bitrates (256kbps).
3. The media is cheap. (Compare pricing of a blank MD to a 128meg flash card, and then consider the amount of music one could purchase with the change left over after buying a minidisc or three)
The only un-cool factor about it, compared to flash-based players, is that it can skip. Not that it won't take a high amount of abuse before skippage occurs, but it can happen. Flash doesn't suffer from that problem.
As for the Empeg unit, it's neat. However, (I've expounded upon this at length in the past) putting hard drives inside automobiles is asking for trouble. Witness the fact that the Empeg unit spins down the drive after loading a song into RAM, and you'll see that even the designers of it understand the insurmountable problems involved. Further, once the disc in spun down, one no longer has instant access to other songs, but rather must wait for the drive to come back to life, which tends to work against the instant access Cool Factor of mp3 in general.
All said, an MD-based MP3 portable is very close to the best of all worlds. Instant access to 144 minutes of music, ability to play minidiscs, durability, and low cost of ownership.
I'm sold. Where do I sign up?
(note to those paying attention to the Big Picture: it's likely that Sony will attempt to kill this device by any means possible, as it represents a threat to both their music publishing business and possible future uses of their beloved Memory Stick flash bullshit)
There's quite a few "serious" programmable hand-held remotes out there -- seems every audio company that's putting their fingers into the home theater market has one (Sony, H-K, Rotel, Onkyo, Marantz, B&K, Carver, and so forth). Some of these are all but incapable of reliably learning codes; others get them right most of the time; none of them get it right all of the time. That said, once the codes are learned, they'll always work. Rather, they'll always work, *if* they've got enough memory to store all of the codes for all of your gear (no good way of determining that without actually trying it).
:^), but it works wonders. A large, geekish array of buttons with equally geekish labels (what did they intend the BEQ button to do, anyway? I've got it running the TV's sleep timer), and I've never come close to running out of memory with it. It supports lengthy macros, and has an LCD clock (which can also trigger said macros). List price was $150, iirc.
Many of the more expensive ones use an LCD touch panel. Some of these emulate a hands-on remote (which is silly), while others allow placement and shapes of buttons to be minutely tuned. Still others only have an LCD for clock display, and others still have no LCD at all.
What to do? Depends on how much you like the the toys your equipment has. At the low end, Radio Shack has a learning remote that also has preprogrammed codes (which is a good thing, as it's only got enough memory for about one full keypad of codes - you'd be lucky to get two devices into it if neither worked out-of-the-box). It's around $20, and also works with X10 stuff such as the Firecracker kit that Slashdot is still in bed with.
On the other end of the price spectrum exists Crestron, who makes incredibly serious gear. You get to create your own interface (sadly, using Windows software) and write some code to run it that runs on a large, black, rack-mount box. Plugged into this box can be almost anything - a Matrix Orbital RS-232 keypad would not be out of the question. Or an RF reciever, snagging control codes out of the air from a wireless backlit 256 color LCD panel. And light control? It wouldn't take much doing in order to get it to talk DMX-512 over RS-485, such that you can plug in your choice of professional halogen light dimmers or pretty effects lighting for your next party or stadium gig. One word of caution, though - Crestron does not list prices on their site for a reason.
Xantech has a few serious remote control systems (mostly geared toward permanent installation), and is the behind-the-scenes manufacturer for a large percentage of IR equipment.
Me, I can't afford a Crestron system, Xantech is too inconveniently yuppie for my taste (though I do use a remote repeater system of theirs, and our host Rob has one of their ground loop eliminators hung off of his VCR), and the cheaper LCD panel remotes seem flaky and cheap. So, I use a couple of things (depending on my mood and/or how involved I want to be with button-pushing).
Firstly is a Rotel RR920 learning remote. They don't make it anymore
No pre-programmed codes, so you're on your own if you've lost the original remote.
I've also got the aforementioned Radio Shack remote. It doesn't do as much, but does have a glow in the dark button you can push to light up the keypad. I keep it by the bed to turn the lights on and off with X10. For each bank of buttons, there's a few (usually) unassigned keys that you can learn arbitrary commands into. And, the pre-programmed codes aren't complete shit - it does every feature of my DSS equipment, and formerly did the Primestar boxen without complaint. But, it has no codes for my Carver CD player or Rotel preamp, and its poor little memory got filled up rather quickly because of that.
Whatever you get, it'd serve you well to buy from a place with a liberal return policy. Some of these things will not do what you expect (never trust the packaging), and there's some devices (such as a Samsung TV that I have) which no third-party remote can control (except a Crestron system, which just doesn't care how funky the remote's signal is; it will duplicate it).
Er. What US-owned TV companies are there, anyway? Which US company makes a VCR? I've got a Sony TV, a JVC, and a couple of RCAs. None are American.
What's that you say, doesn't RCA stand for "Radio Corporation of America"? Yes, it does. However, it's been the property of the Japanese Victor Corporation (JVC) for some decades.
None of the big-name TVs are American. Mitsubishi, Hitachi, Panasonic, Sharp; nothing you'll find at the local Wal-Mart or discount electronics whore. Nor are any of the possibly lesser-known TV manufacturers, such as Proton or Fisher or...
Now, none of this is to say that TVs aren't made here in the states - Philips has a nice little fab near here which cranks out CRTs 24/7.
But it leads me to ask, when someone mentions American companies in the context of TV and VCR manufacture, to whom they refer.
Indeed. Best of luck getting the Dreamcast modem to ignore dialtone, though, even if it is willing to work across an unpowered line (which is troublesome, in my experience...).
It's not too hard to make the Dreamcast talk TCP/IP over the network of your choice.
Items required:
1 Dreamcast
1 Linux box with reasonably quick modem
2 RJ-11 telephone patch cords
1 network
1 phone line simulator from Viking
Make PPP dialins work on linux box. Make PPP dialouts work on Dreamcast. Connect linux box to line simulator, connect line simulator to Dreamcast. Execute whatever sequence of button-pushage and disc-swappage required to initiate a call to the remote (several feet away) linux box. Enjoy.
Wouldn't decreasing mass tend to increase the radius of an orbit, by decreasing the effects of gravity and allowing centrifugal force to spin it further outward?
If said hypothetical author wanted assurance that his software remain "free", he would have chosen something different to develop under.
There are a great many "free" software licenses (not to mention the roll-your-own variety) which do slap restrictions on what restrictions you can place on redistribution of code you've modified. BSD is not one of them, as it takes the freedom of the recipient's use of thus-licensed software one step closer to being absolute.
While I don't see it as an issue of respect, as you seem to, I do believe this: If, given the myriad of prefab licensing options available and the option of creating your own you are yet unable to devine a set of terms which fits your personal taste, you henceforth command precisely zero respect in such matters.
However, the page describing said webserver places the cost at $1. For simplicity, let us assume it is exactly one dollar. 90 * 4 = 360MHz. The tiny webserver wins hands-down, at least in terms of aggregate clock speed.
I've used Exceed with success under both Windows and OS/2. It's got a few (mostly forgivable) quirks, but otherwise works fine with all X apps I tried to use it with.
It costs real-live money, but free evaluation copies are available. It's much faster than vnc on my 100mbit half-duplex lan, and integrates X stuffs nearly seamlessly with Windows once set up.
Versions have also existed for Win16 and DOS, iirc.
I believe the item you are searching for exists, and is called VMware and/or dosemu.
Else, bochs compiles readily on x86 linux.
It's all there; use it.
Where X and the other "GUIs" you mentioned is that X is not an operating system, while the rest of them are.
Most (all?) Linux distributions (operating systems based on the Linux kernel) and other free unices (*BSD) include network-transparent Postscript-compatible printing in the form of lpr/lpd and ghostscript.
Printer support is independant of the GUI, as it should be.
From this abstract, I'd say it's a very narrow patent. One must remember that the patent covers an entire system, from raw audio to the end result of someone downloading and playing it. If any one of those claims is varied in a given product, the patent does not apply to it. That said, it doesn't seem any more valid than, say, a modern-day patent on cheesecloth:
/dev/audio".
Before 1995, had noone ripped an audio CD using a fast SCSI drive (faster than real-time), compressed it by some means (MPEG layer I? gzip? pkzip? they'd be fools not to...) and offered it via FTP? FTP is tailored, streamlined, simple, and automatic, and has a seamless interface for selecting audio program material (ls or dir), ordering that program (get), acknowledgement (data connection opens on seperate port), and automatic download to non-volatile media. If the download was accomplished using a web browser, anything from Lynx to Netscape has the ability to execute arbitrary commands immediately upon download of a file - such as "cat audio.au >
Depending on interpretation, it may not even be as complex as that. Copying a file from one physical medium to another may satisfy the "digital replacement for an analog tape recorder" statement, as replication is one of the most common uses of cassette tape. This copying was accomplished by automatic, streamlined means and posted for public consumption by many early 90's BBS systems, much faster than realtime (1/3 second to move that 5-minute 50kb MOD file from CD-ROM to hard drive so that the user can download it, and it's compressed by a variety of means). The download stipulations describe fairly accurately the process of starting a z-modem download from a BBS. If this isn't prior art, I don't know what is.
Additionally, the patent has a technical inaccuracy in that it claims that hard disk storage is solid state. Solid state (IIRC) refers to the ability of a given component to operate without the use of gaseous material. Hard drives rely on the Bernouli effect, which in this context relies on air. Take away the air, and the heads will scrape violently across the platter until every last bit of ferrite is gone and you're left with a wonderously polished alluminum or glass material, perfect for recycling.
Thus, either hard drive storage is exempted, or all other forms of solid state media aside from flash EPROM.
I welcome all attempts to rip my arguments apart.
The UN is examples of how email would be taxed in an attempt to justify their position to the public.
The proposed unconstitutional tax is on bandwidth, not 'substantial email'.
There is an urgent need to find the resources to fund the global communications revolution -- to ensure that it is truly global. One proposal is a "bit tax" -- a very small tax on the amount of data sent through the Internet. The costs for users would be negligible: sending 100 emails a day, each containing a 10-kilobyte document (a very long one), would raise a tax of just 1 cent. Yet with email booming worldwide, the total would be substantial. In Belgium in 1998, such a tax would have yielded $10 billion. Globally in 1996, it would have yielded $70 billion -- more than total official development assistance that year.
Given a tax rate of $10/gig as shown above, would you consider 7,000,000,000 gigabytes of information too high for the world to have transferred in 1998 (including Quake, ftp.cdrom.com, and all else that comprises the network)? It doesn't sound unreasonable to me...
From each according to ability, to each according to need.
For starters, it is not my belief that the UN is the sort of organization which should impose taxes. It would also be somewhat problematic for them to tax US citizens - I seem to recall something about taxation without representation in the Constitution.
Additionally, if we assume that the going rate for bandwidth is $10/gig, the tax would amount to 100% of that.
Would you accept an increase of 100% in toll charges on your nearest non-free limited access highway so that people in South Africa can drive on one for free? A tax of 100% on your next car, so that someone in Equador can be given one at your expense?
The examples above may sound extreme, but are exactly what a bandwidth tax amounts to.
Now then, I'm certainly not saying that these nations should not have help, by way of charity of other voluntary effort. It's not the dollars I'm opposed to, but the general principle. I simply do not believe that the proper way to make things happen is by taxing industrialized countries and passing the funds along to the less fortunate, from each according to ability and to each according to need.
Sound familiar?
Anyone here ever stress-test IDE?
Using a Diamond Fireport 40 (single channel), two ultra-wide 9.1 gig IBM Ultrastars and one ultra-narrow 4.5 gig of the same family (all 7200 rpm), a reasonably quick Conner tape drive, 32x Plextor CD-ROM, and an 8x Plextor burner (all at 10MHz due to cabling issues), I have done the following, concurrently:
Run a tar backup of part of an UW drive, while cdparanoia rips an audio disc in the CD-ROM and bonnie is repeatedly stomping out a 700meg file on the narrow drive, and cdrecord burns through a CD-R at 8x from the other UW drive.
I let it sit for a bit, and noticed that cdrecord was showing no signs of its buffer beginning to empty, so I fired off updatedb and a few fscks on unmounted partitions.
After a few more minutes of horrid thrashing sounds as the hardware struggled to keep up, cdrecord ejected a perfect CD-R.
Can IDE do this, let alone on a P-133 such as that which I was using at the time? I suspect not, but I welcome any reports to the contrary.
It might also be worth mentioning that Netscape (the most cpu-intensive application I regularly use) was very responsive during all of this, probably due to the near-zero CPU time required to tend to a decent SCSI adapter.
(and for those of you who are thinking of flaming me for using a battery which is highly unlikely to occur in the real world, consider this: he who wants to have a computer which is capable of doing only one difficult task at a time is probably better off with the simplicity of ms-dos. it's faster, too - just imagine wordperfect 4.2 on a PIII/500!)
I hate to break this to you, but the Amiga isn't exactly 'mainstream' either.
This may be a silly question either yes or no, but, since the "Amiga OE" is based on the Linux kernel, can it be ported to x86 and the rest? Or is it Amiga OS, and just that, an OS...?
If Amiga makes any significant changes to the Linux kernel, they will probably be to support specialty hardware (sound, graphics, something like the BeBox's GeekPort - who knows) or a custom CPU (Transmeta?).
In any event, even if these changes are portable to say, x86 the hardware probably won't exist in a form which you can use on that architecture. Additionally, any userland programs included to make AmigaOS unique (which could very well be the whole OS) will be compiled specifically for whatever CPU they choose for their machines.
So, you'll almost certainly be able to throw out AmigaOS and run your favorite Linux distribution on a new Amiga, but running AmigaOS natively on an x86 CPU will probably never happen...unless they release the source.
You limeys with your 220VAC 50Hz power can't use our X10 stuff (and we can't use yours on our 110/60 power). Why not find someone on your side of the pond to buy it from?
I've actually done this, and it works nicely with around 75M of cat5 strung above a parking lot between two buildings.
However, within the first week the hub at the far end died. Could've been lightning, or just a fluke (wasn't a very good hub to begin with, but the ethernet card on this end survived that round). Replaced the hub with a 3com and installed an APC surge arrest at either end.
Since that time (more than a year ago), the thing had been working flawlessly until a very recent lightning strike happened nearby and the resultant EMP destroyed lots of equipment in both buildings.
All modems died along with all other phone-related items such as a PBX and alarm system, the far-away Ascend bit the dust, UPSs suddenly stopped working, video cards smoked, soundcards blackened, motherboards fried; you get the idea.
What's interesting is that the linux box we have parked over there (connected to the same hub as the Ascend and the lengthy above-ground wire, via a $20 NE2000 clone) survived unscathed. That hub, AFAIK, also lived through it - without losing a port. And though the box on the near end of the network did suffer damage, all indications are that it happened through the modem - the 3c509 which drives the long line is still in service as I write this.
While lightning hits across the cat5 are certainly a real concern, the above experience shows me that Bad Things are more likely to happen through the phone and electrical systems, and/or an EMP inducted by long cables (RS-232, parallel and similarly single-ended things -- properly installed cat5 wire is highly non-inductive by nature, at least in the *baseT sense).
Ground loops should be a problem with neither 10/100base-T (cat5) or 10base2 (rg-58 coax). The former has no ground lines at all. The latter is supposed to be grounded only at one end. (side note: if coax is *not* grounded at one end, you are not reaping any of the benefits of the expensive shielded wire.)
So, if you're close enough to legally string ethernet between the two points in questions, it'd probably work fine, and inexpensively. Fiber would certainly be a better choice, but even if the cable is as inexpensive as the above poster claims, terminating the line is a bitch, the hardware is difficult to find / expensive, and it's nowhere near as flexible as cat5. (I know I'm wrong here, but I'd like to see an ethernet hub with stock fiber ports for less than $2k).
Having said all this, I should probably also say that although everything here is entirely factual, I don't recommend using any product in a manner inconsistant with the instructions of its maker. However, if you do make the choice to go down this dark path, please use a condom^H^H^H^H^H^H^H surge protector. And be sure to arrange for a trip sitt^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H 'qualified technician' to prevent you from doing anything stupid.
I don't know anything about Linus's rules for the Linux trademark, which may also apply; anyone have a URL for them?
Sure. If there's any other people in your building who use X10 control for anything, you have as much control over their stuff as they do. :)
Me, I picked up a kit to use as a light dimmer that I don't have to walk across the room to fiddle with, thanks to the RF remote. Everything else has a remote control to allow me to be lazy; why should lighting be any different?
That it includes a (wireless!) serial interface certainly improves the geek factor, but I have yet to come up with any ideas to make it more useful than the remote.
Any way you look at it, $5.95 to have a remote controlled lamp and coffee pot is money well spent.
The reason you don't want a getty running on /dev/ttyX in this situation is that /dev/ttyX doesn't exist. You've removed VGA support from the kernel, and leaving init to try to run all of those gettys will result in much spewage on one's (serial) console as they race to their death.
Seems Seagate drives have been giving the rest of the fast bunch a bad rep.
I've got a couple of 2.5gig Seagate Medalists at 5400rpm, which have always run hot enough that it's uncomfortable to place my hand on them for any length of time.
On the other hand, I've also got three IBM 9ES drives (two 9.1's, one 4.5gig) at 7200rpm. None of them ever get anywhere beyond mildly warm, even when mounted in the same places as the aforementioned Seagates, under similar ambient conditions. (by mildly warm, I mean about the same temperature that an electric blanket might be comfortable at.)
Methinks Seagate hasn't been doing many things right as of late if they can't make a fast drive which doesn't require supplemental cooling.