Oh, I agree - the 23" ACD is a fantastic monitor, and is certainly worth looking at if you're playing in that price range. But remember, the post I replied to was specifically looking for a 4:3, 23" LCD screen. They probably have a specific reason for needing the 4:3 ratio.
In fact, I was looking for a 1600x1200, 4:3 screen a couple years ago myself. I didn't have quite that much money to burn, so I settled for the ViewSonic VP201MB, the 20" little brother to the linked VP230MB above. I've been perfectly happy with it, even though it's "only" big enough to be obnoxious, not totally in-your-face.:) In fact, I'm looking at it right this moment as I compose this post!
I suppose when it's finally time to "move up" from this tiny little 20" screen, I'll look for a 23" (or bigger) 16:9 LCD of some sort. Hopefully I'll be able to afford one by then. If they're still making them, I'm sure the ACD will be on my list of possibilities.
Why will this never happen? Two words: product liability.
Look at the cost of a simple, single-engine general aviation aircraft. A good chunk of those costs go to pay for product liability insurance for the manufacturer. And aircraft are built with the assumption that they are being piloted by a trained, skilled, intelligent human being.
You shift the "skill" requirement to the computer, let any Joe Blow get behind the wheel, and the FIRST time the computer screws up and kills/injures/maims Mr. Blow, you're going to get sued into oblivion.
Sorry, unless the *legal* climate changes, this is one *technical* change I doubt will ever come to pass.
Red herring. Last time I checked, only one elevator ran on a track at a time. Combined with the fact that the elevator never CHANGES tracks, and that the only safety device needed is one to prevent a fall in a single direction, and the problem faced by an elevator's "computer" is ridiculously simple compared with what a car's driver faces every moment he/she is on the road.
Actually, as a resident of Colorado that recently got a new license, I have to mention that while the process IS digital, they do not "print your license right in front of you". Our DMV in its infinite wisdom has outsourced the printing of the licenses to a company in California. You now leave the DMV with a little slip of paper that's good for 30 days, until your new license is mailed to you - FROM ANOTHER STATE! They do at least let you keep your old license if you're renewing, but not before punching a hole through the expiration date to mark it as expired pending the new arrival.
Imagine the pleasure I experienced when after having had said hole punched in my license, I had to fly two weeks later, prior to the arrival of the new license. The oh-so-friendly TSA people in Chicago were not impressed with either my "punched" license, or the little photoless slip of paper that was supposed to pass in its place. I very nearly wasn't able to come home. (The TSA folks at Denver's airport were aware of the DMV's stupidity, so I had no problem leaving).
To add just a little more to the "stupidity" column, did you know our DMV must take a new picture of you for every document? If I have no license, and come in to take both the written and driving tests the same day, it goes like this: - Take/pass written test - Get photo taken - Take/pass driving test - Get photo taken again, 1 hour later than last one - Leave DMV with silly slip of paper - 3 weeks later, learner permit (which was only valid for about an hour 3 weeks ago) AND license arrive in the mail FROM ANOTHER STATE!
You just can't make this stuff up. Oh, and can we please skip the painfully obvious "???" "profit" jokes.
law enforcement may still not take phishing seriously. But I bet Citibank, US Bank, et al do.
And you might actually lose that bet. I received a "phishing" spam allegedly from CitiBank, and when I tried to send it on to spoof@, abuse@, and postmaster@, I got three very curt, very automated replies informing me that "an email you sent to us was blocked from being delivered because it appeared to be spam". Well, no shit, you geniuses. At that point I decided that I'll simply delete any further CitiBank "phishing" scams I get, and CitiBank can go pound sand. Good thing I'm not (and won't ever be) a customer of theirs.
As long as we're tossing out commercial solutions, one that I haven't seen mentioned is Unicenter, from Computer Associates. Among all its other myriad features, it has a first-class workload management component. The place I'm working at now uses it, and it supports job dependencies, time constraints, resource constraints and about a zillion other conditionals. It's even somewhat reasonable to configure, once you get into it and learn its terminology. It does everything Control-M does, and then some, plus its interface isn't quite as much of a nightmare.
I don't work for CA, I'm just glad I'm not still doing battle with Control-M.:)
So I was just thinking about this after I posted my remark mentioning gutters. I have a legitimate question for any metric-using folks that might have worked in the printing industry.
One of the reasons non-metric paper has the 1" gutters in the larger 'standard' sizes is because books are generally made by combining 16-page folded signatures, binding them, then 3-side trimming them to make them square and clean. If all metric paper sizes are exactly twice the size of their next smaller size, do all of your books wind up undersized? Or do you have the equivalent of our larger sizes, where there's a gutter available to be trimmed off after folding/binding to get you down to a 'standard' size?
And oddly enough, non-metric paper also comes in 5.5x8.5 (half of letter size), 23x17 (two 11x17s and a gutter), and 23x35 (two 23x17s and a gutter). This just makes sense to do, so you can print 16-page signatures for books or 8-up letter-size pages that can be cut down. How is the metric version superior because they can get two of each size out of the next size up just as easily as we can?
Nope, no oxymoron. Take some materials science classes, they're actually pretty eye-opening. Strong and brittle can exist happily together. Pure iron is another example of a strong but brittle material. "Strong" implies that the material can take a relatively large amount of stress before it fails/breaks. It has nothing to do with what actually *happens* when it fails. "Brittle" means that when the material fails, it fails abruptly and completely. The opposite of brittle is malleable (the material bends, or fails slowly instead of snapping abruptly). Think of the difference between snapping a hard pretzel stick vs. tearing a soft pretzel. The hard pretzel can be quite strong - especially if it's as thick as normal soft pretzel - but when it breaks, it breaks completely and abruptly, and with basically no warning.
Of course this isn't so much of a problem as compared to the special materials handling required to work with magnesium parts. Like they said, the training and equipment needed to handle aluminum body work is expensive. Well, the same goes for magnesium.
What happens when SCO gets swept back under the rug?
What happens is Microsoft open their warchest and throws funds at some new chowderhead to have them come forward and start making life suck for people using (or thinking about using) Linux.
Actually, I do have a partial solution to spam, but in involves changing the email protocol to require the SENDER to store the email, rather than the receiver.
Congratulations. Maybe you and Mr. Bernstein could get together and discuss it?
Hmm - guess I was one of the lucky ones. I just retired my U10 440/2 after well over a year of service as a great personal workstation. The only time it was ever rebooted was when I was physically adding to/upgrading the hardware.
Re:I've got an Ultra 5 and a Sparc Station 5!
on
Sun Sparc 5 Nostalgia
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I hear this complaint occassionally, and I usually try to ask - have you actually tried using the app in question under Solaris 8 and had it not function somehow? Sun has always been hard-core about making sure that apps for earlier versions of Solaris continue to work on the later versions. So much so in fact, that they guarantee compatibility in writing, as long as you follow their ABI guidelines. Any app that runs on 7 that won't run on 8 is rather badly written from the get-go.
As for the other questions, the CPUs pop up on eBay from time to time - try to get a 360/2 or a 440/2, they have a faster FSB. And the mozilla library dependencies ARE quite the nightmare. If you can move to Solaris 8, the dependencies at least go from being a nightmare to just a bad dream.:)
Ok, so now I've looked through the patent, and I have to respectfully disagree. I see nowhere in the claim where they require the entity doing the delegation or selling of the service to be in control the top-level domain. In fact, I don't see any reason why their use of "subdomain.domain" couldn't be interpreted to include "foo.bar.com" (with domain being bar.com) just as easily as "bar.com" (with domain being com). They only specify "domain", they do not explicitly say "top-level domain". Not only that, but further down in the text, they specifically call out someone running a service that uses name@service.com and name.service.com as an example of someone implementing their claimed method.
The scope of this looks genuinely frightening, and this really needs to be thrown out - pronto.
I haven't actually dug through the patent, but even if it just covers third-level domains, it most certainly could be applied to.com,.net,.org and so on. What's to stop someone who owns example.com and uses emails like user@example.com from also using user.example.com as a website?
For an example a little closer to home, look at sourceforge.net. project.sourceforge.net is how they hand out URLS. If they allow email addresses project@sourceforge.net, they'd be violating this patent as well, right?
The simple fact is that if the FCC and the US Govt gets heavy-handed with regulating VoIP, it will go underground, just like file and music swapping did when they clamped down on it. VoIP is going to happen one way or another. Whether it's done rogue P2P-style, or above-board remains to be seen.
Yes, early versions of Marinetti (1.0,1.1) had their issues, like any software under active development. But I was able to use Marinetti 2.0 just fine via 56k dial-up PPP and null-modem PPP directly wired to a Solaris machine acting as proxy/router with no issues. 2.0 is reasonably stable, and is still readily available for folks who still have their IIgs's up and running.
MOSP - the Marinetti Open Source Project - was still developing on it last I heard, and they were shooting for a 3.0 version. They've cured a number of bugs, and I believe they've even got a working MacIP layer. Of course, it's been quite a while since I checked in on the code....
I have a IIgs, and a bunch of Basic games I wrote in HS that I'd like to get moved over to PC so that I can run them under an emulator.
If all you want to do is move data from your IIgs to a PC, don't waste your money on a network card - us psychos that do filesharing to the IIgs from the Mac/Linux boxes via AppleTalk need them. Just make yourself a cheap null modem cable and grab a copy of the ADT (Apple Disk Transfer) software. It moves disks between the Apple// and the PC pretty quickly over the serial port. They're only 140K after all. Once the disks are imaged onto the PC, there's even DOS-level utilities for manipulating the files on the images directly.
For those who maybe want to pull the old Apple//'s out of the attic and use them again, drop by comp.sys.apple2 and join the fray. There's still a fairly active group of people using them.
For the record, my IIgs has a 7MHz accelerator, 8 Megs of RAM, CD-ROM, 2Gig hard drive, two 5.25" drives, two 3.5" superdrives, 14" monitor (Apple's was only 12") and a full 101-key keyboard. Quite a fun machine to use, even still today. A LanceGS is next on my list to add.
And at the risk of getting modded down for replying to my own post, I forgot to mention that marinetti also supports the LanceGS, a 10Base-T ethernet card for the IIgs. Don't laugh, it really works!
Any reason there's no mention of marinetti in this article? Marinetti implements a TCP/IP stack for the IIgs, but works under the IIgs' native interface, GS/OS. There's telnet, ftp, AIM, and email apps already, and even the beginnings of a *graphical* web browser for it. And yes, it's open source as well.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's NOT as simple as line-out to line-in. Phonograph signal levels are notably lower than "standard" line-levels, such as CD, and require a pre-amp of some sort.
One thing people don't realize is that many times a rebate is just a sneaky way for a particular retailer to get around a MAP (Minimum Advertised Price). Say XYZ Company sets a MAP of $300 for a given product. Bob's Computer Warehouse and Discount Footwear Emporium can advertise that product as "$250 ($300, with $50 mail-in rebate)" and still be within the letter, if not the spirit, of XYZCo's MAP policy.
In almost all of these cases, the sole reason for offering the rebate is to get you in the store, and most of the time the rebates are handled by a third-party company. The retailer has no interest in fulfilling the rebate - they got you into their store, and chances are pretty good you bought more than just the advertised product while you were there.
TCP syslogging already available
on
SDSC Secure Syslog
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
If you need syslogging over TCP and want a *way* more configurable system for filtering syslog destinations, including regex filtering and per-host routing, you might want to look at syslog-ng. It works great for me, and is already GPL'ed, so no waiting for a license change.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, I agree - the 23" ACD is a fantastic monitor, and is certainly worth looking at if you're playing in that price range. But remember, the post I replied to was specifically looking for a 4:3, 23" LCD screen. They probably have a specific reason for needing the 4:3 ratio.
:) In fact, I'm looking at it right this moment as I compose this post!
In fact, I was looking for a 1600x1200, 4:3 screen a couple years ago myself. I didn't have quite that much money to burn, so I settled for the ViewSonic VP201MB, the 20" little brother to the linked VP230MB above. I've been perfectly happy with it, even though it's "only" big enough to be obnoxious, not totally in-your-face.
I suppose when it's finally time to "move up" from this tiny little 20" screen, I'll look for a 23" (or bigger) 16:9 LCD of some sort. Hopefully I'll be able to afford one by then. If they're still making them, I'm sure the ACD will be on my list of possibilities.
Here ya go. It's still hella expensive, though.
Why will this never happen? Two words: product liability.
Look at the cost of a simple, single-engine general aviation aircraft. A good chunk of those costs go to pay for product liability insurance for the manufacturer. And aircraft are built with the assumption that they are being piloted by a trained, skilled, intelligent human being.
You shift the "skill" requirement to the computer, let any Joe Blow get behind the wheel, and the FIRST time the computer screws up and kills/injures/maims Mr. Blow, you're going to get sued into oblivion.
Sorry, unless the *legal* climate changes, this is one *technical* change I doubt will ever come to pass.
Red herring. Last time I checked, only one elevator ran on a track at a time. Combined with the fact that the elevator never CHANGES tracks, and that the only safety device needed is one to prevent a fall in a single direction, and the problem faced by an elevator's "computer" is ridiculously simple compared with what a car's driver faces every moment he/she is on the road.
Actually, as a resident of Colorado that recently got a new license, I have to mention that while the process IS digital, they do not "print your license right in front of you". Our DMV in its infinite wisdom has outsourced the printing of the licenses to a company in California. You now leave the DMV with a little slip of paper that's good for 30 days, until your new license is mailed to you - FROM ANOTHER STATE!
They do at least let you keep your old license if you're renewing, but not before punching a hole through the expiration date to mark it as expired pending the new arrival.
Imagine the pleasure I experienced when after having had said hole punched in my license, I had to fly two weeks later, prior to the arrival of the new license. The oh-so-friendly TSA people in Chicago were not impressed with either my "punched" license, or the little photoless slip of paper that was supposed to pass in its place. I very nearly wasn't able to come home. (The TSA folks at Denver's airport were aware of the DMV's stupidity, so I had no problem leaving).
To add just a little more to the "stupidity" column, did you know our DMV must take a new picture of you for every document? If I have no license, and come in to take both the written and driving tests the same day, it goes like this:
- Take/pass written test
- Get photo taken
- Take/pass driving test
- Get photo taken again, 1 hour later than last one
- Leave DMV with silly slip of paper
- 3 weeks later, learner permit (which was only valid for about an hour 3 weeks ago) AND license arrive in the mail FROM ANOTHER STATE!
You just can't make this stuff up. Oh, and can we please skip the painfully obvious "???" "profit" jokes.
law enforcement may still not take phishing seriously. But I bet Citibank, US Bank, et al do.
And you might actually lose that bet. I received a "phishing" spam allegedly from CitiBank, and when I tried to send it on to spoof@, abuse@, and postmaster@, I got three very curt, very automated replies informing me that "an email you sent to us was blocked from being delivered because it appeared to be spam". Well, no shit, you geniuses. At that point I decided that I'll simply delete any further CitiBank "phishing" scams I get, and CitiBank can go pound sand. Good thing I'm not (and won't ever be) a customer of theirs.
As long as we're tossing out commercial solutions, one that I haven't seen mentioned is Unicenter, from Computer Associates. Among all its other myriad features, it has a first-class workload management component. The place I'm working at now uses it, and it supports job dependencies, time constraints, resource constraints and about a zillion other conditionals. It's even somewhat reasonable to configure, once you get into it and learn its terminology. It does everything Control-M does, and then some, plus its interface isn't quite as much of a nightmare.
:)
I don't work for CA, I'm just glad I'm not still doing battle with Control-M.
So I was just thinking about this after I posted my remark mentioning gutters. I have a legitimate question for any metric-using folks that might have worked in the printing industry.
One of the reasons non-metric paper has the 1" gutters in the larger 'standard' sizes is because books are generally made by combining 16-page folded signatures, binding them, then 3-side trimming them to make them square and clean. If all metric paper sizes are exactly twice the size of their next smaller size, do all of your books wind up undersized? Or do you have the equivalent of our larger sizes, where there's a gutter available to be trimmed off after folding/binding to get you down to a 'standard' size?
And oddly enough, non-metric paper also comes in 5.5x8.5 (half of letter size), 23x17 (two 11x17s and a gutter), and 23x35 (two 23x17s and a gutter). This just makes sense to do, so you can print 16-page signatures for books or 8-up letter-size pages that can be cut down.
How is the metric version superior because they can get two of each size out of the next size up just as easily as we can?
Nope, no oxymoron. Take some materials science classes, they're actually pretty eye-opening. Strong and brittle can exist happily together. Pure iron is another example of a strong but brittle material.
"Strong" implies that the material can take a relatively large amount of stress before it fails/breaks. It has nothing to do with what actually *happens* when it fails.
"Brittle" means that when the material fails, it fails abruptly and completely. The opposite of brittle is malleable (the material bends, or fails slowly instead of snapping abruptly).
Think of the difference between snapping a hard pretzel stick vs. tearing a soft pretzel. The hard pretzel can be quite strong - especially if it's as thick as normal soft pretzel - but when it breaks, it breaks completely and abruptly, and with basically no warning.
Of course this isn't so much of a problem as compared to the special materials handling required to work with magnesium parts. Like they said, the training and equipment needed to handle aluminum body work is expensive. Well, the same goes for magnesium.
What happens is Microsoft open their warchest and throws funds at some new chowderhead to have them come forward and start making life suck for people using (or thinking about using) Linux.
Actually, I do have a partial solution to spam, but in involves changing the email protocol to require the SENDER to store the email, rather than the receiver.
Congratulations. Maybe you and Mr. Bernstein could get together and discuss it?
Hmm - guess I was one of the lucky ones. I just retired my U10 440/2 after well over a year of service as a great personal workstation. The only time it was ever rebooted was when I was physically adding to/upgrading the hardware.
I hear this complaint occassionally, and I usually try to ask - have you actually tried using the app in question under Solaris 8 and had it not function somehow? Sun has always been hard-core about making sure that apps for earlier versions of Solaris continue to work on the later versions. So much so in fact, that they guarantee compatibility in writing, as long as you follow their ABI guidelines. Any app that runs on 7 that won't run on 8 is rather badly written from the get-go.
:)
As for the other questions, the CPUs pop up on eBay from time to time - try to get a 360/2 or a 440/2, they have a faster FSB. And the mozilla library dependencies ARE quite the nightmare. If you can move to Solaris 8, the dependencies at least go from being a nightmare to just a bad dream.
Ok, so now I've looked through the patent, and I have to respectfully disagree. I see nowhere in the claim where they require the entity doing the delegation or selling of the service to be in control the top-level domain. In fact, I don't see any reason why their use of "subdomain.domain" couldn't be interpreted to include "foo.bar.com" (with domain being bar.com) just as easily as "bar.com" (with domain being com). They only specify "domain", they do not explicitly say "top-level domain". Not only that, but further down in the text, they specifically call out someone running a service that uses name@service.com and name.service.com as an example of someone implementing their claimed method.
The scope of this looks genuinely frightening, and this really needs to be thrown out - pronto.
I haven't actually dug through the patent, but even if it just covers third-level domains, it most certainly could be applied to .com, .net, .org and so on. What's to stop someone who owns example.com and uses emails like user@example.com from also using user.example.com as a website?
For an example a little closer to home, look at sourceforge.net. project.sourceforge.net is how they hand out URLS. If they allow email addresses project@sourceforge.net, they'd be violating this patent as well, right?
The simple fact is that if the FCC and the US Govt gets heavy-handed with regulating VoIP, it will go underground, just like file and music swapping did when they clamped down on it. VoIP is going to happen one way or another. Whether it's done rogue P2P-style, or above-board remains to be seen.
You get a hub and some cables and some private IP addresses and you get to work. That doesn't make the policy any less draconian, though.
MOSP - the Marinetti Open Source Project - was still developing on it last I heard, and they were shooting for a 3.0 version. They've cured a number of bugs, and I believe they've even got a working MacIP layer. Of course, it's been quite a while since I checked in on the code....
If all you want to do is move data from your IIgs to a PC, don't waste your money on a network card - us psychos that do filesharing to the IIgs from the Mac/Linux boxes via AppleTalk need them. Just make yourself a cheap null modem cable and grab a copy of the ADT (Apple Disk Transfer) software. It moves disks between the Apple // and the PC pretty quickly over the serial port. They're only 140K after all. Once the disks are imaged onto the PC, there's even DOS-level utilities for manipulating the files on the images directly.
For those who maybe want to pull the old Apple //'s out of the attic and use them again, drop by comp.sys.apple2 and join the fray. There's still a fairly active group of people using them.
For the record, my IIgs has a 7MHz accelerator, 8 Megs of RAM, CD-ROM, 2Gig hard drive, two 5.25" drives, two 3.5" superdrives, 14" monitor (Apple's was only 12") and a full 101-key keyboard. Quite a fun machine to use, even still today. A LanceGS is next on my list to add.
And at the risk of getting modded down for replying to my own post, I forgot to mention that marinetti also supports the LanceGS, a 10Base-T ethernet card for the IIgs. Don't laugh, it really works!
Any reason there's no mention of marinetti in this article? Marinetti implements a TCP/IP stack for the IIgs, but works under the IIgs' native interface, GS/OS. There's telnet, ftp, AIM, and email apps already, and even the beginnings of a *graphical* web browser for it. And yes, it's open source as well.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's NOT as simple as line-out to line-in. Phonograph signal levels are notably lower than "standard" line-levels, such as CD, and require a pre-amp of some sort.
One thing people don't realize is that many times a rebate is just a sneaky way for a particular retailer to get around a MAP (Minimum Advertised Price). Say XYZ Company sets a MAP of $300 for a given product. Bob's Computer Warehouse and Discount Footwear Emporium can advertise that product as "$250 ($300, with $50 mail-in rebate)" and still be within the letter, if not the spirit, of XYZCo's MAP policy.
In almost all of these cases, the sole reason for offering the rebate is to get you in the store, and most of the time the rebates are handled by a third-party company. The retailer has no interest in fulfilling the rebate - they got you into their store, and chances are pretty good you bought more than just the advertised product while you were there.
If you need syslogging over TCP and want a *way* more configurable system for filtering syslog destinations, including regex filtering and per-host routing, you might want to look at syslog-ng. It works great for me, and is already GPL'ed, so no waiting for a license change.