Bluetooth isn't really designed for anything that uses much bandwidth at all and printers use a lot. Printers also use a crap load of power, so a totally wireless one doesn't make sense.
802.11 on the other hand is perfect for this and HP sells some WONDERFUL 802.11 printer/fax/scanner/cappier/flash card readers pretty cheap. 802.11 is mainly for networks and printers fit onto networks perfectly.
I know the Airport Extreme Client mini-pci cards use the broadcom chipset but it's very probable that their base-stations do not have them. Apple's base-stations have quite a few features that seem to me like they are using one of Cisco's chipsets
LEAP and RADIUS authentication support
can simultaniusly work as a bridge and an access point
Apple has Cisco's logo posted all over their website(when talking about security crud)
- Cisco recently bought out Linksys so I guess this is kind of a moot point.
I had one in my old file server for around 2 years and had never had the thing crash, It was pretty damn reliable, probably a mean uptime of 6 months. I'd constatly stream files off it(MP3s) and also used it to backup video I had ripped(2-3 gig files).
I'm now using one in this machine(epox nforce2 mobo) because the built-in NIC isn't supported terribly well yet on boot CDs. I've recently backed up my iMac(4 gigs) to this box(Debian SID 2.6.4 kernel) and had no problems.
sorry, a bit wrong there, the XFree86 licence changed making it GPL incompatable causing a mass migration to the X.Org fork of Xfree86 which is under the the old GPL compatable X11 Licence.
The X11 licence didn't change, xfree86's licence changed.
Enabling macrovision on the video-out if a program asks it to isn't really DRM. The MPAA is cracking down on drivers that don't let programs know if the card supports macrovision. Correctly enabling/disabling macrovision is something all drivers are going to have to do to be allowed to work with a legitimate DVD player program(aka WinDVD). Linux has very very few legit DVD players, so I'm no worried. Nvidia is doing the same thing to.
Actually, as many people here have pointed out, both Apache and Perl are under GPL compatable licences, so you can use them under the GPL(which is more restrictive than Apache's or Perl's licences). People do care about GPL compatability(I.E. X11's new licence).
The problem with this approach with Java is that when a fork happens(and they will), the forked source can then never be merged back into the main tree. QT is much less likely to fork so it's less of a problem for them, but they still can't accept patches that are only GPL licenced.
Apple's xserve raid comes with 128MB of cache on each of the two fibre-channel ports, you can upgrade them to 1Gig(512MB per controller), It supports Raid 0, 1, 3, 5, 0+1 natively. This isn't exactly what you were talking about, but is cheaper than a true scsi setup. It even plays nice with Linux and Windows.
couple the xserve-raid with a PCI-X fibre-channel card and you have a storage solution for about any situation. The 3.5 TB raid setup is $11,000 + fibre-channel card($500), which is actually pretty cheap.
Java stopped changing much after 1.2, 1.1 was a pretty big step from 1.0 and 1.2 was almost as big a step as before, but since then not much has been depreciated or added. Hell, all of Yahoo's Applets are still written to the Java 1.8 spec because that is the latest JVM for MacOS 9. Some of the stuff they have added recently only effect the compiler and the JVM isn't touched(i.e. enumerated datatypes).
The shitstorms are because Die-Hard Linux geeks/distros want to have everything on their computer/CDs under the GPL. If they don't put it out under a GPL compatable license then this exercise will be utterly pointless.
IF they release it under the GPL, I see this making the open-source world a lot friendlier to Java. IF thy release it under a GPL licence, then KDE/GNOME will integrate java more closely(I.E. standardize).
I think the smartest move would be for Sun to relase Java's source under the plain old GPL, but not let any implementation use the Java trademark unless it meets their criteria( so they can keep Java from fragmenting)
backwards compatible with any newer PCI (2.2) card.
If you read the PCI-Express crud it actually is only SOFTWARE compatable with regular PCI. PCI-X is the one that is HARDWARE compatable with PCI 2.2 cards.
There are specs for a PCI PCI-Express bridge, so you could have a breakout box full of PCI cards for every PCI-X slot.
That's not exactly true... If the motherboard designer wanted to put a dedicated bus per slot he could, but you could do that with regular PCI slots. I'm betting cheaper motherboards will use a PCI-Express hub to feed slots(sharing bandwidth).
Motherboard designers don't like running a bunch of wires to one chip, it means they will probably need more layers on the motherboard to keep the signals from interfering. A LOT of motherboards have unused features(ethernet/firewire/USB/PCI busses) in the main chipset because the complexity of running wires. Many times they won't use the south-bridge's ethernet and put a Realtek 8139 on the board, because it's cheaper than adding another layer to the motherboard. PCI-Express is serial(so it uses few wires), so maybe this will not happen much.
PCI-X, Besides being 64-bit, the specs for PCI-X say it can go up to 533Mhz, although current boards only go up to 133Mhz. So PCI-X and PCI-Express are really about the same speed. PCI-X is also backwards compatable with regular PCI cards(PCI-Express isn't). PCI-Express should be cheaper to implement(fewer pins), which seems to be it's big selling factor over PCI-X.
Here is a link to the actual LNE100TX site, It's hillarious. In the oldest picture they have a picture of a tulip(digital 21140) card, while the newest one shows that it's a 66Mhz/33Mhz PCI card with a chip the size of a realtek 8139. There are a total of 7 drivers listed for this one card that are all incompatable with each other.
Hopefully Linksys will never do this again now that they are being bought by Cisco.
If you want an insanely compatable card, go with anything with a realtek 8139 chipset.
Asus mainboards have been then same for me and AMD CPUs, I'm 2 for 2. Those two motherboards have given me no problems and are rock solid, and they aren't too more expensive than crappy boards.
I would put tulip(Digital 21134) based cards on par with 3com's 905s. They were both exceptional cards for servers back in the day, and still decent 100Bt workhorses. There are some very good gigabit ethernet cards out now that have totally outpaced these cards for servers.
I've used Realtek 8139's in about every machine I have(Linux 2.2/2.4/2.6, MacOS 9/X,I don't use Windows) and never had one "crap out" under a heavy load. It's no Digital 21143(tulip), but the driver support is amazing, they have QNX and BeOS 4/5 drivers listed on their website!! I've put them in several people's Windows boxes and haven't heard any complaints.
99.9% of the time an 8139 is the best ethernet chip for the job. If you can spend some money, go with 1000Mb.
The only differences I see when I switch from Mozilla-Linux to Mozilla-MacOSX is the middle-click issue and that tabs move between the URL bar and the main window(instead of between elements). You can fix these two issues by setting middle-click to command-click, and setting tab to move between elements in the preferences. Firefox's preference panel lacks the option to change tabs behavior, but regular Mozilla for OSX has it.
I hadn't ever heard of ctrl-enter auto-complete before, but it seems worthless considering Mozilla assumes http:// for any URL lacking a protocol and you rarely need www before a domain. CTRL-ENTER in Linux Mozilla opens links in new Tabs, Command-Enter in OSX Mozilla does the same thing, I don't have a Windows box.
I have been using middle-click set to command-click since to the days of Mac OS8, when Command-clicking a link in Netscape 4.5 would open it in a new window. If you haven't already got it, try out Side Track with your powerebook. It lets you set sections of your trackpad to do different things, like middle and left buttons or scrolling.
Monsato still owns all his crops and seed. They can run any farmer that doesn't buy a contract from them out of business now.
Taking people to court for their grass could make quite a bit of money. Design it as a protection racket, pay me to grow my crab-grass, or I'll sell your lawn as sod! bwa ha ha ha!
Oh, wait, Monsanto/Scott is already developing a creep grass weed to do that. DARN!
Well, I thought PCIe was backwards-compatible, oops, I thought I'd read that it was, it's only compatible at the software level.
It is kind of a pipe dream, but I'd love to see Mac cards come with open-firmware-ish drivers on ROMs again. Apple doesn't seem to be headed in that direction though.
PCI-X has more bandwith in that it has 4.3Gb per slot with PCI-X 533, PCI-X's specs say it will have up to 4Gb/sec per bus. So if you have one slot per bus they have the same bandwidth, but PCI-X systems will normally have more bandwidth.
Slashdot Mirror
802.11 on the other hand is perfect for this and HP sells some WONDERFUL 802.11 printer/fax/scanner/cappier/flash card readers pretty cheap. 802.11 is mainly for networks and printers fit onto networks perfectly.
Yep, people have been controlling iTunes(along with every other app) with their bluetooth phones/PDAs. It's one of the "Big" applications for bluetooth.
- LEAP and RADIUS authentication support
- can simultaniusly work as a bridge and an access point
- Apple has Cisco's logo posted all over their website(when talking about security crud)
- Cisco recently bought out Linksys so I guess this is kind of a moot point.Any one taken one apart and looked?
I'm now using one in this machine(epox nforce2 mobo) because the built-in NIC isn't supported terribly well yet on boot CDs. I've recently backed up my iMac(4 gigs) to this box(Debian SID 2.6.4 kernel) and had no problems.
The X11 licence didn't change, xfree86's licence changed.
Enabling macrovision on the video-out if a program asks it to isn't really DRM. The MPAA is cracking down on drivers that don't let programs know if the card supports macrovision. Correctly enabling/disabling macrovision is something all drivers are going to have to do to be allowed to work with a legitimate DVD player program(aka WinDVD). Linux has very very few legit DVD players, so I'm no worried. Nvidia is doing the same thing to.
Actually, as many people here have pointed out, both Apache and Perl are under GPL compatable licences, so you can use them under the GPL(which is more restrictive than Apache's or Perl's licences). People do care about GPL compatability(I.E. X11's new licence).
The problem with this approach with Java is that when a fork happens(and they will), the forked source can then never be merged back into the main tree. QT is much less likely to fork so it's less of a problem for them, but they still can't accept patches that are only GPL licenced.
Apple's xserve raid comes with 128MB of cache on each of the two fibre-channel ports, you can upgrade them to 1Gig(512MB per controller), It supports Raid 0, 1, 3, 5, 0+1 natively. This isn't exactly what you were talking about, but is cheaper than a true scsi setup. It even plays nice with Linux and Windows.
couple the xserve-raid with a PCI-X fibre-channel card and you have a storage solution for about any situation. The 3.5 TB raid setup is $11,000 + fibre-channel card($500), which is actually pretty cheap.
but that real estate may actually go up in value, instead of plummeting like a lead pigeon.
Java is pretty damn mature.
That's what I'm hoping for, release it under the GPL(which is actually pretty restrictive) but retain the right to certify something as "Java".
IF they release it under the GPL, I see this making the open-source world a lot friendlier to Java. IF thy release it under a GPL licence, then KDE/GNOME will integrate java more closely(I.E. standardize).
I think the smartest move would be for Sun to relase Java's source under the plain old GPL, but not let any implementation use the Java trademark unless it meets their criteria( so they can keep Java from fragmenting)
If you read the PCI-Express crud it actually is only SOFTWARE compatable with regular PCI. PCI-X is the one that is HARDWARE compatable with PCI 2.2 cards.
There are specs for a PCI PCI-Express bridge, so you could have a breakout box full of PCI cards for every PCI-X slot.
That's not exactly true... If the motherboard designer wanted to put a dedicated bus per slot he could, but you could do that with regular PCI slots. I'm betting cheaper motherboards will use a PCI-Express hub to feed slots(sharing bandwidth).
Motherboard designers don't like running a bunch of wires to one chip, it means they will probably need more layers on the motherboard to keep the signals from interfering. A LOT of motherboards have unused features(ethernet/firewire/USB/PCI busses) in the main chipset because the complexity of running wires. Many times they won't use the south-bridge's ethernet and put a Realtek 8139 on the board, because it's cheaper than adding another layer to the motherboard. PCI-Express is serial(so it uses few wires), so maybe this will not happen much.
Where does ATI use DRM? I don't see what it would do in a graphics card?
PCI-X, Besides being 64-bit, the specs for PCI-X say it can go up to 533Mhz, although current boards only go up to 133Mhz. So PCI-X and PCI-Express are really about the same speed. PCI-X is also backwards compatable with regular PCI cards(PCI-Express isn't). PCI-Express should be cheaper to implement(fewer pins), which seems to be it's big selling factor over PCI-X.
Hopefully Linksys will never do this again now that they are being bought by Cisco.
If you want an insanely compatable card, go with anything with a realtek 8139 chipset.
Asus mainboards have been then same for me and AMD CPUs, I'm 2 for 2. Those two motherboards have given me no problems and are rock solid, and they aren't too more expensive than crappy boards.
I would put tulip(Digital 21134) based cards on par with 3com's 905s. They were both exceptional cards for servers back in the day, and still decent 100Bt workhorses. There are some very good gigabit ethernet cards out now that have totally outpaced these cards for servers.
99.9% of the time an 8139 is the best ethernet chip for the job. If you can spend some money, go with 1000Mb.
Thanks for the Firefox "tabfocus preference to 7" thing. That realllllly annoys me when I'm on Firefox in OSX.
I had not noticed any of those other problems.
I hadn't ever heard of ctrl-enter auto-complete before, but it seems worthless considering Mozilla assumes http:// for any URL lacking a protocol and you rarely need www before a domain. CTRL-ENTER in Linux Mozilla opens links in new Tabs, Command-Enter in OSX Mozilla does the same thing, I don't have a Windows box.
I have been using middle-click set to command-click since to the days of Mac OS8, when Command-clicking a link in Netscape 4.5 would open it in a new window. If you haven't already got it, try out Side Track with your powerebook. It lets you set sections of your trackpad to do different things, like middle and left buttons or scrolling.
Taking people to court for their grass could make quite a bit of money. Design it as a protection racket, pay me to grow my crab-grass, or I'll sell your lawn as sod! bwa ha ha ha!
Oh, wait, Monsanto/Scott is already developing a creep grass weed to do that. DARN!
It is kind of a pipe dream, but I'd love to see Mac cards come with open-firmware-ish drivers on ROMs again. Apple doesn't seem to be headed in that direction though.
PCI-X has more bandwith in that it has 4.3Gb per slot with PCI-X 533, PCI-X's specs say it will have up to 4Gb/sec per bus. So if you have one slot per bus they have the same bandwidth, but PCI-X systems will normally have more bandwidth.