As I understand it, the crypto stuff only applies to DVD movie discs. If you are just going to publish a standard DVD-ROM, then it should work under Linux with no problems.
which DVD has: note there's no "NTSC" or "PAL" DVD's: the translation to NTSC or PAL is done on the player from a standard disc
Hmmm...then what does the "NTSC" mark on most of the Region 1 discs mean?:-)
I was actually confused by this the first time I noticed it on a DVD, as I was under the same impression you are. Perhaps you (or someone else) can clarify this for me?
P.S. It's funny how long, antagonistic articles are better at eliciting karma, isn't it?
Uhm, well, to the best of my understanding, karma is only determined by meta-moderation, and its only purpose is to determine if you are a candidate for moderator points. It has nothing to do with your average comment score.
I was disappointed when the XF86_SVGA server that supposedly added support for accelerated graphics when using Trident Cyber9397 was as dog-slow as the previous version of the server. But then I did some research. (Gotta love DejaNews *grin*) Supposedly, the authors of the Cyber9397 support *disabled* acceleration by default because they couldn't get it to work reliably. Someone else discovered this and then also discovered that a couple of extra Options in your XF86Config file kept it from crashing ("tgui_pci_read/write_on"). I made the necessary patches to the XFree86, and bingo! It worked.
And you're right -- the difference is like night and day. I know what a non-accel video driver feels like.:-)
I don't own a 600-series ThinkPad, but my 770 works GREAT with Linux, and I believe that the 600 uses comparable hardware (except for the graphics chipset; 770 uses Trident, 600 uses NeoMagic).
First, the essentials mentioned by grappler: there are NO Windows keys (allowing for full-size Ctrl and Alt) and the 'mouse' has 3 buttons.:-) Also, practically everything is supported: Accelerated XFree86, APM (the timers, standby, suspend, AND hibernate!), the sound chipset, the PCMCIA and CardBus controller (works with the LinkSys CardBus Ethernet card (tulip-based) I use at least), etc. I'm _very_ happy with this computer. The only thing that doesn't work is the MWAVE modem, but I don't mind that as I can just plug it into the network via my PCMCIA ethernet.
Besides the fact that Linux works on it rather well, the computer just oozes quality. And IBM's warranty and repair policy is fantastic. I could go on, but I don't have time right now.;-)
Well if you don't already have SCSI (which I don't currently), then you have to go out and purchase a good SCSI interface as well because Plextor only makes SCSI drives (AFAIK). I'm not willing to pay close to $200 for a drive I will only be using to rip audio. Perhaps when I resolve to switch completely to SCSI I'll break down and buy a Plextor, but until then I can't think of a good reason to purchase a (good) SCSI interface _just_ to drive an expensive CD-ROM that I'll _only_ use for audio CDs. (It's expensive if it's twice what I'd pay for a quality IDE drive, and the Pioneer only gost me $60).
That, and Plextor doesn't make any CD-ROM drives that use a slot-in loader like my Pioneer has.;-)
Of course, if you don't want to pay the premium for a Plextor, there _are_ other options out there that will get you at least as good results (bitperfect-wise) as a Plextor would. I've heard that the Panasonic 24x and 32x IDE drives do bitperfect extractions at 8x and can hold their own when it comes to scratched CDs. I myself use a 36x Pioneer IDE (though I hear the SCSI works equally well if not better) which gives me 12x across the disc (switches into CLV mode to do DAE!) with bitperfect results. I extracted a whole CD 3 times (each time took about 5 min.) and compared each track to each track. No differences! I've tried tray-load and slot-load versions of the 36x and both worked the same. I paid $60 for mine (OEM).
BEWARE other Pioneer drives, though -- Pioneer did a good job with the 36x firmware, but they have a reputation for not being consistent when it comes to DAE. The 32x Pioneer was getting great DAE reviews for a while, but then a few months later it was getting not-so-good reviews. It appeared that the only difference between the drives that worked and the drives that didn't was the version of the firmware. The newer firmware broke DAE. Then the 36x models were released and everything was okey-dokey again. Now the 40x Pioneers are out and DAE is broken yet again. (I've got a 40x Pioneer as well and the reports are true -- it does not do bitperfect DAE). At least we know that Pioneer has the ability to manufacture drives that can do good DAE.
So, if you can get a 36x Pioneer for cheap, go for it!:-)
I don't remember about NEC (doesn't mean it didn't happen:-)), but I do remember that Apple recalled one of their lines of PowerBooks because the new batteries they were using (yes, they were Lithium-Ion) were catching on fire. They replaced that PowerBook with a similarly-equipped model that used NiMH instead until they could get all of the bugs worked-out.
I believe that it was Compaq who invented the battery-charging keyboard. They have small magnets under the keys or something. I'd have to go dig up the references that I saw to that keyboard to be sure that it wasn't IBM, though...
This article failed to answer the question that I've had for a while: if the two communities have so much in common, why is there a need for one or the other? According to the author, the Linux community handles the "newbies" and the oddball hardware, and the BSDers concern is security, portability, and stability. Why can't we combine the forces we have and come up with a platform that is secure, portable, stable, and well-supported (not to say that any one of the mentioned platforms does not yet fit this description)? To me, it seems as if the only thing that separates Linux advocates from *BSD advocates is the philosophy of software and the respective licenses that the platforms have been placed under; nothing more, nothing less.
The other thing that troubles me is the common thread that I saw running through the article and that I also see in some of the comments made so far here on Slashdot. That thread is the idea that Linux exists for new users to learn UNIX on, and if they want to actually do anything serious with their hardware, they need to "move on" to the *BSDs. This, to me, says that the common image of Linux in the UNIX community is that it is nothing more than "UNIX on training wheels." Does no one take Linux seriously outside of the Linux community?
I'm trying to piece together a home audio MP3 player myself, and I have found a case that is very close to standard dimensions. I haven't purchased it yet so I can't say for sure that it will work, but you can see it for yourself at Karrie Group's website, http://www.karrie.com.hk/ It's the KCS-211 Super-Slim Desktop case. It measures 16 x 15.2 x 3.3in, so it's slightly wider and deeper but is shorter. It's actually the smallest case that I've been able to find that fits an AT-style mainboard. It has three bays: 1 external 5.25, 1 external 3.5, and 1 internal 3.5. It has space for 2 PCI cards horizontally mounted via the included riser card. The U.S. distributor tells me that they will sell it to me for $54, which I thought sounded pretty good.
About the manufacturer, I remember reading somewhere that Karrie was a well-known brand and that they do design for some big name OEMs like IBM and Acer. I don't know how true this is, and I can't remember where I read that. DejaNews shows that not too many people are talking about Karrie (relative to Enlight, In-Win, SuperMicro, etc.).
Slashdot Mirror
As I understand it, the crypto stuff only applies to DVD movie discs. If you are just going to publish a standard DVD-ROM, then it should work under Linux with no problems.
which DVD has: note there's no "NTSC" or "PAL" DVD's: the translation to NTSC or PAL is done on the player from a standard disc
:-)
Hmmm...then what does the "NTSC" mark on most of the Region 1 discs mean?
I was actually confused by this the first time I noticed it on a DVD, as I was under the same impression you are. Perhaps you (or someone else) can clarify this for me?
BTW, ml.org's been dead for forever and a day- don't you feel odd posting with that dead URL?
:-P I'm just too lazy to do anything about it. ;-)
Yeahhhh, I know.
P.S. It's funny how long, antagonistic articles are better at eliciting karma, isn't it?
Uhm, well, to the best of my understanding, karma is only determined by meta-moderation, and its only purpose is to determine if you are a candidate for moderator points. It has nothing to do with your average comment score.
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong...
There's always ROT-13. :-)
I am certainly not kidding.
:-)
I was disappointed when the XF86_SVGA server that supposedly added support for accelerated graphics when using Trident Cyber9397 was as dog-slow as the previous version of the server. But then I did some research. (Gotta love DejaNews *grin*) Supposedly, the authors of the Cyber9397 support *disabled* acceleration by default because they couldn't get it to work reliably. Someone else discovered this and then also discovered that a couple of extra Options in your XF86Config file kept it from crashing ("tgui_pci_read/write_on"). I made the necessary patches to the XFree86, and bingo! It worked.
And you're right -- the difference is like night and day. I know what a non-accel video driver feels like.
I don't own a 600-series ThinkPad, but my 770 works GREAT with Linux, and I believe that the 600 uses comparable hardware (except for the graphics chipset; 770 uses Trident, 600 uses NeoMagic).
:-) Also, practically everything is supported: Accelerated XFree86, APM (the timers, standby, suspend, AND hibernate!), the sound chipset, the PCMCIA and CardBus controller (works with the LinkSys CardBus Ethernet card (tulip-based) I use at least), etc. I'm _very_ happy with this computer. The only thing that doesn't work is the MWAVE modem, but I don't mind that as I can just plug it into the network via my PCMCIA ethernet.
;-)
First, the essentials mentioned by grappler: there are NO Windows keys (allowing for full-size Ctrl and Alt) and the 'mouse' has 3 buttons.
Besides the fact that Linux works on it rather well, the computer just oozes quality. And IBM's warranty and repair policy is fantastic. I could go on, but I don't have time right now.
Well if you don't already have SCSI (which I don't currently), then you have to go out and purchase a good SCSI interface as well because Plextor only makes SCSI drives (AFAIK). I'm not willing to pay close to $200 for a drive I will only be using to rip audio. Perhaps when I resolve to switch completely to SCSI I'll break down and buy a Plextor, but until then I can't think of a good reason to purchase a (good) SCSI interface _just_ to drive an expensive CD-ROM that I'll _only_ use for audio CDs. (It's expensive if it's twice what I'd pay for a quality IDE drive, and the Pioneer only gost me $60).
;-)
That, and Plextor doesn't make any CD-ROM drives that use a slot-in loader like my Pioneer has.
Of course, if you don't want to pay the premium for a Plextor, there _are_ other options out there that will get you at least as good results (bitperfect-wise) as a Plextor would. I've heard that the Panasonic 24x and 32x IDE drives do bitperfect extractions at 8x and can hold their own when it comes to scratched CDs. I myself use a 36x Pioneer IDE (though I hear the SCSI works equally well if not better) which gives me 12x across the disc (switches into CLV mode to do DAE!) with bitperfect results. I extracted a whole CD 3 times (each time took about 5 min.) and compared each track to each track. No differences! I've tried tray-load and slot-load versions of the 36x and both worked the same. I paid $60 for mine (OEM).
:-)
BEWARE other Pioneer drives, though -- Pioneer did a good job with the 36x firmware, but they have a reputation for not being consistent when it comes to DAE. The 32x Pioneer was getting great DAE reviews for a while, but then a few months later it was getting not-so-good reviews. It appeared that the only difference between the drives that worked and the drives that didn't was the version of the firmware. The newer firmware broke DAE. Then the 36x models were released and everything was okey-dokey again. Now the 40x Pioneers are out and DAE is broken yet again. (I've got a 40x Pioneer as well and the reports are true -- it does not do bitperfect DAE). At least we know that Pioneer has the ability to manufacture drives that can do good DAE.
So, if you can get a 36x Pioneer for cheap, go for it!
I don't remember about NEC (doesn't mean it didn't happen :-)), but I do remember that Apple recalled one of their lines of PowerBooks because the new batteries they were using (yes, they were Lithium-Ion) were catching on fire. They replaced that PowerBook with a similarly-equipped model that used NiMH instead until they could get all of the bugs worked-out.
I believe that it was Compaq who invented the battery-charging keyboard. They have small magnets under the keys or something. I'd have to go dig up the references that I saw to that keyboard to be sure that it wasn't IBM, though...
This article failed to answer the question that I've had for a while: if the two communities have so much in common, why is there a need for one or the other? According to the author, the Linux community handles the "newbies" and the oddball hardware, and the BSDers concern is security, portability, and stability. Why can't we combine the forces we have and come up with a platform that is secure, portable, stable, and well-supported (not to say that any one of the mentioned platforms does not yet fit this description)? To me, it seems as if the only thing that separates Linux advocates from *BSD advocates is the philosophy of software and the respective licenses that the platforms have been placed under; nothing more, nothing less.
The other thing that troubles me is the common thread that I saw running through the article and that I also see in some of the comments made so far here on Slashdot. That thread is the idea that Linux exists for new users to learn UNIX on, and if they want to actually do anything serious with their hardware, they need to "move on" to the *BSDs. This, to me, says that the common image of Linux in the UNIX community is that it is nothing more than "UNIX on training wheels." Does no one take Linux seriously outside of the Linux community?
AC,
I'm trying to piece together a home audio MP3 player myself, and I have found a case that is very close to standard dimensions. I haven't purchased it yet so I can't say for sure that it will work, but you can see it for yourself at Karrie Group's website, http://www.karrie.com.hk/ It's the KCS-211 Super-Slim Desktop case. It measures 16 x 15.2 x 3.3in, so it's slightly wider and deeper but is shorter. It's actually the smallest case that I've been able to find that fits an AT-style mainboard. It has three bays: 1 external 5.25, 1 external 3.5, and 1 internal 3.5. It has space for 2 PCI cards horizontally mounted via the included riser card. The U.S. distributor tells me that they will sell it to me for $54, which I thought sounded pretty good.
About the manufacturer, I remember reading somewhere that Karrie was a well-known brand and that they do design for some big name OEMs like IBM and Acer. I don't know how true this is, and I can't remember where I read that. DejaNews shows that not too many people are talking about Karrie (relative to Enlight, In-Win, SuperMicro, etc.).
The empeg uses _laptop_ hard disk drives (2.5" form factor). Those 6GB drives are expensive...
-- Nathan
Most of the icons you see in the screenshots there are from OS/2...if anyone cares. :-)