I saw this cross-posted on./ previously. Cakewalk benchmarked Win7 versus Win8 when running their digital audio software, and saw some significant improvements: http://blog.cakewalk.com/windows-8-a-benchmark-for-music-production-applications/
The Cakewalk software runs in desktop mode, which is fine since we're all going to ignore Metro after we log in, right?:)
I've been running the Win8 developer preview with Metro disabled for months now in my engineering lab, and it got to the point that I forgot it was Windows 8.
Is the rumor true that the registry setting to remove Metro is gone in the RTM version? Now that will be annoying!
As I'm currently writing some C++ software, I find this tangential thought experiment fun. With C++'s operator overloading, all possibilities such as 1+1=3 and 2+2=potato can be accomplished.
Facts are facts, but communication of the facts can fail if we don't agree on how to interpret the written symbols (operator+ in this case).:)
My previous client Carrier Access used "Solve for X" in all of its marketing.
A Google search reveals its usage in many of their product manuals: +"solve for x" +"carrier access"
They were purchased by a California-based company called Force 10. I wonder if they will allow Google to use their trademark. Every time I hear "Solve for X", I think of cell site backhaul. I haven't RTFA yet, so wondering if the Google concept is anything close.:)
I worked at this observatory in the 90's to help enforce the quiet zone. The people in the area were highly educated, not typical hillbillies. I met a few nobel prize winners and had the opportunity to meet Grote Reber who was there one summer delivering his memoirs to the observatory. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grote_Reber
Green Bank has easy access to a ski resert, whitewater rafting, caving, rockclimbing, and mountain biking. That part of W Va is quite an outdoor sports mecca. The location and the people should not be dissed at all, since they are exceptional compared to the average Slashdotter!
The quiet zone is a regulatory creation, and I know local folks in the area sometimes had non-compliant transmitters. For those obsessed with EM, note that just because there's a regulatory quiet zone, it doesn't mean that people aren't still using Wi-Fi. They just haven't been busted yet!
It was usually only an issue if an astronomer complained about interference swamping out their observations. The interfering frequency would have to be in the RF passband of the observation. If the signal source was in the band, it still has to be in the beam of the antenna or couple into the system via cabling, etc. to be a problem.
There is a schedule that shows which receiver is installed for the observations being done today: https://dss.gb.nrao.edu/schedule/public
If interference was seen, we tried to identify the modulation on a spectrum analyzer to decide if it was a faraway source such as a TV transmitter, satellite, or aircraft. We had a communications receiver where we could snoop conversations to identify the nature of the broadcast. If we suspected a local source, we would drive around town in a truck fitted with a spectrum analyzer and a directional antenna. When we found the source, we would help the individual or organization come to compliance. Interference could be nonintentional, such as power lines or even a farmer's tractor.:)
I have fond memories of the observatory, I got to experience Ethernet when it was coax and TCP/IP before the Web existed! (Gopher, Archie, telnet BBSes and such). One former employee ran a MUD at the observatory that wasn't discovered for years. If that's not Slashdot-worthy, I don't know what is!:)
If you're a C.S. person, it's likely that you are a digital person, and you will most frequently use the oscilloscope to troubleshoot digital busses. Don't skimp on the channel count, go for 4! For things like serial busses (RS-232, SPI, I2C, etc.) you will want to watch clock, tx, and rx simultaneously. For a parallel bus, you can get your clock, chip select, and a couple addy or data lines. For most problems on your board, you can get by with the scope instead of an expensive logic analyzer if the scope has enough channels. The scope is better than the logic analyzer in many ways as you can watch for issues with noise, bus contention, etc.
Every engineer has their bias, I say go for Tek! LabVIEW and DAQ are cool for repetetive measurements under automation, but there's just no substitute for a physical front panel interface with knobs and buttons when you just want to spend a couple minutes looking at a few levels.
Try to find something with Ethernet or USB. Many of the used scopes on ebay have the old 3.5" floppy, and that becomes annoying when noone in the office remembers floppy disks and you need to get a plot off the scope to send to an FAE!:)
Most electronics companies where I've worked or consulted use LabVIEW for automated product testing.
You can download an eval copy from http://www.ni.com/labview/optin/trylabview
LabVIEW is graphical programming. I'm still loyal to C/C++, but all those text languages are so 20th century!;) Until we achieve natural language programming, LabVIEW is as good as it gets for 21st century.
Putting humor aside, LabVIEW apps are very simple to write and deploy. The Application Builder allows you to create an EXE from your app and bundle it with the runtime in a nice Windows installer that you can send to your customers.
I've seen some suggestions on here for PowerShell. One limitation of DOS batch files is the inability to interact directly with.NET. Anyone on modern Windows should learn.NET since it is the preferred framework now for that OS. PowerShell can give you the.NET access, but LabVIEW will have a much quicker learning curve if you ever have the urge to delve into.NET.
The LabVIEW forums are very active, and the community gurus provide quick turnaround on support questions. For long-term maintenance of your test app, you're likely to find more engineers in the Test&Measurement arena that use LabVIEW versus DOS.
The author must never have written in BASIC, because I can still run the programs I wrote as a kid with GW-BASIC in the 1980's on my Turbo XT. I bet I could still lend him the 5.25" floppy, assuming he has 360k free and can read double sided disks. People writing an opinion piece on technology should always check in with Slashdot first!:)
As I sat here editing my C++ source code, I saw this article. I'm using caps all over the place, putting my initials and TBD's in code comments, entering #defined macro constants, etc. My pinky has been working the Caps Lock key on PC keyboards for 20+ years. I was very surprised to see this article.
I view the bandwidth demand of MySpace as a good thing, as it adds to the demand for additional backhaul, turn-up of dark fiber, faster access devices, etc. which are all good for carriers and communications equipment manufaturers. $$$
Much of this discussion has been related to the change in corporate culture at HP.
I am curious whether the spinoff companies such as Agilent maintained any of the original culture. I'd be interested in hearing thoughts from their engineers. Maybe the "HP Way" carries on in some of the businesses that were jettisoned.
Took a look at the Agilent corporate site, and they expound on their HP tradition: "While, physically, we have outgrown HP's garage, we continue to live the values handed down from Bill and Dave: uncompromising integrity; trust, respect and teamwork; and innovation that makes a difference."
I am wondering what the maximum service offering from Verizon is. I get the sense from the article that the AFC ONT is underutilized. It shows the 4 POTS lines are connected but the author says "we don't need them all". The video port is not connected, and it looks like the connector has a cover installed (also the video LED is not on) so this is not being used.
Does anyone know the speed of the PON interface and whose OLT that Verizon is using? I'd be curious how much bandwidth from the optics the end user is actually getting to use. The typical value for upstream is 155 Mbps, so I'm guessing this guy is getting less than 10% usage of the optical interface (15 Mbps / 155 Mbps =.097).
Is the Vista functionality different from Windows Defender? I'm curious if the Microsoft software is already taking market share from the other players...
The posts I have seen are very critical of the government, but I have not seen adequate discussion on the merits of this device compared with the riot gear currently in use. We should perform this analysis.
Also, I am very much in favor of considering the use of nonlethal weaponry for regular forces. Every war we fight is tragic and horrible, but every war we fight is more humane than the previous. I consider myself a pacifist, and until we have evolved to rid ourselves of violent ideologies, the development of nonlethal weaponry is worthy and admirable. If we can corral our opponents without maiming and shredding their bodies to pieces, I think we're improving the human condition.
The government that controls the weapons may be democratic or totalitarian, but I argue that the weapon ownership is a different discussion since most governments have automatic weapons, rockets, and bombs and can currently opress their citizens using equal methods.
Who here on Slashdot is actually developing with ARM-based processors? I have to say, Helium 210-80 is pretty freaking cool. We should be discussing the merits of this technology.
I suggest grabbing a copy of QuickBASIC 4.5. It has a great help system and lets you build an EXE.
QuickBASIC knowledge is sometimes very handy. I've seen many QuickBASIC programs in manufacturing used for controlling GPIB instrumentation, etc. Nowadays it's difficult to find programmers who can maintain this code.
I've always wondered, is it possible to implement any type of interprocess communication between an Windows App and a QBASIC app in the DOS Window?
I think topics like these express a bit of naivite, because the root cause for most system failures are economics and human nature. As the universal goal for a business is "money for nothing and chicks for free", an academic discussion of creating a "perfect" commercial product is a bit like debating the existence of God, imho.
I think most commercial software is written with the minimum effort required to gain the largest chunk of market share. Bugs are expected and tolerated. If you can sell crap and get away with it, then it doesn't make sense to spend as much up front making a perfectly reliable program. It's better to wait until people are dependent on your system, then with the established customer base, go forward in making incremental improvements in reliability. Didn't we have this conversation about Microsoft before?
I think most products are done this way, using the cheapest components and the smallest amount of labor possible. If you can get your devices mostly working, then time-to-market and pretty packaging can be more important than having the best quality. It's all about whoring yourself properly!
I think the big picture belongs in the domain of the program manager and system engineer. Then the ability of the individual developer to deliver a correct product or implement a subsystem properly depend on passing down complete documentation of system requirements. It also doesn't hurt to include the customer in detailed design reviews. Without a "black box", you wouldn't be able to contract anything out!
I recommend reading MIL-STD-498, it gives a great overview of the type of documentation required by government contractors. I think IEEE 1074 is more up-to-date, though I haven't read it. If you're familiar with some of these life cycles, then you won't be shocked as much by the extensive documentation you'll be maintaining when you work for your first defense company.
Marconi's stock is 20 cents, I wonder if this product will survive.
Anyway, there are may companies working on a standards-based PON. There is a group called FSAN (Full Services Access Network) with a Web site http://www.fsanet.net that describes the standards.
FSAN is working on an ATM-based PON (APON) which will compete for dominance with Ethernet-based PON (EPON). If you are interested in PON technology, you should focus on these techniques since the interoperability between equipment vendors will be based on these methods.
Check out the equipment from Quantum Bridge for active products that support a standards-based PON.
Echo has made a PCMCIA laptop adapter for their Layla recording system. The system includes a breakout box with 8 inputs, 8 outputs, MIDI, and S/PDIF. Check out their Web site. The whole system is about $1000.
I've used the older Layla20 with a PCI card and Cakewalk Pro Audio for over 2 years and it's working very well. I'm interfacing with the mixer section of a Tascam 4-track, a Boss drum machine, and a Digitech effects processor. Let me know if you have questions about my setup.
Slashdot Mirror
I saw this cross-posted on ./ previously. Cakewalk benchmarked Win7 versus Win8 when running their digital audio software, and saw some significant improvements:
http://blog.cakewalk.com/windows-8-a-benchmark-for-music-production-applications/
The Cakewalk software runs in desktop mode, which is fine since we're all going to ignore Metro after we log in, right? :)
I've been running the Win8 developer preview with Metro disabled for months now in my engineering lab, and it got to the point that I forgot it was Windows 8.
Is the rumor true that the registry setting to remove Metro is gone in the RTM version? Now that will be annoying!
As I'm currently writing some C++ software, I find this tangential thought experiment fun. With C++'s operator overloading, all possibilities such as 1+1=3 and 2+2=potato can be accomplished.
Facts are facts, but communication of the facts can fail if we don't agree on how to interpret the written symbols (operator+ in this case). :)
My previous client Carrier Access used "Solve for X" in all of its marketing.
A Google search reveals its usage in many of their product manuals:
+"solve for x" +"carrier access"
They were purchased by a California-based company called Force 10. I wonder if they will allow Google to use their trademark. Every time I hear "Solve for X", I think of cell site backhaul. I haven't RTFA yet, so wondering if the Google concept is anything close. :)
When IE8 came out, it was sent by default through the automatic updates on XP. To prevent installation, they offered an IE8 blocker tool.
Reading the article, there is still a blocker tool for people who don't want the latest update.
So, what is so different now and why is it a big deal?
I worked at this observatory in the 90's to help enforce the quiet zone. The people in the area were highly educated, not typical hillbillies. I met a few nobel prize winners and had the opportunity to meet Grote Reber who was there one summer delivering his memoirs to the observatory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grote_Reber
Green Bank has easy access to a ski resert, whitewater rafting, caving, rockclimbing, and mountain biking. That part of W Va is quite an outdoor sports mecca. The location and the people should not be dissed at all, since they are exceptional compared to the average Slashdotter!
The quiet zone is a regulatory creation, and I know local folks in the area sometimes had non-compliant transmitters. For those obsessed with EM, note that just because there's a regulatory quiet zone, it doesn't mean that people aren't still using Wi-Fi. They just haven't been busted yet!
It was usually only an issue if an astronomer complained about interference swamping out their observations. The interfering frequency would have to be in the RF passband of the observation. If the signal source was in the band, it still has to be in the beam of the antenna or couple into the system via cabling, etc. to be a problem.
There is a schedule that shows which receiver is installed for the observations being done today:
https://dss.gb.nrao.edu/schedule/public
If interference was seen, we tried to identify the modulation on a spectrum analyzer to decide if it was a faraway source such as a TV transmitter, satellite, or aircraft. We had a communications receiver where we could snoop conversations to identify the nature of the broadcast. If we suspected a local source, we would drive around town in a truck fitted with a spectrum analyzer and a directional antenna. When we found the source, we would help the individual or organization come to compliance. Interference could be nonintentional, such as power lines or even a farmer's tractor. :)
I have fond memories of the observatory, I got to experience Ethernet when it was coax and TCP/IP before the Web existed! (Gopher, Archie, telnet BBSes and such). One former employee ran a MUD at the observatory that wasn't discovered for years. If that's not Slashdot-worthy, I don't know what is! :)
If you're a C.S. person, it's likely that you are a digital person, and you will most frequently use the oscilloscope to troubleshoot digital busses. Don't skimp on the channel count, go for 4! For things like serial busses (RS-232, SPI, I2C, etc.) you will want to watch clock, tx, and rx simultaneously. For a parallel bus, you can get your clock, chip select, and a couple addy or data lines. For most problems on your board, you can get by with the scope instead of an expensive logic analyzer if the scope has enough channels. The scope is better than the logic analyzer in many ways as you can watch for issues with noise, bus contention, etc.
Every engineer has their bias, I say go for Tek! LabVIEW and DAQ are cool for repetetive measurements under automation, but there's just no substitute for a physical front panel interface with knobs and buttons when you just want to spend a couple minutes looking at a few levels.
Try to find something with Ethernet or USB. Many of the used scopes on ebay have the old 3.5" floppy, and that becomes annoying when noone in the office remembers floppy disks and you need to get a plot off the scope to send to an FAE! :)
Maybe this is in the works. Just read that they are getting the ARM core.
http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4204863/Microsoft-takes-ARM-license
Obtaining the leading processor core for mobile phones positions them well to create a mobile phone, don't ya think? :)
Most electronics companies where I've worked or consulted use LabVIEW for automated product testing.
You can download an eval copy from http://www.ni.com/labview/optin/trylabview
LabVIEW is graphical programming. I'm still loyal to C/C++, but all those text languages are so 20th century! ;) Until we achieve natural language programming, LabVIEW is as good as it gets for 21st century.
Putting humor aside, LabVIEW apps are very simple to write and deploy. The Application Builder allows you to create an EXE from your app and bundle it with the runtime in a nice Windows installer that you can send to your customers.
I've seen some suggestions on here for PowerShell. One limitation of DOS batch files is the inability to interact directly with .NET. Anyone on modern Windows should learn .NET since it is the preferred framework now for that OS. PowerShell can give you the .NET access, but LabVIEW will have a much quicker learning curve if you ever have the urge to delve into .NET.
The LabVIEW forums are very active, and the community gurus provide quick turnaround on support questions. For long-term maintenance of your test app, you're likely to find more engineers in the Test&Measurement arena that use LabVIEW versus DOS.
Good luck in your choices!
The author must never have written in BASIC, because I can still run the programs I wrote as a kid with GW-BASIC in the 1980's on my Turbo XT. I bet I could still lend him the 5.25" floppy, assuming he has 360k free and can read double sided disks. People writing an opinion piece on technology should always check in with Slashdot first! :)
As I sat here editing my C++ source code, I saw this article. I'm using caps all over the place, putting my initials and TBD's in code comments, entering #defined macro constants, etc. My pinky has been working the Caps Lock key on PC keyboards for 20+ years. I was very surprised to see this article.
I view the bandwidth demand of MySpace as a good thing, as it adds to the demand for additional backhaul, turn-up of dark fiber, faster access devices, etc. which are all good for carriers and communications equipment manufaturers. $$$
Much of this discussion has been related to the change in corporate culture at HP.
I am curious whether the spinoff companies such as Agilent maintained any of the original culture. I'd be interested in hearing thoughts from their engineers. Maybe the "HP Way" carries on in some of the businesses that were jettisoned.
Took a look at the Agilent corporate site, and they expound on their HP tradition: "While, physically, we have outgrown HP's garage, we continue to live the values handed down from Bill and Dave: uncompromising integrity; trust, respect and teamwork; and innovation that makes a difference."
I am wondering what the maximum service offering from Verizon is. I get the sense from the article that the AFC ONT is underutilized. It shows the 4 POTS lines are connected but the author says "we don't need them all". The video port is not connected, and it looks like the connector has a cover installed (also the video LED is not on) so this is not being used.
.097).
Does anyone know the speed of the PON interface and whose OLT that Verizon is using? I'd be curious how much bandwidth from the optics the end user is actually getting to use. The typical value for upstream is 155 Mbps, so I'm guessing this guy is getting less than 10% usage of the optical interface (15 Mbps / 155 Mbps =
Is the Vista functionality different from Windows Defender? I'm curious if the Microsoft software is already taking market share from the other players...
Also, I am very much in favor of considering the use of nonlethal weaponry for regular forces. Every war we fight is tragic and horrible, but every war we fight is more humane than the previous. I consider myself a pacifist, and until we have evolved to rid ourselves of violent ideologies, the development of nonlethal weaponry is worthy and admirable. If we can corral our opponents without maiming and shredding their bodies to pieces, I think we're improving the human condition.
The government that controls the weapons may be democratic or totalitarian, but I argue that the weapon ownership is a different discussion since most governments have automatic weapons, rockets, and bombs and can currently opress their citizens using equal methods.
Who here on Slashdot is actually developing with ARM-based processors? I have to say, Helium 210-80 is pretty freaking cool. We should be discussing the merits of this technology.
Try looking at some Acqiris digitizers. I like these better than the National Instruments and the Gage scopes.
Check www.99er.net for updates on this rockin machine.
Check www.99er.net for updates on this rockin machine.
I suggest grabbing a copy of QuickBASIC 4.5. It has a great help system and lets you build an EXE.
QuickBASIC knowledge is sometimes very handy. I've seen many QuickBASIC programs in manufacturing used for controlling GPIB instrumentation, etc. Nowadays it's difficult to find programmers who can maintain this code.
I've always wondered, is it possible to implement any type of interprocess communication between an Windows App and a QBASIC app in the DOS Window?
I think topics like these express a bit of naivite, because the root cause for most system failures are economics and human nature. As the universal goal for a business is "money for nothing and chicks for free", an academic discussion of creating a "perfect" commercial product is a bit like debating the existence of God, imho.
I think most commercial software is written with the minimum effort required to gain the largest chunk of market share. Bugs are expected and tolerated. If you can sell crap and get away with it, then it doesn't make sense to spend as much up front making a perfectly reliable program. It's better to wait until people are dependent on your system, then with the established customer base, go forward in making incremental improvements in reliability. Didn't we have this conversation about Microsoft before?
I think most products are done this way, using the cheapest components and the smallest amount of labor possible. If you can get your devices mostly working, then time-to-market and pretty packaging can be more important than having the best quality. It's all about whoring yourself properly!
I think the big picture belongs in the domain of the program manager and system engineer. Then the ability of the individual developer to deliver a correct product or implement a subsystem properly depend on passing down complete documentation of system requirements. It also doesn't hurt to include the customer in detailed design reviews. Without a "black box", you wouldn't be able to contract anything out!
I recommend reading MIL-STD-498, it gives a great overview of the type of documentation required by government contractors. I think IEEE 1074 is more up-to-date, though I haven't read it. If you're familiar with some of these life cycles, then you won't be shocked as much by the extensive documentation you'll be maintaining when you work for your first defense company.
I think this box takes C-cell batteries to keep the POTS active in the event of a power failure.
Marconi's stock is 20 cents, I wonder if this product will survive.
Anyway, there are may companies working on a standards-based PON. There is a group called FSAN (Full Services Access Network) with a Web site http://www.fsanet.net that describes the standards.
FSAN is working on an ATM-based PON (APON) which will compete for dominance with Ethernet-based PON (EPON). If you are interested in PON technology, you should focus on these techniques since the interoperability between equipment vendors will be based on these methods.
Check out the equipment from Quantum Bridge for active products that support a standards-based PON.
Echo has made a PCMCIA laptop adapter for their Layla recording system. The system includes a breakout box with 8 inputs, 8 outputs, MIDI, and S/PDIF. Check out their Web site. The whole system is about $1000. I've used the older Layla20 with a PCI card and Cakewalk Pro Audio for over 2 years and it's working very well. I'm interfacing with the mixer section of a Tascam 4-track, a Boss drum machine, and a Digitech effects processor. Let me know if you have questions about my setup.