With MPlayer, when I resize the window, the video remains the same size.
That's odd, because mplayer handles that perfectly on my systems. Video playback pauses during the resize, but the image is resized, and playback continues without a blip in the audio and without any loss of sync in the video.
What version of mplayer are you using?
I've got:
grappa:~% pkg_info -a | grep mplayer
mplayer-share-0.90rc14 Documentation and fonts used by mplayer and gmplayer
mplayer-0.90rc14nb1 Software only MPEG-1/2/4 video decoder
... and I really doubt it's the NetBSD patches doing the resizing correctly...
Why would he mention that he ported to Virtex-II pro instead of just PowerPC architecture?
Presumably because significant effort was necessary over and above the existing NetBSD/powerpc port to get the OS to actually run on that hardware with full features. Kind of like how there's a separate NetBSD/macppc port.
Hrm. I've been putting in some rather excessive hours as a sysadmin, especially lately in moving systems into a new data center.
My company also lacks any official overtime (for salaried employees) or comp time (for anyone) policies. In theory we have time cards... but they're electronic, and are only filed by salaried employees in order to judge billing of clients. Since nothing I do is directly billable to clients, I don't (nor does any one else in my--the IT--department, who have shared those excessive hours for the most part).
Is the sense that I should insist there be official notation of how many hours a week I work if I want to have any hope of being fairly compensated?
Alphas, Sparcs. PowerPC (as in, from IBM, not as in from Apple), even.
Hell, Tru64 Unix is named for it. And Solaris has presumed its use if you want decent performance for years.
Is the consumer market not ready for 64-bit computing? Who knows, maybe it's not really necessary.
It's certainly an integral part for Veritas, Oracle, and other enterprise software I use out here in the real world with (marketing) data warehousing...
And Legato! Legato! It looks just swell! So far, anyway. (I'm not done playing.)
Then there's SyncSort BackupExpress. Sync who? Yeah, so they start their daemons out of/etc/inittab...
And there's always Schily tar (for when you finally wake up and notice that GNU tar's performance sucks balls).
This guy is not near technical enough to rate any desktop environment. He just takes a glance at the defaults, says what he thinks, and comments that it might be possible to improve this. And he does this for the lot.
Stop and think about that statement for a moment.
Are all users of computers technical? Should they be? Would a technically-inclined individual's response to a GUI be apropos to how your grandmother would interact with a computer?
How the default configuration behaves is very important, and is exactly the way many people will see most of the features in a GUI.
Maybe VWs are better than the average diesel, but I see a lot of three-year-old diesels in the UK doing just that. It's no wonder that our air is so polluted compared to most US cities I've visited when the government has been pushing people to drive 'green' diesels for so long.
Hrm. Having worked with a friend on his '91 VW (non-turbo) diesel (non-injected) Jetta, I can say it belches no black smoke (but makes a pretty awful racket; no, it's not just belts). And the TDI is leaps and bounds smarter than old diesel engines, and cleaner than a whole lot of regular-gas burners. (VW's current TDI gets both better gas mileage and makes better environmental numbers than my '94 VW 2.0 liter four-banger. It's got more horses too, though the torque curve's not quite so pretty.)
And VW's TDIs have been out plenty long enough to have started hearing horror stories about them if there were any to hear. VWs been selling them in the states since at least '95, and in Europe and Canada before that.
The other important German carmakers (AMG and BMW) also make a good turbodiesel engine with similar characteristics, and I think the French (Renault, Peugeot, Citroen) might have something to market by now too, though I live in the states, so I'll only notice the French doing something if it affects the WRC.
...but on Intel you're limited to a signed 32bit (2GB) filesize anyway (which I agree makes Linux thoroughly broken for all sorts of useful stuff).
Um... what?
It's entirely possible to manage file sizes larger than 2 GBs on a 32-bit architecture, you just can't store the address in one register. So what?
Every modern local file system can handle files significantly larger than this, ext{2,3}, xfs, jfs, ReiserFS, Berkeley ffs, Berkeley lfs, and various ufs implementations included.
The OpenAFS folks are working to resolve that problem, so it should go away soon enough.
I'm about to tell Veritas I can't buy their NetBackup software because it can't handle >2GB files in its Linux client, and they even have a specified timeline for when it will. "It'll be fixed soon" means nothing in a corporate world, precisely where you were suggesting that AFS was a win.
And the system management advantages of AFS over everything else out there outweigh that little problem.
Go tell that to just about anyone doing datawarehousing. Tell them that they'll have to split the incoming files from mainframes and real Unix systems into 2 GB chunks on the fly to be able to use the FS. See how they react.
(Or, take me as an example: I admin systems to do exactly that job, and I assure that AFS is utterly useless to me.)
Honestly, show me another rock solid network filesystem which allows for live volume migration from server to server, multiply redundant RO volumes for failover, kerberos security, and encryption over the wire. It's good stuff.
NFSv4 does all of those things.
Yes, including the migration. Use a (real) volume manager on the backend and store your data in a SAN. Use CNAMEs for your NFS servers. When you want to move, just reallocate the volume in the volume manager, remap the LUN in your SAN management interface if necessary, and update DNS. Poof.
Start out presenting RO copies of the backing LUN to several other systems and do the DNS stuff in Perl (or just buy a hardware product to do load balancing/failover) and you've got redundancy. Poof, poof.
No, I don't mean to suggest that's anywhere near the ease with which AFS handles either of those situations, but it's not like it's an impossible goal.
AFS support: OpenAFS is good, real good. But its licensing terms are unacceptable for inclusion into the main kernel tree. AFS is critical for enterprise quality network filesystem support.
I really disagree. No AFS implementation I've seen is useable for enterprise-quality network filesystems because none can handle files larger than 2 GBs.
When was the last time you bought something from Sony and gave them an extra $5 to help them out? No, you paid the minimum amount--just enough so that you could legally acquire what you were purchasing. Must be that you care only about keeping as much money as you possibly can. Your motives are selfish and greedy
What color is the sky where you live? Can you actually read that aloud with a straight face? You're blaming a consumer for paying market value for something and then having the outrageous gaul to criticize what he purchased?
I'll agree this whole article smells of sour grapes, but there's a kernel in there somewhere of a legitimate complaint that Sony is not treating their customers in a reasonable manner. I'm a Unix systems administrator. If I make a change to the way in which a system functions and it breaks something for a client, my company almost definitely loses money, and if that happens enough, we lose clients. Sony is in the remarkable position that its clients don't vote with their wallets, but that doesn't mean they're allowed to hold those clients in complete disrespect.
You're welcome to devolve everything into personal interest (and it's quite easy to do so), but try not to state your belief like it's absolute truth, eh?
Using a seemingly innocuous message as a carrier wave for a truly useful message you don't want other people to know about is an old-news crypto technique, of course. But here's a fun, new place to apply it.
And you don't even need to seem to be doing anything funny during decoding (the message would obviously have to be enciphered; pass it in the clear and anyone who owns a cell tower between the two points can read it); build that into the phone/PDA. With the ridiculous proliferation of the damn things, no one will blink if you receive a call, chat for a few minutes, and then tap a few buttons. For all they know, you're sending an SMS, even if you are entering your passphrase.
All it really takes to do 3DES or Blowfish in software in a reasonable period of time is a StrongARM or similar (my Newton's got one, you cell phone must), though you'd get far better performance doing it in hardware. (Watch out for escrow, though!)
Also, looking at the 'Top Donations by Industry', you may notice that Microsoft is, conspicuously, the only entry under 'Computers/Internet.'
So?
Lockheed Martin is the only entry under "Defense Aerospace". MBNA is the only entry under "Finance/Credit Companies".
Where's Boeing? Where's McDonnell? Where's... umm... anything that competes with MBNA? (Everything I'd say here belongs in a different category on that list... but I'd say MBNA belongs in the "Securities and Investment" category, so whatever.)
I'm sure Oracle, Apple, and Sun all lobby. I'm sure because I just checked using this form. (I don't see an easy way to paste a URL directly to results, or I would.)
Re:No, Apple should continue to heed Intel
on
PowerPC Goes 64 bit
·
· Score: 2
Hrm.
Did this somehow slip past your notice as an Apple product?
In addition, I've a hard time believing the time (and, by way of paychecks, money) spent porting would be worth the (probably moderate) savings in chip costs. Granted, since Darwin's written based on a portable OS (NeXTStep, itself based on 4.2 BSD), porting it to another processor architecture wouldn't be any big feat (espeically considering this already happened at Apple to get from mac68k to macppc), but I'm not so sure it'd be saving Apple any money to do so.
My Apple Newton 2100 is significantly larger (about the size of a mini-legal pad; that is, the four by six inch ones) and heavier (a couple of pounds anyway), and it's WAY better, easier to use, and more expandable (drivers for IBM microdrives on PCMCIA cards are on the way soon, 802.11B ethernet works right now, various PCMCIA ethernet cards have worked for quite a while) than the Palm IIIx I kicked to the curb for it. (Too bad Apple stopped making them in '97...)
The moving parts thing is perhaps moderately valid... only but laptops seem to deal just fine (barring stupidly fragile plastic bits; that's why you should be using a sparcbook!).
and I have heard from numerous people and DBA professionals which say that HPUX+Oracle is the way to go
Stop trusting anything whoever told you that tells you.
Oracle is developed under Solaris. Though Veritas products do exist for HP-UX, Veritas's happier dealing with Sun. There is a group of support engineers from all three companies working in the same place, answering calls together, precisely because the most common use of any of their products is with the other two. The ties between Oracle and Sun (and Veritas) run quite deep, and result in better performance.
The question does arise as to whether there is any difference between a huge patch and an upgrade, or whether in applying a whole raft of patches you are in effect performing an upgrade.
If your RH 6.0 servers are perfectly happy without the patches, then you did have the option of running them as is.
No, you've missed the original poster's point.
He doesn't mind applying vendor-supplied patches, regardless of what OS is there. His point is that RedHat stopped providing patches for a system after a couple years. Sun's still providing patches eight years later. Therefore, Sun's more stable and less hassle for sysadmins.
Further, there is a Huge difference between running patchadd or rpm -F and rebooting the machine off of some install media, using the vendor's install software to upgrade the OS (presuming that actually works with your vendor's software), booting back up, then fixing all the software that doesn't work in the new version of the OS, since no dependencies were checked in the upgrade process.
(For most commercial installations, that difference might as well start and stop with "Rebooting..."--"nope, can't do that. This system needs to have 24/7 availability. Find another way.")
Slashdot Mirror
What version of mplayer are you using?
I've got:
grappa:~% pkg_info -a | grep mplayer
mplayer-share-0.90rc14 Documentation and fonts used by mplayer and gmplayer
mplayer-0.90rc14nb1 Software only MPEG-1/2/4 video decoder
Jay's the legal and publications guy, cut him some slack. He certainly gave straight answers to the questions he was asked.
What technical questions where you hoping to hear answered?
Perhaps Slashdot should do its own interview with a Wasabi engineer? (Perry Metzger, Christos Zoulas, Allen Briggs, Jason Thorpe...)
Hrm. I've been putting in some rather excessive hours as a sysadmin, especially lately in moving systems into a new data center.
My company also lacks any official overtime (for salaried employees) or comp time (for anyone) policies. In theory we have time cards... but they're electronic, and are only filed by salaried employees in order to judge billing of clients. Since nothing I do is directly billable to clients, I don't (nor does any one else in my--the IT--department, who have shared those excessive hours for the most part).
Is the sense that I should insist there be official notation of how many hours a week I work if I want to have any hope of being fairly compensated?
Alphas, Sparcs. PowerPC (as in, from IBM, not as in from Apple), even.
Hell, Tru64 Unix is named for it. And Solaris has presumed its use if you want decent performance for years.
Is the consumer market not ready for 64-bit computing? Who knows, maybe it's not really necessary.
It's certainly an integral part for Veritas, Oracle, and other enterprise software I use out here in the real world with (marketing) data warehousing...
And Legato! Legato! It looks just swell! So far, anyway. (I'm not done playing.) Then there's SyncSort BackupExpress. Sync who? Yeah, so they start their daemons out of /etc/inittab...
And there's always Schily tar (for when you finally wake up and notice that GNU tar's performance sucks balls).
Are all users of computers technical? Should they be? Would a technically-inclined individual's response to a GUI be apropos to how your grandmother would interact with a computer?
How the default configuration behaves is very important, and is exactly the way many people will see most of the features in a GUI.
And VW's TDIs have been out plenty long enough to have started hearing horror stories about them if there were any to hear. VWs been selling them in the states since at least '95, and in Europe and Canada before that.
The other important German carmakers (AMG and BMW) also make a good turbodiesel engine with similar characteristics, and I think the French (Renault, Peugeot, Citroen) might have something to market by now too, though I live in the states, so I'll only notice the French doing something if it affects the WRC.
It's entirely possible to manage file sizes larger than 2 GBs on a 32-bit architecture, you just can't store the address in one register. So what?
Every modern local file system can handle files significantly larger than this, ext{2,3}, xfs, jfs, ReiserFS, Berkeley ffs, Berkeley lfs, and various ufs implementations included. I'm about to tell Veritas I can't buy their NetBackup software because it can't handle >2GB files in its Linux client, and they even have a specified timeline for when it will. "It'll be fixed soon" means nothing in a corporate world, precisely where you were suggesting that AFS was a win. Go tell that to just about anyone doing datawarehousing. Tell them that they'll have to split the incoming files from mainframes and real Unix systems into 2 GB chunks on the fly to be able to use the FS. See how they react. (Or, take me as an example: I admin systems to do exactly that job, and I assure that AFS is utterly useless to me.) NFSv4 does all of those things.
Yes, including the migration. Use a (real) volume manager on the backend and store your data in a SAN. Use CNAMEs for your NFS servers. When you want to move, just reallocate the volume in the volume manager, remap the LUN in your SAN management interface if necessary, and update DNS. Poof.
Start out presenting RO copies of the backing LUN to several other systems and do the DNS stuff in Perl (or just buy a hardware product to do load balancing/failover) and you've got redundancy. Poof, poof.
No, I don't mean to suggest that's anywhere near the ease with which AFS handles either of those situations, but it's not like it's an impossible goal.
Btw, thanks for conforming to my
OpenAFS gets to be an answer when the get around to >2 GB file support. Till then, they're irrelevant.
Karma whoring, but it's not on the first page yet, so:
n asa.transcript/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/02/01/shuttle.
I'll agree this whole article smells of sour grapes, but there's a kernel in there somewhere of a legitimate complaint that Sony is not treating their customers in a reasonable manner. I'm a Unix systems administrator. If I make a change to the way in which a system functions and it breaks something for a client, my company almost definitely loses money, and if that happens enough, we lose clients. Sony is in the remarkable position that its clients don't vote with their wallets, but that doesn't mean they're allowed to hold those clients in complete disrespect.
You're welcome to devolve everything into personal interest (and it's quite easy to do so), but try not to state your belief like it's absolute truth, eh?
Using a seemingly innocuous message as a carrier wave for a truly useful message you don't want other people to know about is an old-news crypto technique, of course. But here's a fun, new place to apply it.
And you don't even need to seem to be doing anything funny during decoding (the message would obviously have to be enciphered; pass it in the clear and anyone who owns a cell tower between the two points can read it); build that into the phone/PDA. With the ridiculous proliferation of the damn things, no one will blink if you receive a call, chat for a few minutes, and then tap a few buttons. For all they know, you're sending an SMS, even if you are entering your passphrase.
All it really takes to do 3DES or Blowfish in software in a reasonable period of time is a StrongARM or similar (my Newton's got one, you cell phone must), though you'd get far better performance doing it in hardware. (Watch out for escrow, though!)
Supposing I want to get those direly important files off my Apple Lisa 1's Twiggy disks!
;^>
I mean, with just a little hardware hacking, I can get at the files on my ProFile hard drive, but how am I to read from the two-windowed Twiggy floppies?
Lockheed Martin is the only entry under "Defense Aerospace". MBNA is the only entry under "Finance/Credit Companies".
Where's Boeing? Where's McDonnell? Where's... umm... anything that competes with MBNA? (Everything I'd say here belongs in a different category on that list... but I'd say MBNA belongs in the "Securities and Investment" category, so whatever.)
I'm sure Oracle, Apple, and Sun all lobby. I'm sure because I just checked using this form. (I don't see an easy way to paste a URL directly to results, or I would.)
Why in the world would I be using wireless access for web browsing?
That's clearly any sysadmin's most miniscule use of bandwidth.
In any case, anything I'd do on your wireless network would be going over IPSec back to my apartment, so it's not like you could add the ads anyway...
Whoops.
Hrm.
Did this somehow slip past your notice as an Apple product?
In addition, I've a hard time believing the time (and, by way of paychecks, money) spent porting would be worth the (probably moderate) savings in chip costs. Granted, since Darwin's written based on a portable OS (NeXTStep, itself based on 4.2 BSD), porting it to another processor architecture wouldn't be any big feat (espeically considering this already happened at Apple to get from mac68k to macppc), but I'm not so sure it'd be saving Apple any money to do so.
Hrm.
My Apple Newton 2100 is significantly larger (about the size of a mini-legal pad; that is, the four by six inch ones) and heavier (a couple of pounds anyway), and it's WAY better, easier to use, and more expandable (drivers for IBM microdrives on PCMCIA cards are on the way soon, 802.11B ethernet works right now, various PCMCIA ethernet cards have worked for quite a while) than the Palm IIIx I kicked to the curb for it. (Too bad Apple stopped making them in '97...)
The moving parts thing is perhaps moderately valid... only but laptops seem to deal just fine (barring stupidly fragile plastic bits; that's why you should be using a sparcbook!).
As I posted on Bugtraq, no, that doesn't fix shit. Because I just arp flood your router, spoof the IP address, and you lose.
Updates must be at least checksummed and really should also be cryptographically signed. Period.
Oracle is developed under Solaris. Though Veritas products do exist for HP-UX, Veritas's happier dealing with Sun. There is a group of support engineers from all three companies working in the same place, answering calls together, precisely because the most common use of any of their products is with the other two. The ties between Oracle and Sun (and Veritas) run quite deep, and result in better performance.
He doesn't mind applying vendor-supplied patches, regardless of what OS is there. His point is that RedHat stopped providing patches for a system after a couple years. Sun's still providing patches eight years later. Therefore, Sun's more stable and less hassle for sysadmins.
Further, there is a Huge difference between running patchadd or rpm -F and rebooting the machine off of some install media, using the vendor's install software to upgrade the OS (presuming that actually works with your vendor's software), booting back up, then fixing all the software that doesn't work in the new version of the OS, since no dependencies were checked in the upgrade process.
(For most commercial installations, that difference might as well start and stop with "Rebooting..."--"nope, can't do that. This system needs to have 24/7 availability. Find another way.")