I work in the Computer Science Department at the University of Copenhagen (DIKU) and our undergrad and grad student labs are made up of SunRay stations (I guess about 120 of them or so). They are run by 3 fairly slow SunFireV440 and require a number of application servers that can handle the load - in our case that is a pile of cheap Linux-boxes. With an LTSP solution you might be able to get by with fewer application servers as LTSP is able run applications locally.
The setup performs well for most tasks that our studens perform: browsing, compiling, emacs, lyx, etc. However getting audio from the application on a different server through the network into the V440 and finally to the earphone plug on the terminal is a challenge - and ofen more than the SunRay servers can handle.
They require very little attendance from the administrator - except for hardware failures everything can be handled remotely.
I don't know which prices you used for you calculations, but Sun just announced that SunRay software should be on the way for Linux which should bring the price on the servers down substancially.
I've been fascinated by the RUF dual mode system for a long time (also linked from the UW site). It has yet to be imple anywhere, however it looks extremely attractive to me.
It combines the advantages of cars and public transport with it's roll-on/roll-off railway system. It's part of the EU cybercars project, which has some nice videos.
IMHO Flytech is still the most attractive in the small noise-free genre - they are fairly expansive, and not entirely state of the art on graphics and CPU slots (custom made motherboard), but I've had no problems installing a 750 MHz VIA C3 (all though this requires an undocumented jumper setting), and on the NC3 I've actually managed to squeeze an expansion card in there.
With just passive cooling and the external fan-less PSU this make my PC entirely noise-free, ahh..
Re:What's the big deal?
on
Debian And WineX
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
If the CEO is so clear on why they don't want third parties to package and redistribute, why didn't they state this in the license in the first place? I'm sure there was no harm meant by the Debian packager, they just read the license and apparently it said that it was OK.
What's the point of making pseudo free license if you don't really mean it? Was the idea to get more free software developer, and as soon as anyone used the benefits of free software they backed off saying "hey will change the license if you do that"!?
If their business model is one that could be harmed by the Debian packages and not benefit from them I don't see the point in allowing it in the license.
Both 802.11 and BT uses Frequency Hop Spread Spectrum (FHSS) meaning that two communicating nodes will hop frequency on a predetermined sequence within the 2,4Ghz band. BT devides the band into something like 79 channels and hops every 612,5 us (I think) while 802.11 hops much much slower. Meaning that the likelyhood of a BT transmitter acidentially hitting the same frequency as a nearby 802.11 device is quite high.
A great alternative compatible with a lot of standard hardware is the Cyrix III CPUs. Giving great preformance/$ and low power consumption.
At 550Mhz Cyrix III promises something like 8W. The new Via C3 (Samuel II) promises as low power usage as 6W. As an extra bonus no active cooling is requiered - allso saving a bit of power.
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds like Oticon ConnectLine might be what you are looking for.
http://oticon.com/products/wireless-accessories/connectline/about-connectline.aspx
Singing: "The internet is for porn.. The internet is for porn.. The internet is for porn"..
r n
Everybody now...
http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/internet4po
I work in the Computer Science Department at the University of Copenhagen (DIKU) and our undergrad and grad student labs are made up of SunRay stations (I guess about 120 of them or so). They are run by 3 fairly slow SunFireV440 and require a number of application servers that can handle the load - in our case that is a pile of cheap Linux-boxes. With an LTSP solution you might be able to get by with fewer application servers as LTSP is able run applications locally.
The setup performs well for most tasks that our studens perform: browsing, compiling, emacs, lyx, etc. However getting audio from the application on a different server through the network into the V440 and finally to the earphone plug on the terminal is a challenge - and ofen more than the SunRay servers can handle.
They require very little attendance from the administrator - except for hardware failures everything can be handled remotely.
I don't know which prices you used for you calculations, but Sun just announced that SunRay software should be on the way for Linux which should bring the price on the servers down substancially.
I've been fascinated by the RUF dual mode system for a long time (also linked from the UW site). It has yet to be imple anywhere, however it looks extremely attractive to me.
It combines the advantages of cars and public transport with it's roll-on/roll-off railway system. It's part of the EU cybercars project, which has some nice videos.
The flytech PC's are the smalest I've seen: as low as 2,5 cm in width running VIA C3 with no fan without breaking a sweat.
http://www.flytech.com.tw/
IMHO Flytech is still the most attractive in the small noise-free genre - they are fairly expansive, and not entirely state of the art on graphics and CPU slots (custom made motherboard), but I've had no problems installing a 750 MHz VIA C3 (all though this requires an undocumented jumper setting), and on the NC3 I've actually managed to squeeze an expansion card in there.
With just passive cooling and the external fan-less PSU this make my PC entirely noise-free, ahh..
http://www.flytech.com.tw/nc4-1.htm
If the CEO is so clear on why they don't want third parties to package and redistribute, why didn't they state this in the license in the first place? I'm sure there was no harm meant by the Debian packager, they just read the license and apparently it said that it was OK.
What's the point of making pseudo free license if you don't really mean it? Was the idea to get more free software developer, and as soon as anyone used the benefits of free software they backed off saying "hey will change the license if you do that"!?
If their business model is one that could be harmed by the Debian packages and not benefit from them I don't see the point in allowing it in the license.
I suggest that you go to your preferences under "Exclude Stories from the Homepage" you select "Microsoft"! Problem solved.
This has got to be a fake.. I mean DrDinosaur!? For real? I think not.
Even so I laughed so hard my stomach started to hurt.
Looks interesting. Do you know the name of the company producing the devices?
Both 802.11 and BT uses Frequency Hop Spread Spectrum (FHSS) meaning that two communicating nodes will hop frequency on a predetermined sequence within the 2,4Ghz band. BT devides the band into something like 79 channels and hops every 612,5 us (I think) while 802.11 hops much much slower. Meaning that the likelyhood of a BT transmitter acidentially hitting the same frequency as a nearby 802.11 device is quite high.
So yes they will interfer.
Does anyone know how Journaling on software RAID is coming around? As I recall, the last time I checked it was a no-go.
A great alternative compatible with a lot of standard hardware is the Cyrix III CPUs. Giving great preformance/$ and low power consumption.
At 550Mhz Cyrix III promises something like 8W. The new Via C3 (Samuel II) promises as low power usage as 6W. As an extra bonus no active cooling is requiered - allso saving a bit of power.