I generally like USB-C but one thing that perplexes me is why there are no true USB-C hubs? I’m not talking about port adapters. I mean real hubs. You plug a USB-C cable into one port on your computer and the other end into a box with 4, 5, or 7 USB-C ports, not USB-A ports. That way you can connect all your peripherals and you only need one set of cables. Not a USB-C cable when you want to connect it to your computer and a USB-A cable when you need to plug it into your hub.
5) Search through contacts by business or other methods 6) cut/paste 7) Categorize contacts/memos 8) task list 9) Scientific calculator mode 10) Bluetooth GPS profile 11) A2DP Bluetooth profile
It isn't just follow the herd. There are a number of reasons why developers really don't like itanium.
1) they are very very very sensitive to compiler optimizations to get performance. Tuning your app to run quickly on an itanium is more challenging than it is on other arches. One thing that isn't shown on the top500 numbers is the fact that linpack is well optimized for ia64 and people compete for the best linpack scores. Being able to get real codes to perform as well as linpack is very difficult.
2) the ia64 code is more difficult to debug. I can't really pin this one down. Like porting to other architectures, you uncover bugs when going to ia64. However, the way that the register stack works and the way things execute seem to make it just a little more frustrating to debug problems on ia64.
3) Function pointers are weird. They are pointers to a structure that includes both a pointer to the function and a pointer to its register stack. This makes some things rather difficult. It is different than what you expect.
4) The documentation, while thorough and complete is daunting. There is a lot more to the ia64 architecture than just the processor and the chipset. It seems like Intel is sort of backporting some of that to the ia32. So moving to the ia64 wasn't just porting your app, it included retraining your staff to one extent or another. Things work differently in the ia64 world.
This book review does not do this book justice. The book is much better than the reviewer seems to give it credit for. The book teaches you a vast amount natural history and biology in a way that is in such stark contrast to the typical dry and often times unrefined and boring presentation of scientific literature that you find yourself quite eager to delve into the next chapter. In particular, the book is actually funny and you find yourself laughing at the subtlety of the setups that the author puts the creatures in. You get the feeling like she spent literally days watching shows like Jerry Springer and contriving these scenarios. All the broached taboos that make shows like Jerry Springer so facinating to some people are represented in this book through the sex lives of various animals. It is almost unsettling at times how, things that are so universally verboten in our species are normal in other species. The book continues to surprise you with the extremely deviant sexual behavior and breaks down your aversion to it by explaining how it fits into the context of the lives of the creatures that practice it.
The breaking down of taboos surrounding sexuality is the slightly hidden agenda of the book. By presenting, the wide breadth of sexual behavior in the animal kingdom, in such a matter of fact way you become increasingly aware of how limited your own sexual repitoir truly is. The universal truths that you unquestioningly accept such as incest is bad, and females are chaste while men are promiscious are not quite as universal as you have been led to believe and that opens you up to a new way of thinking about the world.
Toward the beginning of the book and near the end Judson lifts her skirt just a little bit and hints at the book's hidden agenda and her personal feelings about sex after writing this whole book about on the topic. What she revealed and what she kept hidden reminded me of that old quote about bikinis, "What it reveals is suggestive, what it conceals is vital". This few paragraphs very effectively communicated to me that Ms Judson was not just a well lettered academic; the very pretty Ms. Judson also understands human sexuality and in particular the art being a seductress. She did this so well that after I finished the book, I had a serious crush on her for several weeks.
I have a honda insight. It is much better than just a geeky toy. I really love it. I've put about 30,000 miles on it in the year I've had it. Over that time, I've gotten a lifetime average of 62MPG.
The car is really well designed for what it is. It is a 2 person car that can carry a surprising amount of baggage as long as it isn't too heavy. It gets its fuel efficiency from having a very small engine. A small engine would normally have very bad acceleration but the electric motor provides the needed torque and so it is well matched for general driving.
It is not a sports car and doesn't really have the feel of driving something with lots of muscle but it doesn't poke around either. If you try you can out accelerate almost anything out of a redlight up until the point where the RPM gets up there on other car, at least 25MPH if not more. I've also had it up to 105MPH on a long straight highway near flagstaff so it does have an OK high end. The cornering and handling are surprisingly good. It has a very good suspension system for handling but as is often the case this is a tradeoff for smooth ride. It does tend to be a stiff ride.
The one place where it doesn't do really well is in passing traffic at highway speed. If you are already going 75 and you want to pass someone, the acceleration from 75 to say 85 is not that great. Also at fast highway speeds the ride can be a bit loud and rough. However, if you are just keeping a constant speed it will sip fuel while going 75 MPH.
As for long trips. I've found that it works rather well as long as it is just one person or you and your companion don't carry too much stuff. One thing I found amusing about the insight is that it has more range than I do. My previous car forced you to stop every 260 miles to get gas. This worked out nicely for food and a pee break. However, the insight with the 60+ MPG and the 10.6 gallon tank can drive for around 8 hours without refuelling. That was much more than I could take.
One thing that I didn't like about the insight on a long trip is the batteries are right behind the seats and so the seats can only recline about 20 degrees past vertical. This is not the best sleeping configuration. My old car allowed me recline almost the whole way.
As for city driving, the insight doesn't seem to be as well suited for it as the Toyota Prius. OTOH the Prius doesn't do as well on the highway. You can get really good gas milage in the city but it requires a substantial amount of practice and a bit of a change in your driving habits. It is a finesse thing. You have to know how to work with the car to figure out how to minimize its gas usage.
The insight really can't be used to haul kids. There is no back seat and there is no way to disable the passenger side airbag.
Overall, I think the Honda engineers did a really good job with the Insight. They made the tradeoffs between capability and efficiency in really good places. The car doesn't have many issues.
I'm a pilot and I have a small airplane and I often fly with my cell phone on. However, there are certain times when a cell phone really can interfere with aircraft avionics. I've read about several such examples on one of the mailing lists that I belong to and I've seen at least one example where a gadget that I have interfered with my navigation/communication radio. There are certain times when it is not wise to have a cell phone on.
Here is one such example. IMC is instrument meterological conditions. It means that you are in the clouds and cannot see anything. This by itself is very disorienting. You may find this hard to believe but you literally cannot tell how you are oriented in space and it is very easy to feel that you are flying straight and level when you are in fact spiralling into the ground. Another example is you can roll the airplane completely around wing over wing and if you are careful you will never notice it because I've kept the accelerations on your body pointing you directly down in your seat. This works for much the same reason that you don't fall out of your seat when on a roller coaster that has a loop in it.
During IMC as a pilot are TOTALLY dependent on the instruments to keep the airplane from tricking you in one of these ways that you can't feel. The thing is, when you are flying commercially you are likely to slip in and out of IMC. If you are in VMC Visual meteerological conditions then it doesn't matter if your instruments are being messed with by stray RF. Since the passengers may not know when the pilot is having to deal with IMC they say no cell phones during the flight.
To: "Mooney mailing list" Subject: autopilot funk revisited -- cell phone interference
* From: "John Breitinger"
* Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 19:51:20 -0600
* Importance: Normal
A few weeks ago, I posted an account of a problem that I encountered with my autopilot while IMC. I thought that you may want an update. I was at 13,000 in the clouds when the autopilot started acting up and quitting intermittently. At one point, I found myself in a 60 degree bank descending, while set up for straight and level -- disconcerting, to say the least.
After a bunch of trouble shooting, we have determined that it was interference from a cell phone that caused the problem. We have duplicated the problem in the same conditions. It has worked flawlessly with all cell phones turned off. Our autopilot is a Century 21 with an S-Tec 60 Pitch Stabilization System. Both components were affected independently.
The problem would occur when the phone would sense a new cell.
We were also getting intermittent weather mapping faults on the storm scope.
For the last several flights, we have been very diligent about turning off all portable electronic devices with good results.
I'm a pilot and I have a small airplane and I often fly with my cell phone on. However, there are certain times when a cell phone really can interfere with aircraft avionics. I've read about several such examples on one of the mailing lists that I belong to and I've seen at least one example where a gadget that I have interfered with my navigation/communication radio. There are certain times when it is not wise to have a cell phone on.
Here is one such example. IMC is instrument meterological conditions. It means that you are in the clouds and cannot see anything. This by itself is very disorienting. You may find this hard to believe but you literally cannot tell how you are oriented in space and it is very easy to feel that you are flying straight and level when you are in fact spiralling into the ground. Another example is you can roll the airplane completely around wing over wing and if you are careful you will never notice it because I've kept the accelerations on your body pointing you directly down in your seat. This works for much the same reason that you don't fall out of your seat when on a roller coaster that has a loop in it.
During IMC as a pilot are TOTALLY dependent on the instruments to keep the airplane from tricking you in one of these ways that you can't feel. The thing is, when you are flying commercially you are likely to slip in and out of IMC. If you are in VMC Visual meteerological conditions then it doesn't matter if your instruments are being messed with by stray RF. Since the passengers may not know when the pilot is having to deal with IMC they say no cell phones during the flight.
To: "Mooney mailing list"
Subject: autopilot funk revisited -- cell phone interference
* From: "John Breitinger"
* Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 19:51:20 -0600
* Importance: Normal
* List-archive:
* List-help:
* List-id: Aviation discussion list for Mooney enthusiasts
* List-post:
* List-subscribe: ,
* List-unsubscribe: ,
*
A few weeks ago, I posted an account of a problem that I encountered with my
autopilot while IMC. I thought that you may want an update. I was at
13,000 in the clouds when the autopilot started acting up and quitting
intermittently. At one point, I found myself in a 60 degree bank
descending, while set up for straight and level -- disconcerting, to say the
least.
After a bunch of trouble shooting, we have determined that it was
interference from a cell phone that caused the problem. We have duplicated
the problem in the same conditions. It has worked flawlessly with all cell
phones turned off. Our autopilot is a Century 21 with an S-Tec 60 Pitch
Stabilization System. Both components were affected independently.
The problem would occur when the phone would sense a new cell.
We were also getting intermittent weather mapping faults on the storm scope.
For the last several flights, we have been very diligent about turning off
all portable electronic devices with good results.
John Breitinger
High mountains make for really good cell phone reception. In many places in the remote areas it is easier to setup a bunch of cell phone stations than it is to bring in copper
The aerodynamics of SUV's and trucks are not necessarily bad because of styling constraints but rather because of cooling constraints. In the 60's and early 70's cars could pull trailers. In the late 70's when the US fuel prices shot up, cars were made dramatically more aerodynamic by using smaller engines. Smaller engines meant less heat and less heat meant less frontal area devoted to cooling the engine compartment. If you look at car designs from the 60's and from the 80's the big difference that you will see is that the front grill almost disappeared from cars.
Trucks and SUV's are still designed to pull trailers or carry substantial loads. Therefore they still need the larger engines with much better cooling than cars. Therefore they need more frontal area and the designs are less aerodynamic.
We've been working with HP's LaserJet division to improve support for their printers. Some of the work is starting to trickle over to the DeskJet Printers but that is a seperate division.
Please have a look at http://hp.sourceforge.net for information.
ben@valinux.com
This scares me. It doesn't matter if we are 100% right and they are 100% wrong and only saying that because it serves their self interest. If they use their lobbiests (who have access to the nation's policy makers) to "educate" those policy makers to the dangers of open source technolgy. We will be fighting an even greater uphill battle than we are now.
I've known several politicians. They really don't understand most of the issues that they are being asked to make decisions about. So they rely on people coming and telling them how to vote on an issue. If the only people that come and share their point of view are Microsoft's lobbiests then the decisions are going to turn against us.
What if this is just a demonstration of power? Something kind of Mafia like.
It could be some group (possibly the NSA) saying to these big powerful companies, "You think you are powerful. You are not! I can cut off your air supply any time that I want." It is like sending someone pictures of their daughter sleeping in her bed. It reminds them that they are vulnerable and that they shouldn't make waves.
This is not for show! We are really trying to bridge some gaps in the printing technology that currently exists. We want to allow people to do things like have their output stapled or come from different paper trays. We want to make it easy to access the duplexer and stuff like that.
We also want to do a bunch of user side stuff to make setting up parallel connected printer trivial.
That sounds to me like you have old firmware in your JetDirect cards. I would recommend that you either use WebJetAdmin or my program npadmin to update your firmware.
The newer cards accept the connection but don't accept any data until they are ready to print it.
Don't be worried about that. HP is a logo and the HP/UX people are so far from the LaserJet people that it is almost like they work for different companies.
I am working on the project. And here is what I can tell you so far. Most of the technologies that you mentioned are pieces to the overall printing puzzle. Quite a bit of what we at VA are doing for HP is to kind of fill in the gaps between the technologies.
For example gnome-print generates PS and corel's stuff is designed to provide a C api to the print system. In other words it sends jobs to the printer. These technologies work together and are needed by each other.
For example, one of the first things that I am working on is to make setting up a parallel printer easier by using the IEEE1284 information provided by the parallel port plug and play kernel module and using that to automatically setup the printer properly.
Also let me assure you that I am a lazy programmer. I don't want to bother writing any code that I don't have to. Corel has some stuff, CUPS has some stuff, a few other people have some stuff. I am going to try to sew it all together not reinvent the wheel. Hopefully as the developers work together we will have more and more shared code.
No this isn't a server end thing. It is fairly neutral in that it is not a server or a client thing. It is a "fill in the gaps" sort of thing.
Color managment and getting colors right is a really big deal. It will take a lot of coordinated work between the scanner people, the printer people, and the X server people, as well as work on the end user apps like gimp.
Man he will be sorely missed. He was my favorite technical author. He was an excellent author. In contrast to many other writers his writings were clear, and thorough. He seemed to persue each topic from all angles which is what you need when you are in need of a good technical book. He didn't just gloss over topics to make sure that they were covered, he covered each and every topic in depth and he did it in a way that it was reasonably easy to read.
Last time I talked to him (at SANS last year) he was working on an update to Advanced Unix Programming and expected it to be done and released around the beginning of the year 2000. I wonder if it was close enough to done that the editor can patch it together and release it. I am sure that it has all sorts of wonderful knowlege in it.
I run the print system at Cisco we have something like 3000 printers on the network and something like 100 linux print servers.
Anyway, network printing is a good thing. It allows you to work with literally hundreds of printers reliably. The thing is how do you talk to a printer. In most cases you have two choices. LPR and port 9100. LPR is not well suited to talking to printers because it doesn't allow you to pass any information back from the printer. For example you don't know if your print job just failed becasuse of a PS error. You also can't ask the printer about its capabilities. Port 9100 and PS together solve these problems. Port 9100 is just a standard port for a bidirectional TCP/IP connection to the printer. That way when you get PS errors you can read the error messages back from the socket. PS allows you to interrogate the printer for information.
The thing is this sort of means that you have to have a fairly intelligent print server. The printer vendors want to build all that intellegence into the printer and the protocol that communicates with the printer. So that is why they invented IPP.
Slashdot Mirror
I generally like USB-C but one thing that perplexes me is why there are no true USB-C hubs? I’m not talking about port adapters. I mean real hubs. You plug a USB-C cable into one port on your computer and the other end into a box with 4, 5, or 7 USB-C ports, not USB-A ports. That way you can connect all your peripherals and you only need one set of cables. Not a USB-C cable when you want to connect it to your computer and a USB-A cable when you need to plug it into your hub.
5) Search through contacts by business or other methods
6) cut/paste
7) Categorize contacts/memos
8) task list
9) Scientific calculator mode
10) Bluetooth GPS profile
11) A2DP Bluetooth profile
It isn't just follow the herd. There are a number of reasons why developers really don't like itanium.
1) they are very very very sensitive to compiler optimizations to get performance. Tuning your app to run quickly on an itanium is more challenging than it is on other arches. One thing that isn't shown on the top500 numbers is the fact that linpack is well optimized for ia64 and people compete for the best linpack scores. Being able to get real codes to perform as well as linpack is very difficult.
2) the ia64 code is more difficult to debug. I can't really pin this one down. Like porting to other architectures, you uncover bugs when going to ia64. However, the way that the register stack works and the way things execute seem to make it just a little more frustrating to debug problems on ia64.
3) Function pointers are weird. They are pointers to a structure that includes both a pointer to the function and a pointer to its register stack. This makes some things rather difficult. It is different than what you expect.
4) The documentation, while thorough and complete is daunting. There is a lot more to the ia64 architecture than just the processor and the chipset. It seems like Intel is sort of backporting some of that to the ia32. So moving to the ia64 wasn't just porting your app, it included retraining your staff to one extent or another. Things work differently in the ia64 world.
I have over 43,000 miles on my 2002 Honda Insight and my lifetime average is 61.1 MPG.
This is lower than the published numbers but considering the way that I drive it is still pretty good.
This book review does not do this book justice. The book is much better than the reviewer seems to give it credit for. The book teaches you a vast amount natural history and biology in a way that is in such stark contrast to the typical dry and often times unrefined and boring presentation of scientific literature that you find yourself quite eager to delve into the next chapter. In particular, the book is actually funny and you find yourself laughing at the subtlety of the setups that the author puts the creatures in. You get the feeling like she spent literally days watching shows like Jerry Springer and contriving these scenarios. All the broached taboos that make shows like Jerry Springer so facinating to some people are represented in this book through the sex lives of various animals. It is almost unsettling at times how, things that are so universally verboten in our species are normal in other species. The book continues to surprise you with the extremely deviant sexual behavior and breaks down your aversion to it by explaining how it fits into the context of the lives of the creatures that practice it.
The breaking down of taboos surrounding sexuality is the slightly hidden agenda of the book. By presenting, the wide breadth of sexual behavior in the animal kingdom, in such a matter of fact way you become increasingly aware of how limited your own sexual repitoir truly is. The universal truths that you unquestioningly accept such as incest is bad, and females are chaste while men are promiscious are not quite as universal as you have been led to believe and that opens you up to a new way of thinking about the world.
Toward the beginning of the book and near the end Judson lifts her skirt just a little bit and hints at the book's hidden agenda and her personal feelings about sex after writing this whole book about on the topic. What she revealed and what she kept hidden reminded me of that old quote about bikinis, "What it reveals is suggestive, what it conceals is vital". This few paragraphs very effectively communicated to me that Ms Judson was not just a well lettered academic; the very pretty Ms. Judson also understands human sexuality and in particular the art being a seductress. She did this so well that after I finished the book, I had a serious crush on her for several weeks.
I have a honda insight. It is much better than just a geeky toy. I really love it. I've put about 30,000 miles on it in the year I've had it. Over that time, I've gotten a lifetime average of 62MPG.
The car is really well designed for what it is. It is a 2 person car that can carry a surprising amount of baggage as long as it isn't too heavy. It gets its fuel efficiency from having a very small engine. A small engine would normally have very bad acceleration but the electric motor provides the needed torque and so it is well matched for general driving.
It is not a sports car and doesn't really have the feel of driving something with lots of muscle but it doesn't poke around either. If you try you can out accelerate almost anything out of a redlight up until the point where the RPM gets up there on other car, at least 25MPH if not more. I've also had it up to 105MPH on a long straight highway near flagstaff so it does have an OK high end. The cornering and handling are surprisingly good. It has a very good suspension system for handling but as is often the case this is a tradeoff for smooth ride. It does tend to be a stiff ride.
The one place where it doesn't do really well is in passing traffic at highway speed. If you are already going 75 and you want to pass someone, the acceleration from 75 to say 85 is not that great. Also at fast highway speeds the ride can be a bit loud and rough. However, if you are just keeping a constant speed it will sip fuel while going 75 MPH.
As for long trips. I've found that it works rather well as long as it is just one person or you and your companion don't carry too much stuff. One thing I found amusing about the insight is that it has more range than I do. My previous car forced you to stop every 260 miles to get gas. This worked out nicely for food and a pee break. However, the insight with the 60+ MPG and the 10.6 gallon tank can drive for around 8 hours without refuelling. That was much more than I could take.
One thing that I didn't like about the insight on a long trip is the batteries are right behind the seats and so the seats can only recline about 20 degrees past vertical. This is not the best sleeping configuration. My old car allowed me recline almost the whole way.
As for city driving, the insight doesn't seem to be as well suited for it as the Toyota Prius. OTOH the Prius doesn't do as well on the highway. You can get really good gas milage in the city but it requires a substantial amount of practice and a bit of a change in your driving habits. It is a finesse thing. You have to know how to work with the car to figure out how to minimize its gas usage.
The insight really can't be used to haul kids. There is no back seat and there is no way to disable the passenger side airbag.
Overall, I think the Honda engineers did a really good job with the Insight. They made the tradeoffs between capability and efficiency in really good places. The car doesn't have many issues.
I'm a pilot and I have a small airplane and I often fly with my cell phone on. However, there are certain times when a cell phone really can interfere with aircraft avionics. I've read about several such examples on one of the mailing lists that I belong to and I've seen at least one example where a gadget that I have interfered with my navigation/communication radio. There are certain times when it is not wise to have a cell phone on.
Here is one such example. IMC is instrument meterological conditions. It means that you are in the clouds and cannot see anything. This by itself is very disorienting. You may find this hard to believe but you literally cannot tell how you are oriented in space and it is very easy to feel that you are flying straight and level when you are in fact spiralling into the ground. Another example is you can roll the airplane completely around wing over wing and if you are careful you will never notice it because I've kept the accelerations on your body pointing you directly down in your seat. This works for much the same reason that you don't fall out of your seat when on a roller coaster that has a loop in it.
During IMC as a pilot are TOTALLY dependent on the instruments to keep the airplane from tricking you in one of these ways that you can't feel. The thing is, when you are flying commercially you are likely to slip in and out of IMC. If you are in VMC Visual meteerological conditions then it doesn't matter if your instruments are being messed with by stray RF. Since the passengers may not know when the pilot is having to deal with IMC they say no cell phones during the flight.
To: "Mooney mailing list"
Subject: autopilot funk revisited -- cell phone interference
* From: "John Breitinger"
* Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 19:51:20 -0600
* Importance: Normal
A few weeks ago, I posted an account of a problem that I encountered with my
autopilot while IMC. I thought that you may want an update. I was at
13,000 in the clouds when the autopilot started acting up and quitting
intermittently. At one point, I found myself in a 60 degree bank
descending, while set up for straight and level -- disconcerting, to say the
least.
After a bunch of trouble shooting, we have determined that it was
interference from a cell phone that caused the problem. We have duplicated
the problem in the same conditions. It has worked flawlessly with all cell
phones turned off. Our autopilot is a Century 21 with an S-Tec 60 Pitch
Stabilization System. Both components were affected independently.
The problem would occur when the phone would sense a new cell.
We were also getting intermittent weather mapping faults on the storm scope.
For the last several flights, we have been very diligent about turning off
all portable electronic devices with good results.
John Breitinger
I'm a pilot and I have a small airplane and I often fly with my cell phone on. However, there are certain times when a cell phone really can interfere with aircraft avionics. I've read about several such examples on one of the mailing lists that I belong to and I've seen at least one example where a gadget that I have interfered with my navigation/communication radio. There are certain times when it is not wise to have a cell phone on. Here is one such example. IMC is instrument meterological conditions. It means that you are in the clouds and cannot see anything. This by itself is very disorienting. You may find this hard to believe but you literally cannot tell how you are oriented in space and it is very easy to feel that you are flying straight and level when you are in fact spiralling into the ground. Another example is you can roll the airplane completely around wing over wing and if you are careful you will never notice it because I've kept the accelerations on your body pointing you directly down in your seat. This works for much the same reason that you don't fall out of your seat when on a roller coaster that has a loop in it. During IMC as a pilot are TOTALLY dependent on the instruments to keep the airplane from tricking you in one of these ways that you can't feel. The thing is, when you are flying commercially you are likely to slip in and out of IMC. If you are in VMC Visual meteerological conditions then it doesn't matter if your instruments are being messed with by stray RF. Since the passengers may not know when the pilot is having to deal with IMC they say no cell phones during the flight. To: "Mooney mailing list" Subject: autopilot funk revisited -- cell phone interference * From: "John Breitinger" * Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 19:51:20 -0600 * Importance: Normal * List-archive: * List-help: * List-id: Aviation discussion list for Mooney enthusiasts * List-post: * List-subscribe: , * List-unsubscribe: , * A few weeks ago, I posted an account of a problem that I encountered with my autopilot while IMC. I thought that you may want an update. I was at 13,000 in the clouds when the autopilot started acting up and quitting intermittently. At one point, I found myself in a 60 degree bank descending, while set up for straight and level -- disconcerting, to say the least. After a bunch of trouble shooting, we have determined that it was interference from a cell phone that caused the problem. We have duplicated the problem in the same conditions. It has worked flawlessly with all cell phones turned off. Our autopilot is a Century 21 with an S-Tec 60 Pitch Stabilization System. Both components were affected independently. The problem would occur when the phone would sense a new cell. We were also getting intermittent weather mapping faults on the storm scope. For the last several flights, we have been very diligent about turning off all portable electronic devices with good results. John Breitinger
High mountains make for really good cell phone reception. In many places in the remote areas it is easier to setup a bunch of cell phone stations than it is to bring in copper
We are working on one. Please check out http://www.freestandards.org/printing
-ben
The aerodynamics of SUV's and trucks are not necessarily bad because of styling constraints but rather because of cooling constraints. In the 60's and early 70's cars could pull trailers. In the late 70's when the US fuel prices shot up, cars were made dramatically more aerodynamic by using smaller engines. Smaller engines meant less heat and less heat meant less frontal area devoted to cooling the engine compartment. If you look at car designs from the 60's and from the 80's the big difference that you will see is that the front grill almost disappeared from cars.
Trucks and SUV's are still designed to pull trailers or carry substantial loads. Therefore they still need the larger engines with much better cooling than cars. Therefore they need more frontal area and the designs are less aerodynamic.
This is exactly what we have been working on for HP. Please take a look at http://hp.sourceforge.net
We've been working with HP's LaserJet division to improve support for their printers. Some of the work is starting to trickle over to the DeskJet Printers but that is a seperate division. Please have a look at http://hp.sourceforge.net for information. ben@valinux.com
This scares me. It doesn't matter if we are 100% right and they are 100% wrong and only saying that because it serves their self interest. If they use their lobbiests (who have access to the nation's policy makers) to "educate" those policy makers to the dangers of open source technolgy. We will be fighting an even greater uphill battle than we are now.
I've known several politicians. They really don't understand most of the issues that they are being asked to make decisions about. So they rely on people coming and telling them how to vote on an issue. If the only people that come and share their point of view are Microsoft's lobbiests then the decisions are going to turn against us.
What if this is just a demonstration of power? Something kind of Mafia like.
It could be some group (possibly the NSA) saying to these big powerful companies, "You think you are powerful. You are not! I can cut off your air supply any time that I want." It is like sending someone pictures of their daughter sleeping in her bed. It reminds them that they are vulnerable and that they shouldn't make waves.
This is not for show! We are really trying to bridge some gaps in the printing technology that currently exists. We want to allow people to do things like have their output stapled or come from different paper trays. We want to make it easy to access the duplexer and stuff like that.
We also want to do a bunch of user side stuff to make setting up parallel connected printer trivial.
That sounds to me like you have old firmware in your JetDirect cards. I would recommend that you either use WebJetAdmin or my program npadmin to update your firmware.
The newer cards accept the connection but don't accept any data until they are ready to print it.
Don't be worried about that. HP is a logo and the HP/UX people are so far from the LaserJet people that it is almost like they work for different companies.
I am working on the project. And here is what I can tell you so far. Most of the technologies that you mentioned are pieces to the overall printing puzzle. Quite a bit of what we at VA are doing for HP is to kind of fill in the gaps between the technologies.
For example gnome-print generates PS and corel's stuff is designed to provide a C api to the print system. In other words it sends jobs to the printer. These technologies work together and are needed by each other.
For example, one of the first things that I am working on is to make setting up a parallel printer easier by using the IEEE1284 information provided by the parallel port plug and play kernel module and using that to automatically setup the printer properly.
Also let me assure you that I am a lazy programmer. I don't want to bother writing any code that I don't have to. Corel has some stuff, CUPS has some stuff, a few other people have some stuff. I am going to try to sew it all together not reinvent the wheel. Hopefully as the developers work together we will have more and more shared code.
No this isn't a server end thing. It is fairly neutral in that it is not a server or a client thing. It is a "fill in the gaps" sort of thing.
Color managment and getting colors right is a really big deal. It will take a lot of coordinated work between the scanner people, the printer people, and the X server people, as well as work on the end user apps like gimp.
Man he will be sorely missed. He was my favorite technical author. He was an excellent author. In contrast to many other writers his writings were clear, and thorough. He seemed to persue each topic from all angles which is what you need when you are in need of a good technical book. He didn't just gloss over topics to make sure that they were covered, he covered each and every topic in depth and he did it in a way that it was reasonably easy to read.
Last time I talked to him (at SANS last year) he was working on an update to Advanced Unix Programming and expected it to be done and released around the beginning of the year 2000. I wonder if it was close enough to done that the editor can patch it together and release it. I am sure that it has all sorts of wonderful knowlege in it.
-ben
I run the print system at Cisco we have something like 3000 printers on the network and something like 100 linux print servers.
Anyway, network printing is a good thing. It allows you to work with literally hundreds of printers reliably. The thing is how do you talk to a printer. In most cases you have two choices. LPR and port 9100. LPR is not well suited to talking to printers because it doesn't allow you to pass any information back from the printer. For example you don't know if your print job just failed becasuse of a PS error. You also can't ask the printer about its capabilities. Port 9100 and PS together solve these problems. Port 9100 is just a standard port for a bidirectional TCP/IP connection to the printer. That way when you get PS errors you can read the error messages back from the socket. PS allows you to interrogate the printer for information.
The thing is this sort of means that you have to have a fairly intelligent print server. The printer vendors want to build all that intellegence into the printer and the protocol that communicates with the printer. So that is why they invented IPP.