What bothers me is that there is no sign of any technical specifications at all.
20 mega pixels - five times HDTV resolution
Sure, very nice if they were to show it on a screen as large as a 28" TV, but on a screen with an area of 66 m^2? 560 pixels/m? That doesn't sound very highres to me.
Lets calculate bandwidth. 20 Mpix = 20971520*24*3 = 1440 MB/s, uncompressed. That's a lot. Let's say they manage to compress the video 20 times, which could be difficult or expensive with real time compression. That leaves us with 72 MB/s video only over far distances, excluding sound. How are they going to get that through the 100 MBit network they mention in the article?
Also, I can find no references from google regarding "Hypersound(C), a revolutionary directional sound technology". If it was that revolutionary, someone would have written something about it, you might think.
I really don't know. It's a cool idea, but it sounds fishy. Is there a working prototype at all, or are they still in the attract-investor-money phase?
This is part of why I think it would be interesting to port DriverLoader's technology to a microkernel OS (such that they can be Just Another Process, like any other, instead of running the ported driver in kernel space).
Kernels and drivers are hardly areas where I have much knowledge, but as far as I could understand, the reputedly poor networking performance in BeOS before b.o.n.e. was introduced was due to user space network drivers, which might make this a less good idea?
Also, how would wrapping drivers affect networking performance? You would think adding a layer would slow stuff down a bit. Sure, a slow but working network card is better than a non functional, but not by far.
Why would my post be both unsucessful and unclear if many people understand it?
By saying mac, I and most people saying so mean a computer made by Apple, using an OS made by Apple. Misunderstanding that on purpose doesn't make you look informed, if that's what you think.
No, I would call an intel box running Linux a "linux box", though I fail to see how asking that question helps your argument. I would call a "windows box" running linux a "linux box", just like I would call an Apple computer running Linux a "linux box".
And if I want a windows box I am limited to one OS vendor.
Yes, that is exactly what I said in my first post on this subject. But you still have the choice of hardware from the manufacturer giving the best price/performance/overall deal.
And if I want a RedHat box I am limited to one OS vendor.
Do you often hear people say: "I'm thinking about getting a Red Hat box"?
No.
If someone say something to that effect it's rather: "I'm thinking about getting a Linux box", or "I'm thinking about getting a Red Hat Linux box", implying there is choice. If someone would like exactly a Red Hat box and can't choose another distro, well, then they have this very unusual limitation. However, the whole limitation scenario is kind of made up, since most Linux apps you would need, would run on any distro of your choice.
So the only advantage is hardware choice, but that's only for the base system. And even there, I've said it before, how much of a choice do you have?
In the Linux case, in a majority of the cases, no. You might choose any distro you like. If your chosen one is closed down, you can always leave for another.
In Windows, yes, but you still have more choice than in the Apple community, which is the point I have been trying to make all along. It's simply a less controlled system. Also, I would hesitate saying the only advantage of a windows system, when speaking of choices, is hardware choice.
If I want a Linux box, I am free to choose both OS and HW vendor from plenty of sources. If I want a Windows box I have only one OS vendor, but lots of hardware vendors to choose from. If I want a Mac, I have only one OS vendor and the one and same HW vendor.
I am sometimes heard complaining about the defacto monopoly MS has in personal computer issues, but compared to Apple users HW/OS choices, Windows users situation actually looks better.
Note that I don't dislike OSX/Apple as such. It's a polished product. But, I won't leave one monopoly for an even bigger lock-in.
Well, politicians are not that aware of differences in the software market. They might have heard bad things about proprietary software (ms security), but also bad things about OSS (sco might own linux). Then they base their decisions on what their advisors tell them is the reasonable thing to do, combined with what they have heard/researched for themselves.
Enter, lobbyists. These guys actively hands out information that support their case. Corporations, having lots of money, can hire professional lobbyists (people who know how to get the message through) to do this full time, while OSS projects might have a few people (not professional lobbyists) doing this in their own spare time. Wonder whose words of wisdom the politicians and their advisors will be hearing the most?
You don't need to buy off anyone. It's enough making sure that your side is the one "shouting loudest" to get things going your way in politics, as long as the subject isn't something with which politicians or their associates are very familiar with themselves.
Do the math of a 8 lb bowling ball traveling 400 FPS for 600 yards.
Ok, a quick example. I'll use SI-units.
Wk = mv^2/2 (kinetic energy) m = 8 lb ~= 4 kg v = 400FPS = 400/3,22 = 124 m/s Wk = 4*124^2/2 = <b>30752 J</b>
Ok, how much is that then? Well, if we consider a.44 bullet weighing in at 240g, we get:
v = sqrt(2Wk/m) v = sqrt(2*30752/0,240) = 506 m/s
Ok, being hit by the flying bowling ball would be like taking a.44 magnum bullet flying at ~500 m/s. Normally, a magnum bullet when fired has the velocity of ~300 - 350 m/s. Taking into account that speed (v) is squared, when counting kinetic energy, crossing the path of the ball in flight, would not be recommended. (doh)
How can "Linux" become "mainstream"? I guess a few distros could go mainstream (if you by that mean user friendly/used by a lot of users), but then just use whatever other distro you like, slackware, linux from scratch, debian or gentoo. I can assure you these distros won't go mainstream (windows way) any time soon.
Well, it is not like the MSN protocol specification has been open earlier, which didn't stop developers from making third party clients. I see no reason why the same people shouldn't be able to reverse engineer the protocol specs once more.
The question you should ask yourself is why MS is going this very public about "closing" their protocol.
However, everything entered into *any* chat service is totally unprotected, and can be snooped. In fact, in the current EULA, they explicity state that they will give archives of the messages (which they store, BTW) away to officials upon prompting.
You can always try Miranda IM with the SecureIM plugin activated. The only problem is that the ones recieving your messages needs to have Miranda and SecureIM activated.
I think some Jabber clients and servers support encryption too.
(*) with some exceptions. Apparently a girl I went to high-school with is the Green Party's spokesperson. Sharp as a tack, that one.
Maria Wetterstrand??? Then you must have some inside information, hidden from the masses. In most public debates she comes off as a ignorant amateur compared with other participating politicians. There is a reason MiljÃpartiet have Peter Eriksson as a spokesperson when the debate is important. Not that he is too sharp, either.
Maybe these other politicians you despise would seem pretty sharp if you got to know them too.
Yes, it is ridiculous. Paying a fee for what we might do with our recordable media. But this is no new idea, it has been in effect here for decades.
A funny thing about this law is that the most common reaction when people hear of this bull is: "Well, then I can copy whatever I please, because we have already paid for it when buying the CD/casette, etc.". If you don't use your media for making illegal copies, you loose the money you paid for making up for illegal copying.:)
But, speaking of these laws generally, I am not surprised. Business as usual in sweden. When authorities (in this case EU) say jump, everyone is busting their guts to be the one jumping highest.
In fact, iirc, in an article I read at IDG.se, they said this proposal for a law reaches even further than suggested in this/. article. Supposedly filesharing alltogheter would be made illegal. Not only sharing copyright protected material would be outlawed, even using the clients would be prohibited. Outrageous. I can't find this article now, if my memory serves me wrong or IDG.se misunderstood something, please correct me.
New interfaces are always harder to code for, until standardized drivers become available.
Yes, but as hardware becomes increasingly complex, drivers, libraries and toolkits will be equally more difficult to write. Even more so if you don't have reference material for the hardware you are writing drivers for, as most OS projects don't have today.
It is not like standardized drivers appear magically for an OS, except a few select ones with critical mass.
I think the e-mail metaphor is a very nice one when explaining what jabber is to newbies.
Unlike most other IMs, where there is only one server (no more than one adress for accessing the server(s)) the Jabber network is built up by lots of servers communicating with each other, like e-mail.
Your jabber address looks and works a lot like your e-mail addresse. User@jabber.org or User@mail.com, same functionality, different protocols. A pretty obvious and shallow observation, but is very useful when explaining for newbs.
Slashdot Mirror
What bothers me is that there is no sign of any technical specifications at all.
20 mega pixels - five times HDTV resolution
Sure, very nice if they were to show it on a screen as large as a 28" TV, but on a screen with an area of 66 m^2? 560 pixels/m? That doesn't sound very highres to me.
Lets calculate bandwidth. 20 Mpix = 20971520*24*3 = 1440 MB/s, uncompressed. That's a lot. Let's say they manage to compress the video 20 times, which could be difficult or expensive with real time compression. That leaves us with 72 MB/s video only over far distances, excluding sound. How are they going to get that through the 100 MBit network they mention in the article?
Also, I can find no references from google regarding "Hypersound(C), a revolutionary directional sound technology". If it was that revolutionary, someone would have written something about it, you might think.
I really don't know. It's a cool idea, but it sounds fishy. Is there a working prototype at all, or are they still in the attract-investor-money phase?
This is part of why I think it would be interesting to port DriverLoader's technology to a microkernel OS (such that they can be Just Another Process, like any other, instead of running the ported driver in kernel space).
Kernels and drivers are hardly areas where I have much knowledge, but as far as I could understand, the reputedly poor networking performance in BeOS before b.o.n.e. was introduced was due to user space network drivers, which might make this a less good idea?
Also, how would wrapping drivers affect networking performance? You would think adding a layer would slow stuff down a bit. Sure, a slow but working network card is better than a non functional, but not by far.
Just curious.
Lucasarts, for using Monkey Island MIDI files as proof of sound quality.
Why would my post be both unsucessful and unclear if many people understand it?
By saying mac, I and most people saying so mean a computer made by Apple, using an OS made by Apple. Misunderstanding that on purpose doesn't make you look informed, if that's what you think.
No, I would call an intel box running Linux a "linux box", though I fail to see how asking that question helps your argument. I would call a "windows box" running linux a "linux box", just like I would call an Apple computer running Linux a "linux box".
Are you slow or something?
And if I want a windows box I am limited to one OS vendor.
Yes, that is exactly what I said in my first post on this subject. But you still have the choice of hardware from the manufacturer giving the best price/performance/overall deal.
And if I want a RedHat box I am limited to one OS vendor.
Do you often hear people say: "I'm thinking about getting a Red Hat box"?
No.
If someone say something to that effect it's rather: "I'm thinking about getting a Linux box", or "I'm thinking about getting a Red Hat Linux box", implying there is choice. If someone would like exactly a Red Hat box and can't choose another distro, well, then they have this very unusual limitation. However, the whole limitation scenario is kind of made up, since most Linux apps you would need, would run on any distro of your choice.
So the only advantage is hardware choice, but that's only for the base system. And even there, I've said it before, how much of a choice do you have?
In the Linux case, in a majority of the cases, no. You might choose any distro you like. If your chosen one is closed down, you can always leave for another.
In Windows, yes, but you still have more choice than in the Apple community, which is the point I have been trying to make all along. It's simply a less controlled system. Also, I would hesitate saying the only advantage of a windows system, when speaking of choices, is hardware choice.
"If I want a Mac"
By that I meant "If I want a Mac with MacOS". I thought that was obvious, but obviously not.
Newsflash, I can install Linux/BSD on almost any windows box too, if you are going to read it that way.
.
"If I want a Mac"
...
By that I meant "If I want a Mac with MacOS". I thought that was obvious, but obviously not.
Newsflash, I can install Linux/BSD on almost any windows box too, if you are going to read it that way.
"If I want a Mac"
By that I meant "If I want a Mac with MacOS". I thought that was obvious, but obviously not.
Newsflash, I can install Linux/BSD on almost any windows box too, if you are going to read it that way.
If I want a Linux box, I am free to choose both OS and HW vendor from plenty of sources. If I want a Windows box I have only one OS vendor, but lots of hardware vendors to choose from. If I want a Mac, I have only one OS vendor and the one and same HW vendor.
I am sometimes heard complaining about the defacto monopoly MS has in personal computer issues, but compared to Apple users HW/OS choices, Windows users situation actually looks better.
Note that I don't dislike OSX/Apple as such. It's a polished product. But, I won't leave one monopoly for an even bigger lock-in.
Well, politicians are not that aware of differences in the software market. They might have heard bad things about proprietary software (ms security), but also bad things about OSS (sco might own linux). Then they base their decisions on what their advisors tell them is the reasonable thing to do, combined with what they have heard/researched for themselves.
Enter, lobbyists. These guys actively hands out information that support their case. Corporations, having lots of money, can hire professional lobbyists (people who know how to get the message through) to do this full time, while OSS projects might have a few people (not professional lobbyists) doing this in their own spare time. Wonder whose words of wisdom the politicians and their advisors will be hearing the most?
You don't need to buy off anyone. It's enough making sure that your side is the one "shouting loudest" to get things going your way in politics, as long as the subject isn't something with which politicians or their associates are very familiar with themselves.
Ok, a quick example. I'll use SI-units.Ok, how much is that then? Well, if we consider a
Nah, he will also need a wooden leg, a hook instead of a hand or at least an eye patch to become a full fledged pirate.
But then, playing with toys like these, that problem will be solved in a not-so-distant future...
It is too big to be a space station.
RUN/STOP-RESTORE and Ctrl-Amiga-Amiga
How can "Linux" become "mainstream"? I guess a few distros could go mainstream (if you by that mean user friendly/used by a lot of users), but then just use whatever other distro you like, slackware, linux from scratch, debian or gentoo. I can assure you these distros won't go mainstream (windows way) any time soon.
Well, it is not like the MSN protocol specification has been open earlier, which didn't stop developers from making third party clients. I see no reason why the same people shouldn't be able to reverse engineer the protocol specs once more.
The question you should ask yourself is why MS is going this very public about "closing" their protocol.
However, everything entered into *any* chat service is totally unprotected, and can be snooped. In fact, in the current EULA, they explicity state that they will give archives of the messages (which they store, BTW) away to officials upon prompting.
You can always try Miranda IM with the SecureIM plugin activated. The only problem is that the ones recieving your messages needs to have Miranda and SecureIM activated.
I think some Jabber clients and servers support encryption too.
(*) with some exceptions. Apparently a girl I went to high-school with is the Green Party's spokesperson. Sharp as a tack, that one.
Maria Wetterstrand??? Then you must have some inside information, hidden from the masses. In most public debates she comes off as a ignorant amateur compared with other participating politicians. There is a reason MiljÃpartiet have Peter Eriksson as a spokesperson when the debate is important. Not that he is too sharp, either.
Maybe these other politicians you despise would seem pretty sharp if you got to know them too.
I hate to burst your bubble, but this law has been in place for decades over here.
Also, the fee isn't anywhere near the $4 mentioned in the article, it's more like $.1...
Last time I bought CDROMs, it was something like $9 for 25 CDs.
Yes, it is ridiculous. Paying a fee for what we might do with our recordable media. But this is no new idea, it has been in effect here for decades.
:)
/. article. Supposedly filesharing alltogheter would be made illegal. Not only sharing copyright protected material would be outlawed, even using the clients would be prohibited. Outrageous. I can't find this article now, if my memory serves me wrong or IDG.se misunderstood something, please correct me.
A funny thing about this law is that the most common reaction when people hear of this bull is: "Well, then I can copy whatever I please, because we have already paid for it when buying the CD/casette, etc.". If you don't use your media for making illegal copies, you loose the money you paid for making up for illegal copying.
But, speaking of these laws generally, I am not surprised. Business as usual in sweden. When authorities (in this case EU) say jump, everyone is busting their guts to be the one jumping highest.
In fact, iirc, in an article I read at IDG.se, they said this proposal for a law reaches even further than suggested in this
New interfaces are always harder to code for, until standardized drivers become available.
Yes, but as hardware becomes increasingly complex, drivers, libraries and toolkits will be equally more difficult to write. Even more so if you don't have reference material for the hardware you are writing drivers for, as most OS projects don't have today.
It is not like standardized drivers appear magically for an OS, except a few select ones with critical mass.
What could really fix M1 is making it non-anonymous, like K5. I think it would at least remove some of the problems with stalkers.
34 minutes!?
The horrors of running MS Windows...
I think the e-mail metaphor is a very nice one when explaining what jabber is to newbies.
Unlike most other IMs, where there is only one server (no more than one adress for accessing the server(s)) the Jabber network is built up by lots of servers communicating with each other, like e-mail.
Your jabber address looks and works a lot like your e-mail addresse. User@jabber.org or User@mail.com, same functionality, different protocols. A pretty obvious and shallow observation, but is very useful when explaining for newbs.