It's no secret that Apple rumor sites receive a large spike in traffic during events such as the WWDC. I found it interesting that this year, one rumor site is attempting a new approach to reduce their bandwidth consumption Mac Rumors (http://macrumors.com/) has teamed up with Equiknox to deliver update via Javascript and XML (recently coined AJAX http://www.adaptivepath.com/publications/essays/ar chives/000385.php). They believe that this technique, combined with a lightweight http server, will allow them to serve 3300 hits/sec over three servers and to withstand the any severe spike.
I think I can shed a little light on this situation as I have had both of the above cases happen to me.
This is how the system works. Google can index your site very quickly (within a couple of days), if you have an incoming link or submit to their crawler. If your site is well keyword optimized for a fairly rare keyword, it is entirely plausible that it would come up number one fairly quickly.
What takes a long time is for google to update their pagerank index. This is where your site will sit in the Google Sandbox for a while Google updates your pagerank.
In most cases, the sites initial pagerank of 0 will not be enough to take it to the top.
For a site that we just released about 10 days ago, this was not the case (http://www.jimschlessinger.com/). Since the keywords we were optimizing were fairly rare, it climbed right to the top.
I am a mac user and of course I am seeking some sort of comparison to spotlight.
Has anyone used both? Are there any articles on this out there?
KHTML Developers Assumed Too Much
on
Safari vs. KHTML
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I think Apple made a decision that it needed to switch cores and at that moment has every right to do so and never look back. The fact that they are putting any effort into KHTML at all should be looked at as a mere bonus for the KTHML developers at this point.
Apple never claimed to be the white night funding the KHTML project or that they would be the dominant developer for the future. This is not an example of IBM taking over a project.
I think some KHTML guys read way too much into this relationship. It was pretty clear from the start that they were being used (but the nature of their license allows for this). It was great that they showed trust and attempted to built a relationship, but they should not have become in anyway dependent. I'm not saying this is the case, but the bitterness of their response seems to suggst this sort of dependence.
Wow. This is a pretty interesting idea and could turn out to be an interesting marketing ploy.
I am barely a graphic designer, but I am very curious about the ability to mix vector graphics directly into html. The potential sounds amazing. Can anyone shed any light on what the implementation of such a website would be like?
Also, I wonder if this is at all likely to be considered for the upcoming IE 7 update.
The solutions provided in this article have very limited usefulness. I support the inclusion of a good web efficiency article on slashdot, but this article is a waste of time and its techniques are a waste of energy unless, for some reason, your site uses a ton of dropdowns.
I read another article on IBM once about web efficiency that was much more thourough and much more slashdot worthy, but I can't find it unfortunately. When I do, I will post it.
One bottleneck that is on the verge of being taken on with the advent of various dual core processors is that of concurrency. Due to the nature of Virtual Reality programming, parallel processing demands are very high (just think of how many things run in parallel in the real world).
Languages such as The SHADOW System that are designed for programming Virtual Reality Environments are highly threaded and designed to take advantage of these systems. However, the concepts were ahead of their time in the case because the computing power simply did (does) not exist. In fact, the degree of parallel processing required is so high, that it will not be sufficed by the initial wave of dual core CPUs, but they will go a long way in terms of improvement of Virtual Reality systems.
Read the permananent version of this post here and more on the topic here
You can read the permanent version of this response here.
I know only a little about this field, but I do know that current available computing power can only scratch the surface of what is possible with Virtual Reality. I took a class on the subject a couple years ago, in which we were introduced to some currently available technologies. Most of these I found fairly impressive, though not the fully submersive environment that I had envisioned as a child.
As is most technology innovation these days, the impetus behind many of these devices was largely for military purposes. One such device that sticks out in my mind was a set of goggles that performed a matching algorithm on a subjects face to determine if they were anyone that the soldier should remember. The example the guest speaker used was to suppose a soldier got a glimpse of Saddam Hussein. The goggles projected a small screen in the top corner of the lense that could be used for a variety of things including a conformation of a suspect and another example they gave of an MPEG video display. The screen was pretty tiny, but near the eye it had a pretty neat effect.
Another device introduced was the Phantom from MIT's touch lab. This haptic feedback device provides touch feedback to simulate real world situations. The example in the article I linked to cites the feel of Tiger Woods' grip as and example.
There was some talk of submersive three dimensional environments ala star trek, but we didn't go into much depth. There are all sorts of complications regarding various projection systems and with the helmets there are still serious simulator sickness problems in many subjects.
These aren't the only limits however. Others include a lack of computing power to create a realistic 3D environment that can really fool the brain and problems creating haptic and other sensory feedback. After all of this, perhaps a bigger problem is an overall lack of interest. Outside special circumstances such as military training (flight simulators etc), there is no great need. There is also no great want. The public is largely satisfied (read saturated) with smaller, "low" cost devices such as iPods, PDAs, cameras, cellphones, gaming systems camera phones and laptops. All of these barriers will have to be overcome before we see Virtual Reality anywhere near the forefront of technology.
I often times find myself annoyed by software that comes attached to operatings systems (read my review of Mac OS X 10.4 to see why Safari 2.0 is really raising my ire). The most recent culprit is Quicktime 7.
I happen to be one of many people who shelled out the necessary bones for the Pro version of Quicktime 6. So what does apple do to us loyal customers when we upgrade our operating system? Poof, no more Quicktime Pro.
But wait a sec, what if I was satisfied with Quicktime 6? What if the features of having the Pro version outweight the features of upgrading to 7 (which they certainly do for my purposes)? It would seem that Apple is not concerned with any of this.
At some point, I'll probably shell out again for Quicktime 7 Pro, but I would really prefer to make this choice myself.
You can read the permanent version of this post here.
Thanks for the info. I wasn't aware that the current situation for HD DVR was so grim. I suppose it all makes sense given the amount of bandwith and the file sizes.
H.264 will do great things for the HD consumer. 100 hours!
I wonder if there is a web repository out there for people attempting projects such as yours. You should definitely post some pictures etc when you finish.
If you wish, you can read my short article on the future of podcasting. I got to thinking about podcasting and was comparing it to some other internet distribution models. I could be way off, but I fear for the financial stability of this grassroots based format. No one has a good answer for this sort of model yet...
I decided I should write this stuff down and then reflect more on it later. Your feedback is very welcome; I am very interested at this topic right now.
But also it is good to consider that there are also a lot of question marks regarding the web. Newspapers, for instance, are in a similar positions to radio and podcasts. The distribution format seems great for the consumer, and for that I'll try to keep a positive outlook.
I think I phrased my initial post incorrectly; I am now more concerned of the future of the format, with regard to how companies like viacom will make there money off of it.
Having 20 million people using a product does not necessarily translate into a profit. Look at the old napster model for an example. You are absolutely right about the implications on society, however. Unfortunately, in a capatalist system, it seems these implications are often bad.
My hope is that a good distribution model, such as the web, or a podcast can avoid the bastardization required to keep the financiers satisfied. We are at an interesting point with a lot of technology in this respect.
Call me crazy, but I fail to see what all the hubbub is about podcasting (I also dislike the name). I think it is kind of neat as an idea, but I just don't see any financial strategy behind this that is in anyway sustainable. This isn't meant to be flamebait, I am really curious.
Can anyone explain this to me?
Does anyone know any relevent links about this topic?
My biggest concerns voiced in my tiger review were in reference to the new extensible architectures provided in tiger.
In summary, if developers don't develop with extensions like Automator in mind, then Automator, for example, becomes more or less useless outside of the iLife suite.
I installed Tiger last night and went to the website to check out the third party plugins. The dashboard section seemed fine, but I was alarmed by the disorganization of the Automator Plugins. For instance, while looking for plugins for photoshop, I found numerous. But some were individuals and others were suites of plugins; no doubt that some of these overlap. I think that Automator plugins should be packaged with software and made by the developers. This is the ultimate level of acceptance. If the developers themselves don't provide them, then it is likely to stay in a disorganized state.
Read my Tiger Review here. My mac is now about three years old, and last night I was quite pleased to find that Apple is by no means building out its older computers. I can't remember the last version of Windows that ran as fast as the previous.
Also provided is some additional feedback on the core new features (automator, safari RSS, spotlight, Dashboard etc...) which you may or may not find interesting.
Slashdot Mirror
It's no secret that Apple rumor sites receive a large spike in traffic during events such as the WWDC. I found it interesting that this year, one rumor site is attempting a new approach to reduce their bandwidth consumption Mac Rumors (http://macrumors.com/) has teamed up with Equiknox to deliver update via Javascript and XML (recently coined AJAX http://www.adaptivepath.com/publications/essays/ar chives/000385.php). They believe that this technique, combined with a lightweight http server, will allow them to serve 3300 hits/sec over three servers and to withstand the any severe spike.
If you want, you can read more about this on their technology reviw or on my blog.
Well it appears this is not the case. I'm getting a 502 error.
(Now I'm waiting for my 19 seconds to be up)
I think I can shed a little light on this situation as I have had both of the above cases happen to me.
This is how the system works. Google can index your site very quickly (within a couple of days), if you have an incoming link or submit to their crawler. If your site is well keyword optimized for a fairly rare keyword, it is entirely plausible that it would come up number one fairly quickly.
What takes a long time is for google to update their pagerank index. This is where your site will sit in the Google Sandbox for a while Google updates your pagerank.
In most cases, the sites initial pagerank of 0 will not be enough to take it to the top.
For a site that we just released about 10 days ago, this was not the case (http://www.jimschlessinger.com/). Since the keywords we were optimizing were fairly rare, it climbed right to the top.
Do I smell a rip off of apple advertising?
I am a mac user and of course I am seeking some sort of comparison to spotlight.
Has anyone used both? Are there any articles on this out there?
I think Apple made a decision that it needed to switch cores and at that moment has every right to do so and never look back. The fact that they are putting any effort into KHTML at all should be looked at as a mere bonus for the KTHML developers at this point. Apple never claimed to be the white night funding the KHTML project or that they would be the dominant developer for the future. This is not an example of IBM taking over a project. I think some KHTML guys read way too much into this relationship. It was pretty clear from the start that they were being used (but the nature of their license allows for this). It was great that they showed trust and attempted to built a relationship, but they should not have become in anyway dependent. I'm not saying this is the case, but the bitterness of their response seems to suggst this sort of dependence.
Make malicious software a thing of the past??
I don't think so. As long as there is a will, there is a way...
(and Microsoft is pretty good at providing the will)
Will I see this on google maps by 2006?
Wow. This is a pretty interesting idea and could turn out to be an interesting marketing ploy.
I am barely a graphic designer, but I am very curious about the ability to mix vector graphics directly into html. The potential sounds amazing. Can anyone shed any light on what the implementation of such a website would be like?
Also, I wonder if this is at all likely to be considered for the upcoming IE 7 update.
Read my not so thorough, but more subjective review here if you are interested in another user's perspective before you upgrade.
Also, Dashboard is great!
The solutions provided in this article have very limited usefulness. I support the inclusion of a good web efficiency article on slashdot, but this article is a waste of time and its techniques are a waste of energy unless, for some reason, your site uses a ton of dropdowns.
I read another article on IBM once about web efficiency that was much more thourough and much more slashdot worthy, but I can't find it unfortunately. When I do, I will post it.
One bottleneck that is on the verge of being taken on with the advent of various dual core processors is that of concurrency. Due to the nature of Virtual Reality programming, parallel processing demands are very high (just think of how many things run in parallel in the real world).
Languages such as The SHADOW System that are designed for programming Virtual Reality Environments are highly threaded and designed to take advantage of these systems. However, the concepts were ahead of their time in the case because the computing power simply did (does) not exist. In fact, the degree of parallel processing required is so high, that it will not be sufficed by the initial wave of dual core CPUs, but they will go a long way in terms of improvement of Virtual Reality systems.
Read the permananent version of this post here and more on the topic here
That reminds me exactly how much I hate graduation speeches...
You can read the permanent version of this response here.
I know only a little about this field, but I do know that current available computing power can only scratch the surface of what is possible with Virtual Reality. I took a class on the subject a couple years ago, in which we were introduced to some currently available technologies. Most of these I found fairly impressive, though not the fully submersive environment that I had envisioned as a child.
As is most technology innovation these days, the impetus behind many of these devices was largely for military purposes. One such device that sticks out in my mind was a set of goggles that performed a matching algorithm on a subjects face to determine if they were anyone that the soldier should remember. The example the guest speaker used was to suppose a soldier got a glimpse of Saddam Hussein. The goggles projected a small screen in the top corner of the lense that could be used for a variety of things including a conformation of a suspect and another example they gave of an MPEG video display. The screen was pretty tiny, but near the eye it had a pretty neat effect.
Another device introduced was the Phantom from MIT's touch lab. This haptic feedback device provides touch feedback to simulate real world situations. The example in the article I linked to cites the feel of Tiger Woods' grip as and example.
There was some talk of submersive three dimensional environments ala star trek, but we didn't go into much depth. There are all sorts of complications regarding various projection systems and with the helmets there are still serious simulator sickness problems in many subjects.
These aren't the only limits however. Others include a lack of computing power to create a realistic 3D environment that can really fool the brain and problems creating haptic and other sensory feedback. After all of this, perhaps a bigger problem is an overall lack of interest. Outside special circumstances such as military training (flight simulators etc), there is no great need. There is also no great want. The public is largely satisfied (read saturated) with smaller, "low" cost devices such as iPods, PDAs, cameras, cellphones, gaming systems camera phones and laptops. All of these barriers will have to be overcome before we see Virtual Reality anywhere near the forefront of technology.
Wow. Impressive fix. I knew there was a reason I posted this stuff on slashdot. I might actually try this...
I often times find myself annoyed by software that comes attached to operatings systems (read my review of Mac OS X 10.4 to see why Safari 2.0 is really raising my ire). The most recent culprit is Quicktime 7.
I happen to be one of many people who shelled out the necessary bones for the Pro version of Quicktime 6. So what does apple do to us loyal customers when we upgrade our operating system? Poof, no more Quicktime Pro.
But wait a sec, what if I was satisfied with Quicktime 6? What if the features of having the Pro version outweight the features of upgrading to 7 (which they certainly do for my purposes)? It would seem that Apple is not concerned with any of this.
At some point, I'll probably shell out again for Quicktime 7 Pro, but I would really prefer to make this choice myself.
You can read the permanent version of this post here.
Thanks for the info. I wasn't aware that the current situation for HD DVR was so grim. I suppose it all makes sense given the amount of bandwith and the file sizes.
Sounds like an interesting project. Good luck!
H.264 will do great things for the HD consumer. 100 hours!
I wonder if there is a web repository out there for people attempting projects such as yours. You should definitely post some pictures etc when you finish.
If you wish, you can read my short article on the future of podcasting. I got to thinking about podcasting and was comparing it to some other internet distribution models. I could be way off, but I fear for the financial stability of this grassroots based format. No one has a good answer for this sort of model yet...
I decided I should write this stuff down and then reflect more on it later. Your feedback is very welcome; I am very interested at this topic right now.
I like this analogy. Its a good point.
But also it is good to consider that there are also a lot of question marks regarding the web. Newspapers, for instance, are in a similar positions to radio and podcasts. The distribution format seems great for the consumer, and for that I'll try to keep a positive outlook.
I think I phrased my initial post incorrectly; I am now more concerned of the future of the format, with regard to how companies like viacom will make there money off of it.
Having 20 million people using a product does not necessarily translate into a profit. Look at the old napster model for an example. You are absolutely right about the implications on society, however. Unfortunately, in a capatalist system, it seems these implications are often bad.
My hope is that a good distribution model, such as the web, or a podcast can avoid the bastardization required to keep the financiers satisfied. We are at an interesting point with a lot of technology in this respect.
Can anyone recommend a good hdtv tv card? I'm curious about building one of these and have several questions about it.
How much hard drive spaces does and hd feed take up per hour?
What software is compatible with HD (I'm flexible with windows or linux)?
Thanks
Call me crazy, but I fail to see what all the hubbub is about podcasting (I also dislike the name). I think it is kind of neat as an idea, but I just don't see any financial strategy behind this that is in anyway sustainable. This isn't meant to be flamebait, I am really curious.
Can anyone explain this to me?
Does anyone know any relevent links about this topic?
My biggest concerns voiced in my tiger review were in reference to the new extensible architectures provided in tiger. In summary, if developers don't develop with extensions like Automator in mind, then Automator, for example, becomes more or less useless outside of the iLife suite. I installed Tiger last night and went to the website to check out the third party plugins. The dashboard section seemed fine, but I was alarmed by the disorganization of the Automator Plugins. For instance, while looking for plugins for photoshop, I found numerous. But some were individuals and others were suites of plugins; no doubt that some of these overlap. I think that Automator plugins should be packaged with software and made by the developers. This is the ultimate level of acceptance. If the developers themselves don't provide them, then it is likely to stay in a disorganized state.
Read my Tiger Review here. My mac is now about three years old, and last night I was quite pleased to find that Apple is by no means building out its older computers. I can't remember the last version of Windows that ran as fast as the previous.
Also provided is some additional feedback on the core new features (automator, safari RSS, spotlight, Dashboard etc...) which you may or may not find interesting.
I hope you enjoy...
I think thats pretty good...