A better solution is to make your program generate a log of everything that happens, when an object is created, when an database connection is made etc.
And when you launch the program in debug mode everything is printed to a log file and when it crashes or a bug occurs you can just halt everything (if it hasn't crashed) and look at the log to see what it was doing.
Different levels of logging could be used. Say level 1 with the most basic logging (database connections, disk access, network access, etc), level 2 includes all level 1 plus network traffic, level 3 has all object creations, etc.
Perhaps but making your program rely on catching execeptions to handle bugs isn't very good. And adding a bunch of try and catches when you experience a bug to try and find it really does take a long time.
It's not the source code that concerns me, as a user it's the design of the software and the interface. Most OSS looks it was just throw together without any preplanning. Some OSS have good planning because they have an organization running it, or some kind of committee, but MOST (98%) of OSS is total trash design/UI wise. Just look at all the listings on Sourceforge.
Open Source software is a perfect example of why you SHOULD plan and design. Most of it is so poorly thought out and looks like every feature was just slapped on.
Design is dynamic for a prototype, not the final product.
I've also been very impressed with the canon cameras in the past 2 years. They have stunningly clear photos, especially considering they aren't known for their lenses.
Before their last product line revision, all their cameras came with a (fairly) high quality video mode with sound which was also very impressive for those cameras, even the cheapest model had it!
My little nikon does 15s video clips with no sound that look like shit, the canons are high quality (640x480 I think) with good sound and go as long as your memory card can handle.
Re:Why were MP ever such a big deal?
on
Beyond Megapixels
·
· Score: 1
I know home printers don't make prints as good as the stores do, I don't print at home either. Was just easier to use that as an example!
Although I have seen some printers do some excellent jobs recently, especially the photo printers from olympus and canon (they are quite affordable!)
It's not just for large prints, it's for creative freedom.
With a high megapixel camera I can take a picture of a statue from far away, get home and crap 3/4 of the picture out and still be left with a picture that's high quality enough for a print.
I have a 2 megapixel camera and it's good (not great) for 3x5 prints but I am not able to crop any of my picture or the quality loss is evident in prints.
Re:Why were MP ever such a big deal?
on
Beyond Megapixels
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Because APS was as good for small as prints as 35mm was.
Some digital camera still don't product pictures that look as good as 3x5 film prints, so they are still chasing higher megapixels for that perfect image quality that they desire.
And with APS or 35mm, people didn't have the capability to crop and enlarge from the comfort of their own home, now resolution matters to them if it means being apple to crop grand ma out of a wide shot and print out a perfect looking picture at home.
Ugh, it's not about sending 1gb size files. It's about having a (in case of most people text emails) an nearly unlimited storage limit so you never have to delete email or get messages bounced back.
It's not about storing files and downloading them.
Not only do they have to have 1GB of disk space for each user, but think of the backup system! If they're using RAID they could use up to several gigabytes per user!
I used to have the first version of the 12" PowerBook, the same one you speak of.
For financial reasons I had to give it up and then I managed to get another one a few months later just after the second revision came out (1ghz, 256mb standard, usb 2.0, fx5200) and the heat issue was nearly gone alltogether.
It's still noticably warm but it's no longer _hot_.
As a general rule, stay away from first versions of any new hardware, in this case the new PowerBook enclosures.
Sure I'd love to get a G5 powerbook as soon as they come out but I would wait until the second or third revision before buying one.
Because a benchmark of a modern FPS game is a terrible way to benchmark the processor since most of the work is dependant on video cards.
Here's is something from a post I made somewhere above concerning speed compairisons:
--------
I have the previous version of the 12" PowerBook running at 1ghz and it's noticably faster than my p4 1.5ghz. I'd rate it as feeling about the same as a 2.0ghz p4.
So I'd say the 1.5 would be about a 2.8 or 3.0ghz pentium.
While we're on this topic I'd like to point out that Macs feel much faster than they actually are because of the superb multi tasking and UI response under heavy load.
When I am encoding a video on my Windows machine I can't do anything else on my computer, if I try to click something it takes about 30 seconds for the menu to popup.
On the other hand, my Mac can have 20 apps running and encoding a video at the same time and the UI still responds beautifully.
This is why using a Mac is a great experience, you so rarely get frustrated at it because it just works.
----
FYI it has the same NVidia FX5200 the new ones have and it plays all the current games very well (Except the super high end FPS games like Ut2004...playable but not that enjoyable). Anyway, anyone who intends to do serious gaming on a laptop is a damn fool, even more so on a Mac laptop.
I have the previous version of the 12" PowerBook running at 1ghz and it's noticably faster than my p4 1.5ghz. I'd rate it as feeling about the same as a 2.0ghz p4.
So I'd say the 1.5 would be about a 2.8 or 3.0ghz pentium.
While we're on this topic I'd like to point out that Macs feel much faster than they actually are because of the superb multi tasking and UI response under heavy load.
When I am encoding a video on my Windows machine I can't do anything else on my computer, if I try to click something it takes about 30 seconds for the menu to popup.
On the other hand, my Mac can have 20 apps running and encoding a video at the same time and the UI still responds beautifully.
This is why using a Mac is a great experience, you so rarely get frustrated at it because it just works.
Film studios have always been using higher quality masters and they have never leaked. This doesn't change anything.
Who's gonna bother to steal it (it being hundreds of gigabytes) and then downscale it to regular resoluiton for hours just to have something at the same quality that's available at blockbuster for $5?
Or are you implying that people would like to download the original and store it on a terabyte disk array?
Re:What is the point of scanning at such a high re
on
600 PowerMacs Make One DVD
·
· Score: 4, Informative
the poster got it right wrong. The film isn't scanned 4000 times per square inch, the entire film is scanned at 4000 LINES of resolution.
Yeah it was their cheapo bottom of the line model. Don't remember what it was but I did trash it after a year, because the keypad really annoyed me and I think it's common across most Sony models (atleast at the time).
I now use a Samsung that feels like it could withstand a nuclear blast, but the reception isn't stellar. But my carrier only seems to have flashy hip models, no phones that perform well or have good reviews.:(
USB devices that get charged from the USB power are a minority. And if we had wireless power then alot of the worlds problem would be solved;)
But it raises another issue, why can't we have standard power adapters? Why can't someone make a universal power adapter that adjusts power output for the specific device? BAH
It's not about distance and keeping your peripherals far away, it's about not having any wires. I'd rather just plop my mp3 player on my desk and have it sync then have to plug it in and find an empty usb port or buy a usb hub to plug it in.
I look at the back of my desk and it makes me cry to see the mess of wires and all the different cables I have for all my devices.
Why bluetooth has failed
on
USB Going Wireless
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
in compairison to standard wired USB.
Bluetooth is only useful for a very limited number of applications on a desktop computer (or even a laptop). A mouse, keyboard, and maybe a bluetooth cell phone or PDA (which very little people have). It's not worth the cost of having to buy a bluetooth setup or for manufacturers to include it on the motherboard.
If it had higher bandwidth then it could be useful for printers, scanners, mp3 players, hard drives, etc.
If wireless usb does provide the speeds they claim then it will be a huge success. The U in USB does infact standard for Universal, and that's what bluetooth needed to be really successful.
Oh and not to mention bluetooth support is awful in windows.
Slashdot Mirror
A better solution is to make your program generate a log of everything that happens, when an object is created, when an database connection is made etc.
And when you launch the program in debug mode everything is printed to a log file and when it crashes or a bug occurs you can just halt everything (if it hasn't crashed) and look at the log to see what it was doing.
Different levels of logging could be used. Say level 1 with the most basic logging (database connections, disk access, network access, etc), level 2 includes all level 1 plus network traffic, level 3 has all object creations, etc.
ex: logEvent(3,"DBO_Connection create");
Perhaps but making your program rely on catching execeptions to handle bugs isn't very good. And adding a bunch of try and catches when you experience a bug to try and find it really does take a long time.
It's not the source code that concerns me, as a user it's the design of the software and the interface. Most OSS looks it was just throw together without any preplanning. Some OSS have good planning because they have an organization running it, or some kind of committee, but MOST (98%) of OSS is total trash design/UI wise. Just look at all the listings on Sourceforge.
Open Source software is a perfect example of why you SHOULD plan and design. Most of it is so poorly thought out and looks like every feature was just slapped on.
Design is dynamic for a prototype, not the final product.
I've also been very impressed with the canon cameras in the past 2 years. They have stunningly clear photos, especially considering they aren't known for their lenses.
Before their last product line revision, all their cameras came with a (fairly) high quality video mode with sound which was also very impressive for those cameras, even the cheapest model had it!
My little nikon does 15s video clips with no sound that look like shit, the canons are high quality (640x480 I think) with good sound and go as long as your memory card can handle.
I know home printers don't make prints as good as the stores do, I don't print at home either. Was just easier to use that as an example!
Although I have seen some printers do some excellent jobs recently, especially the photo printers from olympus and canon (they are quite affordable!)
It's not just for large prints, it's for creative freedom.
With a high megapixel camera I can take a picture of a statue from far away, get home and crap 3/4 of the picture out and still be left with a picture that's high quality enough for a print.
I have a 2 megapixel camera and it's good (not great) for 3x5 prints but I am not able to crop any of my picture or the quality loss is evident in prints.
Because APS was as good for small as prints as 35mm was.
Some digital camera still don't product pictures that look as good as 3x5 film prints, so they are still chasing higher megapixels for that perfect image quality that they desire.
And with APS or 35mm, people didn't have the capability to crop and enlarge from the comfort of their own home, now resolution matters to them if it means being apple to crop grand ma out of a wide shot and print out a perfect looking picture at home.
Store them on a series of floppy diskettes. They have proven to be VERY reliable. ;)
RAID 1 atleast doubles the disk usage, depending on how redundant you make it.
+ backups. *Could* be several gigabytes per user.
Ugh, it's not about sending 1gb size files.
It's about having a (in case of most people text emails) an nearly unlimited storage limit so you never have to delete email or get messages bounced back.
It's not about storing files and downloading them.
Christ.
Not only do they have to have 1GB of disk space for each user, but think of the backup system! If they're using RAID they could use up to several gigabytes per user!
I used to have the first version of the 12" PowerBook, the same one you speak of.
For financial reasons I had to give it up and then I managed to get another one a few months later just after the second revision came out (1ghz, 256mb standard, usb 2.0, fx5200) and the heat issue was nearly gone alltogether.
It's still noticably warm but it's no longer _hot_.
As a general rule, stay away from first versions of any new hardware, in this case the new PowerBook enclosures.
Sure I'd love to get a G5 powerbook as soon as they come out but I would wait until the second or third revision before buying one.
Because a benchmark of a modern FPS game is a terrible way to benchmark the processor since most of the work is dependant on video cards.
Here's is something from a post I made somewhere above concerning speed compairisons:
--------
I have the previous version of the 12" PowerBook running at 1ghz and it's noticably faster than my p4 1.5ghz. I'd rate it as feeling about the same as a 2.0ghz p4.
So I'd say the 1.5 would be about a 2.8 or 3.0ghz pentium.
While we're on this topic I'd like to point out that Macs feel much faster than they actually are because of the superb multi tasking and UI response under heavy load.
When I am encoding a video on my Windows machine I can't do anything else on my computer, if I try to click something it takes about 30 seconds for the menu to popup.
On the other hand, my Mac can have 20 apps running and encoding a video at the same time and the UI still responds beautifully.
This is why using a Mac is a great experience, you so rarely get frustrated at it because it just works.
----
FYI it has the same NVidia FX5200 the new ones have and it plays all the current games very well (Except the super high end FPS games like Ut2004...playable but not that enjoyable). Anyway, anyone who intends to do serious gaming on a laptop is a damn fool, even more so on a Mac laptop.
I have the previous version of the 12" PowerBook running at 1ghz and it's noticably faster than my p4 1.5ghz. I'd rate it as feeling about the same as a 2.0ghz p4.
So I'd say the 1.5 would be about a 2.8 or 3.0ghz pentium.
While we're on this topic I'd like to point out that Macs feel much faster than they actually are because of the superb multi tasking and UI response under heavy load.
When I am encoding a video on my Windows machine I can't do anything else on my computer, if I try to click something it takes about 30 seconds for the menu to popup.
On the other hand, my Mac can have 20 apps running and encoding a video at the same time and the UI still responds beautifully.
This is why using a Mac is a great experience, you so rarely get frustrated at it because it just works.
Film studios have always been using higher quality masters and they have never leaked. This doesn't change anything.
Who's gonna bother to steal it (it being hundreds of gigabytes) and then downscale it to regular resoluiton for hours just to have something at the same quality that's available at blockbuster for $5?
Or are you implying that people would like to download the original and store it on a terabyte disk array?
the poster got it right wrong. The film isn't scanned 4000 times per square inch, the entire film is scanned at 4000 LINES of resolution.
Current HDTV displays 1080 lines interlaced.
I am not saying it's not good at what it does and it doesn't have uses.
The point I am trying to make it that it doesn't have enough uses for the general consumer to ever become widely adopted.
Yeah it was their cheapo bottom of the line model. Don't remember what it was but I did trash it after a year, because the keypad really annoyed me and I think it's common across most Sony models (atleast at the time).
:(
I now use a Samsung that feels like it could withstand a nuclear blast, but the reception isn't stellar. But my carrier only seems to have flashy hip models, no phones that perform well or have good reviews.
It is not an urban myth here in Canada.
Here you are locked down to certain providers based on your phone and they will only activate phones they sell.
The only phones available here that have bluetooth are very expensive.
And no, not every sony ericcson has bluetooth. I just got rid of a Sony Ericcson, it was shit and definately did not have bluetooth.
USB devices that get charged from the USB power are a minority. And if we had wireless power then alot of the worlds problem would be solved ;)
But it raises another issue, why can't we have standard power adapters? Why can't someone make a universal power adapter that adjusts power output for the specific device? BAH
It's not about distance and keeping your peripherals far away, it's about not having any wires. I'd rather just plop my mp3 player on my desk and have it sync then have to plug it in and find an empty usb port or buy a usb hub to plug it in.
I look at the back of my desk and it makes me cry to see the mess of wires and all the different cables I have for all my devices.
Wireless USB would be a godsend. See my other post regarding why I think bluetooth sucks
in compairison to standard wired USB.
Bluetooth is only useful for a very limited number of applications on a desktop computer (or even a laptop). A mouse, keyboard, and maybe a bluetooth cell phone or PDA (which very little people have). It's not worth the cost of having to buy a bluetooth setup or for manufacturers to include it on the motherboard.
If it had higher bandwidth then it could be useful for printers, scanners, mp3 players, hard drives, etc.
If wireless usb does provide the speeds they claim then it will be a huge success. The U in USB does infact standard for Universal, and that's what bluetooth needed to be really successful.
Oh and not to mention bluetooth support is awful in windows.
They've addressed this issue (apparently) in this new product.
Each tape has it's own read/write heads so nothing is exposed (or potentially) to the outside of the casing.
This should dramatically reduce any chances of the data being affected.
Iomega rates the disks as being able to last about 30 years.
Lock in? AAC is an open standard and was NOT created by Apple. Of all the next generation audio formats (that aren't open source) it's the most open.
We should be happy.