What we are discussing here is a simple, slim, expandable and manageable OS. We have an ideal situation here; Unified platform, virgin audience, some very strong constraints and the opportunity to effect something really significant with a currently windows-ignorant userbase. This could be the Linux marketing coup of a lifetime.
I suggest that we look at what has gone before:
In my experience, I have owned and used PCs, Newtons, Amigas and a variety of other devices even more obscure, all of which have provided some base functionality. What I suggest is:
A Text editor.
A Web browser
An email client
A Graphics app
A sound App
An office application
Some games
Now, considering that network connectivity is not a given, it's quite possible that - in the beginning, at least - most distribution will take place over sneakerNet, it is far more important that the applications/expansions be stable. Given that we have this unified platform, distribution of binaries is not an issue, but stability is imperative as these end users can't just dial up laptop.org for a patch....
Given also that distro media may be shared, even the install media may be inaccessible for much of the time, so our end user must choose wisely and the disc creator must ensure that all dependecies are catered for, assuming at all times that this person is installing enhancements to a vanilla box.
Essentially my position is this: Keep the install choices to the above list (although net-reliant apps may be redundant in some areas) or of that range of functionality. A distro such as Gentoo would be eminently suitable as the binary results would be what is being distributed, although gcc is probably a good idea, regardless. Regardless of all our patronising comments here, we are dealing with a population here that may never have seen a computer before, let alone have one in their lap.
I am posting this on an HP4150 currently running DSL which occasionally struggles (64MB not quite enough) and previously ran Gentoo but due to a mis-configuration would no longer update (I never said I was an expert) hence my suggestion of a binary installation process.
In summary I repeat. This is a fantastic opportunity to demonstrate that FOSS can work. We are not trying to convert windoesn't users here, we're installing a whole new user base. Lets show that the experience can be better this way. Oh, and I am not suggesting that binary distro makes anyone closed-source, just that that this saves the 48 hour compile (having been woken by the laptop fan at regular intervals...) This is a chance for the FOSS community to extend itself insanely, let's get it right.
Because analogue recording processes provide the equivalent of infinite bits (as against 16) and infinite sample rate (rather than 44.1/48/etc kHz). the only limitation then is the quality of the amplifiers used to record and replay the recording and the quality/condition of the recording (vinyl/tape). The advantages offered by digital are no generation loss and no degeneration of the signal over time (until it won't play at all - after all it IS digital...)
I'm in complete agreement there. Here in Sydney there is one (one:-() petrol station experimenting with B30, B50 and B100 fuels which are 30, 50 and 100% biodiesel fuels. With dinosaur extract becoming more expensive, renewable alternatives are more viable every day. I've heard that diesels run cleaner on vegetable oil (read biodiesel) than on the real thing. Can anyone Inform us on this point? (btw, I've heard turbodiesels kick some serious petrol ass - any takers?)
My bad, I responded to the wrong comment. I stand behind what I said 'though, in that regardless of the system involved, the increase in complexity required to go from monochrome to full colour involves an order of magnitude of additional additional hardware.
I admit that going to colour would provide 3 times the intensity (for three, or more times the power consumption) but only for a white display. As for the overlaying of three images, the process is the same as is performed by your eyes as they move from focussing on a distant object to a near one. In saying so, I have to allow that that is an over-simplification. (haiychest) I have worked with a variety of large screen display systems, crt projectors, lcd/dlp and led outdoor screens for the last 20 years...(/hairychest) which doesn't necessarily mean that I am the full bottle either...
I don't think that you understand the engineering required. with one source of light, the only obstacle is focus and they seem to have overcome that. when you you three discrete sources of light you need to overlay them correctly, or you get errors in the display. I think that anyone with a rear-projection tv or one of the three-gun units will understand.
I suspect that what they'll need is three projection sources (r,g,b) and a fourth single distance measuring i.r. laser to determine the projection distance which will select the convergence map for the measured distance. Hmmm... pricey
That is precisely the point. The optics are the limiting factor. I used to work with the old CRT projectors with an f-rating of 0.9 - 1.2 on their lenses. Yeah, I know, you shouldn't be able to achieve better than 1.0 but it's the ratio of diameter to length, as far as i understand (hey i fixed the electronics not the optics - I'm STILL trying to get my head around scheimphlug correction...).
Anyway, to the point. In a lens-based system, there are losses. With an F rating of 1.0, theoretically, there is no light lost through the optical path (third law notwithstanding) my grasp of optics isn't perfect but i think that an f3 lens means that half the light is lost within the lens. Now, typically, to provide the convenience of being able to place the projector wherever-you-damn-like(tm) they provide zoom lenses (f4.5 and up) and digital auto keystone correction (which drops your effective resolution). The aforementioned CRT machines couldn't afford to lose any light. The solution? Position the projector correctly, and spend a s**tload on glass lenses, as against plastic.
So look for a projector with fixed-length lenses. Why spend extra for a zoom lens that will be adjusted exactly once.
Diffraction doesn't suffer from the losses of optics and is brighter as a result, however diffraction involves phase cancellation of the light source in order to achieve...... whatever it is that they are trying to achieve. In case there are those among us who don't appreciate what phase cancellation is, it means taking a signal source of equal and opposite power and using it to cancel out the original source (presumably) to achieve black. Or focus. Or both. IMHO there are better ways to achieve both, such as velocity modulation.
I wouldn't say germicidal, but I'm pretty sure that it's biologically neutral. Given that it has been used for dental fillings, I would say that the chances are that it isn't poisonous...
Another interesting thing they got right was CD-ROMs being able to store higher quality sound than audio CDs. A CD-ROM today can store 24-bit 96khz 5.1 audio with a greater playing time than a similar audio CD. So the quality increase is there too (~1.2 megabits is a LOT of bits to work with for compressed digital audio), and the technology to do so was around in 2001 (DVDs, for example, use compressed 24-bit audio).
No they didn't. okay, you might get 5.1 sound, but only through lossy compression. There are gains and losses. 1.2 megawhats? how do think that compression is achieved? I think you've missed the point....
Here is as good a place as any to butt in, i guess. Everyone is quick to suggest what is not a planet, so how about we take a few calls, to hear what the listeners have to say and maybe discover just what does constitute a planet? Who knows, maybe someone from the IAU is reading...
Precisely. Sometimes knowledge can limit our ideas of what we can do. If we don't know it to be impossible, then we will find a way. As I recall, communications satellites were effectively invented by a science fiction writer... I think that his name was Arthur C. Clarke....
I hope that they're all the same brand, or as the previous post mentioned i dont envy you. Some brands (Barco for one) have *luxury* an auto-calibration tool for some of their monitors. From observation, it seems to take around 5 minutes per monitor. I hope this helps. otherwise L.E.D.s are sensitive to wavelengths similar to that at which they radiate. Perhaps if you obtain a multimeter and measure the voltage of each led for a given (standardised) setting for each monitor, at least you should have a sort of way to quantitatively compare the brightness/colour balance. Just a thought
Anyone here remember CP/M? insofar as I recall, each platform version of CP/M interpreted the (mostly 8080/Z80) hardware implementation so that the OS (disk os? you lucky, lucky bastard) could talk to the hardware. Please explain to me why any one version of BIOS should be a secret? after all asus/via/etc WANT their MB to be functional since they want to sell a few;)
Absolutely. What he said. If we don't speak up this is what WILL happen. Be slow, be subtle, make the changes small and no-one will notice... A principle proven in the 1930's in Germany...
interesting point. as i recall, the open bios project (it may have been linuxbios, don't quote me) booted so fast that you had a console prompt before the HD had spun up necessitating a reboot while the hardware caught up...
I agree, I'm waiting for the mandarin version of 'and for something completely different' where we laugh at the ignorant for speaking LOUDLY and CLEARLY in cantonese... you know we deserve it.
and i agree about the truth being trolled... people should do their homework..
Re:Article text posted here for your convience
on
Language Tempest At Orkut
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
I know I'm going to be flamed for this but hey, this is, as I understand it, the INTERnet, inter, as I understand it, standing more for international nowadays. Hello, xenophobic americans, there are a lot of people out there who don't - or choose not to - speak english. Get over it. I'm an english speaking Australian and I have, so what's your problem, don't you have enough international friends to get an invite??? There are deeper issues here...
I am not a troll, I am simply expressing my freedom to speak (I believe you have an amendment to your constituition that covers this.)
yeah, but try a little cut and paste form someone else's code were they use spaces instead of tabs, or hack some code where you move code in and out of blocks... I moved to perl, then to php
ps: somehow I am glad that cold fusion does not even rate a mention here
What he said! my experience consists of R.H. 5,6 and 7, BSD, knoppix and (right now) gentoo. Linux assumes that you know what you are doing. It's a good thing that (pretty much) I do. Not all of us are that fortunate, or - indeed - care.
I agree, a computer should be as easy to use as a 'fridge door. Trouble this is one very complex 'fridge. the difficulty is in explaining that. If every computer was a 'fridge door' then (helpdesk heaven' every box would be the same - exeactly the same - which sort of defeats the individuality thing (see 1984 or THX1138)
redhat 5 fluxbox dillo nedit sylpheed on an nec versa (dx2/50) w/ 20 MB and 300MB (running constantly @ 97%) goes well, currently upgrading to omnibook 366 64MB 12GB gentoo. so far, so-so....
Slashdot Mirror
What we are discussing here is a simple, slim, expandable and manageable OS. We have an ideal situation here; Unified platform, virgin audience, some very strong constraints and the opportunity to effect something really significant with a currently windows-ignorant userbase. This could be the Linux marketing coup of a lifetime.
I suggest that we look at what has gone before:
In my experience, I have owned and used PCs, Newtons, Amigas and a variety of other devices even more obscure, all of which have provided some base functionality. What I suggest is:
Now, considering that network connectivity is not a given, it's quite possible that - in the beginning, at least - most distribution will take place over sneakerNet, it is far more important that the applications/expansions be stable. Given that we have this unified platform, distribution of binaries is not an issue, but stability is imperative as these end users can't just dial up laptop.org for a patch....
Given also that distro media may be shared, even the install media may be inaccessible for much of the time, so our end user must choose wisely and the disc creator must ensure that all dependecies are catered for, assuming at all times that this person is installing enhancements to a vanilla box.
Essentially my position is this: Keep the install choices to the above list (although net-reliant apps may be redundant in some areas) or of that range of functionality. A distro such as Gentoo would be eminently suitable as the binary results would be what is being distributed, although gcc is probably a good idea, regardless. Regardless of all our patronising comments here, we are dealing with a population here that may never have seen a computer before, let alone have one in their lap.
I am posting this on an HP4150 currently running DSL which occasionally struggles (64MB not quite enough) and previously ran Gentoo but due to a mis-configuration would no longer update (I never said I was an expert) hence my suggestion of a binary installation process.
In summary I repeat. This is a fantastic opportunity to demonstrate that FOSS can work. We are not trying to convert windoesn't users here, we're installing a whole new user base. Lets show that the experience can be better this way. Oh, and I am not suggesting that binary distro makes anyone closed-source, just that that this saves the 48 hour compile (having been woken by the laptop fan at regular intervals...) This is a chance for the FOSS community to extend itself insanely, let's get it right.
I know he's an AC but how about an informative?
Because analogue recording processes provide the equivalent of infinite bits (as against 16) and infinite sample rate (rather than 44.1/48/etc kHz). the only limitation then is the quality of the amplifiers used to record and replay the recording and the quality/condition of the recording (vinyl/tape). The advantages offered by digital are no generation loss and no degeneration of the signal over time (until it won't play at all - after all it IS digital...)
I'm in complete agreement there. Here in Sydney there is one (one:-() petrol station experimenting with B30, B50 and B100 fuels which are 30, 50 and 100% biodiesel fuels. With dinosaur extract becoming more expensive, renewable alternatives are more viable every day. I've heard that diesels run cleaner on vegetable oil (read biodiesel) than on the real thing. Can anyone Inform us on this point? (btw, I've heard turbodiesels kick some serious petrol ass - any takers?)
My bad, I responded to the wrong comment. I stand behind what I said 'though, in that regardless of the system involved, the increase in complexity required to go from monochrome to full colour involves an order of magnitude of additional additional hardware.
I admit that going to colour would provide 3 times the intensity (for three, or more times the power consumption) but only for a white display. As for the overlaying of three images, the process is the same as is performed by your eyes as they move from focussing on a distant object to a near one. In saying so, I have to allow that that is an over-simplification. (haiychest) I have worked with a variety of large screen display systems, crt projectors, lcd/dlp and led outdoor screens for the last 20 years...(/hairychest) which doesn't necessarily mean that I am the full bottle either...
We're all in search of knowledge...
I don't think that you understand the engineering required. with one source of light, the only obstacle is focus and they seem to have overcome that. when you you three discrete sources of light you need to overlay them correctly, or you get errors in the display. I think that anyone with a rear-projection tv or one of the three-gun units will understand.
I suspect that what they'll need is three projection sources (r,g,b) and a fourth single distance measuring i.r. laser to determine the projection distance which will select the convergence map for the measured distance. Hmmm... pricey
That is precisely the point. The optics are the limiting factor. I used to work with the old CRT projectors with an f-rating of 0.9 - 1.2 on their lenses. Yeah, I know, you shouldn't be able to achieve better than 1.0 but it's the ratio of diameter to length, as far as i understand (hey i fixed the electronics not the optics - I'm STILL trying to get my head around scheimphlug correction...).
... ... whatever it is that they are trying to achieve. In case there are those among us who don't appreciate what phase cancellation is, it means taking a signal source of equal and opposite power and using it to cancel out the original source (presumably) to achieve black. Or focus. Or both. IMHO there are better ways to achieve both, such as velocity modulation.
Anyway, to the point. In a lens-based system, there are losses. With an F rating of 1.0, theoretically, there is no light lost through the optical path (third law notwithstanding) my grasp of optics isn't perfect but i think that an f3 lens means that half the light is lost within the lens. Now, typically, to provide the convenience of being able to place the projector wherever-you-damn-like(tm) they provide zoom lenses (f4.5 and up) and digital auto keystone correction (which drops your effective resolution). The aforementioned CRT machines couldn't afford to lose any light. The solution? Position the projector correctly, and spend a s**tload on glass lenses, as against plastic.
So look for a projector with fixed-length lenses. Why spend extra for a zoom lens that will be adjusted exactly once.
Diffraction doesn't suffer from the losses of optics and is brighter as a result, however diffraction involves phase cancellation of the light source in order to achieve
I wouldn't say germicidal, but I'm pretty sure that it's biologically neutral. Given that it has been used for dental fillings, I would say that the chances are that it isn't poisonous...
Another interesting thing they got right was CD-ROMs being able to store higher quality sound than audio CDs. A CD-ROM today can store 24-bit 96khz 5.1 audio with a greater playing time than a similar audio CD. So the quality increase is there too (~1.2 megabits is a LOT of bits to work with for compressed digital audio), and the technology to do so was around in 2001 (DVDs, for example, use compressed 24-bit audio).
No they didn't. okay, you might get 5.1 sound, but only through lossy compression. There are gains and losses. 1.2 megawhats? how do think that compression is achieved? I think you've missed the point....
How about if it does (or did) support an atmosphere? (damn! I guess we're back to 8!)
Here is as good a place as any to butt in, i guess. Everyone is quick to suggest what is not a planet, so how about we take a few calls, to hear what the listeners have to say and maybe discover just what does constitute a planet? Who knows, maybe someone from the IAU is reading...
Precisely. Sometimes knowledge can limit our ideas of what we can do. If we don't know it to be impossible, then we will find a way. As I recall, communications satellites were effectively invented by a science fiction writer... I think that his name was Arthur C. Clarke....
I hope that they're all the same brand, or as the previous post mentioned i dont envy you. Some brands (Barco for one) have *luxury* an auto-calibration tool for some of their monitors. From observation, it seems to take around 5 minutes per monitor. I hope this helps. otherwise L.E.D.s are sensitive to wavelengths similar to that at which they radiate. Perhaps if you obtain a multimeter and measure the voltage of each led for a given (standardised) setting for each monitor, at least you should have a sort of way to quantitatively compare the brightness/colour balance. Just a thought
given that the fine is 1.1 million dollars, I presume that we are considering a 1 million dollar fine plus 10% G.S.T.?
"Advanced users are users too" Yes, but we should know better...
Anyone here remember CP/M? insofar as I recall, each platform version of CP/M interpreted the (mostly 8080/Z80) hardware implementation so that the OS (disk os? you lucky, lucky bastard) could talk to the hardware. Please explain to me why any one version of BIOS should be a secret? after all asus/via/etc WANT their MB to be functional since they want to sell a few ;)
it's thursday, this must be canberra
Absolutely. What he said. If we don't speak up this is what WILL happen. Be slow, be subtle, make the changes small and no-one will notice... A principle proven in the 1930's in Germany...
I thought I left my keys here...
interesting point. as i recall, the open bios project (it may have been linuxbios, don't quote me) booted so fast that you had a console prompt before the HD had spun up necessitating a reboot while the hardware caught up...
hardware, software... wetware is where I live...
I agree, I'm waiting for the mandarin version of 'and for something completely different' where we laugh at the ignorant for speaking LOUDLY and CLEARLY in cantonese... you know we deserve it.
and i agree about the truth being trolled... people should do their homework..
I know I'm going to be flamed for this but hey, this is, as I understand it, the INTERnet, inter, as I understand it, standing more for international nowadays. Hello, xenophobic americans, there are a lot of people out there who don't - or choose not to - speak english. Get over it. I'm an english speaking Australian and I have, so what's your problem, don't you have enough international friends to get an invite??? There are deeper issues here... I am not a troll, I am simply expressing my freedom to speak (I believe you have an amendment to your constituition that covers this.)
yeah, but try a little cut and paste form someone else's code were they use spaces instead of tabs, or hack some code where you move code in and out of blocks... I moved to perl, then to php ps: somehow I am glad that cold fusion does not even rate a mention here
What he said! my experience consists of R.H. 5,6 and 7, BSD, knoppix and (right now) gentoo. Linux assumes that you know what you are doing. It's a good thing that (pretty much) I do. Not all of us are that fortunate, or - indeed - care.
I agree, a computer should be as easy to use as a 'fridge door. Trouble this is one very complex 'fridge. the difficulty is in explaining that. If every computer was a 'fridge door' then (helpdesk heaven' every box would be the same - exeactly the same - which sort of defeats the individuality thing (see 1984 or THX1138)
even when I made a really stupid mistake (resolve.conf, not resolv.conf) I posted it. Anyone could make such a mistake...
redhat 5 fluxbox dillo nedit sylpheed on an nec versa (dx2/50) w/ 20 MB and 300MB (running constantly @ 97%) goes well, currently upgrading to omnibook 366 64MB 12GB gentoo. so far, so-so....