Write a PHP script to do a query to Google, strip out the images, gzip the content, and feed it to a user.
Sure, gzip may not be as good as these compressed emails, but hey, gzip gets a google search page (for "linux") down from 23,859 bytes to only 5,724 bytes.
Now, even a 14.4k modem would download that in (theoretically) 3.2 seconds. They don't get much slower than 14.4k modems. But even if you insisted on a 300 baud modem, that's still only two and a half minutes to download!
Now, no matter how slow the connection, I would bet dollars to donuts it's faster than 300 baud even in a third world country. In other words, standard gzipped webpages are good enough, no need for silly programs distributed on CDs. (This is besides the fact that I can't figure out why a simple 4KB program to send/receive an email would require an entire CD)
Quake 3 Fortress has already been out for years. It is not based on TFC, but instead stays true to the original Team Fortress. Right down to the physics, for which they attempted to mimmick QuakeWorld.
" Note: The information transmitted in this Notice is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from all computers."
Isn't posting it on the internet the same as retransmitting or disseminating?
And despite the fact that they still have tons of customers who aren't on the new Alacatel DSLAMs (for 3.5mbit service), and way more people who can't even get DSL, their current upgrade of the 1.2/160 service to 1.7/384 seems stupid.
You might consider cable, if you live in Quebec. I know, I know, Videotron is evil, but 3.0/160 isn't so bad for cable internet. And their Extreme speed cable internet goes up to 4.0/640
But I'm happy with my 3.5/800 DSL:)
Re:This is getting really annoying
on
150 Mbit/s DSL.
·
· Score: 1
If those are the only requirements, you can do that with currently available DSL technologies.
g.dmt (or was it g.lite? I always confuse the two) supports roughly 7mbit downstream. Assuming 1mbit is enough for one mpeg4 television stream (and it is if you don't get silly with the resolution), and that 32kbit is enough for voice (32kbit is WAY more than is needed to provide voice quality audio using Ogg Vorbis), that is a total non-data use of 3168kbit. Now, assuming 20% overhead (my 3.5mbit line does 2.8mbit) that still leaves you with 2.5mbit actual bandwidth available for internet.
On the upstream side of things, the connection is 800kbit upstream, or about 640kbit after overhead. The three voice lines would leave 544kbit upstream available.
In other words, what you describe can already be done with CURRENTLY deployed DSL technologies, with an internet connectivity of 2.5/0.5 to go with it.
Future DSL developments will only serve to increase the speed of the internet connection that goes with the service, or perhaps to load more TV streams in.
-----
Anyhow, all this aside, VDSL is useless. After all, what use is 150Mbit DSL when ISPs still won't give their subscribers the full 7mbit they can currently provide?
I agree, though he'd have to switch the monitor chassis to one from a flatscreen CRT to avoid the gap along the edges of the LCD, plus he'd have to make a black mask to cover the gray metal edge of the LCD if the LCD is smaller than the CRT.
1000$ for 1GB for a year? I guess you didn't look very hard, or didn't look into virtual servers.
There have probably been other posts about this so far, but you should look into virtual servers. (You get your own entire server to control completely, though you don't own it) Here's one off the top of my head:
http://rackshack.net - 99$/mth for a Celeron 1.3, 60GB HDD, and 400GB monthly transfer
I had seen another that was 99$/mth for a Celeron 1.7 with 500GB of monthly transfer, I can't recall the address now.
I don't actually spend much time reading threads. The +1 is more so I don't have to read the posts by the anonymous-coward stalker that likes to post goatse.cx stuff as a reply to everything I port.
I concentrate more on replies to my posts than to new posts.
I'm not that familiar with them, but didn't they design two truely unique chipsets, the VooDoo 1, then the VS100 (I think it was called) that was used on the Voodoo 4-5(-6)?
Well, better that some support ATI than none; otherwise we'd see nothing but "The way it's mean to be played - NVIDIA" logos everywhere. Good to have balance.
We're not talking higher end, we're talking stuff that's years out of date. After all, Half-Life will run on computers that are five or more years old.
With a good hardware modem, dialup is perfectly playable. Pings of 150 are possible (again, with a good hardware modem), and Half-Life has goood prediction and lag-correction. In many mods, most weapons are hitscan, meaning latency does not affect aiming.
I have broadband, yet I still find servers to which I ping 150-200 perfectly playable, at least in my favourite mod, Natural-Selection.
Half-Life doesn't need an expensive gaming machine; it should be able to run on a machine with the same hardware as the requirements for this 2D game.
An 8MB 3D card and 300mhz processor would handle it just fine, a much faster but still cheap machine could be bought for under 200$.
Using PriceWatch: 30$ US would buy you a GeForce 2 MX, 20$ would buy you a case, 23$ for a Duron 800, 38$ for a motherboard, 7$ for soundcard, 57$ for a 14" monitor. Total? 175$ US, and it can play Half-Life just fine (I played HL on a similar machine). I bet if you bought slower used components, the machine could still play Half-Life, but would be much cheaper.
Why go 2D for 56K gameplay? Tons of 3D FPS are playable on a good hardware dialup modem. As for the slow computer requirement? Well, why do so many people like Half-Life and it's mods? Because the game runs on just about anything.
The PDA that interfaces with this thing can already do all that.
I can think of a better object to have; a 2.5" HDD with short-range 802.11g. No processor. Your PDA can access audio and video files, your MP3 player can have the capacity of a hard-disk without the size involved, a portable video player's size could be dramatically reduced...
Apple has proven that you can integrate an HDD right into your device (iPod), but the iPod could be even smaller if it used a shared HDD that never had to leave your pocket/purse/backpack.
Speaking of which, do they have 80GB platters in 2.5" HDDs yet, or is 60GB still the largest size?
The whole point of a PDA or laptop is to use it when you don't have access to a computer. Yet, this so-called PDA/laptop killer will somehow replace PDAs/laptops without being usable where PDAs/laptops are? I don't follow Intel's logic.
How will this personal-server allow people to use a computer in a car, an airplane, a meeting, a bus, a waiting room, a restaurant, or anywhere else that one uses a PDA/laptop? Obviously whoever made those statements wasn't thinking very hard.
Forgive me, I'm spoiled by Montreal's high coverage for DSL:)
I do know for a fact though that 3.5mbit is available in parts of Waterloo, and 1mbit more widely. Perhaps you're in one of the pockets that don't have it yet?
If you're just trying to play games, WineX is your best bet. According to their site:
StarCraft: Demo and full game both work perfectly in single player mode. There are visual issues with Battle.net.
Multiplayer over UPD (tcp/ip) lan works perfectly. Requires v1.09.
WarCraft 3: No description, but has the same "working" rating as StarCraft
Slashdot Mirror
Write a PHP script to do a query to Google, strip out the images, gzip the content, and feed it to a user.
Sure, gzip may not be as good as these compressed emails, but hey, gzip gets a google search page (for "linux") down from 23,859 bytes to only 5,724 bytes.
Now, even a 14.4k modem would download that in (theoretically) 3.2 seconds. They don't get much slower than 14.4k modems. But even if you insisted on a 300 baud modem, that's still only two and a half minutes to download!
Now, no matter how slow the connection, I would bet dollars to donuts it's faster than 300 baud even in a third world country. In other words, standard gzipped webpages are good enough, no need for silly programs distributed on CDs. (This is besides the fact that I can't figure out why a simple 4KB program to send/receive an email would require an entire CD)
Quake 3 Fortress has already been out for years. It is not based on TFC, but instead stays true to the original Team Fortress. Right down to the physics, for which they attempted to mimmick QuakeWorld.
It also states no review by people other than the intended recipient. Am I not "reviewing" it by reading it on the website?
At the bottom of the page/letter:
"
Note: The information transmitted in this Notice is intended only for the
person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or
privileged material. Any review, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination
or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by
persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you
received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from
all computers."
Isn't posting it on the internet the same as retransmitting or disseminating?
And despite the fact that they still have tons of customers who aren't on the new Alacatel DSLAMs (for 3.5mbit service), and way more people who can't even get DSL, their current upgrade of the 1.2/160 service to 1.7/384 seems stupid.
:)
You might consider cable, if you live in Quebec. I know, I know, Videotron is evil, but 3.0/160 isn't so bad for cable internet. And their Extreme speed cable internet goes up to 4.0/640
But I'm happy with my 3.5/800 DSL
If those are the only requirements, you can do that with currently available DSL technologies.
g.dmt (or was it g.lite? I always confuse the two) supports roughly 7mbit downstream. Assuming 1mbit is enough for one mpeg4 television stream (and it is if you don't get silly with the resolution), and that 32kbit is enough for voice (32kbit is WAY more than is needed to provide voice quality audio using Ogg Vorbis), that is a total non-data use of 3168kbit. Now, assuming 20% overhead (my 3.5mbit line does 2.8mbit) that still leaves you with 2.5mbit actual bandwidth available for internet.
On the upstream side of things, the connection is 800kbit upstream, or about 640kbit after overhead. The three voice lines would leave 544kbit upstream available.
In other words, what you describe can already be done with CURRENTLY deployed DSL technologies, with an internet connectivity of 2.5/0.5 to go with it.
Future DSL developments will only serve to increase the speed of the internet connection that goes with the service, or perhaps to load more TV streams in.
-----
Anyhow, all this aside, VDSL is useless. After all, what use is 150Mbit DSL when ISPs still won't give their subscribers the full 7mbit they can currently provide?
I get the same line, which is 3.5mbit downstream and 800kbit upstream, for 49.95$ canadian a month.
My ISP is http://www.istop.com and they serve everywhere Sympatico does.
Spam isn't legitimate if it's unsolicited, and most spam is. It doesn't have to be fraud to be illegal.
Give it all the features of the GBA SP.
Install (or have someone install) an Afterburner, and you've got the SP's front-lit screen.
Purchase a battery pack (preferably one that installs into the GBA battery compartment) and you've got the SP's lack of AA/AAA batteries.
I agree, though he'd have to switch the monitor chassis to one from a flatscreen CRT to avoid the gap along the edges of the LCD, plus he'd have to make a black mask to cover the gray metal edge of the LCD if the LCD is smaller than the CRT.
It's not red. You guys must be subscribers or something.
What do you mean nobody knows the original source? That's the trashcan icon from Mac OS 8+.
Ripping off icons from major OS' is a bad idea. Pleading ignorance to an obvious source doesn't help in the slightest.
I believe BitTorrent will allow you to exceed your upload rate if there is network bandwidth to spare.
1000$ for 1GB for a year? I guess you didn't look very hard, or didn't look into virtual servers.
There have probably been other posts about this so far, but you should look into virtual servers. (You get your own entire server to control completely, though you don't own it) Here's one off the top of my head:
http://rackshack.net - 99$/mth for a Celeron 1.3, 60GB HDD, and 400GB monthly transfer
I had seen another that was 99$/mth for a Celeron 1.7 with 500GB of monthly transfer, I can't recall the address now.
Then how come you saw my +2 post :)
I don't actually spend much time reading threads. The +1 is more so I don't have to read the posts by the anonymous-coward stalker that likes to post goatse.cx stuff as a reply to everything I port.
I concentrate more on replies to my posts than to new posts.
I'm not that familiar with them, but didn't they design two truely unique chipsets, the VooDoo 1, then the VS100 (I think it was called) that was used on the Voodoo 4-5(-6)?
Well, better that some support ATI than none; otherwise we'd see nothing but "The way it's mean to be played - NVIDIA" logos everywhere. Good to have balance.
We're not talking higher end, we're talking stuff that's years out of date. After all, Half-Life will run on computers that are five or more years old.
With a good hardware modem, dialup is perfectly playable. Pings of 150 are possible (again, with a good hardware modem), and Half-Life has goood prediction and lag-correction. In many mods, most weapons are hitscan, meaning latency does not affect aiming.
I have broadband, yet I still find servers to which I ping 150-200 perfectly playable, at least in my favourite mod, Natural-Selection.
Half-Life doesn't need an expensive gaming machine; it should be able to run on a machine with the same hardware as the requirements for this 2D game.
An 8MB 3D card and 300mhz processor would handle it just fine, a much faster but still cheap machine could be bought for under 200$.
Using PriceWatch: 30$ US would buy you a GeForce 2 MX, 20$ would buy you a case, 23$ for a Duron 800, 38$ for a motherboard, 7$ for soundcard, 57$ for a 14" monitor. Total? 175$ US, and it can play Half-Life just fine (I played HL on a similar machine). I bet if you bought slower used components, the machine could still play Half-Life, but would be much cheaper.
Why go 2D for 56K gameplay? Tons of 3D FPS are playable on a good hardware dialup modem. As for the slow computer requirement? Well, why do so many people like Half-Life and it's mods? Because the game runs on just about anything.
The PDA that interfaces with this thing can already do all that.
I can think of a better object to have; a 2.5" HDD with short-range 802.11g. No processor. Your PDA can access audio and video files, your MP3 player can have the capacity of a hard-disk without the size involved, a portable video player's size could be dramatically reduced...
Apple has proven that you can integrate an HDD right into your device (iPod), but the iPod could be even smaller if it used a shared HDD that never had to leave your pocket/purse/backpack.
Speaking of which, do they have 80GB platters in 2.5" HDDs yet, or is 60GB still the largest size?
The whole point of a PDA or laptop is to use it when you don't have access to a computer. Yet, this so-called PDA/laptop killer will somehow replace PDAs/laptops without being usable where PDAs/laptops are? I don't follow Intel's logic.
How will this personal-server allow people to use a computer in a car, an airplane, a meeting, a bus, a waiting room, a restaurant, or anywhere else that one uses a PDA/laptop? Obviously whoever made those statements wasn't thinking very hard.
WineX's source is available under the AFPL and GLPL (certain source files are under one licence, certain under the other)
Forgive me, I'm spoiled by Montreal's high coverage for DSL :)
I do know for a fact though that 3.5mbit is available in parts of Waterloo, and 1mbit more widely. Perhaps you're in one of the pockets that don't have it yet?
If you're just trying to play games, WineX is your best bet. According to their site:
StarCraft: Demo and full game both work perfectly in single player mode. There are visual issues with Battle.net. Multiplayer over UPD (tcp/ip) lan works perfectly. Requires v1.09. WarCraft 3: No description, but has the same "working" rating as StarCraft