Actually I think it probably undershoots the mark...
By the article: The researchers relied on existing data such as ISBN numbers to count books and journals, as well as industry reports about data handled by enterprise servers for things such as supermarket sales and airline bookings. They performed surveys to estimate how much unique information exists on each type of hard drive.
I don't think they attempted to collect information on more ephermeral data... For example, artists that go through many versions of a 3d model or movie or textures (each of which is data that is "created" but not all is stored), or hell, in core files alone the numbers must be staggering!
On the other hand, this would probably be lowered quite a bit if they were looking for unique information. A lot of the data farms are compiliations of other data. But it would be a major undertaking just to define what "unique" meant. I wonder how big the "file" would be if you compressed all the worlds data with various compression algorithms.
You aren't the target market. Its aimed at large organization that can use an inexpensive desktop for groups of people.
Maybe you're right, maybe I'm not the target market. But I still am the one making these decisions. They
have to convince me.
As far as you go, your TCO calculations are confused as well. You are comparing not paying anything more for what you already have versus spending anything for something new. Under those circumstances nothing will look good, even another windows or linux box. Try comparing a new windows box with office versus Sun's new kit. The math looks a little different.
No, that's not what I'm doing. I'm saying I keep Windows boxes (and Linux/BSD/etc.) running longer than their costs. The cost for Windows isn't really significant because it's a one-time cost - and many machines don't get upgraded for quite a while (uh.. because they work now and I don't need to change them?) -- So when I look at a set of machines and have to decide what I'm going to install, am I going to install/recommend something with a annual cost, or something we can just buy and forget? Also remember that some machines (not connected to the internet) work just fine and are rarely touched by any IT -- now they would have to be tracked (license costs), and that is extra work for IT and accounting. Sometimes it's worth it, sometimes it isn't -- In this case, I haven't seen any evidence to say it is.
(Responding to my own post...)
Also, since Sun's page doesn't make it clear, I assume that the desktop can't be redirected to another machine without a new seat license. Right now I have dumb terminals that use KDE that is running on a server and redirected over ssh. How will this kind of setup be integrated into this desktop (and still checking licenses?) -- and how easy will it be to transfer licenses around? For example, can I have 4 "floating" licenses that are used as thin laptops connect to the servers for a desktop? I don't have anywhere near enough information to decide on this regardless of how "good" it is.
From the article:
The price, $50 per seat per year, including updates and support is attractive, especially if Sun's $100/seat Java Enterprise System lives up to its goal of allowing 2000+ users to be administered by a single IT worker.
I was interested in checking it out, but at $50/seat/year it's a little to much for me to suggest setting up on all the machines. I don't mind paying -- but I have Windows machines that I haven't paid anything for in years. I don't have to pay unless I want to upgrade those boxes. This looks like a solution that's trying to be as much like Windows as possible, but with a TCO that's higher.
I'd be OK with $100 flat fee. Then if I want support (past 30 days or whatever), I can pay extra.
That said I might want to get one seat just to check it out, but there's no way it's going to replace my current Linux or Windows desktops at that price.
OK - I can verify that nifty (a very large provider) here in Japan does not block it. To make it worse, Verisign's page seems to be only available in English (Well, at least not Japanese), so now many people are getting redirected to pages they can't even read. At least Microsoft's version of this was localized.
LUFS does what you want -- it will allow you to mount locally to/via ftp, ssh, gnutella, gnome vfs, memory cards, and CE devices.
Here's a discussion of people wanting to include it in the boot scripts for Knoppix.
I'm posting as AC because I'm still covered under my unbelievably strict NDA.
Which you signed willingly. Whose fault is that?
Which you are now breaking. Whose fault is that?
Which makes you no better than the whiners at fatbabies. Whose fault is that?
What you have just demonstrated is not just the breaking of a legal contract, which you agreed to abide by, but your word - which may or may not have been valuable once, but it isn't worth shit now.
While I agree with the point I think that power users should be allowed to call up the ISP (maybe even at initial sign-up) and be allowed to request that the ports remain unblocked. Otherwise, the internet *will* become just the web and AIM for everyone if they like it or not.
Well, what's going to happen is: The ISPs will eventually block most ports, "'cause most users don't need 'em." and that'll help some people. "Power users" will be able to pay an extra fee to get the ports unblocked - a "setup" or "administration" fee. Probably even a per-month fee, so they can/really/ get some extra cash. And those people with residential ISPs (e.g. DSL) will be SOL because arguing with the phone company about what ports are blocked will be totally ineffective -- and since they typically have a monopoly on the lines, there's not much you can do. Remember when shell access was standard? Same deal.
This will suck for a while. Especially when they block port 22 at first, because they forgot about SSH. Then eventually most things will be re-written to tunnel through port 80, making everything more complicated (multiple servers switching on the same port). And of course, the worms will follow.
The point is, there is a reason these ports exist in the first place -- they allow some flexibility and simplify communications. What they're really saying is "We don't like the way the internet is designed. So we're going to break it. Sucks to be you."
I travel a/lot/ -- and I have a need to have my data accessable from anywhere in the world whenever I want it.
I think you need to see someone about your addiction to pr0n
I know you were just trying to be funny. But lugging around data is a serious problem for me. I'm a game developer and I usually have different projects going on at different sites in different countries -- and some modern console games are/huge/ -- I have to keep the unconverted art handy (different versions) and the final game-ready art handy as well (different versions) for different projects. I just can't d/l this much data from the internet - especially when we want it encrypted over public lines -- scp/sftp is many things, but fast it is not.
Thanks! Yeah, the NDU10-160 (160GB) version is pretty close to what I want. Except that it's Windows-only (requires a windows app to access). The price is pretty good 299USD for 160GB networked drive is reasonable. I think I'll pick this one up for my next drive!
From the article: "You would have to look at what a government does--whether it's a protectionist issue," Robertson said, "As with any trade-related issue, Microsoft would look to its peers and colleagues in the information technology community for guidance."
Who exactly are Microsoft's "peers"? IBM, Sun, Sony, the Open Source "community"? On one hand MS wants to create a "government security program" that it defines and implements, on the other they want their "peers" to say that doing anything else is unfair?! Good luck!
This goes a little further than raw disk access or network filesystem. The purpose of the webserver isn't to serve files to someone else but you (it can do that, but it can also do more). Its purpose is an access restriction layer on top of the data.
Sure, I can appreciate that. But why not just a networked harddrive with an encrypted filesystem? And the mimimal display could just be the IP address. (So many places where DNS/ReverseDNS doesn't work correctly), but DHCP almost always works.
Can anyone else perhaps point out what I missed?
See my comment above.
I don't know if I'm exactly the market they're looking toward, but I need things like this because I have networks I need to connect to (physically) around the world and have access to large amounts of data. So yeah, I think there is a use simply because no network is faster than sneakernet when you're talking about a couple hundred of gigs of data.
Perhaps this will work for big companies in highly specialized situations. I just can't think of any where existing tech like the ones I mentioned wouldn't do just as well.
You're right. For now a USB HD works better for me. But that's what they're saying this is: Basically a harddrive with extra features. It's just not a very good one, IMO.
What I really need is are smaller portable harddrives with bigger capacities (200GB to start would be nice) that are network-aware. Just plug in an ethernet cable and mount it.
The Snap Appliance Server 1100 is pretty close. It's a little large, but not too bad. It's something that's much more useful to me than this "personal server". But the cost is outrageous. About 800USD for a 120GB networked drive? Considering I can get a 160GB USB drive in Japan for under 200USD now, the extra 600USD does not justify the cost of adding ethernet.
I guess I'll just have to wait, someone's bound to come out with something. For now I'm just thinking of picking up one of those brick-PCs and mounting my drives to that (especially as I need more) and just connecting that to the network wherever I am.
I travel a/lot/ -- and I have a need to have my data accessable from anywhere in the world whenever I want it. I have servers in 3 countries connected together for most things, but for very large files (or sets of files) this is really impractical and can get very expensive. So I carry two 120GB USB drives with me wherever I go. These drives are pretty bulky, but they do allow me to do what this "personal server" is promoting - access my data from any workstation.
I don't really need a webserver with me, since that is better placed on a server that I don't unplug. This feature is pretty useless for me. Nor is bluetooth really practical to me, since USB is much wider supported than bluetooth on the machines I might sit at.
What I really need is are smaller portable harddrives with bigger capacities (200GB to start would be nice) that are network-aware. Just plug in an ethernet cable and mount it.
OK -- I know this will be an unpopular opinion here, but I think this move by Microsoft is a good thing, and shows promise.
First, they are right -- it's their network, and other people are piggy-backing on their servers for free and making bank on it. Why should they allow that? You have plenty of other options if you want to chat outside of Microsoft's servers...
Second, instead of the standard MS practice of just squashing the competition, they are introducing a reasonable (assuming the fee is reasonable) solution -- and have decided it's OK to join forces with third party products, if that's what the users want. I say "Bravo!" to MS in this instance.
If Apple offered licensing to their music service servers for third-party developers, people would be cheering. But if it's MS, it simply must be bad, right?
On top of this, presumably, part of the license fees include the network protocols - Which means less reverse-engineering, and less tail-chasing, which will probably counter-balance the cost of the license itself. And hell, these clients may actually work consistantly now.
I want to encourage MS whenever they do anything even remotely reasonable. To show them they don't have to be anti-competetive, business-stealing, life-destroying bastards to make money.
I also happen to have a similar connection, although I'm not complaining about my latencies...
I have 8Mbps(down) ADSL with NTT in the Osaka area of Japan. I also had the same service in Yokohama until recently. It's very cheap (about $22/month) too.
I have a 1.5Mbps(down) ADSL in San Diego with SBC which is decent, but has too many outages for my taste. It's more expensive (about $50/month)
Z.
Dunno, but I'm interested in picking one of these up! I'm in Japan about 6 months of the year (and am an American) and sometimes I'd like to catch something on TV in The States -- and as it happens, I have a house with cable there not being used while I'm gone, so... perfect!
Somewhat off topic... But, imagine the fun of a job where McD's paid you to reak havoc in Burger King and Wendy's resturants:-P
It already happens. All of the big chains (PepsiCo (i.e. TacoBell, PizzaHut, HotNNow, etc.), McDonalds, etc.) use simulations+data/video to improve their drive-through/walk-in throughput.
Some corps decided that a pure FIFO is best on average, where McD decided to let people get out of line and wait (if the order is unusual) -- So it has been reported that some McD people (who knows? franchise owners? managers?) send people out to nieghboring places with large custom orders at rush hour that totally screw up a pure FIFO system.
But not owning a camcorder I don't know what the usage patterns typically are. I imagine that most days it's used it isn't used for more than an hour throughout the whole day.
Ah... I see you've never been suckered into taping your friends Catholic wedding.
I would buy something like this (but not this one... not yet) for the same reason I own a portable DVD player. I spend over 20 hours a month in a plane and countless hours in trains, so I want something that is easy, small, light and has good battery life. A laptop does not cut it. I don't want to wait for it to boot and shutdown. Even the smallest laptop is much heavier than my DVD player. And I have easily 8 hours of battery life. I also have a PDA, 'cause it's much more convinient to pull it out, tap the screen a few times, get the map or note I need and throw it back in my pocket than a laptop would be. There is a market for these. But I understand that you'd rather have an all-in-one device for a lower cost. So would I - If it was easy, small, light and had a good battery life.
Arg, this is really frustrating! People use this [sarcasm]non-obvious[/sarcasm] concept all the time. In countless magazines, newspapers, etc. How silly would it be for Auto Trader to patent the concept of OBO (which is what we're talking about here) for paper media? And how much more absurd is it that now, any person who uses "$XXX OBO (Or Best Offer)"/online/ to sell their goods (let's say in a forum, where they are responsible for their choice) is liable for patent infringement. This is cleary the same thing - The $XXX is the buy it now, the OBO is the, "otherwise start bidding".
In theory this affects everyone who wants to sell something online, not just the auction sites.
Re:Hopefully Mozilla Mail POP3 bug is fixed
on
Mozilla 1.4 RC1
·
· Score: 1
I actually have no problem with this. I've set my user to: user@domain and it logs on correctly. I think I remember mozilla complaining a bit when I set it that way, but it's been working since 1.3a for me. Many servers will also accept user#domain BTW, as a user name if '@' gives you trouble. Z.
Yes, the PS2 supports VGA. It always has.
PS2/Linux users can use monitors (well, most monitors) no problem. However, there is no way for a developer to tell if VGA is connected. So no one bothers supporting it (Plus there's the whole it takes up more vram issue, of which the PS2 is lacking enough already). Currently, It'd have to implemented it in a menu option - meaning, you'd have to plug in a TV, select VGA, then go.
I'd expect Sony to pull it at some point (for cost). I'm pretty sure they're pulling firewire.
Z.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually I think it probably undershoots the mark...
By the article: The researchers relied on existing data such as ISBN numbers to count books and journals, as well as industry reports about data handled by enterprise servers for things such as supermarket sales and airline bookings. They performed surveys to estimate how much unique information exists on each type of hard drive.
I don't think they attempted to collect information on more ephermeral data... For example, artists that go through many versions of a 3d model or movie or textures (each of which is data that is "created" but not all is stored), or hell, in core files alone the numbers must be staggering!
On the other hand, this would probably be lowered quite a bit if they were looking for unique information. A lot of the data farms are compiliations of other data. But it would be a major undertaking just to define what "unique" meant. I wonder how big the "file" would be if you compressed all the worlds data with various compression algorithms.
Ah... Interesting anyway!
You aren't the target market. Its aimed at large organization that can use an inexpensive desktop for groups of people.
Maybe you're right, maybe I'm not the target market. But I still am the one making these decisions. They have to convince me.
As far as you go, your TCO calculations are confused as well. You are comparing not paying anything more for what you already have versus spending anything for something new. Under those circumstances nothing will look good, even another windows or linux box. Try comparing a new windows box with office versus Sun's new kit. The math looks a little different.
No, that's not what I'm doing. I'm saying I keep Windows boxes (and Linux/BSD/etc.) running longer than their costs. The cost for Windows isn't really significant because it's a one-time cost - and many machines don't get upgraded for quite a while (uh.. because they work now and I don't need to change them?) -- So when I look at a set of machines and have to decide what I'm going to install, am I going to install/recommend something with a annual cost, or something we can just buy and forget? Also remember that some machines (not connected to the internet) work just fine and are rarely touched by any IT -- now they would have to be tracked (license costs), and that is extra work for IT and accounting. Sometimes it's worth it, sometimes it isn't -- In this case, I haven't seen any evidence to say it is.
(Responding to my own post...)
Also, since Sun's page doesn't make it clear, I assume that the desktop can't be redirected to another machine without a new seat license. Right now I have dumb terminals that use KDE that is running on a server and redirected over ssh. How will this kind of setup be integrated into this desktop (and still checking licenses?) -- and how easy will it be to transfer licenses around? For example, can I have 4 "floating" licenses that are used as thin laptops connect to the servers for a desktop? I don't have anywhere near enough information to decide on this regardless of how "good" it is.
From the article: The price, $50 per seat per year, including updates and support is attractive, especially if Sun's $100/seat Java Enterprise System lives up to its goal of allowing 2000+ users to be administered by a single IT worker.
I was interested in checking it out, but at $50/seat/year it's a little to much for me to suggest setting up on all the machines. I don't mind paying -- but I have Windows machines that I haven't paid anything for in years. I don't have to pay unless I want to upgrade those boxes. This looks like a solution that's trying to be as much like Windows as possible, but with a TCO that's higher.
I'd be OK with $100 flat fee. Then if I want support (past 30 days or whatever), I can pay extra.
That said I might want to get one seat just to check it out, but there's no way it's going to replace my current Linux or Windows desktops at that price.
Z.
OK - I can verify that nifty (a very large provider) here in Japan does not block it. To make it worse, Verisign's page seems to be only available in English (Well, at least not Japanese), so now many people are getting redirected to pages they can't even read. At least Microsoft's version of this was localized.
LUFS does what you want -- it will allow you to mount locally to/via ftp, ssh, gnutella, gnome vfs, memory cards, and CE devices.
Here's a discussion of people wanting to include it in the boot scripts for Knoppix.
I'm posting as AC because I'm still covered under my unbelievably strict NDA.
Which you signed willingly. Whose fault is that?
Which you are now breaking. Whose fault is that?
Which makes you no better than the whiners at fatbabies. Whose fault is that?
What you have just demonstrated is not just the breaking of a legal contract, which you agreed to abide by, but your word - which may or may not have been valuable once, but it isn't worth shit now.
Loser.
While I agree with the point I think that power users should be allowed to call up the ISP (maybe even at initial sign-up) and be allowed to request that the ports remain unblocked. Otherwise, the internet *will* become just the web and AIM for everyone if they like it or not.
/really/ get some extra cash. And those people with residential ISPs (e.g. DSL) will be SOL because arguing with the phone company about what ports are blocked will be totally ineffective -- and since they typically have a monopoly on the lines, there's not much you can do. Remember when shell access was standard? Same deal.
Well, what's going to happen is: The ISPs will eventually block most ports, "'cause most users don't need 'em." and that'll help some people. "Power users" will be able to pay an extra fee to get the ports unblocked - a "setup" or "administration" fee. Probably even a per-month fee, so they can
This will suck for a while. Especially when they block port 22 at first, because they forgot about SSH. Then eventually most things will be re-written to tunnel through port 80, making everything more complicated (multiple servers switching on the same port). And of course, the worms will follow.
The point is, there is a reason these ports exist in the first place -- they allow some flexibility and simplify communications. What they're really saying is "We don't like the way the internet is designed. So we're going to break it. Sucks to be you."
Z.
I travel a /lot/ -- and I have a need to have my data accessable from anywhere in the world whenever I want it.
/huge/ -- I have to keep the unconverted art handy (different versions) and the final game-ready art handy as well (different versions) for different projects. I just can't d/l this much data from the internet - especially when we want it encrypted over public lines -- scp/sftp is many things, but fast it is not.
I think you need to see someone about your addiction to pr0n
I know you were just trying to be funny. But lugging around data is a serious problem for me. I'm a game developer and I usually have different projects going on at different sites in different countries -- and some modern console games are
Thanks! Yeah, the NDU10-160 (160GB) version is pretty close to what I want. Except that it's Windows-only (requires a windows app to access). The price is pretty good 299USD for 160GB networked drive is reasonable. I think I'll pick this one up for my next drive!
From the article: "You would have to look at what a government does--whether it's a protectionist issue," Robertson said, "As with any trade-related issue, Microsoft would look to its peers and colleagues in the information technology community for guidance."
Who exactly are Microsoft's "peers"? IBM, Sun, Sony, the Open Source "community"? On one hand MS wants to create a "government security program" that it defines and implements, on the other they want their "peers" to say that doing anything else is unfair?! Good luck!
Why not use an iPod? You can store more than just mp3s on these things. It charges off the firewire port. very small. and it plays music. :)
I like the idea -- but 30GB is not nearly enough. If Apple releases a 200GB iPod at a reasonable price, hell yeah, I'd buy it.
This goes a little further than raw disk access or network filesystem. The purpose of the webserver isn't to serve files to someone else but you (it can do that, but it can also do more). Its purpose is an access restriction layer on top of the data.
Sure, I can appreciate that. But why not just a networked harddrive with an encrypted filesystem? And the mimimal display could just be the IP address. (So many places where DNS/ReverseDNS doesn't work correctly), but DHCP almost always works.
Can anyone else perhaps point out what I missed?
See my comment above.
I don't know if I'm exactly the market they're looking toward, but I need things like this because I have networks I need to connect to (physically) around the world and have access to large amounts of data. So yeah, I think there is a use simply because no network is faster than sneakernet when you're talking about a couple hundred of gigs of data.
Perhaps this will work for big companies in highly specialized situations. I just can't think of any where existing tech like the ones I mentioned wouldn't do just as well.
You're right. For now a USB HD works better for me. But that's what they're saying this is: Basically a harddrive with extra features. It's just not a very good one, IMO.
What I really need is are smaller portable harddrives with bigger capacities (200GB to start would be nice) that are network-aware. Just plug in an ethernet cable and mount it.
The Snap Appliance Server 1100 is pretty close. It's a little large, but not too bad. It's something that's much more useful to me than this "personal server". But the cost is outrageous. About 800USD for a 120GB networked drive? Considering I can get a 160GB USB drive in Japan for under 200USD now, the extra 600USD does not justify the cost of adding ethernet.
I guess I'll just have to wait, someone's bound to come out with something. For now I'm just thinking of picking up one of those brick-PCs and mounting my drives to that (especially as I need more) and just connecting that to the network wherever I am.
I travel a /lot/ -- and I have a need to have my data accessable from anywhere in the world whenever I want it. I have servers in 3 countries connected together for most things, but for very large files (or sets of files) this is really impractical and can get very expensive. So I carry two 120GB USB drives with me wherever I go. These drives are pretty bulky, but they do allow me to do what this "personal server" is promoting - access my data from any workstation.
I don't really need a webserver with me, since that is better placed on a server that I don't unplug. This feature is pretty useless for me. Nor is bluetooth really practical to me, since USB is much wider supported than bluetooth on the machines I might sit at.
What I really need is are smaller portable harddrives with bigger capacities (200GB to start would be nice) that are network-aware. Just plug in an ethernet cable and mount it.
OK -- I know this will be an unpopular opinion here, but I think this move by Microsoft is a good thing, and shows promise.
First, they are right -- it's their network, and other people are piggy-backing on their servers for free and making bank on it. Why should they allow that? You have plenty of other options if you want to chat outside of Microsoft's servers...
Second, instead of the standard MS practice of just squashing the competition, they are introducing a reasonable (assuming the fee is reasonable) solution -- and have decided it's OK to join forces with third party products, if that's what the users want. I say "Bravo!" to MS in this instance.
If Apple offered licensing to their music service servers for third-party developers, people would be cheering. But if it's MS, it simply must be bad, right?
On top of this, presumably, part of the license fees include the network protocols - Which means less reverse-engineering, and less tail-chasing, which will probably counter-balance the cost of the license itself. And hell, these clients may actually work consistantly now.
I want to encourage MS whenever they do anything even remotely reasonable. To show them they don't have to be anti-competetive, business-stealing, life-destroying bastards to make money.
Z.
I also happen to have a similar connection, although I'm not complaining about my latencies... I have 8Mbps(down) ADSL with NTT in the Osaka area of Japan. I also had the same service in Yokohama until recently. It's very cheap (about $22/month) too. I have a 1.5Mbps(down) ADSL in San Diego with SBC which is decent, but has too many outages for my taste. It's more expensive (about $50/month) Z.
Is this really a significant market?
Dunno, but I'm interested in picking one of these up! I'm in Japan about 6 months of the year (and am an American) and sometimes I'd like to catch something on TV in The States -- and as it happens, I have a house with cable there not being used while I'm gone, so... perfect!
In other words, it's significant to me.
Z.
Somewhat off topic... But, imagine the fun of a job where McD's paid you to reak havoc in Burger King and Wendy's resturants :-P
/walk-in throughput.
It already happens. All of the big chains (PepsiCo (i.e. TacoBell, PizzaHut, HotNNow, etc.), McDonalds, etc.) use simulations+data/video to improve their drive-through
Some corps decided that a pure FIFO is best on average, where McD decided to let people get out of line and wait (if the order is unusual) -- So it has been reported that some McD people (who knows? franchise owners? managers?) send people out to nieghboring places with large custom orders at rush hour that totally screw up a pure FIFO system.
But not owning a camcorder I don't know what the usage patterns typically are. I imagine that most days it's used it isn't used for more than an hour throughout the whole day.
Ah... I see you've never been suckered into taping your friends Catholic wedding.
I would buy something like this (but not this one... not yet) for the same reason I own a portable DVD player. I spend over 20 hours a month in a plane and countless hours in trains, so I want something that is easy, small, light and has good battery life. A laptop does not cut it. I don't want to wait for it to boot and shutdown. Even the smallest laptop is much heavier than my DVD player. And I have easily 8 hours of battery life.
I also have a PDA, 'cause it's much more convinient to pull it out, tap the screen a few times, get the map or note I need and throw it back in my pocket than a laptop would be.
There is a market for these. But I understand that you'd rather have an all-in-one device for a lower cost. So would I - If it was easy, small, light and had a good battery life.
Z.
Arg, this is really frustrating! People use this [sarcasm]non-obvious[/sarcasm] concept all the time. In countless magazines, newspapers, etc. How silly would it be for Auto Trader to patent the concept of OBO (which is what we're talking about here) for paper media? And how much more absurd is it that now, any person who uses "$XXX OBO (Or Best Offer)" /online/ to sell their goods (let's say in a forum, where they are responsible for their choice) is liable for patent infringement.
This is cleary the same thing - The $XXX is the buy it now, the OBO is the, "otherwise start bidding".
In theory this affects everyone who wants to sell something online, not just the auction sites.
I actually have no problem with this.
I've set my user to: user@domain and it logs on correctly. I think I remember mozilla complaining a bit when I set it that way, but it's been working since 1.3a for me.
Many servers will also accept user#domain BTW, as a user name if '@' gives you trouble.
Z.
Yes, the PS2 supports VGA. It always has. PS2/Linux users can use monitors (well, most monitors) no problem. However, there is no way for a developer to tell if VGA is connected. So no one bothers supporting it (Plus there's the whole it takes up more vram issue, of which the PS2 is lacking enough already). Currently, It'd have to implemented it in a menu option - meaning, you'd have to plug in a TV, select VGA, then go. I'd expect Sony to pull it at some point (for cost). I'm pretty sure they're pulling firewire. Z.