Not only did the software that controls audible and visual alarms stop working at 2:14 p.m. EDT, but about a half hour later, two servers supporting the emergency system failed, too.
Memo to power company:
Put power-system controlling servers on UPSes:-)
(yeah yeah, I know, it wasn't because they lost power. Its a joke:-)
Except that the Senior VP from HP in the article is a woman. Of course, C|Net certainly buried that by only putting her name+picture in the non-print version of the article and not using her name anywhere in print(I smell something foul here, but anyway).
Look on the bright side, at least you didn't call -Fiorina- a man(she's probably the best known female executive in the world today aside from maybe Oprah or Martha Stewart. Not that it's a good thing though- she's somewhat regarded as slightly off her rocker after the whole merger thing- talk about fanatical).
Cnet:"Look you weenie, we all know you people talk in marketspeak. What are you REALLY saying you pathetic looooooser?"
SWISH! ZOOM! KAPOW! BUY IBM DB2 PRODUCTS!
HP:"Uh, what was that?"
Cnet:"Nothing, you shmuck."
Pay no attention to the IBM flash ads(or, for that matter, that IBM advertises with Slashdot etc.) Wouldn't it be nice if technical journals held to the same standards as newspapers with regards to journalistic integrity? Then again, i suppose it would be nice if people who wrote technical articles were actually journalists, instead of mystery consultants who have no qualifications except that they claim to know something about technology and list "technical writer" on their resume...
Full text searching improved and other goodness
on
PostgreSQL 7.4 Released
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Full text searching also got another overhaul- I plan on messing around with it when I get some free time. They've included a.sql file you can just import into an existing DB.
The real power here is that the index is quick to update, and as a result, can be done in real-time via triggers and stored procedures- neither of which you can do with MySQL:-) The new release is also even more SQL compliant- something else MySQL can't claim. PostgreSQL is both SQL92+98 compliant if I recall.
It can't be said enough- PostgreSQL is now MUCH faster...and due to features like stored procedures, triggers, and some of the best locking available combined with some of the best transaction support, it's actually far faster at many of the same tasks if you take advantage of these greater abilities.
Even back as early as '99, PostgreSQL absolutely mopped the floor with MySQL when as little as 10% inserts or updates were thrown into a select test. Why? Piss-poor locking and zero transaction support. The stuff you have to do in the application layer to make up for proper(or ANY) transaction support will make most benchmarks completely pointless.
MySQL always has, and always will be, a DB best suited for blogs and 2-guys-in-a-garage; it's slapped together, has a low featureset, and is not standard-compliant. PostgreSQL is not an enterprise fish(replication still needs work if I understand it correctly)- Oracle, DB2 etc have that market pretty well covered- but it's great for everyone else who isn't, say, a multibillion $ company...if those people just bothered to have an open mind instead of pointing their fingers at benchmarks showing MySQL running out of an in-ram-only table can select 50,000 rows faster than PostgreSQL can, and whining about how they need to make a cron job to vacuum/vacuum analyze tables at an appropriate time(with autovacuum, also in this release, there goes that excuse!)
Sherlock never really impressed me- until I tried the latest version; they've included a fair bit of stuff, and at least at work and at home on cable, it's pretty zippy compared to getting the same info via the web. The dictionary search has been pretty handy.
What amazes me is the near vacuum of useful sherlock modules- there's a website here or there that has maybe a dozen or two, of which only a few are actually interesting. There's a fedex module, but no UPS module.
What is MUCH worse is the distribution model for sherlock modules- you don't actually get the module, you get a LINK to the module, and if that website goes down, the module essentially stops working after a while even if you've added it to Sherlock; it only caches them, doesn't download them(which is why it takes a while to access a module if you haven't used sherlock in a while). Stupid, stupid, stupid, STUPID! Not only is it unreliable and a waste of bandwidth, but it has great exploit potential- breaking into one account and an author's module could deliver all sorts of goodies right to an attacker's doorstep, and nobody would be the wiser. Not to mention, maybe Fedex decides they don't like Joe Blo's module and DMCA him- everyone looses their Fedex module.
In the long run does MS really have a chance when competing against free, well written, well understood software?
I love Linux and free software as much as the next slashdot reader....and I'm not trying to troll...but there's a lot of free software which is neither well written nor well understood, particularly the latter...even by people like me who have been using linux for years personally and professionally. Case and point would be the linux kernel, which has dozens of options which for years have had no help, no corresponding HOWTO, and names that remind you of PlotHoleFillTech from Star Trek.
I am an advocate of a law that says the loser in a tort must pay the winner's court costs. That would prevent fishing expiditions like SCO's because they are too expensive.
How so? The only thing this would accomplish is making it riskier for the little guy to stand up for himself. Not only does he have to risk his life's savings to pay for his own legal defense, but now, if he looses(and going up against a megacorporation, they'll drag it out until he's homeless on the street), he's got to pay their legal expenses as well?
The only thing your idea would do is make the legal system all that less accessible.
Could the RIAA take the shotgun/mass-sue approach if they had to cover the legal defense costs for everyone they wrongly sued?
Of course.... they've got more money than god. I would not doubt if there was enough money to pay 10x over.
Making fun of hard core criminals is not always that funny in the end.
Hard core? They run a computer program, and take trips to the local Western Union when suckers send them their money. Hard core over there is same as it is here. Shooting, raping, home invasion, carjacking, robbery...
If that's hard core- lesse, I run computer programs of all sorts and kinds all day, and I stop at the ATM+bank all the time. Egad, I must be Hannibal Lechter then!
Noticing some commonalities in the spam flooding their email in-boxes, a small group of hackers set out to track down who was responsible. Along the way they uncovered a trail that led them to an organized gang of criminals halfway around the world, and right back to some of the largest financial institutions in the US, and their customers, that became the gang's prey
This reminds me of Cliff Stoll- an astrophysicist who moonlighted as a sysadmin at UC Berkley, and noticed a discrepancy of a cent or less in the CPU time accounting system.
I won't spoil the story, but see if your local library has a copy of the Cuckoo's Egg(by Stoll). His more recent book, Silicon Snake Oil, discusses the falsities behind throwing technology(computers) at people- particularly in schools, for example...and was also quite good when it came out(and schools were dumping boatloads of $ into computer labs which sat mostly empty).
He's humble, intelligent, well educated, writes fun to read stuff...one of the computer scientists(and physicists) I respect the most- far above all the three-letter personalities.
The german newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung reports on its website, that the german ISP T-Online wants to buy AOL.[snip] Ask the fish for help."
Running AOL's profit/loss statements and investor reports through The Fish are about the only thing that could explain someone actually -wanting- AOL right now...
About the only thing I've ever found The Fish useful for was once confusing the crap out of a friend visiting Italy by making her think I 'spoke' formal Italian. That was good for a few days before another friend spoiled it and told her...
I'm not sure I believe that using electronic trickery (presumably phase differences and relative volume) can create a realistic surround-sound volume-of-space for people to sit in.
It can't. I've heard this kind of technology, and sometimes it works, more often it doesn't...and even when it does, the sound just "feels" "weird" but has no direction. Any directional effect is usually quite weak.
If I understand it correctly, it's based off the way sounds are affected by the shape of your ear- but if you've ever noticed, people have differently shaped ears and I imagine their brains become 'calibrated' to their ears...
Further, it's stupid in this price point. Nice idea, but considering for HALF the price you can get a really nice sounding, REAL system from someone decently respectable like Cambridge Soundworks...I fail to see the point. Usually this kind of technology is provided by laptop manufacturers or cheap A/V equipment makers. Not $800 speakers.
By monitoring an array of GPS receivers located throughout California she was able to determine that a massive 7.9 earthquake in Alaska last year resulted in the constillation of GPS satellites generating a mesaurable amount of interference.
Unless this is a new technique, GPS has been used for years by geologists looking for earthquakes and crust movement(and I don't mean the lojack in grandma's blueberry pie).
I imagine this is what Stallman wanted, a chance to prove the GPL in court. And involvement in the case may give him legal room to see 'evidence' without signing non-disclosures.
...and I imagine that SCO wanted RMS to appear in court so the court could 'see' RMS's, uh, unique grooming and personality:-)
rechargables have gone from lead-acid to Nickel-Cadmium to Nickel Metal Hydride and also Lithium-Ion.
...and unfortunately, NiMH was 'too' good and was phased out pretty damn quickly. It didn't have quite the energy capacity of LiIon, but NiMH doesn't destroy itself with every cycle. I dunno about you, but I'd rather have a battery that lasts 2 hours instead of 3, if I don't have to replace it every 6 goddamn months.
LiIon is the biggest scam around- complete garbage technology that will no doubt be the subject of a consumer lawsuit, if it hasn't been already- even now, the "this battery looses capacity with each charge/discharge cycle" notice is buried deep, deep in the owner's manual...if included at all.
One of the top complaints about the iPod is that its battery is utter garbage- and useless within months of anything even resembling moderate usage.
As if the environment wasn't suffering enough from electronics- "gee, lets put a highly toxic battery that won't last but a few months inside a SEALED consumer device that the consumer will just chuck in the trash!"
This is strange. Ever since I installed 10.3.1, my powerbook's sleep light (y'know, the one on the button to open the screen) has been much, much dimmer. Either my PBG4 is about to explode or Apple decided to chill it out a bit.
Close the lid, instead of choosing sleep- or close the lid while it's asleep. Believe it or not, "lid open" sleep mode uses a much dimmer light.
I suppose it's possible Apple got a lot of complaints about the brighter mode(I know it was annoying as hell at night in my bedroom, felt like I was about to be abducted by aliens) and just set it to dim all the time.
Nowdays cars aren't built to last, well, not last lifetimes. They're built to last until the payment book is done.
My 1991 Audi 200 quattro 20v is kicking around just fine, and it's lasted through -my- loan payments too(I bought it at 6 years, 100k miles- it now has 190k). It can kick the crap out of most of the 50's/60's cars you mention- 0-60 in about 5.9 seconds flat my friend. 280hp and all wheel drive.
Sure you have exceptions like Toyota Camary's or Honda Civic's that go on and on
My '91 Audi's body is entirely galvanized from the factory, and doesn't sport a single spot of rust(well, actually, there's one, about the size of half a dime.)
I know I have harped on American cars alot, and I really do love them, but even the author's AUDI is not unique.
It depends. If it's an 1985 Audi Turbo Quattro Coupe in good condition, it'll fetch 10k or more and is highly collectable. There are, after all, only a few hundred in the US. Some are meticulously restored and driven every day. If you see what looks like an old VW Scirocco(they're most mistaken for these) with big fenders, that's an 'UrQ'.
Audi has for years traded engine and body parts and techniques with Volkswagon
Wonders never cease, VW owns Audi. Along with Bentley, Lamborghini, Seat, Skoda. That does not make a VW a Lamborgini, nor an A4 a Jetta.
so much so that alot of Audi's now have VW W8 engines
Acutally, VERY few Audis have the W8; in the US, only the previous generation A8. Very few VW's have the W8...
while VW itself builds three of it's cars on the same chassi. The Passat, New Bettle, and Jetta are, when you trear them down, all the same car
No, the Passat is a C-platform car; the Jetta and Beetle are B-platform cars. The Audi TT runs on a modified New Beetle chassis(the TT is wider among other things.)
Go to an Audi dealer. Sit in an A4. Now go into a VW dealer, and sit in a Jetta. Now do you understand why the A4 sells like hotcakes, despite costing well over 20k base?
All the time I hear people say "oh, an Audi is just a fancy VW". Unlike Toyota, which happily sells Toyota models here in the US as Lexus models with little more than a badge change(Toyota Altezza in Japan = that little 4-door Lexus sedan here), VW/Audi do no such thing. There's a clear differentiation between models if you bother to do more than look at the frame.
VAG-COM works with the older Audis going back to about 1989 or so. You need a special Y adapter to adapt the ODB-II style plug
Oh, I forgot- not only VAG-COM, but any diagnostic tool based on the VAG-155x series(I forget what the current model is, but the earliest model is the VAG-1551), which is as close as your nearest Audi OR VW dealer, will work. The dealership should have the necessary Y adapter since it's about $15-20, but may not if they're somewhat new and never had to deal with pre-ODB-II cars.
VAG-COM works with the older Audis going back to about 1989 or so. You need a special Y adapter to adapt the ODB-II style plug; if you have the plugs, they're two or three multicolored, 2-pin connectors, usually in the driver's side footwell or in the fusebox. 1991 was the first year in which fault codes could be stored in memory, so if your model is before that, you'll need to leave the engine running or crank it to 'generate' a code.
If your Audi is pre-1990 or so(you said 14 years yes?), run the car until the check light comes on or you see the problem; remove a spare fuse, plug the fuse into the top of the fuel pump relay for about 5 seconds and remove; the check engine light(engine block w/lightning bolt) will come on and blink a code of 4 digits, with a short pause between the digits; this will report all the codes and then repeat. Look up the codes at www.sjmautotechnik.com. Really really old Audis will either bounce the tachometer, or point it to different numbers in sequence to indicate the code.
If the problem is a no-start, you should attempt to crank the engine for 15 seconds, LEAVE the ignition ON, and then do the code retrieval.
You can also trigger an output test, which activates all the various eleectronic valves(there are many) in sequence.
If you still need more help, sign on to the 'quattro' list at www.audifans.com- but do so in a few days, the site admin had a death in the family right after we had some data loss, and things are pretty messed up unfortunately; you can't post, and archives are missing. We'll be running within a week. Google has a fair bit of our 10+ years of archives in its cache, however.
What about those of us who despise this incessant obsession with music and movies and p2p? Slashdot has turned into every other news outlet- endlessly gabbing about music or movies(or both). I fully expect to see a Bennifer story here before the end of the year.
I like listening to music as much as the next guy, but beyond listening, I really couldn't give a crap about music, and I'm really getting tired of Musicdot's...er, I mean, slashdot's, endless obsession with it, nor p2p software, nor universities doing this or that, nor the latest drivel from the industry groups. ENOUGH. At least Timothy is picking worthwhile causes to obsess about.
We initially volunteered for the trial, but didn't bother once we heard of the terms- basically, 15%, same as paypal. Our users would have objected to keeping a balance they couldn't use anywhere else. Worse, we'd loose ANOTHER 15% because they(at the time) only supported PayPal for transferring funds. Worse, they only do the transfer when it gets to a certain size. Micropayments, macrotransfers, mean that not only are they ripping you a new one on the 15% fee, but they're ALSO getting your interest.
Call me silly and slap me stupid, but the point of micropayments was to make small payments economically viable. I don't call "three times a credit card processing fee" viable for what amounts to nothing more than a proxy service.
All Bitpass does is play "mini paypal", and that's neither original nor novel. Next, please. That technology involving random numbers+statistics looked far more promising....
The Tomatometer [rottentomatoes.com] is currently at 38/100..
It's even lower if you count that several reviews which panned the film(Ebert one of them) were mistakenly(?) mis-categorized as tomatoes, and not splats.
Slashdot Mirror
Yep. That his lawyer need only reach for his notes for applicable case history should Apple- or anyone else for that matter- choose to try him again.
Memo to power company:
Put power-system controlling servers on UPSes :-)
(yeah yeah, I know, it wasn't because they lost power. Its a joke :-)
Except that the Senior VP from HP in the article is a woman. Of course, C|Net certainly buried that by only putting her name+picture in the non-print version of the article and not using her name anywhere in print(I smell something foul here, but anyway).
Look on the bright side, at least you didn't call -Fiorina- a man(she's probably the best known female executive in the world today aside from maybe Oprah or Martha Stewart. Not that it's a good thing though- she's somewhat regarded as slightly off her rocker after the whole merger thing- talk about fanatical).
HP: "Blah blah blah"
Cnet:"Look you weenie, we all know you people talk in marketspeak. What are you REALLY saying you pathetic looooooser?"
SWISH! ZOOM! KAPOW! BUY IBM DB2 PRODUCTS!
HP:"Uh, what was that?"
Cnet:"Nothing, you shmuck."
Pay no attention to the IBM flash ads(or, for that matter, that IBM advertises with Slashdot etc.) Wouldn't it be nice if technical journals held to the same standards as newspapers with regards to journalistic integrity? Then again, i suppose it would be nice if people who wrote technical articles were actually journalists, instead of mystery consultants who have no qualifications except that they claim to know something about technology and list "technical writer" on their resume...
Full text searching also got another overhaul- I plan on messing around with it when I get some free time. They've included a .sql file you can just import into an existing DB.
The real power here is that the index is quick to update, and as a result, can be done in real-time via triggers and stored procedures- neither of which you can do with MySQL :-) The new release is also even more SQL compliant- something else MySQL can't claim. PostgreSQL is both SQL92+98 compliant if I recall.
It can't be said enough- PostgreSQL is now MUCH faster...and due to features like stored procedures, triggers, and some of the best locking available combined with some of the best transaction support, it's actually far faster at many of the same tasks if you take advantage of these greater abilities.
Even back as early as '99, PostgreSQL absolutely mopped the floor with MySQL when as little as 10% inserts or updates were thrown into a select test. Why? Piss-poor locking and zero transaction support. The stuff you have to do in the application layer to make up for proper(or ANY) transaction support will make most benchmarks completely pointless.
MySQL always has, and always will be, a DB best suited for blogs and 2-guys-in-a-garage; it's slapped together, has a low featureset, and is not standard-compliant. PostgreSQL is not an enterprise fish(replication still needs work if I understand it correctly)- Oracle, DB2 etc have that market pretty well covered- but it's great for everyone else who isn't, say, a multibillion $ company...if those people just bothered to have an open mind instead of pointing their fingers at benchmarks showing MySQL running out of an in-ram-only table can select 50,000 rows faster than PostgreSQL can, and whining about how they need to make a cron job to vacuum/vacuum analyze tables at an appropriate time(with autovacuum, also in this release, there goes that excuse!)
Sherlock never really impressed me- until I tried the latest version; they've included a fair bit of stuff, and at least at work and at home on cable, it's pretty zippy compared to getting the same info via the web. The dictionary search has been pretty handy.
What amazes me is the near vacuum of useful sherlock modules- there's a website here or there that has maybe a dozen or two, of which only a few are actually interesting. There's a fedex module, but no UPS module.
What is MUCH worse is the distribution model for sherlock modules- you don't actually get the module, you get a LINK to the module, and if that website goes down, the module essentially stops working after a while even if you've added it to Sherlock; it only caches them, doesn't download them(which is why it takes a while to access a module if you haven't used sherlock in a while). Stupid, stupid, stupid, STUPID! Not only is it unreliable and a waste of bandwidth, but it has great exploit potential- breaking into one account and an author's module could deliver all sorts of goodies right to an attacker's doorstep, and nobody would be the wiser. Not to mention, maybe Fedex decides they don't like Joe Blo's module and DMCA him- everyone looses their Fedex module.
I love Linux and free software as much as the next slashdot reader....and I'm not trying to troll...but there's a lot of free software which is neither well written nor well understood, particularly the latter...even by people like me who have been using linux for years personally and professionally. Case and point would be the linux kernel, which has dozens of options which for years have had no help, no corresponding HOWTO, and names that remind you of PlotHoleFillTech from Star Trek.
How so? The only thing this would accomplish is making it riskier for the little guy to stand up for himself. Not only does he have to risk his life's savings to pay for his own legal defense, but now, if he looses(and going up against a megacorporation, they'll drag it out until he's homeless on the street), he's got to pay their legal expenses as well?
The only thing your idea would do is make the legal system all that less accessible.
Could the RIAA take the shotgun/mass-sue approach if they had to cover the legal defense costs for everyone they wrongly sued?
Of course.... they've got more money than god. I would not doubt if there was enough money to pay 10x over.
A+ for good intention, D for implementation.
Hard core? They run a computer program, and take trips to the local Western Union when suckers send them their money. Hard core over there is same as it is here. Shooting, raping, home invasion, carjacking, robbery...
If that's hard core- lesse, I run computer programs of all sorts and kinds all day, and I stop at the ATM+bank all the time. Egad, I must be Hannibal Lechter then!
Ah, yes grasshopper...but what are our chances of colliding with copies of bad asteroid movies in the video rental store?
This reminds me of Cliff Stoll- an astrophysicist who moonlighted as a sysadmin at UC Berkley, and noticed a discrepancy of a cent or less in the CPU time accounting system.
I won't spoil the story, but see if your local library has a copy of the Cuckoo's Egg(by Stoll). His more recent book, Silicon Snake Oil, discusses the falsities behind throwing technology(computers) at people- particularly in schools, for example...and was also quite good when it came out(and schools were dumping boatloads of $ into computer labs which sat mostly empty).
He's humble, intelligent, well educated, writes fun to read stuff...one of the computer scientists(and physicists) I respect the most- far above all the three-letter personalities.
Running AOL's profit/loss statements and investor reports through The Fish are about the only thing that could explain someone actually -wanting- AOL right now...
About the only thing I've ever found The Fish useful for was once confusing the crap out of a friend visiting Italy by making her think I 'spoke' formal Italian. That was good for a few days before another friend spoiled it and told her...
It can't. I've heard this kind of technology, and sometimes it works, more often it doesn't...and even when it does, the sound just "feels" "weird" but has no direction. Any directional effect is usually quite weak.
If I understand it correctly, it's based off the way sounds are affected by the shape of your ear- but if you've ever noticed, people have differently shaped ears and I imagine their brains become 'calibrated' to their ears...
Further, it's stupid in this price point. Nice idea, but considering for HALF the price you can get a really nice sounding, REAL system from someone decently respectable like Cambridge Soundworks...I fail to see the point. Usually this kind of technology is provided by laptop manufacturers or cheap A/V equipment makers. Not $800 speakers.
Unless this is a new technique, GPS has been used for years by geologists looking for earthquakes and crust movement(and I don't mean the lojack in grandma's blueberry pie).
...and I imagine that SCO wanted RMS to appear in court so the court could 'see' RMS's, uh, unique grooming and personality :-)
...and unfortunately, NiMH was 'too' good and was phased out pretty damn quickly. It didn't have quite the energy capacity of LiIon, but NiMH doesn't destroy itself with every cycle. I dunno about you, but I'd rather have a battery that lasts 2 hours instead of 3, if I don't have to replace it every 6 goddamn months.
LiIon is the biggest scam around- complete garbage technology that will no doubt be the subject of a consumer lawsuit, if it hasn't been already- even now, the "this battery looses capacity with each charge/discharge cycle" notice is buried deep, deep in the owner's manual...if included at all.
One of the top complaints about the iPod is that its battery is utter garbage- and useless within months of anything even resembling moderate usage.
As if the environment wasn't suffering enough from electronics- "gee, lets put a highly toxic battery that won't last but a few months inside a SEALED consumer device that the consumer will just chuck in the trash!"
Close the lid, instead of choosing sleep- or close the lid while it's asleep. Believe it or not, "lid open" sleep mode uses a much dimmer light.
I suppose it's possible Apple got a lot of complaints about the brighter mode(I know it was annoying as hell at night in my bedroom, felt like I was about to be abducted by aliens) and just set it to dim all the time.
My 1991 Audi 200 quattro 20v is kicking around just fine, and it's lasted through -my- loan payments too(I bought it at 6 years, 100k miles- it now has 190k). It can kick the crap out of most of the 50's/60's cars you mention- 0-60 in about 5.9 seconds flat my friend. 280hp and all wheel drive.
Sure you have exceptions like Toyota Camary's or Honda Civic's that go on and on
My '91 Audi's body is entirely galvanized from the factory, and doesn't sport a single spot of rust(well, actually, there's one, about the size of half a dime.)
I know I have harped on American cars alot, and I really do love them, but even the author's AUDI is not unique.
It depends. If it's an 1985 Audi Turbo Quattro Coupe in good condition, it'll fetch 10k or more and is highly collectable. There are, after all, only a few hundred in the US. Some are meticulously restored and driven every day. If you see what looks like an old VW Scirocco(they're most mistaken for these) with big fenders, that's an 'UrQ'.
Audi has for years traded engine and body parts and techniques with Volkswagon
Wonders never cease, VW owns Audi. Along with Bentley, Lamborghini, Seat, Skoda. That does not make a VW a Lamborgini, nor an A4 a Jetta.
so much so that alot of Audi's now have VW W8 engines
Acutally, VERY few Audis have the W8; in the US, only the previous generation A8. Very few VW's have the W8...
while VW itself builds three of it's cars on the same chassi. The Passat, New Bettle, and Jetta are, when you trear them down, all the same car
No, the Passat is a C-platform car; the Jetta and Beetle are B-platform cars. The Audi TT runs on a modified New Beetle chassis(the TT is wider among other things.)
Go to an Audi dealer. Sit in an A4. Now go into a VW dealer, and sit in a Jetta. Now do you understand why the A4 sells like hotcakes, despite costing well over 20k base?
All the time I hear people say "oh, an Audi is just a fancy VW". Unlike Toyota, which happily sells Toyota models here in the US as Lexus models with little more than a badge change(Toyota Altezza in Japan = that little 4-door Lexus sedan here), VW/Audi do no such thing. There's a clear differentiation between models if you bother to do more than look at the frame.
Oh, I forgot- not only VAG-COM, but any diagnostic tool based on the VAG-155x series(I forget what the current model is, but the earliest model is the VAG-1551), which is as close as your nearest Audi OR VW dealer, will work. The dealership should have the necessary Y adapter since it's about $15-20, but may not if they're somewhat new and never had to deal with pre-ODB-II cars.
VAG-COM works with the older Audis going back to about 1989 or so. You need a special Y adapter to adapt the ODB-II style plug; if you have the plugs, they're two or three multicolored, 2-pin connectors, usually in the driver's side footwell or in the fusebox. 1991 was the first year in which fault codes could be stored in memory, so if your model is before that, you'll need to leave the engine running or crank it to 'generate' a code.
If your Audi is pre-1990 or so(you said 14 years yes?), run the car until the check light comes on or you see the problem; remove a spare fuse, plug the fuse into the top of the fuel pump relay for about 5 seconds and remove; the check engine light(engine block w/lightning bolt) will come on and blink a code of 4 digits, with a short pause between the digits; this will report all the codes and then repeat. Look up the codes at www.sjmautotechnik.com. Really really old Audis will either bounce the tachometer, or point it to different numbers in sequence to indicate the code.
If the problem is a no-start, you should attempt to crank the engine for 15 seconds, LEAVE the ignition ON, and then do the code retrieval.
You can also trigger an output test, which activates all the various eleectronic valves(there are many) in sequence.
If you still need more help, sign on to the 'quattro' list at www.audifans.com- but do so in a few days, the site admin had a death in the family right after we had some data loss, and things are pretty messed up unfortunately; you can't post, and archives are missing. We'll be running within a week. Google has a fair bit of our 10+ years of archives in its cache, however.
What about those of us who despise this incessant obsession with music and movies and p2p? Slashdot has turned into every other news outlet- endlessly gabbing about music or movies(or both). I fully expect to see a Bennifer story here before the end of the year.
I like listening to music as much as the next guy, but beyond listening, I really couldn't give a crap about music, and I'm really getting tired of Musicdot's...er, I mean, slashdot's, endless obsession with it, nor p2p software, nor universities doing this or that, nor the latest drivel from the industry groups. ENOUGH. At least Timothy is picking worthwhile causes to obsess about.
We initially volunteered for the trial, but didn't bother once we heard of the terms- basically, 15%, same as paypal. Our users would have objected to keeping a balance they couldn't use anywhere else. Worse, we'd loose ANOTHER 15% because they(at the time) only supported PayPal for transferring funds. Worse, they only do the transfer when it gets to a certain size. Micropayments, macrotransfers, mean that not only are they ripping you a new one on the 15% fee, but they're ALSO getting your interest.
Call me silly and slap me stupid, but the point of micropayments was to make small payments economically viable. I don't call "three times a credit card processing fee" viable for what amounts to nothing more than a proxy service.
All Bitpass does is play "mini paypal", and that's neither original nor novel. Next, please. That technology involving random numbers+statistics looked far more promising....
Lets see- Flash killer, by company that will never port it to Linux or OS X...
[stands up and cheers MS on]
I bet Q-tip is thrilled- and talking to the phone sanitizer wipe companies about new vertical markets!
It's even lower if you count that several reviews which panned the film(Ebert one of them) were mistakenly(?) mis-categorized as tomatoes, and not splats.