So, the pentagon decides to fdisk all the hard drives for regular de-classified pc's. Big deal.
fdisk will not necessarily destroy any data. It may simply mean that you will not be able to gain access to that data again if you don't know how to restore the partition tables you just hosed with fdisk. Writing new tables of differing sizes may overwrite some small amounts of data though.
Whenever I build a machine that I don't want to be hosed, I take the precaution of printing out the partition tables so I can restore them if need be.
I have needed to restore them and I was able to restore that partition to it's original usable state with no data loss.
A simple dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hda will render a drive completely unsalvagable without a specialized hardware+software solution. NO software will be able to get old data back off this drive while it is in any ordinary PC. The drive will read zeroes and nothing else, since the data on it will be falling well under the digital trigger level for a 1. You'll need hardware that reads directly from the heads to get data off it and a standard PC can not do that.
The suggestion I was replying to, was that we could be watching DVDs at the cinema, once digital projection is mainstream. No way I'll be doing that, due to the limits of DVD.
What resolution are we taling about for these digital projectors? They will need to be on the order of about 4096x3072 just to match ASA100 35mm film.
Since the heads don't follow the exact same path every time, you've also got to do something to ensure that the fringe areas out to each side of the track really got overwritten. If you can get direct control of the head position microstepper, you write once a little to the inside of the nominal track position, then write once a little to the outside.
Hard drives have'nt used stepper motors for a very long time. They are very slow and suffer from backlash that causes exactly what you describe about not being able to position the heads exactly enough.
Older SCSI, MFM and ESDI drives may have required this treatment, but a modern SCSI or IDE drive should not need this extreme treatment. In fact (I'm not sure about the modern SCSI drives) this is not possible through software for the IDE drives. Technically, IDE drives can not be low level formatted the way a SCSI drive can be, by a user. This is something only the factory can do. The track positioning is done by a spare platter face which does not have write heads. The "low level" format utilities that IDE makers provide, only writes zeros to the whole drive, it does not allow repositioning of tracks the way a SCSI low level format util does, which is the true meaning of a "low level format".
I would prefer filling the drive with zeroes, then ones and then repeating a few times, then finalizing with the random data.
PS. Why a bootable DOS floppy? MS kernel somehow the best for this? ; )
There have been zillions of studies done, that all found that ionizing radiation (like UV, X ray) can cause cancer and they also all found no evidence that non-ionizing radiation (like that from radio transmitters, phones, microwave ovens) caused cancer.
I take that as pretty strong evidence that microwaves cause little more than problems associated with heating effects and not cancer.
When the movie theatres themselves convert to digital projection systems, it will no longer be necessary for studios to release film prints to Zone 1 first, then other zones later.
There is no way I am paying to watch a DVD projected onto a cinema size screen with 500 something lines of resolution.
The pictures I take with my (almost 30 year old) Nikon F2 come out to about an equivalent of 5 to 40 MegaPixels depending on what film I use. Until digital projection and media can support the resolutions that cinemas already provide, I will steer clear of it. To make matters worse, digital projection will need not only to catch up to 35mm, but 70mm also.
And then there is the sound issue. The first time I saw an Imax film, I was amazed by the sound quality and asked a friend if it was compressed, he believed it to be AC3. After my own investigation, I found they use 6 uncompressed CD quality channels via 3 sync'ed CD players. So my perception that Imax sounded clearer than AC3 and DTS was correct.
Anyone ever noticed the high pitched sounds get mangled in most movies? With words that have "S" and "TH" sounds for example? I agree that the overall sound of current cinema is better than the old, but it is not as good as it could be an some Imax titles show this.
You have a pretty narrow, idealistic point of view. Being the best is the only way to survive? Are you aware of the words cheat, lie, steal and marketing?
Witness Beta vs. VHS just for an example of when the best does not succeed.
If office or windows did not serve the needs of the business community - it would fail.
You can actually lead the public into believing what they do and don't need without actually providing them with what is best for thier needs.
Have you thought, just for a microsecond, that instead of always bullying people out of business, microsoft actually makes, what the majority of corporate users consider, a superior product?
I have supported thier shit for almost 10 years. In that time I have seen them cheat, lie and steal their way to the top with predatory tactics that kill competitiors by having one way avenues into thier software, changing formats of files and streams that amazingly break the competition with a single "service pack", and simple theft.
Wether or not you consider it a superior product is irrelevant.
Huh?!?! They provide an image through thier products and marketing of ease of use and yet underlying that facade is a code base and fundamental design that is very unreliable and insecure. They are first and foremost a marketing company.
The business end-user community has practically standardized.
Yes, since it is so hard to get Microsoft out of your business without them later breaking compatibility with your new non-MS apps and business tools.
There is nothing better out there for the generic, end-user market right now.
THERE WOULD BE, IF THEY HAD'NT KILLED EVERYTHING ELSE OFF, by breaking "standards", stealing, FUD, etc.
UNIX: Great for servers.
Great for more than just servers. Mission critical workstations, number crunching clusters, graphics and audio manipulation, office productivity, file/print/other servers, real time applications through real time Unixes, general workstation use, etc.
Unix can be extremely secure, functional, flexible and reliable thanks to the fundamental design. Although, many Unix-like OSes can't be called Unix for legal reasons, not because they are not Unix to the core. Witness FreeBSD, about as Unix as you can get.
Don't forget, these are just Operating Systems, which spend most of their time idle compared with the CPU clock. On a workstation or a server, a CPU can sit idle waiting for users input, or be pegged at 100%, the OS overhead in both cases, should not and normally is not, the biggest factor in the performance. The OS' ability to seperate itself (CPU time and memory) and various user processes fairly, along with network and on-disk security is the most important requirement of an OS IMHO. What the user decides to use this Unix machine for is up to them, and not limited to being a mere out-of-sight server (with the exeption of real time requirements, where a real time OS may be needed). A Unix kernel is not limited to being a file/print server!
MacOS: Great for graphics.
A nice concept, create an interface between the hardware and the user which is very easy, allowing software developers to exploit this through standard GUI and hardware interfaces. It would have been nice if it at least used protected memory but who really cares now, OS X is going to be a killer, and my next platform purchase may well be a Mac thanks to OS X.
BSD to the core, awesome performance and stability within the scheduling, networking and VM mechanisms, with the power, stability and security you would expect from such an OS. If they develop this fully to the extent of releasing it for x86 as a consumer package like WinMe along with Win32 emulation and massive World wide marketing, it may well become a Windows killer.
Either or, I will be using it at home and where ever else I can wedge it.
Windows: Great for end users.
Yeah, BSOD, fucked networking and on disk security, difficult support mechanisms, very high hardware requirements, memory leaks and buffer overflows galore, often non standard UI methods within Windows itself, etc.
I've been around more than long enough to know that this is crap. Windows is not great for the end user.
Linux: Adequate for an introduction to basic UNIX concepts.
Linux, for all intents and purposes, is a System V Unix, whether it is legal for me to say this or not. It may not be POSIX yet, and may never be legally blessed with the name Unix, but it works just like my SCO and Solaris machines, providing services and administrative experiences that differ no more than Solaris does to SCO does to FreeBSD. The internals and mechanisms of all of these may be slightly different, but the concepts are mostly the same. Linux is much more than just adequate for learning Unix. Cisco employs Linux for it's World wide networked printing system. I'm sure they could'nt care less that Linux can not legally be called Unix.
A certain cow-orker of mine at one time posed the question to me as to why Linux isnt a better choice for End User desktops. The list of reasons is large..
No, the reason comes down to one thing, monopoly tactics. Do you work for Microsoft?
mostly, there is no linux standards base.
This is an issue that I believe needs some work in Linux and it is a part of why I love to employ FreeBSD and Debian as servers. But I don't think it is a show stopper right now.
Now, if we could all just agree to use Debian... (hey, just kidding! I love Debian but I would'nt want to impose my beliefs onto anyone.)
Most GUI's lack intuitive behavior most of the time, more concerned on asthetics than functionality.
I find gnome and KDE very intuitive. Actually, Unix is traditionally more focused on function than form. But that is very rapidly changing into function+form.
Microsoft has invested $$ in intuitive functionality for windows. Most of the time, the windows all behave the same way, either SDI or MDI.
It all matters not, when one app crashes and then all of a sudden a standard GUI API just stops working until a reboot is done. It really is a simple formula, 1. build a kernel that provides reliable, secure, fast scheduling, memory management and networking, 2. on top of that you place an intuitive, reliable, secure, fast GUI, which sits atop 3. a reliable, secure, fast file system.
Microsoft has failed terribly on the first requirement (kernel), fucked up on the second (GUI) and did'nt think a whole lot about the file system either. What they did think a lot about however, is marketing this garbage to sound like it is the best of its breed, backing it up with polished looks.
Ever seen all those lights of Vegas? Trying to seduce and romance your money out of you through this image of success and happiness? All the people really bad at math get fscked and the people really good at math also get fscked (ie. kicked out).
Microsoft is selling an image of great products and delivering the mediocre.
GUIfied linux lacks stability. Prepackaged KDE crashes on me. constantly.
"GUIfied linux" is not KDE. There are options, which is a key word in the free OS World. You can use plain X without a Window Manager, you can even steer clear of X and write your own low level 2D GUI if you did'nt mind either forgoing functionality or putting in a massive ammount of effort.
You can choose to compile your own or install a binary package of X (perhaps along with), Gnome, KDE, Enlightenment, Window Maker, whatever, your own, etc.
KDE crashing is not Linux fault, it may even well be the fault of the packager. I choose to compile the latest XFree86, along with Matrox 2D and 3D drivers with full speed optimizations, running Gnome on top of this. I love it and prefer this to being force fed Bill Gates excrement.
In almost 4 years, I have experienced a few X hangs, moderate app crashes and NO Linux crashes. The apps were easily re-started without affecting OS or user applications at all and if X did'nt bomb-out completely, a simple CTRL-ALT-BKSPCE killed it and restarting X was as normal with no added instability or required reboot. If for some reason X did'nt die with that (it always has worked for me), I could have just switched to a virtual text terminal and killall -9'ed it.
I have the power and so can you.
And why do i use prepackaged, you might ask? Well, i don't believe you should have to compile every application you want for every computer.
Choice my friend, choice. We all have it in the free OS World.
Such is the power of the Win32-PE. Compilation is, 80% of the time, a huge time sink.
That is a choice you don't have in the Win32-PE World.
The closest thing UNIX has to a stable, smooth, standard GUI is CDE - and thats not saying too terribly much.
Crap. There are many others that don't quite have the bells and whistles that Gnome and KDE have, yet are nicer and more customizable than CDE. Sun is going forward into free GUI's now, that ought to be telling you something about the stability these free projects are achieving. I find Gnome very smooth and it is becoming extremely popular and seemingly limitless.
For one, the front panel is clunky and simple task switching many times isnt. My point is that Windows has all these things:
Yeah, I agree, Windows is clunky. ; )
A single, Standard, intuitive GUI
Not always the case. The moves between Windows 3.x - NT 3.51 - Win95 - NT 4.0 - WinME - Win2k - WinXP, were/are not always standard or intuitive.
Centralized Development
You think this is a good thing? It is very limiting and a terrible side effect of this model is the production of a system that is out of touch with customers (thus quirky) and largly untested (thus unstable).
Big-name support.
Linux and FreeBSD have great "big-name" support. With support from Creative Labs, Epson, Sony, Adaptec, SGI, Xerox, HP, AMD, Intel, etc and support for other big names via open standards, reverse engineering and general smarts, I would'nt be too worried.
A current Linux distro (and even a few older versions), like Debian, Progeny, Red Hat, Mandrake, SuSE, Caldera, etc, will automatically detect and install appropriate drivers for my Matrox G400 video card, Maestro II sound card, Adaptec 2930CU Ultra SCSI card and DEC Tulip 100base-TX NIC card at install time, with no nasty issues. Windows ME for example does manage to install a generic DEC NIC driver, Maestro sound driver but not my SCSI or G400 drivers. Win98 did the same except for the sound at a time when Linux was doing all also.
Enterprise Functionality
Whoa dude, big words.
So what do we want here, Intranet, safe Internet web and email access, group mail and calendar, database server and various databases, standard environments and file formats, group network faxing, network service proxying, corporate wide file storage, all these with reliability, security, functionality and flexibility in mind?
Mircosoft is not the best anywhere here, let alone the cheapest, and the use of them is a serious threat to your business security.
In summary, Windows right now is the best choice for the generic desktop EU environment.
Not a chance.
(Just in case your wondering, I admit MS has some pretty nasty tricks up its sleeve when it comes to business practices. But nobody ever said the world was a nice place to live).
Of course the World is not a nice place to live, thanks to arseholes like Microsoft and the other evils in human society.
Free software is going to change at least that aspect of our lives.
There's that whole common-knowledge versus learned-knowledge debate.
Sure, but if someone is looking around to use something else, then they ought to be willing to look into learning the new methods of the new app. Rather than using the new app as if it is the old. In this case, of course the new app is going to feel wrong and not perform as well in those hands which are not truely willing to migrate.
I used 3D Studio Rel 2, 3 and 4 since 1992, just as a hobbiest, but I made some pretty neat stills and animations. It took me quite a while to get to grips with 3DS, then I got to play with 3DS Max and thought "WTF!?!?", the massive changes have totally put me off, I'm not willing to learn the new methods and no longer am interested in 3DS (although my interest in Linux, FreeBSD's, etc have taken lots of this interest in 3DS away).
So I think a person needs to be willing to relearn methods before giving up something that works for them (not to say that 3DS Max is not much better than 3DS though!).
The GIMP has the button panel, layers panel, brushes, etc etc, that looks pretty similar to Photoshop, and the right click options.
Right clicking on objects for options should be a familar concept to both X Window and MS Windows people.
The GIMP could have a nicer layout though.
For example, to select the paint brush. Should I Left-click, right-click, middle-click, alt-click, control-click, or shift-click to get that menu.... Or should I just click on the paint brush icon in the corner...
The GIMP has the paint brush icon near where the Photoshop icon is.
I'm not trying to say The GIMP is better than Photoshop of course, I just don't think it is at all that hard to use, especially for a Photoshop adept user. Someone who can make really effective use of layers in Photoshop are probably also going to get good results in The GIMP, with perhaps a little more effort, depending on what they're doing. Which is pretty impressive considering it is developed as free open source software.
It can only get better, but I think it's development might not be as quick as some other open source projects which might tend to have a larger, geekier following of people interested and more capable of improving a codebase. All the masses of admins with geeky tendencies taking care of various server apps, versus the graphics people that are mostly either curious, using Photoshop or the few that understand good GUI design, and image manipulation techniques are willing to put in the efforts required to help develop The GIMP for free.
The port to OS X might turn out to be a great thing for The GIMP, as maybe a larger group of image manipulation hackers with a new found interest in Unix, their new OS and a native app that looks like it is almost ready to go, grab a hold of it and go crazy with the code.
Actually, the thing I really hated about Photoshop was all the screen space it wasted. I like the fact that in The GIMP all I have to do is right click on the image for access to almost all the options.
Eh? Oh, *only* Photoshop, *only* the undisputed market leader with the most features etc etc.
When I read that, I took the "only" as "sole image editing experience is with Photoshop *alone*, no experience with anything else", I doubt "only" was meant in the "lesser" sense.
Fucking open-souce zealots. I love the Gimp, but play fair...
The GIMP does'nt crash on me anywhere near as much as Photoshop, and it is plenty capable, though not quite as Photoshop yet.
Some of the Worlds smartest people can be pretty excentric, so, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
Are your papers based on research into current technologies and the reasons for their effectiveness, or are you proposing improvements. If the latter how does one go about testing this kind of thing outside of building prototypes for testing. Just software emulation of concept algorithms?
What changes can be achieved with Itanium microcode updates? Can cache pipeline algorithms be adjusted through them, negating the need for emulation?
After penguinpowered went the way of the dodo, I never bothered to change my email details on/. Giving out my direct email address on/. is pretty unlikely.
I notice that you enjoy being anon in this regard also, so maybe you'd like to give me the gist of your works here for some discussion? I don't think people will mind much since this whole story is pretty crap as far as News for Nerds goes. Your stuff should be much more interesting than some guys ring.
BTW, I previously insulted the Christ out of you and now all of a sudden you are nice as pie and asking for my email address. How about just a few paragraphs on the details of your contributions to Comp.Sci/Comp.Eng? The whole email thing could get all messy. ; )
Awesome. Don't be shy then, are you going to keep us in suspense? Post a link to them so we can give your publications the huge peer review that/. can generate, and then maybe you'll manage to maintain a (Score:1) with the sudden respect you will receive.
You spend your spare time at/. posting 48 comments in the last 14 days, almost all of which are moderated down to -1 and spend the rest of your time designing our future?
Me? I'm happy enough contracting in IT with loads of stuff from embedded to mission critical big iron at a rate I'm very happy with, going on 13 years combined with electronics (previously in electronic warfare, fire/missile control, etc, (I discovered D to A conversion and used it before I actually learned of its existence, back when I was designing some digital projects for college in the 80's). Hobbies, tinkering with an LFSR rand# gen device I've built, aiming for extreme entropy with a view to perhaps finishing it onto a PCI card with an FPGA (just descrete logic via par0 at the moment), and some stuff under NDA which sometimes gets a story here which I won't go into.
Looking at your user info, I can see you are just another pathetic troll who has nothing to contribute to anyone here but morbid curiosity. Unless of course you were to jump under the nearest fast moving truck/train/X-34. It would seem, that all you are capable of, is blindly 'standing up' to people with pathetic one liners. I bet you are not even anywhere near successful at your biggest 'standing up' ambition, of being a script kiddie.
I was brought up Catholic (Sisters of Mercy / Marist Bros./ the whole fucking shit), at 6 years old I see my grandmother die of cancer, uncle, see kids on TV getting killed and raped, etc and think, how could there be a God, and if there is one, I will be arsefucked if I am going to worship the cunt.
Then I come across these arsehole religious mental cases who want to "save" me from my wicked ways (which are of course that I don't fall down onto my knees trembling for gods forgiveness that I am not "sorry for his death".
Ah Metallica...
Leper Messiah
Spineless from the start, sucked into the part
Circus comes to town, you play the lead clown
Please, please
Spreading his disease, living by his story
Knees, knees
Falling to your knees, suffer for his glory
You will
Time for lust, time for lie
Time to kiss your life goodbye
Send me money, send me green
Heaven you will meet
Make a contribution
And you'll get a better seat
Bow to Leper Messiah
Marvel at his tricks, need your Sunday fix
Blind devotion came, rotting your brain
Chain, chain
Join the endless chain
Fame, Fame
Infection is the game, stinking drunk with power
We see
Time for lust, time for lie
Time to kiss your life goodbye
Send me money, send me green
Heaven you will meet
Make a contribution
And you'll get a better seat
Bow to Leper Messiah
Witchery, weakening
Sees the sheep are gathering
Set the trap, hypnotise
Now you follow
Time for lust, time for lie
Time to kiss your life goodbye
Send me money, send me green
Heaven you will meet
Make a contribution
And you'll get a better seat
Veddermatic,
I'm not trying to have a dig at you or your flash skills. I must say, thats a pretty flash example! ; )
However, I'm just wondering what a company of 50 people needs something like this for? I supported a stock exchange backup site of around 100 developers and IT admin staff, and practically everyone knew the name, location and sexuality for that matter of everyone else. You most likely knew, off the top of your head, the extension of the person you wanted to dial and if you did'nt a quick query of a printed phonelist, the intranet or reception would quickly remind you. 100 people can get downright friendly, 50 is small.
Your flash phonelist looks awesome, and I am pretty impressed if you really did get this from idea to current state in one day, complete with floor plan design, etc and database linking. Do you like your day job? You could do this stuff for hollywood, they love showing hyper-powerfull systems that render information in slow, smooth movements designed for the dumb audiences to accept what they're seeing as what hollywood has already tought them about super computer interfaces.
A kernel compile is a real World test. But definitely NOT a good choice for testing fs performance. This is why there was only 2% difference between them on that test.
Real World tests, need to be chosen so that they put a strain on the part of the system that is being scrutinized. Choosing a test that barely uses the part in question is ridiculous.
Choosing a "real World" test that traditionally strains nothing more than a particular part of the system (CPU) of which is not the part being scrutinized, is actually a very bad choice of test. Then going on to call this "real World" pertaining to the tested part is just silly.
This is kind of like getting an ordinary car, putting much wider slick tyres on it, and then only driving in a straight line at street legal speeds and then saying they don't appear to be giving much improvement in handling. Then someone coming along and saying, "it is a real World test because they drove within speed limits".
You want to test grip, test on a skid pad. Engine, then test on a dyno. Drag coefficient, test in a wind tunnel.
Inevitably, you have some guys saying that these are not good tests, because they are not "real World". So they'll go out to the drag strip, some 200kW 4 cylinder 4WD will blow the doors off some old Ford hotrod that weighs twice as much and that is putting 400kW onto the ground at the rear wheels.
Sure, the driver of the Ford smoked up the rear wheels too much, trying to push a lot more car towards the finish, but this does'nt mean that the Ford had a less powerful engine. It means the 4WD had better grip, perhaps less weight and more humanly managable power. But what if all we were interested in at the moment was engine power? Should we base our opinion of the comparative engine power on this drag race? Hell no.
Real World tests are only good for proving that small localized tweaks (usually done with "artificial" tests), brought about improvements at the end of the day which were practical for the task at hand, thus real World. But trying to get these tweaks done trough a single "real World" test introduces too much requirement for human interpretation of the results and thus error and limits on performance gains. If you use an artifical test for disk i/o then tweak accordingly, network then tweak, core application then tweak, OS kernel then tweak, etc, you will have fine grained control over what is lacking where and then at the end of it all, you can prove the performance gain with your real World test compared with the same test done before the changes. Code profilers are great for application optimization, good luck finding those limitations through a generic "real World" test.
These "real World tests" should never be used to test seperate components of systems unless they are carefully chosen to tax that component to stress levels. make bzImage was not carefully chosen to test file system performance. It is a choice that shows extreme ignorance, it would however be an excellent choice for testing CPU speed, as would Ray Tracing.
To test file system performance, cp, mv, rm -rf, and maybe a script that creates files from/dev/zero, would be good choices.
To test disk performance and perhaps RAID performance (whether hardware or software), then some tests like hdparm -Tt/dev/md0 or timing a dd if=/dev/md0 of=/dev/null might be good choices.
But testing a kernel compile and then saying, dah this here AMI MegaRAID controller with 6x striped 15,000rpm SCSI 160 drives is only 2% quicker than this here 10 year old 200MB Connor IDE drive is laughable.
They, don't know what they are doing, plain and simple. Sorry. I would like to see a decent comparison of Ext2, Ext3, ReiserFS, XFS, JFS, FFS+Softupdates, BeOS FS (if possible), QNX4 FS and the FS Solaris and Unixware use (FFS?), along with any other notable contenders.
Dude, you're getting a bit too serious on me here.
OK, now on a more serious note, rekon they could vector the exhaust downwards, (with afterburners) to get some lift happening? A'la Battle Star Galactica type take offs?
Seriously, you can never have enough after burners. I put one each on my 7200rpm Barracuda drives and what with all the extra torque and air speed, my transfer rates are up from 20MB/s to 2,480MB/S (yes, I also put an afterburner on my BX chipset to get these numbers past the ATA33 ceiling).
And with the flames coming out the back, I can still see the keyboard while I type in www.hotgrits.com with the light off!
Come to think of it, you might also melt the rear tire at speed.
With 286bhp at the back wheel, who needs afterburners to melt tires! ; )
Obviously you own a Gee-Sux-Rrr and feel that nothing else matters.
Some Ninjas, Yammies and Hondas are awesome out of the shop. Dukes, Triumphs, etc also.
You can't just say that Yamahas are crap. Yammy was ahead of the comp for years with the R1, nothing came close. And the R1 now has a cult following that is making it as common on the street as Suburu WRX for 4 wheel hoons. That Yammy is not that popular for no good reason.
No, I don't own an R1, it would still be my choice, but thats not to say that I would think the other superbikes are not also awesome.
I personaly think the GSXR's look the best and R1's handle the best.
Oh for the love of Linus, guys. Who gives a fuck that he did'nt spell a word correctly.
His points are 100% valid. I looked at that bike, and thought, single seat, very fucking loud, who on Earth is going to use this for hostage rescue?!?! and where the fuck did they read that crap? Yes, folks, you read this bullshit here at/. first!
Almost anything is better than this for hostage rescue, like ahh... body amour and some Heckler & Koch silenced automatic weapons. Why try to escape from bandits weilding (did I spell that right? I really could'nt give a shit) weapons, when you can just put three.45 rounds into their face.
I can walk down to my local Sydney bike shop, hand over 13 grand and get myself a bike that will break 10 seconds easily. YZF-R1, or some Ninja, GSXR or Hondaaaaaaaaaaaaa, and how about that bike that is Japanese for Peregrine Falcon?
Slashdot Mirror
So, the pentagon decides to fdisk all the hard drives for regular de-classified pc's. Big deal.
fdisk will not necessarily destroy any data. It may simply mean that you will not be able to gain access to that data again if you don't know how to restore the partition tables you just hosed with fdisk. Writing new tables of differing sizes may overwrite some small amounts of data though.
Whenever I build a machine that I don't want to be hosed, I take the precaution of printing out the partition tables so I can restore them if need be.
I have needed to restore them and I was able to restore that partition to it's original usable state with no data loss.
A simple dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hda will render a drive completely unsalvagable without a specialized hardware+software solution. NO software will be able to get old data back off this drive while it is in any ordinary PC. The drive will read zeroes and nothing else, since the data on it will be falling well under the digital trigger level for a 1. You'll need hardware that reads directly from the heads to get data off it and a standard PC can not do that.
Nobody's asking you to.
The suggestion I was replying to, was that we could be watching DVDs at the cinema, once digital projection is mainstream. No way I'll be doing that, due to the limits of DVD.
What resolution are we taling about for these digital projectors? They will need to be on the order of about 4096x3072 just to match ASA100 35mm film.
Since the heads don't follow the exact same path every time, you've also got to do something to ensure that the fringe areas out to each side of the track really got overwritten. If you can get direct control of the head position microstepper, you write once a little to the inside of the nominal track position, then write once a little to the outside.
Hard drives have'nt used stepper motors for a very long time. They are very slow and suffer from backlash that causes exactly what you describe about not being able to position the heads exactly enough.
Older SCSI, MFM and ESDI drives may have required this treatment, but a modern SCSI or IDE drive should not need this extreme treatment. In fact (I'm not sure about the modern SCSI drives) this is not possible through software for the IDE drives. Technically, IDE drives can not be low level formatted the way a SCSI drive can be, by a user. This is something only the factory can do. The track positioning is done by a spare platter face which does not have write heads. The "low level" format utilities that IDE makers provide, only writes zeros to the whole drive, it does not allow repositioning of tracks the way a SCSI low level format util does, which is the true meaning of a "low level format".
I would prefer filling the drive with zeroes, then ones and then repeating a few times, then finalizing with the random data.
PS. Why a bootable DOS floppy? MS kernel somehow the best for this? ; )
There have been zillions of studies done, that all found that ionizing radiation (like UV, X ray) can cause cancer and they also all found no evidence that non-ionizing radiation (like that from radio transmitters, phones, microwave ovens) caused cancer.
I take that as pretty strong evidence that microwaves cause little more than problems associated with heating effects and not cancer.
When the movie theatres themselves convert to digital projection systems, it will no longer be necessary for studios to release film prints to Zone 1 first, then other zones later.
There is no way I am paying to watch a DVD projected onto a cinema size screen with 500 something lines of resolution.
The pictures I take with my (almost 30 year old) Nikon F2 come out to about an equivalent of 5 to 40 MegaPixels depending on what film I use. Until digital projection and media can support the resolutions that cinemas already provide, I will steer clear of it. To make matters worse, digital projection will need not only to catch up to 35mm, but 70mm also.
And then there is the sound issue. The first time I saw an Imax film, I was amazed by the sound quality and asked a friend if it was compressed, he believed it to be AC3. After my own investigation, I found they use 6 uncompressed CD quality channels via 3 sync'ed CD players. So my perception that Imax sounded clearer than AC3 and DTS was correct.
Anyone ever noticed the high pitched sounds get mangled in most movies? With words that have "S" and "TH" sounds for example? I agree that the overall sound of current cinema is better than the old, but it is not as good as it could be an some Imax titles show this.
The best, most powerful, candidate survives.
You have a pretty narrow, idealistic point of view. Being the best is the only way to survive? Are you aware of the words cheat, lie, steal and marketing?
Witness Beta vs. VHS just for an example of when the best does not succeed.
If office or windows did not serve the needs of the business community - it would fail.
You can actually lead the public into believing what they do and don't need without actually providing them with what is best for thier needs.
Have you thought, just for a microsecond, that instead of always bullying people out of business, microsoft actually makes, what the majority of corporate users consider, a superior product?
I have supported thier shit for almost 10 years. In that time I have seen them cheat, lie and steal their way to the top with predatory tactics that kill competitiors by having one way avenues into thier software, changing formats of files and streams that amazingly break the competition with a single "service pack", and simple theft.
Wether or not you consider it a superior product is irrelevant.
Huh?!?! They provide an image through thier products and marketing of ease of use and yet underlying that facade is a code base and fundamental design that is very unreliable and insecure. They are first and foremost a marketing company.
The business end-user community has practically standardized.
Yes, since it is so hard to get Microsoft out of your business without them later breaking compatibility with your new non-MS apps and business tools.
There is nothing better out there for the generic, end-user market right now.
THERE WOULD BE, IF THEY HAD'NT KILLED EVERYTHING ELSE OFF, by breaking "standards", stealing, FUD, etc.
UNIX: Great for servers.
Great for more than just servers. Mission critical workstations, number crunching clusters, graphics and audio manipulation, office productivity, file/print/other servers, real time applications through real time Unixes, general workstation use, etc.
Unix can be extremely secure, functional, flexible and reliable thanks to the fundamental design. Although, many Unix-like OSes can't be called Unix for legal reasons, not because they are not Unix to the core. Witness FreeBSD, about as Unix as you can get.
Don't forget, these are just Operating Systems, which spend most of their time idle compared with the CPU clock. On a workstation or a server, a CPU can sit idle waiting for users input, or be pegged at 100%, the OS overhead in both cases, should not and normally is not, the biggest factor in the performance. The OS' ability to seperate itself (CPU time and memory) and various user processes fairly, along with network and on-disk security is the most important requirement of an OS IMHO. What the user decides to use this Unix machine for is up to them, and not limited to being a mere out-of-sight server (with the exeption of real time requirements, where a real time OS may be needed). A Unix kernel is not limited to being a file/print server!
MacOS: Great for graphics.
A nice concept, create an interface between the hardware and the user which is very easy, allowing software developers to exploit this through standard GUI and hardware interfaces. It would have been nice if it at least used protected memory but who really cares now, OS X is going to be a killer, and my next platform purchase may well be a Mac thanks to OS X.
BSD to the core, awesome performance and stability within the scheduling, networking and VM mechanisms, with the power, stability and security you would expect from such an OS. If they develop this fully to the extent of releasing it for x86 as a consumer package like WinMe along with Win32 emulation and massive World wide marketing, it may well become a Windows killer.
Either or, I will be using it at home and where ever else I can wedge it.
Windows: Great for end users.
Yeah, BSOD, fucked networking and on disk security, difficult support mechanisms, very high hardware requirements, memory leaks and buffer overflows galore, often non standard UI methods within Windows itself, etc.
I've been around more than long enough to know that this is crap. Windows is not great for the end user.
Linux: Adequate for an introduction to basic UNIX concepts.
Linux, for all intents and purposes, is a System V Unix, whether it is legal for me to say this or not. It may not be POSIX yet, and may never be legally blessed with the name Unix, but it works just like my SCO and Solaris machines, providing services and administrative experiences that differ no more than Solaris does to SCO does to FreeBSD. The internals and mechanisms of all of these may be slightly different, but the concepts are mostly the same. Linux is much more than just adequate for learning Unix. Cisco employs Linux for it's World wide networked printing system. I'm sure they could'nt care less that Linux can not legally be called Unix.
A certain cow-orker of mine at one time posed the question to me as to why Linux isnt a better choice for End User desktops. The list of reasons is large..
No, the reason comes down to one thing, monopoly tactics. Do you work for Microsoft?
mostly, there is no linux standards base.
This is an issue that I believe needs some work in Linux and it is a part of why I love to employ FreeBSD and Debian as servers. But I don't think it is a show stopper right now.
Now, if we could all just agree to use Debian... (hey, just kidding! I love Debian but I would'nt want to impose my beliefs onto anyone.)
Most GUI's lack intuitive behavior most of the time, more concerned on asthetics than functionality.
I find gnome and KDE very intuitive. Actually, Unix is traditionally more focused on function than form. But that is very rapidly changing into function+form.
Microsoft has invested $$ in intuitive functionality for windows. Most of the time, the windows all behave the same way, either SDI or MDI.
It all matters not, when one app crashes and then all of a sudden a standard GUI API just stops working until a reboot is done. It really is a simple formula, 1. build a kernel that provides reliable, secure, fast scheduling, memory management and networking, 2. on top of that you place an intuitive, reliable, secure, fast GUI, which sits atop 3. a reliable, secure, fast file system.
Microsoft has failed terribly on the first requirement (kernel), fucked up on the second (GUI) and did'nt think a whole lot about the file system either. What they did think a lot about however, is marketing this garbage to sound like it is the best of its breed, backing it up with polished looks.
Ever seen all those lights of Vegas? Trying to seduce and romance your money out of you through this image of success and happiness? All the people really bad at math get fscked and the people really good at math also get fscked (ie. kicked out).
Microsoft is selling an image of great products and delivering the mediocre.
GUIfied linux lacks stability. Prepackaged KDE crashes on me. constantly.
"GUIfied linux" is not KDE. There are options, which is a key word in the free OS World. You can use plain X without a Window Manager, you can even steer clear of X and write your own low level 2D GUI if you did'nt mind either forgoing functionality or putting in a massive ammount of effort.
You can choose to compile your own or install a binary package of X (perhaps along with), Gnome, KDE, Enlightenment, Window Maker, whatever, your own, etc.
KDE crashing is not Linux fault, it may even well be the fault of the packager. I choose to compile the latest XFree86, along with Matrox 2D and 3D drivers with full speed optimizations, running Gnome on top of this. I love it and prefer this to being force fed Bill Gates excrement.
In almost 4 years, I have experienced a few X hangs, moderate app crashes and NO Linux crashes. The apps were easily re-started without affecting OS or user applications at all and if X did'nt bomb-out completely, a simple CTRL-ALT-BKSPCE killed it and restarting X was as normal with no added instability or required reboot. If for some reason X did'nt die with that (it always has worked for me), I could have just switched to a virtual text terminal and killall -9'ed it.
I have the power and so can you.
And why do i use prepackaged, you might ask? Well, i don't believe you should have to compile every application you want for every computer.
Choice my friend, choice. We all have it in the free OS World.
Such is the power of the Win32-PE. Compilation is, 80% of the time, a huge time sink.
That is a choice you don't have in the Win32-PE World.
The closest thing UNIX has to a stable, smooth, standard GUI is CDE - and thats not saying too terribly much.
Crap. There are many others that don't quite have the bells and whistles that Gnome and KDE have, yet are nicer and more customizable than CDE. Sun is going forward into free GUI's now, that ought to be telling you something about the stability these free projects are achieving. I find Gnome very smooth and it is becoming extremely popular and seemingly limitless.
For one, the front panel is clunky and simple task switching many times isnt. My point is that Windows has all these things:
Yeah, I agree, Windows is clunky. ; )
A single, Standard, intuitive GUI
Not always the case. The moves between Windows 3.x - NT 3.51 - Win95 - NT 4.0 - WinME - Win2k - WinXP, were/are not always standard or intuitive.
Centralized Development
You think this is a good thing? It is very limiting and a terrible side effect of this model is the production of a system that is out of touch with customers (thus quirky) and largly untested (thus unstable).
Big-name support.
Linux and FreeBSD have great "big-name" support. With support from Creative Labs, Epson, Sony, Adaptec, SGI, Xerox, HP, AMD, Intel, etc and support for other big names via open standards, reverse engineering and general smarts, I would'nt be too worried.
A current Linux distro (and even a few older versions), like Debian, Progeny, Red Hat, Mandrake, SuSE, Caldera, etc, will automatically detect and install appropriate drivers for my Matrox G400 video card, Maestro II sound card, Adaptec 2930CU Ultra SCSI card and DEC Tulip 100base-TX NIC card at install time, with no nasty issues. Windows ME for example does manage to install a generic DEC NIC driver, Maestro sound driver but not my SCSI or G400 drivers. Win98 did the same except for the sound at a time when Linux was doing all also.
Enterprise Functionality
Whoa dude, big words.
So what do we want here, Intranet, safe Internet web and email access, group mail and calendar, database server and various databases, standard environments and file formats, group network faxing, network service proxying, corporate wide file storage, all these with reliability, security, functionality and flexibility in mind?
Mircosoft is not the best anywhere here, let alone the cheapest, and the use of them is a serious threat to your business security.
In summary, Windows right now is the best choice for the generic desktop EU environment.
Not a chance.
(Just in case your wondering, I admit MS has some pretty nasty tricks up its sleeve when it comes to business practices. But nobody ever said the world was a nice place to live).
Of course the World is not a nice place to live, thanks to arseholes like Microsoft and the other evils in human society.
Free software is going to change at least that aspect of our lives.
There's that whole common-knowledge versus learned-knowledge debate.
Sure, but if someone is looking around to use something else, then they ought to be willing to look into learning the new methods of the new app. Rather than using the new app as if it is the old. In this case, of course the new app is going to feel wrong and not perform as well in those hands which are not truely willing to migrate.
I used 3D Studio Rel 2, 3 and 4 since 1992, just as a hobbiest, but I made some pretty neat stills and animations. It took me quite a while to get to grips with 3DS, then I got to play with 3DS Max and thought "WTF!?!?", the massive changes have totally put me off, I'm not willing to learn the new methods and no longer am interested in 3DS (although my interest in Linux, FreeBSD's, etc have taken lots of this interest in 3DS away).
So I think a person needs to be willing to relearn methods before giving up something that works for them (not to say that 3DS Max is not much better than 3DS though!).
The GIMP has the button panel, layers panel, brushes, etc etc, that looks pretty similar to Photoshop, and the right click options.
Right clicking on objects for options should be a familar concept to both X Window and MS Windows people.
The GIMP could have a nicer layout though.
For example, to select the paint brush. Should I Left-click, right-click, middle-click, alt-click, control-click, or shift-click to get that menu.... Or should I just click on the paint brush icon in the corner...
The GIMP has the paint brush icon near where the Photoshop icon is.
I'm not trying to say The GIMP is better than Photoshop of course, I just don't think it is at all that hard to use, especially for a Photoshop adept user. Someone who can make really effective use of layers in Photoshop are probably also going to get good results in The GIMP, with perhaps a little more effort, depending on what they're doing. Which is pretty impressive considering it is developed as free open source software.
It can only get better, but I think it's development might not be as quick as some other open source projects which might tend to have a larger, geekier following of people interested and more capable of improving a codebase. All the masses of admins with geeky tendencies taking care of various server apps, versus the graphics people that are mostly either curious, using Photoshop or the few that understand good GUI design, and image manipulation techniques are willing to put in the efforts required to help develop The GIMP for free.
The port to OS X might turn out to be a great thing for The GIMP, as maybe a larger group of image manipulation hackers with a new found interest in Unix, their new OS and a native app that looks like it is almost ready to go, grab a hold of it and go crazy with the code.
Thanks Troll Catcher,
/dev/random feeds /dev/urandom to increase urandom's entropy when it gets some real'ish random input, I just can't believe I'm defending my .sig!
Shit, does this mean I'm a troll!?!?
We don't want even the slightest chance that Windows can be saved do we!?!?
I know,
Open Source marches on to kill Windows! Consider it changed! ; )
Actually, the thing I really hated about Photoshop was all the screen space it wasted. I like the fact that in The GIMP all I have to do is right click on the image for access to almost all the options.
Does Photoshop allow for this now?
Eh? Oh, *only* Photoshop, *only* the undisputed market leader with the most features etc etc.
When I read that, I took the "only" as "sole image editing experience is with Photoshop *alone*, no experience with anything else", I doubt "only" was meant in the "lesser" sense.
Fucking open-souce zealots. I love the Gimp, but play fair...
The GIMP does'nt crash on me anywhere near as much as Photoshop, and it is plenty capable, though not quite as Photoshop yet.
This is pretty impressive stuff if it is true.
Some of the Worlds smartest people can be pretty excentric, so, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
Are your papers based on research into current technologies and the reasons for their effectiveness, or are you proposing improvements. If the latter how does one go about testing this kind of thing outside of building prototypes for testing. Just software emulation of concept algorithms?
What changes can be achieved with Itanium microcode updates? Can cache pipeline algorithms be adjusted through them, negating the need for emulation?
Bye for now.
After penguinpowered went the way of the dodo, I never bothered to change my email details on /. Giving out my direct email address on /. is pretty unlikely.
/. is getting worse by the day.
I notice that you enjoy being anon in this regard also, so maybe you'd like to give me the gist of your works here for some discussion? I don't think people will mind much since this whole story is pretty crap as far as News for Nerds goes. Your stuff should be much more interesting than some guys ring.
BTW, I previously insulted the Christ out of you and now all of a sudden you are nice as pie and asking for my email address. How about just a few paragraphs on the details of your contributions to Comp.Sci/Comp.Eng? The whole email thing could get all messy. ; )
PS, I cruise at 2,
Having just had a quick look over some of your last posts...
What do you all think of the new God Dethroned cd? I think it's pretty good but a lot of people have said it sucks... *hmpf*
brutal death metal kills all your pussy music
I like NewOS... (Score:-1) for me to POOP ON!
Argh... oh well... listen to some death metal you fucks... I'm gonna be grooving to new aborted (yes the one not out until june) later today...
Would you superconduct my thick load of semen into your waiting mouth?
All hail master looge... can I have my weed now?
Why are you modding him down?
Can't handle the truth?
Can't handle the TRUTH!?!?!??!
Dear LORD you're a homosexual...
I like eggs
I realise that while I was working with fiber optics, 3D RADAR and anti-aircraft systems, you were probably just being born.
Awesome. Don't be shy then, are you going to keep us in suspense? Post a link to them so we can give your publications the huge peer review that /. can generate, and then maybe you'll manage to maintain a (Score:1) with the sudden respect you will receive.
/. posting 48 comments in the last 14 days, almost all of which are moderated down to -1 and spend the rest of your time designing our future?
You spend your spare time at
Me? I'm happy enough contracting in IT with loads of stuff from embedded to mission critical big iron at a rate I'm very happy with, going on 13 years combined with electronics (previously in electronic warfare, fire/missile control, etc, (I discovered D to A conversion and used it before I actually learned of its existence, back when I was designing some digital projects for college in the 80's). Hobbies, tinkering with an LFSR rand# gen device I've built, aiming for extreme entropy with a view to perhaps finishing it onto a PCI card with an FPGA (just descrete logic via par0 at the moment), and some stuff under NDA which sometimes gets a story here which I won't go into.
So anyway, the suspense is really killing me....
Looking at your user info, I can see you are just another pathetic troll who has nothing to contribute to anyone here but morbid curiosity. Unless of course you were to jump under the nearest fast moving truck/train/X-34. It would seem, that all you are capable of, is blindly 'standing up' to people with pathetic one liners. I bet you are not even anywhere near successful at your biggest 'standing up' ambition, of being a script kiddie.
You are my hero.
Quoting metallica is pretty much the most pathetic way of 'standing up' to people there is...
I'm not 'standing up' to anyone, I merely like the song and think it apt.
I was brought up Catholic (Sisters of Mercy / Marist Bros./ the whole fucking shit), at 6 years old I see my grandmother die of cancer, uncle, see kids on TV getting killed and raped, etc and think, how could there be a God, and if there is one, I will be arsefucked if I am going to worship the cunt.
Then I come across these arsehole religious mental cases who want to "save" me from my wicked ways (which are of course that I don't fall down onto my knees trembling for gods forgiveness that I am not "sorry for his death".
Ah Metallica...
Leper Messiah
Spineless from the start, sucked into the part
Circus comes to town, you play the lead clown
Please, please
Spreading his disease, living by his story
Knees, knees
Falling to your knees, suffer for his glory
You will
Time for lust, time for lie
Time to kiss your life goodbye
Send me money, send me green
Heaven you will meet
Make a contribution
And you'll get a better seat
Bow to Leper Messiah
Marvel at his tricks, need your Sunday fix
Blind devotion came, rotting your brain
Chain, chain
Join the endless chain
Fame, Fame
Infection is the game, stinking drunk with power
We see
Time for lust, time for lie
Time to kiss your life goodbye
Send me money, send me green
Heaven you will meet
Make a contribution
And you'll get a better seat
Bow to Leper Messiah
Witchery, weakening
Sees the sheep are gathering
Set the trap, hypnotise
Now you follow
Time for lust, time for lie
Time to kiss your life goodbye
Send me money, send me green
Heaven you will meet
Make a contribution
And you'll get a better seat
Lies lies lies lies lies lies lies liiiiiiiiiiieess!
Punch out a preacher today!
Veddermatic, I'm not trying to have a dig at you or your flash skills. I must say, thats a pretty flash example! ; ) However, I'm just wondering what a company of 50 people needs something like this for? I supported a stock exchange backup site of around 100 developers and IT admin staff, and practically everyone knew the name, location and sexuality for that matter of everyone else. You most likely knew, off the top of your head, the extension of the person you wanted to dial and if you did'nt a quick query of a printed phonelist, the intranet or reception would quickly remind you. 100 people can get downright friendly, 50 is small. Your flash phonelist looks awesome, and I am pretty impressed if you really did get this from idea to current state in one day, complete with floor plan design, etc and database linking. Do you like your day job? You could do this stuff for hollywood, they love showing hyper-powerfull systems that render information in slow, smooth movements designed for the dumb audiences to accept what they're seeing as what hollywood has already tought them about super computer interfaces.
A kernel compile is a real World test. But definitely NOT a good choice for testing fs performance. This is why there was only 2% difference between them on that test.
/dev/zero, would be good choices.
/dev/md0 or timing a dd if=/dev/md0 of=/dev/null might be good choices.
Real World tests, need to be chosen so that they put a strain on the part of the system that is being scrutinized. Choosing a test that barely uses the part in question is ridiculous.
Choosing a "real World" test that traditionally strains nothing more than a particular part of the system (CPU) of which is not the part being scrutinized, is actually a very bad choice of test. Then going on to call this "real World" pertaining to the tested part is just silly.
This is kind of like getting an ordinary car, putting much wider slick tyres on it, and then only driving in a straight line at street legal speeds and then saying they don't appear to be giving much improvement in handling. Then someone coming along and saying, "it is a real World test because they drove within speed limits".
You want to test grip, test on a skid pad. Engine, then test on a dyno. Drag coefficient, test in a wind tunnel.
Inevitably, you have some guys saying that these are not good tests, because they are not "real World". So they'll go out to the drag strip, some 200kW 4 cylinder 4WD will blow the doors off some old Ford hotrod that weighs twice as much and that is putting 400kW onto the ground at the rear wheels.
Sure, the driver of the Ford smoked up the rear wheels too much, trying to push a lot more car towards the finish, but this does'nt mean that the Ford had a less powerful engine. It means the 4WD had better grip, perhaps less weight and more humanly managable power. But what if all we were interested in at the moment was engine power? Should we base our opinion of the comparative engine power on this drag race? Hell no.
Real World tests are only good for proving that small localized tweaks (usually done with "artificial" tests), brought about improvements at the end of the day which were practical for the task at hand, thus real World. But trying to get these tweaks done trough a single "real World" test introduces too much requirement for human interpretation of the results and thus error and limits on performance gains. If you use an artifical test for disk i/o then tweak accordingly, network then tweak, core application then tweak, OS kernel then tweak, etc, you will have fine grained control over what is lacking where and then at the end of it all, you can prove the performance gain with your real World test compared with the same test done before the changes. Code profilers are great for application optimization, good luck finding those limitations through a generic "real World" test.
These "real World tests" should never be used to test seperate components of systems unless they are carefully chosen to tax that component to stress levels. make bzImage was not carefully chosen to test file system performance. It is a choice that shows extreme ignorance, it would however be an excellent choice for testing CPU speed, as would Ray Tracing.
To test file system performance, cp, mv, rm -rf, and maybe a script that creates files from
To test disk performance and perhaps RAID performance (whether hardware or software), then some tests like hdparm -Tt
But testing a kernel compile and then saying, dah this here AMI MegaRAID controller with 6x striped 15,000rpm SCSI 160 drives is only 2% quicker than this here 10 year old 200MB Connor IDE drive is laughable.
They, don't know what they are doing, plain and simple. Sorry. I would like to see a decent comparison of Ext2, Ext3, ReiserFS, XFS, JFS, FFS+Softupdates, BeOS FS (if possible), QNX4 FS and the FS Solaris and Unixware use (FFS?), along with any other notable contenders.
Dude, you're getting a bit too serious on me here.
OK, now on a more serious note, rekon they could vector the exhaust downwards, (with afterburners) to get some lift happening? A'la Battle Star Galactica type take offs?
Seriously, you can never have enough after burners. I put one each on my 7200rpm Barracuda drives and what with all the extra torque and air speed, my transfer rates are up from 20MB/s to 2,480MB/S (yes, I also put an afterburner on my BX chipset to get these numbers past the ATA33 ceiling).
And with the flames coming out the back, I can still see the keyboard while I type in www.hotgrits.com with the light off!
Come to think of it, you might also melt the rear tire at speed.
With 286bhp at the back wheel, who needs afterburners to melt tires! ; )
Obviously you own a Gee-Sux-Rrr and feel that nothing else matters.
Some Ninjas, Yammies and Hondas are awesome out of the shop. Dukes, Triumphs, etc also.
You can't just say that Yamahas are crap. Yammy was ahead of the comp for years with the R1, nothing came close. And the R1 now has a cult following that is making it as common on the street as Suburu WRX for 4 wheel hoons. That Yammy is not that popular for no good reason.
No, I don't own an R1, it would still be my choice, but thats not to say that I would think the other superbikes are not also awesome.
I personaly think the GSXR's look the best and R1's handle the best.
Yamaha's are not "crap".
Oh for the love of Linus, guys. Who gives a fuck that he did'nt spell a word correctly.
/. first!
.45 rounds into their face.
His points are 100% valid. I looked at that bike, and thought, single seat, very fucking loud, who on Earth is going to use this for hostage rescue?!?! and where the fuck did they read that crap? Yes, folks, you read this bullshit here at
Almost anything is better than this for hostage rescue, like ahh... body amour and some Heckler & Koch silenced automatic weapons. Why try to escape from bandits weilding (did I spell that right? I really could'nt give a shit) weapons, when you can just put three
I can walk down to my local Sydney bike shop, hand over 13 grand and get myself a bike that will break 10 seconds easily. YZF-R1, or some Ninja, GSXR or Hondaaaaaaaaaaaaa, and how about that bike that is Japanese for Peregrine Falcon?
As impressive as it sounds (and no doubt, it must sound impressive!), I have seen a stock Yamaha YZF-R1 eat the 0.25 mile in 9.8 seconds.
Pretty awesome from a piston powered, 153bhp/385lb machine that must contend with gear change time, compared with this fire breathing monster.
'Course, an R1 won't go to 400+ km/h!!!!
Rekon some sick bastard will put an afterburner on one? ; )
Stuff that I don't give a fuck about?
X-Files rings a bell though. So what am I missing out on?
Dodge?