Shuttlecom have a fascination with Javascript
on
Shuttle SS51 Reviewed
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Like so many sites, the folks who did the web pages for Shuttle Computer Group seem to think that nothing can be done without Javascript - you cannot even view their site with JS turned off. I do wish these so-called web designers would realize that some of us either cannot run JS, or choose not to.
I went to the Shuttle site trying to see if they had non-P4 systems - I'd rather get a 1800MHz processor that runs like 2200MHz than a 2200MHz processor that runs like 1800MHz. Also, I'd like to know how compatible this system is with Linux.
Lastly, while it has 2 optical SPDIF ports, I'd like to have a unit with a co-ax port. Why? My stereo has one optical and one co-ax input, and the optical is being used by my DirectTivo - I'd like to use the co-ax for my MP3 player.
Of course, what I'd really like is a simple USB -> SPDIF converter - no other I/O, just USB in and SPDIF co-ax out.
This would completely screw up any modern OS (or Windows).
The OS assumes that it, and it alone, modifies the disk, and that the disk won't change state without the OS making that change. This is one of the reasons you don't want to allow raw disk access from a VMWare or DOSemu session to a mounted file system - the emulated OS will access the disk, and the host OS's file system won't know about it. Boom! Instant corrupted file system.
In the case of this double-ended drive, the web server will assume that, since it has read the disk once, it needn't read that sector again. Then the write side computer modifies the disk, and the web server won't pick it up.
I'd rather see a disk with dual heads, and the logic to allow the system to read different sectors at the same time, all kept coherent by the drives controller as a way to increase throughput.
But to use this as a protection on a web server is just plain dumb.
It is only "easy" to play them because the various players emulate enough of a Windows environment to allow Windows DLLs to run. This is only marginally better than no drivers at all since this only works for x86 machines.
Microsoft is as deserving of detestation in this matter as Apple and Sorenson.
Actually, from what I've heard nVidia's drivers aren't terribly stable - they frequently hard-lock the machine.
And one of the single biggest problems holding back the DRI developement is that hardware venders refuse to provide documentation for the drivers (e.g. no specs on the chips), forcing the DRI team to reverse engineer everything. And surprise surprise, they sometimes miss things (oh, you have to CLEAR the DMA fifo before starting a new operation!). nVidia's internal engineers have access to all the documentation on the card - OF COURSE they can implement all the features.
And even for companies like ATI, the chip set docs are only available to the XFree developers under NDA - ordinary folks cannot get access to them. Because you cannot get access to the info on the chips unless you are a registered XFree developer, many people who COULD contribute CANNOT because they cannot get access to the chip docs. This reduces the number of people contributing.
And as for X being "huge" for embedded work - there's embedded and there's embedded. The systems I design have 64M of RAM on each of the 4 DSPs, before we EVEN start talking about the main processor. X is a drop in the bucket to me.
This is why I keep beating the drum on this.
CHIPSET MANUFACTURERS - PAY HEED!
The magic is IN YOUR CHIP, not in the interface to your chip. Telling me about the settings of the frobnicate register does NOT tell me how to implement the frobnicate function in silicon - and if it DOES, then you are SCREWED anyway, as your competitors WILL reverse engineer it.
Provide US, the developers, with the chip docs. We in turn will provide YOU with quality drivers, and we ALL profit!
You are running Windows, and you feel that running a program from the government reduces your security?
Think about it - if the ONLY backdoor your Windows machine has is Uncle Sugar's, you are doing pretty well, what with all the Trojans, spyware, viruses, and bugs.
Right. YOU will be able to fix bugs in the driver that the developers can't fix. Yes, because THAT bug is important to ME, whereas it may NOT be important to the developers, so they may not work on it.
Point #2 will give you a 0.01% improvement. I suppose you have some actual EVIDENCE to back that number up, other than having freshly extracted it from your nether oriface? Most drivers are compiled for least common denominator, and so cannot most effectively use features specific to one processor. Additionally, by compiling the code inline rather than accessing it via a run-time conditional, you can greatly speed up the code. You see child, I do this for a living, and probably have been since before you were able to wake up with dry sheets.
What the hell does the kernel have to do with video drivers? All the 3D drivers have a component in the kernel to provide for security - a fact you would be aware of if you actually followed the DRI mailing list.
When the card is discontinued, you'll probably throw it away. Since my first message clearly stated that wasn't the case, your point was void before you made it. Especially in my work, where I design systems with a projected service lifetime of a decade.
The bsd people can very well run the drivers if the company makes them for bsd. And if they don't? Consider nVidia - they DON'T make BSD drivers. Again, had you done some homework you would have known my point was valid, but you lost this one before you started.
If you're an embedded developer, I don't think you'll be integrating a PCI card into your "designs," much less tweaking drivers for it. BZZT! Wrong. I do. Again, since this point was made in my previous message, you lost this one before you began as well.
Let me make a suggestion: Next semester, see if your high school has a Debate class. Perhaps when you've actually studied how to analyze an argument, identify the points made, research them, and then formulate a response your ability to post intelligent discourse will be improved.
And this is why RAND is unacceptable in any public standard. Any body making public standards should require all participants to provide a license to anybody using that patent for the purpose of implementing that standard free of charge to all.
Given how patent-encumbered JPEG-2000, MPEG-4 et. al. are, this will seriously interfere with open implementation of these standards.
We geeks are our own worst enemies on this matter. When we show up at meetings like this and are disruptive, we reduce our credibility. It is far too easy for the other side to catch us at our worst, and then show that time and time again to discredit us. "They are hooligans and evil hackers, and nothing they say has merit."
Look at what happened with the DeCSS case - because of the tenor of 2600, it was far too easy to attack the man, not the case.
When you show up for these sorts of events, WEAR A SUIT! Yes, it it ananthema to our kind. Yes, many of us don't have to wear suits on a regular basis. BUT THAT'S HOW THE GAME IS PLAYED!
Be polite - let the other side have their say, no matter how BS it may be. Then, when you get a chance to speak, shred them, point by point, politely.
We already have enough minuses on our side - don't act like 3 Charisma morons.
The drivers for the ATI 7500AIW aren't working very well with the latest DRI code now, and there are problems with the I2C bus on the ATI - it's not documented where the bits for it are. ATI has been asked to provide this information, and last I'd heard it has not been provided.
That depends on what your definition of drivers is....</voice>
If by "drivers" you mean "closed source drivers for the FireGL card based on this chip that support all the card's rendering features, but none of the video capture or tuner functions of the inevitable AIW version", then I would guess about 8 months.
If you mean "closed source drivers that support all the rendering, video capture, tuner, etc. functions of this card" from ATI, then I suggest you monitor Mr. Andy Krist's credit cards for purchases of cold weather gear - this will happen about the same time the MBA selects Dr. Hawking as a star player.
If you mean "Open source drivers that support some of the rendering, none of the video capture, and none of the tuner", then I would guess about 18 months.
Sad but true. A pity - were there to be good drivers for this card (good = open source, all features supported by the standard APIs (Xv, Video4Linux2, DRI)) then I would pay up to $500 for one.
Now, the question is, what about all the Mac owners?
On the "Shrek" DVD, they have some honest-to-goodness bloopers (rather than the contrived bloopers on the Pixar films). Most of these stem from rendering goofs (such as the "ChiaPet Donkey" sequence, or the "Exploded face" renders).
Now, obviously the days of photo-realistic rendering at realtime speeds are long off (since the more CPU you have, the higher you define "photo-realistic"), but for the normal preview work, how close to real-time are we? For example, are we looking at 10 to one (ten seconds to render one second of preview), or what?
This happens every time a court gets close to announcing a verdict with respect to Microsoft's anti-trust actions. Look back when Jackson was getting ready to announce his verdict - the same thing happened: MS announces that "Linux is pretty good - not as good as Windows, but pretty good."
Now: cat MS_statements | subtext.filter
"See, we have competition, and it is doing pretty good. So we cannot be monopolists, and if you so rule, we will appeal and point to this as evidence of bias."
cat MS_statements | subtext.filter | ms2english
"Bias against Microsoft = disagreeing with anything that makes Microsoft money"
The reason the cell system doesn't work everywhere is that the systems aren't in place everywhere.
Now, if you have to build a new system anyway, why not build a system with higher throughput, greater flexability of use, and longer lifespan? Given 802.11a speeds (or even 802.11b speeds), you can do voice, SMS, and other stuff....
Now, if somebody like Jumptec, Ampro, or any of the other embedded CPU board makers would use this! I'd love to have that for my embedded system - fast graphics for all the traces, USB 2.0 for RF control, two Ethernet ports for access...
I wonder if anyone could pursade nVidia to put one of these in there... They have everything else....
The submitter said it wrong...
on
nForce2 Preview
·
· Score: 1
And should anyone at nVidia marketing read this - the license to use this commercially is Free Software Drivers....
erehem! <cough cough> Six USB port FIIIVE PCI! Ge4MX Three firewire Two Ethernets AND ATA-ONE-THIRTY-THREEEEEEEE!
Slashdot Mirror
Like so many sites, the folks who did the web pages for Shuttle Computer Group seem to think that nothing can be done without Javascript - you cannot even view their site with JS turned off. I do wish these so-called web designers would realize that some of us either cannot run JS, or choose not to.
I went to the Shuttle site trying to see if they had non-P4 systems - I'd rather get a 1800MHz processor that runs like 2200MHz than a 2200MHz processor that runs like 1800MHz. Also, I'd like to know how compatible this system is with Linux.
Lastly, while it has 2 optical SPDIF ports, I'd like to have a unit with a co-ax port. Why? My stereo has one optical and one co-ax input, and the optical is being used by my DirectTivo - I'd like to use the co-ax for my MP3 player.
Of course, what I'd really like is a simple USB -> SPDIF converter - no other I/O, just USB in and SPDIF co-ax out.
This would completely screw up any modern OS (or Windows).
The OS assumes that it, and it alone, modifies the disk, and that the disk won't change state without the OS making that change. This is one of the reasons you don't want to allow raw disk access from a VMWare or DOSemu session to a mounted file system - the emulated OS will access the disk, and the host OS's file system won't know about it. Boom! Instant corrupted file system.
In the case of this double-ended drive, the web server will assume that, since it has read the disk once, it needn't read that sector again. Then the write side computer modifies the disk, and the web server won't pick it up.
I'd rather see a disk with dual heads, and the logic to allow the system to read different sectors at the same time, all kept coherent by the drives controller as a way to increase throughput.
But to use this as a protection on a web server is just plain dumb.
"Hi, and WWWELCOME to WWWayne's WWWorld"
WWWanye's WWWorld! WWWayne's WWWorld! Party On! Excellent!
No. It's falling, with style.
double f = (1.0/0.0)++;
Why re-invent Win98, when they could contribute to Wine?
Right now, the single biggest thing Wine lacks is Out Of Process COM - that makes many Windows programs fall over and die under Wine.
But with the kind of programmer resources China could throw at the problem, they could probably add OOP COM to Wine in short order.
After all, there's nothing like having a billion-node Beowulf cluster of programmers....
It is only "easy" to play them because the various players emulate enough of a Windows environment to allow Windows DLLs to run. This is only marginally better than no drivers at all since this only works for x86 machines.
Microsoft is as deserving of detestation in this matter as Apple and Sorenson.
For years, Apple and Sorenson have played "Ask you mother" about making a Sorenson decoder available under Linux:
Developer: Sorenson, would you please let us release a binary only, closed version of your decoder for Xanim?
Sorenson: Well, we can't help you - Apple has an exclusive contract with us, so they will have to allow it. Go ask them.
Developer: Apple, would you please let us release a binary only, closed version of your decoder for Xanim?
Apple: Well, it's not ours to release, it belongs to Sorenson. Go ask them.
Now, the two of them are squabbling amonst themselves because Sorenson had the gall to let Macromedia have the decoder.
Boo Hoo Hoo, cry me a river....
Actually, from what I've heard nVidia's drivers aren't terribly stable - they frequently hard-lock the machine.
And one of the single biggest problems holding back the DRI developement is that hardware venders refuse to provide documentation for the drivers (e.g. no specs on the chips), forcing the DRI team to reverse engineer everything. And surprise surprise, they sometimes miss things (oh, you have to CLEAR the DMA fifo before starting a new operation!). nVidia's internal engineers have access to all the documentation on the card - OF COURSE they can implement all the features.
And even for companies like ATI, the chip set docs are only available to the XFree developers under NDA - ordinary folks cannot get access to them. Because you cannot get access to the info on the chips unless you are a registered XFree developer, many people who COULD contribute CANNOT because they cannot get access to the chip docs. This reduces the number of people contributing.
And as for X being "huge" for embedded work - there's embedded and there's embedded. The systems I design have 64M of RAM on each of the 4 DSPs, before we EVEN start talking about the main processor. X is a drop in the bucket to me.
This is why I keep beating the drum on this.
CHIPSET MANUFACTURERS - PAY HEED!
The magic is IN YOUR CHIP, not in the interface to your chip. Telling me about the settings of the frobnicate register does NOT tell me how to implement the frobnicate function in silicon - and if it DOES, then you are SCREWED anyway, as your competitors WILL reverse engineer it.
Provide US, the developers, with the chip docs. We in turn will provide YOU with quality drivers, and we ALL profit!
You are running Windows, and you feel that running a program from the government reduces your security?
Think about it - if the ONLY backdoor your Windows machine has is Uncle Sugar's, you are doing pretty well, what with all the Trojans, spyware, viruses, and bugs.
Conflicted: the feeling you get thinking about a scummy company using a bad patent to rid the world of goatse.cx.....
Right. YOU will be able to fix bugs in the driver that the developers can't fix.
Yes, because THAT bug is important to ME, whereas it may NOT be important to the developers, so they may not work on it.
Point #2 will give you a 0.01% improvement.
I suppose you have some actual EVIDENCE to back that number up, other than having freshly extracted it from your nether oriface? Most drivers are compiled for least common denominator, and so cannot most effectively use features specific to one processor. Additionally, by compiling the code inline rather than accessing it via a run-time conditional, you can greatly speed up the code. You see child, I do this for a living, and probably have been since before you were able to wake up with dry sheets.
What the hell does the kernel have to do with video drivers?
All the 3D drivers have a component in the kernel to provide for security - a fact you would be aware of if you actually followed the DRI mailing list.
When the card is discontinued, you'll probably throw it away.
Since my first message clearly stated that wasn't the case, your point was void before you made it. Especially in my work, where I design systems with a projected service lifetime of a decade.
The bsd people can very well run the drivers if the company makes them for bsd.
And if they don't? Consider nVidia - they DON'T make BSD drivers. Again, had you done some homework you would have known my point was valid, but you lost this one before you started.
If you're an embedded developer, I don't think you'll be integrating a PCI card into your "designs," much less tweaking drivers for it.
BZZT! Wrong. I do. Again, since this point was made in my previous message, you lost this one before you began as well.
Let me make a suggestion: Next semester, see if your high school has a Debate class. Perhaps when you've actually studied how to analyze an argument, identify the points made, research them, and then formulate a response your ability to post intelligent discourse will be improved.
And this is why RAND is unacceptable in any public standard. Any body making public standards should require all participants to provide a license to anybody using that patent for the purpose of implementing that standard free of charge to all.
Given how patent-encumbered JPEG-2000, MPEG-4 et. al. are, this will seriously interfere with open implementation of these standards.
Would that that would slow their adoption....
Because Larry had pictures of them with .... Well, you use your imagination ;^>
Because when I find bugs in the driver, I will be able to fix them faster than the company will get around to it.
Because I can compile the drivers for my CPU, and screw compatibility with other CPUs I don't have.
Because I will know it will work with the kernel I am running, which may be some mutant patched up version that the vender has never seen.
Because when the card is discontinued, I will STILL have it, and will still be USING it, and will still want UPDATES to the drivers.
Because my bretheren who run *BSD also deserve to have good drivers.
Because I am an embedded software developer, and damn it I NEED to be able to tweak the drivers if I am using it in my designs.
We geeks are our own worst enemies on this matter. When we show up at meetings like this and are disruptive, we reduce our credibility. It is far too easy for the other side to catch us at our worst, and then show that time and time again to discredit us. "They are hooligans and evil hackers, and nothing they say has merit."
Look at what happened with the DeCSS case - because of the tenor of 2600, it was far too easy to attack the man, not the case.
When you show up for these sorts of events, WEAR A SUIT! Yes, it it ananthema to our kind. Yes, many of us don't have to wear suits on a regular basis. BUT THAT'S HOW THE GAME IS PLAYED!
Be polite - let the other side have their say, no matter how BS it may be. Then, when you get a chance to speak, shred them, point by point, politely.
We already have enough minuses on our side - don't act like 3 Charisma morons.
The drivers for the ATI 7500AIW aren't working very well with the latest DRI code now, and there are problems with the I2C bus on the ATI - it's not documented where the bits for it are. ATI has been asked to provide this information, and last I'd heard it has not been provided.
That depends on what your definition of drivers is....</voice>
If by "drivers" you mean "closed source drivers for the FireGL card based on this chip that support all the card's rendering features, but none of the video capture or tuner functions of the inevitable AIW version", then I would guess about 8 months.
If you mean "closed source drivers that support all the rendering, video capture, tuner, etc. functions of this card" from ATI, then I suggest you monitor Mr. Andy Krist's credit cards for purchases of cold weather gear - this will happen about the same time the MBA selects Dr. Hawking as a star player.
If you mean "Open source drivers that support some of the rendering, none of the video capture, and none of the tuner", then I would guess about 18 months.
Sad but true. A pity - were there to be good drivers for this card (good = open source, all features supported by the standard APIs (Xv, Video4Linux2, DRI)) then I would pay up to $500 for one.
Now, the question is, what about all the Mac owners?
Yes, but did you get to Star Commander Rank?
Besides, I always used the "Off-by-one" Long range scan trick when I jumped (unless LRS was offline), so I'd have missed the hyperdrive effects.
And the 800 usually shipped with 16k of memory, and you could upgrade to 48k (or do as I did and put 256k bank-switched RAM in, and use a ramdisk).
On the "Shrek" DVD, they have some honest-to-goodness bloopers (rather than the contrived bloopers on the Pixar films). Most of these stem from rendering goofs (such as the "ChiaPet Donkey" sequence, or the "Exploded face" renders).
Now, obviously the days of photo-realistic rendering at realtime speeds are long off (since the more CPU you have, the higher you define "photo-realistic"), but for the normal preview work, how close to real-time are we? For example, are we looking at 10 to one (ten seconds to render one second of preview), or what?
This happens every time a court gets close to announcing a verdict with respect to Microsoft's anti-trust actions. Look back when Jackson was getting ready to announce his verdict - the same thing happened: MS announces that "Linux is pretty good - not as good as Windows, but pretty good."
Now: cat MS_statements | subtext.filter
"See, we have competition, and it is doing pretty good. So we cannot be monopolists, and if you so rule, we will appeal and point to this as evidence of bias."
cat MS_statements | subtext.filter | ms2english
"Bias against Microsoft = disagreeing with anything that makes Microsoft money"
Even a petabyte...
dd if=/dev/brain of=/mnt/cdrom/wowbagger.backup
The reason the cell system doesn't work everywhere is that the systems aren't in place everywhere.
Now, if you have to build a new system anyway, why not build a system with higher throughput, greater flexability of use, and longer lifespan? Given 802.11a speeds (or even 802.11b speeds), you can do voice, SMS, and other stuff....
Now, if somebody like Jumptec, Ampro, or any of the other embedded CPU board makers would use this! I'd love to have that for my embedded system - fast graphics for all the traces, USB 2.0 for RF control, two Ethernet ports for access...
I wonder if anyone could pursade nVidia to put one of these in there... They have everything else....
And should anyone at nVidia marketing read this - the license to use this commercially is Free Software Drivers....
erehem! <cough cough>
Six USB port
FIIIVE PCI!
Ge4MX
Three firewire
Two Ethernets
AND ATA-ONE-THIRTY-THREEEEEEEE!
The downside to The KLF is getting any of their older albums - sure, you can get The White Room, Chill Out, or their Best of, but that's it.
Anybody got a good location for getting the other KLF albums?