In trying to avoid OS licensing fees, Motorola has shot themselves in the foot.
"Java-based OS" - While it may technically be cool, it's basically useless. An OS is as good as its applications, which means that unless you're using PalmOS or (dare I say it) Windows Crack Enhanced, you're dead in the water compared to the competition. No one is going to want to pay $$$ for a large phone that's NOT compatible with the majority of PDAs out there. (How many people have PDAs that are not PalmOS or WinCE? Not many. Linux PDAs are cool, but PalmOS is still the best in the market for PDAs in my opinion.)
Someone noted that the battery life listed for this is crap compared to most other phones - another reason this is "wannabe" that will never truly succeed. For many people, battery life is EVERYTHING. This is why I will NEVER touch a color-display phone. Motorola tried the integrated StarTac/PDA before, no one I knew bought it.
On the other hand, there's the Kyocera Smartphone 6035, which I have and I LOVE. It has killer battery life, runs all PalmOS apps, etc. It's bigger than a phone, yes. But considering I was carrying around a Palm III and a phone all the time before, it's a big improvement.
Kyocera's next-gen phone (Due out in Sept-Oct) is color (unfortunately), PalmOS based, has a larger screen in a smaller phone. (It's a flip phone and the graffiti area is on the keypad portion while the screen is on the main body. kewl. Something like those nextgen Palm concept designs that looked like the Graffiti area pulled out from inside the unit.)
Samsung's Palm-based phone is also far better than this thing and is Out There already, despite bad things I've heard about its abilities as a phone. (The review of it I saw indicated you have to dial the number on the touchscreen itself - screen fingerprints ahoy!)
I believe there are also some WinCE phones out there too, which will blow away any proprietary OS for phone use - Still not something I'd buy since CE devices are generally not known for good battery life.
Microsoft is alive because they're entrenched. If Microsoft loses it's dominance, it's not going to be immediately to Apple.
It's going to be a slow process, and once MS starts slipping, it's going to be a free-for-all. Apple's corporate legitimacy can bring down the MS barriers, but once they're down, it's going to be time for Linux to truly rise.
Apple can try to become the next MS, but I don't think they can succeed. Not in the current environment. With open source, the entrenched players can stay entrenched a while, but no one else is going to have a chance to become entrenched in the market.
Thanks for your input. If it's comparable to any SB, then it's pretty good for an onboard sound chipset. Not that I'm saying SB is better than most - Even super-cheapie Yamaha chipset cards are "acceptable", i.e. I can't tell the difference for gaming/home multimedia use.
My definition of "bad" is the onboard audio on VIA KT266 chipsets, such as my Epox EP-8KHA. It SUCKS. It has this obscenely loud high-pitched squealing that gives you a splitting headache on 1-2 minutes flat. Needless to say, I'm now VERY wary of onboard audio solutions.
Over the years, my computer has replaced more and more of my media systems.
Why not replace an expensive AC3 decoder with onboard decoding and some external cheap amps? (I'm not saying get a noname amp - I'm saying get a good name amp that is a decade or so old. Sound quality's the same, the only difference is all sorts of doodads you don't need.) Or one of the recent sets of PC speakers designed for use with surround-capable soundcards?
But as I asked earlier, I wonder what the quality of the onboard audio is. The onboard audio on my Epox EP-8KHA (VIA chipset onboard) is just plain unacceptable for ANY use - HORRENDOUS feedback/squealing.
Did anyone notice that the three audio ports can be remapped between input and output at the user's discretion? Want surround output, set them all to output. Want to record something? Switch a port to input. VERY nice - But is the audio quality up to snuff?
AOL owns one of the largest broadband and cable TV networks in the country.
They are being singled out because they signed a merger agreements saying that they CANNOT offer next-generation IM services over their cable network until they are interoperable.
This could be one of the reasons MS is playing nice, in addition to the ones pointed out earlier. MS is worried about having MORE ammo against them in their antitrust suit due to the close ties of MSN Messenger, Windows, and MSN service. So as a result, they play nice and look like the Good Guys for once.
Apple cooperated with AOL from the design phase onward to make it interoperable with AIM as easily as possible.
I'm assuming it's Just Another OSCAR Messenger. (OSCAR is the protocol used by both AIM and recent versions of ICQ.) It's AIM, just with a different UI and different servers.
If you read the article, it's server (Userbase) interoperability that is the issue, not client interoperability. The article mentions clients like Trillian, which offer the same interop capabilities as gAIM. It then says, "The user must sign up for each service."
The issue here is interoperability between services. For example, say I have MSN messenger, foo@bar.com. I want to talk to my friend who uses AIM with the screenname Bazola. Right now, I can't, and the issue at hand is making this happen.
This particular guard didn't have more pressing issues, since he was handling exports - Probably not too much illegal exporting into Mexico going on that takes priority.
Yes, Perens has a distinct advantage in the chances of what he's doing attracting attention.
My point is still that he can get farther with both a court of law and a court of public opinion if he can break the law while using a product as intended - In this case, simply viewing a legit Region 1 disc in Region 1 on an unsanctioned platform.
Region-unlocking doesn't look as good to the public nor to the courts, and some people even speculated that region unlocking might not even fall under the DMCA to begin with, while it's been confirmed that DeCSS WILL get you busted for a DMCA violation. (i.e. no matter how much publicity it gets, he may likely not get arrested for region unlocking, while if he makes it clear he's using a derivative of the law-breaking evil DeCSS, his chances of getting arrested are much higher, AND his chances of succeeding in smacking down the DMCA are much higher.)
It doesn't matter if it is The Law in theory - Sometimes things are so minor that The Man just doesn't care. My friend TRIED to get arrested for an ITAR violation.
That border guard was, by your definiton, "required" to enforce it and arrest Justin. Did he? As someone else pointed out, he had bigger problems to deal with than some stupid export restriction on something so stupid as encryption.
No one is going to arrest Bruce unless the MPAA asks them to on their behalf. The FBI didn't just say, "Hey, look at this guy, I think he's violating the DMCA" on their own when they busted Skylarov. Adobe said, "This guy is violating the DMCA by screwing with our product. Please arrest him for us."
So to make a difference, Bruce must not only break The Law, but he must make The Man care enough to take him to court where the DMCA can be struck down. As someone pointed out earlier, a singular failuer to enforce a law doesn't invalidate it, and the MPAA knows this. If Bruce region-unlocks a DVD, he's seen as a whiner about the way the MPAA goes about his business. If Bruce plays a Region 1 DVD under Linux, he's breaking the law, but the Court of Public Opinion is guaranteed to side with him, and most likely so will the Court of Law.
This is Compaq we are talking about. Second worst reliability reputation of any computer manufacturer. (#1 being Packard Smell - Are they even still in business???)
I've had better experiences with Dells than many others have, esp. their Inspiron 8000 series. My dad has one, a friend at school has one, the research lab I was in at school had one, they all rocked. Their 7500s don't seem to be as well made - My apartmentmate had one and the battery door... Let's just say it was a HORRENDOUS design. Dell's reputation used to be stellar, they've gone WAY downhill, but they still blow away Compaq and probably always will.
A few years ago, I sold computers at my school's campus store. For destops: Gateway. Best prices, VERY sturdy design. Nice standard ATX cases - and ducted cooling, too! The Dell desktops we had at the time were subpar, with a tendency to develop weird noises.
Compaq couldn't make a laptop screen if their life depended on it. Average life of a Compaq laptop before the screen died = 1-2 months. 50% of the laptops that came into our service department were month-old Compaqs of various models with dead screens. (Nothing physically wrong, just dead connections.)
I agree with other posts here - IBM has the most durable laptops on the market (unless you consider those specially ruggedized ones), but you WILL pay much more for it. Toshibas tend to be solid and reasonably priced. We had mixed results with Gateway. (Unlike the desktops we sold, we couldn't reccommend one manufacturer across the board for our laptops. Toshiba ruled in the low price range, IBM in the mid, Gateway in the high end. Their low-end units sucked, but they had stuff in the high end that no one else had.)
Bruce is merely region-unlocking. Its not even necessarily illegal, as it often involves simply hitting a few menu buttons. (Admittedly secret ones, so it COULD violate the DMCA) - Unfortunately, it's such a minor violation that the MPAA probably won't care - They're smart and most likely realize that trying to arrest Perens is silly and will just get their precious law overturned on them for... Nothing.
Now if he plays a DVD using one of the Linux DVD players - THAT is a different story, as all of them are illegal and based on DeCSS in some form. It should be clear that he is using the DVD EXACTLY as intended (Playing a Region 1 disc in Region 1), yet still breaking the law. Since it's based on DeCSS, it'll attract more attention from the MPAA since that's their pet peeve. Also, since he is using the disc exactly as intended, it makes his case that much stronger.
An interesting story: A friend of mine found a lawyer willing to help him with defense against an ITAR violation. (Read: Exporting strong encryption before the government eased up on regulations.) He then implemented RSA on his HP48 calculator. Calculator is now a munition. Justin lived in San Diego, so drove down to Tijuana. In the process of crossing the border, he carefully explained to the border guard/customs officer the exact manner in which he was breaking the law and should be arrested. Customs officer basically told him to fuck off, leave him alone, and go do his business in Tijuana.
He's talking about Kai's PhotoSoap, which is a closed-source Windows-only application. Issues with Windows GCC are irrelevant to such an application, since you can't recompile your system libraries. More to the point, issues with Linux GCC are even less irrelevant - What does a Linux GCC problem have to do with PhotoSoap, which doesn't run under Linux no matter what GCC you have? (Exception being WINE, but since that implements the windows ABI itself, recompiling that under GCC 3.1 should be all you need to fix all your WINE apps.)
The main difference between the cameras in each series is the resolution.
2000-series is 2.1 megapixels 3000-series is 3.3 4000-series is 4.something
Not too much major changes other than this, but there are minor benefits to higher-series cameras.
For example, the C-3000 adds sound capability and USB, which the 2000-series didn't have. It also has better "preserve featurs between poweroff" settings. The 2000-series had "Reset to factory" and "Don't change", the 3000 series added "Reset to custom settings"
Don't know what other than res the 4000 series adds, but for the sort of stuff you're looking for it's probably minor tweaks and higher res, just like the 3000s "major" differences were mainly gimmicks (although nice to have occasionally for general use)
These being the C-2000 series, C-3000, and C-4000.
All of them have a similar body that's somewhere halfway between an SLR and a rangefinder camera. It's not SLR, but it's *close* - I had similar requirements to you, and my dad's 2020 was the first digital I actually found to be sufficient. I have a 3000, it's wonderful.
It has MOST of what you ask, in the sub-$1000 price range. (Aperture control, shutter speed control, and film speed control, although instead of graininess, higher film speeds = noise.)
Going a bit farther, you have the option of the Olympus E-10, around $1200-1500, which is a full-blown SLR.
The only thing missing in your case is the lens issue.
Couple of points, two are confirmations of what others posted:
-4 dB is a lot. It's over twice your power, although given the specs you stated you should be seeing 5-6 dB of loss (6 dB is losing 75% of your power) - The receiver saturation someone mentioned could be why.
The question is: Does the system work at 11 Mbps? If so, don't bother. If not, you have two options:
Both involve getting rid of the LMR-400. You mentioned HOAs - oh the joys of antenna restrictions. To those who suggested PoE, he likely can't do that due to various housing regulations. (He's lucky to be even able to use a helical - Well, they're small.)
Maybe a hybrid solution: PoE to the entrance point of the coax into the building, and then coax outside to the antenna.
The last solution: Get better coax. Unfortunately, this costs $$$. LMR-400 is amazing given its similarity to RG-8 (Same dimensions, compatible connectors), but it still sucks at 2.4 GHz. 6.65 dB/100 ft, more if you're using the Ultraflex variety (7.8 or so dB).
You have two options, I'm not sure which will be cheaper: Get larger sized LMR, or Just Say No to braided-shield cable. Get some good semirigid, even better, get air-dielectric semirigid - It's a bitch to work with, but it is VERY high-quality and very low-loss. One of the biggest names in semirigid is Andrew Corporation (http://www.andrew.com/) - they make HELIAX, which is VERY well known to hams and broadcasters. Their 1/2-inch EFX-series foam dielectric cables have a loss of only 3.25 dB/100 ft at 2 GHz. Their 7/8" (warning, it's going to be VERY tough to work with and probably quite expensive) has a loss of only 1.86 db/100ft at that frequency.
He made no mention of amplifiers, so he is running WELL within the FCC requirements, esp. if using a cantenna.
You can run 802.11 up to 1 watt into an omni legally. (Over 100 mW you need to have automatic power control though - To keep the minimum power required for minimum 11 MBps operation.) You can run even more than 1 watt ERP with a directional - I don't remember the exact rules, it's in a HOWTO/FAQ somewhere, but for every 3 dB of gain in your antenna, you only have to reduce input power to the antenna by 1-2 dB (I forget how much, but it's less than 3).
In this case, he's using Linksys WMP11s - FCC certified, and in no way are they being run in excess of the FCC regs for the band. The WMP11, like almost any Intersil Prism[1;2;2.5] card, runs only 25-30 mW - Even having to reduce input power by 3 dB per 3 dB of antenna gain, he is still within limits for a 15 dBi antenna (quite a bit of gain, good for many kilometers LOS). Given the regs, he's good to 20 or 25 dBi of gain legally. Only the larger dishes can hit this range - Cantennas definately cannot.
Let's not forget that with good antennas on both ends, he can have 20-40 dB of total path gain if he wishes with an omni at one end. (15 dBi omni, 20-25 dBi directional is realistic. 10 dBi omni and 15 dBi directional is much easier/cheaper and will still give you incredible range.)
Plus, it looks like he IS setting up a "real" wISP - Including a 32-mile T1 loop. If you can't compete effectively with an (expensive) setup like his, maybe you should go find another line of work or rework how you're doing things.
All it was used for was SSH, AbiWord, web browsing, and gaim. Oh, and xchat. 133 is plenty for basic day-to-day applications. (Otherwise no one would buy any of the internet appliances that have hit the market and the i-Opener would never have been popular for hackers.)
If I wanted to play Quake, I'd turn on my desktop.
I agree, 133 is pitiful for a primary system. But as a secondary system to do stuff "on the go" occasionally, it's just fine.
If you just want to read email, Pine is wicked fast on even a 386.:)
I did replace the laptop due to failure - 200MMX, 128M RAM.
I see no reason to waste huge amounts of money on a computer that does everything. I have the laptop for portable web surfing and checking of email. 200MMX (even 133) was enough for the following, which are my sole laptop requirements:
xchat gaim SSH Web browser
MP3s were an added bonus with the 200MMX, other than that I have no need for more power in the laptop as long as a web browser runs well.
For stuff like Quake 3, UT, DAoC (my one non-Linux app), etc., I have my nice 1.1 GHz DDR Athlon system.
Buying a superlaptop to use for everything is a waste of money and pointless. To get the features of a sub-$1000 desktop you need to spend $2000-2500 on a laptop. Rather than that $2500, you can buy a hot desktop and a surplus laptop and have $1000 or more left over.
My original point in my first message: A browser that works faster than another on a modern system may be slower on an older system. What works in my desktop is not always what works best on the laptop.
Previously, Moz ran like a 1-legged dog on ANY system I tried it on, even my desktop. But NS7 on my somewhat slower P3 at work seems quite snappy.
Slashdot Mirror
In trying to avoid OS licensing fees, Motorola has shot themselves in the foot.
"Java-based OS" - While it may technically be cool, it's basically useless. An OS is as good as its applications, which means that unless you're using PalmOS or (dare I say it) Windows Crack Enhanced, you're dead in the water compared to the competition. No one is going to want to pay $$$ for a large phone that's NOT compatible with the majority of PDAs out there. (How many people have PDAs that are not PalmOS or WinCE? Not many. Linux PDAs are cool, but PalmOS is still the best in the market for PDAs in my opinion.)
Someone noted that the battery life listed for this is crap compared to most other phones - another reason this is "wannabe" that will never truly succeed. For many people, battery life is EVERYTHING. This is why I will NEVER touch a color-display phone. Motorola tried the integrated StarTac/PDA before, no one I knew bought it.
On the other hand, there's the Kyocera Smartphone 6035, which I have and I LOVE. It has killer battery life, runs all PalmOS apps, etc. It's bigger than a phone, yes. But considering I was carrying around a Palm III and a phone all the time before, it's a big improvement.
Kyocera's next-gen phone (Due out in Sept-Oct) is color (unfortunately), PalmOS based, has a larger screen in a smaller phone. (It's a flip phone and the graffiti area is on the keypad portion while the screen is on the main body. kewl. Something like those nextgen Palm concept designs that looked like the Graffiti area pulled out from inside the unit.)
Samsung's Palm-based phone is also far better than this thing and is Out There already, despite bad things I've heard about its abilities as a phone. (The review of it I saw indicated you have to dial the number on the touchscreen itself - screen fingerprints ahoy!)
I believe there are also some WinCE phones out there too, which will blow away any proprietary OS for phone use - Still not something I'd buy since CE devices are generally not known for good battery life.
Simply put:
Microsoft is alive because they're entrenched. If Microsoft loses it's dominance, it's not going to be immediately to Apple.
It's going to be a slow process, and once MS starts slipping, it's going to be a free-for-all. Apple's corporate legitimacy can bring down the MS barriers, but once they're down, it's going to be time for Linux to truly rise.
Apple can try to become the next MS, but I don't think they can succeed. Not in the current environment. With open source, the entrenched players can stay entrenched a while, but no one else is going to have a chance to become entrenched in the market.
Or did this AC get modded to +4 for ripping off another guy's post from the Bruce Perens thread?
i d= 3943580
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=36633&c
Simlple - Each port has 2 channels (Stereo)
Thanks for your input. If it's comparable to any SB, then it's pretty good for an onboard sound chipset. Not that I'm saying SB is better than most - Even super-cheapie Yamaha chipset cards are "acceptable", i.e. I can't tell the difference for gaming/home multimedia use.
My definition of "bad" is the onboard audio on VIA KT266 chipsets, such as my Epox EP-8KHA. It SUCKS. It has this obscenely loud high-pitched squealing that gives you a splitting headache on 1-2 minutes flat. Needless to say, I'm now VERY wary of onboard audio solutions.
Over the years, my computer has replaced more and more of my media systems.
Why not replace an expensive AC3 decoder with onboard decoding and some external cheap amps? (I'm not saying get a noname amp - I'm saying get a good name amp that is a decade or so old. Sound quality's the same, the only difference is all sorts of doodads you don't need.) Or one of the recent sets of PC speakers designed for use with surround-capable soundcards?
But as I asked earlier, I wonder what the quality of the onboard audio is. The onboard audio on my Epox EP-8KHA (VIA chipset onboard) is just plain unacceptable for ANY use - HORRENDOUS feedback/squealing.
Did anyone notice that the three audio ports can be remapped between input and output at the user's discretion? Want surround output, set them all to output. Want to record something? Switch a port to input. VERY nice - But is the audio quality up to snuff?
A friend of mine is looking into upgrading his machine or simply getting a new one.
I was thinking of reccommending the SS51 to him... Until I saw that it was a P4 machine.
AOL owns one of the largest broadband and cable TV networks in the country.
They are being singled out because they signed a merger agreements saying that they CANNOT offer next-generation IM services over their cable network until they are interoperable.
This could be one of the reasons MS is playing nice, in addition to the ones pointed out earlier. MS is worried about having MORE ammo against them in their antitrust suit due to the close ties of MSN Messenger, Windows, and MSN service. So as a result, they play nice and look like the Good Guys for once.
Apple cooperated with AOL from the design phase onward to make it interoperable with AIM as easily as possible.
I'm assuming it's Just Another OSCAR Messenger. (OSCAR is the protocol used by both AIM and recent versions of ICQ.) It's AIM, just with a different UI and different servers.
If you read the article, it's server (Userbase) interoperability that is the issue, not client interoperability. The article mentions clients like Trillian, which offer the same interop capabilities as gAIM. It then says, "The user must sign up for each service."
The issue here is interoperability between services. For example, say I have MSN messenger, foo@bar.com. I want to talk to my friend who uses AIM with the screenname Bazola. Right now, I can't, and the issue at hand is making this happen.
This particular guard didn't have more pressing issues, since he was handling exports - Probably not too much illegal exporting into Mexico going on that takes priority.
Yes, Perens has a distinct advantage in the chances of what he's doing attracting attention.
My point is still that he can get farther with both a court of law and a court of public opinion if he can break the law while using a product as intended - In this case, simply viewing a legit Region 1 disc in Region 1 on an unsanctioned platform.
Region-unlocking doesn't look as good to the public nor to the courts, and some people even speculated that region unlocking might not even fall under the DMCA to begin with, while it's been confirmed that DeCSS WILL get you busted for a DMCA violation. (i.e. no matter how much publicity it gets, he may likely not get arrested for region unlocking, while if he makes it clear he's using a derivative of the law-breaking evil DeCSS, his chances of getting arrested are much higher, AND his chances of succeeding in smacking down the DMCA are much higher.)
Did you bother to read my post?
It doesn't matter if it is The Law in theory - Sometimes things are so minor that The Man just doesn't care. My friend TRIED to get arrested for an ITAR violation.
That border guard was, by your definiton, "required" to enforce it and arrest Justin. Did he? As someone else pointed out, he had bigger problems to deal with than some stupid export restriction on something so stupid as encryption.
No one is going to arrest Bruce unless the MPAA asks them to on their behalf. The FBI didn't just say, "Hey, look at this guy, I think he's violating the DMCA" on their own when they busted Skylarov. Adobe said, "This guy is violating the DMCA by screwing with our product. Please arrest him for us."
So to make a difference, Bruce must not only break The Law, but he must make The Man care enough to take him to court where the DMCA can be struck down. As someone pointed out earlier, a singular failuer to enforce a law doesn't invalidate it, and the MPAA knows this. If Bruce region-unlocks a DVD, he's seen as a whiner about the way the MPAA goes about his business. If Bruce plays a Region 1 DVD under Linux, he's breaking the law, but the Court of Public Opinion is guaranteed to side with him, and most likely so will the Court of Law.
This is Compaq we are talking about. Second worst reliability reputation of any computer manufacturer. (#1 being Packard Smell - Are they even still in business???)
I've had better experiences with Dells than many others have, esp. their Inspiron 8000 series. My dad has one, a friend at school has one, the research lab I was in at school had one, they all rocked. Their 7500s don't seem to be as well made - My apartmentmate had one and the battery door... Let's just say it was a HORRENDOUS design. Dell's reputation used to be stellar, they've gone WAY downhill, but they still blow away Compaq and probably always will.
A few years ago, I sold computers at my school's campus store. For destops: Gateway. Best prices, VERY sturdy design. Nice standard ATX cases - and ducted cooling, too! The Dell desktops we had at the time were subpar, with a tendency to develop weird noises.
Compaq couldn't make a laptop screen if their life depended on it. Average life of a Compaq laptop before the screen died = 1-2 months. 50% of the laptops that came into our service department were month-old Compaqs of various models with dead screens. (Nothing physically wrong, just dead connections.)
I agree with other posts here - IBM has the most durable laptops on the market (unless you consider those specially ruggedized ones), but you WILL pay much more for it. Toshibas tend to be solid and reasonably priced. We had mixed results with Gateway. (Unlike the desktops we sold, we couldn't reccommend one manufacturer across the board for our laptops. Toshiba ruled in the low price range, IBM in the mid, Gateway in the high end. Their low-end units sucked, but they had stuff in the high end that no one else had.)
Bruce is merely region-unlocking. Its not even necessarily illegal, as it often involves simply hitting a few menu buttons. (Admittedly secret ones, so it COULD violate the DMCA) - Unfortunately, it's such a minor violation that the MPAA probably won't care - They're smart and most likely realize that trying to arrest Perens is silly and will just get their precious law overturned on them for... Nothing.
Now if he plays a DVD using one of the Linux DVD players - THAT is a different story, as all of them are illegal and based on DeCSS in some form. It should be clear that he is using the DVD EXACTLY as intended (Playing a Region 1 disc in Region 1), yet still breaking the law. Since it's based on DeCSS, it'll attract more attention from the MPAA since that's their pet peeve. Also, since he is using the disc exactly as intended, it makes his case that much stronger.
An interesting story: A friend of mine found a lawyer willing to help him with defense against an ITAR violation. (Read: Exporting strong encryption before the government eased up on regulations.) He then implemented RSA on his HP48 calculator. Calculator is now a munition. Justin lived in San Diego, so drove down to Tijuana. In the process of crossing the border, he carefully explained to the border guard/customs officer the exact manner in which he was breaking the law and should be arrested. Customs officer basically told him to fuck off, leave him alone, and go do his business in Tijuana.
He's talking about Kai's PhotoSoap, which is a closed-source Windows-only application. Issues with Windows GCC are irrelevant to such an application, since you can't recompile your system libraries. More to the point, issues with Linux GCC are even less irrelevant - What does a Linux GCC problem have to do with PhotoSoap, which doesn't run under Linux no matter what GCC you have? (Exception being WINE, but since that implements the windows ABI itself, recompiling that under GCC 3.1 should be all you need to fix all your WINE apps.)
How can GCC break Kai's PhotoSoap???
PhotoSoap is a Windows application, it didn't run under Linux (except for maybe under WINE) to begin with.
The main difference between the cameras in each series is the resolution.
2000-series is 2.1 megapixels
3000-series is 3.3
4000-series is 4.something
Not too much major changes other than this, but there are minor benefits to higher-series cameras.
For example, the C-3000 adds sound capability and USB, which the 2000-series didn't have. It also has better "preserve featurs between poweroff" settings. The 2000-series had "Reset to factory" and "Don't change", the 3000 series added "Reset to custom settings"
Don't know what other than res the 4000 series adds, but for the sort of stuff you're looking for it's probably minor tweaks and higher res, just like the 3000s "major" differences were mainly gimmicks (although nice to have occasionally for general use)
So the "number two" guy in security has finally realized that a good portion his "l33t 0-day warez" have virii in them?
Maybe he should be a good citizen and stay away from the piracy.
These being the C-2000 series, C-3000, and C-4000.
All of them have a similar body that's somewhere halfway between an SLR and a rangefinder camera. It's not SLR, but it's *close* - I had similar requirements to you, and my dad's 2020 was the first digital I actually found to be sufficient. I have a 3000, it's wonderful.
It has MOST of what you ask, in the sub-$1000 price range. (Aperture control, shutter speed control, and film speed control, although instead of graininess, higher film speeds = noise.)
Going a bit farther, you have the option of the Olympus E-10, around $1200-1500, which is a full-blown SLR.
The only thing missing in your case is the lens issue.
Couple of points, two are confirmations of what others posted:
-4 dB is a lot. It's over twice your power, although given the specs you stated you should be seeing 5-6 dB of loss (6 dB is losing 75% of your power) - The receiver saturation someone mentioned could be why.
The question is: Does the system work at 11 Mbps? If so, don't bother. If not, you have two options:
Both involve getting rid of the LMR-400. You mentioned HOAs - oh the joys of antenna restrictions. To those who suggested PoE, he likely can't do that due to various housing regulations. (He's lucky to be even able to use a helical - Well, they're small.)
Maybe a hybrid solution: PoE to the entrance point of the coax into the building, and then coax outside to the antenna.
The last solution: Get better coax. Unfortunately, this costs $$$. LMR-400 is amazing given its similarity to RG-8 (Same dimensions, compatible connectors), but it still sucks at 2.4 GHz. 6.65 dB/100 ft, more if you're using the Ultraflex variety (7.8 or so dB).
You have two options, I'm not sure which will be cheaper: Get larger sized LMR, or Just Say No to braided-shield cable. Get some good semirigid, even better, get air-dielectric semirigid - It's a bitch to work with, but it is VERY high-quality and very low-loss. One of the biggest names in semirigid is Andrew Corporation (http://www.andrew.com/) - they make HELIAX, which is VERY well known to hams and broadcasters. Their 1/2-inch EFX-series foam dielectric cables have a loss of only 3.25 dB/100 ft at 2 GHz. Their 7/8" (warning, it's going to be VERY tough to work with and probably quite expensive) has a loss of only 1.86 db/100ft at that frequency.
He made no mention of amplifiers, so he is running WELL within the FCC requirements, esp. if using a cantenna.
You can run 802.11 up to 1 watt into an omni legally. (Over 100 mW you need to have automatic power control though - To keep the minimum power required for minimum 11 MBps operation.) You can run even more than 1 watt ERP with a directional - I don't remember the exact rules, it's in a HOWTO/FAQ somewhere, but for every 3 dB of gain in your antenna, you only have to reduce input power to the antenna by 1-2 dB (I forget how much, but it's less than 3).
In this case, he's using Linksys WMP11s - FCC certified, and in no way are they being run in excess of the FCC regs for the band. The WMP11, like almost any Intersil Prism[1;2;2.5] card, runs only 25-30 mW - Even having to reduce input power by 3 dB per 3 dB of antenna gain, he is still within limits for a 15 dBi antenna (quite a bit of gain, good for many kilometers LOS). Given the regs, he's good to 20 or 25 dBi of gain legally. Only the larger dishes can hit this range - Cantennas definately cannot.
Let's not forget that with good antennas on both ends, he can have 20-40 dB of total path gain if he wishes with an omni at one end. (15 dBi omni, 20-25 dBi directional is realistic. 10 dBi omni and 15 dBi directional is much easier/cheaper and will still give you incredible range.)
Plus, it looks like he IS setting up a "real" wISP - Including a 32-mile T1 loop. If you can't compete effectively with an (expensive) setup like his, maybe you should go find another line of work or rework how you're doing things.
All it was used for was SSH, AbiWord, web browsing, and gaim. Oh, and xchat. 133 is plenty for basic day-to-day applications. (Otherwise no one would buy any of the internet appliances that have hit the market and the i-Opener would never have been popular for hackers.)
:)
If I wanted to play Quake, I'd turn on my desktop.
I agree, 133 is pitiful for a primary system. But as a secondary system to do stuff "on the go" occasionally, it's just fine.
If you just want to read email, Pine is wicked fast on even a 386.
On my desktop.
I did replace the laptop due to failure - 200MMX, 128M RAM.
I see no reason to waste huge amounts of money on a computer that does everything. I have the laptop for portable web surfing and checking of email. 200MMX (even 133) was enough for the following, which are my sole laptop requirements:
xchat
gaim
SSH
Web browser
MP3s were an added bonus with the 200MMX, other than that I have no need for more power in the laptop as long as a web browser runs well.
For stuff like Quake 3, UT, DAoC (my one non-Linux app), etc., I have my nice 1.1 GHz DDR Athlon system.
Buying a superlaptop to use for everything is a waste of money and pointless. To get the features of a sub-$1000 desktop you need to spend $2000-2500 on a laptop. Rather than that $2500, you can buy a hot desktop and a surplus laptop and have $1000 or more left over.
My original point in my first message: A browser that works faster than another on a modern system may be slower on an older system. What works in my desktop is not always what works best on the laptop.
Previously, Moz ran like a 1-legged dog on ANY system I tried it on, even my desktop. But NS7 on my somewhat slower P3 at work seems quite snappy.