They may not be 100% yet, but at least they're giving it a try. They have said that they want to have content for all known browsers, and I'm sure Fox will get to the remaining case (text only) in the course of the redesign.
Of course, if they don't, we ought to let them know Slashdot en masse fashion. I'll be setting a cron entry for the middle of January to check their progress. I suggest several of us do it; We can't make the 'net bearable again without a little work..
Hmmm.. I'm running of the RC2 and 3 in a variety of roles. (I kept the early machines 'cuz I'm lazy and the bugs are pretty much worked around) While I'm not primary support for those machines, I haven't heard of this flaw. As we plan on 'early adopting' W2k, and I'm unlikely to get a straight answer from Microsoft, do you have any further detail?
In short: Several products have been developed that use the delays and incongruities inherent to any TCP/IP stack to try and 'fingerprint' the OS. Nmap, for example, can tell the difference between Linux 2.0.xx, patched 2.0.xx, 2.1.xx and 2.2.xx. The TCP/IP stack only changed slightly between kernels, yet there is a discernable difference. None of these products, however, can sniff out one iota of difference between the Chicago, Win95, Win NT 4.0, Memphis or Win98 TCP/IP stacks. Why? They're the same! No change. Additional evidence: Notice how each and every one of the Microsoft OS's is/was vunerable to the same 'nuke' type attacks? This is very unlikely if they do not consist of the exact same code.
I doubt run-time data is actually written to this drive. At a million samples/sec, the sample size would have to be terribly small (100 bytes or less). What precise data set can you hold in 100 bytes? Also, there is no mention of any super high-speed interface (Yellowfin, FireWire, striped 100 ethernet, etc) that could take a data stream as such. I think it more likely that the data is sampled 'in-air' and later transferred to the workstation for analysis and storage, a situation for which RAID is better than standalone, both in terms of redundancy and read throughput. Looking at the systems being replaced: Would an Octane (The WS being replaced) be capable of raw-write of that kind of bitrate? I'm not sure, but I think it unlikely.
Anyone got a LAN full of iMacs? I was wondering the same point; credibility of the otherwise paranoid author. If it were true, (And I assume it is) the Skr1p7 K1dd1eZ will truly have a field day.
Perhaps I should have said 'historically better support' when referring to the Matrox. nVidia has gotten better!
As for the 905, I just got rid of some in favor of a Tulip based card, and I saw a fair (10-15%) increase in actual throughput. This is a good thing if you have to plan the network around the fact it will always be saturated.
I doubt they will be using the workstation to play MP3's! At least I hope that the on-duty military personel will have something better to do! I too have noticed the difference between the SB-16 and 'Ensonique' cards, but no one would ever notice if they weren't playing high bitrate audio;-) Besides, its a moot point, as I don't believe they make the SB16 anymore. The 128 is about as cheap as you can get, unless you're looking at Crystal Audio ISA cards.
1. i840: The best choice of chipset. No complaints.
2. dual ATA-66: Why, beyond the spectre of universal upgradability, would one want integrated ATA-66 when planning to use the 160/M SCSI interface? Perhaps a less expensive board w/o the ATA-66 controller would be a better choice.
3. 2x USB, serial, parallel: No complaints.
4. Integrated Ultra 160/M and U/W SCSI: Good choice if running the two HD 'standalone'. Perhaps a RAID controller on top of it to handle the data spool instead of the single 36 G drive. The controller and smaller SCSI volumes will probably be more cost-effective in the long run also.
5. 733 PIII: Intel may not be terribly committed to releasing faster chips in the slot 1 variety, now that they're also trying the FCs and PPGAs. If you're counting on a brain transplant down the road, perhaps a quad board with two empty slots would serve you.
6. (storage): A single 9G volume for the root fs and a 36+G volume for data is a fair start, but as mentioned earlier, RAID for the data spool may be more cost-effective in the long run. The DVD drive, well, I'll leave it alone.
7. Viper V770: Go with a Matrox, and a G200 at least. Better Linux support and a better card for the money.
8. 3c905: Go DEC Tulip-based instead. It performs better under Linux, and the driver is excellent.
9. SB PCI128: Try a standard SB16 instead. You'll never notice the difference.
10. Keyboard: Please, if there is to be someone typing at it night and day, substitute a more expensive ergo unit.
Remember folks, they'll be spending OUR tax dollars on this, let's give them the best bang for the buck!
I have to second the suggestion. DEC Tulip cards perform the best of any ethernet card I have run across. (at least in a single processor board) I can't really comment on the SMP troubles of the 905, though I can tell you I gleefully swapped four of them out for cheap Tulip cards and got a 15% throughput increase.
Have you ever considered that we, the users of/., enjoy Dvorak not for the value of his articles, the depth of his insight, or the wisdom of his Windows ways?
We enjoy Dvorak simply because of the great flame wars that inevitably ensue from an airing of his mis-opinion.
And, in the spirit of a Dvorak inspired flame-war, go frag yourself, in the kitchen, with the candlestick.
I'm sure everyone noticed the portion of the doc that mentioned that proper use of the IA64 platform could inflate the size of binaries by almost 33%
33% ??
I guess Intel really is a 'Microsoft Strategic Partner! They're helping them with code bloat!!
Re:Is this really an area that needs filling?
on
IceWM 1.0.0 released
·
· Score: 1
You're right.. C-A-esc only appears to do the correct thing, open the 'Start Menu'. I'm slipping on my shortcuts..
Re:Is this really an area that needs filling?
on
IceWM 1.0.0 released
·
· Score: 1
You can do it in two clicks. It's a simple 'right click, drag upwards, click' if you have the Display Properties in your toolbar. Many Win9x installations have it there by default.
Ctrl Alt - and Ctrl Alt + are still better by a wide margin, as they can be done one-handed WITHOUT the wire-tailed rat. The Windows key combination for such a venture on my machines is:
ctrl-alt-esc, up, up, up, up, up, right, enter, right, right, right, right, shift-tab, right, right, right, right, right, right, tab, tab, tab, tab, right or left to adjust screen res, tab, right or left to adjust desktop res, tab, tab, tab, tab, tab, tab, tab, tab, tab, enter.
I've dealt with too many (l)users who thought they could switch the resolution to 1600x1200 on a 15-inch crapola monitor to forget that one..
I see no correlation between the version number and the actual windowmanager. DR0.13 was stable, fast, and complete. It should have been 1.0, but Raster and Mandrake don't seem to realize it. DR0.15 was also complete and stable, and should have been marked a 1.2 release. Again, they underestimate E and continue the minute incrementation of the rev.
Besides that, the only real complaint I have is that Raster and Mandrake seem to suffer from a bad case of 'I need to add this new rotational 3D axis compensator or my UltraAmazing fade function will have to use bitmask subtraction!'. They implement an amazing WM but don't seem to see where to draw the line on new features
Microchannel PS/2? That's the only non-flawed 486 that RH 5.x (and the rest of the 2.0.xx ilk) wouldn't run on. The 2.1.1xx and newer kernels run nicely. Both the current SuSe and RH distros install easily and even like the brain-damaged MCA SCSI adapters they usually shipped with.
Just remember, there is a special MCA boot image for installation, and SuSe doesn't lock during the SCSI probe, it just takes seemingly forever to reset the SCSI bus.
IBM has been playing the press game with the POWER4 specs. While I won't quote them as they are probably just 'hype' at this point, (And I believe the fellow who showed me the 'hard' specs is covered by a NDA) the sanest guess makes the current rev look like an old 962...
We can't apply the/. moderation system to reality.
I can't just walk up to my boss, ask her about the lan outage and scream '-1 Offtopic! Watch it, Barb, you're approaching Troll" when she complains about her coffee.
I can't get in my nephews face and yell "Flamebait! -1, you're below my threshold now, Nathan" when he starts chanting the childish stuff I often see in first posts.
Well, I can, but I will surely be addressing my next message, unemployed, from the Clinton Valley Mental Rehabilitation Facility.
1. would be wearing tinfoil berets 2. would promptly go back to complaining about the swarms of black helicopters or 3. work for Microsoft Covert Marketing.
Presumably a parser cold be constructed to automatically bracket, quote and parenthesize most of the code. Acceptable C, C++, or Java code is so very narrowly defined that a set of rules could be devised. An aquaintance of mine writes adaptive rule systems for a living; I'll hit him up for an opinion on it, as he is far more knowledgable on the capabilities and limititations of such a postulate than I.
The downside I see is a learning curve. Shortly after posting, I hit up my old copy of Dragon Dictate for some real test results. I only expected human intelligible results, and read all punctuation fully. I started by reading off some of my own Java source, which went much faster than I could type.( I type 40-50 wpm ) Reading a coworker's C++ stuff took quite a bit of thought, but also was faster than I type.
The snafu came when I tried to write original code. I made a mockery of myself, half stammering 'code' that would normally just spring from my fingertips. I couldn't do it. I don't see trying to edit code verbally as easy either.
I suppose the only real test short of writing a parser would be to speak to a programmer incapable of typing due to RSI, a spinal injury, etc. Only someone who has actually done it can tell us how bad a curve it is, and if it is even worth the effort when we still have our IBM Model M's..
Slashdot Mirror
They may not be 100% yet, but at least they're giving it a try. They have said that they want to have content for all known browsers, and I'm sure Fox will get to the remaining case (text only) in the course of the redesign.
Of course, if they don't, we ought to let them know Slashdot en masse fashion. I'll be setting a cron entry for the middle of January to check their progress. I suggest several of us do it; We can't make the 'net bearable again without a little work..
Hmmm.. I'm running of the RC2 and 3 in a variety of roles. (I kept the early machines 'cuz I'm lazy and the bugs are pretty much worked around) While I'm not primary support for those machines, I haven't heard of this flaw. As we plan on 'early adopting' W2k, and I'm unlikely to get a straight answer from Microsoft, do you have any further detail?
In short: Several products have been developed that use the delays and incongruities inherent to any TCP/IP stack to try and 'fingerprint' the OS. Nmap, for example, can tell the difference between Linux 2.0.xx, patched 2.0.xx, 2.1.xx and 2.2.xx. The TCP/IP stack only changed slightly between kernels, yet there is a discernable difference. None of these products, however, can sniff out one iota of difference between the Chicago, Win95, Win NT 4.0, Memphis or Win98 TCP/IP stacks. Why? They're the same! No change. Additional evidence: Notice how each and every one of the Microsoft OS's is/was vunerable to the same 'nuke' type attacks? This is very unlikely if they do not consist of the exact same code.
I doubt run-time data is actually written to this drive. At a million samples/sec, the sample size would have to be terribly small (100 bytes or less). What precise data set can you hold in 100 bytes? Also, there is no mention of any super high-speed interface (Yellowfin, FireWire, striped 100 ethernet, etc) that could take a data stream as such. I think it more likely that the data is sampled 'in-air' and later transferred to the workstation for analysis and storage, a situation for which RAID is better than standalone, both in terms of redundancy and read throughput. Looking at the systems being replaced: Would an Octane (The WS being replaced) be capable of raw-write of that kind of bitrate? I'm not sure, but I think it unlikely.
Anyone got a LAN full of iMacs? I was wondering the same point; credibility of the otherwise paranoid author. If it were true, (And I assume it is) the Skr1p7 K1dd1eZ will truly have a field day.
Perhaps I should have said 'historically better support' when referring to the Matrox. nVidia has gotten better!
;-) Besides, its a moot point, as I don't believe they make the SB16 anymore. The 128 is about as cheap as you can get, unless you're looking at Crystal Audio ISA cards.
As for the 905, I just got rid of some in favor of a Tulip based card, and I saw a fair (10-15%) increase in actual throughput. This is a good thing if you have to plan the network around the fact it will always be saturated.
I doubt they will be using the workstation to play MP3's! At least I hope that the on-duty military personel will have something better to do! I too have noticed the difference between the SB-16 and 'Ensonique' cards, but no one would ever notice if they weren't playing high bitrate audio
Now you can say to someone, 1930's gangster-style, that you're going to iWhack them.
I can see this kind of distributed DOS being called the 'iWhack Attack'.
If they're the flawed Linksys cards, I have a 'hack-around' that works for me to prevent the 10-100 drops. Send me mail if you'd like it.
Point by point, dissection of the specs.
1. i840: The best choice of chipset. No complaints.
2. dual ATA-66: Why, beyond the spectre of universal upgradability, would one want integrated ATA-66 when planning to use the 160/M SCSI interface? Perhaps a less expensive board w/o the ATA-66 controller would be a better choice.
3. 2x USB, serial, parallel: No complaints.
4. Integrated Ultra 160/M and U/W SCSI: Good choice if running the two HD 'standalone'. Perhaps a RAID controller on top of it to handle the data spool instead of the single 36 G drive. The controller and smaller SCSI volumes will probably be more cost-effective in the long run also.
5. 733 PIII: Intel may not be terribly committed to releasing faster chips in the slot 1 variety, now that they're also trying the FCs and PPGAs. If you're counting on a brain transplant down the road, perhaps a quad board with two empty slots would serve you.
6. (storage): A single 9G volume for the root fs and a 36+G volume for data is a fair start, but as mentioned earlier, RAID for the data spool may be more cost-effective in the long run. The DVD drive, well, I'll leave it alone.
7. Viper V770: Go with a Matrox, and a G200 at least. Better Linux support and a better card for the money.
8. 3c905: Go DEC Tulip-based instead. It performs better under Linux, and the driver is excellent.
9. SB PCI128: Try a standard SB16 instead. You'll never notice the difference.
10. Keyboard: Please, if there is to be someone typing at it night and day, substitute a more expensive ergo unit.
Remember folks, they'll be spending OUR tax dollars on this, let's give them the best bang for the buck!
I have to second the suggestion. DEC Tulip cards perform the best of any ethernet card I have run across. (at least in a single processor board) I can't really comment on the SMP troubles of the 905, though I can tell you I gleefully swapped four of them out for cheap Tulip cards and got a 15% throughput increase.
Or rather, you can for the first 1/650th of a second, then your fingers burst into flame from the air resistance.
Have you ever considered that we, the users of /., enjoy Dvorak not for the value of his articles, the depth of his insight, or the wisdom of his Windows ways?
We enjoy Dvorak simply because of the great flame wars that inevitably ensue from an airing of his mis-opinion.
And, in the spirit of a Dvorak inspired flame-war, go frag yourself, in the kitchen, with the candlestick.
Dude, you weren't paying attention!
The new, yet-to-be-released 486 uberphone runs WinCE
The phone they do produce, based on a 386, runs Linux.
I'm sure everyone noticed the portion of the doc that mentioned that proper use of the IA64 platform could inflate the size of binaries by almost 33%
33% ??
I guess Intel really is a 'Microsoft Strategic Partner! They're helping them with code bloat!!
You're right.. C-A-esc only appears to do the correct thing, open the 'Start Menu'. I'm slipping on my shortcuts..
You can do it in two clicks. It's a simple 'right click, drag upwards, click' if you have the Display Properties in your toolbar. Many Win9x installations have it there by default.
Ctrl Alt - and Ctrl Alt + are still better by a wide margin, as they can be done one-handed WITHOUT the wire-tailed rat. The Windows key combination for such a venture on my machines is:
ctrl-alt-esc, up, up, up, up, up, right, enter, right, right, right, right, shift-tab, right, right, right, right, right, right, tab, tab, tab, tab, right or left to adjust screen res, tab, right or left to adjust desktop res, tab, tab, tab, tab, tab, tab, tab, tab, tab, enter.
I've dealt with too many (l)users who thought they could switch the resolution to 1600x1200 on a 15-inch crapola monitor to forget that one..
I see no correlation between the version number and the actual windowmanager. DR0.13 was stable, fast, and complete. It should have been 1.0, but Raster and Mandrake don't seem to realize it. DR0.15 was also complete and stable, and should have been marked a 1.2 release. Again, they underestimate E and continue the minute incrementation of the rev.
Besides that, the only real complaint I have is that Raster and Mandrake seem to suffer from a bad case of 'I need to add this new rotational 3D axis compensator or my UltraAmazing fade function will have to use bitmask subtraction!'. They implement an amazing WM but don't seem to see where to draw the line on new features
Microchannel PS/2? That's the only non-flawed 486 that RH 5.x (and the rest of the 2.0.xx ilk) wouldn't run on. The 2.1.1xx and newer kernels run nicely. Both the current SuSe and RH distros install easily and even like the brain-damaged MCA SCSI adapters they usually shipped with.
Just remember, there is a special MCA boot image for installation, and SuSe doesn't lock during the SCSI probe, it just takes seemingly forever to reset the SCSI bus.
However, since Jobs became iCEO
'iCEO'?
That was the biggest laugh I've had in a while..
Thanks!
Dude, Linux already has SMP Athlon support, as do the BSD's and Windows NT 4.0 and Win2K.
It's not a change in arch, only a change in vendor and speed!
IBM has been playing the press game with the POWER4 specs. While I won't quote them as they are probably just 'hype' at this point, (And I believe the fellow who showed me the 'hard' specs is covered by a NDA) the sanest guess makes the current rev look like an old 962...
We can't apply the /. moderation system to reality.
I can't just walk up to my boss, ask her about the lan outage and scream '-1 Offtopic! Watch it, Barb, you're approaching Troll" when she complains about her coffee.
I can't get in my nephews face and yell "Flamebait! -1, you're below my threshold now, Nathan" when he starts chanting the childish stuff I often see in first posts.
Well, I can, but I will surely be addressing my next message, unemployed, from the Clinton Valley Mental Rehabilitation Facility.
The only people with that response:
1. would be wearing tinfoil berets
2. would promptly go back to complaining about the swarms of black helicopters
or
3. work for Microsoft Covert Marketing.
Believing in #3 is not crazy!
Bought it three weeks back at a local Suncoast. $16 bucks, widescreen and fullscreen. No availability problem (at least here in the US).
The original 'House on Haunted Hill' is also newly available on DVD. I'm rewatching it now..
Presumably a parser cold be constructed to automatically bracket, quote and parenthesize most of the code. Acceptable C, C++, or Java code is so very narrowly defined that a set of rules could be devised. An aquaintance of mine writes adaptive rule systems for a living; I'll hit him up for an opinion on it, as he is far more knowledgable on the capabilities and limititations of such a postulate than I.
The downside I see is a learning curve. Shortly after posting, I hit up my old copy of Dragon Dictate for some real test results. I only expected human intelligible results, and read all punctuation fully. I started by reading off some of my own Java source, which went much faster than I could type.( I type 40-50 wpm ) Reading a coworker's C++ stuff took quite a bit of thought, but also was faster than I type.
The snafu came when I tried to write original code. I made a mockery of myself, half stammering 'code' that would normally just spring from my fingertips. I couldn't do it. I don't see trying to edit code verbally as easy either.
I suppose the only real test short of writing a parser would be to speak to a programmer incapable of typing due to RSI, a spinal injury, etc. Only someone who has actually done it can tell us how bad a curve it is, and if it is even worth the effort when we still have our IBM Model M's..