It's too bad that the US and the EU can't work together in a more efficient way to develop material sciences.
Considering that MS and this grant from the EU are about the only two sources of revenue at Nokia right now, we can't really say that the collaboration isn't happening. Whether it could be more efficient, well--
LED room lights will double as "Li-Fi" wireless nodes
The great side benefit of that, that nobody seems to be talking about, is that living organisms can finally start to expose themselves on a routine basis to the low-level functioning of computer communication technology. In a mere few million years, we will have evolved to the point of comprehending the flickering of the LEDs, much the same as we now comprehend written and spoken communication.
Who knows, maybe we'll even co-evolve some sort of organic signalling system of the same calibre, so we can eliminate the computer 'middle man' altogether!
Keep in mind that MSO 2010 (I haven't looked at other versions), will refuse to run on a Windows Server if Remote Desktop Services is active, unless MSO is volume licensed. Best I could determine, this means you're getting a minimum of MSO Pro Plus at $500/user. Still a bargain compared to 100 individual licenses I suppose.
thereby making the term even more deceptive, since there is nothing at all inherently different about the NAT utilized by carriers and the NAT employed by a $30 desktop router. There's nothing "carrier grade" about it. They might as well call it closet grade NAT.
For those who don't know, the L in WRT54GL stands for Linux. This routers was differentiated from the contemporary revision WRT54G only in that it ran the Linux-based firmware. While subsequent revisions of the WRT54G featured less and less capable hardware, the WRT54GL maintained its original configuration of flash and RAM, allowing it to run third party firmwares such as dd-wrt, openwrt, and Tomato.
To the average consumer, the WRT54GL looked exactly like the significantly less expensive WRT54G and its prolific variants, but to the power user and professional, it held much greater potential and warranted the higher price tag. These pros and power users generally have no use for stock firmwares, and are only interested in the open nature of the hardware platform, and are therefore willing to pay the premium (although personally I preferred the more capable and less expensive ASUS WL-520gu. I guess legend status has its privileges).
So yes, it is shocking to those who are familiar with the platform to learn that any significant portion of WRT54GL is running stock firmware in the wild.
It will probably really help on 3D movies where they are cheesing out by cutting the vertical resolution in half.
If 3D films only have half the vertical resolution, wouldn't a more sensible fix be to distribute files with double the normal height (or width in the case of SBS formats)? I've sometimes wondered why 1080p 3D files don't come in 1920x2160, or 3840x1080 resolution, which could be chopped and displayed on a normal 1080p display without the loss. It's like interlacing all over again.
All existing tech will be dead soon. That's the nature of tech.
That said, however, I'm rather fond of my Roku. It's not perfect; seeking more than a couple minutes at a time is labourious, it won't play from a NAS without crappy add-on channels, and it won't let you control the refresh rate of your output. These shortcomings aside, I find my Roku to be an adequate means of bringing Netflix and a tonne of great free programming to my living room without the commercials and other obnoxious intrusions of traditional tv.
So what makes you think Roku is especially doomed?
As long as you don't care about least common denominator quality
I use a NAS and this has not been a big issue. My video is almost all 720p and 1080p and the audio mostly flac with a few mp3. BSPlayer on Android handles all of this fine (with the exception of 1080p on my wife's older Galaxy S), including connecting to the SMB share.
The only annoyance I ran into was streaming to the tv. It's a Samsung smart tv, and although it understands dlna, it inexplicably has no support for smb or nfs. I had no desire to set up a dlna server on my NAS box, so I instead installed in on my Tomato-based AP. This works fine once you realize you have to configure USB-based swap on a USB drive (that's a tutorial in itself), but for some reason it doesn't auto-add new media, so you have to rescan your file share every time you add something, which is a 3+-hour excercise.
That got old, so I finally put together an old ionitx machine with xbmcbuntu and now all seems to be right in the media streaming world. In the end, I would have no trouble recommending NAS for the backend with xbmc or a capable HD app for mobile devices on the front end. dlna complicates life unnecessarily in my experience.
Yes, Linux is great on servers. Or on supercomputers, where they have a programmer team to make it work. However, we are talking about desktop.
Linux is also great on desktops. I know, because I've been using it as my primary desktop OS for years. I've also set up Linux desktops for peers seniors, and adolescents. They're not programmers, and neither am I. Many of these setups I never see again after I set them up.
Malware problem - Linux is not immune to it, unless it somehow forbids one from running cutekittens.sh they got in an email attachment.
Good theory, but what's the real world infection rate of Windows to Linux? 10^3? 10^4? Even given the bigger install base of around 10^1, that's bad.
The only reason why there is little malware on Linux is because Linux has a tiny desktop market share, so it is not worth the effort to create malware for it. However, if the market share increasess there will be malware, just look as MacOS or Android.
That's a tired myth. You already know that Linux abounds on servers, and again, we're talking about real world. Just because malware exists for platforms other than Windows, doesn't make it a comparable problem.
Just install a fresh copy of Windows if possible. That takes time, but not a lot of "active" time.
That's only the beginning of the problem. The real problem is that a fresh copy of Windows is good for nothing. Next comes the problem of finding, downloading and installing drivers, basic usability software (like a web browser), removing crapware if you happen to be working with an OEM image, and fixing all the insane defaults. Four hours is a fair approximations, and it's silly to say that it's not a lot of active time, because last I checked, a usable and updated install of Windows 7 requires in the neighbourhood of 10 reboots and user intervention at a minimum interval of about 15 minutes, and that's on fast hardware.
I can take a Windows 3.0 program and run it on XP or 7 (either the 32bit version or in XP mode). Can I do the same with a 20 year old Linux binary? No, recompiling is not an option, because if the source was available, then it would make running old software on Windows also easier.
In the real world, most Linux-compatible software comes with the source code, while for Windows it does not.
On the other hand, Linux either works perfectly or there pretty much is no hope of making it work (incompatible/too new hardware, incompatible drivers etc) unless you are a programmer and can edit and recompile the whatever service that does not work.
Fortunately, in most cases it just works. The notable exception these days is wireless adapters.
I think I tried MoboPlayer and a whack of others on Android, but finally settled on BSPlayer as the only one that will play DTS sound. As a bonus, BSP can access SMB shares directly, bypassing the need for ES.
Haven't seen a problem with this system since, nor do I recall the specifics of the error today, just that the upgrade process failed at some point after Win7 was installed, but before user files were restored. In fact, I don't specifically remember running the upgrade adviser at the time, so all the interesting details are lost at this point.
if you haven't tried a Vista to 7 upgrade its the most painless thing in the world, you didn't even need a guy like me as long as you were replacing like with like, like 32 bit for 32bit, because it would transfer your docs and setting on the upgrade so it was pretty damned painless.
Lucky you. My first and only attempt to upgrade Vista to 7 resulted in the upgrader puking up something to the effect of "Upgrade can't continue. Sorry." At this point the upgrade was essentially finished, it merely failed to restore the user settings, resulting in me spending a buch of time digging user files out of buried folders with obscure names and plopping them back in their correct locations on the new system.
This was nothing complicated either. I build and installed the Vista system just weeks before 7 came out, and did the upgrade as soon as the free media was available. The customer was a light user and didn't know how to check his email when I delivered the thing, so it's not like he was in editing the registry or something. The whole thing had hardly been touched.
Anyway, I don't doubt that you've had good experiences with it, but it's not something I'll try again.
I've switched to win 8 on my gaming PC because it boots much faster with my uefi board and ssd - about 20 seconds to desktop.
My desktop computer boots to a desktop in around 10 seconds in Ubuntu or Windows 7. My laptop (Core i3) in under 20. I'm not trying to get into a hardware pissing contest, I just don't see anything attractive about your claim for Windows 8, unless you have a specially slow computer. Maybe if you told us how long it takes to boot into Windows 7 by comparison we might see some comparative benefit.
Slashdot Mirror
It's too bad that the US and the EU can't work together in a more efficient way to develop material sciences.
Considering that MS and this grant from the EU are about the only two sources of revenue at Nokia right now, we can't really say that the collaboration isn't happening. Whether it could be more efficient, well--
LED room lights will double as "Li-Fi" wireless nodes
The great side benefit of that, that nobody seems to be talking about, is that living organisms can finally start to expose themselves on a routine basis to the low-level functioning of computer communication technology. In a mere few million years, we will have evolved to the point of comprehending the flickering of the LEDs, much the same as we now comprehend written and spoken communication.
Who knows, maybe we'll even co-evolve some sort of organic signalling system of the same calibre, so we can eliminate the computer 'middle man' altogether!
Keep in mind that MSO 2010 (I haven't looked at other versions), will refuse to run on a Windows Server if Remote Desktop Services is active, unless MSO is volume licensed. Best I could determine, this means you're getting a minimum of MSO Pro Plus at $500/user. Still a bargain compared to 100 individual licenses I suppose.
Yeah, yeah. I know. RTA. :(
How does one quantify the heartbeat of a daisy?
the marketing name changed from c-nat to cgnat
thereby making the term even more deceptive, since there is nothing at all inherently different about the NAT utilized by carriers and the NAT employed by a $30 desktop router. There's nothing "carrier grade" about it. They might as well call it closet grade NAT.
The WRT54GL is the minority of all routers.
For those who don't know, the L in WRT54GL stands for Linux. This routers was differentiated from the contemporary revision WRT54G only in that it ran the Linux-based firmware. While subsequent revisions of the WRT54G featured less and less capable hardware, the WRT54GL maintained its original configuration of flash and RAM, allowing it to run third party firmwares such as dd-wrt, openwrt, and Tomato.
To the average consumer, the WRT54GL looked exactly like the significantly less expensive WRT54G and its prolific variants, but to the power user and professional, it held much greater potential and warranted the higher price tag. These pros and power users generally have no use for stock firmwares, and are only interested in the open nature of the hardware platform, and are therefore willing to pay the premium (although personally I preferred the more capable and less expensive ASUS WL-520gu. I guess legend status has its privileges).
So yes, it is shocking to those who are familiar with the platform to learn that any significant portion of WRT54GL is running stock firmware in the wild.
It will probably really help on 3D movies where they are cheesing out by cutting the vertical resolution in half.
If 3D films only have half the vertical resolution, wouldn't a more sensible fix be to distribute files with double the normal height (or width in the case of SBS formats)? I've sometimes wondered why 1080p 3D files don't come in 1920x2160, or 3840x1080 resolution, which could be chopped and displayed on a normal 1080p display without the loss. It's like interlacing all over again.
What, because large companies aren't fickle about paid products too?
The clear solution then, is to call it not the metric system, and not SI, but "The Freedom System (TM)".
Learn to love Alaska [romancingalaska.com]
But still encouraging others to go there?
Roku will be dead soon
All existing tech will be dead soon. That's the nature of tech.
That said, however, I'm rather fond of my Roku. It's not perfect; seeking more than a couple minutes at a time is labourious, it won't play from a NAS without crappy add-on channels, and it won't let you control the refresh rate of your output. These shortcomings aside, I find my Roku to be an adequate means of bringing Netflix and a tonne of great free programming to my living room without the commercials and other obnoxious intrusions of traditional tv.
So what makes you think Roku is especially doomed?
As long as you don't care about least common denominator quality
I use a NAS and this has not been a big issue. My video is almost all 720p and 1080p and the audio mostly flac with a few mp3. BSPlayer on Android handles all of this fine (with the exception of 1080p on my wife's older Galaxy S), including connecting to the SMB share.
The only annoyance I ran into was streaming to the tv. It's a Samsung smart tv, and although it understands dlna, it inexplicably has no support for smb or nfs. I had no desire to set up a dlna server on my NAS box, so I instead installed in on my Tomato-based AP. This works fine once you realize you have to configure USB-based swap on a USB drive (that's a tutorial in itself), but for some reason it doesn't auto-add new media, so you have to rescan your file share every time you add something, which is a 3+-hour excercise.
That got old, so I finally put together an old ionitx machine with xbmcbuntu and now all seems to be right in the media streaming world. In the end, I would have no trouble recommending NAS for the backend with xbmc or a capable HD app for mobile devices on the front end. dlna complicates life unnecessarily in my experience.
Yes, Linux is great on servers. Or on supercomputers, where they have a programmer team to make it work. However, we are talking about desktop.
Linux is also great on desktops. I know, because I've been using it as my primary desktop OS for years. I've also set up Linux desktops for peers seniors, and adolescents. They're not programmers, and neither am I. Many of these setups I never see again after I set them up.
Malware problem - Linux is not immune to it, unless it somehow forbids one from running cutekittens.sh they got in an email attachment.
Good theory, but what's the real world infection rate of Windows to Linux? 10^3? 10^4? Even given the bigger install base of around 10^1, that's bad.
The only reason why there is little malware on Linux is because Linux has a tiny desktop market share, so it is not worth the effort to create malware for it. However, if the market share increasess there will be malware, just look as MacOS or Android.
That's a tired myth. You already know that Linux abounds on servers, and again, we're talking about real world. Just because malware exists for platforms other than Windows, doesn't make it a comparable problem.
Just install a fresh copy of Windows if possible. That takes time, but not a lot of "active" time.
That's only the beginning of the problem. The real problem is that a fresh copy of Windows is good for nothing. Next comes the problem of finding, downloading and installing drivers, basic usability software (like a web browser), removing crapware if you happen to be working with an OEM image, and fixing all the insane defaults. Four hours is a fair approximations, and it's silly to say that it's not a lot of active time, because last I checked, a usable and updated install of Windows 7 requires in the neighbourhood of 10 reboots and user intervention at a minimum interval of about 15 minutes, and that's on fast hardware.
I can take a Windows 3.0 program and run it on XP or 7 (either the 32bit version or in XP mode). Can I do the same with a 20 year old Linux binary? No, recompiling is not an option, because if the source was available, then it would make running old software on Windows also easier.
In the real world, most Linux-compatible software comes with the source code, while for Windows it does not.
On the other hand, Linux either works perfectly or there pretty much is no hope of making it work (incompatible/too new hardware, incompatible drivers etc) unless you are a programmer and can edit and recompile the whatever service that does not work.
Fortunately, in most cases it just works. The notable exception these days is wireless adapters.
I think I tried MoboPlayer and a whack of others on Android, but finally settled on BSPlayer as the only one that will play DTS sound. As a bonus, BSP can access SMB shares directly, bypassing the need for ES.
By 2015 no one should be running 32 bit XP software or operating systems anymore. I mean enough is enough!
MS is way ahead of you on that point.
Let me set the price, FB can take 10%.
The day they institute that is the day I might actually sign up.
a service that costs billions of dollars in infra structure
[citation needed]
This isn't health care we're talking about.
Everything is a remix.
As a long-time Teksavvy customer on an unlimited plan, after looking over Voltage Pictures catalogue all I can say is... those are movie titles?
Haven't seen a problem with this system since, nor do I recall the specifics of the error today, just that the upgrade process failed at some point after Win7 was installed, but before user files were restored. In fact, I don't specifically remember running the upgrade adviser at the time, so all the interesting details are lost at this point.
This game is so last year.
At the time I just chalked it up to bad tools and moved on. Three years on the customer continues to use the same Windows 7 install with no complaint.
if you haven't tried a Vista to 7 upgrade its the most painless thing in the world, you didn't even need a guy like me as long as you were replacing like with like, like 32 bit for 32bit, because it would transfer your docs and setting on the upgrade so it was pretty damned painless.
Lucky you. My first and only attempt to upgrade Vista to 7 resulted in the upgrader puking up something to the effect of "Upgrade can't continue. Sorry." At this point the upgrade was essentially finished, it merely failed to restore the user settings, resulting in me spending a buch of time digging user files out of buried folders with obscure names and plopping them back in their correct locations on the new system.
This was nothing complicated either. I build and installed the Vista system just weeks before 7 came out, and did the upgrade as soon as the free media was available. The customer was a light user and didn't know how to check his email when I delivered the thing, so it's not like he was in editing the registry or something. The whole thing had hardly been touched.
Anyway, I don't doubt that you've had good experiences with it, but it's not something I'll try again.
I've switched to win 8 on my gaming PC because it boots much faster with my uefi board and ssd - about 20 seconds to desktop.
My desktop computer boots to a desktop in around 10 seconds in Ubuntu or Windows 7. My laptop (Core i3) in under 20. I'm not trying to get into a hardware pissing contest, I just don't see anything attractive about your claim for Windows 8, unless you have a specially slow computer. Maybe if you told us how long it takes to boot into Windows 7 by comparison we might see some comparative benefit.