We wouldn't have to deal with bills like this one if the parents of the good ol' US would take the time to actually pay attention to what their children do for fun and watch on TV. It's not that hard!
This bill is the result of lazy US citizens who think the government should tell their children what they can and cannot watch on TV, and which video games they should be allowed to play. Sorry, folks, but we're getting exactly what we asked for.
Columbine... What a joke. If either one of those two bozos' parents had taken the time to talk to their children regularly, that "incident" could have been prevented, EASILY.
Wake up, people... Take an interest in your children, and get off your duffs!
Oh, BTW, I was born and raised in the US. I still live in the US. I hope things get better in the US...
Before I start my rant, here's the link for the CS department at Purdue University:
http://www.cs.purdue.edu/
Sounds like you were one of the people who couldn't cut the mustard in CS at Purdue, eh? Don't take too much offense, I got dropped from CS, as well as a few of my friends.
Purdue isn't THAT big, either. Geographically speaking, it's a fairly compact campus! There are quite a few students, but from my personal experience it isn't too difficult to get ahold of your profs during their office hours. They will remember you if you make the attempt to talk to them.
Lastly, thank you for your opinion on how Purdue's campus looks! I've been to a few other universities, and I have to say that although Purdue's brick buildings do start to look the same after a while, the campus is well laid out and the grounds crew does a decent job of keeping it clean.
I am no longer a student at Purdue, but I still live in Lafayette and work in West Lafayette, for Purdue University.
Isn't there a way to do realtime broadcast of mp3s? This would probably cost a lot less than RealAudio, even if it does take a little more bandwidth to get a good sounding stream. It could be done with a 10Kbit stream, mono...
I sure hope they can keep these powerstations on target when they beam the power down the the planet's surface! Of course, this would work way better than a nuke, so now we've got to worry about other countries building these things!
We just received a couple new systems, similarly spec'ed out, where I work. Two of the systems are nearly identical, except for the fact that one is running an IDE interface (ATA-66 hard drive, IDE DVD), and the other is running UW SCSI and narrow SCSI (UW hard drive, Narrow CD-ROM).
The SCSI system is so much faster that the IDE system, I really find it hard to believe that ATA-66 is all that great. IDE is IDE, and still has a long way to go before it will come close to the efficiency of SCSI.
Of course, from a performance/price standpoint, today's IDE is pretty impressive. I wouldn't mind having IDE in my home computer, but my servers will NEVER have an IDE drive system, period.
>Heh, like Microsoft and their pundits have been >saying about UNIX-like systems for a >decade or two now? Right.
Don't for get Mac! Everyone's been saying they've got hours to live for the past 5 years. I personally don't use Macs, but hey, what's wrong with choice?
>There will be *BSD machines running continously >from now until four or five years time.
Just like my little print server running Slackware Linux... BSD is older, but for certian things it does hold an advantage. No reason to say it should go away for quite a while, IMHO.
>Will all the same distributions be there? Maybe >not, though I rather expect to see a few more >rather than a few less. Don't forget that in the >current world a marginal position means >hundreds of thouands and maybe millions of >installations.
Eh... I think we have plenty of distributions right now, for both *BSD and Linux. Look at all the distro factions we have right now! We don't need any more FreeBSD, RedHat, etc. 'net militias.
>Incidentally, has anyone noticed that the real >fanatic Linux crowd are getting just as arrogant >as Microsoft or IBM ever were?
Well, every distro is going to have its more outspoken supporters. Just look at the article we're all responding to. If that isn't a good slice of arrogance, I don't know what is.
It's always the few bad people who ruin the fun for the rest of us.
Dang... From the tone of that article, I'd definately say the author looks down at Linux as an OS in many respects. This sounds like something I'd write about xBSD, only because I don't have a ton of experience with BSD systems.
Linux is every bit as stable and secure as xBSD, period. At least, my Linux systems tend to be. If you're running every experimental module on your 2.3.x kernel, yes, your system might be a little flakey and could have a few memory leaks. Stick with the stable kernel, and only use the services you need (for security & performance), and a Linux machine will run for months at a time, if not longer.
And that crack about how xBSD will run on a 486 system really got me laughing... My main system at home is a 386 running Linux, and it's running just fine with Linux (Slackware, baby!).
Speaking of Slackware, isn't it partially BSD based? BSD*nix?;-)
Oh, well. It's late, and I thought I'd post my opinion of this article.
It can be done, yes. You won't see much of a performance improvement by adding a third IDE channel, though. I'd just stick the two stripped drives on one channel, and the parity drive on the second channel (with the CD-ROM, if you have it...).
IDE is NOT going to yield good performance, period. Just because it is slow, though, doesn't mean you won't be able to get it to work perfectly. Play with it on IDE, and if you think it is worth it, invest in SCSI hardware.
SCSI costs more, but there's a reason for that extra $$$... You can plain DO more with SCSI!
At any rate, what this DOES mean is that AMD's marketing people are actually starting to think here. They've blown their marketing of previous chips (with the help of low volume production), and they need to make this new chip sell, BAD.
From what I've read about the new K7, it sounds like a real winner. As long as AMD can get the word out, and produce a large number of these processors ASAP, I think they will do very well. I guess only time will tell, though.
AMD could have picked other names, and they might have been worse. I haven't seen it posted on their website, so if they don't publicly acknowledge this label for the K7, they could change it later. Let's wait and see!
Danno
(Still have my AMD 386DX-40 system running Linux as my main home computer!;-)
Re:software processing of communications
on
K7 Benchmarking
·
· Score: 1
Man, I hope that NEVER happens... I hate WinModems, and WinxDSL cards would just suck.
Of course, most of us (I hope!) are running some form of *nix operating system, so we won't want them anyways! More processing time for RC5!;-)
I've done my own comparisions at work between Solaris x86, NT 4.0, and Linux. All I can say is Solaris and Linux performed much better than NT when it came to fileserving, serving up web pages, and being reliable.
I trust Solaris with serving DNS, web pages, sendmail, FTPing, Telneting, Samba, and running an IRC server all off of one machine with only 64Megs of RAM (Sun hardware). I wouldn't trust NT any farther than I could throw the box!
Why would Microsoft port Office to Linux in the first place? Why spend all the time, money, and effort on an operating system that you know they can't stand see get popular? I smell a rat...
Don't get me wrong, it's an intriguing idea. Maybe Microsoft is getting out of the OS business, and will only be doing applications soon?
Al Gore isn't responsible for making the internet what it is today... The commercial backing and educational backing of the internet has shaped it into what it is now. Gore is just an idiot trying to get some credit where it is definately NOT due. The internet was alive and kicking and growing on its own without any help from Gore.
He'd make a terrible president, BTW. I'm definately NOT voting for him.
So, on Sun systems, the ID does not come from the CPU, but from another part on the motherboard. Even if you switch processors, the number doesn't change. On an Intel P3 system, the ID is stored in the processor itself, so changing processors changes the ID.
I can see how this would be a pain in the ass if you wanted to upgrade near the end of the year from a 450Mhz P3 to a 550Mhz P3. You'll have to reinstall all of the software that is dependant on that ID, or at least reregister the software.
If Intel is trying to accomplish what Sun did with their ID numbers, they ought to rethink where the ID comes from on the computer. They could stick the ID number in the motherboard chipset, or in the BIOS.
I don't care much about all of this, though. I'm an AMD user.
Wow... That article was almost exactly how I felt after I had first installed linux over three years ago. I'd never touched a Unix type of operating system before, and although it was a struggle at first to understand what everything did, in a week I was able to get XWindows running, install a couple of browsers, fire up PPP over a DOV in my dorm, and plow through web pages.
Three years later, I am a systems administrator for almost a dozen Sun machines running Solaris. Thanks to Linux, I overcame my ignorance to Unix, and I'm a much happier computer user and administrator! All thanks to Linux.
You know, if you would just take a gamble and type your messages straight onto the board, instead of typing them in Word and running the spell check, it might be easier to read. Hehehehehe...
Three cheers for Linus, and everyone involved with Linux, GNU, FSF, etc... not to mention some of the people here who are using something OTHER than a Micro$oft or Macinto$h operating system.
I would have to agree... I think that the article in question here was editted heavily to make room for all the stupid banners on ZDNet (PCWeek). It would be nice to get the entire interview and post it somewhere, oh, like here?:-)
Slashdot Mirror
We wouldn't have to deal with bills like this one if the parents of the good ol' US would take the time to actually pay attention to what their children do for fun and watch on TV. It's not that hard!
This bill is the result of lazy US citizens who think the government should tell their children what they can and cannot watch on TV, and which video games they should be allowed to play. Sorry, folks, but we're getting exactly what we asked for.
Columbine... What a joke. If either one of those two bozos' parents had taken the time to talk to their children regularly, that "incident" could have been prevented, EASILY.
Wake up, people... Take an interest in your children, and get off your duffs!
Oh, BTW, I was born and raised in the US. I still live in the US. I hope things get better in the US...
Before I start my rant, here's the link for the CS department at Purdue University:
http://www.cs.purdue.edu/
Sounds like you were one of the people who couldn't cut the mustard in CS at Purdue, eh? Don't take too much offense, I got dropped from CS, as well as a few of my friends.
Purdue isn't THAT big, either. Geographically speaking, it's a fairly compact campus! There are quite a few students, but from my personal experience it isn't too difficult to get ahold of your profs during their office hours. They will remember you if you make the attempt to talk to them.
Lastly, thank you for your opinion on how Purdue's campus looks! I've been to a few other universities, and I have to say that although Purdue's brick buildings do start to look the same after a while, the campus is well laid out and the grounds crew does a decent job of keeping it clean.
I am no longer a student at Purdue, but I still live in Lafayette and work in West Lafayette, for Purdue University.
Wasn't the speed listed as "100Mb/s"? That's roughly 10Megs a second, not 100Megs a second.
Still, it isn't shabby, and if they can do it for $50 I'll buy a dozen.
:-)
Isn't there a way to do realtime broadcast of mp3s? This would probably cost a lot less than RealAudio, even if it does take a little more bandwidth to get a good sounding stream. It could be done with a 10Kbit stream, mono...
SaDan
Ever felt like flash-frying a blue whale?
I sure hope they can keep these powerstations on target when they beam the power down the the planet's surface! Of course, this would work way better than a nuke, so now we've got to worry about other countries building these things!
SaDan
We just received a couple new systems, similarly spec'ed out, where I work. Two of the systems are nearly identical, except for the fact that one is running an IDE interface (ATA-66 hard drive, IDE DVD), and the other is running UW SCSI and narrow SCSI (UW hard drive, Narrow CD-ROM).
The SCSI system is so much faster that the IDE system, I really find it hard to believe that ATA-66 is all that great. IDE is IDE, and still has a long way to go before it will come close to the efficiency of SCSI.
Of course, from a performance/price standpoint, today's IDE is pretty impressive. I wouldn't mind having IDE in my home computer, but my servers will NEVER have an IDE drive system, period.
SaDan
Yeah, right. I'd like to see you go out and drive an 18-wheeler, or start farming 800 acres by yourself. It's a lot harder than you think!!
I grew up on a farm, and I've done the work. It is much harder than it looks. And the "dime-a-dozen" farmers are already out of business.
If everyone in those professions in the post you replied to suddenly went on strike, we would all be in a world of hurt.
SaDan
'Vpenis' envy, perhaps? Sounds like you've got some personal issues... Interesting sig line.
SaDan
>Heh, like Microsoft and their pundits have been >saying about UNIX-like systems for a
>decade or two now? Right.
Don't for get Mac! Everyone's been saying they've got hours to live for the past 5 years. I personally don't use Macs, but hey, what's wrong with choice?
>There will be *BSD machines running continously >from now until four or five years time.
Just like my little print server running Slackware Linux... BSD is older, but for certian things it does hold an advantage. No reason to say it should go away for quite a while, IMHO.
>Will all the same distributions be there? Maybe >not, though I rather expect to see a few more
>rather than a few less. Don't forget that in the >current world a marginal position means
>hundreds of thouands and maybe millions of >installations.
Eh... I think we have plenty of distributions right now, for both *BSD and Linux. Look at all the distro factions we have right now! We don't need any more FreeBSD, RedHat, etc. 'net militias.
>Incidentally, has anyone noticed that the real >fanatic Linux crowd are getting just as arrogant
>as Microsoft or IBM ever were?
Well, every distro is going to have its more outspoken supporters. Just look at the article we're all responding to. If that isn't a good slice of arrogance, I don't know what is.
It's always the few bad people who ruin the fun for the rest of us.
SaDan
Dang... From the tone of that article, I'd definately say the author looks down at Linux as an OS in many respects. This sounds like something I'd write about xBSD, only because I don't have a ton of experience with BSD systems.
;-)
Linux is every bit as stable and secure as xBSD, period. At least, my Linux systems tend to be. If you're running every experimental module on your 2.3.x kernel, yes, your system might be a little flakey and could have a few memory leaks. Stick with the stable kernel, and only use the services you need (for security & performance), and a Linux machine will run for months at a time, if not longer.
And that crack about how xBSD will run on a 486 system really got me laughing... My main system at home is a 386 running Linux, and it's running just fine with Linux (Slackware, baby!).
Speaking of Slackware, isn't it partially BSD based? BSD*nix?
Oh, well. It's late, and I thought I'd post my opinion of this article.
SaDan
It can be done, yes. You won't see much of a performance improvement by adding a third IDE channel, though. I'd just stick the two stripped drives on one channel, and the parity drive on the second channel (with the CD-ROM, if you have it...).
IDE is NOT going to yield good performance, period. Just because it is slow, though, doesn't mean you won't be able to get it to work perfectly. Play with it on IDE, and if you think it is worth it, invest in SCSI hardware.
SCSI costs more, but there's a reason for that extra $$$... You can plain DO more with SCSI!
Athlon... It doesn't sound too bad.
;-)
At any rate, what this DOES mean is that AMD's marketing people are actually starting to think here. They've blown their marketing of previous chips (with the help of low volume production), and they need to make this new chip sell, BAD.
From what I've read about the new K7, it sounds like a real winner. As long as AMD can get the word out, and produce a large number of these processors ASAP, I think they will do very well. I guess only time will tell, though.
AMD could have picked other names, and they might have been worse. I haven't seen it posted on their website, so if they don't publicly acknowledge this label for the K7, they could change it later. Let's wait and see!
Danno
(Still have my AMD 386DX-40 system running Linux as my main home computer!
Man, I hope that NEVER happens... I hate WinModems, and WinxDSL cards would just suck.
;-)
Of course, most of us (I hope!) are running some form of *nix operating system, so we won't want them anyways! More processing time for RC5!
SaDan
I've done my own comparisions at work between Solaris x86, NT 4.0, and Linux. All I can say is Solaris and Linux performed much better than NT when it came to fileserving, serving up web pages, and being reliable.
I trust Solaris with serving DNS, web pages, sendmail, FTPing, Telneting, Samba, and running an IRC server all off of one machine with only 64Megs of RAM (Sun hardware). I wouldn't trust NT any farther than I could throw the box!
You can get Star Office for Windows... I tried it out a while back. Not to bad.
Why would Microsoft port Office to Linux in the first place? Why spend all the time, money, and effort on an operating system that you know they can't stand see get popular? I smell a rat...
Don't get me wrong, it's an intriguing idea. Maybe Microsoft is getting out of the OS business, and will only be doing applications soon?
Al Gore isn't responsible for making the internet what it is today... The commercial backing and educational backing of the internet has shaped it into what it is now. Gore is just an idiot trying to get some credit where it is definately NOT due. The internet was alive and kicking and growing on its own without any help from Gore.
He'd make a terrible president, BTW. I'm definately NOT voting for him.
Danno
So, on Sun systems, the ID does not come from the CPU, but from another part on the motherboard. Even if you switch processors, the number doesn't change. On an Intel P3 system, the ID is stored in the processor itself, so changing processors changes the ID.
I can see how this would be a pain in the ass if you wanted to upgrade near the end of the year from a 450Mhz P3 to a 550Mhz P3. You'll have to reinstall all of the software that is dependant on that ID, or at least reregister the software.
If Intel is trying to accomplish what Sun did with their ID numbers, they ought to rethink where the ID comes from on the computer. They could stick the ID number in the motherboard chipset, or in the BIOS.
I don't care much about all of this, though. I'm an AMD user.
SaDan
Wow... That article was almost exactly how I felt after I had first installed linux over three years ago. I'd never touched a Unix type of operating system before, and although it was a struggle at first to understand what everything did, in a week I was able to get XWindows running, install a couple of browsers, fire up PPP over a DOV in my dorm, and plow through web pages.
Three years later, I am a systems administrator for almost a dozen Sun machines running Solaris. Thanks to Linux, I overcame my ignorance to Unix, and I'm a much happier computer user and administrator! All thanks to Linux.
You know, if you would just take a gamble and type your messages straight onto the board, instead of typing them in Word and running the spell check, it might be easier to read. Hehehehehe...
Three cheers for Linus, and everyone involved with Linux, GNU, FSF, etc... not to mention some of the people here who are using something OTHER than a Micro$oft or Macinto$h operating system.
:-)
I would have to agree... I think that the article in question here was editted heavily to make room for all the stupid banners on ZDNet (PCWeek). It would be nice to get the entire interview and post it somewhere, oh, like here?