Dead on. I am in a COD Clan, which I will not mention here. We were in existence as far back as MOH Spearhead...and later hosted servers for COD UO, COD2, COD4, and now, WaW. We typically support (modded) servers long after others have left the game...and are currently still running servers for COD2 and COD4 in addition to WaW.
We buy our games on release day. Actually, we pick them up on release day...we buy them well in advance. We have about 150 clan members and another 100 or so associated regular players...in addition to our guests. We don't pirate...and we run PB...so they are free to check what they want for our members, regulars, and guests.
We pay over $400 a month for a dedicated physical server (on which we host multiple game servers). We also pay for a separate host for forums, map redirects, and a Vent server.
In the past, we have also run BF2, BF2142, MOH Airborne and other titles, but CoD is our primary game...and we were really looking forward to MW2. No longer.
We run only games that allow us to host our own server. We finally were able to swing that with BF and that's why we ran it. For us, the community is *at least* as important as the game. We want a single place (or set of servers actually) where our members, regulars, and guests can join us. We also want control over the maps, mods, and admin. We run a mature server and do not tolerate immature players, cheaters, or folks who lack sportsmanship.
Frankly, I have limited expectations for this petition...or any type of boycott. That said, my clan is out. There is no way that we support a game that doesn't allows us to host it. i.e., a game that ignores the importance of our community. We have had a fairly sizable number of members cancel pre-orders...and now have switched our attention to BF3. It's a big leap for us (sad, but true), but as the dude says, this will not stand.
Wow...that is absolutely amazing...and she is so fortunate to have a family that sees the situation so positively...and who supports related research by the scientific community to see if there is a potential broader benefit here. Frankly, it must be tough for them at times, but I am sure that my wife would *love* it if our little girl never grew up. Thank goodness her sisters are supportive, because they will most likely need to take care of her in the future after her parents advance in age. Great stuff.
...no offense implied to your post, with which I agree...but seriously mods, marking the fact that women don't like to be told that they are fat as "informative"? Are you serious? Let's mark posts that tell us that the sun is probably coming up tomorrow as informative as well.
...and no ladies, the jeans don't make your ass look fat...the dozen donuts that you ate this weekend make your ass look fat.;)
...but my thoughts are still awaiting moderation (facists)...so I will repeat myself:
In general, men and women *do* tend to look for diferent things in gadgets. Let's not pretend otherwise. That is not to say that all men are knowledgeable about such things or that all women are not, but seriously, when arguing a point about women not being technically clueless and Dell being insulting and/or condescending, perhaps they could get a better spokesperson. Seriously, did you folks read her comments?
If the netbook is great for using the Internet and has a long memory,
Long memory? Okay marketing "expert", perhaps you should step out of the spotlight now...since you have just reinforced the stereotypes that you are trying to dispel.
Yes, we could legislate this issue...and add flashing strobes to also help the deaf...and task a government agency to manage this mandate...and add more burden to customs, law enforcement, and the courts...and then also potentially create additional legislation to also outlaw the crop of non-phone-based portable silent cameras that will surely come to market if this legislation passes...
...or women could start wearing underwear.
Seriously, what can these perverts photograph if you are a women and wearing underwear beneath your dress? Anything more than they see of you at the beach? If so, are you concerned that a nice breeze will also expose your thong to the world? Perhaps you should wear pants.
Frankly, I think that it's a great problem to have. Sort of like "damn, the FDIC only insures up to $100,000 in any single bank for any single account holder. How will I keep all of this cash safe?"
If we have people walking around on this planet in 10,000 years, that would be awesome.
Regarding the warnings...well hell, it's not like we are trying to warn visitors from another planet in 10,000 years. There will be many generations in between now and then and each should carry that knowledge. Granted, we don't know all of the secrets of Stonehenge, but we are also no longer a sparsely populated largely agrarian planet. We have well-developed writing and communication skills that we will pass down. Certainly they will evolve, but one would hope that all will not be lost.
Of course, there is smallpox, genetically engineered smallpox (thanks Russia), and any number of other virulent strains that make nuclear weapons look like children's toys...and one of those biological agents could wipe out half the planet's population in a flash and leave the surviving civilization in quite a state of disarray...so perhaps they do need to solve this problem....but I am encouraged that we believe that we have the problem and that some experts feel that the planet won't just be inhabited by cockroaches at that time...or turned into a Venus-like pressure cooker due to the greenhouse effect. Rock on linguists.
Did I say all the engineers? No, I said "a bunch". Most sources seem to agree that the decision to launch Challenger was made by NASA and management...not engineering. Many Google sources agree. Example:
Forecasts for January 28 predicted an unusually cold morning, with temperatures close to 31 degrees F (â'1 degree C), the minimum temperature permitted for launch. The low temperature had prompted concern from engineers at Morton Thiokol, the contractor responsible for the construction and maintenance of the shuttle's SRBs. At a teleconference which took place on the evening of January 27, Thiokol engineers and managers discussed the weather conditions with NASA managers from Kennedy Space Center and Marshall Space Flight Center. Several engineers - most notably Roger Boisjoly, who had voiced similar concerns previously - expressed their concern about the effect of the temperature on the resilience of the rubber O-rings that sealed the joints of the SRBs. They argued that if the O-rings were colder than 53 degrees F (12 degrees C), there was no guarantee they would seal properly. This was an important consideration, since the O-rings had been designated as a "Criticality 1" componentâ"meaning that there was no backup for them and their failure would destroy Challenger and its crew. They also argued that the low overnight temperatures would almost certainly result in SRB temperatures below their redline of 40 ÂF (4 ÂC). However, they were overruled by Morton Thiokol management, who recommended that the launch proceed as scheduled.
...and...
Although the Ice Team had worked through the night removing ice, engineers at Rockwell International, the shuttle's prime contractor, still expressed concern. Rockwell engineers watching the pad from their headquarters in Downey, California were horrified when they saw the amount of ice. They feared that during launch, ice might be shaken loose and strike the shuttle's thermal protection tiles, possibly due to the aspiration induced by the jet of exhaust gas from the SRBs. Rocco Petrone, the head of Rockwell's space transportation division, and his colleagues viewed this situation as a launch constraint, and told Rockwell's managers at the Cape that Rockwell could not support a launch. However, Rockwell's managers at the Cape voiced their concerns in a manner that led Houston-based mission manager Arnold Aldrich to go ahead with the launch. Aldrich decided to postpone the shuttle launch by an hour in order to give the Ice Team time to perform another inspection. After that last inspection, during which the ice appeared to be melting, Challenger was finally cleared to launch at 11:38 a.m. EST
...and...
Feynman was so critical of flaws in NASA's "safety culture" that he threatened to remove his name from the report unless it included his personal observations on the reliability of the shuttle, which appeared as Appendix F.[32][33] In the appendix, he argued that the estimates of reliability offered by NASA management were wildly unrealistic, differing as much as a thousandfold from the estimates of working engineers. "For a successful technology," he concluded, "reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled."
While Columbia was still in orbit, some engineers suspected damage, but NASA managers limited the investigation on the grounds that little could be done even if problems were found
Granted, in the Columbia disaster, other engineers performed simulations and stated that the damage wa
Awesome response posted on Washingtonpost.com
on
Send the ISS To the Moon
·
· Score: 5, Informative
astrobill wrote:
As a space physicist and engineer, I praise Mr. Benson's enthusiasm for space exploration. However, I feel compelled to explain to him and the millions of Post readers he was allowed to mislead why his idea to send the International Space Station (ISS) on interplanetary jaunts is wholly unrealistic, and frankly, impossible.
For one thing, the shielding, wall thicknesses, and many other design aspects of the ISS were chosen to protect crews from the worst-case radiation environment known to exist throughout its present orbital environment. The ISS spends its entire time wholly within the protective cocoon of the Earth's magnetosphere, a complex electromagnetic structure generated within the Earth which also happens to protect the Earth from most forms of high energy cosmic rays and other ionizing particles. The ISS design is wholly unsuitable for long-duration jaunts outside this region and could not easily or practically be changed at this point to accommodate a different environment.
Secondly, Mr. Benson's proposal to simply connect engines to the ISS and launch it away from Earth and onto interplanetary trajectories completely ignores the fact that every source of propulsion he cites would impart accelerations, even small ones for certain scenarios, that the ISS structure, joints, and arrays simply cannot accommodate -- the structure would simply exceed design tolerances under any source of thrust sufficient to launch it out of Earth orbit and on a transfer trajectory around the Sun to another Solar System body. Moreover, even the low-thrust ion engines Mr. Benson cites (actually, low "specific impulse," but that's another lesson...) would be unable to launch the ISS onto a transfer orbit to another solar system body, and certainly not on any reasonable timescale. It would be, perhaps, years before Mr. Benson's hypothetically-suitable ion engines could impart enough added velocity ("delta-V" to engineers) to move the ISS into an appreciably higher orbit, much less on a suitable trajectory to another planet in our Solar System. The ISS would require thousands of miles per hour of additional velocity to be placed onto such an orbit, regardless of the engine type used.
Thirdly, Mr. Benson's essay completely ignores the fundamental fact that even the most efficient transfer orbit between Earth and, say, Mars, requires at least 8-9 months each way, not to mention the time spent actually DOING anything once there. The ISS is simply unable to hold enough food, water, air, and other "consumables" for any sized crew for the duration of any mission of the type Mr. Benson has in mind. And "direct" trajectory missions that ignore the more efficient transfer trajectories require so much acceleration that the ISS would simply flex and buckle were an attempt made.
Forth, the amount of power the ISS solar arrays can generate is fundamentally tied to the solar energy received on their surfaces. Some of the interplanetary bodies Mr. Benson proposes visiting are at locations too far from the Sun for the arrays to generate enough power to operate systems on board. For example, the ISS solar arrays at Mars would receive only about half as much solar energy per square meter as they do at Earth. The ISS simply cannot accommodate hanging enough "extra" solar panels on its structure to make up for the difference, and wiring in new, additional power sources would require wholesale redesign of the ISS.
There are about a dozen other significant reasons why sending the ISS on interplanetary missions is completely unfeasible from a technical perspective, and which time an space prohibit me from addressing here.
Mr. Benson's claim that "...there are good answers to all these objections..." and his attempt at preemptive criticism of "skeptics" -- as well his claim that NASA is not "particularly welcoming to outside ideas" -- does not obviate the laws of physics, engineering limitations, much less the laws of astrodynamics and the hostile environment of our solar system.
Very interesting...and I did Google it...and ii turns out that there are actually four inclinations that allow one to orbit the moon indefinitely: 27Â, 50Â, 76Â, and 86Â
Still though, it's an interesting point and a nice read...so thanks for the info.
Me? I am still going with the lack of radiation shielding as the nail in the coffin. That reason alone makes this guy's idea seem fairly poorly thought out.
Design phase means they have requirements. Most likely detailed requirements...with detailed interface specifications between thousands of systems. Design of a system like Ares is not just industrial engineering. There are most likely a myriad of electrical, computer, and software systems being designed in parallel. Most likely thousands of items in fact.
Of course, the real issue is most likely that people have a vested personal interest in the current direction...and perhaps congressional support for tasks being performed (or that will be performed) in their districts.
Of course, I am just guessing. I don't build rockets...but I do work on software systems that have 5-10 million LOC...and there is a heck of a lot of work that is performed before coding starts...so I wouldn't assume that they don't have much invested in Ares yet just because they are not yet building...unless they are performing extreme agile spiral rocket building.;)
Of course, good ideas should not be dismissed...and given the size of this contingent, their proposal almost certainly warrants further investigation. Napkin drawing? Some of the most creative ideas in the world started in this fashion...and 57 engineers with a 100+ page white paper and a website is one hell of a napkin. Of course, it's almost certainly orders of magnitude less mature than the Ares design, but I think that the idea at least warrants a DAR.
What happened the last time that NASA ignored a bunch of their engineers? I think they had plenty of time to reconsider while they were picking up Shuttle parts all over the western US.
Ahhh...yes, good point. I'll admit that I just skimmed.
That said, I still believe that he'll give up the password(s). He may be a belligerent and arrogant neckbeard...but the potential consequences are going to start to set in soon...and unless he is mentally unbalanced, once he cools off, he will most likely try to reduce any further time spent in the CA penal system...and yes, you can spell that a different way and still be accurate.
I work in an "at will" state as well...but most organizations STILL require a significant paper trail of counseling sessions, warnings, and progress measurement before anyone is terminated for poor performance.
This procedure is pretty ingrained in most HR types...partially due to the fact that they believe everyone deserves a chance to know that they are failing, what they need to do to improve, and be given a chance to do so...but a HUGE part of it is liability protection...and people are free to sue in all 50 states...even "at will" states.
They are still free to sue if you do all of this of course, but most courts would rule that their case has no merit in the face of such objective and thorough documentation.
I'll wager that you've never fired someone in a white collar environment...and be happy for that. It is not fun...and no one feels very good at the end.
Firing someone for poor performance (as opposed to firing someone for a single unacceptable action) takes time....and MUCH coordination...at least everywhere that I have worked.
In a decently managed environment, the employee knows in advance that his management views his/her performance as unacceptable since the manager has discussed it with the employee and laid out a plan for improvement. Even an average employee could see the writing on the wall weeks/months in advance...but this individual was also using his administrative access to monitor related email messages.
If his group comprised even a moderately-sized MIS group, you could pull his admin responsibilities and transfer him to a role with lesser rights during the period of performance review and monitoring...but this individual was most likely hired to do this very specific job...and there may not have been another position in to which he could transition naturally...even temporarily.
My question - where are the backup tapes? Pull the tapes from a date prior to his manipulation of the system. Presumably, it should not be that long ago if they were ensuring that at least one other admin had routine access to the system. In such a case, they should have known within 24 hours that he had done something. If, on the other hand, he was a one man show, then I think that they are screwed until he gives up his password...which he will. Mark my word.
I love that router...and have three running Tomato at home - two configured as bridges. Regardless of what anyone says about Linksys, I'll give them props for coming out with the GL and keeping it out there just for the geeks. They are ROCK solid with Tomato.
I would also love to see the N spec go final...and then see a Tomato-supported N router hit the market. G is getting a little long in the tooth to stream video in my place.
I am also bewildered by the supposed reports of a schedule slip. Shoddy reporting.
As far as "difficult to develop for?"...
Well, let's start with the fact that the SDK will have been out in some form for nearly a year before we even see the OS released on consumer hardware...as opposed to one year AFTER the iPhone was released. Considering that fact, any comment on maturity seems overly harsh. BTW, this SDK runs on just about anything...also unlike the iPhone SDK...assuming that you received a blessing from Cupertino to get a copy.
Let's also consider that an OS like Android is going to have to be far more robust and flexible than the iPhone OS. The iPhone, like the MacOS/Leopard/Snow Bunny OSes, has the convenience of running on only a small number of device architectures. Those architectures are finite and well-known by Apple. In contrast, Android must be an OS that supports a wide range of ever-evolving architectures and feature sets...or lack thereof.
This complexity extends from the OS to the application development environment. When you write an application for the iPhone, you know the exact screen size and available resources. Not so for Adroid. Your UI must scale...or be lowest common denominator. You may leverage supporting peripherals like a camera, GPS, trackball, physical keyboard, SD card slot...but then again, you better be prepared for them not to be there. Processor? Memory size? There may be min specs, but having to build an OS that runs on the expected range of offerings is not trivial.
Masking some of this complexity is a task for the Android OS developers...which is why it is inherently more complex than an OS for a finite set of devices...but it is worth it...at least to the consumer...by fostering an environment that motivates hardware innovation by a range of competing vendors.
Seriously folks, let's not be disingenuous and just pretend that the only difference between the iPhone and Android (or the MacOS and Windows) is Apple's genius.
Multiple accounts isn't working for me...or many others who use queues for their children. I can now create a profile for my child that only allows her to rent movies listed at a certain rating or below. NetFlix labels this attribute "maturity rating." A dedicated (more expensive) account for each child isn't cutting it for many of us...especially since it also gives the child access to account management settings.
Couldn't agree more...assuming that you have a plan with at least two disks at one time. It allows everyone to be happy...and avoids fights between siblings and/or partners.
In fact, if NetFlix was smart, they would aggressively market this feature to motivate users to have a plan that has at least as many disks as the household has family members. I imagine that most NetFlix users don't see the need to have a plan that supports having more than 2 or 3 disks out at once...but if NetFlix marketed queues properly, a 5 member household might immediately see the need to upgrade to a 5 disk plan.
Netflix claims that only 2% of their users utilize multiple queues...and they also state that maintaining them is a burden.
2% usage? Man, I am consistently amazed at the ineptitude of the average consumer. This is a FANTASTIC feature...and I cannot imagine that the majority of Netflix customers who have more than one movie-watching individual in their household would not benefit.
My wife and I use it for my teenage daughter. We have a separate "one movie" queue for her that allows her to select her own movies...and manage that movie without interfering with our queue. We are never stuck in line behind her and vice versa. We have also defined her queue such that she can only add movies rated between G and PG-13.
I know other folks who use this feature so that husbands and wives (or boyfriends and girlfriends) have similar autonomy.
My wife and I have contacted NetFlix. I have also signed the petition (http://www.petitiononline.com/netflix0/petition.html)...but frankly, if we are only 2% of the population and maintenance for some odd reason (poor implementation perhaps?) is onerous, it may be to their benefit to take their chances and see if we will really jump. Dang, I am just amazed that more people do not see the benefit of these queues...but then again, probably only 2% of people did not have a blinking 12:00 on their VCRs when that technology ruled the family room.
Oh well, I really will go to Blockbuster if this occurs. The option of a brick and mortar rental for impulse viewing trumps NetFlix when they get rid of queues. I suppose NetFlix is focusing on online content delivery now...and they may just not care as much about silver disks at this point...even though they represent 99.99% of their business.
I had a whitelist for my mobile phone starting four years ago...and loved it, but lost it when I "upgraded" my phone a couple of years ago.
The capability was actually built-in to the specific Motorola mobile handset that I was using. The phone had an option to send callers directly to voice mail if they were not in my address book. It would also capture the incoming phone number in my call list. Friends and family got right through. Those whose numbers I did not have left a message...which I then added to the address book just by going to the call list and hitting "save."
The downsides:
- Calls from offices often come in with a semi-random PBX number...so even if I had my wife's or friends' office numbers in my address book, their incoming call would normally get kicked to voice mail. It actually trained them. They stopped calling from those lines and started calling me from their mobile phones.
- I had to remember to turn this feature off if I was expecting a service or delivery person to call me before they dropped by my house...because I didn't have a home phone either.
Small price to pay. That said, the "do not call" list has made my life somewhat easier...but I do miss the whitelist capability at times...and it looks like I might need it again some day according to TFA.
Why do iPods outsell other MP3 players? You can tout their UI or iTunes, but I honestly believe it comes down to the fact that they look cool and, perhaps more importantly, many folks who buy them are trying to also make a fashion (or cultural) statement. No longer does one need to have an opinion on individual issues...or evaluate the superiority of a specific product. No...all you need to do is grab a brand and slap it on your forehead.
Someone mentioned that the iPhone is essentially a sexed-up Treo. As a long-time Treo owner, I very much disagree. It isn't even close to a Treo...at least in terms of functionality.
I love my Treo. Is the PalmOS dead? Almost certainly. Is the Treo hardware innovative? Not anymore. Not even close. So why do I prefer the Treo over an iPhone? Countless reasons, 3G and multiple carriers aside (and those are fairly large issues to set aside).
Start with the fact that I can install whatever software I want on my Treo...and do - MP3 players, streaming internet radio players, video players (and recorders), a JVM, games, eBook readers, an RPN calculator, PDF readers, DocsToGo to both view AND create Microsoft Office documents, third-party phone dialers, third-party web browsers and email clients, third-party IM clients...whatever I want...and they are not AJAX applications. They are rich client-side applications with access to the full range of phone functionality.
Memory is another issue. How much RAM does an iPhone have? My Treo? It has infinite storage...since it accepts SD cards. I just came back from vacation...and I brought about 30 hours of video, including full length movies and content from my TiVo. I also brought several thousand MP3s and hundreds of eBooks. SD cards are dirt cheap and extremely portable...and essentially allow you to have infinite storage on the go...and obviate the need to upgrade every time that you have gigabyte lust.
Is the Treo UI sexy? Hell no. Sure, you can change it in many ways with third-party applications, but in general, the iPhone kills it in this regard...but the UI is also very FUNCTIONAL. I can enter an appointment in one click, have a global find function, can cut and paste, can search for a contact by typing a few letters and have it match either first name, last name, occupation, or company (using TakePhone). I can delete (or mark read) multiple email messages at once. I have a real keyboard with tactile feedback and ten other fully programmable hard buttons...and a D-pad. I have utility applications that can change phone behavior in almost anyway - how lights flash for various events, when the phone rings, how it rings (for example, different ring tones for different people...or times of day). I even have a utility that allows me to send a specific SMS to the phone and have it perform any one of a number of functions, include lock, wipe memory, or wipe memory and SD card. The real issue is that the platform is OPEN for development. Applications developed with the iPhone SDK will be crippled...and will have to live in tightly defined sandbox.
Oh well, Palm is all but dead...but that doesn't make my 3G Treo any less valuable...at least until something better comes along. I will admit, the iPhone's 320x480 screen (50% larger than my Treo's 320x320 screen) looks AWESOME...and I would love to have it. Safari also beats the pants off of Blazer and Opera Mini...and WiFi would be killer in certain situations. Thus, I am keeping a very close eye on the next iPhone...and developments in the iPhone SDK world...as I am with Android. I seriously doubt my next phone will be Palm-based...and I am no longer on contract so I am ready to jump platforms...but I have just not seen the compelling reason yet.
Your mileage may vary.
BTW, whatever phone you have, this software is an excellent way to get video on to it - http://www.pqdvd.com./ I am not affiliated with them in any way. I am just a very happy customer.
Excellent points...and I also assume that performance far exceeds a VM-based install.
That said, for many of us who need to maintain Windows, dual booting is somewhat painful. Can you imagine having to reboot each time that you needed to use Outlook and then reboot again to get back to Linux? WUBI, like most dual booting options, seems like a great idea for someone who wants to take the leap, but doesn't want to commit 100%...but also someone who does not need to routinely perform functions in Windows.
Like many, I need to switch back and forth in real-time...and I also would prefer not to be locked into Windows and just one other OS. A VM-based approach addresses both issues for someone like me. In fact, as I type this in windows, I can glance over at two VMs that I have running on my second monitor - Ubuntu 7.10 and OpenSUSE 10.3...and I can be in either one and back out in a flash. I agree that it is certainly more complex than how you represent a WUBI install...but then I think Joe SixPack may stumble again after the install. Say, perhaps when it comes time to get his wireless drivers working.;-)
In fact, the last Ubuntu install that I performed had major issues with monitor detection...and each boot took approximately 5 minutes. I hunted dowwn the fix (editing a file of course) and thought of that very same Joe SixPack after I made the fix. Don't get me wrong...I think Ubuntu can be great for low-tech user...and my 78 year-old mother is using a Ubuntu box, which replaced her spyware infested Windows box...but I think we are still quite some distance away from the ease of a windows install with plug-and-play hardware detection. While they have made amazing progress, they are not there yet...and a quick search for "wireless" in the Ubuntu forums will tend to support that bold claim.;-)
Re:** How does this compare with VMWare server per
on
Ubuntu 8.04 Beta Released
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
My empirical evidence shows otherwise. That may be due to a range of factors...not the least of which is the fact that the VM creates a hardware architecture that is more generic and thus, you may not have access to optimized drivers for your specific hardware (e.g., graphics card). The fact that an entire windows stack is running underneath the VMWare server application also cannot be understated, however, regardless of how efficient the VMWare Server application is. Keep in mind, I am talking about (the free) VMWare server...and not VMWare ESX.
BTW, this isn't just theoretical for me. I have numerous VMWare Server installs.
One example, I have Ubuntu 7.10 installed on two devices at home:
1) Installed as the actual OS on a 5 year-old Compaq laptop with 512 MB of RAM (and it was a budget laptop the day that I bought it new)
2) Installed in VMWare on a intel-based quad core Q6600 with 4GB of RAM, an 8800GT GPU, and a 10k Raptor Hard Drive...running XP SP2 as the base OS.
The compaq laptop Ubuntu performance absolutely SMOKES Ubuntu running in VMWare in the Q6600...even when the Q6600-based PC is running nothing beyond anti-virus, anti-spyware, and other lighter weight services. I don't have CPU mark tests, so I apologize for throwing out an assessment without objective measures to base it...but I stand by it. I will try to run some tests to isolate the GPU factor however, since I really believe that is a large part of the issue. Native graphic drivers are just plain better.
Actually, is states that it does not "affect the existing bootloader", but you are right...I definitely missed the boat there. I read that description, but I think my past experience unconsciously dismissed that line because I do not see how that is possible. That said, I have googled a bit since posting my original message and it appears that it does not replace your boatloader, but does require upadtes to the existing loader...as well as adding another one. Specifically, it does this:
1. On installation, WUBI adds an entry in the settings of the ntldr boot loader of Windows 2000/XP/2003.
2. That entry points toward a special version of the grub bootloader (grub4dos) that does not overwrite to the Master Boot Record on your hard drive.
3. On boot, it searches for wubi/boot/initrd and wubi/boot/linux.
Modifying boot.ini is no big deal...as long as they stay away from my MBR. Thanks for keeping me honest.
cheers, Steve
** How does this compare with VMWare server perf?
on
Ubuntu 8.04 Beta Released
·
· Score: 5, Informative
I use (the free) VMWare Server (not ESX) on Windows boxes for various Linux installs...including Ubuntu. I do not understand an earlier comment stating that VMWare Server is complex. You install it as a Windows application, fire it up, select "new VM", choose a linux distro (Ubuntu 32 and 64 are options) for the VM architecture, and away you go...you now have a VM ready for a Linux install. The Live Ubuntu CD works with no issues...as does the default Ubuntu install.
You can also tweak the number of processors, hard disk size, and memory that you assign to the VM, but VMWare suggests low-end (working) default values. I have run VMWare on numerous machines (laptops, desktops, servers) and it just plain works. It is a fantastic way to test out various distros without putting the Windows partition at risk. If you take the time to mount and install VMWare Tools in the VM's hosted OS, switching back and forth between the host and guest OSes (including copying and pasting) is a breeze. You can also have as many VMs (and OSes) installed as you please. Want to play with 8.04 without losing 7.10? No problem. Create a new VM.
Downsides include:
- It is virtualized. Thus, it is going to run significantly slower than a native install.
- You are limited by the types of hardware architectures that VMWare simulates. That said, I have not had issues getting any sound or graphics card to work...and the networking options are fantastic. I cannot get access to all four cores however. The free VMWare server only allows me to create a VM that simulates either 1 or 2 CPUs...and I am not sure how many cores the VMWare container is using.
- Memory...since Windows is still running, it needs its share. Thus, you need a lot.
Of course, on the positive side, Windows is still running...so you have access to whatever you need there (e.g., Outlook, games, whatever). You can also run in reverse, and run VMWare on Linux and install Windows in a VM, but I dare say that most of us are in a situation that requires (or prefers) the VMWare on Windows approach.
I assume that Windows is not running in the WUBI option and that Ubuntu is running right on the metal (not virtualized), with full access to the real hardware architecture and all of the memory. Putting the HD in a Windows file must have some performance impact, but most likely far less than the entire OS in a VM (which also uses the Windows file approach for the HD). Does anyone have anecdotal performance impressions for WUBI? It sounds very cool and a great option for someone who is not yet committed...but I will say that I am not much of a fan of modifying the boot loader, but perhaps I am just being overly skittish.
Lunch is not free. Authors and publishers have mortgages too.
The book is available online for reading online only - not for download - and the online version looks like a series of highly compressed JPEG images given the "noise" surrounding the text. You would have to be fairly frugal to read the entire book on that site...and that is most likely by design. Read a chapter or two and then buy the book if you like it...and like your eyes.
Slashdot Mirror
Dead on. I am in a COD Clan, which I will not mention here. We were in existence as far back as MOH Spearhead...and later hosted servers for COD UO, COD2, COD4, and now, WaW. We typically support (modded) servers long after others have left the game...and are currently still running servers for COD2 and COD4 in addition to WaW.
We buy our games on release day. Actually, we pick them up on release day...we buy them well in advance. We have about 150 clan members and another 100 or so associated regular players...in addition to our guests. We don't pirate...and we run PB...so they are free to check what they want for our members, regulars, and guests.
We pay over $400 a month for a dedicated physical server (on which we host multiple game servers). We also pay for a separate host for forums, map redirects, and a Vent server.
In the past, we have also run BF2, BF2142, MOH Airborne and other titles, but CoD is our primary game...and we were really looking forward to MW2. No longer.
We run only games that allow us to host our own server. We finally were able to swing that with BF and that's why we ran it. For us, the community is *at least* as important as the game. We want a single place (or set of servers actually) where our members, regulars, and guests can join us. We also want control over the maps, mods, and admin. We run a mature server and do not tolerate immature players, cheaters, or folks who lack sportsmanship.
Frankly, I have limited expectations for this petition...or any type of boycott. That said, my clan is out. There is no way that we support a game that doesn't allows us to host it. i.e., a game that ignores the importance of our community. We have had a fairly sizable number of members cancel pre-orders...and now have switched our attention to BF3. It's a big leap for us (sad, but true), but as the dude says, this will not stand.
The clan abides,.
Wow...that is absolutely amazing...and she is so fortunate to have a family that sees the situation so positively...and who supports related research by the scientific community to see if there is a potential broader benefit here. Frankly, it must be tough for them at times, but I am sure that my wife would *love* it if our little girl never grew up. Thank goodness her sisters are supportive, because they will most likely need to take care of her in the future after her parents advance in age. Great stuff.
...no offense implied to your post, with which I agree...but seriously mods, marking the fact that women don't like to be told that they are fat as "informative"? Are you serious? Let's mark posts that tell us that the sun is probably coming up tomorrow as informative as well.
...and no ladies, the jeans don't make your ass look fat...the dozen donuts that you ate this weekend make your ass look fat. ;)
...but my thoughts are still awaiting moderation (facists)...so I will repeat myself:
BTW, I tried to comment here:
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/what-do-women-want-in-a-laptop/
In general, men and women *do* tend to look for diferent things in gadgets. Let's not pretend otherwise. That is not to say that all men are knowledgeable about such things or that all women are not, but seriously, when arguing a point about women not being technically clueless and Dell being insulting and/or condescending, perhaps they could get a better spokesperson. Seriously, did you folks read her comments?
If the netbook is great for using the Internet and has a long memory,
Long memory? Okay marketing "expert", perhaps you should step out of the spotlight now...since you have just reinforced the stereotypes that you are trying to dispel.
$0.02
- Scuba
Yes, we could legislate this issue...and add flashing strobes to also help the deaf...and task a government agency to manage this mandate...and add more burden to customs, law enforcement, and the courts...and then also potentially create additional legislation to also outlaw the crop of non-phone-based portable silent cameras that will surely come to market if this legislation passes...
...or women could start wearing underwear.
Seriously, what can these perverts photograph if you are a women and wearing underwear beneath your dress? Anything more than they see of you at the beach? If so, are you concerned that a nice breeze will also expose your thong to the world? Perhaps you should wear pants.
Frankly, I think that it's a great problem to have. Sort of like "damn, the FDIC only insures up to $100,000 in any single bank for any single account holder. How will I keep all of this cash safe?"
If we have people walking around on this planet in 10,000 years, that would be awesome.
Regarding the warnings...well hell, it's not like we are trying to warn visitors from another planet in 10,000 years. There will be many generations in between now and then and each should carry that knowledge. Granted, we don't know all of the secrets of Stonehenge, but we are also no longer a sparsely populated largely agrarian planet. We have well-developed writing and communication skills that we will pass down. Certainly they will evolve, but one would hope that all will not be lost.
Of course, there is smallpox, genetically engineered smallpox (thanks Russia), and any number of other virulent strains that make nuclear weapons look like children's toys...and one of those biological agents could wipe out half the planet's population in a flash and leave the surviving civilization in quite a state of disarray...so perhaps they do need to solve this problem....but I am encouraged that we believe that we have the problem and that some experts feel that the planet won't just be inhabited by cockroaches at that time...or turned into a Venus-like pressure cooker due to the greenhouse effect. Rock on linguists.
Phoenix Mars Lander To Begin Rasping Ice Shavings
Jesus, first huffing and now this. Will these youngsters ever learn?
I predict a short life if he continues on this road.
Did I say all the engineers? No, I said "a bunch". Most sources seem to agree that the decision to launch Challenger was made by NASA and management...not engineering. Many Google sources agree. Example:
...and...
...and...
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Challenger_disaster
Forecasts for January 28 predicted an unusually cold morning, with temperatures close to 31 degrees F (â'1 degree C), the minimum temperature permitted for launch. The low temperature had prompted concern from engineers at Morton Thiokol, the contractor responsible for the construction and maintenance of the shuttle's SRBs. At a teleconference which took place on the evening of January 27, Thiokol engineers and managers discussed the weather conditions with NASA managers from Kennedy Space Center and Marshall Space Flight Center. Several engineers - most notably Roger Boisjoly, who had voiced similar concerns previously - expressed their concern about the effect of the temperature on the resilience of the rubber O-rings that sealed the joints of the SRBs. They argued that if the O-rings were colder than 53 degrees F (12 degrees C), there was no guarantee they would seal properly. This was an important consideration, since the O-rings had been designated as a "Criticality 1" componentâ"meaning that there was no backup for them and their failure would destroy Challenger and its crew. They also argued that the low overnight temperatures would almost certainly result in SRB temperatures below their redline of 40 ÂF (4 ÂC). However, they were overruled by Morton Thiokol management, who recommended that the launch proceed as scheduled.
Although the Ice Team had worked through the night removing ice, engineers at Rockwell International, the shuttle's prime contractor, still expressed concern. Rockwell engineers watching the pad from their headquarters in Downey, California were horrified when they saw the amount of ice. They feared that during launch, ice might be shaken loose and strike the shuttle's thermal protection tiles, possibly due to the aspiration induced by the jet of exhaust gas from the SRBs. Rocco Petrone, the head of Rockwell's space transportation division, and his colleagues viewed this situation as a launch constraint, and told Rockwell's managers at the Cape that Rockwell could not support a launch. However, Rockwell's managers at the Cape voiced their concerns in a manner that led Houston-based mission manager Arnold Aldrich to go ahead with the launch. Aldrich decided to postpone the shuttle launch by an hour in order to give the Ice Team time to perform another inspection. After that last inspection, during which the ice appeared to be melting, Challenger was finally cleared to launch at 11:38 a.m. EST
Feynman was so critical of flaws in NASA's "safety culture" that he threatened to remove his name from the report unless it included his personal observations on the reliability of the shuttle, which appeared as Appendix F.[32][33] In the appendix, he argued that the estimates of reliability offered by NASA management were wildly unrealistic, differing as much as a thousandfold from the estimates of working engineers. "For a successful technology," he concluded, "reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled."
Columbia?
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Columbia_disaster
While Columbia was still in orbit, some engineers suspected damage, but NASA managers limited the investigation on the grounds that little could be done even if problems were found
Granted, in the Columbia disaster, other engineers performed simulations and stated that the damage wa
astrobill wrote:
As a space physicist and engineer, I praise Mr. Benson's enthusiasm for space exploration. However, I feel compelled to explain to him and the millions of Post readers he was allowed to mislead why his idea to send the International Space Station (ISS) on interplanetary jaunts is wholly unrealistic, and frankly, impossible.
For one thing, the shielding, wall thicknesses, and many other design aspects of the ISS were chosen to protect crews from the worst-case radiation environment known to exist throughout its present orbital environment. The ISS spends its entire time wholly within the protective cocoon of the Earth's magnetosphere, a complex electromagnetic structure generated within the Earth which also happens to protect the Earth from most forms of high energy cosmic rays and other ionizing particles. The ISS design is wholly unsuitable for long-duration jaunts outside this region and could not easily or practically be changed at this point to accommodate a different environment.
Secondly, Mr. Benson's proposal to simply connect engines to the ISS and launch it away from Earth and onto interplanetary trajectories completely ignores the fact that every source of propulsion he cites would impart accelerations, even small ones for certain scenarios, that the ISS structure, joints, and arrays simply cannot accommodate -- the structure would simply exceed design tolerances under any source of thrust sufficient to launch it out of Earth orbit and on a transfer trajectory around the Sun to another Solar System body. Moreover, even the low-thrust ion engines Mr. Benson cites (actually, low "specific impulse," but that's another lesson...) would be unable to launch the ISS onto a transfer orbit to another solar system body, and certainly not on any reasonable timescale. It would be, perhaps, years before Mr. Benson's hypothetically-suitable ion engines could impart enough added velocity ("delta-V" to engineers) to move the ISS into an appreciably higher orbit, much less on a suitable trajectory to another planet in our Solar System. The ISS would require thousands of miles per hour of additional velocity to be placed onto such an orbit, regardless of the engine type used.
Thirdly, Mr. Benson's essay completely ignores the fundamental fact that even the most efficient transfer orbit between Earth and, say, Mars, requires at least 8-9 months each way, not to mention the time spent actually DOING anything once there. The ISS is simply unable to hold enough food, water, air, and other "consumables" for any sized crew for the duration of any mission of the type Mr. Benson has in mind. And "direct" trajectory missions that ignore the more efficient transfer trajectories require so much acceleration that the ISS would simply flex and buckle were an attempt made.
Forth, the amount of power the ISS solar arrays can generate is fundamentally tied to the solar energy received on their surfaces. Some of the interplanetary bodies Mr. Benson proposes visiting are at locations too far from the Sun for the arrays to generate enough power to operate systems on board. For example, the ISS solar arrays at Mars would receive only about half as much solar energy per square meter as they do at Earth. The ISS simply cannot accommodate hanging enough "extra" solar panels on its structure to make up for the difference, and wiring in new, additional power sources would require wholesale redesign of the ISS.
There are about a dozen other significant reasons why sending the ISS on interplanetary missions is completely unfeasible from a technical perspective, and which time an space prohibit me from addressing here.
Mr. Benson's claim that "...there are good answers to all these objections..." and his attempt at preemptive criticism of "skeptics" -- as well his claim that NASA is not "particularly welcoming to outside ideas" -- does not obviate the laws of physics, engineering limitations, much less the laws of astrodynamics and the hostile environment of our solar system.
And contrary
Very interesting...and I did Google it...and ii turns out that there are actually four inclinations that allow one to orbit the moon indefinitely: 27Â, 50Â, 76Â, and 86Â
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/06nov_loworbit.htm
Still though, it's an interesting point and a nice read...so thanks for the info.
Me? I am still going with the lack of radiation shielding as the nail in the coffin. That reason alone makes this guy's idea seem fairly poorly thought out.
Design phase means they have requirements. Most likely detailed requirements...with detailed interface specifications between thousands of systems. Design of a system like Ares is not just industrial engineering. There are most likely a myriad of electrical, computer, and software systems being designed in parallel. Most likely thousands of items in fact.
Of course, the real issue is most likely that people have a vested personal interest in the current direction...and perhaps congressional support for tasks being performed (or that will be performed) in their districts.
Of course, I am just guessing. I don't build rockets...but I do work on software systems that have 5-10 million LOC...and there is a heck of a lot of work that is performed before coding starts...so I wouldn't assume that they don't have much invested in Ares yet just because they are not yet building...unless they are performing extreme agile spiral rocket building. ;)
Of course, good ideas should not be dismissed...and given the size of this contingent, their proposal almost certainly warrants further investigation. Napkin drawing? Some of the most creative ideas in the world started in this fashion...and 57 engineers with a 100+ page white paper and a website is one hell of a napkin. Of course, it's almost certainly orders of magnitude less mature than the Ares design, but I think that the idea at least warrants a DAR.
What happened the last time that NASA ignored a bunch of their engineers? I think they had plenty of time to reconsider while they were picking up Shuttle parts all over the western US.
Ahhh...yes, good point. I'll admit that I just skimmed.
That said, I still believe that he'll give up the password(s). He may be a belligerent and arrogant neckbeard...but the potential consequences are going to start to set in soon...and unless he is mentally unbalanced, once he cools off, he will most likely try to reduce any further time spent in the CA penal system...and yes, you can spell that a different way and still be accurate.
I work in an "at will" state as well...but most organizations STILL require a significant paper trail of counseling sessions, warnings, and progress measurement before anyone is terminated for poor performance.
This procedure is pretty ingrained in most HR types...partially due to the fact that they believe everyone deserves a chance to know that they are failing, what they need to do to improve, and be given a chance to do so...but a HUGE part of it is liability protection...and people are free to sue in all 50 states...even "at will" states.
They are still free to sue if you do all of this of course, but most courts would rule that their case has no merit in the face of such objective and thorough documentation.
I'll wager that you've never fired someone in a white collar environment...and be happy for that. It is not fun...and no one feels very good at the end.
Firing someone for poor performance (as opposed to firing someone for a single unacceptable action) takes time....and MUCH coordination...at least everywhere that I have worked.
In a decently managed environment, the employee knows in advance that his management views his/her performance as unacceptable since the manager has discussed it with the employee and laid out a plan for improvement. Even an average employee could see the writing on the wall weeks/months in advance...but this individual was also using his administrative access to monitor related email messages.
If his group comprised even a moderately-sized MIS group, you could pull his admin responsibilities and transfer him to a role with lesser rights during the period of performance review and monitoring...but this individual was most likely hired to do this very specific job...and there may not have been another position in to which he could transition naturally...even temporarily.
My question - where are the backup tapes? Pull the tapes from a date prior to his manipulation of the system. Presumably, it should not be that long ago if they were ensuring that at least one other admin had routine access to the system. In such a case, they should have known within 24 hours that he had done something. If, on the other hand, he was a one man show, then I think that they are screwed until he gives up his password...which he will. Mark my word.
I love that router...and have three running Tomato at home - two configured as bridges. Regardless of what anyone says about Linksys, I'll give them props for coming out with the GL and keeping it out there just for the geeks. They are ROCK solid with Tomato.
I would also love to see the N spec go final...and then see a Tomato-supported N router hit the market. G is getting a little long in the tooth to stream video in my place.
I am also bewildered by the supposed reports of a schedule slip. Shoddy reporting.
As far as "difficult to develop for?"...
Well, let's start with the fact that the SDK will have been out in some form for nearly a year before we even see the OS released on consumer hardware...as opposed to one year AFTER the iPhone was released. Considering that fact, any comment on maturity seems overly harsh. BTW, this SDK runs on just about anything...also unlike the iPhone SDK...assuming that you received a blessing from Cupertino to get a copy.
Let's also consider that an OS like Android is going to have to be far more robust and flexible than the iPhone OS. The iPhone, like the MacOS/Leopard/Snow Bunny OSes, has the convenience of running on only a small number of device architectures. Those architectures are finite and well-known by Apple. In contrast, Android must be an OS that supports a wide range of ever-evolving architectures and feature sets...or lack thereof.
This complexity extends from the OS to the application development environment. When you write an application for the iPhone, you know the exact screen size and available resources. Not so for Adroid. Your UI must scale...or be lowest common denominator. You may leverage supporting peripherals like a camera, GPS, trackball, physical keyboard, SD card slot...but then again, you better be prepared for them not to be there. Processor? Memory size? There may be min specs, but having to build an OS that runs on the expected range of offerings is not trivial.
Masking some of this complexity is a task for the Android OS developers...which is why it is inherently more complex than an OS for a finite set of devices...but it is worth it...at least to the consumer...by fostering an environment that motivates hardware innovation by a range of competing vendors.
Seriously folks, let's not be disingenuous and just pretend that the only difference between the iPhone and Android (or the MacOS and Windows) is Apple's genius.
Multiple accounts isn't working for me...or many others who use queues for their children. I can now create a profile for my child that only allows her to rent movies listed at a certain rating or below. NetFlix labels this attribute "maturity rating." A dedicated (more expensive) account for each child isn't cutting it for many of us...especially since it also gives the child access to account management settings.
Couldn't agree more...assuming that you have a plan with at least two disks at one time. It allows everyone to be happy...and avoids fights between siblings and/or partners.
In fact, if NetFlix was smart, they would aggressively market this feature to motivate users to have a plan that has at least as many disks as the household has family members. I imagine that most NetFlix users don't see the need to have a plan that supports having more than 2 or 3 disks out at once...but if NetFlix marketed queues properly, a 5 member household might immediately see the need to upgrade to a 5 disk plan.
Netflix claims that only 2% of their users utilize multiple queues...and they also state that maintaining them is a burden.
2% usage? Man, I am consistently amazed at the ineptitude of the average consumer. This is a FANTASTIC feature...and I cannot imagine that the majority of Netflix customers who have more than one movie-watching individual in their household would not benefit.
My wife and I use it for my teenage daughter. We have a separate "one movie" queue for her that allows her to select her own movies...and manage that movie without interfering with our queue. We are never stuck in line behind her and vice versa. We have also defined her queue such that she can only add movies rated between G and PG-13.
I know other folks who use this feature so that husbands and wives (or boyfriends and girlfriends) have similar autonomy.
My wife and I have contacted NetFlix. I have also signed the petition (http://www.petitiononline.com/netflix0/petition.html)...but frankly, if we are only 2% of the population and maintenance for some odd reason (poor implementation perhaps?) is onerous, it may be to their benefit to take their chances and see if we will really jump. Dang, I am just amazed that more people do not see the benefit of these queues...but then again, probably only 2% of people did not have a blinking 12:00 on their VCRs when that technology ruled the family room.
Oh well, I really will go to Blockbuster if this occurs. The option of a brick and mortar rental for impulse viewing trumps NetFlix when they get rid of queues. I suppose NetFlix is focusing on online content delivery now...and they may just not care as much about silver disks at this point...even though they represent 99.99% of their business.
I had a whitelist for my mobile phone starting four years ago...and loved it, but lost it when I "upgraded" my phone a couple of years ago.
The capability was actually built-in to the specific Motorola mobile handset that I was using. The phone had an option to send callers directly to voice mail if they were not in my address book. It would also capture the incoming phone number in my call list. Friends and family got right through. Those whose numbers I did not have left a message...which I then added to the address book just by going to the call list and hitting "save."
The downsides:
- Calls from offices often come in with a semi-random PBX number...so even if I had my wife's or friends' office numbers in my address book, their incoming call would normally get kicked to voice mail. It actually trained them. They stopped calling from those lines and started calling me from their mobile phones.
- I had to remember to turn this feature off if I was expecting a service or delivery person to call me before they dropped by my house...because I didn't have a home phone either.
Small price to pay. That said, the "do not call" list has made my life somewhat easier...but I do miss the whitelist capability at times...and it looks like I might need it again some day according to TFA.
Scuba
Why do iPods outsell other MP3 players? You can tout their UI or iTunes, but I honestly believe it comes down to the fact that they look cool and, perhaps more importantly, many folks who buy them are trying to also make a fashion (or cultural) statement. No longer does one need to have an opinion on individual issues...or evaluate the superiority of a specific product. No...all you need to do is grab a brand and slap it on your forehead.
Someone mentioned that the iPhone is essentially a sexed-up Treo. As a long-time Treo owner, I very much disagree. It isn't even close to a Treo...at least in terms of functionality.
I love my Treo. Is the PalmOS dead? Almost certainly. Is the Treo hardware innovative? Not anymore. Not even close. So why do I prefer the Treo over an iPhone? Countless reasons, 3G and multiple carriers aside (and those are fairly large issues to set aside).
Start with the fact that I can install whatever software I want on my Treo...and do - MP3 players, streaming internet radio players, video players (and recorders), a JVM, games, eBook readers, an RPN calculator, PDF readers, DocsToGo to both view AND create Microsoft Office documents, third-party phone dialers, third-party web browsers and email clients, third-party IM clients...whatever I want...and they are not AJAX applications. They are rich client-side applications with access to the full range of phone functionality.
Memory is another issue. How much RAM does an iPhone have? My Treo? It has infinite storage...since it accepts SD cards. I just came back from vacation...and I brought about 30 hours of video, including full length movies and content from my TiVo. I also brought several thousand MP3s and hundreds of eBooks. SD cards are dirt cheap and extremely portable...and essentially allow you to have infinite storage on the go...and obviate the need to upgrade every time that you have gigabyte lust.
Is the Treo UI sexy? Hell no. Sure, you can change it in many ways with third-party applications, but in general, the iPhone kills it in this regard...but the UI is also very FUNCTIONAL. I can enter an appointment in one click, have a global find function, can cut and paste, can search for a contact by typing a few letters and have it match either first name, last name, occupation, or company (using TakePhone). I can delete (or mark read) multiple email messages at once. I have a real keyboard with tactile feedback and ten other fully programmable hard buttons...and a D-pad. I have utility applications that can change phone behavior in almost anyway - how lights flash for various events, when the phone rings, how it rings (for example, different ring tones for different people...or times of day). I even have a utility that allows me to send a specific SMS to the phone and have it perform any one of a number of functions, include lock, wipe memory, or wipe memory and SD card. The real issue is that the platform is OPEN for development. Applications developed with the iPhone SDK will be crippled...and will have to live in tightly defined sandbox.
Oh well, Palm is all but dead...but that doesn't make my 3G Treo any less valuable...at least until something better comes along. I will admit, the iPhone's 320x480 screen (50% larger than my Treo's 320x320 screen) looks AWESOME...and I would love to have it. Safari also beats the pants off of Blazer and Opera Mini...and WiFi would be killer in certain situations. Thus, I am keeping a very close eye on the next iPhone...and developments in the iPhone SDK world...as I am with Android. I seriously doubt my next phone will be Palm-based...and I am no longer on contract so I am ready to jump platforms...but I have just not seen the compelling reason yet.
Your mileage may vary.
BTW, whatever phone you have, this software is an excellent way to get video on to it - http://www.pqdvd.com./ I am not affiliated with them in any way. I am just a very happy customer.
cheers,
Steve
Excellent points...and I also assume that performance far exceeds a VM-based install.
;-)
;-)
That said, for many of us who need to maintain Windows, dual booting is somewhat painful. Can you imagine having to reboot each time that you needed to use Outlook and then reboot again to get back to Linux? WUBI, like most dual booting options, seems like a great idea for someone who wants to take the leap, but doesn't want to commit 100%...but also someone who does not need to routinely perform functions in Windows.
Like many, I need to switch back and forth in real-time...and I also would prefer not to be locked into Windows and just one other OS. A VM-based approach addresses both issues for someone like me. In fact, as I type this in windows, I can glance over at two VMs that I have running on my second monitor - Ubuntu 7.10 and OpenSUSE 10.3...and I can be in either one and back out in a flash. I agree that it is certainly more complex than how you represent a WUBI install...but then I think Joe SixPack may stumble again after the install. Say, perhaps when it comes time to get his wireless drivers working.
In fact, the last Ubuntu install that I performed had major issues with monitor detection...and each boot took approximately 5 minutes. I hunted dowwn the fix (editing a file of course) and thought of that very same Joe SixPack after I made the fix. Don't get me wrong...I think Ubuntu can be great for low-tech user...and my 78 year-old mother is using a Ubuntu box, which replaced her spyware infested Windows box...but I think we are still quite some distance away from the ease of a windows install with plug-and-play hardware detection. While they have made amazing progress, they are not there yet...and a quick search for "wireless" in the Ubuntu forums will tend to support that bold claim.
My empirical evidence shows otherwise. That may be due to a range of factors...not the least of which is the fact that the VM creates a hardware architecture that is more generic and thus, you may not have access to optimized drivers for your specific hardware (e.g., graphics card). The fact that an entire windows stack is running underneath the VMWare server application also cannot be understated, however, regardless of how efficient the VMWare Server application is. Keep in mind, I am talking about (the free) VMWare server...and not VMWare ESX.
BTW, this isn't just theoretical for me. I have numerous VMWare Server installs.
One example, I have Ubuntu 7.10 installed on two devices at home:
1) Installed as the actual OS on a 5 year-old Compaq laptop with 512 MB of RAM (and it was a budget laptop the day that I bought it new)
2) Installed in VMWare on a intel-based quad core Q6600 with 4GB of RAM, an 8800GT GPU, and a 10k Raptor Hard Drive...running XP SP2 as the base OS.
The compaq laptop Ubuntu performance absolutely SMOKES Ubuntu running in VMWare in the Q6600...even when the Q6600-based PC is running nothing beyond anti-virus, anti-spyware, and other lighter weight services. I don't have CPU mark tests, so I apologize for throwing out an assessment without objective measures to base it...but I stand by it. I will try to run some tests to isolate the GPU factor however, since I really believe that is a large part of the issue. Native graphic drivers are just plain better.
Actually, is states that it does not "affect the existing bootloader", but you are right...I definitely missed the boat there. I read that description, but I think my past experience unconsciously dismissed that line because I do not see how that is possible. That said, I have googled a bit since posting my original message and it appears that it does not replace your boatloader, but does require upadtes to the existing loader...as well as adding another one. Specifically, it does this:
1. On installation, WUBI adds an entry in the settings of the ntldr boot loader of Windows 2000/XP/2003.
2. That entry points toward a special version of the grub bootloader (grub4dos) that does not overwrite to the Master Boot Record on your hard drive.
3. On boot, it searches for wubi/boot/initrd and wubi/boot/linux.
(paraphrased from https://wiki.ubuntu.com/WubiGuide)
Modifying boot.ini is no big deal...as long as they stay away from my MBR. Thanks for keeping me honest.
cheers,
Steve
I use (the free) VMWare Server (not ESX) on Windows boxes for various Linux installs...including Ubuntu. I do not understand an earlier comment stating that VMWare Server is complex. You install it as a Windows application, fire it up, select "new VM", choose a linux distro (Ubuntu 32 and 64 are options) for the VM architecture, and away you go...you now have a VM ready for a Linux install. The Live Ubuntu CD works with no issues...as does the default Ubuntu install.
You can also tweak the number of processors, hard disk size, and memory that you assign to the VM, but VMWare suggests low-end (working) default values. I have run VMWare on numerous machines (laptops, desktops, servers) and it just plain works. It is a fantastic way to test out various distros without putting the Windows partition at risk. If you take the time to mount and install VMWare Tools in the VM's hosted OS, switching back and forth between the host and guest OSes (including copying and pasting) is a breeze. You can also have as many VMs (and OSes) installed as you please. Want to play with 8.04 without losing 7.10? No problem. Create a new VM.
Downsides include:
- It is virtualized. Thus, it is going to run significantly slower than a native install.
- You are limited by the types of hardware architectures that VMWare simulates. That said, I have not had issues getting any sound or graphics card to work...and the networking options are fantastic. I cannot get access to all four cores however. The free VMWare server only allows me to create a VM that simulates either 1 or 2 CPUs...and I am not sure how many cores the VMWare container is using.
- Memory...since Windows is still running, it needs its share. Thus, you need a lot.
Of course, on the positive side, Windows is still running...so you have access to whatever you need there (e.g., Outlook, games, whatever). You can also run in reverse, and run VMWare on Linux and install Windows in a VM, but I dare say that most of us are in a situation that requires (or prefers) the VMWare on Windows approach.
I assume that Windows is not running in the WUBI option and that Ubuntu is running right on the metal (not virtualized), with full access to the real hardware architecture and all of the memory. Putting the HD in a Windows file must have some performance impact, but most likely far less than the entire OS in a VM (which also uses the Windows file approach for the HD). Does anyone have anecdotal performance impressions for WUBI? It sounds very cool and a great option for someone who is not yet committed...but I will say that I am not much of a fan of modifying the boot loader, but perhaps I am just being overly skittish.
Steve
Lunch is not free. Authors and publishers have mortgages too.
The book is available online for reading online only - not for download - and the online version looks like a series of highly compressed JPEG images given the "noise" surrounding the text. You would have to be fairly frugal to read the entire book on that site...and that is most likely by design. Read a chapter or two and then buy the book if you like it...and like your eyes.