Yeah, the lag would have to be on the order of milliseconds. You have to remember current aircraft have lags too... you are adding another lag. My concern would be drops in the system. This can be countered by a little bit of intelligence. If you are sending with your packets your current airspeed, position, and orientation you can have a chip on the other end that detects dropouts and can calculate (during a dropout) a "smooth" maneuver to put the aircraft in a statically stable position. For example say you are banking and there is packet loss for more than the limit. The aircraft would smoothly break the bank and right itself until comm was fixed. Now this becomes a little more tricky on landing unless we are starting to talk about automated landings. Then you could have redundnat backup flight computers on each aileron/engine combo (would make sense to have them as 1 unit). 1 single board on each is a minimal weight penalty.
Not an EE but I can make one observation for you. One of the big things is every piece of equiptment you mention is operating in high-traffic bands. Lots of devices, mostly low power, competing for a small sliver of airspace. FAA-regulated aircraft concievably wouldn't have that problem, they could get a hunk of the airwaves carved out for them. In air you are far enough from disturbances, the concern is takeoffs and landings.
Composites are the future, Boeing's dreamliner and whatever Airbus's new airliner is are being made of more and more composites. Composites are strong, but composites are very flexible. They don't lend themselves well to control wires although cabling is acceptable if you have slack (which adds weight)... but movement is never a good thing so wireless kinda makes sense if you can make it fault-toloerant.
Never make assumptions. I own a C64, a 1584 drive, tape drive, 3 joysticks, roughly 1000 disks of software... in good working order. While there was no reset button there was **still** the need to reset the box when things went wrong. Whether it was a toggling power button (effectively a reset switch) or kicking the power supply in anger...
(Where I work...) You get cell phones approved (big sticker on the back) and (if you work for a small company on a military installation) you **do** get some input into the hardware you get to use. So yes, I get some say into both areas.
I'm not sure what you value your time at, but I don't have the time nor CPU cycles to run spyware detectors, malware detectors, virus & trojan detectors, etcetera.
I don't either but I still run Windows. I rebuilt my box in January and it is still clean. Take the patches as they get pushed and use a a cheap computer switch as a firewall (you are probably running multiple computers anyways? A network printer?) and you will be fine just like me.
... they are an exception to a "normal" car he was refering to.
And even if you lumped them into cars, so, you have what, a few hundred prius's that have reset buttons, among the hundreds of millions of cars. And every computer in existance still has a reset button, and at some point in time that reset button has been exercised.
Then settle for the onboard video card you have:) seriously, you are talking about a huge increase in performance for minimal price. Take any benchmark and divide by price, and the 6600 or 6800 will come out on top.
You are right, $500 card is way too much. But an $80 card is gimp. If you are going to make the upgrade do it right and get a mid-range card that has withstood the test of time, something like a nVidia 6600 or 6800 GTS. It'll set you back a few bucks more than these cards - 30-50$ more - but you will get a whole lot more value.
Just upgraded to a Western Digital 250gb hard drive. No drivers required at all. Windows XP Pro. Put the drive in, put the windows CD in the DVD drive, turned the computer on and was good to go.
Does anyone besides open source zealots care about open drivers? I think so.
No. Quite frankly I like nVidia's drivers. They work well, I've installed them on at least a dozen unique machines over the last few years with no issues.
One of the many reasons I suspect they have no intention of participating in OSS is that there's a number of speed over quality decisions written into it that would be exposed, perhaps even application specific optimizations.
Doubtful. The more likely reason is that since they used a shared codebase with their windows drivers (95% of the code in your kernel driver is common with the driver on a windows machine) they probably have IP they don't want revealed.
As a developer I'm glad they do this. When I render something on my linux box, I know when I recompile it for Windows in a few hours/days it will look the same. That can't be said for ATI, or Matrox, or any other card. There are **so** many inconsistancies out there. And if people start rolling their own nVidia drivers for Linux then the same deterioration will happen for the nVidia drivers as well.
EQ1 at its peak had 400,000 concurrent members online... not sure how man subscribers total. Regardless WoW has ecliped EQ1. Doesn't really matter and as an EQ fanatic I've come to terms with it.:P EQ1 caters to hardcore gamers whereas WoW caters to the casual gamer.
The only one which might give WoW a run for its money is EQ1 with all the expansion packs. But then it took how many years to get all that content?
I'd argue about 2 years into it that EQ had at least double the landmass of WoW - by that point in time Kunark and Velius were out. But I'd wager even the basic lands - Odius, Antonica, Faydwer - are probably roughly the size of all of WoW. And there are a lot of quests, they aren't as easy to find as WoW and they aren't managed as well (no quest journal, my "quest journal" is a notebook and pen). Actually my theory, which I've run by a lot of gamers who were former EQ players is that EQ got too big, too much land mass. They need to focus on content vs. land mass. It is possible to add the latter without the former, which they have - LDoN, DoN, DoDh - mission-type expansions that add content and quests without adding landmass. So as people move on to other games, you can give the faithful few more to do without spreading them out in the world and making them feel isolated and alone.
As long as your stock is diversified it really doesn't matter. Short of another black monday/black tuesday you will be fine. Will you lose some money in the short term? Of course. But the market rebounds, you don't lose shares. By moving that money from stocks to bonds/money market now you lose out on the potential interest in the meantime.
All a "correction" means is that you can afford more stock during the correction. Buy, buy buy!
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, the lag would have to be on the order of milliseconds. You have to remember current aircraft have lags too ... you are adding another lag. My concern would be drops in the system. This can be countered by a little bit of intelligence. If you are sending with your packets your current airspeed, position, and orientation you can have a chip on the other end that detects dropouts and can calculate (during a dropout) a "smooth" maneuver to put the aircraft in a statically stable position. For example say you are banking and there is packet loss for more than the limit. The aircraft would smoothly break the bank and right itself until comm was fixed. Now this becomes a little more tricky on landing unless we are starting to talk about automated landings. Then you could have redundnat backup flight computers on each aileron/engine combo (would make sense to have them as 1 unit). 1 single board on each is a minimal weight penalty.
its just Jack Bower trying to land the plane before getting shot out of the sky ...
damn you, 24!
Not an EE but I can make one observation for you. One of the big things is every piece of equiptment you mention is operating in high-traffic bands. Lots of devices, mostly low power, competing for a small sliver of airspace. FAA-regulated aircraft concievably wouldn't have that problem, they could get a hunk of the airwaves carved out for them. In air you are far enough from disturbances, the concern is takeoffs and landings.
Composites are the future, Boeing's dreamliner and whatever Airbus's new airliner is are being made of more and more composites. Composites are strong, but composites are very flexible. They don't lend themselves well to control wires although cabling is acceptable if you have slack (which adds weight)... but movement is never a good thing so wireless kinda makes sense if you can make it fault-toloerant.
If you were "just fine" you wouldn't have to re-build your computers; they would just work.
:) From a celeron 2GHz to a dual core AMD 4400+ and nVidia fx5200 to a GeForce 6800.
...
It was an upgrade
Get back to us in three years and we'll see how much maintenance you've done.
It had been running fine for two years, when I built it from parts
You've obviously never used a Commodore machine
Never make assumptions. I own a C64, a 1584 drive, tape drive, 3 joysticks, roughly 1000 disks of software... in good working order. While there was no reset button there was **still** the need to reset the box when things went wrong. Whether it was a toggling power button (effectively a reset switch) or kicking the power supply in anger...
(Where I work...) You get cell phones approved (big sticker on the back) and (if you work for a small company on a military installation) you **do** get some input into the hardware you get to use. So yes, I get some say into both areas.
In cell phones and notebooks, everywhere. Makes it a pain in the ass when you work in a secure installation.
I'm not sure what you value your time at, but I don't have the time nor CPU cycles to run spyware detectors, malware detectors, virus & trojan detectors, etcetera.
I don't either but I still run Windows. I rebuilt my box in January and it is still clean. Take the patches as they get pushed and use a a cheap computer switch as a firewall (you are probably running multiple computers anyways? A network printer?) and you will be fine just like me.
poor dude
MINIX is BSD'd, not GPL'd. More freedom.
... they are an exception to a "normal" car he was refering to.
And even if you lumped them into cars, so, you have what, a few hundred prius's that have reset buttons, among the hundreds of millions of cars. And every computer in existance still has a reset button, and at some point in time that reset button has been exercised.
Why not doing a "proof of concept" instead of battling?
... fight!
Torvalds vs. Tanenbaum
Yeah, I upgraded 2 months ago and purchased a 6800. Good card. $140. Its one step from the 7xxx series and a couple Benjamins lower :P
7800gs. http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.asp?N=20 10380048+1305520548+106790717+1069609639&Submit=EN E&SubCategory=48
Then settle for the onboard video card you have :) seriously, you are talking about a huge increase in performance for minimal price. Take any benchmark and divide by price, and the 6600 or 6800 will come out on top.
more pipelines
You are right, $500 card is way too much. But an $80 card is gimp. If you are going to make the upgrade do it right and get a mid-range card that has withstood the test of time, something like a nVidia 6600 or 6800 GTS. It'll set you back a few bucks more than these cards - 30-50$ more - but you will get a whole lot more value.
Just upgraded to a Western Digital 250gb hard drive. No drivers required at all. Windows XP Pro. Put the drive in, put the windows CD in the DVD drive, turned the computer on and was good to go.
Does anyone besides open source zealots care about open drivers? I think so.
No. Quite frankly I like nVidia's drivers. They work well, I've installed them on at least a dozen unique machines over the last few years with no issues.
One of the many reasons I suspect they have no intention of participating in OSS is that there's a number of speed over quality decisions written into it that would be exposed, perhaps even application specific optimizations.
Doubtful. The more likely reason is that since they used a shared codebase with their windows drivers (95% of the code in your kernel driver is common with the driver on a windows machine) they probably have IP they don't want revealed.
As a developer I'm glad they do this. When I render something on my linux box, I know when I recompile it for Windows in a few hours/days it will look the same. That can't be said for ATI, or Matrox, or any other card. There are **so** many inconsistancies out there. And if people start rolling their own nVidia drivers for Linux then the same deterioration will happen for the nVidia drivers as well.
EQ1 at its peak had 400,000 concurrent members online ... not sure how man subscribers total. Regardless WoW has ecliped EQ1. Doesn't really matter and as an EQ fanatic I've come to terms with it. :P EQ1 caters to hardcore gamers whereas WoW caters to the casual gamer.
The only one which might give WoW a run for its money is EQ1 with all the expansion packs. But then it took how many years to get all that content?
I'd argue about 2 years into it that EQ had at least double the landmass of WoW - by that point in time Kunark and Velius were out. But I'd wager even the basic lands - Odius, Antonica, Faydwer - are probably roughly the size of all of WoW. And there are a lot of quests, they aren't as easy to find as WoW and they aren't managed as well (no quest journal, my "quest journal" is a notebook and pen). Actually my theory, which I've run by a lot of gamers who were former EQ players is that EQ got too big, too much land mass. They need to focus on content vs. land mass. It is possible to add the latter without the former, which they have - LDoN, DoN, DoDh - mission-type expansions that add content and quests without adding landmass. So as people move on to other games, you can give the faithful few more to do without spreading them out in the world and making them feel isolated and alone.
Sir, i enjoy your views and would like to subscribe to your newsletter...
And SWG was a SOE game. Theory disproved.
Sucks to be you ...
As long as your stock is diversified it really doesn't matter. Short of another black monday/black tuesday you will be fine. Will you lose some money in the short term? Of course. But the market rebounds, you don't lose shares. By moving that money from stocks to bonds/money market now you lose out on the potential interest in the meantime.
All a "correction" means is that you can afford more stock during the correction. Buy, buy buy!
couldn't find the wii 6 months ago... or now, for that matter. And Microsoft could announce another price drop between now and Wii's release.