If money is the issue, zone wiring works pretty well for a call center environment.
Ultracheap solution is to bring a high pair count cable to each row, and install a 6-25port breakout box where final connections are done with patch cables. Downside is that you would be limited to 10Mbit, but phone and data can all be done together.
With a little more money, you can go for actually bringing cat 5 cables to the breakout box...
From the article, the thing that bothers me is that they are proposing to use red laser technology still. It would seem to make (a lot) more sense to use the blue lasers and go for a dramatic increase in capacity, and not just an extra 1GB.
Am I missing something? I thought thet blue lasers could still be used for the same DVD media...
But, if they are targetting the bottom end of the market (presumably unlike MS), and if they make content available... there is a reasonable incentive for the consumer to spend extra money "upgrading."
The real (obvious) market is domestic distribution in China, where you need to keep the costs minimal...
My only concern would be that MPAA & Fiends would try to block this.
No problem... get India involved. Get all of Asia involved for that matter! The US would have no clout in the matter if the justification is simple economics! India produces how many times the content of Hollywood? Even Thailand has a little film industry... The US has no authority to dictate the entertainment content or format for other countries.
In the end... it just might be good for the US in damaging the MPAA stranglehold... but that part will take time. (Watch what happens when other countries produce content targeted at Americans..!)
I would demand that the fee is paid in the store, when someone buys the player.
Sorry, but that wouldn't work. Enforcement is too tough. It is easy enough for Phillips to stop the things in Customs... without pissing off the consumers!
This article (Google cache of MSNBC) was posted a ways back, about the "bandwidth crunch" that the military has experienced in Afganistan.
As I understood the technology, though, most of the signal is directed up, to the sattelites, so jamming in and of itself might not be that big of an issue.
The idea of software controlled transcievers fails if you look at it as a "new radio." It's not like HTDV, though; the purpose of putting one of these fancy things into your car wouldn't just be "FM", (or, for that matter anti-theft devices, GPS/directions systems which are also prevalant today), but maybe also movies for the kids, internet access... whatever.
Sure, you have to create a need for it, but... with the rate that people want to be unteathered, you have to make better use of the spectrum.
$10 is about my price point as well. Good luck! The cost isn't just distribution, there has to be some mechanism to compensate the "authors." But, how would you make just that distribution element work? Over an existing pipe that you pay for seperately, or is that "included."
I can't find the link now, but I think I recall the "real" cost for bandwidth being on the order of $0.01/MB. (That number at least works for web hosting; I think the "total" cost was at least 5x that number.) Best case, $10 buys you 10GB, or 15 hours of VCD quality video... and that is JUST the bandwidth!
So, $0.33/day buys you 30 minutes of programming. The ad revenue for that 30 minutes is worth about $0.15 (15 ads, $0.01 each). If you were to tolerate (read: watch actively) the ads, then your $10 would buy you up to an hour of content per day... based on distribution costs only! We still haven't compensated the authors of the content!
I can appreciate how it could work for music, but... i am really scratching my head on how video programming could work in this fashion... WITHOUT DRM! (What is worth more, a 3MB song, or a 3MB video clip? The artists shouldn't be compensated on the basis of file size...)
Please... doe someone have any good ideas how to make it work economically?!
I'll bite: You will accept a pay-per-view system. How much will you pay (a) per "program", and (b) per month total?
Are you willing to be forced into a digital rights managemlent system? What rights do you think you have earned with your payments?
Don't get me wrong; I can belive that the future is in centralizing storage of content and providing a service in making it all available. What I fail to see is how it can be done at a "reasonable" price for a widespread audience.
It's not about copying, it's about CONTROL. It's about the survival of an outmoded business model that has left many of the original artists of rock dependent on charity in their old age. It's all about preserving the KNOWN historical rip-off (of the artists by the labels) by preventing a future speculative one.
So close, but yet so far! No, it isn't about copying, yes, it is about control.
However, it isn't that they are protecting an outmoded business model, it's about protecting the next (obvious) revenue stream.
The "old" revenue model is good, and we should support it: Paying money to watch a movie in a theater, paying more to buy a DVD or tape. The problem is that "pay per view" (and any derrivative distribution techniques) just doesn't seem to work well with rational copyright laws!
Maybe the solution is simple: reduce length of copyrights. If the studios want to come up with a proprietary, integrated device for playing their pay-per-play media, well, go for it! If consumers don't want to buy into it... deal with the fallout!
Why does it always get so convoluted?!
If you want to keep the vendors in check, and prevent the company from being sucked into bad licensing agreements later on, a different approach than "just switch to linux" should be looked at.
1. Stay open. Standard or open protocols, commodity hardware, standard document and storage formats, and flexible users.
Benefit: Theoretical interoperability, and never a need to change everything at once to perform one "minor" system change.
Cost: Vigilance, and therefore additional internal expenses to ensure that solutions are not just "packaged." Possibly not getting all the new and cool features of an integrated and proprietary solution.
2. Stay diverse. Always use different desktop OS's, different applications to do the same tasks.
Benefit: Promotes objective of staying standardized and open. One system failure will not (necessarily) impact everything. Resources can be shifted around to take advantage of new developments.
Costs: Additional expense associated with a heterogeneous system. (Arguable) Different systems aren't a benefit unless all can perform the tasks at hand equally well.
In general, if the objective is to save money, don't change! When you MUST change... prepare long and hard and make changes to improve productivity. However, remember that the software companies have a vested interest in forcing you to change, through technology, licenses, and whatever other tricks they can come up with.
However, if the objective is to always get the best return on investment, stay flexible and adapt to change! Play vendors against each other to always get the best products at the best price!
Really, though... isn't that area supposed to have almost constant wind, and suitable for offshore windmills? I agree with the parent that the fuel cells seem to just be a toy...
I agree that it should be a law enforcement official, but it isn't practical for a police officer to go to the console and get the data. Furthermore, people that are not properly trained should not be inside the data center.
Wouldn't a simple solution be to have employees sworn in as an official of the court, something like a notary public, to conduct the search? As long as there is no conflict of interests that the company or individual may have, what is wrong?
125W is actually quite a bit; it's about 200VA given normal power supply PF. Putting 42 in a single rack should be OK still; I think it is more "efficient" than the Compaq 1U servers.
From a heat standpoint, when you have more than about 6kW in a rack you start to run into problems with air cooling, so a server farm with dual G4's might get you in trouble.
All in all... I think Apple has come out with something else that people will really warm up to!
Devil in the details: The architect owns the "design." They don't (really) own the drawings.
The purpose being, if they are fired mid-project, they must recieve some additional compensation if the owner wants to continue to use the design. Likewise, the owner does not have the "right" to use the exact same plans to build another building with the same prints... not that it would really work that way (for buildings at least).
In reality, though, an architect can only own novel parts of their design, and not...the toilet details.
The same should be said for software; there is a design component, and a word-processing component. Don't confuse the two... Programming is work-for-hire (IMO), although the software architecture is design.
Similar experiences in Hong Kong and Thailand; restaurants (and individuals) would buy up to 10-20 movies a week, and pay $5 each! Some would be terrible, but... most are watchable.
I can't believe that the studios couldn't make a profit marketing there (or at least drive the pirates out with lower prices). I know there are additional costs (sub titles, etc), and a lower rate of return, but... it spreads their influence!
you don't want your data center to have a big sign announcing its presence to anyone driving down the street
Nor do you want the sign in the elevator lobby that says "pull fire alarm to disengage man traps." But sometimes people put data centers in San Francisco...
Re:Sometimes smaller is not better
on
Sony PCG-U1
·
· Score: 1
It all depends on the market; smaller is great for portability, big screens are (practically) required for a "desktop replacement."
While the trend (here in the US) IS for nicer screens, look at all the people using wheely carts to lug around their laptops! People have found an (absurd) way to manage the weight, but does it meet their needs?
What do "most people" need to lug home / to meetings / to onsite locations? While I do use some applications that lean towards having the extra power and screen real-estate, if I could drop a couple kilos out of the messenger bag I would do it in a flash!
Slashdot Mirror
Here, Here! As long as I have used a Palm, the HP48 is still by the side when it comes to actually doing some calculations!
It just works better than anything I have found for a PDA... actually having buttons and a clean, logical UI!
Too bad HP ditched calculator development...
...boy, we must need that consumer broadband bill after all, eh? That way, we will get all the "high quality programming" that Hollywood has to offer!
Sounds a lot like most of the government institutions I have seen... ;)
If money is the issue, zone wiring works pretty well for a call center environment.
Ultracheap solution is to bring a high pair count cable to each row, and install a 6-25port breakout box where final connections are done with patch cables. Downside is that you would be limited to 10Mbit, but phone and data can all be done together.
With a little more money, you can go for actually bringing cat 5 cables to the breakout box...
...but going wireless to save money?
From the article, the thing that bothers me is that they are proposing to use red laser technology still. It would seem to make (a lot) more sense to use the blue lasers and go for a dramatic increase in capacity, and not just an extra 1GB.
Am I missing something? I thought thet blue lasers could still be used for the same DVD media...
But, if they are targetting the bottom end of the market (presumably unlike MS), and if they make content available... there is a reasonable incentive for the consumer to spend extra money "upgrading."
The real (obvious) market is domestic distribution in China, where you need to keep the costs minimal...
No problem... get India involved. Get all of Asia involved for that matter! The US would have no clout in the matter if the justification is simple economics! India produces how many times the content of Hollywood? Even Thailand has a little film industry... The US has no authority to dictate the entertainment content or format for other countries.
In the end... it just might be good for the US in damaging the MPAA stranglehold... but that part will take time. (Watch what happens when other countries produce content targeted at Americans..!)
Sorry, but that wouldn't work. Enforcement is too tough. It is easy enough for Phillips to stop the things in Customs... without pissing off the consumers!
This article (Google cache of MSNBC) was posted a ways back, about the "bandwidth crunch" that the military has experienced in Afganistan. As I understood the technology, though, most of the signal is directed up, to the sattelites, so jamming in and of itself might not be that big of an issue.
The idea of software controlled transcievers fails if you look at it as a "new radio." It's not like HTDV, though; the purpose of putting one of these fancy things into your car wouldn't just be "FM", (or, for that matter anti-theft devices, GPS/directions systems which are also prevalant today), but maybe also movies for the kids, internet access... whatever.
Sure, you have to create a need for it, but... with the rate that people want to be unteathered, you have to make better use of the spectrum.
$10 is about my price point as well. Good luck! The cost isn't just distribution, there has to be some mechanism to compensate the "authors." But, how would you make just that distribution element work? Over an existing pipe that you pay for seperately, or is that "included."
I can't find the link now, but I think I recall the "real" cost for bandwidth being on the order of $0.01/MB. (That number at least works for web hosting; I think the "total" cost was at least 5x that number.) Best case, $10 buys you 10GB, or 15 hours of VCD quality video... and that is JUST the bandwidth!
So, $0.33/day buys you 30 minutes of programming. The ad revenue for that 30 minutes is worth about $0.15 (15 ads, $0.01 each). If you were to tolerate (read: watch actively) the ads, then your $10 would buy you up to an hour of content per day... based on distribution costs only! We still haven't compensated the authors of the content!
I can appreciate how it could work for music, but... i am really scratching my head on how video programming could work in this fashion... WITHOUT DRM! (What is worth more, a 3MB song, or a 3MB video clip? The artists shouldn't be compensated on the basis of file size...)
Please... doe someone have any good ideas how to make it work economically?!
I'll bite: You will accept a pay-per-view system. How much will you pay (a) per "program", and (b) per month total?
Are you willing to be forced into a digital rights managemlent system? What rights do you think you have earned with your payments?
Don't get me wrong; I can belive that the future is in centralizing storage of content and providing a service in making it all available. What I fail to see is how it can be done at a "reasonable" price for a widespread audience.
So close, but yet so far! No, it isn't about copying, yes, it is about control.
However, it isn't that they are protecting an outmoded business model, it's about protecting the next (obvious) revenue stream.
The "old" revenue model is good, and we should support it: Paying money to watch a movie in a theater, paying more to buy a DVD or tape. The problem is that "pay per view" (and any derrivative distribution techniques) just doesn't seem to work well with rational copyright laws!
Maybe the solution is simple: reduce length of copyrights. If the studios want to come up with a proprietary, integrated device for playing their pay-per-play media, well, go for it! If consumers don't want to buy into it... deal with the fallout! Why does it always get so convoluted?!
1. Stay open. Standard or open protocols, commodity hardware, standard document and storage formats, and flexible users.
Benefit: Theoretical interoperability, and never a need to change everything at once to perform one "minor" system change.
Cost: Vigilance, and therefore additional internal expenses to ensure that solutions are not just "packaged." Possibly not getting all the new and cool features of an integrated and proprietary solution.
2. Stay diverse. Always use different desktop OS's, different applications to do the same tasks.
Benefit: Promotes objective of staying standardized and open. One system failure will not (necessarily) impact everything. Resources can be shifted around to take advantage of new developments.
Costs: Additional expense associated with a heterogeneous system. (Arguable) Different systems aren't a benefit unless all can perform the tasks at hand equally well.
In general, if the objective is to save money, don't change! When you MUST change... prepare long and hard and make changes to improve productivity. However, remember that the software companies have a vested interest in forcing you to change, through technology, licenses, and whatever other tricks they can come up with.
However, if the objective is to always get the best return on investment, stay flexible and adapt to change! Play vendors against each other to always get the best products at the best price!
But don't you get burned with the licensing agreements when you have computers but don't use MS products on them?
Agreed that the "business guys" are the hardest to hit, but... 85% of the work is in MS Office according to the poster.
Is there really no (viable) alternative to MS?! Something that is a cost-effective alternative that maintains a suitable level of efficiency?
Thank God for Government Subsidies!
Really, though... isn't that area supposed to have almost constant wind, and suitable for offshore windmills? I agree with the parent that the fuel cells seem to just be a toy...
But how can you pay the artists directly if they have signed away all their rights to their label?
Simple solution: Swear 'em in!
I agree that it should be a law enforcement official, but it isn't practical for a police officer to go to the console and get the data. Furthermore, people that are not properly trained should not be inside the data center.
Wouldn't a simple solution be to have employees sworn in as an official of the court, something like a notary public, to conduct the search? As long as there is no conflict of interests that the company or individual may have, what is wrong?
Careful with the numbers!
125W is actually quite a bit; it's about 200VA given normal power supply PF. Putting 42 in a single rack should be OK still; I think it is more "efficient" than the Compaq 1U servers.
From a heat standpoint, when you have more than about 6kW in a rack you start to run into problems with air cooling, so a server farm with dual G4's might get you in trouble.
All in all... I think Apple has come out with something else that people will really warm up to!
Any company using a yahoo account as contact information for a corporation is going to have a tough time proving that they invented e-commerce!
...except air ducts.
Devil in the details:
...the toilet details.
The architect owns the "design." They don't (really) own the drawings.
The purpose being, if they are fired mid-project, they must recieve some additional compensation if the owner wants to continue to use the design. Likewise, the owner does not have the "right" to use the exact same plans to build another building with the same prints... not that it would really work that way (for buildings at least).
In reality, though, an architect can only own novel parts of their design, and not
The same should be said for software; there is a design component, and a word-processing component. Don't confuse the two... Programming is work-for-hire (IMO), although the software architecture is design.
Similar experiences in Hong Kong and Thailand; restaurants (and individuals) would buy up to 10-20 movies a week, and pay $5 each! Some would be terrible, but... most are watchable.
I can't believe that the studios couldn't make a profit marketing there (or at least drive the pirates out with lower prices). I know there are additional costs (sub titles, etc), and a lower rate of return, but... it spreads their influence!
Nor do you want the sign in the elevator lobby that says "pull fire alarm to disengage man traps." But sometimes people put data centers in San Francisco...
It all depends on the market; smaller is great for portability, big screens are (practically) required for a "desktop replacement."
While the trend (here in the US) IS for nicer screens, look at all the people using wheely carts to lug around their laptops! People have found an (absurd) way to manage the weight, but does it meet their needs?
What do "most people" need to lug home / to meetings / to onsite locations? While I do use some applications that lean towards having the extra power and screen real-estate, if I could drop a couple kilos out of the messenger bag I would do it in a flash!