On Slashdot, all I have to do is check the box "Disable Ads". But I don't because I want to support Slashdot. I use it, and I know all to well that it costs money to provide the service.
I find it funny that all the comments above are damming Canonical for doing this, while posting on ad-supported Slashdot.
I think Canonical may be doing a very smart thing. Most of use will disable the ads and move along, or switch to another distro. But it this gives Canonical the cash to promote Linux, it will gain much more market share than it will lose. And it benefits Amazon to promote this. I can see Amazon offering free Ubuntu disks in every order. It worked for AOL.
Image an Amazon home page ad saying:
"Is you old Windows PC running slow? Replace Windows with this FREE disk and get speed and security without buying a new PC."
I'm sure it would have a few tie-ins with Amazon services and include a Kindle e-book reader.
Thanks for the effort, but we know of that and use it on our Win 7-64 machines. It's not so much that we can't get current stuff to connect than support issues. General support ended March 2010, and extended support ends September 2013 - next year. Current model HP servers are no longer certified for Netware. I will be glad to see it go for many reasons.
My comment was more of a "if you think you have it bad, listen to this." When the customer said they ran Novell, I said "Great! I know quite a bit about SuSE Linux." The room went dead quiet for quite a while.
I'd think it's a tad unfair to even try to compare a dSLR to anything large format. It's like apples to apple wine;)
You are right - two totally different cameras. However, I was responding to your question:
Professional DSLRs, I'd think, bury film when it comes to pretty much everything, don't they?
And the answer is "not in the case of large format film".
Cameras are just tools to make images and prints. I make large prints, so for me it is not unfair at all. I was using a dSLR for large images, but went to 4x5 film for much sharper images. Google "Clyde Butcher" if you want to see a modern master who creates massive prints.
For those who are unfamiliar with camera terminology, "full frame" refers to a sensor size equal to 135 film (24mm x 36mm) commonly called "35mm". APS-C sensors have an area half that size (or smaller), so you get almost twice the number of sensors per wafer. Another issue is the steppers used in the fabrication process are big enough to make a APS sensor in one shot, but a full-frame sensor requires two overlapping shots (so I'm told), leading to alignment issues and lower yield.
Medium format film ranges from 56mm x 41mm, to 56mm x 224mm - all using 120/220 roll film (60mm wide). Medium format sensors are all over the place, but generally 50% larger than 135 full-frame. The largest medium format sensor I know of is used in the Phase One IQ-180. It is a 80 megapixel (MP) sensor measuring 53.7mm x 40.4mm. No large format sensors (100mm x 125mm) exist in the commercial photography market.
Why does sensor size matter? Photography is highly dependent on the performance of the optical system. For a given print size, a smaller capture device would have to be magnified more than a larger device. Optical flaws become more obvious. This is why film photographers want the largest film that is practical. 135 is portable, while 8x10 cannot be hand held. Those old speed graphics used in the old days were 4x5.
A large format lens are very simple designs relative to modern zooms. Most of mine are only 6 glass elements, while my Nikon zoom has 22 elements. The LF lens is very sharp on large format film, but not as sharp as the Nikon zoom. A 16" x 20" print is only a 4X enlargement for 4x5, but it is a 16x enlargement for full frame 135, and about a 22x enlargement for APS-C. It is very easy for modern sensors to "out-resolve" the lens, which is why pros spend thousands of dollars on each lens. It is not uncommon to see pro lenses price from US$2,000 to $10,000.
For small cameras, digital rules. Same with 35mm. Medium format digital cameras cost US$10,000 to $50,000 while film cameras cost far less. But there is no large format digital cameras, and my 4x5 (100mm x 125mm) Sinar is equal to a 200 to 800 megapixel camera if you scan the film. Digital has yet to match 4x5 and is far away from 8x10 film.
I shoot full-frame Nikon digital for color, but nothing comes close to 4x5 film for large prints.
If I have a vertical architecture, then I want a box I can get someone onsite in 4hrs or less.
And that ain't Newegg, that is an Dell or HP sized company.
Management turned down my plan to have a second server. It was to be the identical model, but without all the disks and redundancy. They figured HP's 4-hour response time would be better than a hot spare server.
Then the crash came.
A nice fellow showed up within 4 hours, with the "most likely" part. It wasn't. The next day, more parts. Nope. The next day, two nice fellows showed up and replaced every part but the case. That solved it.
The cost of downtime was so far beyond the cost of the spare server that it wasn't even funny. Hey, this stuff happens, and the HP guys were great. It just took a lot of time to resolve the problem and a spare would have let us do it while the rest of the factory kept working.
From TFA: " But Rivera told me he believes this also is blocked."
Believes? There's your clue. He doesn't actually know and MS isn't saying because they want developers to hop onto Metro thus feeding apps to the tablet and phone. They are willing to forgo W8 acceptance to achieve this. And that might not be a bad plan. With no way to turn it off, it will show devs that MS is committed to Metro.
The enterprise is still in the process of moving from XP to W7-64. They'll skip W8 so this is no issue at all. No lost sales.
MS knows that they can give OEM's the ability to downgrade and all is well. No lost sales.
MS may not really care which Windows you buy, as long as it is $$$ to MS. Hey, that W9 upgrade might cost you more.
Then of course someone will discover the secret registered key and it won't matter any longer. Except I'll get paid to change it for people who buy W8 by mistake.
I've done a LOT of data recovery, and Spinrite is the first tool I grab. It's cheap and works regardless of the OS. I've recovered Windows, Linux, BSD and Mac drives. I've recovered SAS RAID arrays, too.
I've done the freezer trick too, and it works in many cases, as does the PCB swap.
You do realize there's a good chance that IT has a backup of your entire system, right? If that's the case, nothing you do will get rid of the data you've got on the machine.
I'm not sure why you thought it was a good idea to have all that personal data on a employer-owned machine. You have given IT the ability to peek at all your stuff. Take a couple of IT guys to lunch and pay for it, or take them out for drinks. I'll bet you get much better advice than Slashdot.
And yet, it doesn't seem to do all that much more than the old WYSIWYG office apps that ran on DOS and used 2 megabytes of RAM.
I was thinking the same thing. I switched from Word Perfect (DOS) to MS Word 2.0 (DOS) and read a pretty think book on the product. (yeah - I'm old enough to have used products that came with thick user manuals). I made heavy use of Style Sheets, and the Outline Editor. Those were the killer features of the product.
The Windows version is so easy to use that most people never take any time to get trained or even read a user manual. They miss out on most of what Word can do. So while MS keeps adding "features", the users don't do much beyond WordPad-with-spell-checking.
When I show people the Outline Editor, they are amazed at this "new" feature.
The man is an idiot. Adding one extra capital, number or symbol to a password does not increase password strength that much. The algorithm assumes that all places in the password can be all characters.
Disagreeing with you doesn't make him an idiot.
Since we don't know what position a capital letter might occupy, I think we can agree that this expands the MAXIMUM search range above 26^6 and below 52^6+1. That's the teaching point the tool is designed for. It is not designed to be an accurate estimator, but more of a shock value tool to get the attention of users. It has some value in that role.
In his podcast, Steve clearly knows these things. He collected a number of "hacker" tools and studied them before he wrote haystack. I have not looked at his code, so I can't say what he build. But I recall that he said this was a very basic tool that ran on the local machine using Javascript.
I've had users enter their old passwords and they are universally shocked. It's a pretty good teaching tool for your average office worker.
In those days, there was a lot of fear that the US and USSR would engage in World War III, but with nuclear weapons. The news that the USSR had launched a earth-orbiting satellite caused a lot of military leaders to speculate they would soon put nuclear weapons in space and nuke us from above. Uncomfortable that we (USA) were behind in the space race, President Kennedy changed the game by announcing we would go to the moon in 10 years. This had the effect of changing the perception of the USSR's breakthrough into a first step on a long road to the moon. Americans got behind the moon race and it became accepted that the USSR's lead was temporary.
Once we "won" the race to the moon, the public lost interest. There didn't seem to be much reason to be there once the excitement died down. There was a unpopular war in Vietnam and the public was upset about the cost and all the body bags coming back. NASA figured out that an orbiting space station (SkyLab) made much better economic sense.
I used to get calls from scammers trying to sell me over-priced copy machine toner. They would claim to be my "copier company", then ask for the model number. So I'd make up a fake model number and see how long I could keep them on the phone.
Scammer: "We don't show a Nikon Z1000 on our list. Are you sure that's the model?" Me: " I'll check again. Can I put you on hold while I go to the second floor?" (we start timing) Me: "Ah, it's a Nikon Z2100. You know - one of those big ones. It really eats a lot of toner, you know. We sure buy a lot of it" Scammer: "Really? We can make you a great price. But I still don't find that on our list. Are you sure about the model?" Me: "Well I'll go down there and check again. Can you hold on a few minutes? (Timer rings - I pickup the phone) Me: "Yep - its a Canon KR600 all right." Scammer: "Ah - you said Nikon before. Hmmm....I don't have that one on my list either" Me: "You should have - your company sold it to us." Scammer" Ah... yes.... Could you check that number again? Me: "I might have written it down wrong. I'll check again. We run it non-stop so I know the boss will be excited that we can save on all that toner we buy. Can you hold?"
When I get tired of the game, I'd pass them on so someone else to play. 15 minutes was easy. Never broke the 1 hour mark, but not for lack of trying.
Interesting. I am not in a position to judge this for myself - I guess it's like a computer trying to see if it is rooted, while the rootkit is operational. I was exposed to a lot of chemicals and toxins (PCB, organic solvents, and the Louisiana public school system) over my 55 years, so this might be related in some way. But I'm pretty sure it is simply knowing too much about the process. As a coder/IT guy/photographer/videographer, I am trained to look for flaws in my work (and others). Things like macro-blocks in video compression are annoying to me. I pointed out macro-blocks to a friend on his new HDTV and now he is annoyed. He never noticed them before and now sees them everywhere.
Slashdot Mirror
On Slashdot, all I have to do is check the box "Disable Ads". But I don't because I want to support Slashdot. I use it, and I know all to well that it costs money to provide the service.
I find it funny that all the comments above are damming Canonical for doing this, while posting on ad-supported Slashdot.
I think Canonical may be doing a very smart thing. Most of use will disable the ads and move along, or switch to another distro. But it this gives Canonical the cash to promote Linux, it will gain much more market share than it will lose. And it benefits Amazon to promote this. I can see Amazon offering free Ubuntu disks in every order. It worked for AOL.
Image an Amazon home page ad saying:
"Is you old Windows PC running slow? Replace Windows with this FREE disk and get speed and security without buying a new PC."
I'm sure it would have a few tie-ins with Amazon services and include a Kindle e-book reader.
Thanks for the effort, but we know of that and use it on our Win 7-64 machines. It's not so much that we can't get current stuff to connect than support issues. General support ended March 2010, and extended support ends September 2013 - next year. Current model HP servers are no longer certified for Netware. I will be glad to see it go for many reasons.
My comment was more of a "if you think you have it bad, listen to this." When the customer said they ran Novell, I said "Great! I know quite a bit about SuSE Linux." The room went dead quiet for quite a while.
We'll be replacing those shop-floor Win XP machines - right after we get rid of the Novell Netware servers. Yeah - we still use Netware.
I guess you'll have to mod me 'funny' because you can't mod me "sad".
My mother claims prior art!
I'd think it's a tad unfair to even try to compare a dSLR to anything large format. It's like apples to apple wine ;)
You are right - two totally different cameras. However, I was responding to your question:
Professional DSLRs, I'd think, bury film when it comes to pretty much everything, don't they?
And the answer is "not in the case of large format film".
Cameras are just tools to make images and prints. I make large prints, so for me it is not unfair at all. I was using a dSLR for large images, but went to 4x5 film for much sharper images. Google "Clyde Butcher" if you want to see a modern master who creates massive prints.
Exactly. Wafer yield is a huge cost driver.
For those who are unfamiliar with camera terminology, "full frame" refers to a sensor size equal to 135 film (24mm x 36mm) commonly called "35mm". APS-C sensors have an area half that size (or smaller), so you get almost twice the number of sensors per wafer. Another issue is the steppers used in the fabrication process are big enough to make a APS sensor in one shot, but a full-frame sensor requires two overlapping shots (so I'm told), leading to alignment issues and lower yield.
Medium format film ranges from 56mm x 41mm, to 56mm x 224mm - all using 120/220 roll film (60mm wide). Medium format sensors are all over the place, but generally 50% larger than 135 full-frame. The largest medium format sensor I know of is used in the Phase One IQ-180. It is a 80 megapixel (MP) sensor measuring 53.7mm x 40.4mm. No large format sensors (100mm x 125mm) exist in the commercial photography market.
Why does sensor size matter? Photography is highly dependent on the performance of the optical system. For a given print size, a smaller capture device would have to be magnified more than a larger device. Optical flaws become more obvious. This is why film photographers want the largest film that is practical. 135 is portable, while 8x10 cannot be hand held. Those old speed graphics used in the old days were 4x5.
A large format lens are very simple designs relative to modern zooms. Most of mine are only 6 glass elements, while my Nikon zoom has 22 elements. The LF lens is very sharp on large format film, but not as sharp as the Nikon zoom. A 16" x 20" print is only a 4X enlargement for 4x5, but it is a 16x enlargement for full frame 135, and about a 22x enlargement for APS-C. It is very easy for modern sensors to "out-resolve" the lens, which is why pros spend thousands of dollars on each lens. It is not uncommon to see pro lenses price from US$2,000 to $10,000.
For small cameras, digital rules. Same with 35mm. Medium format digital cameras cost US$10,000 to $50,000 while film cameras cost far less. But there is no large format digital cameras, and my 4x5 (100mm x 125mm) Sinar is equal to a 200 to 800 megapixel camera if you scan the film. Digital has yet to match 4x5 and is far away from 8x10 film.
I shoot full-frame Nikon digital for color, but nothing comes close to 4x5 film for large prints.
If I have a vertical architecture, then I want a box I can get someone onsite in 4hrs or less.
And that ain't Newegg, that is an Dell or HP sized company.
Management turned down my plan to have a second server. It was to be the identical model, but without all the disks and redundancy. They figured HP's 4-hour response time would be better than a hot spare server.
Then the crash came.
A nice fellow showed up within 4 hours, with the "most likely" part. It wasn't.
The next day, more parts. Nope.
The next day, two nice fellows showed up and replaced every part but the case. That solved it.
The cost of downtime was so far beyond the cost of the spare server that it wasn't even funny. Hey, this stuff happens, and the HP guys were great. It just took a lot of time to resolve the problem and a spare would have let us do it while the rest of the factory kept working.
RAID cards are great when they work. And when they fail.... well...
I'd much rather depend on ZFS.
Look at Kodak. It's nearly dead, but no one seems to care.
We film photographers do. Both of us.
I just ran the code and something about my system is causing it to decrypt, and it appears be tr***CARRIER LOST***
From TFA: " But Rivera told me he believes this also is blocked."
Believes? There's your clue. He doesn't actually know and MS isn't saying because they want developers to hop onto Metro thus feeding apps to the tablet and phone. They are willing to forgo W8 acceptance to achieve this. And that might not be a bad plan. With no way to turn it off, it will show devs that MS is committed to Metro.
The enterprise is still in the process of moving from XP to W7-64. They'll skip W8 so this is no issue at all. No lost sales.
MS knows that they can give OEM's the ability to downgrade and all is well. No lost sales.
MS may not really care which Windows you buy, as long as it is $$$ to MS. Hey, that W9 upgrade might cost you more.
Then of course someone will discover the secret registered key and it won't matter any longer. Except I'll get paid to change it for people who buy W8 by mistake.
I just realized the Intel microprocessor is almost as old as the F1 rocket engine.
Not quite sure what to make of that realization.
I did have my hands on a F1. If you want to see my photo, google "VolCo360". or click this link. http://www.volco360.com/2012/07/the-engine-that-could.html
I've done a LOT of data recovery, and Spinrite is the first tool I grab. It's cheap and works regardless of the OS. I've recovered Windows, Linux, BSD and Mac drives. I've recovered SAS RAID arrays, too.
I've done the freezer trick too, and it works in many cases, as does the PCB swap.
You do realize there's a good chance that IT has a backup of your entire system, right? If that's the case, nothing you do will get rid of the data you've got on the machine.
I'm not sure why you thought it was a good idea to have all that personal data on a employer-owned machine. You have given IT the ability to peek at all your stuff. Take a couple of IT guys to lunch and pay for it, or take them out for drinks. I'll bet you get much better advice than Slashdot.
And yet, it doesn't seem to do all that much more than the old WYSIWYG office apps that ran on DOS and used 2 megabytes of RAM.
I was thinking the same thing. I switched from Word Perfect (DOS) to MS Word 2.0 (DOS) and read a pretty think book on the product. (yeah - I'm old enough to have used products that came with thick user manuals). I made heavy use of Style Sheets, and the Outline Editor. Those were the killer features of the product.
The Windows version is so easy to use that most people never take any time to get trained or even read a user manual. They miss out on most of what Word can do. So while MS keeps adding "features", the users don't do much beyond WordPad-with-spell-checking.
When I show people the Outline Editor, they are amazed at this "new" feature.
I'm safe. My face cracks lenses.
The man is an idiot. Adding one extra capital, number or symbol to a password does not increase password strength that much. The algorithm assumes that all places in the password can be all characters.
Disagreeing with you doesn't make him an idiot.
Since we don't know what position a capital letter might occupy, I think we can agree that this expands the MAXIMUM search range above 26^6 and below 52^6+1. That's the teaching point the tool is designed for. It is not designed to be an accurate estimator, but more of a shock value tool to get the attention of users. It has some value in that role.
In his podcast, Steve clearly knows these things. He collected a number of "hacker" tools and studied them before he wrote haystack. I have not looked at his code, so I can't say what he build. But I recall that he said this was a very basic tool that ran on the local machine using Javascript.
I've had users enter their old passwords and they are universally shocked. It's a pretty good teaching tool for your average office worker.
In those days, there was a lot of fear that the US and USSR would engage in World War III, but with nuclear weapons. The news that the USSR had launched a earth-orbiting satellite caused a lot of military leaders to speculate they would soon put nuclear weapons in space and nuke us from above. Uncomfortable that we (USA) were behind in the space race, President Kennedy changed the game by announcing we would go to the moon in 10 years. This had the effect of changing the perception of the USSR's breakthrough into a first step on a long road to the moon. Americans got behind the moon race and it became accepted that the USSR's lead was temporary.
Once we "won" the race to the moon, the public lost interest. There didn't seem to be much reason to be there once the excitement died down. There was a unpopular war in Vietnam and the public was upset about the cost and all the body bags coming back. NASA figured out that an orbiting space station (SkyLab) made much better economic sense.
I used to get calls from scammers trying to sell me over-priced copy machine toner. They would claim to be my "copier company", then ask for the model number. So I'd make up a fake model number and see how long I could keep them on the phone.
Scammer: "We don't show a Nikon Z1000 on our list. Are you sure that's the model?" ....I don't have that one on my list either"
Me: " I'll check again. Can I put you on hold while I go to the second floor?"
(we start timing)
Me: "Ah, it's a Nikon Z2100. You know - one of those big ones. It really eats a lot of toner, you know. We sure buy a lot of it"
Scammer: "Really? We can make you a great price. But I still don't find that on our list. Are you sure about the model?"
Me: "Well I'll go down there and check again. Can you hold on a few minutes?
(Timer rings - I pickup the phone)
Me: "Yep - its a Canon KR600 all right."
Scammer: "Ah - you said Nikon before. Hmmm
Me: "You should have - your company sold it to us."
Scammer" Ah... yes.... Could you check that number again?
Me: "I might have written it down wrong. I'll check again. We run it non-stop so I know the boss will be excited that we can save on all that toner we buy. Can you hold?"
When I get tired of the game, I'd pass them on so someone else to play. 15 minutes was easy. Never broke the 1 hour mark, but not for lack of trying.
> "... and refuses to let you do anything but change the cable?"
I tell them I don't believe it will help at all, but I'm glad to sell them a new one if that is what they want. Wait....
1 - Offer new Anti-Virus USB cable
2 - ???
3 - Profit!
I use four 24" monitors, and I find that works rather well.
Hardware, baby!
Interesting. I am not in a position to judge this for myself - I guess it's like a computer trying to see if it is rooted, while the rootkit is operational. I was exposed to a lot of chemicals and toxins (PCB, organic solvents, and the Louisiana public school system) over my 55 years, so this might be related in some way. But I'm pretty sure it is simply knowing too much about the process. As a coder/IT guy/photographer/videographer, I am trained to look for flaws in my work (and others). Things like macro-blocks in video compression are annoying to me. I pointed out macro-blocks to a friend on his new HDTV and now he is annoyed. He never noticed them before and now sees them everywhere.