Sorry Charlie, This was downloaded an installed in a clean directory (extracted to desktop). No previous builds were installed since the last time I had to reinstall Windows (grin!).
1) Go to www.icecast.org and use their GPL'd icecast and liveice software to do the broadcasting. 2) The server horsepower depends on a few things: how many streams you want to run, are the streams mono or stereo and what encoder do you plan to use. Note that if you want to use one of the free encoders (such as LAME or one of it's patched versions), you won't be able to stream at less than 28.8kbps - you will need the Xing encoder at $19.95 or the Freanhoffer (?) at major $$. Note that the Xing uses MMX, which will give you a better encoding at the same CPU level, or a similar level of encoding quality at a lower CPU level. 3) If you use the Xing encoder, you'll need to patch the icecast software to work around a problem with the Xing encoder. It's a small, minor change that makes a big difference. 4) It doesn't make sense to run a high bit rate encoding if your listeners can't receive it. Don't encode a 28.8k signal for users unless they are using a minimum 56k modem. If they're using 28.8/33.6 modems, encode at 16k so they don't drop frames.
To give you an idea, I set up an MP3 broadcast for a local minor league baseball team over the summer. I pulled the signal in from the local AM radio station (mono only) to my sound card's headphone jack. Liveice grabbed the input and passed it on to Xing. Xing encoded it and then icecast broadcasted it. The hardware I used was:
Cyrix 200MX (o/c'd to pr-266) (Xing's MMX support made this work, otherwise go with AMD/Intel) 32 MB Ram AWE 32 sound card 4.3 GB IDE hard drive Xing encoder NE2k clone
I streamed a 32k/44200 mono and a 16k/22100 mono signal at a CPU level of ~35%. This system was rock stable and managed easily. I set up a cron job to fire up just before the pregame program started, and stopped recording 4.5 hours later. I then moved a 'taped' version of the game over to a directory I set up for my web site so people who missed the game can download on demand and listen.
Bugles are a *corn* flavored snack (possibly with real corn, but most likely corn meal, corn stalks, corn husks, corn syrup...). I think you're confusing them with the more aptly named 'Cheesit'.
BTW - Here's a puzzle for you, find the Debian program in the above paragraph!
The following sports team will *not* win their respective championships this century, due to brain-dead, money-grabbing owners:
The Philadelphia Eagles (a monkey with a dart and dartboard can do better!), Phillies (give us an additional $80 million so we can build the stadium where we want to!) and Flyers (get a real coach!).
Thankfully, over the past two years the Sixers have finally realized what they hell they are doing and are well on their way to a championship. Thank God for Pat Croce, Larry Brown and Alan Iverson!!
Coming from an AS/400 environment, IBM releases patches to their OS and applications called PTF's (Program Temporary Fixes, if I remember correctly). If you needed a fix immediately, it was available. Every once in a while, you could call up IBM and order a tape containing all outstanding PTF's for your system. What is the difference between downloading a fix from RedHat to patch a program, or installing a PTF from IBM? What is the difference between installing all outstanding patches from RedHat or installing a tape containing all outstanding PTF's from IBM? Last time I checked, there were quite a few AS/400's out there in the 'enterprise' world.
1. Somebody pointed out that the Linux distribution used is more secure than the boxed set NT distribution. Paranoid as I am, no system is stronger than it's weakest flaw. NT may have many, but frankly, so does Red Hat. They might not be too many, but they are there. The weakest point in *any* system is the administrator. If they don't know what they're doing, forget it! Give some bozo (say, an admin at PC Weak) a freshly installed box. If they don't know/care how to maintain it properly, then it's their fault the box gets hacked.
2. I agree totally with the people saying that PC Week had done more work with the NT box, than with the Linux one. In fact, this kind of press coverage is only looking bad on PC Week. I remember I saw a full page with documentation on how they set up the NT box. Steps on how they applied the service packs and all. I couldn't find one note on how the Linux box was configured. I think that one that knows how to do so much research on NT, should be able to read webpages and mailinglists for Linux issues.
Let me give you a hand - from www.hackpcweek.com... Microsoft pitched in by modifying their guestbook application to a classified ad application. They also helped with the myriad configurations of Nt, IIS,SQLServer, and MTS. We used the latest distribution from Redhat, along with Apache. Much thanks to the open source community for help in securing the server. Boy, I guess it's nice to be able to have M$ at your beck and call. And I'll tell you what, if I was one of the 'open source community' that helped PC Weak set up the box, I'd make sure they didn't publish my name!
3. The most important issue. What did this teach us? PC Week actually brought to light that too many Linux users are ignorant about their security. I remember reading an article in a major PC magazine about firewalls. They brought up different products. Linux based solutions got good security remarks, just because, they were Linux. And NT based ones got bad, because they were NT based. This is not good journalism. Perhaps it is all time that we do more extensive security auditing on our boxes...
Gee, from the comments here, I'd say that PC Weak is ignorant about security. How else can you explain them putting SP's on NT, but not even checking for updated rpm's? Too difficult did they say?? Sheesh! This 'test' is about a rag trying to generate interest. To me, it lessens their credibility (what little they have left).
Maybe they should change their logo to: "The Failure of Interactive Testing... PC WEEK Labs ONLINE"
Slashdot Mirror
Didn't find an old one, just one dated 10/9/99. Deleted that, and am getting further along. Sorry if I missed it in the Release Notes.
You twit. Why don't you go find out the origin of the quote before making yourself out to be what you signed your comment as.
I've READ the release notes, no Java plugins. In fact, here's all my plugins:
Adobe Acrobat 4.0
Headspace Beatnik Player Stub V1.0.0.1
Shockwave Flash 3.0 r8
LiveAudio
NPAVI32 Dynamic Link Library
Netscape Default Plug-in
Sorry Charlie,
This was downloaded an installed in a clean directory (extracted to desktop). No previous builds were installed since the last time I had to reinstall Windows (grin!).
Is anyone else getting this error? Just did a fresh download of the Win 32 binary, double-clicked on apprunner and:
APPRUNNER caused an invalid page fault in
module XPCOM.DLL at 015f:60ad1510.
Damn!
Here's a few things to check out-
1) Go to www.icecast.org and use their GPL'd icecast and liveice software to do the broadcasting.
2) The server horsepower depends on a few things: how many streams you want to run, are the streams mono or stereo and what encoder do you plan to use. Note that if you want to use one of the free encoders (such as LAME or one of it's patched versions), you won't be able to stream at less than 28.8kbps - you will need the Xing encoder at $19.95 or the Freanhoffer (?) at major $$. Note that the Xing uses MMX, which will give you a better encoding at the same CPU level, or a similar level of encoding quality at a lower CPU level.
3) If you use the Xing encoder, you'll need to patch the icecast software to work around a problem with the Xing encoder. It's a small, minor change that makes a big difference.
4) It doesn't make sense to run a high bit rate encoding if your listeners can't receive it. Don't encode a 28.8k signal for users unless they are using a minimum 56k modem. If they're using 28.8/33.6 modems, encode at 16k so they don't drop frames.
To give you an idea, I set up an MP3 broadcast for a local minor league baseball team over the summer. I pulled the signal in from the local AM radio station (mono only) to my sound card's headphone jack. Liveice grabbed the input and passed it on to Xing. Xing encoded it and then icecast broadcasted it. The hardware I used was:
Cyrix 200MX (o/c'd to pr-266) (Xing's MMX support made this work, otherwise go with AMD/Intel)
32 MB Ram
AWE 32 sound card
4.3 GB IDE hard drive
Xing encoder
NE2k clone
I streamed a 32k/44200 mono and a 16k/22100 mono signal at a CPU level of ~35%. This system was rock stable and managed easily. I set up a cron job to fire up just before the pregame program started, and stopped recording 4.5 hours later. I then moved a 'taped' version of the game over to a directory I set up for my web site so people who missed the game can download on demand and listen.
Bugles are a *corn* flavored snack (possibly with real corn, but most likely corn meal, corn stalks, corn husks, corn syrup...). I think you're confusing them with the more aptly named 'Cheesit'.
BTW - Here's a puzzle for you, find the Debian program in the above paragraph!
The following sports team will *not* win their respective championships this century, due to brain-dead, money-grabbing owners:
The Philadelphia Eagles (a monkey with a dart and dartboard can do better!), Phillies (give us an additional $80 million so we can build the stadium where we want to!) and Flyers (get a real coach!).
Thankfully, over the past two years the Sixers have finally realized what they hell they are doing and are well on their way to a championship. Thank God for Pat Croce, Larry Brown and Alan Iverson!!
Coming from an AS/400 environment, IBM releases patches to their OS and applications called PTF's (Program Temporary Fixes, if I remember correctly). If you needed a fix immediately, it was available. Every once in a while, you could call up IBM and order a tape containing all outstanding PTF's for your system. What is the difference between downloading a fix from RedHat to patch a program, or installing a PTF from IBM? What is the difference between installing all outstanding patches from RedHat or installing a tape containing all outstanding PTF's from IBM? Last time I checked, there were quite a few AS/400's out there in the 'enterprise' world.
Let's try this again...
1. Somebody pointed out that the Linux distribution used is more secure than the boxed set NT distribution. Paranoid as I am, no system is stronger than it's weakest flaw. NT may have many, but frankly, so does Red Hat. They might not be too many, but they are there.
The weakest point in *any* system is the administrator. If they don't know what they're doing, forget it! Give some bozo (say, an admin at PC Weak) a freshly installed box. If they don't know/care how to maintain it properly, then it's their fault the box gets hacked.
2. I agree totally with the people saying that PC Week had done more work with the NT box, than with the Linux one. In fact, this kind of press coverage is only looking bad on PC Week. I remember I saw a full page with documentation on how they set up the NT box. Steps on how they applied the service packs and all. I couldn't find one note on how the Linux box was configured. I think that one that knows how to do so much research on NT, should be able to read webpages and mailinglists for Linux issues.
Let me give you a hand - from www.hackpcweek.com...
Microsoft pitched in by modifying their guestbook application to a classified ad application. They also helped with the myriad configurations of Nt, IIS,SQLServer, and MTS.
We used the latest distribution from Redhat, along with Apache. Much thanks to the open source community for help in securing the server.
Boy, I guess it's nice to be able to have M$ at your beck and call. And I'll tell you what, if I was one of the 'open source community' that helped PC Weak set up the box, I'd make sure they didn't publish my name!
3. The most important issue. What did this teach us? PC Week actually brought to light that too many Linux users are ignorant about their security. I remember reading an article in a major PC magazine about firewalls. They brought up different products. Linux based solutions got good security remarks, just because, they were Linux. And NT based ones got bad, because they were NT based. This is not good journalism. Perhaps it is all time that we do more extensive security auditing on our boxes...
Gee, from the comments here, I'd say that PC Weak is ignorant about security. How else can you explain them putting SP's on NT, but not even checking for updated rpm's? Too difficult did they say?? Sheesh! This 'test' is about a rag trying to generate interest. To me, it lessens their credibility (what little they have left).
Maybe they should change their logo to: "The Failure of Interactive Testing... PC WEEK Labs ONLINE"