I mean, with virtualization, "cloud" services can allow your admins to be in a cheaper country, like India.
Not if latency has anything to do with your business (which it does for most businesses). And by "latency" I mean both speed of response of admins, as well as speed of response of servers. If your web-based customers are primarily in America, you don't want database queries (which can easily be more than 20 per page depending on the application) traversing the ocean... and if something is broken, you don't want a troubleshooting response time of 15 hours between email replies.
Re:What problem does Gnome 3 solve?
on
GNOME 3 Released
·
· Score: 1
I'm not sure whether Gnome 3 is a complete rethink or a desperate attempt to break out of the Windows 95 mould
It's an update to the Windows mold. Lots of the new features I see (especially window snapping) are directly lifted from Windows 7.
The symptoms are similar but they are only tangentially related. The headline is incredibly misleading by suggesting a drug has been produced that can reverse autism, which is of course not true.
If you wonder where the anti-Microsoft FUD comes from, it comes from people like me who still remember this stuff. Don't get me started on how Geoworks was crushed.
This is wholly inaccurate. The only reason the Mac didn't have decent sound was because Burrell only put a single-voice DAC into the Mac and Burrell and Hertzfeld didn't have a lot of time to write a decent mixing routine. More details here: http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Sound_By_Monday.txt
Jam Session and Studio Session by Bogas were able to mix up to six voices realtime, so decent sound was possible through software.
That wasn't very efficient. You could have had 14% more space with 50% less CPU if you'd gone with raidz. raidz2 was intended for 6 drives or more, not 5 or less.
I learned this the hard way recently... I bought a few games because they were cheaper from other services, and was disappointed that the entire process wasn't as seamless as Steam is. Poor download times, odd licensing, and misbehaving system tray icons eventually forced me to re-purchase all my games from Steam just so I wouldn't have to deal with it. And I'm glad I did.
One of the things I like about Steam is that, without any effort on my part, my games follow me. If I log into any computer in the world with the steam client, my games are there, ready to download and play. That's DRM I can live with.
I'm with you. I think the students underwent such a project without having seen an actual television from that era. If you're trying to emulate something, you need the original something to compare against.
I ordered a Dell Studio 15 filled to the brim with Blu-ray goodness (ie. I took the stock config and added a BDROM, opted for the 1080p LED screen, and an ATI Radeon 4850 for decoding). While it plays Blu-rays brilliantly, the keyboard -- I am not making this up -- lacks a BREAK key. There is no way to hit Ctrl-Break on this laptop. Dell opted for some stupid multimedia function key where BREAK would normally go and there is NO ALTERNATIVE. Without ctrl-break, debugging on this machine is essentially not an option. And the best part is, it can't be remapped because ctrl-break is a three-byte scancode (all others are two) and cannot be remapped in Windows.
So, do NOT get a Dell Studio 15. I recommend Dell, but not that one. If you go for a Dell, make sure to look close-up at the photographs of the keyboard, and don't buy a model without a Break...
It's not FUD, it's true. The clip chosen for that particular comparison (Big Buck Bunny) is one of the worst videos you can use to test codecs because it has very little motion (most scenes have a locked camera) and it has zero noise. The author of that page calls it a "real world test case" but nothing could be farther from the truth. Maybe the author of that page should attempt his comparison using actual video corpus test suites before coming to a similar hasty conclusion.
Ogg Theora is a vector quantization-based codec, which is early 1990s tech, and simply can't scale as compared to how H.264 can scale. It's clearly inferior in every way, but just because it's less encumbered by patents, people think it's the holy grail of video codecs.
I was just going to say that. If Facebook et al are not looking at the Sun coolthreads servers, they're idiots. A T5240 would deliver a whopping 128 hardware threads per 1u of rackspace.
...you'll find a lot of people that was unable to recover arrays because they used cheap hardware...Because of this I discarded NAS and similar solutions. I have external hard drives and I plug them as I need using USB.
I think you missed your own point. External hard drives are the same commodity drives you would use in a cheap/homebuilt NAS. Just because they're in an external case doesn't mean their bearings won't seize up after a few years.
If anything, any redundant array means you have a *better* chance of recovering from failures. If an array is unrecoverable, it means it wasn't set up correct, not because it was cheap.
A windows PC connected to the LAN, and DVDDecrypter. Assuming the DVD doesn't attempt any silly anti-copy stuff, just rip an ISO image. I've backed up my purchased DVDs this way; to play them, just open the.ISO with VLC player. I've been doing this for over three years, so I know it works well.
Hard drives do not withstand anywhere near the amount of shock that tapes can. If you are going to offsite your backups using a commercial facility (ie. a person that transports containers in a truck every day), you would be a fool to offsite hard drives instead of tape.
Hard drives are obviously the correct choice when you need online or "near-line" access to your data. But proper offline archival to an Iron Mountain-style facility is done with tape for a reason.
eSATA is great for external drives that stay connected and turned on. But for removable (i.e. flash) drives they can be a pain. Every time you pop a card in or out and then reboot the BIOS makes you redefine Boot Order, eSATA drives are just like regular SATA drives, not a "removable device".
So don't make your primary boot device a removable drive. Make it the internal drive and you don't have a problem.
As a photographer who unloads about 20-30GB of raw files every week from CF cards in multiple readers, I'm pretty excited about USB 3.0.
As someone involved with a Blu-Ray project with 3 terabytes of footage, my life has been made much easier by eSATA. I can pop a drive into a $40 hard drive "dock", turn it on, dump footage onto it at speeds exceeding 90MB/s (5.4G/minute), pop it out, and give it to a client. And the dock even came with a SATA-to-external-bracket so I didn't need to buy anything else.
That's not my company's policy, that's *my* policy. I can take a 3-month hit to my personal data. AND YET MY LAX PERSONAL POLICY WOULD HAVE SAVED JOURNALSPACE.
My *company's* policy is daily offsiting. Expensive, but very many of our locations could become a smoking hole in the ground and we'd still be able to restore and operate.
Well, for one thing, Vista on my wife's brand new laptop can't transfer files at speeds exceeding 1.25MB/s despite the network link being capable of almost one hundred times that speed.
The out-of-box experience is a giant "meh" right in the first ten minutes. I was expecting a lot more product for something that requires 2G of RAM to boot up without paging.
Slashdot Mirror
I mean, with virtualization, "cloud" services can allow your admins to be in a cheaper country, like India.
Not if latency has anything to do with your business (which it does for most businesses). And by "latency" I mean both speed of response of admins, as well as speed of response of servers. If your web-based customers are primarily in America, you don't want database queries (which can easily be more than 20 per page depending on the application) traversing the ocean... and if something is broken, you don't want a troubleshooting response time of 15 hours between email replies.
It's an update to the Windows mold. Lots of the new features I see (especially window snapping) are directly lifted from Windows 7.
all the computer systems shown in Jurassic Park where real
Right, but the video surveillance footage -- a quicktime movie playing back, complete with scrolling thumb to show position -- was not!
Wait, we're talking about Stevie Case, right?
The symptoms are similar but they are only tangentially related. The headline is incredibly misleading by suggesting a drug has been produced that can reverse autism, which is of course not true.
The code was present but disabled.
Yes, I know it was 3.1 and the article is 3.0. I was making a different point.
"Some say that the Windows 3.0 GUI (remember, it needed MS-DOS/DR-DOS to work)"
That should read "needed DR-DOS to NOT work". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD_code
If you wonder where the anti-Microsoft FUD comes from, it comes from people like me who still remember this stuff. Don't get me started on how Geoworks was crushed.
This is wholly inaccurate. The only reason the Mac didn't have decent sound was because Burrell only put a single-voice DAC into the Mac and Burrell and Hertzfeld didn't have a lot of time to write a decent mixing routine. More details here: http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Sound_By_Monday.txt
Jam Session and Studio Session by Bogas were able to mix up to six voices realtime, so decent sound was possible through software.
5x1.5TB in RAIDZ2
That wasn't very efficient. You could have had 14% more space with 50% less CPU if you'd gone with raidz. raidz2 was intended for 6 drives or more, not 5 or less.
I learned this the hard way recently... I bought a few games because they were cheaper from other services, and was disappointed that the entire process wasn't as seamless as Steam is. Poor download times, odd licensing, and misbehaving system tray icons eventually forced me to re-purchase all my games from Steam just so I wouldn't have to deal with it. And I'm glad I did.
One of the things I like about Steam is that, without any effort on my part, my games follow me. If I log into any computer in the world with the steam client, my games are there, ready to download and play. That's DRM I can live with.
I'm with you. I think the students underwent such a project without having seen an actual television from that era. If you're trying to emulate something, you need the original something to compare against.
with the Intellivision overlay system and the Commodore 64 Extender.
Don't you mean the System Changer? That played Atari VCS games, not C64.
I ordered a Dell Studio 15 filled to the brim with Blu-ray goodness (ie. I took the stock config and added a BDROM, opted for the 1080p LED screen, and an ATI Radeon 4850 for decoding). While it plays Blu-rays brilliantly, the keyboard -- I am not making this up -- lacks a BREAK key. There is no way to hit Ctrl-Break on this laptop. Dell opted for some stupid multimedia function key where BREAK would normally go and there is NO ALTERNATIVE. Without ctrl-break, debugging on this machine is essentially not an option. And the best part is, it can't be remapped because ctrl-break is a three-byte scancode (all others are two) and cannot be remapped in Windows.
So, do NOT get a Dell Studio 15. I recommend Dell, but not that one. If you go for a Dell, make sure to look close-up at the photographs of the keyboard, and don't buy a model without a Break...
It's not FUD, it's true. The clip chosen for that particular comparison (Big Buck Bunny) is one of the worst videos you can use to test codecs because it has very little motion (most scenes have a locked camera) and it has zero noise. The author of that page calls it a "real world test case" but nothing could be farther from the truth. Maybe the author of that page should attempt his comparison using actual video corpus test suites before coming to a similar hasty conclusion.
Ogg Theora is a vector quantization-based codec, which is early 1990s tech, and simply can't scale as compared to how H.264 can scale. It's clearly inferior in every way, but just because it's less encumbered by patents, people think it's the holy grail of video codecs.
I was just going to say that. If Facebook et al are not looking at the Sun coolthreads servers, they're idiots. A T5240 would deliver a whopping 128 hardware threads per 1u of rackspace.
...you'll find a lot of people that was unable to recover arrays because they used cheap hardware...Because of this I discarded NAS and similar solutions. I have external hard drives and I plug them as I need using USB.
I think you missed your own point. External hard drives are the same commodity drives you would use in a cheap/homebuilt NAS. Just because they're in an external case doesn't mean their bearings won't seize up after a few years.
If anything, any redundant array means you have a *better* chance of recovering from failures. If an array is unrecoverable, it means it wasn't set up correct, not because it was cheap.
A windows PC connected to the LAN, and DVDDecrypter. Assuming the DVD doesn't attempt any silly anti-copy stuff, just rip an ISO image. I've backed up my purchased DVDs this way; to play them, just open the .ISO with VLC player. I've been doing this for over three years, so I know it works well.
Hard drives do not withstand anywhere near the amount of shock that tapes can. If you are going to offsite your backups using a commercial facility (ie. a person that transports containers in a truck every day), you would be a fool to offsite hard drives instead of tape.
Hard drives are obviously the correct choice when you need online or "near-line" access to your data. But proper offline archival to an Iron Mountain-style facility is done with tape for a reason.
I can't believe a server designed to simply plug into the wall doesn't support powerline ethernet. Or wifi for that matter!
But I have a sub 50k Slashdot UID!
Christ, I am such a loser.
Does that make me better or worse than you?
Simple: Buy two, and use one in an eSATA hard drive cradle/dock. Once a night, turn on the dock, back up the data, then turn it off.
When I built my media PC, I skimped on the processor (1.6GHz C2D clocked at 2.2) and made sure the video card could decode AVC (aka x264) in hardware.
What player do you use that decodes H.264 using the graphics card hardware?
eSATA is great for external drives that stay connected and turned on. But for removable (i.e. flash) drives they can be a pain. Every time you pop a card in or out and then reboot the BIOS makes you redefine Boot Order, eSATA drives are just like regular SATA drives, not a "removable device".
So don't make your primary boot device a removable drive. Make it the internal drive and you don't have a problem.
As a photographer who unloads about 20-30GB of raw files every week from CF cards in multiple readers, I'm pretty excited about USB 3.0.
As someone involved with a Blu-Ray project with 3 terabytes of footage, my life has been made much easier by eSATA. I can pop a drive into a $40 hard drive "dock", turn it on, dump footage onto it at speeds exceeding 90MB/s (5.4G/minute), pop it out, and give it to a client. And the dock even came with a SATA-to-external-bracket so I didn't need to buy anything else.
That's not my company's policy, that's *my* policy. I can take a 3-month hit to my personal data. AND YET MY LAX PERSONAL POLICY WOULD HAVE SAVED JOURNALSPACE.
My *company's* policy is daily offsiting. Expensive, but very many of our locations could become a smoking hole in the ground and we'd still be able to restore and operate.
Well, for one thing, Vista on my wife's brand new laptop can't transfer files at speeds exceeding 1.25MB/s despite the network link being capable of almost one hundred times that speed.
The out-of-box experience is a giant "meh" right in the first ten minutes. I was expecting a lot more product for something that requires 2G of RAM to boot up without paging.