Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Well then... (Score 1) 123

You don't need usenet for these, by the way, it's all torrent driven.

Usenet tends to be faster, however. Torrent download speeds are highly variable: fairly quick for popular files that everyone else is downloading at the same time, not so much for other files. I've had to leave many a torrent running for days or even weeks for it to complete. SABnzbd, OTOH, will usually pull anything that hasn't expired at 5.5-6 MB/s (bytes, not bits) over my connection, which is pretty much as fast as the connection supports.

Comment Re:It was the first standard for video? (Score 1) 406

And if you don't have at least a dual-monitor setup, you're doing it wrong.

I have a dual-monitor setup at work (one at 1680x1050 and the other at 1440x900 or so, both somewhere near 20") and a single-monitor setup at home (28" 4K). I think the single 4K monitor is more useful than two lower-res monitors, and it takes up less space (as in it still fits on the smaller desk at home).

Comment Re:It was the first standard for video? (Score 1) 406

You're not kidding. Consider this tripe from TFA:

"One of the first computers with built-in video output, the Apple II, simply threw a lot of CPU time at a character generator, a shift register, and a few other bits of supporting circuitry to write memory to a video output."

The Apple II wasted no CPU time on graphics. Memory access was interleaved between the CPU and the video hardware; the video hardware (a bunch of 74LSxx logic, eventually reduced to two chips in the IIe and then one chip in the IIGS) was entirely responsible for drawing the screen contents based on the contents of the frame buffers and some softswitches.

With that error right off the bat, I didn't bother continuing with the article. The author is the Howard Zinn of computer history, if this is an accurate indication of his output.

That this is coming from Hackaday is troubling. Aren't they usually better than this?

Comment Re:Well, that was surprisingly boring. (Score 1) 62

Tried out this code in an Apple II emulator:

10 I=0
20 I=I+1:PRINT I
30 GOSUB 20

It gets to 25 before bombing out with an out-of-memory error. Assuming that it's using the processor's 256-byte stack and not some other chunk of memory, the "out-of-memory" condition more than likely is a stack overflow.

Comment Re:Europe, land of the sheep and chickenshit (Score 0, Troll) 460

Forcing people into dept so they can get an education.

Nobody forced you to sign on the dotted line for the loan to fund your $55k/year Critical Queer Trans Women's Studies degree that rendered you less fit for a career asking people "you want fries with that?" than you were before you went in. It's your fault you didn't look into more cost-effective options which you might've been able to pay as you go, or at least rack up a smaller, more easily paid-off pile of debt. It's your fault you picked a worthless degree with no real-world applicability. Why should I (with the computer-science degree from a state school) and others like me (not to mention all of the millions who found gainful employment without a degree in the trades, the military, or whatever) have to finance your poor choices?

Comment Re:Replacement?? (Score 1) 388

You were still using DOS as a primary OS in 1995? Dude Windows 3.1 wasn't THAT bad. I know it's cool to like the command line around here but DOS wasn't GOOD command line (no multitasking being a major drawback).

I wasn't using DOS all the way up to 1995 (I had been running OS/2 and early versions of Linux starting around maybe '93 or '94), but there were ways to get DOS to multitask that didn't involve Windows. DESQview, for instance, was pretty decent, and it let me share my 286 between running a BBS and doing other things.

(To be perfectly honest, my primary computer at the time would've been an Apple II. I built a computer to run my BBS so I could have my Apple II back. :-) )

Comment Re:Easy (Score 2) 235

I think the big failure is that "Smart TVs" just aren't quite good enough to replace the "TV sticks", or at least not at a competitive price.

Also, TVs tend to last a while. The four-year-old 55" Toshiba in my living room most likely has at least twice as many years ahead of it. Streaming services and their associated gadgets come and go much more quickly. Netflix or Amazon will probably be around for the long haul, but what about those other services you've never heard of that the average "smart TV" of today supports? Long before eight years is up, they're gone, and your TV's support for them is about as useful as an 8-track. It's better to farm this support out to gadgets that are easily replaced as they become obsolete.

Comment Re:Not meant to be a good device but to undercut C (Score 1) 243

If you're OK with 3.3V I/O, connecting straight to the header will work. My board puts level shifters (a transistor and a couple of resistors each) on the 1-Wire and I2C pins for 5V I/O. It also includes a clock (connected over I2C) and an SSR controller (a DS2406 connected to the 1-Wire bus). Since I was going to put a DS18B20 temperature sensor inside a refrigerator at the end of a long cable, 5V I/O would be preferable.

Slashdot Top Deals

The first 90% of a project takes 90% of the time, the last 10% takes the other 90% of the time.

Working...