Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: I had it done, and am loving it (Score 1) 550

by the_crowbar (#47525189) Attached to: Laser Eye Surgery, Revisited 10 Years Later

I am one who opted to get the surgery. It was a couple of months ago. I am in my mid thirties with mild astigmatism. (-2.75, -2.25) My prescription for glasses or contacts had not changed in more than three years.

I actually had pre-op workups done at several centers in town that perform the surgery. I did not like the way TLC, Spectrum, and some others have a medical office, but the surgeon only comes to town one day a month. There is an eye doctor that has her practice locally and specializes in cornea related problems. She has the same lasers and surgery equipment as the cattle car like outfits.

I was able to view her surgery equipment and she was very thorough in answering all my questions. My corneas were on the thin end of the spectrum so I knew if there were any mistakes that I would be in trouble. Very little room for any corrective procedures. My mother-in-law had PRK about 10 years ago and had a very rough time.

I finally decided to go ahead and have it done. Total cost was $4300. $4200 for the surgery and $100 in medication I had to purchase. The day of the surgery they did another workup to ensure nothing had changed from three days before, when they did the previous workup. Another commenter in the thread mentioned the suction on your eyes. Yes, they put a suction device on each eye to hold it still while a laser cuts a flap on the eye. One of mine did not seal properly and had to be re-done. This left a "bruise" on my left eye for 2-3 weeks. Once the flap is cut, I was moved over to the main laser and each eye was done. Total time was less than 20 minutes.

My regular vision has been 20/20 since the day after the surgery. I think it has improved somewhat in the months following surgery. I have two 27" 2560x1440 monitors on my desk and I can read text more easily now than I could with glasses or contacts. Night vision is every bit as good. One area they have improved in is the size of the flap the gets cuts. If the edges of the flap are not larger than your maximum pupil dilation, then you end up with permanent halos at night. I have had no halos from day one. The laser she used has the largest treatment size of any certified by the FDA.

Due to how recent my treatment was, I have no comment on long term effects. I do know that I will require reading glasses at some point. Probably between mid forties to fifty. This is a fact of aging. Were I to be wearing my regular glass I would need bifocals. I will need reading glasses, but they are cheap; unlike my regular glasses or bi-focal glasses.

Would I do it again? Absolutely. I live in the southern US and it gets hot. In the summer just a few minutes outside would cause sweating that made glasses a pain. If it were raining and I had to walk from car to a store, I might have to dry my glasses just to be able to see well. I can see from the minute I wake up until I go to bed. Glasses/contacts were not too much of a hassle, but freeing myself from the time and aggravation of them was well worth it. The fact that I can see slightly better is a bonus.

Thank you,
James

Comment: Re:Routerboard (Score 1) 241

by the_crowbar (#44307071) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Enterprise Level Network Devices For Home Use?
I would try roc-noc.com. They have most RouterBoards in stock except the 2011. The 2011 is the closest to a home router all in one that MikroTik makes. I also have some RB493G devices. The 493 has 3 mini-PCI slots and you can add radios for whatever bands you want (2.4GHz, 5GHz). The price will be higher. For one with dual radios you will probably be in the $300 range. You do get 9 GB ports which is nice if you have all GB devices.

Thanks,
the_crowbar

Comment: Re:Routerboard (Score 1) 241

by the_crowbar (#44307051) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Enterprise Level Network Devices For Home Use?
These are absolutely awesome pieces of gear. The RB2011UAS is cheap for what it gets you.
  • 5 GB LAN ports (one defaults to WAN port)
  • 5 100MB LAN ports
  • Builtin 2.4GHz WiFi with amazing range
  • SFP cage if your are lucky enough to have fiber to your building
  • USB port for connecting a 3G modem
  • Console port
  • SSH/Web/Windows Config utility (config utility runs great in Wine)
  • Handles high heat better than most home oriented gear (rated to 65C!)

So many configuration options it makes dd-wrt, open-wrt, or tomato look like children's toys. I know OpenWRT/DD-WRT/etc are running Linux underneath and have many options for changing the system, but the MikroTik gear provides an easy way to access all these options. MikroTik is not open source, but the others are (DD-WRT is partly open source).

As noted by others, the problem is getting one. I have standing orders for them and they have been back ordered for a couple of months.

If you are in a hurry also check out Ubiquiti. I just picked up some of their gear and it seems very solid. I have not yet had a chance to stress it the way I have the Mikrotik stuff, but it seems to be in stock everywhere.

the_crowbar

Comment: Re:First? No. (Score 2, Informative) 45

by the_crowbar (#32606688) Attached to: Bluecherry Releases GPL'd MPEG-4 Driver

I don't think the Hauppauge 1212 (the HD-PVR) is a comparable product. The 1212 takes in a single analog video up to component 1080i and produces a x264 stream from it. This card has multiple inputs (4,8, or 16) that are D1 (720x480) max. Utilizing 16 inputs it does not support 30 frames/sec that NTSC video uses (7.5 fps max @ 16 inputs). This is aimed at the digital security market. The 1212 is aimed at the HTPC market.

Cheers,
the_crowbar

Comment: This is primarily aimed at the security market (Score 4, Interesting) 45

by the_crowbar (#32606516) Attached to: Bluecherry Releases GPL'd MPEG-4 Driver

I actually have one of their cards and I must say it works quite well. For full D1(720x480) you only get 7.5 frames/sec from 16 cameras, but for security that is plenty. I think the 4 port cards may be able to do 30 fps per camera. Version 1 of their software is a bit kludgy. It works, but needs help. Version 2, supposed to be a complete rewrite, is due out next month. If you are interested in good quality security hardware take a look at their stuff. bluecherrydvr.com I don't work for them, just am a happy customer.

Cheers,

the_crowbar

Comment: Re:Obvious (Score 3, Insightful) 285

by the_crowbar (#30769868) Attached to: Kodak Sues Apple & RIM Over Preview In Cameras

Obvious was my first thought as well. How long have cameras had a "preview"? Let's see, the very first camera I can remember was a Polaroid with the instant pictures. That camera had a view finder that showed you what to expect to see in the final picture. Every film camera I have every used had a "preview." Why was this patent granted? Just because it is a digital camera does that negate the decades of prior art in film cameras?

Cheers,
the_crowbar

Comment: Re:Beware Google's penchant for auto-updates... (Score 3, Informative) 197

by the_crowbar (#30368298) Attached to: Google Upgrades Chrome To Beta For OS X, Linux

I just installed the beta from google.com and it installed an entry in /etc/crond.daily. The comments say it only reactivates the repository after dist-upgrades disable it. I.E. intrepid->jaunty From a quick read of the script that is what it does.

Cheers,
the_crowbar

Comment: Re:It says: 256MB RAM... (Score 1) 744

by the_crowbar (#29924213) Attached to: Ubuntu 9.10 Officially Released

Windows 7 also starts out slow but as you use your computer it gets noticeably faster, much the same way as Vista and is honestly why Vista generated so much negative PR.

I really wish this were the case. Windows 7 has not increased in speed on her machine. I know Windows has some sort of disk access optimization, but with only 1GB of RAM (minus whatever is used by onboard video) it is simply constrained. Maybe the home versions are a little better with memory use. I plan on putting another 2GB in her computer as soon as I get a chance.

I am running 32 bit Windows 7 because I got it for free. If I had to pay for it the machine would continue to run Windows XP. Windows 7 for basic home use is no better than XP.

Cheers,
the_crowbar

Comment: Re:It says: 256MB RAM... (Score 1) 744

by the_crowbar (#29914103) Attached to: Ubuntu 9.10 Officially Released

Despite that, I wager Windows 7 on your 1 GB machine would run as well as XP.

If I was the original poster I would take that wager.

On my wife's computer Windows 7 does not run as well as Windows XP in 1GB of RAM. Her system is a little old. AMD Athlon 64 4000+ (2.4GHz I think) with onboard GeForce 6150 and 1GB of RAM. It had Windows XP Professional on it and it ran ok. Her computer does not run as well as my laptop with 2GB and a Core 2 Duo, but ok. She uses Firefox and can have 20-40 tabs open at once. I installed Windows 7 Business on it and while the basic OS runs ok, things slow down considerably as soon as any apps are open. Windows 7 Business is not as efficient as Windows XP Professional on her machine. Both versions of Windows are 32 bit.

Cheers,
the_crowbar

Comment: After BlackBerry Storm I am ready (Score 3, Insightful) 378

by the_crowbar (#29807459) Attached to: 50+ Android Phones Expected In Near Future

I have had a BB Storm for a few months I like a few features and loathe a few others.

Likes:
- Easy web page viewing most anywhere
- BB Messenger is good and beats SMS/MMS anyday (plus its cost is included in my plan unlike SMS)

Hates:
- Speed of the device (it feels slower now than when I first got the device and can take a few seconds now to come from locked screen to usable mode)
- Battery life ( I don't know how any of the Androids stack up here)

I have briefly used a G1 and I thought it was a nice device. The touchscreen keyboard on the Storm is ok, but when typing quickly it lags several keys behind. I did not experience that on the G1, plus with a physical keyboard you can type without looking at the phone.

Cheers,
the_crowbar

Comment: Re:Remember (Score 2, Interesting) 318

by the_crowbar (#29446033) Attached to: Professor Posts "Illegal Copy" of Guide to Oregon Public Record Laws

In my state (South Carolina, haven't we been in the news a lot lately) a legally licensed driver can pay a fee ($550/year) to drive as an uninsured motorist. Driving without insurance is not illegal here. Of course most people who drive without insurance have not paid the fee and are illegal.

http://www.scdmvonline.com/DMVNew/default.aspx?n=titleandreg#RegisteringasanUninsuredMotorist

Cheers,
the_crowbar

Save the whales. Collect the whole set.

Working...