John Hearns | 1 Apr 12:45 2009

Re: SLES 11 and TomTom

2009/3/31 Dylan <dylan <at> dylan.me.uk>:
> On Tuesday 31 March 2009, John Hearns wrote:
>> For those of you interested in desktop Linux, SuSE Enterprise Desktop
>> 11 is almost out,
>> and is available for download as an early trial version already.
>
> I hope it's a little more polished than Opensuse 11 / 11.1

I would be interested if you could amplify on that one.

SLED 10 looks fine to me, given that I've installed it for a couple of people.
I'm just about to start a trial of SLED 11
What areas is it weak in?
--

-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug <at> gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug

Dylan | 1 Apr 13:30 2009
Picon

Re: SLES 11 and TomTom

On Wednesday 01 April 2009, John Hearns wrote:
> 2009/3/31 Dylan <dylan <at> dylan.me.uk>:
> > On Tuesday 31 March 2009, John Hearns wrote:
> >> For those of you interested in desktop Linux, SuSE Enterprise Desktop
> >> 11 is almost out,
> >> and is available for download as an early trial version already.
> >
> > I hope it's a little more polished than Opensuse 11 / 11.1
>
> I would be interested if you could amplify on that one.

Well, the installation routine does not recognise existing encrypted 
partitions; there are missing libraries for non-core packages (i.e. they are 
not available on the install media); the AC97 and emu10k sound configuration 
is variously flaky or non-functional (on various machines which function 
correctly under 10 - 10.3); likewise for the xorg ATI setup. I can give more 
technical detail but would need to gather it from various machines scattered 
around several people, and the info for 11.0 is second hand.

Of course, YMMV

Dx

>
> SLED 10 looks fine to me, given that I've installed it for a couple of
> people. I'm just about to start a trial of SLED 11
> What areas is it weak in?

--

-- 
“ ‘... but there is so much else behind what I say. It makes itself known to 
(Continue reading)

Richard Jones | 1 Apr 13:45 2009

Re: To LLU or Not to LLU?

On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 01:34:47PM +0000, Peter Corlett wrote:
> Could you explain to this bear of little brain why a residential property
> requires gigabit Internet access,

Here are a few ideas which hopefully go beyond the usual "everyone
should be able to download porn/hollywood movies/play MMORPGs"
arguments:

(1) Cut carbon emissions and pollution, and free up the roads and air,
by allowing far more people to work at home.  To do this effectively
requires really good quality (high bandwidth, low latency) video
conferencing services.

There is an excellent case for the government to be driving such a
scheme.  The technology is pretty much in place - cameras are cheap,
readily available and very high quality now, and computers have the
processing power to display movie-quality video feeds.  Large
projection screens are cheap-ish, and soon to get a lot cheaper.

What's missing is the huge amounts of bandwidth needed to the home to
make it work effectively.  Not really helped when the monopoly
provider of bandwidth decides to jack up prices and do the very
minimum to extend the network.

(2) Put the BBC archive online, free to UK households.  The BBC
archive contains vast amounts of entertainment and educational
material which goes unseen.

(3) UK universities should both broadcast live and make available
their old lectures online for free.  The technology exists to do this.
(Continue reading)

Dylan | 1 Apr 14:17 2009
Picon

Re: To LLU or Not to LLU?

On Wednesday 01 April 2009, Richard Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 01:34:47PM +0000, Peter Corlett wrote:
> > Could you explain to this bear of little brain why a residential property
> > requires gigabit Internet access,
>
> Here are a few ideas which hopefully go beyond the usual "everyone
> should be able to download porn/hollywood movies/play MMORPGs"
> arguments:

I could add to this:

>
> (3) UK universities should both broadcast live and make available
> their old lectures online for free.  The technology exists to do this.
> Why not let interested people study at home?

Schools also, to allow sick or disabled students to remain in contact with 
their school community; to allow the wider community a level of involvement; 
etc ...

>
> (4) The future we don't know.

distance medical advice and colaboration (by allowing highly trained and thus 
expensive specialists to assess tests etc without a seriously ill or disabled 
patient necessarily having to travel to a centre of excellence, or remote 
expertise to be accessed in emergenciy situations)

In addition to the BBC archive, there are the National Receiving Libraries, 
museums and art galleries who have huge archives of their own which should be 
(Continue reading)

Chris Bell | 1 Apr 14:40 2009
Picon
Picon

Re: To LLU or Not to LLU?

On Wed 01 Apr, Dylan wrote:

> 
> Indeed, I would argue that the infrastructure should never have been bundled 
> with the service provision in the first place. Only if the owners of the 
> wires and the providers of the services are separate can we hope to prevent 
> the sort of obstructive and (arguably) anti-competitive practices whe 
> currently have to endure.
> 
> Dx
> 
   You then reach the state I am in, with fibres independantly installed by
about 10 organisations in the road and sewer behind my house, many more in
the local area, with the roads now in an appalling state of disrepair with
very large holes appearing throughout the North Acton and Park Royal areas.

-- 
Chris Bell NEW alternative address: chrisbell at chrisbell.org.uk
Microsoft sells you Windows ... Linux gives you the whole house.
www.overview.demon.co.uk

--

-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug <at> gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug

Peter Corlett | 1 Apr 14:40 2009
Picon

Re: To LLU or Not to LLU?

On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 12:45:55PM +0100, Richard Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 01:34:47PM +0000, Peter Corlett wrote:
>> Could you explain to this bear of little brain why a residential property
>> requires gigabit Internet access,
[...]
> (1) Cut carbon emissions and pollution, and free up the roads and air, by
> allowing far more people to work at home. To do this effectively requires
> really good quality (high bandwidth, low latency) video conferencing
> services.

This seems to work just fine with Skype, even on 400kb/s uplinks.

[...]
> (2) Put the BBC archive online, free to UK households. The BBC archive
> contains vast amounts of entertainment and educational material which goes
> unseen.

The archive is mainly in SD, which requires a bitrate of a few megabits. The
main problem is that the BBC doesn't actually completely own all of the
material and can't put it online. Purchasing the content outright would be
prohibitive.

An archive of the last seven days programming is also already available via
iPlayer.

> (3) UK universities should both broadcast live and make available their
> old lectures online for free. The technology exists to do this. Why not
> let interested people study at home?

Imperial College already podcast some of their lectures. They're encoded at
(Continue reading)

Troy Jendra | 1 Apr 15:19 2009
Picon

microsoft the panda

http://s300.photobucket.com/albums/nn32/glennjendra/19
Chengdu/?action=view&current=09-03-08037.jpg&newest=1
--

-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug <at> gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug

Richard Jones | 1 Apr 17:23 2009

Re: To LLU or Not to LLU?

On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 01:40:39PM +0100, Peter Corlett wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 12:45:55PM +0100, Richard Jones wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 01:34:47PM +0000, Peter Corlett wrote:
> >> Could you explain to this bear of little brain why a residential property
> >> requires gigabit Internet access,
> [...]
> > (1) Cut carbon emissions and pollution, and free up the roads and air, by
> > allowing far more people to work at home. To do this effectively requires
> > really good quality (high bandwidth, low latency) video conferencing
> > services.
> 
> This seems to work just fine with Skype, even on 400kb/s uplinks.

You have to be joking.  I _work_ at home, and, sure Skype works in
limited cases, except when it doesn't, or when I'm uploading anything,
or just _using_ the connection for anything else.

Anyway, a 640x480 grainy, choppy video with intermittent sound is not
what I'm talking about.

If we are to obviate the need for salesmen to travel up and down the
M1, and overseas in polluting airplanes, we need really high quality,
completely reliable, low latency, secure video streams which can be
projected onto a large wall without any pixelation.  Multiple video
streams too, because you'll want to show the presentation windows
(plural) and the speaker and the audience.

[BBC]
>  Purchasing the content outright would be
> prohibitive.
(Continue reading)

Peter Corlett | 1 Apr 17:43 2009
Picon

Re: To LLU or Not to LLU?

On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 04:23:53PM +0100, Richard Jones wrote:
[...]
> On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 01:40:39PM +0100, Peter Corlett wrote:
[...]
>> This seems to work just fine with Skype, even on 400kb/s uplinks.
> You have to be joking. I _work_ at home, and, sure Skype works in limited
> cases, except when it doesn't, or when I'm uploading anything, or just
> _using_ the connection for anything else.

Well, if you're routinely doing heavy uploading on ADSL, you've bought the
wrong product. You can purchase SDSL right now, and it works over the same
copper you've already got. No need for fibre here.

> [BBC]
>> Purchasing the content outright would be prohibitive.
> You seem to be forgetting that we already paid for it.

No we haven't. A lot of productions are collaborations and so the BBC don't
own the rights. Even for those productions which are entirely in-house, the
actors still need to be paid repeat fees due to the Equity agreements.

The BBC doesn't have much material that is not rights-encumbered in some
way. They've been going through the archives to find stuff that is not
encumbered, and you can already view that at bbc.co.uk/archive/

>> Also why "should" universities make their valuable lectures available for
>> free, given that students pay a lot of money for that service?
> Because we paid for it already!

Again, we haven't. There may be some subsidisation of tertiary education,
(Continue reading)

Richard Jones | 1 Apr 18:33 2009

Re: To LLU or Not to LLU?

On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 04:43:25PM +0100, Peter Corlett wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 04:23:53PM +0100, Richard Jones wrote:
> [...]
> > On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 01:40:39PM +0100, Peter Corlett wrote:
> [...]
> >> This seems to work just fine with Skype, even on 400kb/s uplinks.
> > You have to be joking. I _work_ at home, and, sure Skype works in limited
> > cases, except when it doesn't, or when I'm uploading anything, or just
> > _using_ the connection for anything else.
> 
> Well, if you're routinely doing heavy uploading on ADSL, you've bought the
> wrong product. You can purchase SDSL right now, and it works over the same
> copper you've already got. No need for fibre here.

SDSL buggers your download bandwidth, and it's five times more
expensive than consumer ADSL.  But hey, who needs downloads when they
can pay hundred quid a month for a slightly increased upload speed?

> > [BBC]
> >> Purchasing the content outright would be prohibitive.
> > You seem to be forgetting that we already paid for it.
> 
> No we haven't. A lot of productions are collaborations and so the BBC don't
> own the rights. Even for those productions which are entirely in-house, the
> actors still need to be paid repeat fees due to the Equity agreements.

Yes we did pay for it.  We paid for the actors to work first time.  We
paid the producers and bought all the technical equipment.

(What other job, I'm wondering, do you get paid well first time, and
(Continue reading)


Gmane