Jump to content

CoffeeFiend

Patron
  • Posts

    4,973
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Donations

    0.00 USD 
  • Country

    Canada

Everything posted by CoffeeFiend

  1. That's what I meant by "make a script that would do what's necessary for each new user". It will depend on what blogging software you pick, as the setup changes from one to another. But again, it's a simple programming task for any skilled programmer (just has to know what has to be done for each new user, and then automate it). I can't be of much help finding the person to do the job though... Perhaps you could post on a relevant newsgroup (or coder freelancing site, like rentacoder or others) with a "job offer" of some sort.
  2. So more like blog hosting (multiple blogs), sort of. As for all being in one database, that's a total non-issue (unless the blog software you want to use sucks badly) The idea would be to take whatever blog software your prefer or that is more adapted to your needs (I don't blog, and don't follow with most blog software) like wordpress or whatever, and then make a script that would do what's necessary for each new user (create user profile, copy files or setup rewriting for user, write appropriate config file, etc). I'm sure you can find someone who can do that for you. It's not a very complicated task. (Don't even look at me, I wouldn't touch PHP stuff with a ten foot pole!) But honestly, I don't think there's that much of a market for it. There's already tons of places with blog hosting, like blogger.com and dozens of others. The only difference seems to be your site would be specifically for posting art stuff, but then again, there's nothing preventing others to post art stuff on any other [well known] blog places. Unless I'm missing something.
  3. From what I understand, it sounds much a typical blog. The site owner can post under certain categories, and people can comment on it.
  4. Torrents alone is not too bad (no matter what the bandwidth is). Now keep doing that, but add ed2k+kad on top of that (without limiting connections to something too low; I've got an old 200GB'er just for ed2k temp files) and your router will fry pretty quickly! Most routers are nowhere near able to handle the simultaneous NAT sessions required either. Add ngs, ftp/http downloads (and uploads) on top of that, several ports forwarded for various stuff, mirroring the odd website (winhttrack), VPNs, VOiP, IRC, the average web surfing and all... It'll work fine for a week, then you'll quickly start having to reset it almost everyday (cheap processor heats too much and crashes), until it becomes eventually useless (bugs too much, DHCP from your ISP stops working for no apparent reason, etc - even if you update firmware, reset defaults and all). Honestly, I wish I had never even bothered. Anything software-based I've tried to replace 'em so far has worked great and usually has more features.
  5. Unlucky so many times with that many different routers? A dozen+ lemons in a row? Impossible. I think you're just not putting enough stress on your connection. Lend me your WRT54G and it won't last 2 weeks Hey, I'm not paying extra for a "uncapped" connection (that's no faster) for nothing We're talking about 10GB/day here. Find me a cheap consumer router than can handle this year-round, and I'll show you a flying pig.
  6. I haven't bothered to ask, because I've had such issues with like a dozen different routers, DLink, Linksys 9yes, including the "good" WRT54G), Neatgear and others. Routers suck, period (except for ppl with "simple" needs). I've even put HSFs on some of them, and they still couldn't handle it. Yet, any software solution I've tried since then has worked perfectly, be it RRAS, Sieve, Winroute, m0n0wall, etc. No matter what router it is, I'd still think it's the culprit. Could be interesting to know though...
  7. Like RogueSpear said, I don't think it's the cablemodem. Mine takes almost a minute to sync. I just can't see it take 2 seconds to fix itself (you could tell right away just looking at the LEDs too). Your ISP should be able to tell you they haven't noticed anything weird with your cable modem (unusual # of disconnections or anything like that). I've never seen a cable modem do this even once (including broken ones) I'd be tempted to blame the router though. Especially if you're putting any kind of load on it. They overheat and do exactly that. Drop for short periods of time every now and then. The switch chips in most routers nowadays are plain ghetto (when that happens you get a "cable disconnected" trayicon and can't see your other PCs), and the router part also tends to overheat and cause problems. I had so much problems like that with every router I've tried, until the day I decided I had enough of it, and wasn't going to waste anymore time and money on routers (using software NAT/firewall instead now). Problems solved since then. But it could also be a bad NIC, driver or ethernet cable.
  8. Go ahead. No need to quote me or anything, you can use it as yours Actually, the small independant writers are more like "collateral damage" if I can say. This isn't aimed at them (not that I'm saying their drivers are typically great stuff either - nor necessarily bad). This is mostly so people install the WHQL certified ati/nvidia/nforce/intel/whatever video/chipset/soundcard drivers, and not the ghetto stuff. And yes, they actually do testing, even if you find it hard to believe. They try to force you to install the known good drivers by making it inconvenient to install the non-signed ones. Then there's that small minority of folks with the odd unusual hardware that doesn't have signed drivers (and doesn't have generic drivers or anything like that). It might be more of a PITA to install those now, but I think it's a small price to pay for the vast majority of ppl to use mainly known good drivers (and people stoping to make the old tired unfounded BSOD jokes a few years from now and saying it's an unstable sucky OS because their drivers sucked). I think you're severely underestimating the amount of drivers causing BSODs. There's some information/stories about that on the web, you'd be amazed to see how many such drivers that causes BSODs are found everyday. They just HAD to do something. Again, one way or another, people will complain. Keep the same old apps people have been using forever as is (those that some people say are the only things which are "right" - like notepad/paint/calc) and then some whine there's no SSH in telnet and such (Actually, they've redone the calculator and such for XP, paint supports more formats, etc). Yeah, they still suck in a way (well, notepad is very featureless, but very lightweight/barebones - it's OK-ish), but then again, if they added more features like syntax highlighting in notepad, SSH in telnet and such things, then there would be people whining about bundling (just like how it's seemingly a bad thing it comes with a functional [yet so sucky] media player and WM codecs! But that every other OS/distro also does it is seemingly a good thing though - even a BAD thing if they don't. Talk about dual standards!) Ya know, people would all be saying the old "embrace and extend, teh M$ is at it again!", and how they must be trying to kill putty or such (and be accused of using proprietary standards in the way, regardless of any facts)... As for SSH or syntax highlighting, I'd say 95%+ of windows users don't use it either nor care about it, and those who do already know the apps that have the features they want. Personally, I use SSH like twice a year (truly don't care if telnet doesn't have it), and no matter what they did to notepad, I still wouldn't use it, same for paint). And no matter what changes they did, people would still use another editor ("it's not notepad++/editplus/ultraedit/uestudio/vim/emacs" or whatever it is they really want and have always used). WMP is no exception, no matter what they do to it (just like for notepad or paint), I'd still use ZoomPlayer (and VLC/MPC). Besides, the minute they add a single tiny feature to one of them (that they can notice), tons of people will complain about "bloat" as they always do. When you're Microsoft, there's NOTHING you can do without having some people complain about it. Oh, about the inconsistent user interface, I agree on this one. This is perhaps the first complaint I hear about Vista that's seems to be relevant (unlike "there's no boot logo!" or a couple icons - like it actually matters)
  9. They all say PS is expensive, but it's not THAT bad really. The CS2 upgrade cost me 150$. Considering how good and powerful it is (for someone really into photography) and how often I use it, I'd say it was well worth it. Not sure what PS CS3 will bring though. Might skip it too (and upgrade to CS4 in a couple years for another 150$), it depends what's new... PS CS2 is already an excellent good tool.
  10. Says the guy who does it everyday about .NET! (and open source, and ...) Besides, he's not trolling at all. 9x might have been OK-ish for the time it came out, but nowadays... POS is an understatement.
  11. People have said that about every windows release (since Win 95 at least). Yet, millions of users and tons of large places have used the RTMs without a single problem (or very minor issues - often drivers). I don't recall of any major/critical bugs that ever made me wish I had waited for a service pack. There's hundreds of new features/enhancements/new stuff and what not. Lots of it is VERY significant/real improvements IMO. But then again, it depends where cuts the line as "how much makes it worth it", and for some people, there just couldn't be enough no matter what. As for the activation & WGA crap, as much as I despise being treated like a thief and an OS vendor installing spyware (at least trying to) on my PCs, it's really not all that different from XP. XP had a mandatory activation for almost everyone - just not corporate customers. Most people pirated that one, hence the recent whining about activation, as there is no bypassing it now. WGA? Yep, XP's got that too. The ONLY real difference is that Vista has to be re-activated every 180 days. If being automatically re-activated twice as year (should be totally transparent) is a reason to not use a far superior OS, you're never going to upgrade past XP (think you'll be running XP in 50 years?) Perhaps because one doesn't want overpriced ghey looking hardware with a crap OS that doesn't run any of the software I need and want? Game selection for that "platform" is reason enough for 99% of home users to never want to buy one. I need a mac like a hole in the head - it's the absolute, very last resort IMO (right before not using computers anymore ever, and even then, I'm almost hesitating). Sleeping (or hibernation) disconnects the network on any OS. Some OS/hardware/driver combinations have more problems than others. Vista is FAR better than the older versions of windows WRT this. If you're having problems, I wouldn't instantly blame the OS (very well could be drivers). And that shouldn't be a reason to reboot - ever, on any OS. You just have to reinitialize it (manually reconnect). Seriously, there's a lot of FUD, misinformation (like the "no RAID support" in another thread, like it's not there just because someone doesn't understand it!) and such being said about Vista nowadays. Like the "it's bloated" claims from people that have seemingly forgotten about every previous windows (or ms office) release, where everybody said the exact same things! (bloated/same OS with a new skin - because they can't tell apart from GUI changes since they have no idea of the underlying stuff nor care about it/bothersome activation stuff/etc). Some people try to resist change, they're confused and have to actually learn something, so they all say "this new xyz feature sucks, it was so much better with [version -1]!" just because things are done differently, even if it's improved a lot. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Vista is a perfect OS or anything. UAC is definitely a PITA, but then again there were countless linux folks saying it basically needed this to be secure... Much of it is "damned if you do, damned if you don't". Sometimes you just can't win. Same with the drivers signing. You have millions of people making the same old tired BSOD jokes. And if you read into their online crash analysis service, you'll see that nearly all crashes (the vast majority) are because of bad drivers. So to reduce crashes (and undeserved perception of a buggy OS), the solution is to reduce usage of crappy drivers, which should help in the long run. But now folks are whining about it (wanting to load drivers that can likely make their machine crash - and them in turn blaming MS for making an unstable OS). Their "solution" is to totally disregard singing and load any old crappy drivers regardless - it's not much of a solution either... So they decided to force ppl to use signed drivers as much as possible (the next best thing after "all drivers being perfect/having no bugs at all" which is impossible), but then ppl complain. Again, you just can't win. Give it 6 months to a year, and most people will be using the latest version, and those "Vista sucks" people will be very quiet. They'll be used to the new ways do to things, there will be more drivers, it will ship on all new PCs, etc. Eventually, most people wouldn't ever want to switch to anything older (like most people wouldn't want to go back from XP anymore nowadays). But there will always be a small minority who will stick to the older OS'es for a very long time (like those still running 9x nowadays). It's annoying to read all that negative stuff all the time, so I usually try to ignore it altogether. It's only a matter of time before they stop... Repeat & rince with the next version of windows, and the following, and ... ("it's bloated!", "it does nothing the old OS can't do!", "same OS, just a new skin!", "DRM!", etc)
  12. 1) Like I've said before: They're both 7600 series, and that's about as much as I know about video card 3D performance. I'm not a gamer AT ALL, so I don't follow video card series and benchmarks whatsoever. I'm perfectly happy with onboard video of any kind - I'd be just as happy with a PCI ATI Rage XL 8MB. The only reason I'd buy anything faster nowadays is Vista and and apps using WPF (and perhaps H.264 decoding acceleration). If you want to know exactly how they compare, you'll have to google for some benchmarks (or perhaps some gamer can answer this) 2) No they're not, but I'm comparing against pre-tax prices too. Same taxes should apply.
  13. Same video. BTW, youtube uses flash for video...
  14. Not bad, but not a great deal either... For 165$ cheaper: Core 2 Duo E6300 (MUCH faster!) Gigabyte S3 board (good at OC'ing) EVGA E-GEFORCE 7600 GT PCI-E 256M (don't know how it compares honestly. both are WAY overkill for a non-gamer like me) Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 320GB SATA2 3GB/S 7200RPM 16MB (70GB more, twice the cache) Same DVD burner 1GB RAM in one stick (I'd hate to fill slots with tiny 512MB sticks personally; spend the extra 130$ out of your 165$ savings to make it a pair and have 2GB if you want, and still have saved 35$) Different case (but check the reviews by searching the model #, it's not bad seemingly) (Pre-built too) Linky It's not a perfect system either, but this is a pretty fast system compared to the other one, and it's cheaper. For 965$ I'd expect more. You can save even more if you look for specials and assemble it youself (quick and easy) They have a X2 3800+ EE system rather similar to the one you've quoted too, for 740$ too, but you're hardly saving anything over the Core 2 Duo really... But it's still 225$ cheaper than the one you posted, for something almost identical Linky BTW, that picture's font is so freakin' huge I can read it w/o glasses
  15. Same here. I fail to see any humour in this. Haven't seen windows install itself onto other PCs on it's own... Windows doesn't do that at all. You could esentially say all software does that to an extent. Windows really isn't that bad at all. I haven't seen that happen even once in the last... 5 years at least (and we've got thousands of PCs at work). That's like the old "Windows BSODs every 5 minutes" tired jokes. Eh? Windows embeds a full WinXP iso in other processes or something? This one ain't making any sense at all... Hardly. Games is what makes most people upgrade - oh no, games are viruses? I completely fail to see what was meant to be funny... Altogether.
  16. Since both numbers are +/- 2%, chances are it could be less Likely it's not, but one has to take the numbers with a grain of salt. It's only so accurate (ain't 2.0 vs 4.0, both could be around 3 really). Besides, it's reading quite a bit faster (66 vs 50), so a little more CPU usage wouldn't be very surprising (can't see it use an extra 2% of an OC'ed opteron 170's time though)
  17. IcemanD: IBM made the very best keyboards! I'm definitely a Model M fan. Keyboards with buckling spring switches is all I use - there's just no going back. I've got several "standard" keyboards (many logitech & MS - some that cost 150$), and they all suck badly... If I was rich I'd likely try a maltron keyboard, but 425£ is a lot of money for a keyboard (after exchange rate, ship and customs clearance that's like 800$CAD!)
  18. I've got several of these, great drives all around (speed/noise/heat/warranty/etc), and excellent $/GB ratio.
  19. Yeah, it can be MANY more things than automatic updates. I've never seen auto updates do this ever, but I've seen kaspersky and NOD32 do exactly that before (their services), for no apparent reason (clean machine and all). I've seen this happen if one uses a overly large HOSTS file too. And there's many, many more things can do that. So I wouldn't be so quick to blame automatic updates.
  20. That's totally retarded of them. That's got to be the stupidest plan they've got then (80$/month for a speed most servers on the internet can't deliver anyways - only to go faster through a monthly cap and owe even more). I picked the extreme too because of the ridiculously expensive $8/GB extra over the low cap. Nah, WAY too slow for an OC3. Looks like FiOS or such.
  21. And since .NET 3.0 is really new stuff (WPF/WCF, etc) on top of the old v2.0 framework, you really have both. So one only needs to install v1.1 if one has old .NET apps that require it.
  22. jcarle: videotron extreme? That's pretty much what I get with them too. Just discovered they've got an ever faster service (extreme plus - up to 20mbit), but either ways the extreme is fast enough, except for the upload, but then again the upload is hardly faster with the extreme plus (1mbit vs 900kbit) - and 80$/month is a little too much (I thought 65+tax was bad enough already).
  23. Pretty good indeed. Most signs are like that though, for example, this plastic packaging bag means "don't strangle nuns":
  24. I know, having left time for something else (aka "having a life"), such a strange concept, eh? Ah, another day, another piece of FUD. Hobbyist like to not spend their entire time coding for nothing -> open source apps sucks. I love the logic (or the total lack of). Nevermind that a LOT of open source projects are written by companies & paid developers (often backed up by large companies such as IBM, Red Hat and Google). Others release their code as open source, but have commercial licenses (like community server), and such things. Just like if car makers should be making the very best car possible (better than a Rolls Royce), and ensure you spend day and night so the car consumes one less gallon of gas over its lifetime, or not make cars at all. Or like we should build the absolute very best houses ever (a 500 Billion $ home), spending 75 years building it to ridiculously high standards, or have nowhere to live. Things are a bit black and white in your own little world. It's quite an extremist view. Everybody else will settle for something adequate, on time, and on budget. So basically, if you're not going to spend 10 years hand-optimizing assembly code for your app, don't bother solving the problem (so much for someone who was saying "you ought to use them too, not just program"!) So you're saying people would be better off without something that solves a real world need, just because you it could be more optimized (as long as we didn't mind spending all our time, taking ages, and costing a lot more). People should just go without, just because! One word: ludicrous! And no one's forcing you to use their code. Feel free to spend day and night of your own time (something most people consider valuable) to rewrite everything to gain as much extra performance as most people would get from a 50$ memory upgrade on their PCs. Oh, why don't you create a poll? Asking if nLite or WUD (apps well known to this community) shouldn't exist, i.e. if we should do without them, just because they're not programmed your way? Who? The countless companies who employ people working on open source projects? The countless folks who give their time without asking, and even release their source code along with their program for free? Yes, there are some open source apps that aren't great - but that's because those are usually written by hobbyists. That's what the explanation is (we couldn't expect you to understand that concept ). Not because they chose to have a life. Ever heard the expression "Don't look a gift horse in the mouth"? Don't like it? Don't use it. You're insulting tens if not hundreds of thousands of folks here. It's like you think they owe you something. I'm sure you think people working for charities ought to be ashamed to be helping others too. And if your only problem with open source is resource usage, then why not fix it yourself? You've got the full source code already. Personally I think that for the most part they're far better off spending their time on bugfixes and implementing new and useful features instead of trying to squeeze the very last little bit of performance out of hardware that mostly sits idle so it can sit even more idle. You didn't have a point, and you still don't. Why not stop bashing everything you don't understand, and make use of constructive criticism instead of trolling & talking FUD for a change?
  25. Nevermind what I said... I think I need some sleep (posting at 1am often results in nonsense - for me at least) I'm not sure I get the reasoning behind this. Why would people running an older OS need more patches for their applications than those running newer OS'es? I don't see how the OS choice changes the problem in any way. The apps, no matter what OS they're installed onto, still need to be updated. I don't think so. If properly designed (using parameterized queries/sprocs and all), it should be very secure. And if I can look at the code, I would likely notice code that's vulnerable (I've secured stuff man times before, and we've never been hacked) and fix it pretty quickly. There seems to be a few other C# folks on the forums too (like jcarle). Alternately, you could do like some projects do, have a gotdotnet workspace or such, and force people to join if they want to have access to the source code (only let people you trust join), or setup a private SCM or something. That way others can help, and not everybody peeks. Great stuff! That was just a misunderstanding.
×
×
  • Create New...