Grex Do-it-yourself Conference

Item 43: the near future of networked homes?

Entered by jep on Thu Jan 19 04:48:59 2006:

234 new of 290 responses total.


#57 of 290 by nharmon on Mon Jan 23 17:57:23 2006:

I agree with Marc that this does sound like some extreme interference.
You could always call the FCC and tell them there is some equipment
nearby that is interfering with your network. Who knows, they might have
plenty of spare time now that Howard Stern is off the air.


#58 of 290 by gull on Mon Jan 23 19:46:00 2006:

Re resp:8: Right now the cable companies seem to be using the switch to
digital cable as a way to try to force people to pay more money for the same
content. If it had price parity with analog cable I might be more tempted, but
otherwise it just looks like another rate increase. I also haven't been
terribly impressed with the demo HDTVs at places like Best Buy. Yeah, the
picture is really sharp when there's nothing going on, but when there's much
action on screen the JPEG blockies start to show up. Re resp:19: There are
two problems with predictions like that. One is that they're solutions looking
for problems. How many consumers have actually *asked* for their refrigerator
to tell them when they're out of milk, or their toaster to tell their washing
machine when they make toast so it can pre-configure itself to remove jelly
stains? The other problem is that most people can't or won't deal with complex
systems like that. Sure, it's possible to load all your DVDs into a central
computer and watch them anywhere in the house, but the average consumer, who
can't even program his VCR timer, isn't going to want to fuss with trying to
figure out how to use it. Until it can be made easy and reliable, at least.
There are horror stories of people who have bought "smart homes" and have never
been able to get everything working right. Think about how often your computer
doesn't behave properly. Now imagine the same unreliablity applied to your
lights, heat, and garage door opener, and you have an idea of the problem. Re
resp:31: Maybe the older X10 stuff was better. The stuff I've bought in the
last ten years or so has all been unreliable junk. Re resp:57: The 2.4 GHz
band that wireless network stuff operates on is unlicensed. The tradeoff with
not having to have a license is the FCC won't help you if you have an
interference problem -- they only care about interference to licensed services.
If you look at the documentation for any given wireless device, you'll find
this verbiage: "This device complies with Part 15 of the FCC rules. Operation
is subject to the following conditions: (1) this device may not cause any
harmful interference, and (2) this device must accept interference received,
including interference which may cause undesired operation." The 2.4 GHz band
is sort of a combination of the Wild West and a garbage dump. You may get
interference from cordless phones, amateur radio operators, microwave ovens,
and even weather radar. WiFi uses spread-spectrum technology to avoid most
interference from other services, and it actually works pretty well, but the
potential for problems is built in.


#59 of 290 by gull on Mon Jan 23 19:46:53 2006:

Sorry about the crummy formatting. I forgot that "lazy HTML" ignores line
breaks. I'm too used to LiveJournal.


#60 of 290 by mcnally on Mon Jan 23 19:58:21 2006:

 re #58:
 > Right now the cable companies seem to be using the switch to
 > digital cable as a way to try to force people to pay more money
 > for the same content.

 And don't forget:  less convenience.

 Set-top boxes suck, but they're what we're going to be stuck with
 for at least this generation of TV technology.



#61 of 290 by marcvh on Mon Jan 23 20:11:21 2006:

Re #58: I'm not sure what cable company you're talking about, but
Comcast (as an example) generally provides digital versions of its
standard "analog" content for no extra charge, including HD versions of
local channels.  You'll need to provide your own tuner, of course, and
it won't be as polished a viewing experience as you could get with a
Comcast STB or DVR.

They're certainly hoping that digital cable will be a way to bump you
up to a "more channels" package and that they'll make money off you
with VOD and other services, but the digital content itself isn't
encrypted on the wire and so you don't have to pay anything extra to
see it.  So I don't really think it's accurate to say that you're being
charged more for the same thing.

Best Buy (and other stores of that genre) is famous for having crappy
HD feeds.  But the underlying point is true -- there is a lot of
mediocre HD content out there.  All the DBS providers downres and
recompress into mediocrity, and a fair amount of NBC OTA is mediocre
because they suck away bandwidth for their stupid "Weather Plus"
channel, and so on.  We can hope that when HD movies on disc come out
later this year they'll be able to take advantage of the medium's
storage capacity to allow fewer compromises.

Re #60: True enough.  Alas, the alternative to STBs seems to be
CableCARD, which (so far) sucks more.


#62 of 290 by ric on Mon Jan 23 20:14:28 2006:

I dispute both of those.

I find digital cable to be more convenient because of the built in guide.

I also get more content with digital cable because I'm able to get a bunch
of digital channels that aren't available on standard cable, like ESPNNews,
DIY, and my daughter loves Boomerang and Toon Disney.

I also get a ton of "on demand" channels free where I can watch shows at any
time.. Food Network On Demand is great, DIY On Demand, Golf on demand, cartoon
network on demand, etc.

And I often also listen to the digital music channels when I'm cleaning the
house or doing other kinds of work.  Lately, I've been tuned into the Arena
Rock channel.

Most important though, is that my digital cable box has a built in DVR, which
I could no longer live without.


#63 of 290 by ric on Mon Jan 23 20:16:39 2006:

(#61 slipped in)

i do pay extra for my HD cable box... which included the HD local stations
and Discovery HD and TNTHD.  I pay extra for the "HDSuite" which includes
HDNet, HDNet Movies, inHD, inHD2, etc.


#64 of 290 by tod on Mon Jan 23 20:33:21 2006:

re #61
Whats a good tuner(decoder) and where can I get one? >;)


#65 of 290 by marcvh on Mon Jan 23 21:05:00 2006:

If you crunch the numbers I suspect you'll find it's better to rent than
buy at this point.  For example, if you want a digital cable DVR, you
can buy one for between $500-1000, or you can rent one for like $10/mo;
renting is a no-brainer.  The only reasonably-priced QAM tuners I've
seen have been PCI cards.

Someday all TV sets will be DCR (digital cable ready) but we're not
there yet, and by the time we get there they will probably have
developed some new modulation technique which will make them obsolete
anyway.


#66 of 290 by tod on Mon Jan 23 21:15:23 2006:

Thanks.  It looks like for now, there are QAM tuners built into high end
televisions but there is no guarantee that the channels aren't scrambled or
set to only be received by their receivers...


#67 of 290 by gull on Tue Jan 24 01:53:05 2006:

Part of what makes digital cable such an uninspiring idea is that I have three
TVs, so having to use a set-top box is kind of a non-starter. I also work in
some casinos that use Comcast's digital cable feed for background music (as
well as for video), and I've noticed the digital channels are less than
reliable. There are long stretches of time when the music feed channels are
silent, with a black screen that says "this channel will be available in a few
minutes." In light of that, I find their ads about the unreliability of
satellite service pretty funny.


#68 of 290 by mcnally on Tue Jan 24 03:20:03 2006:

re #62:  your mileage may vary depending on your own cable company.

Here in Ketchikan when our cable company went all-digital they
actually removed channels from their basic line-up and began charging
their customers an extra $5 per television per month to cover the
costs of the set-top boxes needed to provide this "improved service."
Meanwhile their quality is notably bad and gets even worse whenever
a vessel with radar passes through the harbor.


#69 of 290 by marcvh on Tue Jan 24 04:34:24 2006:

Yup, more money for no improvement is a pretty good example of how not
to deploy things.  Re #67, I've seen occasional audio dropouts for a
couple of seconds but haven't experienced what you describe.  Sounds
lousy.

Cable companies are kinda stuck.  On the one hand, they have early
adopters whose main priorities are digital transmission (way better for
DVR) and lots of high-quality HD content.  They are willing to pay a
premium price but they expect a premium product, and when they're forced
to watch a crappy analog static-filled feed of the SciFi channel they're
not happy.

On the other hand, you have foot-draggers who still use analog cable
with old cable-ready TVs.  They enjoy watching whatever their favorite
channels are, CNN or ESPN or whatever.  They don't particularly care
about picture quality as long as it doesn't totally suck, and they're
not particularly interested in new services.  Their main priority is not
seeing their bill go up; they already feel like they pay too much for
the service they get.

I don't particularly envy the kinds of decisions that cable companies
are forced to make in figuring out how to service both crowds.  Soon
DirecTV will roll out local feeds in HD, and a ton of new HD channels
will launch (National Geographic-HD, MTV-HD, HGTV-HD, and so on.)  Early
adopters will expect their cable systems to make at least some of them
available.  Foot-draggers will expect nothing to change.  Not sure it's
possible to meet both expectations.


#70 of 290 by mcnally on Tue Jan 24 07:04:02 2006:

 re #69:  it gets even more complicated when you throw the demands of the
 content providers in..  Ever wonder why your cable system carries a whole
 bunch of really crappy channels you can't imagine anyone watching?  Well,
 if they want to offer you a popular channel like, say, MTV (god only knows
 why it's still popular, but it is..) then they've also got to carry, say,
 Gameshow Network, and the Flannel Channel.  So after you've agreed to
 carry two or three crappy channels for every channel that's in great
 demand you get to bundle the cost of each channel into the customers' bill.
 And of course you've got to offer premium content of some sort..  Well then
 you'd better be prepared to pony up $100K for the new software every time
 the networks decide to change to a new transport encryption.

 The cost of providing the content adds up to an appalling share of the
 monthly bill and that's before paying off satellite dishes, receivers,
 video head end systems, the access platform and cable plant, installer labor,
 set-top-boxes, and everything else..

 We're about to start offering cable-TV-like service and I find the business
 plan to be pretty baffling.  Perhaps giants like Comcast have economies of
 scale and more bargaining power to work with but I wonder how anyone makes
 a profit providing cable service.


#71 of 290 by marcvh on Tue Jan 24 17:37:35 2006:

Yup, the power of a brand.  Consumers don't just want any music channel,
they want MTV (wait, do they still play music?)

Can't Stephens and Young get you some more pork in the form of a federal
"Rural Cableification Act" or something to help provide this vital
infrastructure?  I don't think the city of Ketchikan is going to be able
to grow and prosper without Bravo and TvLand, and it hardly seems fair
for your cruise ship passengers to have better entertainment options
than the people on land.

Digital technology does allow, at least in principle, a more grainular
pricing model where channels are served a la carte instead of in a
handful of tiered packages.  This seems like a better arrangement -- the
content providers set the prices, the consumers pick what they're
willing to pay for, and the service provider is just a common carrier
who enables the transaction.  But DBS providers haven't exactly rushed
to embrace that model, and cable companies look like they'll only do it
if forced.

Lately I've kind of surprised myself by wishing that I lived in Verizon
country, so I that their fiber-optic service (FiOS) was an option.  I
have my doubts as to whether Comcast will ever offer something like
this, and Qwest's idea of TV service is offering price bundling
discounts with DirecTV.


#72 of 290 by gull on Tue Jan 24 19:05:46 2006:

Re resp:69: I'm definitely in the "foot-dragger" category.  I only 
watch half a dozen of the fifty or so channels I get, as it is. I'm not 
particularly interested in movie channels, which seem to be the main 
draw of digital cable, currently.  (I have a Netflix subscription that 
nicely satisfies my movie-watching needs.) 
 
Re resp:71: A la carte pricing is actually a big issue right now.  The 
FCC Commissioner is making noises about asking Congress to let him 
regulate smut on cable unless cable companies start offering plans 
where people can opt out of buying non-"family-friendly" channels.  
It's more likely we'll see a "family friendly" bundle instead of a la 
carte, though.  The content providers are opposed to it because of what 
mcnally points out -- very few people are going to pay to watch QVC or 
The Game Show Network, given the choice.  In fact, Pat Robertson 
recently argued against a la carte pricing because he's worried it 
would reduce the number of homes that religious channels get into. 


#73 of 290 by mcnally on Tue Jan 24 20:18:48 2006:

re #71:
> Can't Stephens and Young get you some more pork in the form of a federal
> "Rural Cableification Act" or something to help provide this vital
> infrastructure?  I don't think the city of Ketchikan is going to be able
> to grow and prosper without Bravo and TvLand, and it hardly seems fair
> for your cruise ship passengers to have better entertainment options
> than the people on land.

Don't worry, because we're a rural telephone company we're already
immune to the laws of economics as you know them -- the invisible
hand isn't just invisible for us, it's nonexistant.  Market forces
have practically no direct effect upon our business revenue, whereas
arcane regulatory decisions are the life or death of our company.
It's horrible.

re #72:
> Pat Robertson recently argued against a la carte pricing because he's
> worried it would reduce the number of homes that religious channels
> get into. 

Pat Robertson, cable-TV welfare queen?  Gotta love the irony..


#74 of 290 by marcvh on Tue Jan 24 20:34:50 2006:

Re #72: I think most people only watch a handful of channels out of the
number available, no matter whether they're technophiles or
neo-luddites.  But yes, movies and sports are two big things for which
many viewers are willing to pay extra for improvements in content and/or
video quality (though I do know people who got digital cable just so
they could watch BBC America.)  I got it mainly so that I could get
movies in HD.

Channels like QVC would have a negative a la carte price, since they
actually pay the cable companies to be carried.  I suppose that the
Jebus channels could also get carried under similar terms if that's
important to them.  But, oddly enough, Pat seems to be the only one
complaining about it.  I haven't heard the homosexuals complain that a
la carte pricing would reduce the reach of Bravo and Logo.

Re #73: Does that mean DBS isn't a viable solution in southeast Alaska?
I know that the terrain is rugged and the satellites would be pretty low
in the sky...


#75 of 290 by mcnally on Tue Jan 24 20:47:03 2006:

 re #74:  Not a lot of homes have the necessary low-angle south-facing
 view needed for satellite reception.


#76 of 290 by tod on Tue Jan 24 21:09:09 2006:

Mine doesn't.  I had to build a crane looking thing to extend it out off the
garage..and not a very stable solution.


#77 of 290 by slynne on Tue Jan 24 22:06:23 2006:

I have Comcast's unadvertised $11/mo option. I got it after I realized 
that I mostly only watched broadcast channels so I called and asked 
about it. Digital cable costs around $80/mo which is way more than I 
want to spend on TV. I do most of my TV watching with netflix anyways. 
I love renting TV shows from them because there are no commercials and 
one can watch it whenever one wants to instead of being a slave to a 
schedule. 



#78 of 290 by tod on Tue Jan 24 22:20:45 2006:

re #77
Ditto on both


#79 of 290 by keesan on Wed Jan 25 02:44:14 2006:

Does Comcast offer anything cheaper than $80/month for nonprofits selling used
TVs?  They are gouging Kiwanis, which uses the cable to sell TVs 12
hours/month, and has to sell a TV every week to pay for it.


#80 of 290 by mcnally on Wed Jan 25 02:48:57 2006:

 Why not just hook the TV up to a VCR or DVD player? 


#81 of 290 by keesan on Wed Jan 25 02:50:54 2006:

I dont' know.  They could also hook up to a dish on the roof.  I think he
wants to prove the TVs will work with cable.


#82 of 290 by gull on Wed Jan 25 03:10:07 2006:

Re resp:74: I think Pat's problem with it may be that only the 
already-converted would buy his channel, thus eliminating his chance to 
preach to unbelievers.  I understand some minority-targeted channels 
also worry that their audience buy-in would be too low to support their 
programming. 
 
(Side note: Just heard today that UPN and WB have folded.  The most 
popular stuff from the two of them is going to be merged into a new 
CBS-Warner channel called CW.) 
 
Re resp:77: That's cool, but it wouldn't work for me.  I need my Daily 
Show. :) 
 


#83 of 290 by n8nxf on Wed Jan 25 14:25:27 2006:

n


#84 of 290 by slynne on Wed Jan 25 14:39:21 2006:

resp:79 Do the Kiwanis need digital cable or can they sell tv's with 
analog cable? Comcast has an $11/mo analog option that only includes 
broadcast channels. Even if you need digital, they may have something 
similar. Call them and ask. 


#85 of 290 by marcvh on Wed Jan 25 15:36:29 2006:

Comcast's basic option generally includes digital versions of the 
broadcast channels, but I find it hard to imagine that the Kiwanis are
reselling almost-new expensive televisions.  Most likely they just want
to have cable at their facility, and "testing TVs" is the excuse to
justify it.  It's pretty easy to tell from the configuration options
whether a TV is cable-ready, and virtually all TVs for something like the
past twenty years have been cable-ready.  Do the Kiwanis resell a lot of
TVs from the seventies?


#86 of 290 by rcurl on Wed Jan 25 18:22:53 2006:

I tried to ask earlier about some properties of WiFi networks but I guess 
I asked in an unclear manner as no one answered. Here are my questions.

Can others detect my "closed" network (i.e., I have SSID broadcast turned
off)? If so, how?

And, if they can, how difficult is it to them connect to my network (apart
from security options like WEP)?



#87 of 290 by twenex on Wed Jan 25 18:25:22 2006:

WPA is much more secure than WEP.


#88 of 290 by mcnally on Wed Jan 25 18:32:21 2006:

re #86:
> Can others detect my "closed" network (i.e., I have SSID broadcast turned
> off)? If so, how?

Yes.  Basically just by having their cards listen for traffic using a utility
designed for the purpose..

> And, if they can, how difficult is it to them connect to my network (apart
> from security options like WEP)?

I've never bothered but my impression is it's comparatively easy.


#89 of 290 by rcurl on Wed Jan 25 19:06:11 2006:

(My base station doesn't offer WPA. What's wrong with WEP if the key is 
changed frequently?)

Can that utility learn my SSID? Doesn't another system need that to connect?


#90 of 290 by springne on Wed Jan 25 19:32:41 2006:

Yesterday, Time Warner dropped off my 24 port fiber switch and a rack mount
ups to go with it.  Fired it up and I've got servers running today!



#91 of 290 by keesan on Wed Jan 25 23:21:01 2006:

Kiwanis sell TVs from the 70s and even the 60s (with tubes).  Nobody watches
TV there, they are just sold.  Is there some way I can look up online the
cheapest possible business option?  The person who decided to pay for this
cable service won't pay for an ISP for himself (but does pay for grex).  His
logic escapes me.  He could get broadband for kiwanis at 1/4 the price, set
up computers with adsl modems, and sell those for more than TVs.


#92 of 290 by marcvh on Wed Jan 25 23:45:04 2006:

Yeah, www.comcast.com.  I don't think they support lynx though.

I'm trying to think of what the free market price of a forty-year-old TV
with no remote, a 300 ohm antenna input, a fussy tuner that requires constant
adjustment of knobs that nobody has heard of like "horizontal hold", and so
on.  Unless it's some sort of collector's item, I'm thinking it's negative
since it's full of hazardous materials that cost money to have disposed.
I certainly hope they're not selling them to people who lack the money
(or the willingness) to properly dispose of it when it breaks.


#93 of 290 by keesan on Thu Jan 26 01:45:47 2006:

We sold one turqouise one maybe from the 50s (when was turquose faddish?).
And they still sometimes get in small portables BW (7 or 9" diagonals).
People come to Kiwanis looking for antiques.  Reel-to-reel tape decks
fetch a lot, as do good turntables.  There is a jukebox for sale.  


#94 of 290 by slynne on Thu Jan 26 14:09:58 2006:

Sindi, the broadcast only option is not one they advertise. You have to 
call them and ask about it specifically. 


#95 of 290 by marcvh on Thu Jan 26 14:28:34 2006:

It's not advertised, but it is listed on their web site (in my area anyway)
as "limited cable service."

Turntables are an example of an old technology which is still of some
value, and also which is sufficiently durable that old ones are still
useful.  Television is not.


#96 of 290 by twenex on Thu Jan 26 14:36:32 2006:

I heard somewhere that sales of turntables are actually increasing.

Old TV's not usable? Au contraire. Until High Definition Digital Television
stomps all over bog-standard analogue transmissions, even old black and white
televisions will be USABLE, if not particularly desirable.


#97 of 290 by marcvh on Thu Jan 26 17:08:18 2006:

I didn't say they are not usable, I said they are not useful.

Relic TVs may still work, but they don't do anything that can't be done
better by newer TVs.  They have parts that tend to wear out over time
and can't be serviced in a cost-effective fashion any more.  Newer TVs
are better in every way and are very cheap. 

Turntables, by contrast, don't have consumable components like tubes
and may still be possible to fix basic parts like needles and such.  New
turntables are not readily available, and what there is caters to the
high end (DJs who scratch records, or audiophiles who don't mind paying
$1000 for a really good turntable.)  That means an old turntable is
still useful for some people.


#98 of 290 by slynne on Thu Jan 26 18:17:19 2006:

Well. I have a couple of seriously old tv sets. One of them, I have had 
for over 10 years and it was already so old when I got it that it had 
been placed in the bathroom in my parents master bedroom. My Dad said 
that he wanted to be able to watch TV while taking a bath but I have a 
feeling based on how quickly my mother was willing to give me the set 
that that wasnt actually the case. It wasnt so old that it had tubes 
though. Anyways, it is still working and is up in my guest bedroom. 

I currently have four TV sets in my house. I am thinking about buying a 
new one though because all four are pretty old. Then, I think I will 
get rid of three of the others and just have two. 


#99 of 290 by keesan on Fri Jan 27 05:16:29 2006:

Old TV sets are cheaper than cheap new ones - they are free.  We gave away
our only TV set last week to Kiwanis.  It worked fine but there was nothing
we wanted to watch.  And lots of good books in the library.


#100 of 290 by tod on Fri Jan 27 17:13:19 2006:

Dont the older TV's suck more electricity?


#101 of 290 by nharmon on Fri Jan 27 17:25:08 2006:

They're the SUVs of televisions.


#102 of 290 by marcvh on Fri Jan 27 17:49:27 2006:

Yeah, more hazmats too.  And I don't understand how this organization 
makes money by giving away TVs for free; volume maybe?


#103 of 290 by mcnally on Fri Jan 27 18:01:38 2006:

 Maybe it's a loss leader.  You give the television away but charge
 a nickel for the coaxial cable that goes with it, thus practically
 guaranteeing a nickel in revenue for each one you sell..  ;-)


#104 of 290 by marcvh on Fri Jan 27 18:26:40 2006:

Not coaxial, 300 ohm twin-lead (the stuff that was obsolete twenty years
ago.)  You can get a 2m Monster Cable twin-lead cable for $85.  I think
you can still use it to hook up your Pong game (but you shouldn't, since
sets of that era had horrendous burn-in problems.)


#105 of 290 by tod on Fri Jan 27 19:13:18 2006:

re #102
The free section of craigslist tends to do the same thing..give away TV's and
monitors
The reasoning behind it is that usually these are broken items which cost you
money to properly dispose of.


#106 of 290 by keesan on Fri Jan 27 20:02:03 2006:

Kiwanis does not give away free TVs, we do.  We find them at the curb.  This
one only  needed the power cord replaced.  Jim spliced on a plug end instead.
One time he found a TV/DVD player at the curb, with a little note from the
garbage collectors saying they could not take it for free.  So he took it home
to fix and was really disappointed that it already worked.  I use it to watch
library DVDs.  


#107 of 290 by nharmon on Fri Jan 27 21:42:01 2006:

This response has been erased.



#108 of 290 by nharmon on Fri Jan 27 21:42:33 2006:

What do you do with TVs you find on the curb that are too broke to fix?


#109 of 290 by tod on Fri Jan 27 21:56:16 2006:

Hook them into Jones the dolphin.


#110 of 290 by keesan on Sat Jan 28 00:31:14 2006:

We don't take home TVs from the curb normally, just if a friend wants one,
which only happened once and that one was fixable.  The cut cord was a
giveaway.  


#111 of 290 by gull on Mon Jan 30 04:42:03 2006:

Re resp:98: I once replaced a 1990 RCA TV that had already died with a
1980s Sylvania one that still worked. (This was in about 1996.) I find that
newer TVs give a better picture but the build quality is lousy. RCA, in
particular, has apparently forgotten how to solder properly.


#112 of 290 by keesan on Mon Jan 30 14:04:57 2006:

Lots of the TVs donated to Kiwanis get fixed there by soldering some bad
joint.  


#113 of 290 by nharmon on Mon Jan 30 14:25:37 2006:

What happens to the ones that can't be repaired?


#114 of 290 by keesan on Mon Jan 30 16:04:38 2006:

They get put behind the dump truck.  I don't know where they go next.  The
unsellable or unusable computer monitors and computers get sold at 5 cents/lb
to someone who reuses or recycles them.  THe printers go in the dump truck
along with books and floppy disks and cables.  (We recycle our own cables as
copper, and books as paper, and printers we spend 30 min taking apart into
unrecyclable plastic, and recyclable steel, copper and aluminum).  


#115 of 290 by marcvh on Mon Jan 30 19:15:28 2006:

Those prices would make me very concerned about whether the un-sellable
monitors are being properly disposed of.  Normally it costs more money to
properly deal with the hazardous materials in an old monitor than you can
get out of recycling and/or salvage.

On my own front, I had to have a Comcast service call over the weekend
for a signal outage issue.  Over the course of analysis I discovered
that the ground loop isolator I put on my cable TV line is responsible
for introducing ghosting and other signal degredation, and the amplifer
I put on the line (to try to reduce the degredation) seemed to be
over-driving my cable modem.  The service tech wanted to remove them
both, but unfortunately that re-introduces a ground loop and the famous
60 Hz hum.

This is on a setup where everything is relatively new and is done
"right"; the electricity and cable TV both enter the home at the same
point, and both are properly grounded to the same point.  Unfortunately
something still causes a loop; I guess it's a mismatch in impedance
and/or resistance, I'm not an EE so I was never totally clear on the
point.

It appears that the only cost-effective solution is to lift the ground
on my amplifiers, which solves the problem perfectly but is a bad idea.
About the only other thing I can think of is trying to add some
shielding around the isolator in the hope that it will lessen the degree
to which it's allowing OTA to leak into my CATV signal.

Anyway, the lesson of all this is that the future of home networking is
lots of annoying conflicts.  I consider myself somewhat above-average in
terms of the amount of time, money and knowledge I'm willing to bring to
the table and yet I still feel stymied.  So, in the future, everything
will work together, except that it will have little niggling problems
that make it all come crashing down.


#116 of 290 by tod on Mon Jan 30 19:29:41 2006:

Are you using your water lines for true ground?  I'm assuming if you have a
newer home with proper fuse box wiring then you are but what about the loop?
Is it wired to an AC outlet ground or water pipe?


#117 of 290 by rcurl on Mon Jan 30 19:59:10 2006:

I also had a Comcast service outage over the weekend. I eventually had to 
shut everything down and bring them back up in the order cable modem, WiFi 
router, and WiFi adapter. I didn't contact Comcast, but this is what they 
had suggested on previous outages. What causes Comcast outages?


#118 of 290 by keesan on Mon Jan 30 20:03:10 2006:

A friend of ours thinks he has to get a dsl line ($20/month plus $77 for the
DSL modem) so his wife can use the phone.  What is the cheapest cell phone
service he could get instead, for light use?


#119 of 290 by tod on Mon Jan 30 20:05:43 2006:

7-11 Speak Out


#120 of 290 by kingjon on Mon Jan 30 20:07:10 2006:

Re #118: I have a Tracfone, which is something where you buy only the minutes
you need, though you have to keep it activated by periodically buying more. I'm
not sure how much the phones themselves cost, since I was given mine by a
coworker of my dad's. If your definition of "light use" is as low as mine
that's probably best -- I've probably been on the phone maybe forty minutes
since I got it in August.



#121 of 290 by marcvh on Mon Jan 30 20:26:46 2006:

Both electicity and cable are grounded at the entry point, not using any
water pipes.  But I'm hardly surprised that there are other leaks to ground.

Re #117, if shutting down your modem and restarting it fixes the problem,
then I don't think Comcast would consider it an outage.  An outage is
where you do that several times and it still won't work.


#122 of 290 by keesan on Tue Jan 31 04:07:05 2006:

What does the Tracfone cost?  


#123 of 290 by gull on Tue Jan 31 06:55:27 2006:

I have a ground loop problem with my cable TV, too. I'm not sure what to do
about it. The problem comes of having a computer as part of my home
entertainment system, since the computer is grounded through its power supply
and the cable is grounded somewhere else.


#124 of 290 by kingjon on Tue Jan 31 12:02:30 2006:

Re #122: I don't trust my memory. Look at tracfone.com .



#125 of 290 by slynne on Wed Feb 1 01:01:18 2006:

I have a t-mobile cell phone plan that costs $20 a month for 60 anytime
minutes and 500 weekend minutes. It works for me but the pay as go plans
might be cheaper for someone who uses their phone even less. 


#126 of 290 by kingjon on Wed Feb 1 01:17:56 2006:

If I recall, we paid something like $80 or $90 for a year's airtime when the
time came, which incidentally came with a hundred-some minutes (when I got it
it had three-hundred-some on it already, and I hadn't used more than twenty).



#127 of 290 by keesan on Wed Feb 1 02:08:58 2006:

Our friends don't need any weekend minutes because they have internet service
only 9-6 M-F, and they are usually home on weekends.  $20 for 60 minutes is
too much.  Is there some plan without weekend minutes, but more weekday?


#128 of 290 by slynne on Wed Feb 1 02:36:49 2006:

Unfortunately M-F before 6p is the most expensive time with almost all
cell phone plans. I guess that is when demand is the highest


#129 of 290 by marcvh on Wed Feb 1 05:43:29 2006:

In general cell phone plans tend to be priced around a "sweet spot" in the
neighborhood of $40-50/mo; there exist plans that go for less than that
but usually they have lousy value (e.g. for $20 you get 60 minutes, but
for $40 you get 1500.)  Providers aren't particularly interested in
competing for the highly-frugal demographic; I think they either don't
care about it or figure that they should go prepaid.

I ended up removing the ground loop isolator from my cable; not only did it
allow analog leakage from OTA but it also did not cleanly pass some of the
digital channels recently introduced as part of digital simulcast.  So, at
least for the moment, I lifted the ground on my amplifiers and found that
to be the only workable short-term solution until I can find a better one.
But at least now all of my channels are better quality than I could get 
via DBS.


#130 of 290 by slynne on Wed Feb 1 15:51:36 2006:

resp:129 Yeah. I found that really frustrating when I was shopping 
around for a cell phone provider. I hardly use my cell phone and I 
mostly use it on weekends. t-mobile was the ONLY company that has a 
plan in the $20/mo range. Everyone else has lots of plans at $40/mo 
with lots of minutes. I fully expect t-mobile to drop this option at 
some point and then I will upgrade I guess but not without a lot of 
whining first! 


#131 of 290 by jep on Wed Feb 1 16:21:02 2006:

I now have 4 Sprint PCS phones, costing me a total of $80 per month.  I 
could get one more for $10 per month.  They all share a pool of 550 
minutes per month, but calls between Sprint or Nextel phones are free, 
and weekends, holidays and evenings after 9 pm are free.

My teenage stepdaughter spent over 2000 minutes on the phone last 
month, she told me, but it was all to other Sprint phones.  Thank 
goodness.


#132 of 290 by tod on Wed Feb 1 17:04:56 2006:

I have a 7-11 Speak Out rechargable phone and put $5 on it every few weeks.


#133 of 290 by keesan on Wed Feb 1 21:12:00 2006:

How many minutes do you get for $5 and where do you get the phone?


#134 of 290 by tod on Wed Feb 1 21:18:19 2006:

I think its 25 minutes for $5 and you can get the phone at any 7-11.
It has all the bells and whistles of a typical cell phone and you can
receive/send IM or voicemail, etc...check your balance anytime, etc
Mine also has a built-in flashlight.  It is way more than adequate for my
minimal cell use.


#135 of 290 by keesan on Thu Feb 2 02:52:22 2006:

Do you also pay for the physical phone before paying for minutes?
This sounds ideal.  Someone could phone for 1 minute and ask for the husband
to get off the computer so his wife could use the phone.  


#136 of 290 by mary on Thu Feb 2 02:58:07 2006:

Sindi, do you need the portablity of a cell phone or are you just
looking for really inexpensive long distance or what?  Maybe VoIP
service would do some of what you want and it's free if both parties
connect over computers and dead cheap if one computer calls a 
land line.  Check out Skype.  We used it to call our son in Scotland
without charge.  It's how Bruce Howard sometimes connects for long
Grex board meetings.


#137 of 290 by keesan on Thu Feb 2 03:05:17 2006:

They are looking for a way to get phone calls when the husband is online. 
Their kids and grandkids give them lots of free long distance minutes in the
form of phone cards.  SOmeone told them to get a DSL line to free up the
phone.  He does not need broadband, just a way for his wife to get phone calls
when he is online for maybe an hour a day, early morning and late afternoon.

In West Virginia you can pay $5 a month for a phone line that you can only
receive calls on, not make calls from.  


#138 of 290 by mary on Thu Feb 2 03:06:51 2006:

Gotcha.  Nevermind. ;-)


#139 of 290 by keesan on Thu Feb 2 03:09:33 2006:

If their friends had computers, they could email instead.
That is how people get hold of us.


#140 of 290 by tod on Thu Feb 2 05:33:26 2006:

re #135
I think its normally $69 which includes the phone, charger, ear piece, and
10 or 20 minutes of phone time included.  When I got mine, it also included
a $30 rebate.  The phone that came with mine is a Nokia 1100.
I like the fact that I was able to pay cash and stay out of a contract let
alone remain anonymous.


#141 of 290 by keesan on Thu Feb 2 15:35:38 2006:

Thanks.  Can you use your own cell phone and put minutes on it, if you happen
to get a used one somewhere?  Kiwanis has a boxful, cheap.  


#142 of 290 by glenda on Thu Feb 2 16:40:36 2006:

Does she get so many phone calls that she really can't do without the phone
for an hour a day while he uses the computer?


#143 of 290 by cross on Thu Feb 2 16:48:23 2006:

This response has been erased.



#144 of 290 by keesan on Thu Feb 2 17:13:28 2006:

What would be the total cost of cable modem and Vonage?  Right now they pay
$25/month for the phone, probably nothing for long distance since they are
given phone cards as presents, and $6/month for internet.  I thought Vonage
was something like $15/month and required being in the room with the computer
to talk on the phone.


#145 of 290 by tod on Thu Feb 2 19:09:35 2006:

re #141
I think Verizon and a few other carriers have rechargable plans.  Phone models
vary by carrier.


#146 of 290 by gull on Thu Feb 2 20:13:43 2006:

Re resp:144: I think Vonage offers a little widget that plugs into your
network and has an ordinary phone jack on it, so you can use whatever regular
phones you own. I'm not sure, though. I'm required to have a cell phone for
work, so I just use it for everything.


#147 of 290 by tod on Thu Feb 2 20:25:58 2006:

I used Vonage and basically they send you a modem.  The LAN connector goes
in and then there's an output for phone jack and output for fax machine jack.
Vonage wouldn't work sometimes if there was heavy traffic in my neighborhood
and with moderate to high traffic the phone audio sounded like talking into
a long tube.
You had to program your 911 through their webinterface.  The webinterface was
nice though because it gave you extensive auditing of all your
inbound/outbound calling.  Plus, the modem is portable to anywhere in the
world that has a decent pipe.


#148 of 290 by marcvh on Thu Feb 2 20:36:06 2006:

Yeah, they do.  My impression is that Vonage (and other VoIP services)
still haven't yet reached the point where they're seamless, and you
still end up with niggling annoyances like what shows up on caller ID
when you call somebody else using it.  But we may be heading toward a
world where the only people with POTS are poor people who get their
rates subsidized (although if everybody else opts out of the system
there won't be anybody left to do the subsidizing.)

On the other hand, many people are willing to make those trade-offs.
Using a cordless phone reduces quality and reliability in exchange for
convenience, but tons of people have used them for decades today, often
using them exclusively (which means they have no phone that will work
in a power failure.)  A fair number of people are also willing to put
up with the reduced reliability and quality of VoIP or other digital
services.  Comcast now offers digital phone service in my area, but I'm
not sure I want it because one of the main uses for my landline is to
wait on hold for a Comcast service representative during outages. :-)

Heck, why have a coax OR twisted pair going into your house?  In
principle all of that stuff can come over the same wiring you use to get
your electric power.  Once we master the art of matter replication that
same wire can also handle water, natural gas, sewage and garbage.


#149 of 290 by nharmon on Thu Feb 2 20:50:42 2006:

Is it true that if you have your POTS line disconnected that 911 service
is always still available on it?


#150 of 290 by jep on Thu Feb 2 21:01:56 2006:

It was true for me.  A year after I disconnected my land line, I could 
still call 911 or the phone company using that line.


#151 of 290 by nharmon on Thu Feb 2 21:05:56 2006:

Well, then there you go. There are cheaper VoIP providers out there if
you provide your own equipment. Load up an asterisk system and plug your
disconnected POTS line into an FXO card. Program the PBX to route 911 to
the POTS line and everything else through VoIP.


#152 of 290 by gull on Thu Feb 2 21:07:37 2006:

Incidentally, faxing is pretty unreliable over VoIP, even on services that
claim to support it. The digital compression messes with the signal too much.
Modems have the same issue.


#153 of 290 by keesan on Fri Feb 3 16:36:14 2006:

If you buy rechargeable phones from other companies, is there a monthly fee
or minimum?


#154 of 290 by rcurl on Fri Feb 3 17:22:35 2006:

POTS is useful for more than 911 when power goes out. You may want to contact
the power or gas company, or city utilities, and friends or relatives for
assistance, etc. 


#155 of 290 by tod on Fri Feb 3 17:37:36 2006:

re #153
My understanding is that there is an expiration date due to inactivity.


#156 of 290 by mcnally on Fri Feb 3 17:57:30 2006:

 re #153:  Many pre-paid rechargeable cellular plans are structured
 to cheat you out of your minutes by expiring them aggressively if you
 don't use the service.  They want you to pay them lots of money, not
 use the phone once every month for two minutes..


#157 of 290 by keesan on Fri Feb 3 18:15:45 2006:

I am trying to look up 'rechargeable minutes' and 'cell phones' and I just
learned that some school has banned cell phones for kids (they need to go
through a metal detector and a body search every day) because they might use
them for bomb threats or drug dealing.  And that most children now carry them
everywhere.  The school is in D. C. and the hired security staff is no longer
authorized to confiscate the phones, meaning they have to have an (assistant)
principal at the front door.  30% of the children have cell phones and use
them to call their parents for taxi service.  (I would that thought they would
live close enough to walk in such a big city, or have bus service).

I found www.wirelessguide.org/plan/prepaid.htm (prepaid, not rechargeable).
The minutes expire in 30 to 90 days.  You can sometimes automatically recharge
via credit card, or pay by phone or online.  Tracfone has cards valid up to
1 year.  Verizon has 10 cents/minutes.  Liberty Wireless lets you use then
pay.  Verizon also costs $1/day on top of the per-minute charge, but you can
call free at night.  Liberty seems to be $30/month including 300 minutes. 
Virgin Mobile (associated somehow with Amazon.com) has no monthly charge, but
you need to pay at least $20 every 90 days, and use it at least once every
60 days or it expires.  Long-distance is no extra charge.  They let you
automatically charge to your credit card via the phone.  25 cents/minute first
ten minutes of any day, then 10 cents/minut.  text messages received free,
sent for 10 cents each.  Reviews indicate that coverage is spotty.  7-11 seems
to be cheapest for low usage - how is reception around Michigan?

ZD Net reviewd 7-11 Speak-Out prepaid phone service.  No contract.  $50 after
rebate for the Nokia phone.  Cards must be used within 45 days and cost at
least $25.  This comes to about $15/month.  Virgin Mobile is half that.

Someone's blog mentions that they use their cell phone as a PDA, for email,
and to send watch and listen to music and movies.  Now they want 1GB storage
and a USB port so they can read mpeg4 videos from a flashdrive.  How big are
these LCDs.


#158 of 290 by tod on Fri Feb 3 18:17:40 2006:

re #156
*The recharge of SpeakOut minutes is good for 1 year from date of purchase.

Here's what my 7-11 SpeakOut booklet says:

Your prepaid system will notify you to refill your account when:
-Your account balance is at or below $2
-Your account has 10 days left before it expires
-Your account balance is too low to pay for a call
-Your account does not have enough value to continue an existing call
(The notification is a text message.  After every call I make, I get a text
message telling me how much the last call cost me and what my remaining
balance is.  Also, I can always hit *777# and get sent a text message of the
remaining balance.)

Minutes carry forward when you buy more time.  When your account expires, you
have 45 days to refill it before your phone number is cancelled.  (That means
you have 55 days to recharge your phone before your phone # expires.) 

* Again, the recharge of minutes is good for 1 year from date of purchase.  

Another feature I like is someone can send you a text message 
{your ph #}@mobile.mycingular.com  
or via SMS from their phone to your phone #..and vice versa..you can send an
SMS text message to someone else's cell phone.

I only use the phone to receive/place the rare personal call.


#159 of 290 by tod on Fri Feb 3 18:25:19 2006:

re #158
I rescind my last statement.  SpeakOut minutes are only good for 120 days.

The main thing to remember though is that they don't charge you for "roaming".
Others (like AT&T Free2Go) will suck up your minutes if you go out of area.
Plus, others will make your minutes expire sooner than 120 days if you buy
less time.  Examples:
Verizon "Free-Up" $15 refill only good for 30 days or $30 for 60 days
TMobile "EasySpeak" $10 refill 30 days and $25 to 90 days
These guys will kill you on roaming charges.

There's a good Forum review at
http://forums.wirelessadvisor.com/southern-us-wireless-forum/2079-7-eleven-
spe
ak-out-wireless.html


#160 of 290 by keesan on Fri Feb 3 18:55:24 2006:

Thanks for the info.  I found also Net10, 60 days of 300 minutes $30, which
comes to $15/month if you don't use more than 5 min/day.    5 cents per text
message.  No other fees.  Your $25 for 120 days is certainly the cheapest
for very low usage, but twice the cost per minute.  I don't know if Net10 lets
you use your own phone.  Kiwanis has very cheap used phones.  Net10 offers
$30 used (refurbished) Nokia phones with a choice of cover colors and 37 ring
tones.  (So you can hear yours in a crowd?).  No roaming charges for Net10.


#161 of 290 by tod on Fri Feb 3 18:59:55 2006:

I have mine set to vibrate and ring in crowd situations.  Work hours, its set
to only vibrate.  
Boeing Surplus has a big box of used cell phones, too.  They're maybe $3 each.
I think its much easier to just use the phone that comes with the plan though
because they use SIM chips and providers may charge you a setup fee if you
bring your own..plus batteries might not last as long on older phones, etc..

I have a boeing surplus phone in my wife's car with no service plan.  Its
there if she needs to call 911.


#162 of 290 by mcnally on Fri Feb 3 19:25:17 2006:

 re #146:
 > I think Vonage offers a little widget that plugs into your network
 > and has an ordinary phone jack on it, so you can use whatever regular
 > phones you own.

 They do.  Those devices are commonly called "ATAs" (for "Analog Telephone
 Adapter.")


#163 of 290 by gull on Fri Feb 3 19:37:45 2006:

SIM chips can be moved from handset to handset *if* the handset is "unlocked."
Most handsets that are sold with cellular phone service are locked to one
particular network, and another network's SIM card won't work. eBay is a good
source for unlocked phones.


#164 of 290 by tod on Fri Feb 3 19:57:05 2006:

re #163
The first thing I did with this 7-11 SpeakOut was jam it up with crack
attempts.  Then, I called customer service at Nokia and get the PUK #'s.
Yay me. ;)


#165 of 290 by keesan on Sat Feb 4 00:05:24 2006:

Jim pointed out that you can get call-waiting, which is $6/month, and knocks
you off the computer when someone calls (unless you have a tone phone and dial
with *70 before the ISP number).  However you don't get any signal that this
is happening ,and would need to watch the little black square in icewm that
indicates a connection.  But sometimes it puts garbage on the screen instead
of knocking you off and you have to hangup the computer and answer the phone
before the caller gives up.  .


#166 of 290 by drew on Sat Feb 4 06:44:09 2006:

I handled that problem by running the modem with speaker continuously on. (AT
M2).


#167 of 290 by keesan on Sat Feb 4 13:38:40 2006:

Another solution, for $8/month, would be voice mail with SBC, but people would
still need to wait 3 hours to be called back.


#168 of 290 by keesan on Sun Feb 5 03:04:43 2006:

Net10 says you have to buy their phone, you can't move over the SIM.
Our friends have a cell phone already, they bought it 2 years ago used ($2?)
with cradle/charger) and once put some minutes on it with Verizon and used
it once or twice and lost interest.  I think we can get them another
rechargeable lithium battery in some shell for another cell phone, for $1,
at Kiwanis, and charge it so they can use it for 911.  He is on the computer
6-7 am and 4-6 pm and she is used to this.  He forgot there was no problem.
Today we stopped at Kiwanis to get a ride with him and Jim went to get a modem
and he asked me 'what am I waiting for?'.  'Jim'.  We tried to set him up to
browse without images and turn them on only as needed, and cache them for 24
hours, but he likes to see the latest stock charts and can't remember how to
load images so now we are back to the slow method again. We made him a script
'e' to go directly to email, but one to go directly to a login page sent Opera
into an endless loop (99.9% cpu usage).  He has four bookmarks and is happy.
We told him to tell all his friends to write him at his webmail instead of
grex but also made him a 'g' script to ssh to grex, where Jim set him up to
go straight into Pine email.  Now we are all set to make another such computer
for anyone else who wants to go on the internet in 30MB or less.


#169 of 290 by keesan on Wed Feb 8 20:49:20 2006:

Jim charged for two days the Motorola cell phone from our friends that they
had not used for 2 years.  The battery reads 3.3V now.  How does he test
whether it is working?  Where would he look for an ON or POWER button, or how
else can you test it short of phoning 911?  The LCD screen has nothing on it.


#170 of 290 by tod on Wed Feb 8 20:53:13 2006:

He should be able to turn it on and get a message from the local provider's
network.


#171 of 290 by keesan on Wed Feb 8 20:55:10 2006:

HOW does he turn it on and who is 'the local provider'?


#172 of 290 by tod on Wed Feb 8 22:06:43 2006:

dial a #
the voice message should tell you who the local cell provider is


#173 of 290 by keesan on Thu Feb 9 02:18:44 2006:

How do we dial a number without turning it on first?
If it is sitting in the cradle it is lighted and has some writing on the
screen, but when removed from the cradle it is blank.  Does this mean the
battery has too little current?  


#174 of 290 by bru on Thu Feb 9 03:43:25 2006:

push the red button and hold it down for 10 seconds, it should turn on.  You
wouldn't know anyone who has a used bike for sale cheap.


#175 of 290 by keesan on Thu Feb 9 16:07:00 2006:

Kiwanis has used bikes for $10.  Reuse Center has used bikes for negotiable
prices, probably $10.  If you promise to keep the bike indoors when you are
not using it, Jim could tune up whatever you bought if you biked it to us,
which is easy to do from Kiwanis.  Look for something with the newer style
of brakes that does not say Murray or Huffy or Sears on it.  Aluminum wheels
are also better quality, lighter and don't rust.  Jim might be willing to meet
you at Kiwanis some time.  We gave away our extra bikes already.


#176 of 290 by ball on Fri Feb 24 09:20:11 2006:

Tracfone (and probably other prepaid mobile phone companies)
use phones with custom firmware that prevents their use with
a different provider and prevents people from using phones
from other service providers.

Keesan: let me know if you need a Tracfone.


#177 of 290 by keesan on Fri Feb 24 15:54:27 2006:

Thanks, but our friends appear to have given up on the idea of a cell phone.
They tried one 2 years ago and left it recharging since then.


#178 of 290 by ball on Mon Feb 27 01:45:11 2006:

I should post a rant to the electronics conference about
equipment designed with defective charge circuits that can
cook a battery.

A wireless LAN should be a feature of my next home.  I will
even install one here if I am able to arrange broadband
service.  DSL would probably be least expensive, but as
mentioned in the telephone wiring item I'm struggling to get
a phone jack installed.  :-/


#179 of 290 by keesan on Mon Mar 6 21:42:05 2006:

Jim asks, if you have DSL and a network, does the main computer need to be
left on all the time in order to use the DSL on another computer?  If so, I
presume you don't need monitor or keyboard, and maybe you can run it from RAM
and have the hard drive powered down.  How much power would a server like this
use?  He is thinking about using one wireless PCMCIA network card to share
a neighbor's DSL, then cabling a couple of other computers to that one.  We
have a desktop PCMCIA slot for the card.


#180 of 290 by rcurl on Mon Mar 6 22:01:40 2006:

I would think so as how else would the wireless card get power? We also have
a Ethernet LAN for two Macs, but have a separate wireless adapter on the
network - i.e., not in one of the computers but plugged into the LAN. 


#181 of 290 by twenex on Mon Mar 6 22:17:44 2006:

Re: #179. To use DSL on more than one computer, the best idea is to get a
router which allows you to connect it to an ADSL "modem". The router then
connects to the computers; either by wires, or wirelessly. (Some routers have
both wireless and wired connections, typically 32 of one and 4 of the other).


#182 of 290 by keesan on Mon Mar 6 22:55:26 2006:

We don't have DSL service, the neighbor does.  We want to pick up his service
wirelessly and then wire our computers together with network cable.  We have
a hub.  We don't need 32 connections.  Someone gave us a box with a wireless
router and a wireless PCMCIA ethernet card and we have a PCMCIA slot in one
desktop computer.  Do we need the router or just the card?  We can connect
our computers via nullmodem cable and share a phone connection that way
(telnet from one to the other, or use kermit to connect).  

This is not important, we can just try to make DSL work on one computer in
the living room and listen to streaming audio with it. I am giving up on the
Detroit classical station, it has too many 30 sec noisy commercials and
traffic reports from 3:30 to 7:00 pm, which is when I would have listened to
it because the other stations stop playing music then.  

We could run the sound from the sound card to the digital piano as Aux in,
but I think it is optimized to sound like a boomy grand piano.  

First we need to get ndiswrapper working to use this wireless card in linux.


#183 of 290 by nharmon on Tue Mar 7 01:13:33 2006:

I would be very carefull about setting up a wireless network with a
neighbor in order to share broadband internet. Without said neighbor's
permission, this is clearly illegal. However the law concerning a
neighbor sharing such a connection is still a bit hazy and I wouldn't
want to be the first person to have to defend myself against a phone
company's lawyers.


#184 of 290 by keesan on Tue Mar 7 02:19:51 2006:

A different neighbor was going to let us use his but he moved.  They were
thinking of Pringle antennas between houses a few houses away.  Of course we
would have permission.  How would it hurt the ISP?  The neighbor might
experience a slightly slower connection if we listened to the radio at 32K/sec
on their 1.5MBit/sec connection.  Jim points out that if people don't want
to share their connections they can set up a password to use them.  We have
udhcpc, they would probably run some server for udhcp with password required.
How does this work with wireless connections at libraries?

We are still nowhere near having a usable wireless network card since the
stupid thing was designed to require Windows.  SOmeone in our group tried to
compile ndiswrapper to let linux use the Windows driver for the card.  There
may also be a linux module for a new kernel available.


#185 of 290 by nharmon on Tue Mar 7 03:01:35 2006:

> How would it hurt the ISP?

Lost revenue. The question is, whose service is your internet
connection? Is it the ISP's, or is it your's after you have bought it?
This is quite a grey area, but precedence is on the ISP's side, and
theft of service laws do have some teeth.

> Jim points out that if people don't want to share their connections 
> they can set up a password to use them.

I think that is a dangerous attitude to have. You cannot trespass onto
someone's property because they left the gate unlocked, just as you
cannot trespass onto someone's computer network because they didn't know
to set a password. This is something I tell kids who think "war driving"
is cool: Do you really want to be at the mercy of some old guy who
doesn't know how his wifi works being told by the police that he needs
to press charges because that will prevent these things from happening
again? For them, its a good way to ruin their lives.


#186 of 290 by marcvh on Tue Mar 7 03:40:21 2006:

Actually, you can enter someone else's property if their gate is
unlocked.  In order for there to be any reasonable chance of a
trespassing charge, the owner has to somehow ask you to leave.  This can
be done in person, or can be done by posting signs, or any number of
other ways.  Heck, if you leave your front door unlocked someone can
even enter your house and you can't charge him with breaking & entering
(since there was no breaking) or much of anything else unless you can
somehow show intent to do something illegal.

Unlike homes, however, ISPs do have terms of service, and they typically
permit sharing the service only within members of the same immediate
household living at the same address (that's what Comcast's says, for
exaxmple.)  Tapping into your neighbor's ISP isn't any different from
tapping into your neighbor's cable signal because you don't want to pay
for HBO.


#187 of 290 by slynne on Tue Mar 7 03:49:25 2006:

I imagine there are ways to set up a shared network though. I know that
there was a woman who was going to buy the house next door and she had a
plan where she was going to get some super fast connection and then
share it with me and with the neighbor on the other side of her. I dont
know what kind of connection she was thinking of getting but she thought
it would cost $150/mo. I imagine that would have been a different
situation than DSL or Cable. 


#188 of 290 by tod on Tue Mar 7 04:24:54 2006:

re #184
Yagi pringle antennas are neat if you can mount them well.  Good luck with
that.


#189 of 290 by jep on Tue Mar 7 13:42:20 2006:

I got a wireless network router (Linksys) and some adapters, and have 
networked a couple of Windows 98 computers in the kids' rooms.  My 
stepdaughter is getting a computer from the Rotary Club in a couple of 
weeks.  When she gets it we'll move the router to her room, a more 
central location for our network, and then it should work a little 
better for everyone.

I don't know anything about network security.  The network is wide open 
right now.  How risky is this, and how should I deal with it?


#190 of 290 by tod on Tue Mar 7 17:20:41 2006:

re #189
Setup WEP on your router and the Wireless machines.  You're basically
broadcasting everything you do on your computer and also opening yourself up
to who knows what.


#191 of 290 by ball on Tue Mar 7 17:52:51 2006:

Re #179: Generally you would leave your DSL modem and router
  on all the time and power up computers as you use them.  I
  would guess about 20W max. continuous.

Re #190: WEP is trivial to crack, so offers no significant
  protection.


#192 of 290 by tod on Tue Mar 7 17:55:49 2006:

re #191
Car door locks are also trivial but they deter most that may be tempted.
Defense in depth starts with simple security.  Why would you not recommend
a simple configuration?  Does jep live in Fort Knox or something?


#193 of 290 by rcurl on Tue Mar 7 18:05:23 2006:

Re #189: also choose a more cryptic SSID and create a closed network (so that
the SSID is not brodcast to any passing computer). I keep hearing different
opinions about the security of WEP - if the password is changed now and then
I thought it was pretty secure.


#194 of 290 by tod on Tue Mar 7 18:15:20 2006:

re #193
The neighbors were leeching bandwidth off my wireless router for several
months before I realized it.  When I put the clamps down on the WEP setup then
there was a noticable difference in performance.  Normally, I SSH for most
of my online transactions but for the layman I'd recommend securing your
entrypoint to the router.


#195 of 290 by gull on Tue Mar 7 22:12:15 2006:

Re resp:191: It's "trivial" in the sense that it's been automated, but
cracking WEP requires capturing a significant amount of traffic. Unless jep has
a lot of network traffic going on, someone's going to have to capture data for
several days before they'll stand a good chance of cracking his key. (And of
course they'll be foiled if he changes his key during that time.) WEP isn't
secure in the sense computer professionals use the word "secure," but it does
act as a deterrent to casual leechers and eavesdroppers.


#196 of 290 by keesan on Tue Mar 7 22:48:39 2006:

WEP - Windows Entertainment Pack?
We don't have a router or ADSL modem.  How much power would a computer draw
with the monitor turned off and hard drive powered down?  

There would be no loss of service to an ISP if someone who would not buy
broadband service borrowed a very small fraction of it.  The phone company
used to consider it illegal to have your own phone instead of renting a phone
from them, or to have extension phones when it became legal to own your own
phone, not that it cost them anything.  People would turn off the ringers on
the extension phones so the company would not know about them.  


#197 of 290 by marcvh on Tue Mar 7 23:40:43 2006:

WTF?  You said in #182 that you have a router, now you say you don't
have one?

Using someone else's broadband to check your email once a week would be
using a "very small fraction" of the service.  Using it to stream music
for three and a half hours a day is not a "very small fraction."


#198 of 290 by twenex on Wed Mar 8 00:25:31 2006:

You need both a router and some sort of network card. 

You don't usually get to pick and choose the number of connections your router
can support other than by selecting one model over another. Just because your
router supports 32/64/a gazillion connections doesn't mean you have to use
them all.


#199 of 290 by keesan on Wed Mar 8 02:57:57 2006:

We are not planning to use the router, just the wireless card, to learn how
to use a wireless card, and play 32K streaming audio, which is a very small
fraction of 1500K DSL line.  Jim's 'ISP' connection is simply too
unpredictable to listen to music with - anywhere from 5K to 0K/sec downloads
and you get bumped off whenever they feel like it.  3/150 is about 2%.

We succeeded in getting the digital piano to play through headphones (phone
jack) and through the receiver (AUX out), and (badly) from the tape deck into
the piano (AUX in) and recorded my playing directly to the tape deck.  The
AUX in has a great deal of static.  Jim says we won't need radio now, we can
just record all the great piano music after getting free sheetmusic downloads.
He also plugged into the headphone jack a little gadget that broadcasts FM
to the nearest receiver, and it sounded awful but recognizable.  

Does anyone know how to construct the cable that plugs into the round MIDI
jack at the back and then into the sound card MIDI (game port) port (or does
it plug into line out?)?  I will look online for the wiring diagram.  I want
to try playing piano midi music on the piano from the sound card.  

Who needs broadband to check email when there is grex?


#200 of 290 by ball on Wed Mar 8 07:25:16 2006:

Re #192: I don't know jep's circumstances but I'm about to
  deploy two wireless LANs, one of which will be at home.  I
  don't have anything top secret, but would still prefer to
  keep my information private unless I explicitly publish it
  for some reason.  I have heard that WPA is less insecure
  than WEP, but I'm thinking of going further by using
  additional software to encrypt everything that gets sent
  over the wireless LAN.

Re #195: My wireless LAN will see a significant amount of
  traffic.

Re #196: I have a computer with a good power supply that
  burns 27 Watts most of the time it's switched on.  Other
  machines may require more power.

Re #199: This is a guess, but it's
  worth a try.  Please let me know         PC      MIDI
  if it works, so that I can add it    ~~~~~~      ~~~~~~
  to my notes.  Use sheilded cable      4 GND ---- RX- 5
  and connect the shield to pin 2      12 TXD ---> RX+ 4
  on the MIDI connector.  Leave the
  shield unconnected at the PC end.


#201 of 290 by nharmon on Wed Mar 8 13:41:12 2006:

I do not rely on WEP or WPA for my wireless. Any encryption I need is 
performed in different layers.


#202 of 290 by keesan on Wed Mar 8 13:42:36 2006:

Could you explain to me what RX means?  Do we need only two wires connected?
The midi port looks like a keyboard plug.

Linksys (who made our wireless card) says they only support Windows.  Realtek
(who made the chip on it) has a lot of broken links to Mac and Linux (source
code) drivers.  Someone else posted an alpha version of a driver for this
chip, source code, which requires that I have kernel source code for 2.4 or
2.6, which I need to get and unpack into about 100MB on my computer in order
to be able to compile one little module (102K for Windows, by Realtek).  Is
there some way to compile a module without the entire kernel source code? 
Can I read the Makefile and just put in the parts it needs?


#203 of 290 by nharmon on Wed Mar 8 13:47:27 2006:

RX usually means 'receive'. TX is usually 'transmit'.


#204 of 290 by nharmon on Wed Mar 8 13:48:02 2006:

And here is a schematic of a midi cable:

http://www.cryogenius.com/hardware/sbmidi/


#205 of 290 by fudge on Wed Mar 8 13:59:31 2006:

re 202: most drivers can be built outside the kernel tree, but you might need
at least the kernel headers installed - depending on the disrto, you might
require the kernel-devel package or equivalent.


#206 of 290 by keesan on Wed Mar 8 14:03:29 2006:

Slackware.  So I install just the kernel headers for 2.4.31 and then do a
'make'?  I followed a link at the URL cited for cryogenics and found the
schematics for the SB $50 MIDI cable, which requires 1 diode, 2 resistors,
an OptoIsolator and an IC (with transistors in them) and a plug ends for
gameport, MIDI IN and MIDI OUT (5 pin) which we might have around but not the
IC and OptoIsolator.  I wonder if this would let me also record MIDI files
to the computer (from MIDI out) with the right software.  


#207 of 290 by kingjon on Wed Mar 8 14:14:27 2006:

For any compilation it's supposed to be the headers for the kernel libc was
compiled under, and for compiling kernel modules I'm pretty sure it has to
match the kernel you'll be trying to use the module under.



#208 of 290 by fudge on Wed Mar 8 14:17:37 2006:

I'm not familiar w/ slack, haven't touched it in a dozen years at least, but
I'd expect to unpack my driver source somewhere and be able to run
make in the directory, maybe with a configure first (that might show some
library dependency), unless it's one of those rare ones that actually use bits
of ones existing in the kernel tree, then you'd need the lot.
If my memory serves me correctly the MIDI interface use a current loop, hence
the need for couplers, and is a serial interface, with one transmit loop (TX)
and one to receive (RX).


#209 of 290 by keesan on Wed Mar 8 14:29:53 2006:

The INSTALL file said to just 'make', not make config or configure.  Do the
kernel headers come with a .config file or would I need to get hold of the
one used to compile the 2.4 kernel I will use with this module and copy that
to /build along with kernel headers?


#210 of 290 by jep on Wed Mar 8 15:19:47 2006:

My circumstances are that I have a wireless network with 3 (soon to be 
4) computers sharing cable modem service.  I use the Internet a fair 
amount and so do the kids, for e-mail, music downloads, games, on-line 
banking, chat, random browsing and homework.  If I need WEP, I guess 
I'll figure out what it is and how to install it or turn it on.  If I 
need more than that, please someone let me know.  I will appreciate it 
very much!


#211 of 290 by keesan on Wed Mar 8 19:40:35 2006:

I installed kernel-headers and they did not go into /lib/modules/2.4.31/build,
where .config was supposed to show up, so I also apparently need kernel source
code, or at least the .config file from it.  In addition, the 2.4.31 kernel
headers overwrite the ones in /usr/src/linux-2.2.16/include/linux (because
of the way the symlinks are set up, because they installed into
/usr/include/linux, which is symlinked to
/usr/src/linux-2.2.16/include/linux).  Will this be a problem if I want to
compile another 2.2.16 kernel some time?  They are dated 1998-2005 and have
no mention of the kernel version, so maybe they are just updates that will
also work with older versions.

I need to get hold of the 37MB of source code now.


#212 of 290 by kingjon on Wed Mar 8 19:42:10 2006:

/lib/modules/<kernel-version>/build, if it exists, should be a symlink to
/usr/src/linux-<version>. Did you look there?



#213 of 290 by keesan on Wed Mar 8 20:32:53 2006:

There is no such symlink on my computer, should I make one?  I now have 2.4.31
kernel headers in the 2.2.16 directory.   Should I rename it, and then
reinstall 2.2.16, and make the symlink?  I tried making the symlink and since
I don't have kernel source on this computer yet there is no .config file.

It would be easier to get an older wireless card from ebay than to get this
stupid WIndows one to work with linux.  


#214 of 290 by nharmon on Thu Mar 9 00:47:58 2006:

Orinoco wireless cards work very well with Linux.


#215 of 290 by keesan on Thu Mar 9 04:10:18 2006:

Do you have an extra one you want to give us?  It is against our rules to buy
anything we can get for free.  Jim is going to modify keyboard plugs to make
180 degree 5-pin DINs and maybe chop the 15-pin DB off a joystick.  First he
has to remove the rubber outer part of a roller to try to make a subpad out
of it for a laser printer that feeds all the sheets at once.  THe official
replacement costs $10.50 plus shipping.  In the meantime he has had it apart
a few times to clean it, and I feed one page at a time.  And someone returned
a working laser printer we lent them in 2001.


#216 of 290 by tod on Thu Mar 9 04:38:32 2006:

 It is against our rules to buy
 anything we can get for free.
Amen!


#217 of 290 by ball on Thu Mar 9 06:43:45 2006:

Re #202: Only two wires connected all the way through, not
  counting the shield which you only connect at one end.


#218 of 290 by nharmon on Thu Mar 9 12:49:16 2006:

Sorry, all I have is a Linksys 802.11G card. It is why I have to run 
Windows XP on my laptop. :(


#219 of 290 by twenex on Thu Mar 9 13:33:57 2006:

Grr. tell me about it. I have an internal card that is turned off and on via
a switch that appears not to work in FreeBSD (or Linux). After days of trying
to get the damn thing to work, I gave up and created a VMWare guest for it.
Works great!

Tip: set the applications priority in the task manager to "RealTime"


#220 of 290 by fudge on Thu Mar 9 13:36:29 2006:

re#218: no ndiswrapper?
  #219: what card?


#221 of 290 by nharmon on Thu Mar 9 14:21:26 2006:

ndiswrapper is a resource hog and my laptop isn't that fast. :)


#222 of 290 by ball on Thu Mar 9 17:03:59 2006:

I have to buy a couple of wireless ethernet adaptors.  One
will be USB since my iBook doesn't have PC-Card or Cardbus
slots. I could conceivably add an internal Airport card, but
a USB adaptor is more portable between machines.  It will
almost certainly be a Linksys WUSB11, since that's one that
NetBSD supports.  The other could be PCI, but I don't know
yet which to buy.


#223 of 290 by keesan on Thu Mar 9 20:06:25 2006:

I may have the same Linksys card.  Maybe those of you more knowledgeable can
compile that rtl8180.o module for your own systems, if not mine.  I just tried
to recompile a 2.4.31 kernel and it no longer recognizes memory cards so I
added back a few things I had taken out (having to do with USB storage) and
recompiled it and now the modules again.  If this works I will make one try
at the module but I compiled a kernel without Wireless LAN support to make
it smaller and would have to recompile it one more time.  I had no idea which
device we have in their list so I said N instead of Y or M.  

We do have a Win98 laptop computer from the neighbor and will try the card
in there at the library, for educational purposes (and we can download linux
kernel source code with it there via 98SE).


#224 of 290 by marcvh on Thu Mar 9 20:14:59 2006:

Oh, back on the issue of a la carte cable channels, recent news reports
have confirmed what I've always suspect but hadn't seen in print -- the
biggest single reason why basic cable costs so much is ESPN.  It's the
most expensive channel in the typical basic lineup, $2-3 per month
even though only something like 30% of the households paying for it
actually watch it, and the cost gets even worse when you bundle in the
other critical add-ons like ESPN2 and The Golf Channel (myself I'd
rather watch The Flannel Channel.)

Apparently the FCC has started to warm up to the idea of a la carte, but
I still suspect it will get derailed somehow.  Disney will lose billions
in market cap if they can't continue making money from people who don't
watch.  But I'll just put those extra costs on my mental list along with
the taxes I'm paying to make payments on the Kingdome and such.


#225 of 290 by twenex on Thu Mar 9 23:38:44 2006:

Re: #222. That depends on what drivers you want to use. If you want to use
the madwife (aka madwifi) drivers (or their NetBSD equivalent, whatever that
may be), then I suggest looking VERY HARD at compatbility and getting, if at
all possible, a guarantee from the vendor that if the card does not work *on
NetBSD* then you may return it. Given that I believe the problem with my
broadcom internal wireless card was the on-off switch built in to th laptop;
that an external card of any sort shouldn't have one; and that i downloaded
broadcom chipset drivers from linksys which appeared to interface well with
the card, i should say that linksys drivers with an external wifi card and
ndiswrapper should work a charm. (ndiswrapper is a wrapper for proprietary
windows network drivers which, by emulating the Windows Network Device
Interface System, trick the drivers into thinking they are running on Windows
instead of Linux or the BSDs.)


#226 of 290 by keesan on Fri Mar 10 00:50:13 2006:

How much memory does ndiswrapper take up?  Our best laptop has 32MB.
Someone at my linux list will give another try at rtl8180 driver.  My 2.4.31
kernel works with glibc but not libc5 linux, don't know why, and finds the
USB memory stick, but I have no idea how to compile for PCMCIA so can't use
the wireless card with it if I compile it for 2.4.31 (which INSTALL says
requires hacking, 2.6 does not).  


#227 of 290 by ball on Fri Mar 10 06:47:01 2006:

ndiswrapper sounds hideous.  The vast majority of vendors,
when asked about NetBSD, Linux or whatever will simply say
"we only support MS Windows".  My understanding is that the
WUSB11 is supported by NetBSD's native atu(4) driver, but
there is always the risk that a vendor will switch chipsets
without changing a product's model number or packaging.
Gits.

I faced a similar risk with a recent webcam purchase.
Happily the NetBSD people were kind enough to bring the
spcaview in pkgsrc up to the latest version, which included
support for my camera.


#228 of 290 by mcnally on Fri Mar 10 07:04:30 2006:

 re #227:  there's nothing particularly awful about ndiswrapper 
 and it's very, very useful in cases where the manufacturer (I'm
 looking at *YOU*, Broadcom..) won't release details necessary
 to implement a native driver.

 The Dell laptop I use for work has a built-in broadcom wireless
 chip that isn't supported by Linux except through ndiswrapper.
 However with the hardware emulation mode that ndiswrapper provides
 it works very well (better, seemingly, than it does in Windows,
 as odd as that may be..)


#229 of 290 by twenex on Fri Mar 10 15:35:02 2006:

Re: #226. Sorry, I've no idea how much memory ndiswrapper takes up, as I'm
not using it at the moment. But my comments on the subject were addressed to
ball.

Re: #227. More hideous than running UN*X under VMware? More hideous than
having no net access or not running UN*X at all?

Re: 228, Broadcom: Let's look together.

re: 228, ndiswrapper: Hah. Hahah. Hahahah. Oh, I larfed.


#230 of 290 by keesan on Fri Mar 10 16:02:49 2006:

Somebody with ndiswrapper please let us know its memory usage before I bother
with it.  DSL (50MB of Debian on live CD) may support it if you download an
extra package of applications.  Ubuntu Live might support it too, but we don't
have 128MB of RAM on our laptops to run that huge GUI in (it won't run at all
with less, not sure if DSL will accept 32MB).  I will try the card once in
Win98 at the public library.

My 2.4.31 kernel won't work at all with USB - crashes with uhci.  I modelled
it on something that works and just added usb-uhci (as module) and removed
a bunch of things that did not look essential (various USB scanners, cameras,
serial adaptors, ISDN modems).  My kernel config is at
http://keesan.freeshell.org/bl/2.4.31/configsy.431 - all help appreciated.
And when I tried using this setup to compile rtl8180 it would not compile
anyway and INSTALL says I need to hack Makefile for 2.4, and 2.6 is easier.
2.6 takes too much RAM and is ridiculous for a 100MHz laptop computer.


#231 of 290 by ball on Fri Mar 10 17:57:11 2006:

Re #229: More hideous than finding natively supported hard-
  ware, although in some cases (such as hardware built into
  laptops) I can see that's not always practical.


#232 of 290 by cross on Fri Mar 10 21:29:04 2006:

This response has been erased.



#233 of 290 by nharmon on Fri Mar 10 22:21:24 2006:

> And Running Unix sucks.

As opposed to what? Windows? 


#234 of 290 by cross on Fri Mar 10 22:35:26 2006:

This response has been erased.



#235 of 290 by ball on Sat Mar 11 05:10:19 2006:

I suspect Plan 9 has more scant hardware support even than
NetBSD ;-)


#236 of 290 by cross on Sat Mar 11 14:39:36 2006:

This response has been erased.



#237 of 290 by ball on Sat Mar 11 16:44:09 2006:

Out of interest though, what makes Plan 9 good?


#238 of 290 by twenex on Sat Mar 11 22:04:04 2006:

Having more than one machine spare!

And sorry, but they got the Plan 9 windowing system VERY wrong, unless they
now believe in dictating policy as well as implementation. In which case, both
the windowing system and they are wrong.


#239 of 290 by ball on Sat Mar 11 23:27:33 2006:

Re #238: ?


#240 of 290 by naftee on Sun Mar 12 03:00:10 2006:

 ?[3~[3~


#241 of 290 by cross on Sun Mar 12 14:32:43 2006:

This response has been erased.



#242 of 290 by nharmon on Sun Mar 12 15:41:07 2006:

> they get it in their heads that the way Linus et al do it is the One 
> True Way

This is probably because Linux is the first unix-like operating system
these people have ever used. It was pretty much that way with me.


#243 of 290 by remmers on Sun Mar 12 17:58:03 2006:

Hey, at least Linux and X11 are actually used by lots of real people to
get useful stuff done.  Plan 9 seems to be mainly a platform for
generating superior attitudes and academic papers on operating system
design.


#244 of 290 by ball on Sun Mar 12 18:34:05 2006:

Re #241: I'm not so sure about Linux, but I like X.  I like
  the ability to run a client program on whatever machine
  happens to be most appropriate and have its output display
  to (and keyboard/pointing device input from) whatever
  machine happens to be in front of me. I also like the fact
  X makes no attempt to dictate my choice of window manager.
  I imagine X predates Linux and it's developed by different
  people.


#245 of 290 by cross on Sun Mar 12 19:37:52 2006:

This response has been erased.



#246 of 290 by ball on Sun Mar 12 23:16:34 2006:

X works for me.  It's nice that it's cross-platform too.  Is
Plan 9's windowing system confined just to Plan 9?


#247 of 290 by cross on Sun Mar 12 23:46:41 2006:

This response has been erased.



#248 of 290 by twenex on Mon Mar 13 01:54:48 2006:

I think there's also an X11 wm that's meant to look like rio.

You're right, Dan. X11 DOES suck. And so does UNIX, whatever flavour. The
trouble is, they're SO much better than That Other System in SO many ways,
and Plan 9 is SO little known, that its suckiness is (almost) irrelevant. Now,
if I'm wrong about the window manager thing, then fine. But don't assume I'm
just some ignorant Linux fanboy. I also use (and happen to prefer) FreeBSD
on one machine. I can also see lots of areas where linux went wrong, like
kernel module support. But I suspect that unless you're a kernel programmer
(which I'm not), and/or you have a few machines kicking around that you can
power constantly just to have a distributed OS (which I don't), then Plan 9
really wouldn't look much more attractive to you than Linux/BSD. (As an aside,
imho Plan 9 still doesn't do device management correctly: /dev/dev/ and
/dev/devctrl is certainly an improvement over /dev/dev/ and ioctrl, but the
OS should include facilities for decoding whether what's written to /dev/dev
is a command or data, instead.

As for the bad old days; point taken. But I know that lots of people prefer,
and always have preferred, developing for UNIX rather than Windows, and
developing for Mac OS Classic (especially early versions) sounds like a
nightmare. Let's face it, aside from some shining lights (now sadly mostly
dimmed), programming graphical applications on just about ANY platform in the
eighties must have been the GUI equivalent of batch-mode-only OSES. Did I
mention it sounds painful?


#249 of 290 by cross on Mon Mar 13 03:11:55 2006:

This response has been erased.



#250 of 290 by nharmon on Mon Mar 13 03:46:48 2006:

Is Plan 9 free software?


#251 of 290 by twenex on Mon Mar 13 12:41:29 2006:

Re: 249. OK, maybe that ouldn't work!

Re: #250. What's your definition of "Free software"?


#252 of 290 by cross on Mon Mar 13 14:46:05 2006:

This response has been erased.



#253 of 290 by twenex on Mon Mar 13 14:49:23 2006:

Re: #252. "Approved by the OSI" does not mean that it is approved by Richard
Stallman and the GNU/Free Software Foundation people. The OSI-approved
software stack *includes* (all?) software approved by the FSF, but the reverse
is not necessarily the case.


#254 of 290 by cross on Mon Mar 13 14:58:49 2006:

This response has been erased.



#255 of 290 by twenex on Mon Mar 13 15:02:41 2006:

And I quote:

"...There was a shakey start with Stallman and the OSI people..."


#256 of 290 by fudge on Mon Mar 13 15:23:48 2006:

r#253: thankfully RMS hasn't got the right of veto for software worldwide.


#257 of 290 by ball on Mon Mar 13 15:25:17 2006:

I think I should network my next home with Ethernet
(probably a combination of 10baseT, 100baseTX and perhaps
1000baseT over cat-5e and RS-485 (over Cat-3?)


#258 of 290 by ball on Mon Mar 13 15:27:07 2006:

)


#259 of 290 by cross on Mon Mar 13 15:29:03 2006:

This response has been erased.



#260 of 290 by twenex on Mon Mar 13 15:51:20 2006:

Re: #259. I see. For one, your original statement implied, or at least I took
it as implying, that RMS and the OSI were "intimately connected" in the way
that RMS and the FSF are. I didn't realize that the OSF had merely "taken his
side".

For another, RMS/FSF advocate free software, not merely "Open Source", which
the OSF is "responsible" and which looser definition merely *includes*, but
is not restricted to, free software.

Re: #256. Why should Stallman, or anyone, give anyone the right to use,
modify, and distribute software they've distributed *with source*, without
requiring them to either (a) give credit to the original authors, (b)
distribute either the original, or their modified, source under the same 
conditions as the source they got in the first place, (c) pay up, or (d) some 
combination of the preceding?

Might as well work one's rear end off to buy a High Definition, Widescreen,
Digital Television, then give it to the nearest beggar, complete with
generator.

The only people who really want to have the right not to distribute source are
those who are interested in getting something for nothing and charging for the
privilege.


#261 of 290 by twenex on Mon Mar 13 15:53:10 2006:

Charging others for the privilege, that is.


#262 of 290 by cross on Mon Mar 13 16:38:21 2006:

This response has been erased.



#263 of 290 by keesan on Mon Mar 13 18:23:01 2006:

The Linksys wireless card works in Windows (I think, we have no signal to test
it on but the driver CD installed drivers and found the card).  A neighbor
lent us a Netgear card to try with linux, but it needs the same linux module.
I got the source code at Driverguide (Realtek's links are broken) but can't
compile it - I get lots of warnings and then an error.  I downloaded the Win98
driver for it (about 100K) and unzipped to get a .sys and a .inf file. 
Obviously this is not the self-installing type of driver.  How do we feed it
properly to Win98? I want to test it before returning it to the neighbor so
he will know if it works.  (He sleeps until late afternoon).  

We also found a Yahoo camera setup exe that installed itself somewhere or
other but we have no idea where.  Jim fixed the camera somehow.  .1 MP.
Serial cable, not working with our DOS Photopc download software.


#264 of 290 by ball on Mon Mar 13 18:52:44 2006:

Is that a Webcam?  What make & model?  I recently got one
that works with NetBSD (probably Linux too).  Mine is a
Logitech Quickcan Chat.  Once I have DSL, I will try video-
conferencing with it.


#265 of 290 by keesan on Tue Mar 14 01:06:12 2006:

Tiger Direct Yahoo Digital Camera.  Blue and yellow, 320x200, stores 20 low
res photos.  We installed the software (ran the .exe file) and I have no idea
where it was put.  An online review said to reboot to use it so we plugged
in the camera and 10 min later got back into Win98 and still had no idea how
to download a photo.  1.1MB .exe file, no instructions for use.

We took the laptop computer with wireless card to the library.  A librarian
helped us fill in the same long number on two lines and we still have no
connection.  Jim plugged in his USB memory stick to a computer there and it
does not work. The library said they will fix that eventually.  There is a
floppy drive but we can only get small files onto it and the whole point was
to download things like kernel source.

Win98 would not work with the USB stick so we used a 1-floppy linux to
transfer 2.8MB of file for the other wireless card from my linux download.
Win98 says it cannot find some files it needs.  We seem to have Win98FE.

The first card is said to have worked on a friend's computer, I wonder how.
I am going to get out some paper books and go home now.


#266 of 290 by ball on Tue Mar 14 01:41:54 2006:

In case this helps, I found a few random pages on the Web
that seem to suggest that uses the STM STV680 chipset.  I
don't know whether Linux drivers are available, but if the
camera supports a removeable flash card (like my cheap
digital still camera, which uses Smartmedia cards), you may
be able to mount those cards in a suitable reader and read
that way the pictures you take.


#267 of 290 by keesan on Tue Mar 14 02:51:31 2006:

The card has about 100Kbytes of built-in RAM, not a flash card.  The only
mention I found for it for linux was that nobody had any idea whether it
worked and to let them know if it did.  My expensive Olympus digital camera
uses Smartmedia cards (for which I have a reader that works in linux but not
DOS) and it also comes with a serial download cable that works in linux or
DOS (40K, fits onto a book disk).  Can you find linux software for the camer?
It apparently takes nighttime photos via infrared flash and Jim wants to try
it for fun.  A grexer gave it to us.  It is reviewed under 'toys, other'. 


#268 of 290 by ball on Tue Mar 14 05:06:02 2006:

My wife recently bought an Olympus digital camera. I suspect
(althought I have yet to confirm this) that it supports the
umass standard and should work directly with systems like
NetBSD and Linux.

I'll look for open-source drivers for your Yahoo Digital
Camera.


#269 of 290 by mcnally on Tue Mar 14 07:20:41 2006:

 The Olympus camera I bought 4 years ago worked as a USB mass
 storage device, as does the one I bought earlier this year.
 I'm sure yours will as well.  


#270 of 290 by ball on Tue Mar 14 08:58:56 2006:

Nice job Olympus! ;-)


#271 of 290 by keesan on Tue Mar 14 14:52:58 2006:

Mine is never going to work as a USB mass storage device because it only comes
with a serial cable.  The card reader is mass-storage.
I found STV0680.c linux software but it seems to be for USB.  I also found
two other Win98 drivers to try next with the Yahoo camera.  The camera is said
to also need Video4Linux (maybe to act as a webcam?  Maybe to take single
photos while acting as a webcam?).  Someone using it with Windows said just
to plug it in and reboot to download photos, which is all we are after.
Lots of other cheap cameras (spycam, pen camera) use this chip.


#272 of 290 by ball on Tue Mar 14 15:12:34 2006:

I don't know if this helps...

          http://gkall.hobby.nl/stv680-aiptek.html

               ...or if it supports the RS-232 cable option.
Have you tried sane or gphoto?


#273 of 290 by keesan on Tue Mar 14 22:08:12 2006:

I have SANE set up for a scanner.  I deleted the qcam parts, which I think
are for webcam.  I read about gphoto - it is about a 5MB download with dozens
of dependencies, and most things won't compile on my system.  Today we tried
three Win98 drivers and they all installed but there are no instructions about
what to do next.  This camera has a serial cable.  Jim just wants to play with
it a bit and take infrared flash shots and I am not going to knock myself out
trying to compile a huge program, one little bit of which downloads images
from this toy camera.  

How does one use a camera that is not USB in Windows?  It installed a couple
dozen files, I think.  The third of these Win98 packages is 1.1MB.

It put files stv* into c:\windows\system :  cfg, dll, sys, drv.  Ten files.

Maybe the batteries ran down?  It has stopped beeping when we reboot.


#274 of 290 by ball on Wed Mar 15 01:50:03 2006:

It's some time since I saw a digital camera with a serial
interface.  That was an old Apple QuickTake (I forget which
model, but perhaps all of them had serial ports).  If the
supplied software doesn't work with your camera, I don't
know what to suggest, since I doubt there's a serial
equivalent of umass.


#275 of 290 by keesan on Wed Mar 15 02:00:50 2006:

It probably does work, we just don't have any instructions how to use it.
Our other two serial cameras work with 40K of Photopc software in DOS or
linux, for downloads, or to list what is on there, remove it, rename it, etc.
I don't know what the 1.1MB of Windows software is supposed to do, or how.
umass - usb-storage?  I will look into qcam (SANE).


#276 of 290 by keesan on Wed Mar 15 03:56:11 2006:

I am about to try compiling a PCMCIA kernel to use with the 133MHz laptop and
the wireless card.  Can someone give a simple summary of how to go about this?
I have kernel source code in /usr/src/linux-2.4.31 (linked to
/lib/modules/2.4.31/build) and I think I put the pcmcia-cs package there and
unpack it and run a make config on that package as well as for the kernel.


#277 of 290 by gull on Fri Mar 17 08:09:10 2006:

Re resp:222: Good luck finding a USB wireless adapter that works with 
MacOS.  I never did.  I found one D-Link model that was supposed to, 
but the drivers were terrible and made MacOS unstable. 
 
 
Re resp:248: Actually, I think a problem with X11 is that there *are* 
so many options.  Instead of having one or two window managers that are 
really good, and one or two sets of widgets and interface standards to 
support, there are dozens of half-baked ones.  The network-oriented 
operation of X also made it slow, which has since inspired three or 
four direct rendering methods, all of which are (of course) 
incompatible with each other. 


#278 of 290 by twenex on Fri Mar 17 09:37:48 2006:

Better dozens of half-baked ones to choose from than one half-baked one you're
forced to use.


#279 of 290 by keesan on Fri Mar 17 15:57:39 2006:

Jim mentioned to people that we were trying to get PCMCIA and modems working
so someone in his Dawn Ducks group gave him two external 56K (probably v92)
and a router with an Airwire 330TX Maxgate.  Maxgate is made by Umax and I
could not find any drivers for it there.  I could not find Airwire 330TX on
the web.  I found Addtron AEF-330TX which uses the same chip as Accton EN1217
according to BSD, and the Macronix 98713 chip, which is supported by tulip
but may need something special done during compilation.  I will try it anyway,
precompiled module from Slackware.  

This card plugs into a PCMCIA slot in a box that also has a printer port and
two ethernet ports labelled PC and hub and one wider WAN? port.  What gets
plugged into each of these?  Do we plug something from the ISP (if we have
DSL) into one port and a hub into the other into which we can plug several
computers (if we don't want to use wireless)?  I presume we can take this same
wireless card and put it into a laptop computer to take to the library.
What is the WAN used for and how?


#280 of 290 by ball on Fri Mar 17 16:09:55 2006:

Re #277: I was really hoping to use NetBSD, but my iBook's
  firmware wouldn't boot from an ffs partition.  I tried
  OpenDarwin, but it was dismal.  Perhaps I'll try putting
  the NetBSD kernel on a small Darwin partition and making
  the rest of the disk ffs.  Failing all that, I'll need to
  find MacOS X Panther on CD.

Re #279: What is the make and model of the mystery box?


#281 of 290 by keesan on Fri Mar 17 16:17:24 2006:

MaxGate UGate-3300 Wireless Sharing Router with Print Server.


#282 of 290 by keesan on Fri Mar 17 16:47:41 2006:

UMax has links to linux drivers for its routers, but they are broken.  I tried
to write them and they returned my mail.  THey use sorbs blacklist.


#283 of 290 by rcurl on Fri Mar 17 20:54:04 2006:

Re #277: http://www.macwireless.com/html/products/11g_11b_cards/11bUSB.php


#284 of 290 by ball on Fri Mar 17 21:20:10 2006:

Re #281: http://www.homenethelp.com/web/review/ugate-3300.asp


#285 of 290 by gull on Sat Mar 18 00:54:53 2006:

Re resp:283: Wow! That's steep! I think the D-Link model (which works fine
with Linux, but not with MacOS) cost $60.


#286 of 290 by keesan on Sat Mar 18 01:07:51 2006:

When compiling a PCMCIA kernel, if I am going to use precompiled modules do
I answered N or M to CONFIG_PCMCIA?  I tried both ways.  If I don't have APM
and PNP and I get messages about them being unresolved symbols while using
precompiled modules, do I need to answer Y to them or compile my own modules?


#287 of 290 by gull on Mon Mar 20 02:38:10 2006:

I think you need CONFIG_PCMCIA to provide the framework the other PCMCIA
modules work with. I'm not totally sure, though. I don't compile many kernels
from scratch anymore.


#288 of 290 by keesan on Mon Mar 20 16:05:22 2006:

I had to answer N in order to compile directly within the downloaded pcmcia
package instead of using the precompiled modules.  It works now except Cardbus
has a bus and does not work.  The precompiled modules for some reason did not
work with the precompiled kernel so I had to compile kernel and modules in
two steps.  Answering Y would have compiled drivers into the kernel, M would
have NOT compiled any drivers, N lets you compile them yourself afterwards.
Very confusing, and now I need to learn to use /sbin/hotplug and maybe some
other scripts in order to use regular PCI modules with Cardbus cards.


#289 of 290 by wilt on Tue May 16 23:52:02 2006:

HACKED BY GNAA LOL JEWS DID WTC LOL


#290 of 290 by ball on Wed Oct 4 01:49:08 2006:

My networked home now has an 802.11g LAN in addition to a
small 10baseT LAN in the study.  The wired LAN connects via
the wireless LAN and then DSL to the Internet.  AT&T DSL
registration requires access to MS Windows.


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: