Messages

46

Users / KDE Desktop Resolution - NOT OVERSCAN!

« on: June 02, 2009, 05:03:37 pm »

I have posted this before and had a few suggestions that didn't work out, just hoping something different/new will come of it.

I would like to change the resolution of the KDE desktop for the purposes of being able to read text when browsing the internet from my couch 10 feet away.  I run my MD at 720P and when I drop to KDE or use the computing menu to open a browser, the text is far too small to read from a distance any further than 2 feet.

Can I and/or How do I change the resolution of KDE to something lower without changing the resolution of the whole MD?

Thanks,

Dale

47

Users / Re: Does mce support USB-rs232 convertors?

« on: May 26, 2009, 04:55:10 pm »

Some of them.

I tried the Belkin usb>serial adapters and they didn't work.  The Simpletech adapters however, were plug and play.

48

Users / Re: VPN - Home office under linuxmce

« on: May 15, 2009, 05:18:07 pm »

First, my disclaimer:  I'm assuming you're using VPN software/hardware to connect and that it is configured securely.

VPN by definition is secure.  If you're IT dept has setup your VPN correctly you should be able to connect safely from the public WiFi at Starbucks.  The router/firewall at your location is virtually irrelevant from a server side security viewpoint.

Now, the caveat to this is that if your computer is compromised any data on that computer is compromised.  What that means is they wouldn't have direct access to your server but would have access to data on your computer you pulled from the server.  However, if your IT people have allowed you to pull data from the server (as opposed to working with it server side only) they have created a security breach.

The short of it is that VPN security is handled for all intents and purposes, server side, and the method of routing/firewall on the client end is negligible.

49

Users / Re: Power off MD at midnight? (timed events issue)

« on: April 30, 2009, 07:46:34 pm »

I am actually doing this and have been for a while.  I'll post my timed event setup when I get home tonight.

50

Users / Re: Paid Development in Open Source

« on: April 29, 2009, 09:32:32 pm »

The simple fact is that there is NO way in HELL that a single commercial entity could produce a piece of software, this large, and monolithically support it.

Pluto tried.

Pluto died.

It has taken a community of people to be able to continue development, to be able to develop the pieces that Pluto simply did not have the ability to, for a variety of reasons, including that certain features got lower priority due to pressure from investors, etc.

And I can tell you've never done any software development. In any project, open or commercial, the first 60% gets implemented quickly. The problem is, the last 20% are on the upper swing of an asympyotic scale.

Read that last sentence again.

The amount of time to fill in what is considered the last finishing details is the absolute killer for any project, because you're also debugging during this time, and having to support others during this point. It makes NO difference whether the project is commercial or not. The only difference lies in the prioritization. You may think things are progressing faster if YOUR features are being worked on, but what about SOMEONE ELSE'S features?

Stop being selfish and think about the bigger picture.

-Thom

Thom,

I think you're seriously misunderstanding what I'm saying.  I think that because your replies are turning slightly aggressive.

Of course I've never done any programming/developing, if I had, why would I have helped pay you for development.

As far as a commercial entity not being able to develop and support LMCE or a project like it, I disagree and we'll probably just forever disagree on that point.

I certainly understand that the last 20% is the most difficult.  But I bet it would be much less difficult if the devs were paid to do only that.  Imagine if LMCE stuff wasn't what you did after work but it's what you do FOR work.  Am I to believe that more wouldn't get done?

Please don't take my posts as any sort of attack on the project or it's devs.  Quite the contrary, I'm making the point that development would go faster and be broader if more people paid for it.

I think of my own profession, if a friend asks me to help him with his network and I know it will be free.  I'll get to him when I have the time.  If, on the other hand, someone needs help and they're paying me $150/hr, I'll MAKE the time.  Paid for stuff happens faster, that's the only point I'm making.

51

Users / Re: Paid Development in Open Source

« on: April 29, 2009, 09:20:55 pm »

dale_k, you seem to be basing your arguments on an assumption that hardware manufacturers are paid directly to support one platform or another, which is rarely the case (ie microsoft does not pay a hardware manufacturer to write drivers for windows). each platform has an associated developement cost for them to support it, and they base their decisions on what platforms have the market penetration to make their time worthwhile (as in number of units sold in that market segment). so it is a matter of market penetration, not direct monetary compensation.
I think sponsored open source developement provdes a great way to get around this limitation even for hardware drivers, but it takes copperation from the manufacturers. for other general software like LinuxMCE it is a proven model that works well in the real world.

Agreed, that's the point I was making with the Nvidia example, but it's a cascading effect.  Open source porjects like LMCE will never be a huge market share because it's not commercial.  There is no entity advertising it on TV and in magazines.  There are very few companies even installing it on a commercial level.  This will sound like a catch 22 but part of the reason it's not commercial is slow development which is due to lack of resources because it's not commercial.  Not saying it's a bad thing, just how it is.

I'll wager that if MS purchased Pluto/LMCE and began marketing/developing it there'd be tons of hardware supported. (That's what money can do for you.)

Again, please don't take any of this as knocking LMCE or the devs in any way at all.  I'm just pointing out the advantages of paid development as per the original topic.  I am a big believer in paid for services and I think this project is no exception.

52

Users / Re: Paid Development in Open Source

« on: April 29, 2009, 09:08:59 pm »

I disagree, I think you may be oversimplifying.

Let's use the remote as our example.

As an opensource project, the people that have the knowledge to develop support for that remote including yourself, don't do it, not out of any nefarious reason, just circumstance.  You don't happen to use that remote so it's not priority, you're working on something else that has more importance to you, etc.  For whatever perfectly legitimate reason, it doesn't get done.

Now, as soon as it becomes a situation of monetary compensation the function of that remote moves up the importance scale.  I'm not saying that's a bad thing or that you're a bad person.  In my opinion if you posess a skill that others don't then they should pay you to use it.  I'm saying that "money gets shit done".  That's why I pay for development and will continue to do so.  Because I want the things important to me to get higher priority.

The original topic of this thread was an inquiry into opinion on the appropriateness of paying for development.  My post and this reply demonstrates that development progresses faster if it's paid for.  As in our example, I guarantee that if people like myself HADN'T donated money, there would still be no development on that remote.  Again, no bad reflection on you or any of the developers on this project.  All of you have a lot to do and you're doing it as an aside to your own daily lives, so it's expected to have slower than commercial development.  

But, answer me this, if LMCE were a retail product and it's sales provided enough income that the core developers on the project made a living equal to or better than they currently make, would the development be faster and more hardware supported?  I'm very confident, yes.

I'm not saying one way is better, they're just different, commercial = better/faster support/development, open source = more flexible and cheaper.

53

Users / Re: Paid Development in Open Source

« on: April 29, 2009, 05:43:14 pm »

I'm about to be unpopular.

I think the IDEA of open source is a noble and lofty concept, BUT.  I would, have and will continue to pay for support/development.  Open source is cool, but has anybody noticed that LMCE hardware support seems to be predominantly EOL products?  This is by no fault of anybody, it's just the nature of opensource.  When you're relying on people's free time and/or interest level for development, development will be slower.  Combine that with the fact that hardware vendors aren't going to be as fourthcoming to a Linux market with specifications and driver support as there isn't enough money in it for them.

It's an attractive concept to think that a group of interested people can get together and donate their time and resources to develop a quality product.  LMCE is a testament to that.  However, I believe that opensource will only take you to a certain point (LMCE is also a testament to that).  

I know Linux/Unix people love to bash MS and other companies that make money but it's undeniable that when a new piece of hardware comes out, it will hit the shelf with Windows support.  Hardware vendors know they have to or they won't make money and don't kid yourselves children, making money is what it's all about.  Nvidia doesn't sit around and say "Our new card will make gamers so happy!" they say "We will sell the shit outta these things."  And I don't mind that at all.  If someone has or can provide something I want, I'm happy to pay them for it.  I certainly don't work for free, why should they?

I for one wholeheartedly support paid development.  I would actually support making LMCE a commercial product.  I'd rather pay $1500 for the product and be assured that my new hardware will be supported than have to scrounge around ebay looking for old equipment that works.  (God I'd love to be able to buy a brand new webpad, it pisses me off to no end that I've got a used one sitting on my table.)

The undeniable fact is that money gets shit done.  I don't care what it is, sex, your lawn, whatever it is, you'll get it faster and usually better if you pay for it.

54

Installation issues / Re: LinuxMCE as DHCP server, NOT gateway!

« on: April 16, 2009, 09:03:04 pm »

ROFLMAO.

I'm just trying to prove a point really... The more you guys fight the system, the less it works for you. It's a smart home, and if you spend a bit of time using it as intended, it will work better in the long run.

-Thom

I think I just disagree in my specific situation.  If it were a case of my system was complete and running all the time, I might agree.  But a good example is that my Core is down right now (I crashed it, again).  If the system were setup 'as intended' I would have no internet on any of my PC's.  This is not acceptable.  I do a lot of stuff with my internet connection including hosting a Teamspeak Server, FTP Server and Web Server on a Win2K3 box.  My wife and I play WoW as well so "I know you can't play while I'm at work because the LMCE server is down." would most likely end in divorce and quite possibly physical harm to my person.

In the separate physical network configuration I am taking nothing away from the LMCE installation.  As far as my Core is concerned the setup IS 'as intended', it's just blind to my PC network.

I'm not saying my configuration is better or worse than any other.  I'm saying it's a viable option for those that are in similar circumstances and I have yet to see any negative reprocussions as a result of this configuration.

55

Installation issues / Re: LinuxMCE as DHCP server, NOT gateway!

« on: April 16, 2009, 08:06:13 pm »

Sure, people plug in their laptops, but you just tell it not to ask about it again. Problem solved.

*shake-head*

-Thom

Or, never deal with it at all.
*shake-head*

56

Installation issues / Re: LinuxMCE as DHCP server, NOT gateway!

« on: April 16, 2009, 07:54:40 pm »

... and I don't get any annoying 'found new shit' ...

(-:

I'm not disputing or disagreeing with anything you say, but the intent of the first post in the thread was to attempt to work within the framework of the design of LinuxMCE. As we are so often told to do. And, theoretically, if not in practice, once the core is built, it's built. (Not in practice in the sense that functionality is evolving, not static.)

What I mean by that is that when my kids comes over and plug their laptops in or connect to the wireless, LMCE would give me the 'found new shit'.  With my PC network and LMCE network separate, my Core will only detect hardware I intentionally want to connect to LMCE.

If I understand correctly, could you not accomplish the same functionality you mention by turning off the firewall and DHCP in the core? (Everything being on the same network.)

No, the Core MUST be the DHCP server for your LMCE installation.  I don't know exactly why other than an ass-ton of stuff stops working if it isn't.

57

Installation issues / Re: LinuxMCE as DHCP server, NOT gateway!

« on: April 16, 2009, 07:22:23 pm »

I'm new to LinuxMCE, but not new to networking.  Why not setup another subnet for LinuxMCE?  Leave your existing network in place, setup your core, plug the internet facing nic into your current network, give it a static IP address, then plugin either a cheap switch or another wifi ap (with a different SSId and channel) to the internal NIC on the core, then hang all your MDs off that? 

I believe this would also limit traffic on the LinuxMCE network to only media traffic so you should reduce the chance of stuttering or other media issues.

Hopefully this will work because that's what I intend to attempt to do.

This configuration works swimmingly and is exactly how I run my setup.

LinuxMCE external network plugged into wireless router that serves my home computer networking and internet access.  LinuxMCE gets dynamic 192.168.1.x address.

LinuxMCE internal network plugged into a switch that also has a wireless access point attached.  Running the default 192.168.80.x subnet.

All LinuxMCE related equipment is connected to the internal network via hardwire or wireless to the accesspoint.

The only special configuration is I have to open the LinuxMCE firewall to allow communication from my PC's to LinuxMCE through the external interface. (The 192.168.1.x subnet).

I have run this configuration from day one and I'm very happy with it.  There is no impact on my internal network or my LinuxMCE network and I don't get any annoying 'found new shit' on my Core everytime I plug a laptop/hdd/whatever into my network.  It has the added benefit of maintaining internet connectivity on my PC network even when my Core is down.  (Which is pretty frequent due to my tinkering).

58

Users / Re: Fiire Invisible Replacement

« on: April 14, 2009, 05:50:18 pm »

Anybody have any news on the release of the eee B206?

Last I heard it was to be somewhere around April/May.

59

Users / Re: Full support of Gyration Remote development work - Contributors please post

« on: April 14, 2009, 05:45:09 pm »

Sent a Benji.

Thx Thom

60

Users / Re: Giving credit where it is very due

« on: April 14, 2009, 05:39:22 pm »

WTH?!? I don't get a thank you mention?  I think I posted an answer once too.  (Searches forums.....)  Nevermind, looks like it was a wrong answer.

No, seriously, I have to join in on the lovefest as well.  I think I said in another post that I'm continually amazed at the lengths I've seen devs go to help someone out (one of which has been me).

So, yeah, big thanks to the devs and all the people that help with the project.