Digital Lifestyle

Well, Microsoft to the rescue.

I had given up on my EyeTV streaming setup from India. The only way I could get it to work without constantly rebuffering was if I dropped the quality down to the point that it was practically unwatchable.

It used port 2170 and my router has a limited number of entries for port mapping and I needed to set up something else so I ended up removing that map from the router.

Tonight I decided to give it a try again but since I didn't have any free port mapping entries on the router, I thought I'd try setting it up to use reverse-proxying/URL-rewriting on my Windows server.

That seems to have fixed everything.

I think the problem is that my Internet connection here is subject to some really strange traffic shaping. It's a 512kbps connection in theory but when I look at the diagnostics on the DSL modem, I see that the link itself is 2.4Mbps. The throttling is happening at the ISP side of the link. With the help of Activity Monitor, I'm able to see how they're applying that. My actual throughput jumps up and down faster than the DJIA. Over the course of 15 seconds, it peaks at 1.2Mbps and then drops to 16kbps.

I suspect the HTTP server built into EyeTV doesn't deal well with that but I think IIS on the Windows Server caches the stream from EyeTV and delivers it more gracefully to my system here with the wonky connection.

Whereas before I could only get an uninterrupted stream by setting the bitrate to 90kbps or less, I can now get a stable stream at 320kbps.

I think this is the closest thread for appropriateness...

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3ieedb56d6b7d31495515d322a83bdd347

The camel's nose is sniffing around the tent. At least the FCC didn't *completely* roll over.

DPDA (double post, days apart):

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/05/11/leaked-telcos-secret.html

Go figure... astroturfing.

Triple post, double salchow:

Ok, maybe, maybe not. Seems convoluted enough to actually be both.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20004758-38.html

Wasn't quite sure what category to post this in, if any. Here's a captcha I got at bloglines yesterday:

peter, did you mean to place that link as an img? i was going to select the text to copy, and saw that all of it dragged, rather than highlighted.

that said, I do believe you have long declined to be shmucky.

ddt

DDT and gang,

I didn't intend to post that message until I'd found a suitable place on the web to host the image. Ooops. But while I'm at it, any recommendations?

imgur.com

Image not loading for me.

There must be some sort of referrer checking going on. Open in a new window worked for me.

And me as well.

Definitely sending a message there, hmm?

If anyone who cares to hasn't seen it yet, this is the image that was broken in the earlier post. It was a captcha from Bloglines, and it was not Photoshopped, or otherwise phonied up far as I can tell. I try not to take it personally.






Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/02/2010 06:09AM by peter.

I got the exact same two words when I attempted to post a reply, and did not proceed past this step.

Are they always those two words?

http://mac360.com/index.php/mac360/comments/say_goodbye_to_mac_os_x_hello_to_ios_for_mac/

You know, the naming of iOS makes the iMac the one big question in all this.

On the one hand, I am sure the Mac OS is a big market that Apple doesn't want to kill. And it's crucial for development on the iOS. Heck, it still boggles my mind that without a computer you can't activate the iPad (misstep!).

On the other hand… 

Why not? This would make sense as Mac OS 11 or rather iOS X? Apple gets to take a cut of all software sold. Apple gets to control the experience ever more.

I see it happening at first via an Apple Netbook. Think an iPad with a built-in keyboard. Or maybe Apple develops a new keyboard that can attach to the a modified iPad? That's almost a no-brainer. The current bluetooth keyboard is too big to accompany an iPad.

But the gals had a point. No mention of OS X in the WWDC. Um, problem?

Quote

This would make sense as Mac OS 11 or rather iOS X?

It would also spare us Mac OSX 11 Tabby, to be followed by Mac OSX 12 Moggy ..... ;-)

Aside from the names of housecats, I'm not too worried about the lack of Mac OS in the keynote. I'd rather Apple not put crap into the OS simply to have something to talk about. The iDevices are where things are hot, so take advantage of it. I don't have the time this morning to give a full run-down but pick your favorite application (or one that you hate, but have to have). When new versions come out that are simply color scheme changes or esoteric feature additions, aren't you pissed off? Additionally, I fully believe that just because Apple is not talking about the Mac OS, it is not dead. Public statements reinforce that.

I don't think full-blown OS X is going to be going anywhere, but there are lots of places where iOS would be great. There would still need to be a lot of work done though. I could see this being great for schools and other places with labs, but you would need to allow multiuser logins, be able to mount network shares, print etc.

I'd rather see Mac App Store. The iTunes/App store(s) really drive freshness.

No link at hand, but one of TSO's recent public responses was no to Mac app store from Apple. I think there is someone else trying a similar concept though, Bodega.