PilotGOne is a GO game viewer and recorder for PalmOS. It uses the Smart Game Format (SGF) for input and output. PilotGOne can play back existing SGF files with variations and comments, and it can also be used as a board for stand-alone play. It uses only 42 Kb of Palm Pilot memory, and it supports comments, marks/labels, and annotations. Other features include Zoom-In for bigger image, editing of game records, sorting/searching of games, handicaps, Komi, and board sizes 5x5, 9x9, 13x13, and 19x19.
Battery Panel is a system preference panel for PalmOS which displays the current battery settings. If your handheld supports user-changeable batteries (Alkaline, NiCad), the battery type can be chosen. The warning and critical (shut off) voltages can also be set. All settings will survive a soft reset. Battery Panel is an application, and it does not patch any system trap (unlike a hackmaster hack).
Re: Difference between SCP and SFTP?
> Maybe i'm just to stupid but are those
> to the same or different Protocols?
> But thanks for the chroot ssh part of
> the tutorial, it helped me a lot.
FTP is a (separate, obsolete) protocol for file transfer. It has no encryption, and cannot unless the client and server agree beforehand on a separate encryption layer -- in which case the encryption has nothing to do with FTP.
SSH is a protocol for encrypted network sessions. The common use for this is remote command shells, but a file transfer can be done using (among others) SFTP, a command protocol carried over SSH and designed to look like FTP.
They are completely separate protocols, with separate feature sets and requiring completely separate programs (both for client and server), but SFTP is designed to allow the user to use it as though it was FTP.
Releasing specs is the only answer.
> The other reason why vendors don't support linux
> most of the time for commidity hardware such as
> webcam is low returns on investments. They're
> already writing drivers for Win98 WDM/Win2k WDM
> (they're not the same binary wise, and you still
> have to verify that the drivers work correctly on
> both OSs), Win95, Win95SE, and sometimes Win NT4.
They shouldn't have to write drivers for yet
another OS. If they bent to the pressure from
Linux users and released drivers for Linux
kernels, then they'd just come under pressure
again when the *BSD users what to use it. This,
as you say, is a foolish way to spend resources.
The way for these companies to support all
operating systems, maximising their market share,
is to release hardware specs sufficient for other
people to write the drivers for whatever OS they
choose. Zero investment on the company's part,
and the market decides which platforms they want
> The returns that these
> companies make developing drivers for
> 4 or 5 OSs already is probably pretty low.
They are hardware companies; why are they spending
so much time and money on writing software and
keeping it current?
> Not to mention the fact of licensing issues, etc.
> Sometimes companies don't own the technology that
> they use in devices and the company that controls
> it won't release programming information.
Then they have painted themselves into a corner,
and they have no-one to blame for their wasted
efforts on writing and maintaining drivers for a
This is where the pressure needs
to come from; the hardware companies should
realise that they must get themselves in a
release full specs for their hardware, otherwise
companies that are able to do so will eat their
lunch because they can be supported on every
current operating system with no extra investment
from the company.
> The only way to fix this is for linux to get
> enough market share to be able to make
> demands for hardware support.
No, this is just as short-term as asking for BeOS
as an extra platform; it places more burden on the
hardware company for very little return, and is no
help at all when then ext great platform arrives
with its hordes of users screaming for support.
Hardware companies -- don't spend
on writing binary-only drivers that you must
continue to support for as long as your users
scream at you -- do release full specs to your
hardware so that people can use your hardware in
many more places than you can spend money to support.