Robotics – Wireless Controls: A starter

I have been working to enter the RoboCup International in the Rescue Robot League division. I have been developing methods of controlling the robot wirelessly from a computer.

I just thought I would share a few starting tips with my readers – in case any of you are also in the same age category as me, and interested. File attached.

Robot Wireless.pdf

Testing Linux under VMware

Introduction

I love testing out new Linux distributions. But I hate installing a Linux distribution, only to find that the one I had before was far better. I also spend most of my time is spent under Windows Vista, because no Linux can satisfy the two major demands of mine: Adobe CS and Microsoft Office 2007.

Yet, when I need to reboot into Linux for network related activity or just feeling the speed and stability of Linux, I have to shut down all my Windows programs, including the many servers I run on my university network (just for fun, of course).

And thus, I turned to VMware, so I could at least test out my distros before burning them in and installing them to my hard disk partitions.

Of course, I had know about VMware, but I had not been bothered enough to go through the hassle of getting a copy, and moreover, I could hardly spare another 10-15 GBs of hard disk space on my already full hard disk. But I just recently bought myself a 500GB external hard disk, and there I was, ready to spare VMware some space.

Using it

VMware has it’s site here. Mind that you obtain the Workstation, not just the free Player.

Actually, VMware is rather easier to use than I ever expected. It is simply a case of install, click and run. There’s a fine little wizard to guide you through the process of creating a virtual machine, and if it detects the version of Linux you have from the ISO image, even easier.

But even under ‘Advanced’ mode, things are hardly any challenge: if you know how to install Linux in dual boot configuration, this virtual machine setup will not break your sweat. All you have to do is to specify the virtual machine’s working directory, and the settings you want for your virtual machine, as well as a few other minor parameters. Elementary.

One necessary trick, though is to know the version of Linux that you run. In most cases, it will not correctly detect the latest Linux distros, so during the machine setup, it gives you a long menu of Linux types to manually choose from. In most cases, your field will lie under ‘Other 2.6.x kernel’

When you run the virtual machine, you get a full computer in a computer, and you use exactly as you would a physical computer. And that, is what makes things so much fun.

Furthermore, the virtual machines so created are portable – and they can be be run on any operating system where the free VMware Player is installed. Most communication between the guest OS and other OSes (whether outside the host OS, or as other virtual OSes or the host itself) is done via a virtual network. Like I said earlier, it is not much to grapple with – at least for someone ready enough to try virtualisation.

There are other fine features too, my favourite being ‘Unity’, that kind of melds the guest operating system into the host, and allowing copy & paste operations from the host to the guest.

But these advanced features need a little software installed inside the guest OS, called VMware tools. Once again, this is easier done than said – all it takes is clicking ‘Install VMware tools’ in the Workstation menu. For Linux, this loads up a virtual CD drive containing an archived Perl script that you run to install.

Performance & the nags

Of course, virtualisation has its downsides. Sometimes, things that work on your virtual machines may not work on the direct native installation, and vice versa.

But most importantly of all, there is a massive performance hit. Not only to the guest operating system, but the host operating system too. That is because unless you have a really powerful computer will loads of RAM (in fact, 2GB is my recommended minimum), and a lot of processing power to boot (1.8 GHz dual core processor, at least), you will really be stretching your computer to its limit. And that is not very unexpected, after all, you are running more than one complete OS on a single system.

Price is a bit of a problem too: it costs a good $190 to buy a single license, if you are planning to keep it for anything more than 30 days.

Final words

If computing power is not short on demand (as for me), and you have disk space to spare, and most importantly, it serves your purpose to be able to run one or more OSes simultaneously from inside another OS, then this is worth your time (and money). For distro hoppers, this is a useful item to have on your system.

P.S. The first major Linux distribution that I am testing is Mint 6. My review should be ready once I have given this upcoming distro my ‘harsh’ treatment.

Another Logic Project – Temperature Detection and Control

This is another of the projects I was working on for my EE221 course in my third semester just now.

It is a temperature detection and control mechanism – just modify to meet your specs.

Download Here.

Touch Switch Design Schematics

It has been some time since I last posted. That was because I was doing a small project for my third semester Circuit Analysis course. My project was to make a Touch Plate switch, that would switch on/off at the slightest touch, without any pressing required at all.

I have uploaded the schematics for download. They would be very useful for someone else designing a circuit, or just some slightly intelligent fellow who wanted to replace the light switches in his house something more fancy.

Download here.

How to Buy a Computer for Your Needs

This is not exactly my usual run-of-the-mill stuff, but since I wrote a post or two about benchmarks not being the ultimate say in computer buying decisions, I have had mails requesting me to elaborate on how to buy a good computer. So I decided to dedicate this small post to an answer. I do not pretend to be an expert, but I can still provide a few small hints:

Important: Learn not to be awed by what marketers throw at you, and the specifications you see! Stick to what you had in mind.

• Look at your budget. As a general rule, there are two best ways to buy a computer:
  1. Fit the best computer to your budget
  2. Fit the most economical computer to your needs
• Further, there can be two ways to get a computer:
  1. Buy a branded box (more expensive, but sure to end you up with a good PC)
  2. Buy the components, and make up the PC (less expensive but required a little know-how about PC parts and combinations)
• The exact choice depends entirely on you, and how much time and money you can spare.

• The internet is your tool. Whenever buying a branded computer, making one from components, or a laptop, be sure to to check out the reviews around the internet. And not only ‘editorials’ and ‘expert reviews’ but also ‘user reviews’ which are often more helpful than the expert reviews in pointing out flaws and performance issues, even if they are rather subjective.
• A computer’s final performance should at least be equal to the sum of its parts, or perhaps even more. Some combinations of hardware work particularly well – in my experience, AMD and ATI hardware couples well, as does Intel and Nvidia.
• Performance is purely subjective: the computer should ‘feel’ fast, and run the software you want in the way you want. Other metrics are all eyewash. For the same price, one computer can be faster than the other.
• If you are buying a laptop or a branded PC, see if you can do a hands on test. It helps to see if the object you are buying is up to your needs.
• If you are buying a Windows Vista system, the Windows Experience Index is a handy little rating of what your system is capable of – many applications and games for Windows are rated by this, so you can know beforehand what your platform will be able to run.
• Unless you are buying a gaming rig, go for maximum performance per unit price. At the higher end of the performance spectrum, large inputs of cash bring only marginal improvements in performance. Avoid them.
• Always invest in the largest hard-disk capacity you can.
• Remember to buy a balanced computer, no matter what the salespeople tell you. A computer is only as fast as the slowest component (for general work), and computer with a very powerful processor, and lots of RAM is crippled without a strong complement of graphics processing.

This is hardly a conclusive list. But this includes many points that people often forget when buying. Addition of points to this list will be welcome!

AMD and Intel (and Nvidia) – How Things Stand

Much has been written about how Intel has trumped over AMD cleanly in recent times, with it’s Dual and Quad Core processor (Santa Rosa, Penryn, Nehalem, etc).

Well, to begin with, do no take this article as review. This is just a opinion, a presentation of kinds. This article will not help you buy a processor – this is not a buying guide. This is simply for reading pleasure.

Intel’s processors are good. Almost all current reviews rate Intel processors over AMD in terms of general benchmarks. Even in terms of performance per unit money, many now call the balance in favour of Intel, particularly in the Dual Core domain.

However, things are not as simple as they seem. Read my full case against benchmarking here, or read on for a short recap:

… benchmarking does not make sense for regular desktop use. I am not interested in the speed score of the computer I am going to buy (or already have, but want to compare), I want to know if it gets the things I want done faster than others that compete. And in that kind of test, I have often found benchmarks to be awful liars: my laptop does the exact same sequence of Photoshop processes, video conversions, Matlab compilations and webserving faster than another computer with 3DMark, PCMark scores considerably than my own…

…benchmarks may often be optimized for one specific kind of computer hardware. For example, nowadays, Intel processors of the Core 2 Duo breed are said to be triumphing over the AMD 64 X2 processors – based on benchmarks. But what if the benchmark algorithms are more optimized for Intel processors? They would then obviously be faster on the Intel! Even more complicated, I do know of a few benchmark results that run faster on an AMD Turion X2 than a Core 2 Duo Mobile of the same specifications, while other tests run faster on the Intel. Is it fair to say that the Intel is faster simply because it tops more benchmarks? After all, it all depends upon the hardware environment each processor is set in…

…One benchmark may test the processor for super number crunching, whereas that computer may normally be used for, say, multimedia. Another benchmark may test multitasking, when the computer’s main use may be Adobe Photoshop. That is where the problem lies: benchmarks are often portrayed – and accepted – as absolute ranks, when they are almost always relative to task specific requirement…

This, then, is where problems come in: how do you test a processor for power? Truth is, that may actually be impossible without actually having the exact requirements, and the final, optimized hardware build for that processor.

And that is where AMD is still holding fort: there are benchmarks that AMD still tops, particularly in the domain of super fast linear computing.

People have even begun to claim that AMD is going down the drain, while Intel has become dominant. I am inclined to agree. AMD, while having a history of comebacks, is simply cash-strapped. They have recently been forced to split their company into two, a section each for design and fabrication. That is an ode to how powerful Intel actually is. And while we may not want a competition less Intel (that would send prices skywards), it does prove that Intel is the strongest player in the game.

However, AMD never ceases to surprise. Their most recent shot was not in the processor industry, but the graphics: after years of yielding their graphics card market to Nvidia, they suddenly bounced back recently with the ATI (a.k.a AMD) Radeon HD 4870 X2 graphics card, and blasted apart the integrated graphics chipset market with the 780G.

And Intel may soon be in line: courtesy, the AMD Fusion Processor with integrated GPU. Intel has no real plans to counter such an innovation, to the best of my knowledge.

Last Words

So. As things stand, AMD is bumped and Intel is flying. But this is a phase that AMD may come out of in the near future, since the company restructuring. Moreover, AMD’s innovation (and Intel’s lack of imagination) may once again put AMD in a position to attack. For users, that will mean another glorious era of high speeds and low prices.