I'm surprised no one has mentioned inverter microwaves. Unlike plain old regular microwaves where power settings just adjust the time that the magnetron is running at full blast the inverter ones can actually change the power of the magnetron. Makes it tons easier to cook food evenly and calmly. Never am I buying again one without.
It's kinda hard to find them though. Most manufacturers hardly list this but Bosch seems to have inverters in most of their mid and higher-end ones. My favourite is the Bosch BFL634GB1. Bosch BFL7221B1 was a huge downgrade due to the shitty touch screen and wheel along with a multi-second boot time.
I love inverter microwaves so much. I got a cheap one at Target for maybe $100 or so. I almost never use full power, typically I go for 50% or 60%. Food heats through evenly, every time.
I try and tell friends about it and they all think I am crazy. I've had more luck with induction cook tops, probably because there is more general buzz around them.
I really with Alex on Technology Connections would do a video on inverter microwaves to get the word out!
This explains a lot, American microwaves have these settings for different types of food etc, it seems most people throw something in and just 'nuke it'. European microwave ovens on the other hand, have a setting for different wattages (90W up to 720W 'Max' in my case), which, combined with instructions in the recipe or on the box, provide the right setting for this particular food.
Are you sure that European microwaves actually use continuous power at those wattages and not also "simulate" the wattage by using short bursts of a fixed power?
Some have inverters for continuous power adjusting, others turn on and off the magnetron.
In any case, all that I have ever used have 2 dials, one for power and one for time (and a button to allow to chain multiple time intervals, each with a different power level). I have always used only these 2 dials and I have never used any other buttons that may exist for preset programs.
For many years I have used microwave ovens only for reheating food. Now I consider that I was stupid and I cook all the food that I eat in a microwave oven, from raw ingredients.
This is much better than by traditional means, because it is much faster and perfectly reproducible. Moreover, cooking in a microwave oven removes the need for continuous or periodic stirring that is required in many traditional cooking methods, because the microwave-cooked food is homogeneous (without lumps etc.) even with no stirring, if the time and power level are chosen correctly.
They switch the magnetron on and off, unless they have inverters I guess. I have seen the two knob ones (and I prefer these) and the fancy ones, which all have cryptic user interfaces and usually no manual next to them.
> The inverter models are marginally better at converting the total power they draw from an outlet (the apparent power) to useful work (the active power). However, your residential electricity bill is calculated based on active power use, so an inverter microwave won't save you any money.
If any power company has the ability, much less the inclination, to not charge you for your appliances waste heat that would be news to me.
I wonder why microwaves can't work like modern radio transmitters. Magnetrons generate ~2.4 GHz radio waves using resonance and a strong magnetic field acting on free electron orbits. That was necessary in the 1940s for radar transmitters. But today, solid state electronics generate 2.4 GHz (and higher) waves without any trouble - cf. WiFi and Bluetooth hardware. I'm not the first to have this question, and it looks like there is some ongoing work. https://www.digikey.com/en/blog/will-the-microwave-ovens-mag...
Because transistors for generating even very low microwaves like 2.4GHz are extremely expensive comparatively speaking, and don't produce much power. They're good, though, because you can produce very precisely tuned and modulated signals and very precisely controlled output powers - as long as they're less than a couple of watts.
A cavity magnetron is a block of metal with some holes drilled in, two bits of glass glued on, and all the air sucked out. They're hard to tune to exact frequencies and hard to regulate to exact powers, and modulation is as you've already discovered kind of limited to just turning them on and off - but they're extremely cheap to make, last a very long time, and require minimal support circuitry to generate double-digit kilowatts of RF.
You don't need to be cock on frequency to heat up a pie.
Now there are gallium nitride microwave transistors that can produce very high microwave power at very high efficiency. So that is no longer a limitation.
Microwave ovens with such transistors have been demonstrated, which have the advantage of modulating the microwaves in such a way as to achieve a more uniform heating throughout the oven, than can be achieved with the fixed-frequency magnetrons.
At least for now, such microwave ovens with transistors might be encountered only in some professional applications, because these transistors together with the associated control circuits remain much more expensive than magnetrons.
They are ridiculously expensive, but there was an article in a magazine that said that a certain vendor of ready-to-eat food uses for cooking its food an industrial microwave oven with gallium nitride transistors instead of a magnetron.
Like I have said, the advantage of transistors is that it is easy to modulate in frequency the microwaves. This avoids to have standing waves inside the oven, which cause cold spots and hot spots, so they ensure that heating is uniform everywhere in the oven.
I assume that this advantage is more important for a big industrial oven, where many portions of food are cooked simultaneously and it is desired that all of them are cooked uniformly.
But for home users, magnetrons will not be replaced any time soon.
Ah, thanks, good to know. I thought solid state power electronics had come down in price more than they apparently did. I guess it's high frequency plus high power that's still expensive. For not so high frequencies (< 1 MHz), mass production for ubiquitous switched-mode power supplies and electric cars has surely brought down the price.
(Side note, modern very high power radio transmitters might also still use some vacuum tube technology - my latest information is that there's a slow transition going on)
I had until now (in Europe, for somewhat more than the last 2 decades) a couple of Panasonic microwave ovens.
Both of them match your description. They had some other buttons, which I have never used. Besides the 2 rotary knobs, I use 3 buttons: start, stop and a button for chaining multiple time intervals, each with a different power level.
I cook all the food that I eat in the microwave oven, from raw ingredients.
Unless you have an inverter microwave it simply adjusts the % of the time that the magnetron is turned on. So at 50% you will have the magnetron at full blast 700W for 5 seconds and then 5 seconds off (or similar timestemps). On older microwaves you may be able to hear the magnetron cycling between being on and off.
> My understanding with Mesa is that it has very few dependencies
Some of the shader compilers require LLVM which is a giant dependency to say the least. But with Valve's ACO for RADV I think that could technically be omitted.
The difference probably is that GCC extensions have been stable for decades. Meanwhile Rust experimental features have breaking changes between versions. So a Rust version 6 months from now likely won't be able to compile the kernel we have today, but a GCC version in a decade will still work.
Not that you'd usually need this if you have IPv6 but might still be useful to bypass firewalls or forward access for IPv4 clients from your newer IPv6-only resources.
How do you feel about something like CBOR? In which stage would you say it's stuck in evolution compared to ASN.1 (since you said Protobuf is still TLV)?
CBOR and JSON are just encodings, not schema, though there are schemas for them. I've not looked at their schema languages but I doubt they support typed hole formalisms (though they could be added as it's just schema). And since CBOR and JSON are just encodings, they are stuck being what they are -- new encodings will have compatibility problems. For example, CBOR is mostly just like JSON but with a few new types, but then things like jq have to evolve too or else those new types are not really usable. Whereas ASN.1 has much more freedom to introduce new types and new encoding rules because ASN.1 is schema and just because you introduce a new type doesn't mean that existing code has to accept it since you will evolve _protocols_. But to be fair JSON is incredibly useful sans schema, while ASN.1 is really not useful at all if you want to avoid defining modules (schemas).
I was considering CBOR+CDDL heavily for a project a while so they're a tad intertwined in my head. I very much liked CBOR's capability of being able to define wholly new types and describe them neatly in CDDL. You could even add some basic value constraints (less than, greater equal, etc.). That seemed really powerful and lacking ASN.1 experience it sounds like a very lite JSON-like subset of that.
I recently wanted to do point-to-point Wi-Fi for transferring some data but apparently support for the ad-hoc IBSS mode wasn't available on my MT7925. Wi-Fi Aware is completely new to me and didn't come up while searching on the topic at all. I can't find anything about using it on Linux now either. Anybody have any references on its support?
There's a single kernel commit referencing Wi-Fi Aware from 2023 [0].
iw supposedly supports a few commands pertaining to it [1].
The WiFi Alliance has a habit of always have a marketing name and a different name in the spec, you'll a lot more references to it in places like WPA supplicant if you search for Neighbor Awareness Networking (NAN). Also here is the link to the spec https://www.wi-fi.org/system/files/Wi-Fi%20Aware%20Specifica...
Any WiFi operation besides STA is in general a crapshoot, especially if the card is not meant for use in an AP. WiFi hardware vendors can't be bothered to provide fully usable stacks for anything else (if even that).
For example Intel's broken Location Aware Regulatory completely breaks any use-cases where your device is not the STA (on anything besides 2.4GHz). Most cards also have no DFS support, meaning you'll be left with a microscopic usable segment. Then there's also the problem with incorrect regulatory information.
All of which in the end makes reliable high-speed point-to-point operation very annoying to achieve. Even if it'd be totally legal. Leaving you with a terribly slow link.
Adhoc was the coolest thing, I still miss it. One day in 2002-ish, I was showing a friend some photos on my laptop and noticed a crowd had gathered over my shoulder, and there simply wasn't enough room for everyone to get a good view.
"Fire up adhoc, set it to this ssid, vnc to this address"
Two minutes later, my photos are on five screens around the coffee shop and everyone can see.
Adhoc just worked, and that's more than I can say for a great many things before or since.
My windows laptop supports creating a wifi hotspot. It even allows sharing my upstream wifi internet connection over the hotspot, which I wasn't aware was a thing until recently (my Pixel 7 also supports this). I'm sure you could do the same thing with Linux with the right incantation. Not as cool as adhoc but it's also a paradigm people are very familiar with these days.
The explicitly includes Cloudflare as one of the big services they currently used and needed to excise from their life as part of this move. Promoting consolidation from many providers to one while also switching from a generic solution to a vendor locked-in one would probably be a downgrade in their book.
It's kinda hard to find them though. Most manufacturers hardly list this but Bosch seems to have inverters in most of their mid and higher-end ones. My favourite is the Bosch BFL634GB1. Bosch BFL7221B1 was a huge downgrade due to the shitty touch screen and wheel along with a multi-second boot time.
reply