Lucy Linux, Dressed to Kill 175
An anonymous reader sent us a fairly positive article
about Linux but
written primarily from the perspective of a Mac advocate. Talks
a lot about KDE, the usability issues and similiarities between
Mac and Linux advocacy.
Thanks for the compliment! (Score:1)
Although I do a lot of stuff, most of my work has been in typesetting for print projects.
Let me give you some background in the print world.
It used to be, with photolithography, that typesetters would take other people's copy and generate a photographic print (a 'whiteprint') of it. This was usually just a long column of text, with minimal formatting, in one of a relatively small number of typefaces. Whiteprints of copy and of photos would then go to the compositors, who would arrange everything, by hand, on sheets of paperboard. The whiteprints were affixed to it with wax. Then that went to platemaking, a lithographic plate was made via a photographic method and the plate went to the pressroom and they put it on a roller and printed with it.
It was a fscking nightmare, but there was no way out.
When computers first began to enter the print world, they were used chiefly by typesetters. I myself once used some of this stuff in school, after it had been outdated. The typesetter would type stuff into the computer, and if any formatting was required, like italicizing something, control codes very similar to HTML or TeX were used. Then it printed directly to film, and you still made a whiteprint. So it wasn't a big improvement.
PageMaker (and the infrastructure of the Macintosh, PostScript and cheap ($7000) laser printers) changed this. Basically they merged the typesetters and compositors, by putting a virtual compositing setup on the computer. It was a lot faster to slide stuff around onscreen and get photoready laser prints than to use the old methods. The adoption of the Mac for printing purposes was incredibly fast.
BUT ONLY BECAUSE WAX WAS A PAIN IN THE ASS. The old method was still used, just on the screen, rather than in the real world.
Generally, everyone in the print world is very, very conservative. If something is working, it is left alone. If something is broken, it's fixed as rapidly as possible. If something can be sped up, it is. The reason is the almighty deadline. We don't screw around looking for better ways to do stuff, because we'd waste time looking. We don't waste time looking for the right way to fix stuff, because we'd waste time when a kludge will do. And as long as the budget holds out, we'd add anything if it'll shave off five minutes. (Case in point: An HP laser printer was having problems printing 10MB TIFFs. So they overnighted 64MB of RAM for the printer, figuring that it might help. It did but was probably not the 'right' solution. If the 'right' solution would have taken longer, they wouldn't have bothered)
So currently 90% of everyone uses Macs, with XPress or PageMaker, Illustrator or Freehand and Photoshop. The remaining 10% either still use the old paste up methods, or use Wintel (usually not by choice but by fiat of the MIS)
While a lot of us know how to keep the Macs running, and have some technical savvy, they still aren't willing to fsck about with a good thing. That's just a matter of fixing things fast, without waiting for repairmen. Most couldn't care less, because they're DESIGNERS. The computer is just a way to avoid wax-based paste-up, but has little intrinsic value.
So why would these sorts of people care about Linux? Free software is not really important, as it's management's job to pay for it. And they do. Hardware and type are much more expensive than software (Adobe's full type library is something like $15,000, and that's just ONE foundry. This is why we all pirate type). Further, everyone would have to learn how to use Linux, how to keep it working properly, and how to use all of the new programs. All this to get back to where we started, and which would likely involve the missing of a few deadlines.
And we do not like to miss deadlines. If Microsoft is only a month late, it's a miracle. If we're two days late we will probably never see the client again. Print is not good for one's social life. OTOH, it's probably very similar to software development, but possibly on LSD and PCP simultaneously. (YMMV; everyone likes to gripe about their jobs)
So even if Linux has all of the tools we need, for free, they have to be significantly better in ways that are probably unimaginable now, for people to look into them. The only reason that we use computers is because they are exactly like paste-up, but without wax, and the waste of time involved in outputting all the pieces. It's not because of a love of computers, I can tell you that.
TeX, from my brief look at it (I'm much more interested in computers than most of my colleagues) isn't sufficinently similar to paste up to win many friends. It may be good at doing books, but so is Quark, with it's stylesheets and master pages, and we already HAVE Quark, and it's good for other things besides.
The GIMP offers a subset of Photoshop's functionality, and we already HAVE Photoshop, which is good for more stuff than the GIMP. Like CYMK, which is more commonly used than RGB. If you could invent a CYMK monitor, you'd get rich fast off of all the designers who would buy them (RGB/CYMK conversions are very annoying in the resulting color shifts. That's why color correction is such a big deal. sRGB is awful, btw)
So by and large, most Photoshop users are unlikely to become aware of the GIMP and even if they were, wouldn't care. The sole exception is among the lucky few who work on projects that are exclusively in RGB. Which is to say new media and the web. And there are damn few web designers who get to work on projects that don't inherit art from more important or preexisting print projects (CYMK again)
Worse yet for your argument, most Photoshop users are designers. Precious few designers can program. So finding a team to develop MacGIMP is tricky. On Linux, very many users are programmers, so it's not quite as tough.
And as for 'nor does it mean you have a clue,' let me tell you something: Not one professional designer that I have ever met knew about the GIMP. One had a vague idea about Linux. I am an _extremely_ well-informed designer. And I like to think of myself as competent too, thanks very much.
You see, what we do is function as a black box, accepting the requirements of clients and outputting something they're willing to accept, on a deadline so tight that if it were an ass, it would crap diamonds (pardon my french). For the GIMP to win acceptance among the large body of people who would actually use it - people who currently use photoshop, it would have to have not only all of the functionality of the latter, but be so similar as to make a transition from program to another quick and painless, coexist with all the stuff that has come before, and make something much better in our lives, like DTP did in a paste-up world. The GIMP falls way short.
Hopefully it will improve - I'd like it to. But I just can't spare time for something that isn't all there yet.
Ctrl-u is your friend! (Score:1)
Just click in the Location: box and type
Ctrl-u and it will erase the URL.
_steve
Yet another nice mascot... (Score:1)
Great article (Score:1)
suggests a point that he doesn't state as such.
The idea is *nix, whatever the flavor, is the wave
of the future.
You gotta love that.
The Linux Lynx! (Score:1)
eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeew, get it away
Mmmmmm.... (Score:1)
Course I'd probably have to compete with Tux for her favour. And he'd probably kick my ass. Maybe if I'm lucky Lucy will kick my ass.
Funny indeed... (Score:1)
Also, there are alternative OS's for Macs, both 68k and PPC. Allow me to submit NetBSD [netbsd.org], OpenBSD [openbsd.org], BeOS [be.com], and LinuxPPC [linuxppc.com] for consideration. My Mac Centris (old, I know) runs NetBSD and MacOS...the primary functions of MacOS are, 1. booting NetBSD, and 2. Downloading packages to my Newton MessagePad.
All in all, I found it a nice look into the mind of a Mac addict as he views the Linux phenomenon.
Scripts are easy. (Score:1)
A drag & drop applescript to change file/creator type is really easy to write, and those sorts of scripts are handy to have around to do batch changes as well. All the tools are included in the Apple Extras folder to write the scripts. Also ResEdit can change creator/file types easily and is easy to use - open the file, choose get info from the file menu, and edit away - just don't mess with the rest of the resource fork. As far as easily opening files in other applications - just drag & drop 'em. Spring loaded folders make this especially easy now.
IF WOMEN WERE OPEN SOURCE.... (Score:1)
Women are open source. However, due to the use of built in options packaging and firmware controlled interfacing, they conflict with all known architectures...
eh... file types? (Score:1)
Those files were part of the desktop database which tracks file types, and also tracks the information so that when you put the disk back in the drive the relative positions of things on the disk and desktop follows, which is really useful if you are using a mac. So what if a few tiny invisible files appear on your disk? They are very useful from the Mac side, and can be deleted if you do not want them. As far as it goes they should be invisible for a typical user because they would have no benefit from editing them, and could screw up the way the file system is handled if they removed them. Those files did not have any serious effect on your disk or hurt you or your media in any way.
The most aggravating thing about certain Linux/BSD advocates is their railing against FUD, and then pulling out their own lies and FUD to bash Macs. Your price quotes are unrealistic (you could pay that much, but only if you were stupid, and did no research), and MacOS Server's GUI is not particularly bloated/slow. It is true that as the next phase of OpenStep/NextStep it does have a lot of features, but if you want to kill them you can. BTW - There are many companies that offer hardware upgrades, if you want an IBM or a Motorola PPC upgrade then you can take your pick and get them from various dealers - though not from Apple who generally do not sell upgrades.
linuxchiq (Score:1)
going to have to live my life without such beauty.
I even like the nickname, 'bubbles'.
The Cray really is a damn sexy computer. Just wish that girl would put some clothes on and get
out of the way
Lucy Linux (Score:1)
Abita Purple Haze (Score:1)
eh... file types? (Score:1)
Personally, I think "the right way" to do it is either to autodetect filetypes, or to *always* have an easy way to open a file in another application.
I've had to copy files off of a CD and use Norton Utilities on a Mac to change a creator type to view a movie before, because it was associated with the wrong application, and I've had even more trouble with text files that are too big to open in SimpleText.
This is a Mac feature that I don't consider to be user-friendly, due to the lack of useful options.
a vulnerable industry (Score:1)
I understand... why listen to him... but Ill tell you this... I know him, and he is
miss mac (Score:1)
Damn, I need a bucket of cold water to pour on my head now.
Apple: HW or SW company? (Score:1)
Apple's main problem is that when it comes to letting you run non-Apple OS's on their hardware they act like the hardware sales are unimportant compared to their software sales, and when it comes to running their software on someone else's hardware, they act as if the software sale is unimportant compared to the hardware.
In a way, this gives them the worst of both worlds... all the liabilities of both and advantages of neither.
Cutting off cloning is vastly inconsistent with their decision to not be friendly to alternate OS's running on their hardware.
Phil Fraering "Humans. Go Fig." - Rita
this Mac user's first impressions of Linux (Score:1)
Linux and Macintosh (Score:1)
Daniel
this Mac user's first impressions of Linux (Score:1)
It's not something that's directly obvious to someone used to a different interface. Both Windows and MacOS have Edit menus with the options so someone could, in theory, find them. It also requires a "middle" mouse button, which not everyone has.
-Virgil
--
linuxchiq; Miss Mac, the woman who did me wrong (Score:1)
Beer recipe: free! #Source
Cold pints: $2 #Product
I still prefer Rosie... (Score:1)
Escape from the Matrix. Choose Linux.
Beer recipe: free! #Source
Cold pints: $2 #Product
I hear Linux runs on the Mac. (Score:1)
Damn! Now I need a cold shower too. So much for conserving water
Have you worked on a car much? (Score:1)
Call Mazda and ask for instructions on how to fix the engine. You can get from Mazda:
Part Descriptions
Part Specfications
Placement of the parts
how to remove the parts
how to replace/repair the parts
Specs on how the engine functions
places to go for repair if you really @#$% it up
damn near everything you need to build the damn thing
Ask Microsoft for similar help and you get
Code?...nope.
Application hooks for optimial program function?...not the last time I checked.
How Windows runs?...not likely.
Help when it @#$%s up?...they tell you to reinstall.
There was a joke spreading through E-Mail that you probally read called Car95...that explains the attitude about Microsoft
My Two Coppers
Phoenix
miss mac (Score:1)
You misspelled... (Score:1)
HTH
Negative stereotypes cut both ways... (Score:1)
eh... file types? (Score:1)
It's absolute nonesense for an OS to do that. Don't put mystery files on my media without my permission. Don't presume I need you to tell me what app to use with what file. I'll tell you what I want done. Extensions can be useful, especially because they give the user pertinent information. The user can then make the important decisions. The MacOS's most annoying trait is assuming the user is a flaming idiot.
Of course, from what Mac users I know, it may be an appropriate assumption if your willing to pay over 5000 dollars for a G3, when you could by equivalent hardware from Dell for almost half the cost, and install your choice of *nixes (FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, RedHat, Debian, SUSE) on it. Not only will you have saved money on hardware, but you won't be bound to a single company for further hardware upgrades (gee, I want a new chip, let's get an AMD rather than an Intel!) and won't have to pay as much for software as you did for your hardware (hm...MacOSX, a BSD4.4 derivative which is slowed by a Mach microkernel sitting between the BSD kernel and the hardware and a bloated, slow GUI for several hundered dollars, or FreeBSD...a BSD developed beyond the 4.4 release of BSD for 3 versions for free! Tough choice here...). The smart money's on an inexpensive PC box and *BSD/Linux distribution (whatever is your flavor of the month).
Photoshop & GIMP? (Score:1)
Sigh. Look, I do web and print design for a living. It's not much of a living, but anyhow....
What would really make the GIMP become a serious contender to Photoshop is a Mac binary. My box is not currently supported by Linux, although it should be soon. But even so, I'll be damned if I'm going to reboot, when my layout and illustration programs (Quark XPress/Adobe PageMaker and Adobe Illustrator/Macromedia Freehand) are on the Mac side. Having to use the GIMP under Linux is unacceptable to me, and I'm a pretty liberal designer, with an interest in linux, beos, etc. Most designers would balk at the thought of anything that would even possibly, maybe screw up their systems, which are known quantities, even if they still sometimes crash.
What the GIMP people need to do is out Photoshop Photoshop, and on its own turf, too boot. Few people in design and production are willing to have overlapping programs (outside of prepress, where you want to have all programs). Quark OR PageMaker. Illustrator OR Freehand. Photoshop OR... uh... heh. Well there is no viable alternative yet. Not professionally pal. And I'm a professional.
Give me Photoshop or give me the GIMP with CYMK support, colorsync support, Mac binaries, better undo/text support/paths/scaling than Photoshop....
I do think that with effort the GIMP could become a competitor to Photoshop. But until it's every day, in every way, better, it's not going to win too many friends in the design world. Sorry.
Just call me atropos (Score:1)
@gryphon.auspice.net
Those three letters are "cpt" of course.
But within walls of esoteric knowledge & equip (Score:1)
I think you may have misunderstood me.
Minor evolutionary advances are no problem. Especially if they help satisfy our need for speed (or are percieved to do so). Personally, I've been wanting to experiment with the MacOS X Server that Apple's just released, since I think that the Un*x underpinnings could save a lot of time rebooting, and read-only disk images could protect against virii. Don't misconstrue the crashing thing by the way; the Mac's font system is old and has been extended I don't know how many times. Furthermore, since we tend to exceed these limits, and for project management reasons, we use a lot of software that is known to cause instability, betting that we'll save more time not having to shuffle stuff around. Plus this is only my impression, and I'm sure a lot of designers have trouble-free setups.
Anyhow, the problem is with major evolutionary changes. (the last revolutionary change was probably the use of photography. Computer design generally uses metaphors and extensions of what we had) Moving from the MacOS to Linux, and from our current tools to new tools is not really as major as I may have inadvertantly made it appear, but it's no walk in the park either.
We'd have to ditch much of our existing skills and either learn or retrain on using and maintaining Linux systems (we frequently get grief from MIS with Macs, so why would they want to help with Linux?), learn or retrain for the new software. The GIMP is quite similar to Photoshop, so actually it would probably present the easiest change. However, rebooting from one OS to another in order to use different programs is not going to be acceptable. The illustration software you pointed out in a previous branch looked interesting, but I didn't have the chance to try it out (still awaiting Linux for my particular Mac). TeX, I must argue though, is not awfully useful anymore. Sure, it's great for typesetters, and I'll agree readily that it's pretty certainly one of the most bug-free programs ever. But the holy trinity of design (right now) is Compositing, Vector Editing and Raster Editing. (Embodied in Quark, Illustrator and Photoshop. PageMaker and Freehand are also fairly popular) Most of us in the print world function more as compositors than typesetters for any job large enough to require much of a style guide.
Typesetting functions for anything of that length (books, really) are either performed by authors who use computers or the small group of typesetters still remaining. (a lot of them are secretaries who either moonlight or are pressed into service. Also graduate students ;)
Although I couldn't try it out to be sure, ImPress didn't impress me very much as a compositing program, only as an illustration program. Trust me on this, compositing with an illustration program is not all that much fun. I've seen people who used Illustrator and Freehand for that purpose, and they could have saved a lot of time by using Quark or PageMaker.
And worst of all, a lot of existing documents would be lost if we changed over to different programs. That would mean a whole lot of time lost if a client wanted another print run, or had a minor change to make (especially a global change, like inserting a page someplace other than the end) VERY good programs for converting proprietary data formats without losing data or screwing up positioning, etc. would be essential for this task. Adobe is releasing a new program called InDesign (or something like that) which is supposed to replace PageMaker and compete with Quark. So they included a converter that is supposed (so the rumor says) to convert Quark files with 99% accuracy. If they hadn't done that, few people would be likely to switch.
So using the GIMP necessitates using a whole new set of programs, using a new operating system and the loss of specific device drivers for esoteric equipment and for the early adopters, loss of compatability (or the perception of compatability) with the rest of the dtp groups in the world. And of course the standard concerns (which don't have to be valid to have a real effect) about switching to Linux.
This is still a very large evolutionary step, and while I'd certainly like to use Linux, I just can't get my work done as quickly (if at all) on it right now. In the future this may not be the case, and then Linux and the programs available for it will have met the conditions for engendering a changeover. Think of the dilemma developers would face if a platform had an editor and a linker and no compiler. That's what we've got, only designers usually don't have the ability to code for themselves. Surprising as this may sound, not everyone cares to program. Thus other programmers would be needed to selflessly (open source software, remember) write the tools that other people need. It's beginning to be done, but Linux is just not there YET.
BTW, Photoshop does have some scripting potential in version 4.0 and later, with Actions, and on the Mac anyhow, some hooks into AppleScript (IIRC). Maybe not totally scriptable, but I don't think that it's a commonly used feature. DeBabelizer is a more obscure tool that gets used a lot for that sort of work because it's better and not a hardship to use in conjunction with everything else.
As for your point about how informed I am, well yes, I was speaking in the context of my profession. (Although I do read a lot and usually win at Trivial Pursuit, if that helps :) But how well informed do designers have to be? While I think that it's good to have a thorough knowledge of the tools that are available to oneself, that really is secondary to having a thorough knowledge of the tools at hand, the process you're involved in (composition, prepress, etc.) and plain old artistic sense. Being able to rapidly make things look good is what we do. Everything else, no matter how interesting or neat, is used in the service of that goal.
Oh, and the only section I found on CYMK in the GIMP manual (via the index on the web version) said that there was such a thing as CYMK and gave a brief description of it. I didn't see anything that indiciated that the GIMP supported it (although I infer that you can always make four greyscale images to correspond to each plate, but that's an awful way to do things). CYMK is not trivial to support in any program, that's true. It's also not a trivial feature. We NEED it.
this Mac user's first impressions of Linux (Score:1)
| copy and paste, and consistent key shortccuts
| across applications, are non-existant.
I presume you're using a two-button mouse under X11? X cut-and-paste (which does exist - it's how I pasted the text I quoted above) works much better when you have a three button mouse, as the middle button is used to paste. Note that this is for the most part text cut 'n' paste only, but it it there, and works with pretty much any X application. If you've got a two button mouse you can usually emulate a three-button by clicking left and right at once, but this is a far from optimal solution when you can get a 3-button mouse that'll work in X for dirt cheap.
As for the consistent key shortcuts, remember that X isn't a GUI.
GIMP GIMP GIMP GIMP (Score:1)
< /flamebait >
what!? (Score:1)
Linux $0-headache in 6 seconds flat
(just kidding, I had a bad linux week)
Mac OS $90-100
Win98 $180-200
WinNT $275-300
Which proprietary OS is cheaper again?!
Completely open? I've heard the occasional grumble that bits of Linux are completely open. I'm not sure how that works tho...
Many platforms? why, do have all them?!
Apple Darwin comes pretty close to completely open source (at least in spirit it does) and all it'll take is porters to get it to different cpu's and that work is done for x86 according to some coders.
true dat (Score:1)
When i am in windows, i always try to use the X method, and then i sit and wonder why the damn thing didn't paste. Then i remember that i got to right click, seclect copy, the right click again and then select paste. Its a real hassle. Anyway...
John is NOT a "Mac Zealot"... (Score:1)
For a prime example of the kinds of, er, citizens that I have to deal with, check out www.macopinion.com's forums.
There is a huge differnce from a Senior Staff Software Engineer for Lockheed Martin Astronautics (John) and some moron calling themselves MaCfReAK or some other such nonsense getting it loud and wrong...
-K
I know plenty about GIMP and Photoshop... (Score:1)
As good as the GiMP is at what its good at, it is practically useless to profressional print designers.
It's funny, too, because as a Linux user, I see this all the time from people that all like like Scriptfu-thiss or GPL-that....
But, as it's been stated, it's not suitable for printing.
Ah well.
-K
Actually, it was The Laserwriter... (Score:1)
I find it funny how similar uniformed platform zealos are, regardless of the platform and te Mantra that they spew...
-K
One problem with analogy (Score:1)
Otherwise - a great article that sheds some light on the goofy super-evangelist types.
MacOS and Linux and Jilted Girlfriends (Score:1)
Oh come on! I'm pretty conservative, and I could have done without the JPG files, but I think he used a perfect metaphor! Haven't you ever heard a Mac user (Or for that matter, a die-hard Linux user) talking about his computer? You'd think they have sex with the thing by the way they gush over its features. It's as bad as religion (and I'm religious too). When you've spent that much time fighting for the existence of your OS against the onslaught of the Evil Empire, when you know you can serve the user better, only to have the limelight stolen by someone else...
Well, he might have come up with some other metaphor, but not one with the same level of resonance as the julted girlfriend.
linuxchiq (Score:1)
Here's a link to it. (Score:1)
Damn you, uclick.com!
If that does not work, go to http://www.newsday.com/comics/comics.htm.- --------------------------
------
"The Internet interprets censorship as damage,
I still prefer Rosie... (Score:1)
As a mascot, that is.
---------------------------------
"The Internet interprets censorship as damage,
Here's a link to it. (Score:1)
Doonesbury 19990409 [uclick.com]
The URL will probably change tomorrow.
Trudeau is a commie ass wipe.
I always preferred Bloom County.
---------------------------------
"The Internet interprets censorship as damage,
Linux is much easier to handle than a 6-ft blonde. (Score:1)
;-p
thank (insert your deity here)! for this thread (Score:1)
this Mac user's first impressions of Linux (Score:1)
my problem: for some reason xterms under solaris don't behave like this... they scroll up/down on page up/page down, without the shift requirement. this annoys me, since now my page up/page down doesn't get sent to the app running in the terminal. grrr...
i've read the xterm man-pages, and perhaps i'm blind, but i can't seem to find any info on this anywhere...
how do i make xterm pass the page up/page down to the program running in terminal and use shift-page-up/shift-page-down to scroll instead... anyone have any ideas?
Argh, doncha hate that! (Score:1)
AMEN!
That drives me nuts as well. I'm not sure, but I think that is a function of the window manager (selection), isn't it?
It should be possible to change how selection works at the window manager level, it would be nice if some of the WM developers would give us the choice between implicit selection (like we have now) and explicit selection.
If you've got an Xlib programming manual handy, check out chapter 12.4.
Who knows, maybe I'll try to hack explicit selection into a window manager this weekend...
Forbidden By Ratings Check (Score:1)
"Forbidden By Ratings Check" - what a hoot!
Next, good ol' slashdot won't be on the approved site list. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that my company has sold it's soul to Microsoft.
IF WOMEN WERE OPEN SOURCE.... (Score:1)
Meanwhile, slick yuppies would be stuck with the half-lame sheep they "liscence" from Microsoft for $100 a shot.
The enemy of my enemy is my enemy (Score:1)
If Apple continues with Darwin, this is exactly what you will have. It already doesn't crash, doesn't cost money, and partially open. It is written in a way that it can be easily ported to other platforms.
Remember though that they are a hardware company, so they are not going to give all their software for free, and they are not going to develop software for competing platforms. But this is true of any corporation, and you have to buy hardware from someone.
this Mac user's first impressions of Linux (Score:1)
The other thing I find really annoying about X cut-and-paste is that the operations of selecting and copying are indistinuaishable. For example, if I want to paste a URL into Netscape, selecting the current URL blows away the new URL I just copied. It ought to be possible to select text without clobbering the contents of the clipboard. I also frequently want to use the contents of the clipboard several times, and I would like it to stay there until I am done with it. In X this means that I can't do any text selections (say in emacs) until I am done with the contents of the clipboard. The time I save with the middle-button click is more than taken up in going back to recopy something that got overwritten in the clipboard.
There are a *lot* of things like that in X. For all its improvements, the unix GUI's are still less intuitive, consistent, and useful than either Windows or the Mac OS. Linux is a kick-ass OS in technical terms, but it has a long way to go before I am willing to give up my Mac as my primary home computer.
Just my Mac partisan $.02
this Mac user's first impressions of Linux (Score:1)
'man xterm'. Under the section 'POINTER USAGE'. Somewhere around page 23.
Where did you expect it to be documented :-)?
Have you worked on a car much? (Score:1)
Ctrl-u is your friend! (Score:1)
(I think I actually learned that in a thread on
Not a bad mascot... (Score:1)
WP8 segfaults in Debian (Score:1)
glibc, WP8 uses libc5 so you need the libc5
versions of Xpm and Xlibs. After I got these, wp8
ran fine.
The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend (Score:1)
No I haven't, not to defend Microsoft too much, but maybe you haven't been listening to Apple talk about MS latly, or for that matter the Linux community in general talking about MS or Apple.
The enemy of my enemy is my enemy (Score:1)
forget them.
Photoshop (Score:1)
good substitute (Score:1)
Also, the keyboard shortcuts can do cut and paste. Like I can right click a mail URL from netscape, and copy it in balsa with "SHIFT+INS". I use balsa, a gnome app, to show that it is pretty consistent with most X apps. If the app isn't consistent with that, and it's a big deal to you, don't use it. (however, netscape used to crash when when using "SHIFT+INS". Lets see if works with the 4.51 version after I click submit).
Ahh cr@p (Score:1)
However, the SHIFT,CTRL,INS,DEL combos work in gnome apps, emacs, rxvt, and probably more, I just don't use much else besides those.
Photoshop (Score:1)
Brilliant logic. (Score:1)
this Mac user's first impressions of Linux (Score:1)
Forbidden By Ratings Check (Score:1)
Right up their with breast cancer as far as offensive material goes IMHO...
-RWR
Re: Baa haaa WHAT OS are *YOU* using? (Score:1)
Obviously, Digital Domain (the company that did the rendering for Titanic) doesn't think that Linux/Alpha isn't worth it.
Obviously, someone has drastically taken Red Hat's Bob Young out of context.
IF WOMEN WERE OPEN SOURCE.... (Score:1)
this Mac user's first impressions of Linux (Score:1)
The backspace key? In an xterm... "stty erase " does the trick. Or you can muck with xmodmap.
As another
Have fun...
The Linux Lynx! (Score:1)
(bigger version here [mit.edu])
Now's there's something I want gracing my Linux box };-)
(apologies to Tux)
Linux is much easier to handle than a 6-ft blonde. (Score:1)
tgif
IF WOMEN WERE OPEN SOURCE.... (Score:1)
Now that's funny... (Score:1)
Not a bad mascot... (Score:1)
She's the afterstep theme of the week (Score:1)
its the theme of the week/month/whatever
IF WOMEN WERE OPEN SOURCE.... (Score:1)
this Mac user's first impressions of Linux (Score:1)
Not a bad mascot... (Score:2)
this Mac user's first impressions of Linux (Score:2)
> the unix GUI's are still less intuitive, consistent, and useful than either Windows or the Mac OS.
Because of the lack of consistency, I don't think the other two are valid generalizations to make. Because it's customizable, I can (and do) set X up to whatever configuration I feel is most intuitive and useful for me. It's also quite easy to set it up to be an unmanagable bear, if that's what you're into.
And, while the Mac's UI is nice, though not entirely to my tastes, I find even the worst X setups to be more intuitive, consistent, and useful than Windows has ever been.
miss mac (Score:2)
MacOS and Linux and Jilted Girlfriends (Score:2)
The content wasn't bad. It wasn't what I'd call a technical article, but telling people to be informed before they start spouting arguments is always good. Judging from the ranting about how "X doesn't support cut-and-paste", I'd like to see articles like this more often...
If you somehow thought linking two
Also, if this somehow misled you, there were also links to other Linux sites, which should correct any misinformation for the avid reader. Also an example of getting informed before you rant.
Anyhow, I found the article to be remarkably informative and well-written, and that didn't offend me either.
actually i don't think you get it (Score:2)
For that reason, freedom is only one way to make my life better - it's not the only way. I disagree fundamentally with your postulation that "everybody loses" when software is not free. It is, and always will be a *choice* as to whether software is free, as the freedom to *choose* about what you do with your property is a more fundamental freedom than to have the freedom to have widespread modification/redistribution rights to someone else's property, intellectual or otherwise.
The mainstream is not going to all of a sudden awaken from their slumber and realize magically that our personal freedoms are being trounced upon by proprietary software. This is based on the fundamentally flawed assumption that intellectual property rights don't exist from a moral/ethical perspective. The jury's still out on that one because history & economics have shown the power of "property-driven" societies.
As RMS says, the one threat to software freedom is to use proprietary software when it is "convenient to do so". Do you really think the herd is going to move to free software unless it IS MORE CONVENIENT than proprietary? That IS the reason Linux & Apache are so successful. Will the GIMP replace Photoshop any time soon? I doubt it. Will vi/emacs+gcc replace the major IDE environments out there? Very, very, doubtful.
As for your domestic violence analogy: I'm a recent Mac convert - I guess I must be a masochist, is that it?
Mac users do 'get it', after living in there self-enforced bubble over the last 10 years, they're starting to venture out of it and realize there's a big, complex world out there. Perhaps some Slashdot users will do the same some day....
Baa haaa WHAT OS are *YOU* using? (Score:2)
Are you even RUNNING Linux on one of those non-Intel platforms, and would you reccoment it to others?
And doesn't "completely open" mean you're using an open sourced CPU (sputter!), or at least avoiding Intel and their evil Slot One?
Hypocrite.
The "problem" of multiple platforms (Score:2)
From an American perspective at least, if you weren't scared off by FUD and wanted GOOD graphics and an easy to program system.. you got an 8-bit Atari. If you wanted to run "all the latest software"... you got a Commodore 64 (with a pathetic disk i/o system marginally faster than an Atari 1010 tape drive..). Later the roles were somewhat reversed with the Atari ST and the Amiga. The Atari ST was the first Macintosh clone... just buy the Magic Sack, some Apple ROMS and you've got a faster, cheaper Mac.
Porting software between OS's was relatively easy, although the ports sometimes offended advocates (ST users will remember being insulted by that dickhead who now runs 3DO... RIP), like Marble Madness for the ST not eving having a title screen. Programming was easy using BUNDLED TOOLS that came with the computer. I used to type in all the code from Antic, and A.N.A.L.O.G., and port non-Atari stuff from COMPUTE!
These days some people argue against multiple platforms, and this saddens me. Why is it people will bitch about their local cable monopoly by think it would be better for just one software platform? The point of all this is to highlight just one point, which you touched:
It's NOT difficult to port software xplatform, and to a lesser extent but still true it's NOT difficult to support it either.
1st, the LACK of diversity is the #1 reason why Windows sucks so bad... nobody is a real threat so Microsoft won't change. Say goodbye to the last piece of "Open" code in Windows... DOS goes bye-bye in Win2K. Some Windows users say "we need Apple for competition and to make Windows better", but few of these people give serious consideration to Windows "alternatives", so what's the point of lip talk?
2nd, MOST porting difficulty can be attributed to using Microsoft tools in the first place. If you didn't build your freakin app using black boxes like Direct3D and ActiveX you wouldn't be dumbfounded when your app won't port.
That's all. I have work to do.. end rant.
The "problem" of multiple platforms (Score:2)
From an American perspective at least, if you weren't scared off by FUD and wanted GOOD graphics and an easy to program system.. you got an 8-bit Atari. If you wanted to run "all the latest software"... you got a Commodore 64 (with a pathetic disk i/o system marginally faster than an Atari 1010 tape drive..). Later the roles were somewhat reversed with the Atari ST and the Amiga. The Atari ST was the first Macintosh clone... just buy the Magic Sack, some Apple ROMS and you've got a faster, cheaper Mac.
Porting software between OS's was relatively easy, although the ports sometimes offended advocates (ST users will remember being insulted by that dickhead who now runs 3DO... RIP), like Marble Madness for the ST not eving having a title screen. Programming was easy using BUNDLED TOOLS that came with the computer. I used to type in all the code from Antic, and A.N.A.L.O.G., and port non-Atari stuff from COMPUTE!
These days some people argue against multiple platforms, and this saddens me. Why is it people will bitch about their local cable monopoly by think it would be better for just one software platform? The point of all this is to highlight just one point, which you touched:
It's NOT difficult to port software xplatform, and to a lesser extent but still true it's NOT difficult to support it either.
1st, the LACK of diversity is the #1 reason why Windows sucks so bad... nobody is a real threat so Microsoft won't change. Say goodbye to the last piece of "Open" code in Windows... DOS goes bye-bye in Win2K. Some Windows users say "we need Apple for competition and to make Windows better", but few of these people give serious consideration to Windows "alternatives", so what's the point of lip talk?
2nd, MOST porting difficulty can be attributed to using Microsoft tools in the first place. If you didn't build your freakin app using black boxes like Direct3D and ActiveX you wouldn't be dumbfounded when your app won't port.
That's all. I have work to do.. end rant.
this Mac user's first impressions of Linux (Score:2)
You probably don't want the terminal to scroll on page up/page down. Those are perfectly valid keys to the programs running inside the terminal.
xterm will scroll the buffer using Shift-Page-up and Shift-Page Down.
I still prefer Rosie... (Score:2)
eh... file types? (Score:2)
>way of handling file types.
Eh? What's wrong with the way Macs handle filetypes?
Having a 'type' and 'creator' code associated with each file makes for a great deal of flexibility. Why should opening a text file directly always open a certain text editor? What if I want for than one text editor, for use with different kinds of text files?
For one thing, the way the Mac handles type/creator codes allows me to have multiple files of the same kind associated with different apps. What if I want some HTML files to open in Netscape, some in BBEdit, some in Simpletext, and some in Dreamweaver? The Mac keeps track of this, and it (normally) works quite well.
Also, it rids us of the concept of file type extensions - a relic that would have been gone long ago if things went right. A filename shouldn't have to function as a holder for metadata such as a file's type. The only reason Mac files have file extensions is due to convention (so you know what they are when they're stored on a 'foreign' file system).
The only thing Apple should do is make it a bit easier to manipulate type/creator information without having to open an app. Something in 'Get Info' and/or a contextual menu would be fine.
I just hope they don't go backwards with MacOS X. Putting extensions in the MacOS will go over like a Windows installation for most Mac people.
The BeOS has a pretty decent system set up for file types as well, although there is some room for improvement. Using MIME types is a very good idea, but the community hasn't really standardized enough for my tastes. Lots of bogus MIME types out there.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
Great Article (Score:2)
Now for the silly stuff. Some of the previous posters have expressed their preference for lucy over miss mac. I would like to point out that miss mac's picture is in b/w. Hence it is obvious that it must be the "before" picture taken prior to 1987 (i.e., pre-MacII). I'm positive that the "after" picture would, uh, kick your socks off.
Scroll xterm (Score:2)
(I don't know how many years I'd been using X11 before someone showed me that one.)
BY THE WAY, I'm not sure of the original author's intent, but he may have been speaking of more than just text cut-n-paste. Unix has been able to do this with text for years, but cutting and pasting formatting, images, diagrams and other sorts of data is more recent. I remember when Motif first implemented drag-n-drop. Can I drag an icon for an image file into a word processor and have it integrate the image into the document I'm working on? Maybe yes. Maybe no.
``Macintosh users are like... (Score:2)
No, Macintosh users(I think what he really
means here is The Mac Faithful) are like the
girlfriend who's a victim of ``domestic
violence''.
She's been with him for so long because he
tells her ``without me, you'd be nothing''(a
`PeeCee' user) and explains away the bruises to
her friends and family(David K. Every).
She needs him to justify her self worth.
She goes out of her way to please him(goes to
CompUSA and tidies up the iMacs when no one is
looking), all the while hoping that someday,
somehow he'll notice the devoted look in her
eyes...oh, yes...if he would only look at her...
But he never does.
Microsoft tells its users to bend over too; the
difference is they usually do not end up saying
``More...please,sir..I want more.''
*sigh*
The poor fools who write articles like this DO
NOT GET IT. It is not about marketshare, or
desktop applications, ``enterprise support'',
etcetera. When software is not libre, everybody
loses.
---------------------------------
"The Internet interprets censorship as damage,
Linux and Macintosh (Score:2)
I've been a Mac user for slightly over ten years, but I've also been using Linux on my Powermac for about 3 years. I'm really excited about the future of the Linux OS and GNU software, but more and more feel like an outsider it was once a friendly and open community. Simply because I don't like Intel hardware. One of the greatest strengths for Linux is that it runs on so many different types of processors, with the same behavior. And with the POSIX and other movements most software runs the same across them all. I just compiled the latest version of Windowmaker the other day right out of the tarball. So easy a chimp could do it.
As more and more "commercial" interest have begun developing shrink-wrapped software the ability of those of us who chose to use non-Intel processors are getting left out in the cold. Although often overlooked, this is in fact one of the main strengths of Open Source: if the code is open users can adapt the software for other platforms without your company having to spend the extra development costs.
Oh well, I am happy that so many of the rest of you in the Linux community will get to play the next Civilization or Quake. Just wish I couls join in all the excitement.
(This reply was written just after I've renetworked the SPARC network I administer for Soalris 2.6. Let's hope it sends!
Witchblade
The Mac guy is more fair thatn PC guys of 2~3 year (Score:2)
Mac platform.
But, unlike them, the Mac person who wrote the
article is fair about the Linux.
It's more pleasant than being a Mac person 2~3
years ago.
I'm a Linux/Windows/Mac person.
I agree with the article.
Linux has WHAT?!?!?! (Score:2)
And here I thought that Linux was immune, or at least resistant, to viruses.
But then again, geeks all over the world have had their fingers in it. ANYBODY can get their hands on it. Likes a big hard disk, but comes on a floppy as well. Likes lots of RAM. As far as hardware goes, the faster the better. Can keep going non-stop for months, without ever going down on you. Is, by default, multi-user. You can share it with your friends. If you get it on the street, the shrinkwrap comes off without a fight. Gladly gives you an intimate look at the source.
Linux is a slut!
Was that Nikita?? Hmmm..
What a well written article (Score:2)
Enjoy, and don't let it degerate into G3 vs. Pentium or Mac vs. Linux or KDE vs. Gnome flamewars.
Am I hoping for too much?
Mac and Linux (Score:2)
I totally agree that Macintosh advocates should become very aware about linux. It would be benefitial for the future of MacOS in general, with discovering features that should be included with any OS, one of the more obvious being the virtual desktops. Any mac user can see the functionality of many of the of the KDE, Gnome, etc. features, and maybe would be interested in having them in their already friendly OS
In short, Mac users need to know what's available in order to possibly request needed features for future MacOS versions.
That's my two cents.
"But we'd never spread lies about the competition. We have too much class."
Domestic violence. (Score:3)
GNU/Linux does.
I've been with OS/2 long enough that I consider myself a `battered-spouse' OS/2 user. Like anyone in a codependent relationship, I continue to use OS/2, and it doesn't seem to know that I'm seeing another operating system (and a freed one at that).
I feel empowered. I'm in control. My computer is MINE!
(I do not mean to make light of domestic violence, as that is a terrible thing (as I should well now, being a survivor of some moderate violence myself in the past). I am simply drawing an analogy.)
Cheers,
Joshua.
Cut and paste with X11. (Score:3)
The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend (Score:3)
The author also states: "it is not sufficient for us to simply bad mouth Linux and dismiss it. (Let Microsoft do that.) To do so makes us just as ignorant and stupid as the Best Buy salesmen who keep repeating the litany that Apple is dead or the PC idiots who seem to get everything wrong when they write about the iMac."
Have you noticed that one and only one software maker consitantly spreads FUD, lies and misinformation about the competetion?
Damnit there are hundreds and hundreds of different automobile models to choose from, yet they all are profitable and they all share enough traits and characteristics in common so that once you learn how to drive, you can drive any model.
There's no reason why several OS's can't simultaneously be successfull. There's also no reason why standards can't be open enough for several OS's to co-exist and transparently talk to one another and share data.
The biggest problem in the entire world of software is that one company, Microsoft, cannot tolerate the idea of anyone on the face of planet earth producing software except them.
If Microsoft would compete on an honest and decent level and on the merits of their own product, without using dishonest and sleezy tactics to try to undermine honest competition, I would have nothing against them.
Yet, it is these sleezy tactics that undermine and stifle innovation in the software world.
The author of this article shows a very mature and well reasoned position on the coexistance of platforms.
He has elevated my opinion of the Mac community.
Here's a Friday afternoon beer bottle toast to John Martellaro, Lucy Linux, and Miss Mac!
this Mac user's first impressions of Linux (Score:3)
Just getting my video card (i740) and keyboard (backspace key!) to work right in X was a long and painful adventure.
Things that Mac users take for granted, like copy and paste, and consistent key shortccuts across applications, are non-existant.
KDE feels clunky somehow; I can't describe it because I didn't like it and installed GNOME instead. GNOME feels better, but the Midnight Commander crashes, and has some really obvious bugs. KDE's filesystem-browser is pretty nice.
I'll stick to my Mac for most things, for now. But I'm reading slashdot and typing this reply while chasing a bug in my Mac program that's causing me to reboot every five minutes.
DOug