Slashdot Mirror

Generally I prefer to work from a Linux box, but whenever I need to copy/paste with outlook, having the same session open on a Windows box is quite helpful...

Yep. It's great for that. But if the machines have screens on the same desk or around the room, then for copy/paste and input sharing I'll also have Synergy.

For CSS development the new mini or an iMac would be fine. You are right that Apple doesn't serve this market well. The PC market offers far more choice of hardware configuration.

The mac pro isn't a general purpose computer, its not even a general purpose workstation... it feels almost like "Final Cut Pro Appliance" in the sense that its configuration options only make any sense to very very specific niche markets.

That's fair. Though I'd amend according to the higher end video companies (i.e. software in the $10k-50k per workstation) it is a great fit. So your "professional film editing workstation" I used to always joke that Apple was SGI 10 years later. And the MacPro is a lot like the Onyx or Altix in terms of design and function (though obviously not cost).

Good question. I still run windows on my desktop computer. I'd like to have OSX on it too though, because I have other OSX devices, and like consistency from one computer to the next.

Have you considered: http://synergy-foss.org./ Just run it on your windows box with the OSX box as a client. You can also use a KVM or just pop the monitor back and forth. (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817399101)

On macs back in 1995-1999, I used a program that would provide 10 copy buffers.

I use GNU Screen on all my terminals. Multiple copy buffers, multiple views per terminal/screen & split views too. Sure beats that massive KVM switch with several windows boxes I had in the 90s... Now I use two or three screens GNU/(Windows, Linux|BSD, sometimes MacOS), and Synergy, all on separate hardware (VMs are nice, but nothing beats testing on the metal); Synergy lets me move my mouse & keyinput from one screen to the next, and I can copy on Linux and Paste into Windows without some VNC BS. I do most of my work in the terminal, so I could give a fuck less if Gnome remove every god damned feature, I stopped giving a fuck about WMs in the 90s too. I would take the time to switch to Awesome WM, I guess, but it doesn't matter. All I do is open a terminal maximized and run GNU/Screen in it. I'd go raw terminal mode, but Synergy doesn't support that, and I like to tab over to a browser or image editor every now and again.

(yes GNU/Linux, GNU/BSD, and GNU/Windows: One userland to rule them all -- cross platform porting is "git pull && make")

It's much easier than you think to adopt new platforms. PUTTY runs on Windows, and so does Git and CURL.
The interface doesn't matter -- The guts haven't really changed all that much, and where they have it's been abstracted to provide the same interface again. I used to just LOVE programming a PDP-11, it was Cool, had spinning tape drives and a noisy paper terminal, you could really mess things up big-time! (I'm not that old, it was my step-dad's hand-me-down, but I loved learning to program on old tech as a kid). Then I fell in love with x86 ASM, and now I love ARM.

With each advancement comes limitations and platform growing pains, so we've been limited and had to go back to doing things the old way, until the platforms get fast enough that I don't need machine level optimization, then I write in C, and soon after it's scripting and interpreted languages and VM languages. About that time another platform comes out that does some crazy new thing, like multi-threading, multi-core processors, or the Playstation 3's cell processor, or GPU shading languages.

With the hardware GPU acceleration we initially started off doing pixel overlay math to pull off tricks with the fixed function pipeline -- I used the pixel blending math as my ASM, and colors as my variables -- Reminded me of flipping switches to load accumulators and playing bitwise games with adds to pull off different mathematic operations like multiply and divide on the limited interface, just like in the old days, but now with pixel buffers... Then came pixel shaders, and we got back some more control, it was back to a more ASM like interface, then vertex shaders. Now we're now set to have integrated 'heterogeneous' computing with shared memory architectures to drop the RAM latency back down to where it's like having one big block of RAM again. I still write algorithms in make-shift assembly with pixel values and carve logic and datasets out of a huge slab of RAM, just like in the 16 bit era, before OSs had virtual memory... Although there's languages like OpenCL, you can still be very low level. Soon that'll be high level and we'll have Perl and JavaScript running around inside GPUs. Soon we'll have quantum computers and affordable ASIC -- I'll be programming in NAND gates again, and multiplying by 5 by shifting left two and adding it back to the original number, just like when I used to 'write' programs with a wire twister.

All the while the new tech comes out, goes through its paces, I still have my trusty text editor and multiple terminals. Hell, with GNU screen I have many terminals within terminal tabs within terminal windows -- All color coded, and searchable, with speaker sounds for alerts, spread across multiple monitors all running different OSs with one keyboard and mouse (cross platform or bust). Just like in the good old days with KVM switches and terminal servers. The point is, everything that's old is new again, so there's no reason not to keep reliving the good old days today. If you haven't been keeping up, then you've been missing out -- At the bleeding edge, It's just like way back when!

If you're talking about adopting gadgets like tablets and phones and stuff like that, Well, my phone and tablet have video out and blue..teeth? I use a rechargeable wireless keyboard and mouse with them, and use *nix no matter what OS is in the way of the UI I like... For all the advancement we've done in computing, you still program the damn things by compiling text files. I even twisted a wire on a post the other day to get LIRC talking to my home theater setup. :-)

It's bad enough having to find room on my already cluttered desk (3 desktops + monitors + 1 laptop + 4 mice + handover/ events diary + this shift's operations paperwork) in 1.3sq.m of desk space, but having to find space for each mouse when I need to move to each system

Check out Synergy. Use one mouse/keyboard with all four machines.

Yeah that's what I use, it's dirt cheap and you can just buy a roll and cut the lengths you need. My home office desk I screwed some longer strips to the back underside of the desk so everything stays up high, out of the way and out of sight, then it's easy enough to redo since you're working with velcro. Being able to get behind the desk I highly recommend as well.

For Wall warts, I use these guys ( http://www.cablestogo.com/product_list.asp?cat_id=1020 ), power squid type power strips, you can attach them high underneath your desk then coil up the excess cable length near them so you don't have hanging wires. Additionally then you dont have to worry about them blocking recepticles on your good power strips (I'm still an isobar fan for those http://www.tripplite.com/en/products/product-series.cfm?txtSeriesID=825 )

Also dont be afraid of physical separation, I have my cable modem, firewall, and a switch on one side of the room on a cabinet where printer, mfd etc are, along with a small nas, then gig isl's over to the other side of the room where workstations on the desk are plugged in.

I'm also a big fan of synergy ( http://synergy-foss.org/ ) as a software keyboard/mouse for machines vs having use physical keyboards or physical kvm's for multiples, and you still get the separated video output for each which is nice.

Every once and a while you need to go through the stuff you've got cabled up, getting rid of things you don't use all the time, or can consolidate (that's probably an annual or bi-annual job though lol). I did that earlier this year and it actually helped quite a bit.
 

For Example Synergy Is an aspect when people working in a team or a group produce more then the sum of each person.

No, Synergy is a program that lets me run multiple computers with one keyboard & mouse. It's like a KVM switch without the switching -- Just move the mouse to a different screen and start typing (uses the network). With this program my productivity has increased 18% (Average of SLOC improvement and per feature implementation duration improvement). For me it's especially since I do many cross platform projects, so I can have each screen on a different OS instead of a single PC and dual booting rebooting (VMs are nice, but nothing beats bare metal for testing). I can copy something on the Linux screen and paste it into a text box on the Windows7 screen. I move my mouse and travels around the room waking up all my computers before landing on my TV w/ XBMC. The graphical front end for configuring screens is OK for most setups, but editing the single .conf on the server allows you to place the screens in any orientation you like, even non-euclidean (I have two screens above each other, but moving off the side of either jumps diagonally to a side screen).

I know this sounds "spammy", but I don't get paid to use their program, it's free and open source.

Now that I have experienced Synergy, I never want to go back. That other synergy you're talking about? No, that reduces my productivity because it requires more time for brain synchronization, and it's often faster to just do things myself: "In the time it took to make the technical design doc, or explain it to you, I could have implemented the damn thing." Screw that kind of synergy. It's necessary sometimes, but not usually beneficial, and certainly not as useful as the program by the same name. Bouncing ideas off each other for creative stuff like story lines or game mechanic ideas? Yeah that's really awesome, but I'd call that collaboration or brain storming not synergy.

Make sure fullscreen on one monitor is functional while it is technically backgrounded

If that doesn't work, run two computers with one head each and use Synergy to move between them.

I use synergy at work all the time and increases my productivity.

Or use Synergy. I've been using it for about 2 years not and it works great. The best part is the ability to use copy-paste from one computer to the other.

Mouse wraparound would be nice. Hmmm, it's probably an option..

I am generally running synergy on my desktop, which (if set up that way) does allow wraparound, and also allows your keyboard and mouse to be shared across multiple machines - even linux and windows. In the rare occasions when I have to do some work on the POS windows box in my cube, I like being able to cut and paste between two machines!

Synergy

http://synergy-foss.org/

One counter example... sort of... but more to provide some, hopefully, helpful info:

I run three systems on my desk (Win 7, Mac OS X, Mandriva Linux). I run Synergy+ on all three (server runs on Linux) although I also have a KVM for those few rare moments when Synergy is not running. I also run virtual desktops on all three systems (Win 7 - 2x3, OS X - 2x2, Linux - 2x2). I am constantly switching between systems and desktops and I do use specific desktops for specific tasks. Typically I have between 3 and 5 windows open on each desktop. Lastly, I am a system administrator and only do related scripting and programming as opposed to being a developer and constantly in a programming environment.

Certainly I run the three systems to have one of each type of desktop system I typically administer. However you can also look at the setup as having three monitors as I use all three in my non-platform specific tasks. Certainly I could run with less monitors and virtual desktops although my efficiency and organization would greatly suffer (IMHO). I find organizing virtual desktops by task extremely useful when dealing with interruptions, multiple tasks, etc. Even going down to three systems/monitors and no virtual desktops would significantly increase screen clutter and decrease efficiency. Going down to a single system with remote access to the other two and having virtual desktops would be worse yet. Of course, a single monitor/system with remote access and no virtual desktops would be a nightmare.

I know other system administrators with only single monitors but with virtual desktops. However, even they have 1 or 2 additional systems on their desk which gets designated for a current task to help reduce screen clutter and increase organization. The developers I know run multiple screens when possible regardless of the platform used.

Finally, regarding virtual desktops on Windows 7: I highly recommend the following:
- VirtuaWin (using 4.3) with plugins: VirtuaPlus, VWDesktopIcons, vwKvasdoPager (this is the must-have module), VWPreview
- http://virtuawin.sourceforge.net/
Of course if you are running more than 1 system on your desk:
- http://synergy-foss.org/
- http://www.volker-lanz.de/software/qsynergy

No way that a motherboard in a cardboard box is going to pass the various RF emission tests for FCC or CE certification.

1) Fortunately they are selling the Motherboard, not the entire PC (the PC assemblers would have to pass the FCC or CE certs).

2) The FCC or CE (and possibly NFPA) would really flip out if they saw my "computer room" which has several computers sans cases mounted across 4x8 plexiglass sheets. They're so much easier to upgrade & clean, they're more functional than paintings/posters (and more aesthetic (to me) ). Wallputers give the room a cosy, cyber-punk feel...

Who needs cases? Also: the cardboard case is fairly bulky, ugh.

P.S. I use Synergy for my Multi-screen/Multi OS/Multi Computer command and control center.

It is generally more practical to design a controller that can control many things than to design a device that can be controlled by many things

Wait, what? Many motherboards accepts several different CPUs. The, USB, parallel port, IDE, PCI & ISA connections on the motherboard all accept multiple kinds of devices that can provide input for your computer.

Microsoft isn't inventing multiple clickers that can adapt themselves "when there is no single standard for communication". MS is patenting using more than one type of input device (clicker) at once to provide input to a live updated poll.

Claims:

1. A computer-implemented process for allowing different types of clicker devices to be used in a personal response system, comprising:receiving inputs from more than one type of clicker device;formatting the inputs from the more than one type of clicker device with at least one clicker adapter for the type of clicker device to adapt the inputs from the more than one type of clicker device to a common single polling controller;processing the adapted inputs from the clicker adapters with the polling controller to interface the adapted inputs with a personal response system software application to allow user polling data to be obtained, wherein the receiving, formatting and processing are performed by at least one processor.

2. The computer-implemented process of claim 1 wherein one type of clicker device is a virtual clicker device comprising a computing device and a software application that lets the computing device act as a clicker device.

3. The computer-implemented process of claim 1, wherein one type of clicker device is a radio frequency clicker device.

4. The computer-implemented process of claim 1, wherein one type of clicker device is an infrared clicker device.

5. The computer-implemented process of claim 1, wherein one type of clicker device is implemented on a mobile device.

( More claims about processing the input from multiple clickers via hardware or software to aggregate feedback for the poll )

A simple website poll should be prior art since some people can use mice, track-balls, joysticks, keyboards, mousekeys (numpad mouse control), etc, to register their votes at once, in real time, for a "personal response system" AKA: online web survey.

Now, to me this X + "multiple types of [input devices]" (clicker is an input device) is also very obvious since I am typing this right now using Synergy. Normally I just use one keyboard and trackball to control all of my PCs, but sometimes I have someone using the computer next to me with it's own keyboard and mouse. When they ask: "Oh, can you put in your password", or, "What's the word for ____" or "Help me find _____". I just move my mouse around the room and onto that screen and control the PC for them. We can both use our own pointer devices and keyboards at the same time to control that one computer.

It's also very obvious to me since I have a trackball, a mouse, and a wireless presentation clicker (with joystick for a mouse) all connected to the same PC. All of these devices control any one of my computers, and when controlling a computer via Synergy the other mice/keyboards connected to the PCs can still control the computer.

Additionally: My satellite set-top box is a "dual" receiver. It features two remotes, and two separate TVs can be connected at once (watching different channels) . The second TV (not HD) can be located in another room, and its remote sends commands to the main receiver via radio (wireless, not IR).

Now, I don't have a standard def TV to connect to it, so I put the receiver into "single mode".
In singe mode both remotes can change the channel that the single TV is displaying.

I also use LIRC to control my TV via my computers ( and all of their many different connected input devices), and to control my computers via any of the IR TV remotes I ha

With Synergy you can share a mouse and keyboard between two computers, each running its own native OS, beats virtualization any day.

http://synergy-foss.org/