Slashdot Mirror


Stop the Math Press's Presses — Knuth Announces iTex

After Donald Knuth's anticipated "earthshaking announcement," it's safe to say that the world is still here. yowlanku writes "Christoper Adams tweeted live from TUG 2010 Conference that 'Donald Knuth's TeX successor will be named iTeX.' " Knuth "also stated that this successor of TeX will have features like 3-D printing, animation, stereographic sound."

284 comments

  1. WTF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WTF is this!!@1!!!!!!!@111

    1. Re:WTF by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 5, Funny

      I know, WTF indeed. This iTEX is even going to have TrueType fonts! And he rewrote it in Java. Knuth has really gone soft in his old age.

      --
      Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
  2. Not on the iPhone by biryokumaru · · Score: 4, Funny

    I hear it's already been rejected from the App store.

    --
    When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
    1. Re:Not on the iPhone by Locke2005 · · Score: 4, Funny

      What did he expect? It supports printing!

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    2. Re:Not on the iPhone by therealobsideus · · Score: 1

      It was rejected, but Apple did their usual flip flopping and approved it. With the help of iForce, my psychic powers tell me it'll be rejected again (and re-approved) all in the next week.

    3. Re:Not on the iPhone by lostmongoose · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ...yes?

    4. Re:Not on the iPhone by Stumbles · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes. One bad Apple spoils the whole bunch.

      --
      My karma is not a Chameleon.
    5. Re:Not on the iPhone by LurkerXXX · · Score: 1

      When someone sticks an 'i' in front of their application's name? Yes.

    6. Re:Not on the iPhone by epedersen · · Score: 1

      Ether Apple or Microsoft, what else would you expect?

    7. Re:Not on the iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not true, historically the ratio was about:
      90% Microsoft bashing
      10% Intellectual property bashing

      Then it turned into:
      50% Microsoft bashing
      50% Intellectual property bashing

      Only recently did Apple fight their way into the mix, but they've gained market share quickly, eating primarily into Microsoft bashing. What's interesting, is it parallels the browser wars a bit, though the swings are more dramatic here. But:
      Microsoft=IE (obviously)
      Intellectual Property=Firefox (open source, makes sense)
      Apple=Chrome (works in the both big brothery sense)

      I'm not sure what Opera is, maybe SCO?

    8. Re:Not on the iPhone by msauve · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Google is the new Apple
      Apple is the new Microsoft
      Microsoft is the new IBM
      IBM is just old

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    9. Re:Not on the iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. One bad Apple spoils the whole bunch.

      You're just a barrel of laughs, aren't you?

    10. Re:Not on the iPhone by vivian · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's the karmic company cycle.

      One of these days IBM will die and then reincarnate as the new Google.

    11. Re:Not on the iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod this up!!

      I just shudder thinking what Apple would have become if they were successful from the beginning. MS's bundling stuff is nowhere as anti-competitive as what Apple has done in short five years.

    12. Re:Not on the iPhone by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 3, Funny

      Monkeys even.

    13. Re:Not on the iPhone by snl2587 · · Score: 1

      More like a bushel.

    14. Re:Not on the iPhone by bonch · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What do you expect? Apple took the wind out of Slashdotters' fantasy of Linux on the desktop supplanting Windows, so there's some bitterness there.

    15. Re:Not on the iPhone by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      And then you guys complain about noisy fanboys.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    16. Re:Not on the iPhone by ae1294 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Google is the new Apple
      Apple is the new Microsoft
      Microsoft is the new IBM
      IBM is the new Xerox
      Xerox is...

    17. Re:Not on the iPhone by binarylarry · · Score: 2, Funny

      More like a library of congress.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    18. Re:Not on the iPhone by rhyder128k · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's a hoax, but it it's a shame that something isn't being to speed up development on the successor to LaTeX2. LaTeX 3 development work has been underway since the early 1990s. One feature I'd like to see implemented is a reliable way of inserting an inline text box that the main text wraps around, for tip boxes. There is some third party support for images that take up less than a full column width, and it can be hijacked for text, but it doesn't work reliably. Basically, what I think will happen is that TeX will die out to be replaced by DTP due to the stalled development process. A shame, as a lot of us liked it, particular when teamed up with LyX.

      --
      Michael Reed, freelance tech writer.
    19. Re:Not on the iPhone by multi+io · · Score: 2, Funny

      Thank you, Sigmund.

    20. Re:Not on the iPhone by AshtangiMan · · Score: 5, Funny

      The new DEC

    21. Re:Not on the iPhone by jedidiah · · Score: 0

      > What do you expect? Apple took the wind out of Slashdotters' fantasy of Linux on the desktop supplanting Windows, so there's some bitterness there.

      Except Apple never supplanted anything.

      Microsoft is as entrenched as ever on the desktop.

      The only place that Apple is getting anywhere is with their iPod concept. The fact that Steve has
      openly declared that he wants his overgrown iPod to replace customer controllable computing devices
      is what gets all of the Slashbots riled.

      As far as real computing devices go, Apple has at best managed to make up ground they lost in the 80s and 90s.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    22. Re:Not on the iPhone by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      meh. My iPhone is neither here nor there.

      Although it's good that I can jailbreak it and make a shell script to make
      up for Apple's pisspoor design decisions with their SMS app.

      I wonder if an Android phone would force that sort of shenanigan.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    23. Re:Not on the iPhone by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Flamebait? Really?! Are you suggesting that iPhone fans won't get noisy when Apple gets bashed in threads that have nothing to do with it?

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    24. Re:Not on the iPhone by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what Opera is, maybe SCO?

      Linux. It has a lot of great features, a lot of people have a lot of good things to say about it, and no one uses it. Except me. And sopssa.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    25. Re:Not on the iPhone by TheKidWho · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Except that 80% of laptops sold over $1000 are Apple and most high end computers tend to be Macs. It's more entrenched than Linux on the desktop that's for sure.

    26. Re:Not on the iPhone by The+Spoonman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes! It's just terrible when companies give you things for free that you can then choose to either use...or not. Shameful behavior! Congress should do something about it!

      --
      Which is more painful? Going to work or gouging your eye out with a spoon? Find out!
      http://www.workorspoon.com
    27. Re:Not on the iPhone by TheKidWho · · Score: 1

      Piss poor? I take it you never used SMS prior to the iPhone?

    28. Re:Not on the iPhone by wmbetts · · Score: 1

      Man I'm glad someone else realized that!

      --
      "Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me". - stolen from Dan C alt.os.linux.slackware
    29. Re:Not on the iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      - Google is the new DEC. That's how it is, kids.
      - Ehm... yes, grandpa.

    30. Re:Not on the iPhone by quadelirus · · Score: 1

      Of course, its turing complete.

    31. Re:Not on the iPhone by deniable · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And 100% of laptops over $1000 are expensive.

    32. Re:Not on the iPhone by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      Steve Jobs says: "Don't put your mouse pointer on the lower right corner of your iTex window."

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    33. Re:Not on the iPhone by TheKidWho · · Score: 1, Insightful

      For poor bastards, most definitely.

    34. Re:Not on the iPhone by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Flamebait? Really?! Are you suggesting that iPhone fans won't get noisy when Apple gets bashed in threads that have nothing to do with it?

      Are you actually suggesting they'll actually STFU in threads that have nothing to do with Apple if nobody bashes it?

    35. Re:Not on the iPhone by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Yes.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    36. Re:Not on the iPhone by pankajmay · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Except that 80% of laptops sold over $1000 are Apple and most high end computers tend to be Macs. It's more entrenched than Linux on the desktop that's for sure.

      Very True.
      I am a big Linux fan and personally use it everywhere, even on my macbook - however, to be honest, I am still appalled at non-resolution of issues that were glaring in the nineties and are still a gaping hole.

      A Linux user is painted as not giving a rat's ass to anything as fancy as X with beautiful ornately decorated windows -- which is true to a large extent, but I guess a large set of core developers forgot that X is what a casual computer user sees.

      I am not denying that there are some really extensive Linux distributions (Ubuntu, Mint etc.) geared towards user experience - the fact is that all these distributions are trying to provide an environment similar to Windows. Graphical Linux has always tried to emulate either Windows/Mac OS, as if they are the standard in user friendliness.

      Any other graphical environment in Linux does not make it friendly for the user.

      My gripe is that Linux has not invented a standard of user friendliness for itself, that is unique to it. A casual user sees an emulation of Windows/Mac OS and feels as if he/she is settling for second best -- I mean why not go for Windows or OS X itself!
      The advanced user doesn't even care about that!


      The result? X is still a very unwieldy system when things don't go right. If things are perfect, the autodetection system works well, but do something delta out of ordinary and X literally regurgitates all its mess, and you can spend days trying to fix something as simple as monitors of different sizes, or different makes, or on different graphic cards.

      And let us not even talk about enabling 3D acceleration for your graphics card if it is not Nvidia.
      Oh, then there's Java configuration (Want Sun Java, some distros make it extremely difficult to switch!), Flash idiocy (another reason to hate flash), and finally..

      don't even forget actually customizing KDE/Gnome so that everything at the very least looks properly, scales properly. Mac OS X does a fantastic job of all of that. Linux can actually use quite a few tips from OS X.

    37. Re:Not on the iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The new IBM again

    38. Re:Not on the iPhone by soupforare · · Score: 1

      Google is the new DEC.

      Not sure why this is modded down. Inmates running the asylum, money and arrogance out their ass, projects with and for no reason going on forever, changes to long-time services for the sake of change... All they need is a PRISM or a couple Rainbows and we'll see Gmail getting spun off before they die. People forget how quickly gods can fall.

      --
      --- Do you believe in the day?
    39. Re:Not on the iPhone by slasho81 · · Score: 1

      Yes.
      Ctrl-F vilification

    40. Re:Not on the iPhone by mysidia · · Score: 3, Informative

      And TeX is a language interpreter, which is explicitly banned

    41. Re:Not on the iPhone by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      ... but in true Knuth fashion, only one typeface will be available.

    42. Re:Not on the iPhone by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      There are iPhone apps that support printing... e.g. Coupons.

    43. Re:Not on the iPhone by xtracto · · Score: 1

      It has been said several times that LaTex3 will be included in the next release of Hurd, along with a copoy of Duke Nukem Foverver.

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    44. Re:Not on the iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF? What has Apple ever given anyone for free? As for choice, that is precluded by the developer agreement.

    45. Re:Not on the iPhone by TheKidWho · · Score: 1

      Wow, nice article.

    46. Re:Not on the iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oracle is the new Sun?

      (Ha! ... oh wait. ... *single tear*)

    47. Re:Not on the iPhone by itsdapead · · Score: 1

      One of these days IBM will die and then reincarnate as the new Google.

      Please keep up - that happened a while ago when IBM saw the light and came over all open source friendly and heroic slayers of the SCO dragon.

      Its like Lord of the Rings 6: The Revenge where the hobbits team up with the Nazgul to defeat a common foe. We're just waiting for the sudden but inevitable betrayal... :-)

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    48. Re:Not on the iPhone by gtall · · Score: 1

      I use the package wrapfig for inline text boxes, is that not what you are asking for?

    49. Re:Not on the iPhone by itsdapead · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What do you expect? Apple took the wind out of Slashdotters' fantasy of Linux on the desktop supplanting Windows, so there's some bitterness there.

      On the other hand, they have rather successfully put Unix on the desktop. That should count for something.

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    50. Re:Not on the iPhone by Dilaudid · · Score: 1

      It's good to see that fans of Fisher-Price style gadgets don't have difficulty understanding complex concepts like irony :)

    51. Re:Not on the iPhone by mcvos · · Score: 1

      I hear it's already been rejected from the App store.

      It must be good, then.

    52. Re:Not on the iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DEC? Bad Xerox! Bad! go back to your printers.

    53. Re:Not on the iPhone by aradnik · · Score: 1

      At least it's still in progress and not forsaken...

    54. Re:Not on the iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the case of Microsoft they DID!

    55. Re:Not on the iPhone by thijsh · · Score: 1

      More accurately: 1 library of congress = over 9000 Boeing 747's full of monkeys.

    56. Re:Not on the iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many steps till we get to SCO the lowest possible life form?

    57. Re:Not on the iPhone by rhyder128k · · Score: 1

      I've found it to be unreliable, particularly when the wrapfig doesn't appear near the top of a page.

      --
      Michael Reed, freelance tech writer.
    58. Re:Not on the iPhone by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > Except that 80% of laptops sold over $1000 are Apple and most high end computers tend to be Macs. It's more entrenched than Linux on the desktop that's for sure.

      Apple and their fanboys are great at this game of propagating numbers out of context.

      So what if all of the overpriced laptops are sold by Apple? That's what Apple does. They sell overpriced stuff.

      Apple probably also has 80% of the over $2500 desktop market too.

      They have it because everyone else as MOVED ON.

      It's no longer 2001.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    59. Re:Not on the iPhone by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > The result? X is still a very unwieldy system when things don't go right.

      That's true of any platform.

      I could tell you about my MacOS frustrations or my Windows 7 frustrations.

      Where the rubber hits the road is how the system acts when it is behaving as intended.

      However, those details don't really matter in the end because the computing market is
      not some naieve meritocracy. The previous 30 years of Apple and Microsoft should be a
      pretty convincing demonstration of that.

      Marketing is everything.

      Although even that hasn't helped Apple that much. That is why they are moving away from
      the Mac model of things and to the ipod model. It is something where they have already
      managed to gain some success and they can use market leveraging like Microsoft.

      MacOS is a much harder sell despite everything.

      They have to fight the perception that "Microsoft" is the standard even in areas
      where they are clearly not or may even be lagging behind even Linux.

      MacOS as a dominant operating system is a lot less threatening to Free Software than PhoneOS is.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    60. Re:Not on the iPhone by VisceralLogic · · Score: 1

      Monkeys even.

      We were on an Apple discussion, not a Ballmer discussion.

      --
      Stop! Dremel time!
  3. Lame. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    What?

    No Twitter integration?

  4. internet TeX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I, for one, welcome our new marketing-lingo overlords.

  5. Bummer. by dgatwood · · Score: 3, Funny

    We were all hoping he'd announce proof that P = NP....

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    1. Re:Bummer. by martin-boundary · · Score: 4, Funny

      The way I see it, he's announced that the proof of P = NP will fit easily in the margin of an iTeX file...

    2. Re:Bummer. by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

      We were all hoping he'd announce proof that P = NP....

      That's easy. Just let N=1 and you got it. :)

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
    3. Re:Bummer. by DMiax · · Score: 1

      Yes, I hoped TeX would finally run in a reasonable amount of time.

    4. Re:Bummer. by williamhb · · Score: 1

      We were all hoping he'd announce proof that P = NP....

      He was going to, but he thought he'd need a better system to typeset a big announcement like that first.

    5. Re:Bummer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Patience. The proof is probably an NP problem.

    6. Re:Bummer. by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

      The crypto industry was probably hoping for a P != NP proof. ;)

    7. Re:Bummer. by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but where's the fun in that? :-)

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  6. What is this? by hackstraw · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Idle. A joke. Content please...

    1. Re:What is this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't get this iTex joke either.

  7. Of course... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's the new M$, or Micro$oft, or whatever the kids are calling it these days. Haven't you heard?

    1. Re:Of course... by drachenstern · · Score: 1

      AAPL

      --
      2^3 * 31 * 647
    2. Re:Of course... by E+IS+mC(Square) · · Score: 1

      You mean Apphole?

  8. iTex by Locke2005 · · Score: 0

    Got a great big belt buckle right above your little bitty pecker? There's an app for that!

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  9. Enough with the iNames already! by Cordath · · Score: 4, Funny

    Name it after some other deliberately mispronounced form of fetish-wear. I'd happily write papers in buttplug (pronounced bootploog).

    1. Re:Enough with the iNames already! by bmo · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'd happily write papers in buttplug (pronounced bootploog).

      bootploog

      Canadian, eh?

      --
      BMO - Happy Canada Day!

    2. Re:Enough with the iNames already! by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      You just gave me an idea for a USB enabled fork of Grub.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    3. Re:Enough with the iNames already! by R.Mo_Robert · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, it's only the diphthongs that raise in Canadian, and only (for most speakers who have it) before voiceless consonants. That's what Canadaian "out" sounds like General American "oat," but a word like "plug" is unaffected for two reasons: the final voiced consonant and the monophthong. ("Boot," too, since it's also only monophthong /u/.)

      --
      R.Mo
    4. Re:Enough with the iNames already! by Pfhorrest · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'd happily write papers in buttplug (pronounced bootploog).

      Needs more umlauts for that:

      Büttplüg.

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    5. Re:Enough with the iNames already! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wooosh!

    6. Re:Enough with the iNames already! by formfeed · · Score: 1

      Yeah, googling for "buttplug" will be so much more successful than my previous attempts:

      Using Latex
      Latex in the office
      latex in the library
      latex pictures

    7. Re:Enough with the iNames already! by bandwidthcrisis · · Score: 2, Funny

      Name it after some other deliberately mispronounced form of fetish-wear.

      I always thought that "per-vertex" (as in "per-vertex lighting") sounded like that.

    8. Re:Enough with the iNames already! by Eternal+Vigilance · · Score: 2, Funny

      A hollow voice says "BÜTTPLÜG"

      There's a reason Will Crowther changed the name of the game from "Colossal Cave Adventure" to just "Adventure."

      (Sadly, an entire line of Infocom fetish followups was never to be.)

    9. Re:Enough with the iNames already! by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      You could write papers by drawing them in the Gimp.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    10. Re:Enough with the iNames already! by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      I think IKEA make a rolling pin called that.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    11. Re:Enough with the iNames already! by ribuck · · Score: 1

      And I have a reference book on my bookshelf whose spine carries the bold text "The Latex Companion". Takes a bit of explaining.

    12. Re:Enough with the iNames already! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...but...a butt plug is not fetish wear. You do not wear a butt plug; it wears you!

      --
      ('Cept in Soviet Russia, void where prohibited, money-back guarentee only applies on orders of 10 or more.)

  10. 3D Printing by CarpetShark · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Come to think of it, I'm only familiar with the hardware side of 3D printing.

    What is the state of the art in terms of 3D printing software and/or definition languages? Is there anything approaching a standard yet, that can take account of issues like number and type of available materials (conductive metal, plastic, etc.), material properties (tensile strength etc.), degrees of freedom (angles that can be accessed), resolution/step size, and other issues like that in a reasonable way?

    I doubt it really, but I guess my question is more "how far are we from achieving it? What work's been done so far?"

    1. Re:3D Printing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's usually referred to as Rapid Prototyping, and properties are limited to whatever the particular technology you're using can support. The good news is some companies (disclaimer - previous employer) like Stratasys have evolved their FDM technology to the point of creating usable plastic parts.

      Sadly, the venerable, verbose, and error-prone STL file format is still the standard input for most of these systems.

      So, perhaps Tex will support STL output for 3D printing :)

    2. Re:3D Printing by flaming+error · · Score: 1

      > What is the state of the art in terms of 3D printing software and/or definition languages
      RTF Summary. Thanks to Knuth, now we can print animated audio stereographs in 3D.

    3. Re:3D Printing by Plazmid · · Score: 1

      There's very little in the way of standards for 3d printing, heck it's pretty hard to even get repeatable and precise prints. There are many different 3d printing processes and many have issues specific to them. The closest thing there is to a standard is the .stl(stereolithography) file format, pretty much every 3d printer accepts the .stl?" file format. The state of the art in 3D printing software is proprietary software that runs on the computer hooked up to the machine and manages things specific to the machine. Sure there's open source 3d printing software, but that's for reprap and mostly hobbyists use that. As far as multiple materials go, there's only one printer on the market capable of doing such a thing(objet Connex500) and any other printers capable of multiple materials are custom built or modified for research. Someone has proposed a .stl 2.0 file format?" for doing exactly this. It even includes method for defining objects made of repeating mesotructures like repeating trusses or frame cubes. Material properties can be found in proprietary online databases or from the manufacturer and really more useful for the design part of things. By designing the structure and the way materials are distributed in a structure one can tailor the properties of the metamaterial that results. For example, one can make a titanium structure match the properties of bone(important when one's making an artificial hip joint), just by making it in the right shape. Resolution/step size are printer specific parameters and are usually handled depending on whether you want a fast print or a high fidelity print. There are other printer specific parameters that might be worth including in the file format though. For example, in selective laser sintering and electron beam melting it's possible to change the micro-structure of the material by manipulating beam energy. Tailoring the microstructure along parts, would definitely be interesting. Though this is printer specific so it makes thing hard. If one wants to make a universal 3d printer file format, one should probably make it like g-code.

    4. Re:3D Printing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ummm...CAD?

  11. Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Philip+K+Dickhead · · Score: 1

    Film at 11.

    --
    "Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
    1. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by icebike · · Score: 3, Funny

      That's not fair.

      All 27 users of TeX will be quite excited about this.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    2. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by steveha · · Score: 4, Informative

      All 27 users of TeX will be quite excited about this.

      Ah yes, the reliable old joke: all X people who care will be happy, where X is a humorously small number. Classic!

      But kidding aside, TeX is in heavy use. Most TeX users use LaTeX or even LyX to wrap TeX and make it easier, but TeX is in there doing the work.

      My understanding is that TeX is standard in the academic world, because it can correctly typeset serious math equations. Also, Wikipedia uses TeX to process all <math> tags (see here for details).

      I have many times read discussion boards where people said something like "I started writing my thesis in Microsoft Word using its equation editor. After my fourth bout of heavy drinking and depression, my friend showed me LaTeX, and I was able to finish my thesis with just a few wine coolers and hardly any Prozac."

      steveha

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    3. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Bluesman · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I did my thesis in LaTeX; in fact I learned LaTeX to do the thesis so I wouldn't have to use MS Word. I probably didn't save any time since I was starting from scratch with LaTeX and had to update the school's age-old LaTeX template to work with the newer versions, but man, when I saw everyone else struggling with Word and whatever awful math plugin they had to use, I was glad I took the extra time.

      Now I use LaTeX whenever I can since the output is so beautiful and I can type lists and tables a lot faster than I can mouse them in in Word.

      I highly recommend it.

      --
      If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
    4. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by quadelirus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It is the standard for mathematics, and computer science, and maybe some other sciences, but I'm not familiar with those.

      It is not, sadly, the standard for the "soft" sciences nor for humanities. My friend in economics is using Word and has never written a line of TeX. When he tried to merge docs for his thesis in Word he ran into huge trouble.

    5. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now I use LaTeX whenever I can

      Have you tried LyX, or do you just figure you are better off typing in LaTeX by hand? All I have done is write some manuals, and for me LyX has been great. I didn't have to stop and learn any codes, I just dove in and started typing. And I'm a fan of the LyX equation editor.

    6. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    7. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by pankajmay · · Score: 1

      I highly recommend it.

      Amen to that! Personally Auctex in Emacs is just about the best that LaTeX gets. I have tried LyX but it hides too many details to my tastes.
      auctex and Emacs make for a powerful environment and the ideal mixture of WYSIWIG and advanced fine-tuning.

    8. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Bluesman · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Lyx is cool, but I like LaTeX by hand because it's just faster. Anything repetitive I write my own definitions (i.e. macros) for, so it's a huge time saver.

      I really dislike WYSIWYG. I want to type, never use a mouse, and have the program format it for me.

      --
      If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
    9. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by soundhack · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I went the opposite. I did my thesis in Word, even though LaTeX was the standard to use at my lab. I knew how to use LaTex (I did my MS thesis in it) but to me LaTeX was too clumsy.

      I hated the way it laid out figures/tables. A slight change of the text (add a line or two, change a parameter) would result in widely different figure/table placement, sometimes even clumping them all at the end.

      The default font the generated postscript files had was 1) ugly 2) always the same. Of course, the latter is a "good thing", but you can easily tell someone's thesis was done in Tex/LaTeX, while in Word you can choose slightly different fonts from the same family that made it look at least a little different from every other thesis.

      Viewing figures/graphs is a pain, if you add a new figure you have to "compile" the latex, call up the ps viewer, then scroll to the figure to see if it looks right, not to mention figure out where LaTeX decided to place them.

      All in all, Word has its faults but WYSIWYG was a godsend and I never regretted using it for my thesis.

      As for tables, I make them in Excel then link them into Word. That is (to me) a heck of a lot easier than typing extra syntactic markup to get tables.

    10. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by drosboro · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I did my thesis in LaTeX - and I don't believe there was a single mathematical equation in it. I chose to use it so that I could focus on the structure of the document, rather than formatting. There's lots of good things about it beyond just math!

      Of course, I may have been the only person in the Faculty of Education at my university ever to use LaTeX for their thesis - at least outside of the math education folks. I had to use a LaTeX style from our computer science department - only CS, physics, and math seem to have LaTeX thesis styles at my school.

    11. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      You must not be very familiar with academic publishing in CS, Math, and Physics. LaTeX is used extensively.

    12. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Magic5Ball · · Score: 1

      > As for tables, I make them in Excel then link them into Word. That is (to me) a heck of a lot easier than typing extra syntactic markup to get tables.

      Word/Excel/Illustrator > Print to PDF > embed in LaTeX. Much easier to use a real DTP program to set and tune tables and figures, or when the entire imaginable area of a page needs to be accessed.

      I'll take another look at TeX when it gains the ability to sanely line wrap underlined text such as URIs, and when it starts to respect j/k rules designed into typefaces.

      --
      There are 1.1... kinds of people.
    13. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by ooloogi · · Score: 1

      The preview-latex component of auctex is hard to beat. You get to keep all the raw latex editing, but have the equations and figures rendered in the editor.

    14. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by tyrione · · Score: 1

      Lyx is cool, but I like LaTeX by hand because it's just faster. Anything repetitive I write my own definitions (i.e. macros) for, so it's a huge time saver.

      I really dislike WYSIWYG. I want to type, never use a mouse, and have the program format it for me.

      One correction. LyX is WYSIWYM not WYSIWYG. Your entire LyX document can be one ERT embedded TeX/LaTeX document. I tend to use Kile, TeXShop and now TeXWorks and straight LaTeX as well with Memoir because until LyX 2.0 is ready I can count on all those environments to be clean and sift through the error messages very rapidly.

    15. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Abcd1234 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Now I use LaTeX whenever I can since the output is so beautiful and I can type lists and tables a lot faster than I can mouse them in in Word.

      And, as a bonus, it's actually amenable to version control. Nothing like being able to throw a document into cvs/svn/git/what-have-you, and have real, sensible diffs to tell you how the document changed over time, without resorting to storing all that version info in the damn document format itself where it can't be accessed by anything but specialized software designed to work with that format.

    16. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Caraig · · Score: 1

      And where said version information is at the same time all-too-easy to dig out. It must be one of Murphy's rules: Meta-information you want a document to be available is nearly impossible to get, while meta-information you don't want to be available is ridiculously easy to retrieve.

      I haven't the cites, but I do seem to recall a couple of embarrassing moments when documents with redacted information still stored that information, and it was only slightly nontrivial to have it reappear in all it's classified: top secret glory.

      --
      "I am an Adept of Tantric VAX."
    17. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by buchner.johannes · · Score: 1

      Lyx is not WYSIWYG but WYSIWYM. And for saving time, just look at how long it takes you to write a 1-page document (e.g. letter). Much faster with LyX, especially if you don't want to put up with LaTeX's weird error messages.

      --
      NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
    18. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Count+Fenring · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It is not, understandably, the standard for the soft sciences and humanities, for the simple reason that, if you don't need the ability to typeset complicated formulas (or don't need it badly enough), the cost/reward tradeoff for learning any kind of markup language is never going to look good enough to offset the initial outlay of effort.

      Add that to the comparative rarity of technically inclined people in those fields, and I'm not sure the tradeoff is worth it in the end. These are not failproof, cookie-cutter solutions, and if you add becoming familiar with the concept of markup-based styling to the effort of learning TeX specifically...

      Most soft sciences and humanities students don't have the time or background to come to grips with LaTeX, and most faculty can afford to leave formatting up to the publisher; after all, English grammar is handled reasonably well by Word.

    19. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by DrFalkyn · · Score: 1

      The syntax for equations are about the only redeeming feature of LaTeX. Every other typesetting feature is hideously painful. "OK, I want to change the page margins... um, I'm not really allowed to do that hard? Are you sure this is a 'typsetting' language?" Not to mention, you can't do anything without a template. Not without a low-grade headache, in any case.

    20. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by xtracto · · Score: 1

      I also did my PhD thesis (Comp.Sci.) in LaTeX, however I published some articles before in LaTeX too.

      Unfortunately now I am working in a projectg with Agricultural Economists, soft-Geologists and other people that use a .DOC file as a "template" for reports... and I am forced to use that abomination.

      Of course everytime I have the chance I submit to in LaTeX format, but for the project itself I have to use DOC...

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    21. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by xtracto · · Score: 1

      Uuuh I did my PhD thesis using PDFLatex and I dont remember having any trouble with tables, equations and figures (I think it is possible to include PNGs directly).

      As for the different font types in your Doctorate Thesis, what where you doing, an Art or Design degree?

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    22. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by PrecambrianRabbit · · Score: 1

      This is a weird hangup for me, but WYSIWYG exacerbates my writer's block. It's like I sit there looking at the emptiness and think, "my god, how can I ever fill up this space." It doesn't matter how little space it is, I just focus too much on it, and it crowds out useful thoughts. For some reason when I'm writing plain text I can just focus on the content instead of the whitespace. I've never met anyone else with this problem, so I'll assume I'm a weirdo :-).

    23. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by ctrl-alt-canc · · Score: 1

      You make me remember that I wrote my thesis on a Commodore 64 using Vizawrite (it was in 1987), and it had plenty of equations....the result didn't look that bad, after all!

    24. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by HyperQuantum · · Score: 1

      Viewing figures/graphs is a pain, if you add a new figure you have to "compile" the latex, call up the ps viewer, then scroll to the figure to see if it looks right, not to mention figure out where LaTeX decided to place them.

      As others have pointed out, you should have tried LyX. It does all the 'compiling' for you at the push of a button.

      --
      I am not really here right now.
    25. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, the implementation of macros in modern versions of Lyx is just great. You define a macro in two parts : the latex part, that will appear in the .tex file produced and its graphical counterpart in Lyx. I use many macros in my thesis this way and it works just superb.

    26. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by MrZilla · · Score: 1

      Me and a friend used LaTeX/SVN for all of our collaborative theses during our university time, and it worked great.

      --
      mov ax, 4c00h
      int 21h
    27. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by drewhk · · Score: 1

      Er, why would you use your mouse in LyX???

    28. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by hgesser · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The default font the generated postscript files had was 1) ugly 2) always the same.

      Funny argument. In Word the default font (Times New Roman) is 1) not truly a good option for printing documents and 2) always the same. With LaTeX you can change the standard fonts as easily as you change them in Word, plus with many fonts you get modified math fonts so your math equations fit the normal text.

      [...] you can easily tell someone's thesis was done in Tex/LaTeX, while in Word you can choose slightly different fonts from the same family that made it look at least a little different from every other thesis.

      You can easily tell someone's thesis was done in Word, because the typesetting is broken and formulas look disgusting, unless the author spent hours changing things like the size of exponents. Also, when writing for a journal/conference proceedings etc., articles are meant to look the same (since they'll appear in the same book). With LaTeX you get that for free, with Word, even when using the official publisher's stylesheet, there are always minor errors in the layout.

    29. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I did my thesis in OpenOffice.org. The best of both worlds - equation syntax similar to TeX, ease of use as in Word. Perfect!

    30. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by squizzar · · Score: 1

      I asked people when I was at university how long they spent sorting out references, numbering figures etc. in their Word dissertations, and for most people it was a day or two of work, and if you changed anything you had to check it all again. I felt quite smug thinking that I never had to worry about all that cruft (it's why I started using LaTeX in the first place). Build the document, all the references are correct. Simple.

      We've seen from the internet that most partially trained monkeys are capable of knocking together some reasonable HTML, and it's not like using Word for dissertation+ level documents doesn't require some learning, so really I think it's just that it's entrenched in some fields to the extent that no one even realises there is an alternative. We had a lecture to compare the benefits of both approaches quite near the start of our course. You could use either, but the message was that you would be wasting time using word, and if you were doing anything postgraduate you'd need to know LaTeX (this was for the CS/CE/EE undergrads). The majority of people studying in different departments I've talked to haven't the slightest inkling that there is any other approach than to use word.

    31. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by m.alessandrini · · Score: 0

      just for curiosity, did you pay all the licenses you needed to use Word in all the computers you own?

    32. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by m.alessandrini · · Score: 0

      ... and Excel, of course, and maybe other Office apps

    33. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The default font ... always the same.

      I hate it when defaults are always the same.

    34. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have the wrong idea about LaTex. The point of LaTex is that you do not do the typesetting/layout. You just write the text, and give some suggestions where you would want the pictures to be and let LaTex figure out the rest - which it usually does far better than most humans.
      Yes, occasionally it needs some fine tuning during the final proofreading of the document, but if you are compulsory checking your layout, you are doing it wrong.

      Btw, I write my documents in VIm, with a kpdf instance of the pdf in the background. !pdflatex .tex (or for more complicated documents, !../make) would give me a nigh instant preview. If I would want one.

    35. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 1

      My original degree was done in the days of hand-written pages being hammered in on an old typewriter. But there's no need to frighten the youngsters. I returned to university in mid-career for additional degrees.

      I did my MSc thesis in Word, several versions ago. It was painful in the extreme, especially the deficient equation handling: no way to search for an equation element, or to search & replace across equations to rename a variable. It was also appallingly awkward for handling citations and cross-references - it's OK for a handful, but sucks when you've got hundreds (click-click-scroll-scroll-click-etc.). If you define some decent styles and apply them consistently, then basic text layout and formatting was OK, which was about its only redeeming feature. But then there were Word's fuck-ups in formatting or file corruption, which I defended against by changing the file name every time I edited the thing.

      Older and wiser, my subsequent PhD thesis was done in LaTeX, also some years back. It required adding a few simple macros for my particular purposes and fiddling a bit with some page layout parameters (so figures & tables would be placed sensibly), but these then applied through the whole document. Equations were correct and could be searched, cross-referencing was trivially easy, and several hundred citations were a doddle. The joys of working in a text editor also cannot be ignored. As a result, I could concentrate on the content of the thesis, without fighting against the tool being used.

      We are compelled to use Word for certain collaborative documents at work, but if a PDF is sufficient, I nearly always produce it in LaTeX - the easier faster way. Also, some conferences and journals require that manuscripts be submitted in LaTeX, and usually provide a suitable template. This is especially true in fields where equations are extensively used.

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    36. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by ultranova · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The default font the generated postscript files had was 1) ugly 2) always the same. Of course, the latter is a "good thing", but you can easily tell someone's thesis was done in Tex/LaTeX, while in Word you can choose slightly different fonts from the same family that made it look at least a little different from every other thesis.

      It's good to know that people in academics are concentrating on the essential.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    37. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by TheLink · · Score: 1

      tortoisesvn works with word documents. It can diff them.

      The feature has been around for years.

      This feature is why I'm using svn at work instead of say bzr, hg or git. Because "work" uses lots of Microsoft stuff.

      --
    38. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Dilaudid · · Score: 1

      I think the difference is that all 27 TeX users actually *use* TeX. This is the difference between a useful tool, and an aspirational ornament/"perfect gift suggestion!" like the iPad.

    39. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by zbharucha · · Score: 0, Troll

      You, Sir, are an idiot.

    40. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I did my thesis in Word,

      As long as you only use on your own computer, you should be good.

    41. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Alistair+Hutton · · Score: 1

      I did my thesis in LaTeX because I wanted to do cross-referencing and I didn't want to go mad.

      --
      Puzzle Daze is now my job
    42. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      PDFlatex improves things for a couple of reasons

      1: you can use hyperref (plus the extra package whose name I can't remember right now which is needed to make hyperref link figures in a sane way). This makes the final document much nicer but it also helps you to find stuff while working on it.
      2: it takes "images" in a selection of common formats (JPG, PNG and PDF) while old fassioned latex insists on eps (which is quite a rare format these days).

      Still it doesn't fix what are for me the biggest annoyances in latex.

      1: quotes, to get decent looking quotes in latex you have to use a pair of backticks for opening quotes and a pair of single quotes for closing quotes. I understand the history behind this but it's annoying not to be able to enter text in the normal way and have it dealt with decently.
      2: lack of instant feedback, the "close file in acrobat", "compile", "reopen file in acrobat", "find where you were in the document" cycle gets very annoying during the tweaking phase*.

      * IMO writing a good document splits into two phases. During the writing phase I just write stuff without worrying too much about what it lookes like. Then comes the tweaking phase where I try to balance between things like avoiding people having to turn pages to look between figures and thier associated text, size of figures vs general flow of the document and keeping whitespace under control (some whitespace is good don't get me wrong but too much looks ugly)

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    43. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The default font the generated postscript files had was 1) ugly 2) always the same. Of course, the latter is a "good thing", but you can easily tell someone's thesis was done in Tex/LaTeX, while in Word you can choose slightly different fonts from the same family that made it look at least a little different from every other thesis.

      Yes, heavens forbid that the content is more important than the font you use.

    44. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by gtall · · Score: 1

      Re 2: errr... what are you using for a front end. I use TeXShop, it has the tex output preview in a separate window and activates that winder right after I hit the Latex button at the top of the source window and the backend finishes texing. Hell, even old Blue Sky's version did this through the 90's.

    45. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      With LaTeX you can change the standard fonts as easily as you change them in Word
      The thing with latex is it does it's "own thing" regarding fonts. So if you want to use consistent fonts in your latex document and in the files you are embedding you have to either find a way to turn latex fonts into system fonts* or a way to turn system fonts into latex fonts. The instructions i've found for doing at least the latter of these seemed very complex ( http://www.radamir.com/tex/ttf-tex.htm ).

      * by which I mean fonts that can be installed on the system and used by ordinary apps. Afaict that usually means truetype or opentype.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    46. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by icebraining · · Score: 2, Informative

      All in all, Word has its faults but WYSIWYG was a godsend and I never regretted using it for my thesis.

      There are plenty o LaTeX editors that can show a live preview, which for me is the best of two worlds.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_TeX_editors

      I tried both Gummi and Lyx, and I like them both, although I do prefer Gummi.

    47. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by lars_stefan_axelsson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Also, for theses, the integration with BiBTeX makes LaTeX a godsend. I know of no citation management system that is as comprehensive (and works as well) as BiBTeX. I couldn't live without it (coupled with reftex-mode for emacs).

      --
      Stefan Axelsson
    48. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was my case (seriously).

    49. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by lars_stefan_axelsson · · Score: 1

      1: quotes, to get decent looking quotes in latex you have to use a pair of backticks for opening quotes and a pair of single quotes for closing quotes. I understand the history behind this but it's annoying not to be able to enter text in the normal way and have it dealt with decently.

      The LaTeX-mode in emacs has handled this for you since (wait for it) 1985... :-) So, it's been taken care of.

      P.S. Yes, tweaking can be painful. That's a feature, not a bug. It helps you putting it off until you're really done. No, I mean, *really done* with the content. It's like optimization; "Don't do it. At least don't do it yet."

      --
      Stefan Axelsson
    50. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The default font the generated postscript files had was 1) ugly 2) always the same. Of course, the latter is a "good thing", but you can easily tell someone's thesis was done in Tex/LaTeX, while in Word you can choose slightly different fonts from the same family that made it look at least a little different from every other thesis."

      And in science, standarization is a bad thing. And you want everyone to use a different font for his tesis.
      Maybe comic sans.

      You sir, have a estetical tastes that are against the point of engineering and science. What is not important, because maybe you are profient anyway in these fields. but.

    51. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by jandersen · · Score: 1

      After my fourth bout of heavy drinking and depression, my friend showed me LaTeX, and I was able to finish my thesis with just a few wine coolers and hardly any Prozac

      Ah, yes, there we have the whole mistake - what you mean, obviously is:

      After my fourth bout of heavy drinking and depression, my friend showed himself to me in latex, and I sobered up instantly ...

      Jokes aside, though, you are right. The arguments are pretty much along the same lines as the arguments why some prefer vi or C: you want to spend your time on the core job rather than trying to figure out what the fancy bits actually mean and how to use them; most jobs don't require advanced editing, syntax high-lighting or garbage collection, just common sense and sufficient understanding of the task at hand.

      From my own experience with Word (and, for that matter, Openoffice) I know that in order to use the tool efficiently and to get a consistent result, you have to master a large number of not really very intuitive techniques, such as templates and styles. It looks prettyish on the screen, but all the time I see less skilled users getting lost in formatting problems they can't get out of. And sometimes you just can't seem to find where the hell the bloody formatting, that causes you a headache, should be found - at least in TeX and other markup languages you can see the markups directly.

      And finally, there is the issue of document size: With TeX, you can produce documents with 1000s of pages, which I did in the past at a time when Word would die from exhaustion around 300+ pages. You can see the logic in this - TeX basically compiles a simple ASCII file, holding very little in memory at any time, but Word et al have to keep much more of the document and its formatting in RAM, which is riskier.

    52. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Com2Kid · · Score: 1

      I asked people when I was at university how long they spent sorting out references, numbering figures etc. in their Word dissertations, and for most people it was a day or two of work, and if you changed anything you had to check it all again.

      Word has features to handle much of that for the user. Indeed, in Word 2007 and above, there is a giant References tab on the ribbon.

      People who don't use a program to its full extent will indeed find life painful. Someone can use LateX and manually label every diagram as well.

      The longest technical document I wrote in Word was over 200 pages, choked full of diagrams and references to diagrams. This was using Word 2000 and it handled everything for me just fine.

    53. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      Unless they used XeTeX, which is better at OpenType then Word is. Seriously.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    54. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Reaper9889 · · Score: 1

      Lyx gives you both options. E.g. I want to use the fancy macro I made previously, so I write \macroname like I would in your latex by hand. I need to take the union of two sets and can't remember the syntax (it is \cup or \bigcup but this is a example - I could write \bigcup, but this is a example) so I find it in the menu...

      The real strength, to me, is that per default you see the equations as they would look in print (and not like \frac{stuff}{other stuff}). It is (to me atleast) alot easier to read 10 lines of inequations using symbols with 1 super script and 2 subscribts if I can see them as the way they are in the output instead of unstructed text. It is not really a solution to have output at the side, since you have to look back and forth between them.

      LyX bad sides are that it cant convert that well from pure latex and that the algorithms (I am a ph.d. student in comp. sci.) are not the best looking.

    55. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm guessing you haven't tried XeTeX and the fontspec package which allows you to access most fonts available to the OS. My wife uses Hebrew and Greek regularly and XeTeX has no problem with right-to-left text or unicode characters either.

    56. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize that you have some control over placement of tables, right? As far as fonts go, were you designing some kind of advertisement or were you writing your thesis? Right tool for the job and all that.

    57. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by uiuyhn8i8 · · Score: 0

      >All 27 users of TeX will be quite excited about this.

      Funny. Personally I generate 3000 pages of technical documentation for our chips in about 20 seconds with latex. Secretaries and salesdrones can play with the wysiwyg toys, while we who need serious results for serious work use serious tools. Having spent the last week reading a lot of scientific papers it amazes even me that close to 100% of them are done in latex.
       

    58. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      arxiv.org:
      "613,220 e-prints in Physics, Mathematics, Computer Science, Quantitative Biology, Quantitative Finance and Statistics"

      Every single one ($- \epsilon$) compiled with tex. For theoretical physics this is essentially the complete scientific output of the last 15+ years. BTW you can download the source to all these articles from the arxiv as well.

    59. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by wxjones · · Score: 1

      \begin{center} {\Large I \Heart LaTeX\footnote{$\mathrm{LaTeX}\gg\mathrm{MSWord}$}} \end{center}

      --
      My SIG is a P226
    60. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by trickyD1ck · · Score: 1

      Academics need to follow very precise formatting guidelines when they submit their papers though. An example for IEEE from the top of my head: http://bme.ee.cuhk.edu.hk/TITB/instr4authors.html. I suppose there is some solution for this with TeX (templates?), but Word worked best for me so far. Another thing is reference management. Word has build-in one, plus integration with EndNote and others. What about TeX?

    61. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by n0rr1s · · Score: 1

      I'd like to add that creating diagrams with tikz or pstricks is so simple, and they look great. I also like Kile for hiding many of latex's idiosyncrasies.

    62. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by GreatBunzinni · · Score: 1

      I really doubt you had to use MS Word to any relevant extent if you both complain about LaTeX's fonts and how "a slight change of the text would result in widely different figure/table placements, sometimes even clumping them all at the end". I've dedicated a considerable portion of my life writing documets and reports, both with LaTeX and MS Word and although LaTeX documents, when written by hand with the help of a plain text editor (which, according to your description and complains, appears to be your case), has it's weak points, MS Word is by far the worse, most painful, problem-prone, gotcha-plagued tool available to write a document. I mean, MS Word 2007 doesn't even offer a clean way to generate numbered, hierarchical ToCs, forcing it's users to jump through hoops to edit new styles for hierarchical headers that don't screw around with document references. Moreover, the bloody tool doesn't even support referencing equations, which forces MS Word users to rely on custom combinations of tables, equations and custom reference targets. And have you even tried to add pictures to a MS Word document? Adding pictures to LaTeX documents so that they look half decent is child's play when compared to the MS Word way of doing things. Yes, MS Word let's you drag and drop but what good does it do to you if it SCREWS THE FORMATTING OF YOUR ENTIRE DOCUMENT in such a way that you are forced to hand-tweak the entire document by hand?

      And don't get me started on collaborative work. MS Word even manages to screw terribly basic operations such as copying a text-only MS Word document and pasting it at the end of another MS Word document. I'm talking about documents which are produced with the default MS Word style, the one with unnumbered headers in the blue calibri fonts, and without ever touching a single text formatting option.

      And you get all that from a tool which costs you around 200 euros?

      Hand-written LaTeX may have it's weak points, such as generating tables. Yet, generating tables by hand may be a cumbersome task but at least it assures you that when you finish writing the table's markup you get a impeccable table that doesn't change just because you added another paragraph just before it. And the best thing about LaTeX is that your documents do look great, if not absolutely flawless. And a good sign of how this is a widely known fact is that chances are a randomly picked book from your bookstore or even your shelve was compiled from LaTeX. You will be hard-pressed to get your hands on a paper that wasn't compiled in LaTeX. And that happens although MS Word is around for what? 30 years?

      And by the way, just because it's LaTeX it doesn't mean it must not be WYSIWYG. There are plenty of WYSIWYG tools for LaTeX such as Scientific Workplace. You would know that if you really did any serious documentation work.

      --
      Slashdot, fix your code or at least hire someone who is competent at it to do it for you.
    63. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thing with latex is it does it's "own thing" regarding fonts.

      You mean "its".

    64. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by GreatBunzinni · · Score: 1

      It is not, understandably, the standard for the soft sciences and humanities, for the simple reason that, if you don't need the ability to typeset complicated formulas (or don't need it badly enough), the cost/reward tradeoff for learning any kind of markup language is never going to look good enough to offset the initial outlay of effort.

      That would make sense if typesetting math formulas was the only reason that kept LaTeX being used up to this day. You cannot do collaborative work with MS Word, let alone employ any semblance of a version control system.

      With LaTeX, unlike MS Word, it's terribly easy to do collaborative work. It could be as easy as writing a main LaTeX file where you \include{file} the chapters that people have been working on independently, which guarantees that you get a seamless merger of work just by updating the included files and compiling the doc. And employing a version control system is trivial, as your entire document is nothing more than a list of source code files and images.

      Add that to the comparative rarity of technically inclined people in those fields, and I'm not sure the tradeoff is worth it in the end. These are not failproof, cookie-cutter solutions, and if you add becoming familiar with the concept of markup-based styling to the effort of learning TeX specifically...

      You are assuming that academic types from fields such as soft sciences and humanities are, somehow, complete idiots who can't manage to grasp simple aspects that even first-year students from any IT degree manage to grasp on their first weeks on the course. They may not be familiar with the workflow associated with writing a LaTeX document but to go as far as insinuate that they are so technically incompetent that they can't possibly manage to work through all that voodoo... Well, you aren't basing your opinion on reality.

      Most soft sciences and humanities students don't have the time or background to come to grips with LaTeX, and most faculty can afford to leave formatting up to the publisher; after all, English grammar is handled reasonably well by Word.

      This comment is completely out of touch with reality. I point it out to you that no one is born knowing how to use a WYSIWYG editor, let alone MS Word. If you need to use MS Word you have to spend your "time" and you must have enough "background" to come to grips with MS Word. In fact, using MS Word forces you to waste even more of your time as you are forced to deal with it's long list of gotchas and as you are forced to spend countless hours hand-formatting your entire text just to compensate for MS Word's knack to screw up the document's formatting. By claiming that learning how to use LaTeX is somehow cumbersome while using MS Word is somehow an error-free experience you are both demonstrating you don't have a clue about what's it like to use LaTeX and MS Word.

      --
      Slashdot, fix your code or at least hire someone who is competent at it to do it for you.
    65. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by azmodean+1 · · Score: 1

      No I'm similar, though not so much with science/math papers and more with requirement and design documentation and business proposal type crap.

      I'm fine with having a WYSIWYG display *option*, but I definitely don't want to use a WYSIWYG interface to actually write content.

    66. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Count+Fenring · · Score: 1

      I will agree that LaTeX is less commonly known in humanities and literature, but that's the effect, not the cause. (Note, I'm not claiming sole effect)

      You mention reference and figure numbering. Now, welcome to Literature. What you need is footnotes; if you need a figure, it's quite unusual, and Word's (or Openoffice's, for that matter) methods suffice quite easily.

      References can be automatically handled by Word as of recent versions, but more likely will be farmed out to refworks, especially since there's no numbering involved, using either MLA or APA citations.

      Note that I say this as a big fan of LaTeX, and as someone with an undergrad degree in British/American Literature, in graduate school for a humanities-similar field (Library and Information Science). I'm not at any point saying that LaTeX isn't excellent, or even the superior choice if you have the technical mindset and desire to pick it up. But, honestly, producing real, quality documents with LaTeX is more complicated than HTML. Installing LaTeX is liable to be more complicated than beginning HTML, come to think of it. And for these people the only benefit is its presentational edge over word since the time savings certainly don't occur for the first document you layout with it, or, for the technically uninclined, likely the second, third, or... well, they've given up by now.

    67. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      while in Word you can choose slightly different fonts from the same family that made it look at least a little different from every other thesis.

      Wait a minute.. \usepackage{helvet} ? That alone made my documents not "look" like it was done in LaTeX.

    68. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen! I've been preaching this for a while. At work we have several technical documents written in Word that are 100's of pages long.
      Trying to figure out what changed between two versions is a nightmare. The problem is especially bad if you switch Word versions during the review cycle (2000/2003/2007/2010).

      I would love if we could convert the document to Latex and stick it in cvs/svn/whatever.

    69. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by NikeHerc · · Score: 1

      "but to me LaTeX was too clumsy"

      ms patented clumsy. It's a part of every ms product.

      "I hated the way it laid out figures/tables."

      Then don't let'em float.

      "All in all, Word has its faults but WYSIWYG was a godsend and I never regretted using it for my thesis."

      After having learned LaTeX six or seven years ago, I took an oath *never* to create another Word document as long as I live. LaTeX is like Unix and Linux: hard to learn and easy to use. Word (and all ms products) are the opposite: easy to learn and hard to use.

      I use LaTeX under Linux and have an incredible wealth of free products (xfig, grace, ps2epsi, convert, many others) which help me be very productive and easily create gorgeous documents. I can't imagine using anything but LaTeX for typesetting equations.

      My biggest LaTeX document so far has 51 .eps includes and is about 100 pages long. I set up make so that if any include file or .tex file changes, all I have to do is type "make" and I have a new .pdf file. How could anything be simpler?

      Long live Professor Knuth and LaTeX!

      --
      Circle the wagons and fire inward. Entropy increases without bounds.
    70. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      /---/The default font the generated postscript files had was 1) ugly 2) always the same. Of course, the latter is a "good thing", but you can easily tell someone's thesis was done in Tex/LaTeX, while in Word you can choose slightly different fonts from the same family that made it look at least a little different from every other thesis./---/

      You can always tell if someone is using MS Word. MS Word has been using the same horrible pagebreaking/linebreaking/wordbreaking algorithms since the mid-80's, it use no whitespace adjustments anywhere and its tables have looked similarly ugly since the dawn of MS Word. My first contact with MS Word was in 1985 or -86, a decade before I came to know TeX existed. I had used a lot of different wordprocessors and pagesetting systems previosly (even written a very simple pagesetting system of my own as a kid, with IBM ProPrinter output (my printer had a manual thick as a telephone book)) . My first contact with MS Word was a paper someone had printed, I was really revolted, it was a lot uglier than something printed with a typewritter. Shortly after I was forced to use MS Word at school; my heart bled and my eyes hurt.

      The default font in TeX is just a default font, it can be changed. You can also change how figures and tables are treated, you may even choose to not use a floating figure or table but insert the table/figure in a fixed place. It is sometimes harder to change the default looks in LaTex, but it is doable. The horrible typhografi of MS Word is unchangeble.

    71. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, you suck. get the fuck off this website you loser

    72. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Much as I hate to say anything good about Microsoft, I do all my writing with Word 2003...and very few people write more heavily mathematical material than I do. It's a matter of taste, but I'll never use anything but a WYSIWYG equation editor. The only reason I don't use OpenOffice is that I hate its equation editor.

    73. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah yes, the reliable old joke: all X people who care will be happy, where X is a humorously small number. Classic!

      Ah yes, the old reliable "Ah yes..." retort. Classic.

      Critiquing the repetitive memes is getting as old and foolish as feeding trolls. Hence this meta-critique.

      Meta-critiques are the latest in-thing!

    74. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Chapter80 · · Score: 1

      I primarily used Latex in college, with an occasional use of Lambskin.

    75. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by tixxit · · Score: 1

      LaTeX gives you a number of advantages over word. First, the equations. This matters more to some, then others, but being able to quickly write math equations, and even just symbols, inline is great. Being able to split up my thesis into different files by chapters was also great. So was the sane versioning since it is all text (using git, in my case). Easy references and what not are great too, especially since it is all text and you can quickly search(/replace) most anything, including formatting.
      Your drawbacks were never an issue for me. Evince automatically refreshes files when they change on disk, so if I recompile my files to a DVI, or PS or PDF, it'll auto refresh it for me. Figure placement can be configured inline and there exists lots of packages to help with this as well.

    76. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by quadelirus · · Score: 1

      That's true, but I think that there might be some good reasons to have a sort of LaTeX light, that is a bit of a cross between WYSIWYG editing like Word, and some embedded markup for things like references and importing documents.

    77. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by WorldMaker · · Score: 1

      The modern docx format (as well as OpenOffice's odt format) is just a zip archive of mostly XML files. Unzip the docx and xmllint the XML and you can get nice textual diffs. Rezip to go back to WYSIWYG.

      I even wrote a simple tool to automate the process called musdex. It's on PyPI.

    78. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by TopherC · · Score: 1

      I mostly agree here, FWIW, but it's still probably easier to learn MS Word or OOO Writer "from scratch" (whatever that means) than LaTeX. The main reason I believe this is that it takes programmer's skills to understand TeX/LaTeX error messages and go back to the source document and figure out how to fix the problem. For long equations or complicated tables I often comment out sections to figure out what's not working, or pull out pieces to render one at a time, etc. This process is familiar and intuitive to me, but only because I've been programming for the last 30 years.

      For people who can deal with fixing strange LaTeX errors (at least better than they can deal with bizarre Word formatting quirks), LaTeX is great. Besides equations, it's great for including and captioning figures. It's also better than Word at tables, large documents, and collaborative writing. Others have pointed these out but I wanted to add figures to the list of LaTeX advantages over WYSIWYG.

    79. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by soundhack · · Score: 1

      I am not sure what you mean by Times New Roman not being a good option for printing documents? I actually like it, and use it a lot as default. But my point was that I can easily change to another similiar font without guessing what it would look like. In LaTeX (and yes I should have known about lyx and like back in 1998 or so, but I didn't because everybody else in the lab just used emacs) you can select fonts but you won't know what they look like until you compile/view and a few times of that was enough for me. Plus depending on how the default fonts were set up changing fonts was never as easy as Word.

      Someone mentioned it being funny considering fonts for a thesis, and admittedly it was only a minor nitpick, but I think it amusing when unix/tex/geek people so decry MS folk for acting like sheep but then turn around and criticize people who nitpick about the lack of choices on unix/tex/etc. I agree that some of my points are invalidated if I had used a WYSIWYG type editor, but by the time I was aware of them for TeX I had moved on.

      Sorry I am responding to a bunch of posts in one, but several mentioned about how hard math equations were to create. I really am confused about this, because equation editor was actually pretty easy for me to use and all my equations turned out ok, with no errant exponents/subscripts etc. I had more trouble getting equations to work right in LaTex because all that _{} ^{}, in a complicated equation, was hard to quickly see and make sense of. Then again I didnt have like 100 equations to do, and I can see if you have lots of similar equations it may be easier to copy and paste text syntactic elements.

    80. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Count+Fenring · · Score: 1

      That would make sense if typesetting math formulas was the only reason that kept LaTeX being used up to this day. You cannot do collaborative work with MS Word, let alone employ any semblance of a version control system.

      At no point am I saying that LaTeX has no advantages over Word. What I am saying is that, in terms of Literature and Humanities specific needs, the advantages are neither obvious or compelling.

      Add to this that your claim that Word doesn't support versioning, which isn't accurate (while you can't version it using CVS, git, etc, it does in fact support internal versioning), and that it doesn't support collaboration (untrue, although I do admit that it's of poor quality).

      And employing a version control system is trivial, as your entire document is nothing more than a list of source code files and images.

      Yes, employing a version control system is trivial. Yes, the document is source code. Your technical bias is showing. I'm guessing that you didn't come up through the Humanities or Literature, and that you don't do tech support for the average population of those areas of study. Those TERMS aren't common knowledge in those communities, much less the concepts behind them.

      You are assuming that academic types from fields such as soft sciences and humanities are, somehow, complete idiots who can't manage to grasp simple aspects that even first-year students from any IT degree manage to grasp on their first weeks on the course. They may not be familiar with the workflow associated with writing a LaTeX document but to go as far as insinuate that they are so technically incompetent that they can't possibly manage to work through all that voodoo... Well, you aren't basing your opinion on reality.

      I'm not saying that at all; I'm saying that the skills and knowledge involved in becoming proficient in LaTeX are entirely separate from the skills and knowledge that are central to the departments of Humanities and soft sciences. Just as a side note on this, while I'm personally technically adept, I have a B.A. in British and American Literature, and am currently working on a LIS Masters. Nine-tenths of my friends in college and beyond are former or current Literature or humanities majors; I spent a large amount of time discussing publishing and writing tools with my professors, as well. I've personally used Word, Openoffice, LaTeX (Lyx, Auctex, and raw with a code-highlighting text editor.

      This comment is completely out of touch with reality. I point it out to you that no one is born knowing how to use a WYSIWYG editor, let alone MS Word. If you need to use MS Word you have to spend your "time" and you must have enough "background" to come to grips with MS Word.

      Yes. Which 100% of US schoolchildren do, since it's taught in late elementary through high school. Additionally, while yes, Word has gotchas and problems, most of what a Literature or Humanities person needs is either discoverable through poking around, or is available through the first resource most people consult - their slightly more experienced peers.

      By claiming that learning how to use LaTeX is somehow cumbersome while using MS Word is somehow an error-free experience you are both demonstrating you don't have a clue about what's it like to use LaTeX and MS Word.

      So, is there a particular reason you're being so rude here? This isn't a particularly emotional issue, as far as I can see; furthermore, you seem to be inventing some sort of anti-LaTeX bias here. I'm a happy Linux-head with a good deal of affection for LaTeX. I also routinely taught HTML and other technical subjects to classmates during college, and did software and hardware troubleshooting for both students and faculty. I'm at no point saying "WORD IS GREAT, LaTeX SUX," just that it's understandable that Word and other WYSIWYG editors are the standard in non-technical academic fields.

    81. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Count+Fenring · · Score: 1

      So you mostly agree with him by stating my point? ;-)

      LaTeX is a much better piece of software than Word. It's infinitely superior to Word in most presentational aspects; but most of the advantages are immaterial to Literature and Humanities subjects. We don't use many figures or tables, work tends to be single author (this becomes slightly less true on the faculty level, but is still true in the main), and large simple documents of primarily text are much handled much more adroitly by Word than complex documents of any size.

      All I'm saying is what you say here - that it's much easier for a non-technical person to just use WYSIWYG, which they've generally already been trained on, than to pick up unrelated technical skills they don't have yet.

    82. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Unordained · · Score: 1

      Not being a user myself, I tried to look that up, and saw two implementations. xdocdiff, which uses xdoc2txt to convert documents to plaint-text, then diff's the results; and some scripts that will convince Word to launch and compare two files as if they were versions of the same file. The latter would give you the ability to diff complicated stuff (tables, diagrams), but does either allow any sort of auto-merge when contributors make simultaneous changes, or useful conflict-resolution?

    83. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Maury+Markowitz · · Score: 1

      > Ah yes, the reliable old joke: all X people who care will be
      > happy, where X is a humorously small number. Classic!

      Ok, starting out by bashing the idea of antidotal evidence.

      > I have many times read discussion board

      And then going on to use antidotal evidence.

      Sweet.

      Maury

    84. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Maury+Markowitz · · Score: 1

      > I did my thesis in Word, even though LaTeX was the standard to use at my lab

      All of these arguments are based on a false dichotomy. Anyone remember FullWrite? Taste? Even Pages would be great for this if it had MathML support.

      Word became the standard that it is today due to market forces. You could get all of Office for about the same price as just WordPerfect. All the money in the office app market evaporated and so did all the competition along with it. So when Word didn't cut it, you had to use some even worse tool, like LaTex.

      Sad really. Here's a great game: ask someone to enumerate the layout that LaTeX does that supposedly makes for those greatly superior looking documents they always go on about. Invariably it's paragraph layout and a few other concepts long ago subsumed into every other WP.

      Maury

    85. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Maury+Markowitz · · Score: 1

      > Also, Wikipedia uses TeX to process all tags

      To everyone's general complaints. There are widespread efforts to ditch it in favour of MathML.

      As someone who actually writes on the Wikipedia (aprox 7000 articles) I would prefer troff.

      Maury

    86. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Instead of "LaTeX light", you could just try using LyX to write your paper. It is no harder to use than Word, and contains the full power of TeX.

      http://www.lyx.org/

    87. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by r_batty_00 · · Score: 1

      >> I probably didn't save any time since I was
      >> starting from scratch with LaTeX

      I did my thesis in Word... I wish I hadn't. Half of the lab used LaTeX, other half used Word. Trust me, you saved time.

    88. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      antidotal evidence

      LOL. I'm pretty sure you meant "anecdotal evidence". And I'm not sure what anecdotal evidence has to do with somebody pointing out that someone is using an old joke with the serial numbers filed off, rather than making an informed comment.

      Unless you are trying to claim that the OP wasn't joking and really thinks there are only 27 users of TeX? And you further think that this needs serious debate? I'm really not sure whether you are serious about this, or not.

      And then going on to use antidotal evidence.

      LOL. I'm sure you have some kind of a point, but I'm not seeing it, sorry.

      And I presume you have some sort of sense of humor and you noticed the jokes about heavy drinking and Prozac? Or did you think the booze and Prozac were just antidotes?

      Sweet.

      LOL. Whatever, dude.

    89. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everything you complain about screams to me that you truly don't know how to use LaTeX.

    90. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My understanding is that TeX is standard in the academic world, because it can correctly typeset serious math equations.

      It probably depends on the exact academic field, but in mine (astrophysics), LaTeX is absolutely standard. If I sent a paper to any of my colleagues in Microsoft Word format, I'd get the same sort of astonished responses as you'd expect from an average secretary who received an attachment in LaTeX source code.

    91. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Alinabi · · Score: 1

      If you don't need the ability to typeset formulae, all the markup you need is a \chapter command whenever you start a new chapter and a \footnote wherever you insert a footnote. Not exactly a steep learning curve.

      --
      "You can't allow somebody to commit the crime before you detain them." [Condoleezza Rice]
    92. Re:Perspective vs. Tunnel Vision by Count+Fenring · · Score: 1

      In my own experience, this statement is somewhat inaccurate. At minimum, you'll need some level of knowledge of meta-document stuff (author, etc) and you'll need to know enough to choose a style, unless your campus provides a default LaTeX style for documents produced. I know that I had to override several aspects of the standard MLA style in order to produce a document that conformed to my teacher's specifications.

      And if we're talking about raw LaTeX, there's a learning process needed for just producing output - given that many of the students coming into these programs won't have ever interacted with a computer through the command line. LyX and other such solutions can ameliorate some of this, but there are still a fair amount of gotchas.

      Again, it's not rocket science, and it's not out of the reach of non-technical users; but it's also not the zero-effort instawin that it's being portrayed as. And, given that the main benefits of LaTeX are, as I previously stated, either not germane to the field or not obvious/usable without deeper knowledge, any amount of extra effort is going to kill adoption.

  12. "...the world is still here." by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

    He said earthshaking, not Earth-destroying. Sad to see that he is going to waste more time on typesetting, though.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    1. Re:"...the world is still here." by Martin+Blank · · Score: 3, Funny

      Apparently, typesetting is one of those things that can grab hold of you and never let go. I know a couple of people who were trained in typesetting, and they can't seem to help but criticize the kerning and leading of... well, just about everything printed.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    2. Re:"...the world is still here." by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

      Sad to see that he is going to waste more time on typesetting, though.

      Don Knuth: It's an old habit. I spent my whole life trying not to be careless. Women and children can afford to be careless, but not men.

    3. Re:"...the world is still here." by Yoozer · · Score: 5, Funny

      criticize the kerning

      Perhaps you meant "keming"?

    4. Re:"...the world is still here." by quadelirus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm pretty sure this is a joke. All the twitter posts have a parody flag, and Knuth is renowned for his odd sense of humor.

    5. Re:"...the world is still here." by NEDHead · · Score: 0

      I hear keening

    6. Re:"...the world is still here." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had high hopes that Knuth would be offering a new theory of the Brontosaurus.

    7. Re:"...the world is still here." by Trogre · · Score: 2, Funny

      For the IIIrd time, I'll Hear No Ill Spoken of Problems with Fonts.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  13. This version of iTex is junk. by TheRedDuke · · Score: 3, Funny

    Wait for build 1729.

    1. Re:This version of iTex is junk. by rjk94 · · Score: 0

      Good choice of number:
      12^3 + 1^3 = 10^3 + 9^3 = 1729
      Lowest number to do this, yesiree.

      You could say TeX has just been 1 (knuth arrow) up'd!
      I mean, if your puns were real sucky you could.

      --
      Don't try to out-weird me, three eyes. I get weirder things than you in my breakfast cereal. - Zaphod Beeblebrox
    2. Re:This version of iTex is junk. by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 1

      I'll wait for 87539319.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    3. Re:This version of iTex is junk. by 1729 · · Score: 1

      Good choice of number:

      12^3 + 1^3 = 10^3 + 9^3 = 1729

      Hey, that is a cool number!

    4. Re:This version of iTex is junk. by md65536 · · Score: 1

      I agree that 1729 will be rather a dull one.

      I'm waiting for Ta(7) though.

      (thus proving that I know how to look up shit in wikipedia)

    5. Re:This version of iTex is junk. by rjk94 · · Score: 0

      And, incidentally, cool username!

      --
      Don't try to out-weird me, three eyes. I get weirder things than you in my breakfast cereal. - Zaphod Beeblebrox
  14. Some details from the conference by WillAdams · · Score: 4, Informative

    here:

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1702818&cid=32752126

    It was an hilarious presentation in the spirit of his first publication... http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2008/01/the-enduring-art-of-computer-programming.html (scroll down to Potrzebie)

    to repeat (w/o the geocoord)

    a successor to TeX which he has been working on for some time

    scratch tex78 and tex82

    so making up for assumptions which don't fit the internet age

    jokes about measuring and math in TeX .4pt == .3999pt

    maxdimen too small, 1sp too large

    tunnel vision caused by computers of the day

    subset of XML uses Unicode automatic everything

    all directions and all dimensions

    hypertext

    text audio video sensors GPScoords accelerometers haptics

    midi input to score and back to music

    no macros --- menu driven like Word but enhanced

    spoken command and gestures

    \i \TeX (wrapped on a sphere)

    spoken name accompanied by (optional) ringing bell

    not programmed directly

    1289 bugs in TeX
    571 bugs in metafont

    Project Marianne

    www.projectmarianne.com

    Project Biturgical

    written in Scheme using all buzzwords

    pricing - monthly subscription on cloud

    first year one month free

    pricing based on internet speed

    will change everyday

    life is too short to reread anything

    will benefit world's economy, user's can sell documents

    network of certified consultants

    online help
        - for dummies
        - for wizards
        - personalized on-line

    symbolic equations
    graphics
    maps
    satellite photos

    \i\TeX hyper document

    math mode like mathml --- must evaluate

    avatars

    hyperbolic geometry

    videoconferencing

    world-class photo retouching

    character, face, speech recignition

    cognition

    output format:
        - lasercutters
        - embroidering machines
        - 3D printers
        - plasma cutters

    interactive cookbook

    life as hypertext document

    released next month

    pending patent applications

    --
    Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    1. Re:Some details from the conference by zippthorne · · Score: 3, Funny

      It seems we have no time to lose in bringing out a new typesetting engine!

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    2. Re:Some details from the conference by wannabgeek · · Score: 1

      Anywhere we can get to view the presentation? Is it recorded and uploaded anywhere?

      --
      I'm much more funny, interesting and insightful than the moderators think
    3. Re:Some details from the conference by GregariousBoson · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the 10% referral refund. If you refer 11 friends, you're guaranteed a steady income for the rest of your life! And of course, the interactive cookbook interfaces with your kitchen hardware to cook you dinner.

    4. Re:Some details from the conference by WillAdams · · Score: 1

      Kaveh Bazargan recorded all of the presentations (that's me asking Tom Rokicki why TeXview.app wasn't used as the basis for worldwideweb.app during the panel) and will be putting them all up at http://river-valley.tv/

      William

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    5. Re:Some details from the conference by WillAdams · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I was writing as fast as I could (literally, I wrote it out on a Tablet PC from the back row since Dr. Knuth didn't want people using laptops to check web sites during his presentation) --- but I kept laughing....

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    6. Re:Some details from the conference by md65536 · · Score: 1

      I like it! It reads like Fitter, Happier.

      Slashdot ate my first reply where I commented on that.

  15. Is it supposed to replace HTML? Flash? by GreatBunzinni · · Score: 0

    TeX has been extensively used to develop high-quality documents, from small articles to full-fledged books. Yet, I don't believe that neither animation nor stereographic sound will come out well in print. Exactly, what's the objective here? Is it to replace media formats which support sound, video and 3D graphics?

    --
    Slashdot, fix your code or at least hire someone who is competent at it to do it for you.
    1. Re:Is it supposed to replace HTML? Flash? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Whoosh!

    2. Re:Is it supposed to replace HTML? Flash? by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Yet, I don't believe that neither animation nor stereographic sound will come out well in print. Exactly, what's the objective here? Is it to replace media formats which support sound, video and 3D graphics?

      Ever hear of a Kindle?

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    3. Re:Is it supposed to replace HTML? Flash? by thogard · · Score: 2, Informative

      What do you expect them to typeset the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy with?

    4. Re:Is it supposed to replace HTML? Flash? by dangitman · · Score: 1

      Whoosh!

      Look, I don't mind if iTex replaces Flash, but don't take Whoosh away from me! I'm rather fond of it.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
  16. What is stereographic sound? by noidentity · · Score: 1

    I'm trying to figure out what stereographic sound is. I think it's sound, but the graphic makes me thing maybe it's graphics. Or is this a joke? I'm really confused.

    1. Re:What is stereographic sound? by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      No, you're just misunderstanding the -graph suffix. It's more than just for images.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    2. Re:What is stereographic sound? by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      The normal term is stereophonic....

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    3. Re:What is stereographic sound? by prockcore · · Score: 1

      If you cross your ears, you can hear a sailboat!

    4. Re:What is stereographic sound? by treeves · · Score: 1

      A visual representation of sound with 3d effects, for which either red-and-blue or polarizing headphones are needed to enjoy the experience...or ...whooosh.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    5. Re:What is stereographic sound? by dangitman · · Score: 1

      No, you're just misunderstanding the -graph suffix. It's more than just for images.

      Actually, you seem to be the one misunderstanding the -graph suffix. Or missing the joke.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    6. Re:What is stereographic sound? by lahvak · · Score: 1

      You mean a schooner.

      --
      AccountKiller
    7. Re:What is stereographic sound? by noidentity · · Score: 1

      Actually, you seem to be the one misunderstanding the -graph suffix. Or missing the joke.

      I'd have caught the joke if it were at all funny. I'm still trying to figure this out. So the announcement a few days ago was a lead up to this? Somehow the humor totally failed for me.

    8. Re:What is stereographic sound? by TopherC · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure either but someone will figure it out and add it to Qt.

  17. i... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i call iShenanigans

  18. this was... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    your one and only chance today to claim "1st iPost" but nooooo, you had to do something else instead...

  19. TFA is 22hrs stale tweet by dragisha · · Score: 1

    Never saw Slashdot article with less substance... And that says a lot.

    And who is this news source?

    --
    http://opencm3.net, http://www.nongnu.org/gm2/
    1. Re:TFA is 22hrs stale tweet by laffer1 · · Score: 4, Informative

      according to google, his presentation was a hoax.

    2. Re:TFA is 22hrs stale tweet by selven · · Score: 1

      22hrs stale tweet

      Less than a single day is stale??! Oh no, I found out about a news item about a product which won't come out for some more months or even years 22 hours after some other people! I'd rather come here and read some meaningful discussion (that's where the substance is and has been for years, not the summary) so I can understand the significance of this than get some minimal 140 character news feed one day in advance.

    3. Re:TFA is 22hrs stale tweet by dragisha · · Score: 1

      It is stale, when used as "stop the presses".

      Also, it is ridiculous... To have a tweet for TFA...

      --
      http://opencm3.net, http://www.nongnu.org/gm2/
    4. Re:TFA is 22hrs stale tweet by dangitman · · Score: 1

      according to google, his presentation was a hoax.

      So, his presentation didn't actually happen? How does that work, people are reporting on it. Did he manage to convince people to hallucinate that he gave a presentation that he didn't?

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    5. Re:TFA is 22hrs stale tweet by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      Really? Stereographic sound and animation in a typesetting system? It's called fucking iTeX.

      I don't even use the damn thing, and I spotted this was a hoax.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    6. Re:TFA is 22hrs stale tweet by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > I don't even use the damn thing...

      If you did you would not have been so fast to "spot the hoax" (self-parody, actually).

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  20. Lame Indeed by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Knuth "also stated that this successor of TeX will have features like 3-D printing, animation, stereographic sound."

    In other words, it will become a bloated mess.

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    1. Re:Lame Indeed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In other words, it will become a bloated mess.

      Dude, if you'd ever installed the entire TeX suite from source, you'd already know it's bloated. The saving grace is that it's anything but a mess and all that bloating stuff is actually useful.

    2. Re:Lame Indeed by makapuf · · Score: 5, Funny

      Is it a plane ? Is it a bird ? No, it's a Woosh !

    3. Re:Lame Indeed by bonch · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How does supporting those features make something a "bloated mess?"

    4. Re:Lame Indeed by molecular · · Score: 1

      become?

  21. iText by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    iText is a free and open source library for creating and manipulating PDF files in Java.

    Whoa

  22. Re:Donald Knuth is a Christian. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is that a "Troll"? I can see "offtopic", but what is trollish about that?

  23. Animations... hmm by SteveFoerster · · Score: 2, Funny

    Animations? So with a buildup like that we get... a blink tag?

    --
    Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
    1. Re:Animations... hmm by grilled-cheese · · Score: 1

      No, you get a contender to animatedGIF. After 5+ years of development and 3rd party toolkits, you might get flash.

  24. Re:Donald Knuth is a Christian. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    OT comments on religion or politics are, ex ipso, trolls.

  25. It's three months late. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    It amazes me how many people take this seriously.

    It reads just like the Kernighan & Ritchie C "admission" or RFC 1149.

    Jeez folks. It's a JOKE.

  26. Google search for "knuth announcement" produced... by jthill · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wonder if this would surprise him: at 4AM Pacific today, I searched for "knuth announcement".

    Google told me that was the 27th most common search over the preceding hour.

    --
    As always, all IMO. Insert "I think" everywhere grammatically possible.
  27. Other reasons it's lame... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > No Twitter integration?

    It also has no wireless and less space than a Nomad.

  28. Stereographic sound? by mr.canuck · · Score: 0

    stereophonic sound maybe?

    'I can't hear you without my glasses on!'

    1. Re:Stereographic sound? by Dilaudid · · Score: 1

      stereographic is a real word - disney used it to describe the sound on Fantasia - it means that you can visualise the position of the object based on the stereophonic effect. Quite an interesting use of words because it highlights the primacy of vision over the other senses in terms of how we perceive the world.

  29. This was the earthshaking announcement? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who does Knuth think he is? Steve Jobs?

  30. So... how long before.... by Izhido · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... Apple sues Knuth for infringing trademarks over the use of the "i" in iTex?

  31. So *that's* what Knuth was doing at Techshop ! by billstewart · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Techshop is a shared-equipment workspace in Menlo Park CA, with a few other branches (they're opening in San Francisco this summer.) I was there welding a couple of weeks ago, and ran into a friend of mine who was doing a project in the laser cutter room, and the people working on the other laser cutter were Knuth and his wife. (I refrained from walking over and saying "Hi, I'm Joe Fanboi, I used your books 30 years ago!".) Techshop has laser cutters, embroidering machines, 3D printers, and plasma cutters, and here's Knuth's latest project supporting them. I wonder if he's got any plans for controlling CNC milling machines and routers?

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    1. Re:So *that's* what Knuth was doing at Techshop ! by WillAdams · · Score: 1

      I believe he was making memorabilia for the conference.

      Every one got an iTeX logo and people he wished to thank got an embroidered piece.

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
  32. Umm, no by ynotds · · Score: 1

    As I posted moments ago on my own site, Google is now exceeding M$/IBM/GE/GM/Standard Oil/The East India Co at their worst.

    Apple remains Apple. Comparing the two is like calling atheism a religion ... a category error.

    --
    -- Our systemic servants do not good masters make.
    1. Re:Umm, no by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      According to your site, their crime is letting you configure google news - and then failing to save those customizations! The horror! It's practically genocide!

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
  33. alternate solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    P=0 is also a valid solution.
    --
    srpd

    1. Re:alternate solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And P = infinity

  34. color me impressed... by X0563511 · · Score: 1

    Wow, your earthshattering announcement sure was earthshattering! You're going to name your next project iTex! Wow! I mean, holy shit, wow!

    --
    For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
  35. 26, not 27 by YA_Python_dev · · Score: 1

    26 users.

    I don't do that stuff anymore.

    --
    There's a hidden treasure in Python 3.x: __prepare__()
  36. I'd say not so much by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 0

    Latex is still used in the academic world, but mostly by stick-in-the-mud professors that don't want to learn anything new. Word seems to be the fast growing standard. I understand the included equation editor is good for most things, and for what it isn't, you get Mathtype.

    I work as tech support in an engineering department so this is the sort of thing I see a lot of. We have a number of Latex users, but we have far more Word users. Of those Word users some find Mathtype useful or necessary, others say the included equation editor is enough. We have some who have moved from Latex to Word because it is easier in terms of being able to see what you are doing and having robust spell checking.

    Absolute formatting isn't all that useful a feature since the journal you send it to will reformat things to fit on the page, anyhow.

    Of course any of this only applies to "hard" sciences with lots of equations. Engineering, math, chemistry, etc. The social sciences, arts, humanities, etc have no need as they do not do massive equations. They are all Word all the time.

    Tex seriously is a very, very small market and getting smaller. Computer users who have come up using GUIs are wanting WYSIWYG programs like Word.

    1. Re:I'd say not so much by decoy256 · · Score: 1

      The social sciences, arts, humanities, etc have no need as they do not do massive equations.

      Um... when was the last time the arts did ANY equations, let alone "massive" ones.

    2. Re:I'd say not so much by dotwaffle · · Score: 1

      Computer users who have come up using GUIs are wanting WYSIWYG programs like Word.

      The GUI word processor (with WYSIWYG rendering) has been around for about 20 years in the home market, and 30 or more in the professional market.

      TeX might be smaller than Word, but if you compare the number of people who use "Styles" such as "Heading 1" etc in MSWord versus TeX users, I imagine the numbers will be roughly comparable.

    3. Re:I'd say not so much by tuttleturtle42 · · Score: 1

      It still depends on what department you are in though. I wrote up my homework in LaTeX for all of my classes since I learned it freshman year. In both departments (I was a math/CS double major), professors took me more seriously than other students specifically because of handing in homework written up in LaTeX. It was easier for them to grade and they recognized it and were thankful for it. So in engineering it might be getting smaller, but from a student's perspective, it is not getting any smaller in either math or computer science. Most of the grad students I know learned LaTeX early on in their master's program because it was just something necessary to know, if they had not already learned it as an undergrad.

    4. Re:I'd say not so much by chichilalescu · · Score: 1

      "TeX is a small market" doesn't make sense. TeX, LaTeX and other derivatives are free, people use them as they see fit. Engineers do not need to write a lot of equations; heck, I have physics teachers who use word because they are too old to learn latex, and they haven't really had something complicated to write (experimental physics).

      See this link for a good presentation of what TeX can actually do http://nitens.org/taraborelli/latex . For arts and stuff.
      Furthermore, consider that there are scientists who have to write equations as fast as normal text, because their normal text IS equations --- see this article for instance http://arxiv.org/abs/1007.0044 .

      TeX is also a systematic system of writing. That means stuff like sympy (http://code.google.com/p/sympy/), maxima (http://maxima.sourceforge.net/), GiNaC (http://www.ginac.de/) and others can be used to make complicated symbolic computations and then output them automatically in a TeX file. Do you realize what this means in terms of productivity?

      Anyway, my point is not to turn you into a TeX enthuziast. But, if you hear someone say that TeX is getting used more and more, don't act like we're just a couple of old farts talking about our half forgotten youth, because it really makes you look bad.

      --
      new sig
    5. Re:I'd say not so much by Y-Crate · · Score: 1

      The social sciences, arts, humanities, etc have no need as they do not do massive equations.

      Um... when was the last time the arts did ANY equations, let alone "massive" ones.

      Take Cinematography and get back to me on that.

    6. Re:I'd say not so much by Engine · · Score: 1

      Latex is still used in the academic world, but mostly by stick-in-the-mud professors that don't want to learn anything new.

      When I read that sentence I seriously thought you were trolling. I'm a physicist, and everyone I know is using Latex.

    7. Re:I'd say not so much by Chutzpah · · Score: 1

      The engineering (EE and Mech) and CS research group who I do IT for use TeX (specifically LaTeX) extensively. There are several groups where the professor basically tells their grad students "you are expected to learn and use LaTeX if you are part of this lab". We do have some people using Word + MathType, but they are certainly a large minority. I used to do IT for the CS department at the same University. LaTeX was the most important package to have installed on all the grad student machines, I don't think a single one used Word.

      Sure, I have yet to meet a humanities student that uses or even knows what TeX is, but it is certainly alive and well in science and engineering. You could say the same thing about Matlab.

  37. Knuthing to see here by CrazyJim1 · · Score: 4, Funny

    please move along

    1. Re:Knuthing to see here by NNKK · · Score: 1

      You need to be punished for that.

  38. earthshattering by ifeelswine · · Score: 1

    we all know that earthshattering is caused by women dressing immodestly. An Iranian cleric told me this so I know that it is true. The lack of any earth shattering during knuths presentation suggestion he did not yell "show us your tuts!" to throngs of swooning coeds.

  39. Please, have some respect. by tqk · · Score: 0

    This's Donald Knuth. The guy's no joking matter, even for /. IT-wise, he's the equivalent of Galileo or Copernicus. I'm glad he's still on the hunt. I'm going to love playing with his new invention.

    For the uninitiated, TeX and its cousins are documentation programming languages. If you're a programmer, you'd probably love writing documentation in LaTeX, once you learned it, and it isn't tough sledding. This stuff makes you look beautiful. I suggest you try it before you joke about it.

    --
    "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
  40. And iTex will be followed... by Mr.+Moose · · Score: 1

    ...by a new version, called Hitex.

  41. Write it in Turkish. Biitpliig. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Turkish is such a cool language. They can put a tit on an uppercase "I" like how a lowercase "i" has a tit above it. Umlaut is cool because it has two tits above that Uhm, but that arrived from latination of the Germs by the Holy Roman Uhmpire. Turkish isn't latin in any way, so it f*cking earned those tits on it's uppercase "I" and that's what I like. Yet then, what if it wasn't the miscegenation of Rome into a Germani Superior by conquest to bring about the Uhmlaut? What if the Ottoman Uhmpire introduced the Uhmlaut into Dooshlund? oh oh!

  42. So how are the releases going to be numbered? by Fraggy_the_undead · · Score: 1

    even though it's called iTex, i isn't useful as a version numbering scheme... \sqrt{2} maybe?

  43. I hope this is real by drewhk · · Score: 2, Funny

    I hope this is real, because this would be very bad for a joke.

  44. stereographic sound by ETruss · · Score: 1

    OK, so what is "stereographic sound"?

  45. huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what the hell is a TeX?

  46. Re:Google search for "knuth announcement" produced by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

    I wonder if this would surprise him: at 4AM Pacific today, I searched for "knuth announcement".

    Not likely. A lot of computer scientists have strange hours.

    --
    Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  47. Video of talk here... by kaveh1000 · · Score: 1

    http://river-valley.tv/an-earthshaking-announcement/ posted with permission from Knuth.

  48. Download of the announcement itself by stasike · · Score: 1

    Download the announcement at http://river-valley.tv/conferences/tug-2010