First of all, I already spotted my spelling error before you kindly pointed it out. I wouldn't be so pedantic given your use of "prehaps" and the confusion between spelling and grammar (and what's with "continued" anyway?). Well, yeah, I probably would be. I seem to recall points at which I've taken humorous exception to spelling errors and introduced a few of my own at the same time.
In another post (I'm sure you can find it) I do admit that I missed the point and that you were better able to parse the poster's message. After reading the original post again in the context of the discussion I don't see that my misreading was such an egregious error though.
Since the discussion was that this new GPL'd release either was or was not a big deal, I thought tiger99's post was saying that the newly released code eliminated the need for an Exchange server at home. I think my thought process in that regard is evident in the portion of my reply that you didn't quote.
If it helps I can bow and scrape and extol your superior comprehension skills in a direct reply to you.....
You're right. I did miss the point. It seemed you were saying, "Hey, with this being GPL'd we no longer need an exchange server at home." I'll have to go back and look at the wording.
Wish I'd read this reply before responding to the other one. Seems they understood your original post as "There never was a need" instead of "now no need".
Perhaps it's you who missed the fact that the parent seems to think this replaces and Exchange server at home.
This does not negate the need for an Exchange server at home, it drops the need for Outlook in order to tap into a corporate Exchange server (or one at home I suppose, but most home users can't afford the steep purchase price and wouldn't be able to set it up in a meaningful way anyhow).
Wow. You have an exchange server at home AND consider yourself a typical home user? Based on that you're right about one and wrong about the other, I just can't figure out which is which....
While building the search engine in a garage, never in his wildest dreams did he think Google would become what it is today.
I had no idea the search engine was mechanical. I thought it was software, more likely produced in a bedroom office or a basement on a computer. That's why I keep reading the articles here, I learn something new almost every time.
Hmm. I wasn't aware that AC's were blocked from reading back up the thread....
...those who would misrepresent themselves using your products for VC or even illegal/infringing sales revenue?
Those things.
But let's wait till we can prove it first, or we'll just end up coming across like a bunch of paranoid and immature zealots.
We're talking about asking questions here. If we run into it what do we do about it? That's a question that supposes it's possible to do these things, not necessarily that David is doing this and what should we do to them in response.
They haven't done anything wrong at all, except earned some bad PR by badmouthing Wine while apparently using it themselves.
It seems that your idea of "wrong" and mine do not coincide. I'd say trying to secure VC dollars by passing off someone else's work as your own is wrong. I'd say that disparaging WINE while using it as the secret ingredient in your own product is wrong.
Re:Want high-quality? Get a real camera!
on
Camera Phone Tips
·
· Score: 1
He already mentioned 2MP phones in his post. I'm sure he was talking about 4 or even 5MP. He's also correct in that, all else being equal, sensor size is more important than pixel count when it comes to better images.
The questions are still valid. I don't think the poster was looking to stir up a lynch mob, but to ask what his opinions are regarding folks who do such things and what should be done to curtail such activities.
If you'll check I mentioned using a regular bucket. You're still thinking in terms of the bucket having to be on the ground. I'm saying put a regular, ordinary, everyday bucket at the top. Now you can use your 40' (or longer) "straw", bent at the top so that it fits down into your bucket, to suck the water DOWN (it only has to rise a foot or so before it's gravity fed all the way to the ground) to another bucket or whatever.
You're getting close. Why not put the bucket (a normal bucket, not some cobbled up monster bucket) up at the top and the straw with a crook in it easily drains the water down to the ground.
It's kind of interesting that the NYT would engage in what I would consider sensationalist press.
Right. That's/.'s job....
From the article:
Probably no more than 500,000 people are using I.R.C. worldwide at any time, and many of them are engaged in legitimate activities, network administrators say.
Ah. That makes a little more sense then. Bouncing things off others is a great way to gain traction when you're learning something new. I've only recently begun to play with Photoshop and going it alone which is rather different than starting with a nascent version and with a group no less. I think it's much more daunting with current features and functionality (guessing from my experience with other packages) than it might have been to learn as new features were added.
And who says I read the books? I buy them from time to time, but find most of them too tedious when the program beckons to be explored right now. I found Photoshop User magazine to be an exception.
Do you use PS primarily for design or as a photographer? I've picked up design stuff by playing, but it was some of the photography stuff (and that's what I'm after for the most part) that I learned from others that I didn't feel was intuitive.
I tried using PS without instruction and got pretty far into it. I recently went to a seminar and was amazed by all that I didn't know. I've since looked through some old issues of Photoshop User and been even more amazed at how ignorant I was.
How do you know you're all that and a bag of chips if you don't expose yourself to something outside of your own intuited experience? Don't get me wrong. Several years ago I was using WordPerfect to produce a weekly magazine. I had trouble with a particular header and sent it to WP for help. They told me I was using the product well beyond its intended design and I was on my own. I finally figured it out on my own. There've been too many things I've learned about PS that I never would have picked up intuitively for me to think that you can just fall into it the way you seem to think you have.
I don't post to slashdot saying "I would move to Windows if..."; why should you?
Because Linux is more than an OS. It is part of an ideology as well. Perhaps Open Source fits the poster's philosophy of life or maybe they just want to save some bucks. It's doubtful any of those things would apply to someone moving in the other direction (unless you're a programmer who sees Open Source as taking bread from their hungry children's mouths or something).
For me, the GIMP works well enough (I don't see anything wrong with it) and hey, it's $0 and I can see the source code. For that reason (the source code) it will ALWAYS be better than photoshop.
The key here is your first two words. Hey, if it works for you, great! I started with the GIMP and thought it was wonderful. Then I got ahold of a copy of Photoshop Elements 2.0 and all I could do was say "Wow". I was so impressed I bought a copy. I've since tried Photoshop 7.0 and been even more impressed. However I'm not impressed with the cost of entry. For that reason I'd love to have GIMP come up to speed. So, put me in the column with the parent (except that I already use Linux) in wanting certain things to work better than they do now.
They'll need the 5, 10, 20 MP cams to print their enlargements, which will always be accurately composed and framed (ie, need no cropping).
There's still cropping involved even when the image is well composed simply because the ratios between the captured image and the printed image differ (if you're going to be printing standard stuff like 4x6, 5x7 or 8x10 (or larger)).
Slashdot Mirror
First of all, I already spotted my spelling error before you kindly pointed it out. I wouldn't be so pedantic given your use of "prehaps" and the confusion between spelling and grammar (and what's with "continued" anyway?). Well, yeah, I probably would be. I seem to recall points at which I've taken humorous exception to spelling errors and introduced a few of my own at the same time.
In another post (I'm sure you can find it) I do admit that I missed the point and that you were better able to parse the poster's message. After reading the original post again in the context of the discussion I don't see that my misreading was such an egregious error though.
Since the discussion was that this new GPL'd release either was or was not a big deal, I thought tiger99's post was saying that the newly released code eliminated the need for an Exchange server at home. I think my thought process in that regard is evident in the portion of my reply that you didn't quote.
If it helps I can bow and scrape and extol your superior comprehension skills in a direct reply to you.....
Twice as powerful in the 50's?
You're right. I did miss the point. It seemed you were saying, "Hey, with this being GPL'd we no longer need an exchange server at home." I'll have to go back and look at the wording.
Wish I'd read this reply before responding to the other one. Seems they understood your original post as "There never was a need" instead of "now no need".
Perhaps it's you who missed the fact that the parent seems to think this replaces and Exchange server at home.
This does not negate the need for an Exchange server at home, it drops the need for Outlook in order to tap into a corporate Exchange server (or one at home I suppose, but most home users can't afford the steep purchase price and wouldn't be able to set it up in a meaningful way anyhow).
With no need for an exchange server at home...
Wow. You have an exchange server at home AND consider yourself a typical home user? Based on that you're right about one and wrong about the other, I just can't figure out which is which....
While building the search engine in a garage, never in his wildest dreams did he think Google would become what it is today.
I had no idea the search engine was mechanical. I thought it was software, more likely produced in a bedroom office or a basement on a computer. That's why I keep reading the articles here, I learn something new almost every time.
Hmm. I wasn't aware that AC's were blocked from reading back up the thread....
Those things.
But let's wait till we can prove it first, or we'll just end up coming across like a bunch of paranoid and immature zealots.
We're talking about asking questions here. If we run into it what do we do about it? That's a question that supposes it's possible to do these things, not necessarily that David is doing this and what should we do to them in response.
They haven't done anything wrong at all, except earned some bad PR by badmouthing Wine while apparently using it themselves.
It seems that your idea of "wrong" and mine do not coincide. I'd say trying to secure VC dollars by passing off someone else's work as your own is wrong. I'd say that disparaging WINE while using it as the secret ingredient in your own product is wrong.
He already mentioned 2MP phones in his post. I'm sure he was talking about 4 or even 5MP. He's also correct in that, all else being equal, sensor size is more important than pixel count when it comes to better images.
The questions are still valid. I don't think the poster was looking to stir up a lynch mob, but to ask what his opinions are regarding folks who do such things and what should be done to curtail such activities.
Even if you found the Sears catalog useless for purchases you could still wipe with it. Tried that with eBay and now I can't read my email...
If you'll check I mentioned using a regular bucket. You're still thinking in terms of the bucket having to be on the ground. I'm saying put a regular, ordinary, everyday bucket at the top. Now you can use your 40' (or longer) "straw", bent at the top so that it fits down into your bucket, to suck the water DOWN (it only has to rise a foot or so before it's gravity fed all the way to the ground) to another bucket or whatever.
I think they meant, "nothing GNU here." So, what's it doing on /.?
You're getting close. Why not put the bucket (a normal bucket, not some cobbled up monster bucket) up at the top and the straw with a crook in it easily drains the water down to the ground.
Right. That's
From the article:The
I didn't take it. I promise.
Does it matter if the matter is missing if the missing matter never mattered before?
mutter.... mutter....
Ah. That makes a little more sense then. Bouncing things off others is a great way to gain traction when you're learning something new. I've only recently begun to play with Photoshop and going it alone which is rather different than starting with a nascent version and with a group no less. I think it's much more daunting with current features and functionality (guessing from my experience with other packages) than it might have been to learn as new features were added.
And who says I read the books? I buy them from time to time, but find most of them too tedious when the program beckons to be explored right now. I found Photoshop User magazine to be an exception.
Do you use PS primarily for design or as a photographer? I've picked up design stuff by playing, but it was some of the photography stuff (and that's what I'm after for the most part) that I learned from others that I didn't feel was intuitive.
Heh. I've been to some classes like that...
I tried using PS without instruction and got pretty far into it. I recently went to a seminar and was amazed by all that I didn't know. I've since looked through some old issues of Photoshop User and been even more amazed at how ignorant I was.
How do you know you're all that and a bag of chips if you don't expose yourself to something outside of your own intuited experience? Don't get me wrong. Several years ago I was using WordPerfect to produce a weekly magazine. I had trouble with a particular header and sent it to WP for help. They told me I was using the product well beyond its intended design and I was on my own. I finally figured it out on my own. There've been too many things I've learned about PS that I never would have picked up intuitively for me to think that you can just fall into it the way you seem to think you have.
I didn't have to get used to Photoshop, I just found all the stuff I needed naturally.
Then I'd wager you're either not using it for much or not using it very well. The program is immense.
Is it really that hard to move a mouse to the top of the screen?
Tomorrow, when you wake up and get dressed (provided you don't sleep in your clothes I guess), go out into the living room naked.
Then go back into the bedroom and get some drawers man.
Drag 'em into the living room and put them on.
Then go back into the bedroom and get some socks.
Drag 'em into the living room and put them on.
Then go back and get some pants.
Drag 'em into the living room and put them on.
Then.... well, I think you get the picture.
I don't post to slashdot saying "I would move to Windows if..."; why should you?
Because Linux is more than an OS. It is part of an ideology as well. Perhaps Open Source fits the poster's philosophy of life or maybe they just want to save some bucks. It's doubtful any of those things would apply to someone moving in the other direction (unless you're a programmer who sees Open Source as taking bread from their hungry children's mouths or something).
For me, the GIMP works well enough (I don't see anything wrong with it) and hey, it's $0 and I can see the source code. For that reason (the source code) it will ALWAYS be better than photoshop.
The key here is your first two words. Hey, if it works for you, great! I started with the GIMP and thought it was wonderful. Then I got ahold of a copy of Photoshop Elements 2.0 and all I could do was say "Wow". I was so impressed I bought a copy. I've since tried Photoshop 7.0 and been even more impressed. However I'm not impressed with the cost of entry. For that reason I'd love to have GIMP come up to speed. So, put me in the column with the parent (except that I already use Linux) in wanting certain things to work better than they do now.
I am what I am. I never post AC.
Yeah. Those posers really infuriate those of us who really are descendants of Jesse James.....
Don't know that I've ever seen anyone modded "Flamebait" for conceding a point....
They'll need the 5, 10, 20 MP cams to print their enlargements, which will always be accurately composed and framed (ie, need no cropping).
There's still cropping involved even when the image is well composed simply because the ratios between the captured image and the printed image differ (if you're going to be printing standard stuff like 4x6, 5x7 or 8x10 (or larger)).
I was going to suggest that using a printer might make for better results if for no other reason than a wider color gamut....