Sounds like something coming from a person who has never created music. It's actually a craft, and needs a certain competence. And even the ancient Greeks knew there was a relation between mathematics and music.
Re:KDE Zealots: A vocal minority of a dying DE
on
GNOME 2.12 Released
·
· Score: 1
Yeah, fo sho', but what does DistroWatch mean? I can't imagine it counts us oldtimers who have run Debian for years (how could it?). I never visit the site. It's a site for people who try new distros, or try Linux for the first time. The statistics there don't mean a thing.
And BTW, you find the same rampant fanboyism in all stories these days. There is no interesting discussion left on this site, at all.
You are entirely correct. I should perhaps have been more specific, but didn't think it necessary, since I mentioned fonts only in passing. I wasn't thinking of how to install fonts and so (which truly is a mess, although I have managed to do so, and I'm just a regular geek with education in comletely different disciplines), but of how the fonts are handled, and how well they end up being suitable for reading by a human. This is a complex issue, but you really only have to compare a document produced in Word to one produced with LaTeX to decide which you prefer. If they use the same font, you'll usually prefer LaTeX (there are add-ons for Word to make it support ligatures and stuff, though).
Oh, and TeX does seem to (probably through pdftex) support OpenType.
But Word doesn't work. Or rather, it doesn't work well. If you want to create good looking documents, Word can't do it (compared to TeX, it doesn't handle fonts, page breaks, line breaks, etc. well). If you want to create documents for publishing, where some other person does the layout and page design, Word is still technically a bad choice, for several reasons:
The document format is application specific.
Although you can use styles, few people know this, leading to unstructured documents.
Even if you use styles, the format is still a bastard between page layout and structured layout, leading to unstructured documents.
This leads to a lot of extra work for the designer. For instance, if you use Quark, all italics have a tendency to get lost when you import the text. If you use unicode, it often gets fubar'ed. All habitual errors from the user (very few people know how to use Word properly) that Word hides because it's a bastard, show up again when you do the page layout, and have to be fixed.
So why do journals insist on Word documents? Because InDesign and those other apps have to support Word in some way, and do. But don't expect that turtlenecked designer to know how to handle TeX. So yeah, we should all accept that the world revolves around Microsoft, not around sound technical decisions (or aesthetical, for that matter).
You're not going to get as good output from Word as from TeX, so just forget about keeping the document ready for print. The journals will change the lay-out anyway. You need only to keep the basic structure; paragraphs, chapters, lists, figures, etc. And footnotes.
I would try converting to html instead of Word, (and maybe to Word from html). There are several command line tools that claim to do this. Since YMMV and all that, I can only suggest that you try it yourself. It shouldn't be too time consuming.
Well, by giving Java a GPL (or preferably LGPL) license, Sun could have users port Java to other platforms as needed. For instance, I could compile it for Linux PPC, and have a functional JVM on this computer. Or rather, I could just install it from Debian's archives, like I do with the rest of my applications. AFAIR, one of the great things about Java was supposed to be its portability, but the fact is that there are other languages with better portability. Sun could compete with these if they gave Java a proper free software license.
Other stats show that Slashdot is rapidly degenerating into a pile of shit. And that has got nothing with the user agent strings from the site's visitiors. The "articles" posted these days are mostly trolls and ads.
Journals take months or years to respond to a submision, and often as not they respond with a rejection so the submitter has to give up or start the whole process over with another journal. There are so many scandals that one could quote. The whole process seems more designed to support the status quo than to promote knowledge.
This depends on how you define status quo. If you mean endless debates that probably end up nowhere, then I'd agree. If you mean stuff that supports the established dogma, then I guess it depends on the discipline. I think decline in former leads to a greater acceptance of attacks on the latter.
Science thrives on a bit of controversy. That also means that a significant part of the community have to be wrong, to some degree. Peer-reviewed journals are necessary to weed out the controversies that are not worth discussing -- those are assigned to the likes of Slashdot, where the editors just troll us to respond.
I generally wouldn't recommend using them in an environment where it was important to maintain compatibility with Microsoft products.
e.g. in real life. He's a school kid. Yeah, Open Orifice is great for school, where the profs are more open minded than, say a 'client' or a 'boss'.
"Open Orifice". How brilliant of you to come up with a name that describes the product better than its actual name, just by replacing a few letters. No, wait, you didn't.
But more to the point: In real life, you're not going to use Office XP in 2010, and at that point, you'll find loads of incompatibilities between you old Office XP docs and your new MS Office MMX, just like Office 2003 for Windows is incompatible with docs written in Office 2004 for Mac (and vice versa), if the docs contain unicode characters. This makes it impossible to achieve perfect compatibility for other apps as well. MS Office might be far better than OOo, but standardising on it is very short-sighted. That's why governments demand open document formats these days.
After having worked with OpenFirmware on an OldWorld Powerbook, I can't really say I agree. It's a buggy peace of shit. Give me something that actually works.
Why don't you just learn how to use Google instead. Instead of pasting in the whole Hamlet when you look for information about Shakespeare, you could try searching for just Hamlet and Shakespeare, for instance.
In this case, you could search for just Xnest, read the manual you find in the first link, or the page about it on MacOSXhints for a more gentle introduction. When you've read that, you know what DISPLAY=:1 means, and can go on to search for metacity.
Read the name backwards: It's evile. EVIL-E! Get it? It will suck out your soul and install a Microsoft OS. Better stick to KDE until enlightenment has a distribution approved by the Pope.
There is a place for DRM when you want to send information to someone you don't trust. Yes, this includes record companies that don't want their customers to redistribute, reencode or modify their music.
The problem with DRM is that it always has a bunch of annoying and unwanted side effects: Will the wmv I bought for playing on a Creative Zen or whatever still work when I decide that I rather want an iPod? Will it work on players sold in five or ten years, when the Creative is fubar? Will it work on Linux? For the wmv, the answer is likely NO to all of those questions, and that's the main reason why I don't buy DRM'ed music -- or use closed document formats, for that matter. (Of course, obsolescence isn't unwanted by the music industry, but it's not something we should be willing to accept.)
I would expect an open DRM system to be cross platform and free to implement, so one could expect many different applications to support it, and that in itself could make it less of a hassle. (It would still have the usual problems DRM is meant to create, of course, or it wouldn't be DRM.)
The problem really is: Would it work at all, when everyone knows how it works?
Unlike, of course, most of the people who post here...
You get a lot of strange comments on Slashdot. But posting something by DiDio on the front page is the equivalent of posting a press release from the GNAA, stamping it with a +5, troll, and calling it news.
It just shows that the editors have given up this site a long time ago.
Funny? Perhaps, but Samuel L. Jackson and some other rather big names did voice acting for GTA: San Andreas. Good dialogue and voice acting can add quite a bit to a game.
I hope they use better actors if they ever decide to make a Deus Ex 2.
It doesn't really stand a chance. But it certainly has some advantages. There's always an advantage to run something other than Windows, because of spyware, viruses, and so on (and I'm sure you've heard all the arguments, so let's stop there).
Against OS X, it has the advantage of being an easy to use, lightweight desktop OS. OS X takes about 3 GB for the default install, and that's with very few apps. I don't think Zeta takes that much, even with all the bundled apps, and there are plenty. It also boots quickly, and feels quite fast even on slow computers with little memory.
Of course, it also lacks some features (don't know if Zeta has a good network stack, but BeOS's sucked), and has relatively few applications, often unfinished shareware. If it fits your needs, it's very good.
It's not going to help. How do you think those in government financed their absurdly expensive campaigns? By collecting stamps from their received letters, or from bribes^Wdonations from wealthy industries? Let's try to imagine how the DMCA got there in the first place.
Sorry, but your democracy is there only to force people to suck it up, whatever comes from above. After all, it's the will of the people, and if it isn't, well, then it's the people's own responsibility anyway.
But don't worry, you're not alone. The WTO makes sure your laws will be shared, by the same democratic means, with the rest of the world.
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds like something coming from a person who has never created music. It's actually a craft, and needs a certain competence. And even the ancient Greeks knew there was a relation between mathematics and music.
Yeah, fo sho', but what does DistroWatch mean? I can't imagine it counts us oldtimers who have run Debian for years (how could it?). I never visit the site. It's a site for people who try new distros, or try Linux for the first time. The statistics there don't mean a thing.
And BTW, you find the same rampant fanboyism in all stories these days. There is no interesting discussion left on this site, at all.
You are entirely correct. I should perhaps have been more specific, but didn't think it necessary, since I mentioned fonts only in passing. I wasn't thinking of how to install fonts and so (which truly is a mess, although I have managed to do so, and I'm just a regular geek with education in comletely different disciplines), but of how the fonts are handled, and how well they end up being suitable for reading by a human. This is a complex issue, but you really only have to compare a document produced in Word to one produced with LaTeX to decide which you prefer. If they use the same font, you'll usually prefer LaTeX (there are add-ons for Word to make it support ligatures and stuff, though).
Oh, and TeX does seem to (probably through pdftex) support OpenType.
- The document format is application specific.
- Although you can use styles, few people know this, leading to unstructured documents.
- Even if you use styles, the format is still a bastard between page layout and structured layout, leading to unstructured documents.
This leads to a lot of extra work for the designer. For instance, if you use Quark, all italics have a tendency to get lost when you import the text. If you use unicode, it often gets fubar'ed. All habitual errors from the user (very few people know how to use Word properly) that Word hides because it's a bastard, show up again when you do the page layout, and have to be fixed.So why do journals insist on Word documents? Because InDesign and those other apps have to support Word in some way, and do. But don't expect that turtlenecked designer to know how to handle TeX. So yeah, we should all accept that the world revolves around Microsoft, not around sound technical decisions (or aesthetical, for that matter).
You're not going to get as good output from Word as from TeX, so just forget about keeping the document ready for print. The journals will change the lay-out anyway. You need only to keep the basic structure; paragraphs, chapters, lists, figures, etc. And footnotes.
I would try converting to html instead of Word, (and maybe to Word from html). There are several command line tools that claim to do this. Since YMMV and all that, I can only suggest that you try it yourself. It shouldn't be too time consuming.
Well, by giving Java a GPL (or preferably LGPL) license, Sun could have users port Java to other platforms as needed. For instance, I could compile it for Linux PPC, and have a functional JVM on this computer. Or rather, I could just install it from Debian's archives, like I do with the rest of my applications. AFAIR, one of the great things about Java was supposed to be its portability, but the fact is that there are other languages with better portability. Sun could compete with these if they gave Java a proper free software license.
Ctrl-H actually minimized Opera. Confusive, no?
Other stats show that Slashdot is rapidly degenerating into a pile of shit. And that has got nothing with the user agent strings from the site's visitiors. The "articles" posted these days are mostly trolls and ads.
I had serious video problems when installing Ubuntu on a Dell laptop, but they went away after a BIOS upgrade.
Science thrives on a bit of controversy. That also means that a significant part of the community have to be wrong, to some degree. Peer-reviewed journals are necessary to weed out the controversies that are not worth discussing -- those are assigned to the likes of Slashdot, where the editors just troll us to respond.
But more to the point: In real life, you're not going to use Office XP in 2010, and at that point, you'll find loads of incompatibilities between you old Office XP docs and your new MS Office MMX, just like Office 2003 for Windows is incompatible with docs written in Office 2004 for Mac (and vice versa), if the docs contain unicode characters. This makes it impossible to achieve perfect compatibility for other apps as well. MS Office might be far better than OOo, but standardising on it is very short-sighted. That's why governments demand open document formats these days.
After having worked with OpenFirmware on an OldWorld Powerbook, I can't really say I agree. It's a buggy peace of shit. Give me something that actually works.
Why don't you just learn how to use Google instead. Instead of pasting in the whole Hamlet when you look for information about Shakespeare, you could try searching for just Hamlet and Shakespeare, for instance.
In this case, you could search for just Xnest, read the manual you find in the first link, or the page about it on MacOSXhints for a more gentle introduction. When you've read that, you know what DISPLAY=:1 means, and can go on to search for metacity.
It really isn't hard at all.
Read the name backwards: It's evile. EVIL-E! Get it? It will suck out your soul and install a Microsoft OS. Better stick to KDE until enlightenment has a distribution approved by the Pope.
There is a place for DRM when you want to send information to someone you don't trust. Yes, this includes record companies that don't want their customers to redistribute, reencode or modify their music.
The problem with DRM is that it always has a bunch of annoying and unwanted side effects: Will the wmv I bought for playing on a Creative Zen or whatever still work when I decide that I rather want an iPod? Will it work on players sold in five or ten years, when the Creative is fubar? Will it work on Linux? For the wmv, the answer is likely NO to all of those questions, and that's the main reason why I don't buy DRM'ed music -- or use closed document formats, for that matter. (Of course, obsolescence isn't unwanted by the music industry, but it's not something we should be willing to accept.)
I would expect an open DRM system to be cross platform and free to implement, so one could expect many different applications to support it, and that in itself could make it less of a hassle. (It would still have the usual problems DRM is meant to create, of course, or it wouldn't be DRM.)
The problem really is: Would it work at all, when everyone knows how it works?
znagh5" And thatgfer juewst bweegtr. Whiseknea prwidv betger!
Ah, nothing encrypts like a bottle of fine single malt whisky.
It just shows that the editors have given up this site a long time ago.
Funny? Perhaps, but Samuel L. Jackson and some other rather big names did voice acting for GTA: San Andreas. Good dialogue and voice acting can add quite a bit to a game.
I hope they use better actors if they ever decide to make a Deus Ex 2.
Neither, really. 3840 bugs should be enough for everyone.
It doesn't really stand a chance. But it certainly has some advantages. There's always an advantage to run something other than Windows, because of spyware, viruses, and so on (and I'm sure you've heard all the arguments, so let's stop there).
Against OS X, it has the advantage of being an easy to use, lightweight desktop OS. OS X takes about 3 GB for the default install, and that's with very few apps. I don't think Zeta takes that much, even with all the bundled apps, and there are plenty. It also boots quickly, and feels quite fast even on slow computers with little memory.
Of course, it also lacks some features (don't know if Zeta has a good network stack, but BeOS's sucked), and has relatively few applications, often unfinished shareware. If it fits your needs, it's very good.
Freedom is impossible to protect if it's given by a deity. That's why Christian freedom is a duty, not a right.
It's not going to help. How do you think those in government financed their absurdly expensive campaigns? By collecting stamps from their received letters, or from bribes^Wdonations from wealthy industries? Let's try to imagine how the DMCA got there in the first place.
Sorry, but your democracy is there only to force people to suck it up, whatever comes from above. After all, it's the will of the people, and if it isn't, well, then it's the people's own responsibility anyway.
But don't worry, you're not alone. The WTO makes sure your laws will be shared, by the same democratic means, with the rest of the world.