You might as well have just said "Make Windows Open Source". Dude, whatever. It's not going to happen. And we don't NEED an Open Source Photoshop. We have The Gimp. It's a decent package that supports everything Photoshop does from filters to layers, as long as you don't need prepress stuff.
Running Photoshop on VMWare has even less to do with running Photoshop in Linux that running Photoshop running on Wine.
It's still a Windows application running on an implementation of the Win32 API. Which means it's not a Linux application, it's a Windows application that runs in an emulator. So what?
Actually, with a little bit of customization, I bet a KDE desktop would at least match Windows XP or MacOS in useability tests. This can easily be rectified with a little customization using basic KDE functionality.
Which is the main thing that KDE has going it for -- it is infinitely customizable, yet the customization ability doesn't get in the way of ease of use.
KDE apps generally adhere to design guidelines, not unlike those for Windows XP or MacOS, which gives the system a consistent look and feel.
My tips would include changing the "K" menu to look more like the Start button in Windows; if you're going to use OpenOffice, get the OpenOffice.org Quickstarter; to create a "My Computer" and "Network Neighborhood" icons using symlinks and folder; and turn off the desktop switcher, as this just confuses most non-techie users.
Also, the default KDE style, Keramik, is very nice and usable, I recommend sticking with it.:) For GTK apps, you can get the Geramik GTK theme, which mimicks the KDE Keramik style quite well and leads to less confusion and more consistency.
I work in the auto biz, and the job I had before this one (less than 2 years ago) was working for the Manufacturing Technology Applications department in the North American Vehicle Operations division of the world's largest auto maker.
Let me tell you. Minis are not BTO. First off, BTO implies that you can order anything -- different body styles, even custom panels. Mini doesn't do this. Minis may be built using JIT, but JIT is a lie. It's an accounting trick. There is no JIT, YHBT.;)
Secondly, cars of different colors, options, and different body styles, even different makes are already produced on the same line. GM does this every single day. In fact, in it's Lake Orion, MI, assembly plant, three different models and brands are produced in the same plant. At it's assembly plant in Hamtramck, cars and trucks even roll off the same line (or will if they haven't started already).
No what this guy is talking about is totally different. GM announced a similar technology last year. Mostly it involves creating modular vehicle, shifting production work from plants to Tier 1 suppliers. Entire doors, entire ends of the car, and in some cases, even entire bodies, completely assembled, would be shipped to the assembly plant, where the body would mostly simply be married to the engine and chassis, which roll down the line in one piece (this is actually already how most cars are built, just the rest isn't custom build-to-order).
The problem is worse than that. There are frequently cases where the information required to come up with a proper translation is simply not present in the source text. For example, in English (unless you are south of the Mason-Dixon) there's no plural second-person pronoun,
Y'all.:-P
but in many other languages there are such words, so when the source text says "You should vote for the Republicans."
as in "Y'all should vote for the Republicans." (Errmm...no, you actually shouldn't just randomly vote for a candidate based on their party, but it was *your* example.;)
Actually, there are two grammatical variations of that. There is "Y'all" and then there is "All y'all". "Y'all" refers to the people you are immediately talking to, while "All y'all" refers to those people and the larger subset of people that they belong to. For instance:
"Y'all should come to my party."
means the two people I am talking to should come to my party.
"All y'all should come come to my party."
means the two people and (perhaps) their entire family, group, etc. should come to my party.
Of course "All y'all" can be rather ambiguous.
Exercise for the reader and a point I was making in the above: What did I mean by party?:) Ahhh...the subtelties of the English language.:)
If there's no indication in the source text then you aren't going to be able to tell which word to use.
Well, that rather is the point isn't it? How would the machine translate my use of the word 'party' for that matter? I was referring to political parties above, but how does the machine know if below that, I didn't mean a kegger?
Of course machine translations are never going to quite get it. But my point is that each new technology that is developed is a new piece of the technlogical puzzle to develop such technologies as a Universal Translator or HAL 9000.
Even better yet, "rm ~/.bash_history && ln -s/dev/dsp ~/.bash_history". Now everything you type will literally "sound like crap".
But uhh...from the tcsh manpage (emphasis mine)
A login shell begins by executing commands from the system files/etc/csh.cshrc and etc/csh.login. It then executes commands from files in the user's home directory: first ~/.tcshrc (+) or, if ~/.tcshrc is not found, ~/.cshrc, then ~/.history (or the value of the histfile shell variable), then ~/.login, and finally ~/.cshdirs (or the value of the dirsfile shell variable) +). The shell may read/etc/csh.login before instead of after/etc/csh.cshrc, and ~/.login before instead of after ~/.tcshrc or ~/.cshrc and ~/.history, if so compiled; see the version shell variable. (+)
Looks like tcsh has a history file as well, "if so compiled"? Just thought I'd point that out something you might wanna check into?
also in your/etc/csh.cshrc or/etc/csh.login you *might* wanna just throw in something like the following shellcode: # just to make sure the user didn't delete the # symlink... if ( -e ~/.history ) then
rm -f ~/.history endif ;)
Heh. I was *around* at that time, I didn't need the documents, but you might want to re-read them.:) Both documents state that support was added for hard disks exactly in the version I remember them, version 2.0. The IBM PC/XT came with a 10 MB hard drive originally, and was the impetus for hard drive support in MS-DOS. It's not entirely unlikely that IBM actually wrote the partition table code, but it still was most likely written *for* MS-DOS/PC-DOS. Remember that DOS was a *joint* project between IBM and Microsoft, it was *never* just Microsoft's OS. 2.0 1983 This added support for IBM's 10 MB hard disk, directories and double-density 5.25" floppy disks with capacities of 360 KB
March 1983 MS-DOS 2.0 OEM Version For Zenith - This added support for IBM's 10 MB Hard Disk, Directories and Double-Density 5.25" Floppy Disks with capacities of 360 Kb
Note that a March 1983 release date would mean that most of the code would have been written in 1982.
I remember reading about IBM doing this research about 10 years ago. The biggest problems then adequate processing power and storage space. Those things have greatly improved in the last 10 years (thank the spirits of Moore). I think that's why you're starting to see all this cool research with speech recognition and AI that was being done in the 80s and 90s become more and more commonplace. This trend will likely continue, and all the cool research only stuff you remember reading about in the 80s and 90s will just be common fixtures on PCs of today.
Speaking of which -- speech recognition, AI, translation learning algorithms -- sounds like we have the seeds for the Universal Translator.:)
The partition table format is not OS specific. That particular format is supported by all OSes I know for the PC. (And for good reason). Linux does support other formats as well, but the "native" format when compiled for IA32 is the same as the one DOS uses.
Where do you think the one DOS uses came from?
Yes, it's supported by most of the common PC OSes (Windows NT/2000/XP, OS/2, Linux, etc.) at least, yes*. But ultimately it was a partition table that was developed for MS-DOS, it originated with MS-DOS, and hence it *is* the MS-DOS partition table format. There are OTHER formats that did NOT originate with MS-DOS. (FWIW, modern Windows versions support other formats than the MS-DOS format for partition tables.)
[*] Though I'm not sure about Solaris x86, I tend to think it would support the Solaris partition table format.
The partition table specifies the type of filesystem contained on the partition, yes, but the format of the partition table itself is an MS-DOS partition table. The only thing that defines what partitions are what and where they are on the disk is the partition table. Hence, they are DOS partitions, even if the filesystem type on the partition may be non-DOS.
Unless you are using the kernel Logical Volume Management (LVM), you are most likely using a DOS parition for Linux. FAT16 and FAT32 are filesystems, not partitions. ext2/ext3 and other compatible Linux filesystems typically install on top of a DOS partition unless using the new LVM stuff.
Windows XP For Smoke Signal Computing, sure. It requires the use of a Microsoft IntelliSmoke(tm) Smoke Signalling Device and an annual subscription to Smoke-Dot-Net(tm) Services.
Logitech made this "pad" thing a while back that had special paper and a special pen and you could write into it and then upload the contents into the PC.
most ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mst) adj. Superlative of many., much.
1.
1. Greatest in number: won the most votes.
2. Greatest in amount, extent, or degree: has the most compassion.
2. In the greatest number of instances: Most fish have fins.
n.
1. The greatest amount or degree: She has the most to gain.
2. Slang. The greatest, best, or most exciting. Used with the: That party was the most!
pron.
(used with a sing. or pl. verb) The greatest part or number: Most of the town was destroyed. Most of the books were missing.
adv. Superlative of much.
1. In or to the highest degree or extent. Used with many adjectives and adverbs to form the superlative degree: most honest; most impatiently.
2. Very: a most impressive piece of writing.
3. Informal. Almost: Most everyone agrees.
Idiom: at (the) most
At the maximum: We saw him for ten minutes at the most. She ran two miles at most.
Note that there is nothing in there about a 'plurality'. Most means greatest in number, the greatest amount or the greatest part or number. Note that 20% of anything is not the greatest part or number of the whole, while it may be the largest piece, it is not the 'most'.
I wish people would be more precise in their use of language.
Exactly how is 20% 'most people'? If I have 20 green marbles, 10 black marbles, 5 blue marbles, 15 orange marbles, 9 plaid fuschia marbles, 11 clear marbles, etc., are 'most' of my marbles green? No, I have more green marbles than any other kind.
So that would mean (if 20% is indeed higher than any other language, I have seen no statistics to verify this fact -- last I heard one of the main Chinese dialects was the most widely spoken language in the world, not English, but this was 20 years ago) if you were going to pick a language that was (based on what you have said) the most widely spoken language, then English it would be. But my own understanding is that this is not the case.
'Almost everyone'? What *are* you talking about? You must be an American. From a recent online Harris poll, most Americans think at least half the world speaks English. This is just plain wrong. The truth of the matter is that it's more like 20%. That's it. Most people on the NET might speak English, but most people in the world? Hardly.
No programmer in their right mind uses the I/O POSIX functions without checking the user input. Too bad there are still very common buffer overflows, format strings and heap overflows found in (more or less major) projects.
I do, but then again, I'm working on a project that requires Windows compatibility.;)
Well, there is the older standard, POSIX Standards/2 (or PS/2)...
Re:How about making more Distros comply first.
on
LSB & Posix Conflicts
·
· Score: 0, Interesting
The biggest violator is Debian gnu/linux. It uses an outdated kernel (violation, the standard specifies 2.4.19 and above), a non standard implementation of X (A hacked version of 3.3.6 to use X4 modules), A propeirtry (as in incompatible, not as in closed) package format known as dotdebs (RPM is the official standard). Uses an outdated file system (it uses ext2, the offical filesystem is reiserfs). Uses EMACS as its text editor (the offical one is vi for the console and kate for X) and finally it uses gnome as its default window manager (the offical standard mandates kde)
These decisions regarding implementation and USER PREFERENCE are mandated by LSB? You're kidding right?
Slashdot Mirror
You might as well have just said "Make Windows Open Source". Dude, whatever. It's not going to happen. And we don't NEED an Open Source Photoshop. We have The Gimp. It's a decent package that supports everything Photoshop does from filters to layers, as long as you don't need prepress stuff.
Running Photoshop on VMWare has even less to do with running Photoshop in Linux that running Photoshop running on Wine.
It's still a Windows application running on an implementation of the Win32 API. Which means it's not a Linux application, it's a Windows application that runs in an emulator. So what?
Red Hat's countersuit is only beneficial to Linux. Even Chris Stone, who is moving Novell ahead with it's own desktop Linux distro, seems to think so.
Of course Red Hat is going to countersue. The Linux kernel has a lot of code that THEY developed and spent money on.
Actually, with a little bit of customization, I bet a KDE desktop would at least match Windows XP or MacOS in useability tests. This can easily be rectified with a little customization using basic KDE functionality.
:) For GTK apps, you can get the Geramik GTK theme, which mimicks the KDE Keramik style quite well and leads to less confusion and more consistency.
Which is the main thing that KDE has going it for -- it is infinitely customizable, yet the customization ability doesn't get in the way of ease of use.
KDE apps generally adhere to design guidelines, not unlike those for Windows XP or MacOS, which gives the system a consistent look and feel.
My tips would include changing the "K" menu to look more like the Start button in Windows; if you're going to use OpenOffice, get the OpenOffice.org Quickstarter; to create a "My Computer" and "Network Neighborhood" icons using symlinks and folder; and turn off the desktop switcher, as this just confuses most non-techie users.
Also, the default KDE style, Keramik, is very nice and usable, I recommend sticking with it.
I work in the auto biz, and the job I had before this one (less than 2 years ago) was working for the Manufacturing Technology Applications department in the North American Vehicle Operations division of the world's largest auto maker.
;)
Let me tell you. Minis are not BTO. First off, BTO implies that you can order anything -- different body styles, even custom panels. Mini doesn't do this. Minis may be built using JIT, but JIT is a lie. It's an accounting trick. There is no JIT, YHBT.
Secondly, cars of different colors, options, and different body styles, even different makes are already produced on the same line. GM does this every single day. In fact, in it's Lake Orion, MI, assembly plant, three different models and brands are produced in the same plant. At it's assembly plant in Hamtramck, cars and trucks even roll off the same line (or will if they haven't started already).
No what this guy is talking about is totally different. GM announced a similar technology last year. Mostly it involves creating modular vehicle, shifting production work from plants to Tier 1 suppliers. Entire doors, entire ends of the car, and in some cases, even entire bodies, completely assembled, would be shipped to the assembly plant, where the body would mostly simply be married to the engine and chassis, which roll down the line in one piece (this is actually already how most cars are built, just the rest isn't custom build-to-order).
The problem is worse than that. There are frequently cases where the information required to come up with a proper translation is simply not present in the source text. For example, in English (unless you are south of the Mason-Dixon) there's no plural second-person pronoun,
:-P
;)
:) Ahhh...the subtelties of the English language. :)
Y'all.
but in many other languages there are such words, so when the source text says "You should vote for the Republicans."
as in "Y'all should vote for the Republicans." (Errmm...no, you actually shouldn't just randomly vote for a candidate based on their party, but it was *your* example.
Actually, there are two grammatical variations of that. There is "Y'all" and then there is "All y'all". "Y'all" refers to the people you are immediately talking to, while "All y'all" refers to those people and the larger subset of people that they belong to. For instance:
"Y'all should come to my party."
means the two people I am talking to should come to my party.
"All y'all should come come to my party."
means the two people and (perhaps) their entire family, group, etc. should come to my party.
Of course "All y'all" can be rather ambiguous.
Exercise for the reader and a point I was making in the above: What did I mean by party?
If there's no indication in the source text then you aren't going to be able to tell which word to use.
Well, that rather is the point isn't it? How would the machine translate my use of the word 'party' for that matter? I was referring to political parties above, but how does the machine know if below that, I didn't mean a kegger?
Of course machine translations are never going to quite get it. But my point is that each new technology that is developed is a new piece of the technlogical puzzle to develop such technologies as a Universal Translator or HAL 9000.
Even better yet, "rm ~/.bash_history && ln -s /dev/dsp ~/.bash_history". Now everything you type will literally "sound like crap".
/etc/csh.cshrc and etc/csh.login. It then executes commands from files in the user's home directory: first ~/.tcshrc (+) or, if ~/.tcshrc is not found, ~/.cshrc, then ~/.history (or the value of the histfile shell variable), then ~/.login, and finally ~/.cshdirs (or the value of the dirsfile shell variable) +). The shell may read /etc/csh.login before instead of after /etc/csh.cshrc, and ~/.login before instead of after ~/.tcshrc or ~/.cshrc and ~/.history, if so compiled; see the version shell variable. (+)
/etc/csh.cshrc or /etc/csh.login you *might* wanna just throw in something like the following shellcode:
...
;)
/dev/null
But uhh...from the tcsh manpage (emphasis mine)
A login shell begins by executing commands from the system files
Looks like tcsh has a history file as well, "if so compiled"? Just thought I'd point that out something you might wanna check into?
also in your
# just to make sure the user didn't delete the
# symlink
if ( -e ~/.history ) then
rm -f ~/.history
endif
ln -s ~/.bash_history
Heh. I was *around* at that time, I didn't need the documents, but you might want to re-read them. :) Both documents state that support was added for hard disks exactly in the version I remember them, version 2.0. The IBM PC/XT came with a 10 MB hard drive originally, and was the impetus for hard drive support in MS-DOS. It's not entirely unlikely that IBM actually wrote the partition table code, but it still was most likely written *for* MS-DOS/PC-DOS. Remember that DOS was a *joint* project between IBM and Microsoft, it was *never* just Microsoft's OS.
2.0 1983 This added support for IBM's 10 MB hard disk, directories and double-density 5.25" floppy disks with capacities of 360 KB
March 1983 MS-DOS 2.0 OEM Version For Zenith - This added support for IBM's 10 MB Hard Disk, Directories and Double-Density 5.25" Floppy Disks with capacities of 360 Kb
Note that a March 1983 release date would mean that most of the code would have been written in 1982.
I remember reading about IBM doing this research about 10 years ago. The biggest problems then adequate processing power and storage space. Those things have greatly improved in the last 10 years (thank the spirits of Moore). I think that's why you're starting to see all this cool research with speech recognition and AI that was being done in the 80s and 90s become more and more commonplace. This trend will likely continue, and all the cool research only stuff you remember reading about in the 80s and 90s will just be common fixtures on PCs of today.
:)
Speaking of which -- speech recognition, AI, translation learning algorithms -- sounds like we have the seeds for the Universal Translator.
The partition table format is not OS specific. That particular format is supported by all OSes I know for the PC. (And for good reason). Linux does support other formats as well, but the "native" format when compiled for IA32 is the same as the one DOS uses.
Where do you think the one DOS uses came from?
Yes, it's supported by most of the common PC OSes (Windows NT/2000/XP, OS/2, Linux, etc.) at least, yes*. But ultimately it was a partition table that was developed for MS-DOS, it originated with MS-DOS, and hence it *is* the MS-DOS partition table format. There are OTHER formats that did NOT originate with MS-DOS. (FWIW, modern Windows versions support other formats than the MS-DOS format for partition tables.)
[*] Though I'm not sure about Solaris x86, I tend to think it would support the Solaris partition table format.
The partition table specifies the type of filesystem contained on the partition, yes, but the format of the partition table itself is an MS-DOS partition table. The only thing that defines what partitions are what and where they are on the disk is the partition table. Hence, they are DOS partitions, even if the filesystem type on the partition may be non-DOS.
I'll take that challenge!!
:)
ewww.... so THAT's why my keyboard is all soggy...
Unless you are using the kernel Logical Volume Management (LVM), you are most likely using a DOS parition for Linux. FAT16 and FAT32 are filesystems, not partitions. ext2/ext3 and other compatible Linux filesystems typically install on top of a DOS partition unless using the new LVM stuff.
well, between that and the licensing fees for Microsoft BASIC. :-P
Windows XP For Smoke Signal Computing, sure. It requires the use of a Microsoft IntelliSmoke(tm) Smoke Signalling Device and an annual subscription to Smoke-Dot-Net(tm) Services.
Uhhh..actually, that's already been done.
Logitech made this "pad" thing a while back that had special paper and a special pen and you could write into it and then upload the contents into the PC.
most ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mst)
adj. Superlative of many., much.
1.
1. Greatest in number: won the most votes.
2. Greatest in amount, extent, or degree: has the most compassion.
2. In the greatest number of instances: Most fish have fins.
n.
1. The greatest amount or degree: She has the most to gain.
2. Slang. The greatest, best, or most exciting. Used with the: That party was the most!
pron.
(used with a sing. or pl. verb) The greatest part or number: Most of the town was destroyed. Most of the books were missing.
adv. Superlative of much.
1. In or to the highest degree or extent. Used with many adjectives and adverbs to form the superlative degree: most honest; most impatiently.
2. Very: a most impressive piece of writing.
3. Informal. Almost: Most everyone agrees.
Idiom:
at (the) most
At the maximum: We saw him for ten minutes at the most. She ran two miles at most.
Note that there is nothing in there about a 'plurality'. Most means greatest in number, the greatest amount or the greatest part or number. Note that 20% of anything is not the greatest part or number of the whole, while it may be the largest piece, it is not the 'most'.
I wish people would be more precise in their use of language.
U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist
Is this a Frist Psot?
Most of the people that matter speak English
Okay, so 80% of the world population is irrelevant?
Exactly how is 20% 'most people'? If I have 20 green marbles, 10 black marbles, 5 blue marbles, 15 orange marbles, 9 plaid fuschia marbles, 11 clear marbles, etc., are 'most' of my marbles green? No, I have more green marbles than any other kind.
So that would mean (if 20% is indeed higher than any other language, I have seen no statistics to verify this fact -- last I heard one of the main Chinese dialects was the most widely spoken language in the world, not English, but this was 20 years ago) if you were going to pick a language that was (based on what you have said) the most widely spoken language, then English it would be. But my own understanding is that this is not the case.
Heh. A friend of mine from India who worked for GM was fond of that joke. :)
'Almost everyone'? What *are* you talking about? You must be an American. From a recent online Harris poll, most Americans think at least half the world speaks English. This is just plain wrong. The truth of the matter is that it's more like 20%. That's it. Most people on the NET might speak English, but most people in the world? Hardly.
No programmer in their right mind uses the I/O POSIX functions without checking the user input. Too bad there are still very common buffer overflows, format strings and heap overflows found in (more or less major) projects.
;)
I do, but then again, I'm working on a project that requires Windows compatibility.
Well, there is the older standard, POSIX Standards/2 (or PS/2)...
The biggest violator is Debian gnu/linux. It uses an outdated kernel (violation, the standard specifies 2.4.19 and above), a non standard implementation of X (A hacked version of 3.3.6 to use X4 modules), A propeirtry (as in incompatible, not as in closed) package format known as dotdebs (RPM is the official standard). Uses an outdated file system (it uses ext2, the offical filesystem is reiserfs). Uses EMACS as its text editor (the offical one is vi for the console and kate for X) and finally it uses gnome as its default window manager (the offical standard mandates kde)
These decisions regarding implementation and USER PREFERENCE are mandated by LSB? You're kidding right?