Hell, it's nothing about "average users" and UI-prettiness. It's about making sure you don't destroy your eyes reading text on your computer! That said, Linux fonts have been great for a long time. If you're fonts look bad, you're doing something wrong.
If you're running a high-res screen (currently this would be one of those 133 or 140 DPI LCDs) or if you like your fonts on the softer side, the TrueType hinting algorithm will tend to make your fonts too thin. I'm running a 1600x1200 LCD and the bytecode interpreter, which tends to snap fonts to integral numbers of pixels, distorts the shape and makes fonts too thin to read. A wonderful fix for this is to download and compile the FreeType2-current from FreeType's FTP site (under the unstable directory). Then, get some nice Type1 fonts (currently, a lot of fixes are in the pshinter) and make sure to disable the TrueType bytecode interpreter (it's disabled by default). Turn on AA, and you're treated to some wonderfully rendered fonts. Anti-aliased enough to be smooth, but still sharp enough to be easily readable. I've got a screenshot at: http://home.mindspring.com/~heliosc/fonts.png
My laptop was about $2000 (2.0 GHz P4), including a couple of hundred in student discounts. However, you can get a 1.7 GHz P4 with the same screen for $1500.
A 15" 1600x1200 LCD is physically different than a 19" 1600x1200 LCD. The former has a much higher transistor density. If manufacturers can build 15" panels at that density, why can't they build 17" panels at that density? The quality improvements are ENORMOUS.
There is a funny thing about LCDs. The desktop LCD market is a bit behind the laptop one in screen quality. My laptop has a 1600x1200 15" screen, and it has perhaps the most perfect image (color aside) I've sever seen. At 133 dpi, text is rendered more than one pixel wide, which improves quality immensely. I've yet find a desktop LCD, however, that hits that high a DPI. Which is a shame, because high-DPI LCDs are just the thing for people who stare at text all day (a large percentage of computer users!)
I've got a new Dell LCD in front of me, and the only artifacts I notice is slight blurring of text when moving a window quickly around the desktop. For stuff like games and movies (that aren't as sharp as text) I have noticed absolutely zero artifacts. DVD's (even high action ones) look incredible on this thing.
If this is the case, then Joe user would be wise to remember one week spent learning to use the OS is worth years (if not decades) of increased productivity. I gave up on file managers a long time ago. Learned the command line, and now I don't have to waste my time navigating complex folder hierarchies graphically. Sure, the CLI takes longer to learn, but (in this file manipulation example) it pays of big time in the long run. My new favorite example is the new search function in XP. It's been wizard-ized, and as a result, it takes twice as long to do a quick search than it used to. I used to use it a lot in Windows 2000, but dreaded having to use it in XP. These days, I run a pure Linux desktop, so I couldn't care less, but I honestly hate having to go back to XP. So much stuff has been dumbed down that it just beats me over the head at every turn. Yes, I (who thinks nothing of downloading CVS versions of major OS components and playing around) have trouble using it, it's so bad.
Heh heh. I have the same sort of LCD (those new wide-angle UXGAs, IBM calls them "FlexView") in my Dell laptop, and the thing is a beauty. Since I can't find any 133 DPI desktop LCDs, and the damn thing lacks a DVI input, I'm thinking my next system will be a nice, headless dual Hammer with the laptop acting as a X terminal.
Don't forget KDE 3.x beta. I've been running it for weeks, and the only crashes I've had are related to the Qt 3.1 beta I'm running under it. (Specifically, some semantics changed that Konqueror doesn't like, and even then it only crashes when closing the program!)
Well that's the problem! They're using game devleopers to manage a database project! Will MySQL 4.0 outdo Excel and ship with a First Person Shooter easter egg?
1) MS is a monopoly, so no, it can't do whatever the hell it wants with its own OS. Google is not a monopoly, so it can.
2) MS has a history of strong-arming companies who use alternative OSs. Google hasn't, as I recall, blocked the site of any PC company that by default shipped with their browsers linked to AltaVista. And even if they did, it wouldn't matter, because Google isn't a monopoly and Microsoft is! Once you commit certain crimes (using monopoly position to hurt your competitors) you lose certain rights.
3) Google isn't a platform. It takes very little effort to switch to another search engine. Same thing with Ford cars or Charmin toilet paper. Not only does it take a non-trivial amount of effort, but Microsoft actively uses it's monopoly power to make it difficult for users to switch, by locking people into proprietory file formats and closing services off to people using alternative OSs.
Hmmmmm. On my G4 top shows the window manager taking 15 meg registered pages and 81megs virtual, which we all know don't count. >>>>>>>>> 'top' is unreliable on Linux, so why should it be any more reliable on OS X? Install QuartzDebug from the Developer Tools and see just how much memory you're windows take up.
I also havn't noticed the 'massive speed hits' you mention. Even when viewing a DVD with 3 layers of semi-transparent windows displaying AA text over it. Huh. Doesn't seem to be choking. >>>>>>> I've used OS X on 800MHz Macs. My KDE 3.x desktop blows it away.
I would also argue that useing OpenGL to render to screen is a good option. Most video cards today have a lot of proccessing power devoted to 3D rendering, and pure 2D isn't much of a priority. Don't expect anyone to bring out 128 bit floating point color anytime soon in a 2D incarnation. >>>>>>> That's the whole point. There is huge amounts of power in 3D cards, so why not draw the desktop as a 3D scene. Look at one of the main graphics primitives in Quartz, the Bezier curve. The traditional method of rendering a closed bezier curve is to break it down into polygons. It's almost begging to be hardware accelerated via OpenGL. Quartz is a vector GUI, OpenGL accelerates vector (which is what 3D really is) graphics. It's almost a no-brainer.
Actually, if you play games this can be important. Start up UT 2003 from a 1600x1200 desktop and run it at 800x600. The image will end up taking only 1/4 of your monitor.
MacOS's window server isn't that great. It's whole purpose is to support fancy transparency effects at the cost of inordinate amounts of memory (hundreds of megs) and massive speed hits. Quartz "Extreme" proves the faults of the design. It's the first major extension to Quartz, and is very half-assed because it uses OpenGL only to accelerate window effects, not actual 2D rendering. Why? Because the design is so tied to DisplayPDF that replacing the render core with an OpenGL accelerated version would be a huge amount of work. Yep, real great architecture, chokes on its first major extension...
I'm not really talking about major publishers. I'm talking about all those people who distribute photos or documents or whatnot to others. Today, you can at least view on Linux Word documents sent from others. This allows you to switch to Linux without being cut off from Windows users. If Word documents or whatnot were automatically Palladium-ized (in the name of "security") that would keep Linux from being interoperable, making it much less appealing as an alternative platform.
I'm not worried so much about the can't run Linux issue as the can't view open file formats issue. Palladium is a method of taking any file format, even an open one, and turning it into a closed one. Wheras Linux users today can basically take any document out there, even a Word document, and view it on their Linux machines, Palladium might make that impossible. And by tying Palladium to major software applications like Office, Microsoft and lock Linux users out of a huge amount of content in a way that has nothing to do with software piracy or DRM. What do you think will happen when all those morons running Word 2005 or Frontpage 2005 (all with Palladium integrated goodness) decide to "publish" their work on the internet. Suddenly, Linux users either a) submit to Palladium, or b) lock themselves out of that content, even if Linux could technically read those file formats normally.
Slashdot Mirror
Hell, it's nothing about "average users" and UI-prettiness. It's about making sure you don't destroy your eyes reading text on your computer! That said, Linux fonts have been great for a long time. If you're fonts look bad, you're doing something wrong.
If you're running a high-res screen (currently this would be one of those 133 or 140 DPI LCDs) or if you like your fonts on the softer side, the TrueType hinting algorithm will tend to make your fonts too thin. I'm running a 1600x1200 LCD and the bytecode interpreter, which tends to snap fonts to integral numbers of pixels, distorts the shape and makes fonts too thin to read. A wonderful fix for this is to download and compile the FreeType2-current from FreeType's FTP site (under the unstable directory). Then, get some nice Type1 fonts (currently, a lot of fixes are in the pshinter) and make sure to disable the TrueType bytecode interpreter (it's disabled by default). Turn on AA, and you're treated to some wonderfully rendered fonts. Anti-aliased enough to be smooth, but still sharp enough to be easily readable. I've got a screenshot at: http://home.mindspring.com/~heliosc/fonts.png
My laptop was about $2000 (2.0 GHz P4), including a couple of hundred in student discounts. However, you can get a 1.7 GHz P4 with the same screen for $1500.
A 15" 1600x1200 LCD is physically different than a 19" 1600x1200 LCD. The former has a much higher transistor density. If manufacturers can build 15" panels at that density, why can't they build 17" panels at that density? The quality improvements are ENORMOUS.
There is a funny thing about LCDs. The desktop LCD market is a bit behind the laptop one in screen quality. My laptop has a 1600x1200 15" screen, and it has perhaps the most perfect image (color aside) I've sever seen. At 133 dpi, text is rendered more than one pixel wide, which improves quality immensely. I've yet find a desktop LCD, however, that hits that high a DPI. Which is a shame, because high-DPI LCDs are just the thing for people who stare at text all day (a large percentage of computer users!)
I've got a new Dell LCD in front of me, and the only artifacts I notice is slight blurring of text when moving a window quickly around the desktop. For stuff like games and movies (that aren't as sharp as text) I have noticed absolutely zero artifacts. DVD's (even high action ones) look incredible on this thing.
What kind of idiot names their files randomly? I take a look at my files, and they lend themselves extremely well to regexs.
The guy who invented Drag & Drop should be dragged to edge of a cliff and dropped, just MHO.
If this is the case, then Joe user would be wise to remember one week spent learning to use the OS is worth years (if not decades) of increased productivity. I gave up on file managers a long time ago. Learned the command line, and now I don't have to waste my time navigating complex folder hierarchies graphically. Sure, the CLI takes longer to learn, but (in this file manipulation example) it pays of big time in the long run. My new favorite example is the new search function in XP. It's been wizard-ized, and as a result, it takes twice as long to do a quick search than it used to. I used to use it a lot in Windows 2000, but dreaded having to use it in XP. These days, I run a pure Linux desktop, so I couldn't care less, but I honestly hate having to go back to XP. So much stuff has been dumbed down that it just beats me over the head at every turn. Yes, I (who thinks nothing of downloading CVS versions of major OS components and playing around) have trouble using it, it's so bad.
Apparently, it's impossible to push in space. They've tested this underwater in similar conditions, and apparently dolphins do the same thing.
Heh heh. I have the same sort of LCD (those new wide-angle UXGAs, IBM calls them "FlexView") in my Dell laptop, and the thing is a beauty. Since I can't find any 133 DPI desktop LCDs, and the damn thing lacks a DVI input, I'm thinking my next system will be a nice, headless dual Hammer with the laptop acting as a X terminal.
Heh heh. It would have to be a honeymoon/swinger resort, because apparently it takes 3 people to have sex in space.
Don't forget KDE 3.x beta. I've been running it for weeks, and the only crashes I've had are related to the Qt 3.1 beta I'm running under it. (Specifically, some semantics changed that Konqueror doesn't like, and even then it only crashes when closing the program!)
Well that's the problem! They're using game devleopers to manage a database project! Will MySQL 4.0 outdo Excel and ship with a First Person Shooter easter egg?
support for drives >2TB
>>>>>>>>
Dammit Maxtor, I just bought the 160GB model the other day!
I could. I'm sure google takes specific steps to block out those sites that exist just to get themselves higher on the page ranking (like SearchKing).
The file is named PageRank.c, which gcc will by default interpret as a ANSI-C file.
Quit trolling.
1) MS is a monopoly, so no, it can't do whatever the hell it wants with its own OS. Google is not a monopoly, so it can.
2) MS has a history of strong-arming companies who use alternative OSs. Google hasn't, as I recall, blocked the site of any PC company that by default shipped with their browsers linked to AltaVista. And even if they did, it wouldn't matter, because Google isn't a monopoly and Microsoft is! Once you commit certain crimes (using monopoly position to hurt your competitors) you lose certain rights.
3) Google isn't a platform. It takes very little effort to switch to another search engine. Same thing with Ford cars or Charmin toilet paper. Not only does it take a non-trivial amount of effort, but Microsoft actively uses it's monopoly power to make it difficult for users to switch, by locking people into proprietory file formats and closing services off to people using alternative OSs.
Hmmmmm. On my G4 top shows the window manager taking 15 meg registered pages and 81megs virtual, which we all know don't count.
>>>>>>>>>
'top' is unreliable on Linux, so why should it be any more reliable on OS X? Install QuartzDebug from the Developer Tools and see just how much memory you're windows take up.
I also havn't noticed the 'massive speed hits' you mention. Even when viewing a DVD with 3 layers of semi-transparent windows displaying AA text over it. Huh. Doesn't seem to be choking.
>>>>>>>
I've used OS X on 800MHz Macs. My KDE 3.x desktop blows it away.
I would also argue that useing OpenGL to render to screen is a good option. Most video cards today have a lot of proccessing power devoted to 3D rendering, and pure 2D isn't much of a priority. Don't expect anyone to bring out 128 bit floating point color anytime soon in a 2D incarnation.
>>>>>>>
That's the whole point. There is huge amounts of power in 3D cards, so why not draw the desktop as a 3D scene. Look at one of the main graphics primitives in Quartz, the Bezier curve. The traditional method of rendering a closed bezier curve is to break it down into polygons. It's almost begging to be hardware accelerated via OpenGL. Quartz is a vector GUI, OpenGL accelerates vector (which is what 3D really is) graphics. It's almost a no-brainer.
Actually, if you play games this can be important. Start up UT 2003 from a 1600x1200 desktop and run it at 800x600. The image will end up taking only 1/4 of your monitor.
MacOS's window server isn't that great. It's whole purpose is to support fancy transparency effects at the cost of inordinate amounts of memory (hundreds of megs) and massive speed hits. Quartz "Extreme" proves the faults of the design. It's the first major extension to Quartz, and is very half-assed because it uses OpenGL only to accelerate window effects, not actual 2D rendering. Why? Because the design is so tied to DisplayPDF that replacing the render core with an OpenGL accelerated version would be a huge amount of work. Yep, real great architecture, chokes on its first major extension...
user usability issues.
>>>>>>>>>>>
That's like claiming GDI has "user usability" issues!
Quality of POVRay aside, those are some really artistic pictures! This guy has some serious talent. I especially like Citadel.
I'm not really talking about major publishers. I'm talking about all those people who distribute photos or documents or whatnot to others. Today, you can at least view on Linux Word documents sent from others. This allows you to switch to Linux without being cut off from Windows users. If Word documents or whatnot were automatically Palladium-ized (in the name of "security") that would keep Linux from being interoperable, making it much less appealing as an alternative platform.
I'm not worried so much about the can't run Linux issue as the can't view open file formats issue. Palladium is a method of taking any file format, even an open one, and turning it into a closed one. Wheras Linux users today can basically take any document out there, even a Word document, and view it on their Linux machines, Palladium might make that impossible. And by tying Palladium to major software applications like Office, Microsoft and lock Linux users out of a huge amount of content in a way that has nothing to do with software piracy or DRM. What do you think will happen when all those morons running Word 2005 or Frontpage 2005 (all with Palladium integrated goodness) decide to "publish" their work on the internet. Suddenly, Linux users either a) submit to Palladium, or b) lock themselves out of that content, even if Linux could technically read those file formats normally.