I'm also curious where they came up with the 20-30 bugs per thousand lines of code that proprietary software suffers from since they can't see the code.
Presumably, at some point in the past someone (these researchers or others) was given access to some proprietary software's code in order to do this kind of analysis on it.
Similarly, the methods used to track down the bugs in the code are expected to be equivalent in both cases for a study like this to be valid. That fixes the other problem you raise, that of the researchers missing bugs. Sure, they probably miss a few....but the same is true for the other studies on enterprise software. When the difference in bugs/line is that huge (1:1000+) you just can't explain it away by conjecturing that they missed some.
That said, I do see one issue; I'm not sure it's correct to hold a kernel to the same standards as generalized "enterprise software." It seems to me that if they compared the bugs/line in the major OS kernels, the numbers would be a lot different. But then, that's just a guess.
Informative? Ridiculous. Almost all of this is bunk:
1) Steam is bad, yes, but the shiny Half-life 2 box was so pretty I overcame my compunction.
Whatever. It's the promise of a good game in that box that overcomes our issues with steam.
2) I'd already installed Cedega 4.2 from CVS, so I don't know how new users would do it. Good luck.
This is a game review, not a howto. Cedega has adequate documentation on its own.
3) Half-life 2 didn't load the first time.
No, the author lacked patience and killed it before it loaded. He found out later that the first load takes a really long time. This may or may not be solvable with the heapsize fix he mentions in the update which you obviously didn't read.
6) I couldn't see the cut scenes, so I skipped them.
This is wrong. The author says:
"I selected new game, and after waiting for ages again, I heard someone speaking, but had just a white screen. Turned out that my concerns about having problems with my graphic card/setup have been unnecesarry for this was just part of the intro. Well, I won't bother you with the contents and storyline here."
There were no problems with the cut scenes.
7) Graphics were rough, framerate was low, sound skipped. It was a fine experience.
If you read the update at the bottom of the article, all these problems are fixed and had reasonable explanations. The guy was telling cedega to use the wrong audio subsystem, for one; that solved the sound issue. Then he was trying to push directx9 through a GF5900; changing that setting fixed the framerate issues. Even the startup problems were fixed.
8) Hacking my video card settings hung my machine.
Huh? It's possible that I just missed it, but I did read all the way back through the article trying to find mention of any hanging of the machine. I could not find one...there's the application hang which you already mentioned in #5, but that wasn't a system crash at all. I think you made this up completely.
9) I'm a little bit disappointed.
Not any more. It looks like since the update he's pretty happy.
SP2 did not break anything, it merely patched holes that shouldn't have been there and put an extra layer between the average user and the bits they can take out their PC with.
a)This makes no sense.
b)If these "holes that shouldn't have been there" are patched by removing functionality (which certainly happens) and/or this "extra layer" involves changing the API, then programmers can't really be blamed for using the old models...yet their programs will break after the "upgrade."
Well, I made a reasoned argument based on evidence from several people who do use the GIMP for professional paid graphics work, for both electronic and print photography delivery. You, on the other hand, made wild, poorly supported generalizations without providing any evidence at all. I'll let the readers of our comments decide who is "talking crap."
And don't even get me started with GIMP - its ok if you need to create 81x31 banner but if you need to work on A1 or A0 size poster it simply won't do.
And this is precisely what I mean. What is it exactly that keeps the GIMP from being funtional for this work? I'd like some specifics...particularly because it's such utter, base foolishness for you to act like the size of the print has anything to do with anything. It can handle plenty large files at plenty high resolutions, it's operations produce precise and accurate manipulations, and it can leave the files in whatever format you need them for production. So what's the trouble?
Oh, and for the record, while I have not ever done paid work with GIMP or Photoshop, I do know plenty on the subject to know what I'm talking about personally. I have worked in a professional digital lab, and definitely have manipulated an image in the GIMP and sent the result through a Durst Lambda 76+ large-format photo printer, getting sizes well above those you list (that printer will do 32" edge-to-edge for a whole roll of photo paper). I never experienced any problems; I think about the biggest GIMPed image I printed was about 32"x7' and it was honest, perfect photo quality. The idea that the GIMP is somehow incapable of dealing with images bound for large size, high quality reproductions is simply preposterous.
It does look like there's not an OSS driver that's known to work with the i9900. That's too bad. However, turboprint may work for you...it's moneyware, but if you're currently using Windows you should be used to that. Anyway, that printer is supposed to be fully functional with that driver, so maybe that removes that last barrier for you.
I hope so. It would be nice to see more people in these desktop intensive industries pick up Linux. I'm not deluded at all about the nubmers; I'd imagine we're lucky to have a tenth of a percent of pro photographers......but if you've got the inclination and a bit of time, there's really not a lot holding you back any more.
GIMP is nowhere close to Adobe PhotoShop in terms of functionality and ease of use.
Hmmm...another comment from someone who obviously hasn't used the GIMP for any length of time any time recently.
I do not work with the GIMP (or Photoshop) professionally; I suck at that sort of thing. But I do know several people who do. Mostly they are working in electronic media...web or software development and such. But I also have a friend doing work for a lot of pro photographers who has been using the GIMP a while. She doesn't seem to miss any functionality, although she came over from Photoshop and Windows. I think the switch was for ideological reasons, though I don't really know...I'll bet she's saved a bit of money as well.
Anyway, the point is, GIMP is more than ready for real photography work and has been for a long time. Material headed for magazines and newspapers was for a while out of reach...but CMYK support is fine now, so that removes one of the last gripes.
Also realise that the majority of the time the majority of scientists are wrong. It's just the way it is, anytime in history this is true. Statisticly speaking the more scientists agree on something the more likely it is incorrect or misleading.
Purely statisticly, of course.
This statement alone is more than enough reason to completely disregard everything you ever say with respect to any scientific issue for the rest of your life.
Thanks for playing the "Expose yourself as a dumbshit flat-earther on/." game. See you next week.
I don't know whose ass you pulled that out of, but I defy you to produce any evidence of what you are saying.
Everyone who's a legitimate expert in this field recognizes that global warming is both real and significantly affected by our activities. Saying otherwise is just another part of this awful shared hallucination we like to call neoconservatism.
The company rarely has everything in the same system for anything - source control, document management, personnel databases, whatever you can imagine, they aren't doing it consistently.
Dude...just because you work for the phone company doesn't mean the rest of us do...
If you don't already have strong feelings one way or the other, you're probably pretty new to the Linux game, so I'd suggest SuSE out of the two choices.
I'm typing this on my Gentoo laptop, which is awesome, but a bit unwieldy for newcomers. My top choices would be Fedora or Mandrake, but it's been a long time since I've used SuSE.
Mr. President, just because you are the last person on Earth that doesn't "buy" the global warming "theory" doesn't mean you have to post AC...we/.ers are real freindly regardless of whatever crazy viewpoint you have.
Slashdot Mirror
PROFIT!!!!
No, no...there was once a (very) small race of people whose last members were on the sidewalk at 34th and lexington, but granny in the snow.....
Am I missing something? There's that Layer menu in Photoshop. or shift+ctrl+n. How hard is it to see?
Am I missing something? There's that Layer menu in the GIMP. Or ctrl-l, n. How hard is it to see?
Ballicker.
Both Photoshop and GIMP support layers, It is easy to add a new layer and Minipulate it in photoshop.
That's funny...I find it easy to add a layer in the GIMP, yet have to look around for the functionality in photoshop.
Imagine that...the program you spend a whole lot of time with ends up feeling more familiar to you. Who ever would have thunk it?
I'm also curious where they came up with the 20-30 bugs per thousand lines of code that proprietary software suffers from since they can't see the code.
Presumably, at some point in the past someone (these researchers or others) was given access to some proprietary software's code in order to do this kind of analysis on it.
Similarly, the methods used to track down the bugs in the code are expected to be equivalent in both cases for a study like this to be valid. That fixes the other problem you raise, that of the researchers missing bugs. Sure, they probably miss a few....but the same is true for the other studies on enterprise software. When the difference in bugs/line is that huge (1:1000+) you just can't explain it away by conjecturing that they missed some.
That said, I do see one issue; I'm not sure it's correct to hold a kernel to the same standards as generalized "enterprise software." It seems to me that if they compared the bugs/line in the major OS kernels, the numbers would be a lot different. But then, that's just a guess.
Informative? Ridiculous. Almost all of this is bunk:
1) Steam is bad, yes, but the shiny Half-life 2 box was so pretty I overcame my compunction.
Whatever. It's the promise of a good game in that box that overcomes our issues with steam.
2) I'd already installed Cedega 4.2 from CVS, so I don't know how new users would do it. Good luck.
This is a game review, not a howto. Cedega has adequate documentation on its own.
3) Half-life 2 didn't load the first time.
No, the author lacked patience and killed it before it loaded. He found out later that the first load takes a really long time. This may or may not be solvable with the heapsize fix he mentions in the update which you obviously didn't read.
6) I couldn't see the cut scenes, so I skipped them.
This is wrong. The author says:
"I selected new game, and after waiting for ages again, I heard someone speaking, but had just a white screen. Turned out that my concerns about having problems with my graphic card/setup have been unnecesarry for this was just part of the intro. Well, I won't bother you with the contents and storyline here."
There were no problems with the cut scenes.
7) Graphics were rough, framerate was low, sound skipped. It was a fine experience.
If you read the update at the bottom of the article, all these problems are fixed and had reasonable explanations. The guy was telling cedega to use the wrong audio subsystem, for one; that solved the sound issue. Then he was trying to push directx9 through a GF5900; changing that setting fixed the framerate issues. Even the startup problems were fixed.
8) Hacking my video card settings hung my machine.
Huh? It's possible that I just missed it, but I did read all the way back through the article trying to find mention of any hanging of the machine. I could not find one...there's the application hang which you already mentioned in #5, but that wasn't a system crash at all. I think you made this up completely.
9) I'm a little bit disappointed.
Not any more. It looks like since the update he's pretty happy.
SP2 did not break anything, it merely patched holes that shouldn't have been there and put an extra layer between the average user and the bits they can take out their PC with.
a)This makes no sense.
b)If these "holes that shouldn't have been there" are patched by removing functionality (which certainly happens) and/or this "extra layer" involves changing the API, then programmers can't really be blamed for using the old models...yet their programs will break after the "upgrade."
So then why couldn't he be a DB developer running SQL server on his workstation? Seems reasonable to me...
Yeah, the type of collisions caused by an MP5 have been known to be harmful for some time...
So why don't you shut up and stop talking crap?
Well, I made a reasoned argument based on evidence from several people who do use the GIMP for professional paid graphics work, for both electronic and print photography delivery. You, on the other hand, made wild, poorly supported generalizations without providing any evidence at all. I'll let the readers of our comments decide who is "talking crap."
And don't even get me started with GIMP - its ok if you need to create 81x31 banner but if you need to work on A1 or A0 size poster it simply won't do.
And this is precisely what I mean. What is it exactly that keeps the GIMP from being funtional for this work? I'd like some specifics...particularly because it's such utter, base foolishness for you to act like the size of the print has anything to do with anything. It can handle plenty large files at plenty high resolutions, it's operations produce precise and accurate manipulations, and it can leave the files in whatever format you need them for production. So what's the trouble?
Oh, and for the record, while I have not ever done paid work with GIMP or Photoshop, I do know plenty on the subject to know what I'm talking about personally. I have worked in a professional digital lab, and definitely have manipulated an image in the GIMP and sent the result through a Durst Lambda 76+ large-format photo printer, getting sizes well above those you list (that printer will do 32" edge-to-edge for a whole roll of photo paper). I never experienced any problems; I think about the biggest GIMPed image I printed was about 32"x7' and it was honest, perfect photo quality. The idea that the GIMP is somehow incapable of dealing with images bound for large size, high quality reproductions is simply preposterous.
Oh, and you're a jackass.
It's that 'Express' in the title. It makes things go faster!
Yes, and it also has "speed holes."
It does look like there's not an OSS driver that's known to work with the i9900. That's too bad. However, turboprint may work for you...it's moneyware, but if you're currently using Windows you should be used to that. Anyway, that printer is supposed to be fully functional with that driver, so maybe that removes that last barrier for you.
I hope so. It would be nice to see more people in these desktop intensive industries pick up Linux. I'm not deluded at all about the nubmers; I'd imagine we're lucky to have a tenth of a percent of pro photographers......but if you've got the inclination and a bit of time, there's really not a lot holding you back any more.
So you do pro graphics using GIMP?
GIMP is nowhere close to Adobe PhotoShop in terms of functionality and ease of use.
Hmmm...another comment from someone who obviously hasn't used the GIMP for any length of time any time recently.
I do not work with the GIMP (or Photoshop) professionally; I suck at that sort of thing. But I do know several people who do. Mostly they are working in electronic media...web or software development and such. But I also have a friend doing work for a lot of pro photographers who has been using the GIMP a while. She doesn't seem to miss any functionality, although she came over from Photoshop and Windows. I think the switch was for ideological reasons, though I don't really know...I'll bet she's saved a bit of money as well.
Anyway, the point is, GIMP is more than ready for real photography work and has been for a long time. Material headed for magazines and newspapers was for a while out of reach...but CMYK support is fine now, so that removes one of the last gripes.
Could one see the top? Or would it "fade" into the sky?
Yes, absolutely...you'll be able to see the other end of the 1-2m-wide, 100,000km long object. Trust me.
Also realise that the majority of the time the majority of scientists are wrong. It's just the way it is, anytime in history this is true. Statisticly speaking the more scientists agree on something the more likely it is incorrect or misleading.
Purely statisticly, of course.
This statement alone is more than enough reason to completely disregard everything you ever say with respect to any scientific issue for the rest of your life.
Thanks for playing the "Expose yourself as a dumbshit flat-earther on /." game. See you next week.
Flamebait? I mean, honestly...if you asked him, he would say he didn't write Windows...he had hired coders by then.
I don't know whose ass you pulled that out of, but I defy you to produce any evidence of what you are saying.
Everyone who's a legitimate expert in this field recognizes that global warming is both real and significantly affected by our activities. Saying otherwise is just another part of this awful shared hallucination we like to call neoconservatism.
What'd they use their extra lives on, if you hadn't dealt them a death blow yet?
The company rarely has everything in the same system for anything - source control, document management, personnel databases, whatever you can imagine, they aren't doing it consistently.
Dude...just because you work for the phone company doesn't mean the rest of us do...
At least Bill Gates didn't have the ego to name an OS after himself like Linus did!
Perhaps that's because he didn't write it?
If you don't already have strong feelings one way or the other, you're probably pretty new to the Linux game, so I'd suggest SuSE out of the two choices.
I'm typing this on my Gentoo laptop, which is awesome, but a bit unwieldy for newcomers. My top choices would be Fedora or Mandrake, but it's been a long time since I've used SuSE.
or del /s c:\*.*
Somehow I get the feeling that isn't likely to work on a machine you just ssh'd into...
Wow. You're a bright one. Bright like that energy-creating sun of ours.
/. membership.
Cluelessness concerning the laws of thermodynamics is grounds for revokation of your
George? Is that you?
/.ers are real freindly regardless of whatever crazy viewpoint you have.
Mr. President, just because you are the last person on Earth that doesn't "buy" the global warming "theory" doesn't mean you have to post AC...we