You wouldn't go to a pub and leap in to conversations without testing the water. So why do it on line.
Because another difference between USENET elitist denizens and an unattached newbie is that the newbie recognizes the fact that a USENET group is not a pub, and would never make such an inane comparison. They see it as what it is, while the elitists spin it into something different because they spend so much time there and need to justify their feelings of attachment and rejection of new members.
But in rock 'n' roll, it ain't over till it's over. And even after the trio went their separate ways at the conclusion of the album, there were more challenges.
"Geddy went away to do the mastering. I went away on a golfing trip as soon as we finished (last February)," Lifeson says.
"It had been 14 months (making the record), and in the past, we spent four to six months making a record... I just had to go. I felt badly, because everything was dumped on Geddy, to do the mastering and make all those decisions."
Even as he was hitting the links, Lifeson was on the phone four or five times a day with Lee, who was forced to deal with unexpected glitches that didn't emerge until late in the recording process.
"We found problems that we didn't hear in mixing that were apparent in mastering. To get the kind of levels (we wanted), we had digital distortion. We remixed a couple of songs half-way through the mastering, through the remix, back to mastering," says Lifeson.
"The poor guy (Lee) was doing this on his own. It really shook him up."
Still, Lifeson took a final, mixed-and-mastered version of "Vapor Trails" with him to Hawaii for a holiday with his wife. And even then, he couldn't bring himself to listen to the finished product until late in the two-week vacation, when he settled onto the beach, slid the finished disc into his Discman, and pressed play.
"I was really thrilled by the fact that I heard the songs and I really liked the songs a lot. I was really proud of the work we did. It all unfolded for me," he says with obvious satisfaction.
"When I got back, I called him and said, 'Ged! The album is great! We did a great job! We got through it, we stuck to everything we believed in and we did it!'
"He said: 'I don't know what to think. I think it's awful.' I said, please do me a favour. Just don't put it on for a couple of weeks. Be relaxed and open'."
Lifeson said he's still not sure Lee is at a point where he has separated himself from the trauma of finishing the album, to where he can listen to it as a whole. But given how intense an experience creating "Vapor Trails" was, that's not surprising.
The author of the article doesn't know what he's talking about.
It is relatively evident from an investigation of the audio on Vapor Trails that the problems arose in mixing or mastering, not in tracking.
Geddy stated in interviews that the actual recorded tracks were digitally clipping because they were so overdriven. He was having breakdowns over it.
However the audio on this disk is so bad that had I been the record label, I would have sued the responsible party for malpractice. Unfortunately, I know all too well that the record label is almost certainly the culprit in this crime, and the band and its fans the victims.
Geddy Lee produced and mixed the thing. It was not the label.
I'm a fan of the heavy metal genre and I've seen (or heard, more like) many songs that would be absolutely great if they weren't subjected to the same LOUDER IS BETTER butcher job Rush's Vapor Trails went through.
The article mentions that artists usually don't have a choice in the matter, but Geddy Lee himself did Vapor Trails. He stated in interviews that he was having breakdowns because everything was digitally clipping, but that he was reassured that it sounded okay by the rest of the band.
Many feel it's the only way to get posted to the front page these days. A scan of the daily articles that get posted supports this idea. Slashdot isn't just a cool nerdy tech news site anymore; it's become a voice of ideology.
Do you realize just how successful those "few successful products" really are? That's what investors care about. Everything else is just grabs for marketshare.
Last time I used GNOME, I was dragging the taskbar to the top, and it wouldn't recognize that I had let go of the mouse. No amount of clicking and dragging would cause it to stop moving the taskbar around whenever I moved my mouse. Of course, this meant I couldn't access any buttons on it. I had to Ctrl-Alt-Backspace the thing. That's the last time I've used GNOME.
Good use of "M$" there. That completely validates your point and all.
Think of how many Microsoft patents and concepts are being infringed with all those thousands of clones out there. They have a history of not suing and I doubt they'll start now. But Gates is sure going to mention it.
He didn't say a single thing about code in his statements. The writer of the article added that in, just to correlate it with SCO in some way (just like Slashdot did).
What do you mean, OSS must die? Did Bill Gates say that anywhere? Oh, you're just arbritrarily deciding what Billy said.
Microsoft has a long history of allowing things like WINE to exist. People have been cloning their products for years into free and shareware versions. As a matter of fact, they are the least litigious company in that department that I can think of.
The only thing they did due was sue for use of the name Lindows, which in my opinion was understandable.
But, of course, Slashdot needed a controversial paint-Microsoft-as-bad article today. So the only thing this article did was take a quite logical quote by Gates--people who clone someone else's products are likely copying their IP in doing so (note that he didn't say anything about code, people)--and end with a question out of nowhere that there was no reason to bring up, and past history contradicts. Oh, and end with the obligatory SCO reference to ensure postage to the front page.
These kinds of articles are formulaic, as are their inevitable responses, as yours illustrates. People fall for it time and time again. "+5 Interesting!"
This is how Slashdot folklore gets started. You're obviously referring to that ridiculous article posted a while back on Slashdot that said Linux would overtake Apple in the desktop market in a year. Everyone ridiculed that article. Linux will not beat Apple in the desktop market. Not until people get their shit together.
But, there are those who refer to it as truth long enough, and now it's morphed into "Linux users are soon to outnumber Mac users." This is why people make fun of Slashbots and their inability to stop drawing up vague claims with nothing to back them up as if they are common knowledge. It was a bizarre report then that nobody believe, and it's a bizarre claim now that nobody believes.
The server is called Kolab, and the client is KMail, Korganizer, KAddressbook and KPilot. In KDE 3.2 these will come together in one bunch under the name Kontact. We are now porting the features to KDE cvs HEAD.
I'm sorry, but that is still a ridiculously amusing mish-mash of K-prefix names. I actually laughed as I read that paragraph. My boss would too. "Kmail, Korganizer, Kaddressbook, all under the name Kontact."
I'm happy to hear Kroupware won't be in use like that, but still. The naming thing needs a serious reconsideration by everyone writing KDE applications.
I may be modded redundant for this, but I'm okay with that. It's a more serious issue than people seem to realize. I've gotten laughed at before when talking about certain open source apps to get the job done, just from the goofy names.
It's interesting to find that most comments thus far has been about the name of the app. Is there really no more to say or are people just looking for cheap Funny-karma?
No, people are wanting open source products to be taken seriously and to compete head-on with popular proprietary solutions, and it's just frustrating when you have to tell your boss about something called "Kroupware" as opposed to "Microsoft Exchange."
Seriously, the K-prefix thing is quite unprofessional. Even KDE is a horrible name for a desktop environment (in the name recognition department, GNOME has it beat, though that's still a bad name).
You underestimate the importance of a friendly and accessible name when it comes to gaining new users. You set the whole tone of the project by your name. Dislike that fact, but it's still true. I can't talk to people about things like "xlf," "bash," or "XFree86," without sounding like I'm spewing gibberish, which of course turns away newbies. Even shareware and freeware projects for Windows choose reasonable names. I don't know why there is the obsession with naming everything all lower-case, abbreviating, or adding Gs and Ks at the front.
Mod me down if you want, but if you truly disagreed, you'll reply instead.
God, another crappy name. Kroupware? Does absolutely everything have to begin with a "K"?
If my boss asks me the software I recommend, will he be more keen to something called Exchange or to something called Kroupware?
Why are so many projects so lazy with their names? Believe it or not, there is a bit of brand recognition that comes into play, and even if it is something trivial and meaningless when it comes to technical merits, it's a lot more friendly and accessible to actually come up with a nice project name. Kroupware sounds...stupid.
Maybe I'm alone in this opinion. But the whole K-something schtick has run quite thin with me.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, this post sure reads a lot like this one earlier post here.
You wouldn't go to a pub and leap in to conversations without testing the water. So why do it on line.
Because another difference between USENET elitist denizens and an unattached newbie is that the newbie recognizes the fact that a USENET group is not a pub, and would never make such an inane comparison. They see it as what it is, while the elitists spin it into something different because they spend so much time there and need to justify their feelings of attachment and rejection of new members.
Here's one, found from a simple friggin' Google search:
m l
... I just had to go. I felt badly, because everything was dumped on Geddy, to do the mastering and make all those decisions."
http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicRush/may7_rush-can.ht
Relevant snippet:
But in rock 'n' roll, it ain't over till it's over. And even after the trio went their separate ways at the conclusion of the album, there were more challenges.
"Geddy went away to do the mastering. I went away on a golfing trip as soon as we finished (last February)," Lifeson says.
"It had been 14 months (making the record), and in the past, we spent four to six months making a record
Even as he was hitting the links, Lifeson was on the phone four or five times a day with Lee, who was forced to deal with unexpected glitches that didn't emerge until late in the recording process.
"We found problems that we didn't hear in mixing that were apparent in mastering. To get the kind of levels (we wanted), we had digital distortion. We remixed a couple of songs half-way through the mastering, through the remix, back to mastering," says Lifeson.
"The poor guy (Lee) was doing this on his own. It really shook him up."
Still, Lifeson took a final, mixed-and-mastered version of "Vapor Trails" with him to Hawaii for a holiday with his wife. And even then, he couldn't bring himself to listen to the finished product until late in the two-week vacation, when he settled onto the beach, slid the finished disc into his Discman, and pressed play.
"I was really thrilled by the fact that I heard the songs and I really liked the songs a lot. I was really proud of the work we did. It all unfolded for me," he says with obvious satisfaction.
"When I got back, I called him and said, 'Ged! The album is great! We did a great job! We got through it, we stuck to everything we believed in and we did it!'
"He said: 'I don't know what to think. I think it's awful.' I said, please do me a favour. Just don't put it on for a couple of weeks. Be relaxed and open'."
Lifeson said he's still not sure Lee is at a point where he has separated himself from the trauma of finishing the album, to where he can listen to it as a whole. But given how intense an experience creating "Vapor Trails" was, that's not surprising.
The author of the article doesn't know what he's talking about.
It is relatively evident from an investigation of the audio on Vapor Trails that the problems arose in mixing or mastering, not in tracking.
Geddy stated in interviews that the actual recorded tracks were digitally clipping because they were so overdriven. He was having breakdowns over it.
However the audio on this disk is so bad that had I been the record label, I would have sued the responsible party for malpractice. Unfortunately, I know all too well that the record label is almost certainly the culprit in this crime, and the band and its fans the victims.
Geddy Lee produced and mixed the thing. It was not the label.
Next.
I'm a fan of the heavy metal genre and I've seen (or heard, more like) many songs that would be absolutely great if they weren't subjected
to the same LOUDER IS BETTER butcher job Rush's Vapor Trails went through.
The article mentions that artists usually don't have a choice in the matter, but Geddy Lee himself did Vapor Trails. He stated in interviews that he was having breakdowns because everything was digitally clipping, but that he was reassured that it sounded okay by the rest of the band.
They didn't do a kernel rewrite for Windows 2000. XP comes from 2000 which comes from the old NT kernel.
Many feel it's the only way to get posted to the front page these days. A scan of the daily articles that get posted supports this idea. Slashdot isn't just a cool nerdy tech news site anymore; it's become a voice of ideology.
There are few things more irritating than people who reply to things with "Bzzzzt! Wrong!" It makes you look like a total incompetent ass.
I'm not trolling; I only point it out because I keep seeing people do it on Slashdot, and it never becomes any less blatantly jerky.
...care to explain what's right about trading artists' material without their permission?
You're in a very, very small minority who actually chooses operating systems based on their EULAs.
See subject.
Do you realize just how successful those "few successful products" really are? That's what investors care about. Everything else is just grabs for marketshare.
I don't understand the big deal over Clippy. A right-click->Hide and he's gone forever. It was the first thing I turned off.
This relates to teh SCO case because of the tossing around of the term "IP"
No, it doesn't. It relates to the SCO case because Slashdot needed another SCO article up for hits.
That was not "+5 Funny."
Mod me down for saying so. I don't care. It wasn't that funny, at all.
See subject.
What's in XP that was taken from GNOME?
Last time I used GNOME, I was dragging the taskbar to the top, and it wouldn't recognize that I had let go of the mouse. No amount of clicking and dragging would cause it to stop moving the taskbar around whenever I moved my mouse. Of course, this meant I couldn't access any buttons on it. I had to Ctrl-Alt-Backspace the thing. That's the last time I've used GNOME.
Good use of "M$" there. That completely validates your point and all.
Next.
You think IP involves just code?
Think of how many Microsoft patents and concepts are being infringed with all those thousands of clones out there. They have a history of not suing and I doubt they'll start now. But Gates is sure going to mention it.
He didn't say a single thing about code in his statements. The writer of the article added that in, just to correlate it with SCO in some way (just like Slashdot did).
Microsoft is far, far from the end. Heck, they're posting profits when nobody else is.
The days of innovation and competition aren't over. Companies were always litigious. Haven't you read about the 80s and 90s? You get over it and deal.
Wouldn't Apple then be able to claim that the Windows GUI is their IP, and then Xerox could claim that everyone's is theirs?
No, Apple lost that claim last time.
What does Xerox have to do with anything? They licensed to Apple. There was no theft.
What do you mean, OSS must die? Did Bill Gates say that anywhere? Oh, you're just arbritrarily deciding what Billy said.
Microsoft has a long history of allowing things like WINE to exist. People have been cloning their products for years into free and shareware versions. As a matter of fact, they are the least litigious company in that department that I can think of.
The only thing they did due was sue for use of the name Lindows, which in my opinion was understandable.
But, of course, Slashdot needed a controversial paint-Microsoft-as-bad article today. So the only thing this article did was take a quite logical quote by Gates--people who clone someone else's products are likely copying their IP in doing so (note that he didn't say anything about code, people)--and end with a question out of nowhere that there was no reason to bring up, and past history contradicts. Oh, and end with the obligatory SCO reference to ensure postage to the front page.
These kinds of articles are formulaic, as are their inevitable responses, as yours illustrates. People fall for it time and time again. "+5 Interesting!"
Linux users are soon to outnumber Mac users.
This is how Slashdot folklore gets started. You're obviously referring to that ridiculous article posted a while back on Slashdot that said Linux would overtake Apple in the desktop market in a year. Everyone ridiculed that article. Linux will not beat Apple in the desktop market. Not until people get their shit together.
But, there are those who refer to it as truth long enough, and now it's morphed into "Linux users are soon to outnumber Mac users." This is why people make fun of Slashbots and their inability to stop drawing up vague claims with nothing to back them up as if they are common knowledge. It was a bizarre report then that nobody believe, and it's a bizarre claim now that nobody believes.
Next.
The server is called Kolab, and the client is KMail, Korganizer, KAddressbook and KPilot. In KDE 3.2 these will come together in one bunch under the name Kontact. We are now porting the features to KDE cvs HEAD.
I'm sorry, but that is still a ridiculously amusing mish-mash of K-prefix names. I actually laughed as I read that paragraph. My boss would too. "Kmail, Korganizer, Kaddressbook, all under the name Kontact."
I'm happy to hear Kroupware won't be in use like that, but still. The naming thing needs a serious reconsideration by everyone writing KDE applications.
I may be modded redundant for this, but I'm okay with that. It's a more serious issue than people seem to realize. I've gotten laughed at before when talking about certain open source apps to get the job done, just from the goofy names.
It's interesting to find that most comments thus far has been about the name of the app. Is there really no more to say or are people just looking for cheap Funny-karma?
No, people are wanting open source products to be taken seriously and to compete head-on with popular proprietary solutions, and it's just frustrating when you have to tell your boss about something called "Kroupware" as opposed to "Microsoft Exchange."
Seriously, the K-prefix thing is quite unprofessional. Even KDE is a horrible name for a desktop environment (in the name recognition department, GNOME has it beat, though that's still a bad name).
You underestimate the importance of a friendly and accessible name when it comes to gaining new users. You set the whole tone of the project by your name. Dislike that fact, but it's still true. I can't talk to people about things like "xlf," "bash," or "XFree86," without sounding like I'm spewing gibberish, which of course turns away newbies. Even shareware and freeware projects for Windows choose reasonable names. I don't know why there is the obsession with naming everything all lower-case, abbreviating, or adding Gs and Ks at the front.
Mod me down if you want, but if you truly disagreed, you'll reply instead.
God, another crappy name. Kroupware? Does absolutely everything have to begin with a "K"?
If my boss asks me the software I recommend, will he be more keen to something called Exchange or to something called Kroupware?
Why are so many projects so lazy with their names? Believe it or not, there is a bit of brand recognition that comes into play, and even if it is something trivial and meaningless when it comes to technical merits, it's a lot more friendly and accessible to actually come up with a nice project name. Kroupware sounds...stupid.
Maybe I'm alone in this opinion. But the whole K-something schtick has run quite thin with me.