To understand punk you must understand that punk was born out of a rebellion against, the easy sounds of the Eagles, Disco, and Glam-rock. The "working class" needed to express their anger through a musical style.
Punk has always been rebelious. If you look at its history, it has sided against a lot of rather heavy political topics.
The great think about punk is that it's something different in every scene, and it's ability to transform to something new to rebel against popular culture.
Unlike the "Alternative" music of the 90s that was quickly adopted, and ruined, by corporate media, true punk (not this blink 182 shite) after 25 years still remains elusive enough to be considered the true alternative.
First off I don't recomend A pirate readio station from your Linux box. To have effective broadcast range, you would have to steal a tower and A LOT of power. I'm sure somebody would notice that.
So lets say for the sake of argument that you want to do this right. Many of the posts say that you need a lot of start up catital. They are right. AND you need to secure the rights to play copyrighted music, and pay the GOV to secure a radio frequency. AM is much cheaper but, as you know the signal quality sux and its mono only.
So you might want to look into if your school teaches communications and broadcasting. They might have and old station that they don't use anymore because it was too costly. Talk to the dean of the department and see what it's going to take to get it started again.
You can go the NPR route. Rebroadcast classical and news durring the day and whatever you want at night. This will help you save on staffing. I ran a problem of a station at my college and it was a huge task, (especially since I was still in school). I figgured out that I had to fire all of the students who were not Seniors because they wouldn't take it seriously enough to show up for work!
So basically if your major is economics, don't bother with a radio station because it WILL be a fulltime job.
The problem lies with there are so many variables for coding a widely accepted Linux version. Do you use Alsa or OSS? Do you use GTK or QT or Motif? These are all factors that major companies don't want to deal with because it's too costly to acomidate for the various different Linux users.
Even if all Linux users went to a standard API it still wouldn't make a difference. For all of the little jobs we have open source projects that will do just fine: Abiword, Gimp and the like. But there is no equivilant for QuarkExpress for linux. Quark just rocks. Even if Express was ported to Linux, there would be a problem with fonts, or printing or something that isn't the same across all Linux boxes like Quark can expect from windows.
Personaly I would love to see Sonic Foundry's tools ported to Linux and have them work as well as their windows counterparts. Vegas Video rocks. It's a poor man's AVID. It's beats the pants off of any other prosumer NLE that I have tried. And it works with ACID files. How cool is that? But it will never be. WHY? Because Windows has made it easy to make multimedia application with their codec and DirectX APIs. Why hasn't linux done this yet? It wouldn't be that difficult and would open the barndoor for easily upgradable applications. I have been advocating this for years an nobody want's to hear it.
Thank you for reading this rant. You may now flame.
Supose somebody offers you a coice between two brand new cars of the same model with the only quality of the radio being the difference. The car with the crap radio is free while the car with the Clarion head unit will cost full price. Which one will you choose?
The free one of course! Why pay for something if the same person is also offering it for free?
As for the people who posted the Serial #'s on./, there are always assholes in the world.
I have been a Linux user for about six years now. I love the fact that I can look under the hood of my system and see everything that I could possibly ever want to mess with.
This year I return to college and I need an office suite that works. Not one that will do. One suite that will work the way that I work. So I recently switched to win98 and Office XP. I feel like a bastard for doing this, but you know what? Office XP does everything that I need it to. Yes, Abiword will open.doc files. Yes it's fast (actually damn fast). Yes, to this day it is still riddled with bugs and it has been in development for almost three years now.
So now everybody is "Switching" to OSx because it just works. Of course the Mac's architecture has always just worked. Finally they have an OS that can do the platform some justice. I hate the fact that I can't build a G4 system, and if I could, I couldn't afford it.
Windows is somewhat useable. The nice thing about windows is that it is a standardized product. There are no splinters or factions. Every Windows book will tell you how to do something in the exact same way. Windows has some cool features like DirectX, multimedia codecs and the like. I like the fact that I can buy a reputable piece of new hardware and install it. I hate the fact that Windows is controlled by a money-hungry monster of a corporation that tries to manipulate their customers in to market trends that are completely unnecessary.
Linux is great for developing and as a server. A "good" server needs to run forever and its maintenance consists of a can of compressed air every four months. Linux works great in that department. Where Linux really suffers is the desktop where you are constantly inundated with technicalities that keep you from doing the real work. Things like upgrading Abiword to a newer version that has less bugs can be a real pain in the ass when you also need to upgrade shared libraries. This of course also means that you need to upgrade a whole schlew of other applications because they rely on the older libraries. So when you look at it, it's not really an application upgrade, it's a system upgrade. The Linux desktop sux as a functional productivity workspace. It might make a fine industry specific workstation as in ILM's case, but a swiss-army knife it is not. Gnome and KDE are slick, but they don't have all of the bases covered like OSx does. Gnome (Nautilus in particular) runs like a sick pig on older hardware. In fact, the only way to have a fast X on older hardware is to dumb it down to the bare minimum. And even though I love Linux, it is just not and, after nearly a decade of fracturing, probably never will be friendly enough for my mom to use. I hate having to compile a new Kernel for new hardware and hope that the patch works. I hate the fact that Linux takes forever to boot. I hate the fact that RTFM very rarely applies to what you need to do. I have never read a Linux document or help file that told me how to fix a problem or do something in a step-by-step fashion and have it work. I have ALWAYS had to interpret what I am reading. I consider myself a technically savvy person. I think that I know what I'm doing on a computer most of the time. I can imagine a person who just needs to print a F*CKING report to give to their boss/teacher would go mad trying to install their printer correctly under Linux.
What I don't understand is why everybody is trying to make Linux work on the desktop when BEos was probably the best desktop Os ever invented. It had a great file system. It could multithread EVERY application. It's audio latency was great. Yea, it was kind of ugly. Yea the company went bankrupt. But, it's Open Be project is alive and needs quite a bit of help.
If the open source community really wants a free desktop, why not start from scratch? Why not make a desktop that is targeted for the end user instead of adapting the hardcore computer geek Os? The open source community is not just Linux. Open Be is part of it too and it is better designed for the desktop. Why not let Linux be the best Server on the market and make Be the best desktop on the market?
Microkernel archicture. One cool thing that is does is multithread everyapplication so EVERY app can take advantage of SMP.
Other cool stuf like, mount audio cds as a fs and "see" the tracks as wav files.
If it wasn't so expensive, then maby it would sell
on
id On Linux: Bad News
·
· Score: 1
At my local Ecectronic Boutigue, the Linux games never drop in price. Q3 is just as expensive as it was the day it became availble. Linux's "Civilation: a Call to Power" is still somewhere in the $40-50 range while the Windoze vewrsion is near $25.
I work at a local newspaper doing page layout and graphic design. Let me tell you that color correction and dot gain are very important.
An explanation of dot gain is how much more or less saturated the color is going to be from the start of a project to finish. Lets say that you get an ad from a customer. First you need to turn it into an EPS from a PDF, then you print it to negative, burn the plate and then ink the plate and press it to paper. We have a 30% dot gain. That means that an area that is 70% black on the computer screen will be 100% black on press after all of the conversions; consequently 30% black will be almost white. If you can see what the colors are going to look like accuretly on screen then you will get a better printed product.
One time I worked on a project at home using the GIMP (RGB only) and then taken it to work, after the conversions to CMYK and the dot gain, the image looked like shit! So I only use the GIMP for web graphics. That really sucks because the GIMP would be a graphic powerhouse if it supported CMYK and if I could color correct X properly.
Now if we could only convince Quark to port Express and Macromedia to port Freehand I would never touch a Mac again.
Yes, but Windows codecs are not just limited to mpeg streams only. They are nice when you get things off of the web. They are especially usefull when producing music on a virtual mixing console, or editing video.
It would be nice if Gnome && || KDE could get together and agree on some form of central media API's that everybody could write for and not have to worry if the end user has the correct libraries.:)
This would be great for DV editing. Linux would make a kick ass platform for this need, but only if hardware OEM would support Linux.:(
One thing that windows has that Linux doesn't have is "standard" component based media libraries. I Say "standard" in the sense that you don't have 4 different system mpeg API's that all work in different ways.
I like Linux but it sure sucks in the "wow" department for digital entertainment and production.
Does anybody know if photogenics has support for CMYK color chanels? I know that the Gimp 1.0.x versions don't. That is really where Photoshop comes in strong in print industry.
I work at a local newspaper in the graphics department. The other day I took some work home because I was verry tired. What I didn't know was that Gimp doesn't support CMYK color chanels. Oops! SO I had to go back to work to finish the graphics on photoshop. It wasn't that bad but I think that computers that have only one mouse button are hiding something important.
But anyway this is where there is really a need for a good graphics program. There are many good apps that handle imaging for web design or for presentations, but when you are using a printing press the only ones that are really any good are Photoshop and Freehand.
I hope morer people get involved into OSS StarOffice than they did Mozilla.
Things that make SO cool: It does everything I need an office suite to do.
Things that make it suck really hard: 1) It does everything I need an office suite to do VERRY SLOWLY.
2) it tries to replace desktops rather than integrate with them.
3) make it smaller. with the propritary staticly linked API's, it really takes a toll on 32 megs of ram which is already taken by either GNOME or KDE. Hell I remember when 32megs wal more than anybody needed (about a year and a half ago).
4)It ahs WAY too much configuration options. KISS man, KISS.
Actually my friend and I were working on a way to get 4mbs download time over a 56k voice modem. It worked in theory. Basicaly use tonal frequncies and chords to represent 32bit bytes. Ok It's not near as cool as those damm Frenchies.
Slashdot Mirror
To understand punk you must understand that punk was born out of a rebellion against, the easy sounds of the Eagles, Disco, and Glam-rock. The "working class" needed to express their anger through a musical style.
Punk has always been rebelious. If you look at its history, it has sided against a lot of rather heavy political topics.
The great think about punk is that it's something different in every scene, and it's ability to transform to something new to rebel against popular culture.
Unlike the "Alternative" music of the 90s that was quickly adopted, and ruined, by corporate media, true punk (not this blink 182 shite) after 25 years still remains elusive enough to be considered the true alternative.
I understand the fact that radio stations suck.
First off I don't recomend A pirate readio station from your Linux box. To have effective broadcast range, you would have to steal a tower and A LOT of power. I'm sure somebody would notice that.
So lets say for the sake of argument that you want to do this right. Many of the posts say that you need a lot of start up catital. They are right. AND you need to secure the rights to play copyrighted music, and pay the GOV to secure a radio frequency. AM is much cheaper but, as you know the signal quality sux and its mono only.
So you might want to look into if your school teaches communications and broadcasting. They might have and old station that they don't use anymore because it was too costly. Talk to the dean of the department and see what it's going to take to get it started again.
You can go the NPR route. Rebroadcast classical and news durring the day and whatever you want at night. This will help you save on staffing. I ran a problem of a station at my college and it was a huge task, (especially since I was still in school). I figgured out that I had to fire all of the students who were not Seniors because they wouldn't take it seriously enough to show up for work!
So basically if your major is economics, don't bother with a radio station because it WILL be a fulltime job.
The problem lies with there are so many variables for coding a widely accepted Linux version. Do you use Alsa or OSS? Do you use GTK or QT or Motif? These are all factors that major companies don't want to deal with because it's too costly to acomidate for the various different Linux users.
Even if all Linux users went to a standard API it still wouldn't make a difference. For all of the little jobs we have open source projects that will do just fine: Abiword, Gimp and the like. But there is no equivilant for QuarkExpress for linux. Quark just rocks. Even if Express was ported to Linux, there would be a problem with fonts, or printing or something that isn't the same across all Linux boxes like Quark can expect from windows.
Personaly I would love to see Sonic Foundry's tools ported to Linux and have them work as well as their windows counterparts. Vegas Video rocks. It's a poor man's AVID. It's beats the pants off of any other prosumer NLE that I have tried. And it works with ACID files. How cool is that? But it will never be. WHY? Because Windows has made it easy to make multimedia application with their codec and DirectX APIs. Why hasn't linux done this yet? It wouldn't be that difficult and would open the barndoor for easily upgradable applications. I have been advocating this for years an nobody want's to hear it.
Thank you for reading this rant. You may now flame.
Supose somebody offers you a coice between two brand new cars of the same model with the only quality of the radio being the difference. The car with the crap radio is free while the car with the Clarion head unit will cost full price. Which one will you choose?
./, there are always assholes in the world.
The free one of course! Why pay for something if the same person is also offering it for free?
As for the people who posted the Serial #'s on
I have been a Linux user for about six years now. I love the fact that I can look under the hood of my system and see everything that I could possibly ever want to mess with.
.doc files. Yes it's fast (actually damn fast). Yes, to this day it is still riddled with bugs and it has been in development for almost three years now.
This year I return to college and I need an office suite that works. Not one that will do. One suite that will work the way that I work. So I recently switched to win98 and Office XP. I feel like a bastard for doing this, but you know what? Office XP does everything that I need it to. Yes, Abiword will open
So now everybody is "Switching" to OSx because it just works. Of course the Mac's architecture has always just worked. Finally they have an OS that can do the platform some justice. I hate the fact that I can't build a G4 system, and if I could, I couldn't afford it.
Windows is somewhat useable. The nice thing about windows is that it is a standardized product. There are no splinters or factions. Every Windows book will tell you how to do something in the exact same way. Windows has some cool features like DirectX, multimedia codecs and the like. I like the fact that I can buy a reputable piece of new hardware and install it. I hate the fact that Windows is controlled by a money-hungry monster of a corporation that tries to manipulate their customers in to market trends that are completely unnecessary.
Linux is great for developing and as a server. A "good" server needs to run forever and its maintenance consists of a can of compressed air every four months. Linux works great in that department. Where Linux really suffers is the desktop where you are constantly inundated with technicalities that keep you from doing the real work. Things like upgrading Abiword to a newer version that has less bugs can be a real pain in the ass when you also need to upgrade shared libraries. This of course also means that you need to upgrade a whole schlew of other applications because they rely on the older libraries. So when you look at it, it's not really an application upgrade, it's a system upgrade. The Linux desktop sux as a functional productivity workspace. It might make a fine industry specific workstation as in ILM's case, but a swiss-army knife it is not. Gnome and KDE are slick, but they don't have all of the bases covered like OSx does. Gnome (Nautilus in particular) runs like a sick pig on older hardware. In fact, the only way to have a fast X on older hardware is to dumb it down to the bare minimum. And even though I love Linux, it is just not and, after nearly a decade of fracturing, probably never will be friendly enough for my mom to use. I hate having to compile a new Kernel for new hardware and hope that the patch works. I hate the fact that Linux takes forever to boot. I hate the fact that RTFM very rarely applies to what you need to do. I have never read a Linux document or help file that told me how to fix a problem or do something in a step-by-step fashion and have it work. I have ALWAYS had to interpret what I am reading. I consider myself a technically savvy person. I think that I know what I'm doing on a computer most of the time. I can imagine a person who just needs to print a F*CKING report to give to their boss/teacher would go mad trying to install their printer correctly under Linux.
What I don't understand is why everybody is trying to make Linux work on the desktop when BEos was probably the best desktop Os ever invented. It had a great file system. It could multithread EVERY application. It's audio latency was great. Yea, it was kind of ugly. Yea the company went bankrupt. But, it's Open Be project is alive and needs quite a bit of help.
If the open source community really wants a free desktop, why not start from scratch? Why not make a desktop that is targeted for the end user instead of adapting the hardcore computer geek Os? The open source community is not just Linux. Open Be is part of it too and it is better designed for the desktop. Why not let Linux be the best Server on the market and make Be the best desktop on the market?
Microkernel archicture. One cool thing that is does is multithread everyapplication so EVERY app can take advantage of SMP.
Other cool stuf like, mount audio cds as a fs and "see" the tracks as wav files.
At my local Ecectronic Boutigue, the Linux games never drop in price. Q3 is just as expensive as it was the day it became availble. Linux's "Civilation: a Call to Power" is still somewhere in the $40-50 range while the Windoze vewrsion is near $25.
I work at a local newspaper doing page layout and graphic design. Let me tell you that color correction and dot gain are very important.
An explanation of dot gain is how much more or less saturated the color is going to be from the start of a project to finish. Lets say that you get an ad from a customer. First you need to turn it into an EPS from a PDF, then you print it to negative, burn the plate and then ink the plate and press it to paper. We have a 30% dot gain. That means that an area that is 70% black on the computer screen will be 100% black on press after all of the conversions; consequently 30% black will be almost white. If you can see what the colors are going to look like accuretly on screen then you will get a better printed product.
One time I worked on a project at home using the GIMP (RGB only) and then taken it to work, after the conversions to CMYK and the dot gain, the image looked like shit! So I only use the GIMP for web graphics. That really sucks because the GIMP would be a graphic powerhouse if it supported CMYK and if I could color correct X properly.
Now if we could only convince Quark to port Express and Macromedia to port Freehand I would never touch a Mac again.
Yes, but Windows codecs are not just limited to mpeg streams only. They are nice when you get things off of the web. They are especially usefull when producing music on a virtual mixing console, or editing video.
:)
:(
It would be nice if Gnome && || KDE could get together and agree on some form of central media API's that everybody could write for and not have to worry if the end user has the correct libraries.
This would be great for DV editing. Linux would make a kick ass platform for this need, but only if hardware OEM would support Linux.
One thing that windows has that Linux doesn't have is "standard" component based media libraries. I Say "standard" in the sense that you don't have 4 different system mpeg API's that all work in different ways.
I like Linux but it sure sucks in the "wow" department for digital entertainment and production.
Does anybody know if photogenics has support for CMYK color chanels? I know that the Gimp 1.0.x versions don't. That is really where Photoshop comes in strong in print industry.
I work at a local newspaper in the graphics department. The other day I took some work home because I was verry tired. What I didn't know was that Gimp doesn't support CMYK color chanels. Oops! SO I had to go back to work to finish the graphics on photoshop. It wasn't that bad but I think that computers that have only one mouse button are hiding something important.
But anyway this is where there is really a need for a good graphics program. There are many good apps that handle imaging for web design or for presentations, but when you are using a printing press the only ones that are really any good are Photoshop and Freehand.
P
I hope morer people get involved into OSS StarOffice than they did Mozilla.
Things that make SO cool:
It does everything I need an office suite to do.
Things that make it suck really hard:
1) It does everything I need an office suite to do VERRY SLOWLY.
2) it tries to replace desktops rather than integrate with them.
3) make it smaller. with the propritary staticly linked API's, it really takes a toll on 32 megs of ram which is already taken by either GNOME or KDE. Hell I remember when 32megs wal more than anybody needed (about a year and a half ago).
4)It ahs WAY too much configuration options. KISS man, KISS.
Actually my friend and I were working on a way to get 4mbs download time over a 56k voice modem. It worked in theory. Basicaly use tonal frequncies and chords to represent 32bit bytes. Ok It's not near as cool as those damm Frenchies.