I'd think you could write up a simple php script that'll use passthru() to send the contents of the file through. You'd have to send a header with the file type first and to specificy download. That way you can auth the user against your purchased database, and only if they've purchased it can they download that image. I'm sure there's software out there that does this already and is integrated into a storefront - A poster further down the thread mentioned OSCommerce, so check that out. It shouldn't be too hard to come up with an in house script to do it, and if done properly that would be far more elegant than OSCommerce.
Exactly as I was saying, not everyone fits into that model that I've observed. Like yourself for example, using Linux simply because you like it. That's a damn good reason to use Linux, the best reason to use it I'd say. I'd also guess from what you said that you're the type of person who would help a newbie out instead of yelling something along the lines of "RTFM NOOB! >:O":)
I think all of the OSes have their place. If I wanted a Unix type OS on my desktop I would use some form of Linux for that as its desktop support is far superior to that of the BSDs. Currently I use Windows on my desktop since the recording software I use (I'm a musician) isn't avaliable for Unix. I could get a Mac, the software I use is avaliable there, but that'd mean new hardware and spending money that I don't currently have.
For my servers I prefer FreeBSD simply because of how easy it is to maintain. I definitely wouldn't use FreeBSD on my laptop. I've tried running it on a Dell Inspiron 8200 and it fried the hard drive - the system fans never turned on... I never had that problem with Linux on that laptop so Linux wins in the laptop world for me.
I've looked into Gentoo for my servers as I've seen that it takes some of the strong points from FreeBSD and makes them even better; portage being one example that really shines. I'm a die hard fan of ports in FreeBSD which is honestly one of the major reasons I use FreeBSD on my server instead of Linux. Now that something like this is avaliable in a Linux distro that opens up the doors for me to start using it on my servers.
I try not to hold any OS or manufacturer in contempt - I think everything has its use and I'll reccomend the most appropriate software to someone for what they're trying to do. We really need more people around here like that instead of the mass of MS/Linux/BSD/OSX zealots who preach their OS of choice as the only solution for everyone no matter what the person wants to do.
It may be a quip, but at least in my experience, most people I know personally who use Linux use it out of hatred for Microsoft, and those that use BSD use it because they love Unix.
Of course I can't say this is true for everyone, because I don't know everyone. I'm just saying this out of experience with my personal real life friends and coworkers. There's definitely exceptions to this - it can't be said that every Linux user uses it out of hatred for Microsoft and that every BSD user uses it for love of Unix. This would be simply untrue. This is just my observation.
I also know that I'll probably get modded troll or flamebait for this, even though I'm simply stating something that I've noticed throughout the years.
I don't see how IE being part of the OS makes any difference. The problem is that the holes in IE allow arbitrary code to be run. If a hole popped up in Firefox for Windows that allowed some random.exe to be run, I'm sure it would be exploited the same way that the ActiveX vulnerabilities are exploited in IE.
There's no difference that I can see whether or not it's integrated into the OS, the only thing that matters is that arbitrary code can be executed. This hasn't been readily demonstrated in Firefox, yet, and we all hope it stays that way.
Also, take note that Outlook 2000, XP, 2003, and so forth are not integrated into the OS. The only version that is integrated into the OS is Outlook Express.
I may be wrong on some of this, so if something isn't right point it out. I just don't see any way that OS integration makes a difference in executing arbitrary code.
I don't know how you got modded troll, because honestly, this is what's happening in the US today.
Corporations are picking on 12 year old girls, there's a new bill that if passed will allow the FCC and such to snoop on every bit of data going through the internet, and we're throwing away basic freedoms that our country was founded on in order to "stop terrorism." I'm sure most of you have read the PATRIOT act, and realized how scary it truly is. Now we're looking to expand on that even more? Welcome to the People's Republic of America, folks.
I'm dead serious, if we don't get our act together I'm going to move to Canada or Australia, and I'm sure I'm not the only person here who's thinking that.
About the SLI profiles, anyone can create an SLI profile for a game if they want to, it just takes a bit of research beforehand. Have a look here. It should work for pretty much anything, but it takes a bit of tweaking.
To reinforce what you're saying, I have a PSU from a manufacturer that isn't well known, and before that I had an Enermax PSU that didn't work properly.
I've got an Ultra X-Connect 500 watt PSU running dual 3.2 GHz Xeons and a 6800 Ultra. I only have one hard drive and one DVD burner in the machine, and I'm fairly sure that makes a difference.
I was kind of surprised though, I didn't expect it to be a great PSU. So far though I've had zero problems with it. Before I bought the Ultra X-Connect PSU I was running on a 600 watt Enermax PSU. My PC would completely lock up five minutes after I fire up say Unreal Tournament 2004 or WoW. It took me a while to realize that it was the PSU causing the problem, but as soon as I swapped it out it worked like a charm. You'd think Enermax would make good PSUs but no, we can't have that!
Short reply here. I agree completely with everything you've said there. The only thing that most businesses need that isn't avaliable on Linux yet is Exchange. Migrating from Exchange to another form of groupware software is hell. Not to mention the hell that is setting up Exchange in the first place, but that's a different story. There's a lot of nice features Exchange has that many businesses want to use.
I agree that most of the reason for not wanting to switch is because they're afraid of change, but there are a few smaller things such as Exchange that keep it from happening any faster. Also, most businesses have netadmins who are absolutely clueless about security, and computers in general. I have a friend who works for a company whose IT director is a "FreeBSD admin." I use quotes because the man has no clue how to install FreeBSD from scratch.
This type of thing is commonplace, and I think until we get a new generation of people in IT, changes like this aren't going to happen.
Another example. Everyone I work with at University of Miami is completely stuck on Windows, and don't want to change. There's three FreeBSD servers in my department, two Linux ones, and those are RHEL. The rest are all Windows 2000 server. This isn't going to change anytime soon because all that the people there know is Windows. Not to mention the total lack of security such as using an unencrypted VNC session to admin one of our Win2k servers from anywhere on campus... This isn't an exxageration, the only people who really know FreeBSD and Linux well are my boss and myself.
Once we get people running IT departments who are familiar with Linux or BSD, we'll see that change starting to happen faster.
Random and kind of off topic, but I went to school in Hoboken at Stevens Tech. The city's really cleaned up a lot from how it used to be. Personally, I think it's an awesome little town, and I loved it there. Yeah it's a very densely packed town but at the same time it's not like the urban metropolis type cities you see around. It's dense, but homey at the same time. I can't say I've ever had a time there that I wasn't able to find something to do.
On another note, I've been down to Raritan - I have a friend there. I have to say that's a REALLY nice area. I don't know how the grandparent got the idea that NJ is completely flat and nothing but chemical plants, becuase that area clearly shows that it isn't.
Now, Florida, where I live, is about as flat as it gets...
I'll definitely look into that switch. And yeah, I'm aware of the broadcast problem and the fact that my setup isn't fool proof at all. I have yet to come across a worm that doesn't use IP though. I also don't have anything other than IP enabled on any of the machines.
I have a question about the switch, how would that work if I only had one switch, since I have hubs in some areas of the house. Wouldn't it make sense to replace each hub with a switch, because I have trusted and untrusted devices on the same hub in certain places? I'm curious about this now. I really don't have much experience with vlans and how that works, so any info would be appreciated.
I know I shouldn't feed this troll, but I'm going to.
That's a very elitist attitude. What about the people in marketing and sales who are likely to be clueless about computers have to learn something totally new to them? If they aren't a serious computer geek, they get fired?
I don't know what kind of world you think we live in, but Linux is not for everyone. Period. It has a wonderful place in the server world, and for some desktop users who really are into computers, but for your average sales drone, it has no place.
People will use what they're familiar with, and if you try to teach them something new, they will be very reluctant to learn it.
Also, what about central administration of the system? With Linux that's nearly impossible to do for anything other than users and groups. Try rolling out patches and security fixes to 1000 Linux computers in one swipe. That's pretty much impossible to do. On the other hand, Microsoft's Active Directory does a wonderful job of this, as does Apple's Remote Desktop. I've yet to see anything in Linux that even comes close to this functionality.
Another feature that you won't find in a Linux environment that's very important to corporations is Exchange. People want their shared calendars, people want their central user directory, and people want to be able to simply type in a person's name to send them an email, instead of remembering a full email address.
I've done something similar to this on my home network. We have 8 PCs there, for various purposes, and wireless which friends use when they come over.
Basically I have two subnets - 192.168.60.x (trusted) and 192.168.61.x (untrusted). Any computer that I don't explicitly put in the trust segment goes on 192.168.61.x, and can only send data out to the internet.
Untrust doesn't get SMB access to my server, ssh, nothing. They also can't communicate with the trust segment unless the computer on the trust segment initiates communication. The trust segment can connect to anything on the network.
I only put computers that are in my complete control and on my SMB domain into the trust segment, everyone else is untrusted. It works really well to keep the computers clean, because if someone comes in with a worm, they can access the internet but can't propogate it to the house computers. I uh, also have my 16 year old sister's computer on the untrust segment.;)
There is a downside - if someone sets their IP to 192.168.60.x, they will be able to get on the trust segment, and there's really no way I can avoid that without putting managed switches in. They won't however be able to get out to the internet because I also check the MAC addresses in my IPFW rules - I have a rule that denys all traffic to my server on the trust segment unless it's one of the appropriate MACs.
Despite these few problems, most people that are there will have no idea how to get around it, so hey, it works.
Back on the article's subject, I'd imagine in a business setting where you have managed switches you'll be able to set something up which would be much more effective than what I've done. Since you have the capability of seperate vlans, set up a trust and untrust vlan similar to what I mentioned, and do MAC filtering of untrusted devices on the switch level so untrusted devices get shut off if they're trying to use a trusted IP. That'll effectively block infected laptops from infecting your main computers, as they won't be able to communicate to those machines. And if they do choose to supply their own IP on the trusted segment, the switch will shut their port off or deny all their traffic. This of course will increase the help desk calls, but for the added security I think it'd work.
Exactly. It would be really nice if they were ported to Linux and BSD, but since it isn't mainstream in the market yet it isn't going to happen for some time. And sadly it won't be mainstream until this becomes avaliable. Also, most of the closed source VSTs contain upwards of 4 gigabytes of sound data. I wouldn't want to have to download that much for one instrument.
It's one of those things where A isn't going to happen until B, and B isn't going to happen until A. I'd really like if they were avaliable in native formats, and there was some software such as Cubase SX which I'm very used to using. If that happened, then you'd see VSTs start becoming avaliable for Linux almost instantaneously. Developers would start porting them fairly fast to keep up with the new release of software.
Currently the best thing out there is what Mprx mentioned, and even then it's only in beta and doesn't have any effect capabilities... yet. Hopefully that will change some day though.
Meanwhile, I'll keep using Windows for my recording purposes.:-\
Actually I'm pretty sure the format for VST, DXi, AU, and RTAS is in fact open. I've seen several open source projects with VST support built in. Audacity comes to mind off hand, and it supports VST in Windows, Linux, and MacOS. Native on MacOS and Windows, WINE on Linux and BSD.
Also, if it was truly a closed format and developers had to license the format to use it, you wouldn't see free VSTs around - Who would want to pay to license a technology when they're releasing their project for free? Granted, the free VSTs are nowhere near as good as the commercial ones, but it is possible, they do exist, and they aren't made by people hacking or reverse engineering the format.
If you'd like to have a look at what I'm talking about, take a look at this post. Also, if you'd like a look at the SDK info for VST, have a look here.
The VST format is an open format, and if more people did get around to trying to create hosts for it, it would be possible. Creating an API to host VSTs can be done from the same documentation, you simply have to write code to parse the input generated by the VST plugins.
Granted, running them on Linux or BSD would require WINE, as I've said before, but it is possible.
As for DX, RTAS, and AU - those aren't nearly as commonly used as VST. Also, pretty much any plugin avaliable in those three formats is also avaliable as a VST. I'm well aware the DX is a closed format, and I'm unsure as to the open/closed nature of RTAS and AU.
Neat. I didn't see that mentioned anywhere on the site. Maybe if it becomes more reliable in the future I'll check it out. That really depends on WINE though, so it may take a while. I'd love to get away from Windows with Vista coming out sometime soon and all. I've been thinking of getting a Mac, since all the software I use is also avaliable there - I want to wait till the Intel Macs come out if I do get one. Thanks for the info about Ardour though, I'll definitely have a look at it.
Ardour looks nice, but does it support VSTi, DXi, RTAS, or AU? I don't see support for any of those virtual instrument formats that are very important in music production, for me and many others. It makes it pretty much useless for anything other than vanilla audio recording.
Sequencing low latency MIDI is MUCH easier with VSTi instruments, as is making changes, since you aren't forced to re-record the track as audio from your device every time you make a change. The reason I say it's better to re-record the tracks after changes is to normalize sound, and get the mix at least somewhat right so you know what it's going to sound like. Quite often a live feed is too quiet to be used for an actual recording, and normalizing audio realtime is pretty much impossible. Compression is a different story, which can have a similar effect, but not exactly.
Also in general with VSTis you can get much better sound than with an external device, since you have a program that's designed to make whatever type of sound you're using very, very well. For example, the Bosendorfer grand piano VSTi, or Steinberg's The Grand both produce much better sound than anything I've ever heard from an external device, save for a real piano.
I do quite a bit of music production, and I can't work without VSTis. This software would be fine for recording 100% live sound, but that just isn't the case 99% of the time you're doing music production. Not only are VSTis important, but also VST effects and DX effects for audio post processing realtime while recording. That pretty much makes it unusable for me, and most other producers out there.
Still, it looks like a promising piece of software to bring Linux/BSD into the recording world, and as a beta I can understand it's still going through improvements, but the features I mentioned are key and currently only avaliable in Windows/MacOS. That's really the only thing keeping me from running FreeBSD as my main operating system.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd think you could write up a simple php script that'll use passthru() to send the contents of the file through. You'd have to send a header with the file type first and to specificy download. That way you can auth the user against your purchased database, and only if they've purchased it can they download that image. I'm sure there's software out there that does this already and is integrated into a storefront - A poster further down the thread mentioned OSCommerce, so check that out. It shouldn't be too hard to come up with an in house script to do it, and if done properly that would be far more elegant than OSCommerce.
I think all of the OSes have their place. If I wanted a Unix type OS on my desktop I would use some form of Linux for that as its desktop support is far superior to that of the BSDs. Currently I use Windows on my desktop since the recording software I use (I'm a musician) isn't avaliable for Unix. I could get a Mac, the software I use is avaliable there, but that'd mean new hardware and spending money that I don't currently have.
For my servers I prefer FreeBSD simply because of how easy it is to maintain. I definitely wouldn't use FreeBSD on my laptop. I've tried running it on a Dell Inspiron 8200 and it fried the hard drive - the system fans never turned on... I never had that problem with Linux on that laptop so Linux wins in the laptop world for me.
I've looked into Gentoo for my servers as I've seen that it takes some of the strong points from FreeBSD and makes them even better; portage being one example that really shines. I'm a die hard fan of ports in FreeBSD which is honestly one of the major reasons I use FreeBSD on my server instead of Linux. Now that something like this is avaliable in a Linux distro that opens up the doors for me to start using it on my servers.
I try not to hold any OS or manufacturer in contempt - I think everything has its use and I'll reccomend the most appropriate software to someone for what they're trying to do. We really need more people around here like that instead of the mass of MS/Linux/BSD/OSX zealots who preach their OS of choice as the only solution for everyone no matter what the person wants to do.
Of course I can't say this is true for everyone, because I don't know everyone. I'm just saying this out of experience with my personal real life friends and coworkers. There's definitely exceptions to this - it can't be said that every Linux user uses it out of hatred for Microsoft and that every BSD user uses it for love of Unix. This would be simply untrue. This is just my observation.
I also know that I'll probably get modded troll or flamebait for this, even though I'm simply stating something that I've noticed throughout the years.
There's no difference that I can see whether or not it's integrated into the OS, the only thing that matters is that arbitrary code can be executed. This hasn't been readily demonstrated in Firefox, yet, and we all hope it stays that way.
Also, take note that Outlook 2000, XP, 2003, and so forth are not integrated into the OS. The only version that is integrated into the OS is Outlook Express.
I may be wrong on some of this, so if something isn't right point it out. I just don't see any way that OS integration makes a difference in executing arbitrary code.
Corporations are picking on 12 year old girls, there's a new bill that if passed will allow the FCC and such to snoop on every bit of data going through the internet, and we're throwing away basic freedoms that our country was founded on in order to "stop terrorism." I'm sure most of you have read the PATRIOT act, and realized how scary it truly is. Now we're looking to expand on that even more? Welcome to the People's Republic of America, folks.
I'm dead serious, if we don't get our act together I'm going to move to Canada or Australia, and I'm sure I'm not the only person here who's thinking that.
Just curious, what does DDTT stand for? I tried googling it and I only found a site about making bombs. :\
About the SLI profiles, anyone can create an SLI profile for a game if they want to, it just takes a bit of research beforehand. Have a look here. It should work for pretty much anything, but it takes a bit of tweaking.
I've got an Ultra X-Connect 500 watt PSU running dual 3.2 GHz Xeons and a 6800 Ultra. I only have one hard drive and one DVD burner in the machine, and I'm fairly sure that makes a difference.
I was kind of surprised though, I didn't expect it to be a great PSU. So far though I've had zero problems with it. Before I bought the Ultra X-Connect PSU I was running on a 600 watt Enermax PSU. My PC would completely lock up five minutes after I fire up say Unreal Tournament 2004 or WoW. It took me a while to realize that it was the PSU causing the problem, but as soon as I swapped it out it worked like a charm. You'd think Enermax would make good PSUs but no, we can't have that!
I think the GP is referring to Microsoft buying AOL in order to attempt to destroy Google, not Microsoft buying AOL in order to destroy AOL.
Come on, flamebait? This is obviously a joke! I'd give it funny points if I had mod points but I don't. :\
I agree that most of the reason for not wanting to switch is because they're afraid of change, but there are a few smaller things such as Exchange that keep it from happening any faster. Also, most businesses have netadmins who are absolutely clueless about security, and computers in general. I have a friend who works for a company whose IT director is a "FreeBSD admin." I use quotes because the man has no clue how to install FreeBSD from scratch.
This type of thing is commonplace, and I think until we get a new generation of people in IT, changes like this aren't going to happen.
Another example. Everyone I work with at University of Miami is completely stuck on Windows, and don't want to change. There's three FreeBSD servers in my department, two Linux ones, and those are RHEL. The rest are all Windows 2000 server. This isn't going to change anytime soon because all that the people there know is Windows. Not to mention the total lack of security such as using an unencrypted VNC session to admin one of our Win2k servers from anywhere on campus... This isn't an exxageration, the only people who really know FreeBSD and Linux well are my boss and myself.
Once we get people running IT departments who are familiar with Linux or BSD, we'll see that change starting to happen faster.
On another note, I've been down to Raritan - I have a friend there. I have to say that's a REALLY nice area. I don't know how the grandparent got the idea that NJ is completely flat and nothing but chemical plants, becuase that area clearly shows that it isn't.
Now, Florida, where I live, is about as flat as it gets...
Hey, I'm a twenty year old American slashdotter! We do exist, I swear!
Whoever made that Winamp theme you linked needs to be smacked upside the head with a wiffleball bat! =D
I have a question about the switch, how would that work if I only had one switch, since I have hubs in some areas of the house. Wouldn't it make sense to replace each hub with a switch, because I have trusted and untrusted devices on the same hub in certain places? I'm curious about this now. I really don't have much experience with vlans and how that works, so any info would be appreciated.
That's a very elitist attitude. What about the people in marketing and sales who are likely to be clueless about computers have to learn something totally new to them? If they aren't a serious computer geek, they get fired?
I don't know what kind of world you think we live in, but Linux is not for everyone. Period. It has a wonderful place in the server world, and for some desktop users who really are into computers, but for your average sales drone, it has no place.
People will use what they're familiar with, and if you try to teach them something new, they will be very reluctant to learn it.
Also, what about central administration of the system? With Linux that's nearly impossible to do for anything other than users and groups. Try rolling out patches and security fixes to 1000 Linux computers in one swipe. That's pretty much impossible to do. On the other hand, Microsoft's Active Directory does a wonderful job of this, as does Apple's Remote Desktop. I've yet to see anything in Linux that even comes close to this functionality.
Another feature that you won't find in a Linux environment that's very important to corporations is Exchange. People want their shared calendars, people want their central user directory, and people want to be able to simply type in a person's name to send them an email, instead of remembering a full email address.
Basically I have two subnets - 192.168.60.x (trusted) and 192.168.61.x (untrusted). Any computer that I don't explicitly put in the trust segment goes on 192.168.61.x, and can only send data out to the internet.
Untrust doesn't get SMB access to my server, ssh, nothing. They also can't communicate with the trust segment unless the computer on the trust segment initiates communication. The trust segment can connect to anything on the network.
I only put computers that are in my complete control and on my SMB domain into the trust segment, everyone else is untrusted. It works really well to keep the computers clean, because if someone comes in with a worm, they can access the internet but can't propogate it to the house computers. I uh, also have my 16 year old sister's computer on the untrust segment. ;)
There is a downside - if someone sets their IP to 192.168.60.x, they will be able to get on the trust segment, and there's really no way I can avoid that without putting managed switches in. They won't however be able to get out to the internet because I also check the MAC addresses in my IPFW rules - I have a rule that denys all traffic to my server on the trust segment unless it's one of the appropriate MACs.
Despite these few problems, most people that are there will have no idea how to get around it, so hey, it works.
Back on the article's subject, I'd imagine in a business setting where you have managed switches you'll be able to set something up which would be much more effective than what I've done. Since you have the capability of seperate vlans, set up a trust and untrust vlan similar to what I mentioned, and do MAC filtering of untrusted devices on the switch level so untrusted devices get shut off if they're trying to use a trusted IP. That'll effectively block infected laptops from infecting your main computers, as they won't be able to communicate to those machines. And if they do choose to supply their own IP on the trusted segment, the switch will shut their port off or deny all their traffic. This of course will increase the help desk calls, but for the added security I think it'd work.
You can re-order tabs in Firefox 1.5b1. It's really nice! I haven't experienced a single crash yet either, check it out.
It's one of those things where A isn't going to happen until B, and B isn't going to happen until A. I'd really like if they were avaliable in native formats, and there was some software such as Cubase SX which I'm very used to using. If that happened, then you'd see VSTs start becoming avaliable for Linux almost instantaneously. Developers would start porting them fairly fast to keep up with the new release of software.
Currently the best thing out there is what Mprx mentioned, and even then it's only in beta and doesn't have any effect capabilities... yet. Hopefully that will change some day though.
Meanwhile, I'll keep using Windows for my recording purposes. :-\
Also, if it was truly a closed format and developers had to license the format to use it, you wouldn't see free VSTs around - Who would want to pay to license a technology when they're releasing their project for free? Granted, the free VSTs are nowhere near as good as the commercial ones, but it is possible, they do exist, and they aren't made by people hacking or reverse engineering the format.
If you'd like to have a look at what I'm talking about, take a look at this post. Also, if you'd like a look at the SDK info for VST, have a look here.
The VST format is an open format, and if more people did get around to trying to create hosts for it, it would be possible. Creating an API to host VSTs can be done from the same documentation, you simply have to write code to parse the input generated by the VST plugins.
Granted, running them on Linux or BSD would require WINE, as I've said before, but it is possible.
As for DX, RTAS, and AU - those aren't nearly as commonly used as VST. Also, pretty much any plugin avaliable in those three formats is also avaliable as a VST. I'm well aware the DX is a closed format, and I'm unsure as to the open/closed nature of RTAS and AU.
Neat. I didn't see that mentioned anywhere on the site. Maybe if it becomes more reliable in the future I'll check it out. That really depends on WINE though, so it may take a while. I'd love to get away from Windows with Vista coming out sometime soon and all. I've been thinking of getting a Mac, since all the software I use is also avaliable there - I want to wait till the Intel Macs come out if I do get one. Thanks for the info about Ardour though, I'll definitely have a look at it.
Sequencing low latency MIDI is MUCH easier with VSTi instruments, as is making changes, since you aren't forced to re-record the track as audio from your device every time you make a change. The reason I say it's better to re-record the tracks after changes is to normalize sound, and get the mix at least somewhat right so you know what it's going to sound like. Quite often a live feed is too quiet to be used for an actual recording, and normalizing audio realtime is pretty much impossible. Compression is a different story, which can have a similar effect, but not exactly.
Also in general with VSTis you can get much better sound than with an external device, since you have a program that's designed to make whatever type of sound you're using very, very well. For example, the Bosendorfer grand piano VSTi, or Steinberg's The Grand both produce much better sound than anything I've ever heard from an external device, save for a real piano.
I do quite a bit of music production, and I can't work without VSTis. This software would be fine for recording 100% live sound, but that just isn't the case 99% of the time you're doing music production. Not only are VSTis important, but also VST effects and DX effects for audio post processing realtime while recording. That pretty much makes it unusable for me, and most other producers out there.
Still, it looks like a promising piece of software to bring Linux/BSD into the recording world, and as a beta I can understand it's still going through improvements, but the features I mentioned are key and currently only avaliable in Windows/MacOS. That's really the only thing keeping me from running FreeBSD as my main operating system.
I think he's saying someone's mom is a dog. Not sure who's though! :P
Yeah, I noticed that after posting, hence my reply to myself saying that I'm an idiot. :)
Blah, didn't link the right page. Click the "What Is NTFS" link in that page. The info's there.