I ordered two just now. I plan to keep one and give one away. This is a great way to kickstart the project. Benefits include increasing the number of Linux desktops out there. Hopefully this will help break the Redmond monopoly, as well as provide an interesting tool to children worldwide.
Furthermore, I like the fact that I get a $200. tax deduction for each laptop. The free T-mobile account is just gravy.
CYMK (cyan magenta yellow black)IS a different colorspace model from rgb (red green blue) It is used in the print industry. These would be the color of the inks used to print....everything. When mixed together, these colors will give a wider range of possible colors than Red Green Blue. Basically, if you are into graphic design you deal with CYMK for anything that will end up on paper.
I have been grinding telescope mirrors and making telescopes for many years. Although it is not a particularly complex or difficult thing to do, you would do well to find others who have done it before to help you out, or to get together a group interested folks to work together. It is well within the abilities of the first time mirror maker to produce an 8 inch diffraction limited telescope mirror. Perfect, in other words, and much better than the average mirror available in consumer telescopes. Grinding mirrors is also a great social activity for geeks. So grab yourself some glass, abrasives and a girl and have at it.
And lets not forget that the argument that Sony would not have made the Spiderman movies if the copyright on the character had run out is completly absurd.Most likely there would be more movies, and they would be better because it is likely that more than one movie house would want to make a Spidy Show, and competition is a Good Thing. Right? The movie would still have its own copyright because it is a new work. The reason copyrights no longer work as the constitution provides, is because it now copyright law prevents derivetive works in any meaningful time frame
I have used word perfect since WP 4.2 in the bad old DOS days, I skipped the whole windows thing, ran WP on OS/2 and then switched to Linux in about 1997 and started using word perfect for unix and then WP for Linux v. 7 and then v. 8. I fell in love with version 8. When Corel announced they were going to port their office suit to linux, I signed on as a Beta tester, and bought the first release.
However, the office suit was a port using wine, and it stank. Not only was it difficult to install and unstable, it worked just like the windows version. This was very unfortunate, as one of the beauties of WP 8 for Linux was its integration with X. you open a new document and you get a new window on the desktop. In the wine port, everthing happens within the original window.
It was with great sadness that I gave up on the new office suit and returned to WP8. We still use it in our office today.
Bottom line is that Corel had no chance of success with their wine port, because it was a dog and would always be a dog. It would have been much wiser to stick with and develop WP8 for linux. By the way, I understand they still sell WP8 for use with Unix, such as SCO unix, but it is very expensive and takes special libraries to run. It probably would not take much effort to recompile WP8 against up to date libraries and sell this fine program for use on Linux. The fact that they don't has probably more to do with agreements reached with Microsoft when they bailed out the company than any technical or financial reason.
I am an architect with a five person practice. I have been searching for a decent non-autodesk CAD program that runs on linux for some time. I have finally found one. Check out Bricscad. http://www.bricscad.com/ It is an Autocad clone. Even has the 3-D stuff. Reasonably priced. If you are familiar with Autocad you will be up and running in an hour. It is a Linux port from there windows product and uses wine. We were a Beta test site for them It will read and write all autocad files going back to version 2.2. Worth the price just for that.
Kurt.
As a long time OS/2 user (since version 1.3) this whole article just makes me laugh. "Ease of use" and "consistent interface" has been the Windows cover story for hiding buggy poorly functioning software for years. There really is no getting around it. Microsoft got to where they are by dirty tricks and unfair tactics. Not by producing better software.
OS/2 although long in the tooth and at end of life from IBM still beats the pants off windows as an object oriented operating system.
I am the owner of a 5 person Architectural firm in the Raleigh Durham area. With a significant amount of work, I have kept our office microsoft free for about fifteen years. Truly the most difficult task has been CAD programs.
We use a combination of Linux and OS/2. Linux for servers and administrative desktops. OS/2 for drafting workstations running DOS based cad programs. Some of the older DOS based CAD programs are really very good, and run like greased lightning on newer hardware.
I am quite sure that some of the win32 CAD programs will become quite usable on linux through use of wine. I have copies of a number of these programs(All legal!) which I test against various releases of WINE. My current favorite is VISUAL CADD which is almost usable.
Quite frankly I think there are a lot of technically savy design firms who would like to dump Microsoft (and Autodesk for that matter!) who would leap at a resonably functional WIN32 cad program running on Linux/Wine.
I have been an amatuer telescope nut (ATN)for quite a few years. Main reason to build a telescope yourself (other than the self satisfying geek factor) is that it is possible to build a very high quality scope (better than any consumer grade scope) for cheap.
It is quite within the range of any reasonbly competent person to grind and figuer a telescope mirror so that it is diffraction limited. This means that the surface has been shaped close enough to the ideal parabola (for a newtonian design) that the limiting factor for resolution is the wavelength of light you are interested in. In other words, the mirror is opticaly perfect.
The larger you go, the more difficult it is to do this, however.
unfortunatly, the design presented in the article seems to have been optimized solely for a lower eyepiece height, and all the rest of the choices made will result in a less than optimal image. eyepiece height.
the plate glass will make in very sensitive to temperature changes.
the large central obstruction will reduce contrast
the spray on mirror coating will almost certainly change the effective shape of the figure.
I could go on. There is not much to recommend this design other than eyepiece height.
But hey, the guy built his own telescope, and it works!
Damn, hope you have good fire insurance.
on
Cube House
·
· Score: 1
One tiny spark and whoosh, your cube is charcole man. Watch your task lights.
Dear Mr. Szulik, We have run Rehat on our office servers since the 4.2 days. We have recently been replacing our desktops (mostly OS/2 machines)with Redhat nine. Now that your company will no longer provide an inexpensive supported desktop solution for those of us who do not need the (expensive) enterprise solution, what other linux distribution would you recommend we use in lieu of Redhat 9?
First of all, you will be happy to know that astonomers (at least amateure astronomers) Still grind their own primary mirrors. I have ground four. (an 8 inch f8, an 8 inch f6, a six inch f8 and an elipticaly figured 2.5 inch secondary)
The quote you reference is good advice often given to a first time mirror maker. The point of the advice is the it will take you less time to grind a (small) 6 inch mirror and a (medium) 12 inch mirror than it would be to grind a 12 inch mirror as your first effort, because it is much easier to learn the required skills with the smaller mirror.
As an additional off topic comment, the reason that folks still grind their own mirrors, is that you can make a more optically accurate mirror by hand that you can buy. This is so because of the random nature of grinding by hand. As in most things, technique counts.
In spacecraft construction, you will get a lot more bang for you buck by starting small, make a learn from your mistakes and then build the big one.
Why did this get moderated as insightful? This is (as the poster states) a rant. Fact is, folks crossing the border from Mexico illegal or otherwise, in my experience, have the attributes that made the USA great: hardworking, intelligent, family oriented and interested in self determination. John Ashcroft take note.
Slashdot Mirror
I ordered two just now. I plan to keep one and give one away. This is a great way to kickstart the project. Benefits include increasing the number of Linux desktops out there. Hopefully this will help break the Redmond monopoly, as well as provide an interesting tool to children worldwide.
Furthermore, I like the fact that I get a $200. tax deduction for each laptop. The free T-mobile account is just gravy.
Kurt
CYMK (cyan magenta yellow black)IS a different colorspace model from rgb (red green blue) It is used in the print industry. These would be the color of the inks used to print ....everything. When mixed together, these colors will give a wider range of possible colors than Red Green Blue. Basically, if you are into graphic design you deal with CYMK for anything that will end up on paper.
I have been grinding telescope mirrors and making telescopes for many years. Although it is not a particularly complex or difficult thing to do, you would do well to find others who have done it before to help you out, or to get together a group interested folks to work together. It is well within the abilities of the first time mirror maker to produce an 8 inch diffraction limited telescope mirror. Perfect, in other words, and much better than the average mirror available in consumer telescopes. Grinding mirrors is also a great social activity for geeks. So grab yourself some glass, abrasives and a girl and have at it.
And lets not forget that the argument that Sony would not have made the Spiderman movies if the copyright on the character had run out is completly absurd.Most likely there would be more movies, and they would be better because it is likely that more than one movie house would want to make a Spidy Show, and competition is a Good Thing. Right? The movie would still have its own copyright because it is a new work. The reason copyrights no longer work as the constitution provides, is because it now copyright law prevents derivetive works in any meaningful time frame
Why is parent post moderated as funny? It should be moderated +5 as informative.
Kurt
I have used word perfect since WP 4.2 in the bad old DOS days, I skipped the whole windows thing, ran WP on OS/2 and then switched to Linux in about 1997 and started using word perfect for unix and then WP for Linux v. 7 and then v. 8. I fell in love with version 8. When Corel announced they were going to port their office suit to linux, I signed on as a Beta tester, and bought the first release.
However, the office suit was a port using wine, and it stank. Not only was it difficult to install and unstable, it worked just like the windows version. This was very unfortunate, as one of the beauties of WP 8 for Linux was its integration with X. you open a new document and you get a new window on the desktop. In the wine port, everthing happens within the original window.
It was with great sadness that I gave up on the new office suit and returned to WP8. We still use it in our office today.
Bottom line is that Corel had no chance of success with their wine port, because it was a dog and would always be a dog. It would have been much wiser to stick with and develop WP8 for linux. By the way, I understand they still sell WP8 for use with Unix, such as SCO unix, but it is very expensive and takes special libraries to run. It probably would not take much effort to recompile WP8 against up to date libraries and sell this fine program for use on Linux. The fact that they don't has probably more to do with agreements reached with Microsoft when they bailed out the company than any technical or financial reason.
I am an architect with a five person practice. I have been searching for a decent non-autodesk CAD program that runs on linux for some time. I have finally found one. Check out Bricscad. http://www.bricscad.com/ It is an Autocad clone. Even has the 3-D stuff. Reasonably priced. If you are familiar with Autocad you will be up and running in an hour. It is a Linux port from there windows product and uses wine. We were a Beta test site for them It will read and write all autocad files going back to version 2.2. Worth the price just for that. Kurt.
As a long time OS/2 user (since version 1.3) this whole article just makes me laugh. "Ease of use" and "consistent interface" has been the Windows cover story for hiding buggy poorly functioning software for years. There really is no getting around it. Microsoft got to where they are by dirty tricks and unfair tactics. Not by producing better software.
OS/2 although long in the tooth and at end of life from IBM still beats the pants off windows as an object oriented operating system.
I am the owner of a 5 person Architectural firm in the Raleigh Durham area. With a significant amount of work, I have kept our office microsoft free for about fifteen years. Truly the most difficult task has been CAD programs.
We use a combination of Linux and OS/2. Linux for servers and administrative desktops. OS/2 for drafting workstations running DOS based cad programs. Some of the older DOS based CAD programs are really very good, and run like greased lightning on newer hardware.
I am quite sure that some of the win32 CAD programs will become quite usable on linux through use of wine. I have copies of a number of these programs(All legal!) which I test against various releases of WINE. My current favorite is VISUAL CADD which is almost usable.
Quite frankly I think there are a lot of technically savy design firms who would like to dump Microsoft (and Autodesk for that matter!) who would leap at a resonably functional WIN32 cad program running on Linux/Wine.
I know I would. Bye OS/2, sadly, I knew ye well.
I have been an amatuer telescope nut (ATN)for quite a few years. Main reason to build a telescope yourself (other than the self satisfying geek factor) is that it is possible to build a very high quality scope (better than any consumer grade scope) for cheap.
It is quite within the range of any reasonbly competent person to grind and figuer a telescope mirror so that it is diffraction limited. This means that the surface has been shaped close enough to the ideal parabola (for a newtonian design) that the limiting factor for resolution is the wavelength of light you are interested in. In other words, the mirror is opticaly perfect.
The larger you go, the more difficult it is to do this, however.
unfortunatly, the design presented in the article seems to have been optimized solely for a lower eyepiece height, and all the rest of the choices made will result in a less than optimal image. eyepiece height.
the plate glass will make in very sensitive to temperature changes.
the large central obstruction will reduce contrast
the spray on mirror coating will almost certainly change the effective shape of the figure.
I could go on. There is not much to recommend this design other than eyepiece height.
But hey, the guy built his own telescope, and it works!
One tiny spark and whoosh, your cube is charcole man. Watch your task lights.
Dear Mr. Szulik, We have run Rehat on our office servers since the 4.2 days. We have recently been replacing our desktops (mostly OS/2 machines)with Redhat nine. Now that your company will no longer provide an inexpensive supported desktop solution for those of us who do not need the (expensive) enterprise solution, what other linux distribution would you recommend we use in lieu of Redhat 9?
Regards
First of all, you will be happy to know that astonomers (at least amateure astronomers) Still grind their own primary mirrors. I have ground four. (an 8 inch f8, an 8 inch f6, a six inch f8 and an elipticaly figured 2.5 inch secondary)
The quote you reference is good advice often given to a first time mirror maker. The point of the advice is the it will take you less time to grind a (small) 6 inch mirror and a (medium) 12 inch mirror than it would be to grind a 12 inch mirror as your first effort, because it is much easier to learn the required skills with the smaller mirror.
As an additional off topic comment, the reason that folks still grind their own mirrors, is that you can make a more optically accurate mirror by hand that you can buy. This is so because of the random nature of grinding by hand. As in most things, technique counts.
In spacecraft construction, you will get a lot more bang for you buck by starting small, make a learn from your mistakes and then build the big one.
Why did this get moderated as insightful? This is (as the poster states) a rant. Fact is, folks crossing the border from Mexico illegal or otherwise, in my experience, have the attributes that made the USA great: hardworking, intelligent, family oriented and interested in self determination. John Ashcroft take note.