What are you smoking? Celeron is the low end of the Intel single-CPU line. Core Duo was the high end of the dual-CPU line (above Pentium D and now below Core Duo 2), with a newer architecture and a smaller nm process. The Duo should absolutely smoke the Celeron.
Legacy ports cost next to nothing to include. They come in handy when you spill something on your keyboard and can just grab any old keyboard out of the supply closet and know it will work until you can order a new one.
I wouldn't want them on a laptop, where space is limited, and uh...you have a keyboard built in, but there's no good reason not to include them on a tower.
Last time I checked, the term 'most' meant a majority.
Firefox, Safari and Opera may have significant market penetration, but 30% a majority does not make.
If you're talking about "browser instances" or "browser installations," then it would be incorrect.
"...not supported for most browsers in the world."
Assume there are 100 actively developed browsers in the world (there are probably many more, but for the sake of argument). IE is 1 browser. That would make "other browsers" 99% of all browsers in the world, aka "most."
Let's sue them for providing you with mislabeled material with the sole intend to defraud...Yeah, bogus lawsuite clearly, but still better than the average riaa lawsuit.
Yeah, that doesn't hold up.
But one thing that's interesting as far as the usual RIAA/MPAA lawsuits is that these "official" decoys are legitimizing the defense that you didn't know what you were getting, and therefore didn't know you were downloading copyrighted files. If the RIAA can easily fool people with decoys, perhaps they (or anyone really) fooled the downloader with other copyrighted files.
Good point. They're giving the filesharers (almost) exactly what they wanted, for free, with their blessing. All while suing others for the same thing.
The problem with all the 360 content has been that the various quests/items/lairs etc have just been given to you via notes or something. Which seems pretty damn contrived.
Yeah, I read some posts on TES forums saying that they probably did that so people would easily notice that the mod they bought worked, right at the beginning of the game.
Microsoft said it was relinquishing all license claims on its Virtual Hard Disk Image Format - new software that will allow computers running on rival products like Apple's OS X or Linux, its chief competitors in operating systems, to simultaneously run Windows.
So it sounds like MS is giving away a.img -like file format for use in virtualization products, possibly in an OSS-compatible license, although knowing MS, something will make it incompatible.
It's probably a good idea for MS. If they keep the disk image format to themselves, then gain almost nothing. But if they can make Windows easier to run through another OS by allowing other programs to use the technology, they sell more server licenses.
You'd think if they bothered to take all that time to hook it up and test it on a Windows PC, they'd at least include in their process hash verification of the contents of the disk, to verify that it was written correctly, that the drive doesn't have errors, and that no viruses are installed on it.
Imagine a bank saying "Whoops! We lost all your money. It's the Windows ATMs we use. They're to blame for this." Rather than accepting responsibility for their processes and systems being faulty.
You wouldn't think very highly of that bank that chose an OS that probably wasn't best suited to the job, didn't bother to secure it, then didn't even bother to have the QA processes in place to catch it when something seriously goes wrong. And yet they're blaming the supplier of the OS they chose to use on the production line.
And how do you suggest I (as an interested party, but not a gimp coder) would do that without asking?
It is not the job of users to prove they have a right to not like products.
Of course they have a right. But at the same time, if they are unwilling to try to explain in any detail what the problem actually is, they kind of get what they deserve. If you want something out of free software, it's in your interest to at least contribute that much.
Now, if you're mainly programming to satisfy your own needs or those of the rest of the developers, you are the user, and everything is hunky dory. Just don't be surprised that othe user groups, professional graphics people, might not share your view of the product.
I have a strong suspicion almost all GPL coders are mainly programming to satisfy their own needs. Why else would they do it? Altruism? No. They're scratching an itch.
If the Gimp is not well designed for graphics professionals, I'd say not enough graphics professionals have gotten involved in the project. I'd love some free graphics work too, but I'm not holding my breath that any of them will do it for me. Especially perfectly to my tastes, without even telling them what my tastes are.
* Note that I'm not defending The Gimp. It's definitely not perfect. I do use it almost every day though, and wonder what turns some people off from it so much. So I ask. I do wonder what "attitude...that keeps gimp from improving" you inferred I have from my original post though.
That's probably one of the worst examples of forking. It hasn't exactly worked smoothly for both parties, as far as getting changes back into KHTML. But that's another discussion.
Anyway, the same thing isn't as likely to happen to any Gimp forks, thanks to its licensing requirements. But I suppose a dev could still make huge patches along with huge releases, which would still cause similar problems for the core project.
I'd personally rather that Gimp could save scripts/macros named, say "my custom shadow" and then reapply them as many times as you want. You could build up your own effects library that way, without requiring special-case "Layer Effects." Though I suppose making a fake layer that actually *is* just that script, dependent on the layer above/below it and automatically synchronizing, is exactly what Photoshop is doing.
A similar feature I'd like would be if your whole action history was saved that way and you could arbitrarily go back several steps, modify the action you performed, then bring it right back to the current step automatically. Combined with the first feature, it would be nice to be able to select a few steps you've already performed and save them as a macro, or "custom action" or similar.
Anyway, you're right. It should have something like that.
You can select a different brush size for circle brushes, fuzzy brushes, etc. or pull up Dialogs->Brushes and edit/create new brushes at any size. I don't know if that's what you were looking for though. I use the standard various size brushes.
Also it would be nice for windows to be a little less... every where. With Gimp there seems to be about 3-4 windows open and IMs get in the way and such. A minor thing but I would perfer a solid "raise all windows" type option when you click one. But this is a problem with the entire lay out IMO and a good theme could give this.
I agree that it can get annoying on Windows where there are generally no virtual desktops. It's not so bad if you dock your most frequently used dialogs (such as Layers) in the toolbox where the brush options, etc are. Then you can just switch tabs to get to the different dialogs. You still have seperate Toolbox and image windows though.
Wheres the "import folder as frames" option as well?
File->Open as Layer? Select a bunch of images in there. Then use the Animation filters to create an ani gif if that's what you're after.
Some of your other points about discoverability of tools/options I agree with though.
Note If you deleted and created a new System partition, but you are installing Windows XP on a different partition, you will be prompted to select a file system for both the System and startup partitions.
I didn't modify the partition table during Windows XP installation, so this KB article is not relevant. What I did was try to install to an existing system with an unformatted NTFS partition as part of the following layout:
I believe the note is slightly inaccurate. It should say "If you have a partition before the partition you are installing Windows to, that is formatted anything other than FAT/FAT32/NTFS, or unformatted, it must be reformatted along with the Windows partition."
I always create a 1 GB boot/pagefile partition and a Windows partition when installing Windows, so I remember the prompt appearing twice, which confused me a little the first time, but I paused and figured out it needed to put the bootloader on the first partition. It still screws up my drive letters though, so I actually need to hide that partition, install Windows, then unhide that partition to make the second partition C:\. PartitionMagic sure comes in handy and I wish there was a full featured GPL alternative. Anyway, that's all way offtopic.
I'm almost positive it asks twice, but I can't refresh my memory without formatting the first partition to get to the second prompt, which would have to be one of my working partitions I have now.;-)
Ever tried to do basic drawing in The Gimp? Like, say, drawing a circle?
That's actually a really old version that those instructions are for, as evidenced by the fact that Shift constrains circles now, not Ctrl. You can either select a circle, then use Edit->Stroke Selection and select the width of the line, or Select->Border after selecting a circle, then fill it with a color or pattern. Neither option is as simple as a circle tool, but both are easier than those old (1.x?) instructions.
Slashdot Mirror
Apparently it's an excerpt from the book, Windows Vista Unveiled. All the images have /book_chapters in the path as well.
The images are ripped directly from that book.
So for every month of the past year, it's safe to assume that Oracle had between 50-100 open vulnerabilities.
Rhetorical question: How many did PostgreSQL or MySQL have open during any of those months?
And when it comes to HDDs, both lose to eSATA. With eSATA you get the speed, DMA access, SMART features, and low/zero CPU usage.
So they're pretty much soon to be only relevant for peripherals. Almost half the HDD/Raid controllers I looked at recently had an eSATA port.
What are you smoking? Celeron is the low end of the Intel single-CPU line. Core Duo was the high end of the dual-CPU line (above Pentium D and now below Core Duo 2), with a newer architecture and a smaller nm process. The Duo should absolutely smoke the Celeron.
Legacy ports cost next to nothing to include. They come in handy when you spill something on your keyboard and can just grab any old keyboard out of the supply closet and know it will work until you can order a new one.
I wouldn't want them on a laptop, where space is limited, and uh...you have a keyboard built in, but there's no good reason not to include them on a tower.
If you're talking about "browser instances" or "browser installations," then it would be incorrect.
"...not supported for most browsers in the world."
Assume there are 100 actively developed browsers in the world (there are probably many more, but for the sake of argument). IE is 1 browser. That would make "other browsers" 99% of all browsers in the world, aka "most."
Did you miss the part where that would be free?
Yeah, that doesn't hold up.
But one thing that's interesting as far as the usual RIAA/MPAA lawsuits is that these "official" decoys are legitimizing the defense that you didn't know what you were getting, and therefore didn't know you were downloading copyrighted files. If the RIAA can easily fool people with decoys, perhaps they (or anyone really) fooled the downloader with other copyrighted files.
Good point. They're giving the filesharers (almost) exactly what they wanted, for free, with their blessing. All while suing others for the same thing.
So they admit that filesharers are the active music audience.
They're one step away from admitting filesharers buy more music.
Yeah, I read some posts on TES forums saying that they probably did that so people would easily notice that the mod they bought worked, right at the beginning of the game.
It's still pretty stupid.
He had to get in a quick 6 hour raid between reading the post and replying to it.
Heh, the last post listed at my threshold, and it's the first one to clearly explain the situation. gj
You'd think if they bothered to take all that time to hook it up and test it on a Windows PC, they'd at least include in their process hash verification of the contents of the disk, to verify that it was written correctly, that the drive doesn't have errors, and that no viruses are installed on it.
Imagine a bank saying "Whoops! We lost all your money. It's the Windows ATMs we use. They're to blame for this." Rather than accepting responsibility for their processes and systems being faulty.
You wouldn't think very highly of that bank that chose an OS that probably wasn't best suited to the job, didn't bother to secure it, then didn't even bother to have the QA processes in place to catch it when something seriously goes wrong. And yet they're blaming the supplier of the OS they chose to use on the production line.
Great idea! Remind everyone what pathetic losers* they are staring at a screen all day instead of actually doing something.
* this post brought to you by a pathetic loser who stares at a screen all day instead of actually doing something.
And how do you suggest I (as an interested party, but not a gimp coder) would do that without asking?
Of course they have a right. But at the same time, if they are unwilling to try to explain in any detail what the problem actually is, they kind of get what they deserve. If you want something out of free software, it's in your interest to at least contribute that much.
I have a strong suspicion almost all GPL coders are mainly programming to satisfy their own needs. Why else would they do it? Altruism? No. They're scratching an itch.
If the Gimp is not well designed for graphics professionals, I'd say not enough graphics professionals have gotten involved in the project. I'd love some free graphics work too, but I'm not holding my breath that any of them will do it for me. Especially perfectly to my tastes, without even telling them what my tastes are.
* Note that I'm not defending The Gimp. It's definitely not perfect. I do use it almost every day though, and wonder what turns some people off from it so much. So I ask. I do wonder what "attitude...that keeps gimp from improving" you inferred I have from my original post though.
That's probably one of the worst examples of forking. It hasn't exactly worked smoothly for both parties, as far as getting changes back into KHTML. But that's another discussion.
Anyway, the same thing isn't as likely to happen to any Gimp forks, thanks to its licensing requirements. But I suppose a dev could still make huge patches along with huge releases, which would still cause similar problems for the core project.
Why are you crossposting all over the place? lol I ain't replying. Oh wait, I just did. Oops!
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=201065&cid=164 61513
I'd personally rather that Gimp could save scripts/macros named, say "my custom shadow" and then reapply them as many times as you want. You could build up your own effects library that way, without requiring special-case "Layer Effects." Though I suppose making a fake layer that actually *is* just that script, dependent on the layer above/below it and automatically synchronizing, is exactly what Photoshop is doing.
A similar feature I'd like would be if your whole action history was saved that way and you could arbitrarily go back several steps, modify the action you performed, then bring it right back to the current step automatically. Combined with the first feature, it would be nice to be able to select a few steps you've already performed and save them as a macro, or "custom action" or similar.
Anyway, you're right. It should have something like that.
You can select a different brush size for circle brushes, fuzzy brushes, etc. or pull up Dialogs->Brushes and edit/create new brushes at any size. I don't know if that's what you were looking for though. I use the standard various size brushes.
I agree that it can get annoying on Windows where there are generally no virtual desktops. It's not so bad if you dock your most frequently used dialogs (such as Layers) in the toolbox where the brush options, etc are. Then you can just switch tabs to get to the different dialogs. You still have seperate Toolbox and image windows though.
File->Open as Layer? Select a bunch of images in there. Then use the Animation filters to create an ani gif if that's what you're after.
Some of your other points about discoverability of tools/options I agree with though.
I believe the note is slightly inaccurate. It should say "If you have a partition before the partition you are installing Windows to, that is formatted anything other than FAT/FAT32/NTFS, or unformatted, it must be reformatted along with the Windows partition."
I always create a 1 GB boot/pagefile partition and a Windows partition when installing Windows, so I remember the prompt appearing twice, which confused me a little the first time, but I paused and figured out it needed to put the bootloader on the first partition. It still screws up my drive letters though, so I actually need to hide that partition, install Windows, then unhide that partition to make the second partition C:\. PartitionMagic sure comes in handy and I wish there was a full featured GPL alternative. Anyway, that's all way offtopic.
I'm almost positive it asks twice, but I can't refresh my memory without formatting the first partition to get to the second prompt, which would have to be one of my working partitions I have now.
That's actually a really old version that those instructions are for, as evidenced by the fact that Shift constrains circles now, not Ctrl. You can either select a circle, then use Edit->Stroke Selection and select the width of the line, or Select->Border after selecting a circle, then fill it with a color or pattern. Neither option is as simple as a circle tool, but both are easier than those old (1.x?) instructions.