Guillermo Garron wrote:
> On 2/11/07, Joe Hart wrote:
>> Guillermo Garron wrote:
>> >> tom arnall wrote:
>> >> > I booted from the Ubuntu CD the other day and was very impressed.
>> >> It got my
>> >> > wireless card right off. Back 6 months ago when I did a Debian
>> >> install from
>> >> > the minimal cd, I had to recompile the kernel etc to get my card to
>> >> work.
>> >> > Does anyone know if this has changed?
>> >> >
>> >> > I am thinking seriously of recommending Ubuntu as a starting point
>> >> for new
>> >> > users. Comments on the advantages/disadvantages of this idea are
>> >> encouraged.
>> >> >
>> >> > What is involved for a user to switch from Ubuntu to Debian?
>> > What I am doing is using Ubuntu and Fedora for my desktops and Laptop
>> > as you said all is recognized at the first try.
>> > But for my servers, I use CentOS 4.4 and Debian 3.1 as I want stable
>> > software, and server usually do not use Digital Cameras, or Wireless
>> > Lan, so you usually do not need that things you need on your desktop.
>> >
>> > That is just my opinion, but I hope can give some light to you.
>> >
>> > best regards,
>> >
>> > ---- And why do I use RedHat and Debian based? just because i am
>> > curious, and like to experiment :) ---
>> >
>> Well said. Experimenting=Learning. My kids who are in 1st and 2nd
>> grade have already leaned that (van proberen komt leren : lit: from
>> trying comes learning).
>>
>> However, just because Debian is stable, doesn't mean it isn't good for
>> the desktop. I don't know about you, but how would you like to have X
>> crash on you while you're in the middle of you're online poker game. By
>> the time you get your computer working and back to the site, gee, 2
>> rounds might have already passed. We can't sit out two rounds.
>>
>> Seriously. Like was explained earlier, Ubuntu and all the distros based
>> on them, take a snapshot of sid on dax X, and give themselves till day Y
>> to fix it. On day Z they release, regardless of the state of the
>> system. If you know the history, you'll know that Dapper was two months
>> late. Edgy was on time. Dapper is better than Edgy? Why? Because
>> instead of 6 months from the snapshot they were 8.
>>
>> Now think of it this way. A large number of packages including the
>> kernel are newer on Debian Etch than on Ubuntu Edgy. Once Etch goes
>> stable, and Fiesty is released, things will turn the other way. Along
>> comes Lenny to tip the balance.
>>
>> I have a feeling that quite of bit of the work being done is artwork.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Joe
>>
> You send this only to me, Is this good? or you wanted to send to the
> list?
>
> Thanks I did not know that etch was "newer" that edgy!
>
>
Damn, did it again. I am so used to hitting reply. I have to remember
Reply to ALL...
Yes, it works that way because Debian Testing is constantly being
updated with packages. The latest release of Ubuntu is always a
snapshot of Unstable a few months before they release. By the time they
do release, a large number of the packages have already migrated to
Testing. You want a distro that is really bleeding edge? Take a loot
at www.sidux.com.
Joe
--
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Militantly FREE software support.
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 07:03:18 +0100
Joe Hart wrote:
> Damn, did it again. I am so used to hitting reply. I have to
> remember Reply to ALL...
'Reply to list' would be better. There was just recently a thread about
Icedove/Thundebird extensions to achieve that.
Regards,
Andrei
--
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
(Albert Einstein)
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
Andrei Popescu wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 07:03:18 +0100
> Joe Hart wrote:
>
>
>> Damn, did it again. I am so used to hitting reply. I have to
>> remember Reply to ALL...
>>
>
> 'Reply to list' would be better. There was just recently a thread about
> Icedove/Thundebird extensions to achieve that.
>
> Regards,
> Andrei
>
Thanks, I'll check the archives because I searched for it on mozilla and
couldn't find it.
To be honest I would prefer switching to Kmail because it integrates
much better to KDE, and it is a good client, but I can't do that because
my mail has to be accessible from Windows, that my wife insists that I
keep on this PC.
She gets mail too, and says that she has to have windows for her
school. I told her about Crossover Office, but she says "Why should we
buy something so I we can run MS Office on Linux when it runs fine under
Windows". Maybe I'll play with wine and get her apps working. I have
yet to spend the time. She says OpenOffice isn't good enough, because
it can't read the .doc files reliably (thanks to the proprietary nature
of the .doc files).
I have no viable argument. I could install Windows in a VM, but I
already cut the space to only a few gigs, and with 750 gigs or so of
storage available on this computer, I don't really miss the space. With
IceDove/Thunderbird, I can (and have) set it so it uses the same
folder/directory to store the mail so it makes no difference if she
reads the mail in Windows or I do it in Linux.
Joe
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Sunday 11 February 2007 04:43, Joe Hart wrote:
> Andrei Popescu wrote:
> > On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 07:03:18 +0100
> >
> > Joe Hart wrote:
> >> Damn, did it again. I am so used to hitting reply. I have to
> >> remember Reply to ALL...
> >
> > 'Reply to list' would be better. There was just recently a thread
> > about Icedove/Thundebird extensions to achieve that.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Andrei
>
> Thanks, I'll check the archives because I searched for it on mozilla
> and couldn't find it.
>
> To be honest I would prefer switching to Kmail because it integrates
> much better to KDE, and it is a good client, but I can't do that
> because my mail has to be accessible from Windows, that my wife
> insists that I keep on this PC.
>
> She gets mail too, and says that she has to have windows for her
> school. I told her about Crossover Office, but she says "Why should
> we buy something so I we can run MS Office on Linux when it runs fine
> under Windows". Maybe I'll play with wine and get her apps working.
> I have yet to spend the time. She says OpenOffice isn't good enough,
> because it can't read the .doc files reliably (thanks to the
> proprietary nature of the .doc files).
If Office is the issue, and not Windows overall, then why should she buy
office when she can use OpenOffice for free and it will read and write
all MS Office files?
Why pay for Microsoft when there's a FOSS program that is not going to
be an infection vector for viruses?
Hal
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 11:06:15 -0500
Hal Vaughan wrote:
> On Sunday 11 February 2007 04:43, Joe Hart wrote:
> > Andrei Popescu wrote:
> > > On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 07:03:18 +0100
> > >
> > > Joe Hart wrote:
> > >> Damn, did it again. I am so used to hitting reply. I have to
> > >> remember Reply to ALL...
> > >
> > > 'Reply to list' would be better. There was just recently a thread
> > > about Icedove/Thundebird extensions to achieve that.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Andrei
> >
> > Thanks, I'll check the archives because I searched for it on mozilla
> > and couldn't find it.
> >
> > To be honest I would prefer switching to Kmail because it integrates
> > much better to KDE, and it is a good client, but I can't do that
> > because my mail has to be accessible from Windows, that my wife
> > insists that I keep on this PC.
> >
> > She gets mail too, and says that she has to have windows for her
> > school. I told her about Crossover Office, but she says "Why should
> > we buy something so I we can run MS Office on Linux when it runs fine
> > under Windows". Maybe I'll play with wine and get her apps working.
> > I have yet to spend the time. She says OpenOffice isn't good enough,
> > because it can't read the .doc files reliably (thanks to the
> > proprietary nature of the .doc files).
>
Where/how is the mail stored? maybe kmail can be configured to work with
whatever option you want ...
> If Office is the issue, and not Windows overall, then why should she buy
> office when she can use OpenOffice for free and it will read and write
> all MS Office files?
>
You did read the line above that she says that openoffice isn't good enough for
here?
Personally I am a bigger fan of openoffice but it does have problems with
properly formatting word documents.
Actually I am a bigger fan of lyx, but that's a hard sell for office fans.
> Why pay for Microsoft when there's a FOSS program that is not going to
> be an infection vector for viruses?
>
> Hal
>
>
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Sunday 11 February 2007 11:41, Micha Feigin wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 11:06:15 -0500
>
> Hal Vaughan wrote:
> > On Sunday 11 February 2007 04:43, Joe Hart wrote:
> > > Andrei Popescu wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 07:03:18 +0100
> > > >
> > > > Joe Hart wrote:
> > > >> Damn, did it again. I am so used to hitting reply. I have to
> > > >> remember Reply to ALL...
> > > >
> > > > 'Reply to list' would be better. There was just recently a
> > > > thread about Icedove/Thundebird extensions to achieve that.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Andrei
> > >
> > > Thanks, I'll check the archives because I searched for it on
> > > mozilla and couldn't find it.
> > >
> > > To be honest I would prefer switching to Kmail because it
> > > integrates much better to KDE, and it is a good client, but I
> > > can't do that because my mail has to be accessible from Windows,
> > > that my wife insists that I keep on this PC.
> > >
> > > She gets mail too, and says that she has to have windows for her
> > > school. I told her about Crossover Office, but she says "Why
> > > should we buy something so I we can run MS Office on Linux when
> > > it runs fine under Windows". Maybe I'll play with wine and get
> > > her apps working. I have yet to spend the time. She says
> > > OpenOffice isn't good enough, because it can't read the .doc
> > > files reliably (thanks to the proprietary nature of the .doc
> > > files).
>
> Where/how is the mail stored? maybe kmail can be configured to work
> with whatever option you want ...
>
> > If Office is the issue, and not Windows overall, then why should
> > she buy office when she can use OpenOffice for free and it will
> > read and write all MS Office files?
>
> You did read the line above that she says that openoffice isn't good
> enough for here?
I thought I had read it clearly, but I must have missed that part. I
don't know how. Maybe I tune it out because I've dealt with too many
people that look at OOo, try it for 2 minutes, say, "It won't work,"
and then I ask them to show me how to do a few things in Office and
realize they really don't even have much of a clue with Office. With
OOo 2.x, there's really no reason to stick with Office any longer
unless the PHB orders it.
> Personally I am a bigger fan of openoffice but it does have problems
> with properly formatting word documents.
I've never really had a problem with that. Are you dealing with
specific or unusual formatting?
Hal
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 12:05:26 -0500
Hal Vaughan wrote:
[... snip ...]
> On Sunday 11 February 2007 11:41, Micha Feigin wrote:
> > On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 11:06:15 -0500
> >
> > > If Office is the issue, and not Windows overall, then why should
> > > she buy office when she can use OpenOffice for free and it will
> > > read and write all MS Office files?
> >
> > You did read the line above that she says that openoffice isn't good
> > enough for here?
>
> I thought I had read it clearly, but I must have missed that part. I
> don't know how. Maybe I tune it out because I've dealt with too many
> people that look at OOo, try it for 2 minutes, say, "It won't work,"
> and then I ask them to show me how to do a few things in Office and
> realize they really don't even have much of a clue with Office. With
> OOo 2.x, there's really no reason to stick with Office any longer
> unless the PHB orders it.
>
I am with you on that, but windows users tend to be hard headed about such
stuff or they wouldn't be using it in the first place (linux is software with
some bugs, microsoft is bugs with some software ;-)
> > Personally I am a bigger fan of openoffice but it does have problems
> > with properly formatting word documents.
>
> I've never really had a problem with that. Are you dealing with
> specific or unusual formatting?
>
by order of importance and tendency for problems:
mathematics, hebrew, tables, location of page breaks (probably font issue)
I use openoffice almost solely for opening word documents that I have to open
(with most of them I don't bother and my own work is with latex, lyx (latex again)
or text).
> Hal
>
>
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 06:41:55PM +0200, Micha Feigin wrote:
> Actually I am a bigger fan of lyx, but that's a hard sell for office fans.
I'm just starting down the LaTex and Lyx road (from Lout since I want
html output option). Is there anything that you _can't_ do with Lyx
that you can do with LaTex?
Doug.
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 12:17:41PM EST, Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 06:41:55PM +0200, Micha Feigin wrote:
> > Actually I am a bigger fan of lyx, but that's a hard sell for office fans.
>
> I'm just starting down the LaTex and Lyx road (from Lout since I want
> html output option). Is there anything that you _can't_ do with Lyx
> that you can do with LaTex?
Don't take my word for it but the short answer is no since as far as I
can remember for stuff that it doesn't do out of the box, LyX lets you
imbed LaTeX native statements in your document.
But to answer your second question (should I choose LyX over LaTeX)
unless you absolutely want something that feels a bit like Microsoft
Word I would not bother with LyX. I did have some familiarity with
markup languages but it only took me a few hours to figure out how to
put together a basic native LaTeX document. It took me much longer to
customize LyX to my liking.
As always, YMMV.
A few good (?) reasons to choose LaTeX:
With native LaTex you will be using your editor of choice .. you won't
have to teach your fingers new habits. Worth a thought if you plan on
using LaTeX extensively.
Overhead and portability. Recent versions of LyX use the KDE/QT gui.
With native LaTeX all you need is an editor and LaTex.
If you are a vim user & insist on working in something gui you may want
to take a peek at this:
http://vim-latex.sourceforge.net
Lastly, another thing to consider before you decide: Despite the name
is mostly a LaTeX support list and it is both very
friendly to (serious) novices and very responsive.
I'm not sure LyX has the equivalent.
HTH
Thanks,
cga
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 02:08:14PM -0500, cga2000 wrote:
> If you are a vim user & insist on working in something gui you may want
> to take a peek at this:
>
> http://vim-latex.sourceforge.net
Have you managed to get it working with vim7.x?
--
Chris.
======
Don't forget to check that your /etc/apt/sources.lst entries point to
etch and not testing, otherwise you may end up with a broken system once
etch goes stable.
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 14:08:14 -0500
cga2000 wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 12:17:41PM EST, Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 06:41:55PM +0200, Micha Feigin wrote:
> > > Actually I am a bigger fan of lyx, but that's a hard sell for office fans.
> >
> > I'm just starting down the LaTex and Lyx road (from Lout since I want
> > html output option). Is there anything that you _can't_ do with Lyx
> > that you can do with LaTex?
>
> Don't take my word for it but the short answer is no since as far as I
> can remember for stuff that it doesn't do out of the box, LyX lets you
> imbed LaTeX native statements in your document.
>
> But to answer your second question (should I choose LyX over LaTeX)
> unless you absolutely want something that feels a bit like Microsoft
> Word I would not bother with LyX. I did have some familiarity with
> markup languages but it only took me a few hours to figure out how to
> put together a basic native LaTeX document. It took me much longer to
> customize LyX to my liking.
>
I find it's main power come in three places:
Mathematics (you see almost anything on screen making it much easier to get the
equations right, especially when they are long an complicated).
Tables (not as much as an issue as with mathematics).
Images, much less than the previous two.
I found that setting up shortcuts, esspecially for mathematics is very easy and
straight forward, of course once you figure out where to put them. On the other
hand I still haven't managed to get vim and emacs to behave as I like
> As always, YMMV.
>
> A few good (?) reasons to choose LaTeX:
>
> With native LaTex you will be using your editor of choice .. you won't
> have to teach your fingers new habits. Worth a thought if you plan on
> using LaTeX extensively.
>
> Overhead and portability. Recent versions of LyX use the KDE/QT gui.
> With native LaTeX all you need is an editor and LaTex.
>
There is a lyx version for linux windows and I believe mac osx IIRC, the
windows version even takes care of installing latex properly.
As for the overhand, I find the lyx doesn't take more memory than vim or emacs,
probably more than the lighter ones (it uses qt, not the full blown kde, so it
doesn't pull along the whole daemon party. There is also a xforms version btw)
Just for the record:
USER PID %CPU %MEM VSZ RSS TTY STAT START TIME COMMAND
micha 7344 0.2 3.5 26388 9044 ? S 21:16 0:23 lyx-qt
> If you are a vim user & insist on working in something gui you may want
> to take a peek at this:
>
> http://vim-latex.sourceforge.net
>
Or if you are an emacs user there is auctex, I prefer that to vim (and
vim-latex)
> Lastly, another thing to consider before you decide: Despite the name
> is mostly a LaTeX support list and it is both very
> friendly to (serious) novices and very responsive.
>
> I'm not sure LyX has the equivalent.
>
lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
very helpful for both lyx and latex
> HTH
>
> Thanks,
>
> cga
>
There are occations for each and there are some edge cases where lyx can cause
some latex errors which can be a pain to understand, but pure latex can cause
more.
If you only need simple text with sections or like programing or fine twiking I
would go with pure latex. If you like some "what you see is almost what you
get", some math or making something more complicated without much more work
than the simple stuff I would go with lyx (it can also smooth the learning
curve a bit).
>
>
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
Thanks all for your discussion on Lyx vs LaTex (and Word).
I've been traveling and now pouring through a month's worth of emails.
Just before I left, after reading all the documents that come with the
TexLive system on Debian, I took 30 minutes and translated a few Lout
letters into Latex. It works. In fact, some things are easier than in
Lout. I started with lout because it looked like an easier learning
curve and certainly a shorter download, but it doesn't do html.
I prefer to use a regular editor, like I've been doing with Vim and
Lout, rater than a GUI and especially rather than a WYSIWYG. The
advantage of just using any editor is that I can use any editor. I can
take the file with me and use anyone's computer with any editor and work
on a document. When I get home I can process it and see how it looks.
Since my printer is text-only, if I want a document to look beautiful I
get out my pen, ink, a nice piece of parchment, and start writing
Chancery. With everyone else spitting stuff out on a laser printer, its
amazing the positive reception a hand scribed letter receives. I can do
all the prep work on the computer.
I'll be starting a new structured document soon, using LaTex, and I'll
learn how to set things up for good html presenation (in addition to
good pdf, ps, and plain text).
Thanks again,
Doug.
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 12:17:41 -0500
Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 06:41:55PM +0200, Micha Feigin wrote:
> > Actually I am a bigger fan of lyx, but that's a hard sell for office fans.
>
> I'm just starting down the LaTex and Lyx road (from Lout since I want
> html output option). Is there anything that you _can't_ do with Lyx
> that you can do with LaTex?
>
There is the occasional extreme fine tuning of the preamble issue for conference
papers (very rare) and it can be a bit difficult to collaborate with latex only
users (when I need to reincorporate changes into the document).
Note that anything that lyx doesn't know how to do directly can be done by
inserting a latex box. BTW these things get fewer and fewer by the
version.
> Doug.
>
>
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:41:55 +0200
Micha Feigin wrote:
> Actually I am a bigger fan of lyx, but that's a hard sell for office
> fans.
lyx is good for big documents, or when you already have a class to use.
If you are doing something small (one or two pages) and atypical it
might be faster to just use abiword.
Regards,
Andrei
--
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
(Albert Einstein)
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
Andrei Popescu wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:41:55 +0200
> Micha Feigin wrote:
>
>
>> Actually I am a bigger fan of lyx, but that's a hard sell for office
>> fans.
>>
>
> lyx is good for big documents, or when you already have a class to use.
> If you are doing something small (one or two pages) and atypical it
> might be faster to just use abiword.
>
I've never heard of lyx. Have to check it out. Would you consider a
450 page book a big project?
Joe
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 02/11/07 14:16, Joe Hart wrote:
> Andrei Popescu wrote:
>> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:41:55 +0200
>> Micha Feigin wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Actually I am a bigger fan of lyx, but that's a hard sell for office
>>> fans.
>>>
>>
>> lyx is good for big documents, or when you already have a class to use.
>> If you are doing something small (one or two pages) and atypical it
>> might be faster to just use abiword.
>>
> I've never heard of lyx. Have to check it out. Would you consider a
> 450 page book a big project?
Only if it's a trilogy of 450-page books, along with accompanying
documentation.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFFz3weS9HxQb37XmcRAhTUAJ9GUI1Damt1NyrpI9L16ahJHsVlgwCgmdwF
3fhDG8b1Cu6PUFQ68fMzD/s=
=AwNw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 09:16:50PM +0100, Joe Hart wrote:
> Andrei Popescu wrote:
> >On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:41:55 +0200
> >Micha Feigin wrote:
> >>Actually I am a bigger fan of lyx, but that's a hard sell for office
> >>fans.
> >lyx is good for big documents, or when you already have a class to use.
> >If you are doing something small (one or two pages) and atypical it
> >might be faster to just use abiword.
> >
> I've never heard of lyx. Have to check it out. Would you consider a
> 450 page book a big project?
>
Think of Lyx as a GUI front-end to LaTex. You can use LaTex to do
anything from a simple letter (no sections, no TOC), report, or a whole
book. Its all about the structure of the document without worrying
about the typographic details.
Presumably, your 450 page book would have front-matter, title page, TOC,
chapters, sections, etc, appendicies, bibliography, and perhaps an
index. LaTex does all this.
If you want a GUI, use Lyx. If you want to just use Vim, then use
straight LaTex.
Doug.
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 09:16:50PM +0100, Joe Hart wrote:
>
>> Andrei Popescu wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:41:55 +0200
>>> Micha Feigin wrote:
>>>
>>>> Actually I am a bigger fan of lyx, but that's a hard sell for office
>>>> fans.
>>>>
>>> lyx is good for big documents, or when you already have a class to use.
>>> If you are doing something small (one or two pages) and atypical it
>>> might be faster to just use abiword.
>>>
>>>
>> I've never heard of lyx. Have to check it out. Would you consider a
>> 450 page book a big project?
>>
>>
>
> Think of Lyx as a GUI front-end to LaTex. You can use LaTex to do
> anything from a simple letter (no sections, no TOC), report, or a whole
> book. Its all about the structure of the document without worrying
> about the typographic details.
>
> Presumably, your 450 page book would have front-matter, title page, TOC,
> chapters, sections, etc, appendicies, bibliography, and perhaps an
> index. LaTex does all this.
>
> If you want a GUI, use Lyx. If you want to just use Vim, then use
> straight LaTex.
>
Thanks Doug. I will definately have to check it out. Most of my work
is fiction and doesn't need to TOC or the index, but does need chapters
and perhaps sections. I'd never heard of LaTex either. I learn more
and more each day. How fun!
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 10:12:42PM +0100, Joe Hart wrote:
> >If you want a GUI, use Lyx. If you want to just use Vim, then use
> >straight LaTex.
Or auctex with emacs.
> Thanks Doug. I will definately have to check it out. Most of my work
> is fiction and doesn't need to TOC or the index, but does need chapters
> and perhaps sections. I'd never heard of LaTex either. I learn more
> and more each day. How fun!
Apparently some people use Linux just for TeX/LaTeX.
TeX vs wordprocessing is like Linux vs Windows (no comparison!!)
http://www.river-valley.com/tug
http://www.tug.org/
http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/info/lshort/english/
http://www.tex.ac.uk/cgi-bin/texfaq2html?label=dropping (try different
label=xxxx)
--
Chris.
======
Don't forget to check that your /etc/apt/sources.lst entries point to
etch and not testing, otherwise you may end up with a broken system once
etch goes stable.
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Sun, 2007-02-11 at 21:16 +0100, Joe Hart wrote:
> Andrei Popescu wrote:
> > On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:41:55 +0200
> > Micha Feigin wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Actually I am a bigger fan of lyx, but that's a hard sell for office
> >> fans.
> >>
> >
> > lyx is good for big documents, or when you already have a class to use.
> > If you are doing something small (one or two pages) and atypical it
> > might be faster to just use abiword.
> >
> I've never heard of lyx. Have to check it out. Would you consider a
> 450 page book a big project?
It would be with Microsoft Word using Change Tracking. Infact I ahve
seen a 100 page document being 2 years old with 1-2 changes a day being
done to it... literally require a machine with the fastest processors
and 4GB of memory (using WindowsXP) just to open it in under 10 minutes.
The document was the "production" scheduling system... and they wanted
to keep track of what happened, without making it any different. So a
genius MCP suggested Change-tracking.
One day it failed to open at all Word just crapped out on it. And Guess
what, there were no backups as "long ago" it was too slow if opened from
the S: network drive and was decided to put it on the C: network drive
as everything was being backed-up on the network. Huh, C:\scheduling.doc
wasn't on the backups.
--
Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's
Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive
product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at
the playfield. -- Thane Walkup
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 02/11/07 19:48, Greg Folkert wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-02-11 at 21:16 +0100, Joe Hart wrote:
>> Andrei Popescu wrote:
>>> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:41:55 +0200
>>> Micha Feigin wrote:
[snip]
> The document was the "production" scheduling system... and they wanted
> to keep track of what happened, without making it any different. So a
> genius MCP suggested Change-tracking.
Master Control Program?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFFz92RS9HxQb37XmcRAhx7AKC1qIG3TfhKAPHhtyyRYC4PlrAa2ACfVHk+
RWHHfNFZ9xU9T/OG3iji3Us=
=Rg2T
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Sun, 2007-02-11 at 21:22 -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 02/11/07 19:48, Greg Folkert wrote:
> > On Sun, 2007-02-11 at 21:16 +0100, Joe Hart wrote:
> >> Andrei Popescu wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:41:55 +0200
> >>> Micha Feigin wrote:
> [snip]
> > The document was the "production" scheduling system... and they wanted
> > to keep track of what happened, without making it any different. So a
> > genius MCP suggested Change-tracking.
>
> Master Control Program?
Microsoft Certified Professional
Someone that passed the "How to REALLY use Microsoft Office to the
extreme, to annoy everyone else that has to support it once you are
gone" test.
--
Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's
Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive
product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at
the playfield. -- Thane Walkup
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
Greg Folkert wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-02-11 at 21:22 -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
>
>> On 02/11/07 19:48, Greg Folkert wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 2007-02-11 at 21:16 +0100, Joe Hart wrote:
>>>
>>>> Andrei Popescu wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:41:55 +0200
>>>>> Micha Feigin wrote:
>>>>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> The document was the "production" scheduling system... and they wanted
>>> to keep track of what happened, without making it any different. So a
>>> genius MCP suggested Change-tracking.
>>>
>> Master Control Program?
>>
>
> Microsoft Certified Professional
>
> Someone that passed the "How to REALLY use Microsoft Office to the
> extreme, to annoy everyone else that has to support it once you are
> gone" test.
>
>
LOL!
How can anyone outside of MS support the software? If one does not
understand the internal workings, one cannot adequately support the
software.
Aside from the crashes, virus/spyware problems on Widows, the reason I
switched to GNU/Linux in the first place is so I could learn how it
worked. It bugged me that all these things were happening behind my
back and I had no idea what they were or why they were there. Some of
the information I could find on the net, but not enough to satisfy my
desires. Hacking the registry was possible, but as everyone who has run
Windows for a long time knows, after a while the registry is bloated
with all sorts of entries that are no longer valid, not to mention that
half of the entries are GUID keys, and humans (at least this one) are
not good at reading them. The Uninstall features of programs don't
always uninstall everything... I could write a long list. This isn't
about Windows.
Now as far as this thread goes, I still think Kubuntu was a good
distribution, however, Feisty is focused almost exclusively on laptops,
which is good because wireless and pcmcia support is needed in a
laptop. I however don't have a working laptop (My power cord fried my
battery and both need replacing). I use desktop machines, and I don't
want or need either of those things.
Etch had no problem identifying all of the hardware on my machine. I do
still get the APIC error on CPU0: 40(40) but I have yet to find a distro
that didn't generate that error, and it's pretty harmless.
I am looking forward to sifting through all the books and learning the
command line like the old DOS days. GUI's are great for getting things
done quickly, but I prefer the power of the command line, and some tasks
are far easier to do on the command line than through mouse clicks.
Konsole is my second most used program.
Before I decided on Etch, I was toying with the idea of installing
Gentoo. I still might do that, but only on a spare PC because I don't
want to have my main computer crashing on me because I forgot to include
this USE flag or that USE flag. Since I am not very familiar with GCC
yet, I thought it best to get more up to speed with Linux before I try.
Of course one of the best ways to get up to speed is to try.
At least now I know how to do most of the things that I need, and can
write bash scripts much more powerful than the batch files I used on
Windows. However, I think it will take me years to really understand
how everything works. By the time I get udev down, a new system will
take its place :) Look at all the references to LILO in the Official
Debian Reference. I've never used it. It's been grub since I started.
Joe
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 09:27:13AM +0100, Joe Hart wrote:
>
> How can anyone outside of MS support the software? If one does not
> understand the internal workings, one cannot adequately support the
> software.
>
s/MS/Ford/
s/software/automobile/
I would submit that most mechanics are not mechanical or automotive
engineers. That being the case, they can still hook the car up to test
equipment, identify faulty components and replace them. In many cases,
the owner of the vehicle is not capable of doing this himself. So, you
don't need to be expert in the internal workings just to support it.
At work, I support as a sysadmin lots of Linux servers and workstations.
I am no expert in the internal workings of lots of things (most of the
kernel, Samba, OpenOffice). That does not stop me from adequately
supporting those things.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 20:48:40 -0500
Greg Folkert wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-02-11 at 21:16 +0100, Joe Hart wrote:
> > Andrei Popescu wrote:
> > > On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:41:55 +0200
> > > Micha Feigin wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >> Actually I am a bigger fan of lyx, but that's a hard sell for office
> > >> fans.
> > >>
> > >
> > > lyx is good for big documents, or when you already have a class to use.
> > > If you are doing something small (one or two pages) and atypical it
> > > might be faster to just use abiword.
> > >
> > I've never heard of lyx. Have to check it out. Would you consider a
> > 450 page book a big project?
>
> It would be with Microsoft Word using Change Tracking. Infact I ahve
> seen a 100 page document being 2 years old with 1-2 changes a day being
> done to it... literally require a machine with the fastest processors
> and 4GB of memory (using WindowsXP) just to open it in under 10 minutes.
>
> The document was the "production" scheduling system... and they wanted
> to keep track of what happened, without making it any different. So a
> genius MCP suggested Change-tracking.
>
> One day it failed to open at all Word just crapped out on it. And Guess
> what, there were no backups as "long ago" it was too slow if opened from
> the S: network drive and was decided to put it on the C: network drive
> as everything was being backed-up on the network. Huh, C:\scheduling.doc
> wasn't on the backups.
Typical for windows (backing up/keeping track of changes/synchronizing is a
pain with windows)
it does sound like the job much better handled by a text document along with
cvs/svn.
BTW, lyx has change tracking in the 1.4 version.
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
Joe Hart wrote:
> Andrei Popescu wrote:
>> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:41:55 +0200
>> Micha Feigin wrote:
>>
>> lyx is good for big documents, or when you already have a class to use.
>> If you are doing something small (one or two pages) and atypical it
>> might be faster to just use abiword.
>>
> I've never heard of lyx. Have to check it out. Would you consider a
> 450 page book a big project?
Another difference between anything based on TeX (LaTeX, Lyx,
pdftex,...) and anything not based on it (M$, abiword, OOo, etc.) is
that the formatting of the text will be much better with LaTeX.
It will take care of ligatures, have better integration of symbols,
foreign characters, better hyphenation, better page breaks, better than
TTF-looking large and small letters (headings, footnotes etc.), better
setting of mathematics, etc. etc.
It is really surprising that all the money earned from commercial office
products has only led to more (pseudo)-features, but not to improvements
in the finished product (ie. improvements in hyphenation, integration of
professional fonts instead of the not-so-beautiful ones that were
available for free decades ago, when the word processor business
started, etc. etc.). But maybe that only tells
There are many leading book publishers that use LaTeX-based typesetting
for their finished products and next to none that use plain
doc-documents, because of the bad result of the latter.
I might be a bit of a purist, but I would say that even for one page of
a document you will be better of with LaTeX. Word output might be ok for
a quick fax, but the printed text from a half-way decent printer will
always look better, if it's done in LaTeX.
My 2ct.
Johannes
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 02/12/07 11:49, Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
> Joe Hart wrote:
>> Andrei Popescu wrote:
>>> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:41:55 +0200
>>> Micha Feigin wrote:
[snip]
> I might be a bit of a purist, but I would say that even for one page of
> a document you will be better of with LaTeX. Word output might be ok for
> a quick fax, but the printed text from a half-way decent printer will
> always look better, if it's done in LaTeX.
Outside of high academia & the publishing industry, that amount of
precision doesn't really matter.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFF0KpSS9HxQb37XmcRAl37AJ92KGYM47fDIGKsdJ1+laFcUJswngCgoZr5
9Q3B6rS46GsSldSDHm1CLto=
=44Ti
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 02/12/07 11:49, Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
>> Joe Hart wrote:
>>> Andrei Popescu wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:41:55 +0200 Micha Feigin
>>>> wrote:
> [snip]
>> I might be a bit of a purist, but I would say that even for one
>> page of a document you will be better of with LaTeX. Word output
>> might be ok for a quick fax, but the printed text from a half-way
>> decent printer will always look better, if it's done in LaTeX.
>
> Outside of high academia & the publishing industry, that amount of
> precision doesn't really matter.
Outside of high academia & the publishing industry, most people don't
care how ugly their printed documents look. They accept what they are
used to accept. When they are told about LaTeX, they fear the effort
that might be involved in getting used to create documents in a
different way and don't take the time to have a closer look. They also
don't take the time to even ponder about the possibility that LaTeX's
concept of separating structure, content and layout would boost their
productivity in the long run or not. And they know that within their
ranks they stick with the majority and thus can't be wrong.
In this way, talking to M$ word users about LaTeX is just about the same
as talking to M$ O$ users about linux or debian. They might struggle
with some of the shortcomings, but their pain is not big enough to leave
the mainstream and to dare the move to another way of working.
0.02€
Johannes
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
> Outside of high academia & the publishing industry, most people don't
> care how ugly their printed documents look.
I think there are an awful lot of us in business, non-profits, and
government who'd contest this.
Not to mention those in the advertising and marketing arena.
Larger organizations typically have fairly detailed standards for what
documents have to look like,
along with design departments, document templates, and so forth.
Smaller organizations - at least smart ones - spend a lot of time on
making documents look good,
because image and presentation make a big difference.
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 02/13/07 06:17, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
>> Outside of high academia & the publishing industry, most people
>> don't care how ugly their printed documents look.
> I think there are an awful lot of us in business, non-profits,
> and government who'd contest this.
I said "most". There are always exceptions.
> Not to mention those in the advertising and marketing arena.
They are publishers.
> Larger organizations typically have fairly detailed standards for
> what documents have to look like, along with design departments,
> document templates, and so forth.
And Word and OOo have templates.
> Smaller organizations - at least smart ones - spend a lot of time
> on making documents look good, because image and presentation
> make a big difference.
DTP. It's what made the Mac.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFF0b/dS9HxQb37XmcRAvtpAJ9wifbJjrD0aYdgsrUVxGVK6cHDtgCfV2GM
vPsy3SSGvJTiMdr87h8emuU=
=eXq5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 07:40:45 -0600
Ron Johnson wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 02/13/07 06:17, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> > Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
> >> Outside of high academia & the publishing industry, most people
> >> don't care how ugly their printed documents look.
> > I think there are an awful lot of us in business, non-profits,
> > and government who'd contest this.
>
> I said "most". There are always exceptions.
>
> > Not to mention those in the advertising and marketing arena.
>
> They are publishers.
>
> > Larger organizations typically have fairly detailed standards for
> > what documents have to look like, along with design departments,
> > document templates, and so forth.
>
> And Word and OOo have templates.
>
Which is where a person who know what s/he is doing makes word/OOo behave like
latex ;-)
And they still have a tendency to mess things up (you set up a style for
something that word decides to mess up the whole document).
> > Smaller organizations - at least smart ones - spend a lot of time
> > on making documents look good, because image and presentation
> > make a big difference.
>
> DTP. It's what made the Mac.
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFF0b/dS9HxQb37XmcRAvtpAJ9wifbJjrD0aYdgsrUVxGVK6cHDtgCfV2GM
> vPsy3SSGvJTiMdr87h8emuU=
> =eXq5
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On 2007-02-13, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
>> Outside of high academia & the publishing industry, most people don't
>> care how ugly their printed documents look.
> I think there are an awful lot of us in business, non-profits, and
> government who'd contest this.
> Not to mention those in the advertising and marketing arena.
Currently working in academia, I'd contest this too. A lot of
academics know only the WYSIWYG approach, and are not motivated to
learn anything different. Paradoxically, scientists are very much
'early-adopters' when it comes to the techniques used in their
mode-of-inquiry, but extremely conservative with everything else. Of
course, compsci and related math types are a big exception.
--
Regards,
Tyler Smit
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 02/13/07 07:30, Tyler Smith wrote:
> On 2007-02-13, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>> Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
>>> Outside of high academia & the publishing industry, most people don't
>>> care how ugly their printed documents look.
>> I think there are an awful lot of us in business, non-profits, and
>> government who'd contest this.
>> Not to mention those in the advertising and marketing arena.
>
> Currently working in academia, I'd contest this too. A lot of
Contest that those in The Academy care or do not care?
> academics know only the WYSIWYG approach, and are not motivated to
> learn anything different. Paradoxically, scientists are very much
> 'early-adopters' when it comes to the techniques used in their
> mode-of-inquiry, but extremely conservative with everything else. Of
The sane human brain can only be an early-adopter in a finite number
of areas. Otherwise, you turn into a butterfly, always flitting
about from new fad to new fad.
> course, compsci and related math types are a big exception.
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFF0cSnS9HxQb37XmcRApz8AKDX4QHztspvSDfyddsZQFiQ7Zl/zACg26Ep
PH8aO6MwO7fqq6psB8ogxJU=
=caXv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
>> Outside of high academia & the publishing industry, most people don't
>> care how ugly their printed documents look.
> I think there are an awful lot of us in business, non-profits, and
> government who'd contest this.
> Not to mention those in the advertising and marketing arena.
I slightly overstated that, playing on the reply of Ron. I should have
better written that most people will never question their accustomed way
of doing things in order to get a better result. Maybe some Word users
will look around for Word options to make their documents 'look better',
but they won't notice that there are basic options missing in Word that
are *required* to print truly beautiful documents.
To take this further, one would have to argue about what is ugly. There
is a continuous scale from very ugly to very beautiful. Products like M$
Word cover the range from very ugly to somewhere in between. The very
beautiful end is accessible to professional typesetting systems only,
ie. TeX based systems like LaTeX or Adobe's InDesign.
These remarks are not intended to start a flame, but from the very
outset (La)TeX was designed with the very best finished result in mind,
enabling the user to typeset anything that would be conceivable to have
on paper, and to get it print to the highest possible standards. As an
example, all lengths in TeX and derivatives are calculated to a
precision better than the wavelength of light. It is therefore
inconceivable that one would ever have a printer that would print a
character or anything with a better resolution than that used by the
program.
The handling of ligatures, line breaks, page breaks etc. by common word
processors is inherently of lesser quality [1]. If you print the same
.doc on two different computers with two different printers, the same
document will print differently.
This is *never* the case for LaTeX. If you tell TeX to draw a line of
10.000 mm and the printed line would turn out not to be exactly 10.000
mm, then you should complain to the manufacturer of the printer, not to
TeX. I have not investigated the achievable precision of Word, but
already the visible spacing between letters and words is clearly worse
than that of the same text typeset with LaTeX (using the same fonts).
Ie. Word's spacings deviate by more than 0.05 mm from what would be
optimal.
> Larger organizations typically have fairly detailed standards for what
> documents have to look like,
> along with design departments, document templates, and so forth.
>
> Smaller organizations - at least smart ones - spend a lot of time on
> making documents look good,
> because image and presentation make a big difference.
It is disappointing that even professionals spending a fair amount of
time and money on their corporate designs and templates fail to realize
that the finished product in Word or OOo will never look as good as the
same text set with proper ligatures, optimal hyphenation, etc.
Just my humble opinion,
Johannes
[1] http://nitens.org/taraborelli/latex
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
> Miles Fidelman wrote:
>
>> Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
>>
>>> Outside of high academia & the publishing industry, most people don't
>>> care how ugly their printed documents look.
>>>
>> I think there are an awful lot of us in business, non-profits, and
>> government who'd contest this.
>> Not to mention those in the advertising and marketing arena.
>>
>
> To take this further, one would have to argue about what is ugly. There
> is a continuous scale from very ugly to very beautiful. Products like M$
> Word cover the range from very ugly to somewhere in between. The very
> beautiful end is accessible to professional typesetting systems only,
> ie. TeX based systems like LaTeX or Adobe's InDesign.
Point taken.
I think what typically happens is that individuals who care about really
beautiful design will migrate to
either a commercial product or a Tex based system, depending on what
they're more comfortable
with. Corporate design departments (or university, or other large
organization) are likely to
pick a tool for reasons having to do support, or what their vendors
(printers, ad agencies, etc.)
use.
> These remarks are not intended to start a flame
Likewise. Just commenting on personal experience in various work
environments.
I'm personally in the camp of time and data exchange being more
important than beauty - Word is
good enough, it's what most of the people I exchange documents use, and
we have internal
templates to start from. (And I'm not sure my eye or taste are good
enough to do much better).
When I need really fancy design work, I hand a Word document to someone
else (like my wife, a former mechanical
artist from the old pre-computer days, who went on to work at Bitstream
for a while) and let them use their prefered tools.
FYI: Just for perspective, I'm also old enough to remember designing
control logic for film processors used for in preparing print the
old-fashioned way (you know, half-tone separations, prepared with
screens and cameras) - and, for that matter, laying out the PC boards
with black tape on acetate. Never used TeX or LaTeX, but used enough
runoff and troff (remember those :-) to prefer WYSIWIG editors for short
documents.
Cheers,
Miles
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Tuesday 13 February 2007 16:29, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> FYI: Just for perspective, I'm also old enough to remember designing
> control logic for film processors used for in preparing print the
> old-fashioned way (you know, half-tone separations, prepared with
> screens and cameras) - and, for that matter, laying out the PC boards
> with black tape on acetate. Never used TeX or LaTeX, but used enough
> runoff and troff (remember those :-) to prefer WYSIWIG editors for
> short documents.
>
This whole discussion reminds me of my (software product development)
department in the 1980's. I had fought for, and succeeded, in getting
dumb terminals on everybody's desk connected through to a central Unix
system (Xenix from Microsoft - sold by the company I work for in the
UK, Logica) running on a PDP 11, where we had introduced version
control (SCCS and some modifications) to the software development
process.
in about 1982 I was in the market for a line printer so that my team
could print out their software listings and was pursuaded by the our HP
account manager to take a look at their new product - the HP Laserjet.
I was sold on the fact that we could get our printouts in A4 form for
the first time.
As soon as we had taken delivery of this, one of my senior developers
set up a series of nroff macros that made it very simple to create a
whole range of our companies standard documents in nearly perfect form
(company logo etc in header and footer - times fonts in the right size
and weight for all the different sections). Most of the rest of the
company were still using IBM electronic typewriters - and nobody really
understood how our department always produced such good AND STANDARD
documentation.
Unfortunately the one downside (which today would be handled by svg) was
the inability to include anything other than ascii art in embedded
diagrams - and eventually PCs on everyone's desk and Microsoft Word
took over and by about 1989 this documentation method died.
I no longer have anything to do with that area - but I would say today
that we still cannot produce documents with the consistency and
completeness (proper version control of all documentation, with the
version numbers automatically printed in the footer is just one such
example)
--
Alan Chandler
http://www.chandlerfamily.org.uk
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 09:45:16PM +0000, Alan Chandler wrote:
>
> I no longer have anything to do with that area - but I would say today
> that we still cannot produce documents with the consistency and
> completeness (proper version control of all documentation, with the
> version numbers automatically printed in the footer is just one such
> example)
>
Tell me about it. I wish people would invest a little time in learning
LaTeX. I deal with documentation all day and even from within the same
department, it is all a mish-mash of different things (produced mostly
in Word), with no standardization whatsoever.
With LaTeX, you could have centralized version control of all documents,
with centralized control of standard style sheets. Of course, that will
never happen as long people believe that they have a pressing need for
WYSIWYG. Of course, I can't remember who said it (maybe Leslie
Lamport), WYSIWYG is better stated as WYSIAYG---what you see is *all*
you get.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
latex (was Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction))
On Tuesday 20 February 2007 15:49, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 09:45:16PM +0000, Alan Chandler wrote:
> > I no longer have anything to do with that area - but I would say today
> > that we still cannot produce documents with the consistency and
> > completeness (proper version control of all documentation, with the
> > version numbers automatically printed in the footer is just one such
> > example)
>
> Tell me about it. I wish people would invest a little time in learning
> LaTeX. I deal with documentation all day and even from within the same
> department, it is all a mish-mash of different things (produced mostly
> in Word), with no standardization whatsoever.
>
> With LaTeX, you could have centralized version control of all documents,
> with centralized control of standard style sheets. Of course, that will
> never happen as long people believe that they have a pressing need for
> WYSIWYG. Of course, I can't remember who said it (maybe Leslie
> Lamport), WYSIWYG is better stated as WYSIAYG---what you see is *all*
> you get.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Roberto
what a great thread. hopefully we can begin 'subject'ing it properly with this
mail.
what about a WYSIWIG which produces latex files? You rough out or do easy
stuff with the wysiwig, then modify the latex files if there's stuff not
easily handled by a wysiwig.
tom arnall
--
latex (was Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction))
On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 11:45:09AM -0800, tom arnall wrote:
> what about a WYSIWIG which produces latex files? You rough out or do easy
> stuff with the wysiwig, then modify the latex files if there's stuff not
> easily handled by a wysiwig.
Lyx, but why?
Discovered 'gnuhtml2latex'. What a *neat* package.
--
Chris.
======
Don't forget to check that your /etc/apt/sources.lst entries point to
etch and not testing, otherwise you may end up with a broken system once
etch goes stable.
--
latex (was Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction))
On Sat, Feb 24, 2007 at 10:54:30PM +1300 or thereabouts, Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 11:45:09AM -0800, tom arnall wrote:
> > what about a WYSIWIG which produces latex files? You rough out or do easy
> > stuff with the wysiwig, then modify the latex files if there's stuff not
> > easily handled by a wysiwig.
>
> Lyx, but why?
>
> Discovered 'gnuhtml2latex'. What a *neat* package.
Cool. Always enjoy hearing about such gems !
--
Regards
Stephen A.
Encrypted/Signed e-mail accepted (GPG or PGP) -- Key ID: 978BA045
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Suspicion always haunts the guilty mind.
-- Wm. Shakespeare
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
latex (was Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction))
On Saturday 24 February 2007 01:54, Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 11:45:09AM -0800, tom arnall wrote:
> > what about a WYSIWIG which produces latex files? You rough out or do easy
> > stuff with the wysiwig, then modify the latex files if there's stuff not
> > easily handled by a wysiwig.
>
> Lyx, but why?
>
better maybe is Open Office, since it's full WYSIWYG and has an export to tex.
smaller feedback loop?
tom
Make cyberspace pretty: stamp out curly brackets and semicolons.
Relax - the tests extend the compiler.
--
latex (was Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction))
* tom arnall [070224 17:28]:
> On Saturday 24 February 2007 01:54, Chris Bannister wrote:
>>On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 11:45:09AM -0800, tom arnall wrote:
>>> what about a WYSIWIG which produces latex files? You rough out or
>>> do easy stuff with the wysiwig, then modify the latex files if
>>> there's stuff not easily handled by a wysiwig.
For text-only material of the general categories "letter", "report",
or "article" (that is, material for which there exists a standard
LaTeX "class" or template), there hardly is a quicker and easier way
to "do easy stuff" than to type or paste the material into a skeleton
document, then run "latex", "dvips", and "lpr" on the document.
I often use this approach when I wish to save a copy of material which
is poorly-formatted on a web page. By using a two-column format, I
end up with a compact and easy-to-read document.
This approach typically is quicker and easier than using OpenOffice,
for OpenOffice requires that headers, footers, page numbers, etc., be
added manually.
The only problem occurs if you happen to be cutting and pasting from a
document which uses escape codes such as "\201c". It is necessary to
replace these punctuation escape codes with the corresponding TeX
punctuation symbol.
The few minutes which are required to create a suitable skeleton
document for a particular LaTeX document class constitute a one-time
investment which quickly is repaid.
RLH
--
latex (was Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction))
On Saturday 24 February 2007 16:15, Russell L. Harris wrote:
> * tom arnall [070224 17:28]:
> > On Saturday 24 February 2007 01:54, Chris Bannister wrote:
> >>On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 11:45:09AM -0800, tom arnall wrote:
> >>> what about a WYSIWIG which produces latex files? You rough out or
> >>> do easy stuff with the wysiwig, then modify the latex files if
> >>> there's stuff not easily handled by a wysiwig.
>
> For text-only material of the general categories "letter", "report",
> or "article" (that is, material for which there exists a standard
> LaTeX "class" or template), there hardly is a quicker and easier way
> to "do easy stuff" than to type or paste the material into a skeleton
> document, then run "latex", "dvips", and "lpr" on the document.
>
> I often use this approach when I wish to save a copy of material which
> is poorly-formatted on a web page. By using a two-column format, I
> end up with a compact and easy-to-read document.
>
> This approach typically is quicker and easier than using OpenOffice,
> for OpenOffice requires that headers, footers, page numbers, etc., be
> added manually.
>
> The only problem occurs if you happen to be cutting and pasting from a
> document which uses escape codes such as "\201c". It is necessary to
> replace these punctuation escape codes with the corresponding TeX
> punctuation symbol.
>
> The few minutes which are required to create a suitable skeleton
> document for a particular LaTeX document class constitute a one-time
> investment which quickly is repaid.
>
> RLH
yeah, a different 'paradigm' than wysiwyg. similar maybe to command line vs.
gui. i prefer command line i'face usually.
Make cyberspace pretty: stamp out curly brackets and semicolons.
Relax - the tests extend the compiler.
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 02/20/07 15:45, Alan Chandler wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 February 2007 16:29, Miles Fidelman wrote:
[snip]
> in about 1982 I was in the market for a line printer so that my team
> could print out their software listings and was pursuaded by the our HP
> account manager to take a look at their new product - the HP Laserjet.
> I was sold on the fact that we could get our printouts in A4 form for
> the first time.
I've *never* understood why developers like laser printers. Green
bar line printers are so much more useful.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFF29ejS9HxQb37XmcRAn4qAJ9621Yvy+kZ4dO3nnrvzke16lABfwCffy2d
/ZAQlrqtoAJmvYL3A1AzoR8=
=KfbL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 11:24:52PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 02/20/07 15:45, Alan Chandler wrote:
> > On Tuesday 13 February 2007 16:29, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> [snip]
> > in about 1982 I was in the market for a line printer so that my team
> > could print out their software listings and was pursuaded by the our HP
> > account manager to take a look at their new product - the HP Laserjet.
> > I was sold on the fact that we could get our printouts in A4 form for
> > the first time.
>
> I've *never* understood why developers like laser printers. Green
> bar line printers are so much more useful.
I recall they are huge, requiring a lot of floor space and required a
noise cover otherwise you'd hear ear-splitting, griding noise. X-(
--
| .''`. == Debian GNU/Linux == | my web site: |
| : :' : The Universal |mysite.verizon.net/kevin.mark/|
| `. `' Operating System | go to counter.li.org and |
| `- http://www.debian.org/ | be counted! #238656 |
| my keysever: subkeys.pgp.net | my NPO: cfsg.org |
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 02/20/07 23:52, Kevin Mark wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 11:24:52PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 02/20/07 15:45, Alan Chandler wrote:
>>> On Tuesday 13 February 2007 16:29, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>> [snip]
>>> in about 1982 I was in the market for a line printer so that my team
>>> could print out their software listings and was pursuaded by the our HP
>>> account manager to take a look at their new product - the HP Laserjet.
>>> I was sold on the fact that we could get our printouts in A4 form for
>>> the first time.
>> I've *never* understood why developers like laser printers. Green
>> bar line printers are so much more useful.
> I recall they are huge, requiring a lot of floor space and required a
> noise cover otherwise you'd hear ear-splitting, griding noise. X-(
That's what insulated hoods and data centers are for! ;)
Actually, I'm serious about the utility of big line printers. The
large print and *wide*, lined paper made it easy to step thru your
program, making notes, side calculations, etc. Think of them as
magic whiteboards that you could lay on your desk and didn't need
thick, stinky, messy markers to write with.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFF2+EkS9HxQb37XmcRAg2ZAJ9A6XcM1AguKJ3mkfkGFvEc3w0k/QCdGQUr
lJjVr/1VkqOt6ua8SH0FFGU=
=RgeD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 12:05:24AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 02/20/07 23:52, Kevin Mark wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 11:24:52PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >> Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >> On 02/20/07 15:45, Alan Chandler wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday 13 February 2007 16:29, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> >> [snip]
> >>> in about 1982 I was in the market for a line printer so that my team
> >>> could print out their software listings and was pursuaded by the our HP
> >>> account manager to take a look at their new product - the HP Laserjet.
> >>> I was sold on the fact that we could get our printouts in A4 form for
> >>> the first time.
> >> I've *never* understood why developers like laser printers. Green
> >> bar line printers are so much more useful.
> > I recall they are huge, requiring a lot of floor space and required a
> > noise cover otherwise you'd hear ear-splitting, griding noise. X-(
>
> That's what insulated hoods and data centers are for! ;)
>
> Actually, I'm serious about the utility of big line printers. The
> large print and *wide*, lined paper made it easy to step thru your
> program, making notes, side calculations, etc. Think of them as
> magic whiteboards that you could lay on your desk and didn't need
> thick, stinky, messy markers to write with.
You certainly are correct in that the wide paper left sufficient room to
make notes, etc. I'd use the side for comments and corrections and the
back for flow charts and such.
> --
Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Introduction)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 02/21/07 00:15, Kevin Mark wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 12:05:24AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
>>
>> On 02/20/07 23:52, Kevin Mark wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 11:24:52PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 02/20/07 15:45, Alan Chandler wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday 13 February 2007 16:29, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>>>> [snip]
>>>>> in about 1982 I was in the market for a line printer so that my team
>>>>> could print out their software listings and was pursuaded by the our HP
>>>>> account manager to take a look at their new product - the HP Laserjet.
>>>>> I was sold on the fact that we could get our printouts in A4 form for
>>>>> the first time.
>>>> I've *never* understood why developers like laser printers. Green
>>>> bar line printers are so much more useful.
>>> I recall they are huge, requiring a lot of floor space and required a
>>> noise cover otherwise you'd hear ear-splitting, griding noise. X-(
>> That's what insulated hoods and data centers are for! ;)
>>
>> Actually, I'm serious about the utility of big line printers. The
>> large print and *wide*, lined paper made it easy to step thru your
>> program, making notes, side calculations, etc. Think of them as
>> magic whiteboards that you could lay on your desk and didn't need
>> thick, stinky, messy markers to write with.
>>
> You certainly are correct in that the wide paper left sufficient room to
> make notes, etc. I'd use the side for comments and corrections and the
> back for flow charts and such.
That's exactly right.
IMNSHO, the Personal Computer mindset has seriously retarded IT.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFF2+XCS9HxQb37XmcRAmfFAKDfBQkLXoutuGEPPbRhgfXOeyl9KgCfSFDO
juyzsUpZkZWx4EPfTW8nmr8=
=6hgY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian
Kevin Mark writes:
> You certainly are correct in that the wide paper left sufficient room to
> make notes, etc. I'd use the side for comments and corrections and the
> back for flow charts and such.
Print in landscape mode on 11X17.
--
John Hasler
--
Ubuntu vs. Debian
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 02/21/07 07:32, John Hasler wrote:
> Kevin Mark writes:
>> You certainly are correct in that the wide paper left sufficient room to
>> make notes, etc. I'd use the side for comments and corrections and the
>> back for flow charts and such.
>
> Print in landscape mode on 11X17.
*Maybe* on a color continuous-form laser printer.
But there's just something about the chatter of a band printer and
the feel of greenbar fanfold.
GET OFF MY LAWN, YOU CRAZY YOUNG WHIPPERSNAPPERS!!!!!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFF3J7dS9HxQb37XmcRAo4dAKC5C+DEOja+e9mmezBDKMDOO7XxJACgp44k
7ButkaoZg2gzHE3IpjaobFk=
=hzIe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--