[ALUG] Linux Laptop

Brett Parker iDunno at sommitrealweird.co.uk
Mon Dec 6 13:43:44 GMT 2010


On 06 Dec 13:29, Anthony Anson wrote:
> BAH! Just hit 'send' innit!
> 
> Sorry Brett
> 
> Brett Parker wrote:
> >On 06 Dec 12:34, Anthony Anson wrote:
> >>Steve Engledow wrote:
> >>>>Id love a new Mac but cant afford it.
> >>>No you don't, that's just the conditioning talking ;)
> >>*I'D* love a Mac too - there are things a Mac can do in its sleep
> >>that Linux and Windows make a banquet of.
> >
> >Erm, such as?
> 
> Multitracking and layering music, and tweaking individual tracks for one.

That's not an operating system feature, that's a software feature. And I
believe that audacity is capable of this.

> Also, a lot of graphics software.

ITYM "A lot of commercial graphics software", and a lot of that is down
to taste.

> >Remembering that a Mac is just a piece of hardware, and is x86 based...
> 
> ITF those are a bit passé now.

Assuming you mean x86 is passé, I'm using x86 to cover both ix86 and
x86_64 architectures. If x86_64 has suddenly become passé it's news to
me.
 
> >Do you mean "there are things available in OSX that are difficult in
> >Linux and Windows", in which case, the usual one I hear about is
> >"networking just works, it's lovely!" right up until they hit a network
> >that OSX doesn't know much about, or it's having an off day, or the
> >winds blowing in the wrong direction - at which point it's a complete
> >PITA.
> 
> No. Never used a network apart from connecting to wifi.

And it's the wifi connecting that most mac users ooooh and aaaah over at
me. Until it doesn't work.

I've got a slightly more complicated wireless setup on my laptop, but it
does "just work", and is predicatable in what it's going to do.

> >If it's printing, then I'm afraid that OSX is actually just using cups,
> >and an out of the box cups on a modern linux is Damned Good at "just
> >working".
> 
> Nope -I'm quite content with the abilities of both Linux and Windows (of
> certain flavours)
> 
> >>And I shall have one, if I live long enough.
> >
> >Yeah - cos you need to save for years to get the shiny machine, and then
> >you get to consistently pay for OS upgrades because "oh, noes, this
> >piece of software needs the latest version and I needs it, I needs it
> >now!"
> 
> What I want it for is probably developed up to the hilt anyway, and like
> other OSs I rarely consider 'upgrades', mainly becaus they aren't...

So, you don't like security updates, then? Or ongoing security support?
These are the bits that I don't like with non-free systems.

> >>>>So I am looking for suggestions. It will run Ubuntu or Mint alongside
> >>>>Windows (for those times when you have to use Windows).
> >>>If you've had a mac for 11 years, what times do you face when need
> >>>Windows? Go the whole hog, you'll love it :)
> >>>Life without Gates, Jobs, or other corporate monsters with plural
> >>>nouns for surnames is far shinier.
> >>>In the REM sense.
> >><mode="McEnroe>
> >>You *CANNOT* be serious!
> >></mode>
> >>Name me one Linux program which can do what Irfanview does? Name me
> >>one Linux program which is as good as Paintshop Pro or Photoshop,
> >>and as intuitive?
> >
> >Irfanview doesn't look far different to Eye of Gnome, actually.
> 
> I'll have a look.
> 
> >>And don't say "The Gimp" - IMO it's a pile of poo.
> >
> >That's your opinion, and you're welcome to it. It's just as intuitive as
> >either that you've listed (i.e. not at all). Personally I can find
> >things a hell of a lot quicker in GIMP than in PSP or Photoshop, and I
> >used to use PSP "rather a lot".
> >
> >>Which is why my notebook has its native Xandros, but my (bigger)
> >>flaptop has Debian as a main OS, but XP, so I can run proper
> >>graphics.
> >
> >There's a difference between "proper graphics" and "what I know how to
> >use". But meh.
> 
> I can't remember what it was I wanted to do in Gimp some time ago - I
> think it was some cloning from one pic to another, but I spent an
> afternoon trying to get it to do it, and failed. I threw together a load
> of bits: 400 MHz CPU, old m/board, old HDD, installed Win 2000 and PSP 4
> and did that lot faster than sraping round Gimp.

That's just a case of using the clone tool, from what I remember.
Infact, having just tested, yup... it's "click on source image whilst
holding control with the clone tool selected", followed by clicking on
the destination image where you want the cloned bit to go. The button is
directly available in the toolbox too.

Something, many years ago, were complicated, yes. Gimp 2.6 is actually
*really* rather good at doing what you'd expect.

> >Also, see inkscape, sketch, etc for vector stuff. Or Xara LX (non-free,
> >but free to use).
> 
> If I get round to it - or a meeting where someone has them.
> 
> >Cheers,
> 
> Bottoms up!
> 
> -- 
> Tony Anson
> www.girolle.co.uk/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> main at lists.alug.org.uk
> http://www.alug.org.uk/
> http://lists.alug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/main
> Unsubscribe?  See message headers or the web site above!
> 

-- 
Brett Parker                     http://www.sommitrealweird.co.uk/
PGP Fingerprint 1A9E C066 EDEE 6746 36CB  BD7F 479E C24F 95C7 1D61



More information about the main mailing list