Can someone please help with some advice.
At the moment I run a dual boot system, with Windows XP and Ubuntu sharing my hard drive. I would like to go the whole hog and rid myself of windows. I know I can do 90% of what I use my computer for under Linux, office, graphics and music.
The only thing I'm having trouble with is an equivalent for Planetside Terragen landscape generator. Is there anything compatible or am I stuck running it in WINE.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Alistair
On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 10:03:15PM +0000, Alistair Macgregor wrote:
Can someone please help with some advice.
At the moment I run a dual boot system, with Windows XP and Ubuntu sharing my hard drive. I would like to go the whole hog and rid myself of windows. I know I can do 90% of what I use my computer for under Linux, office, graphics and music.
The only thing I'm having trouble with is an equivalent for Planetside Terragen landscape generator. Is there anything compatible or am I stuck running it in WINE.
Personally I'd go for running XP in VirtualBox, it's what I do for the odd bits and pieces that I can't transfer to Linux, in my case these are:- Epson software for my scanner An access database (I keep meaning to transfer to Dabo) Occasional web sites that need IE to work (many French ones)
On 04 Nov 09:47, Chris G wrote:
On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 10:03:15PM +0000, Alistair Macgregor wrote:
Can someone please help with some advice.
At the moment I run a dual boot system, with Windows XP and Ubuntu sharing my hard drive. I would like to go the whole hog and rid myself of windows. I know I can do 90% of what I use my computer for under Linux, office, graphics and music.
The only thing I'm having trouble with is an equivalent for Planetside Terragen landscape generator. Is there anything compatible or am I stuck running it in WINE.
Personally I'd go for running XP in VirtualBox, it's what I do for the odd bits and pieces that I can't transfer to Linux, in my case these are:- Epson software for my scanner
Huh?! Does it not work with SANE? What make/model Epson scanner?
An access database (I keep meaning to transfer to Dabo)
Hmm, there was a thingummy that'd play with those... mdbtools, IIRC, but that won't give you the shiny forms etc... doesn't look like it's been worked on for a few years though :( I believe there was an ODBC layer that'd talk at 'em too - oh, no, that appears to have been part of mdbtools too...
Occasional web sites that need IE to work (many French ones)
ies4linux. (http://www.tatanka.com.br/ies4linux/page/Main_Page)
Depending on the size of the access database (I'm assuming that it's not huge, otherwise you'd have moved it to a sane format a long time ago) it might not take very long to migrate it to something like pgaccess or oobase, it appears that pgaccess has kinda died a bit, which I don't suppose is that suprising now that OpenOffice.org Base actually seems to work.
Ho hum,
On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 10:03:36AM +0000, Brett Parker wrote:
On 04 Nov 09:47, Chris G wrote:
On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 10:03:15PM +0000, Alistair Macgregor wrote:
Can someone please help with some advice.
At the moment I run a dual boot system, with Windows XP and Ubuntu sharing my hard drive. I would like to go the whole hog and rid myself of windows. I know I can do 90% of what I use my computer for under Linux, office, graphics and music.
The only thing I'm having trouble with is an equivalent for Planetside Terragen landscape generator. Is there anything compatible or am I stuck running it in WINE.
Personally I'd go for running XP in VirtualBox, it's what I do for the odd bits and pieces that I can't transfer to Linux, in my case these are:- Epson software for my scanner
Huh?! Does it not work with SANE? What make/model Epson scanner?
Oh yes, of course it works with SANE but I want the specialised slide and negative scanning ability and that most certainly doesn't work with SANE. Even Vuescan doesn't work nearly as well (or easily) as the supplied Epson software. In particular the ability to scan multiple images using the slide holder or negative holder works only with the Epson software.
An access database (I keep meaning to transfer to Dabo)Hmm, there was a thingummy that'd play with those... mdbtools, IIRC, but that won't give you the shiny forms etc... doesn't look like it's been worked on for a few years though :( I believe there was an ODBC layer that'd talk at 'em too - oh, no, that appears to have been part of mdbtools too...
Dabo does all I need (and more), I wrote the Access myself so know pretty well what it does. It's not incredibly complex but there are quite a few forms etc. and some little 'clever bits'.
Occasional web sites that need IE to work (many French ones)ies4linux. (http://www.tatanka.com.br/ies4linux/page/Main_Page)
.... but, but, that doesn't do what one needs. Most of the problem with sites that only work with IE is that they use all of the nasty 'only in windows' hanging on bits. The above specifically excludes them as it's only for testing that a site will work in IE.
Depending on the size of the access database (I'm assuming that it's not huge, otherwise you'd have moved it to a sane format a long time ago) it might not take very long to migrate it to something like pgaccess or oobase, it appears that pgaccess has kinda died a bit, which I don't suppose is that suprising now that OpenOffice.org Base actually seems to work.
Dabo, dabo, dabo, dabo. Sits on top of just about any database you want to use, has all the framework, forms, etc. you could possibly want, is written in python and has lots of excellent support on the mailing list.
The real issue though is that it's simply still *easier* to run a few oddball things in XP in virtualbox, plus it's there if you need to try something else which for some reason doesn't work in Linux (often it doesn't work in Windows either but it's nice to be able to check). Finally it means I can often help friends and family on the phone by doing the same thing on my screen that they're doing to see where they're going wrong.
What have you got *against* running XP (or Vista or W7) in VirtualBox? It's free, it's easy to set up and very, very few people don't have a licence they can use.
Chris G wrote: [...]
The real issue though is that it's simply still *easier* to run a few oddball things in XP in virtualbox, plus it's there if you need to try something else which for some reason doesn't work in Linux (often it doesn't work in Windows either but it's nice to be able to check).
It's nice to have two broken drivers instead of one, where one of those you can't even attempt to fix???
Finally it means I can often help friends and family on the phone by doing the same thing on my screen that they're doing to see where they're going wrong.
It would be better to help them switch to an operating system which allows remote access and screen sharing for multiple simultaneous users without needing a "Professional" version.
What have you got *against* running XP (or Vista or W7) in VirtualBox? It's free, it's easy to set up and very, very few people don't have a licence they can use.
Is that a troll? It's not free in any sense of the word and running XP in VirtualBox means continuing with the unjust, untrustworthy and (for W7 at least) insecure buggy system which no-one else is allowed to fix.
The claim that almost everyone has spare licences is worrying because that suggests that gov.uk could soon try site-licensing the whole country through general taxation. That's a pretty common "New Enclosures" tactic already seen in some countries with patented crops and that sort of thing.
Sorry I can't help with the software at the start of the discussion, but can we agree that this is a LUG list and rampant Windows advocacy should go elsewhere?
Thanks,
MJ Ray wrote:
Chris G wrote: [...]
What have you got *against* running XP (or Vista or W7) in VirtualBox? It's free, it's easy to set up and very, very few people don't have a licence they can use.
Is that a troll? It's not free in any sense of the word and running XP in VirtualBox means continuing with the unjust, untrustworthy and (for W7 at least) insecure buggy system which no-one else is allowed to fix.
IRTA VirtualBox is free, not windows. I would have though that many of us people in ALUG could probably lay our hands on a windows key to install Windows. That's not to say that it wouldn't break the terms of their licence etc.
Sorry I can't help with the software at the start of the discussion, but can we agree that this is a LUG list and rampant Windows advocacy should go elsewhere?
I didn't spot any rampant windows advocacy - sorry - YMMV obviously! :-)
No offence meant.
MJ Ray wrote:
Sorry I can't help with the software at the start of the discussion, but can we agree that this is a LUG list and rampant Windows advocacy should go elsewhere?
Thanks,
I can't help thinking that "rampant Windows Advocacy" wasn't really the intention of anyone posting on this thread.
It's easy to take an idealist standpoint and suggest that everything should be done with Free software. But what about situations like this where there appears to be no alternative. Are you suggesting that Alistair just abandon whatever it was he wanted to do with Terragen ?
Moreso are we presenting the right attitude if at the first mention of something that can't be replicated and the only viable alternative appears to be dual boot/Virtual Machines/wine we tell them that further discussion is not encouraged because it is windows advocacy ?
Wayne Stallwood ALUGlist@digimatic.co.uk wrote:
MJ Ray wrote:
Sorry I can't help with the software at the start of the discussion, but can we agree that this is a LUG list and rampant Windows advocacy should go elsewhere?
I can't help thinking that "rampant Windows Advocacy" wasn't really the intention of anyone posting on this thread.
Well, it seemed to me that it was getting pretty close to it, what with Brett being challenged to explain why he doesn't run Windows!
It's easy to take an idealist standpoint and suggest that everything should be done with Free software.
No, it's a realist standpoint. Idealism is "impracticality by virtue of thinking of things in their ideal form rather than as they really are" (WordNet 2.0), like expecting everything to work immediately, even with unfriendly suppliers who won't let you change it or even let you see how it works.
Free and open source software is the practical long-term choice because it's more repairable and fixable. We accept the reality that programmers aren't gods who get it all right at every release time, that users have something to contribute to development, and that software can be improved. Everything should be done on free software because when the benefits of improvements are shared around, it's good for everyone.
But what about situations like this where there appears to be no alternative. Are you suggesting that Alistair just abandon whatever it was he wanted to do with Terragen ?
No, but I've little idea what that is (it wasn't explained in this thread) and it's not a topic I know much about.
I would observe that the original request for "anything compatible" with "an equivalent for Planetside Terragen landscape generator" is a pattern which we know to fail. As far as I read on http://www.planetside.co.uk/content/view/15/27/ it seems that that's a piece of special-purpose software which doesn't seem to follow any open standards, so a free and open source (or even Linux-compatible) alternative won't be exactly equivalent or compatible unless it comes from the same maker. That maker doesn't offer one.
There may be something similar out there, but I don't know it, for which I already apologised.
Moreso are we presenting the right attitude if at the first mention of something that can't be replicated and the only viable alternative appears to be dual boot/Virtual Machines/wine we tell them that further discussion is not encouraged because it is windows advocacy ?
No, we would not be, but that wasn't the first mention and it's not clear that it is "the only viable alternative" because it seems an incomplete description of a problem.
But when Windows users on the email lists are challenging LUGgers to justify why they're not running XP, then something has gone seriously wrong here, hasn't it? I feel that's pretty clearly miles off topic.
Even if you want to facilitate people running Windows under XP, there's no need to assert it's the only viable way for everyone. With smart hardware choices and in most mainstream topics, that's no longer true, as several LUGgers demonstrate.
Regards,
MJ Ray wrote:
Even if you want to facilitate people running Windows under XP, there's no need to assert it's the only viable way for everyone. With smart hardware choices and in most mainstream topics, that's no longer true, as several LUGgers demonstrate.
I didn't see that assertion, but in general I like your point of view more than I am currently able to agree with it (if that makes sense).
It's not so long ago that using Linux instead of Windows for many people was "impossible" (in their eyes) because too many things didn't work. Dual-booting allowed people to manage the migration slowly, so that they use each O/S for the task they feel it is best suited to - without this it would have just been "stick with Windows". Virtualisation allows those of us who have got a bit further into the migration and found very few things they need/want to do with Windows software to work more efficiently that dual-booting (after all, I'd rather encourage people to not have to switch off their FOSS in order to run non-FOSS).
In my case, what I have seen is that when this happens the Windows apps within the VM become, by their nature, "temporary". I actively look for FOSS alternatives to avoid the hassle of starting the VM and keeping it up to date with security patches. I have a TomTom satnav that I'm quite happy with, but when I see a decent competitor with software that runs under Linux that'll be a key deciding factor, which it wouldn't otherwise have been. I've pretty much decided now to ditch my Nokia loyalty because despite all they do with Linux they won't let me manage my Symbian phone using it (none of the FOSS options I've looked at have worked). So my next phone will, if possible, be chosen with Linux support in mind.
Without the half-way step I'd never make it to the end. I'm the only one in the office who uses Linux on the desktop, but increasingly others are SSH-ing into one of the servers to perform tasks they're discovering are easier in Linux (or asking me to do them because I have the tools), and that's the start of the process for them too. At home, the GF would never consider using Linux (doesn't have time to learn something new), but on the other hand will use my PC that's on rather than start up the laptop and wait for it to boot, provided she can do what she needs (which means just checking her email, oh and updating her farm and cafe on Facebook. Oh, and opening that spreadsheet she got from work. Oh and .....) She's overcome the "it's new, it's different, help!" and will be less averse to using it elsewhere now (she'd never admit it though).
All that said, I need people like MJR further along than I am fighting harder for what I believe to be right but don't have the time or motivation to fight myself. I absolutely support him in that even though I think he's being a bit unfair here, because I need him to try to edge things along a bit further.
On 05/11/2009, Mark Rogers mark@quarella.co.uk wrote:
otherwise have been. I've pretty much decided now to ditch my Nokia loyalty because despite all they do with Linux they won't let me manage my Symbian phone using it (none of the FOSS options I've looked at have worked). So my next phone will, if possible, be chosen with Linux support in mind.
"Won't let me manage my Symbian phone" -- in what way?
You could go for a Nokia phone, as long as it's not running Symbian. I don't know exactly, but some of their newer products seem like they may have much better support. Heck, they may even run Linux. And since Nokia took over Qt, they seem to be doing some cool things, so I suspect the support is even better.
I've not actually got one of those phones, just going by some things I think I may have possibly seen. Might be worth investigating?
or... http://qt.nokia.com/developer/qt-4.6-beta-for-symbian-developers
Srdjan
On 05 Nov 10:55, Srdjan Todorovic wrote:
On 05/11/2009, Mark Rogers mark@quarella.co.uk wrote:
otherwise have been. I've pretty much decided now to ditch my Nokia loyalty because despite all they do with Linux they won't let me manage my Symbian phone using it (none of the FOSS options I've looked at have worked). So my next phone will, if possible, be chosen with Linux support in mind.
"Won't let me manage my Symbian phone" -- in what way?
You could go for a Nokia phone, as long as it's not running Symbian. I don't know exactly, but some of their newer products seem like they may have much better support. Heck, they may even run Linux. And since Nokia took over Qt, they seem to be doing some cool things, so I suspect the support is even better.
The N900 does run linux... and if someone would politely buy me one, that'd be fantastic (and it's not android, so it gets bonus points!).
At Thu, 5 Nov 2009 11:02:30 +0000, Brett Parker wrote:
On 05 Nov 10:55, Srdjan Todorovic wrote:
On 05/11/2009, Mark Rogers mark@quarella.co.uk wrote:
otherwise have been. I've pretty much decided now to ditch my Nokia loyalty because despite all they do with Linux they won't let me manage my Symbian phone using it (none of the FOSS options I've looked at have worked). So my next phone will, if possible, be chosen with Linux support in mind.
"Won't let me manage my Symbian phone" -- in what way?
You could go for a Nokia phone, as long as it's not running Symbian. I don't know exactly, but some of their newer products seem like they may have much better support. Heck, they may even run Linux. And since Nokia took over Qt, they seem to be doing some cool things, so I suspect the support is even better.
The N900 does run linux... and if someone would politely buy me one, that'd be fantastic (and it's not android, so it gets bonus points!).
You can run emacs on maemo. Mmmm.
http://danielsz.freeshell.org/code/mine/emacs-for-maemo/
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 11:02:30 +0000 Brett Parker iDunno@sommitrealweird.co.uk allegedly wrote:
The N900 does run linux... and if someone would politely buy me one, that'd be fantastic (and it's not android, so it gets bonus points!).
Ummm - seconded (maybe I should read all my mail first).
Mick
(Christmas is coming and I'm hopeful)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The text file for RFC 854 contains exactly 854 lines. Do you think there is any cosmic significance in this?
Douglas E Comer - Internetworking with TCP/IP Volume 1
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc854.txt ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Srdjan Todorovic wrote:
"Won't let me manage my Symbian phone" -- in what way?
In pretty much any way!
It's an N82 (sort of N95-ish in many ways). I can connect it via USB to have access to the phone memory (but not the memory card, bizarrely, so I can't pull photos off without putting the card into a card reader). I can manage some basic file management stuff using bluetooth, but if I want to access my addressbook, SMS messages, etc then I'm out of luck. And as for actually doing the sort of things I still have a Windows box for (like firmware upgrades etc) then no chance!
When I've looked at Linux apps (eg gnokki) they've either been unable to connect to the phone at all or been unable to do anything remotely useful.
This coupled with the fact that the phone has a damn good camera and some pretty decent hardware all round, but the software is weak in many other areas; predictive text functionality that came out of the ark, painfully slow operation when more than a limited number of SMS messages are present (currently takes about 30sec to open the messaging app).
I'm looking at Samsung Pixon 12 (camera matters a lot to me) but I've not confirmed that is Linux friendly yet (one reason I haven't upgraded yet). Or maybe Sony Ericsson (same comments about Linux - not really checked yet).
It seems odd, however, that Nokia don't have a native Linux client. They have a lot of Linux devs who presumably have Nokia phones, surely this must frustrate them too?
You could go for a Nokia phone, as long as it's not running Symbian.
The N82 has a good 5MP camera (by good I mean decent Xenon flash etc, not just high MP count for a 2-yr-old phone), although limited in software camera features compared with the GF's SE phone (which is much newer). I have some really great photos (and videos) of my nieces and other people and places that I only have because I had my phone with me in situations that I'd ever have had a camera otherwise.
2009/11/5 Mark Rogers mark@quarella.co.uk:
I'm looking at Samsung Pixon 12 (camera matters a lot to me) but I've not confirmed that is Linux friendly yet (one reason I haven't upgraded yet). Or maybe Sony Ericsson (same comments about Linux - not really checked yet).
I recently bought a Sony Ericsson c905. I don't know about syncing contacts with a PC (I sync with an on-line cloud service instead), but I do know that accessing both memory stores (internal and the removable fingernail-sized card) over USB works just fine - the phone can either be in Phone mode or Mass Storage mode, and no silly extra drivers are required to make it work.
Tim.
On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 10:31:18 +0000 Mark Rogers mark@quarella.co.uk allegedly wrote:
I've pretty much decided now to ditch my Nokia loyalty because despite all they do with Linux they won't let me manage my Symbian phone using it (none of the FOSS options I've looked at have worked). So my next phone will, if possible, be chosen with Linux support in mind.
Take a look at the Nokia N900 - due for UK release in a week or two. Built around Maemo, and looks a much better bet than an iphone (and I confess that I'm not enough of a google fan to be comfortable with an android based phone). I sincerely hope that the N900 will play nicely with my desktop.
Mick ---------------------------------------------------------------------
The text file for RFC 854 contains exactly 854 lines. Do you think there is any cosmic significance in this?
Douglas E Comer - Internetworking with TCP/IP Volume 1
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc854.txt ---------------------------------------------------------------------
mick wrote:
Take a look at the Nokia N900 - due for UK release in a week or two.
Hmmm, maybe worth considering I guess.
As mentioned elsewhere, I do use the camera a lot, and it looks like the N900 will be a step down from where I am with the N82 (which is also 5MP but has Xenon flash) - although the camera software might be better. Shame it doesn't at least have 8MP (I know that camera quality can't be gauged by MP but there isn't typically a lot else to go by).
It may be too pricey though, depending on the deals I can get on O2.
On 06 Nov 10:17, Mark Rogers wrote:
mick wrote:
Take a look at the Nokia N900 - due for UK release in a week or two.
Hmmm, maybe worth considering I guess.
As mentioned elsewhere, I do use the camera a lot, and it looks like the N900 will be a step down from where I am with the N82 (which is also 5MP but has Xenon flash) - although the camera software might be better. Shame it doesn't at least have 8MP (I know that camera quality can't be gauged by MP but there isn't typically a lot else to go by).
Bah - just get a seperate camera - for anything that you actually need the quality for a phone camera is never going to cut it. Phone and PDA merge is almost logical, phone and camera merge is getting a bit silly.
(Phone and PDA I say because typically your contacts are stored in the phone already, so being able to tie contacts to appointments and basic todo lists makes sense).
It may be too pricey though, depending on the deals I can get on O2.
Well, it's £499 direct from nokia not sim locked... so not sure what the carriers are going to put it at, but I doubt very much that they'll let anyone have it on less than a 18 month contract.
Cheers,
Brett Parker wrote:
Bah - just get a seperate camera - for anything that you actually need the quality for a phone camera is never going to cut it. Phone and PDA merge is almost logical, phone and camera merge is getting a bit silly.
Agreed re: quality, but having a great camera at home isn't much use when you want to take a photo away from home! And actually, the quality of the photos I got out of my N82 were vastly superior to the quality of the photos I got from my £100 Kodak 7MP camera (note: I know that's not a "decent" camera to compare with). The only thing missing is optical zoom, and that's where a high MP count can help: you can cut the 2MP image you want out of the 5/8/12MP image you took and get more-or-less the same effect as with optical zoom.
Also, the phone camera takes decent video footage, something the digital camera never did. The audio quality is much better (but then phones tend to have decent mic's), and the frame rate is much higher (but then, the phone has a much faster CPU than the camera did).
I honestly do not miss the digital camera - the phone battery even lasts longer than the digicam did, and because I use it a lot more (it's always with me so I can) I am better at using it than I ever was with the "proper" camera. (It's quite handy to take a photo of the specials board in a restaurant so you can choose from it at the table!) Geo-tagging of photos is also a potential benefit of linking to the phone (not one I've really used yet but think I might).
However, I did a lot of research before buying the phone and the N82 was a damn good camera(-phone). Compared with it's N95 cousin it was considerably better, despite them both having 5MP (and presumably identical) CCDs. The optics are better, the flash is better. This is why I won't actually pick a phone/camera just from it's MP rating. However, the manufacturers trying to take a lead in the photography side are doing more than just increasing the MP rating, and I have to say I would really like one of the forthcoming Samsung 12MP with 3x optical zoom models (yes, it still makes calls!)
For my money, the logic is that modern phones have decent CPU, storage, and battery management, at a high unit price. A decent camera benefits from all of these features, but my network won't subsidise it (and I do need a phone anyway, so having one with a decent CCD or not isn't going to make a hige difference to the price).
Bizzarely, I've never taken to sync-ing contacts to my mobile and doing other PDS tasks from it (diary etc). Perhaps because the N82 is pretty rubbish at that (esp when I can't link to it from my Linux box).
Adam Bower wrote:
I'd rather have a 2MP camera in a phone than 5 or 8... as you shrink sensors (well, increase the density of the light detector thingies) they create a lot more noise and make the picture look crap (generally).
Agreed in principle, but see the optical zoom replacement argument above.
I'd rather they put in a decent lens in with a low megapixel sensor and a good flash (something missing from many cameras on phones) instead of letting marketing get in the way who just want bigger megapixel numbers as it looks good in the press.
The N82 has xenon flash and decent (by these standards anyway) lens. Modern 5MP phones tend not to have - they're reserved for the top end where the top end keeps moving. Some of the newer phones have much wider angle lenses too, so you don't have to get so far away from something to take a decent picture.
I know I'll not win many people over with any of this, but I honestly believe that anyone who would only budget £100 for a digital camera could do much worse than add that to their phone budget instead (and do some research before parting with it).
On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 10:17:10AM +0000, Mark Rogers wrote:
As mentioned elsewhere, I do use the camera a lot, and it looks like the N900 will be a step down from where I am with the N82 (which is also 5MP but has Xenon flash) - although the camera software might be better. Shame it doesn't at least have 8MP (I know that camera quality can't be gauged by MP but there isn't typically a lot else to go by).
I'd rather have a 2MP camera in a phone than 5 or 8... as you shrink sensors (well, increase the density of the light detector thingies) they create a lot more noise and make the picture look crap (generally).
I'd rather they put in a decent lens in with a low megapixel sensor and a good flash (something missing from many cameras on phones) instead of letting marketing get in the way who just want bigger megapixel numbers as it looks good in the press.
Adam
On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 10:17:10AM +0000, Mark Rogers wrote:
mick wrote:
Take a look at the Nokia N900 - due for UK release in a week or two.
Hmmm, maybe worth considering I guess.
As mentioned elsewhere, I do use the camera a lot, and it looks like the N900 will be a step down from where I am with the N82 (which is also 5MP but has Xenon flash) - although the camera software might be better. Shame it doesn't at least have 8MP (I know that camera quality can't be gauged by MP but there isn't typically a lot else to go by).
It may be too pricey though, depending on the deals I can get on O2.
The problem with the N900 to my mind is that it isn't actually a phone is it? Certainly the N8xx series weren't phones. Maybe the N900 has changed that.
On 06 Nov 14:02, Chris G wrote:
On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 10:17:10AM +0000, Mark Rogers wrote:
mick wrote:
Take a look at the Nokia N900 - due for UK release in a week or two.
Hmmm, maybe worth considering I guess.
As mentioned elsewhere, I do use the camera a lot, and it looks like the N900 will be a step down from where I am with the N82 (which is also 5MP but has Xenon flash) - although the camera software might be better. Shame it doesn't at least have 8MP (I know that camera quality can't be gauged by MP but there isn't typically a lot else to go by).
It may be too pricey though, depending on the deals I can get on O2.
The problem with the N900 to my mind is that it isn't actually a phone is it? Certainly the N8xx series weren't phones. Maybe the N900 has changed that.
The N900 most definately is a phone, it's what the N8xx series *should* have been.
http://shop.nokia.co.uk/nokia-uk/product.aspx?sku=10208380%C2%A7ion_id=911&a...
HTH HAND.
On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 02:07:12PM +0000, Brett Parker wrote:
On 06 Nov 14:02, Chris G wrote:
On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 10:17:10AM +0000, Mark Rogers wrote:
mick wrote:
Take a look at the Nokia N900 - due for UK release in a week or two.
Hmmm, maybe worth considering I guess.
As mentioned elsewhere, I do use the camera a lot, and it looks like the N900 will be a step down from where I am with the N82 (which is also 5MP but has Xenon flash) - although the camera software might be better. Shame it doesn't at least have 8MP (I know that camera quality can't be gauged by MP but there isn't typically a lot else to go by).
It may be too pricey though, depending on the deals I can get on O2.
The problem with the N900 to my mind is that it isn't actually a phone is it? Certainly the N8xx series weren't phones. Maybe the N900 has changed that.
The N900 most definately is a phone, it's what the N8xx series *should* have been.
http://shop.nokia.co.uk/nokia-uk/product.aspx?sku=10208380%C2%A7ion_id=911&a...
Ah, the N900 is on my 'next possible PDA' list then.
On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 14:07:12 +0000 Brett Parker iDunno@sommitrealweird.co.uk allegedly wrote:
The N900 most definately is a phone, it's what the N8xx series *should* have been.
http://shop.nokia.co.uk/nokia-uk/product.aspx?sku=10208380%C2%A7ion_id=911&a...
Yep. I've had an N800 for a couple of years and the only thing that stopped it being really useful was the lack of telephony. It is a neat little internet tablet (I have used it in US and european hotels in preference to taking my laptop) but I still needed a phone.
As for prices, http://www.eweekeurope.co.uk/product/hands-on--nokia-n900---a-good-cheap-opt... suggests that it will be available on contract in the £20-35 range depending on upfront contribution and contract length.
On my christmas list.
Mick ---------------------------------------------------------------------
The text file for RFC 854 contains exactly 854 lines. Do you think there is any cosmic significance in this?
Douglas E Comer - Internetworking with TCP/IP Volume 1
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc854.txt ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris G wrote:
The real issue though is that it's simply still *easier* to run a few oddball things in XP in virtualbox, plus it's there if you need to try something else which for some reason doesn't work in Linux (often it doesn't work in Windows either but it's nice to be able to check). Finally it means I can often help friends and family on the phone by doing the same thing on my screen that they're doing to see where they're going wrong.
What have you got *against* running XP (or Vista or W7) in VirtualBox? It's free, it's easy to set up and very, very few people don't have a licence they can use.
Personally I have nothing *against* it, to me it is a necessary evil to be able to replicate customers systems. It doesn't mean I have to like it though.*
The problem however with doing this to support one or two applications is that you end up having to maintain 2 operating systems, Windows will still need security updates etc if you are going to let it lose on the network, will still need anti virus measures etc.
For one application I would always see how far I get with wine first, without the VM overhead it usually offers better performance and you don't have to waste system resources booting an entire second OS just to do one thing.
* I don't dislike all aspects of Virtualisation, in fact p2ving a box and keeping functional VM clones is a very worthwhile alternative to the dark server principles of Disaster Recovery Planning and something I have used to save my customers a great deal of money. Also using a VM environment to "dry run" risky upgrades or irreversible operations has saved me a considerable amount of pain in the past. It's also seems to be working out pretty well for consolidation projects and if that means less machines sitting 99% idle in server rooms saping power around the world then this is a good thing.
On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 02:37:25AM +0000, Wayne Stallwood wrote:
Chris G wrote:
The real issue though is that it's simply still *easier* to run a few oddball things in XP in virtualbox, plus it's there if you need to try something else which for some reason doesn't work in Linux (often it doesn't work in Windows either but it's nice to be able to check). Finally it means I can often help friends and family on the phone by doing the same thing on my screen that they're doing to see where they're going wrong.
What have you got *against* running XP (or Vista or W7) in VirtualBox? It's free, it's easy to set up and very, very few people don't have a licence they can use.
Personally I have nothing *against* it, to me it is a necessary evil to be able to replicate customers systems. It doesn't mean I have to like it though.*
Well that is my feeling about it too, I most certainly don't want to run Windows but, as for some other people here too, it's plain *easier* to have a Windows installation.
The problem however with doing this to support one or two applications is that you end up having to maintain 2 operating systems, Windows will still need security updates etc if you are going to let it lose on the network, will still need anti virus measures etc.
To some extent yes but a considerably lesser extent than if you run it as the 'controlling' OS. I don't have any E-Mail going in and out of Windows, there's no visibility of the Windows system from the outside world and I use IE very little. In addition if *it* gets corrupted I just throw the installation away and start at a snapshot again.
For one application I would always see how far I get with wine first, without the VM overhead it usually offers better performance and you don't have to waste system resources booting an entire second OS just to do one thing.
In general the sorts of things that I want to do in Windows are so low-level drivery sorts of things that Wine isn't going to have much chance. OK, my Access database isn't, but the solution to that is to write it using something other than Access.
Chris G wrote:
Personally I'd go for running XP in VirtualBox, it's what I do for the odd bits and pieces that I can't transfer to Linux
You might want to look at the software Alistair wants to use before recommending virtualisation. it looks to me like the sort of thing that might really suffer from the VM overhead. I'd say in this case (and given it is one app) that Wine would be a better choice, assuming this software works in Wine of course.
On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 10:53:10AM +0000, Wayne Stallwood wrote:
Chris G wrote:
Personally I'd go for running XP in VirtualBox, it's what I do for the odd bits and pieces that I can't transfer to Linux
You might want to look at the software Alistair wants to use before recommending virtualisation. it looks to me like the sort of thing that might really suffer from the VM overhead. I'd say in this case (and given it is one app) that Wine would be a better choice, assuming this software works in Wine of course.
You might be right. I guess where virtualisation does least well is for intensive graphic applications.
Chris G wrote:
On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 10:03:15PM +0000, Alistair Macgregor wrote:
Can someone please help with some advice.
At the moment I run a dual boot system, with Windows XP and Ubuntu sharing my hard drive. I would like to go the whole hog and rid myself of windows. I know I can do 90% of what I use my computer for under Linux, office, graphics and music.
The only thing I'm having trouble with is an equivalent for Planetside Terragen landscape generator. Is there anything compatible or am I stuck running it in WINE.
Personally I'd go for running XP in VirtualBox, it's what I do for the odd bits and pieces that I can't transfer to Linux, in my case these are:- Epson software for my scanner An access database (I keep meaning to transfer to Dabo) Occasional web sites that need IE to work (many French ones)
As said above I too would recommend Sun's virtual box.
I know you need to have a full windows install within Vbox but you already have one available as you dual boot.
I kept a winXP vbox as my scanner didn't work with SANE (it does now that I've fixed and recompiled the SANE driver), and I do find it handy for some other devices that will only work with windows eg my Motorola phone, and the odd IE only website. It is pretty useless for graphic heavy applications though.
For me the good part of Vbox is I get from *buntu to a fully working and ready to use WindowsXP in under 20seconds rather than the 10-15mins needed to boot up my spare windows machine.
I've never had any success with WINE but YMMV.
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Chris G cl@isbd.net wrote:
On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 10:03:15PM +0000, Alistair Macgregor wrote:
Can someone please help with some advice.
*snip*
Personally I'd go for running XP in VirtualBox, it's what I do for the odd bits and pieces that I can't transfer to Linux, in my case these are:- Epson software for my scanner An access database (I keep meaning to transfer to Dabo) Occasional web sites that need IE to work (many French ones)
I thought the OP was saying they currently run this single app in wine, and would prefer a native equivalent, so... is there any conceivable reason it'd be advantageous to run terragen in virtualbox?
I really feel I must be missing something about your advice, because I can't see it doing anything other than wasting time, gigabytes of disk space, cpu time, money on Microsoft's balance sheet for a windows license, memory and so on for no benefit whatsoever and probably at the cost of reliable accelerated 3D support.
I would fervently support MJ Ray's sensible and well thought-out points if it were even necessary to go that far, but as far as I can see, the idea flies in the face of technical common sense, anyway.
Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, I hate being wrong.
Back on topic, I'm aware that there's an Epic-style linux port "in development" foir terragen, but not aware of native alternatives that are up to scratch. I'd be interested to see any suggestions people have.
On 03 Nov 22:03, Alistair Macgregor wrote:
Can someone please help with some advice.
At the moment I run a dual boot system, with Windows XP and Ubuntu sharing my hard drive. I would like to go the whole hog and rid myself of windows. I know I can do 90% of what I use my computer for under Linux, office, graphics and music.
The only thing I'm having trouble with is an equivalent for Planetside Terragen landscape generator. Is there anything compatible or am I stuck running it in WINE.
Appears from a glance that it runs fairly nicely in wine, but you might want to take a look at innerworld, which is a blender plugin.
http://innerworld.sourceforge.net/
But that's as good as I can find at the moment.
Cheers,
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 22:03:15 +0000 Alistair Macgregor alistairnacf@aol.com allegedly wrote:
The only thing I'm having trouble with is an equivalent for Planetside Terragen landscape generator. Is there anything compatible or am I stuck running it in WINE.
Alistair
To get back to your original question (and away from the OS religious discussion it has spawned)....
I don't know enough about graphics rendering software to know whether this will help, but osalt suggests that pixie http://www.renderpixie.com/ may do a little of what you want.
HTH.
Mick
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The text file for RFC 854 contains exactly 854 lines. Do you think there is any cosmic significance in this?
Douglas E Comer - Internetworking with TCP/IP Volume 1
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc854.txt ---------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Adam Bower -
Alistair Macgregor -
Brett Parker -
Chris G -
Mark Rogers -
mick -
MJ Ray -
nev young -
Richard Lewis -
runlevel ten -
Srdjan Todorovic -
steve-ALUG＠hst.me.uk -
Tim Green -
Wayne Stallwood