beware of the updates you install

[Scott Dorsey]

dave <dave@dave.dave> wrote:

The Kernel has thousands of drivers already installed. Please name a
consumer device (other than Apple) that you would like to use with Linux
that had a driver issue. I have found Linux to be way more plug-and-play
than Windows, and this has been getting moreso in the past few years.
Usually you need to boot a CD to install something to Windows; virtually
unheard of in Linux.

This morning's has been a Trident Cyber 9525 graphics card. VESA driver
under Centos 6.3 sort of works but locks up when gdm _exits_. I forced a
panic and I'm looking at it right now to see what's going on.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

 

[Neil Gould]

Frank Stearns wrote:

"Neil Gould" <neil@myplaceofwork.com> writes:

snips

Those programs are not for technical writing or publishing. Even
Adobe keeps FrameMaker alive and well because it is the only
surviving alternative to Ventura for that purpose. For my active
clients, I only use FrameMaker because it has kept abreast of the
rather significant changes to the publishing industry since the last
update of Ventura.

Hi Neil -

Wow! Someone who has heard of FM!! I've been using it in my other day
jobs of technical writer and plug-in writer since FM 2.1 in late
80s/early 90s. I was on Frame Technology's Customer Advisory Board
(pre-Adobe) when it was active in the early 1990s. (Cisco Systems
actually gave me their board seat -- that's another long story best
told some other time.)

Adobe moved FM development to India a few years back. They've been
doing a pretty good job, though there have been some missteps.
Generally, though, things are better, with regular releases coming
along for the foreseeable future. And, the new guys have been
reasonably responsive with fixes.

I just met with a client this morning whose tech documents are done in FM!

IIRC, my first copy of FM was 3, prior to Adobe's acquisition of Frame, Inc.
At that point, it was no match for VP technically, but its cross-platform
abilities were a big plus. Then, Corel acquired VP and managed to screw it
up for a few years, during which time Adobe improved FM's ability to handle
type and color properly, among other things. Today, FM is the most viable
app for technical documents, IMO, largely because Corel dropped the ball.
Although some folks complain about FM's UI (it isn't anywhere near as
flexible as VP's), it has not been a problem for me, and I appreciate that
fact that it has remained "familiar" for decades. That's rather atypical for
Adobe apps, which shuffle their UI with regularity.
--
best regards,

Neil

 

[conklin]

"Jason" <jason_warren@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:MPG.2cfb55636f8242529897c6@news.eternal-september.org...

On Sat, 23 Nov 2013 04:43:24 -0500 "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in article <KrCdnXhYy-
hc5Q3PnZ2dnUVZ_gydnZ2d@earthlink.com

Les Cargill wrote:

I used to have to do the annual reinstall to clean up
the registry.


If you use the right tools to uninstall crap programs, you don't have
problems with the registry. Revo Uninstaller lets you use the program's
built in uninstaller, then will clean the remainder of the registry
entries and leftover folders. Prior to this, I edited the registry by
hand. The pro version is supposed to clean ot trash left from sloppy
uninstalls.

http://www.revouninstaller.com/revo_uninstaller_free_download.html

I endorse Revo, too. You have to be a little careful about its registry
cleanup if you choose the more "aggressive" post-uninstall scanning
options; it can propose to delete stuff that shouldn't be. For instance,
I have an Adobe CC subscription and created a CC folder. If I uninstall
an app and let Revo do it's aggressive thing, it'll try to zap entries to
other CC apps. It does warn you that the folder contains other apps, but
picking your way through all the possibilities is hopeless.

On a simpler note, the new IE update (11) is not recognized by the server at
work, which seems to call it a non-standard browser. It also does not work
well with dlink cameras. I have had to resort to using a IE 8 version
running on XP to make the softwre work where I want it too. IE 11 has
problems with other programs too. Java runtime seems to be banned by IE11.
You can download it, and it IE still won't recognize it.

 

[Trevor]

"dave" <ricketzz@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:6tadnY21g_IAZQjPnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@earthlink.com...
> I don't fear Windows, I refuse to pay for an operating system,

Hard to get a laptop these days without Windows already included whether you
use it or not.
But hey if you also refuse to pay for the hardware, your problems are
solved!


> The Kernel has thousands of drivers already installed.

And more thousands not installed. Just as with Windows.

Please name a consumer device (other than Apple) that you would like to use
with Linux that had a driver issue. I have found Linux to be way more
plug-and-play than Windows,

Yes it is *IF* the hardware manufacturer bothers with Linux (still all too
rare) or the Linux developer types get around to writing them for free. You
may wait a long time (or forever) for stuff with a very small user base.

Trevor.

 

[dave]

On 11/28/2013 12:28 AM, Trevor wrote:

"dave" <ricketzz@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:6tadnY21g_IAZQjPnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@earthlink.com...
I don't fear Windows, I refuse to pay for an operating system,

Hard to get a laptop these days without Windows already included whether you
use it or not.

Hard but not impossible, however I have no use for another notebook. The
fact that manufacturers include it free says something.

But hey if you also refuse to pay for the hardware, your problems are
solved!

But hey are you suggesting I'm a thief?

The Kernel has thousands of drivers already installed.

And more thousands not installed. Just as with Windows.

Please name a consumer device (other than Apple) that you would like to use
with Linux that had a driver issue. I have found Linux to be way more
plug-and-play than Windows,

 

[William Sommerwerck]

While we're talking about computers, operating systems, and Al...

Have you seen the commercial for the iPad Air? It appears Microsoft has
finally forced Apple into defensive advertising. The ad talks about all the
things you can actually /do/ on an iPad -- a machine without a useful keyboard
or pointing device * -- "start a poem, finish a symphony". ** Apple has always
been more about image than what you can actually do with their products.

* I've used an iPad once. Bleh. Touchscreens don't work as easily as we are
led to believe. There is a learning curve. (The touchpad on my notebook, and
the gestural input for my graphics tablet, are comparably not-easy.)

** That particular part of the commercial parodies a famous Irving Penn
photograph.

https://www.google.com/search?q=irving+penn+stravinsky+piano&rlz=1T4NDKB_enUS510US510&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=lkOXUrWDHOSKjALJmoCgBg&ved=0CCsQsAQ&biw=1620&bih=1060

 

[John Williamson]

On 28/11/2013 13:09, dave wrote:

On 11/28/2013 12:28 AM, Trevor wrote:
"dave" <ricketzz@earthlink.net> wrote in message
The Kernel has thousands of drivers already installed.

And more thousands not installed. Just as with Windows.

Please name a consumer device (other than Apple) that you would like to use
with Linux that had a driver issue. I have found Linux to be way more
plug-and-play than Windows,

You seem to have ignored the list I posted earlier.....

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

 

[dave]

On 11/28/2013 05:50 AM, John Williamson wrote:

On 28/11/2013 13:09, dave wrote:
On 11/28/2013 12:28 AM, Trevor wrote:
"dave" <ricketzz@earthlink.net> wrote in message
The Kernel has thousands of drivers already installed.

And more thousands not installed. Just as with Windows.

Please name a consumer device (other than Apple) that you would like
to use
with Linux that had a driver issue. I have found Linux to be way more
plug-and-play than Windows,

You seem to have ignored the list I posted earlier.....

A camera? A smart-card reader? did you lsusb them to get chipset
information? There are several packages in the Ubuntu world for handling
RAW files.

http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-audio-users/msg94052.html

You do need to do a little digging, which is where Linux really shines;
nobody offers you a solution upon receipt of payment. It's all for the
love of the medium. The open source world is dripping wet with good karma.

 

[Frank Stearns]

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> writes:

"Frank Stearns" wrote in message
news:0s6dndDq_vjnmwvPnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@posted.palinacquisition...

Wow! Someone who has heard of FM!!

FrameMaker (not to be confused with PageMaker) was originally created for some
OS other than Windows.

Right... Several UNIX platforms -- Sun, NeXT, SCO, HP (among others), and Mac.
Windows was added at FM4, 1993-ish, IIRC. (I knew the guy who led the port to
Windows. Good fellow, very savvy engineer. I jokingly asked him if he felt the need
for a stay at a mental health spa after that effort. He nodded vigorously.)

I used it for a while about 15 years ago, in its first
Windows incarnation. It had the most-poorly designed dialog boxes for any
piece of software I have ever used.

Not sure what you were seeing. The UI was fairly consistent among the various
platforms, though because of the underlying dictates of the windows UI resources
sometimes things were a bit squirrely.

At least back then, they chose system resources rather than create their own so as
to reflect each user's general tweaks to the UI. These days, they have a custom
windowing system, which I don't like because (a) it reflects none of my general
windows tweaks and (b) they don't provide much in the way of appearance tweaks in
their custom system! (Re-inventing the wheel and making it square...)

In general FM dialogs could get confusing because they are very dense -- lots of
stuff you can do. While a little off-putting at first, once you got used to this
you appreciate having so much power close at hand.

Contrast to Interleaf (competitor of the day) when most things were 3-4 menu pulls
down with few or no keyboard shortcuts, and lots of clicking through "single
purpose" dialogs -- THAT was crazy-making if you wanted any speed with the UI.


>I hope it's gotten better.

Yes and no; YMMV. While the new UIs since FM9 are more "contemporary," many of us
who have used FM for 20+ years don't like the new UI dictates (I still use 10 year
old FM7 for most of my daily doc needs, as do many folks). As with many applications
these days, some UI designers think they know best and force you into something
that's far less efficient.

It's unsettling how often UI folks don't actually use the product they're working on
-- they just do what seems pretty with little understanding of the work flows.

Last fall, at Adobe's invitation, I spent 90 minutes on the phone with the new UI
guy for FM pleading with him to keep certain UI needs and standards in mind. Mostly,
doc professionals were sick of "cute" and just wanted the damn UI to not get in
their way. I think he got the message, and I was not the only one making the same
complaints. We shall see what comes along...

Frank
Mobile Audio
--
.

 

[John Williamson]

On 28/11/2013 14:59, dave wrote:
<Stuff not working under Linux>

A camera? A smart-card reader? did you lsusb them to get chipset
information? There are several packages in the Ubuntu world for handling
RAW files.

But not, as far as I can tell, the ones generated by this particular
camera. Fuji have recently changed their RAW file format.

http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-audio-users/msg94052.html

My Zoom R24 doesn't appear to be covered.

You do need to do a little digging, which is where Linux really shines;
nobody offers you a solution upon receipt of payment. It's all for the
love of the medium. The open source world is dripping wet with good karma.

And the Windows world is full of stuff that "just works". I like this
idea, it frees me up to actually do stuff rather than fight the computer.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

 

[Frank Stearns]

"Neil Gould" <neil@myplaceofwork.com> writes:

Frank Stearns wrote:
"Neil Gould" <neil@myplaceofwork.com> writes:

snips

Those programs are not for technical writing or publishing. Even
Adobe keeps FrameMaker alive and well because it is the only
surviving alternative to Ventura for that purpose. For my active
clients, I only use FrameMaker because it has kept abreast of the
rather significant changes to the publishing industry since the last
update of Ventura.

snips

I just met with a client this morning whose tech documents are done in FM!

IIRC, my first copy of FM was 3, prior to Adobe's acquisition of Frame, Inc.
At that point, it was no match for VP technically, but its cross-platform
abilities were a big plus. Then, Corel acquired VP and managed to screw it
up for a few years, during which time Adobe improved FM's ability to handle
type and color properly, among other things. Today, FM is the most viable
app for technical documents, IMO, largely because Corel dropped the ball.
Although some folks complain about FM's UI (it isn't anywhere near as
flexible as VP's), it has not been a problem for me, and I appreciate that
fact that it has remained "familiar" for decades. That's rather atypical for
Adobe apps, which shuffle their UI with regularity.

I used VP for a couple of client projects. Can't remember if it was Corel or not.

I initially liked what I saw and was looking forward to using it -- until things
started going wrong in small and large ways at every turn. Made me crazy as hell,
and the usual issues with support. "Oh, yes, sorry; that is a known problem;" or,
"don't know about that;" and the classic "Please reinstall" with the classic
response, "I've done that 10 times, no change..."

FM was typically very stable. I loved FM3 under Sunview on my Sparc station, but it
was of limited capability compared to the needs of the current day. Eventually, I
was forced over to windows for a number of business reasons.

FM conquered with FM4, and the introduction of their fabulous Table Editor -- still
from what I've seen the best thing out there for tables.

Combine that with FM's very powerful numbering system, their book system,
long-document capabilities, and now multiple delivery paths, and it is likely still
a "best buy" -- assuming you need that kind of power.

Frank
Mobile Audio
--
.

 

[William Sommerwerck]

"John Williamson" wrote in message news:bfp57oFgufkU1@mid.individual.net...

And the Windows world is full of stuff that "just works". I like this idea,
it frees me up to actually do stuff rather than fight the computer.

This is generally true. If a device doesn't have a driver, Windows will search
for one (locally or the Web). It usually comes up with the right one (or a
good one).

Driver problems are usually related to the manufacturer's failure to update
them. This gets customers Very Angry at having to abandon a product they like
(qv, the HP see-through scanner) or having to buy a new one.

A good example is the classic Palm T3 (and related PDAs). There /were/ updated
drivers, but no way to install them easily, because simply plugging the
interface cradle into a USB port didn't trigger a search for the correct
driver. The trick was to press the sync button on the cradle, then -- during
the 60 seconds or so Windows was trying to make contact -- have the Hardware
Wizard install the driver.

 

[William Sommerwerck]

"Frank Stearns" wrote in message
news:5LGdnSUR25tawwrPnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@posted.palinacquisition...
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> writes:

I used it for a while about 15 years ago, in its first Windows incarnation.
It had the most-poorly designed dialog boxes for any piece of software
I have ever used.

Not sure what you were seeing. The UI was fairly consistent among the
various platforms, though because of the underlying dictates of the
Windows UI resources sometimes things were a bit squirrely.

They were simply lousy -- poor layout, poor of choice what a particular dialog
box contained, etc. Whoever designed them apparently had no experience with or
understanding of DTP.

In general FM dialogs could get confusing because they are very dense --
lots of stuff you can do. While a little off-putting at first, once you got
used to this you appreciate having so much power close at hand.

I didn't. A dialog box should contain a closely related set of functions.

Contrast to Interleaf (competitor of the day) when most things were 3-4 menu
pulls down with few or no keyboard shortcuts, and lots of clicking through
"single
purpose" dialogs -- THAT was crazy-making if you wanted any speed with the
UI.

Neither Ventura nor PageMaker were like that. Word isn't like that.

I hope it's gotten better.

Yes and no; YMMV. While the new UIs since FM9 are more "contemporary,"
many of us who have used FM for 20+ years don't like the new UI dictates
(I still use 10 year old FM7 for most of my daily doc needs, as do many
folks).
As with many applications these days, some UI designers think they know
best and force you into something that's far less efficient.

I'll take clarity over efficiency any day.

It's unsettling how often UI folks don't actually use the product they're
working
on -- they just do what seems pretty with little understanding of the work
flows.

This is critical. No one should be allowed to design a product who does not
use it.

Last fall, at Adobe's invitation, I spent 90 minutes on the phone with the
new UI
guy for FM pleading with him to keep certain UI needs and standards in mind.
Mostly, doc professionals were sick of "cute" and just wanted the damn UI to
not
get in their way. I think he got the message, and I was not the only one
making
the same complaints. We shall see what comes along...

What is "cute"?

 

[William Sommerwerck]

"Frank Stearns" wrote in message
news:kdOdnV67WPlz_ArPnZ2dnUVZ_vCdnZ2d@posted.palinacquisition...

I used VP for a couple of client projects. Can't remember if it was Corel or
not.

I initially liked what I saw and was looking forward to using it -- until
things
started going wrong in small and large ways at every turn. Made me crazy as
hell,
and the usual issues with support. "Oh, yes, sorry; that is a known problem;"
or,
"don't know about that;" and the classic "Please reinstall" with the classic
response, "I've done that 10 times, no change..."

Oddly, I never had problems -- except for figuring out column balance.

You probably had a Corel version. Corel added needed features, but also
eliminated the modular document format, which is unbelievable.

 

[Scott Dorsey]

John Williamson <johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:

On 28/11/2013 14:59, dave wrote:
Stuff not working under Linux
A camera? A smart-card reader? did you lsusb them to get chipset
information? There are several packages in the Ubuntu world for handling
RAW files.

But not, as far as I can tell, the ones generated by this particular
camera. Fuji have recently changed their RAW file format.

That's not really a driver problem so much as an application problem, to
be honest.

If you want a really awful example, though, check out the National
Instruments PCI cards. National's Windows drivers pretty much work
and they are well documented and the tech support people know about them.
The Linux drivers... well, they sort of work. But they are so badly coded
that when they don't work they don't actually say that they are not working.
They'll fail to modload without giving any message, or they'll load but not
find any hardware without giving any message. They only work with certain
kernel versions, not with any 64-bit kernels or PAE kernels, but the manuals
don't say anything about that. Nobody in tech support knows a damn thing about
them, so you can pay by the minute on the tech support line to talk to someone
who has no idea even what dmesg is let alone what the driver is supposed to
be reporting.

Now, mind you, this is an NI issue and not a Linux issue, per se. But I do
encounter this a lot with companies who claim to support Linux but don't
really. (Not that a lot of the same companies also fail to support their
Windows stuff as well.)

You do need to do a little digging, which is where Linux really shines;
nobody offers you a solution upon receipt of payment. It's all for the
love of the medium. The open source world is dripping wet with good karma.

And the Windows world is full of stuff that "just works". I like this
idea, it frees me up to actually do stuff rather than fight the computer.

The nice thing about Linux is that you can look inside the box, so when it
fails to work, you can fix it. The nice thing about Windows is that it
usually just works. The problem is that when Windows systems fail to work,
you're pretty much out of luck because it's just that way and your tools for
real system-level debugging don't exist.

Given my choice, I'll run NetBSD. But usually I don't have a choice because
the application doesn't give me one.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

 

[dave]

On 11/28/2013 07:19 AM, John Williamson wrote:

On 28/11/2013 14:59, dave wrote:
Stuff not working under Linux
A camera? A smart-card reader? did you lsusb them to get chipset
information? There are several packages in the Ubuntu world for handling
RAW files.

But not, as far as I can tell, the ones generated by this particular
camera. Fuji have recently changed their RAW file format.

http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-audio-users/msg94052.html

My Zoom R24 doesn't appear to be covered.

You do need to do a little digging, which is where Linux really shines;
nobody offers you a solution upon receipt of payment. It's all for the
love of the medium. The open source world is dripping wet with good
karma.

And the Windows world is full of stuff that "just works". I like this
idea, it frees me up to actually do stuff rather than fight the computer.

http://www.camerahacker.com/Digital/dcraw_by_example.shtml

http://www.softpedia.com/reviews/linux/UFRaw-Review-49016.shtml

 

[Frank Stearns]

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> writes:

snips

Not sure what you were seeing. The UI was fairly consistent among the
various platforms, though because of the underlying dictates of the
Windows UI resources sometimes things were a bit squirrely.

They were simply lousy -- poor layout, poor of choice what a particular dialog
box contained, etc. Whoever designed them apparently had no experience with or
understanding of DTP.

I'm curious; do you remember a specific example?

Generally, things are related in an FM dialog; depends on how far down you want to
drill. For example, most everyone knows what a "paragraph" is, but related to DTP a
paragraph takes on many layers. Within the FM "paragraph designer" dialog, for
example, live 6 tabs with some 50-60 parameters in total. At first glance, this
might seem overwhelming. But start using it, and you appreciate the logical
divisions and clarity, given the information density.

But you also have to know enough about the product to see how this parameter set
relates to other things you might be doing.

Any complex app is like this; perhaps a real test is how well you can predict
how something works you don't know based on other things that you already know.

Protools looked really odd to me at first, but as I got to work through it, most of
it seemed fairly well thought out and I've learned to appreciate how PT deals with
high information density. But my initial impression was, "who designed this piece of
excrement?"

In general FM dialogs could get confusing because they are very dense --
lots of stuff you can do. While a little off-putting at first, once you got
used to this you appreciate having so much power close at hand.

I didn't. A dialog box should contain a closely related set of functions.

See above.

Contrast to Interleaf (competitor of the day) when most things were 3-4 menu
pulls down with few or no keyboard shortcuts, and lots of clicking through
"single
purpose" dialogs -- THAT was crazy-making if you wanted any speed with the
UI.

Neither Ventura nor PageMaker were like that. Word isn't like that.

And these three products are for different groups of users. The one that's closest
to FM is probably VP. PageMaker (distant weak cousin of In Design) is more for
display and design work, not so much for long documents.

Each is great for what they do. For example, I would never suggest that someone
writing a 2-4 page business letter fire up FM unless they really know it well. By
all means, use Word. Use PM for newsletters. But for that kind of work, Word will
likely break; FM will do it but you're using a complicated, big machine to swat a
fly.

At the same time, I would never suggest that the doc set for a Boeing 747 be put
together with Word, PM, or even Ventura. Those 80,000 (or so) pages are best handled
by FM or something like it. (My personal record with FM was a 9,000 page doc set, hw
and sw, in some 21 volumes, for an high-speed I/O computer. FM easily handled
this. As an aside, it was simple to create a master TOC and master index.)

I hope it's gotten better.

Yes and no; YMMV. While the new UIs since FM9 are more "contemporary,"
many of us who have used FM for 20+ years don't like the new UI dictates
(I still use 10 year old FM7 for most of my daily doc needs, as do many
folks).
As with many applications these days, some UI designers think they know
best and force you into something that's far less efficient.

I'll take clarity over efficiency any day.

Again, depends on your goals and needs. And are we talking surface clarity or deep
clarity? Sometimes the two are in conflict.

If a superficial level of "clarity" reduces an expert user's speed by even 10%, I'd
probably not want to change the UI. At 50% or more, leave the UI alone, period. Find
another product for the user who wants a "simpler" UI.

A better solution might be a configurable UI, with higher-level UI "personality"
settings for expert or novice. (There is a subset of that in FM now and has been for
a while, but it's not called that directly and it really only scratches the
surface of the concept.)

It's unsettling how often UI folks don't actually use the product they're
working
on -- they just do what seems pretty with little understanding of the work
flows.

This is critical. No one should be allowed to design a product who does not
use it.

Yup. Absolutely. But that's not the way applications development works in too many
cases, unfortunately.

Last fall, at Adobe's invitation, I spent 90 minutes on the phone with the
new UI
guy for FM pleading with him to keep certain UI needs and standards in mind.
Mostly, doc professionals were sick of "cute" and just wanted the damn UI to
not
get in their way. I think he got the message, and I was not the only one
making
the same complaints. We shall see what comes along...

What is "cute"?

As one example, how about a small, drop shadowed, serifed font for dialog title
bars, stippled gray on a dark gray title bar background? I know that many of the
graphics folks get a tingle of excitement when they see such a thing, but for the
rest of us, it's an eye-aching outrage. Worse, because it's an app-specific
windowing system, you can't get to it to change it to something rational. At least
within Windows there are adjustments for such things.

Or, how about "pods" and "docks" that *might* lend clarity at first, but then
severely bog down the experienced user. (Fortunately, the more recent versions of
FM allow you to disable such "cute clutter" and get directly to where you want to
go, without "hand-holding" that becomes "hand-cuffed holding".

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you; my main abstract point is not to force one
UI design on all different levels of users doing different kinds of work.

And I'm in complete agreement when the UI of a complex app is seemingly a random
mess. Ugh. For the most part, though, FM is not in that camp.

Frank
Mobile Audio
--
.

 

[Frank Stearns]

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> writes:

"Frank Stearns" wrote in message
news:kdOdnV67WPlz_ArPnZ2dnUVZ_vCdnZ2d@posted.palinacquisition...

I used VP for a couple of client projects. Can't remember if it was Corel or
not.
I initially liked what I saw and was looking forward to using it -- until
things
started going wrong in small and large ways at every turn. Made me crazy as
hell,
and the usual issues with support. "Oh, yes, sorry; that is a known problem;"
or,
"don't know about that;" and the classic "Please reinstall" with the classic
response, "I've done that 10 times, no change..."

Oddly, I never had problems -- except for figuring out column balance.

You probably had a Corel version. Corel added needed features, but also
eliminated the modular document format, which is unbelievable.

That's probably the case -- I don't recall seeing a "modular doc format" item. From
the sound of it, perhaps this was something like FM's "book" feature". And it would
be the height of stupidity were FM ever to delete the book system. Fortunately,
they've only made it better.

I worked around most of the VP bugs, but the killer was the placement of tables and
figures. Settings for "place here" or "float to next page" did not work. At random,
those items wound up at the end of the file, many pages away, sometimes in random
order. Maddening.

Frank
Mobile Audio

--
.

 

[William Sommerwerck]

"Frank Stearns" wrote in message
news:QN-dnY4Xq6CoFgrPnZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@posted.palinacquisition...
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> writes:

You probably had a Corel version. Corel added needed features, but also
eliminated the modular document format, which is unbelievable.

That's probably the case -- I don't recall seeing a "modular doc format"
item.

There was no such "item". The earlier versions of Ventura kept /everything/ in
separate files -- text, graphics, file locations, style sheets, etc. And all
the files were plain-text readable! (Thank you, Xerox!) One of the nice things
about this is that you could change the document's style just by substituting
a different style sheet -- a particularly useful feature if you wanted to
publish both paper and Web documents.

Unfortunately, Corel started wadding up everything into a single file. This
meant you had to create completely separate documents (rather than just style
sheets). And heaven help you if the file became corrupted -- you could lose
everything.


> From the sound of it, perhaps this was something like FM's "book" feature".

It isn't. In Ventura, a book is a collection of chapters.

I worked around most of the VP bugs, but the killer was the placement of
tables and
figures. Settings for "place here" or "float to next page" did not work. At
random,
those items wound up at the end of the file, many pages away, sometimes in
random
order. Maddening.

It sounds as if you had the first Corel edition, v5. It had disastrous bugs,
including the one you describe. Corel had to issue a corrected version. Didn't
they tell you?

 

[tuinkabouter]

On 11/28/2013 2:09 PM, dave wrote:

On 11/28/2013 12:28 AM, Trevor wrote:
"dave" <ricketzz@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:6tadnY21g_IAZQjPnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@earthlink.com...
I don't fear Windows, I refuse to pay for an operating system,

Hard to get a laptop these days without Windows already included
whether you
use it or not.

Hard but not impossible, however I have no use for another notebook. The
fact that manufacturers include it free says something.

But hey if you also refuse to pay for the hardware, your problems are
solved!

But hey are you suggesting I'm a thief?



The Kernel has thousands of drivers already installed.

And more thousands not installed. Just as with Windows.

Please name a consumer device (other than Apple) that you would like to use
with Linux that had a driver issue. I have found Linux to be way more
plug-and-play than Windows,

try:
https://www.thinkpenguin.com/catalog/notebook-computers-gnu-linux-2