Renzatic
-
Posts
419 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Renzatic
-
-
Just now, ClairelyClaire said:
i used to refer to spaghetti as "abiki" when i was still learning to talk.
one day, my brother very snottily corrected me. "it's not abiki, it's PA-SKETTI"
can't think for the life of me why that popped into my head just now.
If it makes you feel better, I thought a flyswatter was called a flas-water until I was about 10.
-
2 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:
Linux came to the world in 1991... Linux did not bring virtual desktops to the world.
You get right down to it, Unix and Linux can just about be considered the same thing, since the later is (or was) practically a 1:1 clone of the former. Technically, you're correct, but it's a technicality made through the barest splitting of a single hair.
-
5 minutes ago, ClairelyClaire said:
this is the best possible outcome 🤣🤣
I'd heart you, but it looks like reached my daily limit of hearts.
-
1 minute ago, LondonSquirrel said:
I know that. I'm refuting the idea that Linux 'invented' virtual desktops, which is entirely untrue.
You could argue it was the first still extant OS to offer it. Windows didn't have built in support for virtual desktops until Win10, and Apple didn't offer it until, I think, OSX 10.4. Unix did have it before Linux, but since there's so much blending between the 'nix's, it's mostly an academic point.
-
Just now, LondonSquirrel said:
Before Xerox?
The Xerox Parc OS wasn't really a consumer product. It cost beaucoup bucks, and was only sold to a select few companies.
...but yeah, you can pretty much trace almost all of modern computing to Xerox Parc.
-
4 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:
Er, hello. Let me remind you of your facts: Desktop compositing didn't exit in Mac or PC before Linux. Neither did virtual desktops.
Turns out none of us were right. The Amiga was the first consumer platform to offer virtual desktops.
The fact that I went out and looked this up makes me feel like a total nerd, and you should be totally ashamed of yourself for doing this to me.
-
1 minute ago, Renzatic said:
Derp!
Delete this, mods! Hit quote instead of edit!
-
9 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:
I will state it again: the Linux desktop market is so small that it's not worth worrying about.
Then why is it that some companies do? Epic, Unity, Adobe, Autodesk, SideFX, The Foundry, Black Magic Design, hell, I could go on...
There's a reason why Microsoft has spent all this time and money building WSL. There is a very lucrative market that is centered on Linux. The question is whether this market will go for the Affinity apps, since they cater to a group not normally represented on the Linux scene.
-
2 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:
You could not back up anything you wrote with a single valid argument. It's not my problem, it's a general problem in the Linux 'community'.
-
2 minutes ago, B-Interactive said:
I'm comfortable with rigorous debate, but we're not even debating about the merits of "Affinity for Linux" anymore.
Yup. It's pretty much turned into a usual internet argument, when the person on the losing end goes from trying to argue a point, to scrambling to look right.
I mean, if he really wanted to go for the throat, he could say that all these things started out on Unix first, which were then easily ported over to Linux, which were copied by Windows, and eventually snapped up by NeXt from the 'nix scene, and later incorporated into Apple, but, you know...
He's just kinda spinning his tires to kick up mud by this point.
-
-
3 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:
Another example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swm from 1989 had virtual desktops, two years before Linux was even released! At least try to know your argument before putting it.
That's an X window manager, not an OS.
...guess which OS uses X?
-
11 minutes ago, ClairelyClaire said:
ARM is an architecture, not a specific brand, OEM, or product.
lmao you're so full of it it's funny
There is ARM Holdings, which owns the core IP and basic instruction set for the architecture. In practice, it's somewhat like a consortium, with other companies sitting on the board of directors, buying licenses to manufacture their own chips, and adding to the design.
If Nvidia does buy ARM, they can't do anything to keep Apple from using and building upon their ARM chips, though Apple may be obligated to disclose any additions or tweaks they've made to it, which Nvidia and other licensees can later use for themselves.
-
-
2 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:
Er, the news? Nvidia is buying Arm... If the deal goes through.
That shouldn't effect any of the other high end ARM manufacturers like Apple, Qualcomm, et al. They're all grandfathered into ARM's highest tiered license agreement, practically giving them carte blanche to do what they want with the architecture.
-
3 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:
As though Nvidia owes Linux anything. Remember the desktop share: Linux is nowhere. It's unimportant to Nvidia.
Yet they spend the time and effort to release and support their hardware drivers right alongside Windows.
4 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:But you highlight, probably unintentionally, an important point: the Linux 'community' thinks the world revolves around them. I haven't seen anything that is actually 'new' in Linux that I have not seen in older versions of (real) UNIX, or on Windows or Mac. So Linux is hardly at the forefront of anything.
It's not just the Linux community. Nvidia's kinda known to be a bit rude to everyone else. They did quite a bit to piss off Apple too, to the point that they now refuse to support any Nvidia hardware on their machines.
- Michael Tunnell and Vex
-
2
-
16 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:
Oh indeed. Including Linus Torvalds and his attitude towards Nvidia. The fact that Nvidia make well performing drivers really annoys him. Too bad.
What annoys Torvalds is how Nvidia does its own thing, and ignores everything else the Linux community tries to do. Like their refusal to do anything with Wayland until here recently being one of the bigger sticking points.
-
7 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:
Adobe.
Substance Painter and Designer.
It's understandable why Adobe would choose to support Linux on this front. It has a big footprint in the 3D movie/game design industries, but doesn't draw much attention from the graphics design crowd. Hence why the aforementioned apps are available, but Photoshop and Illustrator aren't.
Linux's biggest weakness isn't that it's some also-ran OS only used by FOSS zealots, rather, it's that it's use case doesn't cover all demographics.
-
3 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:
It's not a very long list, is it?
How many apps do we all use on our computers? If I were to take a screenshot of my taskbar in Windows, you'd see most of the same icons there as you would were I running Linux. The Affinity apps are the only ones I'd be missing.
- B-Interactive and Snapseed
-
1
-
1
-
20 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:
Nonsense. What Linux lack is professional apps. Not another notepad app, of which there are hundreds. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Linux on the desktop is insignificant, which is precisely why there are so few professional apps available for it. It has been like this forever.
I had access to plenty of professional, closed source, paid for apps over on Linux, two of which are now owned and supported by Adobe.
-
28 minutes ago, Bryan Rieger said:
I fear this may be much of the problem. Despite the dark, modern looking interface, the Affinity apps actually feel rather dated in both their iconography, but also their overall UX; with all of the panels/studios and often arbitrary feeling 'modes/personnas'.
I'd say this is due to Serif's strategy to combating Adobe, the yee olde entrenched industry standard. They set out to make a better, more affordable Photoshop and Illustrator, and for good and ill, they've succeeded. We now have these nice alternatives that fit like an old glove for those who have used the aforementioned apps, but are just as dense and unfriendly to the newbies.
-
20 hours ago, ennuied said:
Fine as in intuitive? Not to me, and I'm only a moderately picky type. I've been using the app for quite some time now and I can't get used to how these tools are being represented, to me they look like some kind of Chinese characters, as in you just have got to know what they mean (even though ancient Chinese characters looked more like what they represented, but this is beside the point). To be specific the node tool is just an arrow that looks like a cursor, corner tool looks like some kind of constellation, pen tool draws lines but pencil does not, in reality both can do same function, fill tool is very strange, vector crop tool, again, looks like some alien symbol. I don't think there was enough thought put into this, it could be done so much better, more intuitive and modern.
Designer's icons are following the same basic paradigm defined by Adobe Illustrator way back when. Just like Illustrator, they're not immediately intuitive to the point that any newbie can roll in and start using the program after staring at it for 2 seconds, but they're easy to spot once you know what they all do.
I mean, look at Illustrator's width tool icon. It makes sense once you know what the width tool does, but at a casual glance, it looks like a one-eyed ghost trying to pick a fight with you.
-
-
Affinity for Linux
in Feedback for the V1 Affinity Suite of Products
Posted
It's a thin straw to grasp upon.