Meindert Sprang wrote:

> My Linux server requires minimum maintenance. It simply runs year in, year
> out.

Servers are easy because they do only one thing year in and year out.
Does your
Linux DAW require any maintenance?




--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without
a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be
operated without a passing knowledge of audio." - John Watkinson

On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 06:59:59 -0500, Mike Rivers wrote:

> Lucian Bicescu wrote:
>
>> Disney, Pixar and several other movie production houses use Linux.
>
> Sure. So does practically every large network server. Disney, Pixar and
> movie production houses aren't like small studios and individual musicians
> with a need to record. They do different things, and they have full time IT
> staffs so the people doing the creative work have no need to know what
> operating system their workstation is using. They just work, and when
> something goes wrong, they go for lunch and call the support team.
>
>> So you would rather waste your time upgrading your anti-virus
>> software, scanning your system for spy ware and re-installing
>> Windows because it craps on you every 3 months or so?
>
> I have never re-installed Windows. I don't get viruses. Most anti-virus
> programs have the option of automatically updating themselves and
> running on a regular schedule. I don't do that. I open my virus scanner
> once a week, check for updates, start it, and do something else, like
> grocery shopping. It doesn't interrupt my computer use, but I just would
> rather leave it alone to do its thing. I don't put my studio computer on
> the Internet except to go to trusted web sites to get updates to programs
> that I use, so there's really no need for a virus scanner there.
>
>> That's good for you but a Linux system can do most of what a
>> ProFools system can do.
>
> One thing it can't do is attract or easily gain the confidence of outside
> clients. I won't argue with the choice (or reasons thereof) of a user who
> operates totally on his own. That doesn't mean you can't have clients,
> but they must be the kind of client who is only interested in the final
> product, like you're creating music for a film. But if you're interested in
> "cold call" business, one of the first questions you'll be asked these days
> is whether you use ProTools.
>
>>> It just works and I can interchange my sessions and files easily
>>> with PT systems all over the world.
>>
>> Assuming they have access to the same plugins you have used.
>> Export as broadcast wave and you can exchange your Linux sessions
>> as well.
>
> You can exchange audio files. You can't exchange sessions. Do you
> know the difference? A "session" is the set of instructions that tells
> the program what parts of the original source material to play when,
> and at what volume. If you make some adjustments, export what you
> hear as a broadcast wave file, and send it elsewhere, the person
> receiving the file can only modify it, he can't put back something you've
> edited out, or change an edit point, or crossfade differently, or un-do
> some processing that you applied.
>
>> The guy featured in the article doesn't look like he is tinkering.
>> His studio is a commercial studio earning a living for him.
>
> That's fine for him. Have you done a project there? Are his rates
> any cheaper than the ProTools studio down the block because he
> didn't have to pay for his software? Or does he not have rates
> because he doesn't have (nor need, for what he's doing) any clients
> other than those who buy his final products?

Mike, don't waste your time with these Linux morons.


They claimed all I could play was the radio, or skin flute.

I posted some files of my works and they ran and hid like the
vermin they are.

Linux sucks for professional audio or video work.
it's a proven fact.
Don't waste your time trying to convert a bunch of religious
idiots.

Meindert Sprang wrote:

>> 4. What did you have to do to create that CD?
>
> Nothing. It is the installation CD of my linux distribution. Just like the
> installation CD of Windows (where you cannot do this).

Were you saying, in your rant, that you can't boot a Windows system
from a CD and install or repair an operating system? Isn't that what you
do when you put in the "recovery" CD and boot from it? Isn't that what
you do when you have a virgin system, put in the Windows installation
CD and boot from it? No command lines needed.

What's needed, and it's usually not presented in an obvious place or
way, is to know how to make the computer look at the CD (or a USB
flash drive, or floppy disk, or network boot partition) for bootup rather
than the internal hard drive or whatever serves as one. Most modern
motherboards (BIOSs?) bring up a boot device menu when you press
the F12 key within a fairly short time period after powering up.

>> 5. Will it save you from say a total hdisk failure?
> Yes.

Nothing will save you from total hard disk failure. There are things that
will allow you to recover from one, but it starts with replacing the hard
disk. If it's not a "total hard disk failure" but rather corrupt data that
won't boot or run, then the usual procedure (and I expect this is the same
for Linux as any other OS) is to replace the data with fresh data loaded
from a bootable source (like the OS installation CD).

> So, to restore, you need Acronis, an extra package which is not part of the
> OS CD. This is exacly my point. In my opinion, a decent backup and restore
> solution should be part of the whole package and be usable. Like with OS X
> and Linux. Windows doesn't come near...

I create a clone of my hard disks using Norton Ghost. If I have a total
hard disk
failure, I just put in the clone drive and I'm up and running. If I've
been diligent about
keeping a backup copy of files that I've been working on between
clonings, then
I can just copy those on to the new disk. If I haven't, well, I probably
don't care
that much about losing them.

I looked at Acronis and couldn't really figure out what it does that's
anything
special? Does it have something to do with an automatic periodic backup to
an external disk drive that's used to restore what's on the computer's
drive?



--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without
a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be
operated without a passing knowledge of audio." - John Watkinson

"Mike Rivers" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:hlgnbt$4pt$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Meindert Sprang wrote:
>
> Were you saying, in your rant, that you can't boot a Windows system
> from a CD and install or repair an operating system?

No, that is not what I am saying.
What I am saying is that you cannot boot from the Windows CD in order to
backup and/or restore an existing system.
Windows cannot be backed up when running. You can only backup your data. In
case of a crash, you cannot restore a complete working system. You must
first install a new fresh windows and only then you can start reinstalling
your apps and restoring your data.

With Linux or OS X you can actually boot from CD and restore the entire
working system in one go. Or, as I have done in OS X, re-install OS X
without having to reinstall my applications and data.

> Isn't that what you do when you put in the "recovery" CD and boot from it?
Isn't that what
> you do when you have a virgin system, put in the Windows installation
> CD and boot from it? No command lines needed.

I don't want to install a virgin system, because I then also need to
reinstall all my applications. I want to be able to restore a full backup,
using the OS disk. I don't want to be forced to spend money on a separate
backup software.

> I create a clone of my hard disks using Norton Ghost. If I have a total
> hard disk failure ....

Exactly my point. In order to do that, you need to purchase Norton Ghost.
With OS X and Linux, I don't have to obtain extra tools for system security,
they are part of the system.

Meindert

(E-Mail Removed) wrote:

> Until the hardware and software are truly
> integrated, I believe they´ll never be consistently stable machines.

This is what the Linux-based workstations that the Disney folks work
on, and the Linux-based Harrison consoles, the Linux-based
phones and book readers, and the whatever-based Alesis and Radar
(which I believe is Linux-based) hard disk recorders. The user never
touches the operating system not, in most cases, the application software
other than to go through upgrade steps with data provided by the
PRODUCT manufacturer.

> Apple may well arguably be a smug, arrogant, closed-shop, but they
> make products that are damned near perfect from an industrial and
> aesthetic design point of view

The only thing they aren't is cheap, and there are a whole lot of people
for whom this is very important.

> As a result, their products work and in the
> 20+ years I´ve been using them, I get to achieve finished audio
> products without all the hassle of kernel crashes, viruses, anti-
> viruses, OS license issues and other assorted IT nightmares that
> frankly I don´t have the time nor the inclination to be bothering
> with.

You also have a platform that, at least in the audio (and a few other
specialized) fields, can run programs that are supported on the other
major platform. Other than small differences in the user interface, a
ProTools user can move between Windows to Mac systems with no
impact. Similarly a project can move between platforms with different
users with complete compatibility.

The process is not so transparent if you send the project to a didgeridoo
player with only a Linux-based system to get him to lay down a track. If
it's your own project on your own schedule with your own (limited) budget,
it's not a big deal to export a stereo mix or a few stems in broadcast wave
format and import the file of the track he contributes back into the project
on your system. But not everyone has the patience or knowledge to
do that.




--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without
a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be
operated without a passing knowledge of audio." - John Watkinson

Meindert Sprang:

> My Linux server requires minimum maintenance. It simply runs year in,
> year out.

A server is a different thing than a DAW machine!

> <rant mode>
> As long as Microshaft refuses to equip their CD's/DVD's with a
> bootable GUI mode in which you can create a disk image for backup or
> restore a disk image to harddisk, like OS X and linux offer, I cannot
> regard Windoze as a professionally developed OS. Merely a toy created
> by a company that doesn't take it's business clients seriously. Heck,
> OS X can even be reinstalled on an existing system without needing to
> reinstall all data and applications. It simply renames the system
> folder to System.old, installs a new one et voila, your're up and
> running again.
>
> Windows is a toy...
>
> </rant mode>

Windows does pretty much the same, if you install it over an existing
system -> e.g. the existing "Windows" folder is left and the new one gets
named "Windows.1" or so.
Your cheap rant is beyond ridicolous distance from reality!

Meindert Sprang wrote:
> "M0she_" <(E-Mail Removed)> (flatfish) wrote...
>
>> Yea I know that... So what SPECIFICALLY is the magic command?
>
> You know, since you're calling linux users vermin anyway, I won't go
> into anymore trouble trying to defend myself. I use various OSses,
> that are best for their task. Some require more in depth knowledge,
> some don't. So what? And based on my real-life day to day experience
> with Linux, OS X and Windows, I is my experience that Windows is the
> worst of them all. Period. End of discussion for me.

You are speaking with flatfish, known liar, prolific nymshifter to avoid
kill filters, whose intent is to denigrate Linux and those who speak
positively of it or negatively toward Microsoft, to the point of libel.
The troll, its many nymshifts and examples to include libel are
documented in:

http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/

Some key quotes:

[QUOTE-1]
On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 14:05:15 -0700, High Plains Thumper wrote: [...]

> And last but not least, there is a Linux motorcycle in the off'ing to
> those who can afford:
>
>

> 130 mph Linux Motorcycle
> Nov 09, 2009
>
> It's big, black, fast, and appeals to Linux and motorcycle
> enthusiasts alike: the new E-motorcycle TTX02 from Mavizen. Motorbike
> with Linux
>
> The limited edition Mavizen TTX02 with Linux board-computer. [...]
>

>
> http://www.linuxpromagazine.com/Onli...nux-Motorcycle

So which rider has the biggest cock and which one has the smallest
cock, George Hostler?

BMW or Harley?
Suzuki or Mavizen?

I'm sure you have extrapolated your EXTENZive study on cock size
vs motorcycle size to include those brands.

Maybe you could sell your data to this company so they can use for
targeted marketing?

http://www.4extenze.net/
[/QUOTE-1]

From: M0she_ <goldee_loxnbag...@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.m otorcycles
Subject: Re: Harley vs BMW (was "An actually respectable iPad/Apple
critique")
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 16:16:37 -0500
Message-ID: <9u4aawvmi34v$.1uov1kafqqx6d$.(E-Mail Removed)>

http://groups.google.com/group/comp....36ac752f072641

Nymshift as Erin Mungan, the following rant hints a responsibility
connection for death threats to mjcr, who coordinated development of the
c.o.l.advocacy FAQ and Primer at

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/

[QUOTE-2]
Here is the lunatic who developed and wrote the COLA FAQ...

Coincidently he is also the person who fabricated the flatfish = Gary
Stewart LIE...

Look for yourself....

http://groups.google.com/group/comp....64c6e578019d77

"The FAQ and Primer for COLA will no longer be published. I do not want
my family endangered, so the document is being withdrawn the project is
being canceled and my other pro-Linux projects and efforts are also
being canceled."

A real stable person...
Don't ya think?
Hahahahahhahaha!
[/QUOTE-2]

From: Erin Mungan <mungan4lynxReMo...@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: The Mental Case Who Wrote the COLA FAQ....
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 02:03:12 -0500
Message-ID: <(E-Mail Removed)>

http://groups.google.com/group/comp....e40eece6c5d656

Nymshift as Moshe Goldfarb, nymthieving a WW-2 Jewish Holocaust
survivor's name, new poster to comp.os.linux.advocacy tells the profound
truth:

[QUOTE-3]
> Dan, you're probably a nice guy, but we get a ton of "works for me"
> crap in COLA and most times it's just people telling lies.

Well sorry to dissapoint you, but I'm not in COLA. I'm reading these
posts in the Ubuntu group. The only reason they are going to COLA is
because whomever started the thread had it crossposted there...and to
Vista groups, which I removed because this has nothing to do with Vista.

I'm NOT a Linux pusher, I still use Windows most of the time since I'd
just installed Linux a few weeks ago, maybe a month+ ago, and still
checking out apps and learning Linux. There are things I like and things
I don't like.

Believe what you want to believe. It's painfully obvious that you are
completely anti-Linux, just like some are completely anti-MS, and have
such strong preconceived beliefs that it doesn't really matter what
anyone says about any particular Linux item, everyone's a liar, and
nothing works out-of-the-box.
[/QUOTE-3]

Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy, alt.os.linux.ubuntu
Subject: Re: [News] Red Hat Developer's Update on PulseAudio, Fedora
Live CDs Interview
Message-ID: <Xns9A7D9779E7902thisnthatadelphianet@66.250.146.1 28>
Date: 11 Apr 2008 18:53:55 GMT

http://groups.google.com/group/comp....b1680a2d59746b

--
HPT

Branimir Maksimovic wrote:
> M0she_ wrote:
>
>> Don't waste your time trying to convert a bunch of religious
> ~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~
>> idiots.
>
> I can smell proselytism here? Ok you are pretty good preacher almost
> convinced me to convert immediately. Hail Windos, Hail Billy! Im
> going tommorow to found temple Of Worship of Windows, but I need some
> craftsmen to paint walls and build statues, and perhaps some windows
> screen savers or elements in Saint Billy life, perhaps write Life Of
> Billy as New Evangelic Bible, and prophecy. One OS to to rule them
> all, one OS to bind them all, and all cashe to go to microsoft for
> higher purposes, such as spiritual enligntment and welfare of all
> living beings! Temple Of Linux Members should be all converted to new
> religion!

The spiel smacks of:

In the Mopping Up phase, Evangelism's goal is to put the final nail into
the competing technology's coffin, and bury it in the burning depths of
the earth. Ideally, use of the competing technology becomes associated
with mental deficiency, as in, "he believes in Santa Claus, the Easter
Bunny, and OS/2."

Just keep rubbing it in, via the press, analysts, newsgroups, whatever.
make the complete failure of the competition's technology part of the
mythology of the computer industry.

We want to place selection pressure on the companies and individuals
that show a genetic weakness for competitor's technologies, to make the
industry increasingly resistant to such unhealthy strains, over time.

PDF page 55
Microsoft Evangelism
Comes vs. Microsoft court case

http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/Comes-3096.pdf

From: "Gary M. Stewart" <(E-Mail Removed)>
Subject: Re: Another user loves Ubuntu
Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 21:01:48 -0500
Message-ID: <gjjshp$bmi$(E-Mail Removed)>
X-No-Archive: YES

On Thu, 1 Jan 2009 20:58:05 -0500, Don Zeigler wrote:

> Gary M. Stewart wrote:
>
>> "How Windows Ruined My Life"
>>
>> By "Fairy Tale"
>
> How I Wasted My Life Trolling COLA
>
> by Gary Stewart, aka flatfish and about 600 other nyms

It's made me A LOT of money....
A Best Seller you might say......

http://boycottnovell.com/2009/01/02/...roll-unmasked/

--
HPT

"Meindert Sprang" wrote ...
> My Linux server requires minimum maintenance. It simply
> runs year in, year out.

Oh please. We have several hundred Windoze servers which
only get powered down once a year to blow out the dust bunnies.
ANY operating system that can't run "year in, year out" doing
something as simple as being a server isn't worth the name.

There are at least as many 3rd party utilities available for disk
and partition and boot and OS maintenance for Windoze as
for any of the dozens of flavors of Linux. Or maybe you don't
believe in 3rd party *open source* utilities except in the Linux
world?

"Krooburg Science" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:d4962d27-43b6-4c00-a2f0-(E-Mail Removed)...


With Pro Tools already being an industry standard on Mac & Windows for
TV, Feature film, and recording audio sweetening/editing/mixing, why
on earth would anybody want to waste their time building and
supporting such system??

I honestly cannot comprehend that statement.

Why would anybody support anybody other than Microsoft? Because it is
healthy to have alternatives.

I don't want pro tools to be the only thing available.

All that said, I would probably use pro tools, but I actively encourage
alternatives.