addicted to linux

I'm rather fond of the SuSE distribution myself. It's fairly nice, and easy to install/administrate.<P>CD burning isn't too difficult in Linux. I've never really warmed up to any of the GUI tools for it, so I do it strictly from the CLI. Linux Journal had an article on it about 3 months back that is a good intro to it.

I would love to use it more, but lack of support for my sound card pretty much puts a stop on that ... shame too I really like Suse 6.1 (what i got installed now)

I was thinking about running linux, but I was afraid of not being able to burn cd's - that is pretty much the only thing holding me to Microsoft right now. What kind of software do you use on linux to do it? Will it work with any cd-rw drive?

Your right is not as bad as I think, it is worse...<P>I have used all the distributions, RedHat, SuSe, SlackWare and Debian. The best distribution is SuSe in my opinion if you don't really want to do thw windows thing. <P>But since I play real games (not just Quake III), I need, use a like Windows...

I think most people use a program called cdrecord for burning CDs in Linux. Some distros include it, otherwise try here.<P>There are various graphical frontends for it floating around, too... I used to use gcombust, but I upgraded Slackware and gcombust broke and I've been too lazy to fix it.<P>Personally, I think Slackware is the best distro... it depends on what you really want it for. If you want to get your hands down in the guts of the system and learn how it really works, and you're not afraid of a steep learning curve, you can't beat Slack...<P>Besides, it's got a great name. View image: /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Roostahman<P>I use the utils that come with the OS. cdrecord, mkhybrid, mkisofs. You use mkhybrid and mkisofs to make the iso images. Then burn with cdrecord. It's not really too tough. In octobers issue of linuxjournal they have an article on it. Additionally the howto on burning cd's is useful http://www.linux.com/howto/CD-Writing-HOWTO.html#toc4 <P>There are a lot of GUI front-ends to help you burn CD's, I just haven't found one I liked. As for will you're CDRW work, probably. Is it SCSI or IDE? What model is it? If it's scsi you are almost certainly fine.<BR><P>[This message has been edited by Zuvembi (edited December 02, 1999).]

Thanks for the links guys. So far so good View image: /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<P>My burner is, unfortunately, IDE. I have an HP 8100. Think it will be ok?<P>SRW

I'm using BeOS right now. I haven't used my SuSE partition in quite a while... I just like BeOS a lot better. It's a whole lot easier to do tasks, more integrated, faster, and less bloated. It's cool, too, sort of like MacUnix (without all the bad shit that goes along with the Mac).<P>I'm not bashing Linux, but I really think you Linux guys should try BeOS. You might never go back...

Here's what I need BeOS to be able to run before I can consider it my primary OS:<P><LI>The latest EGCS<BR><LI>Gvim<BR><LI>Apache<BR><LI>A web browser that's as good as Navigator 4.7 (shouldn't be to hard View image: /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif)<P>I <B>would</B> love to run BeOS, but I need some apps... and I would probably still lurk around in Linux to learn more about UNIX.

With any luck, maybe someone will get the Mozilla source and tweak it to compile under beOS

Ok, for all those with ATAPI burners in linux, I am going to blatnatly plagiarize the Linux Journal's semi-recent article on getting it to work. It's work for me, so it should for you.<P>This what you gots to do when you compile your kernel:<P>Diable IDE/ATAPI CD-ROM support.<P>Enable the following:<P>SCSI Support<BR>SCSI CDROM support<BR>SCSI Generic Support<BR>ISO9660 filesystem<BR>SCSI Emulation support<P>You'll also want the loopback device support enabled if you want to mount your images to make sure they're good before you burn them.<P>I used the command line and graphical tools. The best graphical tool I used was CDR Toaster (http://www.jump.net/~brooke/cdrtoast/) which made copies just fine for me.<P>Any other help can be directed to jfincher@cinci.rr.com . I rarely read the forum. I'm also reachable through icq (28153190) and aim (jemfinch02).<P>Jeremy

Isn't Linux SO easy?<P>Christ if I hadda do all that crap to get a simple IDE burner to work I would pull all my hair out...<P>Compare to Windows:<P>Install Drivers<BR>Install burner software<BR>Reboot<BR>Start burning<BR>

Gotta agree with E_M on that one.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Christ if I hadda do all that crap to get a simple IDE burner to work I would pull all my hair out...<P>Compare to Windows:<P>Install Drivers<BR>Install burner software<BR>Reboot<BR>Start burning<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Effects of monopoly case at work.<P>--treatment--

Treatment you are getting a little dry.<P>Meanwhile while you are battling with your IDE CD-ROM burner issues, spouting MONOPOLY MONOLPOLY, I am happily making copies of system drives (Plextor makes cool software too), to help me setup systems even sooner...<P>

E_M,<P>You gonna blame Linux for making your life miserable? Or are you gonna blame the entity that <B>made</B> all these manufacturers conform to MS specifications <B>only</B> and deny other x86-platforms the same specs?<P>Pick your poison. We all know that not all Win9x software/hardware works with NT, and both these "OS" are made by Microsoft. <P><BR>--treatment--

I was thinking of converting to Linux because of my system being a dual 550, but it always seems like i need 2 os's to do all the things i need to do View image: /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

treatment:<BR><P>What exactly is closed about the specs of an IDE CD-Recorder? And what do IDE CD-R specs have to do with Microsoft, for chrissake?<BR><P>If you were ranting about Winmodems, then there might be some truth to that. But CD-R's?!? Gimme a break. Soon you'll be saying that USB is a Microsoft conspiracy.

Imarshall,<P>As a matter of fact, it's not just CD-R specs. Here's an example from Handspring's support-site http://www.handspring.com/support/ts_qt_hotsync.asp: <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR><BR><LI>To use a USB cradle, your computer must be equipped with a USB port AND running Windows 98 or MacOS 8.1 (or higher).<P><LI>If your computer is running Windows 95, Windows NT 4.0, or not<BR>equipped with a USB port, you will need to use a serial cradle. <BR><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>What is wrong with the above? I have a perfectly working and reliable <B>usb-equipped/enabled</B> Win95 computer that must be upgraded to Win98 in order to use Handspring's usb-cradle and synchronization software. I also have a perfectly reliable and working NT4-workstation that must use Win98 in order to use Handspring's usb-cradle and synchronization software. Now tell me again exactly why do I need to upgrade two reliable computers (Win95 and NT) to Win98 to use handspring synch? Last time I checked, USB is a <B>standard</B> spec. These two OS are both Microsoft's, so imagine the bigger hurdle that alternative platforms such as Linux faces.<P>Nobody has ever said Linux is easy. <P><BR>--treatment--

Actually, I've found that enabling stuff in the kernel and recompiling is often simpler and much more likely to work right on the first try than the "Install Drivers" step in Win9x is. Possibly more time-consuming, depending on the processor speed, but at least compiling a Linux kernel doesn't render the machine otherwise useless for the duration, as Windows' probing for hardware does...

treatment:<BR><P>So instead of saying "MS has a monopoly, so specs are restricted", you're saying "hardware support for certain devices is so difficult that even MS can't do it right". Make up your mind, man.<BR><P>Wasn't there a patch for USB on Win95, BTW? USBSupp.exe, or some such thing? As for NT4, I'm not sure how easy it would have been to add USB support to a non-PnP OS. In both cases, though, the idea of encouraging upgrades probably weighed more than technical factors.<BR><P>BTW, CD-R support is 100% provided by the burning software, even on Windows. Please explain how Microsoft's monopoly is impeding CD-R support on Linux.

IMarshall,<P>I think you are reading my posts in the wrong way. Let's summarize these:<BR>treatment <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR><BR> EM

<BR> Christ if I hadda do all that crap to get a<BR> simple IDE burner to work I would pull all my<BR> hair out...<P> Compare to Windows:<P> Install Drivers<BR> Install burner software<BR> Reboot<BR> Start burning<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Effects of monopoly case at work.

Click to expand...

<BR>Treatment <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>You gonna blame Linux for making your life miserable? Or are you gonna blame the entity that made all these manufacturers conform to MS specifications only and denyother x86-platforms the same specs?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Imarshall <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Soon you'll be saying that USB is a Microsoft conspiracy.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Treatment <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>http://www.handspring.com/support/ts_qt_hotsync.asp <BR>Last time I checked, USB is a standard spec. These two OS are both Microsoft's, so imagine the bigger hurdle that alternative platforms such as Linux faces.<BR><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Imarshall <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>So instead of saying "MS has a monopoly, so specs are restricted", you're saying "hardware support for certain devices is so difficult that even MS can't do it right". Make up your mind, man.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I think you are <B>deliberately being blind</B> to this. Microsoft <B>made</B> manufacturers conform to Win9x-compliance. The examples above are a clear case of Win9x monopoly-practices. The fact that even Microsoft can't make NT work with Win9x-compliant hardware/software only makes it more obvious that the MS's Win9x-compliance/monopoly-practice is bad even for Microsoft themselves. Like I've stated already, I have a perfectly reliable <B>usb-equipped/enabled</B> Win95-computer. To be blunt, these Win95-computers are Win95-C versions and have other usb-equipments working fine with it, except the new equipments such as Handspring.<P>Who exactly knows what exactly was in the USB-standard that makes a usb-hardware works only for Win98 on the x86-platform and at the same time be incompatible with usb-equipped Win95 computers? Why is USB-compliance lacking from NT? Why is DirectX-software always included on most, if not all, newer equipments and software?<BR>Imashall <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>CD-R support is 100% provided by the burning software, even on Windows<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Not entirely true. Microsoft publishes DirectX technologies that are usually incorporated into media-software such as CD-R software. DirectX is a proprietary Microsoft API for media(sight,sound,etc) and I believe most, if not all, CDR software for the Win9x-platform must conform to it for better working-relationship with Win9x-platform, in conjunction with using MS Dev-tools such as VC++ that uses <B>MFC</B>. This is an extension of monopolistic-practice that even MS itself is suffering from. <P>So, in conclusion, it is you that needs to make your mind up. Even Alex St.John (directx creator) doesn't make apologies for Microsoft's practices.<P><BR>--treatment--

Treatment, you are the typical Linux freak. When things don't work for linux or something is wrong with hardware/driver/software support, you blame Microsoft. Get over it buddy. Linux will not replace Windows in the next 5 years, or mayhap even 10 years. Your pipe dream of an OS is still that. You have to fight for driver support, hardware support and manufacturer support. I don't. And I have the CHOICE not to by MS products if I chose. Too bad those manufacturers choose to make MONEY. Gee even iD software is saying that of all the people playing QuakeIII, a mere 4% are playing on Linux, and HALF of those people dual boot into Win32. Gee, mayhap if Linux concentrated more on USER ACCESSABLILITY, instead of Distributions, differing opinions of what OpenSource is, "killing" Bill Gates, fighting Microsoft, and shut the hell up when someone chooses NOT to support Linux, you will get more work done. But nope, you and your ilk blame all your woe's on Microsoft. Yet I don't hear you complaining when the CEO of RedHat says he wants RedHat to domintate the world. Funny thing hypocracy is. If you really want to get into an argument about the success of Linux vs. Microsoft, that is fine, but for EVERY point you bring up about the PRO's of Linux, I can make one for Microsoft's Windows solutions. For everything negative you can say about Windows, I can say something negative about Linux. All the whining and crying still does not move linux above a fringe OS sitting at 4% or so of the current market.<P>BTW I hope you are not talking about DirectCD Treatment as that is a ADAPTEC product NOT a Microsoft product. If that was the case, why does this burner in this box run just fine without any directX on it? If you have links to prove that MS has put parts of DirectX into your CD-ROM burning software, I would like to see the links.<P>[This message has been edited by Evil_Merlin (edited December 06, 1999).]

treatment:<BR><P>I think I'm reading your posts just fine. You have such an amazing mishmash of anti-Microsoft conspiracy theories that defy the facts.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Microsoft made manufacturers conform to Win9x-compliance.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Well, Microsoft and Intel established PnP guidelines for the industry, and Microsoft said "if you don't write Win9x PnP drivers your hardware won't work with Win9x". Aside from WinModems and the like, I don't see how this is monopolistic. (And even WinModems just need drivers to work elsewhere...) Are you suggesting that an absence of PnP guidelines would have been better?<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>The fact that even Microsoft can't make NT work with Win9x-compliant hardware/software only makes it more obvious that the MS's Win9x-compliance/monopoly-practice is bad even for Microsoft themselves<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>The fact that NT5 has good PnP / USB support belies your claim. I don't like the fact that NT4 doesn't support USB, but like I said, it was more a marketing decision than a technical one.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I have a perfectly reliable usb-equipped/enabled Win95-computer. To be blunt, these Win95-computers are Win95-C versions and have other usb-equipments working fine with it, except the new equipments such as Handspring<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>First of all, they may simply have that warning because IIRC no version of Win95 shipped with built-in USB support. Have you actually tried your hardware with your version of Win95?<BR><BR>Secondly, if you look through the MS KB, you'll see that a lot of USB problems are fixed in Win98. It's possible that Win95's USB support can't handle a certain USB feature that your hardware uses.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Why...? Why...? Why...?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Very simple. MS wants to make money just like anyone else. They want to have compelling features to make you upgrade your OS. If you were them, would you repackage every NT5 feature into NT4 at no additional cost? Would you have released Win98 for free? At some point you have to draw the line between a free service pack (which should have no new features, just bugfixes, right?) and an upgrade.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Microsoft publishes DirectX technologies that are usually incorporated into media-software such as CD-R software<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>LOL! Excuse me?!? Name one CD-R package that requires DirectX in order to write CD's. (Note, just because an app might use it to give you an animated paperclip while they burn CD's doesn't mean it's "necessary".)<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>DirectX is a proprietary Microsoft API for media(sight,sound,etc) and I believe most, if not all, CDR software for the Win9x-platform must conform to it for better working-relationship with Win9x-platform, in conjunction with using MS Dev-tools such as VC++ that uses MFC. This is an extension of monopolistic-practice that even MS itself is suffering from. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>treatment, you are severely confused. DirectX has nothing to do with SCSI, IDE or CD-R. Are you thinking of ASPI? Do you know what the 'A' in ASPI means? And what do MS Dev tools have to do with _anything_? Do they force you to use DirectX? Do they force you to use MFC? Do you have to use MS dev tools to writer apps for Windows?<BR><P>Sheesh, man. You're smarter than this.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Even Alex St.John (directx creator) doesn't make apologies for Microsoft's practices.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>LOL, please provide a link to Alex St. John mentioning ASPI, CD-R's or USB as part of the grand hardware monopolizing scheme. (If anything, he'll talk about how Microsoft wanted to see developers coding games for Windows. For shame, Microsoft!)

EM - Why do you always have to act like a jerk. I know from our conversations on #arstechnica that you're not a jerk so why do you start acting like one in here? I used to think you were a rational fellow but now I see I was wrong. Regardless of Microsoft tactics Linux will continue to grow and to prosper. It's a fast moving freight train that will only get better and better and it will do it much faster than the competition. Why is it that you only seem to take account of an OS in the desktop sense. Different OSes have their different strengths. While I have been perfectly happy using Linux as a desktop I can admit that right now that is really not it's strength. Wether or not that will change remains to be seen. But to make a blanket statement that Linux will not replace Windows in the next 5 years or even 10 years is not only foolish it's insane. The world moves very fast especially in Computers. The way we do computing in 5 or 10 years will probably not even resemble the kind of computing we do now. Maybe Linux won't be the dominant OS in 5 -10 years but in that case Windows probably won't either. User accessability is all fine and dandy but when it takes away from Linux's other strenghts then there is a problem. Linux was never meant to be like windows. It was never even meant to be a desktop OS. But thanks to the very nature of the OS and the community of developers that surround it there is a lot of movement towards making it a desktop OS. <P>And by the way. You're first post... total troll. No one was talking to you and no one was asking you what you thought of installing a CD-R under Linux. Also you make it sound much worse than it is. It's pretty much a matter of a view clicks. a couple of typed commands and away you go. Takes a wee bit longer but it's not very hard.

Thought I'd toss out a few uninformed opinions View image: /infopop/emoticons\icon_wink.gif<P>On the issue of CD-R software...I related this story a while back in the Linux forum. Half a year-year ago I decided to try burning some cdrs on my plextor 4x12x scsi cd-r. I was only at that time able to find X-cdroast besides cdrecord. I went for X-cdroast..lack of documentation, impossible to figure out procedures, and a generally sucky interface led to the utter destruction of my partition table. I was _extremely_ disgusted. Here I was expecting something simple to use like Adaptec's or CDRwin's offerings. Never have I had such a unpleasant software experience.<P>Second issue: Blaming Microsoft for lack of drivers. Nope sorry folks, that doesn't cut it. Hardware manufacturers write drivers for money, if the Linux market is small then they have no incentive to write drivers for Linux. Don't blame Microsoft for the size of the Linux market either, if Linux was half as great as it is proffessed to be, and Microsoft's software was half as sucky as it is painted to be then the current OS market positions would be reversed. Linux advocats also please don't point fingers at MSIE and Netscape, claiming that Netscape would've been good if MS had charged money for IE is somewhat hypocritical coming from a group which gives out FREE Operating system that is BUNDLED with Apache, Gimp, Perl, and numerous other goodies. In fact, don't whine about MSIE being bundled period, I think it's safe to say that everyone who has used it for at the very least file browsing can agree that it is a leg up over the old explorer.

First of all, _I_AM_NOT_BLAMING_MICROSOFT_FOR_LACK_OF_DRIVERS. EM and IMarshall, you guys both know better and you guys are completely <B>blanketing with ignorance</B> whatever I posted. <P>EM, <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Treatment, you are the typical Linux freak. When things don't work for linux or something is wrong with hardware/driver/software support, you blame Microsoft.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Calling the kettle black, huh? You are the one who <B>started</B> the linux-bashing in this thread. Did I stated something was wrong with linux??? Nope. Did I blamed Microsoft? Nope. I have only exposed the results of monopolistic-practices of your favorite company that even your favorite company can't correctly implement on their high-end operating-system: NT. <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Get over it buddy. Linux will not replace Windows in the next 5 years, or mayhap even 10 years. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>You are so full of yourself that you read stuff that <B>I have not even claimed in this thread, i.e. Linux replacing Windows</B>. Why are you so afraid of Linux becoming the dominant desktop anyway in the first place?<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>You have to fight for driver support, hardware support and manufacturer support...<BR>..Too bad those manufacturers choose to make MONEY.<BR><HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Read the news, buddy. The linux-advocates are not fighting for any driver-support because the linux-developers have been writing homegrown linux-drivers since DAY-1. Furthermore, it is now the manufacturers who are trying to get their own linux-drivers out of the door to compete against the open-source developers' own linux-drivers. You are so <B>mis-informed</B>. <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Gee even iD software is saying that of all the people playing QuakeIII, a mere 4%...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>So fuggin what? And how the heck did IdSoftware or Quake3 got into this?<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Gee, mayhap if Linux concentrated more on USER ACCESSABLILITY, instead of Distributions,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>This is the <B>lamest</B> excuse of a microsoftie. Who is concentrating on distributions? Who is concentrating on the kernel? Who is concentrating on XFree? You are <B>blatantly</B> confusing everyone with your blanket statements like these. You know how linux and linux-development works. You know who develops "user-accessibilities". Of all people, you know who and what and which and how linux development is all about. You're completely <B>hiding</B> the achievements of KDE and GNOME projects. <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>differing opinions of what OpenSource is, "killing" Bill Gates,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Man, you are really so deep in your hallucination. No one in the Open-Source/FSF movement advocates this "opinion". You claimed to have worked on the linux tcp-ip stack, tell us exactly why you contributed code to it and the atmosphere in it, then.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>and shut the hell up when someone chooses NOT to support Linux, you will get more work done. But nope, you and your ilk blame all your woe's on Microsoft.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Blanket statements yet again. We only blame MS for <B>blocking</B> and <B>polluting</B> existing open-standards to create incompatibilities.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Yet I don't hear you complaining when the CEO of RedHat says he wants RedHat to domintate the world. Funny thing hypocracy is.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hehehe. The difference is, <B>all</B> Redhat software is <B>governed</B> by the GNU Public License. That in itself is a better safeguard than anything. If redhat wants to dominate, fine. But this "domination" also gets to <B>all</B> Linux-developers and distros. It's FREE and OPEN. Mandrake is built on top of Redhat's and even better than RH. So, who's dominating? So, where's the "hypocracy" you're implying?<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>If you really want to get into an argument about the success of Linux vs. Microsoft, that is fine, but for EVERY point you bring up about the PRO's of Linux, I can make one for Microsoft's Windows solutions. For everything negative you can say about Windows, I can say something negative about Linux.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Unfortunately for you, I have already exposed you many times as just another poser with no real argument about the pros and cons of linux. You have <B>nothing</B> of substance. All your rhetoric here or anywhere else doesn't even make for any good debate on your part. You are constantly whining about linux this and linux that. You're always bashing about Linux without any provocation. You got no base and all of your "arguments" are all pure speculations and propaganda. Then you cry and make up all these fluff when someone like me or another linux-advocate exposes your inconsistencies and bullshit.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>All the whining and crying still does not move linux above a fringe OS sitting at 4% or so of the current market.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>There you go again. <B>Do not equate Win9x market-share with NT market-share</B>. What is the current market-share of NT in the server market (all spectrums) anyway? What is your source? You got nothing, man. You are all fluff.<P>IMarshall, here's your link where DirectX is involved, not necessarily CD-R since I don't have the specs: http://www.adaptec.com/adaptec/developers/1394/releasesw.html <P>Here's a direct quote: <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Description: Available from our Support page as HotConnect Ultra 8945 - Win95/98/NT4, these files install the 1394 drivers, 1394Diagnostic, DVDeck, uninstall, and the readme file. This update includes support for Adobe Premiere 5.0 Gold Release and <B>DirectX 6.0 (specifically DirectShow)</B>. There have been updates to the 95 and NT drivers to improve stability and compatibility with DV devices. Most of the updates have been centered around improved qualityand performance with Adobe Premiere 4.2 and 5.0. Please note that our testing has indicated that 1394 and Adobe Premiere 5.0 operate more reliably when <B>DirectShow is disabled</B> as described in the Adobe Premiere 5.0 readme file.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR>Here's another: http://www.adaptec.com/support/files/clipviewversions.html <BR> http://www.emedialive.com/JunEM/news6.html#e <BR> http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/1999/09-22directx.htm <P>Sonic-Foundry used to have a directx plug-in for noise-reduction, too.<P>Imarshal,<BR>You do not know what you are talking about and you are tossing out acronyms to confuse the readers here and to hide your ignorance. Nowhere did I even mentioned ASPI, SCSI, or IDE. <B>PnP-guidelines does not equate to DirectX</B>, so stop confusing yourself and the readers here.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>The fact that NT5 has good PnP / USB support belies your claim.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Really? Where is NT-5 right now? Does Microsoft really have to put out another version to incorporate USB-support when USB-specs were published years ago even before NT-3.51? Win95 and NT were both ready in 1995. Win95-B has USB. How many service-packs did NT-4 had and still no USB? You have no base at all. You are completely trying to circumventing the issue.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>, but like I said, it was more a marketing decision than a technical one.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>OMFG! Marketing-decision?? Can we get an even more lamer excuse than this? Why did MS stop DirectX on NT-4 to DX-3 and not upgrade to the latest DX-versions of those days? It's not marketing. It was a technical issue that they could not resolve. Don't be like Evil_Merlin and confuse Win9x with NT.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>First of all, they may simply have that warning because IIRC no version of Win95 shipped with built-in USB support. Have you actually tried your hardware with your version of Win95?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>It is not a warning. Let me refresh your memory. Win95-B (SR-2) has native USB-support. Win95-C was the last version also had more improved usb-support. All my compaq's here are either Win95-b or Win95-c and I have stated in my threads that usb-equipments work on these computers.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>...please provide a link to Alex St. John<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>It was on one of my old Boot magazines' Ask the Saint column. Not sure if they published it on their website. And, no, he did not mentioned ASPI or SCSI or IDE. Neither have I. Maybe you need new glasses to read my posts.<P>Linux-developers have historically and currently wrote their own drivers for old and new hardware, regardless if hw-manufacturers release their specs or not. It's even a moot point now since almost every manufacturers right now are scrambling to get their linux-drivers out and getting stomped and severely criticized by linux-developers and linux-users because of the poor quality and incompatibilities of these manufacturers' drivers i.e. sblive and tnt.<P><BR>--treatment--<P><BR><P>[This message has been edited by treatment (edited December 06, 1999).]

treatment:<BR><P>Forgive me when I say that you are so amazingly confused that you don't even seem to know what you're arguing about.<BR><P>This conversation went like this:<BR><ul><BR><LI>Someone: my CD-R works in Windows, sucks to use in Linux<BR><LI>treatment: that's because MS has a monopoly, closed specs, bla bla.<BR><LI>Me: what does MS have to do with CD-R support?<BR><LI>treatment: DirectX, Alex St. John, USB, bla bla.<BR></ul><BR>It would be nice if you could clearly state what it is that you're trying to argue about Microsoft and CD-R's.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>... Links to Adaptec stuff<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>So they mention DirectShow 6.0, a very small component of DirectX that provides some video services. WTF does this have to do with USB, 1394 or CD-R? Every platform has its own multimedia layers, and the Windows software that is shipped with 1394 hardware uses the Windows multimedia layer. Shocking, huh?<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Nowhere did I even mentioned ASPI, SCSI, or IDE<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>You're right, you said "DirectX is a proprietary Microsoft API for media(sight,sound,etc) and I believe most, if not all, CDR software for the Win9x-platform must conform to it". I guess my humble attempt to educate you as to what's important for CD-R support failed.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Sonic-Foundry used to have a directx plug-in for noise-reduction, too.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Sonic Foundry writes CD-R's? Wow, I'm sure ACID will be happy to hear that.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Where is NT-5 right now?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>On a lot of people's machine, including one of mine, and very close to RTM. You'll have to do better than that.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Why did MS stop DirectX on NT-4 to DX-3 and not upgrade to the latest DX-versions of those days? It's not marketing. It was a technical issue that they could not resolve.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>treatment, you can foam at the mouth all you want. You've demonstrated in this thread that you don't have a clue about DirectX, or Windows software. Please don't embarrass yourself further. If there were showstopping technical issues then how do you explain DirectX on W2K?<BR><P>The fact is that Microsoft originally intended to release NT5 in early 1998, and USB / FAT32 / DirectX were intended as upgrade incentives. Afterwards, even though NT5 was delayed and delayed, Microsoft had already committed to adding no more features in service packs after SP3. Try to think - how hard do you think it would have been to have slipped a FAT32 filesystem driver into NT4SP4? Consider why they didn't do it, and extrapolate to something a bit harder, like USB.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>DirectX, bla bla.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Let me ask you this: what is the relevance of DirectX to this thread, now that we've established that you don't need DirectX to burn a CD?<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>poor quality and incompatibilities of these manufacturers' drivers i.e. sblive and tnt.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Welcome to the wonderful world of IHV drivers. If you think the Windows driver scene is bad, wait until you see these guys try to keep track of Linux kernel versions and whatnow. And until Linux becomes more popular, we'll see how many resources are invested in these drivers. Are you still wondering why thee drivers have been open sourced?

James Dean, how is what I am saying any different than Treatment blaming Microsoft for all of the software worlds woe's on Microsoft? Dear god, I am able to make my own decisions. There is nothing worse than a person like Treatment who simply points his finger at Microsoft everytime something goes wrong or Linux does not exceed Microsoft in some way form or such. Ever since the trial Treatment's anti-Microsoft rhetoric as simply been MONOPOLY. Nothing else. No drivers, MONOPOLY, no support, MONOPOLY. I got sick of it so I spoke out. Afterall this IS the Battlefront. People have been claiming the same thing for Linux since 1993. I know, I was there in 1993. I was there in all the years when Linux was supposed to take the world by storm. The ONLY reason linux is getting attention now, is because of the Microsoft trial. If there was no trial, the press would have cared less for it. Linux did not replace Windows95, Windows NT, Windows 98 and it sure won't do it to Windows2000...<P>And just what is wrong with my comment. See the title BATTLEFRONT?<P><BR>Treatment this one is for you:<P>I did not START any bashing of Linux, simply voicing my dismay of a SIMPLE upgrade in linux...<P>Second Microsoft is NOT my favourite company. I would have to say that currently Brooks Automation is, or I would not be working for them (and these are MY opinions, not Brooks or even close to what Brooks MAY or MAY NOT think as a corportate identity).<P>Gee as for implementing NT, more people are using it to RUN THEIR BUSINESSES THAN LINUX! Imagine that, so much for you idea that they cannot correctly implement their high-end OS.<P>I am not afraid of Linux doing anything, because if it does, I will be supporting it. But it won't, not any time soon, and probably not till RedHat starts selling IT's own version of Linux that breaks from Linus' wants/needs etc.<P>Mis-informed huh? That is why my CD-ROM burner (a SCSI one at that) is not supported under Linux it has drivers and software for all versions of Windows. And my sound card, while creative labs has released limited support, is no place near the support I have under Windows (again ALL versions). My SCSI RAID cards are not supported under Linux. None of them, why? Dunno but they are some of the more common cards for RAID.<P>Quake III is important because it is one of the few software packages you will be able to purchase of the shelf that supports Linux. Not to mention the fact that the people who play Quake tend to be more of the movers and shakers of the hardcore gaming commiunty and the computer industry as a whole, Carmack made a nice post about it in one of his .plan files a few weeks ago (or a few days ago, I forget).<P>No I am NOT forgetting KDE and GNOME, hell I have heard and watched plenty of battles over that one alone...<P>Man, you need to read the Newsgroups or /. where everyone is quite like you. Blame MS for everything. Then you got the ones that flame ANYONE who does not support LInux out of the box (check out what happened to Epic when they pulled the linux binaries off the CD's to Unreal Tournament), or the post by YOU YOURSELF right here when Quake III was not going to be made in a multi-OS cd. The Bill Gates thing was a little exteme, but one read of /. will lead to plenty of messages about nuking Redmont and killing the "anti-christ"<P>MS blocking and polluting? Since MS does not work with OpenSource how could they do this? MS has EVERY RIGHT to mantain their business. Should Ford allow dealers to install Chevy engines in new cars? Should Apple allow x86 processors in their monopolistic regime (whoops did I say that)? It is called business. <P>Do you really think RedHat is going to continue following GNU for much longer? Not if they are going to make money. A great IPO does little but get you money up front. Investors demand results and if RedHat continues loosing money, all is not going to be cheery. I am willing to bet that RedHat's GPL stuff is going to change soon. I can promise so, but I am willing to bet it changes. <P>Ok you want to get into the specifics of Windows (in general) over Linux?<P>One GUI, one shell. Easy for training and support. MOST linux distributions offer a different Xwindows shell, KDE, GNOME, WindowMaker etc. Don't get into being able to download other shells for Windows, as companies would not allow that in the workplace. <P>Good support for developers, integrators etc from Microsoft, I have been in small companies, middle size and huge companies, Microsoft was always willing to lend a hand. In fact go out of their way to help us. Linux support, while getting better, does not offer near what MS does in this area. Sure in Linux you have the source code for the OS, but does that make things any easier for a programmer? Not always.<P>I always have drivers for the new hardware when it comes out. <P>I can get better support for my programming languages on Windows. Want Java 2.0? C++? C? PERL? sure you can get some on Linux but nothing as complete as what is offered on Windows. Want a full IDE? Got quite a few of them in Windows, and they are good ones too, that help not hinder.<P><BR>As for WindowsNT? it controls about 36-40% of the server market. Linux? 12-15%<P>All fluff? Hey Treatment, when it the last time you played Half-Life on your Linux box? Or StarCraft? or hell any of the top ten games sold today? Or use a professional graphics (GIMP is not a professional graphics tool, more along the lines or PaintShop Pro), A good IDE for developing not only C++ but Java? Watch a DVD movie and have Dolby Digital Out to your stereo reciever? have your cable modem or DSL provider hook you up?<P>

Ordermaster, then you should have posted this in the Linux room not the Battlefront.

Please, Evil_Merlin, feel free to rage and roar, but try to mind your facts. Tell me one C compiler and one C++ compiler for Windows* that beats the standard compliance of EGCS. And enlighten me on how Windows is the leading Perl platform, in front of Linux.<BR>An while your at it, take a look at the latest version of the GIMP, it's hugely more advanced than PSP.

Wow, E_M has a lot of pent-up /. anger...<P>Its strange that I read slashdot every day, but I can't recall ever seeing someone claim that Linux users should kill Bill Gates, because he is the anti-Christ.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I always have drivers for the new hardware when it comes out.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Yes, that is because M$ software is currently the dominant force in the desktop market. What exactly does this prove? Are you saying that if Linux was dominant, there would still be no drivers? Of course not. Hardware manufacterers will support what the majority of people use.<P>How exactly does Windows make a better Perl (AFAIK, no caps... right?) development environment? I think you are going a little overboard E_M<P>Java 2, I agree, is a bit shabby right now. But in reality, Java is not a very popular language, when you get past the hype. Give me Python/Perl/C(++) any day. <P>Linux has full IDEs - kdevelop, Code Warrior, Code Crusader, etc.<P>I play Starcraft on Linux all the time. It runs quite well under Wine. My cable modem works fine under Linux, as do many of my friend's DSL lines.<P>Is the issue really Linux here? Linux is basically a variant of *NIX, when you get down to it. And *NIX controls more of the server market than NT (BTW, where are you getting these numbers from - 35-40% NT? wtf? Maybe in Evil_Merlin land...) - especially considering that Apache and derivatives run ~59.5% of all web servers (and the Apache NT port is not very popular - I think one can safely assume the vast majority of that 60% is running *NIX of some kind)<P>1 gui, 1 shell? Thats a step backwards IMHO.<P>For interests sake, what burner do you have?<P>(Off-topic - E_M, you (and others) seem to know what you are doing as far as professional development - I assume you do at least some web development. Have you checked out Zope (www.zope.org). Just wondering....)

Ordermaster: No, you could have loaded MSCDEX and then allowed Windows to use MSCDEX to copy files from the CD. You don't have to copy them to the hard drive at all.<P>Treatment and all you people:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR><small>IMarshall, here's your link where DirectX is involved, not necessarily CD-R since I don't have the specs: http://www.adaptec.com/adaptec/developers/1394/releasesw.html <P>Here's a direct quote: <P>quote:<BR>Description: Available from our Support page as HotConnect Ultra 8945 - Win95/98/NT4, these files install the 1394 drivers, 1394Diagnostic, DVDeck, uninstall, and the readme file. This update includes support for Adobe Premiere 5.0 Gold Release and DirectX 6.0 (specifically DirectShow). There have been updates to the 95 and NT drivers to improve stability and compatibility with DV devices. Most of the updates have been centered around improved qualityand performance with Adobe Premiere 4.2 and 5.0. Please note that our testing has indicated that 1394 and Adobe Premiere 5.0 operate more reliably when DirectShow is disabled as described in the Adobe Premiere 5.0 readme file.</small><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Uh, that's nothing to do with CD-R, FireWire (it's a FireWire card that the drivers are for, presumably), or any other bit of hardware. That's to do with Adobe Premiere. If you don't know what Adobe Premiere does, I suggest you look at Adobe's site. It's not a hardware driver or anything like that, it's software. DirectX isn't involved with the hardware support, it's involved with the software. Not having DirectX doesn't impede the hardware from working. It's pertinent to the software that's installed with the driver set. There's a problem with using Premiere (video editing) and DirectShow with video devices on the the FireWire, but that's a complete opposite of reliance on DirectX. It's more an incompatibility with DirectX. Hardly the kind of thing that causes manufacturers to let themselves be tied to a particular platform.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Really? Where is NT-5 right now? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Installed on my computer. If you want, you can buy a copy from MS.<P><BR>Compiling a kernel simply isn't an option for most people. Installing Redhat or Corel Linux is one thing. Getting them to compile a kernel is quite another. There are a lot of confusing options there, and in a number of situations (last time I did it) the defaults are not the options they should use.<P>Hardware vendors have provided limited Linux support -- such as CL's SBLive drivers. And what happened? They got flamed to hell on /. because they weren't open source. They got flamed to hell on /. because CL would only recommend certain kernel versions. Is that a great incentive for other manufacturers to follow suit? To disclose certain secrets about the things that they've invested time and money in, and to start supporting not three or four OS versions (the Windows family) but more, like 13-odd 2.2 kernels, 36-odd 2.0 kernels, and all the others?<P>No, I can't see any IHV in their right mind wanting to do that. That's just as much -- maybe more -- of a barrier than the fact that Windows has the #1 market share. Linux is too much of a headache, and the Linux zealots are an ungrateful bunch of cunts.<P>[This message has been edited by PeterB (edited December 07, 1999).]