square bullets

[John Larkin]

Something I've found handy: I have set up a second "printer". It's a
top-of-the-line PostScript printer that I don't have but I've set it up
to print to file. I can print from pretty much anywhere to this printer
then convert to .PDF with Ghost Script.

Ted

I have Acrobat, which pops up in the "printers" list, so I can print
directly to a PDF. It works fine, and the pdf's are usually smaller
than the .doc files, and the bullets don't change shape.

John

 

[John Larkin]

[....]
XP does run a mighty fine DOS box.

No it doesn't. It has a bug in how it does the environment variables.
They don't allocate any room for new ones and you can't use a:

command /e:10000 /csome.bat

to get around the bug.

All my old DOS stuff seems to work... my inventory control/parts list
system (now networked to the server), assemblers, APEEL, the DOS
PowerBasic environment and compiler, and my various compiled DOS apps,
graphics and all. And it still runs my favorite PC program of all
time, Tim Stouse's File Manager.

You aren't using environment variables in batch files for any of those.

True. My autoexec.bat is two lines.

I've written some very large batch files that do some quite complex stuff.

I don't seem to do complex stuff. I do release a batch file with each
embedded firmware release, GO.BAT, that completely rebuilds everything
from sources. I can't understand how a GUI-based build process can
ever be under any sort of rigid control.

John

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

I have Acrobat, which pops up in the "printers" list, so I can print
directly to a PDF. It works fine, and the pdf's are usually smaller
than the .doc files, and the bullets don't change shape.

John

But the document reformats when you change the printer from a real
printer to Distiller.. IME (based on older versions) Word is more
attuned to an HTML kind of thinking rather than precise page layout.

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

 

[Ted Edwards]

But the document reformats when you change the printer from a real
printer to Distiller.. IME (based on older versions) Word is more
attuned to an HTML kind of thinking rather than precise page layout.

Ghost Script and Ghost Vue are free.

Ted

 

[Simon Scott]

Ghost Script and Ghost Vue are free.

Ted

It always cracks me up when windows users have to go hunting for
functionality that any decent linux distro will provide out of the box

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

Ghost Script and Ghost Vue are free.

Ted

And Word costs money. But the reformatting issue is with Word itself.

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

The other night, the "Daily Show" on Comedy Central (Jon Stewart's show)
had a piece about Bill Gates meeting with the Chinese President. There
was
a clip of Bill nattering about how China and Microsoft both saw
technology
as the key to the future ... and then Clippy popped up on screen:

"You seem to be equivocating in a morally ambiguous situation. Would
you like some help?"

That's hilarious. I'll have to try to find it on the net.

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

 

[Paul Hovnanian P.E.]

Office craps all over Office. And enjoys it. Just wait until the mind
of Bill Gates is included in its entirety into 'Clippy' in the 100G
Office XX. It already watches over your shoulder and makes smart-ass
comments.

The other night, the "Daily Show" on Comedy Central (Jon Stewart's show)
had a piece about Bill Gates meeting with the Chinese President. There
was
a clip of Bill nattering about how China and Microsoft both saw
technology
as the key to the future ... and then Clippy popped up on screen:

"You seem to be equivocating in a morally ambiguous situation. Would
you like some help?"

 

[Ken Smith]

[...]

those.

True. My autoexec.bat is two lines.

A couple of program I use want the path back to their install directories
as environment variables. Other than that my autoexec.bat just does a
"path" and "prompt".

I don't seem to do complex stuff. I do release a batch file with each
embedded firmware release, GO.BAT, that completely rebuilds everything
from sources. I can't understand how a GUI-based build process can
ever be under any sort of rigid control.

This is part of the reason for some of my batch files. To inplace program
the CPLD, it is much better if the technician just types:

prog 12345

Where: 12345 is the part number of the PCB being made.

The batch file goes to the server and gets the latest version of the file
and does the programming.

I use JAM STAPL programming when I can.

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

It always cracks me up when windows users have to go hunting for
functionality that any decent linux distro will provide out of the box

Go hunting? I typed "free PDF software" into Google years ago and
found http://www.pdf995.com which was a free shell program for Ghost
Script. It installed in under a minute and has worked well every
since. How many users ever need to create a PDF?


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[Keith]

[....]
XP does run a mighty fine DOS box.

No it doesn't. It has a bug in how it does the environment variables.
They don't allocate any room for new ones and you can't use a:

command /e:10000 /csome.bat

to get around the bug.



All my old DOS stuff seems to work... my inventory control/parts list
system (now networked to the server), assemblers, APEEL, the DOS
PowerBasic environment and compiler, and my various compiled DOS apps,
graphics and all. And it still runs my favorite PC program of all
time, Tim Stouse's File Manager.

You aren't using environment variables in batch files for any of those.

True. My autoexec.bat is two lines.
Wazzat?

I've written some very large batch files that do some quite complex stuff.

I don't seem to do complex stuff. I do release a batch file with each
embedded firmware release, GO.BAT, that completely rebuilds everything
from sources. I can't understand how a GUI-based build process can
ever be under any sort of rigid control.

I found Make to be far superior to any batch file, even when I was using
DOS. When I built for the final test I'd simply delete *.obj and rerun
Make. I don't understand what a GUI has to do with "rigid control". DO
you use CVS? If not CVS or something like it, IMO you really don't have
the control you may think you have (yes, CVS is a PITA).

 

[John Larkin]

[....]
XP does run a mighty fine DOS box.

No it doesn't. It has a bug in how it does the environment variables.
They don't allocate any room for new ones and you can't use a:

command /e:10000 /csome.bat

to get around the bug.



All my old DOS stuff seems to work... my inventory control/parts list
system (now networked to the server), assemblers, APEEL, the DOS
PowerBasic environment and compiler, and my various compiled DOS apps,
graphics and all. And it still runs my favorite PC program of all
time, Tim Stouse's File Manager.

You aren't using environment variables in batch files for any of those.

True. My autoexec.bat is two lines.
Wazzat?

I've written some very large batch files that do some quite complex stuff.

I don't seem to do complex stuff. I do release a batch file with each
embedded firmware release, GO.BAT, that completely rebuilds everything
from sources. I can't understand how a GUI-based build process can
ever be under any sort of rigid control.

I found Make to be far superior to any batch file, even when I was using
DOS. When I built for the final test I'd simply delete *.obj and rerun
Make. I don't understand what a GUI has to do with "rigid control". DO
you use CVS? If not CVS or something like it, IMO you really don't have
the control you may think you have (yes, CVS is a PITA).

What's CVS? Obviously, I don't use it.

I can't delete .obj files, because I don't have any. My embedded code
is always absolute assembly of one source file... less stuff to have
to control.

John

 

[xray]

That's hilarious. I'll have to try to find it on the net.

Yep. Share if you find it.

 

[Andrew M]

I was typing a datasheet in Word, and it decided at some point to
change all my "features" bullets from OK round things to ugly square
things. And it now refuses to change them back. And now this 2-page
document likes to lock up and freeze Word now and then.

To Microsoft, Bill Gates, and the entire Word team: you code crap.

John

Windows is probably the most complex machine that is regularly used
without even reading the manual. Think about it - this thing is
COMPLEX. I've found XP to be extremely reliable on a wide variety of
design software if used and configured correctly.

I'd bet that 90% of the moans and complaints about XP in this thread,
are from people who DON'T READ MANUALS OR HELP FILES.

Read the manuals guys, then complain. IMHO for $100, XP is damn good
value. WAAAAY easier to maintain and operate than Linux GUIs.

-Andrew M

 

[SioL]

It always cracks me up when windows users have to go hunting for
functionality that any decent linux distro will provide out of the box

That's just rubish. One of the reasons most people stay with Windows is
that many programs simply don't exist in linux version. And there's probably
more freeware/shareware out there for Windows than any other platform ever.
Which reminds me, last time I checked OpenOffice was just as buggy, if not worse,
than the M$ original.

I hate Microsoft just as must as the next guy, but come on, get some reality check.

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

Yep. Share if you find it.

http://www.comedycentral.com/shows/the_daily_show/videos/most_recent/index.jhtml
"Who's HU in America?"

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

 

[Keith]

[....]
XP does run a mighty fine DOS box.

No it doesn't. It has a bug in how it does the environment variables.
They don't allocate any room for new ones and you can't use a:

command /e:10000 /csome.bat

to get around the bug.



All my old DOS stuff seems to work... my inventory control/parts list
system (now networked to the server), assemblers, APEEL, the DOS
PowerBasic environment and compiler, and my various compiled DOS apps,
graphics and all. And it still runs my favorite PC program of all
time, Tim Stouse's File Manager.

You aren't using environment variables in batch files for any of those.

True. My autoexec.bat is two lines.
Wazzat?

I've written some very large batch files that do some quite complex stuff.

I don't seem to do complex stuff. I do release a batch file with each
embedded firmware release, GO.BAT, that completely rebuilds everything
from sources. I can't understand how a GUI-based build process can
ever be under any sort of rigid control.

I found Make to be far superior to any batch file, even when I was using
DOS. When I built for the final test I'd simply delete *.obj and rerun
Make. I don't understand what a GUI has to do with "rigid control". DO
you use CVS? If not CVS or something like it, IMO you really don't have
the control you may think you have (yes, CVS is a PITA).

What's CVS? Obviously, I don't use it.

http://www.nongnu.org/cvs/

All of our hardware source files (VHDL), Sim environment (mostly
C++), and tools are under CVS control. Like any highly structured
environment it's a pain, but so is running out of control, though
perhaps the pain is felt at a different stage of the project.

I can't delete .obj files, because I don't have any. My embedded code
is always absolute assembly of one source file... less stuff to have
to control.

That's the point. You don't control .obj files. You do source
control and build from consistent source.

 

[Keith]

Go hunting? I typed "free PDF software" into Google years ago and
found http://www.pdf995.com which was a free shell program for Ghost
Script. It installed in under a minute and has worked well every
since.

I found PDFCreator first. I had a license for Adobe PDFWriter, but
the install of PDF 7.0 (I think it was 7) caused so much grief that
I had to uninstall everything PDF and start over, so lost
PDFWriter. PDFCretor is good enough.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/pdfcreator/

How many users ever need to create a PDF?

How many users know it's possible?

 

[Keith]

Windows is probably the most complex machine that is regularly used
without even reading the manual. Think about it - this thing is
COMPLEX. I've found XP to be extremely reliable on a wide variety of
design software if used and configured correctly.

I'd bet that 90% of the moans and complaints about XP in this thread,
are from people who DON'T READ MANUALS OR HELP FILES.

Manuals? This laptop came with *NO STEENKIN' MANUALS*.

Read the manuals guys, then complain. IMHO for $100, XP is damn good
value. WAAAAY easier to maintain and operate than Linux GUIs.

BS. Ever try to fix a Windows registry problem? Where's the
documentation for that? Hmm? Windows is 25% of the price of an
entry level system. By comparison, Linux is free.

 

[John Larkin]

That's the point. You don't control .obj files. You do source
control and build from consistent source.

If your project is part source and part obj's, are the obj's
(standard? 3rd party?) libraries, or do you just want to save time by
only recompiling things that change?

I'm *so* glad I don't do big systems! I type "GO" <enter> and my
entire rebuild is done in, say, 1.5 seconds. And I can archive an
entire project, tools and all, on one floppy.

John