On Mon 04 Jul 2011 08:58:07 PM PDT, Pieter Praet wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 11:18:16 -0700, Noah Birnel wrote:
> > I am not arguing that no one should attempt to calibrate their
> > monitor - but that it is not a necessity for all graphics work.
> > In our case, it would be a waste of time.
>
> So
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 11:18:16 -0700, Noah Birnel wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 07:00:33PM +0200, hiro wrote:
> > I don't get it, are you calibrating your printer so that it matches
> > the display instead?
> >
> No. The printer and the monitor are not going to match. There is no
> hope for that.
On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 07:00:33PM +0200, hiro wrote:
> I don't get it, are you calibrating your printer so that it matches
> the display instead?
>
No. The printer and the monitor are not going to match. There is no
hope for that. What matters to us is the print.
I am not arguing that no one sho
I don't get it, are you calibrating your printer so that it matches
the display instead?
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 18:39, Noah Birnel wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 06:00:49PM +0200, Pieter Praet wrote:
>> Color calibration [1] (and frequent recalibration) is mandatory when
>> doing *anything* gra
On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 06:00:49PM +0200, Pieter Praet wrote:
> Color calibration [1] (and frequent recalibration) is mandatory when
> doing *anything* graphics-related for production purposes, as the output
> of any and every visual output device known to man *will* be distorted,
> due to used mat
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 16:13:09 +0100, Ethan Grammatikidis
wrote:
> [...]
> I do seem to have less of a problem when there's a color management
> system in the display, but I can't imagine anything more sucky in a
> display than a system to adjust every already-rendered pixel.
> [...]
Color calibrat
On Mon, 04 Jul 2011 15:23:05 +0200
Pieter Praet wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 14:55:38 +0200, hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Most people getting eye problems in front of the computer are caused
> > by the concentrated day-long staring without blinking once.
>
> ^ Also rather influential.
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 14:55:38 +0200, hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Most people getting eye problems in front of the computer are caused
> by the concentrated day-long staring without blinking once.
^ Also rather influential.
Especially for Ethan, who (based on his reference to deviantART to
Most people getting eye problems in front of the computer are caused
by the concentrated day-long staring without blinking once.
Personally I hate the typical CRT flickering (especially if set to <85 Hz)
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 12:20:02 +0100, Ethan Grammatikidis
wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 22:23:03 +0200
> pancake wrote:
>
> > Also crt and lcd/tft screens have differet brightness effects. Tft are less
> > damaging to eyes than crt.. So i think discussion about colors on text
> > moved to only st
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 22:23:03 +0200
pancake wrote:
> Also crt and lcd/tft screens have differet brightness effects. Tft are less
> damaging to eyes than crt.. So i think discussion about colors on text moved
> to only stethical and personal issue because its no longer dramatic as it was
> in th
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 08:49:45PM +0200, Jakub Lach wrote:
> To add another one, I'm not entirely sure LCD vs CRT
> eyes health debate is settled.
>
I'm fairly sure the "Cathode ray cannon pointed at your head; is it safe ?"
debate is well over..
djp
Dnia 13 czerwca 2011 20:14 Michael Farnbach
napisał(a):
> Then the easiest to read is amber on black. There is a lot we can
> learn from the sharp shooters, and the old dumb terminals.
Wondering if this concept is related to "selective yellow" [1]
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_y
Then the easiest to read is amber on black. There is a lot we can learn from
the sharp shooters, and the old dumb terminals.
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 2:52 AM, Pieter Praet wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 22:23:03 +0200, pancake wrote:
> > Just to add my 5c to the thread..
> >
> > I remember in the
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 22:23:03 +0200, pancake wrote:
> Just to add my 5c to the thread..
>
> I remember in the msdos5.0 age where everybody was using a 80x25 text console
> to run programs and graphical mode was just for games..
>
> Many text editors used a blue background. This is:
> wordperfec
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 11:53:32 +0200, Nicolai Waniek wrote:
> On 06/07/2011 07:09 PM, pancake wrote:
> > Its anti natural.
>
> It's not.
>
> Because I asked myself which is the best working environment regarding
> ones eyes some time ago, I looked around for some scientific research on
> the topic
Just to add my 5c to the thread..
I remember in the msdos5.0 age where everybody was using a 80x25 text console
to run programs and graphical mode was just for games..
Many text editors used a blue background. This is:
wordperfect/wordstar/edit.com ..
I remember my teacher arguing this as some
On 12 June 2011 10:53, Nicolai Waniek wrote:
> Quite the opposite, that they could not detect any difference.
So uh, not *quite* the opposite.
I'm willing to believe people have a higher reading speed with
black-on-white, though I suspect this is in part because that's how we
read the vast major
On 06/07/2011 07:09 PM, pancake wrote:
> Its anti natural.
It's not.
Because I asked myself which is the best working environment regarding
ones eyes some time ago, I looked around for some scientific research on
the topic of black-background vs white background.
There's not that much research t
On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 01:45:54 +0200
hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I like his rationale. pre-aliasing and neuro-aliasing come to mind,
> but idiotic as it might sound the only technically clear term is
> really "not antialiased".
>
> I guess I (we?) should get a life :D
Probably. :D I like
I like his rationale. pre-aliasing and neuro-aliasing come to mind,
but idiotic as it might sound the only technically clear term is
really "not antialiased".
I guess I (we?) should get a life :D
On Thu 09 Jun 2011 02:50:53 PM PDT, hiro wrote:
> The Tamsyn guy says it's an "aliased font". What does it mean?
Here's a reply from the author of Tamsyn regarding this matter:
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2011 14:04:43 -0700
From: Scott Fial
To: "Suraj N. Kurapati"
Subject: Re:
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 15:00, Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:
> I'm not sure "aliased" is quite an appropriate word for a font since it's the
> display which does the aliasing by virtue of its pixellated nature.
I think neither would be appropriate because in the artistic task of
creating the font ea
> The Tamsyn guy says it's an "aliased font". What does it mean?
He means it's not anti-aliased. See also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliasing
--
Eckehard Berns
On Thu, 9 Jun 2011 13:55:30 +0100
Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Jun 2011 14:50:53 +0200
> hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> > The Tamsyn guy says it's an "aliased font". What does it mean?
>
> It's not, but it has some overlap in places which makes it look smoother.
My bad, I th
On Thu, 9 Jun 2011 14:50:53 +0200
hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> The Tamsyn guy says it's an "aliased font". What does it mean?
It's not, but it has some overlap in places which makes it look smoother.
On 9 June 2011 13:50, hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> The Tamsyn guy says it's an "aliased font". What does it mean?
It means it isn't anti-aliased.
Nice font, btw.
cls
The Tamsyn guy says it's an "aliased font". What does it mean?
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 10:00, ilf wrote:
> On 06-09 09:04, Petr Sabata wrote:
>>
>> How about bgs? http://s01.de/~tox/index.cgi/proj_bgs
>
> Been using that for a while. Doesn't do it for me with rxvt-unicode 9.09 any
> more, because
On 06-09 09:04, Petr Sabata wrote:
How about bgs?
http://s01.de/~tox/index.cgi/proj_bgs
Been using that for a while. Doesn't do it for me with rxvt-unicode
9.09 any more, because it doesn't set XROOTPMAP on the root window. Too
busy to fix.
--
ilf
Über 80 Millionen Deutsche benutzen keine
On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 10:12:26PM +0200, Mate Nagy wrote:
> Hi,
> On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 08:40:48PM +0200, ilf wrote:
> > On 06-08 12:13, Bert Münnich wrote:
> > >>i dont think this is a task for an image viewer. we should
> > >>probably write an ssetroot or so linking against imlib2 and
> > >>al
On Wed 08 Jun 2011 10:11:52 PM PDT, Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 13:50:14 -0700 "Suraj N. Kurapati" wrote:
> > [2]: http://www.fial.com/~scott/tamsyn-font/
>
> If I may say so on brief acquaintance with it, that's a well-made
> bitmap font, that is.
Indeed, Tamsyn is the fairest
On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 21:47:02 +0100
Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 8 June 2011 21:39, Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:
> > Incidentally, I compared executable sizes of curl wget and p9p hget the
> > other day, finding hget to be larger than curl. Maybe it's the p9p libs,
> > but Plan 9 hget is about as
On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 13:50:14 -0700
"Suraj N. Kurapati" wrote:
> On Wed 08 Jun 2011 09:26:08 PM PDT, Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:
> > On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 19:09:25 +0200 pancake wrote:
> > > White background terminals harm my eyes.
> > >
> > > I cant think on anybody spending lot of time on a white
> >
On Wed 08 Jun 2011 09:26:08 PM PDT, Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 19:09:25 +0200 pancake wrote:
> > White background terminals harm my eyes.
> >
> > I cant think on anybody spending lot of time on a white
> > background terminal. Its anti natural.
>
> I've been through a lot of (o
On 8 June 2011 21:39, Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:
> Incidentally, I compared executable sizes of curl wget and p9p hget the other
> day, finding hget to be larger than curl. Maybe it's the p9p libs, but Plan 9
> hget is about as large.
P9P executables are huge. It's ridiculous. I suspect the rea
On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 09:52:23 +0100
Nick wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 01:09:38AM +0100, Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:
> > It's also good for unpacking archives, I much prefer its zoom-to-unpack to
> > mucking about with tar (or especially zip,) although it's not as clean as
> > p9's `hget url |
On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 19:09:25 +0200
pancake wrote:
> White background terminals harm my eyes.
>
> I cant think on anybody spending lot of time on a white background terminal.
> Its anti natural.
I've been through a lot of (old) screens and I have to say it depends on screen
and font.
Still, I
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 08:40:48PM +0200, ilf wrote:
> On 06-08 12:13, Bert Münnich wrote:
> >>i dont think this is a task for an image viewer. we should
> >>probably write an ssetroot or so linking against imlib2 and
> >>allowing opaque colors like xsetroot does..
I think developing another X
On 06-08 12:13, Bert Münnich wrote:
i dont think this is a task for an image viewer. we should probably
write an ssetroot or so linking against imlib2 and allowing opaque
colors like xsetroot does..
Yay!
but well.. changing the background is not something we do everyday
unless you have any k
On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 09:32:43AM -0400, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> it is impossible to rename a file
Har. Yes, sometimes I want to to rename some arbitrarily named files.
On 8 June 2011 09:32, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> it is impossible to rename a file
>
O wow, I definitely missed the sarcasm here, was about to say
> rename(2) ?
I must be tired.
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Noah Birnel wrote:
> Really? You never work with files created and named by other people? And
> all of the files you see fit a universal naming scheme that is machine
> sortable across all interesting selections? I wonder why your computer
> needs you at all, once y
On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 03:45:11PM +0800, Patrick Haller wrote:
> file manager
> = file selection + file (pre)viewing
> = ls/awk/$EDITOR + i_give_my_files_retarded_names
> => fix your naming convention
>
Really? You never work with files created and named by other people? And
all
On 06/08/11 14:43, Mate Nagy wrote:
I like to change my background to a random color every 2-10ms; it's
http://dagobah.net/flash/epilepsy-with-nice-music.swf
http://lolcathost.org/
>I like to change my background to a random color every 2-10ms; it's
>easier on the eyes than the plain black I used formerly, especially
>with my transparent terminals.
I hate to say it but this makes some sense. However, the tools to
use to get it right are already around (cron+xsetroot+sh), so
> I like to change my background to a random color every 2-10ms; it's
http://dagobah.net/flash/epilepsy-with-nice-music.swf
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 6:04 AM, pancake wrote:
> changing the background is not something we do everyday unless
> you have any kind of mental disease..
I like to change my background to a random color every 2-10ms; it's
easier on the eyes than the plain black I used formerly, especially
with my t
On 08.06.11, pancake wrote:
> On 06/08/11 11:49, ilf wrote:
> >On 06-08 11:23, Yoshi Rokuko wrote:
> >>>sxiv is my image viewer of choice, currently...
> >>>http://github.com/muennich/sxiv
> >>thank you for pointing out - i immediately?switched from feh to
> >>sxiv it's so much better and tiling fr
On 06/08/11 11:49, ilf wrote:
On 06-08 11:23, Yoshi Rokuko wrote:
sxiv is my image viewer of choice, currently...
http://github.com/muennich/sxiv
thank you for pointing out - i immediately?switched from feh to sxiv
it's so much better and tiling friendly ...
I use feh only for --bg-center, a
On 06-08 11:23, Yoshi Rokuko wrote:
sxiv is my image viewer of choice, currently...
http://github.com/muennich/sxiv
thank you for pointing out - i immediately?switched from
feh to sxiv it's so much better and tiling friendly ...
I use feh only for --bg-center, any way to do that with sxiv?
-
+-- Petr Sabata ---+
>
> sxiv is my image viewer of choice, currently...
>
> http://github.com/muennich/sxiv
>
thank you for pointing out - i immediatelyÂswitched from
feh to sxiv it's so much better and tiling friendly ...
Noah Birnel writes:
> So a suckless file manager would maybe throw away the whole file manager
> concept and have a sort of dmenu-like multiple file selector?
This patch may be useful:
http://tools.suckless.org/dmenu/patches/multiselect_and_newline
--
\ Troels
/\ Henriksen
+ pancake ---+
>
> White background terminals harm my eyes.
>
> I cant think on anybody spending lot of time on a white background terminal.
> Its anti natural.
>
no for me it is not, i'm using black on white for a long time now:
On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 01:09:38AM +0100, Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:
> It's also good for unpacking archives, I much prefer its zoom-to-unpack to
> mucking about with tar (or especially zip,) although it's not as clean as
> p9's `hget url | gunzip | tar -x`.
you know you can do something like
`c
On 06/07/11 19:44, Andreas Wagner wrote:
I like dmenfm (dmenu based file manager):
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=2&p=1
yay, looks like a nice tool. but:
- it's bash, should be rewritten to be posix
- there's spaguettis in the file opening code
- doesnt honor default unix envir
I can only say: Wow!
it's 2088LOC..but it's config.h friendly, simple, clean and fast. x))
thanks for noticing, im gonna package it in slpm
On 06/08/11 08:05, Petr Sabata wrote:
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 05:34:00PM +0200, pancake wrote:
If you need thumbs use an image viewer. Gqview works quite
On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 08:01:10AM +0200, Petr Sabata wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 12:57:40PM +0800, Patrick Haller wrote:
> >
> > define $EDITOR then ^x^e
>
> I guess this is just something bash-specific?
yeah, edit the current command using $EDITOR
file manager
= file selection + fi
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 05:34:00PM +0200, pancake wrote:
> If you need thumbs use an image viewer. Gqview works quite well for this.
>
sxiv is my image viewer of choice, currently...
http://github.com/muennich/sxiv
--
# Petr Sabata
pgpmcotAqOQJu.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 12:57:40PM +0800, Patrick Haller wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 09:03:06PM -0700, Noah Birnel wrote:
> > ls >listing && vim listing && mv `cat listing` dest
>
> define $EDITOR then ^x^e
I guess this is just something bash-specific?
--
# Petr Sabata
pgpfZqzUqtb6n.
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 09:03:06PM -0700, Noah Birnel wrote:
> ls >listing && vim listing && mv `cat listing` dest
define $EDITOR then ^x^e
Patrick
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 04:25:40PM +0100, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> With the exception of image thumbnails, icons are really completely pointless.
>
+1
> My thoughts on a suckless file manager, though my file manager is 'ls':
>
> Orthodox: two paned, plus command line. At compile time you just
On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 16:13:28 +0100
Rob wrote:
> I like rox, I used to use thunar but it stopped loading thumbnails,
> which is the only reason I use a file manager, so I switched. IMO, rox
> without all the desktop-panel extras is good enough. When not looking at
> thumbnails though, coreutils do
Ok the last mail to the list,is proof that all smartphones suck...
What are the thoughts on 'pilot ' alpones file manager (its available as a
standalone app iirc)
Jase
On 7 Jun 2011 20:29, "Hootiegibbon" wrote:
> On 7 Jun 2011 18:45, "Andreas Wagner" wrote:
>
> I like dmenfm (dmenu b...
>
>
On 7 Jun 2011 18:45, "Andreas Wagner" wrote:
I like dmenfm (dmenu based file manager):
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=2&p=1
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Le Tian wrote:
> Continuing these threads abo...
I like dmenfm (dmenu based file manager):
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=2&p=1
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Le Tian wrote:
> Continuing these threads about suckless "anything"
> I've been looking quite a long time for fast and lightweight file manager
> for dwm. There are occ
White background terminals harm my eyes.
I cant think on anybody spending lot of time on a white background terminal.
Its anti natural.
As a funny note. All non-advanced users tell me that this black terminal have
aome text they cant delete. (the prompt)
Looks like the plan9 terminal will be m
On 7 June 2011 17:01, Le Tian wrote:
> > And the dark background is less scary? I'd have expected the opposite
>
> I thought he meant light background and dark font.
Indeed. This is how it is in Plan 9 and OS X, too. I used
dark-on-light for a while, actually, and it just didn't feel right.
Mayb
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Benjamin R. Haskell wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, Le Tian wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
>>
>> [...] (I find inverting the colours actually helps to a worrying degree.)
>>>
>>>
>>> Interesting... Yeah, "I find inverting the c
On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, Le Tian wrote:
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
[...] (I find inverting the colours actually helps to a worrying
degree.)
Interesting... Yeah, "I find inverting the colours actually helps to a
worrying degree." I think this should be a default
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Jakub Lach wrote:
> pancake wrote:
>
> > What's phycology?
> > Oh, well.. Wikipedia informs: "the scientific studies of algae"
>
> Hey! Just because they can't use terminal does not mean
> they're algae. That could be somebody's mother you
> know.
>
> lol, but an
pancake wrote:
> What's phycology?
> Oh, well.. Wikipedia informs: "the scientific studies of algae"
Hey! Just because they can't use terminal does not mean
they're algae. That could be somebody's mother you
know.
On 6/7/11, pancake wrote:
> What's phycology?
>
> Oh, well.. Wikipedia informs: "the scientific studies of algae"
>
No.
What's phycology?
Oh, well.. Wikipedia informs: "the scientific studies of algae"
On 07/06/2011, at 17:32, Le Tian wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> Hey,
>
> On 7 June 2011 15:53, Le Tian wrote:
> > There are occasions, when u need to see or show some
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 11:17:32AM -0400, Le Tian wrote:
> Yes, icons are not efficient, but there are cases, when not only you will
> use the pc, like a girlfriend, she needs icons and stuff). I think it's a
> bad habit of a windows user, to see everything in rows of thumbs. But still
> like click
Another filemanager is vim. But i dont really use it. Shell is superior in all
aspects.
On 07/06/2011, at 17:17, Le Tian wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:12 AM, pancake wrote:
> I've never felt the need of seeing files as icons. It's just inneficient and
> useless.
>
> Many years ago
If you need thumbs use an image viewer. Gqview works quite well for this.
For other file formats i dont see any reason to use thumbnails.
Maybe to easily see the mimetype or file extension more graphically.. Buy if
you can sort or glob files like canoe does its much more efficient than having
t
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> Hey,
>
> On 7 June 2011 15:53, Le Tian wrote:
> > There are occasions, when u need to see or show some lovely icons.
>
> With the exception of image thumbnails, icons are really completely
> pointless.
>
> On 7 June 2011 16:17, Le Tian
Hey,
On 7 June 2011 15:53, Le Tian wrote:
> There are occasions, when u need to see or show some lovely icons.
With the exception of image thumbnails, icons are really completely pointless.
On 7 June 2011 16:17, Le Tian wrote:
> like a girlfriend, she needs icons and stuff
Yeah, it's well-kno
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:12 AM, pancake wrote:
> I've never felt the need of seeing files as icons. It's just inneficient
> and useless.
>
> Many years ago i wrote 'canoe' a lightweight filemanager in gtk. I did it
> for the n770.. So clicking on icons is better than Using the shitty onscreen
>
On 7 June 2011 15:53, Le Tian wrote:
> Continuing these threads about suckless "anything"
> I've been looking quite a long time for fast and lightweight file manager
> for dwm. There are occasions, when u need to see or show some lovely icons.
> MC and derivatives are the last resort here. I liked
I've never felt the need of seeing files as icons. It's just inneficient and
useless.
Many years ago i wrote 'canoe' a lightweight filemanager in gtk. I did it for
the n770.. So clicking on icons is better than Using the shitty onscreen
keyboard that n770 had
It has some segfaults, and support
> Xfe,
I'm waiting for suckless BonziBUDDY.
On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 10:53:03 -0400
Le Tian wrote:
> Continuing these threads about suckless "anything"
> I've been looking quite a long time for fast and lightweight file
> manager for dwm. There are occasions, when u need to see or show some
> lovely icons. MC and derivatives are the last resort
Continuing these threads about suckless "anything"
I've been looking quite a long time for fast and lightweight file manager
for dwm. There are occasions, when u need to see or show some lovely icons.
MC and derivatives are the last resort here. I liked pcmanfm, but it just
lacks functionality. Rox
84 matches
Mail list logo
