[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Bad Poetry - oldviolin - Jan 28, 2023 - 10:19pm
 
The strange tale of KFAT - oldviolin - Jan 28, 2023 - 8:57pm
 
Things You Thought Today - Steely_D - Jan 28, 2023 - 7:42pm
 
Sunrise, Sunset - islander - Jan 28, 2023 - 6:25pm
 
What Did You Do Today? - Bill_J - Jan 28, 2023 - 6:24pm
 
The Obituary Page - haresfur - Jan 28, 2023 - 4:58pm
 
Radio Paradise Comments - Coaxial - Jan 28, 2023 - 3:57pm
 
Wordle - daily game - Manbird - Jan 28, 2023 - 3:55pm
 
Today in History - Isabeau - Jan 28, 2023 - 1:39pm
 
Strange signs, marquees, billboards, etc. - Isabeau - Jan 28, 2023 - 1:34pm
 
Ukraine - R_P - Jan 28, 2023 - 1:00pm
 
Economix - R_P - Jan 28, 2023 - 12:07pm
 
Guns - R_P - Jan 28, 2023 - 10:57am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - geoff_morphini - Jan 28, 2023 - 7:43am
 
Music Requests - Ralf - Jan 28, 2023 - 7:39am
 
last.fm-scrobbling - hans-juergen - Jan 28, 2023 - 12:25am
 
Immigration - westslope - Jan 27, 2023 - 4:13pm
 
Mixtape Culture Club - Steely_D - Jan 27, 2023 - 3:39pm
 
Linking to "What's Playing" - fraenki - Jan 27, 2023 - 2:18pm
 
What Makes You Cry :) ? - black321 - Jan 27, 2023 - 12:42pm
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - GeneP59 - Jan 27, 2023 - 10:19am
 
The Monks of Zagorsk - cathyetsylvain - Jan 27, 2023 - 9:16am
 
Having a Bad Day??? - GeneP59 - Jan 26, 2023 - 8:27pm
 
Living in America - Red_Dragon - Jan 26, 2023 - 8:16pm
 
Things for which you would sell ManBird's soul - GeneP59 - Jan 26, 2023 - 7:53pm
 
Upcoming concerts or shows you can't wait to see - Steely_D - Jan 26, 2023 - 4:58pm
 
Things I Saw Today... - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jan 26, 2023 - 4:56pm
 
Trump - haresfur - Jan 26, 2023 - 3:59pm
 
OUR CATS!! - Isabeau - Jan 26, 2023 - 3:02pm
 
Oil, Gas Prices & Other Crapola - black321 - Jan 26, 2023 - 12:44pm
 
RightWingNutZ - R_P - Jan 26, 2023 - 12:20pm
 
Anti-War - R_P - Jan 26, 2023 - 10:07am
 
21st century technology - black321 - Jan 26, 2023 - 9:44am
 
Florida - black321 - Jan 26, 2023 - 7:10am
 
The end of the world - miamizsun - Jan 26, 2023 - 6:38am
 
Joe Biden - kcar - Jan 25, 2023 - 9:21pm
 
Love is... - Isabeau - Jan 25, 2023 - 6:03pm
 
Least Successful Phishing Scams - Proclivities - Jan 25, 2023 - 6:35am
 
Poetry Forum - ScottN - Jan 25, 2023 - 5:12am
 
a thank you for the team - guy-wernher - Jan 25, 2023 - 3:05am
 
Are you ready for some football? - GeneP59 - Jan 24, 2023 - 5:45pm
 
COVID-19 - thisbody - Jan 24, 2023 - 3:41pm
 
USA! USA! USA! - R_P - Jan 24, 2023 - 11:30am
 
Todd Rundgren - Steely_D - Jan 24, 2023 - 11:08am
 
Republican Party - ScottFromWyoming - Jan 24, 2023 - 8:35am
 
Nuclear power - saviour or scourge? - miamizsun - Jan 24, 2023 - 6:44am
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - JrzyTmata - Jan 24, 2023 - 5:14am
 
Surfing! - thisbody - Jan 24, 2023 - 2:15am
 
::odd but intriguing:: - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jan 23, 2023 - 9:00pm
 
Manbird's Episiotomy Stitch Licking Clinic - KEEP OUT - miamizsun - Jan 23, 2023 - 3:09pm
 
Way Cool Video - miamizsun - Jan 23, 2023 - 2:00pm
 
Russia - cc_rider - Jan 23, 2023 - 8:14am
 
NOT Main Mix - ScopPics - Jan 23, 2023 - 4:25am
 
Memorials - Remembering Our Loved Ones - GeneP59 - Jan 22, 2023 - 9:14am
 
News of the Weird - Bill_J - Jan 20, 2023 - 7:51pm
 
Breaking News - ScottFromWyoming - Jan 20, 2023 - 2:57pm
 
Philosophy (Meaty Metaphysical Munchables!) - R_P - Jan 20, 2023 - 1:48pm
 
The Bucket List - miamizsun - Jan 20, 2023 - 10:38am
 
Derplahoma! - Red_Dragon - Jan 20, 2023 - 10:02am
 
Things that make you go Hmmmm..... - haresfur - Jan 19, 2023 - 8:14pm
 
What music have you paid real money for recently? - kurtster - Jan 19, 2023 - 7:30pm
 
Twitter's finest moment - westslope - Jan 19, 2023 - 7:03pm
 
Tidal / Spotify - bigbargain - Jan 19, 2023 - 2:33pm
 
Is there any GOOD news out there? - black321 - Jan 19, 2023 - 2:06pm
 
Tesla (motors, batteries, etc) - Steely_D - Jan 19, 2023 - 11:17am
 
Baseball, anyone? - ScottFromWyoming - Jan 19, 2023 - 11:13am
 
Covers that are better than the original - ScottFromWyoming - Jan 19, 2023 - 9:01am
 
Wardrobe malfunction - miamizsun - Jan 19, 2023 - 8:42am
 
Climate Change - miamizsun - Jan 19, 2023 - 8:26am
 
Name My Band - islander - Jan 19, 2023 - 7:58am
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Jan 18, 2023 - 4:25pm
 
Happy holidays, everyone! - Manbird - Jan 18, 2023 - 1:49pm
 
Switching 'channel' in app - phil_the_blues - Jan 18, 2023 - 11:58am
 
Positive Thoughts and Prayer Requests - GeneP59 - Jan 18, 2023 - 8:57am
 
Martin Luther King day - cc_rider - Jan 18, 2023 - 8:14am
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » NEED A COMPUTER GEEK! Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 234, 235, 236  Next
Post to this Topic
ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 5, 2023 - 7:56am

 westslope wrote:

Help please.

I am looking for an 'App' that would allow text communication between an iPad and an Android smartphone or Windows 10 PC Workstation.

The owner of the iPad does not have an iPhone.  I mention this because apparently if you have an iPhone, you can sync to an iPad and get WhatsApp to work.

The owner of the iPad lives in a provincial hospice, lost both legs to a CN freight train a couple of years ago and has limited use of his hands.   I occasionally visit this man and bring him edibles.

I am the one with the android and windows devices and would rather not have to buy an iPhone.

Suggestions?



If the iPad owner has a cellphone they can text from the iPad if they're logged into their Apple ID *and* have enabled SMS messaging in the "Messages" app. 

rgio

rgio Avatar

Location: West Jersey
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 5, 2023 - 5:17am

 westslope wrote:

Help please.

I am looking for an 'App' that would allow text communication between an iPad and an Android smartphone or Windows 10 PC Workstation.

The owner of the iPad does not have an iPhone.  I mention this because apparently if you have an iPhone, you can sync to an iPad and get WhatsApp to work.

The owner of the iPad lives in a provincial hospice, lost both legs to a CN freight train a couple of years ago and has limited use of his hands.   I occasionally visit this man and bring him edibles.

I am the one with the android and windows devices and would rather not have to buy an iPhone.

Suggestions?


I used Pulse for several years, and it worked great.   

https://home.pulsesms.app/over...

Instructions on setting up an IOS alternative are here:  https://home.pulsesms.app/over...


thisbody

thisbody Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 5, 2023 - 2:08am

 westslope wrote:

Help please.

I am looking for an 'App' that would allow text communication between an iPad and an Android smartphone or Windows 10 PC Workstation.

The owner of the iPad does not have an iPhone.  I mention this because apparently if you have an iPhone, you can sync to an iPad and get WhatsApp to work.

The owner of the iPad lives in a provincial hospice, lost both legs to a CN freight train a couple of years ago and has limited use of his hands.   I occasionally visit this man and bring him edibles.

I am the one with the android and windows devices and would rather not have to buy an iPhone.

Suggestions?




What about good old Email?
Other than that, you could install Whatsapp on your Android (provided it is installed on the iPad and phone).
Same goes for Signal Messenger, as well as other messenger apps.
westslope

westslope Avatar

Location: BC sage brush steppe


Posted: Jan 4, 2023 - 4:05pm

Help please.

I am looking for an 'App' that would allow text communication between an iPad and an Android smartphone or Windows 10 PC Workstation.

The owner of the iPad does not have an iPhone.  I mention this because apparently if you have an iPhone, you can sync to an iPad and get WhatsApp to work.

The owner of the iPad lives in a provincial hospice, lost both legs to a CN freight train a couple of years ago and has limited use of his hands.   I occasionally visit this man and bring him edibles.

I am the one with the android and windows devices and would rather not have to buy an iPhone.

Suggestions?

Manbird

Manbird Avatar

Location: Owl Creek Bridge
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 3, 2022 - 3:18pm

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:


Well even more basic than that. The "missing" color book from Adobe that is the biggie is Pantone Solid Coated. That is a recipe book —literally— for printers to mix a wide range of spot color inks. Using a palette of uniform base colors, you would weigh out 3 parts Rubine, 1 part black, 1 part cobalt blue and get, I dunno, Pantone 498. The customer in Schenectady and the designer in LA and the printer in Taos are all looking at the same swatch in their (expensive) Pantone guides, so there are no surprises—as long as the guy mixing the ink knows how to use a scale and do a drawdown. 

Pantone came out with a Process formula book that was all CMYK values, but it was different from Solid Coated and everyone referred to Solid Color numbers even though those were supposed to be spot colors only. Anyway, computers allowed people to export CMYK renditions of Solid Coated spot colors and everyone was happy even though those conversions aren't valid: your CMS settings can play havoc with how they're converted. So now rather than use the Process book, design firms specify a PMS color (Solid Coated) and then give what they want as a CMYK equivalent. So yes, access to Pantone for most designers is not needed; we only need that CMYK formula. Which should change depending on the paper used, but absolutely zero agencies address this, so I guess no one is as anal retentive about consistency as they used to be in the 80s when designers got flown around the world to do press checks. Before my time, unfortunately, but I have a friend who works for —Adobe— and she still gets to go on press checks in Vietnam.


I almost got to go somewhere East when I was doing the watery bum cleaning toilet attachment work but after almost 2 years of paying me 70/hour they put someone on the payroll full time. I wasn't offered the job. I couldn't have commuted that far anyway. Story of my life. Lucky they tolerated me such as they did. 

ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 2, 2022 - 3:35pm

 rgio wrote:
Pantone was founded in the 1960's to standardize color naming and application so businesses could share an understanding of the exact same thing without having to be in the same room.  They don't own the colors, but if you want to use their language you need to pay for it...especially in business.  There are plenty of other ways to share color now (RGB, Hex, etc,),  but if you want to use their naming scheme, you have to pay for it


Well even more basic than that. The "missing" color book from Adobe that is the biggie is Pantone Solid Coated. That is a recipe book —literally— for printers to mix a wide range of spot color inks. Using a palette of uniform base colors, you would weigh out 3 parts Rubine, 1 part black, 1 part cobalt blue and get, I dunno, Pantone 498. The customer in Schenectady and the designer in LA and the printer in Taos are all looking at the same swatch in their (expensive) Pantone guides, so there are no surprises—as long as the guy mixing the ink knows how to use a scale and do a drawdown. 

Pantone came out with a Process formula book that was all CMYK values, but it was different from Solid Coated and everyone referred to Solid Color numbers even though those were supposed to be spot colors only. Anyway, computers allowed people to export CMYK renditions of Solid Coated spot colors and everyone was happy even though those conversions aren't valid: your CMS settings can play havoc with how they're converted. So now rather than use the Process book, design firms specify a PMS color (Solid Coated) and then give what they want as a CMYK equivalent. So yes, access to Pantone for most designers is not needed; we only need that CMYK formula. Which should change depending on the paper used, but absolutely zero agencies address this, so I guess no one is as anal retentive about consistency as they used to be in the 80s when designers got flown around the world to do press checks. Before my time, unfortunately, but I have a friend who works for —Adobe— and she still gets to go on press checks in Vietnam.
thisbody

thisbody Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 2, 2022 - 12:41pm

 rgio wrote:
...

There are plenty of other ways to share color now (RGB, Hex, etc,),  but if you want to use their naming scheme, you have to pay for it.  

They aren't selling water in the desert, they're selling sand with names on it.  If you don't want theirs, grab some of the free stuff.

Ayupp.

thisbody

thisbody Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 2, 2022 - 12:36pm

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:

So you clearly don't understand the problem that Pantone solves. Or how the dying dead-trees printing industry means fewer people have that problem. Pantone will likely die in our lifetimes and maybe Adobe is putting a boot to their neck deliberately, but it's not surprising that Pantone would try to come up with a way to keep their income up. Do I wish Adobe would have kept up? Sure. And like I said, I don't know why they haven't. Probably a sweetheart deal from decades ago that Pantone wasn't making any money off of. The short version is: I don't need Pantone. It's nice, but not $20/month nice, and I'm sure 95% of Adobe users haven't ever thought about it. But that 5% who do need it? $20/month is a no-brainer. Pantone's probably done their math and said something like "If we were getting 50¢/month per user on the old contract, then $20/month for 5% of all users will double our income." It's not greed, it's just numbers.

Saying it's a thing that can't be owned is like saying "how can they charge for cookbooks when I already have all the ingredients?" and then complaining when your chocolate chip cookies taste terrible because you put chicken in them.


I do understand what calibrating of device colors (sreen, printer) means. I have no preferences there, as you seem to. I don't publish anything, anymore nowadays. But I do know, Adobe, as well as Pantone aren't needed if one is serious about professional output in desktop publishing. It only may seem more comfortable, and that comfort comes with a price.
Regardless of - that's the way we've been used to doing it on Windows for decades...    

ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 2, 2022 - 12:10pm

 thisbody wrote:
Just calling out man's greediness! Making money of things that can't really be owned by one, or a group of people via patents.

So you clearly don't understand the problem that Pantone solves. Or how the dying dead-trees printing industry means fewer people have that problem. Pantone will likely die in our lifetimes and maybe Adobe is putting a boot to their neck deliberately, but it's not surprising that Pantone would try to come up with a way to keep their income up. Do I wish Adobe would have kept up? Sure. And like I said, I don't know why they haven't. Probably a sweetheart deal from decades ago that Pantone wasn't making any money off of. The short version is: I don't need Pantone. It's nice, but not $20/month nice, and I'm sure 95% of Adobe users haven't ever thought about it. But that 5% who do need it? $20/month is a no-brainer. Pantone's probably done their math and said something like "If we were getting 50¢/month per user on the old contract, then $20/month for 5% of all users will double our income." It's not greed, it's just numbers.

Saying it's a thing that can't be owned is like saying "how can they charge for cookbooks when I already have all the ingredients?" and then complaining when your chocolate chip cookies taste terrible because you put chicken in them.

Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 2, 2022 - 11:59am

 thisbody wrote:

So the question remains, what is the difference between "patenting" and just "buying the rights"?
Morally?

EDIT: I was yet editing my post... down there...


I was not debating the moral implications or analogies; I was referring to the literal meaning of the word.  Words matter, semantics matter - well, they do to me.  There's already more than enough reckless exaggeration and arbitrary redefinition out there.
rgio

rgio Avatar

Location: West Jersey
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 2, 2022 - 11:46am

 thisbody wrote:

Not intending to thread-jack. Only answering to Scott's question?

A bit late to the dance, but patents have created the environment that you benefit from countless times every day.   

Only when your efforts can be rewarded (and not stolen), is it worth toiling to create something new.   Capitalism thrives on innovation, which would stop if people had to share their efforts with whoever decided to use them without having to pay.  Computer innovation over the past 40 years has been absolutly amazing, and mostly due to the pursuit of financial reward by inventors.

Pantone was founded in the 1960's to standardize color naming and application so businesses could share an understanding of the exact same thing without having to be in the same room.  They don't own the colors, but if you want to use their language you need to pay for it...especially in business.  There are plenty of other ways to share color now (RGB, Hex, etc,),  but if you want to use their naming scheme, you have to pay for it.  

They aren't selling water in the desert, they're selling sand with names on it.  If you don't want theirs, grab some of the free stuff.

thisbody

thisbody Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 2, 2022 - 11:32am

 Proclivities wrote:
Privatizing water supply and delivery systems (as greedy as it could be considered) is not the same as "patenting drinking water".

So the question remains, what is the difference between "patenting" and just "buying the rights"?
Morally?

EDIT: I was yet editing my post... down there...

Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 2, 2022 - 11:26am

 thisbody wrote:

Not intending to thread-jack. Only answering to Scott's question?
The documentary "We Feed The World, 2005" explains what I was mentioning.. while it is still worth watching as a whole imo, here's the beef of it in this discussion. Meanwhile, the internet has been cleaned up, and Néstle have done their best to correct that image shown in the film very successfully as your comment shows, for all traces of the upheaval this documentary created then on the net are gone from the internet today (there were tons of pages, back then)...

Privatizing water supply and delivery systems (as greedy as it could be considered) is not the same as "patenting drinking water".
thisbody

thisbody Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 2, 2022 - 11:17am

 Proclivities wrote:
Obvious furthering of a thread-jack but what is this story about Nestle attempting to patent drinking water?  I know Nestle drains water for bottling from various places around the world - even some places which have very limited supplies of drinking water, but that's not the same as patenting it.  Purification systems, chemical treatments, or extraction methods can be patented, but 'patenting drinking water' sounds like hyperbole.

Not intending to thread-jack. Only answering to Scott's question?
The documentary "We Feed The World, 2005" explains what I was mentioning.. while it is still worth watching as a whole imo, here's the beef of it in this discussion. Meanwhile, the internet has been cleaned up, and Néstle have done their best to correct that image shown in the film very successfully as your comment shows, for all traces of the upheaval this documentary created then on the net are gone from the internet today (there were tons of pages, back then)... thinking... what is the difference between patenting drinking water and buying all the distribution rights?!

There's more: Bottled Life... Can you imagine someone turning ordinary water into a billion dollar business? The secret key to the blue gold lies in the hand of Swiss transnational nutrition company Nestlé.
Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 2, 2022 - 10:26am

 thisbody wrote:


Just calling out man's greediness!

Making money of things that can't really be owned by one, or a group of people via patents.

So many other examples coming to mind. HIV, COVID meds for the poor, etc. etc.

We cannot really be ok with someone patenting drinking water in the Sahara region (Néstle). Can we?


Watch out for the future, when sunlight will be patented just there by the energy undistry...

Obvious furthering of a thread-jack but what is this story about Nestle attempting to patent drinking water?  I know Nestle drains water for bottling from various places around the world - even some places which have very limited supplies of drinking water, but that's not the same as patenting it.  Purification systems, chemical treatments, or extraction methods can be patented, but 'patenting drinking water' sounds like hyperbole.
thisbody

thisbody Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 2, 2022 - 9:50am

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:
GIMP sucks balls. Interface is as inelegant as possible, probably as a middle finger to people who want things to be nice. Cheap bastards are better off buying Affinity Photo. It's less capable but less user-hostile than GIMP.

Pantone has had a proprietary system for communicating colors for 60 years, it's not a new thing. I don't know what the beef is between Adobe and Pantone but your take on the situation is just weird.


Just calling out man's greediness!

Making money of things that can't really be owned by one, or a group of people via patents.

So many other examples coming to mind. HIV, COVID meds for the poor, etc. etc.

We cannot really be ok with someone patenting drinking water in the Sahara region (Néstle). Can we?

Watch out for the future, when sunlight will be patented just there by the energy undistry...
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 1, 2022 - 4:13am

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:
I've tried to do, but nothing is intuitive, and requires having a web browser open so I can search up how to do basic things—but I would do it just to prove it could be done. But now I'm old and am a lot less stubborn about things. 

just give me an AI based assistant to get that stuff done
maybe an elevated/genius smart screen

i'm sure deep mind is on it...

ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2022 - 7:10pm

 rgio wrote:

I added GIMP, tried it, and deleted it.   Then I needed SVGs for a site.  After adding it back and using it a bit more...it's OK.  It could definitely be easier to use...but once I figured a few things out I've changed my mind.



I've had it available on my machines for 20 years and yeah it works for most things I've tried to do, but nothing is intuitive, and requires having a web browser open so I can search up how to do basic things—but I would do it just to prove it could be done. But now I'm old and am a lot less stubborn about things. 
rgio

rgio Avatar

Location: West Jersey
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2022 - 6:33pm

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:
GIMP sucks balls.

I added GIMP, tried it, and deleted it.   Then I needed SVGs for a site.  After adding it back and using it a bit more...it's OK.  It could definitely be easier to use...but once I figured a few things out I've changed my mind.

ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2022 - 3:44pm

 thisbody wrote:

So you're ok with businesses patenting the air that I breathe? You go right ahead. Mind, Nestlé the world biggest food industry hulk already went to patent water in the Sahara region.
Ok  for you? Must be, so go right ahead...

As far as dickin 'round with Walmart knockoffs.. you don't seem to know free and open-source software now, do you? Let me tell you about GIMP (GNU Linux Image Manipulation Program). It can do anything Photoshop can do, and it is completely free, as it is developed by a world community of voluntary Linux coders, again, for free.

I doubt Walmart would ever sell something like that, not even on knockoff, as you name it, as that would get them into legal trouble, because Open Source is an official license.   




GIMP sucks balls. Interface is as inelegant as possible, probably as a middle finger to people who want things to be nice. Cheap bastards are better off buying Affinity Photo. It's less capable but less user-hostile than GIMP.

Pantone has had a proprietary system for communicating colors for 60 years, it's not a new thing. I don't know what the beef is between Adobe and Pantone but your take on the situation is just weird.
Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 234, 235, 236  Next