Suggesting, I think - a continuing need to {ugh} Evangelize against the language murder of the Beast and his $Repo allies everywhere. This is a forum mainly about preserving Tektronix equipment. Some hams, many engineers - some ex-Tek-employees and.. some scientists. Thread started re an alternative to .pdf, with some conversion features. Note that there have been previous offhand comments demonstrating a trusting naivete re Doze, etc. Having to carry the guidon sans the IGM - for more pithy denunciatory phrases, I came up with: (a reply which could be cut to half, in V.2)



Miroslav Pxxxxxx wrote:

>>It is not so much that major software vendors are putting significant
>>resources into pdf format, it is major users adopting it what promises a
>>longevity of that format. I do not think that it would take full 20
>>years for this point to become clear, my guess is that in 5 years DjVu
>>will become a curiosity.
>>
>>There seems to be a fascination with free and open software. That was
>>promoted mostly by people who donated their employer's time to develop
>>free software. If company supplies something else besides software, that
>>might be tenable, but if mainstream product is software, you can not
>>give it away, on a long run.Where is Open Software Foundation in these days?
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Miroslav Pxxxxxx
>>
>>John Myyyy wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>
>>>>You'll know why, 20 years from now when you can't find a DjVu viewer
>>>>to save
>>>>your life. :)
>>>>
>>>>Significant resources are put into the .PDF format by major software
>>>>vendors
>>>>on a continuing basis. DjVu was something some guy came up with in his
>>>>basement. He has probably retired by now, or been hit by a bus, or
>>>>something.
>>>>
>>>>The question's come up before. While I'm not exactly a big Adobe fan,
>>>>I do
>>>>feel that the BAMA people are going to regret choosing a nonstandard file
>>>>format for a few marginal benefits.
>>>>
>>>>-- john, KE5xx

Moi -

Sorry, can't let this one go out into the \ufffdther unmolested; there's
enough simplistic stuff launched daily from Leaders et al - sometimes
one must invoke A. Einstein for perspective.

("Things should be made as simple as possible. But not simpler.")

I'm sure that, with all the current (Wars on (Wars on (Warz))) and other
language murders for political hackery; other Weapons of Mass
Distraction: we don't want to delve here, into the differences between
the 'free' in Free (Beer) and Free-of (various constraints of
Closed-source-code) intellectual work --- unless that seems pretty
relevant to keeping our museum pieces operating. Hmmm maybe it does:

Thought about firmware for the 24xx series, a lot? Maybe in 2022?

As to longevity, there's one Good Thing about any pretty-well- debugged
software, whose Source IS available:
2s complement arithmetic is unlikely to be 'Innovated' into a daily tax
for usage of the \ufffd.

Future brainstorms as well as features, can be added (or unwanted ones
removed) by You or your competent nephew / and you cannot be held
hostage by expensive 'upgrades' as may break more than they fix, become
bloated with can openers and built-in toy games -hidden in 'Easter
Eggs'- and other such Featurez as are seen within a popular series of
Toy Software (which attracts diseases like a dying dinosaur attracts flies).

I don't pretend competence to evaluate the quality of the alternative to
.pdf here, nor the long-term aims (and 'corporate competence', if that's
not an oxymoron too?) of Adobe --- but I am familiar with the
gestation of the US toy-computer industry. Have paid close attention
since CP/M and Osborne1 days (and PDP-n, big iron of previous ilk). The
closed-source paradigm >pioneered by Mr. Gates< from his very first
rip-off of university computer time, merely to port a stolen Basic to
the Altair (then pretend he 'Innovated' it) -- this has its inherent Problems, as:

S/He who will be in Big Trouble - is apt to be anyone who puts a
lifetime's work into some M$-Office\ufffd format [that format is
Closed-Source, forever] -- and needs it in 20 years.

More-so, IMO than -- anyone who has a copy of the Source Code for *whatever* is his
chosen system. Ditto re the above .pdf Question. Own your Own Data -- or
someone else will Rent it back to you, forever. Until they disCorporate.

All I mean is: this is no simple matter, soluble by simplistic slogans
similar to those that 'elect' people / spawn industrial cartels. There
are significant 'Issues' (that popular catchall) involved, plus the
history of cupidity of, especially! the US computer industry, to be
considered:

If ... you fancy passing-on something complex to grandchildren or say,
'The Ages'.
Formats and media will always be in flux.
No Source? Then: No Key.

I'll eschew challenging Miroslav on the "donation of employer's time"
quip. There are philosophical and demonstrated- practical alternatives
to Redmond-everywhere mediocrity Forever. These seem to be working Just
Fine, as the idea of 'Security' came with the blank design sheet - not
perpetually "added-in" after each new infection == a self-evident type oxymoron?

[The 'web' is in serious, some Pros say imminent.. danger of chaos as
more and more unprotected Doze machines become 'Owned'; ie become
spam-generators X millions! of techno-illiterate users. Security -
never build an Empire without it. BG never heard of it till nose rubbed
in it. That nose is now pretty RAW.]

And I think that's probably too-much on this topic for this forum, lest
it deteriorate into religion-mode, a common occurrence in our Brave new
theocracy of '05. Surely at [xxxx] we can achieve better standards
than the politicians (?)


Ashton

Maybe we can take-back that mutilated word, 'Innovation' sometime soon, too?
Tek knew what it meant.

(I see that I'll have to spawn some more-compact boiler-plate for other occasions when these chestnuts are dredged up - elsewhere than this tech-staffed outpost. Silence is complicity in a Red Herring.) And yes.. a little fan mail attaboy or two, off list. Always heartwarming to hear about Billy, pins, dolls.

but if asked, would have punted it over here. I think they were mainly dealing with a subset query - a temporary way of d/ling some images of schematics, some already in this format. Odds are that they could not talk the purveyors of such mostly free services, into a better choice. (I'd have butted out, except for M's gratuitous trashing of O.S., in principle.)

I think I've learned a general lesson re how far non-\ufffd folk usually want to go in reassessing their habits, in light of long-term: the fact that many of Andrew's clients have read (?) his aax material, paid to have fungi eradicated, maybe several times: and elect to do nothing differently. You can't find the subtleties more clearly written, for normal people - than at aax, IME.)

Can't push the river.
But it's still frustrating that the Beast's Rovian propaganda is as effective as it is, even among science trained people. Bet not 1:100 would care to peruse the gist of the GPL, the intent of Copyleft and how that needs first to use the \ufffd laws in its implementation.

Pity that so much of IT matters just doesn't evoke Interest in the usually curious! Maybe it seems too much like bookkeeping. (Hell, if I hadn't played with it; sweated over a trivial problem, finally gotten something to Work == the Carrot - I guess that'd be my attitude, too :(