Q. I have no clue what GNU is but I know gui is Graphic User Interface. GUI is in like mac windows while GNU is in linux/ubuntu, basically any unix system.
A. GNU is the name of software or software collections release by the Free Software Foundation. Originally a recursive acromyn (hackers are quite fond of recursive acronyms) that means GNU is Not Unix.
GNU's GUI is GNOME (GNu Object Model Enviroment), other GUI's for linux are KDE, or XFCE and are not GNU.
GNU really underlies the core system, the compiler, utilities, and many of the tools.
GNU's GUI is GNOME (GNu Object Model Enviroment), other GUI's for linux are KDE, or XFCE and are not GNU.
GNU really underlies the core system, the compiler, utilities, and many of the tools.
How to get into cgi and movie production with CGI?
Q. I currently study IT at college, and pretty much set to go to UNI in 2 years.
I'm wondering what i can study at UNI to get myself into cgi and what other things I could also study.
I want to do a foundation diploma in graphics before i go to UNI so im just wondering if that will help too.
I really need some pointers on where to go and what im expected to do before uni etc.
Any help is wonderful
Cheers.
I'm wondering what i can study at UNI to get myself into cgi and what other things I could also study.
I want to do a foundation diploma in graphics before i go to UNI so im just wondering if that will help too.
I really need some pointers on where to go and what im expected to do before uni etc.
Any help is wonderful
Cheers.
A. Definitely graphics will help but most of the people I know who are in animation and movies actually have more of a fine arts background. They don't even often have degrees in it but at least they've been through a two year foundation program at one or another school. The one exception is purely IT: he got his job because he knows Linux (and UNIX which he often prefers). He handles networking and troubleshooting render farms. Not the creative stuff. Really, to work in Movie production you will find you are competing with LOT of top-ranked people and you will need to know whatever you know thoroughly. Most CGI that gets done these days uses the Renderman Graphic description standards.
Could anybody tell me what's the big difference between linux and windows?
Q. Our office has purchased windows programs with license. Our administrator, however, insist to use linux?
A. Carl P's answer is very good, however there is something which a lot of people don't talk about. Windows evolved from MS-DOS (which itself was a port of CP-M) and conceptually still owes an AWFUL lot to it, even though microcomputers have changed so radically there probably isn't that much code yet.
In fact, we almost never use the term microcomputer for desktops any more. They aren't microcomputers. Microcomputers had a far simpler chip architecture than other computers and Windows had to accommodate this.
MS-Dos evolved on and for independent computers which did not connect with each other by default. These computers were often very simple, and didn't have the resources for forking and other basic things which UNIX used. The first GCC compiler for MS-Dos/Windows came about when D. J. Delorie heard Richard Stallman (who wrote GCC) give a speech where he discussed why he didn't think DOS would ever get a port. Delorie certainly had the right to, but Stallman didn't think it was possible till djgpp proved him wrong.
UNIX, since it was so widely used for networking (the Internet pretty much developed on it and it evolved with it) was and is a modular operating system with programs which work together regardless of what architecture they are compiled for.
As microprocessors started to get sophisticated enough to do things like fork(), Linus Torvalds wrote a kernel of an operating system which would run UNIX programs on the 386 and up microprocessors. Programs like X-Windows, which is what drives Ubuntu desktops and which you will see older versions of on films from Nasa and Carnegie-Mellon as far back as 1987.
There are a lot of profound differences which can be summarized as: Windows is an OS based on MS-DOS which is intended for consumers. Not users, consumers. That's why the hardware demands are so heavy and why Vista was expected to spur hardware sales then didn't. All their design choices are based on that fact and they are so willing to limit your choices that it doesn't provide a very good development environment. It's no wonder your administrator would prefer Linux.
A typical example of what I'm talking about. There was a recent email from Microsoft to the Blender Open Source project -- a three-dimensional animation project which began life as in-house software for an Amsterdam animation house. I don't know what inspired this, other than their efforts to encourage people to develop specifically for windows, but they were trying to get them to do that and talked up two features -- OOXML which has absolutely nothing to do with animation -- and DirectX which is so Windows-specific it makes it hard for programs which render with it to run on MacOS or Solaris or other operating systems.
And that is precisely important. To use two Linux-specific examples, a recent film sponsered by the Blender Foundation (and available for free at http://www.bigbuckbunny.org ) made to show off what the program can do was rendered on a network of Ubuntu boxes. A small, eccentric but neat Linux distro called dyne:bolic (for media activists) has specific documentation for Blender, but instead of talking about animation it discusses setting up networks to render the animations which somebody does.
Ubuntu markets itself as an OS for consumers. What it really is is the UNIX Development Desktop with a Linux kernel and a bunch of scripts and hacks which make it reasonably useful for consumers and the Computer-illiterate. Compare it to a Sun Solaris desktop and you will see what I mean.
Microsoft is a consumer oriented desktop. As such it is focusing more and more on OSes for computers with the latest hardware and unlimited broadband internet connections (since the nineties many of its programs have attempted to access the net with or without the User's permission). That's the bottom line -- there are downsides to Microsoft's approach the company does not discuss at all. And it has made Ubuntu very attractive to a lot of people.
But as an engineer your administrator probably prefers Linux because of the control it gives him over his own machine. Windows Machines, through required patches and validations, are controlled by Redmond. The motto of the free software movement is "free as in freedom, not as in beer."
In fact, we almost never use the term microcomputer for desktops any more. They aren't microcomputers. Microcomputers had a far simpler chip architecture than other computers and Windows had to accommodate this.
MS-Dos evolved on and for independent computers which did not connect with each other by default. These computers were often very simple, and didn't have the resources for forking and other basic things which UNIX used. The first GCC compiler for MS-Dos/Windows came about when D. J. Delorie heard Richard Stallman (who wrote GCC) give a speech where he discussed why he didn't think DOS would ever get a port. Delorie certainly had the right to, but Stallman didn't think it was possible till djgpp proved him wrong.
UNIX, since it was so widely used for networking (the Internet pretty much developed on it and it evolved with it) was and is a modular operating system with programs which work together regardless of what architecture they are compiled for.
As microprocessors started to get sophisticated enough to do things like fork(), Linus Torvalds wrote a kernel of an operating system which would run UNIX programs on the 386 and up microprocessors. Programs like X-Windows, which is what drives Ubuntu desktops and which you will see older versions of on films from Nasa and Carnegie-Mellon as far back as 1987.
There are a lot of profound differences which can be summarized as: Windows is an OS based on MS-DOS which is intended for consumers. Not users, consumers. That's why the hardware demands are so heavy and why Vista was expected to spur hardware sales then didn't. All their design choices are based on that fact and they are so willing to limit your choices that it doesn't provide a very good development environment. It's no wonder your administrator would prefer Linux.
A typical example of what I'm talking about. There was a recent email from Microsoft to the Blender Open Source project -- a three-dimensional animation project which began life as in-house software for an Amsterdam animation house. I don't know what inspired this, other than their efforts to encourage people to develop specifically for windows, but they were trying to get them to do that and talked up two features -- OOXML which has absolutely nothing to do with animation -- and DirectX which is so Windows-specific it makes it hard for programs which render with it to run on MacOS or Solaris or other operating systems.
And that is precisely important. To use two Linux-specific examples, a recent film sponsered by the Blender Foundation (and available for free at http://www.bigbuckbunny.org ) made to show off what the program can do was rendered on a network of Ubuntu boxes. A small, eccentric but neat Linux distro called dyne:bolic (for media activists) has specific documentation for Blender, but instead of talking about animation it discusses setting up networks to render the animations which somebody does.
Ubuntu markets itself as an OS for consumers. What it really is is the UNIX Development Desktop with a Linux kernel and a bunch of scripts and hacks which make it reasonably useful for consumers and the Computer-illiterate. Compare it to a Sun Solaris desktop and you will see what I mean.
Microsoft is a consumer oriented desktop. As such it is focusing more and more on OSes for computers with the latest hardware and unlimited broadband internet connections (since the nineties many of its programs have attempted to access the net with or without the User's permission). That's the bottom line -- there are downsides to Microsoft's approach the company does not discuss at all. And it has made Ubuntu very attractive to a lot of people.
But as an engineer your administrator probably prefers Linux because of the control it gives him over his own machine. Windows Machines, through required patches and validations, are controlled by Redmond. The motto of the free software movement is "free as in freedom, not as in beer."
Nec Projector Review
Plastic Shed Reviews
Ati Graphic Reviews
Nurse Uniforms Reviews
Cabochons Reviews
Inflatable Water Slides Reviews
Barcode Scanner Reviews