I just want to give you a tip about a remake of the classic game
series Warlords. We have made a remake of it in the browser played
for free running on our Ubuntu machine. For any old-school gamers who
enjoyed turn-based games of the 1990s, it is worth taking a look:
www.warbarons.com.
Hope to see you there.
—
Piranha
Piranha, thanks for the link! I looked briefly and didn't see hidden fees or anything. Hopefully, it really is as cool as it seems, and I haven't been bamboozled. The only way to tell for sure is to spend time playing. You know, for science!—Ed.
Just quickly browsing through the new issue, I noticed that Dave Taylor was discussing how to find words in a dictionary that match the desired letters using all sorts of regexes [see Dave's Work the Shell column in the February 2012 issue through the current issue].
Unless I'm missing something very subtle, it seems to me that this problem can be trivially (and efficiently) solved by simply creating a modified version of the dictionary where the letters of each word are themselves put in alphabetical order and then the entire list is resorted. (Each word would be followed by an index that refers to the line number of the original word.)
A trivial binary search then would find the word given an input sequence of letters that are also alphabetically ordered. Use the index beside the word to refer to the original word.
Multiple words that use the same letters would, of course, be right beside
each other in the modified list.
—
David Jameson
Dave Taylor replies: An interesting idea, David. I thought about your approach for a few days, but having just finished the third column in the series where I present my own complete solution, it turns out there are a number of reasonably efficient ways to solve the problem. My approach was more to screen words out of the dictionary based on letters appearing in the original “set of tiles”, than to analyze letter frequency on a word-by-word basis. In that situation, there's no real benefit to sorting alphabetically.
Further, and this would be a great topic to explore in more detail here in the magazine, I don't really think we need to be as worried about efficiency and performance on modern computers. Heck, I do a lot of my testing in Ubuntu on my MacBook Pro, and it flies through tests and code, even when I give it a big data set to work with. For some situations, of course, speed is of the essence, but I think it's becoming less important for admins and shell script programmers to worry about shaving a few cycles off their code, especially given that if speed's really important, they'll probably switch to Perl, C, Ruby or some other language that's way faster.
In any case, I really appreciate you writing in with your idea. Perhaps you can code your solution, download mine once my column is published, run some speed tests, and then let us know!
I've had a subscription since 1996. I signed up for the 100 issues for $100
some years ago, and when my subscription was up last year, I renewed. I'm
very happy that you've gone all-digital. I love being able to read the
journal on my phone, Kindle, Netbook, laptop, PC, etc. My only
complaint is there is too much mention of Ubuntu and so little mention of
Slackware.
—
Albert Polansky
Albert, you've been a subscriber even longer than I have, well done! Believe it or not, we do try to make articles less distro-specific. The problem is popularity. Because Ubuntu is the most popular and most widely used distribution, most of our authors and readers tend to default there. We will continue to strive for more nonspecific distro content. We run into the same problem if we focus on Slackware, in that we alienate a large portion of our readership. Thanks for bearing with us as we attempt to reach everyone.—Ed.
TrueCrypt has Linux binaries on its download page, and it functions much
the same way as its Windows and OS X counterparts. However, you declare
the opposite in the Non-Linux Foss article in the Upfront section of the February 2012 issue! Whyyy I
oughhttaa....
—
Max Mouse
I apologize for the confusion. I didn't mean to say there weren't Linux binaries, I just specifically mentioned the Windows and OS X binaries, because it was the Non-Linux FOSS column. Hopefully, that clears up any misunderstandings.—Ed.
I consume Linux Journal in two ways: either in PDF format at my desk with a keyboard and my monitor in portrait mode or as an .epub file from the recliner using my TV and a wireless mouse. For the latter, I found Calibre usable, but unintuitive, unattractive and lacking autoscroll.
Adding EPUBReader to Firefox makes reading the digital edition of
LJ as
good or better an experience as reading the hard copy. In full-screen mode with the
bottom menu hidden, only a mouse is needed to toggle autoscroll, adjust
text size and move from one section to another.
—
J. Lee Becker
I really like the EPUBReader Firefox extension too! In fact, I wrote about it in a recent issue. (Here's the article on-line: www.linuxjournal.com/content/epubreader.) Although Calibre is a wonderful tool for managing e-books, I've never really considered the built-in reader to be something I'd actually use to read. It's nice to make sure a conversion went well, but like you mention, it isn't perfect.—Ed.
I am trying to work with your digital conversion, and I'm hoping it works, because I am trying to get away from paper publications (45+ years of accumulating them gives one a different perspective I suppose). However, it seems it is still a work in progress (at least I hope so).
The PDF is an ongoing annoyance—bloated and requiring constant zoom and scroll to view on any but the biggest monitor (or high-res notebook turned sideways), which means I'm desk-bound. That is why I was not going to renew my digital subscription last year, about the time you switched to digital-only, since that was the only option initially.
The addition of the .epub option got me back onboard again, but it definitely needs some work. I tried using the Android app to read the February 2012 Moodle article, but when it referred to figures, it did not show them unless I switched to the PDF-like page view, which was an unreadably tiny “fail” on my 5" Dell Streak screen. (I got the Streak because it was such a “generously” sized screen for something I could carry with me easily—hah!)
However, I discovered a reasonable workaround when I found that FBReader on my
Linux PC provided a viable view, so I copied the .epub to the Streak and
opened it with FBReader for Android. It was almost viewable when I long-tapped on
the figure image, and not quite as cumbersome as the PDF zoom-scroll dance.
Please keep working on it, y'all.
—
ROC
We do continue to work on improving layout every month. On a smartphone, I can't pick my favorite consumption model yet, but on a tablet, I must admit the PDF is pretty slick. I figure since I don't do layout, I can say that without it looking like I'm tooting my own horn! Anyway, thanks for the feedback, and rest assured, we are working constantly to improve the reader experience.—Ed.
I have been a Ham radio operator for more than 35 years, much longer than
an LJ
subscriber/reader. It sure would be nice to see some articles every now and
then about the abundance of Ham radio programs available. I am not much on
the programming side. I'm more of a lover/user of Linux, mostly Ubuntu, than
a hacker. I love some of your in-depth articles, and I like to see some
on the usage of some of the logging programs, propagation and other uses
that Linux has with Ham radio. You might even gain some more subscribers
(Hams), as I have talked to several who use Linux. Thank you, and keep
the magazine going.
—
L.B. WB5YDA
WB5YDA, we did an issue focused on Ham radio in January 2010, and we did receive good feedback on it. We'll make sure to be on the lookout for interesting articles about Ham radio and Linux. The crossover between Ham radio operators and Linux users is surprisingly large!—Ed.
I've been a subscriber to Linux Journal ever since I made the move to Linux back in the mid-1990s. There are some aspects of going digital I miss, such as the ability to archive some of my favorite editions on the bookshelf. For example, I still have one of the first Byte magazines I bought in June 1979. What many folks don't realize (until they get older) is that those things you absolutely hate in the magazine right now—the ads—are the most fun to read 30 years later! 16K S-100 memory boards for only $300! There's a full-page color ad for a small California company called Apple, showing a 1970s-style family enjoying a personal computer. It really stands out from the other ads emphasizing technical features. I wonder why they're still around?
But, time marches on. Most of my magazines now come in both print and digital format, and I enjoy both. I particularly like the ability to archive and store the PDF editions on my computer, using full-text search to find back-issue articles instantly. I don't yet have an e-reader, because I'm waiting for a full letter-sized E Ink model to come out that I can build a Gentoo install on. Until then, I use my workstation for reading Linux Journal.
The only complaint I have with your digital edition is that, so far, I have
not come across a way to use wget to download the issues. I prefer the PDF
editions, as I like the traditional publishing look over the EPUB formats.
However, I hate downloading PDFs in the browser, as the PDF plugins are far
less stable than standalone viewers like Evince. Any chance you could
enable wget download, or show me the command-line trick I need to get past
the initial re-direction?
—
Bob Johnson
Although I don't have an answer for you yet, I'm hoping we can come up with a slightly more geek-friendly download method. This is similar to the desire for direct e-mail delivery to @kindle.com addresses mentioned in the Letters section last month. We'll keep looking into it, and hopefully, we'll be able to come up with something.—Ed.
For international readers such as myself, Linux
Journal historically
had been an expensive print magazine. Luckily for me, my work subscribed,
and I merely had to fight off other readers to get my hands on the precious
paper. I always preferred LJ to other electronic-only
magazines, because
I enjoyed the portability of paper. The paradox is this: as soon as
LJ
became electronic-only, I took out my own subscription. Why? Because
12 months of subscription now costs as much as one issue and a bit did
previously. At such prices, it becomes a no-brainer to support something I
want to survive, even if the format is not my preferred option.
—
Geoff Ericksson
Thanks Geoff! It really was a bummer how much it cost for international subscriptions with the paper edition of Linux Journal. I like the idea that digital distribution levels the international playing field. I'm glad to hear you're still reading, and heck, now you don't have to fight every month!—Ed.
I just wanted to congratulate you on going all-digital—now I
know why I couldn't find LJ anywhere on the magazine shelves. I just
thought they were sold out! I was a longtime subscriber from issue #1
to about 2010, and I decided to drop LJ when I saw
an issue full of
articles that really didn't interest me. I enjoy doing a little
programming in Java and saw very few articles on Java,
for one thing. By the way,
about that Vol 1, Issue #1, it's autographed by Linus when I met him at a
USENIX convention—think it might be worth something? Anyway, congrats
on the new format and good luck. I've seen too many of my favorite mags
(such as Popular Electronics) go the way of the dodo bird. I'll be watching
the content, so heck, I might even resubscribe! Make me an offer I can't
refuse.
—
Bruce Juntti
Nah, that first issue signed by Linus isn't worth anything, and I think it was printed on asbestos paper. You should send it to me so I can properly dispose of it. Seriously though, I think we're able to take more liberties with the digital edition, because page count and print runs are moot points. We look forward to your possible return.—Ed.
So I picked up my very first LJ in July 2011 while scanning a B&N for Linux/computer zines. I won't lie, my eyes looked elsewhere first, but my heart and wallet settled on LJ! I read the magazine in about a weekend (my girlfriend wasn't too happy since it was 4th of July) and anxiously awaited the August 2011 issue. When it came out, I read all of it on a couple bus rides to work. During September, I found out the zine was going all-digital, and at first I had mixed feelings, but since I had a NOOK (the original), it would come in good use. I bought my first digital copy in January 2012, and I liked the format a lot, so I purchased again in February and a few days later, purchased a subscription. I like the zine and the Web site for its content, and I am willing to adapt to reading it on an e-reader or a computer.
One recommendation:
make the archive in EPUB format, not PDF (I will buy it if you do this), and
put
more videos on the site.
Happily reading digitally in 2012!
—
Sean
We do have the EPUB version for every issue since we went digital, and we recently released an EPUB archive of all the issues from 2011 (available at lj.mybigcommerce.com/products/Linux-Journal-2011-eBook.html). Doing these archives means laying out every issue again from scratch, so we'll be gauging reader interest before making more archives.—Ed.
I am an avid Linux Journal reader and have been for several years. There are some other attributes regarding me that are relevant to this communique as well. I'm an old geezer having had a life of IT and am now retired. In addition, I'm an amateur radio operator, and also, I am the editor for a regional Ham radio magazine (paper) serving the southeastern United States. When I took this job, I decided to do the layout with open-source tools rather than the conventional, established toolsets. Therefore, I use Scribus for my 60–80 page publication.
Until your conversion to the digital format, I was reluctant to purchase a tablet, but I felt it would have to be my next significant purchase. When surprised with your move to digital, I actually printed the first digital issue on paper! Never will I do that again! I was incensed that you would make such a change so abruptly. As a paper magazine editor, I had a sense of the costs involved with your printing and distribution, and although we have not yet succumbed to the temptation of digital, I already had written articles and told my board that day may come. Therefore, mad as I may have been with your move, I could not fault you for it. As ours is a membership-based circulation, I do not have to fight the profit motive nearly as fiercely as you must.
Nonetheless, I really did enjoy carrying my LJ to various eating establishments and reading it over a meal. (Geriatric and single, I am!) However, even with the Android app on my cell phone, I found it difficult to enjoy the magazine as I did the print version.
So, I decided to break down and spend $79 dollars for a Kindle. What a grand decision that was! I can think of three or four things about the Kindle/.mobi version that I do not like, but the convenience beats them all in the final tally! I am beginning to wonder if I should have sprung for the Kindle Fire or even a tablet, however.
Like other readers have commented, I considered just dropping my
LJ
subscription when it runs out. But that decision is made now. This
stubborn, old, rather inflexible, codger has become a part of the
digital world. Now I begin a quest to migrate
gradually my own paper
periodical to the Web. Best of luck with your continued orientation
to digital publishing. What a vast difference it is from paper
publishing! I would love to learn at your feet!
—
John C. Ghormley
John, I'm happy to hear the Kindle is working well for you! The .mobi version is a bit frustrating for us too, and we keep working to improve it. This is especially true when it comes to coding examples and such. Thanks for sticking with us.—Ed.
I used to enjoy reading the Letters section, but since the switch to digital, it seems like it's being filled with whining. I understand that you are sympathetic to those who are so resistant to change, but one can take only so much of the baseless arguments of so many grown men crying.
LJ moves to digital stating one of the main reasons as being economic, and then dozens of grown men complain that they can't afford a device on which to read the magazine. Don't even get me started on the fact that the world in which Linux is used is always changing! They are upset that they don't have a physical copy to read in the bathroom?! In ten years from now, are they just not going to read new content anymore?
Where is the loyalty? “I've been a customer for 14 years...but now I'm leaving.” That doesn't make any sense. All because they now have an excuse to purchase a tablet or a smartphone? Please. The interpretation of that to me is this:
“Dear LJ, You went digital with the intent to keep Linux Journal alive. I don't care enough about the content to keep reading if that means I can't turn the physical pages. Either keep printing and go out of business, or I'm no longer going to subscribe. Sincerely, Ignorant ones.”
It's frustrating. I say good riddance! Not really, but you get the point. I wonder if it was this hard for these people to switch to digital cameras because they liked the feel of driving to the store to get their film developed. Maybe they had a hard time transitioning to CDs because they liked the way the cassette tape would get wrapped around the heads, and they'd have to wind it all back by hand. They probably complained about having to switch out all of their VHS tapes too.
It was wise to make the decision to go digital, and I, for one, am glad that the decision was made so I can continue to enjoy the true value of LJ—the content.
By the way, you can't Ctrl-f a piece of paper—at least not yet.
—
Ryan
Ryan, I certainly appreciate your candor! In defense of those folks upset by the change, it was a very sudden decision. That's not to say it was a surprise given the state of the publishing world, but nonetheless, it was a shock due to the swift transition. To be honest, I'd rather folks write and tell us they're upset than just stay angry. Hopefully, our responses the past few months have been insightful, or at least sympathetic.
The good news is that, yes, the digital format offers some amazing advantages! I won't deny there are drawbacks, but you're right, the ability to Ctrl-f an issue is awesome. If only I can figure out a way to digitize my office, because I can't seem to find anything in here either!—Ed.
