| Re: New HD [message #33749 is a reply to message #33738] |
Fri, 18 January 2013 18:15   |
Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Patrick Scheible" <kkt@zipcon.net> wrote in message
news:86hame2mwg.fsf@chai.my.domain...
> Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> writes:
>
>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes:
>>
>>> Ibmekon wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 07:52:03 -0500, Walter Banks
>>>> <walter@bytecraft.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >Canbear wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> On 17 Jan 2013 21:48:22 GMT, Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>
>>>> >> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> >It's funny how disoriented you become when your available storage
>>>> >> >changes by a factor 1000.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> >/Jorgen
>>>> >>
>>>> >> You aren't kidding. I am still amazed at the SDHC chips they put into
>>>> >> cameras. I just bought an 8gb, but they had much larger ones at 48gb
>>>> >> or more I think. One tiny chip!
>>>> >
>>>> >I am impressed with the manufacturing tolerances of these chips. Data
>>>> >is
>>>> >stored in many cases as analog levels to get more bits per cell.
>>>> >
>>>> >w..
>>>>
>>>> Consider what happens if you close your eyes, turn your head and
>>>> blink.
>>>>
>>>> What has always impressed me is the data storage and image processing
>>>> done - and no batch processing or task scheduling of the job.
>>>>
>>>> Only in recent years have I begun to be impressed by modern computers.
>>>
>>> The hardware is OK; the OSes still need a lot of work. OSes should be
>>> seen and not heard unless asked.
>>>
>>> Every single one still needs to be wrestled with on a minutely basis.
>>
>> Clearly you are not running a Linux distro.
> Oh come on. Linux may be better than the alternative,
> but there's still a ton of room for improvement,
Sure, but that’s a separate issue to wrestling with it on a minutely basis.
> a lot of things that need to be configured in non-obvious ways to work,
> a lot of things that worked in old versions but not in new ones or vice
> versa.
But it doesn’t need to be wrestled with on a minutely basis.
Neither does XP or Win7 either.
> You can't get too mad at them because they're volunteers and dinking
> with themes is a lot more fun than debugging device drivers, but still.
> As far as commercial software, in some ways things have gotten worse.
> In the olden days you'd pay the manufacturer big bucks to buy or lease
> the system but at least they wouldn't be laying traps all over to entice
> or trap you into buying other products too or exploiting your personal
> information.
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33751 is a reply to message #33716] |
Fri, 18 January 2013 18:36 |
Freddy1X
Messages: 61
Registered: August 2012
Karma: 0
|
Member |
|
|
Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> In article <PM0004D3912EFBEA5D@aca2fcab.ipt.aol.com>, See.above@aol.com
> (jmfbahciv) writes:
>
>> Ibmekon wrote:
>>
>>> Only in recent years have I begun to be impressed by modern
>>> computers.
>>
>> The hardware is OK; the OSes still need a lot of work. OSes should
>> be seen and not heard unless asked.
>
> But, but... then they wouldn't be _interactive_! Microsoft's design
> philosophy can be summed up in three words: "in your face".
>
"in your face", just like an armed robbery.
Freddy,
not getting robbed by his OS maker.
--
Avoid pouring near a flame.
/|>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>\|
/| I may be demented \|
/| but I'm not crazy! \|
/|<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<\|
* SPAyM trap: there is no X in my address *
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33769 is a reply to message #33747] |
Fri, 18 January 2013 19:44 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 1/18/2013 6:05 PM, Dan Espen wrote:
>
> I've read about all the interface changes,
> I don't get it.
>
> Why do these desktops keep changing the way they look/work with the same
> config files?
As usual, someone thinks they have "a better idea." (tm) I've never
been able to understand it either.
I do like Gnome 2, because it comes the closest to that most perfect of
desktops, OS/2. I had to install Mate with the latest Fedora.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33770 is a reply to message #33741] |
Fri, 18 January 2013 20:04 |
Walter Bushell
Messages: 1834
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <50f9cf18$4$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net>,
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid>
wrote:
> In <slrnkfgsd4.ah7.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid>, on 01/17/2013
> at 09:48 PM, Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> said:
>
>> On Wed, 2013-01-16, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?philo=A0?= wrote:
>
>> There's something wrong about how your newsreader generates the From:
>> line.
>
> From what you quoted, there's something wrong with the way slrn
> rendered it. See REC 2047. At a guess A0 is a non-breaking space.
>
> Is there an option to turn on MIME decoding of header fields?
>
>> It's funny how disoriented you become when your available storage
>> changes by a factor 1000.
>
> The first computer that I used had a 2,000 word (10 digit plus sign)
> drum and a 600,000 word disk.
>
> Nobody will ever need more than a petabyte. And if they do I'll deny
> ever having written that. (-;
One of my networking instructors said that she couldn't see why more
than 32 bit addresses would be needed. A decade later even in home
computers the move to 64 bits was on.
--
This space unintentionally left blank.
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33771 is a reply to message #33635] |
Fri, 18 January 2013 20:57 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Jan 18, 3:01 am, Canbear <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> Back in the day, 1980s or even the 1990s, if you even suggested such a
> future, they would say you watch too much Star Trek.
> But here it is.
The kicker is these things are cheap, sold next to candy bars at the
drugstore. I might have envisioned something like them some years
ago, but restricted to major computer labs and such.
Heck, I was happy when I first got a PC and could run GW-BASIC and do
the stuff I did (and more) without paying for a Teletype and computer
service.
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33772 is a reply to message #33662] |
Fri, 18 January 2013 21:01 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Jan 18, 8:36 am, Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com> wrote:
> When I got my first 40 meg drive I thought I had infinite storage and
> I did for the available media of the time. No music, except perhaps
> midi and certainly no video, hell the confuser B&W not even grayscale.
Photos collectively do take up a lot of room.
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33774 is a reply to message #33771] |
Fri, 18 January 2013 22:20 |
swatto
Messages: 37
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Member |
|
|
On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 17:57:50 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> Heck, I was happy when I first got a PC and could run GW-BASIC and do
> the stuff I did (and more) without paying for a Teletype and computer
> service.
But also aren't you glad you were there to watch it all evolve?
When I used to be on Compuserve, it was all text. But even then, the
stuff you could do was cool - at least I thought so. In your face
advertising was practically non-existent. But it was the BBSes that
were the best places to find cool stuff. It was a BBS where I
downloaded my very first graphic - quite exhilarating actually. I
can't remember the exact format, but it was a vector image - that much
I know.
I guess the best way to describe Compuserve and Genie (which a
co-worker of mine subscribed), et al, is like Telnet.
Which is another thing. There used to be TONS of Telnet directories in
the early days of the internet. Now they are all gone for the most
part. Gopher is still going strong for those faithful of the protocol.
I still quite like Gopherspace and still visit Floodgap often to see
new Gopher sites that emerge.
Canbear
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33787 is a reply to message #33668] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 04:10 |
Jorgen Grahn
Messages: 606
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Fri, 2013-01-18, jmfbahciv wrote:
> Ibmekon wrote:
....
>> Only in recent years have I begun to be impressed by modern computers.
>
> The hardware is OK; the OSes still need a lot of work. OSes should be
> seen and not heard unless asked.
>
> Every single one still needs to be wrestled with on a minutely basis.
It's not OSes, but software in general. My hardware may be 100 or
1000 times larger/faster/better now compare to 1993, but my software
isn't.
/Jorgen
--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33788 is a reply to message #33741] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 04:19 |
Jorgen Grahn
Messages: 606
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Fri, 2013-01-18, Shmuel Metz wrote:
> In <slrnkfgsd4.ah7.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid>, on 01/17/2013
> at 09:48 PM, Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> said:
>
>> On Wed, 2013-01-16, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?philo=A0?= wrote:
>
>> There's something wrong about how your newsreader generates the From:
>> line.
>
> From what you quoted, there's something wrong with the way slrn
> rendered it. See REC 2047. At a guess A0 is a non-breaking space.
>
> Is there an option to turn on MIME decoding of header fields?
I think there is, but I think there's also something wrong with his
MIME encoding. slrn actually complains with an error message:
"Expected closing '>' character in the address"
and that's not something it does for other posters who use MIME.
/Jorgen
--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33789 is a reply to message #33787] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 04:45 |
Bob Martin
Messages: 157
Registered: August 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
in 586698 20130119 091018 Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-01-18, jmfbahciv wrote:
>> Ibmekon wrote:
> ....
>>> Only in recent years have I begun to be impressed by modern computers.
>>
>> The hardware is OK; the OSes still need a lot of work. OSes should be
>> seen and not heard unless asked.
>>
>> Every single one still needs to be wrestled with on a minutely basis.
>
> It's not OSes, but software in general. My hardware may be 100 or
> 1000 times larger/faster/better now compare to 1993, but my software
> isn't.
The faster the CPUs, the cheaper the RAM gets, the sloppier the programmers.
Making a program fit in 4KB really concentrated the mind!
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33790 is a reply to message #33787] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 04:40 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 19 Jan 2013 09:10:18 GMT
Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-01-18, jmfbahciv wrote:
>> Ibmekon wrote:
> ...
>>> Only in recent years have I begun to be impressed by modern computers.
>>
>> The hardware is OK; the OSes still need a lot of work. OSes should be
>> seen and not heard unless asked.
>>
>> Every single one still needs to be wrestled with on a minutely basis.
>
> It's not OSes, but software in general. My hardware may be 100 or
> 1000 times larger/faster/better now compare to 1993, but my software
> isn't.
It's probably 100-1000 times larger.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33794 is a reply to message #33739] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 05:59 |
GreyMaus
Messages: 422
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2013-01-18, Elliott Roper <nospam@yrl.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <86hame2mwg.fsf@chai.my.domain>, Patrick Scheible
> <kkt@zipcon.net> wrote:
>
>> and dinking with themes is a lot more
>> fun than debugging device drivers, but still.
>
> Whaat?
>
> Debugging device drivers is the most fun you can have with your clo....
> oh, never mind.
>
Well, defining a device as something that connects to something else
(printer, modem, videooutput)
--
maus
.
.
....
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33795 is a reply to message #33771] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 07:34 |
philo[1][2][3][4]
Messages: 48
Registered: December 2012
Karma: 0
|
Member |
|
|
On 01/18/2013 07:57 PM, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Jan 18, 3:01 am, Canbear <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Back in the day, 1980s or even the 1990s, if you even suggested such a
>> future, they would say you watch too much Star Trek.
>> But here it is.
>
> The kicker is these things are cheap, sold next to candy bars at the
> drugstore. I might have envisioned something like them some years
> ago, but restricted to major computer labs and such.
>
> Heck, I was happy when I first got a PC and could run GW-BASIC and do
> the stuff I did (and more) without paying for a Teletype and computer
> service.
>
>
In one of the early Star Trek movies...there was a backdrop containing
hundreds of vertically mounted 5.25" floppy drives!
--
https://www.createspace.com/3707686
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33796 is a reply to message #33787] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 08:12 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Ibmekon
On 19 Jan 2013 09:10:18 GMT, Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>
wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-01-18, jmfbahciv wrote:
>> Ibmekon wrote:
> ...
>>> Only in recent years have I begun to be impressed by modern computers.
>>
>> The hardware is OK; the OSes still need a lot of work. OSes should be
>> seen and not heard unless asked.
>>
>> Every single one still needs to be wrestled with on a minutely basis.
>
> It's not OSes, but software in general. My hardware may be 100 or
> 1000 times larger/faster/better now compare to 1993, but my software
> isn't.
>
> /Jorgen
The first PC based system I wrote in the late 80's , was on an IBM AT
using DBASE II.
When a "file.dbf" table was open the 512 byte file description header
was in memory. If it was dirty and there was a power failure - all the
table was lost.
When DBASE III was announced, I read the magazine reviews - and found
that this problem had not been fixed.
Also in a PC magazine I read of a DBASE clone package - FoxBase+
It would run my DBASE code unaltered - and they had added a FLUSH
command to their language to cure the problem.
Since FLUSH was a DOS call to write all dirty disk sectors, it meant
litle work for them. I bought it.
I read more about the Fox Software company. They said they regarded
programming as an engineering activity - not an art form.
They introduced Mac style windowing in their product under DOS.
When a new version was released they challenged users to find any bug
whatsoever. I never did.
In 1992 Microsoft took them over - pity they did not adopt their
attitude.
Carl Goldsworthy
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33798 is a reply to message #33787] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 08:44 |
Walter Banks
Messages: 1000
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Jorgen Grahn wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-01-18, jmfbahciv wrote:
>> Ibmekon wrote:
> ...
>>> Only in recent years have I begun to be impressed by modern computers.
>>
>> The hardware is OK; the OSes still need a lot of work. OSes should be
>> seen and not heard unless asked.
>>
>> Every single one still needs to be wrestled with on a minutely basis.
>
> It's not OSes, but software in general. My hardware may be 100 or
> 1000 times larger/faster/better now compare to 1993, but my software
> isn't.
Hardware is still sold, a lot of the software developed in the
last twenty years has been developed in the atmosphere of
software should be *free*. There is little incentive for innovative
software development.
Universities are turning out a whole generation of programmers
using 30 year old software technology.
University fundamental software research is practically non-existent.
(This group could/should have thread on Masters/Phd
level software research topics)
There are are pockets of software innovation in company
confidential products. Good ideas and software innovation
it will need effective software protection and a patent system
for real investment to be made in software development.
Its the weekend, coffee's ready.
w..
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33799 is a reply to message #33796] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 09:36 |
D.J.
Messages: 821
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 13:12:31 +0000, Ibmekon wrote:
> On 19 Jan 2013 09:10:18 GMT, Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2013-01-18, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>> Ibmekon wrote:
>> ...
>>>> Only in recent years have I begun to be impressed by modern computers.
>>>
>>> The hardware is OK; the OSes still need a lot of work. OSes should be
>>> seen and not heard unless asked.
>>>
>>> Every single one still needs to be wrestled with on a minutely basis.
>>
>> It's not OSes, but software in general. My hardware may be 100 or
>> 1000 times larger/faster/better now compare to 1993, but my software
>> isn't.
>>
>> /Jorgen
>
> The first PC based system I wrote in the late 80's , was on an IBM AT
> using DBASE II.
> When a "file.dbf" table was open the 512 byte file description header
> was in memory. If it was dirty and there was a power failure - all the
> table was lost.
> When DBASE III was announced, I read the magazine reviews - and found
> that this problem had not been fixed.
>
> Also in a PC magazine I read of a DBASE clone package - FoxBase+
> It would run my DBASE code unaltered - and they had added a FLUSH
> command to their language to cure the problem.
> Since FLUSH was a DOS call to write all dirty disk sectors, it meant
> litle work for them. I bought it.
>
> I read more about the Fox Software company. They said they regarded
> programming as an engineering activity - not an art form.
> They introduced Mac style windowing in their product under DOS.
>
> When a new version was released they challenged users to find any bug
> whatsoever. I never did.
>
> In 1992 Microsoft took them over - pity they did not adopt their
> attitude.
Microsoft's ignorance isn't anyone's bliss.
..
JimP.
--
Brushing aside the thorns so I can see the stars.
http://www.linuxgazette.net/ Linux Gazette
http://www.drivein-jim.net/ Drive-In movie theaters
http://story.drivein-jim.net/ A story Feb, 2011
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33804 is a reply to message #33789] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 09:42 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Bob Martin wrote:
> in 586698 20130119 091018 Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> wrote:
>> On Fri, 2013-01-18, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>> Ibmekon wrote:
>> ....
>>>> Only in recent years have I begun to be impressed by modern computers.
>>>
>>> The hardware is OK; the OSes still need a lot of work. OSes should be
>>> seen and not heard unless asked.
>>>
>>> Every single one still needs to be wrestled with on a minutely basis.
>>
>> It's not OSes, but software in general. My hardware may be 100 or
>> 1000 times larger/faster/better now compare to 1993, but my software
>> isn't.
>
> The faster the CPUs, the cheaper the RAM gets, the sloppier the programmers.
> Making a program fit in 4KB really concentrated the mind!
I'm talking about ease of use, not efficiency. The last person who told
me about his appreciation of the OS was a guy who used VMS (after it became
usable). The os stayed out of the way unless help was needed and then
it was EASY to ask for help; and the help was specific to the query and
didn't take lots of time to figure out.
/BAH
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33806 is a reply to message #33787] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 09:42 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Jorgen Grahn wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-01-18, jmfbahciv wrote:
>> Ibmekon wrote:
> ...
>>> Only in recent years have I begun to be impressed by modern computers.
>>
>> The hardware is OK; the OSes still need a lot of work. OSes should be
>> seen and not heard unless asked.
>>
>> Every single one still needs to be wrestled with on a minutely basis.
>
> It's not OSes, but software in general. My hardware may be 100 or
> 1000 times larger/faster/better now compare to 1993, but my software
> isn't.
It's the OS which influences the apps programmers. If they have never
seen nor experienced a good OS, they won't know how software should
behave.
/BAH
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33808 is a reply to message #33696] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 09:42 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On 18 Jan 2013 14:52:20 GMT
> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> Stephen Wolstenholme wrote:
>>> On Wed, 16 Jan 2013 15:34:02 -0600, philo <philo@privcy.not> wrote:
>>>
>>>> It seems like only yesterday when I upgraded the hard drive in my P-1
>>>> from 850 megs to 2 gigs.
>>>>
>>>> I recall how nervous I was handling a drive so large. The first time I
>>>> used it...I felt like I was walking around inside a *huge* cavern.
>>>>
>>>> Today the new 3TB drive arrived for my spare machine...
>>>> no big deal, it's already half-obsolete, larger ones are available.
>>>
>>> Size isn't everything!
>>
>> Size is nothing if it doesn't do the job well.
>
> Oh I disagree, if it doesn't work I want it nice and small so it's
> easy to throw away.
Good point. :-)
/BAH
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33809 is a reply to message #33769] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 10:32 |
Stan Barr
Messages: 598
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 19:44:01 -0500, Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 1/18/2013 6:05 PM, Dan Espen wrote:
>>
>> I've read about all the interface changes,
>> I don't get it.
>>
>> Why do these desktops keep changing the way they look/work with the same
>> config files?
>
> As usual, someone thinks they have "a better idea." (tm) I've never
> been able to understand it either.
>
> I do like Gnome 2, because it comes the closest to that most perfect of
> desktops, OS/2. I had to install Mate with the latest Fedora.
>
>
Try xfce. I couldn't get on with Gnome3 and reverted to Gnome2 on the
Debian machine, but the Xubuntu on this machine is nice.
I like Gnome2 because you can make it somewhat oldschool Mac-like.
Someone on the Gnome2 team was obviously a Mac user.
--
Cheers,
Stan Barr plan.b .at. dsl .dot. pipex .dot. com
The future was never like this!
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33819 is a reply to message #33806] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 12:05 |
Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
news:PM0004D3A537EC9AD5@users-ibook-g4-6.unknown.dom...
> Jorgen Grahn wrote:
>> On Fri, 2013-01-18, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>> Ibmekon wrote:
>> ...
>>>> Only in recent years have I begun to be impressed by modern computers.
>>>
>>> The hardware is OK; the OSes still need a lot of work. OSes should be
>>> seen and not heard unless asked.
>>>
>>> Every single one still needs to be wrestled with on a minutely basis.
>>
>> It's not OSes, but software in general. My hardware may be 100 or
>> 1000 times larger/faster/better now compare to 1993, but my software
>> isn't.
> It's the OS which influences the apps programmers.
Bullshit with the UI.
We saw menus show up with the apps well before the OS.
> If they have never seen nor experienced a good OS,
> they won't know how software should behave.
Even sillier.
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33822 is a reply to message #33798] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 12:01 |
Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Walter Banks" <walter@bytecraft.com> wrote in message
news:50FAA334.9214FBE8@bytecraft.com...
>
>
> Jorgen Grahn wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2013-01-18, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>> Ibmekon wrote:
>> ...
>>>> Only in recent years have I begun to be impressed by modern computers.
>>>
>>> The hardware is OK; the OSes still need a lot of work. OSes should be
>>> seen and not heard unless asked.
>>>
>>> Every single one still needs to be wrestled with on a minutely basis.
>>
>> It's not OSes, but software in general. My hardware may be 100 or
>> 1000 times larger/faster/better now compare to 1993, but my software
>> isn't.
>
> Hardware is still sold, a lot of the software developed in the
> last twenty years has been developed in the atmosphere of
> software should be *free*. There is little incentive for innovative
> software development.
>
> Universities are turning out a whole generation of programmers
> using 30 year old software technology.
>
> University fundamental software research is practically non-existent.
> (This group could/should have thread on Masters/Phd
> level software research topics)
>
> There are are pockets of software innovation in company
> confidential products. Good ideas and software innovation
> it will need effective software protection and a patent system
> for real investment to be made in software development.
And even with that you still wouldn't see the same rate of
progress with software as we have seen with hard drives.
Your compilers are an example of that. Very useful progress,
but nothing like the result we have seen with hard drives.
> Its the weekend, coffee's ready.
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33831 is a reply to message #33789] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 15:31 |
swatto
Messages: 37
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Member |
|
|
On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 09:45:42 GMT, Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com>
wrote:
>>>> Only in recent years have I begun to be impressed by modern computers.
I switched on a Compaq 486-SX in September, that had not been booted
up since 1999. It worked fine. The battery was still alive! The clock
was several days behind actual time.
Now that's impressive!
Canbear
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33834 is a reply to message #33787] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 16:57 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <slrnkfkonp.ah7.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid>,
grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se (Jorgen Grahn) writes:
> On Fri, 2013-01-18, jmfbahciv wrote:
>
>> Ibmekon wrote:
> ...
>>> Only in recent years have I begun to be impressed by modern computers.
>>
>> The hardware is OK; the OSes still need a lot of work. OSes should be
>> seen and not heard unless asked.
>>
>> Every single one still needs to be wrestled with on a minutely basis.
>
> It's not OSes, but software in general. My hardware may be 100 or
> 1000 times larger/faster/better now compare to 1993, but my software
> isn't.
Your software might not be faster or better, but it _is_ larger.
What the heck, two out of three ain't bad.
--
/~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33838 is a reply to message #33774] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 17:47 |
Mike Spencer
Messages: 997
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Canbear <nospam@nospam.com> writes:
> On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 17:57:50 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> Heck, I was happy when I first got a PC and could run GW-BASIC and do
>> the stuff I did (and more) without paying for a Teletype and computer
>> service.
>
> But also aren't you glad you were there to watch it all evolve?
I wrote a ca. 100-line program in Fortran in '63, then didn't touch a
computer for over 20 years.
I'm particularly glad that I got my first computer when I did: An
Osborne I in '87 when the typical user had a Mac or DOS/Win-2.0.
I made a hand-raised copper curry pan and swapped it even for the O1,
printer & software.
In order to do anything interesting, I had to learn Z80/8080 assembler
and C. Starting only a bit later, with a less obsolete 80x86, I might
never have spent those many hours on such low-level stuff but, as I
did, I now have a much better grasp that I might have of what's really
happening inside my Linux boxen.
OTOH, I worked once, in 1993, beside a student about to graduate from
a university (and presumably respectable) computer science program.
He didn't understand that when a system such a Unix was doing several
things "at the same time", it was in fact doing only one CPU instruction
from a single program at any point in time. Just didn't get it.
Huh.
--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33839 is a reply to message #33772] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 17:48 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote in message
news:10398dcb-d9e4-4304-a58f-74fc1070ac2c@a15g2000vbf.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 18, 8:36 am, Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com> wrote:
>> When I got my first 40 meg drive I thought I had infinite storage and
>> I did for the available media of the time. No music, except perhaps
>> midi and certainly no video, hell the confuser B&W not even grayscale.
>
> Photos collectively do take up a lot of room.
Yes, photos take up a lot of room... but silicon is cheaper than silver.
The old-style paper for printing pictures... as well as the negatives...
used metalic silver. Flash memories do *not* require such quantities of
silver.
--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33840 is a reply to message #33716] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 17:53 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote in message
news:677.801T2645T6326118@kltpzyxm.invalid...
> In article <PM0004D3912EFBEA5D@aca2fcab.ipt.aol.com>, See.above@aol.com
> (jmfbahciv) writes:
>
>> Ibmekon wrote:
>>
>>> Only in recent years have I begun to be impressed by modern
>>> computers.
>>
>> The hardware is OK; the OSes still need a lot of work. OSes should
>> be seen and not heard unless asked.
>
> But, but... then they wouldn't be _interactive_! Microsoft's design
> philosophy can be summed up in three words: "in your face".
>
To me, "interactive" should *not* mean that you have to wrestle it like it
was a big, black bear!!! That kind of interactive... I can do without.
--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33841 is a reply to message #33796] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 17:59 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Ibmekon" wrote in message
news:g05lf8ljiuhde8k5ldbf2mn3pmidfe9i0r@4ax.com...
> On 19 Jan 2013 09:10:18 GMT, Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>
> wrote:
>
> [snip...] [snip...]
> [snip...]
>
> When a new version was released they challenged users to find any bug
> whatsoever. I never did.
>
> In 1992 Microsoft took them over - pity they did not adopt their
> attitude.
>
In the US, when one attempts to buy a gun... there is a background check to
see that the purchaser is *not* demented and will *not* do horrible things
with the gun. Unfortunately, there is *no* such background check for some
company buying a software company. What Mi$uck does with otherwise good
code... should definitely be illegal!!!
--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33842 is a reply to message #33834] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 18:02 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote in message
news:945.802T2719T8376240@kltpzyxm.invalid...
> In article <slrnkfkonp.ah7.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid>,
> grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se (Jorgen Grahn) writes:
>
>> On Fri, 2013-01-18, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>
>>> Ibmekon wrote:
>> ...
>>>> Only in recent years have I begun to be impressed by modern computers.
>>>
>>> The hardware is OK; the OSes still need a lot of work. OSes should be
>>> seen and not heard unless asked.
>>>
>>> Every single one still needs to be wrestled with on a minutely basis.
>>
>> It's not OSes, but software in general. My hardware may be 100 or
>> 1000 times larger/faster/better now compare to 1993, but my software
>> isn't.
>
> Your software might not be faster or better, but it _is_ larger.
> What the heck, two out of three ain't bad.
>
Charlie... only *one* out of three has improved. The *size* has increased.
One out of three *is* pretty bad....
--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33853 is a reply to message #33834] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 18:17 |
Jorgen Grahn
Messages: 606
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sat, 2013-01-19, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> In article <slrnkfkonp.ah7.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid>,
> grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se (Jorgen Grahn) writes:
>
>> On Fri, 2013-01-18, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>
>>> Ibmekon wrote:
>> ...
>>>> Only in recent years have I begun to be impressed by modern computers.
>>>
>>> The hardware is OK; the OSes still need a lot of work. OSes should be
>>> seen and not heard unless asked.
>>>
>>> Every single one still needs to be wrestled with on a minutely basis.
>>
>> It's not OSes, but software in general. My hardware may be 100 or
>> 1000 times larger/faster/better now compare to 1993, but my software
>> isn't.
>
> Your software might not be faster or better, but it _is_ larger.
> What the heck, two out of three ain't bad.
Spotted the obvious exploit before I posted, but didn't bother to fix
it ...
Also, since I mostly use traditional Unix tools, many of them are
fairly unchanged since 1993.
/Jorgen
--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33854 is a reply to message #33809] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 18:22 |
Jorgen Grahn
Messages: 606
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sat, 2013-01-19, Stan Barr wrote:
....
> I like Gnome2 because you can make it somewhat oldschool Mac-like.
> Someone on the Gnome2 team was obviously a Mac user.
Most likely the same guy who decided OK/Cancel dialogues should say
[Cancel] [OK] rather than [OK] [Cancel]. Very annoying for (as far as
I can tell) users of pretty much anything but a Mac.
/Jorgen
--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33855 is a reply to message #33838] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 18:24 |
swatto
Messages: 37
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Member |
|
|
On 19 Jan 2013 18:47:07 -0400, Mike Spencer
<mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
> In order to do anything interesting, I had to learn Z80/8080 assembler
> and C. Starting only a bit later, with a less obsolete 80x86, I might
> never have spent those many hours on such low-level stuff but, as I
> did, I now have a much better grasp that I might have of what's really
> happening inside my Linux boxen.
I recently found a freeware DOS CD Player written entirely in
assembly. I appreciate those people who can code in low-level
languages. It makes knowing how the computer architecture utilizes
instructions so much clearer.
I was raised on BASIC, so although it was easier to grasp OOP
languages when they became vogue, it left my knowledge of machine code
sorely lacking.
Canbear
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33857 is a reply to message #33789] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 19:22 |
Walter Bushell
Messages: 1834
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <alv8a6FptcgU1@mid.individual.net>,
Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> wrote:
> in 586698 20130119 091018 Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> wrote:
>> On Fri, 2013-01-18, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>> Ibmekon wrote:
>> ....
>>>> Only in recent years have I begun to be impressed by modern computers.
>>>
>>> The hardware is OK; the OSes still need a lot of work. OSes should be
>>> seen and not heard unless asked.
>>>
>>> Every single one still needs to be wrestled with on a minutely basis.
>>
>> It's not OSes, but software in general. My hardware may be 100 or
>> 1000 times larger/faster/better now compare to 1993, but my software
>> isn't.
>
> The faster the CPUs, the cheaper the RAM gets, the sloppier the programmers.
> Making a program fit in 4KB really concentrated the mind!
Not to mention getting perhaps one or two turn arounds a day. One desk
checked *well*. Nowadays, you can't produce at the rate you are
expected to if you do. Submit and recompile and get your sintax[1] err
errors in seconds. This produces a more diffuse and confused state of
mind which is much less pleasant and also more logical errors,
methinks.
--
This space unintentionally left blank.
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33858 is a reply to message #33796] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 19:27 |
Walter Bushell
Messages: 1834
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <g05lf8ljiuhde8k5ldbf2mn3pmidfe9i0r@4ax.com>, Ibmekon
wrote:
> On 19 Jan 2013 09:10:18 GMT, Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2013-01-18, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>> Ibmekon wrote:
>> ...
>>>> Only in recent years have I begun to be impressed by modern computers.
>>>
>>> The hardware is OK; the OSes still need a lot of work. OSes should be
>>> seen and not heard unless asked.
>>>
>>> Every single one still needs to be wrestled with on a minutely basis.
>>
>> It's not OSes, but software in general. My hardware may be 100 or
>> 1000 times larger/faster/better now compare to 1993, but my software
>> isn't.
>>
>> /Jorgen
>
> The first PC based system I wrote in the late 80's , was on an IBM AT
> using DBASE II.
> When a "file.dbf" table was open the 512 byte file description header
> was in memory. If it was dirty and there was a power failure - all the
> table was lost.
> When DBASE III was announced, I read the magazine reviews - and found
> that this problem had not been fixed.
>
> Also in a PC magazine I read of a DBASE clone package - FoxBase+
> It would run my DBASE code unaltered - and they had added a FLUSH
> command to their language to cure the problem.
> Since FLUSH was a DOS call to write all dirty disk sectors, it meant
> litle work for them. I bought it.
>
> I read more about the Fox Software company. They said they regarded
> programming as an engineering activity - not an art form.
> They introduced Mac style windowing in their product under DOS.
>
> When a new version was released they challenged users to find any bug
> whatsoever. I never did.
>
> In 1992 Microsoft took them over - pity they did not adopt their
> attitude.
>
>
> Carl Goldsworthy
I used Foxbase+ Mac and it was a great product for the time. When I
heard that Microsoft was taking it over I knew the jig was probably
up. To write applications you had to be on the campus where you could
talk to the OS developers was what the rep said. Let's just say that
the APIs were apparently not transparent and M$ keep some of the
knowledge in house, I have to believe for competitive reasons.
--
This space unintentionally left blank.
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33859 is a reply to message #33799] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 19:29 |
Walter Bushell
Messages: 1834
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <hqblf8pacej02i360jh5qjqh0b5ukpsbpl@4ax.com>,
JimP. <pongbill127@cableone.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 13:12:31 +0000, Ibmekon wrote:
>
>> On 19 Jan 2013 09:10:18 GMT, Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 2013-01-18, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>>> Ibmekon wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> > Only in recent years have I begun to be impressed by modern computers.
>>>>
>>>> The hardware is OK; the OSes still need a lot of work. OSes should be
>>>> seen and not heard unless asked.
>>>>
>>>> Every single one still needs to be wrestled with on a minutely basis.
>>>
>>> It's not OSes, but software in general. My hardware may be 100 or
>>> 1000 times larger/faster/better now compare to 1993, but my software
>>> isn't.
>>>
>>> /Jorgen
>>
>> The first PC based system I wrote in the late 80's , was on an IBM AT
>> using DBASE II.
>> When a "file.dbf" table was open the 512 byte file description header
>> was in memory. If it was dirty and there was a power failure - all the
>> table was lost.
>> When DBASE III was announced, I read the magazine reviews - and found
>> that this problem had not been fixed.
>>
>> Also in a PC magazine I read of a DBASE clone package - FoxBase+
>> It would run my DBASE code unaltered - and they had added a FLUSH
>> command to their language to cure the problem.
>> Since FLUSH was a DOS call to write all dirty disk sectors, it meant
>> litle work for them. I bought it.
>>
>> I read more about the Fox Software company. They said they regarded
>> programming as an engineering activity - not an art form.
>> They introduced Mac style windowing in their product under DOS.
>>
>> When a new version was released they challenged users to find any bug
>> whatsoever. I never did.
>>
>> In 1992 Microsoft took them over - pity they did not adopt their
>> attitude.
>
> Microsoft's ignorance isn't anyone's bliss.
> .
> JimP.
In the apparent opinion of the M$ management it was to the advantage
of M$ advantage.
--
This space unintentionally left blank.
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33860 is a reply to message #33837] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 19:34 |
Walter Bushell
Messages: 1834
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <kdf7mn$7g4$1@dont-email.me>,
"Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
> "Walter Bushell" <proto@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:proto-66713B.08400718012013@news.panix.com...
>> In article <50F944D1.903914BB@bytecraft.com>,
>>
>> [snip...] [snip...]
>> [snip...]
>>
>> Oh, yes to the abuse. I had a 32 gigabyte SD card go through the wash
>> and it still works. Now if I want a replacement chip for my camera I
>> would have to look hard, I think it can take up to one gigabyte and
>> certainly not 4.
>>
>
> Walter, what you need is a new *camera* for your camera... :-)
>
The thought has occurred to me, but the current camera has a nice
feature set for my needs and I have enough New Englander in me to "Use
it up, wear it out; make it do or do without".
Besides people here are bragging about using a 486 with 2 megabytes of
RAM and my camera is far newer.
--
This space unintentionally left blank.
|
|
|
|
| Re: New HD [message #33861 is a reply to message #33838] |
Sat, 19 January 2013 19:40 |
Walter Bushell
Messages: 1834
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <87ip6skcyc.fsf@nudel.nodomain.nowhere>,
Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
> OTOH, I worked once, in 1993, beside a student about to graduate from
> a university (and presumably respectable) computer science program.
> He didn't understand that when a system such a Unix was doing several
> things "at the same time", it was in fact doing only one CPU instruction
> from a single program at any point in time. Just didn't get it.
Well depends on how you look at it. I was asked wether DMA access to
the CPU stopped the CPU or took place simultaneously. Being a question
from my boss in a class, I replied "Both". The boss laughed and asked,
"How can it be both?" I of course replied that the DMA access stole
cycles from the CPU so the CPU instructions ran slower.
--
This space unintentionally left blank.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
