10.5.4 Released
John
available as a Combo Updater - the preferred method used by experts.
Alan Baker
John <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> 10.5.4 now appears in Software Update. Still waiting for it to be made
> available as a Combo Updater - the preferred method used by experts.
So you'll be using Software Update, then...
--
"The iPhone doesn't have a speaker phone" -- "I checked very carefully" --
"I checked Apple's web pages" -- Edwin on the iPhone
"It is Mac OS X, not BSD.' -- 'From Mac OS to BSD Unix." -- "It's BSD Unix with Apple's APIs and GUI on top of it' -- 'nothing but BSD Unix' (Edwin on Mac OS X)
'[The IBM PC] could boot multiple OS, such as DOS, C/PM, GEM, etc.' --
'I claimed nothing about GEM other than it was available software for the
IBM PC. (Edwin on GEM)
'Solaris is just a marketing rename of Sun OS.' -- 'Sun OS is not included
on the timeline of Solaris because it's a different OS.' (Edwin on Sun)
John
> In article <d_adna8RgujJ1fTV...@netlojix.com>,
> John <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> 10.5.4 now appears in Software Update. Still waiting for it to be made
>> available as a Combo Updater - the preferred method used by experts.
>
> So you'll be using Software Update, then...
>
Negative! As always I use only the Combo updater.
Nashton
> 10.5.4 now appears in Software Update. Still waiting for it to be made
> available as a Combo Updater - the preferred method used by experts.
Here you go Mr. "expert:"
http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/
The combo appeared on Apple's site at the same time as the update via SU.
Snit
PM:
"Resolves an Exposé issue that may result in only a subset
of windows being shown."
By subset they clearly mean proper subset (or partial subset). Just a
public service to help those who have shown deep confusion on this issue in
the past!
--
Satan lives for my sins... now *that* is dedication!
John
Probably needs to be spelled out for technically incompetent people like
Steve Carroll and Steve De Mena.
Snit
nJGdnQXlRpTiFvTV...@netlojix.com on 6/30/08 6:42 PM:
Steve Carroll and Wally got very, very confused about subsets. Here are
some comments from Wally:
I gave a clear example as to when a subset with 0 elements
would not actually be empty as you claimed that it would!
But zero items does not necessarily translate to being empty
as you have said it would!
your delusion is that something that owes its very existence
to the fact that it contains information can in fact be
...empty!
whether it is written {} or {0} has no significance wrt what
the answer actually is
it makes no difference if you write {} and I write {0}
because the meaning is exactly the same ...0 elements!
Now research why a "subset" cannot be "empty"
Too damned funny!
--
Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and
conscientious stupidity. -- Martin Luther King, Jr.
Steve de Mena
Oh boy, not that again.
Steve
Snit
B7WdndDoFNC8PfTV...@giganews.com on 6/30/08 8:10 PM:
Do you disagree?
--
"Innovation is not about saying yes to everything. It's about saying NO to
all but the most crucial features." -- Steve Jobs
Steve de Mena
10.5.4 and the Airport Extreme 802.11n update (released about an hour
ago) still didn't fix the problem I have:
On my Mac Pro I can see the Airport Extreme with the utility but if I
try to configure it it just endlessly attempts to read the
configuration. (And I am hard wired to the base station). I have
to use another Mac, or a Vista machine, to configure the Airport
Extreme base station.
Steve
Nashton
Call Apple. I had a defective EBS and it was a hardware issue. It was a
funny situation because it seemed to work partially, indicating that it
was more of a sw issue, but in the end, the new one fixed the problem.
Nashton
If you're so technically competent, why didn't you know that Apple
issues their updates as standalone downloads at the same time on their
site, as in SU, in the form of combo updates also?
Just curious.
Wally
"Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> "Steve de Mena" <st...@stevedemena.com> stated in post
> B7WdndDoFNC8PfTV...@giganews.com on 6/30/08 8:10 PM:
>
>> John wrote:
>>> 10.5.4 now appears in Software Update. Still waiting for it to be made
>>> available as a Combo Updater - the preferred method used by experts.
>>
>> "the preferred method used by experts"
>>
>> Oh boy, not that again.
>>
>> Steve
>
> Do you disagree?
>
I am not an expert nor do I claim to know any, so in my case it is not a
question of agreeing or not, but I would seriously like for someone to be
able to explain to me why downloading a combo update at 561MB and using that
would be considered an expert approach rather than using the 87.6MB update
that software update considers specific for my computer!
Nashton
There is no advantage, it just John, being the wind bag that he is,
blowing hot and moist air from anywhere it can escape.
Wally
wrote:
Thanks Nashton, I wondered if that was the case!
John
"Nashton" <na...@na.ca> wrote in message news:g4d02l$6re$2...@aioe.org...
At the time I wrote that APPLE HAD NOT. It took them 1.5 hrs to post links.
John
"Nashton" <na...@na.ca> wrote in message news:g4d1cb$6re$5...@aioe.org...
Read Macfixit in the future so you won't be a technically incompetent
dumbass.
Steve Hix
Wally <Wa...@wally.world.net> wrote:
The one evident advantage would be if you had multiple Macs to update;
download the combo update once and use it on all of 'em.
Wally
"John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
It appears that rather than being "the preferred method used by experts" it
is actually only "often better than the incremental update offered by
Software Update."
From Macfixit...
"[Note: Alternatively, go to http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/ and
click the download link for the desired package. In the case of major system
updates, this is the way to obtain the full "combo update", which is often
better than the incremental update offered by Software Update.]"
And as Apple state...
"The Mac OS X 10.5.4 Update is recommended for all versions of Mac OS X 10.5
through 10.5.3.
The delta update lets you update from Mac OS X 10.5.3 to 10.5.4
The combo update lets you update from Mac OS X 10.5, 10.5.1, 10.5.2, or
10.5.3 to 10.5.4"
So Nashton was perfectly correct .... considering that I am updating from
10.5.3 to 10.5.4 there is *no* advantage gained by using the combo update!
the only advantage seems to be for those using a version of Leopard that is
earlier than the last update, and even in that situation your favored
Macfixit can only say that it "is often better" hardly the same as saying
"the preferred method used by experts" John!
Perhaps in future you will not only Read Macfixit John but you will actually
try to understand it so that it won't appear to be you that is a technically
incompetent dumbass?
Wally
sehix-469051....@news.speakeasy.net, "Steve Hix"
<se...@NOSPAMspeakeasy.netINVALID> wrote:
At first glance that would appear to be the case, but as all my Macs are at
the same level i.e. 10.5.3, wouldnšt just downloading the 10.5.3 to 10.5.4
updater achieve the same result?
The only real advantage that I can discover is if a person had a much
earlier version of Leopard installed ... The combo would offer a more
convenient solution than using several incremental updates.
Snit
Which is not uncommon with updates.
--
Look, this is silly. It's not an argument, it's an armor plated walrus with
walnut paneling and an all leather interior.
Steve de Mena
I originally had a 100MB Airport Extreme Base station, the first one
released. I upgraded it 2 months ago to the Gigabit Ethernet model.
Same problem, so I don't think it is a hardware issue.
It works great, otherwise, and 802.11n speeds are terrific on my Mac
laptops.
Steve
Steve de Mena
Slow down, that was too much information too fast for John. Repeat it
again, using smaller words, and preferably with some pictures added.
Steve
John
"Often better" is the reason why experts use it you idiotic dumbshit.
The combo update replaces a tremendous number of files in the OS. If
one had a corrupted file it will often fix it because the file will be
overwritten by a pristine file from the combo updater.
Experts use it because it will VERY often fix any problem that exists
without having to result to a complete OS reload.
What a bunch of technical incompetents guys like Wally are.
Snit
...
>> It appears that rather than being "the preferred method used by experts" it
>> is actually only "often better than the incremental update offered by
>> Software Update."
>>
>>
>
> "Often better" is the reason why experts use it you idiotic dumbshit.
> The combo update replaces a tremendous number of files in the OS. If
> one had a corrupted file it will often fix it because the file will be
> overwritten by a pristine file from the combo updater.
>
> Experts use it because it will VERY often fix any problem that exists
> without having to result to a complete OS reload.
>
> What a bunch of technical incompetents guys like Wally are.
I was having a problem with setting programs to Open at Login. Somehow the
list became "stuck"... I could not get items added or removed from it. I
did little trouble shooting - basically just trashed the pref file. That
did not work.
I did a standard update. That did not fix it.
I then did a combo update... just to see. That quirk is now gone. There
was some file with some corruption. I have *no* idea what file. Would be
interesting to know but I am happy the problem is solved - now Typinator
opens at log in.
--
If A = B and B = C, then A = C, except where void or prohibited by law.
Roy Santoro, Psycho Proverb Zone (http://snipurl.com/BurdenOfProof)
Steve de Mena
>> It appears that rather than being "the preferred method used by
>> experts" it
>> is actually only "often better than the incremental update offered by
>> Software Update."
>>
>>
>
> "Often better" is the reason why experts use it you idiotic dumbshit.
> The combo update replaces a tremendous number of files in the OS. If
> one had a corrupted file it will often fix it because the file will be
> overwritten by a pristine file from the combo updater.
>
> Experts use it because it will VERY often fix any problem that exists
> without having to result to a complete OS reload.
>
> What a bunch of technical incompetents guys like Wally are.
Let me guess - you're an old guy?
Steve
Nashton
Perhaps it's a hardware issue on the Mac Pro side. I have to ask: Have
you tried another ethernet cable? Perhaps the ethernet connector on the
Mac side is defective. Can you connect to Airport Utility via wireless
or you don't have an airport card? Did you trash the preferences of the AU?
John
> "John" <nos...@nospam.com> stated in post
> ZqidnTIXsvCy4vfV...@netlojix.com on 7/1/08 12:02 PM:
>
> ...
>>> It appears that rather than being "the preferred method used by experts" it
>>> is actually only "often better than the incremental update offered by
>>> Software Update."
>>>
>>>
>> "Often better" is the reason why experts use it you idiotic dumbshit.
>> The combo update replaces a tremendous number of files in the OS. If
>> one had a corrupted file it will often fix it because the file will be
>> overwritten by a pristine file from the combo updater.
>>
>> Experts use it because it will VERY often fix any problem that exists
>> without having to result to a complete OS reload.
>>
>> What a bunch of technical incompetents guys like Wally are.
>
> I was having a problem with setting programs to Open at Login. Somehow the
> list became "stuck"... I could not get items added or removed from it. I
> did little trouble shooting - basically just trashed the pref file. That
> did not work.
>
> I did a standard update. That did not fix it.
>
> I then did a combo update... just to see. That quirk is now gone. There
> was some file with some corruption. I have *no* idea what file. Would be
> interesting to know but I am happy the problem is solved - now Typinator
> opens at log in.
>
Now you know why true experts use the Combo updater. It can take care
of problems before they become big problems and with no more effort then
waiting a few more minutes for the larger download.
John
An expert would run the 10.5.4 combo updater before wasting any more
time troubleshooting. That will OFTEN take care of any software problem
that may exist.
Snit
Just for the record: I generally do use the combo (though not always). I
did not this time specifically to see if the Software Update would solve the
problem.
--
Picture of a tuna milkshake: http://snipurl.com/f34z
Feel free to ask for the recipe.
Belphegor
> > "John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> >> "Nashton" <n...@na.ca> wrote in messagenews:g4d1cb$6re$5...@aioe.org...
> >>> Wally wrote:
> >>>> On 1/7/08 11:11 AM, in article
> >>>> C48EEE82.C4709%use...@gallopinginsanity.com,
> >>>> "Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>> "Steve de Mena" <st...@stevedemena.com> stated in post
Seems to me that an 'Expert' would fix problems as and when they arise
rather than wait for an update combo to come along.
If however, the 'Expert' in question is worried about undetected
corrupted files he would surely re-install the complete OS instead.
No?
Steve de Mena
Give some time for the "expert" John to read through "Macfixit" for
the answer.
Steve
Tim Smith
Wally <Wa...@wally.world.net> wrote:
> So Nashton was perfectly correct .... considering that I am updating from
> 10.5.3 to 10.5.4 there is *no* advantage gained by using the combo update!
> the only advantage seems to be for those using a version of Leopard that is
> earlier than the last update, and even in that situation your favored
> Macfixit can only say that it "is often better" hardly the same as saying
> "the preferred method used by experts" John!
I'd consider having a working system at the end of the update to be a
bit of an advantage. The second to last time I tried SU instead of
Combo, it said the update failed, and it left a corrupt Finder. I fixed
that by scp'ing Finder from another Mac to the failed on, then ssh'ing
and launching that copy of Finder, then downloading the Combo update and
using it. It worked without a hitch.
The last time I tried SU, it again gave an error about the update
failing, but did not trash Finder. Again, the Combo update worked.
So this time, I went straight to Combo update, and will do so for all
future updates.
--
--Tim Smith
Dave Fritzinger
Odd that you have had those problems. I just finished updating 3 Macs
(Aluminum 24"/2.8GHz iMac, iMac G5, and MBP/15.4/1.83 GHz CD) without
a problem. Indeed, I have been using SU for all my up dates, with no
problems that I can remember.
As always, YMMV.
--
Dave Fritzinger
Honolulu, HI
Steve de Mena
Fixed it. And without John's help.
It was actually setting the Network adapter's Ethernet settings to
"Automatic" instead of "Manual". (even though Manual settings were
the defaults, i.e. MTU size had not been changed)
Thanks.
Steve
Steve de Mena
Same here, for 3 Macs (Mac Pro, Mac Mini and MacBook Pro). And I
never repair permissions or disconnect USB/Firewire devices or any of
those other things I have read you should do.
Steve
Dave Fritzinger
Actually, I do have to say there was one oddity on the last of my
upgrades (your comment on disconnecting external drives). I have an
external Firewire drive for Time Machine on the aluminum iMac. Upon
the restart after the 10.5.4 upgrade, the system didn't see the drive.
I turned off the drive and turned it back on, and all was OK.
Wally
"Steve de Mena" <st...@stevedemena.com> wrote:
Sorry! ...point taken. :)
John
And yet when I run the Combo on three Macs time after time I ALWAYS have
ZERO problems. Unlike Steve De Mena who always seems to have a bunch of
weird problems.
Wally
"John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
I await your reasoning why these "experts" would be using a version of
Leopard older than the version that 'software updates' was designed to
adequately update John ... I suspect that I have a long wait ahead of me
though!
> The combo update replaces a tremendous number of files in the OS.
And the 'software update' is what? Just there for show?
> If
> one had a corrupted file it will often fix it because the file will be
> overwritten by a pristine file from the combo updater.
"If" John? That scenario has never been suggested! We were merely talking
about a simple update.
Besides an expert of the kind that you mentioned would I suggest want to
know what had gotten corrupted and why.... They are hardly likely to be
satisfied with simply correcting the problem without being able to
understand the cause!
Obviously our definitions of 'expert' are poles apart!
> Experts use it because it will VERY often fix any problem that exists
> without having to result to a complete OS reload.
Having suspected which file is corrupt an expert would simply replace it
from a back up, other wise there cannot be any certainty that the *only*
cause of the problem was that particular file.
Your method may well fix the problem but would offer no satisfaction at all
that the 'expert' had been able to identify the source!
> What a bunch of technical incompetents guys like Wally are.
You think? (That零 rhetorical John, as most here know the real answer to
that!)
Wally
"Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> "John" <nos...@nospam.com> stated in post
> ZqidnTIXsvCy4vfV...@netlojix.com on 7/1/08 12:02 PM:
>
> ...
>>> It appears that rather than being "the preferred method used by experts" it
>>> is actually only "often better than the incremental update offered by
>>> Software Update."
>>>
>>>
>>
>> "Often better" is the reason why experts use it you idiotic dumbshit.
>> The combo update replaces a tremendous number of files in the OS. If
>> one had a corrupted file it will often fix it because the file will be
>> overwritten by a pristine file from the combo updater.
>>
>> Experts use it because it will VERY often fix any problem that exists
>> without having to result to a complete OS reload.
>>
>> What a bunch of technical incompetents guys like Wally are.
>
> I was having a problem with setting programs to Open at Login. Somehow the
> list became "stuck"... I could not get items added or removed from it. I
> did little trouble shooting - basically just trashed the pref file. That
> did not work.
>
> I did a standard update. That did not fix it.
>
> I then did a combo update... just to see. That quirk is now gone.
Has anyone ever suggested that the combo update may not be a tool used
effectively to *fix* an actual problem? If so by whom and where?
> There
> was some file with some corruption. I have *no* idea what file. Would be
> interesting to know but I am happy the problem is solved - now Typinator
> opens at log in.
>
Strange how that problem you had has only now seen the light of day! LOL
Steve de Mena
>
>
>
>
> And yet when I run the Combo on three Macs time after time I ALWAYS have
> ZERO problems. Unlike Steve De Mena who always seems to have a bunch of
> weird problems.
If everyone else had "ZERO PROBLEMS" we would still be at 10.4.0.
The problems I mention can all be found reported by other users by
reading Apple's Discussion forums. The similarity might be that we run
more programs than just iTunes and Safari.
Steve
Wally
"John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
Experts would not be content with merely fixing a problem John, they tend to
try and understand the cause!
But I do understand why you would not fit into that category of user!
Wally
"John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
Funny how that response does not seem to be the favored one on the sites
that deal with various and diverse problems experienced by actual users
John.
Your method appears to be the one of last resort, hardly expert IMO!
Snit
C490EB05.1366%Wa...@wally.world.net on 7/1/08 5:20 PM:
> On 2/7/08 3:13 AM, in article C48FCFDD.C49E6%use...@gallopinginsanity.com,
> "Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> "John" <nos...@nospam.com> stated in post
>> ZqidnTIXsvCy4vfV...@netlojix.com on 7/1/08 12:02 PM:
>>
>> ...
>>>> It appears that rather than being "the preferred method used by experts" it
>>>> is actually only "often better than the incremental update offered by
>>>> Software Update."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> "Often better" is the reason why experts use it you idiotic dumbshit.
>>> The combo update replaces a tremendous number of files in the OS. If
>>> one had a corrupted file it will often fix it because the file will be
>>> overwritten by a pristine file from the combo updater.
>>>
>>> Experts use it because it will VERY often fix any problem that exists
>>> without having to result to a complete OS reload.
>>>
>>> What a bunch of technical incompetents guys like Wally are.
>>
>> I was having a problem with setting programs to Open at Login. Somehow the
>> list became "stuck"... I could not get items added or removed from it. I
>> did little trouble shooting - basically just trashed the pref file. That
>> did not work.
>>
>> I did a standard update. That did not fix it.
>>
>> I then did a combo update... just to see. That quirk is now gone.
>
> Has anyone ever suggested that the combo update may not be a tool used
> effectively to *fix* an actual problem? If so by whom and where?
I never said it was or was not an effective tool for fixing any problem - I
noted a procedure that solved the problem.
>> There
>> was some file with some corruption. I have *no* idea what file. Would be
>> interesting to know but I am happy the problem is solved - now Typinator
>> opens at log in.
>>
>
> Strange how that problem you had has only now seen the light of day! LOL
What do you mean? Strange that I did not publicly talk about Typinator not
starting on login? How bizarre for someone to not do so, eh? LOL!
--
Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments
that take our breath away.
Wally
b1173a31-b261-42ee...@j22g2000hsf.googlegroups.com,
"Belphegor" <hue...@gmail.com> wrote:
Very true! I hadn't thought of that!
> If however, the 'Expert' in question is worried about undetected
> corrupted files he would surely re-install the complete OS instead.
Absolutely! and only then after being able to determine that the *actual*
cause could not be isolated, after all knowledge is power :).
> No?
Yup!
Wally
reply_in_group-0F9...@news.supernews.com, "Tim Smith"
<reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
> In article <C49064FD.12E6%Wa...@wally.world.net>,
> Wally <Wa...@wally.world.net> wrote:
>> So Nashton was perfectly correct .... considering that I am updating from
>> 10.5.3 to 10.5.4 there is *no* advantage gained by using the combo update!
>> the only advantage seems to be for those using a version of Leopard that is
>> earlier than the last update, and even in that situation your favored
>> Macfixit can only say that it "is often better" hardly the same as saying
>> "the preferred method used by experts" John!
>
> I'd consider having a working system at the end of the update to be a
> bit of an advantage.
Absolutely! but wouldnšt an expert be seeking more than merely getting it
working again... Wouldnšt a major concern be what caused it and why!
> The second to last time I tried SU instead of
> Combo, it said the update failed, and it left a corrupt Finder. I fixed
> that by scp'ing Finder from another Mac to the failed on, then ssh'ing
> and launching that copy of Finder, then downloading the Combo update and
> using it. It worked without a hitch.
As I suggested in a previous post an expert would attempt to isolate the
problem with the aid of backups much like you have described doing, rather
than a full blown update that offers nothing wrt the cause!
>
> The last time I tried SU, it again gave an error about the update
> failing, but did not trash Finder. Again, the Combo update worked.
>
> So this time, I went straight to Combo update, and will do so for all
> future updates.
Each to his/her own!
John
Add insanity to your list of problems. You truly are a nutjob.
John
> On 2/7/08 3:13 AM, in article C48FCFDD.C49E6%use...@gallopinginsanity.com,
> "Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> "John" <nos...@nospam.com> stated in post
>> ZqidnTIXsvCy4vfV...@netlojix.com on 7/1/08 12:02 PM:
>>
>> ...
>>>> It appears that rather than being "the preferred method used by experts" it
>>>> is actually only "often better than the incremental update offered by
>>>> Software Update."
>>>>
>>>>
>>> "Often better" is the reason why experts use it you idiotic dumbshit.
>>> The combo update replaces a tremendous number of files in the OS. If
>>> one had a corrupted file it will often fix it because the file will be
>>> overwritten by a pristine file from the combo updater.
>>>
>>> Experts use it because it will VERY often fix any problem that exists
>>> without having to result to a complete OS reload.
>>>
>>> What a bunch of technical incompetents guys like Wally are.
>> I was having a problem with setting programs to Open at Login. Somehow the
>> list became "stuck"... I could not get items added or removed from it. I
>> did little trouble shooting - basically just trashed the pref file. That
>> did not work.
>>
>> I did a standard update. That did not fix it.
>>
>> I then did a combo update... just to see. That quirk is now gone.
>
> Has anyone ever suggested that the combo update may not be a tool used
> effectively to *fix* an actual problem? If so by whom and where?
Macfixit and many of the books by Ted Landau, a known Mac expert.
John
Why bother if it only takes less than 5 minutes to fix the problem.
John
> On 2/7/08 7:21 AM, in article
> reply_in_group-0F9...@news.supernews.com, "Tim Smith"
> <reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <C49064FD.12E6%Wa...@wally.world.net>,
>> Wally <Wa...@wally.world.net> wrote:
>>> So Nashton was perfectly correct .... considering that I am updating from
>>> 10.5.3 to 10.5.4 there is *no* advantage gained by using the combo update!
>>> the only advantage seems to be for those using a version of Leopard that is
>>> earlier than the last update, and even in that situation your favored
>>> Macfixit can only say that it "is often better" hardly the same as saying
>>> "the preferred method used by experts" John!
>> I'd consider having a working system at the end of the update to be a
>> bit of an advantage.
>
> Absolutely! but wouldnšt an expert be seeking more than merely getting it
> working again... Wouldnšt a major concern be what caused it and why!
>
>> The second to last time I tried SU instead of
>> Combo, it said the update failed, and it left a corrupt Finder. I fixed
>> that by scp'ing Finder from another Mac to the failed on, then ssh'ing
>> and launching that copy of Finder, then downloading the Combo update and
>> using it. It worked without a hitch.
>
> As I suggested in a previous post an expert would attempt to isolate the
> problem with the aid of backups much like you have described doing, rather
> than a full blown update that offers nothing wrt the cause!
>
Wrong. An expert would fix the problem in under 5 minutes, rather than
wasting hours and still not fix the problem.
Snit
>>> What a bunch of technical incompetents guys like Wally are.
>>
>> You think? (That零 rhetorical John, as most here know the real answer to
>> that!)
>
>
> Add insanity to your list of problems. You truly are a nutjob.
Nah, Wally is a genius:
I gave a clear example as to when a subset with 0 elements
would not actually be empty as you claimed that it would!
But zero items does not necessarily translate to being empty
as you have said it would!
your delusion is that something that owes its very existence
to the fact that it contains information can in fact be
...empty!
whether it is written {} or {0} has no significance wrt what
the answer actually is
it makes no difference if you write {} and I write {0}
because the meaning is exactly the same ...0 elements!
Now research why a "subset" cannot be "empty"
LOL!
--
When thinking changes your mind, that's philosophy.
When God changes your mind, that's faith.
When facts change your mind, that's science.
Snit
>>> Now you know why true experts use the Combo updater. It can take care
>>> of problems before they become big problems and with no more effort then
>>> waiting a few more minutes for the larger download.
>>
>> Experts would not be content with merely fixing a problem John, they tend to
>> try and understand the cause!
>>
>>
>
>
> Why bother if it only takes less than 5 minutes to fix the problem.
An expert would (or should) asses the need to understand the cause, the
depth of the problem, etc. - and *not* just have a kneejerk same-reaction in
every case.
--
The direct use of physical force is so poor a solution to the problem of
limited resources that it is commonly employed only by small children and
great nations. - David Friedman
Steve de Mena
>> And yet when I run the Combo on three Macs time after time I ALWAYS
>> have ZERO problems. Unlike Steve De Mena who always seems to have a
>> bunch of weird problems.
>
> If everyone else had "ZERO PROBLEMS" we would still be at 10.4.0.
>
> The problems I mention can all be found reported by other users by
> reading Apple's Discussion forums. The similarity might be that we run
> more programs than just iTunes and Safari.
>
> Steve
10.5.4 broke Parallels networking for me.. Ugh. Someone else
uninstalled Parallels and re-installed it and it started working
again. Guess I'll have to try that later.
Steve
Snit
> Wally wrote:
...
>> As I suggested in a previous post an expert would attempt to isolate the
>> problem with the aid of backups much like you have described doing, rather
>> than a full blown update that offers nothing wrt the cause!
>>
>
>
>
> Wrong. An expert would fix the problem in under 5 minutes, rather than
> wasting hours and still not fix the problem.
Would an expert *ever* use Windows System Restore? Wally, if he is to stay
consistent, thinks not!
--
"For example, user interfaces are _usually_ better in commercial software.
I'm not saying that this is always true, but in many cases the user
interface to a program is the most important part for a commercial
company..." Linus Torvalds <http://www.tlug.jp/docs/linus.html>
Snit
No problems here with Parallels and 10.5.4... did you apply the fairly
recent update from Parallels that resolved the screen flickering (etc.)
issues? If not maybe it also fixed some other things... I would have to go
back and read the release notes.
--
The answer to the water shortage is to dilute it.
John
> "John" <nos...@nospam.com> stated in post
> x6WdnV_gPryATffV...@netlojix.com on 7/1/08 5:47 PM:
>
>> Wally wrote:
> ...
>>> As I suggested in a previous post an expert would attempt to isolate the
>>> problem with the aid of backups much like you have described doing, rather
>>> than a full blown update that offers nothing wrt the cause!
>>>
>>
>>
>> Wrong. An expert would fix the problem in under 5 minutes, rather than
>> wasting hours and still not fix the problem.
>
> Would an expert *ever* use Windows System Restore? Wally, if he is to stay
> consistent, thinks not!
>
I have used System Restore several times. Why spend hours trying to
"understand" a problem and STILL not fix it.
John
Works fine on all my systems. Sounds like technical incompetence.
John
You can always count on Steve to screw up and ALWAYS to have problems.
Snit
Well, there are times it might make sense to do so - even if you think you
can fix it quickly for that case. If, for example, you keep seeing the same
problem on a large number of machines and you see it on a non-critical
machine, it may make sense to "dissect" the problem to try to find a
solution that will be longer lasting than some quick fix.
But this is far, far above and beyond the confines of the current topic. :)
--
I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is to try to please
everyone. -- Bill Cosby
Snit
This Steve, however, is not the one who has reported the most problems with
OS X... nor the most unbelievable.
--
BU__SH__
Steve Hix
Wally <Wa...@wally.world.net> wrote:
> On 1/7/08 9:59 PM, in article
> sehix-469051....@news.speakeasy.net, "Steve Hix"
> <se...@NOSPAMspeakeasy.netINVALID> wrote:
>
> > In article <C4903DD6.12DC%Wa...@wally.world.net>,
> > Wally <Wa...@wally.world.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On 1/7/08 6:36 PM, in article g4d1cb$6re$5...@aioe.org, "Nashton"
> >> <na...@na.ca>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> There is no advantage, it just John, being the wind bag that he is,
> >>> blowing hot and moist air from anywhere it can escape.
> >
> > The one evident advantage would be if you had multiple Macs to update;
> > download the combo update once and use it on all of 'em.
>
> At first glance that would appear to be the case, but as all my Macs are at
> the same level i.e. 10.5.3, wouldnšt just downloading the 10.5.3 to 10.5.4
> updater achieve the same result?
Likely (assuming that one or the other update wasn't munged in some way;
but that's the usual risk.
Most people with multiple machines might not have them all at the same
level, for whatever reasons.
> The only real advantage that I can discover is if a person had a much
> earlier version of Leopard installed ... The combo would offer a more
> convenient solution than using several incremental updates.
Steve de Mena
Yes, Parallels is up-to-date. I checked that first before going to
the Parallels forums and see others report the same problem I am having.
I'll do some troubleshooting now.
Steve
John
"Steve de Mena" <st...@stevedemena.com> wrote in message
news:hqCdneq1iOcMn_bV...@giganews.com...
Seems like you always need to do troubleshooting unlike people who
consistently use expert methods like myself.
Steve de Mena
So installing the "combo update" would have prevented my problem?
Wake me up when you have something (1) intelligent or (2) original to
say.
Steve
Nashton
> Nashton wrote:
>> Steve de Mena wrote:
>>>> Steve de Mena wrote:
>>>>>> John wrote:
>>>>>>> 10.5.4 now appears in Software Update. Still waiting for it to
>>>>>>> by experts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "the preferred method used by experts"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Steve
>>>>>
>>>>> hour ago) still didn't fix the problem I have:
>>>>>
>>>>> On my Mac Pro I can see the Airport Extreme with the utility but if
>>>>> I try to configure it it just endlessly attempts to read the
>>>>> configuration. (And I am hard wired to the base station). I
>>>>> have to use another Mac, or a Vista machine, to configure the
>>>>> Airport Extreme base station.
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Call Apple. I had a defective EBS and it was a hardware issue. It
>>>> was a funny situation because it seemed to work partially,
>>>> indicating that it was more of a sw issue, but in the end, the new
>>>> one fixed the problem.
>>>
>>> I originally had a 100MB Airport Extreme Base station, the first one
>>> released. I upgraded it 2 months ago to the Gigabit Ethernet model.
>>> Same problem, so I don't think it is a hardware issue.
>>>
>>> It works great, otherwise, and 802.11n speeds are terrific on my Mac
>>> laptops.
>>>
>>> Steve
>>
>> Perhaps it's a hardware issue on the Mac Pro side. I have to ask: Have
>> you tried another ethernet cable? Perhaps the ethernet connector on
>> the Mac side is defective. Can you connect to Airport Utility via
>> wireless or you don't have an airport card? Did you trash the
>
>
> Fixed it. And without John's help.
>
> It was actually setting the Network adapter's Ethernet settings to
> "Automatic" instead of "Manual". (even though Manual settings were the
> defaults, i.e. MTU size had not been changed)
>
> Thanks.
>
> Steve
I'm at a loss as to why it didn't work while on Automatic. Glad to hear
that your problem is solved:)
Wally
"Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
So you did a "little trouble shooting" then you "did a standard update" you
then "did a combo update" and straight after the combo update you claim that
the problem had gone... But you wasnšt claiming that the combo update was
effective in fixing the problem Snit? ROTFLMAO!
Seriously Snit do you ever read your own posts and actually understand them?
>>> There
>>> was some file with some corruption. I have *no* idea what file. Would be
>>> interesting to know but I am happy the problem is solved - now Typinator
>>> opens at log in.
>>>
>>
>> Strange how that problem you had has only now seen the light of day! LOL
>
> What do you mean? Strange that I did not publicly talk about Typinator not
> starting on login?
Well you must have been putting up with that problem for some period of time
Snit, yet you never sought to find out if anyone else had experienced it and
perhaps found a fix, instead you put up with it in the hope that Apple may
fix it for you ....someday? OK, if thatšs your story!
> How bizarre for someone to not do so, eh? LOL!
Actually yes! Given your history here I see no good reason why you would not
have mentioned it here before now if it were true!
Wally
sehix-8D3BF4....@news.speakeasy.net, "Steve Hix"
<se...@NOSPAMspeakeasy.netINVALID> wrote:
> In article <C4906761.12FC%Wa...@wally.world.net>,
> Wally <Wa...@wally.world.net> wrote:
>
>> On 1/7/08 9:59 PM, in article
>> sehix-469051....@news.speakeasy.net, "Steve Hix"
>> <se...@NOSPAMspeakeasy.netINVALID> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <C4903DD6.12DC%Wa...@wally.world.net>,
>>> Wally <Wa...@wally.world.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 1/7/08 6:36 PM, in article g4d1cb$6re$5...@aioe.org, "Nashton"
>>>> <na...@na.ca>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> There is no advantage, it just John, being the wind bag that he is,
>>>>> blowing hot and moist air from anywhere it can escape.
>>>
>>> The one evident advantage would be if you had multiple Macs to update;
>>> download the combo update once and use it on all of 'em.
>>
>> At first glance that would appear to be the case, but as all my Macs are at
>> the same level i.e. 10.5.3, wouldnšt just downloading the 10.5.3 to 10.5.4
>> updater achieve the same result?
>
> Likely (assuming that one or the other update wasn't munged in some way;
> but that's the usual risk.
>
> Most people with multiple machines might not have them all at the same
> level, for whatever reasons.
Fair point in general terms, but I suspect that is not the case for the
'experts' that John referenced!
The point is that you have been able to highlight a specific reason why the
combo might be the way to go for a certain number of users .... Thatšs fair
enough I have no argument with your reasoning for that category of user!
But John stated that the reason to use the combo update is because it is the
expert way to update! absolute baloney! If you are only going up a one point
update expert or not a combo update is unnecessary, if it's merely the users
choice to use a combo fair enough, but for John to dress it up as being the
expert way .... No not buying it!
Wally
"John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
Could you supply a reference as to where it is stated on Macfixit or in any
of the books by Ted Landau where it is stated or even implied that the combo
update may *not* be a tool used effectively to *fix* an actual problem?"
John?
Come on John don't let all your fellow experts down, they're counting on
you! :-(
Wally
"John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
Spoken like the true expert that I knew you to be John! ROTFL!
(here's a hint John ..... The time to fix a problem is absolutely no
indicator as to the time required to identify the problem... An expert would
not need to be told that!)
Wally
"John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
Your idea of an expert is a simplistic one John, mine on the other hand
would include the ability to try and understand the cause of a problem.
Steve Carroll
wrote:
John (and his backer, Snit) doesn't seem to realize that his position here is
making the case for the opposition that Apple is "technically incompetent" by
offering updates other than the combo updates. It's funny to watch Snit try to
ride both sides of this fence in this thread;)
--
"Apple is pushing how green this is - but it [Macbook Air] is
clearly disposable... when the battery dies you can pretty much
just throw it away". - Snit
Wally
"Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> "John" <nos...@nospam.com> stated in post
> x6WdnSLgPryjUvfV...@netlojix.com on 7/1/08 5:43 PM:
>
>>>> What a bunch of technical incompetents guys like Wally are.
>>>
>>> You think? (That零 rhetorical John, as most here know the real answer to
>>> that!)
>>
>>
>> Add insanity to your list of problems. You truly are a nutjob.
>
> Nah, Wally is a genius:
To know if that is a compliment or not Snit I would need to know if you are
comparing me with you .... Or with someone sane!
Wally
"Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> "John" <nos...@nospam.com> stated in post
> x6WdnVzgPrxRUvfV...@netlojix.com on 7/1/08 5:46 PM:
>
>>>> Now you know why true experts use the Combo updater. It can take care
>>>> of problems before they become big problems and with no more effort then
>>>> waiting a few more minutes for the larger download.
>>>
>>> Experts would not be content with merely fixing a problem John, they tend to
>>> try and understand the cause!
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Why bother if it only takes less than 5 minutes to fix the problem.
>
> An expert would (or should) asses the need to understand the cause, the
> depth of the problem, etc. - and *not* just have a kneejerk same-reaction in
> every case.
I'm "gob smacked" Snit! ...well done indeed! you have restored my faith in
pharmaceuticals!
Steve Carroll
Wally
"Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> "John" <nos...@nospam.com> stated in post
> x6WdnV_gPryATffV...@netlojix.com on 7/1/08 5:47 PM:
>
>> Wally wrote:
> ...
>>> As I suggested in a previous post an expert would attempt to isolate the
>>> problem with the aid of backups much like you have described doing, rather
>>> than a full blown update that offers nothing wrt the cause!
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Wrong. An expert would fix the problem in under 5 minutes, rather than
>> wasting hours and still not fix the problem.
>
> Would an expert *ever* use Windows System Restore?
Why would such an action even be contemplated Snit? .... Clearly as a result
of a problem!
So in that case where have I ever suggested that such an action may not
become warranted Snit?
What I have said is that an expert as opposed to a wanna be expert would
make an effort to understand the cause, that description does not fit John
as all he is interested in is a quick fix!
> Wally, if he is to stay consistent, thinks not!
Clearly your lack of comprehension problems are still thriving Snit.
Snit
You show no comprehension of my comments... and then project. Lovely.
--
Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments
that take our breath away.
Snit
Hey, you snipped your super-intelligent comments:
I gave a clear example as to when a subset with 0 elements
would not actually be empty as you claimed that it would!
But zero items does not necessarily translate to being empty
as you have said it would!
your delusion is that something that owes its very existence
to the fact that it contains information can in fact be
...empty!
whether it is written {} or {0} has no significance wrt what
the answer actually is
it makes no difference if you write {} and I write {0}
because the meaning is exactly the same ...0 elements!
Now research why a "subset" cannot be "empty"
LOL!
Snit
You understood something! Excellent... even with my silly typo. Well done!
--
"If you have integrity, nothing else matters." - Alan Simpson
Snit
Ah, your lack of reading comprehension is still there. OK.
>>>> There
>>>> was some file with some corruption. I have *no* idea what file. Would be
>>>> interesting to know but I am happy the problem is solved - now Typinator
>>>> opens at log in.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Strange how that problem you had has only now seen the light of day! LOL
>>
>> What do you mean? Strange that I did not publicly talk about Typinator not
>> starting on login?
>
> Well you must have been putting up with that problem for some period of time
> Snit, yet you never sought to find out if anyone else had experienced it and
> perhaps found a fix, instead you put up with it in the hope that Apple may
> fix it for you ....someday? OK, if thatšs your story!
What makes you think I never sought out such info? I did not ask *you*?
LOL!
Please note, I am not saying if I did or did not... just noting your absurd
claim. :)
>> How bizarre for someone to not do so, eh? LOL!
>
> Actually yes! Given your history here I see no good reason why you would not
> have mentioned it here before now if it were true!
You are a weird one!
--
BU__SH__
Snit
trollkiller-2BEA...@newsgroups.comcast.net on 7/2/08 7:32 AM:
> In article <C491B0D7.13B4%Wa...@wally.world.net>, Wally
> <Wa...@wally.world.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On 2/7/08 8:51 AM, in article C4901F30.C4B66%use...@gallopinginsanity.com,
>> "Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "John" <nos...@nospam.com> stated in post
>>> x6WdnVzgPrxRUvfV...@netlojix.com on 7/1/08 5:46 PM:
>>>
>>>>>> Now you know why true experts use the Combo updater. It can take care
>>>>>> of problems before they become big problems and with no more effort then
>>>>>> waiting a few more minutes for the larger download.
>>>>>
>>>>> Experts would not be content with merely fixing a problem John, they tend
>>>>> to
>>>>> try and understand the cause!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Why bother if it only takes less than 5 minutes to fix the problem.
>>>
>>> An expert would (or should) asses the need to understand the cause, the
>>> depth of the problem, etc. - and *not* just have a kneejerk same-reaction
>>> in
>>> every case.
>>
>> I'm "gob smacked" Snit! ...well done indeed! you have restored my faith in
>> pharmaceuticals!
>
> LOL!
Hey, if he needs medications to understand simple comments then so be it.
Nothing funny about it.
Now my typo... *that* is funny. :)
--
God made me an atheist - who are you to question his authority?
Snit
Funny to see you lie about me. Again.
But you deny you are consumed by your hatred. Right?
--
Look, this is silly. It's not an argument, it's an armor plated walrus with
walnut paneling and an all leather interior.
Snit
It depends on the circumstances... as has been explained to you.
--
The answer to the water shortage is to dilute it.
Steve Carroll
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
Yeah... I just said that.
John
If one or more files is corrupted a hundred years of troubleshooting
still would not find the "exact cause". What a dumbass Wally is.
Tim Adams
John <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
yet you somehow believe that the combo updater is going to replace all of them.
so much for your 'technical competence'.
--
regarding Snit "You are not flamed because you speak the truth,
you are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting
the newsgroup." Andrew J. Brehm
Snit
teadams$2$0$0$3-C962B6.17...@70-3-168-216.area5.spcsdns.net on
7/2/08 2:18 PM:
>> If one or more files is corrupted a hundred years of troubleshooting
>> still would not find the "exact cause". What a dumbass Wally is.
>
> yet you somehow believe that the combo updater is going to replace all of
> them.
> so much for your 'technical competence'.
Show where John said that a combo updater would replace all of *anything* -
other than the updates it is a combo of, of course!
Oh.
You simply made that up, didn't you.
--
"In order to discover who you are, first learn who everybody else is. You're
what's left." - Skip Hansen
John
"Tim Adams" <teadams$2$0$0$3...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:teadams$2$0$0$3-C962B6.17...@70-3-168-216.area5.spcsdns.net...
I NEVER said it would replace all of them. There is however a very high
chance it will replace a corrupted file.
Snit
>>> If one or more files is corrupted a hundred years of troubleshooting
>>> still would not find the "exact cause". What a dumbass Wally is.
>>
>> yet you somehow believe that the combo updater is going to replace all of
>> them.
>> so much for your 'technical competence'.
>
> I NEVER said it would replace all of them.
I suspected not... and already posted my prediction that Tim's claim would
turn out to be an outright lie.
Not that it is hard to guess that about his comments... just seeing his name
as the author means more often than not that the post is a lie.
> There is however a very high
> chance it will replace a corrupted file.
--
Steve de Mena
Your perceived level of "technical competence" is dropping further
with every post of yours.
If I were you I would drop this magical "combo updater" theory and
never bring it up again.
Steve
Snit
fsWdnfACzbpOafbV...@giganews.com on 7/2/08 2:36 PM:
>>> yet you somehow believe that the combo updater is going to replace all
>>> of them.
>>> so much for your 'technical competence'.
>>
>> I NEVER said it would replace all of them. There is however a very high
>> chance it will replace a corrupted file.
>
> Your perceived level of "technical competence" is dropping further
> with every post of yours.
>
> If I were you I would drop this magical "combo updater" theory and
> never bring it up again.
Tim Adams is the one who claimed John said the combo updater would replace
all corrupted files.
Tim Adams lied, as is his norm.
John
Just go on and practice your usual technical incompetence. Meanwhile I
will continue to enjoy my THREE MACHINES WITH ZERO problems.
Steve de Mena
Enjoy your THREE MACHINES running ITUNES, IPHOTO and SAFARI.
Steve
John
And running the entire Adobe CS3, Final Cut Studio, Logic Studio and
over 200 applications. LOL Mr. Technical Incompetent.
Tim Adams
"John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
So there really is no reason for you to do the combo updater, since earlier in
this thread you claimed that was one of the 'advantages' of using it - fixing
corrupt files.
> There is however a very high
> chance it will replace a corrupted file.
Now you talk of a single file but your reply to Wally it was "one or more
files". Keep moving the goal post john. someday you'll have a clue.
Snit
7/2/08 6:49 PM:
>>>> If one or more files is corrupted a hundred years of troubleshooting
>>>> still would not find the "exact cause". What a dumbass Wally is.
>>>
>>> yet you somehow believe that the combo updater is going to replace all of
>>> them.
>>> so much for your 'technical competence'.
>>
>> I NEVER said it would replace all of them.
>
> So there really is no reason for you to do the combo updater
That is not what he said *either*... but nice dodge of the point that was
just made: you lied about what John said.
And your "defense" was to lie about what John said. Again.
Not your finest moment.
> , since earlier in this thread you claimed that was one of the 'advantages' of
> using it - fixing corrupt files.
There is a difference between replacing and fixing. Really. Ask real nice
and I might even be willing to explain the difference to you.
>> There is however a very high chance it will replace a corrupted file.
>>
> Now you talk of a single file but your reply to Wally it was "one or more
> files". Keep moving the goal post john. someday you'll have a clue.
Ah, you are pretending that since he talked about "one or more" before he
has an obligation to repeat that phrase now.
Not a very bright game of yours, Tim.
--
Try not to become a man of success, but rather try to become a man of value.
--Albert Einstein
John
This is an example of a nitpicking braindead fuckup like Tim Adams. It
will replace ONE OR MORE files to be precise. And that was obvious to
ANYONE except for a braindead fuckup.
John
"Snit" <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in message
news:C4917FA9.C511A%use...@gallopinginsanity.com...
Tim Adams and Wally are two of the most braindead people ever to post on
CSMA.
Snit
>>>>>> If one or more files is corrupted a hundred years of troubleshooting
>>>>>> still would not find the "exact cause". What a dumbass Wally is.
>>>>>>
>>>>> yet you somehow believe that the combo updater is going to replace all of
>>>>> them. so much for your 'technical competence'.
>>>>>
>>>> I NEVER said it would replace all of them.
>>>>
>>> So there really is no reason for you to do the combo updater
>>>
>> That is not what he said *either*... but nice dodge of the point that was
>> just made: you lied about what John said.
>>
>> And your "defense" was to lie about what John said. Again.
>>
>> Not your finest moment.
>>
>>> , since earlier in this thread you claimed that was one of the 'advantages'
>>> of using it - fixing corrupt files.
>>>
>> There is a difference between replacing and fixing. Really. Ask real nice
>> and I might even be willing to explain the difference to you.
>>
>>>> There is however a very high chance it will replace a corrupted file.
>>>>
>>> Now you talk of a single file but your reply to Wally it was "one or more
>>> files". Keep moving the goal post john. someday you'll have a clue.
>>>
>> Ah, you are pretending that since he talked about "one or more" before he has
>> an obligation to repeat that phrase now.
>>
>> Not a very bright game of yours, Tim.
>
> Tim Adams and Wally are two of the most braindead people ever to post on
> CSMA.
>
In the set of brain dead people to post to CSMA they are a significant
subset. :)
--
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.
--Albert Einstein
Snit
>>>>> If one or more files is corrupted a hundred years of troubleshooting still
>>>>> would not find the "exact cause". What a dumbass Wally is.
>>>>>
>>>> yet you somehow believe that the combo updater is going to replace all of
>>>> them. so much for your 'technical competence'.
>>>>
>>> I NEVER said it would replace all of them.
>>>
>> So there really is no reason for you to do the combo updater, since earlier
>> in this thread you claimed that was one of the 'advantages' of using it -
>> fixing corrupt files.
>>
>>> There is however a very high chance it will replace a corrupted file.
>>>
>> Now you talk of a single file but your reply to Wally it was "one or more
>> files". Keep moving the goal post john. someday you'll have a clue.
>>
>
>
> This is an example of a nitpicking braindead fuckup like Tim Adams. It will
> replace ONE OR MORE files to be precise. And that was obvious to ANYONE
> except for a braindead fuckup.
He and Steve Carroll play this game a lot... Tim Adams was busted outright
lying about your claims... instead of owning up to that he nit picks some
wording of yours and pretends you are as dishonest as he is.
Steve Carroll, frankly, is better at this game than is Tim.