anybody running linux on ASUS TF103C Transformer Pad?

[crankypuss]

I'm looking to replace my current netbook with a tablet that will run
either Android or Debian, as a multi-boot option. There's plenty of
storage capability for both on the TF103C, but there is a question of
whether or not it is feasible to install linux.

I've spoken with ASUS support twice; no joy. The first guy claimed that
there is "no BIOS". The second guy claimed that once Android is loaded
it is impossible to change it to any other operating system; then he
went on to say "it's the customer's choice" what version of Android to run.

Has anyone actually gotten any linux distro (other than Android)
installed on one of these?

--
undisclo...@gmail.com

[Ed Cryer]

Those two people you talked to are giving you quite reasonable answers.
They're addressing system boot strategies.
How would you begin to load Linux on a typical android phone? It has no
way at all to begin the damn thing.

Ed

[I R A Darth Aggie]

On Thu, 16 Apr 2015 09:51:30 -0600,
crankypuss <inv...@invalid.invalid>, in

Googling the subject (debian howto install TF103C) doesn't provide
much joy. It doesn't have a BIOS or even a uefi bootloader, but rather
something called Droidboot. My sense: not easy, if it is possible. But
most likely, not possible.

--
Consulting Minister for Consultants, DNRC
I can please only one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow
isn't looking good, either.
I am BOFH. Resistance is futile. Your network will be assimilated.

[ray carter]

I have run Linux on a Tronsmart TV box which is android based. It was a
matter of going into 'developer mode' and booting from an SD card image.
That's what one does to run Debian on a Raspberry Pi as well - boot from
an SD card image.

[crankypuss]

On 04/16/2015 12:31 PM, Ed Cryer wrote:
> crankypuss wrote:
>> I'm looking to replace my current netbook with a tablet that will run
>> either Android or Debian, as a multi-boot option. There's plenty of
>> storage capability for both on the TF103C, but there is a question of
>> whether or not it is feasible to install linux.
>>
>> I've spoken with ASUS support twice; no joy. The first guy claimed that
>> there is "no BIOS". The second guy claimed that once Android is loaded
>> it is impossible to change it to any other operating system; then he
>> went on to say "it's the customer's choice" what version of Android to
>> run.
>>
>> Has anyone actually gotten any linux distro (other than Android)
>> installed on one of these?
>>
>
> Those two people you talked to are giving you quite reasonable answers.
> They're addressing system boot strategies.

I am of the opinion that the two people I spoke with don't know much,
but are doing the best they can to be "tech support" people answering
the phone, and that companies do what they can to prevent the
installation of other operating systems because just selling
pre-configured crap to the great unwashed reduces their support costs,
the "it doesn't break because it doesn't do anything" approach to support.

> How would you begin to load Linux on a typical android phone? It has no
> way at all to begin the damn thing.
>
> Ed

When I converted the netbook I'm currently typing on from Windows to
Ubuntu it was a matter of holding F2 down while powering up, turning off
secure-boot in the BIOS, then rebooting while holding F12 down to select
the boot device; from there, it's a pretty simple matter of booting from
a (presumably USB) device that's capable of installing itself. Unlike
Windows, linux is not designed to be immovable; you can create a
partition, rsync copy the fully configured linux partition over, set up
a boot loader, and you're ready to go as long as it's the same processor
architecture and the source system has all the required device drivers.
I do this frequently when I'm setting up a new distro or doing any
significant amount of tailoring, for example I'm currently moving from
Ubuntu 11.10 to Debian 7.8 and whenever I use synaptic to add or remove
a significant number of components, I backup the *running* linux system
onto a USB-attached "os library" disk; from there it can go to my other
systems.

So, for a phone? Since it doesn't have an F2 or F12 key, the maker
could use a combination of power+volume to let the user select different
boot options or a different boot device. Or, one can modify files on an
unrooted Android phone via ADB the "Android Debug Bridge" as long as
you've turned on the appropriate "Developer Option". The "Developer
Options" settings submenu is clearly visible in Android versions prior
to KitKat, but in KitKat they made it an easter-egg. Once vendors start
hiding necessary functions behind easter-eggs it's time to think about
checking out other vendors imo.

There is nothing I know of, technically, that should prevent any Android
device from running dual-boot. After booting Android one would have the
usual touchscreen capabilities; after booting something else, one would
need to use a bluetooth keyboard and mouse unless the other system
supports touch. Kind of stupid with just a phone, but with a 10" tablet
you have enough screen real-estate to work with. The ASUS TF103C is not
a phone, it's a computer; for that matter your smartphone is just a
pocket computer with some telephony hardware stuck on.

So, there are ways to prevent users from being able to change the
operating system, if you find it convenient to treat them like ignorant
cattle from whom you are bleeding money. For example one could put the
operating system on rom rather than making it writable. If one wants to
restrict the device in order to maximize profit.

--
undisclo...@gmail.com

[crankypuss]

Yes, but if the system will not boot from a USB device or a SD card, and
the vendor has tailored Android to hide Developer Options behind a
sufficiently hidden easter-egg, you're basically out of luck.

--
undisclo...@gmail.com

[crankypuss]

On 04/16/2015 12:34 PM, I R A Darth Aggie wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Apr 2015 09:51:30 -0600,
> crankypuss <inv...@invalid.invalid>, in
> <mgolog$5mc$1...@dont-email.me> wrote:
>> I'm looking to replace my current netbook with a tablet that will run
>> either Android or Debian, as a multi-boot option. There's plenty of
>> storage capability for both on the TF103C, but there is a question of
>> whether or not it is feasible to install linux.
>>
>> I've spoken with ASUS support twice; no joy. The first guy claimed that
>> there is "no BIOS". The second guy claimed that once Android is loaded
>> it is impossible to change it to any other operating system; then he
>> went on to say "it's the customer's choice" what version of Android to run.
>>
>> Has anyone actually gotten any linux distro (other than Android)
>> installed on one of these?
>
> Googling the subject (debian howto install TF103C) doesn't provide
> much joy. It doesn't have a BIOS or even a uefi bootloader, but rather
> something called Droidboot. My sense: not easy, if it is possible. But
> most likely, not possible.
>

That's kind of my take too. It's a helluva note when all the devices on
the market that meet the necessary hardware requirements are emasculated
prior to sale. I'll probably try to encourage vendors by withholding
cash, not that they'll ever notice so long as the crowd is slobbering
for Lollipop which likely is just as lame as KitKat. Emerging
technologies, go figure.

--
undisclo...@gmail.com

[Theo Markettos]

In comp.mobile.android Ed Cryer <e...@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
> Those two people you talked to are giving you quite reasonable answers.
> They're addressing system boot strategies.
> How would you begin to load Linux on a typical android phone? It has no
> way at all to begin the damn thing.

Android is already booting Linux, you just need to change userland, and
maybe put in a different kernel.

You either replace the Android partitions with ones containing the Linux
distro of choice. Or you replace the Android kernel with a secondary
bootloader (eg U-Boot), which will allow selection of an image to boot from.

The first step is installing a custom recovery image (eg TWRP or
ClockworkMod) which then allows you to reflash bits of the storage with
whatever you want. It's the normal procedure to installing a custom ROM,
only this custom ROM happens to contain an Ubuntu (or whatever) userland
rather than an Android one.

However you need to find someone who has built the distro for your phone and
whatever it's booting arrangements are. As well as slightly different boot
techniques (especially between ARM and Intel, etc) you need different
drivers - not fun to use it without touch, for instance.

Theo

[Ed Cryer]

If you know how to get the latest KitKat to write to an SD-card, let me
know.
It's no real handicap. I can plug Android phones and tablets into
Windows through USB and do whatever I like with the files on the card.
But it's a memory limitation on installing new apps (if I ever need that
many apps, of course).

Ed

[crankypuss]

I'm running KitKat on my phone, and I can copy files to/from sd-card
just fine. I seem to remember reading something about technical issues
related to the storage of application data, but I don't recall the details.

--
undisclo...@gmail.com

[crankypuss]

I've been scratching around for information amid the chaos of os
conversion and finally getting around to reorganizing all the crap in my
file tree. I've found the CyanogenMod forums to be basically useless.

I discovered that there is a Cyanogen company that is trying to
commercialize. I am totally fed up with companies trying to
commercialize, maybe we need to pay the corporate mob to leave us alone.

--
undisclo...@gmail.com

[bad sector]

The closest thing I ever had linux on was an asus eepc, it was ok except
for the useless low res. Thank god i got rid of it last year, got one
more asus product, in some ways an inferior g73, to unload and then it's
over.

The other day I saw an $800 version of the Lenovo helix, might wanna
check those out, you might find a refurb around the fc103c price ..ten
times the machine.

my 2

[J0HNS0N]

bad sector <forgetski@postit_INVALID_.gov> wrote:

>The closest thing I ever had linux on was an asus eepc

I had the original 7" Asus EeePc netbook. It had the Linux Xandros dev
if IIRC. It also came with a CD containing Windows XP drivers. So of
course I tried putting XP on it. It did work but was horribly slow and
left little storage. So I went back to and stayed with Xandros for the
rest of the time I had the device.

>, it was ok except for the useless low res.

What else would you expect for a low end netbook? The current cheap
Asus netbook look-alikes, the transformer line, are also low res.

[bad sector]

I had the 10" one and res problem was with KDE, some windows opening to
miniumum sizes greater than the screen could show.

[The Real Bev]

On 04/18/2015 04:08 AM, crankypuss wrote:

> I've been scratching around for information amid the chaos of os
> conversion and finally getting around to reorganizing all the crap in my
> file tree. I've found the CyanogenMod forums to be basically useless.
>
> I discovered that there is a Cyanogen company that is trying to
> commercialize. I am totally fed up with companies trying to
> commercialize, maybe we need to pay the corporate mob to leave us alone.

Yeah. right, like that works so well with the governmental mob!


--
Cheers, Bev
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we could to protect
our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security."
--Microsoft VP in charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.

[crankypuss]

Since just about anything you can buy this week will be obsolete within
3 years, more likely within 2 years, the Lenovo seems a bit pricey at
around $1000 (which across 24 months amounts to around $40/month in
depreciation).

Most of the hardware available today specs out as "more powerful" than
the Acer AOD257 that I'm typing on now, but it's not like I'm trying to
dynamically render MRI data into moving 3D images or something, the
processor in this cheap little Acer is about a gazillion times more
powerful than the first computers I used.

It's my take that it isn't about how fast one instruction can be
executed, or how many instructions can be executed in parallel (since
today's bloatware will eat all the cycles you care to have wasted), it's
about how few instructions are needed to get the job done.

What I find frustrating about the stage the industry is going through
right now is that it's being driven almost entirely by the purchases of
consumers who desperately want the latest, coolest, shiniest
communication and entertainment appliance, rather than anything they can
use for computing purposes. That kind of product can be produced most
profitably when the user is given zero choice in the matter.

--
undisclo...@gmail.com

[crankypuss]

Many/most are limited to 768 pixels in whichever direction. A minority
offer 1280 x 800 which isn't bad. Some offer more, like the ASUS MeMO
FHD 10, which is 1920 x 1200 pixels (but the MeMO also seems to have
something of a reputation for cracking screens). Some might call that
low-res, but I consider it pretty good for a 10.1" screen. On the other
hand if you actually want to use it for computing you might need at
least 1 fullsize USB port that the device will boot from and one
micro-USB port to charge/tether. Not that 99% of these companies'
customer bases have any use for an actual computing device to begin with.

--
undisclo...@gmail.com

[crankypuss]

Recently Ray Carter pointed out the existence of vtwm along with xrandr,
and I'm just starting to explore the possibilities, but it seems made to
order for that very problem. At first I knew of no way to deal with
those idiotic non-scrollable windows except to buy a bigger screen, but
now it's not such a big deal. The idea of replacing my old netbook with
something having more screen resolution has been demoted from
"essential" to "it might be nice".

I'm looking at the state the industry is in, the devices and prices,
thinking how little I want to screw around with Java just to make a
better keyboard... and looking at the amount and type of code that I'm
building... the bottom like is that I'd probably be better off just
writing code and maybe fixing some things instead of chasing after
touchscreen technology that isn't really ready imo.

They don't even have a common "go to top" or "go to bottom" gesture,
selection and cut/paste varies by app (which means Android mal-designed
the whole user-interface subsystem if you can read between those lines)
and so forth and so on; similar deal with privilege/authorization
levels, they seem quite messed up, not allowing the device owner to
control what is done on his nickel.

Not to mention the paternalistic-nazi approach of burdening the
purchaser with a bunch of crappy preloaded apps that are designed to be
non-removable and funnel more money to Google and your broadband carrier.

--
undisclo...@gmail.com

[Chris Ahlstrom]

crankypuss wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 04/18/2015 11:22 AM, bad sector wrote:
>> On 04/18/2015 12:36 PM, J0HNS0N wrote:
>>> bad sector <forgetski@postit_INVALID_.gov> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The closest thing I ever had linux on was an asus eepc
>>>
>>> I had the original 7" Asus EeePc netbook. It had the Linux Xandros dev
>>> if IIRC. It also came with a CD containing Windows XP drivers. So of
>>> course I tried putting XP on it. It did work but was horribly slow and
>>> left little storage. So I went back to and stayed with Xandros for the
>>> rest of the time I had the device.
>>>
>>>> , it was ok except for the useless low res.
>>>
>>> What else would you expect for a low end netbook? The current cheap
>>> Asus netbook look-alikes, the transformer line, are also low res.
>>
>> I had the 10" one and res problem was with KDE, some windows opening to
>> miniumum sizes greater than the screen could show.
>
> Recently Ray Carter pointed out the existence of vtwm along with xrandr,
> and I'm just starting to explore the possibilities, but it seems made to
> order for that very problem. At first I knew of no way to deal with
> those idiotic non-scrollable windows except to buy a bigger screen, but
> now it's not such a big deal.

For console windows, tmux and GNU screen offer builtin scrolling.

Just sayin'.

> I'm looking at the state the industry is in, the devices and prices,
> thinking how little I want to screw around with Java just to make a
> better keyboard... and looking at the amount and type of code that I'm
> building... the bottom like is that I'd probably be better off just
> writing code and maybe fixing some things instead of chasing after
> touchscreen technology that isn't really ready imo.
>
> They don't even have a common "go to top" or "go to bottom" gesture,
> selection and cut/paste varies by app (which means Android mal-designed
> the whole user-interface subsystem if you can read between those lines)

Never noticed that. Select and hold, click copy. Hold, click paste.
Never noticed that was app dependent.

> and so forth and so on; similar deal with privilege/authorization
> levels, they seem quite messed up, not allowing the device owner to
> control what is done on his nickel.

You can blame that on the "service" [1] provider.

> Not to mention the paternalistic-nazi approach of burdening the
> purchaser with a bunch of crappy preloaded apps that are designed to be
> non-removable and funnel more money to Google and your broadband carrier.

[1] The George Carlin definition of "service", as in "I'm *servicing* this
account! This customer needs *service*!"

--
Always be sincere, even when you don't mean it. -Irene Peter

[J0HNS0N]

crankypuss <inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>On 04/18/2015 10:36 AM, J0HNS0N wrote:

>> What else would you expect for a low end netbook? The current cheap
>> Asus netbook look-alikes, the transformer line, are also low res.

The cheap (US$238) Asus Transformer Book I mentioned above has a pixel
density of 157 PPI. (10" screen @ 1368x768.) Not all that great.

>Many/most are limited to 768 pixels in whichever direction. A minority
>offer 1280 x 800 which isn't bad.

1280 x 800 for a 10" screen is 151 PPI, also not that great.

In comparison the 10' iPad Retina screen has 264 PPI. Now that's a
nice screen but it's over twice the price of the Asus.

1280 x 800 on a 15" laptop would be an awful 100 PPI. But then some of
my earlier laptops were in the 110 PPI range and I didn't seem to mind
at the time.

>Some offer more, like the ASUS MeMO
>FHD 10, which is 1920 x 1200 pixels (but the MeMO also seems to have
>something of a reputation for cracking screens). Some might call that
>low-res, but I consider it pretty good for a 10.1" screen.

1920 x 1200 at 10" is 226 PPI, still not iPad quality, but IMO pretty
good. I currently am spoiled to think I need a screen over 210 PPI and
no longer buy anything less. But as always that's IMO and YMMV.

[Eef Hartman]

In alt.os.linux J0HNS0N <J0HN...@nomail.com> wrote:
> 1280 x 800 on a 15" laptop would be an awful 100 PPI.

1280 x 1024 was the standard resolution for a 19" desktop screen!

[J0HNS0N]

1280 x 1024 at 19" is 86 PPI.

The B&W 21" Emerson TV (CRT) I watched as a kid was the equivalent of
19 PPI. And at the time I had no clue just how bad that was.

[tlvp]

On Sun, 19 Apr 2015 07:12:00 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> Select and hold, click copy. Hold, click paste.
> Never noticed that was app dependent.

What's app-dependent is whether you ever get to *see* a "copy" to click on,
and, even if you do, whether you ever get to see the "paste". No guarantee
just what appears in those context menus that "Select and hold" brings up.

Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.

[tlvp]

On Sun, 19 Apr 2015 02:28:52 -0600, crankypuss wrote:

> Many/most are limited to 768 pixels in whichever direction. A minority
> offer 1280 x 800 which isn't bad.

My Acer One offers only 600 in the narrow direction. That's not too good.

[Chris Ahlstrom]

tlvp wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Sun, 19 Apr 2015 07:12:00 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> Select and hold, click copy. Hold, click paste.
>> Never noticed that was app dependent.
>
> What's app-dependent is whether you ever get to *see* a "copy" to click on,
> and, even if you do, whether you ever get to see the "paste". No guarantee
> just what appears in those context menus that "Select and hold" brings up.

As long as I can cut-n-paste URLs and text from the browser/youtube into
texts, emails, and G+ posts, I am happy.

So far, so good.

--
BOFH excuse #80:

That's a great computer you have there; have you considered how it would work as a BSD machine?

[crankypuss]

Yeah, once you let the serfs climb up out of the muck long enough to
look around and get the picture, it's all downhill. <g>

--
undisclo...@gmail.com

[Chris Ahlstrom]

crankypuss wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

I was happy with standard definition to watch sports... until one day
I bought a cheap HD antenna to watch local programming.

--
I get up each morning, gather my wits.
Pick up the paper, read the obits.
If I'm not there I know I'm not dead.
So I eat a good breakfast and go back to bed.

Oh, how do I know my youth is all spent?
My get-up-and-go has got-up-and-went.
But in spite of it all, I'm able to grin,
And think of the places my get-up has been.
-- Pete Seeger

[J0HNS0N]

Chris Ahlstrom <OFee...@teleworm.us> wrote:

>I was happy with standard definition to watch sports... until one day
>I bought a cheap HD antenna to watch local programming.

HD antennas don't make SD TVs into HD TVs.

And the term HD antenna is a sales gimmick anyway. They are the same
old antenna designs that have been around for 50 years or more.

http://wafflesatnoon.com/hdtv-antenna-myth/

[Chris Ahlstrom]

J0HNS0N wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> Chris Ahlstrom <OFee...@teleworm.us> wrote:
>
>>I was happy with standard definition to watch sports... until one day
>>I bought a cheap HD antenna to watch local programming.
>
> HD antennas don't make SD TVs into HD TVs.

Dude, it was an HD TV. Duh-uh.

The problem was that the satellite box was still an SD box.

> And the term HD antenna is a sales gimmick anyway. They are the same
> old antenna designs that have been around for 50 years or more.

Well, since I had no antennas, and HD were all they had in the store ... :-)

> http://wafflesatnoon.com/hdtv-antenna-myth/

Heh, a couple guys at work just hooked up a length of wire to an HDTV and
were able to get a number of channels.

Anyway, a $15 butterfly antenna from WalMart works well. It looks cool,
too, and is very compact.

--
fortune: cannot execute. Out of cookies.

[J0HNS0N]

Chris Ahlstrom <OFee...@teleworm.us> wrote:

>J0HNS0N wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> Chris Ahlstrom <OFee...@teleworm.us> wrote:
>>
>>>I was happy with standard definition to watch sports... until one day
>>>I bought a cheap HD antenna to watch local programming.
>>
>> HD antennas don't make SD TVs into HD TVs.
>
>Dude, it was an HD TV. Duh-uh.

Dude, you didn't say that. Read your post again (above). "I was happy
with standard definition"... Duh-uh.

>The problem was that the satellite box was still an SD box.

Good to know. But you didn't say that (above) either. Just that a
"cheap HD antenna" apparently improved on your SD.

I looked for a smiley or wink on your post and since not finding one
thought the worst. My apology if I offended.

>Heh, a couple guys at work just hooked up a length of wire to an HDTV and
>were able to get a number of channels.

With a strong signal just about anything works.

>Anyway, a $15 butterfly antenna from WalMart works well. It looks cool,
>too, and is very compact.

I think my TV rabbit ears were around $3 but that was 20 or more years
ago. They still work fine. I save them for when the cable goes out.

[Chris Ahlstrom]

J0HNS0N wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> Chris Ahlstrom <OFee...@teleworm.us> wrote:
>
>>J0HNS0N wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>
>>> Chris Ahlstrom <OFee...@teleworm.us> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I was happy with standard definition to watch sports... until one day
>>>>I bought a cheap HD antenna to watch local programming.
>>>
>>> HD antennas don't make SD TVs into HD TVs.
>>
>>Dude, it was an HD TV. Duh-uh.
>
> Dude, you didn't say that. Read your post again (above). "I was happy
> with standard definition"... Duh-uh.

I added the HD antenna to an HD TV that was being fed mainly by a
low-end satellite box (a problem I have since rectified).

The antenna still comes in handy when heavy rain blocks out the satellite
signal.

>>The problem was that the satellite box was still an SD box.
>
> Good to know. But you didn't say that (above) either. Just that a
> "cheap HD antenna" apparently improved on your SD.

Well, I guess I can give you that one, and not disparage your powers of
assumption. :-)

> I looked for a smiley or wink on your post and since not finding one
> thought the worst. My apology if I offended.

No problem. It is difficult to word one's thoughts completely and precisely
in text. My bad.

>>Heh, a couple guys at work just hooked up a length of wire to an HDTV and
>>were able to get a number of channels.
>
> With a strong signal just about anything works.
>
>>Anyway, a $15 butterfly antenna from WalMart works well. It looks cool,
>>too, and is very compact.
>
> I think my TV rabbit ears were around $3 but that was 20 or more years
> ago. They still work fine. I save them for when the cable goes out.

I probably have a pair laying around. But, frankly that small $15
bowtie or the $30 flat, rectangular, black plastic plate look better and are
easier to mount than dangling rabbit ears.

Actually, I bought a third unit that has both the rectangular plate AND
rabbit ears.

--
Life is like a bowl of soup with hairs floating on it. You have to
eat it nevertheless.
-- Flaubert

[tlvp]

On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:41:15 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> It is difficult to word one's thoughts completely and precisely
> in text.

Oh? What would you rather word them in :-) ? Cheers, -- tlvp

[The Real Bev]

But what about the vast improvement given by the use of Monster cables
and powerstrips and screen cleaning liquid? Surely they wouldn't sell
that stuff for so much if it were no better than the ORDINARY equivalents...

Got you there, didn't I?

--
Cheers, Bev
Exercising would be so much more rewarding if calories
screamed while you burned them.

[The Real Bev]

I like the ones that look like little satellite dishes. The copy
informs you that you won't need to pay for satellite channels BECAUSE IT
DOESN"T GET THEM! It's not a bug, it's a feature.

[The Real Bev]

On 04/20/2015 08:00 PM, tlvp wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:41:15 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> It is difficult to word one's thoughts completely and precisely
>> in text.
>
> Oh? What would you rather word them in :-) ? Cheers, -- tlvp

Interpretive dance.

[Chris Ahlstrom]

tlvp wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:41:15 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> It is difficult to word one's thoughts completely and precisely
>> in text.
>
> Oh? What would you rather word them in :-) ? Cheers, -- tlvp

Well, with talking, you get a lot more cues and a lot more opportunity to
hem and haw and change your mind or reword your stuff.

--
What no spouse of a writer can ever understand is that a writer is working
when he's staring out the window.

[Chris Ahlstrom]

The Real Bev wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 04/20/2015 08:00 PM, tlvp wrote:
>> On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:41:15 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>>> It is difficult to word one's thoughts completely and precisely
>>> in text.
>>
>> Oh? What would you rather word them in :-) ? Cheers, -- tlvp
>
> Interpretive dance.

+1

--
When we jumped into Sicily, the units became separated, and I couldn't find
anyone. Eventually I stumbled across two colonels, a major, three captains,
two lieutenants, and one rifleman, and we secured the bridge. Never in the
history of war have so few been led by so many.
-- General James Gavin

[J G Miller]

On Monday, April 20th, 2015, at 20:41:15 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> I probably have a pair laying around. But, frankly that small $15
> bowtie or the $30 flat, rectangular, black plastic plate look better and are
> easier to mount than dangling rabbit ears.

Rabbit ears are optimal for receiving VHF transmissions.

Bowties are optimal for receiving UHF tranmsissions.

As you should know from basic physics, VHF (very high frequencies) broadcasts
have a longer wavelength than UHF (ulta high frequencies).

So for optimal reception of the signal, the receiving dipole (or half or
quater dipole) needs to be relative to the wavelength.

Use the appopriate antenna design for the appropriate transmission frequency
for the optimal signal strength at the receiver.

[J G Miller]

On Tuesday, April 21st, 2015, at 05:53:16h -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
> with talking, you get a lot more cues and a lot more opportunity to
> hem and haw and change your mind or reword your stuff.

Like politicians do? ;+}

[The Real Bev]

On 04/21/2015 02:53 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> tlvp wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:41:15 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>>> It is difficult to word one's thoughts completely and precisely
>>> in text.
>>
>> Oh? What would you rather word them in :-) ? Cheers, -- tlvp
>
> Well, with talking, you get a lot more cues and a lot more opportunity to
> hem and haw and change your mind or reword your stuff.

I thought that's what drafts were for.


--
Cheers, Bev
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
"Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it
everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every
human being who ever was, lived out their lives." -- Carl Sagan

[Chris Ahlstrom]

J G Miller wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

Who needs optimal? I get something like 20 local stations via
a small "HD" antenna shaped like a square plastic plate.

--
Then there was the Formosan bartender named Taiwan-On.

[Chris Ahlstrom]

The Real Bev wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 04/21/2015 02:53 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> tlvp wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>
>>> On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:41:15 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>
>>>> It is difficult to word one's thoughts completely and precisely
>>>> in text.
>>>
>>> Oh? What would you rather word them in :-) ? Cheers, -- tlvp
>>
>> Well, with talking, you get a lot more cues and a lot more opportunity to
>> hem and haw and change your mind or reword your stuff.
>
> I thought that's what drafts were for.

Drafts?! Drafts of USENET posts!?!?!?

--
“I have only made this letter longer because I have not had the time to make
it shorter."
-- Blaise Pascal

[J0HNS0N]

J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG> wrote:

>On Monday, April 20th, 2015, at 20:41:15 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> I probably have a pair laying around. But, frankly that small $15
>> bowtie or the $30 flat, rectangular, black plastic plate look better and are
>> easier to mount than dangling rabbit ears.
>
>Rabbit ears are optimal for receiving VHF transmissions.

Depends on the rabbit ears. Mine are adjustable length and can serve
for both VHF and UHF.

>As you should know from basic physics, VHF (very high frequencies) broadcasts
>have a longer wavelength than UHF (ulta high frequencies).

Why should he know the technical stuff? He bought an antenna and it
works. What more could he need?

>So for optimal reception of the signal, the receiving dipole (or half or
>quater dipole) needs to be relative to the wavelength.

Blah. Blah. Blah. If you have a strong signal like the OP and I do who
cares. With digital TV you either get a perfect picture or dropouts.
If the picture is solid and the antenna is a coat hanger so what?

>Use the appopriate antenna design for the appropriate transmission frequency
>for the optimal signal strength at the receiver.

Perhaps for weak signals an outside well designed antenna is required.
But for most of us this will be one designed by engineers and bought
at Lowes. Basic physics knowledge needed? Snigger.

[I R A Darth Aggie]

On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 12:23:31 -0400,
Chris Ahlstrom <OFee...@teleworm.us>, in

<mh5tg9$q8h$4...@dont-email.me> wrote:
> The Real Bev wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
> > On 04/21/2015 02:53 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> >> tlvp wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
> >>
> >>> On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:41:15 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> It is difficult to word one's thoughts completely and precisely
> >>>> in text.
> >>>
> >>> Oh? What would you rather word them in :-) ? Cheers, -- tlvp
> >>
> >> Well, with talking, you get a lot more cues and a lot more opportunity to
> >> hem and haw and change your mind or reword your stuff.
> >
> > I thought that's what drafts were for.
>
> Drafts?! Drafts of USENET posts!?!?!?

Next, someone will suggest hiring personal editors to make sure our
posts are precise.

After that, we'll need a small army of fact checkers...

Death of Usenet predicted.

--
Consulting Minister for Consultants, DNRC
I can please only one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow
isn't looking good, either.
I am BOFH. Resistance is futile. Your network will be assimilated.

[I R A Darth Aggie]

On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 22:24:17 -0700,
The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com>, in

<mh4ms6$kd1$1...@dont-email.me> wrote:
> On 04/20/2015 09:48 AM, J0HNS0N wrote:
> > Chris Ahlstrom <OFee...@teleworm.us> wrote:
> >
> >>I was happy with standard definition to watch sports... until one day
> >>I bought a cheap HD antenna to watch local programming.
> >
> > HD antennas don't make SD TVs into HD TVs.
> >
> > And the term HD antenna is a sales gimmick anyway. They are the same
> > old antenna designs that have been around for 50 years or more.
> >
> > http://wafflesatnoon.com/hdtv-antenna-myth/
>
> But what about the vast improvement given by the use of Monster cables
> and powerstrips and screen cleaning liquid? Surely they wouldn't sell
> that stuff for so much if it were no better than the ORDINARY equivalents...
>
> Got you there, didn't I?

Almost. *sets flamethrower to standby*

[The Real Bev]

On 04/21/2015 12:10 PM, I R A Darth Aggie wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 12:23:31 -0400,
> Chris Ahlstrom <OFee...@teleworm.us>, in
> <mh5tg9$q8h$4...@dont-email.me> wrote:
>> The Real Bev wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

You're damn right and for your convenience I accept paypal.

>> > On 04/21/2015 02:53 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> >> tlvp wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>> >>> On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:41:15 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> >>>> It is difficult to word one's thoughts completely and precisely
>> >>>> in text.
>> >>>
>> >>> Oh? What would you rather word them in :-) ? Cheers, -- tlvp
>> >>
>> >> Well, with talking, you get a lot more cues and a lot more opportunity to
>> >> hem and haw and change your mind or reword your stuff.
>> >
>> > I thought that's what drafts were for.
>>
>> Drafts?! Drafts of USENET posts!?!?!?

I try to go back and proof/edit before I hit SEND. Note the word 'try'.
Still, I think I do better than 99% of humanity and 99.9999% of
facebook users.

> Next, someone will suggest hiring personal editors to make sure our
> posts are precise.
>
> After that, we'll need a small army of fact checkers...

Unfortunately Snopes has a certain amount of bias.

> Death of Usenet predicted.

...from my cold dead hands.


--
Cheers, Bev
=============================================
"Life is actually fair. It just doesn't seem to be common
knowledge that 'fair' sometimes sucks." -- Jim Cook

[Chris Ahlstrom]

The Real Bev wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 04/21/2015 12:10 PM, I R A Darth Aggie wrote:
>> On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 12:23:31 -0400,
>> Chris Ahlstrom <OFee...@teleworm.us>, in
>> <mh5tg9$q8h$4...@dont-email.me> wrote:
>>> The Real Bev wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
> You're damn right and for your convenience I accept paypal.
>
>>> > On 04/21/2015 02:53 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>> >> tlvp wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>> >>> On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:41:15 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>> >>>> It is difficult to word one's thoughts completely and precisely
>>> >>>> in text.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Oh? What would you rather word them in :-) ? Cheers, -- tlvp
>>> >>
>>> >> Well, with talking, you get a lot more cues and a lot more opportunity to
>>> >> hem and haw and change your mind or reword your stuff.
>>> >
>>> > I thought that's what drafts were for.
>>>
>>> Drafts?! Drafts of USENET posts!?!?!?
>
> I try to go back and proof/edit before I hit SEND. Note the word 'try'.
> Still, I think I do better than 99% of humanity and 99.9999% of
> facebook users.

Oh, I do that, too. Been savaged often enough by nasty trolls that
I try to be careful.

But more than once or twice? Nah.

>> Next, someone will suggest hiring personal editors to make sure our
>> posts are precise.
>>
>> After that, we'll need a small army of fact checkers...
>
> Unfortunately Snopes has a certain amount of bias.
>
>> Death of Usenet predicted.
>
> ...from my cold dead hands.

Unfortunately, people are led to want "active content".

--
Besides the device, the box should contain:
* Eight little rectangular snippets of paper that say "WARNING"
* A plastic packet containing four 5/17 inch pilfer grommets and two
club-ended 6/93 inch boxcar prawns.

YOU WILL NEED TO SUPPLY: a matrix wrench and 60,000 feet of tram cable.

IF ANYTHING IS DAMAGED OR MISSING: You IMMEDIATELY should turn to your spouse
and say: "Margaret, you know why this country can't make a car that can get
all the way through the drive-through at Burger King without a major
transmission overhaul? Because nobody cares, that's why."

WARNING: This is assuming your spouse's name is Margaret.
-- Dave Barry, "Read This First!"

[crankypuss]

On 04/20/2015 04:27 PM, J0HNS0N wrote:

> With a strong signal just about anything works.

There's a reason that wifi has a range measured in feet so we rely on a
network of wires, and it isn't a physical limit that's the stopper, it's
a combination of battery technology (if you're mobile) and the FCC (tone
down that wattage, bub!). Imagine an internet without wires or
backbones, kind of a "wifi sneakernet" that gives a whole 'nother
dimension to the concept of a "store and forward" network.


--
undisclo...@gmail.com

[crankypuss]

On 04/21/2015 01:10 PM, I R A Darth Aggie wrote:
> Death of Usenet predicted.

Wait a minute, did we get through that last prediction of its death already?

I'll make my own prediction: People will eventually get fed up with the
high cost of broadband "mobile data" and start moving to more textual
media where there are fewer ads and fewer pictures and fewer movies to
distract and ohmygawd less megabytes transmitted to move a few thousand
bytes of data instead of thousands of words of pictures.

--
undisclo...@gmail.com

[crankypuss]

On 04/21/2015 06:32 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> The Real Bev wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On 04/21/2015 12:10 PM, I R A Darth Aggie wrote:
>>> On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 12:23:31 -0400,
>>> Chris Ahlstrom <OFee...@teleworm.us>, in
>>> <mh5tg9$q8h$4...@dont-email.me> wrote:
>>>> The Real Bev wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>
>> You're damn right and for your convenience I accept paypal.
>>
>>>>> On 04/21/2015 02:53 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>>>> tlvp wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:41:15 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>>>>>> It is difficult to word one's thoughts completely and precisely
>>>>>>>> in text.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Oh? What would you rather word them in :-) ? Cheers, -- tlvp
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, with talking, you get a lot more cues and a lot more opportunity to
>>>>>> hem and haw and change your mind or reword your stuff.
>>>>>
>>>>> I thought that's what drafts were for.
>>>>
>>>> Drafts?! Drafts of USENET posts!?!?!?
>>
>> I try to go back and proof/edit before I hit SEND. Note the word 'try'.
>> Still, I think I do better than 99% of humanity and 99.9999% of
>> facebook users.
>
> Oh, I do that, too. Been savaged often enough by nasty trolls that
> I try to be careful.
>
> But more than once or twice? Nah.

Is that how you write code, get it to work a couple times and blow off
the cases that fail? Why is writing English any different? Oh, you get
paid to write code but not to write English? Are we just haggling over
price here? No drama, I can't see you blush.

>>> Next, someone will suggest hiring personal editors to make sure our
>>> posts are precise.
>>>
>>> After that, we'll need a small army of fact checkers...
>>
>> Unfortunately Snopes has a certain amount of bias.
>>
>>> Death of Usenet predicted.
>>
>> ...from my cold dead hands.
>
> Unfortunately, people are led to want "active content".

Active content is like any other addiction the dealer wants to profit
from. A week or two ago the BBC News website went to a new format, more
pictures, more videos, more ads, less text... and I haven't been back since.

They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Well yeah, it takes a lot
more than a thousand bytes to send a picture, and every byte is money in
the bank for one wireless carrier or another.


--
undisclo...@gmail.com

[crankypuss]

I always thought it interesting that the exactness of a partial harmonic
(fractional dipole) was so critical; seems like a major clue to
something or other.

--
undisclo...@gmail.com

[crankypuss]

Dang, that's even more than I can pick up on my trick tooth!

--
undisclo...@gmail.com

[Chris Ahlstrom]

crankypuss wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 04/21/2015 06:32 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>> Oh, I do that, too. Been savaged often enough by nasty trolls that
>> I try to be careful.
>>
>> But more than once or twice? Nah.
>
> Is that how you write code, get it to work a couple times and blow off
> the cases that fail? Why is writing English any different? Oh, you get
> paid to write code but not to write English? Are we just haggling over
> price here? No drama, I can't see you blush.

You're conflating writing code, writing published documents, and informal
writing in a semi-hostile environment.

As for my code, it is backed up by unit-testing. Ironically, though, I can
be most rigorous at home, where I have all the time in the world to git 'er
done.

>> Unfortunately, people are led to want "active content".
>
> Active content is like any other addiction the dealer wants to profit
> from. A week or two ago the BBC News website went to a new format, more
> pictures, more videos, more ads, less text... and I haven't been back since.
>
> They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Well yeah, it takes a lot
> more than a thousand bytes to send a picture, and every byte is money in
> the bank for one wireless carrier or another.

Truth

--
All that you touch, And all you create,
All that you see, And all you destroy,
All that you taste, All that you do,
All you feel, And all you say,
And all that you love, All that you eat,
And all that you hate, And everyone you meet,
All you distrust, All that you slight,
All you save, And everyone you fight,
And all that you give, And all that is now,
And all that you deal, And all that is gone,
All that you buy, And all that's to come,
Beg, borrow or steal, And everything under the sun is
in tune,
But the sun is eclipsed
By the moon.

There is no dark side of the moon... really... matter of fact it's all dark.
-- Pink Floyd, "Dark Side of the Moon"

[I R A Darth Aggie]

On Wed, 22 Apr 2015 05:12:50 -0600,
crankypuss <inv...@invalid.invalid>, in

<mh7vlo$4jc$1...@dont-email.me> wrote:
> On 04/21/2015 01:10 PM, I R A Darth Aggie wrote:
> > Death of Usenet predicted.
>
> Wait a minute, did we get through that last prediction of its death already?

He's only mostly dead.

> I'll make my own prediction: People will eventually get fed up with the
> high cost of broadband "mobile data" and start moving to more textual
> media where there are fewer ads and fewer pictures and fewer movies to
> distract and ohmygawd less megabytes transmitted to move a few thousand
> bytes of data instead of thousands of words of pictures.

I'm away from home and I've been using Chrome browser on a older Mac
Mini. It was occasionally so godawfully slow that I eventually looked
around and found an extension to change the User Agent string. I set
it to mimic an Android browser, and *poof* it got much better because
all of the crap wasn't getting loaded and the ads were simpler (no
flash, no autoplay videos).

So, yes, sometimes less is a lot more.

[J0HNS0N]

crankypuss <inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>On 04/20/2015 04:27 PM, J0HNS0N wrote:
>
>> With a strong signal just about anything works.
>
>There's a reason that wifi has a range measured in feet so we rely on a
>network of wires,

Huh??

The subject of my comment (above) was over the air digital TV antennas
and nothing at all was mentioned about digital networks.

Go back and reread the context of my post that you snipped.

>and it isn't a physical limit that's the stopper, it's
>a combination of battery technology (if you're mobile) and the FCC (tone
>down that wattage, bub!). Imagine an internet without wires or
>backbones, kind of a "wifi sneakernet" that gives a whole 'nother
>dimension to the concept of a "store and forward" network.

Wow.

What subject are you babbling on about and where did it come from?

Is that going to happen to me when I get old? 8-O

[crankypuss]

On 04/22/2015 07:08 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> crankypuss wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On 04/21/2015 06:32 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>
>>> Oh, I do that, too. Been savaged often enough by nasty trolls that
>>> I try to be careful.
>>>
>>> But more than once or twice? Nah.
>>
>> Is that how you write code, get it to work a couple times and blow off
>> the cases that fail? Why is writing English any different? Oh, you get
>> paid to write code but not to write English? Are we just haggling over
>> price here? No drama, I can't see you blush.
>
> You're conflating writing code, writing published documents, and informal
> writing in a semi-hostile environment.

Having done all three I see a sameness common to them, but whether that
is conflation is another question. All three are matters of expression,
of holding a focus until what is to be expressed has been expressed. In
all three, the greatest source of error is the misalignment of semantics
and syntax... not saying what you mean is as easy in English as it is in
C, probably easier, especially when writing informally in a semi-hostile
environment, because in that case we are informally free to be just as
sloppy as we want... and, computers tend to complain in ways more
objective and less aggressive than a bunch of drunks in a biker bar (or
trolls in an operating-system advocacy group).

> As for my code, it is backed up by unit-testing.

All code is backed up by unit-testing the first time you try to run what
you have coded, and all writing is backed up by unit-testing the first
time someone reads what you have written; it's the nature of the beast.

I've known people to build systems that automatically run a full
regression suite every time the system boots, and if you go that route
and it doesn't take forever to boot, maybe you've got something that'll
work, maybe not, but at least you find out real quick when you've broken
something essential.

> Ironically, though, I can
> be most rigorous at home, where I have all the time in the world to git 'er
> done.

I don't see anything ironic about that. Employers want what they want,
which is not what you want; they want increasingly efficient workers to
generate increasing profits no matter how stupid or impractical
Marketing may have been in what it has committed them to. The
stockholders expect a money generating machine and don't care about the
details; you on the other hand are actually attempting to do something
useful rather than just grind through the orders you've been given until
the big-hand says it's quitting time.

What I've noticed since I retired is that it takes a long time (years)
to actually get your arms around the idea that, by merit of surviving
long enough, you've become free. When you're free and writing code you
can think things through to greater depth and do things that Management
would never have permitted due to their fear of cost. The only problem
is that by the time you've survived to retirement, you've learned enough
to be hesitant to start those projects we undertook during early years
without a second thought because we knew it could be done but didn't
know how much work it would involve until afterward. Knowing, we think
about it, and sometimes ask ourselves if we have that many years left,
given that we've spun most of our years out like gravel under the rear
tires of necessity. Or, we just do it, and devil take the hindmost.

>>> Unfortunately, people are led to want "active content".
>>
>> Active content is like any other addiction the dealer wants to profit
>> from. A week or two ago the BBC News website went to a new format, more
>> pictures, more videos, more ads, less text... and I haven't been back since.
>>
>> They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Well yeah, it takes a lot
>> more than a thousand bytes to send a picture, and every byte is money in
>> the bank for one wireless carrier or another.
>
> Truth

If you haven't seen the following, you might find it interesting:

http://www.newseveryday.com/articles/14406/20150423/project-fi-google-launches-wireless-service-starting-20-month.htm

I can do the math and see that their plan would increase my monthly cost
significantly, but hey, they're Google, the "don't be evil" guys, right?
Plenty of suckers to feed from.


--
undisclo...@gmail.com

[crankypuss]

On 04/22/2015 09:57 AM, J0HNS0N wrote:
> crankypuss <inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 04/20/2015 04:27 PM, J0HNS0N wrote:
>>
>>> With a strong signal just about anything works.
>>
>> There's a reason that wifi has a range measured in feet so we rely on a
>> network of wires,
>
> Huh??
>
> The subject of my comment (above) was over the air digital TV antennas
> and nothing at all was mentioned about digital networks.
>
> Go back and reread the context of my post that you snipped.

I only commented about "a strong signal".

>> and it isn't a physical limit that's the stopper, it's
>> a combination of battery technology (if you're mobile) and the FCC (tone
>> down that wattage, bub!). Imagine an internet without wires or
>> backbones, kind of a "wifi sneakernet" that gives a whole 'nother
>> dimension to the concept of a "store and forward" network.
>
> Wow.
>
> What subject are you babbling on about and where did it come from?
>
> Is that going to happen to me when I get old? 8-O
>

If you're lucky and you successfully misspend your youth, it might, I
suppose.


--
undisclo...@gmail.com

[Chris Ahlstrom]

crankypuss wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 04/22/2015 07:08 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>

> <snip-o-rama>

>
>> Ironically, though, I can be most rigorous at home, where I have all the
>> time in the world to git 'er done.
>
> I don't see anything ironic about that. Employers want what they want,
> which is not what you want; they want increasingly efficient workers to
> generate increasing profits no matter how stupid or impractical
> Marketing may have been in what it has committed them to. The
> stockholders expect a money generating machine and don't care about the
> details; you on the other hand are actually attempting to do something
> useful rather than just grind through the orders you've been given until
> the big-hand says it's quitting time.

That's why it is ironic. The "hobbyist" beats the "professional".
Much like GNU/Linux.

> What I've noticed since I retired is that it takes a long time (years)
> to actually get your arms around the idea that, by merit of surviving
> long enough, you've become free. When you're free and writing code you
> can think things through to greater depth and do things that Management
> would never have permitted due to their fear of cost. The only problem
> is that by the time you've survived to retirement, you've learned enough
> to be hesitant to start those projects we undertook during early years
> without a second thought because we knew it could be done but didn't
> know how much work it would involve until afterward. Knowing, we think
> about it, and sometimes ask ourselves if we have that many years left,
> given that we've spun most of our years out like gravel under the rear
> tires of necessity. Or, we just do it, and devil take the hindmost.

On that topic, here's something about the author of the Yoshimi software
synthesizer, a fork of ZynAddSubFx:

http://sourceforge.net/p/yoshimi/mailman/message/27998325/

[yoshimi-user] Alan Calvert / Cal / graggrag.com

From: peta calvert <calvert.peta@gm...> - 2011-08-25 04:11:38
Attachments: Message as HTML

Hi all. I'm not sure if this is in the correct forum, so please moderate
and contact me direct if need be.

I am the daughter of Alan Calvert, who gave his heart and soul to the
yoshimi project. I know that he communicated and worked with a few of you a
lot, and whilst many may not have been aware of his health issues, I wanted
to let you know that he passed away peacefully in early July.

He was so proud of the developments with Yoshimi and would talk about it
with so much pride, particularly when it was used in new and amazing music
projects.

I do hope someone takes it on and keeps with it, so if I can be of any
assistance there please let me know. I'm also happy to hear from anyone if
they felt the need to make contact.

So from me personally - thank you everyone for giving Dad reasons to keep
this going; it really was beyond important to him and made the difficult
days worth fighting for.

Cheers,
Peta

I say, "Live until you die!"

--
One nuclear bomb can ruin your whole day.

[J G Miller]

On Thursday, April 23rd, 2015, at 01:56:38h -0600, Cranky Puss observed:

> not saying what you mean is as easy in English as it is in ...


'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone,
'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'

'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so
many different things.'

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.'


Alice through the Looking Glass
by Charles Dodgson (pen name Lewis Carroll)


One may also consider parallels between newsgroup discussions and the
Mad Hatter's Tea Party.

[domenic...@gmail.com]

...man wich part of "there is no bios" is not clear to you ?...

[Jasen Betts]

On 2015-12-19, domenic...@gmail.com <domenic...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...man wich part of "there is no bios" is not clear to you ?...

the part that is clearly false.

--
\_(ツ)_

[crankypuss]

domenic...@gmail.com wrote:

> ...man wich part of "there is no bios" is not clear to you ?...

I'm working at getting a T100 working, don't know about TF103C.

--
http://totally-portable-software.blogspot.com
[Sun Nov 22: "Total Portability is not binary"]

[agm...@gmail.com]

Hi,

I'm posting here as I was able to install Fedora 28 on TF103C, using netinstall media, so configuring the tablet wifi and downloading packages in the install process.

I worked on a tablet updated to Lollipop version, with the procedure described here

https://forum.xda-developers.com/memo-pad-7/general/asus-me176c-cx-unlock-bootloader-t3315603/page24#240

to enable the access to UEFI BIOS, and from there the boot US storage option is available, so I installed the linux system on the external SD card, to keep the original android unchanged.

Then adding android-x86 8.1 rc1 rpm package. I notice this version seems promising too for TF103C, at least video drivers seem at good stage.

[hurr...@gmail.com]

How in the hell! I've got to try this myself - once I figure out how to get it running again (it bricked while I was attempting to upgrade to Lollipop).