Comments about Windross OS
Mark Milligan
Why am I continually amazed by posters to the old Acorn Groups
You know the ones, those who complain about RISCOS not being up to date
the apps of no use the hardware being useless.
Why then are they themselves complaining about the way windows does
things? on these newsgroups?
If RISCOS/ARM based hardware so crap then why are they still wasting
their time and energy here with us stick in the muds ;-0
Happy new year................
--
Warning*Spam test for newsgroups started 6/12/02*
*Just to see how much new newsgroup trawling is happening*
address?;-)*part before @ in 1st plus part after @ in second*
Nick Boalch
> Why am I continually amazed by posters to the old Acorn Groups
>
> You know the ones, those who complain about RISCOS not being up to date
> the apps of no use the hardware being useless.
The advent of Iyonix has made me substantially less bothered about this
than I used to be: no longer does RISC OS run the risk of slipping
gradually into uselessness as the supply of processers with 26-bit
support dries up. The future looks, to me, a lot rosier than it did six
months ago.
> Why then are they themselves complaining about the way windows does
> things? on these newsgroups?
You're making an easy (but extremely confused) conflation between two
entirely unrelated topics. Whether or not RISC OS and the hardware it
runs on is up to date makes no difference as to whether or not the
Windows OS paradigms are any good.
Either of those statements would be a sweeping generalisation and,
though accurate in some measure -- RISC OS is certainly not as advanced
in many areas as other operating systems, and some of the ways in which
Windows works makes me scream -- are largely unhelpful.
Cheers,
N.
--
Nick Boalch <URL:http://users.durge.org/~nick/>
Lionel Smith
Mark Milligan <mill...@manO----Odos.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> If RISCOS/ARM based hardware so crap then why are they still wasting
> their time and energy here with us stick in the muds ;-0
If I am included amongst that band then that is unfortunate.
I have long supported the RISC OS market (and Acorn 8-bit before that) and
will continue to do so.
However as some of my needs cannot be addressed, in the short term, which
is all I may have, by RISC OS based kit (unfortunately Iyonix was announced
about three weeks to late for me) I have, after a long wait, invested in a
PC (that is probably an oxymoron considering).
I dislike intensely the Windows interface and also am beginning to
appreciate, with a vengeance, why Word draws so much scorn. But
unfortunately it does allow me to do things I want to that are not
immediately possible under RISC OS.
I still use the excellent combination of ArtWorks and FontDirectory with a
superb collection of fonts for designing logos and mastheads. OvationPro,
EasyWriter and DrawWorks are other notables amongst a large supporting cast
which continue to provide excellent service. I do not intend to retire
RISC OS.
I don't post here as a whinge, only to draw attention to areas that may
need some consideration by developers. In case they do not already realise
such things.
Lionel
--
___ ______
/ / / ___/ 4 children | Sea Vixen for pugnacity
/ / ionel A.| \ mith 7 grandchildren, | Hunter for elegance
/ /____ __\ | no wonder life is a breeze | Phantom for clout
/_______/ /_____/ http://www.argonet.co.uk/users/lionels | ZFC B+4+2
Get a better OutLook on life - use something else. ;-)
John Cartmell
Lionel Smith <lio...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <f4c4afa...@mandos.demon.co.uk>,
> Mark Milligan <mill...@manO----Odos.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > If RISCOS/ARM based hardware so crap then why are they still wasting
> > their time and energy here with us stick in the muds ;-0
> If I am included amongst that band then that is unfortunate.
Clearly it's a totally misdirected missile. Your support for RISC OS is
without question. I'm only sorry that the rest of us didn't put enough
pressure on MD/RS to get an alternative machine out earlier for you.
Best wishes,
--
John Cartmell jo...@cartmell.demon.co.uk FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527
Acorn Publisher magazine & http://www.acornpublisher.com
Fleur Designs (boardgames)
David
There's plenty that RISC OS doesn't do well anymore and plenty that
rival plaforms just don't do well at all. Although development of
large applications has been lacking in recent years, RISC OS was so
far ahead of its time, as a user experience at least, that it would
only need a modest Iyonix-fuelled rivival for the platform to start
turning heads again.
It's a shame that the new era has taken 4 years to arrive. A glut of
A7000 clones was no substitute for a Phoebe, but at least the players
involved now are ploughing on with the really necessary steps for RISC
OS to be something other than an OS permanantly superglued to Acorn
hardware. Thanks to Castle, the hardware abstraction is coming along,
the 26bit issue all but solved. It's an interseting time.
I'm personally amazing that Iyonix exists. I might even believe a
MicroDigital badged machine is possible too.
David
Mr David Foss
<jo...@cartmell.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> I'm only sorry that the rest of us didn't put enough
> pressure on MD/RS to get an alternative machine out earlier for you.
If enough people had bought the R7500 then probably RiscStation
would have been able to finance the alternative machine John refers to and
which I am led to understand is way ahead of even the very welcome
development of Iyonix. Quite whether it ever sees the light of day is
another question altogether.
David H. Foss
--
__ __ __ __ __ ___ _____________________________________________
|__||__)/ __/ \|\ ||_ | /
| || \\__/\__/| \||__ | /...Internet access for all Acorn RISC machines
___________________________/ foss....@argonet.co.uk
David
> In article <4baf1a7...@cartmell.demon.co.uk>, John Cartmell
> <jo...@cartmell.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > I'm only sorry that the rest of us didn't put enough
> > pressure on MD/RS to get an alternative machine out earlier for you.
>
> If enough people had bought the R7500 then probably RiscStation
> would have been able to finance the alternative machine John refers to and
> which I am led to understand is way ahead of even the very welcome
> development of Iyonix. Quite whether it ever sees the light of day is
> another question altogether.
I haven't really kept an eye on the RISC OS scene for a couple of
years. What happened to the Millipede Graphics board, the one that was
going to form part of that Cerilica box? At the time, it seemed that
was the most likely 'next gen' machine to see the light of day.
You can hardly blame people for not buying the A7000 clones. Most of
the serious RISC OS fans would be using SA RPCs, still such a viable
machine, and would need a big reason to upgrade.
The Windross user experience is awful. I migrated to the Mac, and
while it's amazing to have inDesign, XPress, Photoshop, Acrobat, etc.
right there, Mac OS 8/9's GUI was nothing on RISC OS and it's
difficult to describe in any meaningful way Mac OS X's GUI is better
than Windows - especially as the responsiveness remains poor. Back in
the early ninties, it's impossible to over-emphasise just incredible
the Impression/Artworks combo was, when i first started using Quark in
the 6th Form, it really was stone-age stuff.
David
Richard Walker
Mr David Foss <foss....@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> If enough people had bought the R7500 then probably RiscStation would have
> been able to finance the alternative machine John refers to and which I am
> led to understand is way ahead of even the very welcome development of
> Iyonix.
So... if people wanted a Risc PC replacement, they had to purchase an A7000
replacement and sit there with their fingers crossed?
Yeah, right! :-/
> Quite whether it ever sees the light of day is another question
> altogether.
A new product from RiscStation? Don't think so - and that includes the
portable.
--
Richard.
"The magical mystery tour is coming to take you away."
John Cartmell
<runny...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> In message <na.dd3ef94baf.a...@argonet.co.uk> Mr David Foss
> <foss....@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > If enough people had bought the R7500 then probably RiscStation would
> > have been able to finance the alternative machine John refers to and
> > which I am led to understand is way ahead of even the very welcome
> > development of Iyonix.
> So... if people wanted a Risc PC replacement, they had to purchase an
> A7000 replacement and sit there with their fingers crossed?
> Yeah, right! :-/
Or persuaded schools to purchase RiscStations (your A7000 comment shows
your ignorance) which were *exactly* what schools needed when they were
first released - and are still probably the best performing option for
schools at present [delivery of NC/total cost of ownership].
> > Quite whether it ever sees the light of day is another question
> > altogether.
> A new product from RiscStation? Don't think so - and that includes the
> portable.
We know you don't think so - but we knew that before you said anything. I
don't know if you follow football but, if a team is playing well but just
not getting the ball in the net (it happens), you'd like the commentator to
reflect the state of play as well as the score. You just keep saying "they
haven't scored so they're crap". T'aint so.
Liz
John Cartmell <jo...@cartmell.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> I don't know if you follow football but, if a team is playing well but just
> not getting the ball in the net (it happens), you'd like the commentator to
> reflect the state of play as well as the score. You just keep saying "they
> haven't scored so they're crap". T'aint so.
>
Ooooh - A Scotland supporter ;-P
Liz
--
Virtual Liz at http://www.v-liz.co.uk
Safaris (Kenya and Tanzania); India; Seychelles; image-manipulation
"I speak of Africa and golden joys"
Richard Walker
> In article <459273af4...@proton.acorn>, Richard Walker
> <runny...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> > So... if people wanted a Risc PC replacement, they had to purchase an
> > A7000 replacement and sit there with their fingers crossed?
> >
> > Yeah, right! :-/
>
> Or persuaded schools to purchase RiscStations (your A7000 comment shows
> your ignorance) which were *exactly* what schools needed when they were
> first released - and are still probably the best performing option for
> schools at present [delivery of NC/total cost of ownership].
My A7000 comment is spot-on: The RS7500 machines *are* A7000 replacements.
Schools buying RiscStations? Why should we be doing RiscStation's marketing
for them?
Oh, and how would a class set of 56 MHz 7500FE machines be performing now?
Coping with the web browsing? Absolutely fine with video clips? Back in
1999, a school might *just* have got away with them - but this is 2003.
> > A new product from RiscStation? Don't think so - and that includes the
> > portable.
>
> We know you don't think so - but we knew that before you said anything.
I notice you don't immediately disagree. Is the portable canned, then? Or
would a product like 'Virtual A7000' be needed to kill it for sure?
> I don't know if you follow football but, if a team is playing well but
> just not getting the ball in the net (it happens), you'd like the
> commentator to reflect the state of play as well as the score. You just
> keep saying "they haven't scored so they're crap". T'aint so.
Well, thankfully, I don't follow football at all. :-)
--
Richard.
"Hey you've got to hide your love away."
John Cartmell
<runny...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Schools buying RiscStations? Why should we be doing RiscStation's
> marketing for them?
> Oh, and how would a class set of 56 MHz 7500FE machines be performing
> now? Coping with the web browsing? Absolutely fine with video clips?
> Back in 1999, a school might *just* have got away with them - but this
> is 2003.
We know that you've never read the National Curriculum that schools are
menat to be following in their teaching. I have.
Paul F. Johnson
> Schools buying RiscStations? Why should we be doing RiscStation's
> marketing for them?
You shouldn't. But what you should be doing is pressing your MP to stop
the extortionate waste of cash by constantly renewing the Windows licences.
> I notice you don't immediately disagree. Is the portable canned, then?
No. The portable is not canned - not in the least. It's rather like the
continued saga over the Omega (which has now been sorted out). Development
taking longer than it should, manufacturer problems and general hold ups.
> Or would a product like 'Virtual A7000' be needed to kill it for sure?
It would. This is probably why it hasn't been released.
TTFN
Paul
Paul F. Johnson
By the process of poking various fingers onto keys pv generated this:
> The problem was not with the machine (the R7500 is a very nice machine)
> but simply that most people were looking to upgrade their ageing SA Risc
> PCs, so getting a RiscStation would be perceived as a downward step.
> Everyone was waiting for a new 'top end' machine rather than just a
> 'newer' machine.
And the biggest pity though is that for those using an ARM 610/710
machine, the R7500 is a heck of a lot faster than those machines. In some
respects, it trounces a SA RPC (some tasks I only ever do on my R7500)
Unfortunately, people see that it's running on an ARM7500FE and denounce
it instantly - that is really unfortunate as those who have used the
machine (and this suprised a hell of a lot of people at Wakefield last
year when they were being expertly demonstrated) all agree that it runs a
hell of a lot faster than they expected.
As to the newer machine. The original plan was to sell (IIRC) 1000 units
of the R7500 - not an impossible task if those with old machines actually
bothered to support the market and put their money were their mouths are
and ditched their old machine and bought a spangly new OS 4 machine - and
the money from that would make the next generation machine which would
have been multi-processor, 32 bit, and be extremely expandable. That
machine does exist, but not with RISC OS. And before it's piped up, no,
it's not the CATS board that should have been in the Pheobe.
So much for history.
TTFN
Paul
Paul F. Johnson
By the process of poking various fingers onto keys David generated this:
> I haven't really kept an eye on the RISC OS scene for a couple of years.
> What happened to the Millipede Graphics board, the one that was going to
> form part of that Cerilica box? At the time, it seemed that was the most
> likely 'next gen' machine to see the light of day.
The Millipede board had a number of problems, not least that the OS would
not run on it.
TTFN
Paul
David Robinson
news:pan.2003.01.05...@ukonline.co.uk...
> Hiya,
>
> > Schools buying RiscStations? Why should we be doing RiscStation's
> > marketing for them?
>
> You shouldn't. But what you should be doing is pressing your MP to
stop
> the extortionate waste of cash by constantly renewing the Windows
licences.
Yes, you should be pressing your MP to get schools to switch to Free
Software, Open Source and GNU/Linux. Make use of all that x86 hardware
for the price of one copy of RedHat 8.0 that can be installed on as many
machines as you like. It comes with OpenOffice.org, web browsers, e-mail
clients, software development tools and a much better security record
than Microsoft's products.
<d&rfc>
--
David
A. Top posters.
Q. What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
Liz
John Cartmell <jo...@cartmell.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <7441c3af4...@proton.acorn>, Richard Walker
> <runny...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > Schools buying RiscStations? Why should we be doing RiscStation's
> > marketing for them?
>
> > Oh, and how would a class set of 56 MHz 7500FE machines be performing
> > now? Coping with the web browsing? Absolutely fine with video clips?
> > Back in 1999, a school might *just* have got away with them - but this
> > is 2003.
> We know that you've never read the National Curriculum that schools
"In England and Wales".
Always append that, please.
We are not all English or Welsh.
> are menat to be following in their teaching. I have.
Liz
Richard Walker
> In article <7441c3af4...@proton.acorn>, Richard Walker
> <runny...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> > Oh, and how would a class set of 56 MHz 7500FE machines be performing
> > now? Coping with the web browsing? Absolutely fine with video clips?
> > Back in 1999, a school might *just* have got away with them - but this
> > is 2003.
>
> We know that you've never read the National Curriculum that schools are
> menat to be following in their teaching. I have.
I've not looked at the NC for a few years, as I'm no longer involved with
it.
However, I have recently found out what primary and secondary schools are
actually *doing* with ICT, and it's stuff that jumped-up A7000s simply can't
do. Heck, even Iyonix would be useless.
--
Richard.
"Michelle, ma belle. These are words that go together well, my Michelle."
Richard Walker
"Paul F. Johnson" <paulf....@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
> > Schools buying RiscStations? Why should we be doing RiscStation's
> > marketing for them?
>
> You shouldn't. But what you should be doing is pressing your MP to stop
> the extortionate waste of cash by constantly renewing the Windows licences.
And what can I suggest as an alternative? Mac OS X?
> > I notice you don't immediately disagree. Is the portable canned, then?
>
> No. The portable is not canned - not in the least.
Hmm.
> > Or would a product like 'Virtual A7000' be needed to kill it for sure?
>
> It would. This is probably why it hasn't been released.
Really? Why? Why should Virtual Acorn care *if* a simple piece of software
can kill off a 7500FE-powered notebook? Isn't this a free market? Won't
the buyers decide?
--
Richard.
"Man, you should have seen them kicking Edgar Alan Poe."
Richard Walker
"Paul F. Johnson" <paulf....@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
> And the biggest pity though is that for those using an ARM 610/710
> machine, the R7500 is a heck of a lot faster than those machines.
Really? So if I have a Risc PC 600/700 with 2 MB VRAM, and use something
like 1024 x 768 in 32000 colours, your RS7500 will walk all over it?
If this is so, why didn't RiscStation market their machines in this way? In
fact, why didn't they market them at all?
> As to the newer machine. The original plan was to sell (IIRC) 1000 units
> of the R7500 - not an impossible task if those with old machines actually
> bothered to support the market and put their money were their mouths are
> and ditched their old machine and bought a spangly new OS 4 machine - and
> the money from that would make the next generation machine which would
> have been multi-processor, 32 bit, and be extremely expandable. That
> machine does exist, but not with RISC OS. And before it's piped up, no,
> it's not the CATS board that should have been in the Pheobe.
The problem is that the market was waiting for Phoebe. Those people wanted
a Risc PC replacement, not an A7000 replacement. If RiscStation could have
produced the RS7500 by January 1999, and promised the StrongARM machine in
June, then fine - but they couldn't do that.
--
Richard.
"Obladi oblada life goes on bra."
Paul F. Johnson
By the process of poking various fingers onto keys Richard Walker
generated this:
> In message <pan.2003.01.05...@ukonline.co.uk>
> "Paul F. Johnson" <paulf....@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
>> You shouldn't. But what you should be doing is pressing your MP to stop
>> the extortionate waste of cash by constantly renewing the Windows
>> licences.
>
> And what can I suggest as an alternative? Mac OS X?
Linux. It's free and lots of people use it. Infact, it's probably the
fastest growing OS around...
>> No. The portable is not canned - not in the least.
>
> Hmm.
Hmmm all you like. Some of us know better.
>> It would. This is probably why it hasn't been released.
>
> Really? Why? Why should Virtual Acorn care *if* a simple piece of
> software can kill off a 7500FE-powered notebook? Isn't this a free
> market? Won't the buyers decide?
That's just it though. Aaron Timbrell would not want to harm another RISC
OS company in anyway, shape or form. If they released it, not only would
it have the potential to kill off the laptop, but quite feasibly, kill off
all sales of any ARM7500FE machine and quite a number of RPC sales. No one
would need to update. Okay, there is the licence for the OS to discuss,
but from what I gather, the handshake agreement for 3.7 would apply as it
does for 3.1. That said, if the mutterings at the end of the AGM are
correct, VA and ROS Ltd were talking at the end...
TTFN
Paul
Paul F. Johnson
By the process of poking various fingers onto keys Richard Walker
generated this:
> Really? So if I have a Risc PC 600/700 with 2 MB VRAM, and use
> something like 1024 x 768 in 32000 colours, your RS7500 will walk all
> over it?
With the 50ns memory, it won't be far short. I typically run mine in 1024
x 768 x 256 @ 55MHz, but at 32k (&60Hz) it's still running at a fair lick.
> If this is so, why didn't RiscStation market their machines in this way?
They did.
> In fact, why didn't they market them at all?
Perhaps you didn't notice the large spreads in AU then, sometimes being
the only RISC OS company at BETT, showing up at computer shows (which are
a loss maker most of the time) and not heard of the escapades in the Far
East (trying to get machines into Saudi IIRC). Sorry, no, you won't have -
that's not marketting is it.
> The problem is that the market was waiting for Phoebe. Those people
> wanted a Risc PC replacement, not an A7000 replacement. If RiscStation
> could have produced the RS7500 by January 1999, and promised the
> StrongARM machine in June, then fine - but they couldn't do that.
For once and all time, the R7500 is not an A7K replacement. It never was
and never will be. It is not a replacement for the A7K+ either. The
machine outclasses all of the other ARM7500FE machines out there and for a
lot of the time, low end RPCs (i.e. non-SA).
As with all things, the limiting factor is cash. Who puts the money up for
new machines? You? Me? John Cartmell? Adolphus Sprigs? Most of the time,
it's the owner of the company with some part investment by an investment
group/company, but the bottom line is if the machine/company fails, the
head of the company/security for company (read houses) disappears. With
that in mind, you can see why development is slow. Would you want to risk
your house on a machine in a market where people are quick to pounce on
any failing, make a lot of noise about very little (yes, voila le kettle,
il nom est noir) and people with machines dating back to 1988 not
bothering to upgrade to a new machine due to some crappy game(1) or other
not working under OS 4? I wouldn't.
RS couldn't just release a SA machine like that (there were/are other
reasons which I can't go into) as the money was not there.
TTFN
Paul
(1) Also read any piece of software where the company has disappeared and
is not runnable under anything other than OS 2 or 3.1. I make no apologies
for my comments here - I'm getting pissed off with the "why has such a
body not released such a thing" brigade without them having a fuller
knowledge of what is going on. Speculation is fine, unfounded and constant
bullshit isn't.
Eric Pobirs
on desktops. There is no fame to be won in writing a worm for a product the
average journalist hasn't heard and thus isn't going to submit an article to
his editor.
"David Robinson" <da...@nighttime.demon.invalid> wrote in message
news:L11S9.16818$UD7.11...@news-text.cableinet.net...
Paul F. Johnson
By the process of poking various fingers onto keys Eric Pobirs generated
this:
<reformatted to avoid the abhorent mistake the poster made of top-posting
thus making the logic and sense hard to see>
> "David Robinson" <da...@nighttime.demon.invalid> wrote in message
> news:L11S9.16818$UD7.11...@news-text.cableinet.net...
>
>> Yes, you should be pressing your MP to get schools to switch to Free
>> Software, Open Source and GNU/Linux. Make use of all that x86 hardware
>> for the price of one copy of RedHat 8.0 that can be installed on as many
>> machines as you like. It comes with OpenOffice.org, web browsers, e-mail
>> clients, software development tools and a much better security record
>> than Microsoft's products.
> Actually, that is a myth. What they have is a better obscurity record
> on desktops. There is no fame to be won in writing a worm for a product
> the average journalist hasn't heard and thus isn't going to submit an
> article to his editor.
Erm, hate to disagree with you there. There is no obscurity using Linux -
the desktop is clear, consise and very simple to use. As to writing worms
and notoriaty (sp?) one for most devestating viruses last year was written
by a 7 year old Israli who wanted to annoy his teacher. Poor kid is now
doing pokey as he refused to join the Israli secret service!
At home, we use 2 operating systems - RISC OS and Linux. Other than my PC
card (which may actually have DOS on it). My computer-phobic wife is happy
with both (she was brought up on Windows, so enjoys the experience of not
having to constantly reboot, watch BSODs and has software which actually
does what it says - plus she can't screw things up on the machine as she
doesn't have the correct rights) and my 4 year old son loves playing on
them and I'm happy as on all the OSes, no-one (other than me) can mess
things up.
Take that over to education with lots of little darlings playing on
largely underpowered x86 machines (bought through some no doubt dodgy deal
between IT co-ordinators and companies they also happen to run/own/be
related to the brother of who owns it) using Win 95/98/ME. I spent last
Friday in my son's school trying to recover their machines after they
started dying. The problem was badly installed software and some lovely
*5* year old messing with the system directory and mucking with the
registry. You don't get that under Linux. End of subject. To play with
anything at that level, you have to have su rights.
Now back to the main subject, getting Windows out and anything (preferably
RISC OS) back in. MPs are great barometers for fashion. If it's in to
support M$, they will. If it's in to support war with some little country,
they support it. If it involves them actually doing any work, forget it.
However, if enough people lobby their MPs on the grounds of cost (100
kids, 1 machine == 100 licences @ 50 UKP per year == 5K that could be
better spent reducing class sizes, buying books, buying new equipment,
fixing buildings - the list goes on) then they are usually forced into
action. Write a letter to your MP at the house of parliment and they
*have* to reply. Write to the speaker of the house (remember, include the
prayer at the top of the letter - "thank God for RISC OS" doesn't count)
and the question has to be asked in the house.
For the price of a stamp you can force some action from your MP. Most MPs
are lazy good for nothing yes men (sorry for the term), but if they get
pushed hard enough, like any clapped out piece of machinary, they can be
started.
TTFN
Paul
Eric Pobirs
of bandwidth to constantly retransmit the portions of a conversation already
on the server. Top posting gives the new material the immediacy it deserves.
Also, I'll take a stand on annoyance value if someone makes their little pet
peeve known. If that violates your religion it's your problem.
You completely miss the point of what I meant by obscurity. Linux is
largely unknown to the general public. It is like many things that loom
large for an enthusiast who fails to realize how little of the world shares
interest. Consequently there is a lack of interest from the kind of people
inclined to spread malicious items
The (largely apocryphal) tale of the Israeli child is hardly impressive.
What is he but a literal script kiddie? A practical joke invented in my
grandfather's generation can still snag a sucker encountering it for the
first time. This doesn't make humankind inherently defective. Genuinely new
worms are quite rare. The bulk of them fall into a small set of categories,
relying on holes long since closed. Those who cannot be bothered to patch
their systems are endemic throughout the world considering how easily one
can still find servers with BIND vulnerabilities that were identified four
years ago.
The rest of them depend on users being given permissions that allow them
to commit destructive acts. No OS is proof against what users might do if
given the chance. Administrators all too often set a bad example by
perpetually running their activities in an account with godlike privileges
regardless of whether they're doing anything needing such power. I know of
one such person who cost his company a small fortune this way but managed to
blame it on a user who was soon leaving the company anyway. Did he learn
from this? No, last time I saw him at work he was still running the same
combination of any old code doing whatever it liked and a gullibility bound
to bring the evil code into the network. Administrator root thyself.
Yes, I've seen rooms full of mucked up Linux machines. Creating proper
accounts was too much trouble for the instructor so he just gave everyone
the root password and would re-image the machine's drive when it became too
altered to continue. Somehow he convinced himself that this was cumulatively
less time consuming than just doing things correctly. At the same time I've
seen rooms of Win9X machines very effectively locked down albeit with third
party products. Under NT and its descendents this has become a trival
matter, although the local college gets a lot of mileage out of a package
that has some very nice profile management tools that strike a good balance
between server and locally hosted material. Mostly something that is useful
to educational settings and nowhere else.
I find myself wondering what the minimum age for marriage is where you
are. For your wife to have grown up on Windows and already produced a child
four years ago suggests your boy was conceived at the earliest possible date
she could physically perform the task. Was this an arranged union?
Seriously, when you say someone grew up on something it suggests it was an
element of their life from the earliest time they could perceive it. As the
first software to be called Windows didn't arrive until the mid-Eighties and
the first popular version several years after, the Mrs. couldn't be out of
her teens and grown up on it.
Basing one's opinion of something by its distant history is completely
silly. (Like those tiresome invocations of de Tocqueville.) Comparing
Windows of the earliest version to be widely used, 3.0, to what is currently
shipping on new computers shows there is little more than some backward
compatible API's connecting to then, much as can be said for many other
operating systems and apps. Would you not resent it if my sole basis for
judging RISC OS today (actually I only entered this newsgroup because I was
told expect to see myself quoted but the thread apparently hasn't my server)
was an imported Archimedes from 1987? That was the last time I got to see
any in the flesh. (I was big into reading imported computer mags back then
so I was asked by my then employer {Cinemaware} to keep an eye out for new
possible platforms, which is how I came to spend some time with what was
possibly the only Archimedes in all of Los Angeles County.) There is hardly
a platform worth mentioning that didn't progress greatly from its
beginnings. You should have seen what a horror show it was having games out
for the Amiga in its first appearance. It Got Better.
Those that didn't are the ones that failed so badly there was no chance
to do anything further or operated in such obscurity the world at large
didn't notice. RISC OS is a prime example. Too many circumstances combined
left it out of the running for the mainstream. It makes a fine hobby I'm
sure. I'd love to have a current setup, given the time, space, and funds, as
I love to see the different things possible. I'm that sort but it would be
madness to expect a large buy-in from schools or businesses. I support
trying to talk down a vendor, MS or anyone else, on price but you have to
have a credible threat. If a large institutional buyer says they're looking
at Linux or MacOS they'll get down to serious negotiating. If RISC OS is
invoked they'll merely be greeted with amusement and asked to give a ring
when they're ready to really talk.
"Paul F. Johnson" <paulf....@ukonline.co.uk> wrote in message
news:pan.2003.01.06....@ukonline.co.uk...
> Hiya,
>
> By the process of poking various fingers onto keys Eric Pobirs generated
> this:
>
> <reformatted to avoid the abhorent mistake the poster made of top-posting
> thus making the logic and sense hard to see>
> > Actually, that is a myth. What they have is a better obscurity record
David Jackson
Eric Pobirs <epo...@pacbell.net> typed:
> Usenet is conversational and thread oriented. Ergo it is purely a
> waste of bandwidth to constantly retransmit the portions of a
> conversation already on the server. Top posting gives the new
> material the immediacy it deserves. Also, I'll take a stand on
> annoyance value if someone makes their little pet peeve known. If
> that violates your religion it's your problem.
Top posting means I haven't a clue what you are referring to unless I scroll
down and read the previous post.
It's not a RISC OS v PC argument. Try top posting on comp.lang.c or in the
uk hierarchy and see what response you get from people who have never even
heard of RISC OS.
I see you are using Outlook Express. So am I; it's no reason to top post.
Look at other newsgroups and you'll see plenty of OE users who post
properly, including OE users who will take considerable offence at top
posting. As I said above, it's not a RISC OS v PC issue.
--
David Jackson in the Roman auxilliary fort of Condate
Now known as Northwich Cheshire
http://www.condate.freeserve.co.uk
Paul F. Johnson
By the process of poking various fingers onto keys Eric Pobirs generated
this:
> Usenet is conversational and thread oriented. Ergo it is purely a
> waste
> of bandwidth to constantly retransmit the portions of a conversation
> already on the server.
If that was the case, why did you bother not cutting the previous
mailings?
TTFN
Paul
Eric Pobirs
let a new reader determine exactly which message was intended for the reply
while retaining enough for some of the more specific stuff. Threads mutate
and sometime are really multiple threads under the same subject. This was
enough to isolate the sub-thread, avoiding the lengthy history of titles in
the subject line.
I've been in Usenet groups and similar systems for nearly twenty years
but only recently have I seen an outbreak of whining on this subject. Most
users of more than a few days experience understand that any subject that
starts with 'Re:' is a conversation in progress and move back into the
thread's history if the current material is not readily put in context.
Personally, I find bottom posting quite annoying. When I select a
message I want to immediately see what that person is saying, not what drove
his response. I either already know what was written previously or can
quickly find out. In fact, if I'm entering a conversation in progress I
don't expect the existing participants to make any special effort to bring
me up to date when I can do that for myself. This is one of the advantages
Usenet has over real life or mail lists without available archives.
Watch out! I'm top posting two at once. I'm on a tear now! But
unfortunately I must depart for a good while. I have to be awake in three
hours to assemble and point a satellite dish (www.tachyon.net), get a bunch
of other sundry work out of the way, come home, pack, drive to Las Vegas,
work (www.locationconnect.com) and work some more (www.byte.com) at the
show.
"Paul F. Johnson" <paulf....@ukonline.co.uk> wrote in message
news:pan.2003.01.06...@ukonline.co.uk...
In news:gheS9.7307$Ck7.17...@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com,
Eric Pobirs <epo...@pacbell.net> typed:
Top posting means I haven't a clue what you are referring to unless I scroll
David Jackson
Eric Pobirs <epo...@pacbell.net> typed:
> You'll note that I did away with most of it.
Who'll notice? Oh, you're replying to me. I'd never have guessed without
looking at the bottom of the post.
> I've been in Usenet groups and similar systems for nearly twenty
> years but only recently have I seen an outbreak of whining on this
> subject.
I suspect you've been reading some very unusual newsgroups.
> Personally, I find bottom posting quite annoying. When I select a
> message I want to immediately see what that person is saying, not
> what drove his response.
One seldom makes sense without the other.
Russ Tarbox
the output was as follows:
> Amazingly, David Jackson's fingers fell upon a keyboard in such away
> that the output was as follows:
>> In news:R6fS9.7308$Jo7.17...@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com,
>> Eric Pobirs <epo...@pacbell.net> typed:
>>> You'll note that I did away with most of it.
>>
>> Who'll notice? Oh, you're replying to me. I'd never have guessed
>> without looking at the bottom of the post.
>>
>>> I've been in Usenet groups and similar systems for nearly twenty
>>> years but only recently have I seen an outbreak of whining on this
>>> subject.
>>
>> I suspect you've been reading some very unusual newsgroups.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Personally, I find bottom posting quite annoying. When I select
>>> a message I want to immediately see what that person is saying, not
>>> what drove his response.
>>
>> One seldom makes sense without the other.
>
are only
> apparent when picking up a thread late on, or looking back at one via
> Google. If you've been following a thread then the response at the
> top could be useful, though generally it's intertwined anyway to make
> points.
>
> Bottom posting should however be encouraged.
Corrected. I really should read what I type before clicking send :S
--
Russ Tarbox
Biog: http://www.userve.co.uk/russbiog.htm
Shop: http://www.stores.ebay.co.uk/riscitfromruss
Remove THELID to reply by e-mail
Ian Molton
"Russ Tarbox" <russ...@THELIDuserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> If you've been following a thread then the response at the top
> could be useful
Not really, unless whoever came before failed to snip properly.
Paul F. Johnson
By the process of poking various fingers onto keys Eric Pobirs generated
this:
> You'll note that I did away with most of it. The stub provides enough
> to
> let a new reader determine exactly which message was intended for the
> reply while retaining enough for some of the more specific stuff. Threads
> mutate and sometime are really multiple threads under the same subject.
> This was enough to isolate the sub-thread, avoiding the lengthy history of
> titles in the subject line.
What are you babbling on about? This makes no sense whatsoever! What are
you talking about?
> I've been in Usenet groups and similar systems for nearly twenty years
> but only recently have I seen an outbreak of whining on this subject.
Then you've led an isolated life. Having been posting now on usenet since
around 1995 (when I started at Salford Uni), I can honestly say that it's
only since OE was bust that folks have become lazy and decided that the
time honoured RFCs should be ignored and justify it with the sort of self
justifying drivel you've spouted here.
Top posting in any technical forum or any forum where making sense is
either (a) required or (b) useful is scorned from the highest height(1) and
those who do it, are openly mocked and poked with sharpened rubber
sticks(2).
TTFN
Paul
(1) Except on M$ usenet groups, but you'd expect that
(2) I find that when the rubber stick is attached to two bare wires
protruding from the "justice end" (not the end you hold) and the other
side of the wire attached to a car battery, it is most effective at
getting through to those to blatently silly for upholding something as
broken and frankly ill-mannered as top posting.
David Jackson
Paul F. Johnson <paulf....@ukonline.co.uk> typed:
> Top posting in any technical forum or any forum where making sense is
> either (a) required or (b) useful is scorned from the highest
> height(1) and those who do it, are openly mocked and poked with
> sharpened rubber sticks(2).
Very true. There are very many groups where top posting will be treated as a
crime against Usenet.
> (1) Except on M$ usenet groups, but you'd expect that
Although top posting is common in the Microsoft groups, you find many people
bottom post correctly, even in the OE newsgroup.
Richard Walker
> By the process of poking various fingers onto keys Richard Walker
> generated this:
>
> > Really? So if I have a Risc PC 600/700 with 2 MB VRAM, and use
> > something like 1024 x 768 in 32000 colours, your RS7500 will walk all
> > over it?
>
> With the 50ns memory, it won't be far short.
Right, so it's slower. End of argument.
> I typically run mine in 1024 x 768 x 256 @ 55MHz, but at 32k (&60Hz) it's
> still running at a fair lick.
I assume the 55 is Hz, rather than MHz. Anyway, in both cases, those
refresh rates are too low.
> > If this is so, why didn't RiscStation market their machines in this way?
>
> They did.
Sure? I don't remember any 'Faster than XXX' adverts. (where XXX was
A7000, Mico, Risc PC 600/700 etc.)
> > In fact, why didn't they market them at all?
>
> Perhaps you didn't notice the large spreads in AU then, sometimes being
> the only RISC OS company at BETT, showing up at computer shows (which are
> a loss maker most of the time) and not heard of the escapades in the Far
> East (trying to get machines into Saudi IIRC). Sorry, no, you won't have -
> that's not marketting is it.
Acorn User isn't the place to advertise - that's preaching to the converted.
> > The problem is that the market was waiting for Phoebe. Those people
> > wanted a Risc PC replacement, not an A7000 replacement. If RiscStation
> > could have produced the RS7500 by January 1999, and promised the
> > StrongARM machine in June, then fine - but they couldn't do that.
>
> For once and all time, the R7500 is not an A7K replacement. It never was
> and never will be. It is not a replacement for the A7K+ either. The
> machine outclasses all of the other ARM7500FE machines out there and for a
> lot of the time, low end RPCs (i.e. non-SA).
The RS7500 is *not* a StrongARM Risc PC replacement, so it must be a
replacement for the lower-end machines... an A7000. Anyone with a Risc PC
600 or 700 would upgrade to a StrongARM processor rather than an RS7500.
> RS couldn't just release a SA machine like that (there were/are other
> reasons which I can't go into) as the money was not there.
Yes, but their plan to get that money from selling 7500FE machines is
'interesting', to say the least.
--
Richard.
"I'm back in the U.S.S.R. You don't know how lucky you are boy."
Richard Walker
"Paul F. Johnson" <paulf....@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
> By the process of poking various fingers onto keys Richard Walker
> generated this:
>
> > In message <pan.2003.01.05...@ukonline.co.uk>
> > "Paul F. Johnson" <paulf....@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > You shouldn't. But what you should be doing is pressing your MP to
> > > stop the extortionate waste of cash by constantly renewing the Windows
> > > licences.
> >
> > And what can I suggest as an alternative? Mac OS X?
>
> Linux. It's free and lots of people use it. Infact, it's probably the
> fastest growing OS around...
Get real! You can't use Linux in education! (although it works well in
computing-based degree subjects)
> >> No. The portable is not canned - not in the least.
> >
> > Hmm.
>
> Hmmm all you like. Some of us know better.
Remains to be seen. Do you have a release date? Do all the people who have
PUT DOWN A DEPOSIT, actually know what's going on?
> > Why should Virtual Acorn care *if* a simple piece of software can kill
> > off a 7500FE-powered notebook? Isn't this a free market? Won't the
> > buyers decide?
>
> That's just it though. Aaron Timbrell would not want to harm another RISC
> OS company in anyway, shape or form. If they released it, not only would
> it have the potential to kill off the laptop, but quite feasibly, kill off
> all sales of any ARM7500FE machine and quite a number of RPC sales.
So?
Let me get this right... you want a superior product to be deliberately
witheld, so another company can flog a mythical dead horse?
> No one would need to update.
People wanting a desktop machine (and that's the majority) would still want
an Iyonix. In addition, the challenge would be there for RiscStation to
release a *faster* notebook. If they can't do that, then that's their
funeral.
> Okay, there is the licence for the OS to discuss, but from what I gather,
> the handshake agreement for 3.7 would apply as it does for 3.1. That said,
> if the mutterings at the end of the AGM are correct, VA and ROS Ltd were
> talking at the end...
Indeed.
--
Richard.
"It was twenty years ago today. Sargeant Pepper taught the band to play."
Paul F. Johnson
By the process of poking various fingers onto keys Richard Walker
generated this:
>> Linux. It's free and lots of people use it. Infact, it's probably the
>> fastest growing OS around...
>
> Get real! You can't use Linux in education! (although it works well in
> computing-based degree subjects)
Given the number of schools who are now teaching that there is more than
one OS, it's pretty obvious that you can. Also there is very little a
linux box can't do that a Win box can in education. There are plenty of
education titles available for linux.
Oh look, there's an argument being shot down.
>> Hmmm all you like. Some of us know better.
>
> Remains to be seen. Do you have a release date? Do all the people who
> have PUT DOWN A DEPOSIT, actually know what's going on?
As many of them as cares to phone RiscStation Ltd or email the RiscStation
Support address. Current state of play has not been made public due to
the amount of noise being made on usenet (as I stated in a previous
mailing)
>> That's just it though. Aaron Timbrell would not want to harm another
>> RISC OS company in anyway, shape or form. If they released it, not only
>> would it have the potential to kill off the laptop, but quite feasibly,
>> kill off all sales of any ARM7500FE machine and quite a number of RPC
>> sales.
>
> So?
A business decision is not just based on economic factors (at least, not
in the RISC OS market place) you know. Other things come into it.
> Let me get this right... you want a superior product to be deliberately
> witheld, so another company can flog a mythical dead horse?
Well, it's not a dead horse, so you can't flog it. The R7500 machines are
not mythical either - a lot have been sold. Hmmmm.
>> No one would need to update.
>
> People wanting a desktop machine (and that's the majority) would still
> want an Iyonix. In addition, the challenge would be there for RiscStation
> to release a *faster* notebook. If they can't do that, then that's their
> funeral.
That remains to be seen. The Iyonix is in opposition with the Omega, not
any of the ARM7500FE boxes or the SA RPC. If RiscStation could make an
X-Scale laptop economically (and have a licence for the OS more to the
point!) then I'm pretty sure they would have.
TTFN
Paul
Paul F. Johnson
By the process of poking various fingers onto keys Richard Walker
generated this:
>> > Really? So if I have a Risc PC 600/700 with 2 MB VRAM, and use
>> > something like 1024 x 768 in 32000 colours, your RS7500 will walk all
>> > over it?
>>
>> With the 50ns memory, it won't be far short.
>
> Right, so it's slower. End of argument.
That's just the point though, it's not far short and if you're machine has
dodgy timing, is on it's last legs or the cost of a SA + OS 4 is too much,
then a trade up to the R7500 is a viable alternative.
>> I typically run mine in 1024 x 768 x 256 @ 55MHz, but at 32k (&60Hz)
>> it's still running at a fair lick.
>
> I assume the 55 is Hz, rather than MHz. Anyway, in both cases, those
> refresh rates are too low.
Works fine for me on my monitors - which are nothing amazing, infact, the
one here is rather crappy, but is happily shared between the RPC (60Hz),
R7500 (55Hz) and T5 (56Hz)
>> They did.
>
> Sure? I don't remember any 'Faster than XXX' adverts. (where XXX was
> A7000, Mico, Risc PC 600/700 etc.)
Advertising costs. It's the old RISC OS problem Acorn were up against.
There were plenty of adverts though. There is also a legal problem in
giving speed comparisons between machines - which is why you never saw a
speed comparison between a Ti** machine and a Dell (say) with the exact
same spec.
>> Perhaps you didn't notice the large spreads in AU then, sometimes being
>> the only RISC OS company at BETT, showing up at computer shows (which
>> are a loss maker most of the time) and not heard of the escapades in the
>> Far East (trying to get machines into Saudi IIRC). Sorry, no, you won't
>> have - that's not marketting is it.
>
> Acorn User isn't the place to advertise - that's preaching to the
> converted.
It was also advertised in all of the RISC OS magazines and shown at quite
a number of trade shows and trade fairs. No one expects you to read those
or attend them either, but they are certainly not "preaching to the
converted" (though I take the point about AU)
>> For once and all time, the R7500 is not an A7K replacement. It never was
>> and never will be. It is not a replacement for the A7K+ either. The
>> machine outclasses all of the other ARM7500FE machines out there and for
>> a lot of the time, low end RPCs (i.e. non-SA).
>
> The RS7500 is *not* a StrongARM Risc PC replacement, so it must be a
> replacement for the lower-end machines... an A7000.
Spot on with that analysis. None of the current RiscStation range are SA
RPC replacements and was never intended to be. As I have said, it was
intended for people to upgrade to from either their other ARM 7500
machines or below.
> Anyone with a Risc PC
> 600 or 700 would upgrade to a StrongARM processor rather than an RS7500.
Depends if they can get the SA + RISC OS ROM sets or SA + OS 4 upgrade.
They are getting harder to come by as Intel steps down it's 26 bit (or in
the case of the SA, dual 26/32) production (exception being the
ARM7500FE). While the SA1100 does have the 26 bit mode, Intel will not
guarantee its operation in 26 bit mode.
>> RS couldn't just release a SA machine like that (there were/are other
>> reasons which I can't go into) as the money was not there.
>
> Yes, but their plan to get that money from selling 7500FE machines is
> 'interesting', to say the least.
Not really. They firmly believed that they could do it. If OS 3.1 die
hards finally ditched their ARM250/ARM 3 machines or older RPC users
turned off their boxes and upgraded (as they should have) then this would
all be academic. However, as we all know in the RISC OS community, until
it's dead, why bother changing(1)?
TTFN
Paul
(1) I can't remember who originally said that, but I know it wasn't me.
Ray Dawson
<da...@condate.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> In news:pan.2003.01.06....@ukonline.co.uk, Paul F. Johnson
> <paulf....@ukonline.co.uk> typed:
> > Top posting in any technical forum or any forum where making sense is
> > either (a) required or (b) useful is scorned from the highest
> > height(1) and those who do it, are openly mocked and poked with
> > sharpened rubber sticks(2).
> Very true. There are very many groups where top posting will be treated
> as a crime against Usenet.
> > (1) Except on M$ usenet groups, but you'd expect that
> Although top posting is common in the Microsoft groups, you find many
> people bottom post correctly, even in the OE newsgroup.
I belong to many music and guitar related mail lists and there is a wide
variety of quoting and posting styles. Some top post, some bottom post.
Some give a reply without quoting any of the previous posting, some quote
the whole lot. I usually post according to the previous poster. If he's
top posted, I top post as well. If mine is the first response, I bottom
post.
But nobody ever complains. These guys (and gals) have a life and nothing
to prove by criticising others' posting styles. Their purpose in life is
to be helpful and friendly.
Then there are the riscos newsgroups ...
Cheers,
Ray D
--
Ray Dawson
r...@magray.freeserve.co.uk
MagRay - the audio & braille specialists
David Jackson
Ray Dawson <R...@magray.freeserve.co.uk> typed:
> I belong to many music and guitar related mail lists and there is a
> wide variety of quoting and posting styles. Some top post, some
> bottom post. Some give a reply without quoting any of the previous
> posting, some quote the whole lot. I usually post according to the
> previous poster. If he's top posted, I top post as well. If mine is
> the first response, I bottom post.
>
> But nobody ever complains. These guys (and gals) have a life and
> nothing to prove by criticising others' posting styles. Their purpose
> in life is to be helpful and friendly.
>
> Then there are the riscos newsgroups ...
.... and comp.lang.c and the uk hierarchy (certainly uk.railway and
uk.comp.vendors) for example. Top posters get a very hostile reception and
not from RISC OS users.
Jess
"Eric Pobirs" <epo...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> Usenet is conversational and thread oriented. Ergo it is purely a waste
> of bandwidth to constantly retransmit the portions of a conversation already
> on the server. Top posting gives the new material the immediacy it deserves.
> Also, I'll take a stand on annoyance value if someone makes their little pet
> peeve known. If that violates your religion it's your problem.
Try reading the RFCs. And YOU are wasting bandwidth by retransmitting
what has gone before at the end of your message.
<snip>
--
Jess icq: 91353267 msn: phant...@hotmail.com http://www.kentwebnet.com
Hotmail is my spam trap - don't use for email
RISC OS 4.33 SA233T 144+2M Castle Storm DMA + 17GB 586-133 Smoothwall
Jess
"Eric Pobirs" <epo...@pacbell.net> wrote:
<snip - trying to justify ignoring standards>
> Personally, I find bottom posting quite annoying. When I select a
So do I, bottom posting is wrong too.
> message I want to immediately see what that person is saying, not what drove
> his response. I either already know what was written previously or can
If the message is snipped and interleaved then you can see what has gone
before. If you use proper software then the different levels of quoting
are coloured and it is really fast to work with.
Ian Molton
Richard Walker <runny...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> Get real! You can't use Linux in education! (although it works well
> in computing-based degree subjects)
Huh? WTF are you on about?
Linux has some great, free, and appropriate software.
Abiword, Gnumeric, GIMP, etc.
Eric Pobirs
threads is imposing requirements on others for things other than good
(however you rate that) behavior. I prefer to look upon a thread as being
like a series of snail mail letters. So long as the time stamp lets me
easily keep things in chronological order the conversation is easily
followed.
Some years ago, I used Netscape as a news reader and didn't realize it
was defaulting to posting messages in HTML. HTML in mail and news was rather
new at the time and I wasn't aware of what was happening until someone
mentioned this was creating ugly messages with both the HTML version and
plain text displayed, so while it was readable if you scrolled to the right
part it was bandwidth intensive. You'd have to post a lot to equal the
server space consumed by a decent photo attachment but it wasn't something
I'd have knowingly done unless the group was oriented toward it for some
reason. Many years later plain text still is the rule. The RTF type stuff
detracts from good writing, much like an overdependence on emoticons.
Now, on my display this message is short enough that the new content is
up front and the identifying portion of the previous entry in plain sight.
If I wrote at greater length the portion of the previous post might require
scrolling to see but that only matters if I'm new to the thread. If no
scrolling is needed for me to read a message and either reply or move on to
the next it save time fiddling with the mouse or keyboard.
As for your previous message, I've read plenty of RFCs in my time. The
ones worth reading are for the purpose of establishing technical standards
not aesthetic quibbling. Strunk and White offered a collection of
recommendations but made it clear that these were not hard and fast laws
that should always take precedent over personal style.
As for bandwidth, that is a judgment call. If the previous material is
brief then it is left as is. If the prior post is long and wordy, often
meandering onto several side tangents before coming to the ultimate point,
as mine are wont to do, I'd append just a fragment containing the most
pertinent portion or the leading paragraph (provided that isn't part of a
still earlier message) so as to aid in seeking context if needed.
"Jess" <phant...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bd34c3b...@invalid.itworkshop.invalid.co.uk.invalid...
> If the message is snipped and interleaved then you can see what has gone
> before. If you use proper software then the different levels of quoting
> are coloured and it is really fast to work with.
>Try reading the RFCs. And YOU are wasting bandwidth by retransmitting
Paul F. Johnson
By the process of poking various fingers onto keys Eric Pobirs generated
this:
> It also quickly devolves into an unreadable mess.
And so endth one of the reasons for top-posting. I don't have time to try
and (a) figure out what you're replying to and (b) cross reference what
you have posted to the message(s) your're replying to.
TTFN
Paul
David Jackson
Eric Pobirs <epo...@pacbell.net> typed:
> It also quickly devolves into an unreadable mess.
What does? Oh, having scrolled down to the bottom, I see what you are
replying to.
> I prefer to look upon a
> thread as being like a series of snail mail letters.
Personnally, I've never had to deal with a thousand snail mail letters a
day. I do read newsgroups with that many postings. If you are communicating
by smail mail with one or two people, it's not so hard to keep up with what
you are answering. Even with snail mail, it's often the custom to say things
like 'In your last letter you said zzzzzzzzzz; well I think yyyyyyyyy',
which is similar to interleaving in email and news. The real difference is
that the volume of email/news received is vastly greater than that of snail
mail.
> Now, on my display this message is short enough that the new
> content is up front and the identifying portion of the previous entry
> in plain sight. If I wrote at greater length the portion of the
> previous post might require scrolling to see but that only matters if
> I'm new to the thread. If no scrolling is needed for me to read a
> message and either reply or move on to the next it save time fiddling
> with the mouse or keyboard.
In all your posting here so far, It's been far from clear what and who you
are replying to.
> As for your previous message, I've read plenty of RFCs in my
> time. The ones worth reading are for the purpose of establishing
> technical standards not aesthetic quibbling. Strunk and White offered
> a collection of recommendations but made it clear that these were not
> hard and fast laws that should always take precedent over personal
> style.
Well, as I've said before, you will be flamed and your questions ignored if
you top post in many newsgroups.
In email, you are communicating with one person. If you are both happy with
top posting, all well and good. On Usenet, you are communicating with
millions. It would be a good idea to accept that top posing offends a
substantial proportion of them.
Ray Dawson
Paul F. Johnson <paulf....@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
> > It also quickly devolves into an unreadable mess.
> And so endth one of the reasons for top-posting. I don't have time to
> try and (a) figure out what you're replying to and (b) cross reference
> what you have posted to the message(s) your're replying to.
Bottom posting after (a) top posted response(s) generates an out of
sequence mess. It is much better to follow the posting example of the
previous posters. If they top post, then you top post. It's also more
courteous.
On the other hand, if you get the opportunity to bottom post the first
response, then take it. Subsequent postings should then (hopefully)
follow your example.
That's what usually happens in the real world.
What I hate most is bottom posters who quote over a screenful and make me
scroll down to see if their response was worth the effort. This is VERY
common on the c.s.a.* groups infortunately. As is a load of junk on some
postings above the reference line. Black pots and kettles come to mind.
Simon Willcocks
"Eric Pobirs" <epo...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> It also quickly devolves into an unreadable mess.
What does?
> Now, on my display this message is short enough that the new content is
> up front and the identifying portion of the previous entry in plain sight.
On my display, and possibly on hundreds of others that people are reading
your message on, the identifying portion of the previous entry is not
visible without scrolling. You write your message once, but it is read many
times, almost never on the same setup as yours.
Since the quoted text is quite short (much shorter than your message), you
could have left it at the top allowing your readers to look with their eyes
down the left hand side of the window until they found a line that doesn't
start with a >, this takes a fraction of a second.
> If I wrote at greater length the portion of the previous post might require
> scrolling to see but that only matters if I'm new to the thread.
Not really. What about if I read news early every morning? I would have
read the message to which your are responding nearly 24 hours before yours,
and it is just one of dozens of messages in this thread to which yours could
have been the response.
Also, messages don't always arrive in the order in which they were sent
(although these days most of them do).
> "Jess" <phant...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:bd34c3b...@invalid.itworkshop.invalid.co.uk.invalid...
>
> > If the message is snipped and interleaved then you can see what has gone
> > before. If you use proper software then the different levels of quoting
> > are coloured and it is really fast to work with.
>
> >Try reading the RFCs. And YOU are wasting bandwidth by retransmitting
> >what has gone before at the end of your message.
This quoting is incorrect, only half of that text was in that message.
--
Eiffel and RISC OS - Better alternatives.
Ian Molton
Ray Dawson <R...@magray.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Bottom posting after (a) top posted response(s) generates an out of
> sequence mess. It is much better to follow the posting example of the
> previous posters. If they top post, then you top post. It's also more
> courteous.
No. because if everyone did that, we'd ALL be top posting by now. the
top posters WONT bottom post, or didnt you notice.
Top posting is the WRONG way. its chronologically either backwards (at
best) or a complete mess.
If you like reading stuff upside down, write a patch for your newsreader
to display it upside down.
Ray Dawson
Ian Molton <sp...@f2s.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Jan 2003 10:38:41 +0000 (GMT)
> Ray Dawson <R...@magray.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Bottom posting after (a) top posted response(s) generates an out of
> > sequence mess. It is much better to follow the posting example of the
> > previous posters. If they top post, then you top post. It's also more
> > courteous.
> No. because if everyone did that, we'd ALL be top posting by now. the
> top posters WONT bottom post, or didnt you notice.
That is not my experience. On many mail lists that I subscribe to top
posters usually (not always) bottom post if there have been two or more
responses. But then I usually correspond with people exhibiting common
sense and courtesy.
> Top posting is the WRONG way. its chronologically either backwards (at
> best) or a complete mess.
Top posting is different to the way YOU want it. That doesn't make it
wrong. Many many experienced posters do it without any problems at all.
What makes it messy is shoddy snipping of previous quotes - but this
applies to bottom posting as well. I really hate having to scroll down my
window to get to a gem of wisdom perhaps written as one line at the end
of a long screed of quoting. At least with a top poster I could see it
straight away.
It really amazes me how a few people on a minority platform think that
they can dictate what everyone else on the internet must do.
Life ain't like that sonny.
> If you like reading stuff upside down, write a patch for your newsreader
> to display it upside down.
Try bottom posting to alt.discuss.chineesewriting :-)
Russ Tarbox
the output was as follows:
<snip perhaps valid arguements from both sides>
> It really amazes me how a few people on a minority platform think that
> they can dictate what everyone else on the internet must do.
>
> Life ain't like that sonny.
The concept and accepted practice of bottom-posting was invented back in the
day of geeks on terminals...all people here are trying to do is make sure
the *sensible* tradition continues, by pointing out that top-posting is
generally unacceptable. We don't dictate - we enforce ;)
Russ
David Jackson
Ray Dawson <R...@magray.freeserve.co.uk> typed:
>> No. because if everyone did that, we'd ALL be top posting by now. the
>> top posters WONT bottom post, or didnt you notice.
>
> That is not my experience. On many mail lists that I subscribe to top
> posters usually (not always) bottom post if there have been two or
> more responses. But then I usually correspond with people exhibiting
> common sense and courtesy.
Well, certainly on comp.lang.c, the easiest way to make sure you don't get
an answer is to continue to top post after having been told not to (by
non-RISC OS users).
> What makes it messy is shoddy snipping of previous quotes - but
> this applies to bottom posting as well.
I wouldn't disagree that snipping quotes is essential. If it's not done,
either top or bottom posting becomes irritating.
>
> It really amazes me how a few people on a minority platform think that
> they can dictate what everyone else on the internet must do.
This doesn't make sense. Most of the really strong objections to top posting
are in non-RISC OS newsgroups by non-RISC OS users. Indeed, many of the
objectors are PC users, including OE users.
As I've mentioned before, the top v bottom posting arguments is absolutely
nothing to do with RISC OS v Windows. It's nothing to do with pro v anti
Windows at all. Many Windows users object to top posting just as much as
anything else.
Mech
"Eric Pobirs" <epo...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> As for your previous message, I've read plenty of RFCs in my time. The
> ones worth reading are for the purpose of establishing technical standards
> not aesthetic quibbling.
I guess RFC 1855 was just my imagination then.
--
__ _______ ______ __
/ |/ / __/ ___/ /_/ / # Dan Maloney.
/ /|_/ / _// /__/ __ / # Disclaimer: Not my fault.
/_/ /_/___/\___/_/ /_/ # mailto:me...@toth.org.uk
Mech
"David Jackson" <da...@condate.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> In news:4bb0af...@raydawson.com,
> Ray Dawson <R...@magray.freeserve.co.uk> typed:
> > I belong to many music and guitar related mail lists and there is a
> > wide variety of quoting and posting styles. Some top post, some
> > bottom post. Some give a reply without quoting any of the previous
> > posting, some quote the whole lot. I usually post according to the
> > previous poster. If he's top posted, I top post as well. If mine is
> > the first response, I bottom post.
> > But nobody ever complains. These guys (and gals) have a life and
> > nothing to prove by criticising others' posting styles. Their purpose
> > in life is to be helpful and friendly.
> > Then there are the riscos newsgroups ...
In fact, a quick search with google reveals just how widespread complaints
about top-posting are... "top-posting" gets 477,000 hits. "top-posting"
and "acorn" gets 580 hits.
> .... and comp.lang.c and the uk hierarchy (certainly uk.railway and
> uk.comp.vendors) for example. Top posters get a very hostile reception and
> not from RISC OS users.
...and alt.gothic and uk.people.gothic. Word is: "top-posting gives you
crabs"...
Cheers,
Dan.
VinceH (use reply-to)
> If you like reading stuff upside down, write a patch for your
> newsreader to display it upside down.
You know... thinking about it that would actually be
dead easy to do; rewrite the raw file prior to it
being debatched, in such a way that for each email
(or news message), all the unquoted text is put in
the body first, then all text with one level of
quoting, then all the text with two levels...
VinceH
--
VinceH can be found in the vicinity of http://www.vinceh.com
Soft Rock Software can be found around http://www.softrock.co.uk
WebChange2 for RISC OS & Windows is at http://www.webchange.co.uk
VinceH (use reply-to)
Ray Dawson <R...@magray.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> It really amazes me how a few people on a minority platform
> think that they can dictate what everyone else on the internet
> must do.
Oh, I see, it's only users of minority platforms that
don't top post, and not only that but they dictate it
as well.
I must remember that gem of wisdom next time this same
discussion pops up on other groups, where the majority
of posters are using Windows.
I'll tell them. I will. I'll say to them "you should
*not* be arguing against top posting because you are
*not* users of a minority platform. It is *our* job to
have this argument, and furthermore, we and only we
may dictate that people post in such a way as *we* -
the users of a genuine minority platform - define as
properly. Stoppit! Stoppit at once!"
That'll tell them.
Oh yes.
> Life ain't like that sonny.
Okay Cher.
Harriet Bazley
Mech wrote:
> In message <avcl41$lq7$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>,
> "David Jackson" <da...@condate.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > .... and comp.lang.c and the uk hierarchy (certainly uk.railway and
> > uk.comp.vendors) for example. Top posters get a very hostile reception and
> > not from RISC OS users.
>
> ...and alt.gothic and uk.people.gothic.
... and in fact *every* non c.s.a.* group I've ever read.
But the funny thing is that on every single one of these groups, when
everyone complains, the top-posters say "but in every group *I've* ever
posted to, people do it this way"! There are clearly two completely
non-overlapping sections of Usenet.... :-)
--
Harriet Bazley == Loyaulte me lie ==
Time is nature's way of making sure that everything doesn't happen at once.
Russ Tarbox
news:43663bb14...@freeuk.com, fell upon a keyboard in such a way that
the output was as follows:
> But the funny thing is that on every single one of these groups, when
> everyone complains, the top-posters say "but in every group *I've*
> ever posted to, people do it this way"! There are clearly two
> completely non-overlapping sections of Usenet.... :-)
PErhaps people in the southern hemisphere top-post in order to keep things
the right way round when it reaches us in the north, but somehow it all goes
tits-up?
Simon Challands
"Eric Pobirs" <epo...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> It also quickly devolves into an unreadable mess.
<snip>
Well, I've just jumped into this thread, and it's not clear to me what
is an unreadable mess (other than by scrolling down to the bottom, and
looking at other posts in the thread). Proper quoting requires a bit of
effort on behalf of the poster, in order to keep it tidy, but the end
result is nicer.
> So long as the time stamp lets me
> easily keep things in chronological order the conversation is easily
> followed.
Is it? With a well-quoted thread you don't have to even look at the
threading and order of posting to follow it, you don't have to even get all
the posts in order, and it's easy to follow every thread in the busiest
newsgroup.
The biggest disadvantage to top posting, aside from its tendency to
accumulate piles of irrelevent rubbish, is that if you are replying to
several points in a previous post you're going to have to explicitly say
which ones, instead of replying in a handy place and getting straight on
with what you have to say. You avoided that in this case by jumping straight
in and hoping everyone knew what the hell you were on about.
> If no
> scrolling is needed for me to read a message and either reply or move on to
> the next it save time fiddling with the mouse or keyboard.
A few seconds of time saved on your behalf, which you probably wouldn't
even notice? That's about as lazy as people who don't bother indicating
when they go around junctions.
Has the sig:
A: Top posters
Q: What's the most annoying thing about Usenet?
appeared in this thread yet?
--
Simon Challands, creator of
The Acorn Elite Pages: http://elite.acornarcade.com/
Three Dimensional Encounters: http://www.3dfrontier.fsnet.co.uk/
Philip Ludlam
Harriet Bazley <har...@bazley.freeuk.com> wrote:
>On 7 Jan 2003 as I do recall,
> Mech wrote:
>
>> In message <avcl41$lq7$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>,
>> "David Jackson" <da...@condate.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> > .... and comp.lang.c and the uk hierarchy (certainly uk.railway and
>> > uk.comp.vendors) for example. Top posters get a very hostile reception and
>> > not from RISC OS users.
>>
>> ...and alt.gothic and uk.people.gothic.
>
>But the funny thing is that on every single one of these groups, when
>everyone complains, the top-posters say "but in every group *I've* ever
>posted to, people do it this way"!
They're lying if they say that :-)
Yours,
Phil L.
--
http://www.philipnet.com
Ray Dawson
wrote:
> In fact, a quick search with google reveals just how widespread
> complaints about top-posting are... "top-posting" gets 477,000 hits.
> "top-posting" and "acorn" gets 580 hits.
Which is a ratio of 822:1. So, if there were 822 times as many PCs as
Acorn machines, the proportion against top posting would be the same. As
it's probably quite a few orders of magnitude greater than that,
complaints about PC users top posting is relatively low ...
Now, what were you trying to prove? :-)
Martin Dann
"Russ Tarbox" <russ-eb...@userve.co.uk> wrote:
> Amazingly, Harriet Bazley's fingers, in News-ID
> news:43663bb14...@freeuk.com, fell upon a keyboard in such a way that
> the output was as follows:
>
> > But the funny thing is that on every single one of these groups, when
> > everyone complains, the top-posters say "but in every group *I've*
> > ever posted to, people do it this way"! There are clearly two
> > completely non-overlapping sections of Usenet.... :-)
They may have only posted to comp.sys.windows.toppost
> PErhaps people in the southern hemisphere top-post in order to keep things
> the right way round when it reaches us in the north, but somehow it all goes
> tits-up?
It's 'cos they have to constantly hang on to the hook with one hand to
stop falling off the bottom of earth. Just remember how lucky we are in
the northen hemisphere that gravity keeps us on the planet, not trying
to pull us off.
As they then only have one useful hand, moving the cursor and cutting
out the dead bits is so much more hassle.
Martin.
--
According to the human genome project, humans are 50-60% bananas.
Mech
Ray Dawson <R...@magray.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <3d72cb14b%Me...@mechness.plus.com>, Mech <me...@toth.org.uk>
> wrote:
> > In fact, a quick search with google reveals just how widespread
> > complaints about top-posting are... "top-posting" gets 477,000 hits.
> > "top-posting" and "acorn" gets 580 hits.
> Which is a ratio of 822:1.
822.41 in fact.
> So, if there were 822 times as many PCs as Acorn machines, the proportion
> against top posting would be the same.
And, in fact, a further investigation works out exactly right.
Google claims to have 700,000,000 articles in its usenet database.
A search for "Acorn" turns up 851,000 hits.
If you divide 700,000,000 by 851,000 the result is 822.56. Woah! Bang on!
700,000,000 / 477,000 = 1467.5
851,000 / 580 = 1467.24
Correct to a fraction of a percent! Now what theory was it you were
refuting again??
> As it's probably quite a few orders of magnitude greater than that,
> complaints about PC users top posting is relatively low ...
I think your assumptions are wrong. We're not talking about ratios of
machines here, but ratios of people posting to usenet. A lot of Acorn
users are heavily usenet orientated and that has been the case for a long
time.
> Now, what were you trying to prove? :-)
That Acorn users don't complain about top posting more than anyone else...
I seem to have proved it quite astonishingly well. So well, I'm wondering
if I somehow rigged Google and wiped my memory of the event! :-)
Lionel Smith
Eric Pobirs <epo...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> As for your previous message, I've read plenty of RFCs in my time. The
> ones worth reading are for the purpose of establishing technical standards
> not aesthetic quibbling. Strunk and White offered a collection of
> recommendations but made it clear that these were not hard and fast laws
> that should always take precedent over personal style.
Rather more than 'aesthetic quibble' is at stake here.
Top posters frequently forget the yards of text attached out of site beyond
the text window (this more likely because of the limitations of the Windows
UI) thus wasting bandwidth.
Also most people read a letter before replying to it but hey you are so
clever I bet you provide answers before knowing the questions eh!
> As for bandwidth, that is a judgment call.
And you have been found wanting.
Look at the bandwidth your repeated attempts at self-justification have now
wasted.
You flouted a rule and have gone against all common sense.
You are wrong. Be man enough to accept it.
Lionel
--
___ ______
/ / / ___/ 4 children | Sea Vixen for pugnacity
/ / ionel A.| \ mith 7 grandchildren, | Hunter for elegance
/ /____ __\ | no wonder life is a breeze | Phantom for clout
/_______/ /_____/ http://www.argonet.co.uk/users/lionels | ZFC B+4+2
Get a better OutLook on life - use something else. ;-)
Lionel Smith
Ray Dawson <R...@magray.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> Life ain't like that sonny.
Questions come before answers. That is logical.
Anything else flouts reason ol' boy.
Lionel Smith
Ray Dawson <R...@magray.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> But nobody ever complains. These guys (and gals) have a life and nothing
> to prove by criticising others' posting styles. Their purpose in life is
> to be helpful and friendly.
> Then there are the riscos newsgroups ...
What a strange thing for you to write, but not unexpected thinking about it.
When was the last time that we saw a helpful and friendly post from you
or one which did not take a sly dig at RISC OS or its advocates?
Sure I have had troubles and find limitations I get over them without
resorting to sarcasm.
But there, I have a life too.
Lionel Smith
Ian Molton <sp...@f2s.com> wrote:
> Huh? WTF are you on about?
> Linux has some great, free, and appropriate software.
> Abiword, Gnumeric, GIMP, etc.
Do 6 to 10 year olds need to use those?
I am not so sure that you know whiskytangofoxtrot you are on about.
Ian Molton
Lionel Smith <lio...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > Huh? WTF are you on about?
>
> > Linux has some great, free, and appropriate software.
>
> > Abiword, Gnumeric, GIMP, etc.
>
> Do 6 to 10 year olds need to use those?
>
> I am not so sure that you know whiskytangofoxtrot you are on about.
School doesnt end at 10, you know...
Malcolm Ripley
"Lionel Smith" <lio...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4bb12113...@argonet.co.uk...
> In article <4bb114...@raydawson.com>,
> Ray Dawson <R...@magray.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> > Life ain't like that sonny.
>
> Questions come before answers. That is logical.
>
> Anything else flouts reason ol' boy.
>
that the
reasons for bottom posting rules are due to technology........of the
70's/80's.
Remember those scrolling text only VT terminals :-) you cannot top post on
those,
when using it normally. It also dictates the line length.
regards,
Malcolm
Richard Walker
"Paul F. Johnson" <paulf....@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
> By the process of poking various fingers onto keys Richard Walker
> generated this:
[ RS7500 vs. RPC ]
> > Right, so it's slower. End of argument.
>
> That's just the point though, it's not far short and if you're machine has
> dodgy timing, is on it's last legs or the cost of a SA + OS 4 is too much,
> then a trade up to the R7500 is a viable alternative.
I disagree. Risc PC users are likely to have PC cards, and all sorts of
stuff on podules. What SCSI subsystems are available for the RS7500, for
example? Anything like ViewFinder?
> > Anyway, in both cases, those refresh rates are too low.
>
> Works fine for me on my monitors - which are nothing amazing, infact, the
> one here is rather crappy, but is happily shared between the RPC (60Hz),
> R7500 (55Hz) and T5 (56Hz)
That depends on how high your standards are.
> > I don't remember any 'Faster than XXX' adverts. (where XXX was A7000,
> > Mico, Risc PC 600/700 etc.)
>
> Advertising costs.
Right, so what about the *free* advertising that should be on the good old
haunt: www.riscstation.co.uk ? There's bog-all on there.
> It's the old RISC OS problem Acorn were up against. There were plenty of
> adverts though. There is also a legal problem in giving speed comparisons
> between machines - which is why you never saw a speed comparison between a
> Ti** machine and a Dell (say) with the exact same spec.
Legal problem? Why would there be one if the claims were true?
Apple don't seem to have a problem openly bad-mouthing their competitors!
;-)
> > Acorn User isn't the place to advertise - that's preaching to the
> > converted.
>
> It was also advertised in all of the RISC OS magazines and shown at quite
> a number of trade shows and trade fairs. No one expects you to read those
> or attend them either, but they are certainly not "preaching to the
> converted" (though I take the point about AU)
You don't think advertising in RISC OS magazines is preaching to the
converted? RS should have enough coverage in magazines via news releases,
reviews, and dealer price lists.
> > The RS7500 is *not* a StrongARM Risc PC replacement, so it must be a
> > replacement for the lower-end machines... an A7000.
>
> Spot on with that analysis. None of the current RiscStation range are SA
> RPC replacements and was never intended to be. As I have said, it was
> intended for people to upgrade to from either their other ARM 7500
> machines or below.
Which is crazy, because those people would end up with a faster machine if
they bought a second-hand StrongARM Risc PC.
> > > RS couldn't just release a SA machine like that (there were/are other
> > > reasons which I can't go into) as the money was not there.
> >
> > Yes, but their plan to get that money from selling 7500FE machines is
> > 'interesting', to say the least.
>
> Not really. They firmly believed that they could do it. If OS 3.1 die
> hards finally ditched their ARM250/ARM 3 machines or older RPC users
> turned off their boxes and upgraded (as they should have) then this would
> all be academic. However, as we all know in the RISC OS community, until
> it's dead, why bother changing(1)?
Perhaps the product on offer simply wasn't enough of an improvement? Or,
perhaps more accurately, the product wasn't *perceived* to be enough of an
improvement?
I've got a StrongARM Risc PC, to which I added RISC OS 4 in September 2001.
I'm not going to spend any more money on it ('cos it's ancient), and the
only way up is Iyonix. I'm unsure about blowing such a sum of money on RISC
OS hardware, as (in my opinion) there are too many question marks on RISC OS
*software* - which is why I'm looking at Apple's range.
--
Richard.
"All you need is love, love. Love is all you need."
Richard Walker
> By the process of poking various fingers onto keys Richard Walker
> generated this:
>
> > > Linux. It's free and lots of people use it. Infact, it's probably the
> > > fastest growing OS around...
> >
> > Get real! You can't use Linux in education! (although it works well in
> > computing-based degree subjects)
>
> Given the number of schools who are now teaching that there is more than
> one OS, it's pretty obvious that you can.
How many is that, then? Half a dozen?
> Also there is very little a linux box can't do that a Win box can in
> education.
In some respects, yes - certainly more so than RISC OS. However, it won't
run 99% of the commercial education titles out there (which are being used
in schools *now*). And how compatible are the Linux productivity
applications with respect to Microsoft's formats? Can they read Word docs,
for example?
And please don't mention the yak that is OpenOffice.org
> There are plenty of education titles available for linux.
Name twenty.
[ VA 7000 vs. RS notebook ]
> > Let me get this right... you want a superior product to be deliberately
> > witheld, so another company can flog a mythical dead horse?
>
> Well, it's not a dead horse, so you can't flog it. The R7500 machines are
> not mythical either - a lot have been sold. Hmmmm.
I'm talking about the notebook being mythical.
> > People wanting a desktop machine (and that's the majority) would still
> > want an Iyonix. In addition, the challenge would be there for
> > RiscStation to release a *faster* notebook. If they can't do that, then
> > that's their funeral.
>
> That remains to be seen. The Iyonix is in opposition with the Omega, not
> any of the ARM7500FE boxes or the SA RPC.
Hmm.
> If RiscStation could make an X-Scale laptop economically (and have a
> licence for the OS more to the point!) then I'm pretty sure they would
> have.
What? In the same way that if they could make a 7500FE notebook
economically and get an OS license, then they would have? Oh look, that
hasn't materialised...
--
Richard.
"Cellophane flowers of yellow and green. Towering over your head."
Richard Walker
Ian Molton <sp...@f2s.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Jan 2003 18:03:52 GMT
> Richard Walker <runny...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> > Get real! You can't use Linux in education! (although it works well in
> > computing-based degree subjects)
>
> Huh? WTF are you on about?
Linux is excellent in that it can be used to gain 'Unix experience', *and*
the source code can be examined by those studying operating systems (for
example).
> Linux has some great, free, and appropriate software.
>
> Abiword, Gnumeric, GIMP, etc.
The GNOME productivity applications, in common with many Linux desktop
applications, are not ready for the primetime - i.e. they are not finished,
and/or have dreadful user interfaces.
Should I even mention the technical issues involved with installing and
maintaining a Linux system? Easy for people like us, but for the average
school technician...
--
Richard.
"Rocky Raccoon checked into his room Only to find Gideon's bible."
John Cartmell
<runny...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > Also there is very little a linux box can't do that a Win box can in
> > education.
> In some respects, yes - certainly more so than RISC OS. However, it
> won't run 99% of the commercial education titles out there (which are
> being used in schools *now*).
It's criminal how much confusion can be compressed into such a short space!
No criticism of either Paul or Richard but it's worth noting:
Linux can do things that Win &OR RISC OS can't do
Win can do things that RISC OS &OR Linux can't do
RISC OS can do things than Linux &OR Win can't do
commercial 'education' titles almost invariably aren't (educational that is
- see recent discussion on uk.education.schools-it)
software having been bought by schools does not equal software being used
by schools - and even less does it necessarily have a positive educational
value.
Just items that seemed to be implicit and liable to misinterpretation in
the discussion.
--
John Cartmell jo...@cartmell.demon.co.uk FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527
Acorn Publisher magazine & http://www.acornpublisher.com
Fleur Designs (boardgames)
Paul F. Johnson
By the process of poking various fingers onto keys Richard Walker
generated this:
> The GNOME productivity applications, in common with many Linux desktop
> applications, are not ready for the primetime - i.e. they are not
> finished, and/or have dreadful user interfaces.
What complete bollocks! OpenOffice looks and feels the same as M$ Office,
Scribus gives just about every DTP package I've *ever* come across a
really good run for it's money and Rosegarden is one of the most capable
music applications I've ever seen.
All of these are in constant development, so you're right in they're
unfinished, the UI is so easy, a 4 year old can use them (and he does)
> Should I even mention the technical issues involved with installing and
> maintaining a Linux system? Easy for people like us, but for the average
> school technician...
Sod all. Install, don't give anyone su password and that's that. Oh look
mummy, soooooo easy - it could almost be RISC OS!
TTFN
Paul
Ian Molton
Richard Walker <runny...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> Should I even mention the technical issues involved with installing
> and maintaining a Linux system? Easy for people like us, but for the
> average school technician...
You really ARE clueless.
Linux, in a school, can be made damn near tamper proof.
you can get it secure enough that the pupils would actually have to
/DISMANTLE/ the computer to stand a realistic chance of getting access
to it.
and reinstalling a linux box is easy. insert CD, watch it go.
Steven Pampling
VinceH (use reply-to) <spa...@softrock.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <20030107130039...@f2s.com>,
> Ian Molton <sp...@f2s.com> wrote:
> > If you like reading stuff upside down, write a patch for your
> > newsreader to display it upside down.
> You know... thinking about it that would actually be
> dead easy to do; rewrite the raw file prior to it
> being debatched, in such a way that for each email
> (or news message), all the unquoted text is put in
> the body first, then all text with one level of
> quoting, then all the text with two levels...
Call it !UnTop.
Market as an add in OLE featurette for newsreader software (unless the
authors of the main readers want to add your code into their product)
Steven Pampling
<mri...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> But not all responses are to questions! Anyway I would strongly suspect
> that the reasons for bottom posting rules are due to
> technology........of the 70's/80's.
I suspect the whole thing harks back to older technology than that:
Last line on the page - grab new sheet of paper.
or:
Move down the (vellum) scroll until the end and grab new scroll.
Strangely enough it's the way the whole of the western world did things
until Gatesy boy
1.Registered that the net existed
2. produced something broken (again) to link to it.
> Remember those scrolling text only
> VT terminals :-)
Used one at University. Relatively high tech at the time.
Stephen Courtney
> "Paul F. Johnson" <paulf....@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
> > By the process of poking various fingers onto keys Richard Walker
> > generated this:
> >
> > > > Linux. It's free and lots of people use it. Infact, it's probably
> > > > the fastest growing OS around...
Surely that's a reason *against* having it in general use within schools? -
unless the school is prepared to pay a lot for tech-support to continually
apply patches, update software etc, they aren't going to want Linux?
Before anyone jumps on me for the above, I know it applies to MS stuff as
much as it does to Linux, but I do have other reasons, - see below...
> > >
> > > Get real! You can't use Linux in education! (although it works well
> > > in computing-based degree subjects)
> >
> > Given the number of schools who are now teaching that there is more
> > than one OS, it's pretty obvious that you can.
> How many is that, then? Half a dozen?
If that *is* the case, then I work at 33% of them... :p
I do have to agree that (IMHO) Linux is not yet ready for general use in
schools. Not because the OS is unstable, or particularly unfriendly (KDE,
Gnome and the other desktops can be much easier than Windows these days -
when set up correctly) but simply due to a lack of polished education
titles that cover the entire range of education needs.
Linux *is* in the schools though, - machines are running Smoothwall, and
each is about to get a Debian box for hosting their internal website stuff.
Once major education software producers start doing stuff for Linux, in
addition to Windows and MacOS I think Linux will become a much more
tempting opportunity.
The two schools at which I work have always had two different platforms in
use. Each school had a room of Acorn machines, and another of Windows PCs.
The Acorns (most of them elderly A3000s and A3020s) were simply not able to
run the sort of software we needed (namely video and image manipulation and
encyclopedias for research). Rather than go for a 100% MS setup, both
schools have gone for Macs.
Unfortunately I couldn't find many reasons to recommend staying with RISC
OS - perhaps if the Iyonix heralds the start of a turnaround, then in a few
years time I might change my mind :|
I've not meant this to be an anti-RISC OS, anti-Linux or even pro-MacOS
post (I still prefer the RISC OS GUI, and for my needs RISC OS still has
the edge in Zap, Nettle, FTPc etc).
Cheers,
Stephen
--
_______________________________
Home: http://www.steve-c.co.uk/
Ian Molton
Stephen Courtney <ste...@steve-c.co.uk> wrote:
> I do have to agree that (IMHO) Linux is not yet ready for general use
> in schools. Not because the OS is unstable, or particularly unfriendly
> (KDE, Gnome and the other desktops can be much easier than Windows
> these days - when set up correctly) but simply due to a lack of
> polished education titles that cover the entire range of education
> needs.
Are you seriously suggesting that the education software available for
windows is THAT much better?
There might be more of it, but its unstable rubbish, in LARGE quantity.
Not to say theres nothing good, but the stuff that is, is generally
multiplatform.
VinceH (use reply-to)
Steven Pampling <steve.p...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <4bb13be5...@softrock.co.uk>,
> VinceH (use reply-to) <spa...@softrock.co.uk> wrote:
> > You know... thinking about it that would actually be
> > dead easy to do; rewrite the raw file prior to it
> > being debatched, in such a way that for each email
> > (or news message), all the unquoted text is put in
> > the body first, then all text with one level of
> > quoting, then all the text with two levels...
> Call it !UnTop.
Noooo... the name !UnTop would be, very much, a
misnomer - it's the other way around; I was
suggesting that a program to make all posts
appear as /top posts/ would be easy. (Though
not /quite/ as easy as I first thought, since
the attributions would be wrongly positioned
unless extra code were added to sort those).
So, unfortunately...
> Market as an add in OLE featurette for newsreader software
> (unless the authors of the main readers want to add your code
> into their product)
... I can't see anyone but the most insane
wanting to use code that does that!
Code to do it the other way around would be a
/little/ bit more difficult, I think (though,
admittedly, without actually thinking too hard
about it!). At the very least, it would suffer
the same problem as above, putting the
attributions in the wrong place[1], so code
would have to be written to identify and move
attributions. That's the /main/ difficulty in
both directions, then - but I suspect there may
be others for a bottom poster proglet.
And code to do it *properly*, of course, to
intersperse replies with quoted material
(correctly, not by just sticking it in and
hoping for the best!) would require a good
level of AI.
There's a side of me that wants to say that
this quite probably reflects the way people
post, but that would be just a little bit
naughty of me, wouldn't it? ;-)
[1] If fed something that looked like:
---8<---
wibble said:
> wobble said:
> > blah blah blah
> rabbit rabbit
yadda yadda
---8<---
It would churn out:
---8<---
> > blah blah blah
> wobble said:
> rabbit rabbit
wibble said:
yadda yadda
---8<---
IOW, the relevant attribution appearing
*after* the quoting to which it refers.
And, just for completeness, the top post
conversion would give:
---8<---
wibble said:
yadda yadda
> wobble said:
> rabbit rabbit
> > blah blah blah
---8<---
In this case, the attribution appearing
before the reply.
I suppose the simplest way to deal with that (in
either direction) would be to take the first line
or two at each level of quoting (inc. new text)
and check for certain key words/punctuation at
the end of those lines (wrote: said: wrote...
etc); if there, treat it as the attribution and
locate it appropriately. If not, assume there is
no attribution. A /little/ clumsy and prone to
errors, but it'd get it right a good proportion
of the time. I think.
If nothing else, an interesting excercise.
And in writing this post, I've just nicely proven
one part of a theory as used in a recent/
unfinished piece of humorous fiction, which is
nice. Sort of doing research for the story /after/
writing it, instead of before.
*thinks*
Well, it is about time travel... ;-)
Richard Walker
"Paul F. Johnson" <paulf....@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
> By the process of poking various fingers onto keys Richard Walker
> generated this:
>
> > The GNOME productivity applications, in common with many Linux desktop
> > applications, are not ready for the primetime - i.e. they are not
> > finished, and/or have dreadful user interfaces.
>
> What complete bollocks! OpenOffice looks and feels the same as M$ Office,
That's exactly why *I* don't like OpenOffice.org.
And for those who are OK with MS Office, the problem with OO.org is that
it's file compatibility is poor. Apart from that, I believe some schools in
this area are considering OO.org instead of MS Office (but still on
Windows).
> Scribus gives just about every DTP package I've *ever* come across a
> really good run for it's money and Rosegarden is one of the most capable
> music applications I've ever seen.
Not seen those.
> All of these are in constant development, so you're right in they're
> unfinished, the UI is so easy, a 4 year old can use them (and he does)
Will they fit in with the KDE UI?
> > Should I even mention the technical issues involved with installing and
> > maintaining a Linux system? Easy for people like us, but for the
> > average school technician...
>
> Sod all. Install, don't give anyone su password and that's that. Oh look
> mummy, soooooo easy - it could almost be RISC OS!
Of course! It'll install onto a suite of twenty class workstations, sort
out all the networking, work with existing printers, have sensible secirity
settings etc. all out of the box. Err... no, it won't.
--
Richard.
"I wanna hold your hand, I wanna hold your hand."
Richard Walker
Ian Molton <sp...@f2s.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Jan 2003 18:17:27 GMT
> Richard Walker <runny...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> > Should I even mention the technical issues involved with installing and
> > maintaining a Linux system? Easy for people like us, but for the
> > average school technician...
>
> You really ARE clueless.
Not at all. I've looked at 'desktop Linux' for myself a number of times.
Each time, I've decided that it's just not polished enough, and that it'll
be OK in a year or two. I'm still waiting.
> Linux, in a school, can be made damn near tamper proof.
I know. And so can Windows.
> you can get it secure enough that the pupils would actually have to
> /DISMANTLE/ the computer to stand a realistic chance of getting access
> to it.
I know.
> and reinstalling a linux box is easy. insert CD, watch it go.
Installing and configuring a Linux system that is suitable for use in
education, is not the kind of thing a typical school technician would
manage. I'm sure you can do it, and I think I'd get there in the end - but
that's irrelevant.
Ian Molton
Richard Walker <runny...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > Linux, in a school, can be made damn near tamper proof.
>
> I know. And so can Windows.
not even in the same league. Although windows is (slowly) making a
little progress there.
> > and reinstalling a linux box is easy. insert CD, watch it go.
>
> Installing and configuring a Linux system that is suitable for use in
> education, is not the kind of thing a typical school technician would
> manage. I'm sure you can do it, and I think I'd get there in the end
> - but that's irrelevant.
What part of 'insert CD, watch it go' are these people incapable of?
If they cant manage that, why are they teaching my child IT ?
David Jackson
Richard Walker <runny...@ntlworld.com> typed:
> In message <20030108215503...@f2s.com>
> Ian Molton <sp...@f2s.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 08 Jan 2003 18:17:27 GMT
>> Richard Walker <runny...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Should I even mention the technical issues involved with installing
>>> and maintaining a Linux system? Easy for people like us, but for
>>> the average school technician...
>>
>> You really ARE clueless.
>
> Not at all. I've looked at 'desktop Linux' for myself a number of
> times. Each time, I've decided that it's just not polished enough,
> and that it'll be OK in a year or two. I'm still waiting.
I'd love to be able to say that Linux is a wonderful desktop system.
However, after installing it on my PC with both KDE and GNOME desktops, I've
found that I actually use Windows in preference to Linux and in fact haven't
bothered to use Linux at all for months, as it's such a pain to use in terms
of it's user interface. It's hard to specify exactly what's wrong with it,
it just feels horrible and unnatural.
--
David Jackson in the Roman auxilliary fort of Condate
Now known as Northwich Cheshire
http://www.condate.freeserve.co.uk
alan.calder
Ian Molton <sp...@f2s.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 07:26:38 GMT
> Richard Walker <runny...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
[Snip]
> > > and reinstalling a linux box is easy. insert CD, watch it go.
> >
> > Installing and configuring a Linux system that is suitable for use in
> > education, is not the kind of thing a typical school technician would
> > manage. I'm sure you can do it, and I think I'd get there in the end
> > - but that's irrelevant.
> What part of 'insert CD, watch it go' are these people incapable of?
> If they cant manage that, why are they teaching my child IT ?
C'mon, Ian! 'insert CD, watch it go' applies just as much to a Windows NT
system! Configuring the rest of the network is a different matter!
Since when did schools pay IT technicians enough for them to be able to do
this stuff in a sensible manner? Average wage for IT techs in the schools
in my area seems to be about 18-19k and they have to do a lot more than
your average commercial tech - dealing with the problems of staff and kids
takes way a lot of their techie time.
Incidentally. techs don't teach children (officially) teachers do that -
but they don't have the time for fiddling with the system any more!
Cheers
Alan
--
Alan Calder, Milton Keynes, UK.
James Sargent
> I'd love to be able to say that Linux is a wonderful desktop system.
> However, after installing it on my PC with both KDE and GNOME
> desktops, I've found that I actually use Windows in preference to
> Linux and in fact haven't bothered to use Linux at all for months, as
> it's such a pain to use in terms of it's user interface. It's hard to
> specify exactly what's wrong with it, it just feels horrible and
> unnatural.
That's how I felt too. Along with a tediously slow boot time (caused in
part by it's re-scanning the hardware) and my inability to get it to do
any dial-up networking. Hence, I'm back to using Windows.
James
John Cartmell
alan.calder <alan....@argonet.co.uk> replied to:
[If they cant manage that, why are they teaching my child IT ?]
> Incidentally. techs don't teach children (officially) teachers do that -
> but they don't have the time for fiddling with the system any more!
And the last time I did have to 'fiddle' with a system I had a full
teaching commitment like any other teacher in the school (teaching IT,
Maths, PSE, staff cover, form, year and yard duty) + teaching IT to staff,
supervising one IT suite every lunch time, remotely supervising both IT
suites all the time, sole management of both suites, subject planning
(which uniquely changed every year for every class), &c.
And if you had said to me about anything "If you can't manage ****, why are
you teaching my child IT ?" I'd have been tempted to say "P*** off".
Russ Tarbox
news:20030108234518...@f2s.com, fell upon a keyboard in such a
way that the output was as follows:
> On Wed, 08 Jan 2003 20:49:11 +0000 (GMT)
> Stephen Courtney <ste...@steve-c.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> I do have to agree that (IMHO) Linux is not yet ready for general use
>> in schools. Not because the OS is unstable, or particularly
>> unfriendly (KDE, Gnome and the other desktops can be much easier
>> than Windows these days - when set up correctly) but simply due to a
>> lack of polished education titles that cover the entire range of
>> education needs.
>
> Are you seriously suggesting that the education software available for
> windows is THAT much better?
>
> There might be more of it, but its unstable rubbish, in LARGE
> quantity.
>
But the point is, it's THERE...
--
Russ Tarbox
Biog: http://www.userve.co.uk/russbiog.htm
Shop: http://www.stores.ebay.co.uk/riscitfromruss
Remove THELID to reply by e-mail
Russ Tarbox
news:258cfbb14...@proton.acorn, fell upon a keyboard in such a way
that the output was as follows:
> In message <20030108215503...@f2s.com>
> Ian Molton <sp...@f2s.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 08 Jan 2003 18:17:27 GMT
>> Richard Walker <runny...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Should I even mention the technical issues involved with installing
>>> and maintaining a Linux system? Easy for people like us, but for
>>> the average school technician...
>>
>> You really ARE clueless.
>
> Not at all. I've looked at 'desktop Linux' for myself a number of
> times. Each time, I've decided that it's just not polished enough,
> and that it'll be OK in a year or two. I'm still waiting.
>
>> Linux, in a school, can be made damn near tamper proof.
When I was at school a few years ago, we had a suite of new PCs delivered
for use in the design dept. They were Windows 95, I think there were 20 of
them. The dept. spent a lot of money on some software which was designed to
'protect' the system...i.e. there was no access to Control Panel, the 'Run'
command on the start menu disappeared.
However, I still managed, very easily, to play games etc on the machines,
and run winpopup which was great fun once I had everyone running it:
1) Microsoft Access was installed. From Access' Macro feature, you can
easily execute any command as if you had a command prompt
2) Control Panel, as with most system folders in Windows, are accessible
from a special 'control code'...i.e. you create a folder with the name:
Control Panel.{21EC2020-3AEA-1069-A2DD-08002B30309D}
Windows users, try it...it will give you access to control panel.
So I'm afraid Windows is not completely secure...admittedly Win2K is
probably better protected but even so many schools are still running older
OSes.
Russ
Mark Rowan
John Williams (News) <UCE...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <4bb1d1f6...@softrock.co.uk>,
> VinceH (use reply-to) <spa...@softrock.co.uk> wrote:
> > Well, it is about time travel... ;-)
> Aren't we all! ;-)
> Just that it is relentlessly one-way!
Also there's that simple fundamendal problem - at least while you're
attepting time-travel whilst on earth - of the earth's movement.
Take a trip 5 mins into the past and you'll find yourself stranded in
space with no air, as the earth has moved a few hundred thousand miles
round its orbit :-)
Mark
--
Economics is called the dismal science, but that's just because most economists are dismal scientists.
||Mark Rowan|| Acorn RiscPC 233(T) + 586, 80+1MB, RO 4.02, ADFS 8GB, DeskFM
http://www.tamias.ukgateway.net | tamias(at)ukgateway.net | ICQ 30759398
Lionel Smith
VinceH (use reply-to) <spa...@softrock.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <4bb114...@raydawson.com>,
> Ray Dawson <R...@magray.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> > Life ain't like that sonny.
> Okay Cher.
He! He! I very nearly used that one but didn't want to upset the ol' boy
too much. :-)
I am surprised he didn't mention 'Jim' though. ;-)
Ian Molton
"Russ Tarbox" <russ-eb...@userve.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Are you seriously suggesting that the education software available
> > for windows is THAT much better?
> >
> > There might be more of it, but its unstable rubbish, in LARGE
> > quantity.
> >
>
> But the point is, it's THERE...
Is rubbish thats there really better than none?
(ignoring the fact that linux actually has /some/ educational software,
not even counting 'non-educational' titles that meet the criteria in any
case...)
Ian Molton
alan.calder <alan....@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > > Installing and configuring a Linux system that is suitable for use
> > > in education, is not the kind of thing a typical school technician
> > > would manage. I'm sure you can do it, and I think I'd get there
> > > in the end- but that's irrelevant.
>
> > What part of 'insert CD, watch it go' are these people incapable of?
>
> > If they cant manage that, why are they teaching my child IT ?
>
> C'mon, Ian! 'insert CD, watch it go' applies just as much to a
> Windows NT system! Configuring the rest of the network is a different
> matter!
No. Setting up a windows network is FAR harder than a linux one. on
linux I can trust 'ifconfig' to do exactly what it says on the box, and
as this is what all the distros use 'under the covers' they basically
just WORK.
Windows on the other hand can be a complete pig, especially if something
goes wrong, as W$ has absolutely NO debugging info to help you find the
problem.
Ian Molton
James Sargent <ro...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> That's how I felt too. Along with a tediously slow boot time (caused
> in part by it's re-scanning the hardware)
Redhat, kudzu, yes?
bin it. install a real distro instead of that redhat shite.
my machine boots to X with all apps loaded (xmms, terminals, GAIM,
browser) in under 15 seconds.
> and my inability to get it to do any dial-up networking.
Try wvdial. its commandline based, but its dead simple and hasnt failed
me yet.
Theres probably similar GUI tools, but I only use dialup about once a
year at my dads place, so I wasnt going to look further than wvdial at
the time.
Russ Tarbox
way that the output was as follows:
> On Thu, 9 Jan 2003 11:55:52 -0000
> "Russ Tarbox" <russ-eb...@userve.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Are you seriously suggesting that the education software available
>>> for windows is THAT much better?
>>>
>>> There might be more of it, but its unstable rubbish, in LARGE
>>> quantity.
>>>
>>
>> But the point is, it's THERE...
>
> Is rubbish thats there really better than none?
>
Of course it is. Teachers can buy it, budget for it, and use it when it's
not broken, plus it boosts govenment figures etc etc. It's difficult to do
that with non-existent software...
Russ Tarbox
way that the output was as follows:
> On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 10:51:34 +0000
> James Sargent <ro...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
>> That's how I felt too. Along with a tediously slow boot time (caused
>> in part by it's re-scanning the hardware)
>
> Redhat, kudzu, yes?
>
> bin it. install a real distro instead of that redhat shite.
What do you use?
Mr S C Winsor
> Market as
Nahh. Put it in PC virus to automatically install it on everyones machine
and prevent top posting.
Nothing maliciuos just sort out OE. I guess while it's at it it could also
sort out the siggy problem and allow text only posting :-)
Stuart.
--
__ __ __ __ __ ___ _____________________________________________
|__||__)/ __/ \|\ ||_ | /
| || \\__/\__/| \||__ | /...Internet access for all Acorn RISC machines
___________________________/ stuart...@argonet.co.uk
101 uses for a Pentium: No1 - A slow cooker.
Ian Molton
"Russ Tarbox" <russ-eb...@userve.co.uk> wrote:
> > Redhat, kudzu, yes?
> >
> > bin it. install a real distro instead of that redhat shite.
>
> What do you use?
I'll confess - I dont ;-)
see http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/
However, debian / mandrake would be alright for a relative newcomer.
Debian because it is ROCK SOLID and predictable, which offsets the
learning curve a lot, and mandrake because its 'pushbutton easy' to
install.
James Sargent
> On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 10:51:34 +0000 James Sargent <ro...@127.0.0.1>
> wrote:
>
>> That's how I felt too. Along with a tediously slow boot time
>> (caused in part by it's re-scanning the hardware)
>
> Redhat, kudzu, yes?
>
> bin it. install a real distro instead of that redhat shite.
Well, therein lies the rub. What's a "real distro" when it's at home?
>> and my inability to get it to do any dial-up networking.
>
> Try wvdial. its commandline based, but its dead simple and hasnt
> failed me yet.
Well, unless it was on the install CD, I wasn't in a position to dial-up
and download it!
James
alan.calder
Ian Molton <sp...@f2s.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 09:39:58 +0000 (GMT)
> alan.calder <alan....@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > > > Installing and configuring a Linux system that is suitable for use
> > > > in education, is not the kind of thing a typical school technician
> > > > would manage. I'm sure you can do it, and I think I'd get there
> > > > in the end- but that's irrelevant.
> >
> > > What part of 'insert CD, watch it go' are these people incapable of?
> >
> > > If they cant manage that, why are they teaching my child IT ?
> >
> > C'mon, Ian! 'insert CD, watch it go' applies just as much to a
> > Windows NT system! Configuring the rest of the network is a different
> > matter!
> No. Setting up a windows network is FAR harder than a linux one. on
> linux I can trust 'ifconfig' to do exactly what it says on the box, and
> as this is what all the distros use 'under the covers' they basically
> just WORK.
Interesting, must try it some day. Glad to know that your preferred Linux
distro automatically sets up the whole network for you, including the
virtual CDs, user profiles, user desktops, printers/servers, installs all
the software you need -in the correct language and distributes it to the
appropriate users, sorts out their email and browser privileges, allocates
drive space depending on year group, provides individual desktops for
visually challenged students, balances the network traffic/load between
servers. 8-)
Seriously, yer average it tech has more than enough to do in a day without
getting into the fun of Linux. Generally the external help available is
only there for MS systems (yes I know about the newsgroups but that is a
bit slow) which is a shame but how life is in education. I've just left
this world (of education 8-)) after 30 odd years, ending as Head of IT. My
it tech at my last school and I had fought for 18 months to get a second
IT tech to help out but to no avail. Money's there to buy the visible
things - computers, projectors, the gloss - but the boring things like
network switches, decent cabling, it techs are swept aside as 'something
we are desperately trying to find funding for'. How many machines? Well,
at the moment he is still struggling to cope with 200 odd machines on two
linked networks (admin/curriculum), 3 servers, web/mail server, CD server,
20 odd printers, 1200 users etc etc all for 18.4k.
He's leaving the school in 8 days. Well, we used to work as a team but the
new HoD is not a techie person so he can't face it all on his own.
> Windows on the other hand can be a complete pig, especially if something
> goes wrong, as W$ has absolutely NO debugging info to help you find the
> problem.
True but there are tools available and lots and lots of people you can
call upon for help when things go wrong.
Mind you, when there were only 110 Risc OS machines on the network I did
it all plus teach and run the department but then they basically didn't go
wrong and the system was pretty robust. And I was daft! 8-)
Ben Shimmin
> Ian Molton wrote:
> > On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 10:51:34 +0000 James Sargent <ro...@127.0.0.1>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> That's how I felt too. Along with a tediously slow boot time
> >> (caused in part by it's re-scanning the hardware)
Perhaps. Some distributions insist in installing all manner of
daemons to run at boot time, which tends to delay matters considerably.
I once found myself running a Tamagotchi server.
> > Redhat, kudzu, yes?
> >
> > bin it. install a real distro instead of that redhat shite.
>
> Well, therein lies the rub. What's a "real distro" when it's at home?
It's one of those pretentious computing terms with a vague background
in meaning which is bandied about until the next catchphrase comes
along; generally Slackware and Debian are considered good examples of
`real' distributions (with Slackware the more `hands-on' and Debian the
more `user-friendly', if such a term applies to Linux).
> >> and my inability to get it to do any dial-up networking.
> >
> > Try wvdial. its commandline based, but its dead simple and hasnt
> > failed me yet.
>
> Well, unless it was on the install CD, I wasn't in a position to dial-up
> and download it!
Most real distros (sorry) do come with it; it actually is as easy to
get going as putting your details into a (non-sendmail-esque) config
file, being suid root, and typing `wvdial'.
b.
--
`He certainly left me under the impression that he would have made a
wonderful solicitor.' -- Jonathan Harker on Dracula