Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #160067
| From | "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | alt.folklore.computers |
| Subject | Re: The True Aficionado? |
| Date | 2016-02-22 07:50 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dium82FcaskU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | <na4h2j$kvc$1@dont-email.me> <35595a0c-afed-4e10-8eee-2d3d78d3ac4d@googlegroups.com> <diu6d1F83t0U1@mid.individual.net> <28b18e55-174d-47eb-903b-45bafef3bafb@googlegroups.com> <nacv4l$eq7$1@dont-email.me> |
"Dave Garland" <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote in message news:nacv4l$eq7$1@dont-email.me... > On 2/21/2016 10:56 AM, Quadibloc wrote: > >> It's true that when a computer is a device you use on a daily basis as >> part of >> your regular life - to surf the web, check E-mail, and so on - it makes >> sense >> to want it to be... comfortable. >> >> But I argue the other side of the case because I myself _am_ affected by >> the >> "true aficionado" inclination, and thus I know I want to keep it under >> control. >> >> Thus, on my web site, >> >> at >> http://www.quadibloc.com/arch/perint.htm >> >> I go on at great length about how various schemes might allow a computer >> to efficiently switch from treating memory as composed of 8-bit bytes to >> treating it as composed of 6-bit characters, the better to support >> emulation of some classic computers; >> >> at >> http://www.quadibloc.com/comp/kyb03.htm >> >> I discuss the evolution of the IBM PC keyboard, in the context of how >> reachable the backspace key, the enter key, and both shift keys were >> where I found them most conveniently reachable as a touch-typist - _and_ >> in that section, I also admire some large and complicated keyboards, at >> >> http://www.quadibloc.com/comp/kyb01.htm >> >> And then, to make a computer seem "computery"... what could be more >> impressive than a front panel full of blinking lights? >> >> http://www.quadibloc.com/comp/panint.htm >> >> On this page, >> >> http://www.quadibloc.com/arch/ar0506.htm >> >> I conclude with a spirited defense of big-endian computing as against >> little-endian computing; >> >> another preference of mine, for Pascal strings over C strings as the >> basis for file formats is addressed on this page... >> >> http://www.quadibloc.com/comp/druint.htm >> >> Anyways, it should not be considered unreasonable for me to warn others >> at travelling as far down a path that can lead to madness as I have! >> > But it's a _nice_ sort of madness! > > Of course, those who hang out on a.f.c. are probably too far gone for > warnings to have much effect. I'm not convinced that it has anything to do with too far gone myself. After all, you do have to spend your time doing something, what is fundamentally unhealthy about doing what interests you ? IMO it is actually fundamentally very healthy indeed.
Back to alt.folklore.computers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
The True Aficionado? "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-02-18 13:33 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? mentificium@gmail.com - 2016-02-19 20:42 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-02-20 11:11 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? mentificium@gmail.com - 2016-02-20 05:06 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-20 15:18 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? mentificium@gmail.com - 2016-02-20 15:11 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-21 15:48 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? mentificium@gmail.com - 2016-02-21 13:43 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-23 13:13 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? mentificium@gmail.com - 2016-02-23 06:06 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-24 04:40 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-23 09:50 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-24 13:40 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 03:14 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-01 13:55 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 01:30 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-02 14:19 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 03:51 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-03 13:39 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-03 16:18 +0100
Re: The True Aficionado? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 03:52 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-04 13:22 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-04 16:33 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-03-04 15:47 -0600
Re: The True Aficionado? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-05 01:04 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-05 13:57 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-06 11:40 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-06 23:18 -0600
Re: The True Aficionado? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-04 17:18 +0100
Re: The True Aficionado? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-04 22:09 -0500
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-05 13:57 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-03-05 14:36 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-06 14:08 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 02:03 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-06 17:28 +0100
Re: The True Aficionado? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-06 11:54 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 07:39 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-06 17:24 -0700
Re: The True Aficionado? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-05 18:43 +0100
Re: The True Aficionado? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-06 11:34 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-03-07 16:24 -0600
Re: The True Aficionado? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 03:45 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-03-03 16:01 -0600
Re: The True Aficionado? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-20 20:59 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? mentificium@gmail.com - 2016-02-20 23:14 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-21 16:33 +0100
Re: The True Aficionado? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 03:19 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-21 08:56 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-21 12:22 -0600
Re: The True Aficionado? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 07:50 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-21 22:49 -0800
Re: The True Aficionado? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 19:32 +1100
Re: The True Aficionado? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-22 09:23 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-22 17:17 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-02-22 11:30 +0000
Re: The True Aficionado? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 07:38 +1100
csiph-web