Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #154174 > unrolled thread

[CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32

Started byRS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com>
First post2015-11-08 13:49 +0000
Last post2015-11-11 18:32 +0100
Articles 20 on this page of 80 — 24 participants

Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers


Contents

  [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 RS Wood  <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2015-11-08 13:49 +0000
    Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2015-11-09 09:22 +0300
      Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-11-09 09:22 +0200
        Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2015-11-09 11:10 +0000
          Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-09 12:07 +0000
        Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-09 12:08 +0100
          Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-09 14:13 +0000
            Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2015-11-09 14:23 +0000
              Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-10 14:22 +0000
                Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-10 18:18 +0100
                  Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-10 18:25 +0000
                    Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2015-11-10 19:35 +0000
                      Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-11 06:47 +1100
                        Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2015-11-10 21:15 +0000
                          Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-11 12:15 +1100
                            Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2015-11-11 10:19 +0000
                      Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-11 06:23 +0000
                        Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-11 11:08 -0800
                          Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-11 21:23 +0000
                    Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2015-11-10 19:51 +0000
                    Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-11 00:31 +0100
                      Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-11-11 08:01 +0000
                        Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-11 12:23 +0100
                          Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 pechter@pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter) - 2015-11-12 03:27 +0000
                            Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-12 13:23 +0000
                  Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-11 14:39 +0000
                    Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 05:51 +1100
                Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-11-11 06:28 +1100
            Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Bob Eager <news0005@eager.cx> - 2015-11-09 16:24 +0000
              Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-10 14:22 +0000
                Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-10 16:01 +0000
                  Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-10 18:20 +0100
                    Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-10 18:49 +0000
                  Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-11 14:39 +0000
                    Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-11 16:31 +0000
                      Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Bob Eager <news0005@eager.cx> - 2015-11-11 18:05 +0000
                        Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-11 18:20 +0000
                          Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Bob Eager <news0005@eager.cx> - 2015-11-11 23:24 +0000
                      Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-12 14:04 +0000
                        Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 pechter@pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter) - 2015-11-12 14:47 +0000
                          Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-13 13:58 +0000
                            Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-13 15:44 +0100
                              Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-14 13:56 +0000
                                Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-15 04:44 +1100
                              Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-14 10:15 -0800
                                Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-14 10:53 -0800
                              Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-16 14:47 +0000
                        Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-12 15:26 +0000
                Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-10 17:52 +0100
            Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-09 20:17 +0100
            Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 hankvc@blackhole.lostwells.org (Hank) - 2015-11-10 02:21 +0000
              Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-10 14:22 +0000
        Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-09 14:13 +0000
          Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-11-10 05:31 +1100
            Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-10 14:22 +0000
              Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-10 18:05 +0100
                Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-11 10:52 +0000
                  Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2015-11-11 11:40 +0000
                    Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 mausg@mail.com - 2015-11-11 12:53 +0000
                    Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-11 14:01 +0000
              Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-11-11 06:25 +1100
                Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Johnny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2015-11-10 23:19 +0000
                  Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 "Sam Thatch" <st342@gmail.com> - 2015-11-11 12:23 +1100
                  Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-11 07:34 +0000
                    Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Johnny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2015-11-11 17:24 +0000
                      Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2015-11-11 17:33 +0000
                  Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2015-11-11 09:51 +0000
              Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-11 11:05 -0800
                Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-12 14:04 +0000
                  Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-11-13 12:38 +1100
              Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 pechter@pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter) - 2015-11-12 03:17 +0000
                Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-12 14:04 +0000
                  Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Nyssa <Nyssa@flawlesslogic.com> - 2015-11-12 12:24 -0500
                    Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-13 13:58 +0000
                      Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2015-11-13 15:51 +0000
                        Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Nyssa <Nyssa@flawlesslogic.com> - 2015-11-13 14:51 -0500
                        Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 pechter@pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter) - 2015-11-15 16:44 +0000
                      Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-13 18:11 +0000
                  Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-11-13 12:37 +1100
        Re: [CM] Coding with dad on the Dragon 32 Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2015-11-11 18:32 +0100

Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]


#154312

From"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com>
Date2015-11-11 06:25 +1100
Message-ID<daeum5Fi06dU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#154289
jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote
>>> Marko Rauhamaa wrote
>>>> RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com>:

>>>>> (That said, I /do/ wish boot times were 0.5 seconds again).

>>>> I don't know. Who boots a computer nowadays?

>>> I do.

>> Yeah, but you have always been a fucking dinosaur

> Which makes me an excellent field test site.

Like hell it does when on one with even
half a clue operates like you do anymore.

>> and are actually stupid enough to run down to
>> the library to look something up when everyone
>> else uses this funky system called the net that
>> has been available for quite some time now.

> Which keeps me from spending more than $1200/year.

Doesn’t cost anything even remotely like that. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#154327

FromJohnny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com>
Date2015-11-10 23:19 +0000
Message-ID<GXu0y.123070$mn4.55497@fx42.am4>
In reply to#154312
On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 06:25:54 +1100, Rod Speed wrote:

> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote
>>>> Marko Rauhamaa wrote
>>>>> RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com>:
> 
>>>>>> (That said, I /do/ wish boot times were 0.5 seconds again).
> 
>>>>> I don't know. Who boots a computer nowadays?
> 
>>>> I do.
> 
>>> Yeah, but you have always been a fucking dinosaur
> 
>> Which makes me an excellent field test site.
> 
> Like hell it does when on one with even half a clue operates like you do
> anymore.
> 
>>> and are actually stupid enough to run down to the library to look
>>> something up when everyone else uses this funky system called the net
>>> that has been available for quite some time now.
> 
>> Which keeps me from spending more than $1200/year.
> 
> Doesn’t cost anything even remotely like that.

 Well, that's three *actual* posts that I've seen from this troll. I'm 
used to seeing ghost sightings of him in others postings in the other NGs 
he trolls but I rather suspect I'll not be seeing many such ghosts once 
I've killfiled him in this NG.

-- 
Johnny B Good

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#154334

From"Sam Thatch" <st342@gmail.com>
Date2015-11-11 12:23 +1100
Message-ID<dafjkbFn43dU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#154327

"Johnny B Good" <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> wrote in message 
news:GXu0y.123070$mn4.55497@fx42.am4...
> On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 06:25:54 +1100, Rod Speed wrote:
>
>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote
>>>>> Marko Rauhamaa wrote
>>>>>> RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com>:
>>
>>>>>>> (That said, I /do/ wish boot times were 0.5 seconds again).
>>
>>>>>> I don't know. Who boots a computer nowadays?
>>
>>>>> I do.
>>
>>>> Yeah, but you have always been a fucking dinosaur
>>
>>> Which makes me an excellent field test site.
>>
>> Like hell it does when on one with even half a clue operates like you do
>> anymore.
>>
>>>> and are actually stupid enough to run down to the library to look
>>>> something up when everyone else uses this funky system called the net
>>>> that has been available for quite some time now.
>>
>>> Which keeps me from spending more than $1200/year.
>>
>> Doesn’t cost anything even remotely like that.
>
> Well, that's three *actual* posts that I've seen from this troll. I'm
> used to seeing ghost sightings of him in others postings in the other NGs
> he trolls but I rather suspect I'll not be seeing many such ghosts once
> I've killfiled him in this NG.

No one actually gives a flying red fuck what you do or do not read. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#154339

FromAhem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
Date2015-11-11 07:34 +0000
Message-ID<20151111073430.e0ba8ddab6e4b860a9d56090@eircom.net>
In reply to#154327
On Tue, 10 Nov 2015 23:19:02 GMT
Johnny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> wrote:

>  Well, that's three *actual* posts that I've seen from this troll. I'm 
> used to seeing ghost sightings of him in others postings in the other NGs 
> he trolls but I rather suspect I'll not be seeing many such ghosts once 

	He has many sock puppets, most don't last long.

> I've killfiled him in this NG.

	This is one way of causing him to spawn another one.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN                                      | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#154365

FromJohnny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com>
Date2015-11-11 17:24 +0000
Message-ID<5RK0y.175509$%l3.54687@fx36.am4>
In reply to#154339
On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 07:34:30 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:

> On Tue, 10 Nov 2015 23:19:02 GMT Johnny B Good
> <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> wrote:
> 
>>  Well, that's three *actual* posts that I've seen from this troll. I'm
>> used to seeing ghost sightings of him in others postings in the other
>> NGs he trolls but I rather suspect I'll not be seeing many such ghosts
>> once
> 
> 	He has many sock puppets, most don't last long.
> 
>> I've killfiled him in this NG.
> 
> 	This is one way of causing him to spawn another one.

 That doesn't matter. It's the content not the nym that decides what gets 
killfiled. :-)


-- 
Johnny B Good

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#154367

FromRS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com>
Date2015-11-11 17:33 +0000
Message-ID<n1vu5m$ifh$1@solani.org>
In reply to#154365
On 2015-11-11, Johnny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> wrote:
>  That doesn't matter. It's the content not the nym that decides what gets 
> killfiled. :-)

I've done the same.  Life [on Usenet] is too short to put up with
interlocutors clearly interested only in being offensive.  Killfiles
remain Usenet's best feature.  Indispensible, in fact.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#154341

FromMike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk>
Date2015-11-11 09:51 +0000
Message-ID<fD0EUqW7+wQWFwgP@jasper.org.uk>
In reply to#154327
En el artículo <GXu0y.123070$mn4.55497@fx42.am4>, Johnny B Good <johnny-
b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> escribió:

>I rather suspect I'll not be seeing many such ghosts once 
>I've killfiled him in this NG.

He morphs a lot, Johnny.  He knows it's antisocial and that people who
killfile him would prefer not to read his rubbish, but nymshfts to evade
killfiles.

List of more recent nyms:

"" <987jack@gmail.com>
"John James" <jj9801@nospam.com>
"Simon Brown" <sb6510@nospam.com>
"Jacko" <jkj985@gmail.com>
"Simon263" <Simon263@nospam.com>
"John Chance" <JCJC@gmail.com>
"Ratsack" <ratgsack281@nospam.com>
"Hank" <hfd543@nospam.com>
"kshy" <kshy@gmail.com>
"JHY" <JHY5566@nospam.com>
"Blano" <blano6654@nospam.com>
"Santo Brown" <sb8743@gmail.com>
"hqhy" <hqhy@nospam.com>
"Jim Thomas" <JT@nospam.com>
"Sam Thatch" <st342@gmail.com>
"Hanny Z" <hz@nospam.com>
"78lp" <78lp@nospam.com>
"John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com>

-- 
 (\_/)
(='.'=) Bunny says: Windows 10? Nein danke!
(")_(")

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#154380

FromQuadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
Date2015-11-11 11:05 -0800
Message-ID<336f208e-0755-45ae-b51f-e992f1a870ed@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#154289
On Tuesday, November 10, 2015 at 7:23:27 AM UTC-7, jmfbahciv wrote:

> Which makes me an excellent field test site.

I always shut down my computer when I am not using it. I see no reason to waste 
electricity - or allow software problems to compound. Were I running something 
more stable than Windows, or were I using my computer as a server, it would be 
different.

John Savard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#154417

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2015-11-12 14:04 +0000
Message-ID<PM000524587A85EA46@aca40f93.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#154380
Quadibloc wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 10, 2015 at 7:23:27 AM UTC-7, jmfbahciv wrote:
>
>> Which makes me an excellent field test site.
>
> I always shut down my computer when I am not using it. I see no reason to
waste
> electricity - or allow software problems to compound. Were I running
something
> more stable than Windows, or were I using my computer as a server, it would
be
> different.

Yup.  I always shut mine down, too.

/BAH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#154439

From"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com>
Date2015-11-13 12:38 +1100
Message-ID<dakt8rF3cppU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#154417

"jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message 
news:PM000524587A85EA46@aca40f93.ipt.aol.com...
> Quadibloc wrote:
>> On Tuesday, November 10, 2015 at 7:23:27 AM UTC-7, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>
>>> Which makes me an excellent field test site.
>>
>> I always shut down my computer when I am not using it. I see no reason to
> waste
>> electricity - or allow software problems to compound. Were I running
> something
>> more stable than Windows, or were I using my computer as a server, it 
>> would
> be
>> different.
>
> Yup.  I always shut mine down, too.

More fool you. Makes a lot more sense to sleep instead of shutting down. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#154403

Frompechter@pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter)
Date2015-11-12 03:17 +0000
Message-ID<n210bn$aqe$1@pechter.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#154289
In article <PM000524309B41BCAE@aca41c5c.ipt.aol.com>,
jmfbahciv  <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>Rod Speed wrote:
>>
>>
>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:PM0005241C72B624CC@aca432c8.ipt.aol.com...
>>> Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>>>> RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com>:
>>>>
>>>>> (That said, I /do/ wish boot times were 0.5 seconds again).
>>>>
>>>> I don't know. Who boots a computer nowadays?
>>>
>>> I do.
>>
>> Yeah, but you have always been a fucking dinosaur
>
>Which makes me an excellent field test site.
>
>> and are actually stupid enough to run down to the
>> library to look something up when everyone else
>> uses this funky system called the net that has been
>> available for quite some time now.
>>
>Which keeps me from spending more than $1200/year.
>
>/BAH

$1200/year... what's internet cost out there?  

Comcast is about $60/month on the add I saw online 5 mins. ago.
So it's 1/2 of the $1200 for the connection.  I know I was spending 
less than $100 per month for internet -- more like $59.99.

My current machine cost was about $450 including 22 in monitor, 6 cores of 
Xeon CPU and 24gb of memory with 2 512gb disks.

My last dual core laptop was $38.00 from Goodwill in SF (shipping about $20 --
plus about $40 to upgrade from 2 gb to 4...-- had to replace 2x1gb with 2x2gb).
Added a 240gb ssd to replace the nonexistant disk and it boots to multiuser 
mode in about 5 seconds with linux.  Video is  1680x1050.

The good thing is the connectivity's been good enough to let me work from 
home and remotely access servers with decent speed.

Bill

-- 
-- 
Digital had it then.  Don't you wish you could buy it now!
pechter-at-gmail.com  http://xkcd.com/705/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#154415

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2015-11-12 14:04 +0000
Message-ID<PM0005245876675316@aca40f93.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#154403
William Pechter wrote:
> In article <PM000524309B41BCAE@aca41c5c.ipt.aol.com>,
> jmfbahciv  <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>Rod Speed wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>>> news:PM0005241C72B624CC@aca432c8.ipt.aol.com...
>>>> Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>>>>> RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> (That said, I /do/ wish boot times were 0.5 seconds again).
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't know. Who boots a computer nowadays?
>>>>
>>>> I do.
>>>
>>> Yeah, but you have always been a fucking dinosaur
>>
>>Which makes me an excellent field test site.
>>
>>> and are actually stupid enough to run down to the
>>> library to look something up when everyone else
>>> uses this funky system called the net that has been
>>> available for quite some time now.
>>>
>>Which keeps me from spending more than $1200/year.
>>
>>/BAH
>
> $1200/year... what's internet cost out there?

You have to buy a package.  the last I saw was about $100/month.

>
> Comcast is about $60/month on the add I saw online 5 mins. ago.
> So it's 1/2 of the $1200 for the connection.  I know I was spending
> less than $100 per month for internet -- more like $59.99.

So that's $120/month.  $60 for the Comcast and $60 for the internet.
A lot of ads I've seen have an "introductory" price which is lower
than their usual price.  The fine print says that increases can happen
at any time.
<snip>

> The good thing is the connectivity's been good enough to let me work from
> home and remotely access servers with decent speed.

If I worked, I'd have that, too.  I simply can't justify $60/month for TV
(I have the TV on for about 2 hours every day) nor for internet which
I only use for newsgroups and 2 emails/day.

/BAH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#154422

FromNyssa <Nyssa@flawlesslogic.com>
Date2015-11-12 12:24 -0500
Message-ID<n22hvm$m6g$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#154415
jmfbahciv wrote:

> William Pechter wrote:
>> In article <PM000524309B41BCAE@aca41c5c.ipt.aol.com>,
>> jmfbahciv  <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:PM0005241C72B624CC@aca432c8.ipt.aol.com...
>>>>> Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>>>>>> RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (That said, I /do/ wish boot times were 0.5 seconds
>>>>>>> again).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't know. Who boots a computer nowadays?
>>>>>
>>>>> I do.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, but you have always been a fucking dinosaur
>>>
>>>Which makes me an excellent field test site.
>>>
>>>> and are actually stupid enough to run down to the
>>>> library to look something up when everyone else
>>>> uses this funky system called the net that has been
>>>> available for quite some time now.
>>>>
>>>Which keeps me from spending more than $1200/year.
>>>
>>>/BAH
>>
>> $1200/year... what's internet cost out there?
> 
> You have to buy a package.  the last I saw was about
> $100/month.
> 
>>
>> Comcast is about $60/month on the add I saw online 5
>> mins. ago.
>> So it's 1/2 of the $1200 for the connection.  I know I
>> was spending less than $100 per month for internet --
>> more like $59.99.
> 
> So that's $120/month.  $60 for the Comcast and $60 for the
> internet. A lot of ads I've seen have an "introductory"
> price which is lower
> than their usual price.  The fine print says that
> increases can happen at any time.
> <snip>

And that price (which WILL change at the end of the introductory
period) does not include the extra fees, taxes, and equipment
"rental" tacked onto the base price. And now with caps being
rolled out across the country, it will get even tighter for
some users.

> 
>> The good thing is the connectivity's been good enough to
>> let me work from home and remotely access servers with
>> decent speed.
> 
> If I worked, I'd have that, too.  I simply can't justify
> $60/month for TV (I have the TV on for about 2 hours every
> day) nor for internet which I only use for newsgroups and
> 2 emails/day.
> 
> /BAH

The last time I tried to talk to Comcast about Internet
only, I was given a price that was HIGHER than Internet+TV.
I don't watch TV and didn't want/need a TV cable connection
and said so. The customer droid said that was okay, I could
let them hook it up, then not watch it. :/

And then I asked what happens at the end of their "introductory
price" timeline, and was informed at that time, I was free
to choose from their regular available packages and pricing 
that would be available at that time. Basically, double the
"introductory" prices.

So that's why I'm still on dialup.

Nyssa, who can be stubborn when it comes to NOT dealing with
companies she doesn't like

 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#154451

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2015-11-13 13:58 +0000
Message-ID<PM0005246CB70FB903@aca411e9.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#154422
Nyssa wrote:
> jmfbahciv wrote:
>
>> William Pechter wrote:
>>> In article <PM000524309B41BCAE@aca41c5c.ipt.aol.com>,
>>> jmfbahciv  <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:PM0005241C72B624CC@aca432c8.ipt.aol.com...
>>>>>> Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>>>>>>> RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (That said, I /do/ wish boot times were 0.5 seconds
>>>>>>>> again).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't know. Who boots a computer nowadays?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, but you have always been a fucking dinosaur
>>>>
>>>>Which makes me an excellent field test site.
>>>>
>>>>> and are actually stupid enough to run down to the
>>>>> library to look something up when everyone else
>>>>> uses this funky system called the net that has been
>>>>> available for quite some time now.
>>>>>
>>>>Which keeps me from spending more than $1200/year.
>>>>
>>>>/BAH
>>>
>>> $1200/year... what's internet cost out there?
>>
>> You have to buy a package.  the last I saw was about
>> $100/month.
>>
>>>
>>> Comcast is about $60/month on the add I saw online 5
>>> mins. ago.
>>> So it's 1/2 of the $1200 for the connection.  I know I
>>> was spending less than $100 per month for internet --
>>> more like $59.99.
>>
>> So that's $120/month.  $60 for the Comcast and $60 for the
>> internet. A lot of ads I've seen have an "introductory"
>> price which is lower
>> than their usual price.  The fine print says that
>> increases can happen at any time.
>> <snip>
>
> And that price (which WILL change at the end of the introductory
> period)

Or earlier.

> does not include the extra fees, taxes, and equipment
> "rental" tacked onto the base price. And now with caps being
> rolled out across the country, it will get even tighter for
> some users.

Yup.

>
>>
>>> The good thing is the connectivity's been good enough to
>>> let me work from home and remotely access servers with
>>> decent speed.
>>
>> If I worked, I'd have that, too.  I simply can't justify
>> $60/month for TV (I have the TV on for about 2 hours every
>> day) nor for internet which I only use for newsgroups and
>> 2 emails/day.
>>
>> /BAH
>
> The last time I tried to talk to Comcast about Internet
> only, I was given a price that was HIGHER than Internet+TV.
> I don't watch TV and didn't want/need a TV cable connection
> and said so. The customer droid said that was okay, I could
> let them hook it up, then not watch it. :/

Yea, I still can't figure out that flavor of thinking.
>
> And then I asked what happens at the end of their "introductory
> price" timeline, and was informed at that time, I was free
> to choose from their regular available packages and pricing
> that would be available at that time. Basically, double the
> "introductory" prices.

At least double.
>
> So that's why I'm still on dialup.

PITA, ain't it :-)  The phone company is trying to get the
state legislature to pass a law absolveing them from
maintaining copper.  So, at some point in the near future,
outages won't be fixed.

>
> Nyssa, who can be stubborn when it comes to NOT dealing with
> companies she doesn't like

But needs a fallback plan ;-)

/BAH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#154457

FromRich <rich@example.invalid>
Date2015-11-13 15:51 +0000
Message-ID<n250ta$5cn$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#154451
In comp.misc jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
> Nyssa wrote:
> > jmfbahciv wrote:
> > The last time I tried to talk to Comcast about Internet only, I was
> > given a price that was HIGHER than Internet+TV. I don't watch TV
> > and didn't want/need a TV cable connection and said so. The
> > customer droid said that was okay, I could let them hook it up,
> > then not watch it. :/

> Yea, I still can't figure out that flavor of thinking.

Artifical inflation of subscriber numbers beyond what a free market
would produce.

The bundling results in some ordering extra pieces they would not
otherwise freely purchase, adding an artificial subscriber to that
area.

Their cost of service is identical whether you buy one, two, three, or
a bundle, so the only reason is to 'inflate' subcriber numbers.

> PITA, ain't it :-)  The phone company is trying to get the state
> legislature to pass a law absolveing them from maintaining copper. 
> So, at some point in the near future, outages won't be fixed.

Verizon has already got the Virgina USA state legislature to give them
that ability.  They (Verizon) get to decide that a copper phone line is
"unfixable" and as a result move the customer to fiber whether the
customer wants a "fiber phone" or not.

A huge 'fox guarding the hen-house' situation.  But, with enough money,
politicians can be purchased to do anything.

And of course, I'd bet if one were a fly on the wall during the Verizon
lobbyist talking to the state politicians, that one would never hear
the "only 8 hours battery backup on standby during a power outage until
a _no phone at all_ situation" on fiber mentioned.  Much less, of
course, if one actually tries to use the phone while the mains power is
down.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#154465

FromNyssa <Nyssa@flawlesslogic.com>
Date2015-11-13 14:51 -0500
Message-ID<n25euh$3q9$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#154457
Rich wrote:

> In comp.misc jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>> Nyssa wrote:
>> > jmfbahciv wrote:
>> > The last time I tried to talk to Comcast about Internet
>> > only, I was given a price that was HIGHER than
>> > Internet+TV. I don't watch TV and didn't want/need a TV
>> > cable connection and said so. The customer droid said
>> > that was okay, I could let them hook it up, then not
>> > watch it. :/
> 
>> Yea, I still can't figure out that flavor of thinking.
> 
> Artifical inflation of subscriber numbers beyond what a
> free market would produce.
> 
> The bundling results in some ordering extra pieces they
> would not otherwise freely purchase, adding an artificial
> subscriber to that area.
> 
> Their cost of service is identical whether you buy one,
> two, three, or a bundle, so the only reason is to
> 'inflate' subcriber numbers.
> 
>> PITA, ain't it :-)  The phone company is trying to get
>> the state legislature to pass a law absolveing them from
>> maintaining copper. So, at some point in the near future,
>> outages won't be fixed.
> 
> Verizon has already got the Virgina USA state legislature
> to give them
> that ability.  They (Verizon) get to decide that a copper
> phone line is "unfixable" and as a result move the
> customer to fiber whether the customer wants a "fiber
> phone" or not.
> 
> A huge 'fox guarding the hen-house' situation.  But, with
> enough money, politicians can be purchased to do anything.
> 
> And of course, I'd bet if one were a fly on the wall
> during the Verizon lobbyist talking to the state
> politicians, that one would never hear the "only 8 hours
> battery backup on standby during a power outage until
> a _no phone at all_ situation" on fiber mentioned.  Much
> less, of course, if one actually tries to use the phone
> while the mains power is down.
> 
Yes, I'm in a rural area in Virginia and my neighbors and
I are VERY concerned about this issue. 

After being without power for days and even a couple of
weeks at a time after a major hurricane or ice storm, not
having a *dependable* telephone connection becomes an
important concern, especially for elderly or ill residents.

Verizon claimed they were going to bring us DSL over four
years ago. It never happened and if you ask a CS person,
it doesn't even show up on their future plans. If we can't
even get that in here, I highly doubt that fibre is coming
any time soon.

But Verizon HAS been putting up lots and lots of new cell
towers, like that is a replacement for landline. Again
ignoring the battery/power issues. The county is thrilled
with it because of the additional tax revenues for the
land and towers and keeps harping on how wonderful all
this additional "broadband" will be. Yeah, sure. Their
definition of "broadband" doesn't exactly fit with my
definition and is apples-and-oranges different from 
dependable landline.

Nyssa, who may just crawl into a cave if the landline goes
away and say the heck with 'em all


[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#154516

Frompechter@pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter)
Date2015-11-15 16:44 +0000
Message-ID<n2acoj$8tl$1@pechter.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#154457
In article <n250ta$5cn$1@dont-email.me>, Rich  <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>In comp.misc jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>> Nyssa wrote:

>> PITA, ain't it :-)  The phone company is trying to get the state
>> legislature to pass a law absolveing them from maintaining copper. 
>> So, at some point in the near future, outages won't be fixed.

Did it in NJ -- some houses that were located on the shore became islands
under Sandy.  The fix is to offer a wireless phone solution.
Thanks Verizon.  Anything to get out from the obligation to provide the
service you used to provide that was required by regulation.

>
>Verizon has already got the Virgina USA state legislature to give them
>that ability.  They (Verizon) get to decide that a copper phone line is
>"unfixable" and as a result move the customer to fiber whether the
>customer wants a "fiber phone" or not.

Hell. They're not putting more fiber around so if your copper
goes and they run out of existing pairs... They really want to dump
copper in favor of only deregulated fiber and wireless.

>A huge 'fox guarding the hen-house' situation.  But, with enough money,
>politicians can be purchased to do anything.
>
>And of course, I'd bet if one were a fly on the wall during the Verizon
>lobbyist talking to the state politicians, that one would never hear
>the "only 8 hours battery backup on standby during a power outage until
>a _no phone at all_ situation" on fiber mentioned.  Much less, of
>course, if one actually tries to use the phone while the mains power is
>down.
>

13 days phone-less with Sandy here 3 miles from Union Beach.
No phone wire issues -- just the power station was under water and
needed a major rebuild.  

My wife at the time was on dialysis so it was a real bitch.  Dialysis 
facility was on diesel and generator.

Bill

-- 
-- 
Digital had it then.  Don't you wish you could buy it now!
pechter-at-gmail.com  http://xkcd.com/705/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#154462

FromAndrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com>
Date2015-11-13 18:11 +0000
Message-ID<QZ-dnSW_eZNfutvLnZ2dnUU78bWdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#154451
On 13/11/2015 13:58, jmfbahciv wrote:
{snip}

> PITA, ain't it:-)   The phone company is trying to get the
> state legislature to pass a law absolveing them from
> maintaining copper.  So, at some point in the near future,
> outages won't be fixed.

Keep an eye out for fibre optic links arriving.
Radio or satellite internet may turn up.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#154438

From"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com>
Date2015-11-13 12:37 +1100
Message-ID<dakt75F3ce9U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#154415

"jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message 
news:PM0005245876675316@aca40f93.ipt.aol.com...
> William Pechter wrote:
>> In article <PM000524309B41BCAE@aca41c5c.ipt.aol.com>,
>> jmfbahciv  <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:PM0005241C72B624CC@aca432c8.ipt.aol.com...
>>>>> Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>>>>>> RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (That said, I /do/ wish boot times were 0.5 seconds again).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't know. Who boots a computer nowadays?
>>>>>
>>>>> I do.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, but you have always been a fucking dinosaur
>>>
>>>Which makes me an excellent field test site.
>>>
>>>> and are actually stupid enough to run down to the
>>>> library to look something up when everyone else
>>>> uses this funky system called the net that has been
>>>> available for quite some time now.
>>>>
>>>Which keeps me from spending more than $1200/year.
>>>
>>>/BAH
>>
>> $1200/year... what's internet cost out there?
>
> You have to buy a package.

Like hell you do.

> the last I saw was about $100/month.

Then you need to get out more.

>> Comcast is about $60/month on the add I saw online 5 mins. ago.
>> So it's 1/2 of the $1200 for the connection.  I know I was spending
>> less than $100 per month for internet -- more like $59.99.

> So that's $120/month.  $60 for the Comcast and $60 for the internet.

Nope, you've fucked that up.

> A lot of ads I've seen have an "introductory" price
> which is lower than their usual price.  The fine print
> says that increases can happen at any time.

But they don’t. Mine hasn’t changed in
a decade except to get cheaper.

> <snip>
>
>> The good thing is the connectivity's been good enough to let me work from
>> home and remotely access servers with decent speed.

> If I worked, I'd have that, too.  I simply can't justify $60/month for TV

You don’t get any TV if you use the cellphone system.

> (I have the TV on for about 2 hours every day) nor for internet
> which I only use for newsgroups and 2 emails/day.

Because you are actually stupid enough to run
down to the library instead of using the net. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#154408

FromPaul Sture <nospam@sture.ch>
Date2015-11-11 18:32 +0100
Message-ID<amachc-k0e2.ln1@news.chingola.ch>
In reply to#154198
On 2015-11-09, Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> wrote:
> RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com>:
>
>> (That said, I /do/ wish boot times were 0.5 seconds again).
>
> I don't know. Who boots a computer nowadays?

Regrettably me, since I "upgraded" to the latest version of OS X, "El
Capitan".  Since then I have had USB devices dropping out and not coming
back without a reboot.  This is on 2 separate machines, so it's unlikely
to be a given piece of hardware coming to the end of its natural life.

The only reboots I was doing prior to the upgrade were for OS upgrades
and the occasional power cut.

-- 
Should not the Society of Indexers be know as Indexers, Society of, The?
                                                     -- Keith Waterhouse

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]

Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers


csiph-web