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

Groups > alt.usage.english > #1149582 > unrolled thread

Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays

Back to article view | Back to alt.usage.english

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Kragen Javier Sitaker <kragen@canonical.org> - 2026-08-28 22:45 -0300
    Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-29 15:52 +0800
      Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-08-29 10:09 +0200
        Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-29 16:40 +0800
          Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> - 2026-08-29 22:32 +1000
            Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-29 21:10 +0800
            Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-08-29 16:34 +0200
    Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays "Alan K." <alan@invalid.com> - 2026-08-29 08:43 -0400
      Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-29 21:16 +0800
        Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Charles Hope <clh@candehope.me.uk> - 2026-08-29 18:30 +0000
          Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2026-08-29 21:43 +0100
        Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> - 2026-08-29 23:12 +0100
      Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays athel.cb@gmail.com <user12588@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-08-30 10:08 +0000
    Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Peter Flynn <peter@silmaril.ie> - 2026-08-30 16:11 +0100
      Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Charles Hope <clh@candehope.me.uk> - 2026-08-30 16:30 +0000
        Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-08-30 19:18 +0200
          Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Charles Hope <clh@candehope.me.uk> - 2026-08-30 17:45 +0000
            Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-08-31 08:24 +0200
          Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> - 2026-08-31 09:42 +1000
            Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> - 2026-08-31 08:43 +0100
              Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Charles Hope <clh@candehope.me.uk> - 2026-08-31 10:45 +0000
                Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2026-08-31 16:45 +0100
                  Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays athel.cb@gmail.com <user12588@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-08-31 16:08 +0000
                    Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2026-08-31 20:56 +0100
                  Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) - 2026-08-31 16:54 +0000
              Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-08-31 13:36 +0200
                Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Snidely <snidely.too@gmail.com> - 2026-08-31 12:09 -0700
                  Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-08-31 22:26 +0200
            Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-08-31 10:11 +0200
              Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> - 2026-08-31 20:48 +0100
                different iron alloys (was Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays) Kragen Javier Sitaker <kragen@canonical.org> - 2026-08-31 21:00 -0300
                  Re: different iron alloys (was Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays) Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> - 2026-09-01 10:29 +1000
                  Re: different iron alloys (was Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays) Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-09-01 08:08 +0200
                    active and healthy newsgroups in 02026 (was Re: different iron alloys) Kragen Javier Sitaker <kragen@canonical.org> - 2026-09-01 10:15 -0300
                    Re: different iron alloys (was Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays) Richard Smith <null@void.com> - 2026-09-28 07:19 +0100
                      Re: different iron alloys (was Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays) "Jim Wilkins" <muratlanne@gmail.com> - 2026-10-01 19:46 -0400
                  Re: different iron alloys (was Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays) Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2026-09-13 18:31 -0300
                Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-09-01 07:59 +0200
        Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> - 2026-08-30 13:33 -0400
          Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Charles Hope <clh@candehope.me.uk> - 2026-08-30 19:45 +0000
      Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> - 2026-08-30 21:32 +0100

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#1149778

On 31/08/2026 08:43, Hibou wrote:
> Le 31/08/2026 à 00:42, Peter Moylan a écrit :
>> On 31/08/26 03:18, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>>> Den 30.08.2026 kl. 18.30 skrev Charles Hope:
>>>>
>>>> another one I've recently come across is "iron" where I'd say
>>>> "steel"
>>>
>>> I'd like to see some context. Iron is an element. Steel is an alloy.
>>
>> To the people who produce the stuff the difference matters. When iron
>> ore is first smelted into metal you get pig iron. (The metal ingots are
>> called pigs.) That can be further processed to get different grades of
>> steel.
>>
>> It's all about the impurities. Pig iron has a lot of carbon in it. Steel
>> has a different amount of carbon. They both contain other impurities. So
>> they're basically the same thing: iron plus impurities.
>>
>> Ordinary people who don't run steel mills have picked up the habit of
>> distinguishing between iron and steel. But, really, they're much the
>> same thing.
> 
> 
> Isn't there a notional difference between them? I see iron - pig, cast, 
> and wrought - as an old, basic product, and steel as more advanced and 
> controlled, developed for hardness and strength in tool steel, rust 
> resistance in stainless, and so on.
> 
> (I saw an advert for Irn Bru a couple of days ago - "Made in Scotland 
> from girders," is the claim. It's decades since I've tasted Irn Bru, but 
> as I recall, it tastes of bubblegum, not iron. It's a perfectly foul 
> concoction.)
> 
Perhaps, bubblegum is made from girders, too. Personally, I've never 
tasted girders,
You mustn't insult Scotland's #1 national drink - after Whisky.

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

#1149789

On Mon, 31 Aug 26 10:45:04 UTC
Charles Hope <clh@candehope.me.uk> wrote:

> On 31/08/2026 08:43, Hibou wrote:
> > Le 31/08/2026 à 00:42, Peter Moylan a écrit :
> >> On 31/08/26 03:18, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
> >>> Den 30.08.2026 kl. 18.30 skrev Charles Hope:
> >>>>
> >>>> another one I've recently come across is "iron" where I'd say
> >>>> "steel"
> >>>
> >>> I'd like to see some context. Iron is an element. Steel is an alloy.
> >>
> >> To the people who produce the stuff the difference matters. When iron
> >> ore is first smelted into metal you get pig iron. (The metal ingots are
> >> called pigs.) That can be further processed to get different grades of
> >> steel.
> >>
> >> It's all about the impurities. Pig iron has a lot of carbon in it. Steel
> >> has a different amount of carbon. They both contain other impurities. So
> >> they're basically the same thing: iron plus impurities.
> >>
> >> Ordinary people who don't run steel mills have picked up the habit of
> >> distinguishing between iron and steel. But, really, they're much the
> >> same thing.
> > 
> > 
> > Isn't there a notional difference between them? I see iron - pig, cast, 
> > and wrought - as an old, basic product, and steel as more advanced and 
> > controlled, developed for hardness and strength in tool steel, rust 
> > resistance in stainless, and so on.
> > 
> > (I saw an advert for Irn Bru a couple of days ago - "Made in Scotland 
> > from girders," is the claim. It's decades since I've tasted Irn Bru, but 
> > as I recall, it tastes of bubblegum, not iron. It's a perfectly foul 
> > concoction.)
> > 
> Perhaps, bubblegum is made from girders, too. Personally, I've never 
> tasted girders,
> You mustn't insult Scotland's #1 national drink - after Whisky.

Best bang for the buck is the delicacy imported from Devon,
specifically Buckfastleigh Abbey. So I've been told.

-- 
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

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

#1149791

"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> posted:

> On Mon, 31 Aug 26 10:45:04 UTC
> Charles Hope <clh@candehope.me.uk> wrote:
> 
> > On 31/08/2026 08:43, Hibou wrote:
> > > Le 31/08/2026 à 00:42, Peter Moylan a écrit :
> > >> On 31/08/26 03:18, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
> > >>> Den 30.08.2026 kl. 18.30 skrev Charles Hope:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> another one I've recently come across is "iron" where I'd say
> > >>>> "steel"
> > >>>
> > >>> I'd like to see some context. Iron is an element. Steel is an alloy.
> > >>
> > >> To the people who produce the stuff the difference matters. When iron
> > >> ore is first smelted into metal you get pig iron. (The metal ingots are
> > >> called pigs.) That can be further processed to get different grades of
> > >> steel.
> > >>
> > >> It's all about the impurities. Pig iron has a lot of carbon in it. Steel
> > >> has a different amount of carbon. They both contain other impurities. So
> > >> they're basically the same thing: iron plus impurities.
> > >>
> > >> Ordinary people who don't run steel mills have picked up the habit of
> > >> distinguishing between iron and steel. But, really, they're much the
> > >> same thing.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Isn't there a notional difference between them? I see iron - pig, cast, 
> > > and wrought - as an old, basic product, and steel as more advanced and 
> > > controlled, developed for hardness and strength in tool steel, rust 
> > > resistance in stainless, and so on.
> > > 
> > > (I saw an advert for Irn Bru a couple of days ago - "Made in Scotland 
> > > from girders," is the claim. It's decades since I've tasted Irn Bru, but 
> > > as I recall, it tastes of bubblegum, not iron. It's a perfectly foul 
> > > concoction.)
> > > 
> > Perhaps, bubblegum is made from girders, too. Personally, I've never 
> > tasted girders,
> > You mustn't insult Scotland's #1 national drink - after Whisky.
> 
> Best bang for the buck is the delicacy imported from Devon,
> specifically Buckfastleigh Abbey. So I've been told.
> 
Buckfast Abbey. It's not the same place as Buckfastleigh, though quite close.

-- 
athel

Living in Marseilles for 39 years; mainly in England before that,
with long periods in Singapore, California, Chile and Canada 

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

#1149799

On Mon, 31 Aug 2026 16:08:10 GMT
athel.cb@gmail.com <user12588@newsgrouper.org.invalid> wrote:

> 
> "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> posted:
> 
> > On Mon, 31 Aug 26 10:45:04 UTC
> > Charles Hope <clh@candehope.me.uk> wrote:
> > 
> > > On 31/08/2026 08:43, Hibou wrote:
> > > > Le 31/08/2026 à 00:42, Peter Moylan a écrit :
> > > >> On 31/08/26 03:18, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
> > > >>> Den 30.08.2026 kl. 18.30 skrev Charles Hope:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> another one I've recently come across is "iron" where I'd say
> > > >>>> "steel"
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I'd like to see some context. Iron is an element. Steel is an alloy.
> > > >>
> > > >> To the people who produce the stuff the difference matters. When iron
> > > >> ore is first smelted into metal you get pig iron. (The metal ingots are
> > > >> called pigs.) That can be further processed to get different grades of
> > > >> steel.
> > > >>
> > > >> It's all about the impurities. Pig iron has a lot of carbon in it. Steel
> > > >> has a different amount of carbon. They both contain other impurities. So
> > > >> they're basically the same thing: iron plus impurities.
> > > >>
> > > >> Ordinary people who don't run steel mills have picked up the habit of
> > > >> distinguishing between iron and steel. But, really, they're much the
> > > >> same thing.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Isn't there a notional difference between them? I see iron - pig, cast, 
> > > > and wrought - as an old, basic product, and steel as more advanced and 
> > > > controlled, developed for hardness and strength in tool steel, rust 
> > > > resistance in stainless, and so on.
> > > > 
> > > > (I saw an advert for Irn Bru a couple of days ago - "Made in Scotland 
> > > > from girders," is the claim. It's decades since I've tasted Irn Bru, but 
> > > > as I recall, it tastes of bubblegum, not iron. It's a perfectly foul 
> > > > concoction.)
> > > > 
> > > Perhaps, bubblegum is made from girders, too. Personally, I've never 
> > > tasted girders,
> > > You mustn't insult Scotland's #1 national drink - after Whisky.
> > 
> > Best bang for the buck is the delicacy imported from Devon,
> > specifically Buckfastleigh Abbey. So I've been told.
> > 
> Buckfast Abbey. It's not the same place as Buckfastleigh, though quite close.
> 
Thanks. It seems I'm getting forgetful. 

-- 
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

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

#1149793

In article <20260831164532.cea05b1ba851132b750f9044@127.0.0.1>,
Kerr-Mudd, John <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:

>Best bang for the buck is the delicacy imported from Devon,
>specifically Buckfastleigh Abbey. So I've been told.

When I visited (about 20 years ago) the staff claimed to be unaware of
its role in Scottish drunkenness, but I didn't believe them.

-- Richard

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

#1149781

Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:

> Le 31/08/2026 à 00:42, Peter Moylan a écrit :
> > On 31/08/26 03:18, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
> >> Den 30.08.2026 kl. 18.30 skrev Charles Hope:
> >>>
> >>> another one I've recently come across is "iron" where I'd say
> >>> "steel"
> >>
> >> I'd like to see some context. Iron is an element. Steel is an alloy.
> > 
> > To the people who produce the stuff the difference matters. When iron
> > ore is first smelted into metal you get pig iron. (The metal ingots are
> > called pigs.) That can be further processed to get different grades of
> > steel.
> > 
> > It's all about the impurities. Pig iron has a lot of carbon in it. Steel
> > has a different amount of carbon. They both contain other impurities. So
> > they're basically the same thing: iron plus impurities.
> > 
> > Ordinary people who don't run steel mills have picked up the habit of
> > distinguishing between iron and steel. But, really, they're much the
> > same thing.
> 
> 
> Isn't there a notional difference between them? I see iron - pig, cast,
> and wrought - as an old, basic product, and steel as more advanced and
> controlled, developed for hardness and strength in tool steel, rust 
> resistance in stainless, and so on.

Just the basic kind, pig iron with most of the carbon removed,
is called 'mild steel'. It is malleable and relatively soft.
Just what you need for most bulk applications. (like car bodies)

But it is true that most people are unaware of the diferences
between cast, wrought, and steel, and use the terms interchangeably,

Jan

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

#1149796

J. J. Lodder is guilty of 
<1s0pf8s.7424hpeo2580N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> as of 8/31/2026 4:36:19 
AM
> Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Le 31/08/2026 à 00:42, Peter Moylan a écrit :
>>> On 31/08/26 03:18, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>>>> Den 30.08.2026 kl. 18.30 skrev Charles Hope:
>>>>> 
>>>>> another one I've recently come across is "iron" where I'd say
>>>>> "steel"
>>>> 
>>>> I'd like to see some context. Iron is an element. Steel is an alloy.
>>> 
>>> To the people who produce the stuff the difference matters. When iron
>>> ore is first smelted into metal you get pig iron. (The metal ingots are
>>> called pigs.) That can be further processed to get different grades of
>>> steel.
>>> 
>>> It's all about the impurities. Pig iron has a lot of carbon in it. Steel
>>> has a different amount of carbon. They both contain other impurities. So
>>> they're basically the same thing: iron plus impurities.
>>> 
>>> Ordinary people who don't run steel mills have picked up the habit of
>>> distinguishing between iron and steel. But, really, they're much the
>>> same thing.
>> 
>> 
>> Isn't there a notional difference between them? I see iron - pig, cast,
>> and wrought - as an old, basic product, and steel as more advanced and
>> controlled, developed for hardness and strength in tool steel, rust 
>> resistance in stainless, and so on.
>
> Just the basic kind, pig iron with most of the carbon removed,
> is called 'mild steel'. It is malleable and relatively soft.
> Just what you need for most bulk applications. (like car bodies)
>
> But it is true that most people are unaware of the diferences
> between cast, wrought, and steel, and use the terms interchangeably,
>
> Jan

Cast is difficult to weld, and apt to be brittle.  Repairs often 
involve returning it to the pot.

The hammering of wrought changes the grain structure.
(Extreme examples include Damascus steel for swords)

Most Americans seem to use "steel" for structural forms and for sheet 
metal and fasteners, and for cookware that usually doesn't need 
seasoning.

/dps

-- 
Yes, I have had a cucumber soda.  Why do you ask?

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

#1149801

Snidely <snidely.too@gmail.com> wrote:

> J. J. Lodder is guilty of 
> <1s0pf8s.7424hpeo2580N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> as of 8/31/2026 4:36:19
> AM
> > Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> Le 31/08/2026 à 00:42, Peter Moylan a écrit :
> >>> On 31/08/26 03:18, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
> >>>> Den 30.08.2026 kl. 18.30 skrev Charles Hope:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> another one I've recently come across is "iron" where I'd say
> >>>>> "steel"
> >>>> 
> >>>> I'd like to see some context. Iron is an element. Steel is an alloy.
> >>> 
> >>> To the people who produce the stuff the difference matters. When iron
> >>> ore is first smelted into metal you get pig iron. (The metal ingots are
> >>> called pigs.) That can be further processed to get different grades of
> >>> steel.
> >>> 
> >>> It's all about the impurities. Pig iron has a lot of carbon in it. Steel
> >>> has a different amount of carbon. They both contain other impurities. So
> >>> they're basically the same thing: iron plus impurities.
> >>> 
> >>> Ordinary people who don't run steel mills have picked up the habit of
> >>> distinguishing between iron and steel. But, really, they're much the
> >>> same thing.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Isn't there a notional difference between them? I see iron - pig, cast,
> >> and wrought - as an old, basic product, and steel as more advanced and
> >> controlled, developed for hardness and strength in tool steel, rust
> >> resistance in stainless, and so on.
> >
> > Just the basic kind, pig iron with most of the carbon removed,
> > is called 'mild steel'. It is malleable and relatively soft.
> > Just what you need for most bulk applications. (like car bodies)
> >
> > But it is true that most people are unaware of the diferences
> > between cast, wrought, and steel, and use the terms interchangeably,
> >
> > Jan
> 
> Cast is difficult to weld, and apt to be brittle.  Repairs often 
> involve returning it to the pot.

Yes, it is unsuitable for taking loads, except in compression.
Typical example: Crystal palace. It had vertical cast iron collumns,
connected by wrought iron girders.

> The hammering of wrought changes the grain structure.
> (Extreme examples include Damascus steel for swords)

There was a process called 'puddling'. Jues Verne can go on at length
about it. It involved stirring liquid iron to get the impurities out.
Typical example: the Eiffel tower.

> Most Americans seem to use "steel" for structural forms and for sheet
> metal and fasteners, and for cookware that usually doesn't need 
> seasoning.

Next invention: mild steel was obtained by blowing air through molten
iron to burn the carbon out.
It is suitable for construction as is.
For specialised purposes like tools it needs to be alloyed and hardened.

The meaning of 'steel' has changed greatly over historical time.
For D'Artagnan and Hornblower 'steel' was a semi-precious metal
that swords could be made of. Only officers could afford a good sword.
Hornblower's sailors had to do with cutlass, boarding axe and pike.
But by the end of the 19th century 'steel' had become the cheapest bulk
metal available.

But back on topic: Cookware.
So-called 'carbon steel' containing precisely known amounts of carbon
is made by adding precisely known amounts of carbon to mild steel.
Carbon steel is the material of choice for the best cookware there is,
forged or pressed, one-piece, carbon steel pans,

Jan
(down with teflon!)

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

#1149766

Den 31.08.2026 kl. 01.42 skrev Peter Moylan:

> To the people who produce the stuff the difference matters. When iron
> ore is first smelted into metal you get pig iron. (The metal ingots are
> called pigs.) That can be further processed to get different grades of
> steel.
> 
> It's all about the impurities. Pig iron has a lot of carbon in it. Steel
> has a different amount of carbon. They both contain other impurities. So
> they're basically the same thing: iron plus impurities.
> 
> Ordinary people who don't run steel mills have picked up the habit of
> distinguishing between iron and steel. But, really, they're much the
> same thing.

I question that. Wikipedia has an article about cast iron and another 
one about steel. Though both kinds have iron plus impurities, their 
properties are sufficiently different to earn different names - and more 
important, different uses.

-- 
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

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

#1149798

On 31/08/2026 09:11, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
> Den 31.08.2026 kl. 01.42 skrev Peter Moylan:
> 
>> To the people who produce the stuff the difference matters. When iron
>> ore is first smelted into metal you get pig iron. (The metal ingots are
>> called pigs.) That can be further processed to get different grades of
>> steel.
>>
>> It's all about the impurities. Pig iron has a lot of carbon in it. Steel
>> has a different amount of carbon. They both contain other impurities. So
>> they're basically the same thing: iron plus impurities.
>>
>> Ordinary people who don't run steel mills have picked up the habit of
>> distinguishing between iron and steel. But, really, they're much the
>> same thing.
> 
> I question that. Wikipedia has an article about cast iron and another 
> one about steel. Though both kinds have iron plus impurities, their 
> properties are sufficiently different to earn different names - and more 
> important, different uses.
> 
Iron may 'suffer' from impurities, whilst steel contains carefully 
controlled 'impurities' which are selected to give it the preferred 
properties.


-- 
Sam Plusnet

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

#1149804 — different iron alloys (was Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays)

Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> writes:
> On 31/08/2026 09:11, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>> I question that. Wikipedia has an article about cast iron and
>> another one about steel. Though both kinds have iron plus
>> impurities, their properties are sufficiently different to earn
>> different names - and more important, different uses.
>> 
> Iron may 'suffer' from impurities, whilst steel contains carefully
> controlled 'impurities' which are selected to give it the preferred
> properties.

It’s quite a bit more confusing than that.

References to unqualified “iron” before the 19th century, and sometimes
thereafter, almost invariably refer to wrought iron.

Wrought iron (which is no longer manufactured commercially, not since
Thomas Walmley and Sons shut down the Aston Forge in Bolton in England
in 01973) overlaps with mild steel in composition, but has a different
macrostructure, with slag inclusions giving it a fibrous structure and
reducing its susceptibility to corrosion.

In the specific case of *cast* iron, “iron” *also* "contains carefully
controlled impurities which are selected to give it the preferred
properties".  In fact, the main impurity in both cases is carbon.  Cast
iron has quite a bit more of it (over 2%) than steel; low-carbon “mild”
grades of steel can have as little carbon as wrought iron does.  Roughly
speaking, the usual ferrous grades are something like this:

- 0–0.1% carbon: wrought iron
- 0.05–0.3% carbon: mild steel
- 0.3–2.1% carbon: carbon steel
- 2.1–4.5% carbon: cast iron
- 3.5–4.7% carbon: pig iron (rarely seen outside foundries)

Also, if you have 10.5% or more of chromium, it’s “stainless steel”,
even if it has no carbon.

Cast iron normally also contains silicon to improve its casting
properties.

From the perspective of anyone who has studied this stuff, the above is
a terrible oversimplification, since there are hundreds of grades of
steels, with dramatically different properties, and different pieces of
steel may even have the same composition but dramatically different
properties due to heat treatment.

This is almost certainly off-topic for alt.usage.english at this point,
but which of the still-active newsfroups would be best for it?

Kragen

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

#1149805 — Re: different iron alloys (was Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays)

On the subject of iron and steel ...

One of my undergraduate subjects was called "Engineering Materials". I
went to the first few lectures, and discovered that the subject was
being taught by one of the worst lecturers I had ever encountered. His
lectures were useless. The textbook was pretty good, though, so I
decided to learn the subject by private study.

Over the course of the year I became quite an expert on steel: the
different kinds, crystal structure, properties, smelting processes, and
so on.

When I got to the final exam, I discovered that the syllabus had been
changed. Practically nothing I had studied was on the exam. I just
barely scraped through that subject.

-- 
Peter Moylan       peter@pmoylan.org    http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

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

#1149809 — Re: different iron alloys (was Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays)

Den 01.09.2026 kl. 02.00 skrev Kragen Javier Sitaker:

> This is almost certainly off-topic for alt.usage.english at this point,
> but which of the still-active newsfroups would be best for it?

In the Good Old Days (tm) when there was traffic in all the newsgroups, 
you could find one that was relevant. Today almost all of them are dead, 
and therefore subjects that strictly speaking are offtopic, are accepted 
in this group. The language groups are the last ones to die out for some 
reason.

If you read the stuff that we've been discussing through the last years, 
you'll find heaps that are offtopic.

Your message is number 15 in the set that is about iron.

-- 
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

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

#1149822 — active and healthy newsgroups in 02026 (was Re: different iron alloys)

Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> writes:
> In the Good Old Days (tm) when there was traffic in all the
> newsgroups, you could find one that was relevant. Today almost all of
> them are dead, and therefore subjects that strictly speaking are
> offtopic, are accepted in this group. The language groups are the last
> ones to die out for some reason.

I’ve found quite a few that seem active over the past few days of
browsing, and they’re not all language groups.  But alt.usage.english is
in some sense the healthiest group I’ve found so far.  Here are some
groups roughly ranked by volume, with my casual impressions:

- alt.usage.english: 70 messages per day
- comp.os.linux.advocacy: 60 messages per day, but mostly politics
  flames and racism
- alt.buddha.short.fat.guy: 40 messages per day, but mostly politics
  flames and racism
- sci.math: 30 messages per day, but it's mostly cranks flaming each other
- rec.arts.sf.written: 20 messages per day
- sci.electronics.design: 20 messages per day
- soc.culture.jewish: 20 messages per day, but they’re all deranged spam
  from Christian fundamentalists
- comp.os.vms: 20 messages per day
- comp.lang.c: 10 messages per day
- alt.folklore.computers: 10 messages per day
- comp.lang.forth: 4 messages per day, including many excellent posters
- comp.lang.lisp: 4 messages per day, including many excellent posters
- sci.crypt: 2 messages per day
- comp.arch.fpga: 2 messages per day
- comp.lang.misc: 2 messages per day
- talk.bizarre: 0.5 messages per day
- rec.radio.amateur.moderated: 0.4 messages per day, mostly ARRL
  announcements
- alt.sys.pdp10: 0.4 messages per day
- comp.infosystems.gemini: 0.3 messages per day, surprising for a
  protocol created in 02019
- alt.lang.asm: 0.2 messages per day
- comp.compilers: 0.2 messages per day, but they’re by really top people
- comp.text.pdf: 0.2 messages per day
- rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors: 0.1 messages per day
- comp.ai: 0.05 messages per day
- alt.hackers: 0.02 messages per day

Kragen

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

#1151512 — Re: different iron alloys (was Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays)

Every engineering material is optimised...  There is no way energy would
be expended, transport of materials to be at the place where the
manufacture happens, etc. - then you do not optimise the material you
make and the products resulting.  The incentive for the effort to give a
result is way way way way too high.

As it seems to me (metallurgist, significantly an engineer, etc.) ...

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

#1151652 — Re: different iron alloys (was Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays)

"Richard Smith"  wrote in message news:m1ecedsxs3.fsf@Admins-Air.Home...

Every engineering material is optimised...  There is no way energy would
be expended, transport of materials to be at the place where the
manufacture happens, etc. - then you do not optimise the material you
make and the products resulting.  The incentive for the effort to give a
result is way way way way too high.

As it seems to me (metallurgist, significantly an engineer, etc.) ...

---------------------------------------------

At the home hobbyist level it's useful to know the properties of common 
scrap metal, such as A36 hot rolled structural steel. Then you can judge on 
your feet if what you happen to find will serve for what you want to make.
https://www.azom.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=6117

For example I used inexpensive surplus pallet rack 3" and 4" rolled channel 
to build a bandsaw lumber mill and an overhead travelling gantry hoist to 
move the logs and cut timbers, up to 2 tons and 20' long. Water pipe, 
electrical conduit and chain link fence posts are available locally in small 
quantities and have considerable straight line column strength, though they 
aren't that strong in bending.

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

#1150613 — Re: different iron alloys (was Re: What is the best free software for creating & editing PDFs nowadays)

Kragen Javier Sitaker <kragen@canonical.org> writes:

> Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> writes:
>> On 31/08/2026 09:11, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>>> I question that. Wikipedia has an article about cast iron and
>>> another one about steel. Though both kinds have iron plus
>>> impurities, their properties are sufficiently different to earn
>>> different names - and more important, different uses.
>>> 
>> Iron may 'suffer' from impurities, whilst steel contains carefully
>> controlled 'impurities' which are selected to give it the preferred
>> properties.
> 
> It's quite a bit more confusing than that.
> 
> References to unqualified "iron" before the 19th century, and sometimes
> thereafter, almost invariably refer to wrought iron.
> 
> Wrought iron (which is no longer manufactured commercially, not since
> Thomas Walmley and Sons shut down the Aston Forge in Bolton in England
> in 01973) overlaps with mild steel in composition, but has a different
> macrostructure, with slag inclusions giving it a fibrous structure and
> reducing its susceptibility to corrosion.

It's common for blacksmiths to refer to the material they work with
for ordinary work -- ornamental, sculptural, horseshoes, general
whatever -- as "iron" altough they all know it's "mild steel", not
wrought iron or pure iron.  Most smiths have some degree of
familiarity with iron alloys with differing properties.  Those making
cutlery, tools, machine parts, anything where heat treatment is part
of the regime, become very knowledgeable about alloys.

A noteworthy point about how "iron" -- mild steel -- is sold: Up to
sometime in the last 50 years, m/s was designate by SAE numbers that
indicated the amount of carbon in the material offerd for sale.  SAE
1010 had ten points of carbon. SAE 1040 had forty points.  Blacksmiths
routinely looked for SAE 1010 or SAE 1020 because the strenth was
suitable for most all uses and te lower carbon content meant it was
easier to forge.

But currently, steel is sold with a different rating (I forget the
institutional source) but the number isn't based on the carbon
content.  It's based on the tensile strength, a factor much more
inportant to structural engineers.  But the result is that the ease of
hand-forging isn't predictable from the numerical designation by the
vendor.  Malleability can vary from similarly designated batch to
batch while the tensile strength still meets the standard.

> In the specific case of *cast* iron, "iron" *also* "contains carefully
> controlled impurities which are selected to give it the preferred
> properties".  In fact, the main impurity in both cases is carbon.  Cast
> iron has quite a bit more of it (over 2%) than steel; low-carbon "mild"
> grades of steel can have as little carbon as wrought iron does.  Roughly
> speaking, the usual ferrous grades are something like this:
> 
> - 0-0.1% carbon: wrought iron
> - 0.05-0.3% carbon: mild steel
> - 0.3-2.1% carbon: carbon steel
> - 2.1-4.5% carbon: cast iron
> - 3.5-4.7% carbon: pig iron (rarely seen outside foundries)
> 
> Also, if you have 10.5% or more of chromium, it's "stainless steel",
> even if it has no carbon.
> 
> Cast iron normally also contains silicon to improve its casting
> properties.
> 
> From the perspective of anyone who has studied this stuff, the above is
> a terrible oversimplification, since there are hundreds of grades of
> steels, with dramatically different properties, and different pieces of
> steel may even have the same composition but dramatically different
> properties due to heat treatment.
> 
> This is almost certainly off-topic for alt.usage.english at this point,
> but which of the still-active newsfroups would be best for it?

alt.crafts.blacksmithing or rec.crafts.metalworking (which is fairly
busy but mostly frequented by machinists.)


-- 
Mike Spencer                  Nova Scotia, Canada

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

#1149808

Den 31.08.2026 kl. 21.48 skrev Sam Plusnet:

> Iron may 'suffer' from impurities, whilst steel contains carefully 
> controlled 'impurities' which are selected to give it the preferred 
> properties.

The Wikipedia article gives the impression that alloying elements in 
cast iron is also controlled.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cast_iron

-- 
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

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

#1149727

On Sun, 30 Aug 26 16:30:13 UTC, Charles Hope <clh@candehope.me.uk>
wrote:

>On 30/08/2026 16:11, Peter Flynn wrote:
>> On 29/08/2026 02:45, Kragen Javier Sitaker wrote:
>>> Marion <marion@facts.com> writes:
>>>> it's kind of like when I ask people to use "lend" as a verb vs
>>>> "loan" as a noun; or when I notice people using "further" for
>>>> "farther" in terms of distances; or when people use "less" instead
>>>> of "fewer" for things that can be counted; or when people use
>>>> "dirt" when they really mean "soil"; or when they call a "stone" a
>>>> "rock" when all of these things are actually not what people think.
>> 
>> Many of these are normal usage in various dialects other than your own, 
>> so they are perfectly acceptable in many circumstances.
>> 
>> But their use IS registered by (for example) interviewers for jobs as a 
>> marker or evidence of a certain level or degree of education or social 
>> origin. People will rail against this, but it remains a fact that your 
>> use of language marks you as belonging to a specific segment of the 
>> English-speaking community, and that may work for you or against you.
>> 
>>> - “Less” has been in use with the meaning “a smaller number of; fewer”
>> 
>> Often the target of mockery, this one is often taken as a prime 
>> candidate for detecting an individual's level of literacy in present-day 
>> English, despite its antecedents.
>> 
>>> Similar remarks surely apply to the historical meanings of “stone” and
>>> “rock”,
>> Another classic marker, this time to distinguish Americans from British.
>> 
>> Peter
>another one I've recently come across is "iron" where I'd say "steel"

Two different things with different applications.  I can't see using
"iron" where "steel" is what is being described, or vice-versa.

An object could be called a rock or a stone without mislabeling it
using either choice.

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

#1149730

On 30/08/2026 18:33, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Aug 26 16:30:13 UTC, Charles Hope <clh@candehope.me.uk>
> wrote:
> 
>> On 30/08/2026 16:11, Peter Flynn wrote:
>>> On 29/08/2026 02:45, Kragen Javier Sitaker wrote:
>>>> Marion <marion@facts.com> writes:
>>>>> it's kind of like when I ask people to use "lend" as a verb vs
>>>>> "loan" as a noun; or when I notice people using "further" for
>>>>> "farther" in terms of distances; or when people use "less" instead
>>>>> of "fewer" for things that can be counted; or when people use
>>>>> "dirt" when they really mean "soil"; or when they call a "stone" a
>>>>> "rock" when all of these things are actually not what people think.
>>>
>>> Many of these are normal usage in various dialects other than your own,
>>> so they are perfectly acceptable in many circumstances.
>>>
>>> But their use IS registered by (for example) interviewers for jobs as a
>>> marker or evidence of a certain level or degree of education or social
>>> origin. People will rail against this, but it remains a fact that your
>>> use of language marks you as belonging to a specific segment of the
>>> English-speaking community, and that may work for you or against you.
>>>
>>>> - “Less” has been in use with the meaning “a smaller number of; fewer”
>>>
>>> Often the target of mockery, this one is often taken as a prime
>>> candidate for detecting an individual's level of literacy in present-day
>>> English, despite its antecedents.
>>>
>>>> Similar remarks surely apply to the historical meanings of “stone” and
>>>> “rock”,
>>> Another classic marker, this time to distinguish Americans from British.
>>>
>>> Peter
>> another one I've recently come across is "iron" where I'd say "steel"
> 
> Two different things with different applications.  I can't see using
> "iron" where "steel" is what is being described, or vice-versa.

I suspect a Chinese/English tranlation error.>
> An object could be called a rock or a stone without mislabeling it
> using either choice.

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

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.usage.english

csiph-web