Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.mobile.android > #73523 > unrolled thread
| Started by | The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2021-01-13 10:54 -0800 |
| Last post | 2021-01-20 07:19 -0500 |
| Articles | 14 on this page of 114 — 16 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android
OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-13 10:54 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2021-01-13 11:09 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-13 12:08 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2021-01-13 15:19 -0500
Re: OT: Key duplication Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2021-01-14 13:40 +0000
Re: OT: Key duplication Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2021-01-14 15:43 +0000
Re: OT: Key duplication nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2021-01-14 10:59 -0500
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-13 22:58 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-13 15:56 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> - 2021-01-14 07:33 +0700
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-13 21:27 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication AJL <noemail@none.com> - 2021-01-13 23:28 -0700
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-14 23:07 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> - 2021-01-15 15:58 +0700
Re: OT: Key duplication AJL <noemail@none.com> - 2021-01-15 09:34 -0700
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-15 15:30 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2021-01-15 18:13 -0500
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-15 18:47 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-16 04:17 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-16 09:14 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-17 02:31 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-16 22:08 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-18 23:08 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-18 14:22 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-19 13:50 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-19 10:56 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication AJL <noemail@none.com> - 2021-01-19 12:34 -0700
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-19 22:35 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-19 15:55 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-20 01:42 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-19 19:54 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication Bob F <bobnospam@gmail.com> - 2021-01-19 21:02 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com> - 2021-01-20 08:38 -0700
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-20 10:01 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com> - 2021-01-20 12:37 -0700
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-20 23:14 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> - 2021-01-20 23:34 +0000
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-21 14:56 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-21 09:59 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-21 22:09 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-21 14:06 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-22 04:08 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-21 19:35 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-22 12:45 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-22 09:37 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-22 23:21 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication Bob F <bobnospam@gmail.com> - 2021-01-23 19:59 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2021-01-21 19:48 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com> - 2021-01-22 07:31 -0700
Re: OT: Key duplication Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> - 2021-01-21 22:22 +0000
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-22 04:16 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com> - 2021-01-22 07:42 -0700
Re: OT: Key duplication sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2021-01-21 15:16 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> - 2021-01-22 07:46 +0700
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-22 04:25 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-20 19:49 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication Bob F <bobnospam@gmail.com> - 2021-01-20 21:01 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-20 22:47 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication Bob F <bobnospam@gmail.com> - 2021-01-21 05:16 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-21 09:55 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication Bob F <bobnospam@gmail.com> - 2021-01-23 20:05 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-21 14:49 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2021-01-21 06:46 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-21 10:09 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-21 09:56 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-20 13:04 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication Boris <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2021-01-22 02:02 +0000
Re: OT: Key duplication John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> - 2021-01-22 09:30 +0700
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-22 04:36 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication Bob F <bobnospam@gmail.com> - 2021-01-18 12:37 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-18 14:07 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2021-01-18 14:41 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-18 15:03 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication David Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk> - 2021-01-19 16:02 +0000
Re: OT: Key duplication Bob F <bobnospam@gmail.com> - 2021-01-19 20:48 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication Bob F <bobnospam@gmail.com> - 2021-01-19 20:43 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2021-01-20 09:08 -0500
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-20 23:08 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2021-01-20 09:08 -0500
Re: OT: Key duplication sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2021-01-20 07:42 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2021-01-20 08:25 -0500
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-20 09:37 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2021-01-20 08:16 -0500
Re: OT: Key duplication Arlen Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2021-01-14 00:37 +0000
Re: OT: Key duplication "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2021-01-20 09:03 -0500
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-20 09:53 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication Bob F <bobnospam@gmail.com> - 2021-01-20 20:20 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2021-01-21 08:00 -0500
Re: OT: Key duplication Bob F <bobnospam@gmail.com> - 2021-01-21 05:31 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2021-01-21 07:14 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2021-01-21 12:28 -0500
Re: OT: Key duplication sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2021-01-21 11:18 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-21 22:15 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2021-01-21 17:50 -0500
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-22 04:43 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2021-01-22 08:43 -0500
Re: OT: Key duplication Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com> - 2021-01-22 07:27 -0700
Re: OT: Key duplication "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2021-01-22 12:46 -0500
Re: OT: Key duplication "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2021-01-22 12:50 -0500
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-22 23:29 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication - Wine "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-22 23:36 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-22 23:42 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-22 16:05 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com> - 2021-01-23 09:11 -0700
Re: OT: Key duplication The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2021-01-23 10:37 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2021-01-23 17:23 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com> - 2021-01-23 09:07 -0700
Re: OT: Key duplication "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2021-01-23 13:42 -0500
Re: OT: Key duplication sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2021-01-22 14:48 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-23 05:02 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2021-01-23 08:47 -0500
Re: OT: Key duplication "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-23 00:20 +0100
Re: OT: Key duplication Bob F <bobnospam@gmail.com> - 2021-01-18 12:29 -0800
Re: OT: Key duplication micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2021-01-20 07:19 -0500
Page 6 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-22 23:36 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: OT: Key duplication - Wine |
| Message-ID | <nk0sdh-38b.ln1@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #74029 |
On 22/01/2021 18.46, Mayayana wrote: > "Ken Blake" <ken@invalidemail.com> wrote > > | I'm not the world's biggest Windows > | expert, but I know it very well, and I'm not about to toss away the time > | and trouble I've spent learning it, and start all over again to learn > | something new. > | > > I feel the same way. I have loads of custom programs > and scripts I use. I don't want to move. But I keep it > in mind, especially since Win10. I just don't want a system > where I'm a guest, with no control over spying and forced > updates. > > WINE is interesting in that respect. I explored it a bit > some years ago. WINE programmers were looking for > Windows programmers to test their software. That didn't > work out so well. Their operation was something I can only > describe as paramilitary hierarchy. They were unwilling to > share docs or explanations. The Win32 functions were spread > around willy nilly, so you couldn't check to see whether > a particular function was supported. For instance the basic > function CreateFile is in kernel32.dll. In WINE? It might be > anywhere. So is it supported? Who knows. > > The big cheese refused to give me any info and the docs > were nearly non-existent. He refused to cooperate by sharing > information that might help with translating functions. > My job was simply to test my software and report bugs, > then be responsible for "herding" the bug while college interns > tried to fix it. > Windows developers were considered to be non-tech > people. The WINE plan was to support whatever Windows > people expected to work, rather than cooperating. Well, the mantra is that being open source you can just look it up. I don't know about Wine in particular, but in general the documentation is there, but perhaps not that organized: nobody pays to write it, and almost nobody enjoys writing it for free. I was paid long ago to program, on Windows, and the documentation provided by, for example, BorlandC, was wonderful. One could buy good books on stuff. Linux is not made that way, but the documentation is there. Somewhere. > It's a shame. They could have had a parallel API in > place many years ago. Instead they limp along, fixing > one bug at a time, and mostly concentrating on the > games that the WINE "team" wants to play on Linux. > > On the bright side, it is a real API. I installed Windows > Script Host under WINE and was able to write a perfectly > functional VBScript that enumerated files. It's very much > running in Linux. The down side was > that no one program seemed to entirely work. But I found > that sticking to the Win32 API was a very good bet for > support under WINE. So I'm hopeful that eventually I might > be able to write Linux software... in my favoirite VB6... in > VS6... on Linux... Talk about not wanting to change. :) I guess that they try to replicate the Windows API, the part that is published. You know that not all was published, there were hidden functions since Windows 3. So, yes, if your program just uses the published API chances are it will work well with Wine, that is the goal. -- Cheers, Carlos.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-22 23:42 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vu0sdh-gab.ln1@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #74018 |
On 22/01/2021 15.27, Ken Blake wrote: > On 1/22/2021 6:43 AM, Mayayana wrote: >> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote ... > I've never used, or even tried Linux or Apple's operating system, or any > other operating system except for Android. (and IBM's mainframe > operating systems, none of which I've used for almost 30 years now). > > Which is the best operating system for PCs? I don't know and I don't > care. Windows is fine for me. I'm not the world's biggest Windows > expert, but I know it very well, and I'm not about to toss away the time > and trouble I've spent learning it, and start all over again to learn > something new. The thing is, most people are used to Windows since ever (some in kindergarten, others, well, started with msdos ;-) ) and know how to do the things they wish to on it. They don't notice its quirks, they think that simply that's the way things have to be done. Trying to change to an unfamiliar operating system is not easy: there are differences and hurdles. There is a learning effort. Which is the best OS? The one you feel better with :-) -- Cheers, Carlos.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-22 16:05 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <rufp7k$vnk$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #74041 |
On 01/22/2021 02:42 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 22/01/2021 15.27, Ken Blake wrote:
>> On 1/22/2021 6:43 AM, Mayayana wrote:
>>> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
>
>
> ...
>
>> I've never used, or even tried Linux or Apple's operating system, or any
>> other operating system except for Android. (and IBM's mainframe
>> operating systems, none of which I've used for almost 30 years now).
>>
>> Which is the best operating system for PCs? I don't know and I don't
>> care. Windows is fine for me. I'm not the world's biggest Windows
>> expert, but I know it very well, and I'm not about to toss away the time
>> and trouble I've spent learning it, and start all over again to learn
>> something new.
>
> The thing is, most people are used to Windows since ever (some in
> kindergarten, others, well, started with msdos ;-) ) and know how to do
> the things they wish to on it. They don't notice its quirks, they think
> that simply that's the way things have to be done.
Started with DOS (with a digression into GEM so I could use Ventura
Publisher) and a bit of FORTRAN on the Univac 1100 (I think). Then
win3, 3.1, 95, linux, win2000, win7, win10 and Android.
> Trying to change to an unfamiliar operating system is not easy: there
> are differences and hurdles. There is a learning effort.
I love Picasa for editing photos. The problem is that it's 32-bit and
uses some screwy version of wine that came with it and google eventually
abandoned it. Slackware 14.2 (640bit) has to be crippled in some way to
enable me to use 32-bit picasa, and my live-in tech support guy is
constantly nagging me about getting rid of it. The problem is that
NOTHING I've found is as easy and fast for what I actually want to do
with my photos.
I SHOULD bite the bullet and switch to ubuntu or something, but I really
don't want to. I don't need to be faster or better or anything else.
My system has a lot of weird limitations, but I can live with those. I
like its structure. I can deal with it.
> Which is the best OS? The one you feel better with :-)
There's always someone who knows better than you do what's good for you :-(
--
Cheers, Bev
"We're so far beyond fucked we couldn't even catch a bus
back to fucked." --Scott en Aztlan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-23 09:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <i7306gF2nmiU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #74045 |
On 1/22/2021 5:05 PM, The Real Bev wrote: > On 01/22/2021 02:42 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> On 22/01/2021 15.27, Ken Blake wrote: >>> On 1/22/2021 6:43 AM, Mayayana wrote: >>>> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote >> >> >> ... >> >>> I've never used, or even tried Linux or Apple's operating system, or any >>> other operating system except for Android. (and IBM's mainframe >>> operating systems, none of which I've used for almost 30 years now). >>> >>> Which is the best operating system for PCs? I don't know and I don't >>> care. Windows is fine for me. I'm not the world's biggest Windows >>> expert, but I know it very well, and I'm not about to toss away the time >>> and trouble I've spent learning it, and start all over again to learn >>> something new. >> >> The thing is, most people are used to Windows since ever (some in >> kindergarten, others, well, started with msdos ;-) ) and know how to do >> the things they wish to on it. They don't notice its quirks, they think >> that simply that's the way things have to be done. > > Started with DOS (with a digression into GEM so I could use Ventura > Publisher) and a bit of FORTRAN on the Univac 1100 (I think). It was well before any personal computer, but I once briefly had an assignment to write some code on a Univac 1108, using its assembler language, SALT. -- Ken
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-23 10:37 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ruhqdk$83b$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #74051 |
On 01/23/2021 08:11 AM, Ken Blake wrote: > On 1/22/2021 5:05 PM, The Real Bev wrote: >> On 01/22/2021 02:42 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote: >>> On 22/01/2021 15.27, Ken Blake wrote: >>>> On 1/22/2021 6:43 AM, Mayayana wrote: >>>>> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote >>> >>> >>> ... >>> >>>> I've never used, or even tried Linux or Apple's operating system, or any >>>> other operating system except for Android. (and IBM's mainframe >>>> operating systems, none of which I've used for almost 30 years now). >>>> >>>> Which is the best operating system for PCs? I don't know and I don't >>>> care. Windows is fine for me. I'm not the world's biggest Windows >>>> expert, but I know it very well, and I'm not about to toss away the time >>>> and trouble I've spent learning it, and start all over again to learn >>>> something new. >>> >>> The thing is, most people are used to Windows since ever (some in >>> kindergarten, others, well, started with msdos ;-) ) and know how to do >>> the things they wish to on it. They don't notice its quirks, they think >>> that simply that's the way things have to be done. >> >> Started with DOS (with a digression into GEM so I could use Ventura >> Publisher) and a bit of FORTRAN on the Univac 1100 (I think). I forgot CP/M. > It was well before any personal computer, but I once briefly had an > assignment to write some code on a Univac 1108, using its assembler > language, SALT. I think it WAS an 1108 at JPL. I wrote some stuff in JPLDIS (cards, maybe saved on tape), which Wayne Ratliffe (I think -- anyway, a JPL employee) re-wrote in assembly and made a bundle with as dBaseII, which I also used a lot. Magellan (GPS) used a program called Fourth Shift for manufacturing/sales/ repair/QA/whatever which was built on dBaseII and which was a lot of tun to play around with. It probably handled accounting and personnel too, but I didn't have access to those parts. Damn, FS is still around! -- Cheers, Bev "Too many people in Washington are full of themselves, among other things that they are full of." --Thomas Sowell
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-23 17:23 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ruii6g$1f3$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #74045 |
On 1/22/2021 4:05 PM, The Real Bev wrote: <snip> > Started with DOS (with a digression into GEM so I could use Ventura > Publisher) and a bit of FORTRAN on the Univac 1100 (I think). I read about those in my history book.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-23 09:07 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <i72vtbF2m3kU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #74041 |
On 1/22/2021 3:42 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 22/01/2021 15.27, Ken Blake wrote: >> On 1/22/2021 6:43 AM, Mayayana wrote: >>> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote > > > ... > >> I've never used, or even tried Linux or Apple's operating system, or any >> other operating system except for Android. (and IBM's mainframe >> operating systems, none of which I've used for almost 30 years now). >> >> Which is the best operating system for PCs? I don't know and I don't >> care. Windows is fine for me. I'm not the world's biggest Windows >> expert, but I know it very well, and I'm not about to toss away the time >> and trouble I've spent learning it, and start all over again to learn >> something new. > > > The thing is, most people are used to Windows since ever (some in > kindergarten, others, well, started with msdos ;-) I started on an IBM 1401 in 1962, well before any PCs--well before Microsoft even existed. I started on a PC in 1987, in MS-DOS. But note that some people started with PC-DOS or CPM or on machines like Amiga, Atari, Sinclair, TI, Apple, etc. And a lot of people have never run Windows. They've only run a Macintosh or an iPhone or Android. I've used every version of Windows starting with 2.0, except for those called NT. In general, I think almost every version except for 8 has been better than its predecessors in most respects. Notice that I said "in *most* respects," not "in *all* respects." ) and know how to do > the things they wish to on it. Yes, I do. I also know hoe to do a lot of things I don't want to do. > They don't notice its quirks, That's true of some people. Most people? Maybe, but I'm not so sure. In fact, I doubt it. It's certainly not true of me. I notice lots of quirks. If I owned Microsoft and could dictate what that did, I would make lots of changes. > they think > that simply that's the way things have to be done. I strongly disagree with that. In my experience most people would want many changes. They don't all want the same changes, but they almost all want some. But the same is true, not just of Windows, but of almost every product of any kind. For me, it's true of almost every piece of software I run, of almost every website I visit, of almost every piece of computer hardware I own, of my smart phone, of my car, of my television set, of the cable service I use, of the e-mail service I use, of the usenet service I use, and so on. > Trying to change to an unfamiliar operating system is not easy: there > are differences and hurdles. There is a learning effort. Yes, yes, and yes. I strongly agree. That's the main reason why I don't want to change. As I think I said, I don't want to make the time or take the trouble to do that. Windows is far from perfect, but it's good enough for me, and it generally gets better as the years go by. > Which is the best OS? The one you feel better with :-) That all depends on what you mean by "best." As far as I'm concerned, there's a big difference between "best" and "best for me." Windows is best for me. As I said, I don''t know which as is best and I don't care. -- Ken
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-23 13:42 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ruhqnc$ata$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #74050 |
"Ken Blake" <ken@invalidemail.com> wrote | > they think | > that simply that's the way things have to be done. | | I strongly disagree with that. In my experience most people would want | many changes. They don't all want the same changes, but they almost all | want some. | I don't think you can say that about the majority. People assume geeks are geniuses and that they just don't understand. People I know cross their fingers, start their computer, do what they need to, then shut it down. My favorite quote is from a friend who was having some kind of trouble on the computer I'd refreshed and given to her. She said a message was coming up. What was showing the message? Don't know. What did it say? Don't know. Then how did you choose which button to click? "I don't know. I just click them until I find one that it likes." :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-22 14:48 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <rufko3$3df$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #74017 |
On 1/22/2021 5:43 AM, Mayayana wrote: > "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote > > | > Ha ha. Yes. Free to wrestle with commandline. > | > | Or enjoy the command line :-P > | > > Possibly. I plan to go for a walk today on crutches, > which I don't need. I'll test your idea that idiotic tedium > can be more fun. :) > > For years I would try Linux periodically. I set a goal. > If I can set up what I want without editing files in /etc > or using console windows, and if I could find an easy, > intuitive firewall that blocks outgoing by process, then > I might get more serious about Linux. A very low bar. I'm > happy to have commandline. I just don't want it to be > required. I have several systems where I can dual boot Linux, and one that triple-boots OS-X, Windows 10, and Linux. I rarely boot Linux, though occasionally I have found the need. With a GUI on Linux it looks about the same as Windows. I even tried WINE, what a clusterf$%k that is. Even many of the applications that work don't work terribly well. And the bottom line is that Windows 10 is so good that the need for Linux has largely disappeared except for developers and servers. Many commercial applications abandoned Linux because the support requirements were so high with users running so many different versions of the OS. I like the quote: "Linux is only free if your time has no value."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-23 05:02 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <gojsdh-u0n.ln1@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #74042 |
On 22/01/2021 23.48, sms wrote: > On 1/22/2021 5:43 AM, Mayayana wrote: >> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote >> >> | > Ha ha. Yes. Free to wrestle with commandline. >> | >> | Or enjoy the command line :-P >> | >> >> Possibly. I plan to go for a walk today on crutches, >> which I don't need. I'll test your idea that idiotic tedium >> can be more fun. :) >> >> For years I would try Linux periodically. I set a goal. >> If I can set up what I want without editing files in /etc >> or using console windows, and if I could find an easy, >> intuitive firewall that blocks outgoing by process, then >> I might get more serious about Linux. A very low bar. I'm >> happy to have commandline. I just don't want it to be >> required. > > I have several systems where I can dual boot Linux, and one that > triple-boots OS-X, Windows 10, and Linux. I rarely boot Linux, though > occasionally I have found the need. With a GUI on Linux it looks about > the same as Windows. > > I even tried WINE, what a clusterf$%k that is. Even many of the > applications that work don't work terribly well. And the bottom line is > that Windows 10 is so good that the need for Linux has largely > disappeared except for developers and servers. Many commercial > applications abandoned Linux because the support requirements were so > high with users running so many different versions of the OS. Linux is not designed to be friendly to commercial avenues that don't follow the Linux style. > > I like the quote: "Linux is only free if your time has no value." Don't confuse "free" with "gratis". -- Cheers, Carlos.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-23 08:47 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ruh9f0$78v$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #74046 |
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote | Linux is not designed to be friendly to commercial avenues that don't | follow the Linux style. | | > I like the quote: "Linux is only free if your time has no value." | | Don't confuse "free" with "gratis". | I know you to be a notably intelligent, polite, gracious and open-minded person, yet when you talk about Linux, you sound just like the cultists: "You should use Linux. Really, you should... Well, no, it won't run your software... Well, no, you can't really expect Linux software to be finished, to have help docs, or to install without commandline instructions... Well, of course! Why would you expect that Acme Editor v. 0.89321.435 which requires edlibxz.dll v. 3.1234.567, could possibly work with edlibxz.dll v. 3.1234.566?!... Well, no, there won't be any support after next year. The versions roll over quickly and genius geeks have more important things to do than to support the software they write... You're being completely unreasonable. You can't expect Linux to do anything but waste your time. I'm just saying you should use it. It has fossilized email programs called elm and pine. How cool is that?" :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-23 00:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <g83sdh-3ld.ln1@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #74017 |
On 22/01/2021 14.43, Mayayana wrote: > "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote > > | > Ha ha. Yes. Free to wrestle with commandline. > | > | Or enjoy the command line :-P > | > > Possibly. I plan to go for a walk today on crutches, > which I don't need. I'll test your idea that idiotic tedium > can be more fun. :) > > For years I would try Linux periodically. I set a goal. > If I can set up what I want without editing files in /etc > or using console windows, and if I could find an easy, > intuitive firewall that blocks outgoing by process, then > I might get more serious about Linux. A very low bar. I'm > happy to have commandline. I just don't want it to be > required. Hum. Expecting things to work the same way can be painful, that's not a good approach. The (current) firewall on Linux is based on ports, not on applications. There is no concept of firewalling an application or not. Not absolutely so, there are tools which can do blocking on applications: I know that AppArmour does it or is working on it. And I heard about a new type of firewall being designed. Then, almost all the configuration is based on editing files, that's not going to change. You can do it on a terminal, or with a full blown editor. And some times, somebody may create a graphical interface to configure something hiding the editing of files that happens behind the curtains. The advantage is that we can simply copy a configuration file from backup, or from another computer, and drop it in new place. Or find instructions on internet that tell what to change in a few lines. Once one is used to this methodology, we find the Windows way harder to use. For instance, the openSUSE distribution has a graphical administration tool called YaST. It covers many things with dialogs, but not everything. > > I figure that's common sense. I wouldn't buy a new > car that needs a transmission. I wouldn't move into a > house with ceilings that are falling down. I wouldn't > use an OS that requires me to become an expert > before I can do basic things easily. Linux hasn't even > come close so far. I looked at the WINE site for versions > and ended up coming across a long page of commandline > instructions to install it on Mint. Huh?! What's the matter > with these people? Are they all still 15 year old virgins? Linux *is* different. There is a learning curve (you probably have been learning Windows for decades, like me). There are things that will not change, we like them the way they are, they are intentionally that way. Expecting them to change can be discouraging or hurtful. On the other hand, for a plain user, if there is a person that does the administration/maintenance of the computer, it really does not matter if the machine is Windows or Linux, they feel the same. > > ... But, I haven't tried Linux lately, so... the bar is now > even lower because Win10 is so bad. Which is why I mentioned it. There is no spying on Linux. It is not commercial. At a price, there is less polish. Depending on your needs, there may be much work to do initially (on a not familiar environment). > > I've used Suse before so I decided to try that instead of Mint. > They seem to have a smoother system for software install. > But in recent years it seems that Linux has been missing the > point in other ways. Increasingly there's a "civilian" wrapper > that locks down the system and works great for elderly > people who want to check their email. But the in-between -- > the approach that used to be done so well on Windows -- > is missing. That was the way that MS provided options for > people at every level of expertise... before they decided to > lock customers out of the product with Win10. Mind, Linux changes fast. If you buy an administration guide of ten years ago, it may be useless. Depends on the area. > In Linux there's an attitude that if you're not fluent in > C++ and can't recite the 5 greatest achievements of > Richard Stallman then you shouldn't be able to change > system settings. LOL. I can't either, but I certainly change system settings :-D > The elephant in the room is that the vast > majority of pimple-faced Linux nuts don't want it to be > usable. They like to imagine themselves like wizards, using > arcane incantations that no one else can understand. It's > like the representation of advanced computing in TV shows. > They always show something like a green screen with yellow > text showing scarps of DOS or C++ to indicate "incredibly > advanced computer stuff that you could never hope to > understand". :-D Most of those arcane incantations seem so simply because they are unfamiliar, but they are not arcane at all. To a Linux admin type, the administration of a Windows system (Windows Server more so) seems arcane as well. To me, the installation and administration of Microsoft Exchange is Magic. You do it twice exactly the same, one works, the other fails. Truly, it happened to me in a training course :-) > It was similar recently setting up a raspberry pi. It > works pretty well. But I had to go online to figure out > some basics. Then I had to write down the incantations > needed and run them. That's a serious design flaw, when > I need to search through online forums to find out how > to use the product... and have to be tech-savvy to carry > it out. Would happen to me as well, and I am very learned on Linux :-p > | You might run Linux daily without touching the command line, except for > | some repairs or maintenance. > | > | Hey, even Windows has a command line > > Yes, but I almost never have to use it. I used it > recently on an old XP computer to swap out hal.dll > for the multi-core-cpu version of hal.dll. I used to > use it for youtube-dl before I wrote a wrapper for > that. There's a reason for GUI. It's much, much > easier. If I have to do anything in console more > than once, that's a design problem. There should > be a button or slider or radio buttons or checkbox > somewhere to perform that action. I find the terminal easier than the GUI often :-p You will often not find the GUI, and that's intentional. I have many wrapper tools of my own to do many things, like youtube-dl, but they are textmode themselves. I see creating a GUI like a waste of my time (and I was an MsDOS / Windows programmer once upon a time, I wrote GUIs) It is a different paradigm. Of course, if something is used a lot, someone may create a GUI and publish it. > > | Yu can even install something I forgot the name, from the > | store, to run Linux commands in Windows. > | > > Windows subsystem for Linux? Imagine my excitement. :-D The intention is, I gather, the reverse of WINE. Run Linux applications natively under Windows. > Now I can run commands from 1980 in 2 different > dialects. :) They did a similar thing with PowerShell. What > I heard was that they're trying to cater to Linux/Unix > server admins, in order to make it easy for them to switch > to Windows. It's a horrendous system, which I've so far > had no use for. Just as well. A lot of malware has been > written for PS and it's optional on XP. So there's no reason > to install it. Windows scripting was created in the 90s to > replace commandline. They're only bringing it back so that > Linux geeks can feel at home. It's like McDonald's adding a > hunting range so that you can feel like a caveman by > hunting down your hamburger. Hum. No, the computer would hunt the hamburger or use the available raw meat, and prepare it exactly my way, every day, when I gave the order, instead of having to pay a team of McDonald staff to create a panel for me :-) -- Cheers, Carlos.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob F <bobnospam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-18 12:29 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ru4r3u$lab$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #73523 |
On 1/13/2021 10:54 AM, The Real Bev wrote: > I just found out how much the dealer charges to duplicate my transponder > car key. Key-Me does it considerably cheaper. Have any of you used one > of their kiosks? > > I ask here just because this is one of the more active newsgroups I > subscribe to and we all seem to be at least marginally tech-savvy... > You can buy the keys online (ebay or amazon) for cheap, and may be able to program them with something as simple as inserting the old key, turning the key off and on and opening and closing the drivers door in some specific order, and they inserting the new key. Search online for your car year and model key programming. Details will vary between vehicles.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-20 07:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ep7g0ghdmd44njl9fpuvq2sh5ii3eg0tqs@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #73523 |
In comp.mobile.android, on Wed, 13 Jan 2021 10:54:58 -0800, The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote: >I just found out how much the dealer charges to duplicate my transponder >car key. Key-Me does it considerably cheaper. Have any of you used one >of their kiosks? > >I ask here just because this is one of the more active newsgroups I >subscribe to and we all seem to be at least marginally tech-savvy... No time now to read all the answers, and my cars are no later than 2005, but I think they have transponders in the keys. I just buy blanks on Ebay or maybe it's Amazon. Check both. They let you specify the car. Somehow there was a way to test if they work before having them cut, and then have them cut by a locksmith. It was under $15 per key total iirc. Remote fobs are cheap online too.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6]
Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android
csiph-web