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

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #94962 > unrolled thread

Is This An Old Folks Home?

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc

Contents

  Is This An Old Folks Home? Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-11-02 23:08 +0000
    Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-03 02:51 +0100
      On the on-topicness of tape drives (was: Re: Is This An Old Folks Home?) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-04 23:47 +0000
        Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-11-05 04:14 +0000
          Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-05 17:29 -0500
            Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-11-05 22:52 +0000
              Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-05 19:11 -0500
                Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-11-06 02:41 +0000
                  Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-05 22:31 -0500
                    Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-06 20:51 +0000
                      Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-11-07 02:41 +0000
            Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives Beej Jorgensen <beej@beej.us> - 2026-11-06 05:59 +0000
              Re: Tape Drives Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-06 06:18 +0000
    Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-02 21:08 -0500
    Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-11-03 02:26 +0000
    Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? Woozy Song <suzyw0ng@outlook.com> - 2026-11-04 09:55 +0800
      Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-03 22:14 -0500
        Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-11-04 03:54 +0000
          Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-04 06:21 +0000
            Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? TJ <TJ@noneofyour.business> - 2026-11-05 20:40 -0500
              Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-05 21:52 -0500
                Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-06 14:28 +0100
            My Computer History (Re: Is This An Old Folks Home?) Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2026-11-06 18:37 -0800
    Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? Beej Jorgensen <beej@beej.us> - 2026-11-04 19:15 +0000
      Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-11-04 20:38 +0000
        Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-04 23:51 +0000
        Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2026-11-05 17:48 +0100
          Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-11-05 16:56 +0000
          Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-05 20:55 +0000
    Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2026-11-06 12:23 -0500
      Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-11-06 19:25 +0000
        Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2026-11-06 15:59 -0500
          Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-11-07 02:50 +0000
        Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-06 23:00 -0500

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#94962 — Is This An Old Folks Home?

Is this group an actual GNU/Linux discussion forum or a sordid
home for decrepit old folks and faltering has-beens?

I don't want no useless info on pre-historic tape readers.

I, and many others, want cutting edge philosophy on GNU/Linux/FOSS.

Otherwise, go bury yourselves, grandpas.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!





-- 
Gentoo/LFS: Is there any-fucking-thing else?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#94970

On 2026-11-03 00:08, Farley Flud wrote:
> Is this group an actual GNU/Linux discussion forum or a sordid
> home for decrepit old folks and faltering has-beens?
> 
> I don't want no useless info on pre-historic tape readers.
> 
> I, and many others, want cutting edge philosophy on GNU/Linux/FOSS.
> 
> Otherwise, go bury yourselves, grandpas.
> 
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

Then why are you here, granny? :-p

-- 
Cheers,
        Carlos E.R.
        ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺.

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

#95143 — On the on-topicness of tape drives (was: Re: Is This An Old Folks Home?)

On 2026-11-03, Carlos E. R. wrote:

> On 2026-11-03 00:08, Farley Flud wrote:
>> Is this group an actual GNU/Linux discussion forum or a sordid
>> home for decrepit old folks and faltering has-beens?
>>
>> I don't want no useless info on pre-historic tape readers.
>>
>> I, and many others, want cutting edge philosophy on GNU/Linux/FOSS.
>>
>> Otherwise, go bury yourselves, grandpas.
>>
>> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>
> Then why are you here, granny? :-p

That's actually a load of nonsense in that a very good use of this group
would be someone looking for advice on using a tape drive on GNU/Linux.

I'd argue that, if tape drives are out because that's not the topic,
then so is FOSS in general, unless it's something that's part of a
GNU/Linux distribution...

While I've never used a tape drive myself, I do use the Tape ARchiver a
lot, although sometimes I use the BSD one and not the GNU one, as the
latter can't do ZIP, RAR, ISO9660, &c. :-)

-- 
Nuno Silva

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

#95152 — Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives

Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 2026-11-03, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> 
>> On 2026-11-03 00:08, Farley Flud wrote:
>>> Is this group an actual GNU/Linux discussion forum or a sordid
>>> home for decrepit old folks and faltering has-beens?
>>>
>>> I don't want no useless info on pre-historic tape readers.
>>>
>>> I, and many others, want cutting edge philosophy on GNU/Linux/FOSS.
>>>
>>> Otherwise, go bury yourselves, grandpas.
>>>
>>> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>>
>> Then why are you here, granny? :-p
> 
> That's actually a load of nonsense in that a very good use of this 
> group would be someone looking for advice on using a tape drive on 
> GNU/Linux.

Do keep in mind that Farley is a known troll.

It is best to just ignore the troll's posts.

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

#95198 — Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives

On 11/4/26 23:14, Rich wrote:
> Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2026-11-03, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>
>>> On 2026-11-03 00:08, Farley Flud wrote:
>>>> Is this group an actual GNU/Linux discussion forum or a sordid
>>>> home for decrepit old folks and faltering has-beens?
>>>>
>>>> I don't want no useless info on pre-historic tape readers.
>>>>
>>>> I, and many others, want cutting edge philosophy on GNU/Linux/FOSS.
>>>>
>>>> Otherwise, go bury yourselves, grandpas.
>>>>
>>>> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>>>
>>> Then why are you here, granny? :-p
>>
>> That's actually a load of nonsense in that a very good use of this
>> group would be someone looking for advice on using a tape drive on
>> GNU/Linux.
> 
> Do keep in mind that Farley is a known troll.
> 
> It is best to just ignore the troll's posts.

   Also, tape drives are STILL in use, to around
   30tb for the more expensive units. Not 'ideal'
   for big storage any more, but still valuable.
   Check Amazon, a number to choose from.

   Now the big reel-2-reel jobbies from all the
   old sci-fi movies .... no ... gone.

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

#95201 — Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives

c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
> On 11/4/26 23:14, Rich wrote:
>> Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2026-11-03, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2026-11-03 00:08, Farley Flud wrote:
>>>>> Is this group an actual GNU/Linux discussion forum or a sordid
>>>>> home for decrepit old folks and faltering has-beens?
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't want no useless info on pre-historic tape readers.
>>>>>
>>>>> I, and many others, want cutting edge philosophy on GNU/Linux/FOSS.
>>>>>
>>>>> Otherwise, go bury yourselves, grandpas.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>>>>
>>>> Then why are you here, granny? :-p
>>>
>>> That's actually a load of nonsense in that a very good use of this
>>> group would be someone looking for advice on using a tape drive on
>>> GNU/Linux.
>> 
>> Do keep in mind that Farley is a known troll.
>> 
>> It is best to just ignore the troll's posts.
> 
>   Also, tape drives are STILL in use, to around 30tb for the more 
>   expensive units.  Not 'ideal' for big storage any more, but still 
>   valuable.  Check Amazon, a number to choose from.

Yup, LTO tapes are in wide use for backing up all those Tb's stored on 
all those clouds.  The prices, for the latest models, are at 
"enterprise only need apply" levels, but tape is very much alive and 
well.

>   Now the big reel-2-reel jobbies from all the old sci-fi movies ....  
>   no ...  gone.

Yep, except for museums and the occasional sci-fi movie that want's to 
look 'retro'.

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

#95209 — Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives

On 11/5/26 17:52, Rich wrote:
> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
>> On 11/4/26 23:14, Rich wrote:
>>> Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 2026-11-03, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2026-11-03 00:08, Farley Flud wrote:
>>>>>> Is this group an actual GNU/Linux discussion forum or a sordid
>>>>>> home for decrepit old folks and faltering has-beens?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't want no useless info on pre-historic tape readers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I, and many others, want cutting edge philosophy on GNU/Linux/FOSS.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Otherwise, go bury yourselves, grandpas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>>>>>
>>>>> Then why are you here, granny? :-p
>>>>
>>>> That's actually a load of nonsense in that a very good use of this
>>>> group would be someone looking for advice on using a tape drive on
>>>> GNU/Linux.
>>>
>>> Do keep in mind that Farley is a known troll.
>>>
>>> It is best to just ignore the troll's posts.
>>
>>    Also, tape drives are STILL in use, to around 30tb for the more
>>    expensive units.  Not 'ideal' for big storage any more, but still
>>    valuable.  Check Amazon, a number to choose from.
> 
> Yup, LTO tapes are in wide use for backing up all those Tb's stored on
> all those clouds.  The prices, for the latest models, are at
> "enterprise only need apply" levels, but tape is very much alive and
> well.
> 
>>    Now the big reel-2-reel jobbies from all the old sci-fi movies ....
>>    no ...  gone.
> 
> Yep, except for museums and the occasional sci-fi movie that want's to
> look 'retro'.

   Hmm ... one of those "Captain America" movies
   of late. The evil genius had his brain digitized
   and stored on a warehouse full of those tape units.

   Tape is slow - often VERY VERY slow - but it can
   still deliver an acceptable storage-per-dollar
   figure in some applications.

   I wonder how many corps still have a "The backup
   tapes SHALL be stored in the fireproof safe each
   evening" in the Official Rules book ?  :-)

   Most of the kiddies don't even know what those
   big tape reels were DOING rolling back and forth
   and how SLOW computing was back in the day.
   "Batch jobs" ? "Code overlays" ? "Temporary
   intermediate storage" ?

   But they DID look Cool !

   Today, a USB dual-drive unit with a couple
   of 16tb magnetics inside - faster and cheaper
   and still small enough to put in the safe.

   But tape isn't dead, not YET anyway.

   Yea yea, we all hoped for petabyte holographic
   crystal mass storage about the size of a thumb
   drive by now, very Trek. Sorry ....

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

#95218 — Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives

c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
> On 11/5/26 17:52, Rich wrote:
>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
>>> On 11/4/26 23:14, Rich wrote:
>>>> Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On 2026-11-03, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2026-11-03 00:08, Farley Flud wrote:
>>>>>>> Is this group an actual GNU/Linux discussion forum or a sordid
>>>>>>> home for decrepit old folks and faltering has-beens?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't want no useless info on pre-historic tape readers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I, and many others, want cutting edge philosophy on GNU/Linux/FOSS.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Otherwise, go bury yourselves, grandpas.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then why are you here, granny? :-p
>>>>>
>>>>> That's actually a load of nonsense in that a very good use of this
>>>>> group would be someone looking for advice on using a tape drive on
>>>>> GNU/Linux.
>>>>
>>>> Do keep in mind that Farley is a known troll.
>>>>
>>>> It is best to just ignore the troll's posts.
>>>
>>> Also, tape drives are STILL in use, to around 30tb for the more 
>>> expensive units.  Not 'ideal' for big storage any more, but still 
>>> valuable.  Check Amazon, a number to choose from.
>> 
>> Yup, LTO tapes are in wide use for backing up all those Tb's stored on
>> all those clouds.  The prices, for the latest models, are at
>> "enterprise only need apply" levels, but tape is very much alive and
>> well.
>> 
>>> Now the big reel-2-reel jobbies from all the old sci-fi movies ....  
>>> no ...  gone.
>> 
>> Yep, except for museums and the occasional sci-fi movie that want's to
>> look 'retro'.
> 
> Hmm ...  one of those "Captain America" movies of late.  The evil 
> genius had his brain digitized and stored on a warehouse full of 
> those tape units.
> 
> Tape is slow - often VERY VERY slow - but it can still deliver an 
> acceptable storage-per-dollar figure in some applications.

Yes, although that comes with a very big "it depends" star next to it.  
For random access, yes, very very slow.

For sequential access, modern LTO-10 drives claim a native 400MB/s 
write speed 
(https://spectralogic.com/wp-content/uploads/LTO-10-Tape-Drive-Datasheet-Spectra-Logic.pdf) 
400MB/s rivals a good many of the non-super performance SSD's, and out 
ranks many mechanical disks as well.  Just don't try to randomly read 
the data back out later....

>   I wonder how many corps still have a "The backup
>   tapes SHALL be stored in the fireproof safe each
>   evening" in the Official Rules book ?  :-)

Since those sorts of rules books are very often never scrutinized for 
"what can we remove", likely nearly all of them that used to have that 
clause in their rule book.

>   Today, a USB dual-drive unit with a couple
>   of 16tb magnetics inside - faster and cheaper
>   and still small enough to put in the safe.
> 
>   But tape isn't dead, not YET anyway.

The big advantage tape gives enterprise customers is 40TB of native 
capacity per LTO-10 tape, and long term storage claims.  So their rule 
book can also include: "every fourth backup set is shipped off to Iron 
Mountan" as their 'offsite' storage aspect, with some reasonable 
expectation they can read the tape in 5 or 10 years (presuming they 
have a compatible drive with which to do so).

And that 40TB of tape costs way less than two 20TB hard drives to store 
the same 40TB.

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

#95223 — Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives

On 11/5/26 21:41, Rich wrote:
> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
>> On 11/5/26 17:52, Rich wrote:
>>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
>>>> On 11/4/26 23:14, Rich wrote:
>>>>> Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2026-11-03, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2026-11-03 00:08, Farley Flud wrote:
>>>>>>>> Is this group an actual GNU/Linux discussion forum or a sordid
>>>>>>>> home for decrepit old folks and faltering has-beens?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't want no useless info on pre-historic tape readers.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I, and many others, want cutting edge philosophy on GNU/Linux/FOSS.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Otherwise, go bury yourselves, grandpas.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then why are you here, granny? :-p
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's actually a load of nonsense in that a very good use of this
>>>>>> group would be someone looking for advice on using a tape drive on
>>>>>> GNU/Linux.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do keep in mind that Farley is a known troll.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is best to just ignore the troll's posts.
>>>>
>>>> Also, tape drives are STILL in use, to around 30tb for the more
>>>> expensive units.  Not 'ideal' for big storage any more, but still
>>>> valuable.  Check Amazon, a number to choose from.
>>>
>>> Yup, LTO tapes are in wide use for backing up all those Tb's stored on
>>> all those clouds.  The prices, for the latest models, are at
>>> "enterprise only need apply" levels, but tape is very much alive and
>>> well.
>>>
>>>> Now the big reel-2-reel jobbies from all the old sci-fi movies ....
>>>> no ...  gone.
>>>
>>> Yep, except for museums and the occasional sci-fi movie that want's to
>>> look 'retro'.
>>
>> Hmm ...  one of those "Captain America" movies of late.  The evil
>> genius had his brain digitized and stored on a warehouse full of
>> those tape units.
>>
>> Tape is slow - often VERY VERY slow - but it can still deliver an
>> acceptable storage-per-dollar figure in some applications.
> 
> Yes, although that comes with a very big "it depends" star next to it.
> For random access, yes, very very slow.

   Kinda forget "RA" ...

   But, back in the day, the CPUs were so slow and
   multi-user so clunky ... even 'temporary' storage
   of intermediate results to tapes was acceptable.

> For sequential access, modern LTO-10 drives claim a native 400MB/s
> write speed
> (https://spectralogic.com/wp-content/uploads/LTO-10-Tape-Drive-Datasheet-Spectra-Logic.pdf)
> 400MB/s rivals a good many of the non-super performance SSD's, and out
> ranks many mechanical disks as well.  Just don't try to randomly read
> the data back out later....

   Today, a two-drive USB disk unit can seriously
   out-perform tapes - and it's still pretty compact.

>>    I wonder how many corps still have a "The backup
>>    tapes SHALL be stored in the fireproof safe each
>>    evening" in the Official Rules book ?  :-)
> 
> Since those sorts of rules books are very often never scrutinized for
> "what can we remove", likely nearly all of them that used to have that
> clause in their rule book.

   It'd be fun to have a survey of Big Corp IT rule
   books, just to SEE how many still have that rule "-)

>>    Today, a USB dual-drive unit with a couple
>>    of 16tb magnetics inside - faster and cheaper
>>    and still small enough to put in the safe.
>>
>>    But tape isn't dead, not YET anyway.
> 
> The big advantage tape gives enterprise customers is 40TB of native
> capacity per LTO-10 tape, and long term storage claims.  So their rule
> book can also include: "every fourth backup set is shipped off to Iron
> Mountan" as their 'offsite' storage aspect, with some reasonable
> expectation they can read the tape in 5 or 10 years (presuming they
> have a compatible drive with which to do so).

   As said, tapes DO have some advantages. Good capacity
   for cheap and the modern tapes WILL last a long time.
   Alas nothing 'optical', even Blu-Rays, remotely match
   the capacity.

   HAVE a Blu-Ray unit. Mostly my (home) backups go
   to a little NAS - four-drive USB unit - using NFS.
   However about every six months I burn my most
   important shit to a BR. Even though "home", still
   have to pick and choose carefully just so it'll
   fit on a disk. Make a big ZIP or TAR, burn it.

   Biz uses, even BR-DL is not enough.

   Disappointing.

> And that 40TB of tape costs way less than two 20TB hard drives to store
> the same 40TB.

   True. Tape is CHEAP.

   Also SLOW SLOW SLOW.

   A multi-drive USB unit with some big mag
   drives WOULD cover it ... and still small
   enough for the fireproof safe.

   "Cloud" can be OK too ... but, if smart, DO
   always keep a LOCAL backup (or two or three).
   Vlad or Xi or Kim are gonna disappear all that
   'cloud' shit Real Soon Now. The cyber-war
   is ON. The commiesocialistDems LOVE Xi and Kim,
   won't do a single thing to thwart them.

   Then there will be much crying and screaming
   and gnashing of teeth and infidels burnt at
   the stake and desolation and ...........

   What WOULD happen to global biz if all the
   cloud apps/storage (and backup storage) was
   corrupted at a stroke ? SO many totally
   rely on M$ cloud shit for ALL biz needs.
   But if it Goes Away ... even for a week or
   for months (or forever) ........

   No, they WON'T be 'ready for it' - that much is
   obvious. 'Cloud' has become a religion - faith.

   Anyway, if you want tape, Linux still
   understands tape.

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

#95252 — Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives

On 2026-11-06, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:

> On 11/5/26 21:41, Rich wrote:
>
>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Tape is slow - often VERY VERY slow - but it can still deliver an
>>> acceptable storage-per-dollar figure in some applications.
>> 
>> Yes, although that comes with a very big "it depends" star next to it.
>> For random access, yes, very very slow.
>
>    Kinda forget "RA" ...
>
>    But, back in the day, the CPUs were so slow and
>    multi-user so clunky ... even 'temporary' storage
>    of intermediate results to tapes was acceptable.

Don't underestimate sequential processing.  Sophisticated
techniques were developed that didn't need random access.
You make the most of what you have.

Many tape drives could read tape backwards, which was
exploited by, e.g., sort programs.  This could save the
minute or two it would take to rewind the tape before
starting the next pass.

>> And that 40TB of tape costs way less than two 20TB hard drives to store
>> the same 40TB.
>
>    "Cloud" can be OK too ... but, if smart, DO
>    always keep a LOCAL backup (or two or three).
>    Vlad or Xi or Kim are gonna disappear all that
>    'cloud' shit Real Soon Now. The cyber-war
>    is ON. The commiesocialistDems LOVE Xi and Kim,
>    won't do a single thing to thwart them.

Your #1 right-winger seems to like Kim a lot too.

But we don't need him - a friend lost a lot of
precious photos due to a screw-up at his cloud
provider that had nothing to do with Vlad or Xi
or whoever.

>    Then there will be much crying and screaming
>    and gnashing of teeth and infidels burnt at
>    the stake and desolation and ...........

As long as we can find a scapegoat...

>    What WOULD happen to global biz if all the
>    cloud apps/storage (and backup storage) was
>    corrupted at a stroke ? SO many totally
>    rely on M$ cloud shit for ALL biz needs.
>    But if it Goes Away ... even for a week or
>    for months (or forever) ........

Maybe Lord Bill will decide to pull the plug.
Temporarily, anyway.  There are lots of ransom
opportunities.

>    No, they WON'T be 'ready for it' - that much is
>    obvious. 'Cloud' has become a religion - faith.

I should get one of those T-shirts that says,

    There is no Cloud.
    It's just someone else's computer.

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  Too many people have become
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  dependent on the Internet.
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  It Clouds their thinking.
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |

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

#95271 — Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives

On Fri, 06 Nov 2026 20:51:50 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

> I should get one of those T-shirts that says,
> 
>     There is no Cloud.
>     It's just someone else's computer.

I got some funny looks when I said we were already using a private cloud. 
Most of the companies that were touting a cloud solution for emergency 
services software backed off. Some of the security requirements assumed 
the computer would be surrounded by armed responders, 

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

#95228 — Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives

In article <ipucna2KmLW-nnD3nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
c186282  <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
> Also, tape drives are STILL in use, to around 30tb for the more
> expensive units. Not 'ideal' for big storage any more, but still
> valuable.

Recent headline: "FUJIFILM to Increase Production Capacity by 5x for
Magnetic Data Storage Tape". I guess AI is driving demand up again.

And this is from a recent Tom's Hardware article:

   The current LTO-10 generation stores up to 40TB of uncompressed data
   per cartridge, while HPE and Quantum — the companies behind the LTO
   Program — now envision LTO-14 cartridges with up to 365TB of native
   capacity.

IIRC, the data from Arecibo radio telescope used to be shipped back to
the mainland on tape because that was the only thing that had the
bandwidth.

"Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes
hurtling down the highway."

> Now the big reel-2-reel jobbies from all the old sci-fi movies .... no
> ... gone.

We had one 9-track when I worked as a computer operator in 1992. It was
used to send financial records to the bank. That was the first and last
one I saw in use.

-- 
Brian "Beej Jorgensen" Hall | beej@beej.us

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

#95229 — Re: Tape Drives

On Fri, 6 Nov 2026 05:59:51 -0000 (UTC), Beej Jorgensen wrote:

> We had one 9-track when I worked as a computer operator in 1992. It
> was used to send financial records to the bank. That was the first
> and last one I saw in use.

A decade earlier, it was a slightly different story.

Also, back then, it was still the fashion in movies and TV to portray
a computer as having lots of tape drives with the reels spinning
busily, as though such heavy tape usage was characteristic of normal
computer operation. That would have been true a decade before that,
but by the time the 1980s came along, tapes were primarily used for
backup and data interchange between installations.

Furthermore, back then, there was real difficulty in getting data
between different brands of personal computers, because of
incompatible floppy disk formats, and many machines not even having
floppy drives. But there was this open protocol called “Kermit”, which
ran on serial lines (or modem connections), for which implementations
were available for just about every kind of computer under the sun,
big and small.

And you could get copies free, just by sending a blank reel of tape to
the University of Columbia; they would put all the latest versions of
all the releases on that, and send it back.

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

#94974

Well, IS an "old folks home" to a DEGREE.

Or don't you think 40-50+ years of computing
experiences are worth anything ?

If so, go play Candy Crush and leave us 'old
folks' alone. WE will Know How It Works And
Why and you won't.

Be civil.

We ARE stronger together.

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

#94978

On Mon, 02 Nov 2026 23:08:32 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:

> Is this group an actual GNU/Linux discussion forum or a sordid home for
> decrepit old folks and faltering has-beens?
> 
> I don't want no useless info on pre-historic tape readers.
> 
> I, and many others, want cutting edge philosophy on GNU/Linux/FOSS.

https://fossforce.com/2026/08/the-foss-force-interview-with-richard-
stallman/

Stallman objects vigorously to 'free' and 'open source' sharing the same 
line. 

I'd never heard of Foss Force but Lunduke found Chrissie's rant amusing.

https://fossforce.com/2026/11/lunduke-releases-his-own-devuan-based-linux-
distro/

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

#95063

Farley Flud wrote:
> Is this group an actual GNU/Linux discussion forum or a sordid
> home for decrepit old folks and faltering has-beens?
> 
> I don't want no useless info on pre-historic tape readers.
> 
> I, and many others, want cutting edge philosophy on GNU/Linux/FOSS.
> 
> Otherwise, go bury yourselves, grandpas.
> 
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
> 

Usenet has a lot of people who have been using it since the 1990s, so 
presumably over 50 years old.  I am a bit older, I remember 9-track 
tapes, punch cards and acoustic coupler modems.

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

#95069

On 11/3/26 20:55, Woozy Song wrote:
> Farley Flud wrote:
>> Is this group an actual GNU/Linux discussion forum or a sordid
>> home for decrepit old folks and faltering has-beens?
>>
>> I don't want no useless info on pre-historic tape readers.
>>
>> I, and many others, want cutting edge philosophy on GNU/Linux/FOSS.
>>
>> Otherwise, go bury yourselves, grandpas.
>>
>> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>>
> 
> Usenet has a lot of people who have been using it since the 1990s, so 
> presumably over 50 years old.  I am a bit older, I remember 9-track 
> tapes, punch cards and acoustic coupler modems.

   Umm ... they were EIGHT-track tapes :-)

   Not terrible actually, great for car audio.
   Tended to get mangled alas. Cassettes came
   to rule until cheap CDs arrived.

   "Flies all green and buzzin' in this
   dungeon of despair ..." ........

   Did my years with punch-cards. Had more than
   one 'acoustic coupler' for 300-baud-or-less
   connections. Hey, CUTTING EDGE at the time !

   Still have a Tandy/RS "laptop" from WAY back
   that can do acoustic net OR connect direct
   to an old hard-line phone. News reporters
   loved them. Much of the ROM code, last thing
   done by Bill Gates himself. Had a VIC-20 with
   an acoustic modem too but the C-64 did it better.
   Bulletin-Board-Systems (BBS) in the day.

   In any case, the "old guys" bring a LOT of
   practical experience/sensibility. Don't
   cuss - LEARN. The Future is built-on, guided-
   by, the past. Computer Tech is evolutionary.

   The "sensibility" aspect may be the most important.
   SO many, publicity/profit-driven, flashes in the
   proverbial pan over the years. The "old guys" have
   Been There, Done That, KNOW bullshit when they
   see it.

   Oh wait - the recent gen is SO much smarter :-)

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

#95074

c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
> On 11/3/26 20:55, Woozy Song wrote:
>> Farley Flud wrote:
>>> Is this group an actual GNU/Linux discussion forum or a sordid
>>> home for decrepit old folks and faltering has-beens?
>>>
>>> I don't want no useless info on pre-historic tape readers.
>>>
>>> I, and many others, want cutting edge philosophy on GNU/Linux/FOSS.
>>>
>>> Otherwise, go bury yourselves, grandpas.
>>>
>>> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>>>
>> 
>> Usenet has a lot of people who have been using it since the 1990s, so 
>> presumably over 50 years old.  I am a bit older, I remember 9-track 
>> tapes, punch cards and acoustic coupler modems.
> 
>   Umm ... they were EIGHT-track tapes :-)

Idiot.  Woozy's not referring to "8-track audio tapes".  He's referring 
to 9-track digital computer tapes used on old IBM mainframes.  They 
were 9-tracks:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9-track_tape

Eight data bits plus one parity bit per byte makes for a "9-track" 
tape.

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

#95084

On 2026-11-04, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:

> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
>
>> On 11/3/26 20:55, Woozy Song wrote:
>>
>>> Usenet has a lot of people who have been using it since the 1990s, so 
>>> presumably over 50 years old.  I am a bit older, I remember 9-track 
>>> tapes, punch cards and acoustic coupler modems.

<waves hand> Me too!

>>   Umm ... they were EIGHT-track tapes :-)
>
> Idiot.  Woozy's not referring to "8-track audio tapes".

Uh, I think he was pulling our legs - note the smiley.

> He's referring to 9-track digital computer tapes used on
> old IBM mainframes.  They were 9-tracks:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9-track_tape
>
> Eight data bits plus one parity bit per byte makes for a "9-track" 
> tape.

If you're really old you'll remember 7-track tapes (6 data bits
plus one parity bit, popular before 8-bit bytes came along).
I don't think I ever actually used one of them, but I did read
about them.  I think some units even had a hardware converter
option that let you attach them to a machine that did 8-bit
bytes; for every three 8-bit bytes you sent them they'd write
four 6-bit bytes to the tape.  Good for converting your old
tapes...

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  In this world there are
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  two kinds of people:
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  1. Those who can extrapolate
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |  from incomplete data.

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

#95216

On 2026-11-04 01:21, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2026-11-04, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/3/26 20:55, Woozy Song wrote:
>>>
>>>> Usenet has a lot of people who have been using it since the 1990s, so
>>>> presumably over 50 years old.  I am a bit older, I remember 9-track
>>>> tapes, punch cards and acoustic coupler modems.
> 
> <waves hand> Me too!
> 
>>>    Umm ... they were EIGHT-track tapes :-)
>>
>> Idiot.  Woozy's not referring to "8-track audio tapes".
> 
> Uh, I think he was pulling our legs - note the smiley.
> 
>> He's referring to 9-track digital computer tapes used on
>> old IBM mainframes.  They were 9-tracks:
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9-track_tape
>>
>> Eight data bits plus one parity bit per byte makes for a "9-track"
>> tape.
> 
> If you're really old you'll remember 7-track tapes (6 data bits
> plus one parity bit, popular before 8-bit bytes came along).
> I don't think I ever actually used one of them, but I did read
> about them.  I think some units even had a hardware converter
> option that let you attach them to a machine that did 8-bit
> bytes; for every three 8-bit bytes you sent them they'd write
> four 6-bit bytes to the tape.  Good for converting your old
> tapes...
> 
Guess that makes me really old. I was drafted during the Nixon 
administration, and assigned to run a HP 2116 minicomputer system at a 
research facility. When I got there, it was using a couple of 7-track 
tape drives, and was booted up with a strip of paper tape. Soon after, 
it was upgraded to a then newfangled "moving head disk drive" that had 
one fixed disk and one bay for cartridges about 15 inches in diameter, 
and a revised boot program eliminated the paper tape boot procedure.

TJ

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

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc

csiph-web