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

Groups > comp.sys.raspberry-pi > #9840 > unrolled thread

Flash

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.raspberry-pi

Contents

  Flash Wayne Chirnside <frank@fuax.com> - 2015-10-25 22:24 +0000
    Re: Flash Mel Wilson <mwilson@the-wire.com> - 2015-10-25 23:00 +0000
      Re: Flash Roger Bell_West <roger+csrp201510@nospam.firedrake.org> - 2015-10-25 23:04 +0000
        Re: Flash Wayne Chirnside <frank@fuax.com> - 2015-10-25 23:42 +0000
          Re: Flash rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 22:19 -0400
            Re: Flash Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-10-28 11:55 +0000
              Re: Flash The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-10-28 12:40 +0000
                Re: Flash rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 12:26 -0400
                  Re: Flash The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-10-28 22:02 +0000
                    Re: Flash Roger Bell_West <roger+csrp201510@nospam.firedrake.org> - 2015-10-29 00:43 +0000
                      Re: Flash The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-10-29 08:40 +0000
                    Re: Flash rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 04:57 -0400
                      Re: Flash The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-10-29 10:18 +0000
                        Re: Flash rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 13:01 -0400
                          Re: Flash Tony van der Hoff <tony@vanderhoff.org> - 2015-10-29 18:29 +0000
                            Re: Flash Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2015-10-30 02:58 +0000
                              Re: Flash Tony van der Hoff <tony@vanderhoff.org> - 2015-10-30 08:42 +0000
                                Re: Flash fruit <fruit@invalid.org.uk> - 2015-10-30 09:39 +0000
                                  Re: Flash UoScAr <oscar.gooooooooooo@gooooooooogle.it> - 2015-10-30 20:00 +0800
                              Re: Flash colonel_hack@yahoo.com - 2015-10-30 09:34 -0700
              Re: Flash rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 12:26 -0400
              Re: Flash Mark Justice <mark@faux.com> - 2015-10-28 20:41 +0000
                Re: Flash Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-10-29 01:02 +0000
                  Re: Flash The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-10-29 08:43 +0000
                    Re: Flash Dom <domafp@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2015-10-29 12:41 +0000
                      Re: Flash Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-10-29 12:45 +0000
                        Re: Flash Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2015-10-29 13:26 +0000
                          Re: Flash Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2015-10-29 16:12 +0000
                            Re: Flash Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-10-29 16:54 +0000
                              Re: Flash Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2015-10-29 17:01 +0000
                      Re: Flash The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-10-29 12:45 +0000
                        Re: Flash Dom <domafp@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2015-10-29 13:46 +0000
                          Re: Flash fruit <fruit@invalid.org.uk> - 2015-10-29 14:35 +0000
                        Re: Flash Folderol <general@musically.me.uk> - 2015-10-29 13:47 +0000
                          Re: Flash The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-10-29 13:50 +0000
                          Re: Flash fruit <fruit@invalid.org.uk> - 2015-10-29 14:32 +0000
                            Re: Flash - Warning. Even more off topic! Folderol <general@musically.me.uk> - 2015-10-29 15:55 +0000
                              Re: Flash - Warning. Even more off topic! "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2015-10-31 13:08 +0000
                          Re: Flash alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2015-10-29 15:25 +0000
                            Re: Flash rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 13:18 -0400
                          Re: Flash Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-10-29 15:26 +0000
                          Re: Flash rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 13:06 -0400
                  Re: Flash rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 05:00 -0400
                    Re: Flash The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-10-29 10:21 +0000
                      Re: Flash Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-29 19:57 -0400
                        Re: Flash Folderol <general@musically.me.uk> - 2015-10-30 07:10 +0000
                  Re: Flash Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-29 19:47 -0400
                    Re: Flash Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-10-30 12:13 +0000
              Re: Flash Wayne Chirnside <frank@fuax.com> - 2015-10-29 17:20 +0000
              Re: Flash Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-10-29 19:50 +0100
                Re: Flash druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2015-10-29 23:42 +0000
                  Re: Flash Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-10-30 10:12 +0000
                    Re: Flash Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2015-10-31 00:33 +0000
                  Re: Flash Dr J R Stockton <reply1500@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-10-30 22:45 +0000
    Re: Flash "M.O.B. i L." <mobil@orbin.se> - 2015-10-26 19:35 +0100
      Re: Flash Wayne Chirnside <frank@fuax.com> - 2015-10-27 23:20 +0000
        Re: Flash druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2015-10-28 01:56 +0000
          Re: Flash rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 22:20 -0400
          Re: Flash Chris <c@b.a> - 2015-10-28 13:52 +1100
          Re: Flash Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2015-10-28 05:01 +0000
            Re: Flash Folderol <general@musically.me.uk> - 2015-10-28 09:26 +0000

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

#9893

Folderol <general@musically.me.uk> wrote:
> When I was a wee small lad you used to see this a lot. Miles and miles of
> poles along the roadside with dozens of uninsulated pairs, but I can't remember
> the last time I saw them.
> Yes, I *am* that old :)

They were hardly used here, but we have only weak soil where it is easy
to dig.

However, I remember when I was a child we went on holidays to France with
the family, and both power and telephone lines were overhead there.
The old lines were individual wires on porcelain insulators, arranged
in quads that rotated 90 degrees every few hundred meters, over the span
of two poles.  Interesting view when looking at it from a car going along
the road.   It was being replaced by multipair cable, so in areas that
had been converted the poles carried one or two of those cables and the
insulators still sat there unused.  New poles of course did not have
the insulators.

This is over 40 years ago, and I have been there for a long time.

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

#9902

On 10/29/2015 9:47 AM, Folderol wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 12:45:51 +0000
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 29/10/15 12:41, Dom wrote:
>>> On 29/10/15 08:43, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> Dunno about the US but all phone lines in the UK are insulated
>>>> multi-stranded twisted pairs.
>>>>
>>>> Even the ones up poles.
>>> Dunno about your part of the UK, but here (and everywhere else I've
>>> been) the cables between the poles and the house tend to be two
>>> uninsulated cables, a few inches apart.
>>>
>> absolutely not ever round her.
>>
>> generally two or 4 pair in a sheath with a steel inner.
>>
>> You aren't confusing them with POWER cables carrying 240V are you?
>>
> When I was a wee small lad you used to see this a lot. Miles and miles of
> poles along the roadside with dozens of uninsulated pairs, but I can't remember
> the last time I saw them.
> Yes, I *am* that old :)

I worked for the railroad as a signalman apprentice.  The telephone and 
signal wires were on low poles with insulated wires.  Running through 
very long stretches of low population they would be cut down and sold 
for the copper.  Seems they would burn the insulation off first.  They 
were usually not too bright and would get caught when trying to sell it. 
  I remember one pair traveled to another state to sell the wire, but 
got caught anyway.

-- 

Rick

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

#9877

On 10/28/2015 9:02 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 20:41:58 +0000, Mark Justice wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 11:55:28 +0000, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 22:19:04 -0400, rickman wrote:
>>>
>>>> Last time we had a major storm around here both my ISP and my cell
>>>> phone provider were down for a day or so.
>>>>
>>> Out of curiosity, were landlines in your neighbourhood still working?
>>> I'd expect that they were down too if your local telco still puts the
>>> line up a pole but should have
>> been just fine if it uses underground
>>> cabling.
>>
>> Speaking for myself when I had a land line I never lost that even the
>> year we had four hurricanes back to back.
>>
> It figures when you think about it: small diameter telephone wires that
> can be strung rather tighter between the poles than power lines. That
> means the wire won't thrash around so much in the wind. Being smaller
> diameter the drag, and the resulting wind load on the wires will be less.
> But the wires are still relatively thick compared with insulated copper,
> so power will most likely still get to subscriber kit even if the wires
> get damaged but not actually broken. Last but not least, even if poles
> move so the wires get slack enough to touch and give momentary shorts,
> the voltage is low enough that this won't break the wires.

None of that helps when a tree falls on the line ripping it in half with 
a hundred pairs of wires splayed across the ground.

-- 

Rick

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

#9881

On 29/10/15 09:00, rickman wrote:
> On 10/28/2015 9:02 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>> On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 20:41:58 +0000, Mark Justice wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 11:55:28 +0000, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 22:19:04 -0400, rickman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Last time we had a major storm around here both my ISP and my cell
>>>>> phone provider were down for a day or so.
>>>>>
>>>> Out of curiosity, were landlines in your neighbourhood still working?
>>>> I'd expect that they were down too if your local telco still puts the
>>>> line up a pole but should have
>>> been just fine if it uses underground
>>>> cabling.
>>>
>>> Speaking for myself when I had a land line I never lost that even the
>>> year we had four hurricanes back to back.
>>>
>> It figures when you think about it: small diameter telephone wires that
>> can be strung rather tighter between the poles than power lines. That
>> means the wire won't thrash around so much in the wind. Being smaller
>> diameter the drag, and the resulting wind load on the wires will be less.
>> But the wires are still relatively thick compared with insulated copper,
>> so power will most likely still get to subscriber kit even if the wires
>> get damaged but not actually broken. Last but not least, even if poles
>> move so the wires get slack enough to touch and give momentary shorts,
>> the voltage is low enough that this won't break the wires.
>
> None of that helps when a tree falls on the line ripping it in half with
> a hundred pairs of wires splayed across the ground.
>
I've never seen that happen.
Poles down yes, wires snapped in half - no. 100 pair cables are dam,ned 
tough

I've seen an overhead pair take a direct lightning strike though,. 
Outside my house. Fortunately I wasn't at home as the place was littered 
with exploded sockets and lord knows what else

Fried a lot of electronics too

House had to be rewired.


-- 
the biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly 
diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential 
survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations 
into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with 
what it actually is.

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

#9913

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 10:21:40 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> declaimed the following:

>I've never seen that happen.
>Poles down yes, wires snapped in half - no. 100 pair cables are dam,ned 
>tough
>
	Last time I saw a phone cable "fail" it was because somebody dumped hot
charcoal into the apartment dumpster... Which then ignited and burned
through the phone cable running above it.

	Took a few days to get my phone service straightened out -- they
probably matched the twisted pairs by color code, but with 4+bundles per
cable with identical codes there is only a 25% chance that the correct pair
was linked (we can ignore the first end of the patch, but the other end
then has four choices for each pair)... The cable was replaced on the first
day, and then more days were spent putting a signal injector on each pair
at the building entry panel and going back up the street to the main
distribution box to see where the signal came out, and swapping with the
correct pair.
-- 
	Wulfraed                 Dennis Lee Bieber         AF6VN
    wlfraed@ix.netcom.com    HTTP://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/

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

#9917

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 19:57:38 -0400
Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 10:21:40 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
> <tnp@invalid.invalid> declaimed the following:
> 
> >I've never seen that happen.
> >Poles down yes, wires snapped in half - no. 100 pair cables are dam,ned 
> >tough
> >
> 	Last time I saw a phone cable "fail" it was because somebody dumped hot
> charcoal into the apartment dumpster... Which then ignited and burned
> through the phone cable running above it.
> 
> 	Took a few days to get my phone service straightened out -- they
> probably matched the twisted pairs by color code, but with 4+bundles per
> cable with identical codes there is only a 25% chance that the correct pair
> was linked (we can ignore the first end of the patch, but the other end
> then has four choices for each pair)... The cable was replaced on the first
> day, and then more days were spent putting a signal injector on each pair
> at the building entry panel and going back up the street to the main
> distribution box to see where the signal came out, and swapping with the
> correct pair.

Either someone didn't know what they were doing, or standards have been
abandoned!

Phone cable is built in layers. I can't remember the colours now, but each
layer has a start pair, running pairs and an end pair - that way you know which
direction to go. Each layer is separated from the next by thin plastic tape.
That standard goes right back to the days when underground cable had bare
strands wrapped in coloured paper tape, the layers separated by a spiral of
cotton and the whole lot lead sheathed.

The engineers should be able to join hundreds of pairs without a single mistake.

-- 
W J G

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

#9912

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 01:02:45 +0000 (UTC), Martin Gregorie
<martin@address-in-sig.invalid> declaimed the following:

>It figures when you think about it: small diameter telephone wires that 
>can be strung rather tighter between the poles than power lines. That 

	In my experience, the only time you see "small diameter telephone
wires" is in the run from a distribution box to the house. Otherwise the
phone cable is often the largest diameter run on the pole -- since it may
contain 100+ shielded twisted wire pairs to provide a small neighborhood
(assume spares to allow two lines per customer, and that cable supports a
subdivision of 50 houses, or a large apartment complex; cables up to 200
pairs are available
http://www.telephonecentral.com/Products/Cable--200-Pair-Burial__111178.aspx
[they used the same photo for 100 pair, 150 pair, and 200 pair]).

-- 
	Wulfraed                 Dennis Lee Bieber         AF6VN
    wlfraed@ix.netcom.com    HTTP://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/

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

#9926

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 19:47:17 -0400, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:

> On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 01:02:45 +0000 (UTC), Martin Gregorie
> <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> declaimed the following:
> 
>>It figures when you think about it: small diameter telephone wires that
>>can be strung rather tighter between the poles than power lines. That
> 
> 	In my experience, the only time you see "small diameter telephone
> wires" is in the run from a distribution box to the house.
>
I was talking 'old' - individual wires strung between insulators, not 
multi-wire insulated cables. Where and when I grew up (NZ countryside  
poles and wires were the norm and fairly common in towns as well. The 
main difference was that in the country, most phones[*] were on party 
lines while towns had individual phone lines and exchanges.

Had to arrive in the UK to discover multi-wire telephone cables.

[*] and the phones had a crank handle rather than a dial - you listened 
first, said 'working?' in case you'd picked up during a pause, and 
cranked Morse - half turn for a dot, two or three turns for a dash - to 
indicate whether you wanted to talk to the exchange or a neighbour.


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

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

#9904

On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 11:55:28 +0000, Martin Gregorie wrote:

> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 22:19:04 -0400, rickman wrote:
> 
>> Last time we had a major storm around here both my ISP and my cell
>> phone provider were down for a day or so.
>>
> Out of curiosity, were landlines in your neighbourhood still working?
> I'd expect that they were down too if your local telco still puts the
> line up a pole but should have been just fine if it uses underground
> cabling.

All four hurricanes that year the phone stayed up but no idea about HS 
cable as I hadn't it back then.

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

#9907

In article <n0qd3g$1e3$2@dont-email.me>,
Martin Gregorie  <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> wrote:
>On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 22:19:04 -0400, rickman wrote:
>
>> Last time we had a major storm around here both my ISP and my cell phone
>> provider were down for a day or so.
>>
>Out of curiosity, were landlines in your neighbourhood still working? I'd 
>expect that they were down too if your local telco still puts the line up 
>a pole but should have been just fine if it uses underground cabling.

A week ago we had a municipal-wide planned blackout of 4 hours, announced
well in advance, throughly communicated. (they had to do some essential
service on the 50kV network binding the municipality together.)

It was long enough to see some mobile towers drop out, but my all-fiber
internet connection never had a hitch. I have everything on a UPS on this
side, and the WDM network boxes locally are fully passive, and the CO
is properly backed up. 

One win for fiber.

-- mrr

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

#9911

On 29/10/2015 18:50, Morten Reistad wrote:
> One win for fiber.

The word you are after is 'fibre'.

'Fiber' is someone who tells lies.  :-)

---druck

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

#9924

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 23:42:12 +0000
druck <news@druck.org.uk> wrote:

> On 29/10/2015 18:50, Morten Reistad wrote:
> > One win for fiber.
> 
> The word you are after is 'fibre'.
> 
> 'Fiber' is someone who tells lies.  :-)

	Nope that's a fibber :)

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

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

#9930

On 2015-10-30, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 23:42:12 +0000
> druck <news@druck.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 29/10/2015 18:50, Morten Reistad wrote:
>> > One win for fiber.
>> 
>> The word you are after is 'fibre'.
>> 
>> 'Fiber' is someone who tells lies.  :-)
>
> 	Nope that's a fibber :)

Are you sure you're not fibbing about that?  :-)

-- 
Robert Riches
spamtrap42@jacob21819.net
(Yes, that is one of my email addresses.)

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

#9929

In comp.sys.raspberry-pi message <n0uaoi$hkh$2@dont-email.me>, Thu, 29
Oct 2015 23:42:12, druck <news@druck.org.uk> posted:

>On 29/10/2015 18:50, Morten Reistad wrote:
>> One win for fiber.
>
>The word you are after is 'fibre'.
>
>'Fiber' is someone who tells lies.  :-)

and cannot spell "fibber".


-- 
 (c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK.  ¬@merlyn.demon.co.uk   Turnpike v6.05   MIME.
 Merlyn Web Site <                       > - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.

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

#9852

Den 2015-10-25 kl. 23:24, skrev Wayne Chirnside:
> Newbie to Raspberry but not Linux.
> Does Raspberry Pi have a working Flash or is that too
> processor intensive for a RPi?

It's possible to get Flash working in Raspbian on Raspberry Pi 2 by 
using Chromium and a Pepper Flash plugin, see 
https://www.raspberrypi.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=764091#p764091

It works well for Spotify and Scratch 2, and less demanding 
Flash-applications.

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

#9858

On Mon, 26 Oct 2015 19:35:33 +0100, M.O.B. i L. wrote:

> Den 2015-10-25 kl. 23:24, skrev Wayne Chirnside:
>> Newbie to Raspberry but not Linux.
>> Does Raspberry Pi have a working Flash or is that too processor
>> intensive for a RPi?
> 
> It's possible to get Flash working in Raspbian on Raspberry Pi 2 by
> using Chromium and a Pepper Flash plugin, see
> https://www.raspberrypi.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=764091#p764091
> 
> It works well for Spotify and Scratch 2, and less demanding
> Flash-applications.

Thank you.
I _may_ look into this.
I am also going to run Windows ten on a second Pi 2 and likely various 
linux incarnations on two or three other Pi's.

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

#9859

On 27/10/2015 23:20, Wayne Chirnside wrote:
> I am also going to run Windows ten on a second Pi 2

OMGY?

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

#9862

On 10/27/2015 9:56 PM, druck wrote:
> On 27/10/2015 23:20, Wayne Chirnside wrote:
>> I am also going to run Windows ten on a second Pi 2
>
> OMGY?

WTFDTM?

-- 

Rick

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

#9863

On 28/10/2015 12:56 PM, druck wrote:
> On 27/10/2015 23:20, Wayne Chirnside wrote:
>> I am also going to run Windows ten on a second Pi 2
>
> OMGY?

Y¬ ?

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

#9864

On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 01:56:38 +0000
druck <news@druck.org.uk> wrote:

> On 27/10/2015 23:20, Wayne Chirnside wrote:
> > I am also going to run Windows ten on a second Pi 2
> 
> OMGY?
> 
By most accounts it's not very exciting.

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

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.raspberry-pi

csiph-web